De Nile is a river in Egypt :)

Sweden is getting into the awkward position of obsessively enforcing "progressive" ideology while all signs point to a brewing Mexican-style gang war where hoodlums armed with military ordnance scrap over turf in Swedish cities.

Sweden: The ride never ends.

I would guess the world's self professed feminist superpower will criminalize the party soon and threaten its leaders with imprisonment. Ordinary Swedes, the ones that aren't in the Jonestown Death Cult are too few and too beaten down to take any action in response. This is a bit like a few Iranian middle class wannabe ravers 'protesting' the ayatollahs. Big woop.

Normally I regard your posts as a bit too "hard-edged" for my tastes and view of the world, but in this instance I think you have accurately identified at least the surface of the phenomenon of how the people of Sweden are now "too beaten down to take any action in response". Extreme anger by a very vocal minority does have a way of eliminating any opposition among an essentially peaceful population. Let's just call it a "hostile takeover" by ideological radicals where peaceful people have just given up without a fight.

I wear my cynical nature as a flag planted on a mountain of skulls.

Well said.

What is good in life?

To crush your enemies, drive them before you and to hear the lamentation of their women!

THANX cxt for my laugh of the day.Imagine someone quoting Arnold.

The sentiment originated with Chengis Khan, who had a notable intolerance for insolence or resistance to his will.
John in Indy

This is why I love the comment section......learn something everyday.THANX

:):):)
Welcome!

I appreciate your comments as they are always to the point and provide some insights that others do not provide.
I remember you saying in one of your posts that you grew up in South Africa. Seeing what has happened there since the rise of Nelson Mandela to the Presidency in 1994 could be compared with Fidel Castro coming to power in Cuba in 1959. Maybe that is a stretch but what I have read and heard about what has been happening in both South Africa and the former Rhodesia is pretty horrible. In some respects maybe it would be a better comparison to what Stalin did to the Ukraine.
Either way, it has been another communist take over of formerly productive countries.

Something like that. After all the ANC was owned and operated by the NKVD then the KGB for decades. And it's a really really unpopular thing to say but SA is one of maybe 4 or 5 African countries that in the wake of WW2 and so called post colonialism, changed over to majority rule w/o a genocidal civil war. Say what you want about apartheid, and I am no cheerleader for that, but it's better to live under a bad system and working to change it, no matter how slow the progress than it is to wind up in mass graves with a million other people.

I agree. Most have no idea that Nelson Mandela was identified early on as a good candidate to be trained in the Soviet Union to become a communist revolutionary, along with many others in both South Africa, Rhodesia, Kenya, Angola, etc... (also in Central and South America, and in Southeast Asia as well).
The NKVD/KGB figured out not long after the success of the Russian revolution that they could achieve much more through identifying those that would make good revolutionaries, training them, and then sending them back to their home countries to start insurgencies, rather than trying to start outright communist revolutions as they had done in Russia.
Trying to export the Russian revolution to Italy, Germany, Spain, and other European nations had failed terribly, so a new strategy needed to be used which would not appear to be communist revolutions, and still achieve the same goals.
Unfortunately, they were very successful in this new strategy. They even did the same thing in the USA, and it has not worked as well as they had hoped, but as we can all see, it has worked only too well, at least until now.

cc

" Say what you want about apartheid, and I am no cheerleader for that, but it's better to live under a bad system .............."

Bad system ??! ! Surely you jest ! When you have to "share" a country with parasitic, sub-65 IQ hutus, it is the ONLY way.

And I say that having grown up in NZ in the 50's and 60's, where in that era the sub-65's were " concentrated " in their own suburbs and it worked, insofar as it confined the majority of crime and urban blight to those areas..........the parasitic vermin were still a financial drain on the country and a problem whenever they did infest the civilized (white) parts of cities and suburbs. Strayed off the reservation, so to speak.................

But the white leftist filth screamed loudest , along with the "natives", for sanctions against Rhodesia and South Africa in the 70's, 80's and 90's. Utter scum.

I never had a personal ax to grind for the most part against, ordinary blacks in SA. The system was meant to keep people 'apart' literally. So it was hard to come in contact with one another. They didn't fare well and the laws were stacked against them. But again for SA people they avoided thinking about the system most of the time. What's doubly ironic is that next door Rhodesia was by comparison a far more equitable and integrated society for blacks. Blacks served in the army and the police and home guard. They were teachers too. The way the nationalist government kept the vote out of the blacks hands was by economic means. You had to be a property owner, essentially to have the vote. Not very much different than the US before 1865-1876. But the path was set early on. The British decided on majority rule instantly. And Ian Smith never said that blacks would never get the vote. He never said it would be white rule forever. As early as 1969 there were talks about a gradual progression toward majority rule - maybe 2- years out. At the time blacks in Rhodesia had the highest levels of education and the highest standard of living in black Africa. It was not unforeseeable that in another generation there would be a sufficient population of blacks capable of running the country in the best way possible. The whites always knew that with (at their peak) 240,000 in a country of several million they couldn't hold on forever. What the Nationalist government was trying to avoid was two things 1) a communist takeover from Mozambique, Zambia and Angola and 2) a collapse of the country from the inside. And they won on the battlefield, the won the war but lost the strategic victory.

In any case, majority rule in SA and Rhodesia was going to happen. What the west never understood is that Africans themselves don't see the world in terms of western racism. They don't see themselves as blacks. They see themselves as Xhosa or Zulu or Shona or hundreds of other tribal, ethnic, cultural or linguistic groups. And they don't like one another to the same degree that blacks in the US think all whites are racist. Every genocide in Africa has been black on black. Sometimes there are obvious differences like Christian Ibo in Nigeria vs Muslim Nigeria. Sometimes there are physical differences, like Hutu vs Tutsi in Central East Africa. Sometimes the differences are more subtle than that. And sometimes that have their own oppressive history. The Xhosa in Southern Africa migrated there in the late 1500's. The people who were there think they're invaders. Point is, the notion of majority rule in Africa, once you take whites out of the equation is very strange to a westerner.

Blacks in Africa, with their backward tribalism, are their own worst enemy and always have been. Without it Slavery in the west would never have happened. And after 150 years the Black community in America continues to adopt this destructive mind set.

And it's also more familiar. For instance in the region that generally Cote d'Ivoire there are more than 700 distinct languages and dialects. If post colonialists had any backbone they'd abolish all the post colonial nations since they are inherently not governable with that much diversity. Even South Africa has, what, ELEVEN national languages? Come on.

YES but shagging comes first from the age of 12. 6-8 children are the norm. They can't afford 1 let alone 8 - WE pay.

Same in the M/E... The 'West' does not understand this concept. They ALL employ dimwits from redbrick so called universities. (Joke) who have never been to places like Iraq et al...

Arabs are nomadic/tribal peoples you cannot change thousands of years of history.

" At the time blacks in Rhodesia had the highest levels of education and the highest standard of living in black Africa. "

I rest the case for white rule in perpetuity. m' lord ! Seriously, the blacks have lost out, big time, in both countries and will NEVER again achieve those living standards.

Thanks for the education.

Black-ruled Botswana seems to be doing okay. What's needed is not racial governments -- that's deadly in the long run -- what's needed is for African governments to model themselves on Botswana, or on other successful modern nations. They should import the government structure of Switzerland. The canton system is pretty cool. For example, suppose you lived right on the border between New Jersey and New York. Under the Swiss canton system, you can decide which state you want to be part of, whether you want to pay New York or New Jersey taxes, and whose regulations and laws you want to live under. Thus if one canton starts enacting idiot laws, that canton can rapidly disappear as its borders keep shrinking.

Stefan Molyneux has several presentations regarding South Africa and Nelson + Winnie Mandela. All were VERY interesting and foreboding.

If you haven't seen "District 9" you should.

Like all socialist Revolutions the cure is worse than the disease. The atrocities committed by these Black gangs against White Farmers is never mentioned in the MSM. I agree that apartheid was wrong. But a violent Marxist dictatorship with no respect for lives and property is worse. Nelson Mandela was a Communist agitator in the same mode as our former President. His wife was a corrupt murderous btch. I'm sick and tired of our Media, Academia and popular culture deifying these cretins.

from one cynic to another Thumbs up!

How's that working out for you?

Not bad, really. Back in the day in North Eastern South Africa, we didn't take much guff from the occasional pickup truck full of ' Marxist Rebels' trying to steal whatever wasn't nailed down and some things that were. Put a few rounds over their heads as a warning and it that didn't give them pause, one in center mass would. See, I've seen what happens when 'people's revolts' get out of hand. It's not good but it's entirely predictable and not that interesting. Years later living in a different part of the continent I came to the conclusion that you can help individual people on a face to face case by case basis but whole countries, whole tribes, whole political ethos', not so much. It all ends with child soldiers, famine, anarchy and general dysfunction of everything. I have something better than inner peace; it's the death of hope.

This just in. SCOTUS has just upheld by a 5-4 vote President Trump's travel ban. The majority opinion cited the fact that Congress, wherein immigration policy rests, has given the President broad power to restrict immigration from any groups of people he deems in the National interest. The minority opinion written by Sotomayor employed the same old non sequiturs we've come to expect. In addition to citing statements he made as a candidate, she invoked the First Amendment and it's protection of religious liberty. For the last time Constitutional rights do not extend to people outside the U.S. Is she saying that none of these people have the right to practice Islam unless they live in America? The only mention of religious test in the Constitution is in Article VI which states that no test can be made in consideration of holding public office. Unless Omar the jihadist wants to run for Sheriff in Biloxi Mississippi I fail to see the relevance. If Hillary had been elected and wanted to ban all Christian immigrants she could have. Another reason to thank the Almighty that Trump is the President.

Sotomayor, despite being Supreme Court Justice, doesn't seem to understand that religious liberty in America is not absolute. American law is absolute, and religious liberty is permitted only insofar as the religion does not violate American law. The problem with Islam is that it violates American law in many ways. Therefore, Moslems are NOT free to practice their religion in America because that would entail violating American law. Other religions don't have that conflict with American law. The freedom that Moslems have in America is the freedom NOT to practice Islam compared to Moslems countries where they are forced to practice it to one degree or other.

I want to thank you for you're insightful comment. I agree 100% and with your permission would like to expand on this thought. The decision by the Supreme Court today, while encouraging in it's upholding of the President's Constitutional authority still left the door open for the continued misapplication of the First Amendment. From listening to the various comments on Fox (I never watch the others) the consensus seems to be that the decision to uphold the ban was predicated on the finding that it was narrow in scope with no intent to ban Muslims in general. This despite certain statements by Trump during the campaign. As expected the Democrats on the panel saw it as a travesty of justice. The conservatives saw it as a correct interpretation and agreed that the ban was not religiously motivated. In my opinion they both got it wrong. By taking the position that the ban was legal because it was not animated by religious bias conservatives are, in a sense, conceding the point that religion can't be used as a factor in determining who may enter the country. This is dangerous not only because it has the potential to allow violent enemies into America but it presents an illogical interpretation of Constitutional rights. In the first place it should be self evident that the Constitution's authority and protections apply only to people domiciled within the boundaries and jurisdiction of the U.S. While we may wish that other countries would emulate us we cannot extend or impose our system on them. Let's say a country didn't have a protection against self incrimination. Would we be prevented from imposing a ban on immigration from that country? Secondly the First Amendment concerns the free exercise of religion not a religious test. By denying entry we are not denying Muslims the free exercise of their religion. The only place where a religious test is mentioned in the Constitution is Article VI where it specifically bans the use of such a test for holding public office. Unless some one is an American citizen running for office and requires entry this Article has no bearing on any immigrants. As to your point about the limits of religious freedom I have this question. Would I be able to claim protection under the Constitution if my religion required me to perform human sacrifice? Then why do we think that people have the right to practice a religion that denies that right to others. A religion that calls on it's followers to force others to submit or face violent retribution. We need a Constitutional Amendment codifying what is and is not acceptable religion within the structure of the First Amendment.

Well-said!

Thank you. As Rush Limbaugh says it's "talent on loan from God". If you have anything to add I welcome hearing from you.

" The problem with Islam is that it violates American law in many ways."

No, it doesn't.

Why should anyone believe you? I prefer to believe the Islamic religious authorities who say that Islam and the American constitution are not compatible. The highest Islamic religious authority in America, The Assembly of Muslim Jurists in America, said that there is an irreconcilable conflict between allegiance to Islam and allegiance to America. The Koran requires legal inferiority for women. The Koran requires chopping off the hands of thieves. The Koran requires war against non-Moslems. And, much much more that is contrary to American law. I prefer to believe the Koran, Muhammad and the Islamic religious authorities rather than believe you.

Yawn... So, do you have any sources for this garbage, or did someone who also doesn't know jack about Islam inform your "opinion"? Got 'em, cite 'em.

Salah Al-Sawy of the Assembly of Muslim Jurists of America (AMJA) concluded in a 2008 online fatwa, "As for optionally obtaining citizenship of a non-Muslim country it is definitely prohibited without a doubt, moreover it could be a form of apostasy." An AMJA paper in 2009 stated that "the basic conflict between the declaration of faith and testimony that there is no God except Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah and the declaration and pledge of Allegiance of the USA is irreconcilable."
http://online.wsj.com/artic...

"Ultimately we [Muslims] can never be full citizens of this country… because there is no
way we can be fully committed to the institutions and ideologies of this country.’ "
The leader of CAIR-KY is Ihsan Bagby, the president of its board and Islamic Studies Professor at the University of Kentucky. 1991

“If we are practicing Muslims, we are above the law of the land.”
Mustafa Carroll, executive director of the Dallas-Fort Worth CAIR branch. 2013

It is a restriction from dangerous countries not a restriction on professing this faith or that. These countries happen to be predominantly Muslim just Cuba happens to be.....Cuban or North Korea is filled with North Koreans. This is what the left willfully pretends to not understand.

My point is that it doesn't matter even if it was a ban on Muslims. Not letting these cretins in has no bearing on their ability to practice their special brand of religious bigotry where they already are.

They're dangerous because they're Muslim.

Wow. That is an interesting perspective, but I think you've taken it too far. Human nature is what it is, and as the product of billions of years of survival of the fittest, it definitely tends to be, as Alfred Lord Tennyson suggested, "red in tooth and claw". But that's not the entire truth. There is a spiritual and godlike component to human beings that cannot be denied, and although we dare not overlook the reality of human biological heredity which contains the remnants of species long dead and some which are too mean to die, there is always hope.

The hand of the Lord was on me, and he brought me out by the Spirit of the Lord and set me in the middle of a valley; it was full of bones. 2 He led me back and forth among them, and I saw a great many bones on the floor of the valley, bones that were very dry. 3 He asked me, “Son of man, can these bones live?” I said, “Sovereign Lord, you alone know.” 4 Then he said to me, “Prophesy to these bones and say to them, ‘Dry bones, hear the word of the Lord! 5 This is what the Sovereign Lord says to these bones: I will make breath enter you, and you will come to life. 6 I will attach tendons to you and make flesh come upon you and cover you with skin; I will put breath in you, and you will come to life. Then you will know that I am the Lord.’” 7 So I prophesied as I was commanded. And as I was prophesying, there was a noise, a rattling sound, and the bones came together, bone to bone. 8 I looked, and tendons and flesh appeared on them and skin covered them, but there was no breath in them. 9 Then he said to me, “Prophesy to the breath; prophesy, son of man, and say to it, ‘This is what the Sovereign Lord says: Come, breath, from the four winds and breathe into these slain, that they may live.’” 10 So I prophesied as he commanded me, and breath entered them; they came to life and stood up on their feet—a vast army.

Ezekiel 37:1-10

TP, you have to understand what has happened to her homeland, and to other nations in Africa. Much of what has happened has been kept out of the world news media, and what does get reported is how those nations have become communist utopias...interpreted as Stalin hell holes. I have only seen various independent reports on farmers being killed and their farms being taken by the government. Rapes are a normal thing in most of those countries as is murder. It is happening on a level that makes Chicago sound like a crime free city, and a great place to live.
Think about it in terms of MS-13, the Zetas, the Mexican mafia, and other criminal entities having taken over Houston, Dallas/Ft Worth, San Antonio and much of the rest of Texas, and what it would be like living under those conditions.
Think Somalia...

Wow. Almost impossible to imagine, but clearly not beyond the realm of possibility.

I do not know if they have become "too beaten down" or if they have just become so complacent due to the socialism that has run rampant there for so many decades.
That is one of the true and seldom understood aspects of socialism/communism is that all motivation for trying to accomplish anything at all has been taken away and replaced with a complacency of mediocrity.
A supposed old Russian workers joke is, "They pretend to pay us, and we pretend to work."
Pretty much sums up socialism/communism.

People don't want to be labeled Hitler, racist, lose their jobs, etc. The punishment for speaking up is heavy. For criticizing Islam, heaviest and most dangerous. Look at what is happening to Trump administration staff now -- hounded out of movie theaters and restaurants, threatened with mob violence by the thug Maxine Waters, and shot down at public events. All of that is worse in Sweden. Free speech is less protected in Sweden. So the wrong opinions can get you into legal trouble.

Looks like they will be getting Secret Service protection, now. That should incite the Marxist/Communists even more, and then they'll be confronted by Secret Service agents. It should be fun to watch it go down!

It is not only Sweden but the whole of Europe is a mess, ready for civil war and total disrespect for EU which are a bunch of unelected bureaucrats, considering the influx of Islam in Europe any one would think twice to invest in Europe , Islamic controls and problems could be a severe issue in doing business in Europe.
As europe is divided and will grow even more divided in the near future, The continent is a volatile place...... Unless serious plans and policies are introduced and implemented I think EU is a losing proposition special as I listen to T. Thibault(spelled right??)
Historically Europe always was divide due to the uniqueness of its nature, each nation has strong traditions and systems that do are not harmonized with the EU bureaucrats and we see the cracks occurring every were.....
What will happen if Merkal is removed from power or what does French want, Italy, Brittain.etc etc..so many issues in so many nations it is becoming more and more difficult to govern.....
Sweden is no longer the utopia it ones was, their luck is natural resources........ but otherwise Sweden is not better then other nations.....tremendous problems and they seem to increase, NOT decrease!!!!