Jacob's Soap Box

28 December, 2008

Beliefnet: Are Churches that don’t agree with your politics or religious belief not really churches?

Ann Coulter: Correct: They’re called “mosques”

— Interview, Beliefnet, 7-27-06

[Ann Coulter: If Democrats Had any Brains They’d Be Republicans, Page 55]

My friend Mila publish has a blog on MySpace, She logged on MYSPACE for the last time on Dec 27, 2007. in which she raised awareness of honour killing as it applied in America to two sisters who were murdered by their father.

Amongst most of the comments expressing horror and repugnance about a father that murdered his own daughters, you would not be disappointed if you expected a certain quota of useful idiots who tried and move the attention to side issues whilst other put the blame at … yes you got it …you us, and everybody else from the Crusaders to George Bush, anybody but Islam.

And what about them Jews who bomb the Palestinians daily? Asked one useful idiot; you see, as long as the Jews Bomb the Palestinians it is OK to for a Muslim father to murder his two daughters, I wander would it still be OK if the Jews reduce their Bombing to every other day?

Where from do these guys get their logic from? There is no logic. When you spend 12 years in school whose curricula is control by the Teachers Union and the NSW Branch of the Labour Party (our version of the Democratic party) you learn about critical thinking (meaning how criticise conservative government or opposition, as the case may be), global warming, the invasion and occupation of Australia by the English and multiculturalism , where the emphasis is always on emotion, don’t expect logic too – sorry we out of time fore that one, got to go and save a planet now.

Oh yes, the good old multiculturalism, diversity, reaching-out and if Islam is our topic, tolerance all that suppose to make us all feel wet and warm on the inside (but not too warm as not to cause the planet to overheat). If only we have been more understanding, or had made friends with the father of those two girls, as another comment suggested, all that would have never happen. I wander if this idea was taken from Bill Clinton’s last edition of his book Guide to Abstinence .

If its not for our ignorance, those two girls would be alive and well today. Those bleeding hearts really know how to make us feel guilty. Wait a minute, but ignorance is not a crime, is it? So maybe the whole thing is a misunderstanding, our misunderstanding.

And there is Islam is a religion of peace crap. No, idiot, Islam is not called so after the Arabic word salaam, meaning peace, Islam is after the word aslama, meaning submission, total submission. Islam is not just a religion, it is a way of life that required to total subjugation of every part of you life, including (but not limited to) which leg you put in first when step into the dunny, and out.

* * * * *

You can call me Islamophobic or racist if you wish, even though I remind you that Islam is not a race but who says that to support Islam you have to be logical too? You will not hear from me saying one of my best friends is a Muslim because it reminds me of one of the most idiotic reaction I sometime get revealing that I was born in Israel and that is: one of my best friends is a Jew, so what? What am I to do with such useless information.

My friends are my friends, first last and in between, not Muslims Christians, Jews or Callithumpians. Under cross examination with extreme coercion I may confess that I have never observed any of my female friends dressed in burkah, come to think about it, male friends neither.

Having said that I recognise that there are millions upon millions decent people who were born into the Muslim faith who go about their day providing for their family and striving for peaceful life like I do – these Muslims are not my target, in fact I do not target Muslims, my target is firstly Islam and secondly those who use Islam as excuse for their evil behaviour, big difference.

I often talk about the concept of cause and effect. How can you tell which is which, not always easy, but in essence if you take away the suspect cause and the suspect effect remain unaffected, you can safely conclude that such particular cause and effect, as pair, is bunked.

95% of people die whilst laying in bad. Making all people sleep on the floor would not extend life expectancy by a single micro-second because laying in bad is not a cause of death.

Now experiment time; rebirth that father killer as a Jew or Christian and let him otherwise live identical life. Would you say that those two girls would be alive today? Of course they would. I rest my case (on this issue).

* * * * *

Our lack of cultural sensitivity, sense of social justice, refusal to reach-out and see the splendour of cultural diversity are all the root causes, not only to honour killing and genital mutilation but also to beheading, bombing of trains and discothèques and flying into skyscrapers (except those performed by the CIA in cooperation with the Mossad and MI-5, of course) .

By now you would recognised the Marxist Leninist Stalinist Maoist Socialist Fabian Leftist Liberal (please select one) bleeding hearts terminology which raises the question:

What does a philosophy that was written down in the nineteenth century by two Prussians in a dark room in Brussels, tried for 70 years and failed (but survived by those who never lived its principles), has in common with a religion that started in the deserts of Arabia some 1300 years ago and changed very little since?

Answer: very little, except that they both hate ….. (please insert your own country’s name) meaning they follow the principle of

The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

Why would those who claim the high moral grounds on human rights (women in particular), gay rights, freedom of (or from) religion, sanctity of life and all that stuff support a group of people that believe in the exact opposite?

Just look at Eeron (you see I can pronounce a country name like a pro 🙂 in 1979. Their enlightened “progressive” professors and their clueless students invaded the streets of Teheron (another PRO-nunciation 🙂 in their thousands, kick out the Shah and brought back the Ayatollahs from exile just to find their high esteem dangling off mobile cranes in Town’s Square of Teheron, renamed “Muhammad Square” or such like.

Here in the West, the Islamic revolution is different. We don’t have Ayatollahs in waiting in France. Instead we have youths, They rampage the streets of Paris burnings shops and cars, youths!, the rampage the streets of Sydney reshaping the looks of parked cars with baseball bats, youth!, they blow up a train or two in London, youths!, Allah Akhbar? I did not hear that. Did you?

It is as if the words Islam and Muslim are too inappropriate to appear on the sold-out media. Just after 911 Associated Press (AP) published a photo of Osama Bin Laden with a caption: Exiled Saudi Dissident Osama bin Laden, that sounds like a freedom fighter against the Saudi Royal Family, the only missing bit was the instructions for sending donations to assist in freeing the enslaved freedom seeking Saudi people.

Just listen to what the Deputy Commissioner of the London Metropolitan Police, Brian Paddick, had to say, he must know what he is talking about; right after the London 7/7 bombing ,on the day, he said:

As far as I am concerned, Islam and terrorist are two words that don’t go together

[Melanie Philips: Londonistan page 53, quoting the Independent]

Perhaps we should add those two words to the list of asterisk and bleeped out words in the media.

There you have it, the very people who suppose to protect us against free trade jihad pussyfooting around. They suck the oxygen out of the room, don’t they?

Muslims who tell you outright, that in a few years time your country and mine will turn into the Islamic United States of America, the Islamic Dominion Of Canada, The Islamic European Union, (Eurabia), the United Islamic Kingdom of Britanistan, the Islamic Commonwealth Of Australia (Austarbia) etc. all living in peace under Sharia law – they are serious and you better believe it.

Lets look at some numbers shall we, take one man, Osama Bin Laden, in her book Because They Hate Brigitte Gabriel writes:

He [Osama Bin Laden] is one of fifty-three children. He himself has twenty-seven children. Father and son have sired eighty children.

[Paperback edition page 16]

Do you get my drift? Sure not every Muslim has four wives and umpteen impregnated maids, but still, it is all in demography stupid says Mark Steyn in his book America Alone, (OK the stupid was my addition).

With the exception of USA and New Zealand with fertility rates of 2.11 and 2.01 live births per women (respectively, 2005 figures) the rest of us are going backward in term of population. Great news for the ecophiles who thinks that there are too many of us. In 25 years, not only there will be less of us in Europe, Canada and Australia but a greater proportion of those of us who are still here will be depended on ever growing demand for social security with decreasing resources to pay for it. Who is going to support this Ponzi Scheme? But I am digressing.

* * * * *

Your local loons want you to be nice to Muslims because they are part of the misery industry, poor and helpless, and really, we ought to do the right thing by them as human being (Hey Charley, can you get me the box of Kleenex please).

Just Look how quickly Muslims have adopted to intricate rules of multiculturalism, how have they excelled in learning our immigration and welfare laws, particularly the loopholes. How about their ability to master all the legal technicalities of what constitute an asylum seeker, job seeker, disability pensioner, unmarried mother (This is for wives 2,3 and 4), terms that do not even exist in their mother tongues.

It is gratifying to watch how seamlessly Muslims have assimilated into a vibrant, robust complex, caring, socio-economic, cultural diversified countries of ours with out being able to speak one world in or the language of their host country. Wow!

(OK the welfare in America is not something to write home about but by the look of things the Democrats are working on it, you ain’t seen anything yet my friends.)

Here is another example that these “helpless people” are anything but; For years potential illegal immigrants knew that there was no point trying to reach Australia by boat because if they were caught they would be sent to some islands in the Pacific, which had been excised from the Australian immigration law by the previous (conservative) government, for “processing” leaving them without free “Legal-Aid” , “Human Rights” lawyers and such like interruption to deportations – too risky they concluded and proceeded to another undocumented friendly country.

However as soon as we, in Australia, elected a Labour government, our version of Democratic Party, Kevin747, our Obama08, decided that processing illegal immigrant in Nauru Island is as “inhuman” as processing terrorists in Guantanamo Bay is cruel, and closed it down. As Kevin likes to say “guess what?”, Yes Kev, you be please to know they are back! More voters for the compassionate party.

Our “poor” asylum seekers boats are back! and you want to tell me that those people are not sophisticated? Let me tell you, they know the Australian immigration law better than any of the Department’s bureaucrat and better than you know the laws in your own country, I kid you not.

They may not be able to read and write but they still get invites to participate in “seminars”. Seminars that will remind you of those that are run by investment funds, shared holidays flats salesmen, or retirement home “advisors” with lectern, whiteboard and audio-visual overhead projectors, with signing up session at the end of the conference. Such seminars take place in locations in Kabul, Islamabad, Karachi, Dacca, Beirut and now also in East Africa. They (the seminars) are designed prepare you with your resettling needs and with up to date information about immigration and welfare law in Australia.

An investment of a mere $10,000, payable in advance, will get you an airline ticket and a transit visa for Indonesia (bribe included), a place on a boat to Australia and “technical support” such as at what point you destroy your travel documents, how to lie to immigration investigators in order to gain status of “asylum seeker” and tell you about the special support group waiting to assist you with your quick assimilation into the welfare system of your newly chosen country. This wonderful “beeble” are called the Australian Labour Party .

Unfortunately duty free is extra, but your “human right” lawyer, curtesy of the Australian tax payer, may be able to get you a refund by suing the government for “emotional distress” they inflicted on you by making you come on a boat, instead of a direct flight, placing you in detention and applying “targeted persuasion” in an attempt to establish your true identity.

And I have not touched on their adaptation to human rights, perhaps some other time.

11 August, 2008

In ten years time, perhaps a bit earlier, perhaps a bit later, historians will ponder over a phenomena that became a global orthodoxy in the 1990’s known as “Global Warming” or in its more “correct” term “Climate Change”. What was it that made so many people believe in such a lie?

The world has known doomsday prophecy going back to biblical times, but nothing ever got close to the current global warming phenomena that invades every aspect of our life in a futile attempt to stop some imaginary calamity with as much probability as somehow stopping mother Earth rotating around the sun, or even slowing her down.

What are the underlining dynamics that lead to vast acceptance of the largest fraud ever perpetrated on human kind? A question that may well be a subject of a PhD thesis in History, Psychology, Political Science if those disciplines would ever develop the moral courage to say “we were wrong”.

It seems that there are elements in our times that wish to take us back to the eighteenth century, back to the squabble between the enlightenment movement and the orthodoxy.

By Orthodoxy I mean all forms of conformity without challenge including, but not limited to, religion and politics. The enlightenment movement refers the eighteen and nineteen centuries philosophical approach using observation, reason and/or proof. It sometimes referred to the period from Newton to Jefferson.

Earlier enlightenment brought philosophy and science together, Spinoza, Pascal and Leibniz did not distinguished between philosophy and mathematics. In fact mathematic theories are based on “logical assumptions” known as axioms (or postulates) that cannot be proven, for example if A=B and B=C then A=C (in fact the axiom is about all relations not only equality).

Orthodoxy is not necessarily negative as enlightenment is not inevitably positive, although enlightenment brought us Voltaire, Rousseau and Jefferson, it also brought us Karl Marx and subsequently Stalin. The Enlightenment era also brought us Liberalism a political term which means different things in different countries.

In America a liberal is often used as synonym to socialist whilst in Australia the Liberal party is the conservative side pf politics, for this reason I prefer the use of Leftist or socialist to describe the non conservative part of politics.

New Orthodoxy

In recent times we are called to forget all about reason and proof and to accept dogmas put before us as truths. I refer particularly to issues that are shoved down our throats without reason or proof. We suppose to accept theories such as anthropogenic (human caused) global warming and damage to the ozone layer, other alleged human induced damage to the environment from shopping plastic bags, plastic bottles, fertilisers etc etc etc.

The different between Neo-Orthodoxy and the traditional one is that the very same philosophies that opposed the (traditional) orthodoxy in favour of reason and proof are those who stifle discussion about reason and proof by using the very same tactics of the old orthodoxy; calling names and excommunication. Back in the nineteen century the church label you as sinner or a deviant and bar you from community activities by a decree, or by hanging, burning, stoning or beheading you depending on your religion.

In case of global warming the neo-orthodox will have you believe that the science is settled, that there is a scientific consensus and that their modelling represents a scientific proof that global warming is a result of human activities. (I have already dealt with those lies in past blogs).

However, if you are a scientist and wish to validate, let alone disprove the global warming hypothesis, you will quickly be labelled denier or skeptic, accuse of being funded by the oil companies, be effectively excommunicated from the scientific community and research funding. Some of the proponent of global warming have gone even further calling for silencing any dissention to global warming by legislation. Middle ages stuff.

Far fetched? Not at all. If you present radio or TV In Australia you will be taken of the air with a large fine for your station if you broadcast or allow the broadcast of any information questioning the harm from smoking (active or passive) or broadcast any information on possible beneficial qualities of smoking, e.g. that smoking seems to be beneficial in combating Parkinson Disease. The Global warming Nazis are pushing for a similar laws for their issue.

The neo-orthodoxy is not limited to global warming. Multiculturalism is often confused with multi-racism, extols the diversity of cultures within one community for the sake of diversity and opposes assimilation of cultures. Again you are asked to accept multiculturalism as if it was part of the Tables of the Covenant, no discussions, just (neo) orthodoxy.

You are not permitted to question multiculturalism without being labelled “racist”

Again there are anti-vilification laws in the (people’s republic of the) State of Victoria in Australia that will ensure your imprisonment if you are convicted of vilification against Islam but you mat vilify Christianity or Judaism all you like. You will still be convicted of vilifying Islam even if you quote the Koran’s inconvenient (to Muslims) bits, in other words, the truth is not a defence (!?).

I define the multicultural equation as:

To criticise the majority is a human right but to criticise a minority is vilification (or racism).

Ayaan Hirsi Ali is Somali born, a woman who suffered genital mutilation as a young girl, who escaped from an arrange marriage by seeking and receiving refugee status in the Netherlands. She became a member of the Dutch Parliament and come into the forefront of the news when her partner in production of anti Islam movie, Theo Van Gough, was murdered in mid daylight Amsterdam Street by a Muslim. Her name was found on a note pinned to Van Gough’s body by a knife. She now lives in The USA.

According to her web site:

She has since [the murder of van Gough] become an active critic of Islam, an advocate for women’s rights and a leader in the campaign to reform Islam. Her willingness to speak out and her abandonment of the Muslim faith have made her a target for violence and threat of death by Islamic extremists.

Ayaan Hirsi Ali has 24/7 protection from Muslims that declared her a target, one would expect that she know something about being frighten by Muslims, yet there are still neo-orthodox in the media who are convinced that they know better. Watch one such attempt by one Avi Lewis who must be the greatest dickhead (oops) in Western media:

On The Map with Avi Lewis: Ayaan Hirsi Ali & Islamophobia

Here you have it, super arrogant neo-orthodox moron, who incidentally now works for Al-Jazeera. Yes, there are people in position of influence that despite all evidence to the contrary protray Islam is just another religion (of peace).

The Science Of Marxism

No inverted commas! No, this is neither a joke nor a sarcasm. This is what true Marxists believe even as we speak. Marxism is a science no different from mathematics physics and astronomy hmmmmm hahahha (sorry I could not stop myself)

According to The History Guide dot org:

Just as Darwin discovered the law of development or organic nature, so Marx discovered the law of development of human history”

And if you think that this is a oncer here another one; someone named David North gave a series of speeches to the Social Equity Party (SEP), an American Marxist organisation, in August 2005 and among other thing he said:

But whether Marxism is a science depends, to a great extent, upon 1) whether the laws which it claims to have discovered reveal the real objective mechanisms of socio-economic development; 2) whether the discovery of those laws can adequately explain the preceding historical evolution of mankind; and 3) whether the understanding of these laws makes possible significant predictions about the future development of human society.

[Emphasis & highlight provided]

(In fact if you Google the term “Marxism as science” you will get some 2.7 million hits an indication that at least some people take the possibility seriously.)

We are all aware of the Marxist explanation of preceding evolutions and their ability for “significant predictions” in what they called Five years plans that were published at the expiration of the five years “proving” the soviet “success”. Well comrade, please tell me how come that the science of Marxism did not “significantly predicted” the fall of the Soviet Union?

It is no accident that the so-called science of global warming has been taken up by the Marxism “scientists” albeit they often deny their past.

The Anti-Smoking Neo-Orthodoxy

Try to debate the global warming deception and before long you will be reminded of the anti-smoking campaign as a parallel. By some twisted logic if you accept the “science” that smoking is harmful, you must accept the global warming “science”.

In fact the only larger deception ever perpetrated on mankind, is that of the anti-smoking lobby. Before you jump at me I will say this; smoking is addictive and smoking may be harmful to smokers in certain circumstances – how harmful and what circumstances we don’t know or are not told.

The allege health damage from passive smoking is a fraud!!! But more about it later (By the way, I don’t smoke).

We have legal limit for alcohol consumption, we are even told that consumption of red wine, within reason, is beneficial to our health. We have many safe intake limits on intake of all sorts of chemicals (we call medicines), including arsenic, but we have no such limits on cigarettes.

Why? Because cigarettes and smokers have been demonised by the neo-orthodoxy. Hey, they have never established, to my knowledge, what is the harmful substance in cigarettes, is it nicotine, is the tar or perhaps the (cigarettes’) paper.

Fact: Most of conclusions on the harm of cigarettes comes from statistical observations – NOT CLINICAL ONES!

(You do remember that I sleep on the floor because 95% of people die in bed, don’t you?)

In recent TV ads it transpired that a featured terrible looking woman with what was described as mouth cancer from smoking is in fact a (non smoking) actress and her mouth cancer was pure makeup! I would have thought that if indeed smoking causes moth cancer they would have found a real candidate with no trouble.

The is true for some terrible looking muck that comes out an artery of a smoker, EXCEPT that the photo on packets of cigarettes is of an artery of a non smoking …. Pig!

But to the neo orthodox you are denier and anti social if you dare questioning their “science”.

Next time when someone comments on your smoking and its harm ask him/her what proof do they have (“everybody knows that” is not a proof).

Amazing, the very people who regard themselves as enlightened behave exactly as the middle ages Church did.

Have a fag.

© Copyright Jacob Klamer 2008 (except attributable quotations)

8 January, 2008

To most people outside the Commonwealth, cricket is a leaping insect similar to the grasshopper from the cicada’s family. To the people of the Commonwealth, cricket is also a ball and bat field sport’s game. If you arrived to Planet Earth today and landed in India, don’t get too alarmed by the local press, India is not about to invade Australia or even call its High Commissioner (Ambassador) in Canberra back for “consultations”

It all started in cricket test match (a game that lasts 5 days) between Australia and India in Sydney. Australia, snatched victory from what had looked like a certain defeat earlier in the match, with the usual jubilation which was quickly subdued because, it was transpired that an Indian player, Harbhajan Singh, called an Australian player Andrew Symonds “monkey”

Symonds is a English born with mixed English-West Indian ancestry who plats his hair and look quite ridiculous with bright white sun screen cream on his lips, but play cricket he can.

The matter was brought to the attention of the (South African) umpire (referee) who found Singh in breach of the “anti-racial” rules of the game and banned him from playing for 3 matches.

The Indian “response” was swift, first they threatened to boycott all further planned tests and return home then, presumably because of the financial implication of such action (heavy fine), they modified their attitude, lodge an appeal and “suspended” their participation pending the result of the appeal.

This brought the “anti racial rules” to the fore front. Why do we need an “anti-racial” rules in cricket, or in sport for that matter, is beyond me. This is obviously the product of the Political Correctness and the Multiculturalism viruses that infected every good part of our society including sport. The Australian media, a subsidiary of International Proletarian Movements, took up the Indian side, accusing the Australian team of dobbing, lack of humility and … yes, you got it “RACISM” Do you believe that? the victim, if there is one, became the villain.

There is nothing new in the victim being turned into villain, just watch a “cross examination” of a rape victim in court, the list of “rights” of the defender, defence “deals” to minimize criminals’ sentences or compare the rights of crim to the rights of the cops.

There is somehow the notion that racism and intolerance are the domain of solely white heterosexual of Europeans descent. Blacks, South Asian, other Asian, Latinos, homosexuals or indigenous people can never be accused of racism (you may recall the University of Delaware policy that require students to acknowledge that only “whites are racist”), thus Harbhajan Singh’s comments could not possibly be racist. The media even went as far as bring in an “expert” on Indian culture to “prove” that in fact in Indian culture “monkey” is a term of endearment. WHAT? I have many Indian friends and I have never heard of such stupidity. The Indian media found it “offensive” that there was a suggestion that of them make a racial comment.

To Australians, depending on the tone it is said, the term “you bastard” is a term of endearment, if your mate succeeded in, say, past a difficult exam, you would go, pat him on his back and say “you made it, you bastard”, but you would NEVER do it to a non Australian for obvious reasons.

The point is not whether calling someone “monkey” is racist or just juvenile stupidity, the game’s “anti-racial rules” should not have been there in the first place. This is another example of the results of social engineering the has been shove down our throat for years – without this PC rule the game would have (probably) finished with “sorry mate” – “no worries mate”.

In short the whole episode is, in the eye of the media is the fault of the Australians. Indeed, how dare they win a game of sport against the “oppressed”? (ok they did not quite say that but this the corollary). Beside, we have a RULE that encourage us to get offended, let’s use it, let’s play (and pay) lawyers instead of cricket.

What I find REAL offensive, is the white patronising multi-culti who decide for other people when and why they should be offended. Who are those morons to tell me that I should be offended by Christmas decoration because I am not a Christian? Who are those moron that at times of shortage of beds in public hospital ONLY non Muslim women are forced share a ward with men? Who are those morons who allow people an Australian Drivers License without being able to speak English?

Multiculturalism is in fact Cultural Apartheid. It is divisive and it is DISCRIMINATORY as much as it demands “understanding” of minorities by the majority but not the other way around. Christians suppose to tolerate Yom Kippur and Ramadan but Jews and Muslims suppose to be offended by Christmas, Who is running this asylum?

Take care, you bastard 😮

© Copyright Jacob Klamer 2008