Paving the way for ’soft jihad’

The weirdest embrace: Left-liberals and radical Muslims make common cause against the West.

The list of complaint-triggering speech offences is long in all Western countries, and ranges from the trivial to the politically existential: A decoration on a lid of ice cream distributed by Burger King offends because it resembles Allah in Arabic script; Fox Entertainment’s drama 24 portrays South Americans, Bosnians, Germans and Muslims as terrorists, but only Muslims complain; a Turkish lawyer sues an Italian soccer team because the red cross on their jerseys reminds him of the Crusades.

…One way or another we must stop the fatwa industry in its tracks. Begin with removal of speech-regulation from the HRCs’ legal mandate. Build on that with legislation that imposes costs and damages on litigious third parties who seek to chill journalists.

…

The HRC crisis is not a tempest in a teapot. Stanley Kurtz, senior fellow at the Washington-based Ethics and Public Policy Center, says: “I don’t think it’s too strong to say that the [HRC] complaint against Mark Steyn is a totalitarian document.”

It is therefore no exaggeration to say that Levant and Steyn are fighting for the defining ideal of Western civilization which, once lost, would spell the beginning of the end of all our other freedoms.

Source.

Ezra Levant comments here.

Police recruits to receive special Holo indoctrination

GRADUATION REQUIREMENT
Police recruits to receive special Holo indoctrination New cops to visit Holocaust museum
By GLORIA CAMPISI
Philadelphia Daily News Friday, 11 July 2008
Continue reading Police recruits to receive special Holo indoctrination…

In Canada it’s okay for the state to kidnap the kids of parents with right-wing views

It’s a very odd story. What’s even more odd is that they were debating a fictional story. It was the mother’s ex-boyfriend who drew the universal symbol of love on the kid’s arm. As an aside, I enjoy watching Jews completely lose it whenever one mentions the swastika. Who were the only people in recent memory to have defeated the Jews?

Watch the debate here.

Gross-out: a celebration of Weimar-era paedos and other deviants by the anti-German, Zionist Bastardstate

I can’t believe that any journalist would find descriptions of this stuff cool and groovy, a subject worthy of nostalgia… After all, aren’t there initiatives right now to stamp out paedophile sex tourism in the Third World?

Anyway, the descriptions of Weimar life in this article are additional evidence, to me, that homosexuality and paedophilia are linked - there’s not much of a gulf between ‘man love’ and ‘boy love’…

See also Noam Chomsky as a Jewish Supremacist here.

Trotskyite Morality

Warmongering Neocon Jew and anti-German fanatic, Hitchens.

Via Hannover.

Once again Buchanan states in another article below what others already know; that the Germans were not the first to attack civilian targets but merely responded after pleading for the British to cease, that the so called ‘Allies’ were the major war criminals.

But there’s more weasel writing from Buchanan, excerpts:

Late 1940 was a full year before the mass deportations from the Polish ghettos to Treblinka and Sobibor began. Churchill had ordered the indiscriminate bombing of German cities and civilians before the Nazis had begun to execute the Final Solution.

While Adolf Hitler and the Nazis were surely guilty of waging aggressive war in September 1939, Stalin and his comrades had joined the Nazis in the rape of Poland, and had raped Finland, Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia, as well. Scores of thousands of civilians in the three Baltic countries were murdered.

“Deportations”, but rightfully no mention of the absurdly alleged ‘gassings’. No mention of the fact that the alleged mass graves at these camps cannot be shown. Nothing in the way of support for the falsely alleged plan that claims the Germans wanted to externinate every Jew they could their hands on.

Notice how Buchanan gives no definition for ‘The Final Solution’*. That actual phrase is used in real German documents that state exactly what happened, deportation of Jews to the fringes of Europe.

“Aggressive war”? I suppose fighting back can be called “aggressive”.

Buchanan continues to give no definition of the ‘holocaust’. Why?

* For more on ‘The Final Solution’ canard, see:

‘Occam’s Razor / ‘Code Words’ when no evidence exists’

‘Grubach debunks Jeffrey Herf and the ‘Final Solution’ canard’

Read on.

- Hannover

Morality – Trotskyite vs. Christian

by Patrick J. Buchanan

Did Hitler’s crimes justify the Allies’ terror-bombing of Germany?

Indeed they did, answers Christopher Hitchens in his Newsweek response to my new book, “Churchill, Hitler and the Unnecessary War”: “The stark evidence of the Final Solution has ever since been enough to dispel most doubts about, say, the wisdom or morality of carpet-bombing German cities.”

Atheist, Trotskyite and newborn neocon, Hitchens embraces the morality of lex talionis: an eye for an eye. If Germans murdered women and children, the British were morally justified in killing German women and children.

According to British historians, however, Churchill ordered the initial bombing of German cities on his first day in office, the very first day of the Battle of France, on May 10, 1940.

After the fall of France, Churchill wrote Lord Beaverbrook, minister of air production: “When I look round to see how we can win the war, I see that there is only one sure path … an absolutely devastating, exterminating attack by very heavy bombers from this country upon the Nazi homeland.”

“Exterminating attack,” said Churchill. By late 1940, writes historian Paul Johnson, “British bombers were being used on a great and increasing scale to kill and frighten the German civilian population in their homes.”

“The adoption of terror bombing was a measure of Britain’s desperation,” writes Johnson. “So far as air strategy was concerned,” adds British historian A.J.P. Taylor, “the British outdid German frightfulness first in theory, later in practice, and a nation which claimed to be fighting for a moral cause gloried in the extent of its immoral acts.”

The chronology is crucial to Hitchens’ case.

Late 1940 was a full year before the mass deportations from the Polish ghettos to Treblinka and Sobibor began. Churchill had ordered the indiscriminate bombing of German cities and civilians before the Nazis had begun to execute the Final Solution.

By Hitchens’ morality and logic, Germans at Nuremberg might have asserted a right to kill women and children because that is what the British were doing to their women and children.

After the fire-bombing of Dresden in 1945, Churchill memoed his air chiefs: “It seems to me that the moment has come when the question of bombing of German cities simply for the sake of increasing the terror, though under other pretexts, should be reviewed.”

Churchill concedes here what the British had been about in Dresden.

Under Christian and just-war theory, the deliberate killing of civilians in wartime is forbidden. Nazis were hanged for such war crimes.

Did the Allies commit acts of war for which we hanged Germans?

When we recall that Josef Stalin’s judges sat beside American and British judges at Nuremberg, and one of the prosecutors there was Andrei Vishinsky, chief prosecutor in Stalin’s show trails, the answer has to be yes.

While Adolf Hitler and the Nazis were surely guilty of waging aggressive war in September 1939, Stalin and his comrades had joined the Nazis in the rape of Poland, and had raped Finland, Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia, as well. Scores of thousands of civilians in the three Baltic countries were murdered.

Yet, at Nuremberg, Soviets sat in judgment of their Nazi accomplices, and had the temerity to accuse the Nazis of the Katyn Forest massacre of the Polish officer corps that the Soviets themselves had committed.

Americans fought alongside British soldiers in a just and moral war from 1941 to 1945. But we had as allies a Bolshevik monster whose hands dripped with the blood of millions of innocents murdered in peacetime. And to have Stalin’s judges sit beside Americans at Nuremberg gave those trials an aspect of hypocrisy that can never be erased.

At Nuremberg, Adm. Erich Raeder was sentenced to prison for life for the invasion of neutral Norway. Yet Raeder’s ships arrived 24 hours before British ships and marines of an operation championed by Winston Churchill.

The British had planned to violate Norwegian neutrality first and seize Norwegian ports to deny Germany access to the Swedish iron ore being transshipped through them. For succeeding where Churchill failed, Raeder was condemned as a war criminal and sent to prison.

The London Charter of the International Military Tribunal decided that at Nuremberg only the crimes of Axis powers would be prosecuted and that among those crimes would be a newly invented “crimes against humanity.” This decree was issued Aug. 8, 1945, 48 hours after we dropped the first atom bomb on Hiroshima and 24 hours before we dropped the second on Nagasaki.

We and the British judiciously decided not to prosecute the Nazis for the bombing of London and Coventry.

It was an understandable decision, and one that surely Gen. Curtis LeMay concurred in, as LeMay had boasted at war’s end, “We scorched and boiled and baked to death more people in Tokyo that night of March 9–10 than went up in vapor in Hiroshima and Nagasaki combined.”

After the war, a lone Senate voice arose to decry what was taking place at Nuremberg as “victor’s justice.” Ten years later, a young colleague would declare the late Robert A. Taft “A Profile in Courage” for having spoken up against ex post facto justice. The young senator was John F. Kennedy.

June 25, 2008

Patrick J. Buchanan [send him mail] is co-founder and editor of The American Conservative. He is also the author of seven books, including Where the Right Went Wrong, and A Republic Not An Empire. His latest book is Churchill, Hitler, and the Unnecessary War.

Prospect of gay Lutheran bishop divides Germans

The mainline Christian Churches in the West are a sick joke. All their churches should be turned into museums, condominiums, restaurants, libraries, cafés, movie theatres, etc. (i.e., something useful) and the remaining octogenarian sodomite clergy tarred and feathered and chased out on a rail. They should be told as final warning: “Take your abomination of a religion with you and don’t you ever come back, next time we won’t be so nice!” .

Modern, Post-War Architecture is Shit

Paris is a miraculous city in no small measure because modern architects have not been able to get their hands on it.

Disgusting lesbians win right to children without fathers [can someone please liberate us from the moral gutter that is the liberal West?]

Single women and lesbian couples won landmark parental rights last night as MPs voted to remove the requirement that fertility clinics consider a child’s need for a father.

See also Fathers aren’t needed say MPs: Commons decides IVF babies can do without a male role model.

The Politics Of Perversion

I am convinced that Western society is well advanced along the road toward one of the major goals of the whole lefty, liberal Agenda, which is the decriminalization of all sexual behaviors, period, no matter how gross and nauseating and unnatural. Specifically, having legitimized homosexuality and sodomy, I believe that the media and our intelligentsia are now slowly and methodically preparing the way for, if not us, then the next generation, to accept paedophilia as just another “alternate lifestyle choice,” like buggery and transvestism, “transgender” surgery and miscegenation have become.

A photograph to make a dog sick

That is how White women look and behave in structurelss, fatherless, promiscuous, feminist, anarchical, liberal, individualistic, democratic, permissive, capitalist, immoral, multicultural/mulitiracial, jew-controlled societies.

This is how White women look and behave in hierarchical, patriarchal, traditional, conservative, authoritarian, moral, structured, orderly, nationalist, socialist, collectivist, homogeneous, ethnocentric, jew-free societies.

WHAT DO YOU PREFER, WHITE MAN?

The Immoral Filth that is Jew-run Hollywood

I hope this obvious piece of shit bombs.

Yes, Ewan and Jim play gay lovers.

See also Director of “Basic Instinct” writes Jesus biography.

Diseased Jewess Denies that her Art Project is Fiction [Jews are not normal people!]

What did Hitler think of jewish “art,” again? Can someone please point out where Hitler was wrong about the jews?

Fucked up Jewess (Jews, like women, tend to be masochistic and neurotic…now, imagine a what a Jewess must be like) has spoken to the Yale Daily News and is denying claims from her own University that her self-induced miscarriages as an art piece is an elaborate prank.

Here are some of the LOWlights from her rebuttal:

- Shvarts stood by her project, calling the University’s statement “ultimately inaccurate.”

- But Shvarts reiterated Thursday that she repeatedly used a needleless syringe to insert semen into herself. At the end of her menstrual cycle, she took abortifacient herbs to induce bleeding, she said. She said she does not know whether or not she was ever pregnant.

- “No one can say with 100-percent certainty that anything in the piece did or did not happen,” Shvarts said, “because the nature of the piece is that it did not consist of certainties.”

- Shvarts showed the News footage from tapes she plans to play at the exhibit. The tapes depict Shvarts — sometimes naked, sometimes clothed — alone in a shower stall bleeding into a cup.

Source.

“For the past year, I performed repeated self-induced miscarriages. I created a group of fabricators from volunteers who submitted to periodic STD screenings and agreed to their complete and permanent anonymity. From the 9th to the 15th day of my menstrual cycle, the fabricators would provide me with sperm samples, which I used to privately self-inseminate. Using a needleless syringe, I would inject the sperm near my cervix within 30 minutes of its collection, so as to insure the possibility of fertilization. On the 28th day of my cycle, I would ingest an abortifacient, after which I would experience cramps and heavy bleeding.

To protect myself and others, only I know the number of fabricators who participated, the frequency and accuracy with which I inseminated and the specific abortifacient I used. Because of these measures of privacy, the piece exists only in its telling. This telling can take textual, visual, spatial, temporal and performative forms — copies of copies of which there is no original.

This piece — in its textual and sculptural forms — is meant to call into question the relationship between form and function as they converge on the body. The artwork exists as the verbal narrative you see above, as an installation that will take place in Green Hall, as a time-based performance, as a independent concept, as a myth and as a public discourse.

It creates an ambiguity that isolates the locus of ontology to an act of readership. An intentional ambiguity pervades both the act and the objects I produced in relation to it. The performance exists only as I chose to represent it. For me, the most poignant aspect of this representation — the part most meaningful in terms of its political agenda (and, incidentally, the aspect that has not been discussed thus far) — is the impossibility of accurately identifying the resulting blood. Because the miscarriages coincide with the expected date of menstruation (the 28th day of my cycle), it remains ambiguous whether the there was ever a fertilized ovum or not. The reality of the pregnancy, both for myself and for the audience, is a matter of reading.

This ambivalence makes obvious how the act of identification or naming — the act of ascribing a word to something physical — is at its heart an ideological act, an act that literally has the power to construct bodies. In a sense, the act of conception occurs when the viewer assigns the term “miscarriage” or “period” to that blood.

In some sense, neither term is exactly accurate or inaccurate; the ambiguity is not merely a matter of context, but is embodied in the physicality of the object. This central ambiguity defies a clear definition of the act. The reality of miscarriage is very much a linguistic and political reality, an act of reading constructed by an act of naming — an authorial act.

It is the intention of this piece to destabilize the locus of that authorial act, and in doing so, reclaim it from the heteronormative structures that seek to naturalize it.

As an intervention into our normative understanding of “the real” and its accompanying politics of convention, this performance piece has numerous conceptual goals. The first is to assert that often, normative understandings of biological function are a mythology imposed on form. It is this mythology that creates the sexist, racist, ableist, nationalist and homophobic perspective, distinguishing what body parts are “meant” to do from their physical capability. The myth that a certain set of functions are “natural” (while all the other potential functions are “unnatural”) undermines that sense of capability, confining lifestyle choices to the bounds of normatively defined narratives.

Just as it is a myth that women are “meant” to be feminine and men masculine, that penises and vaginas are “meant” for penetrative heterosexual sex (or that mouths, anuses, breasts, feet or leather, silicone, vinyl, rubber, or metal implements are not “meant” for sex at all), it is a myth that ovaries and a uterus are “meant” to birth a child.

When considering my own bodily form, I recognize its potential as extending beyond its ability to participate in a normative function. While my organs are capable of engaging with the narrative of reproduction — the time-based linkage of discrete events from conception to birth — the realm of capability extends beyond the bounds of that specific narrative chain. These organs can do other things, can have other purposes, and it is the prerogative of every individual to acknowledge and explore this wide realm of capability.”

Source and source.

Jewess Inseminates Herself, Tapes Miscarriages For Art Project (TJB)

Jewish Art.

Just when you think that you’ve heard it all insofar as sociopathic Jewish behavior goes, something else comes along that leaves one in total awe at the extent of Jewish wickedness and depravity. To call Jews a Satanic race would be offensive to Satan.

Anti-British Bias in Britain [the multi-cult Left hates the indigenous inhabitants of the British Isles]

Fire chiefs in Britain have barred white males from recruitment
sessions in a desperate bid to make 15 per cent of staff women and 3
per cent ethnic minority. The Avon Fire Service held five open-days
with four of those days strictly limited for ethnic minorities and
women.

500,000 foreigners settled in Britain last year. 200,000 Britons left
the country. Guess the ethnic-racial makeup of the respective groups.
Okay, don’t guess: over 200,000 were from India, Pakistan, Bangladesh
and Sri Lanka.

You do the maths. At this rate the future of Britain is easy to see.
The population, because of immigration, grows by the size of a city of
Bristol’s population every year.

Source: International Express 29-1/4/08, p.1.

Pregnant Males and a Lost Civilisation

One keeps wondering just how far down the gurgler society can continue to go before it fully and finally implodes on itself. The moral madness that passes for political correctness and open-mindedness is spinning out of control today. And as usual, there are consequences to such madness.

Today’s White Women: Materialistic, Hedonistic, Childish, Egotistic, Moronic, Superficial Whores and Pigs

Heidi Scum, emblematic of modern White women. She personifies so much of what I utterly detest about today’s White women.

Was there ever a man who knew women better than Nietzsche?

-”Women are considered profound—why? Because one never fathoms their depths. Women aren’t even shallow.”

-“You are going to women? Do not forget the whip!”

Taken from a thread on Stormfront: Who else has no female friends?

I’m a 22 year old girl (woman?) and I have no female friends. In fact the only friend I really have is my long term boyfriend. I just hate the way (white) girls my age act. They talk in really annoying gossipy, valley girl voices and they are all into rap music and MTV crap. It seems all they are interested in is partying and other superficial things. They don’t care about the world around them. If they do seem to “care” about any worldly issues, they are just the ones that the media tells them to care about like darfur, hurricane katrina and AIDS in Africa. They don’t understand anything about their race and don’t really care that they even belong to the greatest race on earth. Everytime I have ever said anything race related around one of them they end up getting really pissed off and immediately launch into defense mode, telling me all about the wonderful black “gentlemen” they have dated in the past, or their mexican friends.

It just seems hopeless. I am lonely for female companionship. Having a boyfriend is not enough, I miss girl time. Only problem is all the girls around here are brainwashed, liberal MTV fembots! Who else has this problem?

I don’t have any female friends. I had a few, but they went the way of the norm around here and one of them is living with a black guy and just had his baby(she named the damn thing Zachiah Lumpkin). The other one lost her virginity at the age of 15 and by 16 she had slept with 35 guys, only about 7 of which were white. No, I have one friend, a guy. I really miss ‘girl time,’ but I’d rather be lonely than put up with those negro-loving whores.

I only have one female friend. She is quite the whore, so over the years I’ve limited my communications with her. I have to agree with many of the other girls on this thread that lots of non-racialist females ARE whores. And when she tells me about her ‘escapades’ with all these men, I just sit back and listen, get disgusted, and ask myself why do I keep her as my friend? Well, the answer is simple. I have no others. Being racially and politically aware, I have become somewhat miserable. I cannot tolerate females (or males for that matter) who have no clue about the social ills that are brought about by multiculturalism. I have no patience for people who can’t think for themselves. As it stands, I do rely on my boyfriend for much needed talks, laughter, etc, but when it comes down to it, I would LIKE to have a female to talk to. I think it’s in our nature to want to talk to other females like how it was back in the day of our grandmothers’.

I often get sad thinking about what my wedding ceremony is going to be like, being that I don’t have anyone to invite.

Diffamation néo-antifasciste sur Cyberpresse

Une très bonne analyse de Carl Bergeron que j’ai utilisé mois-même. Rien de neuf; c’est un signe typique de la « légitimité négative » tirée de reduction ad hitlerum dont se sert la gauche bien-pensante, à savoir la gauche caviar.

Je suis quelque peu troublé, mais peu surpris je dois l’avouer, par les commentaires haineux qui depuis quelques instants défilent sur le blogue de Patrick Lagacé. Une lectrice, apparemment obsédée par mon cas, m’accuse d’être la réincarnation de la Bête immonde ; selon cette idéologue passionnée, je combinerais en effet dans ma personne la menace du nazisme allemand et celui d’Adrien Arcand. Tous les lecteurs de L’Intelligence conséquente le savent bien : les 40 000 mots de ce site argumenté et intellectuel sont tous imprégnés d’une haine nazie, c’est l’évidence. L’antisémitisme s’étale à chaque page…

Par un effet de contamination typique de la haine médiatique, les autres commentateurs renchérissent en me rattachant aux Bérêts Blancs (hein?), une frange militante de l’Église catholique que j’ignorais complètement jusqu’à ce jour.

Ce délire est d’autant plus prodigieux et révélateur qu’il ne semble pas être désapprouvé par les autorités de Cyberpresse.
Continue reading Diffamation néo-antifasciste sur Cyberpresse…

Soral : la gauche déteste la France [the Left hates France]

In a reportage of the show Complément d’enquête devoted to the controversial French humorist Dieudonné, and broadcasted on the French television channel France 2 on September 20, 2004; Alain Soral said: «Quand avec un Français, Juif Sioniste, tu commences à dire qu’il y a peut-être des problèmes qui viennent de chez vous. Vous avez peut-être fait quelques erreurs. Ce n’est pas systématiquement la faute de l’autre, totalement, si personne ne peut vous blairer partout où vous mettez les pieds. Parce qu’en gros c’est à peu près ça leur histoire, tu vois. Ca fait quand même 2500 ans, où chaque fois où ils mettent les pieds quelque part, au bout de cinquante ans ils se font dérouiller. Il faut se dire, c’est bizarre ! C’est que tout le monde a toujours tort sauf eux. Le mec, il se met à aboyer, à hurler, à devenir dingue tu vois. Tu ne peux pas dialoguer. C’est à dire, je pense, c’est qu’il y a une psychopathologie, tu vois, du judaïsme sionisme qui confine à la maladie mentale…» (”When with a Frenchman, a Zionist Jew, you start to say that maybe there are problems that come from you. Maybe you might have made a few mistakes. It’s not systematically the other person’s fault, totally, if no one can stand you everywhere you go. Because that’s their general history, you see. For 2500 years, every time they’ve settled somewhere, within fifty years they get themselves beat up. You’ve got to say, that’s a bit weird! It’s like everyone is wrong except them. And the guy’ll start shouting, yelling, going nuts, you know? You can’t carry on the conversation. Which tells you that there’s a psychopathology, I think, of the Zionism Judaism that verges on a mental illness…”)

Source.

No ideology, just money and cocaine

A former guerilla describes daily life with the FARC, the Colombian Marxist rebel group. He explains how the guerillas are not interested in the ideology they preach but in cocaine and money.

We already are political prisoners

LA NAZIONE
Continue reading We already are political prisoners…