If you have heard virtually nothing of the current situation in France, you can be forgiven, as the mainstream media is largely keeping quiet about it, and seemingly for good reason. Even I had only really heard about what is going on through news sites on Gab, not even other social media (not that I frequent those anymore). So to shed light on this for those who are unaware, allow me to give you some context.
Recently, 20 retired French generals and around 1,000 servicemembers signed an open letter warning President Emmanuel Macron of “several deadly dangers” threatening the country, including “Islamism and the hordes of the banlieue,” or the fractured suburbs around major cities which are high in both immigrant populations and crime.
They warn that, because of radical Islam and radical movements like the “anti-racism” movement, which seeks to create a “racial war”, according to the signatories (which is 100% true, given their actions and sentiments), French identity is eroding and being actively destroyed by such people. They also warn that, if Macron doesn’t do something to reverse course on this, France will be headed towards “civil war”, which will lead to deaths “in the thousands.”
“The hour is grave, France is in peril,” warned the letter, published on April 21st, which is the 60th anniversary of a failed coup d’état (don’t know if that was intentional or not). The treatment of the “gilet jaunes” or yellow vest protesters is an example, the letter says, of how the government has used the police “as proxy agents and scapegoats” for tyranny and oppression.
“It is no longer the time to procrastinate, otherwise tomorrow civil war will put an end to this growing chaos and deaths – for which you will be responsible – with numbers in the thousands,” the letter concludes.
Perhaps unsurprisingly, Macron and his government didn’t take kindly to the letter’s warning, with Defense Minister Florence Parly saying “These are unacceptable actions,” adding that serving military members are required by law to remain politically neutral. “There will be consequences, naturally,” she said, adding that she has instructed the army’s chief of staff to discipline the signatories.
Despite the strong pushback against the letter by the Macron administration, a recent poll, conducted by Harris Interactive, found that 58% of respondents “support the words of the soldiers,” with an overwhelming majority, 84%, saying that violence was increasing in society, and 73% believing that the country was deteriorating. Perhaps worst of all for the French Leftists, nearly 75% believe the “anti-racism” movement is having the opposite intended effect and is making race relations even worse, not improving them.
Frankly, that last one is not all that surprising, as all it takes is someone with even a semi-functioning brain to realize that “anti-racists” are openly racist against whites in narrative and minorities in practice.
In any case, nearly 50% of respondents also think that the military should occupy problematic areas, such as the high-crime, high-immigrant population areas, “which would act on its own to restore order.”
Finally, only one in three respondents believe that the signatories ought to be punished, showing pretty clearly that the people of France strongly support the letter and what it says.
It was predicted that such terrible situations would occur for European countries back when the Syrian “refugee” crisis was happening in the mid-2010s. In reality, what that crisis was wasn’t about families and innocents escaping the destruction and possibilities of death in Syria as it was involved in a civil war, but about sending largely military-age male Islamists into European nations to spread Islam and make Europe part of the Muslim world.
Horrible terrorist acts occurred in Europe at high rates since then, including multiple knife attacks, truck attacks, axe attacks, and who could forget the worst terrorist attack in France’s history, the November 2015 attacks, which resulted in over 130 deaths and 413 injuries?
And terrorist attacks continue to happen, as the latest one occurred literally two days after the publication of that letter, where a policewoman was stabbed to death by a radical Islamic terrorist who shouted “Allahu akbar” as he carried out the attack.
France is being destroyed both by radical Islamic terrorists and “anti-racist” Leftists who hold no love or loyalty to France, because communists are almost never nationalistic, and are only so when their country already has communism. The Soviets were nationalistic because they had communism (at least the communists were willingly nationalistic, the others were forced to be nationalistic). The Chinese are nationalistic because they have communism (ditto for Chinese communists and non-communists).
But in other countries where they don’t have communism, the communists hold no love or loyalty for that country and revere already communist countries. So they see no reason not to hate and destroy the country in which they live.
It’s these ghastly people that the French are in opposition against, and thankfully, a majority of them seem to be actually against them.
And they very well ought to be. The citizens of a country should not actively hate their country. That doesn’t mean ignoring their faults and it doesn’t mean pretending like there can’t be improvement, but to actively hate one’s own country is not only odd to me personally, but also odd historically speaking.
Even for France, which is pretty notorious for revolutions and civil wars, I don’t doubt that the people who live(d) there love(d) their country. The revolutionaries of the 18th century hated the oppression of the king and the fact that the vast majority of the population was poor, hungry, and France’s only “democratic” apparatus, The Estates General, would often serve against the majority of the people of France, since it was divided amongst three sects: the clergy (First Estate), the nobility (Second Estate) and the peasantry (Third Estate) and each estate counted as a single vote, with the clergy and nobility often voting with one another as the elites of France.
Basically, imagine if the Washington Establishment got one collective vote in Congress, Hollywood elites got one collective vote, and the rest of the Americans got one collective vote. It was that lopsided for pre-revolutionary France (not to mention that the king had free reign to call The Estates General into session or not, as before Louis XVI in 1789, the last time they had a session was during the reign of Louis XIII, nearly 200 years earlier).
In any case, while the revolutionaries were fed up with the way things “worked” at that time in feudal France, I cannot say that they hated the country in itself (that isn’t to say the revolutionaries were good or right entirely, as they sought a more secular culture and are one of the biggest reasons for secularism to be dominant in Europe). Patriotism – nationalism – is the rule, not the exception, and French Leftists’ actions regarding “anti-racism” and their insistence of bringing more Muslims into France is the exception to national and world history.
But thankfully, it appears as though such people are more on the fringe side of things. And if that is the case in France, I can imagine it can be similar in other countries, like America. While we are not quite faced with the same problems as France (give Biden enough time and terrorism will skyrocket like during the Obama years, I assure you), we are faced with an apathetic, at best, administration that holds no love for our respective countries.
Americans love America, which is why we voted to elect Trump TWICE. Likewise, the French love France, which shouldn’t come as a surprise to people.
The globalist elites will be defeated, of that I am certain, in no small part because of that poll.
“No weapon that is fashioned against you shall succeed, and you shall confute every tongue that rises against you in judgment. This is the heritage of the servants of the Lord and their vindication from me, declares the Lord.”
Last month, France was attacked multiple times by radical Islamic terrorists, beginning with an attack against a teacher who was beheaded for showing cartoons mocking Mohammed, and which included an attack on a church in Nice which killed three people as well as an explosion in a French ceremony in Saudi Arabia.
French President Emmanuel Macron, interestingly enough, did not care to join the far-Left in apologizing to the deranged psychopaths who committed these heinous crimes for the “sin” of being “racist” or “Islamophobic” or whatever. Matter of fact, he went the opposite direction, rejecting the far-Left’s attempts at rewriting history and tearing down statues, as well as outright cracking down on Muslim extremist groups and even now, lambasting the fake news media for trying to rationalize and “legitimize” the violence France has recently seen.
Macron said: “When France was attacked five years ago, every nation in the world supported us. So when I see, in that context, several newspapers which I believe are from countries that share our values – journalists who write in a country that is the heir to the Enlightenment and the French Revolution – when I see them legitimizing this violence, and saying that the heart of the problem is that France is racist and Islamophobic, then I say the founding principles have been lost.”
“We will be inflexible when it comes to tackling racism, anti-Semitism and discrimination, and new strong decisions will be made to reinforce the egality of chances. But this noble fight is perverted when it turns into communitarianism, into a false rewriting of history.”
“This is unacceptable when it is picked up by separatists. I tell you very clearly tonight my dear fellow citizens, the Republic will not erase any trace or name from its history. It will not forget any of its deeds or take down any statue. What we need to do is to look all together with lucidity on all of our history and all our memory. Our relation to Africa in particular so we can build a present and a possible future from one to the other side of Mediterranean.”
While there are plenty of things that I dislike about Macron, particularly the fact that he is imposing more strict lockdowns in France, I can’t help but side with him on this one.
The fake news media, both in the U.S. and in many other countries, has a particular standard when it comes to covering Islamic terrorist attacks: never blame the attackers and, in some cases, even go so far as to blame the victims.
When it comes to France, the country’s “racism” and “Islamophobia” are to blame, which is blaming the victim and a roundabout way of saying “they deserved it.” They may not think that that’s what they are saying but that’s because they are so inundated in their own bullcrap that they cannot see it.
They ascertain that it was “justified” to behead a school teacher in France just because he showed cartoons which mocked Mohammed, which is abhorrent. They maintain that it was “justified” for the church in Nice to be attacked because of Macron’s response. They are, in effect, saying that the very clearly horrible acts are rational and just. It is, again, absolutely abhorrent.
All the while, they attack Christians like Madison Cawthorn for trying to convert Jews and Muslims to Christianity, as though it is an outrageous thing to try to do.
To the fake news media, killing someone in the name of Mohammed is fine, but trying to guide people to Christ is an unpardonable and heinous crime.
And you and I both know the reason for doing this at all: Islamic terrorists are a natural ally to the American Left.
I’ve said this before plenty of times, but it bears repeating. The American Left and radical Islamic terrorists both have in common that they wish for America to go down. They don’t want a dominant America in the least bit. They don’t want it to be the lone world superpower or even a superpower whatsoever. The American Left wants a global government, which would naturally be communistic, and for them to be a part of the global power. Radical Muslims want a global caliphate.
They both want the power to rule the world, and only differ in how to go about it. Of course, under the Hegelian Dialectic model, these two will eventually collide because of their relatively differing objectives. Radical Muslims are no fans of the American Left either, and consider them to be as much an enemy as the likes of Trump and pro-America conservatives.
For crying out loud, bin Laden had planned assassination attempts for OBAMA, who was undoubtedly the biggest ally for radical Muslims that they’d ever had in the White House (unless Biden becomes occupier-in-chief). Granted, the reason they think of Leftists as enemies is probably because Leftists have largely become very pro-war because Trump is so anti-war, and the military industrial complex makes a profit off of blowing up children in the Middle East, but still. These terrorists don’t like even the closest thing to allies that they have in the U.S.
But even with all of that, the American Left still views radical Islamic terrorists as allies, in some capacity, because of their shared goals. Which is why the fake news media, which is run by Leftists, is so keen on legitimizing horrific acts of violence so long as it is radical Islamic terrorists who are perpetrating them. The Muslims don’t even have to have been offended at any capacity either, the MSM will legitimize their actions because they want to keep selling the idea that Western nations, particularly the U.S., are systematically racist and, as such, invite these kinds of horrific attacks.
Which, again, is blaming the victim. So I can definitely sympathize with Macron here in his pushback against the Leftist media. It’s altogether rather surprising that he is even taking this approach in the first place, considering his is, himself, a Leftist, but a welcome action nonetheless.
There is no reason for anyone, least of all national leaders, to be apologizing to people who BEHEAD teachers who do things they find “offensive” and to go along with the message that their countries are, foundationally, racist or whatever else. All countries have had injustices in the past and still have injustice to this day. I mean, look at the U.S. right now. The Democrats are probably the closest they’ve ever come to outright violating the will of the American people and stealing the election away from the duly-re-elected president, Donald Trump. In France, Macron himself is instituting unjust lockdown measures. But to pretend as though France or the U.S. or any other Western country is inherently and systematically racist and/or Islamophobic, or altogether unjust, particularly in the face of horrific acts of violence against the people of France, is outrageous.
So, again, I can’t help but to side with Macron on this one. The fake news media should be ashamed of itself for their coverage of the terrorist attacks in France. They won’t be ashamed because these people are sinverguenzas, but they should be.
“Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God, for it is written, ‘Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.’”
Free speech is something we usually enjoy in the United States (when social media isn’t infringing on it, at least) thanks to the First Amendment rights protecting freedom of speech among other rights provided in that amendment. However, freedom of speech is more limited in countries like France, where it is outright illegal to “incite hatred and attack dignity” according to French President Macron, severely limiting freedom of speech and allowing for what happened to a French teenager to happen the way that it has.
Let me provide some context first. Back in January 18th, a 16-year-old French girl was doing a livestream on Instagram, showing people how she did her make-up (something plenty of girls around that age do in this era). The girl, whom we’ll refer to simply as Mila due to her young age, recounted the events of that particular livestream to the host of a chat show called Le Quotidien (The Daily), where she said: “A guy was hitting on me heavily during the live, telling me ‘you’re beautiful, you’re hot, what age are you?’”
Following that, she informed her viewers that she was a lesbian and that “blacks and Arabs” were not her type. This, she says, prompted a series of insults and threats thrown her way, with someone who identified themselves as a Muslim calling her a “dirty lesbian” and a “dirty whore.” You know, nothing but love from the “religion of peace.”
With the insults and threats thrown her way, Mila stood her ground and began to go off on the entire religion of Islam, saying: “The Koran is a religion of hatred, there is only hatred in it. Islam is s**t, your religion is s**t,” and then went on to describe lewd things she would do to the Muslim god.
A couple of things to say about this. First, not sure if there is an error in translation or what, but of course, the Koran is not the religion itself. It’s the “holy” book that Muslims follow in their faith.
Second, she isn’t lying when she says that it’s full of hatred. Of course, not every single verse in the Koran reads: “kill infidels”, but it very much justifies violence and hatred against those who are not Muslims.
Sura (chapter) 2:190-193 in the Qu’ran reads: “Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you… and slay them wherever you catch them… and fight them on until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah.” So the Koran tells Muslims to “fight” the “enemies of Allah” wherever they appear, even going so far as to kill them if necessary.
Sura 4:101 reads: “For the Unbelievers are unto you open enemies.” This is a direct call to recognize anyone who is not Muslim as an open enemy to Islam, so the aforementioned 2nd chapter becomes more “justified” in their eyes. And there are plenty more passages in the Koran that speak of fighting the enemies of “Allah”, plenty of which are fairly gruesome in detail as to what Muslims should do to the “unbelievers.”
The Koran justifies the use of violence, even as far as killing their enemies. Muslim apologists might try and argue that the Koran says to do it if in the case of self-defense or in the case of oppression, but look at the state of the Middle East today and tell me how exactly that’s worked out. If they had to kill to save their own lives, that’s one thing. But they consider even insults to Mohammed a direct attack on Islam and to kill those who insult Mohammed is considered “self-defense.” If you remember, back in 2015, a French satirical publication was attacked by Muslims, with at least 12 casualties, because of a caricature contest to draw Mohammed. Insulting the “prophet” is seen as a crime punishable by DEATH in Pakistan and the “prophet” himself, when he was alive and running Medina, allowed the killing of people who mocked or ridiculed him.
And in the case of oppression, they considered the U.S. going into the Middle East to find bin Laden and fight against al-Qaeda an “invasion”, with Iran’s Ayatollah Khomeini using the argument of “oppression” from the U.S. as a justification for attacking our armed forces.
So when the girl says that the Koran is filled with hatred, she isn’t wrong in the least. Muslims find justification in vile acts of terrorism and genocide in their Koran. Obviously, most Muslims don’t actually do that, otherwise the entire world would constantly be attacked by Muslims 24/7, but the point remains: the Koran justifies hatred and extreme violence.
But following the pushback by the French teenager, Muslims, obviously, were extremely livid and eventually, her home address and school address were published online. According to HotAir.com: “The video was widely shared on social media, where it elicited more threats, including of death and rape.”
A senior member of the French Council of the Muslim Faith told French radio: “You reap what you sow”, adding that the girl “asked for [the threats]”.
Like I said, the Koran justifies this, so this senior member of the Council of Muslim Faith feels justified in saying “you reap what you sow” regarding death and rape threats towards the 16-year-old girl. “If you insult Islam, you deserve to be threatened and even killed,” is the message here.
Now, I personally do believe the comments were a bit too vulgar (though not untrue), but considering the insults and threats thrown her way both before and after those comments, I would 100% have to side with the girl here. It is outrageous that people would insult her and threaten her like this for stating her opinion, roughly-stated as it may have been and offensive as it may have been.
Of course, like I said in the title, it prompted a debate regarding free speech in France, with free speech thankfully winning out in the end, with even socialist Macron saying she had the right to say what she said, crude as it may have been.
Thankfully, the girl is safe (as far as we know right now) and has moved schools, with protection from the government. She likely would be far safer if the country of France didn’t just have open borders for criminals and terrorists to enter freely, but this is the idiocy the French people have voted into office.
I pray that the girl stays safe and that she would turn her life over to the Lord Jesus, so that she might be saved once she does eventually pass.
“In peace I will both lie down and sleep; for you alone, O Lord, make me dwell in safety.”
In the world of the Fake News Media, it can sometimes be difficult to discern just which one is the biggest joke out there. CNN is up there, when they threaten meme-makers with lawsuits and run Russia-collusion stories for two and a half straight years with zero evidence to show for it. But I think The New York Times has pulled ahead in recent times.
Of course, I am talking about the horrible, terrible, no-good, very bad week the people at the NYT had recently. First, the NYT Archives page remembered the death of Chinese Communist dictator Mao Zedong, who died on September 9th, 1976. They did this by tweeting: “Mao Zedong died on this day in 1976: The Times said he ‘began as an obscure peasant’ and ‘died one of history’s great revolutionary figures.’”
Two things they said about him, one of them wrong and the other one REALLY wrong for different reasons.
First, Zedong was never, himself, a peasant. He was born to a farmer who was once a peasant but became “affluent as a farmer and grain dealer,” according to the Encyclopedia Britannica’s page on Mao Zedong. To say he was a peasant is historically inaccurate.
But that’s, of course, not the worst part. The second part was remembering him as “one of history’s great revolutionary figures.” He was a “great revolutionary figure” in the same way Hitler and Lenin were. That is to say: not at all.
He led a communist revolution in China, became dictator of the land, and subsequently murdered 45 million people thanks to his “Great Leap Forward” policy. This is something even THE WASHINGTON POST acknowledges.
Yeah, kinda “forgot” to mention that part, didn’t they?
But as bad as that is, I believe it pales in comparison to what they did on the 18th anniversary of 9/11.
You may have heard a little something about it, as it was all over Twitter and conservative media (apart from the actual remembrance of the victims and events of 9/11).
The New York Times posted and promptly deleted the following tweet: “18 years have passed since airplanes took aim and brought down the World Trade Center. Today, families will once again gather and grieve at the site where more than 2000 people died.”
Of course, people pointed out the lunacy of that tweet. It wasn’t airplanes that “took aim” at the towers. It was radical Islamic terrorists. But then again, we really shouldn’t be so surprised at the sort of language and rhetoric these people use.
These are people who might actually believe guns can float around and shoot and kill people all on their own, erasing any of the blame on the actual shooter and focusing on the gun.
I have already pointed out how shootings tend to not be paid much attention to if the shooter is someone who hurts their narrative. They talked far more at length about the El Paso shooter because he targeted Hispanics than they did about the openly-socialist Dayton shooter. And back when a Berniebro shot at Republicans during a Congressional baseball game, injuring Rep. Steve Scalise (R-LA), they made the concerted effort not to mention the very intentions the shooter had: to kill as many Republicans because he bought Bernie’s rhetoric that Republicans would kill people by taking away their healthcare.
Similarly, since 9/11 is the biggest terrorist attack in American history, and since it was perpetrated by radical Islamic terrorists, any and all semblance of radical Islam must be taken out of the remembrance of the day, because political correctness deems it so.
Never mind that it was RADICAL ISLAMIC TERRORISTS who hijacked the planes that flew into the World Trade Center, the Pentagon and the Pennsylvania field (though that last one was because the passengers were aware of what happened in New York and realized their plane also got hijacked and bravely fought the terrorists, but ultimately all died). Never mind that radical Muslims all over the world CELEBRATED the attacks in their hatred of America. No, we must avoid talking about radical Islamic terrorism when talking about THE BIGGEST TERRORIST ATTACK IN U.S. HISTORY.
It wasn’t terrorists who did it, you see; it was the planes. As though it was one massive accident and no ill-intent was present whatsoever. What an absolute joke of a news organization. The fact it’s the NEW YORK Times, of all organizations, makes it all the sadder. The attack was in THEIR CITY. Their residents and citizens WITNESSED IT HAPPENING LIVE. And they have the nerve to avoid placing the blame where it belongs?
And their updated tweet wasn’t much better either: “18 years after nearly 3,000 people were lost, families of those killed in the terror attacks will gather at the 9/11 memorial. There will be a moment of silence at 8:46 a.m., then the names of the dead – one by one – will be recited.”
Nearly 3,000 people weren’t “lost”. Again, that erases culpability and makes it appear sort of like an accident or at least like it wasn’t intentional. They were TAKEN by these radical Islamic monsters.
The New York Times is incredibly adamant about revising history to suit their agenda. Only a couple of months ago, they launched the 1619 project, if you remember that one. As a reminder, that project aimed (or aims, if they are still pushing it) at revising the history of our country’s very own founding to push the narrative that we were founded on slavery. To say that we weren’t founded on the basis of liberty for all, but that we were actually founded on the basis of slavery due to the very first slave ship arriving in the New World – that is the goal.
In the title, I put the word “forgot” in quotation marks because this wasn’t by accident in the least bit. At this point, it’s a pattern of revisionist history:
And it all fits perfectly into their agenda: protecting radical Islamic terrorists even when they kill people (and even when they kill another Leftist “protected” group: gay people), protecting the image of one of history’s most brutal dictators and mass murderers, and insisting that our country’s greatness is illegitimate and bought by the blood of slaves and poor people.
All b.s. of the highest order, but that’s how delusional these people are.
The New York Times is a massive joke of an organization, and that’s saying something in comparison to all the other fake news organizations. Fredo Cuomo has more dignity than these people.
“A false witness will not go unpunished, and he who breathes out lies will perish.”
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
Back in March, I wrote an article talking about Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Al-Shabaab)’s anti-Semitic comments and how the Democrat Party initially planned to pass a resolution condemning all anti-Semitism (without singling out Omar) but then simply chose to pass a resolution condemning all forms of hatred, pretending as if no anti-Semitism actually was spewed.
Recently, Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Hamas) tried her hand at a common tactic among anti-Semites: revisionist history of the Holocaust and Israel.
On a Yahoo podcast named, “Skullduggery”, Tlaib said the following words: “There’s kind of a calming feeling I always tell folks when I think of the Holocaust, and the tragedy of the Holocaust, and the fact that it was my ancestors, Palestinians, who lost their land and some lost their lives, their livelihood, their human dignity, their existence in many ways, have been wiped out, and some people’s passports… I mean, just all of it was in the name of trying to create a safe haven for Jews, post- the Holocaust, post- the tragedy and horrific persecution of Jews across the world at that time.”
Now, there are a number of things that are very, very wrong about this.
First, that initial portion is quite horrific. She gets a “calming feeling” when she thinks about the Holocaust and the tragedy of it? That is honestly some of the most vile, anti-Semitic rhetoric I have heard in my life. And before anyone tells me I’m taking it out of context, as pretty much all Democrats will claim here, in what context exactly is the phrase “calming feeling” when thinking of the Holocaust in any way not anti-Semitic?
Had she tried to say she got a “calming” or “pleasant” feeling of “knowing” her ancestors did nice things for the Jews (a complete lie, but we’ll get to that in a moment), then that would’ve been different. But she prefaced that with the actual Holocaust and its tragedy.
She could’ve said: “There’s kind of a calming feeling I always tell folks when I think of what my ancestors did for the persecuted Jews post- the Holocaust, about how they did their best to try to help them, even if it came at the cost of their very own lives and livelihoods.” THAT would’ve still been utterly wrong and Jewish revisionist history, but it at least would’ve been taken a little bit better, in my opinion. It at least would’ve hidden her hatred for Jews and appreciation for the Holocaust. But the Left is convinced they can get away with pretty much everything, so she can make clear her hatred of Jews and appreciation for the Holocaust and the Democrats + the media will come to her defense… exactly as they did.
The second, and perhaps most important thing that is wrong about what she said is the actual revisionist history. The Palestinians living in the area at the time were anything BUT welcoming of the Jewish people post- the Holocaust. Violence was often used against Jews returning to the Holy Land, which was occupied by Muslims at the time.
And matter of fact, it was the Palestinian Grand Mufti, Muhammad Amin al-Husayni, who was a big ally of Adolf Hitler and Nazi Germany, even being a big fan of Hitler’s “final solution” of the elimination of lesser races and people.
Now, a commonplace lie that is peddled by anti-Semites is that Israel only exists today because of the Holocaust. That is patently untrue.
Even ignoring the fact that Israel existed as a nation THOUSANDS of years before the Holocaust took place, what with Abraham essentially being considered every Jew’s ancestor (and every Christian, really), as well as Moses delivering the Jewish people out of bondage through God’s power, and God choosing Saul to anoint him as king of Israel, followed by David and Solomon, the Jewish people began to resettle in the land WELL before the Holocaust.
According to the New York Post: “Last Wednesday was Israel’s Memorial Day for fallen soldiers and victims of terror. Israeli television broadcast all the names – 23,741. The litany begins with Avraham Shlomo Zalman Tzoref, who was murdered by Arabs opposing his work for the Jewish community in Jerusalem. That was in 1851. The Holocaust took place nearly a century later.”
What’s more, Jewish people began to return to Jerusalem, or Zion, around the 1880s. “In 1917, British Foreign Secretary Arthur Balfour declared that his government ‘view[s] with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people.’ The League of Nations, a precursor to the United Nations, gave the British a temporary mandate to govern Palestine, and under the mandate, the Jewish community formed its own self-governing body in 1922.”
So there was already quite the Jewish presence in the area well before Hitler came along. And returning to the Grand Mufti, according to a German transcript of a meeting between him and Hitler, when visiting German troops, the Mufti said: “An appeal by the Mufti to the Arab countries… would produce a great number of volunteers eager to fight.”
Hitler then made a promise to the Mufti that, after conquering the Southern Caucasus, “Germany’s objective would then be solely the destruction of the Jewish element residing in the Arab sphere.”
The Arabs even pressured the British into limiting the number of Jews who would be granted access to the mandate established in 1917 in seek of refuge, leading many ships to be forced to turn around and many Jews to be sent to almost certain death in Europe.
What’s more, in 1947 when the U.N. voted to “partition mandatory Palestine into a Jewish and an Arab state, five Arab armies invaded in an attempt to make it all Arab.”
So not only was there considerable Jewish presence in the region well before the Holocaust, enough to petition the British to allow for a sovereign Jewish state, and not only were the Arabs in cahoots with the Nazis, but once World War II had ended and the newly-formed U.N. voted to allow for a Jewish state to exist in the region, the Arabs (or Palestinians) outright invaded the region to keep it from becoming Israel’s.
The REAL history lesson here is the fact that Tlaib’s ancestors SOUGHT THE DESTRUCTION OF THE JEWS, EVEN SIDING WITH HITLER TO DO SO! And yet, she implies that the real victims here are the “Palestinians” post- the Holocaust. She implies that the Jews were greedy land-grabbers and thieves who took advantage of poor, little Palestinians who only wanted them to be safe and comfy.
What a load of crap! The Islamic Arabs have been mortal enemies to the Jews for centuries, ever since the “prophet” Mohammed’s first bloody crusade against infidels. They worked hand-in-hand with the NAZIS to eliminate the Jews. That is a FACT. What Tlaib is claiming here is entirely ahistorical crap.
But lo and behold, the self-righteous Democrat Party comes to Tlaib’s defense after getting called out for her horrific choice of words and her thinly-veiled attempt at rewriting history to make the Jews look like the bad guys.
Everyone from President Trump to Congressional Republicans to SANE PEOPLE WHO KNOW THEIR HISTORY AND CAN TELL TLAIB IS A HORRIBLE ANTI-SEMITE called Tlaib out on her bigotry and her hatred.
“Democrat Rep. Tlaib is being slammed for her horrible and highly insensitive statement on the Holocaust. She obviously has tremendous hatred of Israel and the Jewish people,” wrote the President.
This, in particular, has gotten the Democrats to, once again, defend anti-Semitism and show themselves to be far closer to the Nazi Party than they could ever claim Trump and Republicans to be.
Dem. Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-MD) tweeted: “If you read Rep. Rashida Tlaib’s comments, it is clear that President Trump and Congressional Republicans are taking them out of context. They must stop, and they owe her an apology.”
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Californistan) tweeted: “Republicans’ desperate attempts to smear Rep. Rashida Tlaib & misrepresent her comments are outrageous. President Donald Trump & House GOP should apologize to Rep. Tlaib & the American people for their gross misrepresentations.”
Yeah, Trump and Republicans should totally apologize to the horrible bigot for making her horrific comments that do not even attempt to hide her hatred for Jews and hardly attempt to hide that she is trying to rewrite history to make Jews look like the bad guys DURING THE WORST TRAGEDY TO EVER BEFALL THE JEWS!
Yeah, Tlaib was only making poorly-thought-out at best comments saying she got a calming feeling when thinking about the Holocaust and the tragedy and was only trying to insinuate the common anti-Semitic lie that Arabs in the region were welcoming of the Jews who totally were never there before.
Even Sen. Bernie Sanders (D-USSR) weighed in on this in defense of Tlaib. May I remind you he himself is Jewish?
Well, he’s a socialist, so I don’t know how one can be Jewish (or Christian) and socialist at the same time. If one were to say he is a socialist, he is not a Jew or a Christian. One cannot serve two masters (God and the government) for he will love one and hate the other and vice versa.
But in any case, we continue seeing the Left-ward trend from the modern Democrat Party to get closer and closer to the Nazi Party of Germany without actually calling themselves Nazis (and even having the nerve to call other people “Nazis”).
One does not have to think very hard about where we will go from here.
“For wicked and deceitful mouths are opened against me, speaking against me with lying tongues. They encircle me with words of hate, and attack me without cause. In return for my love they accuse me, but I give myself to prayer. So they reward me evil for good, and hatred for my love.”
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
Over the weekend, Hamas terrorists at the Gaza Strip fired around 700 rockets towards Israel, killing four Israelis and wounding dozens others, according to the Jerusalem Post.
“Terror groups Hamas and Islamic jihad in Gaza have fired over 700 rockets at Israel since Friday, killing four Israelis and wounding dozens. Defiant Hamas and Islamic Jihad officials said on Sunday that they don’t rule out the possibility that the current round of fighting in the Gaza Strip could lead to an all-out war with Israel,” reported the Jerusalem Post.
Reuters reported: “The latest round of violence began [Thursday] when an Islamic Jihad sniper fired at Israeli troops, wounding two soldiers.” This is important to keep in mind and you’ll find out why in a moment.
Both Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib responded to this attack, but taking the side of the Islamic terrorists attacking Israel, unsurprisingly.
Tlaib tweeted in response to a tweet (which I will share in a moment) the following: “When will the world stop dehumanizing our Palestinian people who just want to be free? Headlines like this & framing it in this way just feeds into the continued lack of responsibility on Israel who unjustly oppress & target Palestinian children and families. #FreePalestine.”
Now, I have a number of things to say about this alone, but let’s first see what this headline is and what tweet she is responding to. The headline comes from the New York Times, ironically enough, considering their disgusting Anti-Semitic picture from about a week ago, and it reads: “Gaza Militants Fire 250 Rockets, and Israel Responds With Airstrikes.”
Really nothing wrong here, as it states some facts. However, Tlaib and the person she responded to have a problem with this headline and the framing of it, making it seem like it’s the terrorists’ fault… which it is. And yet, they have a problem with this. Why am I not surprised?
But that’s just the headline. What tweet was Tlaib responding to? This one: “This is a stunningly irresponsible and misleading headline. Israel shot dozens of unarmed Palestinian protestors in Gaza on Friday and killed 4 Palestinians, including two protesters, in Gaza before any projectiles were launched.”
This comes from a Twitter verified account (again, not surprised) that goes by the name of Yousef Munayyer. Obviously, a Muslim and one that sides against Israel (as most tend to do).
But that is where that Reuters report becomes important. Israel may have shot “unarmed Palestinian protesters” (doubt they were unarmed and they are not protesters but occupiers of a land that belongs to Israel, but I’ll get to that later), but if they did, it is out of retaliation against a Jihadi sniper shooting and wounding soldiers. Is Israel not allowed to retaliate against attacks? Are they supposed to kowtow to Muslim invaders?
In Tlaib’s, Omar’s and Yousef’s minds: yes, Israel should surrender to them.
Now, before I get to Omar’s tweet, I would like to dismantle Tlaib’s. First, the headline is a rather accurate one and places the blame on those who are to blame: the radical Islamic terrorists. The NYT won’t admit it themselves, neither would they dare say the words “radical Islamic terrorists”, but they at least have some basic understanding of who the aggressor here is and it’s not Israel (and this will likely be one of very few and far between times when I will actually compliment the New York Times). So the headline she is talking about does not dehumanize anyone, does not represent a sort of “lack of responsibility” on the part of Israel and does nothing except report the truth (again, a rarity for the NYT).
And second, notice the actual dual loyalty Tlaib demonstrates to have here. “Our Palestinian people”? Who is “our” in this situation, because it’s definitely not the United States. The U.S. supports Israel, not Muslim invaders. Tlaib is massively hypocritical in accusing Jewish American politicians of having dual loyalties to Israel and then proceeding to call Palestinians “our” people. They are not America’s people. They shouldn’t even be Tlaib’s people, but that is why I say she is the one with dual loyalties here.
Now, let’s look into Omar’s tweet:
“How many more protesters must be shot, rockets must be fired, and little kids must be killed until the endless cycle of violence ends? The status quo of occupation and humanitarian crisis in Gaza is unsustainable. Only real justice can bring about security and lasting peace.”
As some people on Twitter point out, this reads much like Hamas propaganda. She accuses Israel of occupying the Gaza Strip when in reality, it belongs to Israel.
Also, what is “real justice” in this scenario? Considering the side she is taking, of attacking Israel and their right to defend themselves against foreign invaders who wish to destroy them completely, I’m assuming “real justice” means the wiping out of Israel off the face of the Earth.
Again, she considers Israel to be occupying the Gaza Strip when it’s radical Muslims who are occupying the area. To her, “justice” is simply vengeance.
But here’s the thing, and I’m repeating myself: IT BELONGS TO ISRAEL! Muslims in the area are the ones making threats (and sometimes act on said threats) of attacking Jerusalem and completely destroying Israel, forcing them to either submit to Islam or be killed. But the Holy Land does NOT belong to Muslims. God did not promise Mohammed that land. He promised Abraham and his descendants that land.
And by descendants, He did not mean Abraham’s illegitimate child Ishmael, whom Muslims consider to be Abraham’s true first-born son and to whom they believe land belongs as his inheritance. According to Muslim exegesis, Sarah asked Abraham to marry Hagar so that they may have a child together, as Sarah was barren. But Abraham never married Hagar and Ishmael was not the son God promised to Abraham. Abraham was impatient with God as he waited decades for the promise to be fulfilled, getting older and older and his hopes diminishing with each passing year. He got impatient, as did Sarah, and they thought God would bring them a son through someone that is not Sarah.
They were mistaken, as years later, they would bear Isaac. Despite the fact that Sarah was barren and despite the fact that she was well beyond the age of child-rearing, God delivered to them the son that He promised them.
Genesis 21:9-13 shows us exactly what was intended out of both Isaac and Ishmael. After Isaac had been born and circumcised, “Sarah saw the son of Hagar the Egyptian, whom she had borne to Abraham, laughing. So she said to Abraham, ‘Cast out this slave woman with her son, for the son of this slave woman shall not be heir with my son Isaac.’ And the thing was very displeasing to Abraham on account of his son. But God said to Abraham, ‘Be not displeased because of the boy and because of your slave woman. Whatever Sarah says to you, do as she tells you, for through Isaac shall your offspring be named. And I will make a nation of the son of the slave woman also, because he is your offspring.’”
God considers Isaac to be Abraham’s heir, as we just read from the Scripture. Ishmael still had his place in history and God blessed him with a nation because he was also Abraham’s offspring, but to Isaac belongs the promise of the Lord made to Abraham. To Isaac belongs the inheritance of his father. To the Israelites, who come from the line of Isaac, belongs the Holy Land.
It is Ishmael’s offspring, the radical Muslims in Hamas, etc. who wish to see Israel destroyed and see themselves occupying the Holy Land. But it does not belong to them.
Do you see why I call the Muslims in Gaza “occupiers”? Because that is what they are. That is not to say they are not allowed to live there, but the land does not belong to them, which is what they claim. The land belongs squarely to Israel.
You can try and argue with me all day long about the issue, but ultimately, it is not me with whom you are arguing, but with the very word and promise of the Lord.
And between Omar, Tlaib and other Muslims who claim the land to be theirs and the Lord God Almighty, I’m not a big fan of the Muslims’ chances.
“Then the Lord appeared to Abram and said, ‘To your offspring I will give this land.’ So he built there an altar to the Lord, who appeared to him.”
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
Strangely, I feel as though I have made a lot of “well, duh!” article titles in recent time, but one cannot help but call out the obvious in the case that I am about to discuss.
While I could go over the religion’s gruesome and violent history, not to mention the incessant attacks against the state of Israel, such as the record-breaking launch of 400 rockets against Israel (which reportedly killed some Palestinian residents), I feel compelled to cover a different case entirely. That case is the Asia Bibi (Aasiya Noreen) blasphemy case that originated in 2010.
Recently, this case has made some news, particularly about Bibi’s release and asylum, which Italy has reportedly offered, while Great Britain has refused to offer asylum to the woman. However, to better understand this whole thing, one must start from the beginning and offer an explanation of the entire case.
Asia Bibi (I will stick to this name since it’s easier than writing out her actual name), is a Pakistani Christian woman who was convicted of blasphemy in 2010 and was sentenced to death by hanging.
Reportedly, in June of 2009, Bibi was accused of blasphemy after an argument with co-workers while they were harvesting berries. Due to that accusation, she was arrested and imprisoned, with a Pakistani judge sentencing her to death by hanging in November of 2010.
Obviously, that hanging never occurred, likely because the case was pretty faulty and she was eventually acquitted by the Pakistani Supreme Court on Halloween of 2018, citing that “material contradictions and inconsistent statements of the witnesses… cast a shadow of doubt on the prosecution’s version of facts.”
I don’t know how Pakistan’s judicial system works, but it appears to be at least somewhat similar to our own in that the rule of law emphasizes presumption of innocence. Then again, a Pakistani lower court did sentence her to death by hanging, even though there likely was still insufficient evidence to justifiably convict her, so I doubt there is much more similarity between our judicial systems.
But in any case, Asia Bibi was acquitted by the Pakistani Supreme Court, which has led to protests by Islamists and, subsequently, calls for her death. Even advocates of her such as Minorities minister Shahbaz Bhatti and Punjab Governor Salmaan Taseer have been assassinated due to their advocacy for Bibi and opposing of blasphemy laws.
Reportedly, Muslim cleric Maulana Yousaf Qureshi announced a bounty of 500,000 Pakistani rupees that would be awarded to anyone who would kill her.
And reportedly, “more than 60 people have been killed by mobs after blasphemy accusations since 1990” in Pakistan.
So due to this, to the fact that more than 60 people have been killed by mobs due to accusations, to the fact that Bibi was on death row for 8 years before her acquittal, to the fact that advocates for Bibi and opponents of the blasphemy laws have been assassinated, we really have to be an insanely ignorant, stupid, or insane people to believe this is the “religion of peace”.
Let me share with you a quote from Wilson Chowdry, chairman of the British Pakistani Christian Association, talking about Britain’s decision to not offer asylum to Asia Bibi: “I’ve been led to believe that the U.K. government had concerns that her moving to the U.K. would cause security concerns and unrest among certain sections of the community and would also be a security threat to British embassies abroad which might be targeted by Islamist terrorists.”
Gee, I wonder why certain people in the U.K. would not be okay with Bibi moving there. I wonder why there would be unrest and why there would be security concerns, particularly for British embassies abroad.
Maybe because these people follow a death cult that gets really ticked off by anyone who dares make a joke about their “sacred prophet” Mohammed? Maybe because said “prophet” was the prototypical Islamist terrorist who slaughtered his way to power in the Middle East to establish the closest thing to an actual religion Satan has ever gotten?
Of course, that’s not to say every single Muslim is a murderous psychopath, but this seems to be a big thing in Islam. Terrorism and extremism seems to be a massive problem stemming from Islam. Christianity does not have this problem (regardless of what the fake news media might want to say). Judaism doesn’t have this problem. Hinduism has this problem, but nowhere near to this level. Islam has a massive problem with extremism. And the thing about it is that these extremists are considered “conservatives”. Not conservatives like you and I. Conservatives in that they follow the more conservative teachings of Islam.
And if that’s the case, doesn’t that say a lot more about Islam than it does about the extremists? Islam IS A RELIGION OF EXTREMISM!
While there may be some Muslim liberals who might argue that the blasphemy laws are too brutal (which they are), that still indicates that, as it was founded, Islam is a death cult not suitable for civilized people.
If these extremists are what they would call “conservatives”, then that just tells me the religion is extremely violent and narrow-minded.
Say what you may want to say about there being Muslims who disagree with the blasphemy laws in Pakistan and elsewhere. Say what you may want to say about there being “moderate” Muslims who don’t support this sort of thing. But let me tell you this: if the people that are extremists are the ones that more closely follow the teachings of Mohammed and the Quran, you cannot make an argument that Islam is a religion of peace. As it was founded, it is the religion of death, of war, of bloodshed and of savagery.
I don’t just say that Islam is a death cult to make a generalization. Like I said, not every single Muslim person is like this. But the reason I say it’s a death cult is because its founding principles are about forcing others to follow Islam and those that would not would be executed.
It is a hateful religion, a false religion, and nothing the Left, the media, or anyone else tells me could make me think for a second that it is a religion of peace. If it’s a religion of anything, it’s a religion of evil.
Now, regarding Asia Bibi, she has reportedly been offered asylum by Italy, Canada and other Western countries, so she might have a happy ending to a decade-long battle against irrational hatred from deranged Muslims.
“Though I walk in the midst of trouble, you preserve my life; you stretch out your hand against the wrath of my enemies, and your right hand delivers me.”
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles delivered right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
During a CNN panel talking about the shooting at the high school in Florida, former Democrat presidential candidate Bernie Sanders’ spokeswoman Symone Sanders made the attempt to make this matter not just about gun laws, but also race.
Sanders said: “If the Parkland shooter had been black or brown we wouldn’t be talking about the types of legislation we could or could not make happen. If he was yelling Allahu Akbar, Congress and the President would’ve been tweeting about it and they would’ve swooped in and did whatever they felt needed…”
Other panelists, such as Bill Kristol tried to make the point that no gun law change occurred after the San Bernardino shootings, with Sanders replying that we have a Muslim ban now.
I’ll get to that part momentarily.
First, I wanna focus on the elephant in the room. She said if the Parkland shooter had been black or brown we wouldn’t be talking about types of legislation. Either she’s insanely stupid or hasn’t been paying much attention at all about the shooter.
Ms. Sanders, I’ll put things in words that even someone like you might be able to understand.
The name of the Parkland shooter was Nikolas Cruz. Typically, that name is indicative of Hispanic descendance. Hispanics tend to count as “brown” people. If you look up his picture, you can see that he’s slightly brown. Admittedly, not too brown, but still of a darker shade than a typical white person.
My question to you then is: what in the absolute heck are you talking about? He may not be black, but he surely is brown. He’s Hispanic. And yet, people talking about this subject couldn’t care less about that. Well, everyone except you, seemingly.
That is why I believe she has either not been paying a whole lot of attention or she’s just that stupid.
Now, she did mention that he had trained with a white supremacist group. The thing about that is that it’s not true. Nikolas Cruz didn’t train with a white supremacist group. This particular fake news comes due to a report by the AP that a spokesman from Republic of Florida, a white supremacist group, “confirmed” that Cruz trained with them.
Later on, however, the story was debunked, saying that pictures taken of “Cruz” didn’t confirm his identity (the pictures showed someone concealing their face or a blurry picture) and the spokesman himself eventually said that there are multiple people in their group by the same name or at least variations of it.
So Sanders is either misinformed and spreading fake news or she’s an idiot and spreading fake news.
Now, let’s move on to the Muslim ban part of her short rant.
Do you know why we have a Muslim ban? Why we specifically disallow these particular people from certain Muslim nations from coming here? Because Islam is the only “religion” in the world that has constant problems with terrorism.
Buddhists don’t have a problem with Buddhist terrorists. Why? Because there are no Buddhist terrorists killing in the name of Buddha.
Hindus don’t have a problem with terrorists in their own religion. Why? Because there are no Hindu terrorists killing in the name of Krishna or Ganesh or Vishnu.
Jews don’t have a problem with terrorists in their own religion. Why? Because there are no Jewish terrorists that kill in the name of Yahweh.
Christians don’t have a problem with terrorists in our own religion. Why? Because there are no Christians that kill in the name of Jesus.
But Muslims have a problem with terrorists in their own religion. Why? BECAUSE ALLAH IS THE ONLY DEITY THAT ORDERS HIS FOLLOWERS TO KILL PEOPLE!
On top of that, the Muslim ban doesn’t even affect all of the Muslim nations in the Middle East, only a select few.
Now, I don’t think it’s necessary for me to go into too much more detail on the actual shooting and on why no form of gun control would work. I simply wanted to share this ridiculous statement made by an insane Leftist who clearly has no idea what it is she’s talking about.
To repeat myself, Nikolas Cruz IS brown, yet, Trump and his administration aren’t doing what Sanders would expect them to do about someone who’s brown in this case. In her mind, she’s probably thinking that Cruz would be sent to Guantanamo Bay or get deported if he were black or brown. Well, he’s brown and he’s still in custody. And likely will be sent to prison for life.
The comment she made highlights her raging ignorance on the subject matter and it also highlights the insanity of the Left’s minds. Whenever a Hispanic person is involved in anything, the Left expects Trump to immediately deport that person even if he or she is here legally. That’s how little they think of Trump and that’s how they view things such as illegal immigration.
I won’t get too much into that topic since it has nothing to do with this case, but it does point to the Left’s mentality. They simply can’t help but to think about people’s race. They are just that shallow.
“The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge, but fools despise wisdom and instruction.”
Over the New Year’s weekend, people (more specifically, women) protested the oppressive Iranian regime and, to an extent, Islam. But is the Left supporting these protesters? You can bet your house they’re not!
“But why wouldn’t they?”, you might ask. Well, considering President Trump is supporting the protesters (and this is an anti-government protest), the Left doesn’t want to make any mention of it.
The Fake News Media has hardly covered it, and when they do cover it, they try to use it to attack Trump and his travel ban.
And if anything, the Left has decided to side with the oppressive government. NBC reporter Matt Bradley reported last Sunday: “In Iran, the regime strikes back. After four days (counting today, 7) of anti-government protests and just as many tweets from Donald Trump supporting protesters for ‘finally getting wise’, Iran’s President Hassan Rouhani broke his silence. In a speech to his cabinet, he defended demonstrators’ right to protest, but took a swipe at President Trump. ‘This man in America who’s sympathizing with us today has forgotten he called Americans ‘terrorists’ months ago,’ Rouhani said. ‘He has no right to sympathize with Iranians.’ The unrest now deadly – two protesters killed at a rally last night. Officials blaming the deaths on foreign agents.”
Right, a couple of things to talk about here.
First, Rouhani has no right to criticize President Trump. NBC claims he defended the demonstrators’ right to protest. Well, arresting the protesters, a death toll higher than 20 people, and the possibility to send the arrested protesters to death row is a funny way of defending these people’s rights.
Let’s not forget that a similar protest happened in 2009, which was utterly crushed by the Iranian government.
Next, I can’t recall a single time that Trump has called Americans “terrorists”. I don’t know if he’s referring to the actual terrorists that came from the Middle East or if he’s referring to a couple of the church shooters, but I don’t recall Trump saying that of Americans.
Iran is on the “travel ban” list because it’s a state-sponsor of terrorism. Rouhani has absolutely no leg to stand on criticizing Trump in any way.
But returning to the moronic Left, this is a prime opportunity to tout women’s rights on an international scale. And what are American women’s rights activists doing about it? Nothing. They make next to no mention of the importance of these protests.
Feminist group “Moms Rising”, a group of feminist parents decided to end the year by talking about the DREAM Act, which really has nothing to do with the advancement of women’s rights.
The National Organization of Women (NOW) and the National Women’s Law Center are, according to the Daily Wire: “bellyaching about Betsy DeVos” and “talking about a ‘pay gap.’”
And possibly worst of all, though simultaneously unsurprising, Linda Sarsour has said nothing about the protests other than a flimsy effort to attack, well, what do you know? THE TRAVEL BAN!
“Is it just me or is Trump praising Iranian protesters AND at the same time also banned Iranians from entering the USA?”, she said on her Twitter.
Is it just me or is she more preoccupied with being an obstruction against the President than advancing women’s rights in a country that follows a religion that has flushed women’s rights down the toilet?
Seriously, she’s spent this whole year touting how a hijab is “empowering” for women and yet she ignores the fact that women who HAVE to wear it in Iran are sick of it and what it represents.
These Leftists are not pro-women, as you can clearly see. And this is where identity politics gets them into trouble. When two of their preferred identities clash, they have trouble siding with one or the other. But funny enough, whenever Islam comes into play, they’ll always side with Islam.
The Left will push for gay and transgender “rights” but utterly ignore the fact that Islam literally kills those who say are gay or act gay. Even the mere ASSUMPTION that someone’s gay can get that person into trouble.
The Left will push for ideals like Black Lives Matter but ignore the fact that the Muslim World is still ok with slaves and most of the world’s slave population lives in the Middle East.
The Left will push for women’s rights but refuse to support them if they go against Islam.
The Left is not pro-gay, pro-black people (and have a horrendous history of being anti-black), pro-women. They’re pro-ISLAM.
They’re pro the cult of DEATH. I’ve said this before, but it’s necessary to say it again: Islam is the worst thing to happen to the world. This includes women, children, gay people, black people, white people, Christians, Jews, even Atheists.
They oppress women, sell little girls off to be wedded to old men, throw gay people off roofs of buildings, enslave black people, kidnap and behead white people, Christians, Jews and Atheists and make plans to either kill everyone who is not Muslim or FORCE the world to be Muslim.
Islam is horrible and I will never apologize for being against Islam. I don’t think they’re all terrorists, but too many of them are either ok with it or will want to join the fight.
Now, I don’t want to make insane generalizations like that. I understand that there are a lot of people who were Muslim at one point but then converted. Those are the smart and brave people. Why brave? Because if you convert from Islam to anything else, you have a serious chance of being killed even by your own parents or siblings.
Islam is the only religion in the world that punishes people in this life for abandoning that faith. Christian parents won’t kill their child if he/she abandons Christ. They’ll be disappointed and afraid for their child’s salvation, sure, but they won’t kill him/her. Atheist parents (most likely) won’t kill their children if they convert to Christianity (I haven’t seen any cases of that happening but it could certainly happen).
But Muslim parents will seriously consider killing their child if he/she abandons Islam.
The protesters in Iran are very brave for doing this. The woman you see at the top, though the picture is blurry, is waving a hijab on a stick. Islam forces women to wear hijabs, supposedly so that the women don’t “attract men” by showing off body parts like her full head of hair. If your religion struggles with rapist men, it might be time to abandon that garbage religion.
Furthermore, if your religion is ok with little girls who have yet to reach puberty to be sold to old men to be their bride, it might be time to abandon that garbage religion.
If your religion basically enslaves women and actually enslaves black people, it might be time to abandon that garbage religion.
If your religion is so hateful that it requires you to kill anyone who is not like you Nazi style, it might be time to abandon that garbage religion.
And yet, the Left LOVES Islam. A religion that oppresses and punishes anyone who disagrees with it. Gee, I wonder why they love it so much.
1 John 3:8
“Whoever makes a practice of sinning is of the devil, for the devil has been sinning from the beginning. The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the works of the devil.”
There come points in time in which the Left is simply very predictable. How they will respond to certain news such as terrorist attacks and shootings seem as though they are parts of a script. A script that tells them “blame gun owners during shootings and claim Islam is a religion of peace when Muslim terrorists kill people.”
This latest attack in New York City on Halloween is no different. You see people like the Deputy Commissioner of the NYPD Intelligence and Counterterrorism saying things like: “This isn’t about Islam. It’s not about what mosque he attends.”
I don’t care what mosque he attends, but THIS IS ABOUT ISLAM! The terrorist, Sayfullo Saipov, pledged allegiance to ISIS and shouted “Allahu Akhbar” on the streets of New York. He intended to kill infidels and did it for his murderous religion and god. This is about Islam.
The Deputy is not the only Leftist that makes sure to not blame Islam, however. Chuck Schumer said in a statement to Trump’s response to the attack: “I have always believed and continue to believe that immigration is good for America. President Trump, instead of politicizing and dividing America, which he always seems to do at times of national tragedy, should be focusing on the real solution – anti-terrorism funding – which he proposed cutting in his most recent budget.”
It’s honestly hilarious for him to say something like that, considering that the terrorist got into the country through the Employment-Related Immigration Act of 1990, otherwise known as the Diversity Visa Lottery Program, a program that randomly selects people from countries that barely migrate any people into the U.S. Why mention this when talking about Schumer, you may ask? BECAUSE THIS WAS HIS PROGRAM! HIS BILL! HIS BILL ALLOWED FOR THIS TERRORIST TO ENTER THE COUNTRY!
This bill, which was for whatever reason passed by Congress through super majority vote and signed into law by Bush Sr., is an incredibly ridiculous bill. This bill benefits people from countries that have relatively few people migrating to the U.S. Wouldn’t that mean that most people in those countries DON’T WANT TO MIGRATE TO THE U.S.? Certainly not to become Americans, at least. And yet, this bill exists.
But let’s return to the topic of this article. Why mention hypocrisy when talking about the attack? Let’s go back to early last month, shall we? The biggest mass shooting in American history: the Vegas shooting.
I doubt you’ve forgotten how the Left reacted to the shooting. How did they react? The same way they react to any other shooting: demanding gun-control. Whenever a shooting happens, regardless of the damage, the Left always blames law-abiding citizens, Republicans, and the guns themselves. They blame people that had nothing to do with the attack. They blame an entire ideology. During terrorist attacks, however, they don’t blame the ideology that encourages people to murder others.
Whenever there’s a terrorist attack, the Left immediately goes to the defense of Muslims, saying they’re not to blame. But whenever there’s a shooting, they immediately attack all gun owners. After a terror attack, they single the terrorist out and say not everyone is like that. After a shooting, they blame everyone that owns a gun.
Now, a Leftist could say that we do the same. That during a shooting, we single the guy out and during a terrorist attack, we blame the entire religion. Here’s the thing: ISLAM TELLS ITS FOLLOWERS TO KILL INFIDELS! THE NRA ENCOURAGES PEOPLE TO DEFEND THEMSELVES! It’s literally offense vs. defense. Muslims are always the attackers, while law-abiding citizens are always the ones being attacked.
And there’s not rebuttal to that argument. Look back at every Islamic terror attack. Was the perpetrator Muslim? Yes. Were the victims law-abiding citizens? Most likely. Wanna know why that is? Because a law-abiding citizen OBEYS THE LAW! Muslim terrorists DON’T!
Why do we come to the defense of gun owners whenever there’s a shooting? Because gun owners are almost entirely law-abiding. You’ve seen the stats I shared after the shooting. You know that there are more registered guns out there than there are PEOPLE in the country. If guns were the problem, we’d know it.
Why do we group Muslim terrorists with other Muslims? Because they all follow the same death cult of a religion. They all read the same religious texts. They all understand what the texts say. They all follow the texts as much as they possibly can. No, not all of them will kill people. No, not all of them will break the law… quite yet. Their Sharia Law is the law they seek to follow. And only that Law. They don’t care for the Constitution. They don’t care for the country. They HOPE the Constitution and the country will fall.
I’ve seen this metaphor on Facebook every now and then. To paraphrase: “Muslim terrorists are snakes in the grass. Muslims are the grass the snakes hide in.” Regardless of the particular actions individual Muslims partake, they all follow the same laws, the same rules, the same ideologies and the same deity and “prophet”. The laws tell them to lie to infidels, take from infidels, kill infidels and that they will be rewarded with sex with 72 virgins.
These are the people the Left LOVES. The people the Left PROTECTS and comes to the defense of whenever one of their own kills people. It happens over and over and over again. And their solution? BRING MORE OF THEM IN AND MAKE THEM A PRIORITY FOR THE COUNTRY!
My solution? Common-sense vetting procedures! Eliminate the ridiculous Lottery Immigration system! Deny refugees entry to the U.S. if they’re Muslim! Oh, and ACTUALLY ERADICATE ISIS FROM THE FACE OF THE EARTH!
Now, I’m not so naïve as to think that eliminating ISIS means no more terrorism ever. But the destruction of our enemies who don’t wish to be peaceful with us is a priority. I want to eliminate Islam not with guns, but with words. I’ve seen plenty of Muslims convert to Christianity, but never once have I seen a Christian (a true Christian, that is) convert to Islam.
Why? Islam doesn’t offer salvation, it offers sex. Mohammed didn’t offer salvation, but sexual pleasure in the afterlife. Pleasure that comes if the followers of Islam destroy the livelihoods of other people who are not like them.
I call Islam the “death cult of Islam” and for good reason: that’s exactly what they are. Not only is that exactly what they are, that’s ALL they are. It’s a sick, sick religion with equally sick followers. And yet, the Left loves them. It’s not hard to see why: the Left is just as sick.
No, the Left doesn’t go around the streets of New York killing people, but their version of “killing” people is destroying their lives. Big government is something they salivate over, even though it controls and destroys lives – often in that order. Actually, let me rephrase that. It’s not despite the fact that big government controls and destroys people why the Left loves it. They love it BECAUSE it controls and destroys people.
I’m never surprised at how the Left reacts to terrorist attacks. I’m never surprised at how they defend Muslims. Why would I be? Both are equally evil. The only difference is that the Left doesn't go around killing people. They go around punching people *ahem* Antifa *ahem*, but they aren't killing people on the street. They do mass-murder people in their mother's womb, though.
But both being evil, both face the same fate: death at the hands of the Lord. I’m not talking about physical death. Yes, they will all eventually die, because they are all mortal. But I’m specifically talking about spiritual death. That’s a fate they both share and can’t escape from no matter what they do (aside from repenting and accepting Christ as their Lord and Savior).
And that message they may not like. But it’s the Truth. It’s not a warning to the Left – it’s literal prophecy.
“For they cannot rest until they do evil; they are robbed of sleep until they make someone stumble.”
We bring you the TRUTH that the Left denies you. You'll live a more joyful and victorious life, because the Truth will set you free...