The Official Blog Of Edward Cline

Month: August 2017 Page 1 of 2

Two Plus Two = Racism

Racism is
all the rage now. It is the battle cry of Antifa and other neo-fascist gangs,
including those in Congress.
A long time ago, in 1997 to be precise, I reviewed
a book, “Guidelines
for Bias-Free Writing
,” and republished it on Rule of Reason in 2013, in “The-Ghouls-of-Grammatical-Egalitarianism.”
In it I wrote:
What is “bias-free” writing? The Guidelines’
definition of it is “writing free of discriminatory or disparaging language.”
It should be stressed that the object of Guidelines’ concerns is not
primarily racial slurs. The AAUP is not referring to the language to be found
in the pathological hate literature published by the Ku Klux Klan, the Aryan
Nation, or the Black Muslims, but to staid university publications. Its
focus is common, inoffensive usage, and the implication throughout the book is
that scholarly works that are not “sensitized” and “sanitized” may in the
future be demoted to the rank of hate literature, and treated with the same
disdain, regardless of their intellectual merit or significance….
Guidelines includes
the disclaimer, “there is no such thing as a truly bias-free language” and
stresses that the advice it offers is only “that of white, North American (specifically U.S.), feminist publishing
professionals.” The Task Force, which is composed of 21 university press
editors (two of them men), recommends euphemistic proxies for all of the terms
on its “hit list…”
In essence, Guidelines advocates abolishing human
comparisons by prohibiting the identity of referents. In the foregoing example,
one would be discouraged from expressing a judgment or evaluation of a person
who has offered abundant evidence of his inability or unwillingness to think
normally or to perform some task. Such a person is simply there, like a rock or
a tree, beyond discrimination (in the strict, nonracial, nonsexist meaning of
that word), beyond evaluation, beyond recognition. He is not incomparable; more
precisely, he is non-comparable. To compare the inventor of the steam
engine with a man who is unable to do simple math or boil a kettle of water
without harming himself is, by egalitarian anti-standards, a grave breach of
“social justice” and an unforgivable faux pas.
So any statement today that
upholds Western civilization as an accomplishment to be preserved and advanced can
be labeled as “hate speech,” specifically racist
hate speech, because what we have today did not come from Islam or the
Central African Republic or the natives of the Argentine pampas or the Algonquians. It is
now primarily racist slurs that are flung at men of reason. Academia and the MSM may
“disparage” whites and civilization without penalty or recrimination. Whites will
even “disparage” themselves to remain in the graces of the PC
collective
.
 GOPUSA reported on August 29th:
House
Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, who last week denounced the Patriot Prayer
gathering in San Francisco as a “white supremacist rally,” had no public
comment on the leftist violence.
So, the purpose of
quasi-government censorship via the giant tech companies such as Google
and Apple
, and financial systems like PayPal, is not just to silence
“offensive” blog sites and to control personal emails, but to suffocate the
public into soundless and voiceless silence.  And to create a permanent pall of ignorance. A
vacuum. The Left has a long history of blanking out reality, and it wishes to
force Americans to blank out as well.
The Left, in
alliance with Islam, is determined to sequester and imprison man’s mind. That
is the long and short of it. “Were you ever there?” asks Ezra Levant of The Rebel Media. The Left doesn’t want
you to know. It prefers you to somehow live and exist in a state of
cluelessness.
In a vacuum. The only thing left is racism.
Vox
on August 15th reported:
There is no question
that Americans have the right to express racist, offensive, unpopular views
under the First Amendment — it’s a right that has been repeatedly upheld by the US
Supreme Court. But the right-wing demonstrators in Charlottesville, Virginia,
last weekend may have gone too far when they began chanting racial and
homophobic slurs to specific people.
It’s a gray area of
constitutional law, but several experts said this week that the white
supremacists may have crossed a line into what is known as unprotected speech.
In 1942, the Supreme
Court ruled that “fighting words” are not protected under the First
Amendment. The Court defines fighting words as “those which by their very
utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace.”
Suppose the police were ordered to stand down when those “fighting
words” were spoken, and to let the two groups rumble without interference. As
they did in Charlottesville and Berkeley. Not so coincidentally, it was a Supreme Court
ruling
that sanctified the notion that words can “inflict injury.” Is that
physical injury, caused by a thrown brick, or a fist, or was the Court also
referring to “psychological” injuries of some kind? The rot goes back decades.
The
Court
notices judicially that the appellations “damned racketeer”
and “damned Fascist” are epithets likely to provoke the average
person to retaliation, and thereby cause a breach of the peace.
Fast forward to the 21st century and again to Vox:
In the context of
the Charlottesville demonstration, experts agree that slurs such as the n-word
and “faggot” would be considered serious personal insults and that
they were directed at a specific person or group of people. What is unclear is
whether their words were likely to spark immediate violence.
But in the Bizarro World of the
Left, personal insults, serious or not, are more injurious than slapstick
comedy’s cream pies thrown in the face; sound vibrations acquire the metaphysical
potency of objects.
Wikipedia writes:
Orwell’s protagonist,
Winston
Smith
, uses the phrase to wonder if the State
might declare “two plus two equals five” as a fact; he ponders
whether, if everybody believes it, does that make it
true
? The Inner Party interrogator of thought-criminals,
O’Brien,
says of the mathematically false statement that control over physical reality
is unimportant; so long as one controls one’s own perceptions to what the Party
wills, then any corporeal act is possible, in accordance with the principles of
doublethink
(“Sometimes they are five. Sometimes they are three. Sometimes they are
all of them at once”).
A colleague, Syme, who is working on the Eleventh Edition of
the Newspeak dictionary in Nineteen Eighty-Four, which will be shorter than the
Tenth Edition, describes his work:
It’s a beautiful thing,
the destruction of words. …
“Don’t you see that the whole aim of Newspeak
is to narrow the range of thought? In
the end we shall make thoughtcrime
literally impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it.
Every concept that can ever be needed, will be expressed by exactly one word,
with its meaning rigidly defined and all its subsidiary meanings rubbed out and
forgotten….”
Orthodoxy
is unconsciousness
.” [Italics
mine]
In “The
Eraser Heads
,” I wrote:
The Eraser Heads
believe that removing or destroying statues will somehow erase the history
behind them. The selectively self-blinded non-seers of the non-existent statues
(and artwork) will no longer be triggered or defiled by them, and will be pure.
While anyone who is white will be tarred and feathered with guilt. Anyone who
upholds Western culture (and not the Deconstructionist brand) and Western
civilization will be smeared as a racist.
The “rising tide of racism”?
Where?  If there’s a tide, then it’s a
puddle. However, if there is a “rising
tide” of racism, it’s being fed by the leaking mains of academia and the MSM. It
has been cited so many times, the term “racism” no longer has any punch or significance.
As Syme explained, such a term serves as a catch-all for anything “negative.” “Every
concept that can ever be needed, will be

Your new lexicographers


expressed by exactly one word…” In
this case, racism. If you question
what is on Donald Trump’s Oval Office desk, you can call it racism. If you
object to Melania Trump’s appearance and sense of fashion, but refrain from Michelle
Obama’s “patented shower curtain dresses,” you can indulge in approved racism. If
you derogate the political and intellectual Founders of the U.S. and cite their
slavery, you can turn the tables and not be accused of racism. You can call Confederate
statues
or statues or portraits of past university
staff
 or a movie
a priori racist, and not
have someone tap you on the shoulder.

And let us not forget the very real “rising tide” of
anti-Semitism on the Left
and abroad.
You can charge all Jews with a conspiracy to conquer the world as many Leftists
and Islam do, but neglect to mention Islam’s 14 century record of anti-Semitism
and slavery and conquest, and get away with it, without so much as a nod to the
facts.
After all, Orthodoxy is unconsciousness.”
And your task as a race-card game player is to be unconscious and to spread and
enforce politically correct unconsciousness on all.
Not that there’s anything
wrong with that
,” as Jerry Seinfeld was want to say.

To the Left, “Ignorance IS Strength”


Pro Publica and the SPLC
identifying a non-pod-person

On August
19th,
Pamela Geller revealed the questions asked by Pro  Publica’s Lauren Kirchner before Kirchner got
Geller’s PayPal account terminated.
I am a reporter at
ProPublica, a nonprofit investigative newsroom in New York. I am contacting you
to let you know that we are including your website in a list of sites that have
been designated as hate or extremist by the American Defamation League or the
Southern Poverty Law Center. We have identified all the tech platforms that are
supporting websites on the ADL and SPLC lists.
We would like to ask
you a few questions:
1) Do you disagree
with the designation of your website as hate or extremist? Why?
2) We identified
several tech companies on your website: PayPal, Revcontent, Disqus, and
Newsmax. Can you confirm that you receive funds from your relationship with
those tech companies? How would the loss of those funds affect your operations,
and how would you be able to replace them?
3) Have you been
shut down by other tech companies for being an alleged hate or extremist web
site? Which companies?
4) Many people
opposed to sites like yours are currently pressuring tech companies to cease
their relationships with them – what is your view of this campaign? Why?
Our deadline is 5pm
EST today.
Thank you,
Lauren Kirchner
“She had asked me, ‘Have you been shut down by other tech companies
for being a hate site?’ I mean, you have to love the assumption that I’m a hate
site because I cover jihad terror-related news and sharia. That’s the focus of
the website,” Geller said.
And these were loaded questions. When did you stop beating your wife?
A question no modern prosecutor would dare ask a witness, especially not a
Muslim.
Is the campaign to shut down sites that purportedly express “hate
speech,” or “racism,” or the alleged defamation of Islam and Muslims,
censorship for the sake of wielding censoring power, or is it to keep the
public in the dark, to enforce ignorance, to create and sustain a dead silence?
“Ignorance is Strength”? Whose strength? Winston Smith in Nineteen Eighty-Four worked in Minitru producing “fake news.” In
the film and in the novel, a Party superior compliments Smith for his “elegant”
rewriting of news in Newspeak (although how one can lend “elegance” to Newspeak
is beyond my ken).
Is their purpose to make the electronic ether as barren of information
as Mars is as barren of boxwoods and roses?
Pro
Publica
can be likened to a person whose body has been “snatched” in the Body Snatchers. He’s now one of
the alien collective, and when he’s sniffed out someone who hasn’t been
absorbed into the collective, he points and screams the alert to other body
snatchers to capture the non-conformist. This is with the help of the Southern
Poverty Law Center
(SPLC), a misnomer if there
ever was one, because it seems to have unlimited
funds
to compile fake lists of sites, individuals, and maps of those guilty
of “hate speech,” “racism,” and other Marxist crimes.
Far from poor,
SPLC raises tens of millions of dollars annually, and has grown an endowment of
over $250 million. The group maintains offshore bank accounts in the West
Indies.
A 1996 USA
Today
article called the Southern Poverty Law Center “the nation’s
richest civil rights organization” with $68 million in assets. According
to a 2007 Harper’s Magazine article, SPLC listed assets totaling $168
million, and pointed out that the sum was more than the annual GDP of the
Marshall Islands at the time.  Line 20 on
the 2008 IRS form 990 for the Southern Poverty Law Center lists total assets of
$221,434,949.00.

The main fake news room of CNN (1984),
Or of the New York Times or Washington Post
To identify the SPLC as
a “civil rights
” organization is tantamount to calling Islam the Jehovah’s
Witnesses.
Pro Publica is also funded by George
Soros
.
Pamela
Geller
reports on PayPal reinstating her account:
It is good to see
Fox News reported on how PayPal has banned our organization, the American Freedom Defense
Initiative
. Even though they restored it, this isn’t over. The left is
working hard to shut us off from all means of communication. It’s coming down
fast, while hate groups like CAIR and the SPLC are getting millions from
left-wing corporate managers. The SPLC received a two million dollar pledge
from Apple and MGM Resorts International will match employees’ donations to
terror tied group CAIR.

Winston Smith as a cog
in altering history
(1984)
The left is awash in
funding. And they still mean to cut off everything from those working in
defense of the free and the brave. But this time, they lost.
So, the purpose of quasi-government censorship via the giant tech
companies such as Google
and Apple
, and financial systems like PayPal, is not just to silence
“offensive” blog sites and to control personal emails, but to suffocate the
public into soundless and voiceless silence.  And to create a permanent pall of ignorance. The
Left has a long history of blanking out reality, and it wishes to force Americans
to blank out as well. Ayn Rand wrote long ago, in Atlas Shrugged:
Dropping below the level
of a savage
, who believes that the magic words he utters have the power to
alter reality, they believe that reality can be altered by the power of the
words they do not utter—and their magic tool is the blank-out, the
pretense that nothing can come into existence past the voodoo of their refusal
to identify it.
And if Americans won’t blank out voluntarily or be terrorized into it,
the Left has Antifa, Black Lives Matter, the other neo-Nazis and gangs are on
standby with clubs and guns to make sure you do.
If you doubt that today’s demonstrators are engaged in voodoo and savagery,
just observe them.
The Left, in alliance with Islam, is determined to sequester and
imprison man’s mind. That is the long and short of it. “Were you ever there?”
asks Ezra Levant of The Rebel Media. The
Left doesn’t want you to know. It prefers you to somehow live and exist in a
state of cluelessness.

“Wolves Not Far”: The Rivals of Nihilist Negan and Antifa

In the hit AMC series, The Walking
Dead
,, measurably worse than the Supreme nihilist, Negan and his “Saviors”
were the “Wolves,” whose appearance in the show preceded the debut the baseball
bat wielding Negan.

The Wolves
are on the streets today
While many of my correspondents are repelled by The Walking Dead, I’ve
seen the series, particularly Season 7, as a concrete lesson in contemporary
politics. Drawing the parallels between Negan and Antifa is eminently
instructive. Negan is a concrete that can communicate the significance of the
anti-reason goals of our real-life nemeses.
 The Alt-Left. And Antifa.
In The
Four Feathers
, as General Burroughs explains the position of his troops, the
Russians, and himself he uses concretes to illustrate what happened in the
Crimean War: a glass of sherry, walnuts, and a pineapple.
But the “Wolves” in The Walking Dead were, in contrast to Negan, the true
nihilists. Negan commanded obedience from his victims, half of what they owned,
and some sort of material value, or else he would bash his victims to death
with his bat or sic his tribe of “Saviors” of them.
The Wolves, on the other hand, killed, quite frankly and in their own
words and actions, for the sake of killing. Their motivation was not loot, or
the slavery of their victims, but death. They wanted nothing for
themselves.  Their “signature” was to
carve a “W” on their foreheads and on those of their victims.

A Wolf victim: tied naked to a tree as walker bait

“You don’t belong
here,” says a Wolf before Carol shoots him. Living people “don’t belong here.”
They shouldn’t exist. They must be erased.

A dramatization of moral or immoral action is an effective way to
convey the importance of fighting for values or for destroying them. It becomes a concrete. The
Walking Dead does that in so many instances, in so many episodes.
It’s not so curious that Morgan Jones, one of the main characters, adopts
a “pacific” philosophy and way of fighting that does not harm or bring the
demise of his potential killers, but allows them to live; first encounters two of
the Wolves, he fights back when they attempt to kill him, he defeats them but leaves
them unconscious in an abandoned car. “All life is precious,” he keeps
thinking. But they both return later in the series to kill again. No life s
precious to them.

and, as a consequence,
to kill another day, because they have not changed; but this thought is negated
by his pacifism, just as our foreign policy will not declare Islam an enemy and
allow it to kill us. When he

Morihei
Ueshiba (1883-1969)
was history’s greatest martial artist. Even as an old
man of eighty, Morihei could disarm any foe, down any number of attackers, and
pin an opponent with a

Disguised as a Wolf, Carol makes war on the Wolves

single finger. Although invincible as a warrior, Morihei
was above all a man of peace who detested fighting, war, and any kind of
violence. His way was Aikido, which can be translated as “The Art of Peace.”

So when the Wolves attack Alexandria, Morgan fights them again with
his expertly wiel ded Aikido stick.Carol goes into action
and helps to bring about the defeat and retreat of the Wolves by killing them
without question or hesitation.

Carol saves Morgan from a Wolf

He intends to disarm (or pacify) Wolves and
let them go, again. “All life is precious,” he keeps telling himself and
others. Carol saves his life, during the attack, by stabbing the savage who was
about to overcome Morgan with an axe. The Wolves attacked without any warning.
They invade the town and just start killing, without rhyme or reason or
provocation. Disguised as a “Wolf,”Carol declares war on the Wolves.

The difference between the Saviors and the Wolves is only one of
scale. Negan has outposts of Savior marauders in his area.The Wolves come out of nowhere.
And the Wolves of Antifa are not far. They are on our streets,
together with the Islamic nihilists.
Get it? Time to yell “Wolf!”
in the theater.

Politically Correct Speech IS NEWSPEAK

The purpose of
Newspeak was not only to provide a medium of expression for the world-view and
mental habits proper to the devotees of Ingsoc, but to make all other modes of
thought impossible. From the Appendix of Nineteen
Eighty-Four
, by George Orwell, “The Principles of Newspeak.”

Your children are learning to speak Newspeak

Orwell does not delve very deeply into the subject, but one of the shared
chief goals of politically correct speech and NEWSPEAK is to literally shrink
the epistemology of the mind. It is not merely a matter of “mental habits,” but
to mold the preferred stunted mind of totalitarian activists like Antifa.
It was intended that
when Newspeak had been adopted once and for all and Oldspeak forgotten, a
heretical thought — that is, a thought diverging from the principles of Ingsoc
— should be literally unthinkable, at least so far as thought is dependent on
words. Its vocabulary was so constructed as to give exact and often very subtle
expression to every meaning that a Party member could properly wish to express,
while excluding all other meanings and also the possibility of arriving at them
by indirect methods.
Newspeak was
designed not to extend but to diminish the range of thought, and this purpose
was indirectly assisted by cutting the choice of words down to a minimum.
Without exaggeration, this is the shrunken state of mind of Antifa
and its political allies in the Democratic Party. The new “thoughtcrime” is now
to be suspected of harboring alleged sympathies with Nazism and racism, even
though the accusers are grossly ignorant of the roots and practices of Nazism
and even of “racism” or “whiteness,” and of the etymological roots and meanings
of the words, even though there is not a shred of evidence that “racism” or “Nazism”
exists in the fabric of a person’s words and actions. But evidence of innocence
Dr. Leonard Peikoff discusses the “mental state” of Nazi Germans and
their Brown Shirts in The
Ominous Parallels
:
“The
concept of personal liberties of the individual as opposed to the
authority of the state had to disappear; it is not
to be reconciled with the
principle of
the nationalistic Reich,” said Huber to a country which listened,
and nodded. “There are no
per
sonal liberties of the individual which fall outside of the realm of the state and which must be respected by the state… The constitution of the nationalistic Reich
is therefore not based
upon a system of
inborn and inalienable rights of the individual.”
Peikoff, writing in
the chapter “Hitler’s War Against Reason” in The
Ominous Parallels
, goes far, and long before the appearance of Antifa
and the statue-smashing Social Justice Warriors:
The voluntarist
worship of mindless action may be designated by the term “activism.” Activism is
the form of irrationalism which extols physical action, based on will or
instinct or faith, while repudiating the intellect and its products, such as
abstractions, theory, programs, philosophy. In a very literal sense, activism
is irrationalism – in action. “We approach the realities of the world only in
strong emotion and in action,” says Hitler. (p. 52 of the book)
Ayn Rand wrote in
1971:
Kant’s expressly
stated purpose
was to save the morality of self-abnegation and self-sacrifice.
He knew that it could not survive without a mystic base—and what it had to be
saved from was reason.
All
within the state; nothing outside it
,” proclaimed Benito Mussolini.

So that they will become Antifa

Imbibing PC speech and writing, and applying it to any and all issues,
achieves the same ends as Orwell’s description of NEWSPEAK, one of which it to
inculcate unswerving conformity in thought and deed. Not to mention automatic.
And thoughtless obedience, and thoughtless action. One is initially dumbfounded
by the crass ignorance of those who censor freedom of speech and the right of
assembly. Thus it is fruitless to accuse an Antifa thug of practicing what he purportedly
and loudly opposes – Fascism, or the suppression of freedom of speech and
assembly – when he physically assaults those with whom he opposes. Anyone who
disagrees with him is an “enemy.” Argumentation with the street totalitarians
is impossible. “Political
power grows out of the barrel of a gun
,” said Mao. Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot,
the Perons, Mussolini, and other dictators could have said it, just as well. It
is doubtful that Antifa thugs have ever heard of Mao’s “Little Red Rule.”
It would be wrong to claim that the Newspeakers consciously apply PC
to their writing and speech; they just do
it
in kneejerk fashion. It is no longer a matter of choice. It would also
be wrong to say that any one Antifa munchkin “disagrees” with what you say (or
even are) and strikes out at you. He is incapable of disagreement as a mental
exercise. Disagreement entails thought.  His
sole method of argumentation is the fist or the stick or blinding spray.
This is the apex of the destruction in modern language and educational
policies. (I would say philosophies,
but that would be honoring today’s destroyers.) Ayn Rand wrote extensively on
the role of concepts and their links to words. In her essay, “The Chickens
Homecoming
,” she wrote as Orwell would never have been able to write:
It is the claim of Linguistic
Analysis that its purpose is not the communication of any particular
philosophic content, but the training of a student’s mind. This is
true—in the terrible, butchering sense of a Comprachico operation. The detailed
discussions of inconsequential minutiae—the discourses on trivia picked at
random and in midstream, without base, context or conclusion—the shocks of
self-doubt at the professor’s sudden revelations of some such fact as the
student’s inability to define the word “but,” which, he claims, proves that
they do not understand their own statements—the countering of the question:
“What is the meaning of philosophy?” with: “Which sense of ‘meaning’ do you
mean?” followed by a discourse on twelve possible uses of the word “meaning,”
by which time the question is lost—and, above all, the necessity to shrink one’s focus to the range of a flea’s,
and to keep it there
—will cripple the best of minds, if it attempts to
comply. [Italics mine]
“Mind-training”
pertains to psycho-epistemology; it consists in making a mind automatize
certain processes, turning them into permanent habits. What habits does
Linguistic Analysis inculcate? Context-dropping, “concept-stealing,”
disintegration, purposelessness, the inability to grasp, retain or deal with
abstractions. Linguistic Analysis is not a philosophy, it is a method of
eliminating the capacity for philosophical thought—it is a course in
brain-destruction, a systematic attempt to turn a rational animal into an
animal unable to reason.

The Newspeak Dictionary shrinks
every edition. And so do men’s minds.

The thugs of Antifa, given the relative youth that one sees in videos
of current riots, are college-educated by the academic and political enemies of
reason. Their minds have been deliberately sabotaged, emasculated, and made
impervious to rational or even plain civil discourse. The brains remain, but
are permanently infected by the pathogen introduced and injected into
philosophy by Immanuel
Kant
and his successors. The teachers charged with the task of preparing
young people for life have instead turned children into The
Walking Dead
, or the living dead, or into humanoid vegetables. (It
is the same virulently anti-reason philosophy promulgated by the scholars and
imams of Islam.) What brains are left, as Edwin Jenner puts it, are just
shells, lifeless dark shells driven by mindless instinct. Unable anymore to
think, or want to.
Politically correct speech – and thought – has loosed on us tribes of the
epistemologically stunted Newspeakers of all suasions, and just not the
activists of Antifa, and the MSM. Antifa and its political allies are indeed
the chickens roosting and clucking angrily and unintelligibly on the growing
rubble of our civilization.

An Antifa/Negan Analogy

Disguised as a “walker,”
Carol takes
 down Terminus with one shot

For the longest time, I couldn’t help but think, or imagine, that the
popular hit AMC/Netflix series, “The
Walking Dead
,” is but  an intentional
and  visual roman à
clef
, or a  gory parody of contemporary
politics. It will debut its eighth
year
(and season) in October 2017.
I know many correspondents and friends who don’t care for the series,
but from Season 1 forward I found it fascinating to observe the trajectory of
character development of many of the main characters from lows to highs in
their individual conflicts. The trajectories are at times erratic and ominous,
as though the show’s writers could not decide which way to go.  
I don’t like horror movies. The Walking Dead has been billed as a “horror”
series. I think that’s a misnomer. It is a drawn-out, and often compelling and
inspiring story of man’s determination to live other than in apocalyptic
circumstances or under the thumb of tyrants and killers.

Carol’s trajectory: from weepy dishrag
to formidable fighter
This is an essay on the parallels between the villains of The Walking
Dead and Antifa. Antifa is as
nihilist
and even sociopathetic and psychopathic as any of the villains of
the TV series. As is Islam. Antifa seeks through violence, intimidation, and
terror to obliterate anything
of value in our culture.
There are four main villains in the series, beginning, by my lights,
with Dr. Edwin Jenner, of the CDC, who initiates the destruction of the group after
he has failed to find a cause or cure for the unknown pathogen that has turned
most of the world’s population into flesh-eating zombies (or “walkers”). He traps
the survivors, allowing them no escape from their imminent “painless” extinction.
At the last minute, moved apparently by the pleading of some of the group, he
unlocks the doors in his research bunker; however, the CDC’s main doors cannot
be opened again. My chief heroine, Carol, found a grenade that could blast the
bullet-proof windows apart, and allows the group to escape before the structure
is reduced to a pile of flaming rubble. Jenner tried to convince the group to “give
up,” as he had. Civilization is gone, and so there would be no point in living.

At Terminus, Gareth adopts the Islamic “halal”
method
 of
animal slaughter, by cutting his prisoners’
 throats  and bleeding them to death.
In the present, Rick and the
other survivors file in to the CDC lobby in Atlanta. Dr. Edwin Jenner meets them at the door
with an automatic. “Why are you here, and what do you want?” Jenner
asks them. “A chance,” Rick says simply.
“That’s asking
an awful lot these days,” Jenner replies, but he agrees to allow them in –
provided they all submit to a blood test. “Grab your things,” he
tells them. “Once this door closes, it stays closed.” Rick agrees,
and they follow Jenner to the building’s basement control center….
After Jenner has locked the doors, or rather after the CDC computer
has locked the first floor doors as a containment measure against the release
of other diseases that were being researched if the CDC runs out of fuel…
In the CDC lobby,
the group finds the doors locked and they pound helplessly on the windows.
Shane shoots a rifle at the glass, to no avail. “I think I have something
that might help,” Carol
says, fumbling in her purse while Shane retorts, “I don’t think a nail
file’s gonna do it.” Carol ignores him. “Your first morning at
camp,” she tells Rick. “When I washed your uniform? I found this in
your pocket.” She pulls the hand grenade that Rick found in the tank (in
Guts“)
from her bag.

The Governor:  
another congenial
psychopath
The second principal villain is “The
Governor
” of Woodbury, a small town protected and “governed” by him. It is
after the group, in search of a “safe” place to live, takes over a state prison
overrun by “walkers.” The group annihilates the walkers, including the “turned”
guards in their riot gear. The group first encounters Woodbury and the Governor
after two members are kidnapped while searching for food and supplies and are about
to be executed by the Governor. The group attacks and bests the Governor’s “soldiers.”
In revenge, the Governor plots to attack the prison. He tries twice and fails,
except that his second army (not the one from Woodbury, as he murdered them in
a fit of anger for having run from the walkers the group set loose during the
first assault) uses a tank to blast the prison. The group is broken up and
flees the prison, now ruined and virtually uninhabitable. The Governor,
fighting Rick, the leader, is killed by another main character.  
The third principal villain is Gareth, who runs
Terminus” with his
mother, Mary. (Shades of “Psycho.”). Originally established as a “sanctuary’”
for survivors, its occupants become cannibals, luring the unsuspecting inside
and then imprisoning them in box cars and containers until they can be taken
out, killed, and cut up for food. Women and children, too.
In Season 5, Carol, who was banished from the prison because she
killed two people she thought were carrying a disease that would sicken and kill
the whole group, has followed Rick and his group to Terminus and rescues them.
It is one of the most enthralling episodes of the series.
The fourth and most prominent villain is Negan,
leader of the “Saviors,” amoral, degenerate, marauders who prey on other
survivors, killing them, and taking whatever they wanted. Wikipedia writes:

An Antifa man to the core: Negan
Negan, portrayed by Jeffrey Dean Morgan,[36]
is a totalitarian and manipulative dictator, who made his first appearance in
the season six finale. He is the
psychopathic and merciless leader of a vast organization of hostile survivors —
The Saviors — that he rules in tyranny. His group coerces other survivors to
give the Saviors their possessions and supplies by the threat of force and
intimidation. When Rick’s group attempts to take Maggie to the Hilltop Colony
for medical assistance, the Saviors capture them all. Negan demands that
Alexandria will turn over half its supplies to him from now on, and reinforces
his mandate by beating to a bloody pulp the heads of, Abraham, and then Glenn
with his barbed wire-studded baseball bat.
He’s nothing like the geeky-looking James Anderson , a
professor at UC-Berkeley, who is the nominal head of Antifa. Others point to George Soros.
Others say it is James
Anderson
, who writes for and maintains “It’s
going down
,” an Antifa website.  
“The resurgence of
the far right really began in the wake of Black Lives Matter, especially
Ferguson,” said James Anderson, the editor of “it’s goingdown.org”, a website
that promotes anti-fascist organizing, propaganda, and recruitment.
Or, it might be run by James Tracy.

Antifa and Muslim activists have
Much in common. Masks and death.
They adopt what they call the “Black Lock,” that is,
the masks to frustrate their identification by the police, dressed in black
from head to toe. I’ve said it time and again; even though Antifa purports to
fight “fascism” its brain-stunted thugs don’t even know what “fascism” is,
could not give you a coherent definition of it, and probably prefer not to
know. Nevertheless, Antifa is a fascist group practicing every vile, violent policy
of the original fascists (the German
and Spanish Nazis
and the Italian
fascists
).
Is there any difference between the fictional villains of The Walking
Dead and Antifa? No. And none between them and Islamic jihadists who are also
nihilists, because they also kill for the sake of killing, to destroy in the
name of the destruction of the good. Would it be accurate to call this a
parallel? Yes and no.
But readers must admit that the truth in reality today is becoming
very close to the fiction. I doubt that the writers, producers, and directors
of The Walking Dead would agree with this analogy.

The Eraser Heads


I call them Eraser Heads.
Their goal is not to acquire knowledge, but to oppose it, to squelch it,  to wipe it from their minds, and if possible,
from existence. To prevent anyone else from knowing more about it than they
care to have known. Such as the true nature and history of the Democratic
Party
. The first option is feasible, if they’re capable of a complete,
sustained blank-out and becoming vegetables. The second isn’t. The first option
would justly commit the Eraser Heads to an insane asylum. The second option is
beyond anyone’s power to achieve.
The Left definitely has an epistemological handicap. The Left is also

Says the statue-destroying Left.
And Islam.

metaphysically challenged.

The Eraser
Heads want to obliterate everything that doesn’t fit into their view of how
existence should be.
And as
another columnist has pointed out, it won’t stop with Confederate statues.
The Eraser
Heads will inexorably move on to the next echelon of triggering entities.
Washington
. Jefferson.
Thomas
Paine
. Even Aristotle. Why not Aristotle? He’s been banned in academia.
The Eraser
Heads believe that by removing or destroying statues will somehow erase the
history behind them. The selectively self-blinded non-seers of the non-existent
statues (and artwork) will no longer be triggered or defiled by them, and will
be pure. While anyone who is white will be tarred and feathered with guilt. Anyone
who upholds Western culture (and not the Deconstructionist brand) and Western
civilization will be smeared as a racist.
Jefferson’s
immortal words are inscribed in the Jefferson memorial.
“….I have sworn upon
the altar of god eternal hostility
against every form
of tyranny over the mind of man.”
Never mind,
says the Left. Jefferson was a racist, and a slave owner. Besides, we have a
new form of tyranny. It’s painless. All you need to do is wear our politically
correct blinders.
And once the
Eraser Heads have erased everything that’s upsetting to them, what would be
left? Logically, nothing. That’s nihilism for you. It’s the only thing the Left
has in its pocket.
This is the
Islamic way of propagating ignorance. “You can’t say that, you can’t show it,
because it’s offensive and insulting and even blasphemous! Off with your head!”
What
“minority” espouses that decree?
The
brainless followers of Islam. And what brainless factions in American politics
have adopted the dictates of
Sharia
? The “anti-racist,” Democratic, anti-Confederate Left and Antifa.
And what is Sharia?
It’s not an ice cream flavor.

Lenin in Seattle: You
can bet he won’t be vandalized.

Britannica notes:
Sharīʿah, also spelled Sharia, [is]
the fundamental religious concept of Islam, namely its law, systematized during the
2nd and 3rd centuries of the Muslim era (8th–9th centuries CE).
Total and unqualified submission to the will
of Allah
(God) is the fundamental tenet of Islam: Islamic law is therefore the
expression of Allah’s command for Muslim society and, in application, constitutes a
system of duties that are incumbent upon a Muslim by virtue of his religious
belief.
Known as the Sharīʿah (literally, “the path leading to the watering
place”), the law constitutes a divinely ordained path of conduct that guides
Muslims toward a practical expression of religious conviction in
this world and the goal of divine favour in the world to come. (Italics mine)
The Left
wants our total and unqualified submission to its blinkered, slanderous, racist
view of America.
Its campaign
to erase Confederate statues, and triggering art in general, is nothing less
than Leftwing jihad.
Pamela
Geller
explicitly underscores a connection between the liberal/left
narrative insanity behind the campaign to remove or destroy Confederate statues,
and Islamic Sharia law: “The Sharia-enforcing leftwing/Islamic war on free
speech just escalated. Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Google, AdSense et al are
rigidly enforcing Sharia-adherent speech restrictions, blocking our feeds,
pages, and posts.”

The Masks are now off.

Muslim supremacists
and their leftwing lapdogs (in this case Buzzfeed) want a perfect record when
jihad terror news is breaking.  How many of these stories were
right?
Millions.
If accuracy and
veracity are indeed a concern, then where is the analysis on how many stories
concerning jihad are reported omitting that salient fact? How many news stories
omit the motive of Islamic attacks? Innumerable.
The subject
is Buzzfeed and its posing as a valuer of truth, while it is guilty of wanting
to be an arbiter of the truth.
Daniel
Greenfield
has some pertinent observations to make about the Eraser Heads:
Once you unleash
extremists, it’s really hard to put them back in the box. Once you start
destroying statues, it won’t end with General Lee. It won’t end until there are
no statues left.
On CNN, Angela Rye, CNN
political commentator
and former executive director of the Congressional
Black Caucus, called for removing statues of Washington and Jefferson.
Then Vice
called for blowing
up Mount Rushmore.
Imperiled: The Jefferson Memorial
Of course we’re just
getting started here. Al Sharpton joined in by going
after the Jefferson
Memorial. The Lincoln
Memorial was vandalized.
 And a statue of Lincoln was set on fire in
Chicago. (Why
is it always Chicago
?)
Protesters went
after the statue of Teddy Roosevelt in front of the New York Museum of Natural
History….
And we’re just
getting started.
Now the cultural revolution
demands that everything be constantly torn down and remade. And that leaves us
with nothing.
Except for perpetual Two-Minute Hates of everything
American.
Oceania
was at war with East Asia. Or was it with Eurasia
? It’s hard to remember
which, here in the Left’s version of 1984. Ignorance is Strength!

Antifa vs. Freedom of Speech and Assembly

A BLM “Flamethower” at Charlottesville

Yahoo News
on August 14th published an article that couldn’t have gotten it more wrong than
if it tried. Well, Caitlin  Dickson, the leftist author, tried, and
got it wrong. In “As
neo-Nazis grow bolder, the ‘Antifa’ has emerged to fight them
,” her focus
is not on the threat Antifa poses to
freedom of speech and the right of free  assembly
with its policy of terrorizing with force and assault supporters of freedom of
speech, but rather the alleged threat that “white supremacists” pose to it. An
Atlantic article blames President Trump, and even candidate Trump, for being a catalyst
for the growth of Antifa, because his alleged “racist” and “fascist” rhetoric
was so hated by its members and by the Left. Peter Beinart, in his article,
The
Rise of the Violent Left
,” in the Atlantic, claimed:

Trump’s
rise has also bred a new sympathy for Antifa among some on the mainstream left.
“Suddenly,” noted the Antifa-aligned journal It’s
Going Down
, “anarchists and Antifa, who have been demonized and
sidelined by the wider Left have been hearing from liberals and Leftists,
‘you’ve been right all along.’ ” An article in The Nation argued that
“to call Trumpism fascist” is to realize that it is “not well combated or
contained by standard liberal appeals to reason.” The radical left, it said,
offers “practical and serious responses in this political moment.”
According to Brian Levin, director of the Center for the
Study of Hate and Extremism at the California State University, San Bernardino,
Antifa activists participate in violent actions because “they believe that
elites are controlling the government and the media. So they need to make a
statement head-on against the people who they regard as racist.”
According to Antifa organizer Crow, Antifa is based on
the idea of direct
action
, “The idea in Antifa is that we go where they (right-wingers)
go. That hate speech is not free speech. That if you are endangering people
with what you say and the actions that are behind them, then you do not have
the right to do that. And so we go to cause conflict, to shut them down where
they are, because we don’t believe that Nazis or fascists of any stripe should
have a mouthpiece.

The Clash of the Midgets
Charlottesville 2017
Beinart makes a very
salient point:
What’s eroding in Portland is the quality Max
Weber
considered essential to a functioning state: a monopoly on legitimate
violence. As members of a largely anarchist movement, Antifascists don’t want
the government to stop white supremacists [or anyone else] from gathering. They want to do so themselves, rendering
the government impotent. (Brackets and Italics
mine)
In short, Antifa wants
to be the government and the vehicle with the power and the potency to
arbitrate who may speak and who may assemble. It wants to oppose and eradicate “hate
speech” which it alone will define and quash.
Antifa’s political “direct action”
predecessors:
Hitler and Hermann
Göring
with
SA Stormtroopers at Nuremberg in
1928.

Wikipedia  also does not deny that Antifa is committed to
violence against individuals, groups, or causes it does not approve of or which
it perceives as a “fascist” threat. Although Wikipedia does not acknowledge the
fact, Antifa has declared war on all
forms of government, against conservative causes and speakers, and against
freedom of speech and the right of assembly of those who champion freedom of
speech and assembly. Antifa itself is as “fascist” in action as was the Sturmabteilung (SA) battling the Communists that
caused civil chaos and which led to the rise of Hitler in Germany.
Antifa protesters participated in the 2017 Berkeley protests where they gained mainstream
media attention, “throwing Molotov cocktails and smashing windows.”
Later, two Antifa groups threatened to disrupt the 2017 Portland Rose Festival parade after hearing
that the Multnomah County Republican Party would participate. The parade
organizers received an anonymous email, saying, “You have seen how much
power we have downtown and that the police cannot stop us from shutting down
roads so please consider your decision wisely”. The email also said that
200 people would “rush into the parade” and “drag and push”
those marching with the Republican Party. The two groups denied having anything
to do with the email. The parade ended up being canceled by the organizers due
to safety concerns

Locking horns at
Charlottesville
Antifa counter protestors at the far-right 2017 Unite the Right rally In
Charlottesville, Virginia in August 2017 “certainly used clubs and dyed
liquids against the white supremacists.”[
 Journalist Adele Stan interviewed an Antifa
protester at the rally who said that the sticks carried by Antifa protesters
are a justifiable countermeasure to the fact that “the right has a goon
squad.” Some Antifa participants at the Charlottesville rally chanted that
counter-protesters should “punch a Nazi in the mouth.”
They were also armed
with sticks, baseball bats, cement filled soda cans, different kinds of
disabling spray, and with rocks and shields. They did not appear to “peacefully”
protest the white supremacists, but to attack them. The white nationalists and
supremacists had a permit to protest the removal of a Confederate statue; Antifa
and its cohorts had no permit and apparently outnumbered and overwhelmed the
supremacists and were allowed to assemble without control restriction by the
police.
Not noted by Yahoo
News, Caitlin Dickson, or by Peter Beinart, is that Antifa’s
outrageous “successes” only fuel the rise of a “counter revolution” against Antifa,
and the swelling of “far right” resistance and numbers, thus guaranteeing more
violence and a virtual civil war.

Ancestors of today’s mobs, Germany 1933
The term “far right” is
an egregious misnomer. If one endorses freedom of speech and the right of
assembly (even if one must obtain a permit, which a government hasn’t the right
to deny), one is not of the right or of the “far right,” but an advocate of individual
rights. One is then the true “Antifascist,” if one is opposed to the arbitrary
power of government (even an “anarchist” one, such as Antifa) to regulate
and/or suppress speech and to violate, prohibit, or interfere with the right of
assembly.
It was not the Bill of
Rights
either group at Charlottesville was defending or even expressing. But
Antifa was certainly attacking it.

The Invasion of the Identity Snatchers


There is an
online black or Identitarian publication called “Root,” which probably was
inspired by “Inspire,” an Al-Qaeda dawah published (which is now instructing
jihadists how to
derail trains
in Europe and the U.S.) that made this racist comment in “Maybe
Now
Isn’t the Time, Guys
”:
If you’re tempted to point out that you’re one of the good ones
right now . . . please don’t.
If you are upset that people of color are upset that their lives
and beliefs are under assault by a resurgent, resilient, citronella
candle-filled white supremacist movement, empowered by a White House that can’t
call a racist a racist because #notallwhitepeople . . . please be quiet.
If you’re wondering why people of color don’t want to hold your
hand through this process, teach you, understand you, cater to your feelings
when it is people of color being beaten, misunderstood and whose feelings are treated
indifferently. Stop wondering why because I’m going to tell you why:
It’s not about you.

“One of the good ones”?
 “You,”
the individual who has an identity that has nothing to do with race,  must be made to feel guilty and to submit to
a vile identity. Your individual identity must be stolen and replaced with a
stereotype.
If you’re white and enjoy “white privilege”
you’re a racist. Teaching
Tolerance
notes:
White skin privilege is not something that white people
necessarily do, create or enjoy on purpose. Unlike the more overt individual
and institutional manifestations of racism described above, white skin
privilege is a transparent preference for whiteness that saturates our society.
White skin privilege serves several functions. First, it provides white people
with “perks” that we do not earn and that people of color do not enjoy. Second,
it creates real advantages for us. White people are immune to a lot of
challenges. Finally, white privilege shapes the world in which we live — the
way that we navigate and interact with one another and with the world.
Then it gets silly:
White people receive all kinds of perks as a function of
their skin privilege.
Consider the following:
  • When I cut my finger and go to my school or office’s
    first aid kit, the flesh-colored band-aid generally matches my skin
    tone. 
  • When I stay in a hotel, the complimentary shampoo
    generally works with the texture of my hair.
  • When I run to the store to buy pantyhose at the last
    minute, the ‘nude’ color generally appears nude on my legs.
  • When I buy hair care products in a grocery store or
    drug store, my shampoos and conditioners are in the aisle and section
    labeled ‘hair care’ and not in a separate section for ‘ethnic products.’
  • I can purchase travel size bottles of my hair care
    products at most grocery or drug stores.
My father, who has worked in economic development for 30
years, would explain away these examples of white privilege as simple functions
of supply and demand economics. White people still constitute the numerical
majority in this country, so it makes sense, for example, that Band-Aid
companies would manufacture “flesh-tone” bandages for white people.
But according to Identitarian politics,
even “the good” whites are guilty. They speak and act from “white privilege,”
so they’re superfluous. Their white presence is innately triggering and an existential offense. The recommendation
of
Danielle C. Belton at “Root,”
at the end of her lecture is: “Check your privilege.”  And shut up already and be quiet. Your “good”
intentions don’t count. You are automatically guilty of all kinds of crimes,
including racism, because you are white. You must be made conscious of that
A woman died Saturday during a Neo-Nazi, Neo-Confederate,
Ku Klux Klan-filled racist protest. In 2017. Dozens of others were injured. Two
others also died in a police helicopter crash, working the racist protest.
No, Danielle, it wasn’t so much a protest
against white supremacists (who had a permit to protest the removal of a
Confederate statue by Charlottesville) as it was a “counter-protest” by Leftards,
 Black Lives Matter thugs, Anti thugs,
and other Identitarians against freedom of speech, none of whom needed to apply
for a permit to disrupt traffic and cause local merchants to take precautions
against destructive rioters. They were not controlled by the city
police
, who apparently were told to let the counter-protesting  mob have the run of the streets after  it became nasty.
Fox News reporter Doug McKelway was in attendance during
yesterday’s deadly events in Charlottesville, VA, where he reported that the
police were called off as soon as things started turning violent.
“But when the tear gas started to fly, thrown by
protesters, the police themselves began to evacuate then. I asked the guy who
was in charge, “Where you going?” He said, “We’re leaving. It’s too dangerous.” They had a chance to nip this thing in the bud and they chose not to.
Of note, “Unite the right” held a rally
which was legally organized with a permit from the city,
as was their first amendment right to do so, and Antifa showed up with
cement-filled cans and other weapons with plans to violently protest the event
– creating a dangerous atmosphere which the police did nothing to control.
The ACLU confirmed that Charlottesville police were
ordered to stand down, which allowed the KKK and Antifa to meet face to face
with no interference.

Lambda symbol used
by
some Identitarian groups

Echoes of the Berkeley
chaos
against Milo Yiannopoulos. The Antifa learned what they could get
away with in Berkeley. The Black Lives Matter mob and Antifa applied those
lessons in Charlottesville.
What is Identitarianism?
Wikipedia provides
its lefist biased definition that focuses:
The Identitarian
movement
is a nationalist movement that advocates the preservation of
national identity and a return to ‘traditional western values’. It started in France in 2002 as
a conservative
youth movement deriving from the French Nouvelle
Droite
(New Right) Génération Identitaire. Initially the youth
wing of the anti-immigrant, conservative Bloc
Identitaire
, it has taken on its own identity and is largely classified as
a separate entity altogether with the intent of spreading across Europe.
The group is described as being part of the counter-jihad movement.
Several small American hate groups are
stepping up efforts to spread local variants of “identitarianism,” a movement
born in France in recent years that preaches opposition to multiculturalism,
often taking shape in the form of anti-Muslim xenophobia.
While Identitarian groups on both sides of
the Atlantic claim their opposition to multiculturalism isn’t racist, their
direct action tactics and end goals indicate otherwise. Put simply,
identitarians want regions and nations that are different from one another —
but at the same time culturally and ethnically homogenous within their borders.
The American efforts are particularly
targeted to young people, much as they are in Europe, where the movement
featured a 2012 “Declaration of War” indicting the generation known as
“68ers,” a reference to the French left-wing radicals of 1968. But in the U.S.,
where some activists have mirrored that call by attacking the “baby boomer
generation” for supposedly selling out the country to foreigners, there isn’t
much evidence that this latest version of racist ideology has caught fire.
But the identitarian
movement in the U.S. has more to do with race than it has with anything else. Wikipedia goes
on:
The term is used in a broader sense by political
theorists like Adolph L. Reed Jr. and Walter Benn Michaels to refer to any
philosophy based primarily on social identity, what is more generally termed identity
politics
. The head of the white
nationalist
National Policy Institute Richard B. Spencer is a self-described
identitarian and promotes white
nationalist
views.
On 20 May 2017 two American marines were arrested after
hanging a banner with an Identitarian logo from a building in Graham, North
Carolina
(Alamance County) during a Confederate Memorial Day event. The US
Marine Corps said that it condemned the behaviour and would investigate the
incident.
Muslims, blacks, and
other ethnic/religious groups can flaunt their identitarian tribalism without recrimination;
whites, however, are forever guilty of oppression of those groups because of
their mere existence. Antifa, which is
basically nihilist at its core, will ally itself with any identitarian tribe
that promises it a chance to assault anything “white.” If you’re white, you’re
fair game to be maced, beaten with a baseball bat, struck from behind, punched
in the face
, and kicked when you’re down.
The Identitarians seek
to rob an individual of his identity as an individual responsible for his own
happiness, values, and actions, and not for those he may know personally of but
not otherwise know. Identitarians do not subscribe to individualism. Identitarians
prefer to deal with “pod
people
” they fabricate out of the seeds of irrationalism. David Duke and Richard Spencer are
not of my ilk. Of the same race, perhaps, but we do not share the same values.

Will you now renounce your wicked whiteness?

Laura
Ingraham
on Fox News Channel’s “Fox & Friends, remarked, in
relation to the toppling of a Confederate statue in Durham, North Carolina:
“This is not about racial healing or racial unity when
you see property being destroyed,” Ingraham said. “That’s not what it’s about.
It’s about the eradication of history and an acknowledgment that we had really
difficult, horrible moments in our country’s history that we were able to
overcome. And at the same time, we do give respect to the dead. I mean, all of
our war dead. We respect them. Not respect everything they stood for, but
respect the fact that, when the time came, they stood up and fought for their
views and this country.”
Ingraham went on to add that book burning could be next.
“What else will be subjected to their eradication and
denunciation?” she said. “This is not about racial healing. This is about the
control of the narrative and a destruction of historical recognition. That is
terrifying. And what about books? Are they going to start burning books, too? I
mean why not?”
The Identitarians are
wannabe totalitarians who want to erase history, erase reality. And you. Yes,
they will, sooner or later, begin also to burn books…and perhaps even you in an Identitarian Inquisition
during which they will “snatch” your identity.

Trump’s Failing Islam Policy

On one hand,
in the Trump administration, we see a loose cannon,
H.R. McMaster
, firing valuable intelligence personnel because they threaten
or question his dawah-imbibed
idea that Islamic terrorism has nothing to do with Islam. He doesn’t want Trump
educated on the roots of Islamic terrorism, which is the Quran itself and its ideology.

Another Muslim “Smiley” face:
Dina Habib Powell: McMaster’s Huma Abedin
As of this
writing, Trump remains painfully uneducated about Islam. He is failing to keep his
promise to fight Islamic jihad and its Muslim Brotherhood plan to conquer
America by corrupting its best men and its institutions. IPT quotes the salient
parts of the 1991 MB
memo
:
The process of settlement is a
“Civilization-Jihadist Proecess” with all the word means. The Ikhwan
must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in
eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and “sabotaging” its miserable house
by their hands and the hands of the believers
so that it is eliminated and
God’s religion is made victorious over all other religions. Without this level
of understanding, we are not up to this challenge and have not prepared
ourselves for Jihad yet. It is a Muslim’s destiny to perform Jihad and work
wherever he is and wherever he lands until the final hour comes, and there is
no escape from that destiny except for those who chose to slack. But, would the
slackers and the Mujahedeen be equal. (Bold
mine)
Pamela
Geller
and Daniel
Greenfield
have introduced us to the Trump clone of Hillary Clinton’s
special advisor, Huma
Abedin
, Cairo-born Dina
Habib Powell
. Powell is also a fashion plate, just another “pretty face.” A
Muslim “smiley” face. Well, granted, Powell has a prettier face than Abedin’s.
Powell is in the White House at H.S. McMaster’s invitation and insistence. She
will always have Trump’s ear, just as Abedin always had Hillary’s. In May Foreign
Policy
reported:
Other efforts to
build his own trusted team have gone much better for McMaster. He appointed Dina Powell, who was already Trump’s senior
counselor for economic initiatives, as a deputy national security advisor for
strategy. He also brought in Fiona Hill, “a
well-respected scholar and sober critic of Russian President Vladimir Putin
,”
as White House senior director for Europe and Russia and Nadia
Schadlow
to be senior director for strategy.
And, here Sharifa
Alkhateeb
, a Muslim educator, explained that the ultimate goal of
Muslim education in America is to make all of America
Muslim
. Original video from a Muslim Brotherhood ISNA event,
aired on C-SPAN

in 1989:
“Our final objective is not
just to become part of the system that we experience now and that we see…is to
create our own Islamic systems for Muslims but to look at all the other people
who are sharing this country with us, as potential Muslims, and if we
look at them as potential Muslims and feel that we have the obligation, which
Allah has told us, to try to bring them 
into the same style of thinking and the same way of behaving and have
the same objectives that we have…we need to have some way of communicating with
them and some way of working with them, and in that process to make America
Muslim, all of America Muslim, then we have to have some actual, short-range
goals. We have to have some way of dealing with them and know how we’re going
to deal with them, or else we will not accomplish our goals….” (Bold
mine)
Sounds like “civilizational
jihad” to me. One couldn’t be clearer. We infidels and kaffirs must be made, by
hook, crook, or terror, to adopt the same “style of thinking” as Muslims so
that all of America becomes Muslim. Those who resist the “education,” those who
won’t be “dealt with” peacefully, must be “dealt with” forcefully. It works in
Europe and Britain; why not here?
In France, the quiet conquest
has the face of the Union of the Islamic Organizations of France (UOIF), which
a Simon Wiesenthal Center report charged with
“anti-Semitism, advocacy and financing of terrorism and call to Jihad…
Not only does UOIF not encourage
the integration of Moslems in France,” the report states, “it
actually provides a nursery for the most radical Islamist positions.”
In Italy we have just witnessed
the strategy of this “moderate Islam.” The largest and most
influential Islamic organization, l’Unione delle comunità ed organizzazione
islamiche in Italia (Ucoii), sponsored Milan’s first Muslim councilwoman, Sumaya Abdel Qader, a veiled candidate of the center-left
coalition. Qader’s husband, Abdallah Kabakebbji, openly called for the
destruction of the State of Israel: “It is a historical mistake, a
scam”, he wrote on Facebook. His solution? “Ctrl + Alt + Delete”.
Soeren Kern of the Gatestone Institute,
in “The Battle for Trump’s Foreign Policy,”  wrote:
The ongoing purge of people
loyal to U.S. President Donald J. Trump at the National Security Council, the
main organization used by the president to develop national security policy, is
part of a power struggle over the future direction of American foreign policy.
Trump campaigned on a promise
radically to shift American foreign policy away from the “globalism”
pursued by his predecessors to one of a “nationalism” which puts
“America first.” He also vowed to: “defeat” Islamic
extremism; “tear up” the nuclear deal with Iran; “reset”
bilateral relations with Israel by moving the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem
“on Day One” of his administration; and “direct the Secretary of
the Treasury to label China a currency manipulator.”
Since becoming national
security advisor in February, McMaster has clashed with Trump and Bannon on policy relating to
Afghanistan, China, Cuba, Islam, Israel, Iran, Mexico, NATO, North Korea,
Russia and Syria, among others.
McMaster has also been accused
of trying to undermine the president’s foreign policy agenda by removing from
the National Security Council key Trump loyalists — K.T. McFarland, Adam
Lovinger, David Cattler, Tera Dahl, Rich Higgins, Derek Harvey, and Ezra
Cohen-Watnick— and replacing them with individuals committed to maintaining the
status quo.
Ayan Hirsi Ali also takes Trump to task for
his failing foreign policy regards to Islam and the Middle East. In her Wall
Street Journal article of August 10th, “On
Radical Islam, Trump Has Lost His Focus
,” she pointed out that :
Perhaps most discouragingly, the administration’s Middle
Eastern strategy seems to involve cozying up to Saudi Arabia—for decades the
principal source of funding for Islamic extremism around the world.
Some administration critics have blamed the loss of focus
on Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster, who became White House national security adviser in
February. The most charitable formulation of this criticism is that military
men who slogged their way through wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have an aversion
to the argument that we face an ideological opponent, as opposed to a series of
military problems.
But I put the responsibility on Mr. Trump. With regard to
radical Islam, he simply seems to have lost interest.
Is all hope of a revamped policy on radical Islam lost?
Not necessarily. Prominent members of Congress—among them Sens. Ron Johnson
(R., Wis.) and Chuck Grassley (R., Iowa) and Reps. Ron DeSantis
(R., Fla.) and Trent Franks (R., Ariz.)—understand that Islamism must
be confronted with ideas as well as arms.
Hirsi, however, believes that Islam can
be reformed
by the peaceful “Meccan” Muslims. This was the thrust of her Hoover
Institution paper,  The
Challenge of Dawah
(March 2017), (which served as a kind of postscript  to “Why Islam
Needs a Reformation
,” in her March 2015 Wall Street Journal  article, in which she wrote:
As I see it, the fundamental problem is that the majority
of otherwise peaceful and law-abiding Muslims are unwilling to acknowledge,
much less to repudiate, the theological warrant for intolerance and violence
embedded in their own religious texts. It simply will not do for Muslims to
claim that their religion has been “hijacked” by extremists. The killers of
Islamic State and Nigeria’s Boko Haram cite the same religious texts that every
other Muslim in the world considers sacrosanct.
Instead of letting Islam off the hook with bland clichés
about the religion of peace, we in the West need to challenge and debate the
very substance of Islamic thought and practice. We need to hold Islam
accountable for the acts of its most violent adherents and to demand that it
reform or disavow the key beliefs that are used to justify those acts.

H.R. McMaster: The Cheat with the Ace of Clubs,
Georges de La Tour (17th century)

McMaster, however, has asserted that it  wasn’t “helpful”  to use the term “Radical Islamic Terrorism.”
As The
Hill
reported:

President Trump’s new national security adviser doesn’t
find the term “radical Islamic terrorism” helpful, the New
York Times
 reported on Friday, while the president has insisted on
using such language.
Individuals who attended Lt. Gen. H. R. McMaster’s first
National Security Council meeting on Thursday told the Times that the newly
appointed adviser thinks the term is not beneficial because terrorists are
“un-Islamic.”
Not “helpful” to whom?
To McMaster and his Deep State colleagues, who
all want to maintain the fiction that Islamic terrorism has nothing to do with
the “religion,” when in fact Islam is a totalitarian ideology from sandal to
hijab.  It is to inure Americans to the
ubiquitous presence and nattering of Muslim spokesmen. Just because, as Hirsi
says, millions of Muslims are “peaceful” and don’t commit violent jihad, doesn’t mean that Islam is
necessarily violent.  Just as, one
supposes, that Nazism or Communism isn’t necessarily “violent,” because
millions of peaceful Germans and Russians weren’t violent at all and submitted
passively to those ideologies.

A Double Helix of Hell


On one hand,
in the Trump administration, we see a loose cannon, H.R. McMaster, firing
valuable intelligence personnel because they threaten or question his dawah-imbibed idea that Islamic
terrorism has nothing to do with Islam. He doesn’t want Trump educated on the
roots of Islamic terrorism, which is the Quran
itself and its ideology.

A Double Helix of
Islam and Cultural Marxism:

its
aim is to “deconstruct” the West

On the other hand Google now will cull non-PC employees from their
employment at Google. This is a consequence of the Damare
paper that was critical of Google’s policy of gender and racial “diversity” at
the expense of a diversity of discussible ideas known as the anti-diversity”
memo
; with the consequence that Damare was fired. Daniel Greenfield has
written a first-rate discussion of how Google is a nascent totalitarian engine
willing to lord is over anyone who uses a computer to search for subjects, “The Google
Gulag
.”
Google
has embedded partisan attacks on conservatives into its search and news
territories under the guise of “fact checks”. It has fundamentally shifted
results for terms such as “Jihad” to reflect Islamist propaganda rather than
the work of counterterrorism researchers such as Robert Spencer. And it wasn’t
the first time. Google had been previously accused of manipulating search
results during Brexit.

Censorship has long been a problem on YouTube. And it will now officially be
caging “controversial” videos using a method developed by Jigsaw. Formerly
Google Ideas, Jigsaw is Google’s left-wing incubator developing social justice
tech.

The aim of the ideological double helix of Islam and Cultural Marxism now
infecting the West as a lethal virus is to “deconstruct” the West, lock, stock,
and barrel.
In biology,
double
helix
is the description of the structure of a DNA molecule. A DNA molecule
consists of two strands that wind around each other like a twisted ladder. Each
strand has a backbone made of alternating groups of sugar (deoxyribose)
and phosphate groups. Attached to each sugar is one of four bases: adenine (A),
cytosine (C), guanine (G), or thymine (T). The two strands are held together by
bonds between the bases, adenine forming a base pair with thymine, and cytosine
forming a base pair with guanine.
In politics, double helix is the description of the structure of a partnered campaign
to emasculate and vanquish the West by acting as philosophical Luddites. The partners are copasetic
and each has a specific responsibility; that is, the partners are imbued with
their own notion of an ideal, totalitarian society. The two partners are held together
by bonds between the bases of a compulsion to reorder society, with force and
terror, if necessary, according to their disparate visions of a perfect polity.
The proponents and purveyors of Cultural Marxism
attack everything that is rational and pro-living-on-earth. Its job is to “deconstruct”
everything from individualism and freedom of speech to gender identity to the Declaration
of Independence, to shred all rational concepts into confetti to be tossed into
the air at whim to settle on anything that a person desires.
One of this partner’s goals is to reduce
rationality into a Scrabble board on which no comprehensible concepts are
permissible or admissible, and on which the Law of
Identity
has been banned. An offspring of Cultural Marxism is “Critical
Theory,” which could reduce a Scrabble or even a chess board to a piece of
plywood with no meaning and nowhere to move on it.
Critical theory seeks to be self-critical and rejects any
pretensions to absolute truth. Critical theory defends
the primacy of neither matter (materialism) [i.e., the
primacy of existence
]nor consciousness (idealism), and
argues that both epistemologies distort reality to the benefit, eventually, of
some small group [e.g., transgenders, Muslims]. (Brackets mine)
Frankfurt School theorists explicitly linked up with the
critical philosophy of Immanuel Kant, in which the term critique
meant philosophical reflection on the limits of claims made for certain kinds
of knowledge and direct connection between such critique and the emphasis on moral
autonomy
as opposed to traditionally deterministic and static theories of
human action. In an intellectual context defined by dogmatic positivism and
scientism on the one hand and dogmatic “scientific socialism” on the other,
critical theorists intended to rehabilitate Marx’s ideas through a
philosophically critical approach.

“Critical Theory” tosses everything
into the air in an orgy of subjectivism

The term “cultural Marxism” was deemed invalid
by the administrators of Wikipedia and its 7-year-old entry was deleted; readers
were redirected to an entry on The Frankfurt School,
whose members were Marxists in Germany until they were “persecuted” by the
equally totalitarian and concept-destroying Nazis, and fled in droves from
Germany.
On the subject of “Critical Theory, The Stanford
Encyclopedia
of Philosophy notes:
Critical Theory has a narrow and a broad meaning in
philosophy and in the history of the social sciences. “Critical Theory” in the
narrow sense designates several generations of German philosophers and social
theorists in the Western European Marxist tradition known as the Frankfurt
School. According to these theorists, a “critical” theory may be distinguished
from a “traditional” theory according to a specific practical purpose: a theory
is critical to the extent that it seeks human “emancipation from slavery” [of
reason], acts as a “liberating … influence”, and works “to create a world which
satisfies the needs and powers” of human beings. (Brackets mine)
One can only suppose it was Wikipedia’s
effort to give credit where it was due, for it was members of the Frankfurt
School who carried the syphilis of Cultural Marxism to America, Britain, and
France, and to other nations that made mortal mistake of hiring members of the School
in its universities. The syphilis has metastasized into a cancer.
As Rich Higgins, the Islamic expert fired
by McMaster for his critique of how the National Security Council was being
gutted
of its best minds, notes in his video, Political Correctness
obliterates one’s critical thinking and reasoning.
On Islam, the other “half” of this double
helix, not all is susceptible to shredding into confetti.
“There
is only one God and Muhammad is his prophet,
there is
no
God but God in heaven, Allah, the God who sees all, the good and the bad.”  Period. There is
no deconstructing the Shahada
and throwing it into the air. There is no deconstructing Sharia. Islam and Sharia are
calculated to inculcate mindless obedience and belief. Britannica notes:
Sharīʿah, also spelled Sharia, the fundamental religious concept of
Islam, namely its law, systematized during the
2nd and 3rd centuries of the Muslim era (8th–9th centuries ce).
Total and unqualified submission to the will of Allah
(God) is the fundamental tenet of Islam: Islamic law is therefore the
expression of Allah’s command for Muslim society and, in application, constitutes a
system of duties that are incumbent upon a Muslim by virtue of his religious
belief. Known as the Sharīʿah (literally, “the path leading to the watering
place”), the law constitutes a divinely ordained path of conduct that guides
Muslims toward a practical expression of religious conviction in
this world and the goal of divine favor in the world to come.
Neither Muslims nor the ideology may
deviate from Sharia. There is no “diversity” in Islam, except perhaps in the
color of one’s hijab (see Sarsour’s
variety of
fashion-conscious head coverings).

Google’s own in-house Mujahideen

One can easily
hypothesize that Google has imposed its own kind of Sharia, one that demands
total submission to its equally brain-stunting notion of “diversity,” which outlaws
diversity in ideas, in thinking. Woe to any Google employee who dares to speak
his mind about Google’s totalitarian policies. He will be told to “get his coat”
and will be directed to the parking lot, where “hurt” or triggered employees,
Google’s own Mujahideen,
may assault him.
The double helix of
Cultural Marxism and Islam has the enfeebling power of piano wire wrapped
around our civilization’s neck. It must be fought.

Page 1 of 2

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén