Queries for 9/11 Truthers

Commentary By Brandon Martinez

Committed 9/11 truthers take umbrage at my saying that 9/11 is increasingly irrelevant to modern events, and that “exposing” the truth about 9/11 changes essentially nothing about the current reality. Here are my queries for them:

1) With the rapid growth of ISIS and other Islamic terror groups, the emphasis of 9/11 truth that the “threat” of Islamic terror is manufactured/staged/faked is now inaccurate. Whatever truth there was in that claim 17 years ago when those groups were weak, it’s not true today. So then what is the ultimate purpose of 9/11 truth when its central premise, that the “terror threat” is entirely fabricated by governments, is belied by modern developments? These truthers have to maintain that all Islamic-related terrorism since 9/11 has also been faked, or else they risk losing relevance. But their narrative is a convoluted mess, and comes apart when they get into the Syria issue, where they, for the most part, propagandize for Assad against his Islamist opponents. So they’ve resorted to saying that the terror threat is real “over there” but is still somehow fake “over here” despite the fact that thousands of Western Muslims support ISIS and have joined their fight.

2) If ISIS, al-Qaeda and Islamism in general is a threat to some nations in the mid-east, then how is it not also a threat to Western nations internally with millions of Muslims living here? Why does the threat become “real” when you leave the terrain of the Western hemisphere, but magically ceases being a threat in our countries? The propaganda of those groups is only a google search away and it is reaching people in the West. If you believe groups like ISIS are a real threat in some countries, like Syria, Iraq, etc., then explain the necessity of 9/11 truth. 9/11 truth was designed to debunk the “threat” and say it’s either minuscule or non-existent. But the threat is now real. So proving 9/11 was an inside job changes essentially nothing about the current situation.

3) Embracing the latest cause du jour, some 9/11 truthers have morphed into war-time propagandists for the Assad regime. These people are now committed to writing propaganda to help legitimize Assad’s rule in Syria, thinking this is some kind of kick-in-the-balls to the New World Order. But from that perspective, 9/11 truth actually serves to undermine the case for Assad, because all it does is make al-Qaeda look less bad than they are. Assad was actually an early terror war ally of the Bush administration, happily torturing the CIA’s rendered “terror suspects” in Syrian jails. As Assad’s main armed opposition, the propagandists for the regime need al-Qaeda and Islamists generally to be discredited. So you’ll notice the more zealous Assad groupies have largely abandoned 9/11 and false-flag truth arguments when attacks are blamed on ISIS-style Islamists. However, they’re still “false-flaggers” when it comes to Syria, as they claim every war-time atrocity blamed on Assad was really the sinister handiwork of the Islamist rebels. So essentially their new position is that radical Muslims themselves are behind the big false-flags as opposed to victims of them!

3) 9/11 truth cannot even stop anything going on in the Middle East today, so those under the impression that “9/11 truth stops 9/11 wars” are deluding themselves. 9/11 was effectively only useful to kickstart one war, Afghanistan. The neocons tried but failed to link 9/11 to Saddam Hussein, so invented the WMD propaganda to justify that invasion. Every war since then required a whole new rationale, so debunking 9/11 does not prevent new wars at all. Nor will screaming “9/11 was an inside job” stop the elite from doing what they want to do anyway. What then is 9/11 truth accomplishing beyond proving that going into Afghanistan was a bad idea? But even that is fruitless because Afghanistan has now been overrun in certain parts by ISIS militants, so the rationale for being there has changed.

These truthers are schizophrenic anyway. Many of them actually support a war on terror-style policy in the Middle East, so long as it’s being led by Russia. If the plane dropping the bombs is a Russian one, it’s hailed as a liberation war, but if the jet is American it’s vilified as imperialism. What Russia is doing in Syria is no different than what NATO powers are doing in Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen and other countries by helping those regimes fight Islamist militants. These fools only oppose intervention from the US or NATO, while backing with vigor the interventionist military moves of Russia, Iran, etc.

The only utility I can see with 9/11 truth is making an anti-Zionist argument out of it. It can be used to show that Israel and Jewish neocons manipulated the event to drag the West into senseless wars for their interests. But that can be shown in myriad other ways as well. 9/11 is a very Muslim-centric issue, so those committed to it are clearly partial to Arab-Muslim interests as a whole. If you’re not a Muslim or Arab with a stake in the political future of the Middle East, it makes little sense to focus on 9/11 and related issues. But proving 9/11 was a false-flag in order to make Muslims look good does not even really work because since that time (especially over the past few years) Muslim militants have wreaked havoc all over the place racking up kill-counts that far exceed the casualties on 9/11.

How many Muslim or Arab immigrants in the West are even committed 9/11 truthers? Probably not very many. A whole lot more of them have signed up with the Cultural Marxist/Antifa crusade to dispossess whites. So why would I or any other Westerner go out of our way to shill for Muslims on terrorism, when many of them are now working with supremacist Jews against our interests today? So I must commit my life to “exposing” Zionist deceptions that have villainizied Muslims/Arabs, but they won’t lift a finger against the Zionist agenda to disfigure Europe?

Despite the fact that I think it’s a real threat nowadays, I don’t believe that there is a military solution to Islamic radicalism, as American and Russian neocons would have us believe. Therefore I don’t believe it necessary to “take on ISIS” wherever they are because they will just pop up somewhere else. The best policy for the West would be to simply remove all their forces from the Middle East and deport all known radical Muslims from Western countries. Then they should close their borders and keep out migrants from war-torn countries which are breeding grounds for these militants. The next step would be to cut off all ties with the Gulf States which originate, export and fund the ideology of radical Islam. Ties with Israel should also be severed, as Western support for that bandit state lies at the heart of Muslim resentment and animosity on a political level.

Mass immigration should be reversed and Europeans should focus our efforts on the fight against the nihilistic anti-white left and their Jewish enablers. A strong line should be taken that neocon-Zionist Jews are also a nuisance in Western nations on par with Jihadist kooks, insofar as they wish to embroil us in conflicts with quarrelsome Muslims in the Middle East. All these malcontents should be ejected from the body politic if the West is to survive into the next century.

Advertisements

49 thoughts on “Queries for 9/11 Truthers

  1. It would help if you actually articulated the “flaws” of my reasoning as opposed to just labeling it such. What is the necessity of 9/11 truth when the Islamic terror threat is clearly now a reality with ISIS?

  2. Israel has treated wounded ISIS (Al Qaeda). Saudi sponsors ISIS in Syria. These are the same players who pulled off 9-11 along with traitors in the US. The alliances are the same as during 9-11. So why is 9-11 irrelevant?

    Your abandonment of efforts to expose who really did 9-11 remind me of Charlie Veitch.

  3. All that proves is that ISIS has some help. It doesn’t prove that it isn’t a real terror threat or that it doesn’t have its own agenda. One false-flag does not prove Islamic radicalism is not a real phenomenon. So if the Islamic terror threat is now real, what good it is trying to prove 9/11 was not done by these radicals? All you’re doing is saying, “look they didn’t do this one attack, but they’re responsible for all this other carnage so what does it matter anyway.”

    Of course, you fail to respond to the myriad of points made. You’re a 9/11 hobbyist who is deluded into thinking talking about this thing that happened 16 years ago can stop the elites in their tracks.

    What’s your view on how Assad supporters have basically the reverse narrative that the “false flags” are being done BY the radical Muslims? While you and other traditional truthers push the line that Islamic terror is fake.

  4. Here you go again brandon. I am the “aging hippie” as your lack of ability to argue described me.
    First ALL events happening from 9/11 until today are the CREATION by a criminal entity set out to destroy the Middle East.
    By creating the proxy army ISIS, or alciada for that matter, the Criminal Cabal has achieved the perfect vehicle for a plausible reason to perform this Destruction.
    The fact that you argue that now “the Muslim threat has turned real” just shows you believe in the ultimate goal the CC has.
    Which makes you further commenting on this issue irrelevant at best.
    Or a provocation against peaceful Muslims at worst.

  5. Yes, the aging hippie can’t get enough. You too believe “the Muslim threat” has turned real as you claim ISIS and al-Qaeda are deadly forces in the Middle East. All you’ve done is take the onus off the Muslim killers of ISIS and put it on some magical “entity” that is supposedly puppeteering them. You want to deny the agency of these groups (because they are Muslims) and say some CIA agent in a tailored suit is bossing them around from behind the scenes when the reality is far more complex. ISIS is so decentralized that any fool can join the group and set up a cell anywhere in the world. There’s no way the CIA or any other intel agency can control something like that.

  6. Brandon, You seemed on the side of those who wish to expose the real perpetrators of 9-11 … perpetrators who created narratives to falsely blame muslims and justify serial toppling of muslim countries–including their central banks. Now you are siding with those who created the false narratives about 9-11. Now you invite readers to forget 9-11 and to get on board with the Lee Harvey Muslim narratives. Are you part Jewish? Tell us how these are not relevant: http://bollyn.com/15522/ and http://noi.org/911Revisited

  7. @Rediscover911

    You’re a typical hobbyist. From what I can remember you’re a retired dentist with too much time on your hands, so you spend your days watching Building 7 come down on loop while your wife watches soap operas on the couch.

    You’ve yet to address really any of my points in the article. 9/11 is irrelevant because the Islamic terror threat is now real. Those still pushing 9/11 truth are committed to the outdated view that Islamic terror is artificial or fabricated. As such they’re forced to say all new attacks are “false flags” or else 9/11 truth becomes irrelevant.

    The only use I see in it is proving that Zionist Jews are also bad, not that Muslims are innocent.

  8. Exposing the Israeli connections to 9-11 isn’t a hobby for me. It is an imperative. Being wedded to narratives, you’ve dismissed the importance of 9-11 lies which still bring a harvest for the war party.

    Your memory about me and my wife is flawed. I’m not retired and my wife does not watch soap operas.

    Are you part Jewish? Tell us how these are not relevant: http://bollyn.com/15522/ and http://noi.org/911Revisited

  9. It’s definitely a hobby for you. I bet that all you do is post some comments online and religiously listen to Kevin Barrett’s radio show.

    No I’m not “part Jewish” you batty old fool. But you look like a rabbi in your pic there.

  10. If it weren’t for 9/11, you would never have had a writing career.
    9/11 was the event to finalize the coup d’etat which began in the early 20th century – possibly well before then. It will always remain relevant. Just like WW1 remains relevant. Just like WW2 remains relevant. This type of “damage control” writing you have here is complete trash.
    You’re not fooling anyone with this new assignment you’re on, Brandon.
    You sure you’re not part Jewish?

  11. 9/11 ‘truth’ will always be relevant, just like many other false flags and/or any other event in history. At the same time, there are all kinds of real Islamic attacks taking place which are never made mention of in the MSM or by any prominent western politicians. Much of the 9/11 truth movement membership likes to exonerate Muslims of any or even all crimes when Islam, as well as Arabs, are certainly not crime free, nor are they ‘angels’ or anywhere even close to it. Many 9/11 truthers like to take a minimalist, rather one-dimensional, and even Marxist approach to 9/11 that goes something like this: “West, and even whites = bad/evil; Muslims, and even Arabs, and often times even brown/black people = good/virtuous.” How they come to these conclusions with all the information available out there on these topics is mind-boggling. They forget ridiculously simple things such as: what racial group/gender made up the majority of deaths in the buildings during the 9/11 attacks? Musta been “white, male privilege” n stuff, dawg. As some of us know, many Muslims like to deny all personal wrong-doing, especially when it comes to past/present Arab/Islamic slavery and colonialism/invasions, while having no problems whatsoever pointing the finger at whites for all their supposed sins, past/present.

    Much of the 9/11 truth membership doesn’t understand that not only is there a “war on terror”, but there’s also a Marxist war in the West on whites, men, heterosexuals, cisgenders, and Christians. They also don’t understand that Muslims/Arabs being in the west is generally not beneficial. They don’t understand that when Arabs/Muslims arrive en masse that crime increases, tension/division increases, IQ drops, and welfare use increases.

    Brandon, the “are you part Jewish” questions you’re getting are hysterical lol.

  12. @ Dana

    That’s because most 9/11 truthers are lefty do-gooder social justice warriors. The whole premise of what they do is “saving the poor brown people” of the Middle East from the “evil West”. They are ignorant of all those other issues you mention because they’re locked in a mental prison where only one issue, 9/11, matters to them. Being lefties they obviously could never find fault in dark-skinned Muslims.

    Roland here is a classic pro-Muslim conspiratard who desperately seeks to keep 9/11 relevant because he feels his life will have no purpose without it. He may even be an Arab himself, although he claims to be Romanian. He’s probably a Romanian gypsy so naturally he sides with the non-white “underdogs”. The guy is nothing more than a Twitter troll who sells wine for the Bronfman mafia for his day job.

    These conspiratards have no serious arguments so they have to resort to passive-aggressive trolling.

    All three of the conspiratards here have the exact same mindset. Pro-Muslim + anti-Zionist. They can’t see beyond that paradigm so this false-flag stuff is their life-blood. Saving Western civilization is a laugh to them because they’re actually nihilistic nutters who want the West to fall and collapse to avenge the “oppressed Muslims”.

  13. I agree that many of these conspiratards, as you call them, oversimplify the issue and make things mutually exclusive when they aren’t. ZioCons putting the shabbat goyim to work for their own selfish interests does not somehow make Islamic radicalism all a false flag. I’d say it’s more of a casus belli for wars in the ME as well as the emergence of (((counterjihad))) parties here. In general, conspiratards tend to believe everything has already been preordained by a rigid, pyramidal structure. In reality, the world is more stochastic and things can have an agency on their own. That’s a whitepill.

    But, Brandon, why not name the Saudi Wahhabi elephant in the room that is in many ways working in tandem with the ZioCons?

    Look, if we peel back this Wahhabi factor muddying the waters, we’ll find that the “proper” Persianate Islam has been the West’s rival for centuries.

    But Wahhabi control of Mecca/Medina as well as over so many Islamic institutions around the world is tantamount to John Hagee taking control of the Vatican. The Ottomans, the mightiest defenders of Sunni-dom fought these Wahhabis of the Najd.

    Much like the West has cucked to Zionism and Israel-worship, the Islamic world has cucked to Wahhabi ideology.

    I opt for a return to a fair, honorable order of things whereby the Frank and the Turk can sort out their differences with nobody to get in their way.

  14. If Brandon was ever a sincere activist in exposing 9-11 (which I seem to recall BM was), it is a “Charlie Veitch” turnaournd–or BM’s profile has been captured.

    Brandon would have people lump me in with “conspiratards”, “lefty-do-gooder social justice warriors” and seems not to be able to bring himself to acknowledge Israel’s role in planning, committing and covering-up 9-11.

    Fifteen years after 9/11, the events of that day still deeply affect our collective consciousness as well as our national decisions and actions–yet BM says we should have moved on from focusing on [who really did] 9-11.

    Tell us how these are not relevant: http://bollyn.com/15522/ and http://noi.org/911Revisited

  15. I agree that many of these conspiratards, as you call them, oversimplify the issue and make things mutually exclusive when they aren’t. ZioCons putting the shabbat goyim to work for their own selfish interests does not somehow make Islamic radicalism all a false flag. I’d say it’s more of a casus belli for wars in the ME as well as the emergence of (((counterjihad))) parties here. In general, conspiratards tend to believe everything has already been preordained by a rigid, pyramidal structure. In reality, the world is more stochastic and things can have an agency on their own. That’s a whitepill.

    But why not name the Saudi Wahhabi elephant in the room that is in many ways working in tandem with the ZioCons?

    Look, if we peel back this Wahhabi factor muddying the waters, we’ll find that the “proper” Persianate Islam has been the West’s rival for centuries.

    But Wahhabi control of Mecca/Medina as well as over so many Islamic institutions around the world is tantamount to John Hagee taking control of the Vatican. The Ottomans, the mightiest defenders of Sunni-dom fought these Wahhabis of the Najd.

    Much like the West has cucked to Zionism and Israel-worship, the Islamic world has cucked to Wahhabi ideology.

    I opt for a return to a fair, honorable order of things whereby the Frank and the Turk can sort out their differences with nobody to get in their way.

  16. I said in the article that the West should cut ties with the terror-funding/exporting Gulf States. But Wahhabis or not, a massive influx of Muslims of any stripe is of no benefit to the West. They can sort out their own internal theological squabbles amongst themselves. I want no part of it. Europe should not have to put up with these kooked out Islamists rampaging down our streets demanding sharia law.

    Much like the West has cucked to Zionism and Israel-worship, the Islamic world has cucked to Wahhabi ideology.

    And these “truthers” are cucked to a Muslim victimhood cult.

  17. Jewish bloodline of the Saudi royals–along with the Saudi-Israel alliance form the narratives

    How does it feel, Brandon, to shift narratives from “truther” to now making efforts to bury the 9-11 lies and take dedicated activists off the mission?

    How do you reconcile the lie-driven destruction of Islamic cities which has precipitated the migration (you and your ilk say ‘invasion’) and the obvious scheming of the zionists to create chaos with the migration?

  18. I think we should do a reverse migration, where we send Islam cucks like yourself over to the Middle East to fight for whichever Semitic regime or group you like the most.

    Yeah Jews and Muslims work together when they have common interests. What’s new? You’re simply confirming what I’ve been saying. They invaded Spain together and now they’re trying to smash nationalism together in the West to impose their Semitic police state on us goyim-infidels.

    Now, go pull out some molars while you listen to the latest “false flag weekly news,” ya squirrelly old kook.

  19. As commendable as putting aside divisions may be, the last 15 years of not knowing who really did 9-11 has been leveraged to many harms and harvest for the satanist-zionists. Even this (((New York Times))) article conforms to your theme, Brandon, of taking activists off the trail/scent.

    Israel did 9-11. All else emanates from the poisonous narratives about 9-11. You used to be about exposing that, Brandon.

    Extremist elements of Islam (Wahhabism and Salafism) are allied with the extremists of Israel. And, you pass that off as “what’s new?”

    Your allegiances to (((the dark side))) are all too apparent.

  20. @ senile dentist

    You’re a broken record, repeating the same primitive blabber every time. Yeah, we got it, everything “revolves around 9/11.” Why don’t you stop trying to drag others into your obsession and go watch Building 7 come down again?

    Extremist elements of Islam (Wahhabism and Salafism) are allied with the extremists of Israel. And, you pass that off as “what’s new?”

    So finally you’ve acknowledged that there are some “extremist elements” in Islam, but your only critique of them is that they’re “allied to Israel”? That’s what’s called “Israel reductionism” where you cannot look at or critique anything on its own without making some effort to link it to your anti-Zionist fetish and attacking it squarely from that angle. How about the fact that they are genocidal maniacs who want to slaughter all infidels and have Islam take over the world? Their alliance with Israel is just a temporary alliance of convenience until they can project power into Europe and beyond. They’re just as sneaky and dangerous as supremacist Jews.

    This perfectly illustrates my point about mentally lazy kooks like you. You’ll grudgingly acknowledge Muslim collaboration with Jews, but only when it affects other Muslims who are having an internal squabble (Sunni-Shia rivalry). But what about when Jews and Muslims collaborate against whites? When that occurs, you’re nowhere to be found, because you’re nothing more than a Sabbath Kaffir lobbying for the interests of Arabs & Muslims in the Middle East. When will you call out and condemn the White replacement agenda, also led and dominated by Jews? You won’t do that or ever make that a focus because you’re a typical race-blind liberal who opposes Jews solely on the basis that they’re “racist” against others, whereas you want to embrace multiculturalism, anti-racism and a utopian rainbow coalition of “enlightened Gentiles”. Sorry, but your liberal anti-Zionism is not very threatening to the Jewish establishment who are much more worried about nationalism among whites than leftist do-gooders who want to “save” the Palestinians.

    Your allegiances to (((the dark side))) are all too apparent.

    Whatever you say, dentist. My allegiance is to Europe, not some Judaism-lite Abrahamic offshoot from the desert. You’re a worthless cuck for the Arabs and of no use to whites opposing their own displacement.

    Now, I suggest you and Kevin Barrett get your rifles and go fight for the Kalifah that you both want so bad.

  21. Yeah, unfortunately many “truthers” have cucked to the cult of Muslim victimhood, while others came to believe “Arabs run hollywood” after exposure to counterjihad propaganda. Obviously, none of these square with the full reality of the situation.
    Luke Rudkowski is one of the few who is pretty spot-on, though.

    I will expand on this in your latest blog entry, but the problem w/immigrants isn’t as “pan-Islamic” as people think and Sharia law isn’t really being demanded as much as Pamela Geller wants us to believe. Islamdom is far from a monolith.
    But, YES, there IS an immigrant problem. MENA immigrants, regardless of religious affiliation, are at odds with our culture and way of life(let alone being ancestrally different).

    Average Muslim Albanians or Bosniaks(who aren’t on the brink of poverty and influenced by a Saudi mosque) are much more compatible than Assyrians, Armenians, Ethiopians or Kurds.

    Berbers migrants from Morocco aren’t as interested in Sharia law or the finer tenets of Qur’anic interpretation as they are in groping some blondes, scamming people or owning da hood and sticking it to whitey in a wigger-esque fashion.

    It is also setting the bar low to only screen for crime or other glaringly obvious no-no stuff like FGM, honor killings, etc. I am against an influx of tribal Kurds and Pashtuns, but I am also against the influx of those “polished” Turks and Persians. Yeah, they might be the French of Asia and I wish those guys the best of luck—-but from a distance. 🙂 They are analogous to us in the same way a bird’s wings are to a bat’s. I regard China and Japan in the same way.

  22. The aging hippie hier brandon.
    Your oppOnions are getting irrelevant through your flawed “truther-logic”.
    Your strategy, which gives you away as a sleepercell against 9/11-truth,
    is to state whatever theory you have ( you have to rename your 2nd “3”)
    against the “truther-community” as “facts”.
    They are only “facts” in your head determined to create a distraction from the fact that 9/11
    Truth DOES disclose the Modern Day Fraud War On Terror.
    You Are Irrelevant brandon.

  23. @ Harald

    Haha. It’s seriously no surprise that you actually believe there are “sleeper cells” trying to derail you and your truther cult and that I am part of it.

    You’re forced to invent these kooked-out conspiracy theories in order to keep yourself and your cult relevant. You need to convince yourself that your futile quest to “get the truth out there” is a pressing threat to the establishment, so you inflate your own importance with these insane theories. Except nobody has ever heard of you because you’re just a hippie, probably living out of a van or on some Jonestown-style commune with other weirdos. You don’t even write or do “research” on this topic. You just repeat what the “gurus” of the movement say while you smoke a joint.

    I bet you were injecting heroin in your arm before you wrote that. Bong-toting hippie truthers like yourself are of no use to anybody.

  24. I know some of us are aware that Islam is not monolithic, but the problem isn’t only with Wahhabi/Salafi Islam, either. Not to say there aren’t honorable or great Muslims out there, but Islam in general, is just not compatible with the West, or even others for that matter (multiculturalism doesn’t work).

    For instance, and speaking of Persianite Islam and for people that may not have heard of Jason Reza Jorjani: he’s half-Persian, half-white and he’s part of the new Iranian Renaissance. They’re trying to return to what Persians were before they were conquered by Arabs/Muslims (they were Zoroastrians). A rather large number of the younger generation of Persians do not want anything to do with Islam and they’ve been rebelling/revolting, although their uprising in the late 2000’s was rather brutally crushed by Islam. Cucks don’t understand that Muslims/Arabs will typically be Muslims/Arabs first. That’s fine on their own turf/territory, but not in the West.

    “Islamic conquest[edit]
    Until the Arab invasion and subsequent Muslim conquest, in the mid 7th century Persia (modern-day Iran) was a politically independent state, spanning from the Aegean Sea to the Indus River and dominated by a Zoroastrian majority.[2][3][4] Zoroastrianism was the official state religion of four pre-Islamic Persian empires,[5] the last being the Sassanian empire that passed a decree solidifying this in 224 CE.[3][6][6] The Arab invasion abruptly brought to an end the religious domination of Zoroastrianism in Persia and instituted Islam as the official religion of the state.[7][8][9]

    After the Muslim conquest of Persia, Zoroastrians were given dhimmi status and subjected to persecutions; discrimination and harassment began in the form of sparse violence.[10] Those paying Jizya were subjected to insults and humiliation by the tax collectors.[11][12][13] Zoroastrians who were captured as slaves in wars were given their freedom if they converted to Islam.[11]

    Many fire temples, with their four axial arch openings, were usually turned into mosques simply by setting a mihrab (prayer niche) on the place of the arch nearest to qibla (the direction of Mecca). Zoroastrian temples converted into mosques in such a manner could be found in Bukhara, as well as in and near Istakhr and other Persian cities.[14][full citation needed] Urban cities where Arab governors made their quarters were most vulnerable to such religious persecution, great fire temples were turned into mosques, and the citizens were forced to conform or flee.[15] Many libraries were burnt and much cultural heritage was lost.[16]

    Gradually there were increased number of laws regulating Zoroastrian behavior, limiting their ability to participate in society, and made life difficult for the Zoroastrians in the hope that they would convert to Islam.[16] Over time, persecution of Zoroastrians became more common and widespread, and the number of believers decreased significantly. Many converted, some superficially, to escape the systematic abuse and discrimination by the law of the land.[11] Others accepted Islam because their employment in industrial and artisan work would, according to Zoroastrian dogma, make them impure as their work involved defiling fire.[17] According to Thomas Walker Arnold, Muslim missionaries did not encounter difficulty in explaining Islamic tenants to Zoroastrians, as there were many similarities between the faiths. According to Arnold, for the Persian, he would meet Ahura Mazda and Ahriman under the names of Allah and Iblis.[17]

    Once a Zoroastrian family converted to Islam, the children had to go to Muslim religion school and learn Arabic and the teachings of the Quran and these children lost their Zoroastrian identity.[11] These factors continued to contribute to increasing rates of conversion from Zoroastrianism to Islam.[18] A Persian scholar commented, “Why so many had to die or suffer? Because one side was determined to impose his religion upon the other who could not understand.”[19]”

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Zoroastrians

  25. It’s like when I was talking to Naveed Khanverse about how multiculturalism doesn’t work and he was trying to tell me that pluralism can or does work, lol. Of course he’s like your typical Muslim that denies all crimes committed by Muslims around the world and he generally sides with blacks in the black/white dynamic, as an SJW would, denying all crimes committed by blacks and blaming everything on whites, even though we could go on for weeks on the topics of black crime and racism. We could do the same when it comes to all the conflicts between Arabs and blacks in North Africa, as well as those going back for centuries. He sent me a vid that he did on FB, but I didn’t notice it until a couple months later because we weren’t on each other’s friend lists and it went to my ‘other’ message box, and when I saw it, I sent him a friend request, but he refused lol, and I think because he knows we don’t see eye-to-eye on multiculturalism or pluralism or even on Islamic crime. These folks love to act like Islam is superior, and as I say, I don’t mind, but I don’t wanna see ’em here, and I don’t think highly of cucks like Kevin Barrett or many in the 9/11 truth movement that do either; they both really need to be gone, if you ask me.

  26. @ Dana

    Jorjani is obsessed with his little internal Iranian squabbles with Muslims. If he wants Zoroastrianism for Iran, then he can get himself a rifle and head over there. Instead, he’s trying to hijack the alt-right and have them prioritize his Persian-Zoroastrian squabble with Muslims. He even called for a “world war” with Islam to get revenge on the Muslims who thwarted the Iranian monarchy. But you’re right it shows that it’s not simply Wahhabis with the aggressive tendencies. The Ottoman and Moorish Muslims invaded and conquered parts of Europe, too. Spreading and expanding the influence of Islam is a universal concept in Islam. It’s a universalist religion.

    Yeah that Khanverse Muslim rapper is a total loser. He’s a stupid clown like his clone Jonathan Azaziah. Both are pro-multiculti Muslims who want us all to prioritize the issues affecting their Shiite cult in the mid-east. Deport them both!

  27. Brandon, yeah I get the same sense off of Jason that he tends to prioritize his, and his own group’s personal struggles with Muslims, first. We know this is natural for people to do, but it just goes to show one of the many reasons why multiculturalism doesn’t work. Different groups of people naturally prioritize their own views, values, beliefs, traditions, rituals, issues, and even DNA, first, over others’. It’s unfortunate that this has to be said over and over and over again because it just doesn’t sink in with multiculturalists. You’d think it’d seem blatantly obvious, but it just isn’t. Lotta folks out there have been preaching anti-white narratives for so long that they can’t bring themselves to go back on it, I guess.

    I’ve noticed that people took 9/11 truth and just prematurely called it the ‘truth movement’. It’s a misnomer because 9/11 truth, by itself, is faaaar from being anywhere close to the whole ‘truth’. There are so many different elements and aspects involved in truly understanding ‘truth’ in the modern information-age that it is, in reality, long, ongoing, and ever-expanding kind of entity, as opposed to simply swallowing a few red-pills and calling it a day or acting like one now just “knows” the “truth”.

    You can tell that Khan and Azaziah have definitely taken a Marxist bent on the topic of race. They probably mean well in a lot of ways, but they’re seriously misguided and incorrect on the topic. They’ve been preaching the pro-Muslim narrative for so long that they simply just run from and/or can’t handle any of the voluminous amount of evidence that contradicts this narrative. They seriously need to look into expatriation because what they’re really doing is just trying to rally up people to take the Muslim side of things. People that can’t accept new information or paradigms because they go against what they’ve been preaching for so long are not of real use or help. They can even easily become enemies and very often do.

    If I had my way, I’d put everybody in a group for whatever topics they talk about and just fight it out – where people are forced to encounter resistance and actually have to back up their claims and viewpoints, and where there’s no blocking. It’d be cool if you could just be as much of a dickhead as you wanna be to people you know are preaching faulty narratives. Unfortunately it’s not very practical and you can lose friends and definitely make enemies over it. It’s the style I like most because it saves time and puts pressure on people to think, like no other, but it’s not something you can do with great results to friends or family or people you encounter on a day-to-day kind of basis. I do it on FB and online, but I don’t do it in person because it can create many hassles for you, lol.

  28. @Dana
    It was not as simple as the Gatestone Institute hacks would have you believe. Many of their talkings points(as well as those of Zoroastrian supremacists like Jorjani) have been thoroughly debunked by Dr.Touraj Daryaee on YT in a series of videos. But to any serious scholar of Islam, their version is always misleading.

    First off, Islam did not come out of the desert as a fully formed ideology ready to torch everything in its path, lol. It underwent a serious developmental period in Khurasan(also in Messopotamia). In fact, 7/8 writers of the canonical hadiths are of Khorasani origin. Not Arabs. Kinda like Christianity was formulated by Greeks and/or Hellenized peoples.

    Secondly, Zoroastrians were not all holocausted by the initial Arab invasion. lol Their numbers dwindled much later by persecutions due to Islamicized Khurasanis/Iranians themselves. In fact, at the time of the Abbasid revolution when Khurasanis de-facto usurped power in the eastern Muslim world, Abu Muslim’s army was comprised of many Zoros.

    There were many other insurrections in the eastern Umayyad realm by people like Bihafarid and Babak Khurramdin. The thing is, NONE of them were trying to oust Islam, but Arabs. Their ideologies were syncretisms between Islam and Mazdanism.

    When Khorasanis formally usurped power in the form of the Samanid dynasty, they made Farsi the official administrative language but held onto Islam and sent many mussionaries to Turan. Ferdowsi, a contemporary of the period, was a devout Muslim himsef, but a Persian nationalist.

    The Islamic period in Greater Iran was quite fruitful—especially in Khurasan, the center of gravity of it all. In Sassanian times, the “more” Iranic subjects did not reap too many benefits. It were the “Semitic” and “Armenoid” parts of Messopotamia and Zagros which were the focus. We didn’t see geniuses like Avicenna(from Balkh), Biruni(from Khworasm), Rumi(Balkh), al-Khwarizmi(Khworasm), etc.

    Hanafi Islam is very much a Persian thing. No, it’s not copatible with our civilization any more than Conducianism is! lol

  29. @Dana

    To make a long story short, the Islamicized Turkics ended up usurping political power in eastern Islamdom and dominated the military forces there from that point on. It became a sort of a symbiosis: the Turks became the military class while the Persians(or Tajiks–how they called themselves) were the bureaucratic, intellectual and artisan class. That became the essense of Persianate civilization.

    Now, it was not always so cleanly divided. In the Ottoman empire, there was basically just one class of Muslims who spoke a heavily Persianized form of Turkish but were versed in Farsi, too. Yes, there were nomadic Turkmens in Anatolia who spoke a clean Turkish, but were not as militarily important as the Balkan Muslim aristocracy.

    Anyway, the Ottoman state was a Persianate one. Albanians did adopt names from the Book of Kings, like Rustem, which many doubtlessly read from cover to cover. They also started celebrating novruz, originally with pre-Islamic origins but is now staple to all non-semitic hanafis.

    As Brandon said, the Ottoman state did launch many attacks on Europe just like its meta-cultural predecessors Xerxes and Darius did. But it was a beautiful rivalry. The waters were not muddied by Zionism or Wahhabism. The Ottoman sultans were not mindless zombies and neither were Spanish conquerors of the Aztecs. And, yeah, we did win at the end—-with Gallipoli being the last significant stand of the Persian and, indeed, the last breath of traditional Islam.

  30. Also, I would not trust Zoroastrian supremacists from Iran like Reza Jorjani. For one, they like to throw around deceptive anachronism. Additionally, many of them are ardent ZioCons like Ali Sina of FaithFreedomInternational.

    There used to be an active forum called Tajikam. Basically, its members were an assortment of Khorasanis(but also a few Iranians). They wanted to recreate a Greater Khorasan. Extremely anti-Arab, anti-Zionist and of course anti-Pashtun(you know, the Talibans? The “Afghanis”) and for good reasons. They were all mostly devout Sunnis, too, but didn’t constantly invoke Muhammad and took pride in pre-Islamic past.

    It’s not active anymore. Maybe they realized their dream is not readily viable? I mean, they’re a minority in Samarkand/Bukhara, Pashtuns run Af-stan, they’re never getting Merv(Mongol destruction;turkmen repopulated it), Iran won’t give its portion up, etc.

  31. Frangistani, Jorjani has his own take on matters, although he isn’t alone in his way of thinking. I didn’t put his vids up because I’m promoting him or Zoroastrianism. I simply put the vids and article up merely as an example that Islam is not exactly a ‘religion of peace’ as Marxists and many Muslims like to make it out to be. Muslims have all kinds of conflicts around the world, whether they’re with Zoroastrians or Hindus or Sikhs or Buddhists or Christians, etc.

    Now, you could say Islam didn’t necessarily ‘come to torch’, but I wouldn’t necessarily say they came to ‘make peace’, either From the very beginning, Islam was expansionist and they colonized other peoples and cultures, such as the Berbers, blacks, Persians, Indians, and Europeans. Of course slavery and racism are other issues that goes way back in Islam, but Europeans were/are ‘responsible’ for it all, according to the Marxist narrative.

    It’s also true that there’s definitely a pronounced tendency for 9/11 truthers to angelize Muslims. That is all. 🙂

  32. @Fragistani

    Whatever nuances there are in Islam on a regional basis, it is of no concern to us as Europeans. We don’t need large numbers of Muslims in Europe anymore than we need large numbers of Hindus or African voodoo worshippers.

    When Muslims gain numbers they will inevitably start trying to influence the culture and politics of the country to favour their own ways, traditions and beliefs. They’re already doing it as a minority in some Europeans countries. There are already Islamic political parties in some Euro countries: https://www.investigativeproject.org/6038/europe-rising-islam-based-political-parties#

    Why would we want this? On top of the religious problem they bring with them their petty Middle Eastern rivalries with other ethnic groups and sects that they have grudges with. We don’t want or need more disastrous multiculturalism. We already have multiculturalism among Europeans.

    If you look at the big issues most Western Muslims care about and get all hot under the collar about, it’s Israel/Palestine, Middle East wars, and “Islamophobia” in the West. These are all issues that affect their own in-group. They don’t care about the rapidly changing demographics disfiguring Europe. They support that because they’re benefitting from it. They must go!

  33. @Brandon (and Dana)

    Yes, they must. And nowhere did I advocate for any kind of mass migration of non-Europeans to our lands.

    Look, there exists this perception(no doubt popularized by neocon thinktanks like Gatestone Institute) that if Islam is taken out of the picture, all the world’s troubles will evaporate.

    Now, many terror-related ones deff will if we stop supporting and/or neutralize Saudi Arabia and Pakistan(which doesn’t square w/neocon agenda). They are the chief exporters and financiers of heretical Wahhabi and Deobandi ideologies. There’s a reason why Albania, Turkey and Tatarstan are safer for infidels than Britain w/its Paki community. It’s not “false flags” and it’s not “Islam in general” either.

    But even if Islam is totally done away with, I’d be just as much against the influx of refugees from the middle east. The truth is, most of the day-to-day issues stemming from them are NOT exactly Islamically motivated. To pretend otherwise is to aim a rocket launcher at a fruit fly. Just like the day-to-day issues of whites living in majority black and hispanic neighborhoods do not stem from the Baptist Church or Catholicism, per se. So, I am not gonna throw up the ن anytime soon. That rhymes. 😂

    MENAs identify with their ethnicities quite strongly. Palestinian and other Levantine Christians stand in solidarity—against Israel, ISIS, “evil whitey”, you-name-it—w/their Muslim kin and vice versa. Walid Shoebat and Brigitte Gabriel are (rightfully)seen as a traitors among Levantine Christians. PartisanGirl doesn’t exactly prefer Kurds or Saudi correligionists to her Caananite stock.

    My point is that it’s necessary to be right for the right reasons so as not to be lead astray. The solution isn’t take up narrow, anti-Muslim causes. They are just as misleading as libtard or disinfowars “conspiratard” propaganda and ultimately does not serve OUR interests. They don’t care about whites and probably prefer some well-spoken Somali apostate frauds like Ayyan Hirsi Ali to us. They just care we’re on board with their agenda and Jerusalem remains at the “heart of western civilization”, in Wilders’ own words. Why give in to false dichotomies and trade one form of cuckery for another? We have to forge our own path.

  34. @Frag

    We’re not cucking out for either group. Those people/orgs you mention are obviously compromised in that they only push the anti-Islam messaging and support the Jews/Israel. They are misinformation giving us only part of the picture, obviously. I’ve called out all of those frauds. But the folks on the “truther” side go way too far in the other direction and outright shill for Muslims and immigration. Most of these conspiratards are liberals when it comes to race/immigration. Both Muslims and Jews are problems for the West in their own ways. We don’t need either of them in our lands. They can go fight it out in the Middle East for all I care. They’re both hell-bent on dragging us into their squabbles. Where’s Queen Isabella and King Ferdinand when you need them?

  35. I don’t deny that mass immigration to Europe is a problem. My issue is with this idea that the truth about September 11th no longer matters and that the current terrorism is not at all related to what happened on 9/11. The fact remains that the exact same people who lied about and covered up 9/11 are the main propaganda pushers behind every attack which has happened since. Do you really think that organizations such as Rita Katz’s SITE, David Horowitz’s “Freedom” Center, John Bolton’s Gatestone Institute and Frank Gaffney’s Center for Security Policy are reporting the truth about terrorism both here in Europe as well as the US? Bolton and Gaffney are both alum of the Project for the New American Century which laid out the groundwork for the post 9/11 world while calling for a New Pearl Harbor to make it all possible, and Katz and Horowitz along with their partners in crime Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer are hardcore Zionists who push the imminent threat narrative in order to benefit Israel and to demonize Israel’s enemies. In addition to that, the more obvious mainstream Neocons such as Bill Kristol are still pushing the imminent threat of terrorism in order to advance their Middle Eastern goals, the primary difference is that the Kristol crowd does not view Islam itself as the enemy while the aforementioned people and groups (given media platforms from outlets such as Breitbart and Drudge Report and, increasingly Infowars) are promoting the “Clash of Civilizations” narrative, which also advocates for a perpetual state of war and necessitates the portrayal of Islam as the biggest threat facing the world. The overall narrative of perpetual war and of eliminating Israel’s enemies has not changed one bit. You accuse “Truthers” of covering for Zionism and Jewish power, but are you not doing the exact same thing when you constantly focus all of your attention on Muslims and Liberals while pretty much giving the “war on terror” propagandists who are still controlling the Mideast narrative a free pass while accepting their accounts of current terrorism? In my view, there will never be a solution to the dual problems of the destruction of Middle Eastern countries and mass migration as well as the myths which keep the “War on Terror” going are honestly addressed, and that includes the exposure of events such as September 11th which is still the driving force behind this perpetual state of war nearly 16 years later.

  36. I don’t deny that mass immigration to Europe is a problem.

    But you hardly, if ever, talk about it from what I’ve seen from you. Certainly isn’t a focus.

    My issue is with this idea that the truth about September 11th no longer matters and that the current terrorism is not at all related to what happened on 9/11. The fact remains that the exact same people who lied about and covered up 9/11 are the main propaganda pushers behind every attack which has happened since.

    Why would the current terrorism of groups like Isis, Boko Haram and al-Qaeda be linked to 9/11? Those groups are mass murdering their fellow Muslims and Arabs by the thousands, not to mention Christians and other “kaffir”. Their motives for doing so are clearly religious as they state themselves. They do these things in order to “implement the Sharia” and remove the “apostate” kuffar regimes in the Middle East/Africa. 9/11 is irrelevant to that. And 9/11 actually undermines the pro-Assad narratives (I’m not a hack for Assad, but for those who are) which hinges on demonizing the Islamists as the true danger to the West as opposed to the “secular” Ba’athism of Assad which is not international in scope. So why are you not condemning Assad for going along with 9/11 at the time and even today because al-Qaeda (his enemies) were blamed?

    Do you really think that organizations such as Rita Katz’s SITE, David Horowitz’s “Freedom” Center, John Bolton’s Gatestone Institute and Frank Gaffney’s Center for Security Policy are reporting the truth about terrorism both here in Europe as well as the US? Bolton and Gaffney are both alum of the Project for the New American Century which laid out the groundwork for the post 9/11 world while calling for a New Pearl Harbor to make it all possible, and Katz and Horowitz along with their partners in crime Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer are hardcore Zionists who push the imminent threat narrative in order to benefit Israel and to demonize Israel’s enemies.

    All Katz does is repost or translate stuff from Jihadi websites. It’s nothing special. Those groups are simply taking advantage of real Islamic terrorism to forward their Likud agenda, but that doesn’t mean the terror is all fake. Just because someone benefits does not automatically mean they did it. Muslims do things that sometimes benefit their Jewish rivals. Not everything that makes Muslims look bad is a conspiracy.

    And I think there are different types of neocons. The PNAC crowd were more interested in taking down the Arab strongmen regimes whereas people like Gellar are obsessed with the Islamists and Sharia proponents. Neocons and Likudniks are against both the Ba’athists and Islamists, but those two groups also hate each other and have a genuine rivalry (with the exception of theocratic Shiite Iran which sides with the secular dictatorship of Assad vs. its Sunni Islamist rivals in the Gulf). If you listen to Islamists and Baathists talk about each other, you’d think you’re listening to Netanyahu. They genuinely hate each other and are competing for power across the Middle East. Both of those groups have been willing to collaborate with the West & Israel when it suited them to do so. The Jews are now taking advantage of real fissures in that part of the world (Sunni/Shia rivalry) to carve out their own imperium. But that doesn’t mean the splits are not real.

    outlets such as Breitbart and Drudge Report and, increasingly Infowars) are promoting the “Clash of Civilizations” narrative, which also advocates for a perpetual state of war and necessitates the portrayal of Islam as the biggest threat facing the world.

    Truthers love to act like this “clash of civilizations” thing is totally fake but the culture clash is a real thing with millions of Muslims pouring into the West. They really don’t fit into our culture very well. Acknowledging that doesn’t mean I want to have “perpetual war” with Muslim countries. On the contrary, their part of the world should be left alone and our part of the world should be free from their influence also. So not everyone who acknowledges the incompatibility between Islam and the modern secular West are fanatic warmongering neocons. Many are just libertarians who don’t want Muslims gaining influence in the West fearing that when they become strong enough they’ll start pushing their authoritarian Islamic values on everyone. That’s a real concern, but I would agree making that the ONLY concern is part of the alt-lite misdirection campaign to take attention away from the Jewish elites who initiated these immigration and war policies in the first place.

    You accuse “Truthers” of covering for Zionism and Jewish power, but are you not doing the exact same thing when you constantly focus all of your attention on Muslims and Liberals while pretty much giving the “war on terror” propagandists who are still controlling the Mideast narrative a free pass while accepting their accounts of current terrorism?

    I don’t focus all my attention on Muslims and Liberals. I’ve clearly identified Jews as the ringleaders consistently. But that doesn’t mean Muslims and Liberals should never be critiqued on their own. Half of these “truthers” are actually pro-war on terror now that Putin has taken over the fight from the US. So since a lot of these Muslim civil wars kicked off the whole thing is a convoluted mess. Truthers are confused as to which side to choose. The pro-Assad, pro-Russian faction of truthers support bombing Islamists wherever they are from what I’ve seen. How are they not just like neocons then?

    In my view, there will never be a solution to the dual problems of the destruction of Middle Eastern countries and mass migration as well as the myths which keep the “War on Terror” going are honestly addressed, and that includes the exposure of events such as September 11th which is still the driving force behind this perpetual state of war nearly 16 years later.

    But what “myth” of the war on terror are you maintaining is still a myth? Islamic terror is not a myth, but an observable reality all over the world, with attacks happening almost daily. You seem to be stuck in the early truther mindset that al-Qaeda is just a “handful of guys in a cave” when they are clearly a real force now. Recognizing that the threat is now real doesn’t mean I want to go bomb the Middle East. But for Europe’s sake, we need to keep these people out of our countries if we don’t want to be run over with trucks or knifed to death on the subway every other week.

  37. Brandon,

    I’m sure you’ll disagree with what I’m about to say, but at the end of the day, I guess we can at least agree to disagree.

    You seem to be painting many things in a black and white manner, when in reality there are actually way more “gray” areas and complexities involved.

    And this seems to include portraying people that think 911 is still very relevant, implying at least to an extant, that many people with this POV are thinking in one specific way (or ways) – including being SJWs and/or “cucks” for Islam – when there’s a diversity of different opinions and points of view that these people have.

    It goes w/o saying, but people that still think that 911 is very relevant and very important and so forth, come from all walks of life, and philosophies, ranging from leftist “hippy” types to people with very so-called “rightist” pro-NSDAP and/or “1488” views (and everything in between).

    Just because one believes that 911 was a Zionist orchestrated false flag psyop (and still relevant today) – in addition to also believing that “some” (not all) other things are also false flags that are blamed on Muslims (and non-Muslims as well, but I’ll just focus on Muslims since this seems to maybe be your main bone of contention) – does not mean that they believe that everything blamed on Muslims are “false flag” attacks or that there are not bad, evil, despicable “Muslim” terrorists in the world.

    And of course as I’ve told you in the past, I totally agree with the opinion that it’s totally ludicrous to have the POV that all alleged “terror” attacks in the west (or east) are false flags. I agree that it’s crazy to say that “everything” is “staged” although I can understand why many will be a bit apprehensive to just blindly believe what the JMSM or ZOG says (I sure as hell don’t blindly trust them, and this could be on a variety of things; do you think that the media in the US is fair in their coverage say of interracial violence?), before they analyze things for themselves, although trust me (although I’m sure you’re aware) because many people also do this with regard to events or incidents involving non-Muslims as well.

    Now, these two opinions, i.e. believing that there are “some” false flag attacks blamed on “Muslims” (although not perpetrated by them) AND believing that there are terrorist attacks that are indeed perpetrated by Muslims, is not mutually exclusive. To be fair I know you didn’t say otherwise, but I just wanted to point this out, because you seem to be saying that most/all “truthers” have this POV or have an equally flawed POV that Muslims don’t commit evil deeds (including terrorism) in the West, but they do in the East. And while “some” may think like this, I don’t think the majority do (on the flip side, you have many in the “alt-right” who blindly believe everything the Zio controlled media tells them, pretty much having the POV, of almost believing that there has pretty much never been any so-called “conspiracies” all throughout history). In other words, I think people should be skeptical about what they believe from the news, but either extreme (there are no false flags or everything is a staged false flag) is not healthy, although again, I don’t think most “truthers” think the way you seem to characterize them.

    Think about how many in alt-media claimed that because you were anti-Putin, saw through the BS facade that he was the “Messiah” that was going to save the world, etc., also necessarily meant that you also thought that the elite Western leaders (or their goals and objectives, etc.) were any less bad or evil than Putin/the Russia govt., although they used to accuse you of this. It’s not always an “either-or” situation.

    And obviously one can be very much against Muslim (or any non-native) immigration to the west, or against modern day Cultural Marxist/Frankfurt Yeshiva enforced “multiculturalism” but still acknowledge that “some” things are false flags.

    And while you may disagree (which is your right, and I believe you’re being sincere, although wrong), I believe people have a right to be of the opinion that what these criminals did on 911 (for the sake of Zion and to get their western slaves to wage endless crusades against its enemies – but this ALSO benefited their Cultural Marxist cousins to have even more immigration to the West, including to help them fulfill their decades long Kalergi plan) is still very relevant, and no less than what the official holocaust narrative has done in terms of the way it has totally helped to shape (or brainwash) the modern day West in so many different ways in the past several decades, pretty much helping them to finally conquer and “neutralize” the Western white man.

  38. @ Zog

    The main reason I think you still find 9/11 and false-flags important is because you’re a Muslim. If you weren’t a Muslim, I doubt you’d have so much interest in “exposing” these things that principally affect your religious brethren. It ultimately is your Muslim identity and in-group affinity for other Muslims in the Middle East that draws you to those subjects.

    For the most part, only Muslims and leftists still care about 9/11 because they have a political stake in the battles going on in the mid-east. There may be a few weird “rightists” that still talk about it, but they do so mainly to emphasize Jewish involvement, not really because they care what’s afflicting Arabs/Muslims overseas.

    If you acknowledge that Muslims are doing some real terrorism in certain places, then I don’t see what you’re trying to accomplish by obsessing on 9/11. If the terror today is mostly real, then “proving” 9/11 was not Muslims is a waste of time since they are clearly engaged in some of the most heinous atrocities known to mankind on a regular basis. If anything, all 9/11 proves is that Muslim extremists were poorly organized and weak in 2001, so Jews and their lackeys had to fabricate a plot to pin on them. But that doesn’t mean these Islamists aren’t actually as dangerous as the original propaganda sold them as. As we can see with the activities of Isis, Boko Haram, etc., Islamists are as bad as their harshest critics have been saying all along.

  39. Most truthers are definitely of the Marxist bent because there’s a tendency for people to avoid eclecticism, as it takes extra time, research, and the discomfort of red-pill swallowing. So, they come across and ingest certain red-pills, but they often don’t expand much beyond the first series of red-pills they come across.

    In the Manosphere and the men’s rights movement, I’ve come across my fair share of dudes that believed women literally run the world. It’s not so much that they were dumb; it was the result of going deep down the rabbit hole and seeing how the establishment (laws, courts, media, politicians, universities, ‘anti-hate’ organizations, etc) is so anti-male and so pro-female, *combined* with the fact that for many of these dudes, it was the first cause they ever took up, so they were very green/ignorant of so many other issues.

    Let’s say you took the average ‘truther’ and made them debate your average men’s rights activist on male/female gender dynamics. The ‘truther’ would be like a fish out-of-water because he hasn’t put the time and research into it, while at the same time he might also be struggling with strong cognitive dissonance. If you took the average men’s rights activist and made them debate a truther on who runs the government, the men’s rights activist will generally be like a fish out-of-water because this is not his expertise/field. Now some truthers and MRAs can pick it up, and more and more have been, but this is still the general trend of things.

    There are a bunch of fields and even arts out there where the people that are the best in these areas have gone through a long process of continually learning and getting better at them. For example, maybe a veteran boxer, through experience, has learned many tricks of the trade that someone new to the game has had no chance/way of knowing; he ‘learned the ropes’ as it were. At the same time, certain people hit some kind of in-built ceilings the prevent them from making new realizations, that stunt them in their learning process/progress. These reasons could be so many.

    There are also quite a few truthers that see any/all western military action, including military personnel as being ‘evil’. This isn’t exactly the case, either. While there are plenty of atrocities carried out by the American military, the vast majority of the dudes that enter the military are not ‘psychopaths’.

    Someone that comes to my mind is Jocko Willink. Jocko went to Iraq (Ramadi) in 2006. While he’s a very honest dude and has a broad understanding of what he and other Team members and Iraqis went through (Ramadi was one of the most dangerous cities in the world at the time, as they’d been over-run by ISIS, and the US military was tasked at going in and removing them. They had to do this the slow, hard way. They also teamed up with and taught Iraqi soldiers who also hated ISIS – this is contradictory to the narrative that no Iraqis want American military personnel there. He lost buddies in the battle, and after the US pulled out of the area, ISIS took the area over again). While he’s a very honest dude and has a broad understanding of what he and other Team guys and Iraqis went through, he doesn’t know anything about 9/11 or who runs the government/media or anything about Israeli war crimes, etc. So truthers could learn off what he has to say and he could learn off of what truthers have to say.

    Truthers tend to be really, really bad in certain areas though, no doubt, and this includes Muslims. Rarely have I ever heard Muslims acknowledging Muslim slavery, racism, or any other of their misdeeds. They tend to also be quite, to very anti-white. They play right along as ‘victim’ groups and many times either act like they’re ‘superior’ or think they’re ‘superior’, which is one of the many reasons we’ll never really get along if we have to live amongst each other. Certain people that have gotten significant amounts of visibility in the truth movement like Ken O’Keefe or Max Igan or David Icke, to name a few, have major blind spots in certain areas. If I listen to Ken talk about anything in regards to race dynamics or male/female dynamics, I think to myself, holy shit this dude is bad lol; he’s totally anti-white and is a strong white-knight and animal right’s activist while he’s at it. (And on animals, part of transhumanism is the idea that animals are of the same value, or even more valuable than humans. Not do animal rights activists tend to take their activism way too far, when there are certain groups of humans that could be using that time and effort, but I mean, there are plenty of areas in the world where certain species have been over-reproducing to such high degrees that they’re destroying the ecosystems in which they live in. Some of these animals I can think of are jellyfish, squirrels, deer, and hogs. Some of these staunch animal rights activists will say things like, ‘Don’t ever kill any of those animals though; it’s ‘immoral’ for a human to do it, lol). Ken is definitely a ‘lefty-do-gooder’ in these areas and I’ve had a bunch of his own friends block me because they apparently get a lot of their ideas off him, lol. Anyway, this is well worth the listen:

  40. Hello Brandon.

    Do you believe that as Europeans we are stronger as Christians? You say the presence of Muslims and Jews in Europe is a Semitic issue and we should want nothing to do with their Semitic fighting in the Middle East. But what of Christians? Christianity is a Middle Eastern religion. It is founded by a Middle Easterner. It is Middle Eastern by its very Abrahamic nature. Doesn’t standing for our values mean we are taking part in a Semitic squabble?

  41. Christianity is a bit different because it’s been so Westernized over the centuries. That’s why you see all depictions of Jesus in Western film and art as a white European. And Christians are for the most part nominal and don’t have tendencies towards theocracy besides a few fundamentalist cranks. So I’d say Christianity is far better and more compatible with Europe than Judaism or Islam, both of which want to subjugate the unbelievers and impose their own Semitic culture and governance on us. Europeans took Christianity and Westernized it whereas Islam and Judaism have never really been Westernized the way Christianity has. But I would reject the civic nationalism of some Christians in Europe who welcome in Africans, Latinos, Middle Easterners, etc., so long as they’re Christian. While they’re preferable to Muslims on a cultural basis, they’re still part of the Kalergiite invasion force to ethnically replace Europeans, and thus their entry should be opposed too.

  42. The problem you’re having in penning this article is that you’ve somehow gone through a type of devolution in worldview and are calling Daesh Islamic and not understanding what their purpose even is. Do you have any idea at all how people are even recruited to join Daesh or how they dupe people who don’t know much about Islam? Do you know what the word Muslim means? Do you have any understanding that Daesh’s actions completely betray basic tenants of Islam? You’ve lost all the links you pretended to know in the past. So now you see no link or relevance to the history that has already happened.

    Your sentence here: “But proving 9/11 was a false-flag in order to make Muslims look good does not even really work…” Dude, seriously, what is going on in your brain? Proving what happened with 9/11 is not done to make Muslims look good. That is not the point to exposing truth!

    I can see you are not enlightened about the global threat of Zionism/Israel/Jews. You write, “So I must commit my life to ‘exposing’ Zionist deceptions that have villainizied Muslims/Arabs…” and “Why would I or any other Westerner go out of our way to shill for Muslims on terrorism…?” Do you see now, Brandon? You think this is all for Muslims. You don’t even realize that Zionism is a GLOBAL threat and they want WORLD dominance. You don’t even understand how they’re breaking apart the USA, how they’re using it, how their plan is to destroy us too. You just don’t get it. You’re not a citizen of the USA and somehow you think it’s all about virtue signaling for Muslims as though they’re helpless without your dashing and charming intervention? What about the Christians and atheists in Palestine? You think only Muslims live there?

    Straight up, dude: You’re listening to Christian Zionists who are on a “Fuck Islam” brigade and need to stop. They’ve been changing the way you’ve been talking. I’m really curious if you’ll approve my comment. We shall see.

  43. @Jaci

    Do you have any idea at all how people are even recruited to join Daesh or how they dupe people who don’t know much about Islam?

    The fact that they recruit gullible idiots to join their cause does not mean they’re not Islamic. They are Islamic because that’s what they say that they are. Their leader Al-Baghdadi was an Islamic scholar of some sort. In ISIS-controlled territory they even have Islamic courts and judges doing rulings based on Sharia law. What are they following if not Islamic texts, the Egyptian book of the dead?

    Do you have any understanding that Daesh’s actions completely betray basic tenants of Islam?

    I don’t believe that. Daesh has an interpretation of Islam that they believe is correct. The Koran has many passages that call for violence against non-Muslims and “heretics” within the religion. They’re clinging to those passages to justify what they do. Like any religious text the Koran is up for interpretation, so that’s what we’re seeing with Daesh.

    I can see you are not enlightened about the global threat of Zionism/Israel/Jews.

    I know all about it but I asked why I should focus on Jewish-Zionist schemes against Arabs/Muslims as opposed to Jewish/Zionist schemes against whites here in the West? Jews are not only plotting against Muslims, they’ve been steadily undermining the white world as well for centuries. Why should my focus not be on what afflicts my own people here?

    You’re not a citizen of the USA and somehow you think it’s all about virtue signaling for Muslims as though they’re helpless without your dashing and charming intervention?

    The “truther” cult is by and large virtue signalling for Muslims/Arabs in the Middle East. All they do is write propaganda to exonerate Muslims when they’re accused of something evil.

    What about the Christians and atheists in Palestine? You think only Muslims live there?

    And how numerous are Christians and atheists in Palestine, like maybe 1-2% of the population? It’s so minuscule. The reasons Muslims care about Palestinians is because they’re mostly Muslims. If Palestinians were mostly Christians or Atheists most Muslims wouldn’t give a damn about them because they believe non-believers are going to hell anyway.

    You’re listening to Christian Zionists who are on a “Fuck Islam” brigade and need to stop. They’ve been changing the way you’ve been talking.

    I don’t listen to any Christian Zionists. Muslims and Jews are both problems for the West, just in different ways. I don’t see why I have to pick a side between the two in their little inter-Abrahamic war. We need to save the West from globalism and the radical left. I have no time to waste on these Semitic squabbles in the middle east which will go on forever.

  44. Many, if not most Muslims have no problems calling out the faults in Christianity or other religions like Hinduism (such as the major conflicts between Hindus and Muslims and Pakistanis and Indians). But when you point out any of the faults associated with and inherent in Islam, now you’re gonna offend all kinds of Muslims.

    With the exception of some Muslims, it’s just funny as hell seeing all these different Muslims as well as many Arabs blaming whites for colonialism, slavery, racism, ‘privilege’, etc., in their holier than thou fashion. I was just talking to somebody in the ‘truth movement’ who literally told me that Muslims have “never” engaged in colonialism and slavery, lmfao. It’s that bad. They’ve also got this assortment of memes compiled like a quote they took from Malcolm X talking about how there’s “no racism” in Islam. Of course I laugh my mother fukin ass off at that. I mean, not only are they seriously deluded, but you could cover this shit for weeks. It’s a combination of either sheer ignorance, or just being allergic to actually looking shit up and/or thinking for oneself.

    Generally speaking, Muslims will be pro-Muslim, and this is expected because it’s natural for any group to be self-interested. What is not natural is having entitled Muslims come in to your countries thinking they can just call the shots and tell you how the fuck to live and what you can and can’t say about them. Many Muslims have seriously pissed me off, just like these Marxist, “Muslims don’t commit no crime” ideologues like Barrett or Labonte or Azaziah or Mark Glenn or Khanverse, amongst so many others.

    Sorry, but Iran is no angel either and their misdeeds have to also be called out or all the Marxists in the “truth movement” will continue on thinking that Muslims and Arabs are all just “oppressed little angels”, ‘superior in morality and being’ and whatever other hogwash they like to come up with. Covering things such as the migrant crisis or the rise of the Islamic presence in places like Europe or Australia, or the war on whites is beyond these jokers and they need to be put to the fire on it.

  45. Hello Brandon.

    Secularists backed by Jews are the reason we have more nominal Christians. But this is not true for every European country. In Poland, Ukraine, and in countries that were part of the Soviet Union Christianity is on the rise and by far the number one religion. If we manage to regain our sovereignty then we will be able to rule ourselves as a Christian majority and rid ourselves of homosexuality, pornography, prostitution, transgenderism, and all the degeneracy the Jewish lobby is pushing on us. I do not see this as fundamentalist thinking. This is how we can save our European nations.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s