A history of the Spanish Inquisition

Or, a reminder that inquisitions are not merely an effective answer, they are inevitable if the West decides to survive:

A critical question arises in light of the recent spate of fatal terror attacks in France and other European nations: How do you once and for all eradicate “extremism” from Muslim communities living in the West?

Western leaders usually respond by citing anything and everything from new “initiatives” meant to foster closer relations between Muslim communities and their host nations, to surveillance measures of hot spots and mosques.

Lamentably, history has already proven that even much more draconian measures against Islam—of the sort that modern Western man cannot even conceive let along implement—are doomed to failure.  

Consider the historical experiences of France’s neighbor, Spain.  In the eighth century, Muslims from Africa invaded and brutally conquered the Iberian Peninsula.  Christians were massacred and subjugated; churches were destroyed and/or converted to mosques.  By the late fifteenth century, however—after centuries of wars to liberate Spain from Islam (AKA, the Reconquista)—Christian rule finally extended to every corner of the peninsula.

Muslims, however, remained, mostly centered in Granada.  Originally, they were given lenient terms: Muslims could continue practicing their religion, enforce sharia in their own communities, and even travel freely.

Even so, whenever the opportunity arose, Muslims rebelled and launched many hard-to-quell uprisings, some “involving the stoning, dismembering, beheading, impaling, and burning alive of Christians.”  Muslims also regularly colluded with foreign Muslim powers (e.g., North Africans, Ottoman Turks) in an effort to subvert Spain back to Islam.

Fed up with this “enemy within,” the Spanish crown finally decreed in 1501 that all Muslims had two choices: convert to Christianity or leave Spain. The motivation was less religious and more political; it was less about making Muslims “good Christians” and more about making them “good citizens.” So long as they remained Muslim—thereby operating under the highly divisive doctrine of “loyalty and enmity”—they would remain hostile and disloyal to Christian Spain; and because secularism, atheism, multiculturalism, or just general “wokeness,” were not options then, the only practical way Muslims could slough off their tribalism and be loyal to a Christian kingdom was by embracing its faith.

Spain’s entire Muslim population—hundreds of thousands of Muslims—responded by openly embracing Christianity while remaining crypto-Muslims, in keeping with the Muslim doctrine of taqiyya.  It teaches that, whenever Muslims find themselves under infidel authority, they may say and do almost anything—denounce Muhammad, receive baptism and communion, venerate the cross—as long as their hearts remain true to Islam.  So, in public, these newly converted “Christians” went to church and baptized their children; at home, they recited the Koran, preached undying hate for the infidel, and plotted how to destroy Christian Spain.

That these “Moriscos”—that is, self-professed Muslim converts to Christianity who were still “Moorish,” or Islamic, as they came to be known—went to great lengths to foist their deception cannot be doubted, as explained by one historian:

For a Morisco to pass as a good Christian took more than a simple statement to that effect. It required a sustained performance involving hundreds of individual statements and actions of different types, many of which might have little to do with expressions of belief or ritual per se. Dissimulation [taqiyya] was an institutionalized practice in Morisco communities that involved regular patterns of behaviour passed on from one generation to the next.

Despite this elaborate masquerade, Christians increasingly caught on: “With the permission and license that their accursed sect accorded them,” a frustrated Spaniard remarked, “they could feign any religion outwardly and without sinning, as long as they kept their hearts nevertheless devoted to their false impostor of a prophet. We saw so many of them who died while worshipping the Cross and speaking well of our Catholic Religion yet who were inwardly excellent Muslims.”

Christians initially tried to reason with the Moriscos; they reminded them how they became Muslim in the first place: “Your ancestor was a Christian, although he made himself a Muslim” to avoid persecution or elevate his social status; so now “you also must become a Christian.” When that failed, Korans were confiscated and burned; then Arabic, the language of Islam, was banned. When that too failed, more extreme measures were taken; it reached the point that a Morisco could “not even possess a pocketknife for eating with that did not have a rounded point, lest he savage a Christian with it.”

A Muslim chronicler summarizes these times: “Such of the Muslims as still remained in Andalus, although Christians in appearance, were not so in their hearts; for they worshipped Allah in secret. . . . The Christians watched over them with the greatest vigilance, and many were discovered and burnt.”

Such are the origins of the Spanish Inquisition (which, contrary to popular belief, targeted more Muslims than Jews). For no matter how much the Moriscos “might present the appearance of a most peaceful submission,” a nineteenth century historian wrote, “they remained nevertheless fundamental Musulmans, watching for a favourable opportunity and patiently awaiting the hour of revenge, promised by their prophecies.”

Note that the Spanish Inquisition also had a considerably lower body count than the current program of European tolerance. In its 353-year history, the Spanish Inquisition was responsible for a grand total of 3,230 deaths, which on an annual basis is less than the number of French citizens who have been murdered by Muslims in 2020 alone.


Ending the war in Afghanistan

 Bring the troops home. President Trump might need them soon:

Acting US Defense Secretary Christopher Miller is apparently preparing to withdraw troops from Afghanistan, saying the conflict “isn’t over,” but adding that “all wars must end.”

“This is the critical phase in which we transition our efforts from a leadership to supporting role,” Miller said on Friday in a letter to all Department of Defense employees. “We are not a people of perpetual war. It is the antithesis of everything for which we stand and for which our ancestors fought. All wars must end.”

The letter came just four days after President Donald Trump fired Defense Secretary Mark Esper and replaced him with Miller, who was previously director of the National Counterterrorism Center. Miller was among four Trump loyalists who replaced top civilian officials at the Pentagon on Monday, just two days after mainstream media outlets declared Democrat Joe Biden the winner of the November 3 election.

Trump is challenging the election results in court, based on allegations of fraud by voters and election officials, but he also appears to be acting with increased urgency to fulfill his 2016 campaign promise of ending the war in Afghanistan, which has now dragged on for 19 years – making it the longest in the history of the US.

#CrosstheRubicon, Mr. President. They’re not playing fair or legal, and everyone knows it. 


Totally credible reports

NeverTrumper Bill Maxwell very reliably reports, on the basis of his very close connections with people he hates, that President Trump is as demoralized as he wants you to be:

According to Trump’s inner circle, he is depressed, out of money, and afraid of going to jail.

I don’t know, if I was a NeverTrumper, that would frighten me considerably more than a President Trump who is confident of victory and is basking in the full-throated public support of his supporters. After all, he’s still got at least six weeks to utilize the U.S. military and order drone strikes on individual citizens he designates as enemies. 

Don’t buy into the demoralization campaign. Epstein didn’t kill himself. And Biden didn’t win.


Mailvox: complex litigation

 Karl the Martian asks about the latest twist in the Patreon CA court cast:

complex litigation hype train – stronger or weaker than our god emperor’s chances of being president?

It’s not so much weaker as nonexistent. What he’s referring to here is yesterday’s court-approved request for complex litigation made by Patreon back in May. This was a cheap legal stunt intended to increase filing fees for the Bears, which also provided the Bears with a third breach of contract claim in their arbitrations. Because the case isn’t actually complex and complex status wouldn’t serve to do anything it hasn’t already accomplished, Patreon agreed to an order that was filed to designate the case as non-complex more than a month ago, as the court records show.

2020-10-07     FEE PAID ON: STIPULATION & ORDER TO DESIGNATE CASE AS NON-COMPLEX (TRANSACTION ID # 100113383)

As far as I have heard, no one on either side understands how this happened or what’s going on yet. My guess is that this was just an administrative error in which someone failed to notice the original request had already been revoked.


Proof of PA fraud

The Gateway Pundit provides proof of mail-in ballot fraud in Pennsylvania:

In almost every county throughout the state, the President was awarded a percent of votes 40{3aedcb51dac2fbb83a885d32b07950f3050377138d02430f831f0a3ede84357a} less than the percent the President won on election day.  If Trump won a county by 80{3aedcb51dac2fbb83a885d32b07950f3050377138d02430f831f0a3ede84357a} of the vote on Election Day, he won 40{3aedcb51dac2fbb83a885d32b07950f3050377138d02430f831f0a3ede84357a} of the mail-in vote for a county.  If the President won 60{3aedcb51dac2fbb83a885d32b07950f3050377138d02430f831f0a3ede84357a} of the vote on Election Day, he won 20{3aedcb51dac2fbb83a885d32b07950f3050377138d02430f831f0a3ede84357a} of the mail-in vote in another county.  This pattern occurred in almost every county with the only noticeable exception of Philadelphia, where the President only earned 30{3aedcb51dac2fbb83a885d32b07950f3050377138d02430f831f0a3ede84357a} of the vote on Election Day.


Adios, comic book stores

When we started Arkhaven Comics, we initially thought we would be offering a new form of distribution to the comic book shops. And while the first shops we spoke to were interested, it rapidly became apparent to me that they were not a viable distribution channel, or at least, would not be for long. The Dark Herald observes that it appears DC has now reached the same conclusion:

A new article has just been posted by Bleeding Cool, more or less confirming what I had posited in my Red Honeymoon peace. 

That DC is Getting out of the monthly pamphlet business. And that means abandoning the comic shops. 

“That the Warner Bros firings of yet more DC Comics senior staffers, and the subsequent fallout across the company is part of a series of measures that will include a switch away from month print comic books towards digital comic book serialization of stories, then collected in trade paperback sized volumes, or larger, thicker, anthologies aimed at a general mass market, a bookstore market, the bookfair market, the likes of Amazon – and then comic book stores and the direct market almost as an afterthought.

DC is reportedly offering its characters and properties for license, but at exorbitant rates that don’t make sense for anyone. No worries, Arkhaven is going to be introducing a considerable amount of new content in the new year. And yes, a certain war is going to be a particular point of emphasis; you’re not going to believe what The Legend has planned.


AZ voting machines not legit

 The longer this goes on, the more that will come out:

“NEW DOMINION VOTING MACHINES NOT OFFICIALLY CERTIFIED

2019 Arizona Revised Statutes

Title 16 – Elections and Electors

§ 16-449 Required test of equipment and programs; notice; procedures manual

The test shall be observed by at least two election inspectors, who shall not be of the same political party, and shall be open to representatives of the political parties, candidates, the press and the public.

Neither a Libertarian Party agency Representative NOR the Republican GOP Chair Rae Chornenky was preset at this REQUIRED test and by statute there SHALL be at least 2 official observers from differing parties present to certify the machines

THE MACHINES WERE NOT OFFICIALLY CERTIFIED ACCORDING TO STATUTE”

Ignore the media’s propaganda campaign. Its whole purpose is to wear you down and demoralize you.


Watch the wives

First Salvini, now Johnson, have been betrayed by their female companions.

On Monday evening the Prime Minister offered Mr Cain the vacant job of Downing Street chief of staff.

Who else could follow Cummings out the door? 

Many of the most senior figures in Downing Street owe their loyalty to Dominic Cummings from Vote Leave days.

Lee Cain’s resignation on Wednesday night had already caused deep frustration. 

And there are fears that some could follow Mr Cummings out of the door now he has signalled his departure.

They include advisers Cleo Watson, Oliver Lewis – known as ‘Sonic’ – and data guru Ben Warner.

A source has said that while Brexit envoy Lord Frost was unhappy about Mr Cain’s departure, he has no intention of quitting as talks with Brussels enter their final stages. 

The move was backed by both Mr Cummings and the Cabinet Secretary, Simon Case, who argued that Mr Cain had been fulfilling part of the role for months.

However, news of the appointment was leaked to the Mail – prompting a furious backlash from senior Tories, who feared it would further embolden a Vote Leave faction contemptuous of the role of MPs.

Crucially, it also encountered the wrath of Ms Symonds, who dislikes Mr Cain’s abrasive style. She told her fiancé it would be a ‘mistake’ to give him a promotion.

As news of the row behind the scenes became public, Mr Cain decided his role was untenable.

He will stay in post until the end of the year, when he will be replaced as director of communications by former Mail journalist James Slack, currently Mr Johnson’s official spokesman. However, unlike Mr Cain, who was a political appointment, he will remain a civil servant. 

Tory MPs warned Mr Johnson that the chaos in No 10 was undermining public confidence in the Government.

Sir Roger Gale said it was ‘extraordinary and unacceptable that Downing Street should allow itself to be distracted by internal squabbles’ in the midst of a pandemic.

He added: ‘Frankly this is a distraction… the Prime Minister has got to get a grip on it.’

Other MPs urged Mr Johnson to ditch his special adviser.

One said: ‘If they have got rid of one of the Kray brothers they have got to get rid of Cummings as well. To use a well-known phrase, Boris should take back control and be the real Boris that so many of his genuine friends and supporters believe he can be.’

The Prime Minister also faced questions over Ms Symonds’ role in Downing Street. 

‘The question on everyone’s lips is ”who will she go after next”… it looks like senior appointments now have to be approved by Carrie,’ an insider said.

‘That is a dangerous path for the Government to go down.’

Another adviser said the episode reflected poorly on the Prime Minister. ‘It is disappointing that he has failed to return the loyalty of his most loyal lieutenant when the going got tough,’ they said.

‘It begs the question – who is making the decisions now?’

Looks like Britain has a new Lady Macbeth in the making. Boris Johnson actually looks afraid of her. Once again, the foolishness of placing any confidence in a “leader” who can’t stop chasing women is underlined.

UPDATE: And now Johnson’s best adviser has exited the sinking ship.

Boris Johnson’s chief adviser Dominic Cummings has left Number 10 with immediate effect, BBC political editor Laura Kuenssberg says. Mr Cummings spoke to the PM earlier on Friday and it was decided it was best for him to go immediately after days of turmoil, our political editor said.


Too implausible for fiction

Bestselling novelist Larry Correia, who knows fiction when he sees it, asked a number of professional auditors about the plausibility of the statistical evidence for the media-projected results of the U.S. presidential election:

I noticed yesterday that I was having lots of strangers show up to scream at me whenever I posted any information about election fraud, but they were all low information types just barfing up “fact checks” which was basically whatever the news had just told them, but none of them had the basic knowledge of how fraud works to even sorta discuss any of the actual data. So I got curious and posted the following on facebook:

One quick question, only answer if you have worked in auditing/stats/fraud/investigations/or other data analysis type fields. In your entire career, have you ever seen a case that threw up this many flags that DID NOT turn out to be fraud?

Again, flags are not proof. They are merely anomalies which would cause an auditor to check. Nor am I claiming this is a scientific poll (though I’d bet I’m still more accurate than Nate Silver!). There is of course a sampling bias as I know many of these people in meat space (and their resumes on this topic are killer) but it was also open to the public so anyone could comment and it got shared a hundred times.

The consensus thus far is overwhelming. No. Not only no but hell no.

Certified Fraud Examiner since 1992 here. I have never seen such an oversupply of red flags. 3 or 4 might be explicable or coincidence, but dozens all pointing the same way? This would be too implausible for fiction, let alone a case study.

No. In fact I would say that in about 34 years of this work it is my professional opinion that at this level it is mathematically more likely that our sun blinks out of existence as a result of every particle in it spontaneously “blinking” into another state than it is that fraud did not take place on the order of millions of votes.

Epstein didn’t kill himself. Biden didn’t win. And Q says it had to be this way.

How do you ‘show’ the public the truth?

How do you ‘safeguard’ US elections post-POTUS?

How do you ‘remove’ foreign interference and corruption and install US-owned voter ID law(s) and other safeguards? 

It had to be this way.

Sometimes you must walk through the darkness before you see the light. 

Q

This tends to confirm my hypothesis that President Trump was so confident of his reelection that he was willing to appear to put his second term at risk in order to secure free and fair elections in 2024 and beyond. After all, what is the point of winning a second term if the Swamp is simply going to undo everything you have accomplished. This would also explain the need to wait for the second term to drain the Swamp; the only way to systematically excise the full extent of the fraud was to expose it to everyone.


The statistical storm

Although the statistical evidence is rapidly turning into hard physical evidence of ballot fraud, it’s still useful to continue noting the statistical anomalies and how strongly they indicate that there is no shortage of fraud to find by refining the statistical case against Biden:

  1. TURNOUT 
  2. OUTPERFORMANCE VS. OBAMA
  3. BIDEN-ONLY BALLOTS
  4. ABSENCE OF MAIL-IN VOTE VETTING

The statistical case, in isolation, does not prove fraud. But the confluence of highly unlikely results does, emphatically, paint of picture of utter improbability.

Any one of these four factors alone would cast intense doubt upon election results.

Put all four together, and the result is a seemingly impossible statistical perfect storm.

And it is wildly ironic that the self-styled “party of science” that relies so heavily upon statistics for “proof” of racism and income inequality to turn around and reject the idea that statistics are a reasonable basis to justify further investigations into ballot fraud.