Anne Marie Waters of Sharia Watch has a message for what the Germans call Die Lügenpresse: “The Lying Press”.
She and her colleagues at PEGIDA UK have been branded as “far right” in all major media outlets. In the following video she points out the absurdity of that designation — a major FAIL in every category.
Why is resistance against Islamization considered “far right”?
Don’t liberals stand in passionate opposition to everything that illiberal Islam advocates?
Anne Marie Waters is the founder of Sharia Watch UK and a former UKIP candidate for Parliament.
Previous posts by or about Anne Marie Waters:
Poor audio on this one… I had to put the ear horn right on the speaker to hear it at all.
Great lady that Anne Marie.
God bless and keep her safe!
I couldn’t understand it at all. My old computer won’t amplify to much. Maybe the moderator could increase the volume?
I can’t do anything about the volume. The video file can be downloaded, the audio enhanced, and then uploaded to a different URL. Vlad can do that sort of thing, but I can’t.
Anne – Marie Waters is pro-equality, not to mention also a lesbian. Someone who would probably be more at home in the old Labour party than among the Tories. How anyone could accuse her of being “far right”, or a bigot, is beyond me…
The left does that because they must LIE like a dirty spotted dog on a rag rug.
They cannot fight fairly, they must cheat. It is the nature of that LEFTY beast-dog and he can no change his spots!
It’s a combination of lack of detailed thinking (I’d call that “stupidity” because it would seem like it in this case, but that isn’t always the case), cowardice, denial, lack of motivation… All of which lead to the ignorance of trying to treat Islam like a generic “race” that must be beyond all criticism.
Then there’s the self-interested moral corruption of not only antifa but their elite masters.
The Left is so stunningly hypocritical in *condemning* patriarchy: on one hand it skewers with a vengeance white, male so-called patriarchy and yet whispers nary a peep about the murderous mindset of Muslim males who crush not only the spirits of women but their very bodies — as routine practice and as codified in their precious little holy book.
HarrietHT said: “…their precious little holy book.”
Harriet, I am puzzled. That book on a roll is precious – ask anybody…[redacted for incivility], those little white pages are most precious indeed.
But what on earth is holy about it? Obviously, an enigma.
And the funny thing is that “the patriarchy” is increasingly more feminized. That doesn’t seem to stop the complaints though.
I am calling these liar press traitors “Surrenderists” now.
They are Islam’s useful idiots.
They cloak themselves in moral superiority, while they preach tolerance toward the intolerant. They preach surrender to each incremental Islamic demand, until step by step, a free nation is turned into a Muslim slave state, where non-Muslims are dhimmis at best, and women are liable to be gang-raped at any time.
Maybe Islam would sound like what it is, if we all in the English speaking world called by its English name. Surender! What would that bring to mind every time the word was read or spoken.
Lissan al-Arab Dictionary:
ISLAM is derived from the root verb ‘Istlama’. ‘Submit’, ‘give in’, ‘surrender’. But it can also yeald the word ‘peace’.
So this is ambiveilent as to what is more important and if it only means oneself. And under what circumstances.
“Don’t liberals stand in passionate opposition to everything that illiberal Islam advocates?”
Yes, I am. My friends are worried about sharia type islam too, but have no idea what to do about it and still sometimes come up with the usual nonsense about ‘all religions’, ‘crusades’ and ‘nice muslims’.
This is why the Alison Bevege victory was so great. Her words are essential to liberals:
[People] ‘”just were afraid it would be somehow racist to attack gender segregation since the intolerance was coming from Islamists. This idea needs to be dropped immediately – you only empower theocratic fascists when you pander to their intolerance and crush out the voices of the secular and progressive Muslims who would challenge them. ”
From her words in the comments section here:
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/rendezview/i-took-on-hizb-uttahrir-and-i-won/news-story/27b60e0ee608579ecb08a66c1561b9e6
Ah, the big no-racism-here myth. Everyone is racist. Fear of “Other” is hard-wired into the primate brain. Clue: we’re primates.
As for “crush[ing] out the voices of secular and progressive Muslims who would challenge them: dream on. If a person born into Islamic culture is now “secular” he or she doesn’t give a fig for challenging the zealots. Why would they take on that kind of risk? What would it profit them to do so?
These cut-up and canned “talking points” are not anything a secular Muslim is interested in, not unless there is a profit to be made. Americans learned that as far back as the first run-in with the Barbary Pirates, the one where England and France were more than willing to pay the pirate “tax” and leave their own people captive and in slavery.
Those years at the turn of the 19th century showed a clear demarcation between the Europeans and the Americans. The former had,over the centuries, bled dry and bred out the best of their men through ceaseless warfare. The latter had been toughened and improved by generations of pioneer living.
Plus ça change…the World Wars cleared out the remaining crop of best male genes in Europe. What is left in charge sells its people.
Try not to kill me because this is a bit of a semantic nitpick, but racism isn’t entirely the right word for fear of anyone unlike oneself. I guess it depends on how it’s defined but it usually is defined as prejudice based on a sense of superiority.
The fear can also be that the other is superior rather than the in group being superior.
There’s certainly a natural fear of the racial other that generates prejudice, but the superiority aspect seems a bit more complicated.
Then there’s the fact that everyone is prejudiced against various sorts of people because it would be nearly impossible to function otherwise. There’d be no way to communicate with anyone if everyone had to treat everyone else as a unique individual with nothing in common with anyone else previously encountered.
That’s a better distinction than the one I made. More accurate, too.
“My friends are worried……..have no idea what to do about it.” Ever heard of “protest” or put your politicians feet to the fire?
Relates to: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance
Which people seem to be having trouble resolving due to ignorance, fuzzy thinking, and zero-sum class warfare philosophy (conflict theory).