http://globalpolitician.com/articledes.asp?ID=2769
<http://globalpolitician.com/articledes.asp?ID=2769&cid=1&sid=19>
&cid=1&sid=19

Hollywoodistan v Real Life: Should We Fear Islam Or Islamophobia?
Fjordman - 5/9/2007 
I have heard some people say that Western popular culture will destroy
Islam. That is possible, but we need to remember that this is not a one-way
street. What if the opposite happens? Sometimes the barbarians also
influence the civilized people, and there is a disturbing amount of
“understanding” for terrorists in Western movies and media these days.
Creeps come crawling out of the woodwork, more or less cheering for the
terrorists who are trying to bring society down. There are probably always
people who are drawn to blood and mayhem. They would like to destroy the
current political order, but aren’t capable of doing it themselves, so they
end up as cheerleaders for those who are attempting to do so. Let’s call
them “terrorist groupies.” I’m not just talking about the Oscar-nominated
suicide bomber film Paradise Now. There are others examples of this
mentality.

“V for Vendetta” is a recent movie made by the Wachowski brothers, the men
behind the modern sci-fi classic “The Matrix.” It is set in Britain about a
generation from now. The USA has dissolved into chaos and civil war after
its involvement in a prolonged war in the Middle East. Great Britain has
become a Fascist state. The protagonist, a “freedom fighter” named V, wants
to ignite a revolution and brags about how blowing up a building can change
the whole world. He is wearing a Guy Fawkes mask to conceal his identity,
and proclaims that he wants to finish at November 5th what Fawkes tried to
do in the so-called Gunpowder Plot in 1605: Blowing up Parliament. He gets
an accomplice in this task, a young girl named Evey, played by Israeli-born
actress Natalie Portman. Portman cites a popular British rhyme that is often
quoted on Guy Fawkes Night: ”Remember, remember, the 5th of November The
Gunpowder Treason and plot; I know of no reason why Gunpowder Treason Should
ever be forgot.”

During the movie, we see a gay man keeping a 14th century Koran in a secret
room in his house, because he enjoys “the beautiful poetry and imagery” in
it. He is later executed when the authorities discover this, as the Koran is
now banned and Muslims are oppressed. What beautiful imagery we are never
told. “And slay them wherever ye catch them”? “I will instill terror into
the hearts of the unbelievers: smite ye above their necks and smite all
their finger-tips off them”? At the same time, the Church is shown to be a
place of filth, corruption and hypocrisy. Islam is good and “misunderstood,”
Christianity is bad and oppressive. In the final scene of “V for Vendetta,”
the British Parliament is blown up, with hundreds of thousands of people in
Guy Fawkes masks watching and Tchaikovsky’s “1812 Overture” blasting from
loudspeakers, fireworks crackling and Natalie Portman smiling.



*       In Hollywoodistan, gays admire the beauty of the Koran. In real
life, gays are physically attacked in increasing numbers by Muslims in
Europe, and death squads are targeting gays in Islamic countries such as
Iraq.



*       In real life, a gay man, Pim Fortuyn, was de facto executed for
criticizing Islam, after having been demonized by Dutch media and the Dutch
establishment for “Islamophobia” and “hate speech”. 



*       In Hollywoodistan, the Koran has been banned on pain of death in
Britain.



*       In real life, British PM Tony Blair has called Islam “progressive”
and praised the Koran for being “practical and way ahead of its time in
attitudes to marriage, women and governance.” 



*       In Hollywoodistan, Muslims in London are ruthlessly persecuted.



*       In real life, London has become the Islamic terrorist capital of the
entire world, as demonstrated by writer Melanie Phillips in her book
“Londonistan.” 



*       In Hollywoodistan, native Fascists kill British civilians to spread
fear and terror and soften them for their goal of overthrowing democracy. 



*       In real life, the only Fascists trying to do this are Muslims,
following the example of their prophet Muhammad who bragged about how he had
been “made victorious by terror.”

After the Jihadist terror bombings in London in July 2005, not a single
Muslim cleric has been expelled from Britain. Historian David Starkey warned
that Britain was in danger of sleepwalking into a new era of religious
intolerance, as in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. What today might
be described as thought crimes, such as expressing any sympathy for suicide
bombers, would in previous eras have been termed heresy, he said. The right
response to the bombings was that Britain should become more tolerant
towards Islam. A Chester professor, Ron Geaves, has stated that the attacks
that killed 52 people were not the acts of terrorists but “just an extreme
Muslim demonstration” and that “the word terrorism is a political word which
always seems to be used to demonise people.” Muslim immigration continues
unabated, and open hatred towards the West continues to be preached in
mosques. The BBC is busy as always in campaigning against “Islamophobia” and
reminding everybody that Islam is rich in diversity and that Western
civilization would have been impossible without huge Islamic contributions,
which we should be eternally grateful for.

For an outsider, it is sad to see the nation that once faced down Hitler and
Napoleon slowly succumb to these barbarians. It is good that smaller nations
such as Denmark and maybe the Netherlands are at least starting to confront
the Islamic threat, but this isn’t enough. For the sake of Europe, we need
some of the larger countries to do the same thing. France is sinking into a
quagmire of problems of her own, and has been leading the creation of
Eurabia in the first place. Maybe the Germans could do the job, but they are
still restrained by their guilt complex from WW2. We need the British on
board, and so far, there are few signs of this happening. Will Britannia
forever be enslaved, or will she rise to the occasion as she has done in the
past?

Luckily, even though Hollywood won’t tell the truth, there are still a few
people who will. Mullah Krekar, an Al Qaeda-linked Islamic leader who was
granted refugee status in Norway told an Oslo newspaper that there’s a war
going on between the West and Islam. He said he’s sure that Islam will win.
Muslims could indeed win this, if they could just sit tight, remain quiet
and continue the demographic Jihad. But too many of them behave so, well,
Islamic, boast and brag about their plans. Listening to Mullah Krekar
talking is like watching one of those old James Bond movies, where the
villain just has to tell Bond everything about his evil plans, just in time
so that 007 can prevent it. “I’m so smart and evil, you can’t stop me,
bwuahahaha!” Then again, given the state of things in Al-Britannia these
days, James Bond would probably have been working for the other team.
“There’s a nasty case of Islamophobia going on at the Telegraph newspaper
today. Take care of it, will you, 007. How do you want your Koran, Mr.
Bond?” “Shaken, not stirred.”

In another movie, “Good Night, and Good Luck,” directed by star actor George
Clooney, CBS reporter Edward R. Murrow is shown standing up against Senator
Joseph Raymond McCarthy during his intense anti-Communist movement in the
1950s. I assume Clooney’s motivation for making this movie now is
insinuating that the ongoing War on Terror is “just like” the paranoia of
the 50s. First of all: Although there is no doubt that Senator McCarthy went
too far and destroyed the lives of many innocent people, the Communist
threat to the USA and the West was in fact very real during the Cold War.
And second of all: Whoever decided that a new “political witch hunt”
necessarily has to come from the Right? 

“McCarthyism” is sometimes defined as “the use of unfair investigatory or
accusatory methods in order to suppress opposition.” Some would claim that
this describes very well how critics of Muslim immigration in the West have
been demonized during the previous generation, especially by Leftists. Carl
I. Hagen, leader of the right-wing Progress Party, was for several decades
virtually the only Norwegian politician of some stature that warned against
the madness of the current immigration policies. And he was hated for it by
the establishment, denounced as a racist pig, Nazi and subject to every
insult in the dictionary. During the 1990s, when there were still many
people who took the “Oslo Peace Process” seriously, he went in
demonstrations in support of Israel and with the slogan “No money for
Arafat.” The public now understands that he was right, which is why his
party has grown from being a tiny protest party to being at the brink of
replacing the Labor Party as the largest political party in Norway, for the
first time in 80 years. Why doesn’t Mr. Clooney or other Hollywood
personalities make a movie about Carl I. Hagen, Pia Kjærsgaard of the Danish
People’s Party, Pim Fortuyn, Theo van Gogh and Geert Wilders in the
Netherlands or others that have been warning against the madness of Muslim
immigration? They are the real victims of the “new McCarthyism.”

Glorification of anti-democratic fanatics has penetrated Western popular
culture in other ways than movies. Che Guevara’s face is cropping up
everywhere, from posters to t-shirts. Che is famous for helping Fidel Castro
shape the Cuban revolution. Later, he was in charge of La Cabana prison,
where he oversaw a military tribunal which condemned scores of
counterrevolutionaries to death without trial. “Hatred,” he said, is
important. It makes you, he reflected, “into an effective, violent,
selective and cold-blooded killing machine.” He helped set up a police state
in Cuba, and negotiated the stationing of Soviet nuclear weapons on Cuba in
1962. He later became furious when Moscow removed them following the Cuba
Crisis. “If the rockets had remained, we would have used them all...” He
spoke of “unimaginable destructiveness to defend a principle.” Yet this
murderer and symbol of an ideology that killed 100 million people during the
20th century is treated as a pop icon in the democratic West. 

Michel Foucault is one of the best known and most widely read philosophers
of our time, familiar to hundreds of thousands of Western University
students. During and after the 1978-79 revolution, Foucault visited Iran
twice and also met with Khomeini in Paris. Much of Foucault’s work is
grounded in the problems of modernity in Europe. Thus he became fascinated
with the Iranian revolution because it “challenged the Western model of
progress.” He wasn’t the only Western intellectual who was seduced by the
“revolutionary energy” displayed in Iran. The age of marriage for girls was
reduced to 9 years, tens of thousands of political opponents were arrested,
tortured and killed, young women were raped in prisons as a matter of
routine to prevent them from entering Paradise as virgins, and barbaric,
medieval laws were re-enacted for tens of millions of people. Apparently,
for some Western intellectuals, anything is excusable as long as you are
anti-Western and have a “revolutionary cause.”

Phyllis Chesler writes about the Culture War in academia, where both Western
leftists and Islamists employ a systematic misuse of language, writing about
“insurgents,” not “terrorists,” whom they describe as “martyrs,” not
“killers, and as “freedom fighters,” not as “well educated evil men.”
Meanwhile, hateful anti-American and anti-Israel demonstrators are described
as “peace activists. She believes that Western academy has been “utterly
Palestinianized.” Our Islamist opponents have turned out this propaganda
non-stop around the world. As propagandists, they are “far more
sophisticated than Goebbels, and far more patient.”
Yale University in the US admitted a former Taliban spokesman, Rahmatullah
Hashemi, as student. He was the chief translator for Mullah Omar in
Afghanistan. Female Afghan parliamentarian Malalai Joya said Hashemi was one
of the Taliban’s top propagandists and called his status as a student at
Yale “disgusting” and an “unforgivable insult.” Yet people at Yale fired
back and said it was the critics of Yale and Rahmatullah Hashemi who were
the real Taliban, and that excluding him would “ takes us one step closer
into the Taliban-like suppression of views that challenge the party line.” 

Robert Fisk is a veteran British foreign correspondent. During a visit to
Australia, Fisk said: “I see this immense world of injustice . . . and I
must say given our constant interference in the Middle East, I’m amazed that
Muslims have been so restrained.” In fact, so “restrained” are they that
Fisk wasn’t sure how much they can be blamed even for the terror attacks of
9/11. He often spoke in the US, he said, and “more and more people in the
audience believe the American administration had some kind of involvement”.
“ …the worst I can envisage is that they know something was coming and they
preferred it to happen so that their strategy could be put into place.”

Ironically, it seems as if some of the chief defenders of democracy and
Western civilization now are immigrants. Britain’s first black Archbishop
made a powerful attack on multiculturalism, urging English people to reclaim
their national identity. The Ugandan-born Archbishop of York, Dr John
Sentamu, said “that too many people were embarrassed about being English.”
“Multiculturalism has seemed to imply, wrongly for me, let other cultures be
allowed to express themselves but do not let the majority culture at all
tell us its glories, its struggles, its joys, its pains,” he said. He said
that the failure of England to rediscover its culture afresh would lead only
to greater political extremism. “What is it to be English? It is a very
serious question,” he said. “When you ask a lot of people in this country,
‘What is English culture?’, they are very vague. It is a culture that
whether we like it or not has given us parliamentary democracy. It is the
mother of it.” 

Writing about the Muhammad cartoons controversy, author Ibn Warraq quoted
the great British philosopher John Stuart Mill wrote in On Liberty, “Strange
it is, that men should admit the validity of the arguments for free
discussion, but object to their being ‘pushed to an extreme’; not seeing
that unless the reasons are good for an extreme case, they are not good for
any case.”

“The west is the source of the liberating ideas of individual liberty,
political democracy, the rule of law, human rights and cultural freedom. It
is the west that has raised the status of women, fought against slavery,
defended freedom of enquiry, expression and conscience,” Ibn Warraq stated.
“How can we expect immigrants to integrate into western society when they
are at the same time being taught that the west is decadent, a den of
iniquity, the source of all evil, racist, imperialist and to be despised?
Why should they, in the words of the African-American writer James Baldwin,
want to integrate into a sinking ship?”

These are encouraging words, but they cannot conceal the fact that there is
a very powerful undercurrent of self-loathing and guilt-obsession in the
West at the beginning of the 21st century. Where does it come from?

Lars Hedegaard, writer and columnist for newspaper Berlingske Tidende, has,
together with colleagues Helle Merete Brix and Torben Hansen, been one of
the leading forces behind making tiny Denmark into a frontline country in
the battle against Islam. In his book 'While Europe Slept: How Radical Islam
is Destroying the West from Within,' Bruce Bawer gives an account of a
meeting with Hedegaard and Brix in Copenhagen: 'Hedegaard was of the view,
however, that the Danish establishment’s benign neglect of Islamic extremism
must have deeper causes than snobbism or hippie nostalgia.' After all, he
said, the Islamicization of the Nordic countries was 'the most fundamental
transformation' they’d experienced in a millennium. Something so monumental,
in his opinion, could not be explained simply by a few people’s foolishness
or class snobbery. 'Heavy consequences,' he insisted, 'must have heavy
causes.' The surrender of Denmark to Muslims had to be the result of some
deep-seated compulsion. (…..) His theory was that Western Europe’s ongoing
surrender to radical Islam had its roots in the psychic devastation of the
First World War. For while that conflict marked America’s ascent to the rank
of Great Power, Europeans took it as a devastating proof, Hedegaard said,
'the our culture was worthless. It was basically destroyed. And that
prepared the way for two sorts of totalitarianism' — Nazism and Communism —
and for 'atrocities of a magnitude that is hard to imagine.' Those
atrocities, in turn, placed upon Europeans an unbearable burden of guilt.
The Nazis, he said, “made Europe think it is doomed and sinful...and
deserves what it has coming.”

Lars Hedegaard’s view seems to mirror that of French philosopher and
cultural critic Alain Finkielkraut, who thinks that “Europe does not love
itself.” Finkielkraut says that it’s not forces from outside that are
threatening Europe as much as the voluntary renunciation of European
identity, its wish of freeing itself from itself, its own history and its
traditions, only replaced by human rights. The European Union thus isn’t
just post-national, but post-European. What characterizes Europe today is
the will to define itself, not from an ideology, but by dismissing any sense
of identity. Europe is now built upon an oath: Never again. Never again
extermination, never again war, but also never again nationalism. Europe
prides itself in being nothing. According to Finkielkraut, Auschwitz has
become part of the foundation of the EU, a culture based on guilt. But this
is a vague ideology saying that “We have to oppose everything the Nazis were
for.” Consequently, nationalism or any kind of attachment to your own
country, including what some would say is healthy, non-aggressive
patriotism, is frowned upon. To remember is to regret. Europe rejects its
past. “European identity” is the de-identification of Europe. Of the past,
we are only to remember crimes. This didn’t just happen in Germany, but in
all of Europe. “I can understand the feeling of remorse that is leading
Europe to this definition, but this remorse goes too far. It is too great a
gift to present Hitler to reject everything that led to him.” This is said
by the Jewish son of an Auschwitz prisoner.

Finkielkraut says that Europe has made human rights its gospel, to such an
extent that it threatens European history and culture. This creates a Europe
without substance. “When hatred of culture becomes itself a part of culture,
the life of the mind loses all meaning.” Finkielkraut reminds us that the
multiculturalists’ demand for “diversity” requires the eclipse of the
individual in favor of the group. The abdication of reason demanded by
multiculturalism has been the result of the subjection of culture to
anthropology. “Under the equalizing eye of social science,” he writes,
hierarchies are abolished. The disintegration of faith in reason and common
humanity leads not only to a destruction of standards, but also involves a
crisis of courage. “A careless indifference to grand causes,” Finkielkraut
warns, “has its counterpart in abdication in the face of force,” and weakens
the commitment required to preserve freedom. 

What, in fact, is replacing assimilation? Anyone who doesn’t want to
assimilate, French culture assimilates into his identity. Children aren’t
speaking French, but rather a jargon composed of Arabic words and meager
French. “There is always a culture that emerges victorious. In no society is
there a vacuum.” Another thinker, Pascal Bruckner, agrees that Europe has
made repentance for old sins, perceived or real, the central point of its
identity, and something close to an obsession. And this is unhealthy,
according to him. “If somebody hits you, you will think: This is for
something I have done.” “Never again” and the belief that dialogue will take
care of all problems are the guiding principles. We are filled with regret,
but cannot fill Europe with anything positive.

This idea that Auschwitz has defined the modern identity of Europe is
reflected by Spanish journalist Sebastian Villar Rodriguez in his piece
“Europe died in Auschwitz":



  _____  



I was walking along Raval (Barcelona) when all of a sudden I understood that
Europe died with Auschwitz.

We assassinated 6 million Jews in order to end up bringing in 20 million
Muslims!

We burnt in Auschwitz the culture, intelligence and power to create.(...)
Because it is the people who gave to humanity the symbolic figures who were
capable of changing history (Christ, Marx, Einstein, Freud...) and who is
the origin of progress and wellbeing.

We must admit that Europe, by relaxing its borders (…) opened its doors to
20 million Muslims, often illiterates and fanatics(…), the poorest of the
nations and of the ghettos, and who are preparing the worst, such as the
9/11 and the Madrid bombing and who are lodged in apartment blocs provided
by the social welfare.

We also have exchanged culture with fanaticism, the capacity to create with
the will to destroy, the wisdom with the superstition. We have exchanged the
transcendental instinct of the Jews, who even under the worst possible
conditions have always looked for a better peaceful world, for the suicide
bomber. We have exchanged the pride of life for the fanatic obsession of
death. Our death and that of our children.


  _____  



But why does this guilt complex also apply to Britain, which defeated the
Nazis, or Denmark, which saved most of its Jews? Why do we detect some of
the same currents even in the United States? And why on earth can’t
Europeans give stronger support to the survivors of the Holocaust in Israel?

Yes, we have been sold out by our elites through the creation of Eurabia and
the wiping out of our own cultures through Multiculturalism. But this is
only half of the story. In democratic societies, even if sometimes flawed
ones, this would never have been possible if there wasn’t a profound
undercurrent of self-loathing present in the general public already. The
trauma caused by the events of 70 years ago is clouding our judgment this
time, since any talk at all about the threat posed by Muslim immigration or
about preserving our own culture is being dismissed as “the same rhetoric as
the Nazis used against the Jews.” Europeans have been taught to be so scared
of our own shadow that we are incapable of seeing that darkness can come
from the outside, too. Maybe Europe will burn again, in part as a belated
reaction to the horrors of Auschwitz. 

V.S. Naipaul has called India “a wounded civilization.” But maybe it’s
really Europe that is the wounded civilization, the difference being that
India’s wounds were inflicted from the outside, whereas Europe’s wounds are
largely self-inflicted. Islam isn’t destroying Europe, Europe is destroying
itself. Just as a patient with AIDS may formally die from flu or even a
common cold, the real cause is the long, slow decay of his immune system. It
resembles euthanasia on an entire civilization: Europe is tired of living.
Islam just puts it out of its misery.

It is almost fascinating to see how self-loathing and West-bashing make
scores of people in the media and the academia misunderstand and
misrepresent the threat we are facing. The good guys become the bad guys and
vice versa, or alternatively, we’re all equally good and bad, since all
cultures are equal. Some would say that I am reading too much into a few
simple movies. Perhaps. But these are the same people that claim that
popular culture will destroy Islam. 

Pop culture matters. It both reflects and shapes the values of a
civilization. Judging from the message in too many films, almost five years
after 9/11 we have hardly even begun to understand the scale of the Islamic
challenge. On the contrary, many Westerners are busy demonstrating
“understanding,” even sympathy, towards the enemies of civilization.

Britain in “V for Vendetta” is a totalitarian state where the authorities
promise peace in return for total submission. Peace for submission, where
have we heard this mantra before? I know: Islam. “Islam” means submission,
and comes from the same root as “salaam,” which means “peace”. It is curious
to notice that in the previous movie by the Wachowski brothers, “The
Matrix,” people are turned into slaves and passive tools by living in a
make-belief reality designed to pacify them and keep them in chains. In the
real world, one fifth of humanity are proud to proclaim themselves “the
slaves of Allah,” and consider it their mission in life to make the rest of
mankind share their mental bondage.

Islam is the Matrix. Somebody better give the Wachowski brothers their red
pills. 

Fjordman is a noted blogger who wrote for the
<http://fjordman.blogspot.com/> Fjordman Blog in the past. He has also been
published on many other websites, including
<http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/> Gates of Vienna, which is the
publication where this article originally appeared.     

 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



--------------------------
Want to discuss this topic?  Head on over to our discussion list, [EMAIL 
PROTECTED]
--------------------------
Brooks Isoldi, editor
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

http://www.intellnet.org

  Post message: osint@yahoogroups.com
  Subscribe:    [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]


*** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material whose use has 
not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. OSINT, as a part of 
The Intelligence Network, is making it available without profit to OSINT 
YahooGroups members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the 
included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of 
intelligence and law enforcement organizations, their activities, methods, 
techniques, human rights, civil liberties, social justice and other 
intelligence related issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes 
only. We believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material 
as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use 
this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' 
you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

Reply via email to