Eid al-Adha: When Muslim Streets Run Red With (Animal) Blood

Eid al-Adha: When Muslim streets run red with (animal) blood

by SF

The Muslim calendar year is strictly lunar, and consists of twelve lunar months, making a year of 354 or 355 days. That is because Muhammad wanted to show that Islam is “holier” and “truer” than both Judaism and Christianity. Since Jews have a mixed solar/lunar calendar, and Christians a purely solar one, Muhammad chose one that neither of the others use. (Just as he chose Friday as the Muslim holy day rather than Jewish Saturday or Christian Sunday.) But using a purely lunar calendar removes from it any linkage to the seasons. As a result, for every solar year, the Muslim calendar is short by eleven days, and so, year by year, Muslim holidays shift a bit through the different seasons.

Islam itself is a form of Judaism. Jewish Rabbis living in Arabia taught Judaism to Muhammad. Then he killed them and created an arabized version of Judaism. Eid al-Adha (the Feast of the Sacrifice) was originally called Eid al-Qurban. But when the Muslims realized that “Korban” was the unique Hebrew word used by Jews for sacrifice, they changed the name. “Hajj” itself is the Arabic pronunciation of the unique Hebrew word designating a pilgrimage festival. The Hajj celebrates Abraham’s sacrifice of Ishmael at Mecca.

The Koran tells us that the Jews and Christians are liars who falsified their scriptures. According to “Islamic truth”, Abraham was a Muslim, and not a Jew. Allah ordered him to sacrifice his favorite son Ishmael (not Isaac). This was to be done at Mecca, and not Jerusalem. But, similar to the Jewish story, at the last moment allah tells Abraham not to sacrifice his son, and to substitute an animal in his place.

Each year this event is commemorated throughout the Muslim world (in the USA this year it was on August 10 and 11). In Muslim countries, halal animals (kosher for Muslims) are slaughtered. (Australia profits by shipping tens of thousands of live sheep to Muslim countries, while liberal New Zealand recently stopped this practice.) Muslims cannot eat pigs, but can eat camels, cows, and sheep. In Muslim countries, Eid is celebrated by slaughtering and butchering these animals in public. Any good Muslim man can do the slaughtering. The mandatory method of slaughter is to cut the animal’s throat with a knife. It often happens that this slaughter is botched, with the result that the bleeding animal runs screaming in pain through the streets of the town.

Continue reading

Matt Bracken and Vlad Tepes Discuss Video Samizdat

Last week Vlad Tepes made a guest appearance on an InfoWars segment hosted by Matt Bracken. The video below shows their hour of discussion (with the commercials removed). As you may notice, the video has been hosted on YouTube, but not on Alex Jones’ channel — as far as I know, the InfoWars YouTube channel has been permanently taken down.

This is an example of what I discussed a couple of months ago in “Samizdat in the Age of Digital Totalitarianism”: the imperative to propagate dissident information through distributed lateral networks. That’s what Matt and Vlad talk about in this clip, specifically as it pertains to bit-torrented video platforms:

Stoking Herkimer

When I turned eleven I graduated from the Cub Scouts and moved up into the Boy Scouts. We lived in the southern suburbs of Baltimore at the time, and every year our troop spent a week at a BSA camp in northeastern Maryland. A week of intense heat, mosquitoes, swimming, shooting, nature study — anyone who’s been in the Boy Scouts knows the drill.

Our campsite was medium-level when it came to fixtures and conveniences. In the more primitive sites, the scouts had to dig their own latrines and cook over a campfire. In the more swanky sites there was a little electrified building with a kitchen and a dining room, and not far away a modern latrine building.

Our site was in between. We had a latrine building of sorts, and a big canopy tent with picnic tables and a propane stove for a dining hall. And for hot water we had Herkimer.

Herkimer was a massive thick-walled cylindrical tank that we used as a water boiler. It sat over a fire on four big cinderblocks, and was fed by a water pipe from a well that served all the campsites in the area. I don’t know why it was called Herkimer — for some mysterious reason, that was the boiler’s name.

Herkimer had to be fired up before every meal, because the metal trays we used as plates had to be washed in very hot water. Our troop leaders explained the need for rigorous food hygiene, remarking that a failure to run those trays through boiling water would cause the troop to come down with diarrhea — which at scout camp was not a pleasant experience, even with a latrine building less than a hundred yards away.

So three times a day Herkimer was ravenous for wood. The camp management delivered a load of junk wood every morning that could be used for the fire, but it was never quite enough. We Boy Scouts would be sent out into the woods (which our campsite was in the middle of) to fetch whatever additional wood we could find. We weren’t allowed to cut living trees, but we could take down small dead ones, pick up deadfalls, and gather whatever else we could find. We broke up discarded packing cases and threw in big thick hunks of cardboard. Anything that would burn was fair game — I remember using a shovel to root out a large stump and break it up to stoke Herkimer.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

Herkimer came to mind recently when I was contemplating the enormous political and cultural upheavals that are characteristic of our time.

Let’s take a look at the running of that big old water boiler as a process. We could break it down into three parts:

1.   The objective. The purpose of Herkimer was to generate sufficient quantities of boiling water to achieve culinary hygiene. One might devise other schemes for reaching the same objective, but at that particular place and time, a large metal tank with water piped into it and a fire underneath comprised the established system.
2.   The method. One opened the valve to let water into the tank and ignited the fuel underneath. Thermodynamics took care of the rest.
3.   Praxis. Two major components were required for operation, water and fuel. The former was taken care of by a well and a pump. For the latter a horde of grubby Boy Scouts was required. Again, one can imagine other schemes to achieve the same goal — paying top dollar for truckloads of charcoal briquettes to be hauled in, for example. But scrounging for junk wood was the chosen procedure.
 

There’s a socio-political Herkimer currently operating in Western Civilization. We’ve all observed the continuous onslaught against established religion, traditional customs, and cultural institutions that have been built up over the course of more than a thousand years. New rules and practices that would have been unimaginable a generation or two ago are being forced upon a populace that never desired or requested them. I’ll give some specific examples later on in this essay.

This destructive process is painfully visible in its innumerable manifestations, but teasing out the various strands of its three components is a tricky business. Nevertheless, we’ll give it a try.

1. The objective

What is the purpose of all this unpopular cultural coercion? The ostensible reasons — “human rights”, “diversity”, “social justice”, and so on — are obviously only the cover story. The real purpose is generally occluded, and can only be deduced by observing its myriad manifestations within our society.

The apparent goal of all these actions is lysis: the breaking down of long-established social structures. Lytic agents are being deployed throughout society to dissolve cultural membranes and connective tissue.

In the case of Herkimer, the overseers of the process — the camp management and our troop leaders — established the goal. The overseers of our societal Herkimer are of necessity less obvious. They are commonly labeled “globalists”, but a more accurate term might be “global socialists”, since socialism has always been a major component of the one-world utopias conceived by the visionaries of the blood-soaked century that preceded this one.

A new world is being built, and all the components of the old one must be disassembled before the new order can be constructed. That’s what the cultural Herkimer is for.

Continue reading

They’re Coming to Take Me Away, Ha Ha!

The urge to create the above image was prompted by the latest of uncountably many incidents in which a Muslim perpetrator of an atrocity was identified as having mental problems. In this particular case, it was a Tunisian man in Sweden who was described as having “psychological problems” after he stabbed an elderly Jewish woman and then fled the country.

The general rule seems to be this: If (1) there is a single perpetrator acting alone, and (2) his victims are unrelated to him and not among his acquaintances, then he has “psychological problems”. The incidence of the application of this rule by the media seems to be approaching 100%. When was the last time you read a news report about a “lone wolf” mujahid where he was not described as “having a history of psychological problems”, or words to that effect?

Contrast this practice with the immediate and routine description (often without evidence) of any white non-Muslim who commits an atrocity as a “racist”, a “Trump supporter”, a “white supremacist”, a “right-wing extremist”, etc. In other words, the motive for the deed is always described in ideological terms. But if the perpetrator is Muslim, the initially assigned motive is never ideological — as if adherence to Islam were not in fact evidence of adherence to an extreme political ideology.

Mind you, that doesn’t make the description wrong. Devout adherence to Islam is quite clearly a form of mental illness. Either people with mental problems are drawn to Islam, or being exposed to Islamic doctrine induces mental illness. Or both.

(Feel free to use the graphic for meme pics.)

Samizdat in the Age of Digital Totalitarianism

A couple of days ago we posted about the blocking of BitChute in Australia via a process known as “DNS poisoning”. It seems that the emergence of BitChute as a source of uncensored videos was enough of a threat for the Powers That Be in Oz to decide that it must be neutralized.

During the same time period the process of de-platforming dissidents has accelerated. Almost anyone who is well-known and has a slightly right-of-center political opinion can expect to have Tweets and Facebook posts deleted, YouTube videos pulled, and — if he is prominent enough to require complete excommunication — the closing of his account. Dissidents with the greatest celebrity status, such as Tommy Robinson and Milo Yiannopoulos, can expect to lose their accounts on multiple platforms simultaneously, as if their suppression were being coordinated by some trans-national censorship board.

Vlad Tepes is on BitChute and BitTube now, which is why the topic of DNS poisoning came up. His videos are now going up and staying up, thanks to BitChute; hence the establishment’s efforts to cut off viewers’ access to BitChute.

As it happens, all of these methods of censorship and repression are being implemented not by the state, but by private corporations. This gives repressive governments cover so that they can deny responsibility: “Facebook [or Twitter, or Instagram, or Google, etc.] is a private company, and may enforce its terms of use without government interference.” The ISPs in Australia that are sabotaging BitChute’s IP on their domain name servers are also private corporations, as far as I know — the Australian government doesn’t have to do the dirty work.

This doesn’t mean that governments are not arresting, charging, trying, and convicting citizens for “hate speech”. Britain, Sweden, and Germany seem to be vying with each other to see who can rack up the largest number of state prosecutions for hate speech. The rest of Western Europe, Australia, and Canada are no slouches, either. The USA has the First Amendment, so it’s not so bad here, but we’re only hanging on by the skin of our teeth. If Hillary had been elected in 2016, and had thus been able to appoint two Supreme Court justices, we’d probably be following the Canadian model right now.

Nevertheless, private companies are doing most of the heavy lifting when it comes suppressing free speech. Some of them are probably following the inclinations of their CEOs (think Mark Zuckerberg), but a quiet government word about antitrust action or a tax-evasion investigation must do wonders to convince them to help the state suppress Internet dissent.

A few days ago we posted an interview with a French communist MEP from back in 1992. This was one of Vlad’s videos, so it was uploaded to BitChute. However, I happened to find a mirror of it on a minor YouTube channel, and posted that instead.

How was that channel able to post the video? Even if Vlad still had a YouTube channel, that video would have been immediately deleted by Google, because it said naughty things about the European Union. How come the other channel gets a pass?

The answer is obvious: Vlad’s channel was very popular, and had turned into a major influence in the realm of online videos. The other channel is relatively minor, and evidently doesn’t attract enough viewers to warrant being suppressed.

There’s a lesson for us dissidents in that.

Continue reading

A New Conservatism: Nationalist, Populist and Converging

Dr. Turley sums up the realignments that even the New York Times is admitting. From India to Australia to Japan, a form of “Trumpism” is coming into being. And the EU is trembling as it feels the earth moving under its old globalist certainties:

That doesn’t mean the realignments don’t hurt. Some people will be discombobulated; change is inevitable and rocky. Those who can see their loss as an opportunity will flourish. Others, like PM May in Great Britain, could be looking at the end.

With these changes, Gates of Vienna needs to update its categories. No longer is it enough to have the “EU” without naming its constituent nation-states. We will probably have to list “globalism” as a thing, even as it shrinks into something less…well, less global.

How to Bypass the Australian Ministry of Truth

Vlad and I have received a number of complaints from people in Australia who say that BitChute videos never work for them, either as embeds or at the BitChute site itself. It turns out that the Australian government has blocked BitChute so that its citizens can be kept safe from “hate”.

Fortunately for Australians, the authorities chose the quick and dirty way of banning the site: they screwed up its DNS records on two of the main DNS providers in Australia. There’s a fairly easy way to redo your computer’s settings and bypass the government’s preferred DNS. The instructions below were posted earlier at Vlad Tepes in a slightly different form.

How Australians can bypass state censorship of the internet

by Vlad Tepes

The following post is meant for Australians, and any other nationals, who feel the state should not decide for them what information they should have access to and what information they should not. I think it is doubly important in a place like Oz. which has the pretence of being a free state, yet sends police to your door to ask probing questions like, “Do you support Donald Trump?” (This example is from New Zealand but similar things are happening in Oz.)

From what I can gather, all of bitchute.com, Gates of Vienna, and Blazing Cat Fur, and likely due to this post, my site, have been (or will be) blocked by several ISPs in Australia. I base this on emails received by me, and by the operator of Gates of Vienna.

I also Skyped a friend of ours in Oz and using Skype’s screen share feature, had her navigate to these sites.

On her ISP, she was able to see all the listed sites except BCF.

So this is how we bypassed it so that she could see the one that was blocked.

The following graphics are for an Apple computer.

First, go to your settings gear. For most that should be on the dock. If it isn’t, then go to your magnifying glass very top right and type: System Preferences.

Once you have that open, it should look sort of like this:

Then look for the grey globe that says Network. It’s around the middle in this photo, but take your time and find the sphere-like thing that says “Network”. Click that and you should see something like what is below. You want to click the “advanced” button at the bottom.

You should see something like this now, which will list the WiFi networks you use.

In the row of buttons at the top of the picture below, you should see DNS at third from the left. Click that:

Where I have a black square, you will see your DNS numbers. What you need to do, is click the minus sign till both numbers are gone, then type in the exact numbers you see here in this photo below, or what you see below in text. To make it easier I have added them in text so you can scrape and paste.

208.67.222.222
208.67.220.220

Once the existing numbers are gone by using the – button, you can use the + button to create the field to paste in, or type in the numbers above. After you have done so, click OK, then on the next screen, APPLY.

Without a reboot or any other action you should then be able to see any sites you were prevented from seeing.

We know this works as we tested it with someone in Australia, but its extremely common in Turkey and Iran where the governments are ahead of Australia and New Zealand by several months in terms of information totalitarianism.

Continue reading

Milo Speaks Truth to the Powerless

The fellow who went through the trouble of re-creating this event says:

The livestream of this was censored and, with it, the original sound of Milo’s mic was lost. I have reconstructed the sound from multiple sources and used my own video copy of the event.

Erste Konferenz der Freien Medien im Bundestag (The first conference on the free media in Bundestag) was an event organized by the AfD fraction in Berlin on May 11, 2019.

Support this channel (gib shekels)!

Partial text of the speech is below the fold (hat tip WRSA).

Continue reading

A Moment of Clarity

You’re driving down a winding country road late at night. Up ahead, just barely within range of your headlights, you catch a glimpse of a moving shape. Uh-oh — could it be another one of those #@%&?!# deer? After a split second your guess is confirmed: you see the twin red pinpoints of its eyes. And then another pair, and another — the little red winking lights of four or five deer, looking like a row of error codes on a modem. The creatures leap into the road, eager to throw themselves in front of your car and send it to the body shop, and possibly you to the hospital. You brake hard and swerve… Phew! Your luck holds — you miss them by a couple of yards.

Yes, we denizens of the Virginia Outback are all too familiar with the awful moment when the view ahead becomes well-lit and clear enough to see that another close encounter with a deer is on the way. It’s a moment of ghastly clarity.

That’s what the last four years at Gates of Vienna have been like for me. Beginning with the Great Migration Crisis in the summer of 2015, some of the previously obscure underpinnings of currently unfolding events have sprung clearly into view, as if a row of light switches by the door to reality were being flipped on, one by one.

I could list any number of processes that make up this ongoing moment of clarity, but for simplicity of exposition, I’ll condense them into three major categories:

1.   The coordinated, planned invasion of Europe by masses of third-world migrants.
2.   The election of Donald Trump, and the consequent events that followed it.
3.   The global de-platforming of Tommy Robinson.
 

What these events have in common is that they reveal the otherwise occluded machinations of the international elite who strive to manage global affairs to suit their plans. The interference and manipulation have become so obvious that even non-paranoid people can’t help but notice them.

In the following analysis I’ll draw on vast quantities of data that I’ve absorbed over the past few years, without including any links. However, anything that is speculation will be clearly marked as such.

1. The Great Migration Crisis

When the columns of (mostly young male) migrants marched into Europe through the Balkans in the summer and fall of 2015, it quickly became clear that the whole operation had been planned in advance. Yes, Angela Merkel took advantage of the Dead Baby Moment when the corpse of little Ayan was carefully arranged and then “found” on a beach in Anatolia. No good socialist lets a crisis go to waste. Yet the logistical process that followed was far too large, complex, and expensive not to have been arranged ahead of time. Endless caravans of buses were lined up at various national borders to carry the migrants from one photo-op to the next, when they took those brief walks across the frontier that created such good visuals for the media.

And the culture-enrichers were carrying €500 notes to spend at their first stops in the European Union. Where did they get that kind of cash? Almost nobody uses that denomination of banknote in the EU.

A couple of years later it became clear that the EU itself was the cash cow for the migrants, when a credit card company acknowledged that it had partnered with the EU — which had guaranteed repayment of the debt — to hand out prepaid cards to migrants when they arrived in Europe.

Early in the game it became clear that George Soros was heavily involved in the process of migration. His NGOs ferried the “refugees” across the Med, handed out maps and instruction booklets, and chartered the buses that carried them onward towards Germany. But Mr. Soros wasn’t playing the philanthropist — he made that explicit when he told an interviewer that he expected to turn a profit on all his dealings.

Governments across Europe fell into line with the plan. Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán stood alone against the migration, and has become the sworn enemy of Brussels as a result. Until Matteo Salvini became Italian interior minister last year, Mr. Orbán was the sole governmental leader on the continent to actively resist what was happening.

Mass migration into Europe is not intrinsically profitable for anyone except the culture-enrichers themselves. Yet lots of people — people-smugglers, businesses, NGOs, and local governments — have been making money off the process. So who is paying for the population transfer?

Somebody wanted those migrants to get to Europe, and was willing to pay billions of dollars to make it happen.

Three years later, an exactly analogue of the process could be observed in the migrant “caravans” traveling from Central America through Mexico to the southern border of the USA. That was also a complex logistical process costing a lot of money. The trek overland through several countries had to be organized and supplied. Local officials had to be paid off to allow it through.

Who bankrolled all of that?

I don’t have any definitive answers to these questions, just speculations. I’ll get into those later.

2. The election of Donald Trump

Twenty-five years or so before the 2016 election I noticed how unpopular mass immigration was with American voters. Polls routinely showed that somewhere between 60% and 80% of the population said they opposed immigration, and some considered it an important issue. It seemed that an aspiring presidential candidate could do well if he included a prominent anti-immigration plank in his platform. Yet no one ever did, and that seemed peculiar. How could a pragmatic politician resist such an electoral advantage? Yes, it was considered a “populist” position, and everyone knew that populism was bad. Still… the issue could have helped a candidate win an election because it was, well, popular.

Fast-forward to 2016. As the campaign progressed, and Donald Trump deftly picked off all his opponents during the primaries, it became clear that the reason no one ever took up opposition to mass immigration was because they were not allowed to. The intense vitriol aimed at Mr. Trump from both parties — what we now refer to as the Uniparty — made it clear that primaries were designed to weed out any opponents of immigration. And that was OK with the Republican establishment — they didn’t really want to win elections that much anyway, as their rush to join #NeverTrump proved.

The events since January 20, 2017 have provided more evidence that the political establishment (a.k.a. the Swamp) in Washington D.C. is prepared to use all its wealth and power and influence to push Donald Trump out of the Oval Office. And the major issue that makes Mr. Trump so popular is his staunch opposition to mass immigration.

Why do all those wealthy, powerful members of the entrenched elite want so badly to bring millions of illiterate immigrants into the United States?

Continue reading

New Zealand Mosque Attack: Egypt’s Grand Imam Schools the West on Terror Equality

Ashraf Ramelah’s latest essay reports on the reaction of the grand imam of Al Azhar to the Christchurch massacre, and the way Muslim leaders worldwide have used the opportunity posed by the atrocity to further their plans for Islamic expansion.

New Zealand mosque attack: Egypt’s grand imam schools the West on terror equality

by Ashraf Ramelah

The following includes a brief review of how Islam realized its presence in a country such as New Zealand (Muslims are one percent of the population) by way of intentional Islamization efforts and export across the world. The grand imam of Al-Azhar Institute, Ahmed al-Tayeb, responded to the New Zealand tragedy with comments consistent with the context of this background.

The supreme religious leader of Arab-Muslim Sunnis reacted to the Mar 15 fatal mosque shootings in New Zealand with a statement that shows us his real concern. While he is the one individual in the whole world positioned to use this opportunity to create positive reforms of Islam by saying something like “terrorism must be stopped,” he instead expressed relief that Muslims are not the only terrorists.

Under the banner of the popular Egyptian slogan, “Terrorism has no religion,” the grand imam stated that “It’s time for people in the East and West to stop repeating lies concerning Islamic terrorism.” In this quote, the lie he refers to is that terrorism belongs solely to Islam. The white, non-Islamic Australian gunman as reported by the media was a fact that debunked this assumption for the world to see.

It was not an issue of sympathy, prayers and eulogies for the head imam, but of politicizing the perpetrator and the crime. Al-Tayeb’s fixation was with having another example of terror on the world stage — the infidel and “Christian.” His focus has been entirely on blaming those who single out Islam for the terror business.

Please know that the grand imam of Al Azhar has never condemned the killings of Shia Muslims murdered by Sunni Muslims, any ISIS aggression, or any Muslim attacks on Christians and their religious institutions. Instead, through public and private TV channels, Al Azhar imams have instigated the notion that Sunni Muslims must occupy Rome, the White House and recapture Spain.

As the facts of this horrible incident were uncovered, sympathy from New Zealanders began to pour forth with various actions binding non-Muslim to Muslim, including interfaith gestures. Many Christians delivered flowers to the outside of the mosque. Many entered in. New Zealand’s prime minister opened an emergency session of parliament with the religious Islamic greeting, “Al Salam Alikom,” attended the Muslim ceremony for the dead, wore a hijab, and recited Koranic verses.

For Muslim expansion, the tragic event has brought some hope. Muslims are embraced. Their Friday worship will now be welcomed in the open air to be heard even by those who currently hold no real interest in Islam. Also, as a result of the horrible tragedy, New Zealand will now allow outdoor speakers for the Islamic call to prayer. Consequences such as these will advance the grand imam’s and the Vatican’s “Ark of Brotherhood” interfaith pact to spread togetherness throughout the West. Their agreement was signed earlier this year in Abu Dhabi.

Arab-Muslim reaction to the New Zealand tragedy

In the Arabic press, much was made of hatred toward Islam, escalation of hostilities, prejudice and growing Islamophobia with various reactions from Arab-Muslim leaders. A cleric and scholar from Al Azhar Institute pointed out that the gunman was not killed this time, whereas Islamic terrorists are always killed on the scene. Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan stressed the escalation of hostilities toward Islam. He called on the West to take emergency measures to prevent such disasters.

Continue reading

Brad Johnson on the Christchurch Massacre

In the following interview, the retired CIA station chief Brad Johnson talks about some of the background to the recent massacre in New Zealand, material that is not being discussed in the media.

Many thanks to Vlad Tepes for conducting the interview and uploading this video:

Brenton Tarrant’s “manifesto” has been largely scrubbed from major media sites and social media, although I’m sure it’s available on plenty of dissident websites. I’ve uploaded a copy here, in case anyone wants to read it.

I’ve only just started looking at it myself, but the similarities between the slaughter in Christchurch and the massacres by Anders Behring Breivik are remarkable. The main difference is that Mr. Breivik killed Young Socialists, while Mr. Tarrant killed Muslims.

Like the Breivik case, Brenton Tarrant’s ideology (such as it is) was designed to harm specific target groups. The Butcher of Utøya brought down a firestorm upon the Counterjihad — with the exception of Fjordman, his targets seemed to be mainly Counterjihad people in the USA.

Similarly, the Butcher of Christchurch seemed to be aiming at the anti-immigration movement in general, and more specifically the opponents of Islam in the Balkans.

I tend to be paranoid, and the Breivik affair intensified that trait. At the time I thought Anders Breivik must surely have had a “handler”. In the eight years since then I have observed that there is no limit to the depravity, ruthlessness, immorality, and evil of the Permanent Government, a.k.a. the Deep State.

That’s why this little piece of the Tarrant manifesto made my spider sense tingle (the conceit being that he is interviewing himself):

Continue reading

The Five Choices


Sweden — The Partition of India

Update from the Baron:I was using Dymphna’s computer, and forgot to log in as the Baron before posting. But this really is one of my posts.

Ten years ago, El Inglés wrote his ground-breaking essay about the dilemma that Western Europe is currently facing, “Surrender, Genocide… or What?”. It made heads explode even among certain of our supposedly “conservative” allies.

Last week we discussed partition, which is a third option.

Now our long-time commenter RonaldB has added two more options in remarks about the fall of Uppsala. He was specifically addressing the situation in Sweden, but his descriptions are equally applicable to all of Western Europe and the UK, with Canada and Australia moving along right behind them. Even the USA will face the same dilemma, at least in some of our major metropolitan areas, within fifteen or twenty years, so this is something we should all be thinking about carefully.

Option #5 is “Genocide”, but I would assume it includes ethnic cleansing, which might be called “Genocide Lite”.

Remember: The most important thing about these options is not whether one or another of them is the one you prefer. There are two important questions to consider (besides the morality of the chosen solution):

1.   Is the choice politically possible? For instance, I often hear statements to the effect that “All seditious Muslims must be immediately deported, all the mosques must be closed, and all the globalist elite traitors must be tried and executed.” OK, I hear the suggestion. But it is not politically possible, neither now nor for the foreseeable future. So why bother discussing it?
2.   Is the choice viable? That is, even if it is politically possible, would it work? Can it accomplish its goals, or is it almost certain to fail? It’s my contention that partition might be just barely possible in political terms (after all, it was implemented in India in 1947), but it is not viable — it would fail, and fail quickly. Western Europe and India are very different cases.
 

Dymphna and I will shortly be going out for a little while. Y’all can start the discussion, and when we get back, we’ll moderate the comments.

Here’s what RonaldB had to say:

1.   Surrender
    This is indistinguishable from what they’re doing now. Withdraw the police, allow sharia law, sharia enforcement police, sharia courts to do as they wish, and continue sending in welfare and public assistance, including housing and medical care, for any Muslim from the area who applies for it.
2.   Partition
    Build a wall or impenetrable fence around the area, move any Muslims or immigrants in the surrounding area into the partitioned territory, and leave it alone. The main difference between this and surrender is that people from inside the area will not be allowed into Sweden, and no assistance will be given. They can apply to the EU, Saudi Arabia, or anyone else who wants to give them money. Whether they starve will no longer be a concern.
3.   Mass expulsions
    This will take some real planning, as a place must be found to expel the immigrants to. The Israelis had the right idea: pay a head tax to some local despot for every head he accepts, and don’t concern yourself too much with what happens to them after they get there.
4.   A horrific crackdown, completely discarding individual rights
    A simple military movement will not have much effect, because the organized Muslims can simply assassinate anyone who gets in their way. You would have to have a security apparatus akin to Saddam Hussein’s secret police, or Savak or the British Tans who controlled Ireland. The city would be treated as occupied territory. Unfortunately, the welfare and aid would probably continue under this scenario.
5.   Genocide
    There are so many other ways of handling this that genocide would be profoundly immoral.
    Afterword
    Those are all the possibilities I can think of. I don’t think there is a possibility of putting a lid on the situation and pretending it’s been settled. The Muslims feel its time to assert their control, so they’re now in the last stages of jihad and aren’t about to pull back for bribes or appeals to reason or civic pride.
 

Avi Yemini vs. the Facebook Behemoth

Avi Yemini is a Jewish Australian who is also a veteran of the Israel Defense Forces. He is a conservative activist and a candidate for public office. Recently he has been an outspoken advocate for white South African farmers who are currently facing expropriation and genocide.

A few days ago Mr. Yemini’s Facebook page was abruptly taken down. He was unable to get any answers to his questions about why his page was removed, so he has come to New York to confront Facebook in person, and is planning to file a crowd-funded lawsuit against the company.

Vlad Tepes interviewed Avi Yemini yesterday via skype: