Pages

Friday, March 24, 2017

Mad Rant: A British Terrorist

As I am sure all know there was recently another terrorist attack in London. The terrorist was killed by the police but not before taking the lives of a number of innocents. The authorities took their time to release the identity of the villain but, as was no surprise to most, his name was Khalid Masood, an Islamic radical not unknown to the authorities, from Kent. Yes, from Kent, so that the mindless drones on television can tell us this was a "British" terrorist and not in immigrant or refugee. He has and will be endlessly referred to as a "British citizen" and there is from start to finish absolutely nothing about this whole dirty business that I do not find positively infuriating!

In the first place is the man himself and what he is about. He is a vicious, cowardly, hypocritical dog who deserved far worse than he received. The Islamic State was quick to claim him as one of their own, which is well enough as we can see what sort of spineless pigs they consider "holy warriors". He had not the courage of conviction, otherwise he would not have lived his life submitting to a Christian monarch and, inevitably to some degree or other, accepted subsidy from Her Majesty. He was a coward living a lie who ended his life, not in an honorable act of combat but in a cowardly attack on helpless civilians.

Then there is the media description of him, Khalid Masood, the "British" citizen. Personally, the very phrase 'British citizen' rather than 'British subject' still unsettles me but to call him "British" is to point again to the dishonesty of this pig. His real name, according to The Telegraph, was Adrian Elms and he was a convert to Islam. Neighbors said he grew his beard out and wore Islamic white robes at times. Now, this can be a little tricky because the western media is in the habit of referring to people as being of a certain nationality simply because of where they were born or what sort of paperwork they have on file rather than according to the blood in their veins. And, this man was known by several different aliases during his recurring encounters with the police. This is a purely European problem. If HRH Prince William, Duke of Cambridge, whose ancestry can be traced back to the Saxon Kings of England, were to have been born in Shanghai, it would not make him Chinese and every single one of the billion people in China would find the very notion absurd. The average peasant in the interior of China has rather more common sense than European or North American television personalities.

However, given the information at hand at the moment, let us assume this man began his life as English as fish and chips. It certainly does not sound like he considered himself British. Rather, it sounds like someone forsaking his forebears to adopt the religion and culture of another people. It sounds, again, like someone living a lie. Again, had he any shred of decency, if he felt so strongly about being a Muslim, he should have renounced his British "citizenship" and moved to an Islamic country. But, of course, everything is so upside down today and our duly elected leaders so infantile and deluded that it would be considered cruel and unusual to even suggest such a thing.

Indeed, as soon as the attack was over, the British Prime Minister was quick to take to the television to say that this pig had made his attack in London, "where people of all nationalities, religions and cultures come together to celebrate the values of liberty, democracy and freedom of speech." Hearing that, one might wonder just who it was who won the war against the French Revolutionaries. She also said that the attack was an attack on the values of the Westminster Parliament, which she described as, "democracy, freedom, human rights, the rule of law". Now, I have no doubt that Theresa May is to be preferred to Comrade Corbyn but what a load of utterly contemptible nonsense! Democracy? Is the United Kingdom a democracy? Honestly, I am asking because they cannot seem to make up their mind on this point. Has Britain left the European Union yet? Freedom? Seems to be plenty of freedom for some people but not so much for others, like those who would have said, as I would have, that this murderous pig had no business being in Britain long before today. Human rights? As defined by who? Every tyranny on earth claims to love them. The rule of law? Please. The rule of law has totally evaporated in liberal societies because everything is now partisan, everything is political and the rule of law only applies to your political enemies. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia also believes in the rule of law, the rule of Islamic law and they at least make no bones about it.

All of this was like salt on an open wound and then, later, to hear the Prime Minister again take the line spouted by Cameron, Blair, Obama and Bush that this attack, just like all the others in a long line before it, has nothing to do with Islam at all. Then there was the parade of Labour MPs, many Muslims themselves, doing everything they can to shield the "values" of the perpetrator of this crime. We may be living in the most deluded generation in the whole of human history, with leaders coming out in the immediate aftermath of such an attack praising the very poison that has allowed this pig to be about his murderous work. It is disgusting, it is sickening and it is infuriating and it makes me a very, VERY ... Mad Monarchist.

17 comments:

  1. Agree with you that the terrorist was a coward, he only dare to attack defenseless people from the back. Don't know about the West but where I live, terrorist are actively hunted and shot dead if needed. Do not be afraid of being politically incorrect.

    I have a question, you said that nationality should be determined by blood but is it feasible? Does it mean that for example Australia belongs to the aborigines, and the Whites are still British?

    I have difficulty relating to the immigrants crisis in Europe. Because here in Southeast Asia the immigrants (Chinese mostly) often outperformed the indigenous population. The natives become envious and started to harass the Chinese because they are seen as more successful. Immigrants are supposed to work hard in the country where they lived. It baffles me that immigrants to the west are actual troublemakers, parasitic welfare leech. Why do they even immigrate if all they want is just free handout? They do the opposite of the Chinese migrants.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Australia did not belong to the aborigines at any point because Australia was a British colony, built by British colonists according to British law and customs. The land Australia sits on may have belonged to the aborigines but they were doing nothing with it. So, someone else came along and made a successful, productive country out of it.

      I know SE Asia fairly well and most people I know there are also totally bewildered by the mentality of western people. I find it baffling myself. It is worth pointing out that not all immigrants have such problems. I know in the USA that Asian immigrants are the least likely to commit crimes and the least likely to take government handouts.

      Delete
  2. I'm not completely sure I follow your logic about who and who isn't British. Are you saying that black people in Britain are not British? Or is not about race and a white British guy like me who converted to Islam would not be British either?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Are you saying a White person in Nigeria is Nigerian? If so, again, that's a problem only White people have. No one else is that ridiculous. As for the conversion to Islam, I think my point was clear enough that it was a clear indication that he, himself, did not regard himself as British. He didn't become a Druid after all, he took a foreign religion from a foreign culture that imposes the language and cultural norms of its place or origin instead of anything that is even remotely British. As for the race, at the time I wrote this, I still had no idea what the race of the guy was, having heard conflicting reports.

      Delete
    2. Given that most Jewish people in the UK are of foreign descent and follow a foreign religion, would you say that Jews in the UK are not really British?

      Delete
    3. I doubt most Jews in Britain follow any religion at all. For those who do, they will proudly tell you they are Jews first and foremost and you won't have to come ask some American gentile to define them for you. If the Jews had done as you seem to favor and become Englishmen, French or Hungarians or whatever then there would be no Jews today. The only reason they survived for a thousand years with no country was because they clung fiercely to their ancestral identity. However, as you seem to think all people are the same and interchangeable, I doubt you would care much if there were no Jews or any other particular people in the world at all.

      Delete
  3. You can't talk about ancestry, blood, or descent anymore in modern society. That is an important identity and maybe necessary for a people's survival. Truly, if I were born in Japan, no one there would think I would be Japanese. The Japanese, with no guilt or apologies, would say Japan belongs to their people. I would be a guest – maybe even a respected and honored one – but still only a guest in their land. The Europeans are doomed if they can't identify with their ancestors and feel that their inheritance for themselves and their descendants is worth defending and dying for.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I've no idea why a white man cannot be a Nigerian. I don't know what the laws of citizenship are in Nigeria, but I'd be surprised if it's impossible for a foreigner to acquire Nigerian citizenship. It's a pretty diverse culture there, with Muslims in the north and Christians in the south.

    A lot of Africans are welcoming people and I expect many Nigerians would welcome a white person who made Nigeria their home and gave her his loyalty.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well, then there's not much point in trying to reason with you because you have immunized yourself against the facts of life. People are not all the same, they are not all interchangeable. There are biological, genetic, inherited differences between peoples, they have different histories, have been shaped differently, developed different cultures, values, ways of thinking and so on. You must not believe that but it is nonetheless true.

      Not that facts matter to you but, for the hell of it, I'll add this. My mother recently died of heart failure. Her mother died during heart surgery and her father died of a heart attack. All but one of her siblings have had heart problems. I too have a bad heart because of this genetic makeup that I was born with. Now, I could change my name, I could get legal documents saying I belong to any family I like. I'm still in all probability going to die of a heart problem sometime fairly soon. I will because changing my name, speaking a new language and getting some papers off the government does not change the blood in my veins, my DNA or my genetic makeup. Real life doesn't work that way. Pretending that it does is idealistic, revolutionary nonsense at best.

      Delete
    2. In Deutsche Welle, various young people were asked if Islam could be a part of Germany. Of course, they only selected "positive" examples. One young ethnic German, 19, whose name is Paul, answered in the usual brain-washed way, mouthing the cultural Marxism that he has been imbibing since kindergarten:

      “Definitely. Germany is a geographical area in which one society lives and acts. Every group that lives in this area is part of Germany. If I live in Germany, I’m part of Germany, and I have a right to say “I’m German.” As far as I’m concerned people don’t even have to speak the language.”

      Ok, this in a nutshell represents the insidious idea that will kill off a people and a civilization. As you rightly point out, no other peoples in the world have bought into this notion (to their credit), nor did people historically in Europe. I think it reveals some sort of weakness or decadence in modern European man because they were susceptible to these self-destructive ideas – and other peoples have been healthier and more sane for rejecting them.

      I'm just amazed that so many people don't get this.

      Delete
  5. As far as I am concerned, this terrorist represents the worst of its kind. He has betrayed us twice. First, when he forsook Christ for a foreign "god" and second, when he commits a heinous crime of terrorism against his own state and people.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I absolutely adore your blog, but I'm of two minds on this one.
    I don't get much pleasure from seeing the smug airheads on tele explicitly referring to him as British constantly.
    On ethnicity/racial lines, he is absolutely mixed heritage and absolutely British. (unless we adopt non-modern standards), since his mother is White and British.
    But on the other hand, he changed his surname to his fathers, converted to Islam and have resoundingly rejected British society and culture.
    I'd say this guy isn't one of us.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Some of these comments disturb me

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I found Celestine's comments disturbing as well. Just be confident that ancient wisdom trumps modern sophistry every time.

      Delete
  8. But Mr. Mad, I'm FINE with having a 98% sub-saharan britain so long as IT'S WESTERN AND RESPECTABLE.....

    ReplyDelete
  9. This kind madness is what we should expect from the late stages of the Kali Yuga.

    ReplyDelete