London Mayor Sadiq Khan has once again spoken on behalf of the British people. This time he threatens US president Donald Trump with a '"mass 'peaceful' protest" should he come to London for a state visit. Here's why this Muslim mayor is, as usual, wrong about the British view, Trump's welcome, and most of his hate-fuelled rants.
The Withering Wrath of (Sadiq) Khan:
Sad Man of ‘London’ Threatens the US President (again)
ENTHRALLED AND TRIUMPHANT, the liberal media gushed forth their snowflake news - Sadiq Khan, mayor and self-styled supreme ruler of London, had issued a new threat for US president Donald Trump. Should he dare set foot on British soil, or at least London soil, his presence would be met with “mass ‘peaceful’ protests”. And as always, Khan assumed he was squeaking not just for himself but on behalf of all ‘Londoners’ and indeed all Britain and the UK. For in ‘Khanworld’ sad man Sadiq is the ‘voice’ of London and the United Kingdom. With his finger firmly on the pulse of popular opinion, or so he thinks, Khan claims the US president’s values are ‘inconsistent’ with British values, he knows what we think and believe, and who we support and admire.
This is Sadiq Khan’s delusion, and much of it couldn’t be further from the truth.
Mayor Khan’s voice on issues like this is, typically, given sustained exposure by the rampant ctrl-left media channels and press (ctrl-left; extreme left-wing media outlets that aim to control, divert, and manipulate public opinion; for example the BBC, Sky, the Guardian, CNN, etc). Some of these so-called ‘news’ sources positively delight in just about anything and anybody anti-Trump, anti-right, anti-conservative, anti-male, anti-libertarian, anti-rational, anti-heterosexual, and even anti-white. And they, like Sadiq Khan, consistently fail to explain adequately just what the US President has actually done – beyond responding to their incoherent ramblings, and Khan, through social media.
Well, here’s a newsflash for the Sad Man and his disciples – and it’s not pulled from a skyhook or the rear end of a flying pig – Sadiq Khan absolutely does not speak for all London, or Britain, or the United Kingdom, and he most certainly does not speak for yours truly. He speaks for himself, and probably most Muslims, most snowflake ‘lefties’, the alt-left (extreme and sometimes violent liberal left), the ctrl-left (extreme liberal left media and press), and a few other seriously dysfunctional individuals that hate free speech and anyone that disagrees with their neo-Marxist, looney tunes leftie, propaganda and rhetoric.
Sadiq Khan’s hatred of Trump is clearly intense, and he can barely contain himself whenever and wherever there is the merest mention of the US president’s name. Yet ironically, he is himself one of the most deluded, anti-British, racist, and hateful left leaning liberals you are ever likely to encounter. Deeply unpopular in so much of the country beyond the boroughs and borders of London, Khan is barely tolerated by the political establishment. This probably says much about the dire state of the political establishment too, and the stranglehold elements of the extreme left exerts upon it.
In very many places north, south, east, and west of what is now often referred to as ‘Londonistan’ dislike for Sad Khan is commonplace – even though he has little or no influence on the lives of those that dislike him so much. Perhaps one might consider just why, unlike Boris Johnson who generally enjoyed a broad popularity among the general public in and, significantly, beyond London, most of the support for Khan is in one relatively very small patch of the world? Such is life. In ‘Khanistan’ Sadiq makes sense, the rest of the UK are not so gullible or convinced.
The reader will have already noted, I’m sure, that no attempt has been made to disguise the distain and contempt held here for Sad-Act Khan. No apology is offered, this nasty, un-British, and traitorous representative of Londonistan should be responded to, and it’s high time those guided by reason, those on the right side of the argument, started voicing their opinions, and loudly – just as the looney left have for some time now. If reasonable people fail to respond to rabid left-wing hatemongers like Khan people like him will continue to have it their way. Pernicious individals like Sad-Act Khan will then persist in spouting their nasty-minded views whilst claiming to speak for all of us.
Make no mistake, the consequences of complacency in responding to the likes of Sadiq Khan could be dire – evil will indeed flourish if good people stand by and do nothing. So, if you are at all minded to disagree with Khan’s sympathy for terrorism (we must learn to live with it after all, or so he more or less says) or his utopian view of a wonderfully ‘multicultural’, ‘diverse’, and oh-so ‘tolerant’ open-border Euro-Britain, then now is the time to say so. For this is a Britain where, according to Sadiq Khan, almost everyone is welcome except, apparently, the President of a country that counts as one of our greatest allies and friends (the reader should consider, very carefully, just what Ayatollah Khan actually understands by terms like ‘diversity’, ‘tolerant’, and ‘everyone’).
Khan is, of course, absolutely entitled to his view, his opinion, and his fundamental right to this is of great importance. But he is not entitled to claim this is the view of others, let alone an entire city or country. Ayatollah Khan may be a big-wig in ‘Khanworld’ and even ‘Londonistan’ but it’s far from evident his anti-American rants against their president are views shared by the majority of British people – or even a large minority.
When Khan welcomes ‘all-comers’ to London (Britain) he is, naturally, quite happy to accept Islamic terrorists, rapists, gang members, fraudsters, thieves, and child-abusers. Economic migrants, many posing as so-called asylum-seekers, with no skills, no English, and no desire to ‘assimilate’ are all welcome. Children with beards are of course welcome too, as are endless Pakistani rape and child-abuse gangs. Also welcome on Khan’s account are Somali, Nigerian, and Eastern European gangs, along with their pathetic little turf and drug wars - all happily imported into that oh-so cosmopolitan, multicultural and ‘diverse’ Londonistan.
Yet Khan and his followers have no idea why acid attacks, gun and knife crime, street robbery, and other violent crimes are on the rise in their ‘London’. In fact according to Khan and the Ctrl-Left the problem is not just in London (no, but it’s endemic there, and rising much faster) it’s a countrywide problem (it’s not) and crime figures are down (they are not – except in a very few small areas and by very small numbers, i.e 0.4-5%. All the major stats for things like gun and knife crime are flying upwards by large margins, typically 10-15% over previous years, or even more, and this rapid growth rate shows no signs of abating).
Against this reality the London Ayatollah’s denial is nothing short of breath-taking – for him it’s just not true that Londonistan is becoming (or has become) a stinking shithole heavily inflicted by such crime and violence. Rather, he and the Ctrl-Left media keep their besmeared eyes on the London Eye and the city of Westminster’s square mile or so. Focusing on this myopic picture affords them a pretence that images of Big Ben, the House of Parliament, and the rest of this part of postcard London are also representative of the now bustling souks, geottos, and cultural dustbins that make up modern day ‘Londonistan’ (consisting of many of London’s Boroughs). It’s all a bit like those dodgy travel agents and brochures that present idyllic images of that five star hotel and holiday you are never going to get.
It’s strange that for decades before many new ‘Londoners’* arrived such crimes where relatively little heard of - why might that be? And let’s not forget to add to the above things like the 12 years old heroin dealers, honour killings, and female genital mutilation – all fine attributes, and the exclusive domain in many cases, of so many of these wonderful new ‘Londoners’. Over recent decades many parts of what was London have become a huge island state for a fast expanding Muslim population along with a very large contingent of legal and illegal immigrants, a mass of so-called asylum seekers, and of course lots of left-wing melting-pot, ‘love-on-them’ liberals. These are Khan’s supporters and his support network – and they will spew venom at the merest mention of true freedom of speech, action, or choice.
This London, or at least a good deal of it, will support Khan’s ideological hate of a strong and free Western world, and with it anyone challenging their doctrines, including Donald Trump. What is also true of specifically Muslim new ‘Londoners’ is that many support Sharia law, either partially or completely, as a direct replacement for British Law (40%). Around 52% of these ‘Londoners’ also think homosexuality should be made illegal, and about 30% agree that violence against those that insult the Muslim’s favourite historical warmonger Mohammed is justified. All consistent with Khan’s ‘British values’ of course.
Khan’s various virtue-signalling exercises highlight the measure of this this man’s inability to grasp simple inconsistencies. For the Sad-Act that is Khan, Muslim ruler of all London, has informed us of his intention to fight tooth and nail for women’s rights and equality. Yes, the London Ayatollah is going to fight for fairness, and justice on behalf of women everywhere.
Around 29% of Muslim ‘Londoners’ presently think that it’s a women’s duty to always obey their husbands. Will Khan fight against this ancient belief? Regarding schools and education 40% of these same ‘Londoners’ believe in gender segregation and 44% think that the hijab or niqab should be compulsory - yes, compulsory which is to say forced upon - school girls. No doubt Khan will be against these stark and archaic affronts to ‘gender equality’? And these same ‘Londoners’ also support Shariah ‘courts’ in which, as is now commonly known, a woman’s word is equal to precisely half that of a man’s. Now surely Khan won’t let this disgraceful violation of women’s rights to equality go unchecked? We shall see.
We have, though, been a little distracted by the Khanian inconsistency circus so Let’s return to matters in hand – The Supreme Ruler of Khanistan’s apparent assumption that he is the voice and soul of Britain. For if this is true when Sadiq Khan speaks out against US President Donald Trump, so too does Britain.
The problem, for the Sad Man, is it’s just plain not true.
Even if 'London's' favourite Sad Act does speak for the majority of its inhabitants (though this is by no means the case) he certainly does not speak for or represent the views of the people of England, Britain or, more broadly still, the United Kingdom as a whole. It seems Khan learnt little to nothing from the UK referendum on EU membership. If he had he would recall how embarrassingly sure he was of a remain victory. Indeed Khan was so cock-sure, as were so many other remoaners, that even if those thicker than thick northerners voted to leave that wonderful crumbling empire that is the European Union your ‘Londonistan’ votes would turn it around – the London vote would put matters aright – except, oops, it didn’t.
The thing is, what Khan and his hate-filled liberal alt-left chums failed, dismally, to appreciate in the run-up to the referendum was that London is not, and does not represent, England, Britain, or the United Kingdom. London, and especially ‘Londonistan’, are very much no longer part of Britain to so many British subjects. In the hearts of countless English people in particular, what was formally their capital no longer occupies that place, except in principle and as a place where Westminster and government presently resides. How’s that for an exercise in multicultural homogeny and diversity?
Many people occupying ‘the rest of the UK’, probably a majority, are quite happy for President Trump to make a state visit to England. The majority, and that equates to tens of millions, of the British public may well welcome America’s Commander-in-Chief, and would do so as one friend to another. Moreover, such an invitation and welcome is extended to the US President even by many of those not particularly keen on Donald Trump himself. This was even the case with the snowflake and alt-left favourite President Obama, a president deeply unpopular with very many people around the globe.
The reasons for this are probably beyond Khan’s grasp but it is worth visiting them nonetheless. One reason is that a great many British people, outside of the London boroughs, have due respect for the administrative office of the President of the United States. They may or may not like the person occupying that office, they may or may not find him (or her) agreeable, but regardless of this they respect the office itself. As unimaginable as it might seem this would still be the case even if the tragic, whinging, lying, power-mad, gurning, and demented Hillary Clinton had won the presidency – which she didn’t (in case any remoaners out there are still not sure). This is a woman so incredibly, unbelievably, distasteful to the American public that she lost the Presidency to a man many, like the Sad Man of Londonistan, think is entirely unfitting to be in office.
Respect like this (for the US presidential administrative office) issues primarily from three related sources – our own history, deep-rooted patriotism (yes that dirtiest of words) and, lastly, a straightforward instrumentalism, which is to say in this case political and economic pragmatics. To understand this it needs first to be understood that within this context history, culture, patriotism, freedom, and liberty will (or should) always trump multiculturalism, diversity, and limitless immigration (at present rates in many European countries tantamount to invasion).
The Sad Man of ‘London’ also claims (oddly, but of course self-importantly) he is willing to meet with the evil US president, and to show him places where Muslims, Christians, Sikhs, Jews, and many other faiths support and 'love on' each other. How noble is it of the great Ayatollah of the so-called capital to bestow such a privilege upon a mere president of the most powerful nation on Earth. Perhaps, too, he could educate the president further in how not to manage the rising tide in crime figures, illegal firearms, gun and knife attacks, slavery, illegal immigrates, sham marriages, female genital mutilation, ‘honour’ killings, rape gangs, Sharia courts, virtual no-go zones (for white, non-Muslims), and Islamic terrorism – all fine attributes of the Ayatollah’s Khanistan, a place he quaintly refers to as London. And he could further school President Trump in how to alienate, within a generation of two, the entire indigenous white English population and culture from large swathes of the landscape?
There are huge nationwide economic advantages to forging a solid partnership and good relations with the world’s largest single economy, not that the sad and hate-fuelled Khan cares much about this. Moreover, how does it make sense to cause unnecessary discord (or even to make enemies) with the President and administrative office of the largest military power on the planet? What possible gain or purpose is there in alienating Britain and the United Kingdom from the US, other than to create further division (as Khan seems happy to do)? One can but wonder.
There are, of course, those that would like to see such partnerships fractured and broken. Those that would gain from weakening the resolve and strength of a united Western culture and economy. Such individuals and organisations are hell-bent on destabilising the West by any means possible because it suits their well-known plans, backed by a warped and barbaric ideological religion, to establish global domination. Sounds far-fetched? Perhaps, but better we ask Sadiq Khan, for he knows just what’s being referred to here.
For these reasons and many more, Sadiq Khan does not speak for me, does not speak for all Londoners, does not speak for England, does not speak for Britain, and does not speak for the United Kingdom. He speaks for himself and his fellow narrow-minded, racist, haters of freedom, free speech, equality for all, justice, and (most of all), reason. No doubt many of his ‘Londoners’ are of the same simple-minded view so perhaps he speaks for them too - so be it. I leave it to the reader to work out just who these ‘Londoners’ are. In the meantime let us now ask Sadiq, have you, ‘got the message’?**
*Note: many of the ‘Londoners’ Khan likes to speak for are relatively new residents of the capital. Mass and illegal immigration has led to a sharp rise in populations from, in particular, Muslim countries. In some London Borough’s this has led to a vastly disproportionate displacement of the indigenous white population that would be traditionally understood as Londoners.
**Speaking on behalf of all ‘Londoners’ in the Independent (Jan, 2018) Khan claimed President Trump had ‘got the message’ regarding his threat of ‘mass, peaceful, protests’.