The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 iSteve BlogTeasers
Trump's Luck: Vatican Walls Were Built by Pope St. Leo IV After Musselman Sack of Old St. Peter's and St. Paul's-Outside-The-Walls
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Strings  Include Comments

Biff Tannen

In the alternative history of the 1989 sequel movie Back to the Future 2, villain Biff Tannen is a fabulously wealthy casino owner known as The Luckiest Man on Earth because he has built his fortune by betting with uncanny accuracy on sports. (Biff’s secret is that Doc Brown’s time machine was used to visit the future, from whence he obtained a paperback sports almanac). Lately, co-screenwriter Bob Gale has been claiming that Biff was based on Donald Trump.

Unlike with the character of real estate tycoon Daniel Clamp in 1990′s Gremlins 2, I don’t recall this coming up at the time. But it’s not implausible: Trump has been famous forever and his personality has been exactly the same for all these decades (Trump is the anti-Bowie, never reinventing himself). Thus, I was flipping the channels tonight and on one of those digital broadcast networks that recycles really old TV shows, there was Johnny Carson … telling a Donald Trump joke.

(On the other hand, director and co-writer Bob Zemeckis’s account is that Biff Tannen is based on studio executive Ned Tanen, who threw Zemeckis and Gale’s screenplay for I Wanna Hold Your Hand on the floor because he thought it was anti-Semitic.)

Whether or not Biff was based on Trump, for the last 8 months Trump really has been the Luckiest Man on Earth as every spat he’s gotten into turns out golden for him.

In the latest, Pope Francis dissed Trump, saying, “A person who thinks only about building walls, wherever they may be, and not building bridges, is not Christian.”

Trump wrote on Facebook:

In response to the Pope:

If and when the Vatican is attacked by ISIS, which as everyone knows is ISIS’s ultimate trophy, I can promise you that the Pope would have only wished and prayed that Donald Trump would have been President because this would not have happened.

Trump’s supporters tweeted back that, of course, the Vatican is within a wall.

But, as usual with Trump lately, it turns out even better than that: The wall around the Vatican was built by Pope St. Leo IV, a rather Trumpish-sounding fellow, following … the Arab Muslim sack of the Vatican in 846.

St. Paul’s-Outside-the-Walls

From Wikipedia:

Arab raid against Rome

The Arab raid against Rome was an Arab raid in 846 against Rome. Saracen raiders plundered the outskirts of the city, sacking Old St. Peter’s and St. Paul’s-Outside-the-Walls Basilicas, but were prevented from entering the city itself by the Aurelian Wall.

In the 820s, the Aghlabids of Ifriqiya (known by medieval Italians as the Saracens) began the conquest of Sicily. … A large force set sail from Campania, landed at Porto and Ostia in 846. The Arabs struck as the Roman militia hastily retreated to the safety of the Roman walls.[1]

The Arab raiders seem to have known about Rome’s extraordinary treasures. Some basilicas, such as St. Peter and Saint Paul Outside the Walls, were outside the Aurelian walls, and thus easy targets. They were “filled to overflowing with rich liturgical vessels and with jeweled reliquaries housing all of the relics recently amassed”. As a result, the raiders pillaged the surroundings of the city and the two holy shrines.

Shortly after the siege Pope Leo IV built a strong wall on the right bank of the Tiber, in order to protect the Church of St. Peter. The encircled territory, defended by Castel Sant’Angelo, was named after the pope Leonine City

Similarly, the New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia reports:

Pope St. Leo IV

(Reigned 847-55)

A Roman and the son of Radoald, was unanimously elected to succeed Sergius II, and as the alarming attack of the Saracens on Rome in 846 caused the people to fear for the safety of the city, he was consecrated (10 April, 847) without the consent of the emperor. … As soon as Leo, much against his will, became pope, he began to take precautions against a repetition of the Saracen [Muslim] raid of 846. He put the walls of the city into a thorough state of repair, entirely rebuilding fifteen of the great towers. He was the first to enclose the Vatican hill by a wall. To do this, he received money from the emperor, and help from all the cities and agricultural colonies (domus cultae) of the Duchy of Rome. The work took him four years to accomplish, and the newly fortified portion was called the Leonine City, after him. In 852 the fortifications were completed, and were blessed by the pope with great solemnity.

Whilst the work of refortifying the city was in progress, a great fleet of the Saracens sailed for Rome, seemingly from Sardinia, but it was completely destroyed off Ostia by the allied fleets of Rome, Naples, Amalfi, and Gaeta, and by a tempest (849). When the rebuilding of the walls of Rome was accomplished, Leo rebuilt Portus, and handed it over to a number of Corsican exiles, whom the ravages of the Saracens had driven from their homes. Other cities too in the Roman duchy were fortified, either by the pope himself or in consequence of his exhortations.

Leo also endeavoured to make good the damage which the Saracen raid of 846 had done to the different churches. St. Peter’s had suffered very severely, and though as a whole it never again reached its former magnificence, Leo managed to make it in parts at least more beautiful than it had been before. St. Martin’s, where he had been educated, the Quatuor Coronati, of which he had been the priest, the Lateran Palace, the Anglo-Saxon Borgo, Subiaco, and many other places both in Rome and out of it were renovated by the energetic Leo.

The rest of the entry about Pope St. Leo IV, who liked to build things and name them after himself, recounts the various Trump-like feuds he got into with other Dark Age celebrities.

 
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
[]
  1. Trump for Murifex Maximus!

    Read More
    • Agree: International Jew
    • Replies: @International Jew
    Good one. Of course in all fairness, a pontif(ex) is literally a bridge builder, so the Pope is in character!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    http://www.unz.com/isteve/trumps-luck-vatican-walls-built-by-pope-leo-iv-after-musselman-sack-of-old-st-peters-and-st-pauls-outside-the-walls/#comment-1330344
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. Pope St. Leo IV

    Or as he is now known – Leo “the Islamophobic Pope”.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Flinders Petrie

    Or as he is now known – Leo “the Islamophobic Pope”.
     
    Islamopope? Actually, that better suits Pope Francis, given his liberal stance on Muslims and immigration
  3. Wasn’t it the older Biff of the future who visited the past?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Yes it was. Marty and Doc visited the future (2015) in their flying time machine car. (In the 1980s, when the movie was made, it was clear that by 2015 there would be flying cars). Marty got the 2015 sports almanac and told Doc how cool it would be to go back to the past and win every sports bet. Old Biff overheard this, and, when Marty and Doc were away from the car, Old Biff used the time machine to go back to 1955 and give the sports almanac to Young Biff.
  4. This media pope is getting on my nerves.

    Read More
    • Agree: Bill
    • Replies: @Buffalo Joe
    reinor Tor, Remember , the Pope is a Jesuit. The Jesuits pride themselves on being edgy and active in politics, but mostly anti-establishment activity. I again recommend a book by Peter DeRose, a former priest (Jesuit?) titled "Pope Patrick", an easy read. The fictitious Patrick meddles in politic and even extends a hand to the Muslims with startling results. Worth picking up.
    , @Tracy

    This media pope is getting on my nerves.
     
    You and me both --- or you and me and a lot of Catholics all. "Trad" Catholics -- i.e., traditional-style Catholics -- are very much not into this Pope. We also know that papal mumblings do not the magisterium make. But I worry about the "neo-Catholic" types. There's some papolatry going on with some of them...
  5. Since he entered the race, I’ve heard people talk about The Donald as a bumbler, a clown, a fool, an idiot. Well, he’s no idiot, and that should have been obvious from the start. As to the rest, for some reason I’m reminded a bit of Casablanca where Strosser and Renault are discussing the blundering Americans.

    Major Strasser: You give him credit for too much cleverness. My impression was that he’s just another blundering American.

    Captain Renault: We musn’t underestimate “American blundering”. I was with them when they “blundered” into Berlin in 1918.

    Read More
    • Agree: Vendetta, Brutusale
    • Replies: @Eustace Tilley (not)


    How could Captain Renault have done that when the Americans did not enter Berlin in 1918, by "blundering" or otherwise?

    The much-overrated "Casablanca" is half a love story, half an Allied propaganda film. I don't let my enjoyment of the former interfere with my skepticism about the latter.
    , @tbraton
    "Captain Renault: We musn’t underestimate “American blundering”. I was with them when they “blundered” into Berlin in 1918."

    A fine movie, but clearly propaganda. The Americans never got close to Berlin in WWI. The Armistice was declared with the lines of battle completely outside Germany. According to Wikipedia:

    "The occupation of the Rhineland took place following the Armistice. The occupying armies consisted of American, Belgian, British and French forces.

    In November 1918, the Allies had ample supplies of men and materiel to invade Germany. Yet at the time of the armistice, no Allied force had crossed the German frontier; the Western Front was still some 450 mi (720 km) from Berlin; and the Kaiser's armies had retreated from the battlefield in good order."

    This reminds me of an incident which occurred about 20 years ago. I was friends at the time with a couple consisting of a British husband and his Norwegian wife. During the dinner conversation, I made a point about what a mistake it was for America to enter WWI. Immediately, the Norwegian wife said it was a mistake for America not to get involved in WWI from the start and thus succeed in ending the war earlier. I said that was a remarkable statement to be made by someone whose country (Norway) had managed to stay of the war completely. She insisted that Norway had fought in WWI, so I had to go retrieve a history book or the Columbia Encyclopedia to show her that Norway had never fought in WWI. She was taken aback and muttered something about how her grandmother told her stories when she was growing up about the misbehavior of German soldiers, which indicated to me that she was confusing WWI with WWII. So much for the myth that Europeans are better educated than Americans (she was a college graduate, btw).
    , @dearieme
    "I was with them when they “blundered” into Berlin in 1918." But they didn't, did they?
    , @Honesthughgrant
    Casablanca is a movie not a documentary. "Blundering into Berlin" sounds a lot better than "blundering into Sedan and helping force the Germans to declare an Armistice".
    , @Neil Templeton
    Whatever. It's within the margin of error. As currently calculated.
  6. Eustace Tilley (not) [AKA "Schiller/Nietzsche"] says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Hunsdon
    Since he entered the race, I've heard people talk about The Donald as a bumbler, a clown, a fool, an idiot. Well, he's no idiot, and that should have been obvious from the start. As to the rest, for some reason I'm reminded a bit of Casablanca where Strosser and Renault are discussing the blundering Americans.

    Major Strasser: You give him credit for too much cleverness. My impression was that he's just another blundering American.

    Captain Renault: We musn't underestimate "American blundering". I was with them when they "blundered" into Berlin in 1918.

    How could Captain Renault have done that when the Americans did not enter Berlin in 1918, by “blundering” or otherwise?

    The much-overrated “Casablanca” is half a love story, half an Allied propaganda film. I don’t let my enjoyment of the former interfere with my skepticism about the latter.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Richard S
    Yes, exactly! On 11 November 1918 the German army was everywhere positioned on Feindesland. And why would the Germans and Vichy officials honour exit visas signed by General de Gaulle?!
    , @Hunsdon
    In replying here, I hope to respond to what most everyone said, and if only I knew better how to "tag you in" I would do so.

    Casablanca is a great film, a wonderful film, a magical film . . . that is, at its heart, deeply flawed agitprop.

    From a rigorous standpoint it's a mess. How many different drinks does Victor Lazlo drink, after all? Oh, THROW the Vichy water in the toilet, Rick!

    And yet, and yet . . . and yet it works. It's good propaganda, it hits the right notes. Yeah, the Americans didn't blunder into Berlin in 1918 . . . but they sure did in '45.
    , @Busby
    I'm inclined to give the Captain a bit of leeway. The AEF occupied Koblenz in 1918 and left in 1923.
    , @Ed
    I watched Casablanca two days ago. Its still one of my favorite movies, but the propaganda is now really obvious to me. I think it came out right before Torch.

    However, I spotted only two real historical errors, which is not too bad for Hollywood. One of them was the Americans marching into Berlin in 1918. This simply didn't happen. Actually it didn't happen in 1945 either. The second was a short subplot of a female Bulgarian refugee that Renault was trying to take advantage of. In reality the Bulgarian government made an arrangement with Hitler where they helped him out in the Balkans, enabling them to settle some scores with the Serbs and Greeks, but were otherwise left alone and they didn't send troops to Russia. It was probably one of the better countries to be in Europe, at least until Stalin got to them in 1944. They even managed to protect their Jews. I doubt the screenwriters could tell one Eastern European country from another, but there were no refugees from Bulgaria.
  7. Hey iSteve, doesn’t the whole migrant invasion sound like a Gremlins movie? A few Gremlins show up and the Chancellor adopts them, but then they start mysteriously growing in numbers.

    Tragedy straight outta Gremlins

    Iraqi refugee raped 10yo boy in Austria, says it was ‘sexual emergency’

    https://www.rt.com/news/331594-iraqi-refugee-raped-boy/

    In the movie the Gremlin would be chopped to pieces before an actual rape could occur.

    Read More
  8. I wonder why the communist Pope Francis didn’t take the opportunity when he was in Mexico, a country that is nominally 80+% Roman Catholic, to criticize Mexico for its restrictive immigration laws, which I understand are much more restrictive than those of the U.S. His words might have had much more effect in a country which is more than 3X Catholic than the U.S. (percentage-wise) and thus more inclined to follow the wisdom of their Holy Pontiff and more likely to accept his criticism that such restrictive immigration policies are not “Christian.” Where did the Church find this left-wing buffoon who insists in intruding into political matters that have little connection to the Church’s mission?

    Read More
    • Replies: @tbraton
    Scott Adams has this amusing take on the Francis-Donald dispute on his dilbert blog:

    " I could write a long essay about this Pope versus Trump situation, but I think it will be funnier to summarize it instead. What follows is – as far as I can tell – an accurate description of what happened.


    1. The Pope criticized Donald Trump.

    2. The Pope’s credibility declined.

    If this were fiction, no one would believe it.

    I predict that the Pope will issue a public apology to Trump for questioning his faith, as opposed to his policies. [Update: And here it is, sort of.]"
    , @TG
    Well said. It is of course the height of hypocrisy for the pope to go to Mexico and criticize Trump's proposed immigration policies, when Mexico's actual policies are many times more racist, xenophobic, brutal, and harsh. And of course, the Pope himself allows zero muslim refugees to wander into the Vatican.

    However, buffoon? Perhaps not. How about whore. Remember, the Catholic church needs donations from reach people. And rich people love cheap labor. If the pope was not carrying water for the people making all that money from cheap foreign labor (I hear that Merkel is proposing to force the refugees to work for big German companies for a euro an hour!!!! How profitable is that!), then donations to the Catholic church would like decrease significantly.

    It's hard to go too wrong in analyzing politics, than by following the money.
    , @unpc downunder
    Calling him a "communist pope" is a little silly. Marxists are self-declared atheists with a history of killing priests and destroying churches in the name of scientific materialism. Francis is a left-liberal progressive who is going with the flow.

    Unlike communists and libertarians, progressives are too sentimental and politically correct to be materialistic atheists, and instead become wishy-washy spiritualists - a description which sums up most western religious leaders.
    , @Tracy

    Where did the Church find this left-wing buffoon who insists in intruding into political matters that have little connection to the Church’s mission?
     
    Three words: "the Jesuit Order." There are probably only 5 Jezzies left who are true to their founder's mission.
  9. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/20/world/europe/in-defense-of-trump-some-point-wrongly-to-vatican-walls.html

    Some of the walls in Vatican City were built in the ninth century by Pope Leo IV in an attempt to protect it from attacks by pirates and other marauders, historians said. But other stretches of wall were built during the 15th and 16th centuries, Dr. Mannion said, less as a defensive measure and more as “a political and cultural statement” about the cultural and political power of the pope.

    Nice way to not say Saracens.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Seth Largo
    Reference to unwanted memories is Oldthink. The NYT does not approve of Oldthink. Focus instead on Ingsoc-approved memories, such as slavery and Emmett Till. That is Goodthink.
    , @Abe
    From the NYT's article:


    “The rhetoric from Trump’s team is misinformation, and it is not true,” said Gerard Mannion, a professor of Catholic Studies at Georgetown University in Washington.

    It isn’t all surrounded by walls, and it’s not like you need a separate visa or a passport to enter,” he said...

    There are, to be sure, formidable walls in Vatican City, and much of of the site, including the gardens and the modest guesthouse that is home to Francis, is set behind them. But the walls do not entirely enclose the city-state, and in the modern era they are not meant to, historians said.

     

    This reminds of the articles in the NYT, Nate Silver's site, and some foundation report (Brenner?) that alternatively said homicides are up 15% this year but crime's not really up, or that sure, crime is up this year, but there is no systemic reason that explains it- maybe in 30 years after enough metastudies are published can we start to approximate.

    Can we please get better POZ interlocutors, like now, instead of this second-string sh!t? I'm getting tired of debating dumb substitute teacher types, who when they're called out, turn red in the face, pick up the nearest textbook, read several paragraphs corroborating what you just said, then triumphantly slam down the book as they bleat out "See!"
  10. An old line in politics is that some candidates are blessed to have great enemies. Clinton was the last guy who fit this role. Newt Gingrich was a great foil for Clinton and probably saved his presidency. A Speaker who was smart and restrained could have made Clinton’s life hell. Instead, the ridiculous Newt made Clinton look like Churchill and reminded everyone that you could do worse than the soft-core Caligula.

    Trump has also been blessed with some useful enemies. Jeb was a great a foil. Cruz, surprisingly, has been a great enemy of Trump because Cruz is the one guy everyone agrees is a s-bag, even if you like him. His friends say he is a d-bag. When the charge against Trump is that he is aesthetically unacceptable, having that charge made by a guy who reminds everyone of a young Montgomery Burns is manna from heaven.

    Of course, big personalities attract a lot of crazies so maybe the the law of averages just kicks in for guys like Trump.

    Read More
  11. the pope was right.there is little evidence that Donald is a practising Christian.

    Read More
    • Replies: @rod1963
    Neither is the Pope. He seems to be a practicing Marxist from the agendas he pushes.
    , @Ron Mexico
    The Pope didn't use the word "practicing". Seeing that the Donald is a baptized Christian, the Pope was incorrect.
  12. FNC is claiming that a Wall Street Journal/NBC poll shows Cruz leading Trump in SC.

    Funny how a poll commissioned by both the Globalist Sociopaths at the WSJ and the Cultural Marxists at NBC could be so wrong.

    Trump keeps gaining momentum not to mention millions in free advertising with these bogus polls. FNC not to mention CNN and the rest of the dinosaur news networks have no other choice but to quote Trump telling the world that they are full of it.

    In response to Pope’s latest idiocy I would love to have Trump sit down for a one on one with Bill Warner the retired college professor who runs the website Political Islam. Almost single handedly Warner has stopped the construction of several Saudi financed mega mosques across middle America.

    The Cultural Marxist Media would have the vapors over the lastest antics of our soon to be “President Sh*tlord”.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Obamadon_Imbecilis
    WSJ also had a national poll earlier in the week showing Cruz ahead nationally, while all the other polls coming out at the same time had Trump at +15-20%. Either they're brilliant and catching something no one else has or the central media outlet of corporate conservatism is rigging polls to push a narrative.
  13. Like Sellar and Yeatman, sometimes Steve writes to console his readers. Getting in a front-page fight with the Pope is monumentally stupid. If Trump were a stock, even the dullest brokerage on Wall Street would be dumping it by now.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JimB
    Do I detect the arrival of trolls at iSteve? It was bound to happen as Steve's comments and ideas are becoming frequently apparent in Drudge, Breitbart, and the DC, not to mention in the Trump and Cruz primary campaigns.

    Now if only Drudge would actually link to iSteve.
    , @Chrisnonymous
    Yeah, 'cause he'll turn off Hispanic voters, who, as every Republican knows, are the key to electoral victory...

    or maybe you're thinking the Irish Catholics in Boston are finally going to turn MA into a blue state?

    or the great ecumenical love of Southern Baptists for Rome will make Trump lose SC?

    or he'll lose favor of the world? You definitely can't have a US president that's on the wrong side of European opinion!
    , @Difference Maker
    It's fine. Don't you worry. Trump knows what he's doing
    , @Hunsdon
    You know the funny thing, keypusher? They've been saying this from the beginning. "Oh this is it." "This time he's gone too far." So far, they just keep being wrong. There's beginning to be a sense of desperation to what they say.
    , @Divine Right
    "Getting in a front-page fight with the Pope is monumentally stupid."

    Why? Were Kennedy's detractors right after all?
  14. Steve, keep bringing back “Musselman”. Charles Portis uses that term to great comedic effect in a couple passages in Masters of Atlantis, his best book.

    Read More
  15. @Hunsdon
    Since he entered the race, I've heard people talk about The Donald as a bumbler, a clown, a fool, an idiot. Well, he's no idiot, and that should have been obvious from the start. As to the rest, for some reason I'm reminded a bit of Casablanca where Strosser and Renault are discussing the blundering Americans.

    Major Strasser: You give him credit for too much cleverness. My impression was that he's just another blundering American.

    Captain Renault: We musn't underestimate "American blundering". I was with them when they "blundered" into Berlin in 1918.

    “Captain Renault: We musn’t underestimate “American blundering”. I was with them when they “blundered” into Berlin in 1918.”

    A fine movie, but clearly propaganda. The Americans never got close to Berlin in WWI. The Armistice was declared with the lines of battle completely outside Germany. According to Wikipedia:

    “The occupation of the Rhineland took place following the Armistice. The occupying armies consisted of American, Belgian, British and French forces.

    In November 1918, the Allies had ample supplies of men and materiel to invade Germany. Yet at the time of the armistice, no Allied force had crossed the German frontier; the Western Front was still some 450 mi (720 km) from Berlin; and the Kaiser’s armies had retreated from the battlefield in good order.”

    This reminds me of an incident which occurred about 20 years ago. I was friends at the time with a couple consisting of a British husband and his Norwegian wife. During the dinner conversation, I made a point about what a mistake it was for America to enter WWI. Immediately, the Norwegian wife said it was a mistake for America not to get involved in WWI from the start and thus succeed in ending the war earlier. I said that was a remarkable statement to be made by someone whose country (Norway) had managed to stay of the war completely. She insisted that Norway had fought in WWI, so I had to go retrieve a history book or the Columbia Encyclopedia to show her that Norway had never fought in WWI. She was taken aback and muttered something about how her grandmother told her stories when she was growing up about the misbehavior of German soldiers, which indicated to me that she was confusing WWI with WWII. So much for the myth that Europeans are better educated than Americans (she was a college graduate, btw).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Diversity Heretic
    The Norwegian woman was even more mistaken. Norway didn't enter World War II at the outset. It was invaded by Germany in 1940. As I recall, Britain had plans for a similar invasion although they were never executed. Norway stayed occupied by German forces until after the surrender in May 1945--German forces then withdrew. To my knowledge German misbehavior in Norway was not outside the norm of the ordinary criminality of young men--I know of no atrocities committed by Germans in Norway, although I assume that the occupation forces killed resistance fightes and tortured them on occasion. Still and all, nothing like Russia.

    Although I agree with you that the U.S. should have stayed out of World War I, one can have an interesting counterfactual historical argument about, if intervention had to have occurred, whether it would have been better in 1915, after the sinking of the Lusitania. Imagine American doughboys showing up in France in large numbers in 1916, not 1918. No German offensive to knock Russia out of the war in 1917--the Romanovs stay in power. Faced with the obvious inability to win in light of American involvement, the Kaiser abdicates and the new government offers a negotiated peace with the return of Alsace-Lorraine to France and reasonable reparations. Fantasy, yes, but perhaps illustrative fantasy.
    , @IBC

    she was confusing WWI with WWII
     
    Yes, but considering the fact that in the WWI, neutral Norway lost almost as many merchant vessels to U-boats (796) as France did (801), for many Norwegians it probably began to feel like war. Keep in mind, that at that time, Norway had a population of only about 2.5 million and shipping and fishing made up a much larger part of its economy than that of comparable neutral countries like Sweden which lost under a quarter as many vessels (181).

    Second-hand memories of this experience merging with those of later events may explain why your couple-friend was under the wrong impression. That's no substitute for getting the facts right, but it does provide some insight into how many people's historical impressions are actually formed.

    http://uboat.net/wwi/ships_hit/

    , @TheJester
    When the question comes up on who fought on what side in WWII, I'm shocked at how many allegedly college educated people -- young and old -- who admit they don't know or get it wrong.

    This follows closely on the heels of high school students in Massachusetts who can't find Massachusetts on a map and confuse Austria with Australia. Perhaps they spend too much time on Facebook to care about the real world in which they live.

    Having passing knowledge about the Constitution and the three branches of the Federal Government? Let's not go there. The discussion can't even get started. But I'm sure most everyone would be well versed in the nuances about racism, White privilege, women's rights, affirmative action, and microaggressions.
  16. Pope Francis Warns Of ‘Mexicanization’ Of Argentina Because Of Drug Trade

    BY BRIANNA LEE @BRIANNACLEE ON 02/23/15 AT 11:35 AM

    Pope Francis is warning of a surge of drug trafficking in Argentina, saying he hoped his native country could stave off “Mexicanization,” in a letter he sent to an Argentine lawmaker.

    “Hopefully we are in time to avoid Mexicanization. I was speaking to some Mexican bishops, and it is a thing of terror,” the pope wrote in an email to lawmaker Gustavo Vera, in response to a letter Vera had written to him expressing concern about drug trafficking in Argentina.

    http://www.ibtimes.com/pope-francis-warns-mexicanization-argentina-because-drug-trade-1825086

    Read More
  17. I’m getting sick of this guy. He knows as little about history as he does about Christian theology or climate science. I would recommend that he consult his Bible, if he even owns one, and see how many times the word “hypocrite” comes up.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mark Caplan
    When Protestants took up the Bible at the start of the Reformation, the pope put it on the Index Librorum Prohibitorum as a heretical text. To this day, Catholics have no idea what's in it.
  18. And here I thought this whole issue of the Pope inveigling himself into American electoral politics was settled back in 1960.
    There is a problem with walls. It is true that almost all walls initially are built to protect somethings of value. Walls protect families, throughout history walls have protected livestock, during the time of Vauban walls protected the great cities of Europe, walls protected China from the barbarians and are now protecting Israel from its neighbours. And every wall that keeps the hordes out also keeps the slaves/citizens in. The sally ports are closed, the gates are lowered and barred and if you were not quick enough to depart before the barbarian siege armies appeared your freedom of movement became very circumscribed.
    Let America build a wall along its southern border, that wall will have control points and gates and people will come and go, until some future leader decides that too many are leaving with their wealth and then the gates close.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Hunsdon
    And then the citizenry shoots them stone cold dead over the course of a long weekend.
    , @Reg Cæsar

    Let America build a wall along its southern border, that wall will have control points and gates and people will come and go, until some future leader decides that too many are leaving with their wealth and then the gates close.
     
    The lack of such a southern wall, physical, economic, or legal, will make that possibility a probability. While Mexicans and other southerners may not be that proactive about chasing the fleeing rich, the welfarist party sure is, and the "new Americans" will vote overwhelmingly for those welfarists.

    Note that it is much harder for Americans to flee with their wealth, because the taxman's arms reach abroad in a way that other countries' don't (thank the Democrats' resentment of Liz Taylor for that), and even if you renounce your citizenship they make you wait ten years thereafter.

    You seem to want to bring this nightmare about.

    José understands license, not liberty. That you want him here makes me question your commitment to the latter.

  19. “Captain Renault: We musn’t underestimate “American blundering”. I was with them when they “blundered” into Berlin in 1918.”

    Perhaps the Epstein brothers should have consulted a history of the Great War. Or a Newspaper. Or just about anyone who was alive in 1942. No part of Germany was invaded during the course of hostilities (The Rhineland was only occupied after the armistice). And Berlin certainly wasn’t occupied, and certainly not by the Americans.

    Read More
  20. Maybe this is good that we can have a discussion on the history of Arabs/muslims and Europeans. Too many people think it is about the French colonizing North Africa. Too few realize that for the past 1300 years the muslims have had the upper hand over the Europeans more often than not. I am surprised at how many people I know who didn’t realize the long occupations of Spain or Eastern Europe, or the millions of Europeans taken into slavery.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ad Victoriam
    The entire Mediterranean periphery was part of Christendom before Islamic conquest.
    , @Anonymous
    Including Cervantes, author of Don Quixote. Everyone should know that such a famous man was enslaved by the Muslims for a few years.
    , @Erik Sieven
    it is really astonishing that many people know nothing about this. Still I am not sure whether knowledge would change anything in this case. In the current situation the only thing which makes white liberals eveb more enthusiastic (and I don not mean this ironical) about being pro-black is even more black violence, I mean that what BLM is all about, isn´t it? Same with muslims, Europe has got been invaded by muslims for decades in a slowly mode, but the gates have only been opened totally when international jihad reached its for the present peak with the emergence of IS
  21. “Whether or not Biff was based on Trump, for the last 8 months Trump really has been the Luckiest Man on Earth as every spat he’s gotten into turns out golden for him.”

    Golden according to his acolytes.

    Trump, like EVERY candidate running for office, makes grandiose claims—“I can promise you that the Pope would have only wished and prayed that Donald Trump would have been President because this would not have happened.”

    He make assurances, but he cannot predict exactly what is going to happen in the future. He cannot guarantee that, under his watch, another epic radical Islamic terrorist attack will NOT occur.

    “The wall around the Vatican was built by Pope St. Leo IV, a rather Trumpish-sounding fellow, following … the Arab Muslim sack of the Vatican in 846.”

    Let’s understand the context of this situation. Trump is making the assumption today that Muslims in general who emigrate to the United States are invaders, dastardly creatures with their swords in tow seeking to behead their enemies en masse, whether it be inciting physical violence or by fomenting insidious cultural changes.

    Today’s American Christians and Muslims have been at least opening up their minds and hearts to one another, which is exactly what Pope Francis is referring to. Still a ways to go, but this “bridge” refers to each group who acknowledges that it is extremists who pervert their faith, not the rank and file members, and that American Muslims and Christians are able to live their lives without fear of systemic jihad committed by either side on American soil. Thus, the radicals must be warded off through “walls”, i.e. legal means to ensure the protection of our country.

    The Muslims during the reign of Pope St. Leo IV, however, were overall hell-bent on actually conquering their ideological enemies, considering they had gained a foothold in Sicily in 827. Islamic rule began in 902, with the Emirate of Sicily lasted from 965 until 1061. Thus, it is not surprising that Rome was the next target in their operations to expand. Popes at this time were considered the supreme RELIGIOUS AND POLITICAL leaders of the Christian world; Christian kings were to recognize this ultimate authority. That is, the Pope technically was the ruler of their territory. Thus, Pope St. Leo IV had a military reason to erect barriers to defend against future pillaging and plundering efforts undertaken by Muslims. Future Christian kings would contest this papal authority, insisting that the Pope not interfere with their internal political matters. Popes used the power of excommunication to “persuade” Christian kings of their fealty to the papacy.

    Read More
    • Replies: @This Is Our Home
    All your nice words are very nice. I agree with them in sentiment. I just don't have a clue how you jump from this simple virtue signalling to open borders and population replacement.

    I like and respect my neighbour but I don't want him to colonise my living room.

    So, are you simple or disingenuous?
    , @Chrisnonymous
    I can never remember who the stupid leftists are* who post on Steve's blog, but are you one of them? I think the point you just made is that the pope is justified in parting ways, politically, with previous popes because the previous popes had the burden of having to be serious about consequential decisions.

    * I know lots of smart leftists but they don't post here.
    , @5371
    [Trump is making the assumption today that Muslims in general who emigrate to the United States are invaders, dastardly creatures with their swords in tow seeking to behead their enemies en masse, whether it be inciting physical violence or by fomenting insidious cultural changes.]

    Your prose is awful, a thing of horror.
    , @IA
    You are what's known as a dhimmi.
    , @Diversity Heretic
    Donald Trump may not regard Muslim immigrants as invaders but I sure do. That opening of minds and hearts you refer to is a very one-way business. The penalty for apostasy to Islam, to the best of my knowledge, remains death. "Extremist" Muslims are the Muslims most faithful to the dictates of their religion. They're free to practice it in Islamic countries, and I wish them the best, but it is increasingly obvious that they cannot mix peacefully in Western countries.

    Insofar as the division of authority between popes, kings and emperors, this was a constant struggle in the Middle Ages (e.g., the Investiture Controversy). Early popes acknowledged the spiritual as well as the secular authority of the Eastern Roman (Byzantine) Emperor. The Church was a huge landowner and bishops had considerable secular authority.

    , @bomag
    ...opening up their minds and hearts to one another...

    Losers use this line to explain why they had to give their stuff away.

    , @FactsAreImportant
    Hi Corvinus,

    Thanks for providing reasoned opposing views. Too many leftist critics write incoherent comments and don't stay around to defend them, leaving the impression that opposing positions are silly.

    Let’s understand the context of this situation. Trump is making the assumption today that Muslims in general who emigrate to the United States are invaders ... fomenting insidious cultural changes.
     
    Can you point to some factual support for assuming the opposite, that there is little or no chance the current influx to Europe and the US will have negative consequences"? Can you point to some instances where a country experienced a large influx of Muslim immigrants and there were minimal negative consequences? Are there any instances where there were negative consequences?

    Have you considered Kosovo? How did Muslims of Albanian descent and Christian Serbs get along in Kosovo? How did Muslims treat Serbian Christians once they came to power? Kosovo is now 96% Muslim after Serbs were ethnically cleansed in the 90's followed by widespread burning of Christian churches. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kosovo#Demographics
    , @Reg Cæsar

    He cannot guarantee that, under his watch, another epic radical Islamic terrorist attack will NOT occur.
     
    He doesn't have to "guarantee". His job would be to decrease the odds of their success.
    , @peterike
    He make assurances, but he cannot predict exactly what is going to happen in the future. He cannot guarantee that, under his watch, another epic radical Islamic terrorist attack will NOT occur.

    Jeebus Christ [smacks head].

    Wait, what? Donald Trump can't predict the future? Gosh.

    And he makes "assurances"? You mean, assurances like this?

    As president, Hillary will: Dismantle the school-to-prison pipeline... End the era of mass incarceration... Strengthen bonds of trust between communities and police...

    Just like that! Whammo! All those problems solved because she gave "assurances," so she must be trying to "predict exactly what is going to happen in the future."

    Do you understand the notion of political rhetoric, or are you too befuddled by your Aspie literalness to understand anything at all?
    , @Difference Maker
    How did you escape from my ignore list

    Back on you go
    , @SFG
    I actually agree Muslims are unlikely to do in America what they did in Europe; the greater inconvenience of getting here means we get upper-middle-class types who practice watered-down Islam just like the watered-down Christianity (and Judaism) of their colleagues. You get your occasional Fort Hood or San Bernadino, but then every other denomination occasionally goes loony and goes on gun rampages too.

    It's also a bigger country for them to get lost in.

    That said, taking in large numbers of refugees could change that.

  22. I’m waiting for “Rehmat” to charge in and tell us it was the Pope’s army who attacked the peaceful Muslims vacationing in Rome that year.

    Read More
  23. @Hunsdon
    Since he entered the race, I've heard people talk about The Donald as a bumbler, a clown, a fool, an idiot. Well, he's no idiot, and that should have been obvious from the start. As to the rest, for some reason I'm reminded a bit of Casablanca where Strosser and Renault are discussing the blundering Americans.

    Major Strasser: You give him credit for too much cleverness. My impression was that he's just another blundering American.

    Captain Renault: We musn't underestimate "American blundering". I was with them when they "blundered" into Berlin in 1918.

    “I was with them when they “blundered” into Berlin in 1918.” But they didn’t, did they?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Hunsdon
    Hush now! It's a good story.

    (Casablanca was agitprop, and when does agitprop let a few inconvenient facts get in the way of a good story?)
  24. Wow. There’s a lot of useful history to be learned from the Catholic Encyclopedia besides about building walls…

    Don’t get approval from the German emperor…
    Sink boats full of Africans…
    Resettle uprooted Christians in fortified border towns…

    Sounds like a good strategy for Europe.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Chrisnonymous

    To do this, he received money from the emperor, and help from all the cities and agricultural colonies (domus cultae) of the Duchy of Rome. The work took him four years to accomplish, and the newly fortified portion was called the Leonine City, after him.
     
    It's rich. Leo: "We're gonna build a wall and you know what? I'm gonna get the Germans to pay for it. Who's making money off the Roman Imperial system? It's the Germans, so they're gonna pay for the wall. And we're gonna do it in my first term."

    Capitol Hill? No...
    Trumpatine Hill!
  25. @reiner Tor
    This media pope is getting on my nerves.

    reinor Tor, Remember , the Pope is a Jesuit. The Jesuits pride themselves on being edgy and active in politics, but mostly anti-establishment activity. I again recommend a book by Peter DeRose, a former priest (Jesuit?) titled “Pope Patrick”, an easy read. The fictitious Patrick meddles in politic and even extends a hand to the Muslims with startling results. Worth picking up.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bill
    There's also _The Jesuits_ by controversial-even-among-traditionalist-Catholic-cranks Malachi Martin.
    , @Citizen of a Silly Country
    How is agreeing the dominant narrative throughout the West being "edgy" or anti-establishment?
    , @Crawfurdmuir
    "Remember , the Pope is a Jesuit. The Jesuits pride themselves on being edgy and active in politics, but mostly anti-establishment activity."

    I have been reminded by earlier episodes in Francis's papacy that, during the reign of Louis XIV, the archbishop of Paris, Mgr. Harley, ordered his diocesan priests to pray for the conversion of the Jesuits to the Catholic faith.

    Likewise, the Holy Roman Emperors long struggled with the Jesuits. C.J.S. Thompson, in his book on "Poison Mysteries" (1923) recounts a Jesuit plot to poison the Emperor Leopold I with arsenic-laced candles, discovered by the (al)chemist and doctor, G.F. Borri:

    "Meanwhile the chamberlain was summoned and
    commanded to bring all the candles he had into the Emperor's
    cabinet. The entire stock, amounting to thirty-five pounds,
    was brought from a cupboard in the ante-room where they had
    been stored and laid before Borri.

    "On examining them he called the Emperor's attention to
    the peculiar fact that each candle was specially marked with
    a gold fillet round the top as if to prevent any mistake.
    Further questioning revealed the fact that no other candles
    but these had been used in the Emperor's apartments since
    Candlemas. Borri next shredded the candle wick and calling
    for a small dish of meat carefully mixed the candle wick with
    it. A turnspit dog was then sent for, and was shut up in the
    cupboard with the dish of meat.

    "Meanwhile the Emperor was removed to another apartment,
    and Borri and the physician proceeded to the palace pharmacy
    to prepare an antidote for him. Here Borri tested the sus-
    pected candle-wick and found, as he thought, it was impreg-
    nated with arsenic. He had left instructions that he was to
    be called as soon as the dog got restless, but the animal was
    found to be dead by the time he returned to the Emperor's
    cabinet.

    "The antidote prepared by Borri soon produced a beneficial
    effect on the Emperor, and his health improved so rapidly that
    within three weeks he was able to go out again.

    "An interesting record of Borri's examination of the poisoned
    articles shows his remarkable knowledge of chemistry. Of
    the whole of the suspected candles brought to him he kept
    back two as evidence and used the remainder in his analysis.
    The weight of the candles was twenty-four pounds, and the
    impregnated wicks three and a half pounds, from which Borri
    concluded that nearly two and three-quarters pounds of
    arsenic had been employed.

    "Immediately Borri reported the result of his investigation
    to the Emperor he gave orders that the person who supplied
    the candles should be arrested at once.

    "It was found that they had been supplied by the procurator
    of the Jesuits, who was, however, no longer in Vienna and
    was not to be found. Being warned in time, this astute
    individual had made good his escape.

    "The solution of the mystery as to how the candles becctme
    impregnated with arsenic subsequently transpired. It was
    discovered that the pater-procurator of the Jesuits, accom-
    panied by a humble member of the order, had personally
    delivered the prepared candles, which were packed in two
    boxes, at the palace on March 2, 1670, at dark, with instruc-
    tions that they were to be delivered to the chamberlain and
    were to be treated with the greatest care."

    https://archive.org/stream/poisonmysteriesi00thomuoft/poisonmysteriesi00thomuoft_djvu.txt

    That's quite some "anti-establishment activity"!
  26. @Chrisnonymous
    Wow. There's a lot of useful history to be learned from the Catholic Encyclopedia besides about building walls...

    Don't get approval from the German emperor...
    Sink boats full of Africans...
    Resettle uprooted Christians in fortified border towns...

    Sounds like a good strategy for Europe.

    To do this, he received money from the emperor, and help from all the cities and agricultural colonies (domus cultae) of the Duchy of Rome. The work took him four years to accomplish, and the newly fortified portion was called the Leonine City, after him.

    It’s rich. Leo: “We’re gonna build a wall and you know what? I’m gonna get the Germans to pay for it. Who’s making money off the Roman Imperial system? It’s the Germans, so they’re gonna pay for the wall. And we’re gonna do it in my first term.”

    Capitol Hill? No…
    Trumpatine Hill!

    Read More
    • Replies: @tbraton
    Funny.
    , @Anonymous
    Off by some hundred years for this comparison to work.
  27. @iSteveFan
    Maybe this is good that we can have a discussion on the history of Arabs/muslims and Europeans. Too many people think it is about the French colonizing North Africa. Too few realize that for the past 1300 years the muslims have had the upper hand over the Europeans more often than not. I am surprised at how many people I know who didn't realize the long occupations of Spain or Eastern Europe, or the millions of Europeans taken into slavery.

    The entire Mediterranean periphery was part of Christendom before Islamic conquest.

    Read More
  28. @Corvinus
    “Whether or not Biff was based on Trump, for the last 8 months Trump really has been the Luckiest Man on Earth as every spat he’s gotten into turns out golden for him.”

    Golden according to his acolytes.

    Trump, like EVERY candidate running for office, makes grandiose claims—“I can promise you that the Pope would have only wished and prayed that Donald Trump would have been President because this would not have happened.”

    He make assurances, but he cannot predict exactly what is going to happen in the future. He cannot guarantee that, under his watch, another epic radical Islamic terrorist attack will NOT occur.

    “The wall around the Vatican was built by Pope St. Leo IV, a rather Trumpish-sounding fellow, following … the Arab Muslim sack of the Vatican in 846.”

    Let’s understand the context of this situation. Trump is making the assumption today that Muslims in general who emigrate to the United States are invaders, dastardly creatures with their swords in tow seeking to behead their enemies en masse, whether it be inciting physical violence or by fomenting insidious cultural changes.

    Today’s American Christians and Muslims have been at least opening up their minds and hearts to one another, which is exactly what Pope Francis is referring to. Still a ways to go, but this “bridge” refers to each group who acknowledges that it is extremists who pervert their faith, not the rank and file members, and that American Muslims and Christians are able to live their lives without fear of systemic jihad committed by either side on American soil. Thus, the radicals must be warded off through “walls”, i.e. legal means to ensure the protection of our country.

    The Muslims during the reign of Pope St. Leo IV, however, were overall hell-bent on actually conquering their ideological enemies, considering they had gained a foothold in Sicily in 827. Islamic rule began in 902, with the Emirate of Sicily lasted from 965 until 1061. Thus, it is not surprising that Rome was the next target in their operations to expand. Popes at this time were considered the supreme RELIGIOUS AND POLITICAL leaders of the Christian world; Christian kings were to recognize this ultimate authority. That is, the Pope technically was the ruler of their territory. Thus, Pope St. Leo IV had a military reason to erect barriers to defend against future pillaging and plundering efforts undertaken by Muslims. Future Christian kings would contest this papal authority, insisting that the Pope not interfere with their internal political matters. Popes used the power of excommunication to "persuade" Christian kings of their fealty to the papacy.

    All your nice words are very nice. I agree with them in sentiment. I just don’t have a clue how you jump from this simple virtue signalling to open borders and population replacement.

    I like and respect my neighbour but I don’t want him to colonise my living room.

    So, are you simple or disingenuous?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kylie
    Corvinus is disingenuous.
    , @Corvinus
    “I just don’t have a clue how you jump from this simple virtue signalling to open borders and population replacement.”

    I was taking Steve to task for ignoring historical context. No where in my post am I advocating “open borders and population replacement”.

    Now, if one was to employ your logic regarding “population replacement”, all people other than tribal groups able to trace their ancestry prior to European colonization 1492 should leave and go back to their places of origin. Right the ship, so to speak.

    Although, one could argue, history has demonstrated it is inevitable that “lesser people” will infiltrate areas, pop out new generations of idiots, and replace the “native” stock, whether or not the host policies were well-founded or ill-advised. It’s not like America was founded by immigrants. I mean, that’s what the Irish and Germans did in the 1840’s, the Italians and Slavs in the 1890’s, the Mexicans in the 1920’s/1930’s, the Vietnamese in the 1970’s, etc.—gradually replacing the Scots-Irish, Welsh, and English, who are the true founders of America. So, rather than lament about it, enjoy the decline. You can’t fight nature, right?
  29. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @iSteveFan
    Maybe this is good that we can have a discussion on the history of Arabs/muslims and Europeans. Too many people think it is about the French colonizing North Africa. Too few realize that for the past 1300 years the muslims have had the upper hand over the Europeans more often than not. I am surprised at how many people I know who didn't realize the long occupations of Spain or Eastern Europe, or the millions of Europeans taken into slavery.

    Including Cervantes, author of Don Quixote. Everyone should know that such a famous man was enslaved by the Muslims for a few years.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Diversity Heretic
    Cervantes was not only a Muslim slave, but a galley slave--chained to an oar. "We keep you alive to serve this ship. Row well and live!"
  30. @Corvinus
    “Whether or not Biff was based on Trump, for the last 8 months Trump really has been the Luckiest Man on Earth as every spat he’s gotten into turns out golden for him.”

    Golden according to his acolytes.

    Trump, like EVERY candidate running for office, makes grandiose claims—“I can promise you that the Pope would have only wished and prayed that Donald Trump would have been President because this would not have happened.”

    He make assurances, but he cannot predict exactly what is going to happen in the future. He cannot guarantee that, under his watch, another epic radical Islamic terrorist attack will NOT occur.

    “The wall around the Vatican was built by Pope St. Leo IV, a rather Trumpish-sounding fellow, following … the Arab Muslim sack of the Vatican in 846.”

    Let’s understand the context of this situation. Trump is making the assumption today that Muslims in general who emigrate to the United States are invaders, dastardly creatures with their swords in tow seeking to behead their enemies en masse, whether it be inciting physical violence or by fomenting insidious cultural changes.

    Today’s American Christians and Muslims have been at least opening up their minds and hearts to one another, which is exactly what Pope Francis is referring to. Still a ways to go, but this “bridge” refers to each group who acknowledges that it is extremists who pervert their faith, not the rank and file members, and that American Muslims and Christians are able to live their lives without fear of systemic jihad committed by either side on American soil. Thus, the radicals must be warded off through “walls”, i.e. legal means to ensure the protection of our country.

    The Muslims during the reign of Pope St. Leo IV, however, were overall hell-bent on actually conquering their ideological enemies, considering they had gained a foothold in Sicily in 827. Islamic rule began in 902, with the Emirate of Sicily lasted from 965 until 1061. Thus, it is not surprising that Rome was the next target in their operations to expand. Popes at this time were considered the supreme RELIGIOUS AND POLITICAL leaders of the Christian world; Christian kings were to recognize this ultimate authority. That is, the Pope technically was the ruler of their territory. Thus, Pope St. Leo IV had a military reason to erect barriers to defend against future pillaging and plundering efforts undertaken by Muslims. Future Christian kings would contest this papal authority, insisting that the Pope not interfere with their internal political matters. Popes used the power of excommunication to "persuade" Christian kings of their fealty to the papacy.

    I can never remember who the stupid leftists are* who post on Steve’s blog, but are you one of them? I think the point you just made is that the pope is justified in parting ways, politically, with previous popes because the previous popes had the burden of having to be serious about consequential decisions.

    * I know lots of smart leftists but they don’t post here.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anowow
    I've two theories on Corvinus-


    Aging, childless, upper middle class or otherwise well-off white man with a penchant for exotic young men.

    Devil's advocate who is trying to get the rest of us to sharpen our thinking skills.

    , @Corvinus
    @IA

    The point was that Steve failed to consider historical context, something that clearly has gone over your head. Do you have the intelligence to counter my argument rather than make a vain statement?

  31. @Corvinus
    “Whether or not Biff was based on Trump, for the last 8 months Trump really has been the Luckiest Man on Earth as every spat he’s gotten into turns out golden for him.”

    Golden according to his acolytes.

    Trump, like EVERY candidate running for office, makes grandiose claims—“I can promise you that the Pope would have only wished and prayed that Donald Trump would have been President because this would not have happened.”

    He make assurances, but he cannot predict exactly what is going to happen in the future. He cannot guarantee that, under his watch, another epic radical Islamic terrorist attack will NOT occur.

    “The wall around the Vatican was built by Pope St. Leo IV, a rather Trumpish-sounding fellow, following … the Arab Muslim sack of the Vatican in 846.”

    Let’s understand the context of this situation. Trump is making the assumption today that Muslims in general who emigrate to the United States are invaders, dastardly creatures with their swords in tow seeking to behead their enemies en masse, whether it be inciting physical violence or by fomenting insidious cultural changes.

    Today’s American Christians and Muslims have been at least opening up their minds and hearts to one another, which is exactly what Pope Francis is referring to. Still a ways to go, but this “bridge” refers to each group who acknowledges that it is extremists who pervert their faith, not the rank and file members, and that American Muslims and Christians are able to live their lives without fear of systemic jihad committed by either side on American soil. Thus, the radicals must be warded off through “walls”, i.e. legal means to ensure the protection of our country.

    The Muslims during the reign of Pope St. Leo IV, however, were overall hell-bent on actually conquering their ideological enemies, considering they had gained a foothold in Sicily in 827. Islamic rule began in 902, with the Emirate of Sicily lasted from 965 until 1061. Thus, it is not surprising that Rome was the next target in their operations to expand. Popes at this time were considered the supreme RELIGIOUS AND POLITICAL leaders of the Christian world; Christian kings were to recognize this ultimate authority. That is, the Pope technically was the ruler of their territory. Thus, Pope St. Leo IV had a military reason to erect barriers to defend against future pillaging and plundering efforts undertaken by Muslims. Future Christian kings would contest this papal authority, insisting that the Pope not interfere with their internal political matters. Popes used the power of excommunication to "persuade" Christian kings of their fealty to the papacy.

    [Trump is making the assumption today that Muslims in general who emigrate to the United States are invaders, dastardly creatures with their swords in tow seeking to behead their enemies en masse, whether it be inciting physical violence or by fomenting insidious cultural changes.]

    Your prose is awful, a thing of horror.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "Your prose is awful, a thing of horror."

    Really, is that all you can muster? Pro tip --> Focus on breaking down the ideas into manageable parts and craft a counterargument.
  32. @keypusher
    Like Sellar and Yeatman, sometimes Steve writes to console his readers. Getting in a front-page fight with the Pope is monumentally stupid. If Trump were a stock, even the dullest brokerage on Wall Street would be dumping it by now.

    Do I detect the arrival of trolls at iSteve? It was bound to happen as Steve’s comments and ideas are becoming frequently apparent in Drudge, Breitbart, and the DC, not to mention in the Trump and Cruz primary campaigns.

    Now if only Drudge would actually link to iSteve.

    Read More
    • Replies: @keypusher
    Arrival?

    If only there were some way to check on people's posting history here. Maybe Ron Unz can come up with something.

    I was happy there was a strong anti-immigration candidate in the race. But Trump has done himself enormous damage after (i) flipping out over the Iowa caucases (ii) losing it in the recent debate, which seems to have alienated a lot of people (iii) getting into a very public spat with the most popular man in the world.

    I think he's done. Maybe I'm wrong, but that's how it looks to me.
  33. @iSteveFan
    Maybe this is good that we can have a discussion on the history of Arabs/muslims and Europeans. Too many people think it is about the French colonizing North Africa. Too few realize that for the past 1300 years the muslims have had the upper hand over the Europeans more often than not. I am surprised at how many people I know who didn't realize the long occupations of Spain or Eastern Europe, or the millions of Europeans taken into slavery.

    it is really astonishing that many people know nothing about this. Still I am not sure whether knowledge would change anything in this case. In the current situation the only thing which makes white liberals eveb more enthusiastic (and I don not mean this ironical) about being pro-black is even more black violence, I mean that what BLM is all about, isn´t it? Same with muslims, Europe has got been invaded by muslims for decades in a slowly mode, but the gates have only been opened totally when international jihad reached its for the present peak with the emergence of IS

    Read More
    • Replies: @iSteveFan
    It probably wouldn't do much with SJWs since they are suicidal anyway. But I am talking about the average citizen who has no defenses against the constant droning of the narrative. Most of the people I know who are not political don't realize the extent of the muslim conquests of Europe, let alone the fact that comment #32 points out about much of the Mediterranean.

    British America dates back to around 1607. That's 400 years of history of which we've only been a nation for 240 of those years. There were parts of Spain that were occupied for 700 years! Parts of Greece and the Balkans for 450 years! That's longer then the entire English experience in the New World. Throw in a couple million European slaves and suddenly the narrative loses its power to all who are not already insane.

  34. @keypusher
    Like Sellar and Yeatman, sometimes Steve writes to console his readers. Getting in a front-page fight with the Pope is monumentally stupid. If Trump were a stock, even the dullest brokerage on Wall Street would be dumping it by now.

    Yeah, ’cause he’ll turn off Hispanic voters, who, as every Republican knows, are the key to electoral victory…

    or maybe you’re thinking the Irish Catholics in Boston are finally going to turn MA into a blue state?

    or the great ecumenical love of Southern Baptists for Rome will make Trump lose SC?

    or he’ll lose favor of the world? You definitely can’t have a US president that’s on the wrong side of European opinion!

    Read More
    • Replies: @keypusher
    Gosh, I wonder if there's anyone besides Hispanics and Irish Catholics who likes the Pope.

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/sep/21/move-over-donald-trump-pope-francis-approval-ratin/

    And have you noticed how soft and squishy Southern Baptists are getting nowadays? Apparently not.
  35. @Corvinus
    “Whether or not Biff was based on Trump, for the last 8 months Trump really has been the Luckiest Man on Earth as every spat he’s gotten into turns out golden for him.”

    Golden according to his acolytes.

    Trump, like EVERY candidate running for office, makes grandiose claims—“I can promise you that the Pope would have only wished and prayed that Donald Trump would have been President because this would not have happened.”

    He make assurances, but he cannot predict exactly what is going to happen in the future. He cannot guarantee that, under his watch, another epic radical Islamic terrorist attack will NOT occur.

    “The wall around the Vatican was built by Pope St. Leo IV, a rather Trumpish-sounding fellow, following … the Arab Muslim sack of the Vatican in 846.”

    Let’s understand the context of this situation. Trump is making the assumption today that Muslims in general who emigrate to the United States are invaders, dastardly creatures with their swords in tow seeking to behead their enemies en masse, whether it be inciting physical violence or by fomenting insidious cultural changes.

    Today’s American Christians and Muslims have been at least opening up their minds and hearts to one another, which is exactly what Pope Francis is referring to. Still a ways to go, but this “bridge” refers to each group who acknowledges that it is extremists who pervert their faith, not the rank and file members, and that American Muslims and Christians are able to live their lives without fear of systemic jihad committed by either side on American soil. Thus, the radicals must be warded off through “walls”, i.e. legal means to ensure the protection of our country.

    The Muslims during the reign of Pope St. Leo IV, however, were overall hell-bent on actually conquering their ideological enemies, considering they had gained a foothold in Sicily in 827. Islamic rule began in 902, with the Emirate of Sicily lasted from 965 until 1061. Thus, it is not surprising that Rome was the next target in their operations to expand. Popes at this time were considered the supreme RELIGIOUS AND POLITICAL leaders of the Christian world; Christian kings were to recognize this ultimate authority. That is, the Pope technically was the ruler of their territory. Thus, Pope St. Leo IV had a military reason to erect barriers to defend against future pillaging and plundering efforts undertaken by Muslims. Future Christian kings would contest this papal authority, insisting that the Pope not interfere with their internal political matters. Popes used the power of excommunication to "persuade" Christian kings of their fealty to the papacy.

    You are what’s known as a dhimmi.

    Read More
  36. The last time I was in Rome, back when either JP2 or Benny were in charge, the place was replete with African trinket sellers.

    The one place where they were absent was the Vatican – no truck with sanctuary city status from the Swiss Guard.

    I wonder if things have changed?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Chrisnonymous
    The Swiss-Lao guy I know thinks the Swiss are all racists, so I'm guessing no. Now, if it were a German Guard or French Guard...
    , @Ivy
    As a recent visitor, I can tell you that there are still African trinket sellers hovering near the Vatican, although not as many as at other attractions in the Eternal City. The trinkets are often selfie sticks, a specialty of the MENA crowd, or handbags, from the SSA guys. Gypsies have their own undocumented tourist shopping service.
    , @a reader
    Unsuspecting goyim ignore whom the Eternal City souvenirs business belongs to.
  37. The Arab raid against Rome was an Arab raid in 846 against Rome.

    {{{shakes head ruefully}}} Wikipedia.

    Read More
  38. @jimmyriddle
    The last time I was in Rome, back when either JP2 or Benny were in charge, the place was replete with African trinket sellers.

    The one place where they were absent was the Vatican - no truck with sanctuary city status from the Swiss Guard.

    I wonder if things have changed?

    The Swiss-Lao guy I know thinks the Swiss are all racists, so I’m guessing no. Now, if it were a German Guard or French Guard…

    Read More
  39. @Chrisnonymous
    I can never remember who the stupid leftists are* who post on Steve's blog, but are you one of them? I think the point you just made is that the pope is justified in parting ways, politically, with previous popes because the previous popes had the burden of having to be serious about consequential decisions.

    * I know lots of smart leftists but they don't post here.

    I’ve two theories on Corvinus-

    Aging, childless, upper middle class or otherwise well-off white man with a penchant for exotic young men.

    Devil’s advocate who is trying to get the rest of us to sharpen our thinking skills.

    Read More
  40. @tbraton
    "Captain Renault: We musn’t underestimate “American blundering”. I was with them when they “blundered” into Berlin in 1918."

    A fine movie, but clearly propaganda. The Americans never got close to Berlin in WWI. The Armistice was declared with the lines of battle completely outside Germany. According to Wikipedia:

    "The occupation of the Rhineland took place following the Armistice. The occupying armies consisted of American, Belgian, British and French forces.

    In November 1918, the Allies had ample supplies of men and materiel to invade Germany. Yet at the time of the armistice, no Allied force had crossed the German frontier; the Western Front was still some 450 mi (720 km) from Berlin; and the Kaiser's armies had retreated from the battlefield in good order."

    This reminds me of an incident which occurred about 20 years ago. I was friends at the time with a couple consisting of a British husband and his Norwegian wife. During the dinner conversation, I made a point about what a mistake it was for America to enter WWI. Immediately, the Norwegian wife said it was a mistake for America not to get involved in WWI from the start and thus succeed in ending the war earlier. I said that was a remarkable statement to be made by someone whose country (Norway) had managed to stay of the war completely. She insisted that Norway had fought in WWI, so I had to go retrieve a history book or the Columbia Encyclopedia to show her that Norway had never fought in WWI. She was taken aback and muttered something about how her grandmother told her stories when she was growing up about the misbehavior of German soldiers, which indicated to me that she was confusing WWI with WWII. So much for the myth that Europeans are better educated than Americans (she was a college graduate, btw).

    The Norwegian woman was even more mistaken. Norway didn’t enter World War II at the outset. It was invaded by Germany in 1940. As I recall, Britain had plans for a similar invasion although they were never executed. Norway stayed occupied by German forces until after the surrender in May 1945–German forces then withdrew. To my knowledge German misbehavior in Norway was not outside the norm of the ordinary criminality of young men–I know of no atrocities committed by Germans in Norway, although I assume that the occupation forces killed resistance fightes and tortured them on occasion. Still and all, nothing like Russia.

    Although I agree with you that the U.S. should have stayed out of World War I, one can have an interesting counterfactual historical argument about, if intervention had to have occurred, whether it would have been better in 1915, after the sinking of the Lusitania. Imagine American doughboys showing up in France in large numbers in 1916, not 1918. No German offensive to knock Russia out of the war in 1917–the Romanovs stay in power. Faced with the obvious inability to win in light of American involvement, the Kaiser abdicates and the new government offers a negotiated peace with the return of Alsace-Lorraine to France and reasonable reparations. Fantasy, yes, but perhaps illustrative fantasy.

    Read More
    • Replies: @IBC

    I know of no atrocities committed by Germans in Norway, although I assume that the occupation forces killed resistance fightes and tortured them on occasion. Still and all, nothing like Russia.
     
    Besides the usual political executions and arrests, and physical reprisals for acts of sabotage (resistance), as well as responsibility for the deportation and eventual death of over a third of Norway's Jewish population; German treatment of Norwegian civilians was probably harshest towards the end of the war when they carried out a scorched-earth policy in the far north as a response to an impending attack by the Red Army.

    Of course, unlike many people in Eastern Europe, ethnic Norwegians held a favorable position in the Nazi "racial" hierarchy, and to my knowledge, there were no explicit German plans to intentionally destroy them as in Poland or the USSR. However, as in other occupied western European countries like France and Denmark, the Nazis were still happy to run over anyone who got in their way or who dared to defy them.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Nordlicht_%281944%E2%80%9345%29

    , @neon2
    My World War One fantasy is much simpler: the English cabinet votes to stay out, and Germany beats France by Christmas 1914.

    The world goes on as before: monarchical, increasingly Christian, controlled by Europe.

    What's not to like?
  41. Steve, OT, but wondered if you’ve seen this trailer for a documentary on the Gulen cult/US charter school operator:

    Read More
  42. @Corvinus
    “Whether or not Biff was based on Trump, for the last 8 months Trump really has been the Luckiest Man on Earth as every spat he’s gotten into turns out golden for him.”

    Golden according to his acolytes.

    Trump, like EVERY candidate running for office, makes grandiose claims—“I can promise you that the Pope would have only wished and prayed that Donald Trump would have been President because this would not have happened.”

    He make assurances, but he cannot predict exactly what is going to happen in the future. He cannot guarantee that, under his watch, another epic radical Islamic terrorist attack will NOT occur.

    “The wall around the Vatican was built by Pope St. Leo IV, a rather Trumpish-sounding fellow, following … the Arab Muslim sack of the Vatican in 846.”

    Let’s understand the context of this situation. Trump is making the assumption today that Muslims in general who emigrate to the United States are invaders, dastardly creatures with their swords in tow seeking to behead their enemies en masse, whether it be inciting physical violence or by fomenting insidious cultural changes.

    Today’s American Christians and Muslims have been at least opening up their minds and hearts to one another, which is exactly what Pope Francis is referring to. Still a ways to go, but this “bridge” refers to each group who acknowledges that it is extremists who pervert their faith, not the rank and file members, and that American Muslims and Christians are able to live their lives without fear of systemic jihad committed by either side on American soil. Thus, the radicals must be warded off through “walls”, i.e. legal means to ensure the protection of our country.

    The Muslims during the reign of Pope St. Leo IV, however, were overall hell-bent on actually conquering their ideological enemies, considering they had gained a foothold in Sicily in 827. Islamic rule began in 902, with the Emirate of Sicily lasted from 965 until 1061. Thus, it is not surprising that Rome was the next target in their operations to expand. Popes at this time were considered the supreme RELIGIOUS AND POLITICAL leaders of the Christian world; Christian kings were to recognize this ultimate authority. That is, the Pope technically was the ruler of their territory. Thus, Pope St. Leo IV had a military reason to erect barriers to defend against future pillaging and plundering efforts undertaken by Muslims. Future Christian kings would contest this papal authority, insisting that the Pope not interfere with their internal political matters. Popes used the power of excommunication to "persuade" Christian kings of their fealty to the papacy.

    Donald Trump may not regard Muslim immigrants as invaders but I sure do. That opening of minds and hearts you refer to is a very one-way business. The penalty for apostasy to Islam, to the best of my knowledge, remains death. “Extremist” Muslims are the Muslims most faithful to the dictates of their religion. They’re free to practice it in Islamic countries, and I wish them the best, but it is increasingly obvious that they cannot mix peacefully in Western countries.

    Insofar as the division of authority between popes, kings and emperors, this was a constant struggle in the Middle Ages (e.g., the Investiture Controversy). Early popes acknowledged the spiritual as well as the secular authority of the Eastern Roman (Byzantine) Emperor. The Church was a huge landowner and bishops had considerable secular authority.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "The penalty for apostasy to Islam, to the best of my knowledge, remains death."

    Same goes for Christians. Deuteronomy 13:6-9 “If your very own brother, or your son or daughter, or the wife you love, or your closest friend secretly entices you, saying: Let us go and worship other gods (gods that neither you nor your fathers have known, gods of the peoples around you, whether near or far, from one end of the land to the other, or gods of other religions), do not yield to him or listen to him. Show him no pity. Do not spare him or shield him. You must certainly put him to death. Your hand must be the first in putting him to death, and then the hands of all the people.”

    Listen, Muslims worldwide practice their faith on a continuum similar to Joos and Christians--strict, moderate, "loose".

    "They’re free to practice it in Islamic countries, and I wish them the best, but it is increasingly obvious that they cannot mix peacefully in Western countries."

    Maybe Western countries, but what about the United States? I'm sure you are able to provide relevant statistics regarding the number of beheadings, honor killings, and domestic terrorist activities committed by American Muslims which has thoroughly demonstrated its long-standing, perpetual impact on the political, economic, and social systems of America.

    "Insofar as the division of authority between popes, kings and emperors, this was a constant struggle in the Middle Ages (e.g., the Investiture Controversy)."

    "The Church was a huge landowner and bishops had considerable secular authority."

    Which led to corruption in the RCC and subsequent and necessary reforms.
    , @TWS
    Ok so you just disqualified yourself. Christians are not required to keep the instructions of the OT. We don't have to burn witches or stone gays. Go sell your poison elsewhere. If most of the candle is just wax and wick but there's some arsenic it's still poison.
  43. @Anonymous
    Including Cervantes, author of Don Quixote. Everyone should know that such a famous man was enslaved by the Muslims for a few years.

    Cervantes was not only a Muslim slave, but a galley slave–chained to an oar. “We keep you alive to serve this ship. Row well and live!”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Buffalo Joe
    Diversity Heretic, "Put your backs into and pull, the Imam wants to water ski."
  44. @Buffalo Joe
    reinor Tor, Remember , the Pope is a Jesuit. The Jesuits pride themselves on being edgy and active in politics, but mostly anti-establishment activity. I again recommend a book by Peter DeRose, a former priest (Jesuit?) titled "Pope Patrick", an easy read. The fictitious Patrick meddles in politic and even extends a hand to the Muslims with startling results. Worth picking up.

    There’s also _The Jesuits_ by controversial-even-among-traditionalist-Catholic-cranks Malachi Martin.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Buffalo Joe
    Bill ,Thanks will read that , but I endured four years of holier than thou Jesuit college education. However, great networking among alum/
  45. @wolfy
    the pope was right.there is little evidence that Donald is a practising Christian.

    Neither is the Pope. He seems to be a practicing Marxist from the agendas he pushes.

    Read More
  46. @jimmyriddle
    The last time I was in Rome, back when either JP2 or Benny were in charge, the place was replete with African trinket sellers.

    The one place where they were absent was the Vatican - no truck with sanctuary city status from the Swiss Guard.

    I wonder if things have changed?

    As a recent visitor, I can tell you that there are still African trinket sellers hovering near the Vatican, although not as many as at other attractions in the Eternal City. The trinkets are often selfie sticks, a specialty of the MENA crowd, or handbags, from the SSA guys. Gypsies have their own undocumented tourist shopping service.

    Read More
  47. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    The analogy doesn’t really work because the Pope was criticizing a nominal at best Protestant and referring to walls keeping out Catholic populations.

    Read More
  48. @Corvinus
    “Whether or not Biff was based on Trump, for the last 8 months Trump really has been the Luckiest Man on Earth as every spat he’s gotten into turns out golden for him.”

    Golden according to his acolytes.

    Trump, like EVERY candidate running for office, makes grandiose claims—“I can promise you that the Pope would have only wished and prayed that Donald Trump would have been President because this would not have happened.”

    He make assurances, but he cannot predict exactly what is going to happen in the future. He cannot guarantee that, under his watch, another epic radical Islamic terrorist attack will NOT occur.

    “The wall around the Vatican was built by Pope St. Leo IV, a rather Trumpish-sounding fellow, following … the Arab Muslim sack of the Vatican in 846.”

    Let’s understand the context of this situation. Trump is making the assumption today that Muslims in general who emigrate to the United States are invaders, dastardly creatures with their swords in tow seeking to behead their enemies en masse, whether it be inciting physical violence or by fomenting insidious cultural changes.

    Today’s American Christians and Muslims have been at least opening up their minds and hearts to one another, which is exactly what Pope Francis is referring to. Still a ways to go, but this “bridge” refers to each group who acknowledges that it is extremists who pervert their faith, not the rank and file members, and that American Muslims and Christians are able to live their lives without fear of systemic jihad committed by either side on American soil. Thus, the radicals must be warded off through “walls”, i.e. legal means to ensure the protection of our country.

    The Muslims during the reign of Pope St. Leo IV, however, were overall hell-bent on actually conquering their ideological enemies, considering they had gained a foothold in Sicily in 827. Islamic rule began in 902, with the Emirate of Sicily lasted from 965 until 1061. Thus, it is not surprising that Rome was the next target in their operations to expand. Popes at this time were considered the supreme RELIGIOUS AND POLITICAL leaders of the Christian world; Christian kings were to recognize this ultimate authority. That is, the Pope technically was the ruler of their territory. Thus, Pope St. Leo IV had a military reason to erect barriers to defend against future pillaging and plundering efforts undertaken by Muslims. Future Christian kings would contest this papal authority, insisting that the Pope not interfere with their internal political matters. Popes used the power of excommunication to "persuade" Christian kings of their fealty to the papacy.

    …opening up their minds and hearts to one another…

    Losers use this line to explain why they had to give their stuff away.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "Losers use this line to explain why they had to give their stuff away."

    You're going to have to make the connection. How does a person who is willing to consider other points of view, i.e. open up one's heart and mind, remotely relate to "losers" giving away "free stuff"? It seems you just cobbled something down without even realizing what even meant.
  49. The Trump phenomenon reminds me of the mood slime building up in the old NY subway system in Ghostbusters II.

    You get angry at Trump and the mood slime just feeds off the energy and grows more powerful. But you find out how to make it happy (some upbeat Jackie Wilson music/a rousing rendition of Auld Lang Syne), give it control of the Statue of Liberty and suddenly the ghost immivasion is over.

    Also, this clip applies: https://youtu.be/eCv8-qGuINU

    Read More
  50. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    In fact, Isis have explicitly stated their avowed intention to attack and conquer Rome and the Vatican, drive out or kill the Pope and his entourage and install a caliphate there instead. This, they see as the ultimate triumph.
    Methinks Isis are being too hasty – all they need to do is sit back, wait and be patient. Due to Italy’s madcap EU/Communist/Economist imposed policy of massive third world immigration, the job will surely be done with more certainty and permanence simply by applying the artifice of letting the Muslim dominated Rome City Council kick out the Pope ‘bag and baggage’ – and thus fulfilling an ancient prophecy.

    Whilst on the subject, one of the biggest mosques in the world is in Rome, Italy. Built in the 1970s when Italy had not yet been bitten by the immigrationist-madness bug, and thus there were scarce any Muslims to fill the place. It was during the world oil/financial crisis of the time. Apparently the King of Saudi Arabia demanded of the Italian president that it would be built -all in exchange for certain ‘favors’ rendered. Such was the basket case shape of an oil dependent and stressed basket case Italy of the mid 70s. Cravenly, the Italian president, most catholic Majesty he, readily agreed the paying price.
    Totally unnecessary of course. A typical Arabic macho ‘dominance’ affair, much like a slave razzia or Cologne slap ‘n’ tickle gropefest.Humiliation and ‘human foot-stool, as in Valerian, is the name of the game. Much like Saudi downright refusing to take one single Syrian -and getting away Scot free of criticism – whilst offering to build one mosque per hundred ‘Syrians’ on Germany’s soil.

    Read More
  51. @Buffalo Joe
    reinor Tor, Remember , the Pope is a Jesuit. The Jesuits pride themselves on being edgy and active in politics, but mostly anti-establishment activity. I again recommend a book by Peter DeRose, a former priest (Jesuit?) titled "Pope Patrick", an easy read. The fictitious Patrick meddles in politic and even extends a hand to the Muslims with startling results. Worth picking up.

    How is agreeing the dominant narrative throughout the West being “edgy” or anti-establishment?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Buffalo Joe
    Citizen, Don't understand your comment, but Jesuits turned up dead in South American countries where they sided with the "people", meaning communists. Also , the Berrigan brothers, both Jesuits, were arrested for their anti war activism during the Viet Nam era.
  52. @Chrisnonymous
    Yeah, 'cause he'll turn off Hispanic voters, who, as every Republican knows, are the key to electoral victory...

    or maybe you're thinking the Irish Catholics in Boston are finally going to turn MA into a blue state?

    or the great ecumenical love of Southern Baptists for Rome will make Trump lose SC?

    or he'll lose favor of the world? You definitely can't have a US president that's on the wrong side of European opinion!

    Gosh, I wonder if there’s anyone besides Hispanics and Irish Catholics who likes the Pope.

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/sep/21/move-over-donald-trump-pope-francis-approval-ratin/

    And have you noticed how soft and squishy Southern Baptists are getting nowadays? Apparently not.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Brutusale
    A poll from 9/2015 means little. Post a papal popularity poll from the last 3 days.
  53. @Chrisnonymous

    To do this, he received money from the emperor, and help from all the cities and agricultural colonies (domus cultae) of the Duchy of Rome. The work took him four years to accomplish, and the newly fortified portion was called the Leonine City, after him.
     
    It's rich. Leo: "We're gonna build a wall and you know what? I'm gonna get the Germans to pay for it. Who's making money off the Roman Imperial system? It's the Germans, so they're gonna pay for the wall. And we're gonna do it in my first term."

    Capitol Hill? No...
    Trumpatine Hill!

    Funny.

    Read More
  54. @JimB
    Do I detect the arrival of trolls at iSteve? It was bound to happen as Steve's comments and ideas are becoming frequently apparent in Drudge, Breitbart, and the DC, not to mention in the Trump and Cruz primary campaigns.

    Now if only Drudge would actually link to iSteve.

    Arrival?

    If only there were some way to check on people’s posting history here. Maybe Ron Unz can come up with something.

    I was happy there was a strong anti-immigration candidate in the race. But Trump has done himself enormous damage after (i) flipping out over the Iowa caucases (ii) losing it in the recent debate, which seems to have alienated a lot of people (iii) getting into a very public spat with the most popular man in the world.

    I think he’s done. Maybe I’m wrong, but that’s how it looks to me.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rob McX
    Click on the name and you'll get the commenter's posting history.
    , @Difference Maker
    There's been no damage :)
    , @Francis G.
    Concern troll detected.
  55. @backup
    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/20/world/europe/in-defense-of-trump-some-point-wrongly-to-vatican-walls.html

    Some of the walls in Vatican City were built in the ninth century by Pope Leo IV in an attempt to protect it from attacks by pirates and other marauders, historians said. But other stretches of wall were built during the 15th and 16th centuries, Dr. Mannion said, less as a defensive measure and more as “a political and cultural statement” about the cultural and political power of the pope.
     
    Nice way to not say Saracens.

    Reference to unwanted memories is Oldthink. The NYT does not approve of Oldthink. Focus instead on Ingsoc-approved memories, such as slavery and Emmett Till. That is Goodthink.

    Read More
  56. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @IHTG
    Wasn't it the older Biff of the future who visited the past?

    Yes it was. Marty and Doc visited the future (2015) in their flying time machine car. (In the 1980s, when the movie was made, it was clear that by 2015 there would be flying cars). Marty got the 2015 sports almanac and told Doc how cool it would be to go back to the past and win every sports bet. Old Biff overheard this, and, when Marty and Doc were away from the car, Old Biff used the time machine to go back to 1955 and give the sports almanac to Young Biff.

    Read More
  57. @Hunsdon
    Since he entered the race, I've heard people talk about The Donald as a bumbler, a clown, a fool, an idiot. Well, he's no idiot, and that should have been obvious from the start. As to the rest, for some reason I'm reminded a bit of Casablanca where Strosser and Renault are discussing the blundering Americans.

    Major Strasser: You give him credit for too much cleverness. My impression was that he's just another blundering American.

    Captain Renault: We musn't underestimate "American blundering". I was with them when they "blundered" into Berlin in 1918.

    Casablanca is a movie not a documentary. “Blundering into Berlin” sounds a lot better than “blundering into Sedan and helping force the Germans to declare an Armistice”.

    Read More
  58. It’s not so much Trump’s Luck, it’s that he picks his enemies so well.

    During his initial entry, he made Jeb his #1 enemy, and had a battle plan laid out on how to attack him. He could have spent his time taking on Cruz (the presumptive intellectual candidate), Christie (the former lobbyist with the quick tongue) or Rubio (the minority with the mostest—sorry Ben), but instead concentrated his fire on Jeb, the awkward, inept, weak beta male next to whom Trump looked golden. Then he hammered Jeb with hilarious lines and got big by beating him up. He could have ignored Jeb and concentrated on clearing the field, but he picked Jeb to highlight his own strengths and make himself look strong.

    Similarly, Trump could have ignored this sally by Pope Francis (the “pope’s opinion is religious, not political” or some other meaningless pablum) but realized (1) the pope isn’t popular amongst traditionalist and conservative Catholics, as he’s basically a liberation theologist; (2) the pope is setting himself up for YUGE hypocrisy (both with the Vatican walls and the Mexican wall between it and Guatemala) that Trump’s own followers would notice; (3) the pope was inadvertently propping up the old American Protestant fears of Catholics being less loyal to the U.S than Protestants—which carries more weight in evangelical states like, say, SOUTH CAROLINA WHERE THE PRIMARY IS.

    And, most importantly, just like with !Jeb!, Trump knew he could win this battle.

    So he pounced and made Francis his enemy-of-the-moment, and slaughtered him politically.

    Make no mistake that Trump picks his battles to make himself look like a winner. He ignores others that are losers. He picked it with Megyn Kelly to make himself look independent of Fox News and prop himself up with male, anti-pc voters. He picked it with Jeb to make himself look tall, strong, and alpha. And he picked it with Francis to make himself seem loyal, American, and consistent, while the pope looks hypocritical.

    Read More
  59. @tbraton
    "Captain Renault: We musn’t underestimate “American blundering”. I was with them when they “blundered” into Berlin in 1918."

    A fine movie, but clearly propaganda. The Americans never got close to Berlin in WWI. The Armistice was declared with the lines of battle completely outside Germany. According to Wikipedia:

    "The occupation of the Rhineland took place following the Armistice. The occupying armies consisted of American, Belgian, British and French forces.

    In November 1918, the Allies had ample supplies of men and materiel to invade Germany. Yet at the time of the armistice, no Allied force had crossed the German frontier; the Western Front was still some 450 mi (720 km) from Berlin; and the Kaiser's armies had retreated from the battlefield in good order."

    This reminds me of an incident which occurred about 20 years ago. I was friends at the time with a couple consisting of a British husband and his Norwegian wife. During the dinner conversation, I made a point about what a mistake it was for America to enter WWI. Immediately, the Norwegian wife said it was a mistake for America not to get involved in WWI from the start and thus succeed in ending the war earlier. I said that was a remarkable statement to be made by someone whose country (Norway) had managed to stay of the war completely. She insisted that Norway had fought in WWI, so I had to go retrieve a history book or the Columbia Encyclopedia to show her that Norway had never fought in WWI. She was taken aback and muttered something about how her grandmother told her stories when she was growing up about the misbehavior of German soldiers, which indicated to me that she was confusing WWI with WWII. So much for the myth that Europeans are better educated than Americans (she was a college graduate, btw).

    she was confusing WWI with WWII

    Yes, but considering the fact that in the WWI, neutral Norway lost almost as many merchant vessels to U-boats (796) as France did (801), for many Norwegians it probably began to feel like war. Keep in mind, that at that time, Norway had a population of only about 2.5 million and shipping and fishing made up a much larger part of its economy than that of comparable neutral countries like Sweden which lost under a quarter as many vessels (181).

    Second-hand memories of this experience merging with those of later events may explain why your couple-friend was under the wrong impression. That’s no substitute for getting the facts right, but it does provide some insight into how many people’s historical impressions are actually formed.

    http://uboat.net/wwi/ships_hit/

    Read More
    • Replies: @tbraton
    I knew she wasn't basing it on personal experience since she was around 30, roughly 10 years younger than her Brit husband, which means she had to be born in the 60's. She specifically cited conversations she had had with her grandmother growing up and specifically cited the presence of German troops, which was the case in WWII but not in WWI. I chalk it up to her ignorance. After all, polls show that close to 50% of Americans still believed that Saddam Hussein had WMDs even after President GWB admitted that he did not, after a thorough search of Iraq after our conquest turned up nothing.
  60. @tbraton
    I wonder why the communist Pope Francis didn't take the opportunity when he was in Mexico, a country that is nominally 80+% Roman Catholic, to criticize Mexico for its restrictive immigration laws, which I understand are much more restrictive than those of the U.S. His words might have had much more effect in a country which is more than 3X Catholic than the U.S. (percentage-wise) and thus more inclined to follow the wisdom of their Holy Pontiff and more likely to accept his criticism that such restrictive immigration policies are not "Christian." Where did the Church find this left-wing buffoon who insists in intruding into political matters that have little connection to the Church's mission?

    Scott Adams has this amusing take on the Francis-Donald dispute on his dilbert blog:

    ” I could write a long essay about this Pope versus Trump situation, but I think it will be funnier to summarize it instead. What follows is – as far as I can tell – an accurate description of what happened.

    1. The Pope criticized Donald Trump.

    2. The Pope’s credibility declined.

    If this were fiction, no one would believe it.

    I predict that the Pope will issue a public apology to Trump for questioning his faith, as opposed to his policies. [Update: And here it is, sort of.]“

    Read More
  61. @Corvinus
    “Whether or not Biff was based on Trump, for the last 8 months Trump really has been the Luckiest Man on Earth as every spat he’s gotten into turns out golden for him.”

    Golden according to his acolytes.

    Trump, like EVERY candidate running for office, makes grandiose claims—“I can promise you that the Pope would have only wished and prayed that Donald Trump would have been President because this would not have happened.”

    He make assurances, but he cannot predict exactly what is going to happen in the future. He cannot guarantee that, under his watch, another epic radical Islamic terrorist attack will NOT occur.

    “The wall around the Vatican was built by Pope St. Leo IV, a rather Trumpish-sounding fellow, following … the Arab Muslim sack of the Vatican in 846.”

    Let’s understand the context of this situation. Trump is making the assumption today that Muslims in general who emigrate to the United States are invaders, dastardly creatures with their swords in tow seeking to behead their enemies en masse, whether it be inciting physical violence or by fomenting insidious cultural changes.

    Today’s American Christians and Muslims have been at least opening up their minds and hearts to one another, which is exactly what Pope Francis is referring to. Still a ways to go, but this “bridge” refers to each group who acknowledges that it is extremists who pervert their faith, not the rank and file members, and that American Muslims and Christians are able to live their lives without fear of systemic jihad committed by either side on American soil. Thus, the radicals must be warded off through “walls”, i.e. legal means to ensure the protection of our country.

    The Muslims during the reign of Pope St. Leo IV, however, were overall hell-bent on actually conquering their ideological enemies, considering they had gained a foothold in Sicily in 827. Islamic rule began in 902, with the Emirate of Sicily lasted from 965 until 1061. Thus, it is not surprising that Rome was the next target in their operations to expand. Popes at this time were considered the supreme RELIGIOUS AND POLITICAL leaders of the Christian world; Christian kings were to recognize this ultimate authority. That is, the Pope technically was the ruler of their territory. Thus, Pope St. Leo IV had a military reason to erect barriers to defend against future pillaging and plundering efforts undertaken by Muslims. Future Christian kings would contest this papal authority, insisting that the Pope not interfere with their internal political matters. Popes used the power of excommunication to "persuade" Christian kings of their fealty to the papacy.

    Hi Corvinus,

    Thanks for providing reasoned opposing views. Too many leftist critics write incoherent comments and don’t stay around to defend them, leaving the impression that opposing positions are silly.

    Let’s understand the context of this situation. Trump is making the assumption today that Muslims in general who emigrate to the United States are invaders … fomenting insidious cultural changes.

    Can you point to some factual support for assuming the opposite, that there is little or no chance the current influx to Europe and the US will have negative consequences”? Can you point to some instances where a country experienced a large influx of Muslim immigrants and there were minimal negative consequences? Are there any instances where there were negative consequences?

    Have you considered Kosovo? How did Muslims of Albanian descent and Christian Serbs get along in Kosovo? How did Muslims treat Serbian Christians once they came to power? Kosovo is now 96% Muslim after Serbs were ethnically cleansed in the 90′s followed by widespread burning of Christian churches. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kosovo#Demographics

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    “Can you point to some factual support for assuming the opposite, that there is little or no chance the current influx to Europe and the US will have negative consequences”?”

    I see how you framed your inquiry. What does “negative consequences” entail? Because with ANY and ALL immigrants there will be a criminal element, some more vicious than others. So, while there will be events and instances of Muslim immigrants, for example, causing mischief in the United States, it was observably no different than past European, or Asian, or African, groups.

    Europe is an entirely different animal. Refer to link below.

    “Can you point to some instances where a country experienced a large influx of Muslim immigrants and there were minimal negative consequences?“

    
Now you added the qualifier “minimal”. Is there a specific number in mind? What consequences do you refer to—political? economic? cultural? Because one could use the United States as an example regarding the extent of assimilation of Muslims into mainstream society.

    http://www.ibtimes.com/why-do-american-muslims-fare-better-their-french-counterparts-2189449


    “Have you considered Kosovo? How did Muslims of Albanian descent and Christian Serbs get along in Kosovo? How did Muslims treat Serbian Christians once they came to power?”

    One is not going to expect seashells and balloons between these groups giving their long-standing animosities in that particular region.
  62. @5371
    [Trump is making the assumption today that Muslims in general who emigrate to the United States are invaders, dastardly creatures with their swords in tow seeking to behead their enemies en masse, whether it be inciting physical violence or by fomenting insidious cultural changes.]

    Your prose is awful, a thing of horror.

    “Your prose is awful, a thing of horror.”

    Really, is that all you can muster? Pro tip –> Focus on breaking down the ideas into manageable parts and craft a counterargument.

    Read More
    • Replies: @5371
    I won't even offer you any advice on how to write passable English. You would be incapable, as well as unwilling to take it.
  63. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Chrisnonymous

    To do this, he received money from the emperor, and help from all the cities and agricultural colonies (domus cultae) of the Duchy of Rome. The work took him four years to accomplish, and the newly fortified portion was called the Leonine City, after him.
     
    It's rich. Leo: "We're gonna build a wall and you know what? I'm gonna get the Germans to pay for it. Who's making money off the Roman Imperial system? It's the Germans, so they're gonna pay for the wall. And we're gonna do it in my first term."

    Capitol Hill? No...
    Trumpatine Hill!

    Off by some hundred years for this comparison to work.

    Read More
  64. @Chrisnonymous
    I can never remember who the stupid leftists are* who post on Steve's blog, but are you one of them? I think the point you just made is that the pope is justified in parting ways, politically, with previous popes because the previous popes had the burden of having to be serious about consequential decisions.

    * I know lots of smart leftists but they don't post here.

    The point was that Steve failed to consider historical context, something that clearly has gone over your head. Do you have the intelligence to counter my argument rather than make a vain statement?

    Read More
  65. […] repel invading Arab Muslims, who had already sacked the little city in 846, and looted and burned Old St. […]

    Read More
  66. @Eustace Tilley (not)


    How could Captain Renault have done that when the Americans did not enter Berlin in 1918, by "blundering" or otherwise?

    The much-overrated "Casablanca" is half a love story, half an Allied propaganda film. I don't let my enjoyment of the former interfere with my skepticism about the latter.

    Yes, exactly! On 11 November 1918 the German army was everywhere positioned on Feindesland. And why would the Germans and Vichy officials honour exit visas signed by General de Gaulle?!

    Read More
    • Replies: @The Man From K Street

    And why would the Germans and Vichy officials honour exit visas signed by General de Gaulle?!
     
    It's a famous misheard line of Peter Lorre's. If you listen very carefully, and this is borne out by 80% of international close-captionings, what he said was "signed by General Weygand." Which makes more sense, since as you rightly point out, carrying anything with deGaulle's signature in Vichy would have meant summary execution. Still, the letters of transit are a MacGuffin, not meant to be understood as actual historical documents.
  67. Brilliant headline in the Telegraph today: “Trump forces pope to climb down”. Turns out it was just an opinion piece, but good God! Donald Trump is Victory!

    Read More
  68. @anonymous-antimarxist
    FNC is claiming that a Wall Street Journal/NBC poll shows Cruz leading Trump in SC.

    Funny how a poll commissioned by both the Globalist Sociopaths at the WSJ and the Cultural Marxists at NBC could be so wrong.

    Trump keeps gaining momentum not to mention millions in free advertising with these bogus polls. FNC not to mention CNN and the rest of the dinosaur news networks have no other choice but to quote Trump telling the world that they are full of it.

    In response to Pope's latest idiocy I would love to have Trump sit down for a one on one with Bill Warner the retired college professor who runs the website Political Islam. Almost single handedly Warner has stopped the construction of several Saudi financed mega mosques across middle America.

    The Cultural Marxist Media would have the vapors over the lastest antics of our soon to be "President Sh*tlord".

    WSJ also had a national poll earlier in the week showing Cruz ahead nationally, while all the other polls coming out at the same time had Trump at +15-20%. Either they’re brilliant and catching something no one else has or the central media outlet of corporate conservatism is rigging polls to push a narrative.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Difference Maker
    I suspected early on (months ago) that they would rig the polls, but didn't want to give them any ideas
  69. @IBC

    she was confusing WWI with WWII
     
    Yes, but considering the fact that in the WWI, neutral Norway lost almost as many merchant vessels to U-boats (796) as France did (801), for many Norwegians it probably began to feel like war. Keep in mind, that at that time, Norway had a population of only about 2.5 million and shipping and fishing made up a much larger part of its economy than that of comparable neutral countries like Sweden which lost under a quarter as many vessels (181).

    Second-hand memories of this experience merging with those of later events may explain why your couple-friend was under the wrong impression. That's no substitute for getting the facts right, but it does provide some insight into how many people's historical impressions are actually formed.

    http://uboat.net/wwi/ships_hit/

    I knew she wasn’t basing it on personal experience since she was around 30, roughly 10 years younger than her Brit husband, which means she had to be born in the 60′s. She specifically cited conversations she had had with her grandmother growing up and specifically cited the presence of German troops, which was the case in WWII but not in WWI. I chalk it up to her ignorance. After all, polls show that close to 50% of Americans still believed that Saddam Hussein had WMDs even after President GWB admitted that he did not, after a thorough search of Iraq after our conquest turned up nothing.

    Read More
  70. @tbraton
    I wonder why the communist Pope Francis didn't take the opportunity when he was in Mexico, a country that is nominally 80+% Roman Catholic, to criticize Mexico for its restrictive immigration laws, which I understand are much more restrictive than those of the U.S. His words might have had much more effect in a country which is more than 3X Catholic than the U.S. (percentage-wise) and thus more inclined to follow the wisdom of their Holy Pontiff and more likely to accept his criticism that such restrictive immigration policies are not "Christian." Where did the Church find this left-wing buffoon who insists in intruding into political matters that have little connection to the Church's mission?

    Well said. It is of course the height of hypocrisy for the pope to go to Mexico and criticize Trump’s proposed immigration policies, when Mexico’s actual policies are many times more racist, xenophobic, brutal, and harsh. And of course, the Pope himself allows zero muslim refugees to wander into the Vatican.

    However, buffoon? Perhaps not. How about whore. Remember, the Catholic church needs donations from reach people. And rich people love cheap labor. If the pope was not carrying water for the people making all that money from cheap foreign labor (I hear that Merkel is proposing to force the refugees to work for big German companies for a euro an hour!!!! How profitable is that!), then donations to the Catholic church would like decrease significantly.

    It’s hard to go too wrong in analyzing politics, than by following the money.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "And rich people love cheap labor."

    Ain't capitalism grand? Because as soon as laws are passed to restrict a company's ability to conduct their affairs as how they see fit, as soon as regulations are enforced to curtail a corporation's right to control their own property, everyone and his uncle will be yelling "Communist! Socialist! Opposer of the free market".
  71. @Rifleman

    Pope St. Leo IV
     
    Or as he is now known - Leo "the Islamophobic Pope".

    Or as he is now known – Leo “the Islamophobic Pope”.

    Islamopope? Actually, that better suits Pope Francis, given his liberal stance on Muslims and immigration

    Read More
  72. @Erik Sieven
    it is really astonishing that many people know nothing about this. Still I am not sure whether knowledge would change anything in this case. In the current situation the only thing which makes white liberals eveb more enthusiastic (and I don not mean this ironical) about being pro-black is even more black violence, I mean that what BLM is all about, isn´t it? Same with muslims, Europe has got been invaded by muslims for decades in a slowly mode, but the gates have only been opened totally when international jihad reached its for the present peak with the emergence of IS

    It probably wouldn’t do much with SJWs since they are suicidal anyway. But I am talking about the average citizen who has no defenses against the constant droning of the narrative. Most of the people I know who are not political don’t realize the extent of the muslim conquests of Europe, let alone the fact that comment #32 points out about much of the Mediterranean.

    British America dates back to around 1607. That’s 400 years of history of which we’ve only been a nation for 240 of those years. There were parts of Spain that were occupied for 700 years! Parts of Greece and the Balkans for 450 years! That’s longer then the entire English experience in the New World. Throw in a couple million European slaves and suddenly the narrative loses its power to all who are not already insane.

    Read More
  73. @This Is Our Home
    All your nice words are very nice. I agree with them in sentiment. I just don't have a clue how you jump from this simple virtue signalling to open borders and population replacement.

    I like and respect my neighbour but I don't want him to colonise my living room.

    So, are you simple or disingenuous?

    Corvinus is disingenuous.

    Read More
  74. Most white Catholics I know, including family members, do not much like this Marxist pope. One or two of the more conspiracy minded actually think he might be Nostradamus’ antipope.

    Read More
  75. @Buffalo Joe
    reinor Tor, Remember , the Pope is a Jesuit. The Jesuits pride themselves on being edgy and active in politics, but mostly anti-establishment activity. I again recommend a book by Peter DeRose, a former priest (Jesuit?) titled "Pope Patrick", an easy read. The fictitious Patrick meddles in politic and even extends a hand to the Muslims with startling results. Worth picking up.

    “Remember , the Pope is a Jesuit. The Jesuits pride themselves on being edgy and active in politics, but mostly anti-establishment activity.”

    I have been reminded by earlier episodes in Francis’s papacy that, during the reign of Louis XIV, the archbishop of Paris, Mgr. Harley, ordered his diocesan priests to pray for the conversion of the Jesuits to the Catholic faith.

    Likewise, the Holy Roman Emperors long struggled with the Jesuits. C.J.S. Thompson, in his book on “Poison Mysteries” (1923) recounts a Jesuit plot to poison the Emperor Leopold I with arsenic-laced candles, discovered by the (al)chemist and doctor, G.F. Borri:

    “Meanwhile the chamberlain was summoned and
    commanded to bring all the candles he had into the Emperor’s
    cabinet. The entire stock, amounting to thirty-five pounds,
    was brought from a cupboard in the ante-room where they had
    been stored and laid before Borri.

    “On examining them he called the Emperor’s attention to
    the peculiar fact that each candle was specially marked with
    a gold fillet round the top as if to prevent any mistake.
    Further questioning revealed the fact that no other candles
    but these had been used in the Emperor’s apartments since
    Candlemas. Borri next shredded the candle wick and calling
    for a small dish of meat carefully mixed the candle wick with
    it. A turnspit dog was then sent for, and was shut up in the
    cupboard with the dish of meat.

    “Meanwhile the Emperor was removed to another apartment,
    and Borri and the physician proceeded to the palace pharmacy
    to prepare an antidote for him. Here Borri tested the sus-
    pected candle-wick and found, as he thought, it was impreg-
    nated with arsenic. He had left instructions that he was to
    be called as soon as the dog got restless, but the animal was
    found to be dead by the time he returned to the Emperor’s
    cabinet.

    “The antidote prepared by Borri soon produced a beneficial
    effect on the Emperor, and his health improved so rapidly that
    within three weeks he was able to go out again.

    “An interesting record of Borri’s examination of the poisoned
    articles shows his remarkable knowledge of chemistry. Of
    the whole of the suspected candles brought to him he kept
    back two as evidence and used the remainder in his analysis.
    The weight of the candles was twenty-four pounds, and the
    impregnated wicks three and a half pounds, from which Borri
    concluded that nearly two and three-quarters pounds of
    arsenic had been employed.

    “Immediately Borri reported the result of his investigation
    to the Emperor he gave orders that the person who supplied
    the candles should be arrested at once.

    “It was found that they had been supplied by the procurator
    of the Jesuits, who was, however, no longer in Vienna and
    was not to be found. Being warned in time, this astute
    individual had made good his escape.

    “The solution of the mystery as to how the candles becctme
    impregnated with arsenic subsequently transpired. It was
    discovered that the pater-procurator of the Jesuits, accom-
    panied by a humble member of the order, had personally
    delivered the prepared candles, which were packed in two
    boxes, at the palace on March 2, 1670, at dark, with instruc-
    tions that they were to be delivered to the chamberlain and
    were to be treated with the greatest care.”

    https://archive.org/stream/poisonmysteriesi00thomuoft/poisonmysteriesi00thomuoft_djvu.txt

    That’s quite some “anti-establishment activity”!

    Read More
  76. Good thing His Holiness is protected by infallibility in regard to faith and morals. That allows him to be right about something.

    Read More
  77. @Corvinus
    “Whether or not Biff was based on Trump, for the last 8 months Trump really has been the Luckiest Man on Earth as every spat he’s gotten into turns out golden for him.”

    Golden according to his acolytes.

    Trump, like EVERY candidate running for office, makes grandiose claims—“I can promise you that the Pope would have only wished and prayed that Donald Trump would have been President because this would not have happened.”

    He make assurances, but he cannot predict exactly what is going to happen in the future. He cannot guarantee that, under his watch, another epic radical Islamic terrorist attack will NOT occur.

    “The wall around the Vatican was built by Pope St. Leo IV, a rather Trumpish-sounding fellow, following … the Arab Muslim sack of the Vatican in 846.”

    Let’s understand the context of this situation. Trump is making the assumption today that Muslims in general who emigrate to the United States are invaders, dastardly creatures with their swords in tow seeking to behead their enemies en masse, whether it be inciting physical violence or by fomenting insidious cultural changes.

    Today’s American Christians and Muslims have been at least opening up their minds and hearts to one another, which is exactly what Pope Francis is referring to. Still a ways to go, but this “bridge” refers to each group who acknowledges that it is extremists who pervert their faith, not the rank and file members, and that American Muslims and Christians are able to live their lives without fear of systemic jihad committed by either side on American soil. Thus, the radicals must be warded off through “walls”, i.e. legal means to ensure the protection of our country.

    The Muslims during the reign of Pope St. Leo IV, however, were overall hell-bent on actually conquering their ideological enemies, considering they had gained a foothold in Sicily in 827. Islamic rule began in 902, with the Emirate of Sicily lasted from 965 until 1061. Thus, it is not surprising that Rome was the next target in their operations to expand. Popes at this time were considered the supreme RELIGIOUS AND POLITICAL leaders of the Christian world; Christian kings were to recognize this ultimate authority. That is, the Pope technically was the ruler of their territory. Thus, Pope St. Leo IV had a military reason to erect barriers to defend against future pillaging and plundering efforts undertaken by Muslims. Future Christian kings would contest this papal authority, insisting that the Pope not interfere with their internal political matters. Popes used the power of excommunication to "persuade" Christian kings of their fealty to the papacy.

    He cannot guarantee that, under his watch, another epic radical Islamic terrorist attack will NOT occur.

    He doesn’t have to “guarantee”. His job would be to decrease the odds of their success.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "He doesn’t have to “guarantee”. His job would be to decrease the odds of their success."

    [Sound of "Family Feud" buzzer]. Wrong. Trump did make a guarantee. He himself said such an event would not have happened. It's in the King's English, Fiddler.

    Trump--"I can promise you that the Pope would have only wished and prayed that Donald Trump would have been President because this would not have happened."
  78. @keypusher
    Arrival?

    If only there were some way to check on people's posting history here. Maybe Ron Unz can come up with something.

    I was happy there was a strong anti-immigration candidate in the race. But Trump has done himself enormous damage after (i) flipping out over the Iowa caucases (ii) losing it in the recent debate, which seems to have alienated a lot of people (iii) getting into a very public spat with the most popular man in the world.

    I think he's done. Maybe I'm wrong, but that's how it looks to me.

    Click on the name and you’ll get the commenter’s posting history.

    Read More
  79. @backup
    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/20/world/europe/in-defense-of-trump-some-point-wrongly-to-vatican-walls.html

    Some of the walls in Vatican City were built in the ninth century by Pope Leo IV in an attempt to protect it from attacks by pirates and other marauders, historians said. But other stretches of wall were built during the 15th and 16th centuries, Dr. Mannion said, less as a defensive measure and more as “a political and cultural statement” about the cultural and political power of the pope.
     
    Nice way to not say Saracens.

    From the NYT’s article:

    “The rhetoric from Trump’s team is misinformation, and it is not true,” said Gerard Mannion, a professor of Catholic Studies at Georgetown University in Washington.

    It isn’t all surrounded by walls, and it’s not like you need a separate visa or a passport to enter,” he said…

    There are, to be sure, formidable walls in Vatican City, and much of of the site, including the gardens and the modest guesthouse that is home to Francis, is set behind them. But the walls do not entirely enclose the city-state, and in the modern era they are not meant to, historians said.

    This reminds of the articles in the NYT, Nate Silver’s site, and some foundation report (Brenner?) that alternatively said homicides are up 15% this year but crime’s not really up, or that sure, crime is up this year, but there is no systemic reason that explains it- maybe in 30 years after enough metastudies are published can we start to approximate.

    Can we please get better POZ interlocutors, like now, instead of this second-string sh!t? I’m getting tired of debating dumb substitute teacher types, who when they’re called out, turn red in the face, pick up the nearest textbook, read several paragraphs corroborating what you just said, then triumphantly slam down the book as they bleat out “See!”

    Read More
  80. @This Is Our Home
    All your nice words are very nice. I agree with them in sentiment. I just don't have a clue how you jump from this simple virtue signalling to open borders and population replacement.

    I like and respect my neighbour but I don't want him to colonise my living room.

    So, are you simple or disingenuous?

    “I just don’t have a clue how you jump from this simple virtue signalling to open borders and population replacement.”

    I was taking Steve to task for ignoring historical context. No where in my post am I advocating “open borders and population replacement”.

    Now, if one was to employ your logic regarding “population replacement”, all people other than tribal groups able to trace their ancestry prior to European colonization 1492 should leave and go back to their places of origin. Right the ship, so to speak.

    Although, one could argue, history has demonstrated it is inevitable that “lesser people” will infiltrate areas, pop out new generations of idiots, and replace the “native” stock, whether or not the host policies were well-founded or ill-advised. It’s not like America was founded by immigrants. I mean, that’s what the Irish and Germans did in the 1840’s, the Italians and Slavs in the 1890’s, the Mexicans in the 1920’s/1930’s, the Vietnamese in the 1970’s, etc.—gradually replacing the Scots-Irish, Welsh, and English, who are the true founders of America. So, rather than lament about it, enjoy the decline. You can’t fight nature, right?

    Read More
    • Replies: @This Is Our Home

    Now, if one was to employ your logic regarding “population replacement”, all people other than tribal groups able to trace their ancestry prior to European colonization 1492 should leave and go back to their places of origin. Right the ship, so to speak.
     
    Don't be silly. Your inability to deal with complexity is making your comments absurd.

    The indigenous population of America has been replaced. That was bad for them and bad for people with a sense of justice. The current population is being replaced. My thoughts on the issue are similar but one of them is in the process of happening and so one of them can be halted or at least not progressed.

    You cannot stop crimes that happened in the past.


    So, rather than lament about it, enjoy the decline. You can’t fight nature, right?
     
    You are being doubly disingenuous. Probably even to yourself. People have successfully fought this for millenia and continue to do so in most of the world. Indeed if it were not for all of those trying to stop it then the West and America would already be irredeemable third world dumps. Were there no barriers to moving to Europe Africa would be practically empty. An average person would be insane not to move. The only reason that you enjoy a first world standard of living now is that so many supposed haters had the foresight to maintain firmish borders in the past...
  81. @Reg Cæsar

    He cannot guarantee that, under his watch, another epic radical Islamic terrorist attack will NOT occur.
     
    He doesn't have to "guarantee". His job would be to decrease the odds of their success.

    “He doesn’t have to “guarantee”. His job would be to decrease the odds of their success.”

    [Sound of "Family Feud" buzzer]. Wrong. Trump did make a guarantee. He himself said such an event would not have happened. It’s in the King’s English, Fiddler.

    Trump–”I can promise you that the Pope would have only wished and prayed that Donald Trump would have been President because this would not have happened.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Charles Erwin Wilson
    I'll be happy to sponsor you for a Cuban Exchange. You and yours go to Cuba, and we get a victim of the Cuban Gulag and the victim's family to replace you and yours.

    What do you say Corvinus? The Cuban Utopia awaits you!
    , @Reg Cæsar

    Wrong. Trump did make a guarantee.
     
    Wrong wrong. I didn't say Trump didn't make a guarantee, only that he didn't have to. All he, or anyone else, can be expected to do is to lower the odds.

    And that would be an improvement.
  82. @Black Death
    I'm getting sick of this guy. He knows as little about history as he does about Christian theology or climate science. I would recommend that he consult his Bible, if he even owns one, and see how many times the word "hypocrite" comes up.

    When Protestants took up the Bible at the start of the Reformation, the pope put it on the Index Librorum Prohibitorum as a heretical text. To this day, Catholics have no idea what’s in it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Tracy

    When Protestants took up the Bible at the start of the Reformation, the pope put it on the Index Librorum Prohibitorum as a heretical text. To this day, Catholics have no idea what’s in it.
     
    That's a load of crap. The Bible is covered in Mass readings, including the Epistle of James, the one Luther referred to as an "epistle of straw." Luther also wanted to get rid of the Apocalypse of St. John, or "Revelation" to Protestants -- as did Calvin and Zwingli. James's epistle talks about how faith without works is dead, so -- well, you know, it didn't fit the "Reformers'" visions.

    Putting a twisted version of Sacred Scripture on the Index isn't the same as putting Scripture itself on the Index. There are reasons why it was done. For an example of how things can go wrong in that department, see how the Scofield Bible and its footnotes have many Protestants worshiping the State of Israel and the Jewish people as gods. And for a fascinating, nauseating article about all that, see this.
  83. I think Luther’s battle hymn fits here nicely:

    Der alt böse Feind,
    Mit Ernst er’s jetzt meint.
    Groß Macht und viel List
    Sein grausam Rüstung ist.
    Auf Erd ist nicht seinsgleichen.

    Mit unsrer Macht ist nichts getan,
    Wir sind gar bald verloren.
    Es streit’t für uns der rechte Mann,
    Den Gott hat selbst erkoren.

    Read More
  84. @Corvinus
    “I just don’t have a clue how you jump from this simple virtue signalling to open borders and population replacement.”

    I was taking Steve to task for ignoring historical context. No where in my post am I advocating “open borders and population replacement”.

    Now, if one was to employ your logic regarding “population replacement”, all people other than tribal groups able to trace their ancestry prior to European colonization 1492 should leave and go back to their places of origin. Right the ship, so to speak.

    Although, one could argue, history has demonstrated it is inevitable that “lesser people” will infiltrate areas, pop out new generations of idiots, and replace the “native” stock, whether or not the host policies were well-founded or ill-advised. It’s not like America was founded by immigrants. I mean, that’s what the Irish and Germans did in the 1840’s, the Italians and Slavs in the 1890’s, the Mexicans in the 1920’s/1930’s, the Vietnamese in the 1970’s, etc.—gradually replacing the Scots-Irish, Welsh, and English, who are the true founders of America. So, rather than lament about it, enjoy the decline. You can’t fight nature, right?

    Now, if one was to employ your logic regarding “population replacement”, all people other than tribal groups able to trace their ancestry prior to European colonization 1492 should leave and go back to their places of origin. Right the ship, so to speak.

    Don’t be silly. Your inability to deal with complexity is making your comments absurd.

    The indigenous population of America has been replaced. That was bad for them and bad for people with a sense of justice. The current population is being replaced. My thoughts on the issue are similar but one of them is in the process of happening and so one of them can be halted or at least not progressed.

    You cannot stop crimes that happened in the past.

    So, rather than lament about it, enjoy the decline. You can’t fight nature, right?

    You are being doubly disingenuous. Probably even to yourself. People have successfully fought this for millenia and continue to do so in most of the world. Indeed if it were not for all of those trying to stop it then the West and America would already be irredeemable third world dumps. Were there no barriers to moving to Europe Africa would be practically empty. An average person would be insane not to move. The only reason that you enjoy a first world standard of living now is that so many supposed haters had the foresight to maintain firmish borders in the past…

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "You cannot stop crimes that happened in the past."

    Exactly. It was a "crime" in the past, according to nativists, that different racial groups other than white and ethnic groups other than Scots-Irish, Welsh, and English were allowed to immigrate here.

    "The indigenous population of America has been replaced."

    And the least people can do is give their land back to them. Don't blame me for using your logic against you.

    "The current population is being replaced."

    Which again is part of nature. One may certainly call for the enforcement of current immigration laws or work toward new immigration restrictions or bans. Go for it. However, there are Americans who do not share your viewpoint regarding "replacement". More like augmentation.

    "Indeed if it were not for all of those trying to stop it then the West and America would already be irredeemable third world dumps."

    You're air of superiority is showing.

    "Were there no barriers to moving to Europe Africa would be practically empty. An average person would be insane not to move."

    Not really. People in Africa may be impoverished and lack technologically advancements, but it's their home and they are willing to work through those economic and social problems. Not every single African is destitute.

    And there are First World countries seeking to invest in those nations. Because free stuff.
  85. @bomag
    ...opening up their minds and hearts to one another...

    Losers use this line to explain why they had to give their stuff away.

    “Losers use this line to explain why they had to give their stuff away.”

    You’re going to have to make the connection. How does a person who is willing to consider other points of view, i.e. open up one’s heart and mind, remotely relate to “losers” giving away “free stuff”? It seems you just cobbled something down without even realizing what even meant.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thea
    I open my heart to them.

    Muslims deserve to have their own countries, where they ought to remain, or who ought to help there fellow religionists.

    Western countries should refrain from dropping bombs on them. They need to be contained in those nations.

    This is truly kind.
  86. @Bill
    There's also _The Jesuits_ by controversial-even-among-traditionalist-Catholic-cranks Malachi Martin.

    Bill ,Thanks will read that , but I endured four years of holier than thou Jesuit college education. However, great networking among alum/

    Read More
  87. @Diversity Heretic
    Cervantes was not only a Muslim slave, but a galley slave--chained to an oar. "We keep you alive to serve this ship. Row well and live!"

    Diversity Heretic, “Put your backs into and pull, the Imam wants to water ski.”

    Read More
  88. @Diversity Heretic
    Donald Trump may not regard Muslim immigrants as invaders but I sure do. That opening of minds and hearts you refer to is a very one-way business. The penalty for apostasy to Islam, to the best of my knowledge, remains death. "Extremist" Muslims are the Muslims most faithful to the dictates of their religion. They're free to practice it in Islamic countries, and I wish them the best, but it is increasingly obvious that they cannot mix peacefully in Western countries.

    Insofar as the division of authority between popes, kings and emperors, this was a constant struggle in the Middle Ages (e.g., the Investiture Controversy). Early popes acknowledged the spiritual as well as the secular authority of the Eastern Roman (Byzantine) Emperor. The Church was a huge landowner and bishops had considerable secular authority.

    “The penalty for apostasy to Islam, to the best of my knowledge, remains death.”

    Same goes for Christians. Deuteronomy 13:6-9 “If your very own brother, or your son or daughter, or the wife you love, or your closest friend secretly entices you, saying: Let us go and worship other gods (gods that neither you nor your fathers have known, gods of the peoples around you, whether near or far, from one end of the land to the other, or gods of other religions), do not yield to him or listen to him. Show him no pity. Do not spare him or shield him. You must certainly put him to death. Your hand must be the first in putting him to death, and then the hands of all the people.”

    Listen, Muslims worldwide practice their faith on a continuum similar to Joos and Christians–strict, moderate, “loose”.

    “They’re free to practice it in Islamic countries, and I wish them the best, but it is increasingly obvious that they cannot mix peacefully in Western countries.”

    Maybe Western countries, but what about the United States? I’m sure you are able to provide relevant statistics regarding the number of beheadings, honor killings, and domestic terrorist activities committed by American Muslims which has thoroughly demonstrated its long-standing, perpetual impact on the political, economic, and social systems of America.

    “Insofar as the division of authority between popes, kings and emperors, this was a constant struggle in the Middle Ages (e.g., the Investiture Controversy).”

    “The Church was a huge landowner and bishops had considerable secular authority.”

    Which led to corruption in the RCC and subsequent and necessary reforms.

    Read More
    • Replies: @The Millennial Falcon
    Actually Deuteronomy 13 doesn't go for Christians. Check Galatians 3:23-25 "Now before faith came, we were held captive under the law, imprisoned until the coming faith would be revealed. So then, the law was our guardian until Christ came, in order that we might be justified by faith. But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian"
    , @Diversity Heretic
    To my knowledge the instructions contained in Deuteronomy haven't been enforced recently. Donald Trump's daughter converted to Judaism--I haven't noted his call for her execution for apostasy. I have read of sentences of death for apostasy in Afghanistan. Yes Muslims are a continuum, but enough of them are at the extreme end to constitute a genuine menace. Even "moderate" Muslims support the ultimate goals of Islam: the Ummah of the One True Faith, in which non-believers are tolerated only so long as they remain in dhimmi status. Moderate Muslims just disagree with more energetic Muslims about how to get there. I can see why moderate Muslims are frustrated; in a few generations they will be so numerous in the west that they can use the existing political process to impose the sharia--the more energetic faction alerts the dhimmis to their eventual fate.

    You distinguish the United States from Western countries--upon what basis? The U.S., it is true is slipping into Latin America status, but the tradition of the United States is rooted firmly in the West--representative government, the common law, etc. As for terrorist incidents in the U.S., you should check with the relatives of the almost 3,000 people killed on September 11. Or how about Major Hassan, Soldier of Allah, gunning down fellow soldiers while shouting "Allahu Ahkbar?" Or that business in San Bernardino? Or the recent attack by a machete-wielding Somali in Ohio? What does it take to convince you these people are a threat, As Kipling put it, you just never know "When the gods of his far-off land, shall repossess his blood." We have a colossal surveillance state and are stripped of our dignity every time we board a commercial aircraft, largely to avoid terrorism by Muslims.

    And what do they bring us? How many couscous cooks and rug merchants do we need? They come from a culture that peaked around 900 A.D. and hasn't amounted to much since. If we really need immigrants (which I very much doubt) there are better choices than the results of recurring counsin marriages since the Bronze Age.

    There are numerous Muslim majority countries. If you find these people so noble and interesting, by all means go and live with them. You have my sincere best wishes. But they are little but trouble when they try to mix in Western (and I include the U.S.) countries.
    , @Charles Erwin Wilson

    Maybe Western countries, but what about the United States?
     
    You must have missed San Bernadino.
    , @ConcernedAmerican

    Same goes for Christians. Deuteronomy 13:6-9 “If your very own brother, or your son or daughter, or the wife you love, or your closest friend secretly entices you, saying: Let us go and worship other gods (gods that neither you nor your fathers have known, gods of the peoples around you, whether near or far, from one end of the land to the other, or gods of other religions), do not yield to him or listen to him. Show him no pity. Do not spare him or shield him. You must certainly put him to death. Your hand must be the first in putting him to death, and then the hands of all the people.”
     
    That doesn't and didn't apply to Christians, it applied to Jews under the Law of Moses. Of course, Christians also aren't supposed to worship false gods and any Christian who does obviously isn't a true Christian.
  89. @Citizen of a Silly Country
    How is agreeing the dominant narrative throughout the West being "edgy" or anti-establishment?

    Citizen, Don’t understand your comment, but Jesuits turned up dead in South American countries where they sided with the “people”, meaning communists. Also , the Berrigan brothers, both Jesuits, were arrested for their anti war activism during the Viet Nam era.

    Read More
  90. @This Is Our Home

    Now, if one was to employ your logic regarding “population replacement”, all people other than tribal groups able to trace their ancestry prior to European colonization 1492 should leave and go back to their places of origin. Right the ship, so to speak.
     
    Don't be silly. Your inability to deal with complexity is making your comments absurd.

    The indigenous population of America has been replaced. That was bad for them and bad for people with a sense of justice. The current population is being replaced. My thoughts on the issue are similar but one of them is in the process of happening and so one of them can be halted or at least not progressed.

    You cannot stop crimes that happened in the past.


    So, rather than lament about it, enjoy the decline. You can’t fight nature, right?
     
    You are being doubly disingenuous. Probably even to yourself. People have successfully fought this for millenia and continue to do so in most of the world. Indeed if it were not for all of those trying to stop it then the West and America would already be irredeemable third world dumps. Were there no barriers to moving to Europe Africa would be practically empty. An average person would be insane not to move. The only reason that you enjoy a first world standard of living now is that so many supposed haters had the foresight to maintain firmish borders in the past...

    “You cannot stop crimes that happened in the past.”

    Exactly. It was a “crime” in the past, according to nativists, that different racial groups other than white and ethnic groups other than Scots-Irish, Welsh, and English were allowed to immigrate here.

    “The indigenous population of America has been replaced.”

    And the least people can do is give their land back to them. Don’t blame me for using your logic against you.

    “The current population is being replaced.”

    Which again is part of nature. One may certainly call for the enforcement of current immigration laws or work toward new immigration restrictions or bans. Go for it. However, there are Americans who do not share your viewpoint regarding “replacement”. More like augmentation.

    “Indeed if it were not for all of those trying to stop it then the West and America would already be irredeemable third world dumps.”

    You’re air of superiority is showing.

    “Were there no barriers to moving to Europe Africa would be practically empty. An average person would be insane not to move.”

    Not really. People in Africa may be impoverished and lack technologically advancements, but it’s their home and they are willing to work through those economic and social problems. Not every single African is destitute.

    And there are First World countries seeking to invest in those nations. Because free stuff.

    Read More
    • Replies: @The Millennial Falcon
    Picking at exaggerations and generalizations doesn't dismiss any of the core points.

    Massive European immigration was a disaster for the first natives. Massive African immigration was a disaster for the recent European immigrants. And even the newer waves of European immigration had major negative consequences (introduction of ethnic voting blocks and continental preferences for leftist politics, flooded industries with massive supply of labor to kill wages and set off union/capital wars, gave us the Mafia, etc.) despite a shared Western heritage.
    , @Jimmy Docherty
    I am curious. Do you believe in morally-neutral conflicts of interest? That is, do you believe that two people, or two sorts of people, or two nations could both have good reasons for preferring their respective self-interest at one another's expense? I am genuinely curious, because I don't understand enough from what principles you are arguing.
    , @helena
    "Not really. People in Africa may be impoverished and lack technologically advancements, but it’s their home and they are willing to work through those economic and social problems. Not every single African is destitute. "

    Precisely. Why not a quid pro quo; every n number of African migrants = a return share for the host country in the resource capital that the African migrants have turned their back on? Maybe that way Africa could develop for the benefit of everyone.
    , @Divine Right
    “The current population is being replaced.”

    “Which again is part of nature. One may certainly call for the enforcement of current immigration laws or work toward new immigration restrictions or bans. Go for it. However, there are Americans who do not share your viewpoint regarding “replacement”. More like augmentation.”

    I think you’re trying to use the idea that population replacement is “part of nature” (i.e. inevitable) in order to get people to go along with it while also hedging in an attempt to be logically consistent. Nature is also filled with examples of such invaders being turned back; that seems natural enough for me. Death from disease is “natural” but, by your logic, people should just accept it and cast worry into the wind - live for the moment and live only for yourself. No thanks.

    “Indeed if it were not for all of those trying to stop it then the West and America would already be irredeemable third world dumps.”

    ‘You’re air of superiority is showing.’

    Why wouldn’t he feel superior? Did Guatemala invent powered flight and modern computers?

    “Were there no barriers to moving to Europe Africa would be practically empty. An average person would be insane not to move.”

    ‘Not really. People in Africa may be impoverished and lack technologically advancements, but it’s their home and they are willing to work through those economic and social problems. Not every single African is destitute.

    ‘And there are First World countries seeking to invest in those nations. Because free stuff.’

    Yes, really. Or didn’t you catch the part about large numbers of Africans trying to leave Africa? Africa is the world’s poorest inhabited continent. Considering that the continent’s population is also exploding upwards, this guarantees a huge and unending stream of emigrants from the area. There are indeed large numbers of poor Africans who would love to leave their continent if given a chance. Some have already done so.

    And those First World countries are by-in-large investing in Africa due to its geography and natural resources, not its population. If Europe could support the same types of plant life and had the same oil and mineral reserves, investment in Africa would be far less.

    “The indigenous population of America has been replaced.”

    ‘And the least people can do is give their land back to them. Don’t blame me for using your logic against you.’

    Not really. Many indigenous people fought back. Using his logic (and some of yours), we have a right to do the same. However, there were many other indigenous peoples who took your advice (you know, about it being natural and all). How did that work out for them? Answer: great for us, not so great for them. Perhaps there is a lesson to be learned from that.

    “Exactly. It was a “crime” in the past, according to nativists, that different racial groups other than white and ethnic groups other than Scots-Irish, Welsh, and English were allowed to immigrate here.”

    So…we should feel guilty about that in the present when 100% of those people are dead and assuage such guilt by flooding our civilization with people who 1. will predominantly not attain the high achievement of white Caucasians any time soon* 2. have much less in common with us than diverse European groups who were let in later and 3. will racially block-vote, turning all of our elections into racial head counts? Just how do we benefit from all of this, aside from you getting to feel morally superior?

    *“Immigration Reform 2015: More Hispanics In US Schools, But They're Struggling To Keep Up”

    “After years of steady immigration and high birth rates, Hispanics have become the fastest growing ethnic group in U.S. public schools, making up more than one in five kindergarten students. But the children of Latino immigrants are struggling to keep up with other students by nearly every measure, underperforming their white, Asian and sometimes black peers when it comes to SAT scores, math and reading skills, and high school and college graduation rates. The stubborn achievement gap paints a bleak future for the U.S. economy and education system and suggests U.S. schools at every level are failing miserably when it comes to teaching Hispanics regardless of their English-language skills or economic backgrounds, education advocates said.”

    “But every measurement used to assess student achievement suggests U.S. schools are not prepared to teach a growing population of Latino children. Hispanics are graduating from high school at lower rates than whites and Asians. In many states, Hispanics are also graduating at lower rates than black students, who have historically faced numerous education challenges in the U.S. Since 1990, Hispanics have dropped out at much higher rates than any other ethnic group.”

    The achievement gap isn't limited to families of recent immigrants. Even students from Hispanic families who have lived in the United States for several generations are likely to struggle in school, especially if their parents are low-income and obtained little education themselves. That means if schools can't figure out how to help Latino students now, future Hispanic students are unlikely to do any better.

    http://www.ibtimes.com/immigration-reform-2015-more-hispanics-us-schools-theyre-struggling-keep-1827574

  91. @FactsAreImportant
    Hi Corvinus,

    Thanks for providing reasoned opposing views. Too many leftist critics write incoherent comments and don't stay around to defend them, leaving the impression that opposing positions are silly.

    Let’s understand the context of this situation. Trump is making the assumption today that Muslims in general who emigrate to the United States are invaders ... fomenting insidious cultural changes.
     
    Can you point to some factual support for assuming the opposite, that there is little or no chance the current influx to Europe and the US will have negative consequences"? Can you point to some instances where a country experienced a large influx of Muslim immigrants and there were minimal negative consequences? Are there any instances where there were negative consequences?

    Have you considered Kosovo? How did Muslims of Albanian descent and Christian Serbs get along in Kosovo? How did Muslims treat Serbian Christians once they came to power? Kosovo is now 96% Muslim after Serbs were ethnically cleansed in the 90's followed by widespread burning of Christian churches. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kosovo#Demographics

    “Can you point to some factual support for assuming the opposite, that there is little or no chance the current influx to Europe and the US will have negative consequences”?”

    I see how you framed your inquiry. What does “negative consequences” entail? Because with ANY and ALL immigrants there will be a criminal element, some more vicious than others. So, while there will be events and instances of Muslim immigrants, for example, causing mischief in the United States, it was observably no different than past European, or Asian, or African, groups.

    Europe is an entirely different animal. Refer to link below.

    “Can you point to some instances where a country experienced a large influx of Muslim immigrants and there were minimal negative consequences?“

    
Now you added the qualifier “minimal”. Is there a specific number in mind? What consequences do you refer to—political? economic? cultural? Because one could use the United States as an example regarding the extent of assimilation of Muslims into mainstream society.

    http://www.ibtimes.com/why-do-american-muslims-fare-better-their-french-counterparts-2189449

    “Have you considered Kosovo? How did Muslims of Albanian descent and Christian Serbs get along in Kosovo? How did Muslims treat Serbian Christians once they came to power?”

    One is not going to expect seashells and balloons between these groups giving their long-standing animosities in that particular region.

    Read More
    • Replies: @peterike
    One is not going to expect seashells and balloons between these groups giving their long-standing animosities in that particular region.

    Well at least the dingbat Corvinus has acknowledged that there is such a thing as "long-standing animosities" between groups. Now if we can just get him off his magic dirt obsession -- note how he delicately inserts"in that particular region"! It's rich! -- he might just realize that these groups bring their animosities, and quite a lot of other trouble, along with them, and the ground they're standing on has absolutely nothing to do with anything.
    , @FactsAreImportant
    In a spirited debate, it is easy to overlook how much agreement there is. In this case, it seems we agree that:

    1) There can be substantial negative consequences to large-scale immigration,

    2) Kosovo is an example of very negative consequences natives from large-scale immigration, and immigration by Europeans to the New World is another,

    3) It is sometimes possible to assimilate small numbers of Muslim immigrants without large negative consequences,

    4) It is difficult or impossible to come up with examples of non-harmful large-scale Muslim immigration.

  92. @TG
    Well said. It is of course the height of hypocrisy for the pope to go to Mexico and criticize Trump's proposed immigration policies, when Mexico's actual policies are many times more racist, xenophobic, brutal, and harsh. And of course, the Pope himself allows zero muslim refugees to wander into the Vatican.

    However, buffoon? Perhaps not. How about whore. Remember, the Catholic church needs donations from reach people. And rich people love cheap labor. If the pope was not carrying water for the people making all that money from cheap foreign labor (I hear that Merkel is proposing to force the refugees to work for big German companies for a euro an hour!!!! How profitable is that!), then donations to the Catholic church would like decrease significantly.

    It's hard to go too wrong in analyzing politics, than by following the money.

    “And rich people love cheap labor.”

    Ain’t capitalism grand? Because as soon as laws are passed to restrict a company’s ability to conduct their affairs as how they see fit, as soon as regulations are enforced to curtail a corporation’s right to control their own property, everyone and his uncle will be yelling “Communist! Socialist! Opposer of the free market”.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Chess Fan
    Get out of my Sailer comment section REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
  93. OT: Terrific article on Trump’s America, by Charles Murray:

    If you are dismayed by Trumpism, don’t kid yourself that it will fade away if Donald Trump fails to win the Republican nomination. Trumpism is an expression of the legitimate anger that many Americans feel about the course that the country has taken, and its appearance was predictable. It is the endgame of a process that has been going on for a half-century: America’s divestment of its historic national identity.

    http://www.aei.org/publication/trumps-america/

    Read More
  94. @David
    Trump for Murifex Maximus!

    Good one. Of course in all fairness, a pontif(ex) is literally a bridge builder, so the Pope is in character!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Buffalo Joe
    International Jew, To Catholics the Pope is Christ's representative on earth, but remember what Gandhi said. "I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ."
  95. @Corvinus
    "The penalty for apostasy to Islam, to the best of my knowledge, remains death."

    Same goes for Christians. Deuteronomy 13:6-9 “If your very own brother, or your son or daughter, or the wife you love, or your closest friend secretly entices you, saying: Let us go and worship other gods (gods that neither you nor your fathers have known, gods of the peoples around you, whether near or far, from one end of the land to the other, or gods of other religions), do not yield to him or listen to him. Show him no pity. Do not spare him or shield him. You must certainly put him to death. Your hand must be the first in putting him to death, and then the hands of all the people.”

    Listen, Muslims worldwide practice their faith on a continuum similar to Joos and Christians--strict, moderate, "loose".

    "They’re free to practice it in Islamic countries, and I wish them the best, but it is increasingly obvious that they cannot mix peacefully in Western countries."

    Maybe Western countries, but what about the United States? I'm sure you are able to provide relevant statistics regarding the number of beheadings, honor killings, and domestic terrorist activities committed by American Muslims which has thoroughly demonstrated its long-standing, perpetual impact on the political, economic, and social systems of America.

    "Insofar as the division of authority between popes, kings and emperors, this was a constant struggle in the Middle Ages (e.g., the Investiture Controversy)."

    "The Church was a huge landowner and bishops had considerable secular authority."

    Which led to corruption in the RCC and subsequent and necessary reforms.

    Actually Deuteronomy 13 doesn’t go for Christians. Check Galatians 3:23-25 “Now before faith came, we were held captive under the law, imprisoned until the coming faith would be revealed. So then, the law was our guardian until Christ came, in order that we might be justified by faith. But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian”

    Read More
  96. @Corvinus
    "The penalty for apostasy to Islam, to the best of my knowledge, remains death."

    Same goes for Christians. Deuteronomy 13:6-9 “If your very own brother, or your son or daughter, or the wife you love, or your closest friend secretly entices you, saying: Let us go and worship other gods (gods that neither you nor your fathers have known, gods of the peoples around you, whether near or far, from one end of the land to the other, or gods of other religions), do not yield to him or listen to him. Show him no pity. Do not spare him or shield him. You must certainly put him to death. Your hand must be the first in putting him to death, and then the hands of all the people.”

    Listen, Muslims worldwide practice their faith on a continuum similar to Joos and Christians--strict, moderate, "loose".

    "They’re free to practice it in Islamic countries, and I wish them the best, but it is increasingly obvious that they cannot mix peacefully in Western countries."

    Maybe Western countries, but what about the United States? I'm sure you are able to provide relevant statistics regarding the number of beheadings, honor killings, and domestic terrorist activities committed by American Muslims which has thoroughly demonstrated its long-standing, perpetual impact on the political, economic, and social systems of America.

    "Insofar as the division of authority between popes, kings and emperors, this was a constant struggle in the Middle Ages (e.g., the Investiture Controversy)."

    "The Church was a huge landowner and bishops had considerable secular authority."

    Which led to corruption in the RCC and subsequent and necessary reforms.

    To my knowledge the instructions contained in Deuteronomy haven’t been enforced recently. Donald Trump’s daughter converted to Judaism–I haven’t noted his call for her execution for apostasy. I have read of sentences of death for apostasy in Afghanistan. Yes Muslims are a continuum, but enough of them are at the extreme end to constitute a genuine menace. Even “moderate” Muslims support the ultimate goals of Islam: the Ummah of the One True Faith, in which non-believers are tolerated only so long as they remain in dhimmi status. Moderate Muslims just disagree with more energetic Muslims about how to get there. I can see why moderate Muslims are frustrated; in a few generations they will be so numerous in the west that they can use the existing political process to impose the sharia–the more energetic faction alerts the dhimmis to their eventual fate.

    You distinguish the United States from Western countries–upon what basis? The U.S., it is true is slipping into Latin America status, but the tradition of the United States is rooted firmly in the West–representative government, the common law, etc. As for terrorist incidents in the U.S., you should check with the relatives of the almost 3,000 people killed on September 11. Or how about Major Hassan, Soldier of Allah, gunning down fellow soldiers while shouting “Allahu Ahkbar?” Or that business in San Bernardino? Or the recent attack by a machete-wielding Somali in Ohio? What does it take to convince you these people are a threat, As Kipling put it, you just never know “When the gods of his far-off land, shall repossess his blood.” We have a colossal surveillance state and are stripped of our dignity every time we board a commercial aircraft, largely to avoid terrorism by Muslims.

    And what do they bring us? How many couscous cooks and rug merchants do we need? They come from a culture that peaked around 900 A.D. and hasn’t amounted to much since. If we really need immigrants (which I very much doubt) there are better choices than the results of recurring counsin marriages since the Bronze Age.

    There are numerous Muslim majority countries. If you find these people so noble and interesting, by all means go and live with them. You have my sincere best wishes. But they are little but trouble when they try to mix in Western (and I include the U.S.) countries.

    Read More
    • Agree: AndrewR
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    “Yes Muslims are a continuum, but enough of them are at the extreme end to constitute a genuine menace.”

    Yes [insert any group here] are a continuum. but enough of them are at the extreme end to constitute a general menace.

    It's not majority numbers of Muslims that constitute a grave threat to American institutions.

    “I can see why moderate Muslims are frustrated; in a few generations they will be so numerous in the west that they can use the existing political process to impose the sharia.”

    In America? No. In Europe? Don’t get your hopes up.

    “The U.S., it is true is slipping into Latin America status”

    You're going to have to offer specific examples.

    “but the tradition of the United States is rooted firmly in the West–representative government, the common law…”

    Traditions, yes. Culture, yes. But citizens of the United States refer to themselves as Americans, not Westerners.

    “As for terrorist incidents in the U.S., you should check with the relatives of the almost 3,000 people killed on September 11. Or how about Major Hassan, Soldier of Allah, gunning down fellow soldiers while shouting “Allahu Ahkbar?” Or that business in San Bernardino? Or the recent attack by a machete-wielding Somali in Ohio? What does it take to convince you these people are a threat.”

    Yes, I am familiar with those spread out over time events. How about daily occurrences, monthly figures, yearly totals of jihad?

    “We have a colossal surveillance state and are stripped of our dignity every time we board a commercial aircraft, largely to avoid terrorism by Muslims.

    I thought whites don’t play the victim card. My bad.

    “They come from a culture that peaked around 900 A.D. and hasn’t amounted to much since.”

    You're right, black gold is something that is vastly overrated.
    , @anon
    Deuteronomy, and the Old Testament (the Torah) in general, is not meant for Christians. It is a user manual written by Jews for Jews.
    See http://strugglesforexistence.com/?p=article_p&id=13

    I don't quite understand why Christians insist on culturally appropriating it.
    , @Anon7
    The Stranger
    Rudyard Kipling

    The Stranger within my gate,
    He may be true or kind,
    But he does not talk my talk--
    I cannot feel his mind.
    I see the face and the eyes and the mouth,
    But not the soul behind.

    The men of my own stock,
    They may do ill or well,
    But they tell the lies I am wanted to,
    They are used to the lies I tell;
    And we do not need interpreters
    When we go to buy or sell.

    The Stranger within my gates,
    He may be evil or good,
    But I cannot tell what powers control--
    What reasons sway his mood;
    Nor when the Gods of his far-off land
    Shall repossess his blood.

    The men of my own stock,
    Bitter bad they may be,
    But, at least, they hear the things I hear,
    And see the things I see;
    And whatever I think of them and their likes
    They think of the likes of me.

    This was my father's belief
    And this is also mine:
    Let the corn be all one sheaf--
    And the grapes be all one vine,
    Ere our children's teeth are set on edge
    By bitter bread and wine.
    , @Mark Green
    Deuteronomy is in the Torah! This barbaric law applies to Jews, not Christians.
  97. @Corvinus
    “Whether or not Biff was based on Trump, for the last 8 months Trump really has been the Luckiest Man on Earth as every spat he’s gotten into turns out golden for him.”

    Golden according to his acolytes.

    Trump, like EVERY candidate running for office, makes grandiose claims—“I can promise you that the Pope would have only wished and prayed that Donald Trump would have been President because this would not have happened.”

    He make assurances, but he cannot predict exactly what is going to happen in the future. He cannot guarantee that, under his watch, another epic radical Islamic terrorist attack will NOT occur.

    “The wall around the Vatican was built by Pope St. Leo IV, a rather Trumpish-sounding fellow, following … the Arab Muslim sack of the Vatican in 846.”

    Let’s understand the context of this situation. Trump is making the assumption today that Muslims in general who emigrate to the United States are invaders, dastardly creatures with their swords in tow seeking to behead their enemies en masse, whether it be inciting physical violence or by fomenting insidious cultural changes.

    Today’s American Christians and Muslims have been at least opening up their minds and hearts to one another, which is exactly what Pope Francis is referring to. Still a ways to go, but this “bridge” refers to each group who acknowledges that it is extremists who pervert their faith, not the rank and file members, and that American Muslims and Christians are able to live their lives without fear of systemic jihad committed by either side on American soil. Thus, the radicals must be warded off through “walls”, i.e. legal means to ensure the protection of our country.

    The Muslims during the reign of Pope St. Leo IV, however, were overall hell-bent on actually conquering their ideological enemies, considering they had gained a foothold in Sicily in 827. Islamic rule began in 902, with the Emirate of Sicily lasted from 965 until 1061. Thus, it is not surprising that Rome was the next target in their operations to expand. Popes at this time were considered the supreme RELIGIOUS AND POLITICAL leaders of the Christian world; Christian kings were to recognize this ultimate authority. That is, the Pope technically was the ruler of their territory. Thus, Pope St. Leo IV had a military reason to erect barriers to defend against future pillaging and plundering efforts undertaken by Muslims. Future Christian kings would contest this papal authority, insisting that the Pope not interfere with their internal political matters. Popes used the power of excommunication to "persuade" Christian kings of their fealty to the papacy.

    He make assurances, but he cannot predict exactly what is going to happen in the future. He cannot guarantee that, under his watch, another epic radical Islamic terrorist attack will NOT occur.

    Jeebus Christ [smacks head].

    Wait, what? Donald Trump can’t predict the future? Gosh.

    And he makes “assurances”? You mean, assurances like this?

    As president, Hillary will: Dismantle the school-to-prison pipeline… End the era of mass incarceration… Strengthen bonds of trust between communities and police…

    Just like that! Whammo! All those problems solved because she gave “assurances,” so she must be trying to “predict exactly what is going to happen in the future.”

    Do you understand the notion of political rhetoric, or are you too befuddled by your Aspie literalness to understand anything at all?

    Read More
  98. And if anyone doubts the power of “game”, the dark arts, learned charisma, etc., or still thinks of it as some gimmick for socially awkward losers, watch and learn from Senor Trump, the true MOST INTERESTING MAN IN THE WORLD. After blows and controversies that would have folded most candidacies, Trump looks like he actually will wrap-up the GOP nomination.

    And in true Trump alpha fashion I hope he uses this little dust-up with His Holiness to keep pushing farther, harder, deeper. Don’t apologize. Don’t back-down. Reframe. OWN IT.

    CNN Anchor Erin POZette: “How do you feel about being hated by the leader of the world’s largest religion?”
    TRUMP: “I’m not hated. And look, I’m doing so well in the polls, and I have such a good message, that all the world’s leaders are talking about me. President Obama talks about me. Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders in their debates talk about me. The British Parliament holds a special session to talk about me. And now the Pope talks about me. When was the last time you had all the leaders of the world talking about someone who isn’t even out the primaries yet? They talk about me imore than the guy currently in the White House [tin laugh].”

    Yeah, like a lot of you and our gentilious host I too would prefer a Presidential style less down the road to Idiocracy, but that horse has long left the barn. If Trump is a blowhard or buffoon what does that make the other candidates?:

    Yeb: Invasion is an act of love.
    Kasich: Single moms are the real heroes of our society.
    Rubio: And Obama knows exactly what he’s doing…
    Christie: Since we can’t not let Muslims in, let’s pretend to do something by attacking Russia so we can start pretending we’re doing something by attacking Syria.
    Clinton & Sanders: Mmmm… refugees good, smugglers BAD!
    Sanders: My first act as President will be to smash the Syrian refugee for-profit smuggler industry and then organize the refugees into employee-owned, LGBT-friendly, migration co-ops so that these poor Syrian families can get to Europe and America in a carbon-neutral manner…
    Clinton: My first act as President will be to send Navy ships into the Mediterranean. My second act will be to give the State Dept. nuclear weapons to destroy those Navy ships, so that State Dept. personnel can unimpeded begin issuing green cards.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Harry Baldwin
    Kasich: Single moms are the real heroes of our society.

    You could put together a funny mash-up of all the nonsensical things Kasich has said during the debates. "I believe in a patriotism of the gut! Hug a neighbor whose daughter is a victim of drug abuse--that's what conservatism is all about! My daughter doesn't like all the yelling in politics. We need to punch the Russians in the nose!"
  99. @Corvinus
    “Can you point to some factual support for assuming the opposite, that there is little or no chance the current influx to Europe and the US will have negative consequences”?”

    I see how you framed your inquiry. What does “negative consequences” entail? Because with ANY and ALL immigrants there will be a criminal element, some more vicious than others. So, while there will be events and instances of Muslim immigrants, for example, causing mischief in the United States, it was observably no different than past European, or Asian, or African, groups.

    Europe is an entirely different animal. Refer to link below.

    “Can you point to some instances where a country experienced a large influx of Muslim immigrants and there were minimal negative consequences?“

    
Now you added the qualifier “minimal”. Is there a specific number in mind? What consequences do you refer to—political? economic? cultural? Because one could use the United States as an example regarding the extent of assimilation of Muslims into mainstream society.

    http://www.ibtimes.com/why-do-american-muslims-fare-better-their-french-counterparts-2189449


    “Have you considered Kosovo? How did Muslims of Albanian descent and Christian Serbs get along in Kosovo? How did Muslims treat Serbian Christians once they came to power?”

    One is not going to expect seashells and balloons between these groups giving their long-standing animosities in that particular region.

    One is not going to expect seashells and balloons between these groups giving their long-standing animosities in that particular region.

    Well at least the dingbat Corvinus has acknowledged that there is such a thing as “long-standing animosities” between groups. Now if we can just get him off his magic dirt obsession — note how he delicately inserts”in that particular region”! It’s rich! — he might just realize that these groups bring their animosities, and quite a lot of other trouble, along with them, and the ground they’re standing on has absolutely nothing to do with anything.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "It’s rich! — he might just realize that these groups bring their animosities, and quite a lot of other trouble, along with them, and the ground they’re standing on has absolutely nothing to do with anything."

    Yes, these groups, whether it be Catholic or Jewish or Muslim.

    "Do you understand the notion of political rhetoric, or are you too befuddled by your Aspie literalness to understand anything at all?"

    Dude, STEVE-O is the one quoting Trump and putting it into the context that under his watch that the Vatican would not be subject to an attack by extremist Muslims.
  100. @Corvinus
    "You cannot stop crimes that happened in the past."

    Exactly. It was a "crime" in the past, according to nativists, that different racial groups other than white and ethnic groups other than Scots-Irish, Welsh, and English were allowed to immigrate here.

    "The indigenous population of America has been replaced."

    And the least people can do is give their land back to them. Don't blame me for using your logic against you.

    "The current population is being replaced."

    Which again is part of nature. One may certainly call for the enforcement of current immigration laws or work toward new immigration restrictions or bans. Go for it. However, there are Americans who do not share your viewpoint regarding "replacement". More like augmentation.

    "Indeed if it were not for all of those trying to stop it then the West and America would already be irredeemable third world dumps."

    You're air of superiority is showing.

    "Were there no barriers to moving to Europe Africa would be practically empty. An average person would be insane not to move."

    Not really. People in Africa may be impoverished and lack technologically advancements, but it's their home and they are willing to work through those economic and social problems. Not every single African is destitute.

    And there are First World countries seeking to invest in those nations. Because free stuff.

    Picking at exaggerations and generalizations doesn’t dismiss any of the core points.

    Massive European immigration was a disaster for the first natives. Massive African immigration was a disaster for the recent European immigrants. And even the newer waves of European immigration had major negative consequences (introduction of ethnic voting blocks and continental preferences for leftist politics, flooded industries with massive supply of labor to kill wages and set off union/capital wars, gave us the Mafia, etc.) despite a shared Western heritage.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "Picking at exaggerations and generalizations doesn’t dismiss any of the core points."

    Your core point is that massive immigration, whether it be European or non-European, is a disaster at worst or has major negative consequences at best...without even acknowledging its benefits. Furthermore, I take offense to your anti-white rhetoric.

    "introduction of ethnic voting blocks and continental preferences for leftist politics, flooded industries with massive supply of labor to kill wages and set off union/capital wars, gave us the Mafia"

    Are these major negative consequences squarely due to immigration, or other factors involved?
  101. @Corvinus
    "Losers use this line to explain why they had to give their stuff away."

    You're going to have to make the connection. How does a person who is willing to consider other points of view, i.e. open up one's heart and mind, remotely relate to "losers" giving away "free stuff"? It seems you just cobbled something down without even realizing what even meant.

    I open my heart to them.

    Muslims deserve to have their own countries, where they ought to remain, or who ought to help there fellow religionists.

    Western countries should refrain from dropping bombs on them. They need to be contained in those nations.

    This is truly kind.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "Muslims deserve to have their own countries, where they ought to remain, or who ought to help there fellow religionists."

    The world doesn't work that way. People have the liberty to move, provided that where they move, the people there offer them that same liberty.
  102. @Corvinus
    “Can you point to some factual support for assuming the opposite, that there is little or no chance the current influx to Europe and the US will have negative consequences”?”

    I see how you framed your inquiry. What does “negative consequences” entail? Because with ANY and ALL immigrants there will be a criminal element, some more vicious than others. So, while there will be events and instances of Muslim immigrants, for example, causing mischief in the United States, it was observably no different than past European, or Asian, or African, groups.

    Europe is an entirely different animal. Refer to link below.

    “Can you point to some instances where a country experienced a large influx of Muslim immigrants and there were minimal negative consequences?“

    
Now you added the qualifier “minimal”. Is there a specific number in mind? What consequences do you refer to—political? economic? cultural? Because one could use the United States as an example regarding the extent of assimilation of Muslims into mainstream society.

    http://www.ibtimes.com/why-do-american-muslims-fare-better-their-french-counterparts-2189449


    “Have you considered Kosovo? How did Muslims of Albanian descent and Christian Serbs get along in Kosovo? How did Muslims treat Serbian Christians once they came to power?”

    One is not going to expect seashells and balloons between these groups giving their long-standing animosities in that particular region.

    In a spirited debate, it is easy to overlook how much agreement there is. In this case, it seems we agree that:

    1) There can be substantial negative consequences to large-scale immigration,

    2) Kosovo is an example of very negative consequences natives from large-scale immigration, and immigration by Europeans to the New World is another,

    3) It is sometimes possible to assimilate small numbers of Muslim immigrants without large negative consequences,

    4) It is difficult or impossible to come up with examples of non-harmful large-scale Muslim immigration.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    1) There can be substantial negative consequences to large-scale immigration,

    And there can be substantial positive consequence to large-scale immigration.

    2) Kosovo is an example of very negative consequences natives from large-scale immigration, and immigration by Europeans to the New World is another,

    Kosovo is an example of rival ethnic groups native to the land duking it out for supremacy.

    3) It is sometimes possible to assimilate small numbers of Muslim immigrants without large negative consequences,

    It is possible, not sometimes possible.

    4) It is difficult or impossible to come up with examples of non-harmful large-scale Muslim immigration.

    Muslims make up 1% of the American population. How many from this group have committed acts of violence in the name of Allah? How many from this group have engaged in terrorist activities?

  103. @Eustace Tilley (not)


    How could Captain Renault have done that when the Americans did not enter Berlin in 1918, by "blundering" or otherwise?

    The much-overrated "Casablanca" is half a love story, half an Allied propaganda film. I don't let my enjoyment of the former interfere with my skepticism about the latter.

    In replying here, I hope to respond to what most everyone said, and if only I knew better how to “tag you in” I would do so.

    Casablanca is a great film, a wonderful film, a magical film . . . that is, at its heart, deeply flawed agitprop.

    From a rigorous standpoint it’s a mess. How many different drinks does Victor Lazlo drink, after all? Oh, THROW the Vichy water in the toilet, Rick!

    And yet, and yet . . . and yet it works. It’s good propaganda, it hits the right notes. Yeah, the Americans didn’t blunder into Berlin in 1918 . . . but they sure did in ’45.

    Read More
  104. @International Jew
    Good one. Of course in all fairness, a pontif(ex) is literally a bridge builder, so the Pope is in character!

    International Jew, To Catholics the Pope is Christ’s representative on earth, but remember what Gandhi said. “I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Grandpa Jack
    As opposed to, say, a people who maintain a brutal caste system for thousands and thousands of years, burn widows on their husbands funeral pyres, constantly rape women like Africans, and blame the British for everything that they themselves have been screwing up for millenia (while failing to acknowledge the enormous benefits bestowed upon them by the British).
  105. This things about building walls apply to Christians only. Jews and Israel do not need to worry. They do not need to build bridges.

    Read More
  106. OT. I note that Harper Lee died today at 89. Out of curiosity, I checked out the life expectancy of a white American woman who reaches the age of 89, and I was shocked to discover that the average life expectancy is 5.2 years. http://life-span.healthgrove.com/l/90/89 She consumed only 10 months out of the expected 5.2 years, which seems far too little. She died way too young. And, supposedly, she died in her sleep. I smell a rat here. I think that guy who did in Scalia is going around the South snuffing out our cultural icons. The real tip off is that the news stories made no mention of the placement of the pillows in her bed. By my count, that makes two assassinations in less than a week. And the killer didn’t have the courtesy to wait for SC Justice Scalia to be properly buried before knocking off Harper Lee.

    Read More
    • Replies: @The Millennial Falcon
    I'm guessing the same rat did in Umberto Eco.

    Be careful with all this wink-wink noticing: Foucault's pendulum might be coming for you.
  107. @tbraton
    OT. I note that Harper Lee died today at 89. Out of curiosity, I checked out the life expectancy of a white American woman who reaches the age of 89, and I was shocked to discover that the average life expectancy is 5.2 years. http://life-span.healthgrove.com/l/90/89 She consumed only 10 months out of the expected 5.2 years, which seems far too little. She died way too young. And, supposedly, she died in her sleep. I smell a rat here. I think that guy who did in Scalia is going around the South snuffing out our cultural icons. The real tip off is that the news stories made no mention of the placement of the pillows in her bed. By my count, that makes two assassinations in less than a week. And the killer didn't have the courtesy to wait for SC Justice Scalia to be properly buried before knocking off Harper Lee.

    I’m guessing the same rat did in Umberto Eco.

    Be careful with all this wink-wink noticing: Foucault’s pendulum might be coming for you.

    Read More
  108. @Corvinus
    "You cannot stop crimes that happened in the past."

    Exactly. It was a "crime" in the past, according to nativists, that different racial groups other than white and ethnic groups other than Scots-Irish, Welsh, and English were allowed to immigrate here.

    "The indigenous population of America has been replaced."

    And the least people can do is give their land back to them. Don't blame me for using your logic against you.

    "The current population is being replaced."

    Which again is part of nature. One may certainly call for the enforcement of current immigration laws or work toward new immigration restrictions or bans. Go for it. However, there are Americans who do not share your viewpoint regarding "replacement". More like augmentation.

    "Indeed if it were not for all of those trying to stop it then the West and America would already be irredeemable third world dumps."

    You're air of superiority is showing.

    "Were there no barriers to moving to Europe Africa would be practically empty. An average person would be insane not to move."

    Not really. People in Africa may be impoverished and lack technologically advancements, but it's their home and they are willing to work through those economic and social problems. Not every single African is destitute.

    And there are First World countries seeking to invest in those nations. Because free stuff.

    I am curious. Do you believe in morally-neutral conflicts of interest? That is, do you believe that two people, or two sorts of people, or two nations could both have good reasons for preferring their respective self-interest at one another’s expense? I am genuinely curious, because I don’t understand enough from what principles you are arguing.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "That is, do you believe that two people, or two sorts of people, or two nations could both have good reasons for preferring their respective self-interest at one another’s expense?"

    Such as?
  109. @Corvinus
    "He doesn’t have to “guarantee”. His job would be to decrease the odds of their success."

    [Sound of "Family Feud" buzzer]. Wrong. Trump did make a guarantee. He himself said such an event would not have happened. It's in the King's English, Fiddler.

    Trump--"I can promise you that the Pope would have only wished and prayed that Donald Trump would have been President because this would not have happened."

    I’ll be happy to sponsor you for a Cuban Exchange. You and yours go to Cuba, and we get a victim of the Cuban Gulag and the victim’s family to replace you and yours.

    What do you say Corvinus? The Cuban Utopia awaits you!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "I’ll be happy to sponsor you for a Cuban Exchange."

    Except the situation that you created is rooted in fantasy. I am not in need to go anywhere. Other people from around the world, however, provided they meet certain criteria, are given an opportunity to immigrate to the United States or other places.

    "You must have missed San Bernadino."

    How many since then of that magnitude?

  110. @Abe
    And if anyone doubts the power of "game", the dark arts, learned charisma, etc., or still thinks of it as some gimmick for socially awkward losers, watch and learn from Senor Trump, the true MOST INTERESTING MAN IN THE WORLD. After blows and controversies that would have folded most candidacies, Trump looks like he actually will wrap-up the GOP nomination.

    And in true Trump alpha fashion I hope he uses this little dust-up with His Holiness to keep pushing farther, harder, deeper. Don't apologize. Don't back-down. Reframe. OWN IT.

    CNN Anchor Erin POZette: "How do you feel about being hated by the leader of the world's largest religion?"
    TRUMP: "I'm not hated. And look, I'm doing so well in the polls, and I have such a good message, that all the world's leaders are talking about me. President Obama talks about me. Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders in their debates talk about me. The British Parliament holds a special session to talk about me. And now the Pope talks about me. When was the last time you had all the leaders of the world talking about someone who isn't even out the primaries yet? They talk about me imore than the guy currently in the White House [tin laugh]."

    Yeah, like a lot of you and our gentilious host I too would prefer a Presidential style less down the road to Idiocracy, but that horse has long left the barn. If Trump is a blowhard or buffoon what does that make the other candidates?:

    Yeb: Invasion is an act of love.
    Kasich: Single moms are the real heroes of our society.
    Rubio: And Obama knows exactly what he's doing...
    Christie: Since we can't not let Muslims in, let's pretend to do something by attacking Russia so we can start pretending we're doing something by attacking Syria.
    Clinton & Sanders: Mmmm... refugees good, smugglers BAD!
    Sanders: My first act as President will be to smash the Syrian refugee for-profit smuggler industry and then organize the refugees into employee-owned, LGBT-friendly, migration co-ops so that these poor Syrian families can get to Europe and America in a carbon-neutral manner...
    Clinton: My first act as President will be to send Navy ships into the Mediterranean. My second act will be to give the State Dept. nuclear weapons to destroy those Navy ships, so that State Dept. personnel can unimpeded begin issuing green cards.

    Kasich: Single moms are the real heroes of our society.

    You could put together a funny mash-up of all the nonsensical things Kasich has said during the debates. “I believe in a patriotism of the gut! Hug a neighbor whose daughter is a victim of drug abuse–that’s what conservatism is all about! My daughter doesn’t like all the yelling in politics. We need to punch the Russians in the nose!”

    Read More
  111. @wolfy
    the pope was right.there is little evidence that Donald is a practising Christian.

    The Pope didn’t use the word “practicing”. Seeing that the Donald is a baptized Christian, the Pope was incorrect.

    Read More
  112. @Corvinus
    "The penalty for apostasy to Islam, to the best of my knowledge, remains death."

    Same goes for Christians. Deuteronomy 13:6-9 “If your very own brother, or your son or daughter, or the wife you love, or your closest friend secretly entices you, saying: Let us go and worship other gods (gods that neither you nor your fathers have known, gods of the peoples around you, whether near or far, from one end of the land to the other, or gods of other religions), do not yield to him or listen to him. Show him no pity. Do not spare him or shield him. You must certainly put him to death. Your hand must be the first in putting him to death, and then the hands of all the people.”

    Listen, Muslims worldwide practice their faith on a continuum similar to Joos and Christians--strict, moderate, "loose".

    "They’re free to practice it in Islamic countries, and I wish them the best, but it is increasingly obvious that they cannot mix peacefully in Western countries."

    Maybe Western countries, but what about the United States? I'm sure you are able to provide relevant statistics regarding the number of beheadings, honor killings, and domestic terrorist activities committed by American Muslims which has thoroughly demonstrated its long-standing, perpetual impact on the political, economic, and social systems of America.

    "Insofar as the division of authority between popes, kings and emperors, this was a constant struggle in the Middle Ages (e.g., the Investiture Controversy)."

    "The Church was a huge landowner and bishops had considerable secular authority."

    Which led to corruption in the RCC and subsequent and necessary reforms.

    Maybe Western countries, but what about the United States?

    You must have missed San Bernadino.

    Read More
  113. Eventually, perhaps after the next terrorist incident, even the MSM will be forced to admit that you make your own luck, and that Trump is outsmarting a lot of folks.

    Read More
  114. @Eustace Tilley (not)


    How could Captain Renault have done that when the Americans did not enter Berlin in 1918, by "blundering" or otherwise?

    The much-overrated "Casablanca" is half a love story, half an Allied propaganda film. I don't let my enjoyment of the former interfere with my skepticism about the latter.

    I’m inclined to give the Captain a bit of leeway. The AEF occupied Koblenz in 1918 and left in 1923.

    Read More
  115. @Eustace Tilley (not)


    How could Captain Renault have done that when the Americans did not enter Berlin in 1918, by "blundering" or otherwise?

    The much-overrated "Casablanca" is half a love story, half an Allied propaganda film. I don't let my enjoyment of the former interfere with my skepticism about the latter.

    I watched Casablanca two days ago. Its still one of my favorite movies, but the propaganda is now really obvious to me. I think it came out right before Torch.

    However, I spotted only two real historical errors, which is not too bad for Hollywood. One of them was the Americans marching into Berlin in 1918. This simply didn’t happen. Actually it didn’t happen in 1945 either. The second was a short subplot of a female Bulgarian refugee that Renault was trying to take advantage of. In reality the Bulgarian government made an arrangement with Hitler where they helped him out in the Balkans, enabling them to settle some scores with the Serbs and Greeks, but were otherwise left alone and they didn’t send troops to Russia. It was probably one of the better countries to be in Europe, at least until Stalin got to them in 1944. They even managed to protect their Jews. I doubt the screenwriters could tell one Eastern European country from another, but there were no refugees from Bulgaria.

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    Were there any Germans in Casablanca at all? I doubt it. Laszlo (actually László) is a Hungarian and not a Czech name.

    And I haven't seen the movie itself, just a few iconic scenes on Youtube. Those were good. Not historically accurate, but good.
    , @Steve Sailer
    In general, everybody involved in "Casablanca" was kind of winging it.
  116. @Corvinus
    "And rich people love cheap labor."

    Ain't capitalism grand? Because as soon as laws are passed to restrict a company's ability to conduct their affairs as how they see fit, as soon as regulations are enforced to curtail a corporation's right to control their own property, everyone and his uncle will be yelling "Communist! Socialist! Opposer of the free market".

    Get out of my Sailer comment section REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

    Read More
  117. There are good popes and bad popes. We had a pretty good run there, but now we’re taking a little break. Whaddaya gonna do?

    Read More
  118. @Corvinus
    "The penalty for apostasy to Islam, to the best of my knowledge, remains death."

    Same goes for Christians. Deuteronomy 13:6-9 “If your very own brother, or your son or daughter, or the wife you love, or your closest friend secretly entices you, saying: Let us go and worship other gods (gods that neither you nor your fathers have known, gods of the peoples around you, whether near or far, from one end of the land to the other, or gods of other religions), do not yield to him or listen to him. Show him no pity. Do not spare him or shield him. You must certainly put him to death. Your hand must be the first in putting him to death, and then the hands of all the people.”

    Listen, Muslims worldwide practice their faith on a continuum similar to Joos and Christians--strict, moderate, "loose".

    "They’re free to practice it in Islamic countries, and I wish them the best, but it is increasingly obvious that they cannot mix peacefully in Western countries."

    Maybe Western countries, but what about the United States? I'm sure you are able to provide relevant statistics regarding the number of beheadings, honor killings, and domestic terrorist activities committed by American Muslims which has thoroughly demonstrated its long-standing, perpetual impact on the political, economic, and social systems of America.

    "Insofar as the division of authority between popes, kings and emperors, this was a constant struggle in the Middle Ages (e.g., the Investiture Controversy)."

    "The Church was a huge landowner and bishops had considerable secular authority."

    Which led to corruption in the RCC and subsequent and necessary reforms.

    Same goes for Christians. Deuteronomy 13:6-9 “If your very own brother, or your son or daughter, or the wife you love, or your closest friend secretly entices you, saying: Let us go and worship other gods (gods that neither you nor your fathers have known, gods of the peoples around you, whether near or far, from one end of the land to the other, or gods of other religions), do not yield to him or listen to him. Show him no pity. Do not spare him or shield him. You must certainly put him to death. Your hand must be the first in putting him to death, and then the hands of all the people.”

    That doesn’t and didn’t apply to Christians, it applied to Jews under the Law of Moses. Of course, Christians also aren’t supposed to worship false gods and any Christian who does obviously isn’t a true Christian.

    Read More
  119. “The Arab raid against Rome was an Arab raid in 846 against Rome.”

    -Wikipedia ain’t exactly Shakespearean sonnets, is she?

    Read More
  120. @Buffalo Joe
    International Jew, To Catholics the Pope is Christ's representative on earth, but remember what Gandhi said. "I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ."

    As opposed to, say, a people who maintain a brutal caste system for thousands and thousands of years, burn widows on their husbands funeral pyres, constantly rape women like Africans, and blame the British for everything that they themselves have been screwing up for millenia (while failing to acknowledge the enormous benefits bestowed upon them by the British).

    Read More
  121. @Corvinus
    "He doesn’t have to “guarantee”. His job would be to decrease the odds of their success."

    [Sound of "Family Feud" buzzer]. Wrong. Trump did make a guarantee. He himself said such an event would not have happened. It's in the King's English, Fiddler.

    Trump--"I can promise you that the Pope would have only wished and prayed that Donald Trump would have been President because this would not have happened."

    Wrong. Trump did make a guarantee.

    Wrong wrong. I didn’t say Trump didn’t make a guarantee, only that he didn’t have to. All he, or anyone else, can be expected to do is to lower the odds.

    And that would be an improvement.

    Read More
  122. I come back here expecting to find some interesting new comments but all I see is our regulars feeding Corvinus. Say what you will about him, at least Truth is/was entertaining. Not so with Corvinus.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    Say what you will about him, at least Truth is/was entertaining. Not so with Corvinus.."

    And yet, you found it necessary to point that out, rather than actually engage in discourse. Ok, great. Don't read what I have to say.
  123. @tbraton
    I wonder why the communist Pope Francis didn't take the opportunity when he was in Mexico, a country that is nominally 80+% Roman Catholic, to criticize Mexico for its restrictive immigration laws, which I understand are much more restrictive than those of the U.S. His words might have had much more effect in a country which is more than 3X Catholic than the U.S. (percentage-wise) and thus more inclined to follow the wisdom of their Holy Pontiff and more likely to accept his criticism that such restrictive immigration policies are not "Christian." Where did the Church find this left-wing buffoon who insists in intruding into political matters that have little connection to the Church's mission?

    Calling him a “communist pope” is a little silly. Marxists are self-declared atheists with a history of killing priests and destroying churches in the name of scientific materialism. Francis is a left-liberal progressive who is going with the flow.

    Unlike communists and libertarians, progressives are too sentimental and politically correct to be materialistic atheists, and instead become wishy-washy spiritualists – a description which sums up most western religious leaders.

    Read More
  124. Nice way to not say Saracens.

    Haha, The words “Muslim” and “Islam” appear nowhere in that article. The New York Lies. That’s what that is, a lie. When the story has been for weeks that “Trump’s an Islamophobe who he wants to throw the Muslims out and ban them,” omitting the historical Muslim connection here is simply a lie.

    The funny part is the common perception that MSM outlets sensationalize everything to increase revenue. On the contrary, the MSM frequently de-sensationalizes stories to make less money while shaping The Narrative.

    Sort of like how there’s lots of dollars Hollywood doesn’t want, like the money from The Passion of the Christ, or from following the trail blazed by 300.

    Trump has also been blessed with some useful enemies.

    That’s the beauty of Trump’s candidacy; we get to show that we’ll gladly choose the Carney Barker with halfway decent political positions over the hostile Republican elite. This is kind of the point.

    the pope was right.there is little evidence that Donald is a practising Christian.

    The pope’s a heretic.

    Like Sellar and Yeatman, sometimes Steve writes to console his readers. Getting in a front-page fight with the Pope is monumentally stupid. If Trump were a stock, even the dullest brokerage on Wall Street would be dumping it by now.

    No, the pope clearly did Trump a favor. Even NPR agreed (NPR!). Yesterday they had several bites of how this will actually help Trump. One was from Carol Swain, which had me gobsmacked. She managed to properly encapsulate Trump’s appeal in about 30 seconds, in her usual astoundingly unbiased style.

    I am surprised at how many people I know who didn’t realize the long occupations of Spain or Eastern Europe, or the millions of Europeans taken into slavery.

    You’ve got to be uninterested in history to miss Al-Andalus and the Reconquista. We’re talking the better part of a millennium of European history here.

    I’m waiting for “Rehmat” to charge in and tell us it was the Pope’s army who attacked the peaceful Muslims vacationing in Rome that year.

    Rehmat doesn’t get many (any?) posts in Steve’s bailiwick.

    So, are you [Corvinus] simple or disingenuous?

    He’s a bit of both, I think, but heavy on the latter.

    Yeah, ’cause he’ll turn off Hispanic voters, who, as every Republican knows, are the key to electoral victory…

    If memory serves, Trump has gotten way more hispanic votes than Cruz or Rubio.

    [Sound of "Family Feud" buzzer]. Wrong. Trump did make a guarantee. He himself said such an event would not have happened. It’s in the King’s English, Fiddler.

    Trump–”I can promise you that the Pope would have only wished and prayed that Donald Trump would have been President because this would not have happened.”

    You heard it here first: Trump’s going to lose the ‘sperg vote.

    Do you understand the notion of political rhetoric, or are you too befuddled by your Aspie literalness to understand anything at all?

    His neuro-atypicality seems genuine. Otherwise he’d know his ‘sperg style isn’t persuasive.

    “How do you feel about being hated by the leader of the world’s largest religion?”

    He should have taken her to school for saying the pope “hates.”

    Read More
  125. Calling him a “communist pope” is a little silly. Marxists are self-declared atheists with a history of killing priests and destroying churches in the name of scientific materialism. Francis is a left-liberal progressive who is going with the flow.

    It may be silly, but Marxists’ self-declared atheism is irrelevant. Ever heard of crypto-Jews? Protip: they lied a lot.

    Read More
  126. @Corvinus
    "Your prose is awful, a thing of horror."

    Really, is that all you can muster? Pro tip --> Focus on breaking down the ideas into manageable parts and craft a counterargument.

    I won’t even offer you any advice on how to write passable English. You would be incapable, as well as unwilling to take it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "I won’t even offer you any advice on how to write passable English. You would be incapable, as well as unwilling to take it."

    [Laughs] Are you even remotely for real?
  127. @Hunsdon
    Since he entered the race, I've heard people talk about The Donald as a bumbler, a clown, a fool, an idiot. Well, he's no idiot, and that should have been obvious from the start. As to the rest, for some reason I'm reminded a bit of Casablanca where Strosser and Renault are discussing the blundering Americans.

    Major Strasser: You give him credit for too much cleverness. My impression was that he's just another blundering American.

    Captain Renault: We musn't underestimate "American blundering". I was with them when they "blundered" into Berlin in 1918.

    Whatever. It’s within the margin of error. As currently calculated.

    Read More
  128. @peterike
    One is not going to expect seashells and balloons between these groups giving their long-standing animosities in that particular region.

    Well at least the dingbat Corvinus has acknowledged that there is such a thing as "long-standing animosities" between groups. Now if we can just get him off his magic dirt obsession -- note how he delicately inserts"in that particular region"! It's rich! -- he might just realize that these groups bring their animosities, and quite a lot of other trouble, along with them, and the ground they're standing on has absolutely nothing to do with anything.

    “It’s rich! — he might just realize that these groups bring their animosities, and quite a lot of other trouble, along with them, and the ground they’re standing on has absolutely nothing to do with anything.”

    Yes, these groups, whether it be Catholic or Jewish or Muslim.

    “Do you understand the notion of political rhetoric, or are you too befuddled by your Aspie literalness to understand anything at all?”

    Dude, STEVE-O is the one quoting Trump and putting it into the context that under his watch that the Vatican would not be subject to an attack by extremist Muslims.

    Read More
  129. @The Millennial Falcon
    Picking at exaggerations and generalizations doesn't dismiss any of the core points.

    Massive European immigration was a disaster for the first natives. Massive African immigration was a disaster for the recent European immigrants. And even the newer waves of European immigration had major negative consequences (introduction of ethnic voting blocks and continental preferences for leftist politics, flooded industries with massive supply of labor to kill wages and set off union/capital wars, gave us the Mafia, etc.) despite a shared Western heritage.

    “Picking at exaggerations and generalizations doesn’t dismiss any of the core points.”

    Your core point is that massive immigration, whether it be European or non-European, is a disaster at worst or has major negative consequences at best…without even acknowledging its benefits. Furthermore, I take offense to your anti-white rhetoric.

    “introduction of ethnic voting blocks and continental preferences for leftist politics, flooded industries with massive supply of labor to kill wages and set off union/capital wars, gave us the Mafia”

    Are these major negative consequences squarely due to immigration, or other factors involved?

    Read More
  130. @Thea
    I open my heart to them.

    Muslims deserve to have their own countries, where they ought to remain, or who ought to help there fellow religionists.

    Western countries should refrain from dropping bombs on them. They need to be contained in those nations.

    This is truly kind.

    “Muslims deserve to have their own countries, where they ought to remain, or who ought to help there fellow religionists.”

    The world doesn’t work that way. People have the liberty to move, provided that where they move, the people there offer them that same liberty.

    Read More
  131. @Charles Erwin Wilson
    I'll be happy to sponsor you for a Cuban Exchange. You and yours go to Cuba, and we get a victim of the Cuban Gulag and the victim's family to replace you and yours.

    What do you say Corvinus? The Cuban Utopia awaits you!

    “I’ll be happy to sponsor you for a Cuban Exchange.”

    Except the situation that you created is rooted in fantasy. I am not in need to go anywhere. Other people from around the world, however, provided they meet certain criteria, are given an opportunity to immigrate to the United States or other places.

    “You must have missed San Bernadino.”

    How many since then of that magnitude?

    Read More
  132. @Jimmy Docherty
    I am curious. Do you believe in morally-neutral conflicts of interest? That is, do you believe that two people, or two sorts of people, or two nations could both have good reasons for preferring their respective self-interest at one another's expense? I am genuinely curious, because I don't understand enough from what principles you are arguing.

    “That is, do you believe that two people, or two sorts of people, or two nations could both have good reasons for preferring their respective self-interest at one another’s expense?”

    Such as?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jimmy Docherty
    It seems clear that it is in the best interest of American citizens to close the southern border, although many people disagree with that (I do not know if you are one of those who disagree). Likewise it seems to be in the best interests of a certain class of Hispanic/Latino people to come to America, legally or illegally. If you grant that these two interests are at loggerheads, why wouldn't you say that it is appropriate for Americans (or whomever you think should fill the thought experiment) to prioritize their self-interest over that of another? Unless you are a troll, which I cannot tell, do you admit that there isn't a Kantian-style solution for political problems, wherein everybody obeys an a priori, universal rule? Or do you think that everyone, everywhere, should act with perfect logical consistency, as if no natural groupings of people were possible? This crowd, myself included, take a principled stance against the idea that people are only distinct according to number: we believe that there are many natural groupings to be made within the larger group of humanity, and I think we have good arguments to prove that that is more than a belief. I am not trying to be patronizing, but the nature of the commenting system is that a person can only have the appearance of being reactive. What are your beliefs?
  133. @FactsAreImportant
    In a spirited debate, it is easy to overlook how much agreement there is. In this case, it seems we agree that:

    1) There can be substantial negative consequences to large-scale immigration,

    2) Kosovo is an example of very negative consequences natives from large-scale immigration, and immigration by Europeans to the New World is another,

    3) It is sometimes possible to assimilate small numbers of Muslim immigrants without large negative consequences,

    4) It is difficult or impossible to come up with examples of non-harmful large-scale Muslim immigration.

    1) There can be substantial negative consequences to large-scale immigration,

    And there can be substantial positive consequence to large-scale immigration.

    2) Kosovo is an example of very negative consequences natives from large-scale immigration, and immigration by Europeans to the New World is another,

    Kosovo is an example of rival ethnic groups native to the land duking it out for supremacy.

    3) It is sometimes possible to assimilate small numbers of Muslim immigrants without large negative consequences,

    It is possible, not sometimes possible.

    4) It is difficult or impossible to come up with examples of non-harmful large-scale Muslim immigration.

    Muslims make up 1% of the American population. How many from this group have committed acts of violence in the name of Allah? How many from this group have engaged in terrorist activities?

    Read More
    • Replies: @FactsAreImportant
    You didn't disagree with anything I said. You only made additional statements.

    In a court setting, my original statements would be accepted by the court as uncontroverted.
    , @helena
    You're missing the point - Islam is a territorial religion, % is all important. Nature works via threshholds.

    Biologically there's nothing wrong with the changing world. Culturally, Europeans prefer their own cultures.
    , @backup

    Muslims make up 1% of the American population. How many from this group have committed acts of violence in the name of Allah? How many from this group have engaged in terrorist activities?
     
    So there is a threshold. Does that surprise you?

    And there can be substantial positive consequence to large-scale immigration.
     
    That depends to whom. America is generally considered to have benefited from large-scale immigration. However, the Indians beg to differ on that issue.
  134. @Anonym
    I come back here expecting to find some interesting new comments but all I see is our regulars feeding Corvinus. Say what you will about him, at least Truth is/was entertaining. Not so with Corvinus.

    Say what you will about him, at least Truth is/was entertaining. Not so with Corvinus..”

    And yet, you found it necessary to point that out, rather than actually engage in discourse. Ok, great. Don’t read what I have to say.

    Read More
  135. @keypusher
    Like Sellar and Yeatman, sometimes Steve writes to console his readers. Getting in a front-page fight with the Pope is monumentally stupid. If Trump were a stock, even the dullest brokerage on Wall Street would be dumping it by now.

    It’s fine. Don’t you worry. Trump knows what he’s doing

    Read More
  136. @Diversity Heretic
    To my knowledge the instructions contained in Deuteronomy haven't been enforced recently. Donald Trump's daughter converted to Judaism--I haven't noted his call for her execution for apostasy. I have read of sentences of death for apostasy in Afghanistan. Yes Muslims are a continuum, but enough of them are at the extreme end to constitute a genuine menace. Even "moderate" Muslims support the ultimate goals of Islam: the Ummah of the One True Faith, in which non-believers are tolerated only so long as they remain in dhimmi status. Moderate Muslims just disagree with more energetic Muslims about how to get there. I can see why moderate Muslims are frustrated; in a few generations they will be so numerous in the west that they can use the existing political process to impose the sharia--the more energetic faction alerts the dhimmis to their eventual fate.

    You distinguish the United States from Western countries--upon what basis? The U.S., it is true is slipping into Latin America status, but the tradition of the United States is rooted firmly in the West--representative government, the common law, etc. As for terrorist incidents in the U.S., you should check with the relatives of the almost 3,000 people killed on September 11. Or how about Major Hassan, Soldier of Allah, gunning down fellow soldiers while shouting "Allahu Ahkbar?" Or that business in San Bernardino? Or the recent attack by a machete-wielding Somali in Ohio? What does it take to convince you these people are a threat, As Kipling put it, you just never know "When the gods of his far-off land, shall repossess his blood." We have a colossal surveillance state and are stripped of our dignity every time we board a commercial aircraft, largely to avoid terrorism by Muslims.

    And what do they bring us? How many couscous cooks and rug merchants do we need? They come from a culture that peaked around 900 A.D. and hasn't amounted to much since. If we really need immigrants (which I very much doubt) there are better choices than the results of recurring counsin marriages since the Bronze Age.

    There are numerous Muslim majority countries. If you find these people so noble and interesting, by all means go and live with them. You have my sincere best wishes. But they are little but trouble when they try to mix in Western (and I include the U.S.) countries.

    “Yes Muslims are a continuum, but enough of them are at the extreme end to constitute a genuine menace.”

    Yes [insert any group here] are a continuum. but enough of them are at the extreme end to constitute a general menace.

    It’s not majority numbers of Muslims that constitute a grave threat to American institutions.

    “I can see why moderate Muslims are frustrated; in a few generations they will be so numerous in the west that they can use the existing political process to impose the sharia.”

    In America? No. In Europe? Don’t get your hopes up.

    “The U.S., it is true is slipping into Latin America status”

    You’re going to have to offer specific examples.

    “but the tradition of the United States is rooted firmly in the West–representative government, the common law…”

    Traditions, yes. Culture, yes. But citizens of the United States refer to themselves as Americans, not Westerners.

    “As for terrorist incidents in the U.S., you should check with the relatives of the almost 3,000 people killed on September 11. Or how about Major Hassan, Soldier of Allah, gunning down fellow soldiers while shouting “Allahu Ahkbar?” Or that business in San Bernardino? Or the recent attack by a machete-wielding Somali in Ohio? What does it take to convince you these people are a threat.”

    Yes, I am familiar with those spread out over time events. How about daily occurrences, monthly figures, yearly totals of jihad?

    “We have a colossal surveillance state and are stripped of our dignity every time we board a commercial aircraft, largely to avoid terrorism by Muslims.

    I thought whites don’t play the victim card. My bad.

    “They come from a culture that peaked around 900 A.D. and hasn’t amounted to much since.”

    You’re right, black gold is something that is vastly overrated.

    Read More
  137. @keypusher
    Arrival?

    If only there were some way to check on people's posting history here. Maybe Ron Unz can come up with something.

    I was happy there was a strong anti-immigration candidate in the race. But Trump has done himself enormous damage after (i) flipping out over the Iowa caucases (ii) losing it in the recent debate, which seems to have alienated a lot of people (iii) getting into a very public spat with the most popular man in the world.

    I think he's done. Maybe I'm wrong, but that's how it looks to me.

    There’s been no damage :)

    Read More
  138. @Corvinus
    “Whether or not Biff was based on Trump, for the last 8 months Trump really has been the Luckiest Man on Earth as every spat he’s gotten into turns out golden for him.”

    Golden according to his acolytes.

    Trump, like EVERY candidate running for office, makes grandiose claims—“I can promise you that the Pope would have only wished and prayed that Donald Trump would have been President because this would not have happened.”

    He make assurances, but he cannot predict exactly what is going to happen in the future. He cannot guarantee that, under his watch, another epic radical Islamic terrorist attack will NOT occur.

    “The wall around the Vatican was built by Pope St. Leo IV, a rather Trumpish-sounding fellow, following … the Arab Muslim sack of the Vatican in 846.”

    Let’s understand the context of this situation. Trump is making the assumption today that Muslims in general who emigrate to the United States are invaders, dastardly creatures with their swords in tow seeking to behead their enemies en masse, whether it be inciting physical violence or by fomenting insidious cultural changes.

    Today’s American Christians and Muslims have been at least opening up their minds and hearts to one another, which is exactly what Pope Francis is referring to. Still a ways to go, but this “bridge” refers to each group who acknowledges that it is extremists who pervert their faith, not the rank and file members, and that American Muslims and Christians are able to live their lives without fear of systemic jihad committed by either side on American soil. Thus, the radicals must be warded off through “walls”, i.e. legal means to ensure the protection of our country.

    The Muslims during the reign of Pope St. Leo IV, however, were overall hell-bent on actually conquering their ideological enemies, considering they had gained a foothold in Sicily in 827. Islamic rule began in 902, with the Emirate of Sicily lasted from 965 until 1061. Thus, it is not surprising that Rome was the next target in their operations to expand. Popes at this time were considered the supreme RELIGIOUS AND POLITICAL leaders of the Christian world; Christian kings were to recognize this ultimate authority. That is, the Pope technically was the ruler of their territory. Thus, Pope St. Leo IV had a military reason to erect barriers to defend against future pillaging and plundering efforts undertaken by Muslims. Future Christian kings would contest this papal authority, insisting that the Pope not interfere with their internal political matters. Popes used the power of excommunication to "persuade" Christian kings of their fealty to the papacy.

    How did you escape from my ignore list

    Back on you go

    Read More
  139. @Obamadon_Imbecilis
    WSJ also had a national poll earlier in the week showing Cruz ahead nationally, while all the other polls coming out at the same time had Trump at +15-20%. Either they're brilliant and catching something no one else has or the central media outlet of corporate conservatism is rigging polls to push a narrative.

    I suspected early on (months ago) that they would rig the polls, but didn’t want to give them any ideas

    Read More
  140. @Corvinus
    1) There can be substantial negative consequences to large-scale immigration,

    And there can be substantial positive consequence to large-scale immigration.

    2) Kosovo is an example of very negative consequences natives from large-scale immigration, and immigration by Europeans to the New World is another,

    Kosovo is an example of rival ethnic groups native to the land duking it out for supremacy.

    3) It is sometimes possible to assimilate small numbers of Muslim immigrants without large negative consequences,

    It is possible, not sometimes possible.

    4) It is difficult or impossible to come up with examples of non-harmful large-scale Muslim immigration.

    Muslims make up 1% of the American population. How many from this group have committed acts of violence in the name of Allah? How many from this group have engaged in terrorist activities?

    You didn’t disagree with anything I said. You only made additional statements.

    In a court setting, my original statements would be accepted by the court as uncontroverted.

    Read More
    • Replies: @FactsAreImportant
    Sorry.

    I was attempting to do something that doesn't work very well in this type of forum. I was trying to work out areas of agreement, but in this type of forum, there are so many threads, and they are so fragmented that an extended discussion can't be maintained over any length of time.

    My fault (and I'm not being facetious).
    , @David
    In a court setting, your original statements would be lost in the fact that you are addressing them to the spittoon.
    , @Corvinus
    "You didn’t disagree with anything I said. You only made additional statements."

    Additional statements that called into question your reasoning.

    "In a court setting, my original statements would be accepted by the court as uncontroverted."

    On cross-examination, your statements would be vetted as to determine whether or not they are entirely true.
  141. @Corvinus
    "You cannot stop crimes that happened in the past."

    Exactly. It was a "crime" in the past, according to nativists, that different racial groups other than white and ethnic groups other than Scots-Irish, Welsh, and English were allowed to immigrate here.

    "The indigenous population of America has been replaced."

    And the least people can do is give their land back to them. Don't blame me for using your logic against you.

    "The current population is being replaced."

    Which again is part of nature. One may certainly call for the enforcement of current immigration laws or work toward new immigration restrictions or bans. Go for it. However, there are Americans who do not share your viewpoint regarding "replacement". More like augmentation.

    "Indeed if it were not for all of those trying to stop it then the West and America would already be irredeemable third world dumps."

    You're air of superiority is showing.

    "Were there no barriers to moving to Europe Africa would be practically empty. An average person would be insane not to move."

    Not really. People in Africa may be impoverished and lack technologically advancements, but it's their home and they are willing to work through those economic and social problems. Not every single African is destitute.

    And there are First World countries seeking to invest in those nations. Because free stuff.

    “Not really. People in Africa may be impoverished and lack technologically advancements, but it’s their home and they are willing to work through those economic and social problems. Not every single African is destitute. ”

    Precisely. Why not a quid pro quo; every n number of African migrants = a return share for the host country in the resource capital that the African migrants have turned their back on? Maybe that way Africa could develop for the benefit of everyone.

    Read More
  142. @Corvinus
    "That is, do you believe that two people, or two sorts of people, or two nations could both have good reasons for preferring their respective self-interest at one another’s expense?"

    Such as?

    It seems clear that it is in the best interest of American citizens to close the southern border, although many people disagree with that (I do not know if you are one of those who disagree). Likewise it seems to be in the best interests of a certain class of Hispanic/Latino people to come to America, legally or illegally. If you grant that these two interests are at loggerheads, why wouldn’t you say that it is appropriate for Americans (or whomever you think should fill the thought experiment) to prioritize their self-interest over that of another? Unless you are a troll, which I cannot tell, do you admit that there isn’t a Kantian-style solution for political problems, wherein everybody obeys an a priori, universal rule? Or do you think that everyone, everywhere, should act with perfect logical consistency, as if no natural groupings of people were possible? This crowd, myself included, take a principled stance against the idea that people are only distinct according to number: we believe that there are many natural groupings to be made within the larger group of humanity, and I think we have good arguments to prove that that is more than a belief. I am not trying to be patronizing, but the nature of the commenting system is that a person can only have the appearance of being reactive. What are your beliefs?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "It seems clear that it is in the best interest of American citizens to close the southern border, although many people disagree with that (I do not know if you are one of those who disagree). "

    I have no qualms with this proposal.

    "Likewise it seems to be in the best interests of a certain class of Hispanic/Latino people to come to America, legally or illegally."

    No problem there.

    "If you grant that these two interests are at loggerheads, why wouldn’t you say that it is appropriate for Americans (or whomever you think should fill the thought experiment) to prioritize their self-interest over that of another?"

    Absolutely.

    "Unless you are a troll, which I cannot tell, do you admit that there isn’t a Kantian-style solution for political problems, wherein everybody obeys an a priori, universal rule? Or do you think that everyone, everywhere, should act with perfect logical consistency, as if no natural groupings of people were possible?"

    Each situation requires a pro-con list, with the most viable solution through majority rule.

    "This crowd, myself included, take a principled stance against the idea that people are only distinct according to number: we believe that there are many natural groupings to be made within the larger group of humanity, and I think we have good arguments to prove that that is more than a belief. I am not trying to be patronizing, but the nature of the commenting system is that a person can only have the appearance of being reactive. What are your beliefs?"

    I believe that if Americans want to limit the number of immigrants coming into our country that they should work within our existing political system. For those companies who employ illegal immigrants, there are laws on the books to deal with their criminal activities.

    What I disagree with vehemently is the notion that a certain group of people, say Muslims, are overall incompatible with American society because they, as a majority, constitute a perpetual threat to the national security of the United States. Look at the Japanese during World War II. We interned them. From my recollection, there was not one incident of terrorism committed, whether it be first generation or second generation, on America soil. Moreover, Japanese-Americans were drafted and fought on the European honor with tremendous distinction.

    This country was built on settlement and immigration.
  143. @Corvinus
    1) There can be substantial negative consequences to large-scale immigration,

    And there can be substantial positive consequence to large-scale immigration.

    2) Kosovo is an example of very negative consequences natives from large-scale immigration, and immigration by Europeans to the New World is another,

    Kosovo is an example of rival ethnic groups native to the land duking it out for supremacy.

    3) It is sometimes possible to assimilate small numbers of Muslim immigrants without large negative consequences,

    It is possible, not sometimes possible.

    4) It is difficult or impossible to come up with examples of non-harmful large-scale Muslim immigration.

    Muslims make up 1% of the American population. How many from this group have committed acts of violence in the name of Allah? How many from this group have engaged in terrorist activities?

    You’re missing the point – Islam is a territorial religion, % is all important. Nature works via threshholds.

    Biologically there’s nothing wrong with the changing world. Culturally, Europeans prefer their own cultures.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "Culturally, Europeans prefer their own cultures."

    And Americans have generally incorporated several cultures into their society.

    "You’re missing the point – Islam is a territorial religion, % is all important."

    Any evidence to back up your assertion?
  144. @Ed
    I watched Casablanca two days ago. Its still one of my favorite movies, but the propaganda is now really obvious to me. I think it came out right before Torch.

    However, I spotted only two real historical errors, which is not too bad for Hollywood. One of them was the Americans marching into Berlin in 1918. This simply didn't happen. Actually it didn't happen in 1945 either. The second was a short subplot of a female Bulgarian refugee that Renault was trying to take advantage of. In reality the Bulgarian government made an arrangement with Hitler where they helped him out in the Balkans, enabling them to settle some scores with the Serbs and Greeks, but were otherwise left alone and they didn't send troops to Russia. It was probably one of the better countries to be in Europe, at least until Stalin got to them in 1944. They even managed to protect their Jews. I doubt the screenwriters could tell one Eastern European country from another, but there were no refugees from Bulgaria.

    Were there any Germans in Casablanca at all? I doubt it. Laszlo (actually László) is a Hungarian and not a Czech name.

    And I haven’t seen the movie itself, just a few iconic scenes on Youtube. Those were good. Not historically accurate, but good.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ed
    "Were there any Germans in Casablanca at all? "

    Well, yes, they were the bad guys. Major Strasser was the villain.

    The movie also showed a "good German" couple trying to get to the US or the UK and practicing their English ("what time is it? one watch").

    Yes, Laszlo is a Hungarian name. One odd thing about World War 2, little known now and evidently little known when Casablanca came out, is that most of what became the Warsaw Pact countries were allied with Hitler to various degrees. East Germany obviously, but Hungary, Rumania, and Bulgaria were all Axis countries, Slovakia and Croatia also sided with the Nazis, and they treated what later became the Czech Republic relatively leniently and the area didn't cause them much trouble. None of these places were hotbeds of anti-Nazi resistance. The governments of Hungary and Bulgaria weren't all that repressive, though Rumania had an imitation Mussolini regime, complete with a Mussolini style dictator. The really big exception to this was of course Poland, but for some reason Laszlo wasn't Polish, and they had the refugee couple come from the least likely of these places where you would get refugees.
    , @Steve Sailer
    A couple of comments about setting expectations for "Casablanca:"

    - The quality of dialog varies more than in just about any other movie. The best lines are maybe the best ever, but other lines are really corny.

    - The emotional intensity is not high for about the first 45 minutes, until the song kicks in. "Casablanca" owes more to "As Time Goes By" than perhaps any other movie owes to any other theme song.

    In general, "Casablanca" is a bit of a hodge-podge that happened to come together as a great movie at the last moment.

    It was popular and respected on its first release (winning Best Picture for 1942), but its modern reputation derives in part from it becoming a cult film for Harvard students in the late 1950s when the Brattle Theater started playing Bogart films during finals week.
  145. @reiner Tor
    Were there any Germans in Casablanca at all? I doubt it. Laszlo (actually László) is a Hungarian and not a Czech name.

    And I haven't seen the movie itself, just a few iconic scenes on Youtube. Those were good. Not historically accurate, but good.

    “Were there any Germans in Casablanca at all? ”

    Well, yes, they were the bad guys. Major Strasser was the villain.

    The movie also showed a “good German” couple trying to get to the US or the UK and practicing their English (“what time is it? one watch”).

    Yes, Laszlo is a Hungarian name. One odd thing about World War 2, little known now and evidently little known when Casablanca came out, is that most of what became the Warsaw Pact countries were allied with Hitler to various degrees. East Germany obviously, but Hungary, Rumania, and Bulgaria were all Axis countries, Slovakia and Croatia also sided with the Nazis, and they treated what later became the Czech Republic relatively leniently and the area didn’t cause them much trouble. None of these places were hotbeds of anti-Nazi resistance. The governments of Hungary and Bulgaria weren’t all that repressive, though Rumania had an imitation Mussolini regime, complete with a Mussolini style dictator. The really big exception to this was of course Poland, but for some reason Laszlo wasn’t Polish, and they had the refugee couple come from the least likely of these places where you would get refugees.

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor

    Were there any Germans in Casablanca at all? ”

    Well, yes, they were the bad guys. Major Strasser was the villain.
     
    I meant Casablanca the city, not Casablanca the movie. I think the movie gave the impression that it was under some sort of German occupying regime, but it never was.

    The governments of Hungary and Bulgaria weren’t all that repressive
     
    Hungary had a functioning parliament with some Social Democratic MPs. Until March 1944, when Hitler finally sent in some troops to install a more pro-German government.
    , @Romanian

    though Rumania had an imitation Mussolini regime, complete with a Mussolini style dictator
     
    I resent that (tongue in cheek)! It's a demeaning style of comparison. Dour Marshal Antonescu was very far removed in temperament and style from Mussolini. Romanian fascism ended up being quite different from other variants, especially when it comes to the Legionaries and the National Legionary State until it was subdued by Antonescu. For one, it was heavily Orthodox and revolved around religion, honor etc to a degree that was unusual in other forms of fascism. The second is that there was no push for "spazio vitale", the idea of colonization, settling other lands to prevent decay and so on. Greater Romania's formation in 1918 was the epitome of Romanian political ambitions, meaning the unification of historically and/or demographically significant lands. Romanian fascists spent their time either in conflict with social forces and internal enemies (the Iron Guard was especially adamant about Jews in a way which parallels Yockey's Imperium, describing them as culture distorters) or trying to get back various pieces of Greater Romania - Bessarabia, Northern Bukovina, Hertza, which were ceded to the USSR in 1940 after an ultimatum, and Northern Transylvania, which was apportioned to Hungary allied with Germany. This also explains our double game in WW2, being in the unenviable position of having both blocs in the conflict ripping out pieces of the state. Unlike the USSR, however, Nazi Germany was not the beneficiary of the taking of Romanian territory, leaving the hope that what a US Country Study called a "morbid competition with Hungary" to get in Germany's good graces through participation in Operation Barbarossa would result in the recovery of Transylvania.

    PS I've never seen Casablanca.

  146. Interesting how this Islamic Sack of Rome has been ignored by PC scholars and academics who fall over one another in their op stampede to blame modern Muslim aggression on the Crusades. Of course these proponents of Doublethink fail to mention that the first crusade was launched three centuries after the Saracens invaded and occupied southern Italy and Iberia. And it was from their base in Sicily that the warriors of Allah attacked Rome and began devastating towns and villages all over the Mediterranean murdering and enslaving the luckless inhabitants. Fortunately for Europe the Normans defeated the Moorish Sicilians in the 11th century.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    I'd never heard of the Islamic sack of Rome in 846 until 24 hours ago. I could give you the exact dates of two others: 410 AD and 1527, and approximate one other 390 BC. But the Arabs looting Rome, at least the parts outside the walls, in 846 AD was news to me, and I'm relatively well informed.

    Granted, that was during the Dark Ages. But then Pirenne argued that the Dark Ages were dark in Europe because the Muslims transformed the Mediterranean from a highway into a danger zone for Europeans.

    The Romans could travel by land because they had the organization to keep up the roads. When the Germans took over Europe, they didn't have the societal competence to keep up the roads. Still, they could use the Mediterranean, which is amazingly useful. But then Muslim pirates took over the sea.

    , @Rapparee

    Of course these proponents of Doublethink fail to mention that the first crusade was launched three centuries after the Saracens invaded and occupied southern Italy and Iberia.
     
    One need not cite irredentist grudges already centuries old- the First Crusade was launched at the explicit request of then-sitting Byzantine Emperor Alexius I Comnenus, whose Empire had been subjected to unremitting and still-ongoing aggressive war and conquest by the Seljuk Turks for the past 30 years. When the Council of Clermont was called, Jerusalem was a fortified city occupied by an actively hostile invader making war on an ally of the Papacy; it was as much a legitimate military target for the Crusaders as Sicily was for the Americans in WWII.

    Granted, the whole business of crusading turned into a series of darkly comic fiascos almost as soon as the first armies reached Asia Minor (Alexius I certainly came to regret his plea for help). One can question the military and strategic wisdom of the Crusades, but a bunch of Franks didn't just wake up one morning and say "Hey, didn't we Christians used to own the Holy City 450 years ago? We should go get it back from whoever is living there now!" (though that was, admittedly, the general thrust of most of the recruiting slogans).

  147. […] Read more about this episode in the history of our people at UNZ. […]

    Read More
  148. @FactsAreImportant
    You didn't disagree with anything I said. You only made additional statements.

    In a court setting, my original statements would be accepted by the court as uncontroverted.

    Sorry.

    I was attempting to do something that doesn’t work very well in this type of forum. I was trying to work out areas of agreement, but in this type of forum, there are so many threads, and they are so fragmented that an extended discussion can’t be maintained over any length of time.

    My fault (and I’m not being facetious).

    Read More
  149. @reiner Tor
    Were there any Germans in Casablanca at all? I doubt it. Laszlo (actually László) is a Hungarian and not a Czech name.

    And I haven't seen the movie itself, just a few iconic scenes on Youtube. Those were good. Not historically accurate, but good.

    A couple of comments about setting expectations for “Casablanca:”

    - The quality of dialog varies more than in just about any other movie. The best lines are maybe the best ever, but other lines are really corny.

    - The emotional intensity is not high for about the first 45 minutes, until the song kicks in. “Casablanca” owes more to “As Time Goes By” than perhaps any other movie owes to any other theme song.

    In general, “Casablanca” is a bit of a hodge-podge that happened to come together as a great movie at the last moment.

    It was popular and respected on its first release (winning Best Picture for 1942), but its modern reputation derives in part from it becoming a cult film for Harvard students in the late 1950s when the Brattle Theater started playing Bogart films during finals week.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SFG
    Great little piece of movie-buff trivia; I never would have known that! I kind of wonder how much this explosion of comic book movies is due to computer nerds getting rich in the 80s.
    , @Foreign Expert
    The Casablanca story is weird. If you get your hands on stolen "travel documents" taken by murder, and then show up at an airport, then the authorities are helpless to stop you from getting on an airplane.
    , @Jimmy Docherty
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Nikolaus_von_Coudenhove-Kalergi
    Viktor Lazlo was apparently based on Count Coudenhove-Kalergi, a Eurasian aristocrat involved with various international agencies, who advocated for race-mixing to occur between White and dark gentiles. He wanted the goyish races to mix in order to produce a common mulatto race which could be ruled over by a pure-blood Jewish elite (Coudenhove-Kalergi was not himself Jewish). I know this sounds as crazy as a Bond novel, but it is the bizarre truth!
  150. @Ed
    I watched Casablanca two days ago. Its still one of my favorite movies, but the propaganda is now really obvious to me. I think it came out right before Torch.

    However, I spotted only two real historical errors, which is not too bad for Hollywood. One of them was the Americans marching into Berlin in 1918. This simply didn't happen. Actually it didn't happen in 1945 either. The second was a short subplot of a female Bulgarian refugee that Renault was trying to take advantage of. In reality the Bulgarian government made an arrangement with Hitler where they helped him out in the Balkans, enabling them to settle some scores with the Serbs and Greeks, but were otherwise left alone and they didn't send troops to Russia. It was probably one of the better countries to be in Europe, at least until Stalin got to them in 1944. They even managed to protect their Jews. I doubt the screenwriters could tell one Eastern European country from another, but there were no refugees from Bulgaria.

    In general, everybody involved in “Casablanca” was kind of winging it.

    Read More
  151. @Kat Grey
    Interesting how this Islamic Sack of Rome has been ignored by PC scholars and academics who fall over one another in their op stampede to blame modern Muslim aggression on the Crusades. Of course these proponents of Doublethink fail to mention that the first crusade was launched three centuries after the Saracens invaded and occupied southern Italy and Iberia. And it was from their base in Sicily that the warriors of Allah attacked Rome and began devastating towns and villages all over the Mediterranean murdering and enslaving the luckless inhabitants. Fortunately for Europe the Normans defeated the Moorish Sicilians in the 11th century.

    I’d never heard of the Islamic sack of Rome in 846 until 24 hours ago. I could give you the exact dates of two others: 410 AD and 1527, and approximate one other 390 BC. But the Arabs looting Rome, at least the parts outside the walls, in 846 AD was news to me, and I’m relatively well informed.

    Granted, that was during the Dark Ages. But then Pirenne argued that the Dark Ages were dark in Europe because the Muslims transformed the Mediterranean from a highway into a danger zone for Europeans.

    The Romans could travel by land because they had the organization to keep up the roads. When the Germans took over Europe, they didn’t have the societal competence to keep up the roads. Still, they could use the Mediterranean, which is amazingly useful. But then Muslim pirates took over the sea.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Abe

    I’d never heard of the Islamic sack of Rome in 846 until 24 hours ago. I could give you the exact dates of two others: 410 AD and 1527, and approximate one other 390 BC. But the Arabs looting Rome, at least the parts outside the walls, in 846 AD was news to me, and I’m relatively well informed.
     
    Steve, though I think you've referred to him many times, not sure if you've actually read all of Gibbon's DECLINE AND FALL OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE. I got myself a nice 3-volume set at a good price (introductory offer from a book-of-the-month type outfit) right before the Internet broke. Needless to say this is available free now in multiple formats, though even those optimized for e-readers seem a bit spotty to me so take care to find a good one.

    Anyway, if you read through past the fall of the Western Roman Empire you will get a very entertaining and surprisingly thorough survey of European history to the start of the Renaissance (fall of Constantinople). Gibbon's style is old but fully understandable (like the contemporaneous Constitution and Declaration) to modern American ears, and is extremely witty and lively to boot. I have not taken a Medieval European history class since high school, and have never read any other book specifically on the topic, so the fact that I already knew about the sack of Rome- or at least could infer it given Saracen occupation of Sicily and some lower parts of the Italian boot- means I probably read it in Gibbon.
  152. @Ed
    "Were there any Germans in Casablanca at all? "

    Well, yes, they were the bad guys. Major Strasser was the villain.

    The movie also showed a "good German" couple trying to get to the US or the UK and practicing their English ("what time is it? one watch").

    Yes, Laszlo is a Hungarian name. One odd thing about World War 2, little known now and evidently little known when Casablanca came out, is that most of what became the Warsaw Pact countries were allied with Hitler to various degrees. East Germany obviously, but Hungary, Rumania, and Bulgaria were all Axis countries, Slovakia and Croatia also sided with the Nazis, and they treated what later became the Czech Republic relatively leniently and the area didn't cause them much trouble. None of these places were hotbeds of anti-Nazi resistance. The governments of Hungary and Bulgaria weren't all that repressive, though Rumania had an imitation Mussolini regime, complete with a Mussolini style dictator. The really big exception to this was of course Poland, but for some reason Laszlo wasn't Polish, and they had the refugee couple come from the least likely of these places where you would get refugees.

    Were there any Germans in Casablanca at all? ”

    Well, yes, they were the bad guys. Major Strasser was the villain.

    I meant Casablanca the city, not Casablanca the movie. I think the movie gave the impression that it was under some sort of German occupying regime, but it never was.

    The governments of Hungary and Bulgaria weren’t all that repressive

    Hungary had a functioning parliament with some Social Democratic MPs. Until March 1944, when Hitler finally sent in some troops to install a more pro-German government.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ed
    "I meant Casablanca the city, not Casablanca the movie. I think the movie gave the impression that it was under some sort of German occupying regime, but it never was. "

    This is one piece of history the movie gets almost exactly right (I understand this was no documentary and created on the fly). If you re-watch it -it was just rebroadcast on cable last week- you will see that there is alot of arguing between Strasser and Renault over which one of them really runs Casablanca. All the paperwork has to be signed by Renault, Stasser has no official role. But Renault understands that he has to keep Strasser happy.

    Historically, I don't think there ever were any German soldiers in Casablanca. What resistance there was to Torch was put up by purely French forces. The Germans stayed out of the areas allocated to Vichy until Torch. But given that the British and Free French had attacked Vichy run colonies several times, I can swallow the Germans sending in a liaison team to keep an eye on things. Strasser is needed in the movie to provide a villain, Renault doesn't work well in the role for both story and propaganda reasons.
  153. @tbraton
    "Captain Renault: We musn’t underestimate “American blundering”. I was with them when they “blundered” into Berlin in 1918."

    A fine movie, but clearly propaganda. The Americans never got close to Berlin in WWI. The Armistice was declared with the lines of battle completely outside Germany. According to Wikipedia:

    "The occupation of the Rhineland took place following the Armistice. The occupying armies consisted of American, Belgian, British and French forces.

    In November 1918, the Allies had ample supplies of men and materiel to invade Germany. Yet at the time of the armistice, no Allied force had crossed the German frontier; the Western Front was still some 450 mi (720 km) from Berlin; and the Kaiser's armies had retreated from the battlefield in good order."

    This reminds me of an incident which occurred about 20 years ago. I was friends at the time with a couple consisting of a British husband and his Norwegian wife. During the dinner conversation, I made a point about what a mistake it was for America to enter WWI. Immediately, the Norwegian wife said it was a mistake for America not to get involved in WWI from the start and thus succeed in ending the war earlier. I said that was a remarkable statement to be made by someone whose country (Norway) had managed to stay of the war completely. She insisted that Norway had fought in WWI, so I had to go retrieve a history book or the Columbia Encyclopedia to show her that Norway had never fought in WWI. She was taken aback and muttered something about how her grandmother told her stories when she was growing up about the misbehavior of German soldiers, which indicated to me that she was confusing WWI with WWII. So much for the myth that Europeans are better educated than Americans (she was a college graduate, btw).

    When the question comes up on who fought on what side in WWII, I’m shocked at how many allegedly college educated people — young and old — who admit they don’t know or get it wrong.

    This follows closely on the heels of high school students in Massachusetts who can’t find Massachusetts on a map and confuse Austria with Australia. Perhaps they spend too much time on Facebook to care about the real world in which they live.

    Having passing knowledge about the Constitution and the three branches of the Federal Government? Let’s not go there. The discussion can’t even get started. But I’m sure most everyone would be well versed in the nuances about racism, White privilege, women’s rights, affirmative action, and microaggressions.

    Read More
  154. @FactsAreImportant
    You didn't disagree with anything I said. You only made additional statements.

    In a court setting, my original statements would be accepted by the court as uncontroverted.

    In a court setting, your original statements would be lost in the fact that you are addressing them to the spittoon.

    Read More
    • Replies: @FactsAreImportant
    In a court setting, there is a third party (the judge) who gets mad if you don't answer questions or if you introduce irrelevant arguments.

    I spent a year in law school, so I fancy myself a lawyer.
  155. @Corvinus
    “Whether or not Biff was based on Trump, for the last 8 months Trump really has been the Luckiest Man on Earth as every spat he’s gotten into turns out golden for him.”

    Golden according to his acolytes.

    Trump, like EVERY candidate running for office, makes grandiose claims—“I can promise you that the Pope would have only wished and prayed that Donald Trump would have been President because this would not have happened.”

    He make assurances, but he cannot predict exactly what is going to happen in the future. He cannot guarantee that, under his watch, another epic radical Islamic terrorist attack will NOT occur.

    “The wall around the Vatican was built by Pope St. Leo IV, a rather Trumpish-sounding fellow, following … the Arab Muslim sack of the Vatican in 846.”

    Let’s understand the context of this situation. Trump is making the assumption today that Muslims in general who emigrate to the United States are invaders, dastardly creatures with their swords in tow seeking to behead their enemies en masse, whether it be inciting physical violence or by fomenting insidious cultural changes.

    Today’s American Christians and Muslims have been at least opening up their minds and hearts to one another, which is exactly what Pope Francis is referring to. Still a ways to go, but this “bridge” refers to each group who acknowledges that it is extremists who pervert their faith, not the rank and file members, and that American Muslims and Christians are able to live their lives without fear of systemic jihad committed by either side on American soil. Thus, the radicals must be warded off through “walls”, i.e. legal means to ensure the protection of our country.

    The Muslims during the reign of Pope St. Leo IV, however, were overall hell-bent on actually conquering their ideological enemies, considering they had gained a foothold in Sicily in 827. Islamic rule began in 902, with the Emirate of Sicily lasted from 965 until 1061. Thus, it is not surprising that Rome was the next target in their operations to expand. Popes at this time were considered the supreme RELIGIOUS AND POLITICAL leaders of the Christian world; Christian kings were to recognize this ultimate authority. That is, the Pope technically was the ruler of their territory. Thus, Pope St. Leo IV had a military reason to erect barriers to defend against future pillaging and plundering efforts undertaken by Muslims. Future Christian kings would contest this papal authority, insisting that the Pope not interfere with their internal political matters. Popes used the power of excommunication to "persuade" Christian kings of their fealty to the papacy.

    I actually agree Muslims are unlikely to do in America what they did in Europe; the greater inconvenience of getting here means we get upper-middle-class types who practice watered-down Islam just like the watered-down Christianity (and Judaism) of their colleagues. You get your occasional Fort Hood or San Bernadino, but then every other denomination occasionally goes loony and goes on gun rampages too.

    It’s also a bigger country for them to get lost in.

    That said, taking in large numbers of refugees could change that.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "You get your occasional Fort Hood or San Bernadino, but then every other denomination occasionally goes loony and goes on gun rampages too."

    Which means the country doesn't ban an entire group, or label that entire group as being "unassimiliable", or certainly don't limit the opportunity for citizens to obtain guns merely because some crazies commit heinous acts.
    , @Reg Cæsar

    ...the greater inconvenience of getting here means we get upper-middle-class types who practice watered-down Islam just like the watered-down Christianity (and Judaism) of their colleagues.
     
    Yeah, but when the latter's kids rebel against the mushiness of their parents, they don crosses or hats, they don't strap on bombs.

    Midge Decter predicted it in four words: Liberal Parents, Radical Children.
  156. @Steve Sailer
    A couple of comments about setting expectations for "Casablanca:"

    - The quality of dialog varies more than in just about any other movie. The best lines are maybe the best ever, but other lines are really corny.

    - The emotional intensity is not high for about the first 45 minutes, until the song kicks in. "Casablanca" owes more to "As Time Goes By" than perhaps any other movie owes to any other theme song.

    In general, "Casablanca" is a bit of a hodge-podge that happened to come together as a great movie at the last moment.

    It was popular and respected on its first release (winning Best Picture for 1942), but its modern reputation derives in part from it becoming a cult film for Harvard students in the late 1950s when the Brattle Theater started playing Bogart films during finals week.

    Great little piece of movie-buff trivia; I never would have known that! I kind of wonder how much this explosion of comic book movies is due to computer nerds getting rich in the 80s.

    Read More
  157. @jimmyriddle
    The last time I was in Rome, back when either JP2 or Benny were in charge, the place was replete with African trinket sellers.

    The one place where they were absent was the Vatican - no truck with sanctuary city status from the Swiss Guard.

    I wonder if things have changed?

    Unsuspecting goyim ignore whom the Eternal City souvenirs business belongs to.

    Read More
  158. @Ed
    "Were there any Germans in Casablanca at all? "

    Well, yes, they were the bad guys. Major Strasser was the villain.

    The movie also showed a "good German" couple trying to get to the US or the UK and practicing their English ("what time is it? one watch").

    Yes, Laszlo is a Hungarian name. One odd thing about World War 2, little known now and evidently little known when Casablanca came out, is that most of what became the Warsaw Pact countries were allied with Hitler to various degrees. East Germany obviously, but Hungary, Rumania, and Bulgaria were all Axis countries, Slovakia and Croatia also sided with the Nazis, and they treated what later became the Czech Republic relatively leniently and the area didn't cause them much trouble. None of these places were hotbeds of anti-Nazi resistance. The governments of Hungary and Bulgaria weren't all that repressive, though Rumania had an imitation Mussolini regime, complete with a Mussolini style dictator. The really big exception to this was of course Poland, but for some reason Laszlo wasn't Polish, and they had the refugee couple come from the least likely of these places where you would get refugees.

    though Rumania had an imitation Mussolini regime, complete with a Mussolini style dictator

    I resent that (tongue in cheek)! It’s a demeaning style of comparison. Dour Marshal Antonescu was very far removed in temperament and style from Mussolini. Romanian fascism ended up being quite different from other variants, especially when it comes to the Legionaries and the National Legionary State until it was subdued by Antonescu. For one, it was heavily Orthodox and revolved around religion, honor etc to a degree that was unusual in other forms of fascism. The second is that there was no push for “spazio vitale”, the idea of colonization, settling other lands to prevent decay and so on. Greater Romania’s formation in 1918 was the epitome of Romanian political ambitions, meaning the unification of historically and/or demographically significant lands. Romanian fascists spent their time either in conflict with social forces and internal enemies (the Iron Guard was especially adamant about Jews in a way which parallels Yockey’s Imperium, describing them as culture distorters) or trying to get back various pieces of Greater Romania – Bessarabia, Northern Bukovina, Hertza, which were ceded to the USSR in 1940 after an ultimatum, and Northern Transylvania, which was apportioned to Hungary allied with Germany. This also explains our double game in WW2, being in the unenviable position of having both blocs in the conflict ripping out pieces of the state. Unlike the USSR, however, Nazi Germany was not the beneficiary of the taking of Romanian territory, leaving the hope that what a US Country Study called a “morbid competition with Hungary” to get in Germany’s good graces through participation in Operation Barbarossa would result in the recovery of Transylvania.

    PS I’ve never seen Casablanca.

    Read More
  159. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Diversity Heretic
    To my knowledge the instructions contained in Deuteronomy haven't been enforced recently. Donald Trump's daughter converted to Judaism--I haven't noted his call for her execution for apostasy. I have read of sentences of death for apostasy in Afghanistan. Yes Muslims are a continuum, but enough of them are at the extreme end to constitute a genuine menace. Even "moderate" Muslims support the ultimate goals of Islam: the Ummah of the One True Faith, in which non-believers are tolerated only so long as they remain in dhimmi status. Moderate Muslims just disagree with more energetic Muslims about how to get there. I can see why moderate Muslims are frustrated; in a few generations they will be so numerous in the west that they can use the existing political process to impose the sharia--the more energetic faction alerts the dhimmis to their eventual fate.

    You distinguish the United States from Western countries--upon what basis? The U.S., it is true is slipping into Latin America status, but the tradition of the United States is rooted firmly in the West--representative government, the common law, etc. As for terrorist incidents in the U.S., you should check with the relatives of the almost 3,000 people killed on September 11. Or how about Major Hassan, Soldier of Allah, gunning down fellow soldiers while shouting "Allahu Ahkbar?" Or that business in San Bernardino? Or the recent attack by a machete-wielding Somali in Ohio? What does it take to convince you these people are a threat, As Kipling put it, you just never know "When the gods of his far-off land, shall repossess his blood." We have a colossal surveillance state and are stripped of our dignity every time we board a commercial aircraft, largely to avoid terrorism by Muslims.

    And what do they bring us? How many couscous cooks and rug merchants do we need? They come from a culture that peaked around 900 A.D. and hasn't amounted to much since. If we really need immigrants (which I very much doubt) there are better choices than the results of recurring counsin marriages since the Bronze Age.

    There are numerous Muslim majority countries. If you find these people so noble and interesting, by all means go and live with them. You have my sincere best wishes. But they are little but trouble when they try to mix in Western (and I include the U.S.) countries.

    Deuteronomy, and the Old Testament (the Torah) in general, is not meant for Christians. It is a user manual written by Jews for Jews.
    See http://strugglesforexistence.com/?p=article_p&id=13

    I don’t quite understand why Christians insist on culturally appropriating it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Murray
    From a Catholic perspective: when it comes to the OT laws given to Moses, we distinguish between the moral law (summarized in the Ten Commandments), the juridical law (penalties for various crimes), and the ceremonial law (liturgical practice, restrictions on food, etc.). Of these, Christians are bound only to the moral laws; the juridical and ceremonial laws are understood to have been specific to that time and place, and have been superseded by the laws of the new covenant instituted by Jesus Christ. But the moral law, rooted as it is in the eternal order of the universe, is not the kind of thing that can be superseded.

    Popes, on the other hand, come and go. We just have to wait this one out.
  160. @keypusher
    Like Sellar and Yeatman, sometimes Steve writes to console his readers. Getting in a front-page fight with the Pope is monumentally stupid. If Trump were a stock, even the dullest brokerage on Wall Street would be dumping it by now.

    You know the funny thing, keypusher? They’ve been saying this from the beginning. “Oh this is it.” “This time he’s gone too far.” So far, they just keep being wrong. There’s beginning to be a sense of desperation to what they say.

    Read More
    • Replies: @keypusher
    "They" aren't me. Besides, predicting a candidate will fail is like predicting a football team won't win the Super Bowl -- you have an extremely good chance of being right.
  161. @Steve Sailer
    A couple of comments about setting expectations for "Casablanca:"

    - The quality of dialog varies more than in just about any other movie. The best lines are maybe the best ever, but other lines are really corny.

    - The emotional intensity is not high for about the first 45 minutes, until the song kicks in. "Casablanca" owes more to "As Time Goes By" than perhaps any other movie owes to any other theme song.

    In general, "Casablanca" is a bit of a hodge-podge that happened to come together as a great movie at the last moment.

    It was popular and respected on its first release (winning Best Picture for 1942), but its modern reputation derives in part from it becoming a cult film for Harvard students in the late 1950s when the Brattle Theater started playing Bogart films during finals week.

    The Casablanca story is weird. If you get your hands on stolen “travel documents” taken by murder, and then show up at an airport, then the authorities are helpless to stop you from getting on an airplane.

    Read More
  162. @dearieme
    "I was with them when they “blundered” into Berlin in 1918." But they didn't, did they?

    Hush now! It’s a good story.

    (Casablanca was agitprop, and when does agitprop let a few inconvenient facts get in the way of a good story?)

    Read More
  163. @CK
    And here I thought this whole issue of the Pope inveigling himself into American electoral politics was settled back in 1960.
    There is a problem with walls. It is true that almost all walls initially are built to protect somethings of value. Walls protect families, throughout history walls have protected livestock, during the time of Vauban walls protected the great cities of Europe, walls protected China from the barbarians and are now protecting Israel from its neighbours. And every wall that keeps the hordes out also keeps the slaves/citizens in. The sally ports are closed, the gates are lowered and barred and if you were not quick enough to depart before the barbarian siege armies appeared your freedom of movement became very circumscribed.
    Let America build a wall along its southern border, that wall will have control points and gates and people will come and go, until some future leader decides that too many are leaving with their wealth and then the gates close.

    And then the citizenry shoots them stone cold dead over the course of a long weekend.

    Read More
  164. @FactsAreImportant
    You didn't disagree with anything I said. You only made additional statements.

    In a court setting, my original statements would be accepted by the court as uncontroverted.

    “You didn’t disagree with anything I said. You only made additional statements.”

    Additional statements that called into question your reasoning.

    “In a court setting, my original statements would be accepted by the court as uncontroverted.”

    On cross-examination, your statements would be vetted as to determine whether or not they are entirely true.

    Read More
  165. @Richard S
    Yes, exactly! On 11 November 1918 the German army was everywhere positioned on Feindesland. And why would the Germans and Vichy officials honour exit visas signed by General de Gaulle?!

    And why would the Germans and Vichy officials honour exit visas signed by General de Gaulle?!

    It’s a famous misheard line of Peter Lorre’s. If you listen very carefully, and this is borne out by 80% of international close-captionings, what he said was “signed by General Weygand.” Which makes more sense, since as you rightly point out, carrying anything with deGaulle’s signature in Vichy would have meant summary execution. Still, the letters of transit are a MacGuffin, not meant to be understood as actual historical documents.

    Read More
  166. @Jimmy Docherty
    It seems clear that it is in the best interest of American citizens to close the southern border, although many people disagree with that (I do not know if you are one of those who disagree). Likewise it seems to be in the best interests of a certain class of Hispanic/Latino people to come to America, legally or illegally. If you grant that these two interests are at loggerheads, why wouldn't you say that it is appropriate for Americans (or whomever you think should fill the thought experiment) to prioritize their self-interest over that of another? Unless you are a troll, which I cannot tell, do you admit that there isn't a Kantian-style solution for political problems, wherein everybody obeys an a priori, universal rule? Or do you think that everyone, everywhere, should act with perfect logical consistency, as if no natural groupings of people were possible? This crowd, myself included, take a principled stance against the idea that people are only distinct according to number: we believe that there are many natural groupings to be made within the larger group of humanity, and I think we have good arguments to prove that that is more than a belief. I am not trying to be patronizing, but the nature of the commenting system is that a person can only have the appearance of being reactive. What are your beliefs?

    “It seems clear that it is in the best interest of American citizens to close the southern border, although many people disagree with that (I do not know if you are one of those who disagree). ”

    I have no qualms with this proposal.

    “Likewise it seems to be in the best interests of a certain class of Hispanic/Latino people to come to America, legally or illegally.”

    No problem there.

    “If you grant that these two interests are at loggerheads, why wouldn’t you say that it is appropriate for Americans (or whomever you think should fill the thought experiment) to prioritize their self-interest over that of another?”

    Absolutely.

    “Unless you are a troll, which I cannot tell, do you admit that there isn’t a Kantian-style solution for political problems, wherein everybody obeys an a priori, universal rule? Or do you think that everyone, everywhere, should act with perfect logical consistency, as if no natural groupings of people were possible?”

    Each situation requires a pro-con list, with the most viable solution through majority rule.

    “This crowd, myself included, take a principled stance against the idea that people are only distinct according to number: we believe that there are many natural groupings to be made within the larger group of humanity, and I think we have good arguments to prove that that is more than a belief. I am not trying to be patronizing, but the nature of the commenting system is that a person can only have the appearance of being reactive. What are your beliefs?”

    I believe that if Americans want to limit the number of immigrants coming into our country that they should work within our existing political system. For those companies who employ illegal immigrants, there are laws on the books to deal with their criminal activities.

    What I disagree with vehemently is the notion that a certain group of people, say Muslims, are overall incompatible with American society because they, as a majority, constitute a perpetual threat to the national security of the United States. Look at the Japanese during World War II. We interned them. From my recollection, there was not one incident of terrorism committed, whether it be first generation or second generation, on America soil. Moreover, Japanese-Americans were drafted and fought on the European honor with tremendous distinction.

    This country was built on settlement and immigration.

    Read More
    • Replies: @tbraton
    "This country was built on settlement and immigration."

    But when Jamestown was settled in 1607 and Plymouth in 1620, the population of what is now the U.S. was not even close to its current population of 320+ million, the third highest population in the world after China and India. At some point, we have to close the Golden Door. Pope Francis may not approve, but tough.
    , @FactsAreImportant
    [Jimmy Docherty said:]
    “It seems clear that it is in the best interest of American citizens to close the southern border, although many people disagree with that (I do not know if you are one of those who disagree). ”

    [Corvinus replied:]
    I have no qualms with this proposal. ... What I disagree with vehemently is the notion that a certain group of people, say Muslims, are overall incompatible with American society because they, as a majority, constitute a perpetual threat to the national security of the United States

    Corvinas, I was just writing up a comment to ask you why your tone is so fierce given that you agree with a fair amount of what Steve and his commenters say. This seems to explain it. Would you say you are basically deeply offended by racism/xonophobia and the fierceness comes from that?
  167. @SFG
    I actually agree Muslims are unlikely to do in America what they did in Europe; the greater inconvenience of getting here means we get upper-middle-class types who practice watered-down Islam just like the watered-down Christianity (and Judaism) of their colleagues. You get your occasional Fort Hood or San Bernadino, but then every other denomination occasionally goes loony and goes on gun rampages too.

    It's also a bigger country for them to get lost in.

    That said, taking in large numbers of refugees could change that.

    “You get your occasional Fort Hood or San Bernadino, but then every other denomination occasionally goes loony and goes on gun rampages too.”

    Which means the country doesn’t ban an entire group, or label that entire group as being “unassimiliable”, or certainly don’t limit the opportunity for citizens to obtain guns merely because some crazies commit heinous acts.

    Read More
  168. @5371
    I won't even offer you any advice on how to write passable English. You would be incapable, as well as unwilling to take it.

    “I won’t even offer you any advice on how to write passable English. You would be incapable, as well as unwilling to take it.”

    [Laughs] Are you even remotely for real?

    Read More
  169. @helena
    You're missing the point - Islam is a territorial religion, % is all important. Nature works via threshholds.

    Biologically there's nothing wrong with the changing world. Culturally, Europeans prefer their own cultures.

    “Culturally, Europeans prefer their own cultures.”

    And Americans have generally incorporated several cultures into their society.

    “You’re missing the point – Islam is a territorial religion, % is all important.”

    Any evidence to back up your assertion?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Divine Right
    “Culturally, Europeans prefer their own cultures.”

    'And Americans have generally incorporated several cultures into their society.'

    European cultures, that is.
    , @helena
    Yes very generous but it seems that many Americans still prefer their own.

    Yes UK France Sweden Denmark Norway
    , @Tracy

    “You’re missing the point – Islam is a territorial religion, % is all important.”

    Any evidence to back up your assertion?
     
    , @Tracy

    “You’re missing the point – Islam is a territorial religion, % is all important.”

    Any evidence to back up your assertion?
     

    See: https://youtu.be/t_Qpy0mXg8Y
  170. @SFG
    I actually agree Muslims are unlikely to do in America what they did in Europe; the greater inconvenience of getting here means we get upper-middle-class types who practice watered-down Islam just like the watered-down Christianity (and Judaism) of their colleagues. You get your occasional Fort Hood or San Bernadino, but then every other denomination occasionally goes loony and goes on gun rampages too.

    It's also a bigger country for them to get lost in.

    That said, taking in large numbers of refugees could change that.

    …the greater inconvenience of getting here means we get upper-middle-class types who practice watered-down Islam just like the watered-down Christianity (and Judaism) of their colleagues.

    Yeah, but when the latter’s kids rebel against the mushiness of their parents, they don crosses or hats, they don’t strap on bombs.

    Midge Decter predicted it in four words: Liberal Parents, Radical Children.

    Read More
  171. @Diversity Heretic
    The Norwegian woman was even more mistaken. Norway didn't enter World War II at the outset. It was invaded by Germany in 1940. As I recall, Britain had plans for a similar invasion although they were never executed. Norway stayed occupied by German forces until after the surrender in May 1945--German forces then withdrew. To my knowledge German misbehavior in Norway was not outside the norm of the ordinary criminality of young men--I know of no atrocities committed by Germans in Norway, although I assume that the occupation forces killed resistance fightes and tortured them on occasion. Still and all, nothing like Russia.

    Although I agree with you that the U.S. should have stayed out of World War I, one can have an interesting counterfactual historical argument about, if intervention had to have occurred, whether it would have been better in 1915, after the sinking of the Lusitania. Imagine American doughboys showing up in France in large numbers in 1916, not 1918. No German offensive to knock Russia out of the war in 1917--the Romanovs stay in power. Faced with the obvious inability to win in light of American involvement, the Kaiser abdicates and the new government offers a negotiated peace with the return of Alsace-Lorraine to France and reasonable reparations. Fantasy, yes, but perhaps illustrative fantasy.

    I know of no atrocities committed by Germans in Norway, although I assume that the occupation forces killed resistance fightes and tortured them on occasion. Still and all, nothing like Russia.

    Besides the usual political executions and arrests, and physical reprisals for acts of sabotage (resistance), as well as responsibility for the deportation and eventual death of over a third of Norway’s Jewish population; German treatment of Norwegian civilians was probably harshest towards the end of the war when they carried out a scorched-earth policy in the far north as a response to an impending attack by the Red Army.

    Of course, unlike many people in Eastern Europe, ethnic Norwegians held a favorable position in the Nazi “racial” hierarchy, and to my knowledge, there were no explicit German plans to intentionally destroy them as in Poland or the USSR. However, as in other occupied western European countries like France and Denmark, the Nazis were still happy to run over anyone who got in their way or who dared to defy them.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Nordlicht_%281944%E2%80%9345%29

    Read More
    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    as well as responsibility for the deportation and eventual death of over a third of Norway’s Jewish population
     
    The Danes managed to spirit their Jews over (actually under) water to Sweden. (Niels Bohr was one; Victor Borge was by coincidence already in Sweden.)

    Norway has a far longer land border with Sweden than Denmark's channel. You'd think it would have been easier for them.

    , @SFG
    They also had the Lebensborn program to utilize the superior Norwegian Aryan bloodline to produce a master race by...marrying Norwegian women to SS officers.

    You can imagine how the Norwegians felt about this.
  172. @Steve Sailer
    A couple of comments about setting expectations for "Casablanca:"

    - The quality of dialog varies more than in just about any other movie. The best lines are maybe the best ever, but other lines are really corny.

    - The emotional intensity is not high for about the first 45 minutes, until the song kicks in. "Casablanca" owes more to "As Time Goes By" than perhaps any other movie owes to any other theme song.

    In general, "Casablanca" is a bit of a hodge-podge that happened to come together as a great movie at the last moment.

    It was popular and respected on its first release (winning Best Picture for 1942), but its modern reputation derives in part from it becoming a cult film for Harvard students in the late 1950s when the Brattle Theater started playing Bogart films during finals week.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Nikolaus_von_Coudenhove-Kalergi

    Viktor Lazlo was apparently based on Count Coudenhove-Kalergi, a Eurasian aristocrat involved with various international agencies, who advocated for race-mixing to occur between White and dark gentiles. He wanted the goyish races to mix in order to produce a common mulatto race which could be ruled over by a pure-blood Jewish elite (Coudenhove-Kalergi was not himself Jewish). I know this sounds as crazy as a Bond novel, but it is the bizarre truth!

    Read More
  173. @Diversity Heretic
    Donald Trump may not regard Muslim immigrants as invaders but I sure do. That opening of minds and hearts you refer to is a very one-way business. The penalty for apostasy to Islam, to the best of my knowledge, remains death. "Extremist" Muslims are the Muslims most faithful to the dictates of their religion. They're free to practice it in Islamic countries, and I wish them the best, but it is increasingly obvious that they cannot mix peacefully in Western countries.

    Insofar as the division of authority between popes, kings and emperors, this was a constant struggle in the Middle Ages (e.g., the Investiture Controversy). Early popes acknowledged the spiritual as well as the secular authority of the Eastern Roman (Byzantine) Emperor. The Church was a huge landowner and bishops had considerable secular authority.

    Ok so you just disqualified yourself. Christians are not required to keep the instructions of the OT. We don’t have to burn witches or stone gays. Go sell your poison elsewhere. If most of the candle is just wax and wick but there’s some arsenic it’s still poison.

    Read More
  174. @IBC

    I know of no atrocities committed by Germans in Norway, although I assume that the occupation forces killed resistance fightes and tortured them on occasion. Still and all, nothing like Russia.
     
    Besides the usual political executions and arrests, and physical reprisals for acts of sabotage (resistance), as well as responsibility for the deportation and eventual death of over a third of Norway's Jewish population; German treatment of Norwegian civilians was probably harshest towards the end of the war when they carried out a scorched-earth policy in the far north as a response to an impending attack by the Red Army.

    Of course, unlike many people in Eastern Europe, ethnic Norwegians held a favorable position in the Nazi "racial" hierarchy, and to my knowledge, there were no explicit German plans to intentionally destroy them as in Poland or the USSR. However, as in other occupied western European countries like France and Denmark, the Nazis were still happy to run over anyone who got in their way or who dared to defy them.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Nordlicht_%281944%E2%80%9345%29

    as well as responsibility for the deportation and eventual death of over a third of Norway’s Jewish population

    The Danes managed to spirit their Jews over (actually under) water to Sweden. (Niels Bohr was one; Victor Borge was by coincidence already in Sweden.)

    Norway has a far longer land border with Sweden than Denmark’s channel. You’d think it would have been easier for them.

    Read More
    • Replies: @IBC
    I'm not a spokesman for the Norwegian government. But while it's an important aspect of World War Two history and the topic shouldn't be ignored, it's interesting that even in the comments on a blog like this, a specific country's Holocaust record is being weighted first in assessing its wartime legacy.

    If you're interested in looking at that historical angle and making comparisons, Sweden's wartime record of supplying iron ore to Nazi Germany bears a closer look. One of the main reasons Germany invaded Norway, was to ensure continued access to this crucial wartime resource which was vulnerable to attack from Norwegian territory and was most easily exported by sea. This is also why, early in the war, the British and French attempted to preemptively seize the Norwegian port of Narvik, though they were defeated by German forces.

    I don't know how much iron ore it takes to build a crematorium, but I'd guess it takes quite a lot to sustain full-scale industrial warfare across most of Eastern Europe --where the Nazi war machine encountered the majority of its Jewish victims-- not to mention millions of Slavs and others whom most people don't seem to be as interested in hearing about these days. It's understandable that every country should put defense of its own people first and Swedish actions should be viewed in that historical light. However, several times I've heard Sweden's World War Two legacy recounted in terms of its successful assistance of Jewish refugees (particularly the efforts of Folke Bernadotte) to the exclusion of any memory of more self-interested decisions it made which may very well have negatively impacted much larger numbers of Jewish people who had no hope of refuge in Sweden as well as everyone else the Germans were fighting.

    As for Denmark (and I'm a fan of Peter Freuchen, who resisted the Nazis), its success in safely evacuating most of its Jewish population is probably one of the brightest spots in its wartime record, though certainly given Denmark's geography or its resources at the time, sustained military resistance and 100 percent non-cooperation didn't make much sense in terms of saving Danish lives.

    Sweden actually did help the Allies to some extent, especially after they saw that the Germans weren't invincible. Here's a blurb about a British blockade runner used to bring back ball bearings from Sweden:

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

    It probably wasn't intended to be tongue and cheek, but then again, you know what Churchill said, and it's certainly amusing to look back at now, given some of the criticisms leveled at contemporary Swedish (or British) policies in the comments of this blog.

  175. @CK
    And here I thought this whole issue of the Pope inveigling himself into American electoral politics was settled back in 1960.
    There is a problem with walls. It is true that almost all walls initially are built to protect somethings of value. Walls protect families, throughout history walls have protected livestock, during the time of Vauban walls protected the great cities of Europe, walls protected China from the barbarians and are now protecting Israel from its neighbours. And every wall that keeps the hordes out also keeps the slaves/citizens in. The sally ports are closed, the gates are lowered and barred and if you were not quick enough to depart before the barbarian siege armies appeared your freedom of movement became very circumscribed.
    Let America build a wall along its southern border, that wall will have control points and gates and people will come and go, until some future leader decides that too many are leaving with their wealth and then the gates close.

    Let America build a wall along its southern border, that wall will have control points and gates and people will come and go, until some future leader decides that too many are leaving with their wealth and then the gates close.

    The lack of such a southern wall, physical, economic, or legal, will make that possibility a probability. While Mexicans and other southerners may not be that proactive about chasing the fleeing rich, the welfarist party sure is, and the “new Americans” will vote overwhelmingly for those welfarists.

    Note that it is much harder for Americans to flee with their wealth, because the taxman’s arms reach abroad in a way that other countries’ don’t (thank the Democrats’ resentment of Liz Taylor for that), and even if you renounce your citizenship they make you wait ten years thereafter.

    You seem to want to bring this nightmare about.

    José understands license, not liberty. That you want him here makes me question your commitment to the latter.

    Read More
  176. @Diversity Heretic
    To my knowledge the instructions contained in Deuteronomy haven't been enforced recently. Donald Trump's daughter converted to Judaism--I haven't noted his call for her execution for apostasy. I have read of sentences of death for apostasy in Afghanistan. Yes Muslims are a continuum, but enough of them are at the extreme end to constitute a genuine menace. Even "moderate" Muslims support the ultimate goals of Islam: the Ummah of the One True Faith, in which non-believers are tolerated only so long as they remain in dhimmi status. Moderate Muslims just disagree with more energetic Muslims about how to get there. I can see why moderate Muslims are frustrated; in a few generations they will be so numerous in the west that they can use the existing political process to impose the sharia--the more energetic faction alerts the dhimmis to their eventual fate.

    You distinguish the United States from Western countries--upon what basis? The U.S., it is true is slipping into Latin America status, but the tradition of the United States is rooted firmly in the West--representative government, the common law, etc. As for terrorist incidents in the U.S., you should check with the relatives of the almost 3,000 people killed on September 11. Or how about Major Hassan, Soldier of Allah, gunning down fellow soldiers while shouting "Allahu Ahkbar?" Or that business in San Bernardino? Or the recent attack by a machete-wielding Somali in Ohio? What does it take to convince you these people are a threat, As Kipling put it, you just never know "When the gods of his far-off land, shall repossess his blood." We have a colossal surveillance state and are stripped of our dignity every time we board a commercial aircraft, largely to avoid terrorism by Muslims.

    And what do they bring us? How many couscous cooks and rug merchants do we need? They come from a culture that peaked around 900 A.D. and hasn't amounted to much since. If we really need immigrants (which I very much doubt) there are better choices than the results of recurring counsin marriages since the Bronze Age.

    There are numerous Muslim majority countries. If you find these people so noble and interesting, by all means go and live with them. You have my sincere best wishes. But they are little but trouble when they try to mix in Western (and I include the U.S.) countries.

    The Stranger
    Rudyard Kipling

    The Stranger within my gate,
    He may be true or kind,
    But he does not talk my talk–
    I cannot feel his mind.
    I see the face and the eyes and the mouth,
    But not the soul behind.

    The men of my own stock,
    They may do ill or well,
    But they tell the lies I am wanted to,
    They are used to the lies I tell;
    And we do not need interpreters
    When we go to buy or sell.

    The Stranger within my gates,
    He may be evil or good,
    But I cannot tell what powers control–
    What reasons sway his mood;
    Nor when the Gods of his far-off land
    Shall repossess his blood.

    The men of my own stock,
    Bitter bad they may be,
    But, at least, they hear the things I hear,
    And see the things I see;
    And whatever I think of them and their likes
    They think of the likes of me.

    This was my father’s belief
    And this is also mine:
    Let the corn be all one sheaf–
    And the grapes be all one vine,
    Ere our children’s teeth are set on edge
    By bitter bread and wine.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Monopthalmus
    Once again, Kipling nails it. I'm starting to think I should buy and disseminate some of his works, against the time they are banned by the powers that be.

    Reading 'White Man's Burden' while in Afghanistan was jarring. Couldn't get the lines out of my head.
  177. @reiner Tor

    Were there any Germans in Casablanca at all? ”

    Well, yes, they were the bad guys. Major Strasser was the villain.
     
    I meant Casablanca the city, not Casablanca the movie. I think the movie gave the impression that it was under some sort of German occupying regime, but it never was.

    The governments of Hungary and Bulgaria weren’t all that repressive
     
    Hungary had a functioning parliament with some Social Democratic MPs. Until March 1944, when Hitler finally sent in some troops to install a more pro-German government.

    “I meant Casablanca the city, not Casablanca the movie. I think the movie gave the impression that it was under some sort of German occupying regime, but it never was. ”

    This is one piece of history the movie gets almost exactly right (I understand this was no documentary and created on the fly). If you re-watch it -it was just rebroadcast on cable last week- you will see that there is alot of arguing between Strasser and Renault over which one of them really runs Casablanca. All the paperwork has to be signed by Renault, Stasser has no official role. But Renault understands that he has to keep Strasser happy.

    Historically, I don’t think there ever were any German soldiers in Casablanca. What resistance there was to Torch was put up by purely French forces. The Germans stayed out of the areas allocated to Vichy until Torch. But given that the British and Free French had attacked Vichy run colonies several times, I can swallow the Germans sending in a liaison team to keep an eye on things. Strasser is needed in the movie to provide a villain, Renault doesn’t work well in the role for both story and propaganda reasons.

    Read More
    • Replies: @tbraton
    "Strasser is needed in the movie to provide a villain, Renault doesn’t work well in the role for both story and propaganda reasons."

    And who would have walked off into the sunset with Rick?

    It wouldn't have been "Chinatown," Jake, if Faye Dunaway had shot dead her father, played by John Huston, as Robert Towne's original screenplay provided, and if Roman Polanski had not changed the script to have her shot dead by the cop as Dunaway sped away with her daughter. Moral of the story: don't buy convertibles.
  178. @keypusher
    Like Sellar and Yeatman, sometimes Steve writes to console his readers. Getting in a front-page fight with the Pope is monumentally stupid. If Trump were a stock, even the dullest brokerage on Wall Street would be dumping it by now.

    “Getting in a front-page fight with the Pope is monumentally stupid.”

    Why? Were Kennedy’s detractors right after all?

    Read More
  179. @Corvinus
    "You cannot stop crimes that happened in the past."

    Exactly. It was a "crime" in the past, according to nativists, that different racial groups other than white and ethnic groups other than Scots-Irish, Welsh, and English were allowed to immigrate here.

    "The indigenous population of America has been replaced."

    And the least people can do is give their land back to them. Don't blame me for using your logic against you.

    "The current population is being replaced."

    Which again is part of nature. One may certainly call for the enforcement of current immigration laws or work toward new immigration restrictions or bans. Go for it. However, there are Americans who do not share your viewpoint regarding "replacement". More like augmentation.

    "Indeed if it were not for all of those trying to stop it then the West and America would already be irredeemable third world dumps."

    You're air of superiority is showing.

    "Were there no barriers to moving to Europe Africa would be practically empty. An average person would be insane not to move."

    Not really. People in Africa may be impoverished and lack technologically advancements, but it's their home and they are willing to work through those economic and social problems. Not every single African is destitute.

    And there are First World countries seeking to invest in those nations. Because free stuff.

    “The current population is being replaced.”

    “Which again is part of nature. One may certainly call for the enforcement of current immigration laws or work toward new immigration restrictions or bans. Go for it. However, there are Americans who do not share your viewpoint regarding “replacement”. More like augmentation.”

    I think you’re trying to use the idea that population replacement is “part of nature” (i.e. inevitable) in order to get people to go along with it while also hedging in an attempt to be logically consistent. Nature is also filled with examples of such invaders being turned back; that seems natural enough for me. Death from disease is “natural” but, by your logic, people should just accept it and cast worry into the wind – live for the moment and live only for yourself. No thanks.

    “Indeed if it were not for all of those trying to stop it then the West and America would already be irredeemable third world dumps.”

    ‘You’re air of superiority is showing.’

    Why wouldn’t he feel superior? Did Guatemala invent powered flight and modern computers?

    “Were there no barriers to moving to Europe Africa would be practically empty. An average person would be insane not to move.”

    ‘Not really. People in Africa may be impoverished and lack technologically advancements, but it’s their home and they are willing to work through those economic and social problems. Not every single African is destitute.

    ‘And there are First World countries seeking to invest in those nations. Because free stuff.’

    Yes, really. Or didn’t you catch the part about large numbers of Africans trying to leave Africa? Africa is the world’s poorest inhabited continent. Considering that the continent’s population is also exploding upwards, this guarantees a huge and unending stream of emigrants from the area. There are indeed large numbers of poor Africans who would love to leave their continent if given a chance. Some have already done so.

    And those First World countries are by-in-large investing in Africa due to its geography and natural resources, not its population. If Europe could support the same types of plant life and had the same oil and mineral reserves, investment in Africa would be far less.

    “The indigenous population of America has been replaced.”

    ‘And the least people can do is give their land back to them. Don’t blame me for using your logic against you.’

    Not really. Many indigenous people fought back. Using his logic (and some of yours), we have a right to do the same. However, there were many other indigenous peoples who took your advice (you know, about it being natural and all). How did that work out for them? Answer: great for us, not so great for them. Perhaps there is a lesson to be learned from that.

    “Exactly. It was a “crime” in the past, according to nativists, that different racial groups other than white and ethnic groups other than Scots-Irish, Welsh, and English were allowed to immigrate here.”

    So…we should feel guilty about that in the present when 100% of those people are dead and assuage such guilt by flooding our civilization with people who 1. will predominantly not attain the high achievement of white Caucasians any time soon* 2. have much less in common with us than diverse European groups who were let in later and 3. will racially block-vote, turning all of our elections into racial head counts? Just how do we benefit from all of this, aside from you getting to feel morally superior?

    *“Immigration Reform 2015: More Hispanics In US Schools, But They’re Struggling To Keep Up”

    “After years of steady immigration and high birth rates, Hispanics have become the fastest growing ethnic group in U.S. public schools, making up more than one in five kindergarten students. But the children of Latino immigrants are struggling to keep up with other students by nearly every measure, underperforming their white, Asian and sometimes black peers when it comes to SAT scores, math and reading skills, and high school and college graduation rates. The stubborn achievement gap paints a bleak future for the U.S. economy and education system and suggests U.S. schools at every level are failing miserably when it comes to teaching Hispanics regardless of their English-language skills or economic backgrounds, education advocates said.”

    “But every measurement used to assess student achievement suggests U.S. schools are not prepared to teach a growing population of Latino children. Hispanics are graduating from high school at lower rates than whites and Asians. In many states, Hispanics are also graduating at lower rates than black students, who have historically faced numerous education challenges in the U.S. Since 1990, Hispanics have dropped out at much higher rates than any other ethnic group.”

    The achievement gap isn’t limited to families of recent immigrants. Even students from Hispanic families who have lived in the United States for several generations are likely to struggle in school, especially if their parents are low-income and obtained little education themselves. That means if schools can’t figure out how to help Latino students now, future Hispanic students are unlikely to do any better.

    http://www.ibtimes.com/immigration-reform-2015-more-hispanics-us-schools-theyre-struggling-keep-1827574

    Read More
  180. @Corvinus
    "Culturally, Europeans prefer their own cultures."

    And Americans have generally incorporated several cultures into their society.

    "You’re missing the point – Islam is a territorial religion, % is all important."

    Any evidence to back up your assertion?

    “Culturally, Europeans prefer their own cultures.”

    ‘And Americans have generally incorporated several cultures into their society.’

    European cultures, that is.

    Read More
  181. @IBC

    I know of no atrocities committed by Germans in Norway, although I assume that the occupation forces killed resistance fightes and tortured them on occasion. Still and all, nothing like Russia.
     
    Besides the usual political executions and arrests, and physical reprisals for acts of sabotage (resistance), as well as responsibility for the deportation and eventual death of over a third of Norway's Jewish population; German treatment of Norwegian civilians was probably harshest towards the end of the war when they carried out a scorched-earth policy in the far north as a response to an impending attack by the Red Army.

    Of course, unlike many people in Eastern Europe, ethnic Norwegians held a favorable position in the Nazi "racial" hierarchy, and to my knowledge, there were no explicit German plans to intentionally destroy them as in Poland or the USSR. However, as in other occupied western European countries like France and Denmark, the Nazis were still happy to run over anyone who got in their way or who dared to defy them.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Nordlicht_%281944%E2%80%9345%29

    They also had the Lebensborn program to utilize the superior Norwegian Aryan bloodline to produce a master race by…marrying Norwegian women to SS officers.

    You can imagine how the Norwegians felt about this.

    Read More
    • Replies: @IBC
    The dark-haired woman in ABBA, had a Norwegian mother (non-Lebensborn, I think though) and a German-soldier father. After the war, her mother fled with her to Sweden where opinions were less polarized and there was less social rejection. At one point, ABBA was supposed to be second only to Volvo, in terms of Swedish export earnings. So this was at least one case where Sweden overwhelmingly benefited from its policy of open-mindedness and acceptance of immigrants.
    , @reiner Tor
    On the other hand, they also had a policy of encouraging Norwegian men to become SS-soldiers and even officers themselves.
    , @Anonymous
    Anna-Frid, the brunette in Abba, who was forever overshadowed by the blonde Agnetha, was a product of the Lebensborn program.
    The daughter of a Norwegian woman and an unknown German SS officer.
  182. “You get your occasional Fort Hood or San Bernadino, but then every other denomination occasionally goes loony and goes on gun rampages too.”

    ‘Which means the country doesn’t ban an entire group, or label that entire group as being “unassimiliable”, or certainly don’t limit the opportunity for citizens to obtain guns merely because some crazies commit heinous acts.’

    Why not? “Some”, in this context, means a lot more than average. Why should any people have to tolerate that risk just so a few others like yourself can get their fill of moral superiority? Are Ukrainians flying planes into buildings? Are Jews rioting in Europe or terrorist attacking newspapers that publish things they don’t like? …do you live anywhere near a majority Muslim neighborhood?

    And again, you hedge. Most people who support gun rights probably aren’t too thrilled about the prospect of Muslim immigration, either. So, this seems a little odd. Is this unusual hedging an attempt to avoid a ban? In other words, spew progressive b.s., throw some bones that you think the right wants to hear, then go on spewing progressive b.s. without consequence? But I guess I’m just being paranoid. All of these Muslim terrorist attacks you excuse have put me on edge.

    As Sailer has correctly pointed out in the past, Japan has very strict immigration policies. As a result, Muslims are not admitted and the last major terrorist attack inside that country occurred about a fifth of a century ago in the Tokyo subway – committed by some crazy, and very rare, native cult. Japan has gotten perfect safety and cultural homogeneity all for the price of missing out on a little virtue signaling. Works for them. In the mean-time, the West has suffered riots, assassinations (Theo Van Gogh: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theo_van_Gogh_(film_director)), numerous shootings and terrorist attacks using explosives and automatic/semiautomatic rifles, large numbers of rapes and sexual assaults, crime, and…smug, self-assured people like yourself. It would seem that large parts of the world disagree with your opinions and have prospered as a result.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "“Some”, in this context, means a lot more than average. Why should any people have to tolerate that risk just so a few others like yourself can get their fill of moral superiority?"

    Yes, there is a risk of radical terrorist attacks on American soil. How large is that risk? What group is specifically responsible for that risk?

    People assume that the average American-Muslim is probably, as compared to perhaps, likely to engage in widespread terrorist activities in the United States. Again, how many overall incidents since 911?

    Dr. Zuhdi Jasser, president of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy--For me it is a very personal mission to leave my American Muslim children a legacy that their faith is based in the unalienable right to liberty and to teach them that the principles that founded America do not contradict their faith but strengthen it. Our founding principle is that I as a Muslim am able to best practice my faith in a society like the United States that guarantees the rights of every individual blind to faith with no governmental intermediary stepping between the individual and the creator to interpret the will of God. Because of this, our mission is to advocate for the principles of the Constitution of the United States of America, liberty and freedom and the separation of mosque and state. We believe that this mission from within the “House of Islam” is the only way to inoculate Muslim youth and young adults against radicalization. The “Liberty narrative” is the only effective counter to the “Islamist narrative."

    “As Sailer has correctly pointed out in the past, Japan has very strict immigration policies.”
    
Japan, compared to America, has had a long-standing history of this conduct.

    “Japan has gotten perfect safety and cultural homogeneity all for the price of missing out on a little virtue signaling.”

    Except America is not Japan.
  183. @Reg Cæsar

    as well as responsibility for the deportation and eventual death of over a third of Norway’s Jewish population
     
    The Danes managed to spirit their Jews over (actually under) water to Sweden. (Niels Bohr was one; Victor Borge was by coincidence already in Sweden.)

    Norway has a far longer land border with Sweden than Denmark's channel. You'd think it would have been easier for them.

    I’m not a spokesman for the Norwegian government. But while it’s an important aspect of World War Two history and the topic shouldn’t be ignored, it’s interesting that even in the comments on a blog like this, a specific country’s Holocaust record is being weighted first in assessing its wartime legacy.

    If you’re interested in looking at that historical angle and making comparisons, Sweden’s wartime record of supplying iron ore to Nazi Germany bears a closer look. One of the main reasons Germany invaded Norway, was to ensure continued access to this crucial wartime resource which was vulnerable to attack from Norwegian territory and was most easily exported by sea. This is also why, early in the war, the British and French attempted to preemptively seize the Norwegian port of Narvik, though they were defeated by German forces.

    I don’t know how much iron ore it takes to build a crematorium, but I’d guess it takes quite a lot to sustain full-scale industrial warfare across most of Eastern Europe –where the Nazi war machine encountered the majority of its Jewish victims– not to mention millions of Slavs and others whom most people don’t seem to be as interested in hearing about these days. It’s understandable that every country should put defense of its own people first and Swedish actions should be viewed in that historical light. However, several times I’ve heard Sweden’s World War Two legacy recounted in terms of its successful assistance of Jewish refugees (particularly the efforts of Folke Bernadotte) to the exclusion of any memory of more self-interested decisions it made which may very well have negatively impacted much larger numbers of Jewish people who had no hope of refuge in Sweden as well as everyone else the Germans were fighting.

    As for Denmark (and I’m a fan of Peter Freuchen, who resisted the Nazis), its success in safely evacuating most of its Jewish population is probably one of the brightest spots in its wartime record, though certainly given Denmark’s geography or its resources at the time, sustained military resistance and 100 percent non-cooperation didn’t make much sense in terms of saving Danish lives.

    Sweden actually did help the Allies to some extent, especially after they saw that the Germans weren’t invincible. Here’s a blurb about a British blockade runner used to bring back ball bearings from Sweden:

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

    It probably wasn’t intended to be tongue and cheek, but then again, you know what Churchill said, and it’s certainly amusing to look back at now, given some of the criticisms leveled at contemporary Swedish (or British) policies in the comments of this blog.

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor

    It probably wasn’t intended to be tongue and cheek, but then again, you know what Churchill said
     
    He said many things. What are you referring to?
    , @tbraton
    And did Sweden lose anything by escaping the destruction of WWII as a result of remaining neutral? Would the U.S. have lost anything by remaining out of WWI? As it was, the U.S. suffered 50+ thousand combat deaths in WWI (not to mention the millions who died as a result of the influenza epidemic which broke out in the last days of WWI), and a good argument can be made that the U.S.'s entry into WWI led to the rise of Adolph Hitler and the much greater devastation of WWII.
  184. @keypusher
    Gosh, I wonder if there's anyone besides Hispanics and Irish Catholics who likes the Pope.

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/sep/21/move-over-donald-trump-pope-francis-approval-ratin/

    And have you noticed how soft and squishy Southern Baptists are getting nowadays? Apparently not.

    A poll from 9/2015 means little. Post a papal popularity poll from the last 3 days.

    Read More
    • Replies: @keypusher
    Oh yeah, I'm sure his popularity nosedived after taking on His Trumpiness. Get out of your bubble.
  185. @SFG
    They also had the Lebensborn program to utilize the superior Norwegian Aryan bloodline to produce a master race by...marrying Norwegian women to SS officers.

    You can imagine how the Norwegians felt about this.

    The dark-haired woman in ABBA, had a Norwegian mother (non-Lebensborn, I think though) and a German-soldier father. After the war, her mother fled with her to Sweden where opinions were less polarized and there was less social rejection. At one point, ABBA was supposed to be second only to Volvo, in terms of Swedish export earnings. So this was at least one case where Sweden overwhelmingly benefited from its policy of open-mindedness and acceptance of immigrants.

    Read More
  186. @IBC
    I'm not a spokesman for the Norwegian government. But while it's an important aspect of World War Two history and the topic shouldn't be ignored, it's interesting that even in the comments on a blog like this, a specific country's Holocaust record is being weighted first in assessing its wartime legacy.

    If you're interested in looking at that historical angle and making comparisons, Sweden's wartime record of supplying iron ore to Nazi Germany bears a closer look. One of the main reasons Germany invaded Norway, was to ensure continued access to this crucial wartime resource which was vulnerable to attack from Norwegian territory and was most easily exported by sea. This is also why, early in the war, the British and French attempted to preemptively seize the Norwegian port of Narvik, though they were defeated by German forces.

    I don't know how much iron ore it takes to build a crematorium, but I'd guess it takes quite a lot to sustain full-scale industrial warfare across most of Eastern Europe --where the Nazi war machine encountered the majority of its Jewish victims-- not to mention millions of Slavs and others whom most people don't seem to be as interested in hearing about these days. It's understandable that every country should put defense of its own people first and Swedish actions should be viewed in that historical light. However, several times I've heard Sweden's World War Two legacy recounted in terms of its successful assistance of Jewish refugees (particularly the efforts of Folke Bernadotte) to the exclusion of any memory of more self-interested decisions it made which may very well have negatively impacted much larger numbers of Jewish people who had no hope of refuge in Sweden as well as everyone else the Germans were fighting.

    As for Denmark (and I'm a fan of Peter Freuchen, who resisted the Nazis), its success in safely evacuating most of its Jewish population is probably one of the brightest spots in its wartime record, though certainly given Denmark's geography or its resources at the time, sustained military resistance and 100 percent non-cooperation didn't make much sense in terms of saving Danish lives.

    Sweden actually did help the Allies to some extent, especially after they saw that the Germans weren't invincible. Here's a blurb about a British blockade runner used to bring back ball bearings from Sweden:

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

    It probably wasn't intended to be tongue and cheek, but then again, you know what Churchill said, and it's certainly amusing to look back at now, given some of the criticisms leveled at contemporary Swedish (or British) policies in the comments of this blog.

    It probably wasn’t intended to be tongue and cheek, but then again, you know what Churchill said

    He said many things. What are you referring to?

    Read More
    • Replies: @IBC
    "Rum, sodomy, and the lash" in reference to the Royal Navy.
  187. @anon
    Deuteronomy, and the Old Testament (the Torah) in general, is not meant for Christians. It is a user manual written by Jews for Jews.
    See http://strugglesforexistence.com/?p=article_p&id=13

    I don't quite understand why Christians insist on culturally appropriating it.

    From a Catholic perspective: when it comes to the OT laws given to Moses, we distinguish between the moral law (summarized in the Ten Commandments), the juridical law (penalties for various crimes), and the ceremonial law (liturgical practice, restrictions on food, etc.). Of these, Christians are bound only to the moral laws; the juridical and ceremonial laws are understood to have been specific to that time and place, and have been superseded by the laws of the new covenant instituted by Jesus Christ. But the moral law, rooted as it is in the eternal order of the universe, is not the kind of thing that can be superseded.

    Popes, on the other hand, come and go. We just have to wait this one out.

    Read More
  188. @SFG
    They also had the Lebensborn program to utilize the superior Norwegian Aryan bloodline to produce a master race by...marrying Norwegian women to SS officers.

    You can imagine how the Norwegians felt about this.

    On the other hand, they also had a policy of encouraging Norwegian men to become SS-soldiers and even officers themselves.

    Read More
  189. @Corvinus
    "Culturally, Europeans prefer their own cultures."

    And Americans have generally incorporated several cultures into their society.

    "You’re missing the point – Islam is a territorial religion, % is all important."

    Any evidence to back up your assertion?

    Yes very generous but it seems that many Americans still prefer their own.

    Yes UK France Sweden Denmark Norway

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "Yes very generous but it seems that many Americans still prefer their own."

    Prefer their own refers exactly to what group? White? European?
  190. @Corvinus
    "It seems clear that it is in the best interest of American citizens to close the southern border, although many people disagree with that (I do not know if you are one of those who disagree). "

    I have no qualms with this proposal.

    "Likewise it seems to be in the best interests of a certain class of Hispanic/Latino people to come to America, legally or illegally."

    No problem there.

    "If you grant that these two interests are at loggerheads, why wouldn’t you say that it is appropriate for Americans (or whomever you think should fill the thought experiment) to prioritize their self-interest over that of another?"

    Absolutely.

    "Unless you are a troll, which I cannot tell, do you admit that there isn’t a Kantian-style solution for political problems, wherein everybody obeys an a priori, universal rule? Or do you think that everyone, everywhere, should act with perfect logical consistency, as if no natural groupings of people were possible?"

    Each situation requires a pro-con list, with the most viable solution through majority rule.

    "This crowd, myself included, take a principled stance against the idea that people are only distinct according to number: we believe that there are many natural groupings to be made within the larger group of humanity, and I think we have good arguments to prove that that is more than a belief. I am not trying to be patronizing, but the nature of the commenting system is that a person can only have the appearance of being reactive. What are your beliefs?"

    I believe that if Americans want to limit the number of immigrants coming into our country that they should work within our existing political system. For those companies who employ illegal immigrants, there are laws on the books to deal with their criminal activities.

    What I disagree with vehemently is the notion that a certain group of people, say Muslims, are overall incompatible with American society because they, as a majority, constitute a perpetual threat to the national security of the United States. Look at the Japanese during World War II. We interned them. From my recollection, there was not one incident of terrorism committed, whether it be first generation or second generation, on America soil. Moreover, Japanese-Americans were drafted and fought on the European honor with tremendous distinction.

    This country was built on settlement and immigration.

    “This country was built on settlement and immigration.”

    But when Jamestown was settled in 1607 and Plymouth in 1620, the population of what is now the U.S. was not even close to its current population of 320+ million, the third highest population in the world after China and India. At some point, we have to close the Golden Door. Pope Francis may not approve, but tough.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "At some point, we have to close the Golden Door. "

    I believe that if Americans want to limit the number of immigrants coming into our country that they should work within our existing political system. For those companies who employ illegal immigrants, there are laws on the books to deal with their criminal activities.
  191. @reiner Tor
    This media pope is getting on my nerves.

    This media pope is getting on my nerves.

    You and me both — or you and me and a lot of Catholics all. “Trad” Catholics — i.e., traditional-style Catholics — are very much not into this Pope. We also know that papal mumblings do not the magisterium make. But I worry about the “neo-Catholic” types. There’s some papolatry going on with some of them…

    Read More
  192. @tbraton
    I wonder why the communist Pope Francis didn't take the opportunity when he was in Mexico, a country that is nominally 80+% Roman Catholic, to criticize Mexico for its restrictive immigration laws, which I understand are much more restrictive than those of the U.S. His words might have had much more effect in a country which is more than 3X Catholic than the U.S. (percentage-wise) and thus more inclined to follow the wisdom of their Holy Pontiff and more likely to accept his criticism that such restrictive immigration policies are not "Christian." Where did the Church find this left-wing buffoon who insists in intruding into political matters that have little connection to the Church's mission?

    Where did the Church find this left-wing buffoon who insists in intruding into political matters that have little connection to the Church’s mission?

    Three words: “the Jesuit Order.” There are probably only 5 Jezzies left who are true to their founder’s mission.

    Read More
  193. @Steve Sailer
    I'd never heard of the Islamic sack of Rome in 846 until 24 hours ago. I could give you the exact dates of two others: 410 AD and 1527, and approximate one other 390 BC. But the Arabs looting Rome, at least the parts outside the walls, in 846 AD was news to me, and I'm relatively well informed.

    Granted, that was during the Dark Ages. But then Pirenne argued that the Dark Ages were dark in Europe because the Muslims transformed the Mediterranean from a highway into a danger zone for Europeans.

    The Romans could travel by land because they had the organization to keep up the roads. When the Germans took over Europe, they didn't have the societal competence to keep up the roads. Still, they could use the Mediterranean, which is amazingly useful. But then Muslim pirates took over the sea.

    I’d never heard of the Islamic sack of Rome in 846 until 24 hours ago. I could give you the exact dates of two others: 410 AD and 1527, and approximate one other 390 BC. But the Arabs looting Rome, at least the parts outside the walls, in 846 AD was news to me, and I’m relatively well informed.

    Steve, though I think you’ve referred to him many times, not sure if you’ve actually read all of Gibbon’s DECLINE AND FALL OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE. I got myself a nice 3-volume set at a good price (introductory offer from a book-of-the-month type outfit) right before the Internet broke. Needless to say this is available free now in multiple formats, though even those optimized for e-readers seem a bit spotty to me so take care to find a good one.

    Anyway, if you read through past the fall of the Western Roman Empire you will get a very entertaining and surprisingly thorough survey of European history to the start of the Renaissance (fall of Constantinople). Gibbon’s style is old but fully understandable (like the contemporaneous Constitution and Declaration) to modern American ears, and is extremely witty and lively to boot. I have not taken a Medieval European history class since high school, and have never read any other book specifically on the topic, so the fact that I already knew about the sack of Rome- or at least could infer it given Saracen occupation of Sicily and some lower parts of the Italian boot- means I probably read it in Gibbon.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    I've just read an abridged one volume version of "Decline," which jumps around more the further past the Fall it gets -- e.g., it includes the Blue-Green chariot racing riots in the 500s, but skimps on most of the other later stuff.
  194. @Hunsdon
    You know the funny thing, keypusher? They've been saying this from the beginning. "Oh this is it." "This time he's gone too far." So far, they just keep being wrong. There's beginning to be a sense of desperation to what they say.

    “They” aren’t me. Besides, predicting a candidate will fail is like predicting a football team won’t win the Super Bowl — you have an extremely good chance of being right.

    Read More