GayPatriot

The Internet home for American gay conservatives.

What Makes Leftists Happy

by

A media operative is overjoyed because the victim’s of yesterdays “Terror Attack Committed by Islamic Supremacists That Had Nothing to do with Islam” were so diverse!

A snapshot of London’s magnificent diversity in those injured: French, Romanian, Korean, German, Polish, Irish, Chinese, US, Italian, Greek.

Ace asks:

Why does a white racist killer somehow create an obligation in me to examine how my own internalized “white supremacy” might be part and parcel of the attack, whereas the terrorism committed by a Islamist is definitely not cause for any self-reflection within the Muslim community about how their own hatreds and ideas of Islamic Supremacy might have something to do with the latest jihadi rampage?

 

Comments

  3. Just another attempt at a blank slate in the making, I guess.

    It’s not like we haven’t seen those happen before, is it?

    In cases where the alleged evil is so great that ordinary governmental procedures cannot cure it, Mably recommends a dictatorship to promote virtue:

    “Resort,” he says, “to an extraordinary tribunal with considerable powers for a short time. The imagination of the citizens needs to be struck a hard blow.”

    This doctrine has not been forgotten. Listen to Robespierre:

    “The principle of the republican government is virtue, and the means required to establish virtue is terror. In our country we desire to substitute morality for selfishness, honesty for honor, principles for customs, duties for manners, the empire of reason for the tyranny of fashion, contempt of vice for contempt of poverty, pride for insolence, greatness of soul for vanity, love of glory for love of money, good people for good companions, merit for intrigue, genius for wit, truth for glitter, the charm of happiness for the boredom of pleasure, the greatness of man for the littleness of the great, a generous, strong, happy people for a good-natured, frivolous, degraded people; in short, we desire to substitute all the virtues and miracles of a republic for all the vices and absurdities of a monarchy.”

    At what a tremendous height above the rest of mankind does Robespierre here place himself!

    And note the arrogance with which he speaks.

    He is not content to pray for a great reawakening of the human spirit.

    Nor does he expect such a result from a well-ordered government.

    No, he himself will remake mankind, and by means of terror.

    This mass of rotten and contradictory statements is extracted from a discourse by Robespierre in which he aims to explain the principles of morality which ought to guide a revolutionary government.

    Note that Robespierre’s request for dictatorship is not made merely for the purpose of repelling a foreign invasion or putting down the opposing groups. Rather he wants a dictatorship in order that he may use terror to force upon the country his own principles of morality.

    He says that this act is only to be a temporary measure preceding a new constitution. But in reality, he desires nothing short of using terror to extinguish from France selfishness, honor, customs, manners, fashion, vanity, love of money, good companionship, intrigue, wit, sensuousness, and poverty.

    Not until he, Robespierre, shall have accomplished these miracles, as he so rightly calls them, will he permit the law to reign again.

    Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don’t you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough.

    — Frederic Bastiat

  5. The picture of the Europeans standing over the victim and the African Muslim walking past had better become as iconic as the girl kneeling over the body of her fellow student at Kent State. No image better incapsulates the antipathy that the Muslim world feels towards the West.

  7. Muslims are hoist on their own petard so long as they continue to pick and choose their own comfortable interpretation of the Quran.

    “If Israel were to disarm, there would be genocide. If the Palestinians were to disarm, there would be peace.”

    Meanwhile, liberals spit at the Jews and excuse the Palestinians on the basis of freedom of religion. That is how situation ethics and moral relativity works.

    Folks fighting it out over religion is as old as religion. Liberals of today essentially discard the basic principles imbedded in every religion and substitute them with an Utopian flex-system of zeitgeist ideals intended to go-along in order to get-along.

    The hard core Islamists enjoy blowing such snowflakes to smithereens. They get paradise points and an obscene amount of gratification from pure, unbridled barbarism.

    Meanwhile, today’s liberals flagellate those they disdain within their own culture for having forced the hard core Islamists to be so barbaric.

    Mohamed Sifaoui, an Algerian born journalist states: “I consider Islamism to be fascism.”

    I certainly am one of the first Muslims to consider Islamism to be fascism. This is not a subjective decision but rather a serious, academic argument. Fascism and Islamism are comparable in many aspects: Fascism, without evoking all its particularities, bears similarities to trends also present in Islamism. I am, of course, making a reference to their will to exterminate the Jews. On this point, the Islamists may go even further in their doctrine than the Nazis did, considering that the end of the world could only occur when there are no Jews left on earth. In the three monotheist religions, apocalypse, end of the world, and doomsday exist and are liturgical events invested with a high degree of spirituality. Hence, the Islamists interpret the end of the world in a very special way. Whereas it is written nowhere in the Qur’an, exegetes describe the end of the world as the day when even the trees and rocks will be able to talk and tell the Muslims: “Come here, there is a Jew hiding behind me. Come and kill him.” And this would go on, until there would not be any Jew left on earth. This ideology is pure fascism.
    (….)
    The will to exterminate or do harm to homosexuals is another similarity between Nazism and Islamism. The Islamists, also, say that they are the best community in the world, a superior race thanks to their beliefs. They use political means to arrive at this erroneous exegesis. I do not fear to call it fascism. And there are many more similarities between fascism and Islamism.
    (….)
    If the majority of Muslims were not moderate, Islamists would have destroyed the Western world a long time ago. Despite its technological lead, its nuclear power, and all its armies, the Western world would never be able to face an Islamist world entirely convinced by the terrorist cause. One billion people supporting Al-Qaeda would reduce the rest of the world to ashes. Islam contains violent texts that need not be applicable today. Islam is a religion of moderation. I know because I studied theology for four years.

    Perhaps 20 percent of Muslims on the planet must be totally reeducated. We have to fight them politically, ideologically, and also militarily. Western societies do not fight them well; whenever they try to do so, they end up strengthening them.

    Muslims account for nearly 25% of world’s population. If 20% of 1.6 billion Muslims need basic retraining, that means 320 million Islamists are roaming around out there.

    Pretending that these true-believers can be sweet talked into peace and harmony is like sleeping with a Komodo Dragon with your ankles and wrists cuffed together and only a couple of ping-pong balls to fend him off.

    The Muslim woman ignoring the bloody scene is not indifferent. If she could safely spit on the victim, that would more accurately reflect the world she has come from. [This is not a claim to know from whence the woman came, but it is to note that her lack of concerned humanity is striking evidence of two different worlds. ]

  8. Makes sense the picture has everyone (BUT the Islamic women) standing about the victim. She’s too busy on the phone to be bothered…

    Aren’t we all so ‘enriched’ by these people of that ‘religion of peace’. And frankly, Islam cannot be changed. It was a religion of war, and it still is a religion of war – against every non-Islamic person. That – until all have ‘submitted’ to it.

  9. @7:

    On Facebook, someone seemingly adamant to realizing we’ve just got our butts out of a straight 8-year long Obamarxist socio-economic entertainment (and we’re lucky to only be still around in one piece to share our enthusiastic appreciation of it) — shouted:

    “Islam is not the problem! Not Honoring Our Constitutional Republic Principles is!”

    To which I commented:

    “Alright.

    Easy to fix.

    Bring our Constitutional Republic Principles to Islam, them.

    You’re welcome.”

    (I was tempted to add that Christians didn’t have too much difficulty to correct themselves incrementally in that respect, like, ending some slavery stuff going on which, granted, wasn’t super duper cool, etc — but I thought maybe it could be a little biased wrt. Saudi Arabia, Qatar, etc)

  15. Ace really has strange questions, at times.

    I can’t wait to ask The Young Turks what they… cough, cough… “think” of where he/she may be getting at.

    I crave enlightenment again.

    You know… the French.

  16. Delusional – bravely hoping the tiger eats him last.

    It’s a terrible thing to think but I can’t help but wonder if the ruling classes will need an up-close and personal encounter with all this vibrant diversity to see reality.

    For now, it’s mostly just the little people celebrating the rich tapestry.

  17. Ah well.

    What do I know about alleged invasions, fabricated by some white supremacist conspiracy theorists, anyway? — especially with some family coping… sorry, I mean… liiving… in the safest multicultural space one can find — WestGazaParis, “France”.

    Remember, I couldn’t afford to pay for attending the class of Liz Pocahontas Warren — sucks.

    I can’t really know, really can’t.

  19. I’m sorry to repeat myself, but more proof that the Left are sado-masochistic.

    The elite are sadistic b/c they are drinking lattes after sitting around in yoga class enjoying the show and their useful idiots are masochists b/c they love the idea of being victims of violence and rationalizing even more of it.

    Dangerous mental cases.

  20. Dangerous mental cases.

    You think?

    Welcome to anti-patriarchico-hetero-masochisto-landia:

    Male Feminist : Not Allowing Your Wife to Have Sex With Other Men is Sexist

    #CuckoldPride !

    https://youtu.be/p-yaGzOO-Dw

    Next stage:

    wishing one’s own kids be abused by an SJW-approved legally protected minority, I presume?

    I didn’t know I’d get to witness John’s Revelation on Youtube.

    Alright, I know I was/am supposed to be prepared for it, faith-wise, however it may come, but still !

  23. To be fair in British culture this is a horrific attack that people will come together to help victims. For the moslem woman this is just something that happens daily anywhere there are moslems. Literally an attack that would lock down a civilized area for days just gets incident tape around it & business conducts as usual. See Cernovich’s video after the Turkey airport explosion.

  24. Makes sense the picture has everyone (BUT the Islamic women) standing about the victim. She’s too busy on the phone to be bothered…

    Cut that “I’ve got telepathy and I know what she was thinking” shit out, please. There’s no such thing as telepathy, and this photo — indeed, ANY photo — captures only a fraction of a second of information. (The photographer himself has attested that the woman in hijab seemed very shaken, despite seeming calm and aloof in that one particular image.)

  25. One could look at that photo and see a woman ignoring the tragedy that has occurred. Or, they could see a woman invested in her conversation on her mobile updating a loved one on the tragedy that just happened (or something else). People see what they want to see. Because she wears a hijab, a lot of people want to see the former, because they need to confirm to themselves that Muslims are “other” and “evil,” and they will take it where they think they can get it. Just like other people who want to pretend that Muslim integration into the Western world isn’t as big of a problem as it can be in some countries. People believe what they want.

    The woman in the hijab might as well have a bomb strapped to her waste, because she’s obviously a terrorist (or married to one).

  27. Throbert McGee: “… There’s no such thing as telepathy, and this photo — indeed, ANY photo — captures only a fraction of a second of information. (The photographer himself has attested that the woman in hijab seemed very shaken, despite seeming calm and aloof in that one particular image.)”

    And of course it is true that a photo can be (and frequently is) misleading, sometimes intentionally. We have no idea what the woman captured in the photo was actually thinking — but it’s also utterly irrelevant what she was thinking, because this is not about *her*, it’s about “the religion of pieces”, of which she signals herself to be a member.

    At the same time, does the photographer’s impression that she, the individual, was “shaken” have any more to do with the truth of her mental state than my impression that while she may be annoyed at the momentary inconvenience of the result, she isn’t morally outraged by the immorality of what her co-religionist(s) did? Especially now that the photo has been seen by millions — the photographer is going to be under a lot of pressure from leftist virtue-signallers and “social justice warriors” … and from agents of the British government … to insist that the photo doesn’t show what it appears to show. The answer is “No,” because —
    1) “There’s no such thing as telepathy“;
    2) and, once again, this is not about *her*, it’s about “the religion of pieces”, of which she signals herself to be a member.

  29. Sean L, Martel, Ilion: Fail

    Thanks Rusty.

    I know that VtheK will get around to posting what the woman had to say considering he was complicit in propagating an image on a conservative site that was manipulated for purposes of mostly Islamophobia in conservative circles. But, in the event he doesn’t (because he’s of the side who is fair and moral–or so he says):

    “I’m shocked and totally dismayed at how a picture of me is being circulated on social media.

    “To those individuals who have interpreted and commented on what my thoughts were in that horrific and distressful moment, I would like to say not only have I been devastated by witnessing the aftermath of a shocking and numbing terror attack, I’ve also had to deal with the shock of finding my picture plastered all over social media by those who could not look beyond my attire, who draw conclusions based on hate and xenophobia.

    “My thoughts at that moment were one of sadness, fear, and concern. What the image does not show is that I had talked to other witnesses to try and find out what was happening, to see if I could be of any help, even though enough people were at the scene tending to the victims.

    “I then decided to call my family to say that I was fine and was making my way home from work, assisting a lady along the way by helping her get to Waterloo station.

    “My thoughts go out to all the victims and their families. I would like to thank Jamie Lorriman, the photographer who took the picture, for speaking to the media in my defence.”