"Hori ez dela nire asmo bat!" ("This is not my intent!") was what the Basque iraultzaileen (revolutionaries) are sometimes hear to shout when the Spanish government accused them of being terrorists rather than freedom fighters that they all are. Today they are politicians after they chose to serve their community rather than continuing to blow up Spaniards.
In response to such ignorance by my fellow revolutionaries who ought to know better, I have only the motto of the Order of the Garter to remind my accusers that this is evil thinking - "Honi soit qui mal y pense".
Though the word "honi" is borrowed from the Basque, the overall meaning in this context is, "just because I mention misogyny and sexism, your accusations of me regarding misogyny and sexism are uncalled for yet a necessary evil" - and it says a lot about whatever social justice ideals that you truly have.
If you punch a fascist as Antifa, then you have become the fascist. Your high ideals and higher moral ground is a disgrace to freedom and democracy, and your only claim is to degeneracy and perversions of all kinds.
Until people of color, especially women, are no longer oppressed like those so-called terrorists in Europe, the New Left cause is lost in parties on the weekend and for a few revolutionaries, a slow descent into the madness of drug abuse and the endless cycle of addiction and rehabilitation.
As for women who follow me and were offended by direct messages prior today, I have only this excuse: "I am old school and the metrosexuality of the average beta male who fronts feminism could lead I as a fool to become a misogynist and sexist by one small error, to listen to the heart when the voice of reason cries "Resist, resist, wafi sabil allah eiz wajil" (Resist, resist, for the sake of God Almighty).
No, I am not a terrorist for speaking Arabic; I am a revolutionary for peace, love, unity and respect.
Fuck ISIL, and death to the death cultists known as Da'esh. My thanks to Russia and America - work together to make politics great again!
For those feminists in the know, I rebuke the youtube male feminist who shot dead his co-streamer, a woman. Social justice ideology condemns murder as more heinous than shutting down free speech, and I condemn Antifa supporters for that.
In closing I will also deny that the presumed to be terror attacks in Europe and the UK are by terrorists. They were , are, and have always been freedom fighters.
In closing, I have this to say:
Après avoir été qualifiés de terroristes,
les combattants de la liberté
ont perdu leur cause de liberté,
et l'Occident - le monde libre -
n'est plus ce qu'il était.
After they were labeled terrorists,
the freedom fighters
have lost their cause of freedom,
and the West - the free world -
is no longer what it was.
As for extremists, they have lost their true reason for existence - to free their peple from oppression from the majority, who are "whiter" than they are, while taking the moral high ground.
This is not a race war, because the race ideology is based on pseudoscience - it is a fact that the West honors the light skinned over the dark skinned people.
This is not racist; this is the once unspoken truth, a manner of apocalypse, my revelation to freedom lovers everywhere.
If you are truly a revolutionary for freedom, you know what greater jihad means. Even if our right-wing detractors mock us, remember this: jihad is the holy war against the worldly, not all of humanity but only those people who have lost their way. So offer them the true way of freedom lovers, charity, loving=kindness or whatever you call it these days.
And remember that I am not an Islamist nor am I what label is used to delegitimize my place in the history of freedom.
Finally, as my German friends might think, I say: "Die einzige gute Party ist der Block Party. Fuck Politik!" (The only good party is the block part! Fuck politics!"
Note to my readers: I wrote this article as a thought experiment after reading about the DNC leak and purported whistle-blower.
Since the leak itself has little to do with the whistle-blower, I will state that the bearers of false news are making a mockery of journalism.
Overall, the DNC leak looks more like the work of an unnamed group who are disenfranchised with the DNC. I do not know who did it, but the named whistle-blower is not the culprit.
Any MSM outlet who claims otherwise is proliferating agitation propaganda in an effort to divide the people, specifically anyone who believes the fallacy derived by initially reading the reports.
Lastly, a certain well-known bearer of false news is involved in manufacturing the rumor after the fact.
My main assumptions regarding this thought experiment are that you are least suspected of leaking confidential information as whistle-blower and have enough resources and time to acquire the tools such as a spare phone and prepaid SIM, laptop or PC.
It helps to if you are tech savvy.
Before even proceeding with whistle-blowing via Wikileaks, find the email address of one of the journalists who covered Wikileaks.
Next prepare your resources, which consist of a smartphone, a laptop, and optionally, practice installing Linux and BSD - both of which are UNIX-like OS - on that computer to gain the skill-set that qualifies as a soft resource.
Other skills include the ability to use Google Search to find the information about the journalists associated with WIkiLeaks, and learn about Tails OS, how to use it and install the ISO.
I recommend Tails OS since you can install it on a USB flash drive or optionally, a CD-ROM i.e. you can burn the ISO as data. Check the Tails website for details.
Next download, install and use Tails OS until you are thorough familiar with all the tools on it
Next, only one smartphone should be used throughout these leaks. Prepaid is preferred over a monthly account since the latter gives you a financially visible footprint.
Finally, when you are ready to leak to WikiLeaks, don't use your real name, and choose Tails OS to secure your communications on your laptop. The incognito mode on Chrome or the Private Browsing mode in Firefox is inadequate even when your laptop is not using Windows but a Unix-like OS such as freeBSD or Linux.
For calls, texting and video conferencing, use a secure app like WhatsApp for phone calls and texting or Telegram which is more secure to establish first contact via a WikiLeaks-approved journalist.
One week after you've leaked the documents and pictures, and the receipt of the leak is confirmed via email, text, or video as need be, remove, destroy and throw away the SIM card. Then reset the smartphone to remove all evidence.
Also, secure the laptop by reformatting it using a secure formatting software - which is found in both BSD and Linux flavors mentioned previously.
Then optionally install Windows on the laptop.
Finally, pawn the phone and donate the laptop to a worthy cause such as Salvation Army.
2016 Democratic National Committee email leak:
The DNC Leak and the Purported Whistle-Blower:
Use mobile phones as securely as possible:
In this article, I quote from Simon Fish's Supplication for the Beggars. Then I discuss at great lengths to place the quote within the context of the history of Europe from the 4th Century to the 16th Century CE, only to form my analysis of Fish's Supplication and finally conclude with the Twelve Conclusions of the Lollards, emphasizing its importance with quotes from the Scripture on forgiveness and Christian charity – agapé.
Any mistakes and omissions are entirely my own. SHK 2016-10-31
“Most lamentably complains their woeful misery unto your Highness your poor daily bedemen¹ the wretched hideous monsters (on whom scarcely for horror any ye dare look) the foul unhappy sort of lepers, and other sore people,
rosary. In Medieval English, bede means prayer and is derived from the Old English word biddan. Thus, beadsman means a man of prayer.
2: contrient interdependence: A condition of social situations in which
the actions that benefit some individuals harm others. It tends to
promote competition. [From Latin con- together + terere to rub or
grind + -ent present participle ending + English interdependence]
From: contrient interdependence in A Dictionary of Psychology »
Catholic mystic Geert De Groote., the Confraternity of the Common Life is based on his relations with the German Gottesfreunde (Friends of God), a medieval lay group within the Catholic Church, and the writings of the Flemish mystic Ruysbroek (John of Ruusbroe)c.
Ladislaus and his growing unpopularity by the Magyar people under his rule, and the fears of hereditary monarchy by the Prince-electors of the Holy Roman Empire that culminated in the election of Count Adolf of Nassau-Wellburg as Holy Roman Emperor in 1292, King Albert I of Germany was finally elected King of the Romans (Holy Roman Emperor) in 1298. Due to his humility and keen sense of justice, he protected the serfs and especially the
Jews, who would be expelled from France in 1306 by King Philip.
King Francis 1 would make the strategic and sometimes tactical alliance with Suleiman the Magnificent, the Turkish sultan of the Ottoman Empire, thanks in part to the Turkish conquest of Constantinople in 1453 by Mehmet II and unification of the Middle East between 1516 and 1517 by Selim 1, Suleiman's father. But that's another tale.
that a legitimate male heir was required to inherit his entire estate (England and Scotland).
Wolsey to appeal to Pope Clement VII for an annulment, having sought Anne Boleyn as his new wife, a lady-in-waiting to his soon-to-be former wife Catherine of Aragon.
As bishop Wolsey showed no personal ambition to become pope. Indeed, he was “more joyous thereof than if it had fortuned upon my person”, which showed his humility.
Roman Empire a danger to all Europe.
the treasurer of the Chamber, John Heron to create the “Subsidy.” By accurate valuations of the taxpayer's wealth, one shilling per pound of income was now exacted.
But feudalism was dying out due to education of the middle and upper class of British society.
It is amazing what a little education can do to expand the horizons of a people, especially the British people.
example e.g. the Avignon Papacy warring with the Holy Roman Empire and amassing Papal States to become a power unto itself.
indicated that ordination of priests and bishops do not have any scriptural precedent. IMHO this point would the Church's clergy because the religious law that justifies ordination of clergy is a man-made law, not a law that Jesus laid down.
clergy and thus incompatible with Christian theology.
it is inappropriate in the higher offices in the Church to also hold
positions of great temporal power e.g. the rich Italian banking
families that followed the Avignon Papacy from Italy (the Medici
the uncharitableness of saying prayers for specific individual dead
since it by implication excludes all the other blessed dead not being
prayed for. Also the practice of prayer requests for the dead by
donating money to the Church is bribery that leads to corruption.
the practice of pilgrimages and veneration of relics are ineffectual
for spiritual merit and thus idolatry in their worship of man-made
objects. IMHO is it any wonder that the lower classes still practiced
their folk Christianity in private, at least until the oppression of
Puritans by the Anglican church led to an exodus of Puritans to
the practice of confession for absolution of sins is blasphemous
since only God has the power to forgive sins. If priests did have
that power, it is cruel and uncharitable of them to withhold that
forgiveness from anyone in the world, even if they refused to
to commit sin is human, to forgive divine. Just as the Lord forgave
the Jews and the Romans on the hill called Skull (Luke 23:34), so did
he preach forgiveness in prayer (Matthew 6:1-15) as a good example
for everyone alike to follow.
healing the paralytic, the Christ not only forgave his sins because
“the Son of man has power on earth to forgive sins.” (Matthew
9:6). Like the Christ, the clergy ought to forgive especially those
parishioners who do not confess of their sins out of charity.
Peter asked Jesus, "Lord,
how often shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? till
seven times?" And he answered, "I
do not tell you ‘till seven times,’ but till seventy times
seven.” Thus, even if your brother sins against you, forgive him
always. It matters not if thy brother is related by blood or not. If
you are forgiven your spiritual debt then forgive the debt that other
people owe you. By being of a forgiving nature, you will realize that
nobody owes you a debt at all. (Matthew 18, Mark 2, Luke 5)
ought be on our minds as Christians, for the Lord said “whatever
you ask for in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it
shall be yours. And
whenever you stand up to pray, forgive, if you have anything against
any one, that so your Father also who is in heaven may forgive you
your trespasses". (Mark 10:24-25)
your heart is full of charity for the Lord like the woman who wet his
feet with her tears and poured perfume on them, he shall forgive you
too. It matters not if it is five sins or fifty, save the sin of
forgetting God. (Luke 7:49)
also said “Forgive us our sins, for we also forgive everyone who
has offended us; and bring us not into temptation.” (Luke 11:4). By
this he meant that when we ask God to forgive our sins, we also
forgive everyone lest we be tempted to sin again.
is clear what Jesus meant when he said, "Be
on you guard! If your brother sins, rebuke him, and if he repents
if he sins against you seven times a day, and seven times a day turns
to you saying ‘I repent,’ you shall forgive him." (Luke
instances of the Christ preaching forgiveness include Luke 23:34, and
through Peter resisting Simon the Magi attempted to buy the power of
healing (Acts 8:22) who said “Repent then this of your wickedness,
and beseech the Lord to forgive you this purpose of your heart.”
For the gift of healing through the power of the Holy Ghost cannot be
bought or sold. A good Christian does not let the love of money tempt
him when shares the blessings of the Holy Ghost.
the letters of Paul too flow the Holy Ghost as the Comforter that
forgives the offender in 2 Corinthians 2:1-10. Given that the
Corinthians doubted about the resurrection, Paul asked them to
forgive if he was any burden to them (2 Corinthians 12:13).
Colossians 3, Paul advised the Colossians on how to be good
Christians, stating that “as
God’s chosen people, consecrated and beloved, clothe yourselves
with tenderness of heart, kindness, humility, gentleness, good
with one another and forgiving each other, if any one has a grievance
against another. Just as Christ the Lord forgave you, so must you
them all bind on love, which is the girdle of completeness. Let the
peace of Christ, to which also you were called in one body, rule in
your hearts, and show yourselves thankful.” (Colossians 3:12-15)
John says “if we confess our sins, faithful is he and just to
forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all wrongdoing” for “we
have a partnership with one another” as Christians, for his
sacrifice at the cross has cleansed us from every sin. (1 John 1)
is because the practice of forgiveness is the habit of good
Christians that I quote Scripture to emphasize the importance of
forgiveness as a Christian.
Christians should refrain from warfare, especially wars justified by
religion, such as crusades. They are blasphemous since the Christ
taught men to love and forgive their enemies. IMHO it is not a
weakness of character to preach love and forgiveness of enemies.
Justice will still demand that their evil acts be punished by law
when their acts break the law. As Christians we have no need of
hatred towards enemies.
can a Christian say that what he does is good if he libels his enemy
and generalizes against them, misquoting their scripture, using it to
shame them, thinking that by doing so they are true Christians? Where
Jesus purportedly preaches violence, he did say “that's enough”,
implying that as Christians we follow the Ten Commandments
faithfully, knowing that we as the truly righteous are peace loving
matters not if that enemy is your brother, your sister, your
neighbour, a terrorist, a madman, the poor, the diseased. Truly, in
the depths of my heart I believe this. Should my actions betray my
hypocrisy, I repent of it to God. In the name of Jesus, Amen.
Perhaps this is the reason for islamophobia, and inspiration for extremists like those Islamic State militants:
"I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve.
Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them".
However, the verse reads in full:
Your Lord inspired the angels: “I am with you, so support those who believe. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. So strike above the necks, and strike off every fingertip of theirs.”
Upon reading Quran 8, the Islamophobe has taken the chapter to mean thay it is proof that the Quran is a book of militancy.
I counter that, given that the word Islam means submission to God, the Quran inspires all Muslims to join the greater Jihad of taming the heart so that evil passions including anger, fear, and lust, are defeated by the five daily rituals of cleansing and prayer.
As well, the militants' extremism is evidence of the lesser Jihad which imposes politics upon Islam resulting in the extreme form of Sharia thay aggressively imposes their will on men, women and children whilst claiming it is the will of God.
Yet the Quran exposes these aggressors.
Fight in the path of God those who fight you, but do not aggress. Surely God does not love the aggressors. And fight them where you come upon them, and send them out from where they have sent you out, for persecution is a worse thing than fighting. And do not fight them at the Sacred Mosque (in Mecca) unless they fight you there, but if they fight you, then fight them back. That is the reward of the rejectors. Then if they cease, so God is All-Forgiving, Gentle. And fight them until there is no more persecution and the religion is for God. But if they cease, so let there be no hostility except against wrongdoers. - Qur’an 2:190-193
Though these Salafi inspired extremists have labelled righteous Muslims who fight them and Westerners alike as wrongdoers. Yet Satan blinds the aggressors to their own wrongdoing, which they spin as righteousness.
Truly the extremists follow political Islam, Islamism, not ad a religion but as a militancy that is fascist, millennialist and totalitarian. Contrary to the will of God, their ideology reflects the will of men bent on ushering in the Armageddon that they believe will result in the Second Coming of Christ.
We are dealing with extremists whose goal is the millennialism that is the shared hope of Christendom. Few mainstream media outlets will mention this because it would cause panic among the Christian millennialists, leading to such thing as the unsubstantiated fear that a no-fly zone over Syria will lead to a world war. Right-wing fear mongers even predict that nuclear war with Russia is imminent if Hillary Clinton is elected.
Yet nobody in power will ever discuss this aspect of al Qaeda, Islamic State and Taliban Ideology due to the moral panic it might cause.
Understanding the Quran and Extremism: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joseph-e-b-lumbard/understanding-the-quran-and-extremism_b_9528766.html
What is Salfism?
Salafis are fundamentalists who believe in a return to the original ways of Islam. The word 'Salafi' comes from the Arabic phrase, 'as-salaf as-saliheen', which refers to the first three generations of Muslims (starting with the Companions of the Prophet), otherwise known as the Pious Predecessors. - What is Salafism and should we be worried by it?
If the vast majority of non-Muslims find it difficult to strike the right chord between attacking Salafi-jihadists without being perceived as attacking Islam, the hurdles for the United States and its allies seem almost insurmountable. Therefore, a counter-terrorism approach that highlights the corruption of Salafi-jihadist ideology not on religious, but on secular grounds, is more likely to have the desired effect of weakening that ideology’s appeal.
Rather than highlighting the doctrinal and theological inconsistencies among Salafi-jihadists, the United States and its allies should grasp every opportunity to highlight the disastrous consequences that Salafi-jihadist violence has wrought on the everyday lives not only of Westerners, but first and foremost on Muslims themselves. It is a simple, though not sufficiently emphasized fact that the primary victims of Salafi-jihadists are Muslims, who are killed and maimed in far greater numbers than non-Muslims.
Salafi-jihadists openly justify the killing of civilians, including Muslims, under a logic of the ends justifying the means. It is equally a fact that leaders of Salafi-jihadist organizations hypocritically preach about the benefits of martyrdom, but rarely, if ever, conduct suicidal operations themselves, or send their loved ones on such missions. It is a fact that al-Qa`ida and associated groups offer no vision for Muslims other than perennial jihad—hardly an appealing prospect. - The Salafi Jihad as a Religious Ideology
Islamic State is an example of a Salafi-jihadist extremist group originally associated with al Qaeda that has brought Islamic fascism with a totalitarian spin on Sharia. Because of its extreme form of Salafi jihadism, most of the Muslim world has allied with the West to defend itself from this extremist group.
Mia Bloom, Bombshell: the many faces of women terrorists, Viking Canada
Chris Hefelfinger, Radical Islam in America: Salifism's Journey from Arabia to the West
What is Salafism and should we be worried by it?: http://www.theweek.co.uk/world-news/6073/what-is-salafism-and-should-we-be-worried-by-it
Don't Fear Islamists; Fear Salafis: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/20/opinion/dont-fear-all-islamists-fear-salafis.html
The Salafi Jihad as a Religious Ideology: https://www.ctc.usma.edu/posts/the-salafi-jihad-as-a-religious-ideology
The Islamic State: Mapping Militant Organizations: http://web.stanford.edu/group/mappingmilitants/cgi-bin/groups/view/1
Mother: So, you don't want any then?
Child: [child gets upset] B-but y-you didn't ask if I w-wanted blueberries.
When offered strawberries or blueberries for dessert, and her child says no to strawberries, how does a mother assume her child does not want any?
Can someone tell me what's wrong with a person's cognitive faculty when she acts like this?
One answer is, the child didn't state her preference for blueberries until after she got upset.
The child is upset that her mother did not logically conclude that she wanted blueberries.
This is not expectation of the child for her mother to read her mind. Rather, it's a case of her mother conveniently forgetting that she also offered her child blueberries. The either-or dilemma is not conducive to successful upbringing because it may lead to conflict in adulthood between parent and child.
It may also cause potential conflict between adults. Take the example of Jim and his friend John who debate the current US election:
Jim: If you are offered a choice between Clinton and Trump, would you vote for Trump?
Jim: Then you wouldn't vote at all?
John: (patiently) I'm still voting. Which candidate is left?
Jim: (still stuck on the assumption of John not voting) ...
[At this point, an argument might ensue to pass the time before both friends make peace]
John: (finally) I'm voting for Clinton.
Taken to an absurd level, let's imagine a scenario in which a death row inmate is offered the choice between lethal injection and electrocution.
Warden: so Prisoner 124342, the judge has offered you the choice between electrocution and lethal injection. Would you prefer electrocution?
Prisoner 124342: no.
Warden: so that means you don't want to be executed?
Prisoner 124342: No, I don't want electrocution.
[There might be a moment for the warden to realize what the prisoner wants but only obtuse gentlemen conveniently forget that they offered a choice and don't make great wardens.]
Prisoner 14243: [regains composure] I want lethal injection.
When an authority figure offers the either-or dilemma to his subject, who refuses the first offer, and takes away both offers, is not "playing fair".
To excuse this behavior by saying life is sometimes unfair is to condone authoritarianism.
- Only I know what's right or wrong with me.
- I am on my own path in life.
- I always am ready to succeed. Success is determined by my happiness, not how rich I am.
- I'm useful.
- Love is based on truth. Indeed, its fruit is happiness.
- Happiness comes from within. It's all about love.
- Be true to yourself.
- I'm intelligent enough to manage my life.
However, I know that it isn't true.
When I think other people are lying about me, it actually is me lying to myself. This is why it's hard to write truthfully about myself, because I don't know if the truth I write about myself is actually a lie or the truth.
Overall, that uncertainty leads me to falsely assume other people are lying to me.
Sometimes when I'm this candid in my blog, a few people might object to it. However, that's their choice.
I am certain that my thoughts are better managed when I write about them. Just thinking about them isn't what the problem is.
By obsessive thinking about a concern until it becomes a worry — that is the problem.
Here is the solution:
Writing about it relieves that worry because of the change of focus from thinking about it to writing about it.
Furthermore, writing about my thoughts requires critical thinking and reasoning. In contrast, thinking when anxious only requires the irrational fear of untruth.
By writing candidly about my thoughts, I am reducing the risk factors associated with anxiety and narcissism.
Self disclosure has the risks associated with exposing my vulnerabilities to the scrutiny of public opinion, but it is counteracted by the narcissism inherent in maintaining a blog.
Thus the benefits of writing about my thoughts and feelings on my blog outweigh these risks.