I saw at Cross Map (with the help of Pewsitter) that the mouth-breathers of the Religion of Peace called Boko Haram, who seriously suffer from “Isis-envy” (I’m no shrink but that’s what it looks like) have upped their game right on schedule.
After declaring their own little caliphate, our of “Isis-envy”, they are proceeding to the next logical step for Islamists: decapitations of Christians, forced “marriages” of women. You know… the usual.
Boko Haram Declares Full Sharia; Beheads Christian Men, Forces Women to Marry in Gwoza, Madagali
Following the declaration that Gwoza, a town in the troubled northeastern state of Borno is as an Islamic Caliphate and the recent takeover of Madagali by the Boko Haram insurgents, Islamic extremists have reportedly beheaded every Christian man they could find in the area.
In addition, their wives have been forced into Islam and given in marriage to sect members.
According to a story by Maina Maina of an online Nigerian newspaper The Daily Post, the director of social Communications of the Catholic Diocese of Maiduguri, revealed this Thursday, in an electronic statement to journalists in Maiduguri, the Borno state capital.
According to the statement, the Daily Post reported, “The Catholic diocese of Maiduguri covers the whole of Yobe, Borno and Adamawa States, the three states under strict emergency rule. Apart from the churches within Maiduguri that have great share of such attacks by the terrorists group, all the churches on the major road linking Maiduguri and Adamawa state have been shut down due to activities of the insurgents.”
[…]
Thus, the Religion of Peace.
Take a moment to say a prayer for these poor people in Nigeria and everywhere radical Islamic terror is on the rise. And get your heads into that place where you can envision their style of terror comes to a neighborhood near you.
When will some nation or coalition of nations take these maniacs out? Will it be European? Who wants to bet?
Sts. Nunilo and Alodia, pray for us.
St. Lawrence of Brindisi, pray for us.
Loading ...
The Europeans have no military capability that could adequately confront a Boko Haram Germany might want to do something but they will quickly face the reality they lack the capability, and they have to consider their domestic problems in the Ukraine.
The only countries that have the capability to sustain the necessary logpac and associated supply chain would be the US and Russia. China has the numbers, but not the expeditionary capability.
Though, China could potentially mount an invasion of Africa and sustain it through exploitation of the local populace should Boko Haram turn on the countless Chinese who are operating in Africa. However, China has never seemed to prioritize their expats like this in the past. However, control of some potentially strategically critical minerals might provide all the reason they need.
Additionally, South Africa could resource a domestic continental campaign if it were seriously committed. Egypt would have the logistical reach, but domestic considerations would keep it home.
I tend to think that whatever about Germany’s capability, it’s the difficulty to get us want something done is the foremost problem. And of course what little we can do, it seems, alas, wise to spare for the time being for the succour of or being-ready for at the very least our Polish neighbors. [The good part of such times is that I can actually say such a thing without fainting for shame.]
Alas that President Putin is tampering with states’ sovereignty at the very time when such there’s actually a full-scale war going on where by right we should be on the same side (anyone remember Chechnya?), launched by ISIS and their comrades-in-spirit in Nigeria.
That said, France has combatted something similar (but on smaller scale) in the immediate past (in Mali). They might be capable; but now Nigeria’s parent is not France but Britain. Which brings us to the question: Does Britain want? and is Britain able?
The French have fairly extensive experience of using small numbers of Legionaires, airforce and army to scatter assorted armed thugs and lowlifes throughout West Africa, most recently in Chad and Mali. However, I doubt Nigeria would accept the sort of aid France provided to failing or failed Francophone states, even if the Nigerian army seems incapable in providing the rudiments of security in much of northern Nigeria. Boko Haram is reportedly often better equipped than the Nigerian army units facing them.
Mischief-making along its borders, is the only thing that interests Russia at present. Ukrainian Orthodox Christians who accept the Christ-given authority of the chair of St Peter, have lost churches in areas where Russian funded gangs hold sway. That said, none of that compares to followers of the Religion of Peace who seem to revel in depravity.
We Americans need to have an NFL Game for Peace. Afterwards, the players join up with our military and get things done over there!
“Religion of Piece”
A “piece” of the USS Cole…
A “piece” of the New York City Skyline…
A “piece” of the Boston Marathon…
A “piece” of some Russian school girls in Beslan…
A “piece” of “the wrong kind of muslim”…
A “piece” of Iraqi Christians girls…
A “piece” of Iraqi Yazidis girls…
A “piece” of American cameramen and news reporters…
A “piece” of Christian Churches…
A “piece” of a mall…
A “piece” of… You get the picture.
At this point, I’m of the opinion that it is not that the secular West will not defeat islam, it is that the secular west CANNOT defeat islam.
People of the secular wester are too happy in their self-centered, nihilistic death-spiral to defend themselves. The can’t be bothered to look away from hacked celebrity photos, or from whatever disgusting thing they are addicted to.
A person from the secular west looks upon St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome, and thinks: “What nice pretty architecture…” They snap a few photos, and move on.
I, and the few people who frequent this blog, and who are of similar mindset but haven’t found this blog, look at St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome, and think: “This is where the Prince of the Apostles, who was too humble to be crucified like his Lord so he was crucified upside down, breathed his last, where closed his eyes on this life, and opened them up to our Savior, a sight we all hope to one day view.” We then say a few prayers, and then we take a few photos.
The west has given up on religion, and therefore cannot fight against someone who has it. The secular west has the material ability to utterly crush ISIS, but lacks the mental and spiritual ability to actually do it.
This century is going to be a bloody one.
If like me, you have friends, colleagues who have been asleep or absurdly uncurious these past 13 years since the towers entombed 2900, you might hear their silly talk about ISIS, Boko Haram, al Shabab, Jamal Islamaya being “new” or “differing” enemies of the West. Nope. Sadly we modern Westerners think in nanoseconds and so 2001 is ancient history to us, while an enemy ideology founded by The Enemy in 610 AD encourages devotees to ponder in centuries.
To clear up mushy thinking on the subject of Islam, I suggest any of Robert Spencer’s books clarifying Islamic history and doctrine but also a book by Efraim Karsh, ISLAMIC IMPERIALISM, which was published in 2013. Raymond Ibrahim has his own website, blogs on Frontpagemag.com and has written an excellent book, CRUCIFIED AGAIN.
The media keeps referring to radical Islam.Or radical Islamists etc.
The problem isn’t radical Islam.The problem is that Islam IS radical.
Seems PM David Cameron is beginning to catch on. We should show them the door in our country.Seriously.
And if they join the fight with ISIS they are no longer citizens.
Dear boxerpaws1952,
well I wouldn’t say the problem is that Islam is radical. After all, Catholicism is radical too, and do we really want to favor “nonradicalism” – i. e., to radically not dare deviate from the middle of society, whatever the middle of society happens to favor?
The problem is that Islam is Islam, or rather, that Islam is among other things some things that Islam happens to be.
And of course in fact the saying “the problem is radical Islam” is not entirely wrong, because: the non-radical Muslims by definition do not take Islam too seriously, and we may reasonable hope (as they belong to humanity and can be expected to generally share common human morality) that they especially do not take those parts of Islam too seriously which really are problematic.
[Though I fear that once again the blame will be laid not on taking false commandments of false religion seriously, but on taking religion seriously (“fundamentalism”): and we can expect to be blamed by that in the future, as we already are.]