Naam:  Wachtwoord:   Ingelogd blijven? Wachtwoord kwijt? (Waarom) Registreren
Dit is het archief van
Sinds juli 2014 verschijnen hier geen nieuwe stukken meer. De artikelen worden *) heringedeeld in acht categorieën: zie de knoppen links. Met uitzondering van de categorie 'Islam(itische ideologie)' is de indeling nu niet meer naar thema, maar naar aard van de stukken. Vier jaar lang lag het hoofdaccent op het voeren van de noodzakelijke ideologische strijd: zie het motto hierboven. In de komende jaren zal ik (initiatiefnemer en belangrijkste leverancier van teksten voor me meer richten op de noodzakelijke politieke strijd. In termen van deze indeling: veel meer nadruk op Voorstellen, Politieke organisatie en iets meer op Opinie. LEES VERDER »
Focus on Benghazi
Defeating nazism as a piece of cake

'Focus' should be read with lower case 'f' as well as with a capital letter: it was also the name of a group existing in the thirties of last century, which had Winston Churchill as its most prominent member.
Recently I wrote a review (in Dutch) of Geert Wilders' splendid book Marked for Death (in English). In it I gave some arguments to the effect that in a way defeating nazism was a piece of cake compared to the challenge we face nowadays to diffuse muhammedanism throughout the world.
In our time there are Christians who consider muhammedanism as an ally in the struggle against 'secularization'. Lots of people consider 'capitalism', 'global warming' or even the survival of the democratic state of Israel as a greater threat. As a country, the Netherlands (with Israel) still lead the Western world, when it comes to the share of the people understanding the nature of muhammedanism. And yet in our country the tendency prevails to look away. Among the majority of the population and an overwhelming majority of academics, politicians and journalists this tendency is so strong that they simply refuse to contemplate the crucial question, let alone to answer it.
That question being:
Is the global influence of the extremist forces in the muhammedan world growing or declining?

Mr. Appeasement himself
I wrote the review before the terrorist attack of 9-11 in Benghazi and so before the horrors of Benghazi-gate started to surface.
The image announces a very informative as well as disturbing video of a panel discussion with the magnificent Dr. Andrew Bostom, Diana West and Stephen Coughlin.
the willful and reckless disregard of islamic theology, of islamic jihad to spread sharia

I strongly advise you to watch the complete video but if you are a bit in a hurry you can skip to 8:50 where Andrew Bostom starts his contribution with a reference to J.B.Matthews, once a communist, later one of the world's foremost anti-communist authorities who wrote in 1938:
..strange as it may seem, communists denounce those who merely cite the things of which communists openly boast in their own public statements..

Does that sound familiar?
If you have so little time that you want to watch only the lecture of one of these outstanding speakers my advise would be to choose Diana West: from 21:45.
the real Benghazi-gate of course is not this tragic, unnecessary loss of lives in itself
Her biggest concern is that in the avalanche of minor scandals the greater picture is lost: the willful and reckless disregard of islamic theology, of islamic jihad to spread sharia. She presents the most shocking facts about the Al-Qaeda-like group who was supposed to protect the consulate: the February 17 martyrs brigade. By simply researching from where they got this name, she found out that this was basically a sharia/jihadist group. Disregarding this kind of information led to the loss of lives, not just that of the silly ambassador himself but also of a coworker and two courageous Navy Seals.
Well, the real Benghazi-gate of course is not this tragic, unnecessary loss of lives in itself, but the huge Obama-led cover-up of which the Petreaus-charade part reduces to a mere human-interest detail.
To make a link with the situation in the thirties: the cover-up should be compared with the fact that Mr Appeasement himself, prime minister Chamberlain, defended the delivery of aircraft engines to Germany in 1934 when the nazis already had grabbed power [1]

A new Focus group?
Churchills Focus group was not a great success [2]. It gave rise to the promising, multi-party initiative Arms and the Covenant Movement but that in itself was to a great extend underminded by one of the greatest errors of judgment by Winston Spencer Churchill: totally siding with the monarchy on the very worst moment.
When you look at the fine presentations by Bostom, West and Coughlin as a modern time version of the Focus group there is ground for some optimism: in a little more than a week some 3000 people from all over the world have seen (a part of) the video. The original Focus group could never have achieved this.

The 'Catholic' Cathedral of Benghazi. Once the biggest church in all of Africa. Not a church anymore of course, but not a mosque nor destroyed (yet)

1) The Last Lion, William Manchester, p 129.
2) In fact, when you do a Google search on the Focus group you arrive at Holocaust-denying scum relating to the group as proof that Churchill was a puppet on a string for the Jews as part of their plan to start a second world war. The wikipedia note on another member of the Focus group, Wickham Steed, is revealing on this subject: "In 1920, Steed endorsed the notorious anti-Semitic forgery The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion as genuine in an editorial in The Times. In the same editorial, Steed blamed the Jews for World War I, the Bolshevik regime and called Jews the greatest threat to the British Empire. However, in 1921, when The Times’s Constantinople correspondent proved that The Protocols were a forgery, Steed retracted his endorsement of The Protocols."  

Frans Groenendijk,  22-11-2012          

Er is nog niet gereageerd op dit stuk
Reageren is niet mogelijk op dit bericht.