The 4 Freedoms Library

It takes a nation to protect the nation

I'm putting this in the US Room because its a line of thought that first came to me from the American 'Homeland' series - but its a topic that cuts across all categories.

In Homeland, three people are going mad.  Obviously, Brody is mad, with his schizophrenic behaviour and strange relationships with his wife and Carrie.  This is only natural after being held for years, tortured, and forced to kill his buddies by Abu Nazir.  Carrie seemed to be forced to go mad due to the machinations and web of deceit woven by Brody. However in the latest series, her behaviour is so inexcusably erratic that I'm not inclined to excuse it any more.  Brody's daughter went mad and tried to kill herself.  After many sessions of psychotherapy she is now semi-normal, but in the last episode was perhaps toying with the idea of becoming a Muslim like her father.

The point is that, behind all this madness is Islam.  Some people will say that Islam is mad, and that infects those that contact with it.  That's a bigger topic and not one I'm going to consider right now.  My thesis is a smaller one, that:

  • The strain of trying to maintain non-judgement and non-discrimination of all ideologies (of which Islam is one), in a secular democracy, is sufficient to drive people mad

It is extremely difficult to maintain the tolerance of the intolerant Islam, while it is going about its racist and supremacist business.  The contradictions are palpable.  And when you try constantly to maintain two contradictory ideas, you go mad.  Of course, as the Greeks said, "Those whom the gods wish to destroy they first make mad".

Once you think about this madness, you can recognise it in many places.  An obvious example is the Dutch PVV leader who became a Muslim.  Then there are Western secular women of the Left, who are staunch supporters of the ideology that says they are "deficient in intelligence" and worth half a man, and who support the Burqa while castigating Western husbands who don't help with the housework.  this is not just mere irrationality, surely? Its obvious that their fear of Islam, combined with their cowardice, has lead them to seek the only way out: deny Western misogyny but accept Islamic misogyny. Then, in an attempt to cover up their deceit, they scream even louder at anyone who dares question this contradiction.  Of course, there are shades here of the classic witch burning model of the middle ages, where the only way to escape was to denounce someone else as a witch.  Here, the Leftist woman tries to escape her cowardice by denouncing all on the right as witches.  But this surely is the beginnings of madness.

Some of our readers will also be familiar with the concept of the Chasm.  The Chasm is the gap that opens up between Islam and the Kafir, as the dumb Kafir realise that their beloved 'moderate' Islam is but a chimaera, which, even if it does exist, will be destroyed, with its supporters, by the fundamentalists. This has happened for 1400 years, and is happening around the world now.  

So, as the chasm opens up you have strict Muslims on the left cliff, and non-Muslims + Muslim appostates to the right of that.  On the right cliff you have all those secularists who have accepted that this attempt to neutralise the violence of Islam by working with 'moderate' Muslims, will not work, and have accepted that the communities are divided and against each other, and always will be.  But what do you have in the gap in the middle, between the two cliffs?

I believe that what you have in the middle are the mad people.  They are, for example, the tolerant manic-liberal Swedes and Norwegians, letting their women and children get mass raped by a single and clearly identifiable section of the community, while they stand by and politely watch, as the civilians and police did as Lee Rigby was having his face mutilated with carving knives.  Then they have long debates on TV about what they have done to make those Muslims so angry, and how can they appease them. They also boast to the world how they, the purest of the pure, are now going to accept even more Muslim refugees from the poor war-torn regions of the world.  But they don't boast about how well the are protecting their own people, I notice.

If you try stand in the plain between the two cliffs ,preaching moderation and reconciliation while the divide gets deeper and the contradictions plainer, you can only go mad.  As the chasm stretches wider and deeper, over the next 10 and 20 years, I believe we shall see a lot of madness.

Finally, for the Goebbels of the media morons, who will take this article to be an incitement to putative Breveiks to go on a killing spree, I would say, please look up and try understand the meaning of these three words:  Explanation of action (in past), Prediction of action (in future), and Prescription of action.

Tags: Chasm, Homeland, Islam, Madness, and, of, the

Views: 495

Replies to This Discussion

"I believe that what you have in the middle are the mad people.  They are, for example, the tolerant manic-liberal Swedes and Norwegians, letting their women and children get mass raped by a single and clearly identifiable section of the community, while they stand by and politely watch, as the civilians and police did as Lee Rigby was having his face mutilated with carving knives.  Then they have long debates on TV about what they have done to make those Muslims so angry, and how can they appease them. They also boast to the world how they, the purest of the pure, are now going to accept even more Muslim refugees from the poor war-torn regions of the world.  But they don't boast about how well the are protecting their own people, I notice."

You put your finger on the problem here Alan, but what can we do about it?

Islam is making the West mentally ill, schizophrenic. Self destructive, self-hating, apathetic. The sins of Muslims sanctioned by Islam are all too clear, concrete and real. Undeniable and well documented. The madness is in the denial of reality. The reality that Islam (Muslim thought) is totally insane, completely alien and incompatible to rational logical reasonable civilized thought. (Our standards, laws and practices).
The denial, self-induced mental blindness, is the contagious insanity that Islam apologists suffer from. As with the deluded, mentally ill, they believe themselves to be perfectly reasonable and sane, while what comes out of their mouths is pure gibberish. The madness spreads, leaving me close to snapping as eventually many will, there will be a blood-bath one way or another when the Muslims become a majority. It will be the violence we now witness in Muslim countries, only here in Britain, Europe, America and elsewhere.
The cure: remove Muslims from our countries.

Yes, there is a madness coming like an infection from the madness of Islam.

But there is a 2nd source of madness which I am talking about here.  Secular Democracy has fundamental vulnerabilities built into it, which have not been an issue for the past few hundred years thanks to various cultural and historical accidents. The same thing happens with IT systems and applications.  Vulnerabilities get built in.  If you are lucky, someone will simply expose the vulnerability. Then you have the chance to close it, before someone else exploits it.

If the threat from Islam wasn't so serious, one could almost be grateful for them for exposing the vulnerabilities - but the matter is obviously too serious for that, as they have both exposed it and exploited it.

Now what happens with IT systems is not happening with our political and ideological systems.  Our political "professors" and media overlords are too busy screaming the labels of identity politics to do serious investigation.  So the dumb kaffir makes no attempt to seal the vulnerabilities, so Muslims are free to exploit them.  

If Muslims didn't do it, I can assure you, some other group within the next 50 or 100 years would do so.  The problem in our ideological systems still exist whether Muslims exist or not.  Yes, we can moan about Muslim dirty tricks, but it would be more effective, and ultimately more secure and protective, to seal those defects.

Its a conversation that nobody is prepared to have, of which some of its topics are enshrined in the the 4 Freedoms.  We have to decide what tolerance means when confronting an intolerant ideology.  We have to decide what it means to give Freedom of Religion (or the Wall of Separation between State and religion), if a political system (like Marxism or Islam) clothes itself in religion.  We have to decide just how morally pure and virginal we are, when confronting an enemy that is not only happy to lie to our faces, but is also happy to mutilate our faces, as with Lee Rigby and the Kenya Mall Massacre.  We have to decide just how guilt free are the family members of terrorists, when our enemies are happy to hostage and massacre hundreds of tiny children, as at Beslan.  

There are so many questions, and we haven't even begun the conversation.  I thought of yet another one tonight when I was claiming a refund: do we really think our society is so well structured that we can cope with people inside it that wish only to exploit it?  In other words, what is the extra cost to society of proceeding from a system where it is understood that most are honest so you factor in a few traps to catch the dishonest ones, to a system where many are dishonest, and every single step of the process requires authentication and checking?  The administrative load of insurance claims and so on are getting heavier and heavier, with things like the Birmingham tailgating/whiplash scams, you must have noticed this.  Can our society cope with all this extra load?  The current police bill for controlling Islamic Terrorism in the UK is equal to the funding for 5 police forces the size of the Greater Manchester Police, and that does not count normal Muslim criminal activity - currently running at 4 times the average for the population.  So, at what point do we hold a segment of the population responsible for the extra charges that it levels on the population?  Of course, medical needs would be exempt from that consideration.

The  Kaffir cattle seem to want to become extinct.  We must keep reminding them of their vulnerabilities, and the future that lies in store for them, if they don't close them.  And since they don't listen to reason, you may as well tell them how dumb they are, and see if that wakes them up.

"Secular Democracy has fundamental vulnerabilities built into it, which have not been an issue for the past few hundred years thanks to various cultural and historical accidents. "

Liberal democracy grew up protected by strong borders. It is (in some ways) the pinnacle of the Renaissance (although may even have essential characteristics which can be traced by to Medieval England).  It could only develop because the greatest, most enduring form of totalitarian dictatorship and apartheid in history was kept at bay over the last 1300 years.

Now, the enemy have been invited into the heart of this delicate, almost unique, creature.

It is as if Britain had been at war with Nazism for 1000 years, and in the last 50 years the Nazis have been invited to come and live in our towns and cities. And every journalist is a loyal grandchild of Lord Haw-Haw, and all the MPs have passed a law banning anyone from criticising Nazism. The Nazis are loudly proclaiming their views in the beer halls they've created, but the offspring of Lord Haw Haw ignore them, or only publicise the least threatening parts of their speeches.  Successive British governments are funding the beer halls, and using every trick of state oppression to persecute those who try to organise an anti-nazi resistance.  

Why wouldn't those who know what Nazism is, and what the history of Nazism is, go mad?

Yes, our societies were based on the principle that most people are honest and law abiding. That is also true in the example of the opening of our protective national borders, it was assumed that freedom of movement would be respected. Well, aliens have no respect for our borders or our laws. Laws can be enacted and enforced so that those that come uninvited can be forcefully ejected. The real problem (and the crime and the treachery) is that the "know better than us, do things for our own good" band of traitors in power have invited in or allowed to stay (with permanent citizenship) millions of what turn out to be undesirables. How do you get laws made to eject these?

Whether the writers are mad or not i bet they are having fun.  And they are sowing confusion amongst us all.

Warning: Spoiler alert!

It must be tough writing a successful TV series now in its third season.  How to get the balance right, maintain and increase the audience and not offend too many people.  Homeland does it somehow.  I just finished watching the third episode of the third series.  The best line for me is when the Imam turns Brody into the police and says to him, as they haul him out of the shower: ‘You are not a Muslim you are a terrorist!’  How many people cheered for that line?  The writers seemed to be suggesting that a Muslim cannot be both at the same time.  It has to be one or the other.  An Imam would know, of course, the truth of the matter.  The writers might not know some of the Islamic scriptures.  Here are only two for their consideration:

Qur’an 8:12 “Your Lord inspired the angels with the message: ‘I will terrorize the unbelievers. Therefore smite them on their necks and every joint and incapacitate them. Strike off their heads and cut off each of their fingers and toes.”

"I have been made victorious with terror" -- so says Muhammad, the founder of Islam (Bukhari Vol. 4, Book 52, Number 220).

Kinana said:

 ‘You are not a Muslim you are a terrorist!’  How many people cheered for that line?  The writers seemed to be suggesting that a Muslim cannot be both at the same time.  It has to be one or the other.  An Imam would know, of course, the truth of the matter.  The writers might not know some of the Islamic scriptures.  Here are only two for their consideration:
Yes Kinana, an imam would know
We're very lucky to have a few official consultants, including a contact at the CIA and the representatives of Muslims On Screen & Television. We even have an imam on set to work with non-Muslim actors to perfect their salat prayer rituals. But, as Howard says, the authenticity of the characters comes first.
The we have this snippet from an interview with actor Daiman Lewis
Homeland has anointed Lewis as one of the biggest British stars in the world. He’s aware that with great fame comes great responsibility, particularly when your show deals with issues of patriotism and religious faith. Sgt Nick Brody came back from his seven years’ imprisonment both a radicalised jihadist and a practising Muslim. Throughout Homeland’s two seasons, Lewis has sought reassurances from the scriptwriters and producers that the two are not linked.

I did make very clear and say early on that if there were going to be any parallels drawn between Islam and violence, I wouldn’t do it. I just wouldn’t be interested in telling that story. Because it’s not a fair reflection of what’s actually going on, and so I thought that would be irresponsible. “And they kept to their word. They worked really hard to [portray] the Islamic faith as a nurturing, sustaining force for good for Brody. It was a salvation for him while he was being brutalised in captivity.

Hmm, now why did he do that?  Was it because of his vast knowledge of Islamic scripture and history, and a determination to see that the truth was preserved?  

So I don’t feel we’ve done anything that people can blow us up for,” he says

Or was it so that he and his family could be preserved?  As usual, the hard men actors are, in reality, cowards like the rest.  

{Sub note: there's a reality program where they drop Bruce Willis into a remote Canadian mountain with wild bears.  He fails miserably.}

The Scandinavian TV police series The Bridge(Broen) is in its second season. Based on cooperation between police forces on each side of the bridge that links Denmark and Sweden. The American version of the The Bridge happens on the border between Mexico and America. In this second series the mass-murdering terrorists are native Scandinavians, I assume so as not to offend the New Scandinavians of Middle-Eastern descent.

Exactly. In the 3rd series, they will have mass murdering Christian elk herders from Finland. We all know how big a terrorist problem they are.

 'Sgt Nick Brody came back from his seven years’ imprisonment both a radicalised jihadist and a practising Muslim. Throughout Homeland’s two seasons, Lewis has sought reassurances from the scriptwriters and producers that the two are not linked'.

Of course the two aren't linked. When someone wearing a suicide vest wanders of to blow himself up he's a terrorist. But he's only a terrorist at certain times of this act.

When he's screaming Allah u akbar!, he is a muslim carrying out his religious right to worship whom he please's. Even though in Islam it is impossible to leave without a death threat, so 'religious right' may not be a true description. And even though he's got a bomb strapped to his chest. Anyway, any time a muslim is not a muslim he's a terrorist, isn't that what they're saying?  Or if they're saying the Imam believed that carrying out a terrorist act automaticly excluded you from being a muslim, why are muslim's  who have carried out terrorists acts given islamic burials.  I haven't read anywhere that suggests if you are one you can't be the other.  

 -The best line for me is when the Imam turns Brody into the police and says to him, as they haul him out of the shower: ‘You are not a Muslim you are a terrorist!’ -

This is what pushes me over the edge. Those that know that they are lying and even worse those that believe that what they are saying is true, people like Lewis and Cameron-"terror has nothing to do with Islam". From all over Europe Muslims are travelling to war-zones to fight for Jihad. The chief of the security police in Norway when asked what they were doing about it said, "we talk to those we hear about and try to persuade them not to go, we try to keep an eye on those that return with combat experience and training in weapons and explosives". No one is saying what should be said,-that under no circumstances will those that travel out to take part in violent jihad be allowed back into the country.

Such a delciously sweet thought! that those trained in jihad should be banned from return.  But that is too reasonable, too common sense. So now we sense it again, in the police chief, the MADNESS.

What makes it worse is that we cant even convict the jihadists of treasonous support of an enemy, since our insane leaders have chosen to support the anti-Assad forces.

RSS

Muslim Terrorism Count

Thousands of Deadly Islamic Terror Attacks Since 9/11

Mission Overview

Most Western societies are based on Secular Democracy, which itself is based on the concept that the open marketplace of ideas leads to the optimum government. Whilst that model has been very successful, it has defects. The 4 Freedoms address 4 of the principal vulnerabilities, and gives corrections to them. 

At the moment, one of the main actors exploiting these defects, is Islam, so this site pays particular attention to that threat.

Islam, operating at the micro and macro levels, is unstoppable by individuals, hence: "It takes a nation to protect the nation". There is not enough time to fight all its attacks, nor to read them nor even to record them. So the members of 4F try to curate a representative subset of these events.

We need to capture this information before it is removed.  The site already contains sufficient information to cover most issues, but our members add further updates when possible.

We hope that free nations will wake up to stop the threat, and force the separation of (Islamic) Church and State. This will also allow moderate Muslims to escape from their totalitarian political system.

The 4 Freedoms

These 4 freedoms are designed to close 4 vulnerabilities in Secular Democracy, by making them SP or Self-Protecting (see Hobbes's first law of nature). But Democracy also requires - in addition to the standard divisions of Executive, Legislature & Judiciary - a fourth body, Protector of the Open Society (POS), to monitor all its vulnerabilities (see also Popper). 
1. SP Freedom of Speech
Any speech is allowed - except that advocating the end of these freedoms
2. SP Freedom of Election
Any party is allowed - except one advocating the end of these freedoms
3. SP Freedom of Movement
The government can import new voters - except where that changes the political demographics (i.e. electoral fraud by means of immigration)
4. SP Freedom from Over-spending
People should not be charged for government systems which they reject, and which give them no benefit. For example, the government cannot pass a debt burden across generations (25 years).
An additional Freedom from Religion is be deducible by equal application of law: "Religious and cultural activities are exempt from legal oversight - except where they intrude into the public sphere (Res Publica)"

© 2017   Created by Netcon.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service