Archive for the 'Jihad Watch' Category

Re Vlaams Belang Thread at Jihad Watch

November 16, 2007

The thread at Jihad Watch, started by Robert Spencer, has a lively discussion on BNP, Vlaams Belang, Fjordman, Brussels Journal, Paul Belien, Filip Dewinter, Charles Johnson, Little Green Footballs, LGF, etc. Spencer has said he doesn’t want to pour gas on this fire but see it go out in effect. The thread has terms like Nazi, neo-Nazi, white nationalist or nationalism, white supremacist or supremacy, etc. Spencer says he thinks most people involved want to save Europe. He also says we should try to avoid this fight getting out of hand, which to some extent it has. I agree with Spencer on this and applaud him, as well as Charles Johnson for their work and contributions. The thread, “Vlaams Belang, Charles Johnson, and all that”:

Many have commented on this debate including Vanishing American, Lawrence Auster, New Sisyphus, Vdare, Gates of Vienna, Winds of Jihad, etc.

So how do we think about this or discuss it? One way is to take assertions, make them hypotheses and then try to test them. Its usually best to have several hypotheses that conflict to test them against each other. Most assertions in this form are false, and so we have to choose among several false hypotheses which is most useful, none of them being true. Or they are uncertain and we have to consider probabilities that are difficult to estimate.

Most posters would agree there is an unacceptable risk of a major downgrade in the level of civilization in the West. This includes a loss of personal freedom, physical security, and some form or another of discrimination or persecution directed at those posting on the board or others they identify with.

Persecution in the form of affirmative action is already happening in most Western countries, and in non-white countries is sometimes directed at white minorities. Examples are in Zimbabwe and South Africa, which both have affirmative action against whites. (How do whites fight discrimination against whites except by banding together? Are they supposed to just quietly watch others receive the hit and do nothing?)

Most posters at Jihad Watch want some form of immigration restriction that would include Muslims but possibly others. When in Western countries have their been substantial restrictions in immigration? Who made the restrictions and for what reasons?

Most posters likely agree that if the current immigration laws are continued, the results will be unacceptable. So they want them restricted. How can that happen? That gets us back to when and why has it actually happened in Western lands. Or we might look at non-Western lands as well for this.

A transition from allowing immigration to not allowing it is rare? The US did it in the 1920’s. Aside from minor restrictions, when else has a Western land gone from heavy immigration to substantially restricted immigration?

The transition from high immigration to low is not something that has happened often in the West. So its wise to consider when it happened in the past and why it succeeded, and why it has failed to happen in so many countries, even though the people want it.

Why don’t people resist immigration more? Do people think they gain from immigration? Or do they think they are harmed? Polls seem to have a wide dispersion of results on what people believe on this.

Is immigration beneficial? We can test that by looking at median wages. Median wages for men have not changed in the U.S. since 1973. Women’s median wages in the U.S. are the same as men’s were in 1960.

Who is going to vote for this immigration restriction? Without the support of whites can it happen? Why will whites vote against immigration? What do they get? What other groups are needed? What support will it get among such groups?

One concept is that the effort should be stated as stopping Muslim immigration, but not any other type of immigration. Would that work to avoid persecution, loss of freedom, etc? Since those are happening now as Enoch Powell predicted in his Rivers of Blood speech, we are in fact already experiencing persecution, loss of freedom, and discrimination.

Will the public support a stop only Muslim immigration position? Or is that less likely to work than a stop all immigration position? Experience to date suggests the elites find it very difficult to tolerate any discussion of stopping the immigration of one group but not the others. Its also not clear that this would achieve much. In fact, its a math theorem that it will still lead to genetic replacement, and thus the almost complete extinction of whites.

So we have lets call it the PC counter jihad position:

Proposed: to stop only Muslim immigration.

Lets consider as alternative stop all immigration.

Proposed: to stop all immigration.

Which of these proposals will the left, public, mainstream elites, etc. call nativist, bigoted, racist, xenophobic, white nationalist, white supremacist, Eurocentric, etc? The reaction to Virgil Goode and some others suggests that the proposal to stop Muslim immigration only will get the bigger reaction of calling those proposing it names.

Those who have gone along with a total halt of Muslim immigration include Lawrence Auster and it appears also Robert Spencer. So this proposal is possibly more likely to get them called names than a total ban on immigration.

What sort of alliance can be built to stop only Muslim immigration? With whom? As compared to stopping all immigration?

What is the chance to do this without a lot of luck and help from all those inclined in this direction, even for their own reasons? Very low. It will take building an alliance of many and they will have many motives. Survival of what they cherish will surely be part of it.

What is the chance that those pushing this won’t be called bigot, racist, nativist, xenophobe, white nationalist or white supremacist if white? Or being called neo-Nazi, Nazi, fascist, Hitler, thug, etc. whether white or not? The chance of escaping these names is likely zero, whether the effort to restrict immigration succeeds or not.

Traditionally, in the US, third parties push an idea until a major party adopts it. If that is the formula for success, then third parties like BNP, Vlaams Belang, Swedish Democrats, Constitution Party in the U.S., etc. are the main avenue of success. They need to get a critical level of votes to move the major parties. This might be as low as 5 or 10 percent. It only has to be the difference between the votes the two major parties get. That is usually less than 10 percent and often less than 5 percent.

This is a doable level in most Western countries using the existing third parties. So far, no major Western party has embraced a total ban on Muslim immigration. Neither has one embraced a total ban on immigration. So at this point, the best play according to history is to get behind third parties that already exist on this issue and support them until a major party switches.

Getting 10 percent of the vote for such third parties is a reasonable target. We can hope that this will be enough. But it might take more. Ten percent is quite doable with the existing third parties. All of that vote could come from whites. So an appeal to whites who will vote that way consistently may be enough to succeed if we use the history of 3rd party platforms in the U.S.

Opposition to illegal immigration amnesty has already been achieved in the U.S. The people stopped the 2007 amnesty in the Senate by a call-in campaign. That is a major change. They then stopped several follow on efforts in October 2007.

During those debates, the issue of Muslim immigration was never a major part of the debate. Thus the proposal to advocate stopping Muslim immigration only, according to this evidence, was not a winner compared to opposing a more general category of immigration, illegal immigration. In fact, it might even have been counter-productive to advocate a ban of all Muslim immigration at that time.

There are many arguments against legal immigration besides those against Muslim immigration. China is spying on the U.S. Chinese spying can only be stopped by stopping all immigration from China. The same applies to know-how transfer to nuclear states like Pakistan or budding ones like Iran.

Reversing the median wage stagnation in the U.S. since 1973 requires training Americans in college instead of non-Americans. So this economic argument supports stopping all immigration not Muslim immigration only.

Hypothesis: A proposal to stop Muslim immigration only has little chance to succeed. In that case, counter-jihadis advocating this approach only are really advocating defeat. Their position is self-indulgent self-destruction. But its also destruction of the West. So its really no different than leftism, if we accept the relevant assumptions or hypotheses.

If BNP gets 10 percent of the vote at a general election in the UK for parliament, this might be sufficient to tip the Conservative Party in the UK to propose a ban on all immigration. This would be a major shift. At that point, many voters would switch to Conservative. Or they might subtract enough from Labour to elect the Conservatives. The BNP Ballerina supported the BNP, despite her partner being non-British and non-white. She did so not as a counter-jihadi but for reasons of British nationalism.

This is the motive for many people opposed to immigration, including in countries that currently restrict it, i.e. the entire non-white world. So if we look at history or countries that currently restrict immigration, reasons of race, ethnicity, nationalism in a traditional sense, etc. are the reasons everywhere and always we might hypothesize. If there are exceptions, they are not many.

The end of Western civilization would be a calamity. It would certainly be one for whites. They would likely suffer greatly and be reduced to a small minority with some probability. The overall picture presented by the third world today is that third world rule is bad for the people living under it. So its something to be opposed.

Opposition that actually stops Muslim immigration only is highly unlikely to succeed it appears at the present time. So for short term success, stopping all immigration is a better route. This, according to US third party history, may only require a consistent 10 percent vote for it in general elections. That can come from whites alone.

The 2007 call in suggests that non-whites support immigration restriction, but are not going to make calls. The call in in 2007 was likely mostly white. But the non-whites didn’t call for immigration they simply sat back and let the whites do the calling. This suggests non-whites would be quite comfortable for a BNP party to do the public pushing for ending immigration. They may call them white supremacist at every stage, but would be quite happy to let them succeed without opposing it.

People living in the West from the third world came here to escape the third world. They are quite willing to let whites stop new immigration and to maintain the existing high level of society. The left will call any effort to stop immigration white nationalist, white supremacist, xenophobic, etc. However, the US Senate 2007 call in shows that non-whites are quite willing to let activist whites stop immigration and preserve the West as it is and not let it turn into the third world.

All that is necessary is for enough whites to consistently call in to their reps and vote this way in elections, make contributions, blog this way, post comments at WaPo, UK Times, Daily Telegraph, Guardian, etc. and it will happen. The left will call these whites, white supremacist. Non-whites are quite happy to let these whites stop immigration completely.

Then the West can continue on as it is for a longer period of time. The above appears to be the only plan grounded in empirical reality. This plan means getting a critical mass of whites to call in, post, etc. This group can be motivated by anything, as long as they want to stop all immigration, legal and amnesties, asylum, student, etc. its enough to save the West. The more motives allowed, the more who will call in. The non-whites and other whites are willing to sit on their hands while this white minority makes it happen. They too want the West to stay the way it is.

The non-whites who are willing to sit on their hands while motivated whites call in, include Muslims, Hispanics, Asians, blacks, and Native Americans. Whites who didn’t call in to the Senate in 2007 in the U.S. include leftists, liberals, business people, university professors, green card holders, new citizens, etc.

Everyone who supposedly is ready to call the whites calling in names, and who might in fact do so, are willing to sit on their hands while the motivated whites do the calling for ending immigration. The vast majority of whites and non-whites just want it to happen. They don’t want to do it themselves.

So we just need a committed consistent group of whites to stop all immigration, who are willing to call, contribute, and vote for third parties to succeed. We are actually pretty close to this in many Western countries. BNP is one of the best of third parties for this, as is Vlaams Belang. So we are quite close to getting somewhere.

There are many pro BNP comments at UK Daily Telegraph and UK Times. Many people commented at UK Daily Telegraph that Nick Griffin of BNP should be in the top 100 conservatives. Many at UK Times suggested British mottos that were very anti-immigration.

This is a train that has arrived. The counter-jihadis just need to get on board and stop calling the whites who want to stop all immigration white supremacist and white nationalist. The PC counter-jihadis are doing more against their cause than they realize. They are a little like leftists who want it to happen, but don’t want to take responsibility and do what is necessary.

The way to convert major parties is to get the 10 percent vote for BNP and Constitution Party and others. This is quite doable with the existing third parties, blogs, issue groups, etc. We just need to pour it on. So we should stop calling each other names, advocate for all immigration to stop and make our phone calls, vote third party, contribute, and post at WaPo, etc. for ending all immigration including all legal immigration.

Stopping illegal immigration doesn’t work for counter-jihadis since that allows legal Muslim immigration. The only route for counter-jihadis to stop Muslim immigration is to make sure the anti-illegal immigration movement expands to stop all legal immigration in the US context. They also have to make sure that other countries also stop all immigration including student visas, guest workers, asylum, and family reunification.

The only way to stop all Muslim immigration is to stop all legal immigration. That requires a 10 percent third party support. The counter-jihadis can fill out part of that. This is their best realistic chance.

A list of rules to consider:

  1. Don’t attack what the US Department of Justice says is already true, e.g. “racial differences exist“.
  2. Don’t attack what the New York Times has already said, e.g. differences in the frequency of socially desirable traits may be genetic between groups.
  3. Don’t attack what Nobel Prize winners for DNA work say that is on our side.
  4. Don’t attack science or science papers that are on our side.
  5. Don’t attack what you actually believe yourself, or those saying it.
  6. Don’t attack people on our side because others do.
  7. Don’t forget to make your calls to your senator and reps asking them to stop all legal immigration including student visas, asylum, guest workers, H-1B, family reunification, diversity, and no amnesties.
  8. To stop all Muslim immigration requires stopping all legal immigration, asylum, student visa, family reunification, diversity, guest worker, H-1B, etc.
  9. That means you have to oppose all those types of legal immigration in your calls to your reps.
  10. Contribute to organizations like NumbersUSA, Fairus or BNP that oppose any and all immigration, or Vdare or Jihad Watch, American Renaissance, etc.
  11. Don’t attack people on the right who are pushing for what you want.
  12. Don’t repeat what leftists say.
  13. When you want to attack someone on the right, pick someone on the left and attack them instead. Those who make millions from immigration are always good ones to attack.
  14. Consistently criticize any politician or candidate who favors a category for immigration for that support. You can still vote for the least of evils if you want, and should vote for someone, but make it known everywhere you can including the candidate, that you oppose their support of legal immigration in any form. Especially do that with those you vote for. If you vote for someone, but oppose them on a position, write to them about it and tell them you voted for them despite their position in favor of some type of legal immigration, or because they were the least of all evils, but this is your most important issue.
  15. If you are white, you will be called Nazi, neo-Nazi, racist, bigot, fascist, and yes white nationalist and white supremacist. The left has learned we are most afraid of being called white nationalist and white supremacist. This means they will use those to stop us until we treat those names the same as bigot and nativist. Learn to list this whole list as what we are called, and don’t call others these names. Don’t call yourself these either. Treat their use by anyone ever as joke words that make that person ridiculous and non-serious. This has to be a united front. The words Nazi, fascist, bigot, racist, xenophobe, and even white nationalist and white supremacist have to be treated as non-serious words that make the person using them a joke if they are attacking with them.
  16. The left will use any word we are afraid of. They will find a word that makes us afraid. We have to learn, not to call ourselves that, and to list it as a word that automatically disqualifies the person using it as non-serious, at least in that instance. If they are on our side, we can forget it as we go forward.
  17. Anyone on the right using white nationalist or white supremacist to attack others on the right is saying this a serious word to use against the right. That gives the left a weapon against us. We must not use white nationalist or white supremacist as serious terms to attack anyone. We must not refer to ourselves using these words. We must treat them the same as the words bigot and nativist, joke words.
  18. The recent LGF debate over Vlaams Belang has empowered the left to call us white nationalist and white supremacist. These are the new words to make us afraid. We have to make these words into non-serious words the same as we have bigot, nativist, and racist. If there is any word we fear to be called, the left will find it. If we call ourselves that in attack, they will be able to figure out what word we are currently afraid of. They will then use it to silence us and make us fight against our own beliefs and positions. They will make us make the humiliating abject apologies they delight in. This we must never do. (Only those facing prosecution can be excused for such an apology.) We must go on the attack and make jokes about their most powerful words of attack against us.
  19. We must never use the words the left calls us against each other as serious. We must treat everyone of them as a joke word that discredits the speaker.
  20. This is a strictly school yard fight. The other kids know which words get to us. Sticks and stones may break our bones, but being called white nationalist and white supremacist will never hurt me.
  21. We are playing on a school yard by school yard rules. This is a fight without adult supervision. The other side are full of bullies and we have to fight back with school yard rules. The other side is a gang. We have to win.
  22. The other side doesn’t really want to win, as shown by the lack of call ins in 2007 for amnesty. No one called for amnesty, not even professors. I asked the Senate staffers and they said no one at all was calling in for amnesty. Not even the most extreme liberal. This was in Virginia. None of the leftists and immigrants living in Northern Virginia called in for amnesty. No one who works for Washington Post who lives in Northern Virginia called in for amnesty to Virginia senators. No one who works at the Civil Rights Division of DOJ who lives in Northern Virginia called in to their senators for amnesty. Or it was very few. But staffers did tell me at times, it was zero. The senators figured this out. The most extreme people who testify, the millionaires and billionaires, the petty bosses, the farmers, etc. none of them called in for amnesty. PC neocons who live in Northern Virginia didn’t call in for amnesty. People on TV for it didn’t call in. The Senate figured that out, they live here too. The left doesn’t want to win. They don’t want to live in the third world, they want to live here. They want us to call in and to call us names at the same time. They want to be hypocrites. Let them, don’t be them.
  23. Now that we have used the words white nationalist and white supremacist, and white nationalism and white supremacism to attack each other, the left knows that these are words some on the right will use against each other. Its not a secret, its on the internet. That means all of us will be inundated with these words. The other kids know we are willing to use them on each other on our side of the playground, so they know some of us are afraid to be called these words, those using them to attack for sure. That means we will be inundated with these specific words until we show we don’t care. We have to treat white nationalist and white supremacist the same as we treat Nazi, bigot, racist, nativst, xenophobe. By using them against our own side, we guarantee the left will pile these on all of us until we treat them as non-serious words whoever uses them. That is how the playground works. The kids on the other side figure out the words we use on each other we are afraid of. Now we have to show them we are not.
  24. Note that it doesn’t matter what the words mean. All that matters is we called kids on our side these names. The kids on the other side know we are afraid of these words. So they will taunt us with them until we show we don’t care. This is how the playground works.
  25. Those who have used the words white nationalist and white supremacist to attack others on the right are guaranteed to have these words used against them until they show they treat them like the words nativist, bigot, racist, xenophobe, Islamophobe, etc. Those who have been called this should regard this as satisfaction enough. You don’t have to do anything more. The leftist bullies will use these taunts until those on the right who used them will turn on these words and not care about them. This will happen no matter how much emotion anyone on the right has right now about what has happened. Everyone on the right should cool off and realize that under schoolyard rules, those who use these terms as serious will be called them until they aren’t serious. The left knows they are called fascist and Nazi back and that these words stop people listening and discredit the speaker. We have now arrived, because we used the words seriously on each other, at the point where white nationalist and white supremacist are the new fear words. Get used to being called them, whether you used them or didn’t.


Robert Spencer, “Vlaams Belang, Charles Johnson and all that”:

Leon the Pig Farmer, one of my favorite posters at Jihad Watch, supports BNP at the above site and so did one or two others. Charles Johnson picks up on the above thread:

Lawrence Auster on the LGF thread.

New Sisyphus, says why can’t we all unite:

Frank Purcell says patriotism isn’t nationalism.

Vanishing American picks points out some problems with the Purcell and New Sisyphus approaches, as well as Charles Johnson’s attempted purge of the right in neocon fashion.

The following has many links to many posts on the LGF Charles Johnson Vlaams Belang controversy.


Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch Saving the West

July 18, 2007

Today at Front Page Magazine, is an article on Robert Spencer and how he came to do his work at Jihad Watch.

“Jihad Will Destroy Us If We Don’t Act Now”
By Ed West
Catholic Herald | July 18, 2007

The following comment was posted there.

Robert Spencer’s example shows how citizens can save civilization when they are called forward.  Harvard didn’t anoint Spencer with a Ph.D. in Saving the West, he just does it.

It may be, and likely is true, as strange as it may seem to Spencer, that he is a key man in saving Western civilization.  This is what gets him up early in the morning posting on Jihad Watch or late at night.  He realizes, and anyone doing what he does can only half realize it, that it does come down to his effort to save the West.

This is how the West was built.  It wasn’t built by people appointed to create the West, it was built by people who just did it.  Gutenberg was not summoned to Rome and told he would change the West by inventing the printing press, he just did it.

If Hitler, Stalin, and Muhammad can appoint themselves to destroy the West, that means you or I can appoint ourselves to stop them and save it.  Don’t sit there and think you can’t make a difference, you are just one person and you don’t have a degree from Yale.

The 19 hijackers didn’t have degrees from Yale.  You don’t need one either.  Let your voice be heard.  Its better to fight now on the internet than fight later with a bayonet.  Saving the West really does depend, gentle reader, on you, right now.  Its your individual effort that is needed to make the difference.

On May 14 Call Senator John Warner VA to vote against Amnesty

May 11, 2007

It is urgent to get Senator John Warner of Virginia to vote against amnesty. The Senate may reach a compromise early the week of May 14, 2007. You need to call Monday May 14, 2007. If you live in Virginia call Senator Warner to vote against amnesty. Senator Warner is a fence sitter who voted for S. 2611 last year, for amnesty.

Advice from NumbersUSA:

“Always be polite but firm. You can make a very successful call by simply stating your name, where you are calling from, and a couple of brief talking points. Then, free up the line so the next caller can get through.”

We want Warner to vote against whatever bill comes up and to vote against cloture, i.e. vote against cutting off debate. Mention Lou Dobbs and that Lou Dobbs is against the bill. Say you trust and have faith in Lou Dobbs.

Warner has a D from Americans for Better Immigration.

Warner voted for amnesty last year S. 2611:

Warner’s current statement on comprehensive immigration:

John Warner is the 21st wealthiest Senator.

Net Worth: From $4,858,197 to $7,186,148 Ranks 21st among all members of the Senate”

List of All Senators wealth

Vote for final passage on S. 2611, Amnesty i.e. Comprehensive Immigration Reform.

A Nation of Lou Dobbs Democrats


“NEW DATA SHOW EXTRAORDINARY JUMP IN INCOME CONCENTRATION IN 2004″ By Aviva Aron-Dine and Isaac Shapiro for a graph of income share of top 1 percent from 1913 to 2004.

Income Inequality U Shape Timeline

7 of the top 8 wealthiest Senators voted for S. 2611, amnesty, affirmative action, non-deportable crime, and a pathway for the top 1 percent of households to continue to enjoy 20 percent of each year’s income, compared to 10 percent before Kennedy’s 1965 Immigration Act. The only 1 of the top 8 who didn’t vote for S. 2611 didn’t vote, Jay Rockefeller. McCain is 7th and Kennedy 8th in wealth.

Open Secrets

Rank Name Minimum Net Worth Maximum Net Worth

1 Herb Kohl (D-Wis) $219,098,029 to $234,549,004 Voted Yes S. 2611

2 John Kerry (D-Mass) $165,741,511 to $235,262,100 Voted Yes S. 2611

3 Jay Rockefeller (D-WVa) $78,150,023 to $101,579,003 Not Voting S. 2611

4 Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif) $43,343,464 to $98,660,021 Voted Yes S. 2611

5 Lincoln D. Chafee (R-RI) $41,153,105 to $64,096,019 Voted Yes S. 2611

6 Frank R. Lautenberg (D-NJ) $38,198,170 to $90,733,019 Voted Yes S. 2611

7 John McCain (R-Ariz) $25,071,142 to $38,043,014 Voted Yes S. 2611

8 Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass) $19,189,049 to $93,043,004 Voted Yes S. 2611

More data here

Free fax to Congress on hot immigration bills:


Immigration doesn’t help the middle class. Men’s median wages are lower than in 1973.

Income, Poverty, and
Health Insurance Coverage in
the United States: 2005

US Census Report on wages By
Carmen DeNavas-Walt
Bernadette D. Proctor
Cheryl Hill Lee

Graph page 18 shows men’s median wages peaked in 1973, they are lower now. Women’s median wages are lower than men’s, which means they are lower than men earned in 1973. Black median wages are lower than all men, which means black wages are lower than what all men made in 1973.

1973 is 35 years ago. When they push immigration after the US government reports wages are stagnant for 35 years it shows they are voting their stock portfolio.

Immigration keeps wages to the 1973 level. That boosts up stock prices, because productivity has gone up since 1973. So the money is going to profits which pushes up stock prices. The leading Senators pushing immigration, McCain and Kennedy are worth 10’s of millions of dollars. They are i the top 1 percent that get 20 percent of the income.

The top 1 percent got 20 percent of income before the 1920’s restriction, 10 percent after, and now get 20 percent with 1965 legal immigration. Kennedy pushed that act and he is now wealthier because his stocks went up.


Senate trades our lives and security so that they get 20 dollars of every 100 dollars we create at work instead of the 10 dollars they got before the 1965 Immigration Act.

Worker Productivity Graph and info

Productivity never stopped growing, except possibly during some recessions or odd years from 1947 to present.

1947 to 1973 worker productivity up 2.7 percent per year.

1973 to early 1990’s 1.4 percent per year

1995 to 2004 2.9 percent per year increase in worker productivity.

Yet men’s median wages are lower than in 1973, and the other groups, women, blacks, etc. are lower than all men in 1973.

The workers became more productive, but wages stayed at or below the level of men in 1973.

What changed is that the top 1 percent get 20 percent of every 100 dollars we make now but only got 10 dollars per every 100 before the 1965 Immigration Act.

Scroll down for graph below:

U Shaped Income Inequality Timeline

Stocks boomed. Senator’s wealth boomed.

They are trading off our lives for their stock portfolio.


Lower wages, shorter lifetimes data

“Mortality, Education, Income, and Inequality among American Cohorts”

Angus Deaton
Christina Paxson

“People whose family income was less than $5,000 in 1980 could expect to live about 25 percent fewer years than people whose family income was greater than $50,000.”

The Senate is in jihad against middle class wages. The Senate jihad against wages by immigration has also lowered our lifespan. The Senate jihad on wages by immigration kills more Americans than the Senate’s jihad against Americans by importing Muslim jihadis to kill us directly. The indirect killing by lower lifespans kills far more than the Fort Dix type, at least for now.


Did immigration cause productivity to go up? No. Productivity was going up from 1947 onwards. If you draw a straight line from 1947 to 2004 its close to the graph anyhow.

The slowdown in productivity growth started in 1973, 8 years after the 1965 Immigration Act.

“The consensus among most economists is that there is no one factor that accounts for that productivity slowdown, but rather that it was the result of a series of different influences that each made a modest contribution and happened to occur at about the same time.”

“Among the factors that are likely to have played some role are increased safety and environmental regulation, reduced investment in productive equipment, and demographic changes , along with a number of other developments.”

Demographic changes is code words for immigration. They are not even allowed to say it.


Productivity Graph and analysis

So we had 2.7 percent productivity growth before immigration. Immigration brought down productivity growth, it didn’t increase it. Moreover, before the 1965 Immigration Act, wages went up with productivity. We got all our increased productivity. That’s our work. After the 1965 Immigration Act, the rich Senator’s got our productivity increases in their stock portfolio.

Men’s median wages stopped growing completely in 1973. Zero growth in wages while productivity goes up substantially shows that markets are undercutting workers.

The income inequality graph proves this as well. The top 1 percent got 20 percent before immigration restriction in the 1920’s, they got 10 percent during restriction up to the 1965 Immigration Act, and now they are back to 20 percent. This shows its immigration that is driving this redistribution from those who create income to those who control income distribution by controlling immigration. Wealth inequality has become even worse than income inequality.

==Two Virginia Beach Teens killed by drunk illegal

Virginia Beach Teens Killed at Intersection [Brenda Walker]

Click on above to see their photo together. For some systems you can use the mouse to put the cursor over the link above and you can see the photo.

Below, Tessa Tranchant, 16, left, and Allison Kunhardt, 17, were killed late Friday.”

Alfredo Ramos, who was born in Mexico of Guatemalan parents, has been in the United States for about seven years.
[Suspect in crash that killed 2 had alcohol-related convictions, Hampton Roads Pilot 4/3/07]

Diversity Is Strength! It’s Also…Immigrant Mass Murder Syndrome” By Brenda Walker

Top Ten Reasons Why the US Should Not Marry Mexico”
By Brenda Walker

== U Md Econ major killed by drunk illegal who fled scene.

A Son, Brother and “Friend with Everyone” Is Killed
[Brenda Walker] @ 7:32 am [Email author] [Email This Article] [Print This Article]

Another bright young person has had his life snuffed out by a drunk-driving illegal alien. Matthew Watson, 20, a sophomore economics major at the University of Maryland, was killed May 5 at 3 am when the Jeep Cherokee in which he was a passenger was struck by a truck driven by Never Leopoldo Navarro-Montoya. The Cherokee driver and two other passengers were hospitalized with injuries considered not life threatening.

The Mexican fled the scene and was found unconscious a third of a mile away on the median strip. Police said Navarro-Montoya possessed a permanent resident card and a Social Security card with his name, which he said were forged and bought in Texas.

The death by illegal alien was the second of a Howard County resident during the last six months. Marine Cpl. Brian Mathews survived a tour of duty in Iraq, but was killed on Thanksgiving night along with his date.

The family has organized two scholarships to honor Matt’s memory — one for a football player to attend summer training camp and the other for a student who participates in music and sports to attend the University of Maryland. The website also has photos and memories of Matt, including the article ‘He was friends with everyone’.

==Also covered here:

=Islam at GMU

search Northern Virginiastan

Friday, May 11, 2007

GMU – worse than I initially reported

A follow-up to my post Muslim spacehogs at GMU:

UPDATE May 11, 2007: From Snapped Shot via LGF, Brian C. Ledbetter clears up some misperceptions about George Mason U and the Muslim Student Association: for example, not all bathrooms in the Johnson Center have ritual foot-washing basins, but every bathroom in the northeastern half of the building has foot-washing basins. Still doesn’t give me a warm fuzzy.

The original article from Snapped Shot was titled “Some are more equal.” This statement is adapted from the proclamation “All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others” made by the ruling pigs in George Orwell’s Animal Farm. A fitting extension of our porcine metaphor.

As noted in a previous article Muslim accomodations on college campuses:

The [Muslim Accomodations Task Force, a project of the Muslim Student Association] isn’t operated by overly enthusiastic college students. Its professional staff, based in the Washington, D.C., area, includes coordinators who provide legal advice, teach students to lobby, write letters on their behalf, and help them overcome “obstacles” such as college administrators’ concerns about violating the separation of church and state.

To learn how local colleges and universities are “accomodating” Muslim demands, visit Muslim Accomodations (East Zone USA) on the MSA National web site.


Gates of Vienna Monday, October 10, 2005
Jamaat ul-Fuqra in Virginia, Part 1
by Baron Bodissey

During the Beltway Sniper crisis, back in the fall of 2002, a series of articles in The Washington Times described John Allen Muhammad’s conversion to Islam, and his later break with the Nation of Islam (the articles are no longer available, but extracts have been preserved here). Apparently the NOI was not militant enough for Mr. Muhammad, and he left it to become involved with a group called Jamaat ul-Fuqra (Arabic for “community of the impoverished”), a terrorist organization founded by a notorious Pakistani cleric, Sheikh Mubarak Ali Gilani.

What drew my eye in the article was the mention of a Jamaat ul-Fuqra compound in Red House, Virginia. Red House?! I know Red House — a small village in rural Charlotte County.

But first: some background on Jamaat ul-Fuqra. The group was founded in New York by Sheikh Gilani in New York in 1980. Its current headquarters is in Hancock, New York, and it has various compounds, or Jamaats, scattered throughout the United States and Canada, notably in Colorado, New York, Tennessee, Georgia, and Virginia. Most of the adherents are reported to be American-born Black Muslims who follow a strict Islamist ideology.

Sheikh Gilani, you may remember, is the cleric with whom Daniel Pearl had arranged an interview back in January of 2002. Unfortunately, Mr. Pearl was betrayed by his sources, and then abducted and beheaded. Sheikh Gilani was arrested later that month and languishes in Pakistani custody.

Virginia Part 2

Virginia Part 3

==Islamberg branches Red House, Virginia; Falls Church, Virginia, Hyattsville, Maryland

Islamberg, New York: “You can hear gunfire up there. I can’t understand why the FBI won’t shut it down” from Jihad Watch
Paul Williams report in Canada Free Press: Islamberg is a branch of Muslims of the Americas Inc., a tax-exempt organization formed in 1980 by Pakistani cleric Sheikh Mubarak Ali Gilani, who refers to himself as “the sixth Sultan Ul Faqr,” Gilani, has been directly linked by court documents to Jamaat ul-Fuqra or “community of the impoverished,” an organization that seeks to “purify” Islam through violence.

Though primarily based in Lahore, Pakistan, Jamaat ul-Fuqra has operational headquarters in New York and openly recruits through various social service organizations in the U.S., including the prison system. Members live in hamaats or compounds, such as Islamberg, where they agree to abide by the laws of Jamaat ul-Fuqra, which are considered to be above local, state and federal authority. Additional hamaats have been established in Hyattsville, Maryland; Red House, Virginia; Falls Church, Virginia; Macon, Georgia; York, South Carolina; Dover, Tennessee; Buena Vista, Colorado; Talihina, Oklahoma; Tulane Country, California; Commerce, California; and Onalaska, Washington. Others are being built, including an expansive facility in Sherman, Pennsylvania.

Some 9-11 terrorists used Maryland and Virginia for their final staging.


Look up your state impact statement at


Numbers USA lets you fax your Congressman and Senator for free on stopping the amnesty bill for illegals and reducing legal immigration.


You can register without paying money. You click on buttons to send faxes once you enter your personal info. You can send faxes to each Senator and your rep by clicking buttons. They have them already written out.

You can stop chain migration which lets jihadis come through arranged marriage. You can stop illegal amnesty which will help other jihadis.

“NumbersUSA’s 314,000 activist members are contacting their Senators and asking them to honor the pro-worker spirit of the Commission, chaired by the late Barbara Jordan (D-Texas). Click here to see what actions are available for you to take today!”

Join up and make a difference. Its easier to click buttons to fax now, then fight a civil war later.

US Army Mobilization WWI from 0.2 to Victory 19mo

January 31, 2007

US Army Mobilization WWI

” World War I

The United States entered World War I almost completely unprepared: the National Defense Act which Congress had passed in 1916 had provided the basis of a mobilization plan, not an actual army. In early 1917 the country had only 210,000 men under arms, a third of them National Guardsmen who had been called up the previous summer to serve on the Mexican border. The Army had no permanent tactical organization above the level of the regiment and lacked adequate quantities of artillery, machine guns, tanks, modern aircraft, and even gas masks. Its General Staff organization was not designed to cope with the logistical and operational problems presented by a major conflict, and at the direction of the Wilson administration it had made no war plans. The Army had no intelligence organization.

Within seventeen months, however, the country had transformed itself into a fighting machine. With the help of the draft, the United States raised an Army of 4 million men; half of this great force was transported to France, where it provided the decisive margin that led to victory over Imperial Germany and its allies.”

American Expeditionary Force

“By June 1917, there were 14,000 US soldiers in France and by May of the next year there were one million American troops. ”

What was different was a sense of urgency, will, and a nation that believed in its own survival and victory as morally right. With those, its easy to train 500,000 or 1 million troops in 12 months. We were doing it over 2 million a year in WWII with half the population.

We can train an army to finish up the Middle East and Central Asia and win before Bush leaves office. The time from April 6. 1917, US Congress Declared War on Germany to Nov 11, 1917, Victory was 19 months. They don’t teach those dates in leftist universities.

re Thomas Holsinger on “The Case for Invading Iran”

Posted by: Old Atlantic [TypeKey Profile Page] at January 31, 2007 05:31 PM




Iran role seen in attack on US troops. at Jihad Watch

Big Red One . org Society of the First Infantry Division 1919


First ID


The 42nd Rainbow Division was formed in August 1917 of National Guard units from 26 states and the District of Columbia. After Chief of Staff Major Douglas MacArthur remarked that the Division “would stretch over the whole country like a rainbow,” the coalesced national guard units were christened Rainbow Division. As the war progressed Douglas MacArthur was promoted to commander of the 84th Brigade and finally to commander of the Rainbow Division. Its four infantry regiments were respectively 165th (formerly New York’s 69th); 166th (formerly Ohio’s 4th); 167th (formerly Alabama’s 4th); and 168th (formerly Iowa’s 3rd). The field artillery, machine gun, ambulance, hospital, and other units originated in other states from the Atlantic to the Pacific.

The Division saw its first action in February 1918 fighting alongside the French. The battles continued throughout the following months and on July 14, 1918 the final German offensive was contained by the 4th French Army, in which the Rainbow Division played a prominent role at the famous Battle of the Champagne. Many bloody battles and great victories followed until the Germans were finally defeated. Battles included those in the Chateau-Thierry salient where Rainbow’s poet, Joyce Kilmer was killed; St. Mihiel; Verdun front and Argonne, where Rainbowmen engaged in the final battle of WW I. German occupation duty followed.

“Increasing the size of the Marine Corps, he added, could be done only by 1,000 to 2,000 troops per year over an extended period.”

General Peter Pace. Guess he never read about General Douglas MacArthur in World War I.

“Marine Corps May Need to Grow, General Says”





Loyalty to a civilization requires loyalty to the people

January 29, 2007

Loyalty to a civilization without loyalty to the people is meaningless. The people are the physical embodiment of the civilizaiton, not their furniture, houses, spelling and grammar, or even libraries and webpages. Change the people and the rest turns into dust.

The elites in the West oppose the above completely. To the elites, there can be loyalty to a civilization without loyalty to the people. Elites redefine loyalty. The people are always the Archie Bunkers to them.

The response to the attack on WTC in 1993 shows this. No change in Muslim immigration. No loyalty. The response to the WTC 2001 and Pentagon attacks was the same. These were Archie Bunkers who died. So no stop in Muslim immigration.

This concept is embodied in immigration. This is why the West is dying, because in fact, without loyalty to the people, nothing survives. The people are everything.

There can be no loyalty to a civilization that has any meaning without loyalty to the people. Elites have no loyalty to the people, so the civilization dies. The solution is to replace the elites.

Bernard Lewis illustrates this lack of loyalty to the people, in the view of Lawrence Auster:

The Über Suspect by Lawrence Auster

Auster quoting Bernard Lewis

“Europeans are losing their own loyalties and their own self-confidence,” he said. “They have no respect for their own culture.” Europeans had “surrendered” on every issue with regard to Islam in a mood of “self-abasement,” “political correctness” and “multi-culturalism,” said Lewis, who was born in London to middle-class Jewish parents but has long lived in the United States.

Auster then says Lewis is in effect, PC, phony conservative, because Lewis doesn’t admit immigration is what produced this problem and stopping it is part of the cure.

“More Young Islamics Back Sharia Law ” at Raw Story:

“Allah on 480 occasions in the Holy Koran extols Muslims to wage jihad. We only fulfil God’s orders”

according to Baitullah Mehsud.

“Pakistan Taleban vow more violence,” from the BBC:

Baitullah seemed a man with only jihad (holy war) on his mind. During the interview he quoted several verses from the Koran to defend his stance that foreign forces must be evicted from Islamic countries.

“Allah on 480 occasions in the Holy Koran extols Muslims to wage jihad. We only fulfil God’s orders. Only jihad can bring peace to the world,” he says.

This article represents opinion, hypotheses or speculation. It is draft and preliminary. Comments and corrections welcomed. All other disclaimers apply.

Hanoi Jane Fonda AA gun v. Jill Carroll Captive Photo

January 28, 2007

Jane Fonda Video v. Jill Carroll Video
Fonda video from North Vietnam compared to video released by terrorist group. Look at both. Leftists, Still think this is Vietnam?

We are in a war with radical Islam aka Islam. This is winner take all for planet earth. Jane Fonda knows that, that’s why she stayed in DC on the Mall with Americans, not with the Islamists who took Jill Carroll captive.

Jill Carroll Video selection

Jill Carroll Video Youtube

She has to say Americans will lose.

Jane Fonda video in Berkeley on Vietnam

Jane Fonda photo on NVA AA gun

Another Jane Fonda photo on NVA AA gun

Notice the difference between the Jill Carroll video and Jane Fonda in Hanoi. In Hanoi, Fonda speaks her own thoughts. Jill Carroll does not.

Jane Fonda DC Rally video selections

DC Peace Rally video Youtube Jane Fonda

Wonder why Jill Carroll wasn’t there? What would Jill Carroll say different than in the Video?

JC had to say America would lose in Iraq. JF chose to say it. Listen to JF at DC peace rally and Jill Carroll when she was “released” to Iraqis to make her video “of her own free will”, with Islamic headcovering.

Posted by: Old Atlantic [TypeKey Profile Page] at January 28, 2007 04:19 PM

Jane Fonda doesn’t have to wear headscarf
at DC Peace Rally. Why is that? Is it because we haven’t had enough Muslim immigration? Why didn’t Jane Fonda speak up for more of that? Why wasn’t Jane Fonda wearing prescribed clothing under Sharia for women?

Posted by: Old Atlantic [TypeKey Profile Page] at January 28, 2007 04:31 PM

Repeat a bit from above:

“How do we get the percentage of Christians in the US down to zero, or less?

By thrh | Jan 27, 2007 12:46:47 PM” from WaPo

Comments Page 1 at WaPo Thousands Protest Bush Policy

Christian Cleansing Chart at Timesonline

Christian Cleansing Chart data: Percentage of Christians: Turkey 1923 15 percent, Now 1 percent Syria 1920 33 percent, Now 10 percent Iraq 1970 5.8 percent, Now 2.65 percent Jerusalem 1922 53 percent, Now 2 percent Bethlehem 1948 85 percent, Now 12 percent.

Posted by: Old Atlantic [TypeKey Profile Page] at January 28, 2007 04:37 PM

“Jill Carroll” Iraqi interpreter killed

Funny, Jane Fonda’s interpreter didn’t seem to have that problem in Hanoi.

Posted by: Old Atlantic [TypeKey Profile Page] at January 28, 2007 04:44 PM

Jill Carroll Timeline

Saturday, Jan. 7

• Jill Carroll kidnapped in Baghdad. Interpreter Allan Enwiya is killed.

• The Christian Science Monitor requests a media blackout while recovery gets under way.

Posted by: Old Atlantic [TypeKey Profile Page] at January 28, 2007 04:50 PM

Discover the Networks page on Jane Fonda Vietnam

First Air Cavalry page on Jane Fonda

Written excerpts of Fonda on Radio Hanoi and
Congressional Hearings

Posted by: Old Atlantic [TypeKey Profile Page] at January 28, 2007 04:59 PM

Text of a Jane Fonda Radio Hanoi broadcast


One thing that I have learned beyond a shadow of a doubt since I’ve been in this country is that Nixon will never be able to break the spirit of these people; he’ll never be able to turn Vietnam, north and south, into a neo-colony of the United States by bombing, by invading, by attacking in any way. One has only to go into the countryside and listen to the peasants describe the lives they led before the revolution to understand why every bomb that is dropped only strengthens their determination to resist.

end quote.

Jill Carroll had to say almost the same things on her video.

Jane Fonda antiwar timeline

Posted by: Old Atlantic [TypeKey Profile Page] at January 28, 2007 05:03 PM

Jane Fonda on AA gun, better photo

Posted by: Old Atlantic [TypeKey Profile Page] at January 28, 2007 05:06 PM

Jane Fonda apology in 1988 analysis at Front Page

Note when Jane Fonda was on AA gun she was wearing a helmet and smiling while goofing around. Jill Carroll was wearing an Islamic headscarf, never smiled, and was not goofing around.

16 years after her AA gun pose, Fonda apologized, but only for that pose, not for which side she chose. Can we let a billion Muslims have 16 years before she apologizes for what they do?

From 1972 to 1988, North Vietnam did not invade or infiltrate the United States, England, France, etc. There were no bombings in London, Madrid and New York. North Vietnam wasn’t even building a nuclear weapon, or submarines or missiles.

In 16 years, there may not be a West for Jane Fonda to apologize in, and she may be wearing an Islamic headscarf in accordance with Sharia law.

Posted by: Old Atlantic [TypeKey Profile Page] at January 28, 2007 05:14 PM

Jill Carroll Photo as captive from AP Jan 30 at Newsday

This photo is quite different from the Jane Fonda photo. It shows her fearful and on the verge of tears. Why didn’t people carry copies of this photo at the DC Rally?

Posted by: Old Atlantic [TypeKey Profile Page] at January 28, 2007 05:21 PM

Why didn’t rally protesters have a placard with Jill Carroll captive photo on one side and Jane Fonda AA gun on the other side? Why?

Posted by: Old Atlantic [TypeKey Profile Page] at January 28, 2007 05:27 PM

Why can’t we give a billion Muslims 16 years, because we already have. Pakistan has nukes, subs and missiles and is combining them. Iran is on the way.

Posted by: Old Atlantic [TypeKey Profile Page] at January 28, 2007 05:30 PM


Comments at WaPo on anti-Bush Iraq Rally at Mall

quote He also said there are so many Iraq children, mothers, young babies killed—why—they did nothing to us. This madman in the white house has got to be held responsible for all this!!! By jrgeyer | Jan 28, 2007 10:58:23 AM end quote.

Its al Qaeda, Sunni and Shiite insurgents, and Islam that are responsible. Bush’s mistakes are the religion of peace speech, and not taking the war to three main enemy homelands, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan in 2002.

We should have mobilized after 9-11 and conquered all main enemy homelands within 18 months. That is what Bush should do now. Add 2 million to military and finish the job in 18 months.

Posted by: Old Atlantic [TypeKey Profile Page] at January 28, 2007 11:16 AM

Rawstory Comments on anti-Bush Iraq Surge rally at Mall

Posted by: Old Atlantic [TypeKey Profile Page] at January 28, 2007 11:18 AM

Comments Page 1 at WaPo Thousands Protest Bush Policy

Christian Cleansing Chart at Timesonline

Christian Cleansing Chart data: Percentage of Christians: Turkey 1923 15 percent, Now 1 percent Syria 1920 33 percent, Now 10 percent Iraq 1970 5.8 percent, Now 2.65 percent Jerusalem 1922 53 percent, Now 2 percent Bethlehem 1948 85 percent, Now 12 percent.

Data posted at comment line produced following response:

“How do we get the percentage of Christians in the US down to zero, or less?

By thrh | Jan 27, 2007 12:46:47 PM”

Posted by: Old Atlantic [TypeKey Profile Page] at January 28, 2007 11:22 AM


Oringally posted at Jihad Watch.


Bush warns failure in Iraq could widen conflict




Iraqi Soldiers Clash With Insurgents


re: David Selbourne above it all at Jihad Watch

December 2, 2006

Robert Spencer: “Here is a silly and misleading piece in The Spectator by David Selbourne, “Apocalypse on the US blogosphere.” Selbourne has written some excellent pieces about the global jihad in the past; his book, The Losing Battle with Islam, while enlightening…”

There are pictures of people jumping from WTC on 9-11. They didn’t have time to look up references or use so that they could discuss what was happening to them using polite language and proper spelling.

Picture of man in mid air outside WTC

Which of the following statements would this man agree with? Which ones would he want to sign his name to? These are from the Selbourne column.

“There is a world, increasingly driven by unreason, in which voices in the wilderness denounce each other as ‘traitors’, cry out that ‘all I want is no more Islam near me’,”

” It is a world of which the ‘MSM’, or ‘mainstream media’, knows too little.”

“Roughly speaking, the blogging ‘right’ is anti-Muslim (and not just anti-Islam), pro-gun and apple pie, anti-‘big government’ and ‘liberals’ in DC, and generally pro-British, anti-European and pro-Israel;”

“for most of this ‘right’, all-out war has been declared on ‘the West’ by Islam and its ‘terrorists’”

“as Islam’s political fortunes have advanced, irrationality in response to this advance has spread ”

“They are variously said to be ‘dumber than dirt’, ‘godless savages’, ‘losers’, even ‘Koranimals’. As for Islam, or ‘Islamania’, it is (for example) a ‘misogynistic genocidal cult’ which allegedly worships a ‘false pagan moon-rock god of death’ and is ‘eating at the insides of every nation until it is dead’.”

“To Montesquieu in 1748, Islam’s ‘destructive spirit’ spoke ‘only by the sword’; to Schopenhauer in 1819, the Koran was a ‘wretched book’ in which he had ‘not been able to discover one single idea of value’; to De Tocqueville in 1843, Islam was ‘deadly’, ‘to be feared’ and a ‘form of decadence’.”

“A blog-poster declares that the ‘left’ and ‘liberals’ have ‘done nothing but grovel at the feet of Islamofascists’; another that the entire American ‘left’ — who are no better than ‘tares in the midst of wheat’ — are ‘killing this country’.”

“For some, it is ‘the West’ which is done for. ‘We have allowed Islam in. We have sentenced ourselves to death’ is its voice. ”

” London is no more ‘Londonistan’”

than New York is in the above picture.

Would the above man agree with the coverage on TV of 9-11 that day? Would he agree with all the PC statements? Why are PC statements good? Is it possible the man above would consider that PC statements on 9-11 were disrespectful of him? Would he think he deserved the truth to be said when people replayed the picture of him falling?

Did he think his photo would be the backdrop to some TV or MSM person saying polite PC things about the cause of his death?

Was he thinking, I hope no one says any of the things in quote marks above? Or was he thinking that he had been betrayed by the PC mindset, the MSM and the government?

Many victims just don’t have the presence of mind to appropriately state their grievance in PC terms. What about people who are not as educated as Mr. Selbourne? Must they be mute? Can they not speak for themselves? Are their emotions meaningless or unimportant because they can’t be expressed at the Selbourne level of indirection?

History is about change. Most of that change has losers, some are complete losers.

Most victims in history don’t have time to look up a scholarly text to cite statistics. Most victims can’t do a statistical test on how many people really are behind what is done to them. However, we do. So let’s review some.

In 1914, Asia Minor or Anatolia was 40 percent non-Muslim. Now its less than 2 percent.

What about the statement of Talaat Bey during the genocide of the Christians in Turkey? How does that stack up on the Selbourne analysis?

From January 13, 1915 New York Times:

“Talaat Bey, the Minister of the Interior, has stated to the Councillor of the Greek Patriarchate that in Turkey henceforth there will be room only for Turks. While he was profuse in assurance to the Greek Minister regarding the cessation of anti- Greek persecutions, no real amelioration of the situation is perceptible.”

Does Talaat Bey’s statement fall into the “lunatic fringe” category? Asia Minor went from 40 percent non-Muslim in 1914 to less than 2 percent today. Constantinople was over 50 percent Christian as Robert pointed out earlier and is now in the 1 to 2 percent range. So what Talaat Bey said happened.

Sometimes what the “lunatic fringe” says is what happens. How many times has that happened? Is it 1938? Did Talaat Bey really mean it? Or was he too educated and sophisticated to mean it?

Links with references on above stats and quotes

The man jumping from WTC on 9-11 never got to tell us what he thought.  If his thoughts were known as he jumped, they might not be PC.

When do people get to say they don’t want to be killed or taken over?  When can they tell Congress to stop immigration? After they are attacked and by luck survive?

Do they get to prepare for that?  Can they talk to each other to prepare?  When? After they pass the Islam A Level Exam?

This article represents hypotheses, speculation or opinion. All other disclaimers apply.

read more | digg story

re “Pope sells out Europe, says Erdogan”

November 28, 2006

“ANKARA (Reuters) – Pope Benedict told Turkey on Tuesday he backed its bid to join the European Union and believed Islam was a religion of peace, hoping to soothe rows overshadowing a delicate visit to the mainly Muslim country.

Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan hailed the comments, which he said Benedict made to him in their private talk at the airport, and Turkish commentators said they changed the tone of a visit clouded by disputes over the Pope’s view of Islam.”

from Reuters from Robert Spencer, Jihad Watch: Pope sells out Europe, says Erdogan

We are constantly told by our leaders that they have met with foreign leaders. They know better as to what we could get as the best possible deal. Cardinal Ratzinger could more easily tell the truth than Pope Benedict.
But why is it when our leaders meet with foreign leaders they abandon us, but when their leaders meet with ours, they stick to their guns and their people’s interests?

Even when they are caught red handed in over a century of genocide against Christians which is only moderated because very few Christians are left, and most of them old and dying out?

Why is it that a meeting between leaders is for their side an opportunity to stick it to us and for our side an opportunity for apology, betrayal, and surrender?

In the case of Bush, Baker and Prince Bandar, we can say its money. But with the Pope what is it?

The Left has taught us that our leaders should be the Secretary of Apology, Nation Building and Reparations. The Left teaches that to grow in office, our leaders must apologize. To show their sincerity they must give up our right to live in our lands.

This is what the Turks asked for as their right, to get our lands. This is the whole history of the Turks for the last 1000 years. Why can’t EU leaders protect their lands and people? Because the Left won and has instilled in them that they are the Secretary of Apology.

The West is supposed to apologize for Greece, Rome, the Renaissance, the Enlightenment, and modern science. It is supposed to say that the Turks have superior wisdom. The Turks who have never said no to a chance for conquest and invasion of Europe or of killing Christians and Jews. The Turks have demanded that as their right for a thousand years. That is Turk culture.

Its not modern science, its demanding Europe’s surrender. They demanded it today and got it. Our leaders should not be surprised that when they meet with Turks, the Turks demand our surrender and our lands. That’s what they always demand as their right.

They should be prepared with their own demands and a polite refusal to the standard Turk demand, Europe. Why we have to respond to that politely is a good question for us to ask ourselves. If we demanded Turkey as our right, they wouldn’t respond to it very well. Even a demand to free the Christians now, and give them equality would get a rebuff from them.

The whole history of Turk Europe relations is summed up in the scene in Lawrence of Arabia where Lawrence is whipped at the command of the Turkish officer. Its been that scene for a thousand years.

Plus ca change, plus c’est la meme chose.

Both about the Turks and our leaders.

This article represents hypotheses, speculation, opinion, and disappointment. All other disclaimers apply.

Christians and Jews in Turkey in 20th Century

November 28, 2006

New York Times articles reported the Turkish genocide on November 12 1914 and January 11, and January 13, 1915. Pdf of NY Times articles.

From January 13, 1915 New York Times:

“Talaat Bey, the Minister of the Interior, has stated to the Councillor of the Greek Patriarchate that in Turkey henceforth there will be room only for Turks. While he was profuse in assurance to the Greek Minister regarding the cessation of anti- Greek persecutions, no real amelioration of the situation is perceptible.”

Now the Turkish government is “profuse in its assurances” to the EU, the Pope, and to those stout defenders of Americans and Christians, C. Rice and George Bush that they have stopped anti-Christian persecutions. This is because there are so few Christians to persecute, that it hardly counts compared to the numbers before?

New York Times coverage of September 11, 2001.

9-11 Report and articles

9-11 5 years later

NY Times 1914, 1915 repeat of above link

bin Laden’s 1996 Fatwa and Declaration of War on America.

“The latest and the greatest of these aggressions, incurred by the Muslims since the death of the Prophet (ALLAH’S BLESSING AND SALUTATIONS ON HIM) is the occupation of the land of the two Holy Places -the foundation of the house of Islam, the place of the revelation, the source of the message and the place of the noble Ka’ba, the Qiblah of all Muslims- by the armies of the American Crusaders and their allies.”

Plus ca change, plus c’est la meme chose.

Is this now true of France, Denmark, London, Dearborn, Washington, etc?

“…no real amelioration of the situation is perceptible.”

That is care of Bush, Blair, Rice, 9-11 Commission of Hamilton Kean, the Iraq Study Group of Baker Hamilton, Democrats, Republicans, MSM, profs, etc.

“…no real amelioration of the situation is perceptible.”

For Christians in Turkey from 1914 to the 2006 Pope Visit.

For the West after 9-11.

Population of Anatolia 1915 before Genocide Ottoman Official records

Muslims were 5.6 million, total population was 9.1 million. So 3.5 million were non-Muslim. So the genocides or suppression of Christians, Jews and others by the Muslims was really about getting rid of about 40 percent of the population.

Genocide is about getting rid of the people, if we can coin a Yogi Berraism. The Muslims wanted to get rid of 40 percent of the population. This was to take the land, houses, businesses, and money of the victims.

It was a delayed completion of the conquests in previous centuries.

According to the following source, the Muslims killed 3.5 to 4.3 million Christians between 1900 and 1923 in Turkey.

Statistics Of Turkey’s Democide Estimates, Calculations, And Sources” By R.J. Rummel.
Demographics of Turkey

Christian Genocide Minor Asia webpage

Reference on 1942 Tax Law

Unpleasant Genocide Arithmetic

If the population is stable and one group is given an advantage so that its net growth rate is higher than a second group, then the second group will go extinct.


In equilibrium the average growth rate is zero. So if one group is above the other in growth rate, it must be above zero and the second group must be below zero. So the second group goes extinct.

Islam is about giving its members advantage over others. So over time Islam is genocide of non-Muslims. Islam was developed in 622 AD when times were hard. This was the Dark Ages. Some think a volcano was responsible for it, but it was a harsh time of scarcity. Islam was designed to give its members a leg up in that time of scarcity over non-Muslims. So Islam is a religion of genocide in population biology terms.

search Christians Turkey 1914

ISHR Christians in Turkey

Holy Land Foundation shut down after 9-11.

Comments at


Second article quotations below. (first article is also interesting on confiscations of non Muslim foundations in Turkey. They still haven’t returned them as required by the EU.)

“September 5, 2005

by Cathy Phillips, editor of Tax Notes International ”

“On the morning of November 12, 1942, the citizens of Turkey woke up to the most draconian wealth tax ever envisaged. While the tax in theory applied to the entire predominantly Muslim nation, in practice much of its burden rested with the minority Christian and Jewish communities who primarily resided in Istanbul, formerly known as Constantinople. Neither the rate of taxation nor the taxable base and its derivation were made public.”

“Tax assessments were arrived at in secret, and individuals were directed to settle their government assessed liabilities within two weeks, without any appeal provisions in place. The penalty for Christians and Jews who failed to do so within a month was deportation to forced labor camps in eastern Turkey in addition to having their property confiscated. The tax was initially also extended to Christian and Jewish schools, as well as to churches and synagogues, but not to Muslim institutions, because they were owned or funded by the government.”

Formatting of tables is better in the original.

” Table 1: Statutory Tax Rates

Provision Applied to Applied to
Rate on wartime profit Muslim Turks Non-Muslims
12.5 percent 50.0 percent
Additional tax zero Up to 50 percent of personal wealth

Source: Faik Okte, The Tragedy of the Turkish Capital Tax.”

“In an otherwise officially secular state, taxpayers were classified as Muslim and non-Muslim, denoted with the letters M and G, respectively./2/ The latter included Jews and Christians, including Armenians and Greeks. Assyrian Orthodox Christians also fell in that class. An additional class of taxpayers were the Donme, denoted by D. The Donme were Jews whose ancestors had converted to Islam in the 17th century./3/ Like the Jews and Christians, the Donme were taxed at rates higher than those that applied to Muslims.”

“able 3: Tax Assessments of Minority Institutions

Christian and Jewish Institutions/*/ Number Assessment (TRL)
Schools 88 227,550
Churches and Synagogues 27 119,200
Hospitals 7 86,750

/*/ Zero assessment for Muslim institutions, which numbered in the thousands.

Source: Faik Okte, The Tragedy of the Turkish Capital Tax.”

“Table 4: Effective Tax Rates by Religious and Ethnic Affiliations

Merchants by Affiliation Tax Rates (percent)
Muslim 4.94
Greek Orthodox 156.00
Jewish 179.00
Christian Armenian 232.00

Source: C.L. Sulzberger, “Turkish Tax Kills Foreign Business,”
The New York Times, Sept. 11, 1943.”

Posted by: Old Atlantic [TypeKey Profile Page] at November 28, 2006 08:07 AM

Reference on above 1942 Tax Law

Population of Anatolia 1915 before Genocide Ottoman Official records

Muslims were 5.6 million, total population was 9.1 million. So 3.5 million were non-Muslim. So the genocides or suppression of Christians, Jews and others by the Muslims was really about getting rid of them.

It was a delayed completion of the conquests in previous centuries.
Posted by: Old Atlantic [TypeKey Profile Page] at November 28, 2006 08:36 AM..

New York Times coverage of September 11, 2001.

9-11 Report and articles

9-11 5 years later

NY Times 1914, 1915 repeat of above link

Plus ca change, plus c’est la meme chose.

bin Laden’s Fatwa compared to Talaat Bey in 1914 saying Turkey for Turks only.

bin Laden’s 1996 Fatwa and Delcaration of War against America.

“The latest and the greatest of these aggressions, incurred by the Muslims since the death of the Prophet (ALLAH’S BLESSING AND SALUTATIONS ON HIM) is the occupation of the land of the two Holy Places -the foundation of the house of Islam, the place of the revelation, the source of the message and the place of the noble Ka’ba, the Qiblah of all Muslims- by the armies of the American Crusaders and their allies.”

Repeat of

From January 13, 1915 New York Times:

“Talaat Bey, the Minister of the Interior, has stated to the Councillor of the Greek Patriarchate that in Turkey henceforth there will be room only for Turks. While he was profuse in assurance to the Greek Minister regarding the cessation of anti-Greek persecutions, no real amelioration of the situation is perceptible.”

Is this now true of France, Denmark, London, Dearborn, Washington, etc?

“…no real amelioration of the situation is perceptible.”

That is care of Bush, Blair, Rice, 9-11 Commission of Hamilton Kean, the Iraq Study Group of Baker Hamilton, Democrats, Republicans, MSM, profs, etc.

Posted by: Old Atlantic [TypeKey Profile Page] at November 28, 2006 10:22 AM


With respect to my colleague Limes in this case, sometimes you can extrapolate. “Mathematical models might be useful five or ten years out, but don’t extrapolate decades into the future. The unsustainable never is.”

98 percent of Turkey is Muslim today

Ottoman Empire 40 percent Christian 1915

So the Christian population went from 40 percent in 1915 to less than 2 percent today.

So with respect to my colleague, what turned out to be unsustainable in Turkey was Christian life.

“On December 21, 1995, Bethlehem became one of the areas under the full control of the Palestinian Authority. It is capital of the Bethlehem district. The current population of the town is about 40,000. The Christian population is no longer the majority, but a special statute requires that the mayor and a majority of the municipal council must nevertheless be Christian.”

“Bethlehem’s former mayor, Hanna Nasser, says an estimated 2,000 Christians in Bethlehem have emigrated during the period of 2000 – 2003. Fifty years ago, Bethlehem was overwhelmingly Christian. Today, it has a Muslim majority.”

Bethlehem wiki
There is a need to understand the genocides and forced deportations against Christians and Jews in the entire Middle East in the 20th and 21s centuries.


Posted by: Arnie [TypeKey Profile Page] at November 28, 2006 10:44 AM The above is from CNN and the gentle lady from Lebanon, a Chrisian, tells how Hezbollah is taking over. They have large families, drive out the Christians to take their lands for their families and then vote themselves in power. Terrorists are in the government of Lebanon, which was once Christian.

This is what happens. It is happening in America, England, Denmark, France, Germany , Norway, Russia, Spain, Sweden, etc.

This is happening to us now. We must stop immigration. Critics say, it hasn’t happened to us already. Then when it does, if they were here, they would say its too late to do anything. This is what they say about immigration, and nukes in North Korea, Pakistan and Iran. They will let Saudi Arabia and UAE get nukes. They let Russia and China get nukes and the left even gave them the secrets.

They invented Mutual Assured Destruction after the fact to make it sound logical. This was to cover up betrayal. The Ph.D.’s at RAND who made up MAD were covering up the espionage by Russia still going on.

The people justifying nukes for Pakistan, Iran and North Korea today are the same leftists anti-Westerners who covered up communist subversion in the 1940’s and 1950’s and let Russia get the bomb. They said it was ok, it was MAD. Russia will be 50 percent Muslim in 50 years or less.

When they use those nukes on us, will it have made sense to have let Russia get nukes in the 1940’s? The professors lied and betrayed us in the 1940’s just as they do today. Harvard, Princeton, University of Chicago, Berkeley, Stanford, Yale, etc. were covering up espionage then and are betraying us now.

The Christians in Turkey went from 40 percent in 1915 to 2 percent or less in 2006. This is what happens when we listen to the liars and West haters on the Left. We have to fight, not let our politicians, profs and MSM betray us. They can’t think beyond today’s headline. We must. We must act. We must tell them to stop immigration totally. We must denuke NoKo and Pakistan and stop it in Iran and Saudi Arabia. These are enemy homelands funding invasion of us by immigration.

This is real. This is what history is. Civilizations fall. Ethnic groups go extinct. You either face up to reality and do something about it or you disappear from the planet. That is what the Left has wanted since Marx.

We need to stop immigration, give our young adults economic security from no immigration and let them get married, have big families and stay married. That comes from job security. Job security comes from no immigration.

Immigration was started in Europe in the 1950’s. In the US in 1965. In both cases, it killed job security for the young. In both cases it brought the population rate below replacement We need to support young adults with job security and end every type of immigration. This includes H1B, family reunification, asylum, etc.

We need to stop the genocide of Christians in Lebanon and the Middle East and support them. We need to say that this genocide of Christians is what Islam is about from the beginning and is now. Islam was an ideology developed in 622 AD during the Dark Ages to justify taking Christian lands and subjugating them so that their population would decline over time.

Now Islam is on the march again, during a time of demographic stress created by their own birth rates. Their birth rates make their lands unlivable so they have to invade ours. We do nothing but allow it. The Left and the betrayers like McCain, Kennedy, Bush, etc. want this to happen to us. They lied during the 1965 Immigration Act and said it wouldn’t change anything. They lied then and lie now. They want our demographic democide. They work for it and lie to our faces.

Democide happened in Turkey. The Christians went from 40 percent in 1915 to under 2 percent in 2006. This is happening now in the US and Europe. Its reality. We must stop immigration now. This includes family reunification, lottery, waiting in line, etc.

Robert Spencer Jihad Watch: Pope Rage in Istanbul Comments

Limes and Malinois are right, if we respond. If we wait for the invisible hand to stop immigration completely, not just a token amount, then it will happen.

We have to be politically active. We have to persuade. We have to write to Congressman and Senators. It doesn’t happen by itself.

Once we project our exctinction, and anticipate it will happen if we don’t change, then we still have to act based on that expectation. If no change means we go extinct, and we don’t actually change it, then we do go extinct.

Immigration causes extinction of all the genes in a country, and on a rolling basis every annual cohort of immigrants.

Unpleasant Immigration Arithmetic

and more at this search on “Unpleasant Immigration Arithmetic”

We also have to denuke Pakistan and Iran, and support the Christians in Lebanon, Africa, etc.

Posted by: Old Atlantic [TypeKey Profile Page] at November 28, 2006 11:53 AM

“Unpleasant Immigration Arithmetic” is a mathematical theorem. If the assumption of sustained immigration is true, the consequence that genes go extinct follows. This applies to everyone here, and everyone who comes in any given year.

Each cohort of everyone here, including those newly arrived, has its genetic survival ratio asymptote to zero if immigration continues.

To avoid the consequences of the mathematical theorem, the assumption has to be completely avoided. Reducing immigration doesn’t avoid the assumption. Immigration has to be zero. Close doesn’t work. Its a theorem.

Limes and Malinois have said if we change things, the consequences won’t happen that will happen if we don’t change them. But we have to actually change immigration to zero, not just reduce it a lot.

Posted by: Old Atlantic [TypeKey Profile Page] at November 28, 2006 12:48 PM



This article represents opinion, hypotheses, speculation, and perhaps our last chance. All other disclaimers apply.

%d bloggers like this: