So what?

Muhammadans have been slaughtering each other, for 1,300 years.

Hopefully, we are selling bullets to both sides, at a tidy profit.

APilgrim opined: “Only a FOOL would ever let the Muhammadans return.”
Hi APilgrim,
Re; your words above. Hm. Aren’t pilgrims obligated to make moral progress? (zigh)
So what do you make of the article (linked below) written by Chicago-based, Catholic peace activist?
https://www.counterpunch.org/2018/08/13/u-s-is-complicit-in-child-slaughter-in-yemen/
… Writing as a ZUSA citizen, I for one KNOW that our vaunted leadership is complicit in the mass murder of “Muhammadan” Yemen people.
Thank you.

Driving the Muhammadans Out

Alfonso VIII appealed to other Christian leaders, and in 1212 he won the support of Pope Innocent III, who declared a Crusade against the Almohads. Supported by the armies of Aragon, Navarre, and Portugal, Castilian forces routed the Almohad emir of Morocco, Muḥammad al-Nāṣir, at Las Navas de Tolosa (July 16, 1212) and so removed the last serious Islamic threat to Christian hegemony in Spain.

In Portugal, Afonso III captured Faro (1249), the last Moorish stronghold in the Algarve. By the end of the 13th century, the Reconquest was, for all practical purposes, brought to an end.

The Catholic Monarchs, as Ferdinand and Isabella came to be known, completed the conquest of Granada in 1492.

Holy Roman Emperor (HRE) Charles V, allied with Lutherans & AnaBaptists, to expel Muhammadans (Turks) from the HRE, circa 1530.

Only a FOOL would ever let the Muhammadans return.

Medieval Europe WISELY Expelled the Muhammadans.

Modern European FOOLS brought the Muhammadans back.

Giraldi says that the White Helmets will be settled in the US, UK and Germany. This is not accurate – the US has not agreed to accept any White Helmets (despite the fact they funded them ) no doubt because they know they are terrorist. The SUCKER nation of Canada has agreed to resettle 50% with the rest going to Germany and the UK – the later also a big funder of the White Helmets

I believe Canada not the USA is one of the intended recipients of these ‘helmets’. It is time to question how they will benefit my society. Answers will not be forthcoming.

Bush said he would invade Iraq at the time of our choosing. Well, well what time. Purim time. March 17 2003 was Purim eve. This was the time of his Z handlers. What time did Obama pick to invade Libya? Again Purim time. March 19 2011, Purim eve again. Papa Bush ended the first Iraq on Purim – Feb. 27 1991. He ended it by bombing and killing 150000 surrendering Iraqi troops. The US and the west have been under the control of 500 BC fanatics since 1913. Jews and Christians both have the Old testament so it is easy to fool Christians to go along with Z goals.
Another Z gimmick going around for the past 17 years is – Destroy seven nations for the 911 false flag. Where does the idea of destroying seven nations come from? Old testament, oh course. Deut. 7.1-2.

https://biblehub.com/context/deuteronomy/7-1.htm

“      1“When the LORD your God brings you into the land where you are entering to possess it, and clears away many nations before you, the Hittites and the Girgashites and the Amorites and the Canaanites and the Perizzites and the Hivites and the Jebusites, seven nations greater and stronger than you, 2and when the LORD your God delivers them before you and you defeat them, then you shall utterly destroy them. You shall make no covenant with them and show no favor to them. “

Amalek gimmick is another one loved by Zwest and Israel. The Amaleks are people who Yahweh told to totally destroy- men, women, children, infants, livestock and their infrastructure. This Amalek theme gave US/UK to ability to fire bomb guilt free civilians and infrastructure in Europe and the US do so in Japan during WW11. The US ended it with two nuclear bombs on civilians in Japan.

https://biblehub.com/1_samuel/15-3.htm

Now go and strike Amalek and devote to destruction all that they have. Do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.’”

The US and Israel use this Amalek theme endlessly in the past few decades – Gladio operations- coups all over the world- support for terrorism/drug cartels all over the world. Mad Albright was thinking the Amalek way when she said 500000 Iraqi children dying of US sanctions was worth it. Palestinians are thought to be Amalek by many Israelis. Some Zs still think of Germany as Amalek.

…post-Napoleonic France wasn’t that strong, and the French did go to Algeria for the reason I wrote, the conflict started to escalate in 1827 with a naval blockade, with the conquest itself started in 1830 and achieved in 1847. The result was that they actually liberated Algeria from Ottoman rule.
They did overstay their welcome though and did commit crimes against natives on a large scale when their occupation was no longer justified.

Interesting..
“We liberated Poland from Nazi tyranny and overstayed a bit.”
“We liberated Iraq from Saddam’s tyranny and have been overstaying a bit”.
“We liberated Afghanistan from Taliban tyranny and have been overstaying a bit”.
I could make a full page with ease.
Stronger entity (France) expanded on a region held by weaker entity (Ottoman Empire). Eternal.

In this particular case stronger (values, spirituality) entity (Islam) is expanding into regions held by (values, spirituality) weaker entity (West).
Now, not that Islam is so strong; it’s more than West, Europe in particular, is weak.

Muslims know what they want and how to do it.
West, Europe in particular, doesn’t know what it wants and has no idea how to do anything. People with strong beliefs vs people with no beliefs; worse, actually, vs people believing their set of beliefs is wrong. Suicidal.

Time and numbers will, should the game stay the same, make Islam takeover of Europe inevitable.

The thing is, the game can change in a month. Just…….one……..month.

One can only become Christian of his own free will.

I agree here, the same with Islam – it must be sincere belief from the heart. Which is why forcing someone to convert usually just leads to somebody pretending to be what you want while secretly disbelieving. However, it seems the pay off is usually in the person’s children who may end up adhering to the new order.

Those who force conversion…can only pretend to be Christians.

Dang, did you just play the takfeer card on a boatload of medieval Christian theologians and priests?

Your statement is an opinion – obviously, the Christians of the past had a different opinion for centuries. Now, I will admit that the lion’s share of Christian theologians of our age will agree that forcible conversion is not correct.

well, we have a different understanding of the following,

That’s fine by me. You can even believe it requires us to eat your children. The issue here is that non-Muslim understandings of the Qur’an have absolutely no bearing on how Muslims practice their religion.

And sure, I’ll give credit to the French and other European powers for rolling back their empires semi-voluntarily. One must also recognize that all this happened in the aftermath of the post-WW2, which ushered in an era of international relations being dealt with by means of legalities and arbitration. The UN had recognized the right of Algerian independence.

To compare the situation to Ottoman or Umayyad conquests makes no sense – it is better to compare those to, say, the conquest of South America by Spain and Portugal or Australia by the English where the conquerors stuck around for a long time (these, along with a bunch of other pre-WW2 conquests were grandfathered in for obvious reasons).

Peace.

You could well be right.

Vojkan: That part you wrote about how French over stayed and only left 130 yrs. later. Caused me to recall my now long deceased, Uncle Joe….He came to my home when Mom, his sister, invited uncle Joe for Thanksgiving Dinner, which is a once per year event we in usa observe. And Uncle Joe arrived on time for dinner, in November….Yet never left, until, after July 4th!!

Ironic eh, how one can recall such an incident going back 50 years from reading a totally different statement as I did based upon your reply.

“Strong tend to expand, weak to contract”

True. However, post-Napoleonic France wasn’t that strong, and the French did go to Algeria for the reason I wrote, the conflict started to escalate in 1827 with a naval blockade, with the conquest itself started in 1830 and achieved in 1847. The result was that they actually liberated Algeria from Ottoman rule.
They did overstay their welcome though and did commit crimes against natives on a large scale when their occupation was no longer justified.

“Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves.
You will know them by their fruits.”
We are not what we pretend or think to be, we are what we do. One can only become Christian of his own free will. Those who force conversion and those who accept to be converted by force can only pretend to be Christians.
Regarding Algeria, the French did debark to end piracy and ransoming, and they did overstay, which is a sort of understatement given that they left only 130 years later. That’s still shorter than the occupation of Spain or the Balkans. However, unlike in Indochina, where they got their asses kicked by the Vietnamese, and unlike the Moors and the Ottomans who also had to be kicked out, you have to give credit to the French for leaving even though they won the counter-insurgency war. French generals were so irked by the order to pack up and leave that they attempted a coup against de Gaulle.

As for the Qu’ran forbidding conversion by the sword, well, we have a different understanding of the following,

https://quran.com/9

Peace.

Hey Vojkan,

I think we need to step back and look at the various points from as factual a viewpoint as we can.

they don’t gang rape, they don’t shout insults at passers-by, they don’t aggress people in public transport.

I personally don’t think non-Muslims should tolerate this kind of behavior. Perpetrators should be put into place and made an example of harshly. No tolerance policies need to be developed. And if certain Muslims are simply going to act like ethnic-gang predators, by all means, strip them of citizenship and ship them back to countries of origin.

I can understand the anger and the frustration because of how the West treats the muslim world

Irrelevant – Muslims residing in non-Muslim countries have an obligation to obey the laws of the land they live in and not harm the populace. That is the essence of the social contract engendered by either citizenship or right-or-residence. The crimes of Western countries against Muslim peoples do not justify criminal actions in return.

That doesn’t make acceptable muslim violence against innocent Westerners.

100% agree. Any Muslim that is in the West and saying otherwise should be treated the way we would treat a non-Muslim doing the same in Muslim lands.

Both the West and the islamic countries are ruled by bad people. Violence against ordinary citizens certainly won’t solve that problem.

100% agree.

Also, the Gospels, which are the base of Christianity, never teach discrimination against non-Christians

No – nor does it interdict the behavior. Which is why sumptuary laws and discriminatory regulations against pagans, Jews and others were quite common in medieval Christianity with full ecclesiastical backing. Here is an example from Thomas Aquinas:
“Finally you ask whether it is good that Jews throughout your province are compelled to wear a sign distinguishing them from Christians. The reply to this is plain: that, according to a statute of the general Council, Jews of each sex in all Christian provinces, and all the time, should be distinguished from other people by some clothing.”
https://thomistica.net/letter-to-margaret-of-flanders/

And most people that have read what happened with Emperor Theodosius, know that paganism was basically persecuted by the power of the state into minority status (along with proselytizing – no doubt, a lot of that too). Again, this had full ecclesiastical backing.

No, the Gospels don’t teach conversion by the sword and yes, the Qu’ran teaches conversion by the sword.

Again, the Gospels are silent about the subject. Certainly Revelations has a lot of converting by the sword and people scrambling for their lives from the “Lamb of God”. Again, if you’ve read medieval Christian history, you know that they had zero problems with converting by the sword. There were plenty of Crusades within Europe against pagans and many kings claimed authority specifically by their ability and willingness to crush pagan opposition and make Christianity supreme. Christian historians recognize this:
“This issue, more than any other we’ve published, raises the awkward matter of forced conversions—’Be Christian or die.’ There’s no sense in pretending this was an exceptional missionary tactic; for many centuries, it was the method of choice among Christian rulers and missionaries. The conversion of much of Europe and of Latin America is unimaginable without the sword.”
https://christianhistoryinstitute.org/magazine/article/interview-converting-by-the-sword

The Qur’an specifically prohibits conversion by the sword (not that certain Muslims didn’t do it). This is the whole reason we have the dhimmi system.

So perhaps you can say that your interpretation or the currently popular interpretation of Christianity does not discriminate against non-believers or convert by the sword – but Christendom was quite fine with that for the lion’s share of its history under the custodianship of medieval Christian scholars who were giants (in knowledge and spirituality) compared to those of today.

Islamic violent proselytism is not fine with me.

Same here.

The muslims started it by invading the Iberian peninsula.

No – actually you have to go way back when the Ghassanids (a Christian Arab tribe, vassals of Byzantium) killed a message-bearer from the Prophet (pbuh). That is the oldest account of start of hostilities. Not that there needed to be a reason – back in those days, it was assumed if you had an empire, you were going to go to war with another – the only reason not to was lack of logistics. That’s the whole reason why empires existed; The Rahisun duked it out with Byzantium and the Sassanids and came out on top. The Iberian peninsula was way later.

The French went to Algeria only to stop muslim piracy in the Mediterranean.

Not really – why did they start settling there in massive numbers? Why were the Italians in Somalia? The Dutch in Indonesia? The British in Afghanistan?

It’s OK – I don’t mind, there were no rules back then – they built navies to try to conquer the world. Which they practically did with a good combination of technology and well-disciplined soldiers. I mean, you should read about the blow-out against the Mamelukes that Napoleon’s army accomplished at the Battle of the Pyramids – phenomenal.

So why are so many muslims from countries that aren’t under Western attack moving to non-muslim countries if the habits there don’t suit them?

Actually many of them want to move West because they specifically want bling-bling and less religious restrictions. People like to move to greener pastures.

Some of them move since they are both allowed to practice their religion freely (which you claim Christianity allows) as well as live a materially prosperous life. You might be able to make them go away by enforcing discriminatory regulations. Which is already starting with niqab bans and minaret bans, etc.

If you don’t want them to move in, simply enforce border security or start up reverse-dhimmi regulations like extra taxation on military-age males, don’t allow Muslims into certain levels of gov’t, etc.

Peace.

We’ll trade all your Uyghurs for all our Jews.

LOOOL!

the KJV Bible is not standard literary or spoken English for the period

Possibly not, but – like Shakespeare’s works, Milton – it was one of the high points of the English language. That century was phenomenal for English.

Interesting citation, thanks – beautiful language.

Peace.

@170
COMMENT IS FOR YOU

Nearly all of the mainstream media lies persistently these days but some sources are worse than others. People complain about Fox, and rightly so, but CNN is the absolute pits when it comes to slanting its coverage, as is MSNBC.

Philip, Assad is responsible for the largest swath of death in Syria. Just like people will complain about Gaddafi getting sodomized by a bayonet, conservatives will flock to defend Assad. Well, here’s a newsflash: the dictators of the world do not need our sympathy. Assad’s troubles amount to little more than finding a new apple account when his gets banned due to sanctions. Really. His own people hate him. I’m all for opposition to Israel, but not if it’s backed by another no-good regime like Iran. Assad has caused people mental anguish especially in his farce to pretend he is a Muslim. Alawites underwent a period of change under Hafez al Assad because even he knew that this minority sect had nothing in common with the rest of the populace. Bashar is also responsible for the refugee crisis. He routed opponents of his regime to Europe. Ironic that the people complaining about refugees support Assad. You mean nothing to him.

why are so many muslims from countries that aren’t under Western attack moving to non-muslim countries if the habits there don’t suit them?”

The Muslims move because those non-muslim bastards have gone to Muslims lands and have destroyed the Muslim places from 1900

People come from Honduras because those non -Honduran has gone and screwed them for generations.

Now tell me why did the English come to America?

To give birth to some one like you? Was there no place in Poland or Hungary or Baltic?

“As for Jews, they don’t have for habit to torture and kill muslims in France, whereas muslims in France do torture and kill even Jewish grandmothers.”

They kill Muslims in Lebanon Syria Palestine
They ask their servants to kill the Muslims i other place s.

Yes, certainly.

Unfortunately this influence is of the kind that can still be exerted from abroad. Also the most influential Jews are not particularly religious.

For a mirror view of your original question, I saw this comment on Pat Buchanan’s latest thread, which made me laugh:

We’ll trade all your Uyghurs for all our Jews.

My comment a long while ago about the English language apparently got eaten either by Cloudflare or by my browser but I just want to observe that the KJV Bible is not standard literary or spoken English for the period; it’s a specialized translation lingo devised by the original committee*. They did quite a good job, partly probably because they had other versions like the Douay-Rheims before them so they could tell what worked and (more importantly) what didn’t. But they didn’t sound like standard English of the 16th or 17th centuries. Here’s a good example of strong 17th century English which you can contrast with the embedded quotes from the “Authorised Version”: https://www.yorku.ca/comninel/courses/3025pdf/Killing_Noe_Murder.pdf

*For example, the word “righteousness” was practically unused at the time except as an archaism (Middle English “rightwise”) and was chosen because no actual English word fitted the meaning they wanted.

My bad. Was on the phone.
Just feel that my previous comment needs a bit of clarification. Here it goes:

Jews, or East Asians for that matter, don’t represent a threat to society. Whatever they do in private, they abide by the rules of social behaviour as accepted by the French in the public space. They don’t as a community attack other citizens, they don’t throw stones at ambulances, firemen, or molotov cocktails at the police. There are areas in which white Europeans are simply forbidden to strand.
Even though I think Jews are undeservedly overrepresented in academics, in the media, in the entertainment industry, for I haven’t noticed that they’re so much more talented than the goyim, they don’t gang rape, they don’t shout insults at passers-by, they don’t aggress people in public transport.

Pretty much.

People tend to see what happens at their doorstep before seeing what happens in some distant land, and what they see at their doorstep doesn’t plead in favour of muslims.

Yup.

…the Qu’ran too teaches discrimination against “infidels”.

Yup.

To finish, the unavoidable “who started the whole Christianity vs Islam conflict” question also has a quite straight answer. The muslims started it by invading the Iberian peninsula. The Turks continued it by invading the Balkan peninsula.

Agree.
Can’t say, though, that I agree with the below:

The Crusaders only ever wanted to secure Jerusalem for Christians. The French went to Algeria only to stop muslim piracy in the Mediterranean.

Strong tend to expand, weak to contract. Eternal.

And here is the important part:

I’m fine with the incompatibility and have no intention to ever move to a muslim country because I know the habits there don’t suit my way of life. So why are so many muslims from countries that aren’t under Western attack moving to non-muslim countries if the habits there don’t suit them?

I believe you know the answer. They are just working on changing those habits there. In time, with rising numbers…….

Pretty much.

Also, the Gospels, which are the base of Christianity, never teach discrimination against non-Christians, on the other hand the Talmud teaches discrimination against goyim, and yes the Qu’ran too teaches discrimination against “infidels”. No, the Gospels don’t teach conversion by the sword and yes, the Qu’ran teaches conversion by the sword.

It seems you dont know Bible and have not read it

Second Christian talk of bible when it suits them and forget teh genocidal manic that Church unleashed on Non Christian in Europe New World and Philippine and Goa and Africa- all for God Glory and Gold .

Neither it has changed much when Bush went to Iraq in the name of God ( some Agog and Magog – may be his Christian maggot smelt the corpse ) and Blair was sure he would go to heaven because God guided him and had kept his conscience clear

So did the scoundrel Graham family of evangelical mad house and so did Boykin .

Bill Jones confided, wrote to me: “Yup that ‘s the goal.”
Hi Bill,
…Am very pleased you made response to my comment. I do not know if I “know” anything more than that which I have previously wrote.
…Below, will make two (2) points which are key to the sustenance of the American-Israeli Empire’s ongoing lies & air tight cover-ups.
…#1: Israeli complicity in the 9/11 False Flag attacks & consequent (immoral) GWOT.
…#2: Article (below) elucidates a point better than I.
https://original.antiwar.com/smith-grant/2018/08/09/can-the-us-keep-lying-about-israels-nukes/
Fyi, months ago, the knowledgeable commenter, SolontoCroesus wrote, & given a (documentable) slim percentage of meaningful patiotic-American political action, how he’s getting bored with offering piercing comments on U.R.
…I said what I think & know, and I understand S2C’s disappearance in this unique realm of “speech” on which the Zionist censor eyes are cast upon. Thanks very much, Bill Jones!

Nevertheless, I cannot understand gang raping children in the UK, mass killing of people attending a rock concert in France, or eating at terraces, or taking a walk during Bastille Day,

I also cant understand the drone killing of 14 yrs old son of Alwaki,
I don’t understand the killing of the people who congregated to celebrate wedding by US missiles

I really find it is difficult to understand the killing of the family members who came to pick up the body of the men killed by US drones.

I don’t understand the freaking logic US had and have in invading Somalia, Libya, and Yemen .

I don’t understand why the world who sided with one day’s 911 with America has kept quiet , despite of US causing for 5 yrs same 911 in Iraq on daily basis. .

Crusaders only ever wanted to secure Jerusalem for Christians. The French went to Algeria only to stop Muslim piracy in the Mediterranean.

No you cant do the former That is illegal and was illegal.

Second is nothing but distortion and evasion and lying which can be found in today’s’ American hubris of c/o IED from Iran or Syria ending up in Iraq while invading Iraq for pure fun ( to assuage the hatred against Muslim ) and while supplying countries like Saudi with billions dollars arms to kill Yemenis and is akin to supplying Israel with diplomatic political and military supports from 1948.

Piracy was the mother of the bread and butter of European economy in the century when US invaded Libya.

Would really appreciate some analysis as to how much the proposed sanction bill on Russia by messrs Menendez, Graham et al is driven by the Israel lobby, or not? The names suggest to me it is.

I cannot speak for what happens in the US but I can for what happens in France. Jews, or East Asians for that matter, don’t represent a threat to society. Whatever they do in private, they abide by the rules of social behaviour as accepted by the French in the public space. They don’t as a community attack other citizens, they don’t throw stones at ambulances, firemen, or molotov cocktails at the police. There are areas in which white Europeans are simply forbidden to strand.
Even though I think Jews are undeservedly overrepresented in academics, in the media, in the entertainment industry, for I haven’t noticed that they’re so much more talented than the goyim, they don’t gang rape, they don’t shout insults at passers-by, they don’t aggress people in public transport.
I can understand the anger and the frustration because of how the West treats the muslim world and how Western psychopaths use technological advantage to obliterate weddings and funerals in muslim countries. I do feel compassion for Palestinians and I do consider that the behaviour of Israelis is criminal.
Nevertheless, I cannot understand gang raping children in the UK, mass killing of people atttending a rock concert in France, or eating at terraces, or taking a walk during Bastille Day, even though I am a royalist who loathes the French revolutionaries, who were the original terrorists. As for Jews, they don’t have for habit to torture and kill muslims in France, whereas muslims in France do torture and kill even Jewish grandmothers.
People tend to see what happens at their doorstep before seeing what happens in some distant land, and what they see at their doorstep doesn’t plead in favour of muslims.
The psychopaths who rule the Western world do murder industrial numbers of innocent muslims. That doesn’t make acceptable muslim violence against innocent Westerners. Just as whatever the nazis have done to Jews doesn’t make acceptable what Israelis are doing in the Middle-East.
Both the West and the islamic countries are ruled by bad people. Violence against ordinary citizens certainly won’t solve that problem.
Also, the Gospels, which are the base of Christianity, never teach discrimination against non-Christians, on the other hand the Talmud teaches discrimination against goyim, and yes the Qu’ran too teaches discrimination against “infidels”. No, the Gospels don’t teach conversion by the sword and yes, the Qu’ran teaches conversion by the sword. Jews prefer to remain among themselves. If they do, it’s fine with me. Islamic violent proselytism is not fine with me.
To finish, the unavoidable “who started the whole Christianity vs Islam conflict” question also has a quite straight answer. The muslims started it by invading the Iberian peninsula. The Turks continued it by invading the Balkan peninsula. The Crusaders only ever wanted to secure Jerusalem for Christians. The French went to Algeria only to stop muslim piracy in the Mediterranean.
So you see, the muslim version of History is not quite compatible with the European version of History either.
I’m fine with the incompatibility and have no intention to ever move to a muslim country because I know the habits there don’t suit my way of life. So why are so many muslims from countries that aren’t under Western attack moving to non-muslim countries if the habits there don’t suit them?

Solid point. They definitely don’t present a demographic threat (unless in Palestine). But everywhere else, can we agree that they punch waaay above their weight when it comes to political influence (good or bad)?

Peace.

We did have a focus, but I cannot speak for what happens in Europe because, frankly, I don’t live there nor is the situation the same as the US.

O.K.

Why do you think Jews should be allowed to stay, but Muslims booted out? (Third attempt)

Well, I know you didn’t ask me, and I don’t particularly want anybody booted out, but surely one thing that springs to mind is that there are a lot less Jews? You could dump all the Jews in the world in the US and they’d still be outvoted in national elections by Mexicans alone.

We did have a focus, but I cannot speak for what happens in Europe because, frankly, I don’t live there nor is the situation the same as the US.

But you are avoiding my question about the Jewish community. There are a bunch of very Orthodox Jews that live around my area – they are also not assimilating; they have their unique dress, their own businesses, kosher shops, etc.

It’s a simple one – is the Jewish community compatible with core Western values? What about the following?
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DkGG1xoW4AADdUi?format=jpg

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DkGHQ0lW0AEDWpf?format=jpg

Are they exceptions? Why? Please don’t deflect with accusations of anti-Semitism – that’s not respectable. Why do you think Jews should be allowed to stay, but Muslims booted out? (Third attempt)

Four to five sentences should be sufficient.

Yup that ‘s the goal.

Now, that’s just disappointing. I thought we had a focus here.

I got an impression that a combination of my “Islam is incompatible with Western values” and your

…..Muslim demographic preeminence is an inevitability. This is not some underhanded or secret-sauce plan…this is basic arithmetic. I have four kids, my brother has four kids, practically all the Muslim friends I know have either three or four kids.….

….If you want us to assimilate, then no sale. ….

answers the most important questions in our “discussion” here.
Granted, except those on, say, practical level. Devil is in details.

“Islam/Europe”. Focus.
Can’t really get shorter/clearer here.

Not bad you mentioned “Dem Joos”. That’s great for a lively chat here. You just mix it a bit with “9/11”, “Liberty” and “JFK” and we’ll get thousand posts in two days. Oh, wait…….all those are actually connected. Let’s put “Russian Communists” too.
This is post 159, apparently. Looking forward to post my next comment below 500th.

The worst that can happen to you there, should that scenario happen, would be “Japanese WW2 treatment”

Good old Anglo-Saxon rule of law! love it!

Not many Muslims over in Southeast Europe unless you are talking about the historic populations like Albanians and Bosnians, but they aren’t foreign imports.

There are also plenty of Jews there, what happens to them? (second attempt)

I think there has been a slight misunderstanding here.
Location wise.

I love America too much to involve myself in a hot civil-war if it becomes a free-fire zone.

I wasn’t/isn’t/won’t be talking about America here. The worst that can happen to you there, should that scenario happen, would be “Japanese WW2 treatment”, with modern facilities, of course. Say, a white collar soft jail at worst. Actually, more like those gated communities in your place.Bigger, of course.

Location is Europe, south of Austria, for a starter. Later on, who knows……..?

As for

I’d rather just leave.

Well, doesn’t work that way most of the time. There are always exceptions.
Which is related to below:

I have friendly relations with my neighbors and try to be optimistic about my fellow citizens.

I am sure that you know how stupid that sounds.

And you got this right:

That doesn’t mean I am naive – if things move in the direction you say, then I will simply plan to try and leave.

The catch is….mixing that “optimistic about my fellow citizens” with hard cold reasoning?

Again, you don’t need to worry about that. Your side, in Europe, could be in a different boat. Literally.

you triangulating me while chatting, and firing first.

No, that’s not me. I love America too much to involve myself in a hot civil-war if it becomes a free-fire zone. I’d rather just leave.

You give West too much credit

I like to give the benefit of the doubt to most people. I have friendly relations with my neighbors and try to be optimistic about my fellow citizens. That doesn’t mean I am naive – if things move in the direction you say, then I will simply plan to try and leave.

So, you’re both flat-earthers? What did Incoherent Designation say, exactly? And how do you like your computer, cell phone, etc.?

And as for the Jews……

Hehe…I knew you were a smart guy.
You and me are on the exactly same page, just totally opposite paragraphs, naturally.

As I said….in “real” you’d be probably the only guy I could chat with, before opening up with our howitzers. And you counter battering, of course. Or…hehe…you triangulating me while chatting, and firing first.
You know the game….

…something tragic will take place….

Most likely it will.

…one wonders; if one is willing to scrap those same “core Western values” when the going gets tough, did they really have any principles to stand on in the first place?

You are good with history. Rome? Refresh a bit: Lucius Quinctius Cincinnatus.

Besides, I wouldn’t put too much faith in “core Western values”. Call me cynic bu the current paragon of Western values was created on a genocide of Red Indians.
Vae victis, mate.

Who cared/cares about all those expulsions taken place in Eastern Europe after the fall of The Wall? Your “normal” soccer moms don’t even know about it.
How about suffering, as you say, of those peoples in M.E. Iraqis in particular?
Africa? Who even knows, “normal” people that is, what’s going in in Yemen, Sudan and all those exotic places?

You give West too much credit, I am afraid. To those “normal” people, I mean.

And, yes, agree with:

As you said, I guess we’ll see.

That makes no sense unless the White Helmets were somehow even more malign than the armed insurgents fighting the Syrian government.

And, both you and me know that the problem is so easily solvable. Takes just a shift in attitude. Not even a big shift.

Sure. The West never developed anything like the millet system (though it must be said, the Austro-Hungarian Empire did try a pseudo-version – rather successfully – with their Bosniaks before WW1 destroyed that entire enterprise) so it seems to waiver between two bipolar opposites. There seems to be a lack of shades of nuance; it seems to be either being open to everyone and everything which leaves the society highly vulnerable to influences divergent from core values/worldview (I mean, you’re quoting from Friedman and Abrams, so you already understand this) or going ballistic on the wogs with “kill or ship them all out”.

It’s a systemic issue really…Popper’s Paradox and all that. And it’ll likely result in a cycle as before…something tragic will take place and the West will feel really bad about it again for going berzerker-mode and killing or deporting a bunch of innocent women, children and old people and then try to make repentance by shifting back to the other polar opposite…only to eventually set up some other tragedy 100 years down the line…

Happened before.

Yes it did, and if it happens again won’t all those ex-Muslims be hella surprised, eh?

Question though; the famous European expulsions of the Muslims usually went hand-in-hand with the expulsions of Jews. Are we to assume they’d also be shipped out on this go-around, or are they “in like Flynn”?

You’ve talked about “core Western values” before, but one wonders; if one is willing to scrap those same “core Western values” when the going gets tough, did they really have any principles to stand on in the first place? Again, refer to Popper for the paradox.

As you said, I guess we’ll see.

…..Muslim demographic preeminence is an inevitability. This is not some underhanded or secret-sauce plan…this is basic arithmetic. I have four kids, my brother has four kids, practically all the Muslim friends I know have either three or four kids.….

….If you want us to assimilate, then no sale. ….

I know.

As for how all that will unravel, well….we’ll see.

One side shall lose. The only question is which one.

And, both you and me know that the problem is so easily solvable. Takes just a shift in attitude. Not even a big shift.
We also know that I won’t say it here.
Just…..in a proper environment it would take one month to fix the problem, with the current resources.
Three months, tops.
All it takes is that shift in attitude.Happened before.

So….we’ll see.

Sensible last paragraph

It is.

Are all those quotes from George Friedman?

They are.

Where?

From a book, mostly.

The same points he does repeats on several other places, including Youtube videos (if I remember correctly).

Now…..I’d say that the best part of the book is explaining past and present. Predicting the future I’ve found rather wanting. But, he does admits that.

So, should you wish to get the book that’s how I’d read it. Focus on explanations as to what is going on; the real reasons behind some, apparently, puzzling moves.
And ,I do think that based on that one could predict, more or less, next 5 – 10 years at least. Or, at a bare minimum, that’s how Neocons think. And, more importantly, behave.

O.K.

Are all those quotes from Stratfor and George Friedman in particular?

From George Friedman, personally.

I particularly liked the last quote about America’s large margin for error making it careless. Careless of non American and lower class lives certainly but careless about getting to understand the problems well enough to even know what policies and actions might work.

Something like that.

If a so-called rescue group drags a film crew behind them, you can be sure that their purpose is the film, not the rescue.

How more so when the camera crew is dragging the “rescuers” behind them, or has set the scene and prepped the “victims” in anticipation of their arrival.

Can you give some examples of cause and effect to illustrate and explain your last sentence?

The answer lies in my penultimate sentence:
“The Eurasians are working on it, but they’re a long way from taking the world’s financial structures out of American hands.”

If one, and/or one’s sphere of interest is destabilized, how does one supplant, or gain control of existing international institutions? You need critical mass for that, and critical mass needs decades of stability to accumulate unless it comes as a re-boot at the tail end of a mass catastrophe. Bretton-Woods comes to mind.

The latter may be what we’re headed for, and if we are one can hope for a new Bretton-Woods.

Also (because it’s related):
https://twitter.com/Nidalgazaui/status/1025884634951966722

Followed by:

Peace.

Wow you’ve said it all and better

Muslims do not seek to take over. Slowly, patiently, in time.

Muslims seek to have kids and stable families. IF current demographic trends continue (along with current rates of conversion into Islam*), then Muslim demographic preeminence is an inevitability. This is not some underhanded or secret-sauce plan…this is basic arithmetic. I have four kids, my brother has four kids, practically all the Muslim friends I know have either three or four kids.

Which is why, instead of calling for destruction of Muslim lands, it would behoove someone like you to work on getting native non-Muslim Western families back on track to success. This is what you need to put the smack down on:

Muslims are, by default, incompabile.

If you want us to assimilate, then no sale. We can integrate though. Again, if this is a concern, I suggest learning from us and the concepts of dhimmah and millets. I would certainly not mind being part of a reverse-dhimmi agreement – what would my increase in taxes look like; 5, 10, 15%?

I’d change it to best-case scenario to fruition.

Then why advocate the worst options that is likely to exacerbate the situation?

More likely is that both you and me will live under serious surveillance/police state. Serious.

I can see this happening. The level of technology necessary to come up with the greatest Pharoanic system ever devised is now available. All that is left now is the will to see it through and implement it.

Which can present you with a terrible personal dilemma: join or reject.

There is usually a third option; avoid getting on its radar.

Sometimes I think my fellow Americans have watched too many movies. Red Dawn, Rambo and all that good stuff. We’ve never had to live with that boot on our necks. But there are people that have and we can learn from them. Challenging Pharoah outright can result in industrial-scale elimination. Rather, one bears with patience, doing one’s best to avoid the system and trying not be threatening towards it. Then wait for it to collapse under the weight of its own oppressive and incoherent policies.

That’s a bit too vague. NATO? Really? “Special forces” meaning what? Rangers, Seals? “Substantial component”? Can you really believe, given no big leaks from people who have been with lots of WHs, that it would have been more than some plausible agents provocateurs, the Arabic speaking ones almost certainly provided by Mossad?

… it is hard to see any attempt to weaken Europe militarily….

No doubt, but who said anything about “militarily”? Besides, could it become militarily weaker than it is?

… I can see major opposition from American multinational corporations and their servicing professionals.

I can’t. I can and do see major opposition from European multinationals, especially the Germans but the Italians aren’t far behind. Russia sanctions cost them €Bs. Europe’s many SMEs, especially in niche engineering fields, and of course the food industry we hear about got nailed as well.

Anyway, judging by their silence over the Russia sanctions (whose effect, if not stated intent, harmed Europe more than anybody else) and more recently over the imposition of tariffs on EU goods, American multi-nationals seem good with it so far.

Anon hasbara agent # 198 advised me: “Please take your medication if you are going to engage in intelligent conversation… You might start before letting off one of your brain farts.”
Hi Anon agent #198,
…Fyi, as a life long member of the Greek Catholic (Byzantine) Church, I had access to affordable (mental health care) medication that had no nefarious-pharmaceutical side effects!
… For example, a Zio-unwashed assertion in John of Patmos’s “Revelation” (2:9) confided the following cranial heads-up: “I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan.”
… Selah, Blazing Saddles and exposure of fragrant Jewish Corporate Media farts.

The USA needs a TOTAL BAN on Muhammadans.

A 1,000 year ban, will provide sufficient time, for Muhammadans to leave the 6th century.

But don’t hold your breath.

Perhaps the White Helmets contain a substantial component of US/NATO/Israeli special forces.

“I could probably spend a nice afternoon debating with Talha. Not even five minutes with “toxix leftists”.

From his comments, he does seem indeed definitely more open minded than the sooo open-minded “progressives”.

Sensible last paragraph. Are all those quotes from George Friedman? Where?

Please take your medication if you are going to engage in intelligent conversation. You might start by actually reading what was actually written and noting who said it before letting off one of your brain farts.

Are all those quotes from Stratfor and George Friedman in particular?

I particularly liked the last quote about America’s large margin for error making it careless. Careless of non American and lower class lives certainly but careless about getting to understand the problems well enough to even know what policies and actions might work.

Can you give some examples of cause and effect to illustrate and explain your last sentence?

How far does the US go in punishing foreign banks with US assets that engage in transactions outside the US in currencies other than the $US which are contrary to the purposes of US sanctions?

To the extent that US withdrawal from the Iran deal plus imposition of sanctions tests US ability to coerce others through its financial privilege could it not actually precipitate the end of its financial coercive power and the rise of trade in Yuan, Yen, Euros and GBPs?

I wouldn’t doubt that weakening Europe has been floated by more than one of DC’s Dr. Strangeloves but, apart from merely sensible calm people, I can see major opposition from American multinational corporations and their servicing professionals. Of course “weaken” needs definition and no doubt qualification on any likely version of the argument. At first glance anyway it is hard to see any attempt to weaken Europe militarily….

Or….you are trying to convince yourself and gullible and naive Westerners that Muslims do not seek to take over. Slowly, patiently, in time.

Approximately 1.5 billion people are Muslims…including Bashar al-Assad. What is your point exactly?

I guess the Catholics took over when JFK got elected… Is that what you’re saying peterAUS?

I just don’t understand what you’re trying to say or your point…

Please elaborate.

Certainly, as is usually the case, the United States currently appears to be making a mess of things around the world. But it’s important not to be confused by the passing chaos. The United States is economically, militarily, and politically the most powerful country in the world, and there is no real challenger to that power

The point is not whether the US is the most powerful country in the world, but for how long it will remain so.

Given that…
– Its economy, on a PPP basis, is approx $6T(!) behind China’s, and its real economy is smaller still.
– Its military lives in fear of confrontation with even near peers, and wouldn’t dare confront a peer.
– Its political capital has been spent. Most of the world, including most of its “allies” wishes it would just go away.
… it’s difficult to argue against the fact that “economically, militarily, and politically” its power is waning at an accelerating rate, if it hasn’t in fact become 2nd rate on all 3 counts.

Based on your quotes, Friedman misses entirely the source of the US’ power. Namely, the US’ remaining power comes from its control of the financial institutions that run the world. The Eurasians are working on it, but they’re a long way from taking the world’s financial structures out of American hands. Political & economic destabilization is the means by which those institutions are kept under American control.

The world is at a fork in the road. Either it devolves into a partition of the world into 3 zones of influence, or Eurasia integrates successfully, leaving the US (here used as a proxy for “the Anglo world”) out in the cold, doing what it can to lord it over N & S America. I don’t know about Friedman, but that the US’ primary imperial imperative is to keep Eurasian integration from coming somehow is a given in geo-political strategy circles.

As a few in those circles have pointed out, Eurasian integration, is based on three main pillars:
– Europe’s design/engineering prowess and consumption capacity
– China’s financial and industrial horsepower
– Russia’s natural, transport and human resources, but more crucially its ability to provide a security umbrella and as arbiter of energy flows for the whole.
Integration of those 3 strengths into “One market, from Lisbon to Vladivostok ” is the goal of China’s BRI, and the focus of Russia’s military buildup and military/diplomatic/political activity.

Take any one of them away, and the remaining two would be hard-pressed to integrate usefully to anywhere close to maximum effect.

The point of destabilization, whether it’s Afghanistan or the M.E., or Europe is to create conditions under which the Empire can take control of critical nodes. Even if it fails to achieve the latter, keeping the destabilized entity from acting as a sovereign, or from useful control by rivals is an acceptable consolation prize.

Ergo, if the destabilization of Europe isn’t on somebody’s To-Do list in Washington, the Empire better look for some new strategists fast. If one looks at events however, it’s pretty clear that the idea has Washington’s attention.

This isn’t either place or time to seriously talk about the topic. We both know that.
But, if we were to talk about some practicalities of the issue, re:

Why am I to assume you would be a paragon of Anglo-Saxon rule-of-law type here?

You don’t strike me as dumb, so, the answer is obvious. Martial law and such, for plenty of idiots reading our, ahm, “discussion”.

All hypothetical, of course.

I don’t, personally, think that scenario is likely. More likely is that both you and me will live under serious surveillance/police state. Serious.

Should the environment conductive to that scenario, somehow, does materialize, I am sure you are smart enough to know that the main danger for you, personally, wouldn’t be coming from guys like me. You know very well who the real danger will be. Which can present you with a terrible personal dilemma: join or reject.

And, should you choose the later, well, then guys like me could even be of some help.

The world we live in, a?

You have convinced yourself that Muslims are just waiting for the opportunity to grow strong and send armies into the West.

Or….you are trying to convince yourself and gullible and naïve Westerners that Muslims do not seek to take over. Slowly, patiently, in time.

.. the assumption being Muslims are, by default, criminals

Or…the fact being Muslims are, by default, incompabile.

I mean, I outlined that there is a very legal way to get things done (even expulsions of Muslims), but you seem insistent on hoping that the problem metastasizes to the brink of civil war in which the “normies” will be willing to side with extreme measures. This seems to be insisting on bring the worst-case scenario to fruition – why?

I’d change it to best-case scenario to fruition. Always depends on which side of a stick one is.

Fortunately, most non-Muslims don’t think this way and are willing to give Muslims benefit of the doubt and assume we want to move forward in good faith to avoid our mutually bloody history.

You sure? Besides, doesn’t matter, for a couple of reasons. I am sure you know them. You appear to be good with history.

I’ll leave it to the rest of the people observing, if they are convinced by your claim that Muslims will want to destroy them in some distant future…

Sounds good.

The insights by George Friedman were quite illuminating ….

I know.

PeterAUS, quoted this absurdity: “The United States wanted to prevent stability in areas where another power might emerge. Its goal was not to stabilize, but to destabilize.”
Hi Captain PeterChaos,
… The elite (international) Zionist Jew wanted to prevent stability in what was (!) once, long ago, identified as the United States. Such awesome diabolical power engineered the Zionist United States of America, and any (internal) resistant political, economic, cultural, and academic forces were submerged.
… ZUSA was not created to ‘stabilize” anything but Israel’s distorted ideological, territorial, & profit making requirements.
Above, so “there it is,” Captain PeterChaos.
… (zzZigh) You’re lucky to have the Wiz engaging you in flippant comment exchange.
… Selah, don’t ask what (stabilization) perks the ZUSA can do for you, but selah, ask what groveling action you can do for the ZUS!

You have convinced yourself that Muslims are just waiting for the opportunity to grow strong and send armies into the West. This is based on feelz. This is fine, but it has little support from any serious facts on the ground.

While it may have little support from any serious facts on the ground, it has the support of a serious geopolitical pundit, one György Friedman. Who needs facts, when you have a genius like György on your side?

The United States responded by invading the Islamic world. But its goal wasn’t victory. It wasn’t even clear what victory would mean. Its goal was simply to disrupt the Islamic world and set it against itself, so that an Islamic empire could not emerge.

LOL. The muzzies were this close to re-establishing the Caliphate, until the US cavalry rode over the hill and came to the rescue.

This guy sure is a geopolitical genius. What’s his name, again? George Friedman, you say? He couldn’t possibly have an angle, could he?

btw – wiki slipped up, again:

[György] Friedman was born in Budapest, Hungary to Jewish parents who survived the Holocaust.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Friedman

There it is. Every. Single. Time.

didn’t say that

You said “true…true” to my following statement:
there is no push anywhere whether in popular Muslim sentiment or from any Islamic scholars or institutions that are talking about military invasions of Western lands

How else is someone supposed to interpret your confirmation?

You mean leave them to get strong enough for a more robust attempt of expansion.

No, I mean stop destroying countries and killing off thousands and making lives generally miserable for people in that region. Including Christians other minorities may I add, who were doing OK in the stable countries of the area before we made it into a breeding ground for extremist groups.

You have convinced yourself that Muslims are just waiting for the opportunity to grow strong and send armies into the West. This is based on feelz. This is fine, but it has little support from any serious facts on the ground. Muslim nations have been just fine with the non-aggression post-WW2 protocols and there is no sentiment to march on Europe or China or anywhere else.

As annamaria has stated, you are projecting at this point. The only person that seems to be celebrating mayhem and destruction in other people’s land is yourself.

”non-criminal Muslims”

That’s interesting – the assumption being Muslims are, by default, criminals?

People like you.

Uh yeah, apart from a couple of traffic violations I haven’t broken any laws nor do I plan to. As I mentioned, I’m fine with being asked to go back to Muslim lands – when I see the official federal notice in the mail, I’ll start planning. The one’s who will be kicking and screaming will be the more secular Muslims.

Dem Joos, of course

Hardly. I can distinguish between Zionists (like Abrams) and your everyday common Jewish person. Even within Zionists you have varying strains from more moderate to off-the-wall extremists. I’ve even gotten flack around here for being cordial to the Jews I interact with.

If you want to use the criticism-of-Zionism-is-anti-Semitism canard, please try harder.

I feel you know that you’d be treated much better by my types then all those “normal” people you mentioned.

Not sure – you seem to be fine with flaunting international law to destroy Muslim countries and cause chaos there. Why am I to assume you would be a paragon of Anglo-Saxon rule-of-law type here?

I mean, I outlined that there is a very legal way to get things done (even expulsions of Muslims), but you seem insistent on hoping that the problem metastasizes to the brink of civil war in which the “normies” will be willing to side with extreme measures. This seems to be insisting on bring the worst-case scenario to fruition – why?

Other way around, well, I’d hope for a quick firing squad.

Sure, if I was a non-Muslim that had convinced myself that Muslims were out to flay me alive, I’d hope for that too.

Fortunately, most non-Muslims don’t think this way and are willing to give Muslims benefit of the doubt and assume we want to move forward in good faith to avoid our mutually bloody history. For instance, I think it’s great that elderly French people are increasingly retiring to a stable Muslim country like Morocco where they can live out their twilight years in a traditional Muslim society and afford to live well and hire help:
http://moroccomedia.com/2017/03/14/french-expats-on-the-rise-in-morocco/

I’ll leave it to the rest of the people observing, if they are convinced by your claim that Muslims will want to destroy them in some distant future and thus their tax dollars are well-spent in destroying Muslims and visiting misery upon them now.

The insights by George Friedman were quite illuminating – Macchiavelli would have been quite proud.

Found something on one of my machines.
Quick skim and some quotes you could find interesting.
The last in particular; I’ll put it first and last, with my bold:

…the United States had the ultimate aim of preventing the emergence of any major power in Eurasia. The paradox, however, is as follows: the goal of these interventions was never to achieve something—whatever the political rhetoric might have said—but to prevent something. The United States wanted to prevent stability in areas where another power might emerge. Its goal was not to stabilize, but to destabilize.

Certainly, as is usually the case, the United States currently appears to be making a mess of things around the world. But it’s important not to be confused by the passing chaos. The United States is economically, militarily, and politically the most powerful country in the world, and there is no real challenger to that power

The inherent power of the United States coupled with its geographic position makes the United States the pivotal actor of the twenty- first century. That certainly doesn’t make it loved. On the contrary, its power makes it feared. The history of the twenty- first century, therefore, particularly the first half, will revolve around two opposing struggles. One will be secondary powers forming coalitions to try to contain and control the United States. The second will be the United States acting preemptively to prevent an effective coalition from forming.

The United States responded by invading the Islamic world. But its goal wasn’t victory. It wasn’t even clear what victory would mean. Its goal was simply to disrupt the Islamic world and set it against itself, so that an Islamic empire could not emerge.
The United States doesn’t need to win wars. It needs to simply disrupt things so the other side can’t build up sufficient strength to challenge it.

Psychologically, the United States is a bizarre mixture of overconfidence and insecurity. Interestingly, this is the precise description of the adolescent mind, and that is exactly the American condition in the twenty- first century. The world’s leading power is having an extended adolescent identity crisis, complete with incredible new strength and irrational mood swings. Historically, the United States is an extraordinarily young and therefore immature society. So at this time we should expect nothing less from America than bravado and despair. How else should an adolescent feel about itself and its place in the world?

The American response to 9/11 seemed to make no sense, and on the surface it didn’t. It looked chaotic and it looked random, but underneath, it was to be expected.

America was born out of war and has continued to fight to this day at an ever increasing pace. Norway’s grand strategy might be more about economics than warfare, but U.S. strategic goals, and U.S. grand strategy, originate in fear.

And, again, the crux:

…the United States had the ultimate aim of preventing the emergence of any major power in Eurasia. The paradox, however, is as follows: the goal of these interventions was never to achieve something—whatever the political rhetoric might have said—but to prevent something. The United States wanted to prevent stability in areas where another power might emerge. Its goal was not to stabilize, but to destabilize.

And more….

…..Rhetoric aside, the United States has no overriding interest in peace in Eurasia. The United States also has no interest in winning a war outright….

….the purpose of these conflicts is simply to block a power or destabilize the region, not to impose order. In due course, even outright American defeat is acceptable.

And, last but not the least….

The United States has a huge margin of error. It is safe in North America and has tremendous power. The United States therefore tends to be careless in how it exercises its power globally. It’s not stupid. It simply doesn’t need to be more careful—in fact, being more careful could often reduce its efficiency.

So…there it is.

Thus worthlessly spake Wizard of Oz to Captain CHAOS, PeterAUS: “… if what is referred to as the Israeli interest in keeping the ME Balkanised. Is that his (George Friedman) point?”
(zZigh)
By chance, a question. Does Wiz Friedman discuss how Zionist Israeli fanatics (rather quickly) managed to evermore “Balkanise” America while nationwide Chambers of Commerce enthusiasts cheered the free- flow of cheap labor across the deindustrialized ZUS’s southern belly. (zzZigh) And then came the 9/11 False Flag attack, intimidating weaponized-anthrax letters mailed to “slacker” Congressmen, &, voila, subsequent chaotic passage of the pre-planned Patriot Act!
… Homeland Chaos as Zionist WMD.

Well….I am, sort of flattered, that you ask me to explain Friedman here.
Embarrassed too, I am afraid. It would be much better to read the man himself; he’s pretty open and prolific in stating all that.

I’ll try, briefly, and, be warned, not well enough:

I can understand his making your CHAOS point if what is referred to as the Israeli interest in keeping the ME Balkanised. Is that his point?

Not quite. While all that would definitely benefit Israel Friedman is focused on what’s, in his view, American interest.
The region in important to multiple players; some of those players can present a direct challenge to US. By creating chaos there those players will get involved in that chaos to protect their interests there.
Chaos will force those potential competitors to waste time and resources they would, otherwise, use to directly challenge US.
Or….in other words, they, competitors, will get exhausted there MORE than US.

Something like that.

Again, the man explains that quite well.
And, I find that explanation plausible.

That he should suggest America is motivated to weaken Europe I find astonishing. How does he argue that?

Weak enough not to challenge US supremacy in the world.

It’s all about maintaining the position on the top.
Whatever it takes.
Whatever.
Again, he explains that well……

With plain spoken wisdom, geokat62 wrote:
“It Magnitsky Act) creates the pressure on Russia to cut a deal against Iran, Syria et. al that the Russians otherwise wouldn’t be prepared to accept.”
Hi geo,
As you likely know, today, as Jewish Corporate Media reported Putin’s gallant attempt to resuscitate nuke arm limitation talks, the Zionist’s frontman, President Trump, applied warlike “PRESSURE” upon him by slapping additional economic sanctions upon Russia.
… Thanks for your service, geo!

I haven’t been reading Geotge Friedman recently. I can understand his making your CHAOS point if what is referred to as the Israeli interest in keeping the ME Balkanised. Is that his point?

That he should suggest America is motivated to weaken Europe I find astonishing. How does he argue that?

Good news from Syria: one of the senior commanders of Nour al-Din al-Zenki (the “moderate” group that beheaded a Palestinian boy on camera; description and the video of that hideous crime here: https://www.almasdarnews.com/article/aleppo-rebels-behead-a-child/) Abu Alhalik Abdulla Jiro was killed by competing bandits from Hayat Tahrir as-Sham in Idlib. The moment of the explosion was caught on camera (https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=13&v=KX0gostSvV8&has_verified=1).

It is in fact funny how they did it. They planted booby-trapped Syrian flag on his route. Being a crazy Islamist, he stopped to take down the flag. Apparently, he triggered the device and was blown to pieces. Tahrir as-Sham then proceeded to set up an ambush at the spot and killed a few additional al-Zenki bandits when they came to recover his body.

Let all Islamists supported by the “democratic” West kill each other. I wish their sponsors would also follow suit. The Earth would be a better place.

I have met a lot of good Christian . I have met a lot of true believers in democracy voting rights , respect for other cultures and needs.
Can they be compatible with denying heath care to the babies and children, waging or on Iran Syria Iraq Pakistan Afghanistan , can they be compatible with using bible to support Israel allow building of settlements, allow Gaza being kept under blockade and extortion and sanctions by Israel/USA, can they be compatible with just plain simple normal human being ?
Can they be compatible or their views with applying sanctions on Iran?
No Fuck They are not

and F that kind of democracy that survives by screwing rest of the world .

Before looking at Islam , look at your pastor father, church leaders politicians and the neighbors who accompany you to that sorts of shit hole of moral intellectual stupidities.

May be White Helmet is compatible with your type of religion ,upbringing and democracy and culture.

Just saying

No Just being a freaking moron

As my first choice explanation for America’s Middle East disasters is folly, ignorance and hubris…

On the surface, definitely.
But, if you take into account that the primary reason could be creating and maintaining CHAOS there some things could start making sense.
Weakening Europe as a secondary objective.

If/when you have time/inclination take a look at some George Friedman’s writings. He states that very clear. Surprisingly clear in fact.

…Read the suras not as they are ordered in the Qur’an but in their chronological order…

Yup.

True, there are muslims who are good people, I have actually met more muslims than Jews who were truly good people. Can they be considered true muslims though if they don’t follow the Qur’an in its chronological order but are instead picky with the suras they choose to follow?

Precisely.
Keyword “picky“.

And…hehe…interestingly enough, I do share the same sentiment:

That said, I still prefer a picky muslim to the toxic leftist atheists who are destroying European civilisation.

I could probably spend a nice afternoon debating with Talha. Not even five minutes with “toxix leftists”.

Islam, as preached to and believed by masses, needs reforming. Doesn’t seem likely in the near future.

No. A lunatic would be unfit to be judged. peterAus is evil. At the very least, unsuspecting children should be warned to steer clear.

Granted, Peter has the odd lucid moment, though far fewer these days but for the most part he will sound like what he is, a raving lunatic. Best just put up with it, he’s part of the furniture.

True, that the Globalist ‘war-party’ NeoCONs are determined to rekindle the ‘Cold War’.

Globalist NeoCONs are scum.

Vladimir Putin & Banashar Assad are responsible political leaders. IMHPO

Then they were incorporated into the WH organization.

It was hard to tell how much, if at all, they realized that WH is a propaganda unit. All over the world, people with good intentions are coopted and used.

A valid point. I doubt any such were on those Jordan bound buses, however.

War is war is war. Current economic sanctions on Russia are an Act of War.

I agree that John McCain’s ‘White-Helmets’ are dangerous, terrorist pond scum.

Any ‘friend’ of Obama & Hillary, & the Gang-of-8, is an enemy of mine. No way, should President Trump allow any ‘White-Helmets’, into the USA.

But, I suppose, the fix is in.

native Syrian volunteers

Yes, and I’ve met a couple who were brought to DC to speak at the Atlantic Council. They were, they said, doing rescue work from the beginning, before the White Helmets were invented. Then they were incorporated into the WH organization.

It was hard to tell how much, if at all, they realized that WH is a propaganda unit. All over the world, people with good intentions are coopted and used. Millions of dollars have been flowing into WH. If these people were legitimate first aiders, no doubt they were grateful for influx of cash and provisions. Did they know that, elsewhere, WH was staging false flags, or were they duped like most everybody else? Quien sabe.

“The White Helmets show the limitless funds available for these Orwellian propaganda fabrications.”
—True. The Zionized USA empire has no moral scruples whatsoever. The worshippers of Mammon are good at sacrificing any and all human beings for gesheft.

Here, in the magnificent essay by Michael Hudson, is a concise explanation of the ZUSA’s madness: https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2018/08/michael-hudson-life-thought-autobiography.html
Michael Hudson: “So here I was right in the middle of understanding how imperialism really worked. This was not what is in most textbooks. Most don’t talk about the balance of payments, but the key to financial imperialism is the balance of payments. The United States fights to prevent other countries from going back to the gold standard, because at the time America went off gold in August 1971, every American dollar bill was backed 25% by gold at $35 an ounce. Well, finally there was no more surplus gold, and that’s what forced America off gold.” — And it was the “war spending that had driven America off gold.”

Another excerpt: “In the 9th century there was a big fight against strong royal power. It was sort of like Donald Trump and the Tea Party Republicans are fighting against the state, like the privatization in the Soviet Union fighting against the state. The Byzantine emperor invited general Bardas to a big meal. The general said, “There’s only one thing that you should do if you want to end the warfare. You have to tax the wealthy families so that they don’t have any surplus at all. You have to give them so much burden that they can’t fight against you. You have to prevent the polarization of wealth, because if you let the private sector make an enormous amount of wealth, they’re going to try to fight against you and keep all the wealth for themselves that you and the palace are now getting.”

And another excerpt: “The West is moving rapidly into economic barbarism and militarism. As you can see, the austerity program of the Euro is destroying the economy there. The United States is cutting taxes on the rich, while indebting the working class very highly.”

As my first choice explanation for America’s Middle East disasters is folly, ignorance and hubris I wonder whether a better analysis might be that when the US (and allies especially Britain and even Turkey) blundered into the project of removing Assad to free up the oppressed majority it was more misguided than somehow wickedly supporting known jihadists and bloodthirsty fanatics. That is not to say that we shouldn’t be glad that Putin came with relatively clean hands to rescue the least worst solution by supporting Assad’s government. Curiously, even the Israelis seem comfortable enough with the outcome. Perhaps they are confident that Russia will stay and inhibit the Iranian extension of power to the Mediterranean.

The onslaught of defamation and calumny against Putin has been because he thwarted the evil scheme of the US and it’s allies in supporting the hideous Islamic fanatics in Syria. If one can remember the US also supported Pol Pot back in the day when he was opposing the Vietnamese. There’s no group too extreme for the US not to support if it feels it furthers it’s presumed interests. Can one imagine what a bloodbath there would have been had ISIS and it’s allies actually overthrown the secular dictatorship of Syria? All the blood from this ugly war is on the hands of the US and it’s partners in crime. The White Helmets show the limitless funds available for these Orwellian propaganda fabrications. Nice, having these and other war criminals settled nearby unsuspecting citizens. Who knows how many people they’ve murdered?

They were, or so the story goes, native Syrian volunteers rescuing the bejeezus out of their barrel-bombed and gassed neighbours. Every muslim, or so the story goes, has at least 8 children so the real question is what sort of “hero” leaves 2/3s of his family behind to die in the imminent onslaught of the evil dictator’s barrel-bombing, sirin/chlorine dumping juggernaut.

More curiously still, the separation scene must have ramped Sophie’s Choice to the nth power, yet there’s not so much as a 3 minute video.

And… as if the anomalies would finally end there, they’re headed for UK, Canada, Germany etc. instead of Jordan, UAE, KSA, where they could at least be close to such members of their families that may have survived.

What a weird bunch those White Helmets are.

Sounds like a typical Jew-financed front group.

How come 87 White Helmets (or Blue Helmets for that matter) would have over 300 family members with them in Syria? It is so far from making sense I wonder how you can make your comment without commenting on that.