Month: January 2017

“The Trump Effect”

On January 29, 2017

It’s so refreshing to report some tentatively
good news for once.

I left this comment on a Gatestone column of January 22nd, 2017, “Trump
Fires Up Europe’s Anti-Establishment Movement”:

I am encouraged and
heartened by the sentiments reported in this column. I would really like to
visit Europe again someday. But not at present. I think now I would have to
look over my shoulder and resort to dodging Muslims. I would also have to watch
what I say about immigration. I don’t want to be arrested by Germany’s and
France’s and even Britain’s “speech police.”

The indefatigable Soeren
Kern in his January 2017 Gatestone article, “Trump
Fires up Europe’s Anti-Establishment Movement,” lets us in on what the
European “anti-establishment” is up to.

Dutch politician Geert
Wilders (head of the PVV or Party for Freedom) got
together with other leaders of opposition European parties (or
“anti-establishment” parties) to exchange information and to map strategies on
how to come up on top in the upcoming elections in Germany, France, Italy, and
Austria. Although the opposition,
aligned especially against the European Union’s (EU) sadomasochist immigration
policies and its ambivalence toward culture-sapping and rampaging Islam, has
been building for some years, this is the first time so many of these leaders
have gotten together at a “rally” to address the “forgotten men and women” of
Europe on what is possible, what the issues are, and what is at stake, which is
nothing less than a wholly Western Europe and not an Islamized one.

Energized by the formidable Wilders and by what is being called here
as “The Trump Effect” (or by Donald Trump’s sweeping anti-establishment victory
and the
actions he has been taking since taking the oath of office on January 20th),
in addition to Brexit,
also in attendance at the rally in Koblenz, under the banner of “The Year of
Patriots,” were Marine Le
Pen, head of the French nationalist opposition party, the National Front,
since 2011; Frauke Petry,
the leader of the Alternative for Germany (AfD); Matteo Salvini, head of
the Lego Nord party of
Italy; and Harald
Vilimsky head of Austria’s Freedom Party.

Marine Le Pen of the
National Front

It is hoped that these European anti-establishment activists, if
elected as the heads of their own countries, can begin to “drain
their own swamps” of unelected EU bureaucrats, conniving, career
politicians and political appointees, retired politicians who have turned to
lobbying to further their parties’ agendas (and their own incomes) for more
regulation and for special interests (many EU
bureaucrats own substantial interests in their own countries’ farms that
conform to Brussels’ environmental and regulatory diktats), of politicians who
do not apply themselves to representing their constituents’ interests, and
those who are simply moribund in lassitude.

Kern writes:

Polls indicate that
the political sea change engulfing the United States is fueling support for
anti-establishment parties in Europe. In addition to anger over eroding
sovereignty, a growing number of Europeans are rebelling against decades of
government-imposed multiculturalism, politically correct speech codes and mass
migration from the Muslim world.

In
Germany, the anti-immigration Alternative for Germany party (AfD) has become the
third-largest party the country, with support at around 15% percent. The AfD
had gained representation in ten of Germany’s 16 state parliaments, and the
party hopes to win seats in the Federal Parliament (Bundestag) for the first
time in national elections set for September 24, 2017.

Europe’s
establishment parties, far from addressing the concerns of ordinary voters,
have tried to silence dissent by branding naysayers as xenophobes, Islamophobes and
neo-Nazis.

Enter Trump. If
sufficient numbers of European voters are inspired by the political
transformation taking place in the United States, the balance of European
political power may begin to shift in favor of the anti-establishment parties.
European political and media elites will therefore surely view Trump as a
threat to the Europe’s established political order.

Frauke Petry of the AfD

It is not the anti-establishment parties that are worried about Donald
Trump. It is the leaders of the entrenched European establishment that suffers
from what is loosely called the “Trump
Derangement Syndrome,” a tenacious malady that drives its victims to
various states of madness, hysteria, and certifiable irrationality.

The Democrats and the Left, writes Daniel Greenfield about the
Syndrome, believe in their own absolute entitlement to power. Any election that
they win is legitimate. Any election that they lose is illegitimate…. Like all
dictators, the Democrats believe in democracy only until they lose an election.

The last time a
national mental breakdown this severe happened was sixteen years ago when Bush
beat Gore. The Democrats reacted gracefully to their defeat by insisting that
they didn’t really lose because Bush stole the election. Psychiatrists were
soon tending to lefties suffering from depression. Others protested outside the
Florida Supreme Court, President Bush’s home and their parents’ basement.

Jesse Jackson
accused Republicans of a “coup.” Congresswoman Eddie Bernice Johnson warned
that “without justice there will be no peace.” Thousands protested
Bush’s inauguration waving signs like, “We want Bush out of D.C.” and “You’re
not our president.”

The Congressional
Black Caucus tried to obstruct the certification of the Electoral College vote.
Then when Bush won again in the next election, they did it all over again.
Expect them to try it one more time.

There must be something flawed about how American elections are held
and decided, writes Greenfield, about the ubiquitous teeth-grinding reactions
of the losers.

#NotOurPresident on
Twitter quickly gave way to riots in major cities. Democrats in the affected
cities decided that the riots were a great idea even though it was their own
police that were being attacked.

Mayor Bill de
Blasio, New York City’s radical leftist boss, claimed that “more disruption…
will change the trajectory of things”. Even though the only trajectory that the
protests have changed thus far is New York City traffic. “The more people fight
back, the more it takes away his power,” he insisted.

Wiser heads on the
left recognized that messing up Manhattan traffic wouldn’t stop Trump from
taking office. Instead they decided to abolish the Electoral College. Senator
Boxer will introduce a bill to that effect. Bernie Sanders mumbled that it’s
time to rethink it. Michael Dukakis [a first-class loser from long ago] fired
off an angry email insisting that Hillary Clinton had won and that abolishing
it should be a top Democratic priority.

Since Hillary lost,
the Electoral College is, according to Slate, an “Instrument of White
Supremacy—and Sexism”. And probably Islamophobic and Homophobic too.

Harald Vilimsky of
Austria

Greenfield is sardonic about the Derangement Syndrome. But he rarely
writes tongue in cheek. He’s not making anything up. He’s simply reporting the
craziness, hair-pulling, and head-banging over Trump’s victory and the prospect
of yammering yahoos having brainstorms that will somehow turn the sands of Mars
into caramel syrup.

The outer reaches of
Trump Derangement Syndrome include calls to boycott three brands of toilet
paper because they’re allegedly made by the Koch Brothers. Never mind that the
Koch Brothers weren’t supporting Trump. Facts, like democracy, only matter when
they happen to be on your side.

Then there are the
ritual burnings of New Balance sneakers on YouTube and Instagram. Not to
mention support for the secession of California from the United States of
America.

A man has sued
Donald Trump for $1 billion for having inflicted “great emotional pain, fear
and anxiety on Election Day and beyond.” Students
at Cornell held a “cry-in” to mourn the results of the election. The University
of Kansas offered students therapy dogs. At the University of Michigan’s
multi-ethnic student affairs center students took comfort in regressing to
childhood with coloring books and Play-Dough.

John Hopkins
recommended a healing circle. Stanford University urged students to “take care
of yourselves and to give support to those who need it.” Vanderbilt encouraged
them “to take advantage of the outstanding mental health support the university
offers.”

At the University of
Maryland, an astronomy test was canceled to help students cope with “a
personally threatening election result.” A Yale economics professor made his
test optional because students were “in shock” over losing an election. A
dozen midterms were rescheduled at Columbia.

Kern writes that the Trump Derangement Syndrome is a kind of unique American
export (as are “safe spaces”) that only EU bureaucrats and national politicians
and commentators purchase. Some however are trying medication – call it the political
pragmatism of realism or doses of cognitive Valium to cure themselves of the Syndrome:

Commentator Hubert
Wetzel said that Trump posed a threat to European security and called for
European unity to weather the next four years. In an essay laced with
hyperbole, he wrote:

“Europeans will
have to adapt to a new tone in dealing with America. Trump has made it clear in
his speech that he will pursue a nationalist foreign policy, and his speech
contained no reference to America’s allies. [Trump actually said: ‘We will
reinforce old alliances and form new ones,’ and ‘We will seek friendship and
goodwill with the nations of the world’]. His willingness to spend money on the
defense of other countries is limited. He does not see the USA as a protective
power of democratic values in the world; and he is the first U.S. president
since the end of the Second World War who has openly expressed doubts about the
value of European unity and the existence of NATO. At a time when Russia is
trying to weaken the West by means of diplomatic, intelligence, and military
means, it is an attitude that is a serious threat to united Europe.”

In Switzerland, Roger
Köppel, editor-in-chief of Die Weltwoche, warned against efforts by
European elites to belittle Trump. He wrote:

“Trump’s
election was a healthy shock. The shock was necessary. Not only power cartels,
but also worldviews are breaking down. This disruption is fruitful. The taboos
of the last few years are now fully on the agenda: illegal immigration, Islam,
the nonsense of open borders, the dysfunctional EU, the free movement of
people, jobs, law and order. Trump’s predecessors did not want to talk about
it, but the majority of voters did. This is democracy.”

I do not know enough about the mechanics and methods of European
politics to be predict with any prescience whether the muscle-flexing
anti-establishment parties will fall into the errors of a compromise with the
establishments, or fashion tailored tyrannies of their own, or fail miserably
in their appeals to a European population that fears freedom and independence from
the EU. In Germany, for example, there is a very real possibility that its
fed-up citizens may trade a Merkelian totalitarianism for a more populist one. I
hope not.

But I hope I have not misplaced my confidence that many Europeans are
as rational and proud as Americans have been in the last election here, and
that they hear the people
singing and decide to throw off their tyranny.

When tomorrow comes: What will it bring to Europe?

The New Iron Curtain – Goebbels Returns

By Edward Cline

On January 22, 2017

In Uncategorized

Let’s say it in German: Der
neue Eiserne Vorhang – Goebbels Redux!

Angela Merkel’s Political Correctness
predecessor, Goebbels

And who was Goebbels?

Joseph
Goebbels [1897-1945] served as minister of propaganda for the German Third
Reich under Adolf Hitler—a position from which he spread the Nazi message.

In 1927, Goebbels founded Der Angriff (“The Attack”),
a weekly national Socialist newspaper, and the following year, Hitler appointed
him to the post of national director of propaganda for the Nazis.

Once installed, Goebbels began creating the Führer myth around Hitler,
punctuating it with huge rallies geared toward converting the German people to
Nazism. His day-to-day activities also included designing posters, publishing
propaganda pieces, using his bodyguards to incite street battles and generally
increasing political agitation.

An “Iron Curtain”?

The first
recorded application of the term to Communist Russia, again in the sense of
the end of an era, comes in Vasily
Rozanov‘s 1918 polemic The Apocalypse of Our
Times, and it is possible that Churchill read it there following the
publication of the book’s English translation in 1920. The passage runs:

If the German people lay down their weapons, the Soviets, according to
the agreement between Roosevelt, Churchill,
and Stalin,
would occupy all of East and Southeast Europe along with the greater part of
the Reich. An iron curtain
would fall over this enormous territory controlled by the Soviet Union, behind
which nations would be slaughtered.

Although its popularity
as a Cold War symbol is attributed to its use in a speech Winston
Churchill gave in March 1946 in Fulton,
Missouri,^[6]
Nazi Minister of Propaganda Joseph
Goebbels had already used the term in reference to the Soviet Union.

But today, in 2017, Goebbels is unusually
plump, wears a skirt, and has a hair dresser. His name is now Angela Merkel.
She, too, is creating a myth, one that is so full of cracks and leaks it can
hardly hold the malice against truth and for the German people – the myth that
Muslim refugees will help to remake Germany. It can be

Merkel: Riding her Prancing Unicorn to defeat

held together with the
tool of propaganda, government lies, force, and censorship.

But that alliance is not working too well. Were it working as well as expected, there
would be no organized opposition to the Islamization of Germany, no opposition
to the establishment of a “German Islam,”
no demonstrations, no Germans arrested or fined for “hate
speech.” There would be no Afd Party
that threatens to end Merkel’s fantasy in progress of an Islamic Germany.

Germany’s
strict libel and slander laws are meant to protect citizens by making it a
crime to defame others. More than 218,000 cases involving insults were filed
with prosecutors in 2015. But few Internet based cases were prosecuted.

Germans know what Merkel and Jean-Claude Juncker
are up to, which is to force them to submit to the European Union’s immigration
policies, and to submit to Islam, to “integrate” them with Islam, to inure Germans
to the migrant record of rapes, robberies, harassment, and the presence of
countless Muslims hostile to and opposed to assimilating Western culture and
values.

What is the “hate speech” that the German government
wants to suppress or prohibit? Wikipedia’s definition of
it is:

Hate speech is speech which attacks
a person or group on the basis of attributes such as gender, ethnic
origin, religion, race, disability, or sexual orientation. In the law of
some countries, hate speech is described as speech, gesture or conduct,
writing, or display which is forbidden because it incites violence or
prejudicial action against or by a protected group, or individual on the basis
of their membership to the group, or because it disparages or intimidates a
protected group, or individual on the basis of their membership to the group.

Muslims, however, are not ever found guilty of “hate speech”; they can publically
call uncovered Western women “sluts” or “prostitutes,” because their insults
are deemed expressions of their “religion” or as “legitimate” forms of “political
protest.”

“Hate speech” in fact has no
physical power to harm anyone. Its harmful property is purely a
psychological one; if one is so thin-skinned or self-esteem-deficient that a
sneer or a dirty look can be claimed as derogatory or defamatory or hurtful,
then one may as well retire to a cave or an island where one would not
encounter other men. “Hate speech” has no metaphysical or existential potency.
I oppose the very concept of it, mainly because it can be used to censor any
form of criticism – book, cartoon, satire, or middle fingers.

Eugene Volokh, in his May 2015 Washington Post article, “No,
there’s no “hate speech exception to the First Amendment,” notes,

But there is no hate
speech exception to the First Amendment. Hateful ideas (whatever exactly that
might mean) are just as protected under the First Amendment as other ideas. One
is as free to condemn Islam — or Muslims, or Jews, or blacks, or whites, or
illegal aliens, or native-born citizens — as one is to condemn capitalism or
Socialism or Democrats or Republicans.

Unfortunately, Germany has no equivalent of
the First
Amendment that would stymie government plans to regulate speech. Merkel and
her censorial
cronies, such as Mark
Zuckerberg of Facebook, are just fine with its absence. To make a statement
on paper, on a soapbox, or on the Internet that is critical of migrants and especially
of Muslims is fair game for punishment by the government.

This leaves the German government to quash
what it deems “fake news” from any quarter but its own.

Judith Bergman in her January 2017 Gatestone
article, “Germany’s
New Propaganda Bureau,” reports:

Germany has,
of course, been cracking down on free speech for quite a while now. Already in
September 2015, Merkel said, “When people stir up sedition on social networks
using their real name, it is not only the state that has to act, but also
Facebook as a company should do something against these statements”.

Under a
government program, which has enlisted the help of the German non-governmental
organization, the Amadeu Antonio Foundation, led by Anetta Kahane (who has
turned out, in a fine twist of irony, to be a former Stasi agent and informer) German authorities are monitoring how many supposedly “racist” posts
reported by Facebook users are deleted within 24 hours. Justice Minister Heiko
Maas has pledged to look at legislative measures if the results turn
out to be “unsatisfactory”. The program is scheduled to run until
March 2017.

Germany says: “Don’t believe your
lying eyes!”

Bergman continues:

A married
couple, Peter and Melanie M., were prosecuted and convicted in July 2016 of
creating a Facebook group that criticized the government’s migration policy.
Their page stated, “The war and economic refugees are flooding
our country. They bring terror, fear, sorrow. They rape our women and put our
children at risk. Make this end!” Also, in July 2016, 60 people suspected
of writing “hate speech” online had their homes raided by German police.

None of the
above seems to be enough, however, for the president of the Bundestag, Norbert
Lammert, from Merkel’s CDU party, who believes that what Facebook is already
doing against “hate speech” is not enough. According to Lammert, there is a need for more legislation.
A law to bring social networks under penalty of fines if they fail to erase
“hate messages” and “false news” has just been announced by
Volker Kauder, leader of the parliamentary group in Merkel’s current Bundestag
and CDU/CSU faction, and Thomas Oppermann, Chairman of the Social Democratic
Party (SPD) parliamentary group.

European
Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker has also recently called on companies such as Facebook to address “false
announcements” on the Internet, saying he felt that the Europeans were
increasingly becoming “sensitive to who is fluttering around them and who
is telling them the truth.”

As I noted above, Muslims are as a rule
exempt from charges of hate speech. Bergman concludes with:

In another
such instance, a German court found that the firebombing of a synagogue in
Wuppertal by two German Arabs and a juvenile accomplice was not anti-Semitic,
but rather “an act of protest” to “bring attention to the Gaza war.” The men were
convicted of arson.

In Germany,
it is criminal to bring attention to the problems that come with the
government’s migration policies, or to criticize those policies, because this
constitutes “hate speech.” Firebombing a synagogue, on the other
hand, is simply an “act of protest.” Perhaps, once the “Defense
Center against Disinformation” is set up, such “acts of protest”
will be labeled, “Officially Approved Un-Fake Communication.”

Stab a Jew,
or run over him in Israel, and that’s “free expression”! It’s “protest”!

Back to “fake news.” How’s this for “fake
news”?

“His Excellency the Exalted Ambassador from Mars
announces to Linda Sarsour
he will convert to Islam!”

Okay. So you don’t believe that’s a
legitimate headline and that it has no connection to reality. Understandable. But
the truth about Islam and Muslim migrants – and how they are making Germany
(and Sweden, Denmark, and Norway) inhospitable “no go” zones for indigenous citizens
– that’s “fake news.” In short they are being “Islamized.”

Robbie Travers, in his
Gatestone article of January 2017, “The ‘Fake
News’ Censorship Industry,” writes:

The German
government thinks it knows exactly who should be the arbiter of truth
and what articles you should be allowed to post. Itself!

After a bill
was proposed by German lawmakers, which threatened fines of up to 500,000 Euros ($522,000) for
publishing “fake news,” Facebook decided to use an organization called Correctiv, described as a German
fact-checking non-profit organization, to decide whether reported stories are
“real” or “fake.”

This system
would then encourage individual Facebook users to report other users’ posts to
Correctiv. Facebook would then have Correctiv label any of the articles
“fake news,” as they see fit.

Even then,
this proposed response by Facebook was not harsh enough for some German
lawmakers, who want articles deemed to be fake by the government to be removed within 24 hours, or else fine Facebook 500,000 Euros.
That move would undoubtedly lead to individuals abandoning Facebook for other
social networks, or more probably, Facebook abandoning them. German attempts to
police the Facebook could end up useless; to many, the plan looks suspiciously
like a money-making stratagem.

A
centralized “speech police” would also create a monopolization of the
media industry. One or two large platforms would dominate the public debate;
fringe voices would be ignored and cast aside.

Travers continues:

Facebook’s
“Trending News Team” banned people exposing jihadists, but allowed pages glorifying anti-police violence and pages promoting anti-Israeli terrorism. That is quite a track record.

Individuals,
without even inciting violence, have been wrongly censored by Facebook. A
former Gatestone writer, Ingrid
Carlqvist, saw her account suspended; Gatestone writer Douglas Murray’s articles were censored from Facebook; and this author had his Facebook blocked for questioning Black Lives Matter. All the banned
authors challenged politically correct revisions of events.

The whole
censorship industry is open to abuse; presumably, that is what censorship is
for in the first place.

Dutch
politician Geert Wilders

says
goodbye to Germany?

Censorship is about playing with men’s minds,
about faking reality for them and for the censors themselves, with government-approved
“fake news.” The original Goebbels was a master of it, suckering in a morally
and philosophically disarmed populace. Merkel and Juncker are not so good at
it. Thus, Merkel and her co-conspirators are worried that her regime might come
to an end, and the “iron curtain” of fake news would rust away.

Do Black Lives Matter?

By Edward Cline

On January 20, 2017

In Uncategorized

Do black lives matter?

Hispanic lives? Muslim lives? Gay lives?
Women’s lives?

Black lives matter – to me, at least – if
blacks adhere to reason, lead productive, non-parasitical lives, do not demand
the unearned, and, to paraphrase Martin Luther King, Jr., if blacks judge
others, blacks, whites, Asians, Arabs, Hispanics, Muslims (not actually a
“race,” just as Islam is not a “race,” either), Mexicans, Cubans, and so on,
that is, judge an individual by the content of
his character. This is how I expect to be judged, and how I judge others. I
otherwise place no importance on a person’s color.

But this is not what Black
Lives Matter (BLM) means. BLM is grounded on
race and a hatred for whites and the police. The hatred is so severe that BLM
has declared war on the police. It is a terrorist
organization, whether or not the government recognizes it as one. It has
declared war on the police to effect “change” in how the police handle blacks
in their encounters. Often it is black policemen who shoot or “mistreat” violent
blacks in the course of self-defense, and these policemen have also been deemed
“fair targets” by BLM for murder and harassment. Their “blackness” does not
exempt them from murder.

It is a black subculture, perpetuated by the
government and the welfare state, which rejects civilization, which BLM
perceives as an oppressor. Although what blacks as a “collective” would replace
it with has never been answered except for a “racial supremacy of blacks.” In
that respect it is similar to Islam’s goal of dominating every country in the
world.

Readers should be reminded that nothing like
Locke’s Two
Treatises of Government ever came out of the Congo or Egypt or the
Sub-Sahara. Whatever there is to value in the West that serves as a benchmark
of life-affirming progress was produced in the “lily-white” north – across the Mediterranean.

Some historians and cultural writers contend
that climate played a big role in the development or Western civilization, so
that blacks living in deserts or in fetid, smothering jungles were at a
disadvantage to improve agriculture or invent steam engines and even to study
the skies.

This is not an endorsement of the racist
notion (advanced by creatures like the Aryan Nation and others)
that whites are genetically superior to blacks or any other race.

Left out of the narrative is the role of
reason.

This will not be the central subject of this
column, but I am repelled by today’s black subculture. It is anti-reason, anti-esthetics,
anti-everything that comports with a civilized society, and is a belligerent
expression of self-hatred projected onto the “white race.” Today’s black
“entertainers” are not of the caliber of past black singers and musicians as
Cab Calloway and Louis
Armstrong and Billy Holiday.

Any blacks who have achieved anything in
today’s contentious racial environment (an environment encouraged and
perpetuated by Barack Obama) are hated by BLM. This hatred is exacerbated by
the MSM, which is largely Left and similarly reason-deficient and/or hostile.
Blacks who have achieved anything of value to anyone – and BLM members and
advocates also benefit from advances in medicine, engineering, law, and so on,
although they would never recognize them – are dismissed and demeaned as “Uncle
Toms” or “Oreo Cookies.” They are smeared as “sell-outs” to the white race,
when in fact those blacks “sold out” to reason and pro-life values. Reason, as
a tool of human survival, is color blind.

Not meaning to open a can of worms, I have read several books in the
past that discuss the idea that the “West” was superior only because of its
moderate climate or other, circumstantial external factors. I have never been convinced or persuaded by
them.

On the other side of the issue is Martin
Bernal’s’s multi-volume, reconstructive, pseudo-scholarly
explanation of how “whites” benefited from African/Asian civilization, Black Athena: The Afroasiatic Roots of
Classical Civilization (The Fabrication of Ancient Greece 1785-1985), or
stole ideas from African cultures but fabricated the superiority of “white”
Western civilization. Western civilization is a fraud, the books claim.

Bernal’s
opus was on one hand criticized
for the paucity of archeological evidence that would support his thesis, but it
was also welcomed by many anti-West scholars, who now count in the dozens if
not scores throughout academia.

Some commenters
on the Quora
site are skeptical of Bernal’s scholarship.

Johannes
Musch, Archaeologist

Written Dec 8, 2015

Martin Bernal’s “Black Athena”
has been criticized by various authors, like the historians François-Xavier
Fauvelle [1],
Edith Hall [2]
and the Egyptologist James Weinstein [3]
. It should be noted that Martin Bernal wasn’t specialized in Egyptian
archaeology, history and linguistics in the first place. Therefore his work
should be considered merely as the interested view of an outsider.

Footnotes

[1]
Lefkowitz, Mary R. & Maclean Rogers, Guy, eds. – Black
Athena Revisited

[2]
The Black Athena (Part4)

Black Lives
Matter’s main thesis is that whites are the problem for blacks. Blacks are “forced”
to live in a “white” society, but for some unnamed reason this creates
conflicts, and it indirectly asserts that this is a twain that shall – or
should – never meet. BLM does not want reconciliation between whites and blacks
(as though in a society governed by reason one would be needed); that would
deflate any argument for declaring war on whites and the police. There is no
“natural” conflict between whites and blacks; any that may arise are artificial
and bogus and angles for political power.

BLM is basically a virulent spin-off of Louis
Farrakhan’s Nation of
Islam ( NOI), one of whose founding
tenets is that whites were an invention of a mad black scientist to replace the
dominant black race with whites (by kind of switching newborns in a hospital crèche
after delivery, or by murdering them).

The Nation of Islam’s mythology goes:

Elijah Muhammad once said that the Moon was once a part of the Earth, and that the Earth
is over 76 trillion years old. The entire land mass on the Earth was called
“Asia”. This was, Elijah Muhammad claimed, long before Adam.
Elijah Muhammad declared that Black People in America are descendants of the
Asian black nation and of the tribe of Shabazz. He writes on page 31 in his
monumental book, “Message to the Blackman in America”, “…who
is this tribe of Shabazz? Originally, they were the tribe who came with the
earth (or this part) 66 trillion years ago when a great explosion on our planet
divided it into two parts. One we call earth and the other moon. This was done
by one of our scientists, God, who wanted the people to speak one language, one
dialect for all, but was unable to bring this about….”

Wallace Fard Muhammad taught that the original peoples of the world
were black and that white people were a race of “devils” created
by a scientist named Yakub (the Biblical and Qur’anic Jacob) on the Greek
island of Patmos.
According to the supreme wisdom lessons, Fard taught that whites were devils
because of a culture of lies and murder that Yakub instituted on the island to
ensure the creation of his new people. Fard taught that Yakub established a
secret eugenics policy among the ruling class on the island. They were to kill
all dark babies at birth and lie to the parents about the child’s fate.
Further, they were to ensure that lighter-skinned children thrived in society.
This policy encouraged a general preference for light skin. It was necessary to
allow the process of grafting or making of a lighter-skinned race of people who
would be different.

Black Lives Matter’s narrative meshes nicely
with NOI’s insanity,
an insanity that verges on, if not surpasses, a diagnosis of “racial
schizophrenia”. It is not an organization that seeks reason or reconciliation.
It is one that has a vested interest in victimhood, which in turn sanctions
warfare against the police and whites in general.

#BlackLivesMatter
was created in 2012 after Trayvon Martin’s murderer, George Zimmerman, was
acquitted for his crime, and dead 17-year old Trayvon was posthumously placed
on trial for his own murder. Rooted in the experiences of Black people in this
country who actively resist our dehumanization, #BlackLivesMatter is a call to
action and a response to the virulent anti-Black racism that permeates our
society. Black Lives Matter is a unique contribution that goes beyond
extrajudicial killings of Black people by police and vigilantes….

When we say Black Lives Matter, we are broadening the conversation
around state violence to include all of the ways in which Black people are
intentionally left powerless at the hands of the state. We are talking
about the ways in which Black lives are deprived of our basic human rights and
dignity….

#BlackLivesMatter is working for a world where Black lives are no
longer systematically and intentionally targeted for demise. We affirm
our contributions to this society, our humanity, and our resilience in the face
of deadly oppression. We have put our sweat equity and love for Black
people into creating a political project–taking the hashtag off of social media
and into the streets. The call for Black lives to matter is a rallying cry
for ALL Black lives striving for liberation.

Nowhere in BLM literature are any facts cited,
for example, as they are by the noted black intellectual, Walter Williams of
George Mason University. In his January 19th article, “The
Black Community and Crime,” he writes:

The FBI reported that the total number of
homicides in 2015 was 15,696. Blacks were about 52 percent of homicide victims.
That means about 8,100 black lives were ended violently, and over 90 percent of
the time, the perpetrator was another black. Listening to the news media and
the Black Lives Matter movement, one would think that black deaths at the hands
of police are the major problem. It turns out that in 2015, police across
the nation shot and killed 986 people. Of that number, 495 were white (50
percent), 258 were black (26 percent) and 172 Hispanic (17 percent). A study of
2,699 fatal police killings between 2013 and 2015, conducted by John R. Lott
Jr. and Carlisle E. Moody of the Crime Prevention Research Center, demonstrates
that the odds of a black suspect’s being killed by a black police officer were
consistently greater than a black suspect’s getting killed by a white officer.
Politicians, race hustlers and the news media keep such studies under wraps
because these studies don’t help their narrative about racist cops.

Thomas Sowell, another
black intellectual and a prolific author (once a Marxist, he wrote one of the best
refutations of Marxism, to which BLM subscribes in terms of racial instead
of “class” warfare), noted in his July 2013 article, “Who
is Racist?”

I am so old that I can remember when most of the people promoting race
hate were white.

Apparently other Americans also recognize that the sources of racism
are different today from what they were in the past. According to a recent
Rasmussen poll, 31 percent of blacks think that most blacks are racists, while
24 percent of blacks think that most whites are racist.

A marriage of political ends between Islam
and BLM was in the cards. The Counter Jihad
Report of January 9th stresses:

Despite the outcome of the election, and the outpouring of support for
the upcoming administration, there is an agenda by individuals and their
organizations that wish to disrupt and dismantle the future of this presidency.

“This Starts January 14, The Weekend Of
Martin Luther King Jr.’S Birthday, And DOES NOT STOP Till This Regime Is
Prevented From Ruling. This Is The Kind Of Political Crisis Needed At This
Moment In History. It Has Happened
Before, And It Can Happen Again”.

“This Massive Outpouring And Uprising Of Millions Must Be Built Through
Ongoing, And Increasing, Acts Of Defiance And Resistance, In Every Corner Of
Society. We Propose That This Month Officially Begin With Acts Of Resistance On
December 19, The Day Of The Electoral College Voting And Extend To The
Inauguration”.

This, taken from a website that essentially is calling for the
overthrow of the Trump administration. This initiative, led by terrorists,
communists, Marxists and every other “ist”, is a blatant call to action which
should be of concern for all Americans. One of its leaders is former
Weather Underground terrorist Bill Ayers. The same Bill Ayers responsible for
the bombings of the New York City Police Headquarters in 1970, the Capitol
building in 1971, and the Pentagon in 1972.

In addition to Communist thugs like Cornel West, and Charles
Dix, Muslims have also called for a revolution in America….

Somewhere behind Oz’s curtain are other groups drooling for their
chance to cause
chaos in cities across America. Groups like Black Lives Matter, Mpower Change, a Muslim grassroots group, and
ANSWER (The Act
Now to Stop War & End Racism) are just some of the groups that have sought
permits to protest the day of the inauguration. MPower Change, founded by
Arab/Hamas supporter Linda
Sarsour is also part of the Women’s March, to be held on January 21. [I
gather that the “M” in Mpower stands for Muslim.]

Veritas,
the Roman goddess of truth,

who
hid in a well, in time

to
emerge with the truth

James O’Keefe and his Veritas operatives
revealed a plot to stop
or sabotage Trump’s inauguration
with various dangerous actions that technically qualify for a designation of
terrorism. President Trump owes him and his organization a great nod of thanks.
With luck, the people recorded in the “brainstorming” session in a pizza parlor
by now have been arrested and charged with conspiracy.

Black Lives Matter should be dissolved as
well as CAIR and ICNA and ISNA and the Muslim American Society, and all their
Muslim Brotherhood affiliates should be crushed and their heads charged with
treason and being domestic advocates of “change” to a totalitarian society and
government in America. If anyone deserves a Medal of Freedom, it is O’Keefe.

Black Lives Matter and Islam have a natural
affinity, born particularly of the NOI’s cracked brain anti-white and anti-Semitism.
The Nation of Islam and creatures like the former pastor of Barack Obama, Jeremiah
“God Damn America” Wright are
all cut from the same vicious, anti-life cloth.

To my knowledge, BLM has had nothing to say
about the murder
rate in Chicago, most of whose victims, including children, were black at
the hands of gun-toting black gang members. Apparently, the lives of black
murder victims do not matter. It is only the deaths of whites and policemen
that matter.

The BLM site avers: “The call for Black lives to matter is a rallying
cry for ALL Black lives striving for liberation.”

The “liberation” of blacks from black
gangsters is not on Black Lives Matter’s agenda. However, if you strive for
your freedom from BLM terror, you risk being killed, regardless of your
skin color. That fits into BLM’s program.

Triggering: A Sharia State of Mind

By Edward Cline

On January 15, 2017

In Uncategorized

TRIGGER
WARNING!!!

An emblem for a Sharia state of mind

This column can be deemed Trigger Warning-worthy
because it mocks trigger warning addicts and others dependent on
post-adolescence pacifiers.

Short of declaring reality off-limits, the number of things
being declared persona non grata by
college students seems to be multiplying.

However, is it my
imagination or are today’s college students establishing a kind of secular
Sharia, sans a mystical deity,
without possessing an inkling of knowledge of Islamic law? It could go under
another name most college students would be horrified by but unable to refute: Fascism. Historically, Fascism
as a collectivist movement, relied on physical force to propagate and impose
its various statist agendas, from Hitler’s racist supremacism, to the Perons’
class warfare against the upper and middle classes.

Sharia
is a code of Islamic “law” that defines acceptable behavior and “codifies” do’s
and don’ts for the average, gullible, brain-stunted Muslim. By its nature, and
because of its purpose, it is totalitarian;
it prescribes and governs virtually every action, decision, and choice of an
individual.

Like Nazi ideology
(and it is no coincidence that Islam is compatible with Nazism [National Socialism],
and vice versa), Islam erases the individual, requiring him to live, breathe,
and eat for Allah in across-the-board submission. It even prescribes his bodily
functions and behavior in the bathroom.

In the totalitarian regimes,
as the Germans found out after only a few months of Hitler’s rule, every detail
of life is prescribed, or proscribed. There is no longer any distinction
between private matters and public matters. “There are to be no more
private Germans,” said Friedrich Sieburg, a Nazi writer; “each
is to attain significance only by his service to the state, and to find
complete self-fulfillment in his service.” “The only person who is
still a private individual in Germany,” boasted Robert Ley, a member of
the Nazi hierarchy, after several years of Nazi rule, “is somebody
who is asleep.”

Your life purpose
and goal as a Muslim is to join the Ummah,
or the whole collective of Islam, around the globe, and you can join it by
advancing the spread of Islam. (I’ve always nicknamed it “The Borg.”)

Substitute the
state with Allah, and there is no fundamental difference between Islam and
Nazism. Dutch politician Geert Wilders has been right all the long.

Geert Wilders: Always standing tall for Civilization

So many things
upset or offend a Muslim. So many offences may get you, a non-compliant Muslim
or an infidel killed. That has happened countless times, everywhere, and
counted tens of thousands of victims. Here is a short list of permissions and
prohibition from Billionbibles:

• Theft is punishable by amputation of
the right hand (above).
• Criticizing or denying any part of the Quran is
punishable by death.

• Criticizing Muhammad
or denying that he is a prophet is punishable by death.

• Criticizing or denying Allah, the god
of Islam is

punishable by death.

• A Muslim who becomes a non-Muslim
[an apostate] is punishable by death.

• A non-Muslim who leads a Muslim away
from Islam is punishable by death.

• A non-Muslim man who marries a
Muslim woman is punishable by death.

• A man can marry an infant girl and
consummate the marriage when she is 9 years old.

• Girls’ clitoris should be cut (Muhammad‘s
words, Book 41, Kitab Al-Adab, Hadith 5251). [Columbia
University students recently polled said they were comfortable with female
genital mutilation, or FGM]

• A woman can have 1 husband, who can
have up to 4 wives; Muhammad
can have more.

• A man can beat his wife for
insubordination.

• A man can unilaterally divorce his
wife; a woman needs her husband’s consent to divorce.

• A divorced wife loses custody of all
children over 6 years of age, or when they exceed it.

• Testimonies of four male witnesses
are required to prove rape against a woman.

• A woman who has been raped cannot
testify in court against her rapist(s).

• A woman’s testimony in court,
allowed in property cases, carries ½ the weight of a
man’s.

• A female heir inherits half of what
a male heir inherits.
• A woman may not drive a car, as it leads to fitnah
(upheaval). [or accidents?]

• A woman cannot speak alone to a man
who is not her husband or relative.

•Edible meat must come from animals that
have been sacrificed to Allah, i.e., be “Halal.”[“Edible
meat” does not include pork, or any by-product of it; pork is verboten to
Muslims]

• Muslims should engage in Taqiyya and lie to
non-Muslims to advance Islam.

In July 2012, Dr. Hans Jansen
wrote in his excellent and comprehensive FrontPage article, “What
is Sharia?”:

The Islamic Sharia is a system of law. It
is a collection of prohibitions, admonitions and commands about human behavior.
The Sharia is not an internal matter that only concerns Islam and Muslims. The
Sharia includes a large number of provisions about people who are not Muslims.
These rules are usually prohibitions that carry severe penalties if violated.
These provisions of the Sharia make life unsafe and uncertain for someone who
lives under Sharia law and who is not a Muslim.

Under Sharia law, someone who is not a
Muslim possesses no inalienable rights. If I am wrong here, I will be relieved,
and happy to stand corrected and receive your e-mails pointing out why I am
wrong. But if I am right, a prisoner in Guantanamo Bay possesses more rights
than a Jew or a Christian who lives under Sharia law…..

Muslim theology claims that Sharia law is
divine. If unfamiliar new questions arise for which the Sharia has to provide
an answer, Sharia specialists, at least in theory, put forward a solution that
is based upon the four principles or ‘roots’, of the Sharia. These four
principles will reemerge again and again in all discussions concerning the
Sharia. They are Koran, Hadith, Analogy and Agreement.

Obama kicked him out of the Oval Office

I wrote in “Trigger
Happy,” that “Cashing in on their students’ prenatal Progressive
upbringing, and on their potty-training, modern educators patronize and
encourage the bewildering universe of the modern college student, who has been
taught that nothing is real and that therefore reality is anything you want it
to be. If you think a thing is dangerous
or offensive, you deserve a “safe place” from it, and more, that you should be
warned of its proximity and that steps should be taken to expel it from reality
– or at least from a snowflake’s consciousness.”

University
students studying the death of Christ are being given trigger warnings
before being shown images of the Crucifixion. Theology undergraduates studying
an introductory Bible course at the highly-regarded University of Glasgow are
being warned that the execution may distress them.

They are given the opportunity to skip lectures entirely if they are
too fearful that the Biblical imagery may upset them.

Those triggers also extend to such worrisome
things as forensic evidence, dead animals, and urban rioting.

Warnings are also given to the university’s veterinary students who
work with dead animals, and those studying ‘contemporary society’ who will be
discussing illness and violence.

Students of forensic science at Strathclyde University in Glasgow are
given a ‘verbal warning… at the beginning of some lectures where sensitive
images, involving blood patterns, crime scenes and bodies etc are in the
presentation’.

Muslims, of course,
are already granted dozens of mandatory “trigger warnings.” In fact, they are
demanding that the whole country – or all of Europe – be converted, in
conformance with Sharia, into a “safe space,” which now, in Muslim-occupied
sections of major European cities, goes under the appellation of a “no go zone,”
where they can express their outraged hurt feelings or plot their latest
depredation against “infidel” without worry about the police. Barring that,
they’ll exercise their right to riot and stab and rape and set fire to their
own mosques and call it someone else’s “hate crime.”

White “supremacists” who trigger the Sharia-minded

In sum, a kind of campus-defined
brand of Sharia, has
effectively been established and regulated by the trigger fingers of
hypersensitive students. “You can’t show that! It’s offensive and upsetting!”
Often, without even a cue from their professors (but too often in accordance
with an academic, Marxist agenda), students will identify a trigger-worthy
pariah, these students have been well-trained and brainwashed: Cecil Rhodes,
Thomas Jefferson, Brexit, Israel, Jews, Winston Churchill, and the list could
go on. God, as he is depicted in Western lore, is “white,” and so can be
protested, claim the Black Lies Matter fascists. The major Western
philosophers, from Socrates and Aristotle, up to the West’s major philosophical
nemeses who gave rise to it all, Immanuel Kant and Georg F. Hegel, were
“white,” so “off with their heads, too,” and exorcize them out of the syllabus! We
don’t want to know who laid the intellectual groundwork of what we want NOW and
what we want banished!

Jefferson: a bête noire on many campuses

University
officials are succumbing to, or are encouraging, a “Sharia state of mind” in
their faculties, in their classrooms, and in their students. It is a
totalitarian “state of mind” eerily similar to that which existed in Nazi
Germany (a “state of mind” being revived in modern Germany to the benefit of
Muslims there) and in the Soviet Union.

In the classroom, a
student who questions the assertions of a leftist teacher, or who doesn’t hove
to the PC line of “safety,” will be trashed, mocked, ridiculed, and subjected
to gales of laughter on cue from the teacher. And outside the classroom,
physically threatened and likely attacked. As Jews and Trump supporters are
now.

“Western Civ’s Got
to Go!” “Reason is just an arbitrary construct, it’s got to go! It’s Offensive!
Racist! Oppressive! It’s anti-Muslim, anti-gay, anti-LGBT, anti-Hispanic,
anti-Black….!”

Today’s
“snowflakes” are today’s black and brown shirts. They are today’s yearners for
an educational and cultural Kristallnacht. They adhere to their Sharia-like state of
mind. They don’t need to don uniforms made by Hugo
Boss. We witnessed their actions and antics during the Trump/Clinton
presidential campaign. They have discarded reason and all rational values. All
they have left to act on are their emotions; the sweeping Trump victory, has
left then nothing but their malice and vitriol stoked by their leaders in
academia and out. They are the
violent, careening, activist Fascists, pulling real triggers and wielding clubs
and bricks. Or neo-Nazis. Or secular Jihadists. Or the political cannon fodder of
the Democrats.

Trigger Happy

By Edward Cline

On January 8, 2017

In Uncategorized

TRIGGER WARNING!!!

I want my safe place!!!!

The ultimate earner of a Trigger Warning is
having to read a column that mocks trigger warning addicts and others dependent
on post-adolescence pacifiers.

Doxing and dwelling on the progressive
gangrene of Western society, the topic here is “trigger warnings.”

There have been so
many reports lately of the implementation of “trigger warnings,” especially in
universities, that one might well ask oneself: Why bother putting police scene-of-crime
tape around a particular animus? Why not declare everything off limits, reality in fact. Everywhere a
snowflake turns anymore he seems to encounter something troubling, unsafe, and
perilous to his piece of mind – or did I mean “peace” of mind? No sooner is the
issue raised, then some industrious guidance counselor or an academic can be
heard hammering and sawing as he or she builds a “safe space” for the uninitiated
college snowflake.

What?? No trigger warning?? I feel violated!!

Cashing in on their
prenatal Progressive upbringing, and on their potty-training, modern educators
patronize and encourage the bewildering universe of the modern college student,
who learn that nothing is real and that therefore reality is anything you want
it to be and if you think it’s dangerous or offensive, you deserve a “safe
place” from it, and more, that you should be warned of its proximity and that
steps should be taken to expel it from reality.

But is there a “safe space” from reality,
from facts? From “A is A”? but that statement is racist. “A” standing for a
dead white male, Aristotle. Snowflakes must be protected from it.

No. You may as well
try to find fresh air on Titan
or Mars.

The cultural hypochondriacs
have nowhere to hide, nowhere to cower and lick their wounds, hug their puppies,
and open their Cry-on Crayons

An absence of trigger
warnings

will trigger a swarm of
moon bats

Don’t say trigger in front of snowflakes! Guns
have triggers, and guns make them nervous, they make them feel unsafe! Trigger
was also the name of Roy
Rogers’s horse, and they’re against animal exploitation, too; it makes them
feel queasy and nauseous!

Don’t expose them to depictions
of the crucifixion! It’s so depressing! It’s only tolerable if the
narrative is that Christ died for our “sins” against Mother Earth, and against
Muslims, and against oppressed minorities. And then they can feel something
about it. They might even weep. They’ll put up with it and not gag if the
narrative is that Christ has been made an honorary member of Black Lives
Matter, even though he isn’t black! Graham Grant writes:

They are given the opportunity to skip lectures entirely if they are
too fearful that the Biblical imagery may upset them.

Those triggers also extend to such worrisome
things as forensic evidence, dead animals, and urban rioting.

Warnings are
also given to the university’s veterinary students who work with dead animals,
and those studying ‘contemporary society’ who will be discussing illness and violence.

Students of
forensic science at Strathclyde University in Glasgow are given a ‘verbal
warning… at the beginning of some lectures where sensitive images, involving
blood patterns, crime scenes and bodies etc are in the presentation’.

To a correspondent
I remarked that the crucifixion trigger is one of the most laughable trigger
warnings I’ve ever read about. I wonder how many of these snowflakes watch The Walking Dead. Maybe TWD should have
a trigger notice. WARNING: SIMULATED BLOOD SPATTERINGS, GUTS, BEHEADINGS, DECAYING
ZOMBIES, AND MUTILATIONS AHEAD! NOT
TO BE CONFUSED WITH ISIS VIDEOS OF
THE REAL THING! STEEL YOURSELVES FOR NAUSEA AND OFFENDED FEELINGS! Not to
worry! You will get credit for this course anyway if you become uneasy and can’t
continue to attend it.

But make sure you
secure a note from the school mental health counselor excusing you from the
class.

Muslim students demonstrating for a safe place

Muslims,
of course, will be granted dozens of mandatory “trigger warnings.” In fact,
they are demanding that the whole country – or all of Europe – be converted, in
conformance with Sharia, into a “safe space,” which now goes under the appellation
“no go zone,” where they can express their outraged hurt feelings. Barring
that, they’ll exercise their right to riot and stab and rape and set fire to
their own mosques and call it someone else’s “hate crime.”

What on earth will
happen to the disciplined professions if trigger warnings are regularly
established as preambles to taking a college course? Here’s a preview.

In
May,The
Daily Mail reported in its article, “Oxford law students too ‘fragile’ to hear about violent crime:
Undergraduates given ‘trigger warnings’ before traumatic material”:

They are destined to be barristers and
judges – but undergraduates studying law at Oxford are being told before
lectures on cases involving violence or death that they can leave if they fear
the content will be too ‘distressing’.

The revelation marks the arrival from the
US of ‘trigger warnings’ – the politically correct notion that students should
be warned before they encounter material that could elicit a traumatic
response.

Lecturers have been asked by the director
of undergraduate studies for law to ‘bear in mind’ using trigger warnings when
they give lectures containing ‘potentially distressing’ content.

Even Indiana Jones needed trigger warnings: about snakes

Nor are “lovely
bones” a draw to archeological students. They might make them tremble and so
they’re in need of trigger warnings. John Petre of the Daily Mail reports in
his article of September 2016, “Warning
to archeology students that ‘bones can be scary’ sparks fresh fears over
cosseted generation of students”:

For archaeology students, the opportunity to dig up important
historical remains is an enticing prospect.

But astonishingly, students at one of Britain’s leading
universities have been given permission to walk out of classes if they find
dealing with the past too traumatic.

Do I have a “safe place” for you! It’s called a grave.

“Forget the bones, mate! I’m only
interested in digging up pottery shards and stuff like that! I’m not into finding,
touching, and cleaning old bones. They give me the willies. I can’t even watch
an Indiana Jones
excavation without barfing up my breakfast! Can I get full credit?”

The move at University College London (UCL) is the latest example
of controversial ‘trigger warnings’, where academics caution students about
some potentially disturbing material.

Trigger warning
mandates and “safe places” insulated from the real world are a distinctly American
export. They have proliferated in virtually every American university campus.

American students
are now “trigger happy,” and their minds and cognitive faculties are as dull as
butter knives.

Europe’s Amazing Vanishing Act

By Edward Cline

On January 5, 2017

In Uncategorized

“Now you see it! Now you don’t!” the Super Star Magician recites the magic
words, “Allahu Akbar!” (in lieu of “Presto!”).

The Islamic magician, sporting a
magnificently bejeweled turban (in lieu of a top hat), and a handlebar moustache
(not strictly halal) with lascivious grins, first gropes the prone near-nude
form of Europa in its intimate parts to prove to the audience that it is a real
person and not a mannequin. Then the lights dim, he waves his baton, and sweeps
his cape with its blood red lining before the table, and snaps it once with a
deft flick of the wrist. When he jerks the cape away, the table is empty. In
fact, the table itself has even disappeared.

How did he do that?? The audience applauds
and wonders.

No one suspects that the table and its
captive assistant vanished through a stage trapdoor.

It’s not exactly rocket science. Every week
or so we read of another episode of Europe’s Amazing Vanishing Act. I also call
it – and I’m sure I’m not alone in this characterization – The Great
Self-Erasure. Europe, the alleged apogee of Western civilization, is rapidly
erasing itself from existence. Why? It’s the altruist thing to do. Without the
act of immolation and penance, it could accrue no “virtue.” The catch is that
by the time Europe fades completely from existence, nothing will be left to claim
any virtue.

I do not envy the chroniclers of this drawn-out
Western-style act of cultural Hari Kari, such as Soeren Kern and George Igler
of Gatestone, who have for some time provided us with details of this suicide
where the MSM has not and refused to. It’s not an inspiring task they’ve taken
on.

Soeren Kern reports in his January 2nd
article, “The
Islamization of Germany in 2016” the pathetic dhimmi actions
of Western governments in the face of the Islamization of Europe, and especially
of Germany, which brought on the phenomenon and is paying the price:

Mass migration
from the Muslim world is fast-tracking the Islamization of Germany, as
evidenced by the proliferation of no-go zones, Sharia courts, polygamy and child marriages. Mass migration has also been responsible
for a host of social disruptions, including jihadist attacks, a migrant rape epidemic, a public health crisis, rising crime and a rush by German citizens to purchase
weapons for self-defense — and even to abandon Germany altogether.

“There are written instructions … today we are not allowed to
say anything negative about the refugees. This is government journalism, and
this leads to a situation in which the public loses their trust in us. This is
scandalous.” — Wolfgang Herles, Deutschlandfunk public radio.

In Germany, and also in Sweden, Germans and
Swedes are not allowed to get a glimmer of the peril their governments have put
them in, in the name of multiculturalism, even though Muslims especially laugh at
and dismiss the vaunted value of multiculturalism, and proclaim that Islam will
dominate and that Sharia-defined “culture” will set the terms of a country’s
existence. Muslim committed crime rates are not to be reported or publicized
for fear of “offending” Muslims, or for creating a prejudice against Muslims and
all “migrants” (a.k.a. invaders).

A Cologne police superintendent revealed that he was ordered to remove
the term “rape” from an internal police report about the mass sexual
assaults in Cologne on New Year’s Eve. He said that an official at the
North-Rhine Westphalia Interior Ministry told him in an angry tone: “This
is not rape. Remove this term from your report. Submit a new report.”

January 6. Former Interior Minister Hans-Peter Friedrich said it was “scandalous that it took the mainstream
media several days” to report on the sexual assaults in Cologne. He said
public media was a “cartel of silence” exercising censorship to
protect migrants from accusations of wrongdoing.

What was I saying about erasures? “Your
clothes were never ripped off of you, you were not held down and several smelly
migrants had forcible sex on you, you were not robbed, spit on, beaten up, and
left naked in the cold. You were being ‘culturally enriched.’ Don’t laugh. That’s
now a hate crime. Five hundred Euros!”

So “rape” is no longer a reportable crime? Especially
if a migrant commits the crime? To report a rape is now considered a form of “Islamophobia”?
Europeans are no longer permitted to express a fear of violence against them.
It’s not “patriotic.” They are no longer allowed to say anything “negative” about;
Islam or Muslims in public without penalty. They are no longer allowed to even
discuss the subject among themselves, for fear of being accused of “Merkelphobia.”

January 26. In an interview with Deutschlandfunk public radio, retired
public media personality Wolfgang Herles admitted that public broadcasters
receive “instructions from above” when it comes to reporting the
news.

February 16. Migrants committed 208,344
crimes in 2015, according to a leaked police report. This figure
represented an 80% increase over 2014 and worked out to around 570 crimes
committed by migrants every day, or 23 crimes each hour, between January and
December 2015.

The actual number of migrant crimes is far
higher, however, because the report included only crimes that have been solved
(aufgeklärten Straftaten). Statistics show that only around half of all
crimes committed in Germany in any given year are solved (Aufklärungsquote).
This implies that the actual number of crimes committed by migrants in 2015
exceeded 400,000.

Soeren sounds Germany’s death knell in many more instances in just this
one article. On the whole it is a very depressing and terrifying read.

George Igler reports on the refusal of the European Union and many of
its member states to face the apocalyptic consequences of their “come one, come
all” migrant policies. In “The EU vs. the
Nation State?” he writes:

The question remains, however, why any nation
would want to throw out its sovereignty to institutions that are fundamentally
unaccountable, that provide no mechanism for reversing direction, and whose
only “solution” to problems involves arrogating to itself ever more authoritarian,
rather than democratically legitimate, power.

The Netherlands’ Partij Voor de Vrijheid,
France’s Front National and Germany’s Alternativ für Deutschland
are each pushing for a referendum on EU membership in their respective nations.

Given that the EU’s institutions have been so
instrumental as a causal factor in the mass migration and terrorism that are
now dominating the minds of national electorates, some might argue that the
sooner Europeans get rid of the EU, which is now doing more harm than good, the
better.

The European Union was intended in the beginning to be a solution to
European problems and to be a “Great Unifier” of the disparate European
nations. But the EU over a period of decades evolved into an authoritarian
overlord that caused more problems than it ever solved and which overrode
virtually any and all claims of national sovereignty, which were viewed by its
unelected “Politburo” as challenges and threats to the “common good.” Europeans
are reluctant less and less to sleep in the bed they made.

For all the discussion of a populist revolt in European politics, the parties agitating
for change against the continent’s open borders, and its centralized,
unaccountable and un-transparent law-making – originating from the institutions
of the EU – continue to face an uphill climb.

In Germany, despite the calamities associated with the decision of its Chancellor,
Angela Merkel, to accept 1.5 million Muslim migrants into her nation in 2015,
she is seeking re-election.

Never mind the fact that Merkel (and her opposite numbers in France, Scandinavia,
Southern Europe, and even in Canada) has made her country dangerous to live in
now, her bubble world view has fueled a hubristic confidence in her, in spite
of the carnage and misery she caused, that she can be reelected.

The increasing levels of support being
enjoyed by Europe’s populist Eurosceptic parties are clearly associated with
issues which are coming to dominate popular concern. Previous worries over
unemployment and the economy have been side-lined: the issues now vexing
European voters the most, according to the EU’s own figures (pp.4-5), are mass immigration (45%) and
terrorism (32%).

Breaking these Eurobarometer numbers down
further, country by country (p.7), Dutch voters picked immigration
as their greatest concern by a startling 56%, with terrorism following at 33%.

French voters, despite being subjected to
more recent
terrorist atrocities than any other European nation, picked immigration and
terrorism by a margin of 36% and 35%, respectively, according to the latest EU report. The parlous state of the French economy continues to be a major concern to French voters.

The elections scheduled next year in the
Netherlands, France, and Germany, are doubly significant in that they make up
three of the six original signatory nations of the founding treaty which
eventually gave rise to the EU.

The
Local reports that it’s significant that Hitler’s Mein Kampf, now available
in Germany after decades of censorship, is rising in popularity. It has been
popular among Muslims
and Arabs since WWII. No surprise.

For 70 years after the end of the Second
World War, the brutal dictator’s manifesto remained unpublished in Germany.

Its copyright was owned by the state of
Bavaria, which prevented new editions from being printed in Germany for fear of
reinvigorating Nazi sentiments.

But when its copyright expired – 70 years
after the death of the author, as is standard – an annotated version was
printed for the first time again last year by the Institute of Contemporary
History (IfZ) in Munich. And the publisher quickly began to sell out, rushing to print more copies to
meet the high demand.

What Obama would like to do to America and Israel;

make
them disappear.

Over the past year, around 85,000 copies have
been sold, much to the surprise of the institute. The IfZ had at first only
printed 4,000 copies, and now it’s heading for its sixth print run.

In April, the book become number one on
Spiegel’s bestseller list.

“The number of sales has overwhelmed us,” the
director of the IfZ, Andreas Wirsching, told DPA on Tuesday. “No one could have
really predicted it.”

No one could have predicted it – except a philosopher who understood
why Germany is still mesmerized by and hankering for “strong leadership,” else
why would Merkel have ever been elected or feel confident now that she could be
reelected?

So, who sired the EU juggernaut?

Signed in March 1957, by Italy, France, West
Germany, Belgium, the Netherlands and Luxembourg, the Treaty of Rome established both the European Economic
Community – proposing a single market for goods, labour, services and capital
within the bloc – and also, crucially, brought the European Commission into
existence.

The executive body of the EU, which also has
the sole remit for initiating legislation at the European level, is led by the controversial Jean-Claude Juncker, whose own grim opinion
of the nation state’s role in the likely future of the European continent was
made clear in a speech on December 9.

The paramount issue, writes Igler, is why any nation would wish to
become or remain under the thumb of faceless, power-wielding bureaucrats.

The question remains, however, why any nation
would want to throw out its sovereignty to institutions that are fundamentally
unaccountable, that provide no mechanism for reversing direction, and whose
only “solution” to problems involves arrogating to itself ever more
authoritarian, rather than democratically legitimate, power.

It must be a strain self-eradicating sadomasochism. “We are not worthy
of preservation. We must atone for our sins. Therefore we will allow millions
of savages and primitive peoples to invade us and transform us into tolerant
maquettes of nations. Our people will suffer and even die, but, “On ne fait pas
d’omelette sans casser des oeufs.”

A Muslim having a
breakfast omelet of Europeons,

spiced with German mustard, quark,
and Swedish smaktillsats

Despite voters’ concerns about mass
migration, in the absence of presenting their electorates with a compelling economic
vision outside of the EU, polling numbers still favour the political
mainstream.

The EU’s metaphoric rule of thumb saying is
attributed to either Robespierre or Napoleon. It is appropriate that the EU
would adopt it from two of the most egg-breaking tyrants in recent history. And
then they had their cheerleaders.

As Fascism
rose in Europe, and Japanese jingoism emerged in the East, Duranty (Walter Duranty, the Communism-loving
reporter of the New York Times) wrote glowing accounts of Stalin’s Five-Year
Plan. Almost single-handedly did Duranty aid and abet one of the world’s most
prolific mass murderers, knowing all the while what was going on, but
refraining from saying precisely what he knew to be true.

He had
swallowed the ends-justifies-the-means-argument hook, line and sinker. Duranty
loved to repeat, when Stalin’s atrocities were brought to light, “you can’t make an omelet without breaking a
few eggs.” Those “eggs” were the heads of men, women and
children, and those “few” were merely tens of millions.

Stalin was another kind of magician. He made
people disappear. Hitler made people disappear. Duranty made the truth
disappear. No one should be awed, no one should be surprised if they have
examined their agendas.

Merkel, Hollande, and others are all birds of
a feather, magicians who belong to the same elitist union. Their passion is to
pull the wool over everyone’s eyes and pick your pocket at the same time.

Allahu Akbar! First you are free, and then you’re not! For
my next trick, First you exist, and then you don’t!