islam

The Insincere Call for Calmer Rhetoric

The Insincere Call for Calmer Rhetoric

By Erik Rush

There is a subtle dynamic in play of which Americans need to be aware, and which I believe will be singularly enlightening with regard to the machinations of two of our most potent enemies: The political left and Islam. This pertains to calls for an attenuation of harsh political rhetoric in the wake of the recent shooting rampage which left Rep. Steve Scalise (R-LA) and four others wounded, and the actions of Muslims following a spate of what are being called terrorist attacks in the United Kingdom and Europe, though not all of these actually qualify as terrorism.

The tension was almost palpable on the part of liberal and conservative politicos and pundits in the hours prior to James Hodgkinson being named as the perpetrator of the June 14 shootings in Virginia. Had Hodgkinson turned out to be a creature of the political right, of course we would have been treated to gleeful, self-satisfied oratory from leftists affirming that private ownership of firearms should be outlawed, right wingers possess innate homicidal tendencies, and that such violence could only have been catalyzed by the political ascendency of that horrible scoundrel in the White House, Donald Trump.

Once it had been determined that Hodgkinson was in fact a rabid leftist, the cry went up for both Democrats and Republicans to tone down their rhetoric. Although this is being articulated primarily by those on the left, even some like conservative firebrand rocker Ted Nugent stated late last week that he would moderate his public message.

This made me wonder: When Democrat and liberal leaders state that we need to employ less incendiary rhetoric, to whom are they speaking? Is this “we” to whom they refer the “royal ‘we,'” or are they speaking to the ultra-liberal base of the Democrat Party? Certainly they aren’t addressing liberals and conservatives alike, because it hasn’t been conservatives and Republicans advocating for the beating, maiming, and killing of President Trump and others among their political opponents – it is only prominent liberals and Democrats who have done so, and with great relish.

In Britain, we’ve seen several terrorist attacks perpetrated by Islamists since the beginning of the year. Then, early this week, 47-year-old Briton Darren Osborne allegedly drove a truck into a crowd of Muslims leaving Ramadan prayers at a London mosque. The attack left at least one person dead and 10 injured. Days earlier in the Swedish city of Malmö, an alleged neo-Nazi drove a vehicle into a group of Iraqi refugees protesting that nation’s asylum laws.

In the latter two incidents, authorities were quick to designate these as acts of terrorism, employing such terms as “Islamophobia” and “right wing extremism.” The communities of Muslim emigrés in these nations took on the mantle of victimhood with equal alacrity, decrying the perils of their lot and the “racism” (actually anti-Muslim sentiment, since Islam is not a racial designation) of the West. They found a great deal of sympathy in the Western press, which provided them with an abundance of forums in which to air their grievances.

I believe that Republicans and conservatives taking the left’s faux chagrin at face value and validating their counterfeit idiomatic peace offerings are the height of folly. It is also quite curious that the alleged peaceful majority of Muslims residing in the West who so seldom condemn terrorist acts carried out in the name of Islam never seem to be quite as scarce when it comes to condemning such deeds as those of Darren Osborne, which could easily have been the frustrated, desperate actions of a citizen who simply got fed up with his countrymen being targeted by an insidious invading force and political leaders enabling same.

In a fistfight or in war, one does not submit to the entreaties of an opponent who executes a successful attack and then falls back to regroup. If one is able, one executes a counterattack. While I am not advocating an in-kind response to the June 14 shooting or violent acts perpetrated by Islamists, our enemies do need to be put on notice that their actions will not be tolerated in the long term.

It bears mentioning that despite the bogus regret being expressed by those on the left, high-profile liberals have not ceased their provocative rhetoric since the Virginia shooting. This speaks to the lack of restraint many liberals possess, as well as underscoring the deep hatred they have for Republicans and conservatives.

Actor and homosexual activist George Takei – who has become a really creepy old guy regardless of sexual orientation – claimed that Rep. Scalise owed his rescue to an heroic lesbian D.C. police officer. On Saturday, MSNBC host Joy Ann Reid condemned the House Majority Whip’s political positions on Obamacare, gay rights, and race, then went on to mischaracterize Scalise’s stance on those very issues.

The subversive antics of the Obama administration and its Eurozone and Islamist allies gave rise to a great deal of discussion amongst conservative pundits regarding collusion between the political left and Islamists. “The enemy of my enemy is my friend” encapsulates the dynamic in play here; leftists and Islamists are indeed working in tandem to bring down Western republics and democracies, each believing that they will be able to control or subjugate the other after this is accomplished. Thus, it is no surprise that the two groups are engaging in the same passive-aggressive behavior.

The take-away from all of this? Don’t be fooled by this insincere and gutless tactic. Socialists and Islamists are not merely political opponents. They are deadly enemies to be neutralized, and with all due speed.

Originally published in WorldNetDaily

Posted by Erik Rush in Columns, 1 comment
The Global Socialist-Islamist Axis in America

The Global Socialist-Islamist Axis in America

It was a busy weekend for miscreant Islamist scum operating under the imprimatur of the international socialist-Islamist axis within America. On Saturday, Ahmad Khan Rahami, a New Jersey resident and naturalized refugee from Afghanistan, detonated multiple bombs in New York and New Jersey. No one was killed, but nearly 30 people were injured. Rahami was apprehended three days later in Linden, New Jersey after a gun battle with police.

Also on Saturday, 22-year-old Dahir Adan, a Somali Muslim who had been living in the United States for the past 15 years, stabbed 9 people at a mall in St. Cloud, Minnesota. According to St. Cloud Police Chief William Blair Anderson, Adan –who was disguised as a security guard at the time of the attacks – “reportedly made references to Allah during the attack and asked at least one person whether they were Muslim.” Dahir was killed by police at the scene.

According to the New York Times, Rahami, the man arrested for the New York and New Jersey bombings, became a “completely different person” after a trip to Afghanistan, when it is presumed he became “radicalized,” a term used by the press and politicos to describe a Muslim who crosses that obscure line from Islamic to militant Islamist. It has also been reported that Rahami made several other trips to Pakistan and Afghanistan without being detected by the U.S. government. Rahami’s father, Mohammed Rahami, told the press this week that he had reported his son to the FBI as a potential terrorist in 2014, but the agency took no action.

While the Rahami and Adan stories have received wide press coverage, of course we are still being subjected to the usual spin and politically correct propaganda from the press and politicians which deftly avoids the motive attendant to these attacks – this being that the perpetrators were Muslims and were acting based on Islamic doctrine.

At this point, we’ve now seen several high-profile acts of domestic terrorism perpetrated by Muslims wherein communities and law enforcement agencies were previously made aware of the danger posed by these individuals. In all of these cases, nothing was done to mitigate the potential danger.

In the case of federal law enforcement, to some extent it stands to reason that organizations such as the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security might be less motivated to counter these threats, since these are under the control of the Obama administration, whose agenda includes destabilizing America through an influx of potentially violent Muslims and the establishment of insular Muslim communities. In a speech to the United Nations this week, our bath house refugee-playing statesman president Barack Hussein Obama defended increasing globalization and condemned the populist nationalism that has been growing in the West in direct response to the actions of murderous Muslim émigrés and refugees.

This deportment, which has included the Obama administration illegally facilitating the importation of tens of thousands of Muslims from unstable, culturally-bankrupt Islamic nations, has also given rise to such debacles as the 858 people who, according to a new Department of Homeland Security Inspector General’s report, were “mistakenly” granted citizenship due to a failure of the federal government’s fingerprint records system despite having been ordered deported. This is eerily reminiscent of the jihadi training camps known to exist across the continental U.S., but which law enforcement is prohibited from engaging because the Islamist groups operating them somewhat conveniently did not make it onto the federal government’s official list of terrorist organizations.

Tragically, this international socialist-Islamist axis of Western elites even includes powerful religious leaders such as Pope Francis, who regularly condemns “hateful acts of terrorism” with one breath while admonishing Europeans to “welcome refugees into your homes and communities” (the same refugees who are rioting and raping their way across that continent) with the next.

With regard to the United States, this is a component of the agenda calculated to render America irrelevant as a nation of influence on the world stage. The Islamists seek global supremacy for their foul doctrine, while the socialists harbor attitudes varying from those which hold that the concept of nations itself is outmoded, to those which characterize the U.S. as last among the old-school imperialist oppressor nations which must be dismantled. A chief stratagem of the latter is of course the idea that racism practiced by those of northern European descent has been the greatest evil of the last thousand years.

It’s a pretty safe bet that the conservative establishment press will have no interest in that upon which your humble commentator has to say regarding these matters from this point forward, since I would start with a moratorium on Muslim immigration and the summary expulsion of each and every Muslim foreign national in the United States. I would also revoke the citizenship of each and every naturalized Muslim citizen and deport them to their native countries, save for giving them the opportunity to renounce Islam in order to escape this fate. These people, as well as the second and third-generation descendants of Muslim émigrés, could count on ongoing surveillance to ensure their sincerity.

Here, obviously I am dispensing with the subverted notions of constitutionality popularly advanced by the left, as well as political correctness and cultural relativism. Islam is not a religion, nor should it be considered such under law; it is a retrograde system ascribed to by barbarians whose company I would typically pass on in favor of an afternoon cavorting with a troupe of lower primates.

Posted by Erik Rush in Columns, 0 comments
Pedophiles: The Next Protected Minority Group

Pedophiles: The Next Protected Minority Group

With regard to its designs for our nation, debasement has been the name of the game for the political left for a long time. While volumes could be written on the moral debasement alone catalyzed by the left, America’s standing in the world, our economy, our educational system, our worldview and collective self-image, among many other things, have been targets for incremental debasement by the left.

When liberals began targeting the sexual attitudes of our population through mass media and junk science such as Alfred Kinsey’s perverted sex studies, suddenly the worst thing one could be was a prude, and the accusation was thrown around almost as liberally (no pun intended) as “homophobe” has been in recent years. In retrospect, we can see that both were part of the same stratagem of shaming ideological opponents into acquiescence.

Lately, the news has been replete with how the civil rights of transgendered people are being trod upon by narrow-minded state governments and the bigoted straight majority. In a truly perverse turn of events, even the term “transgendered” has become nebulous; it is no longer employed to reference pre-operative transsexuals, but people who have chosen to represent as the opposite of their biological gender. The term “transvestite” doesn’t fit the bill, either; these are people who claim to literally identify as the opposite gender – at least at present.

While this liberally-lubricated political football (again, no pun intended) defies logical interpretation and has given rise to truly bizarre and inane grandstanding on the part of everyone from chain stores to rock stars, it is nothing compared to what is next coming down the pike: legitimizing, and then ultimately decriminalizing pedophilia, or child molestation.

Preposterous, sayest thou?

Case in point 1: Last September, WND’s Matt Barber detailed how the Obama administration’s Department of Defense was facilitating the homosexual abuse of young boys at the hands of Muslim allies in Afghanistan, and how U.S. servicemen who attempted to blow the whistle on attendant policies were being drummed out of the service. Lest any take exception to the source, Barber widely cited a New York Times article on the same topic, which revealed that these atrocious acts were even occurring on U.S. military bases in Afghanistan.

Case in point 2: When the notoriously liberal American Psychiatric Association made a furtive attempt to reclassify pedophilia as a sexual orientation rather than a mental illness in the 2013 version of its Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5 or DSM-V), the outcry from medical professionals and the public was so strong that the APA essentially said that it had all been some sort of mistake, and released a statement that the erroneous use of the phrase “sexual orientation” would be corrected.

Case in point 3: British children are being kidnapped by Muslim men for exploitation as child prostitutes and sex slaves. I say “British children” as opposed to “children in Britain” because these louts apparently prefer white kids. Law enforcement has been hampered in its efforts to stop this practice because prosecuting these crimes entails revealing the perpetrators as Muslims. The disgustingly liberal British government, which now includes plenty of Muslims, maintains that this is “racist.”

The latter example is illustrative of the progression that occurs: In Britain, they began importing Muslims decades before America saw an influx of Muslims. Thus, by virtue of their numbers alone, they now have political as well as cultural influence – and children suffer.

It is a slippery slope from overlooking pedophilia out of political correctness because it is an age-old albeit disgusting cultural practice among one minority group to permitting the same outright within the entire population. In America, this will be even more of a dangerous proposition because there are pedophilia advocacy groups just waiting in the wings for their shot at protected minority status.

Obviously, if Islamists have anything to say about it, this will be moot, since the entire population will eventually be Muslim – but I digress. Debasement is still the name of the game, and rest assured that power players on the left relish the advent of such a scenario. In the end, getting molested by the neighborhood pervert or groomed by a kiddie porn ring will be as common for a child as a scuffle with a schoolmate.

As for the elite ruling class, anyone coming in contact with their children will be vetted six ways from Sunday. The former middle class – the enslaved, seething, ignorant masses – well, we’ll have to fend for ourselves. Taking out the neighborhood pervert with a baseball bat will of course be grounds for prosecution.

I have little doubt that my claims will be taken as a wild, paranoid supposition by my detractors on the left, and that some will assert that I am advocating for the mass murder of some faction or other. If one examines the left’s modus operandi to date and the incremental nature of everything they’ve done however, the same liberal that called his or her neighbor a “homophobe” yesterday and a “transphobe” today will be calling them a “pedophilophobe” tomorrow.

How and whether or not Americans resolve to protect their children from government-sanctioned sexual abuse in the future rests in whether or not they acknowledge who our enemies really are in a timely enough fashion.

Posted by Erik Rush in Columns, 0 comments
The West’s Compulsion for Societal Suicide

The West’s Compulsion for Societal Suicide

Perhaps it’s my twisted imagination, but I can’t help observing current geopolitical machinations and wonder what individuals from another juncture in history or even a non-Earthbound civilization might conclude about our society and, more importantly, those who currently hold power and preeminence among us.

There are things occurring on the geopolitical scene that simply do not merit debate over what is actually transpiring, yet on a daily basis, these are being misrepresented by political leaders, media, the press, and even religious leaders to such a degree that it is surreal beyond description.

One of the most noteworthy examples of this phenomenon has been our scurvy knave of a low-born, treasonous scoundrel president, Barack Hussein Obama, as he attempts to characterize Muslim populations as benign and assimilable. Specifically, I refer to Obama’s recent rhetoric in light of the massive uptick in terror attacks by Muslims over the last several years. He’s found it necessary to admonish Americans not to hold animosity nor suspicion toward “America’s Mooslims” as a result of their worldwide terror attacks, their ongoing invasion of Europe, and the tinderbox that they have made of the Middle East and parts of Africa. Presumably this is toward strengthening his argument for allowing untold numbers of Muslim “refugees” into the United States.

It bordered on hysterical (as in outrageously humorous) a couple of days ago when Obama reminded us once again of the “many contributions” that Muslims have made to the rich history of our country. I defy anybody to name one significant contribution that Muslims have made to this nation – with the qualifier that it is a positive contribution.

To the east, European socialist leaders refuse to acknowledge the damage to life, limb, and their economies being done by over a million invaders who should have been strafed as their raggedy columns approached the borders of prospective host nations.

“All of us together, Muslims, Hindus, Catholics, Copts, Evangelical brothers and sisters — children of the same God — we want to live in peace, integrated…”

– Pope Francis’ Easter Address, March 27

All want to live in peace, integrated? I beg to differ, since the Muslim faction included in Pope Francis’ Easter Address clearly have no desire to integrate.

I’ve always had a great respect for the Catholic Church, and I understand the reality of modern popes being political as much as spiritual leaders, but I am about a hair’s breadth away from declaring this pontiff an apostate Christian. In both his Christmas and Easter addresses, Pope Francis excoriated those who wish to prevent migrants from the Middle East and North Africa from entering Europe, even as they run roughshod over the nations of that continent. He has paid gratuitous, embarrassing deference to the world’s smirking, treacherous Muslim leaders, and although the pope has condemned the recent persecution (rape, maiming, murder, enslavement, etc.) of Christians in the Middle East by Muslims, he has spent just as much time misrepresenting Islam as benign as his contemporary political leaders have.

So is this pope stupid, naïve, or evil?

Last week, the Detroit Free Press reported that Muslim parents of elementary school students in Dearborn, Michigan became upset after their children received flyers promoting an Easter Egg hunt at a local church. While attending public elementary schools in New York during the 1960s, I cannot count the number of handouts I received for events celebrating religious holidays that my family did not celebrate. No one got intimidated, no one got offended, and no one went crying to The New York Times.

But you see, Muslims have made significant inroads into politics in Michigan, so they can afford to be uppity in that state. They’ve also become savvy to the practices employed by every other special interest group in the American left’s big tent: Claim persecution, gain sympathy, secure genuinely unconstitutional protections under the law, and then you’re free to persecute your political opponents.

So, the poor, intimidated little Muslim parents went to the press, complaining that their childrens’ virgin eyes falling upon these horrid, blasphemous Easter flyers was somehow a form of religious persecution that naturally violates the Constitution.

Clever, aren’t they? Well, that’s how it starts. Give it a decade or two, and Muslims in America will have earned the right to Sharia courts, to rape non-Muslim women at will, to kidnap non-Muslim children for use as sex slaves, and to behead American servicemen in broad daylight, just as they have in Britain, Europe, and Scandinavia.

For the record: Although a link to the Detroit Free Press story now defaults to the publication’s home page for some unfathomable reason, other online news outlets did pick it up.

Where those whom we have trusted with our governance and safety should now be ever more committed to the support and defense of the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, and bearing true faith and allegiance to the same, it is apparently more important that they show solidarity with the miniscule number of Americans who oppose an obscure state law blocking individuals from using public bathrooms that don’t match their biological gender, and campaign against the scourge of microaggressions.

What might those from another time in history or some exotic, off-world civilization conclude about us? Clearly, that we in the West are suffering from a form of mass insanity manifesting in a compulsion for societal suicide.

Why any society, in any age, or on any conceivable world, would choose such a path is, I’m afraid, a question that’s above my current pay grade.

Originally published in WorldNetDaily

Posted by Erik Rush in Columns, 1 comment
Muslims Grateful to the West? Never!

Muslims Grateful to the West? Never!

Last week, some entertainment industry ignoramuses sought to “enhance their optics” via a display of solidarity with Muslim migrants amidst what the left has sold as a hateful response to the migrants’ presence by some Europeans. A refugee camp in Calais, France had gained some notoriety and was scheduled for demolition by French authorities. Known as “The Jungle,” the camp was visited by British actor Jude Law and a handful of other celebrities who called on the British government to admit select refugees from the camp into Britain.

Things went south however: No sooner had cameras stopped rolling after the festivities than a group of the beleaguered migrants attacked. As reported by the UK’s Mirror, they assaulted a security team attending the entertainers, pelting them with rocks and robbing them.

The ignorance of entertainers and liberal culture of the industry aside, those in the West are being rather forcefully admonished to ignore the empirical evidence, which illustrates the folly of the West welcoming migrants from Muslim nations into their own.

Muslims have a long history of stabbing their benefactors in the back. Islamic lore is replete with instances of Allah “softening the hearts” of potentates and populations whom they later fell upon and decimated.

During the Clinton administration, the war in the Balkan states was headline news for at least two years. In March 1992, when Bosnia-Herzegovina became an independent republic, Bosnian Serbs rebelled, and hostilities began. Serbian militias took control of two-thirds of Bosnia “and launched a reign of terror against the country’s majority Muslim population.” NATO allies came to the rescue, with the U.S. playing a major role. A NATO ultimatum brought about a cease-fire in 1994.

Despite such interventions, as with the controversial U.S. aid supplied to Muslim Afghanis in their struggle against the Soviet Union during the 1980s, Muslims put this down to the enemies of Islam having their minds befuddled by Allah, since all non-Muslims are enemies of Islam. Non-Muslims who extend hospitality or generosity to Muslims are viewed as fools who are to be ruthlessly exploited. This deadly premise precludes any non-Islamic society ever having the hope of co-existence with Islam.

A few headlines from prominent online news sources, representing just one day in Islam’s latest push for global dominion…

Muslim Migrants Storm Greece/Macedonia Border
60 Minutes Crew Attacked, Beaten in Sweden by Group of African Masked Men
Danish Imam Tells Congregation to Kill Apostates and Non Muslims
After Rash of Islamist Killings, Bangladesh Considers Eliminating Islam as State Religion

Also last week in Moscow, a 39 year-old Muslim woman working as a nanny murdered her charge, a 4 year-old girl, and decapitated her. She then set the family’s apartment on fire, left with the severed head, and displayed the gruesome trophy while milling about on the street shouting Islamic phrases. After her arrest, she reportedly told a reporter that Allah had ordered her to commit the slaying.

Despite Islam’s 1400-year history of barbarism, aggression, treachery, female genital mutilation, rampant pedophilia, misogyny, and institutionalized sexual assault, this is a culture our government and the press are demanding that Westerners embrace. This is a culture that the political left argues is just as viable and civilized as our own.

What will they insist that we countenance next? Cannibalism?

Recently, Felicia Escobar, President Obama’s special assistant for immigration policy, told a National Association of Counties task force that the administration wants to bring even more displaced migrants from Syria to the U.S. despite the national security implications (by “more,” I mean more than those who have arrived since 2012 and the 10,000 which Obama summarily ordered the states to absorb during the course of this year).

The White House clearly knows they’re dangerous, but they want them to come anyway, as do European leaders, who are virtually ignoring the civil unrest and terror attacks incited by Muslims within their own borders. Across the West, political leaders are denying the existence of Islamist expansionism and suppressing any discussion thereof. Their rhetoric and policies have long since passed qualifying as imprudent or surreal; they are treasonous and insane.

It’s bad enough to have a malevolent cabal attempting to set Americans up for murder and mayhem at the hands of devils in order to advance their political objectives. The question is: Will we be stupid enough collectively to compound the situation by falling for their politically correct suicide on an installment plan?

Despite some Republicans’ distaste for the front-running GOP presidential candidate, his infusion of nationalistic fervor into the race is just what we need right now. We cannot wait until several hundred thousand Muslim migrants and their overseas oil-rich patrons establish the political foothold they’ve established in Britain and other nations across the Atlantic, or the cure will be more distasteful than most Americans will ever abide.

Because whatever the circumstances, we know that Muslims will not respond with gratitude to our hospitality. They never do.

Originally published in WorldNetDaily

Posted by Erik Rush in Columns, 0 comments
Look to Britain – And Be Afraid

Look to Britain – And Be Afraid

In my youth, British television was all the rage among many of my peers. Perhaps the fact that there was a limited amount of swearing and nudity in the programming had something to do with it, but some of us were just as devoted to following “I, Claudius” and other ostensibly refined dramas as “Monty Python’s Flying Circus” or “Doctor Who.”

Since this was pre-Internet, altogether too many cable channels and a market that brings programming from pitch to premiere in a few hours, my peers and I didn’t know right off the bat that a lot of our beloved British shows had actually been aired for the first time some 12 to 15 years prior, and had long since ceased production.

Something odd that I noted about British TV’s serial dramas and comedies was a sense of grim resolve and even hopelessness many characters held with respect to their lot in life, their futures and an ever-intrusive government. I saw this as being in conflict with American sensibilities since, at that time, we still viewed ourselves as upwardly-mobile, quite hopeful and with at least some handle on our government.

Perhaps it was a “British thing,” I thought, owing to their history with a monarchy. Despite a few notable real-life British rags-to-riches stories, many Brits seemed reconciled to “their station,” something that was confirmed later as I personally encountered more and more British people.

I also noted something else, and that was the proliferation of people from central Asia, Africa and the Middle East on British TV. There were tons of Puerto Ricans on America’s East Coast where I was raised, but Puerto Rico was a commonwealth of the U.S., so it made sense that they would be represented in media. Slavery explained the millions of blacks, as did sharing a border with Mexico explain all the Chicanos.

But what motivation did the U.K. (and other European nations, I would later learn) have for importing vast numbers of unskilled people from the Third World into their major urban areas?

Well, silly, ignorant me. I guess I couldn’t be blamed given my tender age at the time. The grim resolve and hopelessness I’d seen among average British citizens wasn’t merely their stiff-upper-lip tradition. Nor was their acceptance of the deluge of Third Worlders merely guilt over their history of colonialism.

These were reflections of socialism. Although guilt over colonialism was indeed used as a propaganda tool to sell the malignant socialist agenda to European citizens, much of the same social justice propaganda as is being fed to Americans at present was fed to Europeans from the 1960s on: We’re wealthy compared to this lot, and if you don’t think we should extend our hospitality to them well, you’re just a big, fat racist.

At this point, I have to ask: Would you intentionally take millions of parasitic organisms into your body?

I didn’t think so …

Recently, police in Scotland arrested a man, charging him with “offensive” Facebook posts about Syrian “refugees” in Britain. The individual is being held under Britain’s Communications Act, which conveniently criminalized politically incorrect public statements and publications some years back.

Now that Europe is overrun with Muslim rape gangs, Muslim pedophilia rings and Muslim professional welfare cheats, we know how governments there respond to the chaos their grand, Utopian designs have wrought: They simply deny the problems exist, deny the causality with respect to their magnanimous inclusiveness, cry “racist!” at any who draw attention to the chaos – or simply have them arrested.

Those who have addressed the debate over America’s lax immigration policies and calls to admit untold numbers of mostly Muslim “refugees” into the country with contentions that entry into the U.S. is a “basic human right” need a serious debriefing on the constitutional roles of our federal elected officials and the concept of what constitutes a nation in the first place. I’m not going to identify any of these parties specifically, because my favored disposition where they are concerned is unprintable, so we know what that’s likely to get me.

One can understand how international socialists in Britain were such effective brainwashers since up until recently, the state-run British Broadcasting Company (BBC) produced all of the television programming in the United Kingdom. Now that we can see the brazen coalescing of these political influences in America among entities in government and business, it’s no surprise that our entertainment media are now rife with social justice themes, homoerotica and other subversive material.

There’s a key difference between Europe and America in this case, however: Europeans did not have the benefit of witnessing the rapid societal decline and loss of personal liberties socialist policies brought with them in nations other than their own. Despite ongoing denials on the part of European governments that Muslims had anything to do with the hundreds of rapes that took place in Cologne, Germany, and other cities this past New Year’s Eve, the reports of these occurrences – as well as countless other recent examples of socialist-fostered rot – are readily available for all Americans to see.

I seriously doubt that I could goad many WND readers into ingesting slow poison, arguing that failing to do so would demonstrate a horrid lack of compassion on their part for some obscure minority group. Speaking figuratively, this is precisely what international socialists accomplished with populations in Europe, and are attempting in America.

Originally published in WorldNetDaily

Posted by Erik Rush in Columns, 1 comment
Enshrining Muslims as a Protected Class

Enshrining Muslims as a Protected Class

While it might be no surprise, that which our esteemed affirmative action Attorney General Loretta Lynch is apparently unable to do by decree, radicals in the Democrat party are attempting to do through legislation. One may recall that Lynch recently threatened to prosecute anyone who advocated violent action against Muslims in the United States as a response to escalating acts of violence by Muslims.

A group of Democrat lawmakers want to take Lynch’s initiative a step further. In a measure similar to laws passed in some European nations, House Resolution 569 is a bill that seeks to criminalize “violence, bigotry, and hateful rhetoric towards Muslims in the United States.” The Resolution, submitted on Dec. 17, is currently on its way to the House Committee on the Judiciary.

We’ve been telling Americans for some time that the enshrining of Muslims as a protected class is coming, and measures such as this are efforts to that end.

Now, one might argue that H.R. 569 is an outrageous and blatantly unconstitutional proposal sponsored by the worst of the socialist cabal in the Democrat party, and they’d be right. A cautionary note, however: The unpredictability and capriciousness of sellouts among Republican lawmakers have facilitated all manner of malignant schemes enacted through Democrat legislation.

Remember – these are the same people who got Obamacare passed.

Recently, certain prominent GOP lawmakers came out in defense of Muslims after commentators and Republican candidates made rather blunt, critical statements about Muslims. This is in spite of the fact that the aforementioned statements were made in response to the increase in violence on the part of Muslims. If this inconsistency gives rise to cognitive dissonance, I would assure the reader that this is perfectly normal.

Like the elusive biological catalysts that prompt swarming insects and spawning salmon, the world’s Muslims are currently engaged in one of their episodic campaigns to gain supremacy within the known world. In our modern technological age, this means the entire globe. They are being facilitated by Western socialist benefactors who are using them in their own political designs.

Not only have we seen millions of Muslims streaming from their squalid, Third World toilets into developed nations, but we have also witnessed the abject arrogance and sense of entitlement amongst even the most destitute, unskilled, and uneducated among them. The West is expected to admit these miscreants as honored royalty, simply because they are Islamic.

The international press has given fairly wide coverage to the chaos generated by Muslims coming into Europe from the Middle East and Africa. Vandalizing public and private properties given over to shelter them, intimidating locals, dumping garbage in streets, and protesting such things as a lack of free Internet and dietary accommodation by their hosts – all of these have become regular fare. More than 800,000 have entered Greece alone, and in Italy, violent clashes have erupted between Italian citizens and Muslim “refugees.”

On the French island of Corsica, hundreds took to the streets earlier this week to protest the influx of these thoroughly ungracious invaders. Despite a ban on demonstrations imposed in the regional capital, protesters carrying the Corsican flag marched and shouted anti-Muslim slogans.

As a result of this refugee invasion (which, as we established earlier, was orchestrated by Western leftist and Islamic leaders), anti-immigrant factions are forming across Europe. While these groups are characterized by much of the Western press as bigoted troglodytes, their widespread coverage clearly indicates that the underlying problem does not lie in the intolerance of native populations. Outrage on the part of Europeans is no more indicative of their being closeted bigots than Superior, Wisconsin mayor Bruce Hagen’s recent public reference to Barack Hussein Obama’s role as a Muslim bent on destroying America. These responses are byproducts of the evidence at hand.

In America, criticism of the globally-advancing Muslim horde is seized upon as “controversial” by the press and the Obama administration, and we are admonished to deny the threat they pose and unreservedly accommodate them.

This week, WND’s Joe Farah designated the irrational deference to Islam we see among Americans as “Islamophilia Syndrome,” likening this to “Stockholm Syndrome,” which references a pattern of behavior noted among the victims of a protracted 1973 bank robbery in Sweden. My book “Negrophilia: From Slave Block to Pedestal – America’s Racial Obsession” detailed, among other phenomena, the irrational deference to black Americans that has been inculcated into the American population at large.
The parallel between Islamophilia and Negrophilia in this context is that both are contrivances of the political left – aspects of social engineering imposed upon Americans and calculated to bring about a resulting benefit to the left’s agenda.

A recent interview given to the “Hollywood Reporter” by black actor Samuel L. Jackson was very telling with regard to the insidious psychological devices in play here; I’m sure Jackson himself had no idea of just how revelatory one of his statements was.

On hearing about the December murders committed by Islamists in San Bernadino, Jackson said he had wished the killers had been white rather than Muslim because, with terror attacks now being committed regularly by Muslims on our soil, they have “become the new young black men.”

One wonders: Does this apparent show of solidarity mean Jackson believes that Muslims, like young black men, have a legitimate beef with America, and therefore justifiable reasons for acting out antisocially? Or rather, does it mean that our society’s concern over the actions of Muslims is as irrational as its concern over the actions of young black men – despite the fact that the actions of both Muslims and young black men have been demonstrably problematic?

Neither of these propositions are themselves rational, but both possess traits typical of the divisive train of thought employed by the left, and illustrate how readily they can be adopted by the individual, regardless of race, education, or economic status.

Posted by Erik Rush in Columns, 0 comments
Why the Left Fears Me

Why the Left Fears Me

Earlier this week, Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump came under intense fire over his proposal to initiate a hiatus of entries into the U.S. for Muslims, including refugees, tourists and some Muslim American citizens. His is similar to a policy employed by President Roosevelt during World War II pertaining to those of German, Italian and Japanese descent. At that time, the government had no way of knowing who among those might be Axis sympathizers or operatives.

While I am not a Trump supporter, and have numerous suspicions as to why he is in the race for the nomination at all, his rationale is quite sound and obviously has precedent.

Trump’s willingness to speak frankly on this and other key topics has resonated with many Americans who, as we already know, are far more concerned about terrorism, the economic and social impact of unfettered illegal immigration, and corruption in government than they are concerned about climate change, economic injustice and “safe spaces” for radicals, racists and deviants on college campuses.

I can always tell I’ve hit a nerve when something I’ve written causes the left-wing websites to go berserk in their efforts to ridicule me following its publication. When anyone hits a nerve, we typically see more hyperbole, mischaracterization and ridiculous extrapolations than usual from the left. By hitting a nerve, I mean articulating concepts truly threatening to the agenda of the left.

Black conservatives tend to grind on those aforementioned leftist nerves by their very existence; this is why such vigorous efforts are made by the left to marginalize them. Part of this stems from leftists’ thinly veiled racism; they resent black conservatives for not “minding their place” by rejecting liberal doctrine and liberals’ largesse.

Another factor is a fallacy or stereotype the left itself created, and which is a component of negrophilia: The notion that black Americans possess some mysterious, sage wisdom originating in their unique collective experience on this continent.

Following this line of reasoning, it’s all well and good for a right-wing nut job like me and my ilk to howl at the moon about communists and conspiracies, but it’s an entirely different proposition if people start seriously considering what we have to say.

Sadly, there are too many well-known conservatives (black, white and other) who never merit the scrutiny of the left because their analysis remains extraordinarily superficial. Although I don’t see anything particularly brave in doing it, I am not afraid to say what a preponderance of the evidence suggests. There are certain issues upon which I and a select few others expound which would be extremely damaging to the left’s agenda if people were to begin considering them to any meaningful degree.

A big problem the left has right now is that their lies have grown so big – and one of the biggest has to do with the nature of Islam.

Judging from how establishment Republicans reacted to Donald Trump’s proposal, we can also see that dhimmitude is endemic among this group. Indeed, many influential Republicans are at least as politically compromised due to their involvement with Islamist front groups as are influential Democrats.

Say – speaking strictly hypothetically, of course – I went even further than Trump and stated that “Muslims are garbage, and we don’t need them here under any circumstances.” Not only would the left have a field day, but those establishment Republicans and even some conservatives would balk. Hold on now – we can’t consign over a billion people to the status of garbage!

But why not? If I said “White supremacists are garbage,” I would be hard-pressed to find anyone to disagree with me. What is white supremacy? In short, it’s a pernicious belief system that embodies the inhumane. Many would concur that its followers are “garbage” in the colloquial sense.

What is Islam? It, too, is a belief system – one that advances xenophobia, institutional deception, murder, rape, extortion, slavery, pedophilia and a host of other grievous affronts to the human spirit – an embodiment of the inhumane.

If we’re being honest with ourselves, it doesn’t matter if five guys goose-stepping in circles in a garage down the block or a billion people worldwide subscribe to something; if it embodies the inhumane, we want no part of it. The only agencies that continue to doggedly insist that Islam is a benign religion meriting protection under the First Amendment are those in collusion with Islamists.

Why should the left have a cat if I disrespect Muslims in such an impudent manner? Who cares what one big fat narrow-minded meanie and Islamophobic bigot has to say, anyhow?

Well, imagine all of America suddenly becoming aware of what a dire threat Islam truly is. Their first question would be: Who left us so vulnerable to those of that vile creed in the first place? Then, they would start looking at the great many calamities for which America has been put at risk, and who is responsible. Ultimately, they would get to the causation of discrete hazards such as the recent rise in ethnic tensions, the advancement of sexual ambiguity, the shameless proliferation of crony capitalism, the weaponizing of government against the people, the marginalization of Christians and the insinuation of enemy operatives into sensitive security positions in our government, to name just a few.

The ensuing momentum of that mass of angry Americans on the march could entirely crush not only the radical left, but progressivism as well.

The left, the Obama administration and progressive Republicans know that a climate wherein Donald Trump is doing so well in his bid for the GOP nomination not in spite of, but because he is saying the things he is saying suggests that a few more prominent voices joining those such as mine could lead to the undoing of a hundred years of their evil work.

Originally published in WorldNetDaily

Posted by Erik Rush in Columns, 1 comment
Islam: A Treatable Malignancy

Islam: A Treatable Malignancy

Although average American news viewers remain blissfully ignorant of this, Europeans have been turning out by the thousands in protest of their governments’ intention to throw the doors open wide to innumerable Muslim refugees from regions in which Barack Hussein Obama’s mercenary army (otherwise known as ISIS or Islamic State) and other militant Islamists have made life as they know it untenable.

The ire of these distressed Europeans is certainly not for a lack of tolerance. They have already been subjected to exponentially more tribulation than have Americans as a result of the human garbage with which their politically correct socialist overlords have saddled them over the last 30 years. These new refugees have already proved to be a demonstrable threat to public health and public safety, and have touched off several particularly violent riots.

I use the term “human garbage” not to preserve my good standing as a narrow-minded, far-right racist, because the cultural bankruptcy on the part of the garbage which inspires use of this terminology has nothing to do with race. I’m certain that a hypothetical population of Swedes or Japanese, transported to these regions in infancy and raised with the primitive worldview of its denizens would likely wind up as shiftless, ignorant, crude, xenophobic, misogynistic, duplicitous and barbaric as the Middle Eastern and African Muslims with whom Europe is currently being bombarded.

On Nov. 3, Rep. Adam Kinzinger, R-Ill., posted a letter on his website intended to address recent concerns of his constituents about the encroachment of Shariah law on Americans courts and our legal system. Representing Shariah as falling within the First Amendment’s Free Exercise Clause, he stopped short of chastising those in his district for their intolerance. A recent Sons of Liberty commentary fact checks Kinzinger’s misrepresenting of the Constitution, as well as reaffirming that America’s Christian roots run far deeper than the press or our government will ever let on at this juncture.

Although University of California Merced mass murderer Faisal Mohammad had penned a manifesto praising Allah and did so verbally as he stabbed his victims, Merced County Sheriff Vern Warnke told the community that Mohammad’s Nov. 4 killing spree had nothing to do with Islam, terrorism, or religion. The press is currently crafting a narrative that cites an unrelated personal vendetta, perhaps even one brought on by “bullying.”

This is representative of far too many who, due to reasons of naïveté, stupidity, or collusion, are advancing the notion that some sort of long-term coexistence with Muslims is possible. In truth, they are abetting Islamists in their mission to spread their putrefactive creed across America.

The Muslim is by definition incapable of pledging allegiance to America; if he does, he ceases to be a Muslim, according to Islamic criteria. If he accepts democratic governance (rather than merely claiming that he does for purposes of taqiyya), then he denies the supremacy of Islam, has committed blasphemy and is subject to death under Islamic law.

Thirty years ago in America, it was understood – even by avowed liberals – that Muslims were the backward, belligerent aggressors in the Middle East. With regard to the nation of Israel, it was acknowledged that she ought to have that little strip of land the Jews possessed in antiquity.

When Western elites determined that it was in their interest to undermine their relationship with Israel, defer to Islam and actually use its adherents to destabilize their own nations, they began to import foreign Muslims and enlisted the press in the inculcation of a new, pro-Islamic worldview.

The segment of Americans who currently believe that Muslims are benign and that all would be right with the world if Israel and the West would stop abusing them did not come to this conclusion through deep intellectual discernment. They were systematically propagandized by our government and the press into embracing Islamophilia. With the ascendency of the Obama cabal, pro-Islam, anti-Israel and anti-Western sympathies were even more vigorously promulgated.

Regular readers will take it as given that Barack Hussein Obama’s design of inundating America with Muslims is but one component in his grand plan of sabotage, and that he is also doing the bidding of malignant globalist interests that have long wished to see America brought low.

Regardless of what history’s disposition concerning Obama, his co-conspirators and the Washington corruptocrats we know so well will ultimately be, the most expeditious manner in which America can counter the Islamist threat is through grass-roots efforts that serve to enlighten Americans as to the incompatibility of Islam with our society and the immediate danger it represents. Having accomplished that, it will be far easier for us to collectively acknowledge that Islam is not a religion, but a pernicious political system with a religious component. Thus, its adherents will find themselves bereft of the First Amendment protections they and their brainwashed advocates are opportunistically exploiting to compromise American society.

Given the spirit of inclusion America has always exhibited (human imperfections aside), of course it will be difficult for many of our citizens to consign an entire class of people to the status of persona non grata. For the past 1,400 years however, Muslims – all Muslims – have repeatedly proved that they represent a societal malignancy; they will always perform as a body of enemy operatives, insidiously and incrementally worming their way into non-Muslim nations with the express intention of undermining and conquering them. Every individual has a part to play in this tragic comedy, from the helpless baby to the trained combatant.

When the Muslim population finds its numbers sufficient, for the non-Muslim it’s either conversion, death, or an indentured status. Prior to such a time, it is the duty of non-Muslims to take up the mantle of “infidel” with pride and neutralize this threat with every means at their disposal.

Originally published in WorldNetDaily

Posted by Erik Rush in Columns, 2 comments