Tag Archives: women

2016 Hillary-Michelle ‘Dream Ticket’

2016 Hillary-Michelle ‘Dream Ticket’ floated

Paul Bedard

Hillary Clinton hasn’t stepped into the 2016 Democratic presidential primaries yet and there’s already buzz growing for the ultimate grrl power ticket: Clinton and first lady Michelle Obama.

“All due respect for President Obama and Vice President Biden, but that would truly be a dream team for America,” said former Clinton spokeswoman Karen Finney. “Both women are proven effective leaders who’ve raise children, so dealing with Congress would be a snap!” added Finney, also a former Democratic Party spokeswoman.

“More than anything else, this reflects the growing awareness that it is time for the glass ceiling of the last old boys club to be firmly shattered,” added Democratic strategist Chris Lehane.

It’s not just talk. Bumper stickers reading “2016-Hillary Clinton and Michelle Obama,” and “Hillary-Michelle 2016 First First Lady Ticket For President” are popping up. Cafe Press said sales of the Hillary-Michelle bumper sticker saw a 60% increase from December to March, with the largest uptick in March.
Sign Up for the Paul Bedard newsletter!

“I look forward to the day when a woman can run for the presidency without so much parody and fanfare,” said former Al Gore campaign manager Donna Brazile.

Democratic strategists say that Clinton is a lock to get into the race. Not only is she far ahead of Biden and others in polls, she still has a strong donor network from her 2008 campaign. Former advisor Terry McAuliffe recently told Secrets that she will make up her mind next year. President Obama has also talked Clinton up, choosing her as the only retiring Cabinet secretary to hold an outgoing “60 Minutes” interview with.

Recently, there has been some talk that Obama would be a good Illinois Senate candidate after the White House, much like Clinton, who ran for and won a Senate seat in New York. But teaming her with Clinton would create a political and fundraising force that would be impossible to beat on the Democratic side.

Pollster John Zogby, however, questions if the ticket would sell. “Hillary and Michelle are both very popular and accomplished, but this smacks of too much celebrity and is a tad too dynastic for American voters,” he said. “An interesting reality show, yes. A ticket, no.”

And if they did run and win, questions would turn to the husbands. Suggested Finney: “They could play golf and help support their wive’s agenda.”

OXYTOCIN IN WOMEN The Bridge Between Touch and Sex

The Bridge Between Touch and Sex

Paul H. Byerly

Touch is so vital to humans, and most of us don’t get nearly enough of it. Babies deprived of touch don’t develop normally because certain connections in the brain actually disappear. Orphans who receive very, very little touch often die as a result, and those who survive can experience permanent physical and mental retardation. Kids who don’t get enough touch grow up to become aggressive and antisocial adults. Older adults who don’t get enough touch also suffer, becoming senile sooner, and dying earlier. We’re all affected by touch, and it’s not “all in the mind”; rather it’s the result of complex hormonal responses which actually change our bodies and brains.

Touch causes our bodies to produce a hormone called oxytocin. Not only does touch stimulate production of oxytocin, but oxytocin promotes a desire to touch and be touched: it’s a feedback loop that can have wonderful results. Oxytocin makes us feel good about the person who causes the oxytocin to be released, and it causes a bonding between the two persons. Nursing a baby produces oxytocin in both mother and child, and this is a major part of what initially bonds the mother and her baby. Even thinking of someone we love can stimulate this hormone; when women in good marriages were asked to think about their husbands, the level of oxytocin in their blood rose quickly.

There’s more. Oxytocin plays a significant role in our sexuality too. Higher levels of oxytocin result in greater sexual receptivity, and because oxytocin increases testosterone production (which is responsible for sex drive in both men and women) sex drive can also increase. Moreover, this hormone does not just create a sexual desire in women, coupled with estrogen it creates a desire to be penetrated (that is, it makes her want intercourse). Oxytocin increases the sensitivity of the penis and the nipples, improves erections, and makes both orgasm and ejaculation stronger; it may even increase sperm counts. And while oxytocin can move us towards sex, sex increases production of oxytocin: nipple stimulation, genital stimulation, and intercourse all raise the level of oxytocin in men and women. Orgasm causes levels to spike even higher, three to five times normal, creating the “afterglow” closeness that is experienced following lovemaking. The fact that sex increases oxytocin levels can be helpful for women who complain they “never feel like sex.” Having sex, even when you don’t have a drive to do so, will actually affect you in ways that will result in a greater sex drive. This also explains, at least in part, why many women find that the more sex they have, the more they want, and the less sex they have, the less they want.

Of course no hormone acts independently. Hormones amplify or reduce each other’s effects, and increase or decrease production of other hormones. Among other things, oxytocin increases the production of both estrogen and testosterone. Oxytocin has a special relationship with estrogen. Oxytocin is virtually powerless without estrogen, and oxytocin’s affects are increasingly powerful as estrogen levels rise. This explains why women are far more affected by touch than men. Women have much higher levels of estrogen than men. This also explains why women respond to the same touch differently at different times of the month. When her estrogen is high (ovulation) even a slight touch can have a strong affect; when estrogen is low (menstruation) it will take more touch to get less of a response.

Another interesting effect of oxytocin is that it decreases mental processes and impairs memory. This is why hugging and touching can help us recover from an argument. The oxytocin helps us to stop thinking about it, and even forget some of the pain we felt. While hugging may not be a natural response during conflict, it can quickly cool things off.

While most of us suffer from living in an anti-touch society, women tend feel more touch-starved than men, probably due to the fact that they have more estrogen. A woman who is not receiving enough touch becomes withdrawn and even depressed. In this condition a woman can become strongly, and even violently, opposed to sexual touch. If the situation continues, she may become so withdrawn that she is no longer open to the very touch she needs. So how do we touch more? Mostly we need to be aware of the need. We need to retrain ourselves and look for opportunities to touch. Even a gentle brief touch has an effect, and the more the better. Learn to walk hand-in-hand or arm-in-arm. When you go to church, or watch TV, or sit talking to friends, sit close enough to touch each other. When you’re both reading find a way to be in contact with each other … even sitting at opposite ends of the couch with your feet touching will work. When you are eating together play footsies. Rub each other’s shoulders or feet, or give a long massage. Do anything which brings your body into contact with your spouse, and do it often. And don’t forget your kids, they need touch too!!

Nearly 1,000 Pakistani women ‘killed for honor’

Nearly 1,000 Pakistani women ‘killed for honor’

Custom Search

At least 943 Pakistani women and girls were murdered last year for allegedly defaming their family’s honor, the country’s leading human rights group said Thursday.

The statistics highlight the growing scale of violence suffered by many women in conservative Muslim Pakistan, where they are frequently treated as second-class citizens and there is no law against domestic violence.

Despite progress on better protecting women’s rights, activists say the government needs to do more to prosecute murderers in cases largely dismissed by police as private, family affairs.

“At least 943 women were killed in the name of honor, of which 93 were minors,” wrote the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan in its annual report.

Seven Christian and two Hindu women were among the victims, it said.

The Commission reported 791 “honor killings” in 2010.

Around 595 of the women killed in 2011 were accused of having “illicit relations” and 219 of marrying without permission.

Some victims were raped or gang raped before being killed, the Commission said. Most of the women were killed by their brothers and husbands.

Only 20 of 943 killed were reported to have been provided medical aid before they died, the Commission wrote.

Despite the rising number of reported killings, activists have praised parliament for passing laws aimed at strengthening women’s protection against abuses.

Rights groups say the government should do more to ensure that women subjected to violence, harassment and discrimination have effective access to justice.

Last year, a Belgian court sentenced four members of a Pakistani family to prison for the murder of their daughter, who defied them by living with a Belgian man and refused an arranged marriage.


Catholics, contraceptives and John Locke

Catholics, contraceptives and John Locke

By Michael Gerson

It is extraordinary how far some will go to knit the random scraps and patches of events into the quilt of a narrative. So the Susan B. Komen controversy, resistance to the administration’s contraceptive mandate, a stag-party joke by Foster Friess and a cruel epithet from Rush Limbaugh somehow add up to a Republican war on women, sure to provoke the political backlash of an entire gender.

American women haven’t behaved as predicted or demanded. President Obama’s job approval has risen or, more recently, fallen independently of the chromosomal status of voters. Men and women, it turns out, resent dipping into their retirement savings to drive to work.

Recent opinion surveys on the contraceptive mandate, in particular, have shown women to be an independent-minded lot. In coverage of its own recent poll, the New York Times conceded that the views of women on this topic are “split.” By a plurality of 46 percent to 44 percent, women believe that employers should be able to “opt out” of providing birth-control coverage for religious reasons. But opinion is not really “split” on the question of whether “religiously affiliated employers, such as a hospital and university” should be able to opt out of offering coverage. Women support this proposition by 53 percent to 38 percent.

How is this possible? Americans overwhelmingly endorse contraception and regularly practice what they preach. Most believe — myself included — that child spacing and preventing the spread of sexually transmitted diseases are public goods. Why not impose this social consensus on all private institutions?

The answer depends on your view, not of contraception, but of pluralism and religious freedom.

One tradition of religious liberty contends that freedom of conscience is protected and advanced by the autonomy of religious groups. In this view, government should honor an institutional pluralism — the ability of people to associate, live and act in accordance with their religious beliefs, limited only by the clear requirements of public order. So Roger Williams welcomed Catholics and Quakers to the Rhode Island colony, arguing that a “Church or company of worshippers (whether true or false) .?.?. may dissent, divide, breake into Schismes and Factions, sue and implead each other at the Law, yea wholly breake up and dissolve into pieces and nothing, and yet the peace of the Citie not be in the least measure impaired or disturbed.”

There is another form of modern liberalism that defines freedom of conscience in purely personal terms. Only the individual and the state are real, at least when it comes to the law. And the state must often intervene to protect the individual from the oppression of illiberal social institutions, particularly religious ones.

This is the guiding philosophy of the American Civil Liberties Union. But as Yuval Levin, editor of National Affairs, pointed out to me, this approach has roots in the Anglo American tradition of political philosophy. John Locke’s “Letter Concerning Toleration” urges legal respect for individual conscience because “everyone is orthodox to himself.” But Locke offered no tolerance for the institution of the Catholic Church: “That Church can have no right to be tolerated by the magistrate which is constituted upon such a bottom that all those who enter into it do thereby ipso facto deliver themselves up to the protection and service of another prince.” In Locke’s view, Catholics can worship as they wish as individuals, but their institution is a danger to the liberal order.

In American history, the treatment of the Catholic Church has often been the measure of institutional religious tolerance. It is amazing how Lockean (unconsciously, one assumes) recent actions by the Obama administration have been. Catholics individuals are free to worship. Catholic institutions must be forced to reflect liberal ideals and values.

On a variety of issues, balancing individual and institutional rights isn’t easy. But the contraceptive mandate is a particularly revealing test case. One side of the controversy argues that the autonomy of religious institutions is essential to the expression of individual conscience and important to the common good. The other side believes that the moral and health choices of individuals need to be protected by government against oppressive religious groups such as the Catholic bishops. So it is not enough for contraceptives to be legal and generally available; they must be provided (directly or indirectly) by Catholic institutions to their employees.

This is the real debate on the contraceptive mandate — and the administration has not won it.

Tired of being raped? Want his worst fears to be realized? Try the NEW and Improved RAPE-AXE Condom!

Condoms With Teeth Fight Rape In South Africa

Over 30,000 Rape-Axe condoms are being handed out free at South Africa’s World Cup. While they won’t stop rape, the condoms (worn by women) have jagged-teeth inside to tear penises up, and can only be removed by doctors.

Sounds grim, but then I imagine rape isn’t any fun for the woman either. The inventor, Dr Sonnet Ehlers, was inspired to create the painful condom after she met a woman who’d been raped. The woman apparently told Ehlers “if only I had teeth down there,” which encouraged her to look at ways to make men regret their actions.

Women fearful of being raped can insert the Rape-Axe condom inside themselves like a diaphragm or tampon. If her worst fears come true, and a man attempts to rape her, the Rape-Axe’s inside hooks attach themselves to the penis and don’t come off, instead getting even tighter and stopping the man from being able to urinate. The only way to remove it is by seeing a doctor—which will obviously help with prosecution.

After the World Cup, Ehlers will be selling the Rape-Axe condoms for $2 each.



by Johan P. Prinsloo

There are certain facts about South Africa that tend to be ignored or denied. People do not like hearing the truth, because they prefer living in a dream world of make-believe, but its time to wake up.

An opposition party is a body that consists mainly of people with experience in political affairs, because they have seats in parliament and have experience as active role-players in National and Local Governance.

It is a fact that when the ANC were handed the reigns in 1994 they had ZERO experience and ZERO knowledge of Politics, Democracy or Governance at any level. They were no more than a militant terrorist tea-club put in power to run a FIRST-WORLD COUNTRY.

Nowhere, never in the history of the World had a revolutionary, militant, rebel, terrorist, communist organisation taken over a country and continued its success or turn it into a success. In every single case where terrorists / “freedom fighters” had taken control of a country, they destroyed it.

The New SA is a typical African country on its way to revolution, bankruptcy, anarchy and total collapse.

The infrastructure is destroyed, because it has not been maintained since 1994. Our Railway services are destroyed, because the most overpaid person on Earth, Maria Ramos, sold all the assets to make the books look good, but by the time she left there was nothing left to sell, little income and the SA Railway services was destroyed, leaving us without even that rail infrastructure.

The Energy / Electricity supply is failing, because it has not been maintained or upgraded to keep up with the outrageous growing demand since 1994. Two weeks ago ESKOM the main (only) supplier of energy in the country publicly admitted that they had lost the battle and cannot meet the energy demands of the country. Another example of incompetent uneducated inexperienced fools taking over a well-oiled first world machine and driving it into the ground, besides having robbed it bankrupt.

Health Services is failing, because it has not been maintained since 1994 and from the outset it was given to incompetent uneducated fools to manage.

The whites who possess the knowledge and experience and work ethic to do the work, because they had been doing it for 400 years were removed from their positions and replaced with uneducated, ignorant, inexperienced, fools who do not possess the loyalty, the dedication or the work ethic to do the work.

Less than 6 million people carry the total tax burden of a population officially quoted as 50 million, but unofficially estimated at anything ranging from 70 million to as high as 150 million.

Less than 5% of all residents in all Municipal districts pay for services.

10% of the population is carrying the other 90%, while those in power are squandering 90% of the money taken from that 10%.

The New SA is an upside down pyramid that has to fall over. It cannot remain standing. It HAS to fall.

Educational standards were deliberately dropped and an educational system that built this country and delivered world-class professionals in all fields and at all levels was exchanged for a pathetic picture based based so-called Outcomes Based Educational system. Without proper educational standards from the first grade to the highest post-graduate level, a country is rendered infertile and barren with no future.

Our dams have never been maintained, the motors needed to open the sluices at some of the major dams have been stolen, the foundations of some of the dams damaged beyond repair, the dam walls are nearing the end of their lifespan with no back-up to replace it with. It is suicide living below any dam in the New SA.

There is not a government department that is not either bankrupt or virtually bankrupt. This regime is bankrupt, this country is virtually bankrupt, mostly due to mismanagement by ignorant uneducated inexperienced fools and their theft, fraud and corruption.

The banks are bankrupt and the inflation rate is a pathetic joke, because everyone with even the least bit of sense realises that our inflation rate is at least 10 times what government says it is.

All Government and semi-state institutions are in complete and utter chaos, inefficient, ineffective and incapable of coping with or doing their work.

Notwithstanding the fact that the regime is discriminating against the white minority with transformation policies that PROHIBIT whites from entering the job market and whites are being laid off to make room for uneducated, unqualified, inexperienced blacks.

By 2014 blacks must be the majority shareholders of all companies, whether founded and built by whites or not and even family businesses.

It is a fact that whites are being dispossessed and disowned. Whites are being denied their “Constitutional rights” and their citisenship is being limited. The regime is trying to making life impossible for whites.

Notwithstanding the above, blacks are still unsatisfied with whites being in any position or being allowed in any kind of business. This dissatisfaction is a driving force behind the revolution. Even members of the ruling party frequently make public statements openly expressing their hatred of whites. Members of parliament have on occasion told whites to leave the country if they are unhappy, obviously because we are not wanted.

There are many, many examples of revolutionary videos, articles, movements and calls for the public to rise up against the Regime. This is being done so openly that articles are published in newspapers, black revolutionaries are stirring the pot on their Facebook walls on blogs and in YouTube videos. Numerous journalists and political analysts have warned about the revolution headed our way. This is Africa, therefore the standard symptoms and signs of revolution do not apply. Here it will not be the middle class rising up against the state, but the poor ignorant masses being abused by self-serving militant communists.

The regime is undoubtedly aware that the revolution will not come from the disarmed white minority population and that it is being driven by the black populous, spearheaded by middle-class and super rich blacks. Notwithstanding this knowledge the regime is not lifting a finger to gain the support of the white minority and allowing the white population to be victimised, murdered, harassed and terrorised by militant terrorist blacks.

Many official internationally accepted aspects of genocide are openly being perpetrated against the white minority, yet not a single opposition party, let alone the regime itself, says anything about it. Genocide Watch upgraded the New SA to level 6 Genocide, out of a possible 8 levels. Not a single newspaper, radio station or television network has said a word about it, but perhaps for Radio Pretoria to a limited extent due of legal restrictions. Something strange is happening. Even the leaders of the numerous volkstaat movements are denying the looming revolution.

At the same time the Broers are occupying the minds of a sector of the white population with an ideal of an elitist super Afrikaner-Broer volkstaat, while also being deliberately blind about the coming revolution. The people leading the volkstaat ideology openly object to anyone, like myself, warning people and informing people about the coming revolution and one has to question WHY? If you scroll down my wall you will see those arguments thrown at me, because they the volkstaat Broers do not want people to know whats coming. It obviously does not suite their exclusive elitist self-preservation ideologies.

One has to question why the media, the liberals, the opposition parties and the volkstaters are ignoring the looming signs of revolution and collapse. One has to question why people want to promise the Afrikaner-Broers a promised land of freedom and self-governance, while denying any signs of a civil war? One has to question why the world is being told of a genocide against the Afrikaners and Boers, while ignoring the other non-Afrikaner whites being murdered, while at the same time denying a looming civil war and economic collapse?

With reference to the volkstaat lets consider a few facts being deliberately ignored.

It is a fact that the Boer Republics officially ceased to exist on 31 May 1902, with the signing of the Treaty of Vereeniging. A new British colony, the Union of South Africa, was subsequently established, in which the Transvaal and the Orange Free State became provinces along with the Cape and Natal. The Boer republics AGREED to come under the sovereignty of the British Crown. It is a fact that the Boer Republics were lost because the Boers themselves laid down their arms and gave it to Britain by having signed it away. That is a fact, like or or not. The BOERS signed away the Boer Republics and no one can ever go back on that. Signatories for the Government of the South African Republic, Schalk W. Burger, F.W. Reitz, Louis Botha, J. H. de la Rey, L.J. Meyer, and J.C. Krogh. For the Government of the Orange Free State, C.R. de Wet, J.B.M. Hertzog, C.H. Olivier and WCJ Bebner.

With the advent of the Republic of South Africa on 31 May 1961 the boarders of the Republic were laid down and recognised world-wide. This time the British signed away the entire United territory of South Africa by which a new Internationally recognised Independent Republic was established. It is a fact that the Boer Republics are gone forever, because the BOERS THEMSELVES signed it away willingly, so live with it.

This is Africa. While we may ignore the fact, nothing in Africa works the way it does anywhere else in the World. Africa has its own rules, they make their own new rules as they go along, and always to suite them and their needs and wants.

To change any Act takes no less than five years, lately anything between five and ten years. For a Volkstaat to be established numerous pieces of Legislation would need to be amended and drafted, which would not be possible within the next 15 to 25 years. The volkstaat would also require serious considerations in terms of the Constitution, which would certainly extend that period.

Before the volkstaat could be negotiated they would need to define exactly where this volkstaat would be, which is a major obstacle, because even to this day the promoters of the volkstaat are still arguing and asking where perhaps it could be.

They would need to set the criteria for qualification as a citisen of the volkstaat, which thus far excluded anyone not of the so-called ethnic genetic pool, strictly Afrikaans speaking, strictly Christian (probably only those belonging to the three mainstream Afrikaans Broederbond churches), etc. They have not even given any consideration to those qualifying members of the super-race living in old-age homes, retirements villages, land owners that would need to try and get their land sold and restart everything from scratch in the Shangri-La, because quite frankly they could not be bothered with those people, as long as they themselves could flee to their holy land and be safe, because that is all that matters to them.

Now consider the following. Since 1994 the SA farmers have been demanding that their land be bought for the purpose of redistribution to blacks, but they the white Afrikaner-Broers are expecting to just be given this massive area of land without having to pay for it at current market prices, right? In Africa, right? Yeah right.

Before the Broers could get their volkstaat, they would need to negotiate that the large yet-to-be-identified section of the independent sovereign Republic of South Africa be given away (or sold to them). This would require that COSATU, the DA, the SACP, the ANC, the ANCYL, AZAPO, and every other political grouping in the country agrees to it. At the very least a special Referendum would need to be called and the majority of the country would need to agree to this. Without the approval/agreement of the majority of the owners of the country, which means the citisens of this country, this will never happen. Now the whites are 3 million, of which only about 30,000 could possibly qualify according to these special ethnic genetic language and christian criteria, while at least 20 million people are on the voters’ roll? Perhaps I just cannot do maths. We could ignore these facts, but unfortunately it remains facts they choose to ignore or keep quiet about. Only once that is done would the rest of the World consider recognising this new Broer Shangri-La.

“Nothing is impossible, but some things are just highly unlikely” – my late eldest brother Pieter Willem Prinsloo

Also remember this, the very Afrikaners opposed the Referendum calling for us to break away from Britain and become a Republic in 1961 and the referendum was almost lost, but for a tiny number of votes.

Then the next referendum was to decide about allowing blacks into government with everything that went with it. Well as I recall it was won quite comfortably with the help of huge Afrikaner support.

Then in 1995 Nelson Mandela pulled a Rugby jersey over his shoulders and the Afrikaners cheered him and thought heaven had descended upon this great land. In FACT he stole their hearts and bought their souls in the name of their one TRUE god, Rugby.

Then just a few months ago the DA won their hearts, their support and their votes, while they shunned their own Afrikaner parties? Those that chose not to vote gave their tacit support to the ruling party, the ANC, while they could have supported one of their own Afrikaner parties, like the Freedom Front, which was the only viable option and which I chose to support myself. Those who voted for the DA supported the same land reform policies as that of the ANC? They also supported the ex-leader of the BLACK SASH, Helen Zille. They always have some sneering remarks about the Jews, but yet they chose to support a Jew above their own? Yet now they want a volkstaat without Jews, without English, Portuguese, Greeks, Germans, etc?

It is a fact that Africans are wanting to claim Africa for Africans only. They want to get rid of ALL whites on this continent and they succeeded in every other country in Africa.

It is a fact that the SA whites are under threat, not just the Afrikaans speaking or the so-called Boers. This is a fact we could choose to ignore, but it certainly does not change the fact.

It is a fact that in 1994 the Republic of SA was given away by Afrikaners. It is a fact that those Afrikaners qualify for Boer Status, whether we like to admit it or not. Just like the Boers signed away the Boer Republics the Boers signed away the old Republic of SA.

Sweden unsafe for women and Jews

Sweden unsafe for Jews, women, threatened by ‘Islamic terror’

Acharya S

I hate to see the land of my beloved ancestral heritage being destroyed – and some Swedes become apoplectic when such a situation is even mentioned – but here are the facts. Read them and weep, because just a couple of decades ago Sweden had attained one of the most advanced cultures in history.

First we discover that Jews in the Swedish city of Malmo have been fleeing, because of violence and abuse from Muslims:

Sweden’s reputation as a tolerant, liberal nation is being threatened by a steep rise in anti-Semitic hate crimes in the city of Malmo….

I never thought I would see this hatred again in my lifetime, not in Sweden anyway,” Mrs Popinski told The Sunday Telegraph.

“This new hatred comes from Muslim immigrants. The Jewish people are afraid now.”…

The city’s synagogue has guards and rocket-proof glass in the windows, while the Jewish kindergarten can only be reached through thick steel security doors.

It is a far cry from the city Mrs Popinski arrived in 65 years ago, half-dead from starvation and typhus….

A Swedish newspaper reports that the Swedish government now must set aside funds to protect Swedish Jews from Muslim hate crimes:

The Government will spend four million kroner in 2012 on increasing the security and decreasing the vulnerability of the Jewish minority. Research shows that even though tolerance is increasing in society, anti-Semitic views have not decreased to the same extent. The Jewish minority is the subject of anti-Semitic hate crimes and harassment. Even children are harassed in everyday life. Many Jews in Sweden are afraid of openly showing that they belong to the Jewish minority.

Bizarrely, Jewish organizations apparently think that bringing in hordes of those most inclined towards “anti-Semitism” will help solve the situation, as expressed by this Jewish woman, Barbara Lerner Spectre, who says:

I think there’s a resurgence of anti-Semitism because at this point in time, Europe has not yet learned how to be multicultural. And I think we are going to be part of the throes of that transformation, which must take place. Europe is not going to be the monolithic societies [sic] that they once were in the last century. Jews are going to be at the center of that. It’s a huge transformation for Europe to make. They are now going into a multicultural mode, and Jews will be resented because of our leading role. But without that leading role, and without that transformation, Europe will not survive.

[Swedish woman, Linda, 18, gangraped, beaten and left for dead by Muslim immigrants] With this wave of delightful multiculturalism, Sweden has now become the rape capital of Europe/:

Sweden has the highest incidence of reported rapes in Europe – twice as many as “runner up” the UK, a new study shows.

Researchers behind the EU study, which will be presented on Tuesday, conclude that rape appears to be a more common occurrence in Sweden than in continental European countries.

In Sweden, 46 incidents of rape are reported per 100,000 residents.

This figure is double as many as in the UK which reports 23 cases, and four times that of the other Nordic countries, Germany and France. The figure is up to 20 times the figure for certain countries in southern and eastern Europe….

Naturally, this article and others will not name the ethnicity/culture of the majority of rapists – Muslim immigrants – but Pat Condell has no problem doing so:

Yet, despite the reluctance to attach a name to the problem, the Swedish police are now admitting that “Islamic terrorism” is a major threat:

Islamic terrorism is key threat: Swedish police

Islamic terrorism remains the greatest threat to Sweden, according to Anders Danielsson, head of Sweden’s Security Service (Säpo)….

Säpo’s mission is furthermore to prevent terrorist crimes, Danielsson underlined.

“Our mission is not to get convictions for terrorist crimes, that is not a measure of our effectiveness,” said Danielsson.

We can and are likely to be exposed to terrorist attacks again. But it will not destroy our democratic system. Terrorism rarely does, even though it may seem that way.”...

To summarize, in the face of Muslim violence, Jews are fleeing Sweden, while the government sets aside money to protect them. With Muslim immigration, Sweden has become the “rape capital” of Europe. Swedish police say the greatest threat to Sweden is “Islamic terror.”