Wednesday, March 27, 2019

How is this being published?

So I was taking some old newspapers to the recycling bin when I saw a headline that frankly dropped my jaw.

Left's Diversity Push Played Role in New Zealand Killings.

Related image

I had to read it twice to believe it.

Who int he Hell would have written such at hing?

Surprise, surprise surprise! Pat Fucking Buchanan is still around!

Now how in the year of our Lord Two Thousand and Nineteen anyone still sees fit to publish the son of a bitch is another issue. But Holy God, look at what the bastard wrote about Christchurch!

Of course he begins with the standard "I don't condone these killings, I have always believed that people should not do murder" boilerplate:

Last Friday, in Christchurch, New Zealand, one of the more civilized places on earth, 28-year-old Brenton Tarrant, an Australian, turned on his cellphone camera and set out to livestream his massacre of as many innocent Muslim worshippers as he could kill.
Using a semi-automatic rifle, he murdered more than 40 men, women and children at one mosque, drove three miles to another, and there killed seven more. Dozens are still wounded, suffering and dying.
An atrocity and act of pure evil by a man with a dead soul.

Okay, you've covered your ass, now what do you really think?

Yet, predictably, within 48 hours, the president of the United States was being publicly indicted as a moral accomplice.

Well, of course your first reaction to racist murder is to try and insulate the racist-in-chief from any incrimination. Obviously that's gotta be your first priority! Although, I gotta ask, are we forgetting to emphatically aver that the gun itself is in no way at fault?

Donald Trump, it was said, used a word, “invasion,” to describe the 76,000 migrants caught illegally crossing the U.S. border in February. At the same time, the killer used that word to describe the Muslim migration into the West.

Well, there was that. But also, there was the fact that the terrorist murderer specifically named Donald Trump as "a symbol of renewed white identity and common purpose."

So, ya know. . .  it's not like people are just jumping on a single word that Trump used.

The killer also mentioned Trump in his 74-page manifesto.
What further need have we of proof?
Well, he did a bit more than "mention" him, but why bother with a genuine honest argument, eh?

Anyway, let's skip the Trumpist sideshow and get to the meat of Pat's argument. The rotten, rancid, noxious meat of his argument.

Now, there are no excuses, or defenses, for what happened in Christchurch. But there is an explanation.
All peoples to some degree resent and resist the movement of outsiders into their space.

Holy Fucking Shit, dude!
Let's set aside for a moment that you are using the fact that some people are xenophobic to justify mass murder. Are you saying that this murdering son of a bitch was resisiting "outsiders" coming into "his space?" You do know that white people are not indigenous to New Zealand, right? The people in New Zealand who would have a legitimate complaint about outsiders coming into their land would be the Maori. White New Zealanders are living in "space" their ancestors stole from the Maori. And, as you mentioned in your very first sentence, the killer . . . was AUSTRALIAN. So he didn't even have a half-assed claim to wonership of this "space." HE was a foreigner. He was upset about "outsiders" moving into someone else's "space" which wasn't even their "space" to begin with.

Some migrants are more difficult than others to assimilate into Western societies. European nations that had not known mass migrations for centuries were especially susceptible to a virulent reaction, a backlash.

Oh my God. So the reason that Muslims got murdered in New Zealand is because there were Muslims in New Zealand?
That's like saying "you know, if the banks didn't have all that money in them, John Dillinger wouldn't have had a motive to rob them. So, it's kinda their own fault."
Or it's like saying "Hmm, the pastor here is a child molester. The solution is to not allow any children to attend services here which, oh my God, I just remembered that a church in  Florida actually did! Hold on, we need to go on a tangent here.

A Florida church had previously barred children from attending service because a sex offender convicted of two counts of child molestation had become their pastor right after he got out of prison. He was prohibited from being in the vicinity of children, prompting the church ban on children.

Image result for are you fucking kidding me? gif

So, the church council or the deacons or whoever is looking for a new minister and they're interviewing this dude and they're all like "so I see you were at St. Mark's for four years, you were the senior pastor at First Baptist. Then there's a gap in your resume'. What have you been doing the last several years?" And this pastor's all "oh, I've been in prison. I'm a vile, loathsome child molester!" And the hiring committee is like "Dang, other than the child molestation thing, I really like this guy. Do we even have that many children in our congregation?" And the solution is somehow not "get the hell out of our church and never darken our doorway again. Deacon Smith, would you call an exorcist please?"
The solution is "well, what if we just don't allow children in the building while he's in the pulpit giving us lessons in morality?' I mean, fuck, I know it's Florida, but come on!

There's really no way you could make this any worse! What's that, Florida? Hold your beer? Well, okay, but I don't see how. . .

Just the other day, the probation on the pastor was changed to enable him to minister to children and the church leaders lifted the ban from kids attending service.

Image result for oh come on gif

Look, I understand the idea of giving someone a second chance, but. . .

In 2009, Gilyard pleaded guilty to lewd or lascivious conduct and molestation involving two girls younger than 16. His 2007 resignation after 15 years as pastor of Jacksonville’s Shiloh Metropolitan Baptist Church, a 7,000-member predominantly African-American congregation, marked the fifth pastorate he lost due to allegations of sexual misconduct.

Image result for oh come on gif

And you're seriously going to let children around this scumbag? What does the judge have to say about that?

According to WJXT, a judge modified Gilyard’s probation which now enables him to “minister to children under the age of 18 as long as the children are supervised by an adult other than the defendant.”

Image result for oh come on gif

All right, anyway, let's get back to the subject at hand: Pat Buchannan being a huge disgusting racist asshole.

Americans, after all, reacted viscerally to the Irish migration of 1845-1849, and, again, to the Great Migration from Central and Eastern Europe from 1890 to 1920. Inter-ethnic violence was not uncommon.

Aaaaand. . .? And that waaaaaas. . .? That was. . . no? You don't know? You don't know this one? It was WRONG! When did your Irish ancestors come here? Do you think they were okay with Americans "reacting viscerally" to their arrival? You think ot was okay that inter-ethnic violence was visited on them? I understand the value of tradition, but just because American assholes were shitty to the Irish a hundred fifty years ago and shitty to Germans and Poles 50 years later doesn't mean we should be shitty to Muslims now. It was wrong then and it's wrong now.

Our leaders in the 1920s understood this and took steps to halt the migrations until those who had come could be assimilated, and, in a word, Americanized. It worked. By 1960, we were a united people.

Image result for shocked laughter 

Oh my God! Imagine actually thinking that! Imagine being a person who was alive in 1960 and actually thinking that!

Image result for 1950s civil rights

Yup, just one big happy family!

Image result for anti-integration 

       Ah, so united!

Related image

Boy, I sure hope immigration doesn't sow the seeds of division and spoil this time of peaceful harmony!

Then, without the people’s consent, the great experiment began:
America’s doors were thrown open to peoples of every religion, race, culture and creed, to create a different nation
Wait, what? Without the people's consent? Were we not a Democratic Republic in the 1960s? If  "the people" didn't want increased immigration, couldn't they have just voted in representatives that were even more xenophobic than your average Congressman?

The problem: A universal nation is a contradiction in terms. A nation of all races, religions and tribes had never before existed.

And, as we all know, if something has never existed, it can't be done and is inherently bad. That's why the Founding Fathers didn't try to create a constitutional democracy where citizens could choose their own representatives in goverrnment and there would be no monarch. Because such a nation had never existed, and they wisely understood that if something hasn't happened before it is just too dabgerous to try it now.

The liberal democracies that embraced this ideology, this idea, are at war with human nature, and are losing this war to tribalism and authoritarianism.

I thought you were supposed to be some sort of a Christian.
You know, the entire idea of Christianity is to be at war with human nature. Your basic human instincts are to take whatever you want, kill anyone who might be a rival and fuck every woman you see. The goal of Christianity and pretty much any major religion, is to get people to say "even though I want to do this or that thing, I won't because it would make Baby Jesus cry and then I'll go to Hell." And I'm not saying that you need religion to get people to behave like civilized human beings. You don't. As long as your parents taught you empathy. Anyway, we're getting off track here.

If I'm understanding you correctly, what you're saying is that the way to stave off tribalism and authoritarianism is to have a strong leader who will not allow anyone but your own people in ot the country?

As for Christchurch, unfortunately, such horrors appear to have become the new normal. But Brenton Tarrant alone is responsible for what he did. And it was not Trump but the New World Order globalists who fertilized the soil that spawned him.

Yes. The murderer alone is responsible for his actions. Agreed. No one else is to blame for his despicable actions. Not Donald Trump, not Candace Owens, not "pewdipie," whoever that is. Only the killer is to blame. Oh, and also, it's the globalists' fault. And the New World Order. But not the racist right.

If the globalists would only stop letting "those" people into our nice clean white countries, white people wouldn't have to murder them.

Seriously, how in the hell is anyone publishing this asshole?