Machete Rampage in Brussels by 'Asian' Woman Wearing a Djellaba

Tweet

Responders tend to a victim (or is it the suspect?)

Here is what we know so far:

Earlier today (afternoon in Belgium) a woman randomly stabbed three people. The location has been variously reported as occurring 'in a mall,'  'in a McDonald's,' 'at a bus stop' or 'on a bus' on the outskirts of Brussels.

Most reports claim she was wielding a machete. Some have called it a knife.

Two of the victims are in serious condition.

The woman was shot in the arm by police after refusing to drop her weapon.

Belgian media have reported that the woman was wearing a Djellaba - a loose fitting full-smock, popular in North Africa.

The police have not officially released the suspect's name (partial or full) or a description, but Belgian media reports that a police source claimed the woman was 'Asian.'

Almost immediately, it was reported that police do not believe the attacks were terrorist related or politically motivated, and that the woman had a 'history of mental illness.'

Read the Daily Mail article here.

French Chief of Intelligence: "We are on the brink of civil war"

Tweet

For years, every step of the way, the anti-Islamophobes have claimed there was nothing really to worry about. They have attempted to prosecute, censor or ban anyone who disagreed. Or if that was not possible, viciously smear them.

Even now they are no doubt rushing to deflect responsibility from what they in part caused.

The only thing more noticeable than the blood on their hands is the still prominent smirk on their faces.

This was a headline story in Le Figaro three weeks ago, but was only picked up by the Daily Mail today and then featured in a post by Pamela Geller.

The article in Le Figaro discusses the recent testimony of Patrick Calvary, the head of the General Directorate of Homeland Security (RPS):

"We are on the brink of a civil war," he recently told members of the parliamentary commission of inquiry into the attacks of November 13 . . . A few weeks earlier, he had already warned members of the Defense Committee: "This confrontation . . . I think it will take place. Even one or two attacks and it will happen. It therefore behooves us to anticipate and block all these groups . . .

Of course, everyone knows there will be one or two more attacks.

It's not clear whether by "all these groups" Calvary means Islamists or anti-Islamists. It's possible he means both. I have no reason to doubt Cavalry's integrity or commitment to the safety and security of France. But I think at this point, cracking down on a few "extremist" groups is at least twenty years too late.

Or rather, it still might be within their power to forcibly suppress the rising right, in which case we'll get an authoritarian quasi-sharia France just in time for writer Michel Houellebecq's prediction in 2022.

Geert Wilders on Ronald Reagan and Islam: "We win, they lose."

Tweet

As most of you know, Geert Wilders is one of Europe's foremost champions against the spread of aggressive Islam. He's the head of the Party for Freedom, the Dutch political party currently ahead in the polls. At the same time, he lives in hiding with security protection. Like many prominent anti-Islam politicians/dissidents in Europe he is also currently being prosecuted by the state. This important article, penned by Wilders, was recently published by Breitbart:    

Islam is growing rapidly in Western Europe. According to the Pew Research Center, France has a Muslim population of 7.5%, the Netherlands of 6%, Germany of 5.8%, Austria of 5.4%, the United Kingdom of 4.8%, Sweden of 4.6%. 

The real figures are even higher. Indeed, Pew’s figures predate the refugee tsunami of 2015, when 1 million immigrants flocked to Europe, most of them Muslims. 

Last week, The Washington Post wrote that “annual net immigration into Europe is projected to increase steadily from current levels for another 20 years.” The paper points out that by 2069, the 28 current members of the European Union, as well as Iceland, Norway and Switzerland, will see a net immigration of 77 million people. This will have severe consequences for Europe’s culture. 

The Post writes euphemistically that Europe will become “substantially more diverse than it is today.” The truth, however, is that Europe will Islamize. If there is anything opposed to diversity, then it is Islam. 

As a result, Europe will become less free and less safe. Islam is an existential threat to Western civilisation. No honest individual can say with a straight face that it is a doctrine of peace or freedom. Just read the Koran with its murderous verses. They are a license to kill. 

We can see it on the television news almost every single day. Terror attacks in Istanbul, Paris, Brussels, Orlando. The very word Islam means submission. Islam commands the submission of every nation on earth to Sharia law, if necessary by war. It is inhumane. It is totalitarian. Everywhere it settles, it brings hell with it. That is why immigration from Islamic countries is so dangerous. 

And while Europe’s ruling classes are cultural relativists, who no longer believe in the superiority of our own Judeo-Christian culture and, having lost this belief, are no longer willing to defend it, the good news is that the people in Europe are neither stupid nor blind. 

This week, the publication of an EU-wide opinion poll, conducted by an Hungarian think tank in each of the 28 EU member states, was cause for optimism. It revealed that 70% of Europeans see Muslim migration as a serious threat. And that those who still prefer to turn a blind eye to the danger are a small minority in every single EU member state. 

In each of the 28 countries, the think tank had a representative sample of at least 1,000 people questioned. 65% of Europeans realise that the influx of immigrants increases crime levels – a majority in every country. 65% also realise that it increases the threat of terrorism – again a majority everywhere, with the exception of tiny Luxembourg, where immigrants are predominantly affluent foreigners. A staggering 87% acknowledge that a terrorist attack, like the one in France in November last year, can also happen in their own country. 

And 63% of all Europeans are aware that immigration imposes a risk on the cultural integrity of the countries impacted by it. In the Netherlands this figure is 81%, the highest of all EU countries, closely followed by Sweden. Austria, Germany and the United Kingdom. 

If so many people, in so many countries – as diverse as Finland and Greece, or Ireland and Romania – feel this way, politicians should draw their conclusions. As always, the people realise far better what is happening than the elites, living in their ivory towers. 

Ronald Reagan used to say that “the heart of America is always sound, and America’s judgment is always correct. And if a President knows that and hews to the wisdom of the people, then he can be certain he will have done his job well.” The same applies in Europe. 

Reagan also said that we must “believe in trusting the wisdom of the people rather than taking power away from them and concentrating it in other hands.” The latter is exactly what has happened in Europe in the past decades. Nation-states were dismantled and their sovereignty was transferred to the European Union, which has badly mishandled the immigration crisis. 77% of all Europeans, and a majority in every EU member state, agree with that. 

The wisdom of the people commands us to do something about the threat of Islam. Our governments must face reality before it is too late. Islam does not belong in Europe. We must stop all immigration from Islamic countries and start de-islamizing. We must deal with the facts of Islam’s violent and totalitarian nature, because it we fail to do so, Islam will deal with us. 

We must treat Islam the same way we treat other totalitarian ideologies, such as Communism and Nazism. Perhaps we should even consider outlawing Islam. Here, too, Ronald Reagan, one of the greatest leaders of the free world of the past century, can serve as an inspiration. “Here’s my strategy on the Cold War: We win, they lose,” he once said. 

And here is what our strategy on Islam should be: We win, they lose.

"Paris is Like a Warzone"

Tweet

Paris is "like a war zone," declared one witness.

Here is a video of a woman getting caught in a mass street fight near Notre Dame and the Louvre:

And here's a video of a man who had been knocked unconscious, staggering through the mob: 

 

The city is officially in a "state of emergency" since the November terrorist attacks. But there are no police to be seen.

Take a good look at the perpetrators. No doubt they are extremist Hindus. Or maybe they are extremist Baptists or Sikhs.

As that bloodied man staggers through the crowd, a woman in a hijab makes a call on her cellphone.

From the Daily Mail:

Mob violence in lawless Paris: Terrifying video shows 'woman tourist' viciously attacked by marauding youths in city deserted by police despite 'state of emergency' and Euros rampage 

• Young woman viciously beaten 'within sight of Notre Dame' in Paris 
• Bloodcurdling screams and horrific attack caught on witnesses camera 
• Extended attack not attended by police despite police station next door 
• Paris is 'like a warzone,’ a witness told MailOnline who said he was terrified 

A young woman screamed helplessly as she was set upon by a violent gang in the centre of tourist Paris today. 

She was repeatedly punched and kicked in the head and upper body as around 15 mainly men surrounded her, knocking her to the ground. 

The terrifying attack, which was captured on video, took place within sight of Notre Dame Cathedral, and less than half-a-mile from the Louvre museum. 

Police were nowhere to be seen, as the savagery continued until the early hours of this morning, with others reporting muggings and gratuitous assaults. 

Another video obtained by Mail Online shows a man who was knocked unconscious by another gang staggering away from the scene of the crime with a head wound. 

This is despite France officially being under a ‘State of Emergency’ following the terrorist attacks in which up to 150 people were murdered in Paris last year. 

The arrival of thousands of football fans, including many from the UK, as well as ‘ultra’ hooligans from countries like Russia for Euro 2016 is also meant to have improved security.’ 

But this did not stop the marauding mobs carrying out their assaults unchallenged. 

‘It’s one of the most terrifying situations I’ve ever experienced in my life,’ said a 42-year-old Englishman who asked not to be identified by name. 

At around 1am the woman (circled) and a group of friends were walking in front of an entrance to Chatelet Metro Station, when the violence exploded around them. 

A crowd of some 1,000 people congregated outside a Caribbean restaurant, where giant speakers and a small stage were set up, but the atmosphere soon turned ugly. 

‘Gangs of youths had the freedom of the streets to attack and steal from anyone they wanted. Paris is no longer a safe tourist city – it’s like a warzone.’ 

It all took place during the 35th annual ‘Fete de la Musique’ (Music Party), an event that is meant to be celebration of the arts, with hundreds of thousands taking to the street. 

Anne Hidalgo, the Socialist mayor of Paris, and President Francois Hollande are among those who regularly show off the event as a ‘celebration of Paris life’. 

Manuel Valls, the Prime Minister, even said this year’s Party was ‘the best response to terrorism’, arguing that people should go out and enjoy themselves, in defiance of threats of violence. 

The annual music party is supposed to be a celebration of the art as hundreds of thousands take to the streets. Above a man in a white T-shirt and black backpack tries to help those caught up in the trouble. 

But the attack on the woman – who has not been identified – paints a very different picture. 

She was with a group of friends who attended a rap gig on a street close to Rue de Rivoli, the equivalent of London’s Oxford Street in Paris.

But trouble started almost immediately, when a man was set upon by a gang early in the evening, and knocked unconscious. 

Video shows him being helped up by other members of the crowd, before he staggers away with a head wound. 

The ugly atmosphere grew, as revelers openly smoked cannabis, and drank bottles of beer from nearby supermarkets. 

There is a police station close next to Les Halles shopping centre, next door to where the attacks happened, but not a single officer appeared to deal with the trouble.

Man Stabs Four, One Fatally, at Munich Train Station While Shouting "Allahu Akbar!" and "You Infidels!"; German Investigators Say There is No Indication He Had Islamic Extremist Motive

Tweet

Grafing Banhof station near Munich

The Telegraph has a live news feed on this. A few minutes ago they printed this grotesque eyewitness account from Bild newspaper:

"I heard screams, I saw a man lying on the ground, begging a man who stood over him. 'I love God, I love Allah,' he was saying, obviously to save himself," the newspaper quoted the witness, who has not been named, as saying.

It is not known whether the man who begged for his life by invoking the Muslim god was the man who later died. One other man is in critical condition.

German investigators have "identified" the suspect as "Paul H," a German-born citizen with probable drug and/or psychiatric issues. During the attack he was wearing only socks, which progressively became soaked with his victim's blood. This graphic video seems to show his progress from the train:

There is as yet no word on whether he was a self-identified or practicing Muslim.

Would it be less disturbing if we found out that he was not?

The Archbishop of Cologne is a Smirking Collaborator with Evil

Tweet

Rainer Woelki

I was in Cologne ten years ago.

The most poignant thing was a small and sort of obscure museum to Nazism near the Cathedral. No English translations. It was the site of a Nazi prison. You can still see the graffiti that the victims wrote, knowing they were about to be tortured to death.

But as horrific as that was, the thing that pressed upon me the most were the historical photographs. Triumphant parades. Soldiers in spiffy uniforms. Men and women throwing flowers. Nazism was a liberation, a catharsis. 1936, 1937, 1938, 1939...

They had no idea.

Then only a few years later, the photographs show nothing but burned out buildings and craters. This was the result of their...madness. How could all of this have happened so fast? Those poor ignorant people.

It is of course happening all over again. Though this time as a kind of farce. The parades have been replaced by diversity marches.

It is possible that Cologne will be destroyed again. Due to madness?

But that doesn't leave this prelate off the hook. How many will die (on all sides) to validate his smirk?

In the 1930's and 1940's, the German Catholic Church opposed the Nazis. Many good priests and other Catholics gave their lives resisting them. Some died in that prison.

But this time the Church in Germany is in full alliance with civilization's enemies. As a Catholic, it devastates me to say that. But it's true.

Via Vlad Tepes:

The World According to Facebook

Tweet

XOXO!!!

Last Sunday, Mark Zuckerberg posted this to his Facebook page. It was almost certainly a veiled attempt to respond to criticisms that Facebook had slightly bungled its "Safety Check" feature--sending the "Are you safe?" message to millions of Facebook users who had no connection to the city of Lahore, and then withdrawing it without explanation.

This morning we activated Safety Check in Pakistan after a bomb targeted children and their families in a park in Lahore. Over the last two months, we have activated Safety Check several times for acts of terror -- including in Turkey and Belgium -- so people in the area can let their friends and loved ones know they're safe. 

Each of these attacks was different, but all had a common thread: they were carried out with a goal to spread fear and distrust, and turn members of a community against each other. 

I believe the only sustainable way to fight back against those who seek to divide us is to create a world where understanding and empathy can spread faster than hate, and where every single person in every country feels connected and cared for and loved. That's the world we can and must build together.

Let me first say that I think Safety Check is a great idea, and if they sent it out to too many people this time or confused a few of them (including me), I couldn't really care less. It is to be expected that there will be occasional minor glitches like this and there will presumably always be room for improvement on how to make it work better. That's fine.

I'm more disturbed by the second two paragraphs, If "disturbed" is the right word. "Bemused" is probably more appropriate.

I think it is reasonable to say that the last two paragraphs constitute a sort of worldview. I want to flesh it out. And I'm going to be fair about it:

The world is made up of communities (so begins my interpretation of Zuckerberg's worldview) and of course all the communities together make up one big community. In each community there are members of different races, nationalities, religions, genders, sexual orientations and various other categories.  

Within them, there are good people and bad people. Good people recognize other people's differences but also recognize that those differences are not morally significant. Or to clarify, they are morally significant to those who have them or embody them, as they should be, but we should not make moral judgments about those people based on those differences. Bad people fixate on the differences and want to brand some of them as "bad." Indeed, it's worse than that, as one of the goals of bad people is to convert good people to their side by somehow getting them to go along with that branding-of certain-differences-as-bad thing.

Another way of putting this is that there is love and there is hate. Love consists largely in treating the above differences as unimportant. Hate consists of the opposite. Among the haters are racists, sexists, religious supremacists or bigots, nationalists, homophobes and so on. 

But all is not lost. Bad people aren't precisely to blame for being bad, since they generally get their badness from observing other bad people, or perhaps being earlier victims of bad people. Or again to put it another way, they were taught--directly or indirectly--how to hate. 

But if people can learn how to hate, they can also learn how to love. The answer is therefore to spread love. Only when most people feel loved, will the cycle of hate--and yes, it is a cycle--be broken. 

This is a worthwhile and attainable goal, and Facebook will of course play its part in helping to achieve it.

Before anyone accuses me of presenting Zuckerberg's views inaccurately or in a biased manner, let me again say that the object is to be fair. Indeed, I think I've been more than fair. For example, in his Facebook post, Zuckerberg claimed that war and conflict will only end when "every single person in every country feels connected and cared for and loved." Thinking that it would be possible to satisfy that goal is of course absurd and insane. Thus I changed it to "most people." I think that makes the view more reasonable.

So what are we to say of Zuckerberg's view?

Whatever else we might say, this much is true:

It is the worldview of a child.

This child has control over much of the world's communications and is one of its world's richest human beings. It is not an exaggeration to say that he is also one of the world's most powerful human beings.

This is not the worldview of your hippy dippy third-grade teacher. It is the worldview of an eight-year old of average intelligence who is trying to make sense of things after having been taught for a year by your hippy dippy third-grade teacher.

We've largely entrusted the free flow of information to that.

Don't ask what that says about us.

Now, anyone with any human feeling must acknowledge that there is at least an atom of truth in Zuckerman's worldview, as there usually is in any childish theory. Among other things, Christians should acknowledge that it at least superficially contains elements of Christ's own example as well as certain features of His commands to us. Of course we should love, or at least try to love one another, and all things being equal, the more love there is the better. We should spread it around, as they say, as much as possible.

But in practical terms, that alone is not going to stop ISIS or stop Europe from spiraling into bloody anarchy, bloody authoritarianism, civil war or (probably in that order) all three.

For the record, I don't think Zuckerberg is an evil man. But in his childishness, he has become a collaborator with evil men.

And that's not an April Fools joke.

MUST READ: Geert Wilders Defends Himself at Trial: "Silence is Betrayal."

Tweet

This is what they do to dissidents in Western Europe

In many of the major countries of Western Europe, the leaders of some of the largest opposition parties are currently under indictment or on trial for one form or another of "hate speech" violations involving criticism of Islam. While it is true that they're generally walking free for the moment and not being tortured on the rack or rotting in dungeons, this form of "soft" persecution is relentless and pervasive. 

If Western Europe was democratic and free twenty years ago, it no longer is so. The question now is rather whether it will soon experience a full-blown civil war.

Geert Wilders is the founder and leader of the Party for Freedom, the third largest party in the Dutch Parliament. Since founding the party he has been living in hiding and has been under heavy guard against assassination attempts. He has also been harassed by his own judicial system, being prosecuted (and acquitted) of hate speech charges once before.

He has also suffered harassment from other countries, being banned or discouraged by various government representatives, most notoriously in the United Kingdom, from traveling or speaking.

Wilders is unquestionably one of the leaders of the current opposition to the Islamization of Europe.

And he is one of the true political heroes of the twenty-first century.

I am also proud to reveal that he was born on precisely the same day that I was. I learned that only a few hours ago. If I could be one-tenth of the man he is now, I would be happy.

Like his Dutch anti-Islam predecessor, Pim Fortuyn, who was assassinated in 2002, Wilders is a lapsed Catholic. Sources suggest that Fortuyn was coming back to the Church in the months before he was murdered. God calls us all to come home. Let us pray, for our sake and his, that Wilders is also listening.  

Here is his opening statement at his current trial where is is being accused of "inciting hatred against Moroccans." It is taken from the Vlad Tepes blog, though I'm not sure who translated it:           

For more than eleven years, I have been living under death threats. Every day, I am reminded of this. Even today. This morning, I was driven here in a convoy of armored cars, with sirens, flashing lights, and surrounded by bodyguards. And not only today, but every day.

I will be brought home in the same way. Home is a safe-house. My office is a shielded room. And when I have to stand in court, it is here, in a bunker at Schiphol. 

For more than eleven years already, I have been paying a heavy price. And I think that you as well as I know why. I am paying that price for the same reason as why I am standing in the dock for the second time. Because I dare to criticize Islam and mention the Moroccan problem. 

“Freedom is the power that we have over ourselves,” said the great Dutch jurist Hugo Grotius. His statue stands at the entrance of the Supreme Court in The Hague. Hugo Grotius is the symbol of Dutch law. But once he was on trial himself. He was sentenced to life because he had fought on the side of Johan van Oldenbarnevelt for Dutch freedoms. But Grotius escaped in a coffin and fled to Antwerp. 

Sometimes I wish that I could escape myself. But I know that I cannot. I would have to pay a price which I do not want to pay. I would have to shut up. And I cannot. I do not want that. And I will not do it. Freedom of expression is the only freedom I still have. And, forgive me, I will never give it up. 

So here I stand again. 

And I honestly think it is a disgrace that I have to stand here. 

Millions of people in this country and abroad think so, too. 

I do not ask for your compassion. But now that I am forced to stand here, I ask of you that you give me what I am entitled to: a fair trial. I ask that Lady Justice be blindfolded. 

And I fear this will not be the case. 

As my lawyer explained, over half of the legal complaints lodged against me proved to be false when they were investigated. People thought they were voting in elections, instead of pressing charges. Or they did not know my name. Or they were illiterate or did not recognize their signature. Or they said they did not feel discriminated against, even though it said so in their complaint. I hope that you will never be accused of something that you did not do. Or they got assistance from mosques or Labor politicians. Or they were told by the police that the officers also felt uncomfortable with Wilders’ statements. Or they were told by the mosque administration that they had to fill out the forms the police was going to bring. 

Mr President, Members of the Court, this is nothing but deception, manipulation, intimidation, ignorance, it is a scam. It is incredibly shocking. 

And that the prosecutor just said that this nothing to worry about is a disgrace. 

Because in front of you stands a politician. 

And he is being prosecuted because he has voiced a political opinion. 

Why did I speak about fewer Moroccans? 

The honest answer is because I want fewer Moroccans in the Netherlands. 

The Netherlands has a huge Moroccan problem. It is my job as a democratically elected representative of the people to honestly identify the problems in our country. 

How and why do I want to get fewer Moroccans in our country has already been written down in the PVV election platform since 2006: We want to stop immigration from non-Western immigrants, and therefore also of Moroccans, to promote voluntary repatriation, and to denaturalize criminals with a dual nationality and expel them from the Netherlands. And before, during and after the contested election night, I have repeatedly explained this in front of many cameras and microphones. 

I did not say “All Moroccans must leave the country” or “Moroccans are no good,” but I advocated “fewer Moroccans”. Because that is my opinion, that is what I want, and what many millions of Dutch want together with me. 

The Public prosecutor is trying to catch me, but he is selectively shopping.
If I would have advocated fewer Syrians, then I would not be standing here today. Or I would not stand here alone, but together with Prime Minister Rutte and almost all the government leaders in Europe. Because today they all want to get fewer Syrians. 

The Public Prosecution is also applying double standards. And there are many examples of this. 

How quiet was it when, earlier, politicians from the Labor Party spoke about Moroccan cunts (Mr Oudkerk), about humiliating Moroccans (Mr Spekman) and about Moroccan boys who have an ethnic monopoly on nuisance (Mr. Samson). Why were they not being prosecuted? 

And how quiet was it when a Turkish member of the Dutch Parliament (Mr Öztürk) compared me with a tumor and said “One has to fight him,” and likened me to Hitler. Where were the mayors then who spoke shame of it and led processions of people going to press charges? 

Where was the Public Officer’s press spokesperson when a Labor Party chairman (Mr Den Hertog) said that he hopes that I die of a heart attack, but that if a bullot is needed then it would have to big enough to engrave from the grateful people on it? 

Where was the outrage of the Prime Minister when a D66 member (Mr Mohammed) said he would put a bullet through my head and cut me open and feed me to the pigs? 

And why was there no prosecution of the former police commissioner of Amsterdam, Mr Van Riessen, who said about me, and I quote: “Basically one would feel inclined to say: let’s kill him, just get rid of him now and he will never surface again.” End of quote. 

Where were the preprinted declaration forms then? 

What a duplicity. What a selective indignation. 

And when someone is taken to court, such as the Moroccan rapper who said that he, and I quote, “hates these fucking Jews even more than the Nazis”, end of quote, then he is acquitted, because then suddenly his words are covered by freedom of speech. 

These double standards and this hypocrisy by both politicians and the Public Prosecutor turn this trial into a political trial. The leader of the largest opposition party, who proves too strong to defeat in Parliament, must be neutralized. That is a disgrace and I hope you will not allow yourselves to be taken advantage of. Because the problems of which I speak will not go away by keeping silent about them. 

Silence is not an option. 

Silence is cowardly. 

Silence is betrayal. 

If I, as the political leader of my party, during an election gathering of my party, am not allowed to say what has been written down in my party platform for a decade, then this is absolute madness and then one has to convict me. 

My opinions will not change. And one will not be able to silence me. 

I have been deprived of my freedom for over eleven years and the only freedom I still have is my freedom of speech. Nobody will be able to rob me of it. 

But obviously, I hope that you will leave the political and public debate to the political and public debate, that you will not turn this courtroom into a political forum, and that you acquit me. 

On August 24 last year, in the television program ‘Looking into the Soul’, I heard one of your fellow penal judges, Mr Hermans, say that voting for the PVV is – I quote – a “huge contra-indication to the profession of judge.” Excuse me that this worries me. 

And I am even more worried because, of all people, it happened to be one of you three, Mrs Van Rens, who on August 17 last year in the television program ‘Looking into the Soul’ criticized political views of my party, which is allowed of course. She said that she opposes minimum sentences and expelling illegal immigrants. But she said even more. Mrs Van Rens also criticized the judicial decision during my previous trial to approve our objection to the court. She said she did not understand that the objection was assigned by fellow judges because, and I quote: “there was no proper basis in penal law to allocate the objection.” 

Mr President, Members of the Court, there has been only one single judge in the Netherlands who has openly criticized the judicial decision in favor of me. Only one. And she is exactly the judge opposite me in court today. 

Madam Judge, I hope you understand that I am saying this and that I do not find this very reassuring. It would do you credit if you would withdraw from this case and I strongly call on you to do so. 

Mr President, Members of the Court. 

I conclude. 

I meant what I have said, I spoke on behalf of millions of Dutch, I retract nothing and have no regrets. I have said what I think and I will continue to do so. Always.
But I hate no one, I do not incite any hatred and I abhor everything that has to do with discrimination. 

That is the truth. Only in a dictatorship, speaking the truth is a crime. 

And only in a dictatorship, the opinion of millions of people is criminalized. 

I stand here before three judges, but actually it should be the 17 million Dutch who should judge my political expressions. 

So I ask you: Let freedom of expression prevail. 

Let the Netherlands remain a free country. 

Acquit me. 

Thank you very much. 

The Rt. Hon. Netherlands MP Geert Wilders

Pope Francis Creepily Equates Muslim Migration into Europe with the Impregnation of the Biblical Sarah

Tweet

The man appears to be insane. Against the shocking recent wave of Muslim migrant rapes and sexual assaults--including the anal rape of a 72-year old woman (the convicted perpetrator got 20 months and will not be deported)--creepy is not even the word. A better one would be "obscene."

From a recent interview with Pope Francis in Milan's Corriere Della Sera: 

Often, Bergoglio uses a Biblical metaphor. He compares the Old Continent to Sarah, the wife of Abraham. Sarah was sterile and when she was more than seventy years old, according to the customs of those remote times she gave her slave to her husband so he could father a child on her. But then, miraculously, she succeeded in having one at the age of ninety. "Europe," Francisco loves to repeat, "is like Sarah, who first feared but then smiled secretly." His hope, referring to what he had said, is that Europe will "smile secretly" at the immigrants.*

Without skipping a beat, the Pope then favorably mentioned Konrad Adenauer.

*"Spesso, Bergoglio usa una metafora biblica. Paragona il Vecchio Continente a Sara, la moglie di Abramo. Sara è sterile e quando ormai ha più di settant’anni, secondo gli usi di quei tempi remoti dà in moglie la sua schiava al marito perché partorisca per lei un figlio. Poi, però, miracolosamente, riesce ad averne uno a novant’anni. «L’Europa», ama ripetere Francesco, «è come Sara, che prima si spaventa ma poi sorride di nascosto». La sua speranza, riferisce chi gli ha parlato, è che l’Europa «sorrida di nascosto» agli immigrati" English translation by Diversity Macht Frei via Bare Naked Islam.

Heil Muhammad! Facebook Bans Islam Critics in Germany

Tweet

Mark Zuckerberg standing in front of the shahada: "There is no god but Allah, and Muhammad is his prophet."

I know. Mark Zuckerberg is Jewish. How tasteless! How dare I associate him with Nazis?

Because he's become a collaborator with the New Nazis, and thus, among other things, with the new anti-semitism.

The banned Islamophobes are Michael Mannheimer and Michael Sturzenberger, who have appeared on Gates of Vienna, among other sites.

From a Gates of Vienna translation of an article on the German website Politically Incorrect:

Facebook Bans Islam-Critics 

In the middle of September, Minister of Justice Heiko Maas summoned Richard Allan from Dublin, who is responsible at Facebook for political matters in Europe. Maas blatantly demanded censorship of alleged “hate”-filled content, but he was no doubt most interested in Islam-critical publications. Two and one-half months later, Facebook announced its implementation: the pages of Michael Mannheimer and Michael Stürzenberger, for example, were completely banned. although only demonstrable facts about Islam could be found there. 

...Michael Mannheimer reports on the Facebook ban:

These are the fruits of the Merkel regime. The “chief” met personally with Zuckerberg and her Minister of Justice Maas talked turkey with the responsible agent for Facebook in Germany. That was a few weeks ago. Mannheimer was the first one affected: Nothing more of his on Facebook. Then, ba-da-bing: Stürzenberger and Ester Seitz were banned on Facebook. I got the following cellphone message from Stürzenberger: “Another ‘success’ is that Facebook has now extinguished both my pages with 10,000 friends. Result of a meeting of Minister of Justice Mass with the responsible persons several weeks ago, which resulted in a censorship authority being established…” 

Read the rest here.

Europe in 2020

Tweet

Oddly, I first saw this powerful and short (1:47) video on Friday morning, only a few hours before the Paris attacks. One could say that it has been eclipsed by events. But I don't think that's true. Or at least the perception is that it hasn't.

The perception still is that while Europe may indeed now be in a war, it is merely a "war on terror". Or rather, even if we can identify the particular group--they are members of a maniacal and bloodthirsty cult with headquarters in the Syrian desert-- it's nothing that a determined conventional police and military effort cannot solve.

No.

Even before the recent refugee crisis which brought a million people--mostly young Muslim males--into Europe in only a few months, the Muslim population of most major cities in Western Europe was approaching or surpassing 10%. And if the borders were closed today, the demographic momentum would still double that figure in a generation. This is a grave problem not because Muslims are different per se but because the controlling ideology of their communities is in favor of replacing liberal civilization with illiberal barbarism. ISIS is not the ultimate cause of the current crisis, merely a symptom.

The most notable thing about the identity of the attackers was not that two of them may have "infiltrated" with the refugees, but that a few spoke perfect French and were probably Parisians.

Islam is at war with Europe, whether Europe wishes to acknowledge it or not. And its "soldiers" have already arrived.

A few words about the video. It's a bit too "racial" for my taste. A few years ago I might even have called it racist. The text claims that immigrants are "bringing their wars with them". That's not quite right, and it's certainly not fair to, say, the minority Christian refugees who have been on the receiving end of those wars. 

I couldn't care less about "white people" or even "Europeans" if defined as a quasi-race. Bring in more Syrian Christians or Somali animists or Hindus or Chinese. Heck, even a few more Americans. Europe would probably be better for it. It's Islam not racial or religious diversity that is the enemy.

But possible disagreements aside, I applaud the video's creators.  

The attacks on Friday were the beginning. What will be the end?

I expect large scale violence--on a scale much greater than we have so far seen. The worst scenario is civil war.

Either Islam will be effectively banned, which presumably would provoke a violent response (it's too late for that not to happen) or it won't be. But if it isn't effectively banned, then it will only grow in strength, largely though not entirely due to demographics. I do not believe most Europeans want to live under Sharia, nor (unfair jokes about the French aside) will they put up with a plurality Muslim-leftist alliance that may attempt to impose it on them.

So, one way or another, real war will come, perhaps not by 2020 (though even that is possible), but sooner than most of us think.

I hope I'm wrong. But at this point doing nothing (except hoping) isn't enough. Whatever we do will involve more terrorism, violence and, yes, war of some kind. But what can we do to minimize it, or to at least avoid the worst-case scenario depicted below?

Heil Muhammad! Jews Excluded From Swedish Kristallnacht Commemoration

Tweet

They had it coming

As twenty-first century savages sweep across the middle-east, beheading, crucifying and burning alive "infidels", a miasma has settled over much of Europe.

Bend to it, bow to it, conform. Or you will lose your job. Your government will take you to court. Leftist thugs will rough you up. Or Islamic commandos will shoot you.

What's happening is of course Orwellian. "Anti-Nazi" or "anti-fascist" rallies target Jews. "Diversity" is equated with submitting to the jackboot.

You thought liberalism meant sexual liberation? Think again. Actually, it's about acquiescing to cutting out the private parts of the young girl next-door, then permanently shrouding her in black.

You believe the Church will help you? Actually, it opposes you in every way it can. You want to have a rally for freedom in the central square? The Church will turn off the lights. That's mercy for you. After you get a bullet in the head, the Pope will say you were rude.

And if you're Jewish, get out. Go back to Israel, which will last for a few years until it gets what's finally coming to it. If you're lucky, maybe the EU can resettle you in Madagascar.

From Israel National News:

Scandal: Jews not invited to Swedish Kristallnacht commemoration 

The organizers of an anti-Nazi event in Sweden face controversy Monday, after declining to invite the Jewish community to the event. 

"Umeå against Nazism" will run in the city of Umeå on Tuesday and Wednesday, commemorating Kirstallnacht, or the "Night of Broken Glass," the massive 1938 pogrom against Austrian and German Jews which is seen as marking the start of the holocaust. 

But, absurdly, Jews will not be invited. 

The organizers claim that inviting the Jewish community presents a security risk, nt.se reports, citing anti-Semitic and anti-Israel protests present at past events. 

"In previous years, we have had a lot of Palestinian flags at these rallies, and even one banner where the Israeli flag was equated with a swastika," organizer and local Workers' Party member Jan Hägglund told locals. "The Jewish community wasn't invited because we assumed they might be uncomfortable around that sort of thing." 

Critics claim that Hägglund's omission must be due to the crowd he invited to the event, implying that it could only be far-left or anti-Israel - thus creating the environment which justified the "security risk." 

Meanwhile, the event's Facebook page appears to even downplay the Jewish community's role in the event, instead conveying a generalized, vanilla message of tolerance - not opposition to anti-Semitism. 

Some local officials are holding counter-rallies in protest - including municipal worker Anders Agren, who invited the Jewish community to a ceremony which will feature the lighting of memorial candles and a moment of silence.