Muhammed Cartoons: Once Again, The West is Forcing Jewish Values on the World

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.


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:

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.