You’re Nothing But a Pack of Cards!

Off with her head!’ the Queen shouted at the top of her voice. Nobody moved.

‘Who cares for you?’ said Alice, (she had grown to her full size by this time.) ‘You’re nothing but a pack of cards!’

— Lewis Carroll, from Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland

In case you’ve been traversing the Antarctic, and have been without an Internet connection for the last few days, Donald Trump has caused a new uproar in the media and among the chatterati. His latest offense was to tell the “Squad” (four communist congressbabes: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib and Ayanna Pressley) that if they hate America so much, they should just get on back to where they came from.

Progressive apoplexy ensued. Even though it was obvious that Mr. Trump had directed his remarks specifically towards the non-native Ilhan Omar, the media went into high dudgeon on behalf of all four “women of color” — as if Occasional Cortex were any more colored than I am.

Further details would be tedious and are not worth listing here. If you’re interested, and can stomach these Progressive outlets, here’s the media’s take on Donald Trump’s latest demonstration of “racism”:

Among the non-Woke, opinion is divided on the effectiveness of the president’s latest sally against the socialist Multicults.

In favor of Mr. Trump: He is forcing Nancy Pelosi to give full support to the four congressgendernonbinaries she had just tried to distance herself from. Last week they were anathema to the Speaker of the House; this week they are victims of racist abuse. The president has driven Ms. Pelosi into a corner where she has no choice but to embrace the four people she knows are destroying the Democrats’ chances of holding onto the House next year.

Against Mr. Trump: The president has played into the hands of those who label him a “racist”. He will alienate those undecided voters who might otherwise be leaning towards the Republicans.

Regardless of whether he is pursuing a winning or losing strategy — only time will tell — Mr. Trump is obviously following my advice and refusing to play the game. The huge furor over his first tweets about the Squad did not deter him in the slightest — the day after his initial tweets he doubled down on his theme, elaborating on the Squad’s hatred of America. He’s not at all concerned about being called a “racist”.

In other words, he declined to play the game — the currently accepted, universal Progressive game of forcing non-Progressives to backpedal and try to prove to the world that they do not deserve to be called “racists”.

Continue reading

“If We Don’t Speak Now”

“If we don’t speak now”

by Tabitha Korol

“Speak now or forever hold your peace” is based upon the marriage liturgy of the Christians’ Book of Common Prayer. Today it may refer to our self-monitoring for the irrational fear of not being politically correct.

After reading my essay, “An Assumption of Dignity” on the Internet, a reader commented, “I circulated it to our editorial board who found it very moving. However, based entirely on the reality of it not being ‘politically correct,’ I am recommending that it will not be posted on our educational site. That said, given its compelling nature, I will circulate it privately and selectively.”

This poignant communication appears to be from an academic, in a corporate or military milieu, who wants to share it but is constrained by a fear of being classified “intolerant”. In years past, he’d have thought nothing about forwarding and posting the article with his observations on said educational site. Today, in this post-Obama era, he is threatened by the vitriol that would explode were he to dispatch ideas antithetical to those of people who set the political agenda, intimidated by the possibilities that harm would come to his family, and concerned that he could be summarily dismissed from his position if the first two and harassed if the third.

Although our First Amendment remains unchanged, with its protections extended to all individuals in the United States, the writer nevertheless reasoned that sharing information contradictory to the views of the ruling class could offend and must be done surreptitiously and with extreme caution. He is judicious and self-monitoring, but feeling defenseless in his isolated position; he is slowly conforming to “the plan.” Guarded, he is gradually growing fearful of and more submissive to those in power.

The purveyors of hate-speech accusations work to divide us into groups based on their immutable features — race, religion, ethnicity, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, family breakdown, and views on innumerable subjects. They have always existed in history but are far more forcefully promoted by those who now hold sway over our schools, government, and the workplace. When these were still insufficient to more completely affect our massive population, the ruling class devised issues for additional divisiveness — climate, abortion and post-partum infanticide, American monuments and symbols, slavery and LGBTQ reparations, a unique foreign invasion, and so many more. And when our young adults leave the schools to join the mainstream of American life, they will take with them not only their learned prejudices, but also their ways of stifling the free speech of others who would dare to disagree.

The left has worked doggedly to insert their values into our lives, and because they use compassion as their tactic, traditional Americans failed to see that the compassion was highly selective. Compassion for the mother is denied the unborn child; compassion for the gender-confused is denied the healthy heterosexual; compassion for the Muslim newcomer is denied the indigenous Christian and Jew. We have even witnessed the compassion shown more for the criminal than for his victim in a court of law.

This selective compassion is denied our President, a man who serves his country selflessly, even donating his paychecks to worthy causes. Why does the Left rant about President Trump, insult his every sentence, mannerism, activity? For one thing, it serves to comfort the Left, to keep them engaged with trivia to dodge the discomfort of acknowledging his triumphs. For another, and perhaps the crux of the issue, is that when they cannot suppress his speech, they can still suppress what they hear. They impose their will on others by censoring what’s available to the public, such as on Google, Facebook and Twitter, and discredit the rest. The Shangri La for the left is when society is so controlled that it becomes self-censoring. We are almost there.

Continue reading

What is Citizenship?

The following essay by JLH was occasioned by his translation of the previous post.

What is Citizenship?

by JLH

According to the Federal Statistical Office a person has immigration background if that person or at least one parent was not born a German citizen. The definition comprises the following individuals: 1) foreigners, whether immigrants or not; 2) naturalized citizens, whether immigrants or not; 3) (recent) ethnic re-settlers; and 4) progeny of the first three groups born with German citizenship.

I have been reading the phrase “German with immigration background” defined above, and not really understanding it. It is a way of looking at your citizens that is — pun intended — quite foreign to me. I did realize that “pure French” or “pure German” etc. meant something different to the citizens of an ethnically homogeneous country. But I did not understand how closely it was possible to examine that ethnicity. Some thoughtful Germans have been advocating a revision of the categories described above.

Germans have for some time been reacting to Muslim and other immigrants to their country, who have coined phrases for the resident population such “Scheissdeutsche” (S*** Germans). Unlike the French, Dutch, Swedes, et alii, they are also asked by their neighbors and their own self-appointed consciences to remember that they deserve this, because of what their parents and grandparents did or did not do.

I do not and never have denied the Holocaust. How could I? I was one of the children who got money for a ticket to the Saturday morning cartoon show at the local theater. In those days, you never got to see anything — cartoons, feature film, etc., without first seeing the News of the Day. And the news never ran in those days without a new clip on the liberated death camps.

And since I first heard of it through things like Franz Werfel’s gripping novel The Forty Days of Musa Dagh, I have never doubted or denied the Armenian Genocide. There are many terrible massacres in history, but these two are alive for me, because I have had friends and acquaintances who are the children of those who survived.

Knowing these things does not oblige me to hate Germans or Turks. My Jewish friends have taught me that much. I also do not hate the English because of my wife’s Scots and Irish Gaelic ancestry. I do reserve the right to be indignant at and even contemptuous of the modern-day deniers of Ataturk’s reforms or Churchill’s egalitarianism.

Being an American “of a certain age,” I grew up with the conviction that the Founding Fathers were heroes, the Constitution was a new way to look at the rule of law, and our prosperity came largely from our desire to work — and think — for ourselves.

Those who truly despise freedom of thought and speech have been hard at work to undo those “illusions” of mine. And seeing the tortuous attempts of German statisticians to come to grips with what it means and implies to be “German,” I ask myself, What is it that makes an American? Ethnicity? Don’t make me laugh!

Continue reading

The Men Lost Reason And Faith

It’s Poetry Day, and today’s featured poem is “The Gods of the Copybook Headings” by Rudyard Kipling. I’ve posted this poem at least twice before, most recently just two years ago. However, it’s worth revisiting for two reasons: (1) This is its centennial — it was written in 1919 — and (2) the dénouement outlined in the final two stanzas is that much closer to becoming a grim reality.

It’s a remarkable work. It was written at the dawn of the Socialist Age, after the Bolshevik Revolution but before the height of the Red Terror. The welfare states of the West were in their earliest phase, as were the Culture Wars, as exemplified by the emancipation of women. The poet refers to the confluence of these trends as the “brave new world” — more than a decade before Aldous Huxley borrowed the phrase from Shakespeare (The Tempest, Act V, Scene 1) as the title of his novel.

As we look back on “The Gods of the Copybook Headings” a century later, Mr. Kipling seems to have had an uncanny sense of the shape of things to come (to borrow a title from H.G. Wells, one of the renowned Progressives of his time).

Normally I don’t explain poetry, but a hundred years have passed since it was written, so a little context is in order. The underlying social fabric is that of the Edwardian era, which still ruled the British zeitgeist immediately after the Great War, even though George V was by then on the throne. The great changes that lay ahead in the twenties had already been mapped out by the fashionable intellectual preoccupations of the early 20th century.

A “copybook heading” was an inspirational adage or quote from literature that was written at the top of the page of a schoolboy’s notebook. He would be required to copy it repeatedly in order to improve both his penmanship and his character.

The Gods of the Copybook Headings are here contrasted with the Gods of the Market-Place. Rather than the modern economic meaning of the latter term, think of the agora — the central public space in a city-state where commerce, culture, ideas, and personalities meet and mix. The Gods of the Market-Place were thus the gods of fashions and fads, as opposed to the timeless wisdom and common sense of the Gods of the Copybook Headings.

Three specific fashionable trends are laid out in successive stanzas in the middle of the poem. The first is the disarmament movement, which was just getting up a head of steam after the end of the war. Pacifism became a major political force later on in the twenties and thirties, so much so that it inhibited British rearmament, and thus allowed Adolf Hitler to act out his ambitions more forthrightly than he might otherwise have been able to do.

The second trend was “Free Love”, which was intertwined with the early feminist movement. Sexual freedom was considered a major factor in the liberation of women from the shackles of tradition. The Bloomsbury Group and the Fabians were rife with libertinism, H.G. Wells being a notable example. The fashionable sexual ideas that developed among intellectuals in the Edwardian period spread throughout the culture in the ensuing decades.

The third trend was redistributive socialist governance. Modern socialism was in its infancy in 1919, but the Fabians once again had mapped out the process in advance. As the Labour Party took form in the 1920s, the Fabians and other upper-middle-class socialists looked to the Soviet Union for inspiration.

All of this was just getting started when Mr. Kipling wove it into his poem in 1919. And everything has unfolded as he described in the hundred years since. The same foolishness that was fashionable in 1919 is still fashionable in 2019 — only in a much more deranged and nihilistic form. The burned fool’s bandaged finger just keeps wobbling back to that fire, over and over again.

Rudyard Kipling did not include in his poem what has become the major accelerant of the collapse of Western Civilization: mass immigration from the Third World. But it may be implicit the lines “when we disarmed They sold us / and delivered us bound to our foe”. In this post-modern world we live in a hundred years later, our foe is being delivered to us in our bound and helpless state.

And now for the poem:

Continue reading

“Muslims Are Preparing for Civil War in France”

The following video from Résistance Républicaine features remarks by a woman (reportedly a survivor of the Bataclan massacre) about Rachid Abu Aoudefa, a.k.a Rachid Eljay, who was shot and wounded a couple of weeks ago by a native European at the Sunna Mosque in the French city of Brest. One of the imam’s congregants was also wounded in the incident when he tried to protect the imam.

For details about the shooting of Imam Rachid, see this post at Vlad Tepes.

Many thanks to Ava Lon for the translation, and to Vlad Tepes for the subtitling:

Video transcript:

Continue reading

Reality is Showing Its Ugly Face

Our Dutch correspondent H. Numan sends this report on the latest cultural enrichment news from The Netherlands, especially as it concerns public swimming pools.

Reality is showing its ugly face

by H. Numan

Let’s start in the past. When I was a young man, the first cohort of young ‘Dutch’ muslims was growing up in The Netherlands. They were mainly Turkish boys, at that time much more of a problem than Moroccans. Public swimming pools were becoming unsafe for girls, because those muslim boys grabbed them where they shouldn’t. What was done? Why, nothing, of course! Pretty soon after that Moroccans proudly carried the banner of being the most unruly, violent community. Muslims started to realize they could gain political power — for themselves. Pim Fortuyn was murdered and Geert Wilders appeared on the scene.

We had a minister of justice, Piet Hein Donner. He said — or more accurately, lied: “If 75% of the Dutch population wants shariah law, then there is nothing to stop democracy from becoming a shariah society”. Let’s start here. The Dutch population has absolutely no say in it. It’s parliament (Second Kamer or congress and the First Kamer or senate) who decide that. Yes, I’ll grant him that this is next to impossible.

Legally, shariah must be presented as a law. Both houses have to vote on it, and pass it with a 75% majority. After that the government and both chambers resign and new elections are called. The next government will bring the law again in motion. Only if again 75% of both chambers vote ‘aye’ is shariah law valid in The Netherlands. Next to impossible, in other words. If you were do it the democratic way, that is.

Now, how democratic our bearded fiends are? Not at all. It’s a blasphemous concept to them. Erdogan himself said openly ‘democracy is the train we take towards shariah’. How difficult is it to put serious pressure on 150 members of parliament and 75 senators? Their family members? Friends and relatives? Or their party superiors? We as a nation simply haven’t got that many police available for their protection. That’s the first attempt. They won’t rest if the vote were to be ‘no’. That means another round of voting and violence. We have to protect the new MPs and senators and their families and their friends and their party officials as well.

May I remind you of 1572, the start of the Dutch revolt? It started with a bang, with the Beeldenstorm or Great Iconoclasm. Catholic churches were ransacked, and craven idols removed. At that time about 65% of the population was Roman Catholic. Of the remainder, the vast majority were Lutheran. Only 7% were Calvinists. Both Roman Catholic and Lutheran Dutch were open for negations with the king of Spain (Phillip II).

Now, the king was somewhat inflexible. For him, either you were catholic or you were barbecued. No other options. But compromises are usually possible, even with one party being inflexible. It was the 7% Calvinists who started the open revolt, and later gained control of the country. That was with 7% extremists in our population. Currently the inflexibles are at least 9%.

Calvinists aren’t exactly the first thing on your mind when thinking about extremely violent religious zealots. They have mellowed somewhat over the ages. The same goes for Christianity in general: even the Westboro Baptists are well behaved choirboys compared with the average muslim. In the 16th century, however, they were the Al Quackies of the age.

Which brings us to the news from today. The Dutch news is full with stories of young muslim boys raping girls in swimming pools, preferably the ‘tropical swimming resorts’. Not fondling. Not ogling, but raping. Young is relative here. We’re talking about gangs of boys of all ages, up to and including adults.

Continue reading

The New Czars of Europe

Paul Belien has published an essay today in The Telegraph about Charles Michel (the new President of the European Council) and Ursula von der Leyen (the new President of the European Commission). Below are some excerpts:

Meet Charles Michel, Belgium’s political scion hellbent on building an EU empire

by Paul Belien

The appointment of Ursula von der Leyen, the German Defence Minister, and Charles Michel, the Prime Minister of Belgium, at the helm in Brussels is good news for Brexiteers. Von der Leyen and Michel hate and despise Britain, with the same vigour as Ann Widdecombe and Nigel Farage fight the EU, and they have already indicated that they are eager to see the back of the UK as soon as possible.

Following the Brexit referendum, von der Leyen lambasted the Brits for having “paralysed” and “consistently blocked” the Eurocrats’ ambition to construct a “United States of Europe,” while Michel added that Brexit creates the opportunity for expanding the powers of the EU, “the most beautiful dream of the twenty-first century.”

Both Ursula von der Leyen and Charles Michel grew up in families of Eurocrats eager to create a European super-state. Both were born and raised in Belgium. 60-year old Ursula von der Leyen nee Albrecht is the daughter of Ernst Albrecht, a former Director-General of the European Commission in the 1950s and 60s and afterwards Prime Minister of the German state of Lower Saxony.

As Defence Minister, von der Leyen turned the Bundeswehr into a laughing stock. She had the German army squander money on several useless projects, including purchasing new assault rifles that cannot shoot straight in warm weather. The anecdote about the German soldier who, for lack of weapons during a NATO exercise, took a broomstick and painted it black is not a joke, but sad reality. She is also known for a Ph.D. thesis that contained several plagiarised paragraphs and for going against her own Christian Democratic Party by supporting adoption rights for same-sex couples.

Paradoxically, the appointment of LGBTQ+ activist von der Leyen was supported by conservative governments in Eastern Europe, such as Poland’s. This prompted German journalist Peter Grimm to suggest that “by rendering the German army largely incapable of fighting, she has somehow reassured countries that were once invaded by the Wehrmacht.”

Charles Michel is a product of blatant nepotism. He is the son of Louis Michel, who as former Belgian Minister of Foreign Affairs and former European Commissioner was an outspoken advocate of annexing the entire Mediterranean basin, including North Africa and the Middle East, to the EU.

Continue reading

Vladimir Putin: “The Liberal Idea Has Become Obsolete”

There are three topics guaranteed to cause enormous controversy at this site: Jews, abortion, and the Russians. Opinions on those subjects are so strongly and vehemently held that commenters often forget common civility when they hasten to express their two cents’ worth.

It is thus with great trepidation that I post the following interview with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Before you jump all over me about any lying, brutal, sneaky, conniving, and lethal behavior by Mr. Putin, pay attention to what he says. Read it carefully, and see where you agree or disagree.

All politicians that rise above the county board of supervisors level are dishonest and insincere to varying degrees. No one attains regional political prominence without compromising the truth and his own principles. It’s simply not possible, given the political realities. All major politicians lie and dissemble — some just a little, others a whole lot. There are no exceptions.

So the issue for me isn’t whether Vladimir Putin is sincere in these things he says — it really doesn’t matter. What matters is whether he acts in accordance with what he says. If he does, then the Russian people will be better off than they might be otherwise. I don’t know about the rest of the world — his job is to take care of his own people, so we in the West will just have to keep a close eye on him. Western political leaders need to be wise as serpents and innocent as doves when they deal with the Russians.

And if he doesn’t act in accordance with what he says, then he will be consigned to the ash heap of history, as so many leaders have been before him when they disregarded the needs and aspirations of their own people.

Many thanks to D@rLin|{ for verifying the translation, and to Vlad Tepes for the subtitling:

Video transcript:

Continue reading

This is Our Town! This is Our Pork!

The incident below reminds me of the issue of the Confederate flag here in the USA. People are offended by the Stars and Bars; there’s no doubt about it. Sometimes severely offended. But the police can’t come to your house and tell you to take your Confederate battle flag down. Maybe in San Francisco or Ann Arbor, but not here in Virginia. Not yet.

It’s my choice whether or not to celebrate my Confederate heritage by displaying the flag. As it happens, most of my neighbors are black. They would not view it the same way I do. Some of them would no doubt be offended, or hurt, or angry, or some combination thereof, by my flying the flag. Since I like my neighbors (most of them, anyway), I choose not to fly the Confederate flag, as a courtesy to them.

But it’s my choice. No political authority tells me not to do it.

Thank God for the First Amendment.

It’s not the same in the city of Chemnitz, in eastern Germany. There the police can tell you whether or not you can serve pork. The rule seems to be this: Pork is allowed to be cooked if no one can easily tell if what you are cooking is in fact pork. That means no head, tail, trotters, or clearly visible pig shape. And the police will come and check to make sure your pork barbecue abides by those rules.

It’s not clear whether the following video is from the same incident described in Jihad Watch last month, but it seems likely.

Many thanks to Ava Lon for the translation, and to Vlad Tepes for the subtitling:

Here’s the full story from Jihad Watch:

Sharia Germany: Police stop pork barbecue for fear of offending Muslims, Muslim migrants attack participants

by Robert Spencer
June 13, 2019

According to Searchlight Germany, “After the barbecue, which was organised as a protest against the ‘interreligious Eid festival’, participants were attacked by two Syrians and attacked with a knife.”

It’s clear who is in charge in Germany now. How long will it be before Merkel’s government, seeing consumption of pork as evidence of “right-wing extremism,” bans it altogether?

“Pig triggers police action at barbecue by right-wing extremists,” translated from “Schwein löst Polizeieinsatz bei Grillfest von Rechtsextremen aus,” Lepiziger Volkszeitung, June 10, 2019 (thanks to Searchlight Germany):

The far-right group Pro Chemnitz organized a barbecue in protest. It was directed against Muslims who were celebrating the end of their month of fasting Ramadan. In the end, the police intervened.

The extreme right-wing group Pro Chemnitz launched a police operation with a pig. As a protest against an event for the Muslim Sugar Festival at the end of the month of fasting Ramadan, Pro Chemnitz had invited people on Saturday to a barbecue, where a piglet landed on the grill.

Whole piglet was not allowed

However, the local authorities had not allowed them to grill a whole piglet, which is why officials intervened, as the Chemnitz police department announced. The suckling pig had to be disassembled.

Pro Chemnitz itself wrote on Facebook that they had “strictly” adhered to the guidelines: no whole animals and no single pig heads could be displayed. The piglet had neither legs nor tail. Believing Muslims do not eat pork. This is what the action of Pro Chemnitz were targeting…

Video transcript:

Continue reading

Ann Widdecomb Tells the BBC to Get Stuffed

Or words to that effect.

Yesterday I posted a brief clip of Ann Widdecomb’s remarks on the floor of the European Parliament. Ms. Widdecomb represents Southwest England for the Brexit Party, and stated forthrightly in her speech her reasons for being glad that the UK will be leaving the European Union.

The woke mandarins who run the BBC were appalled by Ms. Widdecomb’s doubleplus ungood statements, and invited her to be interviewed so they could revile her in an appropriate fashion. They sent the cutest and most clueless airheaded blond SJW in their stable (can I say that, or is it equinophobia?) to do the job. The interviewer stuck to the script, but in my opinion she got dumped out of her saddle and dragged by the stirrups down the steep and rocky hillside of Ms. Widdecomb’s rhetoric.

I hope we see a lot more of this admirable woman:

Hat tip: Vlad Tepes.

Matt Bracken and Vlad Tepes Discuss Video Samizdat

Last week Vlad Tepes made a guest appearance on an InfoWars segment hosted by Matt Bracken. The video below shows their hour of discussion (with the commercials removed). As you may notice, the video has been hosted on YouTube, but not on Alex Jones’ channel — as far as I know, the InfoWars YouTube channel has been permanently taken down.

This is an example of what I discussed a couple of months ago in “Samizdat in the Age of Digital Totalitarianism”: the imperative to propagate dissident information through distributed lateral networks. That’s what Matt and Vlad talk about in this clip, specifically as it pertains to bit-torrented video platforms:

No Need to Turn Off the Lights and Don’t Bother Closing the Door

Below is the second in a series of Dymphna’s Greatest Hits. There will be another one next Monday.

Note: This essay is fourteen years old, so most of the external links no longer work.

No Need to Turn Off the Lights and Don’t Bother Closing the Door

by Dymphna
Originally Published June 27, 2005

The Pharisees are in the driver’s seat of the Mini Cooper that has become the Anglican Church in England. Following the map printed up for them by the Anglican Peace and Justice Network, the C. of E. is busy driving over the cliff. How could anyone with a lick of common sense believe one word coming from a “Peace and Justice” committee? Did these people sleep through the birth and (Deo gratias) death of Communism? Do they not see the bright neon socialist signage in “Peace” or “Justice” —good Lord, never mind the double whammy PEACE and JUSTICE.

Does the Anglican Communion in England have any idea how irrelevant it is? The Incredible Shrinking Church has just shriveled another centimeter or two. It’s sooo bad it’s embarrassing. You could go read the report here (it’s a PDF. You’ll need version 7), but why bother? You can recite the p.c. lines from memory by now: poor Palestinians, bad Jews. Let’s take our money away from the bad Jews and give it to the deserving Palestinians who only want peace but the Jews are too mean to let them have it. Blah. Blah.

Well, we knew it was coming; this was just a matter of waiting for the final mainstream sheep farm to sell out. The only surprise is that it took so long. Here’s Melanie Phillips’ take on this “defining moment” —

The APJN report is full of the most inflammatory lies, libels and distortions about Israel — and the fact that the amended resolution that was finally passed only welcomed part of it (a weaselly caveat to provide deniability) does not alter the fact that it provided the ammunition for a poisonous onslaught against Israel. The document uncritically reproduced the Arab propaganda version of Israel’s history and the present circumstances of the Middle East conflict, presenting the Arab perpetrators of genocidal mass murder as victims and their real victims as oppressors merely for trying to defend themselves. But then what can one expect of a report which concludes by referring to ‘the honor of meeting the President of the Palestinian Authority, the late Yasser Arafat, who so warmly welcomed us in what turned out to be one of his last days among us’?

A warm welcome from the late pederast himself. How charming. Arafat was the father of terrorism, a diabolical Communist and one of the most truly evil people of his generation, so of course the Anglican Peace and Justice Network loved him. What’s not to love? Do you suppose they have a position paper on Castro, too? Another honorable sweetie-pie.

There are not words to describe the moral revulsion the name Arafat engenders. You could perhaps see why the naïve could be taken in by the man-in-the-street Palestinian: they’ve had years to work on and perfect their royal sense of resentful entitlement. And you might even decide to overlook the festering sores on a culture which produces suicide bombers who want to attack the hospital that treated them. But information on Arafat is readily available; his shameful history is there for the reading. One has to be willfully blind to refuse to acknowledge the depth and breadth of his malevolent iniquity.

Continue reading

Geert Wilders, Holocaust Denier

Geert Wilders declined to attend the most recent court session in the latest “hate speech” trial against him — he had better things to do with his time. In his absence, various fruits ’n’ nuts testified on behalf of the prosecution.

The PVV sends this translated report about the latest shenanigans.

Absent Wilders is linked to Holocaust at the ‘fewer Moroccans’ trial

Geert Wilders refused to listen to the “nonsense” of the “victims” of his fewer-Moroccan statements. He stayed away from his trial. And so missed allegations that Wilders “wants to set in motion a Holocaust.”

When the Court of Justice sits down in the courtroom at Schiphol in the morning, the seat of the PVV leader appears empty. The judges have to settle with a tweet from Wilders. “I’m just going to work in the Lower House today.” Because Wilders has no desire to hear ‘the nonsense’of ‘so-called injured parties’.

Who are mainly ‘decent citizens’, rooted Turkish and Moroccan Dutchmen, who were ‘deeply hurt’ by Wilders, watching television in March 2014, their lawyers say.

But the trial has also brought forward declarations with more remarkable motives. Jeroen de Kreek gets the opportunity to speak. He argues that Wilders actually used the word Moroccans ‘euphemistically’. Wilders’ words were, he says, directed against Jews. “It is terrorism-related deception. His great heroes are Jew-haters.” They were ‘behind the Second World War and the Holocaust’. In fact, De Kreek argues, Wilders’ statements could ‘trigger a next Holocaust’.

De Kreek says that he is also a victim because of his Jewish origin. After all, Wilders’ statements are equivalent to ‘Juden raus’, he argues.

The court hears it all unmoved, but the lawyers for the others who claim to be affected sighs. ‘We don’t want to be in the same corner with him,’ one will later say in the corridor.

Jews

After all, De Kreek is no stranger, not even in the Wilders trial. A former lawyer himself, he was already convicted of insulting Jews. He previously denied the Holocaust himself, via his websites, and was even considered completely of unsound mind by the court in Amsterdam after he had threatened Minister Jeanine Hennis at the time. His statements could ‘best be ignored’ because of his narcissistic personality disorder and chronic psychoses.

Continue reading

The Greens Will Build the PRC in Germany

On two recent occasions German Chancellor Angela Merkel has displayed severe and obvious whole-body tremors — what you might call the Rattlesnake Shake.

The first video below shows video excerpts from both those shaky occasions, particularly the most recent one. The second video uses the first incident as a jumping-off point to speculate about the possible ascendancy of the Greens — who got the largest share of the vote in the recent European Parliamentary elections — after the all-but-inevitable ouster of Mrs. Merkel and her replacement by a palatable CDU cardboard cutout such as AKK. This clip uses excerpts from an interview with Robert Habeck of the Green Party in which he explicitly declares his goal to be the establishment of a People’s Republic of Germany along the lines of the one in China.

Many thanks to MissPiggy for the translations, and to Vlad Tepes for the subtitling.

Video #1: The Shakes

Video #2: The Greens

Video transcript #1:

Continue reading