Nationalism Gets a Makeover

Henry Wolff, American Renaissance, March 2, 2012

The nationalist Vlaams Belaang party in Belgium and their leader Filip Dewinter will officially kick off their new “Women Against Islamization” campaign next week, and one of its advertisements has already caused a stir.

A post-card version of the ad shows Mr. Dewinter’s 20-year-old daughter, An-Sofie, in a burka:

The text reads: “Our future?”

The card unfolds to show Miss Dewinter in a bikini with the words “Freedom or islam?” and “Dare to choose” written across her body.

“Freedom or islam?” “Dare to choose.”

The purpose of the campaign, Filip Dewinter says, is to enlist women in the fight against Islamization: “Women are always the first victims of Islam. We want to make clear that they have a choice.”

Miss Dewinter says the ad was her idea but there have been reactions from Muslim groups: “I have had everything up to death threats made against me,” she said, adding that “death threats and criticism no longer scare me off.”

The campaign is sure to increase already-high tension between nationalists and Muslims in Belgium. In January, an Antwerp prosecutor recommended two years in prison and a 550-euro fine for Foaud Belkacem, head of the group Sharia4Belgium, for incitement of hatred and violence toward non-Muslims. Mr. Dewinter says Mr. Belkacem “openly said that I should be killed because I am an enemy of Islam.” Last September, Sharia4Belgium opened a Sharia court to mediate disputes between Muslims.

Muslims are about 6 percent of the Belgian population and are expected to be 10 percent by 2020. Mr. Dewinter outlines his plan to stop the Islamization of Europe in his latest book, Inch’Allah? The islamization of Europe. Read the AR review here.

A Fox News video about the “Women Against Islamization” campaign can be seen here.

Topics: ,

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • This is great. Nationalism usually has a problem getting the women but it is a crucial step. I think if we got a few more women we would get a lot more men!

  • jackellis

    Really good.

    We need White women and White Liberal/Leftist/Secularist to take our side. Right Wing, Conservative nationalism just doesn’t sell to lots of Whites. Opposing Islamic barbarism, brutality towards women, towards gays will have great appeal.

    Go for it.

    • Some of us females prefer Moslems to faggots and feminists.

      Why should I worry about having to whisper criticism of Islam? We have to whisper criticism of homosexuals at present, we wouldn’t under Islam. Mind you we already have to whisper criticism of the Moslem colonists unless its in terms the left created and approve of. What would be different in terms of freedom? We’d have to whisper less?

      The Islamisation these people are paranoid of doesn’t even exist, the problem is those who selectively assimilate and get it both ways.

      The Pakis I’ve had trouble with weren’t behaving Islamic at all, they drink alcohol sat on walls and shout abuse at white girls. The only difference between them and white chavs is they’re worse – they can cry racism if you criticise them, *thanks to the same people white knighting homosexuals and promiscuous women*.

      When you’re opposed to the people who control both sides of debate, its lose-lose.

      Now as for the picture… I don’t object to the imagery itself but to the message “dare to choose” written so low down. Like I said the same culture destroyers who invited Moslems in as a means, encourage such behaviour, also as a means, only to turn on Moslems cause they show some spine. Worse still, it reminds me of ‘my body my choice’ arguments to murder beautiful white babies cause mummy wants some stupid career – if this wasn’t the intent of the ad, its framing the argument in such feminist language and I’m sure the people objecting to Islam on grounds of religion but not of race, would be silent about all other immigrants.

      Speaking of abortion it reminds me of those ‘right to life’ ads about how the most dangerous place for little black girls is their mothers wombs. Its great for exposing the hypocrisy of the left, but it also sells out to the left. Are right to lifers still conservative? Is the Gates of Vienna mentality still pro-white when its arguments implicitly bash European culture as ‘misogynistic’ and ‘homophobic’ by association? What else is meant by describing Islam as backwards?

      What kind of Europe do you want to preserve? nAnything as long as its white? Or worse still, the multicult EDL attitude that Englishness is ‘not being Moslem’ (or at least it seems so).

      Will An-Sofie DeWinter be honest and say they’re something else than us, of kind, so they shouldn’t be here whatever the religion? Or  does she think we are ‘people of little brain’ and ‘against equality’ like that traitorous bitch Marine Le Pen?

      I’m commenting late but this kind of thing pisses me off. Females like me who have more sense than to be ‘liberated’ are discriminated against, in the present west. And girls who do choose such a lifestyle have more to fear from misogynistic Pakis cause they’re letting themselves be treated as blow up dolls whilst feeling ’empowered’.

      There’s less rapes in Islamic countries too, and less bulimics and no perfectly healthy females wanting cosmetic surgery to feel normal. Funny is that if Islam is so bad for women.

  • Boereseun

    Wow, nice figure! I think this will draw far more men than women. However,  ideas that try to bring white men and women together for the sake of OUR civilisation and OUR freedoms should always be welcomed.

    • Sonya610

      Yeah it is rather silly but also so typical. The campaign is SUPPOSED to attract more women but is directly aimed at attracting/pleasing men.

      If they want to attract women they need to target things women care about like children, animals, safety, personal rights, etc… in a wholesome way that makes women want to align themselves with their group.

      • Boereseun

        Funny, don’t you think men care about children, animals, safety or personal rights? I suppose men only care about girls in bikinis, right? Even though it was the same girl in the picture above who came up with the idea in the first place.

        I have about has much love for feminists as I do for Islamic preachers.

    • It’ll attract men like post-WW2 sexual freedom in general. “Dare to choose”?

  • Boereseun

    Well of course you’re right, because trying to get more whites to join the cause of white preservation by arguing against the freedoms that Islam takes once in power, is embarrassing.

    I’m not exactly a total fan of the advert itself, mainly because I am a Conservative brought up with a more homely image of women, I still think it sends the message. I think a better message to attach to the picture would be…

    “Allow Islam to continue its conquest and wearing a bikini will be the least of your problems!”

    •  Creating ads with European  women dressed as whores is not going to deter Muslims. LOL!!! It may even convince more to migrate seeing as though they are already well aware of the looseness of a significant portion of western European white women. 

      Also, as far as religions go. I would say that Islam is more closely related to Christianity than is any other worldly faith.  Be that as it may, I do agree that Islamic immigration needs to be halted to European homelands.  The coming century will most certainly be a very interesting time.

       I spent alot of time in Islamic countries. It has been my experience that Muslims are by far and away quite honest people. They treated me well. However many  of them are unable to see anyone’s elses point of view.  Similar to Christianity, and Judaism in this way.

      I do not see things changing very much. I believe our children will see the final eradication of western civilization. I believe that that is close to a 100% certainty.  Rarely (when one looks at history) has a civilization risen again after being knocked off its feet. The death of western civilization has been celebrated in many instances by its  biggest beneficiaries in the modern era.  Ironically, those who profit the most (white woman and Blacks) from western civilization are its greatest detractors and critics. For in a non-western society, all the social safety nets that exist to help those who are unable to earn their way through merit are taken away.

      Also, I think through the coming dominance of Islam, Europeans will pick up many traditional beliefs again. Notions like gay marriage will be a long forgotten topic in another century. As will notions of female equality.

      In closing, I will say this. I believe the natural tendency of the female is to submit and follow a strong man. Western society produces fewer and fewer of these men. I expect many more white European females will be converting to Islam in the coming decades as a way of finding strong male leadership. I take no pleasure in writing these things. I believe all the diverse peoples of the world deserve their own ancestral homeland where their own ethnic soul has freedom to express itself  independent from outside dominance. And this most assuredly includes Europeans. Of which I am one by blood.

      But the truth is, a significant portion of the European descended peoples have put their philisophical ideas above those of nature. A wise man once said that in a struggle between man and nature, nature will always win in the end.

      • Boereseun

        I don’t think the campaign is really about deterring muslims as much as it is about creating an awareness of the complete restrictions one would face under Sharia law. 

        As said above, not really a fan of the advert. I don’t enjoy seeing white women parading around as sex objects as that is certainly not my idea of freedom. The message though is clear, either get busy fighting against Islam or get used to having less and less freedoms.

        I also could not agree with you more about a woman liking and being attracted to a strong man, which is one of the reasons I detest feminists. Destroying manhood was not the way to go about building a better society. As can be seen by modern Western men, it destroys the very fabric of society.

         Still, I can respect a woman for putting her life in danger, as miss Dewinter has done, even if I don’t agree so much with the advert. And for heaven’s sake, it’s a bikini, which many women wear at the beach. It’s not as if she is promoting porn or sexual abandon as a Western Societal model.

        Just a note, I love my people and can never, ever give up and as you so rightly pointed out, nature does win against ideological folly. This is the same reason many of us are now both race realists and gender realists.

  • I can hear the Belgian feminists now.  “You’re exploiting women, turning the into sex objects!  We need more Muslims!”

    The better PR tack would have been to have the bottom woman not in a bikini, but in some sort of professional dress.

    • Kblankenship7

       It does get ones attention.  I could see a series of these, with the second picture being of a Hutterite or Amish woman (would work in the States and Canada), a female athlete such as a figure skater or football player, a professional woman such as a doctor or nurse, and so on.

      Also, a visual campaign which takes up other chilling issues such as rape, mohammedan-run grooming/prostitution rings etc.

      Many women don’t realize how anti-woman this religion can be.

      • Maybe what VB should do is use this ad but make several others.  One would have the woman be middle aged and in professional dress, lawyer, member of Parliament, etc.  Others would have them in the kind of clothing that would would expect to find Belgian women wearing ordinarily.  The message would be that white society gives them the choice, Islam only gives them the burqua and repression.

  • anonymous_amren

    A few points need to be made here:

    Firstly, the alternative to a burqa is not young women parading (or being paraded by their parents) almost naked. The aim should not be for women in burqas to switch to bikinis.

    A burqa is a dehumanising form of enslavement that prevents women from being able to eat, drink, talk, use their hands, have an identity, have friends, go out by themselves, etc. Modest dress, such as jeans and a t-shirt would be a massive liberation for them.

    Maybe this campaign makes sense in Europe, where people dress less modestly, and they are only trying to appeal to nationalists. But it feels to me like they’re missing the point.

    Secondly, it’s  difficult to enlist women in any movement, because Muslims are partly right (in an insane, overreacting a hundredfold, kind of way). Women are slightly smaller-minded, less confrontational, less driven, and less interested in grand plans for humanity as a whole.

    • Sonya610

      Women are slightly smaller-minded, less confrontational, less driven, and less interested in grand plans for humanity as a whole.

      And that right there is one MAJOR reason White Nationalism does not recruit many women. Next we can expect some to chime in and say all the problems are because women got the right to vote, and those rights should be stripped away. 

      That right THERE is a major reason why even those women that DO agree with White Nationalist principles often don’t get involved, because of the belittling and degrading attitudes.

      • Anan7

        “non-confrontational” isn’t always the best thing.  No one in history ever made a difference by being non-confrontational and worried about saying the wrong thing.

        And about including women, I think it is very important!  But women don’t seem to be as interested in it, unfortunately.

        I am a graduate student at a very liberal campus.  If I speak up against the anti-White PC culture I could get censored or expelled.  AmRen is a welcome relief from this sort of atmosphere.  I’m very grateful that my views are expressed somewhere, even if it is male-dominated.

        • Alexandra1973

          So what’s wrong with a patriarchy?  I’m a woman and I see nothing wrong with it.  It used to be, property owners/head of household could vote.

          I for one would not object to going back to the one-vote-per-household.

          Just as I’m a race realist, I’m a gender realist.

          • Sonya610

            Next you will be saying females don’t need to be educated either, the men earn all the money so why teach girls to read? It is a waste of resources!

            And it was NOT one vote per household, do you think rich widows could vote even though they were property owners? No they could not. In fact many rich women chose NOT to marry because the moment they DID marry they would lose all of their property in an instant; the property AND their children would belong solely to the husband. Oh and the husband could beat their wives with a stick legally as long as the stick wasn’t bigger than their thumb. If they divorced they walked out penniless and lost the right to even visit their children.

            Does that sound good to you? You will probably say yes, it sounds lovely.

          • Alexandra1973

            Before you have a tantrum, a little knowledge is a good thing:  http://www.ladiesagainstfeminism.com/feminism-related-issues/modern-women-submitting-and-serving/

          • Sonya610

            Alexandra1973 I guess your last comment means you don’t plan to sign over all property rights to your better male half. Sounds a bit too extreme? What is the worst that could happen!

          • Sonya610

            Clight12 you are reminiscing about the 50’s, a brief era in human history! The right to vote happened in the 1920’s! Black males got the right to vote in the 1860’s when most were illiterate.

            Stop with the “were the schools better, were our lives better” — life was harsh for everyone in the 19th century, few went to school Read a history book and stop fantasizing about the Beaver Cleaver lifestyle.

        • Black Swan

          If I speak up against the anti-White PC culture I could get censored or expelled. 

          Such are the times we live in.  You’ve made a very important point that it is not always safe to “make your views known.”

          Others here blather on about “speaking up” and “speaking out” as if it is safe to do so.   Being singled out, labeled and publicized as a “racist”, “hater” or “supremacist”  can end one’s career on the spot and ruin one’s reputation.  

          No different from when “heretic” was screamed at people during the Middle Ages to destroy their lives, which it did.

          • Anan7

            I am going to write letters to the editor about two terrible articles in my school’s “Campus Times”:
            http://www.campustimes.org/2012/03/01/affirmative-action-could-be-dismantled/
             and
            http://www.campustimes.org/2012/03/01/motion-for-multi-cultural-mecca/

          • Black Swan

            Remember where you are:  Ground zero of PC madness and terror.  The folk who enforce this have a lot of power , believe in the “politics of personal destruction” and will make destroying you their personal goal.  They ENJOY destroying their enemies.

            Do you have to give your real name and phone number to write a letter to the editor of your school paper?  Many papers require that now and are checking.

            Don’t expose yourself,  otherwise your life may become a living hell. You are opening up yourself to death threats and a real possibility of expulsion.  The least they’ll do to you is label you a racist and hater, note it on your transcripts and publish your photo on the front page of the student newspaper for all to see including your professors.  

            Expect no one on your campus to come to  your defense. 

            Ask the Duke boys.

            Your uni is rated as “yellow light” by FIRE meaning a number of your rights are ambiguous.  

            http://thefire.org/spotlight/codes/2510.html

    • Kblankenship7

       Marine LePen is a smart, confrontational woman.  Women can confront evil, just like men, but we all need to be patient and loving “at home”, i.e. with our families, friends, and like-minded acquantances.

      • Marine Le Pen leads a party full of blacks and dismisses us as ‘against equality’ to make room for homosexuals, Zionists and the usual suspects.

        Have you not read Colin Liddell’s piece on FN at AltRight? Or the comments to it especially by Roman Bernard, who asked her questions?

        Le Pens forcing us out to save the rest of the leftistkult from Islam.

  • jackellis

    Another good idea is to present the truth that in Islam, people are not allowed to drink beer. 

    Lots of Germans, Texans and Australians don’t really care a lot about politics, but they would fight for their right to drink beer.

    Start doing some reverse propaganda of insulting, pushy Muslim immigrants demanding local Whites can’t do things they’ve always done like enjoy beer.

    • Bradfield86

      As an Australian (and oddly a non-drinker), I think your suggestion is a good one.

      I have said before on AmRen and other similar sites that Australians are one of the most politically and socially apathetic lot on Earth.  However, if ever their beer supply or sporting events were threatened, then we would likely see a reaction. 

      I realise this is pretty pathetic to admit that Australians would spring into action over beer before they would a threat to the survival of our civilisation.  

      • jackellis

        Well said. And it’s an honest assement of your own people. All of the various sub groups of White Indo European people have various cultural loyalties, strengths and weaknessses. So many White Australians are not really in to politics, don’t want to take the time to try to understand the origins of Neo Conservatism, the Frankfurt School of Cultural Marxism – that’s understandible. I would rather not have to think too much about this stuff myself.

        But, when it comes for standing up for the basic, good things in life – which I include beer as one of the basic good things in life – yeah, I know my mates in Australia will be on our side.

        Cheers mates – never give up your/our freedom.

        14 Words

  • Anan7

    What would you suggest we do about it?

    Seriously?

  • 1gravity

    The ad seems to posit a choice between Ms. Burka, and the Sanda Flukes of this world.  I am not moved to join in an intense culture war so Susie Q down the street can sport her bikini one day and flout her equality cum affirmative action preferences the next.  Are Belgians likely to be persuaded by this, or when shall I expect my restraining order for posting this insensitive, divisive post?

  •  Thanks for the update. For those who have forgotten, the nationalist Swiss People’s Party (SVP) ran a similar poster a couple of years ago (AR posted the article). The top photo was four nude young women (backs to the camera) wading in a clear lake; the bottom photo was a bunch of burqa-clad women in a polluted lake. The SVP message was exactly the same as this one: The burqa is the future unless you vote with us.

    A lot of people here need to escape from their Puritan-imposed mental jail cells. Most Europeans do not go into a swoon over bare skin, which is why posters like these work over there. In fact, there was a time when nudity didn’t faze Americans either. Every morning during his presidency (weather permitting), John Quincy Adams took a nude swim in the Potomac.

  • Mel

    I’m a white woman who has been trying to do a bit to speak out about the implications of political Islam.  I’ve noticed so far the most vocal people speaking out about what Islam will do to women’s rights are mainly white men.  I’m not sure if this is because they can’t trust out current public womens’ rights advocates to speak out or because it is such a dangerous thing to do that men feel it is better they do it. 

    I’m in a slightly different situation to a lot of white women because I’m single with no kids. This gives me the time to research, and I do a lot of research and wish I had the time to do more. To understand Islam you need to really have the time to research it and get your head around everything. I think a lot of women are time poor and really haven’t had the kind of awakening I’ve had.  

    We somehow have to get the message out that women’s rights are something you can lose, and that Shariah Law doesn’t really benefit women. I think that the advertising campaign does try to push that message out there; don’t take it for granted that you can wear a bikini once Shariah law is enforced, because you are going to have to wear a Burka. 

  • OldAtlantic

    Onze toekomst means our future.  As the article points out, durven kiezen means free to choose.  These are good slogans to make people think.  Dare to choose our future. 

    This is really the situation ordinary people are in.  The establishment parties are choosing our future and telling us we can not choose our future.  It takes an act of courage to resist it.  Not an act of fear.

    The question is not is it risky to speak out, but how does our risk now compare to our risk in the future?  It is getting worse.  In the 1990s, we had Pat Buchanan as a candidate and Jared Taylor and Peter Brimelow got more establishment attention.

    But the gap from here to Syria, Libya, Egypt or even Moscow is still substantial.  Speak up.  Join NumbersUSA, support Amren.  Let your politicians know.  Go to caucuses.  You don’t have to be dressed like this woman, but you can go and push. 

    An ad like this helps people discuss it.  It is a prompt and learning aid.  They come along one way or another, as they do, seize the opportunity to make your point and speak out.  Support others who do.

    We choose our future.  Not Santorum.  Not Romney.  Not Jeb Bush.  Not Fox News.  You either dare to choose and speak out or others choose it for you.  It took courage to get where we are.  The 1776 era Founding Fathers knew that.   “A republic if you can keep it”.  Not a republic if you are afraid to speak out even when the physical risk is almost zero.  

    Dare to choose.  The establishment doesn’t welcome you choosing instead of them.   Dare to choose in their face.  Occupy Wall Street did.  The Tea Party did.  The Tea Party were called racist when they came out.  Now they are called absent.  Which one works?

  • Boereseun

    Just like white men.

  • anmpr1

    So the choice is between Islam and a woman’s “right” to wear a revealing swimsuit, presumably in public?  If the contest over civilization boils down to that, and if such superficiality is the measure of our Western heritage and tradition, then we are doomed.  It is not a question of if, but only when.  

    Finally, if this is the level at which women will be sufficiently engaged politically, then women have no business  being political.  And I question the seriousness of the men, too.

    • Unfortunately, you’re right. Completely wrong strategy.

    • When the enemy fights the enemy, who cares who wins?

      Don’t vote for people like this, they don’t fight for anything except political correctness (minus criticism of Islam, that’s ok cause theyre backwards like our ancestors).

  • MissBonnie123

    I do NOT agree with the sexual angle of the above photograph. I think the Vlaams Belaang party in Belgium should enlighten women on how Islam will subjugate them. The feminists will be up in arms over the photograph and this might backfire on the campaign.

  • They need to get straight to the point and stop with the babes in bikini approach. The barbarians of Islam stone women to death in countries under the rule of Islam. Acid attacks are also not uncommon. Islam is perfectly capable of giving us  all the material needed to oppose it. We just have to have the courage to use it! Leave the bikinis for the beach!

  • Just looking at pics- it seems like an example of soft Islamic-fetish porn.

  • Sonya610

    Uhhh….most Whites male OR female are liberal minded and will allow their offspring to date outside of the race.

    Keep in mind women got the right to vote in the 1920’s, the US really only started to fall apart during the 60’s when WHITE MEN forced issues such as the civil rights movement, desegregation and third world immigration onto the country.

    The White male politicians can claim credit for opening up the flood-gates and leading this country into ruin.

    If women aren’t being won over it is because no one is really trying that hard.

    • Nemo

      So right.

      Add to this the incalculable damage inflicted by Hugh Hefner’s mainstreaming of pornography & marketing of sexual liberation as the “Playboy Philosophy” starting in the 1950’s. Modern feminism was largely the effort to correct this toxic development.
      The best “women’s” argument against Islam is the argument against polygamy.  It’s not an accident that it’s harder & harder to make in the West’s “anything goes” culture. 

    • Black Swan

      Stop blaming White men for ruining this country, they did not.

      White men did not force issues such as the civil rights movement.  You need to research the issue and look closer.  The lawyers who argued for civil rights and  school desegregation were not white and did not represent white interests, only their own.

      http://tinyurl.com/oh4w3x

      Our people are not to blame for the destruction of this country and its way of life.  We did not “turn on each other.”  

      White men DID NOT open up the floodgates to third world immigration.  They argued against it until they were overpowered.  Lyndon Johnson was the ultimate useful idiot, Ted Kennedy even more so.  Paid off or threatened.

      White men do not control the levers of power in the government, the academic institutions or the mass media and haven’t in decades.Follow the money and look at who wields the REAL power in this country.  That’s where you’ll find the answers.

    • Sonya610

      Nemo —

      I don’t think polygamy is the best argument against Islamification. Men may like to think it is the best argument but any female that looks into the reality of the situation would not be concerned about it (marriage contracts, mostly only wealthy men take on multiple wives and the wives know in advance that will happen, each wife has her own home she is not forced to cohabit with the other females, not unlike the rich and famous western men only the partners are all legal and not all “ex wives and girlfriends).

      If the goal is to sway women hit on the topics that make them feel protective, protective of their children, of their pets, of their personal rights etc… Hit on fear, that motivates women to take a stand.

      Black Swan — I am not really blaming White men, but some really love to blame White women for the mess we are in. I was simply pointing out White men were in power when the worst happened, and White men really are still in power despite the mulatto president.

    • Black Swan

      Stop blaming White men for ruining this country, they did not.

      White men did not force issues such as the civil rights movement.  You need to research the issue and look closer.  The lawyers who argued for civil rights and  school desegregation were not white and did not represent white interests, only their own.

      http://tinyurl.com/oh4w3x

      Our people are not to blame for the destruction of this country and its way of life.  We did not “turn on each other.”  

      White men DID NOT open up the floodgates to third world immigration.  They argued against it until they were overpowered.  Lyndon Johnson was the ultimate useful idiot, Ted Kennedy even more so.  Paid off or threatened.

      White men do not control the levers of power in the government, the academic institutions or the mass media and haven’t in decades.Follow the money and look at who wields the REAL power in this country.  That’s where you’ll find the answers.

  •  Spot on. When I was going to University (before my father straightened me out and convinced me to go to trade school) I remember the way white females would pounce on white males in the various Social Science courses I had to take.

    They were worse than the black dudes. The black dudes in the class rarely said much to be honest.  The white females………….holy sh*t would they go off about white male privilege this and white male privilege that. They would usually finish there statement by smirking at me as if to say “HAHA, see what I can say, and you can;t stop me”.  Looking back, I saw a spiteful, spoiled, uneducated, anti-white male (the women’s “rights” movement never focuses on the many rapes perpetrated against white females by African males) rejects.

    Females, by their very nature often feel less nationalistic than males. 1000’s of years of evolution have carved out a far stronger sense of racial pride in males as oppossed to females.

    • Sonya610

      Those are highways leading into Mecca with exit ramps for non-Muslims.  It isn’t like they have “Muslim Only” carpool lanes all over the country, if they don’t want non-Muslim tourists visiting their Holy Sites that is their right, non-Muslims can always convert if they want to go to Mecca that badly.   

      • Certainly. But- I’ve been to Vatican a few times & never noticed “Catholics only” or “Christians only” signs. Nor among visitors. And, more important – it’s a regulation completely at odds with what the rest of the world practices.

        In other words- you can’t do in your land whatever you want, with absolute disregard for the “world”. These times are over. If you do, then you become  a pariah, like North Korea. And if you do, and you’re not a pariah- you’re vital US ally, which will-sooner or later- explode in your face.

        • Black Swan

          Forget moslem countries and the Vatican.  They can do whatever they desire.

          However, moslem encroachment is making itself known in Britain as more and  more areas declare themselves “under Sharia law.”

          Poster are appearing on bus stops, street lamps and in certain boroughs in London warning “that in this zone Sharia law is in effect” and there will be no gambling, no music or concerts, no porn or prostitution, no drugs or smoking and no alcohol.

          This is in Britain home of British Common Law.

          Native Britons are being overrun, living in a police state are losing their country and culture and will eventually live under Sharia law.

          • Mel

            The British Freedom Party are selling similar flyers that say “Sharia Free Zone” where they outlaw Burkas, child marriage, jihadis etc., 

            It is really quite funny and makes light of an incredible situation that is occurring.

        • Sonya610

          The Quran states that non-believers should not be allowed to approach the shrine in Mecca.

          Even if the Saudi Royal Family did NOT wish to abide by the Quran they still couldn’t go against the clearly stated rules as they would be overthrown in a heartbeat (they would be lucky to escape with their lives).

          It is their country, they control who may enter and can restrict some areas. Why do you have a problem with this? Do you believe there should be no restrictions on visitors anywhere which includes the US?

          • However, Sonya, we are not talking about just any “restrictions,” but rather restrictions based upon religion. We have no such restrictions in our country. Clearly, with your knowledge on the subject, you acknowledge the distinction.

            On the other hand, is Islam more than just a religion? Is there a political component as well? You were the one contemplating a conversion to Islam at one point, so you obviously
            know more about the subject than I do.

            Is there a political aspect to Islam?

          •  I remember reading the posts of another poster that went by the name of Sonya. I think she was married to a Iranian Muslim. If this is the same Sonya, then that would explain her knowledge of Islam. 

            In regards to Muslims being being sexually deviant………..I would say most are not. Conditions in their nations do not really permit it. People work just to scrap by and survive. There is much less time for recreational sex than there is in in America, or Britain, or France, etc.

          • Sonya610

            Robert Griffith no. I visited Iran a few years ago on vacation.  No marriage or romantic expectation whatsoever. One does not visit Iran for romantic reasons, they visit to see and experience Persian culture.

          • No, no and no. Jewish, Christian, Hindu, Buddhist … sacred places are “open”. A Christian or Muslim can freely go to Kumbh Mela, and Buddhists and Hindu to Lourdes and Fatima.

            Islam is radically different & it’s useless to deny it.

          • Sonya610

            Mormon Temples are not open to non-Mormons, even if their relatives are getting married they cannot enter or view the ceremony.  Some ancient Jewish Temples also banned gentiles during the time of Christ. 

            If the Mormons in the US can do it how can you condemn the Saudi’s for practicing the same restrictions?

          • Sonya610:  Because Mormons and Jews don’t have as a goal to impose some sort of religious-based law over people who don’t want to abide by it.

      • Your absolutely right Sonya! If only they would stay in “their countries,” we wouldn’t have a problem!

        • Sonya610

          Yes I completely agree!  Tourism is fine, tourists from wherever bring their money and abide by the laws of the land while VISITING. That should be allowed; conquest/moving in is another thing entirely.

      • StivD

        As far as I’m concerned they can impose any laws and codes of conduct for outsiders in their own cultures and nations.  Whites have as little right to dictate to other peoples in their homelands as non-whites do in our traditional homelands. Anything else is globalist thinking.

        • Sorry, but we live in a globalist world. We cannot avoid interference. No way to cop out. There is no possibility to shut oneself out & live in splendid isolation. The point is that we force others to accept our values – and we did it, succesfully, in many areas.

          The true problem is double standards & rotting liberalism, not globalization (which is inevitable, anyway). No way back to the 19th century.

          • StivD

            It’s not necessarily a natural process; it’s been foisted on everyone BY’ liberals’, more like neo-cons.

            It doesn’t have to be either live in a globalist ‘paradise’ or take a trip back to the 19th century. A nation can be involved in the world without taking on too many aspects of other cultures, or expecting them to live by our values. Forcing Western values on others throughout the world is much closer to 19th century thinking.   I have no interest in forcing anything on anyone. 

            Why do so many people insist things are inevitable when all it takes is for people to change it? The entire world is not yours or mine.

          •  I have to disagree- although a part of me agrees with you. We have actually forced our way of life, our ethical standards, our alphabet (Chinese couldn’t use computers without pin-yin), our  clothing, our…everything.

            I’m not talking about some kind of police pressure or control, but about expansionist nature of Western world. I’m talking about freedom, individualism, a dose of healthy skepticism, energy and tolerance of dissent. I’m not talking about civilizational suicide.

            So, I think we agree that globalism is a lie as an ideology, at least in aspects we discuss on this forum.. It is- I think- true as the inevitable process that we should-could-must harness to our purposes.

  • SoCal Local

    Sex Sells! And we must use all the weapons at hand.

    Whites should tell the whole truth. Islam means putting sacks over women and turning them into breeding stock. It also means turning men into knife-wielding, bomb-chucking Jihadists. At this point it is still easier to mention the former than the latter, so lets do so as a start.

  • Boereseun

    Maybe the moderator can answer as to why they deleted my first response to this comment? All it said was “Just like white men”. Which is true, unless of course you believe that white women can have white children with non-white men? For white survival both white men and women are important but I will not be a slave to white women since they are not my very existence.

  • Boereseun

    Why would any sane man commit to a modern, entitlement princess, when 50 % of all marriages end in divorce, where over 65 % of divorces filed are done so by women, where all women need for divorce, alimony and child support from the estranged husband is to state that the husband emotionally abused them? Where not being able to afford child support or alimony lands a man in jail. It really is amazing there aren’t more men lining up for the marriage meat grinder.

    And please stop with the ‘women are just waiting for men to commit’ nonsense. White women are only willing to commit after they are into their thirties, after they have had their fun and after they are sick and tired of working their careers and want a man to suddenly take care of them.

    What white women think of as ‘commitment’ is financial suicide and possible prison time for the man if she wants a divorce when she’s suddenly unhaaapy. Never mind that the only time he will get time with his own children is when the ex-wife decides that it is okay.

    I have no sympathy for women who spent their most fertile years sleeping around, career building, man bashing and then suddenly want a man at the magical age of thirty. There is no reason to commit to them, unless you like being tortured for the rest of your life.

  • Kurt Plummer

    I think it’s a great symbol for exactly the reason that most find it offensive.  It is blatantly sexual and reminds European men of what they stand to lose in access to pretty white women when we are replaced as the dominant population percentage in our own ‘homelands’ and with demographic minority comes economic equivalent.

    Folks, most of Europe is at a TFR of 1.6 (1.6 children per family).  In parts of Scandinavia, it’s down to 1.25.  Seriously sub replacement level horror that would be made better if women were treated like the ripely fecund biped animals they are.  That’s what the flared hips, non lactating enlarged breasts and big thighs/behind are about as engendering the instinctive urge to procreate!

    If you want to desexualize women as entrance requirement to androgynous race politics, you need to acknowledge that such refusal to treat them as breeding machines means also accepting the economics of a falling population which brings with it a cheap, high TFR (up to 6), wage slave consumer class to Europe to replace the children which are not born there, to whites.

    Better to tell women there will be no contraception or abortion anymore and that if they get knocked up out of wedlock _or divorce_, whoever gets custody of any children will have to support the kids, totally on their own.

    Marriage will skyrocket and women who still breed white, whomever they knock boots with, will demand that their life partners be given the social dominance as wage scales necessary to once more support a family as a single wage earner.  Because their innate sex drive will render them pregnant too often.  Liberation is simply a code word for disenfranchising the white middle class until we are driven economically as much as genetically, extinct.

    THAT is the reality of whites being the only race to suffer an absolute vs. percentile loss in the population game.  In 1950 we were 27% of the planet.  In 2100 we will be 4%.

    And not all the smart weapons in the world will prevent the Camp Of The Innocents playout that will happen when races who have never learned to control their own over breeding in fact begin to look enviously at all our open spaces.  Because we have.

    From within or without, we will be replaced.

    The ONLY alternative to rebonding women to a kitchen/church/children reality of specieis replenishment lifestyle is to go with exogenic genomics.  So that artificial wombs can replace those which white women refuse to use, (3 children, minimum) productively.

    And frankly, we may not have the time.

    • Sonya610

      So that artificial wombs can replace those which white women…
       
      Wow…your post was one of the most striking rants I have ever seen on a WN site. That is saying something. Actually I have suggested the “artificial womb” myself as an answer for those White men that hate White women, but I was saying it in jest because realistically, as you mentioned, it is not possible within the time frame.
       
      Keep in mind the White drop in population ratio is MOSTLY due to the proliferation and spread of White technology in the form of vaccines and advanced farming technologies to third world populations. Africa would not have such astounding population increases if it were not for vaccines and farming techniques that allow surplus to feed their ever growing population.
       
      Whites do not need to compete with the rest of the world, they just need to stop feeding/supporting the others and most importantly STOP importing them into white countries.
       
      There are enough White female breeders to sustain a well maintained White population, we aren’t going to go extinct IF the territory is DEFENDED. The problem is NOT the White birth rate, it is that White’s are allowing non-White sinto their countries and encouraging them to out breed our population. It basically comes down to maintaining White territories and homelands!
       
      So do you suggest that the White female protect those territories and homelands?  Or do you think others may be better suited for that?
       
      Whites will NOT go extinct from a slightly lower birth rate, invaders will assure extinction.

      • Our birth ratio compared to other parts of the world is irrelevant if the borders are shut. What matters is that the average family size is at least three children per female, to keep the population afloat.

        Birth rate is important in itself. Why should the young support an aging population because their parents wanted to choose the number of kids they had?

  • I would have apologized, because I think “slut” was a bad choice of words.  His apologizing gets the debate back on the level, that being the left’s maniacal desire to force the Catholic Church to pay for contraceptives.  They should be lucky they’re not BYU.  Remember Brandon Davies?

    As an aside, the Democrats really don’t know the kind of dangerous fire with which they’re playing when they try to start a war with the Catholic Church.

    • StivD

      Selfish and demanding would have been good word choices. She really does want her sex life bankrolled.

      • That alludes to the point I’ve been making all along.

        My rhetorical question used to be this:

        What are the ethics of making consequence-free sex free of charge?

        I have since refined my question to ask this:

        What are the ethics of making consequence-free sex free of  charge for only certain kinds of people?

        To ask it another way, why should the public pay for prophylactics of 11-year old blacks in Philadelphia, and why should the Catholic Church pay for the birth control pills of 30-year old law students at Jesuit schools, when a certain 34-year old white suburban accountant I know has to pay for his own condoms?  (TMI, I know).

  • MissBonnie123

    I am happy that there is a White woman out there who thinks like I do on these issues. Thank you for expressing these thoughts!

  • @c320fe2b4a01552e99ce250689601a3c:disqus You are correct and very ,very wrong at the same time.  White people are not pathetic.  This attempt to “fight back” with wit is definitely lost on Islamists and those who share the more conservative viewpoints of womens portrayal.  It is also lost on those who demand that women not be treated as sexual objects and so it fails on all fronts.  My wife looked at it and said she didn’t like the fact that while the girls loses the robes she is still wearing the head scarf and so this ad loses on all fronts.   But at least it is something.   What have you done to fight back?  I too am tired of the lame attempts to fights violence with reason.  How well did that work out for Socrates?  People seem to be frightened of being labeled the “bad guy” in this conflict of cultures, however this fear is ridiculous as the other side sees all Western culture as evil and openly embraces causing fear amongst the sheeple.  More and more of Our people are waking up every day though and soon enough We will embrace the power that comes through causing ones enemies to shake with fear.  The road ahead is long and not peaceful.  I for one would rather die on my feet than live on my knees.   White people are a proud race.  White people are an amazing people capable of the most impossible tasks.  White people are the saviors of the world.  The problem lies in getting over our own political and regional differences in order to win this war against darkness.

  • StivD

    I think there is a subtle, semi-hidden message that’s being missed here because of all the uproar over a *gasp* scantily clad girl. 

    By showing her in a bikini, and making it easier to see her female form, they have made it easier to see the banners strategically placed. Those banners aren’t there only to have slogans written on them, but to make a symbolic point by pointing out two very important things that Muslims may control if given the chance: the most important one is on the bottom, which isn’t just about sexual control but the.. WOMB.. and the most effective weapon they have against whites; dominance through interbreeding with white women.

    The banner over her breasts is about how Muslims will control whose next generation is nurtured and sustained by the people most likely to do so, in more ways than one. I think it’s a mix showing that both sexual freedom, for everyone, and reproduction/reproductive rights, whose children will benefit the most in the future, are at stake.

    Women’s bodies are a sexual symbol as well as a symbol of the continuation of the race and European society.  This ad is sort of subliminal too as much as it is about sex being used to gain attention.

    I realize I may be over-analyzing it.

  • StivD

    Social ridicule can be a powerful weapon.

  • Sonya610

    Clight12 Like it or not, it is WOMEN who set the moral standard, not men.  It has always been that way since time began. 

    Yes on that we agree. At the same time why did men in the past so ferociously defend their women? Because  losing the women during a war could mean losing the tribe and gene pool.

    It really isn’t about morality. If the territory were protected from invaders what is the worst that could happen? Weak morals, easy sex, and more illegitimate White offspring? It has happened before and the White Nations/Cultures survived just fine.

  • John McNeill

    When I look at this ad, I ask myself: what am I exactly fighting for? Nudity? Promiscuity?  Feminism?

    I’ll pass.

    I think there are better ways of making nationalism appealing to women. More importantly I think there are ways of appealing to both white men and women. Such as invoking images of our rich history and culture that has existed for thousands of years. I’m personally more inspired by images of men and women in traditional folk dress, as it reminds me of my heritage and what I truly wish to fight for.

    • Boereseun

      I quite agree with you. Although I don’t think the advert was meant to come out for nudity, promiscuity or feminism, it certainly can lead in that direction. As someone pointed out before though, the advert will probably get flak from feminists in reality, rather than garner their support.

      Anyway, the idea can be used for many different freedoms, customs or our very heritage that Westerners take for granted and applied in that manner. If Vlaams Belang made a few similar adverts like these, with more specific target markets, I could see it helping to bring more awareness of the Islamic threat and perhaps even more votes. Although it would seem that as soon as they break the 24% mark of Flemish Belgians they get banned as a political party. So much for democracy, eh?

  • Well- nuke the Makkah & rewrite the Koran. And see will Allah move a finger.

  • Wayne Lo

    Picture to stir the soul of white nationalists:

    http://popwife.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/allblk.jpg

  • Most of the posts here are- naive.

    What in earth can a Muslim think seeing this ad ?

    White European women are sluts who deserve to be raped.

    What can White European male think ?

    Well, I thought:

    a) nice Islamic-fetish soft porn

    b) this is his DAUGHTER ? Sorry, this is distasteful, with an incestuous & exhibitionist undercurrent all too obvious

    Which will be reactions of Muslim women ?

    Thanks God I can hide my fat physique. Plus, White women are sluts, radically different
    from us, to God- and man- submissive Muslimas, blessed by God’s unalterable decrees which
    has removed from us the burden of exercising free will & thought. We can be slaves, and we like it.
    No anxieties that come with freedom.

    Which will be reactions of White European women ?

    a) I’m not interested, it’s just another try to reestablish White male patriarchy, our chief enemy

    b) Islam can’t be so bad since our military & hawks have virtually bombed the brains out
    of the entire Islamic world. Military patriarchal aggression – on the global scale, the same
    mindset that rapes us at home.

    c) girl looks good, better than me. A slut.

    d) hmmm….yes, it’s uncomfortable with all these Muslims around & threatening. But it must be a peaceful solution to this, some group talk like Oprah.

  • StivD

    Yes, to me it’s about the beauty of white women more than using them as mindless sex objects. I don’t believe that’s what the ad is about.

    Besides, believe it or not, the first thing I noticed about her was what beautiful eyes she has.

  • Sonya610

    A group shot would be even more effective. A group of German women wearing street clothes and looking happy in a restaurant or store, next picture shows the same women all wearing black burkas. The image would come across as scary and very foreign, much more so than a single model.

  • jeffaral

    Some commenters are not happy with that beautiful young woman in bikini.   In northern Europe nudism is common and there is nothing wrong about that.    Denying one’s body freedom of expression is one political tool of backward Muslims to opress women.   We in the west should stand for freedom or just succumb to the third world!