Peter Holstrand

Palestinian terror supporters get handled by German police.

No Muslim country has ever used a nuclear weapon. No Muslim country has ever started a world war. But sure, Islam is the violent religion.

💢 Jeremy Scahill asks Rep. Ro Khanna: “Do Palestinians have a right to kill Israeli soldiers, Congressman?” “On October 7, did Palestinians have a right to attack Israeli military bases in the Gaza envelope? Yes or no?” 🎥 Watch Khanna’s response in the attached clip. Longer discussion in the post below ⬇️

This is a great example that illustrates how the left’s love for Islam actually makes perfect sense. Many don’t realize this, but Islam is incredibly longhoused. Some of its most brutal enforcers are middle aged mothers and aunties; hijab is both the ultimate act of female intrasexual competition - flattening the beauty hierarchy - as well as a tool for the neutralization of male sexuality. You can see how this perfectly serves the goals of women on the left, who want to exert unilateral control over relations between the sexes at best or even end heterosexuality at worst. The uglification of women in popular media is a form of hijab, hiding male-enticing beauty away “for women’s protection” and punishing male sexual attraction. These illiberal photo guidelines that feel like they’re from a conservative country are another example of the left’s adoption of virtual hijab as a tool for female sociopolitical dominance. You might think, “Doesn’t this contradict the sexual vulgarity & immodesty promoted by the left in the West?” Superficially, it might seem that way, but the popular left’s love of prostitution is/was a stepping stone in the transition from liberal hedonistic democracy to asexual authoritarian regime. They were seeking to “desexualize” the female body through exposure (while also exerting control over the male psyche: just because a woman is scantily clad in public doesn’t mean you have permission to think demonic sexual thoughts about her!). The argument of topless feminists in France is that boobs should evoke zero sexual feelings; they’re just a body part. The argument of OnlyFans feminists is that their body is a tool for extracting resources from men. None of this actually has to do with the promotion of sexual freedom. It’s all a game of flattening the SMV of women while exerting power over men through sexuality, and the tides are naturally shifting towards female-enforced asexuality (rather than female-enforced promiscuity). This is clear in the rhetoric of online Western feminists, who post more and more frequently about how scared they are of sex, how they avoid it (occasionally by going as far as to transition into men themselves). In this view, a feminist hijabi is completely rational, and perhaps even the perfected manifestation of an anti-male ideology. Do not think that the rise of Islam in the West will mean the return of the patriarchy. No, it will mutate with our broken gender relations to form a novel, putrid mixture of sexual communism and repression. The future is asexual hijabis, finger wagging you to death

”Om du vill bli fullkomlig, så gå och sälj allt du äger och ge pengarna till de fattiga. Då ska du få en skatt i himlen. Kom sedan och följ mig.” Jesu ord är svåra att förena med skattesänkningar till rika.