Monthly Archives: April 2007

Was Jose Padilla the Third Oklahoma Bomber?

Posted on by

Blond Sagacity has an update on the trial of terrorist Abdullah al-Muhajir otherwise known to the left wing of this country as “poor Jose Padilla, victim of BushCo”, which includes a link to an intriguing Glen Beck item that links Padilla to the Oklahoma City Bombing. The argument isn’t on completely solid footing, and largely rests on the resemblance of Padilla to a Police sketch or two and also the undeniable fact that White Nationalists are more than willing to work with Muslim extremists.

It’s an interesting read, and the third bomber scenario is one of the most troubling questions about the whole incident, especially because as of now the government really hasn’t explained why they don’t believe there was anyone else besides McViegh and Nichols involved. Jayna Davis has a book out exploring the subject in depth that is well worth your time.

Reports on Davis’ quest for answers have been circulating the web for years, but the MSM continues to ignore this important story, and Padilla’s alleged connection. One thing is for certain, it is vital that we find out if these allegations are true, because their implications are momentous.

Leftists and Michelle Malkin Call Truce (doesn’t include Black People)

Posted on by

Michelle Malkin wrote a post about the relative hypocrisy of how Bigoted White Trash Don Imus was lambasted for his offensive comments, but that rappers use similar terms to Imus’ now infamous “nappy-headed ho’s” seemingly without consequence. Her point would be a good one if in fact hip-hop was an actual reflection of Black culture and more importantly if rap music was created and sold by Blacks for Blacks.

It is not. The majority of consumers in this country for hip-hop are in fact White. It is White-owned corporations that own the record labels that produce hip-hop. It is predominantly White-owned music channels like MTV that push the ghettoized image of Blacks on America, Black and White, because of their vested interest in portraying Blacks as exotic, dangerous and appealing to White suburbanites with a lot of disposable income.

Not that Michelle Malkin insinuates that this isn’t the case. Her point is an especially valid one, I’m sure, for any young mother worried about what kind of images her children are exposed to. Much of rap music is vile, and I say this while listening to Come to the Sabbath by King Diamond. And for the record, many people told me that my Satanic-themed Black Metal was vile and in many ways it is. So what?

Now the digital Maoists at Digg are finally singing the praises of Malkin (in their own way of course) which Michelle and crew consider some sort of victory. It is vindication for the Hot Air crew to read comments like this in response to an article by their boss.

“I haven’t read her previous blogs..but she’s right here. Blacks need to clean up their big spill before blaming others for creating a spot.”

Yes, of course. Black people should stop playing all that rap music on the radio stations and TV channels they own. And until they do they should just take it from White bigots and keep their mouths shut. Or here’s a thoughtful comment:

“Black people shouldn’t use the word ‘nigga’ either. Either the word and words like it are negative and derogatory or they are not. You don’t get to say “when black people say ‘nigga’, it’s neutral”. All you are doing is creating an environment where people are constantly confused about what can and can’t be said. Let me ask you this, if Imus or some other person in the media was pretending (acting perhaps) that he was a black man, would it still be ok to use the word ‘nigga’ freely?”

Yes, quite a victory to get someone so deep and thoughtful to agree with you. The comments on the Digg post are more of the same, a bunch of White Liberals (and of course you know what Red Alerts stand is on them) using Michelle Malkin to revel in their own base racism. They’re agreeing with Malkin only to have the opportunity to write “nigga” over and over again, or so they can “innocently” ask why they can’t lean out their cars and yell “Nigger!” at some Black family. This isn’t a victory for conservatism, it’s an unfortunate convergence of thought among non-Blacks regarding their desire to tell Blacks what should and should not offend them.

When I was about 7, while in the Blue state of New Jersey, my mother was called a nigger by a passing car of White kids. This was in the late ’70s and I’ll never forget it, and I’ll never accept the argument that some White guy should be able to say “nigger” to me because Black rappers say it to each other. But as a point of fact when a Black guy yells to me from across the street “Yo nigga” it isn’t the same. When someone says “you’re my nigga” it’s not the same. Nothing is the same as a White guy looking at you like you’re less than nothing and saying “you’re a Nigger” or a “nappy-headed Ho” or in my case “Zebra” or “Mulatto.”

This isn’t double standard, this is reality. Sometimes speech is offensive because of the context, not the content. If I were in a period piece set in New York in the ’30s and said “Mic” or “Wop” it wouldn’t be offensive; if I said my neighborhood has too many Mics and Wops in it, it would be.

But of course I’m just a racist against White people. I’m just fighting to oppress the White Americans by being offended by Don Imus according to Michelle’s new base:

“It’s clear that the reason they’ve singled out Imus is along racial lines. The black community tolerates and even encourages this type of language from other blacks yet can’t stand to hear a white person utter “their’ language.

It seems crystal clear that the Sharpten’s and King’s of today are fighting for freedom of speech for blacks only. It point out just how racist and prejudice the black community truly is towards the white people.”

That’s quite a coalition you’ve built there.

“The View” Doesn’t Care About Black People

Posted on by

Forget for a moment that the minute Rosie O signed on with daytime hen fest The View Star Jones got handed her walking papers. Forget for a second that The View used to pretend to embrace diversity and now it’s as White as a Klan rally, or DailyKos. Ignore all that while you watch the Hypocritical One and her pet raven Joy Baher defend Don Imus’ “nappy headed Ho’s” comment as free speech. Watch as Joy tells The View‘s resident Republican punching bag Elisabeth Hasselbeck that she shouldn’t support a suspension for Imus because “you don’t know what you’ll say” or as Rosie claims that Blacks demanding something be done about this racist is in some way Nazi-like.

Watch and you tell me: do they care even a little about the young girls Imus insulted? Did they defend Ann Coulter as vigorously? If Imus called someone a pillow biter would Rosie still defend him?

Here’s the vid:

[youtube]uv-M41mjgsw[/youtube]

So, does The View care about Black people at all? I say no. Like all “liberals” they stopped caring about Black people when the Black community stopped being an ATM for the Democrats. With more and more Black families joining the middle class and thus being concerned with middle class values like lowering taxes, saving money for retirement and ensuring a safe future for their children, white liberals like Rosie and Imus are increasingly at odds with blacks who “don’t know their place” and challenge the tired soft Marxism of the nouveau riche celebrity. Now they spitefully lash out at Blacks in their arrogant anger.

I’m not surprised, just disgusted.

Roseanne Barr Hates the Gays! (and She’s not fond of Jews, Republicans, Organized Religion…)

Posted on by

I’ve been waiting for months for a reason to mention how insane Roseanne Barr’s website makes her out to be. Full of completely asinine new age mumbo-jumbo which she clearly doesn’t herself understand only interrupted by her childish rants against “BushCo” (anyone who uses that term is retarded) and “the Rich” (who she claims are going to take all the money to other planets) and her lame attempts to ride Rosie O’s coattails by giving her lavish praise. Barr’s blog lashes out at various groups of Americans seemingly at random, but she shocked her tiny support base when it was reported by Perez Hilton that Roseanne had this to say about her friends the gays:

“Never once in my 54 years have I ever once heard a gay or lesbian person who’s politically active say one thing about anything that was not about them. They don’t care about minimum wage, they don’t care about any other group other than their own self because you know, some people say being gay and lesbian is a totally narcissistic thing and sometimes I wonder. I’ve never heard any of them say anything except for ‘Accept me ’cause I’m gay.’ It’s just, it’s screwed. It’s no different than the evangelicals, it’s the same mindset.”

Ouch. I guess Roseanne’s a little miffed that all these thousands of gays that hang around her (because she’s such a big star, I’m sure) aren’t helping her end slavery through meditation (which according to her shoots her “laser mind’s eye” out into the world to kill the bad thoughts of others) or maybe they don’t agree that Jews should “move past the obsession with being put upon” and finally admit they in fact rule the world.

To be fair Roseanne did apologize to the gays for hurting their feelings and explained why she attacked them the first place:

“The leaders of gay groups need to align with the leaders of Acorn, and other groups of poor and desperate Americans and fight against those who oppress all of us!

I have met too many gays who are Republicans, and I cannot understand how they could choose that!

Let’s all leave our own bedrooms, kitchens, neighborhoods and groups and meet each other to form a diverse army that stands for Democracy and Economic Justice!!!!

(Again I apologize for any pain or hurt I have caused those whom I have always loved and befriended).”

Translation: I support you perverts, now join ACORN and help me preach Communism, Fags! Barr is a hateful harpy who was offended by the fact that some gay guy she met didn’t make her his hag and agree with every inane thing that came out of her mouth, and is completely scandalized by the fact that gays, like any other group, are not uniformly a member of any political party. There are plenty o’gays who like their taxes low and their foreign policy strong, thus they’re not pseudo-socialists like some aging celebrity who has enough money in the bank to pay high taxes.

This cow accused gays of being narcissistic because they didn’t agree with her. This is a woman who thinks that if gays don’t want to redistribute their wealth, they’re not worthy of her support for their rights and her supposed friendship is contingent to their toeing the Barr line. She’s the narcissist, but it would take introspection for her to see that. Roseanne has no time for logic or self evaluation, she’s too busy thinking up mind benders like this:

“Our country has no army here to protect it, and no border patrol. There is no more united states of America. We have now officially become North America. Our enemy is hugo chavez…he nationalized the oil of south america. He controls a large part of the oil we use in this country…so, he has already in effect won. While killing fetuses over seas, our obsession with fetus protection here kept us in line. Revenge of the (clones) Fetuses is happening now. This is the rebirth of the Goddess Miriam. (mary mother of god). She is Cleopatra and she is Isis. SHE IS THE GODDESS MM…the african goddess who’s name is ma ma..

ma ma don’t play that shit. ma ma has decided that now is the correct time for the knowledge of parthenogenesis to return to the earthling. Look it up, asshole!”

WOW! Roseanne manged to take a crazy premise and give it that racist twist that really manages to separate it from all the other crazy rants on the ‘net (An African goddess named ma ma, I suppose if you pray to her she’ll cook you up some collards). But go to her site and see for yourself, I defy you to find a group of people she doesn’t say something offensive about. So far only ACORN gets Roseanne’s positive spin, which says something about her even if you didn’t see the rest of her craziness.

h/t Ace of Spades but why was Ace reading Perez Hilton anyway?

English Bishop does Best to Prove Anton LaVey Right!

Posted on by

Anton LaVey‘s Church of Satan portrays Christianity as not just hypocritical but hopelessly naive. His vision of Christians as intolerant and unworldly, consumed by irrelevant moral stances and in denial of human nature were fodder for a thousand pretentious Black Metal albums, his defiance of popular morality a template for rebellion, but ultimately his vision of religion was a self-serving con game, and his vision of Christians simply an attempt to shock society. LaVey himself knew, on some level, that Christians were in fact not the self-martyring villains he portrayed them as.

Except for Bishop Rt Rev. Tom Burns, that is, who had this to say about Iran’s release of the British hostages:

“Faith in a forgiving God has been exemplified in action by their good deeds. They are offering to release the sailors and marines, not just as the result of diplomacy, but also as an act of mercy in accordance with their religion.”

Emphasis mine, of course. At best the above quote shows that the Rev. Burns is not at all familiar with what Islam considers mercy, and one would question that if releasing hostages you yourself kidnapped is considered by him a good deed, just what does the Rev. consider a bad deed?

Mercy and forgiveness can be taken too far, and in the world today Christ-like behavior may get you into heaven, but it won’t keep you here on earth. The speed with which Christians like the Rev. ascribed honorable intentions to the Iranians is beyond unseemly. It is beyond naive. It is suicidal.

It’s a Christian bishop’s right to be a martyr. But it’s no one’s right to try to make everyone else martyrs with them. What the English need now is less forgiveness, less understanding, and more of that most horrid of sins: pride.

Otherwise, they’ll be everything Anton LaVey said, and more. They’ll be dead.

h/t Hot Air