December 23rd, 2016

The Christmas market terrorist is killed (plus: terrorism and enclaves)

Berlin Christmas market terrorist Anis Amri has been shot and killed by police in northern Italy.

It’s not that the police managed to trace his movements, but it seems that “a tip” (more about that later) led police in Italy to think he might have arrived there, and regular police work (stopping a suspicious man and asking for papers) led to the shootout that left one officer wounded and Amri dead.

You might think it would have been even better to have captured him alive, in order to take advantage of what he knows. However—knowing the way Europeans law works these days—he probably wouldn’t have talked, and he probably would have been let out in a year or two, or perhaps even while awaiting trial.

Yes, that last comment is sarcastic (I doubt at this point he would actually have been released). But my bitterness and cynicism comes from the fact that this man had a rap sheet that should have already precluded his being free and roaming around Berlin to wreak the havoc he was so obviously planning.

At any rate, we can be grateful for the two Italian policemen who stopped him:

ISIS news outlet Amaq today confirmed Amri’s death – and that he carried out the market massacre in Germany.

Security chiefs believe Amri, who used at least six different aliases with three nationalities, was trying to flee to southern Italy where he had entered Europe illegally in 2011.

Police, who had received a tip-off Europe’s most wanted man may have been in the city, approached Amri because they were suspicious that anyone was at the station at 3am.

The terminal had earlier been closed for the night and officials are trying to work out whether he may in fact have arrived in the suburb, north of the city, by bus.

When the patrol approached him, he said he had no ID papers, no phone and just a small pocket knife. But he then pulled a 22 calibre pistol from his backpack and shot one of the two police officers, Christian Movio, 36, in the shoulder.

Amri ran for cover and cowered behind a car in a piazza near the station before being shot dead by trainee officer Luca Scata, 29, who had only been in the job for nine months.

On Amri’s body police found a train ticket that helped reconstruct the attacker’s movements in Berlin, revealing how he took a train from Chambery in France and then from Turin to Milan. But it is not clear whether he had driven from Berlin to Chambery or taken a 1,000-mile train trip all the way to Milan via Frankfurt – the normal rail route to the south of France.

So we have a situation in which the authorities were on high alert for this man, and yet he was able to travel across Europe’s porous and almost-nonexistent borders in the wake of the attack. What’s wrong with this picture? Nearly everything.

Amri also made the obligatory selfie video declaring his allegiance to ISIS, which has been released now that he’s dead. Obviously there is a network of people in Europe (and probably elsewhere) who knew about him and his plans, and assisted him. Here’s a little possible clue about that; it’s easy to miss if the article is read quickly:

[The shootout with Amri] comes hours after two men were arrested at a mosque in Berlin where Amri is believed to have been seen both before and after his murderous rampage.

Are these two men the source of the tip that led police to suspect where Amri might be? We may never know.

This issue of networks of help for jihadis throughout Europe and this country was the subject of the draft of a post I had readied yesterday evening, before Amri was found and killed. Here it is, and you’ll see that it’s relevant to the story that later emerged.

Andrew C. McCarthy writes:

…Gatestone Institute’s superb analyst Soeren Kern recently published a jaw-dropping report, “Inside Germany’s No-Go Zones,” part one of which focuses on North Rhine–Westphalia. It is Germany’s most populous state, and it just happens to be where Anis Amri lived — in housing set aside for asylum seekers.

Kern observes that the German press has identified more than 40 “problem areas” across the country…

How do these communities operate in practice? Kern relates:

The president of the German Police Union, Rainer Wendt, told Spiegel Online years ago: “In Berlin or in the north of Duisburg there are neighborhoods where colleagues hardly dare to stop a car — because they know that they’ll be surrounded by 40 or 50 men.” These attacks amount to a “deliberate challenge to the authority of the state — attacks in which the perpetrators are expressing their contempt for our society.”

If we are lucky, Anis Amri will be apprehended before long, and before he can strike again. It is entirely possible, though, that he will remain on the lam for some time. Like Salah Abdeslam and other jihadists, he is not without places to go.

These are areas where the rule of German law is non-existent. And they are growing in area, and not just in Germany.

What is the solution (and will the countries of the Western world implement it, if they even could identify it)? Is there a solution? An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure, but the West seems stymied and almost paralyzed by its own dedication to tolerance, fairness, and respect for other cultures. But lawlessness and murder are not a culture to respect, and letting known jihadis go free is not a solution.

The violations of law are not limited to terrorism, not by a longshot. There is more ordinary criminality as well. The following is from the Kern article:

Police say they are alarmed by the brutality and aggression of the clans, who are said to view crime as leisure activity. If police dare to intervene, hundreds of clan members are mobilized to confront the police.

A 17-page report prepared for the NRW State Parliament revealed how Lebanese clans in Duisburg divide up certain neighborhoods in order to pursue their criminal activities, such as robbery, drug dealing and extortion.

“Further data collection is not legally permissible. Both internally and externally, any classification that could be used to depreciate human beings must be avoided. In this respect, the use of the term ‘family clan’ is forbidden from the police point of view.” — Ralf Jäger, Interior Minister, North Rhine-Westphalia.

Please read the whole thing.

The Kern article is terrifying in its implications. And neither Kern nor McCarthy even suggest an approach for dealing with the situation as it now is. Obviously, calling a halt to further immigration from terrorist-laden Muslim countries would help, but it is not going to change what’s going on right now. The governments of Europe are never going to clear these people out and deport them, which would have to be an almost military action.

In addition, not all the perpetrators are recent arrivals by any means. Some are full-fledged citizens, many born in the European countries (or the US), or are even converts.

It’s no wonder, though, that both in this country and in Europe, the population is ready to throw out the parties that helped to create this situation and the conundrums it presents.

[ADDENDUM: Here are a few more facts I’d like to highlight from Amri’s checkered past:

In 2011 [Amri] dodged prison in his native Tunisia after fleeing following a violent robbery. He was jailed for five years in absentia.

He arrived in Italy in 2011, arriving on the small island of Lampedusa amongst thousands of people fleeing the Arab Spring uprisings. He pretended to be a child migrant – even though he was 19 – but then rioted inside his detention centre, which was set on fire. He was then jailed for four years, serving it in two prisons on Sicily.

After his release Italy failed to deport him twice because Tunisia refused to take him back and he fled Italy via the Alps for Germany, meaning he probably went via Milan.

Amri’s story highlights so many things. One of them, of course, is that eventual terrorist murderers are ordinarily not strangers to the authorities, often in several European nations. And yet they slip away. Their ability to travel within Europe from country to country, to evade deportation even when they clearly merit it, and to get the help of like-minded jihadis and jihadi sympathizers all across Europe is an outrage. And we are supposed to trust that the authorities have the immigration situation under control, and are effectively screening and monitoring the arrivals? Even when the person comes in waving multiple red flags and shrieking “I am a jihadi!,” it doesn’t seem to matter much.]

36 Responses to “The Christmas market terrorist is killed (plus: terrorism and enclaves)”

  1. Mr. Frank Says:

    It seems that most of these small time terrorists have multiple contacts with the police prior to their big attack. It would not be hard to lock up foreign crooks and trouble makers for indefinite detention pending deportation.

    The West has lost its will to defend itself.

    Ditto for U.S. lefties.

  2. physicsguy Says:

    “The West has lost its will to defend itself.

    Ditto for U.S. lefties.”

    Apparently not, according to a recent drudge post where lefties are now arming themselves with guns in fear of Trump of course. Given the lefties I know, that’s a frightening thought in of itself. None of the ones I know have the slightest clue about firearms.

  3. parker Says:

    The EU has open borders. One you arrive in one nation you can travel from nation to nation without encountering a document check at the border. We were in Europe for 3 weeks last year and after showing our passports in France upon arrival we traveled to both Spain and Portugal and were never asked to show a document until we returned to the airport In Paris.

  4. Frog Says:

    Trump was and is right. Keep the Muslims out, and to hell with the bleeding hearts. We have a country to keep, a country that has been subjected to Democratic evildoers (a term I do not use lightly) who have wrought great harm which it will take heavy lifting to undo.
    Today’s UN Security Council passed an indictment of Israel, which our Hussein could have vetoed, but did not.
    The man’s skin is brown, but his heart is black.

  5. Mr. Frank Says:

    Obama stuck it to Israel on his way out the door. I hope some of those liberal, Democrat Jews feel conned.

  6. Geoffrey Britain Says:

    Western Europe faces a choice; face reality, declare Islam to be incompatible with Western values and then deport them all OR… accept eventual enslavement.

    Of course it’s really not a choice at all, since the great majority of Western Europeans are already enslaved to a dysfunctional ‘philosophy’.

    We are just witnessing the beginning of them changing their master.

    “It is ordained in the eternal constitution of things, that men of intemperate minds cannot be free. Their passions forge their fetters.” Edmund Burke, “Reflections on the Revolution in France”

  7. Tuvea Says:

    It has been pointed out elsewhere that most Jewish people who are democrats are ‘ethnic Jews’ and not observant Jews. The abstention will not trouble them in the least. In fact, it will likely increase their support of the democrat party.

    The real problem for Israel is if its enemies can use the resolution as a way to legally justify a total boycott along with full sanctions of all Israeli products and services.

    Not just those based in Judea and Samaria.

    Of course all the actions in Germany after 1933 were legal according to then current German law. Hence the Numerburg tribunal using words like ‘Crimes against Humanity’ and not rebuking the German legal system.

    No surprise really if you are familiar with Roman history. The proscriptions and slaughter of Roman citizens by various Counsels and their supporters were all legal with respect to Roman law.

    No surprise if you are familiar with US history either. Slavery was legal even after Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation. That only ended Slavery in those areas under Rebellion.

    It wasn’t until the 13th Amendment was passed that the ownership of one human being by another was made illegal in the United States.

    So it may be that the Jews – and Muslims – of Israel can be starved to death legally by so called ‘International Law’. We can thank that ‘Great Friend’ of Israel President Obama for that Legacy.

    After all, after hundreds of thousands dead Syrians what’s the big deal about 7 or 8 million dead Israelis?

  8. neo-neocon Says:

    Geoffrey Britain:

    What you propose is impractical and unnecessary, to say the least. Plus, it’s not going to happen–deport all Muslims?

    Including citizens? Including converts? Including those who were born here? And which Muslims? Observant ones only? Anyone born a Muslim?

    If that’s what you are suggesting, you’re way off base.

    Deporting new arrivals, particularly ones from countries with a lot of terrorists—that’s a different story. And restricting new arrivals drastically from those countries would be a good idea too. Stricter rules against those imams who preach or foster terrorism—likewise.

  9. Frog Says:

    Neo’s counter to Geoffrey Britain accepts the fact that we WILL have home-grown jihadis, more Ft. Hoods and San Bernardinos; to seek otherwise is to be way off base, ain’t gonna happen.
    That’s not an acceptable answer to the dilemma.
    Islam is a religion only in disguise. GB is not way off base. He, as we, are struggling with ways to counter Islam. A conspiracy to violently overthrow the government is against the law, and Islamists, including the “peaceful” Muslims like CAIR, are engaged in just that. The camel’s nose, head, and neck are already inside the tent, the body soon to follow.
    Anyone born a Muslim is an apostate if not practicing Islam. That is punishable by death, per the Koran. Which applies to BHO, by the way. So perhaps his Ramadan in the White House, his favoring of Iran and its mullahs, his aggression toward Israel are all signs of hedging his bets. Never forget taqiyya, for heaven’s sake!
    Tolerance of Islam is a slippery slope, just like tolerating a bit of socialism. Sharia vs. the Constitution? A caliphate? Islam will kill us in the long run if we let it.

    I believe Muslims can remain in the USA if they publicly renounce Islam, kind of like being sworn in as citizens, and destroy all mosques.
    Islam is a cancer, and to cure a cancer with tens of billions of malignant cells (the usual #) you have you kill the last cancer cell. Or the cancer will repopulate and kill you. Anti-cancer interventions are all toxic, damaging normal body parts, and we must accept the same in battling Islam if the USA, the cancer patient, is to survive long-term.

    Betcha Neo will object to my analogy! But let us try for some solutions, however imperfect, rather than being sheep awaiting slaughter.

    BTW, curious fact I learned the other day from a young white female convert to Islam: all prayers are exactly the same, everywhere, every day: some lines from the Koran, always said in Arabic.

  10. neo-neocon Says:

    Frog:

    No, my answer doesn’t “accept” anything of the sort.

    I am describing reality. All believing Muslims in this country will not be deported, period. It’s not going to be done—not even by President Trump, as he has made clear.

    If you think Muslim citizens, minding their own business, would be deported or should be deported, you are IMHO out of touch with reality.

    I have made some suggestions for what should be done. They happen to be pretty much in line with what Trump has suggested, by the way. They also are realistic.

    There is no way to protect against all terrorist attacks, but these things would go a long way towards doing so. Not even remotely analogous to “sheep waiting for slaughter.”

    Nor, by the way, have you or anyone else responded to my points. What about Muslim citizens who are against terrorism? What if they are born here?

    And where are they going to be deported to, in your great plan? Or would you rather just kill them?

    Are you going to send a Muslim back to a country their grandparents came from, when they were born here?

    And what about terrorists who are using taqiyya and lying about their repudiation of Islam?

    Great plan, this plan of yours.

  11. Frog Says:

    ” Neo now bleats “What about Muslim citizens who are against terrorism? What if they are born here?” Don’t ask questions, Neo, but propose credible solutions to those questions.. Being against terrorism is NOT enough, and again there is taqiyya.No more Mosques, no more imams, no more Muslim chaplains in all our prisons,that would help.Substantially.
    Monitoring the taqiyya liars? Just feed them pork or dog once a week in the parole office.
    Muslims who reject terrorism can be put to work in Israel and monitored with our support of course.
    The mistake you make about Muslims is that theyre just like us. They are not.

  12. blert Says:

    At some point, the West is going to have to embrace the Spainish and Hungarian ‘solution’ to Islam.

    The First Amendment prohibits state sponsored religion.

    Islam is a state sponsored creed — with the states sponsoring being hostile to us in the extreme.

  13. CV Says:

    One of the linked articles mentions that early on, Italy tried to deport the Berlin terrorist but Tunisia refused to take him back (he already had a criminal record in his home country).

    I’m not clear on how deportation would provide even a partial solution to the problem, particularly with migrants who are known criminals. I have the same question about Trump’s plan to deport those who entered the US illegally and committed crimes here. Assuming there is accurate info about their country of origin, what if the former country refuses to take them back? How does deportation work, exactly? Honest question.

  14. Richard Aubrey Says:

    A lefty knows his virtue signalling will, statistically, cost somebody else. Who has not been consulted.

  15. Lorenz Gude Says:

    Flynn and Mathis both say from experience, that they have always fought along side Muslims in their actual war experience with radical Islam. I don’t think making all Muslims the problem is the right approach, but those calling for that are responding very understandably to the ridiculous claims by the left that there is noting wrong going on with Islam and anyone questioning them is Islamophpbic. We have to sort the sheep from the goats. Discriminate and act accordingly with deadly force. The Islamic radicals are totalitarians every bit as bad as the Nazis and the Communists and we have not been quick to learn o to fight them. I hope Mathis and Flynn are on the right track, because neither Bush nor Obama got it any where near right.

  16. OM Says:

    To an oncologist every evil is like cancer? We don’t need no stinking bill of rights or constitution because ” _______” is not a suicide pact (fill in the blank). Of course the “we” is relative, Frogs need the bill of rights, others not so much (or at all). Sort of the medieval approach: deport all of them all and let God sort out who deserved it. If deportation doesn’t “work” there are other methods that have been tried in the past.

  17. OM Says:

    Blert:

    So the Muslims from Indonesia (largest number of Muslems) are sponsored by who? Are they the same as the Muslims in the MENA? Must be Blert said it, again, and again. By Blert’s logic the Catholic church should have no protections, after all they have the Vatican from which to direct their faithful. How do you like that Froggy? Or have you forgotten Hugo Black and his animus towards the Catholics? Probably.

  18. Frog Says:

    The proposed solution in Europe: More bureaucracy.

    “Convicted criminals from all countries need to be listed in a European database so that we know when and where they are when they cross our borders or ask for asylum,” German Interior Minister Thomas de Maiziere told Bild am Sonntag newspaper.”

    Surveillance without action. Build more bureaucracy.

    Neo, I do not know what your proposed solutions are. Searching under “Islam” reveals 12 posts, and I am not going to read them all in a search for your past recommendations.

    Telling people like GB and me that “we are out of touch with reality” on the Islam problem in America sets you up as a self-proclaimed Judge Of Reality. Not the spirit in which you founded this blog.

    The European response is a denial of reality, which GB, I and others do not wish to see emulated in the USA. Jihadis are born of non-jihad Muslims; read about Amri, the Berlin truck murderer who began his radicalization at age 14. We should let this happen? He and his ilk should have the religious freedom to kill unbelievers, to advocate the Allah-decreed killing of Christians and Jews? To tax unbelievers (jizyah) while letting them live? To advocate a “religion” that will be a totalitarian power? To emulate Iran?
    I say no.
    Muslims are incompatible with America. Period. To that extent, Trump was and is right. Kicking the Muslim can down the road (what if they’re citizens?) is not a prudent decision, but rather is a legalistic obfuscation to avoid getting to the heart of the matter, and getting the defendants off the hook, as it were.

  19. OM Says:

    It appears that Froggy is incompatible with the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Who knows what Froggy may do, we must deport him now. /S

  20. Frog Says:

    Cardinal Schonborn, Catholic Archbishop of Vienna, recently had this to say:
    “Pope John Paul II had this tremendous capacity—the clearness of his ‘No!’ to certain things,” says the cardinal. “He had learned under the Nazi terror in his own country, and Communist dictatorship, exactly when a clear ‘No!’ had to be said.”
    I submit we must say No to Islam.

  21. Frog Says:

    OM still believes Islam is a religion, not an ideology. Study up, OM, lest you be stuck on stupid.

  22. neo-neocon Says:

    Frog, in brilliant fashion, writes, “Neo now bleats ‘What about Muslim citizens who are against terrorism? What if they are born here?’”

    How rude do you want to get, Frog, before I ban you here? Not that I ever have banned you, or even threatened to, despite your continual insults.

    “Bleats” is the word I’m talking about here in terms of insults. “Bleat” means “the wavering cry made by a sheep, goat, or calf.” Insults such as “bleats” are the refuge of someone—yourself—who has no real or productive answer to my questions, although you followed that “bleat” statement of yours up with, “Don’t ask questions, Neo, but propose credible solutions to those questions.”

    Credible solutions are one thing you certainly are not providing.

    “Don’t ask questions”? What, is Frog above needing to answer a reasonable question about his own unreasonable, unworkable proposals? In addition, I not only have made a few specific suggestions in my comments here, but in the past on this blog I have written quite a few posts and comments on the subject of what to do. Here’s one of them, for example, with a link to an excellent article on the subject by Andrew McCarthy. You’ve been reading here for years; do a little research to learn what I’ve said.

    At any rate, your “solutions” are unworkable and will not be implemented. They are a way for you to sound tough, but no one is about to do what you say, and fortunately you are not king of the world (or even president of this country, or in fact the holder of any public office). Actually, I’m not aware of any holder of public office in this country who is advocating what you’re advocating, either (and that certainly includes Donald Trump), so you are offering a “solution” which is your own personal pipe dream of power.

    How many Muslims do you even know personally? Plenty of Muslims are “like us.”

    Sure, ban mosques. That’s a great idea. Is that YOUR idea of a “credible solution”? How is that going to happen? Will states pass laws banning them? Or will it be the feds who do it? Or will it be Frog, when he becomes king? “Muslims who reject terrorism can be put to work in Israel”—are you stark raving mad? Or have you been drinking?

    Oops, I forgot. King Frog says I shouldn’t ask questions.

  23. neo-neocon Says:

    CV:

    Amri would almost certainly have just returned with different IDs. That’s part of the problem.

    He should have been in prison longer, for starters, however.

  24. OM Says:

    King Frog:

    A legend of wisdom in his own mind. He knows all because, it’s good to be King Frog. Stuck on stupid and stuck on arrogance, you get your own special sign.

  25. J.J Says:

    The key, IMO, to dealing with Muslims in this country is to challenge the Wahhabi/Salafi/political Islam (radical Islam) doctrine. And what is it we challenge? First, the belief that all infidels must convert, pay a tax and be subservient to Islam, or die. In radical Islam there is no tolerance, room for moderation because it is the literal interpretation of the Quran. The key here is that a large percentage of Muslims do not adhere to this doctrine. If they did no infidel could have anything to do with a Muslim and live to talk about it.

    The second challenge is to the idea of sharia law. Sharia law is supposedly derived from Mohamed’s teachings, but it is patently obvious to anyone who has studied the history of sharia that, much like our laws, they have been derived from the thoughts of Islamic scholars as they have ruled on various issues over the years. If Muslims want to live under sharia law, they should not come to the U.S. to live. We have a firmly established doctrine of separation of church and state. Our system is totally incompatible with sharia law.

    Thus, Muslims must renounce forced conversion and intolerance of other religions and the desire to live under sharia law if they wish to live peaceably in the U.S. Some have done this. An outstanding example in the U.S. is Zhudi Jasser, for which see this:
    https://aifdemocracy.org/our-work/our-team/dr-jasser/

    Muslims must be willing to reform their religion. Dr. Jasser is trying to do that. He would be more successful if the full weight of the U.S. law and public opinion aligned behind him and his fellow Muslims. Muslims who reject forced conversion/intolerance and sharia law would be no more problem to the U.S. than any other religious group.

    Wherever there are Muslims polling has shown that about 25% are believers in the radical Islamic doctrine. Those people should not be allowed to immigrate to any Western country and they should be deported from Western countries whenever they their views become known.

    A big part of the problem in this and other Western countries is that the Saudis have exported many imams who preach radical Islam in Saudi supported mosques and move under the cover of our religious tolerance. These imams should be identified and deported. They are like cancerous cells spreading hatred and death within our culture.

    To sum up:
    1. Know what identifies a Muslim as holding radical beliefs.
    2. Stand with Muslims who reject radical Islam.
    3. Identify and deport imams who are preaching radical Islam.
    4. Keep radical Islamists from immigrating to Western countries.
    5. When radical Islamists are identified within the population, deport them.

  26. blert Says:

    OM Says:
    December 24th, 2016 at 11:28 am

    Blert:

    So the Muslims from Indonesia (largest number of Muslems) are sponsored by who? Are they the same as the Muslims in the MENA? Must be Blert said it, again, and again. By Blert’s logic the Catholic church should have no protections, after all they have the Vatican from which to direct their faithful. How do you like that Froggy? Or have you forgotten Hugo Black and his animus towards the Catholics? Probably.

    &&&&&

    Our President attended a Wahhabist institution — which is where he learned to speak fluent Arabic.

    That institution was ENTIRELY paid for by the King of Saudi Arabia — especially to include the salaries of the imams — all of whom are graduates of Saudi theology.

    After the First Gulf War, Saddam Hussein permitted the Saudi King to establish Wahhabist mosques within Iraq. It was a quid pro quo deal.

    It was THOSE mosques that de-secularized a significant fraction of the Sunni community of Iraq… something that’s fully under way in Indonesia.

    What is the difference between Nazism and Wahhabism ? No-one can tell. I know Germany was short on oil, but had an advanced society. KSA is the absolute flip-flop: oil aplenty with a retrograde culture.

    The correct and viable solution:

    Constitutional amendment spelling out that Islam is not a protected religion, not really a religion at all, but a theocracy-state.

    Acknowledgement that 80% of the mosques in the USA are agitprop organs run by the Saudi government — and paid for, too.

    Eject all of these alien imams.

    There are no American imams. The Saudis are paying for this project, and taking on Americans is NOT in their scheme.

    BTW, MUST Muslim countries prohibit Wahhabist imams, Wahhabist mosques.

    Without alien imams to indoctrinate them, Muslims will lapse. This is almost universally true.

    Yes, without social pressure, very few have the gumption to bend over five times a day when no-one is looking.

    All immigration from Somalia must come to a total halt. It’s not even a nation state. Every dude that arrives becomes a perpetual dependent. None of them are acculturated to civil society.

    They need to be left to follow their own cultural destiny, not treated like play-things. ( The Pygmalion impulse.)

  27. blert Says:

    J.J Says:
    December 24th, 2016 at 1:59 pm

    Radical Islam = ORTHODOX Islam.

    The Protestant Reformation took Christianity back to its roots — and Jesus Christ was its ideal.

    The Islamic Reformation is taking Islam back to its roots — and Mohammed is their ideal.

    Spend 12 minutes listening to David Wood on why the current Western trajectory is an engine of perpetual jihad — suicidal jihad.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k6ePVxRLDM0

  28. OM Says:

    Blert is on drugs again.

  29. Frog Says:

    It would appear that GB, blert and I are on the same page.
    I admit to irritation that Neo says “aint gonna happen.” My remarks about slippery slopes go unheeded. I am instructed to research what Neo has said in the past; why not just say it again?
    The solutions to the Islam problem are obviously difficult. We deal with an adversary that has found and taken advantage of the weakness of America: tolerance for religions, even when they are incompatible with the Constitution, and are, in the fact of Islam, tyrannical, oppressive, and hateful.
    When you don’t like and can’t defeat the message or evidence, attack the messenger. Or the witness. It is a time-honored legal stratagem. But it is not an answer or a rebuttal.

  30. J.J Says:

    blert, Woods has a good explanation for the radicalization of young, bad (sinner) Muslims in Western countries. He points out early on that society must challenge the Muslim doctrine. I assume he means the whole doctrine. That leads to only one place, the destruction of Islam. At 1.5 billion believers, that is an impractical goal, and would lead to a holocaust.

    Those Muslims who don’t adhere to Wahhabism must be supported in their goals to resist the radicals. It should be relatively easy to point out, as General el Sisi of Egypt did, that the Wahhabi doctrine puts Islam at unending war with all non-Muslims. Surely no reasonable person (and I have known some reasonable Muslims) wants to be at war with the 5.5 billion non-Muslims in the world. It is a war they cannot hope to win.

    Secondly, it should be easy to challenge sharia law as not being divine. History shows that men have decided on how the laws have been formed, interrupted, and applied based on the human interpretations of the Quran. Our laws can be traced historically to the Ten Commandments, but men have formed, interpreted them, and applied them in various ways by humans at various times down through history. Thus, we do not claim that our laws are divinely inspired. So it should be with sharia law.

    Governments and laws are formed to help humans in their relations to one another. Religions are formed to guide humans in their relationship with their God, Allah, Force, Creator, or ? We have found that separating the two works well for us in the West. We should encourage that in Islam.

    As I mentioned previously, get rid of forced conversion/intolerance and adherence to sharia law, and you have a religion that is no longer a danger to non-believers. A tough job, but I believe it is much preferable to trying to wipe out all of Islam.

  31. neo-neocon Says:

    Frog:

    Well, you are irritated that I speak about the reality, which is that your ideas are not going to be implemented.

    I guess you would rather live in your power-mad dreamland, where you get rid of all the people you think might possibly be a danger to you.

    Oh, and to placate you, and because you wish it (actually you don’t just wish it; you simultaneously insult me and demand I do your bidding), I’m supposed to rewrite the many posts and comments I’ve written over the years.

    Sure thing, King Frog.

  32. blert Says:

    J.J Says:
    December 24th, 2016 at 4:34 pm

    blert, Woods has a good explanation for the radicalization of young, bad (sinner) Muslims in Western countries. He points out early on that society must challenge the Muslim doctrine. I assume he means the whole doctrine. That leads to only one place, the destruction of Islam. At 1.5 billion believers, that is an impractical goal, and would lead to a holocaust.

    &&&&

    More religions have died that you and I can possibly imagine.

    The death of a creed does not mean that the ex-believers are dead, far from it.

    In 536 AD Krakatoa exploded even more profoundly than it did in 1883. Of that later explosion ( steam explosions, all) it was heard to the naked ear all the way to Cape Town. There it was taken to be Royal Naval gunnery practice, just over the horizon. Yup.

    The 536 AD super-detonations ejected the god-rocks that today are worshipped at Mecca. That such is so can be proved by atomic and chemical analysis — should the Wahhabis ever permit it.

    It was many years after these rocks from heaven fell to Earth that Mohammed transformed the pagan rites into a center stone for his creed.

    What’s more relevant for us is that 536 AD’s detonations destroyed religions on a global basis.

    The Japanese Shinto culture dates from this era. The suffering from the eruption was so vast that the old gods were dumped wholesale. A collapse in rainfall caused the Japanese to survive by (pretty) deep sea fishing.

    The same horrors occurred up in Sweden. Beowulf was the result. The massive fresh water lake near Stockholm froze over solid… year-round. A mass exodus occurred, plus a major battle right atop the frozen lake.

    A Mezo-American culture, whose name eludes me, was totally wiped out. The old gods were cast out, wholesale.

    The Eastern Roman Empire suffered such tribulations that the Emperor almost fled the city. (massive food riots) His wife famously talked him back up onto the dock to suffer it out. Constantinople became a death camp without guards or borders.

    What was bad for Constantinople was horrific for Rome. Paganism was totally discredited.

    All of the “end of days” prophecies are but retreads of what really happened during such travails.

    Indeed, across the entire globe, dozens of established religions all died the same (dinosaur) death.

    [ There’s an alternate conjecture that the debris was injected by an asteroid that busted up in the high atmosphere. Contemporary artwork // frescoes show just such an event. ]

    Lastly, Shintoism, as a true faith, died at the end of WWII in the Pacific. That bloody war cost Japan ~ 2-4% of her population. Today, Shintoism is regarded the way that the Church of England is: harmless. Very, very, few Japanese take it seriously.

    The collapse of Shintoism was due to the Emperor bowing and scraping to General MacArthur. That ripped up the belief system.

    Japan then entered its golden age. The Japanese have never had it so good. This sequence was reduced to comedy with “The Mouse that Roared.”

    Something along this line is how Islam will die.

    Then the Muslims will be free, free at last.

  33. OM Says:

    Arbeit macht frei. As if Blert cared about individual Muslims.

  34. Frog Says:

    Neo, you disappoint. Your vehemence about my comments is inappropriate, indeed vicious, as are your insults. “King Frog”?
    I am signing off. You may block me. I do not care. It says something about your intolerance that you are a former Democrat who has returned to vicious Democratic ways of discourse. I will leave you with the OMs, the people who attack the messenger because they cannot attack the message. I will miss blert and GB, parker also. You may have noticed a shift in your readership, an absence of former stalwarts. Wonder why?

  35. J.J Says:

    blert, very interesting comment. I was aware of the death/transformation of many religions going back into recorded history. (4000 BC and onward)
    I don’t recall knowing about the Krakatoa eruption in 536 AD. In researching it a bit, the weather events attributed to it are surely the sort of thing that could challenge faith. I note that some mark that date as the beginning of the Dark Ages.

    I believe that Islam can reform just as Shintoism did. It will not be an easy or painless process. It may require a very bloody war ala WWII in the Pacific, but I would try other things first. Reform cannot happen without challenging the parts of Islam that make it intolerant and dangerous to infidels and apostates. At this point the progs have told us that we can’t question any culture or religion because………diversity and multi-culturalism. We have to break free of that. That is a straight jacket that limits our choices. It is not bigotry to defend yourself from a religion that that commands conversion or death. At least not in my opinion.

  36. neo-neocon Says:

    Frog:

    As a Democrat, a Republican, a liberal, or a conservative, I have never indulged in vicious discourse. Nor did I here.

    Take a good look in the mirror, and note what you have said and done here. You have insulted me. You have told me what I can do and what I cannot do, in a very imperial way. You have said I am a sheep led to slaughter, who “bleats” when I wrote a comment and asked some very reasonable questions.

    You also are saying we need to deport all Muslims in this country, and you don’t pay a particle of attention to the mechanism by which this could be done without violating the Constitution—or even without a single person in office saying that we should do this.

    So, I refer to you as “King Frog”—because you act imperial and dictatorial. You also act insulting, but that’s not why I called you “King Frog.”

    If you think that my referring to you as “King Frog” for those reasons is “vicious,” then you have a very strange definition of “vicious.”

    People come and go on blogs. Plenty of people have been here for a long time. Plenty have come and gone over the years. But I have been remarkably tolerant and even-tempered over the years, with much provocation from many people.

    I have also been very tolerant and even-tempered with you, and you have insulted me—unprovoked, I might add—many many times.

    It is your decision whether you want to continue to comment here. I don’t have endless patience for insults, however.

About Me

Previously a lifelong Democrat, born in New York and living in New England, surrounded by liberals on all sides, I've found myself slowly but surely leaving the fold and becoming that dread thing: a neocon.
Read More >>






Monthly Archives



Blogroll

Ace (bold)
AmericanDigest (writer’s digest)
AmericanThinker (thought full)
Anchoress (first things first)
AnnAlthouse (more than law)
AtlasShrugs (fearless)
AugeanStables (historian’s task)
Baldilocks (outspoken)
Barcepundit (theBrainInSpain)
Beldar (Texas lawman)
BelmontClub (deep thoughts)
Betsy’sPage (teach)
Bookworm (writingReader)
Breitbart (big)
ChicagoBoyz (boyz will be)
Contentions (CommentaryBlog)
DanielInVenezuela (against tyranny)
DeanEsmay (conservative liberal)
Donklephant (political chimera)
Dr.Helen (rights of man)
Dr.Sanity (thinking shrink)
DreamsToLightening (Asher)
EdDriscoll (market liberal)
Fausta’sBlog (opinionated)
GayPatriot (self-explanatory)
HadEnoughTherapy? (yep)
HotAir (a roomful)
InFromTheCold (once a spook)
InstaPundit (the hub)
JawaReport (the doctor is Rusty)
LegalInsurrection (law prof)
RedState (conservative)
Maggie’sFarm (centrist commune)
MelaniePhillips (formidable)
MerylYourish (centrist)
MichaelTotten (globetrotter)
MichaelYon (War Zones)
Michelle Malkin (clarion pen)
Michelle Obama's Mirror (reflections)
MudvilleGazette (milblog central)
NoPasaran! (behind French facade)
NormanGeras (principled leftist)
OneCosmos (Gagdad Bob’s blog)
PJMedia (comprehensive)
PointOfNoReturn (Jewish refugees)
Powerline (foursight)
ProteinWisdom (wiseguy)
QandO (neolibertarian)
RachelLucas (in Italy)
RogerL.Simon (PJ guy)
SecondDraft (be the judge)
SeekerBlog (inquiring minds)
SisterToldjah (she said)
Sisu (commentary plus cats)
Spengler (Goldman)
TheDoctorIsIn (indeed)
Tigerhawk (eclectic talk)
VictorDavisHanson (prof)
Vodkapundit (drinker-thinker)
Volokh (lawblog)
Zombie (alive)

Regent Badge