This guy just amazes me. Not learning anything from his previously wretched article, he doubles up on it and apologizes, on our behalf, for our feelings. Who gave him the right to apologize for me? I'm not sorry for what I think or say about muslims, nor is anyone else who thinks or says these things. Therefore what right does he have to apologize for us? I don't even understand this concept -- I apologize for what that guy over there just said or did. How can that possibly happen? Were you to blame? If not, what are you apologizing for?
The only possible reasoning behind his ability to apologize for someone else, is if we belonged to a collective. In that case, he could say, "as a member of this group, I apologize for my group's behavior." But jew Nicholas Kristoff makes clear that he doesn't belong to the white majority America. All he cares about is Jews, Blacks, and other minorities. He has never stood up for or defended a white person in his life. In Kristoff's previous article, he listed all the sins whites had ever done to minorities, and never said a single word on our behalf. All he talked about is how evil and depraved whites were, and how we must never act 'white' again and must at all times follow the wishes of the more moral, wiser jews, so that we avoid making another misstep like the Holocaust we made before. Has Kristoff ever said he was a proud American, a proud white, a proud Christian, or some other collective identification that could allow him to apologize on our behalf? I doubt it. If he did ever identify himself as such, his own articles give him the lie. Therefore, I ask again, what right does he have to apologize for our behavior? Is he our minder? Our parents? Our Lord and Savior?
"Many Americans have suggested that more moderate Muslims should stand up to extremists, speak out for tolerance, and apologize for sins committed by their brethren.
That’s reasonable advice, and as a moderate myself, I’m going to take it. (Throat clearing.) I hereby apologize to Muslims for the wave of bigotry and simple nuttiness that has lately been directed at you. The venom on the airwaves, equating Muslims with terrorists, should embarrass us more than you. Muslims are one of the last minorities in the United States that it is still possible to demean openly, and I apologize for the slurs."
A moderate what? What are you, Nicholas Kristoff? Are you a moderate iguana? A moderate jew? A moderate what? People are asking muslims, who self-identify as members of the same group as terrorists and child genital mutilators, to reform their own collective, but you, who are a 'moderate' and nothing else, do not self-identify as a member of any of our groups, and thus cannot be obligated to reform us, or apologize for us. To have the right to speak for us, or reform us, or even speak to us, you would first have to take the first step and identify yourself as one of us. Since the only group you belong to is apparently 'moderates' or maybe 'journalists', the parallel completely breaks down. We want Muslims, who identify themselves as belonging to the same group, to deal with members of their group. You, acting on your own, having nothing to do with us, want to apologize for 'our kind' anyway. And yet you can't see the difference, and think that you're somehow 'atoning' for our sins, when all you are doing is listing them and hating us for them.
We are bigots, nuts, embarassing, etc. Did Nicholas Kristoff ever really intend to reform us, or take on our sins, or clean up after us? Or is he just finding a clever and insidious way to insult us and spew venom at us to his heart's content? Does anyone take his apology seriously? Does anyone really think Nicholas Kristoff stays up at night haunted by his collective guilt for what other Americans have been saying about Islam? Or do you think he is smirking right now, drinking down some expensive alcohol, as he recalls all the wonderful zingers he pegged the evil 'stupid white bigots' with today? Which of these two narratives is more likely? Does this article really read as an apology or a flame? A make-up letter or a hate mail? Seriously, is anyone being taken in by this liar? Can his hatred for White majority Americans be made any clearer?
"I’m inspired by another journalistic apology. The Portland Press Herald in Maine published an innocuous front-page article and photo a week ago about 3,000 local Muslims praying together to mark the end of Ramadan. Readers were upset, because publication coincided with the ninth anniversary of 9/11, and they deluged the paper with protests.
So the newspaper published a groveling front-page apology for being too respectful of Muslims. “We sincerely apologize,” wrote the editor and publisher, Richard Connor, and he added: “we erred by at least not offering balance to the story and its prominent position on the front page.” As a blog by James Poniewozik of Time paraphrased it: “Sorry for Portraying Muslims as Human.”"
No, you idiot. The problem wasn't your portraying Muslims as humans, like you so snidely apologize for. The problem was that you ran a front page article on 3,000 (what a strangely coincidental number, the exact same number of Americans killed on 9/11) muslims celebrating Ramadan on the 9th anniversary of 9/11, which should have reserved a front page article commemorating said anniversary. So instead of white majority America waking up to an article remembering our 3,000 fallen, we are suddenly greeted with 3,000 praying, celebrating Muslims on 9/11. If you can't see the ironic, twisted, evil message this newspaper is sending, you are blind. But to Nicholas Kristoff, this sick joke the newspaper pulled on Americans is just 'portraying Muslims as Human.' He can't possibly fathom why anyone, except a bigoted nutcase radical, would ever be offended. It's just beyond him. Who could make heads or tails of the evil, hateful, twisted, insane mind of white majority Americans. The reasons for their taking offense, whether it's a mosque directly on top of a place where muslims killed 3,000 Americans, or a newspaper featuring 3,000 muslims celebrating on 9/11, are just buried in obscurity and 'nuttiness.'
"I apologize to Muslims for another reason. This isn’t about them, but about us. I want to defend Muslims from intolerance, but I also want to defend America against extremists engineering a spasm of religious hatred"
Us? Who is us? In your previous article, you talked about how you, as a jew, feared us, the white majority. You said, 'who's next, blacks, jews?' You never thought of yourself as us in your previous article. In fact, you felt just as threatened by us as you felt the muslims were threatened by us. So who is us, Nicholas Kristoff? Don't tell me you are worried about a wave of religious hate emerging from your fellow jews? Hmm, didn't think so. So apparently us is just a chameleon-like skin that can shift based on the situation. How very jewish of you.
"Many Americans honestly believe that Muslims are prone to violence, but humans are too complicated and diverse to lump into groups that we form invidious conclusions about. We’ve mostly learned that about blacks, Jews and other groups that suffered historic discrimination, but it’s still O.K. to make sweeping statements about “Muslims” as an undifferentiated mass"
Of course, we musn't generalize or stereotype anyone, right Mr. Kristoff? You are a unique precious snowflake, a completely unpredictable individual with no traits typical of your group, and your jewishness has nothing to do with any of the opinions you offer. Again, what a duplicitous 'we' he throws in there.
"We" have mostly learned to avoid making sweeping statements about blacks and jews? Au contraire. "We," white majority America, have mostly been bullied, bludgeoned, shamed, insulted, and terrorized into obeying your Jewishly Korrect speech codes, the ones you and your liberal jewish friends thought up at the New York Times and other institutes that form the powers-that-be. You, Nicholas Kristoff, do not belong to this 'we,' because you have never wanted to stereotype or generalize about Jews and Blacks in the first place, the only group you make insulting generalizations about are whites, who are still fair game. You, Nicholas Kristoff, have never had to fear being branded prejudiced, racist, ignorant, white trash, redneck, bigot, Nazi, etc, because you are a jew, an oppressed minority, who can do no wrong. Whatever you say isn't prejudiced or hateful by definition. It is only whites who must learn the hard, painful, groveling road of how to shut up, never say what we think, and live in terror of our opinions ever leaking out to the public for fear of being fired, ostracized, or even thrown in jail. We whites have been taught well, like a circus lion, by the whips of jewish tongues, how to not stereotype about 'jews' or 'blacks' anymore. You, Nicholas Kristoff, have only had to learn how to whip us. There is no way you can ever claim to belong to our 'we.'
Just so you know, we don't think Muslims are prone to violence. We know Muslims are prone to violence. Islam was founded in violence, Islam calls the entire world outside of Islamic areas the 'region of war,' Islam is constantly at war with all of its neighbors, Islam is constantly murdering its own people, and Muslims in Europe have crime rates ten times as high as their white neighbors. Muslims are the cause of almost all terrorist incidents in the world, as well as most of the remaining wars in the world. Islam praises jihad, holy war, as more beneficial to its practitioners than a thousand years of fasting or prayers. The greatest rewards for Muslims come for the jihadis and only the jihadis. Incidentally, the purpose of Jihad isn't to defend the faith, but to forcefully conquer the world and impose it on the rest of us. It is nothing like the Crusades, and there is no talk of Crusades or Crusading in the Bible anyway. 9/10 of the talk of the Koran is about jihad and killing. That's all Muhammed ever did until the day he died. It is a book of war recited for the sake of his warriors. If violence could somehow be condensed into some sort of written essence, if there were a book that could incarnate all the violence of mankind, it wouldn't stray very far from the exact Koran we have before us.
"In my travels, I’ve seen some of the worst of Islam: theocratic mullahs oppressing people in Iran; girls kept out of school in Afghanistan in the name of religion; girls subjected to genital mutilation in Africa in the name of Islam; warlords in Yemen and Sudan who wield AK-47s and claim to be doing God’s bidding.
But I’ve also seen the exact opposite: Muslim aid workers in Afghanistan who risk their lives to educate girls; a Pakistani imam who shelters rape victims; Muslim leaders who campaign against female genital mutilation and note that it is not really an Islamic practice; Pakistani Muslims who stand up for oppressed Christians and Hindus; and above all, the innumerable Muslim aid workers in Congo, Darfur, Bangladesh and so many other parts of the world who are inspired by the Koran to risk their lives to help others. Those Muslims have helped keep me alive, and they set a standard of compassion, peacefulness and altruism that we should all emulate"
Note how Nicholas Kristoff lies. He says various evil-doing Muslims claim they act in the name of their religion, as though they aren't really doing so. It isn't that various terrorists and genital mutilators are claiming they act in the name of Islam, they also have exact quotes from the Koran and the Hadith backing them up, as well as historical examples from earlier Muslim communities to emulate. They also tend to have the full approval of the Muslims around them while they do it. You don't say people 'allege' they are doing x, or 'claim' they are doing y, unless you wish to imply that even though they allege x and claim y, none of it is really true. Note the complete reversal of tone in his next paragraph --
"Muslims leaders who campaign against female genital mutilation and note it is not really an Islamic practice,"
If this had been written in his previous paragraph, it would have read like this: "A group of people who call themselves Muslim leaders are campaigning against female genital mutilation, claiming it is not really an Islamic practice."
But instead, all of a sudden, there is no doubt about the authenticity of these Muslims. These muslims are the real deal, the real muslims, because they 'claim' the things he wants to hear. The Muslims who 'claim' the opposite must be fake, impostor Muslims, who don't have any real basis for their claims, because they say things Kristoff doesn't want to hear. Just so you know, there are multiple hadith in Islamic tradition praising female genital mutilation. Those who claim otherwise are just lying, including his highly lauded 'muslim leaders.'
Next, he speaks of Pakistani Muslims who 'stand up' for oppressed Christians and Hindus. Are you kidding me? When Pakistan separated from India in the 1970's, it was still around 30% Hindu. Today it is around 1% Hindu. That's quite a lot of 'standing up' for the oppressed those Pakistanis must have done. On the other side of the border, the population of Muslims in India has increased as a percentage since India split off from Pakistan. So we have, statistically, one of the most wretched records on Earth of religious tolerance, the almost complete eradication of an enormous religious community in the space of a single lifetime, and Nicholas Kristoff still says Pakistan is a shining example of religious tolerance and 'good,' 'moderate' 'muslims' who stand up for other faiths. What world does he live in, that one of the most perfect examples of Muslim intolerance can be cited as evidence for Muslim tolerance? Liberals can get away with anything. 2+2=5 anyone?
"The innumerable Muslim aid workers in Congo, Darfur, Bangladesh and so many other parts of the world who are inspired by the Koran to risk their lives to help others."
Yes but why are all these countries so fucked up that they need 'aid workers' in the first place? Could it be because they are populated by Muslims, who manage to fuck up their countries to such an extent that aid workers are suddenly necessary? Christians don't have to be inspired by the Bible to risk their lives to send aid workers to 'Italy, France, the USA, and Denmark.' This is because we don't instantly make every country we live in a hellhole. Christian aid workers do something much more admirable, they not only make a decent society out of their own countries, but they then go and spread aid to other countries they have nothing to do with. Christian aid is true altruism, Muslim aid is just muslims trying to take care of themselves, after having caused all of their own problems themselves! And yet Nicholas Kristoff tries to pass this off as a virtue, when really it is a mark of shame that Muslim aid workers are needed in the first place. Perhaps not all Muslims are responsible for destroying their own countries, but Muslim aid workers, by giving shelter, camoflauge, and plausible deniability to the nation-wrecking, violent, evil Muslims in their midst, are just as much to blame for the state of Darfur as the 'bad' muslims. If these Muslim aid workers would instead convert to Christianity and demand the rest of their country do so as well, and abandon Islam as the root of all evil and the source of all their country's woes, maybe they could make some real progress. But so long as they operate within the manifold of Islam, I promise you all of their 'aid work' will come to naught. In fact, their philosophical identification with Islam and defense of said evil religion will do more harm than all of their relief actions combined.
"I’m sickened when I hear such gentle souls lumped in with Qaeda terrorists, and when I hear the faith they hold sacred excoriated and mocked. To them and to others smeared, I apologize."
It isn't us who lump them in with Al Qaeda terrorists, it's them, by calling themselves Muslims, worshipers of Allah and followers of Muhammed, just like the Al Qaeda terrorists are. Whenever they wanted, they could stop being lumped into the same group by disavowing their mutual ties. You see, what group you choose to belong to is your choice, it is then your problem when the rest of your group makes you look bad. When it comes to religion, how can it possibly be our fault when Muslims associate themselves with terrorists by remaining Muslims? I suppose Kristoff could argue that the Islamic death penalty for apostasy is preventing innocent people from disavowing their Muslim status -- but saying this could only embarrass him further. Islam is so evil that it doesn't even allow its people freedom of religion. If you are a child of two muslims, you are automatically a muslim, and anyone who renounces Islam as an adult is executed by the law or a mob or their own family. This isn't just in the law books, or in tradition, it's also in the Koran and the Hadith, which clearly says the penalty for apostasy is death. But just to make things clear, my blanket condemnation of Muslims does not include people who are forced against their will to be 'Muslim' due to fear of death. Content, Mr. Kristoff? Somehow I doubt it.
You know what sickens me? That people like Mr. Kristoff, liberal jews like him, control CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, the New York Times, most of the movies directed in Hollywood, Time magazine, Newsweek, ad nauseum, and from these platforms, spew lies and hatred towards white America, sane, normal middle America, every day of the year -- and we have no one, nothing, that speaks in our defense. What sickens me is that Nicholas Kristoff and his tribe have gotten normal, sane white children to hate themselves before they leave the school system, feel guilty for things they never did, and repent for their natural, healthy, life-affirming instincts while priding themselves on all of their unnatural, unhealthy, death-affirming habits instilled into them by the likes of Nicholas Kristoff. What sickens me is the country whites made for themselves has now been reformed into a nest designed for jews like Nicholas Kristoff, inimical and ultimately genocidal to the white American majority. What sickens me is Nicholas Kristoff.
No comments:
Post a Comment