Video...ATLANTIC JIHAD: The Untold Story of White Slavery

One of Abraham Lincoln's three favorite books was Sufferings in Africa: The Astonishing Account Of A New England Sea Captain Enslaved By North African Arabs by Captain James Riley. It was long a bestseller and published in 1817.

Something rarely discussed in today's history books, but back when I was in school, we covered much of this information in our World History classes:


Please read the the YouTube blurb (emphases mine):

Iceland abolished slavery in 1117. Ironically thousands of Icelanders (including millions other Europeans) will be enslaved by Muslim pirates in the following centuries.

Whilst the Arabs have been acknowledged as a prime force in the early usage of slaves from Africa, very little has been written about their usage of White slaves, whether they were part of the Russian slave trade or those kidnapped by Arab pirates. However, in recent years, the research of some authors has been bringing this issue to light.

The origins of African slavery in the New World cannot be understood without some knowledge of the millennium of warfare between Christians and Muslims that took place in the Mediterranean and Atlantic and the piracy and kidnapping that went along with it. In 1627 pirates from the Barbary Coast of North Africa raided distant Iceland and enslaved nearly four hundred astonished residents. In 1617 Muslim pirates, having long enslaved Christians along the coasts of Spain, France, Italy, and even Ireland, captured 1,200 men and women in Portuguese Madeira. Down to the 1640s, there were many more English slaves in Muslim North Africa than African slaves under English control in the Caribbean. Indeed, a 1624 parliamentary proclamation estimated that the Barbary states held at least 1,500 English slaves, mostly sailors captured in the Mediterranean or Atlantic. Millions European Christians were kidnapped and enslaved by Muslims in North Africa between 1530 and 1780 -- a far greater number than had ever been estimated before. Professor Robert Davis, in his book Christian Slaves, Muslim Masters: White Slavery in the Mediterranean, the Barbary Coast, and Italy, 1500-1800, estimated that 1 million to 1.25 million White people were enslaved by North African pirates between 1530 and 1780.

One of the things that both the public and many scholars have tended to take as given is that slavery was always racial in nature -- that only blacks have been slaves. But that is not true, We cannot think of slavery as something that only white people did to black people. Slavery in North Africa has been ignored and minimized, in large part because it is on no one's agenda to discuss what happened. The enslavement of Europeans doesn't fit the general theme of European world conquest and colonialism that is central to scholarship on the early modern era, he said. Many of the countries that were victims of slavery, such as France and Spain, would later conquer and colonize the areas of North Africa where their citizens were once held as slaves. Maybe because of this history, Western scholars have thought of the Europeans primarily as "evil colonialists" and not as the victims they sometimes were. Between 1580 and 1680. That meant about 8,500 new slaves had to be captured each year. Overall, this suggests nearly a million slaves would have been taken captive during this period. Using the same methodology, Davis has estimated as many as 475,000 additional slaves were taken in the previous and following centuries.

The result is that between 1530 and 1780 there were almost certainly 1 million and quite possibly as many as 1.25 million white, European Christians enslaved by the Muslims of the Barbary Coast. Enslavement was a very real possibility for anyone who traveled in the Mediterranean, or who lived along the shores in places like Italy, France, Spain and Portugal, and even as far north as England and Iceland.  From 1500 to 1650, when trans-Atlantic slaving was still in its infancy, more white Christian slaves were probably taken to Barbary than black African slaves to the Americas. Pirates (called corsairs) from cities along the Barbary Coast in north Africa -- cities such as Tunis and Algiers -- would raid ships in the Mediterranean and Atlantic, as well as seaside villages to capture men, women and children.

The impact of these attacks were devastating -- France, England, and Spain each lost thousands of ships, and long stretches of the Spanish and Italian coasts were almost completely abandoned by their inhabitants. At its peak, the destruction and depopulation of some areas probably exceeded what European slavers would later inflict on the African interior.

We have lost the sense of how large enslavement could loom for those who lived around the Mediterranean and the threat they were under," he said. "Slaves were still slaves, whether they are black or white, and whether they suffered in America or North Africa."

Perspective

About the Golden Age of Islam (from Political Islam):

"Is It 1914 All Over Again?"

From the Independent:

Is it 1914 all over again? We are in danger of repeating the mistakes that started WWI, says a leading historian

The Great War was sparked by the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand in the Balkans. The Middle East could be viewed as the modern-day equivalent, argues Professor Margaret MacMillan


History never repeats itself, but it sure does rhyme, it has been said. Now an internationally respected historian is warning that today's world bears a number of striking similarities with the build-up to the First World War.

The newly mechanised armies of the early 20th century produced unprecedented slaughter on the battlefields of the "war to end all wars" after a spark lit in the Balkans with the assassination of the Austro-Hungarian Empire's Archduke Franz Ferdinand.

Professor Margaret MacMillan, of the University of Cambridge, argues that the Middle East could be viewed as the modern-day equivalent of this turbulent region. A nuclear arms race that would be likely to start if Iran developed a bomb "would make for a very dangerous world indeed, which could lead to a recreation of the kind of tinderbox that exploded in the Balkans 100 years ago – only this time with mushroom clouds," she writes in an essay for the Brookings Institution, a leading US think-tank.

"While history does not repeat itself precisely, the Middle East today bears a worrying resemblance to the Balkans then," she says. "A similar mix of toxic nationalisms threatens to draw in outside powers as the US, Turkey, Russia, and Iran look to protect their interests and clients."

Professor MacMillan highlights a string of other parallels between today and a century ago. Modern-day Islamist terrorists mirror the revolutionary communists and anarchists who carried out a string of assassinations in the name of a philosophy that sanctioned murder to achieve their vision of a better world. And in 1914, Germany was a rising force that sought to challenge the pre-eminent power of the time, the UK. Today, the growing power of China is perceived as a threat by some in the US.

Transitions from one world power to another are always seen as dangerous times....

Read it all HERE.

75 Years Ago

In the House of Commons in 1938, Winston Churchill gave this speech about the Munich Agreement:

...I will begin by saying what everybody would like to ignore or forget but which must nevertheless be stated, namely, that we have sustained a total and unmitigated defeat....

[...]


It is the most grievous consequence of what we have done and of what we have left undone in the last five years - five years of futile good intentions, five years of eager search for the line of least resistance, five years of uninterrupted retreat....five years of neglect of our...defences....

[...]

Our loyal, brave people...should know the truth. They should know that there has been gross neglect and deficiency in our defences; they should know that we have sustained a defeat without a war, the consequences of which will travel far with us along our road; they should know that we have passed an awful milestone in our history...and that the terrible words have for the time being been pronounced against the Western democracies:

"Thou art weighed in the balance and found wanting."

And do not suppose that this is the end. This is only the beginning of the reckoning. This is only the first sip, the first foretaste of a bitter cup which will be proffered to us year by year unless by a supreme recovery of moral health and martial vigour, we arise again and take our stand for freedom as in the olden time....

And now we have the Obama administration embarking on foolishness with Iran.

SSDD.

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)

Auschwitz

Has the world forgotten?

Has the world become inured?


[hat tip to Mark Alexander of A New Dark Age Is Dawning for the above video]

Israel 2013 - Czechoslovakia 1938?

Is history repeating itself?  Please watch the video (hat tip to Will of MFS - The Other News):

Advice From Ayaan Hirsi Ali

Last night, I read Ayaan Hirsi Ali's recent essay in Newsweek not once but twice. What she has written bears consideration.

If you haven't read this essay, you must do so!

Excerpt to give you a taste of what the woman is saying:

Once again the streets of the Arab world are burning with false outrage. But we must hold our heads up high. Ayaan Hirsi Ali on how she survived Muslim rage—and how we can end it.

[...]

Utopian ideologies have a short lifespan. Some are bloodier than others. As long as Islamists were able to market their philosophy as the only alternative to dictatorship and foreign meddling, they were attractive to an oppressed polity. But with their election to office they will be subjected to the test of government. It is clear, as we saw in Iran in 2009 and elsewhere, that if the philosophy of the Islamists is fully and forcefully implemented, those who elected them will end up disillusioned. The governments will begin to fail as soon as they set about implementing their philosophy: strip women of their rights; murder homosexuals; constrain the freedoms of conscience and religion of non-Muslims; hunt down dissidents; persecute religious minorities; pick fights with foreign powers, even powers, such as the U.S., that offered them friendship. The Islamists will curtail the freedoms of those who elected them and fail to improve their economic conditions.

After the disillusion and bitterness will come a painful lesson: that it is foolish to derive laws for human affairs from gods and prophets. Just like the Iranian people have begun to, the Egyptians, Tunisians, Libyans, and perhaps Syrians and others will come to this realization. In one or two or three decades we will see the masses in these countries take to the streets—and perhaps call for American help—to liberate them from the governments they elected. This process will be faster in some places than others, but in all of them it will be bloody and painful. If we take the long view, America and other Western countries can help make this happen in the same way we helped bring about the demise of the former Soviet Union.

We must be patient. America needs to empower those individuals and groups who are already disenchanted with political Islam by helping find and develop an alternative. At the heart of that alternative are the ideals of the rule of law and freedom of thought, worship, and expression. For these values there can and should be no apologies, no groveling, no hesitation....

Read it all HERE.

Appeasement on the part of the West will only serve to prolong the power of the Muslim Brotherhood and like groups.  The same goes for foreign aid to the regimes of those same groups.  Let them fail miserably on their own, and the collapse will come a lot sooner that that of the USSR.

How Hitler Came To Power

Worth reading by way of review.

Excerpt:

...[T]he National Socialists never captured more than 37 percent of the national vote...

[...]

...Hitler returned to the Reichstag every four years to renew the “temporary” delegation of emergency powers that it had given him to deal with the Reichstag-arson crisis. Needless to say, the Reichstag rubber-stamped each of his requests...

Read it ALL.

Draw your own conclusions.

Also keep in mind the story "The Boy Who Cried Wolf."

Hitler comparisons have been so often drawn that, in my view, most are incapable of realizing when the wolf really is coming in the door.

What If Mohammed Had Never Been Born?

With a hat tip to Stogie:

List Of Jewish And Muslim Nobel Prize Winners

HERE

From the above-linked site:

After reviewing this list, can you supply a reason for the large discrepancy between the Arab/Islamic population's contribution to the world body and that of the Jew? There are 165 Jews listed as opposed to 6 from the Arab side.

'Nuff said.

A Little Something About Koran-Burning

From Planck's Constant's essay "Muslims Burn Bibles Routinely and Often":

Christians and Jews are asked, "How would you like it if Muslims burned the Bible?" Well, here's the problem: we haven't burned any Qurans for hundreds of years. But in that same period Muslims have burned millions of bibles. They still do it every day.

Anyone hear of any Islamic leaders, heads of state or imams, calling for a stop to burning Bibles?

Anyone?

The History Of Islam: India

A reminder of the jihad in India, a genocide which killed at least 80 million (hat tip to Logan's Warning):

A Lesson In History: The Battle of Tours

Many a times we forget that war is a necessary evil. Many a times we forget that our society was formed and protected through and because of a series of wars. Many a times we forget that our ancestors paid the price we are now unwilling to pay to protect our values and our freedom.

I will be posting different videos or articles on different wars or battles that took place and changed the course of history--protecting not only the people of Europe but the Western Civilization itself. And I will also post videos or articles about battles or wars that took place where the West (or other non Muslim countries/tribes made a mistake and paid a high price).

Let's look at the Battle of Tours in this short video.

Unfortunately, it was compulsory, and probably saved MILLIONS

In 1945, after the fearful tolls on Iwo Jima and Okinawa, after the the kamikazes from the Philippines to the seas off Japan, preparations under way for Operations Coronet and Olympic, the invasion of Japan, estimated 250,000 to 500,000 American deaths, and up to 4 million Japanese.

Even after the bomb was dropped 64 years ago today, and then on Nagasaki a nearly successful coup almost undid Emperor Hirohito's recognition of reality.

So thank you Harry Truman and Paul Tibbetts and men who did what history and destiny demanded to save Americans to return home, and in doing so made unnecessary the 4 million spears the Imperial Japanese Army had prepared for it's citizens to use on the foreign barbarians preparing to invade Japan.

1930s Redeux About to Be Completed

My blog, the Gathering Storm, has as its theme the similarities between the 1930s and today. With an enemy having success using intimidation, infiltration and disinformation to achieve the world-wide institution of the Caliphate, complete with appeasers and apologists hurrying to support the Islamist’s goals, and now the worldwide economic meltdown now in place, we need only a missing piece to complete the 1930s scenario. 

That missing piece is a world war. 

It’s coming. Soon. And we can not prevent it. That is my belief. I don’t like it but as far as I can see, it’s a fact. 

The explosive mix of Islamic boldness and progress towards dhimmifying the non-Muslim world, Islamic appeasement, media ignorance, and the crippling of the free world’s economic system, needs only a flash point to ignite the next world-wide conflagration.   

The question is what will that flash point be? Here’s my opinion. 

If you look at the 1930s, WWII really began in 1931 with the invasion of Manchuria. At the time, it was called an ‘incident’.  It took 10 years for the USA to enter the struggle and complete the start of WWII. 

The Manchuria Incident was a potential flashpoint but was ignored by the free world who did not want to enter into another bloody world war. So the League of Nations chastised Japan and ordered them to leave Manchuria. 

Their response? The Japanese delegation, defying world opinion, withdrew from the League of Nations Assembly after the assembly had adopted a report blaming Japan for events in Manchuria. 

There were other flash points, political and military throughout the 1930s – Germany occupying the Rhineland, Italy invading Ethiopia, the German occupation of Austria and the Sudetenland, Japan’s invasion of China – none of which prompted the free world to act until Germany invaded Poland bringing France and Great Britain to war and Pearl Harbor bringing America into the war. 

So what would be the possible flash points for the next world war? 

Europe: A civil war. 

Europe is quickly coming under the thumb of political Islam.  The Euro leadership and Euro institutions are conceding Europe’s culture to Islam. What Muslims in Europe will not get through the political and institutional process, they will eventually take through violent intimidation.  The average European will not voluntarily submit to Islam and Sharia Law. Violence will ensue between right wing elements supported by moderate citizens to take back their culture. This could be a flash point if the Middle East oil suppliers decide to support their Muslim brethren in Europe-which of course they will- by withholding oil to Europe. Europe will not willingly freeze in the dark and the EU will take action to reopen the supply by occupying the oil fields.  China, and perhaps even India, in desperate need of oil, will take military action to prevent Europe’s take over of the oil fields. Russia will not allow Europe to take control of the oil market and will take military action against Europe. 

The Middle East. Nuclear Exchange. 

The conventional struggle between Israel and the Middle East countries can go on for years. But when Iran or some other Islamic country in the area can deploy nuclear weapons, the hate that brews in the region will reach the boiling point and either through deliberate or miscalculation, a nuclear exchange between Israel and those countries will effectively shut down oil production in the Middle East. The exchange will cripple the oil producing countries there and force Europe to occupy the oil fields to restart the supply. Again, China, and perhaps even India, will take military action to prevent Europe’s take over of the oil fields. Russia will not allow Europe to take control of the oil market and will take military action against Europe. 

South Central Asia: Resurgence of Al Qaeda. 

The war in Afghanistan and the failed state of Pakistan would most probably lead to a necessary invasion of the subcontinent through India to rid the resurgence of Al Qaeda and the establishment of a Taliban like State from which terrorist attacks can be launched against the West.  These continuous terror attacks will force India, Europe and the USA into a military invasion of Pakistan and maintain through force an Afghan and Pakistan government that will force the Taliban and Al Qaeda out of the countries.  The Islamic countries in the Middle East will use the oil weapon again to support their Muslim brethren’s struggle. China will take military action to prevent Europe’s take over of the oil fields. Russia will not allow the West to take control of the oil market and will take military action against Europe. 

A point. I’m talking war here. Not the pansy ass military rules of engagement that our armed forces have been struggling under. When national survival is clear and present, political correctness and the foolishness of multiculturalism will be wiped quickly from the battlefield. 

And what of the US? If and how will we be drawn in and complete the world war? 

Except for the South Central Asia scenario, would we be drawn into the world war? We could claim neutrality. We can tighten our belts and live off our own domestic oil supply by opening unlimited drilling. But with our NATO commitments, we would have to support Europe militarily. 

The US will be drawn into the world war and the supply of oil will be the catalyst.  That’s the bad news. Is there any good news? No. But there is an observation. A war, just as it did in 1941, will pull us out of the severe economic downtown that many believe will continue for years due to the current Administration policies.

Today (In 1945)

The liberation of Auschwitz:

Soon after liberation, surviving children of the Auschwitz camp walk out of the children's barracks. Poland, after January 27, 1945.
From the web site of The United States Holocaust Memorial Museum:

Auschwitz was the largest camp established by the Germans. A complex of camps, Auschwitz included a concentration, extermination, and forced-labor camp. It was located 37 miles west of Krakow (Cracow), near the prewar German-Polish border.

In mid-January 1945, as Soviet forces approached the Auschwitz camp complex, the SS began evacuating Auschwitz and its satellite camps. Nearly 60,000 prisoners were forced to march west from the Auschwitz camp system. Thousands had been killed in the camps in the days before these death marches began. Tens of thousands of prisoners, mostly Jews, were forced to march to the city of Wodzislaw in the western part of Upper Silesia. SS guards shot anyone who fell behind or could not continue. Prisoners also suffered from the cold weather, starvation, and exposure on these marches. More than 15,000 died during the death marches from Auschwitz. On January 27, 1945, the Soviet army entered Auschwitz and liberated more than 7,000 remaining prisoners, who were mostly ill and dying. It is estimated that at minimum 1.3 million people were deported to Auschwitz between 1940 and 1945; of these, at least 1.1 million were murdered.

Much more at the above link.

So, here we are in 2008, repeating the mistakes of the 1930s, via appeasement of Islamofascists:

The 1930s were "a time when a certain cynicism and moral confusion set in among the Western democracies." Men and women who should have known better refused to see what was writ large and plain before their eyes...

Some days, I feel total despair that the world hasn't learned the lesson of the danger of feeding the crocodile.

Addendum from "Auschwitz and Islam" (Hat-tip to Verity Ink of DU d'RAT REVIEW, who emailed me the article). Excerpt:

...Imagine if you had stood on that January morning , seeing Auschwitz, and imagine being told that what you were looking at was ''radical Nazism'', and was not representative of ''true Nazism." What would you have thought?

The truth I wish to state is this: You cannot separate a founder from his movement or a phophet from his prophecy. They are one and the same. Auschwitz was the logical terminus for centuries of latent European anti-Semitism as was 9/11 the logical terminus of fourteen centuries of Islam. Both systems are and were murderous political ideologies that sought to dominate the world through aggressive warfare, to eliminate world Jewry and destroy any and all who would oppose them.

Does this mean that those Germans, who were after all Christians, are lock-step murderers? Putting aside the brave few who spoke out, yes it does. Every German who followed Hitler and the Nazis in all they did, made the Holocaust possible. You couldn't listen today to someone who claims to be a Nazi and hear them say '' Nazism is peaceful'' as you watch violence carried out in the name of Nazism.

Mohammed was Islam's sole founder, it prophet, its voice. He commanded his followers to wage jihad--holy war--to bring all under its control and to kill the Jews wherever they found them. To follow Mohammed is to follow Islam. It isn't enough for ''moderate Muslims'' to denounce the slaughter committed in its name, it is Islam, like Nazism, that is the evil. As there was nothing redeeming in Hitler and Nazism, so is there nothing redeemable in Islam or Mohammed. The words and deeds of these two men--Adolph Hitler and Mohammed--have murderously and profoundly impacted humanity in such horrendous ways and should serve as a warning to the world of the danger of those who consider themselves ''prophets'' and to those who would become its adherents.

Nazism is gone and Islam is still with us, still threatening and still killing. As long as those who continue to follow Mohammed's teachings commit violence in its name while their fellow Muslims say little or nothing to condemn it, Auschwitz's legacy will always be us and so will 9/11!

Happy Cyrus Day!

Excerpt from this essay by Amil Imani:

October 29th has been designated as the international day of Cyrus the Great, king of Persia, who declared the first charter of human rights in the world, also known as the Cyrus Cylinder. In 539 BC, Persian troops entered the city of Babylon, without encountering any resistance. On October 29th, Cyrus himself entered the city, assuming the titles of "King of Babylon, King of Sumer and Akkad, King of the four corners of the world.” The Cyrus Cylinder was placed under the walls of Babylon as a foundation deposit, following a long Babylonian tradition.

Cyrus the Great proclaimed more than 2500 years ago: “Today, I announce that everyone is free to choose a religion. People are free to live in all regions and take up a job provided that they never violate other's rights.”...

Read the rest. Experience the irony.