Eric Zemmour is a popular (and politically incorrect) French commentator who appears regularly on television discussion panels. In the following clip Mr. Zemmour discusses the fourth anniversary of the Islamic terror attack on the offices of Charlie Hebdo.
Many thanks to Ava Lon for the translation, and to Vlad Tepes for the subtitling:
Video transcript:
During their recent trip to Finland, Katie & the Wolff met with leaders of the Finns Party, which is the only major political party that opposes mass immigration and Islamization.
In the following video Katie Hopkins talks to the editor of the Finns Party Magazine about the rapidly growing incidence of rape by migrants of underage girls. Ms. Hopkins draws on her own knowledge of Muslim rape gangs in Rotherham and other British cities to help analyze what is now occurring in Finland, and what the future is likely to hold.
Many thanks to Vlad Tepes for editing and uploading this video:
In his latest essay, our Israeli correspondent MC wades into the murky cultural waters where shariah advocates and social justice warriors converge.
Splitting Hairs
by MC
The Hebrew ‘shalom’ is translated as ‘peace’, but that is not particularly accurate. It actually describes an ‘inner peace’, which comes with a personal relationship with the Creator, in this case Yahovah. ‘Peace’ is essentially a manmade thing (or not, as the case may be), but shalom comes through keeping the Commandments of Yah.
In this day and age this kind study of is considered to be ‘splitting hairs’, just as the difference between quoting a hadith about Mohammed’s sexual proclivities and accusing him of paedophilia is ‘splitting hairs’, since the one makes the other obvious.
The problem about a sex act with a 9-year-old is not so much the gross physical intrusion as the potential for damage to the child both physical and — especially — emotional. This is true particularly when considering the case of Mohammed, a religious icon whose every act is to be emulated by the faithful.
A 9-year-old is a child, and it thus vulnerable. Because a child is, by definition, not yet physically or emotionally mature, he or she cannot be considered able to give any kind of informed consent to a sex act. Any sex act.
Islam, being a male fantasy-oriented religion, takes no account of consent from either mature or immature women. On the other hand, the Judeo-Christian religions regard the woman as the ‘life-giver’, as the name Adam gave to Eve (Chava) implies. The woman is thus a pivotal player in the commandment to go forth and multiply, and we build our Western culture around the need to support this life-giver and her offspring — or rather we did until Roe vs. Wade.
Thus, because paedophilia is an intrinsic part of Islam, any judgement comes down to a matter of who can get away with offending whom. Muslims become violent when offended and start murdering people, but since Christians are mainly ‘white supremacists’ and need to be taught a lesson anyway… or so it seems to go these days. But just when did emotion and politicking creep into the modern law-making and its associated executive process?
So the recent European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) decision that to call Mohammed a paedophile is ‘hate speech’ is fraught with implications. In itself, the idea behind ‘hate’ speech is to provide a means to demonize free speech. Bur free speech is only really proven to be free when somebody is offended by it. So just how do we define hate speech in a ‘free speech’ context, if the two are so mutually incompatible?
Is it when free speech causes harm, as in falsely shouting FIRE in a crowded cinema?
To tip the scales of justice, the difference between ‘good’ and ‘bad’ must be clearly delineated, and must be able to be applied in all circumstances to all people, both equally, and across the board.
Do Muslims have an existential problem with paedophilia? Does the rest of society therefore have to give way to these Muslim sensitivities? Is there therefore a different law for Muslims — ‘Yes’, ‘Yes’ and ‘Yes’, it would appear.
I first became aware of the Muslim fad for beheading infidels when Daniel Pearl was executed in Pakistan back in 2002. Over the years I saw a few more beheading videos, especially after the practice really began trending during the heyday of the Islamic State in 2014. I hated watching them, but it seemed a sort of duty, to be aware of what Islam is based on what it does. Eventually I realized that I’d had enough, and I quit watching them. I’ve seen what a beheading looks like now, many times over. I’m old, and my limbic system can’t take that much horror anymore.
Videos of beheadings and other gruesome types of execution constitute a form of Islamic porn. Devout Muslims get off on that sort of thing the same way a voyeur gets off on peeking through a lady’s bedroom window.
Muslims aren’t the only ones who like beheadings, of course. People with a taste for sadistic violence — most of them probably psychopaths — are drawn to such videos. I wouldn’t be surprised if jihad porn were the stimulus behind a lot of Western conversions to Islam. Just think — I’ll get to do all that cool stuff, and God approves of it!
The German news report below discusses the most recent Islamic beheading to gain notoriety: the slaughter of two young Scandinavian women in Morocco.
NOTE: The Moroccan government spokesman’s words might be more accurately rephrased: “We frown upon the murder of infidels on Moroccan soil, because it interferes with the tourist industry, which is how we extract money from the infidel. Mujahideen are required travel abroad if they wish to kill infidels.”
Many thanks to MissPiggy for the translation, and to Vlad Tepes for the subtitling:
Video transcript:
Last week we posted a video of an Italian MEP for the Lega Nord named Angelo Ciocca. In the wake of the Islamic terror attack in Strasbourg (in which an Italian reporter was shot, and later died), Mr. Ciocca stood up on the floor of the European Parliament, held up a yellow vest, and called on his fellow MEPs to “Wake up! Wake up!”
The video below shows what happened immediately after Mr. Ciocca’s speech. The man rebuking him for his bad manners is his compatriot, Antonio Tajani, who serves as the president of the European Parliament.
Many thanks to FouseSquawk for the translation, and to Vlad Tepes for the subtitling:
Video transcript:
A fourth victim — an Italian reporter who was shot in the head — has died of wounds sustained in Tuesday’s Islamic terrorist attack in Strasbourg. The following Spanish-language news report has the latest on the case.
Many thanks to FouseSquawk for the translation, and to Vlad Tepes for the subtitling:
Below is a brief article from ANSA about the death of the Italian reporter:
Italian Reporter Shot in Strasbourg Attack Has Died
Antonio Megalizzi was hit in the head in terrorist attack(ANSA) — Paris, December 14 – Antonio Megalizzi, a young Italian reporter who was shot in the head in Tuesday’s terrorist attack at Strasbourg’s Christmas market, has died, foreign ministry sources said on Friday. “This news saddens me a great deal,” Premier Giuseppe Conte told a news conference following this week’s European summit.
“Affectionate, emotional thoughts go to his girlfriend.” “We must unite in this pain”.
Video transcript:
Hamas is currently at war with Israel, launching missiles and incendiary kites on a daily basis into southern Israel. The news about the attacks only makes it onto the world’s TV screens if one of the puir wee bairns among the Palestinians gets killed — usually because the child’s school or crèche is used to store missiles or arms, making it into a target for the IDF.
Our Israeli correspondent MC sends this report on the situation, literally from his own front yard.
The birds fly over Sderot
by MC
It was a rough night. It started at 10pm and finished at 10am after some twenty missiles were launched in five attacks.
The small arms shooting is still going on as I sit here (8:20pm).
These are photos from about a minute after multiple Iron Dome intercepts occurred right overhead. The photos were taken from the front garden!
This is where the ‘humanitarian’ aid to Gaza ends up. That is your tax money up there burning up.
Islam is incorrigibly malicious. Its doctrines are the doctrines of evangelism by violence and coercion. It seeks to conquer and forcibly convert, and if genocide is necessary, then so be it.
Shooting missiles at random against a civilian population is acceptable in Yemen, Syria, and against Israel. And the world looks on complacently: Not my front door —Yawn!
MC lives in the southern Israeli city of Sderot. For his previous essays, see the MC Archives.
The French government employed a vintage Soviet strategy against Marine Le Pen, the leader of Rassemblement National (National Rally, formerly Front National): they demanded that she undergo a psychiatric evaluation. This came on the heels of her being charged for displaying photos of ISIS atrocities on Twitter, which was in response to someone who compared her party with the Islamic State.
In the following MSM clip from French TV, the interviewer attempts to get Ms. Le Pen to admit that displaying the ISIS photos was indeed likely to stir up hatred.
Many thanks to Ava Lon for the translation, and to Vlad Tepes for the subtitling:
Video transcript:
The following essay about Nissar Hussain and Islamic apostasy was posted on Thursday by UKIP Daily.
Terrified by Islam — Its Apostates (ex-Muslims)
by the Poacher
As a typical UKIP Brit you may fear for the future of our culture, our civilization even, as it is battered in the unattributable “War on Terror”. Yes, we are apparently fighting terror, terror without a cause, a first-mover, a motivation — and just try designating the likely originators of the next horrendous attack. Despite the statistical likelihood of the perps coming from a particular group being clear enough for a 10-year-old to have a good guess, be careful… and if you do, Chief Constable Dick may just get her knickers in a twist and fire off emails to her “experts” as to whether such calumny can be allowed to stand.
Experts, that’s a term to mull over — Vyshinsky might have clarified matters for her, as he did at all those chilling show trials for the recent occupants of the Lubyanka — never needing to return for too long a stay after the judgement, of course. Useful, contemptible, amoral or pliable experts are two a penny, as every totalitarian instinctively knows. (If the use of the “knickers in a twist” phrase is thought of as sexist — it is not. It is being used here as a simple term of contempt for the actions of this time-serving Common Purpose enabler.)
Now, we can act: by voting, by marching, by berating the dopey Momentum-indoctrinated students as they flip burgers, but there are others who daren’t take such actions. They are unable to focus on normal life, let alone take effective action because they are terrified, right now — every hour of every day. And justly. And “our” government ignores their plight. And the police abet the Sharia-enforcing terrorists. These vulnerable people are the apostates of Islam for whom the Sharia lays down the death sentence for their heinous offence — even in Bradford.
However, a few, a special few are forged in the heat, steeled to turn and face the encroaching inferno. Driven so hard, year after year, something alters inside and they find they have morphed into a different kind of person. Such people, seared by the intensity of what they have faced, by the disappointment at the failures of those supposed to be aiding them, they develop a cold fury and complete — and realistic — contempt for the system, for the Janus-faced politicians and for their gutless salaried and pension-hugging lieutenants. Such people can only be stopped in one way — and even that holds no fear for them. Better to have faced down the cowards and the fools than to have bent the knee and surrendered.
Bradford has produced such a son. Nissar Hussain has told his story in a talk videoed at a UKIP branch meeting in Barrow (Google — A talk by Nissar Hussain). His story is compelling and the failures of the state and other organs are too long to list here. He is now writing a book on his experience as a convert from Islam and the Muslim community’s reaction to his apostasy — and it is not of the multi-culti, hug-fest type of experience the Anglican hierarchy would have you believe it would be.
Seventeen years is a long time.
Or it is for younger people; for someone of my advanced age, events of seventeen years ago seem like just the other day. Assuming I can remember them at all, that is.
September 11, 2001 is one of those days I can remember quite clearly: what I was doing, the course of events during the day and for the next few days. I assume it’s the same for many people in my age bracket: those hours are now permanent markers, stuck fast in the brain until the final dissolution removes everything.
In contrast, consider someone who has just graduated from high school. He was just a tiny infant back then, so everything he knows about 9/11 — assuming he is aware of it at all — he learned from his parents, or his teachers, or the TV, or his phone.
A young woman who just graduated from college this past spring is not that much better off. She was probably aware that the adults around her were upset and acting strangely. She probably saw some confusing and disturbing images of destruction and panic on television. But other than that, her knowledge of 9-11 would be from her elders, the TV, her phone, and her college professors.
The cohort who took their doctorates last spring — with a median age of what? 26, maybe? — fare slightly better. They were in grade school at the time, and in the days following surely they heard discussion in class from teachers who had not yet fully assimilated the politically correct line on what happened in Manhattan and Washington on that beautiful fall day.
And so it goes, on up through the age groups until you reach us geezers, who definitely remember. Or at least some of us do.
I saw a hash tag yesterday: #NeverForget911.
My reaction was immediate and cynical: It should read #WeForgot911.
But how much forgetting has really taken place? Of those who were adults in the fall of 2001, how many paid attention, assimilated the memories, and incorporated them into a meaningful structure that was permanently retained? And how many simply went back to the way they had lived before, letting 9/11 become a brief blip in an otherwise undisturbed succession of life experiences?
I don’t know the answers to those questions. My intuition tells me that many younger people — who have been subjected to far more relentless indoctrination than I ever have — regard 9/11 through the politically correct lens that their education and the media have so painstakingly constructed for them.
My intuition also says that those of us who were over fifty when it happened probably retain a slightly less propagandistic memory of it. But only slightly, most of us — my generation stares at the vidscreen a lot, too.
For some of us, however, the events of September 11, 2001, were the beginning of seventeen years of close investigation of Islam. Back then I had read V.S. Naipaul’s Among the Believers. But nothing else. The Sword of the Prophet by Srdja Trifkovic was to come later. The writings of Robert Spencer later still. And then Reliance of the Traveller and Steve Coughlin. And much more in the years since.
In seventeen years I have learned enough to know that the dominant Western cultural narratives about Islam are simply false. If you do your investigations with due diligence — and especially if you follow Maj. Coughlin’s advice, and read sources written by Muslims, intended for a Muslim audience — you learn the extent to which you have been lied to and misled by your own leaders, who themselves have listened to the whispers of Muslim Brotherhood infiltrators.
The construction of what became the current Narrative began shortly after 9-11 with President George W. Bush, the man who inspired us all when he stood on the rubble of the World Trade Center. Islam was proclaimed to be the Religion of Peace (and eventually the “Religion of Peace and Love”, by Condoleezza Rice). A great religion had been hijacked by a tiny minority of extremists. The words “Islamism” and “Islamist” were coined to provide good cover for our friends, the nice Muslims, the “moderate” Muslims. The word “Islamophobe” gained greater and greater currency to describe those who refused to swallow the Narrative.
And so on and so forth, until we arrive at the present day, seventeen years later, when it is no longer possible to publicly assign the problem to Islam itself. Islam unmodified, without prefixes or suffixes. The core ideology, which is not religious, but political. A totalitarian ideology which has world domination as its long-term goal — 1,400 years and counting.
You can’t say those things and expect to hold onto your job, even if it’s with a private corporation. If you wear a slogan like that on a t-shirt, you risk a public beating.
And there are more Muslims now in all Western countries, and more official or unofficial rules against offending them, more public recognition of their sacred days and customs and sensibilities.
Yes, #WeForgot911.
At least enough of us did to facilitate the eventual victory of the Sword of the Prophet.
David Boyajian sends this overview of the ADL’s continuing opposition to the official recognition of the Armenian Genocide by the U.S. government.
No to the Anti-Defamation League in Glendale and Elsewhere
By the Armenian Americans for Human Rights
You may recall the national and international firestorm that broke out in 2007 when Armenian Americans in Massachusetts took action against the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), the most well-known Jewish organization in America.
Colluding with Turkey and Israel, the ADL was denying and/or diminishing the Armenian Genocide and lobbying against its recognition by the U.S. Congress.
It is the height of hypocrisy for an American organization to continually demand commemoration of and legislation on the Holocaust while simultaneously working against the same for a Christian genocide.
Over a span of months, the Armenian community, human rights advocates, and many principled Jews expelled ADL programs such as “No Place for Hate” from over a dozen Massachusetts cities because the ADL’s actions contradicted the civil/human rights principles that it claims to uphold. The Massachusetts Municipal Association, representing all the state’s cities and towns, also rejected the ADL.
Demonstrations against the ADL took place throughout the U.S. including in New York City, Michigan, and San Francisco. Glendale also did its part.
On December 4, 2007, supported by ANC-Glendale Executive Director Elen Asatryan and GUSD Board President Greg Krikorian, Herbert Hoover High School cancelled a scheduled three-day ADL “World of Difference” program.
Armenians appreciate, of course, those principled Jewish organizations and individuals, including historians and elected officials, who have always accepted the factuality of the Armenian Genocide and supported its recognition.
The AAHR letter
A few months ago, the Massachusetts-based Armenian Americans for Human Rights (AAHR) organization sent a copiously documented 24-page letter to Glendale’s Mayor, City Council, and GUSD’s Board of Education and Superintendent. AAHR sent similar letters to several Massachusetts cities which, like Glendale, had previously expelled the ADL.
AAHR’s letter details not only the ADL’s actions against Armenians but also its appalling conduct in American society over the course of decades. The letter concludes by asking Glendale and other municipalities to continue to exclude the ADL from their communities and schools.
A very bad deal
However, two years ago, Newton, MA schools — whether inadvertently or otherwise — invited in an ADL program despite the fact that in 2007 the city’s Human Rights Commission and then-Mayor David Cohen had ousted the ADL due to its anti-Armenian activities.
Unfortunately — and contrary to the advice of Boston-area Armenian activists who had initiated and continued the 2007-8 campaign against the ADL — a small group of Armenians unwisely rushed in and in 2016 made a terrible deal with the ADL.
The ill-advised deal resulted in ADL CEO Jonathan Greenblatt’s acknowledging — but only on the ADL website’s “blog” page — the Armenian Genocide and claiming that his organization “would support” (not “does support” or “will support”) an Armenian Genocide resolution in Congress.
Only the ADL’s National Executive Committee and National Commission, however, not Greenblatt, can make official ADL policy. It’s unclear whether these two bodies have ever formally done so.
Moreover, as the AAHR letter points out, the ADL has yet to publicly confirm that it actively supports the Armenian Genocide resolution. Indeed, the ADL has never fulfilled Armenian Americans’ original demand of 11 years ago — namely, that as partial atonement for its reprehensible behavior, the ADL must lobby as vigorously for an Armenian Genocide resolution as it has for Holocaust legislation.
Even a former top ADL leader has called Greenblatt’s 2016 “blog” post “inadequate … assets, land … everything that Holocaust reparations … has represented should be on the table.”
AAHR’s letter also notes that the ADL has never once apologized for its many wrongdoings against Armenians. Nor has the ADL explained, and opened its files regarding, its collusion with a foreign power — Turkey — to sway a U.S. Congressional vote.
The retired movie star Brigitte Bardot has made a name for herself in France — and been prosecuted several times — for her animal-rights activism and her vigorous opposition to Islam. The following video refers to an event in which both of her principal concerns intersect: the annual slaughter of animals by Muslims during Eid al-Adha.
The young “French” culture-enricher in this video directs some angry remarks at Ms. Bardot because of her tweet about Eid, and asserts that she and people like her cause WAYCISM.
Many thanks to Ava Lon for the translation, and to Vlad Tepes for the subtitling:
Video transcript:
In a video from last week, Paul Weston inveighs against the easily offended, among them the Reverend Cressida Dick*. And he goes to bat for Boris, who complained,observed, remarked upon that ugliest of female garments, the burka bag. And for that sin, the Hon B Johnson was vilified by the usual suspects:
*If I were a lesbian (no, I’m not) as is Chief Commissioner Dick, I’d change my name lickety-split. To something more dignified and Latinate – perhaps “Phallus” would be more in keeping with her exalted position.
Paul mentions an essay by Roger Scruton on taking offence. I looked for it and as feared, found it locked behind the paywall of the UK Spectator, and a gilded paywall, at that. Imagine! They want nine Euros a month for a subscription. Sheesh. Or is that pounds? Never mind; it’s still outrageous. I’ll stick with the free American Spectator. It’s the ones I steal from consistently, as I do with Dr Turley, that I feel obliged to pay.
Meanwhile, here’s a chunk of the relevant material from an English website I plan to investigate later. They clipped this from Mr Scruton:
The emerging witch-hunt culture would be an object of half-amused contempt, were we still protected, as we were until recently, by the robust law of libel. It is still possible to laugh at the absurdity of it all, if you sit at home, avoiding contact with ignorant and malicious people, and getting on with real life – the life beyond social media. Unfortunately, however, ignorant and malicious people have discovered a new weapon in their unremitting assault on the rest of us, which is the art of taking offence.
I was brought up to believe that you should never give offence if you can avoid it; the new culture tells us that you should always take offence if you can. There are now experts in the art of taking offence, indeed whole academic subjects, such as ‘gender studies’, devoted to it. You may not know in advance what offence consists in – politely opening a door for a member of the opposite sex? Thinking of her sex as ‘opposite’? Thinking in terms of ‘sex’ rather than ‘gender’? Using the wrong pronoun? Who knows. We have encountered a new kind of predatory censorship, a desire to take offence that patrols the world for opportunities without knowing in advance what will best supply its venom. As with the Puritans of the 17th century, the need to humiliate and to punish precedes any concrete sense of why.
I recall the extraordinary case of Boris Johnson and the burka. In the course of discussing the question whether the full facial covering should be banned here, as elsewhere in Europe, Johnson humorously remarked that a person in a burka has a striking resemblance to a letterbox. He was right. A woman in a burka resembles a letterbox much as a man in white tie resembles a penguin or a woman in feathers resembles a chicken.
I like his arch correspondences; is he covering his tracks with those similarities? Sometimes I watch fat feathered chickens strutting and clucking; that’s when Walter Mitty’s wife comes to mind.
But I can see the faces of penguins and chickens. A woman in a burka? Not so much.
NOTE: Paul is a sly divil. See what he says at the end, hoping to catch us Americans unawares. Fortunately, me own mither used that word.
The following video is the final message from a Dutch woman named Willie Dille, who committed suicide shortly after recording this video. Ms. Dille was a city council member in The Hague for the Party for Freedom (Partij voor de Vrijheid, PVV).
Significantly, she names as the instigator of her gang-rape an ethnic Dutch politician, Arnoud van Doorn, evidently a convert to Islam. Mr. Doorn allegedly arranged the attacks and threats as a method of political intimidation.
Her death was reported as a suicide, and then a rumor went around that she had been murdered. However, as far as I know, she really did kill herself (which is more than understandable, given the dire circumstances in her life).
Many thanks to SimonXML for the translation, and to Vlad Tepes for the subtitling (Note: Pauline Krikke is the mayor of The Hague):
Video transcript: