An Islamic country wanted to sign a peace accord in order to give Israel a false sense of security

Something that shouldn't be too surprising was recently reported in the news, and it should make clear why the Religion of Peace will not make it possible to lead a civilized relationship with an Arabic country so long as they continue to adhere to said religion:

Several days have passed since the dramatic, earth-shattering revelation that a leader of one neighboring country advised another neighboring country to sign some sort of sham agreement with Israel in order to lull it into a false sense of security and then launch a surprise attack. The report received extensive media coverage, and the reactions were, naturally, various expressions of shock and concern. The underlying report said officials from one country had urged another to reach an agreement with Israel as a tactical measure while preparing for a future military confrontation. The identities of the countries remain under military censorship.

I, too, insignificant little me, was shocked and appalled. Almost like that girl I once was, back when the Middle East was still new to me, who could not understand how the man in the keffiyeh could spout clichés about peace in English, incite terrorism in Arabic, and still get photographed with world leaders on the White House lawn; who could not understand how people were being blown apart on buses while elsewhere people were receiving prizes. As a child, I thought there must surely be something I was missing, some dramatic, closely guarded detail that defied ordinary logic and somehow, almost supernaturally, justified this circus.

Don't keep yourselves in suspense. There was no such thing. So thoroughly was there no such thing that even if someone took a putty knife to the floors of the censorship authorities' basements, they would not find a shred of evidence justifying the Israeli obsession, born more or less alongside the state itself, with making peace with our enemies.

Is it really far-fetched to assume that even back then, when peace fever was burning almost as fiercely as the fuel tanks of Jerusalem's No. 18 buses, there were reports resembling this week's revelation about the true intentions of Arab leaders, but the censor did not permit them to be published? How much are our worldviews really based on facts if we are unaware of most of them? And how meaningful is our choice of leaders if the issues that truly matter are never discussed at all?

And what's really grating is how the military won't allow anybody to know just which country it was who wanted to pull a taqqiya act upon Israel. What if it's Syria under Ahmed al-Sharaa? I don't know at all, but men like him certainly didn't improve the perceptions of such countries when they commit the persecution and under the table tactics they specialize in.

This is very disturbing info, and should make clear why such countries, with the Religion of Peace now dominating, cannot be expected to be honest about their intentions.

The new right-wing anti-Trump crowd kowtows to Islam

Andrea Widburg discussed how bad right-wingers like Tucker Carlson, and also Pope Leo, have sold out to Islam along their path to undermining Donald Trump's policies:

Today’s news brought stories of two thought leaders—the Pope and Tucker Carlson—showing reverence for Islam. This differs from the left’s long-standing political allegiance with Islamic causes, something reflecting that the left and Islam share a common goal, which is the West’s destruction. Instead, this is a reverence for the Islamic faith. That’s new and, I must say, as someone who likes the Judeo-Christian worldview, disturbing.

The way I see it, the Koran is a pastiche of random lessons from the Bible, with which Mohammed was clearly familiar, plus a lot of rules that worked well for Mohammed’s personal advancement. Thus, Mohammed echoed such principles as a unitary god and the rejection of idolatry, charity to the poor, honesty in trade, respect for parents, mercy and forgiveness, and keeping one’s word.

The problem is that he added other rules that were carve-outs for Muslims. Thus, Mohammed himself is idolized to the point at which he is indistinguishable from God, sharia laws are utterly merciless, and Muslims have no obligation to extend to non-Muslims mercy, honesty in trade, or keeping one’s word.

In addition, Islam has icky things layered over it. For example, because the 50-year-old Mohammed married a six-year-old and consummated the marriage when he was 53 and she was nine, that’s a right given to all Muslim men. And because Mohammed veiled his wives because he was a prophet, Muslim women must wear tents.

Lastly, of course, there’s the whole war thing. Mohammed mandated conquest and war against infidels. Some people counter this by pointing to the violence in the Bible but the Bible is both a religious book and a history book. It recounts battles. But there is no “perfect man” telling Christians and Jews that they must convert the world through fire and sword, nor that women are the sexual spoils of such wars.

What’s disturbing is that two Western men who proclaim both their faith and hostility to Trump and the MAGA movement have lately become very supportive of Islam.

You could probably add a few more rotten apples to the list, those being the aforementioned RINO writers at the Federalist, who've also signaled support for Carlson and Leo. What the main 2 figures in focus are doing is merely an attempt to stealth indoctrinate the western populace under the guise of "conservatism", and we must hope most of the population understands what sellouts both these disgraces really are. They both keep silent on Christians persecuated by Islam, and it's chilling to wonder if both could be secret converts to Islam, much like some British in past decades wondered if King Charles was secretly a convert. Why, what if French communist Jean-Luc Melenchon is? For now, it's disgusting how Leo's following up Carlson as a religious figure who's a dhimmi sellout.

Holocaust survivor explains how the Hamas bloodbath is much worse

A 90-year-old Holocaust survivor says the Hamas bloodbath on October 7, 2023 is worse in many ways, because of the savagery involved:

In the run-up to International Holocaust Day, Arutz Sheva - Israel National News spoke with Miriam Schlisser, the heroine of the children's book 'Papusha', on her feelings since the heinous October 7th massacre.

She believes that what the Hamas terrorists did on the morning of October 7th was even more atrocious and horrific than the Holocaust.

"The murderous Germans were intelligent and gentle. Yona, my husband, carried his brother on the Death March. They would walk at night and rest during the day. He weighed thirty kilos and carried another thirty kilos. If he had put him down, the Germans would not have beaten him, but fired a bullet through him and left him on the side of the road, where someone would collect him and transfer him to a mass grave."

On the other hand, Miriam says, the Hamas terrorists "got their hands dirty, cut off the head of a soldier and sold it. This is sadism. This is worse than the Holocaust," she says and recounts that when her brother found himself in Birkenau without any family members with him, he asked a Polish Jew where his parents were, and this person pointed towards the chimney. "They didn't shoot them. They poisoned them with gas and then pushed them into the crematorium to be burned. But they didn't get their hands dirty like the Hamas. To open a pregnant woman's stomach and take out the fetus is not something done by any human being."

She's got a vital point. While what the National Socialists did was abominable, anybody who'd commit graphic gore is taking mass murder to a whole new level. The Hamas has thus made themselves into the National Socialists of the 21st century, as has anybody who supports their barbarism. Of course, a century before that, there was also a massacre in Hebron in 1929, which preceded what happened on October 7, 2023. And that too must be pondered.

A history comic whose subject is even more relevant today

Arnon Shorr, a screenwriter and author originally from Haifa, wrote a column for Jewish Boston telling about a graphic novel he developed about Israel's war of indepdence in 1948, discussing how the armies of the Arab Legion attacked the country, and points out that, in the aftermath of the horrific jihad bloodbath the Hamas committed on October 7, it's even more relevant a subject than ever. The title of the GN he's publishing is "Brother's Keeper":

It sat on a hard drive for several years, until this summer, when an opportunity arose to collaborate once more with Joshua M. Edelglass, the illustrator of “José and the Pirate Captain Toledano.” I shared several story ideas with Josh, who immediately gravitated toward “Brother’s Keeper.” We decided we’d work together to reimagine the story as a single-issue (or “one-off”) comic book. The goal was to have something ready to debut in mid-November, at the Jewish Comics Experience, a new and exciting convention of Jewish comics at the Center for Jewish History in New York. So, in August, with only a few months to get the job done, I began to write.

I went back to old interviews that my uncle Yoav had recorded. My grandfather’s accounts of the battle and its aftermath are riveting, and revealed surprising details that I had forgotten over the years. I also found this very detailed description of the battle. I drew from every account that I could find to create a composite representation of this small piece of that old war. [...]

Ramat Rachel is a small kibbutz on a strategically significant hilltop just south of Jerusalem. In 1948, its residents found themselves surrounded on three sides by three very powerful Arab armies. The Egyptian army approached from the west, the Arab Legion came up from the south, and the Jordanian army, along with local Arab fighters, applied pressure from the east. They all wanted to drive the Jews out so they could attack Jerusalem from this high ground.

My grandfather was sent to help defend this kibbutz, and when that appeared impossible, he oversaw the evacuation and retreat.

When I wrote these scenes, they were fascinating pieces of history. It was hard to imagine an army attacking a kibbutz, with bullets and artillery shattering the bucolic quiet.

And then I was confronted by the grim horrors of Oct. 7, 2023.

What I wrote as history had suddenly become current events. A terrorist army rampaging through Israel, attacking kibbutzim along the Gaza border. Residents, once again, forced to flee.

The book was already written, and Josh was working hard on the illustrations. For him, the experience was even more surreal. He was drawing an attack on a kibbutz while watching one unfold on the news.

Initially, all of this seemed like a horrible coincidence. “Brother’s Keeper” is supposed to be historical. It’s supposed to reflect on something that happened a long, long ago. Never in my darkest nightmares did I imagine that it would become contemporary again.

And yet, here we are.

We continued our work on the book. With the Jewish comics convention about a month away, we had some hard print deadlines to meet.

But I felt as though the book we were working on had fundamentally changed. I wasn’t sure exactly how, but it seemed suddenly more significant. A friend who stopped by for coffee one morning was able to articulate what I couldn’t. When he saw a few of the illustrations, he declared, “We need this. Now!”

He went on to explain: Most of us weren’t born the last time a kibbutz was attacked. Many of our parents weren’t born yet, either. Part of the pain of the Oct. 7 attacks was that we had never experienced anything like it before.

Then my friend pointed at the illustrations I had shown him. He said, “But we have been through this before. We’ve survived this before.”

The moment he pointed that out, I realized that my grandfather’s story was no longer “just a story from a war.” It suddenly had meaning.

It wasn’t the meaning I intended. It certainly couldn’t have been my grandfather’s meaning. How could we have imagined we’d need such a reminder again?

And yet, there it is.

My grandfather, surviving an attack on a kibbutz in 1948, reminds us of what we can overcome in 2023.

Josh and I had no plans for an immediate wide release of this comic book. We expected to print a bunch of copies to sell at the convention, and then to figure out a release plan from there.

But now, the story carries a new, urgent purpose. We are working very hard to make the book available as broadly as possible when it debuts in New York on Nov. 12, 2023.

The guy's doing the right thing to raise the issue at a time when a horrifying incident struck Israel anew. Surely most important, however, is that the publishers and the conventions had better make absolutely certain they stand by his production rock solid, and not cower in the face of any threats that could be made against them by antisemitic sources. The same could be said regarding comics and GNs discussing September 11, 2001.

I'm very glad Mr. Shorr made the effort to develop a GN like this. There's been far too much censorship of subjects involving Islamofascism ever since 9-11, and that includes subjects involving Israel. The time's come for more of all concerned to prove they have the guts to produce comics tackling these vital issues and focus upon them convincingly. For now, let's hope the aforementioned convention along with the publishers are going to stand by Mr. Shorr from A to Z.

Some more reactions by people who worked in comics to the attack on Salman Rushdie

Here's at least 2 more examples of people who've worked in comics responding to the horrifying attempted murder of Salman Rushdie at an institution near Buffalo, New York, which he's been fortunate to survive. First is G. Willow Wilson:

Just unreal. Just too awful. https://t.co/uyB1fFm05K

— Find GWW @ Table J-13 ECCC (@GWillowWilson) August 12, 2022

This is quite rich coming from somebody who took the role of a propagandist in favor of Islam (and even downplayed Iran's tyranny) when she wrote the Muslim Ms. Marvel book in the past decade. Now, she has the gall to address an issue she's unqualified for commenting on, where she'll doubtless claim the Religion of Peace was just "hijacked". If there's anybody whose word shouldn't be taken at face value on topics like these, it's Wilson, whose books should be boycotted.

The second is Neil Gaiman, the UK-born scribe who penned the 1989-96 take on Sandman:

A hard day. Family sickness, a small boy's Rock Academy concert, things to write and watch and approve and change, and over and above all of it worrying about @SalmanRushdie.Texting mutual friends. Finding myself horrified not by the awful act but by the people who approve of it.

— Neil Gaiman (@neilhimself) August 12, 2022

I fervently hope that @SalmanRushdie pulls through. He's funny, brilliant, dry, he has written beautiful wise books & I wish the people who think they hate him would read his words.(You don't hate Salman, who is a real person. You hate someone in your mind who has never existed.)

— Neil Gaiman (@neilhimself) August 12, 2022

Midnight's Children is beautiful and a personal favourite, Haroun and the Sea of Stories/Luka and the Fire of Life are terrific novels for the young, Quichotte is brilliant, and The Satanic Verses is the novel that started the fatwa and the violence that accompanied it. https://t.co/rijnXEvBtX

— Neil Gaiman (@neilhimself) August 12, 2022

Well I think it's a good thing Gaiman's speaking Rushdie's favor. But, is he going to develop any books of his own employing themes similar to what the Satanic Verses contains? Let us be perfectly clear. If you're not willing to exercise your own free speech rights in protest of the tragedy Rushdie suffered through, your words ring hollow, and you're not accomplishing anything or doing justice for the victims of Islamic jihadism. This cowardice has practically led to the modern state of censorship that's affected much of the world, and while you may see some of these would-be auteurs recommending the books that started it all, they do not seem even remotely interested in emulating any of the ingredients the book contains, no matter what they say in their alleged solidarity with the victim of the horrifying jihadist crime.

And does Gaiman also condemn the threats that were made against J.K. Rowling? It should be noted that earlier, Gaiman signaled support for anti-Israeli propaganda, and in doing so, was letting Islamofascism - the very ideology Rushdie fell victim to - off the hook. Such leniency will not solve the issue, and Gaiman decidedly owes an apology for going by double-standards.

Kurt Busiek's actually willing to support Salman Rushdie

As many with knowledge on the comics industry surely know these days, comics writer Busiek's a very far-left ideologue who's upheld accepting views of Islam, the "Religion of Peace", which tragically resulted in a violent assault on Satanic Verses author Salman Rushdie in New York, who's had an Islamic fatwa (judgement) on his head in the nearly 35 years since he wrote the book. So it's a surprise to discover Busiek's offered a supportive stance for Rushdie's sake after this horror occurred, which Rushdie so far was fortunate to survive:

Just bought some Salman Rushdie books.

I've never read his work, though I kept circling MIDNIGHT'S CHILDREN and meaning to get to it. But I'd like to be supportive today, and this seems like the most direct way to do it.

— Kurt Busiek (@KurtBusiek) August 13, 2022

I got MIDNIGHT'S CHILDREN, THE SATANIC VERSES and JOSEPH ANTON. I'll look forward to reading them, and I hope he'll be with us and writing for a good long time to come.

— Kurt Busiek (@KurtBusiek) August 13, 2022

Okay, that's recommendation enough for me -- I just bought THE MOOR'S LAST SIGH too.

— Kurt Busiek (@KurtBusiek) August 13, 2022

Well I gotta admit, this is certainly amazing, considering how far to the left Busiek usually leans. But does this mean he's going to reevaluate any accepting views he may have of Islam? Alas, there's no telling what a left-wing ideologue will think, no matter what information he reads from the Satanic Verses itself. Certainly Busiek's backing for Rushdie is the right thing to do after the horror the poor man suffered along with one of his colleagues. But if Busiek refuses to acknowledge what Bill Maher's willing to (and won't even write any comics stories dedicated to Rushdie's causes), then we get nowhere in confronting a serious issue that's still endangering much of the world. Problems aren't solved if we don't condemn the sources.

European publishers self-censor and capitulate on Islam

Giulio Meotti's written about the terrible state of modern censorship on the issues of Islam, much worse than it was when Salman Rushdie wrote the Satanic Verses:

When Salman Rushdie published The Satanic Verses in 1989, Viking Penguin, the British and American publisher of the novel, was subjected to daily threats from Islamists. As Daniel Pipes wrote, the London office resembled "a battlefield", with police on guard, metal detectors and an escort for visitors. At the New York office, trained dogs sniffed mail packages and the offices were called a "sensitive place."

Many bookstores were attacked and many others refused to sell the book. Viking spent three million dollars on security measures, but it never faltered. Today, Western publishers all self-censor. And London capitulates to intimidation.

A popular children's book from the Biff, Chip, and Kipper series has just been retired following complaints that its portrayal of the Muslim people was racist, the Telegraph said. Oxford University Press is the publisher of The Blue Eye, in which young characters are transported to a foreign land with the help of a magic key. Children gather at a busy street market, which appears to be somewhere in the Middle East, where men are wearing white turbans and a woman is dressed in a niqab. The publisher said: "The book has been completely withdrawn from print and we have destroyed our remaining stock of the book, although a small number of copies may still remain in the supply chain. Some older titles may still be available in bookstores or as second-hand copies."

"And it doesn't matter, as the Times recalls, that" millions of children were trained in England on the books of Biff, Chip and Kipper". Turbans and niqabs are not appropriate, says the BBC.

Islam is treated in white gloves in so-called multiculturalism.

[...] Today the ancient fear of Islam has been welded to the new Woke hegemony. “Wokism has just begun” Pascal Bruckner writes this week in Le Figaro. “It is introduced as a product imported from the United States, especially on campuses (synthesis of asylums and re-education camps) with all the seduction of novelty and chic. It is a passing fad that is turning into a leftist ideology and is destined to consolidate itself for many years in the media, at school and in business. It will disappear only when public opinion gets tired of the nonsense or professed abominations of gender, identity, race. It will take a whole generation”.

Sadly, it makes sense that wokism's come from leftist USA institutions, and now, it's resulted over the years in a tragedy where only so many challenging issues are shunned by publishers and even film studios and such because it doesn't meet their modern standards of political correctness. It's one of the leading reasons why modern literature and entertainment is in such a dire, bankrupt state. That aside, any publisher who doesn't have the courage any more than the resources to deal with all these issues has no business working in book publishing. The query now is, will conservatives be willing to show the courage to work on what leftist outfits aren't?

What Is Ramadan?

Ramadan 2020 begins at sunset on or about April 23 and will end on or about May 23. Muslims, ever contentious about nearly every matter, even disagree among themselves as to when Ramadan should begin.

What does Ramadan really celebrate, particularly Eid ul-Fitr, which marks the end of Ramadan? If one understands the history of Islam and, especially, that of Ramadan, one will come to understand that such a commemoration, including iftar dinners at the White House, should be unacceptable to all those who oppose Islamic supremacism.

Ramadan involves more than prayers, fasting, and the giving of alms — all of which are part of the month long observance but which are also the outward signs of another message. By literal definition, of course, Ramadan commemorates Allah's "revealing" the Qur'an to Muhammad. But history clearly indicates that the "revelations" from Allah to Muhammad began around 610, some fourteen years earlier than 624.

Those earlier passages, sometimes referred to as the Meccan verses, are the oft-quoted peaceful verses in the Koran. Contrary to what one might expect, however, the last day of Ramadan does not celebrate the actual date of the earliest peaceful "revelations" of Allah to Muhammad but rather the Battle of Badr, the first significant military victory by the forces of Muhammad.

The Battle of Badr of March 17, 624, is one of the few military conflicts specifically mentioned in the Qur'an and holds a great deal of significance in Islam. Eid ul-Fitr, the final portion of Ramadan, has as its origin the aforementioned battle. Furthermore and most importantly, this battle marked the turning point for Islam, both politically and ideologically.

Having earlier fled to Medina along with followers who accepted him as their prophet whereas most of the tribes of Mecca did not, early on that morning in 624 Muhammad got word that a rich Quraish caravan from Syria was returning to Mecca. He therefore assembled the largest army he had ever been able to muster, some 300 men, with the original intent of raiding the caravan. After his men successfully overtook the caravan and brought back the booty, Muhammad then conveniently received a new "revelation" from Allah — a "revelation" which not only included rejoicing in having captured an enemy's caravan but which also called "proved" that Muhammad had been preaching the true way all along. Fulfilling Destiny, Muhammad and his forces proceeded to trounce the Quraish as punishment for having earlier rejected the prophet's teachings. From this source:

In the name of Allah, the Beneficient, the Merciful.

The battle of Badr was the most important among the Islamic battles of Destiny. For the first time the followers of the new faith were put into a serious test. Had victory been the lot of the pagan army while the Islamic Forces were still at the beginning of their developments, the faith of Islam could have come to an end.

No one was aware of the importance of the outcome of the Battle as the Prophet (S.A.W.) himself. We might read the depth of his anxiety in his prayer before the beginning of the Battle when he stood up supplicating his Lord:

God this is Quraish. It has come with all its arrogance and boastfulness, trying to discredit Thy Apostle. God, I ask Thee to humiliate them tomorrow. God, if this Muslim band will perish today, Thou shall not be worshipped.

[...]

This battle laid the foundation of the Islamic State...

In other words, victory at the Battle of Badr proved to Muhammad and his adherents that Islam should from that time forth take on a militant aspect because such is the will of Allah. From the day of the Battle of Badr on, the tone of the verses in the Qur'an changed. These more recent "revelations," sometimes referred to as the Medinan verses, abrogated the earlier and peaceful Meccan ones. Because preaching and tolerance had not brought Muhammad the following which he needed in order to establish himself and Islam as political forces to be reckoned with, Allah, via a military victory, showed the prophet a more effective way to spread Islam. Therefore, Muhammad's victory at the Battle of Badr symbolizes both the way to bring about the will of Allah and the will of Allah itself.

In sum, Ramadan is, in and of itself, a statement advocating submission to Islam and to the will of Allah. Ah, the dhimmitude and submission of all Western leaders when they send Ramadan greetings to the Islamic world!

President Donald J. Trump: "The West will never ever be broken"

Image credit

I caught the last ten minutes or so of President Trump's speech today at Krasiński Square, the site of a monument commemorating the 1944 Warsaw Uprising against the Nazis in Warsaw, Poland.

WOWZER!

What a statement of the importance of national borders and of limited government!

But it was the words I cited in the title of this blog post that jumped out at me:

"The West will never ever be broken."

We no longer have an apologist POTUS. Instead, we have a POTUS who stands strong for the West — and without any mealy-mouthed whimpering about colonialism-based guilt (Zinnism).

Below, I have, more or less, cued up the portion of the speech that made me want to stand up and cheer. Worth your time.


Yes, President Trump uttered the words "radical Islamic terrorism."

Note: the full transcript of the speech is HERE. Check out those last several pargraphs. WOOT!

The Tears of Jihad Museum

More information HERE.

The Three Phases Of Muslim Immigration

Click directly on the image to enlarge it:

Meanwhile, most Western leaders choose to disregard the above reality. The West will continue to devolve.

What SHOULD Replace Islamophilia

From "Liberals need to stop flattering Islam and ask the tough questions instead," an essay by Amir Taheri, Chairman of Gatestone Institute in Europe:

...The Islampophilia crowd do a great disservice to both Western democracies and to Islam itself. They invite Americans and Europeans to sacrifice part of their own freedom in atonement of largely imaginary sins against Muslims in the colonial and imperialist era. They also invite Muslims in the West to learn how to pose as victims and demand the rewards of victimhood as is the fashion in Europe and America. To the Muslims world at large, the message of Islamophilia is that Muslims need no criticism...

The author also makes these important historical points, including the following:

During the past six decades, the US has been by far the largest donor of aid to more than 40 of the 57 Muslim-majority nations. In the 1940s and ’50s, tens of millions of Muslims were saved from starvation and famine thanks to US food-aid. And the Point IV program, launched by President Truman, helped eradicate a number of endemic diseases, including smallpox and malaria, that killed large numbers of Muslims each year.

Many Muslims nations have been annually receiving large checks from the US for decades, among them Egypt, which gets $2 billion and Pakistan, the homeland of Syed Farook, the San Bernardino, Calif., killer, which gets $1 billion.

And note the opening paragraph of the essay:

I remember back in the 1980s, the diplomat then in charge of United Sates counterterrorism program, Robert Oakley, insisted that the US will never be targeted by homegrown Islamist terrorists because it was “their final destination, their last best hope.”

Well, THAT hasn't worked out at all, has it?

Read the entire essay HERE.

Interesting Statistics About Murderous Muslims

Muslims kill more people per year than 350 yrs of the Spanish Inquisition

270,000,000: THAT’S WAY MORE THAN STALIN, HITLER, MAO, POL POT, IDI AMIN (a Sunni Muslim), AND THE REST OF THE 20TH CENTURY’S GENOCIDAL SOCIALISTS! AND IT DOESN’T STOP THERE. THE KILLING BY MUSLIMS AROUND THE WORLD CONTINUES TO THIS DAY....IN FACT, NO IDEOLOGY HAS BEEN AS GENOCIDAL AS ISLAM....NOR HAS ANY IDEOLOGY BEEN SO BLOODTHIRSTY FOR SO LONG. FOR CENTURIES....

Read the rest and see the data HERE at The Muslim Issue Worldwide.

Vlad The Impaler, Part 1

Vlad The Impaler, Part 1

Here is Part 1 of a two-part piece on Vlad the Impaler by me, Pastorius:


Vlad III reigned on and off, as Prince of Wallachia, between 1448-1476. He was born, the son of Vlad II, in Transylvania. Wishing to assert his authority in an untamed world, Vlad II had been an early believer in the rallying power of images, and, had thus, used the Dragon, symbol of Order, as the logo of his reign. The people began calling him Vlad Drakul, meaning Vlad the Devil, a name which he seemed to have liked.

When Vlad III ascended to power, he signed his name to documents, Vlad Drakulea, meaning Son of the Devil.

Yes, this Vlad III, or Vlad Drakulea, is the inspiration behind the book Dracula by Bram Stoker.And with good reason, for he seems to have been a blood-thirsty man, both literally, and figuratively. Legend has it, a favorite delicacy was bread dipped in pig's blood. Whether or not that was true, Vlad Drakulea was an extraordinarily cruel ruler. And, guess where he learned much of his cruelty from?

Yes, that's right; the Muslims.

His father's reign as Prince of Wallachia was troubled by the need to balance the competing interests of the Hungarians of the realm with that of the invading Ottoman Empire. Vlad II chose appeasement much of the time, and thus, he was assasinated on the order of John Hunyadi, regent of Hungary.

This left Vlad III with no father, and, as those who assassinated his father did not trust his family, no throne.

In the years leading up to the assassination of his father, Vlad III had lived in Turkey and had familiarized himself with the customs, lifestyle, and military structure of the Ottoman Empire, as well as the language. Thus, when he found himself cut off from his royal lineage he turned to the Turks to help him successfully regain what he believed was rightfully his.

His reign was troubled from there on in. All told he gained and lost the throne three times, spending some years in prison during one fall from grace. One constant, though, was his reputation for cruelty. One of his nicknames was Vlad Tepes, which meant Vlad the Impaler.

The process of impaling an enemy is particularly gruesome. This, from Wikipedia is not for the fainter flowers among us:

Impalement was Dracula's preferred method of torture and execution, which he had learned in his youth as a prisoner of the Turks. It was and is one of the most gruesome ways of dying ever imagined.

Dracula usually had a horse attached to each of the victim's legs as a sharpened stake was gradually forced into the body. The end of the stake was usually oiled and care was taken that the stake not be too sharp; else the victim might die too rapidly from shock.

Normally the stake was inserted into the body through the anus and was often forced through the body until it emerged from the mouth. However, there were many instances where victims were impaled through other bodily orifices or through the abdomen or chest.

As expected, death by impalement was slow and painful. Victims sometimes endured for hours or days. Dracula often had the stakes arranged in various geometric patterns. The most common pattern was a ring of concentric circles in the outskirts of a city that constituted his target. The height of the spear indicated the rank of the victim. The corpses were often left decaying for months.

Vlad was known for many of the other cruel punishments he levied on his subjects. He would cut out the genitals of women who committed adultery. He once invited a large group of the sick and the lame to a big banquet, and at the culmination of the banquet, put the question to them, "Would you like to live with no care in the world?" When they answered in the affirmative, he had the doors locked and the building burned to the ground. There were no survivors. He then told his court that he had done what he had done, because he didn't want weak people in his land.

One lesson he seemed to have learned from the Turks was the hudna. For after just a few years of aligning himself with the Turks in order to establish his power, he turned on them.

The most famous scene of Vlad's life came in a battle against the Ottoman forces of one Sultan Mehmed II. Here is a description:


In the beginning of 1462, Vlad launched a campaign against the Turks along the Danube river. It was quite risky, the military force of Sultan Mehmed II being by far more powerful than the Wallachian army. However, during the winter of 1462, Vlad was very successful and managed to gain many victories.

To punish Dracula, the Sultan decided to launch a full-scale invasion of Wallachia. Of course, his other goal was to transform this land into a Turkish province and he entered Wallachia with an army three times larger than Dracula's.

Finding himself without allies, Vlad, forced to retreat towards Tirgoviste, burned his own villages and poisoned the wells along the way, so that the Turkish army would find nothing to eat or drink.

Moreover, when the Sultan, exhausted, finally reached the capital city, he was confronted by a most gruesome sight: thousands of stakes held the remaining carcasses of some 20,000 Turkish captives, a horror scene which was ultimately nicknamed the "Forest of the Impaled."

This terror tactic deliberately stage-managed by Dracula was definitely successful; the scene had a strong effect on Mehmed's most stout-hearted officers, and the Sultan, tired and hungry, admitted defeat.

Now, see, I know you were thinking to yourselves, "Since when does Pastorius do history?" The answer, of course, is rarely. But, this one is rather important, isn't it?

I'm not going to comment further. Talk among yourselves. Can't wait to hear what you have to say.

Vlad The Impaler, Part 2

Here is the second part of the two-part piece I wrote on Vlad The Impaler. (Click here to read the first part.) Vlad learned how to beat the Muslims from the Muslims himself. It is my opinion that the reason he beat them is he Spooked them.

It is apparent that Muslim culture is primitive and magic-based. They are a superstitious lot. They have paranoid fantasies about their enemies. They believe their enemies posses magical powers. They believe that things are fated by the will of Allah.

When things go against them, they attribute the loss to the will of Allah as well, and they conclude that Allah is punishing them for some misdoing. They are primitives praying to the rain god. Many Muslims are simply barbarians who can afford appliances.

When one thinks about it, one has to wonder if the phenomenon of the Geico Modern Cavemen (which, for our European readers is a TV show which is popular here in the United States) is the result of some subconcious creation on the part of our culture. If we are fighting such an enemy, and we are not allowed to speak openly of our enemies primitive qualities, why wouldn't we create a TV show which at once makes fun of those primitive qualities, and at the same time sets them in the modern world?

Are we to believe that we, with our advance science-based culture, could possibly lose to these idiots? They can not build their own airplanes, much less develop nuclear technology were we not helping them.

Anyway, read about Vlad the Impaler, and let's discuss this some more:


I want to be clear that I am not advocating torturing people en masse in the post below. I put myself in a bad position by declining to comment and make clear my thoughts on the antics of Vlad the Impaler.

Here are my unorganized thoughts on the war we find ourselves in.

As is true of human nature, the nature of warfare does not change as the years go by. The weapons change, the tactics change, and the battlefields change, but war stays the same. Why? Because war is a natural outgrowth of human nature.

Therefore, the thing that beat an enemy a thousand years before Christ, is the same thing that will beat an enemy today.

It is not guns, spears, rocks, or knives that beats the enemy, and, believe it or not, it is not killing the enemy that beats the enemy.

You can never kill every last one of those who oppose you. One thing the Lefties get right is War breeds more enemies. You kill one, and more will show up angry at the one you killed.

We are fighting what we think of as a 21st century war against a medieval enemy. We are using surgical strikes, GPS-mapping, and targeted bombing, all to insure that we kill as few civilians as possible. That is admirable. But, we may find that it also works against us.

We must understand that our enemy in this war has the advantage of being baptised in a Warrior Creed. Islam itself, teaches them to strike fear into the hearts of the infidel. To fight without ceasing, and to die the noble death of a martyr. Warrior Creeds teach that one should not fear dying. Instead, one should fear dishonor, humiliation, and bringing shame upon one's people.

Remember that the Japanese warriors of WWII would take a knife and plunge it into their belly, slicing themselves from groin to chest if they felt they had let their people down.

The Jihadis we are fighting against are no different.

They are Warriors because they were raised in a Warrior Culture. We were not.

Sure, we've got better hardware, but that won't win us the war. What will win us the war is to strike fear into their hearts. To shame and humiliate them.

What brings shame and humiliation upon a warrior?

Think about warrior types that you know. Think about athletes. Think about the most macho human beings you have layed eyes on in our culture. What do they fear? What causes them to lose their minds? What causes them to lose control of their emotions?

Having their manhood called into question in graphic terms. Having their woman taken away from them. Being shown to be weak. Being forced to part with their image of themselves as the most macho men you will ever lay eyes on.

A few days back I posted an excerpt from an article by an Australian Police Detective who seemed to have the right idea. He describes patrolling a Muslim neighborhood, and the fear his fellow policemen felt at having a brick hurled at their police car:


As we drove away in our marked police car, a half-brick bounced on the roof of the vehicle. The driver kept going.

I said, “What are you doing, they’ve just hit the car with a house brick!”

The young constable said, “Oh, they always do that when we drive past.”

The police were either too scared or too lazy to do anything about it. The damage bill on police cars became costly and these street terrorists grew stronger and the police became purely defensive. You see, the Police Royal Commission was about to start and the police retreated inside themselves knowing that the judicial system considered them easy targets. The police did not want to get hurt or attract Internal Affairs complaints.

Call me stupid, call me a dinosaur, but I made sure that day that at least one person in the group that threw the brick was arrested. I began by approaching the group just as that magistrate had lectured me and the other police involved in the Croydon search warrant. I simply asked who threw the brick. I was greeted with abuse and threats.

I then reverted to the old ways of policing. I grabbed the nearest male and convinced him that it was he who had thrown the brick. His brave mates did nothing. By the time we arrived at the police station, this young fool had become compliant, apologetic and so afraid that he kept crying.

You may not agree with what I did, but I paraded this goose around the police station for all the young police to see what they had become frightened of. For some months after that, police routinely rounded up the family whenever it was warranted.

That is what needs to be done to the Jihadis we are fighting. Of course, we are not allowed to broadcast the humiliation of our enemy for the world to see. It is against the Geneva Convention. But, they are allowed to broadcast the beheading of our friends and family, and our media will happily sell commercial time for us to have the privilege of watching.

What kind of sense does that make?

If we do not change our way of doing battle, I doubt that we will win. I think we will, instead, find ourselves in a kind of stalemate, until, eventually, one of their "sleeper cells" detonates a nuclear weapon in one of our cities. And then, we will act like beasts. We would probably retaliate with nuclear weapons and millions, tens of millions, or even hundreds of millions of people will die.

I do not want to see that happen.

And, that is why I brought up the subject of Vlad the Impaler. It seems to me he knew how to strike fear into the heart of his enemy. However, his weakness was that he was truly crazy. He did not go about war with the calm head of a rational being, but instead, like the Jihadis, would turn on anyone who wandered into his path at the wrong time.

We have the advantage of being rational. Now, if we would only also use our advantage in knowing how to thoroughly humiliate an enemy, as we have done time and again throughout Western history.

I am not advocating that we impale tens of thousands of Muslims. But, I am advocating that we do what we need to do to scare them out of their minds. They don't mind dying. It is humiliation that they fear.

If we need to display their gruesome dead bodies for their friends to see, then that might be a better deal than eventually resorting to WMD's, don't you think?

And, if we have to humiliate some top level Al Qaeda terrorists on international television, I don't think that would strip us of every last vestige of our humanity.

We need to get serious, or I fear we will end up being forced to become truly monstrous.


MORE THOUGHTS -

What I like about the logo is that it is, at the same time, subtle and blatant. And, it is quite a piece of artwork at the same time.

The sad truth is, in my opinion, this is the only kind of "shock and awe" Muslims understand. We are going to have to resort to some sort of tragic brutality to beat them.

Vlad seems to have spooked them. I have to wonder if, because their "culture" is so pathetic and primitive, they are more susceptible to being spooked. Are they more superstitious? Are they more given to weird conspiracy theories (yeah, we pretty much know that for a fact)? Are they more likely to attribute strange magic powers to their enemies? 

YES, I THINK THIS IS SO. THE MEDIEVAL TIMES ARE NOT OVER FOR MUSLIMS. THEY STILL LIVE WITH THAT MIND. 

THEY ARE MEDIEVAL MINDS LIVING IN A MODERN WORLD.
I've written a few different pieces, over time, about how to beat the Muslims. For some reason, the right blogosphere seems to ignore these pieces and concentrate on shit by people who tell us why we are going to lose instead.

Thus far, we are getting what we deserve.

Now, really, considering how completely superior our culture is to theirs, how could we lose (if we really wanted to win)?

I think the Muslims are easily defeatable. As Always on Watch commented to me this morning, "The Muslims think we possess big magic."

They are, indeed, spooked by us. The more I think about it, the more clear it is.

The reason they keep trying to hit us with airplanes is because they are transfixed by the "big magic" of airplanes. They can not build one themselves, so the airplane seems like a magical device to them. It's a Magic Carpet. It is the Western equivalent of Mohammed's night flight.

And, they can't make it work on their own.

Always on Watch also commented to me that many Muslims believe that the fact that they have oil is "the will of Allah." It is Allah's way of signaling to them that their civilization is better and is destined to win.

Magical thinking.

It is pathetic and primitive, and easy to beat if one concentrates on what makes them tick.

The Words Of Marco Polo

The militant Muslim is the person who beheads the infidel, while the moderate Muslim holds the feet of the victim. - Marco Polo (c.1254 – January 8-9, 1324)

June 8, A.D. 632

From Jihad Watch:

"'A'isha and Abdullah reported: As the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) was about to breathe his last, he drew his sheet upon his face and when he felt uneasy, he uncovered his face and said in that very state: Let there be curse upon the Jews and the Christians that they have taken the graves of their apostles as places of worship. He in fact warned (his men) against what they (the Jews and the Christians) did." -- Sahih Muslim 1082

"Narrated 'Aisha: Allah's Apostle in his fatal illness said, 'Allah cursed the Jews and the Christians, for they built the places of worship at the graves of their prophets.' And if that had not been the case, then the Prophet's grave would have been made prominent before the people. So (the Prophet ) was afraid, or the people were afraid that his grave might be taken as a place for worship." -- Sahih Bukhari 2.23.472

According to Islamic tradition, Muhammad died on June 8, 632, after once again cursing the Jews and Christians.

As for the historical reliability of these traditions, see here. But the Muslim contempt and hatred for Jews and Christians remains.

ISLAM: THE RELIGION OF GENOCIDE

From Reliapundit, the Astute Blogger:


PERSPECTIVE:

• More people are killed by Islamists each year than in all 350 years of the Spanish Inquisition combined.

• Islamic terrorists murder more people every day than the Ku Klux Klan has in the last 50 years

• Islamists killed more Buddhists in Thailand since 9/11 than the KKK killed in the 100 YEARS from 1865 to 9165.

• More civilians were killed by Muslim extremists in two hours on September 11th than in the 36 years of sectarian conflict in Northern Ireland

• The 19 Muslim hijackers killed more innocents in two hours on September 11th than the number of American criminals executed in the last 65 years.

MORE: Tears of Jihad

These figures are a rough estimate of the death of non-Muslims by the political act of jihad.

Africa

Thomas Sowell [Thomas Sowell, Race and Culture, BasicBooks, 1994, p. 188] estimates that 11 million slaves were shipped across the Atlantic and 14 million were sent to the Islamic nations of North Africa and the Middle East. For every slave captured many others died. Estimates of this collateral damage vary. The renowned missionary David Livingstone estimated that for every slave who reached a plantation, five others were killed in the initial raid or died of illness and privation on the forced march.[Woman’s Presbyterian Board of Missions, David Livingstone, p. 62, 1888] Those who were left behind were the very young, the weak, the sick and the old. These soon died since the main providers had been killed or enslaved. So, for 25 million slaves delivered to the market, we have an estimated death of about 120 million people. Islam ran the wholesale slave trade in Africa.

120 million Africans

Christians

The number of Christians martyred by Islam is 9 million [David B. Barrett, Todd M. Johnson, World Christian Trends AD 30-AD 2200, William Carey Library, 2001, p. 230, table 4-10] . A rough estimate by Raphael Moore in History of Asia Minor is that another 50 million died in wars by jihad. So counting the million African Christians killed in the 20th century we have:

60 million Christians

Hindus

Koenard Elst in Negationism in India gives an estimate of 80 million Hindus killed in the total jihad against India. [Koenard Elst, Negationism in India, Voice of India, New Delhi, 2002, pg. 34.] The country of India today is only half the size of ancient India, due to jihad. The mountains near India are called the Hindu Kush, meaning the “funeral pyre of the Hindus.”

80 million Hindus

Buddhists

Buddhists do not keep up with the history of war. Keep in mind that in jihad only Christians and Jews were allowed to survive as dhimmis (servants to Islam); everyone else had to convert or die. Jihad killed the Buddhists in Turkey, Afghanistan, along the Silk Route, and in India. The total is roughly 10 million. [David B. Barrett, Todd M. Johnson, World Christian Trends AD 30-AD 2200, William Carey Library, 2001, p. 230, table 4-1.]

10 million Buddhists

Jews

Oddly enough there were not enough Jews killed in jihad to significantly affect the totals of the Great Annihilation. The jihad in Arabia was 100 percent effective, but the numbers were in the thousands, not millions. After that, the Jews submitted and became the dhimmis (servants and second class citizens) of Islam and did not have geographic political power.

This gives a rough estimate of 270 million killed by jihad.

270,000,000: THAT'S WAY MORE THAN STALIN, HITLER, MAO, POL POT, IDI AMIN, AND THE REST OF THE 20TH CENTURY'S GENOCIDAL SOCIALISTS!

• FOR GOOD REASONS, THE LEFT LOVES TO HATE THE SPANISH INQUISITION, THE KKK, AND CAPITAL PUNISHMENT IN THE USA.

• SO WHY DON'T THEY CRITICIZE ISLAM - WHICH IS DEMONSTRABLY WORSE THAN ALL THREE COMBINED!?!?

• IN FACT, NO IDEOLOGY HAS BEEN AS GENOCIDAL AS ISLAM.

• NOR HAS ANY IDEOLOGY BEEN SO BLOODTHIRSTY FOR SO LONG. FOR CENTURIES.

• NOR HAS ANY IDEOLOGY EVER BEEN AS ANTI-LIBERTY, ANTI-DEMOCRACY - OR AS ANTI-WOMAN.

IT'S TIME IT WAS STOPPED.

FOR GOOD.

In Memory of King Richard III of England Who Wanted to Kick the Turks Out of Europe

August 22 is the 525th anniversary of the Battle of Bosworth Field in which the controversial English king Richard III died leading a calvary charge against the invading forces of Henry Tudor. Henry survived and became King Henry VII, father of Henry VIII and grandfather of Elizabeth I.

Richard is now acknowledged to have been libeled, slandered, and generally dragged through the muck for political purposes throughout the reigns of the Tudor monarchs. There is an ongoing debate over his actual character and actions that is a hell of a lot more fun than reading about Islam, though the questions raised are, admittedly, of much less timely and urgent concern.

Anyway, being a bit of an amateur "Ricardian" I discovered this tidbit in Bertram Fields 1998 history "Royal Blood". In May 1484 a visiting Silesian knight named Nicholar von Popplau had a meeting with Richard. In the course of their converstation Richard made the following comment: "I wish that my kingdom lay upon the confines of Turkey; with my own people alone and without the help of other princes I should like to drive away... the Turks."

The traditional memorial notice of the British and American Richard III societies goes as follows:

Remember Before God

Richard III

and those who fell at Bosworth Field,

having kept faith

August 22, 1485

Loyaulte Me Lie

[Loyalty Binds Me, which was Richard's motto. His symbol was the White Boar, which would have no doubt annoyed the Turks, as would have Richard had he ever got the chance.]

What Is Ramadan?

Ramadan 2010 began on or around August 11 and will end on or about September 10. Muslims, ever contentious about nearly every matter, even disagree among themselves as to when Ramadan should begin.

What does Ramadan really celebrate, particularly Eid ul-Fitr, which marks the end of Ramadan? If one understands the history of Islam and, especially, that of Ramadan, one will come to understand that such a commemoration, including iftar dinners at the White House, should be unacceptable to all those who oppose Islamic supremacism.

Ramadan involves more than prayers, fasting, and the giving of alms — all of which are part of the month long observance but which are also the outward signs of another message. By literal definition, of course, Ramadan commemorates Allah's "revealing" the Qur'an to Muhammad. But history clearly indicates that the "revelations" from Allah to Muhammad began around 610, some fourteen years earlier than 624.

Those earlier passages, sometimes referred to as the Meccan verses, are the oft-quoted peaceful verses in the Koran. Contrary to what one might expect, however, the last day of Ramadan does not celebrate the actual date of the earliest peaceful "revelations" of Allah to Muhammad but rather the Battle of Badr, the first significant military victory by the forces of Muhammad.

The Battle of Badr of March 17, 624, is one of the few military conflicts specifically mentioned in the Qur'an and holds a great deal of significance in Islam. Eid ul-Fitr, the final portion of Ramadan, has as its origin the aforementioned battle. Furthermore and most importantly, this battle marked the turning point for Islam, both politically and ideologically.

Having earlier fled to Medina along with followers who accepted him as their prophet whereas most of the tribes of Mecca did not, early on that morning in 624 Muhammad got word that a rich Quraish caravan from Syria was returning to Mecca. He therefore assembled the largest army he had ever been able to muster, some 300 men, with the original intent of raiding the caravan. After his men successfully overtook the caravan and brought back the booty, Muhammad then conveniently received a new "revelation" from Allah — a "revelation" which not only included rejoicing in having captured an enemy's caravan but which also called "proved" that Muhammad had been preaching the true way all along. Fulfilling Destiny, Muhammad and his forces proceeded to trounce the Quraish as punishment for having earlier rejected the prophet's teachings. From this source:

In the name of Allah, the Beneficient, the Merciful.

The battle of Badr was the most important among the Islamic battles of Destiny. For the first time the followers of the new faith were put into a serious test. Had victory been the lot of the pagan army while the Islamic Forces were still at the beginning of their developments, the faith of Islam could have come to an end.

No one was aware of the importance of the outcome of the Battle as the Prophet (S.A.W.) himself. We might read the depth of his anxiety in his prayer before the beginning of the Battle when he stood up supplicating his Lord:

God this is Quraish. It has come with all its arrogance and boastfulness, trying to discredit Thy Apostle. God, I ask Thee to humiliate them tomorrow. God, if this Muslim band will perish today, Thou shall not be worshipped.

[...]

This battle laid the foundation of the Islamic State...

In other words, victory at the Battle of Badr proved to Muhammad and his adherents that Islam should from that time forth take on a militant aspect because such is the will of Allah. From the day of the Battle of Badr on, the tone of the verses in the Qur'an changed. These more recent "revelations," sometimes referred to as the Medinan verses, abrogated the earlier and peaceful Meccan ones. Because preaching and tolerance had not brought Muhammad the following which he needed in order to establish himself and Islam as political forces to be reckoned with, Allah, via a military victory, showed the prophet a more effective way to spread Islam. Therefore, Muhammad's victory at the Battle of Badr symbolizes both the way to bring about the will of Allah and the will of Allah itself.

In sum, Ramadan is, in and of itself, a statement advocating submission to Islam and to the will of Allah. Ah, the dhimmitude and submission of all Western leaders when they send Ramadan greetings to the Islamic world!

The Islamic Genocide In India - 80 Million Killed?