Site EtiquettePollsDefence LeaguesFjordman FilesScary MazeLink to usAdvertise on SIOTWBREAKING NEWS!


(1) 2 3 4 ... 16 »
Is Ethnicity Irrelevant in the USA?

I know many people on the outside are puzzled by this fight with LGF and believe it is about personal egos alone. I disagree. There are very real issues involved here. Perhaps one of the most important ones is whether ethnicity matters or whether it is not just wrong but evil to talk about it.

Many Americans seem to believe it’s all about the Constitution, and that everybody who sets foot on US soil is equally an American.. Put in the extreme, this view would mean that you could exchange the present US population with 300 million Zulus, yet the USA would still remain as American as apple pie if the Constitution remained in place. I’m not so sure that is true.

I see no indication that ethnicity is irrelevant in the USA. On the contrary, I see indications that the importance of ethnic rivalries is growing within the US along with mass immigration from non-Western countries. The reason why this haven’t had serious repercussions yet is because the white majority clings to the idea that ethnicity doesn’t matter. But as the white majority grows smaller and eventually disappears, these ethnic rivalries could potentially grow a lot worse as there would no longer be a stable majority group in the country.

The USA, and Canada, Australia and New Zealand, were founded as modern states by people of European origins. European Americans made up almost 90% of the population in the USA until a few decades ago. I don’t know about a single example where a country has totally changed its majority population, and where the people who originally shaped the country’s institutions have been rendered a minority, and where this hasn’t resulted in a huge change in that country’s culture.

If the present immigration to the USA continues, the culture will change profoundly, and a few decades from now the USA will no longer be a Western country. Alternatively, the United States as a unified country could collapse. I’ve mentioned that option before. It’s perhaps not the most likely scenario, but it is one that Americans should take seriously. If the USA should, for some reason, not survive this century in its present shape, it will be because ethnicity does matter after all:

US minorities don’t trust each other

The three main minorities in the United States — blacks, Hispanics and Asians — have little trust for each other and hold prejudiced views about Americans of different ethnic origins to their own, a poll showed Wednesday.

“This extraordinary poll reveals some unflattering realities that exist in America today,” said Sandy Close, head of new America Media (NAM) which sponsored the poll together with ethnic media groups.

Forty-four percent of Hispanics and 47 percent of Asians are “afraid of African-Americans because they are responsible for most of the crime,” the survey of 1,105 adults drawn from the three ethnic groups showed.

- - - - - - - - -

More than half of black Americans polled and 46 percent of Hispanics said Asian business owners do not treat them with respect.

And half of African-Americans said Latin American immigrants “are taking jobs, housing and political power away from the black community.”

Hispanics and Asians, whose populations are made up mainly of immigrants, were positive about the American dream, saying that those who work hard in the United States reap the rewards of their toil.

In contrast, more than 60 percent of African-Americans dismissed the American dream as not working for them.

All three ethnic groups viewed white Americans in a more favorable light than they did members of another minority.

Sixty-one percent of Hispanics, 54 percent of Asians and 47 percent of African-Americans said they would rather do business with whites than members of the other two groups.

“The poll reaffirms that while race relations between ethnic groups and whites grab the headlines, there are also serious racial problems between minority groups in America,” said Sergio Bendixen, an expert on Hispanic and multilingual polling.

“Blacks feel they are left out of the American Dream and are being displaced by newcomers, and each group buys into the negative stereotypes about the other two,” he said.

The three minority groups did agree that the United States would be a better place if blacks, Asians and Hispanics held more authoritative positions at universities, in business, media and government.

They also said they believe racial tensions in the United States will ease over the next 10 years.

  0   Article ID : 136
Give the Nobel Peace Prize to Ayaan Hirsi Ali

Today, Al Gore and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, represented by Dr. R.K. Pachauri, will receive the Nobel Peace Prize for 2007 in Oslo, Norway. The Peace Prize has been viewed by many as something of a joke after it was awarded to the Jihadist Yasser Arafat and to appeasers of Jihad like Jimmy Carter. However, it still generates a lot of media attention. If the Nobel Committee want to stay relevant they need to do some changes. The greatest challenge to world peace right now is not global warming, it's global Jihad. I therefore suggest that the next Peace Prize should be awarded to Ayaan Hirsi Ali.

I have had a few minor disagreements with Hirsi Ali in the past, mainly because she has on some occasions compared Islam to other religions like Christianity and Judaism, which I believe is wrong. However, her views on this have matured considerably, and because of her background she has made criticism of Islam acceptable to people who would otherwise find it difficult to digest the arguments she presents, even though they are perfectly correct. She is no doubt an extremely courageous person. In spite of death threats she has never hesitated in pointing out that many of the problems in the Islamic world are caused by Islam itself. She is an invaluable asset to the fight against global Jihad and as worthy of the Prize as any other living person.

In my view, the Norwegian Nobel Committee will soon have to make a choice: If they want the Nobel Peace Prize to be a Global Celebrity Award for Outstanding Achievements in Political Correctness, they can give the next one to Bono of rock group U2. Or, they can do something meaningful, something that will actually advance the cause of peace and human liberty around the world, and award the Nobel Peace Prize for 2008 to Ayaan Hirsi Ali.

Since members of national assemblies and parliaments can nominate candidates for the Prize, I hereby challenge MPs from the Progress Party in my country, or MPs from any infidel nation, to nominate Hirsi Ali. Other alternatives can be mentioned, too. Ibn Warraq, Ali Sina and Wafa Sultan are all worthy recipients of the Prize for their work and for championing the rights of one of the most abused and oppressed groups of people on the planet: Former Muslims who defy the traditional death penalty for leaving Islam.

Or, if the members of the Committee want somebody with a non-Muslim background, what about Dutch politician Geert Wilders, who has remained steadfast in opposing Islamization despite the murders of his countrymen Theo van Gogh and Pim Fortuyn and the exile of Hirsi Ali? Author Robert Spencer, director of the website Jihad Watch, who patiently monitors the spread of Jihad terrorism across the world, is another excellent choice, as is Bat Ye'or, whose unique work on the plight of non-Muslims under Islamic rule has contributed immensely to our understanding of both the past and the present.

Being Norwegian myself, I would also like to make a suggestion to Norwegian authorities: Norway is, or at least was the last time I checked, the planet's third largest exporter of oil, after Saudi Arabia and Russia. If Saudi Arabia, the world's largest exporter of oil, spends money on promoting Jihad and sharia, is it not fair that Norway, the world's third largest exporter of oil, should spend a little on combating the same? The Norwegian Petroleum Fund amounts to hundreds of billions of dollars. Norwegian authorities could easily create a fund of a billion dollars or more earmarked for the defense of persons threatened for criticizing Islam. That's the least we can do in return for being blessed with wealth we did very little to earn.

This fund could be called the Theo van Gogh Memorial Fund, the Asma bint Marwan Memorial Fund after the poetess who was killed by Muhammad's followers 1400 years ago for mocking Islam, or perhaps the Charles Martel Foundation for Intercultural Understanding. Most citizens in my country wouldn't even notice if we spent a billion dollars on this, but such a fund, whatever we choose to call it, could have a big impact on the lives of people struggling to get their message across or simply to stay alive in the face of death threats.

It is true that smaller nations cannot win major ideological wars on their own, but that is no excuse for not doing our share. Israel is also a small nation, yet it has managed to hold the line against Jihad for decades, and Denmark, the only Scandinavian country with some spine left, has left its mark, too, in recent years.

We can make a difference. Norway was the fourth-largest shipping nation in the world at the outbreak of WW2 and was of major importance to the allied convoys in the Atlantic which kept the war efforts alive. A British publication stated that the Norwegian Merchant Fleet then was "worth as much to the allied cause as a million soldiers." We are currently faced with a world war of a different nature, and if we can make contributions that matter for the outcome of this great struggle for freedom then we should do so. It's time to make a stand. I would like my country to be remembered for something other than awarding the Nobel Peace Prize to Yasser Arafat or for sponsoring the Palestinian government and their terrorist cronies.

  0   Article ID : 135
Why Does LGF Lend Credibility to Eurabia Deniers?

I notice Charles Johnson and Little Green Footballs are at it again with their biweekly — or is it daily? — bash Fjordman/Gates of Vienna/The Brussels Journal/Fascists/Euroweenies post, which is by now becoming as predictable and exciting as watching paint dry.

I admit my initial reaction to all this was a desire to yawn, ignore it, and watch the latest Harry Potter movie on DVD. CJ made another post a couple of weeks ago where he made up claims from scratch with the sole purpose of discrediting me. As was later confirmed by external sources, the claims CJ made were 100% without any factual basis whatsoever. The upstanding thing to do would have been to admit this and perhaps apologize, if not in public then at least in a private email to me. Johnson has had ample time, yet has failed to do so. If CJ and his crowd at LGF cannot even admit it when they publish blatantly false information then I see no point in having any “dialogue” with them about the situation in Europe. Besides, having a rational conversation with LGFers about the threats to freedom in Europe and the West in general is like having a rational conversation with the average Muslim about “Zionists”. I simply have better things to do with my time.

For the most part, I will therefore try to ignore the rantings of LGF as much as I can. However, even though dialogue with CJ may be pointless, there could still be independent readers and third parties who can be reached. I notice that CJ has ceased his attacks against the Sweden Democrats and concentrates on the Vlaams Belang. Is that an indirect admission that he didn’t fully understand what he was doing regarding the SD?

As blog reader Zonka comments:

Another good reason to continue this fight against CJ and LGF, is that if LGF doesn’t succeed in squashing the Counter-Jihad movement, somebody from the MSM and/or the left will pick up the fight using the writings from Charles and his followers as ammunition against the Counter-Jihad movement, painting LGF’s view as the mainstream rightist view, and confirming their claim that everybody who is fighting the islamization of the West is Fascists, Neo-nazis, Racists or worse. So in effect what Charles is doing is not just rattling on in his echo chamber, he is deliberately sabotaging the efforts of countering islamization. His efforts have nothing to do with Vlams Belang, they were just a convenient target for his campaign. The proof of that is that he silently dropped the charges against SD, when it became apparent that he couldn’t use them as a vehicle to smear the Counter-Jihad movement. If his main complaint had been the involvement of the Counter-Jihad movement with VB and SD, he would have stated openly that SD had been cleared or at least that there weren’t sufficient charges against them to continue to oppose them into the Counter-Jihad movement. But no such statement have been made implicit or explicit. The conclusion thus must be that it was never about VB or SD, but to smear the Counter-Jihad movement with any means at his disposal.

I have neither the time nor the inclination to respond to CJ’s every whim, but I will write a reply every now and then if I have the time and feel that some matter of substance is touched upon. In this case, this is Eurabia, the deliberate merger of Europe and the Arab world, conducted by the leaders of the European Union.

The website quoted by LGF’s latest post is run by the Norwegian Leftist Øyvind Strømmen. Mr. Strømmen called me a Fascist long before the current debate began. He has also stated that Bat Ye’or’s writings about Eurabia are “conspiracy theories,” and he is extremely critical of Oriana Fallaci for her views of Islam. This is now linked to approvingly by the “anti-Jihadist” Charles Johnson, who has a photo of Fallaci posted on his website.

So the question to Mr. Johnson becomes: If you link approvingly to “Eurabia denial” websites, what next? Will you also link approvingly to sites claiming that there is no global Jihad, no Islamic threat to the USA and that 9/11 was an inside job? If you discredit Bat Ye’or, perhaps the world’s foremost expert on dhimmitude, the repression of non-Muslims under Islamic rule, is there anything at all left of LGF’s supposedly anti-Jihadist position, or is LGF now simply an anti-European hate site?

Øyvind Strømmen repeated several times his criticism of Bat Ye’or at LGF, and stated that although he doesn’t believe Bat Ye’or is a Fascist, she “spreads a conspiracy theory, a conspiracy theory which in fact makes up a significant part of the mythos of Eurofascism and which sadly has gained quite a bit of a hearing amongst both conservatives and liberals.” He again stated that “I do blame her [Bat Ye’or] for providing a considerable part of the Eurofascist mythos by spreading the false idea of a Eurabian conspiracy.”

I have spent some time checking the Eurabia thesis, and I find it to be perfectly sound, as I have demonstrated in my essay The Eurabia Code, a shorter version of which is also available in Norwegian under the name Eurabia-koden. Strangely enough, this “conspiracy theory” was publicly confirmed by British Foreign Secretary David Miliband, who said in November 2007 that the European Union should expand to include Middle Eastern and North African countries.

Please note that the EU involves the free movement of people across borders. If the EU is expanded to include Muslim nations, Muslims from the entire Greater Middle East would be entirely free to move into and settle in France, Britain, Germany, Italy etc. This would mean the end of European civilization as we know it, and is now actively supported by senior European leaders behind the back of their own peoples. This constitutes nothing less than the greatest betrayal in the history of Western civilization, yet “anti-Jihad” website LGF seems to think this is overrated. The regular LGF reader Thanos says that Europeans need “to get over their hysteria” about the Islamic threat.
- - - - - - - - -
Surprisingly few readers of the “conservative” LGF were critical of the viewpoints of the Socialist Strømmen, although the reader wilinsky stated that “I am widely read and have some professional expertise on the subject of ‘global warming’ and I am, I believe, well-informed on our problems in Iraq. I think you are very, very far off the mark on both issues, so I suspect that anything you have to say about European fascism or Bat Yeor is equally ‘reliable’.”

Indeed. Mr. Strømmen has criticized the conservative politician and writer Hallgrim Berg for including a quote by the “Fascist” Fjordman and several quotes by the Fascist-enabler Bat Ye’or in his book about the dangers posed by militant Islam to the West. Mr. Berg’s book is also available in English. Here are some excerpts from the introduction:

The Euro-Arab ‘bridge-building measures’ are self-deceiving, as long as there is only one-way traffic on the bridge. The author maintains the United States the only power in the world that may secure the world’s free nations. He is discussing the growing anti-Americanism in Europe, a phenomenon evolving despite America’s role as a guaranteeing force for democracy and freedom. Anti-American sleepwalkers do not see that if the American way goes down the drain, Europe will follow. Hallgrim Berg attacks international leftism, which is constantly marketing twisted stereotypes of America, and is also criticizing the feebleness of European politicians, particularly France, where hypocrisy is developed into mastery. Challenged by the most comprising and hard-core totalitarianism the world has seen, the only hope for Western democracy, culture, and our way of living is a more confident cooperation and pooling of resources among European nations and the United States.

For this book, Berg was attacked by members of the Norwegian Left. Another Socialist, Lars Gule, warned that Berg’s writings about Muslims were similar to the writings about Jews in Nazi Germany in the 1930s, although Berg pointed out that he did not write about individual Muslims, but about the threat posed by Islamist ideology. Berg also pointed out that the Palestinian-friendly Gule went to the Middle East with dynamite in his backpack in the 1970s in order to carry out an attack against the Jewish state of Israel. Mr. Gule himself — who was stopped before the plan could be carried out — has never denied this, and continues to be extremely critical of Israel. Yet Mr. Gule gets a free pass for warning against the dangers of anti-Semitism, always coming from the political Right, of course.

Charles Johnson is critical of the Baron from the Gates of Vienna for his use of sources:

One more note to the Baron: it’s time for you to start treating your European ‘sources’ with a little more skepticism. They burned you with their latest attempted cover-up, and now you have egg all over your face.

In defense of the Baron, an upstanding man who tolerates a lot more ideological dissent at his website than LGF — as does The Brussels Journal — I’d just like to point out that CJ linked to a state-sponsored website which used to be run by a rabidly anti-American, anti-Israeli and anti-Christian Communist as his source of information about the Sweden Democrats.

Now LGF links to another Leftist who thinks the Jewish writer Bat Ye’or, who has written excellent books about the treatment of Jews, Christians, Hindus, Buddhists and other non-Muslims under Islamic rule, is an enabler of Fascism by publishing “conspiracy theories” about the advancing Jihad.

Somebody should perhaps inform CJ and his followers that the Scandinavian Left is brimming with Hamas-supporters, Arafat-cheerleaders and anti-Israeli and anti-American attitudes, and that they should be a little bit careful with whom they associate or lend credibility to.

  0   Article ID : 134
Our Offensive National Flag

Jeremy Clarkson heads the program “Top Gear” at the BBC, one of the funniest shows on TV. Since it has absolutely nothing to do with politics or religion, only with cars, it is one of the very few programs at the Burka Broadcasting Corporation still worth seeing.

I have to disagree with Clarkson regarding the English national flag, though. Discrediting national flags as signs of “bigotry” is happening all over the Western world.

And no, you are not being robbed of pride in your national heritage because of your colonial history. I’m Norwegian. We don’t have a colonial history, yet we are still subject to similar attacks. They don’t do this because you are English, they do this because you are Westerners and — dare I say? — white. British colonial history is just a convenient excuse.

From the Times Online, “We’ve been robbed of our Englishness”:

Today, things are rather different. Mention the war and you’ll be told by an outreach counsellor that we must empathise with the Germans, who are coming to terms with their mistakes of the past. “And you know, children, it was actually the British who invented concentration camps . . .”

Empire? When I was at school, teachers spoke with pride about how a little island in the north Atlantic turned a quarter of the world pink, but now all teachers talk about is the slave trade and how we must hang our heads in shame.

Right. So we must forgive Germany for invading Poland. But I must beat myself to death every night because my great-great-great-grandad moved some chap from a hellhole in Ghana to Barbados. In fact I can’t even say we’re British any more because then all of Scotland would rush over the border, pour porridge down my trousers and push a thistle up my bottom.

I believe people need to feel like they’re part of a gang, part of a tribe. And I also believe we need to feel pride in our gang. But all we ever hear now is that we in England have nothing to be proud about. In a world of righteousness we are the child molesters and rapists.

Our soldiers were murderers. Our empire builders were thieves. Our class system was ridiculous and our industrial revolution set in motion a chain of events that, eventually, will kill every polar bear in the Arctic.

And it gets so much worse. Because if you say you are a patriot, men with beards and sandals will come round to your house in the night and daub BNP slogans on your front door. This is the only country in the world where the national flag is deemed offensive.

- - - - - - - - -


Then there’s our national character. In the past, boys were told in school assembly that their mothers had died and were expected to get over it in a nice game of rugby. Crying only happened abroad. Not any more. We were ordered to weep like Americans when Diana died, and no local news report is complete today without some fat oik sobbing because his house has fallen over.


Do you see? We can’t be proud of our past because it’s all bad, we can’t use British humour because it’s offensive and we can’t use understatement to deal with a crisis because the army of state-sponsored counsellors say we’ve got to sob uncontrollably at every small thing.

  5   Article ID : 133
Why We Should Oppose an Independent Kosovo

Hans Rustad runs, the largest independent weblog in my country. A recent post there contained criticism of me, and I have already answered some of it. However, Mr. Rustad also claimed that I support a revisionist view of the Balkan wars of the 1990s which is "just as factually wrong, immoral and politically dangerous as David Irving's Holocaust revisionism." I consider that statement to be too awful to ignore, and decided to write a reply in English.

I have said repeatedly that I believe the Balkan wars were far more complex than we are led to believe by the political establishment, and I fear that we out of ideological blindness have come to support some pretty dangerous Muslim forces. I respect Mr. Rustad for exposing the bias against Israelis in the mainstream media, and I am sad to see that he accepts uncritically a similar bias against the Serbs. My point is that you cannot understand recent history in the Balkans without taking the previous seven centuries of Islamic oppression into account.

Sir Jadunath Sarkar, the pre-eminent historian of Mughal India, wrote this about dhimmitude, the humiliating apartheid system imposed upon non-Muslims under Islamic rule: "The conversion of the entire population to Islam and the extinction of every form of dissent is the ideal of the Muslim State. If any infidel is suffered to exist in the community, it is as a necessary evil, and for a transitional period only. (…) A non-Muslim therefore cannot be a citizen of the State; he is a member of a depressed class; his status is a modified form of slavery. He lives under a contract (dhimma) with the State. (…) In short, his continued existence in the State after the conquest of his country by the Muslims is conditional upon his person and property made subservient to the cause of Islam."

This "modified form of slavery" is now frequently referred to as the pinnacle of "tolerance." If the semi-slaves rebel against this system and desire equal rights and self-determination, Jihad resumes. This happened with the Christian subjects of the Ottoman Empire, who were repressed with massacres, culminating in the genocide by Turkish and Kurdish Muslims against Armenians in the 20th century. This same pattern is now used against the state of Israel. Israelis are not only attacked because they are Jews, but because they do not meekly disarm and accept the status of servitude that they should have according to Islamic law. They are disobedient dhimmis, just as the Armenians were.

According to Dr. Andrew G. Bostom, editor of the excellent book The Legacy of Jihad: Islamic Holy War and the Fate of Non-Muslims, even the Turcophilic 19th century writer Ubicini acknowledged the oppressive burden of dhimmitude in this moving depiction:

"The history of enslaved peoples is the same everywhere, or rather, they have no history. The years, the centuries pass without bringing any change to their situation. Generations come and go in silence. One might think they are afraid to awaken their masters, asleep alongside them. However, if you examine them closely you discover that this immobility is only superficial. A silent and constant agitation grips them. Life has entirely withdrawn into the heart. They resemble those rivers which have disappeared underground; if you put your ear to the earth, you can hear the muffled sound of their waters; then they re—emerge intact a few leagues away. Such is the state of the Christian populations of Turkey under Ottoman rule."

Bostom asks, "Why has the quite brutal Ottoman devshirme-janissary system, which, from the mid to late 14th, through early 18th centuries, enslaved and forcibly converted to Islam an estimated 500,000 to one million non-Muslim (primarily Balkan Christian) adolescent males, been characterized, reductio ad absurdum, as a benign form of social advancement, jealously pined for by 'ineligible' Ottoman Muslim families?"

Writer Vacalopoulos describes how Jihad-imposed dhimmitude under Ottoman rule provided critical motivation for the Greek Revolution:

"The Revolution of 1821 is no more than the last great phase of the resistance of the Greeks to Ottoman domination; it was a relentless, undeclared war, which had begun already in the first years of servitude. The brutality of an autocratic regime, which was characterized by economic spoliation, intellectual decay and cultural retrogression, was sure to provoke opposition. Restrictions of all kinds, unlawful taxation, forced labor, persecutions, violence, imprisonment, death, abductions of girls and boys and their confinement to Turkish harems, and various deeds of wantonness and lust, along with numerous less offensive excesses — all these were a constant challenge to the instinct of survival and they defied every sense of human decency. The Greeks bitterly resented all insults and humiliations, and their anguish and frustration pushed them into the arms of rebellion. There was no exaggeration in the statement made by one of the beys if Arta, when he sought to explain the ferocity of the struggle. He said: 'We have wronged the rayas [dhimmis] (i.e. our Christian subjects) and destroyed both their wealth and honor; they became desperate and took up arms. This is just the beginning and will finally lead to the destruction of our empire.'"

As scholar Reuben Levy noted: "At Constantinople [Istanbul], the sale of women slaves, both negresses and Circassians [likely for harem slavery and/or concubinage], continued to be openly practiced until...1908."

In 1809, after the battle on Cegar Hill, by order of Turkish pasha Hurshid the skulls of the killed Serbian soldiers were built in a tower on the way to Constantinople. 3 meters high, Skull Tower was built out of 952 skulls as a warning to the Serbs not to challenge their Muslim rulers.

Similar Jihad massacres were committed against the Greeks, the Bulgarians and other non-Muslims who slowly rebelled against the Ottoman Empire throughout the 19th century. Professor Vahakn Dadrian and others have clearly identified Jihad as a critical factor in the Armenian genocide in the early 20th century. As Efraim Karsh, author of the book Islamic Imperialism: A History points out, "The Ottomans embarked on an orgy of bloodletting in response to the nationalist aspirations of their European subjects. The Greek war of independence of the 1820's, the Danubian uprisings of 1848 and the attendant Crimean war, the Balkan explosion of the 1870's, the Greco-Ottoman war of 1897--all were painful reminders of the costs of resisting Islamic imperial rule."

In his book Onward Muslim Soldiers, Robert Spencer quotes a letter from Bosnia, written in 1860 by the acting British Consul in Sarajevo, James Zohrab: "The hatred of the Christians toward the Bosniak Mussulmans is intense. During a period of nearly 300 years they were subjected to much oppression and cruelty. For them no other law but the caprice of their masters existed....Oppression cannot now be carried on as openly as formerly, but it must not be supposed that, because the Government employés do not generally appear as the oppressors, the Christians are well treated and protected."

According to writer Ruth King, "during the bombing of Serbia on behalf of Moslem Albanians in 1999 Saudi Prince Khaled Bin Sultan, commander of the allied Saudi troops during the first Gulf War, called on the US to do the same against Israel on behalf of Palestinians. The fate of Jews and Serbs, which has intersected in the past, is doing so again. The jihadist effort to expunge Jews from Palestine mirrors the Moslem goal of incorporating Kosovo into a 'greater Moslem Albania' while expelling Christian Serbs. When Serbia became independent of Byzantine rule in the 12th century, its economic, cultural, social and religious institutions were among the most advanced in Europe. Serbia functioned as a bridge between Greco-Byzantine civilization and the developing Western Renaissance. The center of the Serbian Orthodox Church was in Kosovo where churches, monasteries and monastic communities were established. A form of census in 1330, the 'Decani Charter,' detailed the list of chartered villages and households, of which only two percent were Albanian. The Ottomans invaded Serbia in 1389 and consolidated their rule in 1459, propelling major parts of the Balkan peninsula and adjacent southeast Europe into a Koran-dictated Dark Ages."

Early in the twentieth century Serbian Christians were roughly two-thirds of the population of Kosovo. After WW2, Communist dictator Tito did not allow Serbs who fled from their homes to return and did not enforce border controls as thousands of Albanians moved into Kosovo.

As King says, "Initially, the media reported the situation in Kosovo fairly. For example, in July 1982 The New York Times noted: 'Serbs have been harassed by Albanians and have packed up and left the region. The Albanian nationalists have a two-point platform, first to establish what they call an ethnically clean Albanian republic and then to merge with Albania for a greater Albania. Some 57,000 Serbs have left Kosovo in the last decade.' Five years later, in 1987, the Times was still reporting the persecution of Serbs within Kosovo. 'Slavic Orthodox churches have been attacked, wells poisoned, crops burned, Slavic boys knifed. Young Albanians have been told to rape Serbian girls…. Officials in Belgrade view the ethnic Albanian challenge as imperiling the foundations of the multinational experiment called federal Yugoslavia….Ethnic Albanians already control almost every phase of life in the autonomous province of Kosovo, including the police, judiciary, civil service, schools, and factories.'"

It was this situation that led to the rise of Serb nationalist leader Slobodan Milosevic. However, instead of reporting about the advancing Jihad to make some sense of the situation, Western media, according to Ruth King, "went into a frenzy of accusations against the Serbs, much as it has against Israel and with similar distortions. The media depicted the armed, violent and jihadist Moslem Albanians as 'unarmed civilians' despite the fact they called themselves an army and perpetrated assaults, bombings, murder of civilians and targeted assassinations of Albanians loyal to Serbia. President Clinton outrageously referred to a 'holocaust' perpetrated by Serbia and compared the Moslems of Kosovo to the Jews—this, even though the Serbs had behaved well toward the Jews during the real Holocaust and Clinton himself was pressing Israel's Jews to accept the 'peace partnership' of Arafat, a brutal terrorist far worse than Milosevic, admittedly a dictator and a Communist thug."

Moreover, "While the brutality of the Milosevic regime was indeed a complicating factor, he is long gone, but the KLA [Kosovo Liberation Army] continues its assault on Serbs, on their churches, priests, homes, even on civilians sitting in cafes, this under the nose of the U.S. and UN troops."

Bosnia's wartime president Alija Izetbegovic died in 2003, hailed as a moderate Muslim leader. Little was said in Western media about his 1970 Islamic Declaration, where he advocated "a struggle for creating a great Islamic federation from Morocco to Indonesia, from the tropical Africa to the Central Asia," and that "The Islamic movement should and must start taking over the power as soon as it is morally and numerically strong enough to not only overthrow the existing non-Islamic, but also to build up a new Islamic authority."

As Hugh Fitzgerald says, "One must keep in mind both the way in which some atrocities ascribed to Serbs were exaggerated, while the atrocities inflicted on them were minimized or ignored altogether. But what was most disturbing was that there was no context to anything: nothing about the centuries of Muslim rule. Had such a history been discussed early on, Western governments might have understood and attempted to assuage the deep fears evoked by the Bosnian Muslim leader, Izetbegovic, when he wrote that he intended to create a Muslim state in Bosnia and impose the Sharia not merely there, but everywhere that Muslims had once ruled in the Balkans. Had the Western world shown the slightest intelligent sympathy or understanding of what that set off in the imagination of many Serbs (and elsewhere, among the Christians in the Balkans and in Greece), there might never have been such a violent Serbian reaction, and someone like Milosevic might never have obtained power." Yet, "In all of Europe, only a few French journalists and the Austrian writer Peter Handke tried to explain Serbian fears and Serbian history."

Alija Izetbegovic received money from a Saudi businessman, Yassin al-Kadi, who has been designated as a financier of al-Qaeda terrorists. Evan F. Kohlmann, author of Al-Qaeda's Jihad in Europe: The Afghan-Bosnian Network, argues that the "key to understanding Al Qaida's European cells lies in the Bosnian war of the 1990s." In 1992, the government of Izetbegovic issued a passport to Osama bin Laden. The Wall Street Journal reported in 2001 that "for the past 10 years, the most senior leaders of al Qaeda have visited the Balkans: The Egyptian surgeon turned terrorist leader Ayman Al-Zawahiri has operated terrorist training camps, weapons of mass destruction factories and money-laundering and drug-trading networks throughout Albania, Kosovo, Macedonia, Bulgaria, Turkey and Bosnia."

Yosef Bodansky, director of the Congressional Task Force on Terrorism and Conventional Warfare in Washington, has stated that the Balkans was a "springboard for Islamic extremism" in Europe and that Iran was the main driving force behind it. Both Iran and Saudi Arabia supplied funding, weapons and men to the Bosnians during the war. Saudi Arabia has invested more than $1 billion in the Sarajevo region alone, for projects that include the construction of 158 mosques. Terrorist organization Al-Qaeda gained a strong foothold in the Balkans during the 1990s.

Martti Ahtisaari, former President of Finland and later Chief United Nations negotiator for Kosovo, caused anger when he stated that "Serbs are guilty as people," implying that they would have to pay for it, possibly by losing Kosovo. I disagree. It is one thing to criticize the brutality of the Milosevic regime. It is quite another thing to claim that "Serbs are guilty as a people." If anybody in the Balkans is guilty as a people, it is the Turks, not the Serbs.

Dimitar Angelov elucidates the impact of the Ottoman Jihad on the region:

"…the conquest of the Balkan Peninsula accomplished by the Turks over the course of about two centuries caused the incalculable ruin of material goods, countless massacres, the enslavement and exile of a great part of the population – in a word, a general and protracted decline of productivity, as was the case with Asia Minor after it was occupied by the same invaders. This decline in productivity is all the more striking when one recalls that in the mid-fourteenth century, as the Ottomans were gaining a foothold on the peninsula, the States that existed there – Byzantium, Bulgaria and Serbia – had already reached a rather high level of economic and cultural development….The campaigns of Mourad II (1421-1451) and especially those of his successor, Mahomet II (1451-1481) in Serbia, Bosnia, Albania and in the Byzantine princedom of the Peloponnesus, were of a particularly devastating character."

Author William Dorich states that "The Serbs lost 52% of their adult male population fighting in the First World War as American allies. Twenty-four years later the Serbs were the only people in the Balkans to declare war on Nazi Germany. Hitler bombed the 'open city' of Belgrade on Palm Sunday in 1942, killing 17,000 Serbs in one day. Surrender followed ten days later as the Nazis invaded. The Serbs lost another one-third of their population in the Holocaust again fighting as American allies, especially against their own Croat, Bosnian Muslim and Albanian Nazis."

Serge Trifkovic, author of the books The Sword of the Prophet and Defeating Jihad, documents how Yasser Arafat's uncle Mohammad Amin al-Husayni cooperated closely with Nazi Germany in recruiting Bosnian and Albanian Muslims for Waffen SS units. Serbs had to wear blue armbands, Jews yellow armbands. For Muslims, this was a Jihad against disobedient dhimmis, and thus a continuation of the genocide against Armenians a few years earlier, which was one of the inspirations for the Holocaust. More than a quarter of a million Serbs, Jews and Romani people (Gypsies) were killed by Muslim troops in Nazi service.

Trifkovic cites James Jatras as claiming that Washington's irrational Balkan policy is to a significant extent the product of the ignorant and misguided notion that the U.S. can curry favor in the Islamic world by sacrificing Kosovo's Christians to the violent Jihad-terror elements that dominate Kosovo's Albanian leadership: "Such an unfounded notion shows a breathtaking incomprehension of the worldwide jihadist threat. International opposition and the Bush Administration's failing domestic credibility put a weight on the policy, however, which can be dealt a fatal blow if enough Americans raise their voices against it."

Miroljub Jevtic, professor at the Belgrade University and author of a number of books on the topic of Islam and politics, believes the Western world is in favor of detaching Kosovo from Christian Serbia by fiat and making it into an independent (Muslim) state. The main argument of those supporting this scenario, notably in the United States, is to improve their image in the eyes of the Islamic world and "co-opt the influence of Islamic 'extremists.'"

However, Jevtic notes that "the fact that since the arrival of NATO to Kosovo over 150 Christian churches have been destroyed and some 400 mosques have been built, or are under construction, is for the Muslims a proof that if there is a faith which is supported by true God -- it is Islam! Because, why would the Christian God, why would Jesus, permit the destruction of churches, where He, Jesus, is glorified? Why would He, at the same time, permit the construction of mosques, where His existence as God is denied? Why would He permit it, moreover, in the presence of men who bear arms and who claim to be Christians?"

Miroljub Jevtic warns that the European Union support for Albanian Muslim demands could backfire badly: "Granting the independence to Kosovo will be taken as proof of Europe's own wish to cease to exist, as it not only allows the expansion of Islam but is actively promoting it by aiding those who are destroying churches, raping nuns, spitting on crosses and daubing with excrement holy images of Christ."

In Kosovo, dozens of churches and monasteries have been destroyed following ethnic cleansing of Christian Serbs by the predominantly Muslim Albanians, all under the auspices of NATO soldiers, and Muslims are not ungrateful. Kosovo Albanians plan to honor their "savior," former US President Bill Clinton, by erecting a statue of him. At the same time, in 2007, four Albanians from Kosovo along with other Muslims were arrested for conspiring to attack Fort Dix, a military base in New Jersey, in order "to kill as many soldiers as possible."

The House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Tom Lantos (D-CA) called upon "jihadists of all color and hue" to see Kosovo as "yet another example that the United States leads the way for the creation of a predominantly Muslim country in the very heart of Europe." But a video of Osama bin Laden meeting with two 9/11 hijackers revealed that the mass murderers were motivated by a desire to avenge Muslims... in Bosnia, where the USA intervened on behalf of Muslims. Meanwhile, no Christian Serbs have staged any terror attacks against the United States or Western European countries in retaliation for the NATO bombings. So who are really the bad guys here?

In a commentary, "We bombed the wrong side?" former Canadian UNPROFOR Commander Lewis MacKenzie wrote, "The Kosovo-Albanians have played us like a Stradivarius. We have subsidized and indirectly supported their violent campaign for an ethnically pure and independent Kosovo. We have never blamed them for being the perpetrators of the violence in the early '90s and we continue to portray them as the designated victim today in spite of evidence to the contrary. When they achieve independence with the help of our tax dollars combined with those of bin Laden and al-Qaeda, just consider the message of encouragement this sends to other terrorist-supported independence movements around the world."

Western governments are pushing for independence for a group of Jihadist thugs who recently wanted to create the Osama bin Laden mosque in Kosovo. This name was eventually changed for public relations reasons since the Albanians knew they needed American political support. In June 2007 the visiting US President George W. Bush was hailed as a hero by a group of Albanians, who also apparently stole his watch. "Sooner rather than later you've got to say 'Enough's enough — Kosovo is independent,'" Bush told cheering Albanians. As German newspaper Süddeutsche Zeitung later commented, "Why should the Albanians settle for autonomy when George W. Bush had already promised them their own state?"

President Bush declared a "war on terror" after the Jihadist attacks on the United States in 2001. Six years later, all he has achieved is bleeding American tax payers financially and American soldiers literally while overseeing the eradication of non-Muslim communities in Iraq. Now his administration supports independence for terrorist-sponsoring Muslims in the Balkans and in the Palestinian territories. Unless he does something very substantial in 2008, George W. Bush risks being remembered as one of the worst presidents in American history.

I listened to a speech by Patrick Sookhdeo, a former Muslim who recently launched his latest book, Global Jihad: The Future in the Face of Militant Islam. Sookhdeo had done a lot of excellent – and frightening – research regarding the Islamization of Western Europe, especially Britain. He recalled having a conversation with a senior Western official regarding what would happen if Muslims in a region of, say, Britain or the Netherlands, should declare that they would no longer accept the laws of the central government and would form a breakaway Islamic Republic. This official then stated that they would probably just have to quietly accept that. When witnessing the Muslim riots in France, which more and more resemble a civil war, this question is no longer just hypothetical.

As writer Julia Gorin has warned, "An independent Kosovo will serve as a nod to secessionists worldwide," and "history will show what no one cares to understand: the current world war began officially in Yugoslavia."

Granting Jihadist Muslims independence in Kosovo after they have conducted ethnic cleansing of non-Muslims will establish an extremely dangerous precedent. Not only is it immoral to sacrifice the freedom or perhaps existence of smaller nations, be that the Serbs or the Israelis, in order to save your own skin. As the example of Czechoslovakia demonstrated during WW2, it is also counterproductive. Supporting independence for Muslim Albanians in Kosovo will not lead to stabilization of the Balkans; it will rather lead to the Balkanization of the West. The new thug state will serve as a launching pad for Jihad activities against non-Muslims, just like an independent Palestinian state would do in the Middle East.

In the case of Kosovo, the Russians are right and Western leaders, both in the European Union and the United States, are wrong. The Serbs have suffered enough. Give them a break!

In a conflict between Muslims and non-Muslims, other infidels should always support the non-Muslim side. That goes for Kosovo as much as it goes for Kashmir or southern Thailand. It's time to end the demonization of the Serb people and support their struggle against the global Jihad. We are all next in line.

  0   Article ID : 132
(1) 2 3 4 ... 16 »

Popular Fjordman Files
Recent Images
     "If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. "

Karl Popper