(Weekend blog. Here’s a perceptive article written by somebody much more intelligent than me. Enjoy!)
European leaders talk about two things these days; preserving European values by taking in M*sl*m migrants and integrating M*sl*m migrants into Europe by getting them to adopt European values.
It does not occur to them that their plan to save European values depends on killing European values.
The same European values that require Sweden, a country of less than 10 million, to take in 180,000 M*sl*m migrants in one year also expects the new “Swedes” to celebrate tolerance, feminism and gay marriage. Instead European values have filled the cities of Europe with Shariah patrols, unemployed angry men waving ISIS flags and the occasional public act of terror.
European countries that refuse to invest money in border security instead find themselves forced to invest money into counterterrorism forces. And those are bad for European values too.
But, as Central European countries are discovering, European values don’t have much to do with the preservation of viable functioning European states. Instead they are about the sort of static Socialism that Bernie Sanders admires from abroad. But even a Socialist welfare state requires people to work for a living. Maine’s generous welfare policies began collapsing once Somali M*sl*ms swarmed in to take advantage of them. Denmark and the Dutch, among other of Bernie Sanders’ role models, have been sounding more like Reagan and less like Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren.
Two years ago, the Dutch King declared that, “The classic welfare state of the second half of the 20th century in these areas in particular brought forth arrangements that are unsustainable in their current form.” That same year, the Danish Finance Minister called for the “modernization of the welfare state.”
But the problem isn’t one of modernization, it’s medievalization.
27% of Moroccans and 21% of Turks in the Netherlands areunemployed. It’s 27% in Denmark for Iraqis. And even when employed, their average income is well below the European average.
Critics pointed out in the past that a multicultural America can’t afford the welfare states that European countries have. Now that those same countries are turning multicultural, they can’t afford them either.
Europe invested in the values of its welfare state. The M*sl*m world invested in large families. Europe expects the M*sl*m world to bail out its shrinking birth rate by working and paying into the system so that its aging population can retire. The M*sl*m migrants however expect Europe to subsidize their large families with its welfare state while they deal some drugs and chop off some heads on the side.
Once again, European values are in conflict with European survival.
The European values that require Europe to commit suicide are about ideology, not language, culture or nationhood. But the incoming migrants don’t share that ideology. They have their own *sl*mic values.
Why should 23-year-old M*h*mmed work for four decades so that Hans or Fritz across the way can retire at 61 and lie on a beach in Mallorca? The idea that M*h*mmed would ever want to do such a thing out of love for Europe was a silly fantasy that European governments fed their worried citizens.
M*h*mmed doesn’t share European values. Nor are they likely to take hold of him no matter how often the aging teachers, who hope he gets a job and subsidizes their retirement, try to drill them into his head. Europeans expect M*h*mmed to become a Swede or a German as if he were some child they had adopted from an exotic country and raised as their own, and work to subsidize their European values.
The M*sl*m migrants are meant to be the retirement plan for an aging Europe. They’re supposed to keep its ramshackle collection of economic policies, its welfare states and social programs rolling along.
But they’re more like a final solution.
M*h*mmed is Fritz’s retirement plan. But M*h*mmed has a very different type of plan. Fritz is counting on M*h*mmed to work while he relaxes. M*h*mmed relaxes and expects Fritz to work. Fritz is not related to him and therefore M*h*mmed sees no reason why he should work to support him.
European social democracy reduces society to a giant insurance plan in which money is pooled together. But insurance is forbidden in *sl*m which considers it to be gambling. European social democracy expects him to bail it out, but to M*h*mmed, European values are a crime against *sl*m.
M*h*mmed’s Imam will tell him to work off the books because paying into the system is gambling. However taking money out of the system is just Jizya; the money non-M*sl*ms are obligated to pay to M*sl*ms. Under *sl*mic law, it’s better for M*h*mmed to sell drugs than to pay taxes.
That’s why drug dealing and petty crime are such popular occupations for Salafis in Europe. It’s preferable to steal from infidels than to participate in the great gamble of the European welfare state.
M*h*mmed isn’t staking his future on the shaky pensions of European socialism. He invests in what social scientists call social capital. He plans his retirement by having a dozen kids. If this lifestyle is subsidized by infidel social services, so much the better. And when social services collapse, those of his kids who aren’t in prison or in ISIS will be there to look after him in his golden years.
As retirement plans go, it’s older and better than the European model.
M*h*mmed doesn’t worry much about the future. Even if he doesn’t make it past six kids, by the time he’s ready to retire the European country he’s living in will probably be an *sl*mic State. And he is confident that whatever its arrangements are, they will be better and more just than the infidel system.
Sweden will take in 180,000 migrants this year. Germany may take in 1.5 million. Most of them will be young men following the M*h*mmed retirement plan.
Europeans are being assured that the M*h*mmeds will balance out the demographic disparity of an aging population with too many retirees and too few younger workers. But instead the M*h*mmeds will put even more pressure on the younger workers who not only have to subsidize their elders, but millions of M*h*mmeds, their multiple brides and their fourteen-child *sl*mic retirement plans.
Retirement ages will go further up and social services for the elderly will be cut. The welfare state will collapse, but it will have to be kept running because the alternative will be major social unrest.
Among the triggers of the Arab Spring were rising wheat prices and cuts to food subsidies. Prices went up and governments fell as street riots turned into civil wars. Imagine a Sweden where 50 percent of the young male population is M*sl*m, mostly unemployed, turning into Syria when the economy collapses and the bill comes due. Imagine European M*sl*m street riots where the gangs have heavy artillery and each ghetto Caliph has his own Imams and Fatwas to back up his claims.
Europe is slowly killing itself in the name of European values. It’s trying to protect its economic setup by bankrupting it. European values have become a suicide pact. Its politicians deliver speeches explaining why European values require mass M*sl*m migration that make as little sense as a lunatic’s suicide note.
*sl*mic values are not compatible with European values. Not only free speech and religious freedom, but even the European welfare state is un-*sl*mic. M*sl*ms have a high birth rate because their approach to the future is fundamentally different than the European one. Europeans have chosen to have few children and many government agencies to take care of them. M*sl*ms choose to have many children and few government agencies. The European values so admired by American leftists have no future.
Europe is drinking rat poison to cure a cold. Instead of changing its values, it’s trying to maintain them by killing itself. The M*h*mmed retirement plan won’t save European Socialism. It will bury it.
Following the events in Paris, Dhimmi Dave Cameron and Barak Hussein Obama both came out with the usual drivel about the murders having “nothing to do with *sl*m which is a religion of peace” and they claimed that “the vast majority of M*sl*ms were utterly opposed to such violence”. Cameron did this during PM’s questions this Wednesday and Obama did it at a G20 conference in Turkey. This is all on YouTube. But I won’t even bother giving you the links as you’ve probably heard the same rubbish many times before.
Perhaps surprisingly, a poll conducted by none other than the politically-correct BBC suggests that Cameron and Obama are lying through their teeth.
The BBC found that 45% of British M*sl*ms felt that “M*sl*m clerics preaching that violence against the West can be justified are in touch with mainstream M*sl*m opinion”. Moreover, 46% felt that “being a M*sl*m in Britain was difficult because of prejudice against *sl*m”.
I just can’t guess why British people might feel “prejudice against *sl*m”:
After all, Dave says *sl*m is a “religion of peace”:
I’ve tried to write a parable of life in Britain today
Johnny goes to the teacher and says, “the M*sl*m boy attacked me”.
“Oh”, said the teacher, “then we’d better tie Johnny’s hands together to stop any retaliation which might cause trouble”.
Next day Johnny said the M*sl*m boy attacked him again.
“Oh”, said the teacher, “then we’d better tighten the rope around Johnny’s hands, because it’s not working and Johnny is still getting into fights”.
Next day Johnny told the teacher the M*sl*m boy attacked him yet again.
“Oh”, said the head teacher and she expelled Johnny from school for being a trouble-maker and a racist *sl*mophobe.
Then the M*sl*m boy and his five friends raped Johnny’s 12-year-old sister.
“Oh”, said the social worker, “that must be Johnny the racist’s fault again for provoking the poor, innocent M*sl*m boys”.
A few days later, a gang of M*sl*m boys attacked Johnny in the street and left him so badly injured that he was put on life support in the local hospital.
“Oh”, said the policeman as he looked at Johnny’s file. “I can see that Johnny has a record of *sl*mophobia. If Johnny recovers we’ll have to prosecute him for incitement to racial hatred”.
But Johnny died from his injuries. The teacher, head teacher, social worker and policeman were all relieved that the racist *sl*mophobe Johnny would not cause any more problems for them. As for the M*sl*m boys who killed Johnny, two of them were radicalised at their local mosque, became Jihadis and went to fight in Syria where they beheaded a few people. Then they came back to Britain and went on a murder spree in the London Underground during rush hour killing over thirty innocents.
“Oh”, said the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition and the Home Secretary, and Sami Chakrabarti and all the journalists at the BBC and Channel 4, “the attacks had nothing to do with *sl*m and we’re all responsible because we didn’t do enough to integrate the M*sl*m boys into British society”.
(Incidentally, I posted this parable on the Daily Telegraph website an hour ago and now it has been deleted by the moderator. I guess I must be considered an *sl*mophobe)
As Christmas (the season for giving) approaches, most of us are being bombarded by gimme gimme gimme letters from some of Britain’s over 200,000 charities. Among the pile coming through my door was one from “Crisis at Christmas”.
I have given to them in the past. But since I researched and wrote my latest book THE GREAT CHARITY SCANDAL, I’ve become a bit more careful about whom I give my very limited money to. So, before putting a modest cheque into the Crisis at Christmas envelope, I had a quick shifty through their financial accounts. And I really didn’t like what I saw.
The charity Crisis UK was founded in 1967 in response to the Ken Loach film Cathy Come Home shown the previous year, and a publicity campaign highlighting the plight of homeless people. Crisis launched their Crisis at Christmas campaign in 1972.
There were three things that worried me when I looked at how Crisis uses and (IMHO) abuses our money:
1. Too little used for ‘charitable activities’
According to the Charity Commission on average our charities spend £8.50 of every £10 donated on supposed ‘charitable activities’. Of course, I know that’s complete bollox as many charities include things like consultancy fees paid to the founder, administration costs and all kinds of political campaigning as ‘charitable activities’ when they clearly are not. But let’s put that aside for the moment and compare like with like – the financial report from Crisis with the financial reports from other charities.
Whereas the average charity reportedly spends £8.50 of every £10 donated on ‘charitable activities’, Crisis spends only £6.79. That’s a pretty big difference:
If Crisis could match other charities, that would leave an extra £4m a year less for management and bureaucracy and thus £4m a year more for ‘charitable activities‘
2. Highly-paid staff
You might have thought a relatively small charity dealing with the homeless in the UK would pay its employees less than charities operating in some of the world’s most dangerous countries? Well, you would have been wrong. Whereas the average employee cost (salary, social security and pension) at charities like Oxfam, Red Cross and Save the Children are in the range of £20,000 to £26,000, the average employee cost at Crisis is a much more generous £37,183:
Ooopps!
3. Highly-paid boss
Crisis won’t tell me how much their boss is paid. They just do the legal minimum of reporting that he or she is in the salary band of £100,000 to £109,999 (so let’s assume they’re getting in the middle of that range – £105,000). Crisis has about 251 FTEs (full-time equivalent employees). Yet the Crisis boss is being paid at pretty much the same level as the boss of Oxfam (4,855 FTEs) andmore than the boss of CAFOD (444 FTEs):
So the Crisis boss is being paid a similar salary as bosses of charities with many more employees possibly operating in many more countries. Does that seem right to you?
Conclusion – 1 Does Crisis deserve our money?
I have phoned and emailed the media department at Crisis asking why so little money is used on ‘charitable activities’ and why Crisis employees seem to be so expensive. But sadly I have not yet had a reply.
However, from what I’ve seen, I’m not wasting any more of my money on Crisis at Christmas and its (IMHO) over-paid employees and boss.
Conclusion – 2 Why does Crisis even exist?
But hold on a minute. I’ve just seen a TV ad for Shelter. I wonder what the £60m-a-year Shelter does? Oh, Shelter seems to be doing pretty much the same thing as the £25m-a-year Crisis:
So, if we merged these two charities, we could probably save around £7m in administration and support costs. That’s £7m more that could be used for real ‘charitable purposes’. What about it Shelter and Crisis? Oh, you don’t want to merge as that would mean lots of highly-paid bosses and bureaucrats losing their jobs and bosses losing the chance of their OBEs or whatever gongs they’re after.
So, there’s another reason not to give a penny of your money to either Crisis or Shelter. They’ll just waste too much of it on themselves.
Incidentally, the average employee cost at Shelter is £34,992, well above the main international poverty charities like Oxfam (£22,327) or Save the Children (£19,075), but comfortably below the £37,183 of those lucky people at Crisis
Below are the main parts from an article titled The West Has Lost the Will to Live.
Though I could probably sum up the article with: “We will fight them on Facebook, we will fight them on Instagram, we will fight them on Twitter. But we we’re too cowed by political correctness to actually fight them in reality”.
Anyway, here’s the article:
The most basic, primitive honor a nation owes to its dead is to fight to defend itself—to defeat the enemy and win. And yet the West won’t.
The West is hanging on by a thread and doesn’t even know it. We are living off the fumes of the accomplishments of our forefathers and those who fought and died in the cause of freedom and individual rights. But the thread is wearing thin. Time is just about running out.
After the murderous jihad attacks in Paris comes the predictable Western response: not resolute self-defense, but weepy candlelight vigils, protestations of unity, and hashtags. After the jihad attacks in Garland, Texas, Chattanooga, the University of California Merced, and scores of arrests of American M*sl*ms working for ISIS (the FBI has 900 ISIS-related investigations currently ongoing), our top priority should be to crush the enemy.
Instead, we get pathos and pitiful memes. NBC reported: “Paris residents were using the hashtag #PorteOuverte — French for ‘open door’—on Twitter to offer safe haven to strangers stranded after a string of deadly attacks Friday night.” Everyone is congratulating himself over this hashtag. “Twitter users in other countries,” NBC added, “also began using the hashtag to share their delight that social media was being used for a good cause”— colossal stupidity.
“Share their delight?” This delight is misplaced. I would expect nothing less than that Parisians should offer safe haven: just because savages are at war with us doesn’t mean that we should be less human.
This hashtag is just the latest in an endless stream of manifestations of the sophomoric, embarrassing, preening self-indulgence that is endemic in our sick culture. It is reminiscent of “Boston Strong”: Really? How? After the Boston Marathon jihad bombings, the media and Boston elites refused to call the attack jihad. What stand did Boston take against jihad?
Equally revolting is the Eiffel Tower peace symbol that is circulating around. Do the leftists think the ISIS jihadis will see this and lay down their arms? If the Christians and Yazidis in Syria make the peace sign, will all be well? If the kidnapped schoolgirls—now sex slaves—make the peace sign, will they be freed? Such idiocy is an affront to every freedom-loving human being.
The endless patting ourselves on the back that citizens of Western countries engage in after a mass slaughter by jihadists is disgusting. People are crowing about hashtags and blood donations as if this is somehow new. Of course we care. We always care. That is our value system, that is a Western value. The United States of America is the most charitable nation on earth. That is who we are—although when Obama speaks about universal values, G-d only knows which ones he is talking about: those of the West or those of Sharia?
What no one is talking about is taking on these savages. That is what is so morally depraved about our response. The idea that we’re not allowed to take the appropriate measures to defeat the *sl*mic State is obscene. The idea that the United States of America cannot defeat the *sl*mic State or al-Qaeda is absurd, and the whole world knows it. But we choose not to use our strength. We choose to be victims. It’s shameful.
And clearly, since everybody knows that we are not physically weak, where is the basic dignity that any nation should have, to stand up for its own values? If nothing else, when we find ourselves involved in a war, we should fight it and finish it. You either win or you will be defeated.
Obama has aligned with the jihad force. In Syria, Egypt and Libya, and worst of all, now Iraq. He has blood on his hands. He has the blood of hundreds of thousands of Christians, the blood of our soldiers. By abandoning Iraq, he takes on his hands the death of every soldier who gave life and limb in Iraq to defend this country. Whether you agreed with the Iraq war or not, we did it. We went in and asked the native population to help us. You cannot just withdraw and abandon those people.
Is it proper for us to defend ourselves and to take the appropriate action to defend this country? Of course. One of Obama’s historic crimes is that he allowed our superiority to deteriorate. But that doesn’t mean our enemies have disappeared, or that we cannot or should not defend ourselves against them. Just hours after Obama insisted that he had contained the “Junior Varsity team” ISIS, they laid siege to Paris. And this goes unchallenged.
When M*sl*ms attack, the left attacks us. MSNBC, the Guardian, and Salon all ran pieces blaming the “right-wing” for the Paris attacks. Outrageous, but not surprising. The enemedia is aligned with the jihad force. As the jihad heats up in the West, the media is becoming more clumsy and desperate in its attempts to deflect attention away from the jihad and back to its favorite bogeyman, “right-wing extremists”. Now, even when the evidence of *sl*mic jihad responsibility is everywhere, as it is with the Paris attacks, “journalists” still find ways to put the blame on the “right-wing” that they hate far more than they do bloodthirsty jihadis, whom they don’t dislike at all.
If you have an ounce of self-esteem, when someone comes at you with a gun, you answer with force. If he is out to destroy you, you owe it to yourself to defend yourself. We need to understand that the left is as dangerous, if not more so, than the suicide bomber, for obscuring this basic fact—because leftists have the legitimacy of the mainstream, the imprimatur of respectability, and they wield this spurious legitimacy like a club to destroy all opposition to their totalitarianism.
We need to go to war against the left. We have to get that into our heads. We have to accept that terrible reality. They want to destroy our freedom. They want to destroy our country. They want to steal our children. That’s war. There is no one on the right who has the correct philosophy about this. The left demands the right to lie, and they are lying to the American people on a massive scale, even to the extent of making people think there is something wrong with loving and defending our nation.
The idea that the Paris attacks happened on the eve of a global conference not on the gravest threat to freedom, not on the global jihad, but on climate change, speaks to how unreal and sick we are as rational beings. Even worse, as if that weren’t bad enough, you have a presidential candidate saying that climate change is responsible for terrorism. And the very serious talking heads in the mainstream media are reporting this with a straight face.
The fact is, global jihadists, whether they’re ISIS or al-Qaeda or Hamas or Hezbollah, are monstrous aggressors. We don’t have to wait for the first sign that they are attacking; they have declared war against us. They must be destroyed. We can’t complain about what we should or shouldn’t be doing, we have to correct it. This idea of containment, as Obama claimed the other day to have “contained” ISIS, is absurd—an intermediate state.
There is no intermediate state. It’s either/or. This is war. We have to fight it.
And here’s 2-minute clip from TV series Homeland where a fictional character dares to say what none of our politically-correct, *sl*mophiliac leaders dares say. Please watch it and weep for our future:
1. Here’s an article written by a Spanish journalist in 2008:
(This was written 4 years after the March 2004 Madrid train bombings by our M*sl*m friends which killed 191 innocent people and wounded 2,050)
ALL EUROPEAN LIFE DIED IN AUSCHWITZBy Sebastian Vilar Rodrigez
I walked down the street in Barcelona , and suddenly discovered a terrible truth – Europe died in Auschwitz … We killed six million Jews and replaced them with 20 million M*sl*ms. In Auschwitz we burned a culture, thought, creativity, talent. We destroyed the chosen people, truly chosen, because they produced great and wonderful people who changed the world.
The contribution of this people is felt in all areas of life: science, art, international trade, and above all, as the conscience of the world. These are the people we burned.
And under the pretense of tolerance, and because we wanted to prove to ourselves that we were cured of the disease of racism, we opened our gates to 20 million M*sl*ms, who brought us stupidity and ignorance, religious extremism and lack of tolerance, crime and poverty, due to an unwillingness to work and support their families with pride.
They have blown up our trains and turned our beautiful Spanish cities into the third world, drowning in filth and crime.
Shut up in the apartments they receive free from the government, they plan the murder and destruction of their naive hosts.
And thus, in our misery, we have exchanged culture for fanatical hatred, creative skill for destructive skill, intelligence for backwardness and superstition.
We have exchanged the pursuit of peace of the Jews of Europe and their talent for a better future for their children, their determined clinging to life because life is holy, for those who pursue death, for people consumed by the desire for death for themselves and others, for our children and theirs.
What a terrible mistake was made by miserable Europe ……
*********************************** 2. And here is some supporting evidence
The global *sl*mic population is approximately 1,200,000,000; that is ONE BILLION TWO HUNDRED MILLION or 20% of the world’s population. They have received the following Nobel Prizes:
Literature:
1988 – Najib Mahfooz
Peace:
1978 – Mohamed Anwar El-Sadat
1990 – Elias James Corey
1994 – Yaser Arafat:
1999 – Ahmed Zewai
Economics:
(zero)
Physics:
(zero)
Medicine:
1960 – Peter Brian Medawar
1998 – Ferid Mourad
TOTAL: 7 SEVEN
The global Jewish population is approximately 14,000,000; that is FOURTEEN MILLION or about 0.02% of the world’s population. They have received the following Nobel Prizes:
Literature:
1910 – Paul Heyse
1927 – Henri Bergson
1958 – Boris Pasternak
1966 – Shmuel Yosef Agnon
1966 – Nelly Sachs
1976 – Saul Bellow
1978 – Isaac Bashevis Singer
1981 – Elias Canetti
1987 – Joseph Brodsky
1991 – Nadine Gordimer
Peace:
1911 – Alfred Fried
1911 – Tobias Michael Carel Asser
1968 – Rene Cassin
1973 – Henry Kissinger
1978 – Menachem Begin
1986 – Elie Wiesel
1994 – Shimon Peres
1994 – Yitzhak Rabin
Physics:
1905 – Adolph Von Baeyer
1906 – Henri Moissan
1907 – Albert Abraham Michelson
1908 – Gabriel Lippmann
1910 – Otto Wallach
1915 – Richard Willstaetter
1918 – Fritz Haber
1921 – Albert Einstein
1922 – Niels Bohr
1925 – James Franck
1925 – Gustav Hertz
1943 – Gustav Stern
1943 – George Charles de Hevesy
1944 – Isidor Issac Rabi
1952 – Felix Bloch
1954 – Max Born
1958 – Igor Tamm
1959 – Emilio Segre
1960 – Donald A. Glaser
1961 – Robert Hofstadter
1961 – Melvin Calvin
1962 – Lev Davidovich Landau
1962 – Max Ferdinand Perutz
1965 – Richard Phillips Feynman
1965 – Julian Schwinger
1969 – Murray Gell-Mann
1971 – Dennis Gabor
1972 – William Howard Stein
1973 – Brian David Josephson
1975 – Benjamin Mottleson
1976 – Burton Richter
1977 – Ilya Prigogine
1978 – Arno Allan Penzias
1978 – Peter L Kapitza
1979 – Stephen Weinberg
1979 – Sheldon Glashow
1979 – Herbert Charles Brown
1980 – Paul Berg
1980 – Walter Gilbert
1981 – Roald Hoffmann
1982 – Aaron Klug
1985 – Albert A. Hauptman
1985 – Jerome Karle
1986 – Dudley R. Herschbach
1988 – Robert Huber
1988 – Leon Lederman
1988 – Melvin Schwartz
1988 – Jack Steinberger
1989 – Sidney Altman
1990 – Jerome Friedman
1992 – Rudolph Marcus
1995 – Martin Perl
2000 – Alan J. Heeger
Economics:
1970 – Paul Anthony Samuelson
1971 – Simon Kuznets
1972 – Kenneth Joseph Arrow
1975 – Leonid Kantorovich
1976 – Milton Friedman
1978 – Herbert A. Simon
1980 – Lawrence Robert Klein
1985 – Franco Modigliani
1987 – Robert M. Solow
1990 – Harry Markowitz
1990 – Merton Miller
1992 – Gary Becker
1993 – Robert Fogel
Medicine:
1908 – Elie Metchnikoff
1908 – Paul Erlich
1914 – Robert Barany
1922 – Otto Meyerhof
1930 – Karl Landsteiner
1931 – Otto Warburg
1936 – Otto Loewi
1944 – Joseph Erlanger
1944 – Herbert Spencer Gasser
1945 – Ernst Boris Chain
1946 – Hermann Joseph Muller
1950 – Tadeus Reichstein
1952 – Selman Abraham Waksman
1953 – Hans Krebs
1953 – Fritz Albert Lipmann
1958 – Joshua Lederberg
1959 – Arthur Kornberg
1964 – Konrad Bloch
1965 – Francois Jacob
1965 – Andre Lwoff
1967 – George Wald
1968 – Marshall W. Nirenberg
1969 – Salvador Luria
1970 – Julius Axelrod
1970 – Sir Bernard Katz
1972 – Gerald Maurice Edelman
1975 – Howard Martin Temin
1976 – Baruch S. Blumberg
1977 – Roselyn Sussman Yalow
1978 – Daniel Nathans
1980 – Baruj Benacerraf
1984 – Cesar Milstein
1985 – Michael Stuart Brown
1985 – Joseph L. Goldstein
1986 – Stanley Cohen [& Rita Levi-Montalcini]
1988 – Gertrude Elion
1989 – Harold Varmus
1991 – Erwin Neher
1991 – Bert Sakmann
1993 – Richard J. Roberts
1993 – Phillip Sharp
1994 – Alfred Gilman
1995 – Edward B. Lewis
1996- Lu RoseIacovino TOTAL: 129!
Apparently, after each performance of his sell-out Hamlet, that great thespian and political expert, Benedict Cumberbatch, harangues his audience demanding the British Government takes in more ‘Syrian refugees’.
Well Benedict old chap, continental Europe did take in lots of ‘Syrian refugees’ and at least two of them seem to be responsible for the Paris massacre. So, how do you and your progressive leftie friends feel about that, Benedict? Oh, none of you give a damn? No, I thought not.
For months we’ve been lectured by the holier-than-thou, attention-seeking, self-righteous – Cumberbatch, Geldorf, Chakrabarti, Alibhai-Brown and many others of their ilk – that we have a duty to allow millions of medieval, violent, intolerant Third-World scum into Europe. Well, Paris showed us the result of that idea. What will the self-righteous say now?
Oh, I know. They’ll say it’s our fault. They’ll say we should have been better at integrating the M*sl*m hordes. They’ll say we’re responsible for what happened in Paris.
But these are the people responsible:
The real Paris murderers are our rulers who are encouraging an *sl*mic invasion so they can wipe out any sense of Europe’s nation states and force us into their nightmare of a United States of Europe governed by corrupt, unelected, wasteful, self-serving bureaucratic elites.
During the Cold War, the USSR had its ‘useful idiots’ (many in the Labour Party). The term ‘useful idiot’ is thought to have been coined by Vladimir Lenin. It describes naive communist sympathizers in the West. While Lenin and the Soviets held these stupid ‘useful idiots’ in utter contempt, they also saw them as useful tools for dispensing propaganda.
During Stalin’s massacres of his own people, one of his most useful ‘useful idiots’ was, of course, the treacherous coward Ralph Miliband (Ed Miliband’s father).
Now the Religion of Peace has its ‘useful idiots’ – the Cumberbatches and Geldorfs and Jon Snows and Kathy Newmans and Krishnan Guru-Murphies – who pompously and self-righteously brand anyone worrying about the *sl*mification of Europe as being ‘xenophobes’ and ‘racists’
And still, after the Paris massacre, they’re trying to fool us with their lies. The BBC has claimed that the ‘vast majority of French M*sl*ms are well-integrated’. I humbly suggest the BBC reporters visit the vast, filthy, cesspit, Third-World *sl*mic slums surrounding almost every major French city.
And Channel 4 claims that the problem is ‘*sl*mic extremism’. Really? When over half of French and British M*sl*ms supported the murder of the Charlie Hebdo cartoonists!
We are at war – not with *sl*mic extremism, but with mainstream *sl*m. But our leaders can’t admit this as this would lead to riots and social disorder across Europe. So, our leaders put on stern faces and promise that everything will be done to ‘root out the scourge of *sl*mic extremism’ while doing nothing apart from allowing the invading M*sl*m armies to continue pouring into Europe. Meanwhile anyone who dares question the death cult masquerading as a religion is prosecuted for inciting racial hatred.
When civil war does break out in Europe, whose side will the authorities take? Will they protect what’s left of the indigenous population? Or will they protect the M*sl*m invaders? Having seen video of the German police clubbing ordinary German citizens protesting about a migrant takeover of their small town while the Germans shout “why don’t you just shoot us? You’re destroying our country anyway”, I fear it will be the latter.
(Weekend blog) As the inevitable civil war (which I have long predicted on this website) seems to have started in France, it might be worth remembering the warning that soldier, journalist, politician, historian and statesman Winston Churchill gave us about *sl*m.
Many people know the first part of this warning – that M*sl*ms are like dogs with rabies. But the later parts are even more prophetically chilling.
Here’s the whole quote and below it I’ve listed what I see as the key points:
‘How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia (rabies) in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries, improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live.
A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement, the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property, either as a child, a wife, or a concubine, must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of *sl*m has ceased to be a great power among men.
Individual M*sl*ms may show splendid qualities, but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome.’
So, what do we have?
1. *sl*m is a form of madness
2. All *sl*mic countries are backward, underdeveloped and mired in poverty and misery without any proper rule of law
3. *sl*m is obsessed with sex. Moreover women in *sl*mic countries belong to men and are little better than slaves
4. Although *sl*m is primitive, it is also dangerous as it seeks to conquer ever more countries
5. *sl*m is a threat to Western civilisation
6. Only the fact that the West is technically and scientifically superior to backward *sl*mic countries has prevented us being destroyed by the “Religion of Peace”
I humbly suggest that Churchill nailed it.
But what Churchill probably couldn’t imagine is that, rather than fighting against the primitive death cult that is *sl*m, Western rulers have allowed our countries to be invaded by those who will eventually destroy us.
The most basic duty of any government is to provide security for its citizens – not to encourage a flood of violent, backward, subhuman Third World excrement to pour over its borders.
It will be interesting to see what excuses *sl*mo-Dave, the useless socialist Hollande and Angela “I love M*sl*m Migrants” Merkel give for last night’s Paris massacres.
Will we get action to stop the *sl*mic invasion? Or will we just get tough words while the hordes continue to pour over our non-existent borders?
Here’s your typical bearded loony (sorry, I meant “respected *sl*mic cleric”) describing the delights of paradise:
“Allah said that the black-eyed virgins are beautiful white young women, with black pupils and very white retinas, whose skin is so delicate and bright that it causes confusion. Allah said that they are like hidden pearls. They are virgins, who yearn for their husbands. They are all the same age, morally and physically beautiful. They are like precious gems and pearls in their splendor, their clarity, their purity. They are like hidden pearls – as pure as a pearl within a shell, untouched by man. Each one of them is so beautiful that you can see the bone-marrow through the delicate flesh on their legs.”
“Such brilliant beauty does not exist in this world. Where can you find such beauty? Whereas the women of this world may suffer, for days and nights, from menstruation, from blood for 40 days after childbirth, from vaginal bleeding and from diseases – the women of Paradise are pure, unblemished, menstruation-free, free of faeces, urine, phlegm, children. Moreover, Allah cleansed them of all impure and foul things, both in appearance and character. In character, they are not jealous, hateful, or angry. They are not greedy.”
“They are restricted to tents, locked up for the husband. There is no such thing as going out. When he comes home – they are there. There is no such thing in Paradise as a man coming home and not finding his wife there. Allah described them as women who lower their gaze, and never look at anybody but their husband. As for deriving pleasure – the man is given the strength of 100 men.”
Sounds like loads of fun, huh?
And here’s David Q’moron wishing our M*sl*m friends a happy Ramadan:
I’d like to send my very best wishes to everyone observing the holy month of Ramadan.
It’s a hugely important time as M*sl*ms in Britain and across the world mark the foundation of their faith.
And as friends and families come together in contemplation and in fasting, we are reminded of those M*sl*m values – those British values – of community, family and charity.
You can see them in centuries past, when M*sl*m soldiers served bravely alongside their comrades, from the trenches of the First World War, to the skies of the Second World War.
And you can see them today with British M*sl*ms giving more to charity than any other faith group in Britain, fulfilling their sacred duty of Zakat by making a real difference to lives blighted by conflict and disaster, and with British M*sl*ms at the top of every field – from our biggest businesses, to our precious health service to our Houses of Parliament, and yes – to the Cabinet I lead.
I’ve talked a lot about one nation – about Britain being a country where everyone can get on – whatever their background and wherever they’re from. British M*sl*ms embody that spirit.
They prove that this can be a country where success is determined not by your colour, community or creed, but a place where you can go as far as your talents will take you.
So as families, friends and communities come together at Iftar each evening, I hope all of them, and everyone else across Britain, will reflect on the universal values that Ramadan represents – and the contribution that British M*sl*ms make to our country.
Ramadan Mubarak to you all.
And here’s my message: “British people! Weep for your country, your culture, your freedom, your democracy, your history and your future”.
Following Rotherham and Oxford and all the other towns where our M*sl*m friends have made gang rape and gang sodomisation of white girls the most popular sport in town, you might have thought they would keep a low profile. You would have been wrong. In a recent blog I wrote about how M*sl*ms in Rotherham had protested about *sl*mophobia. And now we learn that in Keighly, West Yorkshire, a 13-year-old schoolgirl was subjected to months of sexual exploitation by a gang of 14 “Asian” men.
I wonder what our media mean by “Asian” – were they Chinese? Or Japanese? Or Indonesian? It’s truly a mystery!
The girl – who was aged 13 when the rapes began – was allegedly attacked in car parks, parks and churchyards around Keighley, by the defendants, one of whom was 59 at the time. The girl said one alleged attacker called her a ‘little white s**g’ and ‘white b*****d’, and laughed at her as she wept on the floor.
But Britain’s rape epidemic has nothing on what’s going on in Sweden. I’ve previously shown this lovely chart about the increase in rape in our Nordic neighbour:
And there was a heartwarming story a couple of days ago about a Swedish woman who was raped twice by different Arab asylum-seekers in Strängnäs. The woman was first caught by a [M*sl*m] man who pulled her down and raped her. After the attack, she started to walk back toward the center of Strängnäs. But just a short distance from the site of the first rape she was assaulted and raped both vaginally and anally by two other Arabs who also spat on her after they had finished raping her.
Sweden, a country of just 9 million people could be taking in around 200,000 backward, unemployable, violent, misogynist Third-Worlders this year. That would be equivalent to Britain allowing 1,500,000 of these excellent people into our country in just one year. Why the Swedes are committing social, cultural and economic suicide is something that future historians will study with amazement.
In conclusion, here’s Pat Condell’s latest video about Sweden’s bright, progressive, multi-cultural future:
Here we go again. Loads of TV ads showing starving Africans as the well-paid Lords of Poverty (sorry, I meant ‘selfless charity workers’) try to guilt-trip us into handing over our money.
The situation in Ethiopia is, as usual, terrible. But unless we start facing the truth about the reasons for Ethiopia’s problems, we’ll be back again with the same ‘starving Ethiopians’ appeals time after time after time:
So, here are the four main things you need to know about the latest Ethiopian famine:
1. Happens every 7 to 10 years
There is a rainfall shortage in the Horn of Africa every 7 to 10 years. These caused famines in 1892, 1913, 1929, 1935, 1942, 1951, 1958, 1966, 1973, 1984, 1988 and 2004. One reason these rainfall shortages lead to disastrous famines is that agriculture in much of Ethiopia (like pretty much everything else in that violent, poverty-stricken cesspit of a country) has hardly developed at all in the last 500 years.
2. Explosive population growth
In 1965, when the developed world started hosing aid money onto Africa, the population of Ethiopia was a mere 25 million. By 1984, when Saint Bob Geldorf did his BandAid thing, the population had reached about 40 million. Now, 30 years after the (IMHO) foul-mouthed, self-righteous attention-seeker Geldorf did BandAid, the population of Ethiopia is 96 million:
By 2050, the population of Ethiopia could reach 177 million. It should be more than obvious, even to a creature like Geldorf, that a largely infertile country which is hit by regular droughts cannot ever support such a rapidly growing population. What Ethiopia needs is not more food, but more birth control. Without that, there will always be famines and always be starving millions.
3. Massive corruption
All African countries are corrupt. But Ethiopia is up there with the best (down there with the worst?) of them. Ethiopia receives around $3.4bn in foreign aid each year. Best estimates (Global Financial Integrity project) are that Ethiopia’s rulers are looting at least $2bn a year from their country. Hardly surprising Ethiopia is still and will probably always be a stinking, starving, backward hell-hole. Moreover, the ten richest people in Ethiopia (mostly political leaders and their business cronies) are estimated to be worth about $24.1bn. There’s plenty of money in Ethiopia – enough to feed, clothe and provide clean water for the impoverished – but most of the money ends up in the hands of a tiny. utterly venal ruling elite
4. The food shortages are largely man-made
Several studies of Ethiopian famines (for example Evil Days: Thirty Years of War and Famine in Ethiopia by Alexander De Waal) have suggested that there has usually been enough food in the country. The problem has been more of food distribution rather than food availability. Ethiopia’s many oppressive governments have repeatedly used food as a weapon to crush dissent by starving those in areas seen as hostile to the government. This is even admitted by the Guardian in one of the very few truthful articles the supposed ‘newspaper’ has ever published https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/poverty-matters/2014/oct/22/ethiopian-famine-report-influence-modern-coverage
The Guardian also admits that much of the aid sent to Ethiopia is stolen by the military
Conclusion
If you want to make Ethiopia’s rulers even richer and continue to subsidise the luxury lifestyles of the holier-than-thou Lords of Poverty working for the charities, please hand over your money.
But if you’re fed up of the self-serving dishonesty and deceit of the international aid brigade then give your money to a small local charity run by volunteers (not fatcat overpaid, over-pensioned executives) doing good work in your area. Ethiopia has money and it has food. Let the Ethiopians sort out their own problems.
And if you haven’t yet seen my short YouTube video about foreign aid to basket-case Africa, here it is:
David Craig, on November 21st, 2015
