Discussion:
Ways of removing Islam from the West
(too old to reply)
Byker
2017-04-02 18:08:22 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Vigorously prosecute all those involved in polygamy, forced marriage,
"honor" violence or female genital mutilation.

Reintroduce sedition laws (where repealed) and prosecute all transgressors
and enablers.

Legislate Western culture and value sets as dominant.

Prohibit all manifestations of sharia law and all dissemination and advocacy
of sharia law.

Abolish sharia courts where they exist.

Remove charitable status from mosques and other Muslim money-raising
institutions.

Remove all restrictions on freedom of speech except for incitement to
violence; repeal all hate speech laws.

Stop all further immigration, including immigration based on family
reunification.

Muslims may privately owe their religious loyalty to Islam, however they
must publicly declare their civic loyalty to their country of citizenship.

Ban the public call to prayer.

Disperse groups praying in the street or other public places.

Deport all foreign-born convicted terrorists, regardless of human rights
legislation.

Former and new immigrants must sign a Pledge of Allegiance to a stated set
of values, under threat of losing their citizenship/ immigrant status and
being deported for breaking the pledge.

Naturalized citizens who have violated the criminal code will be
de-naturalized and deported.

Reclaim universities, schools, churches, the media, local councils, the
civil service and the professions. This requires an ideological purge, in
which advocates of anti-Western and pro-Islam ideologies are removed from
their posts in educational, cultural and media institutions.

Institute a counter-multiculturalism ideology in the schools and society,
teaching the people that multiculturalism is an ideology aimed at
dismantling our culture.

Repeal all laws, programs, and policies that advance group rights and
multiculturalism. Everyone is equal under the law and there is no basis for
making some more equal than others based on their skin color or religion.

Discard the history books which describe our culture and civilization as one
of genocide and oppression. Rebuild the national identities of our children
via the teaching of unbiased truth thus allowing them possession of a
cultural heritage without shame.

Promote each Western country's national language as the language of
government and require immigrants to learn it within a given time period.

Encourage family values and child-rearing to reverse our demographic
decline.

Prohibit foreign countries from financing, investing in and contributing to
all religious, cultural and educational institutions.

Outlaw sharia-compliant financial instruments.

Outlaw Islamic state ownership of sensitive Western assets such as stock
exchanges, ports, security firms, defense contractors and such.

Declare that Islam is incompatible with 21st century, secular, liberal
democracy.

Monitor mosques for content and close mosques found to be promoting
terrorism, sedition or homophobic violence.

Stop the building of any new mosques funded by foreign states.

Remove local government funding for all radical Muslim organizations and
associations in the public sphere.

Expel all foreign-born imams.

Legislate to ensure all domestic imams speak the native language within the
mosque.

Obtain reciprocity from all Islamic countries with respect to existing
foreign-funded mosques in each country (i.e., for existing mosques to remain
open, demand the right for equivalent numbers of churches/ synagogues in
respective countries).

Obtain reciprocal rights to proselytize in each Islamic trading country.

Obtain reciprocal rights for foreigners visiting Islamic countries including
freedoms related to dress codes, food and liquor consumption, property
ownership, right to worship and others.

Confiscate all Western-held funds for Islamic states that finance terrorism
and promote sharia in the West.

Limit child benefit to a maximum of two children.

Make tax evasion and benefit fraud deportable offences.

Since one eighth of zakat goes to jihad make it illegal or at the very least
remove its charitable status.

Regularly inspect takeaways and curry houses for environmental health and
safety and immigration status of employees.

Taxi drivers as part of licensing process to be checked and refused licenses
if found to have criminal records. DNA sample to be taken at application as
they often use brothers and cousins.

No use of translators or signs in foreign languages.

Set up tax task force to tackle tax fraud of businesses paid in cash, and a
special database to tackle insurance fraud.

Set up money laundering task force.

Seizure of family assets for not informing authorities of jihadis in family.

Reform Council Tax to better represent numbers of adults in family
accommodation, e.g., a 25% surcharge for every adult over 18 where more than
2 in a house.

All streets and buildings with Islamic names to be renamed.

Money transfers to Islamic countries to be vetted/ taxed and provable as
being from legitimate source, otherwise seized.

Make harboring or employment of illegal immigrants a deportable offence and/
or subject to confiscation of assets.

Any GP providing false information on medical certificates for insurance
claims or to prevent deportation to be struck off GMC.

Abolish the Equality and Human Rights Commission

Make it illegal to marry cousins and deport any immigrant who does so.

End 'positive discrimination' (Affirmative Action) in employment, etc.

Increase costs of soft courses such as Islamic studies/ cultural studies/
media studies and use the money to subsidize hard sciences, technology,
engineering, etc.

Council houses to be allocated not on basis of need but on local roots and
time spent on waiting list.

Cash inducements for voluntary repatriation.

Immigrant sex offenders to be deported.

Disbar Muslims from employment at airports and other security sensitive
installations.

Support India in combating jihad.

Put legal height restriction on mosques; minarets above this height to be
reduced.

No further mosques to be built.

Any Muslim going abroad on jihad should not be allowed back into the
country.

Friends, relatives and associates of Muslims found guilty of spreading
sedition etc. to be investigated. If there is reasonable suspicion that they
knew about the activity of the guilty person and did not inform the
authorities, then they too should be deported.

Shut down Muslim-only prayer rooms in public spaces (universities, airports,
hospitals etc.).

Withdraw the right to citizenship through birth (perhaps make it dependent
on at least one grandparent born in the UK).

End dual citizenship.

Close down mosques and Muslim facilities in prisons.

Keep Muslim prisoners separate from others.

Ban halal slaughter/ meat.

Ban the burka/hijab.

Elect new leaders dedicated to implementing the above measures.

http://tinyurl.com/qeko3vb
Topaz
2017-04-03 21:20:06 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Tiptoeing around Our Problems
By Dr. William Pierce

"We've been talking about the very dangerous situation in the Middle
East recently, just because so much is happening there, and
undoubtedly we'll be talking about it much more in the future. For
that reason I want to make very clear what my motives and sympathies
are, lest I lead anyone astray and be thought a hypocrite for doing
so. First, regarding Palestine: although my sympathies definitely lie
with the Palestinians rather than with the Jews, it is not horror at
what the Jews are doing to the Palestinians that motivates me. What
motivates me is horror that my country is being used by the Jews in
their war against the Palestinians. If America were not involved at
all in the Middle East I still would sympathize with the Palestinians
and I would wish that they could be successful in driving the Jews
into the sea and annihilating the abomination that is Israel, but that
conflict between Jews and Palestinians would not be a major concern
for me. At least, my
concern there would be dwarfed by my concern for problems more
directly involving my own people in America and in Europe and in
southern Africa.

Even now, with money and weapons being supplied by America and used to
slaughter Palestinians, my concern is much less with monsters like
Ariel Sharon who are doing the slaughtering than it is with the filthy
creatures among my own people in America who are collaborating with
Jews here to keep the weapons and money flowing to Sharon -- and are
ready to do whatever else the Jews require of them here or abroad.

So when I tell you about Jews in occupied Palestine shooting
Palestinian children, and disapproval and anger are evident in my
voice, what I really am angry about is that the American people, my
people, are being used for this murderous activity. I am angry that
America's whole foreign policy has been perverted to serve Jewish
interests at the expense of American interests. I am angry that
America's political system has been perverted to ensure that we always
have so-called "leaders," whether Democrat or Republican, who are
dependent on the Jewish media or Jewish money or both for their
election and consequently will do the bidding of the Jews. I am angry
that our whole government is riddled with Jews -- Jews in our Defense
Department, Jews in our State
Department, Jews in our Immigration and Naturalization Service, Jews
in our Justice Department, Jews in the President's speech-writing
staff - who really set the policies of our government behind the
scenes, while the politicians are out front in the spotlight making
speeches and kissing babies - and doing as they're told by the Jews
behind the
scenes.

Did you know that it was a Jewish speechwriter, David Frum, who put
the phrase "axis of evil" in George Bush's mouth to justify America's
ongoing war against Israel's enemies? Did you know that a clique of
Jews in the Defense Department and among George Bush's foreign policy
advisers are the people actually running the so-called "war on terror"
in Afghanistan: a war that they intend to expand to Iraq and any other
Middle Eastern country that gets uppity, in order to make that part of
the world safe for Israel at American expense? Secretary of Defense
Donald Rumsfeld is a front man for his nominal subordinates, Deputy
Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz and Deputy Undersecretary of
Defense for Policy Douglas Feith; and George Bush's official foreign
policy adviser, Condoleezza Rice, helps him meet his Black quota for
the Cabinet, but it is the Jew Richard Perle, chairman of Bush's
Defense Policy Board, who gives him his foreign policy directives.

As I've said on more than one occasion, George Bush is a feckless
nincompoop who couldn't come up with a defense policy or a foreign
policy on his own if he had to -- which is why he's President. The
real policymakers behind the scenes certainly don't want a man in the
White House who has ideas of his own, because those ideas might
conflict with theirs.

And it is nothing but empty sophistry to make a distinction between
Jews in Israel, such as Ariel Sharon and Simon Peres, and the Jews in
Mr. Bush's administration formulating his policies or the Jews
controlling our mass media. They all are Jews, and that's what really
matters.

There are many knowledgeable Americans besides me who think that it's
not a good thing to have Jews using America to advance Israel's
interests at the expense of America's interests. They know how the
system works: how the Jews exert their control through money and media
and a well-entrenched network of Jewish operatives, such as Wolfowitz
and Feith and Perle. And many of these knowledgeable Americans also
understand how Jewish subterfuge and deceit work: they understand that
the Jews throw up a lot of smoke to conceal their control and make it
appear that they have much less influence than they actually do.

Despite this degree of understanding that many knowledgeable Americans
have, there seem to be very few who are willing or able to draw the
necessary conclusions. What I keep seeing are comments about the need
to get the so-called "peace process" going again in the Middle East,
and how there are hardline supporters of Israel who are obstructing
the "peace process" because they think that it will give too much to
the Palestinians or will compromise Israel's security, or whatever.
These knowledgeable Americans seem to believe that if we could just
get around the Jewish hardliners somehow -- if we could just
neutralize Jews such as Wolfowitz and Feith and Perle; if Ariel Sharon
could be replaced by a "moderate" Jewish prime minister -- then the
"peace process" could proceed, America could gradually reduce its
involvement in helping the Jews keep the Palestinians repressed, and
eventually Israel no longer would be using America, and everything
would be rosy. And so these knowledgeable Americans expend all of
their wit and energy in these trivial pursuits.

Listen! Do you know what the most hopeful aspect of the conflict
between Jews and Palestinians is now? It is the ongoing radicalization
of the Muslim masses throughout the whole Middle East. The
collaborator governments in Pakistan, in Egypt, in Saudi Arabia are
terrified of the reaction they see among their own people to what
Ariel Sharon is doing to the Palestinians. When Sharon's Jewish troops
shoot Palestinian children, Muslim mobs riot, and governments that now
collaborate with the United States quake. Ariel Sharon is the best
thing that has happened in the Middle East in the last 54 years.

The Palestinian tactic of suicide bombing is being denounced by every
politician and every media spokesman over here now. It's nothing but
terrorism, they all say. There's no justification at all for suicide
bombing, they tell us. Of course, whenever you hear that sort of
unanimity from the politicians and the media people you should be
suspicious. In fact, suicide bombing is the best tactic for the
Palestinians to use now, because it provokes the Jews to step up
reprisals. And the reprisals radicalize the masses in every country in
the Middle East. If just one of the collaborator governments falls,
the spines of all the rest will be stiffened, and the Bush government
will be far less likely to find collaborators for building its
so-called "coalition" to do the will of the Jews in the Middle East.

Suicide bombers now hardly put a dent in the population of five
million Jews in occupied Palestine, and Sharon's bloody reprisals
hardly put a dent in the overall Palestinian population. But if
conflict of this sort continues until just one collaborator government
is overthrown, that ultimately will be worth more than ten thousand
successful suicide
bombings in which only 20 or so Jews are killed each time. In the long
run there can be no real peace in the Middle East and no end to
America's shameful role there -- and no future for the Palestinian
people -- as long as there is an Israel. There seems to be a better
understanding of these things among knowledgeable Palestinians than
among knowledgeable Americans.

Shallow thinking and the pursuit of trivial goals is even worse among
knowledgeable Americans when it comes to domestic problems. They
really do not want to grasp these problems with both hands and deal
with them in a forthright way. Look, for example, at what uncontrolled
immigration has done and is doing to America. And what do
knowledgeable Americans propose to do about that? Very little, really.
They make much of the fact that several of the al-Qaeda hijackers who
carried out the September 11 attack were in the United States only
because of very lax immigration policies, and so that's a good reason
for tightening up the policies.

How about simply rounding up all illegal aliens immediately -- all 12
million of them -- and booting them and all of their offspring out of
the country without further ado?

Oh, no, no, no! We can't do that! Why not? Well, the media never would
stand for it. The media would be all over anyone who even proposed a
mass expulsion of illegal aliens. They would denounce any political
leader who tried to do that as a "racist" and a "neo-Nazi." And so
knowledgeable Americans, who understand the immigration disaster quite
well, continue tiptoeing around it, afraid to do or even say anything
really significant about it: terrified even to think about really
radical solutions that might actually end the problem. And it's the
same with the rest of our domestic problems. Lots of people understand
these problems and are worried about them, but they won't tackle them
in any
significant way. They let the Jews -- the Jewish media and Jewish
money and the entrenched Jewish network -- have their way, for all
practical purposes.

Why? Why are the Jews permitted to get away with all of their
destructive policies and activities without being challenged or
opposed in any significant way? Part of the reason is that the Jews
are very powerful, and therefore many people are afraid to cross them.
They're afraid of the sort of media reaction I just mentioned in
connection with immigration. Everyone understands that the Jews stick
together and will viciously attack anyone who opposes them. It's the
old story, so aptly expressed by the late-16th-century writer, Sir
John Harington. Harington wrote: "Treason doth never prosper: what's
the reason? For if it prosper, none dare call it treason." Today the
Jewish power structure is
prospering, and none dare oppose it or even call it what it is. Well,
that's only part of the reason Jews are permitted to get away with so
much. There's more to it than that. There's a mystique the Jews have
built very carefully around themselves and nurtured diligently. It is
a mystique of piety and injured innocence. It is a mystique that says
to the Gentile world: "We are a gentle and inoffensive race, and
because of this everyone hates us. We're smart and we work hard and
achieve success, and because of this everyone hates us. We are a
highly moral and ethical race, and because of this everyone hates us.
We are a very talented race, with many gifted members, many geniuses,
and because of this everyone hates us. We are a very altruistic race,
a race of philanthropists who only want to make a better world for
everyone, and because of this everyone hates us."

Many simpletons among the lemmings simply accept these claims at face
value. Many knowledgeable people, however, who can see through these
claims to the real Jews hiding behind them, still hesitate to
challenge them. Part of the Jewish mystique is the so-called
"Holocaust." In its most simpleminded form the "Holocaust" story is
the claim that the
Germans hated the Jews for the reasons I just mentioned -- for their
gentleness and their success and their morality and their talent and
their altruism -- and because of this hatred roasted six million of
them during the Second World War in "gas ovens," to use one of the
Jews' favorite "Holocaust" phrases.

Actually, the "Holocaust" is a very powerful part of the Jewish
mystique. The Jews crafted the "Holocaust" story with great care and
great effort -- well, actually not with as much care as they might
have used: it's as full of holes as a Swiss cheese, but still it is
sufficient to make most people, even those who understand what Jews
are really like, hesitate to attack them. People don't want to be seen
as bullies. They don't want to be seen as so insensitive that they
would criticize the Jews, who already have suffered so much, poor
dears, at the hands of anti-Semites.

In several past broadcasts we've looked at a number of the lies and
exaggerations and distortions that make up the "Holocaust" story.
There are a number of good books available on the subject from the
sponsor of this broadcast, National Vanguard Books, including Norman
Finklestein's excellent book The Holocaust Industry, which I discussed
in an earlier broadcast. The point is that despite the lies, despite
the fact that many knowledgeable Americans are aware of the lies, the
"Holocaust" still serves its purpose for the Jews. People are afraid
of the image conjured up by the "Holocaust."

Perhaps it's that American life is too soft... Whatever the reason,
many otherwise knowledgeable and hardheaded Americans just can't
entertain the idea of rounding up the Jews and getting rid of them,
even when the situation is as urgent as it is in America today. And
really, in the long run that is the only way to solve the Jewish
problem.

The Germans understood that, back in the 1930s, and they had the
courage and the foresight to act on their understanding. Unlike
Americans today, they had an honest government concerned above all
with the survival, welfare, and progress of the German people, and
they began doing what was necessary, forcing the Jews to emigrate
wholesale from Germany beginning in 1933. And because of that the
Jewish propaganda machine has attacked the Germans so viciously, has
so blackened and demonized their image, that today even knowledgeable
people are afraid to be associated with that image. They are afraid to
say that the Germans were right, that the Germans were justified, and
that we need to do the same if we are to survive. So, as I said, the
"Holocaust" story, despite its
glaring discrepancies and lies, still serves as a shield for the Jews;
it still protects them from criticism.

Well, mostly. In parts of Europe not quite as poisoned by Jewish
propaganda as America is, the shield has slipped a bit. A large
British department store chain, Selfridges, has yielded to demands
from anti-Israel demonstrators and has removed from its shelves
products marked "Made in Israel." Last week the second largest
supermarket chain in Norway, Coop Norge -- which is to say, Norway
Coop, announced its decision to boycott all Israeli imports. That
decision was not the result of pressure from anti-Israel demonstrators
but was based on the feeling by Coop Norge management that it would be
immoral to continue supporting the Israeli economy by selling Israeli
imports under the
present circumstances. That is a step forward, though it is a long way
from what is needed.

The Jews, of course, immediately began waving their "Holocaust" story
around, and now, as the boycott movement catches hold in Scandinavia,
they are trying to portray themselves as injured innocents being
attacked once more by "anti-Semites." They are comparing the growing
Scandinavian boycott of Israeli products to the German boycott of
Jewish merchants in the late 1930s. Certainly, a boycott of Israeli
products is a good thing, and the fact that such a boycott is even
thinkable by big businessmen today is a sign that the Jewish mystique
-- and in particular the Jewish "Holocaust" story -- is becoming a bit
shopworn. It no longer has the hypnotic power that it once had -- at
least, in some parts of the world. And I suppose that we should be
happy about that. The unfortunate fact remains, however, that in
America the Jews still have their money and
their media and their entrenched network of bureaucrats, and even if
the "Holocaust" story has lost some of its charm in Europe, it still
keeps most knowledgeable Americans intimidated.

Knowledge isn't enough. Courage and boldness also are necessary.
Honesty and forthrightness are necessary also. Tiptoeing around the
critical issues of our time isn't enough. Tiny reforms in our
disastrous foreign policy and in our disastrous immigration policy and
in a dozen other disastrous policies aren't enough. We need to stop
apologizing to the people who are destroying us and go full bore at
destroying them instead.

Instead of being hypnotized by the "Holocaust" story we need to look
with clear eyes at why there was a need for action against the Jews in
Germany in the 1930s and 1940s. The Jews' claim today that the Germans
were suffering from collective insanity and had no reason for trying
to get the Jews off their backs is as phony as George Bush's claim
that
Osama bin Laden had no reason for attacking America on September 11.

Wherever Jews go they corrupt and destroy. That is their nature,
always and everywhere. Let us be thankful to the Palestinians who now
are making such terrible sacrifices to help the world see what the
Jews are like. And I suppose we also should be thankful to Ariel
Sharon for demonstrating so forthrightly to the world what Jews are
like.

Let us hope that the conflict between Jews and Palestinians
intensifies and lasts long enough to wake up many more of our people
around the world and fill them with disgust at America's continuing
support for the Jews. Let us hope that it lasts long enough to bring
about the overthrow of every collaborationist regime in the Muslim
world. Let us hope that it brings about an airtight oil embargo
against the United States and shuts off the lights in every shopping
mall and every sports stadium in America long enough for the lemmings
to become restless and begin asking questions. Let us hope that it
makes the efforts of every fool and every traitor who is striving for
a resumption of the so-called "peace process" so obviously futile that
these efforts no longer have the power to deceive anyone.

Ultimately, of course, we must not depend on the Palestinian suicide
bombers or on Ariel Sharon's murder squads to do for us what we should
be doing for ourselves. Ultimately we must stop tiptoeing and begin
marching boldly and forthrightly toward solving our own problems."


www.tomatobubble.com www.ihr.org http://nationalvanguard.org

http://national-socialist-worldview.blogspot.com
Byker
2017-04-04 02:36:26 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Topaz
Tiptoeing around Our Problems
What must we do to put an end to this jihad? Although each Western nation
has its own specific political context, governmental structure, and legal
requirements for going to war, there are a number of general actions that
all Westerners and/or Western nations can and should take if we want to end
this barbarous assault. Here are ten essential steps:

1. Acknowledge that we are at war.

Westerners must acknowledge that we are at war with Islamic states and
jihadist groups that have attacked our countries and killed our countrymen.
We are at war regardless of whether our political leaders have declared war,
regardless of whether Western intellectuals admit we are at war, regardless
of whether anyone acknowledges the fact. Our alternatives do not include
whether to go to war. Our alternatives are whether to win the war that is
being waged against us, or not to do so. Our alternatives are: victory or
submission.


2. Name the enemy.

We cannot target the enemy that is attacking us—much less defeat it—if we
are unable or unwilling to specify who and what it is. We must name the
enemy. We must name it accurately. And we must demand that our governments
and politicians name it accurately.

Our enemy in this war is: Islamic regimes that have in any way sponsored or
supported attacks against the West, and jihadist groups that have planned or
executed such attacks. The enemy regimes are primarily those in Iran and
Saudi Arabia; and the jihadist groups include Hezbollah, Muslim Brotherhood,
Al Qaeda, and Islamic State (aka Daesh).

Importantly, although Islam is a philosophic and cultural enemy of the
West—in that it opposes every principle of Western civilization and calls
for the murder of those who refuse to submit to “Allah”—Islam is not our
military enemy.

Islam is a religion—a body of ideas—and, militarily speaking, one cannot be
at war with ideas. What would one bomb?

The relationship between Islam and our current military enemy is essentially
of the same kind as the relationship between Nazism and Nazi Germany or
Shinto and Imperialist Japan in World War II. Nazism is an ideology, a body
of ideas; Nazi Germany was a state ruled by a regime that was motivated by
its leaders’ and supporters’ acceptance of those ideas. Shinto is a
religion; Imperialist Japan was a state ruled by a regime that was motivated
by its leaders’ and supporters’ acceptance of that religion. Likewise, Islam
is a religion; various states, regimes, and groups today are motivated by
their leaders’ and supporters’ and members’ acceptance of that religion.

Islam motivates our military enemy. And this is an important fact. But Islam
has not attacked the West; Islamic regimes and jihadist groups have. Islam
cannot be eliminated; Islamic regimes and jihadist groups can. Our military
enemy today is not Islam but the regimes and groups that embrace that
religion, take it seriously, and thus seek to kill us in the name of their
alleged God.

Grasping this distinction is vital, because naming our enemy accurately is
crucial to winning the war. If we misname the enemy, calling it “Islam” or
“Radical Islam”—or, worse, “terrorism” or “extremism” or the like—then we
won’t know specifically where to deploy our forces, whom or what to bomb, or
what winning this war means (more on this below).

Additionally, if we accept the notion that our military enemy is “Islam,” we
might come to think that in order to win the war we must kill every
self-described Muslim on the planet, which would be a moral atrocity (to put
it mildly).

Although all jihadists are Muslim, not all self-described Muslims take Islam
seriously enough to engage in, materially support, or encourage jihad. And
unless a Muslim does so, he cannot properly be regarded as our military
enemy.

Like the vast majority of today’s Jews and Christians, many of today’s
Muslims refrain from acting in accordance with the murderous or otherwise
rights-violating tenets of their religion. This does not absolve unserious,
non-rights-violating Muslims of any and all responsibility for jihad, but it
does limit their responsibility to a sub-legal, sub-political level.

Just as we do not and should not hold all Jews and Christians legally or
politically responsible for assaults or murders committed in accordance with
their religious scriptures, so we should not hold all Muslims legally or
politically responsible for assaults or murders committed in accordance with
theirs.

Merely believing in a religion that calls for rights violations does not, in
and of itself, violate rights. To violate rights, one must initiate physical
force against people, either directly—by, for instance, hitting, stabbing,
or shooting them—or indirectly—by, for instance, materially supporting those
who commit such acts, or encouraging or inciting others to commit such acts.

If a Muslim in any way materially supports, encourages, or incites jihad—if
he provides jihadists with weapons, shelter, information, or the like; or if
he calls for aggression against Westerners—he is, by that fact, an agent of
the enemy and should be treated accordingly. But if he merely “believes in”
the tenets of Islam and does not practice the rights-violating tenets of the
religion, he cannot properly be held legally or politically responsible for
practicing them. We recognize this fact in regard to other religionists and
religions, and we morally must recognize it in regard to Muslims and Islam
as well.

Our military enemy in this war is Muslims who engage in jihad, or materially
support jihad, or encourage or incite jihad. These are the Muslims of which
the Islamic regimes and jihadist groups are comprised. And these are the
Muslims, regimes, and groups we must eliminate.


3. Acknowledge and assert our absolute right to self-defense—and recognize
that individuals, groups, and regimes that engage in or call for jihad
against the West thereby forfeit their rights entirely.

Westerners must acknowledge that we have an absolute right to life, liberty,
and the pursuit of happiness—and that this includes the right to
self-defense: the right to do whatever is necessary to eliminate threats
posed by regimes, groups, or individuals who seek to kill us or otherwise
violate our rights.

Although Muslims have a right to believe whatever they want to
believe—including the nonsense that “Allah” exists and is the source of
truth and moral law—they do not have a right to act on their beliefs if
doing so involves committing murder or otherwise violating rights. There is
no such thing as a right to practice religious tenets that call for rights
violations. The notion of a right to violate rights is a patent
contradiction in terms.

We must also recognize that although rights are inalienable (meaning they
cannot be taken away), they are not unrelinquishable. One can relinquish or
forfeit one’s rights by violating the rights of others. If a person, group,
or regime engages in murder or terrorism, or aids in such activities, or
incites others to engage in such activities, he or it thereby forfeits his
or its rights entirely.

Jihadists and their supporters have no rights. They are, by their own chosen
actions, right-less animals. Thus, when we kill them in retaliation, we do
not violate their rights. We cannot violate that which does not exist.


4. Define victory.

We cannot win this war if we do not know exactly what winning it means. If
we want to win, we must define victory—and we must do so in a way that
specifies what is necessary for us to return to normal, jihad-free living.

Victory against this enemy means: (a) the elimination of all Islamic regimes
that have in any way sponsored or supported attacks against the West, and
(b) the elimination of all known jihadist groups (and individuals) that have
attacked, aided in attacks, or encouraged attacks against Westerners or
Western nations.

Only when this two-part goal is accomplished can we return to normal,
jihad-free living. Only then will we have won this war.


5. Use the full force of our militaries to eliminate all Islamic regimes and
jihadist groups that have supported or executed attacks against our
countries or our countrymen.

Which military strategies and weapons will best serve the purpose of
eliminating the Islamic regimes and jihadist groups that have attacked the
West is a matter for military experts and generals to decide. But all
thinking and decision making pertaining to this matter should be guided by
the principle that our respective governments and militaries have a moral
obligation to eliminate the regimes and jihadists who have attacked us—and
to do so as quickly as possible and with minimal risk to the lives of our
civilians and soldiers.

Western nations in general—and the United States in particular—have
extremely powerful militaries. America’s military alone could eliminate any
Islamic regime or jihadist group on the planet in a matter of days (if not
hours)—if the U.S. government unleashed its forces. And America’s military
combined with those of other Western nations could eliminate the entire
field of enemy regimes and groups in short order—if the West chose to do so.

The jihad against the West persists only because the West has not chosen to
end it. This is a moral atrocity. Westerners have a selfish, moral
obligation to end this assault on our lives and the lives of our loved ones.
Permitting this enemy to remain in existence is like permitting known serial
killers to roam our neighborhoods. It is sheer insanity.

It is time to end the insanity. It is time to end the jihad.

Importantly, by eliminating these murderous groups and regimes, we would not
only solve the immediate problem of their existence; we would also strike a
significant blow to the root of the longer-term problem. By summarily
eliminating the existing Islamic regimes and jihadist groups that have
attacked the West, we would significantly discredit the religion that
motivates jihad and that will continue spawning more jihadists until it is
discredited.

Although, as noted above, we cannot eliminate Islam (a body of ideas), we
can discredit it—and doing so is an essential aspect of winning this war. By
demonstrating to jihadists and would-be jihadists that their fantasy God is
powerless against the West’s very real militaries—by showing them that
Westerners can easily destroy the entire Muslim world if we so choose—we
would show them that jihad is a thoroughly hopeless cause (more on this
below).

Of course, no matter what the West does now, some preexisting jihadist cells
will erupt and murder or attempt to murder more Westerners. At this point,
nothing can stop that. We live in a causal environment, and Western
governments and leaders have permitted these Islamic regimes and jihadist
groups to remain in existence and to plan, plot, recruit, and develop cells
for so long that future attacks by existing cells are a certainty. The
question is: Will we tackle the broader problem now and thus reduce the
number and intensity of future attacks—or not?

If we fail to eliminate the jihad-sponsoring regimes and jihadist groups,
not only will existing jihadist cells attack the West; new jihadist cells
will continue to form and attack as well. If, on the other hand, we end
these regimes and groups now, we will cut our losses dramatically and take a
giant step toward normal, jihad-free living. The correct choice couldn’t be
clearer.


6. Airdrop leaflets explaining the West’s new policy and encouraging the
establishment of rights-respecting governments.

After obliterating jihad-sponsoring regimes and jihadist groups, Western
nations should airdrop leaflets throughout the Muslim world explaining that
henceforth this is how the West will respond to any and all jihadist threats
against Westerners, and encouraging the people of the Muslim world to make
the choices and take the actions necessary to join the civilized world.

These leaflets should read roughly as follows:

Dear Arabs, Persians, and Muslims,

This letter is from the coalition of Western nations that recently destroyed
the Islamic regimes in Iran and Saudi Arabia as well as various jihadist
groups that have attacked Westerners or Western nations.

We are writing to inform you of our new policy regarding jihad against the
West and to encourage you to join the civilized world.

Our new policy regarding jihad against the West is that it is forbidden.
Henceforth, any and all people or groups that engage in or advocate jihad
against Westerners or Western nations will be summarily eliminated. Please
do not test us on this. We will not issue additional warnings.

We do not want to be at war with you. And we no longer are. War implies that
both sides in a conflict have some degree of military power and the will to
use it. We have sufficient power to eliminate the entire Muslim world in a
matter of days (actually seconds). And we have demonstrated our will to use
it. Relatively speaking, you have no military power at all.

What you do have is the power of choice. And your alternatives are: Cease
jihad against the West or die.

We want to establish friendly, mutually beneficial relations with you. We
want to be able to engage in trade with you; we want to be able to hire you
to work for our companies, and to be hired by you to work for yours; we want
to be able to visit your countries and have you visit ours; we want to be
able to benefit from each other’s rational ideas, innovations, creativity,
prosperity. In short, we want to live in peace and harmony with you.

But in order for us to do so, you must meet two conditions:

You must repudiate all forms and degrees of rule by Islamic or sharia law.
If you want to believe in “Allah,” that is your prerogative. But if you
attempt to govern or in any way rule others by means of Islamic law, you are
by that fact unfit for peaceful interaction with the civilized world.
You must establish substantially rights-respecting governments—governments
that recognize and protect each individual’s right to think and speak and
act as he sees fit. Such governments entail complete separation of Islam and
state. (See condition number one.)
If you choose to meet these conditions, you will be able to engage with the
West in all manner of mutually beneficial, life-serving ways. If you choose
not to meet these conditions, you will suffer the consequences of that wrong
choice.

Our militaries are watching you, and they have orders to similarly eliminate
any and all individuals or groups that make any effort to engage in jihad
against the West. Please do not require them to take further action.

Please, instead, choose to repudiate sharia law and to establish
rights-respecting governments. Your reward for making this choice will be
lives of prosperity and happiness for you and your loved ones.

Sincerely,

The people of the West


7. Acknowledge that jihadists and their sponsoring regimes bear full
responsibility for all death and destruction resulting from retaliation
necessitated by their aggression.

If a gang of thugs opens fire on a group of concertgoers, and if a
concertgoer draws a gun and fires back at the gang members—thereby killing
an innocent bystander—who is morally responsible for the bystander’s death?
The gang of thugs is, and every thinking adult knows this.

This is a matter of the law of causality: He who initiates physical force
against people is morally responsible for any and all death and destruction
caused by the retaliatory force he thereby necessitates.

The same principle applies to jihadists’ attacks against the West. When the
West’s use of retaliatory force against Islamic regimes and jihadist groups
leads to the deaths of innocents, their deaths are fully the responsibility
of the regimes and groups that initiated aggression and thus necessitated
retaliation.

Of course, leftists and other apologists for jihad will deny this. But their
words have no bearing on the laws of nature. Unlike “Allah,” the law of
causality is real. People can deny it, but their denials have no bearing on
the fact. Just as people can deny the law of gravity but cannot alter the
fact that it exists, so too they can deny causal connections regarding human
choices and actions, but they cannot alter the fact that these connections
exist.

Causal connections are not matters of opinion; they are matters of fact.
When a person, group, or regime necessitates retaliatory force, he or it is
responsible for the consequences of that retaliatory force.


8. Answer objections to the effect that “This approach will fuel more
jihad!” with observations as to why that makes no sense.

Claims to the effect that “killing jihadists will cause more jihad” are
absurd; and, when such objections arise, we should point out why this is so.
Here are a few facts to have at the ready:

First, jihadists cannot attack or plan or plot or recruit if they are dead.
And Islamic regimes cannot spawn or sponsor jihad if they do not exist.
These truths are self-evident.

Second, in the wake of a campaign of total destruction of Islamic regimes
and jihadist groups that have attacked us in the name of an allegedly
all-powerful “Allah,” even the dimmest mullahs and jihadists who escaped
destruction would have to wonder whether Allah is as great and powerful as
they had assumed. They might even begin to doubt his existence. “If Allah is
not willing or able to save us or our regimes from the retaliatory wrath of
the West,” they might wonder, “then maybe he’s not all he’s cracked up to be
. . .” The more intelligent survivors might make substantially deeper and
broader connections: “Maybe, instead of serving Allah, we should serve
ourselves. Maybe we should do what those triumphant, wealthy, happy
Westerners do, and go by reason rather than faith; be productive rather than
destructive; pursue life and happiness rather than death and martyrdom;
establish rights-respecting republics rather than rights-violating
theocracies . . .”

Of course, not all surviving jihadists would pause and think. Some would
doggedly persist in their efforts to murder Westerners. But such
mathematically challenged jihadists would be relatively few in number, and
Western forces could hunt them down and eliminate them in short order.

Third, any Muslims who attack Westerners because we killed jihadists who
murdered our countrymen were already with the enemy and are now just making
it known. This information is beneficial to us because it enables us to
identify and kill these newly exposed jihadists as well—and to do so sooner
rather than later, affording them less time to plan, plot, recruit, murder.

Additional facts can be cited in response to claims that “killing jihadists
causes jihad,” but the foregoing indicates why such objections don’t make
sense.


9. Call Islam what it is. Call dishonesty what it is. And call apologists
for Islam what they are.

Westerners must not let leftists or other apologists for Islam get away with
misrepresenting or excusing this exceedingly evil religion.

Islam is a religion of war, conquest, enslavement, rape, pedophilia,
bloodlust, and death worship—it is a religion of unspeakable evil—and
everyone paying attention knows this, including those who claim otherwise.
As I wrote in the opening of “The Evil of Whitewashing Islam”:

One religion today regularly motivates large numbers of its followers to
murder, behead, rape, and enslave people across the globe. That religion is
Islam. Not Christianity. Not Judaism. Not Buddhism. Islam. Only Islam. You
know this. I know this. Everyone paying attention knows this.

The Koran explicitly and repeatedly commands Muslims to engage in jihad or
“holy war” whether they like it or not. “Jihad (holy fighting in Allah’s
Cause) is ordained for you (Muslims) though you dislike it, and it may be
that you dislike a thing which is good for you and that you like a thing
which is bad for you. Allah knows but you do not know” (e.g., 2:216, 9:38).
The Koran explicitly and repeatedly commands Muslims to “kill the
unbelievers wherever you find them” (e.g., 2:191, 9:5), “strike off their
heads” (e.g., 8:12, 47:4), make sex slaves of their wives and daughters
(e.g., 4:24, 33:50), and continue this jihad “until all opposition ends and
all submit to ‘Allah’” (e.g., 8:39, 9:29). You know this. I know this.
Everyone paying attention knows this.

According to Islam, the “Prophet” Muhammad is the ideal role model for all
boys and men; he sets the perfect example for how to live and wage jihad.
Muhammad regularly killed and beheaded unbelievers (e.g., the massacre of
Banu Qurayza), made slaves of those he conquered but didn’t kill (he had
many slaves), “married” (i.e., repeatedly raped) slave girls (e.g., Safiyah
and Rayhana), raped children as young as nine years old (e.g., Aisha), and
founded a religion in which all such behavior is regarded as morally great
because the “Prophet” did it. You know this. I know this. Everyone paying
attention knows this.

Of course, the moment anyone mentions the murderous and evil tenets of Islam
or practices of Muhammad, leftists and other apologists for Islam begin
harping about the murderous and evil tenets of Judaism and Christianity.
What are we to make of this?

Although Jewish and Christian scriptures call for murder and other rights
violations, almost all Jews and Christians today disavow or ignore those
parts of their religions. Their adherence to their scriptures has been
tempered by the Renaissance and the Enlightenment, and by the obvious need
to reject patently barbaric religious tenets in order to live as civilized
human beings. Given the clear and rationally unarguable fact that virtually
no Jews or Christians today are motivated by their religions to murder or
enslave or rape or the like—and given the equally clear and equally
unarguable fact that many millions of Muslims today are motivated by Islam
to do so—choosing to focus on the evils of Judaism and Christianity rather
than on the evils of Islam is obscenely evasive.

When educated adults deny that Islam is a religion of war and unspeakable
evil—or when they imply that Judaism or Christianity somehow pose threats
similar to those posed by Islam today—or when they imply that the tenets of
other religions somehow mitigate the clear and present danger of Islam—they
are not merely mistaken. They are lying. They are pretending that facts are
other than they know them to be. And, in so doing, they are aiding the
jihadists.

This kind of aid to the enemy is not illegal, but it is evil, and those who
engage in it should be labeled accordingly, as “apologists for jihadists.”
And they should be treated accordingly. They should be morally condemned,
publicly shamed, and thoroughly ostracized.

Islamic regimes and jihadist groups have repeatedly attacked and continue
attacking the West because we embrace secular, Enlightenment values and thus
refuse to submit to their alleged God. They have already murdered many
thousands of Westerners, and they aim to murder all of us. Some Westerners
want to identify the relevant facts so that we can solve the problem. Others
want to obfuscate the facts and thus enable the jihad to continue. Some
Westerners are moral. Others—who don’t deserve to be called Westerners—are
evil.

This is no time to mince words or to hedge the truth. It is a time to call
everything exactly what it is.


10. Acknowledge the difference between being “politically correct” and being
morally correct—and proudly embrace the latter.

The approach advocated here is not “politically correct.” Rather, it is
morally correct. And this difference makes all the difference necessary to
justify it fully.

“Political correctness” requires that we pretend that facts are other than
they are. Moral correctness requires that we call things exactly what they
are. “Political correctness” denies that Islam is a religion of war and
opposes the elimination of Islamic regimes and jihadist groups that attack
and murder Westerners. Moral correctness acknowledges that Islam is a
religion of war and demands the elimination of regimes and groups that
attack Westerners. “Political correctness” is morally wrong. Moral
correctness is morally right.

Of course, in being morally correct, we will “trigger” the ire of leftists,
who will call us names, such as “Racist!”—as if Islam were a race;
“Islamophobe!”—as if fear of those who embrace a religion that requires them
to murder us is somehow irrational; “Warmonger!”—as if defending ourselves
and our loved ones against faith-driven animals who seek to murder us is
somehow wrong. But being on the receiving end of such inanities is a small
price to pay for protecting our rights and the rights of our loved ones.


If a sufficient number of Westerners were to embrace these ten principles of
action, the jihad against the West would soon be a thing of the past. We can
end this god-awful nightmare and return to normal, jihad-free living. We
know what we need to do. We just need to do it.

http://bit.ly/1YC2jXh
Topaz
2017-04-04 20:50:24 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Byker
What must we do to put an end to this jihad?
There is no jihad. There is only false flags run by Jews.

ISIS = false flag

UN: Proven Ties Between ISIS And Israel

Posted by Sean Adl-Tabatabai

A new report from the UN reveals that the Israeli Defence Forces (IDF)
maintained regular contact with members of ISIS since May 2013. The UN
identified contact with IDF forces and ISIS soldiers. - See more at:
http://yournewswire.com/un-proven-ties-between-isis-and-israel/#sthash.X4jhsvpa.dpuf

- See more at:
http://yournewswire.com/un-proven-ties-between-isis-and-israel/#sthash.X4jhsvpa.dpuf

Documented Proof ISIS Is a Creation of The United States of America


http://www.tomatobubble.com/id872.html
By destroying ancient Christian sites, and by murdering contemporary
Christians themselves, the godless Israeli attack dog known as 'ISIS'
is killing two birds with one stone. Christians suffer while Muslims
takes the blame. Only the deluded devotees of Sulzberger's Slimes and
the rest of the piranha press actually believe that the mercenary scum
of ISIS are real Muslims. True Muslims do not murder, rape and loot.
Nor do they oppress Christians. Indeed the Koran venerates Jesus as a
Holy Prophet and commands Muslims to respect Christians.

Please see this very important youtube video:



Even before the documentation, it was obvious that "moderate" ISIS was
only attacking things Israel hates. Syria, Russia, France (France
wants to recognize Palestine; Bibi publicly warned that that was a
"grave error" about a week before Charlie Hebdo), Christians, Europe
and Hamas. It was also clear that we knew about the con that was going
on, because the USA were not attacking them at all, although the USA
were certainly pretending to be at war with them. Then Russia came
along...
Christopher Helms


by Dean Obeidallah
Denounce ISIS? Muslims despise ISIS. (At least those who aren't
pathological.)
True, ISIS is compromised of people who claim to be Muslims. But the
number one victim of this barbaric terror group is Muslims. That's
undisputed. ISIS has killed thousands of Muslims across the Middle
East, including beheading Sunni Muslims in Iraq for failing to pledge
loyalty to them, executing Imams for not submitting to them, and even
killing an Imam in Iraq for simply denouncing them.
And just a few days before the brutal terrorist assault in Paris, ISIS
launched a coordinated terrorist attack in Beirut, killing 43 and
wounding 239 people who were primarily if not exclusively Muslims.
However, in contrast to Paris, American media outlets barely covered
the Beirut attack. Apparently Muslims being killed by ISIS doesn't
attract enough ratings for U.S. media outlets to justify "full team"
or even quarter team coverage.
Post by Byker
Although each Western nation
has its own specific political context,
But all run by Jews who hate the White race.
Post by Byker
governmental structure, and legal
requirements for going to war, there are a number of general actions that
all Westerners and/or Western nations can and should take if we
Who is this "we" you speak of? The USA is run by Jews who hate the
White race.



www.tomatobubble.com www.ihr.org http://nationalvanguard.org

http://national-socialist-worldview.blogspot.com

Loading...