… as the election for Democrat front runner is tomorrow.
Category Archives: Leftism and Islam
A couple of tweets by an Iranian patriot
The same Iranian patriot responds to Charlie Kirk:
Portuguese take to the streets to oppose Islam and Mosques, and Canadian/UK active measures which make such a march impossible
This is good to see. Imagine if this took place in Great Britain or Canada. Mischief and Hate Crime charges would follow amid social ostracism, loss of jobs, millions in legal fees etc.
One might think that there is really no point in trying to explain to people that Canada is communist. We really are at the stage of demoralization Yuri Bezmenov detailed: “Even if I took them by force to the Soviet Union and showed them the concentration camps, they would refuse to believe it”.
Portugal seems not to be quite at that point yet, as they can publicly recognize that Islam is a threat doctrine and Mosques are where this doctrine is spread. But then again, we don’t know what happened to these people after this march.
Short excerpt of Yuri from his 1984 interview with CBC (before the CBC became the chief agent of exactly what Bezmenov is discussing.)
The communist revolution is if not World Wide, certainly across all developed nations. So it is somewhat of a surprise to see this march in Portugal. But as already mentioned, we don’t know what happened afterwards to the marchers. But we all can know for a fact what would happen to this march in the UK, Australia, Canada etc. Protests which do take place and with no resistance from the state, and which are disruptive and often physically destructive are always promoting destruction, or at the least the official side of a narrative attack, itself destructive. Or, they are intensely protesting any grass roots push back on a state narrative. Usually using the same devices. That those who oppose state narrative attacks are ‘racist’ ‘nazi’ ‘hateful’ etc. etc.
Islam is one of the major weapons of the state. See Mark Carney, General Secretary of the Communist Party of the Anglosphere’s statements on Islam in Canada:
Islam actually created its doctrine to be an antithesis to Western thought and values. It was literally written to be in opposition. In fact it really offers nothing else but opposition to all other systems of human thought and societal organization. But unlike Hegel/Marx, there is no intention to destroy Islam and its anti-thesis by combining them to create a synthesis and then so on and so on in an endless cycle of dialectic fusion and destruction. There is only destruction and hatred of the other, and the installation of Islam and its sharia law governance in Islam.
Carney’s line here is a perfect and unvaried active measure which perfectly matches Trudeau’s. Although he does not specifically say, “Diversity is our strength” He does make that same point as a rephrase. That is of course, a dialectic attack on the obviously true statement: “United we Stand, divided we fall”. And of course, “A house divided against itself cannot stand”, (Abraham Lincoln from Mark 3-25) and perhaps “A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within.” attributed to Cicero in Rome.
In other words, “Diversity is our strength” is a way of forcing the nation state of Canada, its culture and laws to fall using Hegelian dialectics. The insertion of a weaponized idea for the sole purpose of destruction of all the demonstrably true and even axiomatic statements and beliefs which hold a country together. Also to get the people who are marked for destruction, the culturally and ethnically Canadian, to carry out that process. And Islam is one of the most powerful weapons the communists have to undo Western values, thought, and of course, our traditional religion(s).
For those of you that have not seen the presser by Campaign Life Coalition last week, please watch their event video again and listen to the list of legislation passed or proposed by the Carney/Trudeau government over the last 10 years and ask yourselves if any of these new laws will be applied to Islam. ANY of them. Especially removing any equality let alone tax advantages to organizations that “promote religion”. Although frankly, the de-incentivizing of the promotion of religion is all by itself, a pretty powerful bit of evidence of the communist nature of this government in Canada, the UK and across the Anglosphere.
And communism is famously opposed to Christianity in particular.
From Marxism to Islam, a communist terrorist’s journey from Marx to Mohammad
For those interested in the alliance between communism and Islam, or, more importantly, communists and Muslims, this video is a fascinating watch.
Later today most likely, a highlight reel will be released from this. Some of the choice bits are how Communists could never hope to assemble a standing army as Islam has prepared. Paraphrasing in fairness. Watch this whole video and make your own interpretations. But a conscientious watch, especially understanding what dialectics actually is, meaning crafted line of destruction of all aspects of the polemic, reveals more than he says out loud.
Actually he does lead us to the concept of dialectic negation of two poles, but then veers away before anyone can think of asking the question: “Once you have used Islam as a dialectic line of destruction against America, what will you oppose Islam with in order to negate that system of power and authority?
In any case, this is a worth watch and instructive. The entire thing frames Islam for what it really is. A tool of destruction of everything else. Which is why so many Marxists, and for that matter, legacy Nazis converted to Islam.
Article at RAIR Foundation
I doubt the IDF will treat Greta to a photo op and a great meal like the Germans and French police did
I wonder if Hamas paid her enough to cover the loss of the boat and other expenses for making this obscene propaganda effort.
Oh well. As Greta herself chanted shortly after Oct. 7, “No Climate Justice; on occupied land”. You would need Alexander Dugin himself to decode that one.
Maybe they should drop her off in a nice mountainous Muslim village somewhere. Afghanistan or Pakistan for instance. Or even Gaza.
The Sultanate of the Proletarian state of Great Britainistan
One of the most telling aspects of a Communist state, is the curious way in which all people are empowered to destroy anyone else in that polity, so long as it enhances the power of the state and the state narratives.
Having had numerous conversations, (although not nearly as many as I want to) with expats from the former Soviet Union and beyond the iron curtain, one common feature is how a neighbour can rat you out to the state and get you taken away or otherwise destroyed if you for example, fail to publicly grieve for a dead official with sufficient intensity.
No where is this more obvious than in North Korea. But I am reliably told this also happened in Poland and other parts of Soviet Controlled Eurasia.
If a person had a romantic interest in a woman, or did want want to pay back a loan, the constant looming threat of being outed for some kind of thought crime was an effective form of blackmail. Pretty much exactly like blasphemy laws in Islam.
Currently there is a case against a boy in Pakistan who is facing the death penalty for receiving a blasphemous image on his phone from someone. No one has seen this image, and no evidence of it is presented. But he was found guilty of having recieved it and may be murdered by the state because of it if there isn’t massive US state dept. intervention.
Which reminds me of my first exposure to Islamic law well over 20 years ago. There was an article in the Ottawa Citizen about a boy who was alleged to have thrown a piece of paper with blasphemous writing on it off the back of a motorcycle towards a mosque. But Pakistani law says that a sharia court judge may not look upon anything blasphemous. So he had to take the prosecution’s word for it and find the accused guilty on the say-so of the prosecutor that inside this sealed cigar box, was a piece of paper with a blasphemous writing which had been hurled at a mosque by a kid on a motorbike.
And once again we see there is no meaningful daylight between Islam and communism.
Currently, across the West, but with focus on the Anglosphere for the moment (shy of the US thank Trump) laws are being implemented that causing offence to an arbitrarily defined, protected group. And for that matter, even entirely fictitious groups so long as people can be persuaded to claim to belong to it.
Also laws are being passed that allow anyone to report anyone who might be in breach of those laws, and hold people to account for even an unrelated person breaking those laws. And even if someone suspects that someone else might say something which could be offensive to some self identified member of a fictitious group.
So it seems as if a bar owner can be held liable if a customer of that bar says something in any context that an employee can arbitrarily decide was offensive.
This is of course, a dialectic attack on the individual. The removal of real rights to invented collective rights, and enforceable arbitrarily by the state to the point of whimsy. Less whimsical though, is that enforcement will pretty much always be whatever is the most destructive to classical constitutional republics like the West was post WW II.
The precedent has been created for decades as well. The incremental destruction of agency for the purpose of collective guilt as defined by the state. The fact that a bartender can be held responsible for what an adult does who gets himself drunk and gets in an accident even if the bartender had no idea how much the patron had to drink.
And my personal favorite, a woman can go to a bar, get herself drunk, pick up a man, drag him home, undress and have sex with him and in the morning if she wishes she hadn’t done those things, according to Canadian law, the man is guilty of rape.
What all of these things have in common is the attack on the individual. The assumption that people have agency and are responsible for their actions as well as may enjoy the rewards of them, such as hard work and disciplined savings.
And of course, the constant, looming threat of utter tyranny and the deracination of the individual, even as a concept in one’s own mind.
The mRNA shots coercion proved that out well. A large percentage of the population defaulted to collective rights at the expense of anyone who felt their right to refuse something which was frankly, patently insane. You either had to give yourself an autoimmune disease to protect your grandmother who you couldn’t visit anyway or have your whole life’s work destroyed. Your vaccine protects the public. The collective good, as defined not by science, but by the state’s literal declaration of what the science was, as Fauci himself declared out loud.
Scientism in a word.
Black Belt Barrister has a video on the newest vice-like crushing destruction of the individual in Great Britain under Sultan Starmer. Or is it Comrade Sultan Starmer.
This is and has also been happening in Canada for a long long time. And Comrade Carney’s actions since taking the reins have been so consistent with everything Trudeau has done, it also adds fuel to the idea that Carney was always the architect behind Trudeau’s destruction of Canada.
No idea if this is true or not yet, but I wouldn’t bet against it. This appears to be the source but I can’t find that actual info yet.
John Ivison: The first Carney spending numbers are out, and they’re as bad as Trudeau’s
If you can’t see the forest, you can’t save the trees: Understanding and Measuring Islam and communism’s dominance over the West
Suddenly that old expression, “Can’t see the forest for the trees” makes a little sense.
The other day we posted a couple of items on the state of the communist revolution in Germany. Unfortunately, Rumble is up and down a lot this past several days, so the video of Dr. Thoma in the post appears intermittently.
But in our post or the RAIR article, it refers to a secret report by the current government which justifies declaring the only non-leftist party a criminal entity. That report can now be seen here after it was ‘released’ to the public.
Although I cannot get it to load at the moment, those who can tell me it is interesting as it is pure allegations with no actual evidence, that any school kid could have written it in a few hours, that it was clearly made with Chat GPT and most interestingly, there are NO REDACTIONS AT ALL including names or other indications of state censorship which at this point we now find, even on grocery lists. Had it been leaked, the lack of censorship would make more sense. But as it was released after ‘pressure’ to show it, its a data point that this is purely fabricated in order to justify disenfranchising the AfD.
At this stage its worth a point form dive into what communism is.
It won’t be detailed because anyone who reads this site already gets it. But as I have had multiple conversations with strangers in the past few weeks where I introduced the notion that certain countries were nascent communist states such as Great Britain, Canada and Germany and I get a good initial degree of incredulity as a rapid response, it may be worth a point-form explanation of how people have been misled to believe what communism is, and what in fact it actually is.
The interesting thing is that when presented with a few facts, you get a lot of stunned silence back when they realize that they may have been incorrect for all these years. It’s easier than one might think.
One of the obvious go-to points is the criminalizing of opinion which is in opposition to state narratives.
Now even those who believe that the state narratives are factually correct, will hesitate to say that making it a crime to present evidence to the contrary is under the rubric of a “free and democratic society”.
Evidence of this is pretty easy. Let’s say you oppose the Canadian and British state sacrament of abortion. You can now be arrested and jailed for praying inside your own home if it is near an abortion assembly line.
A Canadian priest has been taken to jail on a couple of occasions for having a sign within the forbidden zone of a block or so near an abortion facility merely advocating for freedom of speech and nothing else. Not speaking, not praying or interfering with any passers by. Just a sign saying that freedom of speech is a cornerstone of Western Civilization.
That priest and his sign is occasionally shown by this site as a banner actually. He passed away some years ago now.
Also people have been arrested just for standing near an abortion facility in Great Britain and admitting to police that they were silently praying when asked why they were there. Hardly a protest. Hardly an impediment to a medical procedure. But very very communist. One must not oppose a state narrative. It is always a much bigger crime than, well, crime is.
Another fun line of conversation is explaining to people that the Nazis were not in any way whatsoever “right wing” far or moderate. The conversation usually moves along quickly when you ask them to name one communist state where there is freedom of speech and any kind of actual equality of citizens and distribution of wealth based on any kind of merit. Then point put that Hitler’s Nuremberg speeches where pretty much all Karl Marx chapter and verse with class warfare etc. etc. and that the Nazis and Soviet Union where allies at first.
That the Nazis had all the benchmarks of a communist society with minor variations a million times more so than to any kind of libertarian polity, which is the genuine far right wing article. Communism/Nazis use Brutal violent state enforced narratives, as well as criteria for success/survival that have nothing to do with actual merit but based on some abstract criteria like race, religion, ethnicity or beliefs. Not that these things don’t have real world consequences. They most certainly all do. But in a free society these things sort themselves out based on their own momentum and for the betterment of all involved as a general rule.
In other words, people who are good at activity A tend to dominate activity A and people who are not, don’t. The rest of the public understands that and harbours no resentment against the group which typically is at the top of that field, because they either worked harder, were more motivated, or were more naturally talented at that activity. Communist societies insist that all people are born tabula rasa, and therefore, anyone who is better at anything than anyone else is because of ‘Systemic XXXXXX” where you can plug in anything you want after systemic. Recently it’s racism. But it used to be lots of other things, usually class related. The result? Massive resentment and hatred at anyone who succeeds at anything.
Eugyppius who does the best writing on Germany has this update today:
The previously secret dossier assembled by the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution leaked on Tuesday. It is unbelievably retarded.
In my last post, I wrote that “The campaign to ban Alternative für Deutschland is not going well.” Today – a mere seventy-two hours later – you could say that the campaign to ban Alternative für Deutschland is all but dead. This is because the people most committed to banning the AfD also happen to be some of the stupidest, most incompetent legal and political operators the world has ever seen. Their incompetence is so enormous that I am for once willing to entertain conspiracy theories as to why they might have undermined their own project. It is that bad.
Read the rest at his substack linked above. But you get the idea. The German state is so casual about its dialectics that it can invent and publish the sloppiest lies to disenfranchise counter-revolutionaries with no real fear of it being an impediment to the state’s ambitions.
But our focus is understanding what is happening across the West, most notably in Germany, Australia, Canada and the UK with the UK possibly being the most advanced of the communist revolution. And by advanced I mean the shift from a Socratic system to a dialectical one. From a people’s self governance polity to an all powerful state which dictates reality itself. Also where they are in terms of moving from Covert to Overt communistic systems.
Also what things constitute a crime. I just interviewed a man who was fined 120K$ by the state of Canada for election interference. Why? He brought Jordan Peterson to Alberta to present a talk on things as Peterson sees it. We know that theft in leftist US states and Canada overall is not a crime, somewhat depending on who you are. Ask anyone who works retail what happens to people who get caught stealing and what they are prevented from doing to people who are stealing.
And then look at sentences meted out to people who simply say things which are true that defy state narratives. Particularly on Islam these days. But it might easily be extended to the CO2 narrative attack at any time. They are already calling those who present factual evidence of the lack of CO2 caused warming, ‘denialists’ and Holocaust deniers are already criminals in Germany. Which itself is a crime. People should be able to believe what they want, and making it a crime not to, is more in keeping with he Nazis than any false claims about the genocide of the Jewish people in Nazi occupied lands. Not to mention that it fuels suspicions that there may be something to the claims against it. Anyone actually interested in Nazi Holocaust policies and results can examine actual Nazi records from the time. As far as I know, no one has ever accused the Germans of being sloppy record keepers or a badly organized people.
After all, they called serious career scientists, even ones who were world class vaccinologist and even one Nobel Prize winner in Medicine, “Anti-vaxxers” for defying the state narrative, and while they were not criminally prosecuted, having a doctor lose his licence is probably a much bigger punishment than a fine or even a few months in jail.
It is destroying them permanently in some aspects.
Which takes us to the processes themselves. Hearings or trials which used to be based on Socratic principles, where “truth was always an absolute defence”, something lawyers still like to trumpet now and again, but a lot more quietly than they used to, now is about manipulating the process to achieve a predetermined political outcome.
Failure to understand what is taking place but complaining about the individual events within it, is colour commentary. And some argue controlled opposition. If you don’t know a war is being waged upon you, then you cannot possibly fight back let alone win.
Islam for instance is waging a war against the rest of the world, because it has to. Islam is obliged to do nothing else but conquer the world for Islam, using every means possible. We used to say that we are losing to Jihad because we treat a military problem as if it was a law and order one. That was true then. But now we don’t even treat it as a law and order problem.
Eeyore for Vlad.
The systematic destruction of rule of law in the legislature of the UK
The UK allegedly left the EU in BREXIT. Instead, it raced ahead of most of it to Orwellian communism, and medieval sharia. Germany is there for sure as we read at RAIR the other day about the German journalist, jailed for thought crimes. But the UK is moving that way officially in every direction it can, as opposed to Germany, or Canada for that matter, where the defacto is separate from the dejure for now, until they adjust the official way things are done till they sort of match again.
Now the UK is making prison terms much harsher for white British males than anyone else for the identical crimes and circumstances. This, is equity over equality. And is most certainly dialectics. And is therefore, communism in any meaningful sense.
On the sharia side, although the above is also sharia, we have this proposed new law in the UK:
Possessing photos of a Muslim woman without her hijab should be made a criminal offence, MPs say
Possessing photos of a Muslim woman without her hijab should be made a criminal offence, MPs have proposed.
The Commons’ women and equalities committee said pictures of a Muslim woman without her headscarf – taken without her consent – should be considered ‘non-consensual intimate images’.
Such photographs should be treated the same as child sex abuse images, possession of which can carry long prison sentences, the MPs said.
RAIR Foundation also has a more in depth article about this written by Teresa Monroe-Hamilton:
Labour Party MPs are falling all over themselves in Britain to have the nation bow before Shariah. They are proposing that any picture of a Muslim woman without her hijab (Shariah head covering) should be treated as a crime akin to revenge porn or some such nonsense.
This comes from the Commons’ Women and Equalities Committee, according to the Daily Mail. The British MPs are equating any picture taken of a Muslim woman while she is not wearing her headscarf without her consent to “non-consensual intimate images.” This is the act of overlaying British law with Shariah, more or less turning the British into an Islamic Ummah one step at a time, and they are pretty much there already.
Ummah in Arabic refers to the Muslim community or the collective of Islamic believers. It can also mean “nation” or “religious community.” Shariah is Islamic religious law that guides Muslims’ personal and communal lives. In many Islamic nations, it rules above all else and can be brutal when carried out. Many Muslims only recognize Shariah, or at the very least, put it before other laws. They seek to insert it into the legal system where they are living in any way possible.
But wait, there’s more!
If you are anything but a Christian white male, you are less likely to go to jail for the same crime
Like the vast majority though, he doesn’t get that this is not “two tier” but the replacement of a system based on equality and merit, with a dialectical system which reverses the entire concept of process to outcome. The outcome is predetermined for political reasons, and the process must create that result. That is not two tier. It just looks that way on flatland.
It certainly is one way for the UK and other Western governments to deal with this chronic problem.
After all, from the perspective of the indigenous Brits, soon to be consigned to reservations, violently raping their young daughters is a crime. So it shall be a crime if one of them does this. But to Islam, it is recommended to take infidel women as slave girls etc. So for them, it won’t be a crime. Problem of Muslim invaders to the UK creating massive child sex slave harems, solved. Not a crime when they do it.
UK Parliament discuss destroying equality and rule of law
Leftist Tactics of deflection to shield Islam and its followers from any effective policies to stop shaira: “The tiny minority”
The following interview has gone viral on Twitter and other places on the net. It is a German journalist, one I would suspect is of the left, interviewing an Imam. Keeping in mind that in Suni Islam as I understand it, pretty much anyone can be an imam as the authority is the koran followed by the rest of the cannon such as the Hadiths, the Sunna and Reliance of the Traveler and so on.
So while it is natural to accept the authority of this speaker from his “headgear” (A favorite term of mine coined by the Canadian media when Sikhs demanded exceptions to all our various laws concerning helmets for their turbans) as we do that in general for religious figures and musicians alike, what this man is saying is really just orthodox and near universally accepted belief among Muslims based on Koran and Hadiths.
Following this allegedly shocking interview, the journalist adds post script explaining that there is nothing to worry about here, as it is only a tiny minority who believe these things.
To be clear, it is not. But it might be a tiny minority who act on these beliefs to kill homosexuals. The thing about sharia law which this journalist misses entirely, and it is THE thing about it, is that any and all Muslims are deputized to implement death penalty sentences to people who they deem are guilty of death penalty offences in Islam.
These include ‘offences’ such as sexual misconduct as according to Islam, and belief offences such as apostasy. (Or Trudeau’s favourite, the catch-all of “Making mischief upon the land” which Canada has abbreviated to just ‘Mischief’.)
It is worth noting also that there was also only a tiny minority of Nazis who were in the SS. This doesn’t mean that the rest of them didn’t support the mission of the SS, or supply the needed material support for them.
Beyond that, the issue is the jurisprudence. There is no presumption of innocence, and there is no due process. A person is thought to be guilty of homosexuality or improper belief and they are killed for it.
I am reminded of a case in Pakistan which was my first exposure to sharia law in terms of my personal awareness of it. Two teenagers were in front of a judge, accused of throwing a blasphemous piece of paper towards a mosque from a motorcycle. They faced the death penalty for it. The judge was only allowed to see the box within which was alleged to contain the piece of paper. The judge, according to sharia in that time and place, was not allowed to see anything blasphemous. So he had to convict them, which he did, on the basis of being told there was a blasphemous piece of paper in the box which, he had been told, was thrown towards a mosque by the two boys.
In that case there was the appearance of jurisprudence because there was a judge and a court. But the way it operates makes it really just a conviction-machine with a veneer of confirmatory process. Often there isn’t even that, Muslims act on their own, as Koran makes it clear that the only way into heaven is to die fighting in Allah’s way (Jihad). (If anyone wants to challenge me on that, do it in the comments and I will respond.)
The journalist made two critical errors. First, being horrified at execution of people for certain crimes, and second the nature of the crime.
This allowed the ‘imam’ to counter him on one of them, but he missed the opportunity on the other, to counter that the United States executes people with the electric chair. He might have also pointed out that the West pretends to punish people who have sex with children, and occasionally does if they aren’t in any real position of power or influence. And many people in the West would like to see the death penalty for that.
So once again, the ‘journalist’ managed to create opportunities for Muslims to use relativism to justify sharia, without addressing the real issues with sharia. And those are the total lack of evidence or reality based debate between defence and state, in other words, due process, and any presumption of innocence. So at the end of the day, this interview actually creates space to justify sharia law in the West. After all. this ‘shocked journalist’ did not tell us anything all of us didn’t already know, and almost certainly he already knew it as well. And his lack of meaningful questions tends to make one think this was more predictive programming than an actual opposition of sharia law.
As Diana West often says, quoting a US intel officer, “Beware of anyone claiming to be an expert or on the inside who doesn’t tell you anything you don’t already know”.
Every culture codifies its beliefs and values into law. That is all law is, and this is why multiculturalism is an oxymoron. You cannot have two sets of laws operating in the same area unless you do so in order to destroy one or both. The issue with sharia law is that it codifies a different set of values for sure. But also a different set of processes. Sharia is created to protect the authority of Islam in all ways and in all places. It is not in any way about what is best for the people, or what is true.
It is always about what expands or confirms the authority of Islam, and all decisions will reflect that. Much like communism for that matter. Those people whose actions are counter-revolutionary will be guilty, even where the crime is undefinable or non-existent, like JP Ayout’s. Those who commit actual crimes to the advancement of the revolution will likely not be charged or molested by the police, (see BLM riots from 2020) but if they are, a defence of their ideology from on high will follow and punishments will not be equivalent to those who are counter revolutionary.
Just two items. Several people suing Trudeau and his gang over freezing bank accounts, and catching up on the events at Benghazi
1. This conceivably could make a difference. For the record, suing the government over their totalitarian actions during Covid etc. would do no good, even if we won. Yes, it could be financially beneficial to the plaintiff, but the only way to see to it that authoritarians in office do not break the law and crush us is to hurt them in some way when they do. So this might actually have an effect in the highly unlikely chance that it gets a fair and public hearing, and if they win against Trudeau Et al. Story here.
2. There appears to be actual intel coming out now about the Clinton treason concerning Benghazi.
Let’s have a look at three items. The first, is from today. I have zero clue about the X account it is from. For all I know, this is Russian disinformation of which there is a great deal around now. But on the surface, it tracks and frankly it seems like a more detailed account of what we knew back in 2012. That is below.
Full text:
So here’s the REAL story:
Ambassador Stevens was sent to Benghazi to secretly retrieve US made Stinger Missiles that the State Dept had supplied to Ansar al Sharia in Libya WITHOUT Congressional oversight or permission.
Sec State Hillary Clinton had brokered the Libya deal through Ambassador Stevens and a Private Arms Dealer named Marc Turi, but some of the shoulder fired Stinger Missiles ended up in Afghanistan where they were used against our own military. On July 25th, 2012, a US Chinook helicopter was downed by one of them. Not destroyed only because the idiot Taliban didn’t arm the missile. The helicopter didn’t explode, but it had to land and an ordnance team recovered the missile’s serial number which led back to a cache of Stinger Missiles kept in
Qatar by the CIA.Obama and Hillary were in full panic mode, so Ambassador Stevens was sent to Benghazi to retrieve the rest of the Stinger Missiles. This was a “do-or-die” mission, which explains the Stand Down Orders given to multiple rescue teams during the siege of the US Embassy.
It was the State Dept, NOT the CIA, that supplied the Stinger Missiles to our sworn enemies because Gen. Petraeus at CIA would not approve supplying the deadly missiles due to their potential use against commercial aircraft. So then, Obama threw Gen. Petraeus under the bus when he refused to testify in support of Obama’s phony claim of a “spontaneous uprising caused by a YouTube video that insulted Muslims.”\
Obama and Hillary committed TREASON!THIS is what the investigation is all about, WHY she had a Private Server, (in order to delete the digital evidence), and WHY Obama, two weeks after the attack, told the UN that the attack was the result of the YouTube video, even though everyone KNEW it was not.
Furthermore, the Taliban knew that the administration had aided and abetted the enemy WITHOUT Congressional oversight or permission, so they began pressuring (blackmailing) the Obama Administration to release five Taliban generals being held at Guantanamo.
Bowe Bergdahl was just a useful pawn used to cover the release of the Taliban generals. Everyone knew Bergdahl was a traitor but Obama used Bergdahl’s exchange for the five Taliban generals to cover that Obama was being coerced by the Taliban about the unauthorized Stinger Missile deal.
So we have a traitor as POTUS that is not only corrupt, but compromised, as well and a Sec of State that is a serial liar, who perjured herself multiple times at the Congressional Hearings on Benghazi. Perhaps this is why no military aircraft were called upon for help in Benghazi: because the administration knew that our enemies had Stinger Missiles that, if used to down those planes, would likely be traced back to the CIA cache in Qatar and then to the State Dept’s illegitimate arms deal in Libya.
Forward this again and again and again until everyone reads the true story of Benghazi.
This actually does make a great deal of sense, as it explains several events that each on their own make none. I remember the video well. The guy who made it disappeared. It only had around 4 views till Hillary Clinton claimed it was what caused the riots in Benghazi, then suddenly it had thousands because of Westerners going to see what the hubub was. And in fact, it really was a crappy video and not even very good by the standards of insulting Islam and its pirate founder.
Here is a news video from 2012, around a year after the attack on the US embassy compound, for which Clinton told the military to stand down and not assist the staff and military under attack inside.
This next video is a real treat actually. It is Admiral James ‘Ace’ Lyons speaking in 2016 at a conference on Islam which took place in LA. I have stories about just trying to get the videos across the border as I was tasked to edit them. More on that another time. But rest assured, while all the illegal migrants, invaders, drugs and so on can easily get in to Canada whenever they want, it can take several weeks for Canadian border services to let through a single USB drive with some videos on it.
As it happens, I just found them on an old restored hard drive. I don’t even know if this video is out there anywhere anymore. But James Lyons (RIP) was one of my absolute favorite people in terms of those who spoke out against the destruction of the United States by Islam and the Obama-Clinton COMINTERN administration.
This is about more than just Benghazi. But please sit back and warm your hearts by the fire this man puts out in defence of Western Civ while exposing the threats to it with no punches pulled. This man was the commander of the entire Pacific fleet. He knew a thing or two.
2016 interview with Stephen Coughlin on Obama’s CVE, the turning of truth into forbidden knowledge
In the wake of what is going on in the UK, the attempt to formally criminalize Islamophobia, and in Sweden and elsewhere in Scandinavia where it is defacto a capital offence to criticize Islam, even if it is not on the law books as such, we felt it was time to restore this interview with Maj. Coughlin on Obama’s office of the CVE. It is because of this, that the FBI was unable to stop the Tsarnaev Brothers from killing all those people at the Boston Marathon. The FBI knew who they were. But the rules set out in the CVE meant that each time they came across a fact like Tamerlan Tsarnaev and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev were educated in a Madrassa in I think it was Dagestan or Chechnya, it was a dead end. They could not investigate farther, on ANY thread they had based on Islamic extremism.
Please watch the video below, even though it is from 2016. I promise it still has the power to shock, and most especially to inform.
Stephen Coughlin thread on the tactical use of “Islamophobia” now of growing importance with UK new laws
Six part Stephen Coughlin thread on X on the critically important use of the term, “Islamophobia” as a catch all to censor all non-revolutionary speech.
Here is Tweet 1/6 but click through for the whole thread.
I decided to reproduce the entire thread here because it is very good and people should see it as its importance to Western Civ has gone up several notches since various Western countries are now implementing Sharia law, even if they disguise it in Marxist language. But Please do click through if you have an X account and re tweet it so that as many as possible can read this thread.
Remember, Hate-speech is just the Marxist equivalent of Islamic Blasphemy laws, but with MUCH wider applications, and not nearly as specific.
Full text of Tweet 1:
1) Islamophobia has no definition – by design. When a term is manufactured to impose one’s will on others that lacks definition, it is a warning that it can mean anything or nothing at all. Stated differently, it means whatever the state wants it to mean.
Hence, the failure to define is a FEATURE, not a FLAW in the drafting
Islamophobia is designed to be interactively interoperable with the intersectional Marxist term “Racism.” Islamophobia is designed to impose Islamic speech laws against non-Muslims in non-Muslim lands.
Check out “Warning on Racism” (word Search “Blair” – and related) –
Tweet 2:
2) At an OSCE Meeting in Warsaw, Poland, in 2013,(below), I directly intervened to get the status on Islamophobia straight from the official horses’ mouths that Islamophobia lacks a definition along lines developed by the OIC and UK-based (the still EU) Marxists (Runnymede Institute) for implementation through international lines.
The Marxist left and the IM have used international forums to introduce, socialize, normalize and then enforce their vocabulary along extra-legal lines while sounding “rule-of-law-ish.” Today, the international language of diplomacy is Marxist in design and intent.
Towards the end, that’s yours truly securing the definition and meaning of Islamophobia from official OIC releases, drafters, and leaders for use in OSCE functions. There is no speculation about Islamophobia – nor its hostile intent.
National leaders who fail to account for this, and even use the term against fellow American citizens, impose Islamic speech laws on U.S. (and N. American, and EU) on American citizens inside the United States – whether they know it or not.
Check it out, this is how the subversion sausage is made (The Runnymede Institute is the Marxist entity that manufactured the term “Islamophobia” in its current use):
Tweet 3:
Tweet 3)
In May 2015 in Vienna, Austria, at an official opening forum of the OSCE, we got the official panel to expressly state that saying something known and stipulated to be true can constitute “hate speech.” Hate speech is the Marxist term that Islamophobia is designed to be fully interactive and interoperational with at international, national, and local levels. (It drives the “Palestinian” branded street action on American campuses and streets today).
To be clear, when the UK PM commits to imposing Islamophobia mandates on UK citizens inside the UK, they are engaged in a deliberate effort to supersede UK law in favor of facially neutrally stated Islamic law on slander against those same UK citizens. And it’s a civil rights catastrophe.
KNOW WHAT YOU SEE:
Tweet 4.
It’s a “Dialogue and Praxis” thing. Impose the language and use it, you will become it. Adopt the language of Marxism; YOU WILL EXECUTE the Marxist agenda even when you erroneously believe you’re using it to contest it. The opportunity cost of using the Marxist terms developed to implement Marxist mass lines is that you’re not using your language, and you’re not using the language of freedom. It’s just that simple. (Sorry, but the video is down, but the transcript is still posted)
Tweet 5.
This is what Islamophobia implements.
The Islamic Law that Islamophobia executes through facially neutral language is that of Islamic notions of slander – which ARE NOT Western notions of the same.
As I explained this back in 2012 when, having just been purged from DOD (again), I put together a makeshift office in my basement. The following was cut in those circumstances, here, to explain Islamic slander laws. (Yes, not looking my best but WT . . .)
Tweet 6.
BTW, Islamophobia laws (“Defamation of Religions” [where only one religion can be defamed]) is what al-Issa is currently socializing to great effect on all those friendly speaking tours, including with the Marxist head of the UN and religious leaders who ought to know better.
Al-Issah runs the Wahhabi World Muslim League (WML)
that is under the direct control of Saudi Arabia and operates in conjunction with KSA policy and OIC guidance.When interfaith, the Left, and militantly gullible say “building bridges,” force yourself to draw a solid (not a dotted) line to Qutb’s controlling meaning of that phrase.
Communist-Islamic activist who linked Israel to killing of George Floyd, invited guest speaker at St. Thomas U, Fredricton New Brunswick [Guest post]
Tariq Ali, a well known political activist who identifies as British, has been invited to speak at the University of St. Thomas in the Canadian Atlantic province of New Brunswick.
Ali claims to have written 50 books on history.
Here are a couple of Ali’s on the record statements:
in May 2016 Mr. Ali is reported as having stated that “…the annihilation of Israel would greatly benefit both Palestinians and Israelis…” and that “…antisemitism is a result of the creation of a Jewish state, and once Israel is wiped off the map, antisemitism will disappear
University of London Panel Calls for Annihilation of Israel as Solution to Global Antisemitism
- on October 7, 2023, the very day of the murderous Hamas pogrom against Israel that resulted in largest one-day death toll of Jews since the Holocaust, Mr. Ali published an essay which makes clear his support for Hamas and the concept of resistance “by any means necessary”. Hamas has been a designated terrorist entity under Canadian law since 2002. The phrase “by any means necessary” is simply code justifying the unspeakable atrocities committed by Hamas on October 7th – please also see this link.
- Accordingly, and with respect, I fail to see how Mr. Ali speaking on campus achieves what you describe as the University’s “…unique role in fostering informed debate and discussion offering differing perspectives.”
A “perspective” from an outspoken supporter of a recognized terrorist entity under Canadian law calling for the annihilation of Israel and suggesting that antisemitism has somehow only existed since the creation of the State of Israel in 1948 will only serve to inflame and divide, rather than to educate and inform. The result will be to make the St. Thomas campus (as well as the UNB campus) an unsafe and unwelcoming space for Jewish students, staff, and faculty and many other people, and may also impact the Fredericton Jewish community at large.
Accordingly, we are deeply disappointed that the lecture will proceed. That said, we expect that the University and the AHRC will put vigorous safeguards in place to ensure the safety of those who may attend the lecture and question Mr. Ali, as well as mechanisms to monitor antisemitism on campus after the lecture. Based on my personal experience at the Dr. Yossi Olmert lecture at STU in March 2009, as well as at innumerable events across Atlantic Canada since that time, pro-Israel speakers consistently face unchecked (and often extreme) hostility and aggression from anti-Israel activists when expressing their opinion on the Israel-Palestinian conflict – which is entirely contrary to the notion of academic freedoms and informed debate and discussion we aspire to.
UK now so Orwellian even meta data about truth too dangerous for the British to mention
Meta data is information about information.
For example:
A guy commits a crime, and the police suspect it was him, but don’t have a warrant to tap his phone. So they check the available meta data on his phone such as who called, when did they call, and for how long. They can’t hear the conversation, but they can know that say, his mother called at the time of the crime and he didn’t answer, when he normally always answers and they talk for over 20 minutes. But this time he didn’t pick up at all or his phone was off.
With this and similar kinds of meta data, they can get a warrant to do whatever more intrusive searches they want.
When it comes to Muslims committing acts of terrorism or major crimes, we here in Dar al Harb have learned to use meta data to know the motives and nature of these events.
Back in the early days of the jihad on us all, we would hear that a man named Mohammad or a variation of same, would say, randomly stab a bunch of people in the neck while yelling the Arabic Phrase, “Allah hu ackbar”. We were not told this was an act of Islamic jihad, but eventually even the slowest picked up on it.
Then, they stopped telling is the name of the perp. If it was a Muslim name, we knew. That little bit of meta data as enough for us to have forbidden information. It was a Muslim killing random infidels as his religion commands him to do. So they stopped telling us the name, usually for several days or a week till any proper outrage had passed and there was no fear of anyone doing anything effective to stop the mass importation of Jihadis into Western nations.
They also stopped telling us that people yelled allah hu ackbar while committing these acts. Witnesses would be suppressed. Then they would start to not just lie by omission, but lie of fabrication. A dozen years or so ago, the media, facing ever more ludicrous rules from communist organizations like the National Union of Journalists, would create special rules for reporting on what they called “minorities”. Which seldom means minorities, but always means anyone but a white male had to be ‘protected’ such that people might not form a negative opinion about a hostile group before that group was too powerful to control us all. So they started claiming that the jihadi was mentally ill. They would report that the attacker, who usually followed koranic instructions for killing infidels to the letter was mentally ill before they even claimed to know his name. So somehow, they got his medical records unsealed within an hour and without even knowing who it was.
At that point they didn’t care that we knew they were lying to us. There was bugger all we could do about it.
Nonetheless, those of us who cared to know the truth carried on, interpreting meta data into reality as we could. When we heard a nameless person entered a church and cut the head off of a priest for instance, and wrote something in a foreign language, we knew it was a Muslim waging jihad against the infidel in the land of the infidels.
The next big squeeze on what we could know and say came when a Muslim waging jihad on the infidel stabbed something like 11 little girls at a Taylor Swift dance party killing three of them in Southport England. The lies of omissions started. He was a good boy from somewhere in Wales.People who correctly said it was an act of Islamic jihad found themselves sentenced to a year and a half in prison. The public got the message. We cannot interpret the meta data of Islamic jihad as such, or we will be destroyed.
Please watch the whole video below, produced by a regular fellow in the UK trying to describe what is obviously an act of jihad where a nurse was stabbed so badly she is described as having life changing injuries.
This the scariest video out of the UK in many ways. The fact that the public is now so Orwelled, for lack of a better term, that they know they may not speak aloud the truth if it contradicts state narratives, and narratives who’s intent is to destroy every aspect of them, is horrifying.
“The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.” -George Orwell. 1984
King Charles has planted his flag, and it is with the enemy
What follows, is a classical British, gentle, slow and methodical exposé of King Charles and his now revealed alliance with the Muslims and communist and their persuit of the destruction of the British peoples. Many would say that he has made this reveal many many times. And they would be correct. This seems a little more formal and clear however.
The actual speech. Nice of him to play God Save the King to himself. At this point, only God can.
The dialectical phrases, as readers of this site would know them to be, begins at around 5 minutes. About when the soporific tone of the first 5 minutes has made you click away, or lulled you into a receptive state. One would almost think his speech and its delivery were written and rehearsed with a hypnotist. All the examples described in the video above are indeed in the speech. The lies by omission, the construction of a DEI narrative etc. Some are outright lies, “…That there should be peace on Earth, in fact echos through all faiths” is a brutal lie. More than a lie. A narrative attack on Christians and British, and by extension, all Western cultures and peoples. Islam is a military doctrine. Anyone who doesn’t know that by now is beyond hope, or part of the deception Islam uses as part of a line of operation for conquest.
If there are any readers of this site from anywhere within the United Kingdom, please consider honouring this request.
Find and watch the film, Cromwell. If you have never seen it, please do as soon as you can. If you have not seen it for a long time, please consider watching it now in the current context. The King in that film was Charles the Ist.
Actually here it is, free on YouTube for the moment.