The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
FBI Neo-Nazi Informant/Agent Provocateur Incites Muslim Jordanian-American to Vandalize Synagogue
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll 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 three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

From the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel:

Oak Creek man, alleged member of neo-Nazi group ‘The Base,’ charged with vandalizing Racine synagogue

Ashley Luthern and Bruce Vielmetti, Jan. 17, 2020

A 22-year-old Oak Creek man charged with vandalizing a Racine synagogue was arrested Friday as part of a nationwide investigation into The Base, a neo-Nazi, racially motivated extremist group, federal prosecutors announced Friday.

Yousef O. Barasneh spray-painted swastikas and anti-Semitic words on Beth Israel Sinai Congregation in Racine last September and plotted other acts of vandalism against minority residents with the hate group, according to a federal criminal complaint. …

Yousef Omar Barasneh appears to be the son of a Jordanian Muslim immigrant father and a head-covering wearing Muslim mother. Mom looks like she might be a native Wisconsinite who converted to Islam for her husband. I won’t link to the online evidence for their being Islamic (they have enough problems at the moment), but it’s obvious.

According to court records:

One of the group’s ringleaders became an informant and gave investigators details over the past several months.

The man admitted he directed the group to vandalize minority-owned properties, calling it “Operation Kristallnacht,” a reference to Nazi Germany and the night Jewish homes, hospitals and other properties were ransacked and destroyed.

The man told investigators he said: “If there’s a window that wants to be broken, don’t be shy.”

He said a man known as Josef or Joseph in the group’s chat room later sent a message with a news article about the Racine synagogue vandalism and claimed credit for the damage. …

Barasneh was seen going to and from that meeting, which included a goat sacrifice …

His arrest was among at least six others in the U.S. Thursday and Friday of men authorities believe were advancing The Base’s goal of accelerating the collapse of the federal government, inciting a race war and establishing a white ethnostate, according to one agent’s affidavit.

 
Hide 109 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. The Base, a neo-Nazi, racially motivated extremist group

    All iSteve readers are aware that The Base is alqaeida in Arabic.

    • Agree: Twodees Partain
    • Replies: @Hail

    David Pinsen @dpinsen | [from Twitter 7 hours ago]

    “The Base” - Al Qaeda?
     

    Scott Greer @ScottMGreer
    Replying to @dpinsen

    yeah. almost as subtle as just calling yourself "the terrorist group"
     
    , @Polynikes
    The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel may be the most leftist mainstream newspaper in the country. They’re basically a propaganda arm of the Democratic Party.


    I’m not being the least bit hyperbolic.
  2. The Base, a neo-Nazi, racially motivated extremist group

    All iSteve readers are aware that The Base is alqaeida in Arabic.

  3. Anonymous[375] • Disclaimer says:

    Incidentally, Al-Qaeda, which you don’t really hear about anymore, means “The Base” or “The Database” in Arabic. Conspiracy theorists have long maintained that the name referred to the CIA’s database of Muslim CIA assets going back to the US backed Afghan Mujahideen fighters during the Afghan-Soviet War.

    “The Base” is an unusual name for a Neo-Nazi group. One wonders if it’s a reference to the FBI’s database of neo-Nazi types and was formed as a means for the FBI to entrap them.

    • Replies: @Coemgen
    I used to think that all the talk of the CIA causing mayhem in the Middle and Near East from native Persians, Arabs, Egyptians, etc. was propaganda used by their governments to hide their governments' misdeeds. Then 2011 occurred with its "Arab Spring."

    Why were the Democrats and media crowing about the "Arab Spring?"
    Why were they so excited about this "Facebook Revolution?"
    Isn't Facebook referred to as "Fakebook" for good reason (such Whole Foods is referred to as "Whole Paycheck")?
    Why wasn't anyone questioning why Egypt was having an "Arab Spring?"
    Why wasn't anyone concerned about secular governments being deposed then replaced by something called the "Muslim Brotherhood?"

    Well, thanks to the events of 9/11/2012 in Benghazi, Libya and the subsequent Congressional hearings we may have some idea. HRC was extremely interested in Libya in 2011. Why would a venal Secretary of State be so interested in Libya [OIL] and Egypt [SUEZ CANAL]? Could the CIA work with a venal Secretary of State? Well, thanks to events of 2016-present we do know that the highest echelon of the FBI will work with a venal former Secretary of State.
    , @Thomas

    “The Base” is an unusual name for a Neo-Nazi group. One wonders if it’s a reference to the FBI’s database of neo-Nazi types and was formed as a means for the FBI to entrap them.
     
    Nobody’s ever heard of this group and then all of a sudden, the fibbies are making a bunch of busts right before a narrative needs to be established in Richmond. There’s no need to wonder if this is an FBI “glown***er” operation.

    My guess: this “group” was probably mostly a Telegram chat where FBI informants got guys to respond with thumbs-up emojis to proposals of violence.
    , @Bubba
    So Muslim youths encouraged by the FBI to vandalize a synagogue are now neo-Nazis? Yeah, and Jeffrey Epstein killed himself.
    , @Kevin O'Keeffe

    “The Base” is an unusual name for a Neo-Nazi group. One wonders if it’s a reference to...
     
    It was clearly intended as a reference to al-Qaeda.
  4. Come on. Yousef knows he’s faking it while trying to trick white people into joining. The trouble is that the FBI seems genuinely confused.

    • Replies: @Bubba
    Next the FBI will be retconning 9-11 into an attack done by white supremacists.
    , @Dani
    @Bubba - Wow - I will remember I heard it from you first when it comes to fruition in the not-too-distant future! I mean this as a compliment, of course.
  5. @a reader

    The Base, a neo-Nazi, racially motivated extremist group
     
    All iSteve readers are aware that The Base is alqaeida in Arabic.

    David Pinsen @dpinsen | [from Twitter 7 hours ago]

    “The Base” – Al Qaeda?

    Scott Greer @ScottMGreer
    Replying to @dpinsen

    yeah. almost as subtle as just calling yourself “the terrorist group”

  6. The [informant] admitted he directed the group to vandalize minority-owned properties

    Would someone enlighten me on the legal definition of Entrapment; I must not understand the definition, because that seems…

    • Replies: @David
    Having read the article, it seems the informant made that suggestion a while before he himself was arrested for doing something similar. He became an informant to get relief from the case hanging over him.

    Further down in the article, it's nice to see that two of the three guys arrested in Virginia as white nationalists have been charged with harboring an illegal alien, a Canadian in this case. I suppose that happens all the time, when anyone is caught ferrying around someone who's in the US illegally.
    , @Redneck farmer
    It's not really entrapment when the FBI does it.
    , @BB753
    Just about every terrorist act is instigated (or directly performed) by government agencies. Nothing new here.
  7. @Hail

    The [informant] admitted he directed the group to vandalize minority-owned properties
     
    Would someone enlighten me on the legal definition of Entrapment; I must not understand the definition, because that seems...

    Having read the article, it seems the informant made that suggestion a while before he himself was arrested for doing something similar. He became an informant to get relief from the case hanging over him.

    Further down in the article, it’s nice to see that two of the three guys arrested in Virginia as white nationalists have been charged with harboring an illegal alien, a Canadian in this case. I suppose that happens all the time, when anyone is caught ferrying around someone who’s in the US illegally.

    • Agree: YetAnotherAnon
    • Replies: @OscarWildeLoveChild
    The problem is, they haven't come up with a law that is "illegals harboring other illegals" apparently, and that is the sticking point...
  8. “One of the group’s ringleaders *became* an informant…”

    Mmm…

    For how long was this guy working for the Feds?
    And how many times did he ‘encourage’ others to do illegal things?

  9. Anon[174] • Disclaimer says:

    OT

    The new Dr. Dolittle movie is being panned as “one of the worst movies in years … a disaster” (The Atlantic).

    The movie was written and directed by Stephen Gaghan, who wrote and directed the excellent low-key George Clooney geopolitical thriller Syriana, one of Clooney’s patented “every-other” small movies. Not the director you’d put in charge of a kids movie, so whoever made that ballsy call is probably out of a job.

    But Gaghan finished the movie and submitted it. The studio hated it and hired two other directors to add needed “conputer generated animals and silly laughs.”

    And it’s getting about minus 1 million on the tomato meter even after this emergency refurb.

    I really loved Dr. Dolittle books as a kid. I hated Eddie Murphy’s movie versions.

    It occurred to me … why not release the original Stephen Gaghan version on the side, in limited theaters, a “director’s cut,” maybe even let him recut it himself to make it even more of a “disaster” for kids.

    Maybe his version really did suck even worse. But at this point what does the studio have to lose? Some people may see both versions, some people put off by the original reviews or interested in Hollywood inside-baseball and sausage making may see it who would not have gone to the original. The studio could troll movie reviews by marketing the Gaghan version as, “See, it sucks, we were right,” to provoke the critics to come back with, “No, it’s genius, death to the studios!”

    I’d kind of hope that Gaghan made a version of Dr. Dolittle that adults who loved but outgrew the books might like. And if that’s not what he made, maybe someone else should try it.

    • Replies: @Jim Don Bob
    I planned to Doolittle today because I like Robert F. Downney, JR, but every review I read said that was completely incoherent. They spent $175 million making it.
    , @Pericles
    We're currently being blanketed with ads for Cats - The Yiffing, a movie which seems pretty bad too. There are many young white female dancer cats with large furry human tits and hinted loose morals, along with at least one chunky hip negro cat, and they all seem to just looove catnip. What does all of this mean?

    I wonder what T.S. Eliot would have said.
  10. It’s time to start imprisoning people who incite others for conspiracy. Shouldn’t matter whether or not they are on the govt. payroll.

    • Replies: @bomag

    It’s time to start imprisoning people who incite others for conspiracy.
     
    That's the biggest rabbit hole around.

    The FBI etc. should dial back their encouragement of violent acts for the sake of an easy arrest. This sort of thing reached a nadir with the plan to give guns to Mexican drug runners, but I suppose it could sink even lower.

    , @moshe
    No.

    Freedom of speech and freedom of the press should not be curtailed.

    As an aside, I'm pretty sure that freedom of the press is not meant to be available only to officially government accredited "members of the press" but to anyone with the ability to share their written words.
    , @SolontoCroesus

    It’s time to start imprisoning people who incite others for conspiracy. Shouldn’t matter whether or not they are on the govt. payroll.
     
    The Trial of Julius Streicher
    https://avalon.law.yale.edu/imt/04-26-46.asp#streicher
    Justice Robert Jackson, Presiding Judge
    DR. MARX:

    The Prosecution accuse you of having contributed indirectly to mass murders by incitation, and according to the minutes of 10 January 1946, the following charge has been made against you: No government in the world could have undertaken a policy of mass extermination, as it was done here, without having behind it a nation which agreed to it; and you are supposed to have brought that about. What have you to say to this?
     
    STREICHER:

    To that I have the following to say: Incitation means to bring a person into condition of excitement which causes him to perform an irresponsible act.

    Did the contents of Der Stuermer incite, this is the question?
    Briefly stated, the question must be answered, "What did Der Stuermer write?" . . . [In Der Stuermer's] 20 years I published enlightening articles dealing with the race, dealing with what the Jews themselves write in the Old Testament, in their history, what they write in the Talmud. I printed excerpts from Jewish historical works, works for instance, written by a Professor Dr. Graetz and by a Jewish scholar, Gutnot.

    In Der Stuermer no editorial appeared written by me or written by anyone of my main co-workers in which I did not include quotations from the ancient history of the Jews, from the Old Testament or from Jewish historical works of recent times.
    It is important, and I must emphasize that I pointed out in all articles, that prominent Jews, leading authors themselves, admitted that which during 20 years as author and public speaker I publicly proclaimed.
    Allow me to add that it is my conviction that the contents of Der Stuermer as such were not incitation. During the whole 20 years I never wrote in this connection, "Burn Jewish houses down; beat them to death." Never once did such an incitement appear in Der Stuermer.
    Now comes the question: Is there any proof to be furnished that any deed was done from the time Der Stuermer first appeared, a deed of which one can say that it was the result of an incitement . . .[such as] a pogrom? That is a spontaneous deed when sections of the people suddenly rise up and kill other people. During the 20 years no pogrom took place in Germany, during the 20 years, as far as I know, no Jew was killed. No murder took place, of which one could have said, "This is the result of an incitement which was caused by anti-Semitic authors or public speakers."
     
    --
    Streicher was judged guilty of Incitement and hanged.
  11. arrested Friday as part of a nationwide investigation into The Base, a neo-Nazi, racially motivated extremist group

    Narrative control before the Jan. 20th Richmond rally.

    As David mentions above, two days ago they arrested a Canadian visa overstayer along with two others who were sharing a house with him (the crime of illegally harboring an alien. Incredible how strict they are on enforcing the letter of immigration law! in…some cases), all right-wingers who, their surveillance of their communications revealed, were thinking about showing up at the Richmond rally on Jan. 20.

    “Three Neonazis Arrested, Heading for Richmond!” “More Neonazis arrested ahead of Richmond rally.” These are about the perfect headlines for narrative control, both pre- and post-event.

    (I question whether there is anyone, anywhere, who unironically identifies as a ‘Neonazi,’ but it sure doesn’t stop the MSM and SPLC/ADL and others from using it.)

    Matt Bracken speaking to Henrik Palmgren on the case (Jan. 17) [10:20]:

    This thing that happened today [Jan. 16], with them arresting, quote-unquote, “Neo-Nazis”? They’re setting the stage. They’re putting up the background template.

    All they did for any of these guys was get one guy on immigration. He crossed the border from Canada to the USA. There’s nothing like, They had Ricin, or they had a bomb they were making, or they bought some fuel. Nothing!

    But they arrested three guys. Why did they arrest those three guys: They arrested them because they’re setting a narrative. They’re basically putting up the subliminal background music, that the really, really bad white racists, nationalists, are coming to Richmond, and we gotta stop them.

    So no matter what happens on Monday in Richmond, […] Believe me, it’s going to be blamed on the Second Amendment, and it’ll be used to portray supporters of the Second Amendment as dangerous, redneck, white racist yahoos.

    • Agree: Jim Don Bob
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Why is this rally on Monday? Monday is Martin Luther King Day. If I were a conspiracy theorist, I might believe that undercover federal agents were corralling a bunch of neo-Nazi types to hold a gun rally in the former capital of the Confederacy on MLK Day for bad optics and to instigate some sort of violent incident.
    , @Twodees Partain
    Given that this has been circulated already, anyone who stills shows up at the rally in Richmond can be considered an agent provocateur. I wasn't present at Charlottesville and will be far from Richmond on Monday.
  12. @Hail

    The [informant] admitted he directed the group to vandalize minority-owned properties
     
    Would someone enlighten me on the legal definition of Entrapment; I must not understand the definition, because that seems...

    It’s not really entrapment when the FBI does it.

    • Replies: @Mr McKenna
    Reminds me of a pithy quote from Frank Zappa, as he surveyed the socio-political scene and the endless disinformation campaigns of governmedia presstitutes: "Everything you know is wrong."
  13. So: This is the shallow version of the Deep State – the FBI as a zeitgeist-agency.

  14. @Redneck farmer
    It's not really entrapment when the FBI does it.

    Reminds me of a pithy quote from Frank Zappa, as he surveyed the socio-political scene and the endless disinformation campaigns of governmedia presstitutes: “Everything you know is wrong.”

    • Replies: @Hhsiii
    That’s a Firesign Theater album (also a Weird Al song):

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Everything_You_Know_Is_Wrong
  15. Anonymous[375] • Disclaimer says:
    @Hail

    arrested Friday as part of a nationwide investigation into The Base, a neo-Nazi, racially motivated extremist group
     
    Narrative control before the Jan. 20th Richmond rally.

    As David mentions above, two days ago they arrested a Canadian visa overstayer along with two others who were sharing a house with him (the crime of illegally harboring an alien. Incredible how strict they are on enforcing the letter of immigration law! in...some cases), all right-wingers who, their surveillance of their communications revealed, were thinking about showing up at the Richmond rally on Jan. 20.

    "Three Neonazis Arrested, Heading for Richmond!" "More Neonazis arrested ahead of Richmond rally." These are about the perfect headlines for narrative control, both pre- and post-event.

    (I question whether there is anyone, anywhere, who unironically identifies as a 'Neonazi,' but it sure doesn't stop the MSM and SPLC/ADL and others from using it.)

    Matt Bracken speaking to Henrik Palmgren on the case (Jan. 17) [10:20]:


    This thing that happened today [Jan. 16], with them arresting, quote-unquote, "Neo-Nazis"? They're setting the stage. They're putting up the background template.

    All they did for any of these guys was get one guy on immigration. He crossed the border from Canada to the USA. There's nothing like, They had Ricin, or they had a bomb they were making, or they bought some fuel. Nothing!

    But they arrested three guys. Why did they arrest those three guys: They arrested them because they're setting a narrative. They're basically putting up the subliminal background music, that the really, really bad white racists, nationalists, are coming to Richmond, and we gotta stop them.

    So no matter what happens on Monday in Richmond, [...] Believe me, it's going to be blamed on the Second Amendment, and it'll be used to portray supporters of the Second Amendment as dangerous, redneck, white racist yahoos.
     

    Why is this rally on Monday? Monday is Martin Luther King Day. If I were a conspiracy theorist, I might believe that undercover federal agents were corralling a bunch of neo-Nazi types to hold a gun rally in the former capital of the Confederacy on MLK Day for bad optics and to instigate some sort of violent incident.

    • Replies: @Mr McKenna
    The 'optics' are unbelievably bad. I couldn't believe it when I learned of the date. It would surprise few of us if the coincidence were deliberate, on the part of fifth columnists from the Tribe, the Government, or both. OTOH right-wing gun nuts include a fair number of freaks too. They'll be the ones featured in the media reports, whatever happens. I'm not looking forward to this.
    , @Dr. X
    Virginia gun rights groups have a legislative lobbying day every year at the beginning of the session. It's just that this year there's a Democratic majority that's going to impose heavy-handed gun control.
    , @Kevin O'Keeffe

    Why is this rally on Monday? Monday is Martin Luther King Day. If I were a conspiracy theorist, I might believe that undercover federal agents were corralling a bunch of neo-Nazi types to hold a gun rally in the former capital of the Confederacy on MLK Day for bad optics and to instigate some sort of violent incident.
     
    It kinda feels like you might be correct.

    If so, I predict they will regret doing so, as they subsequently discover they have bitten off more than they can chew.
  16. @Anonymous
    Incidentally, Al-Qaeda, which you don't really hear about anymore, means "The Base" or "The Database" in Arabic. Conspiracy theorists have long maintained that the name referred to the CIA's database of Muslim CIA assets going back to the US backed Afghan Mujahideen fighters during the Afghan-Soviet War.

    "The Base" is an unusual name for a Neo-Nazi group. One wonders if it's a reference to the FBI's database of neo-Nazi types and was formed as a means for the FBI to entrap them.

    I used to think that all the talk of the CIA causing mayhem in the Middle and Near East from native Persians, Arabs, Egyptians, etc. was propaganda used by their governments to hide their governments’ misdeeds. Then 2011 occurred with its “Arab Spring.”

    Why were the Democrats and media crowing about the “Arab Spring?”
    Why were they so excited about this “Facebook Revolution?”
    Isn’t Facebook referred to as “Fakebook” for good reason (such Whole Foods is referred to as “Whole Paycheck”)?
    Why wasn’t anyone questioning why Egypt was having an “Arab Spring?”
    Why wasn’t anyone concerned about secular governments being deposed then replaced by something called the “Muslim Brotherhood?”

    Well, thanks to the events of 9/11/2012 in Benghazi, Libya and the subsequent Congressional hearings we may have some idea. HRC was extremely interested in Libya in 2011. Why would a venal Secretary of State be so interested in Libya [OIL] and Egypt [SUEZ CANAL]? Could the CIA work with a venal Secretary of State? Well, thanks to events of 2016-present we do know that the highest echelon of the FBI will work with a venal former Secretary of State.

  17. @Hail

    The [informant] admitted he directed the group to vandalize minority-owned properties
     
    Would someone enlighten me on the legal definition of Entrapment; I must not understand the definition, because that seems...

    Just about every terrorist act is instigated (or directly performed) by government agencies. Nothing new here.

  18. anonymous[331] • Disclaimer says:

    This has been going on for a long time. In the 1965 slaying of Viola Liuzzo FBI informant Gary Thomas Rowe just happened to be in the car from which the shots were fired. He may have egged things on, he might have been the one who actually fired the shots. That was murky and his claims were questionable. A lot of these recent ‘terrorist plots’ involve rather low intelligence eastern types who are surrounded and encouraged by government agents. It’s been said the way to spot the agents is they are the radical, take action now types in the room.

  19. @Bill P
    It's time to start imprisoning people who incite others for conspiracy. Shouldn't matter whether or not they are on the govt. payroll.

    It’s time to start imprisoning people who incite others for conspiracy.

    That’s the biggest rabbit hole around.

    The FBI etc. should dial back their encouragement of violent acts for the sake of an easy arrest. This sort of thing reached a nadir with the plan to give guns to Mexican drug runners, but I suppose it could sink even lower.

    • Replies: @anon
    The FBI etc. should dial back their encouragement of violent acts for the sake of an easy arrest. This sort of thing reached a nadir with the plan to give guns to Mexican drug runners, but I suppose it could sink even lower

    "Gunwalker" was the BATF, and it was not just proposed but carried out. Rifles from gun stores in Arizona wound up in the hands of Mexican cartels. People got killed with those guns by Cartel sicaros. That's right, real people got real dead because of Obama's "gunwalker" plan.

    The sales happened because the federally licensed gun dealers were essentially ordered to do so. The dealers had reason to know and the Feds for sure knew they were illegal. But because "Big Fed says so" the sales went through. It's one of the scandals of the Obama time that should have put some Feds into Fed prison for about 10 to 15 years.

    But nothing happened, of course, for...reasons.
    , @Mr. Anon

    The FBI etc. should dial back their encouragement of violent acts for the sake of an easy arrest. This sort of thing reached a nadir with the plan to give guns to Mexican drug runners, but I suppose it could sink even lower.
     
    It already did sink lower than that, even before "Fast and Furious". The 1993 World Trade Center bombing (the FBI was aware of the plot) and the Boston Marathon bombing - a lot of strange circumstances surrounding that incident too.

    The FBI's job is not to investigate crimes or enforce the law. It's certainly not there to promote justice. It's job is to cover up the misdeeds of the government and enforce the will of the state and its patrons. It always has been so.
  20. When you go to FBI agent-provocateur school to be trained in how to incite others to vandalize synagogue s with the aim of sparking a race war, is one of your classes Goat Sacrifice 101?

    I wonder how many goats Comey and McCabe sacrificised to exonerate Hillary and frame Trump? Does anybody know?

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    ...is one of your classes Goat Sacrifice 101?

    I wonder how many goats Comey and McCabe sacrificised to exonerate Hillary and frame Trump? Does anybody know?
     
    Project Isabela: When Slaughtering 250,000 Goats Meant Saving A Species

    The private Charles Darwin Foundation, which set out to exterminate the goat in 1998, announced last July that it had succeeded completely.

    COUNTERINSURGENCY: THE GREAT GOAT WAR


    Eliminating Goats and Donkeys from the Largest of the Galapagos Islands

    https://allthatsinteresting.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/project-isabela-goat-skull.jpg
  21. @David
    Having read the article, it seems the informant made that suggestion a while before he himself was arrested for doing something similar. He became an informant to get relief from the case hanging over him.

    Further down in the article, it's nice to see that two of the three guys arrested in Virginia as white nationalists have been charged with harboring an illegal alien, a Canadian in this case. I suppose that happens all the time, when anyone is caught ferrying around someone who's in the US illegally.

    The problem is, they haven’t come up with a law that is “illegals harboring other illegals” apparently, and that is the sticking point…

  22. @Anonymous
    Why is this rally on Monday? Monday is Martin Luther King Day. If I were a conspiracy theorist, I might believe that undercover federal agents were corralling a bunch of neo-Nazi types to hold a gun rally in the former capital of the Confederacy on MLK Day for bad optics and to instigate some sort of violent incident.

    The ‘optics’ are unbelievably bad. I couldn’t believe it when I learned of the date. It would surprise few of us if the coincidence were deliberate, on the part of fifth columnists from the Tribe, the Government, or both. OTOH right-wing gun nuts include a fair number of freaks too. They’ll be the ones featured in the media reports, whatever happens. I’m not looking forward to this.

    • Replies: @Hail

    I couldn’t believe it when I learned of the date
     
    In addition to Dr. X's comment above that this is a yearly tradition ("Virginia gun rights groups have a legislative lobbying day every year at the beginning of the session"), I'd also point out:

    The Commonwealth of Virginia (and several other Southern states) never recognized the "Martin Luther King federal holiday" by that name, officially designating the mandatory federal holiday as "Lee–Jackson Day," upgrading previous a state holiday that honored Generals Lee and Stonewall Jackson, both of Virginia, both with birthdays around this time of January.

    So "MLK Day" itself is a form of narrative control; why not "Lee–Jackson Day"?

    After all, it is the people of Virginia peaceably assembling to 'lobby' the Virginia government, where it has always been Lee–Jackson Day; it is not a random collection of anywhere-Americans lobbying the entire United States (the Congress of which passed, to much now-forgotten opposition, the mandatory Martin Luther Kind Jr. holiday in the 1980s, before the extent of his incredibly widespread plagiarism and sexual impropriety were revealed, though his communist connections were known since the late 1950s).

  23. For a minute there I thought Frank Collin had come out of retirement.

  24. @Mr McKenna
    Reminds me of a pithy quote from Frank Zappa, as he surveyed the socio-political scene and the endless disinformation campaigns of governmedia presstitutes: "Everything you know is wrong."

    That’s a Firesign Theater album (also a Weird Al song):

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

  25. @Anonymous
    Why is this rally on Monday? Monday is Martin Luther King Day. If I were a conspiracy theorist, I might believe that undercover federal agents were corralling a bunch of neo-Nazi types to hold a gun rally in the former capital of the Confederacy on MLK Day for bad optics and to instigate some sort of violent incident.

    Virginia gun rights groups have a legislative lobbying day every year at the beginning of the session. It’s just that this year there’s a Democratic majority that’s going to impose heavy-handed gun control.

  26. OT(?)

    Did anyone ever determine if al Queada (the base, or as reported less often, the foundation) was named after/inspired by Isaac Asimovs Foundation books?

    At one point in the days following 9/11, it was reported that OBL had been an avid reader of Ian Fleminh and Asimov, esp Foundation books.

  27. I’m surprised they didn’t use the old LAW-rocket-launcher-tube-with-tracker like the Chicago FBI does.

  28. When Trump was asked about an “epidemic” of threats to American synagogues, he commented that some of them might be false flags. He was brutally savaged by the press as an absolute moron. Turned out a lot of the threats were coming from some “kid” in Israel. Most of the other threats were coming from some black guy who was trying to frame his white ex-girlfriend as punishment for dumping him. (And HE turned out to be the same asshole who created a false narrative about Dylan Roof’s motivation for murdering innocent black church goers–he wrote an article about a fictitious cousin of Roof’s who said that Roof lost his white girlfriend to a black guy, and that’s what sent him off the rails.)

  29. Once again, the Jewish media calls for white man’s blood after the brown man strikes. The only missing piece from this jigsaw is the long stick used to jab Rashida Tlaib into motion from behind.

  30. @Bill P
    It's time to start imprisoning people who incite others for conspiracy. Shouldn't matter whether or not they are on the govt. payroll.

    No.

    Freedom of speech and freedom of the press should not be curtailed.

    As an aside, I’m pretty sure that freedom of the press is not meant to be available only to officially government accredited “members of the press” but to anyone with the ability to share their written words.

  31. @Anonymous
    Incidentally, Al-Qaeda, which you don't really hear about anymore, means "The Base" or "The Database" in Arabic. Conspiracy theorists have long maintained that the name referred to the CIA's database of Muslim CIA assets going back to the US backed Afghan Mujahideen fighters during the Afghan-Soviet War.

    "The Base" is an unusual name for a Neo-Nazi group. One wonders if it's a reference to the FBI's database of neo-Nazi types and was formed as a means for the FBI to entrap them.

    “The Base” is an unusual name for a Neo-Nazi group. One wonders if it’s a reference to the FBI’s database of neo-Nazi types and was formed as a means for the FBI to entrap them.

    Nobody’s ever heard of this group and then all of a sudden, the fibbies are making a bunch of busts right before a narrative needs to be established in Richmond. There’s no need to wonder if this is an FBI “glown***er” operation.

    My guess: this “group” was probably mostly a Telegram chat where FBI informants got guys to respond with thumbs-up emojis to proposals of violence.

    • Replies: @Ash Williams

    There’s no need to wonder if this is an FBI “glown***er” operation.
     
    ding ding ding we have a winn-ah!
  32. You can find this guy’s youtube clips. Some band clips and football games when he was in high school, then some jihadi stuff as he gets older and searches for his roots, I guess.

    But nothing else really when you google him now but this story, with pictures of the 3 white kid losers . Steve, nice sleuthing but I think the wife in the headscarf has been buried. Him mostly, too.

    The Brooklyn blacks who play knockout with the local hasids also don’t get their pictures in the paper. But I doubt the FBI has much to do with them.

  33. @Anonymous
    Incidentally, Al-Qaeda, which you don't really hear about anymore, means "The Base" or "The Database" in Arabic. Conspiracy theorists have long maintained that the name referred to the CIA's database of Muslim CIA assets going back to the US backed Afghan Mujahideen fighters during the Afghan-Soviet War.

    "The Base" is an unusual name for a Neo-Nazi group. One wonders if it's a reference to the FBI's database of neo-Nazi types and was formed as a means for the FBI to entrap them.

    So Muslim youths encouraged by the FBI to vandalize a synagogue are now neo-Nazis? Yeah, and Jeffrey Epstein killed himself.

  34. @Anon
    OT

    The new Dr. Dolittle movie is being panned as "one of the worst movies in years ... a disaster" (The Atlantic).

    The movie was written and directed by Stephen Gaghan, who wrote and directed the excellent low-key George Clooney geopolitical thriller Syriana, one of Clooney's patented "every-other" small movies. Not the director you'd put in charge of a kids movie, so whoever made that ballsy call is probably out of a job.

    But Gaghan finished the movie and submitted it. The studio hated it and hired two other directors to add needed "conputer generated animals and silly laughs."

    And it's getting about minus 1 million on the tomato meter even after this emergency refurb.

    I really loved Dr. Dolittle books as a kid. I hated Eddie Murphy's movie versions.

    It occurred to me ... why not release the original Stephen Gaghan version on the side, in limited theaters, a "director's cut," maybe even let him recut it himself to make it even more of a "disaster" for kids.

    Maybe his version really did suck even worse. But at this point what does the studio have to lose? Some people may see both versions, some people put off by the original reviews or interested in Hollywood inside-baseball and sausage making may see it who would not have gone to the original. The studio could troll movie reviews by marketing the Gaghan version as, "See, it sucks, we were right," to provoke the critics to come back with, "No, it's genius, death to the studios!"

    I'd kind of hope that Gaghan made a version of Dr. Dolittle that adults who loved but outgrew the books might like. And if that's not what he made, maybe someone else should try it.

    I planned to Doolittle today because I like Robert F. Downney, JR, but every review I read said that was completely incoherent. They spent $175 million making it.

  35. Anonymous[263] • Disclaimer says:

    All race power organizations are infiltrated by the feds. No exceptions.

    The leaders of these groups are all fedgov operatives. Each leader either plays ball … or else. Richard Spencer is an obvious example.

    But it’s all colors all stripes. No exceptions La Raza Black Panthers etc. The feds know that race-based rabble rousing is a proven path to political power therefore all attempts will be controlled.

  36. @miss marple
    Come on. Yousef knows he's faking it while trying to trick white people into joining. The trouble is that the FBI seems genuinely confused.

    Next the FBI will be retconning 9-11 into an attack done by white supremacists.

  37. The Feds aren’t concerned about human trafficking, pedophilia, massive financial scams, etc. Instead they dedicate their resources to policing “hate groups” and trying to set up Trump.

    At this point, the FBI is the American secret police. Their purpose is not to catch true criminals like Epstein. It’s to crack down on dissidents and political opposition.

    • Replies: @Twodees Partain
    "At this point, the FBI is the American secret police. "

    The same thing could have been said in 1935. That's what the FBI has always been, using the interstate crime fighters cloak to cover their actual mission.
  38. @Mr McKenna
    The 'optics' are unbelievably bad. I couldn't believe it when I learned of the date. It would surprise few of us if the coincidence were deliberate, on the part of fifth columnists from the Tribe, the Government, or both. OTOH right-wing gun nuts include a fair number of freaks too. They'll be the ones featured in the media reports, whatever happens. I'm not looking forward to this.

    I couldn’t believe it when I learned of the date

    In addition to Dr. X’s comment above that this is a yearly tradition (“Virginia gun rights groups have a legislative lobbying day every year at the beginning of the session”), I’d also point out:

    The Commonwealth of Virginia (and several other Southern states) never recognized the “Martin Luther King federal holiday” by that name, officially designating the mandatory federal holiday as “Lee–Jackson Day,” upgrading previous a state holiday that honored Generals Lee and Stonewall Jackson, both of Virginia, both with birthdays around this time of January.

    So “MLK Day” itself is a form of narrative control; why not “Lee–Jackson Day”?

    After all, it is the people of Virginia peaceably assembling to ‘lobby’ the Virginia government, where it has always been Lee–Jackson Day; it is not a random collection of anywhere-Americans lobbying the entire United States (the Congress of which passed, to much now-forgotten opposition, the mandatory Martin Luther Kind Jr. holiday in the 1980s, before the extent of his incredibly widespread plagiarism and sexual impropriety were revealed, though his communist connections were known since the late 1950s).

    • Replies: @Mr McKenna
    All that being granted, it's foolish in a political sense to give easy ammo to your opposition, and that's what these people are doing. It may make you feel good to score some private point, but if the upshot is a colossal public-relations triumph for your opponents, you've just scored a major 'own goal'.
    , @nebulafox
    I suppose J. Edgar Hoover was bugged by King's hypocrisy, though considering Hoover's own possible bisexual provoclivities, that was a wee bit hypocritical. Stories of a cross-dressing Hoover are a legacy of Soviet black propaganda, and him living with his mother doesn't imply anything: it was the norm for unmarried adults in Old Southern society to live with their parents. But his relationship with Tolson is certainly up for more than platonic interpretation.

    >So “MLK Day” itself is a form of narrative control; why not “Lee–Jackson Day”?

    Because they were rebels that were put down by a government that hadn't lost the Mandate of Heaven. Why would you want to lionize people who tried to destroy the United States? The only rebels to eulogize so far are the ones who created this country.

  39. Hey, what do you know, synagogue vandalism that definitely did not come from within.
    ——–
    What exactly is the terrible disadvantage to ending the FBI? They’re not protecting us now. How can anyone feel good about these diversity hire jokers catching themselves in costume? The FBI should retain the crime lab and be a high-tech high-intellect subordinate helpmate to local law enforcement. Its investigations are laughable, its agents are irresponsible fools and criminals, and its attempt to throw a US presidential election is unforgivable.

    • Replies: @nebulafox
    The United States has enough native born nuts as it is. Do we really need to be importing more from abroad?

    >What exactly is the terrible disadvantage to ending the FBI?

    The Gordian's Knot! Can be applied to a lot of things about the USA these days, from trial lawyers/health insurance to our Middle Eastern Wars.

    The American Sullas and Mariuses and Caesars are out there, waiting...

    > Its investigations are laughable, its agents are irresponsible fools and criminals, and its attempt to throw a US presidential election is unforgivable.

    The FBI is a sprawling bureaucratic apparatus that is notoriously touchy even on Beltway standards. The only boss who ever truly controlled it was the original blackmailer of Presidents, J. Edgar Hoover, now nearly a half-century dead. Ever since then, every President has tried to appoint their men in charge to bring them into line with the White House, and has failed.

    , @Twodees Partain
    The FBI aren't cops, they're spooks with the ability to work domestically. CIA can work in the US as long as the operation is attached to a domestic agency. The FBI is usually the agency of choice.
    , @Kibernetika
    No agency's perfect. Back in the day they did at least fight against foreign agents and friggin' SPIES(tm)! In all honestly, they're now overwhelmed and their effectiveniss is much diminishshed. Selection standards drop, PC stuff increases; you get what you pay for.

    What's the objective? PC crap is almost directly opposed to effectiveness.
  40. I google imaged Yousef O. Barasneh and got nothing. Anyone else have any luck?

  41. I have zero sympathy for militant identitarian politics from any direction, unlike some commentators here, but I’m calling BS on the idea that there’s a serious threat (I never knew graffiti was defined as a “serious threat”) to the stability of the American state here. Why? Because the FBI took care of such things back in the 1960s, using means fair and foul. J. Edgar Hoover took some notes from the playbook of the contemporary West German government, who neutralized their own far-right issue around the same time. It worked. By 1972, the KKK was a shadow of what it had been just a decade earlier in the Deep South, swiss-cheesed by federal agents. Political extremists by nature are prone to paranoia, no matter what the ideological flavoring is, and can be pretty easily goaded into a state of infighting or paralysis with enough agents infiltrating their groups. I’m pretty sure the same was applied to more recent generations of white supremacists, and I strongly doubt that any relative loosening of pressure under 3 years of Trump could make up for 50 years of near constant suppression. The media is giving these guys wayyyyy too much credit, not terribly unlike their Salafist counterparts.

    (Governments less concerned about morality or rule of law-Tsarist Russia-took it a step further and goaded groups like the Bolsheviks into doing dumb, self-defeating, violent things that discredited them in the eyes of the public. Between that and Stolypin’s mix of reform and repressive measures, had the Russian government not blundered into a societal catastrophe it couldn’t afford in 1914, Lenin would be a historical footnote.)

    Now that the media can’t get in a tizzy about radical Islam in order to distract everybody from our parasitical managerial class, they are turning to white supremacism, with not even that much originality. It’s not that either don’t exist or can’t harm people, far from it, but the idea that they pose the most serious threats to the USA is delusional. (If we were talking about Europe, it’d be different, but we’re not Europe.) The real enemies of the Republic and of the American people lie within places like the Beltway, Wall Street, and Silicon Valley. They are Republicans and Democrats, men and women, all races and religions. They are our elites, cultural , economic, and political. What they share in mind is a neo-feudal future for themselves, with the fellow citizens they openly despise as the future immiserated serfs, addled with the fallout of their own proclivities and policies alike. They won’t get it: that, I’m positive of. It’s not in America’s DNA. I just hope that they can be replaced and the USA’s trajectory altered with minimal pain.

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
    'I have zero sympathy for militant identitarian politics from any direction...'

    I have some sympathy for such politics from one direction.

    It strikes me as absurd to think that I wouldn't.

    The end is nigh. Who do you want to win? I didn't start this, but...
  42. @J.Ross
    Hey, what do you know, synagogue vandalism that definitely did not come from within.
    --------
    What exactly is the terrible disadvantage to ending the FBI? They're not protecting us now. How can anyone feel good about these diversity hire jokers catching themselves in costume? The FBI should retain the crime lab and be a high-tech high-intellect subordinate helpmate to local law enforcement. Its investigations are laughable, its agents are irresponsible fools and criminals, and its attempt to throw a US presidential election is unforgivable.

    The United States has enough native born nuts as it is. Do we really need to be importing more from abroad?

    >What exactly is the terrible disadvantage to ending the FBI?

    The Gordian’s Knot! Can be applied to a lot of things about the USA these days, from trial lawyers/health insurance to our Middle Eastern Wars.

    The American Sullas and Mariuses and Caesars are out there, waiting…

    > Its investigations are laughable, its agents are irresponsible fools and criminals, and its attempt to throw a US presidential election is unforgivable.

    The FBI is a sprawling bureaucratic apparatus that is notoriously touchy even on Beltway standards. The only boss who ever truly controlled it was the original blackmailer of Presidents, J. Edgar Hoover, now nearly a half-century dead. Ever since then, every President has tried to appoint their men in charge to bring them into line with the White House, and has failed.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    The American Sullas and Mariuses and Caesars are out there, waiting…
     
    Shhh! Don't give us away. Our sleeper cell is still in deep standby status.

    We have been since President Harding announced his "return to dormancy".
  43. I wonder what an ‘Are You a Cop?’ GWAS would turn up surely some of the variation in going in an LE career is correlated with common variants. Get one, then your extremist group can make people take DNA tests and reject prospective members whose scores are too high.

  44. anon[417] • Disclaimer says:
    @bomag

    It’s time to start imprisoning people who incite others for conspiracy.
     
    That's the biggest rabbit hole around.

    The FBI etc. should dial back their encouragement of violent acts for the sake of an easy arrest. This sort of thing reached a nadir with the plan to give guns to Mexican drug runners, but I suppose it could sink even lower.

    The FBI etc. should dial back their encouragement of violent acts for the sake of an easy arrest. This sort of thing reached a nadir with the plan to give guns to Mexican drug runners, but I suppose it could sink even lower

    “Gunwalker” was the BATF, and it was not just proposed but carried out. Rifles from gun stores in Arizona wound up in the hands of Mexican cartels. People got killed with those guns by Cartel sicaros. That’s right, real people got real dead because of Obama’s “gunwalker” plan.

    The sales happened because the federally licensed gun dealers were essentially ordered to do so. The dealers had reason to know and the Feds for sure knew they were illegal. But because “Big Fed says so” the sales went through. It’s one of the scandals of the Obama time that should have put some Feds into Fed prison for about 10 to 15 years.

    But nothing happened, of course, for…reasons.

    • Agree: Achmed E. Newman
  45. @nebulafox
    The United States has enough native born nuts as it is. Do we really need to be importing more from abroad?

    >What exactly is the terrible disadvantage to ending the FBI?

    The Gordian's Knot! Can be applied to a lot of things about the USA these days, from trial lawyers/health insurance to our Middle Eastern Wars.

    The American Sullas and Mariuses and Caesars are out there, waiting...

    > Its investigations are laughable, its agents are irresponsible fools and criminals, and its attempt to throw a US presidential election is unforgivable.

    The FBI is a sprawling bureaucratic apparatus that is notoriously touchy even on Beltway standards. The only boss who ever truly controlled it was the original blackmailer of Presidents, J. Edgar Hoover, now nearly a half-century dead. Ever since then, every President has tried to appoint their men in charge to bring them into line with the White House, and has failed.

    The American Sullas and Mariuses and Caesars are out there, waiting…

    Shhh! Don’t give us away. Our sleeper cell is still in deep standby status.

    We have been since President Harding announced his “return to dormancy”.

  46. @Bill P
    It's time to start imprisoning people who incite others for conspiracy. Shouldn't matter whether or not they are on the govt. payroll.

    It’s time to start imprisoning people who incite others for conspiracy. Shouldn’t matter whether or not they are on the govt. payroll.

    The Trial of Julius Streicher
    https://avalon.law.yale.edu/imt/04-26-46.asp#streicher
    Justice Robert Jackson, Presiding Judge
    DR. MARX:

    The Prosecution accuse you of having contributed indirectly to mass murders by incitation, and according to the minutes of 10 January 1946, the following charge has been made against you: No government in the world could have undertaken a policy of mass extermination, as it was done here, without having behind it a nation which agreed to it; and you are supposed to have brought that about. What have you to say to this?

    STREICHER:

    To that I have the following to say: Incitation means to bring a person into condition of excitement which causes him to perform an irresponsible act.

    Did the contents of Der Stuermer incite, this is the question?
    Briefly stated, the question must be answered, “What did Der Stuermer write?” . . . [In Der Stuermer’s] 20 years I published enlightening articles dealing with the race, dealing with what the Jews themselves write in the Old Testament, in their history, what they write in the Talmud. I printed excerpts from Jewish historical works, works for instance, written by a Professor Dr. Graetz and by a Jewish scholar, Gutnot.

    In Der Stuermer no editorial appeared written by me or written by anyone of my main co-workers in which I did not include quotations from the ancient history of the Jews, from the Old Testament or from Jewish historical works of recent times.
    It is important, and I must emphasize that I pointed out in all articles, that prominent Jews, leading authors themselves, admitted that which during 20 years as author and public speaker I publicly proclaimed.
    Allow me to add that it is my conviction that the contents of Der Stuermer as such were not incitation. During the whole 20 years I never wrote in this connection, “Burn Jewish houses down; beat them to death.” Never once did such an incitement appear in Der Stuermer.
    Now comes the question: Is there any proof to be furnished that any deed was done from the time Der Stuermer first appeared, a deed of which one can say that it was the result of an incitement . . .[such as] a pogrom? That is a spontaneous deed when sections of the people suddenly rise up and kill other people. During the 20 years no pogrom took place in Germany, during the 20 years, as far as I know, no Jew was killed. No murder took place, of which one could have said, “This is the result of an incitement which was caused by anti-Semitic authors or public speakers.


    Streicher was judged guilty of Incitement and hanged.

    • Replies: @nebulafox
    IMO, it was pretty clear from the get-go that Streicher just wasn't in the same category as Goering (who hated him with the passion of a thousand suns-had Hitler died around 1941 and Goering succeeded him, Streicher wouldn't have been long for the world) or Kaltenbrunner or Speer. Even some of the prosecution realized this, with one commenting that it was ridiculous to call him a conspirator against the peace of Europe because he, well, wasn't: he wasn't a member of the military or the SS or the greater administration of the Reich, he was just a ridiculous perverted Jew-baiter and local thug. Until he was removed from office, he mainly posed a threat to the unlucky denizens of Franconia and no one else.

    But he was so repulsive that the jury had no problem dishing out the death sentence with almost no thought. I recall that one of the people there compared him to a dirty old man who gives trouble in public parks. To be fair, Streicher hardly helped his own case by his court-room theatrics and rantings, so, meh. My suspicion is that if he kept his mouth shut and let his lawyer handle things, he'd have gotten a Spandau sentence. He was too offensive and notorious to simply get off the hook, but he just wasn't in the same league as the other guys who were given death sentences, and in the case of Speer (one can't help but wonder if the opposite dynamic played out with the handsome, cultured, English-speaking Speer), those who didn't.

    , @JimDandy
    Yeah, freedom of speech took a beating after that war was over:

    Robert Brasillach (31 March 1909 – 6 February 1945) was a French author and journalist. Brasillach is best known as the editor of Je suis partout, a nationalist newspaper which came to advocate various fascist movements and supported Jacques Doriot. After the liberation of France in 1944 he was executed following a trial and Charles de Gaulle's express refusal to grant him a pardon. Brasillach was executed for advocating collaborationism, denunciation and incitement to murder. The execution remains a subject of some controversy, because Brasillach was executed for "intellectual crimes", rather than military or political actions.
    , @Bill P
    I think I worded my comment poorly. I didn't mean jail people for political speech, but rather for actively encouraging others to commit crimes as feds routinely do to advance their careers. Why shouldn't FBI agents or informants go to jail when they encourage dim-witted people to commit crimes?
  47. @SolontoCroesus

    It’s time to start imprisoning people who incite others for conspiracy. Shouldn’t matter whether or not they are on the govt. payroll.
     
    The Trial of Julius Streicher
    https://avalon.law.yale.edu/imt/04-26-46.asp#streicher
    Justice Robert Jackson, Presiding Judge
    DR. MARX:

    The Prosecution accuse you of having contributed indirectly to mass murders by incitation, and according to the minutes of 10 January 1946, the following charge has been made against you: No government in the world could have undertaken a policy of mass extermination, as it was done here, without having behind it a nation which agreed to it; and you are supposed to have brought that about. What have you to say to this?
     
    STREICHER:

    To that I have the following to say: Incitation means to bring a person into condition of excitement which causes him to perform an irresponsible act.

    Did the contents of Der Stuermer incite, this is the question?
    Briefly stated, the question must be answered, "What did Der Stuermer write?" . . . [In Der Stuermer's] 20 years I published enlightening articles dealing with the race, dealing with what the Jews themselves write in the Old Testament, in their history, what they write in the Talmud. I printed excerpts from Jewish historical works, works for instance, written by a Professor Dr. Graetz and by a Jewish scholar, Gutnot.

    In Der Stuermer no editorial appeared written by me or written by anyone of my main co-workers in which I did not include quotations from the ancient history of the Jews, from the Old Testament or from Jewish historical works of recent times.
    It is important, and I must emphasize that I pointed out in all articles, that prominent Jews, leading authors themselves, admitted that which during 20 years as author and public speaker I publicly proclaimed.
    Allow me to add that it is my conviction that the contents of Der Stuermer as such were not incitation. During the whole 20 years I never wrote in this connection, "Burn Jewish houses down; beat them to death." Never once did such an incitement appear in Der Stuermer.
    Now comes the question: Is there any proof to be furnished that any deed was done from the time Der Stuermer first appeared, a deed of which one can say that it was the result of an incitement . . .[such as] a pogrom? That is a spontaneous deed when sections of the people suddenly rise up and kill other people. During the 20 years no pogrom took place in Germany, during the 20 years, as far as I know, no Jew was killed. No murder took place, of which one could have said, "This is the result of an incitement which was caused by anti-Semitic authors or public speakers."
     
    --
    Streicher was judged guilty of Incitement and hanged.

    IMO, it was pretty clear from the get-go that Streicher just wasn’t in the same category as Goering (who hated him with the passion of a thousand suns-had Hitler died around 1941 and Goering succeeded him, Streicher wouldn’t have been long for the world) or Kaltenbrunner or Speer. Even some of the prosecution realized this, with one commenting that it was ridiculous to call him a conspirator against the peace of Europe because he, well, wasn’t: he wasn’t a member of the military or the SS or the greater administration of the Reich, he was just a ridiculous perverted Jew-baiter and local thug. Until he was removed from office, he mainly posed a threat to the unlucky denizens of Franconia and no one else.

    But he was so repulsive that the jury had no problem dishing out the death sentence with almost no thought. I recall that one of the people there compared him to a dirty old man who gives trouble in public parks. To be fair, Streicher hardly helped his own case by his court-room theatrics and rantings, so, meh. My suspicion is that if he kept his mouth shut and let his lawyer handle things, he’d have gotten a Spandau sentence. He was too offensive and notorious to simply get off the hook, but he just wasn’t in the same league as the other guys who were given death sentences, and in the case of Speer (one can’t help but wonder if the opposite dynamic played out with the handsome, cultured, English-speaking Speer), those who didn’t.

    • Replies: @SolontoCroesus
    Did Speer sell out to save his hide?
    One historian -- a professor at one of the war colleges, iirc -- observed that "no German general made any mistakes; Hitler done it."
    ---
    I only read the transcript -- Streicher seems merely obnoxious; the Dirty Old Man / pervert quality does not come through. Your point makes sense, given the climate and the prosecution team and their zeal.

    But based strictly on the transcript, and on what I thought were some decently articulated responses and definitions by Streicher, I wondered how many American journalists should be charged with the crime of incitement, and if such a charge, and trial, and sentence to serious prison time might send shockwaves through a journalism industry run amok.

    -- Actually, the writing-grunts should not be Streichered; their network bosses and directors of cable corporations and publishing houses should be.
    , @Yngvar

    But he was so repulsive that the jury had no problem dishing out the death sentence with almost no thought.
     
    There were no jury, just a panel of judges. They would have had to give a reason for their judgment, so somewhere in the Nuremberg Archives there is a file from them fully explaining it.
  48. @miss marple
    Come on. Yousef knows he's faking it while trying to trick white people into joining. The trouble is that the FBI seems genuinely confused.

    – Wow – I will remember I heard it from you first when it comes to fruition in the not-too-distant future! I mean this as a compliment, of course.

    • Thanks: Bubba
  49. @Anon
    OT

    The new Dr. Dolittle movie is being panned as "one of the worst movies in years ... a disaster" (The Atlantic).

    The movie was written and directed by Stephen Gaghan, who wrote and directed the excellent low-key George Clooney geopolitical thriller Syriana, one of Clooney's patented "every-other" small movies. Not the director you'd put in charge of a kids movie, so whoever made that ballsy call is probably out of a job.

    But Gaghan finished the movie and submitted it. The studio hated it and hired two other directors to add needed "conputer generated animals and silly laughs."

    And it's getting about minus 1 million on the tomato meter even after this emergency refurb.

    I really loved Dr. Dolittle books as a kid. I hated Eddie Murphy's movie versions.

    It occurred to me ... why not release the original Stephen Gaghan version on the side, in limited theaters, a "director's cut," maybe even let him recut it himself to make it even more of a "disaster" for kids.

    Maybe his version really did suck even worse. But at this point what does the studio have to lose? Some people may see both versions, some people put off by the original reviews or interested in Hollywood inside-baseball and sausage making may see it who would not have gone to the original. The studio could troll movie reviews by marketing the Gaghan version as, "See, it sucks, we were right," to provoke the critics to come back with, "No, it's genius, death to the studios!"

    I'd kind of hope that Gaghan made a version of Dr. Dolittle that adults who loved but outgrew the books might like. And if that's not what he made, maybe someone else should try it.

    We’re currently being blanketed with ads for Cats – The Yiffing, a movie which seems pretty bad too. There are many young white female dancer cats with large furry human tits and hinted loose morals, along with at least one chunky hip negro cat, and they all seem to just looove catnip. What does all of this mean?

    I wonder what T.S. Eliot would have said.

  50. @Thomas

    “The Base” is an unusual name for a Neo-Nazi group. One wonders if it’s a reference to the FBI’s database of neo-Nazi types and was formed as a means for the FBI to entrap them.
     
    Nobody’s ever heard of this group and then all of a sudden, the fibbies are making a bunch of busts right before a narrative needs to be established in Richmond. There’s no need to wonder if this is an FBI “glown***er” operation.

    My guess: this “group” was probably mostly a Telegram chat where FBI informants got guys to respond with thumbs-up emojis to proposals of violence.

    There’s no need to wonder if this is an FBI “glown***er” operation.

    ding ding ding we have a winn-ah!

  51. @Ano
    When you go to FBI agent-provocateur school to be trained in how to incite others to vandalize synagogue s with the aim of sparking a race war, is one of your classes Goat Sacrifice 101?

    I wonder how many goats Comey and McCabe sacrificised to exonerate Hillary and frame Trump? Does anybody know?

    …is one of your classes Goat Sacrifice 101?

    I wonder how many goats Comey and McCabe sacrificised to exonerate Hillary and frame Trump? Does anybody know?

    Project Isabela: When Slaughtering 250,000 Goats Meant Saving A Species

    The private Charles Darwin Foundation, which set out to exterminate the goat in 1998, announced last July that it had succeeded completely.

    COUNTERINSURGENCY: THE GREAT GOAT WAR

    Eliminating Goats and Donkeys from the Largest of the Galapagos Islands

  52. @SolontoCroesus

    It’s time to start imprisoning people who incite others for conspiracy. Shouldn’t matter whether or not they are on the govt. payroll.
     
    The Trial of Julius Streicher
    https://avalon.law.yale.edu/imt/04-26-46.asp#streicher
    Justice Robert Jackson, Presiding Judge
    DR. MARX:

    The Prosecution accuse you of having contributed indirectly to mass murders by incitation, and according to the minutes of 10 January 1946, the following charge has been made against you: No government in the world could have undertaken a policy of mass extermination, as it was done here, without having behind it a nation which agreed to it; and you are supposed to have brought that about. What have you to say to this?
     
    STREICHER:

    To that I have the following to say: Incitation means to bring a person into condition of excitement which causes him to perform an irresponsible act.

    Did the contents of Der Stuermer incite, this is the question?
    Briefly stated, the question must be answered, "What did Der Stuermer write?" . . . [In Der Stuermer's] 20 years I published enlightening articles dealing with the race, dealing with what the Jews themselves write in the Old Testament, in their history, what they write in the Talmud. I printed excerpts from Jewish historical works, works for instance, written by a Professor Dr. Graetz and by a Jewish scholar, Gutnot.

    In Der Stuermer no editorial appeared written by me or written by anyone of my main co-workers in which I did not include quotations from the ancient history of the Jews, from the Old Testament or from Jewish historical works of recent times.
    It is important, and I must emphasize that I pointed out in all articles, that prominent Jews, leading authors themselves, admitted that which during 20 years as author and public speaker I publicly proclaimed.
    Allow me to add that it is my conviction that the contents of Der Stuermer as such were not incitation. During the whole 20 years I never wrote in this connection, "Burn Jewish houses down; beat them to death." Never once did such an incitement appear in Der Stuermer.
    Now comes the question: Is there any proof to be furnished that any deed was done from the time Der Stuermer first appeared, a deed of which one can say that it was the result of an incitement . . .[such as] a pogrom? That is a spontaneous deed when sections of the people suddenly rise up and kill other people. During the 20 years no pogrom took place in Germany, during the 20 years, as far as I know, no Jew was killed. No murder took place, of which one could have said, "This is the result of an incitement which was caused by anti-Semitic authors or public speakers."
     
    --
    Streicher was judged guilty of Incitement and hanged.

    Yeah, freedom of speech took a beating after that war was over:

    Robert Brasillach (31 March 1909 – 6 February 1945) was a French author and journalist. Brasillach is best known as the editor of Je suis partout, a nationalist newspaper which came to advocate various fascist movements and supported Jacques Doriot. After the liberation of France in 1944 he was executed following a trial and Charles de Gaulle’s express refusal to grant him a pardon. Brasillach was executed for advocating collaborationism, denunciation and incitement to murder. The execution remains a subject of some controversy, because Brasillach was executed for “intellectual crimes”, rather than military or political actions.

    • Replies: @SolontoCroesus
    Gertrude Stein's long and close friendship with overt anti-semite and anti-Masonite (he preferred HardiPlank ta-dum chi) Bernard Faÿ. That friendship brought Stein into contact with Petain, whose Vichy speeches she translated.

    Many claim that Stein worked with Petain to save her hide, and indeed tho French Jews were rounded up, nobody laid a finger on Stein, and the Germans even overlooked her extensive art collection.
    But Stein employed other tactics to stay out of harm's way: she boisterously involved herself with Catholic groups, and hid in plain sight in that camouflage.
    (Alice Toklas was more authentic in her relationship with Catholics: she sought the counsel of a Catholic priest on how to prepare Gertrude for her impending death. Toklas later converted to Catholicism.)

    After the war, Faÿ was arrested and imprisoned for life; Gertrude suffered no repercussions from her associations; she died in 1946 or 1947, leaving her art collection to Alice Toklas.

    Toklas sold a Picasso or two in order to arrange for Faÿ's escape from prison.
    , @John Burns, Gettysburg Partisan
    Wow, and all these years, Tom Brokaw said it was the "good war....."
    , @nebulafox
    A lot more people in Western Europe collaborated with the Germans than postwar encomiums would ever let on. I'm not sure if "pro-German" is the right attitude to describe it, more "not nearly as pro-Anglo American as we'd like to think". Of course, part of this was that you just plain didn't want to get on the wrong side of a totalitarian police state, but most people just wanted to get out of the conflict in one piece, just like any other war.

    The nations that had more significant stratas of the populace take up armed resistance against the Nazis were typically the ones where the Germans treated the locals as subhumans without distinction: Poland and the occupied USSR. A stupid move considering how sympathetic a lot of Poles and Ukrainians would have been to the idea of crushing "Judeo-Bolshevism" like a bug, but Nazi ideology had no time for Slavs as anything more than helot races, so...

  53. I did always think it was funny how many people think uniting Muslims and Nazis against Jews is a winning strategy for taking over the USA.

    • Replies: @nebulafox
    IMO, for conservative, authentic Christianity in the West, the kind actually worthy of real respect that hasn't been debased into a social club oriented around trendy values, from a global perspective there either must be an alliance with Islam against the secularists to preserve God, or an alliance with alienated secularists to preserve the character of a secularized West. The people who could potentially be co-opted into an alliance against global smiley-faced corporate-funded chestless-menism are there... but the choice is stark.

    I am not advocating either course, as an atheist (well, maybe not... I have no idea what I am anymore) who is more sympathetic to the old God than he is to the new one. That's for wiser minds than myself. But it's like the situation the Empire faced after Manzikert. The resources and pull to fight both enemies simultaneously just aren't there anymore. If neither happens, then they'll lose everything, and we'll all have to start thinking about what to preserve first in the new catacombs.

  54. @nebulafox
    IMO, it was pretty clear from the get-go that Streicher just wasn't in the same category as Goering (who hated him with the passion of a thousand suns-had Hitler died around 1941 and Goering succeeded him, Streicher wouldn't have been long for the world) or Kaltenbrunner or Speer. Even some of the prosecution realized this, with one commenting that it was ridiculous to call him a conspirator against the peace of Europe because he, well, wasn't: he wasn't a member of the military or the SS or the greater administration of the Reich, he was just a ridiculous perverted Jew-baiter and local thug. Until he was removed from office, he mainly posed a threat to the unlucky denizens of Franconia and no one else.

    But he was so repulsive that the jury had no problem dishing out the death sentence with almost no thought. I recall that one of the people there compared him to a dirty old man who gives trouble in public parks. To be fair, Streicher hardly helped his own case by his court-room theatrics and rantings, so, meh. My suspicion is that if he kept his mouth shut and let his lawyer handle things, he'd have gotten a Spandau sentence. He was too offensive and notorious to simply get off the hook, but he just wasn't in the same league as the other guys who were given death sentences, and in the case of Speer (one can't help but wonder if the opposite dynamic played out with the handsome, cultured, English-speaking Speer), those who didn't.

    Did Speer sell out to save his hide?
    One historian — a professor at one of the war colleges, iirc — observed that “no German general made any mistakes; Hitler done it.”

    I only read the transcript — Streicher seems merely obnoxious; the Dirty Old Man / pervert quality does not come through. Your point makes sense, given the climate and the prosecution team and their zeal.

    But based strictly on the transcript, and on what I thought were some decently articulated responses and definitions by Streicher, I wondered how many American journalists should be charged with the crime of incitement, and if such a charge, and trial, and sentence to serious prison time might send shockwaves through a journalism industry run amok.

    — Actually, the writing-grunts should not be Streichered; their network bosses and directors of cable corporations and publishing houses should be.

  55. @SFG
    I did always think it was funny how many people think uniting Muslims and Nazis against Jews is a winning strategy for taking over the USA.

    IMO, for conservative, authentic Christianity in the West, the kind actually worthy of real respect that hasn’t been debased into a social club oriented around trendy values, from a global perspective there either must be an alliance with Islam against the secularists to preserve God, or an alliance with alienated secularists to preserve the character of a secularized West. The people who could potentially be co-opted into an alliance against global smiley-faced corporate-funded chestless-menism are there… but the choice is stark.

    I am not advocating either course, as an atheist (well, maybe not… I have no idea what I am anymore) who is more sympathetic to the old God than he is to the new one. That’s for wiser minds than myself. But it’s like the situation the Empire faced after Manzikert. The resources and pull to fight both enemies simultaneously just aren’t there anymore. If neither happens, then they’ll lose everything, and we’ll all have to start thinking about what to preserve first in the new catacombs.

    • Replies: @SFG
    I suspect in this country they'll probably 'round up' the criteria for whiteness and produce a populism that takes in Hispanics and Asians. Lots of them actually want to be American, believe it or not.

    Europe, no clue.
    , @SimpleSong
    Islam seems to be uniquely destructive to civilization, although I don't know the religion well enough to say why. Regardless in AD 600 the most advanced parts of the world included North Africa, Syria, the Levant, and Persia. In contrast the Germanic tribes were described by contemporaries as, frankly, a bunch of dumb primitive brutes. Fast forward 1000 years and you can see the difference between a millennium of Christianity versus a millennium of Islam. The contrast between, say, Italy and Tunisia tells you something, just like the contrast between East and West Germany tells you something. So, I don't think allying with Islam is a good idea unless you want the future of planet Earth to be determined by the eastern civilizations (China etc...)

    Having said that, while I'm pretty confident that Christianity was superior to Islam I am not confident that Christianity was superior to the Greco-Roman pagan religions it replaced. I just simply don't know. (St. Augustine didn't convince me...) Of course I'm talking about the ability of a religion to catalyze a civilization's growth and health. To promote "Civilizationogenesis". The spiritual aspects for the individual I will leave aside. That is between y'all and god.

    So I'm not sure what the future holds. Will 'Christian' become an ethnic/cultural designation rather than a religious one, as happened with Judaism? Will Christianity simply go the way of Zoroastrianism? Will it somehow be reinvigorated?

    The strength and weakness of Christianity has always been its appeal to, and elevation of women. Lately Western Civ has gone off the rails by holding up women's values and virtues as universal values and virtues so if Christianity and the West are to survive they need to find a way to rein that in.
  56. @JimDandy
    Yeah, freedom of speech took a beating after that war was over:

    Robert Brasillach (31 March 1909 – 6 February 1945) was a French author and journalist. Brasillach is best known as the editor of Je suis partout, a nationalist newspaper which came to advocate various fascist movements and supported Jacques Doriot. After the liberation of France in 1944 he was executed following a trial and Charles de Gaulle's express refusal to grant him a pardon. Brasillach was executed for advocating collaborationism, denunciation and incitement to murder. The execution remains a subject of some controversy, because Brasillach was executed for "intellectual crimes", rather than military or political actions.

    Gertrude Stein’s long and close friendship with overt anti-semite and anti-Masonite (he preferred HardiPlank ta-dum chi) Bernard Faÿ. That friendship brought Stein into contact with Petain, whose Vichy speeches she translated.

    Many claim that Stein worked with Petain to save her hide, and indeed tho French Jews were rounded up, nobody laid a finger on Stein, and the Germans even overlooked her extensive art collection.
    But Stein employed other tactics to stay out of harm’s way: she boisterously involved herself with Catholic groups, and hid in plain sight in that camouflage.
    (Alice Toklas was more authentic in her relationship with Catholics: she sought the counsel of a Catholic priest on how to prepare Gertrude for her impending death. Toklas later converted to Catholicism.)

    After the war, Faÿ was arrested and imprisoned for life; Gertrude suffered no repercussions from her associations; she died in 1946 or 1947, leaving her art collection to Alice Toklas.

    Toklas sold a Picasso or two in order to arrange for Faÿ’s escape from prison.

    • Replies: @JimDandy
    Hemingway took a fairly clever position when he sought to defend his old friend, Ezra Pound, calling him "obviously crazy" for his anti-semitic-anti-allies Italian broadcasts, and saying that "he deserves punishment and disgrace but what he really deserves most is ridicule [but] he should not be hanged." It was "impossible" to believe that Pound was sane. In modern parlance he called for Pound to be cancelled, with a healthy dose of gaslighting. But he did help save his neck, and, after Pound was institutionalized, he lobbied, here and there, for his release.

    Today, Pound's thought crimes make him sound like a proto-alt-righter. From The Nation: "You let in the Jew and the Jew rotted your empire, and you yourselves out-Jewed the Jew,” he admonished the British on March 15, 1942 and warned of the white race “going toward total extinction.”

    When he was seen in public after spending years in the nuthouse, reporters asked him when he got out. He told them, "I never was. When I left the hospital I was still in America, and all America is an insane asylum."

  57. @a reader

    The Base, a neo-Nazi, racially motivated extremist group
     
    All iSteve readers are aware that The Base is alqaeida in Arabic.

    The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel may be the most leftist mainstream newspaper in the country. They’re basically a propaganda arm of the Democratic Party.

    I’m not being the least bit hyperbolic.

  58. @Hail

    arrested Friday as part of a nationwide investigation into The Base, a neo-Nazi, racially motivated extremist group
     
    Narrative control before the Jan. 20th Richmond rally.

    As David mentions above, two days ago they arrested a Canadian visa overstayer along with two others who were sharing a house with him (the crime of illegally harboring an alien. Incredible how strict they are on enforcing the letter of immigration law! in...some cases), all right-wingers who, their surveillance of their communications revealed, were thinking about showing up at the Richmond rally on Jan. 20.

    "Three Neonazis Arrested, Heading for Richmond!" "More Neonazis arrested ahead of Richmond rally." These are about the perfect headlines for narrative control, both pre- and post-event.

    (I question whether there is anyone, anywhere, who unironically identifies as a 'Neonazi,' but it sure doesn't stop the MSM and SPLC/ADL and others from using it.)

    Matt Bracken speaking to Henrik Palmgren on the case (Jan. 17) [10:20]:


    This thing that happened today [Jan. 16], with them arresting, quote-unquote, "Neo-Nazis"? They're setting the stage. They're putting up the background template.

    All they did for any of these guys was get one guy on immigration. He crossed the border from Canada to the USA. There's nothing like, They had Ricin, or they had a bomb they were making, or they bought some fuel. Nothing!

    But they arrested three guys. Why did they arrest those three guys: They arrested them because they're setting a narrative. They're basically putting up the subliminal background music, that the really, really bad white racists, nationalists, are coming to Richmond, and we gotta stop them.

    So no matter what happens on Monday in Richmond, [...] Believe me, it's going to be blamed on the Second Amendment, and it'll be used to portray supporters of the Second Amendment as dangerous, redneck, white racist yahoos.
     

    Given that this has been circulated already, anyone who stills shows up at the rally in Richmond can be considered an agent provocateur. I wasn’t present at Charlottesville and will be far from Richmond on Monday.

  59. @gregor
    The Feds aren't concerned about human trafficking, pedophilia, massive financial scams, etc. Instead they dedicate their resources to policing "hate groups" and trying to set up Trump.

    At this point, the FBI is the American secret police. Their purpose is not to catch true criminals like Epstein. It's to crack down on dissidents and political opposition.

    “At this point, the FBI is the American secret police. ”

    The same thing could have been said in 1935. That’s what the FBI has always been, using the interstate crime fighters cloak to cover their actual mission.

    • Agree: Autochthon, dfordoom
  60. @JimDandy
    Yeah, freedom of speech took a beating after that war was over:

    Robert Brasillach (31 March 1909 – 6 February 1945) was a French author and journalist. Brasillach is best known as the editor of Je suis partout, a nationalist newspaper which came to advocate various fascist movements and supported Jacques Doriot. After the liberation of France in 1944 he was executed following a trial and Charles de Gaulle's express refusal to grant him a pardon. Brasillach was executed for advocating collaborationism, denunciation and incitement to murder. The execution remains a subject of some controversy, because Brasillach was executed for "intellectual crimes", rather than military or political actions.

    Wow, and all these years, Tom Brokaw said it was the “good war…..”

  61. @J.Ross
    Hey, what do you know, synagogue vandalism that definitely did not come from within.
    --------
    What exactly is the terrible disadvantage to ending the FBI? They're not protecting us now. How can anyone feel good about these diversity hire jokers catching themselves in costume? The FBI should retain the crime lab and be a high-tech high-intellect subordinate helpmate to local law enforcement. Its investigations are laughable, its agents are irresponsible fools and criminals, and its attempt to throw a US presidential election is unforgivable.

    The FBI aren’t cops, they’re spooks with the ability to work domestically. CIA can work in the US as long as the operation is attached to a domestic agency. The FBI is usually the agency of choice.

  62. Richmond looks more and more like you’ve got 3 or 4 different groups of ABC boys looking to cause problems.

    • Replies: @The Wild Geese Howard
    Richmond is an enormous trap being set for the 2A folks and they appear as though they are marching straight into it.
    , @Ano
    I completely agree. It's a trap and has the potential to be far worse than Charlottesville.
  63. @Hail

    I couldn’t believe it when I learned of the date
     
    In addition to Dr. X's comment above that this is a yearly tradition ("Virginia gun rights groups have a legislative lobbying day every year at the beginning of the session"), I'd also point out:

    The Commonwealth of Virginia (and several other Southern states) never recognized the "Martin Luther King federal holiday" by that name, officially designating the mandatory federal holiday as "Lee–Jackson Day," upgrading previous a state holiday that honored Generals Lee and Stonewall Jackson, both of Virginia, both with birthdays around this time of January.

    So "MLK Day" itself is a form of narrative control; why not "Lee–Jackson Day"?

    After all, it is the people of Virginia peaceably assembling to 'lobby' the Virginia government, where it has always been Lee–Jackson Day; it is not a random collection of anywhere-Americans lobbying the entire United States (the Congress of which passed, to much now-forgotten opposition, the mandatory Martin Luther Kind Jr. holiday in the 1980s, before the extent of his incredibly widespread plagiarism and sexual impropriety were revealed, though his communist connections were known since the late 1950s).

    All that being granted, it’s foolish in a political sense to give easy ammo to your opposition, and that’s what these people are doing. It may make you feel good to score some private point, but if the upshot is a colossal public-relations triumph for your opponents, you’ve just scored a major ‘own goal’.

  64. @SolontoCroesus
    Gertrude Stein's long and close friendship with overt anti-semite and anti-Masonite (he preferred HardiPlank ta-dum chi) Bernard Faÿ. That friendship brought Stein into contact with Petain, whose Vichy speeches she translated.

    Many claim that Stein worked with Petain to save her hide, and indeed tho French Jews were rounded up, nobody laid a finger on Stein, and the Germans even overlooked her extensive art collection.
    But Stein employed other tactics to stay out of harm's way: she boisterously involved herself with Catholic groups, and hid in plain sight in that camouflage.
    (Alice Toklas was more authentic in her relationship with Catholics: she sought the counsel of a Catholic priest on how to prepare Gertrude for her impending death. Toklas later converted to Catholicism.)

    After the war, Faÿ was arrested and imprisoned for life; Gertrude suffered no repercussions from her associations; she died in 1946 or 1947, leaving her art collection to Alice Toklas.

    Toklas sold a Picasso or two in order to arrange for Faÿ's escape from prison.

    Hemingway took a fairly clever position when he sought to defend his old friend, Ezra Pound, calling him “obviously crazy” for his anti-semitic-anti-allies Italian broadcasts, and saying that “he deserves punishment and disgrace but what he really deserves most is ridicule [but] he should not be hanged.” It was “impossible” to believe that Pound was sane. In modern parlance he called for Pound to be cancelled, with a healthy dose of gaslighting. But he did help save his neck, and, after Pound was institutionalized, he lobbied, here and there, for his release.

    Today, Pound’s thought crimes make him sound like a proto-alt-righter. From The Nation: “You let in the Jew and the Jew rotted your empire, and you yourselves out-Jewed the Jew,” he admonished the British on March 15, 1942 and warned of the white race “going toward total extinction.”

    When he was seen in public after spending years in the nuthouse, reporters asked him when he got out. He told them, “I never was. When I left the hospital I was still in America, and all America is an insane asylum.”

    • Replies: @Kibernetika
    And Pound was imprisoned in 1945 with Emmet Till's father, who was convicted and hanged for the rape and murder of Italian civilians. And you're right, Pound was off his rocker (but a clever wordsmith).
  65. @JimDandy
    Yeah, freedom of speech took a beating after that war was over:

    Robert Brasillach (31 March 1909 – 6 February 1945) was a French author and journalist. Brasillach is best known as the editor of Je suis partout, a nationalist newspaper which came to advocate various fascist movements and supported Jacques Doriot. After the liberation of France in 1944 he was executed following a trial and Charles de Gaulle's express refusal to grant him a pardon. Brasillach was executed for advocating collaborationism, denunciation and incitement to murder. The execution remains a subject of some controversy, because Brasillach was executed for "intellectual crimes", rather than military or political actions.

    A lot more people in Western Europe collaborated with the Germans than postwar encomiums would ever let on. I’m not sure if “pro-German” is the right attitude to describe it, more “not nearly as pro-Anglo American as we’d like to think”. Of course, part of this was that you just plain didn’t want to get on the wrong side of a totalitarian police state, but most people just wanted to get out of the conflict in one piece, just like any other war.

    The nations that had more significant stratas of the populace take up armed resistance against the Nazis were typically the ones where the Germans treated the locals as subhumans without distinction: Poland and the occupied USSR. A stupid move considering how sympathetic a lot of Poles and Ukrainians would have been to the idea of crushing “Judeo-Bolshevism” like a bug, but Nazi ideology had no time for Slavs as anything more than helot races, so…

    • Replies: @JimDandy
    Yeah, I know that Brassilach was less a collaborator than a part of some pre-war border-transcending movement that romanticized the joining of Germany and France as some kind of reunion, or something. The "collaborator" narrative is incomplete, at the very least.
  66. @J.Ross
    Hey, what do you know, synagogue vandalism that definitely did not come from within.
    --------
    What exactly is the terrible disadvantage to ending the FBI? They're not protecting us now. How can anyone feel good about these diversity hire jokers catching themselves in costume? The FBI should retain the crime lab and be a high-tech high-intellect subordinate helpmate to local law enforcement. Its investigations are laughable, its agents are irresponsible fools and criminals, and its attempt to throw a US presidential election is unforgivable.

    No agency’s perfect. Back in the day they did at least fight against foreign agents and friggin’ SPIES(tm)! In all honestly, they’re now overwhelmed and their effectiveniss is much diminishshed. Selection standards drop, PC stuff increases; you get what you pay for.

    What’s the objective? PC crap is almost directly opposed to effectiveness.

    • Replies: @J.Ross
    They let Alger Hiss walk out the door because they are nothing.
  67. @Hail

    I couldn’t believe it when I learned of the date
     
    In addition to Dr. X's comment above that this is a yearly tradition ("Virginia gun rights groups have a legislative lobbying day every year at the beginning of the session"), I'd also point out:

    The Commonwealth of Virginia (and several other Southern states) never recognized the "Martin Luther King federal holiday" by that name, officially designating the mandatory federal holiday as "Lee–Jackson Day," upgrading previous a state holiday that honored Generals Lee and Stonewall Jackson, both of Virginia, both with birthdays around this time of January.

    So "MLK Day" itself is a form of narrative control; why not "Lee–Jackson Day"?

    After all, it is the people of Virginia peaceably assembling to 'lobby' the Virginia government, where it has always been Lee–Jackson Day; it is not a random collection of anywhere-Americans lobbying the entire United States (the Congress of which passed, to much now-forgotten opposition, the mandatory Martin Luther Kind Jr. holiday in the 1980s, before the extent of his incredibly widespread plagiarism and sexual impropriety were revealed, though his communist connections were known since the late 1950s).

    I suppose J. Edgar Hoover was bugged by King’s hypocrisy, though considering Hoover’s own possible bisexual provoclivities, that was a wee bit hypocritical. Stories of a cross-dressing Hoover are a legacy of Soviet black propaganda, and him living with his mother doesn’t imply anything: it was the norm for unmarried adults in Old Southern society to live with their parents. But his relationship with Tolson is certainly up for more than platonic interpretation.

    >So “MLK Day” itself is a form of narrative control; why not “Lee–Jackson Day”?

    Because they were rebels that were put down by a government that hadn’t lost the Mandate of Heaven. Why would you want to lionize people who tried to destroy the United States? The only rebels to eulogize so far are the ones who created this country.

  68. @Kibernetika
    No agency's perfect. Back in the day they did at least fight against foreign agents and friggin' SPIES(tm)! In all honestly, they're now overwhelmed and their effectiveniss is much diminishshed. Selection standards drop, PC stuff increases; you get what you pay for.

    What's the objective? PC crap is almost directly opposed to effectiveness.

    They let Alger Hiss walk out the door because they are nothing.

  69. @JimDandy
    Hemingway took a fairly clever position when he sought to defend his old friend, Ezra Pound, calling him "obviously crazy" for his anti-semitic-anti-allies Italian broadcasts, and saying that "he deserves punishment and disgrace but what he really deserves most is ridicule [but] he should not be hanged." It was "impossible" to believe that Pound was sane. In modern parlance he called for Pound to be cancelled, with a healthy dose of gaslighting. But he did help save his neck, and, after Pound was institutionalized, he lobbied, here and there, for his release.

    Today, Pound's thought crimes make him sound like a proto-alt-righter. From The Nation: "You let in the Jew and the Jew rotted your empire, and you yourselves out-Jewed the Jew,” he admonished the British on March 15, 1942 and warned of the white race “going toward total extinction.”

    When he was seen in public after spending years in the nuthouse, reporters asked him when he got out. He told them, "I never was. When I left the hospital I was still in America, and all America is an insane asylum."

    And Pound was imprisoned in 1945 with Emmet Till’s father, who was convicted and hanged for the rape and murder of Italian civilians. And you’re right, Pound was off his rocker (but a clever wordsmith).

    • Replies: @JimDandy
    Till was hung yesterday
    for murder and rape with trimmings



    I don't know how off his rocker he actually was. I just know that's the approach his friends used to help save his life.
  70. @nebulafox
    IMO, for conservative, authentic Christianity in the West, the kind actually worthy of real respect that hasn't been debased into a social club oriented around trendy values, from a global perspective there either must be an alliance with Islam against the secularists to preserve God, or an alliance with alienated secularists to preserve the character of a secularized West. The people who could potentially be co-opted into an alliance against global smiley-faced corporate-funded chestless-menism are there... but the choice is stark.

    I am not advocating either course, as an atheist (well, maybe not... I have no idea what I am anymore) who is more sympathetic to the old God than he is to the new one. That's for wiser minds than myself. But it's like the situation the Empire faced after Manzikert. The resources and pull to fight both enemies simultaneously just aren't there anymore. If neither happens, then they'll lose everything, and we'll all have to start thinking about what to preserve first in the new catacombs.

    I suspect in this country they’ll probably ’round up’ the criteria for whiteness and produce a populism that takes in Hispanics and Asians. Lots of them actually want to be American, believe it or not.

    Europe, no clue.

  71. @Jack Henson
    Richmond looks more and more like you've got 3 or 4 different groups of ABC boys looking to cause problems.

    Richmond is an enormous trap being set for the 2A folks and they appear as though they are marching straight into it.

    • Replies: @Desiderius
    Different marchers, different media, different government.

    Lee statues aren’t God-given rights.

    We’ll see.

  72. @nebulafox
    IMO, for conservative, authentic Christianity in the West, the kind actually worthy of real respect that hasn't been debased into a social club oriented around trendy values, from a global perspective there either must be an alliance with Islam against the secularists to preserve God, or an alliance with alienated secularists to preserve the character of a secularized West. The people who could potentially be co-opted into an alliance against global smiley-faced corporate-funded chestless-menism are there... but the choice is stark.

    I am not advocating either course, as an atheist (well, maybe not... I have no idea what I am anymore) who is more sympathetic to the old God than he is to the new one. That's for wiser minds than myself. But it's like the situation the Empire faced after Manzikert. The resources and pull to fight both enemies simultaneously just aren't there anymore. If neither happens, then they'll lose everything, and we'll all have to start thinking about what to preserve first in the new catacombs.

    Islam seems to be uniquely destructive to civilization, although I don’t know the religion well enough to say why. Regardless in AD 600 the most advanced parts of the world included North Africa, Syria, the Levant, and Persia. In contrast the Germanic tribes were described by contemporaries as, frankly, a bunch of dumb primitive brutes. Fast forward 1000 years and you can see the difference between a millennium of Christianity versus a millennium of Islam. The contrast between, say, Italy and Tunisia tells you something, just like the contrast between East and West Germany tells you something. So, I don’t think allying with Islam is a good idea unless you want the future of planet Earth to be determined by the eastern civilizations (China etc…)

    Having said that, while I’m pretty confident that Christianity was superior to Islam I am not confident that Christianity was superior to the Greco-Roman pagan religions it replaced. I just simply don’t know. (St. Augustine didn’t convince me…) Of course I’m talking about the ability of a religion to catalyze a civilization’s growth and health. To promote “Civilizationogenesis”. The spiritual aspects for the individual I will leave aside. That is between y’all and god.

    So I’m not sure what the future holds. Will ‘Christian’ become an ethnic/cultural designation rather than a religious one, as happened with Judaism? Will Christianity simply go the way of Zoroastrianism? Will it somehow be reinvigorated?

    The strength and weakness of Christianity has always been its appeal to, and elevation of women. Lately Western Civ has gone off the rails by holding up women’s values and virtues as universal values and virtues so if Christianity and the West are to survive they need to find a way to rein that in.

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
    'Islam seems to be uniquely destructive to civilization...'

    God, that's annoying. All you're doing is parading your own ignorance and lack of historical perspective.

    If you'd been in, say, seventh century Spain, and come back three hundred years later, it'd be a pretty open and shut case as to which religion was beneficial to civilization and which was destructive.

    , @SFG
    Islam was ahead of Christianity up until al-Ghazali. The wrong group wins the ear of the king (caliph, whatever) and boom, you're downhill for the next few centuries.

    It's not even clear what the right choice is sometimes. Vladimir the Great picked the more advanced (at the time) Eastern Roman (Orthodox) Christianity over the Western European (Catholic) variety, but that wound up cutting Russia off from the Renaissance. Right choice at the time (Western Europe was a lot less advanced than Byzantium back then), wrong choice 500 years later.

    , @nebulafox
    Religion is ultimately subordinate to the prevailing culture in my view, not the other way around, and Islam as a faith didn't even consolidate until well after the conquests. The early Umayyad caliphate had a strong ethnic Arab character to it, and backlash against that is part of why orthodox Islam strongly de-emphasizes race. But conversely, you could argue that many of the achievements of Islamic civilization during the Middle Ages were the result of converted Persians bringing their Zoroastrian traditions with them.

    IMO, 1000 years is a very long time. The issues that Islamic civilizations face today are not the result of anything that happened in the Middle Ages: as late as the 1600s, the Ottomans could hold their own against Europe just fine. The reason they are characterized today by intolerance and backwardness is less religious doctrine (which for the overwhelming majority of lay believers-in any faith-is a matter of ex post facto rationalization) than historical events that happened to the cultures in question on the way. A lot of the conservative wave you see in the Islamic World has its origins in 1979: it was uncommon for women in lots of Islamic countries to wear hijabs before the 80s, whereas nowadays, they are nearly omnipresent.

    Put another way: had you asked anybody around 1900 what the world's most aggressive religion was, I don't think Islam would have been the answer! If you'd asked the question around 1600, it would have been different again. History is a stochastic game, not a linear one, to the incomprehension of America's invariably Whiggish elites.

    (That's not to say I don't think there's something unique to Western civilization that made it ultimately triumph above all others, as I mentioned above: I believe West is best. But it took a long time for that to play out.)

    >Having said that, while I’m pretty confident that Christianity was superior to Islam I am not confident that Christianity was superior to the Greco-Roman pagan religions it replaced. I just simply don’t know. (St. Augustine didn’t convince me…) Of course I’m talking about the ability of a religion to catalyze a civilization’s growth and health. To promote “Civilizationogenesis”. The spiritual aspects for the individual I will leave aside. That is between y’all and god.

    I take Gibbon's view: Christianity did ease along the Roman state's decline, but it wasn't a primary cause of it (I mean, look at Byzantium), and it also mitigated the consequences of it. Certainly the increasing religious feuds at a time where Rome needed unity weren't a good idea. But if the Roman state collapsed while retaining pagan values-and I think it would have either way-the results would have been even uglier than they were in real life.

    For me, all citizens must unite in support of the United States. What they do with their consciences beyond that is up to them. Suum cuique! And the Constitution prescribes freedom of religion, not freedom from it.

  73. @SimpleSong
    Islam seems to be uniquely destructive to civilization, although I don't know the religion well enough to say why. Regardless in AD 600 the most advanced parts of the world included North Africa, Syria, the Levant, and Persia. In contrast the Germanic tribes were described by contemporaries as, frankly, a bunch of dumb primitive brutes. Fast forward 1000 years and you can see the difference between a millennium of Christianity versus a millennium of Islam. The contrast between, say, Italy and Tunisia tells you something, just like the contrast between East and West Germany tells you something. So, I don't think allying with Islam is a good idea unless you want the future of planet Earth to be determined by the eastern civilizations (China etc...)

    Having said that, while I'm pretty confident that Christianity was superior to Islam I am not confident that Christianity was superior to the Greco-Roman pagan religions it replaced. I just simply don't know. (St. Augustine didn't convince me...) Of course I'm talking about the ability of a religion to catalyze a civilization's growth and health. To promote "Civilizationogenesis". The spiritual aspects for the individual I will leave aside. That is between y'all and god.

    So I'm not sure what the future holds. Will 'Christian' become an ethnic/cultural designation rather than a religious one, as happened with Judaism? Will Christianity simply go the way of Zoroastrianism? Will it somehow be reinvigorated?

    The strength and weakness of Christianity has always been its appeal to, and elevation of women. Lately Western Civ has gone off the rails by holding up women's values and virtues as universal values and virtues so if Christianity and the West are to survive they need to find a way to rein that in.

    ‘Islam seems to be uniquely destructive to civilization…’

    God, that’s annoying. All you’re doing is parading your own ignorance and lack of historical perspective.

    If you’d been in, say, seventh century Spain, and come back three hundred years later, it’d be a pretty open and shut case as to which religion was beneficial to civilization and which was destructive.

    • Disagree: The Wild Geese Howard
    • Replies: @SimpleSong
    One counterexample does not an argument make. The Visigoths who overran Spain were about as sophisticated as a modern motorcycle gang and improving upon their rule was no great feat. Even after three hundred years the best that can be said is that Spain had recovered to something comparable to its highest level of development during the Roman era.

    You would agree that during this period the caliphs used a relatively light touch in terms of religion on the general population, no? So why is it that the greatest 'success' of the Islamic world came in a place where they pushed their religion the least? Doesn't that sorta undermine the idea that it was Islam that improved Spain?

    I mean if we're gonna play that game how about we compare the accomplishments of Spain during the 300 years post Reconquista versus 300 years pre Reconquista? Because that doesn't really support your thesis.

    How about the ratio of inventions made in Syria and Germany in AD 50 versus AD 1500? Saying Germany was a center of technology would have gotten you laughed out of the room in AD 50 but lots of stuff was invented in Roman Syria (e.g. glassblowing). Today the situation is reversed.

    Why do you see such a stark difference between Spain and Morocco, Italy and Tunisia, Serbia/Croatia and Albania? These places have similar geographies and histories.

    Why was Persia one of the great civilizations of the world, and now it struggles to assert itself as a regional power? There may be an HBD element, but since there are Persian Fields medalists running around I don't think that's the whole story.

    It takes a long, long time for ideologies to make their mark, particularly in the pre-modern world. And since Islam had a relatively light touch in most places (at least initially--later on it was a different story) three hundred years was not a long time.
  74. @Jack Henson
    Richmond looks more and more like you've got 3 or 4 different groups of ABC boys looking to cause problems.

    I completely agree. It’s a trap and has the potential to be far worse than Charlottesville.

  75. @nebulafox
    A lot more people in Western Europe collaborated with the Germans than postwar encomiums would ever let on. I'm not sure if "pro-German" is the right attitude to describe it, more "not nearly as pro-Anglo American as we'd like to think". Of course, part of this was that you just plain didn't want to get on the wrong side of a totalitarian police state, but most people just wanted to get out of the conflict in one piece, just like any other war.

    The nations that had more significant stratas of the populace take up armed resistance against the Nazis were typically the ones where the Germans treated the locals as subhumans without distinction: Poland and the occupied USSR. A stupid move considering how sympathetic a lot of Poles and Ukrainians would have been to the idea of crushing "Judeo-Bolshevism" like a bug, but Nazi ideology had no time for Slavs as anything more than helot races, so...

    Yeah, I know that Brassilach was less a collaborator than a part of some pre-war border-transcending movement that romanticized the joining of Germany and France as some kind of reunion, or something. The “collaborator” narrative is incomplete, at the very least.

  76. The Base’s goal of accelerating the collapse of the federal government, inciting a race war and establishing a white ethnostate, according to one agent’s affidavit.

    …as opposed to the New York Times, Harvard University, the federal judiciary, every large corporation, and, oh yeah, the Federal Bureau of Investigation itself, who all have the more respectable goal of accelerating the collapse of federal and states’ governments, inciting a racial caste system, and establishing an anti-white ethnostate (i.e., everyone gets to live and prosper there except white people).

    Seems legit.

  77. @SimpleSong
    Islam seems to be uniquely destructive to civilization, although I don't know the religion well enough to say why. Regardless in AD 600 the most advanced parts of the world included North Africa, Syria, the Levant, and Persia. In contrast the Germanic tribes were described by contemporaries as, frankly, a bunch of dumb primitive brutes. Fast forward 1000 years and you can see the difference between a millennium of Christianity versus a millennium of Islam. The contrast between, say, Italy and Tunisia tells you something, just like the contrast between East and West Germany tells you something. So, I don't think allying with Islam is a good idea unless you want the future of planet Earth to be determined by the eastern civilizations (China etc...)

    Having said that, while I'm pretty confident that Christianity was superior to Islam I am not confident that Christianity was superior to the Greco-Roman pagan religions it replaced. I just simply don't know. (St. Augustine didn't convince me...) Of course I'm talking about the ability of a religion to catalyze a civilization's growth and health. To promote "Civilizationogenesis". The spiritual aspects for the individual I will leave aside. That is between y'all and god.

    So I'm not sure what the future holds. Will 'Christian' become an ethnic/cultural designation rather than a religious one, as happened with Judaism? Will Christianity simply go the way of Zoroastrianism? Will it somehow be reinvigorated?

    The strength and weakness of Christianity has always been its appeal to, and elevation of women. Lately Western Civ has gone off the rails by holding up women's values and virtues as universal values and virtues so if Christianity and the West are to survive they need to find a way to rein that in.

    Islam was ahead of Christianity up until al-Ghazali. The wrong group wins the ear of the king (caliph, whatever) and boom, you’re downhill for the next few centuries.

    It’s not even clear what the right choice is sometimes. Vladimir the Great picked the more advanced (at the time) Eastern Roman (Orthodox) Christianity over the Western European (Catholic) variety, but that wound up cutting Russia off from the Renaissance. Right choice at the time (Western Europe was a lot less advanced than Byzantium back then), wrong choice 500 years later.

    • Replies: @SimpleSong
    Yeah I think there are some subtle HBD issues within Islam that take centuries to manifest.

    My problem with people saying that the Islamic world was advanced is that they conquered Persia, the Fertile Cresent, North Africa, and other parts of the Eastern Roman Empire, which was pretty much all of civilization at the time (excluding China/India). Christianity got stuck with the less advanced Western Roman Empire, a rump of the Eastern Roman Empire, and a bunch of semi-retarded German barbarians. Of course Islamic scholars were more prominent in the aftermath!

    This would be like me taking over as president of Harvard and my identical twin taking over Modesto community college and me crowing that my students had such better outcomes.

    Then when we retire Modesto community college outranks Harvard and I point to a few prominent graduates I had early in my term and I say 'that don't mean nuthin I'm just as good! Maybe better!'
    , @nebulafox
    Russia's relative backwardness had more to do with the Mongols putting them in a centuries-deep hole than picking Orthodoxy over Catholicism, IMO. It took them a couple of centuries to even get free of the Golden Horde.

    However, there is something to be said about the distinction between the spiritual and temporal realms. That was really unique to Western Europe starting in the 1000s: there was no equivalent in either the Orthodox or Islamic worlds, nor in Asia. And that did have consequences, if not exactly the ones the papal reformers had in mind. Had the printing press been invented in, say, China, the government would have immediately co-opted it, and there wouldn't have been the potential for the Reformation.

  78. @The Wild Geese Howard
    Richmond is an enormous trap being set for the 2A folks and they appear as though they are marching straight into it.

    Different marchers, different media, different government.

    Lee statues aren’t God-given rights.

    We’ll see.

    • Replies: @The Wild Geese Howard

    We’ll see.
     
    I see the 2A folks entering a contest that is 100% under the enemy's rules and 100% on the enemy's ground.

    Sun Tzu explicitly warned against this.

    I'm hoping for the best, fearing the worst.
  79. @Kibernetika
    And Pound was imprisoned in 1945 with Emmet Till's father, who was convicted and hanged for the rape and murder of Italian civilians. And you're right, Pound was off his rocker (but a clever wordsmith).

    Till was hung yesterday
    for murder and rape with trimmings

    I don’t know how off his rocker he actually was. I just know that’s the approach his friends used to help save his life.

  80. @Colin Wright
    'Islam seems to be uniquely destructive to civilization...'

    God, that's annoying. All you're doing is parading your own ignorance and lack of historical perspective.

    If you'd been in, say, seventh century Spain, and come back three hundred years later, it'd be a pretty open and shut case as to which religion was beneficial to civilization and which was destructive.

    One counterexample does not an argument make. The Visigoths who overran Spain were about as sophisticated as a modern motorcycle gang and improving upon their rule was no great feat. Even after three hundred years the best that can be said is that Spain had recovered to something comparable to its highest level of development during the Roman era.

    You would agree that during this period the caliphs used a relatively light touch in terms of religion on the general population, no? So why is it that the greatest ‘success’ of the Islamic world came in a place where they pushed their religion the least? Doesn’t that sorta undermine the idea that it was Islam that improved Spain?

    I mean if we’re gonna play that game how about we compare the accomplishments of Spain during the 300 years post Reconquista versus 300 years pre Reconquista? Because that doesn’t really support your thesis.

    How about the ratio of inventions made in Syria and Germany in AD 50 versus AD 1500? Saying Germany was a center of technology would have gotten you laughed out of the room in AD 50 but lots of stuff was invented in Roman Syria (e.g. glassblowing). Today the situation is reversed.

    Why do you see such a stark difference between Spain and Morocco, Italy and Tunisia, Serbia/Croatia and Albania? These places have similar geographies and histories.

    Why was Persia one of the great civilizations of the world, and now it struggles to assert itself as a regional power? There may be an HBD element, but since there are Persian Fields medalists running around I don’t think that’s the whole story.

    It takes a long, long time for ideologies to make their mark, particularly in the pre-modern world. And since Islam had a relatively light touch in most places (at least initially–later on it was a different story) three hundred years was not a long time.

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
    'One counterexample does not an argument make...'

    Alright. Here's another.

    Under Christian rule, Constantinople peaked at about 600,000 inhabitants. It was sacked by its co-religionists in 1204, and thereafter entered what turned out to be an irreversible decline. By the time it fell to the Turks in 1453, it had become a relatively inconsequential provincial center of thirty thousand souls, according to one estimate.

    Thereafter, it began a renaissance as Muslim Istanbul, center of one of the longest-lasting empires in human history. As late as the end of the eighteenth century, one estimate places its population as high as eight hundred thousand.

    Courtesy of your civilization-destroying religion. I'm not carrying a torch for Islam, but such shibboleths simply demonstrate the ignorance of the writer. Of course I can't be 'objective,' -- but I do prefer reasoning from facts to wallowing in blind bigotry. If there's nothing particularly right about Islam, there's nothing particularly wrong about it either.

  81. @Desiderius
    Different marchers, different media, different government.

    Lee statues aren’t God-given rights.

    We’ll see.

    We’ll see.

    I see the 2A folks entering a contest that is 100% under the enemy’s rules and 100% on the enemy’s ground.

    Sun Tzu explicitly warned against this.

    I’m hoping for the best, fearing the worst.

    • Replies: @Desiderius
    The Constitution is still the law of the land, that's why the impeachment frauds keep pretending to uphold it. Not enemy's rules.

    That map of the sanctuary counties doesn't show much enemy ground either. Bloomberg might be able to buy an off-year election, but the state and her people aren't for sale.

    Enemy media forced to recant:

    https://twitter.com/ComfortablySmug/status/1219021006205063168

    This gentleman doesn't look like he's much used to losing:

    https://twitter.com/rosedixontx/status/1217948420696150016

  82. @SFG
    Islam was ahead of Christianity up until al-Ghazali. The wrong group wins the ear of the king (caliph, whatever) and boom, you're downhill for the next few centuries.

    It's not even clear what the right choice is sometimes. Vladimir the Great picked the more advanced (at the time) Eastern Roman (Orthodox) Christianity over the Western European (Catholic) variety, but that wound up cutting Russia off from the Renaissance. Right choice at the time (Western Europe was a lot less advanced than Byzantium back then), wrong choice 500 years later.

    Yeah I think there are some subtle HBD issues within Islam that take centuries to manifest.

    My problem with people saying that the Islamic world was advanced is that they conquered Persia, the Fertile Cresent, North Africa, and other parts of the Eastern Roman Empire, which was pretty much all of civilization at the time (excluding China/India). Christianity got stuck with the less advanced Western Roman Empire, a rump of the Eastern Roman Empire, and a bunch of semi-retarded German barbarians. Of course Islamic scholars were more prominent in the aftermath!

    This would be like me taking over as president of Harvard and my identical twin taking over Modesto community college and me crowing that my students had such better outcomes.

    Then when we retire Modesto community college outranks Harvard and I point to a few prominent graduates I had early in my term and I say ‘that don’t mean nuthin I’m just as good! Maybe better!’

  83. @bomag

    It’s time to start imprisoning people who incite others for conspiracy.
     
    That's the biggest rabbit hole around.

    The FBI etc. should dial back their encouragement of violent acts for the sake of an easy arrest. This sort of thing reached a nadir with the plan to give guns to Mexican drug runners, but I suppose it could sink even lower.

    The FBI etc. should dial back their encouragement of violent acts for the sake of an easy arrest. This sort of thing reached a nadir with the plan to give guns to Mexican drug runners, but I suppose it could sink even lower.

    It already did sink lower than that, even before “Fast and Furious”. The 1993 World Trade Center bombing (the FBI was aware of the plot) and the Boston Marathon bombing – a lot of strange circumstances surrounding that incident too.

    The FBI’s job is not to investigate crimes or enforce the law. It’s certainly not there to promote justice. It’s job is to cover up the misdeeds of the government and enforce the will of the state and its patrons. It always has been so.

  84. @SimpleSong
    One counterexample does not an argument make. The Visigoths who overran Spain were about as sophisticated as a modern motorcycle gang and improving upon their rule was no great feat. Even after three hundred years the best that can be said is that Spain had recovered to something comparable to its highest level of development during the Roman era.

    You would agree that during this period the caliphs used a relatively light touch in terms of religion on the general population, no? So why is it that the greatest 'success' of the Islamic world came in a place where they pushed their religion the least? Doesn't that sorta undermine the idea that it was Islam that improved Spain?

    I mean if we're gonna play that game how about we compare the accomplishments of Spain during the 300 years post Reconquista versus 300 years pre Reconquista? Because that doesn't really support your thesis.

    How about the ratio of inventions made in Syria and Germany in AD 50 versus AD 1500? Saying Germany was a center of technology would have gotten you laughed out of the room in AD 50 but lots of stuff was invented in Roman Syria (e.g. glassblowing). Today the situation is reversed.

    Why do you see such a stark difference between Spain and Morocco, Italy and Tunisia, Serbia/Croatia and Albania? These places have similar geographies and histories.

    Why was Persia one of the great civilizations of the world, and now it struggles to assert itself as a regional power? There may be an HBD element, but since there are Persian Fields medalists running around I don't think that's the whole story.

    It takes a long, long time for ideologies to make their mark, particularly in the pre-modern world. And since Islam had a relatively light touch in most places (at least initially--later on it was a different story) three hundred years was not a long time.

    ‘One counterexample does not an argument make…’

    Alright. Here’s another.

    Under Christian rule, Constantinople peaked at about 600,000 inhabitants. It was sacked by its co-religionists in 1204, and thereafter entered what turned out to be an irreversible decline. By the time it fell to the Turks in 1453, it had become a relatively inconsequential provincial center of thirty thousand souls, according to one estimate.

    Thereafter, it began a renaissance as Muslim Istanbul, center of one of the longest-lasting empires in human history. As late as the end of the eighteenth century, one estimate places its population as high as eight hundred thousand.

    Courtesy of your civilization-destroying religion. I’m not carrying a torch for Islam, but such shibboleths simply demonstrate the ignorance of the writer. Of course I can’t be ‘objective,’ — but I do prefer reasoning from facts to wallowing in blind bigotry. If there’s nothing particularly right about Islam, there’s nothing particularly wrong about it either.

    • Replies: @SimpleSong
    > Courtesy of your civilization-destroying religion.

    What do you mean 'your'? I'm an agnostic; in fact as I said in my initial comment above I am suspicious that Christianity was a net negative for the West, but not as bad as Islam, which was a catastrophe; to the point where those areas have essentially had to be amputated from Western Civilization.

    Regarding Constantinople/Istanbul, you left out the important part, where the residents of Muslim Istanbul invented the printing press, the heliocentric theory, developed transatlantic navigation the steam engine...oh wait none of that happened. You mentioned their main accomplishment, which was having lots of people in their city. Golf clap.

    If that is the best example you can come up with, thank you for proving my point. They had that many people, that many brains, and were sitting right smack in one of the most strategically important spots in the whole world, with tremendous amounts of history going back to the colony of Byzantium in the pre-Roman era...and they still couldn't come up with anything that anybody cares about.

    What's your explanation for this torpor? Is it an HBD issue? Maybe you are right, maybe it is purely HBD and Islam is an innocent bystander. Maybe Islam is great but unfortunately the dumb flock to Islam? I would like to hear your explanation for the extremely unexpected trajectories of Western Europe vs the Near East after the breakup of Rome.

    Anyway, regarding Muslim Istanbul, it had a lot of people, great. So does Bangalore, so does Dhaka, so does Mexico City. While Byzantine technology was genuinely world class (e.g. Greek fire) the same cannot be said of Ottoman tech, much of which was bought from Christian Europe. (Europeans certainly do seem to backstab a lot, very little intra-Christian loyalty, not sure if that's related to Christianity though...)
    , @Desiderius

    I do prefer reasoning from facts to wallowing in blind bigotry.
     
    Give us a heads-up when you're ready to start the former. All we've seen is the latter. Was it your maleducation that did it, or did your start out backward?
    , @The Wild Geese Howard

    I’m not carrying a torch for Islam...
     
    Yes you are.

    It's clear you can't wait to pay your ruinous jizya under a global caliphate.
    , @HA
    "Under Christian rule, Constantinople peaked at about 600,000 inhabitants."

    As for Constantinople, yeah, it’s tough to keep a civilization going when you’re surrounded by hostile Muslims (and perhaps there’s a lesson there that certain people in Europe and elsewhere should take to heart), but I don’t regard that as helping your case. No one denies that the Crusaders’ sacking – not to mention the (Hungarian-made) advanced cannon technology that allowed the Ottomans to rip through Constantinople’s defenses -- are a black mark, but dar-al-Islam has plenty backstabbing in its own history, so it’s hardly exceptional.

    What is surprising is what SimpleSong noted: no one who had been tracking the rise of civilization from its beginnings in Mesopotamia (or wherever other nearby location) would have found it surprising that the Ottomans, given their proximity to all that (we’re talking a legacy that encompasses Egypt, Sumeria, Babylon, Phoenicia, Greece….) would manage to keep the momentum going for a while. I mean, these guys were born on third base. And unlike the Byzantines, they had relatively easy traversal access through a large swathe of it.

    Whereas to suggest that the barbarians who sacked Rome would -- after being baptized – go on to build a civilization that far eclipsed the one they had helped destroy – now that’s the real shocker. But don’t expect any academic in the West to pick up on that. No, for something as obvious as that, we apparently have to do our own noticing.

    , @dfordoom

    I’m not carrying a torch for Islam, but such shibboleths simply demonstrate the ignorance of the writer. Of course I can’t be ‘objective,’ — but I do prefer reasoning from facts to wallowing in blind bigotry. If there’s nothing particularly right about Islam, there’s nothing particularly wrong about it either.
     
    Islam's track record is no worse than Christianity's.

    And when we look at the world today secular liberal capitalism may turn out to be the worst civilisation-destroying force in history.

    But people want to blame Islam for everything that's wrong for the same reason they like to blame Jews or blacks. It's much easier than facing up to the real problems we face and it's much easier than taking responsibility for the failures of our own societies.
  85. @SolontoCroesus

    It’s time to start imprisoning people who incite others for conspiracy. Shouldn’t matter whether or not they are on the govt. payroll.
     
    The Trial of Julius Streicher
    https://avalon.law.yale.edu/imt/04-26-46.asp#streicher
    Justice Robert Jackson, Presiding Judge
    DR. MARX:

    The Prosecution accuse you of having contributed indirectly to mass murders by incitation, and according to the minutes of 10 January 1946, the following charge has been made against you: No government in the world could have undertaken a policy of mass extermination, as it was done here, without having behind it a nation which agreed to it; and you are supposed to have brought that about. What have you to say to this?
     
    STREICHER:

    To that I have the following to say: Incitation means to bring a person into condition of excitement which causes him to perform an irresponsible act.

    Did the contents of Der Stuermer incite, this is the question?
    Briefly stated, the question must be answered, "What did Der Stuermer write?" . . . [In Der Stuermer's] 20 years I published enlightening articles dealing with the race, dealing with what the Jews themselves write in the Old Testament, in their history, what they write in the Talmud. I printed excerpts from Jewish historical works, works for instance, written by a Professor Dr. Graetz and by a Jewish scholar, Gutnot.

    In Der Stuermer no editorial appeared written by me or written by anyone of my main co-workers in which I did not include quotations from the ancient history of the Jews, from the Old Testament or from Jewish historical works of recent times.
    It is important, and I must emphasize that I pointed out in all articles, that prominent Jews, leading authors themselves, admitted that which during 20 years as author and public speaker I publicly proclaimed.
    Allow me to add that it is my conviction that the contents of Der Stuermer as such were not incitation. During the whole 20 years I never wrote in this connection, "Burn Jewish houses down; beat them to death." Never once did such an incitement appear in Der Stuermer.
    Now comes the question: Is there any proof to be furnished that any deed was done from the time Der Stuermer first appeared, a deed of which one can say that it was the result of an incitement . . .[such as] a pogrom? That is a spontaneous deed when sections of the people suddenly rise up and kill other people. During the 20 years no pogrom took place in Germany, during the 20 years, as far as I know, no Jew was killed. No murder took place, of which one could have said, "This is the result of an incitement which was caused by anti-Semitic authors or public speakers."
     
    --
    Streicher was judged guilty of Incitement and hanged.

    I think I worded my comment poorly. I didn’t mean jail people for political speech, but rather for actively encouraging others to commit crimes as feds routinely do to advance their careers. Why shouldn’t FBI agents or informants go to jail when they encourage dim-witted people to commit crimes?

    • Agree: Colin Wright
  86. @Colin Wright
    'One counterexample does not an argument make...'

    Alright. Here's another.

    Under Christian rule, Constantinople peaked at about 600,000 inhabitants. It was sacked by its co-religionists in 1204, and thereafter entered what turned out to be an irreversible decline. By the time it fell to the Turks in 1453, it had become a relatively inconsequential provincial center of thirty thousand souls, according to one estimate.

    Thereafter, it began a renaissance as Muslim Istanbul, center of one of the longest-lasting empires in human history. As late as the end of the eighteenth century, one estimate places its population as high as eight hundred thousand.

    Courtesy of your civilization-destroying religion. I'm not carrying a torch for Islam, but such shibboleths simply demonstrate the ignorance of the writer. Of course I can't be 'objective,' -- but I do prefer reasoning from facts to wallowing in blind bigotry. If there's nothing particularly right about Islam, there's nothing particularly wrong about it either.

    > Courtesy of your civilization-destroying religion.

    What do you mean ‘your’? I’m an agnostic; in fact as I said in my initial comment above I am suspicious that Christianity was a net negative for the West, but not as bad as Islam, which was a catastrophe; to the point where those areas have essentially had to be amputated from Western Civilization.

    Regarding Constantinople/Istanbul, you left out the important part, where the residents of Muslim Istanbul invented the printing press, the heliocentric theory, developed transatlantic navigation the steam engine…oh wait none of that happened. You mentioned their main accomplishment, which was having lots of people in their city. Golf clap.

    If that is the best example you can come up with, thank you for proving my point. They had that many people, that many brains, and were sitting right smack in one of the most strategically important spots in the whole world, with tremendous amounts of history going back to the colony of Byzantium in the pre-Roman era…and they still couldn’t come up with anything that anybody cares about.

    What’s your explanation for this torpor? Is it an HBD issue? Maybe you are right, maybe it is purely HBD and Islam is an innocent bystander. Maybe Islam is great but unfortunately the dumb flock to Islam? I would like to hear your explanation for the extremely unexpected trajectories of Western Europe vs the Near East after the breakup of Rome.

    Anyway, regarding Muslim Istanbul, it had a lot of people, great. So does Bangalore, so does Dhaka, so does Mexico City. While Byzantine technology was genuinely world class (e.g. Greek fire) the same cannot be said of Ottoman tech, much of which was bought from Christian Europe. (Europeans certainly do seem to backstab a lot, very little intra-Christian loyalty, not sure if that’s related to Christianity though…)

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
    'What do you mean ‘your’? I’m an agnostic...'

    None of what follows seems to actually require a response. If you've some specific point you'd like me to respond to, isolate it and let me know what it is.

  87. @The Wild Geese Howard

    We’ll see.
     
    I see the 2A folks entering a contest that is 100% under the enemy's rules and 100% on the enemy's ground.

    Sun Tzu explicitly warned against this.

    I'm hoping for the best, fearing the worst.

    The Constitution is still the law of the land, that’s why the impeachment frauds keep pretending to uphold it. Not enemy’s rules.

    That map of the sanctuary counties doesn’t show much enemy ground either. Bloomberg might be able to buy an off-year election, but the state and her people aren’t for sale.

    Enemy media forced to recant:

    This gentleman doesn’t look like he’s much used to losing:

    • Replies: @The Wild Geese Howard
    Well, it appears your predictions about today's rally were more accurate than my own.

    I am happy that things went well in Richmond, with no significant incidents reported other than a few isolated cases of bad optics.
  88. @Colin Wright
    'One counterexample does not an argument make...'

    Alright. Here's another.

    Under Christian rule, Constantinople peaked at about 600,000 inhabitants. It was sacked by its co-religionists in 1204, and thereafter entered what turned out to be an irreversible decline. By the time it fell to the Turks in 1453, it had become a relatively inconsequential provincial center of thirty thousand souls, according to one estimate.

    Thereafter, it began a renaissance as Muslim Istanbul, center of one of the longest-lasting empires in human history. As late as the end of the eighteenth century, one estimate places its population as high as eight hundred thousand.

    Courtesy of your civilization-destroying religion. I'm not carrying a torch for Islam, but such shibboleths simply demonstrate the ignorance of the writer. Of course I can't be 'objective,' -- but I do prefer reasoning from facts to wallowing in blind bigotry. If there's nothing particularly right about Islam, there's nothing particularly wrong about it either.

    I do prefer reasoning from facts to wallowing in blind bigotry.

    Give us a heads-up when you’re ready to start the former. All we’ve seen is the latter. Was it your maleducation that did it, or did your start out backward?

  89. ‘Give us a heads-up when you’re ready to start the former. All we’ve seen is the latter. Was it your maleducation that did it, or did your start out backward?’

    Happily, this would be one of those posts that doesn’t require a reply.

    However, as you can see, I’ve provided one anyway…of sorts.

    …being a generous guy and all. You don’t need to thank me.

  90. @SimpleSong
    > Courtesy of your civilization-destroying religion.

    What do you mean 'your'? I'm an agnostic; in fact as I said in my initial comment above I am suspicious that Christianity was a net negative for the West, but not as bad as Islam, which was a catastrophe; to the point where those areas have essentially had to be amputated from Western Civilization.

    Regarding Constantinople/Istanbul, you left out the important part, where the residents of Muslim Istanbul invented the printing press, the heliocentric theory, developed transatlantic navigation the steam engine...oh wait none of that happened. You mentioned their main accomplishment, which was having lots of people in their city. Golf clap.

    If that is the best example you can come up with, thank you for proving my point. They had that many people, that many brains, and were sitting right smack in one of the most strategically important spots in the whole world, with tremendous amounts of history going back to the colony of Byzantium in the pre-Roman era...and they still couldn't come up with anything that anybody cares about.

    What's your explanation for this torpor? Is it an HBD issue? Maybe you are right, maybe it is purely HBD and Islam is an innocent bystander. Maybe Islam is great but unfortunately the dumb flock to Islam? I would like to hear your explanation for the extremely unexpected trajectories of Western Europe vs the Near East after the breakup of Rome.

    Anyway, regarding Muslim Istanbul, it had a lot of people, great. So does Bangalore, so does Dhaka, so does Mexico City. While Byzantine technology was genuinely world class (e.g. Greek fire) the same cannot be said of Ottoman tech, much of which was bought from Christian Europe. (Europeans certainly do seem to backstab a lot, very little intra-Christian loyalty, not sure if that's related to Christianity though...)

    ‘What do you mean ‘your’? I’m an agnostic…’

    None of what follows seems to actually require a response. If you’ve some specific point you’d like me to respond to, isolate it and let me know what it is.

  91. @Anonymous
    Incidentally, Al-Qaeda, which you don't really hear about anymore, means "The Base" or "The Database" in Arabic. Conspiracy theorists have long maintained that the name referred to the CIA's database of Muslim CIA assets going back to the US backed Afghan Mujahideen fighters during the Afghan-Soviet War.

    "The Base" is an unusual name for a Neo-Nazi group. One wonders if it's a reference to the FBI's database of neo-Nazi types and was formed as a means for the FBI to entrap them.

    “The Base” is an unusual name for a Neo-Nazi group. One wonders if it’s a reference to…

    It was clearly intended as a reference to al-Qaeda.

  92. @Colin Wright
    'One counterexample does not an argument make...'

    Alright. Here's another.

    Under Christian rule, Constantinople peaked at about 600,000 inhabitants. It was sacked by its co-religionists in 1204, and thereafter entered what turned out to be an irreversible decline. By the time it fell to the Turks in 1453, it had become a relatively inconsequential provincial center of thirty thousand souls, according to one estimate.

    Thereafter, it began a renaissance as Muslim Istanbul, center of one of the longest-lasting empires in human history. As late as the end of the eighteenth century, one estimate places its population as high as eight hundred thousand.

    Courtesy of your civilization-destroying religion. I'm not carrying a torch for Islam, but such shibboleths simply demonstrate the ignorance of the writer. Of course I can't be 'objective,' -- but I do prefer reasoning from facts to wallowing in blind bigotry. If there's nothing particularly right about Islam, there's nothing particularly wrong about it either.

    I’m not carrying a torch for Islam…

    Yes you are.

    It’s clear you can’t wait to pay your ruinous jizya under a global caliphate.

  93. @Anonymous
    Why is this rally on Monday? Monday is Martin Luther King Day. If I were a conspiracy theorist, I might believe that undercover federal agents were corralling a bunch of neo-Nazi types to hold a gun rally in the former capital of the Confederacy on MLK Day for bad optics and to instigate some sort of violent incident.

    Why is this rally on Monday? Monday is Martin Luther King Day. If I were a conspiracy theorist, I might believe that undercover federal agents were corralling a bunch of neo-Nazi types to hold a gun rally in the former capital of the Confederacy on MLK Day for bad optics and to instigate some sort of violent incident.

    It kinda feels like you might be correct.

    If so, I predict they will regret doing so, as they subsequently discover they have bitten off more than they can chew.

  94. @Colin Wright
    'One counterexample does not an argument make...'

    Alright. Here's another.

    Under Christian rule, Constantinople peaked at about 600,000 inhabitants. It was sacked by its co-religionists in 1204, and thereafter entered what turned out to be an irreversible decline. By the time it fell to the Turks in 1453, it had become a relatively inconsequential provincial center of thirty thousand souls, according to one estimate.

    Thereafter, it began a renaissance as Muslim Istanbul, center of one of the longest-lasting empires in human history. As late as the end of the eighteenth century, one estimate places its population as high as eight hundred thousand.

    Courtesy of your civilization-destroying religion. I'm not carrying a torch for Islam, but such shibboleths simply demonstrate the ignorance of the writer. Of course I can't be 'objective,' -- but I do prefer reasoning from facts to wallowing in blind bigotry. If there's nothing particularly right about Islam, there's nothing particularly wrong about it either.

    “Under Christian rule, Constantinople peaked at about 600,000 inhabitants.”

    As for Constantinople, yeah, it’s tough to keep a civilization going when you’re surrounded by hostile Muslims (and perhaps there’s a lesson there that certain people in Europe and elsewhere should take to heart), but I don’t regard that as helping your case. No one denies that the Crusaders’ sacking – not to mention the (Hungarian-made) advanced cannon technology that allowed the Ottomans to rip through Constantinople’s defenses — are a black mark, but dar-al-Islam has plenty backstabbing in its own history, so it’s hardly exceptional.

    What is surprising is what SimpleSong noted: no one who had been tracking the rise of civilization from its beginnings in Mesopotamia (or wherever other nearby location) would have found it surprising that the Ottomans, given their proximity to all that (we’re talking a legacy that encompasses Egypt, Sumeria, Babylon, Phoenicia, Greece….) would manage to keep the momentum going for a while. I mean, these guys were born on third base. And unlike the Byzantines, they had relatively easy traversal access through a large swathe of it.

    Whereas to suggest that the barbarians who sacked Rome would — after being baptized – go on to build a civilization that far eclipsed the one they had helped destroy – now that’s the real shocker. But don’t expect any academic in the West to pick up on that. No, for something as obvious as that, we apparently have to do our own noticing.

    • Agree: Hail
    • Replies: @Colin Wright
    '... Whereas to suggest that the barbarians who sacked Rome would — after being baptized – go on to build a civilization that far eclipsed the one they had helped destroy – now that’s the real shocker...'

    Something along the same lines could be said for the Arabic tribes who took up the banner of Islam and made the derelict remnants of Roman and Persian civilization into something new.

    And in point of fact, depending on your measure, it wasn't until three hundred to five hundred years ago that Western Christendom surpassed Islam.

    The point really is that 'now' is just another moment in time. Yes, we're ahead. That's not an eternal verity, nor is it proof of intrinsic superiority.

    ...and certainly, that bigoted nonsense about Islam being 'a civilization-destroying religion' is right out.

    We're up 21-7. So what?

    This game never ends. Have you checked out our 'progress' of late?

  95. @SFG
    Islam was ahead of Christianity up until al-Ghazali. The wrong group wins the ear of the king (caliph, whatever) and boom, you're downhill for the next few centuries.

    It's not even clear what the right choice is sometimes. Vladimir the Great picked the more advanced (at the time) Eastern Roman (Orthodox) Christianity over the Western European (Catholic) variety, but that wound up cutting Russia off from the Renaissance. Right choice at the time (Western Europe was a lot less advanced than Byzantium back then), wrong choice 500 years later.

    Russia’s relative backwardness had more to do with the Mongols putting them in a centuries-deep hole than picking Orthodoxy over Catholicism, IMO. It took them a couple of centuries to even get free of the Golden Horde.

    However, there is something to be said about the distinction between the spiritual and temporal realms. That was really unique to Western Europe starting in the 1000s: there was no equivalent in either the Orthodox or Islamic worlds, nor in Asia. And that did have consequences, if not exactly the ones the papal reformers had in mind. Had the printing press been invented in, say, China, the government would have immediately co-opted it, and there wouldn’t have been the potential for the Reformation.

    • Replies: @anon
    Had the printing press been invented in, say, China

    It was. Then what happened?
  96. @nebulafox
    I have zero sympathy for militant identitarian politics from any direction, unlike some commentators here, but I'm calling BS on the idea that there's a serious threat (I never knew graffiti was defined as a "serious threat") to the stability of the American state here. Why? Because the FBI took care of such things back in the 1960s, using means fair and foul. J. Edgar Hoover took some notes from the playbook of the contemporary West German government, who neutralized their own far-right issue around the same time. It worked. By 1972, the KKK was a shadow of what it had been just a decade earlier in the Deep South, swiss-cheesed by federal agents. Political extremists by nature are prone to paranoia, no matter what the ideological flavoring is, and can be pretty easily goaded into a state of infighting or paralysis with enough agents infiltrating their groups. I'm pretty sure the same was applied to more recent generations of white supremacists, and I strongly doubt that any relative loosening of pressure under 3 years of Trump could make up for 50 years of near constant suppression. The media is giving these guys wayyyyy too much credit, not terribly unlike their Salafist counterparts.

    (Governments less concerned about morality or rule of law-Tsarist Russia-took it a step further and goaded groups like the Bolsheviks into doing dumb, self-defeating, violent things that discredited them in the eyes of the public. Between that and Stolypin's mix of reform and repressive measures, had the Russian government not blundered into a societal catastrophe it couldn't afford in 1914, Lenin would be a historical footnote.)

    Now that the media can't get in a tizzy about radical Islam in order to distract everybody from our parasitical managerial class, they are turning to white supremacism, with not even that much originality. It's not that either don't exist or can't harm people, far from it, but the idea that they pose the most serious threats to the USA is delusional. (If we were talking about Europe, it'd be different, but we're not Europe.) The real enemies of the Republic and of the American people lie within places like the Beltway, Wall Street, and Silicon Valley. They are Republicans and Democrats, men and women, all races and religions. They are our elites, cultural , economic, and political. What they share in mind is a neo-feudal future for themselves, with the fellow citizens they openly despise as the future immiserated serfs, addled with the fallout of their own proclivities and policies alike. They won't get it: that, I'm positive of. It's not in America's DNA. I just hope that they can be replaced and the USA's trajectory altered with minimal pain.

    ‘I have zero sympathy for militant identitarian politics from any direction…’

    I have some sympathy for such politics from one direction.

    It strikes me as absurd to think that I wouldn’t.

    The end is nigh. Who do you want to win? I didn’t start this, but…

  97. @SimpleSong
    Islam seems to be uniquely destructive to civilization, although I don't know the religion well enough to say why. Regardless in AD 600 the most advanced parts of the world included North Africa, Syria, the Levant, and Persia. In contrast the Germanic tribes were described by contemporaries as, frankly, a bunch of dumb primitive brutes. Fast forward 1000 years and you can see the difference between a millennium of Christianity versus a millennium of Islam. The contrast between, say, Italy and Tunisia tells you something, just like the contrast between East and West Germany tells you something. So, I don't think allying with Islam is a good idea unless you want the future of planet Earth to be determined by the eastern civilizations (China etc...)

    Having said that, while I'm pretty confident that Christianity was superior to Islam I am not confident that Christianity was superior to the Greco-Roman pagan religions it replaced. I just simply don't know. (St. Augustine didn't convince me...) Of course I'm talking about the ability of a religion to catalyze a civilization's growth and health. To promote "Civilizationogenesis". The spiritual aspects for the individual I will leave aside. That is between y'all and god.

    So I'm not sure what the future holds. Will 'Christian' become an ethnic/cultural designation rather than a religious one, as happened with Judaism? Will Christianity simply go the way of Zoroastrianism? Will it somehow be reinvigorated?

    The strength and weakness of Christianity has always been its appeal to, and elevation of women. Lately Western Civ has gone off the rails by holding up women's values and virtues as universal values and virtues so if Christianity and the West are to survive they need to find a way to rein that in.

    Religion is ultimately subordinate to the prevailing culture in my view, not the other way around, and Islam as a faith didn’t even consolidate until well after the conquests. The early Umayyad caliphate had a strong ethnic Arab character to it, and backlash against that is part of why orthodox Islam strongly de-emphasizes race. But conversely, you could argue that many of the achievements of Islamic civilization during the Middle Ages were the result of converted Persians bringing their Zoroastrian traditions with them.

    IMO, 1000 years is a very long time. The issues that Islamic civilizations face today are not the result of anything that happened in the Middle Ages: as late as the 1600s, the Ottomans could hold their own against Europe just fine. The reason they are characterized today by intolerance and backwardness is less religious doctrine (which for the overwhelming majority of lay believers-in any faith-is a matter of ex post facto rationalization) than historical events that happened to the cultures in question on the way. A lot of the conservative wave you see in the Islamic World has its origins in 1979: it was uncommon for women in lots of Islamic countries to wear hijabs before the 80s, whereas nowadays, they are nearly omnipresent.

    Put another way: had you asked anybody around 1900 what the world’s most aggressive religion was, I don’t think Islam would have been the answer! If you’d asked the question around 1600, it would have been different again. History is a stochastic game, not a linear one, to the incomprehension of America’s invariably Whiggish elites.

    (That’s not to say I don’t think there’s something unique to Western civilization that made it ultimately triumph above all others, as I mentioned above: I believe West is best. But it took a long time for that to play out.)

    >Having said that, while I’m pretty confident that Christianity was superior to Islam I am not confident that Christianity was superior to the Greco-Roman pagan religions it replaced. I just simply don’t know. (St. Augustine didn’t convince me…) Of course I’m talking about the ability of a religion to catalyze a civilization’s growth and health. To promote “Civilizationogenesis”. The spiritual aspects for the individual I will leave aside. That is between y’all and god.

    I take Gibbon’s view: Christianity did ease along the Roman state’s decline, but it wasn’t a primary cause of it (I mean, look at Byzantium), and it also mitigated the consequences of it. Certainly the increasing religious feuds at a time where Rome needed unity weren’t a good idea. But if the Roman state collapsed while retaining pagan values-and I think it would have either way-the results would have been even uglier than they were in real life.

    For me, all citizens must unite in support of the United States. What they do with their consciences beyond that is up to them. Suum cuique! And the Constitution prescribes freedom of religion, not freedom from it.

    • Disagree: The Wild Geese Howard
    • Replies: @Colin Wright
    '...For me, all citizens must unite in support of the United States. What they do with their consciences beyond that is up to them...'

    Wouldn't it be nice if that were still a morally palatable proposition?

    Is 'support of the United States' really doing as Israel commands? Are we actually supposed to applaud inviting an opponent to engage in peace talks and then whacking him when he shows up?

    No nation is ever morally perfect. Nevertheless, I support the America that existed sixty, fifty, even thirty years ago.

    Not the one that exists now. It's a sickening travesty.
  98. @HA
    "Under Christian rule, Constantinople peaked at about 600,000 inhabitants."

    As for Constantinople, yeah, it’s tough to keep a civilization going when you’re surrounded by hostile Muslims (and perhaps there’s a lesson there that certain people in Europe and elsewhere should take to heart), but I don’t regard that as helping your case. No one denies that the Crusaders’ sacking – not to mention the (Hungarian-made) advanced cannon technology that allowed the Ottomans to rip through Constantinople’s defenses -- are a black mark, but dar-al-Islam has plenty backstabbing in its own history, so it’s hardly exceptional.

    What is surprising is what SimpleSong noted: no one who had been tracking the rise of civilization from its beginnings in Mesopotamia (or wherever other nearby location) would have found it surprising that the Ottomans, given their proximity to all that (we’re talking a legacy that encompasses Egypt, Sumeria, Babylon, Phoenicia, Greece….) would manage to keep the momentum going for a while. I mean, these guys were born on third base. And unlike the Byzantines, they had relatively easy traversal access through a large swathe of it.

    Whereas to suggest that the barbarians who sacked Rome would -- after being baptized – go on to build a civilization that far eclipsed the one they had helped destroy – now that’s the real shocker. But don’t expect any academic in the West to pick up on that. No, for something as obvious as that, we apparently have to do our own noticing.

    ‘… Whereas to suggest that the barbarians who sacked Rome would — after being baptized – go on to build a civilization that far eclipsed the one they had helped destroy – now that’s the real shocker…’

    Something along the same lines could be said for the Arabic tribes who took up the banner of Islam and made the derelict remnants of Roman and Persian civilization into something new.

    And in point of fact, depending on your measure, it wasn’t until three hundred to five hundred years ago that Western Christendom surpassed Islam.

    The point really is that ‘now’ is just another moment in time. Yes, we’re ahead. That’s not an eternal verity, nor is it proof of intrinsic superiority.

    …and certainly, that bigoted nonsense about Islam being ‘a civilization-destroying religion’ is right out.

    We’re up 21-7. So what?

    This game never ends. Have you checked out our ‘progress’ of late?

    • Replies: @HA
    Something along the same lines could be said for the Arabic tribes who took up the banner of Islam and made the derelict remnants of Roman and Persian civilization into something new.

    You mean, just like the Hittites, and Assyrians and Phoenicians and Sumerians and the Medes and the dozens of other groups arising in the Fertile Crescent/MENA region -- a region that has served as ground zero for Western civilization since Western civilization began? No, it seems pretty evident at this point that if you're a stone's throw -- and a mere trading route or two -- away from whatever great civilization preceded you, it's not that exceptional to cobble those derelict remnants into something new (especially if that "new" amounts to little more than military overthrow).

    In any case, all that changed under Islam's aegis. Once the Mongols sacked Baghdad, it was more or less downhill, the invasion of Constantinople notwithstanding. Despite all those lingering derelict remnants, no one from Tripoli to Alexandria was able to gather enough derelict remnants to stave off the decay. At the very same time -- starting centuries earlier, as a matter of fact -- the monks of Christendom were bringing learning and literature and science in places like Ireland and Sweden and Russia that were far away from any such derelict remnants of past great civilizations. In fact, Saracens and Moors were blocking access to those very same remnants for much of that time. Now THAT is something exceptional.

    Once upon a time, and for thousands of years, a region's proximity to the Mediterranean and Mesopotamia -- like Moynihan's nearness to Canada metric -- made for a steep gradient of advancing civilization. Under Islam's aegis, that gradient reversed. THAT is something exceptional. To this day, if you overlay the basic development and prosperity indices of a given region of Europe with how many years that region was under Ottoman/Saracen/Moorish rule, you'll see some substantially negative correlation there. It doesn't explain everything, but it gives you a pretty good ballpark number. Once upon a time Sicily and Spain were MORE developed and civilized than points northward. Whereas nowadays, a trip from Trieste to Istanbul, through Slovenia, Croatia, Serbia, Bulgaria, etc. is a trip marked by increasing squalor and lack of development, and the residents affected can thank their increasing stints under Ottoman rule for a good part of that decline.

    So you can take your banner of Islam, and... well, let's just say you can stick it somewhere else.

  99. Anon[205] • Disclaimer says:

    While it’s been well-established that “The Base” is a FBI/CIA front, what about the American Nazi Party? Are they a legitimate 3rd Position political party as founded and managed by Rockwell? I believe that their platform is admirable as they advocate for nationalism and traditionalism. However, they don’t appear to be very active on the grassroots level with events, rallies, and getting like-minded representatives elected to office as they once did.

    There appears to be a lot more grassroots activity by other 3rd Position political parties such as the American Freedom Party and American Eagle Party. Both AFP and AEP have ran viable, well-established candidates.

    Furthermore, they’ve been influence across the Atlantic by collaborating with European National Populists movements and such. But you don’t see that kind of activity with ANP — which comes off as suspect.

  100. @nebulafox
    Religion is ultimately subordinate to the prevailing culture in my view, not the other way around, and Islam as a faith didn't even consolidate until well after the conquests. The early Umayyad caliphate had a strong ethnic Arab character to it, and backlash against that is part of why orthodox Islam strongly de-emphasizes race. But conversely, you could argue that many of the achievements of Islamic civilization during the Middle Ages were the result of converted Persians bringing their Zoroastrian traditions with them.

    IMO, 1000 years is a very long time. The issues that Islamic civilizations face today are not the result of anything that happened in the Middle Ages: as late as the 1600s, the Ottomans could hold their own against Europe just fine. The reason they are characterized today by intolerance and backwardness is less religious doctrine (which for the overwhelming majority of lay believers-in any faith-is a matter of ex post facto rationalization) than historical events that happened to the cultures in question on the way. A lot of the conservative wave you see in the Islamic World has its origins in 1979: it was uncommon for women in lots of Islamic countries to wear hijabs before the 80s, whereas nowadays, they are nearly omnipresent.

    Put another way: had you asked anybody around 1900 what the world's most aggressive religion was, I don't think Islam would have been the answer! If you'd asked the question around 1600, it would have been different again. History is a stochastic game, not a linear one, to the incomprehension of America's invariably Whiggish elites.

    (That's not to say I don't think there's something unique to Western civilization that made it ultimately triumph above all others, as I mentioned above: I believe West is best. But it took a long time for that to play out.)

    >Having said that, while I’m pretty confident that Christianity was superior to Islam I am not confident that Christianity was superior to the Greco-Roman pagan religions it replaced. I just simply don’t know. (St. Augustine didn’t convince me…) Of course I’m talking about the ability of a religion to catalyze a civilization’s growth and health. To promote “Civilizationogenesis”. The spiritual aspects for the individual I will leave aside. That is between y’all and god.

    I take Gibbon's view: Christianity did ease along the Roman state's decline, but it wasn't a primary cause of it (I mean, look at Byzantium), and it also mitigated the consequences of it. Certainly the increasing religious feuds at a time where Rome needed unity weren't a good idea. But if the Roman state collapsed while retaining pagan values-and I think it would have either way-the results would have been even uglier than they were in real life.

    For me, all citizens must unite in support of the United States. What they do with their consciences beyond that is up to them. Suum cuique! And the Constitution prescribes freedom of religion, not freedom from it.

    ‘…For me, all citizens must unite in support of the United States. What they do with their consciences beyond that is up to them…’

    Wouldn’t it be nice if that were still a morally palatable proposition?

    Is ‘support of the United States’ really doing as Israel commands? Are we actually supposed to applaud inviting an opponent to engage in peace talks and then whacking him when he shows up?

    No nation is ever morally perfect. Nevertheless, I support the America that existed sixty, fifty, even thirty years ago.

    Not the one that exists now. It’s a sickening travesty.

  101. @Colin Wright
    'One counterexample does not an argument make...'

    Alright. Here's another.

    Under Christian rule, Constantinople peaked at about 600,000 inhabitants. It was sacked by its co-religionists in 1204, and thereafter entered what turned out to be an irreversible decline. By the time it fell to the Turks in 1453, it had become a relatively inconsequential provincial center of thirty thousand souls, according to one estimate.

    Thereafter, it began a renaissance as Muslim Istanbul, center of one of the longest-lasting empires in human history. As late as the end of the eighteenth century, one estimate places its population as high as eight hundred thousand.

    Courtesy of your civilization-destroying religion. I'm not carrying a torch for Islam, but such shibboleths simply demonstrate the ignorance of the writer. Of course I can't be 'objective,' -- but I do prefer reasoning from facts to wallowing in blind bigotry. If there's nothing particularly right about Islam, there's nothing particularly wrong about it either.

    I’m not carrying a torch for Islam, but such shibboleths simply demonstrate the ignorance of the writer. Of course I can’t be ‘objective,’ — but I do prefer reasoning from facts to wallowing in blind bigotry. If there’s nothing particularly right about Islam, there’s nothing particularly wrong about it either.

    Islam’s track record is no worse than Christianity’s.

    And when we look at the world today secular liberal capitalism may turn out to be the worst civilisation-destroying force in history.

    But people want to blame Islam for everything that’s wrong for the same reason they like to blame Jews or blacks. It’s much easier than facing up to the real problems we face and it’s much easier than taking responsibility for the failures of our own societies.

  102. @nebulafox
    Russia's relative backwardness had more to do with the Mongols putting them in a centuries-deep hole than picking Orthodoxy over Catholicism, IMO. It took them a couple of centuries to even get free of the Golden Horde.

    However, there is something to be said about the distinction between the spiritual and temporal realms. That was really unique to Western Europe starting in the 1000s: there was no equivalent in either the Orthodox or Islamic worlds, nor in Asia. And that did have consequences, if not exactly the ones the papal reformers had in mind. Had the printing press been invented in, say, China, the government would have immediately co-opted it, and there wouldn't have been the potential for the Reformation.

    Had the printing press been invented in, say, China

    It was. Then what happened?

  103. @Colin Wright
    '... Whereas to suggest that the barbarians who sacked Rome would — after being baptized – go on to build a civilization that far eclipsed the one they had helped destroy – now that’s the real shocker...'

    Something along the same lines could be said for the Arabic tribes who took up the banner of Islam and made the derelict remnants of Roman and Persian civilization into something new.

    And in point of fact, depending on your measure, it wasn't until three hundred to five hundred years ago that Western Christendom surpassed Islam.

    The point really is that 'now' is just another moment in time. Yes, we're ahead. That's not an eternal verity, nor is it proof of intrinsic superiority.

    ...and certainly, that bigoted nonsense about Islam being 'a civilization-destroying religion' is right out.

    We're up 21-7. So what?

    This game never ends. Have you checked out our 'progress' of late?

    Something along the same lines could be said for the Arabic tribes who took up the banner of Islam and made the derelict remnants of Roman and Persian civilization into something new.

    You mean, just like the Hittites, and Assyrians and Phoenicians and Sumerians and the Medes and the dozens of other groups arising in the Fertile Crescent/MENA region — a region that has served as ground zero for Western civilization since Western civilization began? No, it seems pretty evident at this point that if you’re a stone’s throw — and a mere trading route or two — away from whatever great civilization preceded you, it’s not that exceptional to cobble those derelict remnants into something new (especially if that “new” amounts to little more than military overthrow).

    In any case, all that changed under Islam’s aegis. Once the Mongols sacked Baghdad, it was more or less downhill, the invasion of Constantinople notwithstanding. Despite all those lingering derelict remnants, no one from Tripoli to Alexandria was able to gather enough derelict remnants to stave off the decay. At the very same time — starting centuries earlier, as a matter of fact — the monks of Christendom were bringing learning and literature and science in places like Ireland and Sweden and Russia that were far away from any such derelict remnants of past great civilizations. In fact, Saracens and Moors were blocking access to those very same remnants for much of that time. Now THAT is something exceptional.

    Once upon a time, and for thousands of years, a region’s proximity to the Mediterranean and Mesopotamia — like Moynihan’s nearness to Canada metric — made for a steep gradient of advancing civilization. Under Islam’s aegis, that gradient reversed. THAT is something exceptional. To this day, if you overlay the basic development and prosperity indices of a given region of Europe with how many years that region was under Ottoman/Saracen/Moorish rule, you’ll see some substantially negative correlation there. It doesn’t explain everything, but it gives you a pretty good ballpark number. Once upon a time Sicily and Spain were MORE developed and civilized than points northward. Whereas nowadays, a trip from Trieste to Istanbul, through Slovenia, Croatia, Serbia, Bulgaria, etc. is a trip marked by increasing squalor and lack of development, and the residents affected can thank their increasing stints under Ottoman rule for a good part of that decline.

    So you can take your banner of Islam, and… well, let’s just say you can stick it somewhere else.

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
    '... To this day, if you overlay the basic development and prosperity indices of a given region of Europe with how many years that region was under Ottoman/Saracen/Moorish rule, you’ll see some substantially negative correlation there...'

    And that's been true for all of about four hundred years now. As late as the eighteenth century, levels of prosperity for the average man were about the same in the Ottoman Empire and in Western Europe.

    You're taking our relatively transient lead (and we're being rapidly superseded by the Asians, by the way) and finding in it some kind of proof not merely of superiority, but of Islam being some kind of eternal blight -- which is ridiculous.

    As homeless flood our streets, as we helplessly admit floods of indigent immigrants, as we celebrate increasingly improbable forms of sexual degeneracy, as we fight increasingly futile wars, what will you decide this implies about us? Is Christendom therefore inherently destructive and inferior? Should the Chinese eradicate us all in some kind of genocidal fit?

    After all, what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. In the future, others may regard us with all the sympathy and appreciation you're choosing to extend to others.

    There's a saying that you can judge a man by how he treats those who haven't the power to hurt him. One could say that one can judge the morality of a culture by how it regards others when it's enjoying its moment in the sun.

    Try considering, say, the opening image in Kipling's Kim. Compared to you, he's a veritable multiculturalist. Sometimes we're on top, sometimes we're not. Don't read too much into it.
  104. @HA
    Something along the same lines could be said for the Arabic tribes who took up the banner of Islam and made the derelict remnants of Roman and Persian civilization into something new.

    You mean, just like the Hittites, and Assyrians and Phoenicians and Sumerians and the Medes and the dozens of other groups arising in the Fertile Crescent/MENA region -- a region that has served as ground zero for Western civilization since Western civilization began? No, it seems pretty evident at this point that if you're a stone's throw -- and a mere trading route or two -- away from whatever great civilization preceded you, it's not that exceptional to cobble those derelict remnants into something new (especially if that "new" amounts to little more than military overthrow).

    In any case, all that changed under Islam's aegis. Once the Mongols sacked Baghdad, it was more or less downhill, the invasion of Constantinople notwithstanding. Despite all those lingering derelict remnants, no one from Tripoli to Alexandria was able to gather enough derelict remnants to stave off the decay. At the very same time -- starting centuries earlier, as a matter of fact -- the monks of Christendom were bringing learning and literature and science in places like Ireland and Sweden and Russia that were far away from any such derelict remnants of past great civilizations. In fact, Saracens and Moors were blocking access to those very same remnants for much of that time. Now THAT is something exceptional.

    Once upon a time, and for thousands of years, a region's proximity to the Mediterranean and Mesopotamia -- like Moynihan's nearness to Canada metric -- made for a steep gradient of advancing civilization. Under Islam's aegis, that gradient reversed. THAT is something exceptional. To this day, if you overlay the basic development and prosperity indices of a given region of Europe with how many years that region was under Ottoman/Saracen/Moorish rule, you'll see some substantially negative correlation there. It doesn't explain everything, but it gives you a pretty good ballpark number. Once upon a time Sicily and Spain were MORE developed and civilized than points northward. Whereas nowadays, a trip from Trieste to Istanbul, through Slovenia, Croatia, Serbia, Bulgaria, etc. is a trip marked by increasing squalor and lack of development, and the residents affected can thank their increasing stints under Ottoman rule for a good part of that decline.

    So you can take your banner of Islam, and... well, let's just say you can stick it somewhere else.

    ‘… To this day, if you overlay the basic development and prosperity indices of a given region of Europe with how many years that region was under Ottoman/Saracen/Moorish rule, you’ll see some substantially negative correlation there…’

    And that’s been true for all of about four hundred years now. As late as the eighteenth century, levels of prosperity for the average man were about the same in the Ottoman Empire and in Western Europe.

    You’re taking our relatively transient lead (and we’re being rapidly superseded by the Asians, by the way) and finding in it some kind of proof not merely of superiority, but of Islam being some kind of eternal blight — which is ridiculous.

    As homeless flood our streets, as we helplessly admit floods of indigent immigrants, as we celebrate increasingly improbable forms of sexual degeneracy, as we fight increasingly futile wars, what will you decide this implies about us? Is Christendom therefore inherently destructive and inferior? Should the Chinese eradicate us all in some kind of genocidal fit?

    After all, what’s sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. In the future, others may regard us with all the sympathy and appreciation you’re choosing to extend to others.

    There’s a saying that you can judge a man by how he treats those who haven’t the power to hurt him. One could say that one can judge the morality of a culture by how it regards others when it’s enjoying its moment in the sun.

    Try considering, say, the opening image in Kipling’s Kim. Compared to you, he’s a veritable multiculturalist. Sometimes we’re on top, sometimes we’re not. Don’t read too much into it.

    • Replies: @HA
    "And that’s been true for all of about four hundred years now. As late as the eighteenth century, levels of prosperity for the average man were about the same in the Ottoman Empire and in Western Europe."

    Again, given that Islam, unlike Western Europe, was born on third base, that's already a black mark against it. When in the thousands of year prior to the rise of Christianity was that part of the Middle East "about the same", developmentally speaking, as Western Europe? Oh yeah, NEVER. So tell me again what "exceptional" really means.

    "As homeless flood our streets, as we helplessly admit floods of indigent immigrants, as we celebrate increasingly improbable forms of sexual degeneracy, as we fight increasingly futile wars, what will you decide this implies about us? Is Christendom therefore inherently destructive and inferior?"

    I'm sorry, are you under the illusion that Christianity has been the guiding ethos of the West for the past century or so? No, it was schucked off -- largely because of dissemblers like yourself who have succeeded so well in obscuring something as obvious that gradient -- and its reversal -- that even someone like me regards as obvious. The ones who want to hide and obscure just how remarkable and exceptional the rise of Europe (relative to the MENA regions) was and what was behind it. Moreover, it wasn't Christianity that advocated the sexual degeneracy and warfare you speak of. As I understand it, the only institution -- and I mean the only institution -- in all the West opposed to separating sex and procreation were old-line Christians, predominantly Catholics. They weren't the ones agitating for endless wars either, and they certainly weren't much in favor of the ersatz new-and-improved replacements for religion that have been proposed of late, be they Communism, or liberalism, or hyper-nationalism. In Europe, in particular, the parts that continue to hang on to Christianity seem far more sane with regard to degeneracy and immigrant-replacement than those following one or more of the alternatives to Christianity. The fact that you would nonetheless propose that Christianity is what is inherently destructive and inferior says a lot more about you than Christianity.

    And I suspect the homeless flood, as dire as it is, pales in comparison with the poverty of past generations, so that's not convincing either. At this point, you're just flailing around for any stick to beat the West with. I'm no prophet, and I don't know what the future holds. If the West -- and this includes the Marxist-wannabe bureaucrats in charge of much of Christianity -- continues to ignore the lessons of the past the way you do, maybe it deserves to keep burning. But even if things go back to as they were for thousands and thousands of years -- so that Middle East is once again more productive than Europe -- that still doesn't blot out the black mark of that reversal I noted, however obtusely you want to deny it.

  105. @nebulafox
    IMO, it was pretty clear from the get-go that Streicher just wasn't in the same category as Goering (who hated him with the passion of a thousand suns-had Hitler died around 1941 and Goering succeeded him, Streicher wouldn't have been long for the world) or Kaltenbrunner or Speer. Even some of the prosecution realized this, with one commenting that it was ridiculous to call him a conspirator against the peace of Europe because he, well, wasn't: he wasn't a member of the military or the SS or the greater administration of the Reich, he was just a ridiculous perverted Jew-baiter and local thug. Until he was removed from office, he mainly posed a threat to the unlucky denizens of Franconia and no one else.

    But he was so repulsive that the jury had no problem dishing out the death sentence with almost no thought. I recall that one of the people there compared him to a dirty old man who gives trouble in public parks. To be fair, Streicher hardly helped his own case by his court-room theatrics and rantings, so, meh. My suspicion is that if he kept his mouth shut and let his lawyer handle things, he'd have gotten a Spandau sentence. He was too offensive and notorious to simply get off the hook, but he just wasn't in the same league as the other guys who were given death sentences, and in the case of Speer (one can't help but wonder if the opposite dynamic played out with the handsome, cultured, English-speaking Speer), those who didn't.

    But he was so repulsive that the jury had no problem dishing out the death sentence with almost no thought.

    There were no jury, just a panel of judges. They would have had to give a reason for their judgment, so somewhere in the Nuremberg Archives there is a file from them fully explaining it.

  106. @Colin Wright
    '... To this day, if you overlay the basic development and prosperity indices of a given region of Europe with how many years that region was under Ottoman/Saracen/Moorish rule, you’ll see some substantially negative correlation there...'

    And that's been true for all of about four hundred years now. As late as the eighteenth century, levels of prosperity for the average man were about the same in the Ottoman Empire and in Western Europe.

    You're taking our relatively transient lead (and we're being rapidly superseded by the Asians, by the way) and finding in it some kind of proof not merely of superiority, but of Islam being some kind of eternal blight -- which is ridiculous.

    As homeless flood our streets, as we helplessly admit floods of indigent immigrants, as we celebrate increasingly improbable forms of sexual degeneracy, as we fight increasingly futile wars, what will you decide this implies about us? Is Christendom therefore inherently destructive and inferior? Should the Chinese eradicate us all in some kind of genocidal fit?

    After all, what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. In the future, others may regard us with all the sympathy and appreciation you're choosing to extend to others.

    There's a saying that you can judge a man by how he treats those who haven't the power to hurt him. One could say that one can judge the morality of a culture by how it regards others when it's enjoying its moment in the sun.

    Try considering, say, the opening image in Kipling's Kim. Compared to you, he's a veritable multiculturalist. Sometimes we're on top, sometimes we're not. Don't read too much into it.

    “And that’s been true for all of about four hundred years now. As late as the eighteenth century, levels of prosperity for the average man were about the same in the Ottoman Empire and in Western Europe.”

    Again, given that Islam, unlike Western Europe, was born on third base, that’s already a black mark against it. When in the thousands of year prior to the rise of Christianity was that part of the Middle East “about the same”, developmentally speaking, as Western Europe? Oh yeah, NEVER. So tell me again what “exceptional” really means.

    “As homeless flood our streets, as we helplessly admit floods of indigent immigrants, as we celebrate increasingly improbable forms of sexual degeneracy, as we fight increasingly futile wars, what will you decide this implies about us? Is Christendom therefore inherently destructive and inferior?”

    I’m sorry, are you under the illusion that Christianity has been the guiding ethos of the West for the past century or so? No, it was schucked off — largely because of dissemblers like yourself who have succeeded so well in obscuring something as obvious that gradient — and its reversal — that even someone like me regards as obvious. The ones who want to hide and obscure just how remarkable and exceptional the rise of Europe (relative to the MENA regions) was and what was behind it. Moreover, it wasn’t Christianity that advocated the sexual degeneracy and warfare you speak of. As I understand it, the only institution — and I mean the only institution — in all the West opposed to separating sex and procreation were old-line Christians, predominantly Catholics. They weren’t the ones agitating for endless wars either, and they certainly weren’t much in favor of the ersatz new-and-improved replacements for religion that have been proposed of late, be they Communism, or liberalism, or hyper-nationalism. In Europe, in particular, the parts that continue to hang on to Christianity seem far more sane with regard to degeneracy and immigrant-replacement than those following one or more of the alternatives to Christianity. The fact that you would nonetheless propose that Christianity is what is inherently destructive and inferior says a lot more about you than Christianity.

    And I suspect the homeless flood, as dire as it is, pales in comparison with the poverty of past generations, so that’s not convincing either. At this point, you’re just flailing around for any stick to beat the West with. I’m no prophet, and I don’t know what the future holds. If the West — and this includes the Marxist-wannabe bureaucrats in charge of much of Christianity — continues to ignore the lessons of the past the way you do, maybe it deserves to keep burning. But even if things go back to as they were for thousands and thousands of years — so that Middle East is once again more productive than Europe — that still doesn’t blot out the black mark of that reversal I noted, however obtusely you want to deny it.

  107. How many of these defenders of Islam have read as many books and attended as many lectures and taken as many university courses as I, a poetaster? Take a look at Stephen Coughlin’s “Red Pill” lecture, delivered at the Pentagon until the noted CS Lewis disciple Barack Hussein Obama made him stop. Yes, Islam is objectively worse, and it is objectively worse as a result of hard-wired institutional features of the religion itself practiced properly, and not some fluke or bad crowd. Yes, many critics of Islam are themselves compromised or even guilty of comparable crimes — but that doesn’t exonerate Islam. It is sooner or later going to become necessary to deal with it, because, on top of all of Islam’s other problems, they have decided they want to spread and push us around. The fact that traitors within our walls opened the gates is a separate problem. A practitioner of “cultural Islam” who respects the local laws, doesn’t beat his wife or rape his kids, and who sensibly imbibes relaxing liquids, is the ideal, and hopefully the future, but to the complete majority and mainsteam of global Islam (outside the former Soviet Union and, in the past, Turkey), that’s actually a bad guy.

    • Replies: @The Wild Geese Howard

    How many of these defenders of Islam have read as many books and attended as many lectures and taken as many university courses as I, a poetaster?
     
    I'll take, "extremely few, " for $500, Alex.

    I would wager that even fewer have spent significant time living and working in any Islamic country and fewer still have interacted with the average man in the street on a day-to-day basis in such countries.

    Yes, many critics of Islam are themselves compromised or even guilty of comparable crimes — but that doesn’t exonerate Islam. It is sooner or later going to become necessary to deal with it, because, on top of all of Islam’s other problems, they have decided they want to spread and push us around.
     
    Hijra is one of those built-in features you mention.
  108. @Desiderius
    The Constitution is still the law of the land, that's why the impeachment frauds keep pretending to uphold it. Not enemy's rules.

    That map of the sanctuary counties doesn't show much enemy ground either. Bloomberg might be able to buy an off-year election, but the state and her people aren't for sale.

    Enemy media forced to recant:

    https://twitter.com/ComfortablySmug/status/1219021006205063168

    This gentleman doesn't look like he's much used to losing:

    https://twitter.com/rosedixontx/status/1217948420696150016

    Well, it appears your predictions about today’s rally were more accurate than my own.

    I am happy that things went well in Richmond, with no significant incidents reported other than a few isolated cases of bad optics.

  109. @J.Ross
    How many of these defenders of Islam have read as many books and attended as many lectures and taken as many university courses as I, a poetaster? Take a look at Stephen Coughlin's "Red Pill" lecture, delivered at the Pentagon until the noted CS Lewis disciple Barack Hussein Obama made him stop. Yes, Islam is objectively worse, and it is objectively worse as a result of hard-wired institutional features of the religion itself practiced properly, and not some fluke or bad crowd. Yes, many critics of Islam are themselves compromised or even guilty of comparable crimes -- but that doesn't exonerate Islam. It is sooner or later going to become necessary to deal with it, because, on top of all of Islam's other problems, they have decided they want to spread and push us around. The fact that traitors within our walls opened the gates is a separate problem. A practitioner of "cultural Islam" who respects the local laws, doesn't beat his wife or rape his kids, and who sensibly imbibes relaxing liquids, is the ideal, and hopefully the future, but to the complete majority and mainsteam of global Islam (outside the former Soviet Union and, in the past, Turkey), that's actually a bad guy.

    How many of these defenders of Islam have read as many books and attended as many lectures and taken as many university courses as I, a poetaster?

    I’ll take, “extremely few, ” for $500, Alex.

    I would wager that even fewer have spent significant time living and working in any Islamic country and fewer still have interacted with the average man in the street on a day-to-day basis in such countries.

    Yes, many critics of Islam are themselves compromised or even guilty of comparable crimes — but that doesn’t exonerate Islam. It is sooner or later going to become necessary to deal with it, because, on top of all of Islam’s other problems, they have decided they want to spread and push us around.

    Hijra is one of those built-in features you mention.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS