The House of David

"dawnbreak in the west"

Sunday, April 13, 2014

Breivik II

Another jerk, another bunch of kids.

Over the past week, by the way, we've seen the difference between Right activism that gets results and Right activism that doesn't. [Aside: I'm in no mood to debate what "Right" means in this context.] Right activism that works makes Rightists want to join your cause. Right activism like, I dunno, shooting children - even if they're leftists-in-training - this makes Rightists not want anything to do with you.

It also gives the Left something else to talk about this week, when we could have been discussing the ranch issue.

And this makes me wonder if someone put the jerk up to it. Per Crotchety Jar Head @ Ace: if he was convicted of weapons charges, where'd he get all that firepower? And I'll go further. Note Professor Embree in the first linked article, who invited the clown into his classroom three years ago, to do his little minstrel-show for the students. Why'd Embree put him on, and not - say - Karl Boetel of then-Unamusement Park?

posted by Zimri on 19:47 | link | 0 comments

Saturday, April 12, 2014

The Bundy Ranch, as (not) viewed from the Right

Twitchy was on it. The Blogmocracy was on it (via DorianGrey and as a sidenote). Drudge and InfoWars were on it. And the commenters in several sites spotted 'round the 'web - they were on it. I haven't checked the Sipsey Street lads, but I'll hazard a guess they were on it too.

But the mainstream Right wasn't on it. I don't see anything at, say, Instapundit as of 10 April to now. Very few Right politicians dealt with it. I didn't touch it either.

For my part, I was cautious and, I'll admit, a little afraid. As mentioned, I think Sipsey-style bloggers are a little... excitable. Also in this narrow case I wasn't entirely sure who were the good guys. And a part of me even worried that the Feds might shoot up the protesters; they've certainly been running a decades-long dehumanisation campaign against that sort of Conservative. I need hardly mention that such a crackdown would have long-reaching effects throughout the body politic.

Now that we know the ranchers are in the right, and now that we've seen the Great Blinking of the bureaucratic machine of DC - I'm going to sound the all-clear. Y'all come out, now!

posted by Zimri on 14:56 | link | 0 comments

China's weak vassal

The Feds use some dubious regulations and (allegedly) environmental jurisdiction to run a rancher off his land. A Tea-Party guy compares the standoff to Tiananmen. InfoWars posts about Harry Reid's sweet deal with China for this land. Feds back off. So, now there exists an outstanding order by an American court which cannot be enforced . . . which has some implications I'll get to, below.

I usually consider InfoWars and the Tea-Party to be, well, a little goofy. But one can't easily argue with internal-consistency, and one really cannot argue with empirical results.

Maybe China should call in their agent Harry Reid and fire him. Or at least demote him within the Communist Party ranks.

ALSO: Last year some district-attorneys were murdered in Texas. These crimes were at first blamed on OMGNAZIES!! A prosecutor publicly tucked tail and ran, begging for mercy. It turned out the murder was completely unrelated to anything to do with OMGNAZIES' activities.

So, the Feds are hypocritical, venal, lawless, malicious, anti-white, anti-Christian, and beholden to foreign powers - we knew all that. What happens when word gets around that the Feds are, also, incompetent and cowardly? If it smells like weakness to me, what does it smell like to the Aryan Nation?

posted by Zimri on 13:54 | link | 0 comments

Tuesday, April 08, 2014


Eric Holder has a proposal: bracelet keys for firearms. Holder's thought-balloon here seems like it could end up law before you know it.

What follows is no original insight of mine own. A few months ago I read something from an Ace HQ's "moron" on how "voluntary" liberal programs become law, or at least become custom. So what follows is - I'm going mainly by memory here - how it will happen.

The first stage - after the suggestion is made - is for the local Left to implement it, somewhere. This is couched in buzzwords: voluntary, local, grass-roots, blah blah blah. The grass-roots would be a large assortment of volunteer organisations, which all seem to have the same people on staff. Some will be obvious, like public-sector unions; some will be mainline or left-Protestant churches and reformish synagogues; others will be names you haven't heard of - "Mothers For Fluffy Puppies", say; more will be avowed moderates who always happen to go against Right extremism - "Coffee Party".

The program then gets implemented; partially, in the most Left region possible. The program usually "works": partly because the Leftists follow along, partly because of "incentives" - which means everyone else is taxed more to fund this Leftist whim. More citizens are browbeat into the program. Later the resisters are simply fined and otherwise punished.

The program becomes State law; the program crosses into other States, and then it becomes just the rednecks who resist it, and the Feds do the rest.

So, if you was wonderin' about how Earth Day became more important than Memorial Day at your office, well- there ya go. The weed-roots. It's a pretty well-proven strategy; I can't see it going away.

posted by Zimri on 18:28 | link | 0 comments

Monday, April 07, 2014

If past is prologue

What invariably occurs in liberal tyrannies, like the United States, is chaos. Many rival tyrants will promise to stem the chaos. The first tyrant who's good at tyranting will set out to hunt pedobears, to burn the gay bars, and generally to order up new padlocks for the closet.

These measures tend to be greeted with great applause by the people. Because the people understand sex as chaos, they want order, and they want a symbolic gesture that order will be restored. Homosexuals are an easy target, especially males.

And, yes, by the way, I did intend that link to the Castro brothers. I don't know if our first unelected tyrant will be a Castro, a Hitler or a Pinochet. I just know what he'll do. And I'll know why he did it.

posted by Zimri on 18:39 | link | 0 comments

Bye bye Firefox

And I won't make the mistake of Lot's wife.

I was more disappointed with okCupid (disclosure: I was on that site myself for some years). OkC'd made their name in the alt-right by datamining without regard for PC. I'd thought they just didn't care about all this neo-puritan humbug.

Well, that's their choice. The clientele skewed waaaay Left; by my last few years I'd just given up and played the troll. (I'm probably most proud of introducing the masses to Don Colacho.) Ironically I got more female attention then... but, well.

As for the replacement browser: I figure that my blog's on Google, and I use Youtube a lot, so I can't exactly make my situation any worse by using Chrome. Until something better comes along.

posted by Zimri on 18:04 | link | 0 comments

Sunday, April 06, 2014

Minority leadership

At the company I'm now contracting with, I am on the email-distribution list for the entire company. That means I get the same emails employees get. I have learnt, from these emails, that the company I work at is - well, I don't want to use that commonly-used word, but if it's not that word then I'd love to know what word I should use instead.

This company discriminates against whites (and against men). It implements this policy, at minimum as I observe it, by offering incentives for "leadership" to which only "minorities" (and women) may apply. There is, ongoing, a "leadership award" for some lucky person of this privileged "minority" caste (there exists another award for women, but I am sub-alpha enough that I don't care much about that - last parenthesis, promise). Minority means non-white, in exactly the way gentile means non-Jew: all whites are guilty of the sins of some whites over here, as all Jews are guilty of the deicide which some Jews did over there.

Technically it is some insurance company which is sponsoring this "minority leadership" award; but, post-Obamacare, insurance companies are utilities and not real companies. They work as agents of the State. So what they do, they do because Obama wants them to do it. And what my employer allows to be done under its roof(s), it allows because it fears to cross Obama.

So anyway. I expect that some "minority" will win this award which was rigged on their behalf; like various white Sudafrikaners got to win various rugby trophies in South Africa where blacks weren't invited to compete. I also expect the company will send its email-list a happy-talk email, and that I'll have to read it: "join me in congratulating [name redacted] in his/her achievement blah blah blah". I do hope that whoever "wins" this rigged contest refuses the award - but based on various election results I'm looking at, I am not holding my breath. Even if the winner - whoever it is - were a staunchly ethical person, refusing such an award would blackmark that person. ¡Plata o plomo!

Also, I just work there. I don't have a say in how the company chooses to run things; and that is how it should be. It would be improper for me to complain about such side-issues on company time. It would also be improper for me to name the company (firstly, you don't need to know; but mainly, it doesn't even matter, as it's probably no different from the place you work at). Except - I will note, here on my own time, as a contractor who does not report to its CEO, but has the CEO as a customer: if I am offered a permanent position under that CEO, I will refuse it, on ethical grounds.

But back to this anti-white farce. On the chance that the winner of same doesn't see it as such, and keeps the cash: then, no, I will not congratulate the winner; and if I am transferred under his(her) leadership, I won't even wait for The Talk.

posted by Zimri on 21:16 | link | 0 comments

Saturday, April 05, 2014

Leftism sells

The hat-trick: James Cameron, Titanic; James Cameron, Avatar and now Darren Aronofsky's Noah. I'll throw in Elysium based on overseas sales (its intended audience).

All these films were wished into oblivion. Many many articles were written - mainly on the Right - about how too much money had been spent, on a dull and preachy and obnoxious message; and how Nemesis was going to have Her way with the studios involved.

Um. Okay then.

Look: I don't have to like it either. The insider-information on all these flicks while they were being made really did read like a Software Death March. The movies really are dreadful (okay, I haven't seen Noah, but I can guess at it). They sold well anyway.

This means there's a market for Left propaganda. A lucrative market.

posted by Zimri on 19:04 | link | 0 comments

Friday, April 04, 2014

Poseidon's tempest

The High Chronology has a boost: The Ahmose ‘Tempest Stela’, Thera and Comparative Chronology. Add to this, Baldi's musings on the Red Sea Trough (h/t, circuitously,

Nothing new's been discovered. What has happened instead is that a few older documents have been retranslated and reassigned; the linked article mainly argues (in forceful language) for the retranslation. These revisions pull Pharaoh Ahmose back in time to the most commonly-accepted dating of Thera, which is 1628ish BC - at any rate, to not-very-long afterward.

I also note that the very high chronology, of 1645ish, is here excluded as well. If I recall, that date derived from volcanic tailings found in Greenland. This much turned out to be from Aniakchak and not Thera.

posted by Zimri on 17:20 | link | 0 comments

Monday, March 31, 2014

SG-1 again

Tonight, I have plown through two more Stargate season-five eps. These two are here to develop themes from earlier seasons. They are intriguingly anti-Progressive. Quality-wise... well. Read on.

First is Between Two Fires. This focuses upon the advanced Tollan race, who previously had refused to share their tech with Earth. We learn that the Tollan have biometrics and GPS attached to all their citizens, "to help". Turns out the Tollan have their own internal politics; and if someone falls out of favour, interested parties find ways for the tech not to help. The themes aren't explicitly developed but hey.

2001 is, as promised, the Aschèn sequel (to the previous season's 2010). This ep turns out to be the best of the season so far, by far. Here, our intrepid crew have run across a borderland planet over which the Aschen have long ago assumed their benevolent patronage. There's more to it than that of course. This planet wasn't always a backwater. It used to be an analogue to modern Western Europe, in which the influenza pandemic struck before the First World War. The Aschen had conveniently showed up and then cured the pandemic... with a vaccine... that did the 2010 sterility thing. This time, though, Earth has the advance warning from the 2010 episode. So we avoid the fate of that world and of the alternate future of this one.

Unfortunately Senator Kinsey made his appearance in the latter, doing his Kai Wynn thing, getting everything wrong and evil because that's just what politicians do, especially when they are white and old and Southern-ish. Here Kinsey supports the Aschen; despite that the Aschen are inherently a Left enemy. Know ye this: when I give the finger to the television screen on a Kinsey appearance, I give the finger not to him and not to his character, but to the wankers who wrote the character that way.

posted by Zimri on 21:43 | link | 0 comments

Evangelical Covenant Church

The ECC does have a cross for a logo. Barely. But it's a cross.

The immigration sheet I linked is key. It's "immigration reform" the way John McCain likes it - illegal invaders are conflated with "immigrants" and, yes, the race-card is thrown. They also note current immigration law as unjust and arbitrary (for the alien - not for us with citizenship) and suggest civil-disobedience as a Biblical solution.

Hoo boy, and then there's this pdf.

Seems to me, the ECC're right; for the same reason Gibbon was right. Christianity is a religion that opposes borders, at base; especially such borders as keep the bums out.

posted by Zimri on 17:11 | link | 0 comments

Sunday, March 30, 2014

The Criterion

It is Christianity's notion that Christians go to Heaven and the rest of us don't. This faith offers various longwinded explanations as to how this is just, mostly involving Original Sin and stuff like that. But ultimately Christianity's criterion for letting people into His Grace is simply "choosing the right mythology". So let us consider how Divine justice might work upon the Christian.

When the Christian - Jack Chick, in this example - is admitted before that White Throne in those tracts, God's first question will be: why should I let you through?

The Christian must answer: because I chose Christianity (I have been bathed in the blood of the Lamb! if they are being theatrical; I have accepted Christ as Lord and Saviour, if less emo).

God will then ask: what fate did you expect of those who chose otherwise?

The Christian must then cite the Scriptures which detailed that.

God might switch to the analogy with a game of chance. Sometimes people pull the wrong card. Sometimes such people have indications, that this card shouldn't be pulled. The mathematician among them might consider the other cards played during the game; onlookers who've followed the naysayer's logic might warn against pulling the card in question. Either way, God will ask: is it just to penalise the player who pulls it?

The Christian will enthusiastically agree: that is just. The player chooses, he faces a reckoning. The card is pulled.

God will then bear witness that the Christian has chosen the game to be played, and has chosen the cards he wanted played in it.

*pop* goes the trapdoor.

posted by Zimri on 19:12 | link | 0 comments

Saturday, March 29, 2014

Jack Chick was right

This isn't the first time... but anyway.

Back when I was reading biblical scholarship (rather than Qur'anic), I'd always assumed that the Sodom / Lot tale was just a cheap knockoff of the Gibeah horror story in "Judges". And, like every other secularist (which I still am), I got a good laugh out of Jack Chick's "Doom Town". In 2002 I was linking Jack Chick basically just for trollery - and you'll note that was the only time.

Over the past few years I've had to accept that the author of Genesis, and Jack Chick, had a point. It was this case which clued me in. Whatever the result of the eventual court-case, this is immaterial - it's the act of taking the case to court, of calling in the full force of the US Government, which I care about here. And I care about the mindset of such people as would take this to court.

Homosexuals cannot accept their state in life. If they even believed they were equal to heterosexuals, then when faced with something they disagreed with, they'd just shrug and move on. But they don't think they're equal, and they never will, because they can't, because they aren't. They might have temporal power, for the moment... so, while they have it, they assert their power. "Bring out your guests that we may know them."

posted by Zimri on 22:56 | link | 0 comments

Rolling in the deep

It is vanishingly rare that I agree with a creationist, even partway, but I have to agree on this much: Aronofsky's Noah story is not a Biblical epic. But then, the original Noah story wasn't a Biblical epic either. It belongs to the age of bronze.

The base Flood story is an urSemitic tale about how the Mesopotamian gods got tired of us. Fortunately for us - well, for the Iraqis anyway - Prometheus (here played by the god Ea) took pity on Noah and gave him inside-information, and this is what saved - well, Noah. This story was then borrowed into Sumerian and, later, Babylonian myth: the "Noah" figure is variably Ziusudra / Utnapishtim ("The Immortal One") or Atra-hasîs ("The Wise"). [Irving Finkel, The Ark Before Noah]

Our reviewer Mr Ken Ham has spotted the new Noah for a misanthrope who prefers animals to humans. Structurally, Aronofsky has the right of it - Noah *was* a misanthrope who preferred animals to humans, and/or so was G-d Himself. Ham might've added that the story is structurally Gnostic. Noah doesn't save his fellow Iraqis. He saves his immediate family and - Biblically - also the local fauna. Noah is Saved because Noah Knows - and you aren't because you don't.

Side note: Please let us put aside Ham's insipid notion that "man's inhumanity to man" could have been any factor in the gods' calculus. That's between man and man. And it certainly doesn't excuse the drowning of animals alongside men.

So what we are dealing with here, is the latest of many versions of a nasty little story of Bronze Age my-brothers-against-the-tribe, my-tribe-against-the-world morals which story is millennia old. Aronofsky's version is the version for the present Dispensation, which is that of environmentalism; but is otherwise true to its nasty little Bronze Age heart.

As for whether I'd watch this film myself: eh, probably DVD. I prefer Right-misanthropy to the Left sort.

posted by Zimri on 22:46 | link | 0 comments

On this site



Random crap

Powered By Blogger TM

Property of author; All Rights Reserved