Serial pest’s courtroom showdown with Sonia Kruger will further fuel white resentment

17

In order to not get put in prison for thought crime, citizens of the West are required to publicly hold to the following contradictory statements:

  • White people invented the concept of race as a justification to exploit and enslave the marginalised people of the world.
  • There is only one race, the human race.
  • Islam is a race, and if you are not ethnically Islamic and you criticise Islam, you will be arrested and if you get killed in jail it’s your own fault.

And we wonder why men are climbing over themselves to cut their dicks off..

This is why we can’t have nice things. Like our penises. Photo by Web Summit

As for Sonia Kruger, the only way I can see her getting out of this one is to go full Rachel Dolezal:

“High-profile TV star Sonia Kruger will face a directions hearing next month after failing to have a racial vilification complaint made against her dismissed.

“On July 18, 2016, an emotional Kruger, 52, kicked off a social media storm by telling Nine’s Today show viewers that Australia’s borders should be closed to Muslims…

“A complaint against her July 18 comments was made by Sam Ekermawi, a Muslim living in Australia who claimed the Nine Network vilified “ethnic Muslim Australians”.

“Late on Tuesday, the Civil and Administrative Tribunal refused Nine’s application to have the complaint dismissed without a hearing.

“Mr Ekermawi has been involved in 32 hearings before courts and tribunals, 22 of them related to vilification complaints, according to evidence heard by the tribunal.”

There are two massive red flags in this – Islam is not a race, and this guy Ekermawi is clearly a serial pest – but none of that matters to Australia’s activist judiciary. The left will love this. Sonia Kruger represents everything they hate – a successful blonde woman saying what is on the minds of normal, indigenous white Australians. The Marxists would love nothing better than a ritual humiliation. My only suggestion to Kruger is to turn up the volume and attack at all costs.

As for Ekermawi and his ilk, he is playing a very dangerous game.

There is a common refrain amongst those of us with our eyes open, the idea that surely the latest Islamic terrorist attack, the latest mass Islamic rape scandal, the latest speech suppression outrage against someone who has spoken out against Islam, will wake everybody up and the tide will turn. Kruger’s case may not be a turning point, nor may Tommy Robinson’s in Britain, every time something like this happens, the pressure builds.

And inexorably, white people get more pissed.

I started this article off with three contradictory and false statements. I will conclude with three true and complementary statements:

  • Those who do not learn the lessons of history are doomed to repeat it.
  • White people are the most tolerant people on the planet, until we’re not.
  • When white people get angry, we drop hundreds of thousands of bombs. When white people get really angry, we drop two bombs.

  • entropy

    It’s pointless trying to talk sense into the left when it goes full retard. The trick is to expose its arguments by taking them to their logical conclusions.

    For example, if Islam is a race then so is Christianity and anyone who criticises Christianity is a racist.

    Apply this at your convenience. When accused of having white privilege, say you’re not white, you’re Scientologist.

    Play this out a little to allow time for maximum triggering, then invoke the relevant precedent and drive the point home.

    • Jai_Normosone

      I thought you ran off the rails when you mentioned the use of logic with the left but your point became clear further on. I like it 🙂

    • blaz

      There is a distinct difference between vilification and criticism . For example , “full retard” (of the left) is vilification…it implies that any vigorous defence from the left is “retarded”( whatever that slur actually means). That is, you don’t support an argument, you simply denigrate your opponent.(lazy). Criticism, of any group is valid, if you have supporting argument, and not simply based on preconceptions… ie, Scientologist demand a percentage of your income to be part of their faith, and this binding agreement makes it a business transaction rather than a faith, as opposed to their ideas are simply “looney tunes” or “whacko”.

      • entropy

        It implies nothing of the sort. Look at you trying to characterise my criticism as vilification. I clearly said ‘when’ it goes full retard, not that ‘any’ defence is retarded.

        Your response is the typical projection and hypocrisy we’ve come to expect from leftists – ideologues who frequently rely on personal attacks and moral superiority for lack of logical arguments.

        • blaz

          But “retard” is simply a term of vilification ..it is nothing more than a term of derision, and implies what exactly? It is not an instructive form of argument and informs me of very little…it is as useless as saying that I am right, therefore you must be wrong. Perhaps ,if you simply stick to a subject rather than categorising (some)”leftists”. Funny how you rarely hear the term “rightist” or “righties”

          • entropy

            The left prefers to call right wingers ‘far right’, ‘alt right’ or just ‘Nazi fascists’ per its strategy of discrediting opponents through personal attacks.

            Retard implies diminished mental capacity. Roughly equivalent to ‘stupid’. Not sure what this feigned confusion act is about but ask any random school child if you need more info.

            The argument I made was quite clear. Quibbling about its construction won’t kill the signal.

          • blaz

            “Retard” is often used as a derogatory term, most often used by school children, so you are actually correct when you say that they can explain what that word means (to them). However, it actually means “delay or hold back in terms of progress or development”. “Far Right”, “Alt(ernative) Right” and “Nazi Fascists” are actually terms that are embraced by these particular groups, however there is a stigma attached to them as they represent extreme views. Which brings us back to Sonia’s dilemma. It is clear that she doesn’t have the extreme views of some groups, but when she suggests that a whole group of people should be excluded based simply on their religion, we are on a pathway to the “final solution”….that by eliminating people of a certain faith, you will no longer have a problem. This was Hitler’s solution too. Try telling a Nazi that Judaism is simply a religion and not a race.

          • entropy

            Those labels being embraced by their owners isn’t the problem. It’s them being falsely and maliciously applied to other conservatives to smear them as extremists. Stop being coy.

            The jig is up, blaz. Most people outside your leftist echo chamber see through these childish tactics.

            We’re not eliminating anyone by being discerning about our immigration standards. Culture is a strong predictor of behavior. We can’t eliminate bad behavior but we can minimise it by refusing to import it.

            Finally, try telling a Jew that Judaism isn’t a race and brace yourself for an education.

          • blaz

            I know that a lot of Jews see themselves as a race but doesn’t that just reinforce my argument and counter yours ? Personally I have never used labels unless I am being ironic…and it is up to the user of labels to get the point (they usually don’t) . Culture actually has nothing to do with predicted behaviour…and that is the flaw in your argument. No two people share the same beliefs, even if they regard themselves as having the same faith. Very few Irish Catholics were terrorists, although your theory suggests that enough of them were to be a problem. You were not alone here as many people in Australia considered Irish, and especially Irish Catholics as a problem. So were Polish, Italians, Greeks and anyone who smelt of garlic. read this..https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jul/22/australia-once-banned-catholics-from-mass-and-vilified-the-irish-havent-we-learned-anything

          • entropy

            Culture: the ideas, customs, and social behaviour of a particular people or society.

            Do you always just make things up when you find the facts inconvenient?

          • blaz

            The culture doesn’t say that you should be a terrorist. This was true of Irish Catholics, it is also true of Middle Eastern Muslims. Not sure what you mean by facts. It is as ridiculous as saying that some men are rapists, therefore if we ban men, we will no longer have a problem with rapists. This is your’s and Sonia’s logic.

  • Mattys Modern Life

    Sonia needs to go on full attack mode then simply not turn up. The best thing to do is to reject their authority completely and hold them in contempt.

  • 9x19parabellum

    Its time to press the big red nuke button. On behalf of all leftards in Melbourne, Melbourne volunteers to be the first to be flattened.

  • switch1

    Whether you agree with Miss Kruger’s views or not. After the continued terrorism around the world, child abuse in the UK (estimated in the thousands if not hundreds of thousands) and the massive welfare cost to Australia’s and all other western countries, due to immigration policies. It is surely reasonable for any person to be allowed to discuss such issues in a civilised manner and voice their opinion as long as it is not threatening.
    That such a person like Miss Kruger now has to appear before some tribunal, no doubt payed for by Australian citizens taxes. Really to me say’s more about those we elect and who they are wiling to fund with tax payers money, than the topic of immigration.

  • There needs to be some digging into this fellow , his organisation, its patrons funders and lawyers.

    • John Talbot

      I believe Avi Yemini is taking up the challenge. He was assaulted outside the hearing into Sonia by the serial pest in question. Avi challenged him with questions that this pest took as offensive and took a swing at Avi. Typical response by this group.

  • Logic Police

    1 – “Islam is a race, and if you are not ethnically Islamic and you criticise Islam, you will be arrested and if you get killed in jail it’s your own fault.” Whether Islam is a race isn’t the point ( you are right – It is not one). The point is discrimination against a group based on the actions of a few. And hating all Muslims because of a few nut-job ciminal dickheads, is like hating all christians because of a few pedo priest. It’s a logical fallacy.

    2 – There is zero logical connection whatsoever between Kruger’s comments and “men cutting off their dicks”. Besides, it’s terrifically hypocritical for you – someone worried about “thought crime” – to then attack someone for making a free choice about their own body. Your description says “XYZ is dedicated to free speech and Western restoration.” Well, a pillar of the West is freedom. It it affects no one else, it’s none of your business. So you can’t attack someone for exercising their free right to do whatever to their own body, while also lamenting the loss of free speech. You either believe in individual freedom or not…

    3 – “Those who do not learn the lessons of history are doomed to repeat it.” True. But you seem to gloss over the lesson from “white” Germany not to persecute a whole religion…

    4 – “When white people get angry, we drop hundreds of thousands of bombs. When white people get really angry, we drop two bombs.” Umm, for someone who “has studied history and political science at Melbourne University”, you sure show a ruinously wretched understanding of it. That was America, not “white people”. The other axis countries, Germany & Italy, are also “white” – so your whole point about WWII makes no sense. Clearly you’ve never been to and don’t understand the citizenship laws of America, because “Non-whites” can be Americans (Obama to name 1)…

    It just beggars belief how someone can see the world in such blatant black and white terms. So this will blow your binary mind… I am not a “liberal snowflake”. I am right wing. Your views are not conservative. Conservatives beleive in freedom. Freedom over your own body. Freedom of religion. Both of which you seem to attack. How can you not see the hypocrisy?