Monday, 30 November 2009

Go Switzerland!

Bravo Switzerland! By an overwhelming majority they have shown what they think of the Islamisation of their country. Inevitably the howls from the peecee multi-culti fever swamps have been loud and painful.

All the usual suspects weighed in. The UN, the EU, Amnesty International, the Red Cross, even the Catholic Church, doing anything to divert attention from its history of raping children. To listen to them you’d think the Swiss had reopened Auschwitz, and were busy rounding up the country’s Muslim population.

What has gone totally unremarked is the fundamental issue of reciprocity: Christians can't even repair a church in most Islamic countries. As I showed in this post, even surreptitiously practicing your Christian faith in Saudi Arabia can lead to arrest and imprisonment. Why don't those organisations squeal about that?

Oh, I forgot. The Saudis aren’t white Christians.

What's nothing short of hilarious is the complaint about the vote not being ‘democratic’. I kid you not – this has been said. It’s so democratic that the EU mandarins must be having sleepless nights. My God, what would happen if this democracy broke out everywhere? Certainly, if Switzerland had been in the EU they’d have been brought swiftly to heel

Moving on, does this signal a significant change or just a last futile gasp? Let’s listen to Farhad Afshar, who heads the Coordination of Islamic Organisations in Switzerland. He bleats “the most painful for us is not the minaret ban, but the symbol sent by this vote. Muslims do not feel accepted as a religious community”

To which I'd respond, ‘I certainly hope so’

That malevolent, duplicitous, terror-supporting hypocrite Tariq Ramadan has been given a prominent platform in the Guardian (where else?) to declaim:

"What is happening in Switzerland, the land of my birth?”

It might be the land of your birth you prick, but it’s not your country. To paraphrase Lord Wellington, being born in a stable doesn’t make you a horse. In this case it did make Ramadan a horse – a Trojan one. Like most other Muslims in the West, he’s used our liberal secular laws to secure religious freedom and support, the very things denied to Christians and Jews in Muslim countries.

He goes on “the Swiss majority are sending a clear message to their Muslim fellow citizens: we do not trust you and the best Muslim for us is the Muslim we cannot see.”

If so, I rejoice. And it should be the start of a campaign along the following lines:

Ban the burka, niqab, the veil in work places and also halal slaughter. Make building a mosque as difficult as it is to build a church in Saudi Arabia. Make Islam and the ‘Prophet’ a subject of humour as happens with other religions and their icons.

If we initiated and maintained such a campaign it would make Europe a ‘cold place’ for Muslims. And that in turn would make them less likely to come here, or if they still do, make them realise that they have to live by civilised Western standards.

Fingers crossed. And meanwhile, where can I load up on Swiss chocolates?

Sunday, 29 November 2009

La Cosa Nostra

As every schoolboy knows, la Cosa Nostra means ‘our thing' in Italian and refers to the Mafia’s name for itself. It’s also the name Frank Keating, a former Oklahoma Governor, applied to the Catholic Church, based on his experiences of heading a so-called investigation into child abuse in the US.

"To act like La Cosa Nostra and hide and suppress, I think, is very unhealthy," he declaimed, when he realized that he was heading a cover-up, not an investigation. And for this he got turfed out by the Church authorities.

There’s no point in my going over this scandal, which is a world-wide phenomenon. But I would like you to consider just one aspect of the Irish Church’s response which underlines what I already knew anyway: that there is simply no morality within that organization. It’s just like a multinational corporation, except that it pays no tax at all.

Just consider the concept of ‘mental reservation’. According to Cardinal Desmond Connell, ‘one must never lie, but on the other hand you may be put in a position where you have to answer and there may be circumstances where you can use an ambiguous expression, realizing that the person whom you are talking to will accept an untrue version of whatever it may be’.

Thus he was able to say that ‘I never paid’ any victim of clerical abuse. True, but he gave the money to the abuser, who then paid the victim. Totally convincing, isn't it?
Take another example. When Bishop Comiskey was outed by journalist Veronica Guerin as receiving treatment for alcoholism at a particulate clinic in Florida, it emerged that Comiskey had never even been to that clinic.

Cue outraged reaction from Church spokesmen, who complained bitterly, inter alia, of the ‘hurt’ Comiskey had suffered, the denigration of his character and so on. However, it subsequently emerged that in fact he had been receiving alcoholism treatment at that time, but at a different clinic just a few miles away.

What this illustrates to me is the difference between morality and religiosity ( is there such a word?). These people, as I said at the beginning, are just amoral. And they’re our moral guides.

Pass the sick bag.

Wednesday, 25 November 2009

China and blacks in the MSM

Are you interested in the films I watch? Of course not. But bear with me, I'm going somewhere with this. While sick in bed for a few days in Sweden recently I spent some time watching the only English-language film channel available in my apartment. I watched five, and I’ll describe four of them.

First, ‘A dry white season’. This was about the struggle for ‘freedom’ in South Africa and was the usual cut-and-paste story line and cutout characters. All whites (apart from one) being vile racists, all blacks noble, honourable and decent. Even the one who shoots dead a policeman outside his home. To give this the right perspective, we were treated to a montage of scenes from ‘the legacy of apartheid’ before he was gunned down.

Then there was ‘Rosewood’. This again featured exclusively vile Southern whites and exclusively noble, honest, hard-working put-upon blacks. Without exception.

Ok, move on to what looked to be a very promising concept. ‘Diplomatic Immunity’ had as its theme the rape and murder of a young American girl by a foreigner, who escaped back to his homeland luxurious lifestyle because he was covered by the eponymous diplomatic immunity. Cue for the outraged father of the victim to take things into his own hands.

But the producers were faced with a problem. The rapist/murderer had of necessity to be white, but problem was, those pesky white countries have this annoying habit of putting such people on trial back home, diplomatic immunity or no, or in surrendering immunity.

What’s a peecee multiculti director to do? Eureka! Paraguay! Kill about three birds with the one stone. Not just white, but (roll on the bass drum) Germans! Nazis. They came to Paraguay and siezed power. When our hero gets there he wipes out every single, blonde, cold-eyed killer. And goes back to report, informally to his kind, understanding Commanding Officer – who is, you’ve guessed it, black.

I was getting fed up at this stage when I came to my last one. Girl being raped by evil whites. Only to be rescued by - wait for it – a black gang! Which is about as realistic as Darth Vader togging out in midfield for Scunthorpe United. Seeking something more realistic I turned to ‘Lord of the rings’…

My point, in case you’re slow on the uptake, is that blacks are uniformly portrayed in the MSM and ‘Hollywood’ in a way that’s totally at variance with reality. But we know that, sez you, you’ve repeatedly posted about it.

Yes, and that brings me to China. As I posted in ‘China taking over Africa, now watch the fun’ the Chinese are amongst the worst racists in the world. They’ll tell you openly and without embarrassment that the whiter the skin the better. And they’re going to be seeing a lot more of their non-white brethren in the future. And, if what’s happening in China itself is anything to go by, the future will fulfil the old Chinese curse ‘may you live in interesting times’.

Here are some excerpts from my ‘research’

“People in China think most black people play basketball and are violent. Many people in China also assume that if you are black, you have very little money’

‘One city resident told the Shanghai Star that "crime is so low in Shanghai because there are no black people."’

“If a Chinese woman dates a white man it is social climbing. If she is with a black man, it is 'stepping down'.

“Although individual black athletes and entertainers are respected and idolized, a “generic” black person is often perceived by Chinese, even well-educated ones, to be dangerous or ignorant.”

“When I asked my Chinese teacher and several friends what they think of black people, almost all of them say the same thing, "They're scary, they smell, they're loud"

“One Chinese journalist told me that she believes black men have an abnormally high sex drive. Her friends believe that one can get AIDS from sleeping with black men.”

“A middle aged Chinese driver "Black people are poor and the men are usually really big and intimidating looking. Sometimes they don't pay."’

“The impression mostly gained from west media is that many blacks are violent, less-educated and lazy. Thanks to a steady diet of Hollywood movies.”

“Unfavourable portrayals of dark-skinned characters in movies is also widely cited as unhelpful.”

Now I draw your attention in particular to the last two comments, neither of which came from Chinese, rather from Western observers. Isn’t it incredible that people can still say things like that? Now if they said that the portrayals of dark-skinned characters in movies is totally at variance with reality we could all agree. Although for contradictory reasons obviously.

The interesting thing though is that, despite the MSM and Hollywood, they’ve managed to get an excellent steer on the realities, haven't they?.

Monday, 23 November 2009

A terrible admission

I must admit it, and, for a mature male, it is a terrible admission. Yes, I actually cried last Wednesday night when the 'Hand Of Gaul' goal went in, and Ireland went out. This then was replaced by a terrible and righteous anger.

But time heals, and the healing was enhanced by the cataract of bullshit that followed. Theirry Henri was castigated as a vile cheat, the Swedish officials were bribed by Sepp Blatter to get the big country through, and the French FA were miserable frogs for not immediately offering us a replay.

What bollocks. In fact I think the French, team and public, came out of it very well. The team were obviously affected by the manner of their qualification, Henri admitted his offence, while he and the rest of the team asked for the game to be replayed. So did nearly 90% of the French general public.

The facts are, Henri did what any footballer would have done, and indeed what Robbie Keane had done a few times previously in that very game! Fact is, the officials bottled it. Had they wanted to usher France through they had earlier had a number of opportunities to award penalties. Given that they had already made these tough calls against France, to actually disallow a late goal - the referee was unsighted - would have demanded exemplary, unique, courage.

Now I ask myself, what would have happened if it had been the other way around? We all know don't we? Token regrets for public consumption, but most of us would have snickered behind our backs and as packed our bullet proof vests for South Africa.

Nobody does wounded outrage like the Irish

Friday, 20 November 2009

Offensive: Now the Jews are at it

Now the Jews are at it. It was bad enough with the Religion of Peace, blacks, women, invalids, all eagerly seeking out opportunities to be offended. I had thought Jews to be beyond that, but a number of developments suggest otherwise.

First up was the Irish tenor Ronan Tynan who said something about some Jewish ladies looking at his apartment were "scary". Most of them are - that's why they’re a standing joke among Jews. You know the old joke about the head waiter going over to a table of female Jewish diners and asking ‘is anything all right?’ This was, or should have been, a non-event. But in a manner disturbingly redolent of the Religion of Peace, Jewish organizations in the US threw their collective bottles out of the pram, kicked and screamed and arranged for Tynan’s concert to be cancelled.

A bemused Tynan was forced to make numerous groveling apologies, and they also shook him down for a substantial ‘donation’ to a Jewish charity.

Then there’s Jimmy Carr who joked about the last entry in Ann Frank’s diary. “Today’s my birthday – daddy bought me a set of drums’. It’s a fucking joke, but again the offence industry went into overdrive as the usual suspects, Hitler, the Holocaust and the death chambers were wheeled out for another airing.

There are also disturbing signs in Israel where these repulsive Orthodox mullahs are trying to out-Islam Islam by enforcing their superstitions on the public at large, and assaulting Palestinian civilians while being protected by Israeli soldiers. And all while they themselves won't serve in said armed forces. Bigoted hypocritical creeps.
Anyway, to all of this I say ‘for fuck sake’. Stop it! Stop it now.

Jews beware! Any more of this and you’ll lose my friendship – a terrible price to pay.

Thursday, 19 November 2009

Decisions, decisons........

Africans always complain that they're never consulted about international decisions. Could there be a connection here?

Wednesday, 18 November 2009

Heathrow: Lunatics firmly in control of the asylum

The mindless futility of bureaucracy as well as the fact that political correctness actually endangers lives, were brought home to me forcefully as I transited through Heathrow today. A few places ahead of me in the security queue was a cultural enricher in full burka rigout. All you could see was two beady eyes glaring through the slit.

I watched with keen interest as she approached the, Lol 'security' checkpoint. By the way, was it a she? Anything could fit under that tent and s/he was about six feet tall. And remember one of the London bombing terrorists escaped to Italy by wearing a burka. God, how he must have laughed at our stupidity.

Anyway, ahead of her was this vision – beautiful tall blonde girl. She had to remove her jacked, boots and belt before going through the machine. Burka-man removed nothing. Now that contrasting approach to security in itself indicates lunacy. But it gets better.

Burka-man, unsurprisingly, set off the alarm. She was stopped to be manually searched (by a woman of course). I was at the other line so couldn’t quite hear what was going on, but s/he and her ‘husband’ objected strenuously. The shemozzle went on for a while, holding all the others up.

I stood around to watch. After a while a compromise was reached. S/he was subjected to a perfunctory ‘search’ – really no more than a gentle wave in the vicinity of the burka. That was it.

But it gets better still. We then went to passport control. Up goes burka-man, enclosed in a tent, beady eyes the only visible sign of what lay beneath. The woman takes the passport… and waves burka-man through.

Would you not think, seeing as a terrorist had escaped the country after placing the July bombs in London, that this nonsense would have ceased? Not in this PC-crazed, dhimmi Western excuse for a society.

But, as I mentioned at the beginning, it also underlined the sheer futility of bureaucracy and the mindset of its practitioners. Consider that a fashionably-dressed white girl, self-evidently no security risk whatsoever, was forced to undergo the full panoply of checks, yet a poster child for terrorism was allowed to float through virtually unchecked. But the bureaucrats did what bureaucrats do.

Truly, the lunatics run the asylum.

In any event, as I posted here, this whole airport security industry is a complete and total waste of time and money.

Addendum: If you got a strong constitution check out this link sent in by one of the comments to this post!

Monday, 16 November 2009

SAS does a Lazarus - kind of

A new blog, based in the US to elude the Thought Police, at least temporarily, has taken up the mantle of the closed down South Africa Sucks. It needs to be understood that this blog has absolutely no connection with “Why South Africa Sucks”

This site is managed, edited and authored by a completely new group.

Now I've been forecefull taken to task by Dark Raven, one of my favourite posters on the old WSAS blog. She tells me that what I wrote above in red is 'bollocks' and that all the old WSAS crew, with the sad exceptions of Uhuru Guru and Doodler are beavering away like of old.

Thanks DR - I won't offend you again!

Here's the new address of the new site.

Sunday, 15 November 2009

Germany plans for the 2010 World Cup

The Germans may not be a bundle of fun, but when it comes to planning they’re tops. No surprise then that BaySecur, who will look after the German Football Federation (DFB) at the 2010 WC in South Africa, warned the stars “to wear bullet-proof vests if they venture away from the team hotel”.

"The possibility for the players of moving outside of the hotel boundaries should be kept to a minimum," BaySecur's Guenter Schnelle told German magazine Sport-Bild . "Otherwise there must be a full escort: armed security guards and bullet-proof vests for the players."
Private bodyguards will protect the players both within and around the hotel.
Hardly a ringing endorsement of the Rainbow Nation, is it?
In conclusion, on the left is a still top-secret photo of the vehicle to be used for transporting the players to and from their hotel. It's working name is the Autosfahrenbildtschneissenfeldunersaltzobenunterschriften

I finish by quoting Securicor CEO Nick Buckles, Reuters, May 24 2009: "South Africa was the most dangerous country in the world to work in -- ahead of Iraq and Afghanistan..”

Heckuva job lads.

Saturday, 14 November 2009

Diversity is strength: It's also eating your mother's heart

You all know by now that I'm an impassioned believer in diversity and cultural equivalence. After all, how could I not be? Barry Andrews, our esteemed Minsiter for Something or Other, assures us that ‘diversity is strength’. And if he thinks that, it's good enough for me.

But sometimes, in the wee small hours, a flicker of doubt crosses my mind, only to be briskly dismissed, as quickly as it came. Yet the doubts resurfaced this morning, as I sat down to a meager breakfast of muesli and tofu. You see, I read this story from Ghana, which, as every schoolboy knows, is a poster child for African success.

The story, from Modern concerns Olivia, a reformed witch. She seemingly was ‘given the witchcraft spirit by her paternal grandmother at the age of five’. According to Olivia the other witches ordered her to bring her mother down to the camp to be slaughtered for one of their numerous feasts "since I had been feasting on other witches' meat and had never brought any meat to the camp for a feast."

Well, that sounds fair enough to me.

Over to Olivia again. "Because of their threat to kill me, which I knew they could do, I had no option but to spiritually take my mother to the camp the following day to be slaughtered. They gave my mother's heart to me to eat and our queen witch feasted on my mother's head as our culture demands"

I can understand that, and it doesn’t for one minute impair my belief in cultural equivalence. I'm sure those Norwegians and Swiss get up to pretty awful things too, but of course we never hear about that.

Overall, an enthralling story. And one which gives whole new meanings to ‘have a heart’ and ‘having mother for dinner’

Thursday, 12 November 2009

Another victory for the Thought Police

The South Africa Sucks blog would not be everyone’s cup of tea, exactly. Racist, profane, scatological, raunchy, offensive, hilariously funny on occasion, especially those posts by the Uhuru Guru. But it had a deadly serious purpose – the exposure of what's really happening in South Africa. While partial in the extreme, it never advocated violence and, as a frequent visitor there, I can say it portrayed a much more accurate picture of SA than the panglossian fantasy we see in the MSM.

Before it moved to Wordpress the Google Thought Police had closed it down, after considerable intervention by powerful forces and vast numbers of those who want to foreclose honest debate on uncomfortable issues. However, recently UG suffered the midnight knock, literally in this case, and hauled off to jail on a trumped up charge going back fifteen years. Whereas he was duly released without charge, his life has become a nightmare and, for his own safety and that of his family he’s decided, wisely in my opinion, to call it a day.

Well done ‘liberals’, another great day for free speech.

Which brings me to my own case. As you can see every time you log on, the Google Thought Police have issued a content warning. I have no problem with that, but they’ve also relegated this site to the bottom of their search lists. Don't let anyone convince you that Google’s algorithms apply without fear or favour. They can and do bias their searches. I know this directly from my own experience as I used regularly test the positioning of the IS with a consistent search string.

Well done ‘liberals’, another great day for free speech.

Finally I've found out that I'm on the Romany Black List. Not just on it, right at the top of the list of offensive sites - a compliment of sorts. They’re watching me, I'm told.

Ah, so it goes. I also find that the IS is blocked, only temporarily, it seems, in several countries that I visit, mainly in the Middle East. Many readers, most recently teacher-paris, have found the same thing.

Well, that shows I'm pissing off quite a lot of the ‘right’ people. I just hope I don't get an actual midnight knock at some stage, just like the unfortunate UG.

Well done ‘liberals’, another great day for free speech.

PS – of course these Nazis are not liberals in any meaning of the term. Check this post to see what I mean

Wednesday, 11 November 2009

Now riddle me this.......

Thanks to Elaine for this link. If you read it you’ll see that on an Italian TV show debate an MP, Daniela Santanche (isn't she hot?)claimed "Mohammed was a polygamist and a pedophile because he had nine wives, one of whom was only nine years old, that is a historical fact"

According to the report, “her remark incensed Muslims in the audience. Studio ushers were seen physically restraining an irate, bearded member of the audience from lunging at her.”

Needless to say, the presenter immediately and subsequently went into dhimmi mode. "I and my staff dissociate ourselves from these comments, which are offensive to Islam".

Now what’s the riddle here, you might ask? After all, this is how the Religion of Peace always reacts to this charge.

Let me first, to maintain intellectual rigour, quote the following definitions from Encarta:

Polygamist: having multiple spouses: the custom of having more than one spouse at the same time

Pedophile: adult with sexual desire for children: an adult who has sexual desire for children or who has committed the crime of sex with a child

Now Mo qualifies eminently on both counts. He had innumerable wives and married Aisha when she was six, and consummated the ‘marriage’ (i.e., raped the child) when she was nine.

How do we know this? Why, from the ‘sacred’ books themselves. From the very texts that Muslims are shoving down our throats at every opportunity.

So, the obvious riddle is, if someone uses direct evidence that Muslims themselves accept as true, why do Muslims go ballistic?

Now the facile answer is that it doesn’t take much to get them to go ballistic. But surely even they must see the utter illogicality of their position?

Or is that asking a bit much of them?

Sunday, 8 November 2009

Fort Hood: I help the C-in-C

Don't jump to conclusions” warned the Commander-in-Chief sternly, “we don't want to prejudge motivation here”. (I'm sure Sgt. James Crowley wished the C-in-C had taken his own advice before instantly jumping in to declare Henry Gates a ‘victim of racism’. But as Ronald Reagan used to say, 'let’s not talk about that’.)

However, we all understand the coded statement here, don't we? We’ve seen it a thousand times. When a victim, by which I mean a non-white non-Christian, does something awful, we must emphasise that his deed had nothing to do with his race or religion.

Still, being a sympathetic guy, and knowing that Barak has a lot on his plate, I decided to help him out. And I think I can!!

Here’s my analysis and the conclusions drawn. And if I say so, they’re absolutely brilliant. I've not only solved the problem for Barak, but drawn up some recommendations which would mitigate the risk of future occurrences!

Now pay close attention please, as this gets quite complex. I've extensively reviewed the evidence and it shows that Hasan proselytized for Islam , got angry and violent when people wouldn’t worship Allah, didn’t want to shoot at "fellow Muslims", was a member of a notoriously violent mosque in DC, and screamed 'Allah akbar' as he murdered infidels on that Thursday.

Conclusion: My considered conclusion from this is as follows: he was a Muslim extremist who saw himself doing his job by killing infidels and especially US soldiers.

There you are now Barak, that's just saved you a lot of effort. And I'm not finished! As an esteemed international consultant I'm now going to provide you with a few valuable recommendations as well – all entirely free to you!

Recommendation 1: If an army Captain tells a group of fellow officers in ‘an anti-American rant’ that “if you don't believe you are condemned to hell, your head is cut off, burning oil is burned (sic) down your throat” you don't promote him to Major. But that's what happened with Hassan last year, Barak.

I think you’ll accept this recommendation, but I don’t think you’ll take up the next ones. which is a pity, because they’d save you – and all the rest of us - a lot of trouble in the long run.

Recommendation 2: Within a reasonable timeframe, say end of next March, burn every major proponent of multiculti peecee bullshit at the stake. This recommendation may seem robust, but it is necessary. It derives from the following report from Yahoo News: ”His fellow students complained to the faculty about Hasan's "anti-American propaganda," but said a fear of appearing discriminatory against a Muslim student kept officers from filing a formal complaint.”

Recommendation 3: Pull out of Afghanistan now: This unwinnable war is bleeding America dry in terms of manpower and treasure and every day brings news of further disasters. It’s also driving Muslims demented all over around the world, including in the US, fuelling the very aggression you’re trying to ameliorate.

Recommendation 4: This follows from the last – stop Muslim immigration and sent back any Muslim not absolutely entitled to be in the US.

The latter two recommendations would mean that you wouldn’t have to fight them either at home or abroad. It’s what’s known as a win-win Barak. But you won't do that, though, will you? Too many vested interests to contend with. I understand. Which leads to the last point:

Barak, really, at this sensitive time, did you really have to propose a lobbyist (you know, the people you said you wouldn’t let near your government?) named Islam Siddiqui as your chief international agricultural negotiator? That smacks as being either extreme carelessness or extreme arrogance.

In either case, not good.

I'm worried for you Barak.

Friday, 6 November 2009

And that gurgling sound you hear......

Picture the scene: a 66 year-old woman is being seriously assaulted in her car, strangled in fact. Gärd Forsgren, for it was she, was possibly in danger of her life. At least she thought so. A number of cars drove by the incident at Nas, in central Sweden.

But not Per-Anders Pettersson. He stopped, hit the unnamed assailant on the shoulder with a car jack, and for good measure gave him another wallop on the head, fracturing his skull. Gärd Forsgren survived, and still does.

Now picture this scene: The criminal is brought to court. "Gärd informed the court that a drunk 26-year-old man stopped her car while she was driving on route 71, forced himself into the vehicle and held her in a stranglehold that gave her cause to fear for her life.

Forsgren told the court that as many as 20 cars passed by and did not stop despite her screams and that she had the hazard lights flashing on her car. Her rescuer was to arrive in the shape of 34-year-old Pettersson who at first screamed at the attacker and then hit him on the shoulder with the jack that he was carrying."

The verdict? The criminal got a sentence of one year in jail and has to pay the victim €6,000.

‘He got off lightly’ you say? Oh, perhaps I should explain. The criminal in this instance was not the unnamed attacker of the woman, rather the good Per Anders.

Yes folks, he went to the help of the woman, whacker her unnamed attacker, and now, after an unsuccessful appeal to Sweden’s Supreme Court, has a criminal record and languishes in a Swedish jail.

And the unnamed victim/attacker? He had to pay Gard about €700 in compensation.

That gurgling sound you hear is Sweden going down the drain.

Now some of you might wonder why the victim/attacker hasn't been named. Go to the bottom of the class! You obviously haven't read my post explaining how these things are managed in East Germany Sweden.