Category Archives: Explaining Islam

Muslim woman speaks to the islamic practice for dealing with homosexual children

Posted on by

Story at RAIR

Cash-strapped Britons give up pets as living costs soar

Posted on by

The following is a guest post by contributor, Xanthippa Socrates, who’s family escaped from behind the Iron Curtain from what was then, Czechoslovakia. 

https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/cash-strapped-britons-give-up-pets-living-costs-soar-2022-08-14/

Note: in the 1970’s Czechoslovakia, pets (in particular, dogs) were declared a luxury and the tax on dogs was raised to be about the same as my family paid in rent for 3 months for what was considered a large, modern apartment (the building had an elevator and everything – and it was assigned to us before my dad became a political dissident, so the bureaucracy found it difficult to kick us out afterwards). It would have been well over a year’s worth of rent that my great-grand-parents were paying annually for their kitchen/sitting room, a bedroom across the common hall (their only access to running water was in that hall and shared with all the tenants on that floor) and a shared toilet…

And the cruelty people were capable of towards their pet dogs when they suddenly became expensive to keep was, for me, unimaginable, incomprehensible…

Taking the dog out to a forest, tying it to a tree (out of sight of anyone who might report it – or save the dog) and leaving it there. Even Hansel and Gretel had a better fighting chance… And this was just an example of ‘passive cruelty’, not the more active types.

This was useful to the regime because it sowed discord and hate into nuclear families: typically, one spouse and/or the kids were pro-pet and willing to do anything for them, and the other spouse resented the cost (and political stigma attached to owning a Western-style luxury pet) and that would be the one ‘getting rid’ of the pet. It broke the trust between spouses, parents/children and so on.

Destruction of the nuclear family at its most fundamental.

The kicker was that because of the housing shortage, even broken families often had to live together for quite some time after the marriage failed, so, no privacy and spite-spying on one’s spouse was easily accomplished.

Bonus: becoming callous to the plight/fate of the beloved family pet dehumanized the ones doing it/witnessing it, making it that much easier to behave inhumanly to others, including, well, everyone… much like taking in an animal, making the kids become attached to it and then sacrificing it to Allah for Eid does. Different ideology, same methodology for dehumanization.

OK, so the ‘tax’ here is based on food/vet bills, but, while the means are a different shade of green, the effect is the same. By giving up their pet, because the cost outweighs their love, people are becoming less humane, more ruthless and feeling more justified in doing whatever it takes to make their life easier, regardless of the cost to anyone else, even their loved ones.

Of course, not all people will fall into this trap. But those who do become useful tools for the tyranny machine.

Xanthippa Socrates

A few words on the Democrat Party censorship policies

Posted on by

One of the defining aspects of a totalitarian state, be it Islamic or communist, is that the state takes unto itself the power to determine what is the truth, to punish all those who do not act in the manner that they fully accept that the state’s truth is the truth, and that the state will also make sure that what must be believed as the truth, is actually a massive lie.

The state will achieve this quite easily. They will empower each of us to be judge, jury and even on occasion, executioner towards anyone we see defying the state’s truth. In Islamic states, its blasphemy, and in communist states, heresy, or a variety of other names. My favorite is what the father of a friend of this website was called by the communists in Czechoslovakia. “A leader of the people against the people”.

Currently of course, it would be hate speech in one of its many semantically tightly rammed manifestations. Climate denial, hate speech. Just for one example. Even though the science is clear that there is no AGW taking place and if anything, the Earth is cooling. No questioning the vaccine narratives of course, and the list grows with each issue, and even most of the issues themselves are lies, let alone the solutions.

Earlier today I saw a video in a tweet by Paul Joseph Watson I deeply regret not downloading in time to save it. It was of a pregnant woman shopping and a man in a very effeminate voice but quivering with a degree of sanctimony I thought was only possible from a Canadian, accused her of killing his grandparents because she was in the store without wearing a mask.

UPDATE: The video is still up on Canadian reporter, Joe Warmington’s account and here it is:

He used every trope he could with maximal moral outrage to humiliate a pregnant woman in public who was shopping; and felt that breathing freely was better for her health than wearing a surgical mask.

This was a brilliant example of how a totalitarian state manages to get the general public to act as its thugs and enforce official truth. In Islam this often results in death. if a person being accused of blasphemy, especially a non-muslim, can be accused in a way that other locals can accept as possibly true, it can be justification for her murder on the spot. Sometimes by multiple means. And I say “her” because in the stories I have read, its usually a she that gets murdered in this way. (Somehow I doubt there will be any blowback on this use of pronouns)

I am thinking in particular about a mob justice case where an Afghan woman was accused of blasphemy by a local imam for turning down his advances, and was thrown off a roof, set on fire, then drowned in some sort of muddy embankment. I am trying to find the old videos of that, but it gets increasingly hard to find these things. In the video below, a woman is whipped and stoned in Afghanistan for allegedly having an affair. Which in islam, can mean she was raped.

Perhaps I will add the material on the women killed a few times over in Afghanistan. But I doubt too many people disbelieve it to the point where they need to see the proof these days.

All this though really is about an indirect answer to a question about restricting social media posts by the current US administration, whoever the leader of it may be, and the woman who is most certainly the voice of it.

Apparently, 1st amendment rights don’t apply to those who do not accept the official narrative of the current regime as truth.

For a simpler version of the above video, please hear Anthony Hopkins‘ Richard Burton’s speech below. Especially at 1:50. Truth is what the party says it is. And now we know which party that is.

Eeyore for VladTepesBlog

Imam Suleiman’s views on Sharia and Caliphate for the West

Posted on by

If you make it to the end of this 90 second clip, you see why it matters that this Islamic leader says these things.

This particular imam has quite a history of public antisemitism as well. You can find some of that in the clip below

Special thanks to Andrew Bostom for the clip times and details.

A sterling example of what sharia law is, and how it works

Posted on by

One of the most persistent themes of this site, is trying to assist people in understanding that sharia law, is not like a Western formalized form of law with any kind of equality, and more importantly, MUCH more importantly, not even any kind of due process. Ultimately life and death decisions are made by the guy with the biggest hat.

And all it takes is an accusation. But it is critical to understand why a given accusation will be acted on, or not.

Any accusation that increases the authority and degree of Islam will be acted on, if at all possible. While the exact same accusation or ‘crime’ would not be acted on, if it does not increase the authority of Islam or worse, diminishes its stature, which is itself a crime in Islam.

It doesn’t take a court or anything so formal or grandiose. It just takes a muslim to make the accusation. Say, Blasphemy or adultery or any kind of behaviour where a non-muslim acts like an equal to a muslim like drinking out of a muslim-only well for instance (Asia Bibi) and then a cleric to legitimize the accusation, and then a rabid mob to carry out the murder of the accused. Although sometimes there is a stay in prison and sometimes a sort of trial. But there is no due process. The best an accused can hope for, is massive foreign attention and anger which could result in sanctions.

The example below shows how sharia law works. It was this way in the Islamic State, for years even before it was declared to be such, (although our video proofs of that were taken down. but some where even done by French journalists.) It is this way in much or most of Afghanistan as we saw with a woman who was thrown off a roof, beaten, burned to death and thrown into a ravine of sorts because she was accused of something by an imam who really wanted her killed for some other reason.

Sharia isn’t just something we have to resist. Its the reason people go to war to stop, or perhaps more fairly, to protect a legal system like the one we inherited from the British.

It is also noteworthy that communism has pretty much the same system of justice. And for pretty much the same reasons. You have an opinion, say something or do something that diminishes the authority of communists or communism in the area, you will face court or gulags etc. depending on the stage of communist implementation.

For communism’s equivalent of blasphemy, insulting the leader in any way whatsoever in North Korea, you go to a slave labour camp for three generations. Your grandchildren will be in a camp because you used a part of a page of a magazine in which there is a photo of any of the leaders of North Korea to make a cigarette.

There is little daylight between leftism/communism and Islam.

How to make and maintain a No-Go-Zone. The Netherlands: Video 1

Posted on by

Thank you C. for the fantastic finds and translations on these videos. This is the first in a series which show the real consequences of Muslim no go zones in Europe. And of course, truth is now illegal in the West, so they do not specify who is responsible. But as there is not a recorded crime against emergency crews before the muslim invasion of the West, and as these attacks primarily happen in Islamic areas, anyone who doesn’t get it should probably consider a career licking stamps.