Author: Ssolbergj

Update: The Local is covering the attack from the scene. 

The latest terrorist target to hit Europe has just taken place in the Swedish capital of Stockholm. The BBC has full coverage of the attack.

Rigidly defending the President’s precise formulations will always pose a problem for his supporters. I think even his staunchest backers will acknowledge that Donald Trump isn’t Churchillian in his eloquence. That said, nearly every time he is assailed by his pseudo-sophisticated, morally inverted critics in the culturally Marxist press, it turns out that he was correct.

The manufactured controversy surrounding his remarks about Sweden is simply the latest example of the media’s malicious lying and/or stupendous ignorance. No, President Trump wasn’t referring to a specific terrorist attack in Sweden, although there have been jihadist assaults in that nation, including suicide bombings, but rather to the degradation of that country-as well as others in Central and Northern Europe-occurring as a result of catastrophically wrongheaded immigration policies.

What happened last night, as well as many nights before in immigrant-heavy, Islam-friendly towns and cities in that country, is chaos. Rampant sex crime, tribal warfare, widespread rioting-some of which targets members of the liberal press which is so enamored of non-Swedes-and general lawlessness. In spite of the Swedish government’s refusal to acknowledge reality, censorship of hate facts, and systemic coverup of migrant rape of Swedes, the non-brainwashed know what is happening in Europe.

Despite forbidding the collection of statistics which would identify the ethnicity of those committing crimes in Sweden, we still have a very good idea of who is responsible for many of them. For example, 85% of those sentenced to at least 2 years in prison for rape by a Swedish court of appeals were foreign-born or second-generation immigrants. We have firsthand accounts from career law enforcement officers attesting to the culpability of foreign immigrants and refugees in the diverse array of problems Swedes currently face.

The idea that the state and its accomplices in the media can somehow indefinitely cover up the truth in a networked world, where we can read descriptions of what the multicultural boroughs of Europe are actually like, is the height of absurdity. The facts denied and buried by the mainstream media are at the fingertips of those who choose to obtain them. That is something that will not change any time in the near future, no matter how much our ruling class would like to suppress the truth.

President Obama’s last week in office has brought with it a flood of breaking news. The biggest story, of course, is his commutation of Chelsea Manning’s 35 year prison sentence. My own impression is that his decision is designed as a cynical bit of legacy-building, with the added benefit of perhaps inducing Julian Assange to leave the Ecuadorian embassy. Although that prospect appears increasingly remote, it very well might have factored into his judgement. Overlooked in news coverage of the Manning commutation is the grant of clemency to Oscar Lopez Rivera, a leader of the Marxist-Leninist Puerto Rican terror group FALN. Like Bill Clinton’s pardon of previously released FALN terrorists, which was intertwined with his wife’s Senate bid in New York, this decision was politically-based. In this case, as a parting gift to violent socialists who still comprise a significant portion of the Democratic base and will populate future revolutions.

Another early Christmas present for the hard left  comes in the form of the President’s revocation of the federal government’s Wet Foot, Dry Foot policy. It should be recalled that the policy itself was implemented prior to a pivotal election year, when former President Clinton was attempting to empty Guantanamo Bay of Cuban refugees. In order to prevent a repeat of Mariel-which sunk a young Bill Clinton’s chances of being reelected governor of Arkansas-he struck a deal with Fidel Castro which limited the number of Cubans who would be allowed to enter the United States. As Humberto Fontova astutely points out, one of the unreported effects of this adjustment will be an increase in the number of dependents flowing into the United States with a commensurate decrease in the amount of skilled professionals immigrating.

Even as the Obama administration’s days draw to a close, it continues to imperil the health and safety of ordinary American citizens, as ICE and CBP effectively serve as a shuttle service for unidentified illegal aliens under the pretext of being reunited with family. How many innocent people will meet the same fate of Sarah Root because of this willful indifference to the lives of Americans? Even  as people living throughout the United States are placed in imminent danger through the reckless ideology of the outgoing administration, the tide of refugees from Asia, Africa, and broken nations like Haiti shows no signs of ebbing. The conditions Barack Obama and his lawless bureaucracy have established bear all the hallmarks of the disaster we’ve seen unfold across Europe over the past 2 years.

Unfortunately, there are also ominous hints being dropped by President-Elect Donald Trump, who has responded favorably to proposals to salvage his predecessor’s patently unconstitutional administrative amnesty. In addition to going back on one of the central planks of the platform upon which he was elected-and deflating any enthusiasm felt by his staunchest supporters-this maneuver would significantly enhance the prestige and power of the very worst people, e.g. Paul Ryan, John McCain, and Lindsey Graham. The idea that one of the first domestic policy decisions will be to embrace the instincts of open borders fetishists and neoconservatives is unconscionable. If Trump had campaigned on a promise to continue the disastrous immigration policies of the current administration, he never would have made it past New Hampshire. This is an idea which needs to be categorically rejected by any right-thinking immigration patriot.

In order not to black pill the majority of our audience, we should leave you with a bit of good news from abroad. It seems that Norway has finally shown some of the Scandinavian backbone which Sweden surrendered several centuries ago. While the Norwegians haven’t ejected every jihadist apologist and Muslim fifth columnist from their nation, 2016 did see a record number of deportations. Although too many of these deportees were Europeans, it’s significant that there is a growing movement within that country to assert its sovereignty in the face of a Muslim population that has grown to nearly 150,000.

Perhaps it’s not too late to save Europe.

One of the most frustrating aspects of the ongoing invasion of Europe is the unwillingness of those who supported this disastrous policy to admit that they were wrong. It’s not simply the men and women who ushered in his collective insanity-primarily Angela Merkel, but also the rulers of the unaccountable, unelected European Union-who refuse to accept reality, but scores of ordinary individuals that simply don’t want to admit that we are witnessing a catastrophe unfold on a continental scale. Even those far removed from the consequences of this historical mistake-perhaps especially these people-are adamant that welcoming millions of Muslim Middle Eastern and African refugees into the heart of Western civilization was a splendid idea.

I was reminded of this the other night, when an acquaintance went on an hour-long fact-free tirade celebrating the benefits of this newfound vibrant diversity. Asserting at once that the crime rate in Germany hadn’t increased as a result of these newcomers and that even if they were committing crimes, it was a small price to pay for the economic productivity they would produce. It should be noted that on other occasions, when I’ve tried to educate him about this topic-despite his seeming unwillingness to engage in civil discussion about his pet issue of open borders-he’s refused to even consider the evidence presented. Claiming that the English language reports from Germany’s most widely read, pro-refugee newspapers and journals were somehow biased against his open borders, pro-refugee ideology.

It’s not only the media regents who inveigh against “fake news” who don’t want to hear dissenting opinions or unpleasant truths. There’s a large segment of the population-particularly among libertarians-who simply filter out any information that contradicts their most cherished value, i.e. unfettered third world immigration. The inescapable truth is that this reverse colonization of Europe has led to a surge in crime, 69,000 crimes in the first 3 months of 2016 alone! Despite the fact that 90% of sex crimes committed in 2014 were not reflected in official statistics, and that government institutions have bent the law in order to cover up the link between migrants and rime, there have been scores of horrific violations of women and children throughout Central and Western Europe since the migrant crisis began. Even Politifact, the gatekeeper of acceptable opinion, was forced to admit that the crime rate among migrants increased by 79 percent in 2015.

Even these statistics, spare though they are, don’t reflect the immensity of the crisis host societies are facing. In addition to the crimes committed against Europeans, there is the intimidation and crimes visited against refugees themselves, particularly Christians, atheists, and women. Jihadists threaten non-Muslim refugees before ever attacking unsuspecting Europeans. Female refugees are raped so frequently on their journey to Europe that they have to take contraceptives before embarking, yet we are expected to believe that the sexual predators who are on those ships pose no threat to European civilization. The mental contortions required to entertain these 2 thoughts simultaneously beggars belief.

It’s time for those of you who have buried your heads in the sand up to this point to come to grips with reality. As Ayn Rand once said, “we can ignore reality, but we can’t ignore the consequences of ignoring reality.” This is something defenders of the migrant wave washing over Europe have yet to grasp.

When you surround an army, leave an outlet free. 

Do not press a desperate foe too hard.

-Sun Tzu

Those barriers are designed to prevent a repeat of the massacre that occurred this week at a Christmas market in Berlin. Thankfully, the perpetrator behind that particular atrocity has been put down by a brave Italian police officer. Unfortunately, thanks to Chancellor Merkel, there are now thousands of lovely creatures from the Maghreb who would like to repeat this event throughout Europe. As Tommy Robinson has pointed out, short of a nuclear or radiological device, open borders are the most powerful weapon we can hand to our jihadist foes. In that sense, Angela Merkel and the rulers of Europe are all accomplices to mass murder.

What’s more, they are making it impossible for Europeans without a death wish to preserve their lives in a non-violent manner. Not only must they be sacrificed to the Cult of Diversity, but they must recite its incantations, otherwise they risk being thrown into a dungeon for engaging in wrong think. There is increasingly little to distinguish the legal and societal norms of third world Islamic backwaters and Western capitals, which is why the people in prison are not those who march through the streets of London braying for the imposition of a caliphate, but those who question the ability of foreign Muslims to successfully comport themselves with Western civilization. It’s why we need to invert reality and pretend that the problem isn’t the population replacement taking place in Europe, but the xenophobic right wingers who represent the true threat to European harmony.

The truth is that the extreme right is not extreme at all, but a necessary corrective to the post-war consensus which is based on unreality. The extreme right  would not exist if the sensible mandarins who controlled Europe for the past 6 decades had not made such a hash of things. They’ve not only ruined the nations they’ve inherited, accomplishing something Adolf Hitler himself could not achieve, but are now in the process of stamping out any criticism-however muted-of their ethno-masochistic, suicidal immigration policies. Instead of building walls, deporting those who should have never been invited to settle in Europe to begin with, and acknowledging that multiculturalism and Muslim repopulation of Europe has been a catastrophic mistake, European leaders are busy finding ways to suppress healthy, constructive dissent.

Like Pat Buchanan, I believe that Europeans will fight back eventually. The tragedy is that the not-so benevolent despots who rule over them have ensured that this battle will be bloodier and more protracted than anything they could have ever imagined. They’ve  made what could have been a peaceful repatriation of foreign settlers-or invaders, if you prefer that term-almost impossible, and caused their societies to be torn asunder in order to add ballast to a profoundly stupid, destructive ideology. One which was bound to fail, and will leave millions of victims in its wake.

Breathes there a man with soul so dead, 

Who never to himself has said,

This is my own, my native land!

-Sir Walter Scott

Unfortunately for the rest of us, these men-or women, in the case of Angela Merkel-are the ones effectively controlling Western civilization, or what remains of it at any rate. From Scotland to Sweden, which is now the rape capital of the West, the people entrusted with protecting the borders of their nations view the very concept of national sovereignty with derision. Although the political class deserves the lion’s share of the blame for this state of affairs, we can’t exonerate government bankrolled religious profiteering and cultural conditioning.

On the bright side, there is a growing awareness among the public at large that this is not working. What’s more, the people in Europe, North America, and Australia are increasingly willing to voice their dissent from the multicultural, open borders consensus that’s dominated the politics of their countries for the past half-century. Even though the current crop of patriotic candidates might not succeed, they’ve laid the groundwork for future resistance to the dangerous, multi-decade experiment which has led the West to the brink of disaster. And for that, they deserve our gratitude.

For those of you who needed confirmation that gleeful Nazi accomplice and evil billionaire George Soros is a real-life, Hungarian version of Emperor Palpatine, wait no more! According to a leaked memo from his Open Society Foundation, the man whose chief source of protein is human misery believes Europeans should accept the refugee crisis, i.e. effacement of their civilization, as the “new normal.” Congratulations, Germany, France, Sweden, and the rest of Western and central Europe, you have decades of taharrush, unexpected jihadist violence, and random crime to look forward to. Don’t forget the trillions of dollars lavished upon new Europeans who will never be able to reciprocate the favor for very obvious reasons.

Imploding welfare states? Endless civil strife which never existed prior to this grand social experiment? Increasing militarization of civil society and diminution of fundamental liberties? A wholesale reversal of the values cemented during the Age of the Enlightenment? Well, that’s just collateral damage in the war for vibrant diversity, isn’t it? Thank you, Francois Hollande. Thank you Pope Francis, Angela Merkel, and Tony Blair. I’m sure future generations of Europeans will realize what a small price to pay these sacrifices were for a world where the Crypt Keeper can ball out for a wedding ceremony to his 40 year-old gold digger, i.e. wife.

Update: Suspect taken into custody. In Switzerland, however, the suspect has died of his wounds. 

So far Swiss authorities have not come to the conclusion that the stabbing spree/arson attack on train passengers was linked to terrorism. Then again, we should recall that German and Scandinavian law enforcement have engaged in a systemic coverup of migrant sexual violence and crime against indigenous Europeans. Of course, it’s entirely possible that this attack is simply an isolated outbreak of psychotic violence, a la the man who murdered over a hundred people on a South Korean subway. However, if this was indeed another example of Islamic terrorism, it would fit what social scientists, in any other context, would describe as a pattern. Unfortunately, patterns don’t exist when we’re discussing the regressive left’s rabid pets, which are invariably described as lone wolves, no matter how many of them exist.

In news closer to home, a Bengali imam and his assistant were murdered in Ozone Park, a neighborhood previously known as the bailiwick of John Gotti Sr.-the former head of the Gambino crime family-but which has changed demographically since the Don of the Gambinos held sway. When I first heard about this crime, I immediately thought of Rashad Khalifa, an imam in Arizona who was assassinated by the man who would become Osama Bin Laden’s secretary. Despite the many misleading claims about rampant Islamophobia within the West-the NPR story describing the killings of these mosque officials among them-the truth is that the number of Muslims being victimized expressly because of their religious beliefs amounts to a rounding error in most non-Muslim, Western societies. If you read a story about an imam being killed, chances are that the crime was committed by a co-religionist. If you hear a breathless news report about a mosque in the United States being attacked, it’s more than likely a pre-fabricated hoax.

Yes, there are Muslims who are legitimate victims of crime in our society, just like there are Christians, Jews, Hindus, Sikhs, and atheists who fall victim to malicious individuals. But these crimes are committed by fundamentally damaged individuals whose motivations do not spring from some deep-seated hatred of Muslims. We should also remember that criticism is not crime, despite the increasing criminalization of dissent. Pointing out the incompatibility of Islam with Western norms, or the stupidity of importing millions of unassimilable Muslim settlers from the Middle East does not make you an accomplice to murder. Regardless of whether the perpetrator of this horrific crime was  a disgruntled Muslim, a Hispanic, or a white Christian, any attempt to transpose blame upon Donald Trump is despicable. However, it’s completely in keeping with the modus operandi of CAIR, which is, after all, an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood.

Those of you who can help identify the suspect in these murders-whose sketched image can be seen here-should contact the NYPD immediately. You can find all the information you’ll need here. As loathsome as CAIR  and all it represents is, we can all agree that the perpetrator of this crime, regardless of motive, should be brought to justice as swiftly as possible.

Rather than sit through the inevitable anticlimax which is Sir Hillary’s acceptance speech, why not watch the documentary which crystallizes just how nakedly corrupt the would-be First Family is? BTW, isn’t it funny how none of the critics of this ground-breaking documentary and book have taken up its author’s challenge to debate the merits of his well-documented dissection of Clinton family corruption? I wonder why that is.

I think we’ve established that those who control new media, our primary means of collective communication and social interaction, share neither our beliefs nor goals. The decision by Internet behemoths to enforce draconian abrogations of speech at the behest of the European Union merely crystallizes what we’ve known for some time, i.e. Mark Zuckerberg and his colleagues are not our allies, or even politically disinterested capitalists seeking to maximize their profit margins. They are ideological enemies, although posing as neutral parties, who want to see our ideas, insofar as they  militate against egalitarianism, social democracy, open borders, multiculturalism, progressivism, feminism,  dawa, and social justice,  quarantined. If not eliminated altogether. 

We have an inkling of what the future of this cloistered Web will look like, and it’s not something I look forward to. It’s a place where a drawing of Mohammed potentially garnering thousands of dollars can be removed, albeit temporarily, from eBay, along with CSA flags-at the behest of journalists-yet paeans to the greatest mass murderer of the 20th century remain widely available. A place where peaceful critics of the mass importation of rapists and criminals from the third world have their Facebook accounts suspended, even as calls for the killing of the presumptive Republican presidential nominee remain in place.

The Internet has broken the stranglehold exercised by old media over the flow of information. It’s allowed free citizens to access and disseminate facts, even as traditional gatekeepers try to embargo information which intellectually destroys their narratives and reveals unpleasant truths. It’s leveled the playing field between us and them, which is why they repeatedly and openly attempt to seize control of this invaluable tool for global communication. While the Overton window shifts in our favor, we need to recognize and respond to this unprecedented challenge. This threat is so palpable that it’s even seeped into our popular culture, forming the basis of a plot-line to an episode of the popular Netflix series House of Cards. Naturally, reality was inverted, as it was a Republican candidate collaborating with an enormously influential website in order to acquire and retain limitless executive power.

This prompts the question, how should we respond? How do we fight NGOs, bureaucratic institutions, multinational corporations and Internet monopolies that have seemingly endless resources at their disposal, and which control the medium through which we hope to communicate? There are many proposals, but one of the more intriguing ones involves holding these new media giants to their word.  A pro-life musician sued Youtube after her incredibly popular video was removed without explanation. On a much broader scale, Professor Stephen Bainbridge has suggested that wealthy philanthropists bankroll a lawsuit against Twitter in order to put conservative proposals on its annual proxy statement. Although this tactic sounds rather innovative, it actually bears a striking resemblance to a suggestion made by Senator Jesse Helms during the mid-80s which entailed a hostile takeover of the habitually biased CBS by conservative shareholders of the network.

Another legal proposal floated by some right wing analysts concerned about this growing problem is to force the government to classify these social media giants as public utilities, thus affording access for dissenting, anti-leftist thought. There are a number of reasons why I think this path-like the shareholder revolt-would be an ultimately futile effort. Although I welcome the entrance of affluent right wingers into the cultural war-and have been heartened by the courageous actions of Peter Thiel, the right’s real-life version of Batman-I don’t believe that conservatives will be able to engineer a coup, in the best sense of the word, against Twitter. Similarly, I doubt the efficacy of any effort to compel these corporations to enforce access and equitable treatment through the judiciary.

This isn’t because I believe it would allow the left to squelch some of the few remaining outlets of public conservatism outside of the Internet-although I’m certain liberals will continue to cheerlead for the introduction of any measure that mutes non-leftist opinion. I’m of the opinion that the utility of talk radio and the Fox News Channel to the right has waned and will continue to decline in the years ahead-this election being merely  foretaste of things to come. No, I oppose this route because it relies upon a thoroughly misguided view of how our courts currently operate. Beyond the merits of this controversial idea, the notion  that jurists steeped in progressivism will rescue conservatives is absurd on its face. It’s the same misguided thinking which led many to believe that the Roberts Supreme Court would unilaterally abolish Obamacare, i.e. that an instrument of the state would begin to curtail the excesses of another branch of the state.

Another option is to create right wing analogs to existing Web-based resources. The dreary results of this experiment can be seen in QubeTV and Conservapedia, the latter a Christian fundamentalist response to Wikipedia’s perceived biases. Beyond the self-consciously limiting aspect of these projects, their creators are marginalizing a political philosophy which they  hope to spread to the widest possible audience-in effect, doing the very job of the websites they stand in opposition to. Creating a less professional, derivative, albeit conservative, version of a pre-existing Web platform is not the solution to the problems we’re facing. We’re not going to win the battle of ideas by diving into an ideological cul-de-sac. In my next essay, I’ll explore some strategies which might actually work.