Muslims celebrate the end of Ramadan 2016 this week and the successful slaughter of over one thousand, five hundred infidels and apostates! “2016 was a great year!” they all said, “we had successful slaughters of the enemies of Islam from Florida, and Istanbul, to Bangladesh!”
A fascinating article today by Eugene Robinson of The Washington Post teaches us about the folly of building policy on data and statistics and suggests, instead, that policy be based on wishful thinking and psychic powers.
Writing about Donald Trump’s position on the ‘profiling’ of groups in the fight against terrorism Eugene Robinson tell us that Trump is considering the ‘toxic’ idea of profiling Muslims.
‘Profiling’ is the practice of using data and pattern-recognition to judge the relative likelihood that individuals might be engaging in criminal activities.
The Washington Post suggests that Trump’s idea of profiling is based on a flawed notion of Islam. Eugene Robinson, as one of the world’s foremost Islamic scholars, informs us:
“Despicable acts of terrorism have been committed by groups and individuals who believe in a warped view of Islam”
Those acts of terrorism were, we are left to conclude, informed by an interpretation of the Koran by Muslims who have a far worse grasp of Islam than Eugene Robinson. Indeed, Eugene Robinson goes on to support his claims by use of the psychic powers native to all liberal commentators, telling us that only The Washington Post’s interpretation of Islam is followed by the 1.6 billion Muslims around the world. The ‘warped’ versions of Islam put forward by other scholars are “rejected by the overwhelming majority of the world’s 1.6 billion Muslims, including the more than 3 million who live in the United States.”
With this Eugene Robinson convincingly closes the case: psychic powers and wishful thinking are indeed superior to data and statistics. Data and statistics only tell us completely useless things like the terrorism quotient of the Muslim population. Which could not possibly be used to inform policy.
President Obama has this week clarified what a defeat of ISIS would look like by saying that anything other than a significantly Muslim USA would represent a win for ISIS.
After the attack in Orlando last week and after reviewing the state of the campaign against ISIS, President Obama gave a stark warning about responses to Orlando asking “Are we going to start treating all Muslim Americans differently?” Then answering his own question by saying that such a policy would be a betrayal of what America is fighting to protect.
“If America excludes Muslims, the terrorists would have won,” he added, “and we cannot let that happen. I will not let that happen.”
President Obama went on to explain how ISIS may achieve or fail to achieve its aims through US policy. If the US bans Muslim immigration, then ISIS win because ISIS wants Muslims to be no more than 1% of the US population. ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, President Obama has previously explained, is a fan of cultural diversity and would hate to see global sharia law.
However, if the US opens its borders up to as many Muslims as possible. Becoming, in time, a major Muslim country. This would represent the defeat of ISIS because their main aim is to limit the spread of Islam. Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi would have to concede defeat, his dream of a world of religious and cultural pluralism having failed.
“The only way to defat ISIS,” concluded President Obama, “is for the US to become a Muslim nation.”
When a member of the press asked for more details the President helpfully explained that only a mighty intellect such as his could possibly understand the intricacies of the situation. And that we should trust him.
In a completely and totally surprising, not at all expected, development, the media and politicians from both parties have agreed that Donald Trump ‘saying inappropriate things’ is worse, much worse, than the recent massacre of 49 people in Orlando.
Isaac Chotiner of Slate tells us, with his headline, that “Trump’s Fearmongering, Hate-Filled Speech on Orlando Is the Scariest Thing He’s Done Yet.”
Trump’s behaviour we’re helpfully informed is “so horrifically grotesque in so many different ways that it is easy to become emotionally immune to his hideous and bigoted comments, and the soullessness of his response to tragedy… his speech on Monday afternoon was the most terrifying of the campaign.”
Chotiner’s article contains a fascinating cornucopia of words that vary between the meaningless, the unexplained and the inexplicable, “demagoguery, fearmongering, outright lies—… disgusting … disturbing…”
In contrast with Isaac Chotiner’s inchoate rage and fear in response to a speech by Donald Trump, his response to the massacre of 49 people was an Islam-apologetics-special article telling us that the killer was a ‘lone-wolf’ and, therefore, nothing to do with any identifiable group, sub-culture, religion or race.
Ron Fournier at The Atlantic, comparatively unbothered by the massacre of 49 people in a club in Orlando, was apoplectic at Trump. For Trump had the gall to blame the massacre on radical Islamic terrorism. Fournier, in a rage, corrected this pernicious accusation, pointing out to Trump: “You were not right on radical Islamic terrorism. But you are doing right by radical Islamic terrorism. You are giving legitimacy to ISIS’s nefarious interpretation of a peaceful religion. You are helping ISIS recruit terrorists. You are dividing Americans at a time when all Americans most need to be united.”
Fournier teaches us that whereas the text of the holy Koran, with its instructions to destroy the infidel, have no effect whatsoever on Muslims, the words of Trump have a devastating effect. It is The Word Of Trump that impels otherwise peaceful Muslims to join ISIS and go massacre-crazy on a regular basis.
Trump’s words, we’re told, have incredible power; “your words do undermine the commander-in-chief. Your words do exploit fears, stir prejudices, and divide Americans.”
A representative of The International Conspiracy of Journalists clarified these points for us earlier today: “If Trump just stopped talking, there would be no more violence from lone-wolfs who are pretending to follow the peaceful religion of Islam.”
The representative of The International Conspiracy of Journalists goes on to explain, “a club full of people being shot-up is pretty bad and all but what you have to understand is that it was caused by Trump saying things.”
“That’s why we agree that Trump is worse than the massacre. Insinuations that Islam might be a violent religion, is much much worse than the actual violence. See?”
“I’m absolutely appalled,” said one liberal commentator as she looked over photographs of the dead, “that Donald Trump said anything negative about Islam. This is 2016!”
In an astonishing move in Cleveland this week, Democrat presidential candidate Hillary Clinton claimed to have psychic powers and demonstrated them in front of a crowd of supporters and press.
In response to the Orlando shooting Hillary Clinton said that inflammatory, anti-Muslim rhetoric ‘hurts’ Muslims. She then explained that “the vast majority of Muslims love freedom and hate terror.”
It is believed that, to gain this information, Clinton made us of a remote ‘Cerebro’ device. Clinton campaign representatives later explained that Clinton’s natural psychic abilities are magnified by the Cerebro device which allows her to access “more than a billion minds at once.”
A psychic explains: “by magnifying her natural abilities Clinton accessed the 2 billion or so Muslim minds around the globe. She then, at a subconscious level, ascertained the feelings each of those minds has towards the abstract concepts ‘freedom’ and ‘terror.’”
He continues, “psychic powers are rarely wrong. It is highly unlikely that Clinton would have misread those minds. We must conclude that, indeed, Muslims love freedom and hate terror.”
Clinton’s conclusions are surprising to some. The Islamic holy book, the Koran, appears to contain many passages that explicitly condemn freedom and others that encourage terror. When asked to suggest how we reconcile the Koran, Islamic history with the conclusions reached by Clinton’s mind-reading powers a political commentator shrugged his shoulder and said “I dunno.”
One day after the worst Islamic terrorist attack on American soil since 9/11, Media outlets are busy preparing their most Important articles: those that warn against an Islamophobic backlash.
Journalists at The Washington Post, The Guardian and The New York Times are reportedly digging through their previous ‘backlash’ articles in an effort to ensure that their ‘backlash’ articles this week will not be too reminiscent of them.
Following the code of conduct published by The International Conspiracy of Journalists in 2001, all writers for mainstream news sources are bound, by blood oath, to respond to all violence by Muslims or immigrants with ‘backlash’ articles.
‘Backlash’ articles have no set structure but often begin by introducing innocent Muslims who, having learned of the latest Islamic attack, immediately begin to ‘fear a backlash.’
Quotes from such innocent Muslims will inform us that Muslims are peaceful and civilized and just want to live their peaceful, civilized lives. They, however, sense a threat: the ‘backlash.’
The ‘backlash’ is a violent response to Islam by white people that never actually happens. The main point of ‘backlash’ articles is, however, to make it clear that a ‘backlash’ is definitely happening and that the ‘backlash’ is more troubling and more dangerous than the Islamic violence that triggered it.
Alongside their ‘backlash’ articles many news sources are planning to publish brand new ‘put the focus elsewhere’ articles. Reporters from The Guardian tell us, “we’ve obviously got a journalistic duty to try to pin the blame on something other than Islam, Muslims, or Muslim immigration. Our go-to thing in cases like this is normally guns. So we’ll probably try that this time too.”
“And we’ll have a fair few articles by Muslims writing about how stressful it is being Muslim in the West, what with all the Islamophobia they experience on the London Underground and at airports and stuff.”
The New York Times plans to refer to this latest Muslim terrorist as ‘an American man’ because he was born in New York. “It’s called accuracy!” yelled a New York Times sub-editor.
A feature writer from The Washington Post smiles coyly and says “we’re going to blame Trump. This is what happens when you say you’ll ban Muslim immigration.”
At the time of writing it is believed that writers from Salon, Mother Jones and Gawker are picking out comments from the Stormfront message board in an attempt to build narratives about the Islamophobia of American life.
“Amanda Marcotte over at Salon is doing great work in smudging the blame over to ‘Christian Fundamentalists’ and ‘bigotry,’” said a representative of The International Conspiracy of Journalists, “we’re really hoping for more articles and features like that over the next week or so.”
“We all plan to conclude our pieces by saying that the answer is more Muslim immigration,” continues the representative of The International Conspiracy of Journalists.
The question is undetermined at the time of writing.
The diverse peoples of the planet Earth were unified in mourning this weekend after the death of everyone’s favourite black supremacist, Muhammad Ali.
Black supremacist and life-long member of black nationalist, terrorist organisation, the Nation of Islam, Muhammad Ali died on Friday evening from a respiratory condition.
In an article celebrating the immense contributions to American life of the desert death cult, and Muhammad Ali’s chosen religion, Islam, The Washington Post reports:
Friday night, a few days before Ramadan, the world’s most famous Muslim — a world champion three times over, an Olympic gold medalist, a superstar, a folk hero, a global icon, the man who called himself the greatest in the world — went back to God.
“Muhammad Ali shook up the world. And the world is better for it,” said US President Barack Obama. Former President Bill Clinton – husband of famous criminal Hillary Clinton – said Ali had been “inspiring to the young.”
Future President Donald Trump tweeted that Ali was a “truly great champion and a wonderful guy. He will be missed by all!”
“I would like to be remembered as a man who won the heavyweight title three times, who was humorous and who treated everyone right.
“As a man who never looked down on those who looked up to him…who stood up for his beliefs…who tried to unite all humankind through faith and love.
“And if all that’s too much, then I guess I’d settle for being remembered only as a great boxer who became a leader and a champion of his people. And I wouldn’t even mind if folks forgot how pretty I was.”
Children’s Author Forced To Redraw 1966 Cartoon That Stereotypes Arab Pirate
Books by one of Sweden’s most popular and decorated children’s authors may be withdrawn from circulation after an “investigation” revealed that they contained “stereotypical depictions of other cultures”. Jan Lööf was issued with an ultimatum: redraw the pictures, or have the books withdrawn.
The books in question are incredibly popular, and one – Catch Fabian – is sold out and will not be restocked, while publisher Bonnier Carlsen have withdrawn all 5,000 copies of the other – Grandpa is a Pirate – from sale. “They have given me an ultimatum. I either have to redraw the pictures or the books will not be published anymore,” the author told the newspaper Dagens Nyheter.
Just so you know how horribly stereotypical (and therefore RACIST!) these drawings are, here are some contemporary images of Barbary pirates:
Clearly the children’s books, with their pictures of turban wearing, sword wielding, Christian-enslaving Arab pirates are way off! What was he thinking!?
As all good citizens of our multicultural, multiracial utopia know, there is no such thing as European Civilisation and there is certainly no such thing as white-people history. The only people who have ever done anything or experienced anything of note are The Oppressed Masses and other assorted brown people. But only now is the British education system finally eliminating all the unimportant, fake history from schools… And replacing it with good brown-people history…
Schools teach Islamic history… but ignore 1066 and all that
HISTORY teachers are being told pupils need not study British kings and queens, but must learn about early Islamic civilisation, Mayan culture or of Benin in west Africa.
It makes perfect sense don’t it? I mean, after all, history is just a bunch of stuff that happened by accident to various people. Nothing that ever happened had anything to do with the attitudes, behaviour, abilities or characteristics of the people it happened to, did it? And there’s really no reason an English person now would have anything in common with, or have any interest in, English people of a couple hundred years ago, is there? They ain’t connected in any way. And so that’s why it makes perfect sense to teach kids in Britain the ‘history’ of various black and brown people in various crappy countries where, just by accident, they failed to produce or sustain any civilisation or, y’know, invent the wheel or learn to use tools or something.
CRE chairman Chris McGovern said: “No landmark event in British history has to be taught. Magna Carta, the two world wars and Winston Churchill, for example, are included in the curriculum as non-statutory examples of what teachers ‘could include’. Previously teaching of the world wars was compulsory.
“The Napoleonic wars, as opposed to the preceding French revolutionary wars, are not even included among the non-statutory examples.
“Trafalgar, Waterloo, Nelson and Wellington are ignored. There is no requirement to teach about any specific British monarch, prime minister, act of parliament, battle or individual.
“In contrast, certain topics are placed on prescribed lists, for example either early Islamic or Mayan civilisation or Benin must be taught.”
Why the hell would we teach kids about Magna Carta and two world wars?! What would be the point? Everyone knows that Magna Carta is just a musty old white man’s bit of paper… That probably is RACIST. The Koran is loads better. Also, that book Nelson Mandela wrote that’s all about how great Nelson Mandela is.
No British school children care about British history… Look how bored these little British kids are… reading about Oliver Cromwell probably (boring!)
Following the mass sexual assault in Cologne on New Year’s Eve, German authorities are talking about the phenomenon of ‘Taharrush‘ — where large gangs of men attack and even rape women during major events.
I predict that ‘Taharrush’ is going to be word of the year! Maybe the Oxford English Dictionary will even include it their new edition in August!
Taharrush has so far been confined to the Arab world, but with the huge migrant influx last year, authorities are now concerned the Cologne attacks could be the first example in Europe.
A simple-minded racist might think that more Arabs = more Taharrush. But that kind of simple-minded racism is simple-minded racism. Therefore it is wrong!
The Federal Criminal Police (BKA) told Welt am Sonntag that they are looking at how some Arab countries deal with mass sexual assaults amid fears similar attacks could happen again at other large gatherings in the country.
I think they deal with it by punishing rape-victims don’t they? Hey, maybe Europe should try not importing rapists?
“Such crimes, committed by groups of young men, are of particular concern to local police during large gatherings of people such as demonstrations,” a BKA spokesman said. “The attacks range from sexual harassment to rape.”
I really think when they say ‘young men’ they should add the word ‘brown’ in there. Specificity is good, right?
There’s a facebook page called ‘Against Taharrush’:
The racist observer may notice a pattern in the long list of places and people involved in the harrassments. But of course, noticing racist patterns means you’re a racist, and if you’re a racist, it means everything you say is wrong. Check-mate!
I definitely think that every Western nation is in desperate need for more Muslims. Sod off Le Pen, we should all say… and check out how brilliant Muslims continue to be…
A Yazidi slave who was forced to become an ISIS child soldier has told how his life was spared because he didn’t have any armpit hair.
Ahmed Aslef was just ten years old when jihadi gunmen stormed the Iraqi village of Kocho, lined them up and massacred around 800 men, women and children last year.
He said the youngsters were told to raise their arms and those without underarm hair were judged too young to be murdered.
Those who did were ruled to be older than ten and shot on the spot, he added.
They were instead recruited into the terror group’s notorious youth wing, known as the Cubs of the Caliphate, to be groomed into sadistic killers.
His two young sisters also survived, but only to be sold as sex slaves along with other members of his family in the cities of Mosul and Raqqa.
Speaking to Lara Whyte from the International Business Times, Ahmed said: ‘With Daesh (ISIS), I didn’t go to school with girls. I didn’t learn maths.
This is the sort of behaviour Western Civilisation was built on! And we need more of it! More diversity! More multi-cultural ism! More of all that good stuff everyone keeps saying is good stuff! Everyone, that is, except Trump (fascist!) and Le Pen (Scumbag!)