Monday, December 19, 2011

Australia Calling, Brendon O'Connell, who will be next?

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

People like this are likely to believe that B O'c. should be gaoled because he might encourage dissent. We can deduce this because as a rabbi he teaches the talmud and has probably deemed himself fit, proper and of such ontological exceptionality to judge the gentiles and determine punishments should they transgress laws designed specifically for administering the servile lives of the ‘goyim’.

What the rabbi won't tell you is that his religion has this legal plan for the goyim. It is an inclusive religion this 'judaism'. Unlike the universal and immutable physical laws fashioned by 'God' that affect and determine consistent outcomes for both jews and goyims alike, this judaism includes laws for the Goyim that are not universally applicable for jews and gentiles. This is because judaism declares that non-jews are not fully human and are without souls. They are thus denied the various licences, permissions and entitlements granted to the ‘jews’ and pertaining usually to ‘getting’ from the goyim.

The name of the law that pertains to the not fully human, subhuman, soulless ‘goyim’ of this world is Noachide Law. Its relevance and import has been recognised in the US congress. To institute this law requires that the likes of this rabbi uncreate all that is before he can effect his second rate, no cigar creation and so claim that he and his are in fact “g_d”, the world his throne and the heads of the spittoon mouthed Noachide, his footstools. A consolation prize of smug self satisfaction is a rabbi’s reward as pretender to the throne of “God”.

Brendon O’connell is in gaol because he will not be Noachide. Those are the facts of the matter. The court must decide whether it administers the law for the benefit of the truth and all in accordance with universal principles that recognise the intrinsic value of all people, whether jew or gentile. It might also consider, if it is a true and transparent court, B O’cs responsibility to dissent vociferously should he choose to do so. In gaoling O’Connell it shames all gentiles and jews who in the past have discovered and sought to derail the same burgeoning totalitarian politico/religious organism discovered in different chameleonic disguise, but of the same cycloptic nature.

In denying by legal means the traditional, peaceful and often humorous mechanism of increasing public awareness through soap box delivered free speech and edjumacation, the court facilitates this very totalitarianism. It makes perfect sense that those who desire to impose a totalitarian regime by means of stealth and duplicity want no public discussion of it while the legal corrals of those it seeks to control are built in the secrecy of a complete public ignorance .

The jewish sannhedrin has declared the death penalty for those who refuse Noachidiocy. The court in which B O’c appeared seems to agree, at least to the extent that the dissenter should no longer be permitted to engage in public life.