Does liberalism reclassify 9/11 as an act of random violence?

January 14, 2010

Lawrence Auster suggests that the police use random to mean the attacker did not know the victim.    Is this true of liberalism in general?  Does this explain why liberalism can’t identify Islam as the attacker?

Islam as a whole in effect knows the victim, since it knows the Christian world already.  So if Islam attacked us on 9/11, it wasn’t a random act of violence but purposeful and knowing attack.  But liberalism can’t accept that.  So it defines Muslims who attack Christians and Jews as insane Muslims.

For non-whites or non-Westerners to attack whites or Westerners or Christians and Jews on a knowing intentional basis as an act of racial aggression to dispossess whites of their land and take power from them is impossible under liberalism.  So if a non-white does that, then they are insane according to liberalism.

When Muslims attack the West to take it over and ethnically cleanse whites as blacks have done since the 19th century at least inside America, then liberalism can’t recognize this as purposeful self-interested and intentional behavior.  Instead liberalism defines this as insane.  Then it denies that most non-whites do this.

Then the peaceful bacteria fallacy is invoked in some form.  Suppose a bacteria invades your body and infects your whole body.  However, its only the infection in the brain and nervous system that actually kill you.   Then liberalism defines the portion of the bacteria operating on the brain and central nervous system as insane.   They say its insane for the bacteria.  This is true even though the bacteria act according to their genetic programming.  Nonetheless, to liberalism this portion of the bacteria is insane.

Moreover, the bacteria in the rest of the body is called peaceful and wanting to co-exist with the host.   They die when the host dies from the action of the insane bacteria in this case.  In the case of the Muslim invasion, the peaceful Muslims of course don’t die, they just take over.

Under liberalism, all the attacks on the West or whites are insane.  In every case, liberals invoke the peaceful bacterial fallacy (or doctrine) that most invading bacteria are peaceful and don’t intend to kill the host and don’t even want it.

So under liberalism, 9/11 was a random act of violence.  It was not an intentional act in the conflict of Islam against the West or Arabs or non-whites against whites.

It is interesting how all actors who act contrary to liberalism are defined as insane if non-white.   This is to deny evil intent to non-whites as a group even when they dispossess whites from their lands and then subjugate the whites and subject them to South Africa type treatment.

Whites are classified as insane to try to resist this, because liberalism says it doesn’t exist.  Whites may also be classified as evil somewhat inconsistently by liberalism.  They simply use either term as the moment or even the sounds of the words may suggest.   Crying evil whites or insane whites are both pleasing sounds to liberals and they don’t want to be denied either one.

Non-whites who attack whites to dispossess them are classified as insane by liberals.  This includes Muslims.  Whites who see this behavior as part of ethnic cleansing of whites and dispossession of whites and systematic harm to whites are classified as insane by liberals.  When whites see the invasion and propose responding, the liberals classify them as insane.  Thus liberalism protects itself and denies meaningful protection and self defense to whites at the same time.  Whites need a land of their own.   This is clear with every passing day.

A host that wants separation from the bacteria is labeled insane by liberalism.  Even though the bacteria will with certainty kill it, to separate itself from the bacteria is called racism, bigotry and insanity.  Even though its in the DNA of the bacteria, liberalism at most will say the bacteria in the brain can be separated.  But really it says that every cell in the brain has to be checked, not profiling the bacteria.   Liberalism is insane.  It is systematic insanity.  It is a primitive religion.

Liberalism defines white as evil.  The dispossession of whites from their education, job, government and land is defined as normal and sane by liberalism.  So if a white sees it as invasion and wants to resist it by separation, the liberal defines that as insane.


Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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

%d bloggers like this: