From my inbox today:
From my inbox today:
Did you ever learn how the Romans were able to spread their empire so far and wide…and so quickly? Yes, they had a strong army and were not afraid to use it but the army was there to back up their primary method of colonization.
Romans would send some citizens to live in far away cities to facilitate trade with Rome. Makes sense, right?
These citizens brought their families with them and would build their houses close to each other for mutual support and entertainment. As the trade grew, so would these self-segregated Roman neighbourhoods. Eventually, once these neighbourhoods got large enough, Rome would offer trade incentives to the rulers of the city to permit the Romans within their enclave to be ruled by Roman laws and be subject to Roman authority directly.
It was that subtle ‘carrot and stick’ routine: the carrot of reduced trade tariffs and the stick of the not-so-proverbial sabre-rattling of the Roman army. Most city states thought that this was a beneficial arrangement and agreed.
After a while, the members of the Roman enclave would ask that the Roman law should apply not only within their little enclave but when they traded with the locals: after all, Rome got rich from trading and they all wanted to benefit, no?
Slowly and in very small increments, the Roman enclave would grow – and the demand for more and more Roman laws and norms within the host city would keep pace with this growth.
No matter how hard the host city would try to appease their Roman enclave, they could never satisfy them fully and eventually, Rome would have to point out just how cities that don’t treat their Roman minorities nicely happen to be the next ones to be burned to the ground by Roman armies.
Thus, through self-seggregated and un-integrated immigration, economic pressure and threat of violence, Roman rule spread throughout the lands!
Oh boy, am I glad that we live in enlightened times, when we would never permit members of a supremacist culture to build multiple enclaves throughout our countries and then demand that more and more of our laws conform to theirs, or they will do violence to us!
‘Yaound -The Cameroonian army killed 143 Boko Haram fighters who attacked a military base in the northern town of Kolofata on Monday, in what the government said was the militants’ heaviest loss yet on its territory.
One Cameroonian soldier also lost his life in the clashes, Communications Minister and government spokesman Issa Tchiroma Bakary said in a statement read out on television and radio.
The toll was “the heaviest loss yet” suffered by Boko Haram on Cameroonian soil, he said, and comes at a time of fears of increased cross-border raids by the Nigeria-based group into Cameroon, Chad and Niger.
The spokesperson said the attack began in the early hours when “several hundred” Islamist fighters took advantage of thick fog to cross over from Nigeria and tried to storm the town’s military base, where an elite army unit is stationed.’
From our friends at FIRE:
In the words of the one and only Inigo Montoya:
Or, if you are more into classical music:
“Because, you know, sometimes words have two meanings…”
It is impossible to hold a meaningful conversation with somebody when you both think you know what the words you are using mean, but in reality, you each subscribe to a completely different meaning of that word.
For example, the Islamist Muslim Brotherhood government that had come to power in Egypt following the ‘Arab Spring’ was lead by Morsi’s party, which was called the ‘Freedom and Justice Party’.
Muslim Brotherhood = Freedom and Justice?
Why, yes – if you mean what the Islamists understand these words to mean.
‘Freedom’, according to Koranic sources, is defined as ‘freedom from the laws of men’. In other words, being ruled by the word god, Allah, alone.
In other words, they understand the word ‘freedom’ to mean the implementation of the Sharia and Sharia alone.
‘Justice’ according to laws of God and God alone: again, Sharia.
In these people’s mind, the way we use the words ‘freedom’ and ‘justice’ is a perversion of their true meaning (Sharia and only Sharia) and we are ‘spreading mischief’ by perverting these words.
And under Sharia, the penalty for ‘spreading mischief’ is death.
A simple way to tell a moderate Muslim from an Islamist is to ask their view on whether Sharia should be implemented in the West.
If they say no, they are here because they are attempting to flee the horrors of life under Sharia and we must do our utmost to protect them, because they will be the first victims of the Islamists. Many are afraid to speak out, for very real fear that relatives stuck in Islamic countries would be harmed for their words: Islam is a clan-based culture where you are often held responsible for your relatives actions.
If they say yes, then they are an Islamist who is advocating, in no uncertain terms, the elevation of SHaria above our own laws. This is treason and our societies must treat it as such. All advocates of Sharia in the West must be arrested and charged with treason, because that is what trying to replace our laws with Sharia is.
Following is an excellent video. It is a bit longer than what I usually post, but it is most excellent: