…All across the town, all across the night
Everybody’s driving with full headlights
Black or white turn it on, face the new religion…
…All across the town, all across the night
Everybody’s driving with full headlights
Black or white turn it on, face the new religion…
W E S U P P O R T t h e P O L I S H R E S I S T A N C E
They’ve done it before May they do it again…Stand Up to muslim Invasion.
Great Post S.U. It’s Such A Great News That Other Might Follow.. anyway I Hope So !!!
Europe has apparently forgotten its history. Islam has not changed in hundreds of years, only the zeitgeist of Europeans (mostly neo-Marxists/Socialists) towards it has.
Please recall The Battle of Vienna, September 11, 1683:
“More than 300 years ago, Europe lived in fear of the great Islamic Caliphate, the invincible Ottoman Empire, that ruled a vast portion of the world and constantly threatened the heartland of Europe with attack, domination, and destruction.
In 1683, in March of that year, yet another huge Islamic army advanced upon the west, 140,000 strong, led by the Turk Grand Vizier Kara Mustapha. The path he chose took him toward the great fortress of Vienna, which he reached on July 14 and promptly laid siege to. Vienna was well prepared to withstand a siege…
View original post 235 more words
Mafia bosses have ‘declared war’ against migrants on the holiday paradise of Sicily as one thousand new arrivals pour on to the island every week.
The feared Cosa Nostra are desperate to maintain supremacy after African crime gangs arrived with the migrants – and they are engaged in a deadly turf war.
An innocent Gambian man was shot through the head by an assassin in broad daylight sparking fears of a wider bloodbath.
Mayor Leoluca Orlando told MailOnline: ‘Palermo is no longer an Italian town. It is no longer European. You can walk in the city and feel like you’re in Istanbul or Beirut.’
Immigration to Italy soared by 90 per cent in the first three months of the year. The migrant population in Ballaró, the part of Palermo where the shooting took place, has risen from approximately five to 25 per cent since the migrant crisis began.
There is widespread concern in Italy that the number of new migrants exceeds the country’s capacity to cope – and the mafia is its biggest and most dangerous critic.
The mayor of Palermo, Leoluca Orlando said: ‘In the past, when the Mafia was more powerful, it prevented any immigrants from entering the city. Until I was 30 years old, I never saw an African or Asian in Palermo…
12 may 2016
BREXIT THE MOVIE is a feature-length documentary film to inspire as many people as possible to vote to LEAVE the EU in the June 23rd referendum.
BREXIT THE MOVIE spells out the danger of staying part of the EU. Is it safe to give a remote government beyond our control the power to make laws? Is it safe to tie ourselves to countries which are close to financial ruin, drifting towards scary political extremism, and suffering long-term, self-inflicted economic decline?
BREXIT THE MOVIE shows a side of the EU they don’t want us to see: the sprawling self-serving bureaucracy, the political cynicism, the lack of accountability, the perks, the waste, the cronyism, the corruption.
BREXIT THE MOVIE cuts through the patronizing intellectualism of the noble, higher goals of ‘Project Europe’, to reveal the self-interestedness of the political-bureaucratic class which runs and benefits from the EU.
BREXIT THE MOVIE highlights the danger of becoming a prisoner in an insular, backward-looking Fortress Europe. And it explores the exciting opportunities that open up to us when we look beyond the narrow confines of the EU.
BREXIT THE MOVIE looks to the future, arguing forcefully and persuasively that it is safer and wiser to live in a country which is free, independent, self-governing, confident and global.
For more information, visit http://www.brexitthemovie.com
17 may 2016
London has fallen because of White Flight.
620 000 white Britons have left London in 2001-2011, which is one of the reasons why Sadiq Khan could be elected as the first Muslim mayor of British capital.
Londoner’s choose unity over division:
Numbers od votes for every candidate:
Exodus of white Britons, 620 000 left London in a decade:
White Britons will be minority in UK by 2066:
Study by Migration Observatory:
Where Muslims live exactly in UK:
Moroccan-born mayor of Rotherdam tell Muslims to fuck off:
Italian politician – Jackass:
Bristol bans celebration of St. George’s day:
May Our Heritage Live as long there is a man on earth
Uploaded on Dec 1, 2010
The theft of a country.
Scandalous constitution passed
A constitution for a non-existent people
Sweden tops European rape league
Muslim rape wave in Sweden
Amnesty International: Immigrants enjoy freedom and impunity to rape Swedish girls
Victims of rape – Domestic refugee in Sweden
Immigrants behind most cases of aggravated sexual assault in Oslo, Norway
Muslim rape epidemic in Oslo, Norway
Immigrant rape epidemic in Sweden and Norway
The crisis in Swedish media
Why Iraqi Christians are running scared – in Sweden
Easy targets? Sweden deporting Iraqi asylum seekers: Just not Muslims
Christians attacked again in Iraq as gunmen kill two
Anti-Semitism on the rise in Sweden
Jews leave Swedish city after sharp rise in anti-Semitic hate crimes
Malmo mayor concedes ignorance on Jew attacks
Jew hatred in Sweden and…
View original post 100 more words
Thu, May 5, 2016
Donald Trump is the all-but-declared Republican presidential nominee and Hillary Clinton on the cusp of winning the Democratic nomination. It is time for voters to begin weighing the national security consequences of each candidate’s potential administration.
You can read our full profiles of the candidates’ positions related to Islamist extremism by clicking here for Donald Trump and here for Hillary Clinton. Below is a summary of six policy areas where they differ:
Defining the Threat
Trump defines the enemy as “radical Islam.” Clinton defines it variably as “jihadism,” “radical Jihadism” “Islamists who are jihadists.”
Defeating the Ideology
Trump said in his foreign policy speech that “containing the spread of radical Islam must be a major foreign policy goal of the United States.” His policy proposals include a vague commitment to use the U.S. military more aggressively, deterring terrorists by killing their families, closing down the most radical mosques and banning Muslim immigration into the U.S. until the homeland is secure and an effective vetting process is established.
Trump is adamantly opposed to democracy-promotion and overthrowing regimes; instead, he favors alliances with authoritarian rulers who cooperate on counter-terrorism. He says, “our goal must be to defeat terrorists and promote stability, not radical change.”
He criticizes Clinton for supporting the overthrow of Saddam Hussein in Iraq, Muammar Gaddafi in Libya, Hosni Mubarak in Egypt and Bashar Assad in Syria. However, a reputable senior foreign policy adviser to Trump, Dr. Walid Phares, is an expert on combating the Islamist ideology and believes in promoting human rights and civil society.
Clinton’s national security platform calls for “defeating ISIS and global terrorism and the ideologies that drive it.” Her strategy emphasizes civil society and a foreign policy that promotes freedom, women’s rights, free markets, democracy and human rights, all if which she believes are necessary in order to “empower moderates and marginalize extremists.”
Clinton says the U.S. needs an “overarching strategy” to defeat the ideology like the U.S. used to win the Cold War. Clinton wants the State Department to better “tell our story” overseas by confronting anti-American propaganda via public engagement.
Clinton’s speech on foreign policy and ISIS also includes confronting state sponsors of extremism like Qatar and Saudi Arabia and identifying “the specific neighborhoods and villages, the prisons and schools, where recruitment happens in clusters, like the neighborhood in Brussels where the Paris attacks were planned.”
ISIS, Iraq and Syria
Trump says he will appoint effective generals who will quickly crush the Islamic State. He believes the U.S. has “no choice” but to send 20-30,000 troops to fight the Islamic State. He would also attack the families of Islamic State members, bomb oil sites held by the Islamic State and then seize them for U.S. companies to rebuild and own.
He would not support Syrian rebels against the Iran-backed Assad regime; Trump supported Russia’s military intervention in Syria to save the dictatorship. Trump believes he can be a partner with Russian President Putin. He says he would establish safe-zones in Syria to stop the flow of refugees, but neighboring Arab countries like Saudi Arabia would have to pay for it.
Clinton’s speech on ISIS emphasized her opposition to a large ground campaign by U.S. forces, but she does support President Obama’s deployment of about 5,000 troops to Iraq with a limited role. She disagreed with President Obama when she urged U.S. support for Syrian rebels at the beginning of the civil war in order to prevent Islamist extremists from gaining ground.
Clinton also supported using the U.S. Air Force to implement a no-fly zone in Syria and to create safe zones for refugees. Clinton remains committed to ending the civil war in Syria by forcing Assad to resign from power as part of a political transition.
In Iraq, she favors direct U.S. military assistance to Sunni tribes and Kurdish forces fighting ISIS and expanding the U.S. forces’ role to include embedding personnel in local Iraqi units and assisting with airstrikes.
Trump would terminate the nuclear deal with Iran immediately and pledged to “dismantle” Iran’s global terrorism network in his speech about Israel and the Middle East. He supports placing severe sanctions on Iran to pressure them into a deal that dismantles their nuclear program and ends their support for terrorism.
Clinton supports the nuclear deal with reservations. She has released a 5-point plan to respond to the deal’s negative consequences, Iran’s sponsorship of terrorism and human rights abuses of the Iranian regime. She supports expanding sanctions on Iran for these actions.
Neither candidate has explicitly endorsed overthrowing the Iranian regime, but Clinton took a step in that direction in 2010 when she said she hopes there will be “some effort inside Iran, by responsible civil and religious leaders, to take hold of the apparatus of the state.” She regrets that she and the Obama Administration did not more forcefully support the 2009 Green Revolution and promises “that won’t happen again.”
Neither candidate has endorsed the Muslim Brotherhood Terrorist Designation Act and concerns have been raised about both candidates’ advisers.
One of Clinton’s closest aides, Huma Abedin, was the assistant-editor of an Islamist journal with her family members, some of whom have Muslim Brotherhood links. She has not directly said anything extremist and is married to a pro-Israel Jew. Critics point out that although she has a security clearance, her familial ties may influence her advice to Clinton.
In her book, Clinton seems to understand that the Brotherhood is hostile to the U.S., deceptive and closely linked to Hamas. However, she seems to accept Islamist political parties like the Brotherhood as potential democratic partners. Her State Dept. operation in Egypt gave election training to Brotherhood members and a Clinton Foundation member belonged to the Brotherhood.
One of Trump’s top campaign aides, Paul Manafort, was a lobbyist for Saudi Arabia in the 1980s and a lobbyist for a Pakistani ISI intelligence front in the U.S. that was also closely linked to the Muslim Brotherhood.
Trump has never said anything kind about the Muslim Brotherhood and wanted the U.S. to help keep Egyptian President Mubarak in power.
Posted on May 2, 2016
The story of England’s heroic King Arthur and his arch enemy Mordred has been a popular tale since the medieval era. It has been told and retold and been the subject of paintings and films as well as a succession of books. There are many differences between the narratives. For instance, sometimes Mordred is depicted as Arthur’s illegitimate son from his half-sister, or he might be portrayed as the son of the King of the Orkneys. He is also sometimes described as a member of King Arthur’s court who rebelled against him. However, the conflict between these two warriors and Mordred’s death in battle with Arthur are subjects of general agreement.
From the British Isles the legend of Arthur was carried to the European Continent and later to other English speaking countries around the world. The popularity of the first name Arthur in so many countries can also be traced to the fame of this legendary hero monarch. Today it is going to be hard to find someone educated in one of these lands who has not heard of King Arthur and is also able to name a few other of the characters and places featured. Although parts of the story are so well-known, its history and significance are not so widely appreciated.
The Origins of the Legend
Historians continue to speculate if King Arthur, Mordred and the other scenes and players in the legend have any historical basis. For the most part the story is associated with fifth or sixth century Wales. If a prototype for Arthur did exist he might have been a Celtic chieftain rallying his forces to fight off the Saxon invaders. References have been found to figures that might have been the model for King Arthur in some of the scare writings that survive from the Saxon period in British history, but none of the associations made are conclusive. Two Medieval writers share the responsibility for publicising the tale and incorporating in it many of the elements familiar to us today.
In 1138 Geoffrey of Monmouth wrote a history of the Kings of Britain. Many allege that he drew more on his imagination than on any older records that had come to his notice. Others claim that some of what he wrote corresponds with information in earlier documents that have now come to light. Whatever the authenticity of his facts, Geoffrey introduced his readers to a King Arthur, Queen Guinevere, Merlin the Wizard and of course, King Arthur’s arch enemy Mordred. In this version of the tale King Arthur goes to fight against the Roman Empire in Gaul (France of today). The evil Mordred takes advantage of the opportunity to usurp Arthur’s throne and take Queen Guinevere as his wife. The news reached King Arthur on campaign. He returns to his kingdom and fights a fierce battle with Mordred at a place called Camlann, Mordred is killed but Arthur is mortally wounded.
In the late medieval period Thomas Malory published a revised and comprehensive version of the Arthur stories, entitled “The Death of Arthur” (Le Morte d’Arthur). The publication of this work coincided with the introduction of the printing press. Malory’s work became one of the first books printed in England and standardised many aspects of the Arthur legend, for example, the idea of Arthur and his knights sitting at the Round Table dates from this publication. The bitter enmity between Arthur and Mordred continues to form a key part of the story but in a key change from Geoffrey of Monmouth’s narrative Queen Guinevere remain loyal to King Arthur.
Why have these tales survived the years?
The fact that the reader of this article is likely to be familiar with tales of Arthur and Mordred is a testimony to their enduring power. Yet they are more than simple stories. The Arthur tales have contributed culturally to the shaping of Britain’s identity. Over all these years they continue to serve a useful purpose. People are attracted by the idea that there was once an age when chivalrous knights rode about the British countryside fighting treacherous enemies like Mordred, or even supernatural dragons and other monsters. During World War Two, tales of Arthur’s bravery against the country’s enemies provided a rallying point for resistance to German aggression. Today the interest is probably largely of an escapist nature. Regardless of whether or not there is a basis in history, it seems that tales of Arthur and Mordred still serve a purpose in our hi-tech age.
By: Jane Richardson in newhistorian.com
#A stunning insight into the ISIS-Turkey oil trade. #Documents shedding light on the ISIS oil trade, jihadist passports with Turkish entry stamps, an instruction booklet – printed in Turkey – on how to wage war against the Syrian government, and more. #The areas surrounding Shaddadi has large natural oil reserves, and until recently, ISIS militants profited from it, forcing members of the local population to work in their oil industry. #Piles of detailed invoices used by ISIS to calculate daily revenues from selling oil were found on the site. #Local residents attested that intermediaries from Raqqa and Aleppo arrived to pick up the oil and often mentioned Turkey, while a captured ISIS recruit admitted on camera that the terrorist group sells oil to Turkey. #He and another foreign fighter from Saudi Arabia also revealed that it had been easy to cross the Turkish border.
National Intelligence Director Clapper: Islamic State Exploiting Migrant Crisis In Europe ByPamela Geller on April 28, 2016
What was his first clue? They’ve been exploiting it for months. Back in February 2015, the Islamic State vowed to flood Europe with 500,000 refugees. Only now he is waking up to the crisis? And what is he doing about it? Has he persuaded Obama not to bring the “refugees” here in massive numbers? Of course not. And Obama is plotting with the UN to bring a quarter of a million of these soldiers to the USA. “National Intelligence Director Clapper: Islamic State Exploiting Migrant Crisis In Europe,” by Charlie Spiering, Breitbart, April 25, 2016:
National Intelligence Director James Clapper says Islamic State training camps currently exist in European countries and that terrorists are exploiting the migrant crisis in those countries to infiltrate the population. Clapper was asked by a reporter if the Islamic State had clandestine cells currently operating in countries including Germany and Italy. “Yes they do,” he said, citing heightened coordination intelligence community of terrorists operation in Europe. “We continue to see evidence on the part of ISIL in the countries you name.” Clapper made his remarks during a breakfast meeting with reporters in Washington D.C. hosted by the Christian Science Monitor. During the conversation, he shared what the intelligence community has learned about ISIS. “We’ve learned that they are fanatic, very operational security conscious their very mindful of that,” he said. “They have taken advantage to some extent the migrant crisis in Europe. Something which the nations, I think, have a growing awareness of.”… “On the one hand, the European Union incentives and drives to promote openness and free movement of people and goods, privacy, which is in some ways is in conflict with the responsibilities of each country as a nation state to protect the security of it’s borders of it’s people,” Clapper said.
“National Intelligence Director Clapper: Islamic State Exploiting Migrant Crisis In Europe
Muslim Immigration Pt.37 | Videos 2016-04-30
Posted on April 23, 2016
Saint George is traditionally considered the patron saint of England. His legendary victory over the dragon is seen as symbolic of the power of the English people to subdue their powerful enemies. His red cross on a white background is the basis of the British Union Jack flag. In earlier years it was carried into battle as a standard. The image of George the dragon slayer has been used since the 1800s on English gold coins. However, none of the stories connected with this figure describe him as coming from the British Isles. The story reached England in the medieval period – the time of the Crusades. People were attracted to this tale of bravery and chivalry. In the course of time its foreign origins were forgotten and it began to be seen as an English tradition. It is not a coincidence that George has been the second most popular name given to English monarchs.
The George and the Dragon story
There are several versions of this story. Usually it is set in North Africa. One story recounts how the brave knight arrived in Libya after a very long and arduous trip by land and sea. Here he met a hermit who told him about a terrifying dragon that was terrifying the people of Libya. The dragon had an unpleasant habit of devouring young maidens. The problem the country faced was that all the young maidens had been eaten with the sole exception of the king’s daughter. It was her turn to be the dragon’s lunch tomorrow. The King of Egypt was offering his daughter in marriage to any brave knight willing to rid the land of this dragon.
This was exactly the kind of challenge George was searching for. He galloped off the valley where the beast lived just in time to see the princess of Egypt being led to this grisly death. He comforted her with the news that he was off to kill the dragon and she need not fear. True to his words he rode on to the cave where the dragon lived. The huge beast with a fifty foot long tail and a huge head was understandably furious at this intrusion on its territory. It came out of its cave roaring like thunder. George charged at the dragon and speared it but its scales were so thick his spear broke. George was dismounted but found refuge under a magical tree conveniently on hand for some emergencies. The tree’s magical powers shielded him against the dragon’s poison. When he had recovered from the failure of the first attack he went after the dragon again with his sword. The dragon doused him in poison and his armour fell apart. Everything was almost lost but George noticed just in time that there were no scales under the wings of the beast. He struck it under its wings with his sword and at last succeeded in dispatching the monster.
On the most basic level George and the dragon is an attractive fairy story. We learn about the triumph of good over evil in a manner that leaves no room for alternative interpretations. On a deeper level it is easy to detect in the persona of the dragon a symbolic representation of our fears of the unknown, or situations we perceive as very threatening. The dragon can be seen as almost insurmountable obstacle or approaching terror threatening our very existence. The conquest of the dragon shows that we have the abilities to overcome our most dreaded enemies with sufficient determination and courage. These ideas appeal to individuals. They also clearly held appeal for an island nation fearing invasion from its more powerful Continental neighbours.
If you want to connect the dragon slaying with some episode in early history, there is no evidence that Saint George is modelled on a person whom we know lived in a certain historical period. However, it is interesting to note that many cultures have stories featuring dragons. Some scholars suggest that one explanation for this maybe the survival of dinosaurs into a much later period than we used to believe. The theory has always been that dinosaurs died out before man came on the scene. These scholars postulate that early man might have seen dinosaurs and conceivably needed to defend himself against them. If this really was the case there may have been a real prototype for Saint George – an ancient warrior who fought and killed one of these prehistoric monsters. His exploits would have been talked and sung about for generations and so this story may have a germ of truth in its origins. More prosaically the stories of dragons may have been sparked by the discovery of dinosaur skeletons, which would certainly have the power to terrify a superstitious and uneducated farmer. In truth, we will probably never know.
By: Zoran Krdzic in newhistorian.com
It’s A Question of Survival
View original post 38 more words
The overwhelming majority of the refugees who have been admitted are Muslim. Yet the real victims — the real refugees in Syria — are largely Christian. Obama has a clear preference for the Muslim refugees.
There is no way to vet these refugees. Records in many cases don’t exist — and ISIS doesn’t recruit people with criminal records.
ISIS has threatened to flood Europe with 500,000 refugees. To bring these people in is civilizational suicide.
Last February, the Islamic State boasted it would soon flood Europe with as many as 500,000 refugees. And the Lebanese Education Minister recently said that there were 20,000 jihadis among the refugees in camps in his country. 80% of migrants who have recently come to Europe claiming to be fleeing the war in Syria aren’t really from Syria at all.
The destiny of the Hungarians has become intertwined with that of Europe’s nations and has grown to be so much a part of the union that today not a single people — including the Hungarian people — can be free if Europe is not free.
And today Europe is as fragile, weak and sickly as “a flower being eaten away by a hidden worm.” Today, 168 years after the great Wars of Independence of the European peoples, Europe, our common home is not free!
Ladies and Gentlemen, Europe is not free. Because freedom begins with speaking the truth.
Today in Europe it is forbidden to speak the truth.
Even if it is made of silk, a muzzle is a muzzle.
It is forbidden to say that those arriving are not refugees, but that Europe is threatened by migration.
It is forbidden to say that tens of millions are ready to set out in our direction.
It is forbidden to say that immigration brings crime and terror to our countries.
It is forbidden to point out that the masses arriving from other civilizationsendanger our way of life, our culture, our customs and our Christian traditions.
It is forbidden to point out that those who arrived earlier have already built up their own new, separate world for themselves, with its own laws and ideals, which is forcing apart the thousand-year-old structure of Europe.
It is forbidden to point out that this is not an accidental and unintentional chain of consequences, but a preplanned and orchestrated operation; a mass of people directed towards us.
It is forbidden to say that in Brussels they are concocting schemes to transport foreigners here as quickly as possible and to settle them here among us.
It is forbidden to point out that the purpose of settling people here is to reshape the religious and cultural landscape of Europe, and to reengineer its ethnic foundations — thereby eliminating the last barrier to internationalism: the nation-states.
It is forbidden to say that Brussels is now stealthily devouring more and more slices of our national sovereignty, and that in Brussels many are now making a plan for a United States of Europe — for which no one has ever given authorisation.
Ladies and Gentlemen,Today’s enemies of freedom are cut from a different cloth than the royal and imperial rulers of old, or those who ran the Soviet system; they use a different set of tools to force us into submission.
Today they do not imprison us, they do not transport us to concentration camps, and they do not send in tanks to occupy countries loyal to freedom.
Today the international media’s artillery bombardments, denunciations, threats and blackmail are enough — or rather, have been enough so far.
The peoples of Europe are slowly awakening, they are regrouping, and will soon regain ground.
Europe’s beams that rest on the suppression of truth are creaking and cracking.
The peoples of Europe may have finally understood that their future is at stake:
Now not only are their prosperity, cosy lives, jobs at stake, but our very security and the peaceful order of our lives are menaced as well.
At last, the peoples of Europe, who have been slumbering in abundance and prosperity, have understood that the principles of life that Europe has been built on are in mortal danger.
Europe is the community of Christian, free, and independent nations; equality of men and women; fair competition and solidarity; pride and humility; justice and mercy.
This time the danger is not attacking us the way wars and natural disasters do, suddenly pulling the rug from under our feet.
Mass migration is a slow stream of water persistently eroding the shores.
It is masquerading as a humanitarian cause, but its true nature is the occupation of territory.
And what is gaining territory for them is losing territory for us.
Flocks of obsessed human rights defenders feel the overwhelming urge to reprimand us and to make allegations against us.
Allegedly we are hostile xenophobes, but the truth is that the history of our nation is also one of inclusion. and the history of intertwining of cultures.
Those who have sought to come here as new family members, as allies, or as displaced persons fearing for their lives have been let in to make a new home for themselves.
But those who have come here with the intention of changing our country, shaping our nation in their own image, those who have come with violence and against our will — have always been met with resistance.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
At first, they talk about only a few hundred, a thousand or two thousand relocated people.
But not a single responsible European leader would dare to swear under oath that this couple of thousand will not eventually increase to tens or hundreds of thousands.
If we want to halt this mass migration, first we must curb Brussels.
The main danger to Europe’s future does not come from those who want to come here, but from Brussels’ fanatical internationalism.
We should not allow Brussels to place itself above the law.
We shall not allow it to force upon us the bitter fruit of its cosmopolitan immigration policy.
We shall not import to Hungary crime, terrorism, homophobia and synagogue-burning anti-Semitism.
There shall be no urban districts beyond the reach of the law, there shall be no mass disorder.
No immigrant riots here, and there shall be no gangs hunting down our women and daughters.
We shall not allow others to tell us whom we can let into our home and country, whom we will live alongside, and with whom we will share our country.
We know how these things go. First we allow them to tell us whom we must take in, then they force us to serve foreigners in our own country.
In the end we find ourselves being told to pack up and leave our own land.
Therefore we reject the forced resettlement scheme, and we shall tolerate neither blackmail, nor threats.
The time has come to ring the warning bell. The time has come for opposition and resistance.
The time has come to gather allies to us. The time has come to raise the flag of proud nations.
The time has come to prevent the destruction of Europe, and to save the future of Europe.
To this end, regardless of party affiliation, we call on every citizen of Hungary to unite, and we call on every European nation to unite.
The leaders and citizens of Europe must no longer live in two separate worlds. We must restore the unity of Europe. We the peoples of Europe cannot be free individually if we are not free together.
If we unite our forces, we shall succeed; if we pull in different directions, we shall fail.
Together we are strength, disunited we are weakness. Either together, or not at all — today this is the law.
Hungarians, In 1848 it was written in the book of fate that nothing could be done against the Habsburg Empire. If we had then resigned ourselves to that outcome, our fate would have been sealed, and the German sea would have swallowed up the Hungarians.
In 1956 it was written in the book of fate that we were to remain an occupied and sovietised country, until patriotism was extinguished in the very last Hungarian.
If then we had resigned ourselves to that outcome, our fate would have been sealed, and the Soviet sea would have swallowed up the Hungarians.
Today it is written in the book of fate that hidden, faceless world powers will eliminate everything that is unique, autonomous, age-old and national.
They will blend cultures, religions and populations, until our many-faceted and proud Europe will finally become bloodless and docile.
And if we resign ourselves to this outcome, our fate will be sealed, and we will be swallowed up in the enormous belly of the United States of Europe.
The task which awaits the Hungarian people, the nations of Central Europe and the other European nations which have not yet lost all common sense is to defeat, rewrite and transform the fate intended for us.
We Hungarians and Poles know how to do this. We have been taught that one can only look danger in the face if one is brave enough.
We must therefore drag the ancient virtue of courage out from under the silt of oblivion.
First of all we must put steel in our spines, and we must answer clearly, with a voice loud enough to be heard far and wide, the foremost, the single most important question determining our fate:
The question upon which the future of Europe stands or falls is this:
“Shall we be slaves or men set free — That is the question, answer me!”
Go for it Hungary, go for it Hungarians!
With three jihadis dead and two jihadis jailed in attempts to kill me since my free speech event in Garland, Texas last May, the SPLC’s designation of me as an “Islamophobe” and “hatemonger” is just encouraging more jihadis to come after me — and the other women this Communist hate group names. At a time when jihad killers are moving actively against those whom they hate in the U.S., this is a quite literal hit list. If any of the people named on this list are attacked or killed by jihadis, the SPLC ought to be shut down and prosecuted for incitement — not that such a thing is likely to happen in Obama’s America. Instead, Obama will probably send the SPLC a letter of commendation the week after the killing, as he did with the Oklahoma mosque after a Muslim beheaded one of his coworkers there.
Consider this. The SPLC lists my organizations as hate groups. AFDI, the American Freedom Defense Initiative, is a human rights organization dedicated to freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, and individual rights is designated a hate group by a vicious uber left, pro-jihadist organization widely cited by the media and Obama’s Department of Justice. My group is a human rights group, but the Nation of Islam has been removed from the SPLC’s hate group list. This is the morally inverted state of the world.
Even worse, under the guise of “tracking domestic terrorism,” Obama’s battering ram, the Department of Justice, is colluding with the SPLC to target Americans who oppose Obama’s anti-American domestic and foreign policies. Will Obama employ his “global police force” to go after patriots, vets, tea parties, and counter jihadists?
The SPLC is not a group dedicated to the defense of human rights. It is a hard-left attack machine. Vets, patriots, and freedom’s defenders are in its cross-hairs. Even Presidential hopeful Ben Carson was on their hate list for some time.
Even worse, members of the SPLC have committed a number of acts of terrorism. Several years ago, SPLC member Floyd Corkins stormed the Family Research Council’s Washington, D.C. headquarters and began shooting. Why? Because the FRC had been listed as a hate group by the SPLC. Corkins shot a brave security guard in the arm, but the guard still managed to wrestle him to the ground before he could kill or injure others. Family Research Council President Tony Perkins stated: “Corkins was given a license to shoot an unarmed man by organizations like the Southern Poverty Law Center that have been reckless in labeling organizations as hate groups because they disagree with them on public policy
The SPLC is a dangerous subversive organization that partners with Islamic supremacist and other treasonous groups to destroy America from within. A DOJ official praises the Southern Poverty Law Center’s work in “combating domestic terrorism.” But members are violent domestic terrorists. The communists over at the Southern Poverty Law Center are among the gravest threats to freedom in the United States, “a wellspring of manufactured hate” and are named as such in the AFDI Threats to Freedom Index.
Who watches the watchmen? Who appointed this vicious group the arbiter of what is hate and what isn’t? Why is fighting for the freedom of speech and the equality of rights of all people now classified as “hate”? An uncritical, uninformed public takes for granted that the SPLC is some kind of neutral observer, when actually it uses its “hate group” classifications to stigmatize and demonize foes of its political agenda.
Gatestone Institute has wielded a strong influence over the past month in shaping public discourse regarding the social consequences of mass migration in European countries.
Fox News’ Megyn Kelly interviewed Gatestone Institute Distinguished Senior Fellow Soeren Kern about the cultural repercussions the migrant crisis has created in Europe.
This September report from Kern on the rape epidemic in Germany, perpetrated by migrant men against German and migrant women, was cited by The Wall Street Journal’s Bret Stephens in his article “The Cologne Portent.”
Stephens writes: “In September, Soeren Kern of the Gatestone Institute chronicled some 30 cases of rape and sexual assault perpetrated by migrants against German and migrant women alike. ‘In Bavaria, women and girls housed at a refugee shelter. . . are subject to rape and forced prostitution on a daily basis,’ Mr. Kern writes, citing reports from women’s rights groups. ‘The price for sex with female asylum seekers is 10 euros.’
|swissdefenceleague on Italian Mafia declares war on…|
|T. Bone on Italian Mafia declares war on…|
|lilyredrose on Italian Mafia declares war on…|
|swissdefenceleague on Clinton and Trump: Where Do Th…|
|PARTNERING WITH EAGL… on Clinton and Trump: Where Do Th…|
|Clinton and Trump: W… on Clinton and Trump: Where Do Th…|
|It’s not… on Islamic State Exploiting Migra…|