Forget the Oscars. Forget the Super Bowl. School Shootings are the Trending Public Spectacle.

In the blurb for last Friday’s news feed, I composed a flip introduction to the reports about the murderous school shooting in Texas committed by a kid named Dimitrios Pagourtzis, which had happened earlier that day: “Today’s school shooting was held in Santa Fe, Texas.”

I’d used the same formula for introducing school shootings once or twice in the past. This time, however, a reader took exception to my ghoulish sarcasm, and emailed me with his reproach:

I’ve been a long time reader of your site, and I agree with the vast majority of your viewpoint. While I KNOW that no disrespect was intended, the comment hurts.

I wrote him back with this reply:

Yes, well, it’s a sardonic, sarcastic way of presenting it (which I’ve been using for a while), and it’s meant to hurt. It’s intended to remind the reader what a media circus school shootings have become. The lavish media attention and feting of the victims’ families helps GUARANTEE that there will be more — and worse — shootings in the future.

THAT’S what my sarcasm is about.

The media frenzy that accompanies school shootings these days is driven by a couple of cultural imperatives.

The first is the hoary old newspaper adage: “If it bleeds, it leads.” That was true when Caveman Og chiseled the first edition of the Neanderthal Times. It was true when everyone read at least two newspapers every day, one in the morning and one in the evening. And it’s true now, when we all have access to fourteen gazillion cable channels. The story with the most slaughter and gore is the one that grabs the most viewers.

And this is especially the case when children are the ones who are bleeding. Och, the puir wee bairns! Whether it’s the victims of terrorist violence in Chechnya, or dead baby porn on a beach in Anatolia, or high school students shot up in art class — stories about children as victims of violence are fascinating to the general public.

The second reason that school shootings cause such moist eyes in the media is their major subtext: gun control. Democrat politicians wait a decorous period of time — in Joe Biden’s case, at least two or three hours — and then their litany begins: Haven’t there been enough school shootings? It’s time to get serious about gun control!

This imperative has become even more urgent since the election of Donald Trump. A large chunk of the president’s support comes from Second Amendment enthusiasts. Even the most skeptical libertarian gun owner regards the president more favorably than he does any other major political leader. These are the people that put Mr. Trump over the top in his contest with Hillary. They are the primary wellspring of intractable American orneriness. And it is essential to the Deep State that they be quelled and subdued.

Which means they must be disarmed.

Continue reading

Civilization Jihad in the USA: The Practicum

The process of settlement is a “Civilization-Jihadist Process” with all the word means. The Ikhwan must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and “sabotaging” its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God’s religion is made victorious over all other religions.

— The “Explanatory Memorandum” (1991) of the Muslim Brotherhood

Twenty-seven years ago this month, the Muslim Brotherhood (el-Ikhwan el-Muslimeen) in America published its notorious “Explanatory Memorandum” laying out its long-term plans for converting the United States to Islam and annexing our country to the global Ummah. The document was used in evidence at the Holy Land Foundation trial that convicted a number of Ikhwan operatives in 2008 and sent them to federal prison.

The video below contains the second American installment in a series of documentaries on the Muslim Brotherhood by Zvi Yehezkeli, an Israeli journalist and filmmaker who is fluent in Arabic. During his undercover operations, Mr. Yehezkeli posed as a Palestinian journalist, and was able to visit with Muslims and talk to them about their plans for the United States.

As you will see in the video, the Muslim Brotherhood’s plan has not been thwarted. It has not been stopped. It hasn’t even been slowed down. Muslims who intend to make America Islamic are patient. They are willing to do their sabotage over a period of decades and let the process unfold until the United States joins the global Caliphate in twenty or fifty or a hundred years.

Mr. Yehezkeli’s work is every bit as important as the Explanatory Memorandum, but it can’t have a similar effect unless our public officials are made aware of its significance. This will only happen if you, the American voter, buttonhole them and make them pay attention to it.

I recommend downloading the video file, and/or passing the URL around. Insist that your congressman look at it. He wants to get re-elected — if you make enough noise, he will have to listen.

This report is of enormous significance, but it will only have an effect if it PROPAGATES. That relies on you, the ordinary viewer. Please do your part and spread it!

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

Video transcript:

Continue reading

Funeral in Brooklyn

The following video contains excerpts from Part 2 of a documentary on the Muslim Brotherhood in the USA by Zvi Yehezkeli, an Israeli journalist and filmmaker who is fluent in Arabic. Mr. Yehezkeli specializes in posing as an Arab and going undercover in various Muslim environments.

This excerpt is about the only place a recently deceased Muslim Brotherhood leader could get a proper memorial service — Brooklyn, New York.

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

Video transcript:

Continue reading

Dr. László Szabó: Immigration and the Preservation of European Culture

Further update: Now the video is working again. Which is weird, because it disappeared from the channel for about 20 minutes or so. Anyway, you should be able to watch it now.

Update: It seems that the Westminster Institute has pulled this video off their channel for some reason. I watched it a little while ago, but now it’s missing. I don’t know what happened.

As I reported earlier tonight, on Wednesday Dr. László Szabó, the Hungarian ambassador to the United States, spoke at the Westminster Institute in McLean, Virginia. His talk is now available on video, including the Q&A section at the end. The whole thing is worth listening to:

The most interesting fact that I learned from his remarks is that all the migrants who took the Balkan Route during the Great Migration Crisis of 2015 stopped in at certain bank in Belgrade to pick up an instruction leaflet (#1 on the list presumably being “throw away your passport”), a cell phone, and €5,000 in cash — at least until the money ran out. So that’s where all those €500 notes came from that the “Syrians” were spending that September in Nickelsdorf after they crossed from Hungary to Austria.

The question that we should all ponder is: Who put that money in the bank for those poor destitute “refugees” to claim? I agree with CrossWare — her opinion is that George Soros wasn’t spending his own money on the migration caper; he was simply acting as the distributor of the funds. That is, someone used his NGOs as a conduit, and he undoubtedly managed to turn a profit on the deal. I’m sure we can all make some educated guesses about who the ultimate benefactor was.

An Evening With the Hungarian Ambassador

I’ve been away from my desk for a couple of days because I went up to the Wretched Hive of Scum and Villainy to hear Dr. László Szabó, the Hungarian ambassador to the United States, speak at the Westminster Institute in McLean on Wednesday.

I was able to have a chat with the ambassador during the wine-and-cheese period before he spoke. He’s a very engaging fellow, and we had a good discussion about the migration situation in Europe and North America. As I expected, he hadn’t heard of Gates of Vienna, but seemed genuinely interested when I explained the significance of our work on behalf of Hungary — that is, the work by CrossWare, Vlad, and myself: we are the single largest source of Hungarian political videos subtitled in English. We concentrate on Hungary because it is at the forefront of the resistance to mass immigration and Islamization, and Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán stands head and shoulders above any other Western head of government on those issues.

In his presentation to the audience, Dr. Szabó sounded much like us — more detailed and Hungary-centric, obviously, but on exactly the same page. At no point did I disagree significantly with what he had to say about the migration crisis, George Soros, the European Union, and the worldwide persecution of Christians.

The video of Wednesday night’s talk (and also, I hope, the Q&A) will eventually be made available. Gates of Vienna readers will find it of interest, so I’ll embed it here when it appears.

In the meantime, here’s the blurb that was sent out in advance of the talk:

Immigration and the Preservation of European Culture: A Hungarian Perspective

Hungarian Prime Minister Orbán stated at the end of last year: “we can say that for as long as the national government leads the country, we shall work intelligently, calmly but uncompromisingly to ensure that our homeland remains a Christian culture and a Hungarian country. And we shall do our utmost to ensure that Europe remains European.” Mr. Orbán’s Fidesz party won a sweeping victory in parliamentary elections on April 8th, guaranteeing him another term in office.

Dr. László Szabó, physician, businessman, politician and diplomat, has served as the Ambassador of Hungary to the United States since July 2017.

Prior to coming to Washington, Ambassador Szabó served as Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade from 2014 until his appointment as Ambassador to the U.S. In 2014, the Government of Hungary decided to place trade and investment at the forefront of its foreign policy and looked for a seasoned business leader with widespread international expertise to steer the Foreign Ministry in a new direction. Prime Minister Viktor Orbán and Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade Péter Szijjártó approached Dr. Szabó directly for this position.

Ambassador Szabó graduated from Debrecen Medical University in 1990 with a doctorate in medicine and practiced as a surgeon for several years. In the early 1990s, he shifted his career to the pharmaceutical industry. He spent more than 20 successful years in pharma and served in numerous international leadership positions, including Country Manager for New Zealand and the South Pacific, and Vice President of China Human Resources at Eli Lilly, the Indianapolis-based U.S. pharmaceutical giant. He also worked as CEO of Hungarian Operations at Teva, a major Israel-based pharmaceutical company.

While I was at the Westminster Institute, I picked up a copy of The Death of Western Christianity: Drinking from the Poisoned Wells of the Cultural Revolution by Patrick Sookhdeo. Due to my eye condition, I can’t read the whole book, but I was able to sneak a peek at the section on “hate speech” while I was waiting to hear the ambassador — it looks very interesting. Dymphna is reading it now, and you may hear more from her about it after she finishes it.

The French are furious at Donald Trump’s remarks about the Bataclan. But what did the president actually say?

Last Friday President Donald Trump gave a speech at a National Rifle Association (NRA) event in Texas. Among other things, Mr. Trump described how differently things would have gone at the Bataclan restaurant — where Islamic terrorists massacred hundreds of people back in 2015 — if even one person at the event had been packing heat.

The French political elites — including all the talking heads on TV — were united in their sanctimonious outrage at the effrontery of the American president for saying such things. They demanded a public apology.

We hear from our French contacts that although French TV was filled with the fury of the bien-pensants, what Mr. Trump actually said last Friday was scrupulously omitted — the viewer just saw stills or silent footage of the president at the NRA.

So Vlad had a bright idea: subtitle the original footage of President Trump in French, as a public service. Then the French people can actually read and see what all the outrage is about.

Many thanks to Ava Lon (French to English) and Nathalie (English to French) for the translations, and to Vlad Tepes for the subtitling:

Here’s an objective, unbiased (ahem) account of the brouhaha from CNN:

Trump angers France and Britain with his NRA speech

(CNN) US President Donald Trump took aim at two of America’s closest allies in a speech at the NRA convention, saying strict gun laws failed to prevent the 2015 terrorist attacks in Paris and highlighting a purported increase in knife violence in London.

The comments provoked anger in both France and Britain.

France was especially incensed after Trump, while speaking at the gun rights convention in Dallas on Friday, pointed his hand as if it were a gun while describing how each of the victims in Paris was fatally shot.

“They took their time and gunned them down one by one — boom, come over here, boom, come over here, boom,” he said.

The French foreign ministry issued a statement Saturday after Trump’s comments.

“France expresses its firm disapproval of President Trump’s remarks … and calls for the respect of the memory of the victims,” it said.

Francois Hollande, who was the French President during the 2015 attacks, tweeted Saturday:

“Donald Trump’s shameful remarks and obscene histrionics say a lot about what he thinks of France and its values. The friendship between our two peoples will not be tainted by disrespect and excessiveness. All my thoughts go to the victims of November 13.”

Trump went on to say things might have been different had Parisians in the cafes under attack had been armed.

“If one employee or just one patron had a gun, or if one person in this room had been there with a gun, aimed at the opposite direction, the terrorists would have fled or been shot. And it would have been a whole different story,” Trump said.

Video transcript:

(Three separate clips were combined in this video. The transcripts are listed separately with the original times. Mr. Trump’s words are included in both the French translation and the original English.)

Continue reading

Islam’s Apostates — Captives Behind the Iron Veil

The following essay was originally published by UKIP Daily.

Islam’s Apostates — Captives Behind the Iron Veil

by The Poacher

In Sharia, the worst crime a Muslim can commit is to leave Islam. No ifs or buts — death is the sentence, and that is why eight countries at that feted institution the UN treat apostasy from Islam as a capital crime. Not something much mentioned at their Human Rights confabs, but there it is. Better to pass another resolution against the Israelis for shooting violent Hamas agitators than address the genocidal threat against 1.6 billion Muslims contained in the Sharia and reflected in these national statutes.

So, if you are unfortunate enough to be a Muslim in Afghanistan, Brunei, Mauretania, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, the UAE or Yemen, then don’t dare mention you kinda prefer that Jesus guy, or Buddha, or you think you could happily wash your hands of all religion. Best you hold on to that thought before going public. Which, come to think of it, is probably why practically none do. Last time one did in Afghanistan, he was quietly extracted and re-settled in the West. Too embarrassing for us to deal with and demand reform. Reform is not a word the Ulema (Islamic scholars) and the Qadis (judges and lawyers of the Sharia) like to hear. No whiff of innovation need be wafted in the general direction of their favoured 7th century practices.

Nonetheless, doubters there are. How many tens and hundreds of millions we can never know until they have that option to choose — without the fear of finding themselves in some dust-blown square with crowds containing silent fellow-sufferers looking on as their head is severed from the rest of their heretical self. Not the way many of us would choose to go.

The Iron Veil of Islam confines its “willing” slaves as covetously as the Soviets once corralled theirs behind their Iron Curtain, as suspiciously as a Dixie plantation owner watched over his, and as profitably as nineteenth century Arab slavers “migrated” tens of thousands of African infidel slaves down the Nile each year. These slave-holders were eventually humbled by the patient, enlightened peoples of the West who attacked the ideology of these barbarous states and fought only where necessary to contain and then squeeze the scheming shacklers.

Leaders today need to understand the ideology driving the apostate-killers and attack that, rather than bomb some poor hill peoples’ huts up some remote valley — at prodigious expense. The offensive has to be based on superior thought, not impersonal unconvincing technology. Islam arms its adherents with a terrible fervour and unearthly commitment, and can outstay the rest of us as long as its ideology — most comprehensively spelled out in the Sharia — retains its death grip on all Muslims who have reached the age of reason.

The West has a vision, a noble vision of free peoples — free to choose their religion, their politics, their sexuality — but has apparently forgotten how to defend itself from the truly intolerant as it has itself become intolerant of free speech. We must understand how truly great is our society, a culture that evolved over millennia and was handed down to us by bloodied hands for us to improve upon, not to throw away over some lefty dystopian chimera. We have to fight to defend those rights earned over centuries or continue the coward’s slouch towards the civilizational abyss.

Continue reading

Can Islamization Be Rolled Back Without Eroding Civil Liberties?

The following essay is based on a series of comments that emerged in the thread accompanying Part 1 of El Inglés’ recent three-part essay on the Pakistanis (see also Part 2 and Part 3).

Note: In the remarks below I write as if from a European point of view. I have been specializing in European affairs for so long that I have “gone native”: when considering the issues of mass immigration and Islamization, I tend to examine the situation in Western Europe to get a sense of the way we are headed.

Things are different here in the USA — we are careening towards the same cliff as the Europeans, but we are a right good ways behind them. As a result, America may be able to avoid the catastrophic future that faces Europe. Or, if Western Europe turns it around and follows El Inglés’ advice, we’ll be able to model our responses on theirs and escape martial law or civil war or revolution or whatever nasty outcome would await us otherwise.

But Western Europe will not have the luxury of returning to the idyllic status quo of 1955-2000. My contention is that things have gone too far down the multicultural primrose path for Europeans to be spared an illiberal outcome. The niceties of civil society will evaporate, no matter what. They will either be blown away by the imposition of sharia, or at the very least they will be reduced by whatever authoritarian regime emerges to resist the sharia.

There are no other choices.

Our situation in the West is similar to that of the Hindus who eventually became Sikhs, and violently resisted the Islamic invasion. Will we develop our own version of Sikhism? Or will we simply become the European version of Persia/Afghanistan/Pakistan/Indonesia?

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

A number of commenters on El Inglés’ posts objected to the idea of the draconian actions against Pakistanis that he proposed. They observed, correctly, that these things cannot be done without abrogating the civil liberties of at least some of the targets. They also noted that innocent Pakistanis — those few who do not oppress women, take little white girls as sex slaves, and engage in welfare fraud for their livelihood — would be caught up and punished along with the guilty ones. El Inglés addressed these objections in the conclusion of Part 3, but his answers evidently failed to assuage the fears of his critics.

We’ve been discussing these issues in this space for at least a dozen years. Time was short when the conversation started, and it is far shorter now. Back then we were at five minutes to twelve; today it may be five seconds to twelve.

Any solution that does not rend the civil fabric of our societies must be devised VERY quickly. Bear in mind that such a solution would first have to be raised and discussed in national legislatures. Then a majority coalition would have to somehow be cobbled together in support of it. Horses would have to be traded. Palms would have to be greased. Sausages would have to be made. Individual representatives would have to be convinced to vote in favor of something that would earn them a death fatwa from the Religion of Peace for doing so.

Just think how difficult it would be to accomplish that.

Furthermore, as soon as such a movement gained steam, it would be violently resisted by the antifas and other “anti-fascist” street thugs bankrolled by the globalists. We already know that antifas aren’t averse to a bit of ultra-violence when they bash the fash. How will they respond to real political and cultural change in Western Europe, the kind that would actually deport the “refugees” en masse?

Once the anti-fascists start killing police, for example, the rules of the game will change. The first thing the state will do at that point is to impose martial law and significantly reduce everyone’s civil liberties.

I can’t see a way out of this that preserves the customary civil society that Europeans have grown used to. It’s just too late.

Our choices are between sharia and some form of authoritarian governance by leaders of our own native ethnic groups. There are no other doors out of this room.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

The conversations below are taken from the comments section on El Inglés’ first post. They cover in greater detail the same issues I outlined above. The participants are our Swedish correspondent Svenne Tvaerskaegg, ECAW, and myself.

Continue reading

Ten Years After

We’re coming up on the tenth anniversary of our ejection from Pajamas Media.

It was a watershed moment. The proximate cause was our publication of El Inglés’ ground-breaking essay, “Surrender, Genocide… or What?” on April 23, 2008 — ten years ago today. Four days later we were thrown out of Pajamas Media and ordered to remove PJM’s ads and other materials from our site (which was then at Blogspot).

I followed the instructions and denuded our blog of ads. Later that day I wrote about what happened:

I received a phone call this afternoon from Roger Simon, the CEO of PJM, announcing that our relationship was terminated, and that we should remove anything connected with PJM from our blog’s template. The specific reason given was our publication of Surrender, Genocide… or What?, the guest-essay by El Inglés that has caused so much argument for the last few days. Roger informed me with regret that the PJM Board had decided to cancel our contract.

Every since the recent unpleasantness started last October, I’ve been expecting it. And now the footwear has hit the floor at last.

With the removal of those ads, we lost our only income stream from blogging. Since being laid off almost two years previously, I had had only temporary and part-time contracts, and times were tough. So we polled our readers: should we find another ad provider, or should we appeal to our audience for donations?

Our readers voted for the latter option, and we’ve been ad-free ever since. We gradually fell into the regular quarterly fundraising routine that most of you are familiar with. It was rocky going for a while, but we made it through.

That which fails to kill us makes us stronger.

In honor of the tenth anniversary of being cast into the Outer Darkness, we will publish another ground-breaking essay by El Inglés in several parts. The first installment will appear here tomorrow, if I get my act together. This new one, if I may say so, will make “Surrender, Genocide… or What?” seem like a fluffy-bunny kids’ story in comparison, at least by Roger Simon’s standards. Fortunately, we no longer have to worry about that, nor does Mr. Simon have to concern himself with what ghastly “racist” material might appear here at Gates of Vienna.

The world has changed a lot in the last ten years.

Not too long after we were shown the door at Pajamas Media, it reorganized itself and changed its business model. The “little bloggers” were phased out, and those deemed worthy of keeping were brought under the corporate umbrella. The company rebranded itself as “PJM” — presumably to avoid the silly image of bloggers in their pajamas — and became slick and more professional.

Being thrown out was probably the best thing that ever happened to us. With our new business model — which relies on soliciting modest donations from our readers four times a year, a process commonly known as “crowdfunding” — we became free of editorial constraints. We could post whatever we wanted, and didn’t have to answer to anyone but our readers for what we said.

In other words, we traded financial security for complete editorial freedom. I call that a bargain, the best I’ve ever had.

I’ve recently seen things at PJM that were as “edgy” as our stuff was ten years ago — the kind of thing that would have got us booted back then — but that’s because the “edge” isn’t where it used to be.

We were beyond the pale back then, but the pale has moved. And we still stay beyond it — that’s the nature of this site. Our mission is to tackle the generally verboten topics that need to be examined. And as the situation in the West continues to deteriorate, those topics become ghastlier and ghastlier.

There’s no doubt about it: what lies ahead is grim and unpredictable. All we know for certain is that the near future will be ugly and chaotic. And taking a clear-eyed look at things — what happened in the past, what’s going on now, and what is still to come — is still against the rules at most mainstream sites and paper publications. You just don’t go there — it’s scary. No one wants to think about it. And besides, discussing it openly and frankly might threaten everyone’s funding sources.

Ten years’ worth of water have flowed underneath the bridge, but the rickety old bridge remains exactly the same.

Keep an eye out for El Inglés’ new essay tomorrow — or as soon as I can manage it, but it will be here shortly.

An Outbreak of the Screaming Nazi Heeber-Jeebers* in Hackney

The article below isn’t all that significant, but I’m posting excerpts from it for two reasons:

1.   It very clearly illustrates the rule of the Uni-Party in the UK, much the as franchises of the same party rule in France, Germany, Sweden, the Netherlands, and the United States.
2.   It mentions (blush) Gates of Vienna.

Notice that the author is one “Adam Barnett, Local Democracy Reporter”. Why a “democracy reporter”? Could his beat instead be “fascism”, “despotism”, or perhaps “totalitarianism”?

And which of those isms better fits as a description of the rule of the Tory-Labour Party in Britain?

Anyway, here’s what the article from The Hackney Citizen says, with a few baronial comments interpolated:

Tory candidate in Hoxton suspended for anti-Muslim posts on social media

Alexander van Terheyden went to a far-right rally and has defended the crusades

Oh, NOES! Far-right, how ghastly! And defended the Crusades!

That was a day that will live in infamy…

A council candidate in Hackney has been suspended by the Conservative Party for anti-Muslim posts on social media, the Citizen can reveal.

Alexander van Terheyden, standing for the Conservatives in Hoxton West, has called Islam a “violent political ideology” comparable to fascism and communism, and recently attended a rally headed by the former English Defence League leader Tommy Robinson.

Yep. Tommy Robinson. Enoch Powell. Benito Mussolini. Adolf Hitler. All the same, and all far-far-far-right.

He has also called the UK’s refusing entry to alt-right activists who target NGO ships rescuing migrants a “disgrace”, and said the crusades were “simply a response to Islam spreading through Europe by the sword”.

The Hackney Conservative Party says it was not aware of Terheyden’s social media posts and is “urgently investigating”, adding that Terheyden has been “suspended with immediate effect”.

Here’s the part that made me cringe, though:

Continue reading

What Really Happened in Douma?

The following video features a recent Russian military briefing about the situation in Eastern Ghouta, a suburb of Damascus, and particularly in Douma, where the alleged chemical attack took place a few weeks ago.

Before you dismiss this clip as nothing but Russian propaganda — which it most assuredly is, especially the PR sections at the beginning and end — watch the middle section, which talks about what happened at the hospital in Douma. As Paul Weston remarked a few days ago, the footage of the puir wee bairns in the hospital has all the signs of being a typical Pallywood disinformation production.

Many thanks to Six45 for the translation, and to Vlad Tepes for the subtitling:

Video transcript:

Continue reading

What They Said on Sunday

What They Said on Sunday

by JLH

Two days after the first effects of Friday’s air attack on Syria had worn off, this is what some significant German-language newspapers chose to headline. Note how Macron moves easily in both camps.

In Germany


Secret Fight. Data Surface — This is How the Syria Operation Went Down


US Rockets in Syria

Trump tweets “Mission Accomplished” and the Pentagon walks it back

In the Conflict over Alleged Gas Attack, USA Announces More Sanctions against Russia

(Russian businesses involved in chemical weapons)

Die Welt

Haley Announces New Sanctions against Russia

Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung

(War in Syria)

Messages to Putin

(including from Merkel)

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

In Switzerland


Seven Years of War in Syria. The Suffering of the People.

Neue Zürcher Zeitung

Putin and Trump Owe it to the World

(All parties to the conflict must sit down together)

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

In Austria

Die Presse

Syria: Last Chance for Diplomacy

Donald Trump’s “Bon Ami” in Paris

(despite numerous differences, Macron moves close to the US President)

Continue reading

Paul Weston on the War in Syria

In the following video (which was recorded yesterday), Paul Weston talks about Donald Trump’s new war in Syria and the obvious false-flag characteristics of it. He also discusses the way the Western media’s critical faculties were utterly disabled as soon as the cry of “Och, the puir wee bairns!” was raised:

For links to his previous essays and videos, see the Paul Weston Archives.

The French Comrades Start Their Education Young

Kindergarten is not mandatory here in Virginia. Children are required by law to start their education in the first grade, when they are six. Kindergarten is optional.

When the future Baron turned six, I didn’t want to send him to school. I had taught him to read when he was four, and he was reading Hardy Boys books when he was five. First grade would have been excruciatingly boring for him, even if there were nothing else negative about the public schools.

So I home-schooled him. To do that, you had to use an approved curriculum, or have a bachelors degree (that was the rule back then; I don’t know if it still is). Fortunately, I had a degree from the College of William and Mary, so I satisfied the second criterion. Once a year we had to submit something for the state to look at — I don’t remember exactly what it was — but that procedure went through our local school board, and involved people we knew. So it was smooth sailing.

I doubt the French have the same opportunities to keep their kids out of the public crèche. I assume that France, like most of Western Europe, makes home-schooling very difficult, if not impossible.

And now President Emmanuel “Toy Boy” Macron has just issued a decree (or edict, or ukase, or bull, or whatever they call them in France; here in the USA it would be an executive order) requiring that all children begin school at the age of three. This is full-bore Soviet-style socialism, where the state takes control of the child as early as possible.

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

Video transcript (timed from two originally separate clips):

Continue reading