Contact Form

Name

Email *

Message *

Showing posts with label consesrvative musings. Show all posts
Showing posts with label consesrvative musings. Show all posts

Thursday, March 23, 2017

One Reporter's Essay On The Effects Of Multiculturalism In Britain

Katie Hopkins, The Daily Mail

They stood in the centre of Brussels. Row on row.

Hands held high, making hearts to the heavens. Showing the slaughtered they were not forgotten. Reminding themselves they were here with love. Looking to show humanity wins. That love conquers all.

They lay in the centre of London, face down where they fell. Stabbed by a knife, rammed with a car, flung, broken, into the Thames, life bleeding out on the curb.

And the news came thick and fast.

No anger for me this time. No rage like I’ve felt before. No desperate urge to get out there and scream at the idiots who refused to see this coming.

Not even a nod for the glib idiots who say this will not defeat us, that we will never be broken, that cowardice and terror will not get the better of Britain.

Because, as loyal as I am, as patriotic as I am, as much as my whole younger life was about joining the British military and fighting for my country — I fear we are broken.

Not because of this ghoulish spectacle outside our own Parliament. Not because of the lives rammed apart on the pavement, even as they thought about what was for tea. Or what train home they might make.

But because this is us now.
This is our country now.
This is what we have become.
To this, we have been reduced.

Because all the while those forgiving fools in Brussels stood with their stupid hands raised in hearts to the sky, another mischief was in the making. More death was in the pipeline.

As the last life-blood of a police officer ran out across the cobbles, the attacker was being stretchered away in an attempt to save his life.

London is a city so desperate to be seen as tolerant, no news of the injured was released. No clue about who was safe or not.

Liberals convince themselves multiculturalism works because we all die together, too.

An entire city of monkeys: see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil. Blind. Deaf. And dumb.

Immersed in a seething pit of hatred, hidden in pockets of communities plagued by old animosities and ancient strife.

These people may have left their lands. But they have brought every tension, every conflict, every bit of fight here with them.

The Afghans hate the Somalias who loathe the Eritreans. As it was before, it is now. London is a city of ghettos behind a thin veneer of civility kept polished by a Muslim mayor whose greatest validation is his father's old job.

Son-of-a-bus-driver Sadiq.

I see him now, penning a missive about how London is a beautiful and tolerant city, how we are united by shared values and understanding, and how we will not be cowed by terror.

Sure enough, there he was, saying exactly that, just now. Fool.

Even as mothers text to check their children are safe. Including my own, worrying about me as I sit overlooking the scene, feeling fearful of this place where monsters lurk and steal lives away in an instant. For nothing.

I would ask Sadiq to stop talking. Empty words. Meanwhile, banning pictures of women in bikinis on the Underground. How does that help?

Please, no hashtag, no vigil, no tea lights. I am begging you not to light up Parliament in the colours of the Union.

Because we are not united. We are wrenched asunder.

The patriots of the rest of England versus the liberals in this city. The endless tolerance to those who harm us, (while the Home Office tries to shift the focus of public fear to white terror) — versus the millions like me who face the truth, with worried families and hopeless hearts, who feel the country sinking.

We are taken under the cold water by this heavy right foot in the south, a city of lead, so desperately wedded to the multicultural illusion that it can only fight those who love the country the most, blame those who are most proud to be British, and shout racist at the 52%.

This place is just like Sweden. Terrified of admitting the truth about the threat we face, about the horrors committed by the migrants we failed to deter — because to admit that we are sinking, and fast, would be to admit that everything the liberals believe is wrong.

That multiculturalism has not worked. That it is one big fat failure and one big fat lie.

President Erdogan of Turkey said there is a war being waged between the crescent and the cross. But he is wrong. Because the cross is not strong. We are down on bended knee, a doormat to be trodden on, a joke only funny to those that wish us harm.

The war is between London and the rest of the country. Between the liberals and the right-minded. Between those who think it is more important to tip-toe around the cultures of those who choose to join us, rather than defend our own culture.
How many more times?

And how many more attacks must pass before we acknowledge these are no longer the acts of ‘extremists’? That there is no safe badge with which to hold these people at arm’s length, in the way the liberals casually use the term 'far-right' for anyone who has National pride.

These events are no longer extreme. They are commonplace. Every day occurrences.

These people are no longer extremists. They are simply more devout. More true to their beliefs. Beliefs which will be supported endlessly across our state broadcaster for the next few months until we buy into the narrative that one religion is not to blame.

That in fact we should blame Brexit supporters. For believing in a Britain. As it was before.

Anything but the truth.

This is why there is no anger from me this time, no rage. No nod for those who pretend we will not be cowed, even as they rush home to text their mum they are safe. No surprise that the city of which I was so proud is now punctured by fear, and demarcated even more formally by places we cannot tread; there were always parts in which a white woman could not safely walk.

Now I feel only sadness, overwhelming sadness.

I will walk over the river tonight and look to the Thames, to the Union flag lowered at half mast, and the Parliament below, and I will wonder, just how much longer we can go on like this. 

Saturday, February 11, 2017

Women Who March With Linda Sarsour Had Better Realize What She Really Stands For And It Is NOT Women's Liberation

  • It must be so convenient, while marching in the safe confines of Washington DC, to advocate that other women -- far away -- be genitally mutilated, married off in childhood, and beaten and violated in their own homes. These women in hijabs marching on Washington do not have to live in this "Utopia." They are comfortably living in the "infidel West," protected from such barbarity.
  • The Western culture that allows women to shout into microphones is not even necessarily the culture these women believe in; it is often just a tool they use to promote totalitarian ideas such as anti-Semitism, religious intolerance and imposition of theocratic beliefs.
  • Does Linda Sarsour really think that people have gone so mad that they will give up the civil liberties that their ancestors earned through the centuries, merely for interest-free loans?
  • The hypocrisy is that Sarsour's bold lifestyle in the US portrays that deep down she herself loathes the suppressing conditions that she promotes for the poor women of the Muslim world, who actually have to live with them. Coming from a conservative Muslim society, I know the culture she yearns for would never allow her to launch such activism without permission from her "guardian" men.
  • The dissenting voices of the oppressed are fighting on two fronts. They are being crushed by their own totalitarian regimes and at the same time by Western apologists for these tyrants.
Why do women who believe in equal rights for women, pick as their spokesperson someone who one minute boasts of her supposed dissent as "patriotism," while the next minute advocating chopping off other womens' genitals? It is like choosing a hangman to campaign against the death penalty, or the head of ISIS to campaign for same sex marriages.
The principles of "dissent," of which they claim to be so proud, and to have borrowed from religious sources, are actually the modern world's liberal values and human rights -- just those rights values they seem to be trying to destroy.
From the other side of their mouths, however, they are trying to impose Islamic sharia law on the West. Unfortunately, sharia is openly antagonistic to Western values and human rights.
How can cults that believe in dominating others call themselves progressive, when their entire message runs counter to the spirit of tolerance and social coexistence?
The champions of sharia have always said they wish to establish a "righteous" form of government, made by divine law, and presumably to that end, they implant their set of rules -- such as allowing no debate or criticism on their beliefs, or such as segregating sexes -- to destroy modern democracies.
It must be so convenient, while marching on Washington DC, to advocate that other women -- far away -- be genitally mutilated, married off in childhood, and domestically beaten and violated -- and all the while, in the safe confines of Washington, to stay silent on issues of truly massive abuse: floggings; acid burnings; chopping off limbs or heads, or burning, drowning or burying people alive.
These women in hijabs marching on Washington DC do not have to live in this "Utopia." They are comfortably living in the "infidel West', protected from such barbarity.
The values they are enjoying here are the values of the enlightened world and have nothing to do with the culture they are trying to impose on others.
The culture that is allowing women such as Linda Sarsour to shout into microphones is not even necessarily the culture these women believe in; it is often just the culture they are using to promote totalitarian ideas such as anti-Semitism, religious intolerance and the imposition of theocratic beliefs through infiltration or force.
The culture to which Sarsour says she aspires, allows mutilating women but does not allow women to speak in a loud tone, let alone speaking through microphones. Hence, she owes her current privileges to her American identity.

Muslim activist Linda Sarsour one minute boasts of her supposed dissent as "patriotism," while the next minute advocates chopping off other womens' genitals. (Image source: Seriously.TV video screenshot)

Sarsour stated in a tweet on May 13, 2015: "You'll know when you're living under Sharia Law if suddenly all your loans & credit cards become interest free. Sound nice, doesn't it?"
Then she wrote on an April 29, 2014 tweet: "@RobertWildiris I don't drink alcohol, don't eat pork, I follow Islamic way of living. That's all Sharia law is."
It would be nice if the only requirements of sharia were avoiding alcohol or pork were; there happens, however, to be an ocean of dos and don'ts that fall into the category of "I follow Islamic way of living."
The ocean Sarsour never bothered to mention, but that the world witnesses every day, exists from the Saudi palaces to the caves of Afghanistan and Raqqa.
The culture that Sarsour desires to impose on the world -- along with promises to waive interest on loans -- does not allow women to interact with unrelated men, drive cars, ride bicycles, attend sports events, leave the house without permission, or wear makeup and clothes that reveal their body parts, let alone address a crowd.
Women would also need four male witnesses to prove a rape, or risk being stoned to death for "adultery."
Does Sarsour really think that people have gone so mad that they will give up all of their civil liberties and freedom that their ancestors earned through the centuries, merely for interest free loans?
The hypocrisy is that her bold lifestyle in the US portrays that deep down, she herself loathes the suppressing conditions that she likes promoting for the poor women of the Muslim world who actually have to live with them.
How would these women in hijabs like to spend a few weeks under the totalitarian regimes about which they love to brag?
Three British girls who followed the call of ISIS leader Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi slipped into Syria to join the jihad, only to be desperate over the mistake they had made; one is believed dead.
Kadiza Sultana, Shamima Begum and Amira Abase, intoxicated by ISIS propaganda, entered Syria to join the holy mission and be ISIS brides.
Sultana reportedly was killed in a Russian airstrike while too scared to try an escape from ISIS, fearing extreme torture and public execution if caught.
The whereabouts of the other two are still unknown, apart from rare contact reported between them and their families.
Sophie Kasiki, a French girl who also managed to break away from the ISIS stronghold in Raqqa with her four-year-old son, said she risked death if caught to try to save her son. She defined the ordeal of being with ISIS as "a journey into a hell from which there seemed no return."
Samra Kesinovic, a 17 year old Austrian girl, was reportedly beaten to death by ISIS fighters when she was caught trying to flee, after being "gifted" by her partner to another ISIS fighter as a sex slave.
The irony is that Linda Sarsour and her followers say they love Hamas and caliphates like the one established by Abu Bakar al-Baghdadi, or Saudi and Iranian regimes -- but of course they do not live in them.
Sarsour has doubtless been put forward by men to promote their soft image as they themselves cannot boast about the rights they are giving to their women.
Coming from a conservative Muslim society, I know the culture she yearns for would never allow her to launch such activism without permission from her "guardian" men.
How come she forgot to mention that in Saudi Arabia and many other Muslim states, her kind of activism would cost a woman her family, her honour and probably her life.
A court in the state of Washington suspended the ban on travelers from seven mainly Muslim countries imposed by the President Trump last week.
Would any judge or influential person dare refute the order of, say, the Saudi King, a sharia council of Iran, a member of a royal family from a Middle Eastern country, a military dictator or the Hamas leaders Sarsour apparently so admires?
You cannot even imagine in your worst nightmares dissenting in those sharia-compliant territories, but yes, dissent is allowed in the US and the West, where people are freely allowed to speak their thoughts.
These are not the values of the alien land she professes to admire; these were fought for and earned by the people of the West with their blood.
The progressives' one-sided love affair with extremists will never serve the purpose of promoting equality.
In fact, it could be counterproductive. In Egypt, the conservative men used women as protestors to overthrow Husni Mubarak's regime, but once the Muslim Brotherhood, which spearheaded the Morsi regime, took control, the whole world watched in shock as they imposed sharia on everyone -- most of all on those women. The Morsi regime later punished women who protested the Iranian-style sharia that it was imposing.
The same imams who were the moving spirits behind Egypt's revolution were then delivering fatwas [religious opinions] to rape the same women who had been marching in the streets for their rights. According to al Arabiyya:
"An Egyptian Salafi preacher, said raping and sexually harassing women protesters in Cairo's Tahrir Square is justified, calling them "crusaders" who "have no shame, no fear and not even feminism.... Abu Islam added that these women activists are going to Tahrir Square not to protest but to be sexually abused because they had wanted to be raped...And by the way, 90 percent of them are crusaders and the remaining 10 percent are widows who have no one to control them.. "
Around 80 women were molested in one night alone, when the Morsi government was ousted and people came out to celebrate his departure.
Those are the views Sarsour is trying to sell.
The same men these liberals and progressives are trying to empower, once enthroned, would declare them apostates and inflict the worst imaginable punishments on them for the "crimes" they are committing by promoting the set of values they think bring harmony in the world.
The dissenting voices of the oppressed are fighting on two fronts. They are being crushed by their own totalitarian regimes and at the same time by apologists for these tyrants whom the marchers are empowering -- probably without even realizing what massive harm they are doing.
Khadija Khan is a Pakistan-based journalist and commentator.
© 2017 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.

Wednesday, March 30, 2016

Is This McCain's Waterloo? If So, It's Time.

image: http://www.wnd.com/files/2013/05/mccain-syria-2.jpg
Sen. John McCain visited rebels in Syria in 2013.
Sen. John McCain visited rebels in Syria in 2013.
All the political pundits agree that Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., faces the biggest challenge of his political career trying to get re-elected to a sixth term in the U.S. Senate.
In a year when Washington insiders and career politicians are running for cover, McCain figures to be dead meat, right?
Not so fast, say some.
He has one thing in his favor. Well, two things, actually.
Number one is name recognition. Approximately 99 percent of Arizonans are familiar with the name John McCain. That could cut both ways. But in the year of the “outsider,” it may hurt him as much as it helps him.
More important is the issue of vote fragmentation. Heading toward the Aug. 30 primary, anti-establishment Republicans in Arizona will need to agree on whom to rally around as the strongest challenger to McCain.
By fragmenting the opposition to McCain, only McCain benefits.
McCain is being challenged in the primary by Dr. Kelli Ward, a former state senator and physician, and entrepreneur Alex Meluskey, who runs a printing business in Scottsdale but has never run for political office until now.
image: http://www.wnd.com/files/2016/03/alex-meluskey.jpg
Alex Meluskey is one of two challengers to Sen. John McCain in the GOP primary set for Aug. 30 in Arizona.
Alex Meluskey is one of two challengers to Sen. John McCain in the GOP primary set for Aug. 30 in Arizona.
Meluskey, who is lagging in the polls, just released a blistering new TV ad that hits McCain hard for his support for Syrian refugees, 97 percent of whom are Sunni Muslims and whom the FBI says are virtually impossible to screen for security risks.
The ad describes the attack by Maj. Nidal Hasan at Fort Hood, Texas, in 2009, when he killed 13 fellow soldiers in a jihad attack that was originally called “workplace violence” by the Obama Justice Department.
It then switches to McCain, who famously traveled to Syria in 2013 to meet with rebels seeking to bring down Syrian President Bashur Assad.
“I’m saying that there are some refugees that I think we could take into this country,” McCain says in the ad. The host then asks McCain who would vet the refugees, to which McCain answered, “Well, first of all, I’d vet a number of them because I know them.”
Yet Hasan was an American citizen, a doctor and a U.S. Army major and nobody saw the attack coming, the ad points out.
“If we can’t vet him how do you expect to vet these refugees?” the narrator concludes.
Watch ad below:
3-30-16, John McCain wants to let more radicals into America. It's time to stop the influx of Islamic radicals into America.
Meluskey told WND the ad will run statewide on cable TV stations such as CNN, Fox and MSNBC.
But some are accusing Meluskey of being a “spoiler candidate” who is actually in the race to help McCain win.
“While I would usually be happy to see anyone take issue with John McCain’s horrible record on immigration and refugee resettlement, the problem we face is we have too many challengers, and we believe at least one of them is an arranged spoiler,” says William Gheen, president of Americans for Legal Immigration or ALIPAC, which has endorsed Ward.
Gheen says McCain has benefited from the tactic before.
In his 2010 primary race, McCain benefited from what Gheen calls a “spoiler” on the ballot named Jim Deakin.
“We called for Deakin to drop out of the race. But he was on the ballot to help protect McCain from a strong challenge from Congressman J.D. Hayworth,” he said. Deakin was able to get 12 percent of the vote compared to 32 percent for Hayworth and 56 percent for McCain.
McCain’s longtime friend and ally, Lindsey Graham, several years ago benefited from multiple spoiler candidates running against him in the South Carolina GOP primary.
“The strategy is to not only split up the incumbent opposition votes but to prevent support from coalescing around the strongest real candidate,” Gheen said.
“And in Arizona today, our strongest challenger endorsed by ALIPAC is Dr. Kelli Ward, and she is a true candidate,” Gheen said. “We know she is not a spoiler candidate, and she is also taking issue with McCain’s support for Marco Rubio’s amnesty bill.
“McCain is very likely to be re-elected despite the fact that over 80 percent of Arizonans are against amnesty and his corruption and lies are so overt, because there are multiple candidates opposing him,” Gheen said.
image: http://www.wnd.com/files/2016/03/Dr.-Kelli-Ward-2.jpg
Dr. Kelli Ward is one of two candidates challenging Arizona Sen. John McCain in the GOP primary set for Aug. 30. She has the endorsement of ALIPAC, a leading immigration watchdog organization.
Dr. Kelli Ward is one of two candidates challenging Arizona Sen. John McCain in the GOP primary set for Aug. 30. She has the endorsement of ALIPAC, a leading immigration watchdog organization.
Meluskey strongly refuted Gheen’s claims that he is a McCain “plant” whose only goal is to fragment the GOP opposition to the five-term senator.
“Those people are 100 percent unequivocally incorrect. I’ve heard that I’m responsible for the Alamo too,” Meluskey told WND. “I was the first candidate to file, so I’m not really certain how I could be the plant. If it was just me and John McCain in the race now, I’d hands-down cream him. It’s impossible to launder or put money incorrectly, but if anyone actually looked at my history, my past, they’d know I have no connections with John McCain whatsoever.”
Meluskey’s one claim to political activism is that he is the state director in Arizona for the fair tax, which is a bill before Congress to repeal the 16th Amendment and shut down the IRS, replacing the federal income tax with a consumption tax.
“It’s the only tax I can see that our founders actually approved of,” he says. “So people saying I’m a McCain plant; that’s their own wishful thinking. I would say to a lie detector and before God that I have nothing to do with John McCain except that I want to retire him.”
WND attempted to reach Kelli Ward and reached her deputy campaign manager, Roger Galloway.
Listen to the interview:
Kelli Ward says Arizona deserves better than John McCain
Galloway said Ward is an osteopathic specialist who is married to a fellow physician and a colonel in the Air National Guard. The couple lives in Lake Havasu, Arizona.
“Frankly, it’s really kind of a two-person race,” Galloway said. “Alex, we don’t think he’s struggling to get the signatures he needs to get on the ballot. You’ve got to get a minimum of roughly 8,000 signatures. That’s a great deal of signatures to get in Arizona. We’re close to 17,000 right now. We could stop right now and take any challenge that would be put forward and know we’re getting on the ballot.”
Meluskey said this is also a false accusation.
“I have thousands of signatures. I’m not struggling at all. We all go out. We all collect signatures, and we have no doubt we’ll be able to double the amount that we need,” he said.
Meluskey said he has endorsements from Fox News military analyst Gen. Paul Vallely, former Arizona Attorney General Bob Corbin, and the family of the late former NRA President Joe Foss.
But Meluskey would not address his polling numbers when asked by WND about reports he was lagging behind McCain and Ward.
“We’re not seeing any traction with Alex; he’s not going around the state. He has a talk show on a local station, and his day job is a printer and that’s about all he’s done,” said Galloway. “He’s never shown any interest in running for office of any kind until now.”
But Meluskey insists he’s the only candidate who can beat both John McCain and Democrat front-runner Ann Kirkpatrick, who has focused much of her attention on the state’s Latino voters. A new Merrill Poll shows Kirkpatrick and McCain running in virtually a dead heat.
“Let’s be honest: Right now it’s still early, and it’s all about name recognition. The election is five months from today on Aug. 30,” he said. “I was the first filed candidate, and I am the only candidate in this race that has pledged not to go against the people. If I stay in the race and it’s obvious I’m not polling very well by early to mid-August, I will drop. Let’s say it’s Aug. 20 and it’s obvious, I will drop out. The people need to know I’m here and I’m running for their seat. I challenge the Ward candidacy to make the same pledge. If she’s polling way behind, why won’t she take a pledge? If she becomes the stick in the wheel, why won’t she promise to get out?”
The ultimate goal, said Meluskey, is to get McCain replaced. But that shouldn’t be the only goal.
“The most important thing after that is to get someone in that seat who has a backbone and doesn’t just side with the Republican Party leadership but represents the voice of the people,” he said.
Gheen said he is neither convinced by Meluskey’s pledge to drop out in August if his poll numbers don’t improve nor by his impressive new TV ad on the perils of unchecked refugee resettlement.
“This ad is designed to protect McCain. This ad is designed to fool the voter and into thinking that Alex Meluskey is McCain’s real opponent, when that real opponent is Dr. Kelli Ward,” Gheen said. “Spoiler candidates always mimic the position of the real candidates like Kelli. She’s against illegal immigration and amnesty and refugees.”
Copyright 2016 WND

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2016/03/challenger-scorches-mccain-for-support-of-muslim-refugees/#LcRRs4XEkPGdM56q.99