39 comments on “You may or may not believe this

  1. Tim,

    can you get your techies to sort out the text alignment in the blockquotes at Conts? Centre aligned text is really difficult to read.

    I’ve tried overriding it using my browser’s default CSS but whatever they’ve done its being overruled, even when using “!important”. (I know I’m setting the defaults because I can change the background colour),

  2. @Tim W

    Re: The Continental Telegraph

    Disqus comments again, why?

    Can’t see them without enabling javascript which I will not do – persec

    HEADLINES STILL BOLD UPPERCASE – why? Amateur & childlike.

    KISS

  3. Is altar boys / young men in need of guidance / vulnerable boys a better social dynamic than teen girls and young women?

    Is doing it singly across the country for pleasure any better or worse than doing it as part of an organised group for money and pleasure?

    If we asked the victims of each would they be able to say whether type of abuser was different from the other in terms of mental health problems, pain etc?

    Hey does anyone know if we still do chemical castration or should we go for actual castration?

  4. @ Tim
    Christianity, not just the Roman Candles, has had an impact in publicising Jesus’ instructions to “Love our neighbours as ourselves”.

  5. Fascinating!

    A paper that claims the Catholic church marriage rules reduced the number of first cousin marriages, linking this to the rise of inclusive “communes”, is said to be “pretty good evidence” that it stopped the much-complained-of Rotherham-style asian-on-totally-not-a-cousin-girls grooming?!! The non-sequiturs that must be involved in that particular chain of ‘logic’ have to be particularly eye-poppingly mind-boggling! I look forward to seeing someone here explain how they did it!

    Well, I can’t complain any more that the similarity between the Rotherham rapists and the Catholic grooming problem is being ignored here. This should be… interesting!

    Well done, Tim, on such a truly impressive troll!

  6. I signed it, Ecksy.

    Martin – I think the point is that non-consangenous monogamy existed for good reasons and helped our ancestors avoid a lot of social problems.

    It’s why our current experiment of destroying the Western family through divorce, child support, bastardy, contraception and sexual deviancy is reaping such horrific results.

    On the Catholic Church’s problems with paedoes – which are awful, disgusting and shameful – it’s because their seminaries are gayer than a Frankie Goes To Hollywood gig at a Royal Navy base in Bumchester. So you rarely hear of altar girls being molestered.

    No, not all gays are pederasts, but a lot of them are. The whole “twink” thing gives the game away. (And hetero men often have a thing for “barely legal” girls, but our society frowns on that sort of thing and we tend to think ebolaphiles are a bit odd)

    Basically, Tomas de Torquemada did nothing wrong.

  7. Ecks,

    For maximum effect, something like that needs to be current (that one is 5 months old, expires 14 December – they run for 6 months?), and ideally some top PR to get it off to some big numbers right from the srtart, ie some serious momentum?

    If this utter shite, by some treasonous fluke, gets through Parliament, we’ll need something Countryside Alliance type scale and bigger?

  8. Well, I can’t complain any more that the similarity between the Rotherham rapists and the Catholic grooming problem is being ignored here.

    To be fair, the only reason you make this comparison is because you’re desperate to deny the truth about Islam. Because you’re weak.

    Now, personally, I’m in favour of hanging all pedoes of every colour or creed, but there’s a few important differences between rape jihad and Fr. McFeely:

    * The numbers. Only 5% of the population is Moon Cultist, but their sheer rate of rape is astonishingly high. 1400 little girls in Rotherham alone. Thousands and thousands and thousands more in seemingly every enclave we’ve let them set up in our country.

    * The savagery of the predation: I’ve yet to hear of Catholic priests gang-raping, drugging, prostituting, and murdering a child. Same can’t be said of the followers of Mahound.

    * The targets of the predation: Catholic priests try it on with Catholic boys. Muslims deliberately target little white girls in the vast majority of cases.

    * Catholics don’t believe that a guy who fucked a nine year old child was the Perfect Man, a model to be emulated

    * It’s not illegal to criticise the Catholic Church, the media doesn’t bury their crimes, and nobody’s been huckled into jail for bringing attention to clerical abuse

    Hope that helps. x

  9. If we can spread it and get a shitload of folk on in a short time–even more reason now than 5 months ago–it will help increase the pressure on the pukes.

    Yes we need action but without waiting to long. I don’t think she can get it through without ZaNu catching the same Brain Ebola suicide virus BluLabour has. Well yes you say… they already have it. True they do but it hasn’t yet eaten the tactical animal cunning bit of ZaNu’s brains –the biggest part as they have no frontal lobes for rational thought.

    They aren’t –even under Jizza –dumb enough to help her stay to 2022. When they desperately want a GE. Now.

  10. I’d say your guy got it exactly the wrong way round. Christianity was originally a Middle-Eastern religion. A branch of Judeaism. If it’d stayed in the middle-east, it’d have been no different from that later branch of Judeaism, Islam. Reason being. The goat. Middle easterners are goat herders. Goat herders view their neighbouring goat herders with distrust because they suspect they may steal their goats. So they’re reluctant to cooperate. Brother against brother. Except brothers against family. Except family against the tribe. Except the tribe against everyone else. That describes the history of the middle-east.
    Europeans, except when they keep goats, are farmers. Their wealth is in land, not goats. Land does not go wandering off to be stolen by neighbours. Nor does the farmer want to spend his nights guarding his turnips to prevent his neighbour stealing them. It is much more in his interest to cooperate with his neighbour & agree that he will not steal his neighbour’s turnips if his neighbour doesn’t steal his. And they both get a good night’s sleep. On the other side of his neighbour is his neighbour’s neighbour. Which makes him his neighbour. And so on. All farmers, across Europe, are neighbours. It makes sense for your children to marry your neighbour’s children because your family becomes his family. And so on. All Europeans are part of the same extended family. One tribe, not many.
    Just look at European conflicts. How rarely they are peoples against peoples. Mostly they are rulers of people against rulers of people about who will gain the benefits of rule. Their subjects would rather live in peace with their neighbours and left to themselves, do so.
    So a middle-eastern goat herding religion came up against Europeans & Catholicism was the result. Not totally successfully. It’s still basically a goat herding religion & distrusts anyone not a Catholic. Or anyone not the same sort of Catholic. It’s been persecuting them for much of two millennia & caused endless wars. Look at its bible. The annex. That wasn’t written by goat herders. it was written by Europeans, years after the events it records. With a European message. It’s central character was a goat-fucker of course. And wouldn’t have thought like that, at all.

  11. It is worth looking at history. Europeans had had a couple of goes at the modern commercial state long before Christianity reared its ugly head. The Greeks & then the Romans. Democracy. People governed by the people. It was Christianity brought it rule by God’s anointed. Absolute monarchs. Goat-fuckers

  12. Here’s a thought for you. Farmers don’t tend to produce monotheistic religions. The Greeks, the Romans, the Northern Europeans. Their gods are multiple. They’re not perfect & infallible. They argue & compete. They’re gods you can talk to bargain with. They’re not that much different from the people created them.
    Goat-fuckers need one all powerful god. Ultimate head of the tribe. Infallible & indisputable. Only thing keeps the tribes from killing each other over the goats.
    Europeans tried to Europeanise Christianity. All the angels & Satan & the Father & the Son & the saints. None of that is really in the original Book, is it? Pretty well just the one God, tells you what to do. Chief of the tribe. Not to be argued with.

  13. Is doing it singly across the country for pleasure any better or worse than doing it as part of an organised group for money and pleasure?

    At least victims of left footer nonces only got raped by one person. Not like the poor kids raped by 100 worthless paki goatfuckers.

  14. I can’t recall any Catholic priests inviting their entire congregation to gang bang a drugged up alter boy.

    Yet that’s what the Pak boys do. Find a vulnerable underage white girl, drug her up, pass her around 100 of their mates.

    That’s systematic organised community wide rape.

    Being a tranny-loving Pak defender, NiV can somehow find something which the white community abhors and something the Pak community thinks is fine as being the same. They aren’t.

    Do you get paid to mind their taxis when they’re busy at it?

  15. Farmers don’t tend to produce monotheistic religions. The Greeks, the Romans, the Northern Europeans. Their gods are multiple.
    You can add India and China to that list.

  16. “To be fair, the only reason you make this comparison is because you’re desperate to deny the truth about Islam. Because you’re weak.”

    I don’t have any problem with telling the truth about Islam. I just insist on it being the truth.

    “The numbers. Only 5% of the population is Moon Cultist, but their sheer rate of rape is astonishingly high. 1400 little girls in Rotherham alone. Thousands and thousands and thousands more in seemingly every enclave we’ve let them set up in our country.”

    Actually, no it’s not. As I’ve explained several times before, most child-rapists in Britain are white, the racial distribution of child-rapists is roughly representative of the population. About 90% of child-rapes are carried out by individuals, about 10% by groups/gangs. If you ignore 90% of cases and zoom in on just that 10% carried out by gangs, then yes, about half the gangs and 75% of the perpetrators prosecuted are asian. But of course the only reason for zooming in that way is so that you can have a go at asians/muslims, not because you care about child rape, or rape generally.

    There are a hell of a lot of rapes happen. The numbers here only seem “astonishingly high” because we ignore or are ignorant about most of them for most of the time.

    “The savagery of the predation: I’ve yet to hear of Catholic priests gang-raping, drugging, prostituting, and murdering a child.”

    Have you looked? Has anyone else?

    “The targets of the predation: Catholic priests try it on with Catholic boys. Muslims deliberately target little white girls in the vast majority of cases.”

    Actually, there’s no evidence of that. It appears that the white girls are more likely to go to the police, and most of the cases prosecuted have involved white complainants, but there’s evidence of a hell of a lot of asian girls being abused and not talking, and given the way most abusers of this type work, they pick their targets based on their vulnerability rather than their race, and for cultural reasons (that *do* have some basis in Islam) asian girls tend to be more vulnerable. It’s an honour/shame culture. Chances are that the proportion of asian victims is high, but nobody knows because nobody’s done a serious survey, and the campaigners using the issue for their own political purposes aren’t interested.

    “Catholics don’t believe that a guy who fucked a nine year old child was the Perfect Man, a model to be emulated”

    Granted. And that’s a perfectly reasonable point against Islam.

    But Catholics do revere the Popes as models to be emulated, and quite a few of those had similarly disgusting habits. And there’s still a fair amount of reverence for the Old Testament patriarchs in the Bible, who were even worse, and very much on a par with Mo. I think I’ve mentioned Moses before?

    The distinction between them is that Catholics accept the principle of progressive morality. Moral standards change over time. For most of history, the age of consent was lower – around the age of puberty. In that most famous and revered English classic Romeo and Juliet – Juliet was a 13 year old and in the play Lady Capulet says she had already become a mother by the time she was Juliet’s age. For most of history, rulers were expected to be far more violent, corrupt, and autocratic. Machiavelli wasn’t wrong about them. And the New Testament has several admonitions that slaves should obey their masters willingly, and indeed the church itself owned slaves. It was considered moral or at least acceptable at the time and in their culture, but not today in our culture. So the big question is: should religions like Catholicism and Islam move with the times? If society changes its mind on things like gay marriage and the age of consent and slavery, should religions follow?

    Catholicism has always changed. Often with foot-dragging resistance and a long delay, but it’s been built in to the doctrinal process from the start. Islam, according to the orthodoxy, can not. In actual practice it has too – after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire it has been reforming, although unofficially and without the blessing of orthodoxy, and thus a far more dangerous and fragile process. The jihadist beards and ISIS nutters are the ones who recognise this and are fighting it, trying to restore and preserve the original moral standards of their faith. They’re the Islamic equivalent of the Catholics who oppose gay marriage and women bishops and so on. Conservatives, in other words.

    “It’s not illegal to criticise the Catholic Church, the media doesn’t bury their crimes, and nobody’s been huckled into jail for bringing attention to clerical abuse”

    Nowadays, yes, because the Catholic Church has lost most of its power. But for most of its history that wasn’t the case. The Inquisition used to be very active. And even in the current century, they do still manage to cover a lot of stuff up – as seen when somebody does finally manage to blow the gaff, we usually find out that it’s been going on for decades.

    “I’d say your guy got it exactly the wrong way round. Christianity was originally a Middle-Eastern religion. A branch of Judeaism. If it’d stayed in the middle-east, it’d have been no different from that later branch of Judeaism, Islam.”

    True. And until fairly recently it was indeed very similar. A lot of the Islamic practices we condemn today used to be common in Europe, too. We all got most of this crap from Moses. (You could call him the original goat-fucker.) Both cultures are still in the process of reforming and recovering from that, but Islam is about 50-100 years behind Europe and the West.

    The difference is that The Enlightenment started in Europe, introducing economic and social freedoms that proved very successful and popular. We got it first, and it spread to the Middle East as Western power did. In much the same way that farming started in Mesopotamia, and only spread to Europe later, with the result that they were building stone and brick cities and pyramids and so on when we still lived in mud huts.

    “At least victims of left footer nonces only got raped by one person. Not like the poor kids raped by 100 worthless paki goatfuckers.”

    Is it better to be raped by one person a hundred times, or by a hundred people once each? Serious question. I’m interested in your thinking here.

    “Being a tranny-loving Pak defender, NiV can somehow find something which the white community abhors and something the Pak community thinks is fine as being the same.”

    Most child-rapes in the UK are carried out by white men. As a white men, do you think the activities of your community are “fine”? Or do you – as orthodox Islam mandates – think they should be publicly flogged?

  17. The vast majority of child rapes in European cultures are by individuals and the occasional pairs. The Catholic situation is a red herring in that there is a combination of enforced celibacy and the church being a magnet for those so inclined coupled with a secretive, powerful organization which encourages silence both in victims and anyone who learns of abuse.
    Meanwhile out in general society…
    Imagine, if you care to, that you become a child rapist. Exactly how many of your friends and relatives do you think you could tell without risking one of them going to the police or otherwise causing you massive problems?
    I certainly wouldn’t risk even tangentially broaching the subject with one of them.
    I would like to think that not one of my friends or relatives would think it remotely acceptable and leave me to get on with my child raping, LET ALONE JOIN IN!

    Apparently many, many of the family, friends, acquaintances of Muslim child rapists not only did nothing to stop them, they enthusiastically JOINED IN!

    Don’t tell me that the attitude to child rape is the same in the two cohorts.
    In European culture the act is considered completely unacceptable, in Islam it is compulsory to revere a man who was himself a child rapist

    And Tim, as for your point about Asian girls also being abused by gangs – yes but they are Sikh and other despised non-Muslim girls. There is no evidence that multiple rapists, as opposed to the individuals which exist in any culture, are targeting Muslim girls en mass, even though they would be closer to hand and presumably easier to control.

  18. “All the angels & Satan & the Father & the Son & the saints. None of that is really in the original Book, is it?”

    There are plenty of scholars who think the Jews didn’t become monotheist until the Babylonian captivity where they fell under Zoroastrian influence.

    How much, if any, of the OT was written before then is hard to tell. One theory is that it was mostly concocted after the Assyrians conquered Israel, when it became imperative to bind together the people of Judah and the Israelite refugees who fled south to join them. That was before the Babylonians conquered Judah, obviously.

    What it was concocted from, Lord knows – bits of folklore, scraps of old writing, sheer invention, …

    They presumably picked up new folklore in Mesopotamia, including the Noah/flood story and the baby-in-the-basket-in-the-river story. Someone decided to spatch together two different foundation myths (Abraham, Moses) each having substantial evidence of Mespot yarns.

    I’d like to know who wrote the commandment “Thou shalt have no other God before me” and when he wrote it. It refers to a time before monotheism – it’s a claim that Yaweh is top god, not a claim that he’s the only god. I kick myself that it took me decades to realise that that was its implication. Presumably scholars twigged centuries earlier. If so, the news didn’t reach us in Sunday School.

  19. The thing Steve leaves out is tribalism. Much as they might want to do that sort of thing, Catholics couldn’t because they’re not tribal. Much as their religion would prefer them to be. They’re not going to close themselves in enclaves away from people who are not them. Their farmer’s preference with getting on with and interacting with their neighbours takes preference.
    The thing about Rotherham is not that the blokes did what they did. It’s that what they were doing must have inevitably been widely known about throughout the community. Look at regular prostitution in the wider population. It’s not exactly a secret is it? Yet the amount of men take advantage of the services of a prostitute in the course of their lives are what? 10%? 15%? The amount of regular users in low single figures. Unless the Muslim community is radically different from the wider, how many Muslim men were offered the stock to provide clients for 1400 girls? Yet none of them informed on what was going on. Can you imaging that happening with Catholics? That none of them would have broken ranks?

  20. “asian girls tend to be more vulnerable. It’s an honour/shame culture. Chances are that the proportion of asian victims is high, but nobody knows because nobody’s done a serious survey, and the campaigners using the issue for their own political purposes aren’t interested.”

    It’s difficult to work out if you’re an ignorant cunt, NiV, or just a cunt. Do you know what happens in honour/shame cultures if you fuck their sisters/daughters.? They hunt you down & kill you. Before or after they’ve killed the poor unfortunate girl is immaterial.

    I had some milder experience of this, growing up in a very Jewish area of London. Because the culture really isn’t that much different. Tribal. Jewish lads fucking chiksas is perfectly OK. Better than fucking Jewish Princesses, who should be kept pure for marriage. Yoks fucking Jewish girls can lead to serious grief. Brothers & their mates on your case. Whether she consented is immaterial.

  21. “Imagine, if you care to, that you become a child rapist. Exactly how many of your friends and relatives do you think you could tell without risking one of them going to the police or otherwise causing you massive problems?”

    The same phenomenon can be seen in pretty much any action film involving organised crime. The gangsters always have lots of scantily clad young girls hanging off their arms. The younger the better.

    If you was in with the mob, then being able to get underage girls would be seen as a sign of status and a perk of membership – many of them being immature young men – and getting all moral on other more senior gang members would be incredibly dangerous and obviously fucking stupid! Can you imagine going up to Ronnie Kray and lecturing him about the morality of the girls he provides for entertainment?!

    And can you imagine, given its widespread portrayal in film and TV, that we in the white community are not fully aware of it?

    “it’s a claim that Yaweh is top god, not a claim that he’s the only god. I kick myself that it took me decades to realise that that was its implication.”

    There used to be a thing about the word for God used in bits of the Bible ‘elohim’ being grammatically a plural. You might be interested.

  22. “It’s difficult to work out if you’re an ignorant cunt, NiV, or just a cunt. Do you know what happens in honour/shame cultures if you fuck their sisters/daughters.? They hunt you down & kill you.”

    And the sisters/daughters too. Which is why the sisters/daughters won’t talk about it, or go to the police.

  23. Do you get your entire view of the world from watching movies, NiV? Organised crime is business, not a branch of Hollywood. The people in it are much the same as any other sort of business. Except a little less keen on drawing attention to themselves.

  24. “Organised crime is business, not a branch of Hollywood. The people in it are much the same as any other sort of business. Except a little less keen on drawing attention to themselves.”

    *Every* business uses young and attractive girls in its advertising and entertainment activities. Criminals are just a little less picky about the legality of their methods.

  25. Interesting ideas, there, dearieme. But competing monotheisms aren’t the same as polytheism. The Romans didn’t seem bothered by gods other than their own ones. They even adopted the odd one or two. Don’t suppose a Roman would have baulked at the idea of his gods & the Germanic gods sitting down at a joint banquet & quaffing session at Valhalla or Mount Olympus or wherever.
    It takes a tribal mentality to believe your god is the only true god & all the others are fakes. By extension, you are the only true people & no-one else counts.

  26. Organised crime is *very* picky about the legality of anything to do with the girl trade. It’s an excellent way of laundering illicit money from other activities. It’s run as straight as can be.

  27. Big mistake the British Empire made was not forcing Christianity on our subjects like the Spanish did.

    Years back I knew this beautiful Malay in Singapore… old family friend going back now like 4 generations. Damn…. when we were in our 20s she was soooooo fucking hot. and liberal. Married into another Malay family and suddenly went totally Islamic… such a waste.

    I remember her driving me.through Singapore after a night out at clark quay and would keep the head scarf in the car just in case she got pulled by the police then they wont breathalize. Now all i hear from her is bollocks about whats haram and she looks awful. What a waste.

    Islam is poison.

  28. Sure DJ. But which economy would you want? Singapore or Caracas?
    Not saying one should complain, otherwise. The bountiful crop of delicious – and most importantly, poor & needy – latinas seems infinite.

  29. “Big mistake the British Empire made was not forcing Christianity on our subjects like the Spanish did.”

    On the contrary the East India Company was wise to have a near-ban on Christian missionaries stirring up the locals.

  30. Bloke in spain – farmers nicking crops used to happen. Worked if you could get away with it – either by doing it in a group or else doing it undetected.
    Its why farm dogs were useful for more than herding sheep.

    Never mind non farmers who would happily strip a farm in sufficient numbers. What will the farmer do, fight back against an armed group? Fight back against an army? Call the local policeman on his bike against 40 plus people?

  31. Martin, you rather prove my point. This was a millennium & a half or more ago. The birth of what was to become, in the UK’s case, the Anglo-Saxon legal system. Neighbour combined with neighbour to keep the both secure. A far cry from the tribal blood feuds between neighbours of the goat-fuckers.
    As the farming Romans did before them. It’s a crop farmers produce. Equitable law. Law applies to everyone. Not law applies to the tribe but treats outsiders differently.

  32. I can’t quite work out what the fuck NiV is rambling on about.

    Is he saying that the Pak gangs are really organised crime playing out a movie?

    I see he’s still trying to defend gang rapes, drugging and handing around vulnerable girls on the basis that white people commit rape as well. Of course, most child rape is by a close family member or friend. Perhaps he’s claiming the Pak gangs think they’re just trying to get close to their girls family or something. A sort of cultural misunderstanding.

    I’ve come to the conclusion that NiV is a frustrated taxi driving Pak. They haven’t let him join in so this is his attempt to curry favour. Probably goat curry. Only thing that explains his slavish devotion to these criminals. I mean, fuck, even the convicted have been expressing remorse. Way to late to stop them getting the shit kicked out of them in prison but I for one would see it as a reason for early release for those who do the kicking.

  33. Tim wrote:
    “It’s the same old question being asked, the root one for all economics. What the hell happened in 1750? Why did, for the first time ever, some places start to get rich? Why didn’t others? The lack of first cousin marriage is a new one on me but looks like there’s at least some contribution.”

    Interesting idea, but it’s noteworthy that the places that first started to get rich had to some extent moved on from the Catholic Church. The industrial revolution and the new economic ideas didn’t kick off in Rome.

    I get the impression that the extended family is a stronger structure in catholic countries than in protestant.

  34. “I can’t quite work out what the fuck NiV is rambling on about.”

    That’s probably because you’re not very smart, and find it difficult to read English with more than one syllable in the words.

    “Is he saying that the Pak gangs are really organised crime playing out a movie?”

    I’m saying they’re criminal gangs, as in ‘gangsters’, and that the attitude and behaviour of young men in criminal gangs towards women is so universal and widely known as to be a Hollywood stereotype.

    “I see he’s still trying to defend gang rapes, drugging and handing around vulnerable girls on the basis that white people commit rape as well.”

    I’m not defending the rape gangs. I’ve never defended the rape gangs. I’ve explained that point – at length – multiple times. Do you really find it so difficult to understand why the ‘Group A Group B trick’ is a stupid moronic shit-head argument used by evil pricks like the SJWs?

    I’m simply pointing out the way *you* lot are effectively defending all the *white* rapists by ignoring them, pretending they don’t exist, and then throwing a little tantrum because I mentioned them and so debunked your favourite racist smears.

    “I’ve come to the conclusion that NiV is a frustrated taxi driving Pak.”

    Really? I’ve come to the conclusion that you’re a bit too interested in minimising attention to white child-rapists…

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.