Here’s the predictably obvious differences between raising tabula-rasa human children in an indoctrinating culture of “THOU SHALT KILL!” as opposed to one of “THOU SHALT NOT KILL!”
Holy mobster Moslems only hate “infidels” because the Qur’an says “god” orders them to – Period.
Islam is a threat to everyone because IT says it is.
ALL moslems are criminals because, by their own rules, they must endorse in public every word in the Qur’an.
And the Qur’an tells them that they are so “superior” to all non-moslem humans, that it’s not only their right, but also their holy duty to their god, to extort, enslave, and murder all the non-moslems in the world, simply for the “crime” of not being moslems.
So the Qur’an is a clearly-written, us-versus-them hate-crime book, endorsing a permanent might-makes-right death-threat.
And all threats are psychological attacks (aka: coercion, duress, extortion, “terrorism”) and all non-defensive attacks are already classified as crimes.
After all, when you attack the Others first, then, by definition, you are the predatory criminal aggressor, and they are your innocent victims – there’s no two ways about it!
(Attacking second, or counter-attacking, in defense of one’s self and/or of innocent others, is always OK, and in fact such retaliation is the most basic and crucial, mandatory requirement for having any sort of deterring justice in the world at all, ever)!
In fact, one doesn’t need a god to agree to the basic principle embodied in the Golden Rule of Law which simply defines all sitational morality as:
Do Not Attack First.
Attacking second (Retaliatory counter-attacking to deter evil) is mandatory for justice.
And Threats – intimidation; coercion; duress; harrassment; activist agitation; extortion; terrorism – are (psychological) attacks.
We only have on real right – to not be attacked first – and one real responsibility – to not attack innocent others first. And that’s it; the entire social contract of Civilization.
In reality, it’s all about human reason and an ongoing, dynamic agreement to become situationally right (as in factually correct) as opposed to whining that one should be entitled to the static, idolatrous and victim-blaming right to remain irresponsibly wrong:
We in the West self-reliantly CHOOSE to agree to the Golden Rule of Law, which, by simply defining all situational morality as: “Do Not Attack First!” enables trust, progress, and Civilization.
(See all “Western” countries)!
Even the “Ten” Commandments are really only a bunch of listed symptoms, illustrating this simple binary; the first five are all cautions to “Fear and Obey!” while the second five are all admonishments not to steal! Thus, they, too, can be summed up as “Greed NOT; Be Fearful!” (or, as The Golden Rule of Law which defines all situational morality as: Don’t Attack First)!
But they in the East force everyone to obey the brazen rule of chaos, which embodies immorality as: “Our god says we always have to attack all ‘The Others’ first!” and so inflicts distrust, stagnation, and Barbarism.
(See all ‘moslem’ countries)!
So anyone who engages in the puerile, critical thinking logical fallacy of the Argumentum Tu Quoque, by falsely and slanderously asserting that “All Religions Are The Same!”
… is really only a coward who already knows, fears, and so Submits to islamic extortion; i.e:
“ISLAM ISN’T EVIL BECAUSE WE ALL DO IT TOO! Whee!”
…as if merely by listing and comparing two or more incidental cases of wrongs, would somehow magically turn one of them into a right!
We have reported on Barack Obama’s “Kill List,” his appointment of the first ever US assassination czar (who now heads the CIA), and his use of drone strikes which have killed hundreds of innocent civilians, including children. Criticism of Obama’s use of drones has come under serious criticism from his political opponents, as well as his political allies. However, according to a new book, Double Down: Game Change 2012 by Mark Halperin and John Heilemann, Obama told his aides he is “really good at killing people.”
Really good at killing people? Seriously, this is what the leader of the free world thinks is good? I suppose we should not be surprised that he would be “really good at killing people,” since Obama is nothing more than a Chicago thug.
Post report makes passing reference to the anecdote, saying that while speaking with his aides about the drone program Obama bragged that he was ‘really good at killing people.’
While the White House has not given any comment on the allegations of the statement, Senior Advisor Dan Pfieffer told ABC recently, “The president is always frustrated about leaks. I haven’t talked to him about this book. I haven’t read it. He hasn’t read it. But he hates leaks.”
As I’ve said before, I don’t buy that any leak gets out of the White House without Obama knowing about it and using it to his advantage.
According to the Bureau of Investigative Journalism, approximately 3,000 people have been killed in Pakistan as a result of drone strikes since 2004. Obviously that time includes some of the term of George W. Bush as well.
Among those 3,000, between 416 and 948 of those killed were civilians. That number is upwards of 1/3 of those targeted! One of those, was an American citizen, sixteen year old Abdulrahman al-Awlaki.
The irony in all of this is that Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize back in 2009 and in defending his use of drones which are killing not only alleged terrorists, but innocent civilians, including American citizens, he said back in May at the National Defense University, “Let us remember that the terrorists we are after target civilians, and the death toll from their acts of terrorism against Muslims dwarfs any estimate of civilian casualties from drone strikes.”
Obama has had people on both sides of the aisle defend his actions, including the strike that killed 16 year old Al-Awlaki.
Additionally, former Obama Press Secretary Robert Gibbs was even more callous in speaking about the sixteen year old American’s death at the hands of the Chief Executive. “I would suggest that you should have a far more responsible father if they are truly concerned about the wellbeing of their children.”
The problem in all of this is that the young man in question should not be held accountable for the sins of his father. Second, he was not engaged in any terrorist activities. Third, he was targeted completely separate from his father. Fourth, he was an American citizen and under law, if there was a reason to believe he was engaged in criminal activity, the Constitution provides a means for dealing with him under law. Yet, all we hear are excuses.
I continue to ask elected representatives, why they will not hold this man accountable to the law. I also continue to ask those who lead our military just how long will it be until you take care of the domestic enemy in the White House and hold to your oath to defend the Constitution against domestic enemies? Make no mistake, Barack Obama, and all those that support him in government are domestic enemies to the Constitution.
Tim Brown is the Editor of Freedom Outpost.
The government of the United States has just provided clear evidence that they are absolutely terrified of the liberty-driven sentiment sweeping the country.
Following September 11th, the US Navy advised all of their special forces operatives in the Sea, Air and Land teams that their new uniforms would consist of a flag bearing 13 strips, the traditional rattlesnake of the Gadsden flag, and the words “Don’t Tread On Me.”
It’s purpose, says Michael Dorstewitz of Biz Pac Review, was to let America’s enemies know who they were dealing with when they faced a US Navy SEAL: “I’m an American warship — don’t tread on me.”
But now, amid the widespread outrage over government interference into the lives of Americans on every level, including our personal communications, individual health care choices, and our right to provide for our own safety and security, the Pentagon under orders from the Commander-In-Chief has decided it’s time to retire one of the longest standing symbols of the individual liberty that has for so long been the tenet of our free society.
On October 22nd of this year Naval commanders received the following email, ordering them to have their men remove the jack worn so proudly by members of our armed forces.
WARCOM and GROUP TWO/ONE have pushed out the uniform policy for NWU III and any patches worn on the sleeve.
All personnel are only authorized to wear the matching “AOR” American Flag patch on the right shoulder. You are no longer authorized to wear the “Don’t Tread On Me” patch.
Again the only patch authorized for wear is the American flag on the right shoulder. Please pass the word to all.
Senior Enlisted Advisor
Though senior commanders refused to speak publicly about the changes, one SEAL stated what should be obvious:
Why would our leaders sell out our heritage? Why would they rob present and future sailors of our battle cry?
When a friend of mine asked his leadership the same question, he was told, “The Jack is too closely associated with radical groups.”
We must assume that this thought policeman embedded in the SEAL community is speaking of the Tea Party, whose flag (which also dates from the American Revolution) depicts a snake with the same defiant slogan as The Navy Jack.
This begs yet another question: Who defines “radical group”? The last time I checked, all military personnel are under oath to “support and defend the constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic.” The Tea Party stands for constitutional rights and founding principles of civil liberties and limited government. Radical? Not unless you’re a leftist hell-bent on destroying the foundations of our country. Or as the President has stated as the objective of his presidency, “to fundamentally transform” America.
Via The Daily Caller
In 2009 the Missouri Information Analysis Center released an analysis of militias and revolutionary movements operating within the continental United States. It was dubbed the MIAC report, and detailed specific signs indicative of those who may have a proclivity towards domestic terrorism or rebellion.
The Gadsden flag, which closely mirrors the Navy Jack and shares the same motto, and which was also used during the American Revolutionary War, was identified as political paraphernalia often used by radical extremist groups in the United States.
The report called for law enforcement officials on the local, state and Federal level to be on the look-out for those displaying variations of the Gadsden flag, as well as bumper stickers supporting the U.S. Constitution and third-party candidates like Ron Paul.
What should be clear from the government’s latest move to wipe away any official association with the Gadsden rattlesnake and motto is that those supporting any movement not 100% in line with official narrative are to be considered potential terrorists.
In today’s America, supporting the wrong cause, wearing the wrong clothes, pasting the wrong bumper sticker on your car, or saying the wrong thing on the internet can very easily lead to you being added to one of the government’s many red lists and identifying you as an enemy of the state.
They may not be rounding people up just yet for their transgressions against the state, but orders can be given at anytime under the banner of Patriot Act and the National Defense Authorization Act to detain those who could pose a threat to the greater good.
Of course, things like that only happen in places like Hitler’s Nazi Germany and Stalin’s Russia.
This is America… Land of the Free.
Mac Slavo is the Editor of SHTFplan.com
NBC Claims Taliban Oppose Suicide Bombings, Taliban Disagree
- Pakistan: Islamic seminary gutted as explosives that seminary students were preparing go off prematurely
- Nigeria: Muslims murder 27 people, burn 300 houses in jihad attack on village
A few days ago, NBC News ran an interview with a “moderate” Taliban leader.
“We have been tasked by our leadership to urge the public and clerics to boycott the elections next year,” senior Taliban leader and cleric Maulana Abdul Aziz told NBC News while on a visit to Quetta, just across the border in neighboring Pakistan.
He said bomb attacks against Muslims and innocent unarmed people were against the teaching of Islam but that “suicide attacks on U.S. and NATO forces” were justified.
The Taliban, who do nothing but carry out bomb attacks against everyone in sight, were offended by this and have decided to set the record straight. They have never heard of this Aziz person and are 100 percent for suicide bombings, anywhere, anyhow.
Zabihullah Mujahid, an official spokesman for the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, the official name for the Afghan Taliban, denounced an individual known as Mawlana Abdul Aziz who has purported to speak for the group. Aziz claimed two days ago that the Taliban’s top clerics have declared “martyrdom operations” as “unlawful.”
“That the Islamic Emirate does not have or recognize a scholar with such duties named ‘Mawlana Abdul Aziz’ in its ranks therefore it considers the above assertions as baseless and urges all media outlets to refrain from publishing such groundless and fabricated reports …,” Mujahid continued.
NBC News… the Taliban would like to talk to you and prove to you that they are absolutely on board with suicide bombings.
Did you know that ousted Egyptian president, Mohamed Morsi of the Muslim Brotherhood, along with Barack Hussein Obama, were in regular contact with Ayman al-Zawahiri, the leader of al-Qaeda?
In case you forgot, Obama helped bring down Hosni Mubarak so he could put the Muslim Brotherhood and Mohamed Morsi in office. He has condemned Egypt’s June 30, 2013 overthrow of Morsi and his radical Islamic government by the Egyptian Army with the support of 30 million Egyptians. Obama has been calling not only for the release from prison of Mohamed Morsi, but for all his Muslim Brotherhood associates currently incarcerated, awaiting trial.
Eman Nabih On 16/10/2013, Albawaba Newspaper in Egypt, published a report which revealed calls and messages Recordings, between Egyptian Ousted President Mohamed Morsi and Ayman Alzawahiri, the Leader of Al-Qaeda Terrorist Organization.
In addition to the above mentioned report, Albawaba Newspaper, has exclusively published on 23/10/2013, recordings between Muslim Brotherhood Organization and Al-Qaeda terrorists Organization which were sponsored by the United States Of America, as the following terrifying details are going to reveal.
The recordings reveal that The United States of America is involved in direct contacts, which were held between the Muslim Brotherhood and Al-Qaeda.
On January 2013, Khairat Al-Shater (the deputy of the Muslim Brotherhood Leader in Egypt), and Issam Al-Hadad, Morsi’s Counselor for foreign affairs, made direct calls with Al-Qaeda Organization from inside the US Embassy in Cairo.
The First Secretary of the US Embassy in Cairo had a direct call with Issam Al-Hadad (ousted president’s counselor for foreign affairs), and informed him that an American delegate from the CIA was in Egypt for a visit, and the CIA delegate wanted to hold a meeting with Khairat Al-Shater (the deputy of the Muslim Brotherhood Leader in Egypt).
In that meeting held between the CIA delegate and Khairat Al-Shater, the CIA asked both Essam Al-Hadad and Khairat Al-Shater, that they are seeking the Muslim Brotherhood assistance in facilitating the American’s withdrawal from Afghanistan. The CIA delegate asked the Muslim Brotherhood Organization to have a direct contact with Al-Qaeda Leader Ayman Al-Zawahiri in order to make that withdrawal deal, specially that Al-Qaeda Leader is the cousin of Refaa Rifaa Al-Tahtawy, Chief of Staff of the President of the Republic Mohamed Morsi.
The Muslin Brotherhood Headquarter’s leadership in Cairo Egypt, agreed to carry out the American’s CIA delegate’s request, in favor of the USA. In return, the Muslim Brotherhood were assured through that deal, that they would be able to do whatever they wanted in relation to their plans in Egypt, under the United States cover, blessings and sponsorship.
On the 20th of January 2013, direct calls started between Refaa Rifaa Al-Tahtawy, Morsi’s Chief of Staff, Mohamed Morsi and Ayman Al-Zawahiri the leader of Al-Qaeda,
In another call, an agreement was set between all parties, that a delegate from the leadership of Muslim Brotherhood would go to Libya to meet with another delegate from the Al-Qaeda Organization, and both delegates were authorized to make agreements there. Mahmoud Ezzat, the first deputy of the Muslim Brotherhood Leader in Egypt, was the leader of theBrotherhood delegate who traveled to Libya and that delegate had a meeting in February 2013, with Al-Qaeda Organization’s delegate.
Abu Anas Al-Libi, was one of Al-Qaeda members who attended that meeting in Libya between Brotherhood delegate and Al-Qaeda delegate. Just for those who don’t know, who that guy is: Abu Anas Al-Libi is America’s ‘Most Wanted’ man, who has been seized by a team of Delta Force commandos after they ambushed his car in Libya, on 6/10/2013 – He is wanted for planning 1998 U.S. Embassy bombing in Nairobi and, Kenya!
The Brotherhood confirmed to Al-Qaeda’s delegate that Al-Qaeda members would be able to return to Egypt, whenever they liked, including Ayman A-Zawahiri, leader of Al-Qaeda.
Also, the Muslim Brotherhood made also a deal with Al-Qaeda to help them get to Egypt, through Libya, then to Sinai, and finally to Egypt where they would work with the Muslim Brotherhood regime against their enemies, including Israel and America.
Muslim Brotherhood believes that American withdrawal from Afghanistan, means defeat for the Americans, and a victory to Al-Qaeda, and Al-Qaeda should take advantage of the situation, and facilitate the USA withdrawal from Afghanistan.
All those calls, meetings, and agreements as the recordings show, were totally blessed by Mohamed Morsi, the Mulsim Brotherhood’s Headquarters in Egypt and The United States of America.
Recordings also reveal that Muslim Brotherhood coordinated with Hamas Organization in Gaza strip, the necessary preparations of all Al-Qaeda’s members who entered Egypt through the Libyan borders, to move them all to Sinai. (Apparently this was part of the Obama-Morsi $8 billion deal to give 40% of Sinai to Hamas: shocker-from-arabic-media-secret-8-billion-deal-between-obama-and-the-muslim-brotherhood
Morsi will go on trial in Egypt on November 4th.
“Miss me, yet?”
“The strength of Sin is the Law.”
- 1 Corinthians 15:56 -
It was recently reported in the enemedia that there’s a growing Canadian (and worldwide) “backlash” against the criminals known as “muslims” for their gang’s crimes. The enemedia decries this “backlash” as uncivilized, “thuggish” behaviour.
And yet, I’d like to assert that it’s not “thuggish” to want to inflict some Justice on criminals (these “muslims”) for their ongoing crimes!
We’re tired of waiting for “our leaders” and their police gangs to protect us, as they’ve clearly abdicated their oaths of office by refusing to do so!
In fact, it’s clear that ALL politicians owe the world an explanation for why they continually insist that:
“Islam must be a valid religion because it’s god prescribes wanton random murder as the only sure way into it’s heaven! Whee!”
We’ve been told not to “hate” criminals for their crimes, as if hate were a crime!
But this “Hate” which our betters decry is, for instance, only the perfectly natural human response of perpetual anger towards ongoing injustices (like islam for instance)! Without hate, no one would be motivated to accuse these criminals of their crimes, and by doing so, hope to end them!
So I’d like to posit, in counter to their nonsense, that in reality, Revenge IS Justice!
Fred Bastiat noted something like “We all have the natural right to self defense; bad laws are those which try to deprive us of that right.”
That no-defense nonsense is indeed the current liberal myth – that you are somehow limited to the criminal’s own time-table and plans.
Liberals assert that we have a duty to Submit to other extortion – islam, for instance.
And yet it should never be allowed by such backwards people to be considered “illegal” to accuse these criminals (moslems) of their crimes, allegedly because the painful truth might offend them or hurt their feelings, & so “make” them commit even more crimes!
No problem was ever solved by ignoring it, & nobody is doing even these moslems any favours, by indulging their historic lies that islam is a “religion” (at all, much less one “of peace”) or a “race” (much less one of poor oppressed People Of Colour”)!
ALL moslems are criminals: by their own rules, they must endorse in public every word in the Qur’an, which tells them that they are so “superior” to all non-moslems, that it’s not only their right, but also their holy duty to their god, to extort, enslave, and murder all the non-moslems in the world, simply for the “crime” of not being moslems. So the Qur’an is a clearly-written, us-versus-them hate-crime book, endorsing a permanent might-makes-right death-threat.
ALL muslims are criminals, as being members of the ancient, ongoing global extortion racket called islam. In sharia law texts, muslims are SUPPOSED to be regarded as threats (as “objects of fear”) by all the unbelievers, whether or not the individual muslim has itself actually committed any crimes. That’s why we have laws against simply being a MEMBER of a crime-gang or ‘criminal enterprise’ because the threat is inherent.
ALL muslims are criminals, members of an extortion gang. We have laws against membership in a crime gang, even if one doesn’t specifically engage in any crimes beyond one’s own membership therein endorsing the general threat. Threats are crimes in themselves: they are psychological attacks, also known as intimidation, bullying, coercion, duress, harrassment, activist agitation, extortion, and “terrorism.” And even any “only” attempted crimes are still considered by civilized people to be crimes.
What sort of insane “law” pretends one has to accede to the criminals’ timetables and plans?! “If the criminal stops attacking (for whatever reason, known only to them) then you have to immediately stop defending yourself, too!”
Say a criminal attacks you, but runs out of bullets before managing to finish you off. They then run away, intending to re-load and then return to finish the job.
Obviously, you don’t know why they stopped, nor what they’ll do next (but the balance of probabilities says that, since they’ve already chosen to attack you first, there’s no reason to imagine they suddently became enlightened saints) so why shouldn’t you follow them to make sure?!
They retain all their free-will rights to commit further crimes, while you are limited to their whims and timetables, like some robotic imbecile – the “law” pretends you are limited to immediate defense only, and aren’t allowed to counter-attack at all!
And yet all crimes are routinely counter-attacked well after the facts, sometimes even years later, in the courts of law: by the time when any criminal gets to trial, they aren’t immediately endangering anyone, their crimes are in the past!
“So why punish them at all?” (as liberals might argue!)?
Because they must pay for their past crimes!
Both the falsely-divided “criminal” and “civil” law branches are based on the same idea: You pay for what you take!
This is both how and why revenge IS justice!
All liberal “laws” (What Mark Levin describes as “positivist” laws) are, in fact, crimes.
The only principle any one ever need agree to, is of course the Golden Rule of Law which defines all situational morality as “Do Not Attack First.”
From this agreement, we gain trust, progress, and civilization; this “social contract” means our only real right is to not be attacked first, and our only real responsibility is to not attack (therefore innocent) others first. Period.
The rest are all symptoms, and all sub-sequent valid legislation depends on that Rule: Every law is an if/then warning which says, in effect: If and when you choose to attack first in this, that, or those ways, then this, that, and these punishments will apply to you.
Bad laws are crimes because they attack first. At “best” they are only ‘ethical’ lists of rules and excuses amerliorating bad, attack-first criminal premises.
A “Judge’s” only job is to determine rational cause-and-effect (who started it) and all irrational criminal excuses or alibis are based on the opposite, victim-blaming slanderous pretense.
It should therefore be easy for any judge to see if a law is bad (an attempt to deprive citizens of due process, by disregarding any need for evidence by slanderously insisting on asserting that they are Guilty Until Never Proven Innocent, and so must impossibly prove a negative in order to defend them selves).
Bad laws are slanderously “pre-emptive” first attacks, like all gun control laws:
“Since you DO own a gun, therefore you WILL use it to commit some crimes, SO we must now stop you by ‘defensively’ attacking you first – for your own good, of course!” There’s no if/then; they are threats, not valid warnings. Pretty much every “law” any liberal ever passes, is some form of extortion like this.
Guns exist. They will never again not-exist. More laws do not equal order. In general, no force or police or laws are necessary among free citizens who can and will govern themselves, while the opposite is: no amount of force or police or laws are enough for a people who CANNOT – or will not – govern themselves.
Other bad laws depend not on what your free-will choice of what you might DO might eventually be, but on their subjective yet objectifying definition of what you ARE: in islam’s prejudicially slanderous us-versus-them and might makes right sharia code, all weaker groups – foreign infidels, women, children, slaves – are openly and officially pre-discriminated against, encoded right into their system of criminal laws.
Bad (“defensively pre-emptive”) laws are crimes because they attack first.
Unfortunately, there’s only so many symptoms of “Do Not Attack First!” one can address with “laws” of morality, only so many right answers, before one must veer off into exploiting the almost infinite number of sorta almost right,(but really wrong) answers, in order to keep up the pretense that the legislators are actually doing something responsible to earn their pay and to continue to enjoy the right to govern others – a point which, after whence reached, societies decline into criminality and empires fall into ruin.