White woman in relationship with Asian man unfriends a Facebook friend for being a Nazi; yet is perplexed why her Nazi “friend” is part-Asian

Many white supremacist men pursue Asian women as a ways to “get back” at White, western women, and marry Asian women with the hopes of having white passing children. The mothers, themselves, also praise the child’s light features and European appearance.

Whereby many half Asian young men, being both confused about their identity, as well as being ashamed of being Asian – as is normal in Western societies where emasculation of Asian men is normal, as well as being raised by white fathers who want their son to be white, in order to face down “degenerate society” – these same young men embrace right wing, extremist politics.

This is why there is a prevalence of right-leaning half-Asians who identify as White, and due to insecurity, are the most adamant at maintaining white supremacy, despite being half-Asian.

This is all due to the phenomenon of White racist men and Asian women.



White woman in relationship with Asian man unfriends a Facebook friend for being a Nazi; yet is perplexed why her Nazi “friend” is part-Asian



Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical left and Islamic terrorism.

Matt Duss had once compared Israel’s blockade of Hamas to “segregation in the American South.”

After the murder of the Henkin family in front of their children, the stabbing of a two-year-old and his mother in Jerusalem, Duss wrote, “it shouldn’t shock anyone that Israel’s harsh occupation and abuse provokes Palestinians.” He blamed the “rising violence” on Israel and not the PLO terrorists.

“Israel does need to start facing some costs and consequences for an occupation,” Matt Duss had told Al Jazeera. “The BDS movement has helped to elevate a debate that was long overdue.”

Matt Duss had traveled to Gaza to meet with Hamas members. He then whitewashed the Islamic terror group as a moderate organization willing to accept a two-state solution and stop killing Jews.

When Hamas kidnapped and murdered three Jewish teens, one of them American, Duss whined that Israel had “turned a police matter into a war” and launched a “crackdown on Hamas infrastructure in the West Bank under the pretext of searching for the missing boys”.

He described the Hamas terrorists as “Palestinian activists” and claimed that despite the brutal murders, “Hamas had largely held to the terms of the cease-fire.”

“A better option for dealing with stone-throwing Palestinian protesters might be to stop stealing their land,” Duss had once tweeted.

“One can recognize that anti-Semitism is a particularly pernicious bigotry among bigotries, however, while still questioning whether holding such views makes any leader ‘irrational'”, Duss wrote when defending the Iran nuke sellout.

Now he’s formulating foreign policy for Senator Bernie Sanders.

Bernie Sanders had previously invited Duss to testify before the Democratic Platform Committee in a push for an anti-Israel platform. Duss had urged the Dems to call for an end to the Hamas blockade.

Before becoming a foreign policy advisor to Senator Sanders, Duss headed up the Foundation for Middle East Peace. Despite its misleading name, FMEP is a fixture of the anti-Israel lobby. It was founded by Merle Thorpe: Jr, a wealthy Washington D.C. lawyer who was the sugar daddy for anti-Israel causes.

The Foundation for Middle East Peace funds anti-Israel groups that directly or indirectly promote BDS.

Before that, Duss was at the center of a major anti-Semitic scandal when he headed up Middle East Progress for the Center for American Progress. CAP bloggers had escalated their attacks on the Jewish State by accusing Jews of “dual loyalty” and of being “Israel Firsters”.

Faiz Shakir, the editor-in-chief at ThinkProgress, had admitted that the hateful attacks by at least one CAP blogger used “terrible anti-Semitic language.”

The Simon Wiesenthal Center, the ADL and even the White House’s Jewish liaison, during the Obama era, all criticized the hatred at the Center for American Progress. The Wiesenthal Center had reportedly described CAP as “infected with Jew-hatred and discriminatory policy positions toward Israel.” And CAP tried to smear the Wiesenthal Center, an organization founded by a Nazi-hunter, as “the far-right Simon Wiesenthal Center.”

The White House’s liaison called the CAP situation “troubling” and emphasized that this attitude did not represent the administration.

But apparently it does represent a prospective Bernie Sanders administration. That’s not surprising.

Senator Bernie Sanders has used his ethnic origins to mask the ugly anti-Semitism of his political allies, including Keith Ellison, the former Nation of Islam member whose virulent bigotry was, according to the Minnesota Dailyopinion editor, “a genuine threat to the long-term safety and well-being of the Jewish people.”

When a bigot demanded to know Bernie Sanders’s relationship with the “Jewish community” while claiming that the “Zionist Jews” were “running the Federal Reserve”, “running Wall Street” and “running everything”, the Senator from Vermont responded by disavowing and bashing Israel.

“I may be Jewish, but you’re not going to find any candidate running for president, for example, to talk about Zionism and the Middle East,” Bernie groveled.

Like Ellison, Jesse Jackson and the Sandinistas, whom Sanders had defended despite their ugly anti-Semitism, Duss benefits from the Bernie protection racket for bigots. If you work for a man whose parents were Jewish, then you can’t possibly be accused of anti-Semitism.

What sort of foreign policy could Matt Duss be drawing up for Bernie Sanders?

Two years ago, Duss had called for using “sticks” on Israel and compared Jewish families living in Jerusalem to Iran’s nuclear weapons program. He suggested that political pressure could prevent “Israeli voters” from voting in the pro-Israel and anti-terrorist candidates whom he disapproves of.

“Voters currently see no costs or consequences to the occupation,” Matt Duss had complained. “By beginning to make those costs clear, as floating the possibility of sanctions does, the EU could play an important role in sharpening the choice before Israeli voters.”

Duss suggested that pressuring “millions of voters” in Israel was “worth a try.”

And who better to roll out sanctions on Israel than President Bernie Sanders?

When Bernie brought on Cornel West and James Zogby to push for an anti-Israel platform, a message was sent. When you bring in a 9/11 Truther and BDS activist who calls Israel an “apartheid state” and describes efforts to fight Hamas as “Jewish racism”, that says it all.

So does bringing in Matt Duss to work on “foreign policy”.

Bernie’s foreign policy has been very consistent. He supported the anti-Semitic Sandinistas who ethnically cleansed Jews from Nicaragua. He honeymooned in the USSR which persecuted Jews.

“No guns for Israel,” Sanders declared before the Yom Kippur War, which nearly destroyed the Jewish State. In 1990, he said that he “would like to see the US put more pressure on Israel.”

When Bernie Sanders reached out for perspective on the Middle East during his campaign, he contacted James Zogby, who had defended Hamas and Hezbollah, and Lawrence Wilkerson, who had accused Jewish officials of dual loyalty and suggested that Israel was behind Assad’s chemical weapons attacks.

Matt Duss fits perfectly with the rest of the sad, twisted freaks in the anti-Israel lobby.

And he’s valuable because he’s smoother than lunatics like Cornel West, a 9/11 Truther, or Lawrence Wilkerson, who accused Israel of “false flag” WMD attacks in Syria.

Extremists always need someone like Matt Duss to make their ugly views seem palatable.

We already know what Bernie’s real foreign policy on Israel will be.

He wants to end military aid and divert money from Israel to Hamas. He’ll attempt to end the non-profit status of Jewish schools in areas claimed by Islamic terrorists. He’ll demand the ethnic cleansing of parts of Israel. And those demands will be backed by economic and political pressure.

That’s what Bernie wants. It’s what the radical extremists he panders to want him to do.

Duss is on board to make this ugliness presentable. And to help Bernie avoid tactical blunders like his lie that Israel had killed “10,000 innocent people” in Gaza.

When Bernie Sanders starts delivering his incoherent speeches attacking Israel, it will be based on the work of bigots and haters who have found a human shield with a Brooklyn accent for their agenda.

Canada: Ottawa library cancels planned screening of documentary on Muslim migrants in Europe

Canada: Ottawa library cancels planned screening of documentary on Muslim migrants in Europe


I haven’t seen Killing Europe, or even heard of it before this controversy began. But this is cause for concern: “But even a ’30-second Google search’ by the library would have revealed it to be hate speech, says human rights lawyer Richard Warman, who was one of the people to complain to the library about the screening.”

All that anyone can tell from a 30-second Google search is that it is accused of being “hate speech,” not that it is actually “hate speech.” What constitutes “hate speech” is a subjective judgment, based on the core beliefs and preconceptions of the person making the judgment; the increasingly common assumption that it is an objectively quantifiable category of speech is extremely disquieting, as it paves the way for censorship and authoritarianism.

“The messages contained even in just the trailer is that ‘immigrants are coming to swamp and devastate Europe and that Muslims are engaged in perpetual massacres of the white populations.’ Obviously, it set off alarms.”

The racial aspect is out of focus, as Islam is not a race, and there are white Muslims who are just as much jihadis as jihadis of other races, but note Warman’s airy dismissal of the idea that there could be any problem at all with Muslim migrants: for him, it’s all “hate speech.” But is it? All of the Islamic jihadis who murdered 130 people in Paris in a series of jihad attacks in November 2015 were refugees who had recently been welcomed into Europe. Germany’s domestic intelligence agency admitted in July 2017 that hundreds of jihadis had entered the country among the refugees, and that 24,000 jihadis were active in Germany. Muslim migrants in Europe have also been responsible for an appalling epidemic of rape, sexual assault, theft, petty crime, and looting. In the first half of 2016, migrants in Germany, who are overwhelmingly Muslim, committed 142,500 crimes, an average of 780 every day. This was a significant increase from 2015, during which migrants committed 200,000 crimes. On New Year’s Eve, December 31, 2015, Muslim migrants committed as many as 2,000 mass rapes and sexual assaults in Cologne, Stockholm, and other major European cities. Muslim migrants have made Malmö, once a peaceful city, crime-ridden and hazardous. In Sweden, Muslim migrants from Afghanistan are 79 times more likely to commit rape and other sexual crimes than native Swedes. Migrants and refugees commit 92 percent of rapes in Sweden. Rapists in Sweden come from Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia, Eritrea, Syria, Gambia, Iran, Palestine, Chile, and Kosovo, in that order; rapists of Swedish background do not exist in sufficient numbers to make the top ten, and all the nations on that list except Chile and Eritrea are majority Muslim. Even before the migrant influx, while on a speaking tour in Germany in 2011, I was told by the sixteen-year-old daughter of one of the event organizers that she was routinely harassed on the way to school: Muslims on the commuter trains would call her a “whore” and a “slut” because her hair and arms were not covered. This happened, she said, every day.

Can we talk about this? Or is such discussion immediately consigned to the outer darkness of “hate speech” and “Islamophobia”? That is the question I ask, and endeavor to answer, in my book Confessions of an Islamophobe: get your copy here.

Meanwhile, the cancellation of this documentary is yet another sign of how deeply imperiled the freedom of speech, and free society, is in Canada. Would the Ottawa Public Library have canceled an exhibition of paintings by al-Qaeda jihadis? Not on your life.


“Ottawa library cancels planned screening of controversial ‘Killing Europe’ doc,” by Blair Crawford, Ottawa Citizen, November 24, 2017 (thanks to The Religion of Peace):

The Ottawa Public Library has cancelled this weekend’s screening of a controversial documentary, Killing Europe, after complaints the film was thinly disguised hate speech against Muslims and immigrants.

“I am letting you know that I have been working with the city solicitor about concerns brought forward by the Ottawa district labour council, unions, residents, board members and friends,” Coun. Tim Tierney, who is chairman of the library’s board of directors, said in an email. “I had asked the CEO to review and address the concerns expressed.”

“I can now report that the rental of the room will not take place.”

The documentary was to have been screened Saturday afternoon at the library’s main branch on Metcalfe Street. The screening was to have been hosted by the group ACT! for Canada, a group dedicated “to speaking out about the clear and present dangers emerging from those who do not embrace Canada’s values …”

Killing Europe, by Danish ex-patriate Michael Hansen, purports to warn of the dangers of the “Islamification” of Europe.

But even a “30-second Google search” by the library would have revealed it to be hate speech, says human rights lawyer Richard Warman, who was one of the people to complain to the library about the screening.

Screening the film is “in clear violation of the library’s own rental policy prohibiting the use of space for discriminatory purposes,” Warman wrote in an email to the library and its board members, Mayor Jim Watson, and others.

“When I looked at the three-minute trailer, it was clear it was going to be an all-out assault on immigrants and the Muslim community,” Warman said Friday.

“The messages contained even in just the trailer is that ‘immigrants are coming to swamp and devastate Europe and that Muslims are engaged in perpetual massacres of the white populations.’ Obviously, it set off alarms.”

Warman received confirmation the screening had been cancelled in an email Friday morning from library deputy CEO Monique Désormeaux.

Coun. Catherine McKenney, another library board member, said Friday she “wholeheartedly” supported the library’s decision to cancel the screening and promised better discussion in the future about what the library chooses to allow.

But where to draw the line between suppressing free speech and stifling hate speech?

Warman said the screening clearly violated the library’s obligations, stated on its website, to not provide public space for individuals or groups that “are likely to promote discrimination, contempt or hatred to any person on the basis of race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, age, sex, marital status, family status, sexual preference, or disability, gratuitous sex and violence or denigration of the human condition.”…

In a statement Friday evening, ACT! for Canada’s Ottawa spokeswoman Alexandra Belaire admitted the documentary is “difficult” and exposes the rise of homophobia, anti-Semitism and rape-culture in Europe.

“By de-platforming the world premiere screening of ‘Killing Europe,’ the City of Ottawa and the Ottawa Public Library are permitting the perpetuation of these abuses and are permitting themselves to be tools of institutionalized oppression,” Belaire’s statement said.