MSN lying by omission?

I don’t claim to know the motivations of the Munich mass-murderer Ali Sonboly. People from Muslim countries can be deranged, depressed or at their breaking point just like the rest of us.

But this much is clear: The media is in damage control/propaganda overdrive mode. MSN interviewed a witness, one  Huseyin Bayri, who tried to help the wounded. It’s obvious that they’re going out of their way to interview innocent bystanders who, specifically, are of Muslim origin. This is a known media tactic.

But look closely at the video, also found here, at second 16-17. You’ll notice that they clipped something out. Other sources state that the gunman shouted “Allahu akbar!”

Could it be that Huseyin Bayri told the reporter of this, but that portion was cut out? It wouldn’t surprise me at all.

As this endless bloodshed continues in Europe, it becomes ever more evident that the so-called “media” does not consider its job to be the disseminating of information, but rather to stem the flow of information when possible, and if not, to spin it according to their own narrative.

The German government has even gone a step further, and now prosecutes people for voicing dissent against the government’s immigration policies.

“Diversity” and freedom of speech cannot coexist for long.

Posted in examples of propaganda, freedom of speech issues, Muslims | 3 Comments

My apologies for not posting

Hi friends! It’s been a long time. You might have been wondering why I haven’t been posting. The answer is, besides the fact that the beautiful Oregon summer has arrived, that others, far more eloquent than I, have been doing a fine job saying pretty much all the things I like to say.

I keep finding gems on Youtube. For example, Black Pigeon Speaks. Here are a couple of examples of his amazing work:

And then there’s Acts7apologetics, who does a great job putting Islam in its place. For example:

In other news, I got my concealed carry permit today. Better late than never. Now I’ve got to start hitting the range and training myself. A few more classes are in order.

Speaking of concealed carry, there was an incident not long ago here in Portland. Amren reported on it. A conservative activist was voicing his opinions during a black lies matter protest in downtown Portland. Apparently, some of the protesters started harassing him, and attacking him. At some point, he pulled his gun, and he got arrested. I wasn’t there, so I don’t know exactly what happened. A reporter claimed the man (Michael Strickland) had pointed the gun at him – but I don’t trust such reporters.

I’ve been thinking about this incident, and whether Strickland was justified in brandishing his weapon. If his claims are accurate, and he was being attacked by the mob, then he was in imminent danger and he was justified. But my thought on the matter is that it might have been a better idea to use pepper spray. Just because you’re licensed for concealed carry doesn’t mean you gun should be your first solution. If pepper spray will do the trick, then use that first. If things escalate, and lethal force must be used, then brandish your gun.

One of the handouts I got from the required handgun class deals with “Stand Your Ground.” It announces:

On March 29 2007, the Oregon Supreme Court ruled that Oregonians have no “duty to retreat” when faced with a violent confrontation.

This is not to say that it’s always a good idea to “stand your ground,” but in certain situations, this would be the best option. For example, when your assailants may be able to outrun you and attack you from behind as you retreat, or when retreating might send a bad message. In Strickland’s case (according to his account), it would send a message of cowardice and weakness vis a vis the black lies matter movement.

I would have loved to have joined Strickland on that day, but I didn’t know about it, and it was probably a workday for me anyway.

Posted in Uncategorized | 3 Comments

Confusion in the West Bank

I lived in Israel for 12 years, and returned to visit only twice. That was a long time ago. On one of those visits, I decided to reconnect with a close friend. He, along with his family, lived in Kiryat Arba, the largest Jewish settlement in the West Bank.

Back when I lived in Jerusalem, I’d visit this friend frequently, so Kiryat Arba was almost like a second home to me for a while. Hence, the recent news of a 13 year-old girl’s murder, in Kiryat Arba, sent shivers up my spine and gave me nightmares. How could the citizens of Kiryat Arba have let this happen? Have they allowed their security to become lax over the years?

The last time I was in Kiryat Arba, my friend had to do some shopping in nearby Hebron. Of course, this was done at the suq (Arab marketplace). When we were done, my friend had to interact with an Arab from the window of his car, and he did so with such hatred and contempt that it made me squirm. I’d seen this before from other Israelis. I couldn’t help but wonder what they hoped to accomplish through this behavior. Maybe it was to avoid any signs of what might be perceived as weakness. What we Westerners consider common courtesy and respect can be construed as an invitation to be taken advantage of in the Middle East.

But still, I could never bring myself to treat a stranger this way. For all I know, he could have been Islam al-Bayed. He and his wife stopped to rescue an Israeli family trapped in their car after a terrorist attack. What if one of the rescued children grows up, treats a random Palestinian like shit – and then finds out that the target of his disdain was the same man who saved his life years earlier? How would he feel then?

That’s why I’ve always maintained that it’s best to be nice to people (in most situations) unless you have specific reason not to be.

Blanket hatred for Arabs is the norm in the settlements, or at least it was when I was there. I know that the hatred is reciprocated by the Arabs. This is one reason I no longer call Israel “home.” I could never bring myself to hate Arabs. A couple of times I even rebelled against such hatred.

I’m not saying that such hatred doesn’t serve a purpose; it can help reduce miscegenation, and it can remind people to be wary. But there must be a middle ground, where boundaries are respected, but so are people.

Psychologically speaking, it’s a lot easier to lump all Arabs together and to hate them all. This is especially true when you’re constantly threatened by surrounding Arabs, constantly hearing Arab propaganda against you, and sometimes losing a loved one to Arab terrorism. This is why I’m not so quick to judge the Jews of Kiryat Arba. On the other hand, It’s a sad state of affairs.

These must be trying times for what remains of the family saved by Islam al-Bayed. They grieve for their husband/father. They’re angry at those who attacked them, and those who encourage such attacks. But they must also be grateful to the Arab who saved them. Their world view is now challenged*, and they can no longer be psychologically lazy. Every time they’re tempted to hate all Arabs, they’ll remember al-Bayed. Personal growth could spring from such confusion.

*Assuming, of course, that they’re like so many other Jewish settlers.

Posted in Jewish stuff and Israel | 13 Comments

For Aryeh

I haven’t been posting much, partly due to the fact that it’s summer here, and there are few places on Earth as good to be as Oregon during the summer. But also because I’ve been busy with social stuff, such as friends and family.

One such individual, who counts as both friend and family, is Aryeh. I promised him I’d dedicate a post to him.

Firstly, I’d like to congratulate the UK for their effort in turning the tide against imperialism, and voting to secede from the abomination called the “European Union.” I hope they don’t give in to pressure from the Establishment Left and have another referendum. I also hope they follow up and do what is absolutely necessary to save their countries: Expel as many foreigners as possible and curtail their birthrates. Demographics is destiny, and a people cannot control its own destiny (cannot have self-determination) if it’s dominated by foreigners. Find a place in Africa, or Asia, that will take them and relocate the foreign masses. If that doesn’t work, then mandatory sterilization should be implemented. Is this cruel and inhumane? Perhaps, but the blame should be laid at the feet of the Establishment Left, which brought about this sad state of affairs to begin with.

Secondly, I’d like to ridicule that same Establishment Left for allowing thousands of potentially violent Muslims into the US, doing everything they could to disarm law-abiding Americans – and then having the audacity to blame gun-rights people for the massacre in Orlando, which was perpetrated by a gay-hating Muslim, a product of their own insane immigration policies.

On the topic of Muslims, I found some very well-done (if somewhat vulgar) animations on Youtube about Islam:

The normal response to such accusations against Islam involves citing their behavior in the West, and quoting Qur’anic verses that contradict such accusations. But I say let’s ignore all that; let’s judge Muslims (and other religions/demographics) by what they do when they’re in charge. Let’s judge them by actions that are sanctioned by Islamic organizations (within majority Muslim countries) and authorities.

Posted in immigration/ Hispanics, Muslims, pan-nationalism and multi-culturalism | 2 Comments

Anti-body-shaming or Sharia?

By now, you’ve probably all read about Islam’s new London mayor’s ban on “body-shaming” ads on public transport. Ostensibly, this ban is intended to protect women from being shamed.

Khan announced:

“As the father of two teenage girls, I am extremely concerned about this kind of advertising which can demean people, particularly women, and make them ashamed of their bodies. It is high time it came to an end.

“Nobody should feel pressurised, while they travel on the Tube or bus, into unrealistic expectations surrounding their bodies and I want to send a clear message to the advertising industry about this.”

We are to believe that Khan’s religion has nothing to do with it. But if his intention is to introduce Sharia by stealth, what better way to start than by promoting issues with which Muslims and feminists share common ground?

Most corporate media outlets have ignored any possible Islamic motivation behind this law. But David Li, of the New York Post, writes:

London Mayor Sadiq Khan announced a ban on body-shaming ads on public transit, a moved praised by gender equality groups — but blasted by some who said it’s the start of the “Islamification” of the city by its first Muslim mayor…

But some on social media said the decision was “as per Sharia law,” saying Khan was “using feminist talking points to enact Sharia policy” and “turning London into a Muslim city,” according to RT.

Added Sharene Kirchler to the BBC’s Facebook page:

“What happened to free speech? What happened to not being offended by everything. Why is it a matter of state to decide when something so subjective is to be allowed or not?”

According to Snopes, the initiative came as a response to “massive public outcry” and Change.org petition that garnered over 70,000 signatures. The main piece of evidence, cited by Snopes, is the statement (quoted above) by the mayor himself. They also point out that only a small fraction of London advertisements will be affected. Of course, Snopes has no way of ascertaining the true motivation behind Khan’s initiative. Khan could be lying, and the fact most of London’s advertisements aren’t (yet) affected means nothing; even stealth Sharia must start somewhere.

I don’t claim to know Khan’s true motivation, but I’m pretty good at spotting propaganda. The Miami Herald has a slide show about this new law. Here’s one of the slides:

londonlaw

Notice it uses the fact that “Germany recently banned ads in response to a rise in the number of sexual assault cases within the country.” Apparently, the Herald doesn’t expect its readers to actually click on the hyperlinks. The hyperlink for “Germany recently banned ads” clearly shows that the ban was in response to attacks by Muslim men.

Let’s rephrase that, just to show how perverse it really is:

Critics of the ban say that it forces Khan’s Muslim beliefs on everyone, but Germany recently did the same in response to attacks by Muslim men on its women.

As for France, Israel, Italy and Spain, they didn’t exactly “enact similar measures.” Rather, according to the New York Times, they “enacted policies aimed at preventing models with stick-thin bodies from working in the industry.” Obviously, the model in question is not “stick-thin,” nor do such policies amount to bans on “body-shaming” on public transport.

So shame on the New York Times for misleading its readers, and shame on the Miami Herald for taking such propaganda to even lower levels.

Personally, I agree with the spirit of the policies of France, Israel, Italy and Spain; anorexics should not be held up as the female ideal. However, it’s hard for me to sympathize with overweight people when I see their atrocious eating habits every day. Some people are overweight through no fault of their own, but too many are that way due to their own bad habits and lack of discipline. The Protein World model has a very healthy-looking body, and women should definitely be encouraged to try to emulate her. By the same token, men should be encouraged to emulate svelte male models too.

Incidentally, where’s the outcry over buff male models being shown in public?

 

Posted in examples of propaganda, human sexuality and morality, Muslims | Tagged , , | 8 Comments

Hug a white man t-shirt

I don’t like posting photos of myself on this blog. Not because I’m afraid of SPLC persecution; it’s just that I’m not photogenic. In any event, I walked around Portland today in this t-shirt, and had my buddy snap this photo of me at an auspicious location:

hugawhiteman

Posted in activism | Tagged | 7 Comments

A review of Hive Mind – by Garett Jones

I got this from Counter-Currents:

Hive Mind

1,380 words

Garett Jones
Hive Mind: How Your Nation’s IQ Matters So Much More Than Your Own
Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2016

In Hive Mind, economics professor Garrett Jones departs from the usual individualistic focus of libertarians like himself in that he makes the case, knowingly or not, for more ethnocentric policies. He does this in a normie-safe manner; the reader might at times suspect he is a secret shitlord, but is being careful not to offend orthodoxy too directly.

Jones writes in a simple accessible style which sometimes leaves the reader hoping for more details. This was a wise move, in that it encourages independent research, which may be more effective in red-pilling the reader. Luckily there are extensive endnotes, and six papers to which the author contributed are cited.

The book discusses the value of IQ for the success of groups. Jones believes that being part of a high-IQ group is far more valuable than having a high IQ as an individual, and discusses several reasons for this. Simply bringing this up contributes to red-pilling even without going into the details on race and IQ, in that it points out another area in which diversity is not a strength.

The functioning of groups is investigated here partly in terms of cooperation, and high-IQ groups are for several reasons more successful in this sense. Jones draws this conclusion from research investigating several different aspects of cooperation.

Firstly, high-IQ individuals are more patient. This means they tend to have higher rates of savings. Their patience is part of a higher general concern for the future, as Alt-Right readers may already know from looking at racial differences in time preference.

Second, they are more pleasant in dealing with others, at least initially. They will however be more willing to punish others when it turns out that others are not playing fair.

Third, they are more perceptive, that is, they are more able to accurately assess what others are thinking and feeling. In terms of group cohesion, this means less paranoia and pointless infighting.

As one might guess from all of the above, low IQ is a good predictor of corruption. High rates of corruption are exactly what one would expect when people have less concern for long-term consequences, less inclination to treat others fairly, and less understanding of whether others are trying to take advantage of them.

Read the rest of this review here.

Posted in book/movie/video reviews and links | 4 Comments