Monday, November 08, 2004

France's Betrayal, a speech in front of the French Senate.

Beyond Munich – The Spirit of Eurabia
By Bat Ye’ July 2, 2004
The following presentation by Bat Ye'or was delivered at a seminar in the French Senate in Paris three weeks ago - The Editors.
Allow me first to make a preliminary observation about the title of this session: the ‘return of the spirit of Munich’ – a title which I find somewhat optimistic. At Munich, in 1938, France and England, exhausted by the death toll of the Great War, abandoned Czechoslovakia to the Nazi beast, in the hope that by doing so they would avoid another conflict. The “spirit of Munich” thus refers to a policy of states and of peoples who refuse to confront a threat, and attempt to obtain peace and security through conciliation and appeasement, or even, for some, an active collaboration with the criminals.
For my own part, I would say that we have gone beyond the spirit of Munich, and the present situation should be seen not in the context of the Second World War, but in the present jihadist context.

In fact, for the past 30 years France and Europe are living in a situation of passive self-defense against terrorism. This began with Palestinian terrorism, then Islamic terrorism, not to speak of the local European terrorism, including the IRA in Great Britain, ETA in Spain, the Baader-Meinhof group in Germany, the Red Brigades in Italy.

One need only look at our cities, airports, and streets, at the schools with their security guards, even the systems of public transportation, not to mention the embassies, and the synagogues – to see the whole astonishing array of police and security services. The fact that the authorities everywhere refuse to name the evil does not negate that evil. Yet we know perfectly well that we have been under threat for a long time; one has only to open one’s eyes and our authorities know it better than any of us, because it is they who have ordered these very security measures.

In his book, La Vie Quotidienne dans l’Europe Médiévale sous Domination Arabe (Daily Life in Medieval Europe under the Arab Domination), published in 1978, Charles-Emmanuel Dufourq, a French specialist on Andalusia (Islamic Spain) and the Maghreb, described under the subheading “Une grande Peur” (“A great Fear”) the conditions of life for the indigenous non-Muslim peoples in the Andalusian countryside. (1) Today, Europe itself is living with this Great Fear.

At Munich war had not yet been declared. Today the war is everywhere. And yet the European Union and the states which comprise it, have denied that war’s reality, right up to the terrorist attack in Madrid of March 11, 2004. If there is a danger as Europe proclaims urbi et orbi, that danger can only come from America and Israel. What should one understand? For can anyone seriously maintain that it is the American and Israeli forces that threaten us in Europe? No, what must be understood is that American and Israeli policies of resistance to jihadist terror provoke reprisals against a Europe that has long ago ceased to defend itself. So that peace can prevail throughout the world, those two countries, America and Israel, need only adopt the European strategy of constant surrender, based on the denial of aggression. How simple it all is…

This strategy is less worthy than even Munich’s connivance and cowardice. At Munich there was some sort of future contemplated, even if war, or peace, were to determine the future. There was a choice. In the present situation there is no choice, for we deny the reality of the jihad danger. The only danger comes, allegedly, from the United States and Israel. We conduct a propaganda campaign in the media against these two countries, before entering into a yet more aggressive phase; it’s so much easier, so much less dangerous…And we conduct this campaign with the weapons of cowardice: defamation, misinformation, the corruption of venal politicians.

In the time of Munich, one could envisage that there would be battles that might be won. There was at least the Maginot Line for defense. In Europe today, dominated by the spirit of dhimmitude – the condition of submission of Jews and Christians under Muslim domination – there is no conceivable battle. Submission, without a fight, has already taken place. A machinery that has made Europe the new continent of dhimmitude was put into motion more than 30 years ago at the instigation of France.

A wide-ranging policy was then first sketched out, a symbiosis of Europe with the Muslim Arab countries, that would endow Europe – and especially France, the project’s prime mover – with a weight and a prestige to rival that of the United States (2). This policy was undertaken quite discreetly, outside of official treaties, under the innocent-sounding name of the Euro-Arab Dialogue. An association of European parliamentarians from the European Economic Community (EEC) was created in 1974 in Paris: the Parliamentary Association for Euro-Arab Cooperation. It was entrusted with managing all of the aspects of Euro-Arab relations – financial, political, economic, cultural, and those pertaining to immigration. This organization functioned under the auspices of the European heads of government and their foreign ministers, working in close association with their Arab counterparts, and with the representatives of the European Commission, and the Arab League.

This strategy, the goal of which was the creation of a pan-Mediterranean Euro-Arab entity, permitting the free circulation both of men and of goods, also determined the immigration policy with regard to Arabs in the European Community (EC). And, for the past 30 years, it also established the relevant cultural policies in the schools and universities of the EC. Since the first Cairo meeting of the Euro-Arab Dialogue in 1975, attended by the ministers and heads of state both from European and Arab countries and by representatives of the EC and the Arab League, agreements have been concluded concerning the diffusion and the promotion in Europe of Islam, of the Arabic language and culture, through the creation of Arab cultural centers in European cities. Other accords soon followed, all intended to ensure a cultural, economic, political Euro-Arab symbiosis. These far ranging efforts involved the universities and the media (both written and audio-visual), and even included the transfer of technologies, including nuclear technology. Finally a Euro-Arab associative diplomacy was promoted in international forums, especially at the United Nations.

The Arabs set the conditions for this association: 1) a European policy that would be independent from, and opposed to that of the United States; 2) the recognition by Europe of a “Palestinian people,” and the creation of a “Palestinian” state; 3) European support for the PLO; 4) the designation of Arafat as the sole and exclusive representative of that “Palestinian people”; 5) the de-legitimizing of the State of Israel, both historically and politically, its shrinking into non viable borders, and the Arabization of Jerusalem. From this sprang the hidden European war against Israel, through economic boycotts, and in some cases academic boycotts as well, through deliberate vilification, and the spreading of both anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism.

During the past three decades a considerable number of non-official agreements between the countries of the CEE (subsequently the EU) on the one hand, and the countries of the Arab League on the other, determined the evolution of Europe in its current political and cultural aspects. I will cite here only four of them: 1) it was understood that those Europeans who would be dealing with Arab immigrants would undergo special sensitivity training, in order to better appreciate their customs, their moeurs; 2) the Arab immigrants would remain under the control and the laws of their countries of origin; 3) history textbooks in Europe would be rewritten by joint teams of European and Arab historians – naturally the Battles of Poitiers and Lepanto, or the Spanish Reconquista did not possess the same significance on both Mediterranean littorals; 4) the teaching of the Arabic language and of Arab and Islamic culture were to be taught, in the schools and universities of Europe, by Arab teachers experienced in teaching Europeans.

The Situation Today

On the political front, Europe has tied its destiny to the Arab countries, and thus become involved in the logic of jihad against Israel and the United States. How could Europe denounce the culture of jihadic venom which exudes from its allies, while for so many years it did everything to activate the jihad by hiding and justifying it by claiming that the real danger comes not from the jihadists, themselves, but from those who resist the Arab jihadist, the very allies that Europe serves at every international gathering, and in the European media.

On the cultural front, there has been a complete re-writing of history, which was first undertaken during the 1970s in European universities. This process was ratified by the parliamentary assembly of the Council of Europe in September 1991, at its meeting devoted to “The Contribution of the Islamic civilization to European culture.” It was reaffirmed by President Jacques Chirac in his address of April 8, 1996 in Cairo, and reinforced by Romano Prodi, president of the European Commission, through the creation of a ‘Foundation on the Dialogue of Cultures and Civilizations’ that was to control everything that was said, written and taught on the new continent of Eurabia, which encompass Europe and the Arab countries.

The dhimmitude of Europe began with the subversion of its culture and its values, with the destruction of its history and its replacement by an Islamic vision of that history, supported by the romantic myth of Andalusia. Eurabia adopted the Islamic conception of history, in which Islam is defined as a liberating force, a force for peace, and the jihad is regarded a ‘just war’. Those who resist the jihad, like the Israelis and the Americans, are the guilty ones, rather than those who wage it. It is this policy that has inculcated in us, the Europeans, the spirit of dhimmitude that blinds us, that instills in us a hatred for our own values, and the wish to destroy our own origins and our own history. “The greatest intellectual swindle would be to allow Europe to continue to believe that it derives from a Judeo-Christian tradition. That is a complete lie,” Tariq Ramadan has stated (3). And thus we despise George Bush because he still believes in that tradition. What simpletons those Americans…

The spirit of dhimmitude is not merely that of submission without fighting, not even a surrender. It is also the denial of one’s own humiliation through this process of integrating values that lead to our own destruction; it is the ideological mercenaries offering themselves up for service in the jihad; it is the traditional tribute paid by their own hand, and with humiliation, by the European dhimmis, in order to obtain a false security; it is the betrayal of one’s own people. The non-Muslim protected dhimmi under Islamic rule could obtain an ephemeral and delusive security through services rendered to the Muslim oppressor, and through servility and flattery. And that is precisely the situation in Europe today.

Dhimmitude is not only a set of abstract laws inscribed in the shari’a, it is also a complex set of behaviors developed over time by the dhimmis themselves, as a way both to adapt to, and to survive, oppression, humiliation, insecurity. This has produced a particular mentality as well as social and political behaviors essential to the survival of peoples who, in a certain sense, would always remain hostages to the Islamic system.

The dhimmis are inferior beings who undergo humiliations and aggressions in silence. Their aggressors, meanwhile, enjoy an impunity that only increases their hatred and their feeling of superiority, guaranteed by the protection of the law. The culture of dhimmitude which is expanding throughout Europe is that of hate, of crimes against non-Muslims that go unpunished, a culture which is imported from the Arab countries along with “Palestinianism,” the new European subculture that has been raised to the level of a European Union cult, and its exalted war banner against Israel.

At Munich, in 1938, France had not renounced its own culture, its own history becoming German; it has not proclaimed that the source of her own culture was the German civilization. The spirit of dhimmitude which today blinds Europe springs not from a situation imposed from without, but from a choice made freely, and systematically carried out, in its political dimensions, over the course of the last 30 years.

The well-known scholar of Islam, William Montgomery Watt, described the disappearance of the Christian world from the countries which had been Islamized, in his book The Majesty that was Islam (1974): “There was nothing dramatic about what happened; it was a gentle death, a phasing out.”(4) But Montgomery Watt was wrong; in fact, the long death-throes of Christianity under Islam were extremely painful and tragic, as can be seen even in the 20th century, with the genocide of the Armenians, and the Lebanese Christians’ resistance in the 1970s-1980s, and for the last decades the genocide in the Sudan, and finally the relentless Arab jihad against Israel, which is only one of the examples of the age-old struggle by people devoted to fighting for freedom against dhimmitude, for the dignity of man against the slavery of oppression and hate. But that observation by Montgomery Watt – about the “gentle death, the phasing out” applies perfectly to Europe today.


1) Charles-Emmanuel Dufourq, La Vie Quotidienne dans l’Europe Médiévale sous Domination Arabe, Hachette, Paris, 1978; this book examines the Arab conquest and colonization of Andalusia — see chapter 1, “Les Jours de Razzia et d’Invasion”. I am grateful to Dr Andrew Bostom, for having brought to my attention the works of Charles-Emmanuel Dufourcq, some of which will be included in his forthcoming compendium of essays and documents, The Legacy of Jihad, New York, Prometheus Books, 2005.

2) Pierre Lyautey (the nephew of Marshall Lyautey): “) « Le nouveau rôle de la France en Orient », Comptes rendu des séances de l’Académie des Sciences d’Outre-Mer, 4 mai 1962, p.176, voir aussi Jacques Frémeaux, Le monde arabe et la sécurité de la France depuis 1958, PUF, Paris 1995.

3) Tariq Ramadan, “Critique des (nouveaux) intellectuels communautaires”,, 3 October 2003.

4) William Montgomery Watt, The Majesty that Was Islam. The Islamic World, 66-1100. London: Sidgwick & Jackson, 1974, p. 257.

* Bat Ye’or has written articles and scholarly studies since 1971 on the situation of Jews and Christians under Islam. Her books in French have been translated into English ( / This presentation – translated from the French – was given at a seminar organized by the B’nai B’rith (Europe) in the French Senate (Palais du Luxembourg, Paris), on the theme: “La démocratie à l’épreuve de la menace islamiste” (“Democracy faced with the Islamist menace”), in two sessions: “Les Islamistes et leur alliés” (“The Islamists and their allies”); “Vers un retour à l’esprit de Munich” (“Toward a return to the spirit of Munich”). Her next book covers this subject in depth: Eurabia. The Euro-Arab Axis (Cranbury, NJ., Associated University Presses, 2005). This recent presentation, “Beyond Munich – The Spirit of Eurabia,” along with many other pieces by Bat Ye’or and others, will appear in the essay collection, The Myth of Islamic Tolerance (forthcoming from Prometheus Books), edited by Robert Spencer.

Dhimmicrats and Surrenderism.

Dhimmicrats - Silly Americans that think that 3,000 dead Americans is nothing more than a nuisance. Weak Americans that think that submitting to the Terrorists is preferable to fighting them. These self aggrandized Dhimmicrats show their racism, by not believing that the Arab Muslims can have or want to have freedom. Worst yet are those that don't think they deserve freedom. They have no true values, religious or otherwise, to defend or protect, so Dhimmitude comes naturally.

Just look at their most recent Presidential candidate, Hanoi John. All of the lies, hate and the billions spent to try to make Bush look worse than their traitorous and immoral candidate failed. The real Americans saw through it all. The choice of Kerry is indicative of the depths of the immorality of Dhimmicrats.

For the uninformed, "Dhimmi is the status given to Jews and Christians under Islam. Throughout history, these religious minorities in Muslim lands have been oppressed and victimized. Ending the culture of dhimmitude is a prerequisite for achieving peace and justice for all people in the Islamic world."

The Surrenderists - They used to be called Liberals. America’s Liberals used to promote America’s intervention overseas to promote and foster freedom and Democracies. They have been transformed by Cronkite, Kerry, Rather and others into Surrenderists. Surrenderists do not believe war is right or just, even if it is in self defense. Especially, if the self defense in form of overthrowing a dictator, creating a free democracy in the hope it will transform a region from a terrorist factory in to a free and prosperous region. This plan of hope might be OK if a elitist urban Dhimmicrat had thought of it, but not if a redneck Texas cowboy does.

Surrenderists want to accept terrorism as an inevitable fact of life and it cannot be stopped. Surrenderists want to focus on absorbing and rebuilding after attacks instead of engaging the enemy on their home turf. Surrenderists turn to France for inspiration. Saddam’s Iraq lasted longer than France. Patton will forever be known as the guy who said, "I would rather have a German division in front of me than a French division behind me." Patton would rather have a tough enemy in front than a weak and traitorous enemy behind. Anybody who thinks Europe can teach America anything is a fool. Europe has nothing of value for America. America doesn’t need France to teach America how to surrender, we got Kerry, Cranched, Rather and the rest of the Dhimmicrats for that.

Dhimmicrats have actually been found out by everyone, but themselves. I am amazed at the utter arrogance expressed by the Kerry supporters out East. "How can middle America know what it like to be a homosexual, when they don’t live next door to them?" "We must bring our values to middle America". It appears that the elite of America’s Surrenderism movement just don’t get it. Middle America is aware of the values of the Dhimmicrats and we have rejected them, soundly.

Wednesday, November 03, 2004

Bush Wins!!!!

In another sign that the Democratic Party has lost it's way, Bush as been re-elected for four more years!

Some would say it is not time for gloating! I disagree, Bush and his supporters have been the target for lies and smears for over a year and a half! I have been scorned, ripped off and I am glad to survive! I am glad my attackers failed! I am glad the terrorist appeasers failed! I am happy that I do not have to look at that ugly long faced traitor for the next four years. Not to mention his triple bag wife.

How has my life changed through this ordeal? I have been transformed from an Independent into a Republican. The behavior and tactics of the Democrats have made them Public Enemy #1 for me! I will be able to vote a Republican Party Line from now on. Thank you, Michael Goebbles Moore!

I have already been told by an unhappy DEMon that I cannot complain about Heathcare prices or the lack of a pay raise. As if Bush's re-election will have much of an effect on our unions negotiations with the local government I work for. I don't remember any beneficial effects from Clinton's eight years on our negotiations and contracts.

I have and will continue to complain about the price of the best medical care per dollar in the Western World. I will look to the providers to do more with less, not ask the government to destroy our healthcare system. I will also support drug prescription reform, emphasizing alternate treatments and having drug companies charge all of their customers for research and development costs, not just their American ones.

The only way to get substantial raises is to strike and no one seems willing to do that. The AFCME union slaves here seem to think that voting for Democrats will somehow get them a raise! It has never happen before and I have no reason to believe things would be different this time.

It reminds me of the Black woman that votes for Democrats because they care for minorities, while her life and the life of her family has not ever been made better by a Democrat's legislation. There is no incentive to make the woman's life better, she might then vote Republican!

Kerry, Moveon and Moore have done immeasurable damage to the credibility of the Democrats. They have a lot of work to do!

Monday, November 01, 2004

A dishonorable discharge for the Traitor?

This article examines Kerry's discharge documents(1 and 2).

Everyone should know that Kerry couldn't get into Harvard, the school Bush got a Masters from, for undisclosed reasons. At least one person on the Harvard's admissions board, remembers the reason being a dishonorable discharge.

Will the real John "Hanoi" Kerry please stand up?

Kerry's Senate Record! Why he never discusses it!

This OpEd does a good job of explaining the real differences between Bush and the Traitor as excerpt here, America the vulnerable.

These successes stand in stark contrast to Mr. Kerry's record of being on the wrong side of history. In 1971, he urged the United States to accept the North Vietnamese terms of surrender. In 1984, at the height of the Cold War, he supported the Soviet-sponsored nuclear freeze and opposed the critically important — and NATO-supported — deployment of our INF missiles in Europe. In 1985, as terrorism expanded in Central America, he urged the United States to accept the terms of the Communist Sandinistas. In 1990, when Iraq invaded Kuwait, even though the United Nations approved of kicking Saddam out, Mr. Kerry voted no. Even then he flunked his own "global test." Later, he sought to repeatedly cripple and delay missile defenses, despite missile strikes on Israel and U.S. forces during the same Gulf War.

As terrorism worsened in the 1990s, Mr. Kerry proposed a seven-year freeze on defense spending, arguing, "Where's the threat?" Mr. Kerry also proposed cutting back intelligence resources by the billions. So lacking in judgment was Mr. Kerry that his amendment cutting intelligence was denounced even by fellow Democrats as "dangerous" and defeated by a vote of 75-20. Over 35 years, every time America needed his help, he left us in danger.

10 out of 10 terrorists want Kerry to be the President, including Bin Laden.

If there was any question who Bin Asshole wants to be President here is the proof in his own words,

MEMRI said radical Islamist commentators monitored over the Internet this past weekend also interpreted the key passage of bin Laden's diatribe to mean that any U.S. state that votes to elect Bush on Tuesday will be considered an "enemy" and any state that votes for Kerry has "chosen to make peace with us."

This can be found in this article, MONSTER'S DEADLY WARNING TO 'RED' STATES.

Seems Bin Laden is not happy with the Bush efforts to track him and his coherts down either. He wants American's to elect Kerry, who is going to treat him as a nuisance again.

Oh and thanks to you Democrats, Bin Laden is trying to divide us further. USEFUL IDIOTS! When will you Democrats learn?

America divided!

Of couse, if you ask a liberal who divided America they will say Bush. I say, the Democrats have divided America to elect the Traitor. The Democrats and their polorization of America has hurt them with this voter.

In 2000, I voted for Bush and Mondale. I called myself an Independent. It would have been Wellstone, but he died. I believed that there was some need to hear Wellstone's message, even if I disagreed with it.

Though I may still feel the message still needs to be heard, the Democrats do not have a credible person to say it anymore. They have destroyed themselves by embracing Kerry and other degenerate losers. They have attacked me, my daughter, her fellow soldiers and the President with lies and distortions to further the political ambitions of John "Fucked up" Kerry!

Moore, Kerry and the rest of the rabid Democrat's lies have made me a Republican. I will be voting a striaght Republican ticket this election, regardless of any candidate's positions.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

After the American victory of TET, the VC and NVA were so decimated that NVA General Gaip said they would have signed a peace treaty in 1968 except...the US media and the antiwar protestors gave them the hope necessary to continue the war.

Because of liberal weenies that do not have the gonads to win a war, America lost the war at home and had to pull out of Vietnam 4 years later.

Because we didn't get a peace treaty like the Korean one, Communism spread throughout Southeast Asia and millions of innocent civilians were slaughtered by the communists.

The liberal's(Useful Idiots) self anointed good intentions have killed more people than any conservative hawk ever has. They just don't admit it.

When a Neocon Hawk gets his way thousands died, but millions are freed and lead better lives. When liberals get their way, wars are prolonged, America loses and millions die.

Are the liberals ever going to allow America to sucessfully defend itself?

The Democrats used to be the Party of War. They started every war of the first 75 years of the 20th Century. They were good at winning them too, until Vietnam. Vietnam was a turning point for the Democrats, the communists, isolationists and peaceniks came out of the woodwork and the Democrats embraced them as potential voters. This cadre of weenies have destroyed any semblance of strength within the Party. The Party of FDR and John Kennedy died, with the nomination of McGovern.

The Democrat mainstream have been against every war since Vietnam. Oh sure, they claim to support the Afghan war, but attack the way it was conducted.

Which bring me to the hypocrisy of the Democrats. They claim to support the troops, but cut their funding whenever they can. They claim to support the troops, but demonize them whenever possible for political gain. They claim to support the troops, but they endorse a candidate that is unquestionably a traitor and has spit on every serviceman since 1971. John "Hanoi" Kerry has repeatedly lied about supposed failures in the two theaters of war to attack the Bush Administration. Since Bush has never micro managed either theater, every Kerry attack is an attack on the troops. These are not constructive criticisms to make America stronger and safer. They are attacks for purely political gain at the expense of troop morale and the truth.

The Democrats have not earned any true American's support in tomorrow's election.