Category Archives: Politics

‘Allah Hu Akbar’ Screamer Stabs Italian Soldier

A man who allegedly shouted “Allah hu Akbar” before stabbing an Italian soldier has been detained by police.

The suspect attacked the patroling soldier from the back with a letter opener, causing the victim to suffer light injuries to the neck. Other troopers then apprehended and disarmed the man before handing him over to the police.

Italian anti-terrorism officials are investigating a 23-year-old man suspected of stabbing an army corporal outside Milan’s main train station, Italian media reported on Tuesday. The suspect attacked the patroling soldier from the back with a letter opener, causing the victim to suffer light injuries to the neck.

ANSA described the man as an irregular migrant from Yemen. Witnesses said he had shouted “Allahu Akbar” (Allah is greatest) during his arrest.

Source: Italian soldier stabbed near Milan train station

EU Parliamentarians Brand ‘European Way of Life’ Phrase ‘Far Right’

Pro-EU Members of the European Parliament have their knickers in a twist again after the new leader of the executive branch of the EU – the European Commission – came up with a new slogan: “protecting the European way of life”.

This is of course drastically racist as far as the leftist MEPs are concerned.

They say it plays into the hands of the “far right”.

EU Observer has more:

European People’s Party group leader Manfred Weber defended Ursula von der Leyen’s decision to rename a commission portfolio, partly dealing with migration, “protecting the European way of life”. He said it means rescuing people in the Mediterranean.

Source: Defending the ‘European way of life’ name splits MEPs

Raheem Rants: Who’s REALLY Keeping a Brexit-Conservative Party Pact Down?

Deal or no deal?

Raheem Kassam isn’t talking about the game show in the latest installment of Raheem Rants. He’s talking about the likelihood of the Brexit and Conservative parties “working together in the national interest come a general election, to keep Jeremy Corbyn out of government, or to make Brexit a real thing”.

What exactly is the “deal”?

Nigel Farage’s “pre-election, no-deal Brexit pact” where he asked the “Tories to stand aside in ninety constituencies in a non-aggression pact to avoid splitting the Leave vote”. 

In response, a “senior Tory source” proclaimed: “Neither Nigel Farage nor Arron Banks are fit and proper persons and they should never be allowed anywhere near government” – a resounding no to Farage’s offer.

Who exactly is this “senior Tory source” (who didn’t even have enough courage to attach his name to the statement)?

Raheem explains all in this latest audio clip. Listen now.

Support Raheem on Patreon here.

Raheem Rants: How Blair and Cameron Trashed the British Constitution

You asked for it! 

The latest “Raheem Rants” episode is up: Brexit, Boris, and Parliamentary ‘Sovereignty. It provides clarity on anything and everything related to Brexit, focusing primarily on relevant constitutional issues and other impediments.

It’s a “primer on how/why we got here”.

Concerning the “how”:

“I think we have to reconcile in our minds the fact that Tony Blair and David Cameron were perhaps two of the most malign influences on the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland that we have ever seen in our lives. Probably beyond our lives.”

Specifically, Kassam references Tony Blair’s Lord’s Reform (1999) which “effectively made it [House of Lords] into a chamber of political wankers and people who’ve climbed up the greasy pole their whole lives”. It’s a chamber now filled with people who “couldn’t punch their way out of a paper bag”.

Another flawed piece of legislation, this time introduced by David Cameron, was the Fixed Term Parliaments Act (2011) – “an act of constitutional damage”. Prior to its passage, “it was previously in the power of the prime minister to call an election when an election was an obvious thing to want to do”.

Also under Cameron, the UK nearly avoided adopting an AV+ voting system and the Scottish referendum was a “narrowly avoided disaster”.

And the “why”?

“I believe that parliament is unwilling to face the public not just because they are scared of being deselected but the entire apparatus under which they came to power, whatever “power” they have sitting as a constituency MP in wherever they might be … they have a semblance of power that is pooled with their party, but now that stems from the approval they seek from the EU and The European Commission … They’re seen as delegates now for the European Commission. 

It’s not just about losing their seats; “they now see themselves as guardians of as bastions for the European project”

Kassam calls it like it is: “They’re traitors trying to represent a foreign power and foreign interest.”

There’s a *lot* more on the podcast, but hearing it all in Raheem’s accent makes it exponentially more interesting.

Support Raheem on Patreon here.

Kassam on WMAL on Boris, Brexit, and October 31st

If you’re still perplexed by Brexit, allow Raheem’s latest radio appearance to help resolve your confusion. He was featured on the September 10th episode of “Mornings on the Mall” to discuss the “Brexit battle in parliament”.

The constitutionality of proroguing parliament mixed with the imminent Brexit deadline is messy: 

“Technically speaking parliament is within its right to attempt to use legislation to force Boris Johnson to ask for another extension to the deadline for us to leave the European Union. However, Boris Johnson is also within his right to ask Her Majesty to prorogue and suspend the sitting of parliament, which he has done and which she gave her consent.”

This situation leaves the UK in a “quagmire” where parliament is pushing to extend the October 19th deadline for Brexit which effectively “puts the ball back in the European Union’s court” as it will “require the approval of all European Union member states” – an unlikely event. Just one country could derail the process, and opposition from countries including France and Hungary seems likely.

Kassam predicts the media will echo parliament’s sentiments: they’ll “tell the country they have either a deal with the European Union or an extension.”

He also offers insight on Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty which “sets in place the two year process for leaving”. 

Although it was invoked over two years ago, pro-EU membership parliamentarians have come up with a wide range of excuses: “we’re not ready to leave, we don’t want to leave, we don’t have a deal, we don’t have regulatory, travel, or visa alignment, we don’t have clarity on the Irish border”.

In other words: “they’re saying to the public we don’t care what you voted for”.

Raheem explains broader implications of these Brexit shenanigans on British politics. It has left many people doubting the effectiveness of democracy and undermined any sense of political efficacy.

Listen to the whole show featuring Rep. Louie Gohmert, Dr. Michael Siegel and Richard Kelsey here.

Kassam w/ Seb Gorka: Boris Can Use Emergency Powers to Enact A Hard Brexit

Raheem Kassam recently appeared on the America First show with Dr. Sebastian Gorka to discuss Brexit and the upcoming 2020 U.S. Presidential Elections:

In the clip, Kassam provides analysis of Boris Johnson’s government, specifically the prorogation of parliament and impending October 31st Brexit deadline.

He points out how those leading the crusade against proroguing parliament such as John Major have used the same tactic – suspending parliament – for “political reasons” in the past.

He also commends Johnson’s efforts on rooting out the “British equivalent of RINO’s,” those who “vote against the will of the people” by ejecting them from the Conservative Party and making them unable to stand for election. 

Kassam suggests a tactic that could be used to effect a Hard Brexit:

“In 2004, the Blair government introduced something called the “Civil Contingencies Act” that gives the government of the day a 30 day national emergency declaration that they could do to say we can’t go through parliament, we can’t introduce new legislation, we can’t introduce regulation because something is happening that has national security implications. If the left and the “remainers” are right and a hard Brexit does have those implications you can use their logic and the powers that they introduced against them”

Kassam wagers:

“We have to have a general election in the UK. The public must be able to have their say as to whether or not they want these parliamentarians who keep thwarting their will actually keep representing them.”

Kassam laments the loss of Rep. Eric Swalwell from the Democratic primary, a candidate with “no gravitas but high entertainment value”; his numerous failed attempts to make “pass the torch mainstream” and other overly-rehearsed payoff lines will be missed.

Raheem also explains as to why he thinks a Warren/Sanders ticket is likely:

“The Democratic establishment actually wants to lose this one so they can point to the socialist hardliners and go, “Look you tried and you failed. Let’s get back to our Hillary-style candidates.”

Or just watch the episode to see Raheem’s new double-breasted jacket.

Listen to the the full episode of America First here.

Sweden Scraps Automatic Asylum for Syrians.

Sweden will no longer issue “residence permits” to all Syrian refugees, terminating a policy that allowed over 100,000 asylum-seekers to resettle in the country. 

The policy, championed by left-wing parties, had been in effect since 2013.

Right-leaning parties that opposed the policy change pointed out its flaws, raising concerns that “no conflict is permanent but still we give them permanent residence”.

“[F]or one immigrant that comes here we could help hundreds, maybe thousands of people, [in and around Syria] with food, with medicine, with everything” claimed former Sweden Democrat party spokesman Kent Ekeroth in 2013.

The policy change results from a reassessment of safety levels in different Syrian provinces: the entire country is no longer regarded to be universally “at risk” due to its civil war.

Those living in the Syrian capital of Damascus and the adjacent southern provinces of Quneitra, Rif Dimashq, Suwayda, and Dara’a as well as Northern provinces such as Hassakah and Latakia will no longer automatically be granted asylum. 

Certain provinces including Aleppo, Idlib, and Raqqa are still classified as having “internal armed conflict where everyone risks being affected” meaning residents of those areas will still be granted asylum indiscriminately.

The Swedish Migration agency’s press release attributes this change in classification to the fact that “the number of deaths has decreased so much” as well as the “general risk of coming to harm has decreased” in certain provinces.

It continues: “Everyone was able to get a residence permit due to the general situation in Syria as being in the territory entailed a risk. We now assess that the security situation has become slightly better.

The policy is not retroactive, as those waiting for immigration-related court hearings or wanting to renew temporary residence permits are unaffected: “This affects only new applicants for asylum. Those who are already here in Sweden and who have received protection status as a refugee or subsidiary protection will retain that status”.

Migration has long been a contentious issue in Sweden, particularly from non-Western countries.

And the number of Syrian refugees in Sweden is extremely high. Even former U.S. President Obama’s target for Syrian refugees was 10,000; Sweden has ten times that. The country often accepts the most migrants per capita compared to the rest Europe.

Consequently, no-go zones, or what the media and police like to refer to as “vulnerable”, “especially vulnerable”, or “risk areas” have become increasingly prevalent. 

Bombing and explosions have nearly doubled this year, animal cruelty in “immigrant-dense” areas has increased, and even blood supply in hospitals has been running low due to the dramatic increase in stabbings. 

Furthermore, the exorbitant cost of migration to taxpayers as well as the failure of many migrants to assimilate have caused discontent among native-born Swedes.

It’s not hard to see why a recent poll showed that “over half of Swedes reject taking more refugees”.

And this policy change appears to be a step in the right direction.

Natalie Winters is a freelance reporter

Kassam In Daily Caller: The Queen Just Saved Brexit By Neutralizing Parliament

She’s not “just a figurehead.”

Her Majesty The Queen is Britain’s final constitutional backstop. On Aug. 28, she acted in the interest of the majority of people in Britain. She approved Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s request to suspend Parliament from early September to mid-October.

The move paves the way for Johnson to follow through on Brexit. The British people voted to leave the European Union in June 2016, but Parliament has sought to thwart the people’s will for the last three years.

Parliament has of course done itself no favors as of late: originally voting in favor of the referendum itself, voting for Article 50 — which notified the EU of the result and intent to leave — voting for the Withdrawal Act, which set leaving in motion, but then rejecting a deal with the EU three times.

READ THE REST AT THE DAILY CALLER.

Soros-Funded Anti-Brexit Group Threatens the Queen

An anti-Brexit group has issued an extraordinary statement today, effectively threatening to behead Her Majesty The Queen for her work in ensuring the democratic will of the people who voted for Brexit in 2016 is delivered. 

Naomi Smith, the CEO of the pro-EU group ‘Best for Britain’ said after the Queen allowed for the proroguing of the anti-Brexit parliament: “It would make no sense for the queen to back this deeply undemocratic, unconstitutional and fundamentally political maneuver from the government.”

“If the queen is asked to help, she would do well to remember history doesn’t look too kindly on royals who aid and abet the suspension of democracy.”

Of course the Queen is not suspending democracy. She’s actually working well within the confines of the British constitution, as explained by A.V. Dicey in ‘The Law of the Constitution’ (1885).

The scholar wrote: “The House can in accordance with the constitution be deprived of power [when] there is fair reason to suppose that the opinion of the House is not the opinion of the electors.”

Best for Britain is funded by none other than billionaire George Soros, who is believed to have donated around £500,000 ($610,000) to the effort to kill off the Brexit referendum result from 2016.

Many of Soros’s business interests are reliant upon the crony capitalism and globalism the European Union represents.

Reuters reported in 2018:

News that billionaire financier George Soros is a backer of a campaign group seeking to keep Britain in the EU added fire to Britain’s Brexit debate on Thursday, with supporters of quitting the bloc accusing opponents of plotting a “coup”.

The Best of Britain campaign group confirmed it had received 400,000 pounds from Soros.

The statement by Best for Britain today hearkens back to King Charles I, who was deposed and beheaded after a protracted disagreement with parliament.

Defenders of the statement have taken to social media to claim the statement simply means the Queen will be perceived dimly by the public, a claim not borne out by public sentiment on the matter of Brexit.

Most Britons now want Brexit delivered, and quickly.

1A: Trump Refuses to Sign Macron’s G7 ‘Hate Speech’ Charter

The Trump administration has refused to join other G7 countries in signing up to a “hate speech charter” which would have taken direct aim at American’s First Amendment rights.

According to Reuters:

The United States did not sign up to a charter against online hate speech at the G7 summit for legal reasons, French President Emmanuel Macron said on Monday after the end of the meeting.

“We formalized an agreement for the first time with several Anglo-Saxon and European platforms and with support from nearly all (G7) countries,” Macron told reporters after the summit, which was held in southwestern France.

“We had a very good discussion with the United States, which for legal reasons was not able to formalize the agreement on this point,” Macron said, adding he was hopeful it could be done in the coming weeks.

So called “hate speech” laws are more often than not designed to tackle politically incorrect opinions, rather than any actual criminal behavior.

The United Kingdom has excluded Islam critics from the country on “hate speech” grounds, and Australian liberals recently tried to exclude author Raheem Kassam from the country using similar laws.

Strict hate speech laws would necessarily infringe upon the First Amendment rights of ordinary Americans, and would likely fail the constitutional test in a Supreme Court hearing.

French president Emmanuel Macron has been directly pressuring private companies to sign up to his government censorship charter. Reuters also reported:

France, which is hosting the G7 summit in Biarritz, was initially hoping to make social media giants sign a so-called “Charter for an Open, Free, and Safe Internet” on Friday, according to the official program.

However, the ceremony did not take place and Europe 1 radio said U.S. President Donald Trump had put pressure on the platforms’ chief executives not to sign the pledge publicly. Washington later denied any such pressure.

France’s junior minister for the digital industry said on Saturday the signing had only been delayed and would take place on Monday.

“The initial idea was to make the platforms come to Biarritz and until now, the United States was against the signature of this pledge,” Cedric O told reporters.

“Diplomatically, it was sensitive to make U.S. platforms come to Biarritz and sign something while the American president wasn’t there,” he said, adding that Google, Facebook and Snapchat were among the platforms due to sign the charter.

“There’s no doubt on the fact that the social networks will sign the pledge,” Cedric O said.

In Washington, however, a senior Trump administration official said the U.S. government did not have a position on the initiative and had not pressed U.S. companies not to sign.

In fact, the opposite had occurred, the official said.

“There certainly was no pressure from us,” the official told Reuters. “We heard from a couple of companies that they felt bullied by France to join.”

Click here to support RaheemKassam.com