Epa is spot on with this:
on the day the anti jihad movement is equivalent in people's minds with groups such as the BNP, WE LOSE.We're coming dangerously close to just that conflation, I think. Not we at IBA, the anti-jihad movement in general.
Jihadis win
When Von Brunn invaded the Holocaust Museum and murdered Stephen Tyrone Johns, one of the first things I did upon hearing of the atrocity was try to find out if Von Brunn could be in any way considered part of the anti-jihad. I found no such ties. But suppose I had found such ties? Suppose that Von Brunn had been a frequent commenter here at IBA or at another anti-jihad site? The left would make hay of that, all right, as the left has already done with Free Republic, where he occasionally commented.
Any alliances the anti-jihad makes are going to be scrutinized. We'll all get tarred with the same brush.
That is the reality.
Furthermore, with BHO in office and the recent Cairo Speech, the scrutiny of the anti-jihad has already ramped up. Any indication of racism is going to be found out and the news trumpeted in the media, sooner or later.
And the idealism? Well, we've discussed that aspect ad nauseam. We cannot, however, discuss it often enough, IMO. We either believe in our principles -- or we don't. Look at history. Compromising principles for pragmatism ends in great woe every time.
18 comments:
Wtf is wrong with Europeans? Seriously. You know who the best anti-jihadists in Britain would be? Indians. The British can't just bail on their subjects except for the truly monstrous ones like Egyptians, who've abdicated any welcome they might have received among decent human beings. Ghanians, Kenyans, Somalilanders, Indians: those are people we desperately need on our side.
Well said, Jdamn. Look at those two bishops, Nazir Ali and the other guy (I forget his name), they believe in the principles of Britain more than the average Brit seems to.
You guys sure waste a lot of bandwidth attacking the BNP and VB. But you're curiously silent about the rest of the European political scene. Why?
Should we take your silence about Sinn Fein (the Hezbollah of Ireland) as a tacit endorsement? They elected a member to the EP this election. As I'm sure you're aware, they're the political wing of the Provisional IRA who've slaughtered thousands of people over the years. Yet I've never read a bad word about them here.
Or what about the Communist/Marxist Left, who just elected 33 MEPs. They stand unapologetically for an ideology that was responsible for the deaths of over 100 million people last century. Are you familiar with the Left Party in Germany, made up of functionaries and fellow travellers of the old totalitarian East German regime? They just elected 8 MEPs, yet I've never seen them denounced here.
Or what about the anti-human Green cult that just elected an astonishing 53 MEPs. Why have I never seen these lunatics given the harsh treatment that they so richly deserve here? Because to you they're better than the nationalists, maybe?
Nope, IBA saves all their wrath for the BNP and VB, parties that captured all of 4 seats between them. It's not the blood-soaked terrorists, communists or Enviro-cultists, with their dozens of MEPs that are the problem. And the Eurabian establishment parties (Christian Democrats, Liberals and Socialists), with their hundreds of MEPs, are rarely if ever criticized here. For some reason it's only the parties with the guts to stand up against the Islamization of Europe that get the boots put to them with sickening regularity at a website allegedly opposed to the jihad.
You're following the road that Charles Johnson has trailblazed: From an anti-jihad site to an anti-anti-jihad site. Only 18 months ago LGF was a widely read, influential conservative website. Now, after enless attacks on European nationalists and utter silence about the vastly larger Eurabian left, it's a little read, widely mocked liberal website. Will you turn on Geert Wilders next just like CJ did?
All of us here are a bunch of anonymous nobodies claiming to oppose the jihad by typing away from the comfort of our own homes or offices. Meanwhile the members of the BNP, VB, PVV and other like-minded parties are risking their careers, their personal safety, and even their lives to get people elected to political office in order to actually do something about the Islamization of the West. The only way the jihad can be slowed down, much less stopped, is through legislation, not masterbatory blog-chatter. We need people to get elected to high office to actually make a difference.
So take your oh-so-delicate PC sensibilities and start attacking the real enemies in European politics for a change. I'm not asking you to support the VB or BNP, even though one would think that an anti-jihad website would at least agree with them about SOME things, like opposition to Islamization, mass immigration, the EU Superstate, political correctness, anti-Americanism and anti-Zionism. Just train your guns on the 90-95% of MEPs who truly deserve your scorn instead of the 5-10% who at least share SOME of your values.
Jeppo
Jeppo,
We "waste bandwidth" on the BNP because people like you, who are members of the anti-Jihad dare to defend the BNP.
You don't defend Sinn Fein.
In other words, I don't comment on Sinn Fein because they have little to do with the Jihad.
(However, I do know they have something to do with the Jihad, in that they have forged alliances with Ghadaffi, Hizbollah, and Hamas. However, no one in the anti-Jihad is advocating for them, are they?)
You said: what about the Communist/Marxist Left, who just elected 33 MEPs. They stand unapologetically for an ideology that was responsible for the deaths of over 100 million people last century.
I say: Yep, but once again, they don't have much to do with the anti-Jihad, cuz no one in the anti-Jihad is advocating for them.
To the extent that the Communists/Socialists are involved in the dhimmification process and the moral relativism, we do more than our share of commenting.
You said: You're following the road that Charles Johnson has trailblazed: From an anti-jihad site to an anti-anti-jihad site. Only 18 months ago LGF was a widely read ....
I say, we were at the epicenter of that argument, and thus we have been on the road just as long as Charles.
The first people Charles called out were Atlas Shrugs and Gates of Vienna.
Both of whom were writers here at IBA.
Did you know that?
We did not kick Baron, Dymphna, or Pamela off IBA. They all chose to quit IBA because of our stand against this Ethnic Nationalist bullshit.
I have to wonder if you know the history.
I disagree with Charles Johnson simplistic manner of dealing with the subject, calling people neo-Nazis and neo-Nazi-sympathizers, but I agree with him in essence.
Ethnic Nationalism is a slippery slope to Fascism in the same way that Communism is a slippery slope to Fascism.
Clearly I don't care much about my traffic, considering the fact that I have risked offending Pamela, Charles, and Robert Spencer.
The rest of you comment is valid in the sense that I risk little to spout my opinions, as I am anonymous. However, that does not mean that I have to support racists who do, in fact, ostracize (you choose the word "risk") themselves from the larger culture by virtue of their ignorant world view.
"Should we take your silence about Sinn Fein (the Hezbollah of Ireland) as a tacit endorsement?"
GIVE ME AN EFFING BREAK.
That is manipulative debating technique to frame a winning argument against an absent debater by inventing a red herring to blow away.
We have gone thru Haider here, and we are talking about racially motivated group hiding behind a movement which is something else altogether, JUST LIKE THE NSM and illegal immigration.
Whether Sinn Fein is despicable for using the same tactics as HAMAS is not germain to THOSE ISSUES.
WE are actually trying to STAY AWAY from this stupid stupid debate. But the continuous battle of CJvsPamvsSpencervsGOVvsVBvs ...... is a continuous mess.
SICKOFITSICKOFITSICKOFITSICKOFIT
OK forget the debate for now. Here's my idea: If the UKIP and the BNP ran as a single party in this past election, let's call them the British Independence Party, they would have received 22.7% of the vote, just a couple points behind the Conservatives. More importantly, they would have won 22 seats rather than the 15 they actually won (UKIP 13, BNP 2).
The UKIP would bring respectability, economic conservatism and solid leadership (Nigel Farrage) to the table, while the BNP would bring their staunch opposition to immigration, Islamization and political correctness. If these two parties could combine before the next British general election, I think there's a good chance they could actually win it.
But it probably won't happen because some milquetoast multiculturalist liberals within the UKIP won't have anything to do with the BNP. And that means that the Conservatives or Labour (i.e. tweedledum and tweedledee) will win the election and the descent into al-Britain will continue. To some people, even so-called conservatives, the inevitable Islamization of their country is preferable to co-operating with nationalists to prevent said Islamization. And that's just what those people are going to get.
Pastorius said: "To some people, even so-called conservatives, the inevitable Islamization of their country is preferable to co-operating with WHITE nationalists to prevent said Islamization."
OK, but you forgot to add: "And that's just what those people are going to get." Because NOTHING can be allowed to interfere with mass immigration, multiculturalism and political correctness, not even the impending Islamic takeover of Europe.
Liberalism uber Alles!
I don't think yours is the only alternative. It's just the only alternative you can envision.
Pasto, you and I debating this issue are like a low rent version of Melanie Phillips vs. Lawrence Auster
Heh, that's a good point.
Maybe I should just post another Babe of the Week, and be done with it, huh?
No, read this first. LOL
No Jeppo, I'll just get back to what I'm good at:
http://media1.break.com/dnet/media/2008/11/74%20Hot%20Babe.jpg
how many have bnp killed?
none.
how many have pro-choice people killed: 100 million wolrdwide.
yet i will stand shoulder to shoujlder with a pro-choicer who is anti-jihad.
yet you want constantly attack the bnp.
it seems to me you are playing into the hands of the real enemy.
fdr was right to ally with staklin to defeat hitler.
his mistake (truman's actually) was not going after stalin after ww2. (truman failed becasue state and department of war were filled with comsympos and spies like hiss.)
i think it would be a much better use of all your energies to find way to inspire independents to become anti-jihad and anti-left and to stop attacking the bnp and the like.
or to attack the bnp as being LEFTIST - which they are: they are national/racist socialists.
but: as long as the major parties in bitain ignore jiuhad and act as dhimmis, the bnp is the only gane in towm.
in fact, their success may be the only thing which awakens the tories or labour.
Anonymous and Jeppo are right. The so called "far right" or an alliance of such are the only group with the will to prevent the Islamisation of the UK.
It's a no brainer; would I rather live in slavery under an Islamic republic OR would I rather live under a regime run by the BNP/UKIP?
That's the bottom line for us British to decide and no one else, not even bloggers from the other side of the pond. Just remember you have your constitution and your right to bear arms and YOU will never have to face the same bottom line as us Brits.
Epa,
Nobody is sicker of this topic than I am.
Pasto and I discussed that privately yesterday. I get very agitated about this issue.
I might as well explain why.
I have a personal reason, namely, that I broke with my family over the issue of racial prejudice. I took a stand and had one helluva time. My family and I finally got to an understanding. It was a long process and not easy for any of us in my family.
I thought that I was finished with all this discussion about race, ethnicity, etc. I had left all this dust-rolling behind back in the late 1960s.
Or so I thought.
Ever since all this has come up in the blogosphere, I gasp for air right before I go to sleep and when I wake up in the middle of the night.
I am literally sick over this!
Expecting the major parties to turn around is a pipe dream. All of them are compromised by Islamic infiltration and are so deep in the mess they themselves created that turning around will be a revolutionary act that shatters the parties. It means having to face up to all their little acts of treason over the years, and having to admit that Islam itself is the problem, not "radical" Islam or Islamism or perverted interpretations of Islam. Once they have admitted that Islam is the problem, what are they going to tell their Islamic members and supporters? "Sorry, old boy, we were in denial all this while about your being a menace to society and now that we can no longer put off Judgement Day, kindly bugger off so that we can begin to clean out the Augean Stables."? Yeah, that will go down really well with the slaves of Allah.
"Suppose that Von Brunn had been a frequent commenter here at IBA or at another anti-jihad site? The left would make hay of that, all right, as the left has already done with Free Republic, where he occasionally commented."
No, he didn't comment at Free Republic... some Freeper just grabbed a copy of one of von Brunn's rants about the media from a Norwegian forum.
The first post that shows up in a search for the username wannabegeek is this:
"Too late? Not really. I'm praying in Jesus Christ Name! that the SCOTUS will be vigilant enough, that they'll uphold the Constitution no matter what. I'll pray that they'll check mate the Zero!"
Then ask yourself, why would someone who thinks Christianity was invented by the Jews as a conspiracy to destroy western culture be praying to Jesus Christ?
Whatever issues wannabegeek might have, he or she obviously isn't von Brunn and probably wasn't even aware of von Brunn's racist website.
Watcher,
Thanks for the corrections.
Post a Comment