Sunday, January 15, 2017

French Court of Appeal rules that Israel is the legal occupier of West Bank

From here:

By Jerry Gordon

h/t Imre Herzog. Here’s a stunner. M. Jean Patrick Grumberg of the French blog Dreuz made a useful discovery and somehow the Israel and world media didn’t cover. The PA brought suit in France against French companies building the light rail system in Jerusalem. The PA lost in a decision that ruled that Israel is the legal occupant of Judea and Samaria.

So, why isn’t the Israeli and world media hopping all over this? Perhaps because they are intimidated by the threat of Islamic violence as their god Allah granted possession of any conquered lands in perpetuity. Which will never be held up in a Western court that doesn’t recognize sharia law ruling based on fiction rather than fact. But then the pack of Israel’s enemies gathering in Paris for tomorrow’s hatefest doesn’t care about the facts and law. That would include that self -promoting ‘stalwart defender of Israel’, Secretary of State Kerry. Read this important French court case findings in this Dreuz blog post by the estimable M. Grumberg.

Grumberg, a French lawyer by training wrote:


In a historical trial carefully « forgotten » by the media, the 3rd Chamber of the Court of Appeal of Versailles declares that Israel is the legal occupant of the West Bank*.

When I first learned that the Court of Appeal of Versailles ruled that West bank settlements and occupation of Judea Samaria by Israel is unequivocally legal under international law, in a suit brought by the Palestinian Authority against Jerusalem’s light rail built by French companies Alstom and Veolia, that received no media coverage, I decided to put to work my years of Law Studies in France, and I meticulously analyzed the Court ruling.

To my astonishment, pro-Israeli media did not cover it either. The few who mentioned the case did not have any legal background in French law to understand the mega-importance of the ruling, and, as a few lefty English speaking Israeli websites reported it, they thought that it was a decision strictly pertinent to the Jerusalem light rail. It’s not.

To make sure I did not overestimate my legal abilities and that I wasn’t over optimistic – as usual-, I submitted my analysis and the Court papers to one of the most prominent French lawyer, Gilles-William Goldnadel, President of Lawyers without borders, to receive his legal opinion. He indeed validated my finding. Then I decided to translate it to English, and it will soon be submitted to Benjamin Netanyahu thru a mutual friend.

First and foremost, the Versailles Court of Appeals had to determine the legal rights of Palestinians and Israelis in West Bank. Their conclusion: Palestinians have no right – in the international legal sense – to the region, unlike Israel, who is legitimately entitled to occupy all land beyond the 67 line.

The context :
In the 90s, Israel bid for the construction of the Jerusalem light rail. The tender was won by French companies Veolia and Alstom. The light rail was completed in 2011, and it cross Jerusalem all the way to the east side and the « occupied territories » (more about this term later).

Following this, the PLO filed a complaint with the High Court (Tribunal de Grande Instance) of Versailles France, against Alstom and Veolia, because according to PLO, « the construction of the tram is illegal since the UN, the EU, many NGOs and governments consider that « Israel illegally occupy Palestinian territories ».

The quest for the International Legislation to establish the rights of each party.
In order to rule whether the light rail construction was legal or not, the court had to seek the texts of international law, to examine international treaties, in order to establish the respective rights of the Palestinians and the Israelis.

And to my knowledge, this is the first time that a non-Israeli court has been led to rule on the status of the West Bank.

Why is this an historical ruling: it is the first international case since the declaration of the State of Israel in 1948

It is the first time since the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948 that an independent, non-Israeli court has been called upon to examine the legal status of West bank territories under international law, beyond the political claims of the parties.

Keep in mind though, that the Court’s findings have no effect in international law. What they do, and it’s of the utmost importance, is to clarify the legal reality.

The Versailles Court of Appeal conclusions are as resounding as the silence in which they were received in the media: Israel has real rights in the territories, its decision to build a light rail in the West Bank or anything else in the area is legal, and the judges have rejected all the arguments presented by the Palestinians.

The Palestinian arguments

• The PLO denounces the deportation of the Palestinian population, and the destruction of properties in violation of international regulations. Relying on the Geneva and Hague Conventions and the UN resolutions, it considers that the State of Israel is illegally occupying Palestinian territory and is pursuing illegal Jewish colonization. Thus, construction of the light rail is itself illegal (1).

• The PLO adds that the light rail construction has resulted in the destruction of Palestinian buildings and houses, the almost total destruction of Highway 60, which is vital for Palestinians and their goods, and has conducted many illegal dispossessions. Therefore, several clauses from the annexed Regulations to the October 18, 1907 Fourth Hague Convention were violated (2).

• Finally, the PLO alleges that Israel violates the provisions relating to the « protection of cultural property » provided for in Article 4 of the Hague Convention of May 14, 1954, Article 27 of the Hague Regulations of 1907, Article 5 of the Hague Convention IX of 1907, and Article 53 of Additional Protocol No. 1 to the Geneva Conventions.

The Court of Appeal does not deny the occupation, but it destroys one after another all the Palestinian arguments
Referring to the texts on which the PLO claim is based, the Court of Appeal considers that Israel is entitled to ensure order and public life in the West Bank,therefore Israel has the right to build a light rail, infrastructure and dwellings.

Article 43 of the Fourth Hague Convention of 1907 stipulates that « The authority of the legitimate power having in fact passed into the hands of the occupant, the latter shall take all the measures in his power to restore, and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety ».

Israeli occupation does not violate any international law

« The Palestinian Authority misread the documents, they do not apply to the occupation »

The Court explains that the Palestinian Authority misinterprets the texts and they do not apply to the occupation:
• First of all, all the international instruments put forward by the PLO are acts signed between States, and the obligations or prohibitions contained therein are relevant to States. Neither the Palestinian Authority nor the PLO are States, therefore, none of these legal documents apply.

• Secondly, said the Court, these texts are binding only on those who signed them, namely the « contracting parties ». But neither the PLO nor the Palestinian Authority have ever signed these texts.

Propaganda is not international law
The Court, quite irritated by the presented arguments, boldly asserted that the law « cannot be based solely on the PLO’s assessment of a political or social situation.«

Humanitarian law was not violated

The PLO mistakenly refers to the wrong legal document because the Hague Convention applies in case of bombing. And … « Jerusalem is not bombed. »

The PLO invokes the violation of humanitarian law contained in the Geneva and Hague Conventions.
• But on the one hand, says the judges of the Court of Appeal, international conventions apply between States and the PLO is not a State: « the International Court of Justice has indicated that [the Conventions] only contain obligations for the States, and that individual have no rights to claim the benefit of those obligation for themselves ».

• Then the Court says that only the contracting parties are bound by international conventions, and neither the PLO nor the Palestinian Authority have ever signed any of them.

• The Court draw the conclusion that the PLO is mistakenly referring to the wrong legal document because the Hague Convention applies in case of bombing. And … « Jerusalem is not bombed.«

The PLO and the Palestinians were dismissed
The PLO cannot invoke any of these international conventions, said the Court.
« These international norms and treaties » does not give the « Palestinian people that the PLO says he represents, the right to invoke them before a court.«

The Court of Appeal therefore sentenced the PLO (and Association France Palestine Solidarité AFPS who was co-appellant) to pay 30,000 euros ($32,000) to Alstom, 30,000 euros to Alstom Transport and 30,000 euros to Veolia Transport.

Neither the PLO nor the Palestinian Authority nor the AFPS appealed to the Supreme Court, therefore the judgment has become final.

This is the first time that a Court has legally destroyed all Palestinian legal claim that Israel’s occupation is illegal.

Reprint or redistribution of this copyrighted material is permitted with the following attribution and link: © Jean-Patrick Grumberg for www.Dreuz.info

• (1) The PLO relies on article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention of August 12, 1949, which states that « the occupant power may not deport or transfer part of its own civilian population in the Territory he occupies », and article 53, which states that « the occupant Power is prohibited from destroying movable or immovable properties belonging individually or collectively to private people, to the State or to public authorities or social or cooperative organizations, except in cases where such destruction is rendered absolutely necessary for military operations ».

• (2) The PLO refers to the Fourth Geneva Convention of August 12, 1949: ? Article 23 (g), which prohibits « the destruction or seizure of enemy properties except in cases where such destruction or seizure are imperatively ordered for the necessities of war. »

(3) Article 27 according to which « in the sieges and bombardments, all necessary measures must be taken to spare as much as possible the buildings devoted to worship, the arts, sciences, charitable institutions, historical monuments, and hospitals … »

(4) Article 46 which states that « private property can not be confiscated ».
http://www.dreuz.info/…/israel-is-the-legal-occupant-of-th…/

Israel is the legal occupant of the West Bank, says the Court of Appeal of Versailles, France
In a historical trial carefully « forgotten » by the media, the 3rd Chamber of the Court of Appeal of Versailles declares that Israel is the legal occupant of the West Bank*. When I first learned that the Court of Appeal of Versailles ruled that West bank settlements and occupation of Judea Samaria…
DREUZ.INFO

Saturday, January 14, 2017

10 rules for radicals of the right

From here:

In 1971 Marxist strategist Saul D. Alinsky published his infamous handbook for “community organizers,” titled “Rules for Radicals,” which ever since has been the essential resource for left-wing agitators, including the Clintons and Obama.

Alinsky dedicated his “Rules for Radicals” to “the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom – Lucifer” [the entity also known as Satan, the Father of Lies and Enslaver of Mankind].

As we conservative populists begin to reclaim our nation from Alinsky’s anti-American Bolsheviks, we need a resource for pro-American constitutionalists. These Rules for Radicals of the Right are dedicated to the One who conquered Lucifer:

1. Tell the truth without hesitation or apology.

Truth is our most powerful weapon and strategy. Truth is objective, verifiable and self-evident to a clear-thinking mind grounded in rationality and knowledge of the facts. Rationality proceeds from recognition and respect for the created order and the Creator Himself. His immutable laws provide the fixed standards by which any material or spiritual thing can be measured, proved and trusted. Without fixed standards there can be no steadfast rule of law making all men equal and free, only arbitrary rule by those with power to enforce their will.

2. Keep it simple but not stupid.

The enemy relies on confusion to create chaos and then exploits it to take control. He weaves a complex fabric of falsehoods, half-truths, misrepresentations, misdirection, hidden false assumptions and sophistry designed to mislead the gullible into drawing false conclusions. Complexity favors the deceivers. Honest and intelligent simplification frees captive minds.

3. Trust or not trust, but always verify.

People who spin narratives or otherwise interpret facts or events instead of providing the straight facts to interpret for yourself often have their own agenda. This includes not just leftist media but can be any information source, including those you think are trustworthy. Whenever you’re expected to form a conclusion on any issue based on the authority of the source rather than the full and free presentation of the facts, including opposing opinions and interpretations, don’t trust it. This is especially true when an inherently controversial narrative is repeated consistently over time from only one perspective, such as “climate change,” the “born gay” assumption, or the theory of evolution.

4. Think for yourself.

Human beings are susceptible to jumping on bandwagons or joining teams to meet social needs, but this makes us vulnerable to manipulation by people who form or control teams to serve their own agenda (i.e, the R’s and D’s). Beware of any group, system or institution that requires or expects you to substitute their conclusions for your own, or to adopt a “team” position on a whole slate of issues, and shuns or denigrates you for disagreeing on one or more items. (E.g., many liberals recognize an essential natural order in the eco-systems of living things but are forbidden from acknowledging the natural family as humanity’s ecosystem because “gay rights” is a “must-embrace” leftist goal.)

5. See the good and bad on both sides.

Remember that the devil works both sides of the street, and it serves his goals if we evaluate people by the team they’re on, not their character or the rationality of their arguments. If truth is our standard and filter, we’ll judge things and people fairly and thereby lessen the “us vs. them” stupidity that makes us so easy to manipulate in elections and other cultural conflicts.

6. Restore critical thinking.

The goal of the elites has always been to “dumb down” Americans to make us easier to deceive and control. Thus liberal terminology always avoids simple definitions and distinct boundaries, especially when used in social policy or laws (e.g., “homophobia”: a nonsense word that implies all disapproval is an anxiety disorder). We can defeat the elites by mastering critical thinking skills and restoring true literacy that employs only clearly defined words in unambiguous sentences conveying true and trustworthy knowledge.

7. Reclaim objectivity.

The elites always obscure the distinction between objective truth and subjective opinion, and between hard science (which is never contradictory to biblical truth, properly understood) and “soft science” (which can easily be manipulated to serve a hidden agenda). We must always promote and defend objective truth and contrast it with the subjective opinions and belief systems of the often-fraudulent “soft sciences” that have been driving our social policies for decades.

8. Challenge the know-it-alls.

The elites on both sides invariably assume an attitude of moral and intellectual superiority. It’s easy to expose their errors by practicing the Socratic Method of interrogation. Just ask 1) “What do you mean by that?” (i.e., define your terms), and 2) “How do you know that’s true?” (i.e., what is your source of authority). You don’t have to be an expert on any given topic to take command of the discussion and expose liberal illogic and it’s lack of sound presuppositions.

9. Avoid the tar-babies.

Remember that you can’t persuade a true-believer leftist with fact and logic. Intellectually, most of them embrace a closed-loop Cultural Marxist narrative similar to paranoid schizophrenia. If someone proves himself incapable of recognizing self-evident truths (such as denying the humanity of an unborn baby while looking at an advanced stage ultrasound image), disengage immediately. Conservative populists should largely ignore the left and their delusions and just focus on taking the seats of power away from them.

10. Be an army of one.


Paradoxically, populism is a movement of individualists whose common denominator is the U.S. Constitution. Unlike our cultural opponents who hold the hive-mind mentality of big-government statists, our true strength isn’t in our numbers, but the rightness of our cause. We don’t need to wait for marching orders from Donald Trump or any other perceived leaders; we can act on our own or in small groups on the inherent authority granted to us by God and affirmed by the founders. The quicker we all decide just to do that, the quicker we can restore this republic. (I figure we’ve got about a two-year window.)

 - Scott Lively -

Thursday, January 12, 2017

Introducing ... Anti-Psychiatry!

From here:

New U of T grant backs studies in 'anti-psychiatry;' 


U of T’s ‘anti-psychiatry’ scholarship is affront to science and could hurt mentally ill patients, critics say


By Tom Blackwell | January 10, 2017 6:05 PM ET; Ottawa Citizen Wed January 11 2017 P.#NP3.
_____
Field 'does not stand up to scrutiny': prof
_____

As Bonnie Burstow sees it, there’s no such thing as mental “illness,” no evidence that psychological problems stem from physical imbalances in the brain, and even less that treatments like anti-psychotic drugs actually help people.
But PhD students who follow the University of Toronto professor’s radical ideas have a tough time winning financial support: arguing that mental health care as we know it should be abolished can be a hard sell.
So Burstow has put up $50,000 of her own money and convinced the U of T to back a striking new scholarship – for studies in “anti-psychiatry.”
The university defends the grant as an embodiment of academic freedom, but the controversial initiative is raising questions about just how far that freedom should extend.
"This is a case where academic freedom should be quashed
Burstow says her grant gives new legitimacy to a burgeoning field, and notes that many of the donors — who so far have matched her commitment with another $12,000 — are ”survivors” of psychiatric treatment or their parents.
“When they send it and they say, ‘I wish I could send more, but you’re saving the lives of those not yet born,’ you know that donation meant a lot to them,” she said. “A quite large number are parents of kids who have been hurt by psychiatry and want to see this line of research encouraged.”
Critics, however, worry the university is endorsing an anti-scientific, anti-intellectual exercise – a false attempt at “balance” that could inadvertently convince some patients to eschew treatment and put their lives at risk.
Indeed, the scholarship has won support from an organization founded by the Church of Scientology, zealous foes of psychiatry.
“This is a case where academic freedom should be quashed,” Edward Shorter, a U of T professor and expert in the history of psychiatry, states bluntly. “People will read this and think ‘Well, maybe mother doesn’t need that psychiatrist after all, it’s just a lot of bunkum.’ And then the first thing you know, someone has committed suicide.”
Dr. Joel Paris, a McGill University psychiatrist who does not hesitate to criticize elements of his own specialty, said he was “ashamed” the Toronto institution would endorse a scholarship dismissing the whole field.
While there is much unknown about psychiatry and problems with how it is sometimes practiced, the scientific foundation of mental illness and its treatment is undeniable, he said.
BULLSHIT. Just read Psychiatry founder Dr. Thomas Szasz's "The Myth of Mental Illness!"
“We don’t have an anti-neurology scholarship or an anti-hepatology scholarship. Psychiatry is the only specialty that has people trying to abolish it,” said Paris. “This doesn’t make sense.”
NO, what doesn't make sense are your evasive excuses; neurology (the study of the brain and nervous systems) exists because nerves exist; hepatology exists because the liver exists - but psychiatry isn't a real 'hard' science because the 'mind' is by definition an imaginary construct! Or at least, it hasn't been correctly presented as a hard science until now, because you charlatans are really only acting as high priests and claiming an unearned expertise and authority over other people, to give your selves rights over them without a concomitant  corollary responsibility to educate them all to become self-reliant autonomous beings; in short, you and your kind are hypocrites exactly as are all other sub-categories of criminals   who claim extra rights by offloading their own responsibilities onto their slave-victims, by selling them victimology! 

Unluckily for you and your complicit gangster cohorts, I have actually taken the time to solve these problems, and as such can describe the mind in far greater and more detailed hard-science terms that you could ever have dreamed of from behind the fact-shields you use to deny the existence of any and all universally objective facts in the first place!
But a spokesman for the university’s Ontario Institute for Studies in Education (OISE), home to Burstow and the scholarship, said the project flows from the right of academics to freely research even unpopular ideas.
"Psychiatry’s tenets and claims do not stand up to scrutiny. 
We do not have to begin by trying to prove that
And all disciplines should be open to critical analysis, said Charles Pascal, an applied psychology professor at OISE. 
He cited widespread concerns, for instance, about over-medication of conditions like ADHD,
“The best of us live in a grey zone,” he said. “The best of us do not say black-and-white things about how good any profession is.”
Wow - all the usual and sadly predictable critical-thinking logical fallacies in play here, I see!
"There are no right answers. Since life is too complex for any of us to ever really be able to understand cause and effect, and since all facts are really only opinions anyway, then our entirely fact-free subjective opinions are the diversely opposite equals to your silly objective scientific facts! And furthermore, since we are all so obviously such helpless victims, and we all do it, too, the only real crime should be to accuse other victims of being 'criminals' with free will choices and intentions, just because they commit 'crimes' against other helpless victims, you meanies! We should always go along (with criminal lies) to get along (with all the other lying criminals)! Whee!" 

In other words, Prof. Pascal just proudly confessed to being non-compus mentis, and so ungracefully bowed out of this very serious adult discussion!
;-)
And yet Burstow herself, who has a doctorate in educational theory with a minor in psychology, does not subscribe to a grey area on the topic. She denies the anti-psychiatry label implies any pre-conceived notions or that non-scientists are unqualified to study the area – because it’s already well established mental illness does not exist.
“Psychiatry’s tenets and claims do not stand up to scrutiny. We do not have to begin by trying to prove that,” said Burstow. “I am saying these are not diseases … There is not a single proof of a single chemical imbalance of a single so-called mental illness.”
Shorter and Paris said such statements are simply “absurd,” that thousands of scientific studies – now incorporating sophisticated imaging of the brain – bolster the idea that biology is behind many psychological conditions and that various treatments do, in fact, work.
NONSENSE! There have been absolutely zero instances of any cures for mental 'illnesses!'
And in fact, ALL the scientific evidence goes the other way, in the exact opposite direction!

Morally and legally, rights can only come with responsibilities. "Liberal" crime and hypocrisy is all about avoiding that fact. And not-so coincidentally, so are ALL examples of "mental illness!"


;-)
While controversy in the past often centred around involuntary commitment of psychiatric patients – epitomized by the Ken Kesey novel and 1975 movie, One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest – the vast majority of treatment today is voluntary, and institutionalization relatively rare, said Paris.
Even electro-convulsive therapy, portrayed by Kesey as almost an instrument of torture, has won support recently, with research suggesting new, safer versions of the technology can help severely depressed patients who are unresponsive to other therapy.
More bullshit. ECT simply fries people's memories, so they can't remember their fears!
;-)
National Post

Monday, January 9, 2017

Bombshell New Study Suggests that Liberals are Far More Likely to Commit Crime than Conservatives

From here:



Wow. The results of a new study conducted by researchers from the University of Cincinnati, Florida State University, and Pennsylvania State University are sending shockwaves across the nation.

Four researchers sought to discover whether or not political ideology could predict involvement in criminal activity, but what they found could upend our entire political and criminal justice systems.
Political ideology represents an imperfect yet important indicator of a host of personality traits and cognitive preferences. These preferences, in turn, seemingly propel liberals and conservatives towards divergent life-course experiences. Criminal behavior represents one particular domain of conduct where differences rooted
in political ideology may exist. Using a national dataset, we test whether and to what extent political ideology is predictive of self-reported criminal behavior. Our results show that self-identified political ideology is mono-tonically related to criminal conduct cross-sectionally and prospectively and that liberals self-report more criminal conduct than do conservatives. We discuss potential causal mechanisms relating political ideology to individual conduct.
The data was gathered through “self-reported” behavior and is therefore cannot be trusted as a fool-proof result, but it is instructive in explaining important cultural differences between conservatives and liberals. The data gathered and research presented seems to indicate a very strong correlation between political ideology and willingness to commit criminal behavior!
This dramatic chart is both compelling and astonishing:
Fig. 1. Estimated standardized scores on criminal involvement wave 3 and 4 by political ideology.  
The researchers do caution against assuming a “causal relationship between liberal political ideology and criminal conduct,” but they also observe that there is corresponding research that shows political conservatives are more closely associated with reduced criminal behavior.
There is apparent scholarly agreement that conservatives more strongly value social order, respect for authority, and social conformity and that conservatives are more religious, more conscientious, and demonstrate higher levels of self-control. These traits and values likely influence lifestyle choices in ways that better insulate conservatives against criminal behavior. Moreover, conservative narratives about “free will, personal responsibility, and morality may gel into cognitive scripts that condemn criminal conduct as immoral and worthy of social sanctions.
The researchers also point out that academics and philosophers are realizing more and more that political ideology may play a larger role in our daily life than most people realize. In fact, political ideology may indicate what a person believes, thinks, and does in more places than just the voting booth.

Overall, our study joins a growing stream of empirical assessments that document differences between liberals and conservatives. Collectively, these studies show the potent yet often unexamined role political ideology plays in everyday life. Political ideology represents more than disparate views on the proper role of government and adherence to refined political theories. Ideology reflects an assortment of correlated beliefs and narratives about behavior that are internalized by individuals. These narratives likely impact individual choices, making some choices more likely and other choices less likely. Criminal behavior may also reflect choices rooted in ideological narratives—narratives that promote or reduce the occurrence of crime.
----------

Well, of course libertine "liberals" are all criminals! And here's the scientific proof of it:

SCIENTIFIC PROOF LIBERALS COMMIT FAR MORE CRIME THAN CONSERVATIVES!

DL FREE .PDF VERSION HERE:

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Eric_Connolly/publication/309845639_Political_ideology_predicts_involvement_in_crime/links/5824d25408ae61258e429aa8.pdf?origin=publication_detail

...but it's all just a simple matter of binary either/or logic anyway!

Morally and legally, rights can only come with responsibilities.
"Liberal" crime and hypocrisy is all about avoiding that fact.

And not-so coincidentally, so are ALL examples of "mental illness!"

;-)

If psychopathic hypocrites didn't see something as important, they wouldn't try so fearfully to avoid it, nor work so diligently and obsessively hard to excuse themselves from ignoring it. They are enemies of thinking itself, which they refuse to admit is all fear-based triage, so they can be guaranteed to always try to do the exact opposite of the most inteligent and obvious thing. In old Biblical parlance, they are the Adversary of doing what is right (as in correct)!

Like all other people, they are motivated primarily by fear.

Unlike most others, they are motivated by the fear of 'it' - they are idolaters who try to distance them selves from the idealized ideology of "fear" as if "it" were a separate generalized force with which they could do combat.

They reject the truth - that all fears are separate but still generalized memories of specific pains, projected to the future. They must be analyzed and broken down into their originally-sourced component parts and scrutinized as to their present applicabilities, not rejected en masse.

This process is what has been attempted by psychiatrists and psychologists since the time of Sigmund Freud, BUT because they imitated the confessional, authoritarian approach of the Catholic church, they refused to let individuals apply their techings to them selves, in stead making them into helpless victims who were dependent on the 'doctors' as high priests of the new, 'secular' religion.

In other words, they refused to let people solve their own problems, in favour of enslaving them to a permanent dependency on them selves, because as usual, "There's No Money In Solutions, So Please Give Generously Again!"

Therefore, criminally negligent, morally and intellectually delinquent libertines (aka 'liberals') are emotion-based, but that emotion is idealized 'fear:' the strategy is to deny it, the tactics are all victim-blaming slander and (as is the case with religion) the promotion of mere cause-and-effect-free hope trumped up as the equally idealized, magical power called 'Faith!' to be used to "combat it!" And since 'fear' is the basis for all thinking, they substitute repetitive ritual templates and formats for actual case-by-case thinking.

Leftists fear other people's free-will choices. ALL criminal gangsters (leftists, muslims) want the POWER to forcibly CONTROL all other people, (whom they fear), through fear, simply because they can not trust them selves. As fear-fearing phobophobes, they are scared of others' fears, and so always accuse them of being afraid (as if being afraid or a phobe were some sort of thought-crime)!

Here's a short list of THEIR most prominent common phobias:

Racist, (melanin-o-phobe) Sexist, (femophobe) Homophobic, Xenophobic, Islamophobic, (aka Crime-o-phobic) - you name it.

Yet the only real thought crime is in refusing to think at all, because one is scared of the pain of fearful thought!

In one word, what they fear the most is "Freedom!" In stead, they prefer the safe surety and security of "inevitable" slavery! They are cowardly, suicidal masochists at heart - always seeking to control their own fears, BY causing those very same, worst-case scenario problems which cause the pains they fear the most!

"Since there is no free will, we have no choice but to commit "crimes" (because in every choice we make, something else must have "made" us choose one way rather than the other, right? And the only thing which that inevitable force can NOT have been, is "free will!") Because life is too complex for any of us to ever really be able to understand causes and effect, such that all so-called "facts" are really ever only opinions anyway. Therefore my entirely fact-free, subjective opinions are to be legally held up as being the diversely opposite EQUALS to your silly objective facts! Therefore there are no real "crimes" nor "criminals" because there is no 'mens-rea' guilty mind free-will choice at all, and so we're really ever all only helpless VICTIMS (of predetermined predestined forces, like of society/mere products of our environments, and of course proudly helpless slaves of allah)! Therefore the only real crime possible is to accuse any other victims of being "criminals" just for having committed their "crimes" against some "other" helpless victims!

CAPISCE?"

;-)

That was a true depiction of the caricature of thought used by libertine criminals (aka circular 'reasoning' tautology!) as their #1 alibi to excuse their crimes; aka:

"We're not criminals, we're all really only victims too!"
(And the only people who see 'criminal enemies' are 'insane')! aka "Paranoid" and "conspiracy theorists!"

Libertines ("liberals") are criminals, who follow the brazen rule of chaos. Conservatives obey the Golden Rule of Law.

The Golden Rule is "Do Not Attack First!" The rule of chaos says "All is allowed unless specifically forbidden first!"

Democrats are gangsters. Republicans are individualists who occasionally group together to stop gangsters' extortion.

Gangsters aren't 'sociopaths' (they love grouping together for mob violence) but they are psycho-paths (which literally means "thought killers")! aka HYPOCRITES! 'Subjectivists' who oppose universal equal rights in favor of their double-standards and divisive, adversarial group-identity politics! Us-vs-them and might-makes-right, not right-makes-might!

ALL criminals are always hypocrites who want rights without responsibilities: to our stuff, without having to earn of otherwise pay for it! So extortionists will always use victimology as their main alibi to excuse their ongoing crimes.

Friday, January 6, 2017

The Truth About Israel

  • Led astray from their primary mission, these international organizations have become tools of corruption or terrorism, reinforcing global Islamic power. Those who vote are heads of state, motivated by interests and ideologies that are often criminal, and not all of which represent the opinions of their people whom they tyrannize, including those from European "democracies".
  • In 1948-49, Egypt seized Gaza, Syria stood their ground on the Golan, and Transjordan colonized Judea, Samaria and the Old City of Jerusalem. Their Jewish inhabitants were killed or driven out by the Arab colonists, who seized their homes and destroyed their synagogues and cemeteries. Fighting ceased on armistice and cease-fire lines, there was no peace and no international borders were recognized.
  • Europe rushed to adopt the French position in 1973 and, along with the OIC, planned political measures designed to destroy the Jewish State by denying its sovereign rights and its cantonment on an indefensible territory. Resolution 2334 is now the icing on the cake of this policy, which forms the basis for a Euro-Islamic policy to merge in all EU political and social sectors, as well as in promoting globalism and the enforcement of the UN's supranational decision-making powers.
  • In 1967, once again, the combined armies of Egypt, Syria and Jordan invaded Israel to destroy it, but this time Israel took back all the land that had been lost in 1949, that had become Judenrein [free of Jews], Arabized and Islamized. These were areas from which the Palestinian Jews had been driven out, and that Europe referred to as Jewish colonies. They are called Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria.
  • No European nation protested against the Islamic colonization of Jewish-Palestinian areas, the expulsion of their Jewish inhabitants and the seizure of their belongings, or against the persecution of Jews in Arab countries.
  • An artificial Palestinian Arab "people" was created in order to replace the people of Israel. A European army of forger-historians and Arab Christian dhimmis transferred the historic characteristics of the Jews onto them. Names of towns and regions were Islamized: Jerusalem was called Al-Quds and "the West Bank" replaced Judea and Samaria.
  • Israelis, guilty of existing, were expected to apologize for that, humbly to maintain their enemies and suffer their terrorism without protesting or defending themselves. Their crime? They refused to mingle with and disappear into dhimmitude by giving up their rights and their history to the people created by the Euro-Arab alliance to replace them.
  • It is the turn of Europeans to see a replacement population be created in their countries, with all the rights that are being taken away from them. It is their turn to be forced to renounce their national, historic, cultural and religious identity, to apologize and take the blame for existing. It is their turn to be forced to monitor their borders and guard their airports, their schools, their trains, their streets and their cities with soldiers. European governments that contemplated the destruction of Israel worked together with the enemies of Israel to destroy their own people, their sovereignty, their security and their freedoms.
  • The recognition of the legitimacy of Israel's return to its homeland is the essential condition of Islamic peace with the world, because it will abolish the jihadist ideology.
UN Security Council Resolution 2334, adopted on December 23, 2016, politically reinforces UNESCO's resolution that erased the history of Israel in its historical homeland in order to replace it with the Koranic version of the Bible.


A vote at the UN Security Council (illustrative). [Image source: U.S. State Department]

This UN resolution once again proves that there is Islamic control over the politics and culture of international institutions. Led astray from their primary mission, these international organizations have become tools of corruption or terrorism, reinforcing global Islamic power. But let us not forget that those who vote are Heads of State, fully conscious and responsible individuals, motivated by interests and ideologies that are often criminal, and not all of which represent the opinions of their people whom they tyrannize, including those from European "democracies". Their latest resolutions not only confirm the victory of jihadism and illiteracy: they also express the success of the years of effort made by this post-war Europe that continues to destroy, defame and delegitimize the Hebrew State in the name of Islamic justice. The beginning of this long journey dates back to 1967, in France.

So what are these Israeli "settlements" that obsess nations so much? Are they vast territories thousands of kilometers from Israel, across seas and oceans? How did this so few people "conquer" them? Let us remind ourselves of the facts: in 1948, the Arab League declared jihad to destroy the Jewish State. The armies of five Arab States crossed the borders of Palestine, where the San Remo Resolution (1920) had recognized the legitimacy of a Jewish National Home. Egypt seized Gaza, Syria stood their ground on the Golan, and Transjordan colonized the Judea and Samaria Area and the old city of Jerusalem. Their Jewish inhabitants were killed or driven out by the Arab colonists, who seized their belongings and homes and destroyed their synagogues and cemeteries. Fighting ceased on armistice and cease-fire lines (1949), there was no peace and no international borders were recognized. But, to the great disappointment of millions of Nazi Europeans and their collaborators, Israel was not wiped out. It also welcomed most of the million Jews who had been robbed and driven out of Arab countries. No European nation protested against the Islamic colonization of Jewish-Palestinian areas, the expulsion of their Jewish inhabitants and the seizure of their belongings, or against the persecution of Jews in Arab countries. Between 1949 and 1967, the Israelis who had been brought together in a confined area without any international borders endured endless jihadist attacks from their neighbors.

In 1967, once again, the combined armies of Egypt, Syria and Transjordan invaded Israel to destroy it, but this time Israel took back all the land that had been seized in 1949, and that had become cleansed of Jews [Judenrein], Arabized and Islamized. These were areas from which the Palestinian Jews had been driven out, and to which Europe referred as Jewish "settlements" when in reality they became Arab colonies. They are called Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria.

The 1967 war ended with an Arab defeat. Once again, the Arab camp refused peace, and armistice lines separated the fighters. UN Security Council Resolution 242 (November 22, 1967) recommended the solution of two waves of refugees – both Arab and Jewish - and the conditions of a peace, to be negotiated between Israel and the Arab States that had occupied and colonized Palestinian territories, expelling or killing all its Palestinian Jewish inhabitants in 1949. It did not mention the Palestinians Arabs as a distinct people: they did not exist at that time. The Arabs, determined to destroy Israel, rejected this resolution.

Israel's lightning victory in 1967 humiliated France, which, after its deadly decolonization wars and the loss of countless Muslim colonies, was keen to move closer to the Arabs by playing the anti-Semitic card. Resolution 242 had been written in English, and France translated it into French, falsifying it in the process, by inserting the word "the" before "territories", a word that had been bitterly fought against during the negotiations to make explicit that not all of the disputed land was to be included. It is this French mistranslation that has now been imposed.

France had close links with the Palestinian leader of the Muslim Brotherhood, Amin al-Husseini, Grand Mufti of Jerusalem and an ally of Hitler and the Vichy government. This alliance created the "Palestinian people", invented by Palestinian Chairman Yasser Arafat, the nephew of the Mufti and the representative of the PLO. France, which had saved the Mufti from the Nuremberg trials by hiding him, was the first to recognize Arafat in 1969 and impose him on the still-reticent European Community. To secure recognition on an international stage, the "Palestinian people" used terror - by innovating airplane hijacking, by taking civilians hostage and by terrorist attacks in Europe.

In October 1973, Egypt and Syria attacked Israel once again and sustained another defeat. But this time the OIC declared an oil boycott on all countries that did not recognize Arafat and the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO), and that would not support Arab causes (Declaration of the Arab Summit Conference at Algiers November 28,1973). Europe rushed to adopt the French position in December 1973 and, along with the OIC, planned an agenda of political measures designed to destroy the Jewish State by denying its sovereign rights and its cantonment on an indefensible territory.

Resolution 2334 is now the icing on the cake of this policy, which has developed in several stages and forms the basis for a Euro-Islamic policy to merge in all European Union political and social sectors, as well as in promoting globalism and the enforcement of the UN's supranational decision-making powers.

To begin with, an artificial Palestinian Arab "people" was created in order to replace the people of Israel. A European army of forger historians and Arab Christian dhimmis [non-Muslims who have surrendered to living under Islam] transferred the historic characteristics of the Jews onto them. Made the symbol of salvation from the purported Occupation and the Colonization symbolized by Israel, the Palestinians were compared to Jesus, crucified on the cross of a supposedly "Zionist Nazism." The French Islamophiles and anti-Zionists, Louis Massignon and Jacques Berque, were the promoters of this role-reversal between the Jewish victims of Nazism and the Nazi persecutors, assisted by their Muslim allies on the battlefields and in the extermination camps, under the guidance of the Mufti.

Names of towns and regions were Islamized: Jerusalem was called Al-Quds and the West Bank replaced Judea and Samaria. Jihad and dhimmitude became taboo words. The OIC and its satellites, including Europe, had ordered the planned elimination of Israel. No argument could hinder its condemnation and the hateful campaign, by subverting words and language, that justified it. There was no point in pleading. Neither truth nor morality would change this verdict: Israel was the cause of the war, the terrorist attacks, injustice, all the evils suffered by the Islamic world and Europe, victims of jihadist terrorism - which it attributed to the existence of Israel. The fight to eliminate Israel was referred to as a just cause, a fight for peace.

The Euro-Arab alliance did its best to criminalize the Israelis for having restored their State to their historic homeland. The Israelis' national sovereignty, their cultural and historic roots, their survival, their successes and spectacular military victories earned them reproaches and denigration. Reinvigorated by Palestinian hatred, the post–war Nazi-Islamic alliance did its best to neutralize the success of the Jewish State on a political level, to make sure it remained unstable and insecure. Endlessly harassed by European governments and their armies of dhimmis, the Israelis, guilty of existing, were shamed for it, forced to apologize for it, and expected humbly to maintain their enemies and suffer their terrorism without protesting or defending themselves. Their crime? They refused to mingle with and disappear into dhimmitude by giving up their rights and their history to the people created by the Euro-Arab alliance (Eurabia) to replace them.

The PLO was the jihadist arm of the Ummah [the Islamic community], the embodiment of its theological ideology which justified Islamic expansion and its appropriation of all spaces, while wiping out the previous cultures and people, imposing its law, its customs and its beliefs everywhere.

Heads of state, European ministers, the clergy, dhimmi Christians who had become its courtiers, offered it their help, more than happy to collect its gold, while sweeping away the debris of people and history before its feet, obstacles to its progress as they finally managed to rid it of Israel. And – so they believed – they would rid them of nothing but Israel, and thereby achieve a Holocaust that began in Europe so that at last a world, a humanity, would emerge, without Israel. The dream of Hitler and the Mufti would be realized.

The European governments, allies of the Palestinian anti-Israeli terrorists, whom they called a "just cause" - thus feeding them spiritually and funding them - believed that they were safe. But guess what? This Ummah policy against Israel, actively supported by its European and dhimmi courtiers, was unleashed against the people of Europe. Did terrorists attack Israelis during their festivities? Now it is the Europeans who have to celebrate their festivities protected by an army of soldiers. It is the Europeans' turn to see a replacement population being created in their own countries, with all the rights that are now being taken away from them. It is the Europeans' turn to be forced to renounce their national, historic, cultural and religious identity, to apologize and take the blame for existing as they are. It is the Europeans' turn to be forced to monitor their borders and guard their airports, their schools, their trains, their streets and their cities with soldiers. Ironically, the European governments that contemplated the destruction of Israel worked together with the enemies of Israel to destroy their own people, their own sovereignty, their own security and their own freedoms. The OIC pandered to their unconfessed hatred of Israel, blinding them with its gold and unwaveringly led the cowards and the fainthearted, under the whip of terrorism, towards dishonor and oblivion.

Resolution 2334 is the culmination of this policy, but it is not the last chapter of the story. Syria, Lebanon, Iraq and Libya no longer exist, Egypt is scarcely hanging on. In its cauldron, jihad is burning Muslims who once dreamed of carrying it out against Jews and Christians. Arab dhimmi clergy and intellectuals, who inspired the Euro-Arab alliance against Israel and the Palestinian falsification, are seeing their communities decimated by their own lies. In a ruined Europe, butchered by hostile "sectarians," the people are rising up to send the zealous servants of the OIC to the scrap heap of history. Worried about popular anger, ministers no longer dare to lie and are forced to recognize jihadism and blame the terrorism on it instead of on Israel.

The future may well include the reconciliation of populations based on the recognition of the legitimacy of Israel's return to its homeland. Because this recognition will bring with it the quashing of the jihad against Christians and all non-Muslims. The recognition of the legitimacy of Israel's return to its homeland is the essential condition of Islamic peace with the world because it will abolish the jihadist ideology. Peace with Israel guarantees Islam's peace with the world's diversity. Maybe this is the mission of Israel's return to its birthplace as it battles alone at the bloody crossroads of nations.
Bat Ye'or, author of Eurabia: The Euro-Arab Axis, and of Europe, Globalization and the Coming Universal Caliphate (winner of a price in London, 2012) received a prize in Israel (1986) for her study on Oriental Jewry, and a price for the Courage of Free Speech in Paris (2015) and in Bologna (2015) for her book Comprendere Eurabia (2015). Her forthcoming book, Understanding Eurabia, will be published by Gatestone Institute and RVP Publishers in 2017.

Thursday, January 5, 2017

Free Speech and the 1st Amendment

From here, and from here:

Lying is the most basic form of theft: it's the (at least, attempted) theft of the Truth. Since all crimes are forms of theft, lying (aka "fraud" and "slander") is a crime, and all (non-defensively offensive) frauds are criminals. And as such, most if not all criminals are also hypocrites who want to extort subjective double-standard rights without responsibilities for only them selves and other like-minded criminals, and to deny their victims their rights to self-defense from criminals, by encouraging them to falsely consider them selves to be somehow responsible to the "victimized" criminals' hurt feelings. Since criminology depends on proving 'mens-rea' guilty-mind free-will criminal intent, the criminal's first duty to his craft is to deny any and all self-reliant free will choice even exists, or if it does exist, it doesn't matter because life is too complex for anyone to really ever be able to understand cause-and-effect logic or rationality. They must therefore posit that since all choices are caused by some other pre-existing, predestined and predetermined inevitable yet magical mysterious and ultimately inexplicable force, we really have no free will choices at all in life, and as such there are no real "crimes" nor "criminals" because we're all really ever only helpless victims - of "society"/ mere products of our environments, and of course proudly helpless slaves of unknown and unknowable "allah!" Therefore, the only thing we can know for sure, is that the only 'cause' of all these inexplicable existential effects we experience which we can and so should always rule out, is that of this mythical "free will choice" itself!

Therefore, they continue, the only real crime should be to offend other victims by daring to insult them by accusing them of being "criminals," simply because they attempted and even possibly succeeded in carrying out their "crimes" against "other" helpless victims! This is both how and why all of the soft-science "humanities" faculties in our education systems invariably and almost inevitably become victimology. These "Institutes of Higher Learning" teach students how to deny cause-and-effect in order to become slanderous extortionists claiming to be non-compus-mentis "victims!" We see it every day as hordes of entitled feral Millenial "activist" extortionists demand ever-more rights and ever-less responsibilities for them selves by slandering everyone else.

So our education system reflects this inherent criminal hypocrisy, betraying us and our children.

Slanderous criminal extortionists will always spew victimology as they try to pretend they are the real victims, and their victims are the real criminals. Reversing and ignoring cause-and-effect is who they are and what they do.

So of course they try to reverse the onus of proof, to get us to have to 'prove a negative' ("Prove you DIDN'T offend me!") which is of course subjective and impossible, because even if they could prove one DID offend them, their criminally hypocritical definition of offense is where they want to be the only ones to have rights and no responsibilities to others, and everyone else to only have a responsibility to them and no rights to self-defense what so ever. The cause-and-effect-reversed onus of disproof is now "Accusing me of my crimes after the fact is what made me commit them in the first place!"

ALL criminals always want ever-more rights - like, to our stuff, without having any responsibilities to earn or otherwise pay for it - and the only way to thus divide rights away from responsibilities is to offload their own responsibilities (which are to control their aggressive predatory criminal urges to attack thereby innocent others first) onto their victims, by denying said victims their rights to defend themselves and innocent others. They pretend it's as equally immoral to defensively counter-attack an attacking criminal as it was for the criminal to initiate the attack in the first place. This immoral relativism corruption can be found as far back as Christianity where we are told to "Resist not evil men" and to always turn the other cheek; and that vengeance (aka simple Justice) is the Lord's alone.

So our religion, too, reflects this inherent criminal hypocrisy, betraying us and our children.

A main purpose of the first amendment and free speech in general is to ask other people for assistance in stopping crimes by being able to accuse criminals of committing them.

Yet even our own Western societies have become so corrupted by the deference of our own rights and responsibilities to putative expert "authorities" - where certain gang leaders enjoy idolatrous rights without responsibilities, to do our thinking and acting "for us" and "for our own good" - that we citizens aren't even allowed to make the determination that a crime has been committed, let alone actually legally accuse anyone else of their crimes - without their prior approval! Even the cops who arrest criminals must kow-tow to the wisdom and power of the prosecutors office before the case can be taken to trial, and the prosecution must defer to the judges and their considerations of defense lawyers.

Thus our entire "justice" system has been designed from its inception to subvert individual human rights to idolatrous gang might-made "group rights" - for instance, to "society" alone, and even these days to all sub-group victimologies and the divisively slanderous extortions of perpetual "victim" group identity politics.

So our Justice system also reflects this inherent criminal hypocrisy, betraying us and our children.

But what of "Hate-Crimes!" one might ask? 
Well, that's simple and easy to understand!

"Bullying" (cyber, or otherwise) is already subject to laws against extortion. Extortion is also known as bullying, intimidation, coercion, duress, blackmail, activist agitation, and, of course, terrorism.

As for "hate-crimes:" we already have laws against slander.

Slander is fraud, and it’s a crime because it’s used to accuse people of crimes, without having a shred of evidence to back those accusations up.

The aim of slander is to falsely inspire hatred (perpetual anger) in others, and to hope to incite them to violence.

However, hatred itself is often a good thing, because if people were unable to hate crimes and the criminals that commit them, no one would ever bother to accuse any criminals of their crimes, nor by doing so , hope to end those crimes. Idiots who want to make "hate" (a symptom, or an effect) into a crime, can only ever end up making it 'illegal' to hate crimes!

So what’s the difference between slander and “hate-crimes” legislation?

Well, for starters, the only defense against charges of slander, is the Truth (your accusations are not slander if you can objectively prove them)!

But “hate-crimes laws” are based not on objective Truth, but on the subjectively-claimed “perception” that one is being unfairly accused of one’s crimes, even if there’s proof one did indeed commit them!

So, accusing someone of a “hate-crime” and not of slander, IS in fact, only slander!

But it’s official, government-backed and police-state-enforced slander!

But, what of "Hate-Speech!" one might also ask? 
Well, that's equally simple and easy to understand!

ALL "Hate-Speech Laws" ARE CRIMES!

“Progressive” criminals - who like all criminals desire an equality of outcome over a true equality of opportunity, and to get it will always try to socially engineer ever-more rights and ever-less responsibilities for them selves, by offloading their responsibilities onto their victims by stealing their victims' rights - pretend to hold submissive masochism as the highest virtue (for their victims to hold, not them) and the ultimate crime to be causing offense and hurting other people’s (criminal’s) feelings, (i.e: by accusing them of their crimes).

So they want to make it illegal to accuse criminals of their crimes, since that might hurt their feelings and in offending them with the often-painful truth, "make" them commit even more crimes!

Is there anything which really ought to qualify as hate speech and be banned?

NO - not because it's "hateful" (because that sort of nonsense is only making subjective assessments based on emotions;) and "HATE" is really only the perfectly natural human response of perpetual anger towards ongoing crimes (like islam); without 'hate' we would never bother to accuse criminals of their crimes in  order to stop those crimes.

Unreasonable false displays of hatred and anger on the other hand, are what the Left is good at - but that's already illegal, not because of the anger displayed - that's just the outrageous holier-than-thou virtue-signalling packaging used to disguise their preposterous extortion attempts - but because it's fraudulent slander.

Such criminal leftists who try to make "hate" into a crime, only ever make it 'illegal' to hate crime itself!

Speech which is already disallowed is incitement of immediate violence and death-threats ... and even those aren't illegal, if say they call for the police to use violence to counter ongoing mob violence and looting, or call for the death-penalty for murderers!

See how simple that was? Too bad "our leaders" aka politicians are professional hypocrites, whose criminally negligent motto has ever been "There's No Money In Solutions, so Please Give Generously - AGAIN!" They get paid to pretend to be too stupid to understand problems, in order to never have to solve them, and in fact to exploit the almost infinite symptoms of unsolved problems as ever-more lucrative "causes" as "eternal crises" to champion in stead!

;-)

BOTTOM LINE?

Terrorism works.

By now, everyone knows islam is nothing more than a criminal terror gang which blames a "god" as its holy-mobster "muslim" gang members' #1 alibi to excuse their own criminal desires and actions, and that as such, all "muslims" who are devoted to their crime-manual are at least potential terrorists.

When confronted by fear, people can respond in two ways:

1.) Honestly – they admit they’re afraid, and so then try to do something about solving the problem; (Conservatives;)

2.) Dishonestly – they pretend to be martyrs, but remain masochists, advising everyone else to Submit, too. (Liberals).

Guess which category most politicians (self-promoting salesmen and liars) fall into?

The solution?

Whenever any organism is attacked, it counter-attacks. (Organisms which submit to diseases like islam, die off).

Cells which have already been successfully co-opted by the disease are also destroyed by the white blood cells.

No problem was ever solved by ignoring it, yet the criminally negligent greed-creed motto of those in charge always seems to be the exact opposite, that: “There’s No Money In Solutions! Whee!” (and its corollary: “It’s not broken, so let’s fix it!”)

The real reason the islamic threat is being ignored in public, is this not-so-nascent “Globalization” movement, which is clearly treason to ALL sovereign national people’s governments. It’s a plutocratic kleptocracy to be run by all those corporazis who never want to pay any taxes to anyone, anywhere, ever; by the global communazi labour guys who want free movement and the same lowest common denominator wages for their 3rd-world slaves, and of course by the moslems who want their one-world islamic ummah, to be run by their theocratic caliphate government. It’s a triple-threat. Against all these evil forces, we have only the Truth … while only they currently control both the fear and the greed.

As long as ONLY the enemy controls both the behavioural conditioning binaries of the stick (fear of personally having one’s own family firebombed or beheaded by the Jihad) and the carrot (greed for oil-money bribes), those sales-puppets we laughingly call “our leaders” and their complicit media presstitute pets will insist on maintaining their preposterously backwards, victim-blaming “narrative” that only we are to blame for the Qur’an’s 1,400 years of hate, so that we should all “Submit and learn how to be better victims!”

As long as we remain the lesser threat to them, "our leaders" will continue to ignore islam.

So our system of government reflects this inherent criminal hypocrisy, betraying us and our children.

FAKE CRIMES!

Ann Coulter: The Great Hijab Cover-Up

Forget fake news; the real issue is fake “hate.”
Has there been one (1) documented hate crime committed by white people against any hue in the Rainbow Coalition since Nov. 8? That’s out of the 9,456,723 hate crimes alleged by America’s leading hate group, the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC).
The SPLC is to “hate” what Rolling Stone is to rape. It is the biggest peddler of fantasies since Walt Disney.
I’ve read through dozens of SPLC “hate crimes” and they are all lies. The Muslim girls in particular seem to be very spirited liars.
Since the election, there have been vivid stories from across the nation of Trump supporters tearing off Muslim girls’ hijabs — at the University of Michigan (since retracted), Louisiana State University (also retracted), San Diego State University (that too was retracted), the New York City subway (again: retracted), and the University of New Mexico (no witnesses, won’t reveal attacker’s name or report the incident for investigation).
The main take-away from all these stories is: We sure have taken in a lot of Muslims! They seem to have trouble assimilating to American laws about not committing mass murder, but the good news is, when it comes to America’s culture of victimhood, they assimilate like fish to water!
This isn’t mass psychogenic illness, like when cheerleaders at the same high school all develop tics. It’s not even the Salem witch trials. At least the Salem witch-hunters believed in witches. The Muslim hoaxers are lying, and they know they’re lying.
Otherwise, they’d leave the country.
If Muslims want to convince me that they’re living in abject fear in Trump’s America, instead of rushing to the media, somebody’s got to leave.
I’ve heard endless stories about the reign of terror against Muslims, but have yet to hear of one single Muslim — much less a wave of Muslims — moving out of the United States.
It’s not as if they get depressed at the thought of abandoning the old ancestral home, where their great-grandparents are buried. They just got here!
If any Muslim were at risk of so much as a dyspeptic look from white Americans, there’s emigration as well as immigration.
But to the contrary, we can’t keep them out! They get huffy and give indignant speeches at the Democratic National Convention at the suggestion of a mere pause in Muslim immigration.
The greatest fear of Muslims these days is that they won’t be home when the “Today” show calls and will miss the opportunity to regale credulous hosts with stories about their victimization at the hands of white American men (whose great-grandparents areburied here).
The left has gone so insane that the SPLC, the main propagator of fake hate crimes, is the media’s go-to expert on hate. SPLC spokesmen appear on TV and defame all the people they hate: whites, Christians, Trump supporters, cops, frat boys and so on.
The SPLC is like the cult awareness groups taken over by Scientologists. Terrified parents would call for help in rescuing their kids from Scientology and be told, No, Scientology is not a cult.
With the SPLC, the “hate watch” group is the hater. Unlike some toothless nobody claiming to be a member of the ALL-POWERFUL KU KLUX KLAN, the SPLC’s slanders are instantly amplified by the media megaphone in somber interviews conducted by the most easily fooled people in the universe, American journalists.
Breitbart, Daily Caller and others have done a great job collecting the hoax hate crimes since the election, but we need a central clearinghouse to keep up with the volume.
How about someone found the Northern Poverty Law Center (NPLC), to document actual hate crimes and expose the hoaxes being spit out on an assembly line by the SPLC? Maybe the Koch brothers could get back in Trump’s good graces by funding this much-needed service.
The soon-to-exist NPLC ought to be in the Rolodexes of every media organization, so they can stop reporting fake news and start covering the real hate crimes currently ignored by the press.
The only incidents of actual “hate” since the election have been entirely in one direction: against (mostly white) Trump supporters. This isn’t surprising given the climate of hate being spread by the media.
As illustrated on the website of the NPLC (coming soon!), we aren’t dealing with a Reichstag fire designed to generate hate toward white male Trump supporters. It’s been Reichstag fire after Reichstag fire.
At this point, any claim of “hate” directed at Muslims, blacks, gays or Hispanics by Trump supporters should be treated as if it’s a UFO sighting: presumed false, unless documented with irrefutable evidence.
But until the NPLC is up and running, here are some tips for journalists:
— Real hate crimes do not begin with laughably implausible scenarios. Try to use a modicum of common sense.
— They are almost always captured on videotape or at least are seen by actual witnesses who give statements to the police. Lachrymose accounts posted on Facebook do not constitute evidence.
— They generally result in medical treatment and arrests.
The Trump Justice Department needs to create an office that will serve as a liaison with this new civil rights organization, the Northern Poverty Law Center. Because eradicating hate is Job No. 1!
COPYRIGHT 2017 ANN COULTER