Sunday, July 24, 2011

Anders Beivik imagined cautious alliance with Jihadists: “We both share one common goal”


From Harry's Place:

He said:
An alliance with the Jihadists might prove beneficial to both parties but will simply be too dangerous (and might prove to be ideologically counter-productive). We both share one common goal. They want control over their own countries in the Middle East and we want control of our own countries in Western Europe. A future cultural conservative European regime will deport all Muslims from Europe and isolate the Muslim world. As a result, the Islamists will gain the necessary momentum to retake power in several countries: Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Jordan, Syria, Yemen, Oman, Algeria, Morocco and a few others.
The Jihadists know this very well. An Islamic Caliphate is a useful enemy to all Europeans as it will ensure European unity under Christian cultural conservative leadership.
How this type of scenario could play out:
Approach a representative from a Jihadi Salafi group. Get in contact with a Jihadi strawman. Present your terms and have him forward them to his superiors:
1. Ask for “hudna” (temporary truce) during the discussions/proposal and demand assurances not to be harmed if they reject our offer. Ask if this is acceptable to them.
2. If they accept, try to meet at a neutral place (not like there is a neutral place on Muslim territory) or at least a relatively public place (which will make it harder for them to betray your arrangement) and present your offer. They are asked to provide a biological compound manufactured by Muslim scientists in the Middle East. Hamas and several Jihadi groups have labs and they have the potential to provide such substances. Their problem is finding suitable martyrs who can pass “screenings” in Western Europe.
Hmm.

Desires White European Cultural Hegemony.

Forms alliances with Jihadists.

Right in line with Hitler and the Grand Mufti.

Muslims and White Supremacists do have common cause, they are Separatists and they hate Jews.

3 comments:

Reliapundit said...

what should denmark be if not danish?

what should spain be if not spanish?

what should japan be if not japanese?

what should chile be if not chilean.

shouldn't norwegians be able to live in a norwegiAn norway?

or are people who want to maintain their traditional culture within their cultural homelands all evil?

OF COURSE THEY ARE NOT EVIL.

why should norwegians change their traditions so immigrants can maintain theirs?

arguing that italians cannot maintain italiaN traditions within italy is insane.

arguing that natives have to adapt to immigrants is anti-west postmodern leftist bullshit.

traditional cultures are okay.
ethnic pride is okay.
pride in you tribe is okay.

none are intrinsically bad or evil.

no more so than a gun is intrinsically bad or evil.

a gun in the wrong hand or used for the wrong reason is an evil weapon.

but in the right hands it is a force of justice and goodness and truth.

when jihadists use a gun or the threat of violence to force people away from their traditional ways and beliefs it is evil.

when we use guns to stop jihadists from coercing us and trying to make us submit, we are doing something noble and good and just.

ethnic nationalism is not intrinsically bad.

how one promotes it is another matter.

the counter-jihad is not bad because one monster who thought he was a part of it did a monstrous thing.

and neither is ethnic nationalism bad because one ethnic nationalist did a monstrous thing.

WAKE UP!

Damien said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Damien said...

Pastorius,

Apparently cultural Marxists were a greater enemy to than Islamists to Beivik.