Thought for the Day: Racists for Peace


Tucker Carlson of Fox News appears to be a lone voice in the mainstream media urging caution with relation to action over the alleged chemical weapons attack in Syria:

There are a few things to this, I will focus on two.

The first is the obvious question: Why would the Syrian regime led by Bashar al Assad use chemical weapons against its own people when it appears on the verge of victory, and the US looked set to withdraw its forces?

It is a pertinent question, because such an action would be counter productive, thus it casts doubt on whether the Syrian regime is culpable, and doubt on whether the West should take military action against it.

I find my second point more important, and it isn’t the possible onset of World War III. Tucker Carlson is decried by the left in the usual ways that Fox News anchors are. He is decried as a racist and an apologist for racists. Moreover, the alt-right love him.

Here’s the thing: don’t you find it odd that the people on the side of peace are the racists? The reason for this is sound – we want to avoid open conflict with Russia, and in short, no more brother wars.

But this should concern the left in a fundamental way for the following reason:

If Australia reaches the point where its Anglo-Celtic population is well and truly in the minority; where foreigners own most of its assets; the government continues to burden its citizens with high taxes and over-regulation; and the cultural sphere is dominated by a struggle for dominance between the SJW left and an increasingly assertive Muslim population; if these trends appear irreversible and in this scenario Australia is invaded, I for one will not raise a finger to defend it.

I doubt I am the only one.

We’re the ones the left should be hoping are clamouring for war, because ultimately we are the ones who make our nations safe for them to carry on with their nonsense.

When the racists adopt the attitude of Romans in the fifth century AD, rest assured the barbarians will soon be ruling.

  • Earl Conner

    I for one am getting war weary. Let’s forget about the Saudi’s oil and Israel’s agenda. The Western masses are completely over this crap.

    • Bikinis not Burkas

      Israel’s agenda is to live in peace, nothing more!

      Muhammad was WHITE!
      Muhammad was a dwarf and fat!

      • W. Hunter

        “Israel’s agenda is to live in peace, nothing more!”

        Sarcasm, I hope ????????

        • Addelad

          Of course you do; and while you are in the mood of thinking about all that history stuff, pray tell me which of the various ME wars they began. And don’t give me any bunkum about pre-emptive strikes into Iran.

        • Bikinis not Burkas

          No sarcasm, are they embarking on terrorist attacks around the world no, they are also constantly battling with Islamic terrorism within their borders

    • John Sheppard

      Especially when fracking is already enabling western nations like the US to become self sufficient, and have no need for Saudi oil. Why do you think there is such a push to make fracking out to be such a danger to the environment, etc? Self sufficient states are a big problem for the globalists utopia.

      • Earl Conner

        Agreed. An uncomfortable truth for greenies is that fracking more or less saved us from a global recession a decade back. The coal and oil ‘barons’ continue to love the folly of unreliable, impracticable renewable energy as an alternative as well. Some sort of Western collaboration to develop emerging nuclear technologies is my vision for humanity if the cronies would ever get on board.

  • John Sheppard

    “…I for one will not raise a finger to defend it.” – took the words right out of my mouth, and out of my post responding to David Hilton’s article!!

    • W. Hunter

      I was just thinking along the same lines……….

    • Earl Conner

      Defense is one thing, continued interference in the developing world to
      keep the oil and war machine rolling is another. We’ll have to keep
      raising our fingers to the keyboard to point out the
      marxist/globalist/media alliance behind it I suppose.

  • Repeal fake marriage

    I will definitely not defend Islam or SJDubbleyoos if that is ever the case. I will consider farting in their general directions however.

  • PaulMurrayCbr

    No government uses chemical weapons on its own territory. Chemical weapons is something you only use far, far away from home. For example: Agent Orange.

    • Addelad

      You haven’t heard of Saddam Hussein then and the gassing in NE Iraq circa 1982

      • W. Hunter

        LOL, you have no credibility, dude.If you do the briefest research on Saddam/WMD, you can locate info such as this:

        “A 1994 investigation by the Senate Bank Committee found that U.S. companies had been licensed by the Commerce Department to export a “witch’s brew” of biological and chemical materials, including precursors of anthrax and botulism. The report also noted the exports included plans for chemical and biolgical warfare facilities and chemical warhead filling equipment.

        Yet even after Saddam began gassing his own people in Northern Iraq, the flow of goods continued. In November 1989, Bush approved $1 billion in loan guarantees for Iraq in 1990, and from July 18, 1989, to Aug. 1, 1990, the U.S. approved $4.8 million in advanced technology sales.

        “Only on Aug. 2, 1990, did the Agriculture Department officially suspend the (loan) guarantees to Iraq — the same day that Hussein’s tanks and troops swept into Kuwait,” a Los Angeles Times expose on Feb. 23, 1992, noted.

        Postscript: According to a Washington Post story, when United Nations weapons inspectors were allowed into Iraq after the 1991 Gulf War, they compiled long lists of chemicals, missile components and computers from American companies that were being used for military purposes.”