What ISIS Really Wants – The Atlantic

Following takfiri doctrine, the Islamic State is committed to purifying the world by killing vast numbers of people. The lack of objective reporting from its territory makes the true extent of the slaughter unknowable, but social-media posts from the region suggest that individual executions happen more or less continually, and mass executions every few weeks. Muslim “apostates” are the most common victims. Exempted from automatic execution, it appears, are Christians who do not resist their new government. Baghdadi permits them to live, as long as they pay a special tax, known as the jizya, and acknowledge their subjugation. The Koranic authority for this practice is not in dispute.

Source: What ISIS Really Wants – The Atlantic


My pronouns are whatever you're comfortable with as long as you speak to me with respect. I'm an Afruikan and Iswa refugee living in Canaan. That's African American expat in Israel in Normalian. I build websites, make art, and assist people in exercising their spirituality. I'm also the king of an ile, Baalat Teva, a group of African spirituality adherents here. Feel free to contact me if you are in need of my services or just want to chat.


  1. In regard to the events in Paris, and the crash of the Russian Airliner; I suspect both were a response to a previous act by (for lack of a better term) white people. The connection is clear in the case of the Russian airliner; but the Paris slaughter is like an algebra problem where in order to “balance the equation” you need to determine what “X” needs to be?

    with “X” being something the French government did

    In other words, why now?

    These clowns could have pulled this off at any time in the past?

    So why now?

    Like 9-11, this was their money shot; what happened to cause them to use it?

    This reminds me of that opening scene in “Training Day” where “Alonzo” tells “Jake”:

    “You see this?

    this is a newspaper; its 99% bullshit; but I read it cause it entertains me…”

  2. Stefan Molyneux give his perspective on the attacks. Even if you don’t agree with his politics, he gives a comprehensive view of the situation.

  3. I like Stefan and admire what he has built; but I think his vids should come with a warning sticker. He is what I call a “soft racist”. His presentation is so slick and smooth that many people not realize he is just a kinder, gentler white supremacist…

    For example, just like CH, he pushes the meme that the Africans have an average IQ of 70 BUT,


    unlike the other racists, Molyneux “implies” IQ can be raised?

    See how he works?

    It is my opinion Molyneux cloaks his racism in libertarianism in order to sneak it down people throats.

    Its real slick; and Im not hatin, but people need to be advised.

    • Well, find me an intelligent European who isn’t self hating, but isn’t a little racist. We are all a little racist. Even if one’s definition of racism requires some real world advantage, African Americans who love ourselves and our people are racist. We manage to beat the institutions until they kill us outright, because of our natural advantages.

      It’s just one of those things about human nature, that each of us sees the miracle of our people, and is rightfully suspicious of foreign influence. People should be more suspicious. Some things are mind viruses that out of their original context, have a similar effect to disease or pollution. Cultural exchange is good when it’s organic. Some things are very negative interference, like Christianity and Islam in Africa. The home grown Sufists and Ethiopian Tewahedo church are night and day from outsider-driven missionary efforts.

      So really, nobody should just accept someone’s judgement of a situation blindly in the first place. One should be doubly critical when the speaker is from a very different origin. However, with that in mind, one can take the good from what they’re saying, and leave the bits that are subjective to their people’s common insecurities.

  4. BTW,

    the major criticism and point of opposition I hear being repeated about the Syrian refugee crisis is that large numbers of them are “young healthy fighting age males…”

    Even if its true, so what?

    Why should being a young healthy male disqualify you from seeking refuge from abuse, death of serious injury?

    Matter of fact, young healthy fighting age males should probably get priority since they are the persons most likely to suffer abuse, death or serious injury in any war.

    During the Vietnam war thousand of young healthy American males of fighting age sought and received refuge in Canada to escape a draft which COULD have sent them to Vietnam.

    Should they have been denied refugee status because they were young, healthy and of “fighting age?”

    Don’t forget; in a civil war, BOTH sides force men into combat.

  5. I think its interesting CH decided to do a post ridiculing the female suspect in the San Bernardo shootings? Isn’t her dedication, motivation and obedience exactly what they are looking for in a white woman?

    BTW, anytime “terror” suspects are killed I have to accept the possibility the did not participate in the event. There are many inconsistencies in the narrative being told about the event;
    cui bono?

    • “The dead tell no tales”. When everybody gets dead and nobody gets interrogated, it’s suspicious to me too. Of course, those who want to grow the police state benefit. Some think it’s about taking guns away from citizens, but it’s not quite that simple. What I think they’re going for is a more officially militarized population ultimately. This is just a baby step along the way. Eloi vs. Morlocks is a very naive way to see the future. Human hierarchy has worked the same way just fine since there were humans. The day that breaks, there will simply be no more humans. The elite evolve, and this time around, they’re going to make it harder to wage revolutions. Of course, an easy way to prevent them is to have a combination of internal and external threats that keep people dependent on the leaders to save them.

      It is interesting, but not surprising that he would ridicule the female shooter, since there is a great deal of dissonance there. It seems to me the usual “freedom for me but not for thee” that they project on others, but are just as guilty of, if not more. Something is good if it’s “white” women doing it, but absolute evil if someone else is doing it. Before this, he was picking on African American women for standing by their man in prison.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

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

  • You’ve read the article, now get the t-shirt! :-D