Likelihood vs. Frequency

[M]any people conflate likelihood with frequency. For example, they point out how infrequent Muslim terror attacks are and they make fun of you for even mentioning such an unlikely possibility. There are far more likely ways for you to die, car accident, petty crime, cancer, heart disease, etc… etc… So why are you worried about Islamic terrorism? You’re just an old fuddy duddy, and probably a bigot.

But the likelihood of Muslim terror attacks is not in question. We know now for a certainty that as long as Muslims and westerners continue to mix and mingle, a small but significant minority of Muslims will attack western governments, infrastructure, military, and civilians (but especially civilians) with the aim of inflicting as many casualties or as much damage as possible. Unless something changes, however, those attacks will remain infrequent enough that you probably won’t be caught up in one.

But something IS changing, the number and proportion of Muslims in western nations is changing. The number and proportion of Muslims in western counties is increasing. The ONLY reason anyone mentions the infrequency of their terror attacks (under the duplicitous guise of unlikeliness) is to JUSTIFY increasing their numbers still further. And so the frequency of attacks will rise. And your likelihood of dying or being maimed in one will rise with it.

And if the number and proportion of Muslims in western nations keeps increasing, they will eventually have options other than to engage in random attacks with a near certainty of being caught or killed themselves.

There will be other objects within their reach, supremacy, rule, subjugation, victory. And we can be just as certain that they will reach for those as we are certain now that they will continue to attack us, because that is their aim. They have said so.

This is what those who sow this confusion advocate. This is what those who peddle this lie demand. They have CHOSEN treason to the west and its destruction of their own free will and they have had every reason and opportunity to KNOW that this is what they were choosing.

Whether the west prevails, or Islam, their fate is sealed; unless they repent of their lies and make good the damage they have wrought.


Alberto R Zambrano U · Español (Spanish) · Islam

Islam: Somos competidores, no somos ni aliados, ni amigos, ni semejantes

Texto original de Curt Doolittle, traducido por Alberto R. Zambrano U.

Disponible en:


[N]osotros somos competidores, no somos ni aliados, ni amigos ni semejantes

  1. Somos competidores, no aliados, en el sentido de que cooperamos económicamente para ganancia mutua. Pero si la cooperación requiere que nos sacrifiquemos para aumentar los números de nuestros competidores entonces eso es beneficioso sino parasitario y suicida.
  2. Usted no entiende de economía. Para mover a todo ser humano en una red, se requiere de la aplicación de diferencias mínimas en incentivos. Esto requiere de un vasto capital. Es por medio de ese vasto capital aplicado como incentivos que nosotros podemos producir la organización voluntaria de la producción.
  3. Los errores que usted comete son los siguientes:
    a. Creer que somos semejantes en vez de competidores
    b. Que es posible organizarse por otros medios
    c. Que el mundo pobre no nos genera pobreza contínua de forma perpetua.
    d. Que el objetivo que debemos perseguir es la prevención reproductiva de los pobres.
  4. El Islam es un cáncer que la civilización occidental, los rusos, africanos, hindúes y los asiáticos orientales necesitan erradicar de la faz de la tierra. Los musulmanes son el único pueblo no civilizado de la tierra – y – fuera de los buenos cristianos africanos, son los más tontos del planeta.
    Es necesario ponerle fin al Islam. Para siempre.

    ¿Así o más claro?

Islam · Uncategorized

The Next Era of Domestication: Ending Islam and the Religion of Ignorance

—“Curt Doolittle, Humans are not businesses; we’re interdependent for survival. Even cooperations across the world have stop competing to complement each others weaknesses in the business space… not to talk about humans.”—

[W]e are -because we evolved to be – super-predators that choose to cooperate ONLY when it is MORE beneficial to cooperate than to enslave, or exterminate.

The west advocates meritocratic trade because as a more advanced society and can compete better than others on the basis of merit. So it is to the west’s advantage to advocate trade and commercialism and consumer capitalism. But if cooperation by trade (or any other method) has become parasitic, then it is to our advantage to return to rule. If not rule enslavement. If not enslavement, extermination.

Invasion of our lands by semi-human, ignorant, mystical animals is enough of a reason to return to rule, if not rule, enslavement, if not enslavement, extermination.

Since all societies want to exterminate muslims EXCEPT the west, if the west stops protecting freedom of religion then all societies will justifiable exterminate islam and mulsims.

The muslim is teaching the wetsern man that he must not tolerate freedom of religion, since muslims do not practice a religoin, but a law, and a law is a political system not a religion.

End the west’s protection of islam, and we end much of world conflict. Islam is the source of world conflict. It is a cancer that infects the west, Africa, hindus, and east asians.