Friday, January 31, 2020
Will it be like the dentist's chair...?
At about the 26:40 mark of this video, Dave Rubin begins to broach the dreaded JIM topic (Jihad-Islam-Muslims) and to solicit from Katie Hopkins her thoughts. Speaking of dread, I dread listening to these two robustly politically INcorrect mavens start using rhetoric that sounds bold but which in the end thinly disguises an eggshell-traipsing delicacy on the subject. I find that in the end more aggravating than listening to Mainstream PC MCs indulge their Islamophilia, because at least with those types, you're getting what you're expecting. But the Dave Rubins and Sam Harrises and Katie Hopkinseseses ought to know better -- and indeed, they routinely affect to be so much better than the PC MCs.
So stay tuned readers. I shall grit my teeth and clench my dentist chair arms and suffer through Dave and Katie being oh-so tough on Islam; and will report back here anon.
Sunday, January 26, 2020
Be such a Debbie Downer
A couple of years ago, I had a relatively brief but still substantive enough exchange with a commenter whose opinion I esteem perhaps the most (who has gone by the nicknames "Nobody" and "Infidel") on my former blog, The Hesperado, attached to a posting there titled The Logic of Stealth Jihad (also see its subsequently published postscript), in which, to abbreviate its more nuanced articulation rather drastically, I argued that Westerners will likely only wake up to smell the Islamic coffee when it's too late.
If the reader reads the posting, and then goes through the comments exchange, he will see how I work out Nobody's misunderstandings, which seem to involve a curious mélange of optimism & pessimism, and which culminate in a rather Pollyannish view of what Trump portends.
Sure, one usually doesn't want to be a Negative Nelly or Debbie Downer; but if the data indicates it, it would be not only foolish to be a Peppy Pollyanna, but ironically facilitating (by cultivating a lowering of our guard) the very doom being pooh-poohed.
Further Reading:
From nearly a year ago here, a little notice alluding to my protracted depression vis-à-vis the whole mess of Islam and the West's denial (be sure to follow up on the many internal links therein):
Just under the wire...
Saturday, January 25, 2020
Double-virtue-signalling with a yoga twist
The yoga twist is the Denial Pose (or we could call it the Hypocrisy Flex).
I've noticed, identified, and analyzed various spasms of 'double-virtue-signalling' in Robert Spencer over the years.
What is this 'double-virtue-signalling' ...?
It's a special kind of virtue-signalling. Ordinary virtue-signalling, in the context of the problem of Islam, would be for a non-Muslim Westerner to go out of his way to support a Muslim cause and/or to stand in solidarity with Muslims "suffering" from "Islamophobia".
Meanwhile, 'double-virtue-signalling' is when an anti-Islam guy with one side of his mouth plays to the Counter-Jihad Gallery by sounding all the right counter-jihaddy notes -- while at the same time making sure to throw a bone or two to the politically correct multi-culturalist (PC MC) mainstream. As I said, I've noticed Robert Spencer do that time and time again. Here's a Google page of my articles in this regard on my old blog, The Hesperado; and here's a Google page of a few on this little ol' blog here.
So, the yoga twist on this I noted this morning on Jihad Watch, when Robert Spencer -- editorializing on a story showing that even a conservative bastion like the Henry M. Jackson Society is demonizing opponents of Sharia law as "extremists" -- wrote:
Once again we see “conservatives” kowtowing to the far-Left agenda, in the fond hope that the Left-fascists will spare them.
Is that why Robert double-virtue-signals? In the fond hope that the PC MCs will spare him? (Spare him from, among other things, being damned if you do, damned if you don't...?)
Note to my phone readers:
If you're reading my blog on your phone, you may not be able to benefit from the internal links I provide, if those links (like the ones in this article today) go not to one specific article, but go to an advanced Google search with multiple results of many different articles. If you run into that roadblock, you'll just have to access the posting by a non-phone computer. However, for those stuck on the phone with no computer in sight (is that a thing...?), here is at least one direct link quite searingly pertinent to my theme here today:
Virtue-Signalling at the Crossroads of the West
Friday, January 24, 2020
Brain fart...?
Editorializing on a recent story about how three foreign workers in Dubai were detained and fined $136,000 each for the "crime" of insulting Islam, Robert Spencer wrote:
A glimpse into the future of the West. Right now, insulting Islam will only get you deplatformed, vilified, and suspended from your job. Fines and detention are still in the future.
Huh? No , Spencer is clearly incorrect about this. Fines and detention are not "still in the future" -- they've already happened in the past. I can think of three examples off the top of my head:
Elisabeth Sabbaditsch-Wolffe in Austria
Paul Weston in the UK
and
Brigitte Bardot in France.
In Elisabeth Sabbaditsch-Wolffe's case, she has in fact been fined -- for the "crime" of insulting Islam's Prophet Muhammad. So Spencer is just flat wrong. And she has had to spend years trying to appeal her case; only to learn recently the cruel fact that the Austrian state -- her own Western, supposedly liberal democratic country -- insists on punishing her with the fine anyway.
Then we have the case of Paul Weston. I wrote about it back in 2016 on my old blog, The Hesperado, where I noted that:
...he was arrested for speaking the words of Winston Churchill [against Islam] in England -- more specifically, with a megaphone on the steps in front of Winchester Guildhall in Winchester, a borough a little less than 70 miles southwest of London. Initially, his thought crime (amplified by megaphone) was "racially aggravated crime under section 4 of the Public Order act" (the charge was later dropped and by bail he was set free...).
Again: Spencer is just flat wrong.
And last (but no doubt there have been many, many more cases like these throughout the West), we have the former sexpot of the 60s, Brigitte Bardot, who had realized what, unfortunately, not enough of her fellow Frenchmen do -- namely, that her love of France entails a rational hatred of all things Islamic. And for the "crime" of expressing this in a book she wrote, she has been fined by her own country of France. Robert Spencer's Jihad Watch has had numerous postings about Bardot over the years, including one in 2004 with this headline:
Brigitte Bardot fined for inciting racial hatred
[bold emphasis added by me]
Yet again: Spencer is just flat wrong when just the other day he wrote (as we noted at the beginning):
Right now, insulting Islam will only get you deplatformed, vilified, and suspended from your job. Fines and detention are still in the future.
Spencer knows about the cases of all three, and likely has personally spoken with (and shared podiums with) the first two over the years. So why would he slip up so egregiously?
Wednesday, January 22, 2020
From the muffin archives...
Yet another old The Hesperado essay I bumped into the other day worthy of reposting here; for posterity's sake (you know, the posterity which both Mainstreams -- the broader Western Mainstream and the Counter-Jihad Mainstream -- are, along with our future generations, in various ways consigning to the Mohammedan dogs).
Orientophilia
Not only is that essay (to toot my own horn) meandering in a way that holds the reader's interest; it is chockfull of useful information -- and reflecting that, the text is as studded with internal links as a muffin should be with a marvel of variegated nuts, raisins and dates. A sumptuous choice to go with your coffee you're waking up to.
Thursday, January 16, 2020
Thinking about the whole damned mess
No, that's not me in the picture. It's some writer named Juan Villoros, ruminating at a sidewalk cafe in Mexico City. I just thought it was an apropos photo, evoking a mood conducive to my posting today.
The first thing that comes to mind as I ponder the whole damned mess is the old cliché, that rhetorical question, Where do I begin...?
I could begin at our 0 A.D., the Ground Zero of 911.
And of course the blessed time before that watershed -- in the halcyon years "B.G.Z." when in our relative ignorance of the extent of Islam all we had to worry about was what Seinfeld's Kramer was up to (before Michael Richards' career was ruined by our escalating mass neurosis over "racism") and whether "Y2K" was going to cause general blackouts and ruin our quaintly primitive "World Wide Web" -- contained our ignorance of the assiduously army-ant formication of Muslims in their perpetually expanding diaspora patiently, fanatically weaving the networking tapestry of their global revival of jihad, like grapevining termites burrowing their meticulously diverse voracity into the foundational timber of our civilization.
At the turn of the previous century, some time in the early 1900s I believe (though it could have been as late as the Nineteen Teens or even Twenties), the great (though largely unknown) Dutch scholar of Islam, Snouck Hurgronje -- who studied Arabic, helped administer the Dutch colony of Indonesia, and even disguised himself as a Muslim to go on the Hajj -- wrote that the days of Islam's greatness were long past and that nowadays (in his time, early 20th century), it perdured only as a quaint Orientalist relic of a bygone era; but that, should Muslims ever renew their militant ethos, the world would once again have reason to fear.
Well, guess what: Those Mohammedan army ants (or jihad ants) had been busy as beavers (to mix metaphors) planning all along "under our very noses", as the 20th century unfolded, to get their ducks in a row (still with the mixing of metaphors) for doing what it takes to re-ignite their perennial war against humanity -- which hadn't really ceased in modern times but had only been put on the back burner while Islam since the 18th century had collapsed in internal decadence & corruption relative to a stupendously expanding and progressing West.
And so, while the West was busy frenetically progressing, and its vanguard America was undergoing one of its rhythmic vacillations of power (shifting from the Clinton Years of the 90s to the Bush Years of the New Millennium), Muslims had been assiduously planning to announce their return: Like Jack Nicholson in The Shining, hacking his way with an axe through the bathroom door to get at his terrified wife and kids, on that brilliantly sunny day in September, 2001, they massacred over 3,000 Americans -- their way of saying: "You thought we'd gone away? Well, here we are again! Here's Johnny!!!"
Then we have the years A.G.Z. (the "post-911" era we still live in), characterized chiefly by a semi-incoherent mélange of different styles & degrees of denial -- whose only partial coherence lies in the tortured twin fears that drive all our Western denial, whether it be the denial of the broader Western Mainstream, or of the Counter-Jihad Mainstream: the twin fears being
1) fear of Muslims exploding
2) fear of ourselves succumbing to our own innate white Western "racism" against Brown People.
Over the years, I've slowly come to realize, as my protracted ennui ebbs and flows, that the vast majority "in the Counter-Jihad" are motivated by these twin fears as much as is the broader Western Mainstream. The only difference is that the former are in a more complicated, tortured double-helix of denial generated by their double-virtue-signalling, whereby they are simultaneously anxious about maintaining their counter-jihad cred while also maintaining their virtue of not being "racist" against Muslims -- all the while, of course, denying they are maintaining this double life.
So that's essentially what these past 19 years have been; with a tangential diversity of sociopolitical distractions swirling all around this core of denial.
Now, while the Two Denials of the Two Mainstreams are substantially the same Denial, they are (as I noted in part above) different in form. Another way to put their difference is that the Denial cultivated by the Counter-Jihad Mainstream is dynamic; whereas the Denial of the Other Mainstream is static. What makes the former denial dynamic is its denial about its own denial, which is joined at the hip to its own retention of the post-modern anxiety about being "racist" and thus worrying about being too anti-Muslim (and, as part of this, conflating a general condemnation of all Muslims with some kind of inexorable slippery slope toward genocide, as if the one automatically entails the other). This anxiety coupled with the counter-jihad's own propensity to learn more about the horrors of Islam (with a self-congratulatory sense of being free of the "political correctness" that characterizes the broader Western Mainstream) creates a spiraling tension that is dynamic, insofar as it could lead to the position of Zero Tolerance against All Muslims, and often seems like it's getting closer to that logical point, but never actually does. Hence, the "asymptotic" nature of it I have spoken of over the years.
So, at the beginning of my musing posting here I asked "Where do I begin?" And now as I wind to a close, I may ask, "Where do we go from here?"
As I have surmised with the battle fatigue of years of butting my head against both Mainstreams -- ever since 2015, when I "snapped" and morphed from being The Hesperado to The Desperado -- those of us who are worried about Islam (never mind that there prevails no coherent unanimity about what precisely we are worried about Islam doing) are increasingly hoping for what might be called the "Grim Pleasure" (sort of a "black humor" take on the "guilty pleasure", with humor itself being the blackly comedic underside of this tragic-comic farce we suffer through in these years A.G.Z.) of an attack (if not a concatenation of attacks) by Muslims worse than 911. Why, the reader might ask, would you ever hope for that...? It's obviously not something one desires to hope for; and if deep down inside we do, it's not our fault, but entirely the fault of Muslims and all those PC MCs who dominate our culture around us here in the West, who continue this increasingly surreal charade of denial about the danger of Islam.
That's likely the best case scenario, and doesn't necessarily portend any comprehensive awakening -- at least not one in time to reverse our eventual doom at the hands of Muslims pursuing their revival of jihad as this 21st century devolves.
Meanwhile, I think I'll enjoy another cappuccino with a lemonade chaser as I sit here not far from the shade of white cedar trees whose yellowed leaves ruffle only slightly in the lightsome breeze of an idle afternoon...
Wednesday, January 1, 2020
Kurds and Why...
The Jihad Watch community still seems schizophrenic about Kurds; half the time forgetting that the vast majority of Kurds are mainstream Sunni Muslims (which might not be a bad thing to those in the Western Mainstream who remain deformed by politically correct multi-culturalism but, of course, should be incriminating to those who are supposed to have been educating themselves about Islam all these years), and the other half of the time apparently remembering.
I've noted this before on this blog (and more recently here). Just the other day, it cropped up again, when I saw this story posted at Jihad Watch:
UK: Armed police arrest father for sending $200 to his son who fought with Kurdish forces against jihadis
And what was Robert Spencer's editorial remark? After quoting this Kurdish Muslim jihadist's father --
“ISIS fighters get to come home and settle back down no problem. Yet my son and me are treated like terrorists. The UK has got its priorities all wrong.”
-- Robert wrote:
Yes. That has been true for a very long time now.
And yet on Robert's own Jihad Watch, we've seen essays by his formerly estranged friend, Andrew Bostom, amassing evidence showing that as Muslims, Kurds should not be trusted:
Actual Conditions for Jews Circa Late 2018 in the Iraqi Kurdistan Paradise: Past as Prologue
Don’t Romanticize the Kurds
Not to mention that on Andrew Bostom's own blog, he had two additional essays on how bad (= how Islamic) the Kurds are:
Amir Taheri’s Grotesque Misrepresentation of the World War I Muslim Turkish-Kurdish Jihad Genocidal Killings of Armenians in Eastern Turkey: Debunked By Real-Time 1915 U.S. Consular Reports
How The “Philosemitic” Kurdistan Muslim Kurds Helped Jews “Celebrate” Rosh Hashanah in the Mid-19th Century
Dipping into the comments field of the latest Jihad Watch article on the Kurds, I was hoping for a little clarity instead of the usual schizophrenic muddle of the Counter-Jihad Maintream, and I was somewhat heartened by two instances:
ELI says
Dec 31, 2019 at 5:44 pm
I seem to remember that a few months ago the Kurds were basically just another bunch of shariah supremacists so what’s the issue here? https://www.jihadwatch.org/2019/10/dont-romanticize-the-kurds
Reply gravenimage says
Dec 31, 2019 at 9:09 pm
This article is not wrong. But notice that it *does not* recommend penalizing anyone who has fought the Islamic State. These two articles do not contradict each other.
Notice "gravenimage" (about whom I've written a few times on this blog and on my former blog The Hesperado) is a long-time veteran commenter for years and years, while "ELI" is a name I've never seen before on Jihad Watch; and yet it's the long-time veteran commenter who throws cold water on the good question ELI brought up. Luckily, our old friend "The Big W" was there to add the necessary corrective:
Reply thebigW says
Jan 1, 2020 at 5:26 pm
Yeah, but Robert Spencer’s agreement with the Kurdish Muslim father of the Kurdish Muslim jihadist sure doesn’t help clear it up. The clear message is: “No Muslim jihadists — including Kurds — should be let back in to the UK or any Western country”
Then I noticed another heartening moment, when -- again -- another commenter I've never seen before (one "Harry Again") had to correct another long-time veteran Jihad Watcher, one "mortimer", a person who is either obtuse or himself a stealth jihadist:
mortimer says
Dec 31, 2019 at 8:34 pm
The Kurdish people have fought for their independence and have performed a service to the West in defeating ISIS on the ground. The Western powers should reward them with a country of their own.
Reply Harry Again says
Jan 1, 2020 at 5:09 am
There never was a “Kurdistan” to be independent. It’s as if all the Muslims in the USA/UK banded together to form their own separate enclave. They are terrorists in the same way as ISIS and have acted in exactly the same way.