Violence With The End of Eurabia?

[Annie]

http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2006/04/fall-of-france-and-multicultural-world.html

Read it all:

In my essay about the retreat of the Western world order, I mentioned the possibility of civil strife in the West caused by runaway immigration. This is no longer just a theoretical possibility. It is pretty clear to anybody following the developments in Europe that the situation in France is starting to become rather serious. President Jacques Chirac threw out part of a youth labor law that triggered massive protests and strikes, bowing to intense pressure from students and unions. The unemployment rate for youths under 26 is a staggering 22 percent nationwide, but soars to nearly 50 percent in some of those troubled areas with many Muslim immigrants. French Jews are leaving the country in ever-growing numbers, fleeing a wave of anti-Semitism. Nidra Poller, American ex-pat writer and translator in Paris, has written some appalling stories about aggressive anti-Semitism, such as the murder and brutal torture of French Jew Ilan Halimi early in 2006.

Muslim blogs are calling for violence against the Jews, the whites and the well-to-do. They say, “We must burn France, as Hamas will burn Israel.” The growth of the Islamic population is explosive. According to some, one out of three babies born in France is now a Muslim. Around 70% of French prisoners are Muslims. Hundreds of Muslim ghettos are already de facto following sharia, not French law. Some have pointed out that the French military are not always squeamish, but there are estimates that 15% of the armed forces are already made up of Muslims, and rising. How effective can the army then be in upholding the French republic? At the same time, opinion polls show that the French are now officially the most anti-capitalist nation on earth. France has chosen Socialism and Islam. It will get both, and sink into a quagmire of its own making. Some believe France will quietly become a Muslim country, others believe in civil war in the near future:...

 

[nosarcasm]

Eurabia is a deragotory name, and does not suit well an informed discussion.

On the issue, I hope the muslims show more of their true face, the earlier
the next holocaust in Germany. This time I am confident the US will applaud.

 

[Annie]

Eurabia is a deragotory name, and does not suit well an informed discussion.

On the issue, I hope the muslims show more of their true face, the earlier
the next holocaust in Germany. This time I am confident the US will applaud.

Actually, it seems a descriptive name and has been used widely in academic writings. That it's Orwellian I will grant you.

 

[Emmett]

http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2006/04/fall-of-france-and-multicultural-world.html

Read it all:

I tend to think that civil war is the best bet. Given the poor response they displayed in reaction to the youngster revolt gives me the idea that they are unprepared for whatever does happen.

The demographics do seem to show a future of problems for them! I hate it for em!

I'm glad I'm not French!

 

[American_Jihad]

Boredom and Its Discontents

The demographics are unmistakable: Europe is dying. The wasting disease that has beset this once greatest of civilizations is not physical, however. It is a disease in the realm of the human spirit. David Hart, another theological analyst of contemporary history, calls it the disease of “metaphysical boredom”--boredom with the mystery, passion, and adventure of life itself. Europe, in Hart’s image, is boring itself to death.

And in the process, it is allowing radicalized twenty-first century Muslims--who think of their forebears’ military defeats at Poitiers in 732, Lepanto in 1571, and Vienna in 1683 (as well as their expulsion from Spain in 1492) as temporary reversals en route to Islam’s final triumph in Europe—to imagine that the day of victory is not far off. Not because Europe will be conquered by an invading army marching under the Prophet’s banners, but because Europe, having depopulated itself out of boredom and culturally disarmed itself in the process, will have handed the future over to those Islamic immigrants who will create what some scholars call “Eurabia”--the European continent as a cultural and political extension of the Arab-Islamic world. Should that happen, the irony would be unmistakable: the drama of atheistic humanism, emptying Europe of its soul, would have played itself out in the triumph of a thoroughly nonhumanistic theism. Europe’s contemporary crisis of civilizational morale would reach its bitter conclusion when Notre-Dame becomes Hagia Sophia on the Seine--another great Christian church become an Islamic museum. At which point, we may be sure, the human rights proclaimed by those narrow secularists who insist that a culture’s spiritual aspirations have nothing to do with its politics would be in the gravest danger.

It need not happen: there are signs of spiritual and cultural renewal in Europe, especially among young people; the Buttiglione affair raised alarms about the new intolerance that masquerades in the name of “tolerance;” the brutal murder of Dutch film maker Theo van Gogh by a middle-class Moroccan-Dutch has reminded Europeans that “root causes” do not really explain Islamist terrorism. The question on this side of the Atlantic, though, is why should Americans care about the European future? I can think of three very good reasons.

---
Is Europe Dying? - Society and Culture - AEI

 

[ecks_why]

Gates of Vienna: The Fall of France and the Multicultural World War

Read it all:

In my essay about the retreat of the Western world order, I mentioned the possibility of civil strife in the West caused by runaway immigration. This is no longer just a theoretical possibility. It is pretty clear to anybody following the developments in Europe that the situation in France is starting to become rather serious....

here's a great article from 2005 slamming europes appeasement approach to islam. it was a very popular article just do internet search for title "europe thy name is cowardice"

however i do not believe that europeans will just bow down & submit to the will of allah without fighting back & sadly i see this civil unrest spreading to the USA also...

"Europe, Thy Name is Cowardice" by Mathias Doepfner | Project Syndicate

The writer Henryk Broder recently issued a withering indictment: “Europe, your family name is Appeasement.” That phrase resonates because it is so terribly true. Appeasement cost millions of Jews and non-Jews their lives as England and France, allies at the time, negotiated and hesitated too long before they realized that Hitler needed to be fought and defeated, because he could not be bound by toothless agreements.

Later, appeasement legitimized and stabilized Communism in the Soviet Union, then East Germany, then throughout the rest of Eastern Europe, where for decades inhuman, repressive, and murderous governments were glorified.

Appeasement similarly crippled Europe when genocide ran rampant in Bosnia and Kosovo. Indeed, even though we had absolute proof of ongoing mass murder there, we Europeans debated and debated, and then debated still more. We were still debating when finally the Americans had to come from halfway around the world, into Europe yet again, to do our work for us.

Europe still hasn’t learned its lesson. Rather than protecting democracy in the Middle East, European appeasement, camouflaged behind the fuzzy word “equidistance,” often seems to countenance suicide bombings in Israel by fundamentalist Palestinians. Similarly, it generates a mentality that allows Europe to ignore the nearly 500,000 victims of Saddam’s torture and murder machinery and, motivated by the self-righteousness of the peace movement, to harangue George W. Bush as a warmonger.

This hypocrisy continues even as it is discovered that some of the loudest critics of American action in Iraq made illicit billions – indeed, tens of billions – of dollars in the corrupt UN “oil-for-food” program.

Today we are faced with a particularly grotesque form of appeasement. How is Germany reacting to the escalating violence by Islamic fundamentalists in Holland, Britain, and elsewhere in Europe? By suggesting – wait for it – that the proper response to such barbarism is to initiate a “Muslim holiday” in Germany.

I wish I were joking, but I am not. A substantial fraction of Germany’s government – and, if polls are to be believed, the German people – actually believe that creating an official state Muslim holiday will somehow spare us from the wrath of fanatical Islamists. One cannot help but recall Britain’s Neville Chamberlain on his return from Munich, waving that laughable treaty signed by Adolf Hitler, and declaring the advent of “peace in our time.”

What atrocity must occur before the European public and its political leadership understands what is really happening in the world? There is a sort of crusade underway – an especially perfidious campaign consisting of systematic attacks by Islamists, focused on civilians, that is directed against our free, open Western societies, and that is intent upon their utter destruction.

We find ourselves faced with a conflict that will most likely last longer than any of the great military clashes of the last century – a conflict conducted by an enemy that cannot be tamed by “tolerance” and “accommodation” because that enemy is actually spurred on by such gestures. Such responses have proven to be signs of weakness, and they will always be regarded as such by the Islamists.

Only two recent American presidents have had the courage needed to shun appeasement: Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush. America’s critics may quibble over the details, but in our hearts we Europeans know the truth, because we saw it first hand. Reagan ended the Cold War, freeing half of Europe from nearly 50 years of terror and slavery. And President Bush, acting out of moral conviction and supported only by the social democrat Tony Blair, recognized the danger in today’s Islamist war against democracy.

In the meantime, Europe sits back in the multi-cultural corner with its usual blithe self-confidence. Instead of defending liberal values and acting as an attractive center of power on the same playing field as the true great powers, America and China, it does nothing. On the contrary, we Europeans present ourselves, in contrast to the supposedly “arrogant Americans,” as world champions of “tolerance,” which even Germany’s interior minister, Otto Schily, justifiably criticizes.

Where does this self-satisfied reaction come from? Does it arise because we are so moral?

I fear that it stems from the fact that we Europeans are so materialistic, so devoid of a moral compass. For his policy of confronting Islamic terrorism head on, Bush risks the fall of the dollar, huge amounts of additional national debt, and a massive and persistent burden on the American economy. But he does this because, unlike most of Europe, he realizes that what is at stake is literally everything that really matters to free people.

While we criticize the “capitalistic robber barons” of America because they seem too sure of their priorities, we timidly defend our welfare states. “Stay out of it! It could get expensive,” we cry. So, instead of acting to defend our civilization, we prefer to discuss reducing our 35-hour workweek or improving our dental coverage, or extending our four weeks of annual paid vacation. Or perhaps we listen to television pastors preach about the need to “reach out to terrorists,” to understand and forgive.

These days, Europe reminds me of an old woman who, with shaking hands, frantically hides her last pieces of jewelry when she notices a robber breaking into a neighbor’s house. Appeasement? That is just the start of it. Europe, thy name is Cowardice.

 

[SayMyName]

Boredom and Its Discontents

The demographics are unmistakable: Europe is dying. The wasting disease that has beset this once greatest of civilizations is not physical, however. It is a disease in the realm of the human spirit. David Hart, another theological analyst of contemporary history, calls it the disease of “metaphysical boredom”--boredom with the mystery, passion, and adventure of life itself. Europe, in Hart’s image, is boring itself to death.

And in the process, it is allowing radicalized twenty-first century Muslims--who think of their forebears’ military defeats at Poitiers in 732, Lepanto in 1571, and Vienna in 1683 (as well as their expulsion from Spain in 1492) as temporary reversals en route to Islam’s final triumph in Europe—to imagine that the day of victory is not far off. Not because Europe will be conquered by an invading army marching under the Prophet’s banners, but because Europe, having depopulated itself out of boredom and culturally disarmed itself in the process, will have handed the future over to those Islamic immigrants who will create what some scholars call “Eurabia”--the European continent as a cultural and political extension of the Arab-Islamic world. Should that happen, the irony would be unmistakable: the drama of atheistic humanism, emptying Europe of its soul, would have played itself out in the triumph of a thoroughly nonhumanistic theism. Europe’s contemporary crisis of civilizational morale would reach its bitter conclusion when Notre-Dame becomes Hagia Sophia on the Seine--another great Christian church become an Islamic museum. At which point, we may be sure, the human rights proclaimed by those narrow secularists who insist that a culture’s spiritual aspirations have nothing to do with its politics would be in the gravest danger.

It need not happen: there are signs of spiritual and cultural renewal in Europe, especially among young people; the Buttiglione affair raised alarms about the new intolerance that masquerades in the name of “tolerance;” the brutal murder of Dutch film maker Theo van Gogh by a middle-class Moroccan-Dutch has reminded Europeans that “root causes” do not really explain Islamist terrorism. The question on this side of the Atlantic, though, is why should Americans care about the European future? I can think of three very good reasons.

---
Is Europe Dying? - Society and Culture - AEI

Excellent assessment of the situation.

 

[American_Jihad]

German Muslims Offended In Wake of Muslim Violence

Posted by Daniel Greenfield
Sep 8th, 2012

Muslims are offended a lot. Statistics say that 40 percent of Muslims are offended at any given time, but 80 percent of Muslims found that statistic offensive, conclusively proving it wrong. Talking about how offended Muslims are is also offensive which creates a cycle of offensiveness that leads to riots and bombings by people who are not at all Muslim or offended, let alone offended Muslims.

After several Muslim attacks on German Jews, the Muslims are offended because German authorities want to put up posters for family members who want to report a family member who may be going Jihad.

---

German Muslims Offended In Wake of Muslim Violence | FrontPage Magazine

 

[8236]

Americans talking of weak willed European (meaning British and French) appeasement makes me laugh. World War I 1914-1918 - American entry April 1917. World War II (1937?)1939-1945 - American entry in European theatre Dec. 1941 - and then only because Germany declared war on the US.
There seems to be a misconception in the US that the US defeated Germany. This is nonsense. The Soviets did as is obvious from the proportion of war effort expended by the Nazis against the USSR.
Ecks_why: Comparing the Europe of today with the 'appeasement' of the 1930s is stupid. For a start the continent was completely divided then, it isn't now. The appeasement of the 1930s is a misnomer anyway. Buying time might be better. If any nations deserve credit for standing up to the Nazis when their own interests were not at stake it would be the French, and particularly the Brits. There is a kind of post war historic revisionism in America that likes to paint out the US as some kind of knight in shining armour come to sort out those warring Europeans, again, for the second time in WW2. For WW1 the shining knight might be an accurate caricature. In WW2 it certainly is not. The whole world saw the nature of the beast developing in Germany in the 1930s, and Britain (and perhaps France) was the country that came closest to stand up to it on the grounds of principle, certainly not the US.

As for appeasement today, yes, the article is right: The birth rate among muslims in Europe is vastly greater than that of native Europeans in general, not to mention the muslim 'importation' rate. This is a ticking time-bomb that will lead to Europeans becoming a minority in their own countries within 100 years. This has not gone unnoticed over here, hence the electoral resurgence of anti-immigration parties in many European countries in recent years. Ironically the countries where anti-immigration parties have had very little succes is Germany (that guilt issue is still ubiquitous after all these years), and Britain, where, yes, appeasement really is the name of the game now.

Don't get complacent in America though, you are in exactly the same boat. There are plenty of Somalis in Minnesota and estimates of upto 10 million muslim in the US as a whole. Amerabia is not an inconceivable concept.

 

[American_Jihad]

You beat them before, now do it again...

Today in History: West Saved from Islam at Battle of Tours

October 11, 2013 By Raymond Ibrahim

Precisely 100 years after the death of Islam’s prophet Muhammad in 632, his Arab followers, after having conquered thousands of miles of lands from Arabia to Spain, found themselves in Gaul, modern day France, facing a hitherto little known people, the Christian Franks.

There, on October 10 or 11, in the year 732, one of history’s most decisive battles took place, demarcating the extent of Islam’s western conquests and ensuring the survival of the West.

Prior to this, the Islamic conquerors had for one century been subjugating all peoples and territories standing in their western march—including Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, Algeria, and Morocco. In 711, the Muslims made their fateful crossing of the straits of Gibraltar, landing on European soil. Upon disembarkation, the leader of the Muslims, Tariq bin Zayid, ordered the Islamic fleet burned, explaining that “We have not come here to return. Either we conquer and establish ourselves here, or we perish.”

This famous Tariq anecdote—often reminisced by modern day jihadis—highlights the jihadi nature of the Umayyad caliphate (661-750), the superpower of its day. Indeed, as most historians have acknowledged, the Umayyad caliphate was the “Jihadi-State” par excellence. Its very existence was coterminous with its conquests. Its legitimacy as “viceroy” of Allah was based on subjugating lands in the name of Allah.

...

As for general destruction, Michael Bonner author of Jihad in Islamic History, writes, “The raids are a constant element [of the jihad], always considered praiseworthy and even necessary. This is a feature of pre-modern Islamic states that we cannot ignore. In addition to conquest, we have depredation; in addition to political projects and state-building, we have destruction and waste.”

At any rate, the facts speak for themselves: after the Battle of Tours, no other massive Muslim invasion would be attempted north of the Pyrenees—until very recently and through very different means.

But that is another story.

Today in History: West Saved from Islam at Battle of Tours | FrontPage Magazine