When will the idealistic morons in the West accept reality?

Description of video in case it gets taken down at some point

GEEN STIJL TV Channel. The interview of three Muslim teenagers (probably of Moroccan origin) shows above all how integration had totally failed in the Netherlands. There is no reason not to believe the boys belong already to the third generation non western immigrants that are living in the Netherlands. They are born and raised here. Still their knowledge of the Dutch language is very poor. It is hard to believe, if we think they are attending a Dutch school from the beginning and are now visiting high school. Billions of Guldens and later on Euro’s were invested (still) in extremely expensive integration programs.

Very alarming are their idea’s about the host country that had done so much to give them good life, health care, education etc. How many of them could have reached the age of 5 years old, if they were still living in their country of origin? Now they are spitting on the “Kuffar”. They want to rough up their women and girls for not dressing properly etc. They want to live in the wonderful country IS “where a Muslim can live according to the laws of his faith. It is very obvious that the boys get all their idea’s from their parents and the mosques; it is especially clear by the youngest.

Few day’s after the terror assault in Copenhagen interviewed the Dutch TV the famous Danish cartoon drawer Kurt Westergaard. This is what he had said: Now after the attack. I am afraid that the Danes will take it very hard and hostility among the two groups will grow. By that all integration efforts made for so many years and the milliards of Kronen it had cost, will go down the drain. Alas for mister Hedegaard, integration had TOTALLY FAILED. We have to look at it as a bad investment that had totally failed.

I don’t really have much that I need to add. The description says it all. These people aren’t integrating at all. If anything, each generation becomes more and more distant from the host society. The first generation recognise the value of our societies and come here for a better life. The following generations however end up taking for granted, the benefits they get living in our societies, and develop an idealised view of the societies that their parents left behind. Some of them get to the point that they actually leave their host society to wage Jihad against it. Others, remain as worthless parasites and try to drag down the host society from within.

Can anyone seriously explain to me, why these people are here? How do they benefit our societies? What do they contribute? If they don’t contribute, then what obligation do we have to them? If they aren’t willing to integrate and feel that Shariah states are superior, why aren’t they deported instantly?

All I want, is to understand why. I mean surely if there is a good reason for them to be here, it would make sense to tell us what this reason is, in order to reassure us that they’re worth having here. It’s like how if a child is sick and they need to take horrible tasting medicine to feel better. They’re not going to like the unpleasantness of it, but if you explain to them why it’s necessary, they’ll endure it for the greater good. If someone can explain to me why we need to deal with the unpleasantness of having people who want to destroy our way of life, and do so in a way that makes sense, I’d be willing to listen.


Once again, Whitey is being demonised unfairly.

So apparently, a California school is distributing leaflets about something called a “White Space”. Essentially, white students are to be taken aside and separated from their oppressed non-white classmates and made to feel guilty about all that oppression they are doing.

California Public School Promotes “White Space” to “Unlearn Racism” (Please click on link and read the whole thing. It summarises my thoughts better than I could)

Why A White Space?

For many, it sounds contradictory: Isn’t it racist if just white people get together? Isn’t that segregation? The following are our reasons for meeting as a white anti-racist affinity group:

1. People of color shouldn’t always have to be the ones to educate white people about racism and oppression. We are taking responsibility for learnipractice as a white person can sometimes mean increased alienation and conflict in our lives, especially with other white friends and family who disagree with us. …
4. It’s a space for white people to figure out what it means to be anti-racist white person and challenge racism in all areas of our lives. …
5. It’s a place where white people can begin to build a new culture of white anti-racism, and learn the skills needed to transform the larger white community.
6. White affinity groups are a supplement to, not a replacement for, multi-racial dialogues and activism between white people and people of color. …
7. A white space serves as a resource to people of color who want to work with white people but don’t want to spend all their energy dealing with the racism of white people.ng about our own white privilege and how to challenge it as white people.
2. In order to challenge racism and dismantle white supremacy, white people need to unlearn racism and discover the ways we enact white privilege. …
3. A commitment to anti-racist identity and

Despite the fact that slavery in the West was ended about 150 years ago (by white people) and Jim Crow laws were ended about 50 years ago (by white people, though admittedly due to pressure by black civil rights activists) and despite the fact that every race, including white people have been the victims of slavery at some point, we still need to realise that every single thing that goes wrong in the non-white communities is because of some vague unspecified form of racism committed by white people against them.

All racists, every single one of them.

If black and Hispanic students fail miserably in school, drop out, end up dealing drugs and get shot in the street, it’s all the white students fault for oppressing them. It doesn’t have anything to do with their cultural values, as all people are equal in every way, and the only thing that can possibly account for demographic differences is how much oppression that demographic suffers at the hands of white people. You see, all white people are automatically born as racists and so, need to unlearn racism. We just can’t help ourselves, we’re genetically predisposed to be oppressors (even though we’re led to believe that genetically speaking, we aren’t all that different from the other races).

If only those white students hadn’t oppressed them so much. They could have been doctors or supreme court judges.

It remains a mystery of course why Asian students (another non-white minority in America) don’t fail at education as much as other minorities. In fact, they often do better on average than white people. Why is it that white people oppress blacks, Hispanics, Arabs etc so much, but they don’t oppress Asians? Perhaps Asians are also born with some form of white privilege.

White Privilege

Jokes aside, this is just getting ridiculous. When will people realise that it’s all gone full circle now? The reality is, that White people are now the most discriminated against of the major races in the world? White people are the only race who aren’t allowed to have an exclusive homeland(s) (blacks, Asians, Hispanic, Arabs and Indians all do). White people MUST live in diverse countries. White people are the only race that have to change the laws and traditions of their countries to accommodate outsiders. White people are the only racial group that can be grouped together in negative terms, as the document I’m linked to is doing. It’s perfectly ok to act as if all white people are racist, but it wouldn’t be ok to say the same thing about all black or Hispanic people of course. After all, it would be racist to act as if all members of a racial group are the same, unless that group is white people.


The worry I have, is this. If people of other races are being conditioned to think that white people are evil, and that it’s ok to discriminate against us like this, what’s going to happen in a few decades if (as present trends suggest), our numbers are significantly lower, and their’s are much higher in what were once our countries? Will it spur on racial hatred towards us, and justify acts of genocide? After all, it has often been suggested that genocide begins with demonising the target group with words. That’s already happening to us. What happens next?

This man then proceeded to oppress Will Smith, Al Sharpton and Oprah Winfrey in some vague way for absolutely no reason.

AntiRacist Hitler Cartoon

This cartoon is worth watching as it perfectly symbolises what is going on in (what were once) predominately white countries.

Just to summarise the video:

-Hitler (who apparently survived WW2) comes back and claims that he was wrong for being a racist.

-He decides that now he will dedicate his life to being an anti-racist and spreading diversity.

-He visits Israel and decides that it “isn’t diverse enough”. There are too many Jews and not enough non-Jews

-He opens the borders to Israel and floods it with non-Jewish immigrants.

-He uses propaganda to encourage Jews to intermarry with non-Jews, rather than other Jews, thus producing non-Jewish children.

-Any Jews who complain about any of this are verbally attacked as being racists or Jewish supremacists. Their legitimate fears of becoming a minority in their own homeland is scoffed at.

-15 years later, the Jews are all but extinct (only one remains).

-Thus, Hitler finally succeeds in doing what the holocaust failed to do, the genocide of the Jews.

Now, replace the Jews with white people, Israel with white countries, and Hitler with anyone who pushes multiculturalism in those countries, and you’ve got the current situation facing the Western world.

The way I see it, I completely agree with the Jews in the video. It isn’t racist to want to preserve yourself and your race. It’s perfectly natural and something that should be encouraged. Caring about our own race and its future doesn’t mean that we hate people of other races. There’s no reason why small and reasonable amounts of outsiders (who are willing to integrate) can’t be brought in. It just means that we believe that our race has as much right to exist, and to do so in the countries that our ancestors built, as any other race has to exist in their own.

What’s the problem there? What is so evil about wanting to leave for our descendants, what our ancestors left for us. What is so evil about wanting our descendants to look like us? What is so evil about taking pride in what makes us unique as a people? I honestly can’t see it.

The best part of the video was when Hitler parodied this very real quote from Barbara Spectre. This is genocide, plain and simple.

“You might be Mike Brown if…”

It seems that the anger over the death of black teenager Michael Brown at the hands of white cop Darren Wilson still hasn’t cooled. A stand up comedian did a bit mocking the incident and managed to troll the fuck out of audience big time.

Personally, I found it pretty amusing to watch. Not so much because of the jokes (which were lame) but because of how annoyed the audience were getting. It was also pretty obvious that the comedian took a lot of pleasure in trolling the fuck out of the audience, just from looking at his mannerisms and listening to his tone of voice.

What’s particularly amusing is the fact that what he was saying is all true. I discussed the Ferguson riots a few months ago here, and all his jokes are about the things I discussed back then.

Unfortunately, in the world we live in now, facts are irrelevant. As far as the idiots in the crowd are concerned, Darren Wilson should have allowed Michael Brown to take his gun from him and possibly even use it against him, rather than using it to defend himself. All that matters is that Michael Brown was black (and therefore the innocent victim) and Darren Wilson was white (and therefore the evil oppressor). Anything that goes against that narrative, they don’t want to hear.

Left-Wing French street artist, experiences the joy of diversity first hand.

I always get a giddy thrill when something like this happens. Apparently, a famous street artist who goes by the name of COMBO, decided to paint a mural in a Parisian Muslim ghetto of the word “Coexist” with the letters C, X, and T, replaced with a Muslim half moon, Jewish star of David, and a Christian Cross respectively. Obviously, the point was to promote tolerance and peace between the different religious groups in France currently.

The mural in question.

As noble a goal as that may be, he didn’t take into consideration the fact that not everyone is as tolerant as he would like. For his efforts, he was severely beaten by four Muslim men.

From Conservative Headlines

A French street artist was severely beaten by four Muslim men for refusing to remove a “Coexist” painting. The artist, who goes by Combo, was left with bruises and a dislocated shoulder,

The painting includes a self-portrait of Combo dressed in Arab garb and the word Coexist spelled with a cross, half moon, and six pointed star. Combo had painted the image on the east side of Paris near an immigrant Ghetto.

Combo was adamant that the beating has not swayed his left-wing ideology.

On Facebook he wrote “I am deliberately being vague about the description of these cowards and where it all happened. To me, it doesn’t matter where they come from, what color their skin is, what their religion or their political ideas are. In this context, all they represent is stupidity and ignorance.”

Combo has received international media coverage in the past for street art in Paris, Hong Kong and at the former site of the Chernobyl nuclear disaster,

Reading the bolded part reveals a sad but obvious reality to me. In my last post I discussed how people are very attached to the beliefs they already hold and will do whatever it takes to justify those beliefs and discredit ideas that are counter to them. Reading this however, makes it clear to me that for some of these people, it is far worse than I ever suspected. This man was beaten severely by a group he was trying to promote tolerance towards simply for preaching his messages of tolerance. Yet it seems that no amount of reality can make lunatics like this reconsider their stupidity. There’s literally no hope of ever convincing people like this to think differently. His own daughter could go through a Rotherham like experience and he himself could be beheaded by ISIS, and in the last few seconds before his death, he’d still be preaching the joys of diversity.

Consider yourself “Culturally enriched”, COMBO.

Let this man serve as an example. Do you really want to be so brainwashed by your sense of smug superiority of being tolerant and understanding, that you’d be willing to go through this yourself? Personally, I’d think you were a fucking moron if you did.

“It doesn’t back up my biased preconceptions. Therefore it must be false”

I know what you mean :(
I know what you mean 😦

One thing I’ve noticed while writing this blog, both from discussing its content with people, and from reading comments on stories that I link to, is that people are very set in their way of thinking. It seems that no matter how much evidence there is to support something being true, people will automatically find a way to discredit it, in order to stick to their preconceived way of thinking. Usually the way they discredit it, doesn’t really discredit it at all. Rather, it just makes them feel in their own head that they have discredited it. This can be done through a number of techniques.

The process in a nutshell.
The process in a nutshell.

One technique that comes to mind is attacking the source of the information, rather than the content itself. Lets just say that Fox News was to endorse a Republican candidate for the US presidential election and gave a bunch of reasons as to why they felt he was a better candidate than the Democrat candidate. To a typical democratic voter, these reasons (no matter how true they may be) would be dismissed off hand because Fox has a reputation of being biased towards the Republicans. The fact that they all could be completely true  and verifiable is irrelevant. Conversely, if CNN (a network which has a reputation of being biased towards the Democrats) gave a bunch of reasons why the Democrat candidate was better, the Democrat voter would likely believe them, as they would back up the feelings they already had. If a Republican voter was in the same situation, their reaction would be reversed. People don’t go to the news to get new perspectives. They go to get confirmation of what they already believe.

Fox News as seen by the average Democrat voter.
CNN as seen by the average Republican voter.

Another example is the use of Strawman arguments. Lets just say for example, I was to discuss my fears about mass immigration and its effects on the future of Europe. I might suggest that we should bring in stricter immigration controls so that we only take in people that are in some way useful to us (for example, bringing in Indian IT specialists due to the high amount of IT jobs, and small amount of skilled IT professionals in Ireland). I would suggest that we shouldn’t be bringing in unskilled immigrants when we already have so many of our own unskilled workers who are unemployed. As far as I’m concerned, they are of no benefit to us, and we have no responsibility to them. I would suggest background checks and interviews with prospective immigrants to make sure they are compatible with our culture.

These people are great and are actually worth importing.

I would also suggest that we should be stricter with asylum seekers. People who come from a genuinely dangerous part of the world, and who (somehow) make it to Ireland before any other safe country? No problem, we’ll do our duty and take care of you. It would be inhumane not to. Economic migrants who come here for free everything and who bypass other EU countries in the process? They can go fuck themselves and should be on the first plane back to wherever the hell they came from. The strawman argument that people might make in that case is that I’m just an “Ignorant racist who hates those people just because they have a different skin colour”. Yet, if people actually really paid attention to what I’m saying, they would see that isn’t the case. I have absolutely no problem at all letting in people who have something to contribute and who are willing to integrate with us. I just think its utter insanity to have this overly tolerant attitude of letting anyone in regardless of how little they benefit the European people. I truly believe that doing so is suicidal. Just because other people would rather risk getting themselves or their descendants raped/killed/enslaved, or their culture destroyed just for the sake of feeling good about how tolerant and enlightened they are, doesn’t mean everyone else should. As far as I’m concerned, our way of life is something worth preserving and its more important to me than the feelings of a Muslim jihadist, a Somalian pirate, a gypsy beggar/thief, or any other person with compatibility issues.

“Boy, we sure need more of these vibrant and colourful geniuses, to enrich our boring culture” said nobody ever.

Logical fallacies are another thing that I’ve seen used in many an argument. I don’t feel like going in to too much detail, so here’s a list of what I’m talking about.


I will however highlight one that instantly comes to mind. The fallacy of the middle ground always being right. Some people have this idea that when there are two extreme views on the opposite sides of a discussion, that both are automatically wrong. Therefore, compromising is the right choice. Now imagine this scenario.

I’m sure we’re all familiar with the Rotherham scandal. 1400 young white English girls who were raped and trafficked by Pakistani men. Extreme view one would be “It was perfectly justified to rape those girls and they shouldn’t be punished”. Extreme view two would be “It was a horrific crime and those rapists and anyone who helped cover up their crimes should be severely punished”. The middle ground in that situation would be “It was ok to rape 700 girls but after that, it got a bit excessive. They should receive some punishment (not too harsh) for the extra 700”. Anyone with common sense would see that as being completely insane. Obviously extreme view two is the correct view in that situation. Thankfully enough, I’ve never seen anyone stupid enough to take a middle ground argument like that, but I’m just using it as a point to show that sometimes an extreme view can be the right one. Imagine if someone in politics was to claim “The far right calls me a communist and the far left calls me a fascist. I guess that means I’m in the middle, and doing something right then”. No, it doesn’t necessarily mean that at all. It could just mean that you are an idiot who gets everything wrong.

Seems fair.

Now to be honest, I can understand why it can be difficult to break away from our biased ways of thinking.  As I’ve said before (I think), I too used to think in more or less the same ways that I’m complaining about now. I used to read alternative views with scorn. It was only when I really took the time to think, analyse what I was reading without any biases and compare it to what I was actually experiencing and what my instincts were telling me, that I started to realise that the alternative views made sense. That’s why I would ask others to think critically about things in future and to not just fall back on what they were already engineered to believe. You might be shocked by what you realise.

Bonus post: Parade in Germany halted over terrorist threat.

So just a few minutes ago, I discussed the Islamic Extremist terrorist attack in Denmark that occurred on the 14th of February. Well, it seems I didn’t have to wait long to find another example of something worth talking about, so I had to follow up immediately just to reiterate the point I already made.

From The BBC

A carnival parade has been called off at short notice in Braunschweig, northern Germany, due to the threat of an Islamist attack, police said.

A “specific threat of an Islamist attack” was identified by state security sources, they said in a statement.

Police urged people planning to attend to stay at home.

The parade – a well-known regional attraction – was cancelled only 90 minutes before it was due to start.

“Many people arriving at the train station were already dressed up and very disappointed – but we didn’t want to take any risks,” police spokesman Thomas Geese was quoted as saying.

Braunschweig’s Carnival parade reportedly draws around 250,000 visitors each year. More than 4,000 participants in fancy dress march down a 6km (four-mile) route through the city.

The decision to call it off was taken by Mayor Ulrich Markurth and the parade’s marshal, Gerhard Baller.

“This is a sad day for our city,” Mayor Markurth told public broadcaster NDR.

“The assessment of the police however left us with no other choice.”

Large carnival parades and street parties are held every year in the week before Lent in Catholic regions of Germany.

The cancellation comes hours after Danish police shot dead a man they believe was behind two deadly attacks earlier in Copenhagen, though one German police chief was quoted as saying there was no link.

I already said everything that needed to be said in the previous post, so I have nothing really to add. I just had to post this because it proves just how serious the threat is getting. Only 24 hours after a terrorist attack in one European country, we see the threat of another attack occurring in another European country. A threat based on the same ideology, an ideology that simply isn’t compatible with Europe, yet continues to have the red carpet rolled out in welcome for. Yep, we live in the Twilight Zone

Actually, I think most Twilight Zone episodes were more plausible than the insanity we live in now.

but we didn’t want to take any risks,” police spokesman Thomas Geese was quoted as saying.


Denmark: Shooting at a forum on free speech.

Why indeed?

I know this will probably seem unbelievable but apparently there has been an act of terrorism committed by a member of Islam (the religion of peace) against freedom of speech in a European country. It boggles the mind to think that such an unlikely event could possibly occur. As we all know Islam, throughout its long history has gained a worldwide reputation for spreading tolerance, peace, and harmony throughout the world. We’ve seen clear evidence of this by how well predominately Muslim populations get on with non-Muslims such as Jews, Hindus, Christians, atheists etc, and their tireless efforts to promote equal rights for women and sexual minorities such as homosexuals.

Two gay men in a Muslim country. They’re obviously wearing blindfolds because they are about to receive a surprise gift from the two men behind them. The ropes are obviously to hold them steady so they don’t fall over by mistake.
These women are so lucky to have such cool ninja/ghost costumes. Oh and look at those pretty bracelets they’re wearing.

Yep, it’s truly shocking to think that something like this could happen, but apparently it did.

The Wall Street journal

A gunman killed one person and wounded three in Copenhagen on Saturday when he tried to force his way into an event discussing Islam and free speech in the wake of the January attack on theFrench satirical newspaper Charlie Hebdo.

Hours later, police reported another shooting, near a synagogue in downtown Copenhagen, though it wasn’t immediately clear whether the incident was linked to the earlier shooting. A civilian was killed and two police officers were shot in the arms and legs, the Associated Press reported. The gunman got away in both cases.

Subsequently, Copenhagen police said they killed a man who shot at them near a train station and were investigating whether he was connected to the two earlier incidents, according to the AP.

After the first shooting, police had said they were hunting a man who sprayed dozens of gunshots through the plate glass windows of the Krudttoenden cafe in central Copenhagen, where Swedish cartoonistLars Vilks and France’s ambassador to Denmark, François Zimeray, were attending the free-speech conference. Neither Mr. Vilks nor Mr. Zimeray was injured.

Authorities didn’t disclose the identity of the victim, saying only it was a male in his 40s who was present at the conference. One witness said the man may have been smoking outside the cafe when he was killed. Police said the motive for the shooting remained unclear, but that it was possible that Mr. Vilks was the target. The artist achieved notoriety nearly a decade ago for trying to exhibit caricatures of the Muslim Prophet Muhammad as a dog.

“Denmark has today been hit by a cynical act of violence,” said Danish Prime Minister Helle Thorning-Schmidt. “Everything suggests that the shooting in Osterbro was a political assassination and thus an act of terrorism.”

The initial attack unfolded Saturday afternoon around 4 p.m. local time.

Inna Shevchenko, the Ukrainian feminist activist, had just taken the floor and was talking about one of the Charlie Hebdo cartoonists killed in January when three or four gunshots went off.

For a second, the 50-strong audience didn’t pay much attention, thinking it was some firecrackers, Agnieszka Kolek, a Polish artist and free-speech activist who was present, said in a telephone interview.

But the gunfire intensified and bullets began piercing through the windows, spreading panic inside the cafe. Curtains prevented participants from seeing their assailant but “we heard him shout ‘Allahu akbar,’ ” Ms. Kolek said.

Mr. Vilks’s bodyguards worked to evacuate him while police officers guarding the conference began shooting back at the gunman, she said.

Like others, the French ambassador, Mr. Zimeray, said he crawled on the floor toward a backdoor emergency exit. He is “in complete shock,” French Foreign Ministry spokesman Roman Nadal said.

Ms. Kolek said police and other witnesses later told her how the gunman—minutes before the shooting—had been seen trying to enter the cafe through the back door.

“If he had made his way in, we would all have died,” she said.

One police officer and two bodyguards were wounded in the cafe attack, police said. The suspect then hijacked a car and abandoned it a five-minute drive north of the attack, police added. “We don’t know if it’s an act of terrorism, but we’re investigating it as an act of terrorism,” said Jorgen Skov, head of Copenhagen police.

While police had initially said they were seeking two suspects in the cafe shooting, interviews with witnesses on the scene later led them to believe there was a sole perpetrator, said police spokesman Steen Hansen. Police said the suspect was a tall, athletic man of between 25 to 30 years old, dressed in a dark parka.

The shootings are potentially the latest in a cycle of violence connected to depictions of the Prophet Muhammad, which many Muslims regard as blasphemy.

January’s terror spree in and around Paris began when two brothers burst into the offices of Charlie Hebdo, killing 12 people—including 10 staffers—in what one of the gunmen later said was retaliation for images the newspaper had earlier published of the Prophet Muhammad.

In response, Charlie Hebdo decided to print another caricature of the Prophet Muhammad in a “survivors” issue the following week. That in turn led to waves of anti-French protests that have swept parts of Africa, the Middle East and Asia.

While most of those protests were peaceful, some turned violent. In Niger, 10 people were killed, as rioters torched churches, wrecked bars and blocked several major roads during two days of demonstrations against Charlie Hebdo.

The Charlie Hebdo attacks circle back to Copenhagen. The controversial caricatures that the French newspaper first printed in 2006 were reprints of others that earlier had been printed by a Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten, in what the newspaper said was a defense of free speech.

Most mainstream newspapers in Denmark reprinted some of Charlie Hebdo’s most contentious drawings after the attack, but Jyllands-Posten didn’t, citing concerns for its employees’ safety.

The paper was the target of a foiled terrorist attack in 2010, when five men were arrested for planning to kill as many of the newspaper’s staff as possible. One of its most famous cartoonists, Kurt Westergaard, who penned a depiction of Muhammad wearing a bomb in his turban, was also targeted in a failed murder attempt at his home in 2010.

French President François Hollande deplored Saturday’s attack and expressed his solidarity with Denmark’s Ms. Thorning-Schmidt, his office said. French Interior Minister Bernard Cazeneuve will head to Copenhagen on Sunday morning, his office said.

Ms. Thorning-Schmidt said police were on full alert across the country and all resources had been deployed to catch the perpetrators. “We face some difficult days when our unity will be tested. But in Denmark, we will never bow to the violence,” she said.

At the Krudttoenden cafe, Ms. Kolek said she convinced participants to resume the conference for a moment after the deadly attack.

“I went on the stage and said: They are not just trying to kill us, they want to shut down freedom of speech.”

We really are pathetic weaklings in The West.

This sort of thing is beginning to happen more and more frequently and yet we still refuse to address the obvious problem. The way I see it, Europe has more than done their part for the Muslims we’ve allowed in. I’ve seen from personal experience that plenty of them have accepted the olive branch we’ve extended and are willing to integrate and respect our laws and customs. These people (some of whom I count among my friends) are a welcome addition to our countries and deserve the opportunities to become valued members of our societies.

At the same time, I’m not going to ignore the obvious reality that not all of them are like that. There is a very large portion of these people who simply aren’t compatible with our societies. In a sane and functional society, we would have strict criteria for allowing outsiders in (interviews, background checks etc). I’m confident that the good ones who are capable of integrating would still get through while those who have obvious compatibility issues would not. Even if some managed to slip through, if we were to be stricter with the terms of staying (deporting those who fail to find work within a certain time-frame, who are involved in criminal activity, or who preach hatred against us), we could at least minimise the chances of more incidents like this occurring.

What’s it going to take to wake people up to the reality of what’s going on? Will it take an open declaration of war against us within our own borders? Even then, will people wake up in time? Or are we doomed to eventually live under an oppressive Saudi-like regime, where white European women and girls are raped in the streets for not dressing modestly enough (and then receive 50 or 60 lashes as punishment for getting raped), gay people are executed for their sexual preferences, and all kinds of other human rights abuses occur?

The fact is, our European societies are objectively superior to a society like the one I’m describing. We don’t need to justify this superiority to our “guests”. It should be obvious to them if they choose to come here. If they don’t see it when they come here and they wish to change it to be more like the society they left, then they shouldn’t be here and should instead return to wherever they came from. When is enough enough, and when will we finally expel those who are incompatible with our society? We still have time now, but the clock is ticking.

The Dresden bombing-70 years ago today.

A few weeks ago we had the 70th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz.  In a few short months, we’ll have the 70th anniversary of the end of the European Theatre of WW2. However, as important as it is to remember these events, there’s another important one that doesn’t get the attention it deserves, one which happened 70 years ago today.

Dresden before the bombing.

In case it isn’t obvious from looking at the timeline of events in the latter part of the war:

The Battle of Stalingrad ended with a German defeat in February 1943

The Battle of Kursk ended with a German defeat in August of 1943

D-Day (The Normandy landings) occurred in June 1944.

Auschwitz was liberated by the Soviet Union in January 1945

The Battle of the Bulge ended with a German defeat in January of 1945

Essentially, Germany had been getting crushed on both the Eastern and Western fronts for 2 years by February 1945. Allies had entered German territory on both fronts and their defeat was inevitable. All the allies had to do was keep the pressure on and they were always guaranteed victory just from their sheer numbers and greater amount of resources they had over the Germans. However, they instead chose to commit an act every bit as evil as anything the Nazis themselves have been accused of, an act that was in all honesty, completely unnecessary.

Much has been written about the crimes of the Third Reich and people rightly condemn those actions as being gravely immoral. However, it is simply a reality that history is written by the victors. People tend to have this black and white view of WW2 that the Axis powers were evil and the allies were a force for good. This is completely ridiculous of course just from the fact that the Soviet Union (a member of the allies) was ruled by Stalin (one of the most brutal tyrants in history) alone. However, it wasn’t just the Soviet Union that committed some nasty acts on the allied side. The Dresden bombing is one that the allies would like us to forget.

Bodies of Dresden victims piled up. Every bit as horrific as the images we’ve all seen from the concentration camps.
A family who were killed together in the bombing.
People working in the aftermath of the bombing to clear away rubble and (hopefully) find survivors. Instead what they usually found…
…were horrific sights like this. Reality is truly more terrifying than fiction can ever hope to be.

It’s important to note that Dresden was not some great industrial/military complex for the Third Reich. That’s not to say it had no great industry at all (there was the famous Albertstadt, which incidentally was not targetted during the bombings). For the most part though, Dresden was just a typical highly populated city. Bombing it was utterly pointless in the grand scheme of things. It didn’t help end the war any quicker (which at that point was inevitable anyway). All it did was lead to unnecessary destruction and loss of innocent civilian lives.

While we continue to mourn the deaths of so many innocent people during the second world war, let us also remember all of those innocent civilians who died for absolutely no reason during the Dresden bombings. They’re just as deserving as any other victims of the war.

Committing a hate crime…against yourself?

What kind of a monster would do this? I'm guessing it must have been a white guy with a shaved head and some doc martens. Better bring in some draconian hate crime laws.
What kind of a monster would do this? I’m guessing it must have been a white guy with a shaved head and some doc martens. Better bring in some draconian hate crime laws.

In a fairly recent post, I mentioned that I’m starting to find myself less able to take claims of Anti-Semitism seriously. Well I’m just after hearing about a (to be quite honest) hilarious French news story that has only served to further that feeling.

From Metro News France

The original story was in French (obviously) so I had to put it into Google Translate. Left is the original French article and right is the English translation. click to enlarge.
The original story was in French (obviously) so I had to put it into Google Translate. Left is the original French article and right is the English translation. click to enlarge.

The police had strong suspicions that have a priori confirmed. Monday around 16 pm, a man was caught trying to write the word “Jew” on parked vehicles avenue du General-Clavery avenue Dode de la Brunerie in the 16th district. Twenty cars were tagged. “The police handcuffed him, and they have gotten caught me I said, it’s crazy for doing this ‘An official said,..’ No, and in addition it claims his gesture ‘, “said one witness MetroNews.

The suspect was taken into custody in stride. This man was born in April 1941 and named Pierre B. was already known to police, not as a suspect but as a victim. Last summer, he would indeed twice visited the police station of the 16th district to denounce anti-Semitic remarks.

In July, Peter and his wife Suzanne B., who is Jewish, would have been to the police to report the presence of swastikas on their mailboxes, their bearing and on the door of their dwelling in a building owned by the property management of the City of Paris (RIVP) and located rue Abel Ferry (16th). In August, they would have complained to denounce the same facts.

Several stays in HP

Indeed, comparing the scriptures, investigators found that the complainant was eerily similar to that found on the walls and the mailbox of the building including. “Another coincidence, B. has indicated that the couple had left a moment of its housing to protect themselves. During this period, there was no inscription, notes the source close to the case. The police were convinced that c ‘was him, but lacked proof. With this the act, they could not be better served. “

It was unclear Monday night the wife of Pierre B. was or was not an accomplice to her husband. “The couple wanted to change accommodation. We do not know why because he lived for two in 59m2. He had made two requests RIVP that have been denied. It was perhaps a strategy to succeed “says the source, adding that the husband as his wife would have done several stays in psychiatric hospitals.

Tuesday afternoon, Pierre B. was still in custody. All residents, they were shocked. They too had heard of this desire of the couple to change accommodation. “From there to attack the Jews, moreover when we know that the wife of the suspect is Jewish, it’s surreal,” concludes a neighbor.

The suspect’s custody was extended Tuesday to 17 hours. According to our information, the individual was to be presented to a psychologist in the evening.

Once again we see life imitating politically incorrect art.
Once again we see life imitating politically incorrect art.

Now in all seriousness, I do genuinely believe that there have been actual incidents of Anti-Semitic violence going on recently, so I probably shouldn’t be making light of this. However, I think this incident needs to be highlighted and condemned. Clearly this man was trying to portray himself as some kind of victim in order to get something or cause something (what that something is, I really have no idea). However, by faking incidents like this it draws police and political attention towards non-existent issues when there are plenty of other real problems that need addressing. It also could potentially be used as a catalyst for more draconian thought and speech crime legislation (the last thing we need in a supposedly free society). Thirdly, it makes a mockery of real victims of Anti-Semitic/ Racist/ other hate crimes. For that reason, I hope this man is made to pay for what he’s done as an example for others who would try and pull such tricks.