www.craigread.com - defend Western Civilisation

www.craigread.com -> politics and ideology www.torwug.org -> wireless technology There are 4 main threats to our western civilisation: 1. Left wing small 'l' liberalism and socialism. 2. Radical Islam and Muslim immigration to the West. 3. Weakening Demography. 4. Repudiation of our glorious Western inspired modern world.

Saturday, July 11, 2009

End of World ! Prince Chuckie gives us until 2017 !




L Ron Gore predicted the collapse of Mother Earth some 3 years ago, hyperboling rather hysterically that man had only 10 years to figure out how to control and change the 1 million variables, including solar flare radiation, which makes up the climate. Prince Charles of the inbred House of Windsor is rather more exact and optimistic. In a recent speech the clown Prince stated that the end of the world will occur in July 2017. Not sure how Chuckie got the date so precisely exact, but that is divine right for you illustrating once again how useless and hypocritical, as well as parasitical, the House of Windsor truly is.

Keep in mind however that L Ron and the Prince were predicting the end of the world due to Globaloney Cooling way back in the paleolithic era of the early 1980s, when the knuckle draggers and holocaust deniers expressed rather strong skepticism that ice sheets would not be sprinting down Mother Earth's blighted face anytime soon.

This was of course a decade destroyed by that neo-con, commie slaying fascist, Mr. Reagan, an obvious idiot. Why perchance did he not just ignore Communism and spend his military money on healing Mother Earth ? If he did Globaloney Warming might never have occurred just as the disappearing ozone hole; the massive deforestation and lake annihilation due to acid rain; and the millions of species of fauna which were supposedly to die off due to capitalist-American greed, never happened. Ah well, that is a Christian-fascist for you. Consumed by freedom and human life, with little regard for what really matters – the fate of Mother Earth !

Prince Chuckie makes a good case as to why a monarchy in an age of mass representative politics and consumerist ideals, where people are trying to improve their lot in life, is rather arcane. As an institution it should be abolished. There is no need for it. Tradition in English common-law, and its 1000 year plus historical legacy begat by a long pre-history in Greece, Rome and Western Europe means nothing to most people. England has already become a multi-cult disaster, ruined by Islam, relativity, and self-loathing.

For such a place why bother with a Monarchy ? English history as evinced by Churchill and represented by the Industrial Revolution is viewed with disgust, not pride. If you take Churchill out of the schools, replaced by Urdu and Globaloney Warming classes, and take 1000 years of political-economic-social and moral progress out of the general culture, why bother with a monarchy ? Especially one which expresses a complete disdain for the modern world – a world in which Britain was the tranformative agent in its creation. Prince Chuckie's end-of-the-world rant is nothing more than a disguised indictment of his own country and a complete disavowal of modern life.

There is no rationality in espousing moral relativity and multi-culturalism; hating yourself and your culture; but keeping a pre-modern institution like the monarchy in place. In psychological terms this is called psychopathy – purportedly believing in one thing but doing the opposite.

It is very difficult listening to a man who is about as bright as L Ron Gore, as informed as Joe Biden, as relevant as Michael Jackson and as impoverished in his mental outlook as Marx, informing the world that according to his majestic calculations, we have a decade left before Mother Earth wipes out the virus called the human. July 2017 to be exact. Perhaps this date was garnered from the entrails of sacrificed chickens, or godly signs after a child sacrifice to Gaia ? Forgive the obvious, but this human-hating, modern-loathing disease which grips the Prince is a mark more of insanity, than of clarity.

It is truly ironic that a playboy Prince, parading around on other people's money, bred from a gang of misfits who are the world's largest single private real estate holder, criticises the modern world economy, capitalism, and by extension Anglo-Saxon, Americana. Who does he think pays his exorbitant life-style ? Feudal peasants ? Medieval knaves ? Slaving Roman serfs ? Why does he think that 'modern conveniences' are unnecessary ? What will replace such trifles and who will willingly pay the price to go back to the pre-modern world ? What are the consequences to life, humans, and the planet in eradicating the modern political-economy and contriving a world dedicated to the practices of the Oracle of Delphi circa 1700 B.C ?

As Mark Steyn so wonderfully put it:

“Capitalism and consumerism have brought the world to the brink of economic and environmental collapse, the Prince of Wales has warned… And in a searing indictment on capitalist society, Charles said we can no longer afford consumerism and that the ‘age of convenience’ was over.”

He then got in his limo and was driven to his other palace.

...The old rationale for absolute monarchy – Divine Right – is a tough sell in a democratic age. But the new rationale – Gaia’s Right – has proved surprisingly plausible.”
Chuck's prediction

Divine Right. Prince Chuckie, High Priest L Ron Gore, the Black Jesus and friends; these people seem to believe that the rest of mankind are worthless serfs created to serve the needs of their superiors. Gaia's Right is nothing new in history. Its apogee in the Mediterranean world was reached during the 2 millenia before Christ. Christianity and Judaism, along with Roman civilisation, helped to bring down the barbarity and crudity of such a philosophical outlook including its culling of children, the sick and the outcast. It is rather absurd to return to it.

Just another good reason to disband the British Monarchy and the High Priestly caste of Mother Earth worshippers – Divine Right should never be transformed into Gaia's Right.

Friday, July 10, 2009

13.500 Muslim attacks since 9-11 from an ideology dedicated to war.



Imagine if the Jews or Christians were fomenting such hate and violence.

Much of Muslim violence is singular or small in numbers affected, and therefore goes unreported. As long as this carnage targets Jews or Christians the really smart, progressive, hair-flicking 'intellectuals' and their slavering supporters don't much care. The label, 'they are all the same' only applies to Christians and Jews, in that all are conservative-fascists dedicated to world domination. Unlike Islam and Muslims of course. The peaceful people. The civilised ideology.

Since 9-11 there have been 13.500 or more attacks by Muslims on 'others' including Arabs and Muslims – but the hoi-polloi in the West are told that of course 'most' Muslims are moderates. And one supposes, since most Germans and Russians were not members of the reigning fascist cult, so too were Germans in 1939 and Russians circa 1979. In Pakistan on July 4 2009, 600 Muslims attacked a Christian village, destroying, injuring, and maiming innocents including women and children. The local media report was as follows:

“Muslims apparently angered because a Christian man driving a tractor reportedly tried to pass a Muslim on a motorcycle have rampaged in one village in Pakistan, destroying Christians' homes and throwing acid on women and children as they fled, according to a new report from Barnabas Aid.

The ministry reported that the violence this week happened in the village of Bahmani Walla in Punjab state in Pakistan, which is dominated by Islamic influences.

The report said 600 Muslims used gasoline bombs to vandalize 117 homes belonging to Christians – including 48 damaged by fire, and sabotage water pumps and cut electricity.

According to the report, the violence apparently stemmed from an incident one night earlier, "in which a Christian man driving a tractor requested that a Muslim man riding a motorcycle allow him to pass." Report

It does not take long to get a vicious Muslim crowd organised. After only a few hours, 600 Muslims were in concert agitating for revenge for a blasphemy against Islam. Surely the average Westerner knows that Christians, Jews and non-Muslims are not allowed to pass a Muslim whilst traveling along a street; or even walk along the same side of the street as a Muslim ? What ? Oh you mean that the average Westerner does not know this fact ? Well given the deep and intelligent discussion of Islam in Western society that is surely a surprise.

In Koranic and Islamic tradition infidels cannot walk or pass Muslims in public. They must even lower their eyes when confronted by a follower of the great Arab madman, Mohammed. The Arabs invented the idea of putting yellow stars on the clothing of Jews, and making Christians wear distinctive hats and clothing. This was not a Nazi invention. The slave status of non-believers is expressed all over the Koran and in Islamic writings. A multi-cult piety of love and the Golden Rule, Islam is not.

The violence in Pakistan where 600 raving mad Muslims eradicate a Christian enclave and attack women and children, for the 'crime' of passing a Muslim on a street is nothing new. The Koran and Islamic doctrine is very clear. A Kafir is inferior to the Muslim. Period. A Kafir has no rights. Period. A Kafir has sinned against the Meccan moon deity Allah or ali-ilah and is going to either be converted, or killed or tortured in hell. Period.

The Golden Rule does not apply to Islam. There is no Golden Rule or Book of Matthew outlining the ethical structure of living in a civilised society and wishing to claim higher spiritual and metaphysical insight. In reality Islam denies the truth of the Golden Rule. The duality of Islam divides all humanity into Muslims and Kafirs. The Kafirs must be overcome – that is jihad – and Islam must dominate the world – that is universalism.

It is not a surprise that 600 brainwashed, supremacist malcontents in Pakistan assaulted Christian women and children. The real surprise is that such events are ignored by the Western media and academia. Mired in their stupor and idiocy that all Muslims are 'moderates' and that Islam is a 'religion' of good-will; the 'elite' pander to multi-cult pieties and cultural relativity.

Which is exactly how civilisations collapse.

Thursday, July 09, 2009

L Ron Gore and the Eco fascists invoke Churchill !



According to L Ron Gore, [who has replaced L Ron Hubbard, the inventor of Scientology, as the greatest of the pagan priests]; the most critical struggle in man's history is not of freedom versus oppression and fascism; but of salving Mother Earth's heated sores. In a recent speech in England, the High Druidic Priest L Ron Gore invoked the spirit of Churchill in this millenial struggle. Apparently Churchill would have been four square behind the eco-fascist cult and the elimination of surplus humans; the destruction of economic modernity; and the imposition of a politcal-fascism designed to suppress any vestige of action not controlled by the state. Sure L. Ron.

The fantasy world of the eco-fascists is rather breathtaking. Their ignorance, hypocrisy and power mongering Stalinesque. Their hatred of the human and the modern, Hitlerian.

If Churchill were alive today he would of course recognise L Ron Gore for what he is – a none too bright politician who knows nothing about climate but benefits mightily from the imposition of government controls; emission caps; and greenist ideology. Dear Leader L Ron holds a number of vested interests and investments which all benefit from the Mother Earth cult. In terms of the political-economy L Ron's vision of the future has more in common with Nazism than the erstwhile dunce from Yale would care to admit. All of this Churchill would easily have understood.

The Nazis of course were the original greenist fascists. Before the outbreak of war, plans were under way to force the German population into a meatless-vegetarian based diet. Cities were to be constructed as centers of 'green' living including the gigantic new capital of the world, Germania. Carbon energy was to be replaced by green-friendly forms of power such as wind, solar and batteries [this was a necessity since Germany had to import oil and gas and was an autarchic regime]. Regulations on the use of food, packaging and the output of garbage were in train by 1939.

The Nazified Germans were thus the forerunners of the L Ron Gore eco-cult. Most of today's eco-fascist agenda was developed by the green wing of the Nazi party. It could be suggested that Nazi Germany was not a paradise.

L Ron's plans are thus nothing new, nor untried. They are however entirely fascistic. They negate modernity, the individual, the power of markets and reality. His sermon in England only reinforces his distaste for the individual and the sanctity of private property, as the IBD reported:

“While the former vice president was delivering his sermon, the British were busy creating a para-police squad that will enforce government-imposed carbon dioxide emissions limits. Take a good look, because the formation of this team could well be a preview of what we'll get if the Democrats' climate change bill becomes law.”

In fact under the Cap and Trade legislation which has passed the US House, unlimited powers of government search and seizure are guaranteed. In other words the government's eco police can enter homes and businesses without a warrant and impound private property or even close a business. The intent is to subordinate all of life's activities to eco-fascist regulations and suborn the individual by establishing unaccountable eco-battalions and para-military audits.

L Ron's mission and that of his extensive cult, is to regulate all production and consumption. If government can declare a Mother Earth crisis the extent of future taxes and political-economic regulations will be limitless. This will grant hitherto unheard of power to a centralised bureaucracy whilst wiping out the modern world economy and debasing the individual, regulating the citizen-knave to nothing more than a robot within a universal cult, bearing a tattoo on his arm with an eco-brand and identification number:

“What comes next is the legalized extortion of the American people. Some analysts estimate that this scheme to save us from ourselves could by 2030 cost each American family as much $4,300 a year and destroy 2.5 million jobs. That's even counting the "green" jobs the bill's supporters claim it will create.”
http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=331861272808101

Economic devastation is only part of the eco-fascist plans. Many of the more immoderate eco-cult directors advocate the culling of the human herd and the forcible reduction of human numbers. The eco-fascists of course would be the ones who would decide who shall live or die. But much like the green Nazis or today's aborition movement, they hate life, embrace death and look forward to the widespread genocide.

On L Ron's planet the struggle to control climate with its 1 million variables including solar activity, which the human has no method or means to influence, is tantamount to liberating Europe from Nazism or Russian fascism. As such Churchill would be on L Ron's side. Or so the L Ron propaganda claims.

L. Ron Gore is not only stupid but insane. This is a very unhelpful combination. Churchill for example was for science, not myth; for the human, not the state; for freedom not tyranny; for rationality, not pagan mysticism; for Christian ethics, not fascist totalitarianism. If the English bulldog were alive today he would be forthrightly against L Ron and the eco-fascist movement rightly recognising the very obvious Nazism of their methods and purpose. He would be no friend of L. Ron Gore.

Churchill as a supporter of eco-totalitarianism and L Ron Gore's cult ? Please. Next one supposes, the historical revisionists will declare that Churchill secretly supported Stalinism and German fascism. Insanity but that is what eco-fascism is all about – total insanity reflected in the madness of L. Ron Gore.

Tuesday, July 07, 2009

Suffering through the Koran – Sura 22 named 'The Pilgrimage'.



'We, We, We, We'....Ok a 3rd person talking to the reader about Muslims being the only 'We'?? Hmmm.

In the cult documents which will soon follow the life and travails of the Great Prophet Obamed [perhaps it will supersede the Submission 'religion' in human importance ?], the writers will undoubtedly use the 'pilgrimage' of the demi-God from the corrupt politics of Chicago to Washington as a turning point in human affairs. Nay, it will be portrayed of course as the most important event in the history of human affairs [and faithfully reported as such in the media and 'educational' systems]. One which changed mankind's fruitless struggle for freedom, into a higher crusade of hope, change and post-racialism. Glory to the Prophet.

But let's hope that the Obamed faithful are better and more exact scribes than those who attempted to write the Koran. For truly we say to you, that the words inside the foundational text of Islamic supremacism make no sense to either the infidel or to most 'believers'. Gibberish is gibberish.

The deification of a 'journey' is an old theme amongst all theologies, and the advance of Mohammed to conquer Mecca and enter the city and claim it as his own personal chattel is an example. But as usual with the Koran, there are no real details, facts, or real-world events which are given description in the mad politician's journey and retaking of his city of birth. We the reader are not engaged in the process, the surroundings or the reactions of real people, leaders, believers or those of other Arabian cults.

The writers of the Koran just assume that the audience is Arabic and that the reader an illiterate desert donkey. In the oral tradition of illiterate Arabia the Koran would have been read aloud and repetition in such oral expositions is mandatory. So it reads very badly. Instead of discovering the historicity of the 'journey' the reader is assault with the usual injunctions to be quiet, obey, submit, and watch out for the evil infidel. Creative and realistic writers the Koranic chroniclers were not. Accepting even a minimal level of intelligence from their reading audience never crossed their minds.

The first sentence opens and closes the Sura in a figurative sense, “O Mankind! Fear your Lord! For the convulsion of the Hour (of Judgment) will be a thing terrible!” This sums up the Sura or chapter. They could have stopped there. Obey the thing called Allah [a male Meccan moon deity]; and fear it for if he is displeased you will find yourself on the wrong end of his judgment on the fateful day that he gathers up all the bipeds and tells each who was naughty and who was nice. The naughty ones are killed or baked in Hell. The nice ones get the 5 star hotel treatment with wine, women and song.

And of course lots of 'We's' abound in the Sura. No one knows exactly who the 'We's' are. It might be 'Islam', 'Muslims' or simply Allah and his buddy Mohammed. “O mankind!....We created you....We may manifest (our power)....We bring you out as babes....We pour down rain.....” The 'We's' are busy people. Creating man, begetting children, sending down the rain [no snow is ever mentioned in the Koran]; pretty busy those 'We's'. If you don't believe that the 'We's' are supreme than “We shall make him taste the penalty of burning (Fire).” That must be the ethical-tolerant part of the Sura that Muslim apologists always reference.

Allah has no tolerance for those who oppose his best friend the illiterate politician Mohammed. “If any think that Allay will not help him (His Messenger) in this world and the Hereafter, let him stretch out a rope to the ceiling and cut (himself) off:” Well as usual this sentence makes no sense, but the idea can be grasped. You will support the moon deity's Messenger and nothing you can do will remove him from the favor of the divine moon spirit. A system of humanism and charity towards all, the Koran is not.

Both Jews and Christians will go to hell since Allah is very unhappy with those who worship other Gods. “These two antagonists dispute with each other about their Lord: but those who deny (their Lord), - for them will be cut out a garment of Fire: over their heads will be poured out boiling water....In addition there will be maces of iron (to punish) them.” Isn't the ethical program and spiritual enlightenment of such ideas simply inspirational ? You can see why the Islamo-apologists are so arrogantly certain that the Koran and Islam supports humanism, love and flexible tolerance.

Like Mohammed's capture in war of Mecca, the Muslims have a duty to fight and expect divine aid, “Allah will certainly aid those who aid His (cause); - for verily Allah is Full of Strength, Exalted in Might, (able to enforce His Will).” If Unbelievers are not converted Muslims must engage in jihad, “But those who strive against Our Signs, to frustrate them, - they will be Companions of the Fire.” Note that in Islam, all natural, normal events from the sun rising, to grass growing are 'signs' of Allah's omnipotence and relevance. Denying Allah's role in anything in other words, even a casual event like a thunderstorm, is to sin. How very rational and tolerant, “For those who reject Faith and deny Our Signs, there will be a humiliating punishment.” Yes punishing those why deny Allah is a very clear theme indeed.

To assuage the great Allah one must grovel and ritualise your miserable de-humanised life: “Bow down, prostrate yourselves, and adore your Lord: and do good; that you may prosper.” and “To every people We have appointed rites and ceremonies why they must follow:” If you don't genuflect and babble to Allah in a submissive position of ritual than death is your reward, “It is the Fire (of Hell)! Allah has promised it to the Unbelievers! and evil is that destination!”

Yep that is the Koran. No information whatsoever on the seminal event of Mohammed's journey to Mecca. Nothing. Just the usual supremacist and mad ravings about submitting or going to Hell. Maybe the academics and media scribes can again inform us knaves why this is a 'holy' book ? One can only hope that when the cult of the new Prophet Obamed writes the foundational texts for their theology, that they are better, more realistic and more humanist, than the wild-eyed semi-illiterate, fascist intolerant's who wrote the Koran.

[Note: This sura is taken from 'The Holy Quran', translated by Abdullah Yusuf Ali, reprinted in 1995, Goodword Books. Regarded as one of the best translations from Arabic to English of the Koran.]

Monday, July 06, 2009

The Marxist-Populist tale of woe and ruin. Little has changed since the mid 19th century.


It has been standard 'communard', marxist and populist fare since the 1860s and its grotesque nonsense is the staple of much of modern politics. The world is a terrible place. Liberal bourgeois living is hell. Capital markets and freedom create an uncultured, tasteless, racist, sexist and immoral society. Spirituality can only be felt through communal sentiments, not something as abstract as 'faith' and God. Ergo, hearken our words and heed our calls for revolution and the world of the 'New Man'.

Rousseau, Dickens, Marx, Tolstoy, Hegel, Nietzsche, Wagner, and other 'thinkers' and artists created a philosophical morass into which many have fallen. This muddy pit is the allure of romantic communalism, a replacement of complex society premised on freedom, institutions, choice and responsibility with something akin to a familial tribe comfortably living in nature or in simpler times. For these cultural icons, and their political counterparts, the holy grail of politics is not freedom, independence, hope or spiritual ideals; it is something much cheaper, baser and more primitive – using coercion to create the perfect world.

It is a historical fact that freer markets, freer people, free voices, free elections and laws protecting these freedoms have created the modern world – a one in which wealth, hope and opportunity are in such abundance that the most optimistic forecaster of 1850 would fall stunned to the ground, if he were to appear in current times and partake of what the world has to offer. Grinding poverty, illiteracy, massive unemployment, non existent health care, incredible pollution and disease, low standards of living, slavery, female bondage – all these and much more have been eradicated by freedom and the ideas around freedom.

Yet to the populist communard, marxist or erstwhile hater of liberal bourgiousie culture, the modern world is nothing but a grand larceny - a litany of racist, class based pillaging and deceit. These anti-historical, and poorly thought out conceits are still on display today. Some simple examples, of rather simpleton accusations:

-Hussein Obama and his wife during their US presidential run, routinely claim 'racism' as a defining factor in US culture. Blacks are victims! is the cry. Yet successful blacks, including themselves abound. Black athletes, writers, musicians, politicians and businessmen are legion in the US. How can US society be so caste and race ridden if there are so many successful blacks? And what exactly is an 'Afro-American'? [Obama's mother was white, so he does not qualify].

-Hillary Clinton claims that US society is misogynist and holds down women. How does she explain the great impact American women have had for 200 years on US development including today's veritable tsunamai of successful females in all areas of life. Was Oprah, Nancy Pelosi, Carly Fiorina, or a myriad of others held down by a female hating US culture? The female is a victim, is the feminist cry du coeur!

-Across the US, Europe and Canada, every single group interested in government money covers itself in the flag of 'fairness'; victimhood; social justice, or equality. Politicians in every state seize on this and attempt to make the individual part of a group and hence a client of the state. The eradication of the individual is rendered much easier by this piecemeal attack on liberty and freedom.

Thus we see again a greater trend at work, still nurturing the romantic revolutionary fervor of the 19th century. Almost all politicians, quite a few 'businessmen' and 'expert' pundits, not to mention most of academia assert that more government redistribution of money, through higher tax rates, is necessary to alleviate poverty, racism, unfairness, greed, inequality, and establish social, moral and political 'justice'. This is the European – statist model. It is a throw back to the 19th century's fascination with state power providing equality, social justice and communal-spiritual meaning.

The revolutions effected by Bismark, the French Communards, the 'Reds' in Russia who later morphed into the Bolshe-vik or Big party; and the Nietzsche-Wagnerian-Wilhelmine-Hitlerite statist-fascists in Germany still redound today. According to these violent romantics a new world order of fairness, race or classless purity; purpose and communal spirit could only be achieved through state coercion and the eradication of liberties, freedoms, choice and chaos. In this world-view the individual who supported freedom of anything was nothing but a grasping, clawing selfish immoral beast, devoid of higher purpose. Only state power could eradicate such immorality and egotistical deviancy.

The same anti-reality nostrums still echo today. Every group is a victim. Blacks, females, Gays, Muslims, [not Jews though even though they endured the holocaust and modern day Arab-Muslim fascism]; 'native' Indians; or any skin other than white; are all worthy of massive state support. Economics, laws, schools, standards, and government spending must reflect this cult of creating a new-victimless world order. It is absurd.

There is nothing new in any of it. When Obama talks about Afro-American victimhood, is he really so sure that black Africans are better off than black Americans? When Hillary Clinton - a woman who has never held a private sector job - drones on about putting a government worker in each home to help take care of children, is she really so certain that the individual family unit is in need of being destroyed? When European politicians raise taxes; regulations and erect ever more caring government programs, including the support of Islamic mosques, schools and groups, are they really so certain that virulent statism is the answer to European weakness and apathy?

Freedom begets everything from economic strength, to military might, to higher forms of faith and self-meaning. State induced and coerced slavery or 'client' status achieves the opposite. Whether the descriptions are historically inaccurate and inane Dickensian depictions of poverty and squalor, or Marxian dialectics unfolding to include the death of freedom and markets; or the romantic, bloody, violent and quite insane vision of the Reds and communards, or prancing Hitlerite fascists with their zeal to wipe out reality and insert a dream world of communal greatness; they and their modern equivalents are vicious failures.

There is a simple choice in life. Choose freedom within the constraints of constitutions, laws and moral-cultural norms and reap the social-economic-military and moral benefits therefrom. Or choose statism and with it a decline in wealth, standards, innovation, power and hope.

Life is in many cases black and white – and we don't mean Afro-American black either.

Sunday, July 05, 2009

The importance of Sarah Palin. She represents most of America.


But of course she should be hated. She is a very attractive and successful 45 year old former governor of an important state, and mother of 5 children, with the youngest having Down's. A woman who has started and ran businesses, mayored a small town, reformed her own political party, took on the well monied and entrenched 'old boys' interests and gangs and won and who was a VP nominee. A woman who puts faith, family, physical exercise, and education before anything else. A person who elevates the individual and who intensely dislikes government and its corruption. What is there to like about such a creature ? She did not go to Harvard; did not abort her children; did not live in Upper West Side Manhattan; was not corrupt; and actually likes her country. What an abomination !

Sarah Palin is important because she represents most of America. This is the signal fact which inspires so much hatred. She is normal. She is not an Ivy League educated technocrat like the Prophet Obamed - a man who is indifferent to people, the individual and who exalts the power of the state. Palin believes in family, children, free markets; free speech; freedom of association and small government. She also believes ardently in a divine power. All of these attributes attract a hysterical and disgusting array of attacks and innuendo showing the American media, bloggers and many political pundits at their debased worst.

There are a few things about her that even many conservatives don't like. She is too much of a fundamentalist for my taste for example. The Bible is an ethical metaphor not a literal document of divine interpretation or historicity. I distrust anyone who is a fundamentalist because such a belief reveals an inability to distinguish the essence of what constitutes true Christian thinking and philosophy from supernaturality; ancient myths; and the work of magi. Fundamentalism is mental laziness and can rigidify a person's spiritual and mental structure. For that reason I believe Palin is best left in state and not national politics. Fundamentalists should not in my opinion be in positions of national power.

She also lacks knowledge on many issues and areas. Famously she has trouble answering even simple questions on many topics. Her political beliefs thus come across as superficial and dogmatic. She cannot for example defend free trade or open economics with concrete historical examples; factual details on why trade benefits all parties; or how and why autarchic or government controlled economies fail. Her instinct is right on most issues, but her capacity to defend them properly in the political theatre is under-developed. This opens her up of course to criticism.

Yet the criticisms launched against Palin are not based on fact, performance or reality, but are simply vicious ad-hominem attempts to not only discredit her, but de-humanise her. There is no 'balance' on Palin and no attempt by the broader society to be fair.

For instance all of the legal charges against Palin are false. All ethical lawsuits have been dismissed. But under America's legal system, the defendant pays the costs of 'nuisance' lawsuits. She is $500.000 in debt and will never get the money back – except by resigning as Governor and going on a speaker tour and publishing books. Thus her resignation is a practical move – one designed to free up her 'star' quality and allow the pursuance of money, exposure and probably a thorough self-education in topics in which she has shallow knowledge.

One assumes that once her debts are paid, Palin will seek national office. She no doubt will be pilloried for this too. Left wing groups and agitators have forced her from office and in attempting to repay her claims she will be portrayed as a money-loving starlet, trading on her legs and glasses, preying on hillbillies with no shoes asking for their financial support. Expect the attacks on Palin to increase in volume and fatuousness and vehemence.

David Letterman's smear calling Palin a slut, and her daughter a whore who had sex with a Yankee star player is mild. Many left wing web sites openly advocate the killing of her Down's child – and of Palin herself. When she announced her resignation as Governor most left wing blogs and activist portals celebrated with quite a few calling Palin like her son, a retard. Many claimed that the 'Union' was saved by her resignation. Why would a woman who believes in freedom and doing right, and who decided not to abort or murder her son who simply was born with an extra 21rst chromosome engender so much hatred ?

Yet that is the level of mentality and debate for many on the 'left'. Hard core liberals and socialists are the most intolerant of commentators. Tolerance is unnecessary for the cult of Obama or the Main Stream Media whose fetish of government worship and hatred of Christians propelled them to denigrate Palin at every opportunity. Yet it is people like Palin – pro life; pro markets; pro human – who are intolerant ! Or so the fantasy world of plutocrats, the MSM, and of academics would like us to believe.

Hate Palin because she believes in freedom and life.

Hate Palin because she is proud of her country and like most people in America, unabashedly patriotic.

Hate Palin because you belong a cult of little minds, intolerant, narrow, twisted and absurdly narcissistic and gloriously dismissive of their own nation's great history and purpose. Hating yourself and your country is now the new 'patriotic'.

All good reasons to hate a successful woman one supposes. If only she had just murdered her Down's child........

Saturday, July 04, 2009

Suffering through the Koran – Sura 21 named 'The Prophets'.



Yet more repetition of what has already been said [a thousand times]. “Closer and closer mankind comes to their Reckoning...”

What happy scribes the Koranic writers must have been. Not for them the old nonsense of humanism, free-will, potential, hope, love, effort, humility in faith; fear of an anthropomorphic deity, and ego-less penitence in belief. No Sir. In the name of world domination the happy Arabs focus on extermination, determinism, Jew and Christian hatred, and total submission to that unknowable thing called Allah. And so the 'Prophet' chapter, like the mad barking of Mein Kampf, continues this happy legacy – repeating of course ad-nauseum, the repetitiously rabid supremacism which infuses the previous 205 pages.

The 'Prophets' of course are the leaders of the Christians and Jews who were really in the service of the Meccan moon cult. This theme is repeated to such an extent just in the first 205 pages that one has to wonder about the sanity, and the intelligence of the writers. One sure sign of a mediocre mind and a writer's contempt for the reader is to endlessly repeat what has already been repeated. A great work of literary art the Koran is not.

Nor is there is anything holy or metaphysically promising within this Sura [or any other one cares to peruse]. The Prophets are not dealt with at any length – the usual list of suspects, Moses, Aaron, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and Lut are portrayed as followers of Allah, unable to get their degenerate people, the Hebrews, to follow the true path of enlightenment: “48. In the past we granted to Moses and Aaron the Criterion (for judgment), and a Light and a Message for those who would do right,-”

So 'We' Muslims or 'We' Allah and Mohammed gave Moses the 10 commandments with which he and his spokesman Aaron tried to illuminate the lives of the Israelites. Considering that Moses predates Mohammed by 2000 years, and thus predates the Koranic ideal of Allah, this is a rather curious supposition.

The lives and failures of the Jewish prophets are to serve as general warnings to current Unbelievers who like their ancestors, chose to ignore these messengers and engage in activities contrary to Allah's law. The main purpose of this chapter is thus of course to warn the infidels, the Jews and those eschewing Allah, of their impending destruction:

6.(As to those) before them, not one of the populations which We destroyed believed: will these believe ?

9.In the end We fulfilled to them Our promises, and We saved them and those whom We pleased, but We destroyed those who transgressed beyond bounds.

11.How many were the populations We utterly destroyed because of their inquities, setting up in their places other peoples ?

15.And that cry of theirs did not cease till We made them as a field that is mown, as ashes silent and quenched.

98.Verily you, (Unbelievers) and the (false) gods that you worship besides Allah, are (but) fuel for Hell! To it will you (surely) come !

The second theme is as one would expect dialectical inevitability. Allah – whatever it is – will conquer all and therefore those of 'faith' will simply submit themselves, prostrate their pathetic human forms, and grovel for Allah's approbation. An expression of humanism, hope, free-will and self-assertion this is not:

35.Every soul shall have a taste of death: and We test you by evil and by good by way of trial. To Us must you return.

92.Verily, this Brotherhood of yours is a single Brotherhood, and I am your Lord and Cherisher: therefore serve Me (and no other).

108. Say: “What has come to me by inspiration is that your God is One God (Allah): will you therefore bow to His Will (in Islam)?”

There is not one sentence in this entire chapter about higher ethics, spiritual ideals or the benefits of leading a life outside of base egoistic concerns and narcissism. It is a chapter of demands, accusations and warnings. Nothing inspirational lies inside the words – just a litany of thou shall's.

Arabs taking a Meccan moon deity and conflating it with the Judeo-Christian ideal of an anthropomorphic single deity is a mildly interesting story-line. It can be useful as a political program and a cult organisation. But than to extrapolate from that and declare such a creation to be a religion, peaceful and moderate is not a sign of tolerance but of stupidity and laziness. Read the foundational text and behold its illiterate supremacism. It is not holy, just, or even well-written. It is what it is. A badly written document justifying Arab imperialism. That is all.

[Note: This sura is taken from 'The Holy Quran', translated by Abdullah Yusuf Ali, reprinted in 1995, Goodword Books. Regarded as one of the best translations from Arabic to English of the Koran.]

Friday, July 03, 2009

A 4th of July lament - Fascism in Amerika ! Well sort of.



Imagine if Bushitler tried to do what the Prophet is doing !

Bush's 'crimes' were long and complex. At least according to 'progressives', socialists, internationalists and cringing anti-war activists. Bush's criminality included waging war, demonizing Islam; building a wall to keep out illegal Hispanics; abridging freedom of speech; manipulating the media; spending money like a drunken Texan in an El Paso whore-house; being the puppet of big oil and big banking; being an illiterate and arrogant Texan; and worse of all – being a Christian [a euphemism for an illiterate fascist]. So how does the new Prophet rank in comparison with Bushitler's litany of criminal activity ?

Waging war on peaceful, moderate, faith based Islam:

Much to the great man's credit, the Prophet is continuing Bush policy in both Iraq and Afghanistan. The US now has 70.000 troops in Afghanistan – a doubling from the Bush-era level. He is also following to the day, the Bush timetable to withdraw drown troops in Iraq and have most of the forces out of the country by 2011.

Doesn't following Bush's war plans make the Prophet, Obamahitler ?

Abridging freedom of speech:

The Prophet and friends do not like criticism. There are various plans afoot in Congress regarding the resurrection of the 'Fair Speech code' – a relic from the 1930s when the 3 broadcasters and their radio affiliates were fettered to provide 'fair' coverage. Considering that 95% of 'journalists' or note-takers, and 90% of news media is firmly supporting the Prophet and his ruling gang; the re-creation of a 'fair speech doctrine' would only mean the destruction of any viewpoints not sanctioned by the ruling party; and its bureaucratic minions. In other words, no free speech and government regulation of radio and cable TV.

And this says nothing of continuing other Bush policies to fight Islamic fascism. All laws regarding wire-tapping, warrants and even Guatanamo Bay have been kept. G-bay will never be closed regardless of the Prophet's promises.

Doesn't continuing Bush policy on fighting Islamic fascism, and readying plans to end free-speech make Obama, Obamahitler ?

Spending money:

No one has done this better than the great man the Prophet. All in the name of 'saving' the economy; 'creating' jobs; and building a 'sustainable' Mother Earth-friendly world of course. The Prophet and his radical friends the Pelosi gang, will double the US national debt within 5 years. If the Cap and Trade bill passes the Senate it will be the biggest tax increase in world history - $1.9 Trillion each and every year in new taxes or 15% of US GDP. The $1 Trillion 'stimulus' spending is funding almost exclusively the expansion of government, state services and bureaucratic programs. These are not jobs created, but a welfare state expanded.

Doesn't continuing Bush's reckless spending policies and in fact improving upon them by a factor of 3, make Obama a besotted power-mongering statist and fascist ?

Being a puppet of big oil and banks:

Wall Street and its friends gave the Black Prophet $40 million for his campaign – the most by any single industry to any single candidate in US history. Bush's first $700 billion bailout in the Fall of 2008 was targeted at saving banks – many of whom had bought more than a few US politicians. Obama has continued this policy and accelerated it with the US government now owning 37% of Citibank and with preferred interests in most of the US financial colossi.

Doesn't continuing Bush's policy of using tax payer money to save banks who have bought US politicians and who are collectively, the largest financiers of the Prophet's Democrat party, make Obama a reveling statist and fascist, a leader 'owned' by the Anglo-Jewish financial system ?

Manipulating the media:

Bush was always criticized by the media and by bloggers for manipulating information, lying, distorting reality and having a thinking-speaking impediment. The Prophet of course has every journalist genuflecting to his every utterance; reads from a teleprompter scripted words which bear little resemblance to reality but which are reported as divine inspirations; and as Bernie Goldberg says, has a slobbering love affair with the media. Truth, facts and words mean nothing. Emotions, lies and janus-faced double-talk are what is required.

Doesn't perfecting the so-called Bush manipulation of the media make the Prophet a conniving statist and fascist ?

Being a Christian:

Bush was pilloried as a swaggering Texan Christian who could not say anything without a strange accent and the wrong emphasis on the wrong seal-la-bills. Worse he was a God fearing Methodist. Or so he claimed. The Prophet on the other hand sat in a racist Black dominated church for 20 years and no-one finds that strange. He says he is a Christian and faith is a large part of his life. Yet no criticism is directed towards the divine being for possessing a Bush-like belief in a higher power.

If Bush was a fascist-Christian evangelical, why isn't the Prophet labeled as such ? Or maybe after 20 years in a racist Black church, the Prophet is a racist-fascist ? What if Bushitler had sat in a racist white church for 20 years; 20 weeks or even 20 minutes ?

Sheer arrogance:

Bush was pronounced by 'progressives' as the embodiment of strutting arrogance. But Bush is a piker compared to the Black demi-God. The Prophet, his people, his White House spin speaker Gibbs; Pelosi and the entire retinue of Ivy league trained socialists are easily the most arrogant group to hold power in recent US history. Arrogance, technocratic hubris and a denial of the individual are the markers of this ruling clique. The Prophet's administration does not brook dissent, questions, facts or science. It simply dictates and expects to be obeyed.

This arrogance is reflected in a bizarre and mentally unbalanced addiction to speed in all matters. The Prophet's administration is one gigantic rush. Everything is rush, rush rush. One cannot imagine the media howling or public outrage if Bushitler had engaged in the same tactics as the divine being Obamed.

There is no debate, analysis or even a pretense at caring what the outcomes will be. The objective is clear – expand government to create a state where at least 50% of GDP is under direct state management. Congress is to rubber stamp what Il Duce Prophet says must pass. End of debate.

Climate bill on Globaloney Warming nonsense and saving Mother Earth whilst raising taxes by $1.9 Trillion ? Rush it through between 3 am and 9 am when no legislator has even bothered to read most if any of the 1300 page bill.

A $1 Trillion stimulus package and a $275 Billion bailout of mortgage holders who can't make payments ? Pass it now or the entire world economy will collapse or so everyone is told.

Public money to invest in banks and insurance firms ? Private capital was expressly told not to get involved in restructuring the banks and that the government in a hysterical fit of activity, would be the only investor in the American financial system.

So it too was passed.

And so it is with all government expansionism under the Prophet – a systemic reflating of state power which will in short order soon control 45% of US GDP. But it won't stop there.

What democracy ? The US long ago ceased being a republic and is now a plutocracy. One managed by elitist and professional politicians, all beholden in today's world to their Black Jesus. There is little interest in the public interest or the individual and no interest in facts, debate or reality.

Capital, markets, the single human, freedom, rights, American exceptionalism – all these mean nothing to the Prophet and friends.

Yet it was Bush of course who was the fascist, the statist, the man who wanted government to crawl through your personal affairs; your underwear; your phone records; your inner thoughts and it was Bushitler who wanted to turn America into Amerika.

Bush's non-conservative, state expanding rule was nothing compared to the predations of the Prophet.

Congratulations America on the 4th of July – you are well on the way to destroying your 220 year experiment. Well done.

Wednesday, July 01, 2009

It's Canada Day - the Europeans discovered Canada 28.000 years ago



It is hard to celebrate a national holiday or the birth of a wealthy prosperous nation if you don't know anything about it. Few Canadians know when, how, why what, or who created their state. Few know or appreciate that the Canadian state can trace its origins back one thousand years to the gestation's of freedom embedded in Norman, Briton and Anglo-Saxon practices and culture – themselves tied to the ancient legacies embodied by Charlemagne, Alfred, the Romans and the Greeks. But one inconvenient truth which is never discussed within polite circles is the myth that Asians first discovered Canada and North America. They didn't.

Such a truth would completely upend much of the multi-cult, blame-whitey, hate modernity-industry which now exists across wide swathes of the political-economy. Even to propose such a heresy will immediately imply someone as a racist. But it is a fact which is slowly coming out. Europeans crossed a land bridge circa 28.000 B.C, during the last ice age over a period most likely of 15.000 years and discovered North America – some 18.000 years before a similar ice or land bridge opened up between Alaska and Asia allowing Asian clans to migrate to find game and living space in North America.

The facts supporting the European discovery of North America are quite strong. To its credit some years back the Discovery channel fashioned a short documentary on this migration, though a copy of it in DVD or video form is hard if not impossible to find. This documentary summaries much of the factual evidence supporting the claim that nomadic Europeans, outcasts and those searching for large sources of fresh meat such as seals or Mastodons, traversed a wide arching ice bridge which stretched from southern France to the mid-Atlantic US states. These sojourners discovered America most likely on foot, but also quite possibly by boat.

Spear points found In Virginia and elsewhere dating back to 28.000 B.C. tie North America to Europe. In North America the demise of all the largest mammals including Mastodons, large buffalo, tigers, lions and the massive short face bear, is usually attributed to humans hunting in well organized parties, using advanced flint and stone weapons and especially what is called the 'Clovis' spear point – a highly engineered flint tip which can pierce the toughest hides. Long thought to be created in North America, the Clovis spear point in actual fact resembles exactly the same spear points found in France and Spain called the Solutrean spear point.

The two spear points are not just similar, they are exact replicas. This implies of course that the flint knapping technology and skill was carried from Europe to America. Clovis and Solutrean points have never been discovered in Asia. Most of the Clovis points in North America are to be found in the eastern part of the Continent, though other areas are now being discovered which also contain Clovis fragments. This would make sense since the original European explorers would have hunted and created their communities along the giant ice wall which dominated the eastern landscape of North America down to Virginia. Along this wall of ice would have been grasslands teeming with large game. There would have been little reason to migrate – at least initially – to other areas of North America until millenia after the discovery of the Continent.

Another link to Europeans as the first discoverers of North America is DNA. Genes within DNA are data banks of information extending back to the first humans. American Indian DNA has large traces of European genes. It means that Asian and European peoples at one time co-mingled and inter-bred in North America. The Europeans arrived about 28.000 BC and most likely over 18.000 years there was much traffic as thousands of humans traversed back and forth from Europe to North America.

Around 10.000 B.C another ice bridge in the West from Asia allowed Asiatic clans to imitate the European migration into a new Continent in search of food, better living conditions and more nomadic living space. At some point the two groups would have faced each other. No one knows the results, but the existence of European DNA in Indian tribes as diverse as the Ojibwa of Central Canada, and the Cherokee of Florida, indicates that a cross-fertilization of humans took place.

It has been proven for example that a unique DNA haplogroup marker found in some American Indian DNA must have come from the only other place it is found, namely Europe. Haplogroup DNA is 17,000 years old. The American Association for the Advancement of Science is studying DNA in 'power packs' of cells called mitochondira which can help elucidate and compare populations to analyze migratory patterns. Mitochondria analysis also reveals that up to ¼ of North American Indian DNA is European based.

Even the oldest skull in North America - found near Mexico City, named Peñon woman and dated from 11.000 BC is Caucasian. "Research team leader Dr. Silvia Gonzalez believes that Peñon woman does in fact prove the Solutrean hypothesis. “At the moment it points to that as being likely. They were definitely not Mongoloid in appearance. They were from somewhere else. As to whether they were European, at this point in time we cannot say ‘no’,” Dr Gonzalez said." Caucasian skulls and bones pre-dating Asian tribal arrival have been discovered even in Western North America - much to the disgust and fury of 'Native' Indians. Yet many more such discoveries - far older in fact - await to be found.

The only argument against the connection between Solutrean and Clovis civilisations is that the journey would have been too long and too difficult. But this is not true. The land bridge would have been a 3.000 km journey – similar to what Asian tribes from Japan, Manchuria and Siberia, undertook circa 10.000 B.C.

Solutrean civilisation which existed circa 20.000 B.C., in their use of natural resources, hunting, technology and social skills was at least and quite probably a lot more advanced than those of the migrating Asians some 10.000 years later. We can see this from archeological finds in France and Spain.

Solutrean 'cave dwellers' were nothing of the type. They had a sophisticated and rather advanced stone age society utilizing some astonishing technologies and skill in the shaping of tools, implements, weapons and even social structures. They were not brutes. There is even evidence that Solutreans and their ancestors were adept with seal skin boats, and one theory is that some Europeans made the migration to North America in such vessels - proven to be durable in ocean waters. If this is true it would cut the time of the migration down to a matter of a few months. This is certainly something a fit, determined and motivated clan could and would accomplish.

It is also rather hard to believe that a group of people with method, motive and prowess such as Solutrean or their ancestors, could not have made the same journey, in probably less harsh conditions, than their Asian counterparts. Of course if you were to say the opposite you would be labeled a racist. At the very least this most likely of occurrences – a European migration circa 28.000 B.C. to North America - which lasted for millenia needs to be discussed, investigated and analyzed. That is what is called science and that is what informs real education.

In any event it makes Canada Day more interesting.

Tuesday, June 30, 2009

The Prophet wrong again – on Iraq this time.



US troops are drawing down on the Bush-Maliki schedule. The war was won 2 years ago.

The divine Prophet, the Black Moses, the wizard of tele-prompter ooh and ahh, condemned the Iraq war and said it was lost and that the Bush surge would never work. Now on June 30 2009 he announces with godly thunderclaps of approbation one assumes, that the war is indeed won, so much so that the US can redeploy its troops out of the cities and start to bring them home. He can thank Bush, Cheney and General Petraeus for the Iraqi victory – and choke on his own 7 years of being wrong, of lying and of deceiving US voters to get elected. [But the Prophet is of course a man of principle !] Iraq proves yet again that this man is defective in the most elementary elements of analysis and leadership.

The Iraq war was won 2 years ago. But not for the Prophet and his power hungry, clawing, technocratic friends. Oh no. It was lost, hopeless, a quagmire, another Vietnam, America's Afghanistan, another Balkanized shambles....perhaps even like Rwanda or Somalia. No good would come of it. But it is and was, obviously, and clearly a decisive American victory. The Black God was – as he usually has been on most issues – utterly wrong.

There were 23 good reasons to invade Iraq - see the declaration of war. Hussein and his fascist regime which killed about 1 million civilians, is obliterated. The UN Oil for Food scandal is long gone. Terrorist funding from Iraq has stopped. 60.000 dead Islamic fascists now fertilize Iraqi fields. Al Qaida will never recover from its Iraqi defeat. Its Iraqi affiliated groups such as Al Ansar and Zarqawi's gang – both existent in Iraq before 2003 – are exterminated. A few die hard fascist idiots both Sunni and Shia continue to kill innocents, but Muslims and Arabs have been doing that for 1400 years. That part of Islamic-Arabic culture will never end. And ad hoc explosions of cowardly terror attacks do not a war make.

So the Great Prophet – a demigod who is suppose to know all – was wrong. Here is a very partial list of the Prophet's mistakes and laughable lies about Iraq, as compiled at the National Review website:

Fall 2002 in stating why he would vote against a war in Iraq:
“I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a US occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences....”

[You mean like a victory, and the creation of a future South Korea in the middle of rotten and rotted Islam ?]

January 2007 interview [notice the eloquent uh's]
“We cannot impose a military solution on what has effectively become a civil war. And until we acknowledge that reality, uh, we can send 15,000 more troops; 20,000 more troops; 30,000 more troops. Uh, I don't know any, uh, expert on the region or any military officer that I've spoken to, uh, privately that believes that that is gonna make a substantial difference on the situation on the ground.”

[Ah, the Prophet apparently was like, uh I don't know, ah maybe uh wrong ?]

July 2007:
"Here's what we know. The surge has not worked. And they said today, 'Well, even in September, we're going to need more time.' So we're going to kick this can all the way down to the next president, under the president's plan."
[The surge obviously has failed which is why the Iraq war was won.]

A Democratic debate in September 13, 2007:
“After putting an additional 30,000 troops in, far longer & more troops than the president had initially said, we have gone from a horrendous situation of violence in Iraq to the same intolerable levels of violence that we had back in June of 2006. So, essentially, after all this we're back where we were 15 months ago. And what has not happened is any movement with respect to the sort of political accommodations among the various factions..”

[So the surge failed which is why on June 30 2009, the Prophet admitted that the war was won].

The withdrawal of US troops is not a smart move, but one set by the Bush administration and now being followed by his divine presence's governing elite. It is a de-surge and one full of danger. As his godliness declared; “Now make no mistake. There will be difficult days ahead. We know that violence in Iraq will continue. We see that already in the senseless bombing in Kirkuk earlier today.’’

Yes that is why the knuckle-dragging neo-con, fascists, Bushitler supporters excoriated the Bush plan for committing to a withdrawal plan. It makes no sense. You only withdraw when the time is right and the peace is won. That the Iraq war is won is indisputable but the peace is still in danger. What is at odds with the best laid plans is the level of unnecessary carnage which could follow a pre-mature US fallback from the urban areas. But at any rate, it is now up to Iraqis to take control of their own security situation and that surely is not a bad option, though a risky one.

So on Iraq here is what we know. The Black Jesus tried to buy votes of his hard left, union-leashed, lattee-loving, hair-flicking 'progressive' political party. In so doing he compromised US national security, lied to the American public and continuously agitated against a war and its eventual success. Now of course he claims that the surge did work and that the Iraqi war is a positive both for Iraq and America. No media fallout and no voter disgust is registered.

And this man is President ?

His lack of analysis, insight and courage mark him out more as a community organizer than as a leader of a nation with global responsibilities. Iraq makes that clear. So does Iran. When such a man has ultimate power one can only wonder at the mentality of his supporters and engage in the rational project of thinking about voting reform. Or do divine beings sometimes make mistakes perhaps – just like those in their cult supporting them ?

Why the Crusades were a success.



Don't confront Iran. Iraq was not worth it. Turkey is our friend. The Arabs in 'Palestine' are under 'occupation'. The Saudi's and Gulf Arabs are major allies. Islam is peaceful. Most Muslims are worthy and honest etc. When listening to mad ravings of the Marxist-Liberal chattering class, or sundry vote-buying compassionate 'conservatives', one can't help but fondly reflect on the self-confident energy and faith which galvanized 5 crusades in the early modern period, over a vast distance, to save Europe and Christendom. Contrary to most reports, the Crusades were anything but a failure – they in effect saved Europe from the Muslim hordes. Without them the world would be a different and far sorrier place.

They did of course end in a 'failure' of sorts and in some sense they were bloody – but no more than any other war during that period. Historians or commentators never put that so-called 'failure' into perspective. From 1099 to about 1290 the Crusaders – always small in number, lacking resources and politically divided – were able to mount serious operations far from Europe and wrest control of large swathes of Syria and the Levant from Islamic control for more than 150 years. A rather prodigious feat.

That they succeeded for so long, building some of the most impressive fortifications in the world at that time, is testimony to a high level of skill, organisation and resolve. It gives lie to the oft-repeated claim that medieval Europe was some sort of dung infested ant heap of poverty and stupidity. It wasn't.

The Crusades were bloody, but so are all wars. The biggest tragedy visited by the Crusaders and by far the most vile, was the sack, at the instigation of capricious Venetians and Genoese, of Constantinople – the noblest city in Christendom. The 1204 pillaging of the cosmopolitan Byzantine capital, assured its eventual future collapse and takeover by the Turks. It never recovered from this savagery. It was a disgusting and revolting affair, but one which highlights the perfidy, the crudity, and the political and economic caviling which saturated all of the Crusades. These expeditions to the Holy Land were anything but displays of Christian solidarity.

Why are the Crusades then important, when we are constantly told by Muslim apologists and Marxist professors that they were an unmitigated failure?

Many good books exist on the Crusades and the most interesting ignore politically-correct gibberish and present the incursions into the Holy Land as valid replies to centuries of Muslim aggression and violence. When the first Crusade was called in 1095 by Pope Urban II, the fate of Byzantium or Eastern Christendom was in doubt. The Emperor at Constantinople appealed to the Pope and Western emperors for help. Crushed in 1071 at the battle of Manzikert the Byzantium empire was but a shadow of its former self.

The Arabs defeating the Eastern Christians in 637 A.D. in the south had stripped vital and prosperous property and trade routes from the Byzantines. The Arabs tried, came close, but ultimately failed to take the weakened Byzantium state. The Seljuk Turks however, came to finish off what the Arabs could not do. Seljuk power had taken over much of the Levant, Syria, Iraq and modern day Turkey. By 1095 A.D. they were poised to finish off the Eastern Christian state. By this time Byzantium was a shrunken, poorer state, hanging on to lands in the Balkans, Asia Minor and some islands in the eastern Mediterranean. It appeared that without Western aid, the Eastern Church and millions of Jews and Christians would be destroyed by the Muslim Turks. Hence out went the call from East to West for immediate aid.

Along with the fate of Eastern brothers, Pope Urban and the Western leadership could point out some other facts. Christian pilgrims to the Holy Land were being constantly harassed by the Turks. The Levant and Jerusalem were under Turkish control, and many stories reached Europe about Christians being slaughtered; taxed; subject to huge fees and generally harassed on holy pilgrimages. Given the obsessive nature of the medieval mind towards the Holy Land, such violations were sure to arouse a ferocious Christian response.



Pope Urban was able to galvanize the First Crusade and convince the nobles of Europe to participate not just because of concern for Constantinople's survival, but out of self-interest. Crusaders were exempt from Church taxation on income [which could be quite high up to 25%]. Assets and families were to be guaranteed protection by the Church. Perhaps most importantly the souls of those who participated would be saved and 'indulgences' granted to family members as well. Even better might be the loot and riches in the Holy Land, which awaited a victorious campaign.

The only downside for the Crusading Christian was that he had to pay for the trip, the equipment, the food, the horses and the appurtenances of war, himself. It was a rather expensive deal. In this regard it took the elite quite a bit longer to become involved, than the poor. It was actually the poorer classes who responded with the most vigor. It was only after some arm-twisting and political pressure that French, German and eventually English barons and Kings fell into line.

Catastrophes populated all 5 of the Crusades. The first saw the poor-class army rampage through Germany killing Jews and rich Christians – to pay for the trip. This would be an oft-repeated event during many of the Crusades. Given that state military spending was non-existent and in fact state budgets almost non-existent, it is not a surprise that many Crusaders killed and plundered on their route to the Holy Land to pay for the affair. They were as cynical and complicated a personality as any modern male.

The most remarkable crusade was probably the first professional one. This was a gigantic success. Marching down through Turkey the small crusading army comprising most probably 15.000 professional infantrymen from France and Germany, and most likely 2.000 heavily armored Knights, destroyed Turkish resistance taking the major city of Antioch in present day Syria [at that time a far larger and more important center than Jerusalem], before in mid 1099 taking the Holy City itself. It was a remarkable achievement.

But as with all subsequent Crusades it was the lack of resources, manpower and political unity, which would doom the project in Outremer [or Over the Sea]. After Jerusalem was taken a Muslim Egyptian force attacked in the autumn of 1099 and was wiped out. Instead of consolidating their military victories and marching to Cairo and or Damascus to eliminate the Muslim threat, most of the Crusaders simply went home. Their thinking was simple. We took Jerusalem, we slaughtered a lot of Muslims, we have our indulgences and money, and now it is time to go. King Baldwin, French born leader of the First Crusade was thus left with about 300 heavy cavalry and 1000 or so regular infantry. Such a paltry force could never hope to retain, in the long-term, such vast possessions so recently conquered.

And so it went with all five Crusades [some count six, but there is no proof that the so-called Children's crusade took place]. The Muslims, even despite their varied internal differences and civil wars, could always mount huge armies, supported by extensive resources, supplies and logistical support. They were after all fighting in their own backyard so to speak. The fractious Europeans, riven by jealously, political ambition, greed, and rivalry, had to contend with limited man-power, tenuous supply bases and the constant threat of Turkish encirclement.

It is rather astonishing that the Crusaders were able to keep even a portion of their First Crusade victories for so long. Jerusalem only fell to Saladin in 1187 – after the Kurdish commander had slaughtered and beheaded 1000 Knights who had surrendered to the vastly superior Turkish forces at the battle of Hattin. This was followed by more massacres and raising of Christian settlements – giving lie to the calumny that only the Crusaders engaged in bloody attacks on civilians. The Muslims were just as keen, if not keener, in wanton pillage and destruction.

Even the nadir of the Crusades and the 1204 destruction of the 'Second Rome', and display of crude barbarism and lust for Orthodox riches, still pales to the unmitigated extermination which took place in Constantinople as it fell to the Turks in 1453. Constantinople's streets literally ran with rivers of blood as the Turks butchered the population and desecrated the holiest of Christian shrines and churches. All men were killed, and women and children sold as sex slaves or chattel. No mercy was shown. [These facts however will never make an appearance in a Hollywood film, where all Muslims are earnest, peaceful and extraordinarily intelligent which accounts for why Islam is such a roaring success today.]

Other significant benefits accrued from the Crusades. Trade, ideas, a sense of Christendom and European-ness flowed from the struggle with the Seljuk Turks and Arabs. These were positives as is the base fact that for the first time since the Islamic onslaught in the mid-7th century, the Christians were taking the struggle to the Muslims. No longer were Western Christian states and the Church willing to allow the Turks and Arabs a free reign of terror along the European littoral.

Centuries of Arab and Turkic warring against Christendom had finally engendered a military response. It is not an exaggeration to state there is a direct line between 1099, the naval victory over the Muslims in 1571 at Lepanto, and the Christian defeat of the Turks in 1683 at the gates of Vienna. The Crusades were Europe's fractious yet effective means of taking the war to the enemy.

They proved that even a small tithe of Europe's resources were enough to defeat the pagan Turks and Muslims. Undermanned, under-resourced and never unified, the Crusades destroyed the myth of Muslim superiority and fighting prowess. There is no doubt that if there had been a unified command, using the vast resources of Europe and its professional soldiery and heavy cavalry, that the Europeans would easily have conquered not only the Levant, but also Egypt and Mesopotamia. How different and more positive might world history now been if that had taken place.

This 'pre-emptive' attack by the Christians against pagan Muslims is of course the only way to win a struggle against a robustly fascistic ideology. Especially one which had been warring on Europe for 400 years before the first stirrings of a European counter-attack were formed. Waiting to be conquered and slaughtered is a rather inadvisable strategy - something the moralizers and anti-war philosophers of today fail to recognize. We can learn a lot from the Crusades – the faith, the feat of logistics and engineering, the self-confidence, and indeed the avaricious greed of conquest and blood – in stimulating a grand enterprise.

Even despite its iniquities the Crusades were and are certainly superior to the alternative, namely the banal claims of pacifist stupor, and ignominious slavery. In almost all respects they were a success, not a failure. But that is something that will never be taught in a post-modern, post-reality world.

Monday, June 29, 2009

The Muslim world's indifference to Iran.


If the US State Department does not care, why should Muslims ?

It is a vain enterprise to try and find any Arab-Muslim condemnation of the fascist theocracy in Iran. Still vainer finding any Muslim individual, group or PR lobby institution, demanding a change to Iran's election process and freedom and reforms for its citizens. But publish a cartoon about Mohammed and whoa! Riots, demonstrations, threats and invocations of divine wrath are the natural and logical outcome of such a blasphemy. Human rights ? Dead in Tehran ? Yawn. Muslims could care less.

And so could the US State department – an institution seething and crawling with Islamo-sympathizers and those indifferent to political and theological fascism. Last the State Department spokesman came up with this ringing accusation of Iranian thugocracy: “State Department spokesman Ian Kelly told reporters Monday that the United States is concerned about allegations of ballot fraud...When pressed by a reporter, Kelly declined to condemn the Iranian security forces for their crackdown on street protesters. And he said the U.S. knows too little about the conduct of the election to say for sure whether there was fraud.”

Thanks.

If the US State Department and its divine leader the Black God, Prophet Obamed, can't find the courage to condemn Iran in unequivocal terms with moral clarity and all the superiority of Western methods, might and culture, than why expect Muslims to do it ? Why would anyone expect an Arab or Muslim government to denounce the terrorist Iranian regime, headed by unelected Mullahs who use as their pawn a character out of a Charlie Chaplin film and one as evil and cartoonish as Herr Hitler ? Or why would anyone expect Muslims to take to the streets with placards and cries for Iranian freedom, and the destruction of a fundamentalist regime which has in 30 years killed and tortured literally tens of thousands of people ?

Moral and cultural relativity?

Political and fundamentalist Islam always ends up in failure. It has never been successful anywhere it has been tried at any point in history. The myth of 'golden Islam' is only perpetuated by media, academic and political fellow travelers reveling in grotesque ignorance. Iran far from being an exception, is the rule of where Islam leads to – a crushing, anti-humanist dictatorship. Apparently Western states, and their foreign mouthpieces the 'State Department' or 'Foreign Affairs Ministry' are opposed to ideologies which de-humanise the individual and engage in mass murder.

But you would not know it. If our own agencies can't summon the ganos to confront Iran why expect Muslims, saturated in the absuridty of the Koran and Muslim propaganda to oppose Ahmadinejad and the Mullahs ?

Not one single Arab or Muslim state has stood up to Iran and its gross election fraud, and the regime's fascistic crack-down on dissenters and protesters. As Michael Coren wrote in the Toronto Star:
“According to Scotland's University of St. Andrews, hardly a center of conservatism, and the internationally respected Chatham House think-tank in England, the Iranian election results are impossible to believe. After an exhaustive analysis they conclude that for the election to be accurate Mahmoud Ahmadinejad would have had to have won 100% of the conservative vote, 90% of the new vote and 40% of the reformist vote.”

So where is the Muslim world's outcry over the continued denial of Iranian freedom ? No where to be found. And the reason is that most Muslims view anything Islamic as pure and noble. Even a regime like Iran's which butchers people in the name of some Meccan moon deity, and its own power, is beyond Muslim reproach.

But hell, if those fascist Jews build yet another apartment bloc on some guano-covered hillside....well!

As Coren concludes, “There is still time for Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Nigeria, Pakistan, Syria and the rest to officially condemn Iran and for the Muslims of Canada, the United States and Europe to march and protest. Lots of time. Yes, lots and lots and lots of time.”

Muslims protesting against Islamic fascism ? Ha ha. There is about as much chance of that happening as that of Islam being reformed. In other words, none.

Sunday, June 28, 2009


As I wrote before the real issue with Cap and Trade, or Control and Tax, in limiting 'carbon' emissions is about who controls industry – private markets or the government:
“The parasites who deign to control mankind and dispose of production, wealth, economic output and regulate all matters of consumption, will stop at nothing to achieve their goals of economic socialism, cultural marxism, and international 'solidarity' under the hegemony of a world government. Propaganda, lies, and distortions are stock in trade. Other universalist socialist movements – the Nazis, Islam, Russian imperialism – all engaged or still engage, in reality destruction. You can't create a fantasy-world unless you destroy the modern world and all vestiges of rationality.”
http://www.craigread.com/displayArticle.aspx?contentID=1004&subgroupID=14

The eco-fascists and their political abettors are thus no better than the deranged personalities who promoted other fantasy universalist ideologies. Manage industry. Control output. Tax industry based on carbon usage. Tax families and individuals based on carbon consumption. The 'Cap and Trade' protocol is the perfect disguise for a politician looking to control the world. Save little mother earth by taxing the evils of production and of consumerist culture !

And for free we can throw in the obligatory paean about securing a green, children's children's future. Tears rolling down cheeks. Hand on heart.

Or better hand on your wallet. Once the government starts taxing businesses through a variety of fees and sur-taxes for carbon usage it will simply be passed on as a cost. It will also be used as a protectionist device. Not only will US businesses pay a tax based on their illegal, immoral and unconscionable use of mother earth unfriendly carbon energy, but those nasty Chinese and offshore makers will not be allowed to sell their cheaper products until their countries 'do the right thing' and tax their states into bankruptcy.

After all, nothing less than the survival of mother earth is at stake as evidenced through Globaloney warming, even though the earth has noticeably cooled the last 10 years and those cuddly ursus maritimus have doubled in population size in the past 20.

The 'conservative' [ie. Fascist, neo-con, illiberal, racist, knuckle dragging, unsophisticated] Heritage Foundation claims that by 2035 the Americans Cap and Trade bill will reduce aggregate US gross domestic product by $7.4 trillion. This is 50% of the current per annum GDP. It works out to about $300 billion per year in GDP reduction or 2%.

The irony is of course that there will be no impact whatsoever on mother earth or climate. The reasons are many, but the simple fact is that mankind has no discernible impact at all, on climate.

But mankind can control job creation. By increasing taxes in the order of $2 Trillion p.a. and reducing the ability of both businesses and consumers to operate fairly in a more open market, the Cap and Trade program will destroy on average 844,000 jobs. Some years it might reach 2 million. The current recession by comparison has lost close to 7 million jobs in the past year. In a good economy with a GDP growth of 3.5 % [the level needed to constantly create new and better jobs] the US can produce about 1-2 million more jobs. Cap and Trade effectively neuters the ability of the Americans to manufacture jobs and positions.

And of course the consumer will suffer. Businesses will simply pass the increase in taxes as a higher cost to buyers. According to the Heritage Foundation: "Consumers will see electricity rates increase by some 90% adjusted for inflation. Inflation-adjusted gasoline prices would rise 74%, residential natural gas prices by 55% and the average family's annual energy bill by $1,500."

Can you afford an extra $1500-2000 per year in higher costs for a program which will effectively do nothing about climate but give politicians and their bureaucratic allies unfettered control over your economy ?

Yes we thought not.

Saturday, June 27, 2009

The negative relevance of Michael Jackson. Not art, not interesting and simply Hollywood.


Michael Jackson's suicide reveals the sad reality of his own personal and human irrelevance. Or in an obtuse way, the self-destruction of a Hollywood pop-god, demonstrates the negative relevance of MJ's career. Michael Jackson's life was a Hollywood driven fantasy with all the superficiality that such a life exudes. It was a tragedy and one in which Hollywood and its various parasites took a human and destroyed it. The sum total would reflect well in a Shakespearean melo-drama - much dancing and singing and much ado about not that much. Pity Jackson the deformed man, not Jackson the pop culture dancing and singing puppet.

There is little about MJ which is interesting – outside of his strange personality. Contrary to those holding vigil, listening to old MJ songs, or lamenting the passage of 'one of the great entertainers' of all time, MJ's total corpus of work is and was, rather incredibly constrained. He was in some sense, a dancing and singing slave. It is only the pop-culture fascination with all things singing and dancing – and all things light and superficial – which allowed a person like MJ to become famous and then to kill himself.

Yet few care to surmise that it was Hollywood which created, fed, and managed MJ and which of course killed him.

Jackson's voice was feminine and largely annoying. His vocals like his mind never matured. His lyrics were mostly banal and without larger meaning – the epitome of pop culture psychosis. The dancing was somewhat innovative but over time became largely fatuous and with the crotch grabbing it became an illustration of sexual deviancy and exhibitionism. Sexual deviancies are best left in private.

He made a lot of money and somehow became a bankrupt. A sure sign of an incompetent. He tortured his face and body with surgery trying to transform his biological being into something it was not. A sure sign of someone with a mental health issue. His personality was likewise deformed and immature. Jackson had no spiritual base, no mental depth, and no profundity outside of dancing, crotch grabbing and whining in a high voice. His entire career was without purpose.

Like Munroe and Elvis, Jackson became a slave to the industry he thought he led. He was a pawn not a King of pop culture. His message had no votive and no higher motive. Did he deal with deep themes and personal struggles ? Was he a man for freedom, self introspection, or humanism ? Did he balance his life within a framework of moral, physical and mental parameters and codes ? Did he endeavor to impart a higher metaphysical art in his work ?

Of course not. He sang some catchy tunes, with more than a few of them terrible and repetitive. There was no need in his mind or that of his handlers for a life mired in concrete spirituality or purpose. MJ was a god, and abetted by the corruption of Hollywood, MJ became simply a rampaging narcissist with no higher purpose. Crowds, adulation, fame and living only to be famous. This is Hollywood's export to the world – an utter vacuousness of living and of life. MJ is Hollywood's logical outcome – a life and a talent used and thrown away, all to the beat of a pop culture of emptiness and irrelevance.

MJ's death is feted by Hollywood as a period of mourning, but not for MJ. It is a wake for Hollywood and what Hollywood represents. MJ is simply the vehicle of Hollywood's own self absorption and narcissism. MJ as such never existed, he was a creation by others, for the benefit of others, to project a culture which is more obscene than cultural, onto others. MJ's suicide is Hollywood's murder. A man without character is not much of a man.

And MJ never grew up - hence his fascination some of it sexual, some of it not, with children. A sure sign of a troubled psychology.

As Shakespeare's Borachio so aptly commented in Much Ado about Nothing: “Thou knowest that the fashion of a doublet, or a hat, or a cloak is nothing to a man.”

Or one should know that a sequin glove, military jacket and a deformed face, even if surrounded by fame and money, does not a man make.

MJ killed by pop culture. But not many will make the connection between his death and the emptiness of what they worship.

Friday, June 26, 2009

“How should we eat the flesh of American soldiers ?”




The religion of pieces discussing a burning question in a Jihadist forum.

There were moderate Nazis. Moderate Communists. Moderate Castroists. Perhaps there are even moderate followers of the divine Prophet Obamed. So of course there must be moderate Jihadists and moderate Muslims supporting Islamic imperialism.

PHDs [pretty happy dude degrees] will be published aplenty in which out of work 30 somethings list the evils of Western civilisation and extol the glories of Islamic poverty, imperialism, ignorance and cult rituals. The media will be feverishly recasting views and not news, narrating the wonderful spirituality of the Muslim next door [ah he likes my doggie too]. Politicians will be stentoriously informing the hoi-polloi that multi-culturalism is the end development of mankind and Islam a necessary antidote to Western perfidy, crime and neo-colonialist savagery.

But not many of these fellow-travelers would bother to actually go on a jihadist website and listen to Muslims discuss the Kaffir, the infidel, the crusader, or the Jew.

The Middle East Research Media Institute does. And one of their reports presents a shocking but everyday occurrence in the Muslim world. An online discussion by Muslims on how best to eat US soldiers.

Should it follow halal ? What sauces and spices would make it more palatable ? How long to tenderize it ?

Such discussions are always trivialized in the West. Most Muslims in the West don't approve. Most love their Christian and Jew and atheist neighbors. Most are wonderful pillars of community support. The usual litany of nonsense without even the benefit of anecdotal support or common sense. If this is all true how does one explain that over ½ of Muslims in the US or Britain 'understand' why Muslim terror occurs [meaning they support it, in some way]; or the millions of dollars flowing from America and Europe to Muslim terror groups in the Middle East ?

Muslim jihad and violence are a pandemic which by definition means that a large percentage of Muslims support either aggressive military jihad, or at the very least a cultural jihad of changing the West to conform to Islam.

The MEMRI article highlights the primitive barbarity of Muslim savagery. [see here for the article] http://memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=SD242009

“On June 13, 2009, a member of the Al-Falluja forum who uses the moniker "Al-Maqdisi's Student" wrote a post based on this passage [in full report] titled "Is it permitted to eat the flesh of American soldiers? ............Al-Maqdisi's Student" then cites the aforementioned passage from Al-Maqdisi's Beginner's Guide and follows up with the words: "The mujahideen should inform their belligerent [infidel] and apostate enemies of this exceptional law so that they can bring it up and study it at their conferences on human rights, counterterrorism, and so on! Then they in turn can proclaim that our soldiers lick their lips [at the thought of] eating the flesh of their hamburger- and Pepsi-eating soldiers!

"If We... Eat Americans, Let's Make Them Into A Gunpowder-Flavored Kabsa With Some Hors D'oeuvres Made Of Apostates"

[a poster] Abu Hajir Al-Muqrin wrote: "If we are forced to eat Americans, let's make them into a gunpowder-flavored kabsa with some hors d'oeuvres made of apostates."
[another blogger] Muhammad Al-Baghdadi wrote: "But the slaughtering needs to be according to the shari'a. He then wrote "perhaps this is the best way" above stills from the Nick Berg decapitation video."

This blog posting and discussion is not unique. It savagery happens hundreds of times a day in the Muslim world, articulated by literally thousands of Muslims. There are no Christian and Jew sites of the same barbarity. White supremacist sites have very small followings. Not so Islamic. With 1.3 billion adherents the Islamic cult can draw from a wide and deep pool of resources – many of whom are not humanists, realists, or moralists, but Koranic besotted savages who wish for a Muslim Caliphate and Islamic world rule.

This MEMRI article also contained this factual piece of early Islamic imperialism and pre-modern crudity.

"A quote from the illustrious Sheikh Al-Maqdisi, may Allah preserve him." He began by recounting an exchange between the early Muslim commander Khalid b. Al-Walid and the Byzantine commander at the battle of Yarmuk (in the year 636 C.E.) The Byzantine commander said to Khalid that the Muslims had only gone out from their land due to hunger, and offered to buy them off. Khalid responded: "It was not hunger that drove us out of our land, as you say; we are a people who drink blood, and we know that there is no blood more delicious than Byzantine blood. That is why we came."

Islam was spread the sword. Gold, booty, women, plunder, and the destruction of higher civilisations were the animating and attracting forces for Islamic imperialism. The lust for blood, to conquer and to humiliate still runs strong throughout much of Islam.

Ignoring that reality is simply ignorant. But ignorance is a hallmark of multi-cult piety and post modern irrationality.

Thursday, June 25, 2009

Why the Burqa should be banned.


There are many good reasons to ban the moving bed sheet attire, apparently so deeply coveted as status symbols by Muslim women. Even if one is dubious of Islam's claim that its women really do like looking like unmade gliding beds, there are societal and cultural reasons why the Hijab should be banned. In short banning the Burqa, the Hijab and the Niqab would ban Islam's direct and anti-social assault on Western values.

Many girls are murdered across the Islamic world, some for the petty crime of not wanting to look like their parents unmade bed. Covering women up is not necessarily mandated in the Koran, but it stems from Arab culture and their misogynistic attitude towards the female. In Arab and Muslim culture the male rules, the female obeys, and the female is branded as a piece of property, a cow, a man's dog, chattel to serve and please the man. This is one of the keystones of Arab and Islamic culture and of Islam supremacism. Islam is a male dominated cult.

But the Muslim fetish for bed-sheet wear goes beyond even simple misogyny. It is a direct assault on the West. If you read Ed Hussein's book on 'Why I became an Islamist and left', the former English Muslim makes it very clear that women wear the bed sheet dress to express superiority over Western values, and to assert their distinctiveness. They wear the Burqa [complete body covering including the hands], the Jilbab, [full body covering with the face open]; the Hijab [headscarf with the face left open], or the Niqab [full body covering with only the eyes visible]; as a statement of Islamic superiority. It is a conscious act of Muslim supremacism. Done to intimidate the West.

Should we put up with this?

Bed sheets and their anti-Westen, female-branding are outlawed in public spaces in Holland, France, Germany, and Turkey. The UK, Australia, Canada and the US need to follow suit. Melanie Philips the author of 'Londinistan, How Britain is Creating a Terror State Within', recently told an audience at the Middle East Forum in London that 'wearing the Niqab and Burka or Burqa, was a political act used by Muslims to show that they did not want to integrate or intend to observe our laws by sending a message that their loyalty is only to Allah.'

And that is exactly why it is a problem. But it goes even deeper than Islamic arrogance. It also denigrates, whether they admit or know it, the Muslim female.

In the United States, Newsweek reported that the wearing of a hijab [or the headscarf] was on the increase among American born Muslim university students. The Saudi-financed Wahhabist front organisation CAIR [Council on American Islamic Relations], who has direct ties to Hamas and Hizbollah [party of God], legal advisor, Arsalan Ifhtikar declared that, 'The hijab is the walking symbol of Islam.' Again another open admission of Islamic bravado and supremacism.

In the UK the Burqa [a total head and body covering] has been barred from classrooms in the UK, and it is illegal in public places in five Belgian towns, and the Dutch legislature has banned it altogether. In Italy the country's 'Charter of Values, Citizenship and Immigration', calls face coverings unacceptable, though still not illegal. A courtroom in the United States has expelled a Burqa wearing women on the grounds that it affronted person recognition.


Wouldn't banning Muslim dress affront their 'religion'?

Yes and that is precisely the point. Islam is not a religion. It is a 3000 year old Arabian moon cult with all the attendant features that such a pagan savagery entails. It is ritualised, primitive, patriarchal and anti-modern. If scientology is not a religion than neither is a moon cult.

Western societies do not embrace paganism. Shamans are not allowed to run naked screaming down our streets covered by shamanistic body art because their ideology says they should do that. Druids and Wiccans don't float down our avenues wearing their neo-lithic garb and hair styles. There are numerous laws covering dress and undress. These laws were enacted to protect society and enforce some code of sartorial conformity. They also allow us to be civil, courteous, and amongst strangers, connected.

Within Europe and North America Islam has no natural law; human right or legal claim to be outside of Western culture and mores. Wearing a flowing bedsheet which covers the person is a direct statement of confrontation with the host society. It states boldly that they, the Islamic woman, rejects Western society. If you argue that this is freedom of choice than fine – it is society's freedom of collective choice to reject such supremacism and demand that the initiator take her attitude and her linen-wear, back to the home country. This is not Arabia.

Many Muslim women are forced to wear the bed room attire. A Montreal mosque has posted on its Web site a warning to the effect that if young girls took off their Hijab, they could end up getting raped and having 'illegitimate children.' Most Muslim girls are repeatedly told that if they take off their Hijab, they would cease to be Muslims: 'By removing your hijab, you have destroyed your faith. Islam means submission to Allah in all our actions.'

Therein lies the set of problems. Wearing the Muslim dress is not only anti-social and anti-Western, it is at its root, whether the female realises it or not, anti-female. It is a pathetic form of branding, denoting the woman as Allah's slave, and later in life, as the meat and property of her husband.

It is as crude a branding as the pokers used on cattle, or collars on a dog. By so branding a female, Muslim men ensure compliance to themselves and the cult of Allah; and importantly, they destroy the female sense of independence, free will and freedom of thought and choice. These fundamental values are at the core of Western society. Islam rejects them all. And so too does any woman who enjoys or feels empowered wearing a bed sheet. They are so utterly degenerated and foreign that no amount of multi-cult piety and love exists to reform what cannot be changed – namely, a mental and psychological derangement.

It is obvious why the Muslim bed sheet sartorial splendor needs to be abolished. It is a symbol of everything that is wrong with Islam and everything that Islam rejects from the West. Free will, natural law rights, transparency, openness, social liberation – these and more are soundly rejected by the Hijab covered female and her male oppressors.

Have you ever tried as an infidel pig, worthless in the eyes of the Hijab wearing Muslim female, to carry on a polite conversation ? Hello, how are you, nice bed sheet you have on today, glowing colors, you look fabulous, going out for a stroll in 35 C heat today are we ? Good luck with that. You are ignored. They don't even look you in the eye. They could care less if you were breathing or if you were on the ground skewered and bleeding. They would step around you and never look down. No help and no interest from the linen-people. Bed-room wear is almost pathologically an anti-social statement.

Whether the Muslim woman agrees with the above is immaterial. It is the greater society and culture which are put at risk by this morbid display of anti-Western hatred. We are the West, and we are superior. Muslim women, liberate yourselves and remove your bedsheets. If you can't, have a nice trip back to the greater Arabian empire. Take up your rights concerns in the land of your pagan Allah.

Wednesday, June 24, 2009

The Iranian people do support Ahmadinejad and radical Islam.



One of the great hoary myths is that all, most, or `the great majority`of Muslims are peaceful, unsupportive of Islamic fascism and quite willing to accommodate themselves to Western ways and mores. It is in this context that the recent Iranian elections are being reported. According to Western news outlets few in Iran want the Ahmadinejad gang and his Mullah friends in power. This is another lie. Fascisms never survive without widespread support – and international allies. My guess is that a large plurality of Iranians do support theocratic fascism.

No one knows who voted for what in Iran but two things are clear. First, the Mousavi candidacy whilst marginally better than the Ahmadinejad cult and the Mullahs, was still an Islamist and fundamentalist proposition. A Western supporter and reformer he is not, and the Mullahs who run the country and who are selected and not elected, would have been unaffected by a Mousavi victory. Second, out of about 35 million voting age Iranians at least 20 million, and quite likely upwards of 25 million Iranian voters, accepted and supported the Ahmadinejad regime. This is the real story in Iran – the widespread acclamation that the Ahmadinejad regime enjoys.

The Western media and elite have to pronounce the usual standard multi-cult, Marxist fare that Islam is peaceful and there is no way that educated, intelligent Iranians or Muslims would want to live under a theological fascist regime. This has been the politically correct default position for decades. 9-11, Darfur, Arabs murdering each other in Iraq; the GIA in Algeria; Arafat and 100.000 Christian dead in Lebanon; 5.000 Jews wiped out in the past 7 years in Israel....all these and other Muslim inspired atrocities are blamed on the Crusades, Bush, or Western neo-colonialism or the legacies of Victorian imperialism. No right-thinking Muslim, who is in heart a lover of peace and of Arab `enlightenment` would countenance or aid such monstrosities. But of course many Muslims do – there is no other way to explain 1400 years of Islamic imperialism, warring and terror.

The reality is that Iran is the main sponsor of world terror; the main financier of Hamas and Hizbollah and an ardent devotee of racism and Jewish genocide. These are facts. What is also a fact is that 25 million or more Iranians support this regime. Such facts make little impact upon the great and capacious brains and minds who control the heights of Western media, education and culture. For these multi-cult true-believers, Islam is the holy interpretation of Arabic metaphysics as elided by a mad-man masquerading as a prophet. Ergo, Iran and all Iranians are educated people who would never condone, let alone virulently abet a theocratic fascism, which desires the establishment of a Muslim Kalipha, and the eradication of Jews, and if possible America. Of course not.

Ineluctably such illogical thinking leads to the conclusion by the Western press that the Iranian elections were gross apparitions of thievery and corruption. So-called reformers and democrats had their rightful places in power stolen by theocratic thugs and goons. The mass and majority of Iranians wanted and demanded that Iran be turned into a greater Holland, and a modern state founded upon the principles of the American Declaration, or perhaps the Parliamentary legacy of Westminster. The good people of Iran want to live in a state styled after France, not 9th century Baghdad. Or so the deep and wide brain trust assures us.

Forgive one for being a skeptic.

If the Iranian people want reform, freedom and Western ties, why then the massive support for Ahmadinejad`s regime ? Maybe Muslims and Iranians – for many reasons – do prefer to live in a fundamentalist Islamic regime which is opposed to Western history, and conceptions and abstract notions about humanism and rights. Perhaps Iran is a fundamentalist Islamic state, one dedicated to spreading the corrosive and fascistic totality of the Koran. How is that for an interpretation ? Or is the world so grey and complex that such facts which appear to grin at us directly face à face should be ignored ?

Perhaps a minority of Iranian people do want reforms, freedom, the right to assemble and the right to parlay. Perhaps the youth in the urban centers do desire some form of cosmopolitanism. But then again maybe these reformers just want a lighter version of Islam, a less fundamentalist interpretation of their scriptures, more freedom for the female; a less millennial preoccupation with Jew destruction and perhaps even a better relationship with the Great Satan itself – America. All of these are worthy objectives of course. But they will not and do not mean that Iran wants to be Westernized.

The reality is this - Iran possesses a fundamentalist Muslim regime with widespread political, social and military support. Fascism's never survive without the Marxist conception of cross-class appeal. It is simply another Western media lie that all Iranians are reformers and reject totalitarian fascism. They don`t. The recent election is proof of that.

Tuesday, June 23, 2009

Book Review: Bruce Bawer's “Surrender: Appeasing Islam, Sacrificing Freedom”, Doubleday, May 2009.


Bawer's 2005 book, “While Europe Slept”, was a US national best-seller – which is why the entire corpus of left-wing media 'experts', and academic 'thinkers' ignored it. It was never reviewed by a major US or European publication since it convincingly detailed the eventual demise of European civilisation to Arab and Islamic culture and demography. Bawer's follow up 'Surrender' is just as poignant and just as obvious. And likewise it too will be ignored by grinning politicians and relativist cowards and fanatics. For its message is too bothersome for most to care about – that Europe and North America are erasing free speech, freedom of expression, and even freedom of thinking, in their collective appeasement and genuflection to the intolerance and totality which is Islam.

Bawer is a gay American writer, living with his lover in Norway. He is a 20 year journalistic veteran. His personal story and his profession hardly mark him out to be labeled the usual pejoratives – neo con; fascist; conservative racist; Bush-Hitler supporter etc. But his gay perspective and his American-European experiences are unique since Bawer understands better than most in his profession, that Islamic intolerance is not a 'minority' expression within Islam; nor is it something that 'right wing fascists' make up and intone to justify neo-imperialist slaughter in Iraq and elsewhere.

What makes 'Surrender' a necessary read is the corpus of information Bawer provides about political and media appeasement of Islam. Not one single large media organisation in either the US or Europe, has stood up for free speech in the face of Islamic intolerance, demonstrations, lobbying, whingeing, crying and myth-making about Islamophobia. Any single event one cares to name – murders, explosions, attacks on US soldiers, honor killing, slave trading, female mutilation, or the lack of Western rights within Islamic countries – is always white-washed and presented with a pro-Muslim story line. Even Fox News that supposedly Bushitler channel supporting gestapos, the end of speech, and the creation of a 4th Reich has never demonstrated on any key event, anything approaching a critical examination of Islam.

Bawer aptly sums up this appeasement narrative [p. 75]; “..throughout the Western media establishment, that if social harmony is to be achieved between Muslims and non-Muslims in the West, it's necessary for non-Muslims to undergo a radical shift in views and values.”

How true. Cultural Marxism at work. It is the 'West' which is wrong. It is the evil axis of whites, Jews and capitalists, not to mention the Crusaders which have exasperated the better spirits within Islam and caused 13450 terrorist attacks since 9-11. Who can blame Muslims for killing innocents in their outrage over the printing of cartoons depicting Mohammed, published in Denmark ?

Islam is not to be criticised. As Bawer laments, [p. 98] “Now, every day in the Muslim world, politicians, clerics, teachers, and others spew out the most abominable lies and calumnies about the West, America, Israel, Jews, Christians, Hindus, homosexuals, democracy, and so forth on TV news and entertainment programs, in the press, and in mosques, schools, and sundry venues. Only a tiny fraction of this ocean of slander is ever reported in even the most out-of-the-way Western media.”

For Western news readers and watches, Islam is re-positioned as civilised, peaceful, tolerant and kind. The reality is simply ignored.

As Bawer explains in punishing detail Western journalistic cowards did not stand up to Muslims when Theo Van Gogh – a Dutch film maker and enfant terrible who sneered at the platitudes and holies possessed by the Eurocratic elite – was murdered in a street in West Amsterdam which is a Muslim enclave. Neither did the media defend the slaughtered Dutch politician Pim Fortuyn a gay and noted critic of Islamic culture murdered by a fanatical eco-fascist. Nor would they re-publish the Danish cartoons for fear of Muslim violence and terror. The media were even largely ambivalent about the Madrid and London bombings portraying these acts of Islamic terror as mere rearguard actions and derivatives over an 'illegal' war in Iraq. The media also never reports the Islamic demonstrations, mosque speeches, or public pronouncements adjuring Jihad, the destruction of the West, or the erasure of Israel.

As Bawer relates all Muslims and their mouthpieces in various Islamic organisations are always portrayed as moderates even when they belong to fascist groups associated with the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas or front groups supporting Al Qaida. The lack of analysis and insight is simply staggering.

What is at issue is freedom and Western civilisation. If you can't criticise and analyse an ideology than what type of society do you have ? If the multi-cult, pc fascists won't let bloggers, journalists and lay people question Islamic fundamentalism, whilst Muslims and Arabs are free to roam North American and European streets, universities, and lecture halls denouncing the West, declaiming against Whites and Jews and promoting Islamic supremacism, than what type of world are you living in ? Bawer puts this question well, “At least one thing seems certain: against people who are ready to die in the cause of destroying freedom, people who are not willing to speak up for freedom for fear of being called a racist or an Islamophobe don't stand much chance of victory."

Can you imagine Churchill calling the fundamentalist totality of Nazism a 'religion' ?

Many of us don't want to live under Sharia Law and a politically-correct fascist society where freedom to think is not permitted. It remains to been seen how many of us are left. It is good to read a book by a man who is on the right side of this divide. Too bad those in power don't share his views.

Monday, June 22, 2009

Suffering through the Koran – Sura 20 named 'Ta Ha' or Mystic Letters.


Ta ha ha and Ti hee hee. Mystical giggles as the writers of the Arab universalist manifesto unite in gibberish. The Koran is apparently the mystical set of letters and yes as one would have guessed, the Torah and Christian Bible are really just Allah's mystical letters arranged incorrectly. That big joker Allah saved the right orientation of the mystical script for the Koran and as logic would dictate, he gave it to an illiterate 7th century madman named Mohammed. Ta ha ha indeed. Therefore the mystical Koran is uber alles.

Hitler's mad ravings in Mein Kampf is an obvious proof that a simpleton should not take to writing. Illogic, illusions, irrationalities and repetitions do not a constructive essay on ethics make. So it goes with the rather un-holy Koran. Its repetitive and less than discrete nature makes it an impossible read. So yet again here we have another Sura about why the Jewish prophets are really the creations and creatures of Allah, and why therefore that the Jewish religion is inferior and in fact a developmental part of Islam.

A sure sign of insanity is circular reasoning or looped arguments repeated endlessly. This entire Sura says nothing new but repeats what was already repeatedly repeated. The Arabs who wrote the Koran seem to have a psycho-fixation on Moses for instance. I suppose that if the Arabs can prove that the 1400 B.C. Jewish leader was somehow affiliated with the moon cult, than the entire edifice of Judeo morality tumbles to the desert.

“O you Children of Israel! We delivered you from your enemy, and We made a Convenant with you on the right side of Mount (Sina), and We sent down to you Manna and quails:”

Yawn. The Moses story and the return to Israel of Hebrew slaves who migrated and who most likely were ejected from Egypt, is now rewritten to be a journey in league with the Arab Allah. Allah has nothing in common with Jehovah nor with the Christian idea of God. The Judeo-Christian God is an anthropomorphic being having more in common with Zeus, than with the unknowable and remarkably opaque moon deity ali-ilah of Mecca.

In any event the Allah sent Moses and the Jews the rules – which they ignored in creating their own corrupt version of God-worship. “Thus have We sent this down – an Arabic Qu'ran – and explained therein in detail some of the warnings, in order that they may fear Allah, or that it may cause their remembrance (of Him).”

Apparently this Allah wanted an Arabic Koran invented so the Arabs could teach the Jews the right path of faith and metaphysical peace. One supposes that this Allah did not want to communicate with the Jews directly in their own Hebraic tongue, since they had strayed so far from the truth, that any further communication was impossible or impractical. So he had the Arabs do it.

And the Arabs wielding the Koran have every right to be upset with the prodigal Jews. “Is it not a warning to such men (to call to mind) how many generations before them We destroyed in whose haunts they (now) move ? Verily, in this are Signs for men eluded with understanding.”

So this Allah and his team of Muslims have wiped out many a generation of Jew before. Assyrians, Egyptians, Babylonians, Canaanites, Hittites, Greeks and Romans all had their turns trying to extirpate the Judaic monotheists. Now it is the time of the Arabs to either force the Jews to see truth and reality, or exterminate them.

Nice creed.

As with Mein Kampf the immoral and irrational explanations of why Jews should be killed – they wandered far from the true path; their destruction has been pre-ordained; Jew killing has happened in times past and should happen again – is fascistic determinism. As with Mein Kampf there is nothing new in this Sura or indeed in the Koran. Just a long litany of Jew hate and supremacism, all wrapped up in a moon cult worship. Ta ha ha.

[Note: This sura is taken from 'The Holy Quran', translated by Abdullah Yusuf Ali, reprinted in 1995, Goodword Books. Regarded as one of the best translations from Arabic to English of the Koran.]

Suffering through the Koran – Sura 19 named 'Mary'.


One of the hallmarks about the Koran, besides the usual calls to violence and supremacism, is the lack of originality and its endless repetition. Such traits are hallmarks of mediocrity. There is nothing new which the Koran offers. Instead it seeks to first appropriate and than annul Judaic and Christian teaching and writing. A Sura about Mary, giving birth to a prophet of Allah, is just another attempt at confusing and conflating Islam with Jewish traditions. It is a lame and silly attempt.

A mediocre mind will produce a mediocre piece of writing. Common characteristics of mediocre talent trying to write something include poor organisation, plagiarism, incoherence, venality, and turgid adolescent prose. The Koran is full of such traits. The Sura about Mary, the matriarch of the Christian church is another example of just how lame and exasperating the Koran is.

Its theme ? That Mary and Jesus were really supporters of the Arab conception of Allah and ergo the calls to name Christ divine, a demi-god or a man representing God, are heretical and against Islam. This means of course that Christianity has violated the Arab moon deity Allah, and as such is an invalid program.

How boring.

So the Arabs never creative enough to voice their own metaphysical philosophy of ethics and higher meaning, need to portray Mary as someone connected with Allah. “Relate in the Book (the story of) Mary, when she withdrew from her family to a place in the East.” So now the Mary story gets rewritten with an Arab twist. No journey with Joseph and no manger scene – neither are mentioned in the Koran. Instead we have Mary fleeing from a hostile Jewish society to give a virgin birth under the protection of the Arab Allah. “She said: 'I seek refuge from you to (Allah) Most Gracious:...”

According to the Koran, it was the mighty Allah which saw Mary through her child birthing process, “And the pains of childbirth drove her to the trunk of a palm tree: she cried (in her anguish) 'Ah! would that I had died before this!....But (a voice) cried to her from beneath the (palm-tree): 'Do not grieve! For your Lord has provided a rivulet beneath you;...” And so the gracious Allah waters and feeds Mary and ensures that Jesus is born and fed.

But Christ is not just a typical baby. He is up and walking and talking within hours of his being born – or so the Koran would like us to believe, “He said: I am indeed a servant of Allah: He has given me Revelation and made me a prophet;” So the 1 day old baby Christ is already forming sentences and assures his mother that yes indeed the wonderful Allah has blessed her son as a portentous and powerful prophet. This is what every mother would love to have happen.

This Sura takes the talking 1 day old baby Christ, and directly relates his support of Allah to be in the tradition of all Jewish prophets. Again, the Koran goes through the repetitive exercise of having Jewish prophets and leaders restate that their life's work was dedicated to Allah and to his demands. “Also mention in the Book (the story of) Moses: for he was specially chosen, and he was a Messenger (and) a prophet.”

Thanks for the reminder that Moses was Allah's prophet. I think I got the idea, the first 100 times I read it in the previous 194 pages.

In any event, the real point in this Sura is that Christ was no God, since the venerable Allah cannot have a son. “They say: “(Allah) Most Gracious has begotten a son!”. Indeed you have put forth a thing most monstrous!” Yes Muslims don't take too kindly to the idea that Christ supersedes Mohammed or can be equated with the male moon deity of Mecca. It is blasphemous.

It is therefore clear that in Islam Christ and Christianity are not only inferior to Allah and Islam, but mere tools of Allah's power and program. Christianity is for Muslims, an imperfect part of Islamic development.

Beyond this clear message – that Christianity is a fraud - a few more pages in this Sura rattle on about how great the Allah is and all-powerful and if you don't follow his injunctions you will be casted down as a sinner, “And we shall drive the sinners to hell, like thirsty cattle driven down to water.” How charitable. 'We' being Muslims and fanatics.

In the Christian Bible, wayward souls are approached by those with faith and are induced to change their lives and accept a moral-ethical framework. In the Judeo-Christian faiths a person can be saved irregardless of past transgressions. Christ's ministry was full of social outcasts and those deemed beyond salvation. It is a humanist tradition.

The same is not true of Islam of course. If someone does not believe in the Islamic program, than straight to hell with them. Allah's wrath knows few bounds and has little mercy.

It is clear from this semi-illiterate Sura, that Christ and Christianity are simply expressions of Allah's pre-determinism and omnipotence. Mary and Christ were created by Allah to serve his ends. Sadly according to the Koran the Christians have not followed the path of Allah and have sinned. And as the Koran makes clear, sinners against Allah are either killed, or they go to hell-fire.

Nice philosophy.

[Note: This sura is taken from 'The Holy Quran', translated by Abdullah Yusuf Ali, reprinted in 1995, Goodword Books. Regarded as one of the best translations from Arabic to English of the Koran.]

Friday, June 19, 2009

The Bush Doctrine is working. Iran is a prime example.


You won't reform Islam, nor a theo-cratic fascism from within. It never happens. Hitler's Germany was in no danger of imploding during the entire course of history's bloodiest conflict. Soviet Russia only fell when challenged militarily and morally by the US in Afghanistan and across the world by the Americans and their proxies. Exogenous events force endogenous change. So it will be with Iran.

Iran's reigning fascism is in little danger of being toppled internally. The only way the Americans can remove the obnoxious and medieval regime of Ahmadinejad and his theocratic fascist supporters would be through war – either a revolution openly supported by the West and NATO – or a military confrontation which would shatter the mainstay of theocratic support, namely the Iranian Revolutionary Guard.

Arab, Islamic and totalitarian fascism's will only collapse if confronted and defeated militarily. Economic sanctions, cultural embargoes, and international restrictions on money flows, investments and exports will only serve in the end to solidify the regime's hold on Iran and its people. Moral relativity, inane speeches by the Prophet Obamed, and UN posturing will accomplish nothing. What will bring down the Iranian regime is uncompromising force and military buildup.

We saw the same with Iraq during the 1990s when the corrupt $1 Trillion UN Oil for Food scandal – the largest fraud in history – and its system of military and economic isolation actually abetted the Hussein regime and made it much easier to cast the Americans as the oppressors and originators of conflict and social disorder. It was only through war that the Hussein regime which had killed 1 million civilians in 20 years, was brought to an inglorious end. And it was only with US military strength that the remnants of Hussein's fascism, along with Iranian forces and Iranian trained terrorists, and Al Qaida were finally defeated.

The same will hold true for Iran – but on a larger scale. One of the main reasons to invade Iraq was of course its shared border with Iran. This is a fact that the neo-Marxists and wailing pacifists, so ostensibly concerned with 'rights', but just as quick not to criticise the fascistocracy of Iran, have never grasped. Iran is in a pincer between two states, Iraq and Afghanistan, which are under American tutelage and making the first nascent steps towards something approaching nation state normalcy – for the first time in the history of either country. Iranian reformers emboldened by US resolve in the two neighbouring states are now taking their chances at toppling an outlandishly totalitarian regime.

The Bush doctrine has in essence been a success. Pre-emption does work and is a necessary tool in geo-political power struggles. If you don't posses a real threat of force, your words are meaningless, regardless of how pretty they are, or how artfully they are executed.

There is absolutely no possibility that the Iranian people would be rising up in their millions to denounce their own government if the American military was not in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The Iranian regime and Islamic fascist revolution of 1979 is illegitimate. The US has bases and forces in neighboring states and a plentiful reserve at home to redeploy abroad. Now is the time to side with reformers and democrats and demand a legitimate and lawfully elected Iranian government. If the US acts with moral and military clarity, this regime might yet fall. But it has to be confronted.

Iran is the greatest sponsor of terrorism in the world. Its allies Hizbollah and other groups have killed far more Americans than Al Qaida. Its soldiers and proxies were still fighting US troops in Iraq as recently as 2007. It ignores the basic rights and dignities of its own people. It wants a nuclear bomb to destroy Israel. And the regime is dogmatically fundamentalist, pining for a world-wide Umma of Islamic fascist governance – a nightmare which surpasses even the unbridled evil-fantasy paganism's of Nazism and Communism.

The Bush doctrine works. Iran must be reformed and saved. So far the Americans have pulled 50 million Muslims out of the depths of Islamic fundamentalist hell. 70 million Iranians desire the same change.

[see here for why the Bush doctrine is valid: http://www.craigread.com/displayArticle.aspx?contentID=713&subgroupID=10 ]

Thursday, June 18, 2009

The Prophet and the media. Just like Soviet Russia or Nazified Germany.




The prostration is obscene. The lack of analysis alarming. The sycophancy simplistic. The US main-stream media long ago ceased being the 5th estate. It more closely resembles the state owned propaganda machines employed by the Nazis and Soviets, or the academic organs now used sneeringly and jeeringly by Arab and Muslim propaganda. The entire industry needs to disappear. It is rotten with corruption.

The media fascination with a Black man who can use a teleprompter is bizarre. No policy analysis. No skepticism over his nationalisation of the US economy. No concerns over his lack of foreign policy coherence. No questioning about his background in a racist church, or as a 'community' organiser, or as a loyal sub-lieutenant of the Daly mafia in the corrupt city of Chicago. No appraisal of his radical voting record; his admiration for statism; his feverish support of abortion; nor his university career and studies mired in left-wing dogma and irrelevancies. Nothing but admiration.

It is frankly bizarre and frightening.

Now we have ABC and NBC setting up a permanent base inside the White House. This is akin to Pravda-izing the US 'views' coverage. News long ago disappeared from the US media. It is now a collection of left-wing liberal 'views'. Two views organisations establishing a ground zero base inside the Prophet's HQ [or cave perhaps] is another sign that the 5th estate no longer exists in the US.

Both NBC and ABC reach about 20 million people per evening on their views broadcasts. That is a significant 'megaphone' to quote the Prophet words about his nemesis Fox News. Fox reaches about 4-5 million per evening at any point in time. Yet the White House goes out of its way to criticise Fox's supposed criticism of the Prophet. Why bother with casting aspersions upon this one lonely channel when 90% of the mainstream views and newspapers are supplicated and leashed and barking in unison ?

In reality according to Pew research Fox's news items on the Prophet were evenly split – about 40% negative and about 40 % positive in some way. In the mainstream US views and newspapers, the opposite is true. About 2/3 or more of the views about the Prophet are positive, with only a small percentage containing any criticism - “About four out of 10 stories, editorials and op-ed columns about Obama were "clearly positive in tone," the study said, “compared with 22 percent for Bush and 27 percent for Clinton in the same mix of media outlets during the same first two months in office.” Add in 'somewhat' positive and you have 2/3 positive coverage for the great Prophet. Not even the media's darling Kennedy achieved that level.

The media bias for the great Prophet is the only reason his poll numbers are at 62 % - average historically after 100 days for a President and below those of Eisenhower, Kennedy, Reagan, and just slightly ahead of G. W. Bush. As Bernie Goldberg says, the mainstream media do not have journalists but stenographers. Whatever doth the King Prophet stateth, willeth the media believe.

There is no in-depth coverage of Iran, massive deficits, future inflation, the socialisation of health care, the nationalisation of large swathes of the economy, the war in Afghanistan, the rise of petro-fascisms in Russia and Venezuela, the corruption of the UN, the climate-change baloney and far ranging eco-regulations. Nothing. Even the Prophet's abysmal apology to Islam and his indifference to Iranian reformers risking their lives has generated little media-views interest.

And note the hypocrisy. Every move made by the hated G. W. Bush was lampooned and viciously denounced. Even when the economy was growing and even after the Iraq war was an obvious victory [2 years ago now], Bush was castrated in the main-stream media. Almost every news item on Bush was negative, with ad-hominem attacks and base name-calling permeating all media views coverage. But now of course every move made by the tele-prompter Prophet is smoothly accepted and benignly affirmed. As Victor Hanson writes on his blog, the double standard indicates an Orwellian view of the world, possessed by the chattering elite and their effeminate media friends:

“1. The Budget. Wanting to cut $17 billion from the budget, as President Obama has promised, is proof of financial responsibility. Borrowing $1.84 trillion this year for new programs is "stimulus." The old phrase "out-of-control spending" is inoperative.

2.Unemployment. The number of jobs theoretically saved, or created, by new government policies — not the actual percentage of Americans out of work, or the total number of jobs lost — is now the far better indicator of unemployment.

3.The Private Sector. Nationalizing much of the auto and financial industries, while regulating executive compensation, is an indication of our new government's repeatedly stated reluctance to interfere in the private sector.

4.Race and Gender. ..For example, an Hispanic female judge isn't being offensive if she states that Latinas are inherently better judges than white males.

5.Random violence. ...When a crazed lone gunman murders someone outside the Holocaust Museum or shoots an abortion doctor, we should worry about growing right-wing and Christian extremism. But when an African-American Muslim convert brags about his murder of a military recruitment officer or an Islamic group plots to kill Jews and blow up a military jet, these are largely isolated incidents without larger relevance.”

The decay of a state has occurred when the 5th estate becomes a part of the governing machine. When the 'watch dogs' are now inside the compound playing cards with those they are supposed to watch, the logical consequences are not hard to divine. One of the great truisms about statist fascism's is their unbridled and breathtaking use of propaganda and Orwellian double-speak.

So in the era of the great Prophet, lies are truths; nationalisation is salvation; deficits are healthy; relativity is better; and historical rewriting is now factual. When words mean nothing it leads to the inevitable allocation of all meaningful power within the state and its largely unknown and unfettered bureaucracy.

At some point either the Prophet's administration will simply take over the views networks, or perhaps a public revolt might enjoin a return of these networks to independence. Given the current propensity by people for statism, and their indoctrination by the views organisations, the former looks more likely than the latter. When the news turns to views, part of freedom is irretrievably lost and the future looks a lot darker.

Tuesday, June 16, 2009

The other side of the Iranian election. A pre-dilection by Muslims for fascism.



The untold and more important part of the Iranian election is this: millions of Iranians do support a terrorist theocracy, and an immoral anti-Western fascism. Regardless of vote-rigging and corruption, upwards of some 15-20 million Iranians out of a voting population of 35 millions, do actually support the fascistic-insanity of Ahmadinejad and the blighted theocratic-fascist ignorance of Khomenei. In this regard the Iranian elections clarify one essential point – Iran is not a 'moderate' Islamic state, but just another example of a failed Islamic state in which millions willingly divorce themselves from modernity, rights and morality.

The best case for 'moderates' and reformers within Iran is probably a split in the vote of 50-50 with the Islamic theocracy and gangsters in power. Given the grave internal conditions in Iran including a lack of food, gasoline, consumer items, female education, freedom of speech, freedom of movement, freedom of association, and its increasing autarchy and rabid fundamentalism, this seems amazing. Iran is a failed Islamic state in which women are denied basic rights; in which the economy has long ago ceased to function as a ward of the Islamic state; in which regional neighbors and Jews are constantly threatened; and in which hope has vanished for any not inside the ruling clique of fascists and gangsters. This is the real story. Many in Iran don't want Western liberalism.

Hundreds of thousands of Iranians have been either killed, tortured or beaten for a variety of crimes contrary to Islamic fundamentalism, since the Khomeini takeover in 1979. And yet this regime still enjoys widespread support. Perhaps the widespread support is driven by many factors. The rabid fundamentalists who really do covet Sharia and Koranic systems of totality. Perhaps millions of others vote for the regime out of fear. Others might be entirely ignorant about the blessings and demands of freedom and representative democracy, and blithely prefer the devil they know, to the one they don't.

The reasons for regime support are probably mixed and opaque much as they were with the general populace which supported German and Russian fascism. But the important fact is that the regime of Ahmadinejad does entire some level of widespread support. If it didn't it would not still be in power.

What is remarkable about this current show of dissatisfaction is not that it occurred. What is remarkable is the fact that it is not 80% of Iranians who are demanding the destruction of the current regime, but perhaps only 20-40 % who want such change. Indeed the regime is able to host some impressive demonstrations of its own in recent days constituting hundreds of thousands of supporters. It is hard to believe that all of these people were forced to attend. Not even the fascist Iranian regime is going to enforce compliance with a public show of solidarity. If that was the case, the regime would have ended long ago.

Here then is another lesson which can be derived from this election. Moral relativity and passivity by Western powers does not work. If the West wants peace in the Middle East it will have to replace this Mullah regime with something approaching what the Iraqis are constructing – a Westernized and Western allied, representative Muslim state. But to grovel, apologise and state as the Prophet Obamed has done so often, that 'Iran's elections are the concerns of the Iranian people', is insidious.

Iran is an unstable Muslim fascist state which directly threatens Western and Middle Eastern interests, including the entire liberal state of Israel. Sorry Prophet, but Iran affects everyone – including Western apologists for Islam and people like Bill Clinton who remarked two years ago that Iran had a thriving and vibrant democracy. Like the Prophet Clinton is deluded about the actual state of affairs within a theocratic fascism. There has to be widespread support for the fascist program or the state simply collapses into anarchy.

One primary lesson from Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia is that for a fascist regime to survive it has to appeal to as many 'classes' as possible. The Nazis were extremely popular with students, women, intellectuals and even the Church leadership for example – all very different groups with different points of self-interest. The Soviets likewise appealed to many disparate power bases and waged war on those – like the agricultural owning rich class – which didn't support it. The same is true in Iran. The Iranian regime has a lot of support from different classes and interest groups and it will wage war on those who are outside the orbit of state-theocratic power.

Iran's only great hope for a regime change is a stiff and uncompromising edict emanating from the West, that the Ahmadinejad regime is a fraud, that new elections under international auspices must be held, and that the West will aid with money and other covert support, the reformist groups who desire the overthrow of a failed Muslim fascist-ocracy. If those statements were made then we might have some chance at seeing a new regime in Iran and the first tentative steps towards some form of normalcy. But given the widespread support which exists for Ahmadinejad and Khomenei even these actions, while required, will not be enough.

In any event such statements of will and purpose and morality will of course will never be uttered. Just more nuanced and 'complicated' gibberish, respecting the 'rights of Iranians' to submit themselves to yet another failed and fascist Islamic governance. And such 'leaders' chatter about human rights and freedom ?

Monday, June 15, 2009

Iran: The Fascist leadership imposes its will.








Iran is going through a quiet revolution and the Prophet is reading a statement on health care?

The Prophet should be calling Iran's Mullah state what it is – 'an evil empire' imposing fundamentalist Islamic fascism on a population which wants modernity, not Jew hate and anti-Americanism. The Iranian election was a fraud, a farce, a Stalinist leger-demain and Hitlerian staged coup. Soft-power apology tours won't free Iran from a fascist theocracy. Force, the threat of war, moral clarity and funding Iranian democracy groups and supporting them, will. The collapse of the fascist Russian empire is an obvious testimony to that reality.

Instead of standing up for Iranian democracy and showing that America's world leadership was still intact, the Prophet was in Chicago droning on about another $1 Trillion expansion of government – this time in health-care socialisation.

Instead of denouncing the despot Ahmadinejad, and his falsified elections, the Prophet was busy contorting more lies suggesting that socialising US health care and spending $1 Trillion, will pay for itself.

Instead of demanding that the Iranian regime reform itself and respect the virtue of human rights and human worth; the Prophet was busy meandering through the details of rationed and government controlled health care – and trying to justify it.

The Prophet is absent from what could be considered a revolution in Iranian affairs. It is clear that a majority of Iranians do not want the government of Ahmadinejad, nor the Mullah-ocracy headed by Khomenei, who ostensibly runs the country and is the President's boss. They need moral support, financial support, and unequivocal rights support.

The quickest and cheapest way to rid the world of the Mullah menace in Iran is to have domestic groups, buttressed by international supporters, effect a populist coup. This must be the sought after goal of any US administration. Short of an exogenous shock through war, the only way that Iran can join the comity of nations and start to develop a normalised country, is through a quiet revolution.

To this end, the Prophet's apology tour of last week, in which he praised the 'glories' of Islam is the opposite of what needs to be done. Moral equivalency will not aid the Iranian people in their struggle to develop a nascent modern state premised on free-will and individual rights. Instead of spending millions of dollars forcing Americans to adapt to Islam, the Prophet and his friends need to be spending tens of millions in Iran, forcing the Mullah state to conform to the course of freedom and democratic reform.

The Prophet should be unequivocal in his admiration for Iranian democracy and the US' intolerance of Islamic theocratic fascism distorting the lives of Persians. It is a historic opportunity – a Reaganesque moment is available to be seized with all the domestic and international benefits that would confer. But as one would expect, the 'great man' was too busy with the details of destroying 18 % of US GDP to much care about Iran and its formative steps towards normalcy. Hopeless and un-Changing.

Human migrations changing modern history, from Rome to Europe today. Sadly for Europeans they imported the wrong ideology.



The largest human migration wave in history has been from Mexico and Central America to the United States in the past 40 years. Some 30 million Hispanics have left their failed states and sought refuge in the US, legally and illegally. Europe has seen the second largest migratory wave in history. Some 30-35 million or more Muslims legal and illegal now reside in Europe. Twenty years ago the number was less than 2 million. Both of these mass migrations are of course unnecessary - yet this form of cultural suicide is far more pronounced in tired old Europe, than it is in the US.

The Europeans made the colossal mistake of importing a fascist ideology held by millions to be a universal and dialectical destiny and 'fact'. Islam has much in common with the universalist fascism's formerly espoused by the Germans and Russians. The true tenets of a fascism are easily recognizable in all 3 philosophies of world domination. Rituals, myths, the cult of a leader, will to power, dialectical inevitability, a divine sanction, propaganda, lies, distortions, a hatred of the modern world, an indifference to life, and pre-destination are all key aspects to any fundamentalist fascism.

The Koran details the fascistic predations of Islam. This is true because Islam is not a faith but rather a program, parading and tarting itself up, as a faith. The Koran is not a holy book but a will-to-power screed outlining in violent detail why Jews, Christians and infidels are inferior and why Islam, abetted by the thing called 'Allah', will rule. Koranic law manages both civil and spiritual life – much as German and Russian fascism destroyed and than replaced the church with the new 'secular' faith of the cult.

Russian fascism was supported by the quackery of dialectical Marxism; German fascism by the pathology of Social-racial Darwinism; and Islam by ritualised submission and prostration to this thing 'Allah' – who will decide all matters in life and beyond. All of these versions of irrationality end up in supremacist bigotry and violence; and militate against free-will, markets, individuality and basic humanism. They are in essence death cults.

Islam will conquer because that is the inevitable dialectical espoused by Mohammed and by the writers of the Koran. If you disagree with this, than the more disagreeable of Muslims will kill you or as the Koran says, 'send terror', to teach those who defy the 'Allah' a choice lesson. The supremacist will to power of the Koran is as obvious as the racism and theoretical absurdity of Hitler's ranting in Mein Kampf.

So you are a European elitist confronted with some basic facts. One, European socialism has neutered economic growth and made Europe 30% poorer on average than the US. Two, birth rates are far below the natural replacement level. Three, the future burdens of the welfare state cannot possibly be met by a declining working population. Fourth, a declining real population combined with economic weakness and no military, means that the EU will be viewed as an irrelevant old age home, which will impact Europe's world power standing and its membership in various international fora.

So the solution that the Euro-elite came up with and which has been followed for the past 30 years is the easiest and less politically difficult – import lots of young people from around the Mediterranean and from former colonial possessions. The problem with this idea is that it is politically expedient – no reforms, no painful referenda, and no need to explain why economic, social and political change is necessary for Europe to stay relevant. The importation of Muslims is in fact a resounding affirmation of the multi-cult, one-world, we-are-all-the-same moral relativity which is the premise of European socialism and one of the main reasons why Europe is fast becoming a besotted welfarist-Marxist failure.

No past European leader of any stature or greatness would have opted for substituting Islamic culture for European. The former is certainly inferior to the latter. It takes a lot of mindless, politically-correct buffoonery to come up with the multi-cult thesis that Islam is moderate, peaceful and the same as Christianity, or that Muslims were essential collaborators in creating the modern world, or that the current poverty of the 58 Islamic states across the world vis a vis the West, is a result of the white 'core' exploiting the colored periphery.

Clap-trap all of it. Islam's annihilation of the moral, juridical, economic and individual personality is the reason why it is mired in hate, racism, poverty and miserable stupidity on a massive scale, only equalled by the twin fascisms which emanated from Germany and Russia in the 20th century. Read the Koran, read the life of Mohammed, read the expansion of Arab and Islamic imperialism and read the current modern destruction of Jews, Christians, and those Muslims and Arabs who believe in humanism and free will. Such a pillage of killing has no equal in history.

If confronted with the facts that Islam has spent 1400 years of jihadic expansionism, and imperialism spreading its creed across the globe and in the process killing some 300 million people in the process, most thoughtful statesmen would have reconsidered the import-option. Not so the Europeans. Not only did they believe that youthful Muslims will 'save' Europe, they also believed that this would solidify their alliance with oil-exporting Muslim states and perhaps save Europe from jihad. Neither has worked out. OPEC and Muslim states are motivated by money, power and in the case of Iran and others, a fundamentalist ideology. Never in the history of Islam, have Muslims states been much interested in quid pro quo, negotiation or co-existence. Another historical fact lost on Europeans.

Rome fell in part to the migratory predations of 5 million Goths spread over 2 centuries. Rome needed to fall – it was Oriental, despotic and stood athwart progress, change and human free-will. Yet the 5 million Goths which cascaded across its borders represented about 5% of the Roman world's population at that time. Broken, broke, corrupt and capricious – the Roman state could not react to the Gothic incursions and cultural violence.

The same is largely true now of Europe. The 30 or so million Muslims are 7-8% of the total population welded together by a book, a shared faith outlook and an innate belief in Muslim superiority. Yes of course diversity of some sort is apparent within the Muslim community – but there is far more to unite them, than disunite them within the confines of Old Europe. This Islamic population will double in 20 years and Muslims will represent almost 20% of the Euro total. At that point Europe will be broken apart into 2 societies, one dominated by the indigeneous White culture, and a second Islamic state, quasi-independent running in parallel with its own set of laws, schools, land claims and welfare system.

The basis for either a civil war or an outright Muslim destruction of Old Europe will be inevitable and contingent on time and money. Multi-cults don't survive. They disintegrate. The Hapsburg empire is a good model in this regard.

The logical outcome of multi-culturalism and thus European political expediency is of course the future dismemberment of Europe. European collapse into two states one Islamic and one 'Dhimmi' will be a resounding destruction, akin to that of the Roman empire.

And perhaps just as necessary.

Sunday, June 14, 2009

Suffering through the Koran – Sura 18 named 'The Cave'. The origins of Mohammed and Islam – a place which was never left.


In Islamic mythology their great leader and inspiration, a man whose ideas would in part clarify those of Hitler, went away to a cave to meditate on metaphysics and the meaning of life. It was in the cave that his faith was affirmed by Allah and it was in the cave that an angel conferred upon the illiterate trader and politician Mohammed, the rather burdensome duty of informing the world about the divine power of this Allah. This myth equates Mohammed with Moses, Christ and John the Baptist – a 'great and good man' cast out from society, desiring only to understand the complex spiritual questions and purpose of life.....a man holy and just, able to converse with angels. It is highly doubtful of course that any of it is more than Muslim myth-making, and another absurd attempt to belittle the other 2 monotheism's, while elevating the pagan Arabism of an illiterate military adventurer.

The Sura's purpose is to describe the time Mohammed spent in the cave and why his time was important there. Apparently he retired to the cave for some time with a few friends or followers, yet the writers of the Koran don't even know how much time he supposedly spent in this cave, “Then We drew (a veil) over their ears, for a number of years, in the Cave, (so that they did not hear); Then We roused them, in order to test which of the two parties was best at calculating the term of years they had tarried !”

Interesting. So the friends of this `great` man Mohammed were covered up by Angels, held for a number of years and then released so they could be tested as to the length of time they spent alone with the wondrous `Prophet`and dear Leader. Did they eat or just sit there stunned, covered by a blanket for some time ? Verse 25 states rather implausibly that the companions of Mohammed were there perhaps for 300 years – a rather long time by most human standards, “So they stayed in their Cave three hundred years, and (some) add nine (more).” Okay right. It matters not anyways since of course only the thing called Allah would know the actual time spent, “Say: 'Allah knows best how long they stayed..”

The Koranic writers are not even sure of who went with their noble messenger and how many there were. This seems odd given that the cave pilgrimage is usually viewed as a turning point in the 'spiritual' life, such as it might have existed, for Mohammed. “Some say they were three, the dog being the fourth among them: (others) say there were five, the dog being the sixth....” Indeed they are very few details in this Sura about the cave experience. There is nothing about what was discussed, what transpired, or even which revelations were passed down to the great Arab prophet, the man chosen by this thing Allah, to lead mankind out of its collective ignorance and misery.

Nothing.

What the Sura spends its time on is the usual and quite repetitive supremacism and demands to believe and submit to this Allah. This Sura is thus, like all the others, an illogical and badly written creation. Its theme is the cave and Mohammed's spiritual turning point. Its arguments are unrelated to that event. So we have yet again, the repeating ad-nauseum of tracts and words already many times expounded and recorded in previous chapters:

Verse 29, “...We have prepared a Fire whose (smoke and flames), like the walls and roof of a tent, will hem them in: if they implore relief they will be granted water like melted brass, that will scald their faces. How dreadful the drink !”

Verse 31, “For them [Muslims of course] will be Gardens of Eternity;....'

Verse 56, “..but the Unbelievers dispute with vain argument, in order therewith to weaken the truth, and they treat My Signs as a jest, as also the fact that they are warned!”

Verse 59, “Such were the populations We destroyed when they committed iniquities; but We fixed an appointed time for their destruction.”

Verse 102, “Verily we shall prepare Hell for the Unbelievers for (their) entertainment.”

Verse 106, “That is their reward, Hell; because they rejected Faith, and took My Signs and My Messengers by way of jest.”

None of these verses or the sentences between after and around them deal with ethics, higher morality or human emancipation. They are full of bile, hate and bigotry – which is standard fare in every chapter in the Koran.

Muslims basking in the glory and temporal glow of Allah's good will, shall of course enter paradise when death appears. The Unbelievers however will either be destroyed or if they survive, upon their deaths they will be tortured for eternity, drinking scalding hot brass and entertained by the evils of a Hellish fate. The message is pretty clear. Jews and Christians are inferiors and will be punished accordingly. Muslims are superior and will be protected and rewarded. Supremacist.

Most of this Sura deals with yet again the thesis that Moses and the Jewish-Christian prophets were actually messengers of this Allah. Given that this Allah had composed the final book of divine rules and guidance and given it to the illiterate Mohammed, the Jews and Christians had obviously deviated from the divine ideal. Therefore, they must be punished with Hell – unless they were to see the light of Mohammed's message and convert to the purity of the way or Sharia Islam. Another justification for hating, killing and torturing the infidel.

To say that the Koran is not the impetus and platform for 1400 years of Islamic racism, violence and universalism, is akin to saying that Mein Kampf was not the repository of Hitler's evil madness. People need to read this book, to understand the deranged and psychotic nature of Islamic fundamentalism. Muslims still living in the cave of darkness as it were. And only Allah knows why.

[Note: This Sura is taken from 'The Holy Quran', translated by Abdullah Yusuf Ali, reprinted in 1995, Goodword Books. Regarded as one of the best translations from Arabic to English of the Koran.]

Saturday, June 13, 2009

Suffering through the Koran – Sura 17 named 'The Israelis'.



Do 'moderate' Muslims believe in the immoderate and fundamentalist Koran ? If they do, how can they be moderate ? Do the so-called few 'Liberal' Muslim groups promoting Islamic adaptation within the West to Western mores and civilization support such Suras ? If so how can they defend the outright racism and will-to-power of this and every other Sura ? Are such ideas compatible with civilization or barbarism ? Sura 17 on the 'Israelis' is a marked example of Arab-Muslim hatred of the Jew.

The Sura starts off with the usual Muslim claim that all Jewish prophets were actually envoys of the great moon deity Allah, “We gave Moses the Book, and made it a Guide to the Children of Israel, (commanding): “Do not take other than Me as the Disposer of (your) affairs.”

Okay so for about the thousandth time in 176 pages, the reader is told that all Jewish prophets and leaders are in fact Muslims, and that 'We' or 'Muslims' gave Moses et al their words, books, powers and insights. Why would anyone believe such nonsense ? Anyways the point of the Sura as given in the second verse is clear and quite repetitive – the Jews left the true 'path' of Allah's enlightenment and therefore must be destroyed.

Verse 4 sums up the Muslim antipathy and the Arab-Muslim penchant for dialectical history; “And We gave (clear) warning to the Children of Israel in the Book, that twice would they do mischief on the earth and be elated with mighty arrogance (and twice would they be punished)!”

The Jews had their first temple and state destroyed in 586 B.C. by the Babylonians, the successors to the Assyrian empire. The Romans annihilated the second temple in 70 A.D in reprisal for the 3rd major Jewish uprising in 3 generations. The Romans not only destroyed Jerusalem's holy sites but scattered the Jews in a diaspora, forcibly exiling, removing and extraditing hundreds of thousands of Jews from their state, across the Roman empire. Hence the origins of the Jewish network and future European influence.

But apparently the Jewish wars and associated carnage and outcome was not the work of Rome, or in the case of the first great Jewish revolt, the Byzantine Greeks, but of course the moon-guy, Allah. Of course it was Allah who had pronounced the Jews guilty and it was of course Allah who guided the Greeks and Romans to punish the wayward Jews – the ones who had left the true path of God and had sinned.

And of course the Jews were at it again during the time of Mohammed. Allah and his Muslim supporters had every moral and divine right of course, to desecrate Jewish communities as verse 16 states so emphatically, “When We decide to destroy a population, We (first) send a definite order to those among them who are given the good things of this life and yet transgress; so that the word is proved true against them: then (it is) We destroy them utterly.”

Ah, how very peaceful and accommodating and rational. Let's see – 'We' the Muslims or We perhaps Mohammed and Allah, will decide who is naughty, and who is nice. The naughty ones are the people who need to be killed – completely. So we will trick them and make them rich and comfortable – like say the Jewish communities in 7th century Arabia. When they do everything wrong, we will then have proof that they ignored the teachings of the 'book' which 'they' developed some 1800 years before Mohammed, and we can than kill them all.

The Muslim 'We' – whatever it is – is rather cunning and full of violence and hate isn't it ? This Sura like every Sura has nothing or very little which could be considered an ethical program, the Golden Rule, or higher metaphysics designed to elevate life, human worth and dignity. No, this Sura like every other Sura focuses on death, conversion and racism and universal will to rule. It is an Arabic Wagenerian epic – one designed to impress the reader with the culpability of all Jews, and the divinely sanctioned approval of all Muslims.

There are three verses out of 111 which deal with some form of ethics. Verse 31 says, “Do not kill your children....”, the Arabs in the 7th century A.D. were still practitioners of child sacrifice – a practice the Jews had stopped around 2000 B.C. Verse 32 says, “Nor come near to adultery....” - a good rule and one that does the Koran credit especially since ethics is so rarely pronounced. Verse 33 adjures, “Nor take life – which Allah has made sacred – except for just cause.” This is also a good idea, except it references of course only Muslim life. Non-believers are to be killed or converted as each Sura and innumerable verses make clear.

Part of the genetic Arab hate for Jews is directly attributable to the Koran, as much as it is to the history of Arab-Semitic trading and warring. In this Sura for instance there is the usual gibberish about obeying Allah interspersed with such insights as those of Sura 58, “There is not a population but We shall destroy it before the Day of Judgment or punish it with a dreadful Penalty: that is written in the (eternal) Record.” So Muslims have the divine sanction to eradicate non-Muslim nations. Verse 59 identifies any non-Muslims as objects for terror, “...We only send the Signs by way of terror (and warning from evil).” Sounds tolerant.

This Sura like most of the Koran makes little sense. It screams and cries that the Jews were originally supporters of Allah and that they should now be killed off since they no longer follow the 'book' or the 'Koran' which now, for Arabs at least, supersedes the Jewish Torah. The illogic is staggering. The Jews no longer follow an Arab book which was developed 3000 years or more after the first Jewish texts were first formed in an oral tradition and some 1600 years after they were first written and therefore Arabs have divine sanction to kill them ? What monstrosity of racist illogic informs such ideas ?

This Sura has little to recommend it. It repeats the same, tired, illiterate and irrational claims that the previous 170 odd pages had already claimed. There is no metaphysical, spiritual or moral program worth mentioning. It is poorly writtern and even more poorly organised. It is a testament more to insanity and the shrillness of a will to power racist ideology, than to ethical programs and peace. But alas that is the purpose of the Koran. Convince, conquer, kill.


[Note: This sura is taken from 'The Holy Quran', translated by Abdullah Yusuf Ali, reprinted in 1995, Goodword Books. Regarded as one of the best translations from Arabic to English of the Koran.]

Friday, June 12, 2009

Radical Black America. Racist, violent and increasingly Muslim.



The Blacks in all areas are becoming politicized and radicalised with far too many turning to anti-American and anti-White theology. Black culture in the secular and ideological spheres is shrill with racism, Black victimology and support of supremacist, anti-White eschatology. Of the 15 million US Blacks at least 20% are converts to some degree of racist and supremacist ideology. And this number will only rise in the near future.

There are 3 obvious problems with Black culture and ideological direction in the United States.

First the number of Black 'Christian churches' which teach Black power theology and a virulent dislike of Whites and Jews, and indeed of America, numbers in the many thousands and is increasing in rhetoric and scope.

Second, Blacks are the largest Muslim group within the US, many of them becoming converts in prison. They view Islam as a means to first escape, and then fight against White-Jewish domination. No one knows the exact number of Black Muslims but it is probably somewhere between 1 to 2 million.

Third, secular Black culture in general is becoming more militant, more dismissive of White America and more prone to violence and extremism. From music to crime Blacks are increasingly targeting Whites and espousing aggressive if not lethal remonstrances against their perceived oppressors.

On all fronts – Christian, Muslim and secular – Black America is turning increasingly to radicalised ideologies steeped in racism and conflict. A more general racial-societal conflict is becoming hard to avoid. The only real question is what form it will take ? As Larry Elder, a Black writer and social commentator wrote in his book 'Ten things you can't say in America', in a chapter called 'Blacks are more racist than Whites';

“....[on average per year] the FBI recorded 1.7 million violent acts -- murder, manslaughter, rape, and aggravated assault -- of interracial crime. Of that figure, nearly 1.2 million involved black-white crime. Ninety percent of these cases involved a black perpetrator and a white victim. Thus, blacks, while comprising 12 percent of the population, committed over one million acts of violent crime against whites. On the other hand, whites, while comprising 70 percent of the population, committed about 100,000 acts of violent crime against blacks.”

So Blacks are the great instigators of racist hate crimes ? Rest assured the media and the education establishment will loudly proclaim the opposite. After all there were 2 million Black slaves in 1860 in the US was there not? Yes and 4 million in the Caribbean, 6 million or so in Brazil and Ecuador and tens of millions in Africa and Islam. Only in the US did Whites, Christians and moralists fight to end the scourge of slavery. Black slavery is still a fact today in West Africa, parts of North Africa and in Brazil. No moralising exists about this of course from either Blacks or their political supporters, White socialists and Marxists.

The current Black 'revolt' against all things White or Jewish American is not unique. But what is new is the width and breadth of its savagery and support. Black churches are openly advocating violence against White America. Black Muslim groups post racist slurs on their website promoting demonization of Jews and Whites. Black culture, music, and even 'comedy' routinely pillory Whites and Jews and foment Black victomology complexes. Black youth with over 50% either unemployed or under-educated is taking as one would expect, to the new ethos of despair and anti-modern jihad.

Prophet Obamed's pastor and former friend the execrable racist Revered Wright – the one who baptized his children – is not alone in his support of Black supremacism and anti white-racist hate. Of the 45.000 Black churches in the US only a minority could be considered 'conservative' or 'standard', inclined to Biblical teachings and some form of benign patriotism. Too many are becoming breeding grounds for Black radicalism and White-hatred. When Wright utters a profanely racist comment he is not talking to a fringe minority of Blacks, but increasingly to a larger group of people schooled in popular culture to hate America, Whites and Jews:

““When Moses finally escaped the Egyptians, he turned to God and asked, ‘There could surely be no one as bad at those people?’ God said to Moses, ‘Yes there are. Beware the honkeys. Beware the crackers. Especially beware the Jews. I hate all those people. Frankly, if you blow up their buildings, that’s okay with me.’”

How does one explain this slavering hatred and the fact that the Prophet Obamed spent 20 years in his church ? It is much more than political expedience. For Obama and many Blacks these remarks are mainstream and in accord with White and Jewish oppression of Blacks.

Far too many Blacks are also following the iconic leads of racist and obnoxious 'heroes' such as Muhammed Ali and Malcolm X, by converting to Islam. According to the racist Black Muslim group the Nation of Islam, there is likely some 1-2 million US Blacks who are now Muslims – or about 20-25% of the Black male population. Islam is attractive because it is an anti-American, disavows the White European enlightenment and engages in Muslim supremacist, will to power ideology. Black Islamic theology emphasises the dialectical Marxism found in the Koran, with many converts mixing Islamic racism, supremacism with the destruction of 'capitalist' America.

For the young radical and uneducated American Black who hates his country, or those who find themselves in white-run prisons, Islam seems to offer answers, a framework and a purpose. So does extremist Christian Black centered victim-theology and its secular affiliate Black victimology.

What this 3 pronged attack presages for America's future is bleak. Islam, radical Black Power theology and Black Marxism are gaining strength. The outcome is clear and obvious – another civil war of some variety either hot or cold, but one which will again fracture US society and divide it in some form, perhaps permanently.

Thursday, June 11, 2009

Radical Muslim fascism growing, alive and well in North America.



Muslim groups with nice names are fronts for Islamic terror.

The fountainhead organisation of the modern Islamic-fascist movement is of course the Muslim Brotherhood. The MB was a group originally formed in 1928 dedicated to restore the Islamic pan-empire and defeat the 'Crusaders'. It is a fascist organisation in the true sense of the word – intolerant, fundamentalist, fanatical, immune to rationality, with a deep hatred of the modern world, Jews and the West. It allied itself first with the Nazis and than of course with its fellow-travelers the Russian fascists or communists. Today the Muslim Brotherhood and its offspring probably have some 2 million members in North America and 5 million in Europe – yet few lay people know anything about this radical Islamic fascist organisation and its importance.

Al-Qaeda, Hamas, Hizbollah and virtually every Muslim terrorist organization has its roots in the Muslim Brotherhood. The philosophy of the MB informs for example Bin Laden's stated objective to restore a Muslim Caliphate which would dominate the Mediterranean basin and central Asia. The concept is to have a 'pure' Islamic state, unsullied by Europeans, Americans, Christians, Jews, Greeks or the 'other'.

This goal is replicated and mimicked across Europe and North America with many Muslim groups in Europe calling for an Islamic state in place of the European Union, and CAIR [Centre for Arabi-Islamic Relations] and the Nation of Islam [a Black Muslim group which wants all Whites and Jews killed in the US and the creation of a Black Muslim state to follow]; believing that the Islamicization of the US will happen over time and in degrees and as the founder of CAIR once stated [Ibrahim Hooper], hopefully 'peacefully'.

As Ryan Mauro an investigative journalist has written [see here for his archive http://www.worldthreats.com/?cat=20], in the past 20 years the Saudis have spent at least $80 billion, Wahhabism and radical Islam around the world. The Saudis have funded at least 1500 mosques and 210 Islamic centers in the West. Add to this the various curricula, books and web propaganda and we have a sustained and enormous effort with huge cultural and political repercussions for the West.

The Saudi brand of Wahabbism is the core ethos of the Muslim Brotherhood. Wahabbism is a fundamentalist view of Islam developed in the early 19th century as a reaction against Western imperialism. It adjures that the Muslim faithful go back to basics, to the Koran, and to the literal word of Allah, the moon-cult deity of Mecca. Wahabbism informs Al Qaeda and every Islamic fascist group in the world. It denies humanism, individuality, modernity, and anything to do with Western history and culture. It demands a world-wide Umma under an intolerant Muslim regime.

Saudi money has also bought off a large part of the US political elite. It is no surprise that Hillary Clinton is running the State department. Her husband mades $2-10 million from Saudi and Arab sources. There is simply too much invested by many in and outside of the US government with Arab states not to have 'normalised' relations with the Saudi Royal family and the other oligarchs running Arab states. Saudi and Arab money runs deep within US politics – a fact that should not be forgotten when analysing US actions and support of their 'Arab allies', or framing the Prophet's Obamed's apologetic-speech in Cairo, or the US demands for a 'Palestinian' state. Arab money will accept nothing less.

Saudi money has made the Muslim Brotherhood a force in US and European culture. Fueled with petro-dollars the MB began creating a complex array of front organizations in the United States during the 1960s. These begat more groups creating a series of interlocked organisations all closely following the plan of the Muslim Brotherhood. It is clear from US government sources, the FBI and internal Muslim Brotherhood documents [brought up during various legal cases against the group], that the International Institute for Islamic Thought, Muslim Students Association, Islamic Circle of North America, Islamic Society of North America, Muslim Students Association, and North American Islamic Trust are al Muslim Brotherhood groups. And there are many others.

These Muslim groups are the artful practitioners of Janus-faced double-talk, appearing to be moderate while still supporting terror and Islamic fascism.

MB funded and run groups falsely portray themselves as the representatives of the Muslim community. This gives them 'leadership' gravitas with the media and academic world. Muslim Brotherhood speakers and organisations are very aggressive in their campaigning and media-educational manipulation. Most of the texts used in schools in North America and Europe pertaining to Islam, are created and disseminated by MB groups. These texts are of course little more than Arab-Islamic propaganda.

These radical MB organisations have displaced other Islamic voices from more moderate groups which do not support a fascist Islamic movement and who see the need for widespread Islamic reforms. Groups such as the Islamic Supreme Council of America, the Free Muslim Coalition, the American-Islamic Forum for Democracy, and the American-Islamic Congress are largely marginalised by the MB and have even suffered attacks both physical and verbal from MB affiliated goons and intolerant's.

The Muslim Brotherhood is thus more than just an existential threat to Western interests. It is a large and prosperous affiliation network, one oiled with a lot of money and ideological fanaticism. In just over 30 years the Muslim Brotherhood and its spawn have gone from a comparatively minor radical network, to one encompassing millions of devotees with a firm grip on the Western media and even elected officials.

The Muslim Brotherhood is simply a 5th column and it is in the ascendant. What is remarkable is the general media and public disavowal of this internal threat. The MB and its affiliates have done a remarkable job in changing the Western ethos and culture to one that is now tolerant and even protective of Islam and its predations. As Gramsci knew to defeat the West you had to change the culture and control the commanding heights of education and the media. This cultural Marxist lesson is one that the Muslims have learned very well indeed.

Tuesday, June 09, 2009

The 'moderates'. Adolf Hitler – a misunderstood and quite moderate German freedom-fighter.




He said he was, so of course he was. Why didn't Churchill believe him?

One of the great political myths of the modern age is that anyone who supports expansive government is a 'moderate'. Anyone who supports the socialisation of an industry such as health-care for example, declaims that they are moderates interested in compassion and charity. There is of course, nothing moderate about state power, the eradication of choice or the disparagement of the individual. State power leads inevitably to some form of social, economic or moral bankruptcy. This includes such cossetted and coveted areas as health-care, pensions and welfare. It was after all Hitler, copied in turn by Stalin, who developed the exegesis of the parental-welfare state. And it was Hitler, followed by Stalin, who declared that state control was necessary, moral, and indeed moderate since it benefited all 'classes'.

There is of course little which is moderate about the rise of statism and the destruction of the individual. This is true whether the discussion is about a market [such as health care] or the entire political-economic structure of a state. Once the state assumes control over most of GDP the dangers of state cults developing around state ideals or personalities rises dramatically. And usually such powers are displayed under the guise of 'moderation' or some articulate, fine sounding name designed to appeal to people's communal emotions.

Stephen Lee in a book about Hitler and the rise of Nazi Germany puts it best:
“..Hitler transcended the image created by Goebbels. The main reason for his popularity – and this may seem surprising – was that he was seen as a moderate. After all he made sure his political changes were technically constitutional; he emphasized that he was upholding traditional virtues; and at least until the late 1930s he professed to be deeply religious.....But Hitler was perceived as a moderate who would tame the radicals.”

There are many reasons to be sure why Hitler gained ultimate power. But one reason as outlined in 'Fascism and Paganism', is that Hitler was perceived by the establishment and by all German 'classes' as more moderate than the Communists, Marxists or Militarists. Hitler's Nazis were of course socialist offspring and German statists and communalists. They fought the other 3 main centers of radicalism for the same political space. Nazism was in the main a populist movement, and one which appealed to a broad spectrum of Germans. It is false to say that only unemployed or uneducated males supported the Fascists. Hitler's popularity was highest amongst women, university students and the elite who viewed him as a tool to first stem, and then destroy radical Communism.

The popularity and the spectacular rise of Nazism was broad-based and premised on populist causes. The Nazis were the first to develop the modern welfare state – one based upon Bismarck's cynical program to buy off the middle class and shut them up. Many of the Nazi programs are accepted today as ineffable dogma, virtues of being modern and Western; and expressing various 'national' values:

-State guaranteed health care
-State guaranteed pensions
-'Free' higher education paid by the state
-Job guarantees for anyone who wanted to work
-Baby bonuses and free baby food and clothing for infants and toddlers
-State-funded infrastructure programs

The Nazis even developed the program now copied by the modern eco-fascists and their millenial allies. German national diets based on vegan and non-meat foods were being developed by the late 1930s interrupted only by the war. And national programs to move from oil and coal production of energy to eco-friendly energy systems were in train before the war, and barring the necessity of total war would likely have been developed in Germany some 60 years before the current hue and cry over Mother Earth being saved through 'natural energy sources'.

This populist platform appealed across all classes. When you add in the Nazi re-occupation of the Rhineland; Germany's military buildup and challenging of the hated Versailles treaty; the various charitable, sporting and cultural clubs that the Nazis funded; the nationalism and invocation of German greatness and its indomitable nature [itself built upon Wagnerian-Social Darwinian lines]; and the restoration of national vigor and health; it is no surprise that the vast plurality of Germans supported Hitler.

Hitler's 'moderation' was extolled by himself in his speeches. He always claimed and declaimed that the restoration of Germany's 'rightful place' within the world system was his only objective. Hitler's 'moderation' was in time jettisoned, as his hold on power increased and became unassailable. But it is true that during the early and mid 1930s, those deluded enough by his apparent charisma could and did, highlight the seemingly 'reasonable' nature of his claims which emanated from his staged speeches.

It is alarming and stupendous to consider this fact – Hitler was perceived by many inside and outside Germany as a rational, national figure – and one of greatness. This truism is given ample discussion in Ian Kershaw's excellent book, 'The Hitler Myth'. This book clearly shows how Hitler's moderation was largely the perception held by the vast bulk of the German electorate - an image created by Hitler and Nazi propaganda. There is no other way to explain Hitler's popularity. To garner the mainstream support needed to secure power, Hitler had to appear as a figure of national unity, far above the pettiness of bourgeous politicking and minor prejudices, and one who was separated from the excessive and brutal expressions of the Nazi party.

Many however knew better. For those who had read Mein Kampf and knew the history of orientalist cults premised around 'divine' figures, Hitler's surge to power made war inevitable. Many predicted that the Nazi's takeover of the state and its economic autarchy would bankrupt the German nation. They were right. German GDP growth was like the Soviet numbers around economic growth, a gigantic lie. The state destroyed private capital; private ownership and foreign investment and trade. By 1939 Germany was bankrupt. If the lunacy of Hitler's racial theories and fascistic nationalism did not make war inevitable, the economic paralysis of a nation of 68 millions in the heart of Europe surely did.

Churchill saw Hitler's threat in the early 1930s. He read all his speeches. He read Mein Kampf. He understood where the Nazi program would lead Germany. He was not fooled by talk of moderation, nor by the plethora of programs designed to increase state power and decrease individual responsibility and opposition to state control.

The lesson was and is clear. Just because someone who supports state power believes they are 'moderate', they are in fact proposing a radical, immoderate ideology - one designed against freedom and the individual. They are thus, on the wrong side of history's greatest struggle – that of the individual against despotic, centralised power. There is little in unfettered state control which is 'moderate'.

Monday, June 08, 2009

Public re-education programs. By mythical moderates to cultivate the 'right person'.



Public education or 're-education', suffers from the same problems as anything owned by the state. Never in the history of man's existence has the state or a unionized institution been successful at producing anything of objective value. This must also be true of education – the more socialised it is, the worse it will be. Any 'worth' is always subjective and therein lies the problem with state ownership and control over something as important as what feeds the brain and the mind of young people. Liberate them from the totality of the state.

The belief in education is well-founded. Society does have an obligation to provide a basic level of literacy for its young. But too often that commandment becomes distorted by government's and leads to inevitable abuses. Instead of providing a rational, logical, Western-oriented approach to the world, based on moral and mental revolutions of the Reformation and the Enlightenment, the state will impose a new ideology upon young minds – one designed to increase state power.

State power has every incentive to re-educate young minds in the values of government and state power. It is the core belief in every state school in disciplines which are not objective. It is hard to impinge on reality and natural laws in the areas of math, hard science, technology, medicine and engineering. Post modern, moral-relativism does not lend itself easily to the work of Euclid. Outside of the objective the state can't help but impose itself as the arbiter of the subjective and sociological.

The logical consequence of the state educating 90% of the young is the obvious imposition of state mantras, designed to support state power and dissuade future opposition to state-sponsored programs. Fetishes such as multi-culturalism; Globaloney-warming; moral relativity; Gay sex and a hatred of the Western experience are de-rigeuer in each and every school. These are anti-reality programs – there is nothing scientific, rational or mildly common-sensical about any of them. Yet they are the filler that schools used to replace hard thinking subjects with mindless fodder – much like the 'views' given as 'news' on BC networks.

State education has expanded from providing the essentials to succeed in life and contribute to society, to one increasingly focused on state-owned and state-centric themes. There is also the rush to process as many products as possible through the process. The means to do this are varied. The most vital is of course to replace real course work and the fundamentals with soft-sociological mantras and courses about non-issues ranging from self-esteem to cooking. The state has thus expanded itself into areas which should be the domain of private and family education.

Indeed it is clear that the state would like to mold young minds to actually oppose the values, power and check on government which families in the aggregate provide. This is of course one of the main reasons why Gay sex is so heavily promoted; or the lunacy of human-induced climate change through the emissions of a natural chemical necessary for life. The state is now the arbiter of sex, family development and mother-earth worship. None of these topics belong in public schools, since none of them are presented with facts, real research or proper analysis. They are baseless propaganda.

The state is also essential in promoting a hatred of 'markets', individualism and by extension American and Jewish civilisations. The entire corpus of Western experience is usually questioned and demeaned in public education - but those of other cultures esteemed and verified. It has always been a peculiar disease of those in the soft fields of academia to hate modernity and the individual but now such an ethos is standard within the non-hard curricula managed by the state.

It is highly doubtful that a majority of high school students today would pass an exit examination from high school of 100 years ago. Such exams are available for review and if one scans such tests you will immediately see that the quality of high school education – from a system which was outside of the predations of government and unionized bureaucrats – was infinitely superior to what exists today.

Most state managed systems across the Western world suffer from real issues. Unionized uncaring workforces; state organisation of material with no check on relevance or facts; no competition amongst schools or teachers; disengaged students and faculty and increasingly families and parents losing control of their children's development. The problems with education stem from the oppressive nature of the government machine which manages it and yet the cries are always the same – more money, more teachers, and more 'resources'. None of these will solve the problems.

Quality product is not produced without freedom of choice and competition. This applies to health care, cars, computers, books, as well as to education.

Parents need the power to choose which schools have the privilege to receive their children through the use of vouchers.

Unions need to be abolished so that teachers will become competent in their subjects and subject to market demands on quality, including being fired.

School boards need transparency and fewer dollars to waste in erecting mindless bureaucracies which impede program development and which retard student development.

School budgets need to be ratified by parents and the public and published on the internet so everyone can see where their tax dollars are going to and why.

Such reforms are necessary but will never happen. As a consequence there will be lowered education levels, higher average grades; more useless programs and more graduates who will suffer from state brain-washing and abuse. Families will be further marginalised and the burdens on those who can, and those who do, will only rise.

And the solution will be of course to increase the power of all of the factors which caused the re-education system to fail in the first place. The logical by-product of government intervention – irrationality.

Saturday, June 06, 2009

The Logical consequences of Prophet Obamed's Islamic apology tour. [It is the destruction of Israel.]


One of the most important features of the Prophet's speech from Cairo was its location. Al Azhar university is well-known as a center of Muslim and Arab radicalism. It is famous for publishing decrees on why Jews and Christians can be killed, and why Muslims must turn to Jihad to make the world a community under Allah.

Its teachings helped form and than inspire the fascist group the Muslim Brotherhood and other Muslim terrorists and extremist organisations. Many of its professors are amongst the most radical in the Arab world [see here for more info http://www.memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?Area=sd&ID=SP79004&Page=archives], preaching a steady curricula of Islamic racism and supremacism.

And this is the site of the Prophet's outreach to Islam ?

The location of the Prophet's historic and inane speech should make Jews and Israeli's tremble with fear.

The message in giving an important speech from Al Azhar is obvious. The Prophet did not speak from Jerusalem which could be viewed as 'neutral' ground with obvious importance to the two Westernized religions and the Arab cult. He did not speak from a public space or a site with no apparent ideological linkages. He had to speak from one of the most radicalising instruments in the Sunni Arab and Islamic world – a university with a long history of anti-semiticism and hatred of the West. What is the real purpose of choosing this location ?

Its import is the message it sends to the Arab-Islamic world. Al Azhar is perhaps the most famous and in many ways the most extremist legal school in the Sunni world. By blessing it with his divine presence the Prophet is clearly implying that radical Islamic theology and culture, as taught at Al Azhar, is acceptable. This university is responsible for some fascistic teachings in for instance, the 'Hanafi' school of Sunni extremist 'thought'. Hanafism at Al Azhar as indicated in a key book taught at the school named, Al-Ikhtiyar fi Ta'lil Al-Mukhtar ' [by Abdallah Ibn Mahmoud Al-Mawsily ] teaches the next generation that:

“the war against the infidels is an obligation of all intelligent, healthy, free, and able men… And when the Muslims besiege their enemies in a town or a fortress, they must call upon them to convert to Islam. If they convert, [the Muslims] must cease fighting them, and if they do not convert, they must call upon them to pay the jizya [poll tax]. If they refuse to pay the jizya, the Muslims must call upon Allah's help in the war against them, to erect catapults, to destroy their fields and their trees, to burn them, and to pelt them [with catapult stones], even if [the enemies] use Muslims as a human shield…'"
[http://www.memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?Area=sd&ID=SP79004&Page=archives]

Supremacist racism is being taught at this 'university', which could be viewed in part, as simply a propaganda outlet for modern Jihad. It is likely that most Western academics and media commentators would agree with Al Azhar or at least its defense of all things Islamic. They would view the above paragraph with indifference and divert attention away from real evidence of inspirational fascism, to some fairy-tale idea about the greatness of the mythical 'Arab Enlightenment'. In this view, modern Islamic fascism is a minor problem, abetted by a few radicals; instigated by modern White and Jew colonialism and imperialism.

It must be difficult being so deluded.

The implications of the Prophet's moral relativism emanating from a radical Sunni University, and his disregard of the self-created fascisms which dominate and distort Arab and Islamic society and history, bodes ill for freedom. There is no moral equivalence between Arabs and Jews, or between Jews and Muslims. Jewish culture and society has and always will be superior to that of Arabs and Muslims. Jewish faith premised on an ethical structure which has helped create the modern world is married to a belief in individuals, market dynamics, education and progress. Jews have been significant contributors in all aspects of the modern world. A Jewish list of notables dominates any category of achievement one cares to draw up. None of these attitudes or legacies exists anywhere in the Islamic or Arab world.

It was the Arabs who invaded Jewish territory in 636 A.D. and began the conversion or destruction of Jews, Christians and Greeks within Syria and Israel. It is thus the Arabs and Muslims who are still squatting on Jewish land who are the criminals, and it is the Arab blood lust for Jewish destruction which highlights the fascistic immorality of Arab culture and Koranic ideology. The Koran is replete and contains in every single Sura adjurations to wipe out Jews, Christians or the others. Such a mentality does not a civilisation create.

Obamed's moral relativism and appeasement will have dire consequences. Iran has been given a green light to develop a nuclear weapon. This will take years but if the Jews don't destroy the Iranian ability to produce such a weapon their state and their people or at least 5 million of them, will be annihilated in another holocaust. Once or if Iran has a nuclear weapon the days of the Israeli state will be numbered.

Arabs will be given yet another state from which to attack Israel for the so-called 'Palestinians' who are displaced Arabs, deranged by Arab wars against the Jewish state. Palestine has never existed in history and if Gaza is any indication another Palestinian statelet will be just another international welfare recipient using international money to kill Jews and innocents.

Across the wider Arab world the Prophet's speech will be seen as an excuse to prepare for a war of extermination. American relativism will most likely start another regional war as the Arabs and Muslims will assume that the historical US defense guarantee of Israel is now open to negotiation. If they start a war of annihilation against the Jews it is improbable that the Prophet and his European 'allies' will do anything to defend Israel. Arab calculations will be to use overwhelming force in order to destroy the Jewish state quickly, before international cries for peace or negotiations are organised. With 300 million Arabs surrounding Israel and a military preponderance of 7:1 in men, this is not without plausibility.

The Jews are thus the unlikely and benighted beneficiaries of the Prophet's disturbed and quite mad world-view. Israel is a creation which has every right to exist, a country which is a safe-home for a people persecuted since the time of Moses; and as the Prophet said, who have experienced a recent modern holocaust without parallel in written history. In essence the liberal structure of Israel is allowing Jews to re-settle in lands originally founded and settled by Semitic Hebrews and Canaanites some 3000 years ago. The Jewish state has been a remarkable success – a liberal entity in which 1/3 of its citizens are Arabs living in peace beside Jews. No corollary exists in the Arab or Islamic world.

Why then not defend this greatness ?

Moral relativism always fails. The world is black and white – not grey. Can one imagine Reagan, trying to appease Western academics and media airheads standing in Berlin in 1987 and saying, “Mr. Gorbachev, I congratulate you on this wall. It represents the greatness of Russian imperialism and the world is in debt to Russian genius which did so much to create the modern world. American is wrong to call your empire evil. The Russian imperial system is just as honorable as anything America has created. In fact one could say that America has a lot to learn from Russian fascism. There is much that unites our two ideologies and many similarities in outlook we can share and develop. Mr Gorbachev, please build your wall higher.”

Moral immaturity finds its expression in creeds such as politically-correct fascism; multi-culturalism; or support of various cults such as Globaloney Warming or Islam. What is dangerous about moral relativism is that it de-energizes a society from defending itself, or even caring about civilised progress. If Arabs and Muslims are at least as good as those living in Israel why bother to defend Jews or Christians, or Americans or Europeans from Islamic predations ?

Jewish society premised on a rich 3000 year old Jewish intellectual-spiritual order and the Western Enlightenment tradition is now portrayed as being similar to Arab-Islamic barbarism which has impoverished huge swathes of the world in totalitarianism and ignorance.

The logical outcome of moral relativity is first war, and second, slavery.

Friday, June 05, 2009

The Prophet's speech from Cairo – full of factual errors, appeasement and nonsense.


Lies, half-truths and half-baked historical assertions – all dripping with the crass stupidity of cultural marxist inspired moral relativism. The Prophet's Cairo speech was in most ways simply terrible – inaccurate, relativist and full of soft appeasement. It was as though Ed Said, the Muslim Brotherhood fascist and Islamic imperialist apologist who convinced Western intellectuals that Occidentalism has no right to judge Islam or Arab culture, was in part a co-speech writer. All it does is weaken, not strengthen America in the Long War against fascistic Islam – a war, someone might want to tell the narcissistic Prophet – which has been on-going for 1400 years.

Parsing his speech one can find it full of errors, distortions and self-loathing projections. In many places the assertions made by the Prophet are simply wrong. The facts get in the way of the rhetoric. The following are clear examples of either the Prophet's mendacity or his general ignorance:

1) “For over a thousand years, Al-Azhar has stood as a beacon of Islamic learning; and for over a century, Cairo University has been a source of Egypt’s advancement.”

Al Azhar is the hub of Sunni radicalism, spawning amongst other groups, the Muslim Brotherhood – an Islamic fascist organisation which is responsible for tens of thousands of murders in the past 25 years. Islam has never had an enlightenment culture of learning as well. Even 'thinkers' such as Averroes and Avicenna, deemed moderate rationalists by Arab-philiacs, were fully in support of Jihad, Muslim world rule and the superiority of Muslims over Kaffirs.

2) “More recently, tension has been fed by colonialism that denied rights and opportunities to many Muslims, and a Cold War in which Muslim-majority countries were too often treated as proxies without regard to their own aspirations.”

Fascistic Islam arose from 'colonialism' or the vagaries of the Cold War ? Islam has been a predatory ideology for 1400 years and conquered vast tracts of the planet. Is not Arab and Islamic imperialism the real issue ? And someone should tell the Prophet that it were the Arabs and Muslims who allied themselves with the Nazis and Communists. The exception to this was in Afghanistan.

3) “America and Islam are not exclusive and need not be in competition. Instead, they overlap, and share common principles — principles of justice and progress; tolerance and the dignity of all human beings.”

There is no history in Islam of anything approaching Western freedoms in rights, speech, political organisation or personal beliefs. Nothing. The Koran and Islamic orthodoxy melds church and state. Civilians must submit to authority be it in the form of the Koran, or their tribal, state leader. Democracy has never existed in Islam. There is nothing in common between the practices of Occidentalism and Asiatic-pagan Arab inspired Islam.

4) “There must be a sustained effort to listen to each other; to learn from each other; to respect one another; and to seek common ground. As the Holy Koran tells us, “Be conscious of God and speak always the truth.”

This sentence is highly obnoxious. First, the Prophet has only quoted from the Christian Bible – one of the founding ethical documents of his country – only 3 times in total, since January 2009. He quotes from the Koran 3 times in this speech. The implication is clear – the Koran is the equivalent of the Bible. It isn't. The Koran is a totality of submission, ritual and irrationality. It has no Golden Rule and no ethical code. Read it.

5) “As a student of history, I also know civilization’s debt to Islam. It was Islam — at places like Al-Azhar — that carried the light of learning through so many centuries, paving the way for Europe’s Renaissance and Enlightenment. It was innovation in Muslim communities — (applause) — it was innovation in Muslim communities that developed the order of algebra; our magnetic compass and tools of navigation; our mastery of pens and printing; our understanding of how disease spreads and how it can be healed. Islamic culture has given us majestic arches and soaring spires; timeless poetry and cherished music; elegant calligraphy and places of peaceful contemplation. And throughout history, Islam has demonstrated through words and deeds the possibilities of religious tolerance and racial equality.”

This is nonsense. Nestorians, Greeks, Jews, Byzantines carried on the legacy of Rome and Greece. None of the discoveries in science, math, architecture, medicine or astrology was developed by the Arabs or Muslims. They were imports from civilisations they had conquered and squatted upon. The legacy of the West was already well established and embedded in the Byzantine empire which existed from Constantine to 1453 and its bloody destruction at the hands of maurading Turks.

The magnetic compass was developed first in China.

Algebra was created 1100 years before Mohammed's birth by the Greeks, perhaps people have heard of Euclid and Pythagoras.

Navigation and ship technology were rampant amongst the Greeks, Byzantines and Vikings far exceeding Muslim innovations. The Athenian trireme which helped Athens to empire was a technology marvel existing some 1000 years before Muslims were able to copy and make an inferior replica.

Mycenaens had invented the arch circa 1100 B.C. in their burial sites and city entrances; and Roman keystone arches which allow domes to be built, predate the Persian variety [from which the Arabs developed their architectural mix] by 700 years.

Poetry and writing was first established by the Greeks through Lydia and Mesopotamian influences some 1800 years before the advent of Mohammed. Perhaps the Prophet Obamed has condescended to read Aeschylus, Homer or Hesiod ?

6) “The first nation to recognize my country was Morocco. In signing the Treaty of Tripoli in 1796, our second President, John Adams, wrote, “The United States has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Muslims.”

This is ridiculous. US marines sacked Tripoli in reprisals for the raids and predations of the Muslim 'Barbary' or Berber coast pirates. Muslims carried off in 1000 years at least 10 million whites from Europe. Maybe the Prophet Obamed should have asked for Arab reparations on behalf of whites ?

7) “The Holy Koran teaches that whoever kills an innocent is as — it is as if he has killed all mankind. (Applause.) And the Holy Koran also says whoever saves a person, it is as if he has saved all mankind. (Applause.) The enduring faith of over a billion people is so much bigger than the narrow hatred of a few. Islam is not part of the problem in combating violent extremism — it is an important part of promoting peace.”

The Koran says no such thing. In the Koran it is lawful and in fact a duty for a Muslim to kill Jews and infidels. Almost every Sura or chapter says this. It is however, unlawful for a Muslim to kill another Muslim – unless there is a very good reason to do so, such as apostasy. Islam and the Koran contrary to the Prophet's dissimulation are of course the instigating impetus for Islamic fascism and terror. Apparently people are being murdered across the world in the name of Islam's 'Allah' [whatever that thing is supposed to be], as well as for money, power, and out of simple cruelty.

8) “Although I believe that the Iraqi people are ultimately better off without the tyranny of Saddam Hussein, I also believe that events in Iraq have reminded America of the need to use diplomacy and build international consensus to resolve our problems whenever possible.”

So what is it Prophet ? You hate the war but like the outcome ? Of course Iraqis are better off, for the first time since the British occupation post World War One, they have a chance at normalcy. Congrats for seeing reality.

But his other point is sheer ignorance. The entire 1990s was spent in international dialogue over Iraq and the problem and threat posed by Hussein to regional stability and the security of Israel. Thousands of Iraqis died during this period and it cost the US and Britain $1 billion per annum to cordon off Iraq. Hussein was funding Palestinian terror and Iraqi planes were dogfighting with US fighters in UN authorised 'No Fly' zones. The UN Oil for Food scandal was one of the largest financial scams in history – one that should have ended the UN as a moral arbiter on anything. And 17 UN Resolutions were passed ordering Hussein to comply with the 1991 cease fire obligations. As it turned out 35 nations joined the US invasion.

So in the Prophet's little world, 13 years of diplomacy, sanctions, UN corruption and an invasion with 35 or more countries participating was 'hasty' and uni-lateral. Insane.

9) “I have unequivocally prohibited the use of torture by the United States, and I have ordered the prison at Guantanamo Bay closed by early next year.”

The US does not torture anyone. Waterboarding is not torture and there were 3 – exactly 3 – cases of waterboarding at G-bay. One included the 9-11 mastermind Sheik Mohammed who divulged enough information to allow US intelligence to stop other planned attacks. What misinformed, and deformed individual would object to this ? And G Bay can't be closed. It won't be. So this will be another unkept Prophet promise.

10) “Palestinian people — Muslims and Christians — have suffered in pursuit of a homeland. For more than 60 years they’ve endured the pain of dislocation. Many wait in refugee camps in the West Bank, Gaza, and neighboring lands for a life of peace and security that they have never been able to lead. They endure the daily humiliations — large and small — that come with occupation.”

Palestinians are Arabs, there never was a Palestine. It is the Arabs who are occupying Jewish and Christian lands. The refugee camps were Arab creations stemming from the 5 nation Arab invasion of 1948 and the calls by Arab leaders for all Arabs to leave Israel to make it easier to destroy the Jews. The Arabs of course lost the war and Arab states would not take in Arab refugees. But the Jews are to blame. Within Israel fully 1/3 of the population is non-Jewish. The same cannot be said in reverse of Jews in Arab states. They are simply hunted down and killed. It is a fact as well, that the Arabs in Gaza receive about $500 billion per annum in aid including US military aid and training. Why don't they have a civil society ?

11) “And that’s why I strongly reaffirmed America’s commitment to seek a world in which no nations hold nuclear weapons.”

Unilateral disarmament. As if Russia, China, Pakistan, North Korea, or soon Iran will give up their advanced nuclear weapons capability. This statement is simply dumb.

12) “But I do have an unyielding belief that all people yearn for certain things: the ability to speak your mind and have a say in how you are governed; confidence in the rule of law and the equal administration of justice; government that is transparent and doesn’t steal from the people; the freedom to live as you choose. These are not just American ideas; they are human rights. And that is why we will support them.”

In the real world no such program, outside of Iraq, exists anywhere in the Muslim world. Does this Prophet Obamed really expect that a nirvana of representative democracy and freedom of choice will spread through Islam by magic without exogenous change ? If the Americans had not invaded Iraq or Afghanistan the status quo there would still be the same – tyrannical fascisms with Arabs and Muslims telling the world not to meddle in the affairs of non-Western states.

13) “Islam has a proud tradition of tolerance. We see it in the history of Andalusia and Cordoba during the Inquisition.”

The inquisition killed somewhere between 3.000 and 30.000 and if you add in the Western slaughter of witches probably 100.000 or so people died due to medieval fundamentalism, outside of war. This is equivalent to about 6 months of work in the modern era for Muslims. The doctrines of 'Islamic tolerance' has killed some 300 millions over 1400 years. The sack of Constantinople by the Turks in 1453 killed 30.000 Christian civilians – the grandest city in Christendom slaughtered, raped and ransacked in a rather intolerant manner. Tens of thousands of Jews and Christians were killed in Abbasid Spain during the Arab occupation of some 700 years; including 3.000 Jews in Granada and Cordoba in the 10th century. The idea that Islam is tolerant is a sign of total derangement and displays an alarming ignorance of Islamic history and theology.

13) "On education, we will expand exchange programs, and increase scholarships, like the one that brought my father to America. (Applause.) At the same time, we will encourage more Americans to study in Muslim communities."

Oh so it is Americans who must get 'educated' in a Muslim environment to better appease Islamic sensitivities. But not the reverse of course. Muslims don't need to reform Islam, jettison their racism and supremacism; stop terror; or moderate their anti-Americanism. It is the US which must spend time and money changing itself and contorting to Muslim demands. How puerile and irrational.

Not all of the Prophet's speech was bad – just most of it. Obamed is a small-minded moral relativist. He is indifferent to his own country viewing it as just another state, with nothing much important to teach anyone, and certainly no right to assert a moral or spiritual supremacy. It is doubtful that he knows the history, development or cultural ethos of America in any great detail, preferring Harvard-Columbia caricatures of what America looks like, as opposed to the reality of what it truly is and represents.

It is also clear that he has imbibed the propaganda and nonsense from the Arab and Muslim world. He has never read the Koran, nor the history of Islam, Arab imperialism and Islamic fundamentalism. Islam is not to be questioned or queried. It must simply be accepted and embraced. Such an irrational and naive approach to world affairs is deeply disquieting.

And at heart he is an appeaser, a man opposed ideologically to war and divisive confrontations.

The Prophet Obamed is in many ways a remarkably weak and uninformed personality.

His Cairo speech was full of factual errors and cultural relativism. It would be as if Reagan stood in Berlin in the late 1980s and congratulated Gorbachev on the wall, and apologized to the Russian leadership, whilst blaming America for the Cold War and asserting all matter of Russian greatness and the historical debt that the world owed to Russian genius and the development by Russia of the modern world. It would have been the ravings of a lunatic.

Instead Reagan was very clear. The West and the US are superior and Russian fascism will fail because Russian imperialism kills the moral, the juridical, the economic and the spiritual personality. The same type of speech was required by the Prophet towards the Arab and Islamic world. A Reaganesque-man, a robust personality, one confident of Western superiority should have given the Cairo speech. Not a craven, moral-relativist, unsure of history, morality and the benefits which America has bestowed upon the free world.