CPAC is supposed to be the paragon annual meeting of Conservative voices. Perhaps no longer a paragon and now merely a voice of approved-only Conservative voices. Laura Loomer experienced CPAC censorship and Michelle Malkin calls wishy-washy (perhaps RINO or Establishment – you decide) Conservatives that meet CPAC approval.
Laura Loomer confronted CNN’s Oliver Darcy at CPAC over his part in getting Alex Jones banned from Twitter and Facebook. The CPAC gods decided confronting Fake News CNN was heckling rather than a holding account for censorship. (Face it – agree, disagree, love or mock Alex Jones for his tactics and conspiracy theories is no reason for censorship in America. Facebook is currently censoring my SlantRight 2.0 blog so I feel that pain.) Thus CPAC, pulled Laura Loomer press credentials. Here is Loomer confronting Darcy:
On Friday March 1, 2019, Laura Loomer confronted CNN reporter Oliver Darcy about why he abused his position at CNN to lobby Facebook and Twitter to ban Alex Jones.
Darcy and CNN have been celebrating the de-platforming of Conservatives and have been advocating for Conservatives to be banned on social media for their political speech.
It is an abuse of power and violation of journalistic values as a journalist to lobby big tech companies to censor and silence conservatives.
After Loomer confronted CNN, Soros funded Right Wing Watch, which is a branch of the SPLC pressured CPAC to revoke her credentials. SPLC is a radical left- wing organization that works to defame and sabotage Conservatives.
Why did CPAC ban a conservative journalist from watching President Trump speak while allowing “Fake News CNN” and radical Left wing SPLC & Soros tied “Right Wing Watch” to keep their press credentials? I thought CNN was Fake News?
And then there is Michelle Malkin having the cajones to call out Never-Trumper Conservatives on the CPAC podium. I wonder if she gets an invite in 2020?
The Hill has a good summary of Malkin calling out Never Trumpers (minus videos since already posted above):
Michelle Malkin goes after ‘the ghost of John McCain’ at CPAC
BY RACHEL FRAZIN – 03/01/19 02:20 PM EST
Conservative commentator Michelle Malkin attacked the “ghost of John McCain” during a speech at the Conservative Political Action Conference on Friday.
“Sanctuary cities have metastasized and both parties are to blame,” Malkin said. “And yes, I’m looking at you, retired [Speaker] Paul Ryan; and yes, I’m looking at you, [Senate Majority Leader] Mitch McConnell; and yes, I’m looking at you, Bush family; and yes, I’m looking at you, the ghost of John McCain.”
She pointed upward while directing her fury at McCain’s ghost, at which point several people in the crowd gave Malkin a standing ovation.
McCain, a longtime senator from Arizona and the Republican Party’s 2008 nominee for president, died last year from brain cancer. He was a frequent critic of the Trump administration.
Mrs. Michelle Malkin delivered a strong call-to-arms at CPAC surrounding the insufferable Big Club’s republican corporate agenda toward immigration.
Wolverine Speech and Transcript Below:
[Video of speech deleted – watch above]
[Transcript] Good afternoon. Thank you to CPAC for the invitation. My name is Michelle Malkin. I identify as an American. A proud, unhyphenated, unapologetic, fully assimilated American. My pronouns are U.S.A.
America is good and America is great. Of these basic truths, there is or should be little dispute among us here. But two questions loom large: 1) For how long will the America we grew up in remain good and great? And 2) To whom shall we entrust the existential responsibility of securing the goodness and greatness passed down peacefully for generations?
I wish I could stand here and chirp happily to you about positive news. Yes, unemployment rates are at historic lows, regulations and taxes are being cut, some stellar judges have been confirmed, and the reckless, feckless liberal media has finally, finally self-immolated like a slow-motion downing of the Hindenburg.
Yes, we have much to thank President Trump for as he battles the Beltway swamp, the deep state, the administrative state, and the fake news fourth estate. But there is no sugarcoating America’s long-term forecast. We face fearful odds. The game is rigged. The playing field is manifestly unlevel.
My first book Invasion in 2002, exposed how border failures and systemic non-enforcement of our visa program rules created a national security crisis that led to 9/11. My last book, Sold Out, which I co-authored in 2015 with former American computer programmer-turned-labor lawyer John Miano, documented how Big Business and Big Government created an economic crisis by exploiting the H-1B tech worker visa program and other foreign employment visas for cheap labor.
I’ve been accused of being a grifter for wanting to inform and educate citizens about these destructive rackets. But it’s the GOP sellouts in bed with open borders – like the ones who hijacked the tea party movement to shill for amnesty – who are the real grifters cashing in and practicing deceit at the expense of their base.
Our shining city on a hill has become a much-abused doormat to the world. Building the border wall is just half the battle. The numbers tell all. Our future is dimmed. The odds are fearful.
We currently grant one million legal permanent residencies to people from around the world every year. The number of green card holders is expected to increase by 10 million by 2025. That’s more than the current combined population of Dallas, St. Louis, Denver, Boston, Chicago, Los Angeles, and Atlanta. Now multiply that number by at least three and a half.
Thanks to our chain migration system, created in 1952 and expanded exponentially by Congress in 1965 and 1990, these new immigrants can sponsor their entire extended families: parents, spouses, adult children and their children, and siblings and their children. Princeton University researchers found that recently admitted immigrants sponsored an average of 3.45 additional relatives each.
An estimated 85,000 refugees and 20,000-plus asylees enter the country annually through an overwhelmed system so rife with fraud and abuse that the process is jokingly dubbed “refugee roulette” by immigration lawyers. In total, from fiscal year 2008 to 2017, the U.S. gave green cards to more than 2 million migrants for various humanitarian claims – a population larger than the city of Philadelphia.
Nearly half a million more immigrants in that time frame got in through the diversity visa lottery. Illegal aliens are eligible if a legal family member wins the jackpot. Tens of thousands are pouring in from terrorism breeding grounds through the lottery unvetted, unmonitored and unassimilated. Thanks again to chain migration, immigration lotto winners’ spouses and unmarried children under 21 all get passes into the country, too.
Nearly half of all illegal aliens in the country have violated the terms of their short-term visitor or work visas. More than 10.8 million people received such visas alone in fiscal year 2015, including 500,000 foreign university and graduate students on academic visas and nearly 700,000 total foreign guest workers (both skilled and unskilled, not to mention their spouses, many of whom are allowed to work here as well).
Congress has repeatedly mandated a nationwide visa entry-exit system to track legal short-term visa holders. But one has yet to be built—even in the wake of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, which were perpetrated in part by several illegal alien visa overstayers. E-verify has been stalled. Sanctuary cities metastasized. And BOTH parties are to blame – yeah I’m looking at you, Paul Ryan, Mitch McConnell, the Bush family, Mitt Romney and the ghost of John McCain.
This unrelenting inflow of new green card holders, short-term foreign visa holders, legal temporary workers, refugees and asylees is supplemented by 13 to 30 million illegal aliens who expect amnesty and chain migration privileges from Washington despite breaking immigration laws governing everything from border jumping to ID fraud, benefits fraud, tax fraud, and marriage fraud, to human and drug trafficking, to employment rules, deportation orders, and visa overstays.
The feds have proved themselves serially unwilling and incapable of handling the lapses, backlogs, overload, and yes, invasion. The numbers tell all. Open borders anarchy, multiplied by endless chain migration, amnesty, and cheap labor pipelines, endangers our general welfare and the blessings of liberty. By every clear measure, the war is not on immigrants but on American sovereignty.
I’ve been called white for stating the facts. I’m not white. I’m just right. Both native-born and immigrant families like mine, which revere the rule of law, common traditions, constitutional principles, one identity and one tongue, have been replaced by militantly unassimilable and hostile generations…of future Democrat voters whose tribal allegiance to the Left has only hardened over time.
It’s insane that we have elected Republicans on Capitol Hill doing the bidding of the illegal alien DREAMer racket. Until and unless we reclaim the right of self-determination over the numbers, we are doomed.
My fellow Americans, we stand at the bridge as Horatius stood at the narrow bridge over the Tiber River alone facing fearful odds as hordes of Etruscans marched towards him and cowards cut and run behind him. Like his enemies, our enemies are both foreign AND domestic.
Inside are flimsily defended borders, we are not at peace, or rather, the radical Left is not at peace with us. From the comfort of TV green rooms, Beltway backrooms, corporate boardrooms, and conference ballrooms, it may not look like civil war is imminent. But threats and outright violence against ordinary, law-abiding people are now regularized features, not random bugs, of political life in these dis-United States.
College students are being punched, elderly citizens are being harassed, MAGA hat wearers are being kicked off planes and assaulted in school hallways and restaurants, conservative speakers are being mobbed and Molotov cocktailed, ICE agents and their families are being targeted, pro-lifers are being kicked and menaced, pro-Trump, anti-jihad moms on social media are being monitored and doxxed.
The madness is beyond parody.
Last week, social justice media warriors whipped up hysteria over a Mar a Lago pastry chef’s Instagram posts. Where are the sanctuary spaces for law-abiding conservatives who simply want to exercise their rights to free speech and peaceable assembly?
The divide in this country is between decent people who stand up for America and dastardly people who want to bring America to its knees.
We certainly should make common cause with others across the aisle who shares our values, but we should not rush to embrace those whose fundamental aim is to smear and destroy us all. That’s suicidal. Which is why I cannot stand here and stay silent about the role Van Jones has played in attempting to silence the Right.
My objection is not to his support for criminal justice reform. I have dedicated much of my own time, energy, and money to fighting wrongful convictions, false allegations, and prosecutorial and forensic misconduct. Next time you need a conservative to talk about criminal justice reform, call me. You don’t need someone who’s going to spew fake news pro illegal alien propaganda to talk CJR to conservatives.
Fact check: The most recent research by the Federation for American Immigration Reform found that illegal aliens are up to 5.5 times more likely than Americans to be incarcerated in state prisons compared to Americans and legal residents.
But my most vehement objection is to this stage being used to lend legitimacy to the George Soros-funded organization Color of Change, which dedicated to censoring and sabotaging right-leaning groups for championing the free market, opposing radical Islam, and exposing open borders.
Seven years ago, Van Jones’ group pressured Pepsi, McDonald’s, Intuit and other companies to cut ties to the mainstream American Legislative Exchange Council(ALEC), a half-century-old association of state legislators who believe in “the Jeffersonian principles of free markets, limited government, federalism, and individual liberty.” What was ALEC’s crime? Crafting model legislation on voter ID to protect election integrity, immigration enforcement measures and self-defense legislation to strengthen Second Amendment rights.
Color of Change and the smear machine racket known as the Southern Poverty Law Center use the same playbook to marginalize and criminalize mainstream conservatives, anti-jihad groups, and immigration hawks as “hate groups” and push us out of the public square.
They conspire with payment processors and Silicon Valley to deprive the Right of our voices and our ability to make a living. So many speaking up and fighting on the front lines for liberty and security are being detwittered depaypaled defacebooked deplatformed – people like Laura Loomer and Gavin McInnes and the Center for Immigration Studies and Robert Spencer and so many others.
Many are in this room. Stand up if you are one of them. Many have been forced to beg for money to help them fight in court to restore their reputations. Many have been barred from this room.
Nice is not enough. Logic and facts and appeals to decency and fairness are not enough. Bemoaning double standards is not enough. Ultimately our future will not be secured in a Fox News anchor chair or a think tank office or on a cruise ship or at a cushy GOP retreat. The future is on the frontlines. At the edge of the bridge.
Then out spake brave Horatius, the captain of the Gate. To every man upon this earth death cometh soon or late. And how can man die better than facing fearful odds, for the ashes of his fathers and the temples of his Gods.
Instead of throwing allies under that bridge, movement conservatives who have preached so comfortably here in the Beltway about defending America while preserving the status quo need to help provide financial and moral support to the disrupters willing to fight fire with fire.
Maybe it’s providence that I am privileged to speak here on the 7th anniversary of Andrew Breitbart’s death. He was a disrupter. We need more disrupters. We need legislative action at the local and state level.
We need politicians who will DO SOMETHING to stop the sowers of hate and their handmaidens. Use the tools at your disposal. Don’t just stand there. DO SOMETHING.
Diversity is NOT our strength. Unity is. Our common purpose is the common defense of our nation. Good people make America great.
The Conservative Tree House may be called a Last Refuge for each of us for different reasons. Whatever trail through the woods brought us here, we have shared the turmoil of storms as we have been finding our voices as individuals in this growing community.
Perhaps you’ve had some truly shockingly cruel things said to you purely because you believe in limited government and fiscal conservatism. Perhaps you not only believe that we should be self-reliant and personally responsible, but also believe that when we are allowed to depend on ourselves, we are stronger, more successful, take greater pride in ourselves and our work, and are more likely to make positive contributions to society. And then we are happier people, or at least more likely to be happier.
Which lends to the following theory: Fear is at the core of liberalism, and love/trust is at the core of conservatism. Liberalism is about control. Conservatism is about self-empowerment.
Control is a reaction to fear. Think in terms or politics and society – the fear behind liberalism is the fear that someone might withhold things (opportunities, money, whatever) from me, fear that if you live your life in a way I dislike that it might affect my life, fear that if you get that job, there will be nothing left for me. Fear that if you make tons of money, it’s means there’s less money out there for me. So people who believe in liberal ideologies seek control as a means of …READ THE REST
You don’t hear too much in the American Mainstream Media (MSM) about the European Union’s (EU) devastating problems with Muslim immigrants (legal and illegal) as well as next generation Muslims from those immigrants. What are those problems? Simply put: It is the crimes of theft, assault, rape, rioting and Islamic Supremacism in general.
The sad part of these problems is that the EU Multiculturalist elites are doing their best to cover-up most of the illegal excursions of Muslims causing problems. The cover-ups are a part of the Multiculturalist efforts to brainwash their original citizens to accept the Muslim migration with open arms. The Elites have been doing a pretty good snowball sell to their communities planting sympathy with the altruism of humanitarianism.
Yet, even with the cover-ups and brainwashing, EU citizens are catching on to the societal disruption Muslims are causing as the Western EU voters are electing more and more power to anti-immigrant politicians. Eastern EU voters so far have been very convincing as a constituency with Eastern European governments refusing Muslim immigrants entry have zero intention to conform to Western cultural norms and laws.
There are a number of Eastern European governments on the anti-immigration boat. Poland got my attention today from a post by Ann Corcoran on her Refugee Resettlement Watch blog. Corcoran is actually introducing an American Thinker short post about Poland refusing Muslim immigration to the political displeasure of Western EU power-elites especially in Germany.
Corcoran picked up on Poland’s historical legacy of King Jan (John in English) III Sobieski leading a multinational European force against Muslim invading Ottoman Turks that had made it to Vienna (now in Austria). The Ottomans were about to breach Vienna’s walls when the multinational force came to save the day beating back the Muslim invaders in 1683 A.D. (Anno Domini– in the year of the Lord):
John III Sobieski (Polish: Jan III Sobieski; Lithuanian: Jonas III Sobieskis; Latin: Ioannes III Sobiscius; 17 August 1629 – 17 June 1696), was King of Poland and Grand Duke of Lithuania from 1674 until his death, and one of the most notable monarchs of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth.
Sobieski’s military skill, demonstrated in wars against the Ottoman Empire [Sobieski vs Ottomans], contributed to his prowess as King of Poland. Sobieski’s 22-year reign marked a period of the Commonwealth’s stabilization, much needed after the turmoil of the Deluge and the Khmelnytsky Uprising.[1] Popular among his subjects, he was an able military commander, most famous for his victory over the Turks at the 1683 Battle of Vienna.[2] After his victories over them, the Ottomans called him the “Lion of Lechistan“; and the Pope hailed him as the savior of Christendom.[3] (John III Sobieski; Wikipedia; last edited on 11/19/17 12:33)
And thus, the moral of the story is Poland was responsible for protecting Europe’s Christian heritage against invading Muslims in the past and has no intention of anti-Christian/anti-Western Muslims at this present time.
This cross post will use Corcoran’s intro then I’ll go strait to the American Thinker short article.
Longtime readers know all about the Polish King Jan Sobieski and the battle at the Gates of Vienna in 1683, but we get new readers every day and I need to continue to educate newbies.
We have an extensive archive on the ‘Invasion of Europe’(mostly the modern day invasion), but it is important to repeat that Poland has a really good reason for resisting the migrants that both the EU and Mama Merkel would like to foist on the country.
Here it is, mentioned again inan article about Germany’s political difficulties at the moment, at America Thinker.
The inability of Angela Merkel and her putative partners to form a government has given rise to persistent calls, including from the chancellor herself, that what Europe needs now is a strong Germany. In fact, it is Germany’s unquestioned strength and willingness to throw its weight around that are to blame for much of Eastern Europe’s unhappiness with the European Union at the moment. A case in point is the growing rift between Berlin and its eastern EU neighbors on some of the issues discussed by Merkel and her potential government partners.
Take for instance Merkel’s position claiming that the Russian Nord Stream 2 pipeline is simply a commercial project. To most of her eastern neighbors, this is nothing if not crass German hypocrisy designed to further German business, while facilitating the monopolistic endeavors of Vladimir Putin and Russia’s energy monopoly, Gazprom, at the expense of Eastern Europe. Or the willingness of Germany’s Free Democrats to give Russia a pass on Crimean annexation, which suspiciously sounded like an apologia of the old “might is right” axiom. Or the asinine suggestion of the Greens to settle entire Syrian villages in Eastern Europe to make the migrants feel more comfortable and the locals less so.
Beyond these specific disagreements, there are fundamental, perhaps irreconcilable, differences between Eastern Europe and Germany on at least two issues – defense policy and migration. Regarding the former, following the collapse of the Soviet Union and the reunification of Germany, Berlin seems to have decided that there would never be another war in Europe and it stopped spending money on defense. As a result, in a short time the German military was transformed from being the second most powerful in NATO to a weakling spending barely 1.2% of GDP on defense instead of the 2% agreed minimum. Its personnel collapsed nearly four-fold (600,000 to 177,000) and it has glaring equipment shortfalls that make its functioning as an integral force very doubtful. According to Jane’s, close to half of its Leopard 2 tanks (95 of 244) are not combat ready, and neither are 28 of its 75 Tornado combat aircraft, nor are 41 of its 79 Eurofighters, nor are four out of ten Patriot air-defense systems.
More troublesome than these capability issues is Germany’s unwillingness to determine where the threat to Europe may be coming from. Unlike Eastern Europe, which invariably sees Russia as a clear and present danger, Berlin appears not to be sure. During the recent election campaign, Merkel’s socialist coalition partners called for disarmament and the withdrawal of American nuclear weapons from Germany, in the face of blatant Russian aggression in Ukraine and elsewhere. This fundamental divergence in threat perceptions also results in stark differences in attitudes toward defense spending, the United States and NATO priorities. There is a palpable and growing fault line between East and West Europe on defense matters that does not bode well for NATO.
There is also a huge gulf in attitudes toward migration. Western Europeans cite the easterners’s refusal to take any migrants as a sign of lack of solidarity, populist prejudice and perhaps racism. The easterners respond that nobody asked their views on opening the borders and point out the failure of western societies to integrate the migrants as a reason to not rush into this experiment. They point out that Muslims that have lived for decades in Europe, yet nonetheless voted for the Islamist dictator Erdogan in much greater numbers than their fellow Turks at home. There are also spiking numbers of migrant crimes and sexual assaults.
here is another powerful reason for Eastern Europe’s reluctance to accept Muslim refugees that is seldom discussed, though it is important and it has to do with the region’s historical experience with Muslims. Very few in Western Europe are aware of it, but every child in Poland knows that Jan Sobieski saved Europe and Christendom from the Ottomans at Vienna in 1683. They also know that much of Eastern Europe, including the Balkans, Hungary, Podolia in Poland, Wallachia and Moldavia were for centuries under the Ottomans and subject to infidel taxes, rapacious military levies, the boy tribute, and the depredations of the slave raiders. It was not a happy experience and many historians trace the backwardness of Eastern Europe compared to the rest of it to its unfortunate experience with Muslim obscurantism. Not an experience that is easily forgotten.
Alex Alexiev is chairman of the Center for Balkan and Black Sea Studies (cbbss.org) and editor of bulgariaanalytica.org. He tweets on national security at twitter.com/alexieff and could be reached at alexievalex4@gmail.com.
The Poles remember their history, saved Europe from Muslim horde in 1683….
About RRW
Update[d] April 26, 2015: …
A few months ago A year agoTwoThree years ago, Six years Seven Eight years ago it came to our attention in Washington County MD that a non-profit group (Virginia Council of Churches) had been bringing refugees into the city of Hagerstown (county seat) for a couple of years. Some problems arose and citizens started to take an interest and ask questions about how this federal program works. Our local paper had no interest in finding the facts, so we decided to find them ourselves.
One of the many startling things we found out about this very quiet effort is that these non-profit groups bring to the US on average each year 15,000 (FY90-FY03) Muslim refugees from the Middle East, Africa, the Balkans, etc, almost completely funded by the US Government through grants and contracts to these non-government agencies. Of the 168 refugees brought to our county since 2004, 125 are Muslim. Although we all have sympathy for persecuted and suffering people there are real questions to be answered about the wisdom of this policy.
It turns out that there are hotbeds of this refugee resettlement controversy throughout the US. We have identified some of those. Because the issue is much more complicated than we initially realized, we have set up this online community organizing center athttps://refugeeresettlementwatch.wordpress.com/.
American Thinker is a daily internet publication devoted to the thoughtful exploration of issues of importance to Americans. Contributors are accomplished in fields beyond journalism and animated to write for the general public out of concern for the complex and morally significant questions on the national agenda.
There is no limit to the topics appearing on American Thinker. National security in all its dimensions — strategic, economic, diplomatic, and military — is emphasized. The right to exist and the survival of the State of Israel are of great importance to us. Business, science, technology, medicine, management, and economics in their practical and ethical dimensions are also emphasized, as is the state of American culture.
In the USA, Americans electorally are nearly torn in half by two political ideologies.
The American Left has had decades of brainwashing American minds to accept Multicultural Separatist Secularist morality – a transformation nearly given a PERIOD by former President Barack Hussein Obama. Have you ever heard a Dem say something critical of traditional American Judeo-Christian values such as “Trump’s or Conservatives’ values are not American values or our values”? The Dems really mean we transformed America and we are NOT going to accept E Pluribus Unum Judeo-Christian values ever again.
The American Right believes traditional American (Out of Many, ONE) Judeo-Christian moral values is the paradigm that has made America great. Very simply, the Right wants to Make America Great Again (MAGA). The American Right has become extremely weary of the national dilution of Secularist Multicultural Diversity making America weaker and weaker watching National Sovereignty drift into a globalist New WorldOrder.
The unfortunate issue of the great gulf division between the Left and the Right is a sad emergence of racism on both sides of the aisle.
The Left has given Black Supremacists (Interesting perspectives HERE, HERE & HERE) and Latino Supremacist – HERE, HERE & HERE – (promoting illegal immigration as part of a clandestine Reconquistaparadigm) are given an air of legitimacy. In great irony the Left uses Multicultural Diversity to support the existence of hard-Right standards inherent in the intolerant totalitarian theopolitical ideology of Islam. Obviously using Islamic Supremacism (SEE ALSO: HERE & HERE) to further dilute the hold of Judeo-Christian ethics that had influenced the Founding Fathers concepts of good government of Liberty by and for We The People as opposed to a government of ruling elites not representing the interests of the people.
The extreme Right has grown largely as a result of the legitimization of Leftist Race-Baiting politics. I have been horrified that website locations that are normally Patriotic-MAGA locations spew racist bigotry like make America White again or all that ails America and the is the result of Jews running the world. If I have any control over such comments and find them, I DELETE THEM! That kind of bigoted racism – aka White Supremacy or White Nationalism – is NO DIFFERENT than Black Supremacism, Latino Supremacism and Islamic Supremacism. That thinking is all anti-E PluribusUnum, defeating the unity of the real American melting pot of OUT OF MANY, ONE.
True Americans need to stand for E Pluribus Unum to truly Make America Great Again. If Americans continue a descent into promoting racial supremacist ideologies, we are lost and will cease to be great. Our Founding Fathers’ vision for a land of Liberty (which truly had a slow but indeed evolutionary beginning) will die and become a citation in a history book written by which ever supremacist emerges from a certain blood conflict.
To be honest, I am willing to participate in shedding blood for E Pluribus Unum, BUT NOT any Leftist or Right-Wing supremacist concepts diversity weakness. It’s time to drain the swamp of both extremist ways of thinking.
++++++
Here’s an irony for you. These thoughts evolved from an article written by Geert Wilders about how Islamic culture is absorbing and diluting the Judeo-Christian heritage of Europe. The irony is European and American Leftist Multiculturalists have painted Wilders as a Right-Wing Extremist equating his Conservative stand of protecting Europe’s Judeo-Christian heritage to such wicked racist ideologies of Nazism. It doesn’t help the old Dutchman’s appearance of a big crop of blonde hair and blue eyes. But really he is a Dutch patriot first and an European patriot second in rejecting Islamic Supremacist intolerance that is sweeping all of Europe because Multiculturalist European elitists encourage cultural dilution by taking huge amounts of Muslim immigrants, refugees and allowing illegal migrant Muslim to remain in the name of diversity.
Wilders has been slapped a few times with crazy anti-Free Speech hate-speech violations for wanting to restrict further Muslim immigration and the promotion of each European nation’s cultural heritage.
I wouldn’t be surprised if Geert Wilders faces some legal action for penning the anti-Multiculturalist elitist essay which I am cross posting.
YOU should find the time to read the Wilders essay. The Obama Administration-past, the Dems-present and Leftist Activist Judges are pulling anti-Constitutional rulings and rhetoric against President Trump’s extreme vetting agenda. An agenda that hopefully keeps hate-American cultural and political values Muslims out of the USA so that the Jihad violence and rape Jihad permeating Europe currently does gain a toe-hold here.
Our democracies in the Western half of Europe have been subverted. Their goal is no longer to do what the people want. On the contrary, our political elites often do exactly the opposite. Our parliaments promote open-door policies that the majority of the people reject. Our governments sell out sovereignty to the EU against the will of the people. Our rulers welcome ever more Islam, although the majority of the people oppose it.
Our democracies have become fake democracies. They are multi-party dictatorships, ruled by groups of establishment parties…. The establishment parties control everything, not just the politicians in their pay, but also the top brass of the civil service, the mainstream media, even the courts…. They call us “populists” because we stand for what the people want. They even drag us to court.
We need to show that Europe’s streets are our streets, that we want to stay who and what we are, and do not want to be colonized by Islam. Europe belongs to us!
Next month, I will be visiting Prague, the capital of the Czech Republic. I have been invited to speak to a group of Czech patriots. The Czechs are a freedom loving people. In 2011, on the occasion of the 100th birthday of Ronald Reagan, they named a street in Prague after this great American president and freedom fighter.
This fact reminded me of a shameful event in my home town of The Hague, the seat of the Dutch Parliament and the government of the Netherlands. Look for a Ronald Reagan Street in The Hague and you will find none. A proposal in 2011 to name a street in The Hague after Reagan ran into fierce political opposition. Leftist parties, such as Labor, the Greens and the liberal D66 party, argued that naming a street in honor of Reagan would “do the image of the city no good.” The whole affair ended in a disgraceful political compromise. Last year, a short stretch of a local bicycle path was named the “Reagan and Gorbachev Lane”.
This anecdote is indicative of the difference between East and West in Europe. We can see the same difference in the attitude of their ruling elites towards Islam, the new totalitarianism that is threatening Europe today. In the East, political leaders oppose Islam; in the West, they surrender.
Islam has already gained a strong foothold in Western Europe. Its streets have come to resemble the Middle East, with headscarves everywhere. Parts of Western Europe, such as the Schilderswijk district in The Hague, the Molenbeek borough in Brussels, the banlieues [suburbs] of Paris, Birmingham in Britain, the Rosengård area in Malmö, Sweden, and many other neighborhoods, have become hotbeds of Islamic subversion.
Islam’s totalitarian nature cannot be denied. The command to murder and terrorize non-Muslims is in the Koran. Islam’s prophet Muhammad was a mass murderer and a pedophile. Those who leave Islam supposedly deserve death. And everyone who criticizes Islam and exposes what it actually says, ends up like me: on an Islamic death list.
In the past decades, Islam has entered Western Europe with the millions of immigrants from Islamic countries. Now, the European Union wants to distribute third-world immigrants over all the 28 EU member states. The nations in Central and Eastern Europe reject the EU plans to impose permanent and mandatory relocation quotas for all EU member states. They warn about the dilution of their identity, which is not Islamic, but Judeo-Christian and humanist — rooted in the legacy of Jerusalem, Athens and Rome; not Mecca.
Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán has denounced the EU’s pro-immigration agenda as a means to eradicate the culture and Christian identity of Hungary. Czech President Miloš Zeman is an outspokenopponent of immigration and the Islamification of the Czech Republic. Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico has said that “Islam has no place inSlovakia” and warns that “migrants change the character of our country.” Polish Prime Minister Beata Szydło staunchly defends Poland’s refusal to accept the EU-imposed immigration quotas. “We are not going to take part in this madness,” she says. In the Eastern part of Europe, anti-Islamification and anti-mass migration parties see a surge in popular support.
Resistance is growing in the West, as well. This year, we have seen my party, the Party for Freedom (PVV), become the second-largest party in the Netherlands. This is a great achievement in a country with 13 parties in Parliament. In France, Marine Le Pen made it to the second round in the French presidential elections and her party, the Front National, got more votes than ever. In Austria, the FPÖ became the second biggest party. In Germany, the patriots of the AfD forced their way into the Bundestag.
Geert Wilders, leader of the Party for Freedom (PVV), casts his vote in The Hague during the Dutch general election that made his the second-largest party in the Netherlands, on March 15, 2017. (Photo by CarlCourt/Getty Images)
However, the political elites in the West do all they can to keep the winners of the elections from power. Last month, in my country, the Netherlands, a new government coalition consisting of no less than four parties was formed. Because they stubbornly refused to talk to PVV, it took the political elites a record seven months to put together a coalition. They preferred to take in D66, the party which had denied Ronald Reagan his street in The Hague, and still they were only able to form a government with a majority of just one single seat in Parliament.
Our democracies in the Western half of Europe have been subverted. Their goal is no longer to do what the people want. On the contrary, our political elites often do exactly the opposite. Our parliaments promote open-door policies that the majority of the people reject. Our governments sell out sovereignty to the EU against the will of the people. Our rulers welcome ever more Islam, although the majority of the people oppose it.
Our democracies have become fake democracies. They are multi-party dictatorships, ruled by groups of establishment parties. They wheel and deal, often selling away the principles for which they have been elected. The establishment parties control everything, not just the politicians in their pay, but also the top brass of the civil service, the mainstream media, even the courts. Parties such as mine are excluded from coalition talks. They call us “populists” because we stand for what the people want. They even drag us to court.
Three decades ago, the countries in Central Europe witnessed a Velvet Revolution: Democratic, political and peaceful. They took to the streets. They decided that enough was enough. Thanks to their Velvet Revolution, they have leaders today who truly represent the people and who are not afraid to stand up for their nation and its identity.
We, in Western Europe, can learn lessons from the Velvet Revolution in the East. We, too, urgently need to make clear that enough is enough. In Western Europe, too, it is time to drain the swamp and to drive the elites from power. Peaceful and democratic, but thorough. We have to make our so-called democratic systems truly democratic again. The political actors should no longer be the professional politicians alone. The crisis is existential. It is time for every man and woman to do his and her duty. Because the survival of our nations itself is at stake.
We, too, have to make it very clear that we no longer want to take part in the madness of leaders, who sell out their country to the EU institutions in Brussels, and the madness of the EU elites, who sell out our continent to mass-immigration and Islam. That is why the PVV will demonstrate in the streets of Rotterdam on January 20th. We need to show that Europe’s streets are our streets, that we want to stay who and what we are, and do not want to be colonized by Islam. Europe belongs to us!
Geert Wilders is a member of the Dutch Parliament and leader of the Dutch Party for Freedom (PVV) in the Netherlands.
“Let us tenderly and kindly cherish, therefore, the means of knowledge. Let us dare to read, think, speak, and write.”
— John Adams
Gatestone Institute, a non-partisan, not-for-profit international policy council and think tank is dedicated to educating the public about what the mainstream media fails to report in promoting:
Institutions of Democracy and the Rule of Law;
Human Rights
A free and strong economy
A military capable of ensuring peace at home and in the free world
Energy independence
Ensuring the public stay informed of threats to our individual liberty, sovereignty and free speech.
Gatestone Institute conducts national and international conferences, briefings and events for its members and others, with world leaders, journalists and experts — analyzing, strategizing, and keeping them informed on current issues, and …READ THE REST
DEAR GOD IN HEAVEN! I believe if the Islamic cultural destruction currently occurring in Sweden started to gain traction in the USA, it would be open rebellion by Americans that believe in the U.S. Constitution, Christian heritage and the principles established by our Founding Fathers that led thirteen diverse British colonies to unite under one flag and begin the process of E Pluribus Unum – Out of many, One.
Sweden is a train wreck getting to derail into oblivion.
If you appreciate this essay by Fjordman, please consider making a donation to him, using the button at the bottom of this post. [i.e. at the bottom of the Gates of Vienna page]
Birgitta Ohlsson is a politician from the Swedish Liberal party. On the National Day of Sweden in 2001, she published an essay entitled “Abolish Sweden!” She wanted to abolish all nation states and institute a democratic global parliament and a global police force.[1] Ohlsson has been a member of Parliament for many years, and served as Minister for European Union Affairs in the government of PM Reinfeldt between 2010 and 2014.
A global democracy doesn’t look very likely, but Ohlsson and other Swedish politicians have nevertheless made great progress in abolishing Sweden.
In November 2015, even Sweden had to reinstate a form of border control. At that point, more than one thousand asylum seekers flooded into the country every single day.[2] The then Deputy Prime Minister Åsa Romson from the Swedish Green Party literally cried on TV over this fact.[3] She did not cry because successive Swedish governments have done massive and possibly irreversible damage to the country through their immigration policies. No. Romson cried because she couldn’t continue immigration as fast as she wanted to.
Their official partyprogram in 2017 states the following, in multiple languages:
“The Swedish Green Party has a vision of a world without borders, where all people can move, but no one is forced to flee. We don’t believe in countries’ right to choose their citizens; we believe in people’s right to choose where they want to live. We should greet people with opportunities, not with walls. Everyone should be able to live, work and realise their dreams where they want to. Freedom of movement should be a human right.”[4]
Mass immigration to Sweden still continues, just at a slower pace than in the crazy year of 2015. Back then, Sweden couldn’t even find beds for the many Afghans, Iraqis, Somalis and other immigrants.
The German public broadcaster Deutsche Welle in late June 2017 conducted an interview with the Swedish Justice and Migration Minister Morgan Johansson, a Social Democrat. Johansson then stated that “We have between 400 and 500 asylum seekers each week coming to Sweden. So we haven’t shut our borders but we now have a level which we can handle. And we didn’t have that in 2015.” He stated that “Now we have control over that situation.” The Minister also claimed that there is “no direct link” between migration and terrorism.[5]
This last claim is a flat-out lie. It is a proven fact that Muslim asylum seekers and immigrants have been involved in many deadly Jihadist attacks in Europe. On April 7, 2017, the rejected Muslim migrant Rakhmat Akilovmurdered five people and wounded several others when he mowed them down with a stolen truck in a terrorist attack in central Stockholm.[6] A couple of months later, the Swedish Justice Minister claims that there is no connection between migration and terrorism.
Prime Minister Stefan Löfven, Justice Minister Johansson and other representatives of the Swedish government may pretend that things are under control. There are, however, many disturbing signs that this is not true.
In June2017, eight new districts were added to a police list of “especially vulnerable areas,” where crime rates are very high. Some have labeled them no-go-zones, a label the authorities reject. In 2015, Sweden’s national police released a report of 53 so-called vulnerable areas, including 15 considered especially vulnerable. Eight more urban areas have now been added to that list, bringing the latter number up to 23.[7] This is a big increase in just two years of places where Swedish authorities no longer have effective control over their country’s territory.
A survey in June 2017 suggested that Swedish police officers are facing increased threats and violence and that criminal gangs have created a “parallel society.” Anna Nelberg Dennis, the vice chair of the Swedish Police Union, said that it has become more and more common for gangs of young people to attack police officers in certain areas. “I think it’s part of a change in society, where in socially vulnerable areas, gangs have created parallel societies where they take the law into their own hands,” she said. “[The gangs] believe that police shouldn’t be there because they rule the area. This is something that the police can’t solve themselves.”[8]
The Stockholm region has been hit by a wave of bloody, gang-related murders. A report has found that 94.5 per cent of people identified as being involved in the Swedish capital’s violent, organized crime scene have an immigration background.[9]
One woman visited the emergency ward at the hospital in Lund, southern Sweden, in 2017. She described it as “Dante’sInferno,” massively overcrowded and slow.[10] Swedish hospital staff and ambulance personnel face increasing threats and violence. Elderly Swedes who have paid taxes their whole lives often receive shockingly poor treatment. The Swedish welfare state started to disintegrate after the authorities decided that they should be the welfare office of the entire planet.
Sweden has a record number of unsolved murder cases.[11] Many public gang shootings go unsolved because the ethnic gangs do not talk to the police. Less serious crime can be nearly risk-free for criminals in many municipalities. The police are understaffed and underfunded.
No fewer than 70 police stations in Sweden will be closed down during parts of or for the entire summer of 2017 due to a shortage of money and staff.[12] This is happening at a time when the number of rival mafias and criminal gangs operating in the country has never been higher.
Bråvalla festival, one of the major music festivals in Sweden,announced that they would cancel their entire festival in 2018 due to reported incidents of rape and several sexual assaults.[13] Sweden has infamously high rape rates. Swedish mass media have for many years claimed that this spike in rapes and other violent crime has nothing to do with immigration, despite strong evidence to the contrary. Numbers clearly show that immigrants from the Muslim world and Africa are vastly overrepresented in such crimes.[14]
Gang rapes were very rare in Scandinavia forty years ago. They are now disturbingly common, and destroy the lives of thousands of women. Even gang rapes of boys have now become fairly common in Sweden.
Some migrants from Afghanistan explain that the rape of young boys by one or several older men is a common cultural practice in their country called bacha bazi.[15] European countries such as Sweden have seen a big influx of young Muslim men from Afghanistan. Many of them claim to be children, even if they are in their 20s or older. They bring with them the mentality and practices of their Islamic homeland.
In 2017, a man from Afghanistan was convicted of anally raping a young boy. For child rape, he got one month in a soft Scandinavian prison. He could not be deported since he had become a Swedish citizen.[16]
The first Islamic terror attack in Scandinavia took place in Copenhagen, Denmark, on July 22, 1985. The attackers targeted American and Jewish targets. One person was killed and 26 injured. The terrorists were Palestinians based in Sweden. The problem has got a lot worse since then.
Michael Skråmos, a Swedish convert to Islam and former expert on “Islamophobia,” has joined the Islamic State and calls for Muslims to attack targets in Sweden.[17] A number of Islamic terrorists have even received welfare payments from Europe while staying in the Middle East.
At least 150 Jihadists have returned to Sweden after supporting the Islamic State (ISIS), probably the most brutal terrorist group on the planet. Many of them have been given protectedidentities by Swedish authorities to help them quietly re-integrate into Swedish society. Some of them complain that it is difficult to get a job after having fought for the mass-murdering slave traders of the Islamic State. A re-entry program — which may include free housing, a driver’s license, and tax benefits — was instituted by Anna Sjöstrand, a coordinator against violent extremism in the city of Lund. “There may be criticism, but [I think] that you should get the same help as others who seek help from us. We can’t say that because you made a wrong choice, you have no rights to come back and live in our society,” Sjöstrandtold Swedish radio.[18]
Some might question whether freely joining genocidal terrorists who routinely behead people, burn them alive or stone them to death falls under the category of simply “making a wrong choice” in life.
It is highly likely that some terrorists or war criminals have received asylum in Sweden. The Swedish state seems very concerned with protecting them. It has been less concerned with protecting Swedes against foreign terrorists or war criminals.
In June 2017, the Swedish Security Service (Säpo) warned about an explosive growth in the number of radical Muslims in the country. “We have never seen anything like it before,” Säpo chief Anders Thornberg stated.[19]Thornberg said there are around 3,000 violent extremists in Sweden as of mid-2017. Some 2,000 of those are believed to have Islamic motives, and the remaining originate from far-right and far-left movements.[20] A 2010 report estimated the number of violent Islamic radicals at 200. The number of militant Muslims in Sweden has thus increased at least ten times in just seven years. Despite this, the country continues to import thousands of Muslims annually. Many of them are young and aggressive men from conflict areas.
Although Thornberg did not admit this openly, it is doubtful whether the security services can track thousands of people continuously. If the authorities cannot contain the number of potential Jihadists today, what will the situation be like 5, 10 or 20 years from now? When will the number of radical Muslims exceed the number of police officers in Swedish streets? What happens then?
The Nordic Passport Union allows citizens of Iceland, Denmark, Norway, Sweden and Finland to travel and reside in another Nordic country without a passport or a residence permit. This agreement dates back to the 1950s. Today, these countries are also members of the Schengen Area, which includes much of the EU.
The Danish Security and Intelligence Service (PET) told the public broadcaster DR in June 2017 that Denmark may face a terror threat from the many radical Muslims in Sweden.[21] While Denmark, Norway and Finland also have a significant number of potential Jihadists, this threat is at least one order of magnitude worse in Sweden.
The Danish People’s Party (DF) and others in Denmark are starting to warn that increased border controls against Sweden may be necessary to keep out terror and crime.[22] Sweden’s other immediate neighbors, Norway and Finland, still haven’t properly entered this debate, but they should.
I have warned for many years that the problems in Sweden have grown so big that they are no longer merely a threat to the internal stability of Sweden. They have now also become a threat to neighboring countries.
Notes:
archive.org/web/20110128124331/fc.birgitta.nu/skriver/I006FE608 Avskaffa Sverige!. Essay by Birgitta Ohlsson in the newspaper Expressen, 2001-06-06.
14) avpixlat.info/2017/06/28/statistik-utomeuropeer-begar-nastan-alla-grova-valdtakter/ Statistik: Utomeuropéer begår nästan alla grova våldtäkter. 2017-06-28.
18) sverigesradio.se/sida/artikel.aspx?programid=83&artikel=6540648 Kommuner förbereder för avhopp från våldsbejakande extremism. October 18, 2016. http://www.expressen.se/nyheter/hundratals-svenskar-akte-till-kriget-for-att-slass-for-is—sa-lever-atervandarn/ Hundratals svenskar åkte till kriget för att slåss för IS — så lever återvändarna i dag. June 24, 2017. clarionproject.org/returning-jihadis-given-protected-identities/ Returning Jihadis Given ‘Protected Identities’ June 28, 2017.
When the 9th Circuit Appeals Court upheld a Lower Court stay on President Trump’s Executive Order temporarily banning citizens, refugees, and immigrants from seven nations that are hotbeds of Islamic terrorism, it demonstrated how Leftist Activist Judges ignore the Constitution in favor of Leftist utopianism. The American Left might as rip up the Constitution and burn the scraps of paper.
Paul Sutliff demonstrates how the 9th circuit is torching the U.S. Constitution with misinformation to justify Multiculturalist utopian goals.
The New York Post wrote an article on February 9th that clearly shows the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, carefully choosing words for the purpose of creating misinformation for the media to share with their readers and viewers regarding their actions against President Trump’s Executive Order. According to that article the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals stated:
“The Government has pointed to no evidence that an alien of the countries named in the Order has perpetrated a terrorist attack in the United States,” the three-member panel wrote.”
The terminology “perpetrated a terrorist attack” explicitly excludes all actions prevented or attempted that did not result in a terror attack. Why is this important? There are at least 38 terrorists who were killed or arrested as they worked to be supportive of the Islamic State AND who were also classified as immigrants/refugees at one time. In addition, there areat least 6 persons who were killed or arrested for attempting an act of terror who were second generation Americans refugees. I filed this information in a federally filed affidavit in September 2016 as an Expert Witness. You will notice people from countries other than the seven countries listed in Trump’s ban.
All the information in the graphs below originated in the Threat Knowledge Group last accessed in September 2016, whose site was disabled recently with President Trump’s appointment of Sebastian Gorka, with the exception of the information in the last column which I found. Actual sources for the information cited in the last column is provided in my Affidavit.
Rachel Ehrenfeld writes about the extreme vetting process that President Trump could use to quickly detect if a person has terrorist designs against the United States. Ehrenfeld has an idea based on some technology created in Israel yet commissioned by the United States Department of Homeland Security.
An effective way to find out the applicant’s intentions would be screening through an efficient, unbiased, and non-intrusive system. Such a system was developed by an Israeli company with a grant from the Department of Homeland Security, which the Obama administration refused to utilize.
The Suspect Detection System (SDS) has developed counter-terrorist and insider threat detection technology named COGITO. This technology enables law enforcement agencies to rapidly investigate U.S. visa applicants (and other travelers) entering the country, insider threats among employees, etc.
COGITO technology is an automated interrogation system that can determine in 5-7 minutes if an individual is harboring hostile intent. The system interviews the examinee with up to 36 questions while measuring the psychophysical signals of the human body. The system has 95% accuracy and has helped security agencies globally to catch terrorists and solve crimes.
I did a little looking into this COGITO technology. My impression is the concept was initially developed for companies to use to vet their new employees with something more efficiency than a lengthy lie detector test. Evidently the COGITO technology can be streamlined for many psych detection purposes including terrorism.
In the process of investigating “COGITO” I discovered it is not an acronym for some scientific gizmo, rather it is an actual word. Here is an interesting definition for “cogito”:
1: the philosophical principle that one’s existence is demonstrated by the fact that one thinks
2: the intellectual processes of the self or ego
Origin and Etymology of cogito
New Latin cogito, ergo sum, literally, I think, therefore I am, principle stated by René Descartes
First Known Use: 1838 (Definition of cogito; Merriam-Webster)
Apparently SDS technology has taken a philosophical and retrofitted it to a psychological examination of discovering – so-to-speak – who a person is.
Here is the short version of the SDS COGITO technology that can be employed:
Suspect Detection Systems Inc.’s Cogito Data Center (Cogito DC) is a central knowledgebase and control server that serves as a complete analytical back office to the Cogito Rapid Interrogation System. Cogito DC will enable SDS customers to create a central storage base of all examinee data. The interrogation system collects an vast amount of data with each examination beginning with a scan of the examinees passport or identification card. The system then scans unique biometric identification information including fingerprint and iris (eye) imaging, and voice signature. The Cogito DC knowledgebase then aggregates and analyzes the interrogation results of all examinees. The system compares test results of potential suspects from common backgrounds, which then enables interrogators to perform intelligence analysis over the entire scope of collected metadata. (Cogito Data Center; SUSPECT DETECTION SYSTEMS INC.)
And here is an excerpt from the longer version of the technology behind COGITO:
General
The COGITO system is a technology-based concept and solution for the detection of suspects harboring malicious intent serves for detection of “Internal Threat” (employees of governmental agencies and enterprises that have destructive intents), Police interrogations and border security. The COGITO concept is derived from extensive interdisciplinary know-how in security, polygraph testing and field-proven security-related interrogation techniques.
The COGITO core technology is based on proprietary software – an “expert system” that emulates an investigator’s Modus Operandi by incorporating “soft decision-making” algorithms such as “Neural Networks” and “Fuzzy Logic”. All hardware elements are best-of-breed off-the-shelf third-party components. The technical solution is comprised of a front-end, the ‘Test Station’, and a back-office where multiple-station and multiple-site data is stored, managed and distributed.
COGITO presents a significant conceptual breakthrough that can assist international aviation and homeland security authorities in responding to increasingly sophisticated means of international terrorism. This concept is based on several well-established paradigms and assumptions.
Intent vs. Means
The COGITO concept focuses on detecting terrorist (malicious) intent as opposed to detecting the means (i.e. explosives or weapons). The value of detecting intent is based on several well-founded and proven assumptions. As proven in the 9/11 and many other terrorist attacks when entering a country, terrorists will not necessarily carry weapons or devices on their person. This has been well demonstrated in several international terror attacks. Moreover, terrorists with intent of perpetrating a chemical, biological or atomic terrorist attack are all the more not likely to carry such devices on their person while entering the United States through an official checkpoint or border crossing.
Stimulated Psycho Physical Reaction (SPPR)
The COGITO method is based on stimulating examinees with specific terrorism-related triggers using a “direct contact, interaction, conscious, portal” approach:
The COGITO method postulates that specific words or questions can force terrorist to generate a SPPR that is identifiably different than that of a non-terrorist’s SPPR to the same words or questions. Based on extensive field experience accumulated by Israeli security agencies, the only common characteristic to all suicide bombers and “effective terrorists” is their desire not to be caught by security authorities. The terrorist’s fundamental motivation to successfully perform the terrorist act and not be caught by security authorities clearly differentiates him from the innocent person not harboring such intent. This identifiable motivation is known as the “terrorist hunting–hunted syndrome” (THHS). In order to identify and isolate the terrorist, one needs to … READ THE REST ([COGITO] TECHNOLOGY; Suspect Detection Systems: Human Psychophysiology Behavour Analysis)
On a personal level and at least a palpable negative argument for this rather quick vetting process, I think this is something President Trump should seriously take a look at! ESPECIALLY since President Barack Hussein Obama rejected this technology as a foreign immigrant vetting process.
President Donald Trump’s executive order on “Protecting the Nation from Terrorist Attacks by Foreign Nationals,” has been met, as anticipated, with alarm by opponents at home and abroad. Some resent the new American president and his actions to protect the country, as he promised to do. Others, like the Muslim Brotherhood’s affiliated Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), protest the suspension of U.S. visas to Muslim refugees and travelers from the radical -Islamic-terrorist prone countries Iran, Iraq, Syria, Sudan, Libya, Yemen, and Somalia.
His executive order proclaims (emphasis added): “The United States must be vigilant during the visa issuance process to ensure that those approved for admission do not intend to harm Americans and that they have no ties to terrorism. In order to protect Americans, we must ensure that those admitted to this country do not bear hostile attitudes towards our country and its founding principles. Section 2 of the active order states that the policy of the U.S. is “(a) protect our citizens from foreign nationals who intend tocommit terrorist attacks in the United States; and (b) prevent the admission of foreign nationals who intend to exploit United States immigration laws for malevolent purposes.”
To prevent such individuals from entering the U.S., the executive order requests the development of a uniform screening program, which in fact would reinforce requirements that have been deliberately ignored by the Obama administration.
However, radical-Islamic terrorists are not limited to the countries list by the EO. There are unknown numbers of ISIS volunteers who returned to Europe and other Western nations, which the new EO exempts. But even if the screening is done by the book, and all necessary documentation has been obtained and verified, and the applicant declares he holds no ill intentions toward America and Americans, nothing available to the screeners today would easily reveal that he or she is lying.
An effective way to find out the applicant’s intentions would be screening through an efficient, unbiased, and non-intrusive system. Such a system was developed by an Israeli company with a grant from the Department of Homeland Security, which the Obama administration refused to utilize.
The Suspect Detection System (SDS) has developed counter-terrorist and insider threat detection technology named COGITO. This technology enables law enforcement agencies to rapidly investigate U.S. visa applicants (and other travelers) entering the country, insider threats among employees, etc.
COGITO technology is an automated interrogation system that can determine in 5-7 minutes if an individual is harboring hostile intent. The system interviews the examinee with up to 36 questions while measuring the psychophysical signals of the human body. The system has 95% accuracy and has helped security agencies globally to catch terrorists and solve crimes.
According to the company’s website, the SDS allows the screening of a large number of people in a short time. It “does not require operator training. One operator can handle simultaneously ten stations. It has a central management and database system that allows storing all tests results, analysis, and data mining, and is deployed and integrated with governmental agencies.” Using this system would eliminate the need to use often biased U.S. Consulate employees. Moreover, the SDS uses an automated decision-making system, which is “adaptable to a variety of different questioning contexts, different cultures, and languages. The examination lasts 5 minutes when there are no indications of harmful intent, and 7 minutes to ascertain it (with only 4% false positive, and 10% false negative).”
The COGITO is used in 15 countries including Israel, Singapore, China, India, and Mexico. U.S. airlines operating in Latin America are using COGITO to check their employees.
But last year DHS refused to use the SDS, claiming that it “would constitute an intrusion on the privacy of those screened by the system” and “[i]t may reflect on VISA applicants or Immigrant’s civil rights.” However, foreigners applying for a U.S. visa are not protected by American laws.
SDS capability to detect intent seems to fit President Trump’s promise of “extreme vetting” of Muslim refugees from high-risk regions. This and other similarly objective systems would not only assist in making America safer but also be in keeping its policy and tradition of accepting refugees who do not wish us harm.
The ACD is dedicated to exposing threats to our free speech rights, political and economic freedoms and national security.
ACD is a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit organization. All contributions are tax-deductible to the fullest extent of the law.
OUR DISTINCTION
ACD fills an important gap created by inadequate risk assessments of our cyberspace, GPS & UTC. We use our Threatcon programs, our multidimensional Terrorist Finance Network Tracker (TFNT), and our experts to better inform government, public and private sectors’ policy makers.
CONNECTING THE DOTS
ACD’s synergistic approach to connect the dots on emerging threats is facilitated by extensive multidisciplinary global research in various languages. We publish our knowledge-based analysis and use the information to offer special tools to help prevent and mitigate such threats.
ACD’s Threatcon, offersindividually tailored programs of briefing and scenario gaming to encourage government, public and private sectors to cooperate in preventing and mitigating the risks to our political and economic freedoms and to our national security.
ACD’s Terrorist Finance Network Tracker (TFNT), a unique anti money laundering (AML) system, is using a multidimensional approach to build and regularly update a comprehensive database identifying operational and financial networks of transnational radical Islamic groups.
“Lean and agile, ACD/EWI is always ahead of the next threat: cyber attacks, market manipulation , the use of legal structures to inhibit free speech and stifle debate”-Richard Perle, former Assistant Secretary of Defense
Brigitte Gabriel explains the idiocy of using taxpayer funding the billion-dollar industry of bringing Muslim refugees into America under the guidance of the United Nations. The whole mandate is craziness!
Illegal immigration and the acceptance of unvetted political refugees practicing an intolerant Islam that hates everything about American Liberty the U.S. Constitution makes the rule of law, is one of the factors Donald Trump was elected President of the United States.
Much of Trump’s campaigning was condemned by the American Left as bigoted racism. Fortunately, American voters by a majority of States (Thank God for the Electoral College giving parity to less populated States) saw through the un-American propaganda of the Left. Geert Wilders of the Netherlands has professed much of what Donald Trump campaigned for long before Trump and is getting prosecuted for hate speech.
Below are two Gatestone Institute articles about this unjust hate speech prosecution persecution of Geert Wilders. The first dated November 17 is by Mr. Wilders and the second is more about the Dutch prosecution by Robbie Travers dated November 24.
I just heard the penal sentence demanded by the Public Prosecutor: a penalty of 5,000 euros.
Speaking about one of the biggest problems of our country – the problem with Moroccans – is now punishable, according to the elite. And, hence, we are slowly but surely losing our freedom of speech. Even asking a question is no longer allowed. Even though millions of people agree. And Moroccans have suddenly become a race. So if you say something about Moroccans, you are now a racist. Nobody understands that. It is utter madness. Only meant to shut you and me up.
While in other countries the people send the elite home, here they want to silence an opposition leader. The Netherlands is running the risk of becoming a dictatorship. It looks like Turkey. The differences between the Netherlands and Turkey are getting smaller. The opposition is silenced.
I was elected by nearly a million people. That number will be even higher on March 15th next year. And it is my duty to talk about the problems, even when the politically-correct elite led by Prime Minister Rutte prefers not to mention them. Because looking away and remaining silent is not an option.
I have to say it like it is.
What is the use of political cowards who no longer dare to speak the truth? Who are silent about the problems in our country? Who pander to the government? Who cowardly look the other way?
Nothing at all! Putting one’s head in the sand is cowardliness.
And if you must keep quiet about problems, because simply asking a question has become punishable, the problems will only grow bigger. Then, the Netherlands will become a dictatorship of fearful and cowardly politicians.
I will never accept that. I will continue to fight for a free and safe Netherlands. That is why Islamic terrorists have been trying to kill me for 12 years. Today, these terrorists rejoice. Wilders is going to be punished. The Public Prosecutor has made himself their ally today.
But I will not allow anyone to shut me up!
No terrorist will be able to silence me!
No prosecutor in a black gown or cowardly prime minister will get me on my knees!
I shall therefore not care about their penal demand at all. They can do whatever they want. It will only make me stronger. I will only get more motivated.
And you can support me with this. By continuing to fight with me for the preservation of freedom of expression. For the maintenance of a safe and free Netherlands. Our country.
Geert Wilders is a member of the Dutch Parliament and leader of the Party for Freedom (PVV).
Geert Wilders is now on trial for having national security views that the prosecution have deemed unacceptable to air in public.
To suggest that Dutch citizens, whose safety Wilders was elected to protect — it is his job; it is why he was elected — should not publicly given his best advice, would to countermanding his official duty.
Is it racist to note these problems? Statistical data are usually not racist; they simply express the factual reality of a situation.
The freedom to speak and to question without fear of retribution is fundamentally what separates democratic governments from totalitarian ones. Sunshiny, politically correct views do not need protecting. The reason for free speech is to protect the less-than-enchanting views.
It is fundamental for the health of our society that Wilders and others be able to speak and be heard freely. To protect us and to protect the humanist values of freedom brought to us by Erasmus and the Enlightenment, it is crucial that the Dutch court grant Wilders a full acquittal.
As his trial continues in the Netherlands, Geert Wilders, if found culpable, faces a fine for his comments, purportedly “racist“, on Moroccans.
The prosecution alleges that his comments unfairly “targeted a specific race, which is considered a crime.”
Never mind that Moroccans are not a race or even a religion; they are citizens of a country — apparently, making comments on trends that are prominent within minorities, or advice on how to keep a country secure, is now criminal. Statements might sometimes be unpleasant to hear, but to express these views should not be “criminal.”
Look at the comments of the lead prosecutor, Wouter Bos, who said, “Freedom of expression is not absolute, it is paired with obligations and responsibilities.” This is worrying. To suggest that an individual should have the obligation not to “uncessarily [sic] offend,” is to make every individual responsible for the thoughts of every other, theoretical individual who might be offended by one’s words — or even, as we see now all too often, just claim to be offended for malicious purposes.
Bos added that Wilders has “the responsibility not to set groups of people against each other.” Is this really what Wilders was trying to do? The opposite would seem to be true: Wilders was not calling for racial tension; in his view, he is seeking to alleviate it, his solution being less immigration from Morocco. So far, objectively, immigrants from Morocco seem to have had a significant effect on the increase in crime syndicates, drugs- and human-trafficking, and a notably lopsided change in the composition of the prison population in the Netherlands.
Is it racist to note these problems? Statistical data are usually not racist; they simply express the factual reality of a situation.
With this in mind, perhaps then the struggle Wilders faces could be better described as: Geert Wilders is now on trial for having national security views that the prosecution have deemed unacceptable to air in public.
The latest development in this process is that the prosecution have demanded that Wilders be punished with a €5,000 fine, in order for him to atone for his alleged transgression against Moroccans.
To suggest that Dutch citizens, whose safety Wilders was elected to protect — it is his job; it is why he was elected — should not publicly be given his best advice, would to countermand his official duty. If, heaven forbid, there were to be adverse circumstances in the Netherlands, as seen all too often in France, Denmark, Germany and Belgium, and Wilders had failed to warn his countrymen, why could he not, conversely, risk being charged with reckless endangerment?
Saying that the Netherlands should have fewer Moroccans is apparently considered “unnecessarily offensive.”
Perhaps the problem for the long-term survival of Europe is that in modern politics, too many individuals are seeking to base legislation on protecting people from being offended, instead of basing legislation on what is best for the national and cultural security of a country. While no-one might wish others to be offended, sometimes offending others is necessary, even a duty.
When Wilders criticises Islam and its associated practices and legal codes, no doubt he offends many conservative Muslims. Does this mean his criticism should not have been expressed? (No.)
When Wilders criticises the European Union, he no doubt offends Eurocrats in Brussels. Does this mean his criticism should not have been expressed? (No.)
So when Wilders criticises immigration from Moroccan and suggests there should be less of it, he may well have offended Moroccans. Does this mean his criticism shouldn’t have been expressed? (No.)
Sometimes, causing offence and allowing individuals critically to engage with a viewpoint with which they disagree is a crucial part of our dialogue as a society. Individuals sometimes need to be presented with uncomfortable truths.
Whether one agrees with Wilders’s view or not, it should be comforting that an individual is allowed to question fundamental building blocks for the future health of our Western values and communal well-being.
The freedom to speak and to question without fear of retribution is, in fact, fundamentally what separates democratic governments from totalitarian ones.
If one wants individuals to be able to counter views they perceive to be “racist” or in some other way prejudiced, they first need to be able to hear them to counter them.
In condemning Wilders, we are not only robbing Wilders of his right to free expression, we are also robbing individuals of a right to listen to him.
In a democratic society, individuals should have the right to hear Wilders, and then, based on his arguments, to draw their own conclusions. Too many countries, based on originally well-intended laws that repress free speech, have already fallen into the trap of “the truth is no defense.”
Is the implication, then, that half-truths, distortions and lies are an acceptable defense? In closing the door to “truth” in Europe and Canada, our fragile Western democracies are opening the door to authoritarian governance. Farewell, democracy.
There are other reasons why all Dutch citizens or other individuals should be terrified of this.
For Wilders, as a Member of Parliament, the demand of the prosecutors in this case for a fine of €5,000 may not — on the surface — destroy his life. But this fine would not include the crushing court costs Wilders has had to incur, even if he is acquitted. What happens when ordinary members of the Dutch public are summoned before a court — possibly for even greater penalties and with greater court costs — for expressing views that prosecutors claim are “unnecessarily offensive”?
Wilders, as a private citizen with possibly a moderate income, has had to go up against the virtually unlimited exchequer of the entire Dutch government. People’s resources are not inexhaustible. This is the nightmare that great protectors of freedom such as Franz Kafka or George Orwell have written about.
What happens if Geert Wilders, who is a politician, is only among the first of those who might be prosecuted for speaking out? Other individuals who might also want “fewer Moroccans” may not be able to afford endless court costs and a fine of €5,000 — or whatever the judgement might be on December 9. Are we really asking the citizens of the Netherlands, and much the free world, as we have already seen too often — to go through life weighing whether expressing a view will come with a crippling economic cost?
Surely if there is a conviction this will be only the beginning. Will anyone ever feel free again to express opinions that might be found — by someone, anyone, who knows — “unnecessarily offensive”? Probably not.
What, by the way, does “necessarily offensive” consist of? Will lawyers become rich as person after person is hauled into court to decide, case by case, how necessary is “necessary”?
Is this really what the free world wants: societies that claim to protect the rights of the individual but then instead prosecute them? Sunshiny, politically correct views do not need protecting. The reason for freedom of speech is to protect the less-than-enchanting views. Without any contrarians, how would society have developed?
If this court rules against Wilders, will every politician thereafter who makes a statement that someone deems “unnecessarily offensive” be summoned before a court? At the other end of the political spectrum, three Dutch Labour Party politicians were noted to have insulted Moroccans far more corrosively than Wilders ever did — even likening them to dirt and excrement. Those Labour politicians were never prosecuted. Gee, could this be a double standard we are seeing? Wilders’s judges refused to dismiss his trial on the grounds that it was, as Wilders maintained, politically motivated; but what looks suspiciously like a selective prosecution seems to bear him out. Will the Dutch prosecutors, in fairness, proceed to try these even-more-insulting politicians from the political left?
Repeated trials and appeals only lead, as in a totalitarian government, to no-one being able to afford maintaining his freedom by due process.
That thought leads to the major politically incorrect elephant in this room:
Is it possible that there are people who are exploiting the West’s open but expensive legal process precisely to shut down freedom of speech and political views they find inconvenient for themselves? Is that the whole secret point behind the prosecution: to smother speech and smother thought?
European nations seem to be rapidly approaching a path of political censorship, to prevent views being expressed that their leaders deem unacceptable. The result? These views only grow in prominence. Across Europe, as Brexit, Wilders, Le Pen, and other “politically incorrect” tributaries that leaders are trying to restrict, are surging in popularity.
Ideas cannot be killed by stopping individuals from hearing them; people only seem to want to hear more about what they sense is being hidden from them.
You do not have to like Geert Wilders or even agree with him; it is, however, fundamental for the health of our civilization that he and others be able to speak and be heard freely.
To protect us and to protect the humanist values of freedom brought to us by Erasmus and the Enlightenment, it is crucial that the Dutch court grant Wilders a full acquittal.
Robbie Travers, a political commentator and consultant, is Executive Director of Agora, former media manager at the Human Security Centre, and a law student at the University of Edinburgh.
“Let us tenderly and kindly cherish, therefore, the means of knowledge. Let us dare to read, think, speak, and write.”
— John Adams
Gatestone Institute, a non-partisan, not-for-profit international policy council and think tank is dedicated to educating the public about what the mainstream media fails to report in promoting:
Institutions of Democracy and the Rule of Law;
Human Rights
A free and strong economy
A military capable of ensuring peace at home and in the free world
Energy independence
Ensuring the public stay informed of threats to our individual liberty, sovereignty and free speech.
l and international conferences, briefings and events for its members and others, with world leaders, journalists and experts — analyzing, strategizing, and …READ THE REST
On January 20, 2017- Donald Trump will be inaugurated as the 45th President of the United States. I pray when more than if, that Trump’s campaign promises begin to roll out. I expect a sudden impact on Muslims entering America. Donald Trump promised extreme vetting of Muslims, or anyone for that matter, entering as immigrants or refugees:
At Youngstown State University in Ohio Monday, Donald Trump called for a new screening test for immigrants wishing to enter the United States.
Donald Trump:
“And we will be tough. We will be even extreme. We should only admit into this country those who share our values and respect our people. In the Cold War, we had an ideological screening test. The time is overdue to develop a new screening test for the threats we face today. I call it extreme vetting. I call it extreme, extreme vetting. Our country has enough problems. We don’t need more. And these are problems like we’ve never had before. In addition to screening out all members of the sympathizers of terrorist groups we must also screen out any hostile attitude towards our country or its principles, or who believe that Sharia law should supplant American law. Those who did not believe in our Constitution or who support bigotry and hatred will not be admitted for immigration into our country. Only those who we expect to flourish in our country and to embrace a tolerant American society should be issued Visas.”
Do you agree with Mr. Trump’s “extreme vetting” screening test?
…
I’ve heard Dems and Lefties condemn this promise as bigoted and un-American. IT IS NOT! When we or any Western nation allows a foreign people with a culture in conflict to ours, then our culture is under threat to be undermined.
The USA is a nation of immigrants, but from its very beginnings assimilation was the key. America’s mother country has always been considered England more commonly referred today as the United Kingdom. Our nation has built itself on immigrants that have not come from a British background and yet we expected Europeans of a non-English language to assimilate into our Anglo culture
I came across an essay about how Islam is perversely affecting the culture in Sweden because of that nation’s slant to be a Left-Wing Multiculturalist paradigm welcoming all foreigners to immigrate with any expectation of assimilation.
Fjordman (Peder Jensen) – One of the most prolific Counterjihad essayists writes about Muslim immigration has nearly destroyed the fabric of Sweden’s society. Sweden’s plight is significant to America because the Dem Party is the Multiculturalist mirror of Europe’s Left. Hopefully the election of Donald Trump will reverse this Multiculturalist infection in America.
If you appreciate this essay by Fjordman, please consider making a donation to him, using the button at the bottom of this post.[Blog Editor: To donate to Fjordman one has to go to the Gates of Vienna post and scroll to the bottom until you see the Fjordman logo photo, then left-click to get to the paypal page.]
Fjordman logo donate will look like this:
The first text I ever wrote under the pen name Fjordman, on February 20, 2005, was about the imported rape wave in Sweden.[1] Even though I am from Norway, I have probably written more texts in English about Sweden. Some essays that I wrote in 2005 or 2006 are still being circulated and quoted on the Internet, many years later.
Why this interest in Sweden? Perhaps this is due to its strong “brand.” Many outsiders still have a very positive view of Sweden. They are shocked when somebody describes what the country is actually like today.
Sweden is not the peaceful Utopia some admiring outsiders imagine it to be. Prime Minister Olof Palme was shot and killed on February 28, 1986. This assassination became a national trauma. Foreign Minister Anna Lindh was stabbed and lethally wounded on September 10, 2003. Tensions in Swedish society are even higher now than they were back then.
I was among the first to write for an international audience about the problems in Malmö. Sweden’s third-largest city is probably the most Islamized city in Scandinavia. In the past generation, unrest in Malmö has escalated from stabbings to frequent car bombings. Similar problems are spreading to other areas.
In Sweden today, many people fear for their future. Some feel like strangers in their own country. Several friends of mine either have serious plans to leave Sweden or have already left. They don’t want to grow old there, and they don’t want their children to grow up in an atmosphere of violence, crime and self-loathing.
Sweden has high levels of immigration and emigration at the same time. The same pattern can be seen in other Western European countries such as Italy and Germany.[2] Very often, educated natives leave while unskilled immigrants from the Islamic world or Africa enter. This is supposedly “good for the economy.”
In less than 40 years, Sweden has gone from being the envy of the world to being an increasingly dysfunctional state. The single greatest cause of this negative transformation is mass immigration of people from very different cultures. Things that would have been unthinkable or at least extremely rare in Scandinavia two generations earlier have become commonplace. They include car bombs and deadly gang shootings in residential areas. Hand grenades have repeatedly been used to attack restaurants or even private homes.[3] The violence is no longer confined merely to the major cities. It also affects smaller Swedish towns.
NRK is the government-owned and publicly funded radio and television public broadcasting company in Norway. It often has a pronounced left-wing bias, is generally in favor of mass immigration and positively disposed towards Islam. However, the Multicultural “diversity” problems in neighboring Sweden are now so big that they have become nearly impossible to hide.
The journalist Anders Magnus from NRK visited some of the Multicultural trouble zones in Swedenin 2016. The overworked and undermanned Swedish police openly state that they are about to lose control over certain areas. Many Swedish police officers are deeply frustrated with the situation and are considering quitting their jobs. In some districts, criminal ethnic gangs have already taken effective control. This partly includes the Stockholm suburbs Rinkeby, Tensta and Husby. The economist Tino Sanandaji calls these areas a ticking time bomb.[4]
Several immigrant-dominated areas in Sweden were shaken by violent riots in 2013. None of the fundamental problems have been resolved since then. Non-European immigration continues. Just as in similar urban areas in parts of France, Belgium, the Netherlands and elsewhere in Western Europe, the police are met by stone-throwing immigrants when they enter Muslim-dominated areas. The same thing happens to Swedish firefighters and ambulances. They never travel into such urban districts unless the police are present there first.
An official report from the Swedish police in 2014 counted at least 55 areas where the authorities no longer have effective control over law and order.[5] This number keeps growing. After repeated attacks, Swedish ambulance personnel have requested similar protection gear to that used by people working in war zones.[6]
Sweden has experienced a series of car fires in 2016. The firefighter Kaj Engelke from the city of Malmö hit out at young arsonists who blamed their troubles on society and reacted by setting cars alight.[7]An immigrant man living in the city of Västerås claimed that some immigrants commit vandalism and car fires due to racism and a shortage of interesting “activities” provided to them by society.[8]
On August 10, 2015, two random Swedes, a mother and her son, were stabbed to death by an African asylum seeker at an IKEAfurniture store in Västerås. The murderer from Eritrea has stated that he decided to attack some white people that looked Swedish as a revenge for being denied asylum in Sweden.[9]
Mohamed Dame is fleeing from criminal gangs who rule several suburbs of Gothenburg (Göteborg), Sweden’s second largest city. “It’s like a war zone,” he says. They see murders nearly every week. People are shot and sometimes killed while eating food at local restaurants. Members of criminal immigrant gangs execute each other in public streets. Hand grenades are being thrown into private homes. People are terrified. They fear for the safety of their children. Mohamed Dame is considering moving back to Somalia. His native country now feels safer than parts of Sweden.[10]
A survey was made in 2016 of 1200 pupils at schools in notorious Gothenburg suburbs such as Angered and Bergsjön. More than eleven percent — or roughly one in nine — of children between 12 and 18 years in these Swedish schools openly admit that they sympathize with the Islamic State or similar Jihadist groups. The terrorism researcher Magnus Ranstorp thinks this should be seen as a warning sign by the authorities. Ulf Boström, integration police inspector in Gothenburg, considers the result “very scary.”[11]
Gothenburg suburbs such as Angered have a very high percentage of Muslim immigrants. Many Jihadists have been exported from these communities to fight for the extremely brutal Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS). For years Gothenburg has been one of the main recruiting grounds for ISIS terrorists in Europe.[12] On the plus side, Angered is establishing a new Camel Center where Swedes can buy fresh camel milk.[13]
The British public service broadcaster BBC is often biased in favor of Multiculturalism, Islam and mass immigration. Yet even the BBC have realized that Sweden is no longer the stable and peaceful country it once was. In October 2016, they ran an article titled “How Sweden became an exporter of jihad.”[14] Alongside Belgium, Scandinavian countries such as Sweden are among the biggest per capita exporters of Jihadists in Europe. The welfare state is used by radical Muslims to wage war against the Western society that is harboring them.[15]
On February 14-15, 2015, a Danish citizen of Palestinian Arab origins shot and killed two people and injured several others in Copenhagen, Denmark. The Swedish artist Lars Vilks, who has made drawings of Mohammed, was a likely target of the first terror attack against a debate about blasphemy and free speech. The second attack killed a Jewish guard at a synagogue. A year later, it was finally revealed that Omar the terrorist was carrying a copy of the Koran during his murderous attacks.[16]
Lars Vilks needs constant police protection. Militant Muslims want to kill him for insulting Islam and its alleged prophet Mohammed. As I understand it, he is now being moved around between different residences. Such is the fate of a kind and friendly professor of art history in Sweden today. His only crime is that he has made drawings of a man who may or may not have lived in the Arabian Peninsula in the seventh century.
Meanwhile, Sweden, the EU and the rest of the Western world keep importing more radical Muslims.
On October 12, 2016, hundreds of radical Muslims gathered at a public square in central Stockholm, near the Swedish Parliament and the Royal Palace. Many of them were so-called unaccompanied refugee children from Afghanistan. These asylum seekers claim to be minors. In reality, they are often young men of military age in their 20s or even their 30s. According to an eyewitness, the politician Hanif Bali, one of the Afghan men shouted “May Allah increase our numbers. We must make Muslims of all of them all!”[17]
Unfortunately, those wanting to Islamize Sweden have not faced much opposition from the church. Even though Christians are being persecuted by Muslims in multiple countries, many Christian leaders in Europe are actively engaged in welcoming Muslim immigrants. Some church leaders are as committed to open borders and Multiculturalism as any bureaucrat in the EU or the UN. Swedish bishops seem more concerned about alleged “Islamophobia” than about global Islamic aggression against all those who are not Muslims.
Eva Brunne is the Bishop of Stockholm in the Lutheran Church of Sweden. She became the world’s first openly Lesbian bishop in 2009. Brunne in 2015 called for the removal of crosses and other Christian symbols at the Seamen’s Church in Stockholm. That way, visiting foreign sailors practicing other religions such as Islam would not be offended. She also wanted to mark the direction towards Mecca, to make it easier for Muslims to perform Islamic prayers inside the church.[18]
There is currently a movement throughout the Western world that claims that there are no significant biological differences between men and women, and that gender is “socially constructed.” As usual, progressive Sweden is at the forefront of this movement.
A high school in Sweden is preparing to build an additional gender-neutral changing room to cater to pupils who identify with a gender other than their biological sex, or consider themselves neither male nor female. St Eskil’s gymnasium in Eskilstuna, a town west of Stockholm, has decided to build the new changing facilities at the request of pupils. “We have discussed this with the pupils and have realized that there is a need for this,” Johan Ahlkvist, the headmaster, told Swedish Radio in October 2016.[19]
Soon Swedish girls and young women may not merely be forced to share streets with aggressive Muslim men from war zones. They may sometimes be forced to share toilets or changing rooms with them, too. If you object to any of this, you will be branded a “racist” by the mass media or left-wing activists and risk losing your job.
A nine-year old Swedish girl in Eskilstuna was forced to change school due to sexual harassment. She was repeatedly called “pussy” and “whore,” was beaten and had her pants pulled down. “A staff member at the school explained to us that our daughter was blond and pretty, and therefore exciting to hit on,” says her mother.[20]
Criminals in Scandinavia often get shorter sentences and a softer treatment than they would receive in many other countries. This system is not well-suited to dealing with the mass importation of people from some of the most violent and dysfunctional societies in the world. In Sweden, it is even possible to be convicted of child rape without being sentenced to a single hour in prison.
In November 2014, a Somali Muslim immigrant brutally raped a 12-year-old girl in Sundsvall, Sweden. He was later found guilty of rape. According to the court, he kept repeating the words “black d*** is expensive” over and over while raping the girl. She later “bled profusely from her genitalia” and suffered “both physical and psychological” injuries as a result of the abuse. Yet in June 2015, a Swedish court decided to let the Somali rapist off with 180 hours of community service for child rape. It was argued that he was not yet 18 at the time of the crime and had “some trouble with anxiety as well as sleeping problems.”[21]
The foundations for modern Sweden’s wealth were laid in the generations before the Social Democrats rose to power and turned the country into a welfare state. Many people do not realize this. Including quite a few Swedes. Sweden became rich in spite of the welfare state, not because of it.
It is nevertheless true that the welfare state worked reasonably well in Scandinavian countries as long as the populace was largely ethnically homogeneous. From the 1970s onward, the authorities opened up for the mass importation of people from other countries, also from regions outside of Europe. This turned Sweden into a giant welfare office for much of the world’s population. The natives are essentially forced to fund their own colonization. They are also expected to celebrate this development.
Mass immigration has already put huge strains on the economy. This situation is clearly not sustainable in the long run. The authorities have quietly begun cutting down on certain aspects of the world-famous Swedish welfare state. If you need public health care in Sweden, be prepared to wait for a long time for even basic treatment. Nurses and doctors at hospitals often suffer violence, threats and abuse from imported clans.
Many elderly Swedes who are law-abiding and have worked their whole life receive little support from the state. Meanwhile, billions are spent on recent immigrants from Afghanistan, Somalia, Syria, Iraq, Eritrea, Pakistan, Turkey and Nigeria. Even Islamic terrorists are sometimes prioritized ahead of Swedish pensioners.
In 2015 the soldier Fredrik Brandberg suggested that he was likely to get less help from Swedish authorities than returning ISIS terrorists do. “In a few months, I’m back in Sweden after being deployed in Afghanistan, against Talibans and others,” he said. “There is no permanent job waiting for me when I come home.”[22]
At least 140 people have returned to Sweden after fighting for terror organizations in Iraq and Syria. Lund county in southern Sweden is considering giving these battle-hardened Jihadists economic incentives to reintegrate into society. The mooted benefits include housing grants, debt restructuring and free driving licenses. Radio Sweden spoke to Christoffer Carlsson, the author of a report for the national coordinator against violent extremism. He supports the use of public money, sponsored by Swedish tax payers, to reintegrate Muslim terrorists into Swedish communities.[23]
Anna Sjöstrand is the municipal coordinator against violent extremism in Lund. She states that one cannot deny ISIS terrorists tax benefits just because they made the “wrong choice” of supporting a genocidal terrorist organization, infamous for murdering archaeologists and holding slave markets. “We cannot say that because you made a wrong choice, you have no right to come back and live in our society,” Sjöstrand says.[24]
Yet, as the writer Robert Spencer comments, “Why not, exactly? The Islamic State is at war with Sweden. What evidence does Anna Sjöstrand have that the returning jihadis will not continue to pursue this war?”[25]
Scandinavia got its first Muslim suicide bomber in central Stockholm on December 11, 2010. Fortunately, this terrorist, the Iraqi-born Swedish citizen Taimour Abdulwahab al-Abdaly, was incompetent and only managed to kill himself. Yet he could have killed dozens of people that day.[26] Other militant Muslims may well succeed.
The natives have gradually gotten used to public gang shootings, car fires and bombs. Events that were extremely rare in Scandinavia in the 1970s have become routine. Native Swedes will be a minority in their own country by the middle of this century, if present trends continue. In certain urban areas, they already are a minority.
Sweden has a disturbing number of unsolved murder cases, and one of the highest recorded rape rates in the world.[27] The natives are being replaced and abused. Gang rapes have become so common that they are hardly newsworthy anymore. Swedes have largely become a nation of whipped dogs. They have been shamed, harassed and indoctrinated to celebrate their own national destruction.
Sweden has become a fearful society. Many Swedes, especially women, are now scared to walk the streets in their own country. They are also afraid of losing their jobs and being harassed by left-wing journalists in the mass media if they oppose mass immigration. Ideological indoctrination has been intense for decades in the media and the education system. Powerful suppression of individual dissent was present in Sweden even before mass immigration began. The British historian Roland Huntford described this well in his 1971 book, The New Totalitarians.
Swedes are pioneers in everything that is gender-neutral, even “gender equal” snow plowing. Yes, really.[28] Won’t the many Marxist activists and Socialist Feminists in Sweden object to Muslims immigration? In most cases, no. Feminists with left-wing views generally refuse to link violence to immigration. Even though it is a documented fact that Muslim and African men are involved in sexual violence against women much more frequently than European men, this subject is usually avoided in public debates.
Instead, many Feminists focus on the “patriarchy” as the main problem, which is to say, men in general. If anything, white men are even worse than brown or black men. According to Marxist racial thinking, white men also oppress “people of color.” In early 2016, some Swedish women demonstrated against “racist and xenophobic” white men and warned them not to protect them from immigrant rapists.[29]
Apparently, some Swedish Feminists prefer foreign rapists to white racists. They seem to be getting their wish. Swedish women have never had more Feminism than the do now, and they have never been less safe.
Brutal acts of violence committed by immigrants and asylum seekers from some of the world’s most violent countries have become part of everyday life in Sweden. So far, this development has largely been met by quiet resignation. Yet anger is simmering beneath the surface.
One gang rape triggered a very unusual outburst of public anger in Sweden in October 2016. This happened in Visby, the main town on the island of Gotland in the Baltic Sea. A wheelchair-bound Swedish woman in her thirties was reportedly gang-raped by up to six immigrants at an asylum center after asking if she could use the toilet. She was eventually able to escape the building. Several migrant men were arrested, but released soon afterwards. The case triggered a turbulent protest march. Some angry locals threw rocks and stones at the migrant facility. This generated attention from major international media such as Fox News.[30]
The Swedish police sent reinforcements to Gotland due to the demonstrations and tensions.[31] The police did not protect the locals against imported criminals from brutal war zones. They protected the immigrants and local authorities from angry locals. Meanwhile, the understaffed police in other Swedish cities had to deal with never-ending car fires, bombs and public shoot-outs between criminal immigrant gangs.
As the dissident writer Julia Caesar noted, the Gotland incident revealed an anger that has been accumulating in Swedes for years. Sweden is approaching its breaking point. The gang rape of a disabled, wheelchair-bound woman by immigrants crossed a psychological line. The political and media elites — the same people who have promoted Multiculturalism and mass immigration for decades — now call for calm and restraint.[32]
Camilla Sundelius, a young woman from Gotland, knows the victim. She says many of the locals feel let down by the authorities regarding asylum seekers from Muslim countries such as Afghanistan. Most of them are young men. They have no respect for women or for the local culture. The community has changed for the worse due to immigration. Swedish girls are now harassed at school. This did not happen before. “Nobody has asked us if we wanted to have asylum seekers here. It’s not okay to not ask the people,” says Sandelius.[33]
Given that these asylum seekers and accused rapists were imported to the island against the wishes of the local population, some view this as a political rape.
When locals got angry and demonstrated against the gang rape of one of their own women by asylum seekers, the local newspaper Hela Gotland compared this to the rise of Nazi Germany in the 1930s.[34]Admittedly, some people with neo-Nazi sympathies may have been involved in these demonstrations. Yet the “Nazi” label was essentially used to tarnish all those who oppose mass immigration, regardless of political ideology.
On October 16, 2016, there were demonstrations against “racism and sexism” in the medieval town of Visby on Gotland. No disturbances broke out, though police did separate members of the hard-line nationalist group, the Nordic Resistance Movement, from the rest of the demonstrators. “It was very nice, almost a folk festival. There was really nice music, so people danced,” stated one of those who attended.
A Gotland resident named Agneta Berg said she felt the need to participate in the rally. “I am a volunteer in a network around Garda, where there is accommodation for asylum seekers. My husband works with two unaccompanied minor refugees. We have taken a lot to do with asylum seekers here, and I want Gotland to be welcoming to people who flee from war,” she said. “This is a reaction to the racists who have taken over after the rape case. You don’t want their agenda to apply,” she added.[35]
The rally ended with the participants chanting the slogan: “No racists in our streets!”[36] By “racists,” they were not referring to Muslim men who view European women as worthless infidel sluts. No. They were protesting against European women and men who object to having young Muslim men from brutal war zones forced upon local communities through a state-sponsored policy backed by the EU and applauded by the UN.
The parties that backed this demonstration against racism in Visby were the Marxists of the Left Party (Vänsterpartiet), Sweden’s “reformed” Communist party, as well as the Feminist Initiative.[37]Sweden has a specifically Feminist political party, even though nearly all Swedish politicians claim to be Feminists.
Gudrun Schyman is a spokesperson for the Feminist Initiative. As the then leader of the Swedish Left Party, Schyman in 2002 compared Swedish men to the Taliban, the extremely repressive Islamic movement in Afghanistan that were allied with Osama bin Laden’s al-Qaida terrorist network. Fredrik Virtanen, a male columnist in the major newspaper Aftonbladet, agreed with her. Yes, Swedish men are like the Taliban.[38]
In October 2016, a Swedish prosecutor ruled that the flag of the self-proclaimed caliphate known as the Islamic State (ISIS) does not constitute hate speech and is therefore legal under Swedish law. Prosecutor Gisela Sjövall announced that she would not prosecute a 23-year-old man who posted the black ISIS flag on his Facebook page. Swedish police had launched a criminal investigation into the man, who originally comes from Syria, on suspicion of hate speech. “Put simply, one can say that he is expressing contempt for ‘all others,’ and not against a specific ethnic group,” Sjövall told Sweden’s SVT public broadcaster.[39] That makes it legal.
Swedish authorities ruled that the Islamic State flag, a symbol of still-ongoing slavery, ethnic cleansing, genocide and mass murder, constitutes free speech and is legal. Meanwhile, the street artist Dan Park has spent months in jail because Swedish authorities ruled that his drawings constitute illegal “hate speech.”[40]
Already in May 2005, I warned against the possibility of disintegration, perhaps even civil war in Sweden:
“Swedish culture is disappearing with astonishing speed in front of our eyes. If the trend isn’t stopped, the Swedish nation will simply cease to exist in any meaningful way during the first half of this century. The country that gave us Bergman, ABBA and Volvo could become known as the Bosnia of northern Europe.”[41]
I would love to be proven wrong in this pessimistic assessment. So far, this has not happened.
Some positive trends have emerged since I started writing. Swedish alternative media such as the websites Avpixlat or Fria Tider now have as many readers as some newspapers. The Sweden Democrats are represented in Parliament and have become one of Sweden’s largest political parties. However, they are not in power and are nowhere near having an overall majority. Even if they were to implement their entire party program, this is probably no longer enough to halt Sweden’s decline.
Sweden, like other European countries, cannot regain control over its national destiny until it leaves the European Union (EU). Perhaps followed by leaving the United Nations (UN). As long as mass immigration persists, Sweden will continue along its path toward the abyss.
https://www.jihadwatch.org/?p=102084 Sweden: Returning Islamic State jihadis to get free housing, driver’s license, tax benefits. October 18, 2016, by Robert Spencer.
Have you heard of Geert Wilders? He is a very Politically Incorrect Dutch politician constantly persecuted by his legal system for European hate-speech violations. The Multicultural Left of the EU and the USA have demonized Wilders as a Right-Wing bigot because he tells the truth about Islam sourced both from Islamic writings and current events. Here are some excerpts from Wikipedia that gives you a glimpse as to the reason I admire Geert Wilders (some Wikipedia info links removed as not relevant to Wilders):
Geert Wilders (Dutch pronunciation: [ˈɣeːrt ˈʋɪldərs], born 6 September 1963) is a Dutch politician who is the founder and leader of the Party for Freedom (Partij voor de Vrijheid – PVV).[1][2] Wilders is the Parliamentary group leader of his party in the Dutch House of Representatives. In the formation in 2010 of the Rutte cabinet, a minority cabinet of VVD and CDA, he actively participated in the negotiations, resulting in a “support agreement” (gedoogakkoord) between the PVV and these parties, but withdrew his support in April 2012, citing disagreements with the cabinet on proposed budget cuts.[3] Wilders is best known for his criticism of Islam;[4][Blog Editor: I narrowed this link down to the immigrant subsection for it is closer Wilders sentiments] his views have made him a controversial figure in the Netherlands and abroad, and since 2004 he receives permanent personal protection by armed bodyguards.[5]
…
Wilders has campaigned to stop what he views as the “Islamisation of the Netherlands”. He has compared the Quran to Mein Kampf and has campaigned to have the book banned in the Netherlands.[6][7][8] He advocates ending immigration from Muslim countries,[6][9] and supports banning the construction of new mosques.[10] Wilders was a speaker at the Facing Jihad Conference held in Jerusalem in 2008, which discussed the dangers of jihad, and has called for a hard line against what he called the “street terror” exerted by minorities in Dutch cities.[11] … (Geert Wilders; Wikipedia; page was last modified on 15 October 2016 16:37)
In the article I am cross posting below, Geert largely criticizes the current Netherlands Prime Minister Mark Rutte for not going beyond fiscal Conservatism and attacking the issues of National Sovereignty and the Muslim immigration warping the Western Culture inherent in the Netherlands.
Evidently Rutte and Wilders were political buddies until this split on differences on the future Dutch direction:
THE HAGUE — One of Europe’s most liberal countries is on the brink of turning decisively to the right. Ahead of the elections in the Netherlands on March 15 next year, polls show a tight race between center-right Prime Minister Mark Rutte and his political foe Geert Wilders, a right-wing firebrand with staunch positions on Islam (ban the Quran), the EU (get out) and immigration (close all borders).
Two dominant politicians who once were close allies are now in a position to possibly trash the Dutch Left, a political force that has reliably collected close to 50 percent of the vote since World War II.
Fiscal conservative Rutte blends a typical right-wing agenda — small government, low taxes — with the Dutch tradition of governing by compromise. Far-right Wilders breaks with that tradition and routinely attacks the consensus building attitude of the political class.
The fight pits the “old” Netherlands against the “new,” and the culture of compromise against a new appetite for conflict and polarization. The hot button issues are immigration, religion (read: Islam) and terrorism.
Pim Fortuyn, the hero of Rotterdam, the man who shook the country awake, once said, “Do not aim for what is possible, but what is imaginable.” He wanted to make clear that for us, the Dutch, nothing is impossible.
Pim Fortuyn was right. Nothing is impossible for us. We are Dutch.
Look at our country. We have single-handedly created this unique and beautiful land. We are the only people in the world living in a country which for the largest part we created ourselves. A great achievement.
We not only created our own land, but we also explored the world. We have sailed all the seas. We founded New York and discovered Australia. Sometimes, it seems like we have forgotten it all. Forgotten what we are capable of. What we are capable of when we put our mind to it. And maybe that is our problem. We must dare to think big again. Because where there is a will, there is a way.
And yes, I know. Many things are bothering us. There is also much to be angry about, and rightfully so. This government has destroyed our country with its austerity policies and has allowed our country to be colonized by Islam. But let’s start aiming for the imaginable. Let us liberate our country.
Four years ago, Mark Rutte won the election with a campaign based on false promises. With lies and deceit. No more money to the Greeks, 1,000 euros for every Dutch citizen, a strict immigration policy. And the Labour Party was his enemy, as everyone remembers. He recently apologized, but he didn’t draw his conclusions. On the contrary, he apologized but continues destroying and giving away our country. Perhaps, he will even govern with Labour again for another four years. No one can still believe what he says. And my question to you is: do you want a prime minister like that for the next four years?
At the moment, you are living in the land of Mark Rutte. And for many, that is no longer a pleasant land. Just walk out your front door and look around. Chances are that thugs are hanging around at the entrance of your local convenience store. That you get spit on and robbed there. That your daughters, your wives, and your parents get harassed and no longer dare to go out at night. That you are becoming a stranger in your own country. That must change. Because this is our country. And it is being taken away from you. And I will take it back for you.
A politician like me, who speaks the truth about a huge problem many Dutch are confronted with every day — yes, I am talking about the terror of Islam and the Moroccan problem — is dragged to court. Facing trial, while imams can preach all the hatred they want and the political elites keep silent. They call themselves leaders, but they do not lead; they mislead.
Mark Rutte’s plan can be summarized in one word: Dereliction of duty.
My plan for the Netherlands is called Liberation. And liberation begins with stating the facts.
The facts: Six out of every ten inmates in the Netherlands are immigrants, and of all prisoners, more than 10% are of Moroccan origin. Moroccan youths are nearly five times more often suspected of a crime than native youths. The Netherlands has become a continuous live broadcast of Opsporing Verzocht [“Wanted Criminals”, a Dutch television program]. A politician who keeps silent about this is worthless. I refuse to do that.
And I will not keep silent about Islam either. Never, ever. Because silence is dangerous. Last July, Nobel Prize winner and Holocaust survivor Elie Wiesel passed away. I met him a few years ago in New York. He gave the world a wise lesson: “When someone says they want to kill you, believe them.” Islam says it wants to kill us. The Koran leaves no doubt about that.
Seven out of ten Dutch Muslims believe that religious rules are more important than Dutch secular laws. And more than one in ten Muslims in the Netherlands find it acceptable to use violence in name of Islam. That is more than 100,000 people. Many refuse to integrate and show no respect for Dutch authority in areas such as Maassluis or Poelenburg. They give us the middle finger. Islamic hooligans parade with Islamic State flags through the streets in The Hague and occupy bridges with Turkish flags in Rotterdam. This is our country, but their flags are waving.
Look at their flags. And look at our flag. There is no Koran verse and no crescent on our flag, but red, white and blue stripes. The red of our identity, the white of our freedom and the blue of the truth. This is the time that from house to house, from street to street and from municipality to municipality, we must raise our flag. Everywhere. With pride. Because this is our country, our Netherlands! And it cries for liberation.
When I come to power, I will protect our beautiful country. And this is only possible if we de-Islamize. I want to make it the core of my policy. Because I refuse to let this wonderful country of ours perish and I choose our culture and the freedom of our people.
Our values are not Islamic, but are based on the Judeo-Christian and humanist civilization. We have the right and freedom to choose how we want to live our lives, and to never give away this right. Twelve years ago, Theo van Gogh was murdered. He gave his life for the freedom that lies at the heart of our Dutch identity. And that identity must defend itself. We must not allow those who want to destroy our freedom to abuse freedom in order to take ours away. We must stop being naive and defend ourselves. Because this is our country.
The Dutch are fully aware of the fact that while there are moderate Muslims, there is no moderate Islam. Two out of three Dutch people say that the Islamic culture does not belong to the Netherlands. Three-quarters of the Dutch people believe that politicians underestimate the problem of the rising numbers of Muslims in our country. More than three-quarters believe that Islam is not an enrichment for the Netherlands. Those people are right. But nobody listens to them. Only I do.
Mark Rutte spoke about stubborn optimism, but the Netherlands do not need laughing donkeys. It needs heroes with firm realism. We cannot afford to underestimate the seriousness of the threat. Because the threat is existential: the survival of our country is at stake. Potential terrorists are already among us in great numbers and are coming to Europe on a daily basis, also with the influx of asylum seekers. They walk free here. It is a dereliction of duty to do nothing about it and to leave our borders open to tens of thousands mainly Islamic fortune-seekers from the Middle East and Africa.
We must also liberate ourselves from the Europhiles in Brussels who wipe the floor with our identity, our sovereignty and our prosperity. We are no longer in control of our own borders, our own money, our own democracy. If we decide in a referendum that we do not want something, like the association agreement with Ukraine, then they force it down our throats anyways. Because the will of the people is not relevant to the elite. They are laughing at us.
Everything belonging to our culture is being taken away from us. Even Zwarte Piet (Black Pete) is not allowed anymore. The elite wants to abolish the word “allochtoon” (foreigner), but it is the native people who are losing their country. I refuse to let that happen. This is our country, our culture, our identity. The Netherlands, this beautiful country, this great nation, this beacon of freedom, it is ours and will remain ours! This is the time to withstand tyranny.
Today, I appeal to all the Dutch. To everyone who enjoys our hard-won freedoms, to everyone who wants to safeguard the prosperity and wealth of this great country for their children and grandchildren: let us show the world that we are Dutch. Stand up — democratically and non-violently — against the elites who are giving away your country. The task that lays ahead of us is immense. But the courage to reclaim our country is so, too. There are many good things to be preserved and there are many things that have to be rebuilt.
This is the time for clear language: Dutch money for the Dutch people! Not a penny to Africa, Turkey, Greece or Brussels anymore. If we do that, so much will become possible. Imagine it! Then we will be able to reduce taxes for everyone, so the purchasing power can rise significantly and the economy can get a tremendous boost. We will be able give our elderly a decent old day. We will be able to can lower the retirement age to 65 again, and no pensions will have to be cut.
I also want to keep our nursing homes open and employ thousands of extra nurses. In my Netherlands, we remedy the terrible degradation of healthcare under Rutte II and there will be many nurses taking care of our elderly with dedication, love and respect, day and night. In my Netherlands, we abolish deductibles in healthcare. It is intolerable that Dutch people are avoiding healthcare because they cannot afford it, while asylum seekers, who on average have 1,000 euros more healthcare costs a year, get everything for free. This injustice fills me with disgust.
We will be able to spend more on the police and the army, so they have more resources to keep our country safe and free and to protect our property and borders. We must close our borders to asylum seekers and immigrants from Islamic countries, no longer allow jihadists from Syria return, and denaturalize and expel criminals with dual citizenship. We must liberate our country.
I also want to introduce direct democracy in the Netherlands with binding referendums. Our political system is still that of the 20th century, ruled by the same arrogant political elites with their false promises and hypocritical apologies. If the mess created by Mark Rutte has taught us one thing, it is this: the people should be able to pull the emergency brake when the political elites violate their will. And not just once every four years.
The past decades, millions of Dutch people have seen how their country was hijacked before their very eyes. It did not take a genius to know that this would end badly. The constant transferring of sovereignty to the EU, the euro that does more harm than good, the endless waste of money spent on the Greeks, the dangers of Islam, the open borders and mass immigration, the growing threat of terrorism, the tsunami of asylum seekers, the tax increases, and last but not least, the budget cuts in healthcare for the elderly and the disabled that have crushed the weakest in our society.
Unfortunately, those who warned have been proven right. But there is hope. Together we can take care of that. When a nation awakes and starts moving, everything is possible. I am not saying that the task will be easy. But it can be done, and it must be done. Because we have no choice. A strong and sovereign country where hard work is rewarded and the weak are protected, where terrorists cannot just cross the border at Hazeldonk [main border crossing with Belgium], where women can walk the streets in skirts without being harassed or sexually assaulted, where care is affordable and pensions are decent, where all citizens — including Jews, homosexuals, women, and critics of Islam — are safe. Where patriotism is not an insult but a badge of honor. Where Islam is shown the door.
This beautiful country, our country, is not lost. In fact, the best years lay ahead of us. If we make the right choices. And say goodbye to those who look away from the problems and give away the Netherlands. It is time for liberation! Let us reclaim our country together.
Starting on March 15, 2017!
Geert Wilders is a member of the Dutch Parliament and leader of the Party for Freedom (PVV).
“Let us tenderly and kindly cherish, therefore, the means of knowledge. Let us dare to read, think, speak, and write.”
— John Adams
Gatestone Institute, a non-partisan, not-for-profit international policy council and think tank is dedicated to educating the public about what the mainstream media fails to report in promoting:
Institutions of Democracy and the Rule of Law;
Human Rights
A free and strong economy
A military capable of ensuring peace at home and in the free world
Energy independence
Ensuring the public stay informed of threats to our individual liberty, sovereignty and free speech.
Gatestone Institute conducts national and international conferences, briefings and events for its members and others, with …READ THE REST
paradigm) are given an air of legitimacy. In great irony the Left uses Multicultural Diversity to support the existence of hard-Right standards inherent in the intolerant totalitarian theopolitical ideology of Islam. Obviously using 
European patriot second in rejecting Islamic Supremacist intolerance that is sweeping all of Europe because Multiculturalist European elitists encourage cultural dilution by taking huge amounts of Muslim immigrants, refugees and allowing illegal migrant Muslim to remain in the name of diversity.
The Conservative-Patriot Christian Right 
![Millions of Dutch [& probably Europeans] agree with Wilders, yet opinion is a crime](https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/pics/2051.jpg){kind=link}
