Fitzgerald: A tribute to Jorg Haider

Third Rail or Fifth Leg?

* Is it legitimate and necessary, no matter how much we may resent it, to team up with perceived Neo-Nazi’s, anti-immigrant and white power fanatics in order to stop the spread of Islam, further Muhammedan infiltration and the building of mosques and madrassah’s?

* Strange bedfellows or dangerous alliance? History has many examples of strange alliances born of necessity. Why don’t we take all the help we can get and sort our differences out later?

As long as the concept of being a “fascist” is somehow morally worse than the concept of islamic fundamentalism, then the west still has not fully appreciated the gravity of the situation. As long as the concept of “nazi” still draws a more visceral reaction than the concept of “jihadist”, then we still have a long way to go. As long as the concept of “racist” still holds a greater stigma than the concept of female genital mutilation, then the fight has not yet even begun.

What this kerfluffel proves is that many, many of those skeptical of the islamic presence worry less, in fact, about the destruction of our way of life and actually more about their own personal ethics and political philosophies. That is too bad, because it shows that they still do not take the threat of islam seriously enough. For them, this is still just a hypothetical threat – this idea of returning to the 7th century so their anti-jihad position is more of an intellectual exercise, being that the terms fascist, racist, and nazi carry much more weight, and generate much more of visceral reaction in them, than anything we actually are facing – such as the total destruction, not only of our liberties, but of our western way of life – our music, our art, our sexuality, even our history. They don’t actually believe such a thing could really happen in our modern western world, it’s too far fetched, too much of a right-wing fantasy, so they are not willing to break eggs to make omelets.

Complicating this apathy, is the moral equivalence of the affluent but decadent West. Many feel we can fight this islamic threat from ivory towers while still paying homage to the politically correct ideal that the concepts of “racist”, “fascist” and “nazi” are concepts morally equal to, or in fact, worse, than anything represented in 7th century arabia. This moral equivalence is a uniquely western prejudice, a dementia if you will, born of guilt, and fear, of our own past. Ultimately, many of us intellectual anti-jihadists, and that is what we are, really fear and loathe ourselves more than we fear or loathe the islamic threat. The Left should rejoice in this. For that idiom is, and always has been, the message of the Left that, ultimately, it is the white Christian world that needs to be feared most of all.



* The inimitable Hugh Fitzgerald takes the moral high ground. But how do we build a resistance against the Islamization of our countries without getting into bed with unsavory characters? This debate has been raging for weeks now, started by Charles Johnson from LGF who turned his blog into a hysterical holier- than-thou moral-supremacy wankfest, where Nazi’s and white power supremacists lurk behind every bush to ruin the pure and innocent counter-jihad of the valiant warriors out in cyberspace. Conventional wisdom has it however, that you can’t make an omelet without breaking eggs, and the lizard idea that you can -somehow- fight the global jihad without anybody getting hurt is, – to put it mildly, moonbattish. Haider, Le Pen, Flaams Belang: third rail or fifth leg?


THE Austrian right-wing firebrand Joerg Haider said yesterday he plans to change building laws to prevent mosques and minarets being erected in his home province of Carinthia. from this article

Jorg Haider is akin to, but worse than Le Pen. He is one of those Austrians who drove the late Thomas Bernhard to maddened distraction, the kind who claim that Austrians were the “first victims” of Hitler (forgetting those cheering crowds, that delight at Anschluss). He exhibits every sign of antisemitism except, perhaps, that exhibited by the BBC World Service and The Guardian and Robert Fisk — that is, not quite so systematically vicious when it comes to the state of Israel.

Haider, by the way, owes his considerable wealth to a fluke. In 1938, someone fleeing Austria had to give up his castle in Carinthia (it’s the title of an old book: “A Castle in Carinthia”), selling it , out of desperation, for a song to Jorg Haider’s uncle, who then left that bit of booty, when he died, to his nice heel-clicking nephew. Many fortunes in Europe were made that way. Why, the book and antiques trade in Austria and Germany has been living off such goods — see the sale of Kafka’s library, which he left to his sisters who were murdered in Nazi death camps, and ask just how that library came into the possession or this or that antikvariat or auction house, and multiply that by tens of thousands of examples. Oh, there was money to be made, and there still is.

When Kurt Waldheim, the late Secretary-General of the U.N. and an unpunished Nazi war criminal, was under siege (stoutly defended by, among others, his own son, “Gerhard Waldheim, Ph.D.”), Haider was among the many Austrians who rallied to his defense.

Let’s review the war career of the man he rallied to Waldheim was present during the round-up of Salonika’s Jews, who were forced to stand for hours and hours, absolutely motionless, under the sun of the city’s main square, while all around them the Nazi soldiers, and especially their wives (who had been allowed to accompany them to Greece), watched and jeered, until those Jews who had not died were sent off to the death camps. Waldheim took part in what was called “Operation Kozara,” whose tens of thousands of victims were mostly unarmed civilians, Serbs and some Jews, and he even won a Nazi medal for his performance in that operation. At the war’s end, Waldheim was an intelligence officer serving in a small unit that was later held guilty of war crimes but he escaped detection as a member of that unit. And later, when the photographs of him in his Nazi uniform set off the investigation that led to the outcry that led to the…that led to nothing, in the end, did it? He, Waldheim insisted that it wasn’t him, or it was he but he was never there, or there, or there, or at least not when people claimed he was. And for at least one of those episodes he absurdly maintained that he had been back home in Vienna, studying or taking an exam. He claimed; they all claim.

Haider is awful, and in ways that are not the usual ways, that even when he has done something that may be right, it cannot be held up for admiration or approval, as in this case. The real right-wing, which must include all defenders or apologists for Nazis, or for other defenders or apologists of the Nazis, cannot be tolerated. Besides, these are exactly the kind of people who, when it looks like the Neu Ordnung of Islam is winning, will quickly go over to the other side, just the way so many Nazis became dutiful and loyal servants of the Soviet Empire in Eastern Europe.

Ordinarily one has to be careful and sparing about the use of “right-wing” and “far right-wing,” because these terms are used, by The Guardian (and the inimitable Robert Fisk in The Independent), to blacken the name of so many who have given no signs of being “far-right” but only signs of recognizing the menace of the Muslim presence in the tolerant, advanced, and so-far helpless-to-resist countries of Western Europe. So we found that charming and articulate Pim Fortuyn, “libertin et egoiste,” and the uncowed unlibertine and conservative Geert Wilders, both described as “right-wing.” No doubt Ayaan Hirsi Ali, the grateful child of Spinoza’s Dutch Enlightenment, has also been described as “right-wing.” Whole communities, such as the Maronites of Lebanon, fighting for their lives during the PLO-imposed civil war in Lebanon, were demonized in the Western press as “right-wing.” It was Eugene Ionesco who noted thirty years ago that the phrase “right-wing Christians [of Lebanon]” was always employed by “the newspaper that everyone reads” — i.e., Le Monde — to describe not plutocrats, but Christian villagers, farmers, small merchants. He wondered what could conceivably make them “right-wing” except their desire to stay alive and not suffer the fate of the Christian women and children disemboweled by Muslims at Damur and other cities.

Today the phrase “right-wing” is systematically placed before the name of any person or group or journal or website that sturdily tells the truth about Jihad and Islam. Many called “right-wing” or “far right-wing” may merely be victims of a campaign to undo them in the public’s mind before they can be listened to, and judged on their merits, by what they actually say and do. But Jorg Haider is not one of them. By what he has, over the past few decades, said and done, he does deserve the epithet “far-right” — so that, even when he does something that is correct, he should not be noticed, and passed over in silence. One can be sure that Muslims will be delighted to pretend that they are outraged by this act by what they will call a “neo-Nazi,” though they and Jorg Haider, in many respects, should get along with each other very well.

So there it is. He supports the right legislation — the banning of further building of mosques and minarets. No doubt his support will be cleverly used by Muslims everywhere to undercut such measures, supported by much better people. And he’s also a far-right-wing swine, and if you accidentally stepped into his galère to be ferried around the lake, get out of that boat at once, and take another.

What more is there to say?


*Actually, there is lots more to be said. Read the comments also, they’re quite good.


* The Lizard wankfest continues, in overdrive

But Pamela over on Atlas Shrugs doesn’t buy any. The much derided ‘white power’ symbol from De Winters bookshelf dates back way back when, as we can see here:


* Charles Martell at the Battle of Tours in 732, which has traditionally been characterized as an event that halted the Islamic expansionism in Europe that had conquered Iberia. “Charles’s victory has often been regarded as decisive for world history, since it preserved western Europe from Muslim conquest and Islamization.”


“Had Charles Martel not been victorious,” Hitler told his inner crowd in August 1942, “then we should in all probability have been converted to Mohammedanism, that cult which glorifies the heroism and which opens up the seventh Heaven to the bold warrior alone. Then the Germanic races would have conquered the world.” Hitler told Mr. Speer that Islam is “perfectly suited to the Germanic temperament.”


Clear explanation by Paul Belien over at The Washington Times on Nazis and Islamists. I for one am not spooked by the newly resurrected old bogeyman – NAZIS! We are not at war with the Nazis. This is a distraction from addressing the real problem, the real scourge of civilization – Islamic jihad. Paul Belien is editor of the Brussels Journal and an adjunct fellow of the Hudson Institute.



One ‘sensitive’ moonbat, a ‘Josephine’ attacked Sheik Yer’mami on several occasions while offering no solution or suggestions at all. When taken to task she came up with this:

I agree that, in issues such as immigration policy, the average citizen is not consulted. Our towns, cities and countries are changed without our consent or input. Given that this has happened and is happening, I think it is up to citizens to get involved and become more vocal.

* Start singing, Josephine. Makes you vocal…

Is it necessary or desirable to align oneself with a group such as the BNP? I would not do it. If there was no other group concerned about changing immigration policy and defending and maintaining our democracy, then I hope I or others would have the time and energy to work for change within existing groups that do not have racist underpinnings or backgrounds.

I am opposed to limiting or stopping immigration based on race or ethnicity.
As to how immigration should be managed regarding the threat of Muslims who take their Islam seriously, well, I don’t know. I’m still reading the articles on this site and others and still trying to figure that one out.

The larger (philosophical but also practical) question, for me, is this: How do we defend our countries from the threat of Islam without reverting to a tribalistic mindset?

* Check this: Josephine is not afraid of suicide bombers, cutthroats who fly jets into buildings, honor killings, the burka and female genital mutilation, she worries that our society could somehow be ‘reverting to a tribalistic mindset’-

I think it would have to start with Islam being recognized by our governments as a political movement and not just a religion and would have to include the clear distinction that Islam is not a race.

Posted by: Josephine

* Great. She finally figured out that Islam is not a race.

* Are these the thoughts of a mature person or a mental midget? Would you trust such a person making decisions regarding the future of your country?

I wouldn’t.

2 thoughts on “Fitzgerald: A tribute to Jorg Haider”

  1. Sometimes it is necessary to ally oneself with somewhat odious types-individuals often do so on a daily basis. Who in their right mind would argue that the US and UK were wrong to ally themselves with Stalin against Hitler? Roosevelt and especially Churchill knew what kind of monster Stalin was but he was the (slightly) lesser of two evils. WW2 would have lasted far longer had that alliance not happened and the outcome could have been disasterous. And as history shows, the USSR eventually died peacefully. It’s doubtful Nazi Germany would have died as peacefully had it won WW2-in fact, it might have survived to the present day as menacing as ever.

Comments are closed.