Category Archives: Eeyore’s Opeds

Indonesia succumbs to islamic mob rule

Posted on by

This is an event, the importance of which, will be missed by nearly everybody.

Just a week or so ago, massive mobs demanded that a Christian, more importantly, a non-muslim, governor who is up for reelection in Indonesia, be tried/jailed for blasphemy.

His actual “crime” such as it isn’t, was that he challenged his muslim opponent who claimed that the koran says that muslims may not be ruled by a non-muslim.

The Christian governor disagreed with that interpretation.

He in effect, was trying to say that the literal interpretation of koran should not apply, or be the only consideration when choosing a political leader.

This was determined to be blasphemy by the howling mob.

He was subsequently arrested and is now on trial for this, arguably most victimless crime possible.

The crowds are back, this time demanding a foregone conclusion. Jail. And of course we all know it won’t end there. Assassination attempts will likely take place on him, and his lawyers and any public supporters of his, like it does in Pakistan.

And if it doesn’t. its only a matter of time till it does.

But this is an important event for a few reasons.

The obvious one. That Indonesia is rapidly sliding into a muslim theocracy.

The slightly less obvious one, that we are witnessing a process that can and will take place all over the world if we do not take very very serious measures to stop it.

London England:

Please listen carefully to what the speakers are saying. As some are hard to make out, Breitbart has done us the courtesy of transcribing some of it.

Indonesia was not always a muslim country. And now it is be much more sharia compliant than it was a few years ago. And a few years from now it will be much more sharia compliant than it is now.

Hijra means two things. To make a journey to a place that is not islamic to make it islamic, but it also means the journey of making a place more islamic than it currently is.

As an aside, that is one of the only two clear ways a muslim can make it into the odd, lewd, Islamic concept of an afterlife, with its whores who are virgins and its rivers of wine.

The other reason to be concerned, is that a howling mob can force events to take place in the world of government and courts, based on a blasphemy accusation by a howling mob of people determined to create a despotic state. This is not news and utterly obvious. We see it constantly from Muslims.

But what is less obvious is that it is not for insulting Mohammad or his sock puppet allah.

It is for challenging just one of the ideas in the koran.

This is a demand to make every idea in that insane little book inviolable.

And at the expense of the real meaning of that word.

This is not a slippery slope, this is a well greased slide at a waterpark.

Of course the immediate implication of a guilty verdict will be that no non-muslim can possibly run for office anywhere that the population of muslims is high enough to prevent it, not by voting, although that would be bad enough, but by forming a rabid mob.

Given that Germany now has the highest number of accepted “refugees” in the world, higher than all other countries in THE WORLD COMBINED, one gets a sense of where it will happen first in the Western classical democracies.

(Video on that issue may be available in the next day or so)

Eeyore for VladTepesBlog

 

 

A suggestion for President (elect) Trump

Posted on by

The salvation of liberal democracy and classical civilization has moved a step closer to becoming a reality, thanks to the election of Donald Trump.

His victory has also encouraged our European fellow travelers, while pushing the current crop of international socialists and Islamic, manifest destiny operators into a vitriol-filled panic.

However, upon sifting through the carnage left in the wake of the campaign and election, it seems that there remains something we absolutely must consider very carefully. Consider, and even (perhaps) develop and implement a policy to govern how to deal with the legacy media.

This is more than a “dance with the one that brung ya” appeal and it is much more important than a question of loyalty or revenge.This is about the polarized media roles; the one they were supposed to have played versus the one that they did play.

The fourth estate has an obligation to objectively inform the public so as to enable them to make their own decisions. Instead, the legacy media actively manipulated and concealed singularly important information, any and/or all of which might have led people to a choice that they (the government media complex itself) would not have liked.

An excellent example of this is the distinct lack of media mention of the Clintons robbing the White House as they were moving out of 1600 Penn. One doesn’t have to think hard about what the broadcast media would have done had Melania Trump been president and the Trump’s had robbed the White House on the way out.

In fact, there would be a raging debate nearly constantly on CNN whether or not having the spouse of a former 2 term president, running for the same job was a violation of the two term limit if Trump’s wife had been president in the past.

Never raised once with the Clintons.

Be clear, this is not about revenge. This is about saving democracy.

But there is something else that needs to be carefully considered and a policy of some kind put in place.

If anyone did an honest comparison of the coverage that Obama got when he ran for office, both times, Vs. the coverage that Trump got, people would be calling for guillotines in Times Square for the media collusion with leftist, DNC and Soros allied forces. And well they should. It would be richly deserved.

This shows a long-term deep policy level agenda. not a bias, not personal vendetta, but a deep deep policy level conspiracy intended to subvert the democratic process at its core.

And its no small measure of irony that it is by far leftists extremists as well as Wall Street, the DNC and mass media.

While it would behove Donald Trump to deal mostly with the alternative media who spread the information that got him elected and mostly ignore the massive corporations who conspired against him on the mere basis of dancing with who brung ya, the issue is so much bigger than that.

To save democracy we must destroy senile systems and focus on more organic ones that actually do the job.

In this case, a senile system is one where it puts more effort into protecting itself, than doing what the system was designed to do.

Think of a tank that has so much anti tank equipment on it that it cant move more than one mile an hour and has no room for ammunition or guns. What’s the point? The tank is safe but it has no value. We don’t need that exaggerated an example for a system to be considered senile. The tank would simply not be able to project enough force to be worth the cost of the armour. It is why the Iranians are building thousands of small speed boats to counter US carrier groups. Same thinking at work.

But the media case is actually worse. We have the media which has colluded with illiberal actors to destroy democracy itself in order to guarantee its own place in the hierarchy of established power brokers.

It is the definition of corruption.

And now you can smell the fear of the most disgusting of the legacy media.

The CBC, who takes money from Canadian federal taxes at a rate of approximately one point one BILLION DOLLARS A YEAR (most media could operate off of the interest of one year’s CBC tax dollars) are starting to backpedal already as you can see with that linked interview with Ann Coulter.

The New York Times has already issued an apology for their horrific and agenda driven coverage. They are apparently losing a massive number of subscribers. And once again we see the Free Market picking up the reality-deficit which the government-media complex in no small part, creates.

It is critically important that these systems be dumped. They cannot be repaired.

The very structure of these systems, the fact that they cost so much to run that stable sources of money have to be found if they want to plan ahead to the end of the week.

This means that people with an interest will step up to supply that money.

This website by contrast, is paid for by a few part time jobs I hold, and contributors to this site, and the occasional sale of a Cross of Matamoros. No one who writes for this site is going to misrepresent their opinions for those kind of stakes.

The fact is, that government regulates the broadcast media, and with the wave of a bureaucrat’s pen, hundreds of millions can be lost because a license to broadcast is not renewed.

This is especially true in Canada with the CRTC who would not grant non-leftist, SUN TV a license to broadcast on any channel someone might actually find. They subsequently closed.

Trump got elected because of mostly volunteer and somewhat oddball media people who seem to be beholden to no one, or at least if they are, to those who have the same vested interests in putting the truth out there.

Im pretty sure that Julian Assange of Wikileaks would never in a million years have wanted to actively work to elect Donald Trump. He did not conspire with Trump or anyone connected with him, nor did former NSA whistle blower, Ed Snowdon. But they did want the truth about the Clintons out there because its important to democracy.

They are being accused of helping trump and defeating Clinton. But they did no such thing. The Clintons defeated the Clintons. It was the whistle blowers, YouTubers, social media memers, LiveLeakers, bloggers, and non-beholden, non multi-million dollar media people who’s real stake was in America and the free world, who helped the Clintons defeat the Clintons by exposing who they were.

And that got Trump elected by default.

As it happens, it looks like that may have been a really good move for everyone who wants the best for the West, and for freedom and the principles of liberal democracy.

But I would hope that President Elect Trump does not just accept the crocodile tears of a frightened and senile industry, who deserve the guillotine at worst and obscurity at least, and continue business as usual.

Trump was elected on several clarion calls, one of the main ones being the corruption and bias of the media.

Now lets see Donald help them put themselves to oblivion like we all helped the Clintons do to themselves.

This article is dedicated to, of all people, Alex Jones.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Leftism and Islam, ideological Siamese twins

Posted on by

One of the subjects that must be revisited every now and then; how Islam and Leftism can be cooperative, when they (on the surface only) appear to be diametrically opposed to each other.

In previous articles on this site, attempts have been made to demonstrate why

It is actually a natural alliance. A congruous pairing that has not gone unnoticed by leaders in both communities. Notoriously, Carlos the Jackal (a Venezuelan convert to Islam) wrote to President Obama from prison that only “…a coalition of Marxists and Islamists…” could defeat the United States.lov

It is not a stretch to draw parallels between their respective belief systems and thought patterns.

Not only are these ideological bedfellows both enemies of freedom, they are also equally hard wired for conclusion-based reasoning versus reason-based conclusions.

This must not be overlooked or undervalued.

In the Soviet Union (and other communist territories) any science that did not seek to prove a predetermined conclusion of Marxist thought, was punished with jail, torture or death. The same is equally true in Islamic nations and commensurate with the degree of Islamic adherence.

Socialism has shifted in a similar direction. Canada shows a growing intolerance of anything that contradicts the culturally Marxist narrative, even criminalizing it in degrees. An excellent example of this is the installation of the Human Rights Commission; a group whose power is growing exponentially and will soon likely be in a position to deliver harsher penalties for those who exercise their “right” to free speech.

One of the finest documentaries on intelligence and heredity is actually about canines. Sooner or later someone is going to point out that the mechanism for heredity in Darwinian evolution is exactly the same for all mammals (if not for all living things) and this film will likely be banned. But, for the moment, it is allowed as it just about dogs.

Please note, that in this documentary they specifically point out that the work being done by the Russian scientist was illegal as he was applying Darwinian principles. This is forbidden in communist nations. The acceptable substitute is “Lysenkoism” which allows for ludicrous ideas that conclude that wheat will grow in Siberia because communism requires it to do so.

DOGS DECODED from Antoan Hlebarov on Vimeo.

This documentary deals in depth with the different races of dogs and how each race has distinct and measurably different attributes, from docility to intelligence, which are specific to races and heritable.

This brings me to the inspiration for this post.

James Watson is a world class, Nobel prize winning, history-making scientist who played a significant role in the discovery of the double helix. This discovery propelled not only modern medicine, but the science of genetics and sociobiology. It was quite possibly the single, most important discovery in medical and biological history.

It should be noted that he won a real Nobel Prize, not the fake ones like Arafat, Carter and Obama.

Today, he was scheduled to speak at NYU in a “…departmental lecture series honoring scientists who have made powerful contributions to science…”, however, because of factually-based comments he made in 2007 regarding the link between IQ and ethnicity, he has been uninvited.

This means, that the Left equates recognizing and identifying patterns of IQ with declarations of the quality or value of individuals within races. And therefore, it cannot be allowed to be known that one group has a higher IQ than another.

One may not say that East Asians have a higher IQ (generally speaking) than sub-Saharan Africans. Conversely (and ridiculously) it seems perfectly acceptable to acknowledge that black people are better at most, if not all sports than, say, the Inuit.

The “politically correct left” openly accepts the facts of evolution if it means they can browbeat Christians who believe in Creationism. But they reject results of real science, which contradict the Marxist doctrines about equality of humans, or any science (for that matter) that might contradict pre-set conclusions denying sexual dimorphism in Humans.

As an aside, it is worth mentioning that the process one employs is as important as the raw intelligence possessed by an individual. A person of average IQ (90-115) who has access to factual information and understands the principles of logic and reasoning, will achieve vastly better results than a person of high IQ (140-159) who exercises bad reasoning.

In fact, in the scenario of the “high IQ/bad reasoning”, this individual has the potential to be downright dangerous. Leaving a trail of blood, destruction, and reversal of progress in their wake. History shows this to be consistently true in such examples as Hitler, Stalin and (of course) Mohammed.

The natural tendency for most people who encounter ideas they don’t like is to dismiss the source as “an idiot”. Those who profess ideas that they do like are lionized as “geniuses”.

But the fact is that many dangerous people were also brilliant. Conversely, many highly accomplished people were of average IQ. In all cases, it is process that makes all the difference.

Alas, Cultural Marxists have determined for all us, that which is acceptable to believe and that which is not. Science will be falsified, and scientists will be forced to lend their authority to indoctrinating the Islamic/Marxist narrative rather than do science. Thus proliferating and cementing conclusion-based reasoning.

Much like Islam,where Al-Azhar will not allow the teaching of philosophy as learning to reason may threaten faith.

Eeyore for VladTepesBlog

With special thanks to Ilona Szilágyi for the edit and rewrite.

Posting today.

Posted on by

There is material to post. Another stabbing/shooting in Cologne, and more info from Corsica and even something from Quebec.

What stops me from posting it here and now is that the media has gotten even more deceptive than before.

Up until recently, the media seemed to content to lie by omission. They would also use code words so that the omissions could be at least partially filled in by use of the code. So “Asians” meant muslims in England, “Youths” means muslims in France, “restive” meant an area with lots of muslims, as does “diverse” and so on and so on.

But now much of the legacy media, or perhaps more accurately, the government-media complex, is working on a policy of outright deception where names and descriptions of people and to a degree, events, are being kept from the public but a sudden rush to judgment about the mental health of the attacker is front and center.

In nearly all cases it seems as if people yelling allah hu acbar or clearly devout followers of Islam are now just really just mentally ill.

This is interesting for two reasons.

When the British would refer to antisocial acts as being done by “Asians” they did so, by their own reasoning, because to blame it on muslims was to be racist, so instead, they pointed out the actual biological race of the perps to avoid the false charge of racism for pointing out the actual ideological basis of the crimes which really were the motives.

This would be pretty much identical to saying that Nazis killed Jews because they were Europeans and not because they were Nazis. To call them Nazis would be the racist thing to do, not for calling them Caucasian. The fact that the Jews in Germany where Ashkenazi for the most part and therefore also Caucasian would be avoided.

So real racism was used to avoid appearing to be fake racist? nope. That doesn’t wash.

It was about protecting Islam and thats all.

Now we have them ready to throw the mentally ill under the Islamic bus.

In fact the percentage of those suffering from mental illness who are, dare we say it, ‘violent extremists’ is the same as the general population.

So the new trend in labeling the wave of Muslim or muslim inspired knife, bomb, gun attacks against the unbeliever or anyone who interferes with Islamic global manifest destiny will see news claiming that it was merely a “mental patient”, or someone with “Mental issues”.

And somehow the media will instantly have access to highly secret medical records protected by law and requiring a lengthy court process to obtain, and references to it will appear in an article about a mass attack, yet with a peculiar lack of detail about the name, appearance, mannerisms, things the person said during the attack, eye witness accounts etc.

Often when there is video, the face of the attacker will be pixelated to protect his identity or his group identity but not the victims, who’s own families may not know about the injuries yet.

So it takes a little longer to post because at this stage the only places where we have a chance to get real data about events are twitter and Youtube and those will be closed for that purpose ASAP one might justifiably suspect.

 

 

Geopolitics and ideological motivations for the betrayal and destruction of European civilization

Posted on by

There are two basic models which are used to explain events in the complex and often violent events which shape human history. The geopolitical and the ideological. The two camps differ in the following way. The geopolitical view says that certain factors present certain problems to a population which will react in predictable ways because of the inevitable consequences of the existence of certain geographical factors.

Examples might be that mountains make it difficult and expensive to move goods or grow food and so they tend to be poor and conservative. Rivers make for good borders, Island people tend to build navies and create empires (Japan and England) etc.and coastal people tend to be wealthy from trade and more liberal from interactions with non-locals and an easy life. Interested parties might want to read the originator of this line of thinking, a Prussian general named Von Clausewitz. 

The ideological camp says that geographical factors can temporarily be overridden by a strong ideology which will make a population act beyond or out of character with the usual geopolitical considerations. So communism, Nazism, islam etc. may cause a group to go beyond what they would normally do to deal with the basic geography of their region.

It may help to think of what we see as a combination of both where islam is driving populations to act in the perceived interest of that population, Islamic conquest, coupled with the real geopolitical aspects, such as the need for more leg room, trying to escape the actual consequences of Islamic thought, namely the destruction of the local environment and a very poor standard of living for pretty much everyone. (occasional vast oil wealth not withstanding)

The conquest of Europe is being achieved by both ideological concerns, the strong ideology of islam aided by the self weakening ideology of political correctness and cultural and moral inversion on our side, which make the benefactor the villain and the invader the victim etc. as well as geopolitical factors like cheap transportation for poor populations who see an opportunity for pillage in Europe. (a large percentage live on welfare intentionally which is tantamount to pillage as well as additional factors of invader behaviour such as theft, violent crimes, rape etc)

Many people who refuse to see islam as an ideological component will view this as a purely geopolitical problem. Clearly it is not. This population is acting in exactly the same way as previous islamic invasions with subtle variations due to the fact that this time, we are assisting them in their ambitions, even to supplying transportation, food, lodgings and even throwing our own people out of their homes to house the invasion forces.

The UK is very familiar with this where military veterans and the working poor are often unable to find shelter while illegal muslim recent arrivals often get nice homes courtesy of local governments. Germany is just beginning to apply these same measures now.

The videos below may offer some insight as to who is responsible and how this is being done.

The why of it is another matter. But before we can even ask that question. people need to accept the facts on the ground. What is taking place, and what does it mean. While comments on news posts and videos and calls to talk radio would indicate that more and more people are starting to get a grip on reality, leadership would not indicate this outside of a very few countries like Hungary and the Czech republic.

Certainly however the time for each and every one of us to recalculate the cost benefit of examining reality and speaking plainly about it is here and needs to be done perhaps even on a daily basis given the rapid pace of change and the increased threat level to Western civilization and even Greek thought and reason itself, rapidly being made illegal by the political left and celebrated for its renewed ability to oppress thought and even facts it does not like.

Eeyore for VladTepesBlog

A couple of thoughts on the attack in Texas and Copenhagen in March.

Posted on by

Some regular readers may remember this video from Quebec on April 6 2015 where a father is considering suing a Quebec school for teaching his child about Islam in a non-academic way and for forcing that same father to take down his negative comment about this program from his own personal Facebook page. I repost the link to the video here because there was an interesting moment in it.

The money shot is below:

FirefoxScreenSnapz092

The children are being instructed to draw mohamed but in a flattering way, on horseback or whatnot. My guess would be that this was part of an approved program by an authoritative islamic group in Montreal somewhere. Its hard to believe there is a school in the Western world that wouldn’t think drawing the pirate Mohamed would present a risk to the students and faculty, so its a safe assumption that this was a pre-approved islamic dawa program for the K to 6ers.

Meanwhile, people who are drawing anything islamic in a way that exposes the truth of it, or in a non-flattering way are getting attacked. Thankfully not always successfully like Copenhagen and Texas, but sometimes they are like Paris. I wonder what the Islamic State might say about this program at Quebec schools. I wonder why the school isn’t terrified.

More and more this appears to be a function of sharia enforcement of the islamic concept of slander. Essentially it is not based on damage or or truth, but on how a thing is presented. There is no prohibition on drawing mohamed but there is on mocking him.

This supports a more general thesis on how sharia is implemented. It is not a replacement for courts and legal systems as we understand them. It is not voted in. It is simply that thousands and thousands of armed and violent thugs are ready to enforce sharia norms on the population of an area until they submit to them. It doesn’t matter if that region has passed legislation to not use foreign law in its judgements or procedures or not. Islam skips all that. It goes right to the punishment phase of the legal procedure where all believers are licensed and authorized executioners of sharia as well as people who violate it.

In the next few days, we will see all kinds of islamic organizations make moderate condemnations of the actions of the two muslims who attempted to attack the building in Texas where the cartoon event took place. But you will never hear any of these organizations claim these were not true muslims, or more accurately, that they are apostates. Islam has a procedure for that and they won’t use it. Even the Egyptian and Saudi clerics under pressure from the current governments there, will not declare the Islamic State as apostates and not declare that they are not acting as muslims should act, even if their English apologetics creates a vague, Michael Moore like, impression that is the case.

We cannot fight the growing influence of islam and its effects of limiting freedoms and transforming our rights and sense of what our own culture is like by the means we usually use. This is not a law and order issue. This is a war. Our failure to recognize that is tantamount to surrender. Drawing Mohamed and using our rights and freedoms is compulsory if we are to win this thing and thats only one vector. Making political islam illegal and monitoring the mosques and acting against people who preach sedition etc. is also compulsory. The US did this in WW2 with political Shinto. So we have a precedent. But even if we did not, freedom of religion was never meant to mean people could simply run roughshod over other people’s rights and threaten the security of all of us by claiming a religious right to do so.

Eeyore for Vlad

*~@:^{)>   <— The Pirate Mohamed after a day of looting caravans and raping captives.

The difference between a statement and an argument.

Posted on by

First, a statement. Typically, it is when a person makes an assertion about something where the truth of the assertion is implied in the seriousness with which that statement is made. An example might be,

‘The moon is made of roasted turnips. In fact, those who say that the moon is not made of roasted turnips is an enemy of the moon’.

An even better example of a statement is here, in this official US government document about the Islamic State. (Please note paragraph 3)

ISIL does not represent Islam and Islam does not condone or honor such depravity. In fact, these actions are a reminder that ISIL is an enemy of Islam. The international community and religious leaders of all faiths have strongly and repeatedly condemned ISIL’s horrific acts; we urge them to reiterate their commitment by condemning in the strongest possible terms the commodification of women and children as spoils of war, including through their subjection to horrific physical and sexual violence, intimidation, and deprivation of liberty.

A statement does not even do one the courtesy of what I think of as a kind of ‘logical reach around’ of a tautology. For example a napkin that says:

“This Napkin is god. I know this is true because it says so right here on this napkin”

With the above tautology, the statement is self referential and made correct almost exactly like the koran does, by twigging back to the initial statement as authoritative and true.

The government statements, both by the UK and US, typically do not even attempt that bit of logical contortion and content themselves that the mere statement. “This napkin is god”  is enough for them.

Now an argument:

Basically an argument is where an assertion is explained by way of evidence laid out in accordance with the rules of logic.

“A tree is a type of plant. A plant has all these defining attributes, each one of which trees share, and trees have no other attributes that would differentiate them from the broader category of plants, and therefore, a tree is a kind of plant”

This would be an argument which can be detailed and verified, studied and most importantly, can be falsified. If an argument cannot be falsified, it is not an argument at all. It is likely a statement or a tautology.

There have now been many arguments made which refute the statements of the US and UK governments concerning the Islamic State and the nature of Islam. My favorite ones are made by the Islamic State themselves as they clearly cite Islamic scripture in context and Islamic history etc. with each action they make.

I will post below the video we made with Robert Spencer, Bill Warner, Geert Wilders, Christian Zeitz and others which make an actual falsifiable argument on the nature of the Islamic State and its relationship to Islam.

(Many regular readers will have seen this video before. We first published it September 10 2014)

The US Government must know that their assertions are false and therefore are likely part of a larger strategy. Whatever it is, it isn’t working in the interests of the peoples of the Western World and we should be fighting it with truth at every possible opportunity, even if it is meant to be helpful. One seldom solves a problem by lying about it as a long term solution. In fact when people discover that authorities are lying to them, it often drives them to harsh and violent reactions. Especially when the deceptions come from trusted authorities.

I wonder if this could have something to do with the number of young cultural Muslims who, upon learning that all the leaders of the free world are utterly lying to them about the nature of Islam, its history, its scripture and so on, become so angry at the lies that it pushes them into religiosity. Imagine if you were a teenaged male and the government had been making loud and unsupported statements about your heritage, and upon even a cursory glance to verify the truth of it, discovered you were being lied to in every conceivable aspect of it. By both the government, and the ‘official state sponsored clergy’.

Would that make you mad? It would make me furious. Frankly I would argue that government lies about the nature of Islam are far more likely to ‘radicalize’ (make a more or less indifferent person religious) than people opposing the genuine nature of Islam. At least we in the counter jihad, even the harshest critics and koran burners such as Rev. Jones, have enough respect for Islam to actually say what it is.

 

Eeyore for VladTepesBlog

Trying to spot the important atrocities in a sea of horror

Posted on by

Of course the regular media is all over public beheadings. I can’t blame them for that. In fact, I’m even grateful that at least they don’t ignore them despite getting important aspects wrong, like the ‘lone wolf’ nonsense used by the Obama administration to deflect from the obvious islamic motivations and scriptural support, and the general calls by high-ranking islamic organizations to commit these attacks.

But there are the little things that stick in my claw as being of significantly more importance than they are given, especially when they happen immediately before, or in the wake of an attack like we saw in Oklahoma.

Two such events took place within 24 hours of the Oklahoma attack.

The one I’d like to address first is the family that was thrown off of a British municipal bus because they were singing a song from a popular child’s TV showto their autistic daughter. They were also “branded racists”, the scarlet letter of today’s social crimes.

The couple, who live in Rotherham, started singing the song in an effort to cheer their daughter up, but say they were branded racists by another passenger and told to get off the bus by its driver.

The couple claimed the woman, who they say was wearing a hijab, took offence to the snorting sounds in the song and believed they were a reference to how pork is forbidden in Islam though this has not been confirmed.

She complained to the bus’s driver, who, it is claimed, then told the couple it would be ‘easier’ for them to get off two miles from their home.

We need to take a journey through the levels of abstraction before an event like this happens again, in order to ascertain and expose its meaning. Because the true meaning of this event is orders of magnitude larger than merely a couple and a disabled daughter being inconvenienced. This may be the best example yet of how sharia law results in islamic supremacy and the subjugation of the indigenous population of Europe that I have seen in the papers for some days, sad as that is to say.

First, the idea that you can’t eat pork or alcohol near people who have chosen, entirely arbitrarily, not to eat it themselves is a travesty of justice. Yes, people should be allowed to not eat whatever they choose not to. Doing so is central to freedom. But how we made the leap of expecting other people not to eat or drink those things because it offends others, needs to be studied. It’s as if heterosexuals are compelled to hide their own heterosexuality in public places to avoid offending homosexuals. This is all about exerting control and supremacy over others, and should not be allowed to happen. It has no place in a tolerant or liberal society.

An important distinction here is that homosexuals do not choose their sexual preference. It is a condition of their existence, whereas eating halal is entirely a choice. This again shows how the islamic example is a show of control and supremacy even if it uses the totem of political correctness and religious tolerance.
Continue Reading →

How close are Nazism, communism and Islam? Why does the far left support fascist Islam?

Posted on by

If any readers of this site has not yet seen the excellent and important movie, ‘The Soviet Story’, they would do well to do so. The movie makes the point that the differences between communism, international socialism, and Nazism, National Socialism, are quite subtle. One might even say somewhat like the difference between Shiia and Sunni Islam.

For example, the movie makes the case that Nazism was based on bad biology. Specifically that in the effort to create the new man, the perfected man, one had to take those who were already the perfected people and purify the territory. Namely Aryans of course. And once the homeland of the Aryans was pure they could start forcing those who could be perfected, the British and whatnot, and then exterminate all who could not be made into the perfect man.

This was the Nazi ideology. It could be seen in everything they did but one of the more telling, and yet goofy, analogies was their pseudo-science of ‘phrenology‘.

Like most people or groups that use top down thought, or perhaps better expressed as conclusion driven thinking, the Nazis employed any method or data points that could demonstrate their position while not only ignoring but actually making illegal and exterminating those who did real science that might show a conclusion in opposition to established Nazi dogma.

Communism or International Socialism uses a slight variant on that.

for example Communism also would eliminate or force into reeducation camps any science that did not support their conclusion based reasoning. For example, most people do not know that communism did not allow Darwinism to be taught or studied and all biology had to be based on their own communist evolutionary ideas, who’s survival of the fittest seemed far to capitalist in nature for International Socialism, a fellow named Lysenko and his crypto-science called ‘Lysenkoism’.

The communist idea was based on bad sociology. that there is three social classes. The perfect, ‘new man’ or the communist. Those who could be perfected into communists, which would be the capitalists, and those who could never be perfected because they had not even reached the stage of capitalism yet, and therefore had to be exterminated.

On this the Nazis and Communists were in full agreement. At least in terms of the Slavic peoples.

Then we have the Muslims.

They see the world in terms of three tiered religious thought. The perfect people, the muslims, who can do no actual wrong so long as their belief in islam and its dogma is demonstrably strong and they obey the ‘pirate’s code’ of sharia etc. Then you have those that can be perfected into muslims such as Christians and Jews as they are already more or less monotheistic from the point of view of Muslims and therefore are readily accepted into the islamic community if they convert before they have no choice. Sometimes even if they convert under pure torture or threat of death.

And then you have atheists, Hindus, Buddhists and other religious groups such as African animists or Amer-indians etc. These groups will likely be seen as not having reached mono-theism yet and therefore ripe for extermination. Just have a look at General Tamerlane’s expeditions into India for a sample of how muslims treated the Hindu’s which resulted in what is the largest genocide that has ever taken place in recorded history.

This isn’t to say that Muslims will not exploit divisions in our own societies using groups that have not ‘reached monotheism’ to advance their own supremacy. We saw this clearly in Ferguson where muslim agitators used classic islamic style chants to increase division between white and black Americans during a period of horrific instability there. But at the end of the day, one needs only look at Islamic history and even contemporary Islamic societies and use of African people as slaves to know how this will end for them.

Slavery or extermination. Probably a good deal of both.

Graphic below by Nicolai Sennels:

Eeyore for VladTepesBlog

Islam is not a crime and punishment issue

Posted on by

There are more and more stories, appearing even from the best counter-jihad sites about the man who is presented as guilty for the beheading of James Foley

I believe that to treat this as a crime and punishment issue is a form of distraction and deflection and is nearly guaranteed to make us lose this thing. We must not take our eye off the prize. Islam as an ideology is the cause of this, and its followers are its soldiers as the Nazis were soldiers for Hitler’s ideology, the Japanese imperial army were the soldiers for Shintoism and the bureaucrats who carried out the execution and mass murder of millions upon millions for the communists, mostly of their own people, were the soldiers of that ideology.

We must not be sucked into the idea that this is a crime and punishment issue and we must hold media into account that get swept along with what is tantamount to a suicide pact with Islamic supremacy by commenting, calling and writing them. The crime angle is another attempt to distance Islamically motivated actions from the ideology, now that the Islamic State has made it harder for the purveyors of multiculturalism and peaceful Islam to sell their wares.

Most of us who have opposed Islamic influence and attacks on liberal culture are just so grateful to see the major media take on this issue in any form that we are celebrating these news stories. But they are in fact an attempt to lull us back to sleep.

‘Oh look! A drone strike killed this or that jihadi, we have him on trial now! we know who he is!’

Imagine that approach in any other armed conflict. This was not a personal grudge by a faceless jihadi. He was operating as part of a collective ideology for a collective purpose. No nation has ever, and possibly will ever have the resources to treat a war as a criminal justice matter. Doing so is virtual collusion with the enemy as it guarantees a loss by attrition.

Eeyore for Vlad.

 

Why do muslims insist on public and inappropriate displays of ritual?

Posted on by

By now, pretty much everyone has at least seen a video of massive amounts of muslims pointing their derrières skywards whilst sniffing the one immediately in front of them. This activity, or some variant of it, is repeated in public in pretty much every area that is not under official islamic rule and where the percentage of muslims is high enough to obtain the desired result.

The story here may explain a good portion of the reasons why this is done.

As we see, muslims gathered to ‘pray’ in an area designated for soccer and at a time when the building was full of people for soccer-related activities. The reaction from the general public was 100% predictable. Which of course is why muslims do it. It is a provocation more than an invocation. If the unbelievers do nothing, then they have succeeded in turning all events and public properties to their purpose. But even better, if the public react in a hostile way, which would actually be the appropriate response to an inappropriate activity, then muslims can capitalize on the most treasured of all political substances (and also perhaps one of Canada’s largest exports) – Sanctimony.

The government will show its largesse and willingness to sacrifice its own values and those of its people, by creating dedicated space for muslims for activities not only unrelated to the purpose of the building, but that are often 180° antithetical to it, such as ‘prayer spaces’ at universities (assuming that a university is for continuing the essentially Greek thinking of The Enlightenment). It’s as if somehow, hundreds of publicly-funded mosques just aren’t enough, but that all other public spaces must also become mosques.

From the article linked above:

This evening, one prominent campaigner against anti-Muslim prejudice and a leading MP called on Premier League clubs to invest in prayer rooms for fans so such abuse could be avoided.

The “abuse” of course, was soccer fans chanting a club slogan while muslims were reciting islamic dogma. Remember, this was a soccer stadium during a game. Which action was the provocation? Which one was inappropriate? Again, the public reaction was 100% predictable.

So why do muslims do it?

As the hadith says:

“The (whole) earth has been made a mosque (or a place of prayer) and a means of purification for me, so wherever a man of my ummah may be when the time for prayer comes, let him pray.”

Eeyore for Vlad Tepes Blog

Below, a gift for your local dhimmi politicians. We know they already have plenty of it, but this way we can at least smell it on them before they get too close.

Perfume 4