Archive for the ‘Multiculturalism’ category

Germany Needs An Extra 2,000 Judges and Prosecutors to Process Fivefold Increase in Terror Cases

December 25, 2017

Germany Needs An Extra 2,000 Judges and Prosecutors to Process Fivefold Increase in Terror Cases, BreitbartJack Montromery, December 24, 2017

Sean Gallup/Getty Images

Germany also faces more longstanding issues with immigration: between 43 and 48 per cent of the country’s substantial ethnic Turkish population — which has been growing steadily since the introduction of a special ‘guest worker’ programme in the 1960s and now numbers in the millions — is ‘economically inactive’, with German media reporting the “vast majority … declare that — at least for the moment — they are not interested in a job.”

***********************************

Germany’s judicial system is groaning under the strain of an explosion in terror cases since Chancellor Angela Merkel opened the door to unlimited numbers of migrants in 2015.

The German Attorney-General opened a shocking 1,200 terror cases in 2017, of which around 1,000 were related to radical Islamic terrorism, Tagesschau reports.

This represents a fivefold increase on 2016, when the figure stood at around 250 — with roughly 200 cases being related to radical Islam.

Sven Rebehn, the head of the German association of judges, has warned that the system is struggling to cope with the sheer volume of its expanded caseload, with burden particularly heavy in the migrant hotspots of Berlin, Dusseldorf, Frankfurt, and Hamburg

The judicial federation has calculated that around 2,000 additional judges and prosecutors are needed if the country hopes to tackle the growing terror threat and clear the backlog, or else face real difficulty in the near future.

Migrants have not only increased the workload of the courts in the field of terrorism — for example, 91 per cent of a 48 per cent surge in Bavarian rape cases was attributed to migrants in September 2017.

But the costs of expanding the judicial system’s capacity to absorb the surge in terror cases is not the only expense to fall on Germany as a consequence of mass migration.

The cost of the country’s more recent arrivals was predicted to reach close to 100 billion euros by 2020 last year — with the figure likely to have increased since then.

Germany also faces more longstanding issues with immigration: between 43 and 48 per cent of the country’s substantial ethnic Turkish population — which has been growing steadily since the introduction of a special ‘guest worker’ programme in the 1960s and now numbers in the millions — is ‘economically inactive’, with German media reporting the “vast majority … declare that — at least for the moment — they are not interested in a job.”

Merkel is the administrator of the West’s downfall

December 1, 2017

Merkel is the administrator of the West’s downfall, Israel National News, Giulio Meotti, November 29, 2017

Merkel never joined the Western efforts to defeat Islamic terrorism. She commands the world’s fourth largest economy and Europe’s financial giant, but her country is a military dwarf, weak and disarmed. For Merkel, sending fighting troops abroad, even to defeat ISIS, always looked unthinkable.

Merkel’s former foreign minister, Guido Westerwelle, even made the withdrawal of American nuclear weapons from Germany one of his top priorities. Merkel has also been crucial in the political ransom Turkey’s Erdogan has been able to deploy in the migrants crisis, one of the most important factors in causing chaos on the continent since the Second World War.

Merkel’s open door policy is the product of two factors: the German declining birth rates of the last 40 years, a collective demographic suicide, and the permanent sense of guilt for the Holocaust, for the right moral reasons but the wrong political goals.

Karl Lagerfeld, the creative director of Chanel and Fendi, during the French television show Salut les Terriens just criticized Merkel for allowing one million migrants to enter the country in 2015.

*******************************************

Angela Merkel and her Christian Democrats should have been the winner in the September 24 German elections. The national unemployment rate is 3.7 percent and the economic growth is 2 percent. But Merkel now faces the biggest political impasse in Germany since 1949 with difficulties in forming a new coalition.

The question is: who is Angela Merkel?

Unlike her Christian Democratic predecessors, Chancellor Merkel has no crosses hanging on the walls of her office. She is the daughter of a Protestant pastor from the period when there was an East Germany. She never talks about “values” in public. She is the perfect mirror of a skeptical and post-Christian continent where faith has been totally privatised.

Merkel has no children. Neither do most of Europe’s current leaders. To mention some, the prime ministers of Italy, Netherlands, Sweden, UK and the French President Emammuel Macron have no chlldren either.

“If the Germans don’t have children, does it matter who inherits their country?”, asked David Goldman in the Asia Times. “Why not their house pets?”.

Merkel is a cunning politician personifying a cynical mixture of wealthy multiculturalism and moral relativism. Merkel allowed the Bundestag to vote on gay marriage, despite her party’s contrary opinion. She did it only for electoral reasons – to deprive the Social Democrats of a big reason to gain votes.

Merkel never joined the Western efforts to defeat Islamic terrorism. She commands the world’s fourth largest economy and Europe’s financial giant, but her country is a military dwarf, weak and disarmed. For Merkel, sending fighting troops abroad, even to defeat ISIS, always looked unthinkable.

Merkel’s former foreign minister, Guido Westerwelle, even made the withdrawal of American nuclear weapons from Germany one of his top priorities. Merkel has also been crucial in the political ransom Turkey’s Erdogan has been able to deploy in the migrants crisis, one of the most important factors in causing chaos on the continent since the Second World War.

Merkel’s open door policy is the product of two factors: the German declining birth rates of the last 40 years, a collective demographic suicide, and the permanent sense of guilt for the Holocaust, for the right moral reasons but the wrong political goals.

Karl Lagerfeld, the creative director of Chanel and Fendi, during the French television show Salut les Terriens just criticized Merkel for allowing one million migrants to enter the country in 2015.

“One cannot — even if there are decades between them — kill millions of Jews so you can bring millions of their worst enemies in their place”, Lagerfeld said. He cited an anecdote in support of his assumptions that Jewish people and refugees are at odds. “I know someone in Germany who took a young Syrian in and after four days he said, ‘The greatest thing Germany invented was the Holocaust,’” he said. Lagerfeld also suggested that Merkel felt she needed to take in more migrants in 2015 to counteract the image she was given as “the wicked stepmother in the story of the Greek [financial] crisis”.

Merkel is the daughter of the German unity that arose after the fall of Berlin Wall, the protégé of Helmut Kohl. “The reunification of Germany was the last big goal for Germans” said Gustav Gressel, a defence expert at the European Council on Foreign Relations. “After that everyone fell into this ‘end of history’ feeling – everything is good, we’re all friends and it has to stay that way”.

The Germans feel they must atone for their past deeds and their present wealth by embracing a post-national, post-Christian and post-heroic Western model.

Greg Sheridan of The Australian was right when he called Merkel “the chief agent of Europe’s demise”. But she is more than that. My friend Henryk Broder, the German Jewish journalist, said that Germany has committed to “disappear” from history.

At the time of Western twilight, Angela Merkel is the perfect administrator working for her own downfall.

As the End of Merkelism Nears, What Next for Germany?

November 23, 2017

As the End of Merkelism Nears, What Next for Germany? PJ Media,  Michael Walsh, November 23, 2017

Der Untergang (Bernd von Jutrczenka/picture-alliance/dpa/AP Images)

The worst German chancellor since you-know-who — and one likely to prove almost as destructive to her own country and Europe as her predecessor — has finally worn out her welcome:

Angela Merkel’s worries continue as the latest polls reveal the majority of Germans did not want her to run as a candidate for Chancellor again. The survey, carried out in the coalition talks breakdown, makes worrying reading for Angela Merkel. While Mrs Merkel said yesterday she wanted to stand again in any new snap election the German people appear to be turned off by the prospect. Of those polled, 54 per cent said she should not run for office, according to the polling institute Civey for t-online.de. Only 38.5 percent of Germans would welcome a renewed candidacy of the chancellor.

If you’re wondering why Merkel — who just recently “won” her recent re-election — is thinking about running again so soon, here’s the reason: while her “conservative” party, the CDU/CSU (Christian Democratic Union and its Bavarian counterpart, the Christian Socialist Union), emerged again as the largest party in the Bundestag, she can’t form a functioning government without some sort of tactical alliance with one or more of the other parties. And that isn’t happening.

Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany faced the greatest crisis of her career on Monday after negotiations to form a new government collapsed, shaking a country that is Europe’s political and economic anchor. The breakdown abruptly raised the prospect of new elections in Germany. It came less than two months after the last elections seemed to assure that Ms. Merkel, an icon of Western democracy and values, would remain Germany’s leader for a fourth term.

The chancellor said she remained hopeful about forming a majority government. But if forced to choose, Ms. Merkel said, she would prefer to go through new elections rather than try to lead a minority government.

Of course she would: since allowing into Germany (and thus Europe) more than a million unwashed, unvetted Muslims, largely illiterate in Western languages, ways, and mores, Mutti Merkel and her stock have sunk among the German voting public, which made the anti-invasion fringe party, the AfD (Alternative for Deutschland), the third-largest party in parliament. The chancellor is now toxic, as long-repressed Germans finally cast off the last of their guilt over World War II and come to understand that foreign Muslims are in no way analogous to German Jews during the National Socialist period, and that laws meant to protect Jews and other peoples undergoing actual suffering do not apply to a horde of cultural aliens seeking “a better life” while trying to impose their savagery on the land of Luther.

The collapse of talks reflected the deep reluctance of Ms. Merkel’s conservative bloc and prospective coalition partners — the ecologist-minded Greens and pro-business Free Democrats — to compromise over key positions. The Free Democrats quit the talks late Sunday, citing what they called an atmosphere of insincerity and mistrust.

“There is no coalition of the willing to form a government,” said Thomas Kleine-Brockhoff, director of the Berlin office of the German Marshall Fund. “This is uncharted territory since 1949. We’re facing a protracted period of political immobility. Not only is this not going to go away soon, there is no clear path out.”

Welcome to reality, Germany. Since the end of the war — and certainly since reunification — the Germans have lived in a fool’s paradise in which their guilt morphed into a sense of social and moral superiority to the rest of the world, especially regarding their protector, the United States of America. Shielded by American troops and nuclear weapons from the Russian bear for half a century, they spent little or nothing on their own defense, and instead created a social democracy for themselves that worked just fine as long as a) worker productivity stayed sky-high and b) nobody cheated the system.  But as the pernicious doctrine of multi-culturalism — called Multikulti in German — penetrated German society, the system could no longer hold.

Diversity proved to be its death.

As things turned out, the vaunted German superiority turned out to be helpless in the face of the “progressive” Left (Germany is inordinately fond of socialism — where do you think Marx came from?). Housebroken since the late 1940s to avoid “extremism,” German politics evolved as a revolving door between slightly right of center and a little further left of center — with “center” defined as democratic socialism. Now, in the face of hordes of Syrian doctors, Afghan basket-weavers, African drummers, Arab falafel-shop proprietors, and other cultural enrichers, the postwar political consensus is collapsing. “Wir shaffen das!” was Merkel’s slogan: “We can do it.” In fact, they couldn’t.

Some were quick to link Germany’s disorder to a broader crisis of democracy in the West. “The unthinkable has happened,” said Christiane Hoffmann, deputy head of the Berlin bureau of Der Spiegel, a German magazine. In that sense, she said, “This is Germany’s Brexit moment, its Trump moment.”

The East German Merkel’s reputation was always inordinately high among her fellow travelers in the West, who saw her as both a childless progressive and an unattractive woman, celebrated accordingly, and looked no farther. The media needed a symbol of European “resistance” to both Brexit and Trump, and they thought they had one with her. They relied on German passivity and pre-Muslim invasion social consensus to keep things stable, since it literally made no material difference whether the CDU or its main rival, the SPD (the Social Democratic Party), was in power, first in Bonn and now in Berlin.

Alas, it may still be that Germany’s version of the Permanent Bipartisan Fusion Party will yet come to her rescue:

The leader of Germany’s Social Democrats came under growing pressure on Thursday to drop his opposition to a new “grand coalition” with Angela Merkel’s conservatives, with senior politicians arguing the party had a duty to promote stability. Merkel is facing the biggest political crisis of her career since efforts to forge a three-way coalition with the pro-business Free Democrats (FDP) and Greens collapsed last weekend. That has raised worries across Europe of a prolonged leadership vacuum in the continent’s economic powerhouse.

The Social Democrats (SPD) have governed in coalition under Merkel since 2013. But leader Martin Schulz said the party must heed the will of voters by going into opposition after achieving its worst result of the postwar period in the Sept. 24 election. Pressure is growing on the party to revisit his decision, either by agreeing to prop up a conservative-led minority government by not voting against it, or by forming a renewed coalition.

As we all know, Leftists abhor a “power vaccum,” and will rush right in to fill it. And don’t underestimate how powerful those forces are: the entire American media will cheer any announcement of a new right-left coalition, and the entire European Union is praying for it. The peasants are revolting, and something simply must be done and quickly, until the next Muslim atrocity strikes and the electorate remembers exactly who visited this plague upon them.

But the rumblings of the Blond Beast can be heard in the distance, growing louder. From the battle of Teutoburg Forest to Stalingrad, nothing good has ever come of that.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Exposing Muslim anti-Semitism in Germany

November 22, 2017

Exposing Muslim anti-Semitism in Germany, Israel National News, Dr. Manfred Gerstenfeld, November 21, 2017

(Please see also, France: Muslims In, Jews Out. — DM)

To what extent did top designer Karl Lagerfeld tell the truth when he attacked German Chancellor Angela Merkel on the Salut les Terriens! (Hello Earthlings!) Show on the C8 Channel on November 11 for her policy of open borders for refugees? He observed that one cannot – even if decades pass between these events – kill millions of Jews and put millions of their worst enemies in their place.

Lagerfeld added: “I know someone in Germany who took in a young Syrian. After four days, the young man said: ‘The greatest thing Germany invented was the Holocaust.’ The young man was thrown out.”

Lagerfeld also remarked that Merkel already had millions of immigrants who are well integrated thus she had no need to take in another million “to improve her image as the wicked stepmother after her handling of the Greek crisis.” 

Lagerfeld’s statement can be summarized as truthful in its core, however, partly distorted. The main truth – in addition to the obvious remark about Germany’s murderous behavior during the Holocaust — is that bringing huge numbers of Muslims into Germany from mainly Arab countries means that a large percentage of them are anti-Semitic to different degrees. 

The distortion in his statements is in asserting that the millions of immigrants already in Germany are well integrated. Among them there are significant numbers who do not want to integrate. The percentage of anti-Semites among Muslim immigrants is probably high as well. One might add that the situation in Germany as far as anti-Semitism among Muslim immigrants is concerned may not be dramatically different from some other European countries such as France.

In mid-November a study was released about internet anti-Semitism in the state of Hessen. It found that the number of perpetrators among the extreme right and Muslims were by far the highest at about the same level. This despite the fact that both are relatively small groups of the German population. The study is thus one more support for the essence of Lagerfeld’s statement.

Many media limited themselves to report only what Lagerfeld said. It would have been difficult for them to comment without admitting that Muslim anti-Semitism in Europe is widespread, and in its extreme expressions, violent and sometimes lethal. The more so as all Jews killed in Europe for ideological reasons during the new century were murdered by Muslims.

Admitting widespread Muslim anti-Semitism in Europe is often considered politically incorrect by those who call themselves ‘progressives.’ Negating it when discussing Lagerfeld’s remarks however would expose the extreme whitewashing of hatred by the media.

Nevertheless a few media outlets had no problem in attacking Lagerfeld while ignoring or minimizing Muslim anti-Semitism. One such outlet was the New York Times. It relegated the issue to its Fashion and Style section. There, its reporter, Valeriya Safronova, wrote: “Karl Lagerfeld, the creative director of Chanel and Fendi, is known for making tactless and offensive comments.” She then listed a variety of his earlier remarks which had no relevance to his claim regarding Muslim anti-Semitism and the German willingness to let anti-Semites immigrate.

Safronova then wrote, commenting on Lagerfeld’s statements “His latest moment of inexplicable opinioneering arrived on Saturday.” ‘

The media-watch organization, Camera, has over the years published hundreds if not thousands of examples of the New York Times’ bias and manipulations. It can add Safranova’s article to its collection.
A lesser US news outlet which managed to attack Lagerfeld while minimizing Muslim anti-Semitism in Germany was Salon, a sizable American left wing news and opinion website. The deputy culture editor used more than a thousand words to say that Lagerfeld should be condemned and punished for what he said because he is an Islamophobe.

Probably the greatest manipulator of the issue was the German private television broadcaster RTL in its magazine Exclusiv. RTL journalist, Marc Sterzenbach, asked why Lagerfeld made these remarks. He answered: “Indeed Chanel is in the hands of a Jewish family, the Wertheimers.” The German daily, Die Welt, wrote that RTL used a ‘classic anti-Semitic cliché concerning the so-called “Jewish world conspiracy.”

For those who hadn’t understood what the latter meant, it was explained by the Jewish author Henryk Broder in another article in the same publication. He wrote: “Never before had this [television] magazine, which is focused on gossip on celebrities and their problems, mentioned the religious identification of any family which owns a company, for which one or another celebrity works. Besides that, there are quite a few fashion and cosmetic firms which are in ‘Jewish hands’ that have never been noticed by RTL, nor has it disturbed anybody there.”

After this criticism, RTL apologized. It admitted that it had lacked “semantic sensitivity.” It stated that its choice of words “in no way reflected the attitudes of the author and of course not of the broadcaster.”

Perhaps the best comment was found in the Austrian daily, Wiener Zeitung. Its guest commentator, Christian Ortner, wrote under the heading, “Can the truth be incitement?”: “The former proponents of the welcome culture of 2015 can still live, though barely, with the fact that it has brought with it high costs, major social problems, and huge hostility toward women. Yet, admitting that it has also caused anti-Semitism is, in Austria and Germany, unbearable. The more so if it is true.”

Hundreds of people complained about Lagerfeld’s statements to the French Supervisory Authority of Media (CSA) which now has to handle this hot-potato. If it does not mention the major Muslim anti-Semitism it will expose itself to justified criticism. The CSA has, however, substantial time to think about what it will say as it has a huge backlog of complaints about other broadcasts.

Central Europe and the U.S.: The New Alliance

November 12, 2017

Central Europe and the U.S.: The New Alliance, Gatestone Institute, Drieu Godefridi, November 12, 2017

The US president may be an arch-villain in Western Europe, but in Central Europe, he is a superhero. For years, Central European countries have respectfully disagreed with the Green millenarianism of the EU. Still catching up after 50 years of communism, they do not have the financial means for the “energy transition”. They see no rational reason to exchange their cheap electricity for the most expensive electricity on Earth, with no measurable impact whatsoever on “climate”. Before Trump, they felt alone, and weak in front of the economic (and moral) supremacy of Germany. Now, they know they are not alone.

************************************

Even German Chancellor Angela Merkel recognized that multiculturalism has failed. All scientific studies show that a significant number of Muslims in Europe are fundamentalist; and that thousands of young European Muslims went to Syria to join ISIS. And yet, it is insufferable to Brussels and Berlin, to hear that the people of Central Europe have no intention of following the same path.

The European Court of Human Rights and the Court of Justice of the EU have made sure, through ruling after ruling, that it is virtually impossible to expel a “refugee” after his asylum request has been rejected.

The UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) defines itself as a scientific body, although in reality, unsurprisingly, it is a purely political body. In composition, competence or functioning, there is not a shred of science in the IPCC. Yet, in the name of this “science”, European politicians are extracting from their people trillions in additional taxes, building pyramids of new regulations and inflicting prohibitions in every sphere of human activity.

On immigration, on sustainable development and on many other subjects, the convergence between the United States and Central Europe is now as evident as the new divide between Western Europe and Central Europe.

The European mindset is shifting. Twenty-three of the 28 governments of the European Union now have parliamentarian majorities on the center-right of the political spectrum. Everywhere in Europe, the “left” is on the run.

This is particularly true in Central Europe. The soon-to-be Austrian Prime Minister Sebastian Kurz won the election on an anti-immigration platform and is on the verge of forming a government with the right-wing Austrian Freedom Party (FPÖ) which owes its own success to the same topic.

In the Czech Republic, political parties on the right now hold 157 of the 200 seats in the Parliament and tycoon Andrej Babis­ ­— “the Czech Trump” — is set to be the next prime minister.

All in all, the “Visegrad Group” peoples — Czechs, Hungarians, Poles and Slovaks — plus the Austrians, have voted in the most conservative governments we have seen in Europe for almost 30 years, since the fall of Margaret Thatcher in the United Kingdom.

Pictured: The Prime Ministers of the Visegrad Group countries meet in Prague on December 3, 2015. From left to right: Slovakia’s Robert Fico, Poland’s Beata Szydło, Czech Republic’s Bohuslav Sobotka and Hungary’s Viktor Orbán. (Image source: Chancellery of the Prime Minister of Poland)

These people and parties have much more in common — in terms of values, priorities,Weltanschauung — with the American Right than with the milder Western-European right. To state, as Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, has repeatedly, that people in Central Europe do not want Muslim refugees because they do not want their cities to look like Brussels, Paris or London, is Trumpian, and in no way EU-compatible.

If we go to the bones of the contention, we see that these differing perspectives between Western Europe and Central Europe are no mere trifles, temporary divergences in wait of the next synthesis. They are existential. The world view of Central Europe looks increasingly irreconcilable with that of Western Europe and the EU. Let us focus on just two matters: immigration and environmentalism.

The political elites of Western Europe have not only fully embraced the concept of “no borders”; they would also dub any form of dissent as ignorance, discrimination or racism. Merkel herself has recognized that multiculturalism has failed . All scientific studies show that a significant number of Muslims in Europe are fundamentalist; and that thousands of young Muslim Europeans have departed for Syria to join ISIS. And yet, to hear that the people of Central Europe have no intention of following the same path is insufferable to Brussels and Berlin.

Bearing in mind that under EU law — the Dublin Regulation — these countries have a legal obligation to welcome their “quota” of refugees, who are overwhelmingly Muslims coming via Greece and Italy, you can understand that Europe, that is the EU, has a real problem. It is also worthwhile to note that the European Parliament’s Civil Liberties Committee has just adopted a draft EU regulation to augment this obligation, providing that the refugees should be distributed throughout the whole of the EU immediately following their arrival on EU soil.

The more “moderate” European Commission has proposed to streamline and supplement the current rules with a corrective allocation mechanism:

“This mechanism would be triggered automatically were a Member State to be faced with disproportionate numbers of asylum-seekers. If a Member State decided not to accept the allocation of asylum-seekers from a Member State under pressure, a ‘solidarity contribution’ of €250 000 per applicant would have to be made instead.”

€250 000 per applicant! Let us say should Poland refuse a mere 1000 refugees, the penalty would be a staggering 250 million euros (which may come as a surprise since the official ideology prevalent in the EU is that refugees are of benefit to the economy).

Of course, everybody agrees that “asylum applications should be processed much quicker so those in need of protection get it sooner, while those with no right to asylum can be returned to their home country swifter,” in the words of MEP Cecilia Wikström. The plan is unfortunately of little consequence as the EU is living under the law of the infernal twins: the European Court of Human Rights and the Court of Justice of the EU. They have made sure, through ruling after ruling, that it is virtually impossible to expel a “refugee” after his asylum request has been rejected: no collective deportation, no deportation if the country of origin does not want its national back, no deportation if the country of origin is not a nice democracy, no deportation pending the appeal, no deportation if there is a medical condition, etc. All of these exceptions are reliant upon the “refugee” not seeing fit to destroy his or her own documents, as in that case he cannot be expelled at all.

If the US system of justice regarding immigration is, in Trump’s words, “a joke,” then the EU system is a monumental joke. “Deportation of quarter of a million failed asylum seekers is almost impossible,” said Horst Seehofer, Minister President of Bavaria of Bavaria and reluctant ally of Merkel in her last coalition.

“The question of deportation is a great illusion in Germany. It is almost impossible to send back the migrants once they are in the country. There are mass complaints against courts for deportation. In most cases, papers are missing and without papers, the country of origin does not take people back. In other cases, there are health certificates missing.”

Central Europe, on the other hand has declared that it has no intention whatsoever of taking its part in the extreme policies and grotesque failure of “open borders” and forced multiculturalism of Western Europe.

And that was before there was “sustainable development”. Self-anointed moral leader, Europe, has decided to become the global poster boy for green policy. The past belongs to Fossil fuels; the future belongs to renewable energy — from the wind and sun (“our sisters”, as Pope Francis wrote in his encyclic Laudato si’). Energy transformation — essentially electric energy — has taken on gigantic proportions in Europe. Thanks to the Energiewende, in Germany the average family is now paying more than twice as much for its electricity (per kW/h) as in the US. France, the happy owner of an extraordinary nuclear production capacity, which for decades was its only substantial competitive advantage has decided to reduce the role of nuclear energy in its production of electricity from 75% to 50%, under the guidance of Minister Nicolas Hulot (by education photographer and beach guardian).

There is also the exemplary instance of Belgium. Belgium’s federal government has just decided to close all its seven nuclear reactors by 2025. Eight years! The beauty of it is that nobody knows, at this stage, how Belgium is going to replace its nuclear reactors. There seem to be two options: building gas plants or blotting Belgium’s land and sea with wind turbines. The first option is anathema to the Greens and the Left in general, as Belgium would then be emitting more CO2than now. Or, second, the wind option, which would mean that in ten years Belgian electricity will be at least twice as expensive as now. Millions would be condemned to energy poverty, meaning they would have to live partly in cold and darkness, as is already the situation in Germany.

The whole concept of “energy transition” is based on the science of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which states in report after report that the Earth is warming because of the human emission of CO2. European politicians regard the IPCC as a scientific body, and the IPCC defines itself as a scientific body, although in reality, unsurprisingly, it is a purely political body. In composition, competence or functioning, there is not a shred of science in the IPCC.

Yet, when the IPCC publishes a report, it is in Europe as if Science had spoken. In the name of this “science”, European politicians are extracting from their people trillions in additional taxes, building pyramids of new regulations and inflicting prohibitions in each and every sphere of human activity. Moreover, they stipulated in the 2015 the Paris Accord, that from then on, the West would also finance the “energy transition” of the rest of the world, via the “Green Fund”: intending to donate $100 billion per year, from the Western taxpayer to whole world (including China).

US President Donald Trump said on June 1st that enough was enough. Europeans want to build International Socialism in the name of Science? Very well, but no thank you, we are not interested. In Europe, this decision caused the vilification of Trump as archvillian (until then he had been regarded by the glitterati of the EU as nothing more than a buffoon). It is now common in the highest spheres of European politics publicly to insult the US president: “He is a climate terrorist. Millions of people will die because of such behavior”, wrote the Belgian expert Damien Ernst on October 31, after President Trump welcomed the increase in US coal production.

The US president may be an arch-villain in Western Europe, but in Central Europe, he is a superhero. For years, Central European countries have respectfully disagreed with the Green millenarianism of the EU. Still catching up after 50 years of communism, they do not have the financial means for the “energy transition”. They see no rational reason to exchange their cheap electricity for the most expensive electricity on Earth, with no measurable impact whatsoever on “climate”. Before Trump, they felt alone, and weak in front of the economic (and moral) supremacy of Germany. Now, they know they are not alone.

Of course, the European press still considers Trump to be a cosmic anomaly. They hope that a post-Trump America will come back to the greatest embezzlement in the history of mankind — the Paris Accord, in which Western countries transfer vast amounts of their taxpayers’ wealth to poorer countries in exchange for promises that they will supposedly address their carbon-emission problems in 25 years. This is wishful thinking. Climate and energy are probably the only subjects on which Trump and the Republicans agreed from the beginning. The exit of the Paris Accord is not the isolated act of an unbalanced person, it is only one of the many closely aligned rulings, nominations and deregulation making a moderate energy policy which does not demonize fossil fuels and is open to “renewable” (intermittent) energies as long as they are economical. If the trend persists, in 10 years’ time the electricity in countries such as Germany and Belgium will be at least four times as expensive as in the US. And all, ironically, in the name of “sustainable development”. No ideologically-based “science” could survive such realities; it is only a question of time.

On mass-migration, environmentalism as on many other subjects — such as gender or family values — the divide between Western and Central Europe has deepened into an abyss, aggravated by the arrogance of EU bureaucrats convinced of their own moral superiority. The European Union is a “Union” no more, and the convergence between Central Europe and the US is a new and massive geopolitical fact.

Drieu Godefridi, a classical-liberal Belgian author, is the founder of the l’Institut Hayek in Brussels. He has a PhD in Philosophy from the Sorbonne in Paris and also heads investments in European companies.

A Month of Islam and Multiculturalism in France: October 2017

November 10, 2017

A Month of Islam and Multiculturalism in France: October 2017, Gatestone InstituteSoeren Kern, November 10, 2017

Article 57 of the French Civil Code states that the name chosen by parents must be in “the best interests of the child.” If the public prosecutor thinks the name “Jihad” is contrary to the law, he can ask a judge to order the name to be changed. If the parents are unable or unwilling to choose a new name, the judge has the right to choose a name.

Of the 1,900 French jihadists fighting with the Islamic State, as many as one-fifth have received as much as €500,000 ($580,000) in social welfare payments from the French state, according to Le Figaro.

Henda Ayari, in an interview with Le Parisien, gave detailed public testimony accusing Tariq Ramadan of sexually assaulting her in Paris. She said that Ramadan believes that “either you wear a veil or you get raped.”

October 1. A 29-year-old illegal immigrant from Tunisia stabbed two women to death at the central train station in Marseille. Witnesses heard the assailant shout “Allahu Akbar” as he lunged at the women with a 20-centimetre (eight-inch) knife before threatening soldiers, who shot him dead. The man, identified as Ahmed Hanachi, was using seven different identities and had a long criminal history. He had been arrested in Lyon for shoplifting just days before the attack, but those charges were dropped due to a lack evidence. He was released, despite not having the documents needed to live in France. Why he was never deported remains unclear.

October 2. Five people were arrested in Paris after police found four makeshift bombs at a building in the 16th arrondissement, one of the city’s most exclusive neighborhoods. Police said there was no one living in the apartment block who might be considered a target for jihadists. Interior Minister Gérard Collomb surmised that the bomb was simply meant to create fear: “Blowing up a building in a posh neighborhood shows that no one is safe…that it could happen anywhere in France.” He added: “This shows that the level of the threat in France is extremely high…yes, even if the Islamic State has suffered military setbacks, we are still in a state of war.”

October 2. The trial began of Abdelkader Merah, the 35-year-old brother of Mohamed Merah. In March 2012, Mohamed in March 2012 had gone on a nine-day shooting spree in southern France, killing three soldiers and gunning down a teacher and three children at a Jewish school before being shot dead by police. Abdelkader stands accused of “knowingly” helping to facilitate the “preparation” of the attack, in particular by stealing the scooter used for the three separate shootings. He appeared alongside 34-year-old Fettah Malki, accused of giving Mohamed Merah a bulletproof jacket, an Uzi submachine gun and the ammunition he unloaded on his victims. Abdelkader Merah faces a possible life sentence while Malki could get 20 years in prison.

October 5. Six gas canisters attached to a “crude detonator device” were found under several trucks at a cement company in Paris. The trucks, parked in the French capital’s northeastern 19th arrondissement, belonged to Franco-Swiss cement company Lafarge-Holcim. Lafarge is being investigated over claims that it paid taxes to the Islamic State and other armed groups in Syria to keep a plant running in a war zone. The company admitted that it resorted to “unacceptable measures” to continue operations at a now-closed cement factory in northern Syria in 2013 and 2014, after most French groups had quit the war-torn country.

October 6. A French woman who travelled three times to Syria in support of her jihadist son was sentenced to 10 years in prison for being part of a terrorist conspiracy. Christine Rivière, 51, was sentenced for her “unfailing commitment” to jihad and for helping a number of young women travel to Syria to marry jihadists, including her son, Tyler Vilus. Rivière, a Muslim convert who was nicknamed “Mama Jihad,” said of her son: “I didn’t want to push him to die a martyr, but that could happen. Then he would be in heaven, near Allah.”

October 6. French prosecutors charged three men in connection with a makeshift explosive device made of gas canisters, placed inside an apartment block in western Paris. Amine A, his cousin Sami B, and Aymen B., were charged with “attempted murder in an organized group in connection with a terrorist enterprise” and placed in pre-trial detention. All three were arrested on October 2, two days after the device was found in the exclusive 16th arrondissement. Amine A., 30, and Aymen B., 29, are both on the terror watch list.

October 9. French police and intelligence services are surveilling around 15,000 jihadists living on French soil, according to Le Journal du Dimanche. Of these, some 4,000 are at “the top of the spectrum” and most likely to carry out an attack.

October 10. President Emmanuelle Macron announced a plan to open immigration offices in Niger and Chad to identify persons eligible for asylum on lists provided by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and bring them directly to France. The stated aim is to “better prevent an influx of economic migrants” who are not eligible for asylum. In all, France will take in 10,000 people, not only from Niger and Chad, but also from Jordan, Lebanon and Turkey, by October 2019.

October 11. Interior Minister Gérard Collomb announced the dismissal of the central government’s top representative in the southern Rhône region, after a report criticized “errors of judgement” and “serious faults” in handling foreigners whose papers are not in order. The report was commissioned after 29-year-old Tunisian Ahmed Hanachi stabbed two women to death at the central train station in Marseille on October 1.

October 11. A 20-year-old woman was arrested in Rouen on suspicion that she may have played a role in a jihadist attack on a church in Saint-Étienne-du-Rouvray. On July 26, 2016, two jihadists had broken into the church and murdered Father Jacques Hamel while he was celebrating mass. While leaving the church, they were shot dead by the police. A few hours later, the Islamic State claimed responsibility for the attack. Police say that shortly before the attack, the woman had been in contact with one of the jihadists.

October 12. A French intelligence agent accidentally sent a text message to the mobile phone of a jihadist, inadvertently warning him that he was under surveillance and being monitored, according to M6 television. The target, a “proselytizing Islamist” living in Paris, responded by directly calling the agent and informing him of his mistake.

October 12. The interior ministry announced that France will maintain border checks with its European neighbors until April 30, 2018, because of “persistent” terror threats. The 1985 Schengen Agreement ended passport checks and other protective measures on borders, but after the jihadist attacks in Paris in November 2015, France resumed them.

France recently announced that it will maintain border checks with its European neighbors until April 30, 2018, because of “persistent” terror threats. France resumed passport checks and other protective measures on borders after the November 2015 jihadist attacks in Paris. Pictured: French border and customs police control vehicles at the France-Italy border. (Photo by Murielle Gander Cransac/Getty Images)

October 15. A groundbreaking ceremony was held in Strasbourg to expand the Eyüp Sultan Mosque. The 32 million euro ($37 million) project will make the mosque one of the biggest in Europe. The 15-acre site will include a school, a library, conference rooms, restaurants and boutiques, as well as a prayer room for up to 3,000 worshippers. The mosque, which will be redesigned according to Ottoman architecture, will have 28 domes and 44-meter-high (145-foot) minarets. Local officials say the mosque will contribute to the religious, architectural and cultural diversity of Strasbourg.

October 16. President Emmanuel Macron pledged to deport illegal immigrants who commit crimes in France. He said that even without new legislation, “we can take tougher measures” and expel illegal immigrants if they commit a crime, “whatever it may be.” He added: “We are not taking all the steps that should be taken. Well, that’s going to change.” He was speaking after it emerged that a Tunisian who stabbed two women to death in Marseille had been arrested in Lyon two days earlier for shoplifting.

October 18. President Emmanuel Macron unveiled a plan to bolster France’s domestic security. A key promise was to hire 10,000 extra police and gendarmes during the next five years. He also proposed to create a new “daily security police” (police de la sécurité du quotidian, PSQ) which would be deployed in “priority neighborhoods from the point of view of insecurity.” The PSQ, community police charged with fighting crime at the local level, will be tested in about fifteen localities in early 2018. In addition, Macron announced a plan to combat radicalization and to reform of asylum procedures to bring them in line with those of Germany. Finally, he promised to speed up the deportations of illegal immigrants who commit crimes in France. “We don’t welcome people well; our procedures are too long; we don’t integrate people properly and neither do we send enough people back,” Macron said. “We should take our fair share, but we can’t just welcome in all the world’s poor people.”

October 20. Prosecutors in Toulouse launched an investigation after receiving a report that a couple in nearby Léguevin named their newborn son “Jihad.” Article 57 of the French Civil Code states that the name chosen by parents must be in “the best interests of the child.” A justice ministry memo on the topic states that local registrars must inform the public prosecutor if a name appears to be contrary to the law. If the public prosecutor thinks the name “Jihad” is contrary to the law, he can ask a judge to order the name to be changed. If the parents are unable or unwilling to choose a new name, the judge has the right to choose a name.

October 20. Henda Ayari, a former Salafist who is now a Muslim feminist activist, accused prominent Islamic scholar Tariq Ramadan of sexually assaulting her in Paris. Ramadan, a grandson of the founder of Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood, denied her accusations. Some of his supporters criticized Ayari on social media, insinuating that if the assault did take place, it was her own fault because Islam forbids an unmarried woman to be alone with a man. Others claimed that Ramadan is a victim of “international Zionism” and that the charges were “fabricated by Jews.”

October 22. Eight people, including three minors, were charged with “criminal terrorist conspiracy” for plotting to attack left-wing politicians, migrants and mosques. An investigation found that the group, led by Logan Alexandre Nisin, a 21-year-old far-right activist based in Provence, planned to buy weapons, organize paramilitary training exercises and conduct shooting practice.

October 23. An official inquiry cast doubt on allegations that the French police had abused migrants in the northern port city of Calais. Human Rights Watch had accused police of a disproportionate use of force against migrants as well as aid workers when the notorious Calais migrant camp, known as the “jungle,” was dismantled in October 2016. The inquiry said that some abuse was “plausible” but that there was no proof it had occurred. It added that accusations that police had used pepper spray against migrants while they were sleeping were “without foundation.” The report found that many of the injuries sustained by migrants were due to brawls among migrants. “There is no evidence to prove the most serious allegations made,” Interior Minister Gérard Collomb said.

October 24. France issued an arrest warrant for Redouane Sebbar, a 25-year-old Moroccan man being held in Germany and suspected of helping plan an August 2015 attack on high-speed train traveling from Amsterdam to Paris.

October 26. Of the 1,900 French jihadists fighting with the Islamic State, as many as one-fifth have received as much as €500,000 ($580,000) in social welfare payments from the French state, according to Le Figaro.

October 30. Henda Ayari, in an interview with Le Parisien, gave detailed public testimony accusing Tariq Ramadan of sexually assaulting her in Paris. She said that Ramadan believes that “either you wear a veil or you get raped.” Ramadan denied the accusations as a “campaign of slander.” Since Ayari’s original allegation, two more women have filed sexual assault complaints against Ramadan.

October 30. President Emmanuel Macron formally signed a new counter-terrorism law that gives prefects, police and security forces wide-ranging powers — without the need to seek prior approval from a judge — to search homes, place people under house arrest and close places of worship. The measure also authorizes police to perform identity checks at French borders. The new law, adopted by the French Senate on October 18, makes permanent many of the previously exceptional measures imposed under a two-year-old state of emergency, which was introduced after the jihadist attacks in Paris in November 2015. That state of emergency was slated to expire on November 1. Macron said the new law strikes the right balance between security and respect for civil liberties. Hardliners countered that it does not go far enough, while human rights groups complained that it will leave France in a permanent state of emergency.

Soeren Kern is a Senior Fellow at the New York-based Gatestone Institute.

France’s Islamic WWIII

October 6, 2017

France’s Islamic WWIII, FrontPage Magazine, Daniel Greenfield, October 6, 2017

(Please see also, What Is America’s National Identity?  It is not, and must not become, multiculturalism, which rejects national identity. — DM)

Demographics dictate that France’s terror problem will only keep growing. And the French authorities understand this. That’s why its governments increasingly talk about Islamic terrorism as a lasting threat.

Our War on Terror has squandered endless blood and treasure while avoiding the root cause. Western nations deploy massive armies to root out small terror networks while allying with their Gulf backers. Soldiers patrol major cities waiting for a terrorist or several terrorists to attack. Meanwhile the mosques that indoctrinate them to hate and kill non-Muslims are also protected by those same soldiers.

That’s not how you win a war. It’s how you lose everything.

******************************

Interior Minister Gerard Collomb made it official. France is “in a state of war”.

It’s not just rhetoric. Bombs turn up in a posh Parisian suburb. Two young women are butchered at a train station. And it’s just another week of an Islamic World War III being fought in France.

From the November attacks in 2015 that killed 130 people and wounded another 400+, to the Bastille Day truck ramming attack last year that killed 86 and wounded 458, the war is real.

French casualties in France are worse than in Afghanistan. The French lost 70 people to Islamic terrorist attacks in Afghanistan. And 239 to Islamic terrorist attacks in France.

The French losses in Afghanistan were suffered in over a decade of deployment in one of the most dangerous Islamic areas in the world. The French losses in France were suffered in less than two years.

There’s something very wrong when Afghanistan is safer than Paris.

10,000 French soldiers were deployed in the streets of their own country in Operation Sentinelle after the Charlie Hebdo – Kosher supermarket attacks in 2015. Thousands of French soldiers are still patrolling, guarding and shooting in French cities which have become more dangerous than Afghanistan.

Operation Sentinelle has deployed twice as many French soldiers to France as to Afghanistan. And French casualties in the Islamic war at home have been far higher that they were in Afghanistan.

When the French intervened to stop the Islamist takeover of Mali, they suffered a handful of losses. The 4,000 French soldiers came away from Operation Serval with 9 casualties and Operation Barkhane amounted to 5 dead. The Gulf War? Another 9 dead. It’s a lot safer to be a French soldier fighting Al Qaeda in a Muslim country than a Parisian civilian going to a concert in his or her own city.

French casualties in the struggle with Islamic terror in just the last two years are approaching the 300 casualties of the Korean War.

France is at war. That’s why there are soldiers in the streets.

Its new anti-terrorism bill creates a permanent state of emergency. Suspected extremists can be placed under “administrative detention” in their own homes and neighborhoods under police surveillance and remote monitoring.

Pop-up checkpoints can appear in public spaces that are designated as “security zones” where anyone can be stopped and searched. Mosques can be shut down for six months. Public gatherings can be banned. Warrantless searches can be conducted within miles of potential targets.

The Interior Ministry will have police state powers. And it will be able to wield quite a few of them without having to go through the formality of asking judges nicely for permission.

Some of these measures should be familiar. France is the new Israel.

France’s Interior Minister called the anti-terrorism bill, a “lasting response to a lasting threat”. The choice of words recognizes that Islamic terrorism is here to stay.

The “State of War” is permanent. And France has no plans for winning the war. Instead it’s trying to get better at playing defense. And that’s what most Western domestic counterterrorism efforts amount to.

France is just taking the lead because it has the biggest problem.

The British put soldiers on the streets after the Manchester Arena bombing. The Italians and the Belgians began deploying soldiers in cities around the same time that the French did.

When an illegal alien Muslim terrorist due to be deported murdered two young women in Marseille while shouting, “Allahu Akbar”, French soldiers opened fire. The 24-year-old who shot the terrorist was a reserve member of a regiment of combat engineers in the French Foreign Legion.

The French Foreign Legion isn’t off fighting in a foreign desert somewhere. It’s fighting in France.

French soldiers are told to loudly announce, “Stop or I Shoot”. And then open fire. And that’s what he did. And French soldiers are being forced to learn the phrase and expect to come under attack.

In February, French soldiers were attacked by a Muslim terrorist outside the Louvre. The Egyptian Jihadist shouted, “Allahu Akbar” and came after them with a machete. One soldier from the 1st Régiment de Chasseurs Parachutistes was wounded. The attacker was shot down.

The 1st Régiment de Chasseurs Parachutistes had been deployed to Afghanistan and Mali. Now they were at the Louvre. You don’t need to be Napoleon to know that counts as a major retreat.

A month later, a Muslim terrorist shouted “I am here to die in the name of Allah” while holding a female air force soldier hostage at Orly Airport.

He got his wish courtesy of her fellow soldiers.

In August, six soldiers from the 35th Infantry Regiment were hit by a BMW driven by a Muslim terrorist. Members of a regiment which had been deployed in Afghanistan were sent to a military hospital after an attack in the wealthy Levallois-Perret suburb of Paris. A year earlier, soldiers from the 5th Infantry Regiment had been hit by a Tunisian shouting, “Allahu Akbar” while they were guarding a mosque.

France has entered its longest state of emergency since the Algerian War. The 2015 attacks saw its first state of emergency since 1961. But where is France supposed to withdraw from this time? Paris?

It was one thing to abandon the beleaguered Algerian Christians and Jews to Muslim terror. And to abandon them a second time when they fled to France only to face persecution by their old Islamic neighbors who had tagged along and settled down in Marseille. But can France abandon the French?

The issue once again is colonialism. But the new colonists are Algerians, Tunisians and other Islamic imperialists who have settled in France and wave the black flag of the Jihad over their no-go zone settlements in French cities. And they have made it abundantly clear that they will not stop there.

Last year, former Prime Minister Manuel Valls said that, “Every day attacks are foiled… as we speak.”

And it’s no wonder. Thousands of Muslim settlers left France to fight in Syria and Iraq. Valls was looking at 15,000 potential threats domestically. France has one of the largest Muslim populations in Europe. We don’t know exactly how many millions of Muslim settlers live in France. But we can measure their growth by the expansion of the terror threat. Islamic terrorism is, despite the spin, reducible to Islam.

There is no Islamic terrorism without Islam. As Islam expands, so does Islamic terrorism.

France is in the middle of a civil war. The civil war is based on religious differences. As the religious divide between the Islamic colonists and the militantly secular French government increases, the violence will worsen. The outcome of the war will determine whether France will be a secular republic or an Islamic state. The Jihadists have a plan for winning the war.  The French authorities don’t.

And what goes for France also goes for Western Europe. And for the West.

The French combination of social appeasement and police state enforcement isn’t working. The same model ultimately fails wherever it’s applied. Breaking up terror cells and stopping attacks is far better than the alternative, but the scale of the problem will always continue increasing because of demographic growth and a globalized terror infrastructure.

Demographics dictate that France’s terror problem will only keep growing. And the French authorities understand this. That’s why its governments increasingly talk about Islamic terrorism as a lasting threat.

Our War on Terror has squandered endless blood and treasure while avoiding the root cause. Western nations deploy massive armies to root out small terror networks while allying with their Gulf backers. Soldiers patrol major cities waiting for a terrorist or several terrorists to attack. Meanwhile the mosques that indoctrinate them to hate and kill non-Muslims are also protected by those same soldiers.

That’s not how you win a war. It’s how you lose everything.