Sunday, 4 December 2022

The Great Islamic Reset beginning with the Western world bypassing WW3


In theory, a constitutional amendment could be passed to make the Commandments of Allah the supreme law of the USA abolishing all political parties other than the National Party of America to be run on the same lines as the Communist Party of China.  

The great thing about that system is that if Xi Jinping were to fall under a bus, a new leader would be promptly presented by the Politburo Standing Committee of the CCP. I imagine they would be chosen under the Papal Conclave rules with each member forbidden to vote for himself and obliged to choose the best person other than himself.  


I would advise the incorporation of the farewell speech of George Washington into the US constitution because virtually all the advice given by the venerable American sage has in fact been ignored.



As for Britain doing the same, the British monarchy makes it a very messy exercise since British monarchs are only allowed one religion: Anglicanism. 

The Church of England could be disestablished reducing Anglicans to the status of Coptic Christians in Egypt. 

Charles III has been known to speak warmly about Islam and he could accelerate the transition of Britain from a constitutional monarchy to an Islamic Republic if he were to cause a constitutional crisis by converting to Islam, but this would mean the throne passing to William weakening the sense of continuity through giving the impression that British monarchs came and went like patients in a doctor's waiting room.


The tidiest way for Britain to transition from being a nominally Christian kingdom to becoming an Islamic Republic would be to first become a republic like America.  

The scenario is that the Archbishop of Canterbury would be asked to defend the Trinity. When he fails to do so, the parcel, so to speak, would be passed to the Head of the Church of England, which is the British monarch. When the British monarch also fails to defend it, abdication would seem a natural response.

William would doubtless fail in this exercise in his turn, fatally weakening the monarchy and making the establishment of an Islamic Republic under a one-party state a natural response to the political and social problems that have beset this country.

You may be surprised to learn that this is not the first time the idea has come up in British history.



Establishing an Islamic Republic as soon as possible in the West would have to begin with the American Republic whose foundations I would argue are Islamic, in particular the First Amendment based on https://quran.com/2/256

This is because we already know neither Jews under the Torah nor the subjects of absolute Christian monarchs enjoyed any religious freedom at all. 

The principle of cuius regio, euius religio must have been a universal practice to all kingdoms, but was enforced with more rigour and cruelty than ever before in the newly Christian kingdoms of the barbarian kings of Europe, doubtless encouraged by the Catholic Church. 



When the Americans talk about cruel and unusual punishments, they must have been referring to the practice of heretic burning in the Old World.

I imagine the only reason why any absolute monarch would agree to being a constitutional monarch is because the alternative would have been regicide. After the regicides of Charles I, Louis XVI and Nicholas II, European monarchs must have known they had no choice but to accept their role as the figureheads and puppets of the legislature that is Parliament.

While the American social conservatives of all races and religions campaign in support of a constitutional amendment to make the Commandments of Allah the supreme law of the United States of America, British republicans could be inviting the Archbishop of Canterbury to explain how and why Christianity is not idolatry and blasphemy and how why Jesus is God in writing. This response would be challenged by myself as well as Orthodox rabbis and Islamic scholars.

Since we already know that the Trinity is morally and intellectually indefensible, it is an open goal.   

When it is seen that the Archbishop of Canterbury is not up to the job of defending the morally and intellectually indefensible Trinity under sustained questioning by Orthodox rabbis, Islamic scholars and myself, he will predictably resign as Archbishop of Canterbury leaving it to Charles III to defend it.  

When Charles in turn fails to do so, it is possible he will just convert to Islam as a show of penitence for 14 centuries of idolatry and blasphemy. It is said that 597 was the year Christianity came to England with St Augustine. 

The moment Charles becomes Muslim, he will be forced to abdicate, since only Anglicans can inherit the throne. 

When William V in his turn fails to explain how the Trinity is not idolatry and blasphemy and how Jesus is God, the throne will pass to his children

Prince George of Wales (b. 2013) 
Princess Charlotte of Wales (b. 2015) 
Prince Louis of Wales (b. 2018) 

who cannot be expected to defend it whereupon the parcel will be passed to his brother Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex (b. 1984)

then to his brother's children
 
Archie Mountbatten-Windsor (b. 2019)
Lilibet Mountbatten-Windsor (b. 2021)

If and when they get to his uncle, the disgraced Prince Andrew, Duke of York, the monarchists will finally give up, if they have not done so before. 


Under this scenario, the line to the royal succession will seem like an undignified queue at a public convenience and in this way end, making way for more rational and better government under an Islamic Republic.

The former British dominions of Australia, Canada and New Zealand will seize their chance to declare independence losing America its use of Australia as its naval and military bases making it impossible for it to maintain its global marine empire. 

In this way would the American Empire be ended peacefully and, hopefully, WW3 averted.  

China will continue to peacefully trade with its trading partners in the Far East and perhaps even incline towards Islam since they are already a republic, having given up their monarchy last century, in this way being more advanced in their political development than the West.  

Russia and India would soon follow making international relations globally more harmoniously Islamic than previously.  

This would be the best case scenario of the Great Islamic Reset.

Saturday, 3 December 2022

2nd Koraniyule 2022 with Conops


3:00  Kanye West
4:00  Nick Fuentes
5:00  Jayden
6:00  Nationalism is an incel cult.
9:00  Pederasty in ancient Greece and ancient Rome
11:00  Christianity
12:00  Jimmy Kimmel
14:00  Doooovid saying antisemitism on Koraniyule 2022
18:00  Peter Davidson
19:00  OV
Antisemitism created by Jews who assimilate
20:00  Kanye West



24:00  Charles Moscowitz and Rudy Rochman
29:00  Scapegoats and an incompetent and corrupt ruling class
Christianity is stupid.
Iran
30:00  Cancel culture
31:00  Culture War
32:00  China
33:00  Good government and absolute power
34:00  Ostentatious displays of power
35:00  Holocaust memorials and the deadly sin of envy
36:00  The devil finds work for idle hands.
37:00  Nazi Germany and Joseph Atwill
38:00  The New Testament and Constantine
Persecution of Christians
39:00 Multiple failures of Christians
40:00  Edict of Thessalonica 380
41:00  Bishop of Utrecht
42:00  Easy for the imperial hegemon to spread your religion.
43:00  The bargain of Islam
44:00  Converts
46:00  White House Koran that belonged to Jefferson
47:00  Barbary pirates
48:00  Conops has four Korans.
49:00  John Adams
50:00  No freedom of belief in Judaism or Christiaity.
51:00  Indonesia
52:00  It's a matter of interpretation.
54:00  No fly list and Ann Coulter
55:00  Monopolies
56:00  Recipe book analogy
57:00  Qatar
58:00  Europeans
59:00  Nowhere are Koranic principles being properly applied.
1:00:00  Dialectical materialism.
1:01:00  Belief in God necessary to follow the rules properly,
1:02:00  I do more than Muslims promoting sharia.
1:03:00  Modus vivendi
1:04:00  Vincent Bruno's reasons for supporting Noahidism rather than Secular Koranism
1:06:00  Incest and animal breeding
1:07:00  First cousin marriage
1:08:00  Daniel Sienkiewicz's view on the global American empire
1:09:00  Global majority and minority

1:13:00  Millennial Woes on Nigel Farage on civic nationalism

This is why civic nationalism is insane.

Tolerant Fellow is absolutely right: Farage cannot justify his own statement without violating his own professed beliefs (race-blindness).

If you believe that race is irrelevant, you cannot justify caring that your own race is being replaced in its own homeland by other races. The nearest you can get to doing that - and this is what Farage will probably do - is claim that you were not really referring to race, but to culture. You're not racist, it's just obvious that this speed of migration will prevent cultural assimilation. Or you could go the economics route. You're not racist, but surely such speed of migration will be bad for the economy. But, with either of those routes, you are screwed. They know exactly how to handle both objections:

1. cultural assimilation? Do you have evidence that they're not culturally assimilating? Oh, a study? Is it peer reviewed? What was the sample size? What was the methodology? If the scientists are reputable, why haven't I heard about this study in The Guardian. And anyway, what would "assimilation" actually look like - how many hoops do you racistly expect these poor migrants to jump through to meet your standard? And what exactly do you expect them to assimilate to...? After all, there's no such thing as British culture! - unless you mean stuff that was actually imported from everywhere else, of course. Oh, values, you say? Well, what are these "British values"? And what about native Brits who don't hold those values? And how do you propose to test whether each migrant subscribes to these values? And how long should each one be given to adopt these values, or else face deportation? And anyway, who are you to decree what are and are not "British values"?

2. economics? Well, here's an economist with an unusual surname to tell you that, actually, Africans are great for the economy.

As demonstrated above, civic nationalism offers absolutely no defence against racial replacement. Indeed, it nullifies all possible defences, and actually compels the believer to approve of his racial replacement. This occurs because, for objecting to immigration at all, he gets accused of being racist, so he has to defend himself by assuring everyone that he has only race-blind objections to being replaced - but those other objections can easily be defused (see above), and therefore he has to agree that racial replacement is not bad but neutral, and in fact, because of the benefits of diversity and the sins of white supremacism, actually terrific. This is the bind that civic nationalism ties you into.

Civic nationalism, in an era of mass travel, leads to racial replacement. In such a context, you either care about race and admit that you care about race... or you watch your race being destroyed. It's as simple as that.


1:15:00  Apartheid
1:16:00  Culture is fluid.
1:21:00  quran.com/49/13
Andrew Tate
1:23:00  Jews 
1:24:00  Rabbis ranking the four gentile religions according to their conformity with the Noahide laws
1:26:00  Ir nidachat



1:27:00  Milo and Laura Loomer
1:28:00  Immigrants have taken over white nationalism!
1:30:00  Senior UKIP caught using cheap immigrant labour
1:31:00  My plan for global domination
1:32:00  Over 50%
1:33:00  White people 
1:34:00  White history
1:36:00  China's ideological wars between legalism and Confucianism over the centuries
1:37:00  Australia, Canada and New Zealand are still British and Britain is a US vassal state
1:40:00  Being mainstream 
1:41:00  Christo-Liberals started two World Wars.
1:42:00  Ukraine
1:43:00  Poles are Russophobes.
1:44:00  Governor General
1:45:00  Kanye West
1:46:00  Nazi New Year's Concerts from Vienna
1:47:00  America is the New Rome and Europe is the old Athens and Sparta.
1:48:00  Global imperial means global responsibility.
1:49:00  Global Secular Koranism
1:50:00  Islamic European Union
Francis Fukuyama
1:51:00  Whig interpretation of history

Doooovid on KanYe West and antisemitism



3:00  Bad for Trump
4:00  Nick Fuentes
5:00  Secular Koranism
6:00  E Michael Jones and Charles Moscowitz
9:00  The left never acknowledges
10:00  Spinelessness of Trump
11:00  Nick Fuentes
12:00  Antisemitism caused by Jewish behaviour?


18:00  E Michael Jones
19:00  Escalation
20:00  "Jewish people favour censorship."
23:00  Leo Glassman off YouTube
24:00  Culture War
34:00  Steve Bannon
35:00  Charles Moscowitz
37:00  The role of mosque elders for MPs
40:00  Christians
42:00  Christian Zionists
43:00  Jews or Muslims?
44:00  Trump
45:00  Mike Pence
46:00  Public service and representative democracy
47:00  Kanye West
49:00  George Washington and Madison
50:00  America is a republic, not a democracy.
51:00  Athenian direct democracy
53:00  Immigration and representative democracy
56:00  War and Peace on Russian attitudes towards foreigners
Plebs v Patricians
59:00  Trump, Patrick Little, Nick Fuentes
1:00:00  Richard Spencer, Christian nationalism, alt-lite and antisemitism
1:01:00  Kanye West
1:06:00  ADL
1:09:00  George Floyd and antisemitism
1:11:00  Can Jews provoke antisemitism by their behaviour?
1:12:00  Kevin Barrett
1:14:00  Antisemite sleeping on a gun
1:15:00  Escalation and First Amendment
1:16:00  Censorship
1:17:00  Poor gentile leadership
1:18:00  Immigration and the First Amendment
1:20:00  Complementary Schismogenesis
1:22:00  Abortion
1:23:00  The perception that Jews always get their way.
1:25:00  Patrick Little and the systemic problem of liberalism
1:27:00  Jews make up 20% of the elite.
1:28:00  Richard Spencer, Kanye West and Louis Farrakhan
1:29:00  Blacks have more people to hate being bottom of the heap.
Antisemitism is anti-elitism?
1:30:00  Jews and Muslims and their two protected characteristics.
1:31:00  The senior male in politics is lowest status because he has no protected characteristics. 
1:33:00  Catastrophic event and boom-bust cycle
1:34:00  The elite are the minority. 
1:36:00  China's Cultural Revolution
1:38:00  P Davidson
1:39:00  Russia v Ukraine
1:40:00  Should Jews apologise to Kanye West?
1:41:00  Taylor Swift
1:42:00  Kanye West posts on Jews on social media
1:44:00  O J Simpson 
1:46:00  P Davidson
1:49:00  Richard Spencer and Matt Heinbach
1:50:00  Crime of passion
1:54:00  Trump a former Democrat
alt-right and alt-lite
1:55:00  Big tent
1:57:00  Milo and Richard Spencer
1:59:00  Promiscuity, Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz, Jeb Bush
2:00:00  Trump cannot win any more because of demographic changes.
2:01:00  Nick Fuentes and antisemitism
2:02:00  One-party state
2:03:00  Nazi Germany and Kamala Harris
2:04:00  Blacks more organised than the Jews?
Blacks control DC.
2:07:00  Muslims control London
DC is 70% black. 
2:08:00  Balkanisation
2:09:00  Doooovid says he is prepared to work for any side in the failed state he predicts America will become. 

My answer to the JQ


1:19:22
Mark Smith
would doooovid be approved as a proper jew in your proposed registry?

All Jews would be registered by their Orthodox rabbis who would be the Registrars of the Register of Jews. These rabbis would be expected to strike off any Jew found guilty of having committed any of the 36 capital offences of Judaism. Doooovid practises open idolatry so I would expect an Orthodox Rabbinical Registrar to strike him off. All Jews would have to be observant Jews coming under the authority of a rabbi in order to be registered.  If it comes to the notice of gentiles that this rule is not being observed by the rabbi, that rabbi would be removed as Registrar.

If you are not registered as a Jew, you are not a Jew.  

All political problems are problems of morality

All political problems are problems of morality ie people not doing what they are supposed to do. People don't do what they are supposed to do because the rules don't tell them to do what they are supposed to do, or there is a problem of enforcement. It is quite simple really. 

The rules of patriarchy are markedly different to the rules of matriarchy. Patriarchy is hierarchical, rigid, transparent and accountable, matriarchy is egalitarian, fluid, opaque and unaccountable. 

Friday, 2 December 2022

My message to the Archbishop of Canterbury care of the Reverend Andrew Symes





On Fri, 2 Dec 2022 at 12:32, CK wrote:

Is the Doctrine of the Trinity idolatry?

I do hope we can discuss this because it has been much on my mind.

Thanks,
Claire

On Friday, 2 December 2022 at 12:37:24 GMT, Andrew Symes wrote:

Can I ask: are you a Christian ? Do you go to church?

If so, the best person to start this conversation with, might be your local vicar or pastor?

If you are not a Christian, and you are genuinely interested in finding out answers, I would be happy to have an initial conversation with you, if you can sort out your phone problems!

Andrew

On Friday, 2 December 2022 at 16:35:04 GMT, CK wrote on The Doctrine of the Trinity

Hello Andrew

I am grateful to you for getting back to me so promptly. 

To answer your question, I am an agnostic cultural Christian interested in theology. 

Having explored Judaism and Islam, it seems clear to me that the definition of idolatry is in dispute. 

If God exists, He would have a view on whether Christianity is idolatry, wouldn't He?

If Judaism and Islam are already agreed on the oneness of God, then Christianity is the odd one out.  

Jews are forbidden to enter churches where they believe idolatry is practised but allowed to pray with Muslims in mosques. 


I understand that the Christian position is that it is not idolatry to worship to Jesus if Jesus is God. Is there scripture supporting authority for the proposition that Jesus is God?

If the only authority for the Trinity is Athanasius who died in the 4th century, then we must conclude that the doctrinal dispute between Arians and Trinitarians has not been resolved even after nearly two millennia.  

Judaism and Islam would consider both to be idolatry, in any case.  



While I am agnostic, it greatly concerns me that if God exists, He would be infuriated and disappointed at the adherents of the Abrahamic religions:

  • Jews for not serving the purpose for which God made them His Chosen People being light unto nations leading gentiles away from idolatry
  • Christians for their practice of idolatry for nearly two millennia
  • Muslims who failed to obey quran.com/18/4 in 1400 years of Muslim history since there is no historical record of any Muslim national leader ever asking either the Pope or the Archbishop of Canterbury how Christianity is not idolatry and how Jesus is God
I ask this question as a concerned citizen concerned about the rising chaos, corruption and criminality of British society as well as the increasing corruption and incompetence of its ruling classes who are atheists and nihilists who do not care about either posterity or the national interest.

If Christians started two World Wars, it seems very likely that they will start yet a third with the way things are going in in Ukraine.  


It is my considered view that the Founding Fathers who started the American Revolution did so to reject Christianity and monarchy. It was never about the principle of taxation without presentation, but about freedom of belief supported by the First Amendment based on quran.com/2/256

The Founding Fathers were gentiles worshiping the Abrahamic God while denying the Trinity, which means they must have been proto-Muslim.

There is a White House Koran that belonged to Thomas Jefferson who drafted the Virginia Statute of Religious Freedom which later became the First Amendment.  


Muhammad is already in the US Supreme Court.


If Christianity is indeed idolatry and blasphemy, then Christians should repent to avert divine punishment, should they not?

After WW3, the reputation of Westerners and Christianity will be mud, so it seems better to jump before being pushed, especially if this could avert a Third World War.  

Jews and Muslims do not escape blame for being unprincipled and too fearful of their Christian overlords to correct them in their idolatry so Christians need not take the blame for everything that has gone wrong in the world.  

But what concerns me is Christian reluctance to discuss the issue of idolatry. 

Is it because they already know that the Trinity is morally and intellectually indefensible but still wish to persist with it?  

If so, does that mean they do not believe God exists to punish them in this life or the next for their idolatry which has lasted near two millennia?

If they neither believe in God nor fear Him, why do they pretend to be Christian?

And if they only pretend to be Christian, are they not hypocrites and liars?


Are Christians who refuse to discuss whether Christianity is idolatry in fact hypocrites and liars? Have those who have been rebelling against God's Commandments for 2000 years lost all moral authority?

Is Christianity now indistinguishable from Liberalism?

Is liberalism in the 21st century nothing more than sexual liberation from the rules of marriage and good parenting whose consequence will be degeneracy, dementia and the decline and fall of Western civilisation as we know it? 

If Christo-Liberalism has failed, is it not now time to consider its replacement? 

Are Westerners who refuse to consider its replacement even though they acknowledge the failure of Christo-Liberalism in fact white supremacists?

Are white supremacists white people who think race can be their religion without the support of a functioning moral system at least effective at maintaining minimum standards of morality ensuring most parents are married parents?

Is Christianity a functioning moral system?

Has Christianity not been gradually replaced by liberalism since the French Revolution? 

Can Christo-Liberalism be said to be a functioning moral system at least effective at maintaining minimum standards of sexual morality?

Did Europeans when Europe was monoracial and wholly Christian live peacefully with each other bearing in mind the Wars of the Reformation as well as WW1 and WW2?

Did Europeans who settled in the New World live peacefully with each other bearing in mind the American Civil War and the Spanish American War?

I suspect that the Archbishop of Canterbury or even the Pope is not up to answering these questions. After all, they both would have a vested interest in keeping their income and position as well as their pension which they would lose the moment they failed to defend the Trinity.

They were only able to defend the Trinity in previous centuries when the Christian practice of burning heretics at the stake was still in operation.

Before a century after the last man was executed for heresy in Britain in 1697, the American Republic was founded. 


If neither the Pope nor the Archbishop of Canterbury are prepared to to answer these questions publicly in writing, I imagine neither would be my local pastor and vicar. 

Yes, I am genuinely interested in finding out answers, but fear the obfuscation I would receive by Christians who do not have the answer to these questions and wish to hide this, being atheists and nihilists who wish to continue their practice of idolatry and blasphemy with no care for posterity or the national interest. 

If you are unable to answer these questions, I do hope you will pass it upwards to the Archbishop of Canterbury who would be expected to  be able to give a written answer to these questions. 

Claire Khaw

How Muslims can begin to atone for 1400 years of disobedience to God

The best way of removing all doubt that Anglicanism has failed in its own birthplace is to contact all confirmed Anglicans and ask them if they really believe that Jesus is the co-equal of the God of Israel who is also Allah ie the supreme and eternal Abrahamic God who created the Universe. 

Then we can ask the Archbishop of Canterbury how Christianity is not idolatry and blasphemy. If his response is that Christianity is not idolatry and blasphemy if Jesus is God, then our next question must be how is Jesus God?

Ideally, there should be an Islamic and Jewish Inquisition in a Zoom meeting of Islamic scholars and Orthodox rabbis globally tasked to obey quran.com/18/4 to make up for 1400 years of not doing so. 
 
There should be no problem in believing Jews supporting 18:4 of the Koran since they were made made God's Chosen People chosen to be light unto nations leading gentiles away from the idolatry and blasphemy of Christianity towards the most gentile Noahide religion that is Islam. Christianity is of course the least Noahide of all gentile religions because it is the religion of idolaters and blasphemers in denial that they are idolaters and blasphemers worshiping an executed blasphemer convicted of blaspheming against God. The Doctrine of the Trinity requires Christians to worship Jesus as the co-equal of God of Israel who is also Allah that he was convicted and executed for blaspheming against.  


We already know Jews are forbidden to enter churches which are places of abomination where idolatry is practised but allowed to pray with Muslims in mosques. 

It would be open to the Archbishop of Canterbury to resign from his position to avoid such an inquisition.

If Justin Welby resigns, Charles III would take his place as Head of the Church of England and also be expected to answer these questions. 

If he refuses and also resigns as the Head of the Church of England, British republicans can then declare the divine right of kings and the age of monarchy to be well and truly over.

Are people who expect to go to Hell like condemned prisoners with nothing to lose?

  10:00  Nanny Brett 14:00  Social retard Scott expects to go to hell.  15:00  Dead Man Walking https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_Man_Walki...