How the NYT smears citizens who reject being replaced with African savages

There’s nothing democratic about forcing migration resettlement on a community, then calling people bigoted for not wanting more. This story is playing across western democracies.

The New York Times calls, “xenophobic and conspiratorial” and disses John Palmer, a former university professor, who opposes the import of unassimilable African savages.

As more Somali refugees arrive in St. Cloud, white anti-immigration activists have pressed an increasingly explicit anti-Muslim agenda.

The 2018 elections of Representative Ilhan Omar and Attorney General Keith Ellison, who are Muslim, fueled xenophobic conspiracies that Muslim residents were planning a long-term coup to institute Shariah Law. They also point to individual instances of crime by Somali-Americans as proof of an innate predisposition to violence and ignore the repeated studies showing that there is no demonstrated link between immigrants and criminal behaviour.

Rubbish. It is the purpose of Islam and the duty of every Muslim to implement sharia. That is not a ‘xenophobic conspiracy’, that’s basic Islam 101. And we know from Australia that Africans are 67 times more likely to be charged with aggravated robbery than the general Victorian population, according to new figures reported in The Australian today.

2 thoughts on “How the NYT smears citizens who reject being replaced with African savages”

  1. “Our” politicians are opportunistic cowards, so when they imagine a worst-case scenario outcome, they also imagine how to best personally benefit from helping to facilitate its arrival and completion – having already ruled out solving the problem by preventing it, as they both see all problems as “inevitable forces” and realize that “There’s No Money In Solutions.” Hence their insistence that we accept ALL of the muslims in Africa and Asia into the West.

    This stance pretty-much exemplifies the difference between greed (hope still limited by fear) and true hope, which is where one imagines a problem and its solution, hoping to solve it for everyone, not exploit it merely for personal gain. And the only way to excuse greed, is to pretend that “So what? Everyone else is always ignoring solutions in order to exploit problems, too!”


    Politicians want what you have

    In the mind of politicians — the vast majority of them, at least — what you have is theirs. As self-appointed arbiters of all that is good, right and proper, they get to decide what you “deserve” to have. Everything else is for their use to dole out as they see fit.

    With this end in mind they set tax laws that take money from certain people so they can give it to others. They create laws and fees and taxes to modify your behavior, determine what you can and cannot own, and what you can and cannot do with what you own. And occasionally, if you’re good or lucky enough to fall into one of their favored groups, they’ll give you a slice of their monetary pie. They’ll say you “deserve it.”

    – Jay Baker of Bob Livinston Alerts, 21 June 2019 –

  2. They are the slaughterers coming to our towns because we havent paid attention to the fact THERE IS NO GRAY AREA.
    Its all TAQIYYA.


Comments are closed.