THE VOICE OF REASON Solon, (born c. 630 BCE—died c. 560 BCE), Athenian statesman, known as one of the Seven Wise Men of Greece (the others were Chilon of Sparta, Thales of Miletus, Bias of Priene, Cleobulus of Lindos, Pittacus of Mytilene, and Periander of Corinth). Solon ended exclusive aristocratic control of the government, substituted a system of control by the wealthy, and introduced a new and more humane law code. He was also a noted poet.
Translate
Wednesday, 29 July 2020
Thirty Questions for Muslims
Friday, 17 January 2020
Will Yoram Hazony, Viktor Orban, Douglas Murray and Matteo Salvini be discussing Secular Koranism in Rome?
Whenever a white Westerner reverts, he is labeled an ethnomasochist or a traitor to his own kind even though he has adopted a natural belief system of values that submits to the absolute, the intelligent design of this universe and a straightforward morality.
Every time you hear something from nationalists about Islam, it is always the same: "terrorist", "ISIS" or "pedophile". You would never hear that regarding a Christian nor a Jewish convert. Pure naive silence as usual.
For the last ten years since the BNP fell, nationalists fail to find a solution to the national interest but have mainly resorted to infantile islamophobic mania. Nationalism in Britain will fail again and again."
5:00 Leadership with Truth, Logic and Morality
6:00 Co-ed schools and an incorrect idea of what it means to be an alpha male. An alpha male is a leader of beta males.
8:00 Morality, patriarchal moral values
9:00 Idolatry
10:00 Chinese and Jews
13:00 Abrahamic faiths
14:00 Confucius
15:00 Antisemitism
16:00 Why the Chinese chose Marxism
18:00 Boxer Rebellion
18:30 Nazi Germany
19:00 Rape of Nanking
20:00 The middle class
21:00 The short-termism of an atheist nihilist matriarchy with its unprincipled morally compromised men who don't care about posterity hooked on extramarital sex
22:00 In a matriarchy, all men are lower than the unmarried mother and are afraid to criticise them - this includes POTUS and Jewish baronets
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/wintour-and-watt/2010/nov/25/conservatives-davidcameron
24:00 No fault divorce
28:00 Association of British Muslims https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_of_British_Muslims
Religions can be part of the solution for peace, not the problem, faith leaders say
https://religionnews.com/2020/01/16/religions-can-be-part-of-the-solution-for-peace-not-the-problem-faith-leaders-say/
https://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.com/2020/01/how-to-restore-patriarchy-with-help-of.html
32:00 quran.com/18/4
35:00 Proposed joint letter from Jews and Muslims to Christians warning them of the abomination of idolatry
https://radicalisedrabbi.blogspot.com/2019/03/proposed-joint-letter-from-jews-and.html
37:00 What Press TV could be doing to embarrass the idolaters and the Jews who have been chosen by God to promote the Noahide laws but who have not been doing so for centuries
https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/the-seven-noachide-laws
"In view of the strict monotheism of Islam, Muslims were considered as Noachides whereas the status of Christians was a matter of debate. "
37:30 Israeli Charedi leader accuses Chief Rabbi Mirvis of ‘blasphemy’ over LGBT guide
Rabbi Moshe Sternbuch claims the British Orthodox Jewish leader was “encouraging” homosexuality by releasing guidance against bullying
https://jewishnews.timesofisrael.com/israeli-charedi-leader-accuses-chief-rabbi-mirvis-of-blasphemy-lgbt-guide/
38:00 Secular liberal diaspora Jew Bret Stephens and religious nationalist Israeli Jew Yoram Hazony discuss nationalism
https://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.com/2020/01/secular-liberal-jew-bret-stephens-and.html
The Freedom of Nations Conference in Rome on 4 February 2020
https://nationalconservatism.org/wp-content/uploads/mailings/2020/01-15/email.html
39:00 Hungary and Poland only two European nations able to stand up against globohomo.
40:00 E Michael Jones and the First Amendment
41:00 Secular Koranism https://www.surveymonkey.co.uk/r/96RQWJV
http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.com/2014/05/secular-koranism.html
42:00 The First Amendment was derived from the Koran
https://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.com/2017/05/the-first-amendment-was-derived-from.html
43:00 Why shouldn't Israel be a theocracy?
https://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.com/2012/01/peace-in-middle-east-questions-to-ask.html
https://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.com/2012/01/how-to-solve-problem-of-israel.html
44:00 WASPs
45:00 Catholic Church
46:00 Forced church attendances
47:00 The rules of natural justice and ex post facto law/retrospective legislation
48:00 Israel should be Torah-compliant if it is a theocracy or could it use a lighter kind of theocracy such as Secular Koranism? If Islam is "Judaism Lite", then Secular Koranism is "Islam Lite".
49:00 Is Israel even Noahide-compliant?
50:00 ‘Brought to Jesus’: the evangelical grip on the Trump administration https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/jan/11/trump-administration-evangelical-influence-support
"The sooner we have Armageddon, the sooner we will get to heaven"? Is this any way to run a global empire?
54:00 The unreasoning antisemitism of the peasants who cannot believe that Christianity is kaput and democracy is dementia because everything was working perfectly until the Jews came along and ruined everything, apparently.
55:00 Secular Koranism will protect Jews and gentiles from each other.
56:00 Idolatry https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shirk_(Islam)
57:00 The Al Aqsa Mosque is on the site of the Third Temple for a reason.
58:00 The Sadducees were the corrupt priesthood of the Israelite.
59:00 Parasitic Priesthood v Theocratic Judiciary
1:02:00 Christianity failed to save Rome.
1:03:00 The disestablishment of the Church of England
1:05:00 What is the point of having an Archbishop of Canterbury who is not even Christian?
https://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.com/2014/09/what-is-point-of-having-archbishop-of.html
1:05:30 The illegitimacy of the Archbishop of Canterbury
https://archbishopcranmer.com/the-revelation-of-justin-welbys-real-father-does-not-change-nothing/
1:06:00 Charles should become Head of the Church of England after persuading his mother to abdicate, sacking the Archbishop of Canterbury, demanding a DNA test from Harry and then converting to Islam.
Monday, 12 March 2018
The reason why neither liberals nor nationalists will debate with me
Millennial Woes considers questions such as "How are you going to establish your ethnostate and what economic and political system will it have?" as "stupid". https://t.co/QUz7X9VfqY— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) March 9, 2018
White Nationalists find it hard to decide whom they hate more: Jews or Muslims. While they hate Jews, Jews are familiar and they have become accustomed to their ways. While they hate Muslims, they find Muslims also hate Jews and support their Holocaust Denial. How will it end?— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) March 10, 2018
Hate is the corollary of love and a natural emotion for humans to feel when they feel threatened. I am merely observing that something more than hate is required for successful politics. It is also necessary to propose practical solutions that are not unrealistic or at least be prepared to discuss them. Nationalists dare not discuss solutions or examine the problems honestly because they are afraid of falling out with each other and therefore only concentrate on merely agreeing with each other on whom they hate. Millennial Woes recently said that questions such as how is the ethonostate going to be established and the nature of its government and policies are "silly" and "fatuous". Just because you don't know the answer to the question does not mean the question is silly or fatuous. I have the answer but of course he doesn't want to discuss it with me.
Millennial Woes doesn't want to discuss the solution to feminism - the cause of Western malaise - the way an alcoholic doesn't want to give up drink. I think they have all given up anyway because there is obviously a policy of only to complaining without discussing or proposing solutions.
Nationalists are constantly complaining about Jews and Muslims - people of faith - while having none themselves. Isn't it obvious that the reason why they are in fear of Jews exploiting and Muslims invading them because they have no religion and cannot cooperate with each other to accomplish even the simplest things?
It is of course religion that imposes common values and a hierarchy and sets rules for social behaviour in order to preserve the male solidarity that is so necessary for the co-operation necessary for any society to deal effectively with its internal and external enemies.
There is a reason why MPs like pandering to Muslims: because they still do things as a group. You get a mosque elder to support your party and he will get his congregation to support your party. Trying to get the white working class vote is like herding cats.
The white proletariat are divided in the following categories:
- the aristocracy of labour who are unionised and protected at the cost of the free speech of individual union members
- the independent contractor who is able to say what he wants more or less, eg white van men, taxi drivers, but who are regularly vilified because they support UKIP
- welfare-claimants who are part of the rent a mob from time to time mobilised to intimidate nationalists
- unskilled manual labour who are NEETs who were singly parented by their unmarried mothers without the education or the work ethic or the group support necessary to better themselves or the organisational skills to be effective who are leaderless because the men of their political establishment have completely abandoned them in their mania to pander to the capricious and unreasonable demands of the female voter
Jews and Muslims have more male solidarity and inter-generational co-operation than nationalists because they know they are supposed to respect their elders and they at least go to the same place of worship. Nationalists only ever meet in pubs because they have no community centre and this increases their tendency to steal each other's women, fight each other drunkenly and then stab each other in the back later for a variety of reasons. Community centres come from having a place of worship, after all, and places of worship have higher standards of behaviour than your local pub.
Nationalists don't want to discuss whether Christianity is kaput because they don't want to find themselves admitting that Christianity is kaput.
They don't want to admit that Christianity is kaput because it would mean discussing whether it needs to be replaced.
They don't want to discuss whether Christianity needs to be replaced because they don't want to find themselves having to admit that it needs to be replaced.
They don't want to discuss what might replace Christianity because they know there is only one religion that could replace Christianity anyway.
They are basically cowards and hypocrites unfit to lead any political movement because they cannot even admit the truth to themselves.
Where do you think nationalists are now in the Five Stages of Grief?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kübler-Ross_model
I don't think they are even past the first stage.
I ask nationalists to imagine a time in the future when all non-whites have been expelled including Jews and Muslims. On what basis would such an ethnostate be run?
The silence is deafening.
I think I am shunned precisely because I ask this question.
Individual nationalists know they must not propose any solutions because doing so would simply mean falling out with other nationalists who won't agree with them.
Would they have to live in a patriarchy?
Does this mean shaming sluts who undermine patriarchy?
Who is a slut?
Are the women they are having sex with sluts? (Any woman to whom you are not married with whom you are having sex is indeed a slut.)
Would they have to give up premarital sex? (Virtually all British men regard fornication as their inalienable human right.)
Would they have to give up gay sex? (Many nationalists are gays eg Douglas Murray feeling threatened by Muslims.)
Would they have to stay married to their white wives just to properly parent their legitimate their racially pure white offspring?
Would they have to abolish no fault divorce?
Would they have to abolish the welfare state?
Better not go there!
The long and short of it is that there can be no nationalism without patriarchy because only a patriarchy can produce enough good strong men prepared to effectively defend the national interest.
There can be no patriarchy without slut-shaming and the shaming of morally-compromised slut-fuckers as quran.com/24/2 prescribes.
The truth is that no nationalist is prepared to consider making these sacrifices, let alone actually make them.
This is because virtually all nationalists are atheists who regard this life as their only life and this makes them unwilling to make any sacrifices for the greater good of their race or nation.
This makes them ideologically and morally inferior to Muslims and Jews whose religion imposes on them the religious duty to remain a member of the group and to make sacrifices for it, which is the real purpose of religion.
The reason why no nationalist is prepared to discuss any of the above with me is because they have already made up their minds not to make any sacrifices for the group other than to complain weakly weekly on YouTube without demanding of their slack and supine audience any more than clicks for LIKE and SUBSCRIBE, and that is why they are never going to get anywhere.
Monday, 5 June 2017
Not a review of The Strange Death of Europe by Douglas Murray
I knew for years that the Islamophobic Douglas Murray, author of The Strange Death of Europe, was gay, but only yesterday discovered that Paul Joseph Watson was also gay.
Another weekend, another opportunity to eat books in my mom's basement while simultaneously checking out Prague's vibrant gay scene. 😉 pic.twitter.com/rs5WwgxEhJ— Paul Joseph Watson (@PrisonPlanet) June 3, 2017
The least you can do to perpetuate your race is to sexually reproduce and have legitimate children. If you can't quite bring yourself do that, it means something is very wrong with you and/or your society. It could mean that you are gay, that you cannot face marrying a member of your race, or just can't find anyone to marry you. Don't try to get round the problem by proposing internment and expulsion of the competing group and in this way get rid of the competition, because even if you do get rid of them you would still be a degenerate matriarchy.
Even if you do manage to intern and expel those pesky Muslims, your society would still be degenerate if most people don't marry the other parent of their offspring, if they commit incest, are sodomites, don't get round to being parents, or, if they become parents don't teach their children well.
If you are being outclassed by a group of people who don't go by your rules and go by rules that you find too hard to keep, the problem is not with them, but with you.
So now we know that the reason why the West is being overwhelmed by immigration is because Western governments have been indulging in the degenerate practice of prioritising the female preference for decades. Political parties of the West know they have to attract the female vote in order to be voted into office and this means having ever more restrictive laws to protect feckless females from their own stupidity and promiscuity and ever higher levels of public spending to bribe these irresponsible female voters into voting for a high spending and high taxing government.
And, because these feckless females do not have enough offspring or damage them by depriving them of their fathers, increasing numbers of immigrant labour are required as a result of the labour shortage caused by a declining birth rate whose members are so badly brought up and educated they are mostly unemployable, and an ageing population.
This of course makes the beta male victims of feminism angry and margnalised, but feckless females have grown accustomed to silencing men who dare to challenge the matriarchy by accusing them of rape, sexism, racism, Islamophobia and antisemitism.
Even being victims of Muslim terrorism has a feminine cause because Muslims represent the fightback against matriarchy, for Islam is an ideology of patriarchy.
Muslim terrorism as well as Islamophobic terrorism from the likes of Anders Breivik ad Thomas Mair are a manifestation of male rage at having to live under a government that enacts policies that actively destroys marriage and the family making all men the beta male victims of feminism up to and including the US President.
There is no suggestion that Murray has a solution from this interview with Laura Perrins or that he is interested in discussing any proposal that does not accord with his atheist and homosexual preferences that threaten his licence to enjoy his sexual liberation.
Childless atheists fighting Muslims with a belief in an omnipotent and morally perfectly personal God are as likely as savages who rarely have legitimate offspring hoping to ultimately defeat an enemy with nuclear weapons.
The fact that this book is receiving so much praise from the liberal establishment must be indicative of its vacuity.
http://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/laura-perrins-interview-corbyn-sympathises-anyone-wants-blow-us-says-douglas-murray/
Wednesday, 29 July 2015
Islam v Islamophobes
“Some people say we preach hatred. Of course we preach hatred,” cried Choudary emphatically.
We should hate evil and love good.
How can we tell the difference between good and evil?
It is really very simple.
What is encouraged by the Koran is good.
What is forbidden by the Koran is evil.
What more do you need to know?
Muslims are assured of victory even if hopelessly outnumbered.
008.065
YUSUFALI: O Prophet! rouse the Believers to the fight. If there are twenty amongst you, patient and persevering, they will vanquish two hundred: if a hundred, they will vanquish a thousand of the Unbelievers: for these are a people without understanding.
PICKTHAL: O Prophet! Exhort the believers to fight. If there be of you twenty steadfast they shall overcome two hundred, and if there be of you a hundred (steadfast) they shall overcome a thousand of those who disbelieve, because they (the disbelievers) are a folk without intelligence.
SHAKIR: O Prophet! urge the believers to war; if there are twenty patient ones of you they shall overcome two hundred, and if there are a hundred of you they shall overcome a thousand of those who disbelieve, because they are a people who do not understand.
008.066
YUSUFALI: For the present, Allah hath lightened your (task), for He knoweth that there is a weak spot in you: But (even so), if there are a hundred of you, patient and persevering, they will vanquish two hundred, and if a thousand, they will vanquish two thousand, with the leave of Allah: for Allah is with those who patiently persevere.
PICKTHAL: Now hath Allah lightened your burden, for He knoweth that there is weakness in you. So if there be of you a steadfast hundred they shall overcome two hundred, and if there be of you a thousand (steadfast) they shall overcome two thousand by permission of Allah. Allah is with the steadfast.
SHAKIR: For the present Allah has made light your burden, and He knows that there is weakness in you; so if there are a hundred patient ones of you they shall overcome two hundred, and if there are a thousand they shall overcome two thousand by Allah's permission, and Allah is with the patient.
The NF was formed in 1967.
The BNP was formed in 1982.
Choudary came to the notice of the public in 2003.
Nationalism is nowhere, but Islam is in our consciousness.
From what I have observed of Muslims, Muslim men are more masculine, energetic, educated, intelligent, purposeful and better-organised than the Islamophobes who hate and fear them, evidenced in the utter collapse of the parties dedicated to Islamophobia, anti-semitism and hatred of other races. They are also younger and more technologically savvy than the senescent and technophobic Islamophobes.
Muslim men also tend to marry and have legitimate offspring and stay together for their children, while Islamophobes tend to be gay like Douglas Murray or tend to have bastards with their women who are mostly sluts. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/2285670/Most-children-of-British-mothers-born-out-of-wedlock.html In other words, Islamophobes are irrational degenerates and irrational degenerate effeminates cannot win any war against those who are not degenerate who are neither effeminate nor irrational.
70% of convicted prisoners were singly parented.
The writing is on the wall, but that just means that the Islamophobes are just going to pretend that they can't read.
Atheist Islamophobes like to pretend they are more rational than Muslims, but anyone can see that it ain't so. You may hate what ISIS are saying and doing, but you would be clear about what they want and do. Has the UK government explained to your satisfaction what UK foreign policy is all about? Why won't they? MPs cannot explain its rationale even to themselves.
The British political establishment talks about extremism without being able to define it, other than to set British values in stone with their ridiculous definition of "democracy, the rule of law, individual liberty and mutual respect and tolerance of those with different faiths and beliefs".
Imagine a Victorian Briton reading this arrant nonsense. Will he recognise these PC Libtard values as British values? Would he be appalled that this piece of arrant nonsense that states what British values are has been set in stone for all eternity?
Individual liberty to be a slut - how good is that for the long term national interest when all the degenerate bastards are born?
Traditionally married couples are to respect gaily "married" couples? Why should those who expend their time, energy and resources and make sacrifices to bring up the next generation be treated as equal to those who have purely recreational sex all their lives and don't care what happens to their country after they are dead?
The liberal political establishment will not be answering these questions nor will the liberal media be asking them. Both are hopelessly corrupt and unfit for their designated purpose.
The British government does not see as its role the duty to promote the long term national interest and the British media, instead of asking questions, look the other way.
Therefore the only alternative to this nonsense remains Islam, I have reluctantly concluded.
What makes a violent extremist?
There is no mystery to this. Muslims are more likely to make sacrifices for Muslims than degenerate selfish atheist libtards for other degenerate selfish atheist libtards.
E O Wilson:
"Selfishness beats altruism in groups. Altruistic groups beat selfish groups, and everything else is commentary."
"Human nature is hung in the balance: our behaviour driven by selfishness and our desire to co-operate to ensure the survival of the group."
"The tension between individual and group selection is the tension between sin and virtue."
God if He exists is Darwinian. He means to demonstrate to us that those who follow His laws most closely will triumph over those who flout His laws. For this reason it is not looking good for the West, even if ISIS do occasionally misinterpret the Koran.
Friday, 6 March 2015
The only way to eradicate Islamophobia is to demonstrate the benefits of Secular Koranism
"...@SayeedaWarsi, a former Conservative minister herself, has consistently warned about the need to tackle #Islamophobia..."
— MendCommunity (@mendcommunity) March 6, 2015
@mendcommunity @SayeedaWarsi Islamophobes feel the need to blame foreigners rather themselves or their government.
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) March 6, 2015
@mendcommunity @SayeedaWarsi British Islamophobes come in two categories: the plebeian and patrician.
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) March 6, 2015
@mendcommunity @SayeedaWarsi The Plebeian Islamophobe is uneducated n prefers to hate things they can see eg Muslims rather than gvt policy.
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) March 6, 2015
@mendcommunity @SayeedaWarsi The Patrician Islamophobe is educated, middle class, sexually liberated and probably gay like @DouglasKMurray
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) March 6, 2015
@mendcommunity @SayeedaWarsi Another Patrician Islamophobe that comes to mind is Roger Scruton the Conservative philosopher.
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) March 6, 2015
@mendcommunity @SayeedaWarsi The Patrician Islamophobe is too blinded by chauvinism to acknowledge that Christianity has utterly failed.
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) March 6, 2015
@mendcommunity @SayeedaWarsi The Patrician Islamophobe is too blinded by chauvinism to acknowledge Christianity no longer maintains morality
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) March 6, 2015
@mendcommunity @SayeedaWarsi Another group of Patrician and elderly Islamophobes that come to mind are @TradBritGroup
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) March 6, 2015
@mendcommunity @SayeedaWarsi The interesting thing about these Patrician Islamophobes is how afraid they are to criticise/discuss feminism.
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) March 6, 2015
@mendcommunity @SayeedaWarsi Another Patrician Islamophobe that comes to mind is Winston Churchill. http://t.co/jXihpoKtXk
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) March 6, 2015
@mendcommunity @SayeedaWarsi We know Christianity has failed because Catholicism has gone the way of the @c_of_e and both are corrupt.
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) March 6, 2015
@mendcommunity @SayeedaWarsi If you want to know how Catholicism has failed watch the videos of @Michael_Voris of @Church_Militant.
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) March 6, 2015
@mendcommunity @SayeedaWarsi You will see @Michael_Voris is another Patrician Islamophobe but devout Catholics are necessarily chauvinists.
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) March 6, 2015
@mendcommunity @SayeedaWarsi Because Catholics pay such a high price 4 their faith they must feel superior to every other faith as a reward.
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) March 6, 2015
@mendcommunity @SayeedaWarsi Islam is the only reliable and viable source of social conservatism left in the West now Xtianity has failed.
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) March 6, 2015
@mendcommunity @SayeedaWarsi The West is as Christian as a skeleton used 2b human now Christianity is indistinguishable from PC Liberalism.
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) March 6, 2015
@mendcommunity @SayeedaWarsi PC Liberalism is about sexual liberation and social conservatism is about respecting marriage.
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) March 6, 2015
@mendcommunity @SayeedaWarsi The only way to respect marriage is to forbid extramarital sex but nobody wants to discuss or acknowledge this.
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) March 6, 2015
@mendcommunity @SayeedaWarsi Everything about feminism undermines marriage and the patriarchy runs on marriage the way a car runs on petrol.
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) March 6, 2015
@mendcommunity @SayeedaWarsi It is the purpose of feminism to destroy marriage in order to destroy the patriarchy n establish the matriarchy
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) March 6, 2015
@mendcommunity @SayeedaWarsi Marriage/God/Patriarchy/Forbidding Extramarital Sex v Sexual Liberation/Atheism/Matriarchy/Gay Marriage
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) March 6, 2015
@mendcommunity @SayeedaWarsi The typical sexually-incontinent Westerner addicted to the idea of extramarital sex predictably hates Islam.
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) March 6, 2015
@mendcommunity @SayeedaWarsi Marriage will never be respected again in the West as we know it under indiscriminate universal suffrage.
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) March 6, 2015
@mendcommunity @SayeedaWarsi Most mothers are unmarried mothers AKA sluts in Paedo Bastard Britain Slutland. http://t.co/JDM3YSYOfm
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) March 6, 2015
@mendcommunity @SayeedaWarsi Because most women are sluts and most mothers are Slut Single Mothers with the vote, no MP will criticise them.
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) March 6, 2015
@mendcommunity @SayeedaWarsi Because most women are sluts and most mothers are Slut Single Mothers with the vote, no MP will criticise them.
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) March 6, 2015
@mendcommunity @SayeedaWarsi The last time an MP criticised sluts in Britain was in 1974: his career was destroyed. http://t.co/JqkWqx6Qf9
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) March 6, 2015
@mendcommunity @SayeedaWarsi No Western leader of any political party will criticise sluts cos they hv the vote. This includes US President.
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) March 6, 2015
@mendcommunity @SayeedaWarsi If even the US President fears to criticise sluts then it must mean that all Western men are lower than sluts.
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) March 6, 2015
@mendcommunity @SayeedaWarsi Perhaps reason some Muslims join ISIS is cos they don't want 2b part of a society where men r lower than sluts?
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) March 6, 2015
@mendcommunity @SayeedaWarsi Saying what I have said has breached a taboo and constitutes blasphemy, for sluts are *worshipped* in the West.
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) March 6, 2015
@mendcommunity @SayeedaWarsi While Muslims worship an omniscient and moral God, degenerate disgusting PC Libtards worship sluts and LGBTs.
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) March 6, 2015
@mendcommunity @SayeedaWarsi Group A (slut/LGBT-worshipping atheists) or Group B (Muslims) - who will win if there is a war between the two?
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) March 6, 2015
@mendcommunity @SayeedaWarsi Because deep down Islamophobes know the answer to https://t.co/gXEsLvArq0 that is why they hate/fear Muslims.
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) March 6, 2015
@mendcommunity @SayeedaWarsi The moment men say it is OK for their women to become sluts, they become lower than sluts, which is Western man
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) March 6, 2015
@mendcommunity @SayeedaWarsi Because Western men r oppressed by sluts they feel they feel the need to take it out on Muslims = Islamophobia
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) March 6, 2015
@mendcommunity @SayeedaWarsi "We know who is in power by those whom we cannot criticise" and in the West we cannot criticise *sluts*.
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) March 6, 2015
@mendcommunity @SayeedaWarsi What is the point of having a democracy if the majority of voters are sluts, SSMs, MCSFs and SPOSSMs?
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) March 6, 2015
@mendcommunity @SayeedaWarsi SSMs AKA Slut Single Mother is explained at http://t.co/zqVESAInUz
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) March 6, 2015
@mendcommunity @SayeedaWarsi MCSFs and SPOSSMs are explained at http://t.co/u1fEKbqa7r
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) March 6, 2015
@mendcommunity @SayeedaWarsi Most voters in Britain are sluts, bastards, SSMs, MCSFs and SPOSSMs. Democracy means letting them vote.
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) March 6, 2015
@mendcommunity @SayeedaWarsi If people deserve the gvt they get, what kind of gvt do the people of Paedo Bastard Britain Slutland deserve?
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) March 6, 2015
@mendcommunity @SayeedaWarsi http://t.co/pJN653KDjS The Tytler Cycle shd be of interest to those governing Paedo Bastard Britain Slutland.
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) March 6, 2015
@mendcommunity @SayeedaWarsi In short, the solution to Islamophobia is to implement Secular Koranism. http://t.co/2HKPKUbYSZ
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) March 6, 2015
Wednesday, 11 September 2013
The Oxford Union should have invited Douglas Murray and Anjem Choudary
It is strange and sad that supposedly clever people are no longer clever.
Tommy Robinson is a working class oik, as we all know. However, the Islamophobia Douglas Murray feels is I am sure just as intensely visceral as that of Tommy Robinson's. He does however have the advantage of being educated and articulate.
Please try again Oxford Union. You should have known better than to invite Tommy Robinson.
Monday, 26 December 2011
Koran Book Club
If I had loadsa money I would have a Claire Khaw Koran Essay Prize as substantial as the Woolfson Prize (£250,000 - http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2011/10/wolfson-prize).
The prize would go to an Islamophobe (and s/he must be a practising Islamophobe and recognised as such by Islamophobes - eg Douglas Murray, Andrew Gilligan) who writes convincingly and truthfully about what they like about the Koran and how it could be a force for good if its guidance were adopted by their government.
Koran Book Club
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=310958681842
Sunday, 18 December 2011
A few hours with the Koranists
| Nadia Choudhury, Jacqueline DeVeaux, Yasin Ali Bhatti, Farouk Peru |
http://www.quranists.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Invitation2011withbannerfinal2.doc.pdf
https://www.facebook.com/events/223451914389560/
I thought it was going to be quite dull. I was one of the people supposed to be speaking but was pulled because there was not enough time.
My speech would have been along these lines.
HOW TO ESTABLISH A BRITISH CALIPHATE IN ONE EASY STEP, WITHOUT CONVERTING A SINGLE SOUL
What is this first step?
The Koran is generally acknowledged to be a great work of literature, even by non-Muslims.
It is also said to be the direct word of God.
If that is so, it should be regarded as a contract between God and Man.
It promises to be a warning and a guide for mankind and warrants that its guidance will keep man peaceful and at peace with himself, but only if its directions are followed.
While it is said to be a religion of peace, it is also a religion of war – a war against evil and oppression, idolatry and irrationality, intoxication and sexual licence.
This being so, it would benefit law students to study such a divine contract, whether or not they are Muslim as it would usefully add to their legal knowledge and drafting skills.
Even if Koranic knowledge were acquired reluctantly, just for the utilitarian purpose of passing a law exam and getting a law degree, it is very likely that the law student who goes on to becomes a legal practitioner will apply Koranic principles either consciously or unconsciously when interpreting and applying the law.
An example of this is seen in the case of Donoghue v Stevenson http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donoghue_v_Stevenson which promoted the Christian principle of love thy neighbour. The Koran has a similar principle too.
004.036
YUSUFALI: Serve Allah, and join not any partners with Him; and do good- to parents, kinsfolk, orphans, those in need, neighbours who are near, neighbours who are strangers, the companion by your side, the wayfarer (ye meet), and what your right hands possess: For Allah loveth not the arrogant, the vainglorious;-
PICKTHAL: And serve Allah. Ascribe no thing as partner unto Him. (Show) kindness unto parents, and unto near kindred, and orphans, and the needy, and unto the neighbour who is of kin (unto you) and the neighbour who is not of kin, and the fellow-traveller and the wayfarer and (the slaves) whom your right hands possess. Lo! Allah loveth not such as are proud and boastful,
SHAKIR: And serve Allah and do not associate any thing with Him and be good to the parents and to the near of kin and the orphans and the needy and the neighbor of (your) kin and the alien neighbor, and the companion in a journey and the wayfarer and those whom your right hands possess; surely Allah does not love him who is proud, boastful;
There will doubtless be skeptics and Islamophobes who will have to be persuaded of the wisdom of adopting such a course, which they will find objectionable and controversial.
To counter them, simply form a Koran Book Club and offer generous prizes to non-Muslims only, preferably intellectuals who are known Islamohobes eg Douglas Murray, to write essays that confirm what has been said above.
The Caliphate should be fully mature in about two decades, I predict.
Koranism is basically rejecting any Hadith that contradicts the Koran. The problem for Muslims that they have over the centuries preferred the corrupt practice of asking scholars what they think the Koran says because they have been told that the Koran is too difficult for them to understand and interpret or are too lazy or illiterate to read it. The scholars assume the role of experts who cannot be questioned or contradicted.
What I regard as the intellectual dishonesty of those trying to claim the opposite (either because they are homosexual themselves, or because they want to sell Islam to the current liberal political establishment in a cultural environment that worships sexual licence with indecent fanaticism) did not fill me with confidence for the Koranist movement, and I fear it will fall into the liberal practice of fudging and mudging issues, in rather the same way that the Orthodox Jews have been n interpreting the harsher Old Testament verses right of existence.
I find I am now in the position of being denounced by two Orthodox Jews for my criticism of SSMs http://thebattlefieldoflove.blogspot.com/2009/11/3-degrees-of-culpability-in-single.html, when I am sure in a different age they would have approved of my stance, so corrupted are they too by the unquestioning practice of sexual liberation in the West. Nowadays, you even have Orthodox Jewish rabbis marrying same sex couples.
http://972mag.com/orthodox-rabbi-marries-gay-couple-in-washington-dc/27424/
"O tempora! O mores!", as they used to say in Ancient Rome.
Not that the Chinese are not also now on their way to racial degeneracy with their one-child policy and their demographic time bomb ticking away. "Those two are comrades" would be how the modern Chinese now refer to same-sex couples.
004.015
YUSUFALI: If any of your women are guilty of lewdness, Take the evidence of four (Reliable) witnesses from amongst you against them; and if they testify, confine them to houses until death do claim them, or Allah ordain for them some (other) way.
PICKTHAL: As for those of your women who are guilty of lewdness, call to witness four of you against them. And if they testify (to the truth of the allegation) then confine them to the houses until death take them or (until) Allah appoint for them a way (through new legislation).
SHAKIR: And as for those who are guilty of an indecency from among your women, call to witnesses against them four (witnesses) from among you; then if they bear witness confine them to the houses until death takes them away or Allah opens some way for them.
004.016
YUSUFALI: If two men among you are guilty of lewdness, punish them both. If they repent and amend, Leave them alone; for Allah is Oft-returning, Most Merciful.
PICKTHAL: And as for the two of you who are guilty thereof, punish them both. And if they repent and improve, then let them be. Lo! Allah is ever relenting, Merciful.
SHAKIR: And as for the two who are guilty of indecency from among you, give them both a punishment; then if they repent and amend, turn aside from them; surely Allah is Oft-returning (to mercy), the Merciful.
007.081
YUSUFALI: "For ye practise your lusts on men in preference to women : ye are indeed a people transgressing beyond bounds."
PICKTHAL: Lo! ye come with lust unto men instead of women. Nay, but ye are wanton folk. SHAKIR: Most surely you come to males in lust besides females; nay you are an extravagant people.
I thought this an excellent way of disapproving of homosexuality without punishing them too harshly and sometimes not at all. Farouk however insisted that he did not think these verses signified that homosexuality is a sin.
I then asked what did these verses mean then if they did not mean what most people think it means?
There was a murmur of agreement from the men's side of the room, for we had all subconsciously segregated ourselves as we took our seats.
I am afraid I did not understand his response at all and cannot even begin to report what I thought he said.
There was some discussion about the wife-beating verse, which I feel I have already dealt with at http://thebattlefieldoflove.blogspot.com/2010/06/my-interpretation-of-that-wife-beating.html
We were then told that we would have to agree to disagree and it doesn't matter too much what we think because we can't do anything about it anyway as individuals.
But don't they want a Caliphate? What they said sounded frankly rather feeble and unfocused, to just read it and discuss it and then "agree to disagree"! Muslims are surely more than members of a book club?
It all seemed terribly wishy-washy to me.
I really would not have a problem about a Caliphate, provided the Koran was interpreted in a libertarian civic national socialist way that I would approve of, though of course I know there is no guarantee of that.
After the talk a man also ventured to put it to me that homosexuality was not a sin, according to his interpretation. I have absolutely no desire to seek out gay people to punish them in any way, but was merely pointing out that the Koran seems to be saying quite clearly that homosexuality is a sin simply because it has prescribed punishments for it. The burden of proof is quite high (lesbians to be convicted had to have four witnesses witnessing their lewd act with each other) and Muslims are forbidden to spy on each other so any evidence adduced through spying, phone hacking etc would be deemed inadmissible. The idea is therefore that of tolerance, but never equality, which seems fair enough to me. Therefore a Muslim would repeal the Civil Partnership Act without hesitation and there can be no question of allowing civil partnership ceremonies to take place in a church or a mosque under a nation guided by Koranic principles. They could however cohabit with each other and be left in peace if they are discreet and don't frighten the horses.
If homosexuality is tolerated it will be flaunted. When homosexuality is tolerated, so will widespread female promiscuity until, like in Britain, more than half the babies born now are the bastards of sluts who will be mostly bad mothers, whereupon the savagery, depravity, degeneracy and illegitimacy of the people will reach critical mass, triggering the decline and fall of one's civilisation. http://www.theage.com.au/news/world/truth-about-pommy-bastards-most-births-will-soon-be-out-of-wedlock/2006/02/21/1140284069030.html That is probably why most cultures have always had a horror of bastardy and promiscuous women while in Britain and the West generally this instinctive fear and disgust has been virtually bred out of people, unless they have the protection of a faith they take seriously enough to obey. When all around us is sexual licence, we are near the Sodom & Gomorrah stage of our civilisation, and will probably suffer a similar fate soon enough.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodom_and_Gomorrah
Think of homosexuality as the equivalent of a dead canary in a coal mine. It is the barometer of our societal and civilisation health. On purely Kantian terms of universalisability, homosexuality is wrong, because, if all us were gay, the human race would die out, which would be a Bad Thing as far as we are all concerned.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universalizability
He had some odd take on it that I cannot now remember because it was so convoluted. It may not be wrong of me to say he was probably of the gay persuasion.
I then pointed out that whoever took over, if they did take over, would interpret the Koran in just the way they would wish, because they would presumably be in a position to do so once they have taken over.
Nietzsche:
"All things are subject to interpretation. Whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth."
Friday, 10 July 2009
Cause of Uighur unrest in Xinjiang, the BNP, Social Cohesion and Al Muhajiroun
So now we know (apparently). It was all about a woman, or sex.
It would appear that the BNP are preparing themselves to do something like that about the Muslims, claiming that Muslims prey on white women.
No doubt they do, in the way that any sex predator would prey upon the easiest pickings.
Yet the BNP show no signs of dealing with a culture that condones female promiscuity (which of course exacerbates male promiscuity). In short, the Big Bad BNP are too afraid of their WAGs to tackle that issue properly themselves, while dismissing any Muslim who says that feminism and female promiscuity is a Bad Thing as backward, medieval, barbaric etc.
Far easier to blame the Muslims especially the Sharia for the UK lot AKA Al-Muhajiroun, who are so out of touch with the rest of society they might as well be living in Saudi. Apparently, they did not anticipate a problem at the debate they were hosting at Conway Hall, when they segregated the sexes, for a debate with Douglas Murray of the Centre for Social Cohesion, who now says he wants them banned.
The meeting was stopped by the anti-segregationist fanatics. It seems that these Muslims naively assumed that, as they were the ones hiring the hall and hosting the debate, they would be entitled to prevail upon the guests to accept their particular seating arrangements.
These people, in their alien clothes and their blood-curdling Islamic war-cries had no idea how much they offence they gave.
However, since Anjem Choundary cannot even meet me for an interview without having a chaperone with him, it would appear that these Muslims (who are beaten up by other Muslims for giving Islam a bad name and bringing trouble on the whole Muslim community) are their own worst enemies.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2009/jun/19/religion-islam-muhajiroun-choudary
Thursday, 18 June 2009
Extremist Anti-Segregationists stop debate on Sharia law
This is what I posted at Harry's Place at
http://www.hurryupharry.org/2009/06/17/al-muhajiroun-extremists-and-thugs/#comment-355918
I wonder who the extremists really are.
I was there and would have preferred the debate to have gone ahead
rather than having it stopped on the spurious grounds of infringing the rule of non-segregation.
If only someone had the presence of mind to ask those who were against and for segregation to raise their hands as well as those who didn’t care, and resolved the matter by a democratic vote, even if it meant that the segregationists would have had the day, since they were in the majority.
Not being an extremist trying to make a point, I was actually happy
where I was.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/jun/18/islamist-al-muhajiroun-meeting-chaos
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/islamist-group-has-to-abandon-relaunch-debate-1707890.html
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23709001-details/Clashes+as+Muslim+extremists+attempt+to+segregate+women/article.do
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1193869/Muslim-clashes-segregation-men-women-forces-cancellation-meeting.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2009/jun/18/al-muhajiroun-islamist-relaunch?showallcomments=true
Having been myself accused of all sorts by subsequent commentators, I posted another comment:
It was a trumped-up reason to stop the meeting, and an opportunity was missed to have these Muslims explain to us how and why their version of Sharia is so perfect and beautiful, and for Douglas Murray and anyone else to challenge this.
If they were hiring and paying for the hall, it behoves those
who wished to attend what was after all a free meeting to abide by their rules.To do otherwise would have been an abuse of hospitality.
If invited to someone’s house and asked to remove my shoes before crossing the threshold, I would do so without hesitation and with good grace, even if it were my custom to sleep in my boots in my own home.
It is after all only good manners.
http://www.1party4all.co.uk/Home/Account/TopicForm.aspx?topicsId=135
Vote: Should the Sharia for UK debate have been stopped?
Mark Parker entertains doubts
26:00 Psyop is just another word for state propaganda. 35:39 @DigitalGnosis I dont believe Homer was a person Homer was a pagan. There wi...
-
Key: CK = Claire Khaw CD = Claudia Dalgleish EB = Eddy Butler MC = Mark Collet TC = Tess Culnane CD on Facebook This past month...
-
Beta males will never get female attention if it is OK for women to have premarital sex. If you want beta males to have a reasonable ...
-
Why do Christians not follow the morality of the Bible? Because the Church itself does not follow Biblical principles and is only interes...
