Germans Say Trump Bigger Threat Than Putin, Kim Jong Un, Iran?

                Achtung! 

                This just in: A recent YouGov poll of 2,000 Germans found that more respondents believe American President Donald Trump is a bigger threat to world peace than is Russian President Vladimir Putin, North Korean Chairman Kim Jong Un, Chinese President Xi Jinping, or even Iran’s “Supreme Leader” Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Putin just essentially had himself declared dictator and has been touting extraordinary new weapons, Kim Jong Un is a dictator and has been touting extraordinary new weapons, Xi Jinping is doing everything in his power to take over the world, and the Ayatollah Khamenei has been fomenting hatred and violence near and far. Yet, 41% of the poll’s respondents declared Trump the greatest threat to mankind, as opposed to only 17% who thought Kim Jong Un was. Only 8% named Putin or Khamenei as the biggest danger, and a mere 7% cited Jinping as the top threat. Germany is almost entirely dependent on Russian energy, so that may explain the Kraut’s reticence to criticize Putin, though we all know that they should be getting all their energy from their own wind turbines, solar panels, and other sustainable methods, such as harnessing the power of avalanches, yodeling and bicycle pedaling. 

                Most polling experts are skeptical of online polls’ veracity and prefer traditional polling methods. I myself don’t believe the YouGov poll is an accurate representation of Germans’ attitudes. Of course, that may be because I don’t want to believe that it is. I have always liked Germany—and the Germans I’ve met, with few exceptions. Therefore, I hope the poll isn’t indicative of reality. (And I wonder what percentage of Germans think Trump is a Putin plant. If those who think he’s pro-Putin also believe he is a bigger threat to peace than Putin, it would make less than no sense).

                Most Germans didn’t see Hitler as a threat, but as a savior. 11 million souls perished during his reign. If they truly now see Trump as a bigger threat than the world’s most brutal, power-hungry dictators, each of whom routinely sentence their political opponents to torture and death, it would be a remarkably sad day for The West. As an American once said, “You can’t fix stupid.” (Du kannst dumm nicht reparieren).

Student Files Bias Complaint Over Peanuts...Literally

                The College Fix reported that, in April of 2019, a University of Northern Iowa student contacted the school’s Climate Response Team to file a bias complaint over a small-scale campus event celebrating peanuts. The offending event was held at and around a table at Rialto Dining Hall, “where students could learn all about peanuts,” said The Fix. My God, the humanity! What will the school permit next, a class on cashews?

                The university didn’t release the names of those involved, in an obvious attempt to protect them from harassment. The bias-reporting student, who is not him or herself allergic to peanuts, was purportedly concerned with the safety of others, as attendees could sample a variety of peanut products, including ice cream sprinkles and pad Thai noodles. Shirts sporting the phrase “Peanut Envy” could also be purchased at the presentation, leading me to suspect that perhaps this was what was behind the social-justice-warring scholar’s ire.

                Mr. or Ms. Do-Gooder wrote in his or her bias complaint, “Peanut allergies can be life threatening to some,” and noted that “even when the day is over their [sic] is still risk the air and other surfaces will still be contaminated.” He or she admitted that the dining hall warned students with peanut allergies to eat elsewhere that day, but that didn’t stop him or her from stating: “This is purely targetting [sic] students with that allergy. While not all allergies can be 100 percent avoided when eating in the dining center, this event was completely unnecessary. I seriously question UNI dining in regards to inclusion and students’ well being.”  

                “Peanuts? Aaghhh! Run to the safe space! Run to the safe space!” But what if the warm cookies colleges provide in their safe spaces have nuts in them? Huh? “OMG! I didn’t think of that! What about inclusion?! What about our well-being?! I think they’re targeting us in here, too! Run to…run to…(falls to the ground and breaks down, sobbing inconsolably).” 

                Maybe college dining halls should be banned from serving milk and cheese, too. Many people are allergic to dairy products. What about the lactose intolerant? Don’t we care about them? And seafood should be verboten, as well. As should eggs, strawberries and wheat products, all of which can be dangerous for those allergic to them. In fact, a few folks are allergic to almost every food, so it may be best if dining halls-- and restaurants-- dispense with food altogether.

                It’s extraordinarily difficult to picture today’s youth as cavepersons or pioneers, having to hunt and gather for sustenance, deal with enemies and predators, and all without helmets, electricity, the internet, drugs, and smart phones.

  There were no “safe spaces” back then. And a lot fewer nuts.

 

Toronto Police Threaten Reporter Who Used Term "Terrorist"

                Toronto police threatened to arrest a Canadian reporter after he referred to now-deceased Iranian General Qassem Soleimani as a “terrorist, The Blaze reported recently. Apparently, a “candlelight vigil” attended by over 200 people was held for Soleimani outside of a Toronto courthouse. David Menzies, a reporter for Rebel News, walked the crowd and spoke with those gathered, using the word “terrorist” when referring to Soleimani. A video extant shows Canadian law enforcement officers approaching Menzies and advising him to cease and desist using the word “terrorist” when speaking of the bloodthirsty Iranian general. Menzies logically responded by asking, “I can’t call a terrorist a ‘terrorist?’” To which an officer replied, “Not in this sort of environment, no. You can’t. That’s going to incite a breach of the peace and that is Canadian law. Am I clear? It’s a breach of the peace. You will be placed under arrest.”

                Menzies then said, “So I can’t call Osama Bin Laden a terrorist?” The officer answered: “If I hear another word like that, you’re coming with me. You are not to use that word again here in this environment. Do you understand me? It incites a breach of the peace and you will be put under arrest.” Menzies averred that he had free speech rights protected by the Canadian Constitution, in that Section 2 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms says that all Canadian citizens have the right to freedom of thought, belief, opinion, and expression…but this didn’t have a noticeable effect on the authorities.

                There are a couple of points to be made here. First off, it is now the victims of violent protests and crime that have to watch what they say. If Ben Shapiro or Dennis Prager wish to speak on a college campus, in the most erudite, truthful and non-inflammatory way, they are somehow held responsible for any untoward or violent behavior in which chuckleheaded ignoramuses and/or antifa thugs may engage. Secondly, and even more frustrating—and frightening—is the fact that stating or acknowledging many simple, demonstrable, irrefutable truths is now against the law.

                There is a new kind of terrorist afoot, one we did not anticipate and one for which we are therefore less prepared. That terrorist is infinitely deadlier, and ultimately more effective, than any we’ve seen before. Because that terrorist welcomes all others into his country without expecting that they assimilate. That terrorist has internalized his enemies’ disdain of his homeland. He has become tolerant of absolutely everything…except for the traditions and mores of his own country and people.

                That terrorist…is us.

                                               ***************************************

                “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”—Edmund Burke

                “The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those that speak it.”-- George Orwell

Democrats Become First National Party To Hate The Nation They Wish To Lead

Democrats have now officially become the first national political party to actually detest the country they wish to lead. Democrats have openly sided with America’s enemies and even sympathize with the world’s most heinous terrorists rather than take the side of the president of the United States, as can be seen by their reaction to the death of Iranian mega-terrorist Qassem Soleimani. Barack Obama must have succeeded in “fundamentally” transforming the country, because, in days of yore, this would have universally been considered a priori treason. I honestly believe, if Democrats had their way, American flags would have been ordered to fly at half-staff out of respect and appreciation for the bloodthirsty General whose death they thought would make Trump look bad. Democrats and their supporters are so crazy, they applaud white supremacists if they dis Trump, as Joy Behar on ABC’s “The View” did recently. Many in the media immediately said Trump’s drone strike on Soleimani would quite possibly cause World War III to break out. Some give the impression that they would prefer to have their characterization of the strike as “reckless” be proved correct even if it meant death and destruction on a massive scale. That’s reckless. And sick.

Former donkey party greats such as Andrew Jackson, Harry Truman, JFK, and even liberal Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan would be shocked and appalled at what the party they once led has become. The party is now the bastion of full-fledged socialists, anti-Semites, transgender-worshippers and God-haters. It respects no moral code or law, abhors tradition, the Founders-- and those who have the temerity to live in rural areas of ‘fly-over country’ (i.e. the ‘deplorables’)—and is actively aiding and abetting the abolition of American history. It tolerates no dissent from its political-correctness and is aggressively attempting to strip Americans of their Constitutionally guaranteed rights. And babies from their lives as it ironically tries to invent a “right” to abortion.

There is an old saying, that something or someone is “as American as Mom, baseball, and apple pie.” The Democrats are rapidly rewriting that phrase to better suit their Depraved New World. It will likely read, “as American as non-binary, childless attraction units, soccer, and tofu.”

Houston Neighborhood Terrorized By Squirrel

                KPRC-TV reports that a neighborhood in Houston, Texas, is being terrorized…by a vicious squirrel. The rodent is so abusive that resident Sharlene French-Amezquita says, “We usually don’t go outside during the daytime because he comes out in the daytime.” She stated that she was victimized by the squirrel after trying to shoo it away while it was chewing on her front door. “When I stepped outside the door, he leaped on me and bit my arm. I pulled him off, threw him to the ground, and tried to get in the house,” she said. She told KPRC, “I couldn’t get in the house because he came back,” adding, “he bit this leg,” while pointing out the wound to the station’s news crew.

                The ornery critter has bitten others, as well. Katie Herrera says she, too, was a victim of the deranged animal. “It’s scary,” she said. “I’m just very grateful that it actually attacked me and not my children.” The station notes that some residents will only leave their homes if armed with baseball bats or shovels. Texas wildlife officials have been contacted but have informed those in the neighborhood that nothing can be done unless and until the small mammal is trapped.

                How pathetic a picture is this? I fervently hope these “Texans” are recent transplants from California. An entire neighborhood held hostage by a……squirrel?! Seriously?! These folks wouldn’t have survived the wagon train era or the dust bowl years. They couldn’t have tamed the frontier West. “Indians? Coyotes? Aagghhh! Run for it!” There is an easy solution to this “scary” problem: shoot the rabid rodent.

                Have we been so “wussified” by progressives, altruists and radical environmental activists that we can’t—or won’t—defend ourselves from the specter of a bleeping squirrel? Have even Texans become so soft they will essentially let an undersized rodent tell them, “This town ain’t big enough for the both of us?”

                Say it isn’t so.

Minnesota's Teacher Of The Year Kneels For National Anthem

Minnesota’s “teacher of the year,” Kelly Holstine, decided to kneel while the American national anthem was sung at the college football national championship game in New Orleans recently when she heard that President Trump was going to be on the field with her. Holstine was so proud of her act that she tweeted out a photo of her protest for all to see. The esteemed educator tweeted: “Given platform to stand up for marginalized and oppressed people. Like many before, I respectfully kneeled during Nat’l Anthem because, ‘No one is free until we are all free.’ Not everybody is given the opportunity to have a voice, and I can take a small moment, a respectful moment of protest, and exercise my First Amendment rights, and stand up for my students and for vulnerable adults and for people who are not treated in the way that they should be.” 

Oh, the inanity. Where to start? She “stands up” for marginalized and oppressed people by taking a knee? A person can’t “respectfully” disrespect the anthem and the flag…and all those who sacrificed and died for what they stand for. “No one is free until we are all free?” We are all free in this country, Holstine, but that is a maudlin maxim no matter where one resides. That is like saying, “No one is free from herpes/diaper rash/fill-in-the-blank until we are all free from herpes/diaper rash/fill-in-the-blank.” The virtue-signaling instructor may exercise her precious First Amendment rights by trashing Trump, but one wonders whether she would welcome a Trump supporter or conservative into her classroom, school-- or even community—to speak. If Holstine kneels during The Star-Spangled Banner to stand up for “people who are not treated in the way that they should be,” she should be doing so for the protesters in Hong Kong courageously fighting Chinese oppression…and those in the streets of Iran condemning the Mullahs for shooting down a passenger plane, killing 176 innocent human beings. Or for the girls and women of Muslim nations who are the victims of genital mutilation and/or can’t travel without a male relative chaperoning them. Oddly enough, however, I doubt she would proudly kneel during the national anthems of China, Iran, or any Middle Eastern or North African nation, if given the “platform” or “opportunity.” 

If she is strictly concerned with injustice in the United States, perhaps she could kneel for Ben Shapiro, Dennis Prager, Michelle Malkin, Andy Ngo, or any of a myriad of other conservatives who have been routinely prevented from speaking on college campuses and who have been subjected to the most vile and unwarranted slurs and threats. Or for Sarah Sanders, Tomi Lahren and others who have been forced to leave restaurants and other public places due to the aggressive intolerance of “progressive” thugs. Or for Mark Steyn, who was sued by Michael Mann, the Penn State climatologist and creator of the breathtakingly bogus “hockey stick graph,” for mocking Mann’s preposterously ridiculous chart, a suit that has been ongoing for the better part of a decade. Or, for that matter, me. I’m continuously exposed to leftist lunacy, transgender tripe, historical heresy and anti-Christian crusading, via the mainstream media and/or the government-academia complex. And, I was once the victim of slow and discourteous service at my local DMV.

Ms. Holstine, the next time you’re tempted to take a knee to stand up for someone who’s been mistreated, I hope it’s in front of a cross.

The only thing you’ve taught us is that (your) ignorance isn’t bliss.

Student Forced To Remove Shirt Lauding Virginity

                 Apparently, virginity is not a virtue at a Wentzville, Missouri middle school. KMOV-TV reported that 13-year-old student Londyn Piglowski was sent to the principal’s office for wearing a hoodie saying, “Virginity Rocks.” In this day and age, one would think Master Piglowski should have gotten an award—or perhaps extra credit-- for wearing an article of clothing sporting that sentiment. The student’s social studies teacher sent him to the principal’s office where he was given the choice of taking the hoodie off or turning it inside out so as to hide the offensive message. He was informed that the sweatshirt was “a little bit borderline for the school,” and warned that if he refused officials would “take action.”

                Piglowski acquiesced to the demand, but admitted thinking, “Why am I taking this off? ‘Cuz it’s like a positive message.” His mother claims the district subsequently threatened to suspend him if he wore the hoodie again, though the district denies this. According to KMOV, the district’s dress code bans students from wearing clothing with statements advocating Immoral, illegal, sexual, or violent behavior, as well as apparel exposing the back, stomach, and buttocks. Other students noted, however, that these rules are routinely flaunted. They said girls frequently wear shirts exposing their stomachs and shorts that don’t fully cover their backsides, without any pushback from teachers.

                I’m sure that’s the case. Based on what’s happened in schools in recent years, I’m surprised school officials didn’t tell Piglowski, “Take the hoodie off. And the rest of your clothes, too!” This would explain why KMOV says that students from around the country have been told by their schools that “Virginity Rocks” apparel is inappropriate. The Wentzville School District sent the station a statement reading: “The District’s policy regarding student dress provides opportunities for our administrators to address student attire that is potentially disruptive to the educational environment. We routinely have conversations with students around attire that may be inappropriate and by and large, our students and families work with our staff to address any concerns.”

                So, tats and piercings-- and butts hanging out-- are okay, as are items with rap “artists” names adorning them, yet a salute to abstinence is “inappropriate,” beyond the pale, and “potentially disruptive?!” Well, I guess we wouldn’t want to risk a student getting distracted while teachers are discussing dental dams, birth control and transgender bathrooms.

                Don’t try wearing your “Sobriety Rules” tee-shirts to school, kids. They might put you on Ritalin.

"Evening With Canceled Women" Event Canceled

                According to a New York Post op-ed by David Marcus, the main branch of the New York Public Library canceled an event scheduled for January 17^th. Why is this noteworthy? The event was titled, “Evening with Canceled Women.” (This is not a satire post and you are not reading the Babylon Bee).

                Marcus noted that the event was to be sponsored by the Women’s Liberation Front, a feminist organization that has the temerity to support a biological definition of gender. He stated, “The only plausible explanation is that the NYPL fears backlash from trans activists. That is, the women are being denied a platform over their objections to trans ideology.” He added that the event was specifically designed for women who have been the victims of “social-media bans, protests and hecklers—all for asserting the not-long-ago common view that gender is based in biological facts, not subjective feelings.” He also observed that, “In very short order, the academy, the media and the government have simply decided to overturn thousands of years of the understanding of gender, without so much as a discussion about it.”

                The event’s organizers have been forced to move the meeting to a “secret location” that will only be announced to ticket holders the day it is slated to be held, in an attempt to prevent gender-denying protesters from shutting it down.

                Society has degenerated and devolved so fast that people who wish to state the obvious, undeniable truth now have to go into hiding to do so, or risk being attacked. As Marcus pointed out, in just a matter of a few decades, the elites who control our institutions—and therefore our lives—have attempted to simply invalidate immutable laws of nature, while simultaneously suppressing any and all forms of dissent.

                The fact that the “Evening with Canceled Women” event was… canceled…by the NYPL reads like something from a Monty Python skit. The fact that it is not should be concerning to all of us. Leftists are typically blind to irony, hypocrisy, humor, subtlety and introspection. If “the science is settled” on man-caused global warming, it sure as hell is on the existence of two sexes.

                “Evening with Canceled Women—Canceled” is akin to “Procrastinator’s Anonymous Meeting Postponed.” Except that the latter is fictitious (at least to my knowledge) while the former is all too real.

German Parliament Considered Mandatory Organ Donations

                Germans, you can keep your organs. For now.

                The German parliament recently voted down a proposal that would have made it mandatory for every citizen to become an organ donor. The so-called “objection solution,” was defeated by a vote of 379 to 292. An alternative proposal seeking Germans’ opinions via an online database was passed.

                The “objection solution,” which sounds far too much like the “final solution,” was proposed by health minister Jens Spahn, a member of the Christian Democratic Union, though it sounds particularly unchristian and undemocratic. Karl Lauterbach, a member of the Social Democratic Party, promoted the measure. After the vote was taken, Lauterbach stated: “I believe we will be here again in a few years, and then there will be a majority for the ‘objection solution.’” He and Spahn believe that Germans may be willing to surrender their organs en masse within three to five years.

                Organ donation is, quite literally, a very personal issue, one that involves a person’s views on body, soul, metaphysics and religion. Forced organ donation sounds like something from the Third Reich.

                “Ouch! Hey, Heinrich, I’m not dead yet! Take a hike, I’m still using my liver!”

                Even if a significant majority of a nation’s citizens are in favor of donating their organs, that doesn’t give them—or their government—the right to demand others do the same.

Climate Change Activist Advocates For Human Extinction

                Les Knight, a climate change activist from Portland, Oregon, has hit on what he believes is the most effective way to save the Earth: eradicate the human race. According to England’s The Guardian newspaper, Knight first concluded that the best thing for the planet would be the extinction of his own species about fifty years ago. He reasoned that, since humans are “causing the extinction of hundreds of thousands of other species,” a “peaceful phase-out of human existence” would restore ecosystems and eliminate “fighting over resources.” (Note to Knight: Fighting over resources was part of the definition of life long before humans appeared and would still be were he to get his wish of Homo Sapiens’ demise). He says that it is not enough for couples to limit themselves to just one child. He decided to lead by example and had himself sterilized in the 1970s. (Whew!).

                Knight claimed to be surprised that his idea “wasn’t as well received” as he had hoped. Yes, it’s truly shocking that people don’t whole-heartedly support their own sterilization, the abolishment of family and legacy, and the complete destruction of their own kind.

                In 1980, Knight relocated to Portland and founded the Voluntary Human Extinction Project. He says VHEP’s message is a simple one: “Stop procreating so the biosphere might return to its former glory,” and notes that the organization is now a global one with active volunteers from India to Mexico. Knight’s war on humanity is, unsurprisingly, related to his hatred of American capitalism. “We don’t need to breed more wage slaves to prop up an obsolete system,” he avows. He bemoans the fact that he’ll “never see the day when there are no humans on the planet,” but consoles himself with his ability to “imagine what a magnificent world it would be—provided we go soon enough.” Would that world really be magnificent if there was no one on it to perceive it as such?

                Knight, like nearly all leftists, is not a fan of Biblical Christianity, either. Genesis states: “So God created mankind in His own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them. God blessed them and said to them, ‘Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground.’” This is a far cry from commanding, “Come to think of it, you guys suck. My bad. Do me a favor and don’t reproduce. It’d be better for the other aspects of My Creation if you just ceased to exist.”

                Religion aside, does anyone believe that any member of any other species occasionally thinks to itself: “You know, it seems to me that humans and other animals would be better off if we were extinct. We should just stop breeding and slowly eradicate ourselves for the good of the planet. Our extermination is others’ gain.” Of course not. No other species is capable of pondering its own extinction, let alone the ramifications thereof.

                So why should we? 

                Homo Sapiens is Latin for “wise man,” which, self-evidently, Knight is not.