@echotoall@elonmusk The people telling us to be tolerant and accepting of multiculturalism for the past thirty years didn't mention that the imports would be semi-educated, violent, anti-white racists, filled with resentment fuelled by a victim-mentality.
Sixteen people were murdered at the Sbarro restaurant in Jerusalem—seven of them children, one a pregnant woman—when a Hamas suicide bomber was smuggled in by “journalist” Ahlam Tamimi.
“Intifada” means murder of non-Muslims in Islam’s name.
When Muslims and their political allies in the West chant “globalize the intifada,” they are not calling for peace but for the deliberate murder of non-Muslims in the name of Islam worldwide.
Share this and call for the arrest of all terrorists in the West who openly call to globalize the intifada.
Inciting murder of Jews and Christians is not protected speech. Killing innocent people, including women and children, as human sacrifices for “Allah” is a demonic ritual, not a peaceful act of worship.
Flashback: Hamas “journalist” Ahlam Tamimi brags about using her press card to scout Jewish targets in Israel and personally delivering a suicide bomber to the Sbarro restaurant in Jerusalem.
She sought a place packed with Jews—preferably a school or restaurant—to kill as many as possible. She chose Sbarro.
Sixteen people were murdered, including seven Jewish children and a pregnant woman. Another 130 were wounded.
This is what “intifada” means.
Tamimi later received political asylum in Jordan. Many of her victims were American, and she remains on the FBI’s Most Wanted list. Jordan refuses to extradite her because she is celebrated as a hero among large parts of the Muslim population there and in the Palestinian territories.
A mass murderer of children is protected and admired.
That is Islam!
It is a death cult!
Lisa Domski had spent nearly 38 years at Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan when the company introduced its COVID-19 vaccine mandate. Domski, a devout Catholic, asked for a religious exemption. She wrote that the vaccines available at the time had been developed or tested using fetal cell lines from abortions, and that taking one would violate her faith.
Her job was 100% remote. She had no in-person contact with coworkers. The company denied her exemption anyway and fired her.
She won a $12.7 MILLION lawsuit for being wrongfully fired! Justice is served
Trudeau deliberately flooded Canada with immigrants and exploded welfare spending to overload and shatter public services, executing the Cloward-Piven crisis scheme for radical redistribution.
🚨Mark Carney now drives this catastrophic sabotage even harder.
Have a listen.
⬇️⬇️
🚨 REMEMBER WHEN ELIZABETH MAY SAID THIS?
She warned Bill C-9 could flood the courts with hate-related accusations.
Today, Edmonton police are asking Canadians to report certain online speech they believe is hateful.
Non of their examples are hateful. They are opinions.
The level of disrespect the Labour Government is showing to the victims of crime and their families is beyond contempt.
PC Harper’s killers should never be released early.
3 million of you have watched me explaining why Islam and the west come from antithetical world views.
Thank you.
I love individual Muslims.
I’m suspicious of much Islamic practice.
It’s ok to have different values in different cultures.
It’s what makes each culture unique.
If my interpretation is correct, she is arguing against the motion that “the West is right to be suspicious of Islam,” yet in the same breath she recounts that Muslims at the Oxford Union had to intervene to prevent a debater from being subjected to violence. In doing so she effectively concedes her own case.
Her argument here is also only constructed to win applause rather than actually challenge the statement of the debate.
Simply put, she lost her own argument by seemingly exposing the nature of some of the people she’s defending and revealed that she is a sub-par debater, all because she wanted to personally attack her opponent.
Is this the standard of Oxford debate in 2026? If so it’s an utter waste of time going.
You can feel the overwhelming sense of dread at the repercussions in the room when @LozzaFox declared that he would show an image of Muhammad.
A masterclass by Laurence Fox in demonstrating the threat of Islam to freedom in the West.
A Muslim student’s speech was cut from the footage of the Oxford Union debate.
Why?
Likely because he said that Britain SHOULD be suspicious of Islam and sided with Tommy Robinson, Laurence Fox and Jonathan Sacerdoti.
It’s a great speech. Watch it
It always strikes me as odd that when a Muslim applauds someone standing up for “her people” it’s a noble thing.
Yet when a white Christian stands up for “their people” they are instantly a racist.
There is only one human race.
The ideologies we chase aren’t who we are.
The paradox of tolerance:
First, you must allow an intolerant ideology into your tolerant society.
Next, you must be grateful the ideology did not kill you for not tolerating it.
Now, your society is dominated by the intolerant.
Don’t worry. They’ll have security for you.
Here is Oxford Union member and Muslim Aisha Khan Aziz (named after Muhammad’s 9 year-old bride) glorying in her power to set loose a mob on her opponents in this debate.
In so doing, she stupidly proves the point that Islam is violent — and loves it. Watch her face at the end.