Gay Patriot Header Image

If You Say So

Posted by V the K at 7:23 am - September 21, 2017.
Filed under: Religion Of Peace

This was caught in the Spam filter this morning:

Using the increase regarding extremist organizations
inside the actual Middle East, it’s understandable
that will the particular question “is it safe to travel to Iran” can be a hot theme.

However the good information is that Iran is one of
the most secure and most secure places inside the Middle
East.

Talk Among Yourselves

Posted by V the K at 12:01 pm - September 8, 2017.
Filed under: Religion Of Peace

Barcelona car attacks

As you know, terrorists killed at least 14 people in Barcelona on Thursday with cars, and injured at least 100 more in multiple attacks.

A group called “Islamic State” claimed responsibility, making them explicitly political and Islamic attacks.

By any objective measure, this is a much worse tragedy and problem than what happened in Charlottesville last weekend, although our thoughts and prayers are with all victims of both.

The LA Times article above phrases it oddly. LAT’s title says the attack is “blamed on ‘jihadi terrorism'”. The internal scare-quotes are theirs. The body says:

Spain’s Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy said Barcelona was the victim of “jihadi terrorism”…

In other words, LA Times won’t call it jihadi terrorism; it will only report neutrally the fact that, oddly, for some strange reason that one might not be able to fathom, others choose to leap to that conclusion.

This fits in with the [Left] Media Complex Playbook that V mentioned a couple days ago.

  • If the car is driven by a mentally-ill white supremacist and kills 1 person, it’s proof that Republicans are Nazis, America is in the grip of an epidemic of racism, Trump is the KKKing of racists, and lefties are correct to physically bash their opponents.
  • But if the cars (multiple) are driven by consciously-religious Muslims and kill 14 people, it’s not proof of anything except that Muslims are victims of hate crimes by Republicans – and lefties are correct to physically bash their opponents.

Mohammedanism: The State Religion of the Progressive Left

Posted by V the K at 3:09 pm - July 22, 2017.
Filed under: Liberal Hypocrisy,Religion Of Peace

We all know that UC-Berkeley refused to give a venue to Ben Shapiro because the fascist mob representing the Democrat Left would commit violence were a conservative allowed to speak on campus. (After the public outcry, university officals may be rethinking their stance.)

But did you also know that UC-Berkeley is refusing to allow uber-atheist Richard Dawkins to speak because he has criticized Islam? Specifically, he criticized the bigotry, homophobia, and misogyny of Islam.

It is interesting to know that in the eyes of progressives like these, some religions are more worthy of consideration than others. Islam, generally speaking, is vastly more illiberal than Christianity. Somehow, though, Islam falls under the protecting veil of progressivism.

But of course it does. “The future must not belong to those who slander the Prophet of Islam,” said one prominent Democrat leftist. And the Progressive Democrat Left agrees.

Queer Refugees for Pride

This is a pro-gay Facebook channel, which a Breitbart article linked to in telling a story of Muslims abusing gays. From Breitbart’s article:

Residents of an asylum home in Germany beat a Serbian couple almost to death earlier this week, according to a gay rights activist…

Gay rights campaigner Javid Nabiyev…said that although many consider Serbia to be a safe country, the individuals who were beaten had to flee the Balkan nation because their own family members had threatened violence toward them.

He went on to say that they attempted to hide their sexuality from the other asylum seekers – a move which was recommended by social workers…

The couple had contacted Nabiyev many months before the attack to say they felt uncomfortable in the asylum home. Nabiyev attempted to have them transferred to a different home but was unable because authorities saw no health or safety danger…

The man who carried out the attack was not named, and Nabiyev said that, while he was arrested by police and questioned, he was released back to the same asylum home afterwards.

The attack is the latest in a number of attacks on homosexuals in asylum homes or by asylum seekers, many of whom are Muslim…

To recap:

  • A Serbian gay couple had to flee Serbia.
  • Germany housed them in an “asylum home”, meaning, with a whole bunch of Muslim refugees.
  • They felt under threat for their orientation. The enlightened, tolerant, progressive German social workers told them to not to flaunt it. They didn’t. They still felt under threat. The enlightened, tolerate, progressive German social workers apparently didn’t give a crap.
  • The threat turned out to be real: Muslims beat them to a bloody pulp.

I’ll say this much for the Germans: The above is only one side of the story. Still, it’s a plausible story and I thought it worth noticing.

RELATED (to Europe’s Muslim crisis): Italy wants to unleash 200,000 refugees on the rest of Europe. Because the rest of Europe just isn’t lifting a finger to help.

Senior Italian government figures are threatening to issue European Union visas to 200,000 migrants, granting them unrestricted access to the bloc’s borderless Schengen Zone…

“Letting migrants travel once they reach Italy would create a real problem for our EU neighbours. But I hope it would force France to confront the migrant problem head on,” the government minister said…

In 2015, at the height of the migrant crisis, the EU pledged to redistribute 160,000 African and Middle Eastern migrants based in Italy and Greece to other EU member-states signed up to the bloc’s common asylum policy – but as of June 9th, 2017, only 6,896 migrants have been relocated from Italy.

Let’s be honest about the real solution to these problems. Here it is.

  1. Vote Obama and Hillary out of office. They shattered Libya and Syria, stimulating the present crisis.
  2. Seize the ships of the NGOs who are still illegally transporting the refugees from North Africa into Italy.
  3. If a time machine can’t be built to go back and get Obama and Hillary to not viciously shatter entire nations for no good reason, then, do what we can to fix Libya and Syria now. Finally,
  4. Ship the refugees back to northern Africa and Syria.

The Left sides with Islamic supremacy, part 2

If you missed it: last weekend, beloved left-wing Sharia advocate Linda Sarsour called for “jihad” (her word) against President Trump.

The Left promptly fell over themselves, not to denounce her use of the term; but rather to denounce anyone so bigoted as to think that the word could have a violent connotation.

Sarsour provided the necessary fig leaf, by bracketing her call for jihad with blather about how Peaceful Mohammed was totes about Speaking Truth To Power. But imagine if, during the Obama administration, a far-right Christian activist – the type who advocates Christian Reconstruction, say, and who had excused an abortion clinic bombing – had called defiantly for “holy war” against President Obama. The Left would have called for that activist’s imprisonment.

We live in a world, remember, where the Left thinks that using a crosshairs metaphor in your election advertising is direct incitement to violence; as is an Internet joke (meme) in which a corporate logo is being pounded on.

But calling for “holy war”? (which is what “jihad” means) No problem…provided the call is left-wing and/or Islamist; that is, directed against America, its President and/or the Right. Once more, Islam and the Left are allies.

Real threats to journalists’ safety

#RetardedCNN thought they had scored bigly, because they tracked down a nobody who launched a silly Internet meme – a funny gif of Trump beating down CNN’s company logo. And because they were able to terrorize the nobody into begging CNN’s forgiveness.

Hey CNN, how about getting back to real life? Try this one on:

On the fifth anniversary of [a controversy], I appeared on stage with five other people. Of those five… [and for having spoken about the controversy,] one was shot at point-blank range. The other had his event shot-up and two people were killed. Another was forced out of public life entirely. And the fourth had her family’s restaurant fire-bombed. Those are real threats against media figures that go on… right now.

Can you guess

  1. The specific controversy?
  2. The larger theme – who did it? Who does those kinds of attack on public media figures, in real life?

The first answer might not be obvious, but the second should be super obvious. Hint: It wasn’t Trump supporters, or conservatives of any stripe. (more…)

The Guns of Europe

The last few years, amidst Europe’s ongoing terrorist attacks and Muslim-influx crisis, European gun sales have surged. Article from January 2016:

Gun sales have jumped 350 per cent in Austria amid ‘unease’ over increasing numbers of migrants following the Paris terror attacks…

The final months of 2015 showed increases in gun permit applications, while dealers reported huge demand for self defence weapons such as tasers, pepper spray and blank firing-guns.

It comes just months after shotguns were reported to have sold out across the country as residents became increasingly paranoid about refugee numbers.

Article from August 2016:

Applications for gun permits have gone up significantly in Switzerland, Austria and the Czech Republic. In places with stricter gun laws, such as Germany, non-lethal guns and pepper spray have become alternatives.

“There’s no official explanation for the rise, but in general we see a connection to Europe’s terrorist attacks,” Hanspeter Kruesi, a police spokesman in the Swiss canton of St. Gallen, told Reuters.

Czech Republic’s President saw the light:

President Milos Zeman used to advocate gun control, but called for easier access to guns in July [2016] following the terror attack in Nice.

“Earlier I spoke against possession of large amounts of weapons [in the hands of the people],” Zeman said in a July interview with newspaper Blesk. “After those attacks, I do not think so any more.”

And last week, the Czech Republic began to create their own version of our 2nd Amendment:

Czech lawmakers have passed legislation in the lower parliament that would see the right to bear firearms enshrined in the country’s constitution…

The legislation was passed with 139 deputies agreeing to the amendment to the constitution with only nine deputies voting against. The amendment will now be considered by the Czech Senate where it will require a supermajority of three-fifths…

…the Czech legislation reads: “Citizens of the Czech Republic have the right to acquire, retain and bear arms and ammunition.”

It’s rare to have that right in a country’s Constitution. Hopefully, it’s about to become less rare.

Unfortunately, Germany is busy turning its guns against its own People’s free speech:

German lawmakers approved a bill on Friday aimed at cracking down on hate speech on social networks…

Among other things, it would fine social networking sites up to 50 million euros ($56 million) if they persistently fail to remove illegal content within a week, including defamatory “fake news.”

“Freedom of speech ends where the criminal law begins,” said Justice Minister Heiko Maas, who was the driving force behind the bill…

Social networks also have to publish a report every six months detailing how many complaints they received and how they dealt with them.

This is fascism: the merger of Business and State, in which the State commandeers Business to achieve the State’s aims – such as, in this case, the enforcement of political purity and consensus. Looks like Mark Zuckerberg has no problem with it.

Are the Germans going to target ordinary citizens’ protests against Germany’s insane Muslim refugee policy? Sadly, yes:

By “right wing extremist” what German authorities really mean is anyone who questions the immigration policies of the Europe, or thinks differently than the general population.

The article cites the relevant sections of Germany’s criminal speech code – that sound good on paper, except they are so subjective that the authorities can, will and do use them to punish any speech they don’t like.

I’m not sure – my German is quite rusty – but I think that in this clip, Germany’s Vice Chancellor is saying that Muslim refugees are more German than the Germans who would object to their presence, and who should therefore be locked up.

The mess in the UK

Posted by Jeff (ILoveCapitalism) at 11:24 am - June 19, 2017.
Filed under: Politics abroad,Religion Of Peace,War On Terror

As you’ve probably heard, a UK man assaulted pedestrians with a vehicle last night.

What’s new and different is that, instead of the usual Muslim trying to kill infidels, he was an infidel trying to kill Muslims. Needless to say, his murderous actions were wrong and I condemn them.

What amazes me is that this sort of thing hasn’t happened sooner. European and UK authorities have chronically failed to protect their citizens from Islamic terrorists, prompting citizens to take matters into their own hands. It’s amazing that it took this long for one of their citizens to do so.

As an aside, I’m slightly puzzled by whether this attack should be called “terrorist”. In deciding what to call combatants, I have always used the following matrix:

  • Uniformed soldiers attacking uniformed soldiers: Honorable combatants.
  • Uniformed soldiers attacking civilians: War criminals.
  • Civilians attacking uniformed soldiers: Irregular / guerilla forces.
  • Civilians attacking civilians: Terrorists.

The underlying premise is that a war is going on. Islamic terrorists are called terrorists, in part because they are engaged in a war (against the infidels and/or to establish the supremacy of Islam). Or, as they call it, “jihad”.

If we call this UK guy a terrorist, we implicitly acknowledge that the UK (among others) is in a war with Islam and this particular combatant is on “our” side, however wrongly he goes about it. Do we not? Rather than do that, I’m inclined to just call this UK guy a lunatic mass murderer.

Feel free to let me know your thoughts. Again, due to the failure of UK and European authorities to protect their citizens from Islamic terrorists, a case could be made that the guy is a combatant in an ongoing war with Islam – albeit a degenerate combatant; a civilian attacking civilians – thus a terrorist.

So that’s what I’m stuck on…whether to call him a terrorist or a mass murderer?

The Face(book) of Evil

The Right-o-sphere is rife with personal stories of Facebook, Google/Youtube and Twitter either de-monetizing, restricting, throttling, censoring or banning conservative and libertarian voices.

Facebook seems happy to do it – while allowing Islamists the run of the place, to the point where PM Theresa May called for Internet censorship after the recent Islamist mass murders in Manchester.

Earlier this year, Mark Zuckerberg said:

[Terrorist attacks are] carried out with a goal to spread fear and distrust, and turn members of a community against each other. I believe the only sustainable way to fight back against those who seek to divide us is to create a world where understanding and empathy can spread faster than hate, and where every single person in every country feels connected and cared for and loved. That’s the world we can and must build together.

This is so misguided that, coming from a nominally-intelligent man, one must almost wonder if some evil force possesses him? Because it happens to be what the wolf would say to the hounds if it could; or what Satan might say when cornered.

Newsflash, Mr. Zuckerberg: terrorist attacks are carried out with a goal of killing infidels and establishing the supremacy of Islam. Period. You have to admit a problem’s true nature, before you can solve it.

I don’t want to “fight back against those who seek to divide us.” Because that makes zero sense. Anyone who ever does anything good or new, or who takes a stand (be it true or false) on anything, “seeks to divide us.” It happens. It makes much more sense to fight back against those who seek to subjugate and/or kill us.

The terrorist losers use your own platform, Mr. Zuckerberg, and it’s not clear if you make much effort to stop them. Much less, an effort greater than what you put into stopping U.S. conservatives, or other critics of Hillary or the Big Government that you love so much.

Recently, a Pakistani man was sentenced to death for alleged blasphemy – on his Facebook page. Facebook claims innocence; “we do not provide any government with direct access to people’s data. We will continue to protect our community from unnecessary or overreaching government intervention.”

But I don’t know if I can believe that. Because:

Is Facebook an accessory to Pakistan’s judicial murder of Taimoor Raza? We need to know. I couldn’t find any recent statement about it.

And of course, that Facebook would ever give a hoot about anti-Jewish or anti-Christian blasphemy is unimaginable. (As it should be; the point here is Facebook’s extreme double standard.)

Right now it appears that Facebook puts WAY more into stopping conservatives and libertarians – people who stand for life and liberty – than it puts into stopping various kinds of Islamic murderer. That’s evil.

Hat tip Steven Crowder. By the way, his Painting Muhammad video is must-see.

Antifa is pro-Islam, anti-Constitution, anti-gay

Now we know for sure.

Protesters campaigning against Sharia Law were met with a number of counter-demonstrations on Saturday…

Sharia is the law of Islam…The rules of sharia come from Quranic commandments and the hadiths…Sharia significantly restricts the freedom of women and allows for extreme punishments for violations such as adultery, blasphemy, and apostasy. [ed: and homosexuality] Sharia is the basis of laws in Islamic countries, both Sunni and Shia.

A press release from the ACT! for America website reads: “This is a march against Sharia law and for human rights…”

However, many marches were disrupted by counter-demonstrators, who accused participants of “Islamaphobia”…

The article makes clear that the counter-demonstrators were lefties in masks, many associated with Antifa. One threw urine on Lauren Southern (of The Rebel Media).

Let’s summarize.

  1. Sharia is a legal system. Like any legal system, it must be supreme within a given territory or it doesn’t work. In the U.S. context, Sharia’s advocates basically want it to replace U.S. law.
  2. If you march (demonstrate) in favor of U.S. law over Sharia, Antifa protestors are going to physically attack you and call you “Islamophobic”.

It follows that Antifa protestors favor Sharia and want it to replace U.S. law. Which of course is based on the Constitution; which Antifa therefore must also oppose.

If it isn’t so, it’s up to Antifa to clarify it – by denouncing Sharia. In the meantime: Gays, women, and patriotic Americans everywhere ought to find it alarming.

It Didn’t Have to Be this Way

Posted by V the K at 10:35 pm - June 8, 2017.
Filed under: Religion Of Peace

This photo was taken in Kabul, Afghanistan in 1972.

Isn’t it great that the poor, oppressed women of Afghanistan have been liberated from the tyranny of Western patriarchal colonialist domination?

Hat Tip: Oregon Muse in for Ace

The Ongoing Integration of Mosque and State

Christian prayer is banned from American public schools. Islamic prayers, on the other hand, have been deemed worthy of accommodation. (Another concession to the Islamic Supremacists.)

A New York high school has transformed two vacant rooms into areas where Muslim students can pray during Ramadan.

A spokesperson for Shenendehowa High School said the decision to offer Muslim prayer rooms on public property is part of their effort to be culturally proficient.

“The school is trying to do a lot more to be culturally inclusive and so is the district,” school spokesperson Kelly DeFeciani told the Saratogian newspaper.

So, the district is claiming this is a cultural accommodation, not a religious one, and that makes it OK.

You buying that, ACLU? Oh, you are? OK, how about you, Americans United for Separation of Church and State? You’re OK with it too. Well, surely the Freedom from Religion Foundation must have an objection? No, guess not.

So, all of this “separation of church and state” stuff you’ve been spouting is complete horsecrap and it was really about bullying Christians this whole time.

Just as I thought.

How fake is CNN? At least this fake

CNN carefully stages some “good” Muslim demonstrators:

YouTube Preview Image

CNN thinks it did nothing wrong or unusual.

The group of demonstrators that was at the police cordon was being allowed through by officers so they could show their signs to the gathered media. The CNN crew along with other media present simply filmed them doing so.

First of all – NO. Believe your own eyes, watch the video! CNN poses and directs the people in the shot. CNN doesn’t “simply film” them.

Second, is it normal for CNN to pick and choose which tiny group of demonstrators they will over-report on, to fit CNN’s pre-determined political script? I think they’re saying it is.

Their refutation doesn’t refute. CNN fakes a non-event, then explains in essence, “Oh that’s what we normally do. What’s the problem?”

UPDATE: There’s also that time Don Lemon posed his own co-worker as a random, man-on-the-street Hillary supporter (though Lemon disclosed it afterward).

The CNN reporter propaganda artist above is Becky Anderson. Her piece makes a point that we all WISH were true: Large numbers of Muslims rejecting the terrorist losers. Too bad it isn’t.

Anything to avoid saying ‘Muslim’

The first step to solving a problem for real, is: Naming it honestly.

As Mark Steyn points out (hat tip V), our leftie-globalist-academic Superiors want us to believe that “sowing division” is what’s wrong with the endless stream of mass murders by Muslim terrorists. Because the desirable opposite is “unity”, led by those same Superiors.

Thus, they subtly equate their critics with Muslim terrorists. If, say, you’re a free-market populist who rejects the elite consensus, you’re as bad as a Muslim mass murderer. Because you’re also “sowing division”.

It’s similar to how the Left represents “hate speech” (i.e., criticism or rejection of the Left) as a form of violence, unprotected by the First Amendment. Under such insane terms, the Left is allowed to attack you with physical violence because they are only protecting themselves from the “violence” that you were about to think, or say.

Re: the London attacks, British media says they were done by “men of Mediterranean coloring”. It has a courtroom precision to it, which is nice, but also don’t say Muslim.

London’s Muslim mayor, Sadiq Khan, did at least call them “cowardly terrorists”. And Prime Minister Theresa May slammed the “evil ideology of Islamist extremism” – but then went back to calling for “unity”, plus Internet censorship. As opposed to, say, deporting the UK’s known Muslim radicals and improved vetting of Muslim immigrants, or better enforcement of the UK’s existing laws against inciting violence.

It’s beyond question that the murderers were doing it for Allah. One can only hope that the good people of the UK will wake up.

Damned Lutherans Strike Again

Posted by V the K at 7:00 pm - June 3, 2017.
Filed under: Religion Of Peace

I mean, it’s got to be Lutherans this time, right?

A van ran pedestrians down on the London Bridge (similar to the run-down attack on Westminster Bridge a short time ago), and reports of shootings and stabbings at London Station.

This is just a couple of weeks after the Manchester attack, and the attack on the Manila hotel which was allegedly a “robbery.”

Sigh.

So, stand by for #StandWithLondon and #TerrorHasNoReligion, and media stories about dhimmi Britons kneeling in solidarity with their Mohammedan overlords. Followed in short order by the media expressing bafflement at what could possibly have radicalized the perpetrator(s) while “authorities” search for that ever elusive motive (which they never seem to find).

It’s like, if they could just figure out why Mohammedans commit almost daily terror attacks, they could maybe stop them somehow. But the motive to the terror attacks remains as elusive as Robert Denby.

Happy Ramadan, everyone.

Kathy Griffin fired, but is that enough?

CNN has fired Kathy Griffin from their next New Year’s Eve program. As V noted earlier, she posed for a so-called ‘artist’ with herself holding a blood-drenched, beheaded effigy of President Trump. In a single image, she managed to align herself with Islam (or ISIS imagery), Satanism (or satanic imagery), and assassination of the President of the United States.

To his minor credit, Anderson “Vanderbilt” Cooper tweeted “For the record, I am appalled by the photo shoot Kathy Griffin took part in. It is clearly disgusting and completely inappropriate.” (Minor because it’s something he should have done hours faster, and perhaps an understatement.)

It remains to be seen whether Hollywood and the Left will actually shun Griffin, or rehabilitate her once the dust settles? After all, the first reaction of a CNN panel (led by Jake Tapper) was a dismissive “We’ve got much bigger issues to focus on.”

And indeed, they do. After all, CNN is the Home of Fake News, such as:

  • proclaiming that Hillary is somehow healthy and a lock to win the election;
  • pushing the fake/scripted views of a seven year old as a serious reason for the U.S. to make war in Syria; and
  • pushing evidence-free, anonymously-sourced innuendo against Trump.

But maybe CNN’s dismissive, first reaction didn’t focus-group very well?

The whole thing got me thinking about denunciations in general. After all, conservatives and libertarians are supposed to denounce every little thing done by every little kook – or else we somehow are that thing. Recently,

  • Jacob Schwartz was arrested for child pornography. He isn’t a nobody. He is a longtime Democrat activist and staffer. His father is a huge Democrat donor and insider, having served as an Obama delegate and a lawyer for Bernie Sanders, the SEIU and ACORN (remember them?).

    Young-ish Jacob allegedly possessed graphic images of a 6-month old baby being raped. He was a top staffer to NYC Mayor Bill de Blasio. Schwartz also appeared on Chris Cuomo’s program on CNN (them again!). Hillary’s campaign manager, Robby Mook, can be seen standing shoulder-to-shoulder with Schwartz – or at least he could, before Schwartz’s arrest triggered Democrats into disappearing the inconvenient photo.

    My question is, has Robby Mook denounced Schwartz, in no uncertain terms? Has Hillary Clinton? Or the DNC? Or CNN? Has Chris Cuomo indicated his regret at having Schwartz as a guest? I couldn’t find any such statements.

    Each of them, who has not yet done such a statement, therefore supports pedophiles and pedophilic rape – if we apply the Left’s usual logic about these things.

  • Marina Abramović is another left-wing “artist” who promotes imagery and practices that are awfully reminiscent of Satanism, with that Spirit Cooking thing she’s into.

    John Podesta is, of course, one of THE top Clintonites, as he was Hillary’s campaign chair and her preference for Secretary of State.

    It’s known that Podesta was invited, on warmly intimate terms, to a private Spirit Cooking “dinner” that his brother Tony probably attended, and which Podesta himself may have attended.

    Has either of the Podestas denounced Satanism, or at least Abramović? Has Hillary Clinton denounced either of the Podestas? I don’t think so.

    Again, apply the Left’s typical logic of you-are-clearly-for-that-bad-thing-if-we-don’t-agree-that-you-have-denounced-it-enough, and see where it would go, here.

  • And don’t get me started about Antifa – and the failure of many lefties to denounce their violence.

So, firing Kathy Griffin from a New Year’s Eve program that was going to happen in 7 more months: is that enough? Or should we call for more? If yes, what?

UPDATE: She says “I went too far, and I was wrong.”

Umm, “too far” in what? When I go too far, it’s because I love something. I ate too much chocolate or lemon pie. I tried to power clean too much weight. So, if Kathy “went too far” in making visible her fantasy of beheading the President and soaking his head in the blood, then deep in her soul, she loves…??? Something about this is still “off”.

Lone Wolf My Butt

Posted by V the K at 4:51 pm - May 28, 2017.
Filed under: Religion Of Peace

According to the left, every time an act of mass murder is committed by a Muslim (or Muslims) in the name of global jihad {and these incidents are happening multiple times per week} … the suicide bomber or mass murderer screaming “Allahu Akbar” as he slaughters non-Muslims is a “lone wolf” who was mysteriously “radicalized” by something and not representative of Islam at all. 

(Paradoxically, any act of violence by a person identified as a southern white supremacist means the Confederate Flag must be banned from public display {even in Civil War museums} because southern white supremacist culture is the cause of all racial violence and all white people share responsibility.)

The Manchester suicide bomber was one such “lone wolf.” And the Police have arrested 14 other “lone wolves” for complicity in planning or carrying out the attack.

I wonder if those 14 lone wolves have anything in common; any common shared characteristic that might possibly explain why they committed the act of mass murder. That would be very helpful since our political and media leadership is still baffled as to the suicide bomber’s motives.

BTW, British Intelligence sources say there are 23,000 committed jihadists in the United Kingdom.  But, you know, small price to pay for having that rich, global, cosmopolitan tapestry the left loves so much.

Trump on terrorist Losers

After expressing solidarity with the Manchester bombing victims, he said:

So many young, beautiful, innocent people, living and enjoying their lives, murdered by evil losers in life. I won’t call them monsters, because they would like that term. They would think that’s a great name. I will call them, from now on, losers, because that’s what they are, they’re losers. And we’ll have more of them. But they’re losers, just remember that.

This is what I’ve spent these last few days talking about in my trip overseas. Our society can have no tolerance for this continuation of bloodshed. We cannot stand a moment longer for the slaughter of innocent people. And, in today’s attack, it was mostly innocent children. The terrorists and extremists, and those who give them aid and comfort, must be driven out from our society forever. This wicked ideology must be obliterated, and I mean completely obliterated.

Emphasis in President Trump’s delivery. I find this interesting on several levels.

First, calling them “losers” is a Trumpism. He’s spent his life focused on the issue of winning vs. losing in business, and he speaks colloquially and from his heart. Translators (into other languages) may have to footnote the expression or come up with some local idiom that would strike us as odd (if we heard it translated back).

Second, it’s an Americanism. Trump is a throwback to a time when most Americans were focused on winning vs. losing. As General Patton said in a bygone era, “Americans love a winner and will not tolerate a loser. Americans play to win all the time.” This was before the Left programmed us to look down on winners and give everyone a participation trophy.

Third, it’s true. These terrorists are losers. They can’t think of anything better to do with the wonderful gift of life, than to try to ruin it for others. In addition to being evil, vicious, nihilistic, malicious, etc., they’re indescribably stupid. As such, only the stupidest of women should want to have sexual intercourse with them. They lack evolutionary fitness.

Fourth, it’s something new. I mean, I’ve called these Islamist terrorists “losers” before – but to hear the President of the United States do it, seems new. (If President Obama did it, please let me know in the comments. A search for “obama calls terrorists losers” turns up only Trump doing it.) It expresses a (rightful) depth of contempt for the terrorists that Obama probably never had. I also doubt that Obama ever talked about “completely obliterating” them.

Fifth, it’s strangely persuasive. Killing terrorists in wars, policing and effective border control all do have a place in the War on Terror. But, to really end terrorism, we will need to thrust a moral and social frame upon the terrorists that makes them seem “obviously” contemptible, or even ridiculous. So that, even to an America-hating leftist or a Muslim who may feel oppressed, being a suicide bomber no longer carries any status or moral authority or cachet. “Ugh, what a bunch of losers” is such a frame – and has the virtue, again, of being true.

Sixth and not least: Trump is saying it in the Middle East, to the faces of Palestinians (and earlier, Saudis). Kudos, Mr. President!

Seventh, the Usual Suspects hate it – you know, Whoopi Goldberg, The View, the leftie newspapers saying it makes light of things and doesn’t show enough seriousness – so you know that Trump must be on the right track.

UPDATE: Scott Adams seems to agree.

What kinds of people join the Losers [terrorists]? Mostly young males. And you know what brand young males do not want on them? Right: Losers.

If you call them monsters, they like it. If you call them ISIS or ISIL they put it on a flag and wave it around. If you call them non-Muslim, it just rolls off their backs because they have Korans and stuff. Almost any other “brand” you can imagine is either inert or beneficial to Loser recruitment.

Loser is different. No one joins the Loser movement. Try at home, with your family or friends, to concoct a more effective brand poisoning than Loser. You probably can’t.

UPDATE: Just to give credit where it’s due: in 2015, there was a push from the Obama administration to refer to the ISIS as “Daesh”. That, too, was a brand-poisoning exercise. Maybe not a great one. In Arabic, the letters are an acronym of ISIS’ name and evoke the Arabic words for “one who crushes and tramples” others, and “one who sows discord”. Perhaps our words “sociopath” or “fascist” are dynamic equivalents? Daesh is derogatory enough to make ISIS want to cut your tongue out. So, it’s a good shot. But 1) it evokes nothing in English, 2) it doesn’t get to the heart of the matter: these jihadists are losers.

UPDATE: Sean L gets into the spirit of the thing:

Perhaps we need to start using phrases that carry the same level of contempt in the Arabic world as “loser” does over here. How about “pig penises”?

Motives of Islamist Suicide Bomber a Mystery to Progressives

Posted by V the K at 7:42 am - May 24, 2017.
Filed under: Religion Of Peace

Washington Post Headline: In suburban Manchester, a search for what might have motivated the attacker.

Yeah, it’s a mystery all right, but it seems to have something to do with “radicalization.”

Experts say Manchester’s hidden radicalization problem is not unique to the city.

“What we have seen recently is the emergence of clusters where groups of people — who often live close to one another — radicalize relatively quickly,” said Raffaello Pantucci, the director for international security studies at the Royal United Services Institute in London. “This isn’t only happening in London or Manchester, but also in much smaller towns.”

The article uses “radical” or “radicalize six times, but never quite gets around to explaining exactly *what* is “radicalizing” people to commit terrorism.

“This is such a cosmopolitan city, but there are circles and groups of people which are extremely closed to outsiders,” said the man, who spoke on the condition that only his first name, Jay, be used. “That is where teenagers or young men and women become radicalized. If it can happen here, it can happen anywhere.”

“Radicalization” must be like some form of virus that just randomly strikes people and causes them to commit mass murder. I guess there’s no defense against it.