Saturday, 31 December 2011

The wisdom of Islam: fashion = bullfighting

Drinking is  no different from gambling, sporting events, speed races, cinema, fashion and bull fighting.

Sayyid Qutb In the Shade of the Koran, volume 3 (surah 4) p 137

Igor Slamoff comments:

Applying the same logic, Sayyid Qutb is no different from a smelly baboon.

The complete passage is as follows:

Like gambling and other such fun, drinking is a craze[1], which is not really different from any other craze, such as sporting events, speed races, cinema, fashion and bull fighting. These are simply a manifestation of a spiritual emptiness reflected in the absence of faith and a lack of high concern consuming one’s energy. They are, in themselves, evidence of the bankruptcy of modern civilisation that finds itself unable to fulfil natural needs and to tap the natural resources of man in a clean, healthy way. It is such emptiness and bankruptcy that leads people to fill the vacuum they feel in their lives with wine and gambling. What is more, these social diseases are not only the cause of perversion but also of mental and nervous disorders.
p 137

Igor Slamoff comments: So any amusement except reciting the Koran is just a waste of time. And cinema and fashion are not clean or healthy, but instead reflect “spiritual emptiness.” Strange that he failed to include music and figurative painting and sculpture, which are also on the Korangutan shit-list.

What a horse’s ass!

[1]  Lousy fucking translation! A  ”craze” means a fad, a passing fashion, which is evidently not what the author had in mind. More likely he meant “madness, lunacy, craziness".

Thursday, 29 December 2011

Sayyid Qutb’s Lies about America

by Igor Slamoff

This is a commentary on some of the more egregious horse-shit spewed by the Mohammedan fanatic Sayyid Qutb in 1951, purporting to describe his recent 2-year stay in the US of A.

I would like to preface my remarks by stressing that I am not American and have no emotional attachment to the  country. I strive to be as objective as I can both about America and about the Mohammedan cult that so obsessed Sayyid Qutb.

When criticizing Sayyid Qutb I do not feel as if I were defending America, but rather merely defending the historical truth, which knows no loyalty to land or faith. I strive to be as objective as possible in my assessment. However once my conclusion on a particular issue has been reached, I do not hesitate to express my personal opinion.

Page 5:  “The deformed birth of American man.“

Cite: “In America, man was born with science, and thus believed in it alone.”

 Comment: Sayyid Qutb ignores the fact that many Americans belong to various religions and sects, and that religious faith is more intense in the US than in most other Western countries.    

Cite: “In fact, he only believed in one kind of science, and that was applied science.”

Comment: If this means that in the US applied science has been cultivated to the  exclusion of pure science, then it is a blatant lie. As a matter of fact the US has traditionally been a leader in pure science.  This is no coincidence, because conducting only applied scientific research cannot  be the basis for long-term technical innovation, which is an activity at which Americans excel.

Page 5:  “The origin  of the Americans.”

Cite: “[the] first waves of immigrants … were composed of … adventurers …  and criminals. The adventurers came seeking wealth, pleasure and adventure, while the criminals were brought to this land … as labor for construction and production."

Comment: I do not claim to be an authority on American history, but this is certainly news to me. When writing of “criminals” he seems to be confusing the US with Australia. I know of no British penal settlements in North America.

The description of the "adventurers” well fits the Catholic Spaniards who were indeed the first Europeans to arrive, but who made no permanent impression on the country’s culture or society. Lands deeply marked by Spanish influence began to be incorporated into the US only around the 1830s (Texas), when the country’s character had already been largely fixed in a Protestant, English-speaking mold. The US was largely fashioned by the Protestant ethic, which stresses hard work, frugality and honesty. Sayyid Qutb makes nary a mention of the Protestant sects that so deeply marked the early immigrants.

To save time, I shall merely quote my own remarks (in Psychopathology of Islamic Homicidal Frenzy) on Sayyid Qutb’s outlandish claims about 19th century European history, namely that these inaccurate and highly biased statements show “either profound ignorance or monumental mendacity, most likely both.” Moreover it should be noted that this ideological twaddle appears before he even starts to describe his stay in America.   

I'm getting tired of reading this Mohammedan horse-shit. I'll take a break. Perhaps some other day I shall persevere in my perusal of this obnoxious crackpot. And perhaps not.

Correct interpretation of Mohammedan horse-shit

There follows some idiotic twaddle about the first chunk of the Koran that I downloaded from a Korangutan web site. Then I translate it into colloquial English.

3. Bukhaaree reports from ibn Abbaas (May Allah be pleased with him) that the Messenger of Allah (Peace and Blessings be upon him) said, If, when one of you wishes to go to his wife [for sexual intercourse] says, ‘With the Name of Allah, O Allah! Protect us from the Shaytaan and keep the Shaytaan away from what You will provide us.’ Then if it is decreed that they should have a child out of that act then the Shaytaan will never be able to harm him. [Saheeh Bukhaaree [Eng. Trans. 1/105 no. 143], Saheeh Muslim [Eng. Trans. 2/731 no. 3361]]


Scrotum-Face said, “Whenever you fuck your old lady, you must first say “Yo, Allah! Protect us from Satan and keep him away from the zygote.”  This is a sure-fire way of protecting any ensuing brat from Satan.

This feeble-minded crap is par for the course in Mohammedan Horse-Shit. No wonder Goat-fuckers are such idiots. 

Wednesday, 28 December 2011

Is Shitslamophobia a blessing in disguise?

Haven't written the article yet, but you ve got to admit it's a terrific title!

How can an “Islamophobe” be sure he’s kicking a Moslem?

Tackling Islamophobia: Reducing Street Violence Against British Muslims’
 Press Release from The Muslim Council of Britain

The Muslim Council of Britain hosted a special closed-meeting to discuss the growing spate of attacks in all its forms against British Muslims on March 3rd at the Grand Committee Room of the House of Commons.

Igor Slamoff remarks: It seems that Mohammedans in Britain are in the habit of wearing certain articles of clothing or adornments that identify them as Goat-fuckers. That is what makes them targets of attack. They should learn from Dutch and French Jews, who have learned to conceal their Jewish identity in public, at least in areas where fanatical Mohammedans abound.

Prominent VVD politician Frits Bolkestein believes there is no future for 'active' Jews in the Netherlands. The conservative politician made his remarks in an interview with freesheet De Pers.
In the interview, Mr Bolkestein says that when he talks about active Jews he means those who are recognisable as such, for instance Orthodox Jews. The former EU Commissioner says there is no future for this group in the Netherlands because of "the anti-Semitism among Dutchmen of Moroccan descent, whose numbers keep growing''.
He feels that this group of Jews should encourage their children to emigrate to either the United States or Israel, because he has little confidence in the effectiveness of the government's proposals for fighting anti-Semitism.
Earlier, Mr Bolkestein made similar statements in Het Verval (The Decline) by Manfred Gerstenberg, a recently published book about Jews in the Netherlands. Frits Bolkestein was political leader of the current coalition party VVD between 1990 en 1998. He later served as European Commissioner from 1999 until 2004.
© Radio Netherlands Worldwide

Learning from Sayyid Qutb

Unless an atheist publicly ignores Shari’a, inevitably he will be forced to blaspheme privately and isolate himself spiritually. His relations with others are not fully secular because his blasphemy is confined to a circle of fellow unbelievers. He cannot publicly defy Shari’a. So to refrain from publicly mocking Korangutan malarkey is a form of slavery.

To refrain from publicly mocking
Korangutan malarkey  
is a form of slavery.

Psychopathology of Islamic Homicidal Frenzy

The hard facts of life compel Islam to keep its sword drawn and be incessantly on its guard. 
-- Sayyid Qutb

Islam = ideology of genocide driven by systemic paranoia

– Igor Slamoff

Typically, Sayyid Qutb fails to mention a single one of the so-called “hard facts of life” that supposedly “compel” Mohammedans to behave like maniacs. [1] As a matter of fact Qutb’s ravings dispense with facts almost entirely, whether they be of the “hard” or the soft variety. 

Although Sayyid Qutb  seldom mentions facts, when he occasionally does make a verifiable statement about reality purporting to be a fact, he invariably reveals himself to be a pathological liar. An example is his claim that in the 19th century “an unholy alliance between Christian imperialism and Zionism was forged”.[2]

That claim is quite simply a stupendous lie, an outrageous chunk of Islamo-horseshit.

The history of the Zionist movement displays an ambivalent attitude toward European/”Christian” imperialism at best. After all, Zionism arose as a reaction against anti-Semitism, which was propagated by many European Christians, with great fluctuations over both space and time. Furthermore there was no European, let alone ”Christian” imperialism as such but instead a bevy of European imperialisms: German, French, British, Russian, Belgian, Dutch, etc., all at odds with each other.

By the same token Sayyid Qutb’s breezy assumption that  dozens of mutually distrustful Christian sects were able to agree on making an alliance with anybody, let alone with the Zionists, shows either profound ignorance or monumental mendacity, most likely both. 

The Orthodox Christian rulers of the Russian Empire, for example, were rabid anti-Semites and to accuse them of being in league with Zionists is a classic symptom of Islamic delirium.

The Jewish settlement and eventual conquest of Palestine in the 20th century was constantly thwarted by the British Empire, which was prone to kowtow to Arab public opinion and at times severely restricted Jewish immigration to Palestine so as not to offend the Arabs. Throughout the 1940s Zionists guerrillas actually made war on British troops in Palestine.  

If there were any alliances between Zionism and any European imperialism, they were fleeting, tactical and tacit.

Consequently we must conclude that the alleged “alliance” between Christianity and Zionism is merely a projection (in the Freudian sense) of Qutb’s galloping Islamo-paranoia onto the stage of world history.[3]

Sayyid Qutb thus displays the characteristic that distinguishes all genuine bullshit artists, like Charles Maurras and Adolf Hitler: factlessness, a complete lack of empirical support.  

Or perhaps one of the “hard facts” is Qutb’s  bizarre claim that being governed by jahili institutions is the same as slavery. This completely gratuitous statement is plainly contradicted by a comparison of the dictionary definitions of “government” and “slavery”.

If I start from the premise that fleas are the same thing as rhinoceroses, nobody should be astonished if I go to bed toting a big-game rifle, or go on safari armed only with bug spray.

Thus the notorious Islamic propensity for bloodshed lacks any cogent basis in reality; Qutb’s feverish discourse is merely a manifestation of the absurd nature of his initial assumptions. 

Or as a systems analyst would say: garbage in, garbage out.

[1] “It is not that Islam loves to draw its sword and chop off people’s heads with it. The hard facts of life compel Islam to keep its sword drawn and be incessantly on its guard.” In the Shade of the Qur’an, vol.3, pg. 282. My translation. [p. 243 volume 3 (surah 4) pdf ed.]  The relevant passage reads:

The assumption must never be made that jihad was only incidental to a particular
situation in a particular place, and that that situation no longer exists. It is not that
Islam loves to draw its sword and chop off people’s heads with it.  The hard facts of life compel Islam to keep its sword drawn and be incessantly on its guard. God knows that those who hold the reins of power are hostile to Islam. …This … applies to the situation today and tomorrow, in all places and throughout all generations.  [my emphasis]

Igor Slamoff comments:

To state that god X or god Y “knows” something is an unverifiable claim. Consequently it cannot be called a “fact”.

On the other hand “those who hold the reins of power are hostile to Islam" is indeed a verifiable statement. However if it “applies to the situation today and tomorrow, in all places and throughout all generations,” that means that amongst many others who “held the reins of power”, the Prophet Mohammed and the  rightly guided Caliphs were “hostile to Islam”. That is quite evidently A LIE OF COLOSSAL PROPORTIONS. Hence it too fails to qualify as a fact.
[2] … an unholy alliance between Christian imperialism and Zionism was forged.” Hendrik Hanzen and Peter Kainz, “Radical Islamism and Totalitarian Ideology: a Comparison of Sayyid Qutb's Islamism with Marxism and National Socialism,” Totalitarian Movements and Political Religions, Vol. 8, No. 1, Mar. 2007, p. 61.
[3] Please note that none of my statements on this issue should be construed as being applicable to relations between Zionism and US imperialism, which are a horse of an entirely different color.  

Monday, 19 December 2011


On dealing with primitive stone-age superstitions

By our Neolithic correspondent Infidel Kastrovic

Time Magazine, in its official bleat of submission to the barbarian cultthroats who fire-bombed Charlie Hebdo’s offices, makes, among other cretinous remarks, the following one:

Okay, so can we finally stop with the idiotic, divisive, and destructive efforts by “majority sections” of Western nations to bait Muslim members with petulant, futile demonstrations that “they” aren't going to tell “us” what can and can't be done in free societies? Because not only are such Islamophobic antics futile and childish, but they also openly beg for the very violent responses from extremists their authors claim to proudly defy in the name of common good. What common good is served by creating more division and anger, and by tempting belligerent reaction?
My reply is as follows:

Devotees of primitive stone age superstitions like Islam are not noted for their subtlety. The only way to ward off their persistent snarling encroachments on our freedoms is to exercise such freedoms to the utmost, in a wanton, blatant, provocative, in-your-face and irrepressible manner. Any less forceful response will just bounce off their armor-plated egos like a rubber ball.

Consequently the only reasonable way of proceeding with these moral pygmies is to mock and ridicule their crude superstitions as offensively, as shrilly and as deafeningly as we can.

If they reply with violence we will fight back, and them some!

Our motto is:


Sunday, 4 December 2011


Korangutans doing their thing

by Genghis Cohn

Kit Kittredge’s (of Code Pink) article on AlterNet with the title 'Freedom Waves' (November 2011) makes justified charges against Israel for various illegal and inhumane policies that it practices toward Gaza and its population. For example, despite Judge Goldstone’s coerced retraction of his report, no sensible person denies that Israeli troops committed various war crimes when they invaded Gaza in 2009 in reprisal for rocket attacks against Israel (“Operation Cast Lead”).

Then, of course, there is the harsh Israeli blockade of Gaza, which has led to a decline in the stanard of living there. Kittredge writes an account of a failed attempt to breach the Israeli naval blockade. The Israeli navy appears to have learned from its mistakes and no deaths were registered this time.

However Kittredge’s article is MUCH TOO ONE-SIDED. It completely ignores the many and grievous breaches of human rights and rule of law by the Korangutan Hamas régime that controls Gaza.

A balanced article would explain, among other things, that*

• Human Rights Watch documented numerous Hamas abuses against Gaza civilians during Operation Cast Lead, including the execution of 32 political rivals, shooting of 49 persons in the legs, and breaking the limbs of 73 others.
• Hamas demonstrated a reckless disregard for the population during its putsch against the PA in June 2006
• During the coup Hamas’s actions were characterized by “extra-judicial and wilful killing”
•Torture and the like:
o The leader of Hamas’s Executive Force, Jamal Jarrah, admitted to torture
o The Palestinian Centre for Human Rights documented Hamas torture,
o Hamas arrested the director of Gaza’s electric company, and held him without formal charges for six months
o Hamas abducted political rivals, and set them loose again only after shaving their heads.
Dismantling and replacement of the judiciary: As the PA judicial system in Gaza collapsed, sharia courts became the primary arbiters of disputes.
o Hamas established courts run by the so-called “Palestine Islamic Scholars Association”. In many cases, their judgments were Hamas’s political edicts. The association ruled that a health workers’ strike, in protest of Hamas rule, violated Islamic law
o Hamas, claiming it was dismantling networks of Israeli “collaborators,” sentenced several Palestinians to death for collaborating with Israel. Observers noted a “lack of adequate evidence.”
o Gaza’s top judge in July 2009 ordered all female lawyers to wear headscarves when they appear in court. The Palestinian Centre for Human Rights called the move a “dangerous violation of personal freedoms and women’s rights”
After its 2006 putsch Hamas began openly to mistreat the minority Christian community
o Masked gunmen attacked the Rosary Sisters School and the Latin Church in Gaza City with rocket-propelled grenades.
o There were more than 50 attacks against Christian targets in the aftermath of the Hamas coup, including barbershops, music stores, and a U.N. school
o Gunmen blew up the YMCA library in the Gaza Strip
o A Hamas “modesty patrol” attacked a Christian youth’s car after he drove home a female classmate
Egregious breaches of personal freedoms:
o Hamas imposed sharia law and deploys religious police to enforce these laws.
o The Korangutan vice squads were not new; they had operated in Hamas-controlled neighbourhoods in Gaza and the West Bank for years
o In June 2007, vice squads bombed a pool hall, as well as a tiny shop selling popular Arab music recordings
o Other targets included internet cafes and pharmacies.
o Hamas forces policed the streets for couples walking together, and took it upon themselves to verify their marital status.
o As attacks increased, so did the number of men who grew beards and women who wore veils. Many reportedly chose these expressions of Islamic piety out of fear rather than conviction
Numerous violations of free speech and press freedom:
o Hamas announced on television the “end of secularism and heresy in the Gaza Strip”
o The Korangutan Hamas closed down opposition television and radio stations
o Hamas gunmen attacked two cameramen from the Abu Dhabi satellite television channel
o Hamas gunmen stormed the Gaza bureau of the al-Arabiya satellite channel.
o Hamas detained a German television crew after it shot footage portraying Hamas in a negative light.
o Hamas issued a ban on phrases such as “Hamas militias” and “ousted government”.
o Hamas regularly threatens and blackmails reporters
o Contrary to what Hamas’ leaders say, journalists are not free to criticize the Islamist movement, to communicate the stance of other factions, or simply to set forth divergent opinions.
o Most journalists share this point if view, but none of them can express themselves publicly, so great is the risk of reprisals
• The Muslim Brotherhood, for its part, and the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), identified by the FBI as the Muslim Brotherhood’s front organization in America, have largely remained silent regarding Hamas’s continued violation of human rights in Gaza
• Indeed, while the Brotherhood remained silent during two years of misrule in Gaza, the organization’s leader, Mohammed Mahdi Akef, called upon his supporters to launch a jihad for the Palestinians in Gaza during Operation Cast Lead.
• CAIR launched a 2008 campaign advocating an end to Israel's blockade of the Gaza Strip,” but has remained silent on the issue of Hamas’s Korangutan misrule in the beleaguered territory.
• In other words, Kittredge and her fellow-“freebies” are imitating the cynical Korangutan policy of the Hamas front in the US, CAIR.

All this raises the following questions:

• Which is the major threat to freedom in Gaza?
• Who exercises oppression in Gaza?
• Who opposes civil liberties in Gaza?
• Who violates human rights in Gaza?

Obviously, there are 2 answers to these questions;

1. IN FIRST PLACE, HAMAS, the Mohammedan terror gang. And
2. IN SECOND PLACE but lagging far behind, ISRAEL.

Against whom are the actions of the Free Gaza Movement directed?

Against the number 2 oppressor, Israel.
NOT against the no. 1 oppressor, the Islamo-Fascist Korangutan Hamas gang.

Clearly the adjective “free” in the name “Free Gaza Movement” and those of its clones is being used in an intentionally deceptive way, since the primary enemy of freedom in Gaza is obviously Hamas, and Israel plays merely a secondary role in oppressing Gazans. However, all FGM’s acts are directed against Israel, and none against Hamas.

Consequently FGM and its clones, possibly including Code Pink, must be considered phony front organizations for the Islamo-Fascist Hamas terror gang.

See Talibanization of Gaza, by Jonathan Schanzer

Wednesday, 30 November 2011




            The Bootlegger-General of the Grand Speakeasy in Las Vegas told the world not to be afraid of Kilsam and Mustkils, adding before a gathering of several hundred Mustkils that Kilsam represents a message of peace, goodness and tolerance. Capo Bud Stompanato made the announcement while delivering his Tuesday sermon at the 80 Proof Kilsam Speakeasy in Peoria.

In his sermon, Stompanato said: "Kilsam came to protect the interests of humanity, prevent evils and build bridges with all communities. It offers a great message of mercy and tolerance. Those were Al Capone’s very words (peace be upon him)."

The Las Vegas Bootlegger-General urged Mustkils of the diaspora to abide by the laws of the countries where they reside. Stompanato asked Mustkils to learn from the life and teachings of the Prophet Al Capone (peace be upon him), who used to visit his Armenian pawnbroker. "When the Prophet died his safe was kept with an Armenian as a security," he said, urging Mustkils to establish good relations with non-Mustkils. "This is the best way to attract them to Kilsam."

Stompanato said Mustkils living in the diaspora should serve as ambassadors of their religion. "You should uphold the great Kilsamic values while dealing with Mustkils as well as non-Mustkils and should not engage in any corrupt or unjust practices."

Sicilian News, 18 July 2011


by Igor Stamboulevich Slamoff 

The Zouch! Rule
The very instant someone -- with a straight face and without benefit of a clown costume -- asserts or clearly implies that the Elders of Zion has any standing at all as an historical document, in my mind that immediately triggers the question: Should we attack now, with the benefit of surprise and using whatever weapons we can improvise on the spot? Or should we wait for a tactically more propitious moment, when we have gathered the requisite means to make our onslaught truly lethal?

To claim at this stage of the proceedings that The Protocols of the Elders of Zion is anything but a cheap forgery is equivalent to expressing a death wish. To claim such absurdity is a malicious act, an intolerable provocation that announces murderous intent and can be regarded as fully equivalent to a death threat. Accordingly it warrants immediate proactive self-defense measures of the most vigorous sort, naturally including lethal force.

Furthermore, to make such a outrageous claim automatically renders void everything else uttered by the same biped for two weeks before and for two weeks after the provocative utterance in question, including utterances of such an anodyne and uncontroversial nature as “Please pass the salt.”

That is my formulation of the ELDERS OF ZION HOAX ASSERTION BAN (humorously known as “the Zouch! Rule” ), which I propose forthwith become customary law by acclamation.
In 2006, USrael completely ignored Hamas' allegedly radical democratic reforms and boycott Hamas’ fief of Gazza, a situation that prevails to this day.
An injustice? Perhaps. You see, one measure that Hamas had neglected to carry out was a revision of its founding document, the 1988 Charter, which is truly saturated to the gills with extremist, hard-core fundamentalist hogwash.
Apparently Hamas thought they could just distract attention from this skeleton in their closet by highlighting their new-fangled notions. But here they signally failed. Upon reading their 1988 broadside it becomes clear why the Israelis were skeptical, to put it mildly, of the rejiggered Hamas’s intentions.

The 1988 covenant is a fierce statement of a nationalist and Mohammedan Palestinian revolution, in which no distinction could be made between the national and the religious aspects. Furthermore it trashed the Jews with relish, calling them Nazis and all kinds of ugly names.

However there was one aspect of the 1988 covenant that, more than any other indiscretion, must prove a major stumbling block to any reconciliation with Israel. The Charter stands foursquare on belief in the authenticity of that most notorious, flagrant and lethal forgery in the history of mankind, The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

This year 2011, is the ninetieth anniversary of the publication by The Times of London of the news -- relayed from its correspondent in Constantinople -- that The Protocols of the Elders of Zion was plagiarized from some sordid French political pamphlet and turned into a document slandering Jews, wherein powerful Jews announce their alleged intentions of world dominations. Jews evidently completely devoid of scruples – the giveaway: they intent to corrupt the world’s youth. Now if that isn’t dastardly, what is?

The Protocols of the Elders of Zion was concocted by the Tsarist secret police to provide ideological cover for the pogroms they instigated against the Jews of the Russian Empire. It shows how high- minded Tsar Nicholas II was when, despite being an avowed anti-Semite, he ordered the book banned, because even a noble cause like persecuting Jews must be done with the truth and not with lies. But in vain, alas! It survives to this day.

Actually The Protocols of the Elders of Zion didn't make such a big splash until the 1920s and 1930s,. when the Nazis glommed onto it. After they took power in Germany Protocols of the Elders of Zion was made mandatory reading for all German schoolchildren. Protocols of the Elders of Zion functioned basically as the justification for the Holocaust.

Consequently The Protocols of the Elders of Zion is not merely a brutal distortion of history. Protocols of the Elders of Zion itself became an important factor in history, by serving as a pretext to murder millions of innocent people. Protocols of the Elders of Zion was designed with criminal intent by evil men. Protocols of the Elders of Zion is besmirched beyond repair by its horrendous role it played in justifying a grisly genocide.

When moreover it has been a well-know fact for the better part of a century that the book is a complete forgery, and consequently that nothing in it in any way compromises the Jews or befouls their good name, then we must reach the conclusion that anyone who uses Protocols of the Elders of Zion as a stick to beat the Jews with has not the slightest respect for truth or decency, is completely devoid of scruples and is unworthy of the slightest trust. Nothing such a persons says is worthy of belief.

This is a much harsher condemnation than merely calling someone a bloodthirsty Mohammedan fanatic. Even a bloodthirsty Mohammedan fanatic might contain some spark of decency. But whoever espouses such a sordid lie as The Protocols of the Elders of Zion is indissolubly associated with deliberate and wanton instigation of the most horrendous crimes, which he knows to be completely unjustified

The Protocols of the Elders of Zion were not unmasked once , but twice. No doubt Karl Marx would have said that The Protocols of the Elders of Zion were unmasked the first time as tragedy and the second time as farce. But Karl Marx was given to oracular pronouncements of that sort, so we mustn’t let ourselves be put off by them.

From its louche beginnings as a penny-a-line screed, the fruit of plagiarism by a Russian police spy concocted to defame the Jewish race and justify the murderous pogroms that the more atavistic sectors of the Russian right indulged in against Russian Jews out of blood lust, The Protocols of the Elders of Zion has gone only downhill.

Here is a brief chronology of its perfidious record:

The first investigation into the origin of Protocols of the Elders of Zion was ordered secretly (everything in Tsarist Russia was done secretly) by Piotr Stolypin, the conservative but reformist prime minister that Tsar Nicholas II appointed to try to regain a minimum of prestige after the disastrous defeat in the Russo-Japanese war of 1905 and the practically simultaneous revolution against the Tsar, which was put down only with great difficulty.

Stolypin’s myrmidons ascertained that the propaganda screed had first surfaced in anti-Semitic circles in Paris around 1897., it attests to the nobility of Tsar Nicholas' character that, despite being an enthusiastic anti-Semite, on learning the falsity of the book, he ordered it banned, because, as he reasoned, even a virtuous purpose – i.e. persecuting Jews – must not be accomplished by deceptive and contemptible means – i.e. a forgery. In his words The Protocols shall be confiscated . A good cause cannot be defended by dirty means,.

To expect the leaders of a pidgin relidgin like Mohammedan Horse-Shit to have actual human scruples, like the Tsar of Russia, would be of course ludicrous.

Sneaky-Sleazy Grand Mufti of Jerusalem

The Arabic-language Wikipedia details the sordid history of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion and makes it perfectly clear to all comers that is a complete and outrageous fraud. No Arabic-speaker can produce the slightest justification for believing it authentic..

But Hamas is by no means the only one of the countless sects suffering from Qur’anal fixation to espouse the lies of the Tsarist secret police, the Okhrana. None other than the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem -- no, not the Gestapo stooge, but a more recent incumbent, a biped by the name of Ekrima -- accused the Jews of engineering the assassination of Rafiq el-Hariri, the corrupt Lebanese real estate tycoon who was flattened in Beirut by a bomb apparently planted by the Syrian secret police, or more likely by its stalking-whores Hizbollah, a few years back. The apparent motive was that he had somehow become the leader of an anti-Syrian Lebanese nationalist movement.

Look at yonder photo of this sneaky-slimy Ekrima baboon. Repulsive, not so? Well, this prominent Islamo-dipshit went to São di Arabia and announced that Hariri had been murdered by the Israelis. The evidence? A casual reference to The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, no less. The Islamo-dipshit quoted The Protocols of the Elders of Zion in the same breath as the Koran (alias Mohammedan Murder Manual). Quite appropriate, since they are both blueprints for genocide and saturated with lies.

When a prominent dignitary of a cult, in this case the SWAB cult, makes a public announcement relying on, not just a forgery, but THE MOST NOTORIOUS FORGERY IN THE HISTORY OF MANKIND, we have every right to consider the cult concerned as nothing more than a gang of crooks. Stupid crooks, to boot.

There is a widespread rumour claiming that the reason Mohammedans hate pigs is that Mohammedans secretly suspect that pigs are smarter than Mohammedans. Grand Mufti Ekrima’s pronouncements lend credence to this rumour.

Wednesday, 19 October 2011


Mutawaazi el-Sootooh, the Kaaba's true name

By Adolf Hitlist

One aspect of Mohammedanism that really brings into sharp focus what an epic load of horse-shit Islam is, is the Kaaba.

The Kaaba is a mosque (actually a mosquelet, or mosquito, in view of its paltry size) located in Mecca, the place where Mohammed concocted, or perpetrated, Mohammedanism. According to Mohammedan superstitions, the Kaaba is the oldest mosque in existence.    That comes as no surprise when they go on to tell you that it was built by Adam (Eve’s lover).

But Adam wasn't the ONLY person to tinker with the Kaaba. Nossirree, when the Deluge subsided, Noah came to Mecca and rebuilt the goddam Kaaba, and then a couple of centuries later the Jewish prophet Abraham and his bastard son Ishmael came to Mecca and rebuilt the goddam Kaaba, and since then everybody and his mother in law have come to Mecca and rebuilt the goddam Kaaba. It must be the most rebuilt mosque in the world. Which does not say much for building standards in that part of the world.

As mosques go, the Kaaba isn’t much to look at. It's pretty small, only about the size of a large outhouse. When Mohammedanism became rich and powerful, a monster mosque was built around the Kaaba, so it now stands in a large courtyard recessed into the larger building.

The Kaaba, as the reader must already suspect, was something else before it was a mosque, because mosques started up with Islam in the 7th century AD.

The Kaaba was the sacred building that housed the idols that people worshiped in Mohammed’s day. Mohammed took a shine to the Kaaba and coveted it for his own invisible god. Soon Mohammed started bitching and whining that he wanted all the idols kicked out of the Kaaba. His relatives the Quraishis gave him hell. However Mohammed didn't make any suggestions as to what should be moved into the Kaaba to replace the idols, because Mohammed was against idols (he was also against monasticism, rock and roll, pigs, dogs, monkeys, infidels and a slew of other things). When Mohammed eventually got his wish and all the idols were evicted, it must have looked pretty empty. Invisible gods invariably entail ruin for interior decorators.

In any case, it is not the interior of the Kaaba that invites interest, but its exterior. The Kaaba is the navel of the universe in Mohammedan cosmology. When Mohammedans pray they face the Kaaba. It is sacred to boot, which is rather odd to an infidel like me, because no sacred event ever happened there, or, I should say nobody claims that any sacred event took place. It's just a geographical singularity. Perhaps its sacredness is based on its umbilical nature. The Kaaba is, so to speak, a topological divinity.

Every Mohammedan who makes the pilgrimage to Mecca must perform a large number of truly idiotic rituals once there. I think they were invented by the same man who discovered how to train circus seals. A sizeable chunk of these brainless rituals must be performed at the Kaaba, but I won't bore you with the details. There's a lot of mumbling involved, but action-wise, what you’ll notice is hundreds of people hurriedly walking around the Kaaba in a circle, large or small. It reminds you of musical chairs (while the music’s still on), but it's sort of boring because the music never stops, or more accurately, the music never even begins (music being forbidden in Islam, along with French kissing, holding a fork with your left hand, and hypnotizing crocodiles [actually I made the last one up]), so you don't have the excitement of the music stopping and everyone racing to grab a chair, as we do here in the decadent West.

Then attached to one outer corner of the Kaaba is what can only be called a large silver URINAL containing a black concave surface, which, we are told, is a meteorite kindly donated by the archangel Freddie, or one of his distinguished colleagues. It's been worn hollow on account of a couple of trillion kisses it has received from pilgrims through the ages. Kissing the black stone is desirable but not required, and is in any case impossible because of the crowds of pilgrims trying to elbow their way through the multitude to gawk at the stone.

This yarn about a stone built into the Kaaba, moreover a sacred stone that is a gift from an archangel, is such a corny gag it might have been invented by Walt Disney. And typically for Islam, it's not connected to any of their sacred myths. It's just an instrumental slick anecdote that barely justifies the presence of the Black Stone at the belly button of the Bandit-Cult universe, posing as a . . souvenir. Check it for mikes, boys. But we can't blame Mohammed for the Black Stone, since it was on the premises when he arrived.

And Mohammed wasn't particularly committed to the Black Stone either. He treated it like piece of furniture. It seems it was fashionable for Arabian temples in Mohammed’s day to display spectacular rocks of various tints. One of the gimcrack aspects of the temple business. The Black Stone is the only one of the old gods that remained at the Kaaba, because although a god, it was disguised as a stone, clinging tenaciously to the outside caparison of the Kaaba like a lamprey to a killer shark, in the kitschy urinal in which it is -- through the wisdom of Allah -- currently encapsulated. Who knows what theological manoeuvres it may portend?

Since the Black Stone is a divine remnant, in any reconciliation between Christianity and Islam, the Black Stone could be gussied up and transmuted into the Holy Ghost! To maintain the principle of constancy in the number of godheads, without actually imposing the Trinity on Islam. Pretty sneaky, you’ve got to admit.

We must now abandon the giddy paths of cosmological speculation and profess instead the stodgy academic disciplines of semantics and solid geometry. We are now rapidly approaching the dramatic climax of my Kaaba tale, in which the principal roles are played by semantics and solid geometry.

Al-ka’aba is the name of a small building located at the navel of the universe that has stood vacant for many centuries. Its last known occupants were idols who were ignominiously evicted on account of their idolness.

It is the only building I know of that wears clothing, or anything resembling clothing. It is permanently hooded by a large bonnet of black silk (called kiswa) with gold embroidery that covers the building entirely except for the bottom 6 feet or so. The black silk bonnet is changed once a year. Formerly the kiswa were sent by the Sultan in Constantinople. More recently the bonnets have been sent by local potentates.

Nobody knows what would happen if the building were forced to stand naked.

Al-ka’aba in Arabic means "the cube", “cube" being defined as a three-dimensional body with six equal square faces. So far so good.

Objection no. 1: The Kaaba is not shaped like a cube! Au contraire, it is nothing but a vulgar parallelepiped, since its sides aren’t squares but rectangles. Its dimensions are 13.1 m x 11.03 m x 12.86 m. In other words, its longest side is 2 metres (20%) longer than its shortest side. So it is not only not a cube, but doesn't even approximate a cube or even look like one.

It would be also technically correct to call the Ka’aba an orthogonal hexahedron. The cube constitutes a special type of orthogonal hexahedron, I’ll grant that. in which all edges are the same length. There's a family resemblance, but semantics is not based on resemblance but identity.

Although the Kaaba has been rebuilt many times, strangely enough nobody ever tried to alter its dimensions to turn it into a real cube. Conversely, nobody appears ever to have proposed that its name be changed from al-Kaaba, The Cube, for example to “The Parallelepiped” or, for that matter, to “Joe’s Pizza”, anything that would avoid that most ignominious of solecisms, namely calling a geometrical body by the wrong name for fourteen centuries without a break. Nossirree, they all just went on calling it “The Cube”, knowing full well it is no cube and never was.

That gives you an idea of what a lowbrow religion Islam is, and of the rudimentary intellectual discernment of the slack-jawed yokels to whom it caters. Constantly misusing –for centuries on end! – the term generally used for “cube”, one of the best known geometrical bodies and one of the five Platonic bodies, as a matter of fact, the others being the tetrahedron, the octagon, the pentagonal dodecahedron and the regular icosahedron. Such a flagrant sign of illogic as is this persistent (and reckless) misuse of a term for centuries on end is a permanent assault on reason. Just this grammatical solecism alone suffices to classify Islam as a religion in which all possible propositions as well as their negations are necessarily false.

This scandalous terminological sloppiness is a disgrace! It fits right in with the psychology of Islam, half cave-man, half village idiot. Nothing fits. Things don't mean what they appear to mean. Everything is cockeyed, twisted, inaccurate, sloppy and vague.

Since the Kaaba is a parallelepiped and no cube, instead of al-ka’aba it should be called which is pronounced mutawaazi el-sootooh. The H at the end of sootooh is a triple-alarm H that exists only in Arabic, and sounds like the air coming out of a tire that was brutally punctured less than a second ago. In many Arabic words whose English transcriptions end in an H, this is the H they mean. For speakers of Indo-European languages, such an extravagantly sonorous H at the end of a word is a concept difficult to grasp. Names like Fatah and Rafah are also equipped with these trick Hs at the end.

The best thing about Arabic is the bizarre noises you have to make that sound as if you were being strangled, or something equally dramatic.

Now, mutawaazi el-sootooh sounds a lot sexier than just plain al ka’aba. If somebody proposed to take me to the mutawaazi el-sootooh I would be delighted to go along, but going to al-ka’aba sounds really boring.

So the name of the building in Arabic is “The Cube”. However this name is misleading, because it's a parallelepiped, not a cube. Accordingly once we switch languages, to English, say, it would be natural to expect that all pretence of cubism be dropped altogether.

But that would be underestimating the claim to universal authority that the Mohammedan cult asserts. The ostensible truth of the Koran derives from it being the word of god, the invisible one. The building’s name is hence imprinted by divine authority, and accordingly cannot be altered to something else merely on account of a mere switch in languages, or because it is allegedly inaccurate. Since Arabic is the language of the Koran in which god revealed his designs to humankind, the Arabic name of an object is not a mere label useful for designating the object. No, its Arabic name reveals the object’s inmost essence.

Consequently, the article about the Kaaba in the English-language Wikipedia reads as follows:

“The Kaaba (Arabic: al-Kaʿbah IPA: [ʔælˈkæʕbɐ], English: The Cube)[1] is a cube-shaped building in Mecca, Saudi Arabia, and is the most sacred site in Islam.[2] The Qur'an states that .,..”

Did you notice? They call it a “cube-shaped building”, which is a goddam lie if I've ever seen one. Now you can be sure that the people in charge of editing Mohammedan related pages in Wikipedia are thoroughly saturated with the Mohammedan religion and its conventions, even if they’re not practicing Goat-fuckers. They call it a “cube-shaped building” because if they didn't, they might be accused of contradicting the Koran. And contradicting the Koran even in such a minor detail is a big fat no-no.
But not contradicting the Koran and furthermore not even appearing to contradict the Koran become second nature in a society dominated by Mohammedans. That’s why there’s a lot of self-censorship in Mohammedan countries. In Porkistan you can get life imprisonment for desecrating the Koran. And they’re not too particular about evidence either. One Porkistani Christian (there are a few thousand of those poor devils in Porkistan, always looking over their shoulders and quick to assume an ingratiating smile when challenged) once burned what he claims were old business letters, but his Mohammedan neighbour told the cops he’d seen him burn the Koran. So the poor devil is doing hard time even as we speak. You see, in Sharia the testimony of a Mohammedan is deemed far more reliable than that of a mere infidel! So the judge had no choice but to attribute to the testimony of the prosecution greater probative value than to the testimony of the defence, and the defendant was sent to the slammer for life. .

Later on in the Wikipdia Kaaba article they loosen up and back down from their initial blustering claim that the Kaaba is categorically “cube-shaped”, and instead retreat to their defensive backup positions “cuboids” and “roughly cube-shaped”. Prudent thing to do, since they have no choice but to provide the Kaaba’s dimensions, and the reader can figure out by himself that they’re talking through their hats when they call it a cube. But the important thing is that they covered their asses by blatantly calling it a cube in the initial description, playing it very safe.

After one learns the story of the Kaaba’s name, it becomes much easier to understand Mohammedan thinking.

The underlying essentialist condition requiring all this malarkey about pretending the Kaaba is a cube when it isn't, is the prescientific and religiously imposed requirement that the semantic field of the English term “cube” be congruent with the semantic field of the Arabic term ka’aba. In other words all things that are cubes are also ka’aba and vice versa. But this assumption is completely gratuitous. No rule of language requires that the solid bodies be divided into identical categories in 2 different languages. There can be close matches or very loose matches between the semantic fields of a bilingual quasi synonym couplets.

In this manner a crude, unscientific Mohammedan propaganda pitch  can come to dominate our lives without our realising it.

The reckless, culture–imperialistic Mohammedan goons editing Islam for Wikipedia are distorting and Semitizing the English language by describing the Ka’aba as a “cube”. Which is an extremely inaccurate if not outright misleading description of the Ka’aba structure’s shape.

For one thing, contradicting the Koran might be construed as “making war on Allah and his Prophet”, also known as “making mischief in the land”. This is a capital crime in Shari, Mohammedan law. And contrary to popular belief, Shari is valid EVERYWHERE and is applicable to EVERYONE, at least in the opinion of Mohammedan zealots.

Now “making war on Allah and his Prophet”, alias “making mischief in the land”, is a remarkably fuzzy concept, which can be construed to cover anything and everything. So it's important, if you are charged, to get a lawyer and above all, get a Shari judge to hear your case!

But there are no Shari judges or lawyers where I live, because I refuse to live in Mohammedan countries, where such individuals abound. So the really scary thing is that it wouldn’t even be a proper Shari judge who would make the decision. You see, Shari has such a folksy setup that death sentences can be carried out by any circumcised Mohammedan, and he need not await a judge’s bidding to carry out the execution. So any Mohammedan could set himself up as judge, jury and executioner and simply waste me basically on suspicion!

So when you make public statements concerning the Koran and suchlike, you must be very careful. Being careful can be done in two ways: (1) making only bland and ingratiating statements, or (2) going underground, i.e. using pseudonyms and being very secretive about one’s religious interests. 
Then give them hell.

Sunday, 16 October 2011



You must respect Shitslamic religion. If you don't, our shit-slammers will slam the shit out of you!
Signed the Shitslamic Brotherhood

Sunday, 2 October 2011

How lucky they snagged Awlaki

"When you wiggle your fanny you have to raise your hand like this" Awlaki at his last cha-cha lesson.
Hearty congratulations are hereby extended to the CIA and to the myrmidons of US imperialism in general for squashing this Islamo-savage. Keep it up!

Islam makes you stupid. The proof -- Sayyed Qutb


In addition to the cruelty, the tedium and the general malaise that accompany Mohammedanism wherever it goes, I noticed something in the writings of Sayyed Qutb that I had until then rarely found in such massive amounts: just plain stupidity. Sayyed Qutb frequently writes things that simply do not make sense.

I recall his feeble critique of mechanical inventiveness. He held a low opinion of the inventor’s craft, much like his contemporary the reactionary Spaniard Miguel de Unamuno y Jugo (1864-1936), who famously snapped ”¡Que inventen ellos!” ("Let the other guys do the inventing!") But whereas Unamuno´s remark, while not reasonable, is at least witty, shows some esprit, Sayyed Qutb’s critique of inventiveness makes up in murkiness what it lacks in relevance. It’s not an actual remark, it’s merely the first draft of a remark. The sage limits himself to remarking “Inventing stuff! (snort! chuckle!) That reminds me of cavemen!” and lets it go at that. I have prima facie two objections to these notions of Sayyed Qutb´s. Firstly, when something reminds me of cavemen, I do not immediately drop the issue like a hot potato and change the subject matter of the conversation. Sayyed Qutb gives the impression that when something reminds him of cavemen, he dares speculate no further. Cavemen evidently represent some kind of taboo or alarm signal for Sayyed Qutb.
And the second idiosyncrasy in Sayyed Qutb´s meanderings is "Why on earth do inventors remind him of cavemen, of all things? Why not of craftsmen or scientists?”

Sayyed Qutb leaves implicit the chain of reasoning that reminds him of cavemen when he thinks about inventing. Do cavemen simply symbolize for Sayyed Qutb low-status people who can per se never constitute the subject of any coherent idea, but from which thought flees instinctively? Aversion to manual crafts? Scholarly hubris? Contempt for paupers?

Perhaps Egyptians understand the meaning intended. Perhaps they possess the cultural password that lets them follow Sayyed Qutb´s murky cogitations.

But I do not. If there is a hidden cultural message, then it should be spelt out. Any idea worth divulging is worth explaining to people from alien cultures. Sayyed Qutb´s ideas are not always clear, but the reason for their defects is never a secret: this clown's stupefying provinciality and vulgarity are amazing!

My attitude toward inchoate ideas that fail in their attempt to break out of their source cultural milieu is not sympathetic. It is the same isolation that Arabs undergo because fewer books are translated into Arabic each year than into Greek, which is spoken by one tenth the number of people that speak Arabic.