Thursday, January 22, 2009

The Aggressor State

This kicks serious azz...

I couldn't think of a better way to illustrate this myself. Kudos Vin Suprynowicz

More than 700 and perhaps as many as 1300 years ago — back when the peace-loving Muslims were trying to conquer Europe by the sword (till they were stopped at Tours by Charles Martel) — the ancestors of the people who became the Aztecs passed through what is now Utah and Arizona, on their way south.

Left behind were relatively peaceful farmers, the Anasazi, likely the ancestors of today’s Pima and Papago (Tohono O’Odham.)

Nature hates a vacuum, and peaceful farmers tend to rule a land only until a more aggressive group arrives to take their women and their corn. It appears that warlike group, for the land to become Arizona, consisted of a couple of tribes speaking Athabascan tongues (thus, probably from Canada), the Navajo and Apache.

Did the Navajo and Apache buy their lands? Of course not. They took them.



Anonymous said...

Great stuff.

Anonymous said...


The relationship of male Muslims to the rest of humanity is one of predator to prey. There are the razzias (raping, pillaging raids) against harbis, the extortion of jizya from dhimmis, the treatment of their own women as property to be owned, the organised pedophilic and gang-rape attacks against European kuffar women and children, the encouragement of enslavement in the Koran, and the persistent criminality of all descriptions.

Islam has much in common with the Mafia. It's a predatory international criminal conspiracy, and once you're in, the only way you can leave is through death.

Islam is impervious to rational analysis because its motivation is sexual and material predation, rather than any search for theological or philosophical truth. You can no more reason with these Pedophilic Death-cultists than you can reason with the Mafia itself.

This is why the jails of the west are full of disproportionate numbers of Muslims, and why so many kuffar prisoners convert to a cult that provides them with a psychopath's charter. To the Muslim, murdering, raping and pillaging the kuffars isn't criminal, it is simply carrying out Allah's will.

Islam was founded by a predatory pedophile and caravan-robber, and his followers copy his example.

Harbi said...


DA' WA or DAWAH - Propaganda for Islam with the object of converting infidels, or producing a sanitized, favourable impression of Islam. May involve Taqiyya (see below)

DAR AL-HARB - The domain of war. All those lands not under Islamic control.

DAR AL-ISLAM - Those lands under Islamic control.

DHIMMI - A non-Muslim who accepts Muslim supremacy and pays the Jizya (protection money - see below)

HARBI - A non-Muslim who does not accept Muslim supremacy and is thus regarded as being at war with Islam. All Harbis must be killed.

INTIFADA - A violent Muslim uprising in Dar al-Harb. In India and Britain this is termed 'Communal violence'

JIHAD - The struggle to destroy Dar al-Harb and make Islam supreme throughout the world.
Jihad has many aspects.

JIZYA - Protection money paid by Dhimmis to their Muslim masters.

KUFFAR - Variant spellings are Kafir, Kaffir, Kuffer etc. A Kuffar is a non-Muslim, there are two types - Dhimmis may be allowed to live, but Harbis must be killed.

NAJIS - Ritually unclean. Kuffars are najis.

RAZZIA - A Violent raid of rape and pillage into Dar al-Harb.

SHAHEED or SHAHID A Muslim who dies in the process of killing Kuffars. He goes to paradise, together with 70 of his nearest relatives.

TAQIYYA - Lies, falsehood and disinformation employed to further the cause of Islam.

- Harbi

Mjolnir said...

Thank you for your comments. I am wondering, however, what exactly are you trying to get across and how does it relate to the article?

I am not disagreeing with anything you've written, I'm just curious as to what your statement is?

If you've read more than just this one post from my blog, you'd know I'm well aware of all the information you've written here. And I guess you could call me 'Harbi' as well....I prefer sounds better to me.

Again, I don't disagree with you, but what is your point?

I am letting these comments stay despite the questionable relevance...maybe in an indirect way they're relevant, but aside from simply denouncing Islam (which I have absolutely no problem with), the coments don't much relate to the article...and there really is no forum here for meaningful discourse if you've posted anonymously. By all means though, if you wish to engage meaningfully about this topic, please do so.

Anonymous said...

Por que no:)

Anonymous said...

waiting for next post