Know only this, that the enemy of all free, productive, sane, moral and authentic human beings is the naturally radical left and nihilist Islam.

Muslims in Norway everyday and everynight. An authentic Muslim will always plan to kill you. It's just a matter of time and opportunity. Think Assassins, who were an Arab tribe. No really.



"The Genocidal Harvest of Leftist Self-Loathing By Andrew G. Bostom Wednesday, April 08, 2009.

In a recent blog, I described how a courageous modern “traditional liberal” politician, Geert Wilders, aptly warns of the dangers posed by the ancient, but living totalitarianism of Islam, an entirely unreformed, and unrepentant religio-political system.

Why does the Left—from the more vociferous, to the (outwardly) sober—openly embrace, or rationalize, or at very best ignore and fail to condemn—the totalitarian scourge of contemporary jihadism, and all its accompanying “sacralized” Islamic ugliness: genocidal hatred of non-Muslims, Muslim “apostate” freethinkers, and women?”

Colonel Neville: Why indeed. Cos they're the same kinda nihilist and narcissistic people who hate free individuals that just won't obey and respect them. Essentially jealous, self-loathing, dangerously envious control freak mediocrities, they must therefore project at all costs, an image of themslves as ENTIRELY RIGHT ABOUT EVERYTHING and the ONLY VALID SHOW IN TOWN...or else.

Naturally the complete opposite is true and thus they must shut you up or kill you to stop you ever mentioning this. Go figure. So dig. Thus we get the life-time Marxist con-man creep Barry Hussein Sotoero Barack Obama and an entire world, drowning and lost in a fog and fear of dhimmitude.

Don't do or say anything to offend the Muslims so don't mention the Jihad! What offends Muslims can be narrowed down to precisely everything and nothing.

No, mustn't. Hey, to any practicing Muslims who really believe in all that is Mad Mohammad, the filth of the Krazy Koran and the nihilist fascist totalitarian political project of Islam, I bid a hearty fu..., er golly, no thanks! If I ever want to commit cultural and security suicide, I can always do it myself. Sadly, the left is doing it for as as rapidly as possible.

Why? Cos it's for the "greater good"silly! File under the "fear and self-loathing" of dhimmitude. Bat Ye'or excerpt. Andrew Bostom and here via Amazon on dhimmitude.

Via dhimmitude org. Via americancongressfortruth com, here's Brigitte Gabriel, the Lebanese Christian and best selling author of Why They Hate. It's all about how Muslims murdered and destroyed the once free and prosperous Lebanon. How?

By using the multiculturalism, PC'ism, tolerance and open cosmopolitanism of the host and largely Christian, secular majority against them. And with Islam.

"It could happen soon, for you". Jimi Hendrix.

Now I'm rather pre-occupied of late as many of us are, know what I mean? And I don't have the time to write just now. So I thought it's a great chance to put up a lot of essential stuff I've picked up lately on the diseased mind-sets of leftards and Muslims, together in beddy byes at last. Well, that's the plan, but no, really.

All the best from Colonel Neville.


Via the truly fabulous roadsassy com:

“It matters little if Barack Hussein Obama attended a madrassa or not. The politics of the the left and it’s stepchild, black liberation theology, resonate on a core, essential level with Islam.

European Muslims are presently exercising the political and cultural muscle that their American counterparts are working towards. A democrat/socialist in the White House will accelerate their progress. Obama in the White House will guarantee it.”

Bill Warner, Center for the Study of Political Islam:

Barack Obama has closely aligned himself with Reverend Jeremiah Wright and Black Liberation Theology (BLT). When viewed from the Christian point-of-view, BLT is a strange creed, but when seen from the standpoint of Islam, there is a very strong parallel.

Islam and BLT are theologies that have a political goal of making all politics submit to their demands. Submission is the political goal.

Islam and BLT are both based upon the principle of duality. The Koran divides up humanity into Muslims and the kafirs (unbelievers). BLT has a god that divides humanity into blacks and whites. But the duality is not the division, but a complete separation that is ethical, political, cultural and religious. The believer has nothing in common with the kafir/white. Allah loves the Muslim and a black god loves the blacks.

Allah preaches violence against the kafirs and helps Muslims to kill them. The Koran says that cruelty and hatred of the kafir is a sacred duty for Muslims.

BLT does not preach violence against whites, but excuses and justifies it. BLT also justifies black crime as a legal way for oppressed blacks to strike back at the white oppressors. It sees a rapist or killer of whites as a revolutionary committing a legitimate act of a just war. Here we have a quote from James Cone, the father of BLT:

“What we need is the divine love as expressed in black power, which is the power of blacks to destroy their oppressors, here and now, by any and all means at their disposal” [James Cone, A Black Theology of Liberation, p. 70]”

“The reason for so many parallels between Islam and BLT is that they are both based upon the same principles—submission and duality. Since Islam views white America as an enemy, BLT see Islam as the “enemy of my enemy” and therefore is a friend.

Witness the award that Rev. Wright gave Louis Farrakhan as an outstanding person.

This comradeship is temporary. When the time comes and Islam is fully ascendant, BLT will find out that Islam has been using them, just as Islam uses the Left. In the end, Islam will annihilate BLT for the simple reason that Islam demands political submission from ALL, not the just the whites.”


Gloomwatch Update Mark Steyn.

"I called the last week the "Obama Apology Tour." Caroline Glick thinks it was more of an Obama Appeasement Tour:

AMERICA'S BETRAYAL of its democratic allies makes each of them more vulnerable to aggression at the hands of their enemies - enemies the Obama administration is now actively attempting to appease. And as the US strengthens their adversaries at their expense, these spurned democracies must consider their options for surviving as free societies in this new, threatening, post-American environment...

If they do so successfully, then the damage to global security induced by Obama's emasculation of his country will be limited. If on the other hand, they fail, then America's eventual return to its senses will likely come too late for its allies - if not for America itself.

As I said the other day, this presidency has the makings of global tragedy. To modify a Bernard Lewis line, Obama's speeches risk giving the impression that America is "harmless as an enemy and treacherous as a friend." That's not a good message to send the world.

Distractions by Mark Steyn:

“In a world of legalisms, resistance is futile. The Royal Navy sailors kidnapped by Iran two years ago and humiliated by the mullahs on TV were operating under rules of engagement that call for "de-escalation" in the event of a confrontation. Which is to say their rules of engagement are rules of nonengagement.

Likewise, merchant vessels equipped with cannon in the 18th century now sail unarmed. They contract with expensive private security firms, but those security teams do not carry guns: When the MV Biscaglia was seized by pirates in the Gulf of Aden last year, the Indian and Bangladeshi crew were taken hostage but the three unarmed guards from "Anti-Piracy Maritime Security Solutions" in London "escaped by jumping into the water." Some solution. When you make a lucrative activity low-risk, you get more of it.

As my colleague Andrew McCarthy wrote, "Civilization is not an evolution of mankind but the imposition of human good on human evil. It is not a historical inevitability. It is a battle that has to be fought every day, because evil doesn't recede willingly before the wheels of progress." Very true. Somalia, Iran and North Korea are all less "civilized" than they were a couple of generations ago.


And yet in one sense they have made undeniable progress: They have globalized their pathologies. Somali pirates seize vessels the size of aircraft carriers flying the ensigns of the great powers. Iranian proxies run Gaza and much of Lebanon. North Korea's impoverished prison state provides nuclear technology to Damascus and Tehran. Unlovely as it is, Pyongyang nevertheless has friends on the Security Council. Powerful states protect one-man psycho states. One-man psycho states provide delivery systems to apocalyptic ideological states. Apocalyptic ideological states fund nonstate actors around the world. And in Somalia and elsewhere nonstate actors are constrained only by their ever increasing capabilities.

When all the world's a "distraction," maybe you're not the main event after all. Most wealthy nations lack the means to defend themselves. Those few that do, lack the will. Meanwhile, basket-case jurisdictions send out ever bolder freelance marauders to prey on the civilized world with impunity. Don't be surprised if "the civilized world" shrivels and retreats in the face of state-of-the-art reprimitivization. From piracy to nukes to the limp response of the hyperpower, this is not a "distraction" but a portent of the future.”


Via roadsassy com:

“I ran into an article that I printed out a few years back on the “arab personality” that, at the time, provided me with much needed insight into the behavior of Islamists. It’s worth reading if you want to get a grasp of the muslims inverted sense of honor as well as their disconcerting similarities to the left. It appears that mohammad (spit) found in Arabs a society quite amenable to the claustrophobic conrtol that Islam exerts, just as the left finds comfort in such fatuous notions of “the greater good” or the idea of sacrificing “the one for the all.”

Here are a couple excerpts:

Arab society is tribal-nomadic, with its outstanding trait being clan loyalty and the anarchy of the desert. Most of its values were shaped in the jahiliyah age before Islam. The important values in Arab conceptions and behavior reflect the pre-Islamic ideals. In the jahiliyah age, “The Arabs did not know Allah and his Messenger and the rules of the religion.”

Despite their desert character, the city was the Arabs’ focus of change and political activity. Mecca was a center of trade and pilgrimage, since it was on the caravan routes. Religion had secondary importance in jahili society. Religious customs were observed out of tradition and feelings of respect for forefathers, but religion was fetishist, and values were fatalistic, out of absolute faith in the decrees of fate. Secular values took a central place, and were expressed in the concept of manliness (muruwwah), which meant the whole set of traits of a perfect Bedouin. The most important framework was preserving tribal solidarity (`asabiyyah). The tribe was the foundation for personal and group existence.

The critical phenomenon in its importance to Arab-Islamic society is honor. A man’s honor is sharaf. It is flexible, dynamic, and subject to change in accord with his deeds. A woman’s honor is `ird (also meaning her pelvis). In contrast to a man’s honor, this is firm and permanent. The woman grows up with her honor, and her most important role is to preserve it.

The moment that a woman’s honor is lost, it cannot be restored, and a man’s honor is severely wounded. Indeed, Muslim society is based on the virginity of its daughters. Honor is the most important supreme value in Arab life, more important than life itself. A man without honor is considered dead.

Hence the saying, “It is better to die with honor than live with humiliation.”

A man’s place in the tribe, as well as the tribe’s place among the tribes, was according to the measure of his and its honor. When honor was harmed, shame was caused which originated in public exposure, overt to everyone, a phenomenon which severely humiliated a man. Indeed, the Arab individual is caught up throughout his whole life in intensive activity to avoid shame and advance his honor. The central means for this was vengeance. Honor is restored only when vengeance has been carried out in public and is known to all.

Tribal tradition and clan loyalty had dominant influence in society. Likewise significant were blood ties within the extended family or the tribe, which determined group loyalties and identifications. Most of these social traits exist to this day, and influence the functioning of Arab society as a primordial system in which symbolic values are more important and esteemed than concrete values and the overall, holistic system of beliefs. This is “a shame society”, in which everyone must behave according to the accepted norms and internalize his own feelings in the system of group behavior.

Good lord if that isn’t a working definition of your typical garden variety amerikkan progressive. And shame is a tool that the left wields with great aplomb.. Again I am reminded why the left and Islam do so well in bed together. About the only difference is the left doesn’t embrace a moon god, unless of course you count Al Gore or Obama.

I once read that the series “Friends” faithfully portrays the new type of American family. Severed from meaningful family ties, young people find their identity in the group - be it the one who gathers at the neighborhood pub or those who seek their validity and connection in a tribe like those gathering around Obama. Or Hillary with her detestable “it takes a village”. None of which can provide society with the stability that the family unit can exert.

F. A. Hayek, whose classic work The Road to Serfdom (1944) was a shot across the bow of triumphal statism, connected socialism to primitive tribalism and a yearning for the solidarity and the morality of small groups, a yearning which, if extended much beyond the family, would prove incompatible with the requirements of the extended market order. The great novelist Robert Musil (1990 [1921]: 109), another Austrian critic of both nationalism and socialism, observed that socialism is “stuck in the ethics of fraternity.” The morality appropriate for family members is, however, quite different from that appropriate for governing the relations of the countless strangers one encounters in an extended order.

The following paragraph could easily describe ReProgressives. Substitute Marxism, socialism or progressivism for the words Islam or Arab.

The Arab:

“This reality expressed too the collective’s superiority over the individual. In contrast to modern societies which promote the individual’s interests, and in which the ethos is what the individual takes and receives from the generality, in Arab society, the ethos is what the individual does for the collective. There is a communal consensus in contrast to an individual’s opinion. Islam does not encourage individualism, rather favoring organized, orderly authority.

The individual does not exist by his own right, and he and his opinions are unimportant, except through his belonging to a group framework. This is based on the hadith attributed to the Prophet: “The opinion of the many cannot be mistaken.” There is nothing more contemptible than individualism, which is viewed as factionalism and as harming the achievement of goals.

This is also the basis for the attitude towards political opposition, which is not accepted in principle.

Jews and Christians internalize the guilt. The Jews extend one cheek in the sense of, “We have sinned, we have transgressed, we have committed crimes,” while Christians extend the second cheek, in the sense of “mea culpa”.

In contrast, the Arabs externalize guilt: “Do I have a problem? – You are guilty!” Among them, there is no attempt to compromise. They have no tolerance for the justice and rights of the other. From their vantage point, justice and rights are totally on their side, and nothing will divert them from their total, one-sided position. Among Arabs, you will not find the phenomenon so typical of Judeo-Christian culture: doubts, a sense of guilt, the self-tormenting approach, “Maybe we were not entirely OK,” or “Maybe we need to act or react differently.” These phenomena are totally unknown in Arab-Islamic society, towards outsiders.

They have no doubts about their positions or the justice of their side. They have no sense of guilt that they may have erred. They have neither twinges of conscience nor any regrets that they may have done wrong to anyone else. From their viewpoint, they have no problem concerning unbelievers, and no difficulty accusing or acting against those who do not live in dar al-harb. The phenomenon of the murderers by suicide, sometimes called suicide bombers, is an absolute indication.

There is no condemnation, no regret, no problem of conscience among Arabs and Muslims, anywhere, in any social stratum, of any social position. For the most part, there is total support without reservations.”