The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Russian Reaction BlogTeasers
Al-Alemand

In 2012 this German video on what the news would be like in 2018 was satire…

… but reality seems to be catching up to and overtaking satire three years in advance.

And who says Germans don’t plan ahead?

Laws banning incest between brothers and sisters in Germany could be scrapped after a government ethics committee said the they were an unacceptable intrusion into the right to sexual self-determination.

“Criminal law is not the appropriate means to preserve a social taboo,” the German Ethics Council said in a statement. “The fundamental right of adult siblings to sexual self-determination is to be weighed more heavily than the abstract idea of protection of the family.”

This is a one up even on the Muslims who at least stop at first cousins.

Which of course brings us to recent events in Cologne.

world-consanguinity-map Cousin marriage, especially the father’s brother’s daughter type, is extremely prevalent across the Muslim world. It is also almost unheard of in Christian Europe. It is pretty well known even from perusing MSM outlets that these cousin marriages result in high levels of genetic defects.

Venturing into the twilight realm of what is and what is not politically correct, it is well established in the literature that the children of close cousins take massive hits on IQ. That less intelligent people are more impulsive and more likely to commit crimes is also well established.

Finally, and most germane to the newly flourishing rape culture of Cologne, are the social accoutrements of the mass cousin marriage institution.

What happens if a very large percentage of the girls and young women in a society have their choice of potential future marriage partners tightly circumscribed, and indeed, largely predetermined?

It means that women will be kept out of the public sphere – veiling, segregation, accompaniment by male guardians. You don’t want some young strapping village lad throwing a wrench in the family arrangements.

It means a severe shortage of their own women, especially for younger Muslim males. What to do if your cousin is slated to marry off some older cousin in Pakistan, and you don’t have the gold or the seduction XP to game the loosely dressed and unsupervised local women? You resort to the rape game, as we have seen from the institutionalized grooming in Rotherham and other UK cities to the recent wave of mass enrichment in Cologne to mark the new year.

It need hardly be said but the usual SJWs and feminists have gone crickets, and apart from the ritualistic expressions of outrage, the German state shows no signs of abating on its policy of closing the blinds and pretending the train is still moving. The female Green mayor of Cologne Henriette Reker went one further and suggested German women adopt a code of conduct to prevent future assault.

The suggested code of conduct includes maintaining an arm’s length distance from strangers, to stick within your own group, to ask bystanders for help or to intervene as a witness, or to inform the police if you are the victim of such an assault.

islam-feminist-ideals

Why not go the full hog straight away and put on a burqa while you’re at it.

The radical feminists have always been just fine with it, and in the end, it will become a matter of practical safety anyway, as it has amongst Christian communities in the Middle East.

When should we expect that?

Now to be sure, there are still good reasons to be be skeptical of the “Eurabia” thesis. After all, to keep the focus on Germany, 1, 2, or even 5 million new immigrants would still be relatively minor compared to the German population of 80 million. Fertility rates will converge; Merkel will flip-flop again, or be voted out of office; and walls will go up again.

This is a mistaken view, according to a recent argument by Adorján F. Kovács, a German surgeon and publicist.

The gist of the argument is that number we should be looking at is not so much 80 million as 800,000 – the typical number of yearly births Germany has had since the mid-1970s. And of which a consistent 10%-20% accrued to immigrant parents even back then.

Suddenly, when compared against the much diminished size of the youngest German cohorts, what at first might seem like a trickle becomes a flood. Put another way, the 1 million or so immigrants that were officially registered in Germany this year represent one a half year’s worth of the younger ethnic German cohorts.

A much more accurate picture of the influx can be obtained when it is compared to the already existing German population within this same age group, Professor Kovács says.

The official Federal Statistical Office currently counts some 15 million people in this age group in Germany, he continues, adding that the “proportion of people with an immigrant background in this age group is about 3.5 million people.”

In other words, the current native—European—German population aged between 20 and 35, excluding the new wave of invaders, stands at 11.5 million people.

Working on a rough figure of around a million invaders coming to Germany every year for the next few years—and the real figure may be higher—it is perfectly reasonable to expect a total “asylum-seeking” population in Germany of between three and four million by the year 2020.

This is, however, only the tip of the iceberg. Presuming, Professor Kovács says, that only half this number will actually be granted asylum and stay in Germany, this means that there will be around two million successful applicants by 2020.

“The fact that the majority of so-called asylum seekers are men, means that in almost all the cases, a successful bid for family reunification will be made.

“This will add between three and eight extra persons per successful asylum seeker, which means that by 2020 the total number of this group will be in excess of eight million.”

The fact that that are currently only 11.5 million European Germans in the 20- to 30- year-old age group means that by 2020—just four years away—white Germans will be an outright minority in this age category.

“Of the 23 million people in this country who are between 20 and 35 years, approximately 11.5 million people have a migration background within five years,” Professor Kovács says.

Furthermore, the higher birth rate of immigrants “has not even been factored in,” he continued.

“You have to think ahead 30 years. If the majority, that is, more than 50 percent of those now living in Germany are elderly, and will have died within that time, it takes no imagination to get an idea of the composition of the future German population.”

germany-muslim-fertility-rates According to PEW estimates, the fertility rate of German Muslims is 1.8 children per woman during 2005-10, versus 1.3 children per woman for the non-Muslims (see right).

And one supposes that as the numbers pile up those women who do not feel Islam is all that congruent with feminist ideals, and those men who are not tempted into living out a polygamous Houellebecqian fantasy, will start to emigrate en masse, further accelerating the process of population replacement.

It is still not too late to turn things around and won’t be for a number of years yet (previously it would have been measured in decades). In my own social networks I am even beginning to observe some formerly enthusiastic #RefugeesWelcome people expressing shock and rage at the events in Cologne (admittedly there’s some self-selection going on here because any of the truly rabid SJWs would have long since DeFriended me). After all, a dozen bad apples, as in the Paris Attacks, are presumably easier to explain away more than a thousand strong “group of people who mostly come from her in appearance from the North African and Arab countries” (to use the least obfuscatory official phraseology).

Still, considering the bizarre and abrupt manner in which Merkel pivoted from calling multiculturalism a failure and openly saying that immigrants are “more criminal” to opening the gates wide open and leaning on Zuckerberg and other social media to stamp out “hate” on social media, it is not beyond plausible reason that there are darker and more powerful designs at work that are fundamentally ringfenced from open debate and democratic choice.

 
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: Demographics, Eurabia, Germany, Rape 
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
109 Comments to "Al-Alemand"
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
[Filtered by Reply Thread]
  1. Those Muslim fertility rates are not derived by any valid procedure, the real figures will be far higher.

    Read More
    • Replies: @wolfy
    where is your evidence.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are only available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also only be used once per hour.
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    http://www.unz.com/akarlin/al-alemand/#comment-1284379
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. “Still, considering the bizarre and abrupt manner in which Merkel pivoted from calling multiculturalism a failure ”

    Merkel still claims to be against “multiculturalism”, though she never explains how exactly that is compatible with her open borders policy.
    And yes, she also uses that idiotic “How can 1 million be a threat to 80 million” pseudo-argument. Totally disingenuous.
    Really depressing how things are going in Germany.
    Why exactly is cousin marriage so prevalent in Islamic societies? I think you once mentioned it had something to do with Islamic inheritance law?

    Read More
  3. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    Groups of African and Middle Eastern troglodytes harassing everyone who is not them, their kin included, were a common sight in West European cities for many years now. Why should some women in Cologne be given more attention than everyone else? They should not go out where the lowlifes gather if they want to stay safe. Stay at home, stay sober, behave.

    Read More
    • Replies: @RadicalCenter
    They should go out wherever the Hell they please, whenever they please, accompanied by dozens of german men who are ready, willing, and able to KILL Muslims who harass or assault their women.
    , @marylou
    It is none of Islam's business, none at all.
    , @Anonymouse
    Staying in the 10th arrondissement in Paris some years back, I discovered that the night on the boulevard belonged to African blacks making pretend calls back home inside phone booths. V.S.Naipaul in a recentish novel remarked on the same phenomenon in Germany, African blacks pretend phoning in phone booths in the middle of the night. I wrote to a friend in Berlin, a German/American, asking what he could report on the influx. He was okay with it at that moment (last summer); he had a Turkish mechanic who had been fixing his car for many years.
  4. What is the IQ of Hui Muslims, which are basically Han Chinese Muslims? Does anyone have an idea?

    Read More
  5. Because it is very interesting that one of the arguments being used against Islam is the low IQ angle, but what if a 100 IQ population decides to convert to Islam, albeit the milder Abbasid version, will this make it better?

    Why is the edit window so damn short?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    I would guess that the mean IQ of Tatars, a Muslim group in Russia, is around 100. They don't seem to be very religious.
  6. on the other side of the coin german women – the same as western women in other places – have become ever more sexually aggressive. With the usual results of even better chances on the partner market for 10 % most attractive males and worse chances for the rest. German males have accepted this, Arabs obviously not so much.
    Anyway this is the point: still in 2014 the total fall of a western country as it has been predicted by right-wing guys for years or decades was rather medium-term question. Now for Germany, and some other northern european countries it is question of 2,3 years, due to the total demographic overpowering in the younger cohorts.
    And of course the imbalance of males and females in younger cohorts, especially in the for partnership, marriage etc. important time between 20 and 35, will reach ridiculous levels. For some time western journalists have reported the imbalances in India and China with a good portion of Schadenfreude, but the situation in Germany will be much more extreme soon.
    The value of #males/#females in the the age group of 15-24 is 1.12 right now. In 2014 the respective value for Germany has been 1.05. I assume the value for the age group for 20-35 has been similar. In this year alone thanks to the invasion this value has risen to approx 1.13. Continue this for 2,3 years and we have a level of sex-imbalance yet unseen, except for countries like the UAE with their foreign born male work force, with workers who are excluded from the arab public and private life.
    The problem is: it might be already to late to solve the problem in a way at least a little bit face-saving for the antiracist establishment. The doors are open and not soft measure will stop any one. No one in the MENA region will believe it when a e.g. a german politician says: “we want and will to reduce the number of refugees”. The people who want to come know by now that in this years not ONE SINGLE person was physically stopped entering Europe or Germany. They also know that you do not have to be a real refugee, since deportations still a extremely low and the only people who get deported anyway are people from the Balkan. So either Germany does do thinks which are unthinkable for the majority right now – like towing boats back to the turkish border, building up electric fences, using guns as the least option when securing the border, etc. etc. – or it is literally over.

    Read More
  7. Why the fuck did Islam spread so much and become so powerful if it had all these disadvantages build into it from the beginning?

    God fucking damnit.

    I’m tired of this shit. If it was up to me I would destroy every church and mosque in my country.

    I really try – I swear I try – but I can’t keep from hating white people and europeans for their genetic luck. I want to kill them. To beat them. To bomb them. I need to gain this fucking power of the white demons.

    When I gain power in Turkey I will remove bacon and kebab. In fact I will go beat my
    white neighbor today and break his face. I want to fucking see him suffer and bleed.

    As I punch him I will think about all the HBD motherfuckers. I will break his nose in front of his son.

    I will blow up Hagia Sophia in Turkey and shoot the fucking motherfucker Jesus face.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AriusArmenian
    I will assume that you are serious and that you are probably a citizen of Turkey.

    You exhibit the conflicted nature that is typical of most people. In your case you hate the EU (therefore the West) while at the same time Turkey is a captured vassal of the US, a member of NATO, and played like a fiddle.

    You should be angry with yourself. Why do you Turks allow the US to control your country? Why do you do the dirty work of the West in Syria, in Crimea? Why did your lunatic Erdogan restart the war on Kruds in Turkey?

    Turkey was poised for economic prosperity if it just remained at peace with its neighbors. But no, you Turks yourself had to pick fights to start the race toward catastrophe.

    Stop blaming everyone else (the Greeks, the Armenians, the Russians, Assad, Iran) and focus on the US. The EU is also a totally captured vassal of the US. In attacking the EU you are just one vassals attacking another US vassal. The US loves it.
  8. The fall of Empire, gentlemen, is a massive thing, however, and not easily fought. It is dictated by a rising bureaucracy, a receding initiative, a freezing of caste, a damming of curiosity—a hundred other factors. It has been going on, as I have said, for centuries, and it is too majestic and massive a movement to stop.
    —Isaac Asimov, Foundation, 1951

    The bureaucracy rising problem and too many people too few livestock. If you find yourself having to shoot your way out, your strategy went wrong somewhere along the way.

    Read More
  9. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    it is not beyond plausible reason that there are darker and more powerful designs at work that are fundamentally ringfenced from open debate and democratic choice.

    There are multiple agendas at work, Anatoly. Czech Prime Minister Zeman said a few days ago that the Muslim Brotherhood is behind the refugee tsunami. Soros, Big Business (cheaper labor), foreign people-smuggling rings (it’s a multi-billion dollar business), European profiteers (social workers, legal-aid lawyers specializing in asylum cases, landlords, …), virtue signallers, and on and on and on.

    Backgrounding all of this is an ideology that says Europe must transform itself through mass immigration or perish. A Swiss “philosopher and historian” named Philip Blom says (my translation):

    If Europe closes its borders it will go under. Therefore, it must gain new strength as a multi-cultural melting pot.

    (…)

    Philipp Blom minces no words commenting on the current migrations: either Europe’s leaders close its borders, downgrading it to the status of an appendix on Asia that at best will linger on as a museum for art treasures — or they “cosmopoliticize” Europe and draw new strength from the “melting pot”. However, this can succeed only if liberalism is taken seriously and if human rights at long last are applied in such a way that they benefit everyone.

    http://www.srf.ch/sendungen/sternstunde-philosophie/philipp-blom-die-fluechtlingsstroeme-markieren-eine-zeitenwende

    The thinking of Mr. Blom is: Europeans’ share of world population is fast dwindling –> Europe will be marginalized and not be able to compete on equal footing with Asia, Africa, America –> PANIC –> hit panic button –> import hundreds of millions of warm bodies –> PROBLEM HALF SOLVED ALREADY –> of course, xenophobia will be a problem –> immigrants cannot integrate unless they get same standard of living, jobs, status, recognition as old Europeans –> socialist policies to enforce equality –> eternal job security for social engineers, income redistributors –> that’s it, problem solved, ALL DONE.

    When pressed, people like Blom admit that it’s a huge, costly gamble that won’t begin paying off for decades (if ever), but they sincerely believe that it’s the only way forward for Europe and there is no alternative. And this is the consensus among the elites.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Then again, as a German emigre living in Los Angeles (I mistakenly assumed that he is Swiss because the program appeared on Swiss TV) -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philipp_Blom -- he won't have to suffer the consequences if his prescriptions turn Europe into a hellhole.
    , @Expletive Deleted

    " .. people like Blom .."
     
    .. have their reasons.

    "I also have a good knowledge of Hebrew and Russian, some knowledge of Italian, Arabic, and read (or used to read) several ancient languages.
    I was born in Hamburg and grew up in Detmold, in Germany. I began my university studies in Vienna (Philosophy and Jewish Studies) and then went to Oxford ..."

     
    http://www.philipp-blom.eu/Downloads/CV%20English.pdf
    http://www.jewishrenaissance.org.uk/component/content/article.html?id=31&Itid=151

    Every. Damn. Time.

    , @anon

    When pressed, people like Blom admit that it’s a huge, costly gamble that won’t begin paying off for decades (if ever), but they sincerely believe that it’s the only way forward for Europe and there is no alternative. And this is the consensus among the elites.
     
    Except very often when you troll people who say these things and make them angry they start to vent extreme racial hatred of white europeans - weird coincidence huh.
  10. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Anonymous
    it is not beyond plausible reason that there are darker and more powerful designs at work that are fundamentally ringfenced from open debate and democratic choice.

    There are multiple agendas at work, Anatoly. Czech Prime Minister Zeman said a few days ago that the Muslim Brotherhood is behind the refugee tsunami. Soros, Big Business (cheaper labor), foreign people-smuggling rings (it's a multi-billion dollar business), European profiteers (social workers, legal-aid lawyers specializing in asylum cases, landlords, ...), virtue signallers, and on and on and on.

    Backgrounding all of this is an ideology that says Europe must transform itself through mass immigration or perish. A Swiss "philosopher and historian" named Philip Blom says (my translation):

    If Europe closes its borders it will go under. Therefore, it must gain new strength as a multi-cultural melting pot.

    (...)

    Philipp Blom minces no words commenting on the current migrations: either Europe's leaders close its borders, downgrading it to the status of an appendix on Asia that at best will linger on as a museum for art treasures -- or they "cosmopoliticize" Europe and draw new strength from the "melting pot". However, this can succeed only if liberalism is taken seriously and if human rights at long last are applied in such a way that they benefit everyone.
     
    http://www.srf.ch/sendungen/sternstunde-philosophie/philipp-blom-die-fluechtlingsstroeme-markieren-eine-zeitenwende

    The thinking of Mr. Blom is: Europeans' share of world population is fast dwindling --> Europe will be marginalized and not be able to compete on equal footing with Asia, Africa, America --> PANIC --> hit panic button --> import hundreds of millions of warm bodies --> PROBLEM HALF SOLVED ALREADY --> of course, xenophobia will be a problem --> immigrants cannot integrate unless they get same standard of living, jobs, status, recognition as old Europeans --> socialist policies to enforce equality --> eternal job security for social engineers, income redistributors --> that's it, problem solved, ALL DONE.

    When pressed, people like Blom admit that it's a huge, costly gamble that won't begin paying off for decades (if ever), but they sincerely believe that it's the only way forward for Europe and there is no alternative. And this is the consensus among the elites.

    Then again, as a German emigre living in Los Angeles (I mistakenly assumed that he is Swiss because the program appeared on Swiss TV) — https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philipp_Blom — he won’t have to suffer the consequences if his prescriptions turn Europe into a hellhole.

    Read More
  11. Adorján F. Kovács, a German surgeon and publicist.

    Well, his name is Hungarian. I’d guess both of his parents were Hungarians, so he himself is a ‘German’ of migrant background, albeit of white European migrant background.

    Read More
    • Replies: @German_reader
    These intra-European distinctions are getting increasingly trivial given what we're facing.
    , @snorlax
    Surely, given their shared history, Hungarians get to qualify as honorary Germans. (And by this point, whatever their faults, above-average Germans too).
  12. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    O/T

    but there’s a story being sold in the media that IS have developed a SAM making capacity

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/islamic-state/12083631/Secrets-of-Islamic-States-University-of-Jihad-revealed.html

    this will be a lie to cover one of the anti-assad coalition supplying IS with AA missiles.

    Russki pilots beware.

    Read More
    • Replies: @pyrrhus
    Only in your imagination can ISIS devise high tech devices or SAM missiles bring down advanced modern fighters....
  13. Anonymous says: • Website     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @rvg
    Because it is very interesting that one of the arguments being used against Islam is the low IQ angle, but what if a 100 IQ population decides to convert to Islam, albeit the milder Abbasid version, will this make it better?

    Why is the edit window so damn short?

    I would guess that the mean IQ of Tatars, a Muslim group in Russia, is around 100. They don’t seem to be very religious.

    Read More
    • Replies: @snorlax
    I'd guess the same of Chechens, who are very religious. Scary group, Chechens. Their terror attacks are the best-planned and, if one can say such a thing, in many ways the most savage. Despite being foreigners, they tend to take the leadership roles in violent Islamist groups all over the world. The other terrorists are said to be afraid of them.
  14. The Federal Republic of Germany is a country of immigrants.
    Why are people expecting that to change?

    Laws banning incest between brothers and sisters in Germany could be scrapped after a government ethics committee said the they were an unacceptable intrusion into the right to sexual self-determination.

    “Criminal law is not the appropriate means to preserve a social taboo,” the German Ethics Council said in a statement. “The fundamental right of adult siblings to sexual self-determination is to be weighed more heavily than the abstract idea of protection of the family.”

    Well said, Ethnics Committee.
    Down with the discrimination of siblings-love!

    Read More
  15. @5371
    Those Muslim fertility rates are not derived by any valid procedure, the real figures will be far higher.

    where is your evidence.

    Read More
    • Replies: @5371
    The low figures bear no plausible relation to the fertility of the migrants' relatives in their own countries.
  16. @rvg
    What is the IQ of Hui Muslims, which are basically Han Chinese Muslims? Does anyone have an idea?

    I assume more than 100.

    Read More
  17. How singurely inapropriate ‘Not in our light.’ Cologne Cathedral protests anti-Islamization rally One year on women were being raped by immigrants right under those lights and with the German police present but pretending not to notice . The British police (concerned only for their final salary pensions ) took 40 years to stop pretending not to notice mass rape of little girls by immigrants.

    Like most things states do, Germany’s actions are an attempt to make it more secure. There are risks (as there were to previous strategies the German elite foisted on their population) but those risks have been calculated to be less dangerous than letting Germany be seen as a hegemonic state. So they are espousing post nationalism, with all the fanaticism they once adhered to national socialism.

    After WW1 Germany was very far from a defeated nation, but after WW2 it most certainly was and there was a fundamental conclusion drawn that german power had to take a form that was non threatening to the western world . The EU offered the reunited Germany (now again a feared by its neighbours) a way to be the boss of Europe and be protected from any military rivalry. Germany has abondoned nuclear power because of its association with war.

    Germany benefits from the refugee influx, because it is a total protection against Greeks ect calling the Germans nazis for bossing around the poor countries who a being slowly strangled by the eurozone Germany dominates.

    … it is not beyond plausible reason that there are darker and more powerful designs at work that are fundamentally ring fenced from open debate and democratic choice.

    Most of European, even world history has stemmed from the fear of the German nation

    .Brendan Simms cites … how, for about five centuries, the geopolitical imagination of European monarchs, statesmen and generals framed most global events in terms of the impact on their own continent. Battles, economic opportunities and the conquest of new worlds in Africa, the Americas, Asia and Australasia were all, in the end, largely about the struggle for power in Europe

    Germany is the natural hegemon of Europe, and seen as such they are the great destabilizers, Now, to avoid being perceived as what they can’t help but be, they’re at it again in a sneaky way that will be far more difficult to combat because it calls the whole concept of nation states into question.

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor

    Germany benefits from the refugee influx, because it is a total protection against Greeks ect calling the Germans nazis for bossing around the poor countries who a being slowly strangled by the eurozone Germany dominates.
     
    The same way as a rich and famous businessman would benefit from his own suicide, because it would be a total protection against his rivals fearing and envying him.

    'Germany' is an abstraction which can have no interests at all. The German people (whose embodiment the German state is or should be) cannot benefit from replacing itself by Middle Eastern Muslims, and in the long term not even Germany's elites (who for better or worse are probably leading the country) can benefit from this. If neither Germany's elites nor its ordinary people will benefit, than what is this abstract entity 'Germany' that is going to benefit?

    Am I missing a point?
    , @Anonymous
    It's like the war of attrition of the First World War of a century ago. And just like a century ago, Russia is not involved (Russia left WWI after the revolution, giving Germany free hand in the west) and Germany is poised to win this war of attrition against France and the UK. Anyone who's visited the three countries knows that Germany is in a much better demographic position. But just like a century ago, the problem is US involvement which threatens to overwhelm Germany. A century ago it was American doughboys, today it's American influence and pressure in Europe and intervention in the Mideast, which keeps up the migrant flow into Germany.
    , @Seamus Padraig

    Germany is the natural hegemon of Europe, and seen as such they are the great destabilizers, Now, to avoid being perceived as what they can’t help but be, they’re at it again in a sneaky way that will be far more difficult to combat because it calls the whole concept of nation states into question.
     
    The way to combat it is to quit the EU. Since Germany is no longer a military empire, they can't force any country to stay in.
  18. @Sean
    How singurely inapropriate 'Not in our light.' Cologne Cathedral protests anti-Islamization rally One year on women were being raped by immigrants right under those lights and with the German police present but pretending not to notice . The British police (concerned only for their final salary pensions ) took 40 years to stop pretending not to notice mass rape of little girls by immigrants.

    Like most things states do, Germany's actions are an attempt to make it more secure. There are risks (as there were to previous strategies the German elite foisted on their population) but those risks have been calculated to be less dangerous than letting Germany be seen as a hegemonic state. So they are espousing post nationalism, with all the fanaticism they once adhered to national socialism.

    After WW1 Germany was very far from a defeated nation, but after WW2 it most certainly was and there was a fundamental conclusion drawn that german power had to take a form that was non threatening to the western world . The EU offered the reunited Germany (now again a feared by its neighbours) a way to be the boss of Europe and be protected from any military rivalry. Germany has abondoned nuclear power because of its association with war.

    Germany benefits from the refugee influx, because it is a total protection against Greeks ect calling the Germans nazis for bossing around the poor countries who a being slowly strangled by the eurozone Germany dominates.

    ... it is not beyond plausible reason that there are darker and more powerful designs at work that are fundamentally ring fenced from open debate and democratic choice.
     
    Most of European, even world history has stemmed from the fear of the German nation

    .Brendan Simms cites ... how, for about five centuries, the geopolitical imagination of European monarchs, statesmen and generals framed most global events in terms of the impact on their own continent. Battles, economic opportunities and the conquest of new worlds in Africa, the Americas, Asia and Australasia were all, in the end, largely about the struggle for power in Europe
     
    Germany is the natural hegemon of Europe, and seen as such they are the great destabilizers, Now, to avoid being perceived as what they can't help but be, they're at it again in a sneaky way that will be far more difficult to combat because it calls the whole concept of nation states into question.

    Germany benefits from the refugee influx, because it is a total protection against Greeks ect calling the Germans nazis for bossing around the poor countries who a being slowly strangled by the eurozone Germany dominates.

    The same way as a rich and famous businessman would benefit from his own suicide, because it would be a total protection against his rivals fearing and envying him.

    ‘Germany’ is an abstraction which can have no interests at all. The German people (whose embodiment the German state is or should be) cannot benefit from replacing itself by Middle Eastern Muslims, and in the long term not even Germany’s elites (who for better or worse are probably leading the country) can benefit from this. If neither Germany’s elites nor its ordinary people will benefit, than what is this abstract entity ‘Germany’ that is going to benefit?

    Am I missing a point?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sean
    But rich business men routinely do commit financial suicide, by giving money to charity. Many will, so they proclaim, be giving all their money away. Meanwhile they avoid paying 99% of the tax they ought to. Germany is the people in it, but those steering are articulating the consensus among the power elites. Merkel is going along with an feeling that Germany cannot afford to be seen as anything but what it says it is , a post- national state. Who can compare modern Germany to the Third Reich now? The leadership are taking a calculated risk, as they did twice before.
    , @Seamus Padraig

    The same way as a rich and famous businessman would benefit from his own suicide, because it would be a total protection against his rivals fearing and envying him.
     
    No, reiner Tor. The German state/corporate ruling class is not sacrificing itself - it's sacrificing you in order to empower itself. If all goes as planned, this ruling élite will survive just fine, along with the rest of the Davos set, and preside over a partly mongrelized, partly polarized society, playing each faction off against the rest in order to keep them all down. It's called divide and rule, and it never fails. You have to stop it now, before it's too late.
  19. @reiner Tor

    Germany benefits from the refugee influx, because it is a total protection against Greeks ect calling the Germans nazis for bossing around the poor countries who a being slowly strangled by the eurozone Germany dominates.
     
    The same way as a rich and famous businessman would benefit from his own suicide, because it would be a total protection against his rivals fearing and envying him.

    'Germany' is an abstraction which can have no interests at all. The German people (whose embodiment the German state is or should be) cannot benefit from replacing itself by Middle Eastern Muslims, and in the long term not even Germany's elites (who for better or worse are probably leading the country) can benefit from this. If neither Germany's elites nor its ordinary people will benefit, than what is this abstract entity 'Germany' that is going to benefit?

    Am I missing a point?

    But rich business men routinely do commit financial suicide, by giving money to charity. Many will, so they proclaim, be giving all their money away. Meanwhile they avoid paying 99% of the tax they ought to. Germany is the people in it, but those steering are articulating the consensus among the power elites. Merkel is going along with an feeling that Germany cannot afford to be seen as anything but what it says it is , a post- national state. Who can compare modern Germany to the Third Reich now? The leadership are taking a calculated risk, as they did twice before.

    Read More
  20. It’s very unlikely that Germany will take a million “refugees” every year, but is very likely it will take hundreds of thousands on top of the vast numbers it already took before this crisis. Family reunification, chain migration and higher reproduction rates will drive the number of immigrants and their descendents through the roof, while deteriorating perspectives will drive german natality down.
    The most perplexing thing is that this is something lots of germans, swedes, britons etc want. We often say that they were brainwashed, but brainwashing doesn’t really work and why would the ones who do the brainwashing, who are often intellectuals, professors, journalists, entertainers and government servants (not exactly rich) want to live in a Germany overrun with desperados? Don’t they value the sweet life they have now? Why risk it? Why replace bicycling to work through a safe neighbourhood to a life of fear in a fortified enclave like the brazilian elites live?
    The evil capitalists explanation works for the US, but not for Europe because muslim migrants don’t move to Europe to work but to live off welfare, plus european businesses have access to cheap, qualified and docile labor from the eastern regions of EU and even from the collapsing economies in the south (mostly Greece and Spain).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Erik Sieven
    actually it is very unlikely that Germany will take in LESS than 2-3 million refugees / immigrants / invaders per year. The only thing which held back the masses before was the vague feeling of the potential immigrants that the Asylum System was kind of tough, that there actually was some border control. The Asylum System has not been tough in recent decades, and there has been no border control, but people believed so.
    Now everybody sees how it is, so much more than in 2015 will come.
    And under the current political, ideological, cultural circumstances it is impossible to stop them. Of course technically it would be extremely easy to do so, but every effective measure is forbidden.
    The question remains, why does the majority of people want it that way? Maybe it just feels so good to bash racists? Maybe racist-bashing is like a drug they cannot get off, regardless the disastrous consequences.
    , @Mitleser

    The most perplexing thing is that this is something lots of germans, swedes, britons etc want.
     
    Or maybe they just do not care for this issue.
    You are talking about the future of European nations, but many Europeans do not care for it.
    , @Matra
    It’s very unlikely that Germany will take a million “refugees” every year

    If that turns out to be true it will likely only be because Germany has managed to cajole and/or bully neighbouring countries into taking hundreds of thousands of them. That's even worse - for Europe in general - than having them all concentrated in Germany.

    , @anon

    We often say that they were brainwashed, but brainwashing doesn’t really work
     
    The media and political class falsify the data. People who don't have direct personal experience of the truth make decisions based on that falsified data.

    For example there has been a tidal wave of sexual violence against children in western Europe over the last 20 years (mostly in the poorest areas) as a result of the mass immigration of young men which the media and political class have totally covered up.

    If the media and political class hadn't lied about it then the pressure to halt mass immigration would have been unstoppable.

    Not complicated.
  21. @wolfy
    where is your evidence.

    The low figures bear no plausible relation to the fertility of the migrants’ relatives in their own countries.

    Read More
  22. @Pseudonymic Handle
    It's very unlikely that Germany will take a million "refugees" every year, but is very likely it will take hundreds of thousands on top of the vast numbers it already took before this crisis. Family reunification, chain migration and higher reproduction rates will drive the number of immigrants and their descendents through the roof, while deteriorating perspectives will drive german natality down.
    The most perplexing thing is that this is something lots of germans, swedes, britons etc want. We often say that they were brainwashed, but brainwashing doesn't really work and why would the ones who do the brainwashing, who are often intellectuals, professors, journalists, entertainers and government servants (not exactly rich) want to live in a Germany overrun with desperados? Don't they value the sweet life they have now? Why risk it? Why replace bicycling to work through a safe neighbourhood to a life of fear in a fortified enclave like the brazilian elites live?
    The evil capitalists explanation works for the US, but not for Europe because muslim migrants don't move to Europe to work but to live off welfare, plus european businesses have access to cheap, qualified and docile labor from the eastern regions of EU and even from the collapsing economies in the south (mostly Greece and Spain).

    actually it is very unlikely that Germany will take in LESS than 2-3 million refugees / immigrants / invaders per year. The only thing which held back the masses before was the vague feeling of the potential immigrants that the Asylum System was kind of tough, that there actually was some border control. The Asylum System has not been tough in recent decades, and there has been no border control, but people believed so.
    Now everybody sees how it is, so much more than in 2015 will come.
    And under the current political, ideological, cultural circumstances it is impossible to stop them. Of course technically it would be extremely easy to do so, but every effective measure is forbidden.
    The question remains, why does the majority of people want it that way? Maybe it just feels so good to bash racists? Maybe racist-bashing is like a drug they cannot get off, regardless the disastrous consequences.

    Read More
    • Replies: @German_reader
    "The question remains, why does the majority of people want it that way?"

    Do you really think there's a majority in favour of that idiocy? Yes, there is substantial support (not least among the brainwashed young), but a lot of people just seem to be stunned and shocked. I wouldn't have thought things could get that bad that quickly, and I've been thinking about those issues for years.
    , @Pseudonymic Handle
    The entire migration would have been stopped if Orban would have been allowed to stop them, but Merkel and the others prevented that from happening.
    Maybe they learned their lesson. Maybe. No, you're right. They are going to let other millions come in. 2016 will bring even more stupidity and cowardice, because these people never learn anything.
  23. @reiner Tor

    Adorján F. Kovács, a German surgeon and publicist.
     
    Well, his name is Hungarian. I'd guess both of his parents were Hungarians, so he himself is a 'German' of migrant background, albeit of white European migrant background.

    These intra-European distinctions are getting increasingly trivial given what we’re facing.

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    Yes, but it just shows how few German people are willing to speak out, when in fact it's a Hungarian who writes about these things.
    , @U. Ranus

    These intra-European distinctions are getting increasingly trivial given what we’re facing.
     
    This is something I hear often, which is why I've come to think that one of the EU billionaire elite's darker motivations here is to provide native Europeans with a common enemy, which may be the only social engineering ploy left to make us consent to be ruled by a single European central state.
  24. @Erik Sieven
    actually it is very unlikely that Germany will take in LESS than 2-3 million refugees / immigrants / invaders per year. The only thing which held back the masses before was the vague feeling of the potential immigrants that the Asylum System was kind of tough, that there actually was some border control. The Asylum System has not been tough in recent decades, and there has been no border control, but people believed so.
    Now everybody sees how it is, so much more than in 2015 will come.
    And under the current political, ideological, cultural circumstances it is impossible to stop them. Of course technically it would be extremely easy to do so, but every effective measure is forbidden.
    The question remains, why does the majority of people want it that way? Maybe it just feels so good to bash racists? Maybe racist-bashing is like a drug they cannot get off, regardless the disastrous consequences.

    “The question remains, why does the majority of people want it that way?”

    Do you really think there’s a majority in favour of that idiocy? Yes, there is substantial support (not least among the brainwashed young), but a lot of people just seem to be stunned and shocked. I wouldn’t have thought things could get that bad that quickly, and I’ve been thinking about those issues for years.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sean

    Do you really think there’s a majority in favour of that idiocy? Yes, there is substantial support (not least among the brainwashed young), but a lot of people just seem to be stunned and shocked. I wouldn’t have thought things could get that bad that quickly, and I’ve been thinking about those issues for years.
     
    It was the Pegida demonstrations, which showed there was some basis for recrudescent nationalism among Germans, that precipitated Merkel's decision. The German political class and even upper middle class were horrified by Pegida and the way it was affecting perceptions of Germany abroad. I know it is ridiculous to think Germany could get into another war like 1939-45 but dread of this is a powerful factor. The enormously expensive environmentalism and abandonment of nuclear power by Germany is because of nuclear technology's association with atomic weapons.

    Poor people in the countries that immigrants go to are the ones who do worst because of that immigration, while the already rich do even better (the biggest winners by far are the migrants themselves of course). The upper-middle classes are somewhat insulated, but they probably will accept considerable disruption to their comfortable lifestyle, because they accept the costs of the anti nuclear policy.

    At what many in the west consider the highest moral level, the post national global equity, it is easy to argue, as most economists apparently do, that it doesn’t matter because the winners (immigrants to western countries) gain more than the poor indigenous in the West lose, so it’s’s an overall gain for the world , but I think who benefits (and who loses) is still an important question for predicting if living in Europe will continue to accelerate. I think the people who have the greatest motivation to oppose replacement immigration are the poor indigenous Europeans, who lack the intellectual or organisational resources to affect policy.

    , @Erik Sieven
    I don´t know. In the end, at the personal level most people have contradicting viewpoints, I think. It depends on the framing of the question how people react.

    When they would get asked: "do you want 4 million 20-35 year old male arab immigrants in Germany in 2016?" the majority would probably answer "no!" - although the majority would not be overwhelming.

    BUT

    when the question was: "the racist, evil, ... AfD says 4 million 20-35 year old male arab immigrants in Germany in 2016 are too much, is this correct?" the majority would maybe say no

    and

    when the question is: "do you want that border guards physically stop refugees at the border? which means the use of firearms as last possible option?" the majority would say no I guess.
    , @iffen
    Slowly, then all at once.
  25. @Pseudonymic Handle
    It's very unlikely that Germany will take a million "refugees" every year, but is very likely it will take hundreds of thousands on top of the vast numbers it already took before this crisis. Family reunification, chain migration and higher reproduction rates will drive the number of immigrants and their descendents through the roof, while deteriorating perspectives will drive german natality down.
    The most perplexing thing is that this is something lots of germans, swedes, britons etc want. We often say that they were brainwashed, but brainwashing doesn't really work and why would the ones who do the brainwashing, who are often intellectuals, professors, journalists, entertainers and government servants (not exactly rich) want to live in a Germany overrun with desperados? Don't they value the sweet life they have now? Why risk it? Why replace bicycling to work through a safe neighbourhood to a life of fear in a fortified enclave like the brazilian elites live?
    The evil capitalists explanation works for the US, but not for Europe because muslim migrants don't move to Europe to work but to live off welfare, plus european businesses have access to cheap, qualified and docile labor from the eastern regions of EU and even from the collapsing economies in the south (mostly Greece and Spain).

    The most perplexing thing is that this is something lots of germans, swedes, britons etc want.

    Or maybe they just do not care for this issue.
    You are talking about the future of European nations, but many Europeans do not care for it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sean
    Germany is far behind Britain and France in racial replacement immigration by non Europeans probably that is why the German leadership felt Germany was getting dangerously out out of line with the other great powers, something that Germans have a real dread of.
    , @Pseudonymic Handle
    I'm not talking about future. I'm talking about today, having to live in fear of these thugs and also to pay more taxes for their upkeep.
  26. @Mitleser

    The most perplexing thing is that this is something lots of germans, swedes, britons etc want.
     
    Or maybe they just do not care for this issue.
    You are talking about the future of European nations, but many Europeans do not care for it.

    Germany is far behind Britain and France in racial replacement immigration by non Europeans probably that is why the German leadership felt Germany was getting dangerously out out of line with the other great powers, something that Germans have a real dread of.

    Read More
  27. @German_reader
    "The question remains, why does the majority of people want it that way?"

    Do you really think there's a majority in favour of that idiocy? Yes, there is substantial support (not least among the brainwashed young), but a lot of people just seem to be stunned and shocked. I wouldn't have thought things could get that bad that quickly, and I've been thinking about those issues for years.

    Do you really think there’s a majority in favour of that idiocy? Yes, there is substantial support (not least among the brainwashed young), but a lot of people just seem to be stunned and shocked. I wouldn’t have thought things could get that bad that quickly, and I’ve been thinking about those issues for years.

    It was the Pegida demonstrations, which showed there was some basis for recrudescent nationalism among Germans, that precipitated Merkel’s decision. The German political class and even upper middle class were horrified by Pegida and the way it was affecting perceptions of Germany abroad. I know it is ridiculous to think Germany could get into another war like 1939-45 but dread of this is a powerful factor. The enormously expensive environmentalism and abandonment of nuclear power by Germany is because of nuclear technology’s association with atomic weapons.

    Poor people in the countries that immigrants go to are the ones who do worst because of that immigration, while the already rich do even better (the biggest winners by far are the migrants themselves of course). The upper-middle classes are somewhat insulated, but they probably will accept considerable disruption to their comfortable lifestyle, because they accept the costs of the anti nuclear policy.

    At what many in the west consider the highest moral level, the post national global equity, it is easy to argue, as most economists apparently do, that it doesn’t matter because the winners (immigrants to western countries) gain more than the poor indigenous in the West lose, so it’s’s an overall gain for the world , but I think who benefits (and who loses) is still an important question for predicting if living in Europe will continue to accelerate. I think the people who have the greatest motivation to oppose replacement immigration are the poor indigenous Europeans, who lack the intellectual or organisational resources to affect policy.

    Read More
  28. Germany and Western civilization truly ended in 1945. When people at sites like Breitbart or Fox ask “where are the German men”, the answer is that they last real German men died in the battle of Berlin. What exists now is not Germany and there are very few real Germans left, they are a willing puppet state to the jews and thus deserve all the 3rd world problems in their future.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sean
    I think that the last holdouts in Berlin were the French SS, and there was a Muslim SS division. Apart from Doctor Dirlewanger's brigade of card carrying psychopaths, Germans who fought to the death in 1945 were probably identical to today's most deludedly anti-racist Germans in all but superficial things.
  29. @Erik Sieven
    actually it is very unlikely that Germany will take in LESS than 2-3 million refugees / immigrants / invaders per year. The only thing which held back the masses before was the vague feeling of the potential immigrants that the Asylum System was kind of tough, that there actually was some border control. The Asylum System has not been tough in recent decades, and there has been no border control, but people believed so.
    Now everybody sees how it is, so much more than in 2015 will come.
    And under the current political, ideological, cultural circumstances it is impossible to stop them. Of course technically it would be extremely easy to do so, but every effective measure is forbidden.
    The question remains, why does the majority of people want it that way? Maybe it just feels so good to bash racists? Maybe racist-bashing is like a drug they cannot get off, regardless the disastrous consequences.

    The entire migration would have been stopped if Orban would have been allowed to stop them, but Merkel and the others prevented that from happening.
    Maybe they learned their lesson. Maybe. No, you’re right. They are going to let other millions come in. 2016 will bring even more stupidity and cowardice, because these people never learn anything.

    Read More
  30. @Mitleser

    The most perplexing thing is that this is something lots of germans, swedes, britons etc want.
     
    Or maybe they just do not care for this issue.
    You are talking about the future of European nations, but many Europeans do not care for it.

    I’m not talking about future. I’m talking about today, having to live in fear of these thugs and also to pay more taxes for their upkeep.

    Read More
  31. @neutral
    Germany and Western civilization truly ended in 1945. When people at sites like Breitbart or Fox ask "where are the German men", the answer is that they last real German men died in the battle of Berlin. What exists now is not Germany and there are very few real Germans left, they are a willing puppet state to the jews and thus deserve all the 3rd world problems in their future.

    I think that the last holdouts in Berlin were the French SS, and there was a Muslim SS division. Apart from Doctor Dirlewanger’s brigade of card carrying psychopaths, Germans who fought to the death in 1945 were probably identical to today’s most deludedly anti-racist Germans in all but superficial things.

    Read More
    • Replies: @neutral
    I keep hearing this comparison to the Reich and the Merkel regime, it makes perfect sense. Things like one was pro white and the other is anti white, one was anti jew and the other is pro jew and one did not ever contemplate importing millions of non whites are clearly just minor details.

    Cuckservatives like you that want to compare the current puppet regime to the Reich are the most deluded of them all.
    , @reiner Tor

    I think that the last holdouts in Berlin were the French SS
     
    That's wrong. The remnants of the Charlemagne (French) SS-division were among the last holdouts (and they were fighting close to Hitler's bunker), but the vast majority of soldiers surrendering on May 2, 1945 were Germans.

    The French SS-soldiers then decided to take their chances and try to escape to the West to surrender to the Americans instead of the Russians. A handful of them managed to do that, and were captured by the Americans, who handed them over to de Gaulle's Free French.

    There's an anecdote (might be apocryphal) that a Free French general wearing a modified American uniform was interrogating them, and asked them why they were wearing German uniforms. To which one of the men answered with a question: "Sir, and why are you wearing an American uniform, Sir?" After which the furious general ordered all of them be shot on the spot, which they promptly did.
  32. @Pseudonymic Handle
    It's very unlikely that Germany will take a million "refugees" every year, but is very likely it will take hundreds of thousands on top of the vast numbers it already took before this crisis. Family reunification, chain migration and higher reproduction rates will drive the number of immigrants and their descendents through the roof, while deteriorating perspectives will drive german natality down.
    The most perplexing thing is that this is something lots of germans, swedes, britons etc want. We often say that they were brainwashed, but brainwashing doesn't really work and why would the ones who do the brainwashing, who are often intellectuals, professors, journalists, entertainers and government servants (not exactly rich) want to live in a Germany overrun with desperados? Don't they value the sweet life they have now? Why risk it? Why replace bicycling to work through a safe neighbourhood to a life of fear in a fortified enclave like the brazilian elites live?
    The evil capitalists explanation works for the US, but not for Europe because muslim migrants don't move to Europe to work but to live off welfare, plus european businesses have access to cheap, qualified and docile labor from the eastern regions of EU and even from the collapsing economies in the south (mostly Greece and Spain).

    It’s very unlikely that Germany will take a million “refugees” every year

    If that turns out to be true it will likely only be because Germany has managed to cajole and/or bully neighbouring countries into taking hundreds of thousands of them. That’s even worse – for Europe in general – than having them all concentrated in Germany.

    Read More
  33. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Sean
    How singurely inapropriate 'Not in our light.' Cologne Cathedral protests anti-Islamization rally One year on women were being raped by immigrants right under those lights and with the German police present but pretending not to notice . The British police (concerned only for their final salary pensions ) took 40 years to stop pretending not to notice mass rape of little girls by immigrants.

    Like most things states do, Germany's actions are an attempt to make it more secure. There are risks (as there were to previous strategies the German elite foisted on their population) but those risks have been calculated to be less dangerous than letting Germany be seen as a hegemonic state. So they are espousing post nationalism, with all the fanaticism they once adhered to national socialism.

    After WW1 Germany was very far from a defeated nation, but after WW2 it most certainly was and there was a fundamental conclusion drawn that german power had to take a form that was non threatening to the western world . The EU offered the reunited Germany (now again a feared by its neighbours) a way to be the boss of Europe and be protected from any military rivalry. Germany has abondoned nuclear power because of its association with war.

    Germany benefits from the refugee influx, because it is a total protection against Greeks ect calling the Germans nazis for bossing around the poor countries who a being slowly strangled by the eurozone Germany dominates.

    ... it is not beyond plausible reason that there are darker and more powerful designs at work that are fundamentally ring fenced from open debate and democratic choice.
     
    Most of European, even world history has stemmed from the fear of the German nation

    .Brendan Simms cites ... how, for about five centuries, the geopolitical imagination of European monarchs, statesmen and generals framed most global events in terms of the impact on their own continent. Battles, economic opportunities and the conquest of new worlds in Africa, the Americas, Asia and Australasia were all, in the end, largely about the struggle for power in Europe
     
    Germany is the natural hegemon of Europe, and seen as such they are the great destabilizers, Now, to avoid being perceived as what they can't help but be, they're at it again in a sneaky way that will be far more difficult to combat because it calls the whole concept of nation states into question.

    It’s like the war of attrition of the First World War of a century ago. And just like a century ago, Russia is not involved (Russia left WWI after the revolution, giving Germany free hand in the west) and Germany is poised to win this war of attrition against France and the UK. Anyone who’s visited the three countries knows that Germany is in a much better demographic position. But just like a century ago, the problem is US involvement which threatens to overwhelm Germany. A century ago it was American doughboys, today it’s American influence and pressure in Europe and intervention in the Mideast, which keeps up the migrant flow into Germany.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    What do you mean by Germany being "in a much better demographic position" than the UK and France?

    And what is there to learn about this by actually being a visitor to the three countries? Which parts? In what capacity? How recently? Which can't be learned secondhand? I ask as one who has visited all three.

    Also, what does this have to do with the "war of attrition"? I presume that has to do with the German birthrate having been much greater than that of France and the UK for many decades before WW1???

  34. @German_reader
    "The question remains, why does the majority of people want it that way?"

    Do you really think there's a majority in favour of that idiocy? Yes, there is substantial support (not least among the brainwashed young), but a lot of people just seem to be stunned and shocked. I wouldn't have thought things could get that bad that quickly, and I've been thinking about those issues for years.

    I don´t know. In the end, at the personal level most people have contradicting viewpoints, I think. It depends on the framing of the question how people react.

    When they would get asked: “do you want 4 million 20-35 year old male arab immigrants in Germany in 2016?” the majority would probably answer “no!” – although the majority would not be overwhelming.

    BUT

    when the question was: “the racist, evil, … AfD says 4 million 20-35 year old male arab immigrants in Germany in 2016 are too much, is this correct?” the majority would maybe say no

    and

    when the question is: “do you want that border guards physically stop refugees at the border? which means the use of firearms as last possible option?” the majority would say no I guess.

    Read More
  35. @Sean
    How singurely inapropriate 'Not in our light.' Cologne Cathedral protests anti-Islamization rally One year on women were being raped by immigrants right under those lights and with the German police present but pretending not to notice . The British police (concerned only for their final salary pensions ) took 40 years to stop pretending not to notice mass rape of little girls by immigrants.

    Like most things states do, Germany's actions are an attempt to make it more secure. There are risks (as there were to previous strategies the German elite foisted on their population) but those risks have been calculated to be less dangerous than letting Germany be seen as a hegemonic state. So they are espousing post nationalism, with all the fanaticism they once adhered to national socialism.

    After WW1 Germany was very far from a defeated nation, but after WW2 it most certainly was and there was a fundamental conclusion drawn that german power had to take a form that was non threatening to the western world . The EU offered the reunited Germany (now again a feared by its neighbours) a way to be the boss of Europe and be protected from any military rivalry. Germany has abondoned nuclear power because of its association with war.

    Germany benefits from the refugee influx, because it is a total protection against Greeks ect calling the Germans nazis for bossing around the poor countries who a being slowly strangled by the eurozone Germany dominates.

    ... it is not beyond plausible reason that there are darker and more powerful designs at work that are fundamentally ring fenced from open debate and democratic choice.
     
    Most of European, even world history has stemmed from the fear of the German nation

    .Brendan Simms cites ... how, for about five centuries, the geopolitical imagination of European monarchs, statesmen and generals framed most global events in terms of the impact on their own continent. Battles, economic opportunities and the conquest of new worlds in Africa, the Americas, Asia and Australasia were all, in the end, largely about the struggle for power in Europe
     
    Germany is the natural hegemon of Europe, and seen as such they are the great destabilizers, Now, to avoid being perceived as what they can't help but be, they're at it again in a sneaky way that will be far more difficult to combat because it calls the whole concept of nation states into question.

    Germany is the natural hegemon of Europe, and seen as such they are the great destabilizers, Now, to avoid being perceived as what they can’t help but be, they’re at it again in a sneaky way that will be far more difficult to combat because it calls the whole concept of nation states into question.

    The way to combat it is to quit the EU. Since Germany is no longer a military empire, they can’t force any country to stay in.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mitleser
    There are plenty of non-military ways to keep them in, especially when smaller, poorer nations are the ones who do not accept their place.
    Just ask Greece.
  36. @reiner Tor

    Germany benefits from the refugee influx, because it is a total protection against Greeks ect calling the Germans nazis for bossing around the poor countries who a being slowly strangled by the eurozone Germany dominates.
     
    The same way as a rich and famous businessman would benefit from his own suicide, because it would be a total protection against his rivals fearing and envying him.

    'Germany' is an abstraction which can have no interests at all. The German people (whose embodiment the German state is or should be) cannot benefit from replacing itself by Middle Eastern Muslims, and in the long term not even Germany's elites (who for better or worse are probably leading the country) can benefit from this. If neither Germany's elites nor its ordinary people will benefit, than what is this abstract entity 'Germany' that is going to benefit?

    Am I missing a point?

    The same way as a rich and famous businessman would benefit from his own suicide, because it would be a total protection against his rivals fearing and envying him.

    No, reiner Tor. The German state/corporate ruling class is not sacrificing itself – it’s sacrificing you in order to empower itself. If all goes as planned, this ruling élite will survive just fine, along with the rest of the Davos set, and preside over a partly mongrelized, partly polarized society, playing each faction off against the rest in order to keep them all down. It’s called divide and rule, and it never fails. You have to stop it now, before it’s too late.

    Read More
    • Agree: BB753
    • Replies: @reiner Tor

    If all goes as planned
     
    If.
    , @Ad Victoriam
    You have it exactly right. Globalist traitors are importing the divide for divide and rule, and taxing us to pay for our own demographic dispossession.
  37. @Seamus Padraig

    Germany is the natural hegemon of Europe, and seen as such they are the great destabilizers, Now, to avoid being perceived as what they can’t help but be, they’re at it again in a sneaky way that will be far more difficult to combat because it calls the whole concept of nation states into question.
     
    The way to combat it is to quit the EU. Since Germany is no longer a military empire, they can't force any country to stay in.

    There are plenty of non-military ways to keep them in, especially when smaller, poorer nations are the ones who do not accept their place.
    Just ask Greece.

    Read More
  38. @Sean
    I think that the last holdouts in Berlin were the French SS, and there was a Muslim SS division. Apart from Doctor Dirlewanger's brigade of card carrying psychopaths, Germans who fought to the death in 1945 were probably identical to today's most deludedly anti-racist Germans in all but superficial things.

    I keep hearing this comparison to the Reich and the Merkel regime, it makes perfect sense. Things like one was pro white and the other is anti white, one was anti jew and the other is pro jew and one did not ever contemplate importing millions of non whites are clearly just minor details.

    Cuckservatives like you that want to compare the current puppet regime to the Reich are the most deluded of them all.

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor

    one did not ever contemplate importing millions of non whites are clearly just minor details
     
    The Reich did contemplate importing millions of Slavs and others, and in fact went ahead and did just that. And no doubt would have done so to non whites, had it had a reserve of non whites somewhere in its conquered lands.

    But yes, Merkel is totally different from Hitler, the only common denominator is the fanaticism in pursuing a failed ideology by a childless leader to the detriment of their own people.
    , @Sean
    During the Yugoslavian war paramilitaries captured enemy families and one type of abuse was, when ordered at gunpoint, some fathers raped their own daughters. Other fathers refused and said they preferred to die. There are some who really prefer death before dishonour, and such inviolable principles may be the most important thing about a person in one sense, but not the HBD one.
    , @snorlax
    The Reich was so pro-white they killed ~30 million whites.
  39. why do you expect migrants to have similar fertility rates.for example there are large difference between Indian American and Indian fertility rate.

    Read More
  40. it is not beyond plausible reason that there are darker and more powerful designs at work that are fundamentally ringfenced from open debate and democratic choice.

    Clearly she (i.e. German bankers) and the Greeks cut a deal behind the curtain with Erdogan.

    Read More
  41. @wolfy
    why do you expect migrants to have similar fertility rates.for example there are large difference between Indian American and Indian fertility rate.

    They don’t. Read more carefully.

    Read More
  42. @Sean
    I think that the last holdouts in Berlin were the French SS, and there was a Muslim SS division. Apart from Doctor Dirlewanger's brigade of card carrying psychopaths, Germans who fought to the death in 1945 were probably identical to today's most deludedly anti-racist Germans in all but superficial things.

    I think that the last holdouts in Berlin were the French SS

    That’s wrong. The remnants of the Charlemagne (French) SS-division were among the last holdouts (and they were fighting close to Hitler’s bunker), but the vast majority of soldiers surrendering on May 2, 1945 were Germans.

    The French SS-soldiers then decided to take their chances and try to escape to the West to surrender to the Americans instead of the Russians. A handful of them managed to do that, and were captured by the Americans, who handed them over to de Gaulle’s Free French.

    There’s an anecdote (might be apocryphal) that a Free French general wearing a modified American uniform was interrogating them, and asked them why they were wearing German uniforms. To which one of the men answered with a question: “Sir, and why are you wearing an American uniform, Sir?” After which the furious general ordered all of them be shot on the spot, which they promptly did.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sean
    I have read some of the French SS in a subway tunnel were the last resistance in Berlin. The Russians (and the allies too) generally shot anyone who surrendered in an SS uniform, so they did not have much choice but to go out shooting. The French were prone to shooting their own women merely for going out with Germans (my grandfather saw three girls shot in a Normandy village square during an impromptu party to celebrate liberation) so I don't expect many French SS men who surrendered were ever going to survive.
    , @Al
    The anecdote is true.

    The French general was Leclerc de Hauteclocque, himself a (true) war hero.

    I remember reading about the incident in the memories of a French veteran. It might have been De Gaulle's, but it's been a long while since I read that.

  43. @Seamus Padraig

    The same way as a rich and famous businessman would benefit from his own suicide, because it would be a total protection against his rivals fearing and envying him.
     
    No, reiner Tor. The German state/corporate ruling class is not sacrificing itself - it's sacrificing you in order to empower itself. If all goes as planned, this ruling élite will survive just fine, along with the rest of the Davos set, and preside over a partly mongrelized, partly polarized society, playing each faction off against the rest in order to keep them all down. It's called divide and rule, and it never fails. You have to stop it now, before it's too late.

    If all goes as planned

    If.

    Read More
  44. @neutral
    I keep hearing this comparison to the Reich and the Merkel regime, it makes perfect sense. Things like one was pro white and the other is anti white, one was anti jew and the other is pro jew and one did not ever contemplate importing millions of non whites are clearly just minor details.

    Cuckservatives like you that want to compare the current puppet regime to the Reich are the most deluded of them all.

    one did not ever contemplate importing millions of non whites are clearly just minor details

    The Reich did contemplate importing millions of Slavs and others, and in fact went ahead and did just that. And no doubt would have done so to non whites, had it had a reserve of non whites somewhere in its conquered lands.

    But yes, Merkel is totally different from Hitler, the only common denominator is the fanaticism in pursuing a failed ideology by a childless leader to the detriment of their own people.

    Read More
  45. @German_reader
    "The question remains, why does the majority of people want it that way?"

    Do you really think there's a majority in favour of that idiocy? Yes, there is substantial support (not least among the brainwashed young), but a lot of people just seem to be stunned and shocked. I wouldn't have thought things could get that bad that quickly, and I've been thinking about those issues for years.

    Slowly, then all at once.

    Read More
  46. @Anonymous
    it is not beyond plausible reason that there are darker and more powerful designs at work that are fundamentally ringfenced from open debate and democratic choice.

    There are multiple agendas at work, Anatoly. Czech Prime Minister Zeman said a few days ago that the Muslim Brotherhood is behind the refugee tsunami. Soros, Big Business (cheaper labor), foreign people-smuggling rings (it's a multi-billion dollar business), European profiteers (social workers, legal-aid lawyers specializing in asylum cases, landlords, ...), virtue signallers, and on and on and on.

    Backgrounding all of this is an ideology that says Europe must transform itself through mass immigration or perish. A Swiss "philosopher and historian" named Philip Blom says (my translation):

    If Europe closes its borders it will go under. Therefore, it must gain new strength as a multi-cultural melting pot.

    (...)

    Philipp Blom minces no words commenting on the current migrations: either Europe's leaders close its borders, downgrading it to the status of an appendix on Asia that at best will linger on as a museum for art treasures -- or they "cosmopoliticize" Europe and draw new strength from the "melting pot". However, this can succeed only if liberalism is taken seriously and if human rights at long last are applied in such a way that they benefit everyone.
     
    http://www.srf.ch/sendungen/sternstunde-philosophie/philipp-blom-die-fluechtlingsstroeme-markieren-eine-zeitenwende

    The thinking of Mr. Blom is: Europeans' share of world population is fast dwindling --> Europe will be marginalized and not be able to compete on equal footing with Asia, Africa, America --> PANIC --> hit panic button --> import hundreds of millions of warm bodies --> PROBLEM HALF SOLVED ALREADY --> of course, xenophobia will be a problem --> immigrants cannot integrate unless they get same standard of living, jobs, status, recognition as old Europeans --> socialist policies to enforce equality --> eternal job security for social engineers, income redistributors --> that's it, problem solved, ALL DONE.

    When pressed, people like Blom admit that it's a huge, costly gamble that won't begin paying off for decades (if ever), but they sincerely believe that it's the only way forward for Europe and there is no alternative. And this is the consensus among the elites.

    ” .. people like Blom ..”

    .. have their reasons.

    “I also have a good knowledge of Hebrew and Russian, some knowledge of Italian, Arabic, and read (or used to read) several ancient languages.
    I was born in Hamburg and grew up in Detmold, in Germany. I began my university studies in Vienna (Philosophy and Jewish Studies) and then went to Oxford …”

    http://www.philipp-blom.eu/Downloads/CV%20English.pdf

    http://www.jewishrenaissance.org.uk/component/content/article.html?id=31&Itid=151

    Every. Damn. Time.

    Read More
  47. @German_reader
    These intra-European distinctions are getting increasingly trivial given what we're facing.

    Yes, but it just shows how few German people are willing to speak out, when in fact it’s a Hungarian who writes about these things.

    Read More
  48. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Anonymous
    it is not beyond plausible reason that there are darker and more powerful designs at work that are fundamentally ringfenced from open debate and democratic choice.

    There are multiple agendas at work, Anatoly. Czech Prime Minister Zeman said a few days ago that the Muslim Brotherhood is behind the refugee tsunami. Soros, Big Business (cheaper labor), foreign people-smuggling rings (it's a multi-billion dollar business), European profiteers (social workers, legal-aid lawyers specializing in asylum cases, landlords, ...), virtue signallers, and on and on and on.

    Backgrounding all of this is an ideology that says Europe must transform itself through mass immigration or perish. A Swiss "philosopher and historian" named Philip Blom says (my translation):

    If Europe closes its borders it will go under. Therefore, it must gain new strength as a multi-cultural melting pot.

    (...)

    Philipp Blom minces no words commenting on the current migrations: either Europe's leaders close its borders, downgrading it to the status of an appendix on Asia that at best will linger on as a museum for art treasures -- or they "cosmopoliticize" Europe and draw new strength from the "melting pot". However, this can succeed only if liberalism is taken seriously and if human rights at long last are applied in such a way that they benefit everyone.
     
    http://www.srf.ch/sendungen/sternstunde-philosophie/philipp-blom-die-fluechtlingsstroeme-markieren-eine-zeitenwende

    The thinking of Mr. Blom is: Europeans' share of world population is fast dwindling --> Europe will be marginalized and not be able to compete on equal footing with Asia, Africa, America --> PANIC --> hit panic button --> import hundreds of millions of warm bodies --> PROBLEM HALF SOLVED ALREADY --> of course, xenophobia will be a problem --> immigrants cannot integrate unless they get same standard of living, jobs, status, recognition as old Europeans --> socialist policies to enforce equality --> eternal job security for social engineers, income redistributors --> that's it, problem solved, ALL DONE.

    When pressed, people like Blom admit that it's a huge, costly gamble that won't begin paying off for decades (if ever), but they sincerely believe that it's the only way forward for Europe and there is no alternative. And this is the consensus among the elites.

    When pressed, people like Blom admit that it’s a huge, costly gamble that won’t begin paying off for decades (if ever), but they sincerely believe that it’s the only way forward for Europe and there is no alternative. And this is the consensus among the elites.

    Except very often when you troll people who say these things and make them angry they start to vent extreme racial hatred of white europeans – weird coincidence huh.

    Read More
  49. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Pseudonymic Handle
    It's very unlikely that Germany will take a million "refugees" every year, but is very likely it will take hundreds of thousands on top of the vast numbers it already took before this crisis. Family reunification, chain migration and higher reproduction rates will drive the number of immigrants and their descendents through the roof, while deteriorating perspectives will drive german natality down.
    The most perplexing thing is that this is something lots of germans, swedes, britons etc want. We often say that they were brainwashed, but brainwashing doesn't really work and why would the ones who do the brainwashing, who are often intellectuals, professors, journalists, entertainers and government servants (not exactly rich) want to live in a Germany overrun with desperados? Don't they value the sweet life they have now? Why risk it? Why replace bicycling to work through a safe neighbourhood to a life of fear in a fortified enclave like the brazilian elites live?
    The evil capitalists explanation works for the US, but not for Europe because muslim migrants don't move to Europe to work but to live off welfare, plus european businesses have access to cheap, qualified and docile labor from the eastern regions of EU and even from the collapsing economies in the south (mostly Greece and Spain).

    We often say that they were brainwashed, but brainwashing doesn’t really work

    The media and political class falsify the data. People who don’t have direct personal experience of the truth make decisions based on that falsified data.

    For example there has been a tidal wave of sexual violence against children in western Europe over the last 20 years (mostly in the poorest areas) as a result of the mass immigration of young men which the media and political class have totally covered up.

    If the media and political class hadn’t lied about it then the pressure to halt mass immigration would have been unstoppable.

    Not complicated.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Pseudonymic Handle
    There is a lot of censorship, but in this day and age, information is easily accessible if you're interested.
    Most Westerners prefer to ignore reality and self-censor so they look like generous people supporting trendy progressive ideals, rather than take an public image hit and be seen as low class haters.
    Westerners engage in crimestop even if the cost of committing thoughtcrime is actually very small by historical comparison.
  50. @reiner Tor

    I think that the last holdouts in Berlin were the French SS
     
    That's wrong. The remnants of the Charlemagne (French) SS-division were among the last holdouts (and they were fighting close to Hitler's bunker), but the vast majority of soldiers surrendering on May 2, 1945 were Germans.

    The French SS-soldiers then decided to take their chances and try to escape to the West to surrender to the Americans instead of the Russians. A handful of them managed to do that, and were captured by the Americans, who handed them over to de Gaulle's Free French.

    There's an anecdote (might be apocryphal) that a Free French general wearing a modified American uniform was interrogating them, and asked them why they were wearing German uniforms. To which one of the men answered with a question: "Sir, and why are you wearing an American uniform, Sir?" After which the furious general ordered all of them be shot on the spot, which they promptly did.

    I have read some of the French SS in a subway tunnel were the last resistance in Berlin. The Russians (and the allies too) generally shot anyone who surrendered in an SS uniform, so they did not have much choice but to go out shooting. The French were prone to shooting their own women merely for going out with Germans (my grandfather saw three girls shot in a Normandy village square during an impromptu party to celebrate liberation) so I don’t expect many French SS men who surrendered were ever going to survive.

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor

    The Russians (and the allies too) generally shot anyone who surrendered in an SS uniform
     
    That's not true. What's true is that SS-uniforms made it more likely to be shot after being captured, but it was nowhere near a certainty, especially since the SS often used camouflage uniforms which lacked SS insignia. On the other hand, tank crews were often mistaken for SS and shot, because they also used the death's head symbol (which was as far as I know originally the symbol of the Prussian light cavalry, but other historical German units used that, too, for example even the military unit of German revolutionaries supporting the Hungarian revolution in 1849 used that symbol). But anyway, the majority of the captured SS men survive captivity.

    However, foreign SS men had a higher risk of being killed, because they were usually handed over to the country whose citizens they were, and that often meant death or at the very least long prison sentences.

  51. @neutral
    I keep hearing this comparison to the Reich and the Merkel regime, it makes perfect sense. Things like one was pro white and the other is anti white, one was anti jew and the other is pro jew and one did not ever contemplate importing millions of non whites are clearly just minor details.

    Cuckservatives like you that want to compare the current puppet regime to the Reich are the most deluded of them all.

    During the Yugoslavian war paramilitaries captured enemy families and one type of abuse was, when ordered at gunpoint, some fathers raped their own daughters. Other fathers refused and said they preferred to die. There are some who really prefer death before dishonour, and such inviolable principles may be the most important thing about a person in one sense, but not the HBD one.

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor

    when ordered at gunpoint, some fathers raped their own daughters
     
    How did they get an erection? I'd rather be killed or tortured in any way than doing that, though maybe only because my daughter is only seven months old.
  52. @Sean
    I have read some of the French SS in a subway tunnel were the last resistance in Berlin. The Russians (and the allies too) generally shot anyone who surrendered in an SS uniform, so they did not have much choice but to go out shooting. The French were prone to shooting their own women merely for going out with Germans (my grandfather saw three girls shot in a Normandy village square during an impromptu party to celebrate liberation) so I don't expect many French SS men who surrendered were ever going to survive.

    The Russians (and the allies too) generally shot anyone who surrendered in an SS uniform

    That’s not true. What’s true is that SS-uniforms made it more likely to be shot after being captured, but it was nowhere near a certainty, especially since the SS often used camouflage uniforms which lacked SS insignia. On the other hand, tank crews were often mistaken for SS and shot, because they also used the death’s head symbol (which was as far as I know originally the symbol of the Prussian light cavalry, but other historical German units used that, too, for example even the military unit of German revolutionaries supporting the Hungarian revolution in 1849 used that symbol). But anyway, the majority of the captured SS men survive captivity.

    However, foreign SS men had a higher risk of being killed, because they were usually handed over to the country whose citizens they were, and that often meant death or at the very least long prison sentences.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sean
    The US developed camo but never used it because it looked to much like the one known to be used by the SS, who were a rarity as POWs. Sure some managed to surrender, but during a battle it was extremely dangerous especially after putting up a fight, to try an surrender to troops who had seen their comrades killed and would know than the surrender meant you would survive the war, while they might not, and as you say the danger increased after being taken away. Max Hastings said every combatant he interviewed had seen, not just heard about, prisoners being shot after surrendering. I think the Russians only took a single SS prisoner in 1942, a blinded officer.
    , @German_reader
    SS men also had their blood groups tattooed on their arms so just getting rid of the uniforms wasn't enough to prevent identification as SS members.
  53. @Sean
    During the Yugoslavian war paramilitaries captured enemy families and one type of abuse was, when ordered at gunpoint, some fathers raped their own daughters. Other fathers refused and said they preferred to die. There are some who really prefer death before dishonour, and such inviolable principles may be the most important thing about a person in one sense, but not the HBD one.

    when ordered at gunpoint, some fathers raped their own daughters

    How did they get an erection? I’d rather be killed or tortured in any way than doing that, though maybe only because my daughter is only seven months old.

    Read More
    • Replies: @5371
    I bet Sean was a keen reader of "The Scourge of the Swastika" and "The Knights of Bushido".
    , @RadicalCenter
    I have daughters. Their age won't matter. Shoot me, because i won't do it.
  54. @reiner Tor

    when ordered at gunpoint, some fathers raped their own daughters
     
    How did they get an erection? I'd rather be killed or tortured in any way than doing that, though maybe only because my daughter is only seven months old.

    I bet Sean was a keen reader of “The Scourge of the Swastika” and “The Knights of Bushido”.

    Read More
  55. @reiner Tor

    I think that the last holdouts in Berlin were the French SS
     
    That's wrong. The remnants of the Charlemagne (French) SS-division were among the last holdouts (and they were fighting close to Hitler's bunker), but the vast majority of soldiers surrendering on May 2, 1945 were Germans.

    The French SS-soldiers then decided to take their chances and try to escape to the West to surrender to the Americans instead of the Russians. A handful of them managed to do that, and were captured by the Americans, who handed them over to de Gaulle's Free French.

    There's an anecdote (might be apocryphal) that a Free French general wearing a modified American uniform was interrogating them, and asked them why they were wearing German uniforms. To which one of the men answered with a question: "Sir, and why are you wearing an American uniform, Sir?" After which the furious general ordered all of them be shot on the spot, which they promptly did.

    The anecdote is true.

    The French general was Leclerc de Hauteclocque, himself a (true) war hero.

    I remember reading about the incident in the memories of a French veteran. It might have been De Gaulle’s, but it’s been a long while since I read that.

    Read More
  56. @reiner Tor

    The Russians (and the allies too) generally shot anyone who surrendered in an SS uniform
     
    That's not true. What's true is that SS-uniforms made it more likely to be shot after being captured, but it was nowhere near a certainty, especially since the SS often used camouflage uniforms which lacked SS insignia. On the other hand, tank crews were often mistaken for SS and shot, because they also used the death's head symbol (which was as far as I know originally the symbol of the Prussian light cavalry, but other historical German units used that, too, for example even the military unit of German revolutionaries supporting the Hungarian revolution in 1849 used that symbol). But anyway, the majority of the captured SS men survive captivity.

    However, foreign SS men had a higher risk of being killed, because they were usually handed over to the country whose citizens they were, and that often meant death or at the very least long prison sentences.

    The US developed camo but never used it because it looked to much like the one known to be used by the SS, who were a rarity as POWs. Sure some managed to surrender, but during a battle it was extremely dangerous especially after putting up a fight, to try an surrender to troops who had seen their comrades killed and would know than the surrender meant you would survive the war, while they might not, and as you say the danger increased after being taken away. Max Hastings said every combatant he interviewed had seen, not just heard about, prisoners being shot after surrendering. I think the Russians only took a single SS prisoner in 1942, a blinded officer.

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor

    some managed to surrender, but during a battle it was extremely dangerous
     
    FWIW I heard from an old guy who in the 1960s served as a conscript in the Hungarian People's Army that "in practice" there was no surrender in the first line of battle, because there's no way to guard and lead away the soldiers from the battle, so they'll just be shot anyway. According to this, prisoners were only to be taken if there was a way of guarding them, which meant normally behind the frontlines surrendering stray soldiers or groups of soldiers or surrendering encircled units. (However, they were told to avoid shooting prisoners "if possible" because that will increase the resolve of the not-yet-surrendered imperialist NATO soldiers. But at least some sergeants in at least one Warsaw Pact army taught soldiers that there were situations when capture was impossible and so it was necessary to shoot any surrendering soldier.)
    , @reiner Tor
    We're talking about 1945, the end of the war. Lots of SS-men were captured there and not killed, either immediately or later on.
  57. @reiner Tor

    The Russians (and the allies too) generally shot anyone who surrendered in an SS uniform
     
    That's not true. What's true is that SS-uniforms made it more likely to be shot after being captured, but it was nowhere near a certainty, especially since the SS often used camouflage uniforms which lacked SS insignia. On the other hand, tank crews were often mistaken for SS and shot, because they also used the death's head symbol (which was as far as I know originally the symbol of the Prussian light cavalry, but other historical German units used that, too, for example even the military unit of German revolutionaries supporting the Hungarian revolution in 1849 used that symbol). But anyway, the majority of the captured SS men survive captivity.

    However, foreign SS men had a higher risk of being killed, because they were usually handed over to the country whose citizens they were, and that often meant death or at the very least long prison sentences.

    SS men also had their blood groups tattooed on their arms so just getting rid of the uniforms wasn’t enough to prevent identification as SS members.

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    Provided there was time to check the armpits of prisoners.
  58. @Sean
    The US developed camo but never used it because it looked to much like the one known to be used by the SS, who were a rarity as POWs. Sure some managed to surrender, but during a battle it was extremely dangerous especially after putting up a fight, to try an surrender to troops who had seen their comrades killed and would know than the surrender meant you would survive the war, while they might not, and as you say the danger increased after being taken away. Max Hastings said every combatant he interviewed had seen, not just heard about, prisoners being shot after surrendering. I think the Russians only took a single SS prisoner in 1942, a blinded officer.

    some managed to surrender, but during a battle it was extremely dangerous

    FWIW I heard from an old guy who in the 1960s served as a conscript in the Hungarian People’s Army that “in practice” there was no surrender in the first line of battle, because there’s no way to guard and lead away the soldiers from the battle, so they’ll just be shot anyway. According to this, prisoners were only to be taken if there was a way of guarding them, which meant normally behind the frontlines surrendering stray soldiers or groups of soldiers or surrendering encircled units. (However, they were told to avoid shooting prisoners “if possible” because that will increase the resolve of the not-yet-surrendered imperialist NATO soldiers. But at least some sergeants in at least one Warsaw Pact army taught soldiers that there were situations when capture was impossible and so it was necessary to shoot any surrendering soldier.)

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    The old guy repeated to me what he was taught by his sergeant.
  59. @German_reader
    SS men also had their blood groups tattooed on their arms so just getting rid of the uniforms wasn't enough to prevent identification as SS members.

    Provided there was time to check the armpits of prisoners.

    Read More
  60. @Sean
    The US developed camo but never used it because it looked to much like the one known to be used by the SS, who were a rarity as POWs. Sure some managed to surrender, but during a battle it was extremely dangerous especially after putting up a fight, to try an surrender to troops who had seen their comrades killed and would know than the surrender meant you would survive the war, while they might not, and as you say the danger increased after being taken away. Max Hastings said every combatant he interviewed had seen, not just heard about, prisoners being shot after surrendering. I think the Russians only took a single SS prisoner in 1942, a blinded officer.

    We’re talking about 1945, the end of the war. Lots of SS-men were captured there and not killed, either immediately or later on.

    Read More
  61. @reiner Tor

    some managed to surrender, but during a battle it was extremely dangerous
     
    FWIW I heard from an old guy who in the 1960s served as a conscript in the Hungarian People's Army that "in practice" there was no surrender in the first line of battle, because there's no way to guard and lead away the soldiers from the battle, so they'll just be shot anyway. According to this, prisoners were only to be taken if there was a way of guarding them, which meant normally behind the frontlines surrendering stray soldiers or groups of soldiers or surrendering encircled units. (However, they were told to avoid shooting prisoners "if possible" because that will increase the resolve of the not-yet-surrendered imperialist NATO soldiers. But at least some sergeants in at least one Warsaw Pact army taught soldiers that there were situations when capture was impossible and so it was necessary to shoot any surrendering soldier.)

    The old guy repeated to me what he was taught by his sergeant.

    Read More
  62. @anon

    We often say that they were brainwashed, but brainwashing doesn’t really work
     
    The media and political class falsify the data. People who don't have direct personal experience of the truth make decisions based on that falsified data.

    For example there has been a tidal wave of sexual violence against children in western Europe over the last 20 years (mostly in the poorest areas) as a result of the mass immigration of young men which the media and political class have totally covered up.

    If the media and political class hadn't lied about it then the pressure to halt mass immigration would have been unstoppable.

    Not complicated.

    There is a lot of censorship, but in this day and age, information is easily accessible if you’re interested.
    Most Westerners prefer to ignore reality and self-censor so they look like generous people supporting trendy progressive ideals, rather than take an public image hit and be seen as low class haters.
    Westerners engage in crimestop even if the cost of committing thoughtcrime is actually very small by historical comparison.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    Trust.

    People only look for alternative sources of information if they don't trust the regular sources and most people had no reason to think the media were lying unless they'd had direct personal experience and direct experience was generally limited to the poorest areas - until now.

    Most people have no idea how much the media has lied about immigration related violence and the ethnic cleansing of the poorer half of scores of western cities.
  63. @Anonymous
    Groups of African and Middle Eastern troglodytes harassing everyone who is not them, their kin included, were a common sight in West European cities for many years now. Why should some women in Cologne be given more attention than everyone else? They should not go out where the lowlifes gather if they want to stay safe. Stay at home, stay sober, behave.

    They should go out wherever the Hell they please, whenever they please, accompanied by dozens of german men who are ready, willing, and able to KILL Muslims who harass or assault their women.

    Read More
  64. @reiner Tor

    when ordered at gunpoint, some fathers raped their own daughters
     
    How did they get an erection? I'd rather be killed or tortured in any way than doing that, though maybe only because my daughter is only seven months old.

    I have daughters. Their age won’t matter. Shoot me, because i won’t do it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sean
    But if they made a credible threat to kill you and your daughter?

    Some would still refuse, a definition of toughness is the principle that prefers extinction to what is unthinkable.

    There are maybe countries that would prefer mass rape if the only way to avoid it was racial discrimination. Indeed, racial discrimination is about as respectable as child rape in countries like Germany. Come to think of it, far more respectable https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Cohn-Bendit#On_paedophilia

    Danny the red "was co-president of the group European Greens–European Free Alliance in the European Parliament. He co-chairs the Spinelli Group, a European parliament intergroup aiming at relaunching the federalist project in Europe."
    , @reiner Tor
    Shooting is painless. I was thinking about the threat of being tortured to death or something. And I tried to imagine my daughter older, like 16 years old. I can't imagine any way anybody could get me to have sex with her, even if she consented (for example because she wanted to save my or her own life).

    In any event, the bastards might kill or torture me and my daughter later on anyway. In fact, it's highly likely that people who are so evil to try to force me to have sex with my own daughter will eventually kill the both of us. This happened for example in the Wichita Horror, when the men and women were forced to have sex with each other but then were killed anyway. So why let them have their fun and humiliate myself and my daughter, when I can at least die in dignity?
  65. The 10th SS fought as well as anyone, and right to the end. The enlisted of the 10th were conscripts and probably average Germans (Günter Grass was with the division). To get back to my main point, the Germans who discharged their duty as they saw it even if it required dying in 1945 were just average conscientious Germans, and not really different to the Germans of today.

    Read More
  66. @RadicalCenter
    I have daughters. Their age won't matter. Shoot me, because i won't do it.

    But if they made a credible threat to kill you and your daughter?

    Some would still refuse, a definition of toughness is the principle that prefers extinction to what is unthinkable.

    There are maybe countries that would prefer mass rape if the only way to avoid it was racial discrimination. Indeed, racial discrimination is about as respectable as child rape in countries like Germany. Come to think of it, far more respectable https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Cohn-Bendit#On_paedophilia

    Danny the red “was co-president of the group European Greens–European Free Alliance in the European Parliament. He co-chairs the Spinelli Group, a European parliament intergroup aiming at relaunching the federalist project in Europe.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor

    But if they made a credible threat to kill you and your daughter?
     
    Then they'd probably kill the both of us anyway. They cannot credibly promise to spare my daughter's life if I do what they tell me anyway.
  67. @RadicalCenter
    I have daughters. Their age won't matter. Shoot me, because i won't do it.

    Shooting is painless. I was thinking about the threat of being tortured to death or something. And I tried to imagine my daughter older, like 16 years old. I can’t imagine any way anybody could get me to have sex with her, even if she consented (for example because she wanted to save my or her own life).

    In any event, the bastards might kill or torture me and my daughter later on anyway. In fact, it’s highly likely that people who are so evil to try to force me to have sex with my own daughter will eventually kill the both of us. This happened for example in the Wichita Horror, when the men and women were forced to have sex with each other but then were killed anyway. So why let them have their fun and humiliate myself and my daughter, when I can at least die in dignity?

    Read More
  68. @Sean
    But if they made a credible threat to kill you and your daughter?

    Some would still refuse, a definition of toughness is the principle that prefers extinction to what is unthinkable.

    There are maybe countries that would prefer mass rape if the only way to avoid it was racial discrimination. Indeed, racial discrimination is about as respectable as child rape in countries like Germany. Come to think of it, far more respectable https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Cohn-Bendit#On_paedophilia

    Danny the red "was co-president of the group European Greens–European Free Alliance in the European Parliament. He co-chairs the Spinelli Group, a European parliament intergroup aiming at relaunching the federalist project in Europe."

    But if they made a credible threat to kill you and your daughter?

    Then they’d probably kill the both of us anyway. They cannot credibly promise to spare my daughter’s life if I do what they tell me anyway.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sean
    This is not a home invasion scenario, they were not afraid of the law (because they were the security police) and were forcing victims to do something that many would consider worse than death, mainly for their own amusement. Killing would defeat the object of totally humiliating and degrading. I suppose some were killed but quite a few of the Yugoslavian women did survive to tell their stories of being raped by fathers or brothers.


    There were hundreds of Jehovah's witnesses in Auschwitz, all they had to do is renounce their beliefs and they would have been released. Solzhenitsyn in his Gulag mentioned Jehovah Witness woman who to refused to wear uniforms with numbers on them and spent years in sub zero temperatures with threadbare rags and no shoes. To prefer death to violating one's principles is probably not so easy if you are a materialist

  69. @reiner Tor

    Adorján F. Kovács, a German surgeon and publicist.
     
    Well, his name is Hungarian. I'd guess both of his parents were Hungarians, so he himself is a 'German' of migrant background, albeit of white European migrant background.

    Surely, given their shared history, Hungarians get to qualify as honorary Germans. (And by this point, whatever their faults, above-average Germans too).

    Read More
  70. @neutral
    I keep hearing this comparison to the Reich and the Merkel regime, it makes perfect sense. Things like one was pro white and the other is anti white, one was anti jew and the other is pro jew and one did not ever contemplate importing millions of non whites are clearly just minor details.

    Cuckservatives like you that want to compare the current puppet regime to the Reich are the most deluded of them all.

    The Reich was so pro-white they killed ~30 million whites.

    Read More
    • Replies: @szopen
    But, you see, for the Reich we - the Slavs - were undermenschen, except rare case of "lost Germanic blood", so it was OK to murder us and to kidnap our children.
  71. @Anonymous
    I would guess that the mean IQ of Tatars, a Muslim group in Russia, is around 100. They don't seem to be very religious.

    I’d guess the same of Chechens, who are very religious. Scary group, Chechens. Their terror attacks are the best-planned and, if one can say such a thing, in many ways the most savage. Despite being foreigners, they tend to take the leadership roles in violent Islamist groups all over the world. The other terrorists are said to be afraid of them.

    Read More
  72. @German_reader
    These intra-European distinctions are getting increasingly trivial given what we're facing.

    These intra-European distinctions are getting increasingly trivial given what we’re facing.

    This is something I hear often, which is why I’ve come to think that one of the EU billionaire elite’s darker motivations here is to provide native Europeans with a common enemy, which may be the only social engineering ploy left to make us consent to be ruled by a single European central state.

    Read More
  73. @snorlax
    The Reich was so pro-white they killed ~30 million whites.

    But, you see, for the Reich we – the Slavs – were undermenschen, except rare case of “lost Germanic blood”, so it was OK to murder us and to kidnap our children.

    Read More
    • Replies: @fnn
    Apparently, what was taught in German universities at the time was that Germans and Russians were racially indistinguishable. Search "raciology audio interview" for an interview with the translator of a recent Russian book on race. So something other than implementation of official NS party doctrine was going on. Possible explanations for German behavior on the Ostfront : shortages/resource competition and the traditionally low opinion many Germans had of the Russian national character.
    , @reiner Tor
    The interesting thing is, there were two different provinces in Poland (not the Generalgouvernement, but the provinces directly incorporated into the Reich), where the policies were polar opposites, although both were derived from Hitler's order that the two respective provinces be totally Germanized, i.e. ethnically cleansed of Poles except those Poles who were racially fit and willing to assume a German identity. In one of those provinces, they were thoroughly investigating the racial and ethnic backgrounds of people, and only those former Polish citizens were accepted as Germans who were either ethnic Germans, or had beyond doubt ethnically German ancestors (and I think they needed to have a majority German ancestry for that). The Gauleiter tried to expel all Poles from the province to make it ethnically German. In the other province, the Gauleiter accepted as German any Poles resident in his province who were willing to sign up for Germanization, even organizing German language lessons etc. for them. They were, also, conscripted into the German army as if they were Germans.

    The interesting thing is Hitler was informed of the two totally different policies (and personally seemed to have preferred the more restrictive Germanization policy) but never intervened in the matter.
  74. @szopen
    But, you see, for the Reich we - the Slavs - were undermenschen, except rare case of "lost Germanic blood", so it was OK to murder us and to kidnap our children.

    Apparently, what was taught in German universities at the time was that Germans and Russians were racially indistinguishable. Search “raciology audio interview” for an interview with the translator of a recent Russian book on race. So something other than implementation of official NS party doctrine was going on. Possible explanations for German behavior on the Ostfront : shortages/resource competition and the traditionally low opinion many Germans had of the Russian national character.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Avery
    {…So something other than implementation of official NS party doctrine was going on. Possible explanations for German behavior on the Ostfront : shortages/resource competition }

    More and more inventive ways of Nazi revisionists and apologists justifying the crimes of Nazis invaders. What were the Nazi invaders doing deep inside USSR that their bahaviour could be explained by “shortages”.

    And yes, Nazi invaders were implementing official Nazi/Hitler policy: exterminate most “useless” Slavs, and enslave those strong and healthy enough who could work, and work them to death producing food and other essentials for the Master race now conveniently ensconced in “their” Lebensraum.

    Glory to the (overwhelmingly Slavic) Red Army for eradicating the Nazi infestation.
    , @5371
    [Apparently, what was taught in German universities at the time was that Germans and Russians were racially indistinguishable.]

    That's an exaggeration, but it is true that what was taught in universities was very different from what was taught by propaganda.
  75. {…So something other than implementation of official NS party doctrine was going on. Possible explanations for German behavior on the Ostfront : shortages/resource competition }

    More and more inventive ways of Nazi revisionists and apologists justifying the crimes of Nazis invaders. What were the Nazi invaders doing deep inside USSR that their bahaviour could be explained by “shortages”.

    And yes, Nazi invaders were implementing official Nazi/Hitler policy: exterminate most “useless” Slavs, and enslave those strong and healthy enough who could work, and work them to death producing food and other essentials for the Master race now conveniently ensconced in “their” Lebensraum.

    Glory to the (overwhelmingly Slavic) Red Army for eradicating the Nazi infestation.

    Read More
  76. @fnn
    Apparently, what was taught in German universities at the time was that Germans and Russians were racially indistinguishable. Search "raciology audio interview" for an interview with the translator of a recent Russian book on race. So something other than implementation of official NS party doctrine was going on. Possible explanations for German behavior on the Ostfront : shortages/resource competition and the traditionally low opinion many Germans had of the Russian national character.

    {…So something other than implementation of official NS party doctrine was going on. Possible explanations for German behavior on the Ostfront : shortages/resource competition }

    More and more inventive ways of Nazi revisionists and apologists justifying the crimes of Nazis invaders. What were the Nazi invaders doing deep inside USSR that their bahaviour could be explained by “shortages”.

    And yes, Nazi invaders were implementing official Nazi/Hitler policy: exterminate most “useless” Slavs, and enslave those strong and healthy enough who could work, and work them to death producing food and other essentials for the Master race now conveniently ensconced in “their” Lebensraum.

    Glory to the (overwhelmingly Slavic) Red Army for eradicating the Nazi infestation.

    Read More
  77. @fnn
    Apparently, what was taught in German universities at the time was that Germans and Russians were racially indistinguishable. Search "raciology audio interview" for an interview with the translator of a recent Russian book on race. So something other than implementation of official NS party doctrine was going on. Possible explanations for German behavior on the Ostfront : shortages/resource competition and the traditionally low opinion many Germans had of the Russian national character.

    [Apparently, what was taught in German universities at the time was that Germans and Russians were racially indistinguishable.]

    That’s an exaggeration, but it is true that what was taught in universities was very different from what was taught by propaganda.

    Read More
  78. Go ahead, Christians. Pray your way out of this. If you can. Ultimately, you must put aside your bibles if you are going to defeat Islam. You must learn to kill again. For the same reasons your ancestors did. For survival.

    Read More
  79. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Pseudonymic Handle
    There is a lot of censorship, but in this day and age, information is easily accessible if you're interested.
    Most Westerners prefer to ignore reality and self-censor so they look like generous people supporting trendy progressive ideals, rather than take an public image hit and be seen as low class haters.
    Westerners engage in crimestop even if the cost of committing thoughtcrime is actually very small by historical comparison.

    Trust.

    People only look for alternative sources of information if they don’t trust the regular sources and most people had no reason to think the media were lying unless they’d had direct personal experience and direct experience was generally limited to the poorest areas – until now.

    Most people have no idea how much the media has lied about immigration related violence and the ethnic cleansing of the poorer half of scores of western cities.

    Read More
  80. @Seamus Padraig

    The same way as a rich and famous businessman would benefit from his own suicide, because it would be a total protection against his rivals fearing and envying him.
     
    No, reiner Tor. The German state/corporate ruling class is not sacrificing itself - it's sacrificing you in order to empower itself. If all goes as planned, this ruling élite will survive just fine, along with the rest of the Davos set, and preside over a partly mongrelized, partly polarized society, playing each faction off against the rest in order to keep them all down. It's called divide and rule, and it never fails. You have to stop it now, before it's too late.

    You have it exactly right. Globalist traitors are importing the divide for divide and rule, and taxing us to pay for our own demographic dispossession.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Priss Factor
    White women need to learn from the Knight Sabers and take on the evil elites.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v9UmGFav_Z0
  81. @Kamran
    Why the fuck did Islam spread so much and become so powerful if it had all these disadvantages build into it from the beginning?

    God fucking damnit.

    I'm tired of this shit. If it was up to me I would destroy every church and mosque in my country.

    I really try - I swear I try - but I can't keep from hating white people and europeans for their genetic luck. I want to kill them. To beat them. To bomb them. I need to gain this fucking power of the white demons.

    When I gain power in Turkey I will remove bacon and kebab. In fact I will go beat my
    white neighbor today and break his face. I want to fucking see him suffer and bleed.

    As I punch him I will think about all the HBD motherfuckers. I will break his nose in front of his son.

    I will blow up Hagia Sophia in Turkey and shoot the fucking motherfucker Jesus face.

    I will assume that you are serious and that you are probably a citizen of Turkey.

    You exhibit the conflicted nature that is typical of most people. In your case you hate the EU (therefore the West) while at the same time Turkey is a captured vassal of the US, a member of NATO, and played like a fiddle.

    You should be angry with yourself. Why do you Turks allow the US to control your country? Why do you do the dirty work of the West in Syria, in Crimea? Why did your lunatic Erdogan restart the war on Kruds in Turkey?

    Turkey was poised for economic prosperity if it just remained at peace with its neighbors. But no, you Turks yourself had to pick fights to start the race toward catastrophe.

    Stop blaming everyone else (the Greeks, the Armenians, the Russians, Assad, Iran) and focus on the US. The EU is also a totally captured vassal of the US. In attacking the EU you are just one vassals attacking another US vassal. The US loves it.

    Read More
  82. Laws banning incest between brothers and sisters in Germany could be scrapped…

    Does that mean they’ll finally leave the Stübings alone?

    Siblings can marry in Massachusetts and Iowa, and probably many other states after Obergefell, as long as they’re of the same sex. The words “No man shall marry his sister…” have to be rewritten to cover the new “marriages”. And there’s no reason to do so, is there?

    But Germany hasn’t reached that stage of marital evolution. (They still have strict abortion laws as well.)

    Jews can still marry their nieces in Rhode Island; the 17th-century statute is still in force. How often it’s invoked, I don’t know. The genealogies in the late Stephen Birmingham’s The Grandees don’t show much, if any, avuncularity.

    Read More
    • Replies: @5371
    [Siblings can marry in Massachusetts and Iowa, and probably many other states after Obergefell, as long as they’re of the same sex.]

    And even if they aren't, as long as one of them has transitioned to the opposite sex?
  83. @reiner Tor

    But if they made a credible threat to kill you and your daughter?
     
    Then they'd probably kill the both of us anyway. They cannot credibly promise to spare my daughter's life if I do what they tell me anyway.

    This is not a home invasion scenario, they were not afraid of the law (because they were the security police) and were forcing victims to do something that many would consider worse than death, mainly for their own amusement. Killing would defeat the object of totally humiliating and degrading. I suppose some were killed but quite a few of the Yugoslavian women did survive to tell their stories of being raped by fathers or brothers.

    There were hundreds of Jehovah’s witnesses in Auschwitz, all they had to do is renounce their beliefs and they would have been released. Solzhenitsyn in his Gulag mentioned Jehovah Witness woman who to refused to wear uniforms with numbers on them and spent years in sub zero temperatures with threadbare rags and no shoes. To prefer death to violating one’s principles is probably not so easy if you are a materialist

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor

    they were not afraid of the law
     
    And what makes you think that was what made the Wichita murderers kill the victims? Had they been afraid of the law, they would've just grabbed the jewelry and money and left. It's possible they'd never have been caught at all, because robberies are less thoroughly investigated than quintuple murders.

    they were not afraid of the law
     
    How do you know? I'm sure in Yugoslavia everybody was taught at school about the Nuremberg Trials.

    Killing would defeat the object of totally humiliating and degrading.
     
    No, it might even add to the thrill by making them have sex to save their lives and then not sparing their lives anyway - they humiliated themselves for nothing.

    quite a few of the Yugoslavian women did survive to tell their stories of being raped by fathers or brothers.
     
    Why did they tell these stories? And how do you know it was them who told the stories? I would suppose there might have been other witnesses who told the story, like old women who weren't killed anyway, or people of the same ethnicity as the perpetrators who got disgusted by this and told the story to journalists or investigators or something.
  84. @Reg Cæsar

    Laws banning incest between brothers and sisters in Germany could be scrapped...
     
    Does that mean they'll finally leave the Stübings alone?

    Siblings can marry in Massachusetts and Iowa, and probably many other states after Obergefell, as long as they're of the same sex. The words "No man shall marry his sister..." have to be rewritten to cover the new "marriages". And there's no reason to do so, is there?

    But Germany hasn't reached that stage of marital evolution. (They still have strict abortion laws as well.)

    Jews can still marry their nieces in Rhode Island; the 17th-century statute is still in force. How often it's invoked, I don't know. The genealogies in the late Stephen Birmingham's The Grandees don't show much, if any, avuncularity.

    [Siblings can marry in Massachusetts and Iowa, and probably many other states after Obergefell, as long as they’re of the same sex.]

    And even if they aren’t, as long as one of them has transitioned to the opposite sex?

    Read More
  85. Why can’t they start by simply deporting the 31 (yesterday, many more by now) participants identified so far?

    Read More
  86. @Anonymous
    It's like the war of attrition of the First World War of a century ago. And just like a century ago, Russia is not involved (Russia left WWI after the revolution, giving Germany free hand in the west) and Germany is poised to win this war of attrition against France and the UK. Anyone who's visited the three countries knows that Germany is in a much better demographic position. But just like a century ago, the problem is US involvement which threatens to overwhelm Germany. A century ago it was American doughboys, today it's American influence and pressure in Europe and intervention in the Mideast, which keeps up the migrant flow into Germany.

    What do you mean by Germany being “in a much better demographic position” than the UK and France?

    And what is there to learn about this by actually being a visitor to the three countries? Which parts? In what capacity? How recently? Which can’t be learned secondhand? I ask as one who has visited all three.

    Also, what does this have to do with the “war of attrition”? I presume that has to do with the German birthrate having been much greater than that of France and the UK for many decades before WW1???

    Read More
  87. @Sean
    This is not a home invasion scenario, they were not afraid of the law (because they were the security police) and were forcing victims to do something that many would consider worse than death, mainly for their own amusement. Killing would defeat the object of totally humiliating and degrading. I suppose some were killed but quite a few of the Yugoslavian women did survive to tell their stories of being raped by fathers or brothers.


    There were hundreds of Jehovah's witnesses in Auschwitz, all they had to do is renounce their beliefs and they would have been released. Solzhenitsyn in his Gulag mentioned Jehovah Witness woman who to refused to wear uniforms with numbers on them and spent years in sub zero temperatures with threadbare rags and no shoes. To prefer death to violating one's principles is probably not so easy if you are a materialist

    they were not afraid of the law

    And what makes you think that was what made the Wichita murderers kill the victims? Had they been afraid of the law, they would’ve just grabbed the jewelry and money and left. It’s possible they’d never have been caught at all, because robberies are less thoroughly investigated than quintuple murders.

    they were not afraid of the law

    How do you know? I’m sure in Yugoslavia everybody was taught at school about the Nuremberg Trials.

    Killing would defeat the object of totally humiliating and degrading.

    No, it might even add to the thrill by making them have sex to save their lives and then not sparing their lives anyway – they humiliated themselves for nothing.

    quite a few of the Yugoslavian women did survive to tell their stories of being raped by fathers or brothers.

    Why did they tell these stories? And how do you know it was them who told the stories? I would suppose there might have been other witnesses who told the story, like old women who weren’t killed anyway, or people of the same ethnicity as the perpetrators who got disgusted by this and told the story to journalists or investigators or something.

    Read More
  88. @szopen
    But, you see, for the Reich we - the Slavs - were undermenschen, except rare case of "lost Germanic blood", so it was OK to murder us and to kidnap our children.

    The interesting thing is, there were two different provinces in Poland (not the Generalgouvernement, but the provinces directly incorporated into the Reich), where the policies were polar opposites, although both were derived from Hitler’s order that the two respective provinces be totally Germanized, i.e. ethnically cleansed of Poles except those Poles who were racially fit and willing to assume a German identity. In one of those provinces, they were thoroughly investigating the racial and ethnic backgrounds of people, and only those former Polish citizens were accepted as Germans who were either ethnic Germans, or had beyond doubt ethnically German ancestors (and I think they needed to have a majority German ancestry for that). The Gauleiter tried to expel all Poles from the province to make it ethnically German. In the other province, the Gauleiter accepted as German any Poles resident in his province who were willing to sign up for Germanization, even organizing German language lessons etc. for them. They were, also, conscripted into the German army as if they were Germans.

    The interesting thing is Hitler was informed of the two totally different policies (and personally seemed to have preferred the more restrictive Germanization policy) but never intervened in the matter.

    Read More
  89. Anatoly, I am wondering if you have any data on EU bureaucracy’s social, demographic, ethnic, what have you, make up? Backgrounds are of special interest.

    Read More
  90. @Anonymous
    Groups of African and Middle Eastern troglodytes harassing everyone who is not them, their kin included, were a common sight in West European cities for many years now. Why should some women in Cologne be given more attention than everyone else? They should not go out where the lowlifes gather if they want to stay safe. Stay at home, stay sober, behave.

    It is none of Islam’s business, none at all.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    You may not be interested in Islam, but Islam is interested in you.
  91. Priss Factor [AKA "The Priss Factory"] says: • Website     Show CommentNext New Comment

    How come the world learns nothing?

    Compare Europe after WWII with the Middle East.

    The Middle East came under the shadow of Old Man Sykes-Picot Treaty while new Europe after WWII came under Schicken-Sie-nach-Hause Vertrag(Send Them Home Treaty).

    Now, I aks you, which one turned out better? The Schicken-Sie-nach-Hause Vertrag, of course. And pretty much the same happened with Yugoslavia in the 90s after the terrible war. Most Serbians went home to Serbia, most Croatians went home to Croatia, and etc.

    Schicken-Sie-nach-Hause Vertrag led to some real horror for awhile cuz huge populations had to be moved here and there. It’s like there were huge population swaps between Greece and Turkey after Greek independence. But, in the long run, it turned out better for both sides.
    And French were made to leave Algeria en masse after Algerian liberation.
    And Japanese colonists left Manchuria, Korea, and Taiwan(and other places) after WWII. For awhile, it was disruptive, but it led to much peace. And Vietnam is now unified and peaceful because Americans left long ago and let Viets do their own business in their own nation.

    Send populations back to their homeland, and you have more homogeneity. When Brits in India went back to UK, UK had more Brits and India became more Indian. Good for both sides. (After all, the main source of trouble in India is the diversity of dotters and moos. That damn diversity. It would be much worse if India and Pakistan were one country.)

    After WWII, most of Europe came under the pressure of Schicken-Sie-nach-Hause Vertrag. This was in both Western Europe and Warsaw Pact nations. Poland became mostly Pole, Hungary became mostly Hungarian, Germany became mostly German, etc.
    Yugoslavia was the notable exception, and look what happened to that country once the iron-grip of the communists was loosened. And USSR also fell apart once the iron grip of Moscow was loosened. (If there’s problems in Ukraine, it’s because of diversity of Ukies and Russkies in eastern Ukraine. Generally, US pretends to side with minority victims around the world, but US sure loves to cheer Jewish majority whupping Palestinians and Ukrainian majority whupping Russian minority).

    Anyway, there is nothing as wonderful as homogeneity. While some degree of diversity can add flavor and color, too much leads to trouble. In the case of Kosovo and Palestine, too many newcomers even led to loss of homeland. The arrival of so many Jews led to the erasure of Palestine who were expelled. And too many Albanian Muslims entering into Kosovo led to Serbians losing their sacred homeland.

    Schicken-Sie-nach-Hause Vertrag boosted homogeneity in European nations after WWII, and it was the foundation of peace all around. Also, liberal democracy works best in a homogeneous setting as the issue of race, tribe, and identity becomes irrelevant in a nation where everyone shares the same identity. It is in diverse nations that politics turns into an issue of ‘my people’ vs ‘your people’, and people begin to vote along ethnic lines.
    And this can lead to much anger and violence. This is why diverse nations usually have bad democratic systems or are held together under dictatorial rule.
    Yugoslavia was one nation under iron-fisted communist party. Once the party let go its grip, it began to fall apart.

    Democracy is especially difficult in a diverse nation IF the rulers happen to be of an ethnic minority. The ethnic minority rulers fear that majority-rule will sweep them out of power. This is why Hussein could only rule as dictator in Iraq. In a free election, the Shias and Kurds who outnumber the Sunnis would vote his ass out.
    And this is why Assad of Syria cannot have real democracy either. As Alawites are a minority, they will eventually be voted out of power in a true democracy. It’s like democracy destroyed white rule in South Africa. Jews can have democracy in Israel cuz Jews outnumber the Arabs. But if Arabs were to become the majority, the ONLY way Jews could hold power is through dictatorial rule like that of Hussein or Assad.

    This is why the Schicken-Sie-nach-Hause Vertrag did wonders for democratic culture in Western Europe after WWII. As most nations became homogeneous, the politics was about policy issues than about identity or ‘our side’ vs ‘your side’.
    Imagine if Greece, Italy, and Turkey were fused into one nation. Greeks would vote Greek, Italians would vote Italian, and Turks would vote Turk-and-Islam.
    Imagine if Manchuria, Korea, and Japan were united into single nation. Manchus would vote Manchu, Koreans would vote Korean, and Japanese would vote Japanese. Politics would be ethnic. So, it is good that Greeks got Greece, Italians got Italy, Turks got Turkey(the Kurdish minority thing is a HUGE HEADACHE for Turks), Manchurians got Manchuria(as part of China), Koreans got Korea, and Japanese got Japan.

    I mean who wants to see Serbia, Croatia, Slovenia, Kosovo, and etc all bunched into Yugoslavia again? It’d lead to a lot of crap.

    Indeed, paradoxically, sound homogeneous nationalism is the best foundation for international respect and cooperation. Relations would be better between Greeks and Turks if Turks hadn’t ruled over Greek territory. And this goes for any bunch of other people. Ukrainians are still pissed at Russians cuz of Russian rule in the past. And Koreans still bitch about Japan because Japan once tried to fuse Japan and Korea into one nation in the proto-globalist Greater Asian Co-Prosperity Sphere. And there would be no bad blood between France and Algeria if not for French colonial rule over that territory, indeed to the point where many French saw Algeria as an extension of France. Things got much better when the French finally gave up Vietnam and Algeria and came home to France. Schicken-Sie-nach-Hause Vertrag is the best.

    Now, I’m not saying that people must stay in their own countries. People should travel and trade with the world. And some may work in other nations, and some may even settle there if the law allows it. But it should never be to the extent that the native population is threatened of being eclipsed demographically or culturally. Otherwise, the native population will end up like native Hawaiians: minority in their own ancestral homeland, and who the hell wants that? Native Hawaiians must now live in a homeland that is mostly dominated by whites and Asians. That must suck real bad.
    I mean only a son-a-bitch would tell a native Hawaiian, “hey, diversity is our strength.” ‘Diversity’ destroyed native Hawaiian power in Hawaii. I feel sorry for the fat brownies.

    Anyway, when we contrast Schicken-Sie-nach-Hause Vertrag that prevailed in Europe after WWII and Old Man Sykes-Picot Treaty that prevailed in the Middle East, there is no comparison. Schicken-Sie-nach-Hause Vertrag did wonders for Europe. Homogeneity led to security and happiness. No more bitter ethnic politics. And once each nation could breathe freely, they could trade freely and respect one another. And travel back and forth with mutual respect.

    In contrast, what did the Old Man Sykes-Picot Treaty or Agreement do for Middle East? The ‘national’ lines drawn by European imperialists made no sense in terms of ethnic territory or identity. Kurds weren’t given their own homeland. Instead, they ended up like Poles during the German-Russian imperialism period where some Poles ended up under German rule, others ended up under Russian rule, and some even ended up under Austro-Hungarians.
    Eventually, a strange kind of politics developed where a Shia minority came to rule over the Sunni majority in Syria, and a Sunni minority came to rule over the Shia majority in Iraq(and over Kurds). Democratic reforms were near-impossible. Diversity leads to ethnic politics, and that was the case in both nations. So, the only to maintain order was by iron-fisted dictatorship. Freedom meant division and demagoguery, and that meant social distress and that meant political destabilization.
    It’s like what Lee Kew Yuan of Singapore said: “diversity big headache. no democracy work here.” To be sure, Singapore could have been a democracy cuz the Chinese were the dominant ethnic group, but even so, Lee feared the Malay minority and the communists, many of who were Chinese.

    Now, imagine how the Middle East would have been if it had come under something like Schicken-Sie-nach-Hause Vertrag. Kurds would have been given their own homeland. Shias in Iraq would have their own country. Sunni Arabs in Iraq an Syria would have their own homeland. And Alawites would have their own piece.
    And then, there would be much security, peace, mutual tolerance, and etc.
    I mean the example of Korea shows that even a homogeneous people can be driven crazy by divisive politics. Korea was a homogeneous nation, but US and USSR divided it in half, and soon enough, the Korons were slaughtering one another, and the enmity goes onto this day. This is what happens when globalist-imperialist politics mess with other nations.

    And this happened to the Middle East. Now, to be sure, creating modern nations out of the Middle East was no easy task. The whole area had been under Turkish rule, and many Arabs of various tribes had very weak understanding of nationhood. Many were nomadic tribes. But the West could have done a much better job of carving out more ethno-geographically meaningful nations in the territory, but no such effort was made at all. In terms of geopolitics, Syria and Iraq made hardly any sense.
    They could only be ruled by repression since there was too much diversity. Also, the West helped minority groups gain supreme power in Syria and Iraq.
    Given such problems of diversity, it was easy to set the whole place on fire through US invasion of Iraq, US use of sanctions to starve entire populations, and US use of terrorists to destabilize Libya and Syria. Now, we know that US aided Jihadi groups in Libya and Syria to raise hell all over. And of course, US aided Jihadi groups in Afghanistan before it ultimately backfired into 9/11 attack.

    Old Man Sykes-Picot treaty was one of the worst things of the 20th century, and now, we are seeing its outcome.

    In contrast, Schicken-Sie-nach-Hause Vertrag was a wonder of wonders despite the initial hardships caused by populations forced to return to their homelands. It was rough for Poles to be pushed from Ukraine into Poland, and it was tough for Germans to be pushed from Poland to Germany(reduced in size, to be sure). But it was tough for French to depart from Algeria, Japanese to depart from Manchuria, and Americans to depart from Vietnam. But it had to be done. Schicken-Sie-nach-Hause Vertrag is good.

    But people have such short memories. The EU project was made possible ONLY BECAUSE of Schicken-Sie-nach-Hause Vertrag. With mostly homogeneous nations in Europe, there was more trust. There was more liberal democracy in each nation unburdened by ethnic politics. (Belgium is one of those diverse nations, and Flemish and Walloons often practice divisive ethno-politics and vote purely along ethnic lines.) It’s the paradox of peace. Better borders and increased homogeneity within borders make for better peace.
    In contrast, in places like Philippines and Indonesia, you often have the majority whupping Chinese minorities, like in that documentary THE ACT OF KILLING. And in the 90s, Indonesians scapegoated Chinese and raped and butchered 1000s of them.

    So, you’d think that Europeans finally learned a lesson. Homogeneity and secure borders make for better cooperation among nations in the EU. Instead, the moronic buggers decided to weaken borders, force one currency on just about every nation, bring about vast movements of peoples once again(even among Europeans, this isn’t a good idea; I mean who’d want 10 million southern Italians in Germany or 5 million Spanish in Hungary?) But the idiocy didn’t end there. Once borders among European nations were weakened, the borders between Europe and non-Europe was also weakened. Worse, PC and cult of diversity made dumb Europeans believe that Europe would improve with more diversity since diversity is something to worship without critical skepticism. Indeed, it is so worshiped that, even if it could be proven empirically that it has negative consequences politically and economically, it will still be embraced because it is simply holy and sacred. Even if EU must be sacrificed to the god of diversity, it is justified cuz the diversity-as-god is more important than EU and Europeans. When something is made holy, people are afraid to profane it, even if this supposedly holy thing is doing great damage. It’s like the Ganges River. It is filled with poo, and no sane person should go into it. But Hindus see it as holy, so they swim in it and even drink the poo-ish water. It goes to show the danger of holy psychology. It’s like the Alec Guiness character in BRIDGE ON THE RIVER KWAI. He is so worshipful of the idea of discipline, dignity, and pride that he does his best to build the best possible bridge for the Japanese. When a fellow British officer tells him that he is aiding the Japanese, Guiness won’t hear any of it. He is serving the gods of discipline, honor, duty, and etc.

    And as Europe fills up with darkies, the politics becomes more ethnic, less liberal(even though diversity is promoted in the name of liberalism), less trusting, more poisonous, more repressive(as more and more PC is necessary to suppress dissent against the elites calling for the Suicide of the West)… indeed more like the Middle East.

    Europe was saved after WWII by Schicken-Sie-nach-Hause Vertrag. But it is now being destroyed by neo-Sykes-Picotization. With vast movements of Europeans all over Europe, there is erosion of national identity and pride in every nation. Once Europeans have been made to accept the demographic invasion of their nation by other Europeans, the next step is invasion by non-Europeans.

    It was great that the French in Algeria returned to France. That way, Algerians had Algeria and French had France. But now, with so many North Africans moving to France, France is being colonized by Muslims and Arabs, and it is just making French politics more volatile as many French now feel like Algerians once did when French settlers came in huge numbers to Algeria. (Me thinks that this open borders policy in UK and France is partly to retro-justify their imperialist ventures. Non-white imperialists drove out white settlers in Algeria, Vietnam, and India, and etc. That was seen as a good thing: noble non-whites driving out white imperialists. But if white elites allow their nations to be colonized by non-whites, then it has a way of justifying past imperialism. French can tell Algerians, “You see, we have no problem with you Algerians coming and living over here, so why did you Algerians protest against us settling in Algeria long ago?” Also, UK and France seem to be living their old imperial glory by turning their own nations into sort-of neo-imperialist theme parks. British elites, by ruling over diversity in UK, can pretend that they’re ruling the world. If you can’t rule India and Africa, rule over Indians and Africans in your own nation. As for Sweden and other European nations without imperialist history, their addiction to diversity could partly be a desire to become like the US as America, via Hollywood and pop culture, has become the standard of what is ‘cool’ and ‘vibrant’.)

    If Old Man Sykes-Picot Treaty was imposed on the Middle East by British and French imperialists, the neo-Sykes-Pictization of EU is being stage-managed and puppet-mastered by the Jewish-Homo or Jomo Globalist who seek to totally castrate and lobomotize European identity and pride so that Jews can gain total control over them.

    EU needs its Lawrence of Europe.

    Old Man Sykes having a good laugh about the trick he pulled in the Middle East.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Seamus Padraig
    Once again, Priss, dead on! I have only one minor cavil:

    But the West could have done a much better job of carving out more ethno-geographically meaningful nations in the territory, but no such effort was made at all. In terms of geopolitics, Syria and Iraq made hardly any sense.
     
    Sykes-Picot was no screw-up; it was done deliberately to weaken the Arab civilization and prevent it from ever rising again. A modern, secular, united Arab caliphate in the ME controlling half the world's oil supply would have been London and Paris' worst nightmare. It has worked so well, in fact, they're now using the same technique on the west itself in order to keep all of us plebeians down.

    BTW, do you have a blog or a website of your own? If not, you should definitely consider starting one. I tried clicking on your 'Website' link above, but I didn't see anything there that referenced you.
  92. @marylou
    It is none of Islam's business, none at all.

    You may not be interested in Islam, but Islam is interested in you.

    Read More
  93. @Priss Factor
    How come the world learns nothing?

    Compare Europe after WWII with the Middle East.

    The Middle East came under the shadow of Old Man Sykes-Picot Treaty while new Europe after WWII came under Schicken-Sie-nach-Hause Vertrag(Send Them Home Treaty).

    Now, I aks you, which one turned out better? The Schicken-Sie-nach-Hause Vertrag, of course. And pretty much the same happened with Yugoslavia in the 90s after the terrible war. Most Serbians went home to Serbia, most Croatians went home to Croatia, and etc.

    Schicken-Sie-nach-Hause Vertrag led to some real horror for awhile cuz huge populations had to be moved here and there. It's like there were huge population swaps between Greece and Turkey after Greek independence. But, in the long run, it turned out better for both sides.
    And French were made to leave Algeria en masse after Algerian liberation.
    And Japanese colonists left Manchuria, Korea, and Taiwan(and other places) after WWII. For awhile, it was disruptive, but it led to much peace. And Vietnam is now unified and peaceful because Americans left long ago and let Viets do their own business in their own nation.

    Send populations back to their homeland, and you have more homogeneity. When Brits in India went back to UK, UK had more Brits and India became more Indian. Good for both sides. (After all, the main source of trouble in India is the diversity of dotters and moos. That damn diversity. It would be much worse if India and Pakistan were one country.)

    After WWII, most of Europe came under the pressure of Schicken-Sie-nach-Hause Vertrag. This was in both Western Europe and Warsaw Pact nations. Poland became mostly Pole, Hungary became mostly Hungarian, Germany became mostly German, etc.
    Yugoslavia was the notable exception, and look what happened to that country once the iron-grip of the communists was loosened. And USSR also fell apart once the iron grip of Moscow was loosened. (If there's problems in Ukraine, it's because of diversity of Ukies and Russkies in eastern Ukraine. Generally, US pretends to side with minority victims around the world, but US sure loves to cheer Jewish majority whupping Palestinians and Ukrainian majority whupping Russian minority).

    Anyway, there is nothing as wonderful as homogeneity. While some degree of diversity can add flavor and color, too much leads to trouble. In the case of Kosovo and Palestine, too many newcomers even led to loss of homeland. The arrival of so many Jews led to the erasure of Palestine who were expelled. And too many Albanian Muslims entering into Kosovo led to Serbians losing their sacred homeland.

    Schicken-Sie-nach-Hause Vertrag boosted homogeneity in European nations after WWII, and it was the foundation of peace all around. Also, liberal democracy works best in a homogeneous setting as the issue of race, tribe, and identity becomes irrelevant in a nation where everyone shares the same identity. It is in diverse nations that politics turns into an issue of 'my people' vs 'your people', and people begin to vote along ethnic lines.
    And this can lead to much anger and violence. This is why diverse nations usually have bad democratic systems or are held together under dictatorial rule.
    Yugoslavia was one nation under iron-fisted communist party. Once the party let go its grip, it began to fall apart.

    Democracy is especially difficult in a diverse nation IF the rulers happen to be of an ethnic minority. The ethnic minority rulers fear that majority-rule will sweep them out of power. This is why Hussein could only rule as dictator in Iraq. In a free election, the Shias and Kurds who outnumber the Sunnis would vote his ass out.
    And this is why Assad of Syria cannot have real democracy either. As Alawites are a minority, they will eventually be voted out of power in a true democracy. It's like democracy destroyed white rule in South Africa. Jews can have democracy in Israel cuz Jews outnumber the Arabs. But if Arabs were to become the majority, the ONLY way Jews could hold power is through dictatorial rule like that of Hussein or Assad.

    This is why the Schicken-Sie-nach-Hause Vertrag did wonders for democratic culture in Western Europe after WWII. As most nations became homogeneous, the politics was about policy issues than about identity or 'our side' vs 'your side'.
    Imagine if Greece, Italy, and Turkey were fused into one nation. Greeks would vote Greek, Italians would vote Italian, and Turks would vote Turk-and-Islam.
    Imagine if Manchuria, Korea, and Japan were united into single nation. Manchus would vote Manchu, Koreans would vote Korean, and Japanese would vote Japanese. Politics would be ethnic. So, it is good that Greeks got Greece, Italians got Italy, Turks got Turkey(the Kurdish minority thing is a HUGE HEADACHE for Turks), Manchurians got Manchuria(as part of China), Koreans got Korea, and Japanese got Japan.

    I mean who wants to see Serbia, Croatia, Slovenia, Kosovo, and etc all bunched into Yugoslavia again? It'd lead to a lot of crap.

    Indeed, paradoxically, sound homogeneous nationalism is the best foundation for international respect and cooperation. Relations would be better between Greeks and Turks if Turks hadn't ruled over Greek territory. And this goes for any bunch of other people. Ukrainians are still pissed at Russians cuz of Russian rule in the past. And Koreans still bitch about Japan because Japan once tried to fuse Japan and Korea into one nation in the proto-globalist Greater Asian Co-Prosperity Sphere. And there would be no bad blood between France and Algeria if not for French colonial rule over that territory, indeed to the point where many French saw Algeria as an extension of France. Things got much better when the French finally gave up Vietnam and Algeria and came home to France. Schicken-Sie-nach-Hause Vertrag is the best.

    Now, I'm not saying that people must stay in their own countries. People should travel and trade with the world. And some may work in other nations, and some may even settle there if the law allows it. But it should never be to the extent that the native population is threatened of being eclipsed demographically or culturally. Otherwise, the native population will end up like native Hawaiians: minority in their own ancestral homeland, and who the hell wants that? Native Hawaiians must now live in a homeland that is mostly dominated by whites and Asians. That must suck real bad.
    I mean only a son-a-bitch would tell a native Hawaiian, "hey, diversity is our strength." 'Diversity' destroyed native Hawaiian power in Hawaii. I feel sorry for the fat brownies.

    Anyway, when we contrast Schicken-Sie-nach-Hause Vertrag that prevailed in Europe after WWII and Old Man Sykes-Picot Treaty that prevailed in the Middle East, there is no comparison. Schicken-Sie-nach-Hause Vertrag did wonders for Europe. Homogeneity led to security and happiness. No more bitter ethnic politics. And once each nation could breathe freely, they could trade freely and respect one another. And travel back and forth with mutual respect.

    In contrast, what did the Old Man Sykes-Picot Treaty or Agreement do for Middle East? The 'national' lines drawn by European imperialists made no sense in terms of ethnic territory or identity. Kurds weren't given their own homeland. Instead, they ended up like Poles during the German-Russian imperialism period where some Poles ended up under German rule, others ended up under Russian rule, and some even ended up under Austro-Hungarians.
    Eventually, a strange kind of politics developed where a Shia minority came to rule over the Sunni majority in Syria, and a Sunni minority came to rule over the Shia majority in Iraq(and over Kurds). Democratic reforms were near-impossible. Diversity leads to ethnic politics, and that was the case in both nations. So, the only to maintain order was by iron-fisted dictatorship. Freedom meant division and demagoguery, and that meant social distress and that meant political destabilization.
    It's like what Lee Kew Yuan of Singapore said: "diversity big headache. no democracy work here." To be sure, Singapore could have been a democracy cuz the Chinese were the dominant ethnic group, but even so, Lee feared the Malay minority and the communists, many of who were Chinese.

    Now, imagine how the Middle East would have been if it had come under something like Schicken-Sie-nach-Hause Vertrag. Kurds would have been given their own homeland. Shias in Iraq would have their own country. Sunni Arabs in Iraq an Syria would have their own homeland. And Alawites would have their own piece.
    And then, there would be much security, peace, mutual tolerance, and etc.
    I mean the example of Korea shows that even a homogeneous people can be driven crazy by divisive politics. Korea was a homogeneous nation, but US and USSR divided it in half, and soon enough, the Korons were slaughtering one another, and the enmity goes onto this day. This is what happens when globalist-imperialist politics mess with other nations.

    And this happened to the Middle East. Now, to be sure, creating modern nations out of the Middle East was no easy task. The whole area had been under Turkish rule, and many Arabs of various tribes had very weak understanding of nationhood. Many were nomadic tribes. But the West could have done a much better job of carving out more ethno-geographically meaningful nations in the territory, but no such effort was made at all. In terms of geopolitics, Syria and Iraq made hardly any sense.
    They could only be ruled by repression since there was too much diversity. Also, the West helped minority groups gain supreme power in Syria and Iraq.
    Given such problems of diversity, it was easy to set the whole place on fire through US invasion of Iraq, US use of sanctions to starve entire populations, and US use of terrorists to destabilize Libya and Syria. Now, we know that US aided Jihadi groups in Libya and Syria to raise hell all over. And of course, US aided Jihadi groups in Afghanistan before it ultimately backfired into 9/11 attack.

    Old Man Sykes-Picot treaty was one of the worst things of the 20th century, and now, we are seeing its outcome.

    In contrast, Schicken-Sie-nach-Hause Vertrag was a wonder of wonders despite the initial hardships caused by populations forced to return to their homelands. It was rough for Poles to be pushed from Ukraine into Poland, and it was tough for Germans to be pushed from Poland to Germany(reduced in size, to be sure). But it was tough for French to depart from Algeria, Japanese to depart from Manchuria, and Americans to depart from Vietnam. But it had to be done. Schicken-Sie-nach-Hause Vertrag is good.

    But people have such short memories. The EU project was made possible ONLY BECAUSE of Schicken-Sie-nach-Hause Vertrag. With mostly homogeneous nations in Europe, there was more trust. There was more liberal democracy in each nation unburdened by ethnic politics. (Belgium is one of those diverse nations, and Flemish and Walloons often practice divisive ethno-politics and vote purely along ethnic lines.) It's the paradox of peace. Better borders and increased homogeneity within borders make for better peace.
    In contrast, in places like Philippines and Indonesia, you often have the majority whupping Chinese minorities, like in that documentary THE ACT OF KILLING. And in the 90s, Indonesians scapegoated Chinese and raped and butchered 1000s of them.

    So, you'd think that Europeans finally learned a lesson. Homogeneity and secure borders make for better cooperation among nations in the EU. Instead, the moronic buggers decided to weaken borders, force one currency on just about every nation, bring about vast movements of peoples once again(even among Europeans, this isn't a good idea; I mean who'd want 10 million southern Italians in Germany or 5 million Spanish in Hungary?) But the idiocy didn't end there. Once borders among European nations were weakened, the borders between Europe and non-Europe was also weakened. Worse, PC and cult of diversity made dumb Europeans believe that Europe would improve with more diversity since diversity is something to worship without critical skepticism. Indeed, it is so worshiped that, even if it could be proven empirically that it has negative consequences politically and economically, it will still be embraced because it is simply holy and sacred. Even if EU must be sacrificed to the god of diversity, it is justified cuz the diversity-as-god is more important than EU and Europeans. When something is made holy, people are afraid to profane it, even if this supposedly holy thing is doing great damage. It's like the Ganges River. It is filled with poo, and no sane person should go into it. But Hindus see it as holy, so they swim in it and even drink the poo-ish water. It goes to show the danger of holy psychology. It's like the Alec Guiness character in BRIDGE ON THE RIVER KWAI. He is so worshipful of the idea of discipline, dignity, and pride that he does his best to build the best possible bridge for the Japanese. When a fellow British officer tells him that he is aiding the Japanese, Guiness won't hear any of it. He is serving the gods of discipline, honor, duty, and etc.
    https://youtu.be/bWJkPbBOXL4?t=33s

    And as Europe fills up with darkies, the politics becomes more ethnic, less liberal(even though diversity is promoted in the name of liberalism), less trusting, more poisonous, more repressive(as more and more PC is necessary to suppress dissent against the elites calling for the Suicide of the West)... indeed more like the Middle East.

    Europe was saved after WWII by Schicken-Sie-nach-Hause Vertrag. But it is now being destroyed by neo-Sykes-Picotization. With vast movements of Europeans all over Europe, there is erosion of national identity and pride in every nation. Once Europeans have been made to accept the demographic invasion of their nation by other Europeans, the next step is invasion by non-Europeans.

    It was great that the French in Algeria returned to France. That way, Algerians had Algeria and French had France. But now, with so many North Africans moving to France, France is being colonized by Muslims and Arabs, and it is just making French politics more volatile as many French now feel like Algerians once did when French settlers came in huge numbers to Algeria. (Me thinks that this open borders policy in UK and France is partly to retro-justify their imperialist ventures. Non-white imperialists drove out white settlers in Algeria, Vietnam, and India, and etc. That was seen as a good thing: noble non-whites driving out white imperialists. But if white elites allow their nations to be colonized by non-whites, then it has a way of justifying past imperialism. French can tell Algerians, "You see, we have no problem with you Algerians coming and living over here, so why did you Algerians protest against us settling in Algeria long ago?" Also, UK and France seem to be living their old imperial glory by turning their own nations into sort-of neo-imperialist theme parks. British elites, by ruling over diversity in UK, can pretend that they're ruling the world. If you can't rule India and Africa, rule over Indians and Africans in your own nation. As for Sweden and other European nations without imperialist history, their addiction to diversity could partly be a desire to become like the US as America, via Hollywood and pop culture, has become the standard of what is 'cool' and 'vibrant'.)

    If Old Man Sykes-Picot Treaty was imposed on the Middle East by British and French imperialists, the neo-Sykes-Pictization of EU is being stage-managed and puppet-mastered by the Jewish-Homo or Jomo Globalist who seek to totally castrate and lobomotize European identity and pride so that Jews can gain total control over them.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=riQh4Qpvxm4

    EU needs its Lawrence of Europe.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fBrw53I8QU0

    Old Man Sykes having a good laugh about the trick he pulled in the Middle East.

    https://youtu.be/7NReUd2_0u0?t=1m45s

    Once again, Priss, dead on! I have only one minor cavil:

    But the West could have done a much better job of carving out more ethno-geographically meaningful nations in the territory, but no such effort was made at all. In terms of geopolitics, Syria and Iraq made hardly any sense.

    Sykes-Picot was no screw-up; it was done deliberately to weaken the Arab civilization and prevent it from ever rising again. A modern, secular, united Arab caliphate in the ME controlling half the world’s oil supply would have been London and Paris’ worst nightmare. It has worked so well, in fact, they’re now using the same technique on the west itself in order to keep all of us plebeians down.

    BTW, do you have a blog or a website of your own? If not, you should definitely consider starting one. I tried clicking on your ‘Website’ link above, but I didn’t see anything there that referenced you.

    Read More
  94. What a nice gathering of fundamental racists and right-wingers this is! These kinds of arguments never cease to outrage me. You just don’t realize that the arguments that you try so hard to prove with graphs and statistics are not the tiniest bit better than the supposed arguments that you so easily ascribe to the entirety of those oh-so-bad, dark, criminal, rape-prone immigrant invaders.

    In the face of the logical incoherence of this article, especially in the beginning – jumping from a satire of Germany becoming Salafist, to Merkel’s New Year’s Speech (which is basically content-free), to a statement on the possible ban of incest between siblings as if these snippets add up to any kind of coherent picture – I will restrict myself and only comment on the incest statement since it creates the distorted impression that German government might change this law tomorrow.

    The German Ethics Committee works on behalf of the government. It is independent in its activity. Its members are prohibited from belonging to any part of national or local legislature. Its primary goal is to inform the public and to promote open discussion. Its second goal is to publish official statements of recommendation for political and legislative action. Also, importantly, members can disagree in their judgement (http://www.ethikrat.org/ueber-uns/auftrag). Which, by the way, is the case concerning the issue you talk about: There were nine members in support of a law against incest and fourteen in opposition to it. Finally, the fact that all of this was already going on in September 2014 and nothing has happened so far further stresses the distortedness of this piece of news in the context of a discussion of the incidents in Köln. (http://www.faz.net/aktuell/politik/inland/ethikrat-will-inzestverbot-aufheben-im-schosse-der-familie-13171468.html).

    Read More
  95. KA [AKA "Carthage"] says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    It was neither the presence nor the absence of th culture of the cousin fucking .
    Or ay be abs ence of the cousin screwingb gave rise to indiscriminate unconsented screwing of blacks,native Indian,Chinese women of fallen Boxer soldiers, ,Sand Nigger fucking in Abu Ghraib, fucking the Vichy French women by American soldiers, or of the Mali teenager by the French Army,or the recent exposé of kid fucking by the school administration in Rhode Idland .

    Read More
    • Replies: @pyrrhus
    Wrong. That the west did not have superior ideas is a completely false statement as any review of scientific or engineering advances in the last 1000 years will quickly demonstrate....that cousin marriage is genetically devastating can be confirmed from available medical data.
  96. @anon
    O/T

    but there's a story being sold in the media that IS have developed a SAM making capacity

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/islamic-state/12083631/Secrets-of-Islamic-States-University-of-Jihad-revealed.html

    this will be a lie to cover one of the anti-assad coalition supplying IS with AA missiles.

    Russki pilots beware.

    Only in your imagination can ISIS devise high tech devices or SAM missiles bring down advanced modern fighters….

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    It's not my imagination - the imagination is in the newspaper article I linked.

    Obviously it's not true so why is it in the newspaper?

    cos someone is preparing to give them manpads - like i said.

  97. @KA
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”


    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    It was neither the presence nor the absence of th culture of the cousin fucking .
    Or ay be abs ence of the cousin screwingb gave rise to indiscriminate unconsented screwing of blacks,native Indian,Chinese women of fallen Boxer soldiers, ,Sand Nigger fucking in Abu Ghraib, fucking the Vichy French women by American soldiers, or of the Mali teenager by the French Army,or the recent exposé of kid fucking by the school administration in Rhode Idland .

    Wrong. That the west did not have superior ideas is a completely false statement as any review of scientific or engineering advances in the last 1000 years will quickly demonstrate….that cousin marriage is genetically devastating can be confirmed from available medical data.

    Read More
    • Replies: @bunga
    Scientific improvement came much later, way much later . Britain did not win against India because they had more IQ or better scientific gadgets .
    Niether did Columbus or Vasco da Gama or Cortez. They were ruthless ,poor,and fired with the zeal, and despondnecy that one would find today among ISIS kiler machine or the refugees from Afghanistan or Burma or Rwanda .But they acted collectively and under the guidance of the religion with power .

    IQ baloney is just that - shitload of baloney .
  98. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @pyrrhus
    Only in your imagination can ISIS devise high tech devices or SAM missiles bring down advanced modern fighters....

    It’s not my imagination – the imagination is in the newspaper article I linked.

    Obviously it’s not true so why is it in the newspaper?

    cos someone is preparing to give them manpads – like i said.

    Read More
  99. @RadicalCenter
    They should go out wherever the Hell they please, whenever they please, accompanied by dozens of german men who are ready, willing, and able to KILL Muslims who harass or assault their women.

    lol chill

    Read More
  100. Germany is still occupied by the anglozionist empire and their politicians serve this same empire, not the German people primarily. Merkel is corrupt, not misguided, or mistaken, IMO.

    Read More
    • Replies: @annamaria
    Merkel has been constrained by her overseas masters. She certainly means good for the people; she is smart and well educated. But there are limits that have been set for her by the US politicians. Here is an example of the obstacles she is forced to deal with: https://marknesop.wordpress.com/2016/01/03/the-unbearable-unseemliness-of-partnership/
    "... a growing lobby group [in the US] is putting pressure on Germany to back out of its deal with Russia’s Gazprom and other shareholders to twin the Nord Stream gas pipeline, which would double the available supply of Russian gas to Germany, making Germany a significantly more-important gas hub for Europe. It would also result in Russia sending only domestic supply through Ukraine’s pipeline network... Ukraine reaps $2 Billion annually from Russia for transit fees for basically doing nothing except letting Russia use its pipes... Washington and Brussels want Russia to be on the hook for subsidizing Ukraine to the greatest degree possible, because every dollar that doesn’t come from Russia has to come from the IMF or other western donors... From Brussels and Washington’s point of view, it is essential that Russia participate in the rehabilitation of Ukraine as a prosperous monument to NATO expansion. Because it frankly cannot be done without it. Russia is understandably unwilling to cooperate under those circumstances, the scenario being what it is. Ukraine will therefore be taken off the board as a transit country, and its entire livelihood is now in peril. The west is trying to rectify its enormous blunder by bullying Russia into continuing to send European gas through Ukraine, and it is not working."
    , @L.K

    Germany is still occupied by the anglozionist empire and their politicians serve this same empire, not the German people primarily. Merkel is corrupt, not misguided, or mistaken, IMO

     

    Dead on, Markus, that is it in a nutshell. Unfortunately, most Germans either do not care or r not aware of this. The German people should push the government to exit NATO and close the zamerican bases in the country. Obviously this would not be allowed, but it would at least make the client-state nature of present day Germany impossible to hide.
    As a friend of mine - who is an old German( he was a boy at the end of the war) - says, Germany died in 1945.
  101. Priss Factor [AKA "The Priss Factory"] says: • Website     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Ad Victoriam
    You have it exactly right. Globalist traitors are importing the divide for divide and rule, and taxing us to pay for our own demographic dispossession.

    White women need to learn from the Knight Sabers and take on the evil elites.

    Read More
  102. @Anonymous
    Groups of African and Middle Eastern troglodytes harassing everyone who is not them, their kin included, were a common sight in West European cities for many years now. Why should some women in Cologne be given more attention than everyone else? They should not go out where the lowlifes gather if they want to stay safe. Stay at home, stay sober, behave.

    Staying in the 10th arrondissement in Paris some years back, I discovered that the night on the boulevard belonged to African blacks making pretend calls back home inside phone booths. V.S.Naipaul in a recentish novel remarked on the same phenomenon in Germany, African blacks pretend phoning in phone booths in the middle of the night. I wrote to a friend in Berlin, a German/American, asking what he could report on the influx. He was okay with it at that moment (last summer); he had a Turkish mechanic who had been fixing his car for many years.

    Read More
  103. @Markus
    Germany is still occupied by the anglozionist empire and their politicians serve this same empire, not the German people primarily. Merkel is corrupt, not misguided, or mistaken, IMO.

    Merkel has been constrained by her overseas masters. She certainly means good for the people; she is smart and well educated. But there are limits that have been set for her by the US politicians. Here is an example of the obstacles she is forced to deal with: https://marknesop.wordpress.com/2016/01/03/the-unbearable-unseemliness-of-partnership/
    “… a growing lobby group [in the US] is putting pressure on Germany to back out of its deal with Russia’s Gazprom and other shareholders to twin the Nord Stream gas pipeline, which would double the available supply of Russian gas to Germany, making Germany a significantly more-important gas hub for Europe. It would also result in Russia sending only domestic supply through Ukraine’s pipeline network… Ukraine reaps $2 Billion annually from Russia for transit fees for basically doing nothing except letting Russia use its pipes… Washington and Brussels want Russia to be on the hook for subsidizing Ukraine to the greatest degree possible, because every dollar that doesn’t come from Russia has to come from the IMF or other western donors… From Brussels and Washington’s point of view, it is essential that Russia participate in the rehabilitation of Ukraine as a prosperous monument to NATO expansion. Because it frankly cannot be done without it. Russia is understandably unwilling to cooperate under those circumstances, the scenario being what it is. Ukraine will therefore be taken off the board as a transit country, and its entire livelihood is now in peril. The west is trying to rectify its enormous blunder by bullying Russia into continuing to send European gas through Ukraine, and it is not working.”

    Read More
  104. @pyrrhus
    Wrong. That the west did not have superior ideas is a completely false statement as any review of scientific or engineering advances in the last 1000 years will quickly demonstrate....that cousin marriage is genetically devastating can be confirmed from available medical data.

    Scientific improvement came much later, way much later . Britain did not win against India because they had more IQ or better scientific gadgets .
    Niether did Columbus or Vasco da Gama or Cortez. They were ruthless ,poor,and fired with the zeal, and despondnecy that one would find today among ISIS kiler machine or the refugees from Afghanistan or Burma or Rwanda .But they acted collectively and under the guidance of the religion with power .

    IQ baloney is just that – shitload of baloney .

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    That's stupid.

    Science didn't matter yet in the 18th century (though it must be noted that just a bit later the tinkerers who invented and improved the steam engine knew state of the art physics), but European technology did matter a great deal. For starters they needed very good ships to get to India or the Americas. Neither Indians nor Amerinds could reach Europe with the technology they had at the time.
  105. @Markus
    Germany is still occupied by the anglozionist empire and their politicians serve this same empire, not the German people primarily. Merkel is corrupt, not misguided, or mistaken, IMO.

    Germany is still occupied by the anglozionist empire and their politicians serve this same empire, not the German people primarily. Merkel is corrupt, not misguided, or mistaken, IMO

    Dead on, Markus, that is it in a nutshell. Unfortunately, most Germans either do not care or r not aware of this. The German people should push the government to exit NATO and close the zamerican bases in the country. Obviously this would not be allowed, but it would at least make the client-state nature of present day Germany impossible to hide.
    As a friend of mine – who is an old German( he was a boy at the end of the war) – says, Germany died in 1945.

    Read More
  106. Your piece would be hilarious but for the insanity it so clearly conveys. That raises the obvious question: what in the hell are those people thinking? When I saw those first pictures of the small army of “Syrian refuges” disembarking from that Greek ferry at Athens last August, my first reaction was “Insanity!” I thought the Germans were smarter than that. I thought the Europeans were smarter than that.

    Read More
  107. @bunga
    Scientific improvement came much later, way much later . Britain did not win against India because they had more IQ or better scientific gadgets .
    Niether did Columbus or Vasco da Gama or Cortez. They were ruthless ,poor,and fired with the zeal, and despondnecy that one would find today among ISIS kiler machine or the refugees from Afghanistan or Burma or Rwanda .But they acted collectively and under the guidance of the religion with power .

    IQ baloney is just that - shitload of baloney .

    That’s stupid.

    Science didn’t matter yet in the 18th century (though it must be noted that just a bit later the tinkerers who invented and improved the steam engine knew state of the art physics), but European technology did matter a great deal. For starters they needed very good ships to get to India or the Americas. Neither Indians nor Amerinds could reach Europe with the technology they had at the time.

    Read More
    • Replies: @tbraton
    I totally agree, reiner Tor. It's easy to minimize the very scientific approach the leaders of Portugal, starting with Prince Henry the Navigator, took to navigation down the coast of Africa, patiently accumulating data on the numerous trips. That eventually led to Vasco da Gama's passage of Cape Town, or the southernmost apart of Africa, and on to India. That whole effort was as much intellectual as physical.
  108. @reiner Tor
    That's stupid.

    Science didn't matter yet in the 18th century (though it must be noted that just a bit later the tinkerers who invented and improved the steam engine knew state of the art physics), but European technology did matter a great deal. For starters they needed very good ships to get to India or the Americas. Neither Indians nor Amerinds could reach Europe with the technology they had at the time.

    I totally agree, reiner Tor. It’s easy to minimize the very scientific approach the leaders of Portugal, starting with Prince Henry the Navigator, took to navigation down the coast of Africa, patiently accumulating data on the numerous trips. That eventually led to Vasco da Gama’s passage of Cape Town, or the southernmost apart of Africa, and on to India. That whole effort was as much intellectual as physical.

    Read More

Comments are closed.