The Senate Judiciary Hearing and the perniciousness of feminism

I am given an honourable mention at the 57th minute.

I appear at 2:24:00.

My comments under the video:

Kavanaugh is not an attractive man with his snorty grimacing ways that say redneck, redneck, redneck .... He actually looked more attractive before I heard him speak, but, hey, you can say this about most pretty women, huh?

Flake and his matinee idol looks - not to be trusted. Basically, good looking men are not to be trusted. Men are not for looking at.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Jeff_Flake_official_Senate_photo.jpg

Good-looking men should be assumed to be morally defective or gay unless they prove themselves otherwise.

My dear mother says "We know what these Americans get up anyway. We have seen enough of their movies to know exactly what these loose women get up to ... "

Christine Ford - crazy lady! Ann Coulter - my favourite white nationalist - took the right position on her: that Ford probably was assaulted "but not by Kavanaugh."

Everyone gets bored and irritated with their spouse. It should be written into every Marriage Contract

Mere boredom, irritation and disenchantment with married life shall never be a sufficient reason to apply for a divorce to Matrimonial Disputes Tribunal. It is assumed that marriage is a sacrifice the parties to the marriage make for the rearing of the next generation in optimum conditions. It ain't no bowl of cherries. Divorce will only be granted without investigation by the Tribunal if there are no children of the marriage and both parties agree to the divorce. Fault for divorce always starts at 50/50 even if the parties agree amicably to divorce, because at the very least the parties to the amicable undisputed divorce married the wrong person.

I think only people from a religious background really understand the nature and purpose of principles even if they subsequently reject their religious upbringing.

"Maybe we did wrong" - To fix things, you would have to acknowledge that both your religion (Christianity) and political system (multi-party democracy) have failed and think about its replacement ie one party theocracy . That is really all it takes, in theory. You're not gonna do it though, are you? You will just wait and wait and continue to live in your condemned building until it collapses round your ears. Sad, so sad.

How long did democracy last in Ancient Athens? Not very long!

Did Republican Rome last longer than Imperial Rome?  Nope.

Western academics who are coming round to my point of view:

The China Model
Political Meritocracy and the Limits of Democracy
Daniel A. Bell
https://press.princeton.edu/titles/10418.html

Is this how democracy ends?
David Runciman
https://www.lrb.co.uk/v38/n23/david-runciman/is-this-how-democracy-ends

How many Noahide laws do US laws infringe? How many peoples and nations have the Americans led astray under its imperium after being forcefed its rotten culture?

https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/the-noahide-laws/

1.  Do establish laws (and adhere to the rule of law in order to dispense justice).
2.  Don’t curse God.
3.  Do not practice idolatry. (Christianity is idolatry because the Doctrine of the Trinity is about worshiping an executed revolutionary and claiming he is the co-equal of the supreme and eternal Abrahamic God and persecuting anyone who disagrees with you eg Jews, Muslims, Unitarian Christians, Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses etc.)
4.  Do not engage in illicit sexuality. (Obviously, all extramarital sex is "illicit sexuality".)
5.  Do not participate in bloodshed. (How many neocon wars this century?)
6.  Do not rob. (How many neocon wars this century?)
7.  Do not eat flesh from a living animal.

God's curses for disobedience can be discovered at https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy+28&version=NIV  Presumably He will punish the gentile less harshly if they repent in time.

Stop blaming women! You lot are like parents who leave your adolescent children for three months for a holiday and then come back to find the family home trashed or turned into a drug den or a brothel. Are you really going to blame the children?! Just admit that you have been distracted by taking the bribe of fornication offered to you by feminism and correct yourselves.

Misogyny v Misandry march hand in hand.

Tolerating female promiscuity cheapens relationships between men and women and nothing breeds contempt like familiarity. Why are gay men so bitchy about each other? Because they have all "cheated" on each other and felt they have been cheated on.

I like to think White Sharia came from Secular Koranism.

The first mention of Secular Koranism was at http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.com/2009/12/depression-dementia-atheism-and-new.html

White Sharia came afterwards.
http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.com/2017/05/today-i-discovered-white-sharia.html

Secular Koranism is less restrictive of women's rights than White Sharia because divorce will be allowed and no fault divorce abolished. Coverture will not be reintroduced under Secular Koranism.

There is no need to persuade women to surrender their rights. All you have to do is to persuade enough ambitious, marriageable and influential men to restore the patriarchy.  If you manage that, then it is as good as done.

My blueprint to restore the patriarchy is at http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.com/2018/07/defining-participants-of-culture-war.html

You can't be Nazis if you are not German and don't want to deport Jews, surely? Antisemitism is a feature of Christianity. What Western gentiles need is a religion that protects them from their women and bad unobservant Jews. You know which one there is left, because Christianity is kaput.

The death knell of WASPs was sounded when Britain lost her world empire and the Americans took over. The Anglican Church was the most powerful church in the world after the Catholic Church. As  you would expect, Americans cannot respect a religion of a nation who was really the vanquished after WW2 and whose nation immediately became their debtor. In fact, it really began to fail once it became legal to deny the Trinity after the Doctrine of the Trinity Act 1813.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctrine_of_the_Trinity_Act_1813 It was inevitable that the baby of the Biblical morality would be thrown out with the bathwater of the Trinity.

Bottom line: no patriarchy, no white pride. This is because the immigrants who come here will instantly know that you have lost control of your women. Any attentive foreigner who pays attention to the news and capable of making inferences will also know that you have lost control of your women.

You know what I think makes Muslims blow themselves up when they get to the West?

They blow themselves up when they realise that they and their descendants will suffer the same fate as the white man. And this after they have crossed seas and continents to get to what they thought was their promised land. I can't prove it of course, but that's my theory and I'm sticking to it.


1:49:00 Calling complainants "survivors"  assumes the guilt of the accused.

1:51:00  The corporations might find Islam useful because patriarchy is more likely to create a good business environment of law and order rather than a failed states like South America, huh?

1:53:00  Women are non-combatants in this Culture War between Matriarchy and Patriarchy, like lionesses watching the father of their cubs deal with a challenger for his harem. Whoever wins, the lionesses will have his cubs and this is fine by them because they will always have the cubs of the winner.

http://www.series-books.com/shirleyflight/shirleyflight.html I just discovered this series about older women leading the next generation of women astray in their promiscuity.

This is the best reference to Balaam.  https://thetorah.com/balaam-the-seducer-of-jews-and-an-early-christian-polemic/ I think he was briefly discussed in one of Luke's streams at http://lukeford.net/blog/?p=122336

2:27:00  It was Tuesday 25 September 2018 when Greg Johnson said yes to me. Eeek! Nearly a week ago!

2:28:00  Transcript of what I said on the Victoria Derbyshire Show in 2 March 2011 that got me expelled from the BNP. http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.com/2011/07/transcript-of-what-i-said-on-victoria.html

You can still hear it at https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p00fdkhv

My letter of expulsion from the BNP
http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.com/2011/07/claire-khaw-expelled-from-bnp.html

2:38:00  Dennis Dale notices that the BBC have been taken over by women. Every time he tunes in, it is two women talking.

http://www.series-books.com/shirleyflight/shirleyflight.html I just discovered this series about older women leading the next generation of women astray in their promiscuity.

This is the best reference to Balaam.  https://thetorah.com/balaam-the-seducer-of-jews-and-an-early-christian-polemic/ He was briefly discussed in one of Luke's streams at http://lukeford.net/blog/?p=122336

2:46:00  The ultimate matriarchy is the bee colony with only a few drones allowed to exist for the purpose of pleasuring the queen and siring her offspring.

2:48:00 Kelly Anne Conway is a "survivor"  https://www.breitbart.com/video/2018/09/30/kellyanne-conway-reveals-shes-a-sexual-assault-survivor-in-emotional-moment/

2:52:00  On being London Mayoral candidate for the BNP

2:57:00  Martin Bell, Independent MP

2:59:00  Chinese degeneracy

3:03:00  34 years on, Japan finally prepares to swallow Pill https://www.theguardian.com/world/1999/mar/03/jonathanwatts

3:15:00  Jews

3:16:00  Dennis Prager  https://www.prageru.com/press-release-prager-university-prageru-takes-legal-action-against-google-and-youtube-discrimination

3:17:00  Melanie Phillips  http://www.melaniephillips.com/sea-change-american-jewry/

The Virtue of Nationalism by Yoram Hazony  http://www.yoramhazony.org/tvn/

3:20:00  Ultra Orthodox Rabbi Aaron Bassous  http://radicalisedrabbi.blogspot.com/2018/07/assimilated-liberal-jews-threaten.html

3:21:00  E Michael Jones: No religion, no white identity. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=65tUlQZJ9J0

3:23:00  Neoconservatism = US imperialism

Israel is the status symbol of global imperialists

3:25:00  Chinese Ancestor Worship http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.com/2016/04/how-to-become-hungry-ghost.html

3:31:00  Sukkot

3:32:00  Yom Kippur

3:36:00  The spin of the Trinity

3:39:00  The diversity of Trump supporters

3:40:00  Peaceful conquest of the world by commercial means
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZdUZgFqRg8&t=76s

Discourage social diseases by protecting the small and medium farmer
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mblk0luMHfk

Like a pendulum in its eternal sway
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQH_mfYRpQc&t=2s

The political philosopher and practical political leader
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7_4Qgq49kIA

The operation of democracy
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SxqyZkJwb0c&t=2s

Public opinion and the presstitutes who form it
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Fhpkh-lFPo

Democracy is the forerunner of Marxism
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YitmE9kuEw4&t=84s

The revolutions of 1848 and British democracy
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=33JjbJ8PzHg

Fall of empire
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D2Z2c0dRAjo&t=163s

Under 30s please note
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y9xye4laz_M

An appeal to Jews in the Anglosphere who believe in free speech and are prepared to help the gentile

Yesterday I had a strike from YouTube disabling me from streaming for three months. I have appealed against the strike, but am not particularly hopeful.

What did I say?

The background is given at http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.com/2018/09/hitlers-category-mistake.html

It would appear that I was given a strike simply for having Hitler in the title of the video ie "Hitler's category error".

I was pointing out that the behaviour he attributed to Jews was in fact shared by anyone who refuses to admit he or she has lost the argument and that we have all of us done this at some time in our lives, including me and my mother.

I was not saying "Hitler was right about the Jews", I was in fact saying Hitler attributed to Jews behaviour that is common to all of us. While I was still editing the description under the video explaining this, I discovered I could no longer post because the video had been removed. This happened within one hour of posting.

If you are Jewish with a YouTube channel that you never use and don't mind getting a strike - it just means you cannot stream for three months on your channel- it would be much appreciated if you would read the following, from towards the end of Chapter 2 Years of Suffering and Studying in Vienna Mein Kampf:

At the outset they [the Marxists] counted upon the stupidity of their opponents; but when they got so entangled that they could not find a way out they played the trick of acting as innocent simpletons. Should they fail, in spite of their tricks to logic, they acted as if they could not under the counter arguments and bolted away to another field of discussion. They would lay down truisms and platitudes; and, if you accepted these, then they were applied to other problems and matters of an essentially different nature from the original theme. If you faced them with this point, they would escape again, and you could not bring them to make any precise statement. Whenever one tried to get a firm grip on any of these apostles one's hand grasped only jelly and slime which slipped through the fingers and combined again into a sold mass a moment afterwards. If your adversary felt forced to given in to your argument, on account of observers present, and if you then thought that at last you had gained ground, a surprise was in store for you on the following day. He would be utterly oblivious to what had happened the day before, and he would start once again by repeating his former absurdities, as if nothing had happened. Should you become indignant and remind him of yesterday's defeat, he pretended astonishment and could not remember anything, except that on the previous day he had proved that his statements were correct. Sometimes I was dumbfounded. I do not know what amazed me more - the abundance of their privilege or the artful way in which they dressed up their falsehoods. I gradually came to hate them.

In the description of your video, please post:

A category mistake (or category error) is a logical fallacy that occurs when a speaker (knowingly or not) confuses the properties of the whole with the properties of a part. It contains the fallacy of composition (assuming the whole has the properties of the part) and the fallacy of division (assuming the part has the properties of the whole).
It is an imprecision fallacy and an informal fallacy.

Examples:

1. Confusing (knowingly or not) the Muslim immigrants in their country whom they hate with a book they will never read ie the Koran. 
2. Confusing (knowingly or not) Muslim immigrants in their country whom they hate with the terrorists that they fear who have been provoked by the imperialistic foreign policy of their governments.
3. Confusing (knowingly or not) the consequence of following clear instructions badly or not at all with the correctness of the instruction. (Is your doctor a bad doctor if you do not follow his orders? Is your satnav faulty if you ignore its directions? Is your map wrong if you misread it?)
4. Confusing (knowingly or not) the symptoms ie immigrants with the disease ie feminism. 

The title of the video should be "Hitler's Category Error".

*******************************************************************

That's it, basically, because that was all I did, and I got a strike. 

If you get a strike, it means the following:

1. You don't enjoy Jewish privilege.
2. There could be an algorithm that automatically flags any video which mentions Hitler or the Nazis.  

If you don't get a strike, it could mean the following:

1. You do enjoy Jewish privilege.
2. No one is trying to get you for hate speech the way they are trying to get me. 
3. YouTube has revised its policies on its draconian censorship on discussion of the causes and consequences of WW2 as well as the discussion of continuing imperialistic wars in Muslim lands that provoke Muslim terrorism against both Jew and gentile in the West. 

Before Hitler was going on about Jews in that chapter, he was complaining about his fellow workmen but is rather more indulgent and forgiving of their foibles.

In my relations with my fellow workmen I was often astonished to find how easily and often they changed their opinions on the same questions, sometimes within a few days and sometimes within the course of a few hours. I found it difficult to understand how men who always had reasonable ideas when they spoke as individuals with one another suddenly lost this reasonableness the moment they acted in the mass. That phenomenon often tempted one almost to despair. I used to dispute with them for hours and when I succeeded in bringing them to what I considered a reasonable way of thinking I rejoiced at my success. But next day I would find that it had been all in vain. It was saddening to think that I had to begin it all over again. Like a pendulum in its eternal sway, they would fall back into their absurd opinions.

BEST CASE SCENARIO

1.  Yoram Hazony whose book The Virtue of Nationalism is out and who has a YouTube channel will be prepared to do this. That would certainly make the gentile nationalist of the West sit up and take notice of him and perhaps buy his book.

My new book "The Virtue of Nationalism" has been released by @BasicBooks https://t.co/bYVDIxy012 pic.twitter.com/pkJZWq7fc0

— Yoram Hazony (@yhazony) September 4, 2018

2.  Melanie Phillips who is a Trump supporter and Brexiteer may wish to open a YouTube account and do exactly the same thing to test the waters her end.

Please. Our free speech is also your free speech.

The diversity of the races who do support support Trump and want to leave the EU will be our strength. (In the UK, Muslim-majority areas of Birmingham, Bradford and Luton voted to leave.)

Pilleater talks to Claire Khaw about Asian Aryanism

http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/As-I-see-it-American-Jews-get-it-wrong-473592



http://www.melaniephillips.com/sea-change-american-jewry/

https://www.britannica.com/topic/Optimates-and-Populares

Asian-Aryanism is just socially conservative Asians getting on with white nationalists better than white men get on with white women. From the 51st minute

Melanie Phillips and Germaine Greer made the most sense but still lost the debate: this means most feminists are immune to reason and cannot be trusted to be fair

While Germaine Greer tried to be fair to men and be more nuanced about rape taking into account real life situations, Helena Kennedy used bad language and shock tactics to big up the victimhood of women. She has an illegitimate son. https://t.co/gmkv9eyRtA

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) 28 March 2018

The vocally biased audience was obviously going to reject the arguments of Germaine Greer, who said: "Sex is a blood sport." #MeToo https://t.co/yb4yLs3df0

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) 28 March 2018

While Greer clearly hoped for a rational discussion about sexual behaviour, Helena Kennedy used bad language and shock tactics to big up the victimhood of women. She has an illegitimate son. Unbelievably, she berated Greer and Phillips for even arguing for the other side. #MeToo https://t.co/rMn9qLWEDl

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) 28 March 2018

While the Baroness of Feminazism Helena Kennedy roundly denounced Germaine Greer and Melanie Phillips for daring to argue for the other side, they looked helplessly at each other. The audience cackled and then cheered hysterically. Disgusting and appalling. #MeToo https://t.co/MK0KRkzqVS

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) 28 March 2018

Melanie Phillips had to preface her speech by saying she was not defending rape and sexual assault because the audience was so clearly biased and emotional. Collective female victimhood is not to be encouraged, she said. #Metoo https://t.co/KP0ofDLDWo

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) 28 March 2018

"We are all victims now", says Melanie Phillips. "Victim blaming" shouldn't be the 2 magic words to divest women of all personal responsibility, which infantilises them. Those who willingly enter into the casting couch bargain should not later accuse men of sexual assault. #metoo https://t.co/lY7f7P6RZh

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) 28 March 2018

The number of rape convictions is too low in Britain. "By whose standards?" demands Melanie Phillips. By the standards of a campaigning feminist that is our Derectrix of Public Prosecutions who has reversed the burden of proof requiring the accused to prove his innocence. #MeToo https://t.co/iMO0cgCZtq

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) 28 March 2018

Our Directrix of Public Prosecutions known to be a campaigning feminazi has said the number of rape convictions is too low. She must assume that all the men accused must be guilty, and all the women accusing must be telling the truth. This is undeniably extreme bias. #Metoo https://t.co/8AJwBMGzF9

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) 28 March 2018

Melanie Phillips: Feminism is now injustice to men. #MeToo https://t.co/0awPY090jB

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) 28 March 2018

Melanie Phillips "Helena Kennedy says 'Power is coded male'. Really? In the world that I live in, men and women are capable of abusing their power and do so." #MeToo https://t.co/As0Uc0G7q8

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) 28 March 2018

Melanie Phillips refers to the stellar levels of hypocrisy at the Golden Globes. They wore dresses that said "Does my conscience look big enough in this revealing black dress?" A hint of Islamophobia when she talks about the women in Iran and the victims of Muslims.  #MeToo https://t.co/gw2Hdna6y5

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) 28 March 2018

Melanie Phillips says "Not #MeToo and #NotInMyName" https://t.co/HlMRRLQuhP

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) 28 March 2018

A self-abnegating display of intersectionality from Sophie Walker, a self-hating white middle class educated woman who wants to give everything she got from white middle class white men away to those who hate middle class white men to make herself feel better.  #MeToo https://t.co/4DB2jNtMqy

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) 28 March 2018

"Sex, service and subjugation" are the alliterations Sophie Walker uses to claim ever more measures of victimhood and power from Western men subjugated by their terror of being accused of a historic sexual offence by women like her. #MeToo https://t.co/ySFpMTgq15

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) 28 March 2018

Is the neocon foreign policy the "feminist foreign policy" Sophie Walker is referring to?  "#MeToo is the roar of a gladiator and I am Spartacus."  What a load of bollocks. https://t.co/iAa1p7dwCV

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) 28 March 2018

The 19 year old woman who was thinking of going into politics who asked the first question about what she should do if "a man puts his hand up your skirt and his hand on your breast" [in a trembling voice] shouldn't go into politics. #MeToo https://t.co/OG6yc97ccw

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) 28 March 2018

"The Holy Ghost is not coming.," Germaine Greer informs the 19 year old middle class woman who is thinking of going into politics who shouldn't go into politics asking for advice on what she should do if a man puts his hand up her skirt or on her breast at @HouseofCommons #MeToo https://t.co/bMcjVYVtt3

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) 28 March 2018

Sophie Walker: "How do you punch back someone who is posting revenge porn?"
How about not letting any passing perv you fuck take pictures of you in a compromising position? #MeToo https://t.co/6CN26xVuVI

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) 28 March 2018

Incredibly, Sophie Walker asks "How do you punch back someone who is harassing and abusing you on Twitter?" It seems she is not aware of the block button.  It would also be disproportionate to use physical violence for someone who merely tweeted stuff you didn't like. #MeToo https://t.co/vYyJH8H6VJ

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) 28 March 2018

Apparently, Sophie Walker is always reporting posts on social media only to be told that nothing she reported infringes the rules. How dare anyone fail to do what an entitled white middle class woman from Glasgow wants! #MeToo https://t.co/nfuJTarDtX

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) 28 March 2018

Men, can you imagine what your life would be like if Sophie Walker, the leader of the Woman's Equality Party, became Dictatrix of Britain? #metoo MWAHAHAHAHAHAHA https://t.co/xpzV1XrAWE

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) 28 March 2018

"What do you ladies intend to do with men? What is our future?" asks a man with an Australian accent. Helena Kennedy accuses Melanie Phillips of "male-think".  Can you imagine the Bad Baroness as Dictatrix of Britain? #MeToo https://t.co/VjOGpb0NdJ

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) 28 March 2018

Germaine Greer says the language concerning sexual assault is impenetrable and confusing which means mistakes will be made and injustice caused. She invites feminazis to think of themselves as mothers of young men falsely and maliciously accused of rape in a rigged system. #MeToo https://t.co/JHXdPURFaa

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) 28 March 2018

Helena Kennedy claims she is not demonising men while caling the Australian man who asked what is going to happen to men "silly". She says there is a new wave of feminism and we should be welcoming it, the way we are supposed to welcome the Whore of Babylon, I suppose. #MeToo https://t.co/EAcGQRMTXk

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) 28 March 2018

Melanie Phillips is "sad" that Helena Kennedy who she "respects very greatly" does not see enough to call out the great injustice done to men who are being unjustly accused of rape because she assumes all men are guilty and all women who accuse them are telling the truth. #MeToo https://t.co/KfigRQAhoU

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) 28 March 2018

Melanie Phillips says she does not recognise the picture Sophie Walker is painting that "oppression marks women's lives in a patriarchy". Now men are told that courage and valour are synonyms for oppression because we all know men are violent and brutish. #MeToo https://t.co/zSLX5GyDCQ

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) 28 March 2018

Melanie Phillips: "Men in the last two or three decades have been turned into very little more than sperm donors, walking wallets and occasional au pairs. There is only one way for men to go now and that's castration." Shrieks of hysterical female laughter. #MeToo https://t.co/l9RPsYmSGq

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) 28 March 2018

Sophie Walker: Women calling themselves feminists "takes up space". "Taking up space terrifies the patriarchy." She invited the women on stage to link arms.  Ugh. I wouldn't want to link arms with a fanatical feminazi taking up lots of terrifying space, however fuckable. #MeToo https://t.co/JUEge6VoDF

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) 28 March 2018

Germaine Greer: Life would be simpler if feminists hated men. Often, feminists are mothers to men and often mothers like their sons better than their daughters. She and Melanie Phillips exchange knowing smiles. #MeToo https://t.co/EiBzsX6lrp

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) 28 March 2018

Helena Kennedy accuses Melanie Phillips of being "vitriolic" when all she did was argue for the other side robustly. She implies Phillips hates young women because she is no longer young and says she is "wrong about that". That repugnant woman should be disbarred. #metoo https://t.co/GBu8FmLFk9

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) 28 March 2018

Melanie Phillips' come back was so brilliant and I won't spoil it for you by telling you what she said so you will have to watch the exchange yourself.  Right on, Mel! #MeToo https://t.co/6dCu2JaIgc

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) 28 March 2018

Results for #MeToo debate before the debate: 248 yes it has gone too far, 457 no, 210 don't know. After the debate: gone too far 162. 29 don't know, 710 said no. This means feminists are immune to reason and have no sense of justice. https://t.co/TRbuIl8Yg2

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) 28 March 2018

Why Jews in the West fulfilling their religious duty to promote the Noahide laws should encourage Western governments to adopt Islam

Rabbi Kin asks if Jews are negligent in not doing what they were supposed to which is to "Recount His glory among the nations." https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Psalm+96:3&version=NIV  Otherwise, humans will become worse than animals. He concludes by saying our civilisation will be destroyed if we keep changing the laws and drive ourselves and everyone else mad. God's laws don't change because He doesn't make mistakes, unlike liberals and feminists.

Rabbi Mizrachi predicts another Holocaust with an 80% attrition rate because of the disgusting behaviour of Jews who claim to be religious and says he won't even ask God why He would allow such a thing because it is obvious. https://t.co/zLdF67v0W5

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) March 16, 2018

There appears to be a school of thought in Judaism saying that if only Jews would perform their religious duty and remind the gentile not to fall below the minimum standards of the Noahide laws, all will be well again. This means Jews must point out to the gentiles of the West in no uncertain terms that Christianity has failed and propose that their failed religion be replaced with Secular Koranism ie Islam as I, an agnostic, interpret it, and become a one party theocracy. http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/secular-koranism.html 
Fortunately, America can do it without even having to change its constitution though I would advise the omission of pursuing happiness altogether.
http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2016/02/the-us-could-become-one-party-state.html

Government is now beginning to target the rich to fill its coffers. Remember how the Roman Republic imposed proscription? The wealthy and influential should start protecting their wealth from greedy governments.  @holland_tom @wmarybeard https://t.co/mQpG701Szl

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) March 15, 2018

So I was not the only one to find that strange statement by Nia Griffith more than a little odd. The lights are on but nobody's in. But then that bolsters my case for having an alpha male in charge of the ship of the state chosen by beta males. https://t.co/B2CcALEYiX

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) March 15, 2018

It is obvious to me anyway that what is or isn't in the national interest is a topic particularly suitable for philosophical debate. Too bad Western academic philosophers are not fit for purpose, eh? @RockingMrE @Philosophi_Cat @OUPPhilosophy @PhilosophyNow @Roger_Scruton https://t.co/aAKI0Wfw3U

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) March 15, 2018

Future historians will have to read between the lines of our lying media to deduce the majority view. Do you ever wonder if the voting for war and yet more war by the ancient Athenians was rigged? @holland_tom @wmarybeard https://t.co/xXC67tgikQ

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) March 15, 2018

I think I speak for people everywhere when I say that the least people expect from their governments is that they are promoting the national interest. This would mean a one party state, but why is this so bad if the rights of party members are constitutinally protected?

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) March 15, 2018

Currently, the general belief in those living in liberal democracies is that their politicians are not acting in the national interest and are merely selling out the national interest in obedience to whoever issues their orders which is mostly the arms lobby if they are in NATO. https://t.co/sNpjDWnMpU

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) March 15, 2018

If you are British, you should bear remember it was Britain that declared war on Germany in both World Wars. Military belligerance even if backed by the Americans is unwise in the extreme. We should be friendlier to the Russians with whom we share a contiguous landmass. https://t.co/DVf4BTggqU

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) March 15, 2018

If we envy the Russians for having an alpha male leader who seems to know what he is doing and is trusted by the Russians, it is only because we are sick and tired of our own who do not know what they are doing and who are loathed and despised by the people they presume to govern https://t.co/idgecYDXr4

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) March 15, 2018

As humans whatever our race, religion, class or nationality, the least we can aspire to is to die wiser than when we were born. To do this we must consider the nature of truth, logic and morality and always ask ourselves if our thoughts and deeds are in harmony with this trinity.

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) March 15, 2018

We never know if pursuing our self interest will result in our interests. Similarly nations not really know if a course of action would promote their interests. However, if we regarded our nation as a self-interested entity, then the same moral principles should apply too. https://t.co/msuWhUVkEb

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) March 15, 2018

What religion would you choose if you were shopping for one as an agnostic if you already see the utility of religion? I say there is only one choice the Western gentile non-Muslim can choose after he acknowledges that Christianity has failed, and I am arguing as an agnostic. https://t.co/2X2eYhowDU

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) March 15, 2018

The Koran allows only defensive wars. If Britain had been properly Muslim and following Islamic principles, two World Wars would been avoided and Britain would have retained its world empire. Quite a thought, is it not? https://t.co/8ulXJ7mEbD

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) March 15, 2018

As a Muslim country after WW2, the Koranic permission for men to have up to *four* wives would have easily allowed Britain to replenish the war casualties of two World Wars *without recourse to immigration*. Quite a thought, is it not? https://t.co/QNdP1hAJcP

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) March 15, 2018

Imagine if Western governments abolished usury. Property prices would fall dramatically and debts would be forgiven. Western nations would rebase their currency. There would be inconvenience and confusion, but this would eventually be resolved. The world would make a fresh start. https://t.co/inKp7tDDbk

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) March 15, 2018

https://t.co/j1EfQ9UCYC The 4 Steps of Atonement is a very useful Jewish idea that I urge all to consider, but especially Western governments and historians. 
Step 1, Regret.
Step 2, Ceasing. 
Step 3, Confession and restitution.
Step 4, Resolution https://t.co/feYMHs52Ku

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) March 15, 2018

What should Britain regret? It should regret starting two World Wars the way a bad Monopoly player would buy up properties to prevent other players ie Germany from acquiring them and then end up in debt and unable to benefit from opportunities that came his way. https://t.co/tP1vISCVT3

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) March 15, 2018

What should Britain cease? It should cease pursuing its policies of proxy imperialism dictated to it by America, because it has ceased to be an empire and is now a vassal state. It is in the awkward position of being both the vassal state of the US and the EU. https://t.co/9bx5FN8zgk

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) March 15, 2018

What should Britain confess? It should confess that it was its insane participation in two ruinous World Wars that resulted in loss of empire. After all, the greatest achievement of Britain was its world empire on which the sun never set. https://t.co/yiMOtWPkdg

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) March 15, 2018

What should Britain resolve? To not repeat the mistakes of its history and resolve to do better in future, under a different system of government and a different religion because Christianity has failed. Surely all this must be obvious to most reasonable people? https://t.co/BVH6nooOaO

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) March 15, 2018

All this I have concluded without once having recourse to belief in God. It is really not that hard to acknowledge that God is an instrument of government and His laws are there to preserve our nation and civilisation the way Judaism has preserved Jewish identity over the ages. https://t.co/WiaiZGobWJ

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) March 15, 2018

The success of the Jews in propering and remaining in existence is evidence of the effectiveness of Judaism from which Christianity and Islam are derived. Christianity has failed, so Islam must be the answer to the problems of the West created by liberalism. https://t.co/fQHs30CTP0

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) March 15, 2018

If you are an anti-Semite, Islam will protect you from Jews. If you are Jewish, you must acknowledge that the legal principles of the Koran satisfies the 7 Noahide laws, while nothing in the New Testament with its vague extremist stories is anything to base any legal system on. https://t.co/fv9jGLKc7Q

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) March 15, 2018

Could someone please draw this to the attention of Melanie Phillips who has blocked me on Twitter because she does not like what I say? She seems hell-bent on attempting to revive the corpse that is Christianity, which would be a waste of time. Even if Britain had an absolute dictator, it would not be enough if he just forced everyone to attend church on Sundays and declare that they believe that Christ is God, would it, Melanie? To restore patriarchy, sluts must be shamed and to do this as soon and as effectively as possible requires the enforcement of quran.com/24/2, quran.com/4/15 quran.com/4/16 and the abolition of no fault divorce, the civil partnership and gay marriage as well as the repeal of the Equality Act 2010 and the Equal Pay Act.

By the way, Melanie, only Islam guarantees freedom of worship with quran.com/2/256 and only Islam specifically accommodates both Jews and Muslims. Christian scripture does not accommodate either Jews or Muslims. The First Amendment was derived from the Koran I was also disappointed to note that what she says about Islam in http://standpointmag.co.uk/node/7087 is either irrelevant or untrue.

Because Islam absolutely forbids usury, Jews would no longer get into trouble with the locals and be moved on by gentiles in pogroms when gentiles who borrow usuriously from them realise they will never be able to repay their loans. Calvin the anti-Semite was obviously wrong in allowing Christians to practise usury, thinking it was jolly clever of him to allow Christians to practise usury while making sure Jews always got the blame.

If you are Jewish, you must know that the Jews of the West won't all fit into Israel when they have to flee their failed states of the West. If you are gentile, you must acknowledge that Christianity has failed because it no longer even supports marriage or family values. #Islam https://t.co/DKEIP7GocS

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) March 15, 2018

If you are a married father, you will know that patriarchy will restore your society to one which prioritises the preferences of married fathers over that of unmarried mothers with variously fathered and badly parented illegitimate offspring. https://t.co/QOaLva472h

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) March 15, 2018

If you are a woman who wants to be a married mother properly parenting her legitimate offspring without having to be a working mother, patriarchy will give you a greater likelihood of finding a husband capable of providing for you and the children of your marriage. https://t.co/Nf6iMxGQ6q

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) March 15, 2018

What if you have no intention of becoming a parent of legitimate offspring or of properly parenting them? Then I think your views should be ignored because you are saying you do not intend to make any biological investment in the next generation. This seems fair enough to me. https://t.co/oquWnlggOC

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) March 15, 2018

If the majority of British voters say they have no intention of becoming the parents of legitimate offspring, should the government abide by their decision? Are you so much of a democrat that you will favour the selfish preferences of the majority over national survival? https://t.co/gwdGDvqPPY

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) March 15, 2018

I have just demonstrated why democracy in an environment of indiscriminate universal suffrage is a busted flush and actually immoral and a recipe for failure. Democracy in Athens did not last long, did it? You must have deduced by now that there are more fools than the wise. https://t.co/PLXE3gYD76

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) March 15, 2018

Who should vote? Only those who pay tax. The Koran would make it unconstitutional to tax the citizen more than a flat rate income tax of 20% - you don't have to be Muslim to find this attractive.  https://t.co/uVBQTA4cYK The low-waged would be relieved of voting and being taxed. https://t.co/WvoouyMByL

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) March 15, 2018

It has been easy to demonstrate that Secular Koranism has something for the political classes (they'd become more popular), the wealthy (prevention of a failed state and the inconvenience of becoming an economic migrant) and, last but not least, the poor who'll feel looked after. https://t.co/KplZXhzp2C

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) March 15, 2018

Since Koranic principles are obviously fairer than communism or free market capitalist principles, the West should really give Islam a go, because it is only through the West adopting it that will reform Islam. https://t.co/yl5bG34vQI

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) March 15, 2018

Gay marriage is definitely flouting the Noahide laws on sexual morality for which God will definitely zap us. 

Reform and Conservative synagogues and especially churches are more impure than mosques for the Ultra Orthodox Jew, says Rabbi Mizrachi. Mosques at least do not practise idolatry.  https://t.co/aoPYWpBOZL

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) 15 March 2018

https://www.warhistoryonline.com/featured/did-you-know-napoleon-was-a-serious-admirer-of-islam.html

Napoleon wanted to be the same genius conqueror of the world. He wanted to be for the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries “what Muhammad had been to the seventh.” Therefore he could not accept the slightest denigration of the Prophet. He admired Muhammad in the following words: “Mahomet was a great man, an intrepid soldier; with a handful of men he triumphed at the battle of Bender (sic); a great captain, eloquent, a great man of state, he revived his fatherland and created a new people and a new power in the middle of the Arabian deserts.” Here Napoleon refers to the Battle of Badar which was fought in the second year of Prophetic migration to Madinah.

“Voltaire”, said the Emperor, “in the character and conduct of his hero, has departed both from nature and history. He has degraded Mahomet, by making him descend to the lowest intrigues. He has represented a great man who changed the face of the world, acting like a scoundrel, worthy of the gallows. He has no less absurdly traverstied the character of Omar, which he has drawn like that of a cut-throat in a melodrama. Voltaire committed a fundamental error in attributing to intrigue that which was solely the result of opinion." Omar here refers to Omar bin al-Khattab who was the second caliph after Prophet Muhammad. 

Napoleon rejected the central theme of Voltaire’s play that Muhammad was a fanatic. He observed that the rapid social changes and political victories which Prophet Muhammad realized within a short span of time could not have been the result of fanaticism. “Fanaticism could not have accomplished this miracle, for fanaticism must have had time to establish her dominion, and the career of Mahomet lasted only thirteen years." General Baron Gourgaud, one of the closest generals to Napoleon, gives almost identical accounts of Napoleon’s evaluations of Voltaire’s play. Napoleon further observed that "Mohammed has been accused of frightful crimes. Great men are always supposed to have committed crimes, such as poisonings; that is quite false; they never succeed by such means." 

Napoleon was a true admirer of both Prophet Muhammad and his religion. As an aspiring world conqueror and legislator, Napoleon adopted Muhammad as his role model and claimed to be walking in his footsteps. Before his military excursion to Egypt he advised his soldiers and officers to respect the Muslim religion. “The people amongst whom we are going to live are Mahometans. The first article of their faith is this: "There is no God but God, and Mahomet is his prophet." Do not contradict them… Extend to the ceremonies prescribed by the Koran and to the mosques the same toleration which you showed to the synagogues, to the religion of Moses and of Jesus Christ.” 

“In the name of God the Beneficent, the Merciful, there is no other God than God, he has neither son nor associate to his rule. On behalf of the French Republic founded on the basis of liberty and equality, the General Bonaparte, head of the French Army, proclaims to the people of Egypt that for too long the Beys who rule Egypt insult the French nation and heap abuse on its merchants; the hour of their chastisement has come. For too long, this rabble of slaves brought up in the Caucasus and in Georgia tyrannizes the finest region of the world; but God, Lord of the worlds, all-powerful, has proclaimed an end to their empire. Egyptians, some will say that I have come to destroy your religion; this is a lie, do not believe it! Tell them that I have come to restore your rights and to punish the usurpers; that I respect, more than do the Mamluks, God, his prophet Muhammad and the glorious Qur'an... we are true Muslims. Are we not the one who has destroyed the Pope who preached war against Muslims? Did we not destroy the Knights of Malta, because these fanatics believed that God wanted them to make war against the Muslims?” 

Humberto Garcia observes that Bonaparte promised “to restore egalitarian justice in Ottoman Egypt under an Islamic republic based in Cairo.” The intended Islamic republic was to be based upon the egalitarian laws of “the Prophet and his holy Koran.” Bonaparte casted himself as a Muslim convert and took the Islamic name of “Ali”, the celebrated son in law and cousin of Prophet Muhammad. He expressed his desire to establish a “uniform regime, founded on the principles of the Qur’an, which are the only true ones, and which can alone ensure the well-being of men.” Garcia further observes that “supposedly, the French came as deist liberators rather than colonizing crusaders… and not to convert the population to Christianity…” Juan Cole states that “The French Jacobins, who had taken over Notre Dame for the celebration of a cult of Reason and had invaded and subdued the Vatican, were now creating Egypt as the world’s first modern Islamic Republic.” 

Throughout his stay in Egypt Napoleon used the Qur’anic verses and Ahadith (Prophetic reports) in his proclamations to the Egyptians. “Tell your people that since the beginning of time God has decreed the destruction of the enemies of Islam and the breaking of the crosses by my hand. Moreover He decreed from eternity that I shall come from the West to the Land of Egypt for the purpose of destroying those who have acted tyrannically in it and to carry out the tasks which He set upon me. And no sensible man will doubt that all this is by virtue of God’s decree and will. Also tell your people that the many verses of the glorious Qur’an announce the occurrence of events which have occurred and indicate others which are to occur in the future…” Napoleon used the Muslim apocalyptic vocabulary and tradition to convey his political motives. Ziad observes that the “use of the Qur’an and Sunna in the remaining proclamations serves to consolidate further the image of Napoleon as not only a follower of Muhammad, but a Mahdi destined to conquer that region.” Napoleon truly infused his declarations with “an unprecedented degree of Qur’anic allusion and auto-deification. No longer a mere exporter of the Enlightenment, Napoleon is now the arm of God…”

Napoleon formed a “Directory” comprised of French officials, Cairo elites and Muslim clergy. He patronized mosques and the madrassas, the centers of Qura’nic studies programs. He participated and presided over the Muslim festivals and Egyptian holidays and “even tried converting the French army to Islam legally without undergoing the Muslim practice of circumcision and imposing the wine-drinking prohibition… Marriages between Frenchmen and Muslims women were common, accompanied by formal conversion to Islam. Indeed, French general Jacques Manou, governor of Rosetta, married a notable Egyptian woman of the Sharif cast and changed his name to “Abdullah” (Servant of Allah).” Manuo was a senior French general. He married Zubayda in the spring of 1799. “The adoption of an almost Catholic discourse of piety in an Islamic guise by a French officer in Egypt could scarcely have been foreseen by the Jacobins on the Directory and in the legislature who urged the invasion.” 

The French Jacobins like their deists comrades believed that “Mahometans” were “closer to “the standard of reason” than the Christians…” 

Some notable French thinkers, as discussed above, had already “tried to show how close Europeans could be to Islamic practice, without knowing it, as a way of critiquing religion.” They had already employed Islamic ideas to root out the priestcraft. Therefore, Napoleon was reaping the fruits of a long strand of French radical enlightenment where Islam and Muhammad were the known commodities. Bonaparte’s personal deistic disposition and the overall French propensity towards hatred of organized Christianity and its irrational dogmas combined with simultaneous appreciation of Islamic rational monotheism and medieval Islamic civilization were truly at play in Egypt. The political expediency added to the already existent seeds of the French radical enlightenment and caused them to flourish in a congenial Muslim Egyptian environment. The French were not accepting a new religion. They were accepting a reformed version of their deeply held religious convictions, something already present in their religious outlook. 

Bonaparte dressed in Islamic attire, promoted Islamic art and sciences, and greatly emphasized the “affinity between the French egalitarian principles and Shari’a law. 

The Egyptian scholars, in their letter to the Sharif of Mecca and Madinah, wrote the following about Bonaparte. “He has assured us that he recognizes the unity of God, that the French honor our Prophet, as well as the Qur’an, and that they regard the Muslim religion as the best religion. The French have proved their love for Islam in freeing the Muslim prisoners detained in Malta, in destroying churches and breaking crosses in the city of Venice, and in pursuing the pope, who commanded the Christians to kill the Muslims and who had represented that act as a religious duty.” Napoleon’s public conversion to Islam was more significant for the Egyptians than any of his other policies. 

Napoleon’s conversion to Islam was highlighted by the known newspapers both in France and England. In England, the “Copies of Original Letters from the Army of General Bonaparte” was published in a total of eight editions to implicate “a Franco-Ottoman conspiracy to eradicate Christianity.” The publicity and importance given to Napoleon’s proclamation was geared towards “supplying indisputable evidence of French admiration of Islam”, and identifying a “Jacobin-Mahometan plot to undermine British national interests at home and abroad.” The alliance between the Islamic Egypt and French republicanism was the source of English paranoia that resulted in a grand scale polemical works against Islam culminating in a new biography of Muhammad, the professed model of Napoleon Bonaparte. Humphrey Prideux’s famous biography “The Life of Mahomet, or the history of that Imposter, which was begun, carried on, and finally established him in Arabia… To which is added, an account of Egypt” was published in London in the year 1799. The books multiple editions over a short span of time, the enthusiastic support it generated both from the Church of England and English monarchy and its widespread distribution over the European continent in different languages reflect the levels of anxiety, alarm, suspicion and fears caused by a perceived alliance between the Islamic and French republicanisms. 

Prideaux’s claims of hundreds of thousands of hidden “Mahometans” both in France and England highlight the extent of cross cultural pollination of Islamic ideas during the eighteenth century Europe. While scolding the Mahometan policies of Bonaparte, Prideaux also wanted to incite the British public against the radical enlighteners at home, like Henry Stubbe, John Toland, Blount, Tindal etc., who, like Bonaparte, subscribed to the Islamic republicanism. The egalitarian republicanism of the radical enlighteners both in France and England was depicted as the “corrupt political theology imported from the Muslim world.” The Christian Europe’s divine right monarchy and ecclesiastical authority were in a chaos due to Islamic ideas foreign to Christian Europe. Napoleon’s supposed conversion to Islam had really caused a public paranoia about an Islamic conspiracy to overtake Europe. Napoleon was completely identified with Islam and Muhammad. 

“Although Bonaparte and his defender, Bourrienne, prefaced this account by saying that Bonaparte never converted, never went to mosque, and never prayed in the Muslim way, all of that is immaterial. It is quite clear that he was attempting to find a way for French deists to be declared Muslims for purposes of statecraft. This strategy is of a piece with the one used in his initial Arabic proclamation, in which he maintained that the French army, being without any particular religion and rejecting Trinitarianism, was already “muslim” with a small “m.” Islam was less important to him, of course, than legitimacy. Without legitimacy, the French could not hope to hold Egypt in the long run, and being declared some sort of strange Muslim was the shortcut that appealed to Bonaparte.” 

A systematic study of his ideas over the later years of his life substantiates the fact that he was a true admirer of Prophet Muhammad and his religion. Juan Cole admits that “Bonaparte’s admiration for the Prophet Muhammad, in contrast, was genuine.” Napoleon expressed the same positive sentiments about Muhammad and Qur’an while leaving Egypt after his failed attempt to control it. In 1799 on his way back to France he left specific instructions to French administrators in Egypt. He strongly urged them to respect the Qur’an and love the Prophet, "one must take great care to persuade the Muslims that we love the Qur'an and that we venerate the prophet. One thoughtless word or action can destroy the work of many years." Napoleon showed the same respect towards the Prophet in the last years of his life while living in captivity on a tiny Island in the middle of Atlantic Ocean, Saint Helene, without any hope of political power or gain. One can easily see that in conformity with the French Enlightenment ideals Napoleon truly believed that Prophet Muhammad’s concept of God was genuinely sublime and that the Prophet was a model lawmaker. That is what he said in St. Helene: “Arabia was idolatrous when Muhammad, seven centuries after Jesus Christ, introduced the cult of the God of Abraham, Ishmael, Moses and Jesus Christ. The Arians and other sects that had troubled the tranquility of the Orient had raised questions concerning the nature of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. Muhammad declared that there was one unique God who had neither father nor son; that the trinity implied idolatry. He wrote on the frontispiece of the Qur'an: "There is no other god than God." 

Muhammad’s lack of resources and greatness of accomplishments make him the super hero. His fifteen years of achievements surpass fifteen centuries accomplishment of the Jews and Christians. “Muhammad was a prince; he rallied his compatriots around him. In a few years, his Muslims conquered half the world. They plucked more souls from the false gods, knocked down more idols, razed more pagan temples in fifteen years, than the followers of Moses and Jesus Christ did in fifteen centuries. Muhammad was a great man. He would indeed have been a god, if the revolution that he had performed had not been prepared by the circumstances.” 

Napoleon said, "Mohammed appeared at a moment when all men were anxious to be authorized to believe in but one God. It is possible that Arabia had before that been convulsed by civil wars, the only way to train men of courage. After Bender we find Mohammed a hero! A man can be only a man, but sometimes as a man he can accomplish great things. He is often like a spark among inflammable material. I do not think that Mohammed would at the present time succeed in Arabia. But in his own day his religion in ten years conquered half the known world, whilst it took three centuries for the religion of Christ firmly to establish itself.” Napoleon identified himself with Muhammad. "Mohammed's case was like mine. I found all the elements ready at hand to found an empire. Europe was weary of anarchy. Men wanted to make an end of it.” 

Napoleon believed that religion was necessary for law and order in a given society. “All religions since that of Jupiter inculcate morality.” He further stated that “Society needs a religion to establish and consolidate the relations of men with one another. It moves great forces; but is it good, or is it bad for a man to put himself entirely under the sway of a director? There are so many bad priests in the world." That is why he did not abolish any religion from any country which he conquered. It seems that he outwardly showed respect to almost every faith tradition including the Catholics but inwardly despised Christianity due to his deistic notions of the divinity. The same reasons made him respect the rational monotheism of Islam. 

Napoleon entertained the same lofty ideas about Islam in the final years of his life. He said "The Mohammedan religion is the finest of all. In Egypt the sheiks greatly embarrassed me by asking what we meant when we said 'the Son- of God.' If we had three gods, we must be heathen." He was a staunch admirer of Islamic morality which he considered a prerequisite to the wellbeing of all societies. “A man may have no religion, but may yet have morality. He must have morality for the sake of society.” The simple Islamic monotheism, its lack of burdensome ceremonies and strong emphasis upon morality were the keys to Napoleon’s admiration of Islam. "That is how men are imposed upon Jesus said he was the Son of God, and yet he was descended from David. I like the Mohammedan religion best. It has fewer incredible things in it than ours. The Turks call Christians idolaters." While denying the biblical miracles attributed to Moses, Napoleon confirmed the historical miracle of Muhammad, the stunning victories and sweeping social changes in a short span of ten or so years. " 

John Tolan states that “Bonaparte's Muhammad is a model statesman and conqueror: he knows how to motivate his troops and, as a result, was a far more successful conqueror than was Napoleon, holed up on a windswept island in the South Atlantic. If he promised sensual delights to his faithful, it is because that is all they understood: this manipulation, far from being cause for scandal (as it had been for European writers since the twelfth century) provokes only the admiration of the former emperor.” 

NAPOLEON ON POLYGAMY

Napoleon was also impressed by certain aspects of the Islamic Shari’ah and intended to incorporate some of them into his “Napoleon Code”. John Tolan observes that Napoleon was “ready to excuse, even to praise, parts of Muslim law that had been objects of countless polemics, including polygamy.” Napoleon argued that “Asia and Africa are inhabited by men of many colors: polygamy is the only efficient means of mixing them so that whites do not persecute the blacks, or blacks the whites. Polygamy has them born from the same mother or the same father; the black and the white, since they are brothers, sit together at the same table and see each other. Hence in the Orient no color pretends to be superior to another. But, to accomplish this, Muhammad thought that four wives were sufficient.... When we will wish, in our colonies, to give liberty to the blacks and to destroy color prejudice, the legislator will authorize polygamy.” 

The identification between Napoleon and Prophet Muhammad and the emphasis upon Muhammad the lawgiver perhaps played a role in Adolph A. Weinman’s visual expressions which decorate the main chamber of the U. S. Supreme Court. Weinman (December 11, 1870 – August 8, 1952), a German-born American sculptor, visualized the Prophet as one the great lawgivers of the world. He is one of the eighteen great conquerors, statesmen and lawgivers commemorated in a series that includes Moses, Confucius and Napoleon. Even though Muslims have a strong aversion to sculptured or pictured representations of the Prophet, they can still appreciate the impact of his legacy upon the legal and political traditions in the West. 

Jew prescribing Islam for gentiles satirises white nationalists

Karaite Jew recommends Islam for atheists to better fight feminism

Anti-feminist Karaite Jew encourages mosque attendance

Bishop Ashenden shakes his head at "the total and utter capitulation" of the Archbishop of Canterbury to the secularists

Who is going to challenge it with what? We already know that our male MPs are too stupid and scared of being accused of historic sexual offence to say anything now.

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) November 25, 2017

Melanie Phillips - in the Times: ‘ The Church of England is sowing the seeds of its own destruction’; re- Lorna Ashworth, Gavin Ashenden and Joshua Sutcliffe.https://t.co/Emae1rkxxY pic.twitter.com/wOg9Q6kdcU

— Gavin Ashenden (@gavinashenden) November 13, 2017

You can tell the subversives who have infiltrated the Church are working themselves round to changing all references to God as He and Him to She and Her.

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) November 25, 2017

Isn't the C of E so hopelessly compromised there is no point in talking about how hopelessly compromised it is?

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) November 25, 2017

Bishop Ashenden says #BlackFriday "sounds very racist to an Englishman". https://t.co/1YOOkk6EwZ

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) November 25, 2017

Anglican clergymen - supposedly steeped in their Judeo-Christian heritage - failed to remember that some accusations are obviously unprovable ab initio and should not have been even entertained. https://t.co/uu67jxBMGV https://t.co/1YOOkk6EwZ

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) November 25, 2017

Bishop Ashenden: The C of E is either covering up its sex scandals or over-reacting over them as a form of virtue signalling. https://t.co/1YOOkk6EwZ

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) November 25, 2017

The established church was created in order to be a Creature of the State, surely? The state is now liberal and the C of E is now a Creature of the Liberal State. Why not discuss why the church had to be separated ie *quarantined* from the church by the Americans? https://t.co/1YOOkk6EwZ

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) November 25, 2017

Bishop Ashenden points out that Justin Welby the Archbishop of Canterbury "big up the secular narrative", which appears to be the only way to keep your job.  If you complained to Henry VIII himself that the C of E was a Creature of the State, do you think he would be surprised? https://t.co/1YOOkk6EwZ

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) November 25, 2017

Bishop Ashenden mentions Cultural Marxism.  Cultural Marxism is Feminism and so is Post-Modernism. Post-Modernism is in fact the Feminist Hegemony that squats over our heads about to open her bowels. https://t.co/1YOOkk6EwZ

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) November 25, 2017

Bishop Ashenden talks about the Archbishop of Cant Justin Welby saying he and other spineless Anglican clergy feel obliged to kowtow to whatever the degenerate voters and MPs vote for eg gay marriage. https://t.co/1YOOkk6EwZ

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) November 25, 2017

Bishop Ashenden paraphrasing the Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby: "If the secularists vote for something, what right has the Church to offer any opinion at all against the Will of Democracy?" https://t.co/QnuV3iblui

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) November 25, 2017

Bishop Ashenden asks of the Archbishop of Cant: "What view of the Church can you possibly have when you believe that it has no prophetic witness at all in speaking on God's behalf to a society that has turned its back on Him because the secularists have outvoted you by 51 to 49?" https://t.co/mwp8Vq76xg

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) November 25, 2017

The Erastian Spirit Bishop Ashenden so disapproves in the Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby  https://t.co/1mOela39jQ https://t.co/V5Q4EJhf89

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) November 25, 2017

Bishop Ashenden denounces "the total and utter capitulation" of the Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby to the secularists. https://t.co/v2pwJyvmWx

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) November 25, 2017

Christianity was so weak that all Cultural Marxism had to do was give it a shove, and it fell over and died. https://t.co/twwcvOlCAX

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) November 25, 2017

Bishop Ashenden: "We appear not to believe in the Kingdom of Heaven strongly enough and so now build a Socialist Utopia on earth." https://t.co/guWczn3LX6

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) November 25, 2017

Bishop Ashenden: You won't even get to be the church if you don't stop them closing you down and therefore you have to speak out to maintain the integrity of being the Church in the public place. Welby doesn't get it and just goes along with the democratic majority." https://t.co/a8x5ziGbvm

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) November 25, 2017

Bishop Ashenden mentions Melanie Phillips' Times article on progressive secularism warning us that it lures you into a cosy alliance, after which it will spit you out and shut you down. The only antidote to that is for the Church to speak out in the public place. https://t.co/wDVtJixG9e

— Claire Khaw (@MinimumSt8) November 25, 2017

But if men speak out, they will invariably be accused of a historic sexual offence against the rule of evidence mentioned in  Deuteronomy 19:15 that these two smug-looking well-fed men did not see fit to remind viewers about.

There would be a presumption of guilt entirely contrary to criminal standard of proof required to find an accused guilty of a crime.

In our stinking matriarchy, the woman is automatically believed, and the man automatically disbelieved.

Did you notice how proud the American was when he announced that his daughter asked him what was for dinner? That cuck was obviously proud that he had a daughter to boss him around. Can we expect such men to defend any principle other than weekly weakly?

When will the Post-Christian acknowledge that Christianity has already failed?

Will they pretend to each other that it does not replacing till the day they die leaving the clueless next generation to pick up the pieces? Looks like it.



1:17:

Melanie Phillips:

"AMERICA IS A JEWISH COUNTRY AND WAS FOUNDED ON JEWISH PRINCIPLES."

America is fundamentally a Jewish country in the way Britain is not.

"The Church of England is basically a con-trick."

Melanie Phillips talks about Church of England from 1:16.

Could Gavin Ashenden be that "turbulent priest" mentioned by Melanie Phillips at 1:21? I asked her who this turbulent priest was and her response was to block me on Twitter.

http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2017/11/melanie-phillips-on-zionism.html