Cold Fury

Harshing your mellow since 9/01

It’s “complicated”

As complicated as they can possibly make it.

Let’s say a fire breaks out at Notre Dame cathedral in Paris at the start of Holy Week, and just after two of the city’s other most prominent houses of worship – St Sulpice and the Basilica of St Denis – have been attacked and vandalized.

Well, I think we can all confidently say as the first flames are beginning to lick the ceiling that it’s undoubtedly an accident. Cigarette butt. Or maybe computer glitch. Probably just an overheated smart phone. We don’t need to get in there and sift through the debris. We can just announce it.

On the other hand, when there are coordinated attacks on Easter services at several churches in Sri Lanka, it becomes a little more challenging to pass off multiple suicide-bombings killing nearly three hundred people as an electrical malfunction.

So, in contrast to the confident declarations of a week ago, on Sunday morning the media opted for a subtler narrative. Lead sentence from The Economist:

IT HAS BEEN nearly ten years since the guns fell silent in Sri Lanka’s civil war. But bloodshed returned with a vengeance…

So it’s something to do with the Tamil Tigers? Their guns fell silent, but now they’ve returned with a vengeance, eh?

Let us turn to The New York Times:

Religious Minorities Across Asia Suffer Amid Surge in Sectarian Politics

Gotcha. This is all part of a general problem of various unspecified religions in unspecified countries suffering in a general sort of way. But could you be a little less general and more specific?

Okay. Opening paragraphs:

The deadly attacks in Sri Lanka on Sunday highlighted how easily religious coexistence can be ripped apart in a region where secularism is weakening amid the growing appeal of a politics based on ethnic and sectarian identity.

In India, the country’s governing right-wing Hindu party is exploiting faith for votes, pushing an us-versus-them philosophy that has left Muslims fearing they will be lynched if they walk alone.

In Myanmar, the country’s Buddhist generals have orchestrated a terrifying campaign of ethnic cleansing against the country’s Rohingya Muslims.

And in Indonesia and Bangladesh, traditionally moderate Muslim politicians are adopting harder-line stances to appeal to more conservative electorates.

So Hindus are attacking Muslims, and Buddhists are attacking Muslims, and “hard-line” Muslims are attacking moderate Muslims. Thank God for some clarity on the situation. But what were all these Muslims doing in church on Easter morning?

Well, as we said, it’s all very complex – not like “Edelweiss” being an obvious white-supremacist dog-whistle by a notorious Nazi Jew composer. Best not to think about it.

The lights are going out on the most basic of journalistic instincts: Who, what, when, where, why. All are subordinate to the Narrative – or Official Lie. All day yesterday and into today, if you had glanced at the telly, switched on the radio or surfed the big news sites of the Internet, you would have thought the Tamil Tigers were back “with a vengeance”, as The Economist put it – even though with one exception (the 1990 police massacre) the death toll was higher than any individual attack the Tigers had ever pulled off.

Meanwhile, back in that fast shrinking space known as the real world, from the very first hours the headline of this story was completely straightforward:

Islamic Suicide Bombers Slaughter Three Hundred on Easter Morning

But apparently that can no longer be said.

Perhaps not. But try as they might to keep us in the dark, we all know it just the same. While we’re on the topic of being mushroomed by the Left (ie, kept in the dark and fed shit)…ummm, “Easter worshippers“? SRSLY?!?


Ahh, but we all know what the REAL problem is, right?


Yep, you got it: “far-right anger.” Ace says of this pathetically inept display of propagandizing and narrative-pimping:

The pace of this game has accelerated. It used to be that the media would spend a day or two at least noticing that Islamists had murdered a bunch of people again before claiming The Real Crime is any possible hypothetical speculative future side-eye a woman in a hijab might get at Wal-Mart.

Now, they start claiming that Muslims Are the Real Victims here while they’re still gathering up the limbs sheered off of the victims.

They’re now so utterly transparent they just don’t seem to care anymore whether they’re fooling anyone or not. They’re just phoning it in at this point.

HEARTBREAKER update! Poor ol’ Hils just can’t catch a break.

On a special politicians’ episode of Wheel of Fortune, failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton nearly took home the grand prize. She was on the last puzzle of the regular rounds of the game, which read, CHRISTI_N. The audience began to cheer as it appeared Clinton had finally won something.

But, as is usual for Clinton, she snatched defeat from the jaws of victory, and shouted “Easter worshiper!” instead of the obvious answer, which was “Christian.”

I’m betting on Russian collusion as the culprit behind this latest bitter defeat for Her Herness. Nothing a fifth or two of Ol’ Popskull can’t ease the pain of, of course.

Share

Oh, she’s patriotic all right

She’s just in the wrong country, that’s all. Authentic American hero Kyle Lamb is just the guy to set her despicable ass straight.

Earlier this week, a 2017 tweet from Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) surfaced in which she attacked the men who helped defend from starvation and civil war the country she abandoned in the early 1990s. In her tweet, Omar blasted “American forces” for killing “thousands of Somalis” during the Battle of Mogadishu in October 1993. “#NotTodaySatan,” Omar wrote.

I take special exception to Omar’s disgusting comments because I served in the Battle of Mogadishu, which was later portrayed in the movie “Black Hawk Down.” If you aren’t familiar with the real story behind “Black Hawk Down,” let me set the scene for you.

The Habar Gidir clan, one of the more powerful clans around Mogadishu, was led by the notorious warlord Mohammed Farah Aidid, who made the distribution of international aid to those who needed it nearly impossible. Instead of equitably spreading food and medical supplies, Aidid and his henchmen spread terror and death.

Task Force Ranger was the 1993 military effort ordered by President Bill Clinton to capture Aidid and his lieutenants so the U.N. could deliver food and medical aid without fear of being attacked or killed by Aidid’s forces. The American soldiers Omar attacked in her tweet — the men of Task Force Ranger –weren’t sent to Somalia for fame or fortune. They weren’t there because of a deep desire to visit the God-forsaken nation of Somalia. They were deployed to support peacekeepers who were desperate to rescue the country from starvation and the ravages of civil war. To do that, they had to capture the men responsible for it.

By the time Task Force Ranger had been launched, Aidid’s network of drug-addled, Khat-dealing gun runners had taken over Mogadishu and were doing everything they could to oppress any and all rival clans, including that of Omar, the Majeerteen. In other words, we were sent halfway across the world to help protect people just like Omar and her family. Nineteen incredible men gave their lives defending her country while serving ours. They deserve to be lauded for their service, not attacked for it.

I am thankful Omar and her family and countless others were able to escape to neighboring Kenya while we fought to protect those left behind, but I simply cannot comprehend her attitude towards those of us who fought to protect her country and countrymen from warlords who plunged Somalia only further into violence and starvation. I am glad that Omar can now enjoy the very freedoms we fought to protect, like the freedom of speech and the free exercise of religion affirmed in the U.S. Constitution, but I don’t understand why she uses those freedoms to slur the men and women of the U.S. military who made her security and liberty a reality.

I’m neither thankful nor glad for Omar’s deliverance from Somali hell into the welcoming arms of a nation whose assistance and embrace she is unworthy of. She is a disgusting ingrate, not worth one drop of the priceless American blood shed on her and her fellow primordial knuckledraggers’ behalf that awful day. More and possibly worse from the NYPost:

The controversial Minnesota lawmaker claimed that “thousands” died in the Battle of Mogadishu — though most reputable sources put the contested body count much lower, according a report by the Investigative Project on Terrorism.

#NotTodaySatan,” Omar wrote in response to a Twitter user’s lament that 19 US service members were killed and 73 injured in the battle.

Monica Showalter questions her “patriotism”:

Seriously, she called them ‘Satan’? And she said it a lot more recently than she did with her 2012 ‘Israel has hypnotized the world’ tweet. What amazing ingratitude. She called the people who were trying to deliver aid to her starving clan, the Mateerveen of the Somali north, ‘Satan’ and fliply said ‘Not today, Satan’ on the question of whether there should be appreciation for the Americans who died for her own people. Her country was a hellhole and the Marines came in five years after she left it. Her family were among the people who were so badly off as victims of Somalia’s khat-chewing warlords that they had fled the country — for a four-year stint in a Kenyan refugee camp as a better alternative to life in Somalia — until they hit the jackpot as refugees and came to America. That kind of ingratitude is some strange stuff.

It points to a reflexive anti-Americanism that’s visible in pretty much every statement she makes. And her resentment was there from the beginning – she hated America from the moment she landed here, as she told the New York Times, calling it a land of ‘hypocrisy.’ She “concluded that it was not the golden land that she had heard about,” the Times gently intoned. 

Gee, so sorry about all that, dear. No, really. The blood-boiling closer is Lamb’s.

The simple truth is that Omar enjoys the fruits of American combat deaths, yet she can’t even bring herself to acknowledge the ultimate sacrifice that was made on her behalf, either as a Somali or an American. Her clan didn’t stand a chance against Aidid and Habar Gidirs, so I don’t blame her for leaving. But I do blame her for attacking those of us who had zero personal interest or investment in her nation for doing our jobs on behalf of our country. And I blame her for smearing American servicemen because we answered the call of our nation to address the violent barbarism of hers.

Well said, SMaj. Omar is here in the first place because of some at best extremely suspicious—most likely illegal—maneuvering and manipulation. In light of her obvious dissatisfaction, she should be sent straight the fuck back to where she came from without delay, at least until those questionable circumstances are investigated thoroughly. There just is no demand whatsoever here for yet another disgruntled, unassimilable Muslim “refugee” whose loathing and contempt for America slops forth from every pore like sweat in a blazing desert.

The excretion Omar has no right to be here. She isn’t needed here. She doesn’t like it here. She has nothing of value to offer this country; her contemptuous, entitled attitude confirms that even if she did, she’s way more taker than giver. She isn’t a loyal, patriotic American citizen. She never will be. She’s a fucking parasite.

Send. Her. Back.

Share

Ghouls out

Here they come, predictable as the sunrise. Ladies and gents, I give you the vile, despicable Left, in all its pus-oozing depravity.

“I wonder how many art pieces and artifacts that were sitting in the Notre Dame were stolen from former colonies,” said user Shaziya. When confronted with criticism and backlash, she doubled down: “I’m criticizing French colonialism, if this bothers you so much then you ought to reevaluate your morals, bye.”

Well, SOMEBODY certainly ought to, yeah.

“I think it sucks that Notre Dame is burning but f*** imagine if we had this same energy for every historic building we carpetbombed in the Middle East,” said another user.

Other users reveled in the fact that “white people” were saddened to see Notre Dame go up in flames. “I’m dying at the white people triggered,” said one person named Aly. “It’s a damn building that’s literally used for tourism, no one died, move on.”

While Notre Dame indeed invited tourists to look upon its magnificent beauty, becoming one of France’s most iconic landmarks, the cathedral still served as a home to practicing Catholics who worshiped God through the Holy Mass every Sunday — not to mention the multiple popes in recent history who have led processions there. The church hosted weddings, funerals, and consecrations. It never sacrificed its Christian mission at the altar of commercialism, as perhaps best exemplified by the priceless relics — including the crown of thorns said to have been worn by Christ — that Notre Dame housed within its walls.

“Notre Dame on fire is the most aesthetically pleasing visually I’ve ever seen,” said another user.

“This one’s for colonizing African countries b****,” said another user.

“Notre Dame burning is cosmic karma for all the historical sites and artefacts [sic] France destroyed and stole when being colonialist scum,” said the blue-checkmark “culture writer” Hikikomori Povich.

Sickening. Elsewhere, Rick Moran shits the bed.

It may turn out that the fire that destroyed most of Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris was deliberately set. Maybe it was terrorism. Maybe it was a protest against President Macron. Perhaps it was your garden variety right-wing or left-wing nuts.

But jumping to conclusions at this point is silly and stupid. My colleague Monica Showalter wrote the proper takedown of these fools. And kudos to Fox News hosts Shep Smith and Neil Cavuto for actually cutting off conspiracy theorists who appeared on their shows.

Don’t you wish hosts on other networks had cut off the wild speculation from liberals about the fantastical idea of Russian collusion?

I have no real problem with Moran’s call for caution in the immediate aftermath of events like these, when rumors are flying, no one really knows a whole hell of a lot for sure, and solid facts are awfully thin on the ground. But in this case he’s wilfully brushing past certain realities, particularly Parisian ones, and his shrill accusation of “conspiracy theorizing” on the part of Catholic League president Bill Donohue is just over the top.

Smith’s reaction was exactly right. Cavuto echoed his sentiments:

Several hours later, Cavuto had a similar experience with Catholic League president Bill Donohue, who immediately raised the notion that this inferno was tied to other church burnings.

“Well, Neil, if it is an accident, it’s a monumental tragedy,” Donohoe said. “But forgive me for being suspicious.”

He added: “Just last month, a 17th-century church was set on fire in Paris. We have seen Tabernacles knocked down, crosses have been torn down, statues have been smashed.”

Cavuto went on to request that Donohue avoid bringing up his suspicions as no connections have been made by officials. The Catholic League leader, however, was unable to help himself, eventually asserting: “I’m sorry, when I find out that the Eucharist is being destroyed and excrement is being smeared on crosses, this is what’s going on now.”

The Fox News anchor interjected, letting Donohue that while he appreciates his time, “we cannot make conjectures about this.” Cavuto then dropped the call.

Too often, the media allow this kind of speculation to run rampant, feeding the paranoia of right- and left-wing extremists who will believe anything bad about their perceived enemies. For any news outlet, speculation without evidence is irresponsible. If you want to feed your conspiracy habit, there are plenty of nutcases posting nonsense on the internet where you can get your fix.

Professional news organizations are supposed to be in the business of reporting facts. Intelligent speculation is one thing. But wild fantasies with zero evidence to back them up belongs on social media, not on news broadcasts.

Um, sorry to have to point it out and all, Rick, but like it or not, Donohoe didn’t say anything in the above quote that wasn’t…ummm, y’know…established, well-known fact. Maybe he got into some “wild fantasies” elsewhere in the truncated interview; I didn’t see the thing, so I can’t say. But if the above is what you call “wild fantasies,” “extremist,” “paranoia,” and “conspiracy theorizing,” well, your definition of those things differs one hell of a lot from mine.

Donohoe noted that attacks on Christian churches in Paris are numerous, and escalating. Which, y’know, is true. He cited some specific desecrations. Which, y’know, happened. He then said, calmly and not unreasonably, that this history left him “suspicious”—without naming any names, or accusing anybody of anything at all.

For this, Cavuto went full-on hysterical and cut him off. Moran then took up the cudgel and bashed Donohoe over the head with it, for his “irresponsible speculation” among other atrocities. Both, for no good reason at all. Oddly enough, I can’t seem to recall either Cavuto or Moran reacting quite this intensely to the Left’s knee-jerk penchant for blaming every recent mass-shooting incident on “right-wing extremists” of one stripe or another—a tired, seemingly involuntary reflex the Left maintains despite nearly every one of those shootings later turning out to have been perpetrated either by a Left-leaning psycho or a politically-incoherent or -disinterested one.

I myself am perfectly comfortable with speculating—based on both recurrent historical fact and the oft-stated intentions of Muslims themselves—that it’s very damned likely one (or more) of them was behind the Notre Dame fire. Should it turn out that I’m wrong this time I’m okay with that too, and have no problem owning up to it. Seems to me that maybe my reaction is a good bit less irresponsible, unhinged, and extreme than Moran’s and Cavuto’s were. But hey, YMMV and all that jazz.

Limbaugh, who also includes herein the complete transcript of Cavuto’s unfairly interrupted interview with Donohoe, makes the telling point:

Well, I’ll admit here this could all be irrelevant. The Notre Dame fire could very well have been accidental, caused by some construction worker flicking a still-burning cigarette. But as a thought experiment, apply all the numbers that I just recited to black churches in the United States, and then imagine a fire like the one at Notre Dame at a black church in America, and then imagine how the media would react to that.

Using the same theory, if there had been over a thousand black church fires, acts of vandalism, cemetery violence, if that had been happening in the last two years in the United States and a big black church erupted in flames yesterday, what do you think the story would be? The story would be who on the right did this? What white nationalist is doing this?

The speculation on who on the right could have been responsible would be the story. There wouldn’t be any, “Hey, let’s not jump to conclusions. It could be arson. It could be totally innocent. Let’s not go there.” Every guest would have been required to blame such a fire at a black church in America on white nationalists.

I’ll be honest with you here, folks. I’ve never understood… That’s not the right way to say it. I understand it. That’s the problem! I understand it. You go back to 9/11, and at the time, we knew who did it. The next day, who knew who did it! There were their pictures all over the news of the 19 hijackers. We knew who did it. We knew their names. We knew where they grew up. We knew where they were trained, that the majority of them were from Saudi Arabia — and then Osama Bin Laden is out claiming credit for it.

It’s a no-brainer who did it. And yet, within a few short days the entire narrative changes and becomes our fault. “What did we do to inspire this kind of attack?” The State Department! The State Department convened a symposium on, “Why do they hate us so much?” And it didn’t take long after 9/11 before you weren’t allowed to talk about the people who did it. You know the old saw about, “Oh, we’ve got to guard against the backlash against Muslims in the United States.”

What do you mean guard against a backlash against…? It’s descended from there consistently to today, where you’re not even allowed to mention it, speculate, talk about it. Even things that we know were Islamist terrorism we’re not really supposed to say this.

At some point, it becomes far more irrational and damaging to blind ourselves to observed reality than it is to make speculative judgment based on it, even if such judgment might turn out to be incorrect once in a while. As far as I’m concerned, we passed that point with Muslim terrorism a long time ago. I repeat: if this story quietly goes away in a few more days, you’ll know we’ve just taken another step down the primrose path…with folks like Cavuto and Moran skipping happily along in the lead.

Share

Punches: unpulled

Looks like the Somali Sleeper stepped in it this time, but good.

Omar-NYP.jpg

Real American Dan Crenshaw spikes the Muslim terrorist-loving bitch Ty Cobb style:


Note well that she mentions “love and commitment to our country” that “should never be in question”, and she’s absolutely right—I don’t question her love of country. It’s just that I don’t believe for a second that the USA is her country; Somalia is, and as the Koran requires, Islam will always trump even that. The woman is here illegally, by virtue of a sham marriage to her own brother. Not only should she not be in Congress, she should by all rights be deported. Yesterday would not be too soon to suit me. But by fair the most damning slam of them all against the evil bint is this one:

She dismissed thousands of people being murdered like it was an everyday occurrence when she said “some people did something.”

On 9/11/01 my son, firefighter Jimmy Riches was murdered along with close to 3,000 American citizens by Muslim terrorists.

I rushed to Engine 4 in Lower Manhattan when I heard what was happening. That’s where my son worked.

As I came over the Brooklyn Bridge, the towers had both already fallen. All the rigs at the firehouse were gone, so I knew they were all at the World Trade Center.

When I got there, I saw the death and destruction — people lying there dead and mangled.

We picked up the bodies and saw how gruesome it was. Those people died a horrible death.

We were there for 9 months picking up body parts, pieces.

We found my son’s body six months later, March 5, 2002. He was at the North Tower. We got to bury him.

People talk about closure, but that’s not closure. I’ll never get closure until my son walks through that door again.

My son died doing his job, helping others in distress. The American public said NEVER FORGET 9/11!

Now, we have people who were working down there getting sick and dying. It hasn’t ended.

There’s still 1,000 bodies that have never been recovered. It’s very sad that she could make such light of it.

Sad? Sorry to have to say so, ma’am, but I’m afraid it’s one helluva lot worse than that. It’s disgraceful, is what it is.

Worse still, it’s all on us—all of it.

The fact is, we HAVE forgotten. Omar’s galling, illegitimate presence here—dancing right past the still more abhorrent fact that SHE FUCKING GOT ELECTED TO THE US CONGRESS—is all the proof anyone should ever need of that forgetfulness. I can’t imagine anything more mortifying, reprehensible, and just plain inexcusable than that reality—a blot on the honor of every American who was alive and old enough to remember that nightmarish morning.

Several years ago, after many years of having done some sort of annual 9/11 remake of the CF main page to commemorate the attacks, I stopped even mentioning the anniversary at all. Somewhere along the line I realized, in morbid horror and shock, that we had indeed forgotten; that, in our blithering PC stupidity, we had not only stubbornly refused to learn the lessons of the attacks, we lacked even the guts or honesty to name the real motivation behind them—a moral failure that still plagues us to this very day. Our contemptible abdication of nerve and integrity is demonstrated with each new charade of official befuddlement as to motive from law enforcement, political “leadership,” and Enemedia following yet another murderous Muslim attack someplace.

We The Peepul also dishonored our dead and ourselves when we sat still for the Ogabe junta’s alacritous and semi-clandestine resettlement of hordes of phony Muslim “refugees” in communities throughout heartland America, allowing the (ahem) “fundamental transformation” of the very fabric of American society without complaint or demur. In the end, we have to shamefacedly confess that we got saddled with the likes of Omar for no reason other than our own tremulous complacency. Which means that Omar and her loathsome ilk are here to stay, and will henceforth have to be dealt with on their own terms and not ours. Worse yet, that we deserve them.

All American update! More righteous rage from the Post.

Some people did something? Wow. What a way to describe the heinous surprise attack on America that claimed 3,000 lives.

Especially when Omar’s focus was Muslim rights: That made it all the more vital to note that the terrorists acted in the name of Islam — as self-described “jihadists” in a war against America, Israel and the West. To call them merely “some people” is to deny a cancer festering in the world Muslim community.

Allow me to rephrase that last, in the interest of precision and accuracy: Islam is a cancer festering in the world community. If Muslim terrorists would stick exclusively to slaughtering each other in the privacy of their own shithole nations, nobody would give much of a shit about them. It’s mainly the Koran-mandated effort to wage jihad on infidels throughout the world that the rest of us have a problem with.

She went further: “Many people expect our community to feel like it needs to hide every time something happens.” Again, by “something happens,” she means (but won’t say) “when Muslims commit acts of terror.”

No one expects Muslims to “hide” after an attack by Islamist terrorists. No group should be blamed for the deeds of a few of its members. But defeating terrorism requires facing the facts of who’s behind it and why.

And “facing the facts” requires that we recognize that it’s far, far more than just “a few” Muslims who support global jihad…even right here in the States.

Instead, Omar claimed Muslims are being “terrorized” by the nation’s response to 9/11.

By the way: CAIR wasn’t founded post-9/11, but in 1994. And the feds later named it an unindicted co-conspirator in a plot to steer US funds to the terror group Hamas.

Yet Omar upped the obscure-the-facts ante Wednesday, declaring criticism of her “some people did something” line to be “incitement,” on the grounds that she has received death threats.

Huh? She’d rightly be outraged if anyone minimized those threats as merely “some words from some people.”

Omar’s cavalier brushing off of the murder of thousands of innocents on 9/11 should shock all Americans, Muslims included.

Yep. And it ought to open their blind eyes as well, and thoroughly piss them off. Unfortunately, the vile woman got some needed support from an unsurprising source.

At the end of yet another controversy-filled day, Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) sat down with Stephen Colbert on The Late Show and tried to show the world she’s not actually as scary as Fox News wants you to think she is.

Contrary to this liberal muttonhead, I very much doubt that many of us find Omar “scary.” We find her offensive, noxious, and intolerable.

When you have people on Fox News question whether I am actually American or I put ‘America first,’ I expect my colleagues to also say, ‘That’s not OK’ and call that out,” she continued, referring to comments earlier Wednesday morning from Fox & Friends host Brian Kilmeade. To those who question her loyalty to America, Omar said, “I took an oath to uphold the Constitution. I am as American as everyone else is.”

You are no such thing. You’re an America-hating adherent to a pseudo-religion that openly demands our destruction and subjugation. Your insensitive, outrageously offensive remarks damned well ought to lead people to be skeptical about your loyalties, along with your assumed “right” to be here at all. You came to this country illegally, under false pretenses. You ought to be sent back to Somalia, permanently and with a quickness.

One recent comment that got Omar in trouble was when she referred to Trump adviser Stephen Miller as a “white nationalist.” That made Colbert aware of the double standard she referred to when he thought to himself, “Haven’t I said that?”

“You see this outrage when I speak the truth,” Omar said in response. “Everybody else’s truth is allowed, but my truth can never be.”

“Your truth” is false, therefore there is no obligation to honor it, indulge it, or tolerate it on anyone’s part. Fuck you, go home, drop dead.

Share

They lie

Not-so-candid camera.

Kathy Shaidle drew my attention to the “Candid Camera” episode below. I don’t know of either of the protagonists, but that’s no reflection on them – I’m Mister Squaresville, and they’re hip and happening. But Jim Jefferies is apparently a big name in both his native Australia and Hollywood, and has just started his third season on Comedy Central. He invited on to the show a so-called “anti-Islamic activist” Avi Yemini. Mr Yemini set two conditions, but, suspecting Mr Jefferies would break them anyway, took the precaution of secretly recording it anyway.

Which was a very prudent thing to do. Jefferies did indeed break both conditions, sat on the tape for months, and then used it in response to the Christchurch massacre. He also took Mr Yemini’s answers and matched them up to entirely different questions.

So far that’s just business as usual with the bad-faith bookers of Comedy Central. But listen to what happens next: Jim Jefferies, who plays an impeccably progressive anti-Islamophobe on TV, suddenly starts badmouthing Islam and Muslims himself – and indeed their fecundity, as if he’s just some knuckle-dragging nutter who picked up a secondhand copy of America Alone.

Kathy Shaidle suggests that deep down many so-called lefties agree with the right on Islam; they just object to anybody saying it in public. I would say that’s particularly true of the showbiz crowd. I remember pointing that out to a very well-known West End playwright and Labour Party supporter a decade or so back as we stood at the back of the theatre just before curtain up, and he expressed regret for my descent into Islamic obsession. He’d drawn a youngish crowd that night, which he took as a good sign. “See any hijabs?” I replied. “As London Islamizes, the pool of potential theatregoers shrinks.” He took the point. At some level, nobody in his line of work can avoid taking it, aside from special pleaders on BBC arts show ever ready to hail new breakthroughs in Sharia stand-up or burqa ballet. If you’re an actor or a musician or a comic, you can’t stand on the stage night after night and not notice the contrast between the demographic distribution in the auditorium and that of the street outside – that Mohammed for all his sterling qualities is disinclined to take his four wives for an evening of Oscar Wilde or Brahms and Liszt…or Jim Jefferies. At a certain level, it appears that Mr Jefferies understands that, and once in a while, in contrast to the anodyne pap of “edgy” comedy that has so enriched him, actually says what he really feels.

I’m skeptical of Kathy’s assertion that the Left is in agreement with the Right on Islam. But we’ll see what they have to say when our newly-dominant Muzzrat overlords are throwing their LGBTQXZRFGYSPBLLTHBTPHHHT pals off of buildings, barring “feminists” from the workplace and automobile driver’s seats, and forcing them to humbly walk several paces behind their husbands or fathers while keeping their faces covered, and their fat yaps shut. If nothing else, that last will at least will be a refreshing change.

Share

A fair trial, followed by a first-class hanging

This. This right here.

As the Islamic State caliphate’s last redoubt of Baghouz falls to U.S. allied forces, more than 50,000 women and children have recently streamed into camps run by Kurdish forces in northeastern Syria. Among them is a 24-year-old Hoda Muthana, a former Alabama student and a three-time jihadi bride. This summer, a United States federal court will decide her appeal concerning whether she and her 18-month old son are American citizens and whether they can resettle here.

Wherever Muthana ends up — in a Syrian Democratic Force evacuation camp, an Iraqi detention center, or the U.S. — Washington should ensure that she and other women who flocked to ISIS face charges. They threw their support behind a terror group that the U.S. government officially designated as responsible for religious genocide against the Middle Eastern Yazidi, Christian, and ethnic Shiite minorities. These minorities will struggle for generations to recover, and they yearn for justice.

Muthana may no longer shout Allahu Akbar while flashing the IS sign, an index finger pointing upward for monotheism, but she rushed to join ISIS’s caliphate in its early months in 2014 and stayed until its bitter collapse. She enthusiastically answered ISIS’s call to be a wife for its militants and a mother for its next generation of holy warriors, and she played an important administrative role in the caliphate.

An extensive 2018 Netherlands intelligence study found that “in many cases, jihadist women are at least as dedicated to jihadism as men and they … form an essential part of the jihadist movement.” That is demonstrably true for Muthana. On her social media posts, Muthana served as an IS propagandist under the name “Umm Jihad” (mother of jihad).  “Wake up u cowards,” she incited, “go on drive-bys and spill all of their blood.” She urged truck-ramming attacks against American veteran parades, like the 2016 Bastille Day gathering in Nice, France.  She joined IS’s al-Khanssaa Brigade, a female religious police unit led by Western women and known for lashing local Sunni women with cables for dress-code infractions.

Al-Khanssaa also enforced the caliphate rulings on slave houses – the emblematic institution of ISIS’ genocide. The survivors among 6,000 Yazidi and some Christian victims of IS slavery have testified firsthand about them. Yazidi advocate Pari Ibrahim related: “ISIS brides would lock [the Yazidi slaves] up and beat them. They would shower the girls, put them in nice clothes and put makeup on their faces to get them ready to be raped.”

Complete fucking animals. There’s plenty more, all of it sickening. It would be no more than just for the US to have naught more to do with these pestilential creatures beyond letting them lie in the bed they made for themselves. But yeah, sure, bring these vile women back to the States, I’m good with that option too—provided we then lock ’em all up in Gitmo, put ’em on trial for treason, and hang them by their necks until they are dead, dead, dead.

Update! Same goes for this scumbag, with bells on.

Share

Ho hum, just another random nut

Prepare yourselves for the Christchurch mosque killer’s light-speed trip down the memory hole. The “right-wing H88888R!!! Islamophobic bigot™ right-winger” libmedia narrative doesn’t quite seem to be holding up—as usual—so you can be sure the whole thing will very shortly be dropped—as usual—never to be brought up again.

All jihad is local, but all “Islamophobia” is global. So, if a Muslim of Afghan origin shoots up a gay nightclub in Florida and kills 49 people, that’s just one crazed loner and no broader lessons can be discerned from his act. On the other hand, if a white guy shoots up two mosques in New Zealand and kills 50 people, that indicts us all, and we need to impose worldwide restraints on free speech to make sure it doesn’t happen again. I’m ecumenical enough to mourn the dead in both gay clubs and mosques, but I wonder why we are so conditioned to accept Islamic terror as (in the famous words of London mayor Sadiq Khan) “part and parcel of living in a big city” that it is only the exceptions to the rule that prompt industrial-scale moral preening from politicians and media. [UPDATE: Utrecht isn’t that big a city – 350,000 – but it’s today’s designated “part and parcel”.]

The Christchurch killer published the usual bonkers manifesto before livestreaming his mass murder on Facebook. Brenton Tarrant purports to be an environmentalist – indeed, a self-described “eco-fascist” – who admires Communist China (notwithstanding, presumably, its indifference to environmentalism). He wants to massacre Muslims in order to save the planet:

The environment is being destroyed by over population, we Europeans are one of the groups that are not over populating the world. The invaders are the ones over populating the world. Kill the invaders, kill the overpopulation and by so doing save the environment.

Does he mean this? Or is it a giant blood-drenched leg-pull?

No matter. For the the politicians stampeding to the nearest camera to dust off their tropes, what counts is that, if you’re American, Donald Trump pulled the trigger; and, if you’re British or European and you’re not prepared to say that Google-Twitter-Facebook should silence anybody to the right of Trevor Noah, then you’re part of the problem.

Call me a H8888!-filled Islamophobic H88888RRR!™ if you wish, but I confess that among my first thoughts after hearing about this business was to wonder how many future Muslim terrorist attacks had just been forestalled. My second was to wonder where the mosque-goer who seems to have stopped the attack by shooting back might have gotten his gun, how many more of them might be found in storage at this mosque, and what might be the reason for their being there.

I would be interested to know why Mr Adler thinks it is in the national interest to lend the imprimatur of the Crown and the state to as specious and opportunistically deployed a conceit as “Islamophobia”. One of our Antipodean Steyn Club members, Kate Smyth, drew my attention to a fine example of that: After the Islamic terror attack in Melbourne four months ago, Muslim community leaders refused to meet with Aussie Prime Minister Scott Morrison because of all the systemic Islamophobia. After the Christchurch attack, the same Muslim community leaders are demanding a meeting with Morrison because of all the, er, systemic Islamophobia. To say Terror Attack A is something to do with Islam is totally Islamophobic; to refuse to say Terror Attack B is Islamophobic is even more totally Islamophobic.

Were the Queen or the Governor General to pull an Andrew Scheer and sign on to this somewhat selective view of the world’s travails, it would necessarily imply that “Islamophobia” is now beyond and above politics, and in that sense beyond criticism. The use of “Islamophobia” in the Melbourne attack is, in fact, its standard deployment: it is an all-purpose card played to shut down any debate.

Not, of course, that there’s much debate as it is. And there’s likely to be even less in the future. Facebook, which is unable to devise algorithms preventing a depraved psychopath livestreaming mass slaughter on its platform, is busy fine-tuning its controls to expel the most anodyne dissenters from the social-justice pieties. Less speech inevitably means more violence – because, if you can’t talk about anything, what’s left but to shoot up the joint?

Things are changing faster than you think. The urge to change New Zealand’s gun laws might be politely excused as a reflexive response to the means by which an appalling attack was carried out. But the demand throughout the west to restrict both private gun ownership and free speech are indicative of a more calculated clampdown, and of broader assumptions about control of the citizenry on all fronts. In the transition to the new assumptions, we are approaching a tipping point, in which the authorities of the state (as in the average British constabulary’s Twitter feed) are ever more openly concerned to clamp down on you noticing what’s happening rather than on what is actually happening.

And isn’t it just funny as all hell that, no matter the event, situation, or putative contretemps, Big Boss Man is always able to find a way of using it to keep on workin’ for the clampdown?



Share

Somali problem

It’s remarkable that we should have one. But we do.

As I wrote recently at PJ Media, there’s something about the Somalis that makes them different from other cultural aliens who have arrived in—or, in the Somalis’ case, been deliberately imported to—the United States. An ethnic group low on its share of geniuses but long on violence, the Minnesota Somalis have the disgraceful distinction of sending more men and boys to join foreign terrorist organizations such as al-Shabab and ISIS over the past dozen years than any other place in the country. And this, of course, is Omar’s district—why would we have any doubt that she will represent it faithfully?

Recently one of the first Somali policemen in Minnesota, Mohamed Mohamed Noor—with a name like that, what could go wrong?—was charged with murder in the 2017 shooting death of Justine Damond; he goes on trial next month, having pleaded not guilty. (Be sure to read the details of the killing at any of the links.) And now, open gang—perhaps “militia” will soon be a better word—warfare is breaking out in the Cedar-Riverside neighborhood in Minneapolis as the Somalis (known colloquially in the military and intelligence services as “skinnies”) recreate the same hellish conditions they fled in their East African homeland.

Then we come to maybe the most remarkable facet of our Somali problem:

But coddling terrorists is the least of (Ilhan) Omar’s problems. For one thing, there’s some reason to suspect that Omar married her own brother in order to get him American citizenship—something she denies, although her marital history is, shall we say, culturally colorful. (There’s a good, if confusing, summation of it at Snopes.com, which rates the issue “unproven,” and you can find a video on the subject here.) It’s hard to fathom why she might do such a thing, since even the most dedicated open-borders activist might blanch at outright fraud; further it makes little sense for a lawbreaker to then raise her profile and run for Congress—although, in succeeding Keith Ellison, now Minnesota’s attorney general, she was bound to get elected no matter what.

The Democrats and their “progressive” media allies are so obsessed with the “historic” nature of Omar’s membership in the American congress that they can’t see the danger she poses. By background, religion, and upbringing she is a dedicated enemy of the United States, the camel’s nose under the tent of what the Left likes to call “our democracy.” As such, she’s a useful tool, protected by her faith and her ethnic origins; any criticism of her immediately triggers accusations of racism and “hate.” Indeed, the resolution against anti-Semitism is now being rewritten to include denunciations of other forms of “hate speech.”

It’s a nasty nettle to grasp, although it’s impossible not to enjoy Pelosi’s discomfiture. In order to hang on to her gavel—because you just know the Republicans are going to “pounce” on this—Pelosi has to reduce the public profiles of the radicals lest the rest of America catch on to what they’re up to. Once San Fran Nan was the public face of the Democrats; now, among others, it’s Ilhan Omar, wearing a hijab.

Upon her arrival in Congress, Omar demanded—and got—a change in a 181-year House rule forbidding head coverings on the House floor. If you think that’s the last change she wants to make, you’d better think again. 

Damned sure better. But the change she’s made just by being elected to Congress is the one that counts; after that, the rest just kind of fall into place one by one. It still blows my mind that we brought her and her America-hating, terrorist-sympathizing countrymen here at all, much less ceding them Muslimsota. Somebody ought to ask CW3 Cliff “Elvis” Wolcott, CW3 Donovan “Bull” Briley, and SSG Daniel Busch what they think about all that sometime.

Oh no, wait, you can’t. They’re dead. Them, and plenty of others.

Share

Big trouble in Little Mogadishu

Looks like Ilhan Omar’s constituency is getting a little out of hand.

Let’s start by stipulating that not every newcomer to America is a violent criminal bringing old ethnic and religious conflicts to the New World; nor is he a predatory opportunist, happy to take advantage of the stable, trusting, and yes, welcoming culture he finds. Every country has its social customs and unwritten rules, and often newcomers misinterpret them as weakness. When the Catholic Irish arrived in large number from the middle of the 19th century on, they brought with them a deep suspicion of the police, a distrust of the Protestant ascendancy, and a pent-up willingness to work the system to their advantage — cultural survival skills they had learned during nearly a millennium of English occupation of their home country. It took them more than a full century to fully integrate into American society. Swaths of American cities, especially New York, had Irish no-go zones, into which even the Irish cops feared to tread, and even today we remember the names of the psychopath Mad Dog Coll and the suave but violent Owney Madden, chief of the Gopher Gang, who gave the world Mae West, Primo Carnera, the Cotton Club and Bill Clinton.

Which brings us to Little Mogadishu, in the city soon to be formerly known as Minneapolis, where the good people of Minnesota — of Scandinavian, German, and Irish stock —  have been busily importing people from perhaps the most culturally alien region of the world, Muslim East Africa. In Charles Dickens’s masterpiece, Bleak House, Mrs. Jellyby ignores her own brood while busily organizing aid to Africa; today’s Mrs. Jellybys have instead have brought East Africa to them.

East African community reeling from weekend violence, demands solutions
A group of Somali volunteers including Abdirahman Mukhtar, left, and Abdullahi Farah gave out pizza and tea to young people from a stand Friday in the Cedar-Riverside neighborhood.The men hope by connecting with youth and engaging them in conversation they can combat the shootings that have recently plagued the neighborhood. After the  latest spasm of gang violence, Minneapolis’ Somali residents and business owners on Monday stepped up their calls for help from City Hall and police headquarters to help curb the senseless shootings that they say too often go overlooked. On Friday alone, five men of Somali descent were shot in separate attacks, one fatally.

Police and community members pinned the blame for the bloodshed on an ongoing feud between Cedar-Riverside neighborhood gangs like 1627 and Madhiban With Attitude (MWA) and their rivals, the Somali Outlaws, whose territory includes the area around Karmel Mall. Friday’s shootings were a repeat of a familiar pattern: a shooting on one gang’s turf is usually followed hours, if not minutes later by an “eye-for-an-eye” response so as not to appear weak, community members say. Two shootings last month are also blamed on the conflict. As with other recent shootings, police immediately stepped up patrols in both neighborhoods to prevent further retaliation. But some in the community wondered whether they could be doing more.

What more, one wonders, can they do? If a bunch of white cops come pouring into Little Mogadishu, both coasts will be able to hear the howls unaided. Should they do nothing, then the likelihood is that the neighborhood — represented by the ineffable Ilhan Omar in the United States Congress — may well descend into the levels of violence that characterize, well, Mogadishu.

It’s almost certain that it will. And when it does, the foolish, oblivious Mrs Jellyby will suddenly find herself neck-deep in a world of serious hurt.

Share

HORRORS!

The truth hurts.

The West Virginian GOP displayed a poster in the state Capitol implying that Democratic Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar was a terrorist Friday.

The poster shows the World Trade Center in flames on 9/11 with the caption “‘NEVER FORGET’ — YOU SAID…” with a photo of Omar underneath it. The second half of the caption reads, “I AM THE PROOF – YOU HAVE FORGOTTEN.”

Actually, I don’t think the post “implies” that Omar is a terrorist per se; that kinda misses the actual point. Rather, it flatly states that she’s a radical, jihad-supporting, Jew-hating, anti-American Muslim. Which, y’know, is true. The assertion that she “is the proof…you have forgotten”—which is also true—is upheld by the very fact that, for some unfathomable reason, this nation saw fit to blindly import unvetted Muslim hordes from places like Somalia, Syria, and elsewhere even after having suffered the 9/11 atrocities—naked acts of war perpetrated in the name of Islam, by Muslims, for the greater glory of Allah.

The very fact that a hijab-wearing terrorist sympathizer from Somalia*, of all fucking places, is now treating all and sundry to hate-filled, Islam-inspired harangues from a pulpit in the very seat of American government—having been elected out of an overwhelmingly Muslim-majority enclave in, of all places, Minnefuckingsota, then sworn in on the biggest Koran Nancy Pelosi could find as the cherry on top of the obnoxious-triumphalism sundae—is simply grotesque. Also note this:

Democrat Ilhan Omar made history as she become one of the first two Muslim women to enter Congress – and did so with her head covered.

The 37-year-old who came to the U.S. as a refugee from Somali represents the fifth district of Minnesota, which includes all of Minneapolis and some of its suburbs.

Democrats were to formally end the ban on religious head coverings on the House floor on Thursday afternoon as part of a package of rules to govern the House. That package changes the ban on head coverings to exclude ‘non-religious headdress.’

Naturally, baseball caps, fedoras, cowboy hats, and other such common, all-American headgear remain strictly verboten. I repeat: all of this—ALL of this—after having suffered the 9/11 atrocities.

“Forgotten”? Oh, I’d say that’s putting the thing WAY too damned mildly, if you ask me. Makes the occasional Proggy wailing about the disgraceful, uniquely American scourge of “Islamophobia” seem head-twistingly Kafkaesque, don’t it?

*9/11 isn’t the only thing we’ve forgotten; Somalia, remember, was where the Black Hawk Down disaster took place—another hideous atrocity, one which to this day has never been avenged, and won’t ever be. So anybody wanna maybe try explaining to me why it is we ever saw fit to bring even ONE of the filthy, murdering savages here, thereby “fundamentally transforming” a goodly chunk of Minneapolis into Little Mogadishu?

Share

CANZUKUS(istan)

And white supremacy.

So no, I’m not a supremacist of any kind. I don’t want to lord it over any other race or ethny; I just want to be left alone, and not see the country I live in swamped by millions of hard-to-assimilate foreigners.

I can’t see what’s wrong with any of that. Although of course I understand that nothing could be further from the minds of our ruling ideologues than leaving people alone.

But here’s a thought experiment. Of all possible supremacies—White Supremacy, Black Supremacy, East AsianSupremacy, Male Supremacy, Ashkenazi Supremacy, Hetero Supremacy…of all the supremacies you can come up with, is there any that I’m somewhat favorably disposed to?

I’m picking my words carefully here. As I said, my preference is to be left alone. I don’t want to be bossed around, and I don’t want to boss anyone else around. In all honesty, though, there are bound to be some supremacies that fall more gently on my ear than others.

But all right, I’ll ‘fess up. If I were a supremacist of any kind—which, once again, I’m really not!—I’d be an Anglo-Saxon Supremacist.

Let me enlarge on that. I’m looking at this survey from just over a year ago, a worldwide survey done by the Gallup organization, of how many people want to go live in another country, and which country they most want to move to.

The report lists the top 22 “desired destinations.”[Which countries do migrants want to move to?, by Charlotte Edmond, World Economic Forum, November 22, 2017] The U.S.A. is of course number one. Canada is number three, the U.K. number four. Australia is number six. New Zealand, somewhat to my surprise, is at number seventeen, in between Russia and China. That’s likely just ignorance, though. New Zealand’s a small, quiet, out-of-the-way place; much of the world’s population, I’m sure, has never heard of it.

New Zealand notwithstanding, that’s a pretty impressive showing for what John O’Sullivan has called the Anglosphere.

Surveying the world across the past century or so, in fact, I think a fair-minded person would have to say that a human being’s best shot at liberty, political stability, and modest middle-class prosperity has been in the Anglosphere. So the preferences recorded in the Gallup poll reflect worldwide awareness of that.

You can of course point to some blots, but many fewer in the Anglosphere than elsewhere. I’ll give you the Amritsar massacre if you give me Stalin’s Ukraine Famine, … and so on.

Political stability? France is on its fifth republic since 1789, with a couple of empires and a monarchy in there, too. Germany…the less said the better. The current constitution of China dates from 1982. It’s their fourth since the commies took over in 1949. Russia, Italy, Spain, … you get the idea.

So let’s hear it for the Anglosphere!

Just don’t do it loud enough for any shitlibs to hear you, lest you get another earful of boring tripe about what a horrid shithole the US is, and how it is therefore essential that we open our “borders” to all the illegals clamoring to get in. Derb goes on to explain just what he means by CANZUKUS, and notes the obvious problems with the execution of any such concept.

Paying the freight update! How “supreme” can you really be, when half the world is stepping on your face and making you buy their shoes?

I expected this evening would proceed along its typical polite contours until the father began expressing visible contempt when the conversation turned to his son’s college application process. His son is a very bright boy with a pristine high school transcript and SAT scores in the top one percentile. Being conscientious parents in a way that tends to confer white privilege, they had made significant financial sacrifices to subsidize his many interests and academic pursuits. All told they had given up much of their own for him—as investor societies tend to do.

But being a meticulous investor in an age of extreme extraction preference can sometimes be a bitter pill. Because, as the father began to recount through nearly gritted teeth, his son’s rejection notices from elite universities had already begun to congest their mail box. The father found that grating enough, though understood Ivy League level dismissals are simply a thing to accept with equanimity. What possibly sent him into commenting at the Kakistocracy, however, was his son’s rejection from a large state university. Granted this was a fairly prestigious institution, though one with an incoming class featuring literally thousands of POCs with resumes inferior to his son’s. With alcohol’s gentle urging, he was livid about it. With one hand he rubbed the skin of his forearm and spat out, “apparently this wasn’t the right color.” He was correct, it was not.

Again, I don’t know his politics—pre or post college admissions. But I do know anti-white preening always has an invoice, and white liberals aren’t excused from payment. Diversity is a tribal sham. But it’s delicious to praise from high perches. Whites who get in the door never feel the pain of having their face slammed in it.

Well, I know one father and son who just got their noses broke. Did they think having the luxury of living in a country with millions of people who hate you was just going to be cost free? No, diversity is a luxury. Just not for any of the people actually paying for it. So their son will glumly take his 1500 SAT to a mid-tier state college, where he will promptly be regaled with encomiums to diversity. Perhaps he will Email a list of its benefits back to his father.

I’m sure he will, once the liberal indoctrination process really goes to work on him. It raises a question about “white privilege”: is it really such a “privilege” if you have to pay for it yourself?

Share

“Elsewhere in Yuletide decapitation news…”

Not the sort of headline you can get a whole lot of “comfort and joy” out of seeing, is it?

A nativity scene has been “destroyed by idiots” outside the Christmas tree in the High Road.

The statues were installed and paid for by the British Pakistani Christian Association (BPCA) to remind residents about the real meaning of Christmas and while the Virgin Mary and Joseph were smashed, the infant Jesus got decapitated.

One resident, who is not religious, reported the crime to the Recorder and described the incident as “religious desecration”.

“It is three days before Christmas and this happens,” she said.

“Any other religion and there would be an outcry and it would have been fixed already…”

She reported the incident to Redbridge Town Hall but claims they refused to deal with it as it was not their nativity scene and were about to go to lunch.

Gee, wonder who might’ve been responsible for such a thing?

Leader of the council, Councillor Jas Athwal said the incident was sad and he will not let “mindless people ruin the nativity”.

“One thing I love about Redbridge is the diversity and living together and this year I had the privilege of going Eid celebrations, Chanukah, Vaisakhi and last week I went to a church for Christmas.

“We want to be making sure that all religions are living here peacefully.”

Yeah, well, there’s only one you’re gonna have a problem with on that one. And with that one, it will ALWAYS be a problem, no matter what you do. On the bright side, it was only a statue that was beheaded by The Diversity, instead of an actual, living person.

This time.

(Via Steyn)

Share

A riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma

Well, this is certainly…confusing.

“NJ woman”? One of those real-housewives-of-New-Jersey types? No, this is one of the real housewives of the new New Jersey:

A Secaucus woman has been accused of enslavement for allegedly forcing a Sri Lankan national to work for nine years without pay, federal prosecutors said.

Ah, a “Secaucus woman”: That narrows it down. Any chance of a name?

Alia Imad Faleh Al Hunaity, 43, was arraigned Wednesday in federal court in Camden and charged with forced labor, alien harboring and marriage fraud…

What did “Sri Lankan nationals” do to deserve being enslaved by these crazy out-of-control “Secaucus women”?

America’s newspapers would rather go out of business than tell you anything approximating to the reality of the situation – that this is a wealthy woman from Araby who would like to live as she does back in Saudi or the Emirates, which means importing the indentured servants she enjoys back in the old country. A third of the population of Saudi Arabia are “foreign workers”, mostly laboring in agriculture or domestic service. Just shy of a million are Sri Lankan. Because Saudis are the laziest buggers on the planet, and, having been enriched by oil, have no desire to make so much as a cup of tea for themselves.

So Ms al-Hunaity brought over her servant, enslaved her, and, in order to evade US immigration law, entered into a fake lesbian marriage…

I have written for years about the internal contradictions of the rainbow coalition – Amsterdam’s once famous “Homo Hotel” relaunching itself as a Muslim enterprise, the most fierce opposition to gay marriage in the Aussie referendum coming from the most Muslim constituencies, the orientational cleansing of London’s East End…

But you have to hand it to the more enterprising Mohammedans: Secure in the knowledge that Allah will cut them some slack, they’re willing to do whatever it takes – including tying the same-sex knot in order to import their slaves. One day the last elderly Episcopalian gays in San Francisco will notice that every other couple in the Castro District now seems to be a chap called Mohammed and the fetching young Bangladeshi houseboy who never leaves the house.

Well, they can comfort themselves by waxing even more indignant over how horrible those damned Christians are, I guess.

I can only doff my cap in awe to the faux-lesbo Muslim bint, though: she seems to have worked out exactly which of the Lefty pieties would be of most use as a prop in order to hornswoggle idiot American liberals into tacitly endorsing one of the uglier aspects of Islamic culture—a sin for which, had she been a Southerner, those same libtards would gladly have seen her publicly lynched, then rent asunder by wolves.

Share

More signs and portents?

This Is An Earthquake For Bavaria.

Voters in Germany’s economically dominant southern state of Bavaria delivered a stunning rebuke to the ruling Christian Social Union, in an election that delivered another crushing blow for the parties in Angela Merkel’s grand coalition in Berlin.

With all eyes on Sunday’s Bavaria election, moments ago the first exit polls showed a historic collapse for the ruling CSU party, which has ruled Bavaria continuously since 1957, and which saw its share of the vote collapse from 47.7% in the 2013 election to just 35.5%, losing its absolute majority and suffering its worst result since 1950, as voters defected in their droves to the Greens and the far-right Alternative for Germany.

German newspaper Welt called the election “the most painful election defeat of the past 50 years for the CSU”. As predicted in the polls, the CSU experienced a “historic debacle” in the Bavarian state elections, according to Welt. The CSU was followed by the Greens which soared in the election, more than doubling to 18.5% from 8.6% in 2013, the Free Voters also rose to 11% from 9.0%, in 2013.

Meanwhile, the nationalist AfD are expecting to enter Bavaria’s parliament for the first time ever with 11% of the vote, and as such are setting up for their post-election party. Party leader Alice Weidel already is having the first beer in the small community of Mamming in Lower Bavaria.

As the FT notes, the campaign was dominated by the divisive issue of immigration, in a sign of how the shockwaves from Merkel’s disastrous decision to let in more than a million refugees in 2015-16 are continuing to reverberate through German politics and to reshape the party landscape.

Alarmed by the rise of the anti-immigration, populist AfD, the CSU tried to outflank them by talking tough on immigration and picking fights with Ms Merkel over asylum policy.

But the strategy appeared to have backfired spectacularly by alienating tens of thousands of moderate CSU voters and driving them into the arms of the Greens.

Merkel’s coalition going bye-bye and the prospect of her removal is surely an unqualified Good Thing, if probably far too late to undo the damage she wrought. And I can’t see an increase in support for the Greens as any kind of positive.

(Via WRSA)

Share

Antisemitic Jews

A few of the other distasteful groups some on the alt-right choose to align themselves with: Joo-hatin’ libtards, self-hating Jewish libtards, and…guess who.

Anti-Israel activist Peter Beinart had spent years arguing that Hamas was a potentially moderate organization. Then when he was questioned at Israel’s Ben Gurion Airport, he played victim. 

But as Caroline Glick notes, there was every reason for Israeli authorities to question Beinart’s visit, because the anti-Israel BDS activist had participated in anti-Israel protests in Israel. Beinart was not, despite his claims, detained. He was asked about his participation in that protest by the Center for Jewish Nonviolence. The Center, despite its name, is used by Jewish Voice for Peace members, a BDS hate group, which also, despite its name, advocates for and supports terrorists who attack Israel. 

JVP members are on the banned list. Beinart had participated in a protest organized by a group that it used as a vehicle. So it’s completely normal that he was asked about it just as visitors to this country are asked about their membership in prohibited organizations such as the Nazi, Communist and other totalitarian parties. The BDS blacklist that bigots like Beinart rave about is no different than the United States blacklist on anyone who “has used a position of prominence to endorse terrorism.” 

That’s the BDS movement. 

JVP declared that it was proud to host Rasmea Odeh. Odeh had been convicted of a supermarket bombing in Israel that killed Edward Joffe and Leon Kanner: two Hebrew University students. It called the terrorist an “inspiration” and used the hashtag, #HonorRasmea. That’s using “a position of prominence to endorse terrorism” which gets you banned from both the United States and Israel. 

Beinart writes for The Forward, a paper notorious for attacks on Israel and Jews that veer into the anti-Semitic. Typically anti-Semitic Forward headlines include, “3 Jewish Moguls Among Eight Who Own as Much as Half the Human Race” and “Why We Should Applaud The Politician Who Said Jews Control The Weather.” 

Did I neglect to mention yet another of those distasteful groups above: the absolutely batshit insane? Consider the oversight hereby corrected, then. But wait, there’s more…and worse.

Jewish power, Karl Marx, whose bearded visage still sneers from The Forward’s old building, claimed, is self-interest. That self-interest has corrupted Jews. And Jewish self-interest has corrupted the world. Only socialism, enlightened global altruism, can redeem the world from the corruption of the Jews. 

Behind the special pleading, the foaming outrage, the laughable invocations of Jewish tradition and morality, Beinart, Eisner, The Forward and Jewish Voice for Peace are working off the same Marxist critique of Jews. Israel’s crime and that of its Jewish supporters, they contend, is that its self-interest has corrupted Jewish morality. The only way to redeem the Jews is to destroy Jewish self-interest. 

To destroy Israel. 

Only by abandoning their self-interest, their power, even their survival, can they atone for what Marxist anti-Semites, from their great bearded master on down, see as the ‘original sin’ of the Jews.

Peter Beinart, The Forward and JVP aren’t putting forward bold new ideas. Their Jewish sources are not, as they claim, the prophets of Israel or the Kotzker Rebbe, but the original prototype of the anti-Jewish Jew. Their prophet is the pathological anti-Semite who raved, “What is the secular basis of Judaism? Practical need, self-interest. What is the worldly religion of the Jew? Huckstering. What is his worldly God? Money.” 

Over a century and a half later, Marxist criticism of the Jews has made few innovations, replacing Judaism with Israel, and to a lesser degree, money with power. Leftist anti-Zionism is so hard to distinguish from anti-Semitism because its roots are still in the same anti-Semitic Marxist sewer. 

The Anti-Jewish Jews preach the salvific powers of the left to redeem the selfishness of the Jews. Only the left can save Jews from Jewish power. Only the left can redeem Jews from clinging to their guns, bible, and land by destroying Israel.

Boy, the irony is strong with these ones, ain’t it?

Yeah, I ain’t gonna be joining the chorus of “JOOZ DID IT!” conspiracy theorists, Right, Left, or Confutated, thanks. I don’t care how vociferously they preach their frothy gospel, here at this websty or anyplace else. Try peddling it someplace else, guys; there’s no market for it here.

Share

The real, the bad, and the scary

Steyn on Fukuyama.

“The fears that mass migration has stoked about cultural change” is a coy way of sidling up to the way I put it in America Alone – that culture trumps economics. Pakistanis came to Yorkshire because the mills needed workers. The mills closed anyway, but the workers stayed, and built their mosques and madrassahs. Today, as I mentioned on Tucker’s show a few weeks back, automation (and predictions that it will eliminate 30 per cent of all jobs) ends any economic rationale for mass immigration. That leaves little else to justify it except virtue-signaling. Which is more than enough, judging by the hysteria that greets anybody who seriously questions demographically transformative immigration policies. Fukuyama isn’t quite ready to concede the cultural point to Huntington, and attempts instead to sidestep it…

He has half a point here. Yes, many young western Muslims, the children and grandchildren of comparatively assimilated immigrants, choose a global Islamic “identity” for themselves. Likewise, many secular westerners choose one of the exciting and ever multiplying array of sexual “identities”. But it seems to me that both these phenomena are at least partly responses to the assault we have waged on our own culture and civilization this past half-century. Who wants to identify with a culture that reviles its own past, that blames itself for everything, that demolishes its statuary and denounces its greatest figures and insists that, while multiculturalism posits the equal value of all cultures, if you have to pick a villain pick the culture that built the modern world? In the void of modern western identity, people look elsewhere: Some find the new one-size-fits-all Islam, others find “intersexuality”.

In the end, however, one of these is real, and the other isn’t. And in those societies where the one butts up against the other (Denmark, say) the one that is real will one day steamroller the other. 

The one that considers its culture worth bothering to defend will always win, however ass-backwards, primitive, and immiserating it may be in every conceivable way. In any clash between ruthless savagery and enervated, effete, weak-kneed modernity, the way to bet couldn’t be more obvious.

Share

Still the same

Who gives a shit?

Since April, 1992, an international peacekeeping or monitoring force of some type has attempted to reduce the mayhem in war-wracked Somalia. Subtract 1992 from 2018: you get 26 years.

Prepare to add more. This week the UN Security Council voted to maintain the UN and African Union Somali peacekeeping operation (African Union Mission in Somalia, AMISOM) through at least 2020.

Troops from Kenya, Uganda, Burundi, Djibouti and Ethiopia man AMISOM and do the brunt of the fighting and security work in southern Somalia. AMISOM soldiers battle Al Shabaab Islamist terrorists, protect the national government in Mogadishu, the capital, and attempt to separate warring Somali clans.

Kenya, Ethiopia and Djibouti have immediate security interests in Somalia. Al Shabaab has struck Uganda with several terrible terror attacks. It makes sense their troops serve with AMISOM.

American special operations forces also conduct raids, drone attacks and surveillance missions against Al Shabaab.

Why are Americans involved? Al Shabaab has ties to al-Qaida and the Islamic State. In 2006, the group managed to seize Mogadishu. 2006 pre-dates the Islamic State but Al Shabaab envisioned establishing a militant terrorist state. To be succinct, Somalia in 2006, like Afghanistan in 2001, was an anarchic nowhere apocalyptic terrorists could use to launch global attacks.

So create a highly radioactive glass-lined crater where Somalia used to be and call the job done, then. Lather, rinse, repeat with Afghanistan and any other Muslim shithole that even looks like attacking us, until the mere thought of doing such makes them involuntarily wet themselves in terror.

Yeah, I know, ain’t gonna happen. But a fella can dream, can’t he? The truth is, Somalia ain’t worth the cost of a single Blackhawk helicopter, much less the lives of those American soldiers who died in Bill Fucking Clinton’s ill-advised, bumbling, pointless, and costly UN-mandated clusterfuck there. The idea of involving ourselves there again to any more complicated or risky degree than simply nuking the site from orbit makes me very nearly ill with disgust. Somalia is their shithole; they made it what it is. So let them fix it, then…or not, as they may prefer. Whatever.

Share

THAT’S how you do it

Fixing the unfixable.

On July 1, the New York Times ran a long article by Ellen Barry and Martin Selsoe Sorensen headlined “In Denmark, Harsh New Laws for Immigrant ‘Ghettos.’” How harsh? Henceforth, starting at the age of one, children living in designated “ghettos” – in other words, “low-income and heavily Muslim enclaves” – have to spend at least 25 hours a week receiving instruction in Danish values, “including the traditions of Christmas and Easter, and Danish language.” Parents who refuse to obey may lose their welfare payments.

Given the proven failure (over decades) of innumerable Muslim immigrants in Denmark to learn Danish, find jobs, and otherwise integrate into Danish society – not to mention the tendency of young people who’ve grown up in those “enclaves” to join gangs, commit violence, and express open hostility to native Danes and their culture – these laws sound eminently reasonable. In fact, anyone aware of the scale of the problem might well pronounce them tame and insufficient. But not the Times. Barry and Sorensen describe the new laws not as a responsible attempt to prevent the kind of social and economic collapse looming in next-door Sweden, and to preserve a free, safe, and solvent Denmark for future generations of ethnic Danes and the descendants of immigrants, but rather as a “tough” and “sinister” expression of the Danish government’s “ire.”

One law that the Times writers single out for disdain “would impose a four-year prison sentence on immigrant parents who force their children to make extended visits to their country of origin…in that way damaging their ‘schooling, language and well-being.’” Barry and Sorensen plainly find this law unspeakably severe. One wonders if they know what they’re talking about. The fact is that countless Muslim parents in Europe send their kids “back home” for years at a time – it’s called “dumping” – so that they can attend Koran schools, soak up Islamic codes of conduct, and (most important) be shielded from such abhorrent Western phenomena as individual liberty and sexual equality.

As it happens, this practice has been studied extensively. It represents a profound danger to the children involved – girls especially – as well as to the Western countries to which they eventually return. In her 2001 book But the Greatest of These Is Freedom: The Consequences of Immigration in Europe (2011), Hege Storhaug of Norway’s Human Rights Service explained that “girls are sent abroad so that they won’t be able to live on equal terms with males and enjoy the right to choose their own spouses”; some of them, moreover, “are sent abroad at puberty to be prepared for marriage – to be prepared, that is, to be good wives who live up to the demands and standards set by men in their families’ homeland.” Is a four-year prison sentence too tough a penalty for parents who do such things to their children? No, especially when you consider that Danish prisons could be mistaken for luxury hotels while the madrassas in which these people enroll their kids look like, well, prisons – and the marriages (usually cousin marriages) into which those girls end up being forced are, in all but name, prison sentences.

Barry and Sorensen interviewed two critics of the new laws – a pair of Muslim sisters whom they depict as model citizens and describe as being fluent in Danish (but who are also, bemusingly, on welfare). “Danish politics is just about Muslims now,” one of the sisters complained. “I don’t know when they will be satisfied with us.” Gee, maybe when you stop bleeding the Danish treasury dry? Maybe when the 30,000 or so members of your “community” across Europe who belong to Islamic terrorist cells stop plotting murderous mayhem? Sister #2 griped that “her daughter was being taught so much about Christmas in kindergarten that she came home begging for presents from Santa Claus.” Sounds like a salutary change from what’s happening elsewhere in Western Europe, where, as part of nefarious propaganda campaigns, non-Muslim kids are routinely taken on school trips to mosques, shown how to put on a hijab, and taught to recite the shahada – all of which the Times and newspapers like it routinely celebrate. “Nobody should tell me,” Sister #2 added, “whether or how my daughter should go to preschool….I’d rather lose my benefits than submit to force.” Fine. Get a job.

Heh. Tell ’em, Daniel.

It’s a sad, telling indicator of how far into supine, cringing defenselessness multi-culti “liberalism” has dragged the West that anybody would regard this move as anything but a perfectly reasonable attempt at preserving their own country and culture from those actively trying to destroy it. We, and the Danes, can only hope it isn’t already too late. Greenfield has plenty more, of which you’ll want to read the all.

Share

Creative destruction

I started calling him Trump the Disrupter way back when for a reason, you know.

In Chinese eyes, Mr Trump’s response is a form of “creative destruction”. He is systematically destroying the existing institutions — from the World Trade Organization and the North American Free Trade Agreement to Nato and the Iran nuclear deal — as a first step towards renegotiating the world order on terms more favourable to Washington.

My interlocutors say that Mr Trump is the US first president for more than 40 years to bash China on three fronts simultaneously: trade, military and ideology. They describe him as a master tactician, focusing on one issue at a time, and extracting as many concessions as he can. They speak of the skilful way Mr Trump has treated President Xi Jinping. “Look at how he handled North Korea,” one says. “He got Xi Jinping to agree to UN sanctions [half a dozen] times, creating an economic stranglehold on the country. China almost turned North Korea into a sworn enemy of the country.” But they also see him as a strategist, willing to declare a truce in each area when there are no more concessions to be had, and then start again with a new front.

For the Chinese, even Mr Trump’s sycophantic press conference with Vladimir Putin, the Russian president, in Helsinki had a strategic purpose. They see it as Henry Kissinger in reverse. In 1972, the US nudged China off the Soviet axis in order to put pressure on its real rival, the Soviet Union. Today Mr Trump is reaching out to Russia in order to isolate China.

In the short term, China is talking tough in response to Mr Trump’s trade assault. At the same time they are trying to develop a multiplayer front against him by reaching out to the EU, Japan and South Korea. But many Chinese experts are quietly calling for a rethink of the longer-term strategy. They want to prepare the ground for a new grand bargain with the US based on Chinese retrenchment. Many feel that Mr Xi has over-reached and worry that it was a mistake simultaneously to antagonise the US economically and militarily in the South China Sea.

That’s from a Financial Times article which, unfortunately, is securely locked up behind a paywall; I saw it mentioned elsewhere several days ago and tried to find a way around to no avail. But Matt Vespa found a way to excerpt it somehow, appending some commentary of his own:

China is one of our biggest geopolitical rivals. Is this a bad course of action? No, but Trump will never be given the credit. Instead, we’ll focus on how he hurt some European leader’s feelings and go into hysterics over that, among 10,000 other tiny, irrelevant things he does because that’s how our anti-Trump news media is as of late. But across the vast gulf of the Pacific, our enemies, rivals, competitors, or whatever you want to call them, have a much higher opinion of Trump’s intelligence and capability as a leader. They view him as an effective tactician. They view him as a threat, not based on his tweets, but in what he’s reportedly trying to do. How Trump can accomplish this long-term goal would require swamp draining for sure, but it also shows that Democrats, so blinded by hate, are missing one helluva show that could be in production in East Asia.

It’s clear by now that what Trump intends is a reworking of the post-WW2 world order, which is long outdated and badly in need of modification with American interests in mind. He’s bypassed the shriekers entirely; while they’re all busy accusing him of being a stupid, incompetent fool, he’s running rings around their dumb asses to enjoy success after success. It is indeed a hell of a show, to say the very least.

Share

The radical Muslim wants to chop your head off; the “moderate” Muslim wants the radical Muslim to chop your head off

No taming ’em.

More than 95 per cent of deradicalisation programmes are ineffective, according to a study commissioned by the Home Office that raises questions about the government’s Prevent programme. The study revealed failures in the approach to deradicalisation in schools, youth centres, sports clubs and English-language classes.

The Behavioural Insights Team (BIT), the so-called nudge unit formerly part of the Cabinet Office, examined 33 deradicalisation programmes across the country designed to safeguard vulnerable people from far-right and religious extremist threats. The Times understands that most were funded by or fell under the label of Prevent.

The study found that only two programmes were effective and that some projects were counterproductive. Some participants said that they restricted their freedom of speech. Until the BIT study, the 33 projects claimed a success rate of more than 90 per cent because they evaluated themselves.

On Monday Sajid Javid, the home secretary, reaffirmed his support for Prevent. He said that he recognised criticism of the programme but added that “misapprehensions around Prevent are often based on distortions” and “I absolutely support it”.

By an odd coinkydink, this is another behind-the-paywall article linked by Walsh, commented on thusly:

One of the great fallacies of Western Europe’s multicultural fantasy is that the children of imported Musselmen will become less Muslim and that, eventually, their offspring will become more like their nominally Christian but in fact entirely secular hosts. Accordingly, the British and others now dealing with the consequences of their willfully ahistorical blindness regarding the true nature of Islam, have assumed that “radical” Muslims are the exception rather than the rule, and so have treated them as aberrational.

This, however, flies in the face of no less an expert on Islam than Turkey’s would-be caliph, Recep Erdogan, who famously denied that any such thing as “radical” Islam exists — because, to be a Believer, is to believe in the faith in its entirety. The idea of “cafeteria” Muslims, he has said, is totally wrong…

What no one is facing up to is one simple fact: that without a large Muslim population in the UK, none of these extraordinary efforts would be necessary, and the enormous sums of money expended on surveilling and reprogramming Muslims could well have been spent on something that would have benefitted the real British people. But such is the potency of the “diversity” delusion, which shows no signs of diminishing in the soon-to-be-late country of Merry Olde England.

As I’ve said many times, it’s too late for them. The Muslim-invader virus is too deeply embedded in the soil of Old Blighty to ever be uprooted; as with the rest of Europe, what they never managed to take with a millenium’s worth of attempts at conquest they’ve now achieved via infiltration. We can only hope it isn’t too late for America as well.

Share

Brechtian nightmare

Dissolving the people, and electing another.

These stories are the more obvious signs of the dissolution of the people: One of the livelier members of the new people is affronted by an obvious provocation – a satirical magazine, a Jewish school, a pop concert, a swingers’ club; it’s an ever longer list… But we think we know how to handle that: increase the budget of the security services, more surveillance, more databases, more manpower swooping down in the nick of time…

But, in between such stories, the softer, slyer, suppler dissolution continues unseen and largely unreported. My sometime editor Mary Wakefield has an interesting if rather agonized column about how the dwindling numbers of non-Muslim pupils in certain English schools can’t seem to make any Muslim friends:

Quite by coincidence and on separate occasions, in the past month I’ve met two (non-Muslim) women whose children have had trouble at Muslim-dominated state schools. The kids made friends easily in their first term, said the mothers, but as the months went by it became harder to stay pals. Their schoolmates never invited them home, nor would they come round for playdates or parties. The friendships faded away and the kids were left confused. One of the two mothers I met had decided to move house: new catchment area, new start. She felt guilty, she told me, because she’d been keen her son have friends of all faiths. But he was one of only two non-Muslim boys in his class, and he was lonely.

So there’s now only one non-Muslim boy, who presumably feels even lonelier. Although I’d wager he’ll go too – and, to invert Rupert Brooke, there’s yet another corner of an English field that is forever foreign.

What remains now of “Christian civilization” in England? Or of “our own British life, and the long continuity of our institutions” – such as, say, Church of England primary schools in which all but two boys are Muslim. There are many communities “far beyond the oceans…built up on our laws and on our civilization”, but in the ancient Motherland Bertolt Brecht’s words seem more pertinent than Churchill’s.

And which men in a new Britain will still say “This was their finest hour”?

As Brecht so stingingly quipped of the East Germans, British subjects have forfeited the confidence of the government. Now they’ve indeed been replaced, turning Churchill’s wistful speculation on the Empire and the Commonwealth lasting “a thousand years” into a sad joke. Winston was right, though: it WAS Britain’s finest hour— one they’ll never again come anywhere near equalling.

Share

Desaparicido

Hey, remember when this sort of thing happened mainly in Third World commie dictatorships? Oh wait

The arrest of British free speech activist Tommy Robinson has sent shockwaves across the Anglosphere. The United Kingdom, once dedicated to the values of freedom, has taken a path toward authoritarian government and away from freedom. The once great nation, which created the Magna Carta and once commanded an empire, is now the land of tyranny. Unless the British people love their freedom enough and fight this injustice in fierce fashion, it will remain a land silenced by intimidation and fear.

Robinson, a former member of the English Defense League whose real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, is being unfairly persecuted by the U.K. government.  Robinson’s “crime” was that he yelled questions outside Leeds Crown Court and named the alleged defendants, like any other reporter. So what? The state broadcaster, the BBC, and the mainstream media had already named them. Why was he arrested, and why were they not arrested?

If gangs of white men had spent decades torturing and raping little Muslim girls and a justly outraged Muslim reporter were covering the case, in a similar manner as Robinson, would he be arrested?

We all know that the answer is “no,” and we know why. The U.K. is so invested in its politically correct multiculturalism diversity project that it has applied a different treatment of Muslims under the law, which accepts the diversity of legal systems and places the country on a path toward ruin.

Americans should be highly concerned over this case, because the same type of “hate speech laws” used against British citizens are currently being advocated in the U.S. Senate, by Marco Rubio (R), Kamala Harris (D), Susan Collins (R), and Dianne Feinstein (D) and a long list of others. Hillary Clinton pushed the same laws in 2012 and 2015 and 2017. Three similar unconstitutional laws aimed at our First Amendment rights were advanced in our Congress, after being drafted by Emgage USA and the Muslim Public Affairs Council, two Islamic organizations and defenders of designated terrorist organizations and their supporters, according to the Investigative Project on Terrorism. The passage of any such anti-freedom of speech bill would place our country on Britain’s same ruinous path.

I only wish I could say I find any of that surprising. With just this one grotesque crime against liberty and decency, the Brits have moved themselves from “pitiable” right into the “despicable” column. There could not be a more revolting statement than the one the British government has just made with this outrage: that they much prefer tolerating and protecting Muslim child-rape gangs to safeguarding freedom of speech. But I can’t say I’m much surprised by that either; as noted, we have no shortage of Moonbat Lefties (and gutless RINO sellouts, sadly enough) right here in the States who feel the same way about it.

The very idea of “hate speech” laws is an abomination which of right ought to be intolerable in even a half-free country. Once-Great Britain is well and truly finished; it will soon begin to live up to its “Old Blighty” nickname in ways its benighted subjects never imagined. I don’t pity them; they deserve their ignoble fate, having earned it many times over. But there’s a small, guttering spark yet flickering in some of them:

In a land that once could proudly state, “The sun never sets on the British Empire,” the torch of freedom has been extinguished. It’s a land divided by diversity that has now descended into the darkness of tyranny.

If the globalists in both American parties and the U.S. State Department have their way, America will be next.

Tommy Robinson represents a large segment of Britain’s people, with over 500,000 signatures on a petition already to “Free Tommy.” The people sent a clear message on Saturday, May 26, 2018, that they have had enough, as thousands of British people stopped traffic, chanted, and pressed the gates of 10 Downing Street and threw bottles at machine gun-toting policemen. Their anger hung thick in the air, because they want Robinson, at the very least, to be released from prison and allowed to get back to his life and enjoy the same protection and human rights and dignity as Anjem Choudary, the terrorist-supporter, was afforded by the authorities. Short of this, the summer in Britain will turn out to be a season of riots and civil strife, awaiting the spark that moves the good and decent Brits – of a long ancestry dating to 1066 and William the Conqueror – to fight furiously to make their land free once more.

Well, possibly, I guess, and I wish those folks well. But I have little expectation of any such thing, and none at all that it might be successful. They can anticipate neither succor nor sympathy from these shores; we face a grim enough struggle ourselves, with victory by no means assured.

Share

Also incompatible

Speaking of which, and at the risk once more of sounding like a broken record.

Sharia law and the caliphate are institutions that most Muslims feel an obligation to accept as expressions of Allah’s will. The global imposition of sharia law and the caliphate are not distortions of true Islam; they are mainstream ideals that the religion expects all believers to pursue. Many Muslims secretly admire the jihadists whose personal commitment to establishing sharia under a caliph is glorified by Islam.

The problem for the West is that Muslims view sharia law as the word of Allah, an absolute and uncompromising truth that can never be modified. What makes the problem intractable is that Muslims accept the superiority of sharia law based on its foundation in faith rather than reason. Not only do Muslims believe that law must come from Allah, but they reject out of hand the possibility that the existing laws of sharia can evolve as societal conditions change or that any new legal principle can be entertained if it relies on mere reason.

Compounding the problem for the West is the fact that Muslims believe in the caliphate, an absolutist form of governance in which a single individual exercises authority in the name of Allah – comparable to, but even more absolutist than, the old idea of “divine right of kings.” The caliphate is even more absolutist because Muslims know that there can be only one caliph.

There is, in short, an unbridgeable gulf between Islam and the West, a difference founded in principles and therefore a difference that brooks no compromise. Islam and the West are irreconcilable.   

Now, it is NOT true that no Moslem can live peaceably among us in Western Civ; there are many who do, actually. It’s just that they have to reject certain core Islamic beliefs specifically spelled out in the Koran. They therefore, pretty much by definition, must become what true-believing Moslems would label apostates, the penalty for which is death.

If you’re a Moslem, you can’t be a moderate; if you’re a moderate, you aren’t really a Moslem. The truly tragic thing is that, contrary to the calls from ill- or mis-informed Western pundits for a Moslem “reformation,” they already had it. Its primary mover and shaker was the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, and…well, we all already know how it went.

Share

The hits just keep on coming

Another stunning win for President Trump.

Surreal scenes capped off the historic meeting between Kim Jong-un and Moon Jae-in today as they held hands and listened to Korean pop music during a lavish farewell ceremony.

Kim became the first North Korean leader to step into the South for 65 years as he and President Moon vowed ‘there will be no more war’ and agreed to ‘complete denuclearisation’.

The two sworn enemies exchanged a warm greeting at the 38th parallel in the truce village of Panmunjom before the pair held talks and planted a commemorative tree together. The dramatic meeting has been seen as a precursor to  planned talks between Kim and US President Donald Trump next month.

Yes, yes, I know: it could be some kind of ruse or trick, Kim is not to be trusted, this sort of thing has happened before only to come to nothing in the end, and etc.

Except: no, this has NOT happened before. Not like this, with the NK dictator actually stepping foot on SK soil, treating with SK’s president in an amicable and respectful manner, pledging to end the war, and agreeing explicitly to “complete denuclearization.”

Wherever it all goes from here, there can be no doubt whatever that it was Trump’s “maximum pressure” strategy that made it happen. Whodathunkit: a hardnosed approach to dealing with bellicose, aggressive adversaries actually yields better results than rolling over, showing your flabby yellow belly, and trying to bribe them into the light of reason.

Gee, wonder how all the hysterical surrender-monkeys—so recently weeping over how Trump’s “dangerous, provocative rhetoric” and “threats” against Little Rocket Man were sure to drive him to unleash nuclear hell on Hawaii or LA in response—are going to cope with this most welcome development? I don’t wonder IF they’re going to find a way to complain about and/or belittle Trump’s achievement; that, after all, is a given. I just wonder HOW they might try to go about it, without making themselves look once more like the pusillanimous, ass-backwards clowns they are.

Pelosi for one is probably speechless with worry and rage right about now, if she isn’t crouched in a corner gibbering to herself like Renfield in the rubber room—skull swiveling to and fro on its giblet neck, mad eyes darting wildly, swatting at imaginary insects with those skeletal claws of hers. One can only imagine the rending of garments and gnashing of teeth in Libmedia lairs everywhere once the news broke. Scads of State Department hacks were probably contemplating lying down in the tub and opening a vein.

This is another addition to a lengthening list of serious reversals for the Left and the Democrat Socialists, highlighting one of my cardinal rules: anything that damages them bodes quite well indeed for the American people and the world. And it’s all down to Trump: his willingness to buck conventional wisdom and established procedure, his insouciant refusal to humbly tug the forelock in deference to the supposed wisdom and experience of “experts” who somehow never accomplish a damned thing. His real genius is his reliance on simple, timeless common sense, one of whose dictums is that it is infinitely preferable to deal from a position of strength, with confidence and resolve. Vox gets right down to it:

This is a staggering development of the sort we have not seen since 1989. I expect the Nobel committee will give the award to Kim and Moon, of course, but the world knows who really deserves it. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: Donald Trump is already one of the greatest presidents in the history of the United States of America.

Pretty much, yeah. Just like I said he could very well end up being right from the start, as yu may recall. For a clueless moron whose administration flounders about in perpetual chaos—a reckless, unqualified, and actually dangerous amateur wholly unfit to be President—Trump sure seems to be getting a lot of worthwhile things done.

Update! From Diplomad, decidedly NOT one of those State Department hacks I derided above:

President Trump played Kim like Perlman plays a violin. Trump quickly got the measure of the dictator and checked him at every move, despite the pearl-clutching and couch-fainting in the West. Kim launched rockets; Trump labelled him “Rocket man” and ridiculed his pretensions. Kim bragged about his nuclear button, Trump fired back that his was much bigger and, unlike Kim’s, it was guaranteed to work. SecDef Mattis, in his low-key USMC way, reminded the world that, if need be, we have a military solution to the Korean problem. The US Navy closed in on the peninsula and the USAF deployed bombers. US-ROK military exercises went ahead. Trump went to the Chinese and drove home their responsibility for keeping Kim under control and, not so subtly, asked the Chinese whether their relations with the US were less important than their relations with Kim. Kim got the message; met with the CIA Director; has agreed to a one-on-one with Trump. We have now the first real opportunity since 1953 to turn the page on the Korean War. Things can, of course, go wrong, but they seem to be going quite right.

Trump gets the credit.

As the old TV ad said, he got it the old-fashioned way: he EARNED it.

Share

Culture war

It’s ON in Bavaria.

Bavaria has ordered Christian crosses to be hung at the entrance of all of its regional government buildings, it has emerged.

The German state’s government said the crosses should not be seen as religious symbols, but are meant to reflect the southern state’s ‘cultural identity and Christian-western influence’.

But the move has already drawn a furious reaction from opposition politicians and one prominent cleric accused the regional government of hypocrisy ahead of an election. 

The south-eastern state was on the frontline of 2015’s migrant crisis, when over a million people fleeing war and poverty in the Middle East, Africa and Central Asia arrived in Germany, fueling support for the AfD.

Even clerics were critical of the plan. ‘Many see as a provocation and a hypocrisy the way you speak about Christianity,’ wrote Burkhard Hose, a priest who ministers to the students of Wuerzburg University, in an open letter to Soeder.

‘Stop this misuse of Christianity and its symbols as a supposed bulwark against Islam,’ he added.  

Oh yeah? Got any better ideas for bulwarks against Islam, then? Or are you good with just rolling over and letting them get on with the conquest and sack?

And to think, some people wonder why Christianity is dying in the West. With weak-kneed, namby-pamby clerics like this to defend, uphold, and preserve the faith, it’s something of a miracle it didn’t fade away altogether years ago. The AfD, referred to as you’d expect in the article as a “far right” party, has a more legitimate gripe about the symbolic move:

But the AfD, which campaigns against Muslim immigration, dismissed the cross proposal as ‘the usual gesture politics’.

‘The Christian Cross is being turned into an election accessory, while the conservatives refuse to protect our basic values with real actions,’ the AfD’s co-leader Alice Weidel said in a statement on Wednesday.

Well, I dunno. “Real actions” are called for sure enough, and long past due. But in Europe as in America, you’ll have to be content with baby steps at first, guys…and just pray it isn’t already too late. PRO TIP: it is.

Via DuToit, who also presents this very-much-related item:

A Swedish woman in her 40s was brutally raped by an Afghan teenager while another migrant man molested her, a court has heard.

Anwar Hassani and Fardi Hesari, both 18, met the victim outside a hotel bar in Ljungby, southern Sweden, in the early hours of Boxing Day last year.

The victim later told police she took an interest in the teenagers, having been told they were migrants from Afganistan.

She explained that she had been a member of a Facebook group which campaigns against the deportation of migrants from Sweden.

Fucking moron. As Kim says: you’d have to have a heart of stone not to laugh hysterically at this story.

Share

Categories

Archives

"America is at that awkward stage. It's too late to work within the system, but too early to shoot the bastards." – Claire Wolfe, 101 Things to Do 'Til the Revolution

"To put it simply, the Left is the stupid and the insane, led by the evil. You can’t persuade the stupid or the insane and you had damn well better fight the evil." - Skeptic

Subscribe to CF!
Support options

SHAMELESS BEGGING

If you enjoy the site, please consider donating:



Click HERE for great deals on ammo! Using this link helps support CF by getting me credits for ammo too.

Image swiped from The Last Refuge

2016 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

RSS FEED

RSS - entries - Entries
RSS - entries - Comments

E-MAIL


mike at this URL dot com

All e-mails assumed to be legitimate fodder for publication, scorn, ridicule, or other public mockery unless otherwise specified

Boycott the New York Times -- Read the Real News at Larwyn's Linx

All original content © Mike Hendrix