Message To Antifa

If you want to behave as a Totalitarian, then you will treated as a Totalitarian, from the neck until dead.

A Fact Of Reality

The Democratic Party is effectively an industrial scale version of the Manson Family with postgraduate degrees and paramilitary swat teams instead of LSD and old kitchen knives.

On Hillary

Ayn Rand used to describe the "mainstream" of modern thought and culture as a stagnant swamp.  The fact of the matter is that there is nothing divine about Hillary Clinton.  What this says about those who voted for her I will leave as exercise for the reader.  Before one can lie to another one has to lie to one's self. I don't see why I should waste my time reading or listening to a bunch of liars.

So What?

In some places an election is nothing more than a voodoo ritual that is used to create the appearance of moral legitimacy for the regime in power. As in the cases of the Soviet Union, Baathist Iraq, and the City of Chicago.  We have to remember that Islam is a scam. Thus it should come to no surprise to us that the rulers of Iran, who hold themselves above accountability, would resort to fraud in order to keep their stooges in their positions in the apparatus of the state.  A state without a functioning mechanism of accountability, and a means of peacefully removing those who are unfit to govern, will eventually fall into corruption and a state of tyranny. (In the case of Iran that point is moot. It was a corrupt and tyrannical state from day one.)  It is unlikely that any real reform will occur in Iran. The scam religion of Islam was created in part to legitimize the tyranny of the false prophet Mohammad. Any legal mechanism that holds the apparatus of the state accountable to the people would be deemed a man made law, and thus would be null and void according to the doctrine of Islam. And since Islam denies all of the rights of man any attempt to defend those rights is an offense against the false god Allah.  In order for Iranians to truly obtain freedom they must abandon Islam altogether.

And yes, Hillary Clinton was unfit to govern this nation and she (and her followers) should be hanged.

Verification

This verifies my idea of the separation of education and the state.

Another Thought For The Day

It looks like Leftism is basically an excuse to feel smugly superior to everyone else without regard to actual knowledge, actual ability, and the actual consequences of their actions.

Thought For The Day

The conservative camp largely consists of people who treat reality as being real and human beings as being human. The other side on the other hand treats reality as being unreal and human beings as a form of livestock without inherent rights. Thus in the long term rational people, regardless of how grossly miseducated they were through the socialist controlled school systems, tend to move towards the conservative camp. Alternatively, irrational people, seeking to indulge whatever fantasy that they believe in, will usually fall into the socialist camp in order to actualize that fantasy.

On Euthanasia

In the collectivist version of a social-political order founded on the Primacy of the Parasite the ordinary person is looked upon as a tool to be used, the product of their labor is treated as the property of the collective which is distributed in accordance to those needs which are identified by the leaders of the collective.  An individual who is retired from the workforce requires food, housing, and medical care, all of which is taken from the collective pool of assets without any input to the resource pool from the retiree in return. From the point of view of the collective leadership a retiree is a liability to the collective. The good of the collective requires the reduction of such liabilities as early as possible. Thus it is in the best interest of the collective to encourage self-termination by the elderly and the seriously or terminally ill. And it is also in the best interest of the collective to abort those fetuses that will not grow up to be productive workers in the collective.  And if you think that what I just wrote is outrageous, then think again. One group of collectivists, the National Socialists of Germany, actually carried out a program of euthanasia on developmentally challenged individuals of all ages.  Anyone who believes that an individual has no inherent Right to Life is capable of believing anything and, as history has demonstrated, capable of doing anything.

Hangings

Adolf Hitler should have been hanged.

Hugo Chavez should have been hanged.

Hillary Clinton should be hanged.

On February 1st the Minneapolis StarTribune, the socialist rag of the Twin Cities, published the following full page ad:

 The obvious question is how can someone be tricked into betraying any moral value when they absolutely lack one?  The false prophet Mohammed commanded his followers to conquer along with the commission of the acts of rape, robbery, and murder. The doctrine of Islam commands enslavement and the systematic violation of the rights of man and for the believers to act as predatory animals. Without question the doctrine and practice of Islam is absolutely depraved.  Given that Human Life is the foundation of all valid moral values then Islam must be absolutely condemned. But the signatories of this document refuse to understand these facts of reality and condemn as immoral those who hold an actual moral standard.  Of couse the signatories of this document are enemies of Mankind.

I am hard pressed to respond to this utterly depraved document without the use of barracks language.

A Question

Can we eliminate Islam from the face of the Earth?

To say that Islam is savagery is the truth and it apparently illegal under our so-called laws.  The grandparents of our so-called rulers welcomed Hitler and his goons with open arms and our so-called rulers are now welcoming Muslims with open arms.  Never mind that the false prophet Mohammed was, without question, a criminal.  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  the so-called religion of Islam was not practiced on the American continent.  Our nation's first and regrettable 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.  In effect to live a fully Human life.  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 had previously proposed 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.

The obvious question that has been raised in the past 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 real 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.  And the urban collaborators need to be dealt with as well.

A Fact

The Democratic Party follows the doctrine of National Socialism without the Aryan frills.

Question

Can we just treat Antifa as just a bunch of enemies if Mankind and hang them?

Thought For The Day

In my opinion I think the whole doctrine or practice of Leftism, and thuggery in general, can be reduced down to eight words:

"BEHOLD ME! ADORE ME! OBEY ME! OR ELSE!"

Well, that's my theory.

Definition For Today

From The New Devil's Dictionary:

Fascist : Totalitarian political party founded by former Marxist Benito Mussolini, someone who subsequently killed, imprisoned, or otherwise harshly dealt with his former progressive comrades. This would cause the term "fascist" to be commonly used as a label for any person, group, or a political community who objects in any fashion or to any degree to the subjugation and plunder of themselves or of Mankind In General by progressive, or caring and compassionate people who claim to be acting on behalf of The Earth, The Animals, The Rain Forest, The Children, or The World Proletariat. Example: "Leslie Bates is a Fascist Pig! Kill him!"

Another Monday

Given the long documented tendency for the Left to take positions that are consistently contrary to reality one should wonder what's really the driving force behind their apparent madness.

Message To Liberals

If you insist on behaving like a National Socialist then you will be treated as a National Socialist, from the neck until dead.

Thought For The Day

The Hard Right or the White Nationalists do not exist, but the Hard Left does exist, to protest against the White Nationalists is essentially useless.  The Hard Left must be destroyed.

Thought For The Day

Censorship sucks  Death to censors.

Quote

"The Twentieth Century was not all fun and games."

-Daniel Bonevac

Question

Can we just hang Hillary now?

Comment On George Soros

If I got my hands on George Soros I'd hang him as an enemy of Humanity.

Comment On Islam

To say that Islam is savagery is the truth and it apparently illegal under our so-called laws.  The grandparents of our so-called rulers welcomed Hitler and his goons with open arms and our so-called rulers are now welcoming Muslims with open arms.  Never mind that the false prophet Mohammed was, without question, a criminal.  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  the so-called religion of Islam was not practiced on the American continent.  Our nation's first and regrettable 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.  In effect to live a fully Human life.  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 had previously proposed 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.

The obvious question that has been raised in the past 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 real 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.  And the urban collaborators need to be dealt with as well.

Another Question

Why I do not believe in the concept of God?

An omnipotent being doesn't need a servant.  And all false prophets should be vaporized the moment they open their mouths such as Mohammed (Islam), Joseph Smith (Mormonism), and L. Ron Hubbard (Scientology).

A Question

What's it like to not not have a Human soul?

ISLAM DELNDA EST

Another Truth

To say that Islam is savagery is the truth and it apparently illegal under our so-called laws.  The grandparents of our so-called rulers welcomed Hitler and his goons with open arms and our so-called rulers are now welcoming Muslims with open arms.  Never mind that the false prophet Mohammed was, without question, a criminal.
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  the so-called religion of Islam was not practiced on the American continent.  Our nation's first and regrettable 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.  In effect to live a fully Human life.  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 had previously proposed 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.

The obvious question that has been raised in the past 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 real 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.

And our urban collaborators need to be dealt with, too.

A Message For President Trump

HANG HILLARY!

Another Hard Fact

Democrats never tip pizza or cab drivers

Another Truth For The Hard Left

Once force is openly used against those who speak out against the Hard Left then the gloves will come off and force WILL be openly used against the Hard Left. Once the Hard Left openly repudiates the rules for living in a civil society then their victims (that's us) will no longer see themselves as subject to those same rules.  Or to put it another way to any member of the Hard Left, break the rules of civil society and you will leave your victims no choice but to break you.  It's called a CIVIL WAR,  and cars with bumper stickers, tee-shirts, and other examples of open posturing will make target identification very easy.  What part of "Liberty or Death" does the Hard Left persist in not understanding?  It's generally considered to be bad form to advocate violence against someone simply because of their political views. But if some Hard Leftist thug finds him or herself staring at the muzzle of our rifles it is because the stupid Hard Leftist put him or herself there.

Yes, I'm Speaking To The Hard Left, Now

If you are are being treated as a Totalitarian (from the neck until dead) it's because you are a Totalitarian.  And of course Donald Trump is not your president, you just wanted another Hard Leftist like you, just another mass murdering psychopath like yourself.

The Future

A Hard Truth

Once force is openly used against those who speak out against the Left then the gloves will come off and force WILL be openly used against the Left. Once the Left openly repudiates the rules for living in a civil society then their victims will no longer see themselves as subject to those same rules.  Or to put it another way to the Left, break the rules of civil society and you will leave us no choice but to break you.

It's called a civil war. And cars with bumper stickers, tee-shirts, and other examples of open posturing will make target identification very easy.

What part of "Liberty or Death" does the Left persist in not understanding?

It is generally considered to be bad form to advocate violence against someone simply because of their political views. But if some Leftist thug finds himself staring at the muzzle of a rifle it is because the stupid Leftist put himself there.

Another Good Question

When has The Mainstream Media paid attention to anyone?