Islam versus the Judaized West -- a False Choice
[Comments in blue by Andrei Kievsky.]
Introductory Note: What Samuel Huntington calls "the clash of civilizations . . . between
jihad and McWorld" is a false choice between Islamist theocracy and Judaized "Western
democracy." The most important divergence between Islamist and Judaized societies is how
each deals with women, and both choices are undesirable and un-Aryan. Islamist societies
treat women as the property of their male relatives; Judaized societies treat women as
commodities to sell to the highest bidder, and this is evident in the glossy women's
magazines like Ms. and Cosmopolitan, and also in Jewish involvement in the
White slave trade, where they trick naÔve Slavic women into coming to Israel under the false
pretenses of a job as a nanny or secretary, and then force them into
Aryan societies have traditionally treated women much better than Semitic (e.g. Arab and
Jew) societies. Throughout history, women have fared best in White European civilizations,
especially before they were converted to Semitic religions such as Christianity and Islam.
". . .in the first century CE, Tacitus reported "that the Celts made no distinction between
female rulers"... An illustrative story of women's status in Celtic society is
that of Boudiccea, a female ruler of the Celts. "Boudica's assumption of power after
(her husband's) death angered Roman officials for it was "illegal in their eyes" for a woman
to rule a kingdom." Compare this to the way Muslims, when immigrating to White
countries such as Norway and Australia, assume it¼s ok to gang-rape women not accompanied
by male relatives.
The deep roots of terrorism
By H.D.S. Greenway, published in the Boston Globe on 10/8/2001
MORE THAN 30 years ago, when the shah of Iran was trying to modernize and Westernize his
county by his "white revolution," dissidents would whisper that their shah, through measures
such as land reform and education for women, was undermining traditional society and
affronting Islam. 'Modernize and Westernize,' as Aryans have found
out the hard way, is a process that, once started, proceeds to destroy a nation from within
in short order. America went from a coherent, White Gentile nation in 1945 to a degenerate,
Judaized, multicultural Babylon in 50 short years by means of Jewish television and movies.
Muslims are smart to fight it every step of the way.
A few years later, among the Afghan refugees on the northwest frontier of Pakistan, armed
men ready to die for their cause would tell you what it was they hated most about the
communist government in Kabul. "The communists came to our village," one holy warrior told
me. "They said we had to put our girls in school and that they no longer had to cover their
heads!" And this is only the thinnest end of the wedge. The Jew
pretends he just wants to "liberate the women." What does this mean, coming from the Jew?
The Muslims make women the property of the family and of Allah; the Jew makes the woman a
commodity for purchase by the highest bidder. The Jew, with all the glossy magazines at
the supermarket ranging from Cosmopolitan to Ms. (both owned by Jewesses),
encourages all women to commodify themselves; calls it "liberation." Women always have and
always will use sex for power; however, in healthier societies this is not encouraged as
the most glamorous and best option for the masses of women. The Jew also practices a more
naked commodification of women (no pun intended), in the White slave trade in Israel where
White women from poor Slavic countries are tricked into forcible
Today both the shah's hopes for a modern, Western-oriented Iran The
shah's government was extremely corrupt, abusive, and a toady of American interests -- even
American expatriates who lived in Iran in the 1970s attest to this. and the communist
hopes for a modern, socialist Afghanistan lie in the dustbin of history. If there is a
common thread to link their failures, it is that they were both wrecked upon the rocks of
resistance to change. Good for Muhammad! Aryan men take note!
Things that both communists and capitalists could agree upon Communists
and capitalists agree on everything, they are the false duality that Jewish power presents
as a "conflict." Hence the Jews like David Horowitz and Norman Podhoretz who were "red
diaper babies" discovering capitalism and conservatism in the 1970s. In the hands of the Jew,
ideology is not about right or wrong, it's about "the best tool for the job," and the job
is always the same -- more power for Jews. - and education for women is only one
example - were seen as a threat not only to Islam but to traditional ways of life. Indeed,
in many Islamic countries there is no separation of mosque and state.
If the mosque gives up the power over the State, guess who fills the power vacuum? The
State falls into the hands of toadies for the Judeo-American plutocratic empire. Disneyland
- Riyadh won't be far behind. And so today, both countries, although bitter enemies,
are theocracies that have turned their backs on the modernization (read Westernization) of
the world. Let's see what they¼d get if they embraced
modernization/Westernization: 1. Open borders. 2. Equal rights (or affirmative action) for
the people who cross those open borders. 3. Mass media that are openly hostile to the
ruling stock of the country (e.g. MTV's Save the Last Dance, which was an attempt to
"liberate" the White female from her connection to her own people and encouragement to go
do the AIDS dance with Blacks and breed mulattoes. MTV is working on genocide against the
White race by manipulating the minds of young White females to ruin themselves before they
get a chance to grow up and have a White family.) 4. Mass media which do not permit any
criticism of the Jews. Consider that the Aryan resistance has to resort to throwing
leaflets on lawns in the dead of night to transmit its message at all.
Rapid change and the feelings of being powerless and left behind in an evolving world have
driven hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions, to seek solace in religion, and some to
violence in the name of religion. It helps explain what motivated 19 young men to destroy
themselves and so many Americans on Sept. 11.
Fouad Ajami of Johns Hopkins University wrote years ago that since the 1920s, "Muslim cults
... have looked at the defiled world around them - wild cities, shocking cultural trends,
foreigners with alien ways, subjugation to the outsiders, a world that seems to be
perpetually in crisis, young men and women who have strayed from time-honored ways - and
have felt at one time or another the urge to destroy or the urge to withdraw and escape."
That's a natural and healthy response to Jewish tikkun olam.
Since the end of the Cold War and the beginning of globalization, America has
emerged as the symbol of everything that has gone wrong for them
because America has been enlisted as the flying wedge of tikkun olam. America
has also gone quite wrong for the traditional American majority -- e.g. non-Jews of European
descent. The Muslims see White American and European girls prostituted and they don't want
that to happen in their societies, to their women.
Many Muslims go back to their religious roots because their societies have not given them
any answers. Western secularism, Marxism, nationalism have all, in their view, let them
down. They look at their own rulers as corrupt, hypocritical sellers of their country to
Western (read (read Jewish) American) interests. The vast
majority are nonviolent and lead constructive lives although very, very many tacitly
support the terrorists. Only a very few turn to terror.
Fundamentalism is not restricted to Muslim countries. Hindu fundamentalism is a rising
force in India, nibbling away at the secular India of Jawaharlal Nehru, and violence in
the name of their gods threatens the stability of more than one Indian state. Israel, too,
has seen a rise of Jewish fundamentalism in recent years, disapproving of the mostly
secular state that the founding generation of Zionists created. Most religious Jews are
peaceful, but a few fanatics have shown their willingness to resort to violence in God's
name. There can be little doubt that Yitzhak Rabin was murdered because he promised, or
threatened, depending on your point of view, change. Jews don't
agree on a version of tikkun olam for themselves, but they are united in wanting to
impose Jewish supremacy on the rest of us.
Some 15 years ago, a Kuwaiti political scientist, Khaldoun al Nagueb, said to me: "I wonder
if, in its nonviolent form, what we are experiencing in the Arab world is not a bit similar
to what Jerry Falwell preaches and the rise of militant Protestantism in your own country."
And today we have Falwell saying that secular sin opened the United States to terrorism.
As Yggddrasil said, "If you Jews think crucifixes are scary, wait
till we resurrect the Thor's Hammer!"
Even in our own country, the fearful, confused, left-behinds in our society turn to militia
movements in their fear of a changing world in which they see themselves as losers.
This is where he's talking about White nationalists. However, it's
easy to see that we don't fall into the description of "fearful, confused, left-behinds."
We oppose the manipulation and commodification of our women, we oppose the open borders that
are taking away our sovereignty and turning the country over to a global mass of invaders
from every far flung corner of the world; we see ourselves as a racial family, which we have
been for tens of thousands of years, and which the Jew is working overtime to break up.
Just as the epidemic of divorce emanates from Jewish feminism, the next step of tikkun
olam is the breakup of the White racial family. They may not be religious, but
they see conspiracies everywhere, and if the secular terrorist, Timothy McVeigh, and the
religiously motivated suicide pilots of September have anything in common, it was their
need to destroy symbols of American power and authority.
An Egyptian scholar, Saad Ibrihim, once said that the profile of a typical Islamic
fundamentalist would be "young, at least partially educated, a high achiever, lower middle
class, from a small rural town, rural background but now lost in a big city.
Sounds like the cream of the crop of any society - hungry, upwardly
mobile, and moral. The kind of people who prevent a nation from descending into sloth and
degeneracy. They may graduate from universities but they are often shocked and
dazzled by city life. They are not rewarded. They do not get what they perceive to be their
fair share. They are repelled by corruption and lasciviousness." A
few sentences ago, the writer describes the best people of a nation. Then he infantilizes
them for their natural and healthy responses to social degeneracy and toadying to the
And who is responsible for their misfortune? Those in power in their individual countries,
often. But who has corrupted their leaders? What is the font of everything they half envy
and half fear? The United States of America, or so they believe.
"half envy and half fear?" Don't flatter yourself, Mr. Greenway. When you see a teenage
junkie prostituting herself on a street corner, do you "half envy and half fear"
As much as we may object to keeping girls out of school, neither this nor being forced to
wear beards, nor banning television, for which President Bush scolded the Taliban, is a
casus belli. Oy vey, the Taliban has a telly-ban! This is
very instructive. Televisions are far more destructive than bombs, and the Talibs know
it. South Africa was a racially healthy society in 1977, when television was legalized at
the prompting of Jew Oppenheimer. A mere seventeen years later, in 1994, South Africans
voted the country into the hands of the Communist niggers, and now they are getting raped,
robbed, tortured, driven off their farms, and murdered. Harboring terrorists is.
And now that bombs are falling, we should make it clear that our target is terrorism, not
customs and values we do not share. The 1.5 billion Muslims on the
street don't see it that way. Just today on NPR there were man-on-the-street interviews
with Muslims in Jordan, Egypt, and Great Britain, and there was a clear consensus -- the
war on Afghanistan is a war on Islam itself. Rapid change can be destabilizing.
This begs the question -- is the rapid change Greenway advocates even
desirable? We saw what it did to our White nations, and the verdict is that the sort of
change Greenway has in mind is destructive and serves only Jewish power. We should
not make the same mistake as the shah and the communists in trying, in Rudyard Kipling's
words, to "hustle the East." They aren¼t hustled as easily as the
naÔve and trusting Aryan peoples.
H.D.S. Greenway's column appears regularly in the Globe.
This story ran on page A15 of the Boston Globe on 10/8/2001.