Thoughts Of The Day

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.

Needless to say after the fall of the NSDAP from power the present day Left found it necessary to tone down the external indicators of ideological conformity.  Even though the massive formations of well-bathed and smartly uniformed drones have been replaced by an undisciplined mob of hygenically challenged and ragged savages, the ultimate goal remains the same, the destruction of a free civilization and erection of a Collectivist hive state subject to a single will.

Antisemitism in politics is the practical equivalent of a dead canary in a coal mine, I can't say this often enough.  Antisemitism is a subset of Racial Collectivism.  We (Humanity) have to condemn all forms of Racial Collectivism.  We have to identify Black Lives Matter as the Racial Collectivist group that it actually is.  We have to see that Antisemitism is a symptom of a deeper philosophical problem.  So when someone attacks Jews they're attacking all of us.  Rejection of Racial Collectivism shouldn't be a radical idea.

Comments

What do I have to say about the current Hamas campaign of firing rockets into the state of Israel?

The answer is not nice.

We have to understand that the doctrine of Islam is a load of absolute nonsense.  If someone behaving like the self-proclaimed prophet Mohammad were to appear in the United States today that person would be declared insane, given a life sentence, or in states having the death penalty, given the needle.  But then what can one say about a false religion founded by an individual who combines and magnifies the worst attributes of Jeffery Epstein, Lafayette Ron Hubbard, Charles Manson, and turns them up beyond eleven?

Antisemitism in politics is the practical equivalent of a dead canary in a coal mine, I can't say this often enough.  Antisemitism is a subset of Racial Collectivism.  We have to condemn all forms of Racial Collectivism.  We have to identify Black Lives Matter as the Racial Collectivist group that it actually is.  We have to see that Antisemitism is a symptom of a deeper philosophical problem.  Rejection of Racial Collectivism shouldn't be a radical idea.

Maxine Waters clearly doesn’t believe in The Rule Of Law.  Under The Rule Of Law the act of acquittal is possible.  We hanged many of those who didn’t believe in The Rule Of Law at Nuremberg.  Perhaps we should set up the gallows again. 

Thoughts For The Day

If anything should've been learned from from The Century Of Death (a.k.a The 20th Century) it's that cowardice isn't an option.

The election of Donald Trump (as well as Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan) was a rejection of the will of The Left.  If they cant live without power over us, then we as Americans will see to it that they wont.

Public education in the United States was designed by the closet communists of the so called Progressive Movement to indoctrinate Young Americans into becoming drones in their future communist collective.  If the bloody red banner of Communism is ever raised over this great nation its because The Left had a part in making it happen.

 The unavoidable fact of reality is that the self-styled "peace activist" isn't a morally superior being, he or she is a willing accomplice to conquest, slavery, and mass murder. They're an active hazard to human life.  Or in an ancient tongue: hostis humani generis, an enemy of mankind in general.  In my view killing a so-called peace activist isn't an act of murder.  It's a morally necessary homicide carried out in defense of self, of one's family, of one's nation, and of Humanity in General.

Just because your holy book says that someone with a particular characteristic should be thrown off a building shouldn't mean you should do it.

The photographs of Tank Man usually published show him blocking a platoon of tanks.  He actually blocked a battalion of tanks.

 (Images by Mark Urbin)

Thoughts For The Day

Those who believe falsehoods will do horrible things.  Look at National Socialism, Islam, or Scientology.

Cowardice will always result in more coercion.

A Historical Fact

Vlad Tepes got the nasty reputation for simply imitating what he saw Ottoman Muslims were already doing to Christian men who fell into their hands.

Truth

Someone eats bacon but I don't.

So what?

I'm not going ballistic because because someone eats bacon.

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 the Democrats welcomed Hitler and his goons with open arms and the Democrats 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.

Definition

Our respective cultures are to a large degree defined by what we consider to be divine. (For the record, I'm an atheist.)

In the Christian gospel (if I recall correctly) God came to us in the person of Jesus Christ, a carpenter, a member of the building trades, someone who did creative work for a living. And Christians as a rule generally follow that example.

Islam on the other hand is solely the creation of a self appointed spokesman for a recycled pagan deity. The false prophet Mohammad was an essentially parasitic individual who married for money and then proceeded to pursue a career of wanton vandalism, robbery, murder, rape, and pedophilia, all while claiming to pass on messages from a false god. In the course of his career Mohammad also created the practice of modern political terrorism. Muslims, the slaves of the false god Allah, are commanded to follow the example of Mohammad.

I'm usually loathe to agree with any Marxist but one of them made what I now consider a valid point. We imagine our divine authority to be a reflection of ourselves and our values. The Lord God of the Judaic and Christian tradition is the creator of Heaven and Earth, and the creator and protector of Life, and we in our lives work to emulate him. On the other hand the false god Allah is the perfect reflection of the depraved creature who created him, a malignant narcissist who wantonly destroys and murder at a whim, and hardcore Muslims have not the slightest clue as to why this is wrong.

The product of our respective values is plainly obvious. Jews and Christians are builders and protectors. Those who obey the false prophet Mohammad to the letter are destroyers and murderers.

A Muslim Exits

Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

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.

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.

Another Perspective

On theoretical grounds I think all religions have exactly the same standard of proof underpinning them. Everyone thinks their holy writings are the holy writings and believes with equal passion that their god is the god.  But we don’t live on theoretically grounds, we live in reality. And in reality anyone who insists all religions are equally dangerous or blameworthy is, if I may be so blunt, out of their fucking mind.  Christians don’t marry children. Jews don’t blow up mosques. Buddhists don’t declare jihad. There is one religion widely practiced today that is uniquely unable to coexist peacefully with other religions (or even with other strains of the same religion).  Get with the program, all religions are not created equal, and a Judeo-Christian nation makes me a hell of a lot less nervous than an Islamic one.

More Hard Truths

1. The Hard Left always lies.

2. If a member of the Hard Left wants to find a Fascist, all he or she has to do is look in a mirror.

3. If North Korea erases Democrats from the Earth the Kim Family would be doing us a favor.

4. Islam is evil and the Big Moh is a false prophet.

A Fact Of Reality

A phobia is an irrational fear.  There is no such thing as an irrational fear of Islam.  Those who would subjugate us are vermin fit only for extermination.

Quote Of The Day

"I never bring a knife to a gunfight."

--US Navy SEAL

Islam

On Islam

ISLAM DELENDA EST.

Comment On Islam

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.

Definition

Our respective cultures are to a large degree defined by what we consider to be divine. (For the record, I'm an atheist.)

In the Christian gospel (if I recall correctly) God came to us in the person of Jesus Christ, a carpenter, a member of the building trades, someone who did creative work for a living. And Christians as a rule generally follow that example.

Islam on the other hand is solely the creation of a self appointed spokesman for a recycled pagan deity. The false prophet Mohammad was an essentially parasitic individual who married for money and then proceeded to pursue a career of wanton vandalism, robbery, murder, rape, and pedophilia, all while claiming to pass on messages from a false god. In the course of his career Mohammad also created the practice of modern political terrorism. Muslims, the slaves of the false god Allah, are commanded to follow the example of Mohammad.

I'm usually loathe to agree with any Marxist but one of them made what I now consider a valid point. We imagine our divine authority to be a reflection of ourselves and our values. The Lord God of the Judaic and Christian tradition is the creator of Heaven and Earth, and the creator and protector of Life, and we in our lives work to emulate him. On the other hand the false god Allah is the perfect reflection of the depraved creature who created him, a malignant narcissist who wantonly destroys and murder at a whim, and hardcore Muslims have not the slightest clue as to why this is wrong.

The product of our respective values is plainly obvious. Jews and Christians are builders and protectors. Those who obey the false prophet Mohammad to the letter are destroyers and murderers.