Why Muslims Hate Hate Hate Us (They are Failures, We Are Weak)

With much of our embassies in flames (Cairo, Sanaa, Khartoum, Tunis, Benghazi) or threatened (London, Paris, Berlin), Americans are wondering “Why Do Muslims Hate Us?” Or perhaps why they hate hate hate us. Most also wonder what Obama’s plan or response will be (and we already know it: Sharia Surrender). But the real reasons are this: Muslims are failures, and they know it. We are weak, and they know that too. Muslim Failures plus American weakness = Burning Embassies and murdered Ambassadors. It is that simple.

No one has more reason to hate Russia and Putin than Muslims. The Second Chechen War may have led to as many as 40,000 Chechens killed. The now-dead Aslan Mashkodov claimed 200,000 Chechens died in both Chechen Wars. There is an ongoing insurgency still in Chechnya and related Caucuses Mountains Republics. In addition to that, Russia aided Khadaffi, and stood by him as he faced his ouster, to the dismay of the hard-line jihadists and Salafists who fought to get rid of Khadaffi. Not only that, but Russia under Putin has actively aided Bashir Assad, and his despotic regime, responsible for the deaths of thousands of Muslims, as Assad attempts to retain his Alawite (Sunnis do not consider them even Muslim) control as an Iranian Shia client state over Sunni jihadists backed by Turkey and Saudi Arabia and the Gulf.

Not to mention the historic hatred for Russians over the invasion and degradation of Afghanistan, and the support for secular regimes such as Nasser’s, and the Assads, and Khadaffi. If there is any people and regime that should be hated and be the target of constant violence, it should be Russia and Putin.

And yet, after Beslan, it all ceased. Weak, and craven Boris Yeltsin, who spent most of his time getting drunk, intimidated no one. Weeks after the attack, Russian forces struck back at places like Grozny, leveling it. The Chechens and Muslims world-wide took their measure of Putin. And were AFRAID. Their fear was not limitless, however. They knew if they simply refrained from attacking Putin, they would be left alone. If they did not, and attacked them, they knew they would die very unpleasant deaths very soon.

The Chinese, ought to be second in line for Muslim hatred. After all, the Chinese are busy through mass Han Migration, into Uighur territory, erasing the Islamic religion, and Uighur culture, language, and heritage. So much so that riots and street fighting in places like XianXing broke out in 2010. Hui Muslims (ethnic Han Chinese Muslims) also face discrimination, limits on Mosques, general oppression. By all rights Muslims ought to be upset with China. Since Chinese media routinely depicts Hui and Uighur Muslims as barbaric idiots who need the strong hand of the Han to become civilized.

Why then, are not Chinese embassies ablaze with Russian ones?

Because the Chinese are also feared. Any guesses to the Chinese response if Al Qaeda had flown jetliners into Shanghai skyscrapers?

How soon would Kabul and Islamabad been turned into parking lots?

Alright, but what is the source of Muslim rage?

Failure. Failure of Muslims to achieve anything like the power and prosperity of the West. The riches and power of the West rest on its people, not its leaders who are generally asinine. Western peoples have many flaws. “Honey Boo Boo” and “Dancing With the Has Beens” and “Celebrity Rehab” and singing/talent contest shows are one of them. But unlike most peoples most of the time in history, Western people get up and go to work. Where they use their brains, mostly, in doing basic things like making sure they have enough drilling pipe to drill an oil well, or measuring a window for an opening, or using a computer to diagnose an engine problem in a car.

This is not deep thinking along the lines of Bertrand Russell or Einstein. Not even fairly abstruse work like say, Linus Torvalds or Bill Joy. It is instead a simplistic but effective in mass quantities, thinking in mechanistic terms. Machines and tools behave in predictable ways, based on a Newtonian universe that is regular and predictable. Allah won’t suddenly make your saw restore instead of cut wood. Water does not suddenly flow uphill because a genie did it. You might watch and enjoy Harry Potter movies, but you don’t believe your co-worker put a spell on you.

Other nations and peoples have made the same jump. Japan, South Korea, and much of Coastal China has done so. Belief in magic, capricious gods, and the like has been replaced with a mechanistic belief in the universe operating in predictable and powerful ways. Taken in mass quantities, where nearly everyone operates that way, even for places largely devoid of wealth in the form of natural resources, wealth can quickly accumulate.

Muslims, pretty much all of them, that have any contact with the West (or Asia) understand this. But they cannot make the jump. Because unlike the Japanese, or Chinese, or Koreans, to do so would make them less than what they are. Their entire identity is built on magic, and magical thinking. To give that up would mean they’d stop being Muslim. And yet they WANT WANT WANT the wealth and power of the West. To live with dignity, and not in the dirt. To live long and healthy lives, not poor and powerless ones.

Other peoples have made the jump. And not through democracy and “freedom” either — but by changing how they operate. Meji Restoration Japan, South Korea until recently, and China now, are not exactly bywords of freedom. But again, this means ordinary people must behave as thought the universe is predictable and not ruled by magic and spells. A society’s wealth comes from the bottom up, not the ruler down.

Thus the Muslim rage. Anger that the West is wealthy, and they cannot have that wealth, considering the compromises. Muslims in isolated nations of the Sahel, for example, don’t rage against the West. They’ve barely heard of it. They are too busy lopping off limbs for thievery in Mali to care about what some Egyptian Copt in California put on Youtube. They’ve not even heard of Youtube. They live as most people have lived, in an endless and formless now. But most Muslims are well off enough, compared to history, to know and understand some of the West, having seen it on satellite TV, or living their themselves, in places like London or Paris or Berlin.

This is why, for example, obscure cartoons in an obscure Danish Newspaper generated so much violence. No nation has stayed out of the Middle East more than Denmark. It is tiny, less than six million Danes. They play effectively no part in the world save for exporting butter and beer. Denmark is not exactly friendly to Israel. But it is small, weak, and prone to appeasing Muslims.

Thus, a bunch of Salafists, who see political power through channeling Muslim rage at their inability to get rich, by (stopping being Muslim, essentially), ginned up “days of rage” and violence and killing against … Denmark. This requires three parts, of course.

Danish weakness. Check.

Salafist bloodthirsty ambition. Check.

Muslim rage at wanting what they can’t have (Western prosperity and stability). Check.

You can’t rent a mob if the mob is not disposed to be a mob in the first place. That’s why the Occupy Wall Street rabble is filled with rape, and assaults, and abuse, because the people are a mixture of degenerate trust-funders, permanent hippies, street kids, the homeless, and cheap thugs. All folks for whom violence is fun. The Tea Party, made up of mostly 50 years plus White women with their own small business, were models of propriety and decency, because for them, that’s how they live, and violence and thuggery represent not a good time but existential threats.

If you want to know why the Muslim mob is always a rabble, it is because they are one. They are as addicted to magical thinking, thuggery, and violence as your average Occupy Wall Street loser. And this writ large explains Muslims as a whole.

No, “not all Muslims are like that.” But most are. Those that are not, don’t get into street fights with those who are, either, but silently support them. Effectively, there is no difference between the 80% of Muslim men and women who live in constant rage because they want a middle class lifestyle but are not prepared to give up Allah and Genies to get it, and those 20% who have but remain silent out of fear their friends and relatives will kill them to keep believing in magic.

All of which leads to Obama’s response. Obama has bet it all on two prongs: Drone assassinations kept off the news by a captive, Obama-worshipping media, and hug-a-thug embrace of the Muslim Brotherhood.

Far from the murder of Ambassador Stevens and four others being the “revenge of Khadaffi,” the murder was planned and carried out by the very people Obama helped: the Muslim Brotherhood. Obama reluctantly, but nevertheless visibly, helped remove Khadaffi. While it must be noted, Putin supported Khadaffi. Who did the Muslim Brotherhood attack? The Weak Obama rather than the FEARED Putin.

Then, Obama essentially ordered Mubarak to resign, handing the nation of Egypt to the Muslim Brotherhood. This against the pleadings of both the Saudis and the Israelis, who saw the danger of empowering the Brotherhood.

Obama and his people argued that the Muslim Brotherhood represented most of the people (which was true). And that they would only be responsible if they had power, and that furthermore it was both futile and stupid to keep them out of power, because the ability of dictators to keep and hold power had eroded due to social media and rising commodity prices (no more bribes to keep the populace in check). Too bad they don’t endorse this for the White majority population at home, but nevermind for now.

Die Welt, has said Obama’s Middle East Policy Is In Ruins.

”US President Barack Obama’s Middle East policy is in ruins. Like no president before him, he tried to win over the Arab world. After some initial hesitation, he came out clearly on the side of the democratic revolutions. … In this context, he must accept the fact that he has snubbed old close allies such as Israel, Saudi Arabia and the Egyptian military. And now parts of the freed societies are turning against the country which helped bring them into being. Anti-Americanism in the Arab world has even increased to levels greater than in the Bush era. It’s a bitter outcome for Obama.”

“Obama was naive to believe that one only needed to adopt a new tone and show more respect in order to dispel deep-seated reservations about the free world. In practice, the policies of the Obama administration in the region were not as naive as they may have seemed at times, and the Americans have always been much more involved in the Middle East than the passive Europeans. But Washington has provided the image of a distracted superpower in the process of decline to the societies there. This image of weakness is being exploited by Salafists and al-Qaida, who are active in North Africa from Somalia to Mali.”

“One thing is clear: If jihadists believe they can attack American installations and kill an ambassador on the anniversary of Sept. 11, then America’s deterrent power has declined considerably. For a superpower, it is not enough just to want to be loved. You have to scare the bad guys to keep them in check.”

All of that has failed. Glenn Reynolds notes the coming Sharia (which has in fact already arrived).

When taking office, the President does not swear to create jobs. He does not swear to “grow the economy.” He does not swear to institute “fairness.” The only oath the President takes is this one:

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.

By sending — literally — brownshirted enforcers to engage in — literally — a midnight knock at the door of a man for the non-crime of embarrassing the President of the United States and his administration, President Obama violated that oath. You can try to pretty this up (It’s just about possible probation violations! Sure.), or make excuses or draw distinctions, but that’s what’s happened. It is a betrayal of his duties as President, and a disgrace.

He won’t resign, of course. First, the President has the appreciation of free speech that one would expect from a Chicago Machine politician, which is to say, none. Second, he’s not getting any pressure. Indeed, the very press that went crazy over Ari Fleischer’s misrepresented remarks seems far less interested in the actions of an administration that I repeat, literally sent brown-shirted enforcers to launch a midnight knock on a filmmaker’s door.

But Obama’s behavior — and that of his enablers in the press — has laid down a marker for those who are paying attention. By these actions he is, I repeat, unfit to hold office. I hope and expect that the voters will agree in November.

Reynolds is likely to be disappointed. Most voters, particularly White women, will be happy to trade freedom and a bit of groveling, for a small respite.

The Cerritos man, an Egyptian Copt with a name I don’t recall and can’t pronounce, has been arrested by LA Sheriffs, ostensibly for “parole violations” but really for the “crime” of blasphemy against Islam. Already, we have Sharia. It is against the law, as it is enforced (though not written, yet) to criticize either Islam or Mohammed.

Obama already has his response. It is surrender. His whole being is tied up in not using the military except in highly limited Special Forces ways, or deniable drone attacks. This is the man who by his own admission, hung out with the radical feminists, the marxists, the queer theorists, and the radical muslims.” This is the man who said,

“Of course, not all my conversations in immigrant communities follow this easy pattern. In the wake of 9/11, my meetings with Arab and Pakistani Americans, for example, have a more urgent quality, for the stories of detentions and FBI questioning and hard stares from neighbors have shaken their sense of security and belonging. They have been reminded that the history of immigration in this country has a dark underbelly; they need specific reassurances that their citizenship really means something, that America has learned the right lessons from the Japanese internments during World War II, and that I will stand with them should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.” *

*Audacity of Hope, pg 261.

This is not a man who will stand up for freedom. Or the First Amendment. Rather, this is a man aching to institute Sharia. Obama grew up a Muslim, in Indonesia. He hung out with “Muslim Marxist Millionaires” in Steve Sailer’s language, during college at Occidental and Columbia. Even visiting Pakistan in the summer of 1987. Presumably not for the babes, bikinis, and beer.

This is a man who has a Plan B. Sharia. He can by Executive Order simply arrest and imprison the man who made the video, and do the same for any other man or woman who makes other videos, or movies, or books, or drawings, or any other thing, that Muslims anywhere at any time find offensive. Not the least of which is that this meets Obama’s Agenda:

Surrender Abroad. Tyranny at Home.

In order to keep Muslims happy and be consistent with his apology for America and groveling tour of the Muslim world, Obama will be forced to extradite this man. And others, who have posted burning the Koran, or putting bacon on it, and the like, on various social media. Of course it won’t stop there, because Muslims will demand more, and Obama’s whole agenda is based on groveling abroad (coupled with “surgical” drone strikes against AQ leaders that the media never reports). Weakness invites attack (as anyone entering puberty later in Junior High can attest). Strength repels it (as anyone having passed puberty in High School can verify).

And this ties in with Obama’s agenda, which is the agenda broadly of the elite in the West: destruction of the White Middle Class and its replacement by a broadly hereditary pseudo-meritocracy, a reconstruction of aristocracy with princes and kings and the like, all deeply attractive to women in particular, and offensive to most White men. For obvious gender reasons — women do well in aristocracies and men do poorly.

Broadly, the elites seek ever greater tyranny to suppress the White middle and working class, and enact a permanent aristocracy. This demands a police state, one based on constant surveillance, minuscule rules on every aspect of life, and constant humiliation. All of which is attractive to women (and again, repulsive to men) in that men require freedom of action (if nothing else, to compete for women) and women prefer to know in advance who the winning men are and who to avoid as the losers. A technology based, Sharia-enforced, police state is the best of all possible worlds for the elites. Leveraging a billion Muslims abroad and ones at home, to create surrender enforced by the New Vichy State. So says Ace of Spades.

Of course, Obama and his elite pals overestimate his abilities. According to Peter Brimelow at VDARE.com, Romney is getting 53% of the White Vote, based on the Sept. 9 Rasmussen polling. That’s worse than McCain’s 60%, and likely a result of White women still entranced with Obama. He’s Black, for White women that counts a lot. [Noticing things with your own eyes, you see a lot of Black Male/White Female couples, but very few White Male/Black Female couples.] “Once You Vote Black You Never Go Back” is not aimed at White guys, after all. So Obama is probably the favorite to win. Despite a lousy economy. Incomes in free-fall (and sure to get worse after Helicopter Ben Bernanke dumps money causing inflation and eroding savings after a liquidity trap). That is not surprising. The Story of O might have been published decades ago, but it never sat atop the best-seller lists for twenty weeks nor did it sell in supermarkets (I’ve seen it there myself).

After all, White women have their own rage. They were promised sexy men and all they got was a bunch of “White guys” who create wealth and stability. Who wants THAT?

No, “not all White women are like that.” I have not seen breakdowns of Obama’s current support, but CBS News noted in June that:

The president’s support has declined among both non-Hispanic white women and non-Hispanic white men, including college-educated non-Hispanic white Americans of both genders. He enjoys higher support among women from this group, with 41 percent expressing support, than men from this group, 34 percent of whom support him. In 2008, 47 percent of non-Hispanic white women and 41 percent of non-Hispanic white men supported Mr. Obama.

Logically, if Romney is only polling 53% among Whites, it must be because White women have embraced Obama. Maybe magically White guys have embraced him, but its likely that the near-half majority he got with White women slightly improved, versus the 40% or so he got from White men in 2008.

The only kicker might be the personal background of the late Ambassador Stevens. White women don’t care (because, they don’t and never have, ever) about random dead White guys. White women didn’t march and support Reginald Denny. Nor the families of the two dead British Tourists slain in Sarasota by a guy who looked like Obama’s son. Nor the family of Bob and Nancy Straight. Nor the two early teen White boys set on fire by Black boys. Why would they? It is not any more likely than romance/porn novels will feature men who do the cooking (Kitchen Bitch?) or child-care or are “supportive” and egalitarian.

Hillbuzz is reporting that Ambassador Stevens was sodomized, repeatedly, which has been reported by Libyan sources. It might or might not be true. Hillbuzz is also reporting that Ambassador Stevens was openly gay.

And THAT is a game-changer. One very bad for Obama.

White women don’t care (and again, why would they?) about random non-sexy/dominant White guys. About George Clooney, Leonardo DiCaprio, Brad Pitt, yes very much. So too the Royal Princes, particularly the one that acts like an ahole (women love love love aholes). This is hard for most White guys to grasp. But there it is. They just don’t. (And again, this applies to most, not all, White women. Effectively there is no political difference).

About gay men, White women care very, very much. Its why gays are all over TV. Women Love Love Love them. Gay men are what every White woman would create out of the non-sexy, non-dominant White guy population. As Victoria Beckham (Posh Spice) said, she dislikes straight men save her husband, father, and brothers. Gay marriage is a winning proposition among the populace poll-wise 52% nationally, because White women love gays. Straight guys are not out there demanding marriage be “gayed up.” Rather White women just love gays, and that shows up in any entertainment aimed at them (such as HGTV, better known as “Home and Gay Television”). “House Hunters” and “House Hunters International” feature gay couples every third episode. Because the female audience (men don’t buy feminine health care products, just watch the ads) loves the gays.

IF Ambassador Stevens was openly gay, and IF he was repeatedly sodomized because of it, watch out. The bottom will fall out of Obama’s support among White women. Then he’ll have to go to Plan C. Alberto Fujimori time. A “Self-Coup.” Perhaps establishing Sharia as an emergency measure on national security grounds, and postponing elections on the same. After all, “he won.” And he can rule by fiat, essentially, with a pro-forma Supreme Court ruling.

That is why it is interesting to watch what is going on with the Libyan situation. To protect Hillary? Nope. Obama would be happy to throw HER under the bus, the State Dept. said it will answer no more questions about the subject. But if again, it is true that Stevens was gay, and was sodomized and killed because of it, White women will dump Obama big time. Its one thing if some anonymous White guy gets it, another if a gay man does.

Even if Obama ekes past the post, with phony votes and the majority again of White women as the “Once You Vote Black, You Never Go Back” candidate, White guys are not going to be happy. Because the dynamic will not end. Muslims will demand ever greater concessions, on more and more issues. Because they’ll still be angry at being failures. And there will still be lean and hungry men among the Salafists. And America will still be weak abroad and tyrannical at home. [The preferred stance of women in the US.]

That leaves most White guys with a raw deal. That they’re supposed to like. They’ll rebel. But internally, in ways not seen. A constant surveillance state can be blocked. Cell phones switched to illegal alien/drug dealer oriented pay as you go phones. Email proxied and encrypted. Or messages hidden. More and more mocking put out, on various media, with more and more reaction by Muslim mobs and Salafist manipulators pouncing on weakness. Then more and more internal rebellion. Infecting even the FBI, and the military, which are made up still mostly of men. If one ICE agent can shoot another over an argument, (this happened here in SoCal a number of months ago), so too can the most beta of males do things en masse illegally. Its happened before, naturally over booze, in Prohibition. Nearly everyone drank, the way nearly everyone lights up now.

Ratchet down the Sharia, and you get more and more rebellion. In Egypt, the Mubarak regime fell because the elderly Generals and Mubarak officials and Colonels had stolen everything there was to be stolen, leaving the Majors, Captains, Lieutenants, and non-comissioned officers let alone the enlisted men with nothing. There was no more cash to spread around, to maintain loyalty. Obama is already reaching that point and we’ve just begun the Sharia descent. Obama and Sharia are raw deals for most White guys, and they know it. He might eke past the post (or not if it turns out the Ambassador was GAY because White women love gays), but faces a constant internal rebellion that won’t end up well for him.

About whiskeysplace

Conservative blogger focusing on culture, business, technology, and how they intersect.
This entry was posted in appeasement, muslims. Bookmark the permalink.

51 Responses to Why Muslims Hate Hate Hate Us (They are Failures, We Are Weak)

  1. anonymous says:

    stop complaining about the cutting off thieves’ hands thing. thats a good policy, we would do well to apply it here to bankers and flash mobbers alike.

  2. kcjw33 says:

    I would like your permission to post this as a guest blog on all of my hosting sites (57)

    On Sun, Sep 16, 2012 at 8:01 AM, whiskeysplace

  3. idealart says:

    An interesting article on Christopher Stevens at the NYT. He was career diplomat and described by colleagues as having “a real sensitivity to the Arab world.” It emphasizes his “difference” from other (non-gay?) Americans repeatedly.

    But, curiously, at the end . . . Roya Hakakian, an Iranian-born writer who knew him said that “he displayed the quintessential sunny innocence of Americans.” [not all of us!] She warned him there would be a “lashing out at Americans,” “given the revolutionary narrative.” He wouldn’t listen. He “fell in love with Libya’s revolution. At the end, those very forces whose influence he thought would be curbed had claimed his life.” For some reason the NYT didn’t use “tragic” or “senseless violence” once!

    Christopher Stevens hadn’t yet learned the lesson from his liberal friends living in Washington DC. Filled to the brim with liberal pieties, they began to realize that the forces whose influence they thought would be curbed (after 45 years of social engineering and billions of dollars) will beat, rob, or murder them. To his friends shocked regret, these forces didn’t buy the “I voted for Obama” jive or the rich hipster stuff. What they DID buy is encroachment by whites is “white privilege,” rubbing their noses in it to boot, with its strange cult of bicycles, Starbucks and yoga.

    Following the script, if Stevens was gay (chances are he was) will the US government charge the perps with a hate crime? To be consistent, they should. If blacks and Islam can’t accommodate the seductive charms of liberalism then bring out the big stick! If Americans must never offend Allah and abandon their constitutional first amendment shouldn’t there be reciprocal concessions made by muslims? We should demand hate crime charges. Demand them! And nothing less! Over and over. Oh, the horror.

  4. I had to come back here after your post on isteve about the (believed to be) immininent Israeli attack on Iran. –If it’s going to come, I’d rather it come now (assuming the Israelis can pull it off– because tactically, Obama’s very unlikely to help things), so that at least the comatose American voters can understand the full chaos of the world the Obama police/social democracy order proposes to create.

    You’ve swept up a lot of familiar themes in this essay that are worth digesting. Every Obama ad I see now harps about the “MIDDLE CLASS”, and it makes me nauseous. Romney should be harping on the Middle Class since Tampa, and instead they wasted valuable time on “single moms” and such ludicrous pandering [NB: Clint’s presentation was a gemstone, and the Romney & Ryan speeches were, in themselves, quite good].

    All Obama understands by a “middle class” is an unemployable, unmarried white woman with a state university degree in something empty and unremunerative, student debts, an illegitimate child or two, and food stamps. Food stamps for the middle class!!: that’s the Obama promise in a nutshell. A “middle America” reduced to slavish, shameful dependency and inertness and bastardy, just like the minority underclasses. More or less, just like his own momma, though in fairness she, albeit a troubled young woman, was seemingly intelligent.

    The frenzied projection onto Romney of blame and shame after he dared critique Obama’s foreign policy is the single most frightening cultural demarker of creeping one-party rule that I’ve seen. If the liberal establishment can fight this hard, and underhandedly, to preserve the Obama administration, even in the face of the most inoffensively mainstream and vetted GOP candidate since GHW Bush (a man with two advanced degrees from Harvard, for God’s sake!), then truly, we are dealing with a fearsome and conspiratorial elite, even if the mass of its shenanigans are out in plain view.

    Qualitative Easing Forever– incredible. What are they looking for, a new housing bubble?
    Greenspan wouldn’t do any favors for Bush I, even after he cut the heart out of his own political capital chasing deficit reduction. And the public voted him out after military and foreign triumph, and 4 straight quarters of growth in ’92, to boot.

    And now? The economy is moribund, the Eurozone totters, the Iranian decision looms, our Ambassador is slaughtered, bomb threats of who knows what provenance ring out across the heartland (and wtf is up with that? Totally spurious– or is a terrible show about to drop?), and the top google search right now is undoubtedly Kate Middleton’s t*tt*es, which are about to spring into full view.

    Well, girlfriend, let’s catch a disco nap and set the alarm. Wouldn’t want to miss the most important event “eva” . . . .

  5. ikko3 says:

    There are things I agree with in this post, like that Muslims understand force and respect it. There are other things that are totally insane. The Stevens/Gadafi matter is screwed up. Stevens went over there on a ship with weapons, and he was part of the group of people, along with Hillary Clinton, who wanted to take down Gadafi and install the MB. Whiskey, did you support the US taking down Gadafi? Because these are the wages now, entirely predictable. Stevens had it coming, as I keep saying. He was a treacherous criminal who stabbed Gadafi in the back, our ally who was fighting Al Qaeda and the MB. Now he gets killed by the same people who killed Gadafi, in the same way. What do you have to complain about?

    Russia and China don’t go around the Muslim world fomenting revolutions hoping to bring “democracy,” gay rights, feminism to these primitives. The US does, and it’s getting what it deserves for its stupidity and its treachery (stabbing allies in the back and promoting its own enemies; something that started with BUSH btw, and is bipartisan, not invented by Obama).

    The enemies are not Muslims, but elites here and in Europe…

    The rest of the post, about Obama installing sharia, suspending elections, etc., is nonsense, as is the usual fantasy about white women. Obama is a creature of the US establishment, and not much different from Bush.

    • My view is that Khadaffi, if Obama/Hillary thought he could hang on, ought to have been quietly supported, based on the principle that he finally played ball and we reward those who do so. Otherwise if he was viewed as a goner, Obama should have removed him AND INSTALLED AN ALLY DEPENDENT ON US as the Libyan coastline is strategically important and has been since CARTHAGE.

      But Libya is a sideshow — what is important was throwing Mubarak over the side. It showed that we would do anything to chase the approval of the Muslim Brotherhood, reflecting Obama’s emotional need to ingratiate himself with Salafists rather than the US interest. Among other fall-outs, it has convinced Bibi and others that the US has ZERO intention of doing anything costly to stop Iran’s nukes. The Saudis have drawn the same conclusion.

      Russia and China don’t go “formenting” revolutions, but they OPPOSE the Muslim Brotherhood which was BEHIND THE EMBASSY ATTACKS. That’s what you miss. Obama basically put Morsi in power, and this is what he got in return. Cairo AND Benghazi AND Tunis AND Sanaa and Khartoum. Meanwhile Russia who has been busy killing Muslim Brothers in Syria pays no price. FEAR is the only thing that works.

      Obama is indeed entirely different from Bush. He’s Black. And so pro-Muslim Brotherhood it hurts. Peter Brimelow calls him an “alien occupation President” which is accurate.

      • anonymous says:

        “chase the approval of the Muslim Brotherhood, reflecting Obama’s emotional need to ingratiate himself ”

        Get real, Obama just does what he is told, this isn’t about him in the slightest. This is about a long term jewish plan to reduce the arab states’ ability to challenge israel. A bunch of moderately competent, moderately secular arab nations could economically and (more importantly) demographically STEAMROLL the chosen people. But if the parasitic fuckers convince their host nation to topple such regimes and let the whackos get in charge, forget about it. The extremist muslims will make noise about destroying israel, but lack the ability to do anything.

    • Let me add, Stevens was the official US Ambassador. I might not have liked him, personally, nor Hillary. But as the official symbol of America abroad any attack on him or Hillary via violence is an attack on America. Since it won’t stop there, for practical reasons alone (let alone a me-them attitude which is hard-wired in humans) I object. Today Ambassador Stevens. Tomorrow, a plane crashing into a building I’m visiting. Or a bomb going off in the street.

      I prefer Muslims to fear me and America, than anything else.

  6. ikko3 says:

    Let me also add something about why Muslims hate the West. It has nothing to do with envy, “they hate are freedoms” and this kind of thing. It has everything to do with American support for Saudi regime, for Mubarak, the Gulf dictatorships, and other Arab dictatorships that keep down Islam. Try as you may, you will not find this level of Russian or Chinese involvement in the Muslim world where the center of the Salafi movement would like to form a caliphate. Yes, on the other hand you’re right that Russia and China don’t get attacked because (Russia especially, but not China) has shown it will deal brutally with aggression. But Russia was defending its own territorial integrity in Chechnya, not going around the entire world promoting gay rights and such. No amount of “show of force,” short of using nukes and leveling the Muslim world, would be enough to counter what America has been doing for decades, and is still trying to do, across the Muslim world.

    You need to be clear on this, what are your aims? Would you like to force Egypt, Iraq, etc., to have 40% women in their parliaments, as the US tried to force on Iraq and Afghanistan? I’m not talking about weakness or surrender, but you need to be clear about what your aims are in that region. In my view the US should totally disengage, withdraw support for Israel and for all other Arab regimes, and let them all fight each other without interfering. Any attack after that should be countered brutally. But it is fantasy to pretend that what unites Muslims in hatred of the US is “they hate are freedumbs” or wanting to impose sharia law on Idaho, or “envy.” The US was not “minding its own business” on 9/11.

    And by the way, Christians would do well to emulate Muslims in standing up to the Anglo-American world order, which is what you’re talking about when you mention corrupt elites.

    • oogenhand says:

      Dinesh D’Souza pointed this out in “The Enemy Within”. Conservatives being used as cannon fodder to spread Liberal values. But now retreating would be seen as weakness. We wetted their appetite. I’m sorry, but some mistakes are irreversible.

    • idealart says:

      Hey, Whiskey doesn’t have to have aims. He’s a writer in LA., not Rear-Admiral of the fleet. C’mon ikko, stop bearing down on the poor guy. He needs to sit serenly in his pool with a pina colada while erstwhile starlets transcribe his dictation.

      and other Arab dictatorships that keep down Islam

      Keep down Islam from doing what?

    • This is not true at all, right now Russians are helping SLAUGHTER many Muslim brothers and Jihadis in Syria. In support of the Shia/Alawite and secular Assad state. The response by Sunnis has been … nothing. Russia backed Khadaffi, the enemy of jihadis and got … nothing in response. Russia invaded AFGHANISTAN and fought against jihadis and got … nothing in response. Russia backed Nasser, and other secular pan-Arabs who tortured and killed jihadis by the boatload … and got nothing in response.

      The US best response would be to back people like Mubarak, or others dependent on US force to be friendly to us: US basing rights, overflight, pumping oil, logistical assistance. Its asking too much to remake Muslim regimes, they are not capable of being anything other than they are, but the US has real oil interests and needs for now cheap oil. This is the art of the possible and realistic. A withdrawal will get us hammered like Denmark, anyway, without the ability to keep oil within manageable levels.

      Are you prepared for oil at around $200 a barrel? Because that is the price of withdrawal. If you yearn to live in a ratty urban area filled with NAMs, that’s one thing. If you like a nice safe suburban lifestyle it runs on affordable oil. Which means a constant US intervention. Your car won’t run on unicorn farts and rainbows.

  7. oogenhand says:

    Well, maybe Iran and Israel should bury the hatchet and think about Saudi-Arabia.

    • It is likely Israel and Saudi will come to some arrangement, carefully hidden. As both are status-quo partners. Both want things as they are — and Iranian nukes are daggers at both, essentially ending both regimes existence. For Israel, it faces nuke threats, for the House of Saud dissolution backed by nuclear threats and the Israeli annihilation example. Iran has made no secrets of its ambition to get rid of the House of Saud. Israel and Saudi have been quietly cooperative for some time now is the thinking. Israel being tiny and casualty averse is no threat to the Saudis.

      The Muslim Brotherhood is hostile to the House of Saud and has since the 1930’s aimed at unseating them. Morsi’s visit to Iran is the first by any Egyptian leader since the 1979 revolution. Iran is providing assistance, the Saudis have made only minimal payments to Morsi, and are frankly panicked at the appearance of a Shia-Iranian threat on their Western flank. Thus the Saudi/Gulf-Turkish-US half-hearted alliance to get rid of the Iranian client regime. Again, the US is AIDING the Jihadis, in helping get rid of Assad however tentatively.

      But the jihadis are split. Some are Saudi-Gulf followers, and others are Muslim Brothers who figure the US and Saudis are weak, have made tactical alliances with Iran, and look hungrily at taking over the Saudi regime. While facing economic collapse in Egypt, Libya, and Tunisia.

  8. fakeemail says:

    Jesus Christ, real Americans are “non-Hispanic white men”, these days? There is no American any more. White people and nations are reverting to Caligula-pagan form with hateful dictators and the harpies who love’em; especially when they make gays, slaves, or eunuchs out of the rest of the men. This kind of decadence and greed is goddamn inexcusable. As the Arabs say, the Westerners have all the watches, but they have all the time. . .

  9. Robert in Arabia says:

    Another day in the Kingdom, number of Muslims I chatted with: more than sixty; number of Muslims expressing hatred, envy or dislike, zero.

  10. jhbowden says:

    Whiskey is more right than he thinks he is about the cowardice of Muslims.

    Islam is THE religion for beta males, a religion that allows betas to get off on their own betaness. Muslims have high-pitched voices, fragile physiques, defeated countenances, servile personalities. There’s a reason for this. It isn’t about dominance, it is about submissiveness — Islam literally means submission.

    The physical universe vanishes in their theology, which places an excessive emphasis on God and the soul. As a result, Muslims don’t measure their emotions against circumstances in the temporal world. They catch emotions from others like the weather, or like women on PMS — we can’t know in advance what will hurt their feelings. We think their feelings are shammed, but they’re not. There is no grand strategy, no wordly rhyme or reason to anything they do. Such unpredictability is dangerous and destructive, but not menacing. We can’t appease them, we can’t dismantle their ideology, because it simply does not exist. Islamofascism? It is more like Islamofaggotry. They are preprogrammed to be butthurt. They like being butthurt. There is no ideological pipeline, nothing that will appease them — they’ll find anything, even if it is some stupid cartoons, again, to get off on their own betaness. This isn’t conviction, but the complete absence of conviction. Suicide bombing requires not supreme courage, but supreme indifference.

    Islamic culture, being beta, focuses on shame, not guilt, which is why they have no problem with depraved acts as long as no one finds out — they can wear a mask, or hide in the numerical safety of a swarm, etc. etc. They’re definitely not rebellious alphas who establish individual identities.

    And yes, they are easily intimidated.

    • fakeemail says:

      What you say is true, but at least they are manly (or unmanly) enough to intimidate their women and keep them knocked up and in the kitchen. . .he who lives and MULTIPLIES will win in the end.

      • Matt Strictland says:

        Islamic populations will be dropping.

        As an example our current bugaboo ultra Islamic Iran has a birth rate around that of Europe or so It dropped 70% in the last few decades going from 7 to 1.9 which is a much larger drop and harder to recover from than going from say 3 to 2 or a bit less.

        Given its larger population of elderly it (like China) it will be poor and old before its rich.

        This means were the US smart enough to play the long game (or able, we have numbers but not as many brains) we’d only have to wait them out.

        The other Islamic nations with smart populations have the same things.

        The few that don’t Afghanistan and a few others have no tech.

        Really, long and short the issue is easy to fix. Don’t buy from them if you can help it and don’t allow them to enter your countries. So long as we leave them alone (and yes we meddle as Ikko3 says) and maintain a modest defense posture, they’ll be only a small threat.

        That of course is the rub, we can’t resist meddling and want (not need, want) cheap oil from there.

      • oogenhand says:

        Combined with internecine warfare is that a powerful reason why those Muslim nations need another ideology or religion, one that allows for euthanasia;


  11. asdf says:

    Your posts are getting kind of bad Whiskey.

    Islamic countries fail because their average IQ is low. That’s because of stuff that has been going on a long time and won’t change in our lifetimes. Asian and White societies are rich because they have high average IQ. Disastrous governments can keep a high IQ society down for a century or so, but they always find a way out (China). By contrast low IQ societies can’t succeed no matter what advantageous they are given.

    The rest of the post is pretty shitty. Can’t even go into every aspect. The most glaring is you hate religion, even though lack of religion is the main problem in the west. Because we believe in nothing we have no reason to fight. Those that believe in something have a reason to fight. The result is inevitable.

    • Conquistador says:

      @ asdf

      If Southwest Asia has always been inhabited by low IQ morons why did civilization spring up there and why was the region more advanced than Europe up until the Renaissance?

      Islam is what holds them down. Islam is a bad religion for a variety of reasons. It may have served a purpose once but it’s negatives FAR outweigh the positives.

      • fakeemail says:

        They created Islam. It is who they are. Islam keeping them down, or were they so down that they created Islam? Chicken or egg type deal. Culture is an expression of race which is an expression of IQ, which is an expression of genetics and mating habits.

        Regardless, Islam at least gives them conviction (unlike the West) and high birthrates (unlike the West). The winner is the one who survives and multiplies. Whatever works.

      • Conquistador says:

        I don’t disagree but you can still be smart and create a dumb ideology. Look at liberalism.

  12. @asdf at September 16, 2012 at 5:13 pm : lack of religion is the main problem in the west. Because we believe in nothing we have no reason to fight. Those that believe in something have a reason to fight. The result is inevitable.

    This is the correct view.

    Secular America and Europe are castles built on sand. Up against even a deeply flawed, heretical cult like Islam they will collapse.

    Only Catholic Christianity can stop the Muslim tide and roll it back. Proof: it’s the only force that ever has. Tours 732, Vienna 1683, Spain 1492. One can’t argue with actual numbers.

    • asdf says:

      Secularism does fine as long as GDP keeps going up. GDP going up allows people to not be virtuous and still survive. And GDP keeps going up as long as there as technology allows us to get at more energy. When does that stop? I don’t know. It’s a technology question outside my, or probably anyone’s, expertise. Anyone forecasting collapse or prosperity is usually just guessing.

      We will continue to “beat” Islam, embassies burning aside, until GDP goes down. Secularism can’t handle GDP going down. You don’t necessarily “need” religion in the good times (please forgive my bad theology here), but you certainly need it in the bad times. Religion is about virtue, and virtue is needed in the bad times.

      Guys like Obama can cut Marines off at the knees because the Marines have vast technological and economic superiority on their side. The Muslims have rocks and whatever we will sell them, which they are often too dumb to operate. But what if we didn’t have such an advantage. When if that faded and it was just about will versus will. Well, they have more will then we do. Because they believe in something.

    • oogenhand says:

      Religion is inevitable. Only religion can beat Islam. Sedevacantists are useful, but I think my religion is the best.

    • R. says:

      Neither Hitler nor East Germany had or would have had much problem with Muslim immigration and terrorism, though I suppose you could say Nazism and Communism were religions. We too have our fervently worshiped state religion – Liberalism/Political Correctness. The problem is that the goals of our state religion coincide with the goals of the Islamic religion: the occupation and destruction of the West and its inhabitants. So it is incorrect to say we believe in nothing, we are a society peopled and, more importantly run, by fanatical fundamentalists.

  13. some guy says:

    They may also hate us for bombing them and for siding with Israel.

    • oogenhand says:

      Very well possible, but backing down doesn’t necessarily the wanted effect; it could be seen as weakness.

    • fakeemail says:

      They’d hate us no matter what. They’d hate us if they just met us yesterday. We could build them oil-wells and transfer a huge amount of wealth to them, and they’d still hate us. Oops.

      • oogenhand says:

        My religious reply would be: “Apparently those oil workers were ‘mala’ika’ or Islamic Angels!”. Luckily, Sunnis and Shi’as hate each other. As only conversion can save them, one of the requirements of conversion is handing over their wealth. Remember, my prophecies come true, and Hell is eternal.

  14. tg moderator says:

    I don’t expect the orientation of Stevens to make much difference in the upcoming election. Women vote in their own self interest. (like most people) Married white women tend to be more conservative, but they are no longer a majority. Divorced women and single moms will tend to vote for Obama. It is true that Stevens will become a great martyr if he was gay, but this helps Obama. Women will be sympathetic to Obama who was the champion of the great gay hero Stevens. Obama will be re-elected regardless.

    • idealart says:

      It helps Obama if the narrative is accepted that Stevens himself allowed security to fail. But, the whoile business was about idiots who foolishly trusted in a fantasy about human nature in gerneral and the religion of peace in particular.

      They will go on doing so, feminists, queers, blacks, until the money runs out. Or, the will to believe is undermined by visceral and traumatizing instances of race and muslim reality. They may still cynically vote for the goodies, but its going to get a lot harder to rationalize their greed, stealing from white males through entitlements, quotas, and hate crime laws.

  15. Pingback: LIGFY: Truncated Week Additions | Society of Amateur Gentlemen

  16. Blaximus says:

    You have an amazing lack of historical perspective.

  17. Anonymous says:

    Also proof of the Ferris Bueller truism in the recipient’s response to appeasement…

    “[Y]ou can’t respect someone who kisses your ass. It just doesn’t work.”

  18. JT says:


    Include Sydney in your list. What the Nice White Lady voters have inflicted upon us.

  19. @JT, September 17, 2012 at 6:21 pm: Include Sydney in your list. What the Nice White Lady voters have inflicted upon us.

    Speaking of white women…

  20. Dr Van Nostrand says:

    Whats all this then?
    Nice white American ladies have the hots for Muslim men? I live in Dubai and have dealt with private security personnel in Iraq and Kuwait.And I have met quite a few ripe,fertile and beautiful American women in this macho field.Of all them only ONE had anything to do with a Middle Eastern dude-she married a colonel in the Iraqi army!
    While American men here seem to prefer their own women ,there are somewhat more American men who date inter racially than women.
    Every now and then you do see a Western woman with an Arab man but she is usually Russian or failing that American,British or German.And unless these guys are quite Westernized, well to do and good looking, the women usually are quite hideous.
    Please note that the intermarriage rate of French Muslims is higher for women than for men.ie French Arab Muslim women are more likely to date and marry French infidel men than vice versa!
    Also a disproportionate number of porn stars and prostitutes in France seem to be Arab (google beurette and see what pops up)
    Among those who can afford it ,gulf Arab women make regular trips to France and Italy to take up lovers followed by a hymen reconstruction surgery(if unmarried) and/or an abortion if needed(all categories of women-young,divorced,middle aged etc).Their poorer sisters get their Indian and Sri Lankan drivers to pleasure them.This is an open secret. It is often tolerated by even their family members as long as the lady manages to keeps things discrete!
    We have read Spenglers take on Iranian women and from my anecdotal evidence, it seems rather accurate.
    So if Arabs or Muslims in particular(who are essentially little Arabs as per VS Naipaul) wish to enhance their appeal to infidel women ,Im afraid there are fewer takers than they or whiskey types think are available.Indeed when their own women are gradually ,discretely but surely sliding down the path to debauchery( I saw Twilight books translated in Arabic being sold by the carton), they have plenty on their plate!

  21. Robert in Arabia says:

    Van Nostrand and I do not live in the same Middle East.
    In the three monarchies with which I am familiar western ladies married to Muslims are quite common as are western men married to Muslim women.
    The men must become Muslims to marry Muslim women, the women are not required to convert to marry Muslim men – but most do.
    Sexually liberated western sluts frequently boast of their adventures with all types of non-western men. As you know, western women believe that men deaf or stupid.
    My favorite incident was the 30ish western female who told her gaggle that she had to drop her Muslim boytoy because he thought the purpose of sex was to make babies. Naturally, her gaggle doubled over with laughter at such an absurd old-fashioned concept.
    On average, the western men I know who have married Muslim ladies have four children.
    The unmarried male expats I have met over my many years in the Middle East are predominately alcoholics, homosexuals, or devotees of whore houses.
    The big excitement among my university students this past week has been His Majesty’s decision to grant everyone a four day holiday weekend. Nobody has expressed any interest in the youtube video bruhaha.
    The Mohammed cartoon incident was a burning issue at the time. Danish products disappeared from the shelves. Even then, not a soul expressed any hostility to me. I imagine the French are goiing to receive blowback for Charlie Hebdo’s latest publication.
    Since the United States is most famous for its habit of incinerating civilians from the air, it ought to expect ill-feeling from the surviving relatives of the victims. It is amazing how not angry the generality of Muslims seem to be.

    • Dr Van Nostrand says:

      Robert in Arabia makes some good points but I feel to see how he disproves what I have said!
      I never denied that there is a type of Western woman who is attracted to non Western men but my only point was that the women who blindly go for non Western men for the sake of it don’t tend to be attractive and are over the hill usually as your story of the over 30 lady with the Arab boy toy suggests.
      I think even silly Western women think twice about dating Arab men after hearing stories about having their friends ride the train on them and then the woman when she reports gets incarcerated for adultery!
      Was it Orianna Fallacci who said that there is something about Arab men that makes women of good taste want to throw up?!

      Of course Lebanese and to a lesser extent Syrian men are different matter as they so thoroughly Europeanized
      It should be noted that a good number of gulf arab men marry non arab women because they simply can’t afford the dowry (which can start from 5000usd all the way to 50000 and more!)
      I have also met Western men who have married local women
      Of course Robert, if you are dealing with gulf monarchies there aren’t likely to be many protests!
      The French may receive some blowback but by large I think Muslims will learn to make their peace with blasphemy at the speed of light ..it is out there and this genie can’t be shove back into the bottle.
      My situation is similar to yours, I have quite a few Palestinian friends and they know I am a Zionist but we (wisely) don’t broach the subject and get along fine.I remember during the Mohammad cartoon when one of my Arab friends expressed his outrage, I calmed informed him about “piss Christ” ,Mel Brooks rendition of Moses, Monty Pythons Life of Brian and the cartoons about Hindu gods in Indian magazines .Of course He was still upset about his sensitivities being trampled on but less so in light of such data.
      I think a part of this is because of an increasing apathy among Arabs,particularly the educated ones, about politics and culture.
      I think its the Arabs and Muslims in Europe and UK who are most belligerent and among failed states like Pakistan.

  22. kcjw33 says:

    This needs to be seen to be believed it really exposes his communist beliefs!

Comments are closed.