Let Me Tell You Something, President Bush

Note from the Baron: The following post is the first of a series of old posts by Dymphna, which I’m calling “Dymphna’s Greatest Hits”. I’ll post one every Monday unless something intervenes. They’ll be published under Dymphna’s byline and using her GoV UserID, which will otherwise no longer be seen.

The following post is from December 2005, and is from her series called “I Could Scream”. That was the title of her blog on Wretchard’s site from a few months before this one was posted at GoV. Unfortunately, Wretchard eventually had to close his umbrella site, and as far as I know all her posts from there were lost.

In those days she carried about 80% of the load here at Gates of Vienna, sometimes posting three or four times a day. In recent years she had been despondent about her declining abilities — it was hard for her to focus well enough to write like she used to. In 2004 and 2005 she was a powerhouse.

Let Me Tell You Something, President Bush

by Dymphna
Originally published on December 27, 2005

I wasn’t going to post on Nour Miyati’s suffering again. I swore I wouldn’t. Maybe I thought if I didn’t put up anything, then it would all just go away. However, being an ostrich has real limits. And if we aren’t at least willing to bear witness to another’s agony, then do we have the right to speak at all?

What the Saudis have done, what they have permitted to be done, to Ms. Miyati is so inhumane that it almost beggars description.

Let’s begin with some background from previous posts.

First of all, this woman didn’t go to the authorities — her owner dropped her bruised and battered body at the hospital, denying any responsibility for her condition:

A 25-year-old maid who came to Saudi Arabia as a guest worker will leave behind most of her fingers and toes and part of her right foot when she is repatriated to Indonesia. In addition to the amputations, necessitated by gangrene, several teeth had been knocked out and she is in danger of losing an eye as a result of severe beatings.

That was back in April of this year. I warned then that she would be under the aegis of sharia law, and thus her life — being a mere female, Muslim or not — wasn’t worth much. I also noted that the jerks who did this to her would be let go. Prince (at the time) Abdullah, busy doing a quick cover-your-a** move, stuck his big nose into it, insisting that she get good care and transferring her to the lad-de-dah King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center. Abdullah even sent the Health Minister over to check on her. They both declared her experience at the hands of her employers “disgusting”.

That was then. In May, things started to go sideways. All of a sudden, it wasn’t the employers’ fault. Or if it was, they were only guilty of neglect. But the maid, she was really the guilty party. That woman had the nerve to accuse her owners employers of mistreating her. Therefore she had violated the law by making false allegations. Here are my remarks in May, followed by the hideously criminal medical report from a bunch of Saudi butchers with M.D. after their names:

Brutalization is not just a family affair in Saudi Arabia. The state is a willing and eager partner. And it can twist arms with a mighty force, especially arms with hands whose fingers are missing. On the one hand, there is the medical committee’s report:

A medical committee set up by Riyadh Governor from a number of specialists from the Ministry of Health concluded that the maid suffered wounds and bruises to her body, “suggesting she has been the victim of violence and that the gangrene could not have been caused as a direct result of beating and that it probably was caused by an inherent disease suffered by the patient.”

Her “inherent disease” is simply the grinding poverty which drove her to seek employment far from home. She wound up in Hell. The “inherent disease” of the Saud tribe is corrupt, terminally evil governance. These spawn of Stalin are unspeakable.

Now, to bring you up to date, in case you’ve managed to avoid this until now. It’s hardly “news” anymore, since it’s been floating around the blogosphere for awhile. The Religious Policeman (whose blog is dedicated “In Memory of the lives of 15 Makkah Schoolgirls, lost when their school burnt down on Monday, 11th March, 2002. The Religious Police would not allow them to leave the building, nor allow the Firemen to enter”) had a few sardonic things to say about how judges arrive at their numerology when it comes to handing down lashings for false allegations:

Continue reading

Sabotaging the Miserable House of the U.S. Military by Their Hands

The following article was published earlier today by the Center for Security Policy. The treatment of Raymond Ibrahim by the Army War College is a reminder of why Major Stephen Coughlin was so abruptly terminated as a consultant for the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Agents of the Muslim Brotherhood have been inserted in strategic positions at all levels of federal, state, and local government. This obviously includes the Pentagon:

Army War College Sides with CAIR

by Christopher Holton
June 14, 2019

Raymond Ibrahim is one of the most esteemed and intrepid experts on the threat from Islamic jihad and sharia.

He has written extensively on the subject matter and his work is simply beyond reproach.

In 2007 Ibrahim wrote The Al Qaeda Reader in which he translated the written and spoken words of Osama Bin Laden, Ayman al-Zawahiri and other Al Qaeda leaders. The Al Qaeda Reader is an indispensible window into the world of Islamic jihad.

Last year, Ibrahim came out with his excellent Sword and Scimitar,which details 14 centuries of conflict between the Islamic world and the West.

In addition to his prolific writing in books and columns, Ibrahim is a sought-after speaker.

Recently, the US Army War College invited him to speak.

And that is where the trouble began. In the end it shows an Army War College that has been penetrated by enemy influence operations.

When the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) got word that Ibrahim was slated to speak at the War College, their propaganda and character assassination mechanism shifted into high gear. CAIR contacted the War College and urged them to rescind Ibrahim’s invitation.

Unfortunately, the War College bowed to CAIR’s wishes and “postponed” Ibrahim’s appearance.

Had this been a civilian college or university that caved to CAIR, it could be chalked up to political correctness gone wild.

Continue reading

Trolling for the Muslim Vote in Denmark

The number of Muslims living in Denmark has grown large enough to have electoral significance. And, as in all other Western countries, Muslims organize themselves to vote as a bloc, usually for the left-wing parties — the Left seems more willing than the Right to adopt policies that attract Muslim votes.

Tania Groth, who translated the article below, includes these remarks:

Four years of leftist socialist, globalist open-doors government spells no end of trouble for Denmark. This election was a watershed moment, and it would not surprise me at all if we have seen the last of any future conservative government (not that the last “conservative” government was any great force in stemming the tide — on the contrary — and the immigration-critical Danish People’s Party did pretty much nothing).

In any case, with the demographic situation and Muslims organizing themselves to vote for radical leftist parties… it is the beginning of the end. Denmark is gaining speed on the slippery slope and, alas, they’re either too dumb to realize it, or too lazy to do anything about it.

I despair for my fellow Danes, I truly do.

The translated article from Jyllands-Posten:

The mobilization of Muslim voters, which led to massive advances in the Radical Liberals in vulnerable residential areas, does not please everyone.

“It worries me, because it shows that there is no separation of the various powers, but instead parties are bonded together not on political grounds, but rather on the premises of Islam. It can affect the very basic uniformity we have in Danish society,” says Søren Hviid Pedersen, a debater and high school teacher with a PhD in political theory.

As Jyllands-Posten reported Friday, in urban districts that are on the government’s ghetto list, there was an organized mobilization of the area’s residents. In Gellerup in western Århus, an electoral group was set up, which in co-operation with a mosque and various associations, recommended that people vote for the Radicals and the Unity List.

Nor does it please the debater and priest Sørine Gotfredsen:

“When you begin with this mobilization, and even stand with authorities in the lead recommending specific parties (to vote for), the parallel society has gone from being introverted and closed and in general completely deaf towards the surrounding society to wanting to enter into the debate in order to change society. The parallel society comes a step further in the struggle for what defines Denmark.”

In Gellerup the Radical Liberals went from a voting share of 5.1 percent in 2015 to 34.2 percent in 2019. The same trend was seen in Vollsmose, Tingbjerg and in Nørrebro, where the Unity List is also strong.

Continue reading

Breaking the Ramadan Fast in a Munich Park

The following video shows Muslims praying at an iftar event earlier this month in the Luitpoldpark in Munich. It seems to be an elaborate set-up, considering the sound system, the klieg lights, etc.

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

Video transcript:

Continue reading

Philippe de Villiers: Wherever Islam Settles, Things Always Turn Out Badly

In the past we’ve posted a number of videos featuring Philippe de Villiers (most recently here). Mr. de Villiers is a French author, historian, and former MEP. He is a rare bird among French intellectuals: an actual conservative. He is also the owner of the wildly successful Puy du Fou, a French amusement park based on French history and tradition.

In the following video from French TV, Mr. de Villiers lays out some of the basic facts about Islam. Many thanks to Ava Lon for the translation, and to Vlad Tepes for the subtitling:

Video transcript:

Continue reading

The Lamentable Shortcomings of Some English Judges and Senior Lawyers

What do English judges do when issues involving Islam and sharia appear in their courtrooms? Why, they remain blissfully unaware, of course, as Michael Copeland explains in his latest essay.

The Lamentable Shortcomings of Some English Judges and Senior Lawyers

by Michael Copeland

English judges have shown themselves to be lamentably lacking in knowledge of Islam. They confidently make statements which can easily be shown to be erroneous. What they express are assumptions, not grounded in scholarship. Recent cases demonstrate this assertion.

Mr. Justice Sweeney

Mr. Justice Sweeney presided over the trial in 2014 of the killers of Lee Rigby. One of them was Mujaahid Abu Hamza, formerly Michael Adebolajo, from Nigeria. He had converted to Islam and had been mentored and trained by Anjem Choudary. A diligent student of Islam, he had prepared from the Koran a list of some thirty-one Islamic scriptural authorisations and commands for the killing of non-muslims, which he handed to a passer-by after the gruesome murder.

The Koran has a very significant status: its text, all of it, forms part of Islamic law. No-one may alter any part of it: “None may change his words” (18:27). No-one may disregard any part of it. One who denies any verse instantly ceases to be a muslim and has to be killed as an apostate (Manual of Islamic Law, Reliance of the Traveller, o8.7(7)). The killing can be performed vigilante-style by anyone, and is penalty-free “since it is killing someone who deserves to die” (o8.4). Control is total: there is no room for conscientious objection.

“It is not for a believer, man or woman, when Allah and His Messenger have decreed a matter that they should have any option in their decision” (K. 33:36)

The doctrines set out in the texts are neither negotiable nor optional. Muslims are not permitted to choose: they are instructed. Dr. Salah al-Sawy, the Secretary-General of the Assembly of Muslim Jurists of America, issued a ruling, or fatwa, citing the above verse:

For things which have been stipulated in the texts of Islam, the Ummah [Muslim community] possesses no power except to acknowledge and obey.

The teachings of the Koran, advises imam Ahmed Saad of North London Central Mosque, “are universal and trans-time”: they are promoted as “valid from eternity to eternity”, explains Sam Solomon, former Professor of Sharia Law. Non-muslims, kafirs, are “unclean” (9:28), “the vilest of beasts” (8:22), as “apes and pigs” (5:60), “the most despicable” (98:6). They are to be regarded with “enmity and hatred forever” (60:4). “Kill them wherever you find them” commands the Koran (2:191, 9:5). Instruction after instruction in the Koran mandates violence against kafirs.

Ali Gomaa, Grand Mufti of Egypt, the highest Sunni Muslim religious authority in the world, makes the obligation clear:

Muslims must kill non-believers wherever they are unless they convert to Islam.

Lee Rigby’s killer explained to the passer-by who recorded him on a video:

We are forced by the Koran, in Sura At-Tawba…

Sura At-Tawba is Chapter Nine of the Koran. It does, indeed, at verse 5, command muslims “Kill the idolaters (“mushrikun’) wherever you find them”. “Idolaters” in Islam include Christians, because Islam holds, erroneously, that they worship the Cross. The Koran, it needs to be explained, is not arranged in chronological order. Chapter Nine is, in fact, the latest complete chapter. As such, it has a potent distinction under Islam’s doctrine of “abrogation”. It overrides and “abrogates” all the earlier peaceful verses. It is the final word.

All this was clear to Mujaahid Abu Hamza. Evidently, though, none of it was known to Judge Sweeney. Judges, in fairness, are qualified in English law. No part of their training includes Sharia law, the rules of Islam. The judge evidently shared the widely held, though erroneous, English fair play/goodwill assumption that Islam is benign, a Religion of Peace. He exposed his lack of knowledge in what he said to the defendants:

You each converted to Islam some years ago. Thereafter you were radicalised and each became an extremist — espousing a cause and views which, as has been said elsewhere, are a betrayal of Islam and of the peaceful Muslim communities who give so much to our country.

At that point the two defendants howled and shouted in protest, knowing, as they did and the judge did not, that what they had done was not a betrayal at all, but a dutiful fulfilment of Islam’s commands. They were conducted out of the court room. Of course, this enabled the media to represent them as wild and fanatical misunderstanders, thus prolonging the nation’s ignorance.

Mr. Justice Haddon-Cave

Mr. Justice Haddon-Cave presided over the trial of the young London Tube jihadi, whose bomb fortunately malfunctioned at Parsons Green Station, burning strongly but not exploding. Sentencing him, the judge said:

You’ll have plenty of time to study the Koran in prison…the Koran is a book of peace.

Robert Spencer wrote:

Has Mr Justice Haddon-Cave ever actually read the Qur’an? Almost certainly not; otherwise he wouldn’t have gone on record with this spectacularly asinine and counterfactual statement.

The Koran is no book of peace. Voltaire assessed it scathingly:

[It] teaches fear, hatred, contempt for others. Murder as a legitimate means of spreading and maintaining this devil’s doctrine. It denigrates women, divides people into classes and demands blood and more blood.

Gladstone held up a copy in the House of Commons and told Members:

Continue reading

Islamic Masochism in Bonn

The following video shows a mourning ceremony performed by Muslims on the street in the German city of Bonn. Three identifying features tell you they are most likely Shi’ites, rather than Sunnis:

1.   The black outfits — those are typically Shia. Sunnis normally wear white when they are expressing their religious devotion.
2.   The self-harm ritual, which is very similar to the one performed by Shi’ites at the Ashura festival every year, when they mourn the death of Hussein, the grandson of Mohammed who founded the Shia sect when he was martyred for refusing to submit to what eventually became the Sunni sect. Shi’ites celebrate Ashura by cutting themselves extensively with knives or flails.
3.   The fact that these men take off their shirts in public, which is forbidden under Sunni Islam. As you may remember, in some of the Islamic State’s snuff videos the bare chests of male corpses were pixilated out. A Sunni man is required to cover himself from neck to ankles; to expose any of the flesh in between is haram.
 

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

Video transcript:

Continue reading

The Show Trial

MC uses the upcoming trial of Tommy Robinson as a jumping-off point for a survey of the various tides that are currently at the flood in the affairs of men — at least, the affairs of men of the West.

The Show Trial

by MC

So the TOMMY show trial goes to a new episode in true Roland Freisler style, with the pseudo-fascist fuchsia pink ‘Conservative’ government making it all up as they go along, aided by a justice system who have lost sight of the need to be independent and to serve, all in the effervescent excitement of zealots of a new anti-hatey political religion.

The alt-right of Europe is described as ‘populist’, but I ask: is not populism supposedly at the heart of democracy?

Maybe the critics of ‘populism’ regard the supporters of populism as the great unwashed. Like any other religious fanatics, even political-religious fanatics, they have a name for those who do not believe as they do: Kuffar, yocks, goyim, shixas, left-footers — unbelievers all.

And Tommy Robinson is everything that the leftist pseudo-culture hates, a class system bounder who is clever if unsophisticated, a pleb who can tear holes in the warped opinions of the patricians of both the UK and European establishments.

If the aim is to go back to feudalism, then Tommy must be shut up. He cannot be allowed to embarrass his would-be betters — you know, those who believe that they KNOW best, and are thus self-entitled to inflict their perverted religion(s) on everyone else.

At the centre of Judaism and Christianity is the idea the each of us is individually accountable for our actions at the last judgement, but in this (new?) religion, one is judged at the whim of the reigning power-broker.

At the centre of Judaism and Christianity is a Law which applies to all, great and small. At the centre of this (new?) religion is a flexible opinion to which not only must one be seen to adhere, but for which one must also keep up with the changes as dictated by the hierarchy (to whom the laws don’t apply in the same way: “do as I say not as I do”).

Three little women now dominate the US Left. one is a poor little rich girl, another is a 9/11 apologist, and the other is an overt anti-Semite. These three curiosities, all from failed backgrounds, have one thing in common: they hold a virulent hatred for the white male. So “double, double toil and trouble.”

The white male built the USA as we currently know it, ably supported by the white female. The foundations of the USA are overwhelmingly white and overwhelmingly Judeo-Christian, and you cannot remodel the foundations of a building without seriously undermining any superstructure built upon it.

It is naïve to believe that the future of the USA (or any other Western country for that matter) can be ethnically re-engineered to conform to a new religious mythology of multicultural diversity.

The Religion of Peace has been making war against the unbeliever for 1400 years. Islam is the same now as it was yesterday, is today and will be forever. To believe that it has suddenly reformed is stupid in the extreme, and to try to lurve it into acquiescence is tantamount to doing the same thing time and time again and expecting a different result.

Continue reading

The Assumption of Dignity

In her latest essay, Tabitha Korol discusses Rashida Tlaib, who represents Palestine in the United States House of Representatives.

The Assumption of Dignity

by Tabitha Korol

Rashida Tlaib, the Muslim congresswoman who proclaimed that she feels more Palestinian than American in Congress, and wrapped herself in a Palestinian terrorist flag at her victory party on Friday, May 10, proudly declared, “There’s always kind of a calming feeling, I tell folks, when I think of the Holocaust.” We were deeply offended but not surprised as she had already revealed her lack of empathy for the tragic suffering of so many millions of innocents because she was raised in a culture of disrespect, contempt, bloodshed and death. The Hebrew Commandments mandate respect and reciprocity (The Golden Rule), and the Hebrew and Christian Bibles were able to humanize the savages that had existed previously, while the Koran commands that Muslims torment and kill Jews, Christians, and others unless they convert to Islam (2:120; 3:56; 3:85; 3:118; 3:178; 5:14; and more).

Tlaib added, “When I think of the Holocaust, and the tragedy of the Holocaust, and the fact that it was my ancestors — Palestinians — who lost their land and some lost their lives, their livelihood, their ‘human dignity,’ their existence in many ways, have been wiped out, and some people’s passports.”

Clarification is required here. The “tragedy of the Holocaust,” in her view, is that there were sufficient Jews who survived the Holocaust to re-establish their ancient homeland, Israel! As for the Arabs who “lost their land and livelihood,” they left their homes based on a hollow promise that they would return when the five Arab armies defeated and eliminated the Jews. Life presents choices, and the Arabs who chose to leave (fewer than 750,000) not only forfeited their homes but were also treated as outcasts by their own brethren, never being absorbed into the huge Islamic land mass. They were also held as bargaining pawns, neglected by their own so that the United Nations took on the responsibility of their subsistence. The Arabs who stayed in Israel are the grandparents of today’s Arab Israeli citizens. Unlike their Arab counterparts, the Jews (~850,000) who fled persecution in Arab lands were welcomed and absorbed, primarily into Israel, but also into Europe and the US.

So, the “outcast” Jews and the “outcast” Arabs had the same time, land and climatic conditions to create a home where they were, but the difference is “inherent dignity.” Out of malarial swampland and desert, the Jews worked tirelessly to build a successful, thriving country, today among the most advanced in the world, whereas the Arabs, now named “Palestinians,” continue to this day to wallow in victimhood and world pity, teaching their children to do the same, and extending their hands for additional “humanitarian” aid. Dignity is inherent, or it is not.

Let’s correct some intentional misinformation. The Jews are the indigenous people in what is now Israel. Israel became a nation in 1312 BCE, two thousand years before the rise of Islam. The Hebrews conquered the land in 1272 BCE and held dominion over it for a thousand years, with a continuous presence for the past 3,300 years. Arab refugees in Israel began identifying themselves as Palestinians in 1967, two decades after the establishment of the modern State of Israel, after losing yet another aggressive war against Israel and in need of a fallacious narrative on which to establish a tie with the land.

Continue reading

A Tale of Two Opinions

Europeans are of two minds.

One of those minds is a small one, shared by relatively few people — European commissioners, most members of the European Parliament, the leaders and members of establishment parties in the member states, elite academics, and media apparatchiks.

The second mind is the one shared by ordinary European citizens.

The first mind is of the opinion that Islam belongs in Europe: “Everyone knows that!”

The second mind believes that Islam has never belonged in Europe, does not belong there now, and never will belong there.

The first opinion is well-represented by Frans Timmermans. Mr. Timmermans is currently serving as first vice president of the European Commission, and is in line to succeed Jean-Claude Juncker as the next president of the European Commission. That is, if the new “populist” European Parliament doesn’t withhold its support for him; we’ll know after this week’s elections. The European Commission doesn’t answer to the European Parliament, or any other body but itself, but it might be reluctant to seat a new president who had already been given a vote of no confidence by its alleged “parliament”.

Anyway, here’s what Mr. Timmermans had to say about Islam in Europe. Many thanks to MissPiggy for the translation, and to Vlad Tepes for the subtitling:

In contrast, the video below highlights the results of a phone-in poll in Germany. More than 95% of the callers said: “No, Islam does NOT belong in Europe.”

Mind you, this was a self-selected sample — people who watched a certain TV program and decided to call in. But it’s still significant. And I doubt the citizens of France, Britain, Denmark, or Italy are any less “Islamophobic” than the Germans.

Once again, Many thanks to MissPiggy for the translation, and to Vlad Tepes for the subtitling:

Frans Timmermans is Dutch. Maybe the Dutch are more tolerant and understanding than the Germans. Maybe they, unlike the ignorant and unwashed of the European hinterlands, are aware of Islam’s rich place in European history, which it has held since 600 years prior to the time it was founded.

Video transcript #1:

Continue reading

German Feminist Departs the Narrative on Islam — And Pays For It

Alice Schwarzer is a prominent journalist and feminist in Germany. She isn’t someone who would normally be described as a “right-wing extremist”, but when she veered off the Narrative on the hijab (“a garment of modesty”, “empowers women”, etc.), she became one, and thereby got herself into hot water.

She must not have heard that Islam trumps every other leftist dogma — whether feminism, LGBTQ, abortion, or atheism. If one of those comes into conflict with sharia, then sharia wins. If Ms. Schwarzer didn’t know that before, she surely knows it now.

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

Video transcript:

Continue reading

Farage’s Fatal Flaw

The European parliamentary elections are coming up next weekend, and it looks like Nigel Farage’s Brexit Party will all but run the table when Britons choose their new crop of MEPs. But where does Mr. Farage stand on the issue of Islam? Michael Copeland’s new essay takes a look at the topic.

Farage’s Fatal Flaw

by Michael Copeland

Nigel Farage is remarkable. He knows his EU subject matter completely. His assessments are perceptive, his responses quick, forthright, and to the point. He is not afraid to speak his mind. The British like that. He has worked hard and persistently over the years after founding the United Kingdom Independence Party, UKIP.

It is very largely due to Farage that the British people have been made aware of the undemocratic nature of the EU. He has exposed the fact that its leaders are not elected but appointed by each other, that they cannot be dismissed by the voters, and that the European Parliament has no power to introduce legislation, but is given only the role of endorsing what the unelected leaders supply to it. He has left UKIP. At a time when British voters have hugely lost confidence in the traditional main parties, his newly-formed Brexit party seems likely to sweep the coming elections for the European Parliament. It is a testament to his leadership.

There is one important area, however, where Farage is not an authority, and that is Islam. Robert Spencer, a considerable expert on Islam, writes:

Nigel Farage… reveals his abject ignorance of Islam and the jihad threat…

No politician today can afford to be in that position. The danger is too great.

What “we absolutely must do”, insists Mr. Farage, is to “get the vast majority of muslims on our side against the bad guys.”

No deal, Mr. Farage. Learning curve needed. The “vast majority of muslims” are not available: Islam has walled them off: they are only permitted to be on Islam’s side and to do what Islam instructs. There is no mileage in that stratagem. It is a dead end. Muslims are not allowed any leeway by Islam’s rules. The doctrines set out in the texts are neither negotiable nor optional. Control is total:

It is not for a believer, man or woman, when Allah and His Messenger have decreed a matter that they should have any option in their decision. (Koran 33:36, part of Islamic law)

Muslims are not permitted to choose: they are instructed, and they have to submit. The word Islam means “submission”. There is no room for conscientious objection. Dr. Salah al-Sawy, the Secretary-General of the Assembly of Muslim Jurists of America, issued a ruling, or fatwa, citing the above verse:

For things which have been stipulated in the texts of Islam, the [Muslim community] possesses no power except to acknowledge and obey.

The famous Pakistani scholar Abul Ala Maududi (d.1979) stressed:

No one can regard any field of his affairs as personal and private… the Islamic State bears a kind of resemblance to the Fascist and Communist states.

There is no private conscience in Islam. The Egyptian sheikh Yassir al-Burhani makes this clear in an interview:

Continue reading

Søren Grinderslev: “There is Something Rotten in Denmark, and That Needs to Be Changed”

Below is a campaign video by Søren Grinderslev, who is standing for parliament in Zealand as a member of Rasmus Paludan’s Stram Kurs (“Hard Line”) party.

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

Video transcript:

Continue reading

Red-Pilled by the Bataclan

In the following excerpt from a roundtable discussion on French TV, a woman explains how the terrorist attack at the Bataclan restaurant in 2015 made her understand the danger that Islam poses to Western Civilization. She lived in the same building that housed the administrative offices of the Bataclan, and she knew one of the victims who was killed.

At the end of the clip she addresses a question to Daniel “Danny the Red” Cohn-Bendit, the notorious Green/Communist politician and pedophile, but we never get to hear his answer. I also noticed that Eric Zemmour was among those listening to her story.

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

Video transcript:

Continue reading