Vladdi on Canada’s Supreme Crimina… Vladdi on Canada’s Supreme Crimina… Amy Elizabeth on Atheislam is nothing more than… unclevladdi on Top 10 Reasons Libertarians Ar… dajjal on Top 10 Reasons Libertarians Ar…
- gun control
- human rights
- United Nations
- United States
“Allah’s” officially stated cause is to make Islam superior over all other religions:
9:33. It is He Who has sent His Messenger (Muhammad ) with guidance and the religion of truth (Islâm), to make it superior over all religions even though the Mushrikûn (polytheists, pagans, idolaters, disbelievers in the Oneness of Allâh) hate (it).
Islam is not even a “religion,” (at all, much less one “of peace,”) much less a “superior” one.
Here’s islam’s “holy Message from god” as exemplified by the collective words and deeds of it’s Founder:
“I will save humanity by lying to, extorting, torturing, robbing, burning out of their homes, kidnapping and ransoming, enslaving, raping and murdering everyone who even only verbally disagrees with me – and you can, too!”
Muhammad was really only a con-man and bandit-king, an arch-criminal who always blamed “god” for his own penchant for committing crimes. If Moe got away with committing a crime (and he tried them all, enthusiastically, more than once, but instead of ever showing contrition, bragged about how much fun it was to commit them, and advised everyone else to join in the fun, too), then it was held to be “obvious” that “god” wanted him to get away with having committed those crimes!
Islam itself is only a gigantic, convoluted, victim-blaming slanderous example of an Argumentum Tu Quoque theodicy!
“Muhammad isn’t an evil criminal because we all (i.e: you, ALLAH) do it, too! Whee!”
Just look up all the “In the Way of Allah” references: what do they have in common? As also described explicitly in the Qur’ime manual, “allah” is both unknown, and unknowable – he’s just evil random violence and sudden death! Chaos!
The whole chapter / sura about Moses, shows how “allah” kills off innocent people who “would have” otherwise become “evil,” and replaces them with “better” people. And the whole “moral” of the story is: YOU do not know; only “allah” knows, and he only tells Gebril to tell Muhammad to tell you about any of it!
Sura 4:77: Those who whined “Hold back your hands (from attacking)” were corrected:
“War is compulsory for us – the good and bad both come from allah!”
Allah’s supposed “oneness” with his creation is thus crucial to Muhammad’s eternal theodicy alibi-excuse for his many crimes, and it’s also blatantly, inherently ANTI-God, because when one’s “God” is generally ‘EVERYTHING!’ then it’s also implicitly, specifically ‘NOTHING!’ Existentialism IS Nihilism!
Islam IS Atheism!
The ‘theological’ notion of Allah’s “oneness” is CRUCIAL to their main criminal, might-makes-right alibi, that “we aren’t responsible, and no one is ever really a criminal anyway, because we’re really all only victims:
“The Allah Made Me Do It!”
“In fact, I didn’t do it at all – only the allah did it! Whee!”
[8.17] So you did not slay them, but it was Allah Who slew them, and you did not smite when you smote (the enemy), but it was Allah Who smote, and that He might confer upon the believers a good gift from Himself; surely Allah is All-Hearing, Knowing.
“Fight them; Allah will punish them by your hands and will disgrace them and give you victory over them” – 9:14-15
Islam has sentenced all the world’s non-muslims to “Death By Muslim” for our crime of not being muslims.*
Obviously, the muslims have no “faith” in even their god’s own power nor desire to enforce even it’s own basic us-versus-them and might-makes-right principles, because while, at worst, all real religions only say:
“Obey our silly rules, or GOD (/’the gods’) will get you!”
ONLY islam says:
“Obey our silly rules, or WE will get you (‘for god’)!”
Obviously, a forced “Faith!” isn’t any kind of a “Faith!” whatsoever – islam isn’t a religion at all, it’s only extortion!
And extortion is ALWAYS a CRIME!
*Of course, for all you selfish subjectively-oriented libertine “liberals” out there, this sad fate can be easily avoided by mumbling some magic words called “the shahada” in Arabic, and by adopting proper attire, but there’s still an unfortunate degree of risk involved, in that you will then also have thereby personally become part of that “death by muslim” function yourself, as they fit you out for your very own shiny new suicide vest with its integral explosive belt. Be proud of your new fashion-statement accessory; you’ve
certainly earned it.
Christianity, on the other hand, represents free-will conscience and so potential guilt for not doing one’s best; so since liberals, being criminals, hate all notions of personal, self-reliant responsibility, and in stead choose to favor pre-deterministic alibi excuses to pretend they had no choice but to commit their crimes, must hate Christianity and its symbols, whether or not it’s true. Same for muslims, who are also morally delinquent atheists, because their idolatrous version of a god doesn’t give them free-will
responsibility, but only enslaves them and forces them to do both good and bad things! Idolatry is immorality because it’s only an alibi-excuse for one to avoid all self-reliant responsibility.
Here’s ISLAM IN A NUTS’ HELL (Cowardice Loves Company!):
SUBMIT! (To “predetermined, enforced and inevitable” Inferiority!) SUBMIT – to FAILURE! SUBMIT – to “allah!”
OK – DEFINE ‘ALLAH:’ “Allah is unknown and unknowable; allah is generally “everything!” and so “allah” is specifically NOTHING!
Since one is commanded to only fear and obey, not admire and love, “allah,” it’s clear that islam only focuses on (“worships”) one’s own fear – of Pain.
Allah is ONLY Pain: “La ilaha il Muhammad; ALLAM RASUL MUHAMMAD!”
The Message of the Qur’an is an empty one: “You must fear and obey your Pain!” How pathetic! Allah is Pain, and islam is Submission to one’s own fears.
When people (especially liberals, in the West) are willing to give up everyone’s individual liberty for tribal gangster security, they forfeit the former AND the latter, by Submitting like muslims to the Stockholm-syndrome-like extortion creed of how “We Have To Go Along (with criminal lies) To Get Along (with lying criminals)! Whee!”
And, in their self-righteous, holier-than-thou fear, they are quite willing to sacrifice the individual rights and liberties of everyone else to their own cowardly selfish extortion creed, too, musing that:
“It would, after all, be negligent to not submit to my fears, so any and all such ‘criminal’ “infidels” will deserve whatever they’ve got coming to them, too! In fact, it’s our logical duty to force them to Submit to our own fears of allah, lest allah obviously rightfully get us for not making them Submit to the fear of him!”
So: SUBMIT to the fears of the fearsomely fearful, OR ELSE they will “need” to become fearsomely afraid of you, too!
ISLAM IS ONLY THE CRIMINAL RELIGION OF ALL COWARDLY TRAITORS TO HOPE, RATIONALITY, AND CIVILIZATION!
Here’s how liberals have always viewed islam and sharia:
Initially, liberals must assume that, “Since God is unknowable &/or religion is only some silly opinions anyway, it doesn’t really matter what anyone describes their god as! (even if, as “allah,” he’s portrayed as a violent sadistic slaver.)
To which they *might* add the “unless they believe in it and abuse their kids with it and want to impose it on everyone else against their will, of course!” bits left only implied, but which they’re too polite and “culturally sensitive” (i.e: racist) to ever actually articulate; so that, as selfish cowards, they can safely ignore all the muslims’ crimes by pretending to not pre-judge them, and so leave the crimes and criminals in a perpetually contextually-abstracted, idolatrous state: as eternally innocent until (never even bothering to try to find them to ever be) proven guilty!
To aid them in this delusive deception, they also claim the false, allegedly Christian Commandment, of “Judge Not – EVER!” Whee.
Further, whenever they describe muslim crime as “islam-IST,” Extrem-IST, Radical-IST, Militant-IST, etc., they’re really only sublimating the suffix “-ISH;” as in islam-ish, muslim-ish (but not *really* fully islam-IC)!
At first, they’ll want to assert that “Islam is a great religion of peace,” and “an Abrahamic monotheism,” neither of which are true:
The Qur’an clearly and specifically tells muslims the Bible is wrong and also that all Christians are infidel criminals who worship a false god, and who must therefore be extorted, enslaved, and murdered for their “crime” of not being muslims.
So, if and when liberals consider islam to be a religion, they must also implicitly agree with it’s main tenet: that God is a violent murderer who wants his muslim tribe to violently conquer the world by extorting, enslaving, and murdering all the non-muslim humans, right?
As soon as you pretend this divine extortion fantasy excuse is even a remotely possible scenraio, you’ve also instantly Submitted to the alibi of becoming a criminal “muslim” yourself!
After this, their initial reaction will predictably be: “You can’t claim islam is against us, as in it’s an us-vs-them creed! (because they’re more violent than we are, so it isn’t safe to do so!”) coached in terms of immoral might-makes-right relativism:
“Islam isn’t evil because we (i.e: you) all do it, too!”
Or, in the slightly more intelligent attempt:
“But non-muslims commit crimes, too, so islam isn’t responsible for (any) crimes!”
Well, obviously islam isn’t the *only* cause of crime, (although, in this world and at this time, it has long maintained the position of being the main cause of most crimes globally) but it is definitely a crime-causing venture: if one were to consciously take all the rationalizations and reasons for any humans committing any crimes, and bundle them all into one book, appended with the exhortations that “God” wanted people to commit crimes for these reasons, and which further, were NOT really crimes, BECAUSE said God endorsed them – then you would have created exactly what we are all faced with here and now: the Qur’an, islam, and it’s muslim mobsters.
Islam is a threat to everyone because IT says it is.
Holy mobster Moslems only hate infidels because the Qur’an says “god” orders them to – Period.
ALL moslems are criminals because, by their own rules, they must endorse in public every word in the Qur’an.
And the Qur’an tells them that they are so “superior” to all non-moslem humans, that it’s not only their right, but also their holy duty to their god, to extort, enslave, and murder all the non-moslems in the world, simply for the “crime” of not being moslems.
“Slay the idolators wherever you find them…” Chapter 9, verse 5
“When you encounter the unbelievers, strike off their heads until you have made a great slaughter among them….” Ch. 47:4
So the Qur’an is a clearly-written, us-versus-them hate-crime book, endorsing a permanent might-makes-right death-threat.
But then, both liberals and muslims pretend to be proud of their practicality in submitting to the extortionist’s creed that one must “Go Along” (with the criminal’s lies) “To Get Along” (with the lying criminals)!
To liberals, this is called “Political Correctness” and to muslims, it’s known as Submissive lying (“to Keep The Peace!”)
Liberals also call this cowardly instinctive Submission to despair: “shrewdness,” “realism,” & “realpolitik.”
Both liberals and muslims are group-might-makes-right criminal extortionist gangsters.
Both liberals and muslims believe in the supremacy of group identities over individual choices.
Both liberals and muslims believe in forcing outcomes which are against individual free-will choice.
Both use fatalistic predeterminism excuses: muslims: “the will of allah;” libs: “historical determinism.”
Both believe minority groups are helpless victims, slaves to destiny, and so should all be treated as such.
Both feel the right to be noblesse oblige elitists to “protect” submissive victims, in stead of enabling them to defend them selves.
Most Liberals believe that we’re all really only random mistakes, and, as such, also potentially dangerous victims of predetermined force – victims of society, products of our environments, and slaves of allah – so their great “solution” is always the same: to dilute our potentially dangerous individual propensity to make mistakes by forming into pre-emptively defensive groups (of potentially dangerous mistakes LOL) and all for our own good and “protection,” of course!
Pretending a group of individuals is entitled to have more rights than the sum of those individuals, is idolatry (image over reality, form over substance, lies over truth). When groups have idolatrous rights, then all individuals who are not members of those groups have less rights. And all group-might-makes-rights amounts to anyway is the crime of extortion. Either all humans have the exact same rights, or none have any real rights.
All humans have a right to defend themselves, and part of that defense involves being able to be free to speak to accuse those who seek to attack them first.
Fred Bastiat said something like: “We all have the natural right to self defense; bad laws are those which try to deprive us of that right.”
Criminals attack first by fraudulently lying to slander and blame their own victims in an attempt to remove their victims’ rights to self-defensive free-speech, by asserting that they themselves are the victims and their victims are the criminals who therefore have no right to slander them.
To achieve this irrationality, they must often pretend there is no discernable cause and effect, that all is relative, expecially when it applies to them, because their group is in a minority.
When groups have rights, individuals don’t – simply because such a stance creates an injustice system, where some people (these days, in the West, who are part of some subjectively determined “identifiable protected minority groups,” including “women’s rights”) have more rights than others, which means those others have LESS rights than the protected group, and so are to be officially pre-judged as guilty until never proven innocent in comparison.
By endorsing group rights, any criminal has an automatic alibi for their crimes, if they can pre-posterously claim “retaliation” for something that once happened anywhere else to anyone else who was even only vaguely or remotely “like them.”
Pre-judice is slander, and vice-versa. Group rights is pre-judicial, obviously false idolatry, slander, and fraud – it’s a crime.
Reversing the onus of proof to guilty until never proven innocent is fradulent prejudicial slander and might-makes-right extortion (crime)!
It’s attacking first!
Any so-called Judges or politicians who supported and enabled these crimes are guilty of same.
They are also guilty of criminal harrassment and extortion (conformity, like all communazis want for everyone, is extortion; aka terrorism).
Any “legal” system which endorses group rights – even “minority” ones – is NOT a legal system at all: It’s only an extortion-promoting CRIME system!
And like all gangsters’ extortion rackets, it’s really only formed because each individual criminal (libertine liberal) really only wants rights without responsibilities for them SELF – to dilute their own responsibility in a group (because delinquent cowardice loves company) in order to be able to say:
“I didn’t do it! ONLY The GROUP did it!” and “In fact, NONE OF US in The Group did it, either – ONLY The GROUP did it! Whee!”
These infantile delinquent criminal negligent cowardly traitors in fact always want the false right to remain irresponsibly wrong.
Why do they crave government dictators and slavery? “Because with no power comes no responsibility!”
There’s no perverse crime a lefty won’t compromise with or Submit to!
Liberals racists can invariably be relied on to ignore even the worst depredations of muslims, under the blanket alibi/excuse of:
“Who Are We To Say Our Culture Is Better Than Theirs?”
- And yet they feel perfectly free to say our culture is WORSE than theirs (everyone else’s) – the guaranteed liberal response to the threat of the muslim conquest of the West is always:
“So what?! We’re worse than them so we deserve it!”
They feel perfectly safe and so free to challenge and attack the West, knowing full-well that our history of collaborative discussion and “Thou Shalt Not Kill” and “sticks and Stones” proportional-response cultural indoctrination will save them from any violent retaliation for their incessantly slanderous harrassments.
This is why these self-described champions of diversity and “minority victim’s rights equality” will never be found advocating for the oppressed and victimized minorities in muslim countries: Christians, Jews, or Women!
Here in the West, it’s far easier to be the vicious little guy attacking bemused, innocent goliaths, making names for themselves by complaining, rather than by self-improvement, than it would ever be anywhere else in the world!
And their cries of relativist “multi-culturalism” really only ever amount to racism, because, in denying the obviously inferior cultural indoctrination nurture of islam, leaves the liberals with only nature to explain the total failure of the muslim nations!
They insist we mustn’t belittle the inferior races’ attempts, and so must in stead defend their failures in stead of granting them the equal regard necessary to solve their problems by explaining them to them!
Liberals believe muslims, being inferior animals at the mercy of their instincts, cannot learn from mistakes, so it’s mean of the rest of us to try educating them away from their crime-creed!
In rabidly and vociferously denying the role “nurture” or education (cultural indoctrination) has on any given people’s development, liberals reveal their true prejudicial stance: that “nature” (or ‘race’) is at the bottom of it all anyway!
FINALLY, I wouldn’t hold out too much hope that this recent anti-Boko-Haram trend is any kind of a true wake-up call for liberals.
Just as they’ve prefered to pretend they were always against “Al Quaeda” and “The Taliban” and radical-IST extreme-IST militant-IST islam-ISTS (“IST” = “ISH,” as in: “They’re islam-ISH and muslim-ISH, but “not really” islamic muslims!”) but never against the ancient ongoing extortion-racket CRIME-syndiate of islam itself, nor against any of its holy-mobster muslims.
Criminals (such as liberals and muslims) like “allah,” because allah is predetermined force (the perfect excuse for their own crimes: “The allah made me do it!”) while the Judeo-Christian God allegedly gave us all free-will choice and so both the self-reliant rights to, AND responsibilities for, our own actions – which is why all the criminals hate Him!
They choose Lucifer (allah) because then they get to pretend it’s all someone else’s fault, so they won’t have to face the painful truth that rights only come with responsibilities.
If with great power comes great responsibility, then leftists want to enjoy the right of any slave to remain irresponsibly wrong – because with no power comes no responsibility.
It’s divide and conquer to them, where they pretend to imagine they can have pleasure without pain, hope without fear, and pleasant rights without painful responsibilities. They love the idea of forced predeterminism, so they can always pretend to be the victims, helpless infantile delinquent criminal negligents that they are.
And Cowardice loves company, too!
People who want rights without responsibility always intrinsically, inherently slander their victims by downloading those responsibilities onto them; being an infantile delinquent is really just another form of negligent criminal extortion.
People who are truly cooperative, collaborating to reach a truly objective universal truth, realize that all individuals are equal. But contentious adversarial subjectivists must inplicitly and intrinsically oppose everyone else’s basic human rights to self defense, and so must be seen to at least seem to champion group might made rights extortion, while pretending they are really only “defending groups of victims” by slandering everyone else first.
i.e: If you’re a selfish liberal, you must oppose any and all objective standards of the equality of universal individual human rights, while idolatrously pretending to champion GROUPS (of “poor oppressed minorities”) as a cover for your false ‘right’ to do so!
These adversarial (satanic) lefties (left-hand-path followers) really always oppose EVERYONE and everything else, including, of course, the All (God).
May 6, 2014 by Brandon Smith
Despite popular belief, very few things in our world are exactly what they seem. That which is painted as righteous is often evil. That which is painted as kind is often malicious. That which is painted as simple is often complex. That which is painted as complex often ends up being disturbingly two dimensional. Regardless, if a person is willing to look only at the immediate surface of a thing, he will never understand the content of the thing.
This fact is nowhere more evident than in the growing “tensions” between the elites of the West and the elites of the East over the crisis in Ukraine.
I am continually astonished at the refusal of many otherwise intelligent people to consider the evidence or even the possibility that there is, in reality, no fundamental political or philosophical conflict between the power brokers of the East and the West. As I outlined in great detail in Russia Is Dominated By Global Banks, Too, the truth is they are both working toward the same goal; and both ultimately benefit from an engineered and theatrical display of international brinksmanship.
Russia, like the United States, is utterly beholden to globalist financiers through organizations like the International Monetary Fund and the Bank for International Settlements. Russia’s global economic adviser in matters ranging from investment image to privatization is none other than Goldman Sachs.
Goldman Sachs has also worked closely with the Ukrainian government since 2011, and it started its advisory work with Ukraine for free. (Whenever Goldman Sachs does something for free, one should take special note.)
Russia has continued to borrow billions of dollars from Western banks, including Deutsche Bank and Credit Suisse, year after year.
Russian President Vladimir Putin meets with Mr. New-World-Order himself, Henry Kissinger, on a regular basis; and according to Putin’s press secretary, they are “old friends.” Putin’s meetings with Kissinger began almost immediately after he first took power in 2000.
Putin’s relationship with Kissinger has been so pronounced that the Russian Foreign Ministry gave Kissinger an honorary doctorate in diplomacy, and Putin placed Kissinger at the head of a bilateral “working group” — along with former KGB head and multilateralist (globalist) Gen. Yevgeny Primakov — dealing with foreign policy.
In more recent news, I would also remind pro-Putin cheerleaders that Putin and the Kremlin first pushed for the IMF to take control of the Ukrainian economy, and the IMF is now demanding that Ukraine fight Russia in exchange for financial support. This might seem like irony to more foolhardy observers; but to those who are aware of the false East/West paradigm, it is all the part of a greater plan for consolidation of power.
Clearly, Putin and Russia are just two more puppet pieces on the globalist chessboard, pitted against other puppets in the West in a grand theater designed to distract and divide the masses through chaos. As Kissinger points out, in crisis there is opportunity.
What is the goal? They’ve already told us, openly, on numerous occasions.
The first great prizes of the New World Order are a global currency and centralized economic control. Heads of state from around the world, including Putin, as well as international bankers and IMF representatives have all publicly called for the IMF to take charge of the global economic system through its Special Drawing Rights currency program.
However, for the SDR to become a dominant currency, several issues must be resolved. Here’s a short list.
The U.S. Dollar Must Fall
The dollar must lose its world reserve status, and most likely collapse in relative value, before the SDR can be elevated. This is where mainstream pundits lose track of the facts. For them, the dollar is an invincible monetary element, a currency product as infinite as time. Their normalcy bias prevents them from ever acknowledging the many weaknesses of the Federal Reserve note, including our country’s inability to ever service its more than $200 trillion debt. Others believe the dollar is the NWO currency, and that the globalists are somehow U.S.-centric. The evidence posted above suggests otherwise. Globalists have no loyalty to any nation or culture. Their only loyalty is to the progression of their own power. If sacrificing the dollar or the U.S. as a whole furthers that power, then they will have no problem cutting us loose like a rotting appendage.
A Liquidity Replacement Must Be Introduced
As my regular readers know, I have been covering China’s progression toward a decoupling from the U.S. economy for years. China, in my view, has always been the key to the elitist shift into a truly global currency mechanism. The primary argument in the mainstream against the idea of a dollar collapse is that there is no other currency with ample liquidity to take the dollar’s place. Well, in the past couple of years, this has changed.
China and the banks it controls have issued approximately $25 trillion in debt instruments and monetization. This is often referred to as a “debt bubble” created through panic and a weakness in China’s economy and a response to quantitative easing in the United States. I would take a slightly different position. I would say that China’s monetization has been carefully and deliberately engineered in order to lay the foundation for a massive liquidity spike in the Yuan. The argument that China’s incredible debt generation is a sign of impending collapse may be misguided. U.S. debt, including unfunded liabilities, absolutely dwarfs China’s $25 trillion. If any economy is on the verge of implosion, it is that of the United States, not of China.
The Chinese need exponential Yuan circulation. They do not want it to replace the dollar; they are preparing it for induction into the IMF’s Special Drawing Rights basket.
When might this occur?
The IMF holds an international conference and policy meeting on the SDR every five years. During these meetings, the IMF decides if it will absorb a new currency into the basket and if it will expand the creation or circulation of SDRs around the world. Interestingly, the next IMF conference on the SDR just happens to be scheduled for the end of 2014 to the beginning of 2015.
Another strange coincidence: The U.S. Congress was supposed to vote on legislation for further capital allocations to the IMF by April. The vote never came. The new allocations were to fund an expansion of IMF programs and help with the greater inclusion of BRIC nations in governing decisions. If the U.S. government does not pass this legislation, Russia and other nations have demanded that the IMF move forward without the United States on reforms. At the very least, the U.S. would lose its veto power over IMF decisions. I believe that the timing of this is deliberate, that the U.S. is meant to lose its veto power and that the simultaneous SDR conference will announce the inclusion of the Chinese Yuan, setting the stage for the replacement of the dollar as world reserve.
The SDR will not immediately be issued as a commonly traded currency itself. Rather, the IMF will take over management of included currencies and denominate those currencies using SDR valuations. For example, $1 U.S. is worth only .64 SDR today. In the near future, I expect that the dollar will plummet in relation to the SDR’s value. We will still have our greenbacks when the IMF begins administrating our currency system, but the international and domestic worth of those greenbacks will fall to pennies. In turn, other currencies with stronger economic positions will rise in worth relative to the SDR.
I believe one of the primary determinations in a currency’s value compared to the SDR will be a country’s stockpile of gold. This is why Russia and China in particular have been purchasing precious metals at an unheard-of rate (and why U.S. gold reserves have never been audited). The IMF itself is one of the world’s largest holders of physical gold, with nearly 3,000 metric tons (officially). With the crash of the dollar system and investors clamoring for a reliable hedge to protect whatever savings they have left, gold could conceivably skyrocket into the $5,000 to $10,000 per-ounce range. Governments holding the metal will be favorably placed during an implementation of the SDR as the new reserve standard.
A Cover Event Must Be Created
The centralization of power is best achieved during moments of bewildering calamity. The conjuring of crises is one of the oldest methods of elitist dominance. Not only can they confuse and frighten the masses into malleability, but they can also ride to the public’s rescue as heroes and saviors later on. The Hegelian dialectic is the mainstay of tyrants.
The destruction of the dollar and the institution of a global economic bureaucracy are not actions that can be executed openly by international financiers. These events will coincide with extreme catastrophe, likely worse than the Great Depression era, with millions upon millions of people losing the ability to financially support themselves and their families. Crime, death and public discontent will surely follow. People will be looking for someone to blame. This is where the false East/West paradigm comes in.
I have warned for quite some time that the development of East/West tensions would be used as a cover for a collapse of the dollar system. I have warned that among the American media this collapse would be blamed on an Eastern dump of foreign exchange reserves and treasuries, resulting in a global domino-effect ending U.S. world reserve status. In turn, the international community would be conditioned to see this as the mere bumbling of a spoiled America gone power-mad, rather than the result of a covert program of economic destabilization. This might lead to all-out war or a fiscal firestorm that leaves much of the world crippled and desperate for aid.
In either case, the elitist plan is to use scapegoats and false enemies to draw our attention away from the real culprits: the international banks themselves. Make no mistake: This fight is not about President Barack Obama, it is not about Putin and it is not even about the Federal Reserve. These men are tools, errand boys, public mascots. Do not be fooled by the global stage play being perpetrated. Whatever happens in Ukraine and whatever happens between Russia, China and the West, there are only two real sides to this battle: the elitist establishment and those who are smart enough to recognize their poison.
Okay, I know I said I’d reserve this site for only my own thoughts, but if I hadn’t read this guy’s article first, I’d have ended up saying exactly these same things on my own anyway!
From the famous “Anarchist, Atheist, Asshole,” Christopher Cantwell:
Top 10 Reasons Libertarians Aren’t Nice To You
by Christopher Cantwell • April 8, 2014 • 442 Comments
People often complain about libertarians being rude and obnoxious. It’s not nearly as widespread a problem as some would make it out to be, and contrary to popular belief, this did not begin with me. To the extent that it does exist, I have become to many this sort of picture of the asshole libertarian who doesn’t give a shit about your feelings or opinions. So I figured I’d put this list together of why libertarians aren’t nice to you. Even libertarians who are nice to you, I think will get a kick out of it, because despite their outward appearances, they are every bit as frustrated with your statism as we are. Feel free to bookmark it and produce it every time you hear someone make this complaint.
Libertarians Aren’t Nice To You Because,
10. Ridicule works.
Believe me when I tell you, we would really prefer it if mankind were a rational creature that responded to reason and evidence. If that were the case, we would have already won this debate, and we wouldn’t even be having this discussion. The State would not exist, and there would be no political arguments pertaining to it.
What we have observed from watching your elections and propagandists, is that there’s more of a “that guy sucks so you should support me!” type of psychology behind all of this. Leftists call everybody who opposes them fascists, and racists, and religious nuts, and homophobes, and greedy. Rightists call everybody who opposes them socialists, and enemies of God, they promote xenophobia about homosexuals, and immigrants, and foreign countries that they want to go to war with.
It’s unfortunate that this has become the nature of political discord, but that’s the reality we are met with. You folks have obtained such wonderful political success by being completely miserable towards one another, so we figure this is how to win political battles. Thus, we are sort of compelled to work within it. We make fun of you, because that is the nature of political discussions that we have been met with. We tear down your leaders and your people because they promote terrible ideas, and we don’t want people to take you seriously.
9. If you already have an ideology, we’re actually not terribly concerned with convincing you.
Most people have no concept of politics, economics, or philosophy. If they take an interest in these subjects because of something we said, or because they are genuinely interested in finding some kind of objective truth, then we have some hope of bringing them over to our side. Those are the people we are primarily interested in convincing.
Most people involved in these things aren’t actually interested in finding any sort of objective truth. As far as we’re concerned, the fact that they aren’t already libertarians is evidence enough of this. They chose a side for whatever reason, and they represent their team for better or worse. Liberals don’t tend to become conservatives, conservatives don’t tend to become liberals, and neither tend to become libertarians. At best for us, they try to get libertarians to assist them in their own anti-libertarian political agendas, and they’ve done an excellent job of accomplishing this. Trying to work with you then, generally ends up hurting us, and we’ve learned this lesson too many times to ignore it.
Having an ideology tends to imply some study of the subject at hand. If you have studied government, and determined that it has any potential to do anything positive, this implies you are really not very good at processing information. The failures of the State are so numerous and ridiculously obvious, that we find it difficult to believe any rational person could justify its existence. Your informed adherence to this absurdity tells us that you are pretty much beyond all hope of rescue.
So when libertarians argue with you, it’s not you we’re trying to convince. We’re doing it for the sake of others who might be watching. It gives us the opportunity to put information out there, and while you reject fact, after fact, after fact, we try to make you look like idiots so that others who may be watching have a negative opinion of you and your ideas, so that they do not join your cause and advance them.
Any libertarian who tells you he is trying to win an election is either lying to you about trying to win the election, lying to us about being a libertarian, or terribly misinformed. As far as we’re concerned, elections are a bad thing. We’re trying to end them, not win them.
The nature of the State is to make false promises to bait support from the people it victimizes. They promise to protect you from boogeymen, they promise to solve your economic problems, they promise to carry out the will of your deity. We see this as completely ridiculous, we know it will fail, and we know that most people are stupid enough to swallow it hook line and sinker, so we can’t compete with it in a popular vote.
Libertarians are anarchists, whether they realize it or not. Even the ones who are delusional enough to think that they are going to get elected and restore the bloody republic, are little more than useful idiots who are repeating anarchist propaganda for us through channels normally reserved for government. The goal is not to win your elections, the goal is to turn a large enough minority against the legitimacy of the State as to make its continued function impossible. So there’s absolutely no incentive to work with you in promoting candidates, which is the primary function of your political activity. You’re right when you say “No candidate is good enough” for us, no matter who runs for office we will tear him down because nobody has the right to be our ruler.
If you had ever bothered to study the works of any of the great libertarian theorists, you wouldn’t be asking us the questions you are asking. You ask “Who will build the roads?” or “What about defense?” you tell us “There is no such thing as utopia” and a lot of other really tired arguments. It shows us that you haven’t taken so much as 10 minutes out of your miserable life to even make the slightest effort to understand what we are proposing.
In the meantime, we are always staying tuned to the propaganda you consume so that we can counter it. We write thoughtful articles, and make informative videos, and produce compelling audio content that explains in great detail what exactly it is your politicians and propagandists are saying, and why it is wrong.
You don’t pay any attention to any of that content because it’s not coming from “your team”, and everyone on “your team” repeats the same propaganda. So every time we get into a political argument, we already know what you’re going to say as soon as we know which team you’re on. We already know what the proper response to your propaganda is, and we already know that you are going to act irrationally when we respond. This is extraordinarily frustrating, because we’ve actually put a great deal of effort into this, and these repetitive arguments are tiring, especially when they yield no results.
The nice thing about freedom is, people get to make their own decisions. We’re not entirely sure why this bothers you so much. Every time you ask us “What if X?” we have a thousand different answers we can give you, if you don’t like the first one, we’re happy to give you another. The whole point is, you get to decide for yourself what suits you best in a market environment.
You have become so used to the State being the arbiter of all things, that you seem to panic at every uncertainty. The funny part about this is, the State hasn’t provided you with any certainty at all. There’s absolute chaos in the world, governments have murdered over 260 million of their own citizens in the last century, not including war, and you’re still freaking out about speed limits.
The nice thing about the internet is, it allows us to communicate with many people very quickly. The downside is that this instant gratification has led people to believe answers will just be fed to them without any effort. If you really think that you’re qualified to walk into a voting booth and decide who will run the world and how, then you should have the common decency to study economics first.
All these discussions we’re having really boil down to economics. Your politicians and propagandists feed off of your prejudices and religious ideas and emotions because that’s the easiest way to manipulate you into acting against your own best interests. These tactics allow them to operate in a soundbite world and oversimplify matters. For us to explain to you what’s wrong with those soundbites actually requires some understanding of how human beings respond to incentives in a market environment. We produce thousands of pages of text, and countless hours of audio and video explaining these things. The best we can hope for in a tweet is to link you to some of it and hope you read/listen/watch, but you never do, do you?
The Triple Nine Society, an organization whose membership is reserved for people with IQ’s in the top one tenth of one percent, even more discriminating than Mensa, did a survey on the politics of its members. The results don’t surprise us. Members overwhelmingly supported legalizing all drugs, prostitution, and gambling. They supported gun rights, and free markets. They opposed government involvement in medicine, and income taxes.
Government is a scam, and like other scams it relies on the gullibility of its victims. We’re not falling for it, but you are, and your support of that system harms us. Your stupidity literally hurts.
We know that you have some pretty twisted ideas on morality that stem from religious doctrines and other ancient texts, but logically speaking, morality should be consistent. If your moral platform can’t be applied universally, then it really doesn’t make a great deal of sense.
That’s why your politicians, religious leaders, and propagandists are always getting caught doing things that go against the words they speak. Priests get caught having gay sex, socialists acquire vast amounts of wealth, “family values” candidates get caught cheating on their wives, gun control advocates murder millions of people. Their moral platforms are inconsistent, this makes them rather meaningless, and so there is no reason for them to adhere thereto.
Our moral platform is basically just the non initiation of force. As long as we don’t rob, assault, kidnap, and murder, we’re perfectly within our moral code. This is pretty easy for most people, since violence doesn’t appeal to us, and so we rarely end up looking like hypocrites.
If you want to have people threaten you all the time and tell you what to do, that’s your business. We don’t recommend it or anything, but really you’re more than welcome to submit to someone else’s authority in the absence of the State. We might talk to you about the virtues of freedom, but we’re honestly not trying to force you to be free. All we’re saying is you have no right to force us under the same authority.
By contrast, you want to take our property, force us into wars, “educate” our children, and control our business and personal relationships. You have some really weird idea in your head that this notion of “government” makes that okay, but there is no other circumstance in which you would consider that socially acceptable. We don’t believe in government, so we look at this like any other lunatic trying to do these things to us.
Seriously, what the fuck? Just leave me alone.
Polite discussion in State politics is an illusion. At the end of this discussion, it really doesn’t matter who’s right or who’s wrong, the person with the superior numbers is going to force their bad ideas on everybody else at gun point. Just imagine doing this in reverse, where you start with a threat instead of ending with it. Nobody would try to be polite about their disagreement under those circumstances.
Since we know we have inferior numbers, and the minority always gets screwed and threatened by democracy, this is exactly what this discussion looks like to us. It begins and ends with the threat of violence, so the fact that we don’t shoot you in the face really speaks volumes to our civility.
You give us absolutely no option for escaping this violence. We are forced to choose between the violence of you, or the violence of someone else. You tell us “Love it or leave it!” or “Move to Somalia!” like I don’t have any right to be left in peace in my own home. The fact of the matter is, if you give us a choice of violence or violence, eventually we’re going to give some violence back to you, and making fun of you on twitter will become the least of your concerns.
We Europeans do not have an obligation to destroy ourselves. Africans, Muslims and others are adults and should be able to fix their own problems. Moreover, Europe and the wider Western world simply don’t have the strength to fix all of the problems of Africa, the Islamic countries and the rest of the developing world, even if we wanted to.
The Folly of Open Borders
“There will be free movement, country to country. Globalization in its purest form should not have any boundaries…”– Sheikh Hasina, Prime Minister of Bangladesh. (Both of her children live in North America.)
Ceuta is one of two small Spanish enclaves in North Africa, the second being Melilla. They provide the only possible entry to European territory without leaving Africa. Ceuta is separated from the Iberian Peninsula by the Strait of Gibraltar, and lies at the strategically important boundary between the Mediterranean Sea and the Atlantic Ocean. 1300 years ago, Muslims used it as a staging ground for their invasion of the Iberian Peninsula and their aggressive inroads into Europe. The tide took centuries to turn, but in 1415 the Portuguese conquered Ceuta. This event marked the beginning of half a millennium of European dynamism and global expansion.
It is ironic that Ceuta is now once again at the front lines. This time we are witnessing the retreat and decline of Europe, and the demographic expansion of Africa and the Islamic world. As one member of Spain’s maritime rescue services commented in late 2013: “It has been a very busy summer, because we’re now also rescuing Africans who not only cross in a toy boat but haven’t even spent money on buying proper oars.”
Apart from scaling the fences at Ceuta and Melilla, other common routes into Europe are by boat, sometimes via Spain’s Canary Islands off the Atlantic coast of North Africa, but more frequently to Mediterranean islands such as Italy’s Lampedusa. Some also enter Europe from the east, via the Greek islands. Greece has a huge problem with illegal immigrants, many of them Muslims coming from as far east as Afghanistan.
The tiny island of Malta, which is a member of the EU, has already received tens of thousands of illegal immigrants coming in by boat. Many of the arrivals hail from the poorest and most war-torn parts of sub-Saharan Africa. Their arrival constitutes a heavy burden for such a small nation.
On February 6 2014, at least 14 illegal immigrants, most of them sub-Saharan Africans, died while trying to swim from Morocco to the Spanish enclave of Ceuta. The Spanish government’s local delegate said that the migrants were “aggressive” and began throwing rocks. Civil Guard officials used anti-riot gear to dissuade them from rushing the border, yet about 200 attempted to swim around the seawall. Sources said that the migrants stampeded, some stepping on others on the beach, as they jumped into the sea. Authorities said the police in Ceuta used rubber bullets to ward them off, but that they fired them in the air and did not target anyone directly. “We did not use anti-riot equipment when the immigrants were in the water.”
Meanwhile, the number of illegal immigrants landing in Italy rose tenfold in January 2014, the country’s deputy interior minister said. “In 2013, Italy was subjected to an incessant and massive influx of migrants from North Africa and the Middle East,” Filippo Bubico told parliament. Throughout 2013, a total of 2,925 vessels of various shapes and sizes landed on Italian shores, carrying about 43,000 people. This represented a rise of 325 per cent in just one year. Reality is increasingly imitating fiction, with boatloads of people coming from the south to Europe, just as described in Jean Raspail’s novel The Camp of the Saints from 1973.
In early February 2014, more than 1,000 migrants trying to cross the Mediterranean in nine overcrowded rafts and dinghies were rescued by the Italian navy within the space of just 24 hours. The vessels, in which approximately 1,120 people were packed tightly, were first spotted in waters south of Sicily by Italian military helicopters attached to naval ships. Once reached by naval patrol vessels, the migrants were given life jackets and transferred to a larger ship. It is thought they were trying to reach Lampedusa, Italy’s southernmost island. The turmoil in the Middle East in the wake of the Arab Spring, the civil war in Syria and instability in Africa has led to a sharp increase in the number of illegal immigrants trying to reach European shores.
The German professor of sociology Gunnar Heinsohn worries about the “demographic capitulation” of European nations. He fears that their low birth rates will lead to the collapse of the welfare state. Immigration from Third World nations cannot solve this problem; it only makes it worse. He does not believe that material aid to countries with large youth populations will prevent violence and terror. On the contrary, it may fuel more unrest. Over the course of five generations (1900-2000), the population in predominantly Muslim countries grew from 150 million to 1200 million — an increase of 800 per cent. This growth still continues. Heinsohn notes that Western countries are funding the Palestinian population explosion, for instance. He thinks that we must cease this support. He also believes that the West should stay out of the affairs of Muslim countries with expanding populations as much as possible. We should only interfere briefly if they threaten us directly.
It’s true that birth rates do not remain static. Even in some Muslim countries, birth rates are now lower than they were a few years ago. However, they are still substantially higher than those in virtually all European nations.
We don’t know exactly what the population was in the entire Roman Empire in the first century of our era. However, estimates typically range between 50 million and 80 million people, perhaps a little bit more, perhaps a little bit less. By comparison, it was estimated by 2013 that the global population grew by around 75 millionpeople annually. This means that the world’s total population is now growing by roughly another Roman Empire, every single year. Most of this rapid growth is concentrated in dysfunctional and technologically backward societies.
The continent of Africa today houses a population larger than that of the continent of Europe. This has not happened for thousands of years. Already today, African and Muslim illegal immigrants are fleeing from their own failed societies to get into Europe, sometimes risking their lives by literally swimming to European shores.
A report from 2013 predicted that sub-Saharan Africa will record the largest population growth between now and 2050. According to the Population Reference Bureau, the world’s poorest region will more than double in population, from 1.1 billion to 2.4 billion. The entire population of the European Union is about 500 million people. It is estimated that Africa’s population will grow by at least twice that much, in just two generations. Where are these people supposed to live? Will they have water, food and work at home? If not, where will they go next?
Western governments and human rights organizations seem to treat the huge influx of illegal immigrants as some kind of natural disaster, something that will pass. It’s not. It’s an ongoing process, which keeps getting worse and worse. Europe’s misfortune is that it is situated right at the doorstep of the world’s most dysfunctional continent – Africa – and the world’s most dysfunctional cultural sphere, the Islamic world.
By 2014 Muslim-dominated Bangladesh was estimated to house perhaps 165 million people, a number that keeps growing by a couple of million annually. In 2000, the then Bangladeshi Prime Minister, Sheikh Hasina, was asked by the Los Angeles Times how the country was going to feed, house and employ the expected doubling of its population by 2050. She replied: “We’ll send them to America. Globalisation will take that problem away, as you free up all factors of production, also labour. There’ll be free movement, country to country. Globalisation in its purest form should not have any boundaries, so small countries with big populations should be able to send population to countries with big boundaries and small populations.”
Sheikh Hasina was again Prime Minister of Bangladesh in early 2014. Coincidentally, both of her children live in North America.
Hasina is essentially arguing that her nation needs more Lebensraum, and that other countries should accept this. The Nazis wanted more Lebensraum for Germans. This was seen as evil, and other Europeans fought them. Why are they now supposed to meekly accept more Lebensraum for Pakistanis, Egyptians, Nigerians or Bangladeshis in Europe? Despite their flaws, the Germans have at the very least shown themselves capable of maintaining a science-based industrial economy. That’s not equally the case with Nigerians and Bangladeshis.
We Europeans do not have an obligation to destroy ourselves. Africans, Muslims and others are adults and should be able to fix their own problems. Moreover, Europe and the wider Western world simply don’t have the strength to fix all of the problems of Africa, the Islamic countries and the rest of the developing world, even if we wanted to. We constitute a rapidly shrinking part of the world’s population and economy. Moreover, we have plenty of unemployment, debt and other problems of our own to deal with.
It’s nice to be kind and humanitarian, but the enormous migration waves we are currently facing are unprecedented in recorded human history, both in speed and in sheer numbers. At some point, the issue will no longer be about our humanitarian ideals or feeling good about ourselves. It will be about a fundamental question: Do we want something recognizable as European civilization to exist and flourish a century from now? If so, then the Utopian and dangerously naïve ideal of open borders simply cannot be sustained for much longer.
The muslim ideology is all about hate, revenge, intolerance, violence and lying to gain advantage over your enemy – it’s all about might-makes-right extortion, aka CRIME.
Their religion teaches hate and intolerance, they rape, sodimize, torture and mutilate and kill anyone that will not convert to Islam.
Rape, war and poverty were all endorsed by Muhammad, who called them “holy duties!” Naturally, the poverty bit didn’t apply to him personally.
Islamic “beliefs” include the belief that their god cannot be understood nor reasoned with, (so it might as well not exist at all) only feared and obeyed. They also include the criminal notion that, since Muhammad got away with committing his crimes, (and he tried them all, enthusiastically, many times and, far from ever feeling remorse or apologizing for them, instead encouraged everyone else to join him in committing them, too) then “god” must have wanted him to get away with committing those crimes! So obviously islam is only an ancient yet ongoing extortion-racket CRIME syndicate, and the only “religious” part in it, is where they say:
“God told us to commit these crimes!”
So why does it now always seem to be “illegal” to accuse these moslem criminals of their crimes, if doing so might hurt their feelings (and so “make” them commit even more crimes!)?
Liberals are racists – they always assume that ONLY White, Western people (including, of course, the Jews in Israel,) are INTELLIGENT enough to be judged guilty of being truly evil, while all their pet “People Of Colour” (including, of course, the “swarthy palestinians,”) just can’t help being violent animals, the poor oppressed little dears, so they’ll always indulge their crimes, much as one ignores the new puppy as it pees on the rugs.
Multiculturalism IS racism! The reason all the so-called “islamic” countries are at the exact bottom of all the global developmental indexes, can only be EITHER “nurture” (the software programming, education/”cultural” indoctrination) OR “nature” (the hardware, or “race”)!
Since all humans are born tabula rasa (as blank slates) it’s obvious that their islam causes their own suffering; let’s dare to compare:
In reality, it’s all about human reason and an ongoing, dynamic agreement to become situationally right (as in factually correct) as opposed to whining that one should be entitled to the static, idolatrous and victim-blaming right to remain irresponsibly wrong:
We self-reliantly CHOOSE to agree to the Golden Rule of Law, which, by simply defining all situational morality as: “Do Not Attack First!” enables trust, progress, and Civilization.
(See all “Western” countries)!
They force everyone to obey the brazen rule of chaos, which embodies destructive criminal slander and prejudicial immorality as: “Our god says we always have to attack all ‘The Others’ first!” and so inflicts distrust, stagnation, and Barbarism.
(See all ‘moslem’ countries)!