Wednesday, March 11, 2020

The Revived Roman Empire: Iron And Clay Mixture - Awaiting Arrival Of The '10 Kings'

 41 Just as you saw that the feet and toes were partly of baked clay and partly of iron, so this will be a divided kingdom; yet it will have some of the strength of iron in it, even as you saw iron mixed with clay. 42 As the toes were partly iron and partly clay, so this kingdom will be partly strong and partly brittle. 43 And just as you saw the iron mixed with baked clay, so the people will be a mixture and will not remain united, any more than iron mixes with clay.
(Daniel 2)

24 The ten horns are ten kings who will come from this kingdom. After them another king will arise, different from the earlier ones; he will subdue three kings. 25 He will speak against the Most High and oppress his holy people and try to change the set times and the laws. The holy people will be delivered into his hands for a time, times and half a time.[b]
(Daniel 7)

12 “The ten horns you saw are ten kings who have not yet received a kingdom, but who for one hour will receive authority as kings along with the beast. 13 They have one purpose and will give their power and authority to the beast. 14 They will wage war against the Lamb, but the Lamb will triumph over them because he is Lord of lords and King of kings—and with him will be his called, chosen and faithful followers.”
(Revelation 17)

Is This How Europe Ends?

“Fortress Europe is an illusion.”
So declares the Financial Times in the closing line of its Saturday editorial: “Europe Cannot Ignore Syrian Migrant Crisis.”
The FT undertakes to instruct the Old Continent on what its duty is and what its future holds:

“The EU will face flows of migrants and asylum seekers across the Mediterranean for decades to come.”
Can Europe not repel this unwanted home invasion from the Global South?

It is “delusional” to think so, says the FT. Europe must be realistic and set about “providing legal routes for migrants and asylum seekers.”

What occasioned the editorial was Greece’s rough resistance to Turkish President Erdogan’s funneling of thousands of Syrian refugees, who had fled into Turkey, right up to the border with Greece.
Erdogan is threatening to inundate southeastern Europe with Syrian refugees to extract more money from the EU in return for keeping the 3.5 million Syrians already in Turkey away from EU frontiers.
Another Erdogan objective is to coerce Europe into backing his military intervention in Syria to prevent President Bashar Assad from capturing all of Idlib province and emerging victorious in his civil war.
In the human rights hellhole that is Syria today, we may see the dimensions of the disaster wrought when Wilsonian crusaders set out to depose the dictator Assad and make Syria safe for democracy.

When the Arab Spring erupted and protesters arose to oust Assad, the U.S., Turkey and the Gulf Arabs aided and equipped Syrian rebels willing to take up arms. The “good rebels,” however, were routed and elements of al-Qaida soon assumed dominance of the resistance.
Facing defeat, Syria’s president put out a call to his allies — Russia, Iran, Hezbollah — to save his regime. They responded, and Assad, over four years, recaptured all of Syria west of the Euphrates, save Idlib.
There, the latest fighting has pushed 900,000 more refugees to Turkey’s southern border.
The 21st-century interventions and wars of the West in the Islamic world have not gone well.

George W. Bush was goaded into invading Iraq. Barack Obama was persuaded to overthrow Colonel Moammar Gadhafi in Libya and the Assad regime in Damascus. Obama ordered U.S. forces to assist Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman in his war to crush Houthi rebels who had ousted Riyadh’s resident puppet in Yemen.
And what has the West reaped from our Mideast wars?
In Syria and Yemen, we have helped to create two of the world’s greatest human rights disasters.
In Libya, we have a new civil war.

In Iraq, we now battle Iran for influence inside a nation we “liberated” in 2003
In Afghanistan, we have concluded a deal with our enemy of two decades, the Taliban, that will enable us to pull our 12,000 troops out of the country in 14 months and let our Afghan allies work it out, or fight it out, with the Taliban. America is washing its hands of its longest war.
In five wars over 20 years, we lost 7,000 soldiers with some 40,000 wounded. We plunged the wealth of an empire into these wars.

And what did these wars produce for the peoples we went to aid and uplift, besides hundreds of thousands of dead Afghans and Arabs and millions of people uprooted from their homes and driven into exile?
Now, Europe is being admonished by the FT that, having done its duty by plunging into the Mideast, the continent has a new moral duty to take in the refugees the wars created, for decades to come.
But if the EU opens its doors to an endless stream of Africans and Arabs, where is the evidence that European nations will accept and assimilate them?
Will these migrants and asylum seekers become good Europeans? Or will they create in the great cities of Europe enclaves that replicate the conditions in the African and Middle East countries whence they came?
The history of the last half millennium tells the story of the rise and fall of a civilization.
In the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries, Spain, Britain, France and Portugal, and then Belgium, Italy, Germany and America, all believing in the superiority of their civilization, went out into the world to create empires to uplift and rule what Rudyard Kipling derisively called “the lesser breeds without the law.”
After two world wars, the rulers of these empires embraced a liberalism that now proclaimed the equality of all peoples, races, creeds, cultures and civilizations. This egalitarian ideology mandated the dismantling of empires and colonies as the reactionary relics of a benighted time.
Now the peoples of the new nations, dissatisfied with what their liberated lands and rulers have produced, have decided to come to Europe to enjoy in the West what they cannot replicate at home. And liberalism, the ideology of Western suicide, dictates to Europe that it take them in — for decades to come.
The colonizers of yesterday are becoming the colonized of tomorrow. Is this how the West ends?

Europe Under Siege

Barbarians are storming the gates, but Europeans still won’t pull in the welcome mat.

In recent days, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, president of the Ottoman Empire’s successor state, Turkey, has unleashed thousands of Muslims, mostly young males of military age, upon the European Union, today’s not-so-holy but increasingly imperial reincarnation of the Holy Roman Empire. More specifically, Erdogan, in violation of an agreement with the EU that netted him billions, has allowed – and encouraged – these people, who have been routinely described in the Western media as “refugees” and “migrants,” to storm the border separating his country from the EU’s southeasternmost satrapy, Greece. Indeed, he’s lent them active support, providing many of them with free transport to the border, which they’ve attacked with rocks, “makeshift battering rams,” and tear-gas canisters (supplied by Ergodan) while setting fires and shouting “Allahu akbar!” Photostaken at the border underscore just how perverse it is to call these thugs “refugees” or “migrants.”  

Seems like old times. What’s different this time around is that whereas seventeenth-century Europeans understood that they were confronting, in the Islamic invaders of their day, an existential threat to their way of life, many of their descendants don’t seem to have a clue about what they’re dealing with. On Tuesday of last week, and again on Saturday, thousands of Germans, rallying in Berlin and other cities, demanded that the “migrants” on the Greek borders be allowed to pour into the continent and to find their way to Germany, if they wish, so that they can help form “a solidarity society” in which there will be “no more suffering.”

The youth division (CUF) of the Swedish Center Party sent out a similar message, calling on Europeans to “Open your hearts – and your borders” and let the hustling hordes “come here and become part of our society.” In the Swedish cities of Gothenburg (last Wednesday) and Stockholm (Friday), crowds gathered in support of open borders; the latter demo was organized by the group Feminist Initiative, which, in a show of goodwill, has apparently decided to overlook the tendency of Muslim male arrivals to treat their own wives like chattel and treat Swedish women like sex dolls.

It was only five years ago that German chancellor Angela Merkel made the fateful decision to allow into her country tens of thousands of Muslims who were said to be Syrian refugees. Then as now, the Western world’s mainstream media distributed images of suffering women and children (not a few of which were staged). Ultimately, it turned out that the overwhelming majority of the “migrants” were not Syrian families fleeing war but, yes, young males of military age from all over the Muslim world. Nonetheless Merkel’s action was applauded by many of her country’s citizens, who, desperate as ever to prove that they aren’t Nazis, gathered at railroad stations to welcome these aspiring malefactors and welfare recipients with hugs and kisses.

One consequence of Merkel’s irresponsible move was that upwards of a thousand German women were sexually assaulted by their colorful and exotic new countrymen while celebrating New Year’s Eve 2015-16 in the central squares of Cologne and several other major cities. That was a particularly tough night, but hardly a brand-new phenomenon in a continent where the last few decades of Muslim immigration have led to an ever-rising incidence of violent crimes and to drastic funding cuts in everything from education to health care in order to feed, clothe, and house the restive, and not especially appreciative, denizens of ever-expanding sharia enclaves.

A few questions. If the governments of Europe are obliged “to take responsibility for” foreigners – most of whom, frankly, are healthy-looking young males  – what responsibility do those governments have to their own citizens – among them the elderly, the infirm, the women who are already scared to walk the streets at night, and the girls who are the same age as Britain’s grooming-gang victims? If the Muslims at the Greek border have a “right to seek asylum,” exactly what rights do the taxpayers of Europe have? Do they deserve the “compassion” to which HRW refers? Why should the “dignity and humanity” of Muslims from other continents trump the “dignity and humanity” of native Europeans? At what point in this decades-long Islamic tsunami will it be acceptable for the people of Europe to say “enough” without being called bigots?  


No comments: