Friday, July 22, 2016

Comment On Munich

The absolute first thing taught at infantry basic training during the Cold War was that the maximum effective range of an excuse is zero. On the face of it I saw this as the response to any attempt to explain a failure to learn a necessary skill. But this idea also applies to the moral nightmare we were facing during with the Communists enemy and their excuses for their crimes. Even if the usual Marxist credibility issues did not apply to the position of the White House, we need to remember that there are still millions of Muslims who still believe they are following the Allah given order to murder those who have chosen to live a rational life. Some of them still have money and organizational skills to apply to the problem of murdering infidels like you and me.

As it is the guide to how the Federal and state governments must act with regard to the issue of religion, I will quote the First Amendment of the Constitution:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

When the First Amendment was adopted Islam was not practiced on the American continent. The nation’s first interaction with Islam was in the field of foreign relations. It was during the administration of President John Adams that the European practice of making extortion payments to the states sponsored Barbary Pirates was adopted. When in the process of delivering the extortion payment to the Dey of Algiers, Captain William Bainbridge of the frigate USS George Washington was compelled at cannon point to deliver tribute, including slaves, to the Sultan of the Ottoman empire while under the flag of Algiers.

It was in response to this barbaric act that President Thomas Jefferson sent the United States Navy to the Mediterranean Sea to directly engage and suppress the state sponsored pirates. While President Jefferson was fully a man of peace he clearly understood that the value of peace could not be separated from the value of freedom.

As long as Islam was solely an aspect of foreign affairs it would not become a constitutional issue. But because emigration of Muslims to the United States and proselytism was permitted Islam has now become a political issue.

The fundamental problem is the criminal nature of Islam. The open contempt for the rights of individuals and nations is written directly into the doctrine. As a historically confirmed fact the doctrine of Islam was invented solely as a means to justify the predatory actions of the obviously false prophet Mohammed and his willing followers. As a doctrine Islam allowed the followers of Mohammed to continue the profitable wave of crime and terror after his death.  And where the doctrine of Islam does make a spiritual promise it only has a meaning with the criminal followers of Mohammed. In this it is promised the followers of Islam will receive eternal access to a supply of eternal rape victims in Allah’s eternal whorehouse.  In an actual religion the follower must comply with the rules set down by God, including the command to respect the rights of other people. But the doctrine of Islam commands the followers to rob and murder those who properly reject Islam. To behave as predatory animals.

Within a civilized nation this is absolutely beyond the boundary of toleration. To deal with the problem of Islam I now propose an amendment to the Constitution:

All religions which deny the validity of the Constitution shall not claim protection under it.
The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

An obvious question is why do I not call for a ban on Islam by name?

A name is only a mental label for the concept. Even though it appears to be internally forbidden to change the doctrine of Islam, the doctrine also commands the believer to deceive the victims where necessary. Thus deception, such as a name change, by a Muslim will occur. It is by identifying a specific toxic attribute of Islam that we can properly exclude it from protection under the First Amendment.

A fundamental attribute of the doctrine of Islam is the denial of real laws. The real acts of legislation by real governments that protect the actual rights of the people. In declaring “man made” laws to be invalid Mohammed opened the door to the commission of a multitude of crimes — including rape, robbery, and murder — that would be carried out by himself and for his own personal benefit.

This action is absolutely intolerable in a civil society. In reality The People are the sovereign authority and the sole source of legislation. In reality Islam has to go. And in order for us to live a properly Human life we must allow our government to take a proactive role in defending our rights.

Wednesday, July 20, 2016


Today I saw a Black woman wearing a tee-shirt with the word HUMAN.


Tuesday, July 19, 2016


Can we crush our enemies now?

Again and again there have been more jihad attacks.  Because of this I have a suggestion for a response and the rules of engagement will be simple.  All Muslims, in accordance to the Koran, are enemy combatants.  No exceptions will be made for women and children in accordance to Western standards.  The rules of warfare as adopted by Western Nations are according to the Koran man made laws and thus invalid to Muslims.  Because of this the war will be carried out according Islamic standards.  Although there are apparently no targets where nuclear weapons are deemed necessary there will be no restraint on the use of chemical weapons.  As biological agents cannot be reasonably restrained they will not be used.  Islam denies all of The Rights Of Man.  Muslims cannot under any circumstances claim any of those rights for themselves.   In order to live in a Human society a Muslim must fully renounce Islam.  The refusal to do so must be treated as a capital offense.

No exceptions can be made.

Friday, July 15, 2016

Another Comment On The Nice Massacre

In the spring of 1982 the infantry basic training course at Fort Benning included instruction on Nuclear, Biological, and Chemical warfare.  The unofficial motto of the block of instruction was, UP THE ASS WITH BUGS AND GAS AND NUKE‘EM ‘TILL THEY GLOW!

How could anyone joke about the horrors of an unrestrained war with the Soviet Union?

The first thing I noticed in this image from the Daily Mail was the doll laying on the pavement.  Then I saw the covered body on the little girl laying next to it.  Although I am sitting calmly at my computer my inner emotional state is of quiet rage at the monster who carried out the murder.

But not everyone shares my outrage at this scene.

Across the realm dominated by the doctrine of Islam there is joyous celebration of this act of murder. 

How could anyone be so depraved?

Evil is simply the negation of Human Life.  The doctrine of Islam reverses morality and condemns a joyous and productive life.  And where a normal religion, such as the Western Monotheist Tradition (WMT), promises a higher state of being, Islam instead promises the eternal gratification of the basest animal desires.

Given the doctrine of Islam denies that Human Life is the basic value of a real moral code. Then why then should a true Muslim NOT murder anyone at whim?  The true Muslim has no real moral values.  The true Muslim is promised entry into the eternal whorehouse of Allah and supply of eternal victims to placate his most base carnal desires.

But contrary to the doctrine of Islam rational men have identified God as the first and foremost of rational beings.  From this position rational men seek to join God in his community and to this tries to identify the means of doing so.  This the basis of the Western Monotheist Tradition.  Furthermore in the WMT each man is responsible for and in control of his own life.  He must by his own thoughts and actions identify and follow the correct path to enter the Community of God.

In many Polytheist traditions Man is deemed to be the property of one or more deities.  Man exists solely to serve the deities and may be ritually used or even killed in accordance to the doctrine of the religion.  Man is not held to comply with real laws enacted to protect the life and property of their persons but must instead obey the commandments of the deities who claim ownership over him.   It was into this cognitive environment Mohammed inserted the doctrine of Islam.  Islam was a theological fraud created to recruit a mob of criminals to enforce his will upon the vast sea of victims.   To do this Mohammed recycled a pagan deity as his substitute for the being identified as God in the WMT.  To recruit the criminals required to commit his greater crimes Mohammed promised his followers the eternal gratification of the basest sensual desires.  It was here the real criminal acts are elevated to the moral position of right.  As a result where the doctrine of Islam rules there is savagery and enforced poverty in the place of the social peace and prosperity of the civilized nations.

Because the doctrine of Islam fully denies the Rights of Man those who believe and practice it cannot claim those rights for themselves.  Nor can they claim a place in any civilized nation or society in general.  And in fact Muslims have no place in existence at all.

So why did I mention my training in NBC warfare?

The answer is obvious.

Thursday, July 14, 2016

Comment On The Nice Massacre

Those who deny the Rights of Man are Enemies of Mankind.

There is no way to evade this and those who do, such as the current occupant of the White House, are collaborators with such.. 

The doctrine of Islam was created as a body of excuses for the utterly depraved actions of an absolute monster.  But there can never be a valid excuse for rape, robbery, murder, and the other destructive acts carried out by the followers of the false prophet Mohammed. 

None whatsoever.

So what is to done?

Steve Barry, the editor of  The Resister and founder of the Special Forces Underground, once told me that in rhetoric we had to dehumanize our opponents.  I disagreed.  I argued that our opponents had chosen to dehumanize themselves and all we had to do was to accurately describe their thoughts and actions.

Given this we must accept as a fact of reality that those who fully follow the doctrine of Islam are Enemies of Mankind and must be crushed without anything resembling mercy.

What are your questions on this block of instruction?