The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Carlos Slim's Late Wife Was a Member of the Most Bloodthirsty Lebanese Warlord Clan
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
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.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

As everybody knows, Mexican telecom monopolist Carlos Slim [formerly Salim] and largest single owner of New York Times stock is of Lebanese Maronite Christian descent through both of his parents.

Interestingly, Slim married a Lebanese girl as well, with whom he had six children before her sad death in 1999.

But only today did I learn Slim’s wife’s maiden name:

Soumaya Domit Gemayel

Mrs. Slim was a Gemayel on her mother’s side. The name “Gemayel” brings back memories.

Lebanon’s Gemayel Family has its own Wikipedia page, with eleven members of the family having individual Wiki pages.

If you followed Israel’s invasion of Lebanon in 1982 and America’s subsequent misadventure in Lebanon, you’ll remember hearing the name Gemayel.

After visiting the Berlin Olympics in 1936, Pierre Gemayel founded Lebanon’s fascist-oriented, pro-Western Phalange Party.

Sheik Pierre’s son Bashir Gemayel was the most ferocious Christian warlord of Lebanon’s civil war that began in 1975. (Above is Geraldo Rivera’s 1982 interview with Bashir.) It should be kept in mind that much of Bashir’s violence was devoted less to fighting Muslims than to making the Gemayels supreme over the other Christian warlord clans, such as the Chamouns.

(One of my readers once worked for the State Department and was in charge of babysitting a young member of one of these elite Christian clans eventually overwhelmed by the Gemayels. [I think he was a Chamoun, but my recollection could be faulty.] To pass the time, my reader took the young Lebanese to see The Godfather. His charge was shaken by the movie, saying afterwards: “That’s exactly like my family.” But, as it turned out, they weren’t quite Corleoney enough to stop the rise of the Gemayels.)

Bashir and Ariel

And for 22 days in 1982, Bashir was President-elect of Lebanon, with the backing of the Reagan and Begin-Sharon governments.

Time Magazine wrote:

Gemayel: Ruthless Idealist
Monday, Sept. 06, 1982

Liberator. Warlord. Patriot. Power-mad. Those are some of the terms that Bashir Gemayel’s deeply riven countrymen have used to describe their President-elect during his years as a leader of the Christian militia forces.

Part political idealist and part storm trooper, Gemayel, 34, has shown he will use whatever means necessary to achieve his nationalist goals.

But on September 14th, 1982, Bashir was blown up (apparently by a rival Christian).

The headline on his obituary in the NYT read:

Bashir Gemayel Lived by the Sword

The notorious massacres in the Sabra and Shatila Palestinian refugee camps in Lebanon were carried out by Bashir’s Phalangists (apparently with Israeli approval) two days after his murder.

Bashir’s brother Amine Gemayel took Bashir’s place and served from 1982-1988 as president of Lebanon.

Amine’s son Pierre was assassinated in 2006.

Ronnie and Amine

Three sources I’ve found say the late Senora Slim was the niece of Bashir and Amine Gemayel (which would make her the granddaughter of Pierre Gemayel), while another describes her as their cousin. (Or the genealogical relationship could be more distant: people often collapse relationships when recounting them.)

In summary, I’ve been reading up now and then about Carlos Slim for about eight years now, but until today I’d never heard that his wife was a member of the clan that was in the news practically every single day in 1982.

It probably wouldn’t be good for business for Slim to broadcast that fact. The Gemayels had enemies. On the other hand, important people who would be reassured by this Arab entrepreneur’s ties via his in-laws to, say, Ariel Sharon could be apprised of them personally.

I’m starting to imagine that, with that kind of ancestry, Carlos and Soumaya’s six children will remain a dynastic force even after their parents are gone.

 
Hide 125 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Joshua Landis, an academic expert on Syria and the ME, was interviewed by RT’s Sophie Shevardnadze (granddaughter of former foreign minister of the USSR, Eduard Shevardnadze (of ending- (or, if your a neocon, losing) the-cold-war fame) and made some very clear sighted and candid remarks.

    “SS: But also, the rebels inside Syria, they haven’t united against Assad. Do they even want to unify?

    JL: They claim to want to unify but have failed to do so because they all want to be the leader or “top dog” in their neighborhood. This is the problem with the larger Middle East – it’s very fragmented. Family, clan, and village still predominate over a sense of the nation. Compromise is a bad word that signifies weakness. It is an important reason for the failure of democracy and secular nationalism. Dictators dominate all the Middle Eastern states. Why? Because there are no ideological bonds that unite the people or democratic traditions. The socioeconomic and ideological prerequisites for democracy are weak.

    SS: Does that mean that if Assad is gone, the power struggle between these factions will continue and there will be no unity – so we’re going to get another Libya on our hands?

    JL: I believe so, yes. The West falsely believes that it can separate the regime from the state. It argues that it can pursue regime-change while simultaneously preserving the state and its institutions. Washington believes it can avoid the chaos it sewed in Iraq. I don’t believe it can. It wasn’t only Bremer that criminalized the Baath Party and disbanded the army. The Shiite politicians he empowered insisted on it. In most Middle Eastern countries, the regimes, for better or worse, have transformed the states into reflections of themselves. They have cannibalized the state. They have crammed their loyalists into every nook and cranny of the national institutions. They had to in order to coup-proof their regimes. They justified it in the name of bringing stability. State institutions are not autonomous. Westerners believe that because their own state institutions are run by professional civil servants, Middle Eastern states are too. But they aren’t. Political appointees make up the entire edifice. They cannot simply be swapped out. Regime-change for an Arab country is not like administration change in a Western country. Destroying the regime means destroying the state. The price of regime-change is chaos. That is the situation in Syria today. It is the situation almost everywhere in the Middle East. Think of Saudi Arabia without the Saudi family. What would be left of the state?”

    Of course the neocons all know this very well, in no sense has Libya, Iraq or Syria been a failure. The sectarian collapse of these states along the lines of Lebanon was in keeping with the Oded Yinon Plan.

  2. Its a plus for her being from this distinguished Christian clan plus it shows how connected Carlos Slim was over in Lebanon or wherever the marriage actually took place. Lebanon was the historic Christian fortress and refuge in the Middle East. It was the Israel for Christians, a place to be secure against Jihadist Islam aggression and Middle East Christians sure could use a place like this these days. Please nail down the best accurate statistics but my memory is Lebanon was 80% Christian in 1900.
    BTW Similar to Israel which is about 20% Arab (just about all Muslims) within its actual borders. Meaning no West Bank included.

    Lebanon must be 80% Muslim these days due to explosive Muslim birthrates and Muslim immigration into a once more prosperous country. Much of this immigration was illegal.

    • Replies: @TomSchmidt
    And the Christians know it, too. Muslim Lebanese of my acquaintance are decent people, but they are squeezing out the Christians.
    , @Reg Cæsar
    Has the 1930 census been collated yet?
    , @bomag
    Lebanon must be 80% Muslim these days due to explosive Muslim birthrates and Muslim immigration into a once more prosperous country. Much of this immigration was illegal.

    The Levant was purposely divided: Syria for the Muslims; Lebanon for the Christians. How has that worked out? Likewise, India has been divided: Pakistan for the Muslims; India for the Hindus. Today Pakistan is all Muslim, while India not so much all Hindu.

    Divide and conquer. Apparently leadership can't see this.
    , @IHTG
    The Arab population of Israel isn't quite "just about all Muslim". They're a bit over 80%. If you exclude East Jerusalem (95%+ Muslim) and just look at the traditional Arab-Israeli population centers in the Galilee, the Muslim majority isn't quite that overwhelming.
    , @tbraton
    "Please nail down the best accurate statistics but my memory is Lebanon was 80% Christian in 1900.
    BTW Similar to Israel which is about 20% Arab (just about all Muslims) within its actual borders. Meaning no West Bank included."

    Interesting how you compare the ethnic/religious makeup of Lebanon in 1900 to the ethnic/religious makeup of Israel today. What you forgot to state was that the makeup of Palestine in 1900 was 94% Arab (both Muslim and Christian): "According to Ottoman statistics studied by Justin McCarthy,[24] the population of Palestine in the early 19th century was 350,000, in 1860 it was 411,000 and in 1900 about 600,000 of which 94% were Arabs. In 1914 Palestine had a population of 657,000 Muslim Arabs, 81,000 Christian Arabs, and 59,000 Jews.[25]" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographic_history_of_Palestine
    "By 1948, the population had risen to 1,900,000, of whom 68% were Arabs, and 32% were Jews (UNSCOP report, including Bedouin.)" The difference is that the Arabs had long lived in Palestine, and the Jews had long fled Palestine for other parts of the world. (BTW that process started centuries before the Romans entered the scene, since the city of Alexandria, founded by Alexander the Great in 331 B.C. had a substantial Jewish population from the beginning, hence the need for a Greek translation of the Torah, the Septuagint, in the third century B.C.)
    , @Anonymous
    The last census in Lebanon was in 1932, which had Christians at about 53% and included both Maronites and Orthodox, who are distinct sects that don't always get along and have their own quotas, like the Sunni and Shia. The 1932 census was the basis for its political quota system in which the President has to be a Maronite Christian, the Prime Minister a Sunni Muslim, the Speaker of the Parliament a Shia Muslim, the Deputy Prime Minister and the Deputy Speaker of Parliament Eastern Orthodox.

    The demographic change has primarily been due to large Christian emigration , rather than Muslim immigration or fertility rates.
    , @Cyrus
    It was the Israel for Christians? Is this the same Israel that planned to deport all of Palestine's Christians to Latin America but was only stopped from intervention of western countries? Is the same Israel that still persecutes the remaining Palestinian Christians and Armenians that it hasn't expelled yet? Please don't be ridiculous.

    Lebanon is still around half Christian and much safer than Israel, as is Jordan, and as was Syria prior to Assad losing control of the country. Israel is a very anti-Christian nation.
  3. The Gameyel family is to be lauded for driving out the murderous thugs who invaded and occupied their land.

    If only the West had their drive and determination.

  4. And so it begins. Really, i don’t think hollobeck’s (not looking his name up) world is very different from ours.

    http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/australian-muslim-party-aims-to-contest-federal-and-state-elections-20151116-gl0app.html

  5. @Clyde
    Its a plus for her being from this distinguished Christian clan plus it shows how connected Carlos Slim was over in Lebanon or wherever the marriage actually took place. Lebanon was the historic Christian fortress and refuge in the Middle East. It was the Israel for Christians, a place to be secure against Jihadist Islam aggression and Middle East Christians sure could use a place like this these days. Please nail down the best accurate statistics but my memory is Lebanon was 80% Christian in 1900.
    BTW Similar to Israel which is about 20% Arab (just about all Muslims) within its actual borders. Meaning no West Bank included.

    Lebanon must be 80% Muslim these days due to explosive Muslim birthrates and Muslim immigration into a once more prosperous country. Much of this immigration was illegal.

    And the Christians know it, too. Muslim Lebanese of my acquaintance are decent people, but they are squeezing out the Christians.

  6. @Clyde
    Its a plus for her being from this distinguished Christian clan plus it shows how connected Carlos Slim was over in Lebanon or wherever the marriage actually took place. Lebanon was the historic Christian fortress and refuge in the Middle East. It was the Israel for Christians, a place to be secure against Jihadist Islam aggression and Middle East Christians sure could use a place like this these days. Please nail down the best accurate statistics but my memory is Lebanon was 80% Christian in 1900.
    BTW Similar to Israel which is about 20% Arab (just about all Muslims) within its actual borders. Meaning no West Bank included.

    Lebanon must be 80% Muslim these days due to explosive Muslim birthrates and Muslim immigration into a once more prosperous country. Much of this immigration was illegal.

    Has the 1930 census been collated yet?

    • Replies: @Clyde
    The 1932 Lebanese census stated that Christians made up 54% of the population. Maronites, largest among the Christian denomination and then largely in control of the state apparatus, accounted for 29% of the total resident population. But since the 19th century, Muslim birth rates have been continually higher than Christian birth rates. Also, far larger numbers of Christians emigrated from Lebanon than Muslims.

    Lebanese diaspora
    Apart from the four and a half million citizens of Lebanon proper, there is a sizeable Lebanese diaspora. There are more Lebanese people living outside of Lebanon (8.6[4]-14[5] million), than within (4.3 million). The majority of the diaspora population consists of Lebanese Christians; however, there are some who are Muslim. They trace their origin to several waves of Christian emigration, starting with the exodus that followed the 1860 Lebanon conflict in Ottoman Syria.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Lebanon

  7. @Clyde
    Its a plus for her being from this distinguished Christian clan plus it shows how connected Carlos Slim was over in Lebanon or wherever the marriage actually took place. Lebanon was the historic Christian fortress and refuge in the Middle East. It was the Israel for Christians, a place to be secure against Jihadist Islam aggression and Middle East Christians sure could use a place like this these days. Please nail down the best accurate statistics but my memory is Lebanon was 80% Christian in 1900.
    BTW Similar to Israel which is about 20% Arab (just about all Muslims) within its actual borders. Meaning no West Bank included.

    Lebanon must be 80% Muslim these days due to explosive Muslim birthrates and Muslim immigration into a once more prosperous country. Much of this immigration was illegal.

    Lebanon must be 80% Muslim these days due to explosive Muslim birthrates and Muslim immigration into a once more prosperous country. Much of this immigration was illegal.

    The Levant was purposely divided: Syria for the Muslims; Lebanon for the Christians. How has that worked out? Likewise, India has been divided: Pakistan for the Muslims; India for the Hindus. Today Pakistan is all Muslim, while India not so much all Hindu.

    Divide and conquer. Apparently leadership can’t see this.

  8. I was unaware the Christian clans were that cruel and ruthless among themselves. Thanks for the reporting, Steve. I imagine the fact that Christians are becoming way outnumbered might temper their inter-clan rivalries. Incidentally, there’s a fairly good bit of Lebanese Catholic and Orthodox theological commentary on the web, and you see a lot of handwringing about ‘sectarianism.’ I’m wondering if that’s really code for ‘inter-clan rivalry.’

    • Replies: @Vendetta
    Very Mafia-like, and that's far from the first time I've heard that comparison. That's also why Hezbollah are and will remain the strongest military force in Lebanon. The Christian and Sunni militias were hired killers and Mafia goons, Hezbollah's are actual soldiers.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iEHAltP4PEM

    Check out the footage, note the discipline, quality of equipment, and the absence of moronic screams of "Allahu akbar!"
    , @AndrewR
    I had never heard that explicitly stated either, but it's hardly surprising. Besides its food and ancient history, Italy is known for basically two things: Roman Catholicism and mafia clans. No one should be surprised that fellow Mediterranean "Christians" in the world's most clannish region would be as clannish and ruthless as the Italian mob.
  9. @The Anti-Gnostic
    I was unaware the Christian clans were that cruel and ruthless among themselves. Thanks for the reporting, Steve. I imagine the fact that Christians are becoming way outnumbered might temper their inter-clan rivalries. Incidentally, there's a fairly good bit of Lebanese Catholic and Orthodox theological commentary on the web, and you see a lot of handwringing about 'sectarianism.' I'm wondering if that's really code for 'inter-clan rivalry.'

    Very Mafia-like, and that’s far from the first time I’ve heard that comparison. That’s also why Hezbollah are and will remain the strongest military force in Lebanon. The Christian and Sunni militias were hired killers and Mafia goons, Hezbollah’s are actual soldiers.

    Check out the footage, note the discipline, quality of equipment, and the absence of moronic screams of “Allahu akbar!”

    • Replies: @Earl Lemongrab
    That's amazing footage. You have to marvel at how the crucible of the Israeli invasion and occupation of south Lebanon led to the formerly docile Lebanese Shia producing the toughest, most disciplined light infantry force in the Middle East. Sheikh Nasrallah is some kind of organizational genius for sure.
    , @YEOMAN
    Christians and Sunnis were disarmed by Syrians. Hezbollah strongly depends on Iranian backing.
  10. http://www.overcomingbias.com/2015/11/statestupidity.html#disqus_thread

    Robin Hanson is puzzled why institutions don’t discriminate sufficiently against those with low IQ (or in favor of those w/ high) – i.e. your rent depends on your IQ – so that everyone internalizes all their spillover effects.

    Seriously.

    But to his credit Hive Mind by Jones has cut his conviction that open borders is awesome.

    • Replies: @Romanian
    Wouldn't that be racist?
  11. I just saw this headline:

    “15 Sudanese Migrants Killed at Egypt-Israel Border”

    At first I thought of how that would be received here – those hypocritical Joos, defending their own border but leaving America’s open.

    But then I read further and it turns out that the Sudanese had been killed by the Egyptian border police. Maybe they were caught in a crossfire between their Bedouin smugglers and the cops or maybe the cops just mowed them down – it’s just brown people shooting each other, nothing to see here folks, move along.

    Thank God it was the Egyptians that did this – you can imagine the international outcry if the Israelis had done it. But since this is just brown people killing each other, no war crime was committed. We all know that only white people are capable of racism.

    • Replies: @AndrewR
    If you're going to posit a sarcastic strawman, it should at least be an accurate representation of what your target group would claim.

    It's easy to make fun of what <90 IQ SJWs might say, but I imagine many SJWs are at least vaguely aware that the "Sudanese migrants" probably were very ethnically distinct from the Egyptian police.
    , @iSteveFan

    you can imagine the international outcry if the Israelis had done it.
     
    You are joking, right?
  12. @The Anti-Gnostic
    I was unaware the Christian clans were that cruel and ruthless among themselves. Thanks for the reporting, Steve. I imagine the fact that Christians are becoming way outnumbered might temper their inter-clan rivalries. Incidentally, there's a fairly good bit of Lebanese Catholic and Orthodox theological commentary on the web, and you see a lot of handwringing about 'sectarianism.' I'm wondering if that's really code for 'inter-clan rivalry.'

    I had never heard that explicitly stated either, but it’s hardly surprising. Besides its food and ancient history, Italy is known for basically two things: Roman Catholicism and mafia clans. No one should be surprised that fellow Mediterranean “Christians” in the world’s most clannish region would be as clannish and ruthless as the Italian mob.

  13. @Jack D
    I just saw this headline:

    "15 Sudanese Migrants Killed at Egypt-Israel Border"

    At first I thought of how that would be received here - those hypocritical Joos, defending their own border but leaving America's open.

    But then I read further and it turns out that the Sudanese had been killed by the Egyptian border police. Maybe they were caught in a crossfire between their Bedouin smugglers and the cops or maybe the cops just mowed them down - it's just brown people shooting each other, nothing to see here folks, move along.

    Thank God it was the Egyptians that did this - you can imagine the international outcry if the Israelis had done it. But since this is just brown people killing each other, no war crime was committed. We all know that only white people are capable of racism.

    If you’re going to posit a sarcastic strawman, it should at least be an accurate representation of what your target group would claim.

    It’s easy to make fun of what <90 IQ SJWs might say, but I imagine many SJWs are at least vaguely aware that the "Sudanese migrants" probably were very ethnically distinct from the Egyptian police.

    • Replies: @Jefferson
    "It’s easy to make fun of what <90 IQ SJWs might say, but I imagine many SJWs are at least vaguely aware that the "Sudanese migrants" probably were very ethnically distinct from the Egyptian police."

    But the Egyptian police still look significantly distinct in phenotype from Northern European WASPs who founded America, hence why Social Justice Warriors do not refer to Egyptian law enforcement discriminating against Sudanese immigrants as another example of White cops using police brutality against Black bodies. Social Justice Warriors clearly place Egyptians into the Nonwhite category and so do Right Wing White supremacist groups. That is something that both the far Left and the far Right agree on in that they both do not see Egyptians as a White ethnic group.

    Also using the one drop rule most Egyptians would not even be considered White, since Sub Saharan DNA is present in the Egyptian gene pool. Which is not surprising because Egypt shares a border with Sub Saharan Africa. There is no ocean that separates the two like there is between Europe and Sub Saharan Africa. Hence why Egyptians are not as pure unimxed Caucasoid as Europeans.

    You can't keep Sub Saharan DNA from invading your people's gene pool when you live next door to these people.

    , @Jack D
    Sudanese vary from mostly black to entirely black, while Egyptian vary from partly black to mostly black, so it's on a continuum. In any case, I think the SJW rule is that non-whites of any shade do not possess moral agency and do bad things only because they are manipulated by or forced into bad circumstances by whitey. If for example, a black is killed by a Hispanic (not a "white Hispanic" like Zimmerman but just your garden variety Mexican) it is in no way noteworthy.
  14. The War Nerd (Gary Brecher) has written some deeply cynical and very illuminating commentary on the Middle East. In his Aug. 30, 2013 column about the idealistic, naive, and incompetent Secretary of State of that time, he discussed the Worst, Worster, and Worstest options that the U.S. faced in Syria. In sketching out the position of the Alawites and the Assad clan, he recounted a charming anecdote about Lebanon’s Gemayel family.

    Fair-use excerpt from Little Kerry and the Three Bad Options:

    … [The Ehden Massacre of the Lebanese Civil War] started when the warlord of Ehden broke with Bashir Gemayel over whether to side with Israel or Syria…

    [It] wasn’t even sectarian. All parties involved were Maronite Christians, the dominant sect in Lebanon before the Civil War. Ehden was one of the hill villages they put on Lebanese tourist brochures, back when Lebanon was a big tourist destination… It was also the stronghold of a Maronite warlord named Tony Frangieh. The Frangiehs were big players in the complicated Maronite alliances back then. You don’t hear much about them now. That’s because of what happened on June 13, 1978.

    Tony Frangieh’s decision to side with Syria rather than Israel annoyed Gemayel, and led to firefights among the Maronite gangs. Gemayel finally decided to wipe out the problem. He attacked Frangieh’s fortified house with hundreds of militia, who overran the place killing two dozen guards. Then the fun began. They tied up Tony and his wife Vera, then dragged their toddler daughter, Jihane, in front of them and killed her while her parents watched. Then it was Vera’s turn. Finally they put Tony out of his misery.

    Frangieh was not a good guy. Gemayel was a bad guy, probably, but a bad guy in a bad neighborhood is just called fitting in. What happened to the Frangieh’s family has been happening in those hills for a long time…

    • Agree: Pseudonymic Handle
    • Replies: @Olorin
    Funny...I was just at War Nerd this weekend...digging out his older stuff on Syria. (2013--ancient history here on the MemoryHoleNet.)

    In my view he needs in injection of 50,000 cc of HBD, stat.
  15. There is a new unofficial biography of Carlos Slim. Here is an article in The Daily Mail about this book:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3314438/Tycoons-telecoms-Trotsky-book-lifts-veil-Carlos-Slim.html

    Here is an article in Spanish about the book:

    http://aristeguinoticias.com/0411/lomasdestacado/diego-osorno-revela-la-biografia-politica-de-carlos-slim/

    No translation into English yet.

    It is inconsequential, but I have been curious about why the family name was shortened to “Slim” from “Salim”. The SL consonant combination is not easily pronounced by Spanish speakers. Here in Mexico, I hear news presenters pronounce the name s-LEEM, gliding over the missing first vowel.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    I would assume it was shortened to make it seem less obviously Arabic. Being a "Moor" was never a popular thing in any Spanish speaking country, even before all the recent unpleasantness.
    , @Lot

    The SL consonant combination is not easily pronounced by Spanish speakers.
     
    Yes, Mexicans would pronounce "Slim" as "Ess-Lim." Even after years of English it can be very hard for them to say words that begin with SL, ST, SN, without adding a phantom "es" to the beginning.

    But they could say "Salim" just fine. He likely made the change so people did not assume he was Muslim.
  16. @Reg Cæsar
    Has the 1930 census been collated yet?

    The 1932 Lebanese census stated that Christians made up 54% of the population. Maronites, largest among the Christian denomination and then largely in control of the state apparatus, accounted for 29% of the total resident population. But since the 19th century, Muslim birth rates have been continually higher than Christian birth rates. Also, far larger numbers of Christians emigrated from Lebanon than Muslims.

    Lebanese diaspora
    Apart from the four and a half million citizens of Lebanon proper, there is a sizeable Lebanese diaspora. There are more Lebanese people living outside of Lebanon (8.6[4]-14[5] million), than within (4.3 million). The majority of the diaspora population consists of Lebanese Christians; however, there are some who are Muslim. They trace their origin to several waves of Christian emigration, starting with the exodus that followed the 1860 Lebanon conflict in Ottoman Syria.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Lebanon

  17. @Clyde
    Its a plus for her being from this distinguished Christian clan plus it shows how connected Carlos Slim was over in Lebanon or wherever the marriage actually took place. Lebanon was the historic Christian fortress and refuge in the Middle East. It was the Israel for Christians, a place to be secure against Jihadist Islam aggression and Middle East Christians sure could use a place like this these days. Please nail down the best accurate statistics but my memory is Lebanon was 80% Christian in 1900.
    BTW Similar to Israel which is about 20% Arab (just about all Muslims) within its actual borders. Meaning no West Bank included.

    Lebanon must be 80% Muslim these days due to explosive Muslim birthrates and Muslim immigration into a once more prosperous country. Much of this immigration was illegal.

    The Arab population of Israel isn’t quite “just about all Muslim”. They’re a bit over 80%. If you exclude East Jerusalem (95%+ Muslim) and just look at the traditional Arab-Israeli population centers in the Galilee, the Muslim majority isn’t quite that overwhelming.

  18. Many Lebanese Christians do not consider themselves Arabs like their neighbors but believe they are descendants of the Phoenicians. Their Arabization was superficial and consisted mainly of switching languages. Their DNA might be interesting to check.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    Probably it's the other way 'round - they probably resemble (genetically) the original Arab population but the Muslim Arab population has changed due to the introduction of sub-Saharan genes via the slave trade while they have remained the same.
    , @AP
    This reminds me of Chaldean Iraqi Christians, who consider themselves to be descendants of the original Babylonian inhabitants, distinct from the "filthy" (or other such words they use) Arab Muslims who invaded their homeland.
  19. Hard to imagine Slim himself did not play rough in his career in Mexico, one of the most corrupt countries on earth. Do we know his early history?

    • Replies: @Ed
    Think his dad was well off & made money in real estate after the 1910 Revolution.

    He used to have a site up that went into his background. It's probably down now. The Christians & Jews from the Levantine got pretty wealthy in Mexico and much of Latin America. They generally marry among themselves in Latin America & keep the business dealings among themselves. What's odd is in the USA they intermarry quite frequently well at least they used to.
    , @Olorin
    As he/his handlers construct/present it:

    http://www.carlosslim.com/biografia_ing.html
  20. A close friend of mine is the son of of prominent Sunni family, but he was a member of Bashir Gemayel’s Kataeb party, and was in the paramilitary group in college. Even though Kataeb was almost all Christian, he was a nationalist, as were many of his friends.

    Lebanon must be 80% Muslim these days due to explosive Muslim birthrates and Muslim immigration into a once more prosperous country. Much of this immigration was illegal.

    The big issue in the early ’70’s was the destabilizing influence of the Palestinian refugees. My friend said that when the government essentially allowed them to arm themselves in 1971, that was the beginning of the end.

    I was unaware the Christian clans were that cruel and ruthless among themselves. Thanks for the reporting, Steve. I imagine the fact that Christians are becoming way outnumbered might temper their inter-clan rivalries. Incidentally, there’s a fairly good bit of Lebanese Catholic and Orthodox theological commentary on the web, and you see a lot of handwringing about ‘sectarianism.’ I’m wondering if that’s really code for ‘inter-clan rivalry.’

    My friend would say that this is true. Clan is everything, and as people noted in Iraq, is what people fall back on when the state is failing.

    Lebanon was the historic Christian fortress and refuge in the Middle East.

    My friend told me about a meeting as the Civil War broke out that included a US State Dept attache. The rep told them that the US had decided that Lebanon would have to be a permanent place for the Palestinians that it had taken in so as not to destabilize Israel, and that Lebanon would have to accept that. The reply by several in the meeting was that the Maronites would rather see Lebanon leveled to the ground than to allow that to happen, Israel ally or not.

    For my buddy, the big thing was the ascent of Shia power. Most people didn’t really see it coming. A few did, but they were ignored. When Musa Al Sadr (of the well known Sadr family, which includes Moqtada and Baquir, who founded the Iraq Dawa Party ) founded Amel as the first Shiite civil rights group, few could have predicted that that it would morph within a decade into Hezbollah. Shiites were the poor hillbillies who lived on mountain slopes in the south and grew vegetables, and had no power. Now they’re the envy of the Middle East. Of course, nobody would have predicted Libya’s Quaddafi engineering Sadr’s disappearance in 1978.

    • Replies: @Clyde
    You mention Lebanon's Shiites in your last paragraph. Shiites had/have the highest birthrates in Lebanon. Sunni birthrates cannot compete. My crude analogy is that in the Middle East the Shiites are their Catholics and Sunni are their Protestants. You are more likely find a secular Sunni who has shed Islam than a Shiite. Shiites even have their flagellants (on the day commemorating the martyrdom of Husayn ibn Ali) like the Catholics, though they are hard to find these days in the Catholic world.
    , @Jack D

    The rep told them that the US had decided that Lebanon would have to be a permanent place for the Palestinians that it had taken in so as not to destabilize Israel,
     
    As opposed to what? The US telling Israel that all the Palestinian "refugees" (actually the children and grandchildren, etc. of the few thousand '48 refugees who were still alive, who had personally never set foot in "Palestine") could go "home" now? Do you think that this is within Washington's power, even if they wanted to?

    When a group of people has been living in your country for 60+ years and their children and grandchildren have been born and raised there, at some point you have to accept that they are not going back "home", ever. Even the nutsiest anti-immigrant type in the US realizes that you can't send someone "back" to Mexico who has never been there to begin with.
    , @anonymous

    My friend told me about a meeting as the Civil War broke out that included a US State Dept attache. The rep told them that the US had decided that Lebanon would have to be a permanent place for the Palestinians that it had taken in so as not to destabilize Israel, and that Lebanon would have to accept that.
     
    Sounds like the Americans at present ordering the Germans to accept the Syrian refugees so as not to destabilize their project of reshaping the middle east.
  21. On Tuesday morning, September 14, 1982, I pulled out of my parents’ driveway, in Northwest Indiana, to begin my long, solitary drive to Seattle, to begin law school. (Unbeknownst to me, that was the last time that I would see my father alive; he died, the following May, the week before my 1L final exams, less than six months after he had taken early retirement from the steel mill.) As I pulled out of the driveway of my former home, the Chicago rock station that I was tuned into had its brief news update in progress: Princess Grace had succumbed to her injuries, following her and her daughter’s car accident, that previous Sunday, on a winding road in Monaco, which she had first encountered, alongside Cary Grant, in the filming of “To Catch a Thief” (1955), back in the summer of 1954. Meanwhile, the assassination in Lebanon also made that news brief, and caught my attention. As I approached the end of the street, the station debuted a new single from Joe Jackson, “Into the Night”. I still think that it is a classic pop record, and I always remember, whenever I hear it, exactly where and how I was, at age 25, when I first heard it played, on the car radio, at the beginning of a long, misbegotten journey, following a news broadcast detailing the deaths of two world figures of very different backgrounds and characters.

    • Replies: @D. K.
    ERRATUM: The title of Joe Jackson's 1982 45 is actually "Steppin' Out"; "Into the Night" is the title of a 1985 movie, I believe-- as well as the most memorable line (for me, at any rate) from that aforementioned Joe Jackson single. "Mea culpa!"
  22. @D. K.
    On Tuesday morning, September 14, 1982, I pulled out of my parents' driveway, in Northwest Indiana, to begin my long, solitary drive to Seattle, to begin law school. (Unbeknownst to me, that was the last time that I would see my father alive; he died, the following May, the week before my 1L final exams, less than six months after he had taken early retirement from the steel mill.) As I pulled out of the driveway of my former home, the Chicago rock station that I was tuned into had its brief news update in progress: Princess Grace had succumbed to her injuries, following her and her daughter's car accident, that previous Sunday, on a winding road in Monaco, which she had first encountered, alongside Cary Grant, in the filming of "To Catch a Thief" (1955), back in the summer of 1954. Meanwhile, the assassination in Lebanon also made that news brief, and caught my attention. As I approached the end of the street, the station debuted a new single from Joe Jackson, "Into the Night". I still think that it is a classic pop record, and I always remember, whenever I hear it, exactly where and how I was, at age 25, when I first heard it played, on the car radio, at the beginning of a long, misbegotten journey, following a news broadcast detailing the deaths of two world figures of very different backgrounds and characters.

    ERRATUM: The title of Joe Jackson’s 1982 45 is actually “Steppin’ Out”; “Into the Night” is the title of a 1985 movie, I believe– as well as the most memorable line (for me, at any rate) from that aforementioned Joe Jackson single. “Mea culpa!”

  23. Great catch about the Slim/Gemayel family connection!

  24. @Jack D
    I just saw this headline:

    "15 Sudanese Migrants Killed at Egypt-Israel Border"

    At first I thought of how that would be received here - those hypocritical Joos, defending their own border but leaving America's open.

    But then I read further and it turns out that the Sudanese had been killed by the Egyptian border police. Maybe they were caught in a crossfire between their Bedouin smugglers and the cops or maybe the cops just mowed them down - it's just brown people shooting each other, nothing to see here folks, move along.

    Thank God it was the Egyptians that did this - you can imagine the international outcry if the Israelis had done it. But since this is just brown people killing each other, no war crime was committed. We all know that only white people are capable of racism.

    you can imagine the international outcry if the Israelis had done it.

    You are joking, right?

    • Replies: @Gabriel M
    Yes, because unlike you he doesn't think the word "international" means "America" and he doesn't live in a willful fantasy land where the European and global media isn't anti-Israel.

    Anyway, here's some more news that will screw up your New York Jew obsessed world view. Enjoy ignoring it.
    http://www.algemeiner.com/2015/11/16/hungary-defies-eu-refuses-to-label-judea-samaria-products/
  25. I remember watching ‘Waltz with Bashir’, an interesting Israeli animated movie taking place in that era.

    http://m.imdb.com/title/tt1185616/

  26. Texas hotshot lawyer Joe Jamail is reportedly a distant cousin of President Amin Gemayel. Nobody messes with Joe either.

  27. Man, Geraldo Rivera is an actual journalist, or was.

    I only know the name from the fun being poked at him in sitcoms for his long hair and dreaminess, but the man had chops.

    And the whole program in that video was informative and well made, compared to the dreck you see today. Oh, to be living the fall of the Galactic (Western) Empire, Asimov knew how bittersweet it would be.

    PS How come we’re passed peak fascist chic and don’t have the amazing names for political organizations they used to? Phalangist is really cool for branding. It’s all dry acronyms these days, another sign the USSR has won, even in death.

    • Replies: @Jefferson
    "Man, Geraldo Rivera is an actual journalist, or was.

    I only know the name from the fun being poked at him in sitcoms for his long hair and dreaminess, but the man had chops.

    And the whole program in that video was informative and well made, compared to the dreck you see today. Oh, to be living the fall of the Galactic (Western) Empire, Asimov knew how bittersweet it would be.

    PS How come we’re passed peak fascist chic and don’t have the amazing names for political organizations they used to? Phalangist is really cool for branding. It’s all dry acronyms these days, another sign the USSR has won, even in death."

    Jim Carey did a funny impersonation of Geraldo Rivera on In Living Color.
  28. @Vendetta
    Very Mafia-like, and that's far from the first time I've heard that comparison. That's also why Hezbollah are and will remain the strongest military force in Lebanon. The Christian and Sunni militias were hired killers and Mafia goons, Hezbollah's are actual soldiers.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iEHAltP4PEM

    Check out the footage, note the discipline, quality of equipment, and the absence of moronic screams of "Allahu akbar!"

    That’s amazing footage. You have to marvel at how the crucible of the Israeli invasion and occupation of south Lebanon led to the formerly docile Lebanese Shia producing the toughest, most disciplined light infantry force in the Middle East. Sheikh Nasrallah is some kind of organizational genius for sure.

    • Agree: Vendetta
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    The history of war does show numerous examples of people rising to the occasion and getting themselves organized, like the Prussians after all of Germany got kicked around in 1618-1648. The lowly Lebanese Shi'ites got themselves better organized and surprised Israel with their defensive capability in 2006.
    , @Vendetta
    They've solved the old "Why Arabs Lose Wars" dilemma ( http://www.meforum.org/441/why-arabs-lose-wars ), that certainly speaks to Nasrallah's ability, as well as that of the Iranians who trained Hezbollah's soldiers in the first place.

    Granted, they had prime material to work with. Out of all the Arabs, I'd say only the Yemenis would have the Lebanese Shia beat in terms of raw toughness and fighting spirit, but they'd be far, far harder to organize into a disciplined force.

    The fact that the Iranian sponsorship of Hezbollah is not being studied right now as a model of spectacularly successful foreign intervention speaks volumes to the intellectual dysfunction and ideological blindness of America as an empire. With not even a hundredth of the resources America has poured down the toilet in Afghanistan and Iraq, the Iranians have achieved an enduring success in Lebanon over the last three decades, giving themselves an invaluable asset in the Levant and strategic detrerrent against Israel.

    I don't really see the US being able to replicate this feat in the Middle East, we've burned too many bridges there over the last fifty years. The Kurds might make a candidate, but we'd lose Turkey in the process. Unfortunately, they're still needed as a bulwark, not against Soviet expansion anymore but against the demographic tidal wave threatening Europe.

    Where I could see us applying this would be with Rwanda under its own organizational genius, Paul Kagame. Rwanda's army is very skilled and disciplined by African standards (look up the details of the Kitona Operation for a showcase of their audacity and skill), and Kagame is very keen on developing his country and has made already made great steps forward in that regard.

    Consider how the Soviets used the Cubans as their Foreign Legion in Africa. The Rwandans and a few other client states, if we manage to find another leader or two of Kagame's caliber, could be our boots on the ground. In exchange for our increased sponsorship of Rwanda's economic development, we could have the Rwandans on call if there's ever a crisis we need to respond to in Africa.

    Suppose the Nigerian Army suddenly cracks against Boko Haram? Airlift a regiment of Rwandans there to do what Hezbollah did for Syria: stabilize the front, train the government forces, lead assaults against a few strategic points as shock troops. And if there's ever a need to intervene in the Congo, some genocide the world won't tolerate or some conflict over the mineral resources, we couldn't have a better partner than the Rwandans.

    It's cheap, it doesn't put our troops on the ground in messy interventions that will only get us attacked as being imperialists, and life gets better for twelve million Rwandans as a side benefit. The only flaw I see being likely is that our government just does not have a sense of restraint. They'd probably try throwing the Rwandans into twelve different conflicts over a five year period and wear them out to the point of mutiny.

    Patience. Learn from the Persians. Hone your weapons carefully and don't squander them. If you're deploying them by choice and not by necessity, only choose to when that deployment will strengthen them, not when it will weaken them.

    Hezbollah's deployment to Syria has strengthened them, not weakened them, both on a tactical and moral level. Our pundits say the opposite, blathering on about their attrition rate (not high by any means) and how they've lost credit with the Sunnis (which has never been important to their success as an organization).

    On the contrary, they're accruing a ton of combat experience and they're establishing themselves as an anti-Jihadi force, not just an anti-Zionist force, which is winning them credibility with far more important people than Sunni Arabs on the street - Putin, for example, who's just gone and said they're not a terrorist organization like ISIS or al-Qaeda.
    , @matt
    His title is Sayyed Nasrallah, not Sheikh Nasrallah. "Sayyed" means a descendant of the Prophet, which is big deal for the Shia.
  29. @Clyde
    Its a plus for her being from this distinguished Christian clan plus it shows how connected Carlos Slim was over in Lebanon or wherever the marriage actually took place. Lebanon was the historic Christian fortress and refuge in the Middle East. It was the Israel for Christians, a place to be secure against Jihadist Islam aggression and Middle East Christians sure could use a place like this these days. Please nail down the best accurate statistics but my memory is Lebanon was 80% Christian in 1900.
    BTW Similar to Israel which is about 20% Arab (just about all Muslims) within its actual borders. Meaning no West Bank included.

    Lebanon must be 80% Muslim these days due to explosive Muslim birthrates and Muslim immigration into a once more prosperous country. Much of this immigration was illegal.

    “Please nail down the best accurate statistics but my memory is Lebanon was 80% Christian in 1900.
    BTW Similar to Israel which is about 20% Arab (just about all Muslims) within its actual borders. Meaning no West Bank included.”

    Interesting how you compare the ethnic/religious makeup of Lebanon in 1900 to the ethnic/religious makeup of Israel today. What you forgot to state was that the makeup of Palestine in 1900 was 94% Arab (both Muslim and Christian): “According to Ottoman statistics studied by Justin McCarthy,[24] the population of Palestine in the early 19th century was 350,000, in 1860 it was 411,000 and in 1900 about 600,000 of which 94% were Arabs. In 1914 Palestine had a population of 657,000 Muslim Arabs, 81,000 Christian Arabs, and 59,000 Jews.[25]” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographic_history_of_Palestine
    “By 1948, the population had risen to 1,900,000, of whom 68% were Arabs, and 32% were Jews (UNSCOP report, including Bedouin.)” The difference is that the Arabs had long lived in Palestine, and the Jews had long fled Palestine for other parts of the world. (BTW that process started centuries before the Romans entered the scene, since the city of Alexandria, founded by Alexander the Great in 331 B.C. had a substantial Jewish population from the beginning, hence the need for a Greek translation of the Torah, the Septuagint, in the third century B.C.)

  30. @brendan
    http://www.overcomingbias.com/2015/11/statestupidity.html#disqus_thread

    Robin Hanson is puzzled why institutions don't discriminate sufficiently against those with low IQ (or in favor of those w/ high) - i.e. your rent depends on your IQ - so that everyone internalizes all their spillover effects.

    Seriously.

    But to his credit Hive Mind by Jones has cut his conviction that open borders is awesome.

    Wouldn’t that be racist?

  31. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Ok, so the National Enquirer is reporting that the alleged Hollywood “megastar”, “superstar”, “A-Lister”, etc., is just Charlie Sheen. Bummer. I kind of feel bad for Martin and Emilio though, even though Martin is sort of an insufferable liberal, because they don’t seem like dirtballs and they’ll be tainted by this.

    http://www.nationalenquirer.com/Charlie-Sheen-AIDS-Crisis-HIV-National-Enquirer

  32. OT:

    ***

    Charlie Sheen will reveal to the world that he’s HIV positive.

    Sources connected to NBC’s “Today” tell TMZ … Sheen will sit down with Matt Lauer on Tuesday morning to make the announcement.

    NBC touted the interview in a press release as Sheen making a “revealing personal announcement.”

    A tabloid report came out Monday claiming Sheen’s been keeping the diagnosis secret for years. You’ve gotta imagine he’ll address that report tomorrow morning on “Today.”

    ***

    “Live by the sword….” Well, it certainly is no longer seen as a death sentence, as it once was, like back when ‘Magic’ Johnson shocked the world, twenty-four years ago, as of last week.

    • Replies: @Anonymous

    “Live by the sword….” Well, it certainly is no longer seen as a death sentence, as it once was, like back when ‘Magic’ Johnson shocked the world, twenty-four years ago, as of last week.
     
    "AIDS" originally stood for "anally injected death sentence", but they've retconned the more medical sounding "autoimmune disease syndrome".
  33. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Clyde
    Its a plus for her being from this distinguished Christian clan plus it shows how connected Carlos Slim was over in Lebanon or wherever the marriage actually took place. Lebanon was the historic Christian fortress and refuge in the Middle East. It was the Israel for Christians, a place to be secure against Jihadist Islam aggression and Middle East Christians sure could use a place like this these days. Please nail down the best accurate statistics but my memory is Lebanon was 80% Christian in 1900.
    BTW Similar to Israel which is about 20% Arab (just about all Muslims) within its actual borders. Meaning no West Bank included.

    Lebanon must be 80% Muslim these days due to explosive Muslim birthrates and Muslim immigration into a once more prosperous country. Much of this immigration was illegal.

    The last census in Lebanon was in 1932, which had Christians at about 53% and included both Maronites and Orthodox, who are distinct sects that don’t always get along and have their own quotas, like the Sunni and Shia. The 1932 census was the basis for its political quota system in which the President has to be a Maronite Christian, the Prime Minister a Sunni Muslim, the Speaker of the Parliament a Shia Muslim, the Deputy Prime Minister and the Deputy Speaker of Parliament Eastern Orthodox.

    The demographic change has primarily been due to large Christian emigration , rather than Muslim immigration or fertility rates.

  34. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @D. K.
    OT:

    ***

    Charlie Sheen will reveal to the world that he's HIV positive.

    Sources connected to NBC's "Today" tell TMZ ... Sheen will sit down with Matt Lauer on Tuesday morning to make the announcement.

    NBC touted the interview in a press release as Sheen making a "revealing personal announcement."

    A tabloid report came out Monday claiming Sheen's been keeping the diagnosis secret for years. You've gotta imagine he'll address that report tomorrow morning on "Today."

    ***

    "Live by the sword...." Well, it certainly is no longer seen as a death sentence, as it once was, like back when 'Magic' Johnson shocked the world, twenty-four years ago, as of last week.

    “Live by the sword….” Well, it certainly is no longer seen as a death sentence, as it once was, like back when ‘Magic’ Johnson shocked the world, twenty-four years ago, as of last week.

    “AIDS” originally stood for “anally injected death sentence”, but they’ve retconned the more medical sounding “autoimmune disease syndrome”.

  35. Yet another angle on Basir Gemayel (and Geraldo) can be found in this book, which I read around when the book came out, because I had remembered the interviews ABC did with him:

    http://www.amazon.com/The-Covenant-Love-Death-Beirut/dp/051757215X

    Some articles about the book from when it came out:

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/lifestyle/1989/05/16/the-passions-of-barbara-newman/39eaac3c-4e2d-4c60-844e-ab1dcf0ba2d6/

    http://articles.philly.com/1989-05-23/news/26111561_1_east-beirut-cia-officials-love-and-death

  36. Any word on Slim’s children marriages? Did they marry Arab Mexicans as well? I feel like I read about a couple of them some years back and the surnames of the daughters weren’t Hispanic.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    son Patricio -- married Ma. de Jesus Aramburu

    son Marco -- married Ximena Serrano

    son Carlos -- married María Elena Torruco Garza

    Daughter Soumaya -- married an architect named Romer0, recently got commission to design new Mexico City airport

    daughter Vanessa -- Married to Daniel Hajj -- sounds Arabic

    daughter Johanna -- Married to Alberto Ayub -- Arabic?

    So, I'm guessing two of his three daughters married within the Lebanese-Mexican community. Person some of the other married Arabs with Mexicanized names (e.g., Carlom Slim).
  37. with Israeli approval .
    Don’t you mean under Israeli direction?

  38. @Luke Lea
    Hard to imagine Slim himself did not play rough in his career in Mexico, one of the most corrupt countries on earth. Do we know his early history?

    Think his dad was well off & made money in real estate after the 1910 Revolution.

    He used to have a site up that went into his background. It’s probably down now. The Christians & Jews from the Levantine got pretty wealthy in Mexico and much of Latin America. They generally marry among themselves in Latin America & keep the business dealings among themselves. What’s odd is in the USA they intermarry quite frequently well at least they used to.

    • Replies: @Jefferson
    "Jews from the Levantine got pretty wealthy in Mexico and much of Latin America. They generally marry among themselves in Latin America"

    Generally marry among themselves does not apply to Brazilian Jews as 60 percent of them marry Goys.
    http://www.jweekly.com/article/full/16994/brazil-s-jews-face-60-intermarriage-rate/
    , @Cyrus
    Arab Christians are not much of an endogamous community in Latin America, most probably do intermarry. European Jews intermarry at the same rates in Latin America as they do in the USA, however the Levantine Jews almost never intermarry. There is a large Syrian-Lebanese Jewish community who not only don't marry non-Jews they also don't marry Ashkenazi Jews, and it's the same in New York among their large community there as it is in Brazil and Mexico.
  39. At first I thought of how that would be received here – those hypocritical Joos, defending their own border but leaving America’s open.

    But then I read further and it turns out that the Sudanese had been killed by the Egyptian border police. Maybe they were caught in a crossfire between their Bedouin smugglers and the cops or maybe the cops just mowed them down – it’s just brown people shooting each other, nothing to see here folks, move along.

    Thank God it was the Egyptians that did this – you can imagine the international outcry if the Israelis had done it. But since this is just brown people killing each other, no war crime was committed. We all know that only white people are capable of racism.

    You get it wrong, like always. The diaspora Jews (you know, the ones the American elite is thick with) would raise a huge stink about American or European guards doing this. There’d be no end to the wailing. Heads would roll. But if their bosom buddies the Israelis did it, well, that’d be a different story.

    There, you have your “perfidious Jooz” narrative.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    But that narrative is a hypothetical event you just made up right here. By the same token I could whine, "IF SOME YESHIVA KIDS RUSHED A COP AND BURNED DOWN THE 7-Eleven... Just imagine the ZOG censorship, people!!" But that didn't happen either.
  40. Steve,

    Molenbeek, a large neighborhood in Brussels known as “Jihadi Capital” has been in the news a lot over the last few days in reference to its inhabitants’ connections with ISIS. I just took a peek around the neighborhood via Google Street View. I was expecting to see dilapidated, graffiti-covered buildings. In fact, most of the neighborhood seemed quite pleasant (much nicer than uber-gentrified, SWPL neighborhoods like Williamsburg, Brooklyn). What else do they want from the West??

  41. “Announcement,” lol. Everyone has known for weeks that it’s Sheen. I even G**gled “everybody knows it’s Charlie Sheen” a couple times.

  42. @Vendetta
    Very Mafia-like, and that's far from the first time I've heard that comparison. That's also why Hezbollah are and will remain the strongest military force in Lebanon. The Christian and Sunni militias were hired killers and Mafia goons, Hezbollah's are actual soldiers.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iEHAltP4PEM

    Check out the footage, note the discipline, quality of equipment, and the absence of moronic screams of "Allahu akbar!"

    Christians and Sunnis were disarmed by Syrians. Hezbollah strongly depends on Iranian backing.

  43. @yaqub the mad scientist
    A close friend of mine is the son of of prominent Sunni family, but he was a member of Bashir Gemayel's Kataeb party, and was in the paramilitary group in college. Even though Kataeb was almost all Christian, he was a nationalist, as were many of his friends.

    Lebanon must be 80% Muslim these days due to explosive Muslim birthrates and Muslim immigration into a once more prosperous country. Much of this immigration was illegal.

    The big issue in the early '70's was the destabilizing influence of the Palestinian refugees. My friend said that when the government essentially allowed them to arm themselves in 1971, that was the beginning of the end.

    I was unaware the Christian clans were that cruel and ruthless among themselves. Thanks for the reporting, Steve. I imagine the fact that Christians are becoming way outnumbered might temper their inter-clan rivalries. Incidentally, there’s a fairly good bit of Lebanese Catholic and Orthodox theological commentary on the web, and you see a lot of handwringing about ‘sectarianism.’ I’m wondering if that’s really code for ‘inter-clan rivalry.’


    My friend would say that this is true. Clan is everything, and as people noted in Iraq, is what people fall back on when the state is failing.

    Lebanon was the historic Christian fortress and refuge in the Middle East.

    My friend told me about a meeting as the Civil War broke out that included a US State Dept attache. The rep told them that the US had decided that Lebanon would have to be a permanent place for the Palestinians that it had taken in so as not to destabilize Israel, and that Lebanon would have to accept that. The reply by several in the meeting was that the Maronites would rather see Lebanon leveled to the ground than to allow that to happen, Israel ally or not.

    For my buddy, the big thing was the ascent of Shia power. Most people didn't really see it coming. A few did, but they were ignored. When Musa Al Sadr (of the well known Sadr family, which includes Moqtada and Baquir, who founded the Iraq Dawa Party ) founded Amel as the first Shiite civil rights group, few could have predicted that that it would morph within a decade into Hezbollah. Shiites were the poor hillbillies who lived on mountain slopes in the south and grew vegetables, and had no power. Now they're the envy of the Middle East. Of course, nobody would have predicted Libya's Quaddafi engineering Sadr's disappearance in 1978.

    You mention Lebanon’s Shiites in your last paragraph. Shiites had/have the highest birthrates in Lebanon. Sunni birthrates cannot compete. My crude analogy is that in the Middle East the Shiites are their Catholics and Sunni are their Protestants. You are more likely find a secular Sunni who has shed Islam than a Shiite. Shiites even have their flagellants (on the day commemorating the martyrdom of Husayn ibn Ali) like the Catholics, though they are hard to find these days in the Catholic world.

    • Replies: @Tony
    Not true among the Iranian shiites immigrants in America. A lot of them have become secular. Much more so than the sunnis. Also Iran's birthrate is below replacement.
  44. @AndrewR
    If you're going to posit a sarcastic strawman, it should at least be an accurate representation of what your target group would claim.

    It's easy to make fun of what <90 IQ SJWs might say, but I imagine many SJWs are at least vaguely aware that the "Sudanese migrants" probably were very ethnically distinct from the Egyptian police.

    “It’s easy to make fun of what <90 IQ SJWs might say, but I imagine many SJWs are at least vaguely aware that the "Sudanese migrants" probably were very ethnically distinct from the Egyptian police."

    But the Egyptian police still look significantly distinct in phenotype from Northern European WASPs who founded America, hence why Social Justice Warriors do not refer to Egyptian law enforcement discriminating against Sudanese immigrants as another example of White cops using police brutality against Black bodies. Social Justice Warriors clearly place Egyptians into the Nonwhite category and so do Right Wing White supremacist groups. That is something that both the far Left and the far Right agree on in that they both do not see Egyptians as a White ethnic group.

    Also using the one drop rule most Egyptians would not even be considered White, since Sub Saharan DNA is present in the Egyptian gene pool. Which is not surprising because Egypt shares a border with Sub Saharan Africa. There is no ocean that separates the two like there is between Europe and Sub Saharan Africa. Hence why Egyptians are not as pure unimxed Caucasoid as Europeans.

    You can't keep Sub Saharan DNA from invading your people's gene pool when you live next door to these people.

    • Replies: @AndrewR
    Very true. But Egyptians tend to be whiter than Sudanese and everyone hopefully is aware of the Arab slave trade. Living in metro Detroit where there are many Arabs and way too many blacks, one of the first words I learned was "abed" which is the Arabic word for "slave" and a very common way of referring to blacks.
  45. @Romanian
    Man, Geraldo Rivera is an actual journalist, or was.

    I only know the name from the fun being poked at him in sitcoms for his long hair and dreaminess, but the man had chops.

    And the whole program in that video was informative and well made, compared to the dreck you see today. Oh, to be living the fall of the Galactic (Western) Empire, Asimov knew how bittersweet it would be.

    PS How come we're passed peak fascist chic and don't have the amazing names for political organizations they used to? Phalangist is really cool for branding. It's all dry acronyms these days, another sign the USSR has won, even in death.

    “Man, Geraldo Rivera is an actual journalist, or was.

    I only know the name from the fun being poked at him in sitcoms for his long hair and dreaminess, but the man had chops.

    And the whole program in that video was informative and well made, compared to the dreck you see today. Oh, to be living the fall of the Galactic (Western) Empire, Asimov knew how bittersweet it would be.

    PS How come we’re passed peak fascist chic and don’t have the amazing names for political organizations they used to? Phalangist is really cool for branding. It’s all dry acronyms these days, another sign the USSR has won, even in death.”

    Jim Carey did a funny impersonation of Geraldo Rivera on In Living Color.

  46. @ic1000
    The War Nerd (Gary Brecher) has written some deeply cynical and very illuminating commentary on the Middle East. In his Aug. 30, 2013 column about the idealistic, naive, and incompetent Secretary of State of that time, he discussed the Worst, Worster, and Worstest options that the U.S. faced in Syria. In sketching out the position of the Alawites and the Assad clan, he recounted a charming anecdote about Lebanon's Gemayel family.

    Fair-use excerpt from Little Kerry and the Three Bad Options:


    ... [The Ehden Massacre of the Lebanese Civil War] started when the warlord of Ehden broke with Bashir Gemayel over whether to side with Israel or Syria...

    [It] wasn’t even sectarian. All parties involved were Maronite Christians, the dominant sect in Lebanon before the Civil War. Ehden was one of the hill villages they put on Lebanese tourist brochures, back when Lebanon was a big tourist destination... It was also the stronghold of a Maronite warlord named Tony Frangieh. The Frangiehs were big players in the complicated Maronite alliances back then. You don’t hear much about them now. That’s because of what happened on June 13, 1978.

    Tony Frangieh’s decision to side with Syria rather than Israel annoyed Gemayel, and led to firefights among the Maronite gangs. Gemayel finally decided to wipe out the problem. He attacked Frangieh’s fortified house with hundreds of militia, who overran the place killing two dozen guards. Then the fun began. They tied up Tony and his wife Vera, then dragged their toddler daughter, Jihane, in front of them and killed her while her parents watched. Then it was Vera’s turn. Finally they put Tony out of his misery.

    Frangieh was not a good guy. Gemayel was a bad guy, probably, but a bad guy in a bad neighborhood is just called fitting in. What happened to the Frangieh’s family has been happening in those hills for a long time...
     

    Funny…I was just at War Nerd this weekend…digging out his older stuff on Syria. (2013–ancient history here on the MemoryHoleNet.)

    In my view he needs in injection of 50,000 cc of HBD, stat.

    • Replies: @Romanian
    The problem is that his real life persona is very liberal. Not SJW levels, to the point where he disregards individual shortcomings, but enough bleeding heart Berkeley generation style that HBD would be a bitter pill to swallow. He hated Reagan with a burning passion and wrote a very powerful obituary for him and his "Cheshire snarl".
  47. @Ed
    Think his dad was well off & made money in real estate after the 1910 Revolution.

    He used to have a site up that went into his background. It's probably down now. The Christians & Jews from the Levantine got pretty wealthy in Mexico and much of Latin America. They generally marry among themselves in Latin America & keep the business dealings among themselves. What's odd is in the USA they intermarry quite frequently well at least they used to.

    “Jews from the Levantine got pretty wealthy in Mexico and much of Latin America. They generally marry among themselves in Latin America”

    Generally marry among themselves does not apply to Brazilian Jews as 60 percent of them marry Goys.
    http://www.jweekly.com/article/full/16994/brazil-s-jews-face-60-intermarriage-rate/

  48. @Luke Lea
    Hard to imagine Slim himself did not play rough in his career in Mexico, one of the most corrupt countries on earth. Do we know his early history?

    As he/his handlers construct/present it:

    http://www.carlosslim.com/biografia_ing.html

  49. @Ken Smith
    There is a new unofficial biography of Carlos Slim. Here is an article in The Daily Mail about this book:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3314438/Tycoons-telecoms-Trotsky-book-lifts-veil-Carlos-Slim.html

    Here is an article in Spanish about the book:

    http://aristeguinoticias.com/0411/lomasdestacado/diego-osorno-revela-la-biografia-politica-de-carlos-slim/

    No translation into English yet.

    It is inconsequential, but I have been curious about why the family name was shortened to “Slim” from “Salim”. The SL consonant combination is not easily pronounced by Spanish speakers. Here in Mexico, I hear news presenters pronounce the name s-LEEM, gliding over the missing first vowel.

    I would assume it was shortened to make it seem less obviously Arabic. Being a “Moor” was never a popular thing in any Spanish speaking country, even before all the recent unpleasantness.

  50. @iSteveFan

    you can imagine the international outcry if the Israelis had done it.
     
    You are joking, right?

    Yes, because unlike you he doesn’t think the word “international” means “America” and he doesn’t live in a willful fantasy land where the European and global media isn’t anti-Israel.

    Anyway, here’s some more news that will screw up your New York Jew obsessed world view. Enjoy ignoring it.
    http://www.algemeiner.com/2015/11/16/hungary-defies-eu-refuses-to-label-judea-samaria-products/

    • Replies: @iSteveFan
    And what exactly would have happened if the Israelis had killed those Sudanese migrants instead of the Egyptians? Would the world have demanded that Israel start taking in refugees? I doubt it. Did the world start demanding that Israel take in more migrants after that Israeli mob attacked the Eritrean migrant mistakenly shot by security personnel?

    Yet show a photo of a little dead boy in the Mediterranean and the whole word demands that Europe accept demographic changing levels of refugees. Even after the Paris attacks, much of the media suggests that Europe take even more refugees.

    And what if, God forbid, a bunch of Mexicans were shot by US Border Patrol? Or worse, a bunch of Americans at the border engaging in a mob attack on a migrant. We'd have had amnesty on steroids, no doubt.

    Yet this doesn't happen to Israel when they enforce their border and immigration laws. Thus, I figured the original poster was joking when he suggested Israel would get into trouble had they been the ones who killed those migrants in the Sinai.
  51. @yaqub the mad scientist
    A close friend of mine is the son of of prominent Sunni family, but he was a member of Bashir Gemayel's Kataeb party, and was in the paramilitary group in college. Even though Kataeb was almost all Christian, he was a nationalist, as were many of his friends.

    Lebanon must be 80% Muslim these days due to explosive Muslim birthrates and Muslim immigration into a once more prosperous country. Much of this immigration was illegal.

    The big issue in the early '70's was the destabilizing influence of the Palestinian refugees. My friend said that when the government essentially allowed them to arm themselves in 1971, that was the beginning of the end.

    I was unaware the Christian clans were that cruel and ruthless among themselves. Thanks for the reporting, Steve. I imagine the fact that Christians are becoming way outnumbered might temper their inter-clan rivalries. Incidentally, there’s a fairly good bit of Lebanese Catholic and Orthodox theological commentary on the web, and you see a lot of handwringing about ‘sectarianism.’ I’m wondering if that’s really code for ‘inter-clan rivalry.’


    My friend would say that this is true. Clan is everything, and as people noted in Iraq, is what people fall back on when the state is failing.

    Lebanon was the historic Christian fortress and refuge in the Middle East.

    My friend told me about a meeting as the Civil War broke out that included a US State Dept attache. The rep told them that the US had decided that Lebanon would have to be a permanent place for the Palestinians that it had taken in so as not to destabilize Israel, and that Lebanon would have to accept that. The reply by several in the meeting was that the Maronites would rather see Lebanon leveled to the ground than to allow that to happen, Israel ally or not.

    For my buddy, the big thing was the ascent of Shia power. Most people didn't really see it coming. A few did, but they were ignored. When Musa Al Sadr (of the well known Sadr family, which includes Moqtada and Baquir, who founded the Iraq Dawa Party ) founded Amel as the first Shiite civil rights group, few could have predicted that that it would morph within a decade into Hezbollah. Shiites were the poor hillbillies who lived on mountain slopes in the south and grew vegetables, and had no power. Now they're the envy of the Middle East. Of course, nobody would have predicted Libya's Quaddafi engineering Sadr's disappearance in 1978.

    The rep told them that the US had decided that Lebanon would have to be a permanent place for the Palestinians that it had taken in so as not to destabilize Israel,

    As opposed to what? The US telling Israel that all the Palestinian “refugees” (actually the children and grandchildren, etc. of the few thousand ’48 refugees who were still alive, who had personally never set foot in “Palestine”) could go “home” now? Do you think that this is within Washington’s power, even if they wanted to?

    When a group of people has been living in your country for 60+ years and their children and grandchildren have been born and raised there, at some point you have to accept that they are not going back “home”, ever. Even the nutsiest anti-immigrant type in the US realizes that you can’t send someone “back” to Mexico who has never been there to begin with.

    • Replies: @D. K.
    Yet, every Jewish baby born into the millennia-old Jewish diaspora has an inviolable "Right of Return" to the modern incarnation of Israel, right, Jack?
    , @Romanian
    Refugees from American racism and white privilege. What's not to like? Chavez, bless his heart, would have taken them all in just to thumb his nose at the yanks.
    , @yaqub the mad scientist
    How was it nutty for the issue of 1948 and 1967 refugees to be sent back in 1975? Sorry I didn't make a time line for you. That's hardly 60 years.

    Like it or not, there are ample examples of ethnic groups being killed off or shuffled around in that neck of the woods in the last century. A lot of Westerners have no idea how the period in WWI had massive transfers of people who had been in areas for centuries as modern nation-states formed. The collapse of the Ottoman empire alone featured several: Greeks and Turks shifting out of the newly formed states of Greece and Turkey and the Armenian and Chaldo/Assyrian genocides by the Turks, which left those peoples not only greatly reduced in number, but having to shift their surviving populations where it was safer for them. Masses of Bedouins were "encouraged" to settle in towns, and in some places, that coercion was pretty brutal. The holy Christian city of Antioch is in Turkish hands now, lost to Syria in 1922 agreements that were happening when the British helped draw the borders for much of the region. (Oh, yeah, if you've been watching, those "borders" are starting to evaporate these days, and it looks like Russian muscle is going to be necessary to keep them that way.) There's plenty of other examples outside of the region as well. Read up on the other ethnic shuffling in World War II, India/Pakistan, and plenty of other cases that were pretty current in 1975.

    In short, your claim that the people sitting in that room that day were "nutso" is simply wrong. They had ample examples all around them, however monstrous those examples may be, that renders your assertions to be pretty quaint and naive.

    , @athEIst
    But what about Family reunification. I know that's not how it usually works--get one member of the family into the US and then reunify the family here, finally getting Mama and Papa in to collect their SSI.
  52. @anonymous
    Many Lebanese Christians do not consider themselves Arabs like their neighbors but believe they are descendants of the Phoenicians. Their Arabization was superficial and consisted mainly of switching languages. Their DNA might be interesting to check.

    Probably it’s the other way ’round – they probably resemble (genetically) the original Arab population but the Muslim Arab population has changed due to the introduction of sub-Saharan genes via the slave trade while they have remained the same.

    • Replies: @anonymous

    Probably it’s the other way ’round – they probably resemble (genetically) the original Arab population but the Muslim Arab population has changed due to the introduction of sub-Saharan genes via the slave trade while they have remained the same.
     
    There is no "original Arab population" there. The Arabs came out of the Arabian peninsula and conquered the pre-existing populations living there and elsewhere and Arabized them, superimposing language, culture, having children with local females, etc. There were a variety of peoples living in what is now considered the Arab world just like Egyptians weren't always Arab either.
    , @Vendetta
    I'd be very surprised if the famously enterprising Arab Christians of the Levant never dabbled in the slave trade themselves.
    , @athEIst
    Not that many sS genes. The Arab slavers mostly wanted men and they castrated them.
  53. @AndrewR
    If you're going to posit a sarcastic strawman, it should at least be an accurate representation of what your target group would claim.

    It's easy to make fun of what <90 IQ SJWs might say, but I imagine many SJWs are at least vaguely aware that the "Sudanese migrants" probably were very ethnically distinct from the Egyptian police.

    Sudanese vary from mostly black to entirely black, while Egyptian vary from partly black to mostly black, so it’s on a continuum. In any case, I think the SJW rule is that non-whites of any shade do not possess moral agency and do bad things only because they are manipulated by or forced into bad circumstances by whitey. If for example, a black is killed by a Hispanic (not a “white Hispanic” like Zimmerman but just your garden variety Mexican) it is in no way noteworthy.

  54. Another recollection from my Lebanese friend that highlights the clannishness that exists among the Christian groups:

    When he was in college, he was something of a seeker, even though he was firmly into the sciences and moving up fast in his department. He befriended a retired army officer who had gone bohemian. The fellow lived in an unused garage, would wander out to the beach to catch fish to eat, read and write poetry, and otherwise slept on a mat on the floor of the garage. He’d occasionally hold court with the young people who wanted to hear him talk. My friend said that the man had lived about as full of a life as you could. He was an Assyrian from north in what had become part of modern Syria, and came to Lebanon as a young man to serve in the army. As probably most of you know, Assyrians are Aramaic-speaking Christians who are spread across what was once greater Syria (Syria, Lebanon, parts of Iraq). My friend said that if Lebanon had not absorbed the thousands of Assyrians who moved in the early 20th century (though there was already a large number there), the Christian-Muslim ratio would have already skewed to the latter, as emigration was already a big factor.

    What happened was that some ultra-nationalists (with probably some clan-sentiments) wound up killing the man as a dangerous Syrian infiltrator. It’s absurd, of course, but it shows how toxic it got in Lebanon in the 1970’s.

  55. @Jack D

    The rep told them that the US had decided that Lebanon would have to be a permanent place for the Palestinians that it had taken in so as not to destabilize Israel,
     
    As opposed to what? The US telling Israel that all the Palestinian "refugees" (actually the children and grandchildren, etc. of the few thousand '48 refugees who were still alive, who had personally never set foot in "Palestine") could go "home" now? Do you think that this is within Washington's power, even if they wanted to?

    When a group of people has been living in your country for 60+ years and their children and grandchildren have been born and raised there, at some point you have to accept that they are not going back "home", ever. Even the nutsiest anti-immigrant type in the US realizes that you can't send someone "back" to Mexico who has never been there to begin with.

    Yet, every Jewish baby born into the millennia-old Jewish diaspora has an inviolable “Right of Return” to the modern incarnation of Israel, right, Jack?

    • Replies: @Jack D
    I think that's admirable. Too bad it was too late to save millions of the Jews of Europe. Too bad that the Jews needed to learn the hard way that they needed such a refuge and couldn't depend on the great European "civilization" not to murder them. I only wish that Saudi Arabia, Qatar, etc. would take in their own Syrian brothers, who are not even in danger because of outsiders but because of their own Arab brothers.
  56. @Olorin
    Funny...I was just at War Nerd this weekend...digging out his older stuff on Syria. (2013--ancient history here on the MemoryHoleNet.)

    In my view he needs in injection of 50,000 cc of HBD, stat.

    The problem is that his real life persona is very liberal. Not SJW levels, to the point where he disregards individual shortcomings, but enough bleeding heart Berkeley generation style that HBD would be a bitter pill to swallow. He hated Reagan with a burning passion and wrote a very powerful obituary for him and his “Cheshire snarl”.

    • Replies: @Kamran
    You know you might find this hard to believe, but not everybody is exactly like you, darling snowflake.
  57. @Jack D

    The rep told them that the US had decided that Lebanon would have to be a permanent place for the Palestinians that it had taken in so as not to destabilize Israel,
     
    As opposed to what? The US telling Israel that all the Palestinian "refugees" (actually the children and grandchildren, etc. of the few thousand '48 refugees who were still alive, who had personally never set foot in "Palestine") could go "home" now? Do you think that this is within Washington's power, even if they wanted to?

    When a group of people has been living in your country for 60+ years and their children and grandchildren have been born and raised there, at some point you have to accept that they are not going back "home", ever. Even the nutsiest anti-immigrant type in the US realizes that you can't send someone "back" to Mexico who has never been there to begin with.

    Refugees from American racism and white privilege. What’s not to like? Chavez, bless his heart, would have taken them all in just to thumb his nose at the yanks.

  58. @Earl Lemongrab
    That's amazing footage. You have to marvel at how the crucible of the Israeli invasion and occupation of south Lebanon led to the formerly docile Lebanese Shia producing the toughest, most disciplined light infantry force in the Middle East. Sheikh Nasrallah is some kind of organizational genius for sure.

    The history of war does show numerous examples of people rising to the occasion and getting themselves organized, like the Prussians after all of Germany got kicked around in 1618-1648. The lowly Lebanese Shi’ites got themselves better organized and surprised Israel with their defensive capability in 2006.

    • Replies: @Romanian
    Mr. Sailer, you should do a post on Lebanon as a victim of diversity and a harbinger for Western problems.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Lebanon

    Check out how the Christian population of the country has fluctuated, from 85% in 1900 to a low of 25% in 1985 and 40% today, only after the civil war. It's not like they were converting. This is population displacement and being overwhelmed by fertility rates and immigrants (including the Palestinian refugees).
  59. @Jack D

    The rep told them that the US had decided that Lebanon would have to be a permanent place for the Palestinians that it had taken in so as not to destabilize Israel,
     
    As opposed to what? The US telling Israel that all the Palestinian "refugees" (actually the children and grandchildren, etc. of the few thousand '48 refugees who were still alive, who had personally never set foot in "Palestine") could go "home" now? Do you think that this is within Washington's power, even if they wanted to?

    When a group of people has been living in your country for 60+ years and their children and grandchildren have been born and raised there, at some point you have to accept that they are not going back "home", ever. Even the nutsiest anti-immigrant type in the US realizes that you can't send someone "back" to Mexico who has never been there to begin with.

    How was it nutty for the issue of 1948 and 1967 refugees to be sent back in 1975? Sorry I didn’t make a time line for you. That’s hardly 60 years.

    Like it or not, there are ample examples of ethnic groups being killed off or shuffled around in that neck of the woods in the last century. A lot of Westerners have no idea how the period in WWI had massive transfers of people who had been in areas for centuries as modern nation-states formed. The collapse of the Ottoman empire alone featured several: Greeks and Turks shifting out of the newly formed states of Greece and Turkey and the Armenian and Chaldo/Assyrian genocides by the Turks, which left those peoples not only greatly reduced in number, but having to shift their surviving populations where it was safer for them. Masses of Bedouins were “encouraged” to settle in towns, and in some places, that coercion was pretty brutal. The holy Christian city of Antioch is in Turkish hands now, lost to Syria in 1922 agreements that were happening when the British helped draw the borders for much of the region. (Oh, yeah, if you’ve been watching, those “borders” are starting to evaporate these days, and it looks like Russian muscle is going to be necessary to keep them that way.) There’s plenty of other examples outside of the region as well. Read up on the other ethnic shuffling in World War II, India/Pakistan, and plenty of other cases that were pretty current in 1975.

    In short, your claim that the people sitting in that room that day were “nutso” is simply wrong. They had ample examples all around them, however monstrous those examples may be, that renders your assertions to be pretty quaint and naive.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    I'm very well aware of "exchange of population" - you also left out the millions of Germans displaced from Eastern Europe after WWII. The difference between all of those shifts and the Palestinian situation is that the "Palestinians" are the only ones who anyone talks about sending "home". There is ZERO talk about reversing ANY of the other exchanges of population except this one.
  60. Wikipedia’s Carlos Slim page lists his wife as “Soumaya Domit”. Which is interesting as that is not even her married name. Her married name on the net might be Soumaya Domit de Slim or Soumaya Domit Slim Helu. Soumaya Gemayel Domit is also floating around.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    In American culture, her maiden name would be “Soumaya Domit” -- her Christian name plus her father's surname.

    In Mexican culture, where the tycoon is known as Carlos Slim Helu, her maiden name would be Soumaya Domit Gemayel, her Christian name plus her father's surname and then her mother's surname.

  61. @Ed
    Any word on Slim's children marriages? Did they marry Arab Mexicans as well? I feel like I read about a couple of them some years back and the surnames of the daughters weren't Hispanic.

    son Patricio — married Ma. de Jesus Aramburu

    son Marco — married Ximena Serrano

    son Carlos — married María Elena Torruco Garza

    Daughter Soumaya — married an architect named Romer0, recently got commission to design new Mexico City airport

    daughter Vanessa — Married to Daniel Hajj — sounds Arabic

    daughter Johanna — Married to Alberto Ayub — Arabic?

    So, I’m guessing two of his three daughters married within the Lebanese-Mexican community. Person some of the other married Arabs with Mexicanized names (e.g., Carlom Slim).

    • Agree: Ed
    • Replies: @Lot
    son Patricio — married Ma. de Jesus Aramburu

    Maria de Jesus is the type of ultra-Catholic name you'd find most often among the reactionary upper class that pines for Franco, or a family that aspires to it. Aramburu is also not a standard Spanish name, likely it is of Galacian or Basque origin.

    son Marco — married Ximena Serrano

    Ximena is either Catalan or an affected old spelling. Likely either from Spain or upper class Latin American.

    son Carlos — married María Elena Torruco Garza

    Standard Spanish first and last names.

    daughter Johanna / daughter Vanessa

    Neither of these are Spanish names or spellings, but it has long been pretty common for Mexicans to give their kids non-Spanish first names.

  62. @george
    Wikipedia's Carlos Slim page lists his wife as "Soumaya Domit". Which is interesting as that is not even her married name. Her married name on the net might be Soumaya Domit de Slim or Soumaya Domit Slim Helu. Soumaya Gemayel Domit is also floating around.

    In American culture, her maiden name would be “Soumaya Domit” — her Christian name plus her father’s surname.

    In Mexican culture, where the tycoon is known as Carlos Slim Helu, her maiden name would be Soumaya Domit Gemayel, her Christian name plus her father’s surname and then her mother’s surname.

    • Replies: @george
    The Spanish WP page is the same: "Su esposa, Soumaya Domit, falleció el 7 de marzo de 1999.9"

    https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlos_Slim
  63. anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Jack D
    Probably it's the other way 'round - they probably resemble (genetically) the original Arab population but the Muslim Arab population has changed due to the introduction of sub-Saharan genes via the slave trade while they have remained the same.

    Probably it’s the other way ’round – they probably resemble (genetically) the original Arab population but the Muslim Arab population has changed due to the introduction of sub-Saharan genes via the slave trade while they have remained the same.

    There is no “original Arab population” there. The Arabs came out of the Arabian peninsula and conquered the pre-existing populations living there and elsewhere and Arabized them, superimposing language, culture, having children with local females, etc. There were a variety of peoples living in what is now considered the Arab world just like Egyptians weren’t always Arab either.

  64. @yaqub the mad scientist
    How was it nutty for the issue of 1948 and 1967 refugees to be sent back in 1975? Sorry I didn't make a time line for you. That's hardly 60 years.

    Like it or not, there are ample examples of ethnic groups being killed off or shuffled around in that neck of the woods in the last century. A lot of Westerners have no idea how the period in WWI had massive transfers of people who had been in areas for centuries as modern nation-states formed. The collapse of the Ottoman empire alone featured several: Greeks and Turks shifting out of the newly formed states of Greece and Turkey and the Armenian and Chaldo/Assyrian genocides by the Turks, which left those peoples not only greatly reduced in number, but having to shift their surviving populations where it was safer for them. Masses of Bedouins were "encouraged" to settle in towns, and in some places, that coercion was pretty brutal. The holy Christian city of Antioch is in Turkish hands now, lost to Syria in 1922 agreements that were happening when the British helped draw the borders for much of the region. (Oh, yeah, if you've been watching, those "borders" are starting to evaporate these days, and it looks like Russian muscle is going to be necessary to keep them that way.) There's plenty of other examples outside of the region as well. Read up on the other ethnic shuffling in World War II, India/Pakistan, and plenty of other cases that were pretty current in 1975.

    In short, your claim that the people sitting in that room that day were "nutso" is simply wrong. They had ample examples all around them, however monstrous those examples may be, that renders your assertions to be pretty quaint and naive.

    I’m very well aware of “exchange of population” – you also left out the millions of Germans displaced from Eastern Europe after WWII. The difference between all of those shifts and the Palestinian situation is that the “Palestinians” are the only ones who anyone talks about sending “home”. There is ZERO talk about reversing ANY of the other exchanges of population except this one.

    • Replies: @yaqub the mad scientist
    you also left out the millions of Germans displaced from Eastern Europe after WWII.

    No I didn't. That would be included in the line "Read up on the other ethnic shuffling in World War II". Try reading posts a little more closely before commenting.


    "The difference between all of those shifts and the Palestinian situation is that the “Palestinians” are the only ones who anyone talks about sending “home”. There is ZERO talk about reversing ANY of the other exchanges of population except this one."

    That may be true now, but it's irrelevant to what was being discussed 40 years ago between some men in Beruit. Once again, a timeline would help. Also, regional context. The frontiers of what constitutes "nuttiness" in the Byzantine/Ottoman world are pretty broader than what you or I are used to. See some of Steve's posts for further reference.

  65. @Ken Smith
    There is a new unofficial biography of Carlos Slim. Here is an article in The Daily Mail about this book:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3314438/Tycoons-telecoms-Trotsky-book-lifts-veil-Carlos-Slim.html

    Here is an article in Spanish about the book:

    http://aristeguinoticias.com/0411/lomasdestacado/diego-osorno-revela-la-biografia-politica-de-carlos-slim/

    No translation into English yet.

    It is inconsequential, but I have been curious about why the family name was shortened to “Slim” from “Salim”. The SL consonant combination is not easily pronounced by Spanish speakers. Here in Mexico, I hear news presenters pronounce the name s-LEEM, gliding over the missing first vowel.

    The SL consonant combination is not easily pronounced by Spanish speakers.

    Yes, Mexicans would pronounce “Slim” as “Ess-Lim.” Even after years of English it can be very hard for them to say words that begin with SL, ST, SN, without adding a phantom “es” to the beginning.

    But they could say “Salim” just fine. He likely made the change so people did not assume he was Muslim.

  66. @Jack D
    I'm very well aware of "exchange of population" - you also left out the millions of Germans displaced from Eastern Europe after WWII. The difference between all of those shifts and the Palestinian situation is that the "Palestinians" are the only ones who anyone talks about sending "home". There is ZERO talk about reversing ANY of the other exchanges of population except this one.

    you also left out the millions of Germans displaced from Eastern Europe after WWII.

    No I didn’t. That would be included in the line “Read up on the other ethnic shuffling in World War II”. Try reading posts a little more closely before commenting.

    “The difference between all of those shifts and the Palestinian situation is that the “Palestinians” are the only ones who anyone talks about sending “home”. There is ZERO talk about reversing ANY of the other exchanges of population except this one.”

    That may be true now, but it’s irrelevant to what was being discussed 40 years ago between some men in Beruit. Once again, a timeline would help. Also, regional context. The frontiers of what constitutes “nuttiness” in the Byzantine/Ottoman world are pretty broader than what you or I are used to. See some of Steve’s posts for further reference.

    • Replies: @SPMoore8
    Population transfers are murderous. Even when you try to keep them orderly (not sure if that's ever been tried.) The reason has to do with the breakdown of order, ownership, and the rule of law. It's just chaos.

    The Fourth Geneva Convention (1949) is relevant here. One can say that it was too late for the many tens of millions of Europeans (mostly Central and Eastern Europeans) who were deported, evicted, transferred, put to slave labor, etc. but it indicates a moral position that such collective population transfers are no longer morally admissible. At minimum, that creates a bar that has to be overcome.

    I'm not sure exactly how this pertains to Palestinian refugees in Lebanon, Syria, West Bank, or other locations, not counting the many Palis who are not refugees in the West Bank. But they aren't going anywhere, and the relevant political entities -- this includes Israel -- have to make some kind of accommodation to absorb them. They ain't going anywhere.
  67. @Steve Sailer
    son Patricio -- married Ma. de Jesus Aramburu

    son Marco -- married Ximena Serrano

    son Carlos -- married María Elena Torruco Garza

    Daughter Soumaya -- married an architect named Romer0, recently got commission to design new Mexico City airport

    daughter Vanessa -- Married to Daniel Hajj -- sounds Arabic

    daughter Johanna -- Married to Alberto Ayub -- Arabic?

    So, I'm guessing two of his three daughters married within the Lebanese-Mexican community. Person some of the other married Arabs with Mexicanized names (e.g., Carlom Slim).

    son Patricio — married Ma. de Jesus Aramburu

    Maria de Jesus is the type of ultra-Catholic name you’d find most often among the reactionary upper class that pines for Franco, or a family that aspires to it. Aramburu is also not a standard Spanish name, likely it is of Galacian or Basque origin.

    son Marco — married Ximena Serrano

    Ximena is either Catalan or an affected old spelling. Likely either from Spain or upper class Latin American.

    son Carlos — married María Elena Torruco Garza

    Standard Spanish first and last names.

    daughter Johanna / daughter Vanessa

    Neither of these are Spanish names or spellings, but it has long been pretty common for Mexicans to give their kids non-Spanish first names.

    • Replies: @emilio zapata
    Maria de Jesus is the type of ultra-Catholic name you’d find most often among the reactionary upper class that pines for Franco

    Maria de is a popular name for Mexican girls of all classes, I know several Mexican sisters that have their names start with Maria de.

    Ximena is either Catalan or an affected old spelling. Likely either from Spain or upper class Latin American.

    Ximena is a standard Mexican name since in Mexico the letter X is pronounced as the letter J. In Spain, Mexico is written as Mejico.
    , @5371
    It's an ordinary Catholic name. You do know that Franco wasn't Mexican and Aramburu is Basque, right?
  68. @Lot
    son Patricio — married Ma. de Jesus Aramburu

    Maria de Jesus is the type of ultra-Catholic name you'd find most often among the reactionary upper class that pines for Franco, or a family that aspires to it. Aramburu is also not a standard Spanish name, likely it is of Galacian or Basque origin.

    son Marco — married Ximena Serrano

    Ximena is either Catalan or an affected old spelling. Likely either from Spain or upper class Latin American.

    son Carlos — married María Elena Torruco Garza

    Standard Spanish first and last names.

    daughter Johanna / daughter Vanessa

    Neither of these are Spanish names or spellings, but it has long been pretty common for Mexicans to give their kids non-Spanish first names.

    Maria de Jesus is the type of ultra-Catholic name you’d find most often among the reactionary upper class that pines for Franco

    Maria de is a popular name for Mexican girls of all classes, I know several Mexican sisters that have their names start with Maria de.

    Ximena is either Catalan or an affected old spelling. Likely either from Spain or upper class Latin American.

    Ximena is a standard Mexican name since in Mexico the letter X is pronounced as the letter J. In Spain, Mexico is written as Mejico.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    The actor Jimmy Smits' spouse is actress Wanda de Jesus. Judging from her left-of-Pam-Grier complexion I'd be surprised if she was descended from Franco loyalists. But that would be a very interesting "Hollywood Hispanico Klatsch" panel w/ her and Guillermo del Toro and Richard Rodriguez and Paz de La Huerta
    , @Lot

    Ximena is a standard Mexican name since in Mexico the letter X is pronounced as the letter J. In Spain, Mexico is written as Mejico.
     
    No, the X sounding like J in Latin America is limited to a small number of Indian derived words. It was initially a stand-in for sounds not found in normal Spanish. That's why you also have the x making other sounds, like Taxco, where the x is said like an English soft s, and Ixtapa, where it is pronounced like an English x or "ks" sound.

    The X>J transition in Latin names that includes Ximena>Jimena and Xavier>Javier came hundred of years earlier as part of the evolution from early to middle Spanish.

    In the vast majority of cases, Mexicans say "x" as "ks" just like in Spain.
  69. @yaqub the mad scientist
    you also left out the millions of Germans displaced from Eastern Europe after WWII.

    No I didn't. That would be included in the line "Read up on the other ethnic shuffling in World War II". Try reading posts a little more closely before commenting.


    "The difference between all of those shifts and the Palestinian situation is that the “Palestinians” are the only ones who anyone talks about sending “home”. There is ZERO talk about reversing ANY of the other exchanges of population except this one."

    That may be true now, but it's irrelevant to what was being discussed 40 years ago between some men in Beruit. Once again, a timeline would help. Also, regional context. The frontiers of what constitutes "nuttiness" in the Byzantine/Ottoman world are pretty broader than what you or I are used to. See some of Steve's posts for further reference.

    Population transfers are murderous. Even when you try to keep them orderly (not sure if that’s ever been tried.) The reason has to do with the breakdown of order, ownership, and the rule of law. It’s just chaos.

    The Fourth Geneva Convention (1949) is relevant here. One can say that it was too late for the many tens of millions of Europeans (mostly Central and Eastern Europeans) who were deported, evicted, transferred, put to slave labor, etc. but it indicates a moral position that such collective population transfers are no longer morally admissible. At minimum, that creates a bar that has to be overcome.

    I’m not sure exactly how this pertains to Palestinian refugees in Lebanon, Syria, West Bank, or other locations, not counting the many Palis who are not refugees in the West Bank. But they aren’t going anywhere, and the relevant political entities — this includes Israel — have to make some kind of accommodation to absorb them. They ain’t going anywhere.

    • Replies: @yaqub the mad scientist
    I'm certainly not arguing your point. I was simply trying to illustrate the hardheadedness and desperation that was there in 1975 in Lebanon. These were normal guys doing Sunday drives with their girlfriends, waterskiing, and partying, but they acted on what they said. They leveled the country to the ground.

    Nobody said that brave men are always reasonable.

  70. @SPMoore8
    Population transfers are murderous. Even when you try to keep them orderly (not sure if that's ever been tried.) The reason has to do with the breakdown of order, ownership, and the rule of law. It's just chaos.

    The Fourth Geneva Convention (1949) is relevant here. One can say that it was too late for the many tens of millions of Europeans (mostly Central and Eastern Europeans) who were deported, evicted, transferred, put to slave labor, etc. but it indicates a moral position that such collective population transfers are no longer morally admissible. At minimum, that creates a bar that has to be overcome.

    I'm not sure exactly how this pertains to Palestinian refugees in Lebanon, Syria, West Bank, or other locations, not counting the many Palis who are not refugees in the West Bank. But they aren't going anywhere, and the relevant political entities -- this includes Israel -- have to make some kind of accommodation to absorb them. They ain't going anywhere.

    I’m certainly not arguing your point. I was simply trying to illustrate the hardheadedness and desperation that was there in 1975 in Lebanon. These were normal guys doing Sunday drives with their girlfriends, waterskiing, and partying, but they acted on what they said. They leveled the country to the ground.

    Nobody said that brave men are always reasonable.

  71. @Clyde
    You mention Lebanon's Shiites in your last paragraph. Shiites had/have the highest birthrates in Lebanon. Sunni birthrates cannot compete. My crude analogy is that in the Middle East the Shiites are their Catholics and Sunni are their Protestants. You are more likely find a secular Sunni who has shed Islam than a Shiite. Shiites even have their flagellants (on the day commemorating the martyrdom of Husayn ibn Ali) like the Catholics, though they are hard to find these days in the Catholic world.

    Not true among the Iranian shiites immigrants in America. A lot of them have become secular. Much more so than the sunnis. Also Iran’s birthrate is below replacement.

  72. Is the Gemayel clan involved in the heroin and hashish trade, and wouldn’t a Mexican telephone company be a nice venue for laundering drug profits and political donations?

    Or better yet in the US Free AID stuff Anti communist murder trade, like that Guatemalan billionaire guy?

    Killin communists seems to be wildly profitable sideline for billionaire drug dealers.

    The US plowed billions into Mexico’s drug wars, how much did Slim get?

  73. @D. K.
    Yet, every Jewish baby born into the millennia-old Jewish diaspora has an inviolable "Right of Return" to the modern incarnation of Israel, right, Jack?

    I think that’s admirable. Too bad it was too late to save millions of the Jews of Europe. Too bad that the Jews needed to learn the hard way that they needed such a refuge and couldn’t depend on the great European “civilization” not to murder them. I only wish that Saudi Arabia, Qatar, etc. would take in their own Syrian brothers, who are not even in danger because of outsiders but because of their own Arab brothers.

    • Replies: @D. K.
    How did anything that my own "European 'civilization'" did to your own supposedly blameless race (or whatever you believe your own folks to comprise, categorically speaking) justify your own people's then stealing Palestine from its rightful inhabitants, using terror and mass murder, Jack? Why do you, and most of your your own people, insist, nonetheless, on your still living among us genocidally "'civilized'" Europeans, Jack, instead of your all moving back to where you claim that you all came from, and to where you, now, again belong (which was promoted to be the actual purpose of a Zionist state-- not as a mere refuge, for a perpetual diaspora, if and when needed)? What moral blame do you yourself, as a now-Twenty-first-Century Jew, Jack, bear for your own people's self-confessed genocides against the original inhabitants of Palestine, thousands of years ago, as exulted in your own sacred texts?
  74. @Svigor

    At first I thought of how that would be received here – those hypocritical Joos, defending their own border but leaving America’s open.

    But then I read further and it turns out that the Sudanese had been killed by the Egyptian border police. Maybe they were caught in a crossfire between their Bedouin smugglers and the cops or maybe the cops just mowed them down – it’s just brown people shooting each other, nothing to see here folks, move along.

    Thank God it was the Egyptians that did this – you can imagine the international outcry if the Israelis had done it. But since this is just brown people killing each other, no war crime was committed. We all know that only white people are capable of racism.
     
    You get it wrong, like always. The diaspora Jews (you know, the ones the American elite is thick with) would raise a huge stink about American or European guards doing this. There'd be no end to the wailing. Heads would roll. But if their bosom buddies the Israelis did it, well, that'd be a different story.

    There, you have your "perfidious Jooz" narrative.

    But that narrative is a hypothetical event you just made up right here. By the same token I could whine, “IF SOME YESHIVA KIDS RUSHED A COP AND BURNED DOWN THE 7-Eleven… Just imagine the ZOG censorship, people!!” But that didn’t happen either.

  75. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @emilio zapata
    Maria de Jesus is the type of ultra-Catholic name you’d find most often among the reactionary upper class that pines for Franco

    Maria de is a popular name for Mexican girls of all classes, I know several Mexican sisters that have their names start with Maria de.

    Ximena is either Catalan or an affected old spelling. Likely either from Spain or upper class Latin American.

    Ximena is a standard Mexican name since in Mexico the letter X is pronounced as the letter J. In Spain, Mexico is written as Mejico.

    The actor Jimmy Smits’ spouse is actress Wanda de Jesus. Judging from her left-of-Pam-Grier complexion I’d be surprised if she was descended from Franco loyalists. But that would be a very interesting “Hollywood Hispanico Klatsch” panel w/ her and Guillermo del Toro and Richard Rodriguez and Paz de La Huerta

  76. You’re too hard on the Gemayels, Steve. You can’t be a warlord in Lebanon if you’re not prepared to crack some eggs.

  77. @Steve Sailer
    In American culture, her maiden name would be “Soumaya Domit” -- her Christian name plus her father's surname.

    In Mexican culture, where the tycoon is known as Carlos Slim Helu, her maiden name would be Soumaya Domit Gemayel, her Christian name plus her father's surname and then her mother's surname.

    The Spanish WP page is the same: “Su esposa, Soumaya Domit, falleció el 7 de marzo de 1999.9”

    https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlos_Slim

  78. @anonymous
    Many Lebanese Christians do not consider themselves Arabs like their neighbors but believe they are descendants of the Phoenicians. Their Arabization was superficial and consisted mainly of switching languages. Their DNA might be interesting to check.

    This reminds me of Chaldean Iraqi Christians, who consider themselves to be descendants of the original Babylonian inhabitants, distinct from the “filthy” (or other such words they use) Arab Muslims who invaded their homeland.

    • Replies: @Vendetta
    I'll bet there are some Tunisian sophisticates embarrassed enough of their countrymen to claim to be Carthaginians instead.

    And South Sudan, when it still had the trappings of a marginally functional country, should have revived the Nubia name to distinguish itself from the Muslim north.
  79. @Earl Lemongrab
    That's amazing footage. You have to marvel at how the crucible of the Israeli invasion and occupation of south Lebanon led to the formerly docile Lebanese Shia producing the toughest, most disciplined light infantry force in the Middle East. Sheikh Nasrallah is some kind of organizational genius for sure.

    They’ve solved the old “Why Arabs Lose Wars” dilemma ( http://www.meforum.org/441/why-arabs-lose-wars ), that certainly speaks to Nasrallah’s ability, as well as that of the Iranians who trained Hezbollah’s soldiers in the first place.

    Granted, they had prime material to work with. Out of all the Arabs, I’d say only the Yemenis would have the Lebanese Shia beat in terms of raw toughness and fighting spirit, but they’d be far, far harder to organize into a disciplined force.

    The fact that the Iranian sponsorship of Hezbollah is not being studied right now as a model of spectacularly successful foreign intervention speaks volumes to the intellectual dysfunction and ideological blindness of America as an empire. With not even a hundredth of the resources America has poured down the toilet in Afghanistan and Iraq, the Iranians have achieved an enduring success in Lebanon over the last three decades, giving themselves an invaluable asset in the Levant and strategic detrerrent against Israel.

    I don’t really see the US being able to replicate this feat in the Middle East, we’ve burned too many bridges there over the last fifty years. The Kurds might make a candidate, but we’d lose Turkey in the process. Unfortunately, they’re still needed as a bulwark, not against Soviet expansion anymore but against the demographic tidal wave threatening Europe.

    Where I could see us applying this would be with Rwanda under its own organizational genius, Paul Kagame. Rwanda’s army is very skilled and disciplined by African standards (look up the details of the Kitona Operation for a showcase of their audacity and skill), and Kagame is very keen on developing his country and has made already made great steps forward in that regard.

    Consider how the Soviets used the Cubans as their Foreign Legion in Africa. The Rwandans and a few other client states, if we manage to find another leader or two of Kagame’s caliber, could be our boots on the ground. In exchange for our increased sponsorship of Rwanda’s economic development, we could have the Rwandans on call if there’s ever a crisis we need to respond to in Africa.

    Suppose the Nigerian Army suddenly cracks against Boko Haram? Airlift a regiment of Rwandans there to do what Hezbollah did for Syria: stabilize the front, train the government forces, lead assaults against a few strategic points as shock troops. And if there’s ever a need to intervene in the Congo, some genocide the world won’t tolerate or some conflict over the mineral resources, we couldn’t have a better partner than the Rwandans.

    It’s cheap, it doesn’t put our troops on the ground in messy interventions that will only get us attacked as being imperialists, and life gets better for twelve million Rwandans as a side benefit. The only flaw I see being likely is that our government just does not have a sense of restraint. They’d probably try throwing the Rwandans into twelve different conflicts over a five year period and wear them out to the point of mutiny.

    Patience. Learn from the Persians. Hone your weapons carefully and don’t squander them. If you’re deploying them by choice and not by necessity, only choose to when that deployment will strengthen them, not when it will weaken them.

    Hezbollah’s deployment to Syria has strengthened them, not weakened them, both on a tactical and moral level. Our pundits say the opposite, blathering on about their attrition rate (not high by any means) and how they’ve lost credit with the Sunnis (which has never been important to their success as an organization).

    On the contrary, they’re accruing a ton of combat experience and they’re establishing themselves as an anti-Jihadi force, not just an anti-Zionist force, which is winning them credibility with far more important people than Sunni Arabs on the street – Putin, for example, who’s just gone and said they’re not a terrorist organization like ISIS or al-Qaeda.

    • Replies: @Romanian
    Rwanda really is an interesting country, though I don't know how well this client warrior state business sits with me. The War Nerd, since he's been mentioned here before, was a fan of Tutsis and thought that Rwanda should have had conqueror's rights over the Congo. His take on why African wars never really go anywhere and achieve some lasting positive results (a strong and stable centralized state that can develop) because of constant Western interference was illuminating.

    https://www.nsfwcorp.com/dispatch/tutsi-empire-interrupted/
    , @5371
    [Suppose the Nigerian Army suddenly cracks against Boko Haram?]

    "Boko Haram" are black Africans too, there's not much to worry about))

    [Airlift a regiment of Rwandans there to do what Hezbollah did for Syria: stabilize the front, train the government forces, lead assaults against a few strategic points as shock troops]

    That was already done by a few white South Africans, fortunately there's no need to wait and hope that Rwandans live up to their hype))
  80. @Jack D
    Probably it's the other way 'round - they probably resemble (genetically) the original Arab population but the Muslim Arab population has changed due to the introduction of sub-Saharan genes via the slave trade while they have remained the same.

    I’d be very surprised if the famously enterprising Arab Christians of the Levant never dabbled in the slave trade themselves.

  81. @AP
    This reminds me of Chaldean Iraqi Christians, who consider themselves to be descendants of the original Babylonian inhabitants, distinct from the "filthy" (or other such words they use) Arab Muslims who invaded their homeland.

    I’ll bet there are some Tunisian sophisticates embarrassed enough of their countrymen to claim to be Carthaginians instead.

    And South Sudan, when it still had the trappings of a marginally functional country, should have revived the Nubia name to distinguish itself from the Muslim north.

    • Replies: @athEIst
    The Romans of 146 BCE weren't very nice. Most of the inhabitants were slaughtered, a few sold into slavery where they prospered like most slave peoples.
  82. I remember watching ‘Waltz with Bashir’, an interesting Israeli animated movie taking place in that era.

    http://m.imdb.com/title/tt1185616/

    Yeah, recommended, in particular if you are interested in recovery-from-combat stress type films. Still banned in Lebanon. Probably a little too close to comfort for a number of people:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waltz_with_Bashir

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bachir_Gemayel

  83. Check out the names Kamel Nacif, Maximo Haddad, Jean Succor. All Lebanese-Mexican drug cartel gangsters.

  84. @Jack D
    Probably it's the other way 'round - they probably resemble (genetically) the original Arab population but the Muslim Arab population has changed due to the introduction of sub-Saharan genes via the slave trade while they have remained the same.

    Not that many sS genes. The Arab slavers mostly wanted men and they castrated them.

  85. @Jack D
    I think that's admirable. Too bad it was too late to save millions of the Jews of Europe. Too bad that the Jews needed to learn the hard way that they needed such a refuge and couldn't depend on the great European "civilization" not to murder them. I only wish that Saudi Arabia, Qatar, etc. would take in their own Syrian brothers, who are not even in danger because of outsiders but because of their own Arab brothers.

    How did anything that my own “European ‘civilization’” did to your own supposedly blameless race (or whatever you believe your own folks to comprise, categorically speaking) justify your own people’s then stealing Palestine from its rightful inhabitants, using terror and mass murder, Jack? Why do you, and most of your your own people, insist, nonetheless, on your still living among us genocidally “‘civilized’” Europeans, Jack, instead of your all moving back to where you claim that you all came from, and to where you, now, again belong (which was promoted to be the actual purpose of a Zionist state– not as a mere refuge, for a perpetual diaspora, if and when needed)? What moral blame do you yourself, as a now-Twenty-first-Century Jew, Jack, bear for your own people’s self-confessed genocides against the original inhabitants of Palestine, thousands of years ago, as exulted in your own sacred texts?

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Zionism never had a majority of world Jewry behind it until after it managed to achieve control of a state in 1948. Before then, there were plenty of anti-Zionist Jews whereas today they are only a small number of ultra-Orthodox. Regardless, a lot of Jewish support for Zionism is lukewarm, wishing well from afar. For decades after 1948, most secular Jews didn't want to live in Israel if they had better alternatives. Only in the past decade has Israel's economy moved into first world territory, but the standard of living is still lower than in the U.S. There is also the little matter that Israel faces and will always face existential threats. And for non-Orthodox Jews, it can be very unpleasant to have to deal with the Orthodox religious bureaucracy.
    , @Jack D
    It's pretty clear (to me at least) that if there was no Israel , then "Palestine" would just be one more Arab hellhole where the locals could fight each other (as Hamas and Fatah have already done in Gaza) and occasionally their battles would spill over and they would blow up some Americans or Europeans too. Does the world really need one more Arab hellhole? Aren't there enough of them?

    You didn't mention, BTW, the Arab world's expulsion of its Jewish population after 1948 - this involved more people than the # of Arabs who fled Israel during the the '48 war. Note BTW that maybe 1/2 the Arabs of Israel stayed put (to this day) so the terror couldn't have been that terrific. Jesus said not to speak of the mote in your neighbor's eye but the beam in your own. The "mass murders" of the Israeli war of independence involved hundreds of people - nothing like the millions and millions killed in Europe. Bringing up 3,000 year old Biblical genocides is pretty weak sauce. You forgot to mention that the Jews killed Jesus too.
  86. @Vendetta
    I'll bet there are some Tunisian sophisticates embarrassed enough of their countrymen to claim to be Carthaginians instead.

    And South Sudan, when it still had the trappings of a marginally functional country, should have revived the Nubia name to distinguish itself from the Muslim north.

    The Romans of 146 BCE weren’t very nice. Most of the inhabitants were slaughtered, a few sold into slavery where they prospered like most slave peoples.

  87. @Jack D

    The rep told them that the US had decided that Lebanon would have to be a permanent place for the Palestinians that it had taken in so as not to destabilize Israel,
     
    As opposed to what? The US telling Israel that all the Palestinian "refugees" (actually the children and grandchildren, etc. of the few thousand '48 refugees who were still alive, who had personally never set foot in "Palestine") could go "home" now? Do you think that this is within Washington's power, even if they wanted to?

    When a group of people has been living in your country for 60+ years and their children and grandchildren have been born and raised there, at some point you have to accept that they are not going back "home", ever. Even the nutsiest anti-immigrant type in the US realizes that you can't send someone "back" to Mexico who has never been there to begin with.

    But what about Family reunification. I know that’s not how it usually works–get one member of the family into the US and then reunify the family here, finally getting Mama and Papa in to collect their SSI.

  88. @Romanian
    The problem is that his real life persona is very liberal. Not SJW levels, to the point where he disregards individual shortcomings, but enough bleeding heart Berkeley generation style that HBD would be a bitter pill to swallow. He hated Reagan with a burning passion and wrote a very powerful obituary for him and his "Cheshire snarl".

    You know you might find this hard to believe, but not everybody is exactly like you, darling snowflake.

    • Replies: @Romanian
    If only they were, the world would be a better place ;) . I was explaining how I see the dude's politics in relation to what I see on this site. But the War Nerd really is enjoyable and educational to read. Too bad Pando has a paywall now.
  89. @Gabriel M
    Yes, because unlike you he doesn't think the word "international" means "America" and he doesn't live in a willful fantasy land where the European and global media isn't anti-Israel.

    Anyway, here's some more news that will screw up your New York Jew obsessed world view. Enjoy ignoring it.
    http://www.algemeiner.com/2015/11/16/hungary-defies-eu-refuses-to-label-judea-samaria-products/

    And what exactly would have happened if the Israelis had killed those Sudanese migrants instead of the Egyptians? Would the world have demanded that Israel start taking in refugees? I doubt it. Did the world start demanding that Israel take in more migrants after that Israeli mob attacked the Eritrean migrant mistakenly shot by security personnel?

    Yet show a photo of a little dead boy in the Mediterranean and the whole word demands that Europe accept demographic changing levels of refugees. Even after the Paris attacks, much of the media suggests that Europe take even more refugees.

    And what if, God forbid, a bunch of Mexicans were shot by US Border Patrol? Or worse, a bunch of Americans at the border engaging in a mob attack on a migrant. We’d have had amnesty on steroids, no doubt.

    Yet this doesn’t happen to Israel when they enforce their border and immigration laws. Thus, I figured the original poster was joking when he suggested Israel would get into trouble had they been the ones who killed those migrants in the Sinai.

    • Replies: @Gabriel m
    The "world" did not demand Europe did anything, European media outlets did and what seemed like every single university educated person under 35 took to Facebook and twitter to demonstrate what a sentimental retard they were. I actually live in Europe and you need to get it through your thick head: the Jew York Times is not forcing Europe to destroy itself, Europe's educated, young middle class demands it, the same young middle class that turned the media into a non stop PLO propaganda service during the last Gaza war.

    As for how some imaginary Israeli action would be covered in Europe, you don't need to imagine very much. Try actually learning about a continent you know nothing about.

    http://bbcwatch.org/2015/08/26/differences-in-bbc-coverage-of-migrants-in-europe-and-in-israel/

    Right now Europe, fully backed by the aforementioned dominant social group, is demanding Israel give the Golan Heights to ISIS. Seriously.
  90. @Earl Lemongrab
    That's amazing footage. You have to marvel at how the crucible of the Israeli invasion and occupation of south Lebanon led to the formerly docile Lebanese Shia producing the toughest, most disciplined light infantry force in the Middle East. Sheikh Nasrallah is some kind of organizational genius for sure.

    His title is Sayyed Nasrallah, not Sheikh Nasrallah. “Sayyed” means a descendant of the Prophet, which is big deal for the Shia.

  91. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @D. K.
    How did anything that my own "European 'civilization'" did to your own supposedly blameless race (or whatever you believe your own folks to comprise, categorically speaking) justify your own people's then stealing Palestine from its rightful inhabitants, using terror and mass murder, Jack? Why do you, and most of your your own people, insist, nonetheless, on your still living among us genocidally "'civilized'" Europeans, Jack, instead of your all moving back to where you claim that you all came from, and to where you, now, again belong (which was promoted to be the actual purpose of a Zionist state-- not as a mere refuge, for a perpetual diaspora, if and when needed)? What moral blame do you yourself, as a now-Twenty-first-Century Jew, Jack, bear for your own people's self-confessed genocides against the original inhabitants of Palestine, thousands of years ago, as exulted in your own sacred texts?

    Zionism never had a majority of world Jewry behind it until after it managed to achieve control of a state in 1948. Before then, there were plenty of anti-Zionist Jews whereas today they are only a small number of ultra-Orthodox. Regardless, a lot of Jewish support for Zionism is lukewarm, wishing well from afar. For decades after 1948, most secular Jews didn’t want to live in Israel if they had better alternatives. Only in the past decade has Israel’s economy moved into first world territory, but the standard of living is still lower than in the U.S. There is also the little matter that Israel faces and will always face existential threats. And for non-Orthodox Jews, it can be very unpleasant to have to deal with the Orthodox religious bureaucracy.

    • Replies: @D. K.
    I know all of that. Even my old girlfriend-- a rabid Zionist, a dual citizen (since the early 1990s), and an Orthodox Jew-- has chosen to live most of her life in America, since her making aliyah, back in 1989; and, her Israeli-born twin daughters are both Brandeis alumnae, now making their own young lives, as Israeli-Americans, in the American Northeast, rather than in Zion. If not even as ardent of a Zionist as their mother (their father is, or was, an Israeli, of North African origin) is willing to live by her own very-stridently-and-outspokenly Zionist convictions, it is clear to me that Zionism ultimately has proved to be mostly a bait-and-switch operation.
  92. @Jefferson
    "It’s easy to make fun of what <90 IQ SJWs might say, but I imagine many SJWs are at least vaguely aware that the "Sudanese migrants" probably were very ethnically distinct from the Egyptian police."

    But the Egyptian police still look significantly distinct in phenotype from Northern European WASPs who founded America, hence why Social Justice Warriors do not refer to Egyptian law enforcement discriminating against Sudanese immigrants as another example of White cops using police brutality against Black bodies. Social Justice Warriors clearly place Egyptians into the Nonwhite category and so do Right Wing White supremacist groups. That is something that both the far Left and the far Right agree on in that they both do not see Egyptians as a White ethnic group.

    Also using the one drop rule most Egyptians would not even be considered White, since Sub Saharan DNA is present in the Egyptian gene pool. Which is not surprising because Egypt shares a border with Sub Saharan Africa. There is no ocean that separates the two like there is between Europe and Sub Saharan Africa. Hence why Egyptians are not as pure unimxed Caucasoid as Europeans.

    You can't keep Sub Saharan DNA from invading your people's gene pool when you live next door to these people.

    Very true. But Egyptians tend to be whiter than Sudanese and everyone hopefully is aware of the Arab slave trade. Living in metro Detroit where there are many Arabs and way too many blacks, one of the first words I learned was “abed” which is the Arabic word for “slave” and a very common way of referring to blacks.

  93. @Anonymous
    Zionism never had a majority of world Jewry behind it until after it managed to achieve control of a state in 1948. Before then, there were plenty of anti-Zionist Jews whereas today they are only a small number of ultra-Orthodox. Regardless, a lot of Jewish support for Zionism is lukewarm, wishing well from afar. For decades after 1948, most secular Jews didn't want to live in Israel if they had better alternatives. Only in the past decade has Israel's economy moved into first world territory, but the standard of living is still lower than in the U.S. There is also the little matter that Israel faces and will always face existential threats. And for non-Orthodox Jews, it can be very unpleasant to have to deal with the Orthodox religious bureaucracy.

    I know all of that. Even my old girlfriend– a rabid Zionist, a dual citizen (since the early 1990s), and an Orthodox Jew– has chosen to live most of her life in America, since her making aliyah, back in 1989; and, her Israeli-born twin daughters are both Brandeis alumnae, now making their own young lives, as Israeli-Americans, in the American Northeast, rather than in Zion. If not even as ardent of a Zionist as their mother (their father is, or was, an Israeli, of North African origin) is willing to live by her own very-stridently-and-outspokenly Zionist convictions, it is clear to me that Zionism ultimately has proved to be mostly a bait-and-switch operation.

  94. @Kamran
    You know you might find this hard to believe, but not everybody is exactly like you, darling snowflake.

    If only they were, the world would be a better place 😉 . I was explaining how I see the dude’s politics in relation to what I see on this site. But the War Nerd really is enjoyable and educational to read. Too bad Pando has a paywall now.

    • Replies: @Kamran
    It's just that the topics he writes about have a different focus. He could of course go into trudging ellipses about how the ethnic group du jour is a unable to securely take control of some hilltop because they practice inbreeding closer than third cousins, and then go at length with graphs and charts, and constantly correct every humorous observation with autistic repetition of his data.


    But would that really be the War Nerd?

  95. @Vendetta
    They've solved the old "Why Arabs Lose Wars" dilemma ( http://www.meforum.org/441/why-arabs-lose-wars ), that certainly speaks to Nasrallah's ability, as well as that of the Iranians who trained Hezbollah's soldiers in the first place.

    Granted, they had prime material to work with. Out of all the Arabs, I'd say only the Yemenis would have the Lebanese Shia beat in terms of raw toughness and fighting spirit, but they'd be far, far harder to organize into a disciplined force.

    The fact that the Iranian sponsorship of Hezbollah is not being studied right now as a model of spectacularly successful foreign intervention speaks volumes to the intellectual dysfunction and ideological blindness of America as an empire. With not even a hundredth of the resources America has poured down the toilet in Afghanistan and Iraq, the Iranians have achieved an enduring success in Lebanon over the last three decades, giving themselves an invaluable asset in the Levant and strategic detrerrent against Israel.

    I don't really see the US being able to replicate this feat in the Middle East, we've burned too many bridges there over the last fifty years. The Kurds might make a candidate, but we'd lose Turkey in the process. Unfortunately, they're still needed as a bulwark, not against Soviet expansion anymore but against the demographic tidal wave threatening Europe.

    Where I could see us applying this would be with Rwanda under its own organizational genius, Paul Kagame. Rwanda's army is very skilled and disciplined by African standards (look up the details of the Kitona Operation for a showcase of their audacity and skill), and Kagame is very keen on developing his country and has made already made great steps forward in that regard.

    Consider how the Soviets used the Cubans as their Foreign Legion in Africa. The Rwandans and a few other client states, if we manage to find another leader or two of Kagame's caliber, could be our boots on the ground. In exchange for our increased sponsorship of Rwanda's economic development, we could have the Rwandans on call if there's ever a crisis we need to respond to in Africa.

    Suppose the Nigerian Army suddenly cracks against Boko Haram? Airlift a regiment of Rwandans there to do what Hezbollah did for Syria: stabilize the front, train the government forces, lead assaults against a few strategic points as shock troops. And if there's ever a need to intervene in the Congo, some genocide the world won't tolerate or some conflict over the mineral resources, we couldn't have a better partner than the Rwandans.

    It's cheap, it doesn't put our troops on the ground in messy interventions that will only get us attacked as being imperialists, and life gets better for twelve million Rwandans as a side benefit. The only flaw I see being likely is that our government just does not have a sense of restraint. They'd probably try throwing the Rwandans into twelve different conflicts over a five year period and wear them out to the point of mutiny.

    Patience. Learn from the Persians. Hone your weapons carefully and don't squander them. If you're deploying them by choice and not by necessity, only choose to when that deployment will strengthen them, not when it will weaken them.

    Hezbollah's deployment to Syria has strengthened them, not weakened them, both on a tactical and moral level. Our pundits say the opposite, blathering on about their attrition rate (not high by any means) and how they've lost credit with the Sunnis (which has never been important to their success as an organization).

    On the contrary, they're accruing a ton of combat experience and they're establishing themselves as an anti-Jihadi force, not just an anti-Zionist force, which is winning them credibility with far more important people than Sunni Arabs on the street - Putin, for example, who's just gone and said they're not a terrorist organization like ISIS or al-Qaeda.

    Rwanda really is an interesting country, though I don’t know how well this client warrior state business sits with me. The War Nerd, since he’s been mentioned here before, was a fan of Tutsis and thought that Rwanda should have had conqueror’s rights over the Congo. His take on why African wars never really go anywhere and achieve some lasting positive results (a strong and stable centralized state that can develop) because of constant Western interference was illuminating.

    https://www.nsfwcorp.com/dispatch/tutsi-empire-interrupted/

    • Replies: @Vendetta
    Seems like an idea that could be abused pretty badly, yeah. Just sounding off after I'd had a bit to drink. Major Dolan fan, and he was pretty much right about that. Really nothing boils my blood more than seeing hte progressives turn on Rwanda in the last few years. Now that it's the region's success story they hate the place, they hate Kagame and want him gone yesterday, they don't care if itll start a civil war there again or not.

    The Hutu civil elite was always close with the French and Belgian governments and most of them got away to Europe. I do wonder how many of them are responsible for these stories. It's always this bullshit 'anti-imperialist' slant on it, Paul Kagame being some US/Israeli agent who "triggered" the Genocide through the RPF's rebellion, as if that was a natural response anyone should have expected. And then all these stories trying to spin the Congo Wars into some Rwandan-committed genocide where they murdered millions of people.

    The neo-progressives have it out for them, and the problem is the average person doesn't have enough of a grouding about Rwanda's background to even recognize there's a slant to the story, so it fools a lot of sane, non-ideological on the left and right as well.
  96. @Vendetta
    They've solved the old "Why Arabs Lose Wars" dilemma ( http://www.meforum.org/441/why-arabs-lose-wars ), that certainly speaks to Nasrallah's ability, as well as that of the Iranians who trained Hezbollah's soldiers in the first place.

    Granted, they had prime material to work with. Out of all the Arabs, I'd say only the Yemenis would have the Lebanese Shia beat in terms of raw toughness and fighting spirit, but they'd be far, far harder to organize into a disciplined force.

    The fact that the Iranian sponsorship of Hezbollah is not being studied right now as a model of spectacularly successful foreign intervention speaks volumes to the intellectual dysfunction and ideological blindness of America as an empire. With not even a hundredth of the resources America has poured down the toilet in Afghanistan and Iraq, the Iranians have achieved an enduring success in Lebanon over the last three decades, giving themselves an invaluable asset in the Levant and strategic detrerrent against Israel.

    I don't really see the US being able to replicate this feat in the Middle East, we've burned too many bridges there over the last fifty years. The Kurds might make a candidate, but we'd lose Turkey in the process. Unfortunately, they're still needed as a bulwark, not against Soviet expansion anymore but against the demographic tidal wave threatening Europe.

    Where I could see us applying this would be with Rwanda under its own organizational genius, Paul Kagame. Rwanda's army is very skilled and disciplined by African standards (look up the details of the Kitona Operation for a showcase of their audacity and skill), and Kagame is very keen on developing his country and has made already made great steps forward in that regard.

    Consider how the Soviets used the Cubans as their Foreign Legion in Africa. The Rwandans and a few other client states, if we manage to find another leader or two of Kagame's caliber, could be our boots on the ground. In exchange for our increased sponsorship of Rwanda's economic development, we could have the Rwandans on call if there's ever a crisis we need to respond to in Africa.

    Suppose the Nigerian Army suddenly cracks against Boko Haram? Airlift a regiment of Rwandans there to do what Hezbollah did for Syria: stabilize the front, train the government forces, lead assaults against a few strategic points as shock troops. And if there's ever a need to intervene in the Congo, some genocide the world won't tolerate or some conflict over the mineral resources, we couldn't have a better partner than the Rwandans.

    It's cheap, it doesn't put our troops on the ground in messy interventions that will only get us attacked as being imperialists, and life gets better for twelve million Rwandans as a side benefit. The only flaw I see being likely is that our government just does not have a sense of restraint. They'd probably try throwing the Rwandans into twelve different conflicts over a five year period and wear them out to the point of mutiny.

    Patience. Learn from the Persians. Hone your weapons carefully and don't squander them. If you're deploying them by choice and not by necessity, only choose to when that deployment will strengthen them, not when it will weaken them.

    Hezbollah's deployment to Syria has strengthened them, not weakened them, both on a tactical and moral level. Our pundits say the opposite, blathering on about their attrition rate (not high by any means) and how they've lost credit with the Sunnis (which has never been important to their success as an organization).

    On the contrary, they're accruing a ton of combat experience and they're establishing themselves as an anti-Jihadi force, not just an anti-Zionist force, which is winning them credibility with far more important people than Sunni Arabs on the street - Putin, for example, who's just gone and said they're not a terrorist organization like ISIS or al-Qaeda.

    [Suppose the Nigerian Army suddenly cracks against Boko Haram?]

    “Boko Haram” are black Africans too, there’s not much to worry about))

    [Airlift a regiment of Rwandans there to do what Hezbollah did for Syria: stabilize the front, train the government forces, lead assaults against a few strategic points as shock troops]

    That was already done by a few white South Africans, fortunately there’s no need to wait and hope that Rwandans live up to their hype))

  97. @Lot
    son Patricio — married Ma. de Jesus Aramburu

    Maria de Jesus is the type of ultra-Catholic name you'd find most often among the reactionary upper class that pines for Franco, or a family that aspires to it. Aramburu is also not a standard Spanish name, likely it is of Galacian or Basque origin.

    son Marco — married Ximena Serrano

    Ximena is either Catalan or an affected old spelling. Likely either from Spain or upper class Latin American.

    son Carlos — married María Elena Torruco Garza

    Standard Spanish first and last names.

    daughter Johanna / daughter Vanessa

    Neither of these are Spanish names or spellings, but it has long been pretty common for Mexicans to give their kids non-Spanish first names.

    It’s an ordinary Catholic name. You do know that Franco wasn’t Mexican and Aramburu is Basque, right?

  98. @Romanian
    If only they were, the world would be a better place ;) . I was explaining how I see the dude's politics in relation to what I see on this site. But the War Nerd really is enjoyable and educational to read. Too bad Pando has a paywall now.

    It’s just that the topics he writes about have a different focus. He could of course go into trudging ellipses about how the ethnic group du jour is a unable to securely take control of some hilltop because they practice inbreeding closer than third cousins, and then go at length with graphs and charts, and constantly correct every humorous observation with autistic repetition of his data.

    But would that really be the War Nerd?

    • Replies: @5371
    And are you really Kamran? This comment doesn't sound like the one who was here earlier.
  99. @iSteveFan
    And what exactly would have happened if the Israelis had killed those Sudanese migrants instead of the Egyptians? Would the world have demanded that Israel start taking in refugees? I doubt it. Did the world start demanding that Israel take in more migrants after that Israeli mob attacked the Eritrean migrant mistakenly shot by security personnel?

    Yet show a photo of a little dead boy in the Mediterranean and the whole word demands that Europe accept demographic changing levels of refugees. Even after the Paris attacks, much of the media suggests that Europe take even more refugees.

    And what if, God forbid, a bunch of Mexicans were shot by US Border Patrol? Or worse, a bunch of Americans at the border engaging in a mob attack on a migrant. We'd have had amnesty on steroids, no doubt.

    Yet this doesn't happen to Israel when they enforce their border and immigration laws. Thus, I figured the original poster was joking when he suggested Israel would get into trouble had they been the ones who killed those migrants in the Sinai.

    The “world” did not demand Europe did anything, European media outlets did and what seemed like every single university educated person under 35 took to Facebook and twitter to demonstrate what a sentimental retard they were. I actually live in Europe and you need to get it through your thick head: the Jew York Times is not forcing Europe to destroy itself, Europe’s educated, young middle class demands it, the same young middle class that turned the media into a non stop PLO propaganda service during the last Gaza war.

    As for how some imaginary Israeli action would be covered in Europe, you don’t need to imagine very much. Try actually learning about a continent you know nothing about.

    http://bbcwatch.org/2015/08/26/differences-in-bbc-coverage-of-migrants-in-europe-and-in-israel/

    Right now Europe, fully backed by the aforementioned dominant social group, is demanding Israel give the Golan Heights to ISIS. Seriously.

    • Replies: @iSteveFan

    The “world” did not demand Europe did anything,

     

    I disagree. For example, here is the UN calling on the EU to take another 200K refugees. Here is the UN warning Europe not to backtrack on migrant commitments post Paris. There are more, but these will suffice to show that it is more than just the European media calling for migrants.

    As for how some imaginary Israeli action would be covered in Europe, you don’t need to imagine very much. Try actually learning about a continent you know nothing about.
     
    No one here is saying the media doesn't cover stories about Israel. The point is how the stories are covered. I live in the US. When a white kills a black, the story gets played endlessly in the media. It gets looped 24/7 on cable tv. But when a black kills a white, which happens daily in several places across the land, the story IS duly reported by local media. But it is never picked up nationally and looped 24/7. Technically the media can claim all those stories were reported. And they were. But clearly there is a big difference, and consequently a big impact on public opinion, when certain stories are more prominently featured.

    I have no doubt the press covers migrants being killed in Israel. Obviously I would have never heard about this recent case if they did not. But mentioning the story only once or a few times, and then not writing endless analyses and editorials on it is akin to burying it on the last page.

    On the contrary a story about a US border guard gunning down migrants, or a US crowd stomping on a wounded migrant, would be endlessly looped worldwide and the constant exposure would tend to sway public opinion.

    Ditto for Europe where the dead little boy became a cause celebre.

    I don't see that happening with Israel and her migrant issues. It's reported in a perfunctory manner and that's that. It is not endlessly looped.

    you need to get it through your thick head: the Jew York Times is not forcing Europe to destroy itself
     
    What's with the Jew York Times slur?

    Right now Europe, fully backed by the aforementioned dominant social group, is demanding Israel give the Golan Heights to ISIS. Seriously.
     
    Who is calling for the Golan Heights to be specifically given to ISIS? This sounds like hyperbole to me.
  100. @D. K.
    How did anything that my own "European 'civilization'" did to your own supposedly blameless race (or whatever you believe your own folks to comprise, categorically speaking) justify your own people's then stealing Palestine from its rightful inhabitants, using terror and mass murder, Jack? Why do you, and most of your your own people, insist, nonetheless, on your still living among us genocidally "'civilized'" Europeans, Jack, instead of your all moving back to where you claim that you all came from, and to where you, now, again belong (which was promoted to be the actual purpose of a Zionist state-- not as a mere refuge, for a perpetual diaspora, if and when needed)? What moral blame do you yourself, as a now-Twenty-first-Century Jew, Jack, bear for your own people's self-confessed genocides against the original inhabitants of Palestine, thousands of years ago, as exulted in your own sacred texts?

    It’s pretty clear (to me at least) that if there was no Israel , then “Palestine” would just be one more Arab hellhole where the locals could fight each other (as Hamas and Fatah have already done in Gaza) and occasionally their battles would spill over and they would blow up some Americans or Europeans too. Does the world really need one more Arab hellhole? Aren’t there enough of them?

    You didn’t mention, BTW, the Arab world’s expulsion of its Jewish population after 1948 – this involved more people than the # of Arabs who fled Israel during the the ’48 war. Note BTW that maybe 1/2 the Arabs of Israel stayed put (to this day) so the terror couldn’t have been that terrific. Jesus said not to speak of the mote in your neighbor’s eye but the beam in your own. The “mass murders” of the Israeli war of independence involved hundreds of people – nothing like the millions and millions killed in Europe. Bringing up 3,000 year old Biblical genocides is pretty weak sauce. You forgot to mention that the Jews killed Jesus too.

    • Replies: @D. K.
    If you would care to debate, or otherwise to discuss, the life of Jesus Christ, Jack, you might want to take it up with my Vatican-educated priestly brother, down in El Salvador; I am one of those long-lapsed Catholics who happens to believe that Jesus of Nazareth is purely a mythological character. (Not to worry, though, Jack: my Vatican-educated priestly brother hews quite faithfully to Vatican II's notorious philo-Semitism! Then again, he is far less sympathetic toward political Zionism, since he is both a pacifist and a former conscientious objector.)

    "It's pretty clear (to me at least) that if there was [sic] no Israel" that the Middle East would have been an overwhelmingly stable region, during these past several decades, with most of its state violence, and its other political upheavals, being of the intrastate variety. Those allegedly "anti-Semitic" professional diplomats in the United States Department of State, back in the day, have been proved utterly prophetic about the unmitigated disaster that has been the creation of the modern State of Israel, both for the United States itself and for the region (and world) at large. If there were a Hell, I would know just where to go looking for the shade of Harry 'S.' Truman....

    What hellholes those Arab countries might have proved to be, absent any Jewish interloping and meddling, is utterly beside the point, regardless. The Holocaust did not give European Jews any dispensation, whether legal or moral, to invade Palestine and to displace its existing population, utilizing widespread terror, mass murder, and ethnic cleansing. Nothing that Palestine's Arab neighbors did, in light of the Zionists' malign machinations, changed the legal rights of the Arab population of Palestine itself. (I will skip over the Zionists' collusion with the King of Jordan, and their utter bad faith in accepting the non-binding terms of the United Nations' partition plan, while fully intending to steal the rest of Palestine from its rightful Arab population, when later circumstances would allow.)

    According to an Israeli estimate, at the beginning of 2004, nearly sixty years after the end of World War II, there still were over one million "Holocaust survivors" alive in the world-- which means that there had to have been a few to several million "Holocaust survivors" alive on V. E. Day, back in May 1945. I guess that the Holocaust "couldn't have been that terrific," either, eh, Jack? Or, as Dr. Norman Finkelstein's late mother, a Polish-born Jew who had survived both the infamous Warsaw ghetto and several German internment camps, was wont to ask: "If everyone who claims to be a survivor actually is one, who did Hitler kill?"
  101. anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @yaqub the mad scientist
    A close friend of mine is the son of of prominent Sunni family, but he was a member of Bashir Gemayel's Kataeb party, and was in the paramilitary group in college. Even though Kataeb was almost all Christian, he was a nationalist, as were many of his friends.

    Lebanon must be 80% Muslim these days due to explosive Muslim birthrates and Muslim immigration into a once more prosperous country. Much of this immigration was illegal.

    The big issue in the early '70's was the destabilizing influence of the Palestinian refugees. My friend said that when the government essentially allowed them to arm themselves in 1971, that was the beginning of the end.

    I was unaware the Christian clans were that cruel and ruthless among themselves. Thanks for the reporting, Steve. I imagine the fact that Christians are becoming way outnumbered might temper their inter-clan rivalries. Incidentally, there’s a fairly good bit of Lebanese Catholic and Orthodox theological commentary on the web, and you see a lot of handwringing about ‘sectarianism.’ I’m wondering if that’s really code for ‘inter-clan rivalry.’


    My friend would say that this is true. Clan is everything, and as people noted in Iraq, is what people fall back on when the state is failing.

    Lebanon was the historic Christian fortress and refuge in the Middle East.

    My friend told me about a meeting as the Civil War broke out that included a US State Dept attache. The rep told them that the US had decided that Lebanon would have to be a permanent place for the Palestinians that it had taken in so as not to destabilize Israel, and that Lebanon would have to accept that. The reply by several in the meeting was that the Maronites would rather see Lebanon leveled to the ground than to allow that to happen, Israel ally or not.

    For my buddy, the big thing was the ascent of Shia power. Most people didn't really see it coming. A few did, but they were ignored. When Musa Al Sadr (of the well known Sadr family, which includes Moqtada and Baquir, who founded the Iraq Dawa Party ) founded Amel as the first Shiite civil rights group, few could have predicted that that it would morph within a decade into Hezbollah. Shiites were the poor hillbillies who lived on mountain slopes in the south and grew vegetables, and had no power. Now they're the envy of the Middle East. Of course, nobody would have predicted Libya's Quaddafi engineering Sadr's disappearance in 1978.

    My friend told me about a meeting as the Civil War broke out that included a US State Dept attache. The rep told them that the US had decided that Lebanon would have to be a permanent place for the Palestinians that it had taken in so as not to destabilize Israel, and that Lebanon would have to accept that.

    Sounds like the Americans at present ordering the Germans to accept the Syrian refugees so as not to destabilize their project of reshaping the middle east.

  102. Consider how the Soviets used the Cubans as their Foreign Legion in Africa.

    As what? A way to lose? Better topic would be how to use leftist fifth columns to whitewash a defeat, the left’s success in that regard has been astounding.

  103. It’s pretty clear (to me at least) that if there was no Israel , then “Palestine” would just be one more Arab hellhole where the locals could fight each other (as Hamas and Fatah have already done in Gaza) and occasionally their battles would spill over and they would blow up some Americans or Europeans too. Does the world really need one more Arab hellhole? Aren’t there enough of them?

    You know, I keep telling the Jewish diaspora (Israel’s BFF, oddly enough) that the world’s full of diverse hellholes, and if we import them into the west, they’ll turn the west into just another diverse hellhole, too. But the Jewish diaspora still seems hell-bent on hellholes (except in Israel, strangely). Maybe the Unz Jews’ time would be better spent working the Jewish diaspora?

    • Replies: @5371
    Look on the bright side. Perhaps it's a sign that they really do intend to move to Israel, eventually.
  104. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    You guys are all philosophers !
    Does anyone of you know anything about Lebanon? been here? do you know who created this country?
    Apparently NO
    Maronites did, did you see the 2000 years old monasteries here? did you know they fought Turks when and gained in blood their independence while the whole Ottoman empire ruled in blood for 500 years the whole Mediterranean basin?
    You just come up with your theories
    Do you know that the Maronites were the only and only in 500 years to print Arabic?
    What is your take on Maronites? we fight for our land we lived in thousands of years
    why don’t you address who settled and slaughtered indigenous, Indian in today’s US, Aztech in Mexico,….
    So in your opinion the right to defend own land is a crime?
    then we are criminals, proudly.

  105. @Svigor

    It’s pretty clear (to me at least) that if there was no Israel , then “Palestine” would just be one more Arab hellhole where the locals could fight each other (as Hamas and Fatah have already done in Gaza) and occasionally their battles would spill over and they would blow up some Americans or Europeans too. Does the world really need one more Arab hellhole? Aren’t there enough of them?
     
    You know, I keep telling the Jewish diaspora (Israel's BFF, oddly enough) that the world's full of diverse hellholes, and if we import them into the west, they'll turn the west into just another diverse hellhole, too. But the Jewish diaspora still seems hell-bent on hellholes (except in Israel, strangely). Maybe the Unz Jews' time would be better spent working the Jewish diaspora?

    Look on the bright side. Perhaps it’s a sign that they really do intend to move to Israel, eventually.

  106. @Kamran
    It's just that the topics he writes about have a different focus. He could of course go into trudging ellipses about how the ethnic group du jour is a unable to securely take control of some hilltop because they practice inbreeding closer than third cousins, and then go at length with graphs and charts, and constantly correct every humorous observation with autistic repetition of his data.


    But would that really be the War Nerd?

    And are you really Kamran? This comment doesn’t sound like the one who was here earlier.

    • Replies: @Kamran
    Yes.

    The tone of my comments is different in some blogs or in replies to some people because I may be trolling them, which I enjoy greatly.
  107. @Gabriel m
    The "world" did not demand Europe did anything, European media outlets did and what seemed like every single university educated person under 35 took to Facebook and twitter to demonstrate what a sentimental retard they were. I actually live in Europe and you need to get it through your thick head: the Jew York Times is not forcing Europe to destroy itself, Europe's educated, young middle class demands it, the same young middle class that turned the media into a non stop PLO propaganda service during the last Gaza war.

    As for how some imaginary Israeli action would be covered in Europe, you don't need to imagine very much. Try actually learning about a continent you know nothing about.

    http://bbcwatch.org/2015/08/26/differences-in-bbc-coverage-of-migrants-in-europe-and-in-israel/

    Right now Europe, fully backed by the aforementioned dominant social group, is demanding Israel give the Golan Heights to ISIS. Seriously.

    The “world” did not demand Europe did anything,

    I disagree. For example, here is the UN calling on the EU to take another 200K refugees. Here is the UN warning Europe not to backtrack on migrant commitments post Paris. There are more, but these will suffice to show that it is more than just the European media calling for migrants.

    As for how some imaginary Israeli action would be covered in Europe, you don’t need to imagine very much. Try actually learning about a continent you know nothing about.

    No one here is saying the media doesn’t cover stories about Israel. The point is how the stories are covered. I live in the US. When a white kills a black, the story gets played endlessly in the media. It gets looped 24/7 on cable tv. But when a black kills a white, which happens daily in several places across the land, the story IS duly reported by local media. But it is never picked up nationally and looped 24/7. Technically the media can claim all those stories were reported. And they were. But clearly there is a big difference, and consequently a big impact on public opinion, when certain stories are more prominently featured.

    I have no doubt the press covers migrants being killed in Israel. Obviously I would have never heard about this recent case if they did not. But mentioning the story only once or a few times, and then not writing endless analyses and editorials on it is akin to burying it on the last page.

    On the contrary a story about a US border guard gunning down migrants, or a US crowd stomping on a wounded migrant, would be endlessly looped worldwide and the constant exposure would tend to sway public opinion.

    Ditto for Europe where the dead little boy became a cause celebre.

    I don’t see that happening with Israel and her migrant issues. It’s reported in a perfunctory manner and that’s that. It is not endlessly looped.

    you need to get it through your thick head: the Jew York Times is not forcing Europe to destroy itself

    What’s with the Jew York Times slur?

    Right now Europe, fully backed by the aforementioned dominant social group, is demanding Israel give the Golan Heights to ISIS. Seriously.

    Who is calling for the Golan Heights to be specifically given to ISIS? This sounds like hyperbole to me.

  108. @5371
    And are you really Kamran? This comment doesn't sound like the one who was here earlier.

    Yes.

    The tone of my comments is different in some blogs or in replies to some people because I may be trolling them, which I enjoy greatly.

  109. @Clyde
    Its a plus for her being from this distinguished Christian clan plus it shows how connected Carlos Slim was over in Lebanon or wherever the marriage actually took place. Lebanon was the historic Christian fortress and refuge in the Middle East. It was the Israel for Christians, a place to be secure against Jihadist Islam aggression and Middle East Christians sure could use a place like this these days. Please nail down the best accurate statistics but my memory is Lebanon was 80% Christian in 1900.
    BTW Similar to Israel which is about 20% Arab (just about all Muslims) within its actual borders. Meaning no West Bank included.

    Lebanon must be 80% Muslim these days due to explosive Muslim birthrates and Muslim immigration into a once more prosperous country. Much of this immigration was illegal.

    It was the Israel for Christians? Is this the same Israel that planned to deport all of Palestine’s Christians to Latin America but was only stopped from intervention of western countries? Is the same Israel that still persecutes the remaining Palestinian Christians and Armenians that it hasn’t expelled yet? Please don’t be ridiculous.

    Lebanon is still around half Christian and much safer than Israel, as is Jordan, and as was Syria prior to Assad losing control of the country. Israel is a very anti-Christian nation.

  110. @Ed
    Think his dad was well off & made money in real estate after the 1910 Revolution.

    He used to have a site up that went into his background. It's probably down now. The Christians & Jews from the Levantine got pretty wealthy in Mexico and much of Latin America. They generally marry among themselves in Latin America & keep the business dealings among themselves. What's odd is in the USA they intermarry quite frequently well at least they used to.

    Arab Christians are not much of an endogamous community in Latin America, most probably do intermarry. European Jews intermarry at the same rates in Latin America as they do in the USA, however the Levantine Jews almost never intermarry. There is a large Syrian-Lebanese Jewish community who not only don’t marry non-Jews they also don’t marry Ashkenazi Jews, and it’s the same in New York among their large community there as it is in Brazil and Mexico.

  111. @Jack D
    It's pretty clear (to me at least) that if there was no Israel , then "Palestine" would just be one more Arab hellhole where the locals could fight each other (as Hamas and Fatah have already done in Gaza) and occasionally their battles would spill over and they would blow up some Americans or Europeans too. Does the world really need one more Arab hellhole? Aren't there enough of them?

    You didn't mention, BTW, the Arab world's expulsion of its Jewish population after 1948 - this involved more people than the # of Arabs who fled Israel during the the '48 war. Note BTW that maybe 1/2 the Arabs of Israel stayed put (to this day) so the terror couldn't have been that terrific. Jesus said not to speak of the mote in your neighbor's eye but the beam in your own. The "mass murders" of the Israeli war of independence involved hundreds of people - nothing like the millions and millions killed in Europe. Bringing up 3,000 year old Biblical genocides is pretty weak sauce. You forgot to mention that the Jews killed Jesus too.

    If you would care to debate, or otherwise to discuss, the life of Jesus Christ, Jack, you might want to take it up with my Vatican-educated priestly brother, down in El Salvador; I am one of those long-lapsed Catholics who happens to believe that Jesus of Nazareth is purely a mythological character. (Not to worry, though, Jack: my Vatican-educated priestly brother hews quite faithfully to Vatican II’s notorious philo-Semitism! Then again, he is far less sympathetic toward political Zionism, since he is both a pacifist and a former conscientious objector.)

    “It’s pretty clear (to me at least) that if there was [sic] no Israel” that the Middle East would have been an overwhelmingly stable region, during these past several decades, with most of its state violence, and its other political upheavals, being of the intrastate variety. Those allegedly “anti-Semitic” professional diplomats in the United States Department of State, back in the day, have been proved utterly prophetic about the unmitigated disaster that has been the creation of the modern State of Israel, both for the United States itself and for the region (and world) at large. If there were a Hell, I would know just where to go looking for the shade of Harry ‘S.’ Truman….

    What hellholes those Arab countries might have proved to be, absent any Jewish interloping and meddling, is utterly beside the point, regardless. The Holocaust did not give European Jews any dispensation, whether legal or moral, to invade Palestine and to displace its existing population, utilizing widespread terror, mass murder, and ethnic cleansing. Nothing that Palestine’s Arab neighbors did, in light of the Zionists’ malign machinations, changed the legal rights of the Arab population of Palestine itself. (I will skip over the Zionists’ collusion with the King of Jordan, and their utter bad faith in accepting the non-binding terms of the United Nations’ partition plan, while fully intending to steal the rest of Palestine from its rightful Arab population, when later circumstances would allow.)

    According to an Israeli estimate, at the beginning of 2004, nearly sixty years after the end of World War II, there still were over one million “Holocaust survivors” alive in the world– which means that there had to have been a few to several million “Holocaust survivors” alive on V. E. Day, back in May 1945. I guess that the Holocaust “couldn’t have been that terrific,” either, eh, Jack? Or, as Dr. Norman Finkelstein’s late mother, a Polish-born Jew who had survived both the infamous Warsaw ghetto and several German internment camps, was wont to ask: “If everyone who claims to be a survivor actually is one, who did Hitler kill?”

    • Replies: @Vendetta
    I'm an anti-Zionist, but I tire of seeing the selectively applied legalism. No one "gave" the Arabs any "right" to invade medieval Palestine.

    The Zionists chose to live by the sword, and they're stuck with their decision now. No amount of tedious repetition of legal arguments is going to guilt them into leaving.

    Palestinians of the West Bank and in the refugee camps continue to have my sympathy, those in the Gaza Strip...it's one big insane asylum now. The Israelis drove them crazy and now their war is going to last forever.

    I just want my country out of this mess for good. Dump Israel, cut the welfare check, and don't look back.

    If everyone had had a little foresight, we'd have offered the Zionists a land grant somewhere on the West Coast, either as an independent state or a Jewish state of the U.S.

    Just imagine how many problems could have been avoided.
  112. @D. K.
    If you would care to debate, or otherwise to discuss, the life of Jesus Christ, Jack, you might want to take it up with my Vatican-educated priestly brother, down in El Salvador; I am one of those long-lapsed Catholics who happens to believe that Jesus of Nazareth is purely a mythological character. (Not to worry, though, Jack: my Vatican-educated priestly brother hews quite faithfully to Vatican II's notorious philo-Semitism! Then again, he is far less sympathetic toward political Zionism, since he is both a pacifist and a former conscientious objector.)

    "It's pretty clear (to me at least) that if there was [sic] no Israel" that the Middle East would have been an overwhelmingly stable region, during these past several decades, with most of its state violence, and its other political upheavals, being of the intrastate variety. Those allegedly "anti-Semitic" professional diplomats in the United States Department of State, back in the day, have been proved utterly prophetic about the unmitigated disaster that has been the creation of the modern State of Israel, both for the United States itself and for the region (and world) at large. If there were a Hell, I would know just where to go looking for the shade of Harry 'S.' Truman....

    What hellholes those Arab countries might have proved to be, absent any Jewish interloping and meddling, is utterly beside the point, regardless. The Holocaust did not give European Jews any dispensation, whether legal or moral, to invade Palestine and to displace its existing population, utilizing widespread terror, mass murder, and ethnic cleansing. Nothing that Palestine's Arab neighbors did, in light of the Zionists' malign machinations, changed the legal rights of the Arab population of Palestine itself. (I will skip over the Zionists' collusion with the King of Jordan, and their utter bad faith in accepting the non-binding terms of the United Nations' partition plan, while fully intending to steal the rest of Palestine from its rightful Arab population, when later circumstances would allow.)

    According to an Israeli estimate, at the beginning of 2004, nearly sixty years after the end of World War II, there still were over one million "Holocaust survivors" alive in the world-- which means that there had to have been a few to several million "Holocaust survivors" alive on V. E. Day, back in May 1945. I guess that the Holocaust "couldn't have been that terrific," either, eh, Jack? Or, as Dr. Norman Finkelstein's late mother, a Polish-born Jew who had survived both the infamous Warsaw ghetto and several German internment camps, was wont to ask: "If everyone who claims to be a survivor actually is one, who did Hitler kill?"

    I’m an anti-Zionist, but I tire of seeing the selectively applied legalism. No one “gave” the Arabs any “right” to invade medieval Palestine.

    The Zionists chose to live by the sword, and they’re stuck with their decision now. No amount of tedious repetition of legal arguments is going to guilt them into leaving.

    Palestinians of the West Bank and in the refugee camps continue to have my sympathy, those in the Gaza Strip…it’s one big insane asylum now. The Israelis drove them crazy and now their war is going to last forever.

    I just want my country out of this mess for good. Dump Israel, cut the welfare check, and don’t look back.

    If everyone had had a little foresight, we’d have offered the Zionists a land grant somewhere on the West Coast, either as an independent state or a Jewish state of the U.S.

    Just imagine how many problems could have been avoided.

    • Replies: @D. K.
    Which international law(s) or agreement(s) did the Arabs breach when they invaded and conquered Christian Palestine? The Zionists of the 1940s claimed to found their own modern Jewish state, less than an average American lifetime ago, now, under the color of law-- although they did so in utter bad faith, while using terrorism, mass murder and ethnic cleansing. To compare what they did to Palestine's native Arab population, some of whom still are alive, to what they Arabs did, over a millennium ago, is a stretch that I, as a erstwhile attorney and History major, am unwilling to try to engage....
  113. The author of this article really has no idea what he is talking about.

  114. @Vendetta
    I'm an anti-Zionist, but I tire of seeing the selectively applied legalism. No one "gave" the Arabs any "right" to invade medieval Palestine.

    The Zionists chose to live by the sword, and they're stuck with their decision now. No amount of tedious repetition of legal arguments is going to guilt them into leaving.

    Palestinians of the West Bank and in the refugee camps continue to have my sympathy, those in the Gaza Strip...it's one big insane asylum now. The Israelis drove them crazy and now their war is going to last forever.

    I just want my country out of this mess for good. Dump Israel, cut the welfare check, and don't look back.

    If everyone had had a little foresight, we'd have offered the Zionists a land grant somewhere on the West Coast, either as an independent state or a Jewish state of the U.S.

    Just imagine how many problems could have been avoided.

    Which international law(s) or agreement(s) did the Arabs breach when they invaded and conquered Christian Palestine? The Zionists of the 1940s claimed to found their own modern Jewish state, less than an average American lifetime ago, now, under the color of law– although they did so in utter bad faith, while using terrorism, mass murder and ethnic cleansing. To compare what they did to Palestine’s native Arab population, some of whom still are alive, to what they Arabs did, over a millennium ago, is a stretch that I, as a erstwhile attorney and History major, am unwilling to try to engage….

    • Replies: @Jack D
    Wait a second - didn't you just bring up Biblical genocides earlier in this thread? What the Arabs did 1,000 years ago is off the table but what the Jews did 3,000 years ago is not?
    , @Cyrus
    Arabs aren't a genetic people. They're all natives of different lands assimilated into the Arab nation, much like how Turks aren't actually Asians but native Anatolians that were assimilated. This means Palestinian Arabs are the descendents of people living in Palestine prior to the Arab invasions, and for your information many Palestinians are Christians that were also not spared the Jewish-led ethnic cleansings. Your argument is weak and ill informed.
  115. @D. K.
    Which international law(s) or agreement(s) did the Arabs breach when they invaded and conquered Christian Palestine? The Zionists of the 1940s claimed to found their own modern Jewish state, less than an average American lifetime ago, now, under the color of law-- although they did so in utter bad faith, while using terrorism, mass murder and ethnic cleansing. To compare what they did to Palestine's native Arab population, some of whom still are alive, to what they Arabs did, over a millennium ago, is a stretch that I, as a erstwhile attorney and History major, am unwilling to try to engage....

    Wait a second – didn’t you just bring up Biblical genocides earlier in this thread? What the Arabs did 1,000 years ago is off the table but what the Jews did 3,000 years ago is not?

    • Replies: @D. K.
    Yes, Jack, I asked you a direct question to which you declined to give a direct answer-- as, indeed, you do for most of the questions that I direct at you! The reasons that I found it relevant, vis-a-vis your own comments, are (a) your own people exult in the genocides that you collectively claim to have committed (which, by the way, I actually believe to be mythical-- just like Jesus of Nazareth!), to the point of your extolling them in your own sacred scriptures (in what my people call the "Old Testament"); and (b) your own people also often claim that you now are collectively beyond others' moral reproach-- or even the international community's legal purview-- because of the supposedly transcendental uniqueness of the Holocaust, as an historical event.

    It seems to me that any Jew who believes both that those Biblical genocides actually did take place, as recited in scripture, and that some demographic group, of whatever range (Germans, Europeans, indigenous Europeans, Christians, gentiles), bears an eternal and irremovable stain on its members' collective soul and/or conscience, and owes an eternal and unpayable debt to the Jewish people, because of the Holocaust, either must admit that his or her own people have been carrying a similar stain, and a similar debt, for thousands of years, by now, because of his or her own ancestors' completed (!) genocides against the original inhabitants of Palestine, or else he or she must make the particularistic (and intrinsically racist) counterclaim that the moral strictures that apply to the goyim simply do not apply to the Jews themselves, because Y-HW-H had approved of those ancient genocides. In the latter case, it also seems to me, there simply would be no reason for my own people, nor any other, to give a proverbially flying fuck what you and your own people actually think about us, or about anything else!?!

    The reason that I declined to engage with the subsequent commenter's comparison, on the other hand, was that he was explicitly posing the issue in terms of legality. As an erstwhile attorney and History major, I do know that there was no illegality involved in what the Arabs did, well over a millennium ago, by now-- any more than there was in what your own putative ancestors claimed to have done in ancient Palestine, a few thousand years ago! Nor is there any plausible remedy, now, for what happened, way back when. What the Zionists did, in the 1940s, on the other hand, was done in an era of international law, and their own claim of statehood was explicitly made on that very basis. The same goes for everything done by the State of Israel, ever since. Therein lies the distinction, Jack, in my respective responses to you and the other commenter. Capisci, ragazzo?
    , @Kamran
    Arabs and jews are both descended from a single tribe of semitic herders, who inhabited the levant more than 5,000 years ago. Based on the preponderance of Y haplogroup J1 among both jews and arabs (Muhammad himself belonged to Y-DNA J-P58 as do Cohanem, not a coincidence, as Muhammad belonged to an elite arabian pagan clan that traced it's lineage to Abraham himself, that guy who tried to kill his son because god told him to do so, and god knows best).


    If we want the world to be a safe place, we have to ban semitic languages, semitic religion, and all and any mention of semitic "spiritual" values. No, other religious tradition has been as bloodthirsty as this one.

    As an educational reference to understand current events, I recommend each and every one of you read what Dio Cassius had to say about the Jewish uprisings in the eastern Mediterranean throughout the first century leading up to the destruction of the second temple.

    Before reading those texts, I thought the Romans were a cruel, brutal, imperialistic people, whose religious intolerance resulted in only that pitiful wailing wall remaining where the temple used to stand. Now I know better.

  116. @Jack D
    Wait a second - didn't you just bring up Biblical genocides earlier in this thread? What the Arabs did 1,000 years ago is off the table but what the Jews did 3,000 years ago is not?

    Yes, Jack, I asked you a direct question to which you declined to give a direct answer– as, indeed, you do for most of the questions that I direct at you! The reasons that I found it relevant, vis-a-vis your own comments, are (a) your own people exult in the genocides that you collectively claim to have committed (which, by the way, I actually believe to be mythical– just like Jesus of Nazareth!), to the point of your extolling them in your own sacred scriptures (in what my people call the “Old Testament”); and (b) your own people also often claim that you now are collectively beyond others’ moral reproach– or even the international community’s legal purview– because of the supposedly transcendental uniqueness of the Holocaust, as an historical event.

    It seems to me that any Jew who believes both that those Biblical genocides actually did take place, as recited in scripture, and that some demographic group, of whatever range (Germans, Europeans, indigenous Europeans, Christians, gentiles), bears an eternal and irremovable stain on its members’ collective soul and/or conscience, and owes an eternal and unpayable debt to the Jewish people, because of the Holocaust, either must admit that his or her own people have been carrying a similar stain, and a similar debt, for thousands of years, by now, because of his or her own ancestors’ completed (!) genocides against the original inhabitants of Palestine, or else he or she must make the particularistic (and intrinsically racist) counterclaim that the moral strictures that apply to the goyim simply do not apply to the Jews themselves, because Y-HW-H had approved of those ancient genocides. In the latter case, it also seems to me, there simply would be no reason for my own people, nor any other, to give a proverbially flying fuck what you and your own people actually think about us, or about anything else!?!

    The reason that I declined to engage with the subsequent commenter’s comparison, on the other hand, was that he was explicitly posing the issue in terms of legality. As an erstwhile attorney and History major, I do know that there was no illegality involved in what the Arabs did, well over a millennium ago, by now– any more than there was in what your own putative ancestors claimed to have done in ancient Palestine, a few thousand years ago! Nor is there any plausible remedy, now, for what happened, way back when. What the Zionists did, in the 1940s, on the other hand, was done in an era of international law, and their own claim of statehood was explicitly made on that very basis. The same goes for everything done by the State of Israel, ever since. Therein lies the distinction, Jack, in my respective responses to you and the other commenter. Capisci, ragazzo?

  117. @Jack D
    Wait a second - didn't you just bring up Biblical genocides earlier in this thread? What the Arabs did 1,000 years ago is off the table but what the Jews did 3,000 years ago is not?

    Arabs and jews are both descended from a single tribe of semitic herders, who inhabited the levant more than 5,000 years ago. Based on the preponderance of Y haplogroup J1 among both jews and arabs (Muhammad himself belonged to Y-DNA J-P58 as do Cohanem, not a coincidence, as Muhammad belonged to an elite arabian pagan clan that traced it’s lineage to Abraham himself, that guy who tried to kill his son because god told him to do so, and god knows best).

    If we want the world to be a safe place, we have to ban semitic languages, semitic religion, and all and any mention of semitic “spiritual” values. No, other religious tradition has been as bloodthirsty as this one.

    As an educational reference to understand current events, I recommend each and every one of you read what Dio Cassius had to say about the Jewish uprisings in the eastern Mediterranean throughout the first century leading up to the destruction of the second temple.

    Before reading those texts, I thought the Romans were a cruel, brutal, imperialistic people, whose religious intolerance resulted in only that pitiful wailing wall remaining where the temple used to stand. Now I know better.

    • Replies: @5371
    [As an educational reference to understand current events, I recommend each and every one of you read what Dio Cassius had to say about the Jewish uprisings in the eastern Mediterranean throughout the first century leading up to the destruction of the second temple.]

    Spoiler: they cut out their victims' intestines and tied them in knots around their heads.

  118. @Kamran
    Arabs and jews are both descended from a single tribe of semitic herders, who inhabited the levant more than 5,000 years ago. Based on the preponderance of Y haplogroup J1 among both jews and arabs (Muhammad himself belonged to Y-DNA J-P58 as do Cohanem, not a coincidence, as Muhammad belonged to an elite arabian pagan clan that traced it's lineage to Abraham himself, that guy who tried to kill his son because god told him to do so, and god knows best).


    If we want the world to be a safe place, we have to ban semitic languages, semitic religion, and all and any mention of semitic "spiritual" values. No, other religious tradition has been as bloodthirsty as this one.

    As an educational reference to understand current events, I recommend each and every one of you read what Dio Cassius had to say about the Jewish uprisings in the eastern Mediterranean throughout the first century leading up to the destruction of the second temple.

    Before reading those texts, I thought the Romans were a cruel, brutal, imperialistic people, whose religious intolerance resulted in only that pitiful wailing wall remaining where the temple used to stand. Now I know better.

    [As an educational reference to understand current events, I recommend each and every one of you read what Dio Cassius had to say about the Jewish uprisings in the eastern Mediterranean throughout the first century leading up to the destruction of the second temple.]

    Spoiler: they cut out their victims’ intestines and tied them in knots around their heads.

  119. @Romanian
    Rwanda really is an interesting country, though I don't know how well this client warrior state business sits with me. The War Nerd, since he's been mentioned here before, was a fan of Tutsis and thought that Rwanda should have had conqueror's rights over the Congo. His take on why African wars never really go anywhere and achieve some lasting positive results (a strong and stable centralized state that can develop) because of constant Western interference was illuminating.

    https://www.nsfwcorp.com/dispatch/tutsi-empire-interrupted/

    Seems like an idea that could be abused pretty badly, yeah. Just sounding off after I’d had a bit to drink. Major Dolan fan, and he was pretty much right about that. Really nothing boils my blood more than seeing hte progressives turn on Rwanda in the last few years. Now that it’s the region’s success story they hate the place, they hate Kagame and want him gone yesterday, they don’t care if itll start a civil war there again or not.

    The Hutu civil elite was always close with the French and Belgian governments and most of them got away to Europe. I do wonder how many of them are responsible for these stories. It’s always this bullshit ‘anti-imperialist’ slant on it, Paul Kagame being some US/Israeli agent who “triggered” the Genocide through the RPF’s rebellion, as if that was a natural response anyone should have expected. And then all these stories trying to spin the Congo Wars into some Rwandan-committed genocide where they murdered millions of people.

    The neo-progressives have it out for them, and the problem is the average person doesn’t have enough of a grouding about Rwanda’s background to even recognize there’s a slant to the story, so it fools a lot of sane, non-ideological on the left and right as well.

  120. @D. K.
    Which international law(s) or agreement(s) did the Arabs breach when they invaded and conquered Christian Palestine? The Zionists of the 1940s claimed to found their own modern Jewish state, less than an average American lifetime ago, now, under the color of law-- although they did so in utter bad faith, while using terrorism, mass murder and ethnic cleansing. To compare what they did to Palestine's native Arab population, some of whom still are alive, to what they Arabs did, over a millennium ago, is a stretch that I, as a erstwhile attorney and History major, am unwilling to try to engage....

    Arabs aren’t a genetic people. They’re all natives of different lands assimilated into the Arab nation, much like how Turks aren’t actually Asians but native Anatolians that were assimilated. This means Palestinian Arabs are the descendents of people living in Palestine prior to the Arab invasions, and for your information many Palestinians are Christians that were also not spared the Jewish-led ethnic cleansings. Your argument is weak and ill informed.

    • Replies: @D. K.
    Sorry, but I simply fail to see how your rejoinder addresses anything that I had said in comparing the Arab conquest of Palestine, over a millennium ago, to the Zionist conquest of the 1940s!?!
  121. @Cyrus
    Arabs aren't a genetic people. They're all natives of different lands assimilated into the Arab nation, much like how Turks aren't actually Asians but native Anatolians that were assimilated. This means Palestinian Arabs are the descendents of people living in Palestine prior to the Arab invasions, and for your information many Palestinians are Christians that were also not spared the Jewish-led ethnic cleansings. Your argument is weak and ill informed.

    Sorry, but I simply fail to see how your rejoinder addresses anything that I had said in comparing the Arab conquest of Palestine, over a millennium ago, to the Zionist conquest of the 1940s!?!

  122. @emilio zapata
    Maria de Jesus is the type of ultra-Catholic name you’d find most often among the reactionary upper class that pines for Franco

    Maria de is a popular name for Mexican girls of all classes, I know several Mexican sisters that have their names start with Maria de.

    Ximena is either Catalan or an affected old spelling. Likely either from Spain or upper class Latin American.

    Ximena is a standard Mexican name since in Mexico the letter X is pronounced as the letter J. In Spain, Mexico is written as Mejico.

    Ximena is a standard Mexican name since in Mexico the letter X is pronounced as the letter J. In Spain, Mexico is written as Mejico.

    No, the X sounding like J in Latin America is limited to a small number of Indian derived words. It was initially a stand-in for sounds not found in normal Spanish. That’s why you also have the x making other sounds, like Taxco, where the x is said like an English soft s, and Ixtapa, where it is pronounced like an English x or “ks” sound.

    The X>J transition in Latin names that includes Ximena>Jimena and Xavier>Javier came hundred of years earlier as part of the evolution from early to middle Spanish.

    In the vast majority of cases, Mexicans say “x” as “ks” just like in Spain.

  123. @Steve Sailer
    The history of war does show numerous examples of people rising to the occasion and getting themselves organized, like the Prussians after all of Germany got kicked around in 1618-1648. The lowly Lebanese Shi'ites got themselves better organized and surprised Israel with their defensive capability in 2006.

    Mr. Sailer, you should do a post on Lebanon as a victim of diversity and a harbinger for Western problems.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Lebanon

    Check out how the Christian population of the country has fluctuated, from 85% in 1900 to a low of 25% in 1985 and 40% today, only after the civil war. It’s not like they were converting. This is population displacement and being overwhelmed by fertility rates and immigrants (including the Palestinian refugees).

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS