Little Boy Dhimmi: A Moment In The Life Of A Dutch Child Under Islam

EU, Europe, Islam, Left-Liberalism, Multiculturalism

The Netherland’s prime minister—whoever this non-entity is—has just bestowed upon German Chancellor Angela Merkel, the Whore of Babylon in my book, honors on behalf of the beleaguered Dutch people.

The following poignant snapshot in time, witnessed by a Dutch friend walking on the beach, the other day, ought to tell you why the ignominious Merkel and Prime Minister Mark Rutte ought to be tarred-and-feathered and driven out of office:

A small Dutch boy was hard at work shaping a bunny-rabbit in the sand. He fashioned the ears and the tail and was proudly surveying his handiwork, when along strode the conqueror: a Muslim young boy. The Muslim boy trampled the Dutch child’s sand bunny with rage, and emitted a blood curdling harangue against the sin of image making.

This is a snapshot in time of the lives of Western children destined for dhimmitude.

Treacherous adults like Merkel, Mark Rutte and the rest, their supporters and voters, are responsible for betraying little boys like the bunny sculptor.


like tweet google+ recommend Print Friendlyprint

The Week’s Tweets (4/24): INTEL Trumps, NY Win, Brexits Boo BHO, More Potty Talk

Crime, Donald Trump, Labor, Outsourcing, Political Correctness, Race, South-Africa


like tweet google+ recommend Print Friendlyprint

TESTOSTERONE, Going, Going, Almost Gone

Democrats, Donald Trump, Feminism, Gender, Hillary Clinton, Republicans

“TESTOSTERONE, Going, Going, Almost Gone” IS THE CURRENT column, now on WND. An excerpt:

There are only two men in the 2016 presidential race: Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump.

Like or dislike her, there’s no questioning Hillary’s manly bona fides. Mrs. Clinton is as tough as she’s philosophically misguided.

At the first Democratic debate, on October 14, 2015, Bernie Sanders, Martin O’Malley and Lincoln Chafee shuffled meekly to their respective podiums.

Only Jim Webb and Mrs. Clinton strode onto that stage like soldiers.

Unless her handlers coach her on acting femininely, you’ll never catch Hillary blubbering about Bill and Chelsea coming first in her life.

She doesn’t!

They don’t (come first)!

No, siree. For Hillary, it’s ambition before family.

Still, when Hillary expects it to pay political dividends, she fights like a girl, claws drawn.

Her April 19 victory in the New York primary, April 19, could hardly be bettered. But it’s unlikely to soften Mrs. Clinton’s sharpshooting. She and rival Bernie Sanders have been locked in a cycle of sorts, where Sanders will try mightily to stand up to Hillary, and she’ll swat him down like a fly.

Incredibly, Sanders is too petrified to lay the ruination of Libya at Hillary’s sturdy feet. And he has only to recount the ambient horrors of Hillary’s foreign policy—the vote for “the disastrous war in Iraq,” for one—and Mrs. Clinton’s Amazon Warriors at CNN and elsewhere crow, “Is Bernie Sanders taking the low road?”

It’s a little late in the game, but April saw Bernie try his utmost to expose Mrs. Clinton’s record for all to see. His thundering, “Hillary Clinton isn’t qualified to be president,” however, soon gave way to a whimper, a squeak, a “she started it”; “I would have preferred an issue-oriented campaign.” Mumble-mumble. “Where’s my mommy?”

Sanders finally settled on, “I question her judgment, not experience.” The senator was soon bowing-and-scraping again because a surrogate attached the words “corporate Democratic whores” to Hillary’s incremental approach to socializing the medical means of production. (Yes, Sanders’ Fabian fondness for the state, economic planning and centralization exceeds Hillary’s.)

Sanders’ resistance in the face of ruthless machine politics mounted on behalf of Clinton by Democratic National Committee Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz has been flaccid. At the same time, the senator has been fierce in his defense of Hillary’s email security breaches as secretary of state. He famously fought off Hillary’s critics, neutering himself with this zinger:

“The American people are sick and tired [of] hearing about your damn emails.”

Compared to battle-axe Clinton, Sanders is a mouse, not a man.

Early in March, The Mouse scolded The Man for interrupting him. Said the timid Sanders, “Excuse me, I’m talking.” Right away, the gynocentric national media erupted in a “debate” that revolved around a preposterous proposition:

Was poor Bernie sexist?

Of course, Methuselah jumps to attention whenever Hillary reprimands him for his failure to stand by President Barack Obama on gun control.

And who can forget when, in August of 2015, socialist-in-Seattle Sanders skedaddled as a couple of girl protesters got in his face and grabbed his mic?

Don’t let Hillary’s “wife, mom, grandma” routine fool you. That’s her Twitter handle; that’s not her.

You sense that if she had her way, Hillary would ditch the familial shtick. But Hill’s a smart cookie; she goes through the “wife, mom, grandma” motions because she must.

Unlike mucho Hillary, some other “men” racing for the White House have successfully “transitioned,” as Caitlyn Jenner would say. …

… READ THE REST. “TESTOSTERONE, Going, Going, Almost Gone” IS THE CURRENT column, now on WND.

UPDATED (4/22):


like tweet google+ recommend Print Friendlyprint

Private Property Solves THE POTTY Problem

Gender, Individualism Vs. Collectivism, libertarianism, Private Property

First, one would hope that even creepy Ted Cruz would, like Donald Trump, open his home to Caitlyn Jenner, “reality-TV star and gold-medal-winning Olympian who competed as Bruce Jenner.”

Trump was right to rely on libertarian sensibilities when he said, on “The Today Show,” that in his Trump Tower, “Caitlyn Jenner would be free to use any bathroom she wanted.”

Trump Tower belongs to Trump.

Of course, the North Carolina bathroom law, that “bans people from using bathrooms that don’t match the sex indicated on their birth certificate,” demonstrates why government should not own any property and should certainly not have a say as to how private property is managed.

It ought to be up to private property proprietors to decide what kind of bathrooms they wish to offer at their establishments.

Myself, I’d avoid establishments that don’t offer strict, separate, “ladies” and “gents” loos. I don’t think it’s safe. Women-only bathrooms have worked quite well for women. You never have to think, “It’s late at night, I hope there’s no scary or creepy looking man in there and I am not allowed to carry.”

Scenes from “Dressed To Kill”:


like tweet google+ recommend Print Friendlyprint