Last week at the NoLiesRadio produced "FalseFlagNews", during the discussion of the invasion of Europe, Kevin Barrett of Truth Jihad Radio, directly, in so many words, called for the Islamization of European countries. Perhaps Deanna and/or Kyle will have him on their shows, to explain himself.
Good show. Kyle was on top of his game but the part where he seemed to advocate Europeans shooting at the boats of refugees was unnecessarily cruel and playing into the hands of his opponents, who would like nothing better than to portray people like himself as "cruel," "uncaring" "bigots" rather than protectors of cultures and valuable ways-of-life that took thousands of years to develop. These refugees are pawns being used by forces thousands of times more powerful than them to forcefully and by initiated and enforced top-down legislation invade the houses of Europeans like endless unwanted squatters who then are allowed the outrage of throwing up on your floor and calling you a "tyrant" or a "racist" or "bigot" when you tell them to clean-it-up or get the fuck out. After that they have ten kids each to your three and take over your whole house and kick you, the supposed owner, out and make you the refugee. Who will advocate shooting at the boats of white European refugees then? Syrians who don't like White Nationalists? That is certainly the plan: displacement and tyranny over Europeans, although WN's like to call it "genocide" for propaganda purposes, to spread fear and mobilize to action. By the UN definition maybe but by my definition and that of most others, "genocide" only happens when people of a certain ethnicity or genetic background are killed off through murder or other deliberate means (such as the bombings in Gaza and the plight of the Palestinians which Professor Kevin MacDonald openly declared on John Friend's show that he cares nothing whatsoever about), not when they simply do not reproduce enough or are immigrated upon by those who breed like rabbits.
The Europeans might be on their way to becoming the new Palestinians, by force, but until they get their entire neighborhoods bombed and thousands of people massacred for 1 or 2 Israelis or other members of the supremacist tribe in charge going missing or dead, until they experience that type of horrific "collective punishment" and devastation (which, again, MacDonald cares nothing about since the human beings being massacred happen to be "Arabs" and not "one of his race" and yet wants everyone in the world to care about his own "plight" of being displaced and over-run by Mexicans in Long Beach California), until that dark day, it is not "genocide" and cannot be compared with the 70 year plight of the Palestinians, never mind the horrific suffering of Russians during Jew-Bolshevik rule or the Germans and other peoples in WWII, or the people of Vietnam, Korea, Iraq and Afghanistan at the hands of the Jew-duped Whites.
The second guest who concentrated on the human-hating tyranny of the environmental movement was even better. You know what I say? I say: Fuck the spotted owl, how's that? I'd massacre and make extinct (like thousands of other animals and living forms that go extinct ever single day without anyone knowing about it) the entire spotted owl population of the world to save one good human being from starvation. At the same time, I wouldn't kill even one spotted owl to save Al Gore, Obongo, Hillary Clinton, W Bush, Netanyahu, Abe Foxman, the Ayatollah Khomeini, Che Guevara, Mao, Ahmedinejad, the Saudis or any number of other worthless parasites posing as "leaders," from starvation. How's that? Fair enough? I certainly think so. I think it's about time that the outdoors people in Montana, Northern California and everywhere else had an outright civil war against these human-hating environmental tyrants. I think the ultimate goal is to prevent all freedom-loving people to be able to live "off-the-grid" in any way, shape or form, by gridding into their tyranny every single square mile of the world.
Sultan Kevin Abdul-Barrett is a walking contradiction. He's a Muslim "libertraian." Apparently he thinks Islam and libertarianism are compatible. A few years ago his wife took out a restraining order on him for beating on his 13 year old son in a fit of "libertarian" rage flashbacking into sharia law. lol
They are not compatible. Libertarianism is not compatible with any heavy religious indoctrination of any kind. It is a secular ideology. Although it did spring from previously-Pagan-later-forced-to-become-Christian European peoples, it did not do so until after the industrial revolution was well on its way, and only through openly non-religious people like Thomas Paine, Thomas Jefferson, John Adams and later libertarian/anarchists like Lysander Spooner.
Of course, it was not labeled "libertarianism" at the time but the ideals they were aiming at were very similar (getting the tribe's enforcers of "morality" or "the government" aka the modern witch-hunters out of the lives of individuals). The term "libertarian" was originally coined by 19th century anarchists and not by the more historically recent leaders of the movement such as Murray Rothbard (Jew), Leonard Read (religious Christian who became more and more secular as he became more and more libertarian) or Albert Jay Nock (secular from Christian stock; originally a Henry-Georgist, who became more & more libertarian).
Almost all religions are tribalist and moralist (they espouse a certain morality as the only valid morality which should be forced on others "for their own good") but Libertarianism is obsessed with the rights and well-fare of the individual, not the "welfare" of the group (if it seeks to sacrifice the individual), and the individual's creativity only started to take precedence when the amazing proliferation of endless inventions and innovations during the industrial and post-industrial revolution became known as products of the genius of individual personalities and minds, which, in the absence of the key non-conformist creative individuals, could never be produced by "group think," "tribe-think" or "race-think."
This applies to leadership "creativity" even more than other forms. Without the individual genius of people like Paine, Jefferson (also an inventor of many things), Adams, Franklin (a well-known inventor and general renaissance man), Jay, Madison, Jackson, etc., would the USA have ever come into existence in the form that it did? Absolutely not.
Even more tribe-oriented systems are invariably created by strong and creative individuals. Without the individual genius of people like Mussolini, Hitler, Goebbels, Feder and Rosenberg, would Fascism and National Socialism have come into existence as the "surgical knife" to remove the cancer of Judaic-Communism from Europe? Absolutely not. Without the individual genius of people like Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Seneca, Cicero, etc., would the Renaissance and then Western Civilization itself as we know it have ever come into existence? Absolute not.
There is nothing "in the race" that automatically produces men of genius although some breeds might produce more men of genius, given the same amount of disciplined freedom. Only the willingness of collective force to protect freedom of thought can cultivate the intelligence of men into creative and constructive directions. It is only a tiny minority of men (and even tinier minority of women) of creative talent and high IQ, left free enough to cultivate and exercise that talent through freely chosen paths of most resistance and non-comformity, because they are strong enough to handle it, because they can suffer for their poetry, because they can be tempered by fire and not perish, who lift up tens-of-millions of others, and sometimes even all of humanity, and inspire larger and larger extensions of the circles of creativity.
Not hedonism or "libertinism" but the discipline, the extremely hard but also proportionately rewarding discipline of freedom, and the example set by a few men of genius strong enough to advocate and practice it, which sets the mold and the example later inspiring millions of others to attempt similar temperings by fire. This is how all civilization is seeded. European civilization (or whatever's left of it), the one most advanced in today's world, and the one most people flock to because of its advantages, was created through the blood, sweat and tears, and rock hard intransigence of a few individual thinkers and those smart enough to not envy them but protect them, not by the tyrants and parasites who found clever ways of tricking and exploiting their creativity. Therefore, all tribal force that does not concentrate on preserving these freedoms, or focus on maintaining the healthy and non-exploitive balance between the individual and his tribe, but only on tyrannizing over individuals and forcing this or that "morality" down the throats of everyone, which is what most religion, especially of the fundamentalist variety, tends to specializes in, is a fraud to any true and lasting human well-being. It is a con made by destructively-creative and very clever groups of individual parasites to exploit constructively-creative (only when left free to discipline their freedom themselves) but more honest and naive persons.
In libertarianism, the individual is the basic scientific unit, not the tribe, the clan or the race. This is correct in my view, not because the tribe is not important as a source of synergy (the phenomenon of wholes greater than the sum of individual parts) but because no two individuals, not even identical twins, are the same or can think with the same brain, although people of closer genetic ancestry and culture tend to share common principles and become, over the course of many generations, genetically pre-disposed to accepting those principles and ways of living.
Last week at the NoLiesRadio produced "FalseFlagNews", during the discussion of the invasion of Europe, Kevin Barrett of Truth Jihad Radio, directly, in so many words, called for the Islamization of European countries. Perhaps Deanna and/or Kyle will have him on their shows, to explain himself.
ReplyDeleteGood show. Kyle was on top of his game but the part where he seemed to advocate Europeans shooting at the boats of refugees was unnecessarily cruel and playing into the hands of his opponents, who would like nothing better than to portray people like himself as "cruel," "uncaring" "bigots" rather than protectors of cultures and valuable ways-of-life that took thousands of years to develop. These refugees are pawns being used by forces thousands of times more powerful than them to forcefully and by initiated and enforced top-down legislation invade the houses of Europeans like endless unwanted squatters who then are allowed the outrage of throwing up on your floor and calling you a "tyrant" or a "racist" or "bigot" when you tell them to clean-it-up or get the fuck out. After that they have ten kids each to your three and take over your whole house and kick you, the supposed owner, out and make you the refugee. Who will advocate shooting at the boats of white European refugees then? Syrians who don't like White Nationalists? That is certainly the plan: displacement and tyranny over Europeans, although WN's like to call it "genocide" for propaganda purposes, to spread fear and mobilize to action. By the UN definition maybe but by my definition and that of most others, "genocide" only happens when people of a certain ethnicity or genetic background are killed off through murder or other deliberate means (such as the bombings in Gaza and the plight of the Palestinians which Professor Kevin MacDonald openly declared on John Friend's show that he cares nothing whatsoever about), not when they simply do not reproduce enough or are immigrated upon by those who breed like rabbits.
ReplyDeleteThe Europeans might be on their way to becoming the new Palestinians, by force, but until they get their entire neighborhoods bombed and thousands of people massacred for 1 or 2 Israelis or other members of the supremacist tribe in charge going missing or dead, until they experience that type of horrific "collective punishment" and devastation (which, again, MacDonald cares nothing about since the human beings being massacred happen to be "Arabs" and not "one of his race" and yet wants everyone in the world to care about his own "plight" of being displaced and over-run by Mexicans in Long Beach California), until that dark day, it is not "genocide" and cannot be compared with the 70 year plight of the Palestinians, never mind the horrific suffering of Russians during Jew-Bolshevik rule or the Germans and other peoples in WWII, or the people of Vietnam, Korea, Iraq and Afghanistan at the hands of the Jew-duped Whites.
The second guest who concentrated on the human-hating tyranny of the environmental movement was even better. You know what I say? I say: Fuck the spotted owl, how's that? I'd massacre and make extinct (like thousands of other animals and living forms that go extinct ever single day without anyone knowing about it) the entire spotted owl population of the world to save one good human being from starvation. At the same time, I wouldn't kill even one spotted owl to save Al Gore, Obongo, Hillary Clinton, W Bush, Netanyahu, Abe Foxman, the Ayatollah Khomeini, Che Guevara, Mao, Ahmedinejad, the Saudis or any number of other worthless parasites posing as "leaders," from starvation. How's that? Fair enough? I certainly think so. I think it's about time that the outdoors people in Montana, Northern California and everywhere else had an outright civil war against these human-hating environmental tyrants. I think the ultimate goal is to prevent all freedom-loving people to be able to live "off-the-grid" in any way, shape or form, by gridding into their tyranny every single square mile of the world.
@Mary
ReplyDeleteSultan Kevin Abdul-Barrett is a walking contradiction. He's a Muslim "libertraian." Apparently he thinks Islam and libertarianism are compatible. A few years ago his wife took out a restraining order on him for beating on his 13 year old son in a fit of "libertarian" rage flashbacking into sharia law. lol
http://cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=1572&hilit=kevin+barrett
They are not compatible. Libertarianism is not compatible with any heavy religious indoctrination of any kind. It is a secular ideology. Although it did spring from previously-Pagan-later-forced-to-become-Christian European peoples, it did not do so until after the industrial revolution was well on its way, and only through openly non-religious people like Thomas Paine, Thomas Jefferson, John Adams and later libertarian/anarchists like Lysander Spooner.
http://www.freethought.mbdojo.com/foundingfathers.html
Of course, it was not labeled "libertarianism" at the time but the ideals they were aiming at were very similar (getting the tribe's enforcers of "morality" or "the government" aka the modern witch-hunters out of the lives of individuals). The term "libertarian" was originally coined by 19th century anarchists and not by the more historically recent leaders of the movement such as Murray Rothbard (Jew), Leonard Read (religious Christian who became more and more secular as he became more and more libertarian) or Albert Jay Nock (secular from Christian stock; originally a Henry-Georgist, who became more & more libertarian).
http://anarchism.pageabode.com/afaq/150-years-of-libertarian
Almost all religions are tribalist and moralist (they espouse a certain morality as the only valid morality which should be forced on others "for their own good") but Libertarianism is obsessed with the rights and well-fare of the individual, not the "welfare" of the group (if it seeks to sacrifice the individual), and the individual's creativity only started to take precedence when the amazing proliferation of endless inventions and innovations during the industrial and post-industrial revolution became known as products of the genius of individual personalities and minds, which, in the absence of the key non-conformist creative individuals, could never be produced by "group think," "tribe-think" or "race-think."
This applies to leadership "creativity" even more than other forms. Without the individual genius of people like Paine, Jefferson (also an inventor of many things), Adams, Franklin (a well-known inventor and general renaissance man), Jay, Madison, Jackson, etc., would the USA have ever come into existence in the form that it did? Absolutely not.
http://www.ushistory.org/franklin/info/inventions.htm
http://classroom.monticello.org/kids/gallery/home/6/
(continued . . .)
ReplyDeleteEven more tribe-oriented systems are invariably created by strong and creative individuals. Without the individual genius of people like Mussolini, Hitler, Goebbels, Feder and Rosenberg, would Fascism and National Socialism have come into existence as the "surgical knife" to remove the cancer of Judaic-Communism from Europe? Absolutely not. Without the individual genius of people like Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Seneca, Cicero, etc., would the Renaissance and then Western Civilization itself as we know it have ever come into existence? Absolute not.
There is nothing "in the race" that automatically produces men of genius although some breeds might produce more men of genius, given the same amount of disciplined freedom. Only the willingness of collective force to protect freedom of thought can cultivate the intelligence of men into creative and constructive directions. It is only a tiny minority of men (and even tinier minority of women) of creative talent and high IQ, left free enough to cultivate and exercise that talent through freely chosen paths of most resistance and non-comformity, because they are strong enough to handle it, because they can suffer for their poetry, because they can be tempered by fire and not perish, who lift up tens-of-millions of others, and sometimes even all of humanity, and inspire larger and larger extensions of the circles of creativity.
Not hedonism or "libertinism" but the discipline, the extremely hard but also proportionately rewarding discipline of freedom, and the example set by a few men of genius strong enough to advocate and practice it, which sets the mold and the example later inspiring millions of others to attempt similar temperings by fire. This is how all civilization is seeded. European civilization (or whatever's left of it), the one most advanced in today's world, and the one most people flock to because of its advantages, was created through the blood, sweat and tears, and rock hard intransigence of a few individual thinkers and those smart enough to not envy them but protect them, not by the tyrants and parasites who found clever ways of tricking and exploiting their creativity. Therefore, all tribal force that does not concentrate on preserving these freedoms, or focus on maintaining the healthy and non-exploitive balance between the individual and his tribe, but only on tyrannizing over individuals and forcing this or that "morality" down the throats of everyone, which is what most religion, especially of the fundamentalist variety, tends to specializes in, is a fraud to any true and lasting human well-being. It is a con made by destructively-creative and very clever groups of individual parasites to exploit constructively-creative (only when left free to discipline their freedom themselves) but more honest and naive persons.
In libertarianism, the individual is the basic scientific unit, not the tribe, the clan or the race. This is correct in my view, not because the tribe is not important as a source of synergy (the phenomenon of wholes greater than the sum of individual parts) but because no two individuals, not even identical twins, are the same or can think with the same brain, although people of closer genetic ancestry and culture tend to share common principles and become, over the course of many generations, genetically pre-disposed to accepting those principles and ways of living.