In 2005, a clandestine blogger named “Fjordman” began contributing articles to LGF. For obvious reasons, he preferred anonymity due to his fact-based subject matter as an anti-jihadist, with first-hand knowledge of European politics. In other words, he was a very credible source, and regularly posted threads on Gates of Vienna and elsewhere. Check out his credentials via Wikipedia.

Recently it was brought to our attention that Charles Johnson has been messing with many of Fjordman’s posts, deleting them and reposting them for unknown reasons. Fjordman generally disagreed with Charles’ portrayal of the EDL, and Vlaams Belang in particular, as far-right wing racist organizations with ties to neonazis. While Fjordman never denied that there were some undesirables who attached themselves to the counter-jihad movement, he stated that they were relatively few in number, were ineffectual, and were not welcomed within those groups.

Fjordman eventually tired of arguing fact vs. opinion, and in late 2007 decided to take a break from posting at LGF.  Shortly thereafter he was banned in absentia.

There’s more to the story. Here’s Fjordman’s own response to his banning entitled, “My Farewell to Little Green Footballs” from 14 November 2007, presented in its entirety below the break.

[Update: It appears that the LGF links from Fjordman's post have been very recently blocked, and now go to a 404 Not Found screen. Ironically, one of the links was the same thread where Pamela Geller decided to walk.]

[Update 2: The links still work. They didn't in WP  "preview" mode.]

My Farewell to Little Green Footballs

I recently announced my intention to take a long break from posting at the website Little Green Footballs due to the ongoing controversy regarding the participants in the counter-Jihad in Europe. Shortly after, Charles Johnson announced that Fjordman was “taking a permanent break. After the misrepresentations he’s posted about me and my views, despite being corrected many times, he’s not welcome at LGF.” Just out of curiosity, and with no intention of posting anything, I tried to log in to my account at LGF and discovered that it was blocked. I’ve now been officially banned from LGF, after having posted comments there at irregular intervals for several years.

I have a few unofficial rules I try to stick to when I write essays. The first one is that I should cooperate with as many different people as possible, religious or non-religious, right-wingers or left-wingers (yes, a few sensible left-wingers do exist, even if you have to dig for them) provided I think they have a sensible approach and contribute to combating the global Jihad. The other one is that since I write under the pseudonym Fjordman and not my real name, I try as much as possible to refrain from criticizing those who make significant contributions while using their real names. I will have to deviate somewhat from these rules here because, frankly, I feel that I don’t have much of a choice in this particular case. I cannot pretend that what has happened during the last few weeks didn’t happen, and I have to write some kind of response since the rift between me and LGF now has become permanent. So here goes.

Whenever a previously good relationship breaks down, it can be difficult to remember why it used to be good in the first place. I initially signed up to Little Green Footballs because it was, and still is, one of the best sites on the web to dig up news about the global Jihad. Charles Johnson has done an excellent job at this, and many people have gained more insight from stories posted at his website. One should give credit where credit is due. Johnson has also linked to some of my essays in the past, and I have no doubt gained readers via the network connected to LGF, for which I am grateful. Although the comments section there can be a noisy place and frequently more entertaining than actually enlightening, there are a number of individual posters there that I still respect. So far so good. Now comes the bad part.

I am deeply disappointed by how Charles Johnson has handled this situation. It was dishonest when he presented the Vlaams Belang in Belgium as refusing to denounce the Holocaust. The truth is that the European Union is directly responsible for much of the resurgence of anti-Semitism in Europe, both by importing Muslims and by appeasing Jihad at home and abroad. The EU hardly cares about live Jews, certainly not about dead ones. The Holocaust is shamelessly exploited as an excuse for creating an artificial superstate and above all for imposing restrictions on free speech for everybody who wants to oppose this project. That’s what the VB objected to in this case.

Believing what the Eurabian establishment says is like taking the Chinese Communist Party at face value when they denounce political dissidents in China. In fact, it’s worse. Even the CCP doesn’t import millions of Muslims who attack the native population. The European Union does, in a coordinated attempt to destroy the national cultures from Italy via Belgium to Britain. The EU’s policy of deliberately Islamizing the European continent represents one of the greatest betrayals in the history of Western civilization. There is no other continent on the planet today where the indigenous peoples are being systematically deprived of their heritage, displaced in their own cities and subject to violence and abuse with the active involvement of their own authorities, yet where this is celebrated as a good thing in the media.

Members of the Vlaams Belang were harassed by the police on behalf of the Eurabian establishment during a peaceful demonstration against the Islamization of Europe in Brussels on September 11th this year. If I recall correctly – and I will correct this if I don’t – LGF did not link to this incident, despite the fact that most other anti-Jihad websites deemed it to be important. Why not? Has Charles Johnson held antipathies against the VB for some time?

---

James Lewis speculates whether Eurabian authorities are planting disinformation in this case: “I would guess that Paul Belien and the writers for Brussels Journal are really decent people. They are constantly smeared by the Belgian Left, which is practically a proof of their personal probity. But they have some unfinished business.” He also states that the “Vlaams Belang should clean up its public image, and explicitly denounce suspicious characters. The political benefits of doing that are clear. It is also the right and proper thing to do.”

Splitting Belgium, the ideological and geographical heart of the EU, is the policy of the Vlaams Belang. This would contribute significantly to undermining the EU and, by extension, Eurabia. However, out of all the information published by LGF, a lot of which is nonsense or outdated or both, the one piece of information that I disliked the most was VB’s connection to Jean-Marie Le Pen from the FN in France through the Identity, Tradition, Sovereignty group at the European Parliament. I don’t like Le Pen at all and consider it to be poor judgment by the VB to have even a formal link to that party. They should seriously consider cutting that link in the future. It’s not helpful.

That being said, I’m not impressed by the lopsided coverage Little Green Footballs has displayed regarding the political situation on my continent. LGF linked to a post by the blog Islam in Europe which claimed that right-wing extremists and neo-Nazis were not just as dangerous as Muslims, but in fact a greater threat.

I don’t see how anybody can possibly claim this. Non-Muslims in Europe who want to fight against Islamization are up against the cultural, political and media elites in their own countries, as well as the European Union, the Organization of the Islamic Conference, which is the largest voting block at the United Nations, and finally the entire Islamic world backed up by Saudi petrodollars. If you seriously believe that a few scattered and generally disliked groups of neo-Nazis represent a greater threat to freedom than the Alliance of Evil I just described then your understanding is fundamentally out of tune with reality. The only theoretical reason why more people would embrace extreme right-wing groups is if they feel cornered and have nobody else to turn to. That’s exactly what we’re trying to avoid.

The post by Islam in Europe, which was linked to approvingly by LGF, mentioned a brutal attack against peaceful anti-Jihadists in Denmark and referred to them as ‘right-wing extremists.’ I was genuinely appalled by this and wrote a comment protesting against it: “This wasn’t a ‘clash between right wing and left wing extremists,’ it was a brutal, totally unprovoked and in fact near-fatal assault by left-wing thugs on peaceful protesters.”

After receiving a negative comment from one of the regulars at LGF, I stated: “I just pointed out that LGF links approvingly to a post which contains a twisted version of one of the most brutal attacks against anti-Jihadists I have seen in a long time. Frankly, I think it undermines the credibility of this website.” I meant that and I still do. It’s quite significant that Jihad Watch linked to this story whereas LGF refused to do so. I suspect this is because it demonstrated that besides Muslims, the most openly violent groups are currently extreme Leftists who frequently enjoy at least tacit approval for their actions by the political and media elites. Since this would discredit LGF’s campaign against the supposed threat posed by neo-Nazis, Johnson didn’t link to the story.

However, he did link to a story about how Muslims in Britain now claim that the UK is persecuting them and is becoming similar to Nazi Germany. As Johnson commented, “Britain should continue surrendering [to Islam], or risk becoming Nazi Germany. It’s such insanely overblown rhetoric that it’s hard to believe anyone takes it seriously.” I agree, it’s ridiculous. But the fact that even the British, who led the fight against Nazism, can be accused of becoming “Nazis” indicates that the word now is simply used to slime any person of European origins who wants to limit mass immigration. Has Charles Johnson reflected upon that fact, in light of the accusations of Nazi connections he himself is issuing so frequently these days?

Diana West, who has consistently been one of the most sensible American observers of the global Jihad, calls the Vlaams Belang “freedom fighters” and wonders whether some people have got Nazis on their brains, despite the fact that WW2 ended decades ago and the threats to freedom are of a very different nature today.

Bat Ye’or attended this CounterJihad Conference, together with Israeli politician Aryeh Eldad and others. Dr. Andrew G. Bostom held an excellent lecture based on his forthcoming book The Legacy of Islamic Antisemitism. It is frankly absurd to talk about neo-Nazi connections among this philo-Semitic crowd. What I saw were many good, but concerned Europeans, and a few Americans, dedicated to preserving their freedom and heritage against Muslim colonization. I don’t see what’s so “racist” about that, and the label is starting to become rather annoying to Europeans who wonder why they are denied the right to fight for the lands and nations when everybody else is allowed to do so. There is a certain anti-European bias present at LGF sometimes.

After pushing Charles Johnson on the issue of whether it was OK for native Europeans to limit immigration in order to remain a majority in their own lands, he finally replied that yes, we do. That’s great. But then I suppose that Europeans who want to limit the greatest population movements in human history, which are destabilizing the entire continent as we speak, are not “white supremacists.” They are merely exercising their right to self-determination and self-preservation just like everybody else. I am, and will continue to be, a passionate supporter of Israel’s right to exist and to defend its people. I am also a supporter of the right of native Europeans to do the same thing. Why do so many among the LGF crowd think am I a good guy if I do the former and a bad guy if I do the latter?

The blogger Conservative Swede, one of the European attendees at the Counterjihad summit, commented: “Charles needs to block himself off from reality completely, to be able to uphold two contradicting things: his photo of Oriana Fallaci on the sidebar of his blog, while doing all in his power to bring down our conference (a conference so bad to him that he considers it a no-brainer that Oriana wouldn’t have attended, and considers it arrogance off-the-scale to even suggest the idea). Who will tell him about how the memorial fund started by Oriana’s friends handed out the Oriana Award at the conference? To Bat Ye’or?

Regarding the Sweden Democrats, I questioned CJ’s use of the free online encyclopedia Wikipedia as a source. I use Wikipedia, too, but not in cases involving sensitive political matters because I don’t trust its credibility. What LGF has done here is a textbook case of how NOT to use it. Moreover, if Wikipedia “sucks” and is a “tool for moonbat character assassins” when others criticize Charles Johnson, how come it’s suddenly a reliable and credible source when CJ wants to criticize others? Johnson’s response to this criticism, which I consider to be legitimate and relevant, was to state that “I’ve lost all respect for the person posting as ‘Fjordman’.” Fine. He didn’t answer my question, though, probably because he couldn’t.

[emphasis added above.-- Ed.]

Still, Wikipedia is the least of the problems concerning this post. The other source regarding the Sweden Democrats was Expo, a notorious state-sponsored hard-Leftist organization specifically designed to muzzle any real debate about the country’s immigration policies. It has to be one of the least reliable sources in the entire country. It was founded and led by writer Stieg Larsson until his death in 2004, during which time it was sponsored by the Social Democratic government. Larsson was a Communist, rabidly anti-Christian, anti-Israeli and anti-American and met his wife during a support meeting for the National Front for the Liberation of South Vietnam. Moreover, the “racism” Expo has been exposing includes “Islamophobic bloggers,” which means websites similar to LGF.

The translator used for the Swedish Expo material is a poster calling himself (?) Truumax, who seems to think that the SD is a “racist” party. I asked Truumax whether it should be considered “racism” if native Swedes resist being turned into a minority in their own country, which they will become in a few decades if current the level of immigration continues. He said yes, that should “very much to be considered racism.” According to that definition, I suspect most people on the planet are racists. Truumax also claimed that “it was the Ottoman empire that preserved the antique Greek philosophical works,” which indicates that he has absolutely no knowledge of history whatsoever and has accepted the pro-Islamic, Multicultural propaganda he has been presented without question. This person was treated by Charles Johnson as a credible source regarding Swedish politics. Meanwhile, CJ ignored me when I posted information about the political climate in Sweden.

I have for several years posted material at Little Green Footballs regarding Sweden, especially the enormous increase in the number of rapes, which is intimately linked to mass immigration in general and Muslim immigration in particular, but also about the city of Malmo, which is increasingly ruled by Muslim gangs. Charles Johnson has linked to some of my essays about this in the past. He thus knows that the full effects of Muslim immigration are being deliberately censored by Swedish media and covered up by Swedish authorities, the same authorities which sponsor the source he links to regarding the Sweden Democrats.

To his credit, Johnson did publish documents provided by party member Ted Ekeroth in defense of the Sweden Democrats. However, he has largely failed to link to information posted by Baron Bodissey blog and the Center for Vigilant Freedom about the Vlaams Belang and the SD. Imagine if I wrote something about a controversial political party in the USA, didn’t know too much about the country, didn’t speak the language and yet linked to a Communist website sponsored by their enemies as my main source of information. That’s what Little Green Footballs has done in this case. It’s grossly dishonest and has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with a sensible debate about racism and anti-Semitism. Regardless of what you think of the SD, this use of sources, which would be unworthy even of a C-rated blogger far less one with an international reputation, is something I would otherwise have expected from a hard-Left website like Daily Kos. LGF’s credibility as a critic of dishonest journalism by the mainstream media has in my view suffered a severe blow from this.

[emphasis added above.-- Ed.]

Nobody, myself included, has ever denied that there were people involved in the Sweden Democrats in the early years who did have a shady background. The question is to what extent they have cleaned up the party later. I have been debating how to relate to them with others, including Bruce Bawer, in the past. My conclusion as of right now, which I have reached after considering the issue for several years, is that they are genuine in their efforts to become a legitimate party. The real extremists have their own party because they are not welcome in the Sweden Democrats. It is difficult to find a single decent party to vote for in that country, and if the Sweden Democrats are serious about their efforts to rout out anti-Semites, I think they should get a hearing. I don’t see why I cannot even talk to representatives of a peaceful, democratic party in a nation that is in the process of being overrun by Muslim colonization while Western governments not only talk to, but fund Islamic terrorist organizations.

When Charles Johnson says that “there are other alternatives to talk to” he is flat-out wrong. There are no viable alternatives to the Sweden Democrats for natives who want to protest against the disintegration of their country. There are a number of parties represented in parliament, and their political views range from being slightly to the left of Hillary Clinton – that would be the “conservatives” – to slightly to the left of Karl Marx. And no, that isn’t much of an exaggeration.

According to Jonathan Friedman, an American Jew living in Sweden, “no debate about immigration policies is possible, the subject is simply avoided. Sweden has such a close connection between the various powerful groups, politicians, journalists, etc. The political class is closed, isolated.” The elites are worried to see their power slip away and therefore want to silence critics, for instance the Sweden Democrats, a small party opposed to immigration: “It is a completely legal party, they just aren’t allowed to speak.” In reality, the basis of democracy has been completely turned on its head. It is said: “Democracy is a certain way of thinking, a specific set of opinions, and if you do not share them, then you aren’t democratic, and then we condemn you and you ought to be eliminated. The People? That is not democratic. We the Elite, we are democracy.” It is grotesque and it certainly has nothing to do with democracy, more like a kind of moral dictatorship.

Before the national elections in 2006, the established parties cooperated in boycotting the Sweden Democrats. In one of many similar incidents, around 30 members of the SD were attacked during a peaceful, private party. Brave “anti-Fascists” threw tear gas into the building, forcing people outside where they were beaten with iron bars and axes. Aggressive and sometimes violent harassment of critics of the country’s immigration policies has been going on for years while the authorities have largely turned a blind eye to the problem.

The girlfriend of a politician from the SD was attacked in 2007 at her home outside Stockholm. The woman was found bound with duct tape in the apartment block where she lives with Martin Kinnunen, chairman of the youth wing of the SD. Three men forced their way into the apartment and held the 19-year-old at knife point. Kinnunen blames the media for systematically portraying the SD as monsters and thus for legitimizing aggression against them.

The extreme Leftist organization Antifascistisk Aktion (AFA) openly brag about numerous attacks against persons who get their full name and address published on their website. According to them, this is done in order to fight against capitalist exploitation. Their logic goes something like this: If you protest against Muslim immigration, you suffer from Islamophobia, which is almost the same as xenophobia, which is almost the same as racism. And racists are almost Fascists and Nazis, as we all know, and they shouldn’t be allowed to voice their opinions in public. Hence, if you protest against being assaulted or raped by Muslims, you are evil and need to be silenced.

If a Swede is really lucky, he will first get battered by Muslims, and then beaten up a second time by his own Leftists for objecting to being beaten the first time. The state does next to nothing to prevent either. Native Swedes who resist a mass immigration that will render them a minority in their own country within a couple of generations have been classified as “racists,” and racists are for all practical purposes outside of the protection of the law.

AFA members demonstrated alongside the Swedish police, the Swedish government and the Swedish media establishment during Pride Week in Stockholm in August 2007. At the very end of the Pride Parade marched a group of black-clothed and masked representatives of AFA. Adjacent to them marched a number of policemen, including members of the Swedish Gay Police organization. AFA proudly announced on their website that they had beaten up and hospitalized a couple of individuals deemed to be insufficiently tolerant.

Meanwhile, the Social Democrats, the largest political party in Sweden and the dominant political force in the country for most of the previous century, have decided that the road to power lies in importing voters, a strategy adopted by many of their sister parties in Western Europe. In 2007 they created a formal alliance with representatives of the Muslim Brotherhood, for the mutual benefit of both. The MB has spawned several Islamic terrorist organizations and is sponsored by Saudi Arabia in their attempts to impose sharia worldwide.

The Swedish Social Democrats were pro-Fascist and pro-Nazi during the 1930s and 40s and appeased the Communists during the Cold War. They have consistently supported some of the worst ideologies in human history. Yet they are the good guys, the poster boys of the political Left throughout the world. Now they forge an alliance with the Muslim Brotherhood, another organization with close ideological ties to the Fascist and Nazi movements. At a time when native Swedes are being raped, stabbed and killed by Muslim gangs, the Social Democrats agree to continue allowing Muslims to colonize the country in exchange for their votes. In the old days this would be called treason. Now it’s called tolerance. It’s remarkable how similar the two concepts have become.

As Christine writes at the Center for Vigilant Freedom, “Johnson is an idealist- more, a utopian – in his goals for political parties in Europe. It’s worth noting again that the Vlaams Belang and Sweden Democrats are both the most pro-Israel parties in their countries, that both have taken strong stands against anti-semitism and racism, that extremists have left or been kicked out of both parties because of these policies, and that each is the primary voice (the sole voice in the case of SD) arguing for controls on immigration, standards for assimilation and a stop to Islamisation. If Johnson’s recommended policies were to be applied, not just to the SD but to all political parties opposing Islamisation, all members and previous leaders would be banned – presumably indefinitely, since the evidence of association goes back a long way and seems to contaminate forever.”

It’s interesting to notice that this seemingly applies only to European political parties, not to American ones. Western governments are pushing for independence for a group of Jihadist thugs who recently wanted to create the Osama bin Laden mosque in Kosovo. This name was eventually changed for public relations reasons since the Albanians know they need American support. In June 2007 the visiting US President George W. Bush was hailed as a hero by a group of Albanians who also stole his watch. “Sooner rather than later you’ve got to say enough’s enough – Kosovo is independent,” Bush told cheering Albanians.

In Kosovo, dozens of churches and monasteries have been destroyed following ethnic cleansing of Christian Serbs by the predominantly Muslim Albanians, all under the auspices of NATO soldiers, and the Muslims are not ungrateful. Kosovo Albanians plan to honor their “savior,” former US President Bill Clinton, by erecting a statue of him. During the American-led bombing of Serbia on behalf of Muslim Albanians in 1999, Saudi Prince Khaled Bin Sultan called on the US to do the same against Israel on behalf of Palestinians.

The writer Julia Gorin has warned that “An independent Kosovo will serve as a nod to secessionists worldwide,” and that “history will show what no one cares to understand: the current world war began officially in Yugoslavia.” It will also serve as a launching pad for Jihad activities against Europe and the West. Terrorist organization Al-Qaeda gained a strong foothold in the Balkans already in the 1990s. A video of Osama bin Laden meeting with two 9/11 hijackers revealed that the mass murderers were motivated by a desire to avenge Muslims… in Bosnia, where the USA went to war on behalf of Muslims.

Serge Trifkovic in his book The Sword of the Prophet documents how Yasser Arafat’s uncle Mohammad Amin al-Husayni cooperated closely with Nazi Germany in recruiting Bosnian and Albanian Muslims for Waffen SS units in the Balkans. Christian Serbs had to wear blue armbands, Jews yellow armbands. For Muslims, this was a Jihad against disobedient dhimmis, and thus a continuation of the Turkish genocide against Armenians a few years earlier, which was one of the inspirations for the Holocaust. More than a quarter of a million Serbs, Jews and Romani people (Gypsies) were killed by Muslim troops in Nazi service.

These Albanians are the very same people who US President George W. Bush, whose re-election was passionately supported by the LGF crowd, wants to grant independence. Shouldn’t the involvement by the Republican Bush Administration with anti-democratic, anti-Semitic thugs with strong ideological and historical Nazi connections be a cause for concern? Have the LGF crowd reflected over the fact that the only ethnic cleansing by Nazi-friendly groups that is going on in Europe right now is by Muslims against non-Muslim Europeans, and that this has received active American support? By Johnson’s own logic, shouldn’t that put both the Democratic and the Republican parties beyond the pale in the USA?

I also dislike how LGF uses the late Dutch politician Pim Fortuyn to justify their views. As Bruce Bawer has demonstrated in his book While Europe Slept, Fortuyn was virtually executed by the left-wing media and the Eurabian political establishment for being a “racist, Fascist and Nazi.” Dutch MP Geert Wilders, who lives with constant death threats from Muslims, claims that a climate of “hate and aggression” has been created in which someone might think that “illegal means are justified to stop me and my people.” Left-wing columnists dismiss him as “someone outside of the law, as the leader of a Fascist party, that is anti-democratic and similar in some respects to the Nazi’s,” he said.

Frankly, the treatment the lizards of Little Green Footballs has recently given to several people, Paul Belien of The Brussels Journal in particular, vaguely reminds me of the demonization Pim Fortuyn was subject to before he was attacked. It gives me a bad feeling to see that this now comes from a so-called “conservative” website, which in this case is acting in a manner virtually indistinguishable from the hard-Leftists and the Jihad-appeasing political elites they always like to condemn.

The author Richard Miniter disagrees with Johnson’s assessment of the VB and their alleged Nazi links: “I suspect that Charles Johnson has not met any of the Vlaams Belang leadership or even interviewed them. He is simply following a left-wing link. He does not offer evidence, based not on his own experience, reporting or careful deliberation, but simply links to web sites of virulent critics – virtually all of whom have not interviewed party leaders or spent any time understanding the nuances of Belgian politics. The blind leading the blind. These sites simply repeat a left-wing prejudice against the Vlaams Belang, which no matter how imperfect is not a bunch of neo-nazis.”

In response to this article, LGF reader marwan’s daughter commented that “It looks like the majority of the conservative blogosphere actually supports the side defending Vlaams Belang. I hope Charles isn’t the one booted off the anti-jihad wagon.” Charles Johnson then replied that “They can’t boot me off something I never jumped on.”

Now I’m confused. Is Johnson indicating that the supposed anti-Jihad website Little Green Footballs is not a part of the anti-Jihad struggle? That would be very interesting information for many of his readers, and it sure would explain a lot of his behavior over the past weeks.

Charles Johnson in a comment compared me to Charles Lindbergh, one of the most famous Nazi apologists in the United States. Since I have been among the most pro-Israeli bloggers on the European continent for some time and have repeatedly warned against rising anti-Semitism, I find this comparison grossly unfair, and I suspect some of Johnson’s former readers do so, too. After having witnessed the guilt-by-association tactics employed by Johnson against his opponents, it becomes almost comical to read his statement that “It’s very weird to see conservatives using the same tactics as leftists.”

As I said in the beginning, for several years Little Green Footballs has been one of the best websites on the Internet to find articles about the global Jihad. The one major problem I have had with the blog, long before this unfortunate public quarrel began, is that too many readers are still stuck with the illusion of a moderate Islam. I have said quite consistently that Islam isn’t reformable and that it is a dangerous waste of time and money to pursue such a policy. If you really believe that exporting democracy to Iraq could have worked out then you don’t understand the enemy. Saying this hasn’t always been popular, but I’m convinced it’s true.

Many LGF readers base their world view on the existence of a moderate Islam, which doesn’t exist, and on the existence of a large and rabid network of neo-Nazis in Europe, which also doesn’t exist. Neo-Nazi groups are generally quite marginal for the very simple reason that people don’t like them. I agree that they should be watched, but they are far down the list of enemies of freedom right now, behind Muslims, Leftists and the EU.

Since Charles Johnson, an American blogger, appears to believe that he is in a position to decide what Europeans should or shouldn’t be allowed to do in order to save their own continent from the ongoing Islamic conquest, I believe Europeans are also entitled to hear what kind of alternatives Mr. Johnson envisions if we are not allowed to cooperate with the likes of the Vlaams Belang and the Sweden Democrats.

Johnson has posted stories about aggression and Jihad support from Muslims across the world. Does he still believe that Islam is reformable? And if not, what does he suggest we do about it? I’ve made my position on this quite clear: No, Islam isn’t reformable. The only possible solution then, apart from a global war to the death which nobody wants, is to separate ourselves from the Islamic world as much as possible. And by “we” I mean non-Muslims in general, not just Westerners. This entails completely and permanently stopping Muslim immigration in any form. However, in the USA, Canada and Australia, and certainly in Europe, simply stopping Muslim immigration is no longer enough. Some of the Muslims who are already here need to be expelled. There is no way around this. No, I have never suggested expelling all of them, but the most hardcore ones who push for implementing sharia laws here need to be deported, yes.

If Charles Johnson thinks this is unacceptable, he is in essence saying that much of Europe is already lost. I want to resolve this dilemma as peacefully and civilized as humanly possible. Contrary to the Jihadists, I value human life, even that of my enemies. But I am here first and foremost to win, or simply to survive. Survival trumps ideological purity.

If the readers of Little Green Footballs have any good suggestions on to how I can roll back the Islamization of the West, I’m all ears. And I’m not being sarcastic, I really want to hear it. If Charles Johnson comes up with some good solutions, I’ll be happy to name my next son Charles. Hell, I’ll even name my next daughter Charles. But if he believes that not cooperating with the Vlaams Belang is more important than preventing Europe from falling to Islam, then, with respect, I think he is missing the bigger picture. And don’t give us the lecture about how there are “other alternatives.” No, there aren’t, so do us all a favor and stop pretending that there are.

Fjordman, via Gates of Vienna, 14 November 2007