Haji 2003

One of the best ways of addressing Islamophobia

Is burning marijuana the best way to dispose of it? I'd have thought the smoke would create the wrong kind of noxious gases for the people nearby.

What counts as patriotism or lack thereof? In another thread on this forum we had SAN's views on British Muslims who are critical of Britain. I wonder what his thoughts are about the members of the British establishment who have made money betting on the fall in the value of sterling?

Obviously he'd like his own colonial order, but for the rest of us what matters is some competition amongst the colonialists

You should read Yankel's Tavern by Glenn Dynner. It's published by Oxford University Press, so a serious work of scholarship.

Twitter is buzzing not much in the MSM. The problem seems to be Credit Suisse and Deutsche Bank is also being mentioned. But if one of these fails there may be knock on effects.

So there's a genre of YouTube videos which have the following storyline: Charitable person gets a call from someone about a puppy in dire straits Charitable person goes to find the frightened/scared/dolepful puppy and finds it half starved, dirty and sometimes in bad health Puppy is taken home and bathed, (it's already looking happier) Next is a visit to the vet and sometimes treated with antibiotics or has ticks etc removed At some point the animal is also fed and watered Closing shots of a happy animal that looks ultra cute Along the way there are requests for money so that these people can do more, similar work. Clips that belong to the genre I've seen from Ukraine and perhaps also some other countries, but noticeably there are people in Pakistan doing the same. It's a great shtick. I am not doubting the genuineness of what they do. It's just interesting how it's tailored to the emotional needs, values and priorities of the donors, who are most likely in the West (after all why have English subtitles and no Urdu anywhere?).

I find it fascinating how what counts as sensible behaviour can be upended due to changes in the nature of the products that we are using. Cars Traditionally it has always been the case that keeping things for a long time is a 'good' thing. I bought my first car in 1996 (Ford Fiesta). I bought it new because Ford allow employees to get cars for relatives at a discount. I disposed of it in 2009, partly because there was a financial crisis and the UK government was giving subsidies, otherwise it could have lasted a few years more. The car I bought in 2009 (Honda Jazz/Fit) is still going strong. Again bought new because of the government scheme. Phones I apply the same rule to mobile phones, but I wonder whether that is still such a good thing. I only every buy used/refurb'd iPhones. I bought an iPhone 6 (128Gb) for £269 in 2018. I changed it earlier this year (iPhone 11 £413 128Gb), so about 4 years of useful life. But when I think about the additional functionality of the new one was it really worth hanging on all that time?

@Northwest This was my observation and I felt confident enough (based on the information I have), that it was not brown people who caused this. Your reply identified Zionists in particular and unless there is clear evidence for this, we are straying into territory that's wrong for a number of reasons. For example consider the following: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_Pound_Poms And compare with the following: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMT_Empire_Windrush Both of these stories are at various times extensively reported in the British media. But no one that I know of ever asks why Britain was importing Jamaicans (to address a labour shortage), while at the same time sending white Britons to Australia. Kinda does not make sense at all. Does it? So we have the following: The only way the above two stories make sense (to me) is if UK/Australian government policy was to ensure that a 'new', resource rich continent became predominantly white, while increasing racial diversity back in the UK. Lending some credence to that idea is the well known White Australia policy. Similarly in post-war Germany the need to import millions of Turks was again due to a white supremacist scheme (WWII) gone wrong, resulting in the need for labour. Post WWII the French also seemed to have over-played their hand in North Africa, assuming that they could colonise/exploit the region for their own benefit, and now it is slapping them in the face. In each of the above I have not found any evidence for the involvement of Jews/Zionists. There is a documented sectarian angle to the French occupation of Algeria (preferential French treatment for Christians and Jews), but that's about it. So in each of the above instances the most easily identifiable cause for the current problems being faced by whites is their over-ambition. If, on the other hand, there is evidence that Zionists/Jews were responsible you'd need to show it. Otherwise your argument is both racist and weak.

Well ... that's open to debate. My belief is that while someone can be irreligious, they may well have non-religious beliefs and they can be just as narrow-minded and bigoted in imposing them on other people as the most ardent religious person. The internecine warfare between the trans allies and the trans-exclusionary radical feminists (TERFs) is a case in point.

How the unvaxxed can protect themselves This dude properly understands his target market.

Keep this in mind when Denmark bangs the drum for women's rights https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-63049387

Let me pick up on the two issues in bold. Open borders It's obvious to me that there has been a concerted campaign to eradicate traditional white society in many western countries. Many such societies have gone along with it more or less willingly. The lightning rod for this have been brown people in general and more recently Muslims in particular - but the architects are others. Brown people and Muslims were not in the senior levels of politics in all these countries so as to be able to influence policy. Efforts to preserve native society The Nazis are correctly vilified for their racial policies, but they had parallel attempt to (using your words) 'preserve native society', and I can't see anything unacceptable with that: Swett, P. E. (2013). Selling under the swastika : Advertising and commercial culture in nazi germany. Stanford University Press. In summary I think western society has a problem when the protection of traditions etc. becomes the preserve of the far-right. This should have been on the agenda for a wider political spectrum.