Although the site has evolved some in terms of tone and narrative, when the Daily Stormer was banned from everything, it was primarily a shock humor website.

I’ve no idea why Charlie Hebdo was allowed to continue to do shock humor for so long after I was banished and buried over it. Actually, I do have an idea – they made fewer jokes about Jews, and more jokes about sex.

However, it appears that they’ve now reached the end of the line, as an international outcry is forming over a recent cartoon mocking Meghan Markle and George Floyd (as well as potentially the British Monarchy, though that’s not what the outrage is over).

RT:

Notorious French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo has published a new cover making fun of Queen Elizabeth, Meghan Markle, and George Floyd at once. Amid the outrage, some liberals demanded blood.

“Why Meghan Markle left Buckingham Palace,” read the cover of this week’s Charlie Hebdo, followed by the punchline, uttered by Markle: “Because I couldn’t breathe.” The illustration depicts Markle pinned under the hairy knee of a smiling Queen Elizabeth II, with the pose and punchline a reference to George Floyd, a black man who died under the knee of police officer Derek Chauvin in Minneapolis last summer. “I can’t breathe” were Floyd’s last words.

The cover sparked outrage. “This is wrong on every level,” Halima Begum, director of a UK anti-racism think-tank, tweeted, adding that “this doesn’t push boundaries, make anyone laugh or challenge #racism. It demeans the issues & causes offence, across the board.”

“This is some white supremacist bulls**t,” tweeted a British group called Black and Asian Lawyers for Justice. The group accused Charlie Hebdo of “pimping #GeorgeFloyd trauma for profit,” and publishing “outrageous, disgusting, fascistic racism.”

Yes.

The real “internet hate machine,” which is woke culture, something which seeks to completely destroy any form of creativity or transgression, is now in full swing against these naughty Frenchmen.

Expected nothing better from a disgusting, disgusting magazine that continues to conceal its hate speech as satire https://t.co/QDFuB2wjvW

— Libby (@polliticali) March 13, 2021

In 2015, Moslems shot up the offices of the publication. It was considered an outrage back then.

But now you’re seeing this:

The terrorist shooters should have finished the job https://t.co/QkkqAqYKbt

— (@419simsim) March 13, 2021

(Here’s the archive of that tweet, by the way, as I suspect it might get deleted.)

The entire “woke” thing is definitely shaping up to be a lot more radical than radical Islam. Unlike radical Islam, however, their violent fantasies against anyone who makes a joke they find offensive are endorsed by the most powerful people on earth.

The direction this is going in should probably be pretty concerning.

Conservative normies are natural morons. The only difference between conservative morons and leftist morons is that conservative normies have better instincts. But when anything goes outside of the realm of instinct, they lose the plot.

If no one is there to tell them that they should be supporting all free speech, they will start saying that as a response to conservatives being banned, liberals and other enemies of theirs should also be banned.

When Laura Loomer protested Twitter against her own banning, she was saying that Louis Farrakhan should be banned for speaking against Jews – but that they shouldn’t be allowed to ban her, because she is Jewish.

She wore a Jude star and held up a sign suggesting that Twitter is anti-Semitic.

There are very many problems with this messaging, but many conservatives will see it and nod along with her. Loomer was supposedly protesting general censorship of conservatives on Twitter. Because it is an instinct to say “this person is on my side, therefore I will agree with them,” if you don’t have leaders presenting a coherent and cohesive message, and instead have people like Laura Loomer, the people will back a message that is stupid and contains contradictions that make it very weak.

It is the responsibility of an intellectual elite to present coherent, cohesive messaging to the masses of people. Long before conservatives were banned from social media, they lacked a coherent message, instead promoting ideological mumbo-jumbo, or just weird stuff, like this Laura Loomer sign.

It isn’t the fault of the masses of people. They are not deep thinkers, and they look to authorities to think for them. The authorities in conservatism for the last 40 years have been Jews and Jewish-minded people.

With the internet, new people were getting an opportunity to say things. Some were better than others. Frankly, I was the best. I still am the best. I present clear narratives on every topic for conservatives to follow. That is why I am so very banned.

Confused conservatives are presently cheering Twitter shutting down this Islamic figure.

Fox News:

Twitter took action against a message from the former Prime Minister of Malaysia, Dr. Mahathir Mohamad, on Thursday that declared, “Muslims have a right to be angry and to kill millions of French people for the massacres of the past.”

The post violated Twitter’s glorification of violence policy, which requires the violator to remove the tweet before they’re able to tweet from the account again.

Mohamad, who has over 1.3 million followers, sent the hateful message as part of a lengthy thread that detailed his thoughts on a recent murder. He began the series of tweets by writing “RESPECT OTHERS” in all capital letters before explaining that “a teacher in France had his throat slit by an 18-year-old Chechen boy. The killer was angered by the teacher showing a caricature of Prophet Muhammad. The teacher intended to demonstrate freedom of expression.”

Mohamad said, “killing is not an act that as a Muslim I would approve,” but he doesn’t think insulting other people should be included in freedom of expression. 

“You cannot go up to a man and curse him simply because you believe in freedom of speech,” he wrote.

“But irrespective of the religion professed, angry people kill. The French in the course of their history has [sic] killed millions of people. Many were Muslims,” Mohamad wrote before he posted the tweet. 

“Since you have blamed all Muslims and the Muslims’ religion for what was done by one angry person, the Muslims have a right to punish the French. The boycott cannot compensate the wrongs committed by the French all these years,” he added following the claim that “Muslims have a right to be angry and to kill millions of French people for the massacres of the past.”

Meanwhile, Twitter will hide the tweets that violate its policy until the person decides to remove the message. 

Frankly, this is just another place where it is none of Twitter’s business what this guy says.

Clearly, it is a negative opinion that Moslems should kill the French. However, how is Twitter capable of making that judgement? Who gave them the right to make these kinds of decisions?

By the way: what is going on with the French? What is the purpose of pushing this issue with the cartoons? France doesn’t have freedom of speech – you can and will get locked up in France for questioning the Holocaust, even though the Holocaust is obviously a hoax.

But even if they did have free speech: why is the President of France actively encouraging people to draw these cartoons? Why is the government of France projecting these cartoons onto government buildings?

France invited millions of Moslems to come live in their country – now they are making it part of their national agenda to incite these people and drive them to commit murder.

What for?

I don’t understand?

If you hate Moslems that much, then why did you invite all of them to live in your country?

Frankly, even if you do hate Moslems that much, there is no reason to do this thing of insulting their religion – it is just extreme rudeness, and it has no political implications. The only reality in which it has political implications is the reality in which you have total free speech and you support anyone doing anything offensive simply because the most offensive speech much be protected.

But again – you go to prison in France for asking about the Holocaust.

So what is the point of these Muhammed cartoons?

I literally do not understand.

The President of France is going out there and encouraging it, even as people are getting killed over the cartoons, and even as no one has explained what the purpose of the cartoons is.

What are the political implications of Muhammed cartoons?

Seriously – why has no one explained that?

One more time: I would understand if this was about total free speech. Even then, I wouldn’t really understand the President of the country coming out and endorsing it, but I would understand the concept.

But please, please, please understand – these cartoons are illegal in France:

The only difference between a Muhammed cartoon and a Holocaust cartoon is that the Holocaust cartoon is significant to society, whereas a Muhammed cartoon is only significant in that people might get killed as a result of its publication.

There is no political statement being made by a Muhammed cartoon. It would be more meaningful to burn a Koran, as that demonstrates a total hatred and condemnation of the entire religion and the racial groups associated with it. Muhammed cartoons are esoteric, in that you have to have researched the religion to even know why these people are getting so mad over it. Instead of totally denouncing the religion, it seems designed to surgically mock them for very specific beliefs.

By the Way, Mahathir’s Statement is Being Taken Out of Context

All these conservatives are going nuts on Twitter, first saying he should be banned and then celebrating the deletion of the tweet.

I just want to make my position explicit: Twitter has no place interfering with anyone’s right to say anything, and if he’s calling for killing, then that needs to be weighed against the laws of the United States, where Twitter is headquartered. Even totally isolated, the statement doesn’t break the law.

With regards to violent speech, Brandenburg v. Ohio is the standard in these United States, and that tweet is very far from breaking that law.

That said: the media is completely taking the tweet out of context. You notice that 12 at the beginning of the tweet? Yes, it was #12 in a series. Let’s look at what led up to it.

RESPECT OTHERS

1. A teacher in France had his throat slit by an 18-year-old Chechen boy. The killer was angered by the teacher showing a caricature of Prophet Muhammad. The teacher intended to demonstrate freedom of expression.

— Dr Mahathir Mohamad (@chedetofficial) October 29, 2020

3. In Malaysia, where there are people of many different races and religions, we have avoided serious conflicts between races because we are conscious of the need to be sensitive to the sensitivities of others. If we are not, then this country would never be peaceful and stable.

— Dr Mahathir Mohamad (@chedetofficial) October 29, 2020

5. The trouble with new ideas is that the late comers tend to add new interpretations. These are not what the originators intended. Thus, freedom for women, meant the right to vote in elections. Today, we want to eliminate everything that is different between men and women.

— Dr Mahathir Mohamad (@chedetofficial) October 29, 2020

7. Yes, sometimes some values seem to be inhuman. They cause some people to suffer. We need to reduce the sufferings.
But not by force, if the resistance is great.

— Dr Mahathir Mohamad (@chedetofficial) October 29, 2020

Today a little string covers the most secret place, that’s all. In fact, many in the west are totally naked when on certain beaches.

— Dr Mahathir Mohamad (@chedetofficial) October 29, 2020

10. Generally, the west no longer adhere to their own religion. They are Christians in name only. That is their right. But they must not show disrespect for the values of others, for the religion of others. It is a measure of the level of their civilisation to show this respect.

— Dr Mahathir Mohamad (@chedetofficial) October 29, 2020

But irrespective of the religion professed, angry people kill. The French in the course of their history has killed millions of people. Many were Muslims.

— Dr Mahathir Mohamad (@chedetofficial) October 29, 2020

13. Since you have blamed all Muslims and the Muslims’ religion for what was done by one angry person, the Muslims have a right to punish the French. The boycott cannot compensate the wrongs committed by the French all these years.https://t.co/ysZeXDrQ09

— Dr Mahathir Mohamad (@chedetofficial) October 29, 2020

I’m not going to defend the Moslem. It’s really gay to defend Moslems. I have reflexively started to do that with Iran before, and I felt really gay afterward, so I’m conscious to not do it. (Plus I’ve noticed some really gay people defending Islam, frankly.) The fact that I agree with him doesn’t mean I have to defend him.

But I do agree with him. What he is saying about it being against freedom for the West to force their idea of freedom on others is really spot on, and at the heart of globalism. Furthermore, when he connects that to the fact that we used to be Christians and that we used to cover our women, he makes it clear: these values we are forcing on the world are not our values.

These values:

BOOM:

Today, Botswana decriminalized homosexuality

President Trump's global push to decriminalize homosexuality is achieving results across the world

Will CNN & MSNBC give his administration any credit for this monumental achievement?

🤔

— Charlie Kirk (@charliekirk11) June 11, 2019

Are Jewish values.

When Christians colonized primitive countries, they brought them Christian values. Now, we’re going to these same countries, and forcing them to have anal sex with men, to have feminism. This is in fact much more extreme than Christian colonialism – in those times, we offered help to the people, but didn’t force it on them. The current agenda is using force.

Right now, the US government is saying that we can’t end the war in Afghanistan because women don’t have enough rights. They are literally saying, “we are going to keep bombing you until you give women rights.”

Related: Literally: “We Have to Continue the War in Afghanistan Because of Women’s Rights”

The Taliban, to their credit, is saying, “okay, keep bombing us then – we’re not giving women rights.” This is the first time they’ve ever openly said that they are doing war on a country for feminism, and it needed these specific circumstances for them to do that.

But what the State Department is doing in Africa forcing them to have gay sex is not any different. It is a serious problem, but what the West has done to Africa is trick them into structuring their economies around foreign aid. The era of the IMF “economic hitman” is over, and the West now gives the money as foreign aid and takes resources in exchange for the aid. So, cutting aid is a form of sanctions, because the West set up these economies to be built around the aid. What they are doing is threatening countries that they will cut the foreign aid if they don’t start having anal sex with men.

So far, the one country that has stood up against that is Zambia. Their president, Edgar Lungu, is a Christian – following the rules that white colonists first brought to his country – and he will not yield to gay anal.

He sent out the US Ambassador last year because he was promoting man-on-man anal sex, and said that he will not take the aid money if it is attached to gay sex.

It’s impossible not to respect that in a world where we’ve come to believe that everything has a price.

The values we are forcing on the world were forced on us first. The Jews redefined the word “freedom” and started saying that it meant allowing women to be unregulated whores and allowing men to do anal on each other. They are now using the powerful machine that White Christians built to crush the rest of the world.

Muhammed cartoons represent those values. We were at war with the Moslems for over 1000 years, and at no point did it occur to us to start drawing these cartoons. The former editor of Charlie Hebdo, Philippe Val, has written a “manifesto” about how Islam needs to be reformed to protect Jews. I don’t know if he himself is Jewish, but he wrote that. So, that’s what these cartoons are about: weakening the will of Moslems so that they are no longer a threat to Jews. France is being used to push that agenda.

Moslems first invaded France in the 8th century. The French never drew these cartoons in 1200 years. Drawing these cartoons is nasty and weird and it doesn’t have anything to do with anything. But as with Laura Loomer’s sign about Twitter being anti-Semitic, the masses of conservative people will see that the Muhammed cartoons are upsetting Moslems, who they dislike, and assume that the Muhammed cartoons must be good. They don’t reason things through further than that.

Moslems have invaded us, they’ve stolen our women, they’ve looted our treasuries, with the Jews at their back, pushing them onward.

We should be having a Crusade against Islam. Not drawing rude cartoons against them and giggling.

Moslems actually are a group that attempts to force their value system on foreigners.

They’re not very good at it.

RT:

Mass protests, involving tens of thousands of people, have continued in Pakistan after French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo reprinted cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed to mark the start of a trial over the deadly 2015 attack.

The protests in the country kicked off last Thursday, attracting large crowds of devoted Muslims to condemn the cartoon parody, the satirical weekly and even France as a whole. On Monday, a massive rally was organized by Jamiat Ulma-e-Islam in Peshawar, when the Islamist party gathered for a congress in the city.

Tens of thousands of its supporters took to the streets venting their anger over the controversial cartoons. Drone footage of the event, taken both during the day and night, shows a massive crowd of people flooding the city.

“If non-Muslim people use Islamic symbols and they commit blasphemic acts, the reaction from our people must not be declared unjustified,” the party’s leader, Maulana Fazl-ur-Rehman, stated.

The magazine’s decision also triggered an angry reaction in other Muslim countries. On Tuesday, Iran’s supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei branded the re-emergence of the offensive imagery an “unforgivable sin,” adding that it clearly shows “hostility and malicious grudge” against Islam harbored in the West.

Imagine if white people would protest like this for the things they believe in.

Just go ahead and imagine it for a second – I’ll wait.

A newspaper you say?

This is like, attacking their own team.

Isn’t it?

Breitbart:

A van was driven into the offices of a right-wing Dutch newspaper in Amsterdam Tuesday morning, bursting into flames and causing significant damage in what is being called an attack on the news organisation.

The Dutch police said the strike was a “deliberate action” and revealed a manhunt was underway after a suspect managed to escape the scene.

De Telegraaf, the publication targeting at around 4:00 am on Tuesday morning, described the incident as an “attack” in their coverage.

Security footage of the attack released by the newspaper shows the van driving into the glass wall at speed, but only causing limited damage.

The driver of the van then appears to reverse the truck away to make another attempt to ram the building, stalling the vehicle in the process. After his second attempt to ram the vehicle through into the building, the driver disembarks, wearing a heavy hooded coat and carrying a plastic bag. Igniting some form of explosive in the back of the truck, the man then flees on foot. No arrests have been made.

No one was injured but flames reportedly rose to 50 feet high and there is “considerable” damage to the building which houses the country’s best selling paper.

Writing on Twitter, Prime Minister Mark Rutte said the “attack” was “a slap in the face for the free press and Dutch democracy”.

Yeah, your free press slapped itself in the face a while ago, bud.

No one is mourning that.

But wait.

The paper, which has a conservative and populist style, has previously published images of the Islamic prophet Mohammed after the Danish cartoon scandal and received a bomb threat in 2006 after doing so.

Ah, there we go.

So it wasn’t an ally after all.

Interesting that they choose these media targets.

It’s a smartish move to intimidate political opponents, rather than just run over randos with a big truck.

Didn’t these evil satirists learn Islamophobia was bad last time?!?!

Insulting Islamic rapists is the worst thing anyone could ever do.

Don’t you know that Islam is a religion of peace?

If you deny that, Moslems will justifiably shoot up your workplace!

Telegraph:

French police are investigating death threats against satirical weekly Charlie Hebdo over a cartoon of Oxford scholar Tariq Ramadan, who is facing rape allegations.

The provocative magazine, which suffered a deadly jihadist attack in January 2015 after publishing cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed, depicted Ramadan its edition last Wednesday in an explicit pose, with the caption: “I am the sixth pillar of Islam.”

The five pillars of Islam are the five basic practices obligatory for believers: faith, prayer, charity, fasting, and the pilgrimage to Mecca.

A minority of Sunni scholars considers jihad, or holy struggle – which can have different meanings – to be the sixth pillar of Islam.

Mr Ramadan, who has Swiss nationality and is seen as a controversial conservative Islamic intellectual in France, has been accused of rape by two women after the Harvey Weinstein scandal sparked a wave of sexual abuse accusations around the planet.

Laurent “Riss” Sourisseau, the magazine’s editor, said the threats and hate mail had “never really stopped” after the January 2015 jihadist attack in which 12 people were gunned down at its offices.

“Sometimes there are peaks when we receive explicit death threats on social media – this has been the case once again,” he told Europe 1 radio.

“It’s always difficult to know if these are serious threats or not, but as a principle, we take them seriously and press charges.”

However, he suggested the climate had worsened. “Calls to murder have become commonplace,” he said.

Last time I checked (I haven’t been paying that much attention, tbh), 22 people were confirmed dead in Texas. The French are mocking them.

Now, far be it from me to criticize people for mocking people who die tragically.

But, um.

Isn’t that defacto illegal now?

Aren’t you supposed to get totally kicked off the internet and turned into an unperson if you do that?

Fox News:

On its newest cover, controversial French magazine Charlie Hebdo appears to mock Texans, depicting them as neo-Nazis caught in the deluge of tropical storm Harvey.

The magazine’s cover reads “God Exists! He Drowned All the Neo-Nazis of Texas.” The words accompany an illustration showing swastika flags and arms raised in a Nazi salute — all submerged in water, the New York Post reports.

The cover has sparked criticism on social media.

…

The weekly magazine is known to cause controversy with its cartoons, which often create a backlash against the magazine – including a terrorist attack in 2015 in which two gunmen opened fire on the publication’s staff in their Paris offices for mocking an ISIS leader.

More recently, the magazine’s cartoonists depicted British Prime Minister Theresa May as decapitated and linked the vehicular terror attack in Barcelona to Islam.

The cover showed the words, “Islam: religion of peace … eternal,” with a cartoon showing mowed down people on the street.

It would seem that some jokes about the recently deceased are more equal than others.

I would of course fight for these Hebdo kikes if they had been kicked off the internet, because I understand that censorship is a beast that is always hungry.

But they aren’t. And they won’t be.

Btw, hat-tip to Tiana Lowe of National Review for figuring out the incomprehensible French language in order to tell us about this story.

An evil, despicable cover. Also, the losers at Charlie Hebdo have a God-given right to publish it, & no one has the right to shoot them pic.twitter.com/isOVjkXPR0

— Tiana Lowe (@TianaTheFirst) August 30, 2017

Tiana is a conservative commenter who non-perverts actually want to fuck… until they see the profile shot of her prehistoric underbite.

tfw her Twitter profile literally says “Kafkaesque.”

She said it.

I ain’t say it.

Well actually I also said it.

She’s probably Jewish. Kafka was Jewish. Which is sort of what makes his writing interesting. Jews are a deformed, insectlike species which pretends to be human. And in certain bits of their own literature that nature shines through. Certain rare reflective Jews, like Kafka, are haunted by it.

My personal favorite Jew (yes, Nazis are allowed to have those – it is maybe even a requirement), David Cronenberg, covered this idea of a Jew reverting to his true form as an insectoid being in The Fly. Cronenberg specifically chose a Jewish actor – Jeff Goldblum – to play the character transformed into an insectoid in the film.

You think this is just some arbitrary connection of some rambling Nazi – think again. Cronenberg is a fan of Kafka and wrote the introduction to a new translation of Metamorphosis. Translated by a Jew. Jews are fixated on this work. (Update: The Paris Review published the full introduction.)

In fact, most of Cronenberg’s films had plots revolving around a monstrous evil within. The best of which is of course Videodrome.

Just as another note here: H.P. Lovecraft, a full-on Nazi, wrote science fiction from the opposite angle, with the “other” rather than the self being an embodiment of an alien creature hiding in a human form. He is my favorite short story author, and he has been wrongfully overshadowed by contemporary Jews such as Kafka for the simple fact that he was not Jewish and indeed hated them.

Point being: what is going on with female conservative commenters that they are all deformed in some way?

Or is it just women in general? 

Wait wait – let’s go back to this French thing.

Is the joke just that everyone from Texas is a Nazi?

Is that a joke that makes sense in French?

Because I don’t actually get the joke.

Morbidly hilarious is that Charlie Hebdo editor Stéphane Charbonnier wrote a manifesto against racism before having been removed by kebabs on January 11 of this year.

His solution to racism was to shut down free speech; this is especially bizarre, since the entire backlash following his assassination, and that of ten others, was to celebrate free speech.

Time has printed some of the relevant passages:

Racism has existed in all countries ever since the invention of the scapegoat. There will probably always be racists. The solution is not to paw through the minds of every citizen, searching for the least little ember of racism, but to prevent racists from putting their nauseating ideas into words, from claiming their “right” to be racists, to express their hatred.

In France, racist speech was largely set free by Nicolas Sarkozy and the issue he made of national identity. When the highest authority of the state stands up in front of assholes and bastards and tells them, “Let ’er rip, boys,” what do you think the assholes and bastards are going to do? They’re going to start saying publicly what, up till then, they had limited themselves to belching out at the drunken conclusion of family dinners. Racist speech, which our institutions, politicians and intellectuals had succeeded in confining to the zone between the xenophobe’s teeth and his kitchen door, made its way out into the street, flooded the media and further befouled the plumbing of social networks.

I wonder if he’d known he was scheduled for removal, he’d have been less opposed to those speaking out against kebab?

The rest of the passages printed by Time go into the topic of “Islamophobia,” and how that is different than racism, and how it is okay to be Islamophobic, even though it is evil to be racist.

What Le Dead Cartoonist did not grasp is that all Islam is is a behavior pattern of specific races. People adopt Islam, generally, because of their race being drawn to a belief system which supports an inborn set of behaviors. This is why liberal Arab parents in Europe are watching their children go off to join ISIS: the children have regressed to the racial mean, which is primitive barbarism.

The only reason I am a racist is that I am opposed to the behavior of other races. This is not about physical appearance. It is about what these people do to your society when they are in it. One of the things that Arabs do is murder people who insult their racial ideology of Islam.

#JeSuisCharlie? I hope not.

Charlie Hebdo, the satirical French magazine that was the victim of a violent terrorist attack in January that left twelve dead, will no longer produce images of the prophet Muhammad, according to its editor Laurent Sourisseau.

Speaking to German magazine Stern, Sourisseau said that the magazine has “done its job” and “defended the right to caricature.”

“We have drawn Muhammad to defend the principle that one can draw whatever they want. It is a bit strange though: we are expected to exercise a freedom of expression that no one dares to,” Sourisseau said.

Still, he said he didn’t want people to perceive the magazine as being “possessed by Islam.”

“The mistakes you could blame Islam for can be found in other religions,” he continued.

[Charlie Hebdo will no longer publish images of the Prophet Muhammad, by Anna Silman, Salon, July 20, 2015]

Translation: It’s far safer and more popular to attack targets like the “far Right” or Catholics than it is to attack Muslims. So like most modern “satirists,” we’ll stick to attacking the enemies of the political class.

It’s important to recognize this wasn’t just about surrendering to fear of Islamic terrorism. It was about surrendering to fear of being called “racist.”

The relentless campaign against Charlie Hebdo by those accusing it of “racism” or “punching down” has had an effect. Because once deployed, as the surviving staff of Charlie Hebdo discovered, the racism charge sticks to the accused’s skin like napalm. And no one is immune — even murdered cartoonists — because there are no penalties for filing a false report. So if they expected unmitigated solidarité after their staff was machine gunned (while planning their participation, it should be noted, in an anti-racism event), they were surely disappointed when non-Francophone writers who hadn’t previously heard of Charlie exploded with denunciations of its racist intent. The most profane mainstream examples compared staffers with raping colonialists and genocidal Nazis.

When the American franchise of PEN, a literary association devoted to the defense of free speech, bestowed an award on Charlie Hebdo celebrating it’s courage, over 200 members revolted, conflating the magazine’s attacks on religious fanatics with attacks on average French Muslims, a group “already marginalized, embattled, and victimized.” (One PEN dissenter, novelist Randa Jarrar, demonstrated her grasp of the subject matter when she referred to “Charlie Hebdo” as a person who had unconvincingly denied “his” racism.)

[Charlie Hebdo waves the white flag, by Michael Moynihan, Politico, July 20, 2015]

All the marches and expressions of hashtag solidarity really signified was a vague discomfort with the tactics of the Islamic terrorists. Post-modern Europeans, self-loathing journalists, and sociopathic politicians don’t want people running around in the street with guns. It raises uncomfortable questions and makes things messy. But The Powers That Be fundamentally shared the bottom goal of the terrorists, which was marginalizing indigenous Europeans within their own countries and replacing them with a foreign people and foreign culture.

So Charlie Hebdo never had any support for its actual message or even for the principle of free speech. How could it, when the French government already bans things deemed “offensive” to Muslims? 

The entire pathetic spectacle only reinforces the point that European liberty will not be saved by liberals (classical or otherwise) but by a movement that puts European Identity first. In the end, Identitarians are the only ones willing to say that Europeans have a right to fight (or speak) in their own defense.

Sometimes this stuff gets so goofy, I just can’t even hardly take it.

AP:

The United Nations human rights watchdog said Friday it was “shocked” by a Hungarian government questionnaire which links migration with terrorism, fearing it could bolster anti-immigration sentiments.

“We are shocked by the Prime Minister’s introductory message, which suggests a link between migration and terrorist attacks, including the attack which took place in Paris in early January this year,” the office of the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights said in a statement. “We are also worried about the phrasing of some of the suggestive, leading questions, which actively promote hostility toward migrants and risk spreading xenophobia within the country.”

The “national consultation” being sent to Hungarian voters seeks to build political support for Prime Minister Viktor Orban’s rejection of immigration and for his call on the European Union to give individual countries more power to set their own immigration policies.

One of the questions asks voters whether they agree with the government that it should support “Hungarian families and children to be born” instead of immigration.

So, what is the argument here? That if these Moslems who did Charlie had not been in France, someone else would have done the attack? This is similar to the Sargon of Akkad theory about how if Pakis wouldn’t have raped the girls in Rotherham, White guys would have done it instead, I guess?

This is just completely nutty. Clearly, not every Moslem immigrant is going to commit a terrorist attack, but every terrorist attack (as a rule) will be committed by Moslems. So, following this, the fewer Moslems you have in your country, the lower the chances of terrorist attacks.

This is not complicated math.

Two stupid Hajis tried to do a Charlie in Texas Sunday night and got shot dead.

Appearing at a Mohammed cartoon contest, they waylaid a security guard, opening fire and the cops were like “not on my watch, raghead.”

All Hail Texas.

AP:

The men drove up to the Curtis Culwell Center in the Dallas suburb of Garland as the contest was scheduled to end and began shooting at a security officer, the City of Garland said in a statement. Garland police officers returned fire, killing the men.

“Because of the situation of what was going on today and the history of what we’ve been told has happened at other events like this, we are considering their car (is) possibly containing a bomb,” Officer Joe Harn, a spokesman for the Garland Police Department, said at a news conference.

Police are not aware of any ongoing threat and had not received any credible threats before the event, Harn said.

Harn said it was not immediately clear whether the shooting was connected to the event inside, a contest hosted by the New York-based American Freedom Defense Initiative that would award $10,000 for the best cartoon depicting the Prophet Muhammad.

…

Authorities haven’t removed the bodies of the gunmen, who have not yet been identified, Harn said. The bodies are too close to the car to be removed, but that will happen once the scene is clear, he said.

The security officer who was shot worked for the Garland Independent School District, Harn said. He was treated at a local hospital for injuries and had been released Sunday night.

“Texas officials are actively investigating to determine the cause and scope of the senseless attack,” Texas Gov. Greg Abbott said in a statement issued late Sunday.

The event featured speeches by Pamela Geller, president of the AFDI, and Geert Wilders, a Dutch lawmaker known for his outspoken criticism of Islam. Wilders received several standing ovations as he quoted former President Ronald Reagan and Texas founding father Sam Houston.

Wow, Pamela Geller is now officially the queen troll of the universe, of any genre. She actually trolled hajis into doing a Charlie on her conference. Geert might get a nod for best supporting troll.

But you know what would solve this, goyim? More immigration from Moslem countries. Studies done by Jews have repeatedly proved that more Moslems equals less Charlies.  We should also consider nuking Iran in order to stop Moslem terrorists inside of our country – who we invited into our country – from killing us while they’re here.  Jewish studies have repeatedly shown this to be a perfectly logical course of action.

The scene – just another day in Texas, land of the hardcore bastards:

What I learned from this is that Texas is a way better place than France.  The French are just like “oh yes, please come in, shoot us all in our faces” but Texans are like “nope. gtfo.”