The Netherlands: The Geert Wilders Show Trial Continues


Most European Union (EU) nations operate under a Parliamentary political system rather than a Federal political system as in the USA. As such the Parliamentary system in the Netherlands is now being exposed in doing its version of a Trump-frame against Party for Freedom (Dutch acronym – PVV. Interesting irony on Wikipedia PVV info: the English Wikipedia listing is quite negative while the Dutch language Wikipedia [I used Google Translate] is more informational and balanced) leader Geert Wilders. WHY? Wilders is anti-Multiculturalist and anti-Muslim immigration all to preserve Western Culture.

 

It is extremely apparent Netherlands (and EU) power elites fear a drain-the-swamp avalanche if Wilders ever wins enough of a Parliamentary election to be the Netherlands Prime Minister.

 

The Gatestone Institute authored by Soeren Kern reports on exposé of Netherlands government corruption leveled against Wilders by Amsterdam-based newspaper De Volkskrant.

 

JRH 2/8/20

Your generosity is always appreciated – various credit, check 

& debit cards are accepted by my PayPal account: 

Please Support NCCR

Or support by getting in the Coffee from home business – 

OR just buy some FEEL GOOD coffee.

BLOG EDITOR: I’ve apparently been placed in restricted Facebook Jail! The restriction was relegated after criticizing Democrats for supporting abortion in one post and criticizing Virginia Dems for gun-grabbing legislation and levying protester restrictions. Rather than capitulate to Facebook censorship by abandoning the platform, I choose to post and share until the Leftist censors ban me completely. Conservatives are a huge portion of Facebook. If more or all Conservatives are banned, it will affect the Facebook advertising revenue paradigm. SO FIGHT CENSORSHIP BY SHARE – SHARE – SHARE!!! Facebook notified me in pop-up on 1/20/20: “You’re temporarily restricted from joining and posting to groups that you do not manage until April 18 at 7:04 PM.”

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

The Netherlands: The Geert Wilders Show Trial Continues

 

By Soeren Kern

February 8, 2020 at 5:00 am

Gatestone Institute

  • The emails indicate that Prime Minister Mark Rutte himself was involved in the decision to prosecute Wilders.

 

  • “Minister Van der Steur has deliberately withheld those documents, as is apparent from these documents. Moreover, it appears that another Justice Minister, Minister Opstelten, lied…” — Geert Wilders, February 5, 2020

 

  • “Mr. Presiding Judge, the Minister of Justice interfered in detail with my conviction. The documents even state that the Ministry of Justice instructed the public prosecutor — you will find the word ‘instruct’ in the documents….” — Geert Wilders, February 5, 2020

 

  • “And every day that this trial continues and you do not punish the conspiring prosecution, and the Ministry of Justice for their lies and haggling with the principles of an independent, fair and balanced trial, by declaring them inadmissible, every day this trial continues is a black day in the history of Dutch justice.” — Geert Wilders, February 5, 2020

 

  • “In the Wilders case, we certainly do not have to rely on the judge to agree with Wilders and to reach the conclusion that there has been a political trial, which is therefore not legally valid…. Wilders case appears to have been pre-cooked in the cabinet itself…. [Prime Minister] Rutte himself was involved…. The lying and spinning must stop somewhere…. This rule of law, in which judges and prosecutors receive instructions by the politicians on how to act, is rotten from within.” – Joost Niemöller, Dutch Journalist, Ongehoordnederland.nl, February 5, 2020

Newly released documents show that senior members of the Dutch government — including the former prime minister and justice minister — applied political pressure on public prosecutors to indict Geert Wilders, leader of the Party for Freedom for “hate speech.” Pictured: Wilders (left) sits next to current Prime Minister Mark Rutte at a meeting of political party leaders at the Dutch House of Representatives on March 16, 2017 in The Hague. (Photo by Carl Court/Getty Images)

 

Newly released documents show that senior members of the Dutch government — including the prime minister and two former justice ministers — applied political pressure on public prosecutors to indict Geert Wilders, leader of the Party for Freedom (Partij voor de Vrijheid, PVV), for hate speech for comments he made about Islam and Moroccan immigrants.

 

The documents, which the government turned over to the Amsterdam-based newspaper De Volkskrant in compliance with a Freedom of Information request, appear to confirm long-standing allegations by Wilders that the government’s decade-long legal war against him is far from a principled pursuit of justice, and instead politically motivated aimed at silencing his criticism of multiculturalism and mass migration from the Muslim world.

 

On February 3, De Volkskrant reported that the government documents — numbering nearly 500 pages — show that as early as 2008, then-Justice Minister Ernst Hirsch Ballin was “intensively involved” in the decision to prosecute Wilders.

 

According to De Volkskrant, the Public Prosecution Service (Openbaar Ministerie, OM) found nothing illegal about Wilders statements, but Hirsch Ballin pressed the OM on three separate occasions to change its assessment.

 

In June 2008, the OM dismissed more than 40 criminal complaints against Wilders on the grounds that his statements were made “in the context of political debate” and therefore “not of a punishable nature.”

 

In January 2009, the Amsterdam Appeals Court, the second-highest legal authority in the Netherlands, overturned the OM’s decision and ruled that Wilders could be tried for inciting hatred. Wilders said that it was a “black day for myself and for freedom of speech.”

 

The first trial against Wilders began on October 4, 2010. He was accused of insulting religious and ethnic groups and inciting hatred and discrimination for describing Islam as fascist and comparing the Koran to Adolf Hitler’s book Mein Kampf. Wilders argued that his statements were directed at Islam as an ideology and not at individual Muslim believers.

 

The trial collapsed on October 22, 2010, after it emerged that Tom Schalken, one of the judges in the case, had tried to sway a potential witness.

 

The retrial began on February 6, 2011 with three new judges. Wilders said that his trial was about preserving freedom of expression in the West.

 

On June 23, 2011, Wilders was acquitted of all charges. Judge Marcel van Oosten ruled that the statements by Wilders, while “gross and denigrating,” did not meet the standard of hate speech and as such were “acceptable within the context of public debate.”

 

Despite the acquittal, the government’s harassment of Wilders continued. Internal government emails recently published by RTL Nieuws show that Hirsch Ballin’s successor, Justice Minister Ivo Opstelten, repeatedly pressured the OM to bring a new case against Wilders. Opstelten, his aides and the prosecutor repeatedly consulted with each other before the decision to prosecute Wilders a second time was made in the fall of 2014. The OM has always denied that it was subject to outside political interference; the emails show that the OM denials were untruthful. An email sent by the lead prosecutor, Wouter Bos, on October 8, 2014, warned: “This must not leak!”

 

Other government emails show that the decision to bring a new case against Wilders was discussed as early as March 2014 in the Council of Ministers, the executive council of Dutch government, formed by all the ministers, including the prime minister. The emails indicate that Prime Minister Mark Rutte himself was involved in the decision to prosecute Wilders.

 

On March 18, 2016, Wilders went on trial again for allegedly inciting hatred against Moroccan immigrants. Prosecutors said that in March 2014, Wilders, while campaigning in The Hague, asked a crowd of supporters if they wanted more or fewer Moroccans in the Netherlands. The crowd said fewer. Wilders responded: “We’ll take care of that.”

 

Prosecution spokeswoman Ilse de Heer said that Wilders “targeted a specific race, which is considered a crime.” Wilders countered that his comments referred to Moroccan criminals, not to Moroccans in general, and that, in any event, Moroccans are not a race.

 

On December 9, 2016, Wilders was found guilty of inciting discrimination. The court, however, imposed no form of punishment; it said that the verdict was sufficient penalty. The Public Prosecutor demanded a fine of €5,000 ($5,500). Both Wilders and the Prosecutor appealed.

 

Since then, Wilders has been entangled in a protracted legal process that shows no signs of ending anytime soon. In an appeal hearing on February 5, 2020, Wilders voiced his anger over the political nature of the case against him:

 

“Presiding Judge, members of the court: The shamelessness of the Public Prosecution Office knows no boundaries. In a report we received yesterday and heard about today, they claim — one-and-a-half days after they received the documents from the Ministry of Justice — that nothing is wrong, that nothing has been found that indicates political influence.

 

“Rarely have I seen attorney generals who are so damaging to the rule of law, who don’t care about a fair trial. They are blinded by their hatred for me and the PPV. These kinds of people, like those two attorney generals, ensure that the trust of ordinary people, the common man and woman in the Netherlands, in the public prosecutor and the judiciary has fallen to a low point.

 

“The Public Prosecutor says that there is nothing wrong. Shame on you, attorney generals. What we all know now is enough to immediately end this political process, this charade….

 

“We already knew, Mr. Presiding Judge and members of the court, that officials from the Ministry of Justice, under the responsibility of former Justice Minister Ivo Opstelten, had adjusted press releases from the public prosecutor. That it was Minister Opstelten himself who wanted two press releases. That his officials had made a legal analysis of this case. And shared this with the public prosecutor.

 

“We already knew that they had helped the public prosecutor refute the defenses of the defense. That, for example, the phrase, ‘we will arrange that’ was brought to the attention of the public prosecutor by the Ministry of Justice. That they wanted to see the requisites in advance to provide comments.

 

“And now there are 475 pieces again. And indeed, we have not been able to read all of them, I mean, we could hardly read any of the pieces. But if I only look at what the media writes about it, such as Volkskrant or RTL journalist Pieter Klein, then only more shocking things have come to the surface.

 

“It even appears now that it [the case] has been discussed in the Council of Ministers, Mr. Presiding Judge. In the Council of Ministers. How much more political does it get?

 

“The documents show that a senior official of the Ministry of General Affairs of Prime Minister Rutte informed a senior official of Ministry of Justice of Minister Opstelten that the Prime Minister expects the Minister of Justice to be able to say something meaningful during the Council of Ministers of March 21, 2014 about whether the prosecution of Wilders is promising.

 

“How promising it is! Promising: according to the dictionary, I looked it up, that also means likely, successful. It has a positive connotation. The Council of Ministers, Mr. Presiding Judge. This concerns an opposition leader in the House of Representatives. That is shameful, but that is, unfortunately, not unique, because we also know from the documents that we received yesterday that it was — in relation to the Wilders 1 trial, but I still want to have mentioned it, to indicate what they are capable of — that it was then Justice Minister Hirsch Ballin who requested legal advice three times because he did not like the earlier advice that it was impossible to prosecute Wilders. He repeated his requests for advice until he received the advice he wanted.

 

“Back to this trial. Apart from the fact that it was discussed in the Council of Ministers — words cannot express, it does not become much more political and corrupt — former [Justice] Minister Van der Steur, the documents show, deliberately and personally stopped the publication, on the basis of the Dutch Freedom of Information Act (WOB), of an official message about my persecution. Minister Van der Steur stopped that.

 

“According to the documents, the decision on the WOB request was delayed until after the decision of the Court of First Instance. Until after my conviction. Imagine that. Mafia practices. Pure political influence of the worst kind. A minister who deliberately withholds relevant and possibly exculpatory documents until after the conviction. Words really cannot express…

 

“If we had received those documents earlier and also all the other documents requested on that basis, and now also obtained with the permission of your court, then perhaps it might not have come to a conviction at all…then the court might not have decided on a conviction in the first instance.

 

“Minister Van der Steur has deliberately withheld those documents, as is apparent from these documents. Moreover, it appears that another Justice Minister, Minister Opstelten, lied when he said during his interrogation by the commissioner, that outside the Council of Ministers — you can find it literally in the reports — he never spoke about this matter with other ministers.

 

“The documents that we received yesterday show that he did indeed talk to other ministers about this outside the Council of Ministers, namely with Interior Minister Ronald Plasterk.

 

“Mr. Presiding Judge, the Minister of Justice interfered in detail with my conviction. The documents even state that the Ministry of Justice instructed the public prosecutor — you will find the word ‘instruct’ in the documents — when and at what time they had to call me on October 9, 2014, to say that I was a suspect. For a phone call to me, saying that I was a suspect, the Public Prosecutor’s Office was instructed by the Ministry of Justice when and at what time and on what day that had to happen.

 

“My case has been dealt with in detail. And this whole trial, just like the Wilders 1 trial, is permeated with political influence. From phone calls, up to the Council of Ministers, and to ministers who withheld or delayed documents, an opposition leader from the national parliament has been prosecuted for ten years that way.

 

“Politics have always been involved, from civil servants to ministers and the Council of Ministers. Every day that this trial continues and you do not punish the conspiring prosecution, and the Ministry of Justice for their lies and haggling with the principles of an independent, fair and balanced trial, by declaring them inadmissible, every day this trial continues is a black day in the history of Dutch justice.

 

“This trial will have to stop today. I have said it many times. To be honest, I find it incomprehensible that this has not been decided long ago by declaring the prosecution inadmissible. If in the unfortunate event, even after today, you want to continue with this trial again, then indeed, and you have just said that, Mr. Presiding Judge, we need ample time to read all those documents and possibly based on those documents, also call new witnesses, like Minister Van der Steur. Like the prime minister. Like all the people involved.

 

“It is clear from these documents that they are more involved than we already knew. And see the minutes, the records, of the Council of Ministers as well. It appears to have been discussed. It has been said by the General Affairs official against the Justice official: ‘[Prime Minister Mark] Rutte wants to say something about the chances of this trial, Ivo [Opstelten].’ And Ivo went to the Council of Ministers on March 21. This has always been denied. Denied during the interrogations. Now it appears to have just happened. I want to see those documents from the Council of Ministers. I want to talk to people about it. It is not just about someone who steals a roll of licorice. It is about the opposition leader in the Dutch parliament whose persecution has been influenced up to the Council of Ministers.

 

“I want to hear the truth. I want to hear more than the truth about the political influence in this trial so that this trial is taken off the table as quickly as possible.

 

Veteran Dutch journalist Joost Niemöller wrote:

 

“On February 3, just before another hearing in the endless criminal case against Wilders, a bulk of internal documents were dropped by Justice Minister Ferdinand Grapperhaus which relate to the official and political involvement in this trial. These documents were intended for the House of Representatives and are now public.

 

“If the Chamber takes its task seriously, it must investigate the political nature of this lawsuit. That is emphatically not an investigation into the trial itself — after all, we have a separation of powers here — but an investigation into the political role behind the continuation of this trial….

 

“In the Wilders case, we certainly do not have to rely on the judge to agree with Wilders and to reach the conclusion that there has been a political trial, which is therefore not legally valid…. After the internal documents released, the issue has become even more flammable.

 

“The Wilders case appears to have been pre-cooked in the cabinet itself…. [Prime Minister] Rutte himself was involved…. The lying and spinning must stop somewhere.

 

“The anger of Wilders in court was only too understandable, and all too justified. It is the anger of more and more Dutch people. Even in the mainstream media it is now recognized that this political pre-cooking goes beyond all limits.

 

“This is the umpteenth example in which democracy is excluded by the judiciary, because the judiciary and the OM have become an extension of politics.

 

“This point is increasingly emphasized by, among others, Forum for Democracy leader Thierry Baudet, whose hypocritical opponents accuse him of rejecting the rule of law.

 

“This rule of law, in which judges and prosecutors receive instructions by the politicians on how to act, is rotten from within.”

 

Wilders’ trial will continue on March 23. Four additional hearings are scheduled for April. It remains unclear when his trial will end.

+++++++++++++++++

BLOG EDITOR: I’ve apparently been placed in restricted Facebook Jail! The restriction was relegated after criticizing Democrats for supporting abortion in one post and criticizing Virginia Dems for gun-grabbing legislation and levying protester restrictions. Rather than capitulate to Facebook censorship by abandoning the platform, I choose to post and share until the Leftist censors ban me completely. Conservatives are a huge portion of Facebook. If more or all Conservatives are banned, it will affect the Facebook advertising revenue paradigm. SO FIGHT CENSORSHIP BY SHARE – SHARE – SHARE!!! Facebook notified me in pop-up on 1/20/20: “You’re temporarily restricted from joining and posting to groups that you do not manage until April 18 at 7:04 PM.”

______________________

Soeren Kern is a Senior Fellow at the New York-based Gatestone Institute. Follow Soeren Kern on Twitter and Facebook

 

© 2020 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved. The articles printed here do not necessarily reflect the views of the Editors or of Gatestone Institute. No part of the Gatestone website or any of its contents may be reproduced, copied or modified, without the prior written consent of Gatestone Institute. [Blog Editor: Full disclosure – I did not seek permission and post will be removed if Gatestone Institute requests so.]

 

Donate to Gatestone Institute

 

The Unacceptable Cost of Refugee Resettlement


Justin Smith tackles the issue of settling refugees from cultures that have zero allegiance to American culture and heritage and idiocy of the American Left complicit in destroying our American heritage. Essentially making the Many eradicate the One – ending E Pluribus Unum.

JRH 12/31/19

Your generosity is always appreciated: 

Please Support NCCR

Or support by getting in the Coffee from home business – 

OR just buy some FEEL GOOD coffee.

Blog Editor: Rather than capitulate to Facebook censorship by abandoning the platform, I choose to post and share until the Leftist censors ban me. Recently, the Facebook censorship tactic I’ve experienced is a couple of Group shares then jailed under the false accusation of posting too fast. So I ask those that read this, to combat censorship by sharing blog and Facebook posts with your friends or Groups you belong to.

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

The Unacceptable Cost of Refugee Resettlement

Refugee Resettlement Is Not America’s Obligation 

 

By Justin O. Smith

Sent 12/28/2019 8:19 PM

 

Americans absolutely have the right to determine who, if anyone, enters the country, and it doesn’t violate any law or the Constitution to reject anyone claiming refugee status. So-called refugees do not have any automatic right to be granted entry, despite many leftist assertions to the contrary, and many of us are sick and tired of hearing our leaders’ cliched platitudes that suggest they have a “Big Heart”, much like Governor Bill Lee (R-TN), while they allow people into the country, who come to America to avoid fighting for their own countries; and, usually, of late, these refugees hold ideas and views so anti-American and so antithetical to the Constitution, that they eventually become a great disruptive factor to any community, as they work to undermine the nation.

 

On December 18th 2019, Tennessee Governor Bill Lee announced his decision to send a letter of consent to the Trump administration, in order to accept more refugees for resettlement next year. His decision coincides with those of other Republican governors who have also stated their intent to admit more refugees, such as Kim Reynolds of Iowa, Asa Hutchinson of Arkansas, Doug Ducey of Arizona, Kevin Stitt of Oklahoma, Gary Herbert of Utah and Doug Burgum of North Dakota.

 

And of course, numerous Democratic led states, such as California, New York, Washington, Pennsylvania, Virginia and others have already submitted letters of consent or are making preparations to do so. According to U.S. State Department arrival records, resettlement has occurred in the District of Columbia, every U.S. territory and state since 2003.

 

The state of Tennessee still has a high-profile Tenth Amendment lawsuit in the works, that Governor Lee has essentially undermined through his consent letter, effectively infuriating legislative leaders who had sued the federal government. The lawsuit questions the constitutionality of the refugee resettlement program.

 

House Speaker Cameron Sexton and Lt Governor Randy McNally (TN) issued a joint statement: “Our personal preference would have been to exercise the option to hit the pause button on accepting additional refugees in our state.”

 

While more than a third of Tennessee’s 95 counties are preparing to challenge any refugee resettlement, so too are other counties around America, from North Dakota to Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, and Indiana to Vermont, New Hampshire and Wyoming. Burleigh County North Dakota heard its chairman, Brian Bitner, voice citizens’ concerns, stating: “North Dakota is already the highest per capita state for refugee resettlement in terms of number of citizens, so in the absence of any sort of number, there’s no way we could know the cost to the state or the county, and I simply can’t support that.”

 

President Trump signed an executive order that allowed all fifty states to decide whether to accept refugees or not, in September of this year, and it requires a written letter of consent. This isn’t any guarantee that refugees won’t settle in an area that initially rejected the refugee resettlement program, since they can travel from state to state and county to county; and regardless of this, many Americans simply don’t want any more anti-American refugees, such as Somalia born Representative Ilhan Omar (D-MN), or Representative Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) — American born but raised to hate America by her “palestinian” Muslim mother, given entry to our nation, since they sound and act more like agents of Hamas, the Palestinian Liberation Organization, Hezbollah and Al Shabaab than someone interested in keeping America strong and free.

 

On August 26th 2019, Representative Ilhan Omar called for the government of Somalia to protect Hormuud Telecom Company, from United Nation peace-keepers, even though HTC has been financing the Al Shabaab terrorist organization for years. This link between Hormuud and Al Shabaab is well documented in the October 19th 2019 report compiled by the International Policy Group, entitled ‘Reaping the Whirlwind — Hormuud Entrepreneurs and the Resurgence of Al Shabaab’.

 

One should note that 45 Somali Muslims left their homes in Minneapolis to join the Somali based Al Shabaab Islamic terror group or ISIS, in 2007, as documented by FBI statistics. And as of 2018, a dozen more were arrested as they attempted to leave the U.S. for their expressed purpose of fighting for ISIS.

 

According to Steve Emerson of the Investigative Project, Representative Rashida Tlaib was photographed, in January 2019, with Abbas Hamideh, a Hezbollah supporter, and again in March with Nader Jalajel, a Palestinian activist who mourned the death of a Palestinian terrorist who had murdered a Jewish rabbi the previous year.

 

America has far too many natural born citizens who seemingly hate Her to be bringing in foreign nationals who hate America too, doesn’t She?

 

Refugees come from many countries across the globe, fleeing specific danger in their homelands, although the bulk of refugees have been from Iraq, Syria and Somalia since 2015; and a large number is comprised of people who simply wouldn’t fight for their war-torn countries. They come here too often simply from necessity, in their eyes, and safety, and not out of any sense of kindred spirit or love for the American way of life, our freedom and our liberty. And so, they set about life in their own tradition, with the same associated flaws that created the troubles in their country, regardless of its unseemly and foreign nature and cloistered within an American community.

 

Americans don’t want to see their neighborhoods permanently transformed into United Nations refugee camps filled with welfare dependents, as they now find in Minneapolis where the crime rate has soared exponentially, largely due to the rapid and massive influx of Somali Muslim refugees. According to Steven Camarota‘s 2015 study (The High Cost of Resettling {Muslim} Middle Eastern Refugees), it costs taxpayers $64,370 for each Muslim refugee, which is twelve times UN estimates to care for one refugee in surrounding Middle Eastern nations. Even worse, the crime rate rose by fifty-six percent in Minneapolis, between 2010 and 2018, due to criminal activity by Somali Muslim gangs.

 

For God’s sake, what is wrong with being a bit more discerning in regards of the refugees America accepts? Why can’t we accept more like Ayn Rand, staunch anti-communist defender of liberty, Dith Pran, Pulitzer prize winning photo-journalist and translator for U.S. Military Assistance Command (Cambodia) and Albert Einstein, a genius physicist and Nobel Laureate?

 

The United States granted an astronomical number of asylum requests in September 2019 to a combined 70,246 Afghan refugees and Special Immigration Visas (Afghan “allies”) and 161,665 Iraqi refugees and SIVs. The war in Iraq ended in 2011, so there really isn’t any excuse for U.S. taxpayers to be funding new lives in America for anyone from Iraq, other than the truly persecuted Christians who are still trapped in the region.

 

America spent enormous sums of money and lost thousands of fine men and women to give Iraqis a better path forward and a new chance to govern themselves as free men and women. Is there any good reason that justifies moving tens of thousands of Iraqis, or Syrians or Somalians for that matter, to any American town?

 

President Trump is only willing to give 18,000 refugees entry to America this year, which is the lowest number authorized since the program’s inception in 1980. In contrast, President Barack Obama was willing to accept 110,000 refugees in 2017.

 

Amid the current anti-open borders sentiment in America, the open borders crowd, the Leftists of America always seem to manage to move U.S. policy in the opposite direction, just as they are currently attempting through a lawsuit filed against President Trump’s executive order on November 21st 2019. Although public support for deceasing the numbers of legal immigration of all kinds is significant, the supporters are not well organized, unlike the Leftist coalition of ethnic churches and organizations that skillfully navigates the political arena in strong opposition to any proposal restricting any segment of legal immigration, including asylum seekers.

 

The lawsuit was filed in a Maryland federal court by lawyers representing the Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service, Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society and Church World Service. Shortly afterwards, Krish O’Mara Vignarajah, president of LIRS, stated: “This executive order is unconstitutional and compassionless, and reflects a complete misunderstanding of the refugee resettlement process in this country.”

 

Over the past decade, Ann Corcoran, a refugee law and policy expert, has given America outstanding briefings on the issue. She outlines in great detail the ultimate conflict of interest, by which refugee contractors’ entire budgets grow commensurate to the number of refugees they resettle. The more communities they get on board with refugee resettlement, the more money they receive, and so their is nearly a knock down dragged out fight over all 3007 counties across America, with the goal of moving them to send letters of consent to the State Department.

 

Unbelievable as it seems, most Republican politicians are somewhat amenable to the one-sided pressure for all the wrong reasons, and in some cases, they [Blog Editor: i.e. (alleged) Conservative] are absolutely in the pockets of Open Borders Inc. And although conservatives have ceded a great deal of America to the Left, the refugee coalition has not ceded a single county; and so, thanks to many complacent and corrupt GOP politicians, refugee resettlement has thrived in the most conservative areas of the nation. The financial and cultural costs of refugee resettlement have been unacceptable and enormous.

 

On July 5th 2017, a report, entitled ‘The U.S. Refugee Admissions Program: A Roadmap for Reform’, written by policy analyst David Inserra noted that at least sixty-one people who came to the United States as refugees engaged in terrorist activities between 2002 and 2016. The report detailed scores of other refugees who lied or took part in terror plots, as part of a study aimed at reforming the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program. The report concluded there was a need to place strict limits on refugee numbers and restrictions on the refugees themselves.

 

Surely every knowledgeable American understands full well that there isn’t any universal right to migrate, and resettlement isn’t the solution to mass displacement. Our policymakers have a duty and a responsibility to make certain our nation only accepts as many refugees as can be safely scrutinized, investigated and assimilated. More importantly, America is not obligated to resettle refugees, and the ones we do resettle, America does so from a humane perspective and in hopes that such actions will also benefit our national interests.

 

So, to all the naive shmucks and corrupt, complicit liars out in Fly-Over-Country, who are playing a dangerous game with American lives, place your “Big Heart” on full display, but ignoring a moral and constitutional duty to place American interests and American lives above those of foreign nationals’ needs is unconscionable and treasonous, at its best. Pressure Saudi Arabia, the United Emirates and Qatar to utilize their millions of dollars to resettle Muslim refugees in their own nations, as America works to facilitate the integration and assimilation of refugees it already has accepted, if and when such a feat is possible.  Don’t let your “Big Heart” drive all common sense from between your ears, while your platitudes set the further destruction of America in motion, since the perpetrators of future Islamic terror attacks are already here: And as such, America would be most wise to, at the very least, halt any more Muslims from coming to America.

 

By Justin O. Smith

++++++++++++++++++++

Blog Editor: Rather than capitulate to Facebook censorship by abandoning the platform, I choose to post and share until the Leftist censors ban me. Recently, the Facebook censorship tactic I’ve experienced is a couple of Group shares then jailed under the false accusation of posting too fast. So I ask those that read this, to combat censorship by sharing blog and Facebook posts with your friends or Groups you belong to.

_______________________

Edited by John R. Houk

Source links and text enclosed by brackets are by the Editor.

 

© Justin O. Smith

 

Introducing the Tolerance of the Intolerable:


What Happens When Mixing Multiculturalism, Islam & Multiculturalism?

John R. Houk

© July 12, 2019

 

On July 10 I posted about Tommy Robinson being a “Rebel Against UK Multiculturalism” pleading for his support even after his unjust conviction criminalizing telling the truth about Muslim pedophilia rapists in the United Kingdom.

 

On July 11 I posted “The UN, Globalist Multiculturalism & Islam One World Despotism” being an agenda leading toward the end of National Sovereignty and Liberty in Western Culture but especially as we Americans have known in the U.S. of A.

 

Today’s post somewhat combines the themes of the last two posts about how elitist Multiculturalists are creating New Speak terminology to force a brainwashed population to tolerate what common sense would tell you is intolerable.

 

It’s time for an English vocabulary lesson. Noisy Room has picked up a Linda Goudsmit post at Pundicity introducing the word “Tolerism” describing Tommy Robinson’s political persecution by the UK judicial system ending Free Speech while submitting to Islamic dhimmitude in the name of culture destroying Multiculturalism.

 

Multiculturalism Destroying Cultures:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

JRH 7/12/19

Your generosity is always appreciated:

Please Support NCCR

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

The Humanitarian Hoax Of Tommy Robinson’s Conviction: The Death Of Free Speech – Hoax 38

 

By Linda Goudsmit | Pundicity

July 11, 2019 11:29 AM

Noisy Room

 

Tommy Robinson surrounded by police

 

The Humanitarian Hoax is a deliberate and deceitful tactic of presenting a destructive policy as altruistic. The humanitarian huckster presents himself as a compassionate advocate when in fact he is the disguised enemy.

 

The conviction of journalist Tommy Robinson is a humanitarian hoax that has destroyed free speech in England and threatens free speech worldwide. What does this have to do with America?

 

Tommy Robinson is a British journalist who has been reporting on Muslim rape gangs throughout England that have been raping little English school girls with impunity for decades. The savagery of their acts, and that British authorities are covering up this massive atrocity against the innocent, is extremely destabilizing to British society. Civilized people reject the protection of perpetrators at the expense of victims.

 

For civilized people, Tommy Robinson is the heroic whistleblower who exposed the horror of Muslim rape gangs and their unspeakable acts of barbarity in England. British society experiences enormous confusion and cognitive dissonance because British authorities protect Muslim rape gangs and embolden them by prohibiting the reporting of their heinous acts of savagery. Why is this happening?

 

Let’s sort this out by examining the reasons in numerical order.

 

  1. Tolerism

 

Tolerism is defined by Howard Rotberg in his 2014 book, Tolerism: The Ideology Revealed, [Blog Editor: The GoodReads.com added by me. Book Review] as “excessive leniency to opinions of certain groups, and excessive intolerance to the opinions of other groups.” Rotberg explains that the breakdown of Western society is a direct result of Leftist tolerists who insist that tolerance is more valuable than justice.

 

The once free Britain has reduced itself to a dhimmi nation by tolerating its sharia-compliant Muslim population at the expense of its native Christian population. Make no mistake, there is an Islamic religious war being waged worldwide that seeks to eliminate competing religions and establish a global Islamic caliphate ruled by religious sharia law. Britain’s leaders are tolerists insisting that tolerating Muslim rape gangs in the name of cultural diversity is more important than justice for its victims. Tolerism is Britain’s fatally flawed political ideology providing victory to the Muslim Brotherhood, the multi-national organization that has declared Islamic religious war on the West.

 

Anyone who still questions the global intentions of the Muslim Brotherhood should read its 1991 An Explanatory Memorandum: From the Archives of the Muslim Brotherhood in America the general strategic goals for the group in North America.

 

Populism rejects the twisted logic of political tolerism and embraces the common sense warning of Austrian/British 20th-century philosopher Sir Karl Popper:

 

“If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. . . . We should, therefore, claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant.”

 

The British court’s decision values tolerance over justice. Why would they do that?

 

  1. Leftist/Islamist Alliance

 

In America, the Leftist/Islamist alliance is trying to destabilize and overthrow duly elected populist President Donald Trump. POTUS is the consummate whistleblower in America, exposing the staggering malfeasance of the Washington swamp and the Leftists, Islamists, and globalists who live there.

 

Leftists in America ignore, “Islamic tenets of misogyny, homophobia, antisemitism, pedophilia, gang-raping non-Muslim little girls, female genital mutilation, and wife-beating as long as these sharia-compliant Muslims are anti-American anti-Trumpers. Any anti-American anti-Trump Islamist is welcomed into the Leftist tribe because they are all warriors in the Culture War against America. America-first President Donald Trump is the existential enemy of the Culture War and the target of the Leftist/Islamist alliance.”

 

In England, the Labor party is equivalent to the Leftist Democrat party in America, both prefer globalism to national sovereignty. In England, the Labor/Islamist alliance is trying to destabilize England and create chaos to subvert the will of the people and stop the implementation of BREXIT.

 

So, what do President Trump and Tommy Robinson have in common? Tommy Robinson is the whistleblower in England and the existential enemy of the leftist Labor party that prefers tolerism to justice. Why?

 

Tommy Robinson and President Trump are claiming, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant.

 

  1. Tolerism vs Justice

 

What is the goal of tolerism in England and America? Why do Leftists in America and Labor in England ignore the obvious violations of the laws and norms in their Judeo-Christian countries and surrender their culture to the savagery and barbarism of Islamic sharia norms?

 

Tolerism is a paradox because tolerists selectively decide what to tolerate. Whistleblowing and truth-telling about Muslim rape gangs is not tolerated – it is criminalized. So, a two-tier system of justice is established that prohibits anti-Muslim speech and protects anti-Christian and antisemitic speech. Why?

 

If you want to know the motive, look at the result. The effects of this egregious double standard is that anti-Christian burning of churches, and antisemitism including defacing synagogues is rampant and unpunished in England. If the British courts continue to protect sharia-compliant Muslim perpetrators and their criminal acts at the expense of native Britains, social chaos will result. Remember, seismic social change requires social chaos.

 

Tommy Robinson and President Trump, each in his own way, is exposing the truth of tolerism and its global anti-American, anti-British attacks on our sovereignty and shared Judeo-Christian norms. Their separate efforts continue to unravel the ongoing deceitful multi-national efforts fomenting the social chaos necessary to impose a globalized New World Order.

 

Sir Karl Popper warned us about tolerism. George Orwell warned us that, “During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.”

 

  1. Freedom of Speech

 

Every tyrannical regime the world has ever known begins its reign of terror by eliminating freedom of speech. Lenin did it, Trotsky did it, Hitler did it, now Leftists in England and in America are doing it by disingenuously relabeling free speech as hate speech. There is no freedom without freedom of speech which is why speech is universally the first freedom eliminated by despots.

 

The same tolerist Culture War being waged against America by the Leftist/Islamist alliance is attacking England. Leftism and Islamism have a common cause to destroy the status quo even though their ultimate objectives will make them inevitable enemies. The Islamists are fighting for a global religious Islamic caliphate. The Leftists/Labor are fighting to destroy the national sovereignty and cultural identities of their respective countries in preparation for socialism in America, and a unified European State in England.

 

The irony, of course, is that members of the Leftist/Labor/Islamist alliance are all useful idiots for the globalist elite who finance and foment their lawlessness. The alliance members are just too arrogant to realize they are participating in their own destruction.

 

Seismic social change requires social chaos. The Leftist/Labor/Islamic alliances in the United States and England are providing the necessary social chaos for the globalists who fully intend to impose a New World Order – an internationalized world ruled by themselves under the corrupt auspices of the United Nations. There is no humanitarianism in the conviction of whistleblower Tommy Robinson. His conviction is part of the coordinated attack on free speech and a free and sovereign England imposed by the globalist elite using tolerism and the unholy Labor/Islamist alliance.

 

July 8, 2019, will be recorded as the day free speech died in Britain, the day Tommy Robinson was convicted for reporting the crime of Muslim rape gangs in England. The only law that Tommy Robinson broke was the Islamic supremacist sharia law forbidding criticism of Islam. Islamic sharia law does not consider the raping of little English school girls to be a crime – the prohibition is against criticizing and reporting it. England has reduced itself to a grotesque dhimmi nation willing to sacrifice its own little girls in a globalist power grab that requires social chaos.

 

The humanitarian hoax of tolerism that convicted Tommy Robinson must not be allowed to silence him permanently. Hopefully, populist President Donald Trump will grant Tommy Robinson humanitarian asylum in the United States where he can still expose the realities of an Islamicized England. Britain is, after all, the proverbial canary in the expansionist Islamist coal mine.

________________________

Introducing the Tolerance of the Intolerable:

What Happens When Mixing Multiculturalism, Islam & Multiculturalism?

 

John R. Houk

© July 12, 2019

____________________

The Humanitarian Hoax Of Tommy Robinson’s Conviction: The Death Of Free Speech – Hoax 38

 

© 2019 NoisyRoom.net

 

The UN, Globalist Multiculturalism & Islam One World Despotism


John R. Houk

© July 11, 2019

 

After WWII the image of the United Nations was an international organization that the Allied victors would utilize to prevent another nation to pull any conquest objectives ala Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy and Imperial Japan. After the war and the public emerging of atrocities committed by Nazis and the Japanese war machine populations of Western nations breathed a sigh of relief that a UN would prevent global despotic atrocities.

 

The first dent in this relief was the Communist international revolutionary agenda of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR – essentially Russia) and Communist (Red) China. Those Communist giants used their satellite vassal yet officially independent nations to fill the UN with Marxist opposition to everything Western especially to the USA.

 

The USSR and Red China in their efforts to woo global Communism began to assist Third World nations willing to be anti-Western (with anti-Americanism as the focus) in their development. Hence Communist revolutionaries began to emerge in newly independent nations formerly dominated as Western Colonies primarily of European nations.

 

The Muslim world advanced despots as monarchs and dictators who nationalized the Western control of the oil industries managed by Multinational Corporations (MNC). Islam is inherently antagonistic to all things non-Muslim inspired by Islamic revered writings.

 

The USSR tried to use this Islamic antipathy to export Communist principles to the Muslim world. However, Islam-alone brainwashing ultimately meant the Muslim despots used the USSR support to offset the power of Western supported MNCs. Essentially Muslim despots played an international game of pitting the USA and the USSR against each other to shore up their own Islamic authoritarian regimes.

 

THEN the unthinkable according to Islamic doctrine occurred. Jews abused for centuries in the West gained sympathy due to Nazi genocide resulting in a gradual reclamation of the Jewish Homeland. A homeland that had been under one form or another of Islamic control due to conquest since the mid-600s AD.

 

A Jewish Homeland is unthinkable because in intolerant doctrine, once conquered by Islam a land must remain Islamic forever. The Islamic vision of conquest domination in three opinions:

 

 

 

 

Five Stages of Islamic Conquest

The absence of Communist satellite nations due to the collapse of the USSR led to the domination of two groups in the UN: Nations dominated by Leftist Globalist Multiculturalism and Nations dominated by Islamic Thought.

 

Since I’m not really an erudite writer let’s look at some quotes relating to Leftist (perhaps Marxist) Globalist Multiculturalism (all from essays or opinions that should be read in full at your leisure):

 

The Pox of Multiculturalism; By Bruce Walker; American Thinker; 5/19/18:

 

What the left calls “multiculturalism” is actually the systematic destruction of cultures and the replacement of these cultures by a synthetic, artificial, and meaningless global culture.  When the left talks about “diversity,” it really means the crushing of differences in thought, values, and art into a sort of baby food which neither nourishes the soul or elevates the mind.

 

 

Multiculturalism is an effort to destroy culture in the name of harmonizing cultures.  It is, at best, gross globalist imperialism.  It is, at worst, the Orwellian deconstruction of all societal values and beliefs.

 

Multiculturalism: As A Tool To Divide And Conquer – The Layman’s Primer; By Louis Beam; LouisBeam.com:

 

No nation is born multicultured. Multiculturalism is an unnatural as well as unhealthy condition that can only afflict states in national decline. A multicultural state carries in it’s [sic] geneses the seeds of eventual national destruction.

All multicultural nations will be found to be in a state of political, moral, economic and social decay. Greed and corruption will characterize the government coupled with oppressive measures directed against citizens. Lies and deceit will be stock and trade of media, politicians, and educational institutions. Such are the bellwethers of a multiculturalist advent.

In modern times multiculturalism is instituted from the top down as an elitist ruling class tool used to play one or more racial or ethnic groups against another. The ensuing cultural melee serves the political designs, economic goals and power needs of elitist rulers and their sponsors. This technique was developed by Marxist ideologues who used multiculturalism in Russia to divide and conquer resistance to the institution of a communist state. The end result of their successful takeover was the murder of thirty million humans in the Soviet Union alone. Many more elsewhere.

The same internationalist cabals who sponsored Lenin, Trotsky, and Stalin as the multicultural leaders of the Soviet state from their banking houses in New York, similarly sponsor the multicultural leaders of the United States, Canada, and Europe today. An interlocking network of foundations such as Ford and Carnegie, international banking empires such as Rockefeller and Rothschild, and government agencies firmly in their control work in tandem with controlled propaganda outlets such as the New York Times, CBS, and Hollywood, to promote, foster, and institute multiculturalism today. While the examples used in this essay deal primarily with the United States the same process with the same methods is being employed elsewhere. This of itself is prima facie evidence of a cabal which promotes multiculturalism as a tool to achieve its objectives.

Multiculturalism is being used as a hammer to forge the compliant people who will compose the obedient states of the New World Order. As a weapon of post modern political warfare multiculturalism has few equals, which, thus explains its use currently against all of Western Europe, the United States, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. Deliberate fragmentation of these nations and the resultant loss of national identity and purpose into politically disharmonious units, serves as a stepping stone to world government. And who will compose that world government? A ruling class consisting of an “economic hierarchy” that replaces the philosophy of the nineteenth century “natural hierarchy.” A force that views countries and the people that live in them first as economic targets to be exploited, and second as military targets to be defeated if they resist.

 

 

Social instability, caused by a steady erosion of standards and values, coupled with a scramble over dwindling economic opportunities by conflicting ethnic groups, produces precisely the alienation and conflict needed to implement a multicultural state. Further, the lack of common standards and values leads to personal disorganization, resulting in unsociable behavior. This is the life support system of a multicultural state. In a word: anomie.

As a political tool multiculturalism has several applications. It is used to prevent a national consensus among the electorate. The confluence of divergent life views, cultures, beliefs, religions, ethnic habits, etc. insures a swirling river of discontent upon which the multiculturalist rides. It is a perfect method of ensuring that there can never in the future be accord, unity, and a common agreed upon destiny among those ruled. Multiculturalism represents a basic form of divide and conquer, to the benefit of corrupt government and its sponsors.

Multiculturalism is likewise a financial tool used to socially and economically level a targeted population. When implemented, it becomes in fact a battle over scarce resources and shrinking economic opportunities, with government weighing in on the side of cheap labour. A continual flow of impoverished workers is insured through immigration (both legal and illegal), who by working for less compensation continually drive wages down. For the vast majority of citizens the standard of living will not increase, but rather constantly decrease.

 

As a general rule:

 

The amount of multiculturalism in any society is directly proportional to the corruption at the top of a political system and inversely proportional to national unity.

This means: multiculturalism will have succeeded in so much as the country has failed.

 

Multiculturalism can further be used as “transitional tool” to take a targeted population from one form of government to another. When a political condition of greed, massive corruption, and diversity of objective is coupled to a social condition of drugs, violence, and discontent, therein exists the perfect environment for governmental change to a system that more closely serves long term interests of ruling elitists. Seeing that both the problem and solution are provided by the same people makes the CIA’s importation of some one hundred billion dollars worth of cocaine and other drugs into the United States understandable. While at the same time explaining FBI, ATF, and other, more secretive federal government agencies involvement in domestic terrorism or its cover-up. Suddenly, that which erroneously was previously thought to be unrelated events show their common thread and purpose.

Within the deleterious milieu of multiculturalism exists the propaganda opportunity for re-education of the people into a more malleable entity. A targeted population will be shaped mentally by new forms of public education in the schools, media indoctrination, and by elitist pronouncements. Thus placed in a crucible of economic necessity and social pressure, once free citizens become despondent masses, adjusting to and accepting fundamentally changing national circumstances as a matter of expedient survival. For the reticent, conformity by force will ensue in the form of legal penalties disguised as ant-drug, anti-terrorism, or anti-hate laws. All of this leading toward what George Orwell so aptly predicted in his book 1984:

 

“Almost certainly we are moving into an age of totalitarian dictatorships. An age in which freedom of thought will be at first a deadly sin and later on a meaningless abstraction.”

A society is being spawned where those with the most unsociable behavior, deviant lifestyle, or personal failures are given the most by government. This is TRUST ME READ ENTIRE ESSAY

 

The Globalism Threat – Socialism’s New World Order; By Jeff Carlson, CFA; TheMarketsWork.com; 2/24/17:

 

 

Globalism is often clad in free trade garb but in fact there is a hindrance of free trade with globalism. Globalism, through its attempt to erase national borders (and identities), applies a broad economic brush to varying problems and economic conditions of differing regions and as a result fails by definition. Globalism tends to exacerbate economic problems rather than fixing them, and hinders free trade by distorting market responses.

Globalism initiates with talk of open borders and free trade but inevitably leads to concentrated government and centralized planning. …

 

 

Although the terms are often used interchangeably, Globalization is NOT the same as Globalism. They are very different things. Globalization is a natural economic outgrowth of trade. Globalism is a political goal – plain and simple.

 

 

Globalism differs from Capitalism in several distinct aspects. Globalism promotes globally centralized control of laws, foreign policy and monetary policy. Unlike Capitalism, Globalism inherently blends rule of law with rule of man. Globalism comes into existence through the ownership of laws. And through the ownership of law, Globalism gains ownership of nations.

 

If you refer back to Gramsci, Alinsky and the Left, you will recall I introduced several concepts – Counter Hegemony, Critical Theory and Gradualism. Antonio Gramsci created the Theory of Cultural Hegemony – the way in which nations use cultural institutions to maintain power in capitalist societies. Gramsci felt that in order to change society, the entire value systems of Societal Institutions must be overturned. This would require the introduction of an entirely new set of values and beliefs – Counter Hegemony. Gradualism – along with Critical Theory – were the processes used to achieve Counter Hegemony. Marxist/Socialist philosophers – led by the Frankfurt School – picked up where Gramsci left off and brought these ideas to America. They refined Gramsci’s Marxist ideas – they reshaped them.

 

 

If Culture is the true source of Capitalism – how do you truly change Culture? You change it by removing the identities of Culture. As Theodor Adorno stated, you create a “genuine liberal” – an individual “free of all groups, including race, family and institutions”. A Global Citizen.

 

The tool used to accomplish this goal? Political Correctness – or “same thinking”. Raymond V. Raehn put it this way; “Political Correctness seeks to impose a uniformity of thought and behavior on all Americans and is therefore totalitarian in nature”. Political Correctness is Cultural Marxism – also known as multiculturalism. Political Correctness is the translation of Marxism from economic to cultural terms. And once you’ve changed the culture you can change the laws.

 

The end game of Political Correctness – its ultimate goal – is Globalism.

 

And it is here we must be careful. For Globalization has opened a pathway to Globalism. This is the very reason the two are so often presented as the same. An economic process – Globalization – has been altered and repackaged to further a goal of societal change. This is why Globalists so often dress Globalization as Globalism. Globalization is required for Globalism to become a reality. But Globalism is NOT a necessary prerequisite for Globalization.

 

 

… Just as Communists first seek to impose Socialism on their way to Communism, so do Globalists seek to turn Globalization into a stepping stone towards Globalism. Their goal is to convince citizens they are one and the same. Using Gradualism.

 

But there is a distinct difference – and an obstacle. Globalization can lead to benefits for all while still preserving the nation-state. Which means the concept of national identity stands firmly in the way of Globalism. In order to maintain national identity you must first maintain self-governance and full sovereignty. Globalism seeks to break national identity by subsuming national laws. Ultimately, preservation of national or sovereign law is the key to preventing Globalism.

 

In 1995, the Commission on Global Governance issued a report titled Our Global Neighborhood. The report advanced the view that nations are interdependent and called for a strengthened United Nations. The Commission made a standard definition of global governance stating that;

 

“Governance is the sum of the many ways individuals and institutions, public and private, manage their common affairs. It is a continuing process through which conflicting or diverse interests may be accommodated and cooperative action may be taken. It includes formal institutions and regimes empowered to enforce compliance, as well as informal arrangements that people and institutions either have agreed to or perceive to be in their interest…It is our firm conclusion that the United Nations must continue to play a central role in global governance.”

 

It was the U.N.’s first real published step towards World Governance. Towards Globalism.

 

 

… Of particular note is the UN’s focus and treatment of Israel. Since the creation of the UN’s Human Rights Council in 2006, there have been 121 condemnations of nations for human rights violations. Of these, 62 condemnations were of Israel. Condemnations for the rest of the world’s nations combined equaled 59.

 

Corruption, fraud and mismanagement in U.N. procurement have been ongoing since the organization’s creation.

 

 

How is “piercing the shell of state sovereignty” accomplished? It is done slowly and incrementally. It is done through division – by undermining society through created rifts. It is accomplished through the application of Political Correctness. Society is slowly fractured into divisions of class, race and gender. Sub-groups are created within these divisions to further enhance societal stress. By lessening national identity the process of usurping national sovereignty becomes easier. There is a reason why George Soros, the self-avowed billionaire globalist, funds 150 different progressive organizations through his Open Society Foundation. Groups like the ACLU, Black Lives Matter, CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations), Human Rights Campaign, La Raza and the Women’s March. More importantly, this is why Globalists are in favor of unlimited immigration – and the national strife and divisions it creates.

 

… THIS MAY SEEM A LONG QUOTE BUT THE ESSAY IS MUCH LONGER AND WORTHY TO BE READ

 

I used a lot of posting space to understand the influence of Leftist Globalist Multiculturalism in the United Nations. The other influence in the UN is from Muslim dominated nations committed to Islamic Thought.

 

A rational person would think or wonder: How in the world can Marxist oriented Globalist Multiculturalism and those committed to Islamic thought be on the same page?

 

The simplistic answer is both concepts seek a global New World Order by dismantling the Old World Order.

 

The Old World Order is currently dominated a Western Christian Heritage that has developed governing institutions related to various forms of Representative Democracy. For clarity: Not absolute Democracy which degenerates into mob rule which is its own form of despotism. At present, the American Republic form of governance is the best paradigm of Representative Democracy.

 

The American Republic is the ideological enemy Globalist Multiculturalism and Islamic Thought.

 

What in the essence of the traditional sovereign American Republic bugs the crap out of Islamic Thought? For brevity’s sake here is a quick (meaning not exhaustive) comparison between Islam and guarantees in the U.S. Constitution courtesy of Bill Federer at WND:

 

The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states that Congress shall make no law prohibiting the “free exercise” of religion, yet Mohammad said “Whoever changes his Islamic religion, kill him.” (Hadith Sahih al-Bukhari, Vol. 9, Book 84, No. 57). The Quran also states in Sura 4:89 “Those who reject Islam must be killed. If they turn back (from Islam), take hold of them and kill them wherever you find them.”

 

The First Amendment states Congress shall not abridge “the freedom of speech,” yet Islamic law enforces dhimmi status on non-Muslims, prohibiting them from observing their religious practices publicly, raising their voices during prayer, ringing church bells or say anything considered “insulting to Islam.” Islamic law relegates non-Muslims to “dhimmi” status, where they are not to propagate their customs among Muslims and cannot display a cross, Christmas decorations, or the Star of David.

 

The First Amendment states Congress cannot take away “the right of the people to peaceably assemble,” yet Islamic law states non-Muslims cannot repair places of worship or build new ones, they must allow Muslims to participate in their private meetings, they cannot bring their dead near the graveyards of Muslims or mourn their dead loudly.

 

The First Amendment states Congress cannot take away the right of the people “to petition the Government for a redress of grievances,” yet Islamic law states non-Muslims are not to harbor any hostility towards the Islamic state or give comfort to those who disagree with Islamic government.

 

The Second Amendment states “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed,” yet Islamic law states non-Muslims cannot possess arms, swords or weapons of any kind.

 

The Third Amendment states one cannot be forced to “quarter” someone in their house, yet Islamic law states non-Muslims must entertain and feed for three days any Muslim who wants to stay in their home, and for a longer period if the Muslim falls ill, and they cannot prevent Muslim travelers from staying in their places of worship.

 

The Fourth Amendment guarantees “the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures,” yet Islamic law states if a non-Muslim rides on a horse with a saddle and bridle, the horse can be taken away.

 

The Fifth Amendment states that “no person shall be held to answer for a capital or otherwise infamous crime … without due process of law,” yet Mohammad said “No Muslim should be killed for killing a Kafir (infidel).” (Hadith Sahih al-Bukhari, Vol. 9, No. 50).

 

The Sixth Amendment guarantees a “public trial by an impartial jury” and the Seventh Amendment states “the right of trial by jury shall be preserved,” yet Islamic law does not give non-Muslims equal legal standing with Muslims, even prohibiting them from testifying in court against Muslims.

 

The Eighth Amendment states there shall be no “cruel and unusual punishments inflicted,” yet the Quran states: “Cut off the hands of thieves, whether they are male or female, as punishment for what they have done – a deterrent from Allah.” (Sura 5:38) A woman who has been raped is also punished “with a hundred stripes.” (Sura 24:2) Women can be beaten: “If you experience rebellion from the women, you shall first talk to them, then (you may use negative incentives like) deserting them in bed, then you may (as a last alternative) beat them” (Sura 4:34). Honor killings of wives and daughters who have embarrassed their families have been reported by the United Nations in Muslim populations of Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Morocco, Pakistan, Syria, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Yemen and increasing in Western nations.

 

The 13th Amendment states there shall be no “slavery or involuntary servitude,” yet the Quran accommodates slavery as Mohammad owned slaves.

 

The 14th Amendment guarantees citizens “equal protection of the laws,” yet the Quran does not consider Jews, Christians and other non-Muslims as equal to Muslims before the law. Referring to Jews as “the People of the Book,” Mohammad said: “They are those whom Allah has cursed; who have been under his wrath; some of whom were turned into apes and swine” (Sura 5:60, 7:166, 2:65).

 

The 15th Amendment guarantees “the right of the citizens … to vote shall not be denied … on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude,” yet strict interpretation of Islamic law does not allow voting, as democracy is considered people setting themselves in the place of Allah by making the laws.

 

The 16th Amendment has some similarities with Islamic law, as “Congress shall have the power to lay and collect taxes on incomes from whatever source derived.” Mohammad said “Fight those who believe not in Allah … until they pay the jizya [tax] with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.” (Sura 9:29)

 

The 18th Amendment [Blog Editor: Repealed by 21st Amendment] has some similarities with Islamic law, as “the manufacture, sale, or transportation of intoxicating liquors … for beverage purposes is hereby prohibited.”

 

The 19th Amendment allows women to vote, yet in strict Islamic countries women cannot vote.

 

The 21st Amendment allows for the sale of liquor, yet Islamic law states non-Muslims are not to sell or drink wine and liquor openly. [Bold text by Blog Editor]

 

It is my humble opinion if the Globalist Multiculturalist Left and the Muslim World ended sovereignty nations, eradicated effective Representative Democracy and/or caused the demise of the American Republic; the Globalists and some kind of Muslim coalition would engage in a bloody war for global domination. You could count on genocides from both sides.

 

NOW! To the inspiration of these thoughts leading to global strife with unpredictable winners and losers. The Gatestone Institute has posted some news about how the United Nations intends to “War” on Free Speech at least as America knows it. Many UN speech restrictions have already affected Free Speech in the rest of the so-called Free World.

 

JRH 7/11/19

Your generosity is always appreciated:

Please Support NCCR

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

UN Launches All-out War on Free Speech

 

By Judith Bergman

July 10, 2019 at 5:00 am

Gatestone Institute

 

  • In other words, forget everything about the free exchange of ideas: the UN feels that its ‘values’ are being threatened and those who criticize those values must therefore be shut down.

 

  • Naturally, the UN assures everyone that, “Addressing hate speech does not mean limiting or prohibiting freedom of speech. It means keeping hate speech from escalating into something more dangerous, particularly incitement to discrimination, hostility and violence, which is prohibited under international law”.

 

  • Except the UN most definitely seeks to prohibit freedom of speech, especially the kind that challenges the UN’s agendas. This was evident with regard to the UN Global Compact on Migration, in which it was explicitly stated that public funding to “media outlets that systematically promote intolerance, xenophobia, racism and other forms of discrimination towards migrants” should be stopped.

 

  • In contrast to the UN Global Migration compact, the UN’s action plan against hate speech doescontain a definition of what the UN considers to be “hate” and it happens to be the broadest and vaguest of definitions possible: “Any kind of communication in speech, writing or behaviour, that attacks or uses pejorative or discriminatory language with reference to a person or a group on the basis of who they are, in other words, based on their religion, ethnicity, nationality, race, colour, descent, gender or other identity factor”. With a definition as broad as this, all speech could be labelled “hate”.

 

  • The new action plan plays straight into the OIC’s decades-long attempts to ban criticism of Islam as ‘hate speech’. In the wake of the launch of Guterres’ action plan, Pakistan has already presented a six-point plan “to address the new manifestations of racism and faith-based hatred, especially Islamophobia” at the United Nations headquarters. The presentation was organized by Pakistan along with Turkey, the Holy See and the UN.

 

In January, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres commissioned “a global plan of action against hate speech and hate crimes on a fast-track basis,” and said that governments and institutions need “to mobilize solutions that respond to people’s fears and anxieties with answers…” One of those answers, Guterres appeared to suggest, is shutting down free speech. Pictured: Antonio Guterres. (Image source: Fiona Goodall/Getty Images)

 

In January, United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, tasked his Special Adviser for the Prevention of Genocide, Adama Dieng, to “present a global plan of action against hate speech and hate crimes on a fast-track basis”. Speaking at a press conference about the UN’s challenges for 2019, Guterres maintained, “The biggest challenge that governments and institutions face today is to show that we care — and to mobilize solutions that respond to people’s fears and anxieties with answers…”

 

One of those answers, Guterres appeared to suggest, is shutting down free speech.

 

“We need to enlist every segment of society in the battle for values that our world faces today – and, in particular, to tackle the rise of hate speech, xenophobia and intolerance. We hear troubling, hateful echoes of eras long past” Guterres said, “Poisonous views are penetrating political debates and polluting the mainstream. Let’s never forget the lessons of the 1930s. Hate speech and hate crimes are direct threats to human rights…”

 

Guterres added, “Words are not enough. We need to be effective in both asserting our universal values and in addressing the root causes of fear, mistrust, anxiety and anger. That is the key to bring people along in defence of those values that are under such grave threat today”.

 

In other words, forget everything about the free exchange of ideas: the UN feels that its ‘values’ are being threatened and those who criticize those values must therefore be shut down. Not only that, but — disingenuously — the UN is comparing dissent from its agendas with the rise of fascism and Nazism in the 1930s.

 

Now the action plan that Guterres spoke of in January is ready. On June 18, Guterres presented the United Nations Strategy and Plan of Action on Hate Speech:

 

“Hate speech is…an attack on tolerance, inclusion, diversity and the very essence of our human rights norms and principles,” Guterres said. He also wrote in an article on the subject, “To those who insist on using fear to divide communities, we must say: diversity is a richness, never a threat…We must never forget, after all, that each of us is an “other” to someone, somewhere”.

 

According to the action plan, “Hate is moving into the mainstream – in liberal democracies and authoritarian systems alike. And with each broken norm, the pillars of our common humanity are weakened”. The UN sees for itself a crucial role: “As a matter of principle, the United Nations must confront hate speech at every turn. Silence can signal indifference to bigotry and intolerance…”.

 

Naturally, the UN assures everyone that, “Addressing hate speech does not mean limiting or prohibiting freedom of speech. It means keeping hate speech from escalating into something more dangerous, particularly incitement to discrimination, hostility and violence, which is prohibited under international law”.

 

Except the UN most definitely seeks to limit freedom of speech, especially the kind that challenges the UN’s agendas. This was evident with regard to the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration in which it was explicitly stated that public funding to “media outlets that systematically promote intolerance, xenophobia, racism and other forms of discrimination towards migrants” should be stopped.

 

Whatever constitutes intolerance, xenophobia, racism or discrimination was naturally left undefined, making the provision a convenient catchall for governments who wish to defund media that dissent from current political orthodoxy on migration.[1]

 

In contrast to the UN Global Migration compact, the UN’s action plan against hate speech does contain a definition of what the UN considers to be “hate” and it happens to be the broadest and vaguest of definitions possible:

 

“Any kind of communication in speech, writing or behaviour, that attacks or uses pejorative or discriminatory language with reference to a person or a group on the basis of who they are, in other words, based on their religion, ethnicity, nationality, race, colour, descent, gender or other identity factor”. With a definition as broad as this, all speech could be labelled “hate”.

 

The action plan, “aims to give to the United Nations the room and the resources to address hate speech, which poses a threat to United Nations principles, values and programmes. Measures taken will be in line with international human rights norms and standards, in particular the right to freedom of opinion and expression. The objectives are twofold: Enhance UN efforts to address root causes and drivers of hate speech [and] enable effective UN responses to the impact of hate speech on societies”.

 

The UN makes it clear in the plan that it “will implement actions at global and country level, as well as enhance internal cooperation among relevant UN entities” to fight hate speech. It considers that “Tackling hate speech is the responsibility of all – governments, societies, the private sector” and it envisages “a new generation of digital citizens, empowered to recognize, reject and stand up to hate speech”. What a brave new world.

 

In the plan, the UN sets up a number of areas of priority. Initially, the UN will “need to know more to act effectively” and it will therefore let “relevant UN entities… recognize, monitor, collect data and analyze hate speech trends”. It will also seek to “adopt a common understanding of the root causes and drivers of hate speech in order to take relevant action to best address and/or mitigate its impact”. In addition, the UN will “identify and support actors who challenge hate speech”.

 

UN entities will also “implement human rights-centred measures which aim at countering retaliatory hate speech and escalation of violence” and “promote measures to ensure that the rights of victims are upheld, and their needs addressed, including through advocacy for remedies, access to justice and psychological counselling”.

 

Disturbingly, the UN plans to put pressure directly on media and influence children through education:

 

“The UN system should establish and strengthen partnerships with new and traditional media to address hate speech narratives and promote the values of tolerance, non-discrimination, pluralism, and freedom of opinion and expression” and “take action in formal and informal education to … promote the values and skills of Global Citizenship Education, and enhance Media and Information Literacy”.

 

The UN is acutely aware that it needs to leverage strategic partnerships with an array of global and local, governmental and private actors in order to reach its goal. “The UN should establish/strengthen partnerships with relevant stakeholders, including those working in the tech industry. Most of the meaningful action against hate speech will not be taken by the UN alone, but by governments, regional and multilateral organizations, private companies, media, religious and other civil society actors” the action plan notes. “UN entities,” it adds, “should also engage private sector actors, including social media companies, on steps they can take to support UN principles and action to address and counter hate speech, encouraging partnerships between government, industry and civil society”. The UN also says that, “upon request” it will “provide support to Member States in the field of capacity building and policy development to address hate speech.”

 

The action plan also reveals that the first concrete initiative is already planned. It is an “international conference on Education for Prevention with focus on addressing and countering Hate Speech which would involve Ministers of Education”.

 

The new action plan plays straight into the decades-long attempts of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) to ban criticism of Islam. In the wake of the launch of Guterres’ action plan, Pakistan has already presented a six-point plan “to address the new manifestations of racism and faith-based hatred, especially Islamophobia” at the United Nations headquarters. The presentation was organized by Pakistan along with Turkey, the Holy See and the UN.

 

According to news reports, the plan was proposed by Pakistan’s Permanent Representative to the UN, Ambassador Maleeha Lodhi at a session titled “Countering terrorism and other acts of violence based on religion or belief”.

 

“A particularly alarming development is the rise of Islamophobia which represents the recent manifestation of the age-old hatred that spawned anti-Semitism, racism, apartheid and many other forms of discrimination,” the ambassador said in her speech. She added, “My Prime Minister Imran Khan has recently again called for urgent action to counter Islamophobia, which is today the most prevalent expression of racism and hatred against ‘the other'”.

 

“We are fully committed to support the UN’s strategy on hate speech,” said the Pakistani ambassador, “This is a moment for all of us to come together to reverse the tide of hate and bigotry that threatens to undermine social solidarity and peaceful co-existence.”

 

In 2017, Facebook’s Vice President of Public Policy, Joel Kaplan, reportedly agreed to requests from Pakistan’s Interior Minister Nisar Ali Khan, to “remove fake accounts and explicit, hateful and provocative material that incites violence and terrorism” because “the entire Muslim Ummah was greatly disturbed and has serious concerns over the misuse of social media platforms to propagate blasphemous content”.

 

At the UN, Pakistan’s Ambassador Lodhi called for government interventions to fight hate speech, including national legislation, and reportedly “called for framing a more focused strategy to deal with the various expressions of Islamophobia. A ‘whole of government’ and a ‘whole of society’ approach was needed. In this regard, the Pakistani envoy urged the secretary-general to engage with a wide range of actors, including governments, civil society and social media companies to take action and stop social media users being funneled into online sources of radicalization”.

 

The UN’s all-out war on free speech is on.

 

Judith Bergman, a columnist, lawyer and political analyst, is a Distinguished Senior Fellow at Gatestone Institute.

 

NOTES:

 

[1] According to Objective 17 of the UN Global Compact on migration, member states commit to: “Promote independent, objective and quality reporting of media outlets, including internet-based information, including by sensitizing and educating media professionals on migration-related issues and terminology, investing in ethical reporting standards and advertising, and stopping allocation of public funding or material support to media outlets that systematically promote intolerance, xenophobia, racism and other forms of discrimination towards migrants, in full respect for the freedom of the media.” [Emphasis added.]

____________________

The UN, Globalist Multiculturalism & Islam One World Despotism

John R. Houk

© July 11, 2019

___________________

UN Launches All-out War on Free Speech

 

© 2019 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved. The articles printed here do not necessarily reflect the views of the Editors or of Gatestone Institute. No part of the Gatestone website or any of its contents may be reproduced, copied or modified, without the prior written consent of Gatestone Institute. [Blog Editor: Permission was not acquired to cross post. Upon request the cross post will be removed.]

 

 

Rebel Against UK Multiculturalism:


Donate to Tommy Robinson Legal Defense

John R. Houk

© July 10, 2019

 

Tommy Robinson is a crusader for British Culture against the Islamization of the UK. Since the UK is full in dedicated to multiculturalism, that places Robinson on the UK’s political persecution list.

 

Being a political target in the UK makes Robinson a criminal in the eyes of British law and a target for vilification by the British press which are more dedicated even more to Leftist multicultural cultural programming than the U.S. Mainstream Media.

 

Douglas Murray writing for the National Review provides an evenhanded fair history of Tommy Robinson from violent EDL days to present day  “citizen journalist” (dated 5/31/18): https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/05/tommy-robinson-grooming-gangs-britain-persecutes-journalist/

 

With that in mind, Tommy Robinson has actually been convicted for making Muslim pedophile grooming sex trafficking anxious. Here is a 3:38 minute video from Ezra Levant on this British injustice against Robinson (H/T The Tundra Tabloids):

 

VIDEO: Tommy Robinson GUILTY! Ezra Levant reacts

 

Posted by Rebel Media

Published on Jul 5, 2019

 

See ALL our reports about Tommy Robinson’s trial and SUPPORT The Rebel’s independent journalism: https://www.therebel.media/real-reporters-tommy-robinson-trial-london-uk-ezra-levant/

 

Ezra Levant of TheRebel.media reacts to Tommy Robinson being found guilty on contempt of court charges on July 5, 2019. MORE: https://www.therebel.media/tommy-robinson-news-guilty-verdict-contempt-uk-politics-ezra-levant

 

MORE TO READ

 

As an American protected by the First Amendment guaranteeing Free Speech and a Free Press, I find this British verdict against Tommy Robinson outrageous. In the UK all media is now denied to Robinson meaning public pleas for help if not censored now, it soon will be. The UK is slipping more and more into Big Brother totalitarianism. This is the kind of repression that caused thirteen British Colonies to declare independence in 1776.

 

Below is an email appeal for Tommy Robinson from Canadian Elsa Schieder which ultimately asks for support for at least Robinson’s legal defense bills with a link for this purpose. In case you are already inspired, here is that link: https://www.tr.news/freedom-for-tommy (The link is sponsored by TR [Tommy Robinson] News. You will first notice to donate in British Pounds Sterling, but there is a dropdown arrow-menu to switch that to U.S. Dollars, Euros, Canadian Dollars or Australian Dollars.)

 

JRH 7/10/19

Your generosity is always appreciated:

Please Support NCCR

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

We Have a Dream – from Martin Luther King Jr to Now

 

By Elsa Schieder

Sent July 9, 2019 9:48 AM

Sent via WorldTruthSummit.com

 

 

Martin Luther King, Jr. – August 20, 1963

 

“I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: ‘We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.'”

 

We Too Have a Dream

 

That’s why I’m writing. Because so many of us join with Martin Luther King, Jr, in the dream of equal rights, of living in a land of freedom and justice. We say, as he did: It’s time for one law for all, and for the law applied equally to all.

 

I’m sure he never imagined the possibility of what is going on today.

 

Over and Over, Unequal Treatment

 

So many of us face both unequal treatment under the law, and laws claiming to be for justice, but mandating unequal treatment.

A travesty of justice – that is what Tommy Robinson has lived for years.

 

Tommy Robinson

 

And that is what can be expected in much of the West if the charges relate to something that may put Islam in a bad light, or if someone does something that is or can be seen as anti-Islamic. A man put a bacon sandwich at a mosque. His sentence: one year. The outcome: his death half-way through his prison term.

Here’s the most recent case of the utter injustice Tommy has experienced. On May 25, 2018, after checking carefully that he was not breaking any law, Tommy was accused of breaking a law he did not break, denied fair trial, and within 5 hours sentenced to 13 months for saying to a live video audience something that was on the BBC website, and jailed.

He chose to spend most of his imprisonment – almost 3 months, until the appeal – in solitary confinement, to increase his chance of staying alive. That was only the beginning.

 

In the appeal, the judge – a top UK judge – threw out the case, but left it open that the case could be reopened.

It was. On July 4 and 5th, 2019, there was another trial, this time at the Old Bailey, where most cases are for crimes like murder, rather than for reading from the BBC website. This time, the judge – another top judge – chose to convict. The conviction seems in large part due to Tommy’s having asked convicted rapists how they felt about their verdict. This showed, it was argued, insensitivity to their feelings.

Just yesterday, Tommy appealed to Trump for political asylum. He is to be sentenced within 2 days. The sentence could be for as long as 2 years. He is sure he will be murdered in prison.

The legal system, through the actions of the courts, has been – blatantly, visibly, outrageously – unjust, unfair, endangering Tommy. The greatest danger to Tommy has been through his being placed in prisons with a high proportion of Islamic violent offenders, including murderers. Why has he been sent to such prisons? No answer is required.

One reason the government can do as it does is that the mainstream media publishes untruths – like that Tommy pleaded guilty; like that Tommy had endangered the trial of rape gang members (though the case had ended, and the rapists had been convicted); like that Tommy is a racist Islamophobic hoodlum; and on.

A larger reason is that the legal system, the government, the mainstream media, the establishment religions, are all – as shown by massive evidence – massively corrupted, massively complicit. There is rot wherever one turns.

One way to help is to donate to Tommy’s legal defense fund. The cost to Tommy to date: over 100,000 pounds. Here is the link to donate: https://www.tr.news/freedom-for-tommy

 

Over 250,000 people were listening
on August 20, 1963, when Martin Luther King, Jr spoke.

How Many People Are Listening Now?

 

In 1963, the media reported Martin Luther King’s speech. It was easy to hear his message.

Now, the mainstream media tells blatant untruths.

“The truth shall set you free.”

We need everyone to hear the truth.


Over and Over, Laws that Discriminate

 

There is another massive injustice happening. Not only are laws unfairly applied, with any infringement used as an excuse for a massive punishment, but unjust laws, laws that discriminate, are increasing in number.

In the United States, there used to be Jim Crow laws, laws that discriminated against blacks – like, blacks go to the back of the bus. Now, there are new Jim Crow laws – like, Christian whites, don’t even try to get on the bus.

John Naughton (name changed to protect his identity) was falsely accused of sexual harassment. He went to prison. He now has a criminal record though he was innocent and though he had proof of his innocence, proof that the allegation was malicious in intent. Most likely the accuser was racially targeting him.

Why did he end up in jail? John is working class. He works full time, but his pay is not enough to cover legal costs. The choice he was given: plead guilty, or pay for legal costs, which will mean losing your home.

What could he do?

John is one of many.

 

What About Assistance with Legal Representation?

 

John lives in the UK, where legal assistance used to be available for people in his situation.

It isn’t any more.

The law is now overtly a Jim Crow law. It overtly discriminates.

Needed: one law for all.

Instead, now low income is irrelevant in terms of qualifying for government assistance for legal representation.

All that counts is membership in some designated groups.

John Naughton did not qualify. No one classified as white qualifies, unless that white person belongs to a non-Christian religion or is a refugee.

There is one law for non-whites, especially Islamic non-whites, another for whites, especially Christian whites.

Blatant discrimination. Blatant injustice.

From a Travesty of Justice to Joining Together

 

Everywhere one turns, blatant miscarriages of justice. Unequal treatment. Laws that discriminate.

All people against injustice must join together and act: keep informing ourselves, inform others, and join political parties that expose the rot and expose the truth – about Islam, about the consequences of mass incoming, about the taboo against non-politically correct thinking in the education system.


The War on Truth

 

Here are quotes attributed to Hitler’s minister of propaganda, Joseph Goebbels:

 

– If you repeat a lie often enough, people will believe it, and you will even come to believe it yourself.

– Propaganda works best when those who are being manipulated are confident they are acting on their own free will.

– This is the secret of propaganda: Those who are to be persuaded by it should be completely immersed in the ideas of the propaganda, without ever noticing that they are being immersed in it.

– Propaganda must facilitate the displacement of aggression by specifying the targets for hatred.

– It is the absolute right of the State to supervise the formation of public opinion.

 

Hitler and Goebbels – many powerful quotes that apply today.


Join Together – LINK, ACT

 

We can do the best we can on our own.

Donating is vital – time, effort, money.

Staying informed and reaching out to others – also vital.

More that is needed.

Plato: If you do not take an interest in the affairs of your government, then you are doomed to live under the rule of fools. 

The situation is actually far more dangerous than living under the rule of fools. Currently, throughout much of the West, from all the evidence, we are living under the rule of, at best, dangerous cowards and reality-deniers – at worst, evil-doers out to destroy the West.

We need to be involved, as far as we can.

Where to turn?

There are parties typically denigrated as “populist” – as if the population were rotten.

In the UK, one truth-telling party is Anne Marie Waters’ For Britain: https://www.forbritain.uk

If Gerard Batten continues to lead, there is UKIP:
https://www.ukip.org

(If Batten is replaced as leader – as is almost certain, as he has just been barred from running by the party he co-founded – this party may well return to silence about anything negative relating to Islam).

How can you tell truth from untruths told over and over?


Again, Join Together!

Justice for All.
Save the West!

 

All the best to all who care and do what we can,

Elsa

July 9, 2019 – 2 days before Tommy’s sentencing

  1. Please share. You can forward, or this sendout is online at:
    http://westindanger.com/justice-for-all.html 

INTERVIEWS WITH TOMMY

From July 8, the interview where Tommy appeals for political asylum: https://youtu.be/Ux93kfCiJk4 [blog Editor: The link is to a 39 minute of Alex Jones interview with Tommy Robinson. It is worth to watch because Robinson’s passion. Interspersed throughout the interview are pay-the-bills advertisements. Of they are as annoying to you as I found them simply fast-forward.]


On June 26, 2019, just a few days before the trial, Tommy gave a detailed accounting
 of his encounters with the legal system, starting from the day of his arrest on May 25 2018:
http://elsasblog.com/190628-court-case-update.html

Truth Teller in an Anti-Truth World

 

On May 23 2018, 2 days before his arrest, things had never looked better: http://elsasblog.com/180603-tommy-robinson-interview.html

 

Tommy Robinson Interview, May 23, 2018

 

For lots more, come explore
http://elsasblog.com
and
http://TruthSummit.info 

July 9, 2019

_______________

Rebel Against UK Multiculturalism:

Donate to Tommy Robinson Legal Defense

 

John R. Houk

© July 10, 2019

_______________________

We Have a Dream – from Martin Luther King Jr to Now

 

World Truth Summit
2074 Concession #3, 
Hawkesbury East, 
Ontario, Canada

 

Is Automattic Succumbing to Multicultural Pressure?


John R. Houk

© May 16, 2019

 

Thanks to a Counter Jihad Coalition email update I have discovered WordPress.com (i.e. the one operated by Automattic) has deplatformed a couple of expose Islam blogs. The CJC update links to a Jihad Watch post writing about the deplatforming. The exposé blogs were Creeping Sharia and Muslim Statistics.

The Jihad Watch writer assumes the deplatforming was the result of the government of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan complaining. At the very least pointing to Pakistan is a good guess. On my NCCR blog I have received the same Automattic notification.

 

My experience though was informing me my particular blog would no longer be available in Pakistan due to the legal system’s Blasphemy Law. BUT the Automattic notification also included info for how Pakistani readers could circumvent the Pakistan banning by finding a good VPN service that hides Internet surfing. Here is that NCCR post with the notification and advice.

 

So I am a bit surprised Automattic deplatformed Creeping Sharia and Muslim Statistics over Pakistan’s Free Speech robbing Blasphemy Laws. On the other hand, what in the world could those two expose Islam blogs have done to annoy the powers that be at Automattic?

 

JRH 5/16/19

Your generosity is always appreciated:

Please Support NCCR

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

WordPress.com deplatforms those critical of Islam

 

By MARC

MAY 15, 2019 10:45 AM

Jihad Watch

 

WordPress.com has deplatormed those critical of Islam. I am very disappointed having been a contributor to the WordPress code in the distant past, and I have assisted in responsible disclosure of security vulnerabilities to them on a voluntary basis in the recent past. I did see it coming though.

 

While it would not be possible to restrict use of the WordPress source code which is publicly available and built by volunteers, and distributed at wordpress.org, its [sic] is “open source”.  wordpress.com is very different.  It is a commercial enterprise which has some free options, the codebase being very similar, but proprietary; and includes the hosting aspect as part of the package.

 

Creeping Sharia Suspension Screen Capture

 

I am aware of 2 sites so far that have been taken down, with no warning Creeping Sharia and Muslim Statistics They were first brought to my attention in a tweet:

 

 

Looking at this tweet, it appears that this deplatforming action was due to a complaint from Pakistan regarding breaking Sharia law.

 

 

This is despite their terms of service in section 4 stating:

 

We do not have any control over those websites and are not responsible for their contents or their use.

 

You can always reach out to Automattic to express your disappointment politely on twitter at @automattic at their arbitrary deplatforming of anyone without providing clear reasoning, especially from a platform built mostly by volunteers.

 

I would suggest anyone using wordpress.com (not .org) or for that matter blogger, dump them immediately, and migrate to a non-managed host using the open source version at wordpress.com, I say non-managed host, as managed hosting services seem to be far more likely to be pressured by hate groups such as SPLC into removing services. Non-managed hosting services would include AWS, Linode and my favorite at the moment DigitalOcean (includes referral link).

 

You will also need to use your own domain name, as there is no mysite.wordpress.org as there is with the .com. there are many domain registrars to choose from, you can find a list here at a very useful site for wordpress users.

 

It’s fairly easy to manage your own WordPress blog, these sites all have extensive help documents, and surprisingly un-managed hosting services seem to have far less technical troubles than managed ones do. The WordPress open source community is vibrant.  It might be helpful not to interact using politically sensitive profile names. I mention this as someone I sent there to get help came back telling me they were unhelpful and ignored him. When I checked, I was not surprised.

 

You can import content from your wordpress.com and blogger.com sites into open source wordpress. While I can’t  get too involved in helping you out, if you have any issues, comment here, and I’ll point you in the right direction.

 

Golden rule when managing your own sites and blogs: keep it simple (20 plugins is not OK and use their default themes unless you have programming skills),  keep regular backups, and put them somewhere safe.

___________________

Is Automattic Succumbing Multicultural Pressure?

John R. Houk

© May 16, 2019

__________________

WordPress.com deplatforms those critical of Islam

 

Jihad Watch ® is a registered trademark of Robert Spencer in the United States and/or other countries.

 

Content Copyright Jihad Watch

 

FINALLY—In Spite of Islamic Ideology, Asia Bibi Escapes Pakistan


John R. Houk

© May 9, 2019

 

Asia Bibi Family Collage (includes husband Ashiq Masih. Daughters Eisham, Esha & Sidra)

 

In October 2018 the Pakistan Supreme Court – at great risk to Judges’ bodily harm – finally realized Christian-hating Muslims framed Asia Bibi of violating Pakistan’s incredulously moronic Blasphemy Law and gave her exoneration.

 

After Asia’s exoneration her family fearing death threats managed to flee Pakistan for safety. BUT the Pakistan government refused to allow Asia Bibi to flee for her life. THEN European nations with a Christian heritage refused to grant asylum to Asia Bibi out of FEAR of enraging their significant Muslim population boosted by recent years of Muslim migration (both legal and illegal).

 

SURPRISING to me, I have learned Canada has granted Asia Bibi asylum and indeed it is reported she has arrived in Canada safely. I say “surprising” because Canada’s current Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is a blatant Multiculturalist supporting Muslim refugees no matter the cost that Islamic theopolitical ideology is against the Western rule of law and culture.

 

Below are two stories cross posted from Vlad Tepes and The Gateway Pundit. Especially in The Gateway Pundit NOTICE the HUGE NUMBER of Muslims in Pakistan calling for the death of Asia Bibi. So much for the lie of moderate Islam versus radical Islam. OR perhaps the majority of Pakistan Muslims are radical?

 

No my friends, those Muslims calling for Asia Bibi’s death are merely following the hate inherent in Islamic revered writings.

 

JRH 5/9/19

Your generosity is always appreciated:

Please Support NCCR

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

Asia Bibi in Canada

 

Posted by Eeyore

May 8, 2019

Vlad Tepes

 

VIDEO: Woman given death sentence for blasphemy leaves Pakistan

[Posted by CBC News

Published on May 8, 2019

 

Asia Bibi, a Pakistani Christian woman who spent eight years on death row over false blasphemy charges, has left the country. Bibi was acquitted by the country’s top court six months ago. Her lawyer says she has left for Canada.

 

To read more: https://www.cbc.ca/1.5127324]

 

It is possible that this is the first genuine refugee Canada has taken in. And it is an amazingly good thing that Canada did. One wonders if there are conditions to her being here such as limits to her freedom of speech to discuss Islam and its impact on minorities in Islamic countries. It is difficult not to believe that the Saudi girls are not under conditions like that as their language has been extremely measured since arriving here.

 

The CBC article failed to mention that the UK turned down her application because of concerns over how local muslims would behave. Once again showing who makes the law in the UK.

 

It is a powerfully good thing that Canada brought in Asia. However I personally have met migrants to Canada from Syria who were Christian but had to lie and say they were Muslim to get into Canada as a refugee. So while this extremely high profile case is an excellent event, someone needs to look in to the actual policy in Canada in terms of accepting genuine refugees of Islamic horror and discrimination against minority religions and see what is wrong in the system.

 

++++++++

Persecuted Christian Asia Bibi Flees to Canada After Muslim Blasphemy Law Acquittal in Pakistan

 

By Jim Hoft

May 8, 2019

The Gateway Pundit

 

In November 2018 hundreds of thousands of Muslims rallied in Pakistan demanding that Christian mother Asia Bibi be beheaded for insulting Islam. [PHOTO]

 

Asia Bibi, a poor farm laborer and Christian, was released in October from prison in 2018 for the blasphemy charges. [PHOTO]

 

Bibi was not allowed to leave Pakistan until her trial was over.

 

Muslims want her dead.

 

 

Earlier this week Asia Bibi arrived in Canada after fleeing Pakistan.


She was not safe there despite her acquittal.

 

FOX News reported:

 

The Christian woman who spent years on death row in Pakistan for alleged blasphemy before she was acquitted last year has left the country for Canada, her lawyer confirmed to Fox News on Wednesday.

 

Asia Bibi was convicted on blasphemy charges in 2009 after a quarrel with a fellow farmworker who accused her of insulting Islam’s Prophet Muhammad.

 

After spending eight years on death row, the 54-year-old’s conviction was overturned last year by the Supreme Court. Despite being a “free woman” after the death sentence was thrown out, she has been in protective custody – itself a kind of prison – because of religious extremists’ calls for her hanging.

____________________

FINALLY—In Spite of Islamic Ideology, Asia Bibi Escapes Pakistan

John R. Houk

© May 9, 2019

__________________

Asia Bibi in Canada

 

About Eeyore

Canadian artist and counter-jihad and freedom of speech activist as well as devout Schrödinger’s catholic

 

Copyright © 2019 Vlad Tepes All Rights Reserved.

_________________

Persecuted Christian Asia Bibi Flees to Canada After Muslim Blasphemy Law Acquittal in Pakistan

 

© 2019 The Gateway Pundit – All Rights Reserved.

 

YOU TOO Could be Silenced Like Jayda Fransen


John R. Houk

© May 2, 2019

Ok, I realize I am entering the realm of Jayda Fransen fanboy, but her email update from May 1st is quote annoying. Living America one becomes quite accustomed to the Liberties and Freedoms guaranteed in the Bill of Rights. In Fransen’s case, she never would have become found guilty for exposing Islam, let alone even prosecuted. Fransen would have been protected by the Free Speech Rights of the First Amendment.

 

The UK’s Public Order Act 1986 came into existence with good intentions to battle racism and give protection to persecuted minorities. UNFORTUNATELY the UK Act has turned into a state weapon to force the public acceptance of Left-Wing Multiculturalist ideology. EVEN if the forced acceptance means abandoning the UK’s Western and Judeo-Christian heritage.

 

THAT MEANS a person standing for Biblical principles can actually convicted for promoting hate as defined by Multiculturalism (An Australian’s insight AND Conservapedia). THAT MEANS people who recognize Islamic principles run contrary to and EVEN disparages Jews and Christians, can be arrested, tried in court, fined, jailed and silenced ALL IN THE NAME OF Multiculturalist ideology forcing people to look away from Islam’s harmful history and future supremacist intentions in regard to non-Muslims ALL ACCORDING to Islamic revered writings in the Quran, Hadith and Sira – not to mention ages of Islamic commentary to those revered writings that stretch to this present time.

 

I have a huge suspicion I would be arrested for hate speech in the UK for sharing the prevalence codified hate and violence existent in Islam. So, when I read an email like what I received from Jayda Fransen, I BECOME UPSET. And you should be displeased as well.

 

JRH 5/2/19

Your generosity is always appreciated:

Please Support NCCR

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

WANTED AGAIN John

 

Jayda Fransen logo

 

Sent by Jayda Fransen

Sent May 1, 2019 1:02 PM

Sent via JaydaFransen.Online

 

Dear John,

 

As you know, I am currently on Bail in Northern Ireland waiting to be sentenced for ‘Hate Speech’ this Friday, 3rd May 2019.

 

One of my Bail Conditions states that I must live and sleep at my home address in Northern Ireland.

 

After I was found guilty of ‘Hate Speech’ at Laganside Court in Belfast on 29th March 2019, I contacted the Courts in England who have been Summoning me to attend.

 

I notified Bromley Magistrates Court in writing on 11th April 2019 that – due to my Bail Conditions – I could not attend a Court in London.

 

Fransen Summons for Breach of Post-Sentence Supervision

 

It would be impossible for me to adhere to my Bail Conditions of remaining in Northern Ireland and to appear at a Court in England.

 

I was confident that the Court would understand my position and agree to adjourn the Hearing.

 

I was wrong.

 

Instead, at the start of this week, Bromley Magistrates Court issued two Warrants for my arrest one to an address in England and one to my home address in Northern Ireland.

 

Jayda Fransen wanted 2-places at once 5-1-19 email

 

I am now therefore WANTED once again and facing imminent arrest.

 

This time, my crime is not being able to be in two places at once!

 

I am convinced that this is just a blatant continuation of State pressure to try and push me to breaking point.

 

There is simply no other explanation for such an irrational decision.

 

In less than 48 hours I will learn my fate at a Court in Belfast.

 

I could be spending the remainder of 2019 in a prison cell, just as I spent the majority of 2018.

 

If I manage to make it to Court this Friday without being arrested in my home tonight or tomorrow, I could be walking into a complete set up.

 

The Court will be crawling with Police so I am un likely to leave the building without handcuffs cutting into my wrists.

 

The only way for people to know what is happening to me is by signing up for my updates, just like you have John.

 

Please forward this email to all of your closest contacts and ask them to sign up to my updates by clicking this button:

 

SIGN UP FOR [FRANSEN] UPDATES

 

Yours sincerely,

 

 

Jayda Fransen

_____________________

YOU TOO Could be Silenced Like Jayda Fransen

John R. Houk

© May 2, 2019

______________________

WANTED AGAIN John

 

Jayda Fransen – My Story

 

Do YOU Want European Multiculturalism?


Shrug Off Islamophobia & Xenophobia Accusations

 

 

John R. Houk

© March 30, 2019

 

Some fairly intuitive people have noticed what most would think an unusual cooperation between agendas related to Islam and Left-Wing ideology. I am certain more would publicly speak about this odd pattern of cooperation between Muslim Apologists and Leftist Multiculturalists except for the politically correct labeled fear: Islamophobia and Xenophobia.

 

Merriam-Webster on Islamophobia:

 

irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against Islam or people who practice Islam

 

English Oxford Dictionary on Islamophobia:

 

Dislike of or prejudice against Islam or Muslims, especially as a political force.

 

On a personal level I do not an irrational fear or prejudice against Muslims or all things Islam. I do have a great cognitive understanding of how Islamic revered writings command Muslims to treat non-Muslim. Let’s look at a couple of examples that trust me are ONLY the tip of the iceberg against non-Muslims. Islamic scholar/expert Robert Spencer shows a Quranic surah used by apologists to prove how nice and peaceful Islam is contrasted with another surah that brings better context to the first:

 

In reality, Qur’an 25:68-70 warns Muslims not to kill the soul which Allah has forbidden to be killed”; it does not contain any blanket prohibition on killing someone. The Qur’an also tells Muslims to “kill them wherever you find them” (2:191); again, “kill them wherever you find them” (4:89); and “kill the polytheists wherever you find them” (9:5). So clearly killing is permitted, and indeed, commanded, under certain circumstances. (Does Allah really command Muslims to kill non-Muslims? By Robert Spencer; Jihad Watch; 4/4/18 5:34 PM)

 

For a deeper perspective on Islam and non-Muslims:

 

 

 

 

Then there are Leftists with a Multiculturalist agenda. These ideologues are Open Borders, One World Government and Marxist Cultural Utopian friendly folks. If you criticize Muslim migrants, Muslim immigrants or any immigrants that refuse assimilation into the nation and culture moving to then you practice Xenophobia.

 

English Oxford Dictionary on Xenophobia:

 

Dislike of or prejudice against people from other countries.

 

Cambridge Dictionary on Xenophobia:

 

extreme dislike or fear of foreigners, their customs, their religions, etc.

 

For the record I have no problem with foreigners coming to America for a new or better life. I do have a problem with foreigners moving to America desiring to impose cultural norms different from American culture and heritage. If a foreigner does not like America, for God’s sake don’t move here.

 

These thoughts were inspired by an email alert sent from Rachel Ehrenfeld via ACDemocracy. Ehrenfeld writes about European Union (EU) leadership and an apparent Open Borders Multiculturalism eradicating the separate natural cultures of Europe which is actually complying with an ongoing Islamic Dawah transforming Europe to an Islamic culture more and more every day.

 

This is meaning to America TODAY because of the Dem Party’s Open Borders Multiculturalist agenda is hauntingly similar to EU Multiculturalism.

 

JRH 3/30/19

Your generosity is always appreciated:

Please Support NCCR

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

‘New Europe’ and the Islamist Agenda

 

By Rachel Ehrenfeld

March 29, 2019

American Center for Democracy & Economic Warfare (ACDemocracy)

 

migrants-immigratia

 

The European Union’s Progressive-Left post-nationalist leadership is set on challenging the sovereignty of nation-states, by eliminating borders and letting in millions of Muslims.   This policy has already contributed to moving the “old” European continent towards a new Europe, occupied by new people with a new culture. Apparently, opening the continent to millions of mostly unqualified migrants who refuse to assimilate, and who drain the coffers of their host countries, seems like the preferred solution to the negative birthrates among the Europeans.

 

On August 30, 2010, as he was folding his tent near the Vatican, on his last visit to Rome, Italy, then Libya’s leader Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, forewarned: “Europe runs the risk of turning black from illegal immigration; it could turn into Africa. There is a dangerous level of immigration from Africa into Europe, and we don’t know what will happen. What will be the reaction of the white Christian Europeans to this mass of hungry, uneducated Africans? We don’t know if Europe will remain an advanced and cohesive continent or if it will be destroyed by this barbarian invasion.”

 

Kaddafi urged the Europeans, “imagine that this could happen, but before it does, we need to work together.” He proceeded to offer the Europeans a deal, asking for a modest fee of 5bn euros, to stop the mass migration to Europe, which as he predicted, are costing billions of euros annually.

 

Despite the already increasing number of African migrants and Middle Eastern refugees of the evolving Arab Spring, the Europeans accused Kaddafi of blackmail and dismissed his offer. A few years later, after more than 1million refugees flooded the continent, the EU caved in to Turkey’s Islamist President, Recep Tayyip Erdogan demands of more than 6bn euros, to temporarily prevent refugees from entering Europe.

 

In addition to Kaddafi’s “business proposal,” the Europeans overlooked Kaddafi’s public Dawah sermon, in which he called on Europe to convert to Islam. His handing out Korans to five hundred young Italian women, impressing upon them that “Islam is the “ultimate religion. If you want to believe in a single faith, then it must be that of Mohammed,” was dismissed as one of his publicity ploys, thus overlooking the significance of his performing the Islamic religious duty, the Dawah (calling on infidels to join Islam). Incredibly, European and other Western nations continue to ignore Islamic leaders calls on Muslims residing in the West to spread Islam.

 

Six months later, when Libyan Muslim Brotherhood-affiliated rebels joined the “Arab Spring,” NATO began its military intervention to depose Kaddafi. The chaos that ensued after his death in October 2011, created a vacuum that was swiftly filled by local and foreign jihadist groups, including al Qaeda and ISIS.

 

Libya’s coastline’s strategic importance as a step-stone to Europe was not wasted on ISIS. By 2015, ISIS has been shipping more than a million Muslim and African “refugees”  and to the Italian island of Lampedusa, just 162 nm from the Libyan coastline. It is unknown how many members/supporters of ISIS, al-Qaeda, and other jihadist groups arrived in Europe via Libya as “refugees.”

 

As the refugee crisis worsened, Turkey’s Islamist President, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who aspires to take over and Islamize Europe, demanded a hefty ransom and other political concessions in exchange of helping control the flood of refugees. The Europeans conceded to most of his demands.

 

European nations and central institution’ decades-long denial of the threats posed by radical Islam, have been focusing instead on alleged ‘root causes’ of Islamist terrorism, and on attempts to accommodate and appease them, by codifying the Islamic narrative, imposing political correctness with new draconian hate- speech laws, has played into the hands of the radicals who are set on expanding the Islamization of Europe.

 

Widely publicized declarations by Islamic religious and political leaders and activists that Islam is not merely a religion but also a universal political and social system are not new or secret. They are advertised in all languages on the Internet and on the social media pages of global radical Muslim organizations. The Facebook pages of Hizb ut Tahrir, for example, says: (quote) “Islam is the only system that united people of all races and religions in history and will unite them once more when it returns.”

 

You don’t have to take my word for it. Instead, take a look at our dedicated website news.acdemocracy.org, which provides original documentation of statement made by radical Islamists leaders, official representatives of major Muslim organizations, as well as political leaders in the West who support them.

 

Let’s begin with the Doha based Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, the very influential spiritual leader for the worldwide Muslim Brotherhood – for many years he was on Interpol’s red alert, but last November was removed without an official explanation – who has issued many Fatwas on the duty of all Muslims to spread Islam. His fatwas have been published on his website; on Islam-online – the brotherhood’s official website, and for many years, he issued them on his widely watched TV program on al Jazeera.

 

According to Qaradawi, “Occupying Europe and defeating Christianity will become possible with the spread of Islam inside Europe until it becomes strong enough to take over the whole continent.”

 

After al -Qaeda attacked the U.S., Qaradawi explained that Islamizing Europe would be “the beginning of the righteous Caliphate’s return.”

 

Al-Qaradawi declared: “Islam will return once more to Europe as a conqueror and as a victorious power after it was expelled twice from the continent…I assume that next time the conquest [of Europe] will not be achieved by the sword [i.e., war] but by preaching (dawah) and spreading the ideology [of Islam]….The conquest of Europe …and the expansion of Islam will reach all the areas where the sun shines and the moon appears [i.e., the entire world.” Few, if any Europeans, took him seriously.

 

Instead, advancing the Islamist agenda seems to suit the Progressive-Left post-nationalist leadership everywhere. Like the Muslims, though for different reasons, they are set on challenging the sovereignty of nation states. Both aim at changing the European continent, by creating a new Europe, occupied by new people and a new culture. For the Europeans, opening the continent to millions of Muslims, who drain the coffers of their host country, seems as the solution to the negative birthrates among the Europeans. Oddly, they are convinced that the newcomers, as the old Europeans, would submit to Brussel’s dictates.

 

Why should they? The Europeans were never interested in assimilating Muslims. Instead, they talked about integration, which they miserably failed. They also failed to acknowledge the rise of radical Islam, especially in large concentrations of Muslim neighborhoods. And little attention, if any, has been given to the constant preaching by local Imams and Islamic scholars, many who visit Europe to inoculate the newly arrived, as well as the second and third generation of Muslim migrants against assimilation.

 

These preachers also warn against temptations readily available in Western secular societies, urging instead, to “spread the word of Allah.”

 

In September 2015, at the height of the refugee’s crisis in Europe, when more than 1 million refuges flooded Europe following the German Chancellor’s controversial decision of open border migration.   Fatima Benhatta, a Canadian representative of the U.K based international organization Islamic Relief, which has ties to Hamasissued the following statement on the Syrian mass immigration to Europe.

 

“…My prayer, O Allah, open their [European countries that welcomed Syrian refugees] breasts to [accept] Islam and provide them with the testimony [pledge of allegiance to Allah and Mohammad].  I swear by Allah that they deserve the prayer. What is the achievement of Syrians coming [to Europe]? Islam will be spread even more among them [Europeans], their [Muslims] ratio [in society] will increase and the Syrians will be victorious [conquering Europe], Allah Willing…” (archive)

 

Incidentally, Fatima is friendly with Canada’s Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, who on March 17, 2019, after the awful Christchurch terrorist attack on Muslims,  chose to visit a Muslim Community (SNMC) mosque in Ottawa to express his solidarity with the Muslim community. That mosque, however, is known for hosting a Saudi imam who prayed for killing Jews and Christians.

 

Also in late 2015, the popular Islamist activist Saeed Rageah, who was born in Somalia, raised in Saudi Arabia, and according to his online bio, “found his way to North America,” in the late 1980s’, visited  Sweden to address Muslim refugees and immigrants. In his speech, which was posted on YouTube-  Rageah enlightened his audience, saying: “The reason that Allah brought you here is so you can carry the message of Islam to the people. Why? Because each one of us has the responsibility to call people to Allah.”

 

Rageah has also delivered sermons calling on all Muslims living in the West, to Hire only Muslims: “Use only truck-and cab drivers that are Muslim! Use only doctors who are Muslim. — “If you want to do anything just ask if that individual is a Muslim or not. If he is not, then look for a Muslim, because I’m sure you’ll find a Muslim. I’m sure you’ll find a Muslim in that field…”

 

Shaikh Abdool Hamid, who like many other Islamic scholars from all over the world have been educated at Medina University, the Saudi version of the Patrice Lumumba Peoples’ Friendship University, in the former USSR.

 

Hamid is a popular lecturer who serves as Imam in several mosques in North America.  He regularly holds sermons calling to impose Islam, with instructions on how to advance the transformation of Western secular nations into an Islamic society.

 

He argues that while “it may seem from one perspective that Islam took over…it is really [taking] over in order to enhance the lives” of the people. He also calls on the newcomers to become politically active, because “changing society cannot happen unless we become involved in the political process.” The involvement in the political process, he explains, “is necessary to bring Sharia (Islamic Law) because Islam is universal.”

 

But what should be done to the infidels who reject the Invitation to Islam?

 

When such an invitation, the Dawah, does not convince all non-believers to convert, the Hadith provides the next step. According to the book “The Gardens of the Righteous” [Blog Editor: 346 pg PDF English translation via al Islam] – which was written by a Sunni scholar in the 13th Century, and published and distributed with modern commentary in the United States, and on social media by the Islamic Circle of North America, “Islam strives to achieve global dominance by jihad.,, Until Islam Becomes Victorious or We Die in the Attempt. ”

 

The Saudi Salman bin Fahed al-‘Auda, a member of the Muslim Brotherhood’s International Union for Muslim Scholars, who in 2017 was not allowed into Denmark and in September 2018 sentenced to death by a Saudi court, is famous for asserting that the solution to Islamic distress — that may bring about the fall of America and the Western world — “exists in one word which is Jihad.”

 

As al-Auda explains (quote) -“The West, and above all the United States, and Western culture, in general, are undergoing a historical process that is deterministic. This process leads to its total collapse, sooner or later.” He sounds like most Democrats turned progressive socialists’ Presidential candidates in the US…. Doesn’t he?

 

According to al-Auda and many other Salafi scholars – Jihad is intended to accelerate that collapse. And importantly, he reminds us that Jihad is fought not only on the battlefield.  “Weapons are not only the rifle, the bullet, the airplane, the tank, and the cannon. Not at all!When thinking about weapons to advance Jihad, think about the economy as a weapon, money is a weapon…”

 

Anyone critical of the Europeans’ open border policies, and the Islamization of Europe is labeled Islamophobe by the radical Left and leaders of wide-spread, well-funded Muslim organizations who use lawfare as an economic warfare against their critics.  Joining them are the leaders of the European Union, who willfully ignore the Islamic threat, in their haste to turn the European continent to a new, pinker version of the former USSR. The EU’s central bureaucracy delude itself into believing that they will be able to control the fast-growing radicalized Muslim population, as they have the secular Europeans.

 

Europe’s Left -leaning central institutions, and Europe’s leading Islamic organizations fight to protect their opacity. Both groups fear that transparency would foil their plans. Thus, they stigmatize their opponents as irrational and hate mongers to silence and abuse the legal system to punish them.

 

However, there is nothing irrational with those who dare to identify the threats posed by these two groups. The “Visegrad 4” – made of four Central European nations that for decades lived under Communism: Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, and Hungary, joined in opposition to the EU’s post-nationalist, no-borders, “New Europe”, pro -Muslim migration agenda.

 

The Polish government, which resists the EU dictated quota of Muslim refugees, has instead “rolled out the welcome mat” for some 2 million economic migrants from Ukraine, who are seeking” a better life after the Russian invasion of 2014.”

 

At the forefront of the opposition to the EU’s efforts to end its member nations’ sovereignty, and creating a “new Europeans” with masses of Muslim migrants/refugees, is Hungary’s outspoken Prime Minister Victor Orbán.

 

The Ottoman’s Empire’s 158 years rule over Hungary (1541-1699), has not been forgotten. And Mr. Orban seems intent on preventing the history of Islamic oppression from repeating itself. Despite EU threats and sanctions, he continues to argue that “Without the protection of our Christian culture, we are going to lose Europe, and Europe will no longer belong to the Europeans.”

 

Would Europe catch up with Poland and Hungary? Could Europe get its act together before it’s too late?

________________________

Do YOU Want European Multiculturalism?

Shrug Off Islamophobia & Xenophobia Accusations

John R. Houk

© March 30, 2019

_______________________

‘New Europe’ and the Islamist Agenda

 

Dr. Rachel Ehrenfeld is Founder and President of the New York-based American Center for Democracy, and the Economic Warfare Institute. Dr. Ehrenfeld has authored academic and policy papers and more than one thousand articles. Her books include FUNDING EVIL: How Terrorism is Financed – and How to Stop It (2011) • EVIL MONEY (HarperCollins, 1992,1994). Her latest book project is on The Economic Warfare against the U.S. from Within and Without. • NARCOTERRORISM (Basic Books, 1990, 1992).

 

Copyright © 2019 | The American Center for Democracy is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization. Your contribution is tax-deductible to the fullest extent of the law.

 

Intro to Robert Spencer on Geert Wilders


John R. Houk, Editor

June 13, 2018

Most Americans are clueless about the enormous assault of European so-called democracies against any Free Speech exposing the god-awful crimes of Muslim immigrants, refugees and next-gen born Muslims perpetuated AGAINST the inherent non-Muslim citizens.

 

Why are Americans clueless? Because the American Leftist Mainstream Media (MSM) is quite supportive of these Free Speech restrictions.

 

Why are European democracies restricting Free Speech? Because the idiocy of cultural Multicultural Diversity has capture the political elites running those nations. Muslim crimes therefore must be hidden from their European citizens to maintain the perversity that Islamic culture is compatible with the values of Western culture.

 

In Europe you can actually go to jail for exposing Muslim crimes to the public! The latest victim that I am aware of is Tommy Robinson. I wonder how many others have been jail or prosecuted for exposing the nature of Islamic culture?

 

Americans need to pay attention to what is occurring in Europe. American Leftists (i.e. Democrats) desire to follow the European Multiculturalist paradigm.

 

JRH 6/13/18 (Hat Tip: Freedom Outpost)

Please Support NCCR

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

GEERT WILDERS PUTS THE POLITICAL ELITES ON NOTICE

The people are rising up. Can the elites put the genie back in the bottle?

 

By Robert Spencer

June 11, 2018

FrontPage Mag

 

Geert Wilders – Photo by Jan Kranendonk

 

Geert Wilders spoke at a massive rally for Tommy Robinson on Saturday. 20,000 people came out to call for Tommy’s release, and Wilders took the opportunity to put the political elites of Britain and continental Europe on notice.

 

“Our governments,” Wilders declared, “sold us out with mass immigration. With Islamization. With open borders. We are almost foreigners in our own lands. And if we complain about it, they call us racists and Islamophobes. But I say, no more! And what do you say? No more! And that’s right: enough is enough. We will not be gagged anymore. No more tyranny.”

 

It was extraordinary that the British authorities allowed Wilders into the country at all. Several years ago he was banned from entering the country, but although the ban was reversed on appeal, the British government recently banned Martin Sellner, Brittany Pettibone, Lauren Southern and Lutz Bachmann from entering, all for the crime of opposing jihad terror and Sharia oppression, and thereby made it clear that it is more authoritarian and unwilling to uphold the freedom of speech than ever – at least when it comes to criticism of Islam, Muslim rape gangs, and mass Muslim migration.

 

Even worse, the bannings of Sellner, Pettibone, Southern, and Bachmann were just part of a long pattern. Pamela Geller and I were banned from entering Britain in 2013, apparently for life, also for the crime of telling the truth about Islam and jihad. Meanwhile, Britain has a steadily lengthening record of admitting jihad preachers without a moment of hesitation. Syed Muzaffar Shah Qadri’s preaching of hatred and jihad violence was so hardline that he was banned from preaching in Pakistan, but the UK Home Office welcomed him into Britain.

 

The UK Home Office also admitted Shaykh Hamza Sodagar into the country, despite the fact that he has said: “If there’s homosexual men, the punishment is one of five things. One – the easiest one maybe – chop their head off, that’s the easiest. Second – burn them to death. Third – throw ’em off a cliff. Fourth – tear down a wall on them so they die under that. Fifth – a combination of the above.”

 

Theresa May’s relentlessly appeasement-minded government also admitted two jihad preachers who had praised the murderer of a foe of Pakistan’s blasphemy laws. One of them was welcomed by the Archbishop of Canterbury. Meanwhile, the UK banned three bishops from areas of Iraq and Syria where Christians are persecuted from entering the country.

 

But now matters are coming to a head. Apparently British authorities decided that it would be too politically costly for them to bar Wilders again. And so he entered, and spoke, and gave them a strong dose of the reality that they are determined to ignore and deny.

 

Tommy Robinson is in prison today because he violated a court order demanding that he not film videos outside the trials of Muslim rape gangs. Clearly the government’s intent was to make sure that as few people as possible discovered the truth about its massive, years-long cover-up of those rape gangs, and refusal to prosecute the perpetrators. Theresa May and company obvious hope that other Britons who are furious about the sacrifice of thousands of British girls to the idols of “diversity” and “multiculturalism” will see what happened to Tommy, and be frightened into silence.

 

The British government, in imprisoning Tommy Robinson, has shown itself willing to incarcerate people for having opinions that it considers unacceptable. That heralds the death of Britain as a free society and the beginning of an authoritarian police state there, unless this slide to totalitarianism is stopped now. British public figures, whatever criticism they have leveled against Tommy Robinson in the past, should be calling for him to be freed today, or else they will be exposing themselves as supporting the degeneration of Britain into a police state.

 

Wilders addressed this endeavor head-on, declaring: “We will not be silenced. We will not be intimidated. And we tell the governments, we are not afraid of you. We will never surrender. We will stand strong and do our duty. We will defend our civilization. And we will protect our people.”

 

Wilders added: “And I tell you, to the governments. You can throw us in jail, but you will never defeat us. Because, my friends, for every Tommy whom you imprison, thousands will rise up. So take notice, Theresa May. Take notice, Dutch Prime Minister Rutte. Take notice, Mrs. Merkel or President Macron. Take notice: the future is ours and not yours. We will defeat you politically, because we, my friends, we are the people.”

 

If Wilders’ words don’t prove true, it will be because the death of free societies in Britain and Western Europe is truly at hand.

______________________

Intro to Robert Spencer on Geert Wilders

John R. Houk, Editor

June 13, 2018

_____________________

GEERT WILDERS PUTS THE POLITICAL ELITES ON NOTICE

 

© COPYRIGHT 2018, FRONTPAGEMAG.COM

 

About Robert Spencer

 

Robert Spencer is the director of Jihad Watch and a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. He is author of the New York Times bestsellers The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades) and The Truth About MuhammadHis new book is The History of Jihad From Muhammad to ISIS. Follow him on Twitter here. Like him on Facebook here.

 

FRONTPAGE MAG IS A PROUD PROJECT OF THE DAVID HOROWITZ FREEDOM CENTER

 

The DHFC is dedicated to the defense of free societies whose moral, cultural and economic foundations are under attack by enemies both secular and religious, at home and abroad.

 

The David Horowitz Freedom Center combats the efforts of the radical left and its Islamist allies to destroy American values and disarm this country as it attempts to defend itself in a time of terror.  The leftist offensive is most obvious on our nation’s campuses, where the Freedom Center protects students from indoctrination and intimidation and works to give conservative students a place in the marketplace of ideas from which they are otherwise excluded.  Combining forceful analysis and bold activism, the Freedom Center provides strong insight into today’s most pressing issue on its family of websites and in the activist campaigns it wages on campus, in the news media, and in national politics throughout the year.

 

David Horowitz began the Center for the Study of Popular Culture in 1988 to establish a conservative presence in Hollywood and show how popular culture had become a political battleground. Over the next 18 years, CSPC attracted 50,000 contributing supporters and established programs such as The Wednesday Morning Club, the Individual Rights Foundation, and Students for Academic Freedom.

 

FrontPage Magazine, the Center’s online journal of news and political commentary has 1.5 million visitors and over 870,000 unique visitors a month (65 million hits) and is linked to over 2000 other websites.  The magazine’s coverage of and commentary about events has been greatly augmented over the last two years by the presence of four  Shillman Fellows in Journalism underwritten by board member Dr. Robert Shillman. FrontPage has recently added a blog called “The Point,” run by Shillman Fellow Daniel Greenfield, which has tripled web traffic.

 

READ THE REST