SATURDAY NIGHT HANS ZIMMER, BILLY JOEL.

From Hans Zimmer's Dunkirk soundtrack (2017): Two steps from hell - Victory.





Trivia: the Shepard tone.



Billy Joel with Leningrad, from the album Storm Front (1989).





Joel met the Russian clown Viktor Razinov in 1987 while on tour in the USSR. Razinov lost his father during the 900-day Siege of Leningrad.


Good night.


MFBB.

RECOMMENDED READS: RAYMOND IBRAHIM'S "THE 630-YEAR OLD REASON EASTERN EUROPEANS DISLIKE ISLAM."

A telling exerpt from Ibrahim's book Sword and Scimitar: Fourteen Centuries of War between Islam and the West, via American Thinker:

"Why Eastern Europeans are much more reluctant to accept Muslim migrants than their Western counterparts can be traced back to circumstances surrounding a pivotal battle, that of Kosovo, which took place today, June 15, exactly 630 years ago today in 1389. It pitted Muslim invaders against Eastern European defenders, or the ancestors of those many Eastern Europeans today who are resistant to Islam.

Because the jihad is as old as Islam, it has been championed by diverse peoples throughout the centuries — Arabs in the Middle East, Moors (Berbers and Africans) in Spain and Western Europe, etc. Islam's successful entry into Eastern Europe was spearheaded by the Turks, specifically that tribe centered in westernmost Anatolia (or Asia Minor) and thus nearest to Europe, the Ottoman Turks, so-named after their founder, Osman Bey. As he lay dying in 1323, his parting words to his son and successor, Orhan, were for him "to propagate Islam by your arms."

This his son certainly did; the traveler Ibn Batutua, who once met Orhan in Bursa, observed that although the jihadi had captured some one hundred Byzantine fortresses, "he had never stayed for a whole month in any one town," because he "fights with the infidels continually and keeps them under siege." Christian cities fell like dominoes: Smyrna in 1329, Nicaea in 1331, and Nicomedia in 1337. By 1340, the whole of northwest Anatolia was under Turkic control. By now and to quote a European contemporary, "the foes of the cross, and the killers of the Christian people, that is, the Turks, [were] separated from Constantinople by a channel of three or four miles."

By 1354, the Ottoman Turks, under Orhan's son, Suleiman, managed to cross over the Dardanelles and into the abandoned fortress town of Gallipoli, thereby establishing their first foothold in Europe: "Where there were churches he destroyed them or converted them to mosques," writes an Ottoman chronicler. "Where there were bells, Suleiman broke them up and cast them into fires. Thus, in place of bells there were now muezzins."

Cleansed of all Christian "filth," Gallipoli became, as a later Ottoman bey boasted, "the Muslim throat that gulps down every Christian nation — that chokes and destroys the Christians." From this dilapidated but strategically situated fortress town, the Ottomans launched a campaign of terror throughout the countryside, always convinced they were doing God's work. "They live by the bow, the sword, and debauchery, finding pleasure in taking slaves, devoting themselves to murder, pillage, spoil," explained Gregory Palamas, an Orthodox metropolitan who was taken captive in Gallipoli, adding, "and not only do they commit these crimes, but even — what an aberration — they believe that God approves them!"

After Orhan's death in 1360 and under his son Murad I — the first of his line to adopt the title "Sultan" — the westward jihad into the Balkans began in earnest and was unstoppable. By 1371, he had annexed portions of Bulgaria and Macedonia to his sultanate, which now so engulfed Constantinople that "a citizen could leave the empire simply by walking outside the city gates."

Unsurprisingly, then, when Prince Lazar of Serbia (b. 1330) defeated Murad's invading forces in 1387, "there was wild rejoicing among the Slavs of the Balkans. Serbians, Bosnians, Albanians, Bulgarians, Wallachians, and Hungarians from the frontier provinces all rallied around Lazar as never before, in a determination to drive the Turks out of Europe."

Murad responded to this effrontery on June 15, 1389, in Kosovo. There, a Serbian-majority coalition augmented by Hungarian, Polish, and Romanian contingents — twelve thousand men under the leadership of Lazar — fought thirty thousand Ottomans under the leadership of the sultan himself. Despite the initial downpour of Turkic arrows, the Serbian heavy cavalry plummeted through the Ottoman frontlines and broke the left wing; the Ottoman right, under Murad's elder son Bayezid, reeled around and engulfed the Christians. The chaotic clash continued for hours.





On the night before battle, Murad had beseeched Allah "for the favour of dying for the true faith, the martyr's death." Sometime near the end of battle, his prayer was granted. According to tradition, Miloš Obilić, a Serbian knight, offered to defect to the Ottomans on condition that, in view of his own high rank, he be permitted to submit before the sultan himself. They brought him before Murad and, after Miloš knelt in false submission, he lunged at and plunged a dagger deep into the Muslim warlord's stomach (other sources say "with two thrusts which came out at his back"). The sultan's otherwise slow guards responded by hacking the Serb to pieces. Drenched in and spluttering out blood, Murad lived long enough to see his archenemy, the by now captured Lazar, brought before him, tortured, and beheaded. A small conciliation, it may have put a smile on the dying martyr's face.





Murad's son Bayezid instantly took charge: "His first act as Sultan, over his father's dead body, was to order the death, by strangulation with a bowstring, of his brother. This was Yaqub, his fellow-commander in the battle, who had won distinction in the field and popularity with his troops." Next Bayezid brought the battle to a decisive end; he threw everything he had at the enemy, leading to the slaughter of every last Christian — but even more of his own men in the process.

So many birds flocked to and feasted on the vast field of carrion that posterity remembered Kosovo as the "Field of Blackbirds." Though essentially a draw — or at best a Pyrrhic victory for the Ottomans — the Serbs, with fewer men and resources to start with in comparison to the ascendant Muslim empire, felt the sting more.





In the years following the battle of Kosovo, the Ottoman war machine became unstoppable: the nations of the Balkans were conquered by the Muslims — after withstanding a millennium of jihads, Constantinople itself permanently fell to Islam in 1453 — and they remained under Ottoman rule for centuries.

The collective memory of Eastern Europeans' not too distant experiences with and under Islam should never be underestimated when considering why they are significantly more wary of — if not downright hostile to — Islam and its migrants compared to their Western liberal counterparts.

As Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán once explained:



~ We don't want to criticize France, Belgium, any other country, but we think all countries have a right to decide whether they want to have a large number of Muslims in their countries. If they want to live together with them, they can. We don't want to and I think we have a right to decide that we do not want a large number of Muslim people in our country. We do not like the consequences of having a large number of Muslim communities that we see in other countries, and I do not see any reason for anyone else to force us to create ways of living together in Hungary that we do not want to see[.] ... I have to say that when it comes to living together with Muslim communities, we are the only ones who have experience because we had the possibility to go through that experience for 150 years.



And those years — 1541 to 1699, when the Islamic Ottoman Empire occupied Hungary — are replete with the massacre, enslavement, and rape of Hungarians."

Foolish and immoral Western politicians have allowed, and continue to allow, yet another invasion of our lands by the barbarous and inhumane death cult of islam. Are we headed towards another 500-year occupation by a belief system that is, in fact, a stain on humanity?


MFBB.

FEMALE COMMANDER FOR 40TH INFANTRY DIVISION.

Via Breitbart:

"LOS ALAMITOS, Calif. (AP) — The California National Guard has announced the appointment of the first woman to lead a U.S. Army infantry division.

Brig. Gen. Laura Yeager will take command of the 40th Infantry Division on June 29 at Joint Forces Training Base in Los Alamitos, California.



Yeager currently commands Joint Task Force North, U.S. Northern Command at Fort Bliss, Texas.

Yeager was commissioned in 1986 as a second lieutenant from the Reserve Officer Training Corps at California State University, Long Beach.

She served as UH-60 Black Hawk helicopter pilot, left active duty when her son was born and continued her military career in the California Army National Guard.

Yeager deployed to Iraq in 2011 as deputy commander of the Cal Guard’s 40th Combat Aviation Brigade, then served as a battalion and brigade commander."

I never served, so I think it is more apt to let experts speak. From the relevant comments section:

First one commenter who goes by the name Lycurgus_The_Law_Giver:

"She’s not allowed to fight (and rightly so), she would never win against an actual infantry man in actual combat, but she can command an infantry division? You are out of your mind. Women should never be allowed in the military. It costs just as much to train one woman as it does to train a man. Perhaps more. An army that is half women and half men will lose to an army of all men every time, all other factors being equal. If you don’t believe me, then let’s do a study. Let’s simulate the outcome. Let’s do a full dress rehearsal. Let’s have a full-scale combat exercise with a half woman / half man army versus an all man army, and let’s see what the outcome would be. You’d better be sure this is going to work, commanders, before you get into an actual war and lose, because this really is not going to work, and this is an enormous threat to our national security. All other things being equal, we are going to lose against a near peer adversary with an all man army, unless we are very, very lucky, or unless we are fighting a decisively inferior opponent, which is never guaranteed. A typical nation’s military is 1% or less of the size of its population. There is no reason whatsoever that we would need to draw on the female population to support the military. They can serve as un-armed nurses who do not need actual military training. It is vastly cheaper to train them just as nurses. They cannot be relied on as soldiers, so we cannot pretend that they are soldiers. They can assist with logistical supply lines as civilian contractors. They should never be trained with a weapon or given a weapon, because women are inherently unable to compete with men in combat, and they never will be able to compete with men in combat. I say this as a veteran who served in combat and saw the results of our failed experiment with female soldiers in combat. We lost 75% of our female “soldiers“ during our deployment to pregnancy, because none of them were the least bit interested In going to war, or using deadly force to defend their country. Those who did were usually promoted very quickly if they were pretty, Even if they were incompetent and had very poor judgment, and were probably the worst choice of all the people available for the job, but they had to promote a woman, or else they would be labeled sexist. They were all totally incapable of actually fighting in combat or commanding in combat, and they had a serious negative impact on the unit overall. They should have been wives of soldiers or serving in a purely civilian capacity. No one has a right to serve in the military. The nation decides who will best serve in the military, because the primary consideration is whether or not those who serve will win or not, and how we can best ensure they will win by selecting only the best candidates to serve, as the Spartans did through the Agoge. There is a reason why women have never before served in any military. If you ignore those lessons of history, you will be conquered."

Then, somewhat less nice/less elaborate, some guy named wrench2tc:

"I did convoy security in Iraq. The transportation units had females and every time we would get hit they would freak out and lose their composure. Absolutely worthless."

There are several prisms to look at this development and conclude it won't end well. I recall less than stellar combat records of female units in Israels wars, or the fact that Brig General Yeager as a helicopter pilot has no experience with ground troops (except, so it seems, as a medevac pilot).

But what I also have on my mind is the total bruhaha lately of letting transgender men-to-women athletes compete against genuine females and them clearly having the upper hand. Uh-huh. Thought so. ESPECIALLY in the armed forces, ESPECIALLY in ground combat units, a strong physique is a key issue.

To give just one example, one of the determining factors in the Brits winning the Falklands War, was the fact that post their landing in San Carlos, Royal Marines and Paras covered the 56 miles (90 kloms) to Port Stanley with a full kit in often atrocious weather... in three days. And 'full kit' typically amounts to an 80-pound (40 kilograms) load. They called it 'yomping'.

Your run of the mill ATHLETIC woman couldn't do that. Upper body strength, muscle mass, a pair of very stout legs and su-perb knees are paramount. Women-simply-don't-have-what-it-takes. That's not their fault or responsibility. It's biology. Males can't give birth. Same issue.

Sure, here and there and once in awhile you might come across a yompster. One in thousand perhaps. A statistical refugee. You can't build units with statistical refugees. Also, as a man you prolly wouldn't want to date these examples, although for the moment we won't go down that road.

You may argue that in her position, Brig General Yeager will never be required to do the physical part required of the grunts in the units she commands. And you are correct about that. Some of the most effective generals in world history weren't suited for anything like 'yomping' either. Famous Panzer General Hasso Von Manteuffel had a diminutive physique, yet he gave the Russians hell on the Eastern front and his 5. Panzer Armee advanced the furthest during the Battle of the Bulge, almost reaching the Meuse river.

But that is not the point. This promotion of Brig General Yeager is another dubious 'milestone' in the Diversity Nazis' transformation of the US military, another self-provided argument to usher women of all ranks into combat units, and it won't do the combat effectiveness of these units any good.

Bottom line is, this appointment is another denial of obvious truths, and one that in some near or distant future will inevitably lead to losses that could have been avoided. To unneccessary deaths.

But those insisting on this madness will never be the ones to pay the ultimate price.



MFBB.