IAmDrScott

Ph.D CompSci U.Illinois 1990

[Dr. Sydney Watson @SydneyLWatson]

I'm going to say it again -

People who live in White, culturally homogeneous areas throughout Western countries do not understand what it's like dealing with people who don't speak your language, who don't assimilate, who create enclaves full of rubbish, crime and violence.

You don't understand, so you don't think mass immigration is a problem.

But people dealing with it day in and day out are sick to fucking death of it. And when you vote in favour of this shit, you doom us to more of it. And you will eventually doom yourselves.

I live in a pretty alright part of DFW, and I see fewer and fewer Americans every day. I hear less and less English every day.

I talk to friends back in Melbourne, who work in the city, who say they're lucky if they see another Australian. They also know who is committing all the violent crime, and nobody is allowed to say it.

I talk to friends in Canada whose towns have been taken over by third worlders. I read about little English villages that have been flooded with third worlders, who now outnumber the native population 3 to 1.

Governments KNOW people are getting angrier and angrier. So what do they do? They pass legislation to criminalize calling this shit out. They criminalize people begging for less of this.

I don't want diversity. I don't want multiculturalism. And I'm basically beyond the point of caring if that upsets others.

So many of us have been badgered since we were children into believing being White is some type of sin and we have to atone for the "colonization" of our ancestors. So, now that we're being invaded by the entire third world, it's somehow justified.

Stop buying into it. Stop apologizing and being sorry for wanting your country back. We are allowed to want our cultures, traditions and ancestry upheld. We are allowed to say NO to this.

[Dan Burmawi @DanBurmawy]

The behavioral patterns of Muslim populations in non-Muslim countries change predictably based on their percentage of the total population:

0–2%

When Muslims constitute less than 2% of the population, they typically maintain a low profile.

This is the stage of da’wah, Islamic proselytization, and reputation-building.

Islam is presented to the host society as peaceful, rational, and ethical. The focus is on integration, tolerance, and charitable outreach.

Criticism of Islam is dismissed as ignorance or Islamophobia, while the community builds its infrastructure, mosques, community centers, and Islamic schools.

At this stage, Muslim communities leverage the language of Western liberalism to gain a foothold: religious freedom, civil rights, and anti-discrimination laws.

Political involvement is minimal, and confrontational rhetoric is avoided. Public engagement centers around interfaith dialogues, cultural exchange events, and educational outreach, designed to normalize Islam as a peaceful, constructive force in the multicultural fabric.

This phase is also marked by a strong narrative of victimhood.

Muslims are portrayed as an embattled minority needing protection from xenophobic majorities. Laws protecting hate speech and religious freedom are invoked to shield Islamic doctrines from public scrutiny.

In the early 1990s, Muslim populations in countries like Ireland, New Zealand, and Norway remained below this threshold. The communities focused on mosque-building and cultural integration. Violent incidents were rare, and the rhetoric was geared toward coexistence.

2–5%

As the population crosses the 2% threshold, a noticeable change occurs.

Advocacy groups emerge with more aggressive postures. Demands are no longer requests but framed as civil rights: halal food in schools and hospitals, Islamic prayer rooms in public buildings, gender-segregated swim times, and recognition of Islamic holidays.

These demands are wrapped in the language of equality, but the subtext is unmistakable: Islam is not merely seeking parity; it is beginning to shape the host society.

At this stage, sharia-compliant accommodations are requested, not just in private religious life but in public institutions. Workplaces are asked to allow prayer breaks. Public schools are pressured to remove curriculum deemed Islamophobic.

Terms like “Islamophobia” become strategic weapons to intimidate critics and silence public debate.

Ontario, in the early 2000s, witnessed a push to introduce sharia arbitration in civil and family disputes. Though it was ultimately defeated due to public backlash, the initiative revealed the ideological thrust: the attempt to institutionalize Islamic jurisprudence within the Western legal system. Similar efforts have appeared in Australia and the U.S.

5–10%

Between 5–10%, Muslim communities transition from integration to parallelism. No-go zones begin to form, urban enclaves where state law is either ignored or actively resisted.

Police avoid intervention, and informal sharia enforcement takes hold. Honor killings, female genital mutilation, polygamy, and forced marriages begin to appear, not as isolated events, but as features of a separate legal order within the host nation.

This stage also sees increasing legal jihad, efforts to redefine blasphemy laws, criminalize criticism of Islam, and pressure media, academia, and politicians into compliance. Islam’s totalizing nature refuses compartmentalization.

Everything must bend to its divine law, including speech, gender relations, and governance.

More than 80 sharia courts operate unofficially in the UK, issuing rulings on everything from divorce to inheritance, often disadvantaging women and violating national law.

Efforts to investigate or criticize these courts are met with accusations of racism and Islamophobia.

Banlieues surrounding Paris, such as Seine-Saint-Denis, have become synonymous with lawlessness and Islamic radicalism.

Police do not patrol without backup. Civil authorities are unable, or unwilling, to enforce French secularism. Samuel Paty’s beheading in 2020 after showing a cartoon of Muhammad was not an aberration; it was the fruit of a system where sharia sensitivity overpowered state sovereignty.

In Sweden, Muslim immigration has contributed to the creation of over 60 “vulnerable areas” where government control is minimal. Rape statistics have climbed, often linked to men from Muslim-majority countries. The Swedish state’s response has ranged from denial to appeasement.

In Belgium, the Brussels district of Molenbeek became a safe haven for jihadists, including those who coordinated the 2015 Paris attacks. Radical imams preach freely, and efforts to clamp down on extremism have been paralyzed by political correctness.

10% and Beyond

At this point, the Muslim community ceases to be a subculture and becomes a rival culture. Integration is abandoned for Islamization.

Political parties with explicit Islamic agendas rise. Muslim representatives in parliaments begin defending jihadist regimes and condemning Western foreign policy not from a critical citizen’s perspective, but from the standpoint of civilizational opposition.

In this phase, open threats replace veiled demands. Cartoons of Muhammad are no longer protested, they are punished. Attempts to defend secularism are denounced as hate. Criticizing Islam becomes a criminal or even suicidal act. Entire sectors of society, media, academia, politics, are paralyzed by fear.

The Muslim community, now entrenched and numerically significant, weaponizes democracy against itself. It uses freedoms of speech, religion, and assembly to dismantle those very freedoms. The goal is not coexistence.

The goal is submission, the literal meaning of the word “Islam.”

Why Doesn’t This Happen with Other Immigrant Groups?

Why do these patterns not emerge with Chinese, Indian, Korean, Filipino, Ethiopian, or Jewish immigrants? Why don’t Sikhs or Hindus or Confucianists demand parallel legal systems, segregated public spaces, or censorship of perceived blasphemy?

Because none of those systems contain a theological mandate for global supremacy. Islam does. Islam is not just a private set of beliefs, it is a geopolitical doctrine, a legal code, a social order, and a totalizing ideology.

The behavior of Muslim populations is not a deviation, it is a logical extension of Islam’s core teachings when it gains numerical strength.

Based on Peter Hammond's book: Slavery, Terrorism and Islam: The Historical Roots and Contemporary Threat.

[C3 @C_3C_3]

Illegals are given driver’s licenses so they’re registered to vote.

Illegals are registered to vote so the Democrats have a ballot printed.

Illegals have a ballot printed so Democrats can use it when they know how many votes they need to steal an election.

Simple.

[IAmDrScott @IAmDrScott]

This. Hold the hearing in DC, if you must. But first send your staffers on a one-hour drive to Warrenton, VA and hold a deposition there.

[Kurt Schlichter @KurtSchlichter]

Kudos to Rand Paul for releasing the diary and holding the hearing, but if he were really serious about the hearing, he wouldn’t have done it in Washington DC. He would’ve taken it on the road to the American people that Fauci abused and held it in a venue with a court that would enforced a contempt citation.

[Matt Van Swol @mattvanswol]

My story about pulling our son out of NC public schools to homeschool him reached far more people than I expected.

So I owe you the full explanation. Fair warning: it's worse than you think.

1) My son was in a class with many kids that could not speak the English language.

Zero English. None. Not a word.

You might be asking yourself... well, how did lessons occur in the classroom?

I'm glad you asked.

In fact, the way the teachers communicated with the Spanish-speaking only students was by using their personal iPhones as translators, speaking instructions into the iPhones, and the iPhones spitting out the Spanish instructions to the Spanish-speaking students, and then the Spanish-speaking students speaking Spanish into the iPhones, and the English questions/answers coming are read out for the teacher.

If you're exhausted just reading that...good. Now hold that feeling.

Imagine you’re an English-speaking student sitting in that same classroom, like my 5 year old son was.

Every lesson is interrupted while translations happen and naturally, the teacher’s attention is constantly divided.

The pace of learning slows DRAMATICALLY for everyone else.

The consequence is that the classroom stops being optimized for the students who can already understand the instruction and instead becomes an exercise in overcoming a language barrier that never should have existed inside an American, English-language classroom in the first place.

A place built to teach kids who are ready to learn quietly becomes a place mostly occupied with bridging a gap in language.

I don't think my five-year-old should spend one irretrievable year of his early schooling waiting at that bridge.

2) I saw the writing on the wall for the future of my county's school system and realized that not only was the future incredibly bleak, but downright aggressively woke in a way words fail to describe.

For multiple months, our school system allowed kids to:

a) Create Anti-ICE protest signs inside of the schools
b) Exit the school grounds, often WITHOUT SUPERVISION by ANYONE
c) Stand along busy highways and scream "FUCK ICE" for a few hours

Most shockingly, it was clearly encouraged by the schools, by leadership, and by many of the teachers.

That was political activism.

It gets worse... for years Buncombe County has forced biological girls to deal with biological males (who call themselves trans) to enter into girls locker rooms and bathrooms.

This has been happening for years and no one dared to try to change or speak up until very very recently... that should tell you a lot about what the school leadership believes and their political bent.

There is an evil lie that I see being spread by many that have condemned our decision to homeschool.

That lie is this:

“Public schools are neutral. By homeschooling, you’re only exposing your child to one side.”

This is a grossly evil lie.

In fact, the opposite is happening.

Schools are not neutral institutions simply because they are publicly funded; every school day has a limited number of hours, and every lesson taught means another lesson isn’t.

There is a finite amount of time in school, everyone understands this, which means priorities matter.

Every hour spent discussing political activism is an hour that isn’t spent on reading, writing, mathematics, science, history, or civics.

So when schools increasingly prioritize activism, identity politics, or current political causes... something else inevitably gets pushed aside.

Guess what? That’s not neutrality, that’s a choice.

What so many parents continue to discover is that their child comes home with a head full of ideas about the world that are purely one-sided because that's all there was time for.

Nuance is lost because nuance is time-consuming.

Is there TIME for nuance when half the class cannot speak English and you're speaking into a translator?

Of course not.

A child who can chant but cannot argue the other side hasn't been educated, they've been conditioned and the conditioners always, ALWAYS believe they're doing the child a kindness.

3) I'm fairly confident that today's school system is not designed for boys at all, it's purely designed for girls.

I'll give an example.

One of the schools in my area noticed that boys were throwing pine-cones (calling them grenades) and playing with sticks (calling them guns and swords).

This made the girls in the class uncomfortable.

So the school banned the boys from playing with sticks or pinecones outside, saying that the boys were playing "violent games" and should stop.

One group's nature (the girls) became the rule.

The other group's nature (the boys) became an problem... and once you see it, you see it everywhere.

Classrooms rewards staying still, staying quiet, non-aggression, obedience.

So ask yourself honestly... if you designed an institution that graded children partly on their ability to sit motionless for six hours, who would you expect to win?

Girls, of course.

Boys "get into trouble" FAR more often than girls, and the "offenses" are things like being too aggressive, not staying in line, fidgeting, or being "defiant" for staying buried in a book instead of the worksheet.

The punishment schools reach for first is often to take AWAY recess, which is literally the physical release every study says he needs, as the penalty for needing it!

At my table, he can stand up when he needs to move. He can go deep on the thing that lights him up instead of being dragged off it. He can build his imaginary armies.

He can be exactly the boy he is and have that be an ASSET instead of someone saying that's a problem.

4) No teacher, no matter how gifted, no matter how well-meaning, walks into that classroom knowing my son the way we know him, and no one ever will.

The single most important qualification for teaching a child isn't a degree or a curriculum or a district budget..

...it's just how much do you actually care whether this SPECIFIC kid makes it?

How far would you go for him?
How late would you stay for him?
How many times would you explain it again and again?
How completely would you refuse to give up on him?

And on that measure, the whole world loses to his mother (who will be homeschooling him), it's not even close.

Nobody on earth will ever love him more than she does.

Nobody will study him, root for him, ache for him, and delight in him the way she does every ordinary day.

There has never been anyone on this earth more qualified to raise my son than the woman whose love for him knows no depths and has no end.

Hope that helps clarify a few things.

[Chief_Engineer @ChiefEngineerCE]

Illegal Monday.

They tell you immigrants commit less crime. They fudge the numbers and expect us to believe them.

The same systems that produce those numbers cannot even record race correctly. They admitted it and at this point it looks as if its a coordinated, nationwide tactic from red state to blue.

Large-scale reviews of state records show that 20 to 29 percent of people who are clearly Hispanic by name and appearance are coded as White. The official numbers undercount Hispanics and inflate White totals. While we are it - Blacks too. This is not a theory. It is a documented failure of the data itself.

What don't we see?
Whites booked in under any other race but White.
There goes that excuse.

Immigration status is worse. Most jurisdictions do not collect it. Texas does better because it runs biometrics against federal databases, yet even there the identification lags. Short-sentence offenders and recent arrivals routinely go uncounted as noncitizens.

So when the CATO institute says Illegals commit less crime? They are asking you to believe confirmation bias built on shoddy data collection, and outright lies.

When the categories are this broken, the rate comparisons collapse. Absolute counts of identified illegal aliens charged with serious crimes are harder to dismiss. The polished national claims that “immigrants are safer” rest on incomplete, misclassified, and selectively analyzed data.

Here is what we know- ICE prioritized removing criminal illegals first and homicide rates fell to historic lows. That is a correlation that at least makes sense.

If the system cannot mark race accurately, it has no business telling the American people that the people here illegally are less dangerous than they are. The data is not clean. The conclusions drawn from it are not reliable. Citizens deserve better than statistics that erase the problem.

Bookmark this.
Share it.
Comment if you have seen the same pattern.
Follow for more Illegal Monday.

[Glenn Beck @glennbeck]

If you have a son or daughter who's starting to think that socialism is the answer to our problems, I want you to try something and report back:

Next time you talk, don't argue. Sit down, ask these questions, and just listen:

- When you say "socialism," do you mean that you want the government to pay for a bigger safety net like in Denmark, or that the government owns the means of production? Because those are two very different countries.

- You say the system is rigged. Who rigged it? And who should be handed the power to un-rig it?

- Who sets the price of bread? If not a single person or corporation, what causes that price to remain steady or go up?

- Can you name a country where the state took ownership of the means of production and the poor got richer?

- When borders open or the walls fall down, anywhere in the world, which direction do people run? Towards the free market system or the socialist system? And before the boundaries fell, which way were the guns pointed?

- Would you rather be poor today, or rich in 1900? By the way, only one of those has antibiotics.

- If you and I make a voluntary trade, and we both walk away happy, who got hurt?

- Someone has to decide what your work is worth. Would you rather it be you and the person paying you, or a bureaucrat with an army who has never met either of you?

Try having this conversation with your kids this week. Don't argue. Only listen. And if you want, call into my radio show and tell me how it went.

[IAmDrScott @IAmDrScott]

Start taking depositions in nearby West Virginia.

[Ron DeSantis @RonDeSantis]

One issue the right has yet to deal with is the asymmetry in accountability vis-a-vis the Swamp.

When a conservative clashes with the Swamp, he gets convicted in 15 minutes by a DC jury. When attempts are made to hold a member of the Swamp accountable (ie, the Sussman acquittal in a case brought by Durham), an acquittal usually follows.

A DC jury would likely view Fauci has an almost divine figure. Such a jury would unquestionably vote to nullify any case against him.

[Matthew Berman @MatthewBerman]

Having a second kid will show you it’s 95% nature and 5% nurture. It was a major realization within ~3 months of my second kid being born.

[Handre @Handre]

The Wright brothers invented powered flight at Kitty Hawk in December 1903, and then they spent the next decade making sure nobody else in America could improve on it.

After building the first airplane, they built an army of lawyers, not better airplanes. Orville and Wilbur secured U.S. Patent 821,393 in 1906, a patent so broad it claimed the very concept of lateral control, and they used it as a club. When Glenn Curtiss developed ailerons (a genuinely superior system to the Wrights' wing-warping), they sued him into oblivion. The litigation dragged from 1909 through 1917. Curtiss burned his energy on courtrooms in Buffalo instead of wind tunnels.

Let's measure the result. By August 1914 France fielded roughly 1,400 military aircraft. Germany had around 1,000. The United States, birthplace of the airplane, mustered fewer than 30 serviceable machines, and most of them were obsolete.

Patents are state grants of monopoly, and monopoly does what monopoly always does: it freezes the incumbent in place and taxes everyone who wants to build on his work. In France, Louis Blériot, Gabriel Voisin, and the Farman brothers competed openly, copying and refining each other's designs. Competition compounds knowledge. Legal privilege hoards it.

Washington eventually noticed that its "arsenal of democracy" couldn't produce a decent warplane. So in 1917 the government forced a patent pool, the Manufacturers Aircraft Association, to break the logjam it had created in the first place. The government fixed the wreckage of its own privilege. You will see that pattern again.

The lesson holds. Patents stifle innovation. It always has and always will. Innovation is not a thing you protect. It is a thing you permit. As always, government intervention makes things worse, not better.

[Wade Miller @WadeMiller]

Jack Smith accessed my banking information as part of a J6 investigation. I was a Chief of Staff for Chip Roy and completely uninvolved in J6. Jack Smith spied on the communications of members of Congress and lied about it. I could go on and on about the abuses that have occurred under Jack Smith. Criticizing those who want to hold him accountable for J6 abuses and other abuses of government power are dumb, gross, dangerous, and hacks of the first order.

[IAmDrScott @IAmDrScott]

Good read. I want to keep living in a high trust society. The nuclear family is a necessary supporting technology.

[Krzysztof Szczawinski 🇵🇱 @Kristof_Poland]

The Nuclear Family is a Technology of Western Civilization – So It Needs to Be Destroyed With All the Others.

The nuclear family is not a natural unit. It is a technology – the most successful child-rearing, wealth-transmitting, civilization-building technology ever developed. And like every other Western technology that works, it is currently being systematically dismantled.

1. Every society in history has organized reproduction and child-rearing somehow. The Eastern clan, the tribe, the loyalty network – these are the alternatives. They work, up to a point, for the societies that run on them. They produce strong internal solidarity and fierce external competition. They also produce nepotism over meritocracy, loyalty over competence, the network over the individual. Low-trust societies stay small and family-based – unable to build the large institutions, the corporations, the rule of law that require trust between strangers. The nuclear family is the Western solution: small enough to invest maximally in children, open enough to produce citizens who can cooperate beyond the clan.

2. It is a technology in the precise sense: a solution to a problem, developed through trial and error over millennia, encoding accumulated wisdom that is not immediately visible to those who inherit it. It aligned incentives with extraordinary precision – the man invested in children he was certain were his, the woman had a committed partner for the most vulnerable years, the children had two adults with maximum skin in the game. And crucially: it introduced a free market for mating rather than arranged marriage. Individuals chose their partners – which meant attraction, compatibility, and genuine commitment rather than clan negotiation. The most intimate human bond brought into the competitive, meritocratic framework that produces everything else the West does well.

3. The attack follows the standard pattern. Reframe the technology as oppression. Celebrate the alternatives as liberation. Restructure the incentives – welfare systems that replace the husband, legal systems that make marriage a liability for men, cultural systems that mock the committed father. Then watch the institution dissolve.

4. The data is not ambiguous. Children raised by married biological parents outperform children from every other arrangement on every measurable outcome. This is one of the largest and most replicated findings in social science. The nuclear family is not one lifestyle choice among many equivalent options. It is the arrangement that produces the best human beings at scale. Which is precisely why it had to go.

5. The deepest damage is not measurable. The nuclear family was the primary transmission mechanism of civilization – values, habits, language, culture, and identity passed from one generation to the next in the most intensive possible environment. Destroy this transmission mechanism and you don’t just produce worse outcomes for individuals. You break the chain. The torch cannot change hands if the hands are gone.

6. The replacement is the state. When the family dissolves, the state expands to fill the functions the family performed. This is not a coincidence. It is the design. Tocqueville described it: the soft despotism that replaces every horizontal bond with a vertical dependency on the government shepherd. The nuclear family was the primary horizontal bond. Its dissolution is the prerequisite for the complete vertical dependency the administrative state requires.

7. The nuclear family is not a conservative preference or a religious requirement. Defend it not because it is traditional. Defend it because it works – and because what is offered in its place doesn’t. The clan and the tribe produce loyalty. The administrative state produces dependency. The nuclear family, with its free market for mating and its maximum investment in the next generation, produces citizens. That is the one thing the system replacing it cannot afford to produce.

[Race 🕊️ @multiplanet1]

A SpaceX intern once described eating lunch next to Elon Musk in the company cafeteria.

The intern said Elon sat down at a regular table with a regular tray of food. No entourage. No reserved section. He sat next to two junior engineers who were clearly terrified. One of them was explaining a problem with a valve component to the other.

Elon listened without introducing himself or interrupting. After about three minutes he turned to the engineer and said "have you tried running it at a lower pressure gradient first." The engineer stared at him. Then realized the CEO of the company had just casually solved a problem his team had been stuck on for a week.

The intern said what happened next was the part that surprised him. Elon didn't leave. Didn't check his phone. He spent the next twenty minutes asking the engineers questions about their work. Not CEO questions about timelines and budgets. Engineering questions about fluid dynamics and material stress tolerances. He was genuinely curious. The cafeteria conversation was indistinguishable from a technical review.

The intern said he understood in that moment why people work 80-hour weeks for this man. Not because he's inspiring. Not because he pays well. Because he's the only CEO in the world who sits in the cafeteria and solves your engineering problem between bites of a burrito.

People follow leaders who are above them. People worship leaders who sit next to them and prove they understand the work better than the people doing it.

[Megan Basham @megbasham]

Saw on Instagram and lol’d. Yes, my husband always comes to save me after I do the thing he advised me not to do that created my problem…

[Alexander Duncan @AlexDuncanTX]

Islam needs to be stripped of its religious status. It is not a religion; it is a totalitarian political ideology that must be banned in its entirety.

[Nick Kapur @nick_kapur]

This amazing website, called "Worse on Purpose," is cataloguing all the ways companies are deliberately and secretively degrading their own products

As usual, in most cases the culprit is private equity extracting enormous sums while everyone else is left worse off.

[IAmDrScott @IAmDrScott]

Tuned in by accident many years ago. Still remember the children asking why mommy and daddy were crying.

[Happy Captain @EODHappyCaptain]

If you’ve never seen the movie “Taking Chance,” I highly recommend you take some time and watch it this weekend. It follows a Marine LTC as he escorts one of his Marines home after he is killed in action.

Based on a true story, It’s one of the best movies about war and its aftermath I have ever seen.

It’s a gutting movie, but it’s one you need to see at least once in your life.

[IAmDrScott @IAmDrScott]

A useful update to the original.

[Sensurround @ShamashAran]

I miss the era when pretty women could have anime colored hair and it didn't necessarily mean they were psychos

[Katy Faust @Katy_Faust]

What did you think was going to happen after we legalized #GayMarriage?

That same-sex couples would finally be able to visit one another in the hospital? Inherit property? Make medical decisions? Many of those legal protections were already available through powers of attorney, contracts, and other legal arrangements.

What #Obergefell enabled was something else.

It accelerated the legal replacement of biological parenthood with intent-based parenthood.

It made it easier to detach children from their mother or father and reattach them to biological strangers so same-sex couples could be "equal" to husband-wife couples.

It conditioned an entire culture to repeat, “Love makes a family,” by threatening them with social isolation if they refused.

It permitted scrubbing “mother” and “father” from parentage laws and replacing them with "gestating" and "non-gestating" parent in the name of non-discrimination.

It made politicians afraid to defend the importance of mothers and fathers because genderless families had been upheld by the country's highest court.

The lasting legacy of #Obergefell has not simply been the redefinition of marriage. It has been the unmaking of the American family by erasing mother and father, both in law and culture.

Children deserve better. @MakeKidsGreater

[PoIiMath @politicalmath]

Honestly, if academics truly believe this about themselves, just shut the whole thing down. No public funding for university academics. It was a fun experiment but taxpayers should no longer pay for people to professionally hate them.