Anti-Wilders Mob Goes Mad


The other day I wrote here about a Norwegian TV documentary – to use the term very loosely – in which Robert Spencer, the consummate Islam critic and expert, was expertly demonized.  The program showed him in Stockholm last summer, addressing an outdoor audience from a platform.  While he stood there in suit and tie, his demeanor entirely calm and reasonable, and delivered his talk – or tried to – a violent mob a few feet away spewed out its venom: “Fucking racists! No racists in our streets!”

Meanwhile a small army of riot police struggled to hold them back. It was not easy.

To look at those faces twisted with hatred – those human beings transformed into ferocious beasts, filled with savage indignation and, by all indications, prepared to tear their fellowman limb from limb – was to stare into the very heart of contemporary Europe’s darkness.  It’s one thing to read about the history of Europe from the storming of the Bastille to the present day; it’s another thing to see the most cataclysmic, psychopathic turning points of the last couple of centuries vividly mirrored, as it were, before one’s eyes.

How different were those faces in Stockholm, after all, from the faces one might have seen in the streets of Paris during the Reign of Terror?  This mob rage didn’t come from nowhere: it’s the product of history.  Those rioters in Stockholm were the descendants of Robespierre and the enragés, the heirs to their unquenchable bloodthirstiness; and the rage in their eyes was testimony to the enduring destructive power of pure fanatical ideology, which, time and again since 1789, has turned Europe into a madhouse.

Looking into the eyes of those protesters, one could scarcely doubt that if they could push their way past those cops and get their hands on Spencer, they’d do as much harm to him as they could.  And yet, remarkably, while Frode Nielsen, the “journalist” who made this “documentary,” didn’t try to hide these people’s violence from us, he didn’t breathe so much as a word in condemnation of it.  On the contrary: if silence betokens approval, he approved.  Indeed, even as we watched those rioters raging rabidly at Spencer, Nielsen took pains to spell out for us who the real extremist was – Spencer, naturally.

Needless to say, if Nielsen had paused for just two or three minutes to provide an honest overview of Spencer’s work, the whole premise of his documentary would’ve come crashing down; it would’ve become clear to every viewer that Spencer is the very opposite of what Nielsen, and those rioters, would have us believe.  Yet that wasn’t what Nielsen wanted; he wanted his viewers to see Spencer as a force for evil.  And he apparently wanted them to understand, too, that those barbaric demonstrators were the Good Guys – decent, delicate souls who’d been driven to extreme conduct by a vile American provocateur.  If they were capable of violence, it was violence in the name of virtue.

Spencer’s Stockholm visit took place last summer.  Last Saturday, another one of the men who are routinely characterized by the likes of Nielsen as a contemporary force for evil, Geert Wilders, gave a talk in another Swedish city, Malmö.  On Sunday, a website posted an account by the Danish politician and jurist Aia Fog of what happened when she and three other women arrived at the sports complex where Wilders was scheduled to speak.  They came in a taxi, Fog wrote, but because of police barricades were obliged to walk 200 yards to the entrance.  The cops were out in force; and, as it happened, the protesters were shouting the exact same slogan that greeted Spencer in Stockholm: “No racists in our streets!”

One difference between that demo and this one, however, was that this time around the police weren’t holding the protesters back.  The cops were over here, the demonstrators over there – which meant that Fog and her friends had to make their way through the mob in order to get into the venue.  As they were doing so, some of the protesters apparently recognized one of Fog’s companions, the high-profile journalist Katrine Winkel Holm – who is a columnist for Jyllands-Posten, a founder of the Danish Free Press Society, and a director of Danish state TV and radio.  “Racist!” they shouted.  “Go home, we have border controls for you!” And they screamed at Fog: “Fat fascist pig!”

“Katrine starts to argue with them,” recalled Fog,

but it’s completely futile, and soon I pull her arm and tell her to drop it, so we can get through the crowd and go in.  And then it happens very quickly: Katrine and I are suddenly isolated from Kit and Trine, and I’m surrounded by AFA.

AFA is Antifascistisk Aktion – one of those European groups that call themselves anti-fascists but that, in everything they do and say, are textbook totalitarians.  Fog wasn’t sure that these guys were members of AFA, but they sure looked the part:

Danish men in their twenties, with black hoodies and small ugly tattoos….extremely threatening – not just in their attitude (which is furious, hateful – and just waiting to be permitted to strike), but also physically: I’m completely surrounded by 4-5 of them who not only block my way, but who push me hard with their shoulders, knocking me off balance. Then I feel a blow to the back of my head, and then another – this time not so hard, which in the end turns out to be an egg hurled at my neck.

Though the Swedish police were nearby, they were too far away to see any of this, and so didn’t come to anybody’s aid.  In any case, the four women made it safely into the venue – and when, moments later, concerned about the safety of other attendees, they stepped outside to see whether the police had managed to create a secure “corridor” through which people could pass through the mob unmolested, the cops told them to go back inside, “because we were ‘provoking’ [the protesters] by our presence.” Ah, that word – provoked.  (Indeed, after Wilders’s speech was over, a Swedish journalist asked Fog if she had “provoked” anybody before the egg was thrown at her.)

So much fury!  So many men bullying women in the name of human sensitivity!  It’s all supposed to be about “Islamophobia,” of course – about defending innocent, put-upon Muslims from their racist oppressors.  But scratch these self-styled friends of Islam and what you’ll find is the heirs to Europe’s most poisonous, dehumanizing dreams – men and women who are the sworn enemies of that messy, imperfect thing, human freedom, and who’ll never shake off their dangerous, blind faith in the utopian promise of authoritarian ideology.  So it stands, alas, in much of Europe in the year 2012.  To know anything about the history of the last few generations on this beleaguered continent is to realize that none of this insanity is new – and that every bit of it is, shall we say, profoundly inauspicious.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.

  • Chezwick

    BRUCE: "To know anything about the history of the last few generations on this beleaguered continent is to realize that none of this insanity is new – and that every bit of it is, shall we say, profoundly inauspicious."

    There is ONE thing that is new. Muslim conquerors – Turk and Arab alike – used to enter Europe as invading armies. Now, they are invited in, as immigrants.

    How long before European infidels are being persecuted and forced into exile the same way their counterparts are in the Middle East and North Africa? How long before native Swedes are no longer welcome in Sweden?

    Malmo is a glimpse of Sweden's future.

  • Mary Sue

    Man I hope he said (in Dutch), "Thank you, you are only proving my point."

  • David M

    I wish Sweden had a man like Bruce but it has not. I call Sweden the North Korea of Europe. Malmö is a model of Unholy alliance between Islam and the Left with a notorious lefty antisemitic mayor. In Sweden every thing is a hate speech but you are free to insult and hate Christianity and Christian straight white male. One word against Islam, Muslims, brown or black, gypsies or defending traditional family is considered worse than genocide. Swedish mass media (I call it corrupt-media) is among the worst in the West and they are not only coward but also dishonest and guilty. Sweden is in a very bad shape and the Left has found Islam as its new religion.

    • RoguePatriot6

      "Sweden is in a very bad shape and the Left has found Islam as its new religion. "

      What is ironic and yet so typical at the same time, is the fact that Islamists practice and endorse all of the things that they relentlessly accuse Christians and Jews of doing.

    • Goldbug36

      What more can one expect of Sweden? After all, they admired Fuhrer Adolf and provided war materials and steel to the Nazis to be used against their fellow Scandinavians during WWII? They were also lefty anti-semitics during that unfortunate war, so nothing is new here. Yes, the day will come when the blonde-blue-eyed's will no longer be welcome in their own country, unless they convert, and their women agree to wear burkas.

    • Kiel

      Sweden has a dubious record, all right. WW II did harm the Swedes reputation, and the post-war period with the hapless Oluf Palme and his “folkhem” (democratic socialism Swedish style) followed up. Up to date the political correctness plays its tune full-blown.

  • http://libertyandculture.blogspot.com/ JasonPappas

    Such vicious hate … and it is clearly acceptable in Sweden. They used to have a pacifist left but now …

  • MikeWood

    The account given by Ann Coulter in her book "Demonic" springs to mind. Both Islam and the Left have found in each other a very likeable reflection of themselves: authoritarian, devoted to the power of the mob, self-righteous and fanatical.

  • Indio Viejo

    Profoundly inauspicious indeed! If the death toll in WWI and in WWII killed off the best of European youth and has created the precarious demographic imbalance Europe now suffers, then the coming debacle will end it for sure. In 20 years Europe will be Muslim, and it will be our enemy. It could be the end of civilization as we have known it for 2,000 years.

    • http://www.freerepublic.us Brian Richard Allen

      …. the death toll in WWI and in WWII killed off the best of European youth and has created the precarious demographic imbalance Europe now suffers ….

      We Americans are not without responsibility.

      By allowing the traitor Roosevelt to deal with his Uncle Joe, by pleading guilty, via the Marshall Plan, to winning another of their wars for them and by saving them from their bloody barbarism and by the past sixty-odd years of providing their defense against one another and the Soviets, we have picked up their tab and by doing so have allowed the Europeons’ civilization and their neo-Soviet to degenerate into a post-Christian fascissocialist nihilism, now only a step or two short of descent into a new Dark Age.

      From which they are unlikely to ever emerge!

      • Drakken

        Sorry Gentlemen, I agree with you to a point, but the regular folks who see these leftist openly side with their enemies, know that it will be sooner rather than later that open warfare breaks out and will side with their own. The funny thing about those leftist/communists is once you give them a taste of grapeshot they go back to cowering before their betters. Mark my words, the Europeans natives will fight once their backs are against the wall and God himself won't be able to help those who incured their wrath, this is going to get extremely bloody.

    • SCREW SOCIALISM

      SCREW europe/eurabia.

  • Omar

    Thanks for mentioning the comparison between the violent mob and the French Revolution/Reign of Terror. We all know that the French Revolution and the Jacobins is the origin of radical left-wing politics and that Robespierre is the father of Communism (he came before Marx). The fascist left has tried to intimidate freedom fighters and suppress free speech for a long time. It is time for freedom fighters and their supporters to defeat the unholy alliance of leftists and Islamists.

    • Larry

      No, Jean Jacques Rousseau is the true father of Communism, which is why he hated Voltaire so bitterly, because Voltaire called him out on his stupidity.

      • Omar

        You're right. While Rosseau did lay the foundation for the France Revolution and its legacy, Robespierre carried out the Reign of Terror. Still, the French Revolution/Reign of Terror marked the origins of Communism as that revolution itself toppled King Louis XVI, who was an American ally in the American Revolution against the British. So, Communist anti-Americanism actually went as far back as the French Revolution.

        • Mary Sue

          the irony being that Robspierre was literally hoist by his own petard, and perished at the hands of the very mob he created, under the very guillotine he used to purge society. Karma's a bee with an itch, ain't it robspierre?

        • PamM

          The French revolutionaries in 1789 were very pro-American, as they saw America as being a country that had shaken off its shackles; a process they were trying to emulate in France. Lafayette, for example, who had fought in the American Revolution, was a major player in the early years and became the first commander of the National Guard. The goal of the revolutionaries at this stage was merely to curb the power of the absolute monarchy and establish a more representative form of government similar to that in Britain.

          The Terror followed the revolution of 1792, when the hardline Jacobins, who controlled the Paris mobs, overthrew the monarchy, seized control of the Commune and established the Committee of Public Safety, which was the real instrument of terror. Robespierre came to dominate this body by eliminating all of his rivals. He was a calculating, cold blooded killer who was, unusually at the time, extremely fastidious in his personal habits. By the summer of 1794 many people in France feared for their head, so a group of them, led by Barras, conspired to overthrow Robespierre and send him to the guillotine instead.

  • Marty

    What the totalitarian left refuses to understand is that islam is even more brutal. Once sharia law is implemented, leftists will become (deservedly) the perfect and first victim of genocide. Some will convert to isalm since it is the perfect cult for sociopaths; others will not know what hit them. Of course, the european caliphate will usher in economic stagnation and a medieval life style. Any remaining civilized europeans will migrate to North America or make a determined stand in remote enclaves fighting off the slavery and misery that accompanies and characterizes islam.

    • Mary Sue

      what's already starting to become quite disturbing is the leftists that now claim that disallowing free speech is justified if it will prevent deaths. Except that it can't, and they have no idea. And when the time comes and the Islamic Extremists come for them, they'll be all alone.

  • Schlomotion

    Mr. Bawer completely ignores that fact that racist lunatic megalomaniacs can present an "entirely calm and reasonable" demeanor. David Duke does it. Ernst Zundel does it. Robert Spencer does it. Rightfully, a lot of people are angry about these xenophobic pimps. Mr. Bawer wants to control the tone of their reaction.

    • Omar

      Once again, we have the annoying Flipside giving us the contradiction to anything reasonable. Schlomotion, why do you keep posting Islamist propaganda? The truth is that the fascist mob has tried to silence critics of Islamism for some time now. Quit posting leftist/Islamist propaganda.

      • warpmine

        Talking but no one's home to listen which is standard practice for those of his ilk. In short, your wasting your time sifting through his comments and responding. We know, many have tried to no end with no resulting change in attitude.

    • Chezwick

      Hey Schlo, put up or shut up. Please document a single quote from Robert Spencer that can be objectively termed "racist".

      • Schlomotion

        One can easily find the link to his blog. It's part of the site, after all.

        • Chezwick

          That's a blatant cop-out, Schlo. I reiterate, to support your claim that Spencer is a "racist", please produce a single quote from him that can be objectively termed racist. We're all waiting.

        • Omar

          Flipside, quit posting paranoid propaganda. It's really annoying to read nonsense leftist/Islamist propaganda.

        • Drakken

          Once again your all talk and no action, keep up the good work puzzy. Commis like you are all the same, you will never put up or put your life on the line for your beliefs because deep down your all cowards to the core and have to rely on people better than you will ever be. Bloody pathetic.

        • SCREW SOCIALISM

          The racist part of the blog is the crap from Shariamotion.

    • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

      Schlo, you're only at a -11. But the day is young.

      • Mary Sue

        hee hee, at the end of the day, Schlo is at -24 :D

        • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

          yes, a -24 with a -64 above that one!

          It's nice to feel part of something worth while.

          • Mary Sue

            wow that must be some kind of record

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            For those muslim friendly trolls that don't fear reaching and stretching!

    • maherI

      Islam is not a race. Islam is an obscurantist and crime generating dogma

    • reader

      schlo, on this site, YOU do it, but there's no point of being angry with a sick person.

    • Hesperado

      Schlomotion is correct on one point: the calm demeanor of a speaker isn't ipso facto evidence of an absence of racism in his message. However, Logic 101 also tells us that the calm demeanor of a speaker isn't ipso facto evidence, by itself, of the presence of racism in that speaker's message.

      Thus, Schlomotion would have to present an argument using evidence to persuade us that Spencer belongs in the company of Duke, Zundel (and another good example was bin Laden — quite calm and peaceful in his demeanor).

      It seems that most Leftists think in terms of an intellectual mechanism already in place that contains the axiom — "If you criticize Muslims too much, you must be racist" — and bracketing out any excessive criticism of Islam & Muslims as unacceptable before they have even been considered. This is to judge before you examine evidence, to pre-judge — the classic definition of prejudice.

      When you combine this prejudice with passionate emotions, it's a recipe for mass irrationality, demagoguery, and potentially the very sort of Fascism which many of these Leftists claim to oppose.

      My rhetorical concurrence with part of Schlomotion's comment points to one flaw in Bawer's analysis: He ignores and therefore underestimates the sincerity of many Leftists. Not all Leftists are sincere, and quite a few of them are as Bawer describes. However, an important proportion of them are sincere do-gooders who think the angels are on their side in their cause, and they really believe they are fighting for good, humane values, against what they perceive to be a threat against those values. In doing so, they have made the crucial error of casting Muslims as the victims of the same fascist racism that was purveyed by Nazis, and erecting an axiomatic inability to see the mountain of data that indicates that, in fact, Muslims are as a group themselves the worst racists and haters in the world today, dangerously so.

      Bawer's flaw tends to set up a demonization of all those who disagree with us, whereas it may be more productive to discriminate among our opponents — between

      1) those who are nihilistic anarchists with a consanguine fondness for Islam because they hate their own West so darkly

      and

      2) those who, with good intentions but faulty thinking & feeling, have twisted their own Western heritage of values into a monstrosity of Doing the Wrong Thing For the Right Reasons.

      • Drakken

        I have always described that good intentions and 50 cents won't buy you a cup of coffee. The do gooders in the end always sow the seeds of their own destruction by ingnoring reality. The reality is, there will be bloody reckoning soon and the leftist do gooders will pay the piper, and for all their good intentions the reality will be much much more gruesome.

    • Touchstone

      "Mr. Bawer wants to control the tone of their reaction."

      You had to invent that because you don't have a valid point to make.

      He's DESCRIBING and CRITICIZING the tone of their reaction, not attempting to control it. You're imputing an imaginary motive to him in a lamer-than-usual attempt to discredit him. You're also insinuating that you might actually support the wild antics of the mob.

      You claimed that Mona Eltahawy was justified in vandalizing Pam Geller's sign. Now you virtually claim that a rampaging mob is justified in perpetrating acts of violence against a man you happen to hate. And earlier you declared you'd "gladly" throw Michael Moore "into a pit of sharpened stakes", and fantasized about wringing Ben Shapiro's neck.

      There's a pattern here. You defend criminality, you give a pass to it, and you condemn those like Bawer who condemn it. You support criminal behavior — including violent criminality — against people you despise, even though they're law-abiding like Spencer. You've crossed the Rubicon into fascism-land when you start supporting the destruction of property and human life in the advancement of your political aims.

      The great irony is that the drooling mob makes Spencer's point … and so do you, by attacking one of their critics and thereby aiding them. Between you and Spencer, he's the one with integrity, as loathsome as you may find his peacefully expressed opinions. You're the one lost in a moral jungle.

      • Chezwick

        Great comments!

        • Touchstone

          Thanks, Chezwick!

      • Schlomotion

        I virtually claim? That's funny. Let's deal with your actual point:

        "The great irony is that the drooling mob makes Spencer's point".

        Yes it does. Mr. Spencer's schtick as pastor and faux academic is to present himself as looking calm and composed while insulting people and whipping them into an outrage, and then pointing at them as evidence of themselves. One can see quite easily in videos of Mr. Spencer that when he is moved off of his preferred footing of fake composure and besserwissen, his voice starts to crack, he takes a step backward, looks around wildly for the nearest bodyguard, shrugs quite a bit, and assumes the posture of a cornered nutria. This was true in his videotaped college tours and of his standoff with Suhail Khan. The most amusing part of it all is when he throws Ms. Geller and Ms. Darwish in the way as human shields and then barks at them to shut up when he wants to make another picadore's point. It is no surprise that an entire nation of people are wise to his antics at this point. That is what happens to megalomaniacs.

        Haven't you seen Witchfinder General / The Conqueror Worm with Vincent Price?

        • Drakken

          Ah yes, more of your feelings and less on common sense, logic and simple reasoning. Typical commi all talk and no action.

        • Touchstone

          Just two sentences before "virtually claim" appeared the word "insinuating". That's obviously what I meant, but as usual, context isn't your forte.

          The rest of your little rant confirms my thesis about you. You have no moral compass. You dance around this fact but ultimately can't avoid it. Your M.O. is to make excuses for the inexcusable: bending and breaking laws in order to crush your LAW-ABIDING opponents. How readily you resort to advocating behavior which lies outside the bounds of decency, of law and order. You're alternately amoral and immoral, as it suits your purposes. You invent your quasi-morality as you go along, disparaging the rules the rest of us take for granted, such as "mob lynchings are wrong". You don't believe society's rules should apply to you, and you support the lawlessness of others as long as it serves your aims.

          "while insulting people and whipping them into an outrage"

          How little credit you give your fellow travelers. How low an opinion you have of grown adults. Mona's vandalism is to be forgiven because she was "insulted". A violent mob is to be forgiven because it was "whipped into an outrage". These are GROWN ADULTS who are expected to OBEY THE LAW, not break it the moment they're offended by a transit ad or by ONE SINGLE MAN EXPRESSING HIS OPINIONS whose voice, shame of shames, occasionally "starts to crack". He's to be beaten to a pulp because his voice cracks? Because you don't care for his "posture" and his shrugging shoulders? These to you are incriminating? You couldn't make your "arguments" any more unconvincing if you tried.

          The theme of your seditious posts is "the ends justify the means". That's the link between your defense of Eltahawy's vandalism, the anti-Spencer mob's savagery, and your own violent fantasies where Moore and Shapiro (and presumably many others) are concerned. Such is the moral universe you inhabit. Your endless stream of specious arguments and needlessly esoteric references will never mask the moral bankruptcy at the heart of your every post. (Although, I must admit, it was truly heart-warming when you said so effusively of the genocide that took the lives of six million Jews: "I feel bad about it and I wish it didn't happen". Priceless!)

          "That is what happens to megalomaniacs."

          Then you, not Spencer, face a scary fate indeed.

          • Schlomotion

            Since the issue of Antiracist / Antifa violence is a red herring, feel free to inflate it to the size of a Graf Zeppelin. Nevertheless, we agree that groups like Anti-Racist Action, and Antifascists are easy to inflame hysterical soc.ialist idiots. I don't endorse their acts of violence by any means, and naturally if they didn't have Robert Spencer to tease them to a frenzy with sticks, they would turn to one of his equals, like Westboro Baptist Church or something. I am also sure there other kooks to laugh out of Norway.

            The fact remains that in the war of using one another, sometimes Robert Spencer succeeds in using the crowd, and sometimes the crowd succeeds in using him. In a place like Greece, where the society has collapsed into fisticuffs between Golden Dawn and Antiracist soci.alists, one can only wish that neither would gain headway in other countries. Mr. Spencer and Ms. Geller are the kind of acid that degrades a civilization into such a Jerry Springer Show public brawl, but rather than being skinheads, they are the counterjihadist pro-Israel equivalent of skinheads, of Zundels, and of Dukes. One listens to Robert Spencer and one sees the same possibility of a degraded state where the Liebknechts face off against the Von Badens and people trade off killings in alleys. It is a shame that Mr. Spencer is pumping that kind of bile into the American social fabric or any other, but he is as free to do so as others are to criticize.

            I find it funny that you accuse me of sedition. Let's not make Robert Spencer out to be Americanism incarnate instead of the freelance harasser of Muslim Americans that he is. Let's also not pretend that he doesn't relish the gimmick of blogging live from a hotel room bragging about his security detail like he is a piece of gold being transported from Fort Knox.

          • SCREW SOCIALISM

            Shariamotion,

            When Obama concedes defeat to Romney, your world will fall apart.

            HAPPY ETERNAL NAKBA!

          • Touchstone

            "to tease them to a frenzy with sticks" — Like what you try to do every single day to people who support Israel? It's OK for you to speak your mind, but not Spencer? You, but not Geller? You're not in a credible position to complain. You're not more righteous than Spencer (far from it), you're just much less successful at getting your message out.

            "Mr. Spencer and Ms. Geller are the kind of acid that degrades a civilization" — If you (and the UN) had your way, nobody would be allowed to criticize Islam or defend Israel. That's really the "crime" that Geller and Spencer are "getting away with". What's an "acid" to a zealot like yourself is good medicine to others. The fascist effort to silence political opponents by any means necessary — a wicked practice you defend regularly — is a far more corrosive acid than speaking uncomfortable truths and issuing warnings that certain elements would rather not be spoken and issued.

            "pumping that kind of bile into the American social fabric" — You're the one trying hard to pump bile in the form of daily anti-Jewish provocations, slanders, and celebrations of amorality and anarchy. But like I said, your reach is tiny. Quantitatively, you're not doing much damage. Qualitatively, you're far coarser a wrongdoer than those you condemn. If you could, you would pump your own bile until it buried your enemies, along with millions of others you hate.

            "Let's not make Robert Spencer out to be Americanism incarnate" — Who's doing that? Hyperbole is your go-to rhetorical ploy. Defending someone's right to speak isn't the same as putting that someone on a pedestal.

            The slings and arrows you direct at Spencer (like what he does in his hotel room) sound petty and envious and make you look very small indeed. The more trivial and spiteful your attacks on him, the more he doesn't seem to be doing anything particularly egregious, and the more you look like a jealous, disgruntled git. Your attacks on him are commensurate with a rival classmate who bested your performance on an exam or stole your girlfriend, not with the witch-burning monster played by Vincent Price. The irony is that you're actually diminishing the magnitude of Spencer's alleged wickedness by attacking him in such a petty, spiteful way.

          • Schlomotion

            It really is wild to watch you try to lump Jews who randomly happen to be born Jewish, Jews who benignly observe the Jewish religion, and fanatical nationalist gangster Crip Jews who are merely a xenophobic criminal affiliation all into the same category. I am not anti-Jewish by a longshot, unless you mean anti-Category Three Jews who think that everyone who is a Jew is an obligatory lifetime member in the ethnic nationalist and internationalist special person club. You know, the Jews who issue real and professional fatwas against people who break ranks with the collective? I admit readily that I am anti-those type of Jews. They don't like America as anything but a chuck wagon, and have no real intention of all moving to the volatile piece of real estate they currently run concentration camps on. I am justified in disliking that particular subgroup that you try to cover over with the other two groups of nice people.

            It was a good piece of comedy, you claiming that I am jealous of Robert Spencer in a hotel room, when in fact anybody can rent a hotel room for around $90 bucks a night and sit in front of his laptop over wi-fi and claim he is on an important business meeting with Sun News Canada. Oh, that is funny!

            Now Spencer beat me on a test and stole my girlfriend? Oh, the jokes just don't stop. A hairybeary midget stole my girlfriend? Hey, I'll tell you though, a classmate did beat me on a test once, as you say. She wrote a good treatise on brain-machine interfaces after she got her PhD. Really approachable and ambitious material. I don't think I can ever be spiteful of intelligence. I can definitely be critical of an evil man who poses as a pastor and has a roadshow of hatred though. It's amazing to me that you defend this guy. The lengths to which people go to prolong the inevitable condemnation of an evildoer by the public so that he can score a few more points for selective morality and landgrabbers is really stunning.

          • Touchstone

            You've made plenty of comments disparaging of Jews in general, and Israel in general, not just the fringe you claim to focus on. You've slandered Judaism in terms much stronger than anything you've used to criticize Islam, and you've done the latter only when you've been pressured to spread the criticism around. What's truly "wild" and "amazing" is how unaware you are of your own prejudice, how deep your denial is, how undisciplined you are with your slanders, and how baffled you must be at the ever-growing number of people here who seem to agree that you have a beef with Jews. Reminding people how "nice" you think most Jews are is what all insincere Israel-bashers say when they get defensive.

            As for the "comedy" I unintentionally provided you: I was simply reporting what I was reading. If you're not jealous of Spencer's superior ability to attract attention, then you certainly SOUND like it. That's really the point. I wasn't trying to read your mind so much as I was trying to let you know how schoolgirlish your petty attacks on him sound. Criticizing the guy's physical appearance and hotel room habits? That's perfectly in keeping with small-minded, envious spite; not exactly the stuff of scholarly disquisitions on brain-machine interfaces. (Which reminds me: bragging, whether in the form of name-dropping or ostentatious displays of erudition, is the other go-to defense mechanism you use, when hyperbole won't suffice.)

            "a hairybeary midget" — I rest my case. That tripe could have appeared on any catty teenage girl's twitter feed.

            "the volatile piece of real estate they currently run concentration camps on"

            In one breath you insist you're not an antisemite, and in the next you trot out the old standby of antisemites everywhere: liken Israelis to Nazis, even though the comparison has no merit. It's meant to sting and demonize, not reflect the truth. Yes, let's all pretend that Hamas is a perfectly friendly social club, not linked in any way to genocidal mullahs, and Israelis should just leave them to their own peaceful pursuits. Why be the slightest bit concerned about their activities? And let's also pretend that Israelis, like Nazis, are running "camps" where they're performing gruesome medical experiments on Arab children and making innocent people stand interminably at roll call and gassing them when they collapse from exhaustion. (Have you heard about the luxury shopping in the "camp" called Gaza, by the way?)

            "to prolong the inevitable condemnation of an evildoer by the public" — Inevitable? Is that what your crystal ball tells you? As long as Islamic radicalism threatens to increase, not decrease, the more likely it is that experts who warn about it will be respected and valued by the public, rather than vilified. When Muslims murder an American ambassador, it's the reputation of Islam that takes a hit, whereas that of "evildoers" like Spencer can only get better.

          • Schlomotion

            I am definitely not baffled by the rhetorical trope of the growing trend. Nor am I baffled that you seek to rob from me my genuine like for all human beings which includes, of course, people who happen to be Jewish but does exclude people who choose ethnic nationalism over universal brotherhood. I can't bend myself to like a Khallid Muhammad any more than an Irv Rubin. The fact that that kind of "Jewishness" is optional makes it all the less acceptable when it is beaten so hard into others with not only vicious collective-pride but with the primate deception of group moral rationalization. It really is not only impossible but inappropriate to distinguish it from the Muslim kind which I equally disdain but which I withhold from the gnashing and hungry morons that crave it in the name of equal time.

            I am not jealous of Mr. Spencer's purported superiority at getting attention. Again, I am disgusted and publicly disdainful of his poor choice to pose as a man of religion and exert his highly fragile form of demagoguery over people with the intent of making his community angry only to ridicule them. Let us not forget the modus operandi of DHFC: first the group insult using the full page ad, then the appearance at the institution financed by the insulted audience, then and only then, the calm cool and collected form of academic tilting and sneering. Finally, the angry outbursts, and then the opportunistic photographs of the event portraying Horowitz, Geller, Spencer & Co. as the victims of the mob, when in reality they were parasites of the mob, crowdsurfers.

            You should really get over your intense hatred of schoolgirls. I don't get it. They are pretty, they are bright, and who doesn't like braided pigtails? Schoolgirls never hurt me. To you they are these gargantuan gorgons of bitter ridicule, something from deep in the psyche of Zionist culture where men are cuckolded by women and try to rise above them as cold calculators and moral experts. Poor schoolgirls. If I may name drop some more, I know another schoolgirl who was always excluded for being brainy and Jewish, and went on to write excellent youth fiction to rival William Gibson. I just don't understand your visceral hatred of the schoolgirl. They are the counterpart to schoolboys.

            "in the next you trot out the old standby of antisemites everywhere: liken Israelis to Nazis

            I am finally reading The Wandering Who by Gilad Atzmon. He does the same therein based on his firsthand experience in the IDF. I have to tell you, I am cheering while reading this book. Such a humanist. Such a philosophically sound and plain speaker is Gilad Atzmon. His writing about politics and personal experience and of his leaving the tiny and bitter family of ethnic nationalists for the wider and more welcoming family of joyful and meritocratic musicians is such a heartlifter. I understand why Alan Dershowitz doesn't want him to be given the time of day or allowed to breathe air. Atzmon is a moser who speaks freely about the sayanim. He is also a fellow man of the most excellent order.

            Compared to Mr. Spencer, I can't agree, as you claim, that Spencer is getting a better reputation. I think he is the typical subject of this video:
            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gkPsvMWu4OM

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            Wait until the election results come in and Chicago hasn't stolen enough votes to rob us our White House.

          • Touchstone

            "To you they are these gargantuan gorgons of bitter ridicule, something from deep in the psyche of Zionist culture where men are cuckolded by women and try to rise above them as cold calculators and moral experts."

            That's one of the most imperceptive, misinformed thoughts you've expressed on this site (and you've probably written tens of thousands).

            In an effort to save you the trouble of crafting yet another completely off-the-mark waste of a paragraph, let me just say that I don't "hate" schoolgirls, and I can't believe I have to spell this out for you. I concede that I sometimes lean on the cliche of young girls being catty and occasionally employ this stereotype as a way of diminishing an opponent, when I think it's appropriate, as it certainly is in your case. But I realize it's just a stereotype, and I don't have to be bashed over the head with a pointless lecture about the cosmic potential of young females. Next time I'll try to be more imaginative and compare you to something that won't prompt a needless valentine to schoolgirls. But getting back to what set this in motion: Is your unwarranted digression a sign that you really can't grasp the notion that your attacks on Spencer are trivial, shallow and juvenile? That's the whole bloody point!

            "you seek to rob from me my genuine like for all human beings which includes, of course, people who happen to be Jewish"

            Please say that again with a straight face, after watching the following video, made by the same uber-Nazi you linked to:
            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tQibFxp-b0k&fe

            At approximately 2:25, he laments that "the treasury of the United States will forever be in the hands of the Jews".

            At about 5:08, he says, "the fix is in, and the fix has a Jewish seal on it".

            This b*stard wouldn't have been just an ordinary Nazi. He would have wanted Himmler's job. This is the hate-oozing fiend you promote. Did you not want me to discover what this man truly believes?

            I don't seek to "rob" you of your "genuine like for all human beings". How could I? That would be like robbing an empty vault. (Just read your own words instead of pretending that I've been putting them in your mouth.) If I seek to "rob" you of anything, it's your delusion that you're on a righteous crusade, and now I see that's either a more deeply held delusion than I realized, or it's just one grand deception. Clearly, you're sympathetic to evildoers of a magnitude I wasn't even aware of. Previously I thought you were somewhat prejudiced, enough to be rude and insulting on a daily basis, but simply in denial about it. Now I see I was giving you way too much credit. The man whose video you linked to could have written Mein Kampf. What the hell are you up to? Would a list of your associates include anyone with a swastika tattooed on his forehead? The question is warranted, given the odiousness of the propagandist you just endorsed, if only indirectly.

          • Schlomotion

            I can definitely say it with a straight face. I had not watched any other videos by that author and knew nothing of him except the content of that one video. So I watched the second video that you linked by him. Yes, he sure drops the J-Bomb a lot. I think your choice is helpful because it moves us to one of the pinnacle examples of the paradigm "we are not allowed to talk about Jews."

            The video you linked is decisively more Louis Farrakhan in script. But the big observation I take from that video is that none of these banking cartel swindlers gave a good god-damn whether their actions might reflect poorly on Jews. You and I can share a camaraderie in the fact that these men consider themselves even more special, even more beyond criticism, and even more outside humanity than you or I.

            But is it forbidden to discuss that these men were functionally acting in the historical tradition of Jewish exchequers driving a war-finance engine for an empire in the tradition of the Exchequer of the Castilian Monarchs? Do we not face a financial crisis on par with those times? Are we not reminded constantly that collapse to the forces of invasive Islam is the consequence? To be carved up also by the Asiatic Hordes? We can't discuss it? We cannot discuss that the last three Presidents had Judaized and also Zionized advisory cabinets? We have to blame the collapse of the American empire post-Saddam on Obama and not on Wolfowitz? Wolfowitz and Greenspan, whose scam came crashing down with the Middle East only half attacked and the housing bubble throwing Americans into destitution? Wolfowitz who tried to appoint his girlfriend to Queen of World Finance after he was named King and both had to step down? Please.

            Another important point about the video that you linked is that the rhetoric, the cadence, the logic, the direction of blame is IDENTICAL to the thrust and tone of all of Frontpage's articles. If you take out the word "Jewish" and replace it with "Islamic," if you harp on "Shalom" and "Israel" instead of "Hussein" as a middle name, if you blame collapse on a Muslim-Leftist cabal instead of a Jewish-Likudnik cabal, there is no difference. You have conceded that the DHFC are uber-Nazis in the service of a Zionized Diaspora.

            All of this world fact is indeed unfortunate, but to me it leads to no conclusion that genocide, deportation, or mass disenfranchisement is justifiable. It does not color my impression of people who happen to be Jewish or people who benignly follow the religion of Judaism. It only affects, enhances really, my dislike for the third category of Jews, the militant separatists who never see fit to separate themselves very far from the slop trough. It is ironic that they hate Elijah Muhammad so much when they resemble him in every way.

          • Touchstone

            "we are not allowed to talk about Jews."

            Of course you are. But why do so many people think it's OK to talk about Jews as a collective, each one of us guilty of pure evil and therefore deserving of the harshest punishments? Why is it that you can't distinguish between reasonable discussion about specific individuals who happen to be Jewish, and the most hateful, rabble-rousing, racist bigotry that condemns not specific people but an entire race? Did you notice the bloodthirsty reactions in the comments section under both videos? The author must be thinking, "mission accomplished".

            Did all you notice was the J-Bomb and not the generalized hate? Do you think the author of that video sounds like he wants to limit his reprisals to a handful of bankers? Does the pitchfork-wielding mob in the comments section sound like they want no more than a principled investigation of the crimes of a few individuals? Or are comments like "I say we kill them all" precisely what the author intended? These videos are dog whistles. It's "release the hounds" time.

            "none of these banking cartel swindlers gave a good god-damn whether their actions might reflect poorly on Jews"

            On this point you and I are in agreement. Nevertheless, people who demonize all Jews as a result of a handful of bankers are committing a wrong of their own and have the potential of becoming an even bigger problem, not only for Jews, than those few bankers themselves.

            "the last three Presidents had Judaized and also Zionized advisory cabinets"

            Now you're back to talking like a bigot. I thought you distinguished between Jews and Zionists, believing that today's Zionism is the mutant offspring of Herzl's. But now you're insinuating that something nefarious must be afoot when, heaven help us, a few more Jewish Americans have risen to prominent positions. You represent the element in society that just won't hold bosses accountable for squat, when there's a Jewish underling to blame, and therefore generalize about. Whether it's Bush or Obama or Clinton, it's not them but THE JEWS whose feet must be held to the fire, right? When you talk like this, you're tapping into the ancient, global wellspring of antisemitism.

            Another case in point: Greenspan was operating a "scam"? Is it not conceivable that a Jew in charge of the Fed (or in any position of power) might have just messed up? (Especially when things were going so well economically and he was being widely praised for his wisdom.) The answer is no, because for centuries Jews have been widely suspected of harboring evil designs against the non-Jewish population. Therefore, one doesn't talk about Greenspan's errors in judgment, but the "scam" he was running, as if every powerful Jew is a carbon copy of Madoff. When your premise is so nakedly prejudiced, you're really just asking permission to promote hatred of Jews in the guise of skewering one or two. What you describe inocuously as "discussion" is one in which the prejudiced framework of discussion and its predictable conclusions have been determined from the outset. Using one or two Jews as your starting point, you're really just "discussing" to what extent Jewry has corrupted society, rather than honestly appraising the actions of a few people without regard to their ethnic heritage. Asking you to do so is asking too much when such fevered conclusions are the desired result of the innocent-sounding "discussion" you'd like to conduct. Your accusations suggest that you want the ultimate witch-hunt, not an honest, rational discussion.

            Lastly, I detect another possible contradiction arising from your post. On the one hand, you say that society should be openly discussing the ideas about Jews raised in the video. On the other hand, you equate the tone of the video with FrontPage, against which you rail volubly. So what you're saying unwittingly is that FrontPage is indeed raising topics that should be discussed, but you only want to discuss Jews in such harshly realistic terms, not Muslims. In exposing my double standard, you've exposed your own, yet again.

          • Schlomotion

            I agree that it is wrong to randomly accuse individual Jews of being category three, meaning ethnic nationalists, not people who happen to be Jewish, or who benignly observe the religion of Judaism. Unfortunately, since historically the definition of Jew has conflated the three categories, I have to describe them in categories to disambiguate. It is racism to accuse one person of being the animal stereotype of his affiliated group unless he is acting out that part. Some people believe we should never use racial epithets to describe human beings when they are acting out the animal stereotype of their affiliated group. I have mixed feelings about it. I tend not to. In the second video by the author I linked, the one you linked back to me, the author is clearly using the word "Jew" as an accusation and racial slur. Zeev Tene does as well. I agree with Zeev Tene's reason for doing it. As for the author in the video, I don't know. He makes some wild conspiratorial claims, that I do not see substantiated in the video itself. As for the rabid commentators on the video with their bloodthirsty comments, yes indeed I disagree with those, just like I disagree when I read them in the Frontpage comment section, or ubiquitously, nearly all comment sections.

            In the video I linked, the author was making generalized hate look bad, and making global evil look bad, but he was attributing it to individual and organized, affiliated evil and its participatory defenders. I was moved that Ron Perlman, Benicio del Toro and Malcolm McDowell all agree and participated in the video, and must have gotten to know the producer. The video you linked back to me is less a speech about the human condition and a more sweeping condemnation of Jews as a cartel. I think the second video is quite flawed as it does not distinguish between race, religion, and militant affiliation. I thought Matt Damon's movie Inside Job, was a principled investigation of the crimes of a few individuals, really, of a cartel or cabal. I agree that the video you linked back to me, like the videos Innocence of Muslims, 2016: Obama's America, and The Third Jihad are dog whistle movies, essentially the video equivalent of The Turner Diaries and film-makers should tread conscientiously.

            You said: "people who demonize all Jews as a result of a handful of bankers are committing a wrong of their own and have the potential of becoming an even bigger problem, not only for Jews, than those few bankers themselves. I agree fully.

            However, I don't think it's bigotry to note that due to patronage or due to incompetence, the last three Presidents relied like a crutch upon a ready-made team of either financial or foreign policy analysts drawn directly from the seamiest side of PNAC, JINSA, and AIPAC. The past 16 years of Presidents have been marked by increased incinerations of American citizens for thought crimes such as being a Hebrew Identity movement, being a Constitutionalist, wanting to live too far from your neighbors, or heaven forbid, criticizing the increased use of war weapons on Americans. The prior presidency was marked by an institution of the Wolfowitz Doctrine, and a completely hyperbolic resurfacing of nearly every Euclidean surface of American government. That Israel or pro-Israelis have been leading us around by the nose in this matter or selling us the devices is essential to discuss freely.

            Greenspan can be excused his sad incompetence when he says "we cannot ferret out proxies for M5 (we don't know what the value of money is)." Who could? It's too abstract and too rapidly expansive to calculate when it's not based on real work to the less than second derivative. He can not be excused for generating the subprime housing credit bubble/ponzi scheme. Ben Bernanke cannot be excused for deliberately posturing that his knowledge is too complicated to quantify, or for lying about the true state of the economy, or for bluntly refusing to answer auditing questions about the bailout. I think he should go to prison. Someone like Jon Corzine, I think should get the death penalty. We have to be able to discuss this effective coup against the American economy, especially where it touches upon oil and banking cartels and restructuring the Middle East according to a Wolfowitz/Wurmser Doctrine. It is definitely panning out to be not in the American interest, but Frontpage is duly dedicated to making sure that the next PNAC committee gets installed as our national advisory board and that we absolutely go to war with Iran. We also need to be free to discuss that Wolfowitz's proscription that no aggressive new foreign power should be allowed to rise and challenge American power should not be made to apply domestically to Americans trying to make money, buy homes, or travel.

            I did say that the tone of the second video equates with the tone of Frontpage. I do disagree with both instances. I do also think that the subjects raised at Frontpage should be discussed. However, the discussion is not going to work if it is formulated as DHFC vs the crypto-Muslim Communist left or the "threat" of Muslims displacing Jews as the first among equals in an egalitarian society.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            You ignore the reality in Europe and every other place muslims control. In most Jews are barely tolerated or allowed to survive.

            You refuse to treat any Jew as an individual and putting together a long rant only makes you a bigot in a more boring manner.

          • Touchstone

            "As for the rabid commentators on the video with their bloodthirsty comments, yes indeed I disagree with those"

            You disagree with them, but you aren't alarmed by them. That's understandable and somewhat excusable, since you're not Jewish and therefore not the target. But that doesn't explain why you express so much alarm when Muslims are the target. The double standard that arises from that mismatch suggests to me that you, like the anti-Israel crowd in general, aren't truly sympathetic to Muslims, but rather antipathetic to Jews. That becomes the message, and ultimately adds to the alarm some Jews feel: it's not just the bigoted fringe that wants our heads on a stick, but a growing chunk of society, led by the self-righteous activists and idealists.

            As for some of the individuals you mention: Bernanke's defenders (like Fareed Zakaria) would say that he's actually a hero right now, because his policies are starting to bear fruit, and even the ECB has reversed course and started to adopt his policies, leading to better outcomes. The story may turn out to be that Bernanke helped to remedy the situation that Greenspan presided over. I'm not defending him, I'm just telling you that he's something of a savior in the eyes of some. Your comments about Bernanke might be in line with many of your earlier ones, in that you're far too quick to assign blame and guilt and pound the table, demanding the harshest punishment, because you need reality to conform to what many observers perceive is a prejudiced view that routinely pre-determines Jewish culpability. That's a long way of saying that you think Jews, at least powerful ones, are guilty till proven innocent.

          • Touchstone

            Just wanted to add that few things could be more corrosive to society than what a radical element in Islam has been trying to do, albeit with more success in Europe than America. That radical element, exemplified by Choudhary in the UK, openly (or clandestinely) seeks to overthrow the existing order and replace it with its own preferred medieval one. The problem that's getting more serious in some European cities today could be America's problem farther down the road. It would be worse for society if no-one was talking about it, as you would prefer. At least Spencer and Geller have drawn some attention to it, whether or not they're guilty of alarmism.

          • Schlomotion

            I disagree. Really, it just looks like Zionists are a radical fringe that relies on being "oppressed" and Islamists are the eternal fuel for that radical fringe. So infrequently can radical fringe groups tolerate one another. As we enjoy this post-Zionist era unfolding, an era of acceptance and the concomitant fear of assimilation and loss of specialness, the lunatic fringe feels obligated to rail against the center. Not the Left, mind you, but the center of America because we just don't have the fear of Muslims that Spencer and Geller can hope to squeeze out of Christian Fundamentalists or immigrant wannabe superpatriots.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            And here you are, surely you aren't claiming to be part of any mainstream?

        • Mary Sue

          I don't know why you're objecting. Argument By Outrage is your stock-in-trade.

    • Western Canadian

      Interestingly enough, Shmuckmotion CANNOT maintain his calm facade, he always blows his cover with illogic and racism.

    • Ted G

      Failed once again Schlo!

    • Ghostwriter

      Interesting. Slugmotion can't go for two sentences without making himself look like an imbecile. That's fascinating behavior and should be studied more closely.

  • atthebeach

    Have no answer; save to hold to the lights of 'moral reason' and insure those we have elected; and hope to; hold to same; and as well; be assured they too, recognize the threat at hand per an evil personifed – manifesting – and threatening America's past; present and most critically, our future. Too; we must stand with Israel; and so must those we elect.

    The Islamist poisonous weed of shariah; must be recognized for 'what' is. (At the least; a hate-crime walking) We CAN stop the accommodations to those who 'sell it'; impose it.. The mosques; unless they declare an 'enlightenment'; and follow our Constitution/laws per 'separation of Church/State' cannot continue to stand as 'holy ground'. We must color 'these' gone.. And we must color 'gone'; those politicians who fail to recognize the' beast of abject ignorance' walking in our midst.

  • Riviera

    I wonder if these people have learnt anything from history. In the Iranian revolution, the left supported the Islamists. Once the Islamists gained power, the left were rewarded by being beaten, tortured, massacred and oppressed.

    One wonders what the left thinks it has to gain from supporting European Islamisation.

    • warpmine

      Sure but to expect the left to learn from history is to totally illogical.

  • tagalog

    Ah, provoking the bully-boys. Like punching them in the fist with one's teeth. Must watch out lest one provoke the thugs, upsetting their delicate equanimity.

  • John

    It is hard to say where todays kids get their education. I see the worst jihad in making. The Dutch are so stupid, they are giving their country away to the Maroccans. Had the majority of Dutch voters voted Geert Wilders all the muslim problems in that country would have been solved. It is such a shame that creates nightmares. The Netherlands, where I was born was such a nice country is fast dwindling away for the sharks.

    • Mary Sue

      the irony is the black Morrocans are there to get away from the racism they suffer from the arabs in Morocco!

      • John

        Those are not black Moroccans, they are tinted. They are driving new cars in Morocco bought with Dutch money. This is welfare money they are receiving from the Dutch gov't. 2/3 of the muslims there do not work, they come only to do a lot of damage build mosque's with taxpayers money, but the whole issue is strictly to take the country. This is the same all over in Western Europe and an other few years and Canada is in the same predicament. Most gov't are asleep and let the wolfs sneak up to them till it is to late and therefore is a jihad in the making.

  • LindaRivera

    In a desperate attempt to escape the misery and danger from Muslim immigrants, many Brits and Europeans have left their countries only to discover the same horrors in their new adopted country.

    barenakedislam: AUSTRALIA: 69-year-old Granny laments, “My life in my beloved country is over, they have won, Australia as we once knew it no longer exists. How I weep, my paradise gone”

    Many Britons have left England as their neighborhoods turn into NO-GO areas where Muslim immigrants now dominate. A recent survey showed more native Britons are moving out of the country than those coming in. Squeezed out by immigrants from the mostly-Islamic third world countries, many Europeans are finding
    Australia as their next dream home. But that may not last long.

    ISLAM-WATCH
    A 69-year-old Australian granny writes a letter to explain how her home, which she deemed her paradise, has been lost, thanks to Muslim immigration. Here’s her story: http://www.barenakedislam.com/2012/10/25/australi

    • KarshiKhanabad

      Grandma & her family and disillusioned Britons are most welcome to come to America, acquire defensive weapons, and join our society which however imperfect, presents a face of steel to the Mohammedans in our midst. Armed "infidels" are the Koranimals' worst enemy.

    • Iftikhar Ahmad

      Why do Muslims come to Europe, one wonders….and why do we allow them to? Did someone ask your opinion before letting Muslims come to Europe as you say? I think you have very little say in the matter, and perhaps that's why you're so angry. Cultural diversity, open borders and an end to blatant racism is the only answer. England is big enough for 70 million or more. To be honest, I would be prefer to live in a Britain of immigrants than intolerant bigots.

      I love immigration. The more people of diverse culture the better. The sooner we water down the racists who look down upon anyone with non white skin the better. What goes around comes around…….any one remember colonisation ,…..immigration is pay back time!This debate is not about mass immigration. It's all about maintaining a white majority ,Britain. With so much suffering going on around the world, these people are more concerned about 15 century tribalism than helping humanity.
      IA

  • watsa46

    At the time of Socrates (4 centuries BC) the masses were moronic. 25 centuries later the masses have not changed! Europe has short memory and needs a new or many more lessons. Eventually they will learn?

  • John Magne Trane

    It is incredible that one can "provoke" by existing.

    Good thing that the police knows who is who, and what is what. They must learn ethics and morale at their police school.
    /sarcasm off

  • Drakken

    It seems to be that a lot of folks here believe that Europe and the west in general are doomed? I say absolute bloody nonsense! Sure things look glum and the spirit of defeatism is rank, but what we are seening is the beginning of the end of leftism/communism and islam in the west. Let me explain, human nature always dictates a flight or flight response to danger, when you cannot run anymore humans will fight and the Europeans once pushed to far will come out and fight with a vengeance, if you thought the Serbs and the Croats were brutal, you haven't seen anything yet, For the Northern Europeans will will bring out those genes of old and make no mistake, our heritage is one of bloody conquest and it was never pretty when they did, and soon again that will come to pass, that is always in our nature and will soon be unleashed to a very unsuspecting smug muslim populace who view us as weak and docile.

    • PamM

      Well said Drakken. The dhimmitude and defeatism which is so prevalent in official circles does not represent the general population, who are made of much tougher stuff. Europeans have grown too used to living in peace and security, so their natural tendency is to avoid a fight. If pushed to the limit they are, however, as tough as old boots and will fight to the death.

      Although it is still possible to avoid serious bloodshed by taking firm action against the jihadists, I cannot see any European government having the courage to do so. It will therefore be resolved on the streets in combat as the people, unlike the governments, will not just roll over. I am very confident that we will win that conflict, although casualties on both sides will be heavy. Assuming the traitors have already met their just desserts by that time the only question will be what to do with the remaining Muslims. The way I see it, there are two options, either of which would suit me just fine.

      • Drakken

        It is no longer possible to avoid massive bloodshed, the die is cast.

    • poetcomic1

      In Sweden, when it has gotten to the point that men remain silent as their daughters are raped by Muslim invaders… I'm wondering exactly when do these 'Viking Genes' kick in?

      • Drakken

        It is only going to take some muslim to rape the wrong daughter and the rest will follow suit.

      • SCREW SOCIALISM

        Sweden suffers from estrogen poisoning.

    • Thomasson

      Drakken
      I am sure that one day things will change dramatically in western and northern Europe. But change will not come from politicians and policy makers. It will start by a small riot that will run like a blaze of fire through all the country. I have seen in the Netherlands the public reactions after the murder of Theo van Gogh (by a Muslim extremist). People were angry and had shown their anger. In a country like France it will not take very long before the French people will decide to take matters in own hands and start a new resistance. In Denmark and the Netherlands people are already fed up with multi-culturalism. DF and PVV (Freedom Party of Geert Wilders) are gaining power.

    • DebbieOhio912

      So what are you waiting for? A full-blown war? Don't you think the time is NOW for Europeans to mobilize and support the likes of Geert Wilders and Robert Spencer? From what I've seen, Europe seems to be be very unmotivated to do much of anything about this problem. Please, correct me if I am wrong.

      • Drakken

        Things will get worse before they get better, it is the way it has always been. Once that native populace has been awoken from their stupor and slumber their wrath will be felt without remorse nor quarter. As much as I admire and respect Spencer and Wilders, they are but the messengers, violent times and events will overtake their message and the folks of direct action will run things.

  • http://nola.com popseal

    DHIMMI sympathizers think they can feed the Islamic beast and hold out for being eaten last.

  • Thomasson

    Thank you, Bruce, for your article on Front Page Magazine. You are making an interesting comparison between the demonstrators attending the speech of Robert Spencer in Stockholm (last year) and the demonstrators behaviour at the spot where Wilders held his speech in Malmö. These are the same people; a mingling of ANTIFA and other extreme left wingers plus a bigger mob of Muslims. ANTIFA and other anti-fascist and anti-racist left wingers are jumping on the breach when it concerns Muslims. They would never come to aid the Christians, slaughtered by Muslims in Muslim countries, or non stop attack on Jews by Muslims in European countries. This had happened in the same city of Malmö some two months ago. Neither have the good Anti-Fascists lads and sisters any concern with European locals who are terrorized in order to chase them out of neighbourhoods with Muslim majority.
    The faces twisted by hatred and the maniacal screaming mob, reminds you the mob of the Sans-Culottes who had stormed the Bastille in 1879 and the madhouse during the Terror Reign of Robespierre. Though, the two mobs cannot be compared. The outbreak of the French Revolution was forthcoming out of extreme poverty, hunger and oppression. Marie Antoinette used to say : if they have no bread, let them eat cake. Louis XIV used to say: La France est moi (I am France). All revolutions had started out of: poverty, hunger and oppression. What kind of oppression, hunger and poverty do ANTIFA members know? And the “poor Muslims boys living in Sweden and Norway? They were taken out of the Third World ‘Dreck’ from which they had come from in order to be tended in the greenhouse of Scandinavia. Do they have any right to behave like wild beasts? Their behaviour reminds me an adage of Archie Bunker from the TV-sequence “All in the Family” : ‘You take a gorilla, a little one, you give him the best upbringing, send him to the best school and when he grows up…He still will be a gorilla!’.
    European leaders, policy makers and the media do not like to admit the multi-cultural experiment is a failure and it had turned into a nightmare. This is why no Dutch newspaper or TV channel had paid any attention for the speech of Wilders in Malmö. The news came through internet.

    • SCREW SOCIALISM

      When europe collapses, you can thank socialism.

  • Eva

    Don't you love it that we have the Second Amendment to protect us from these muscular youths with tattoo's? My wish for them is that after enough Muslims are permitted to settle in Denmark/Norway, etc., these youths are beheaded and their sisters are raped by the militant Islamic mob. Maybe, just maybe… this will make them pause and think that they are playing with fire.

    • Mary Sue

      a-freaking-MEN.