Posted tagged ‘Islamic integration’

« WarSclerotic home page
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Political Revolution Is Brewing in Europe

December 22, 2016

Political Revolution Is Brewing in Europe, Gatestone Institute, Geert Wilders, December 21, 2016

The German authorities are dangerously underestimating the threat of Islam… They have betrayed their own citizens.

Let no-one tell you that only the perpetrators of these crimes are to blame. The politicians, who welcomed Islam into their country, are guilty as well. And it is not just Frau Merkel in Germany, it is the entire political elite in Western Europe.

Out of political-correctness, they have deliberately turned a blind eye to Islam. They have refused to inform themselves about its true nature. They refuse to acknowledge that is all in the Koran: the permission to kill Jews and Christians (Surah 9:29), to terrorize non-Muslims (8:12), to rape young girls (65:4), to enslave people for sex (4:3), to lie about one’s true goals (3:54), and the command to make war on the infidels (9:123) and subjugate the entire world to Allah (9:33).

We will have to de-islamize our societies…. But it all begins with politicians with the courage to face and speak the truth.

More and more citizens are aware of that. This is why a political revolution is brewing in Europe. Patriotic parties are rapidly growing everywhere. They are Europe’s only hope for a better future.

Yesterday, the Islamic State claimed the Berlin terror attack of Monday evening, in which twelve people were killed with a truck at a Christmas market.

The killer managed to escape. However, in the truck the police found identity papers belonging to Anis A., a Tunisian who came to Germany as an asylum seeker in 2015.

2032(Image source: RTL Nieuws video screenshot)

When last year German Chancellor Angela Merkel opened Germany’s borders to almost one million refugees and asylum seekers, she invited the Trojan horse of Islam into her country. Among the so-called refugees were many young men of Islamic background, filled with hatred for the West and its civilization. One of them was Anis A.

It took almost a year for the German authorities to reject his asylum request, but meanwhile the man had disappeared. The police are now looking for him as a prime suspect of Monday’s attack in Berlin.

The German authorities are dangerously underestimating the threat of Islam. They signs are there for all to see. In October, an Afghan asylum seeker raped and murdered a 19-year old German girl in Freiburg. And a 12-year old Iraqi boy was caught before he could explode a nail bomb at a Christmas market in Ludwigshafen.

Last Summer, an Afghan with an axe attacked train passengers in Heidingsfeld, a Syrian murdered a pregnant woman with a machete in Reutlingen, another Syrian detonated a suicide bomb at a music festival in Ansbach, a Palestinian attempted to decapitate a surgeon in Troisdorf. And who has forgotten last New Year’s eve, when migrant sex mobs assaulted hundreds of women in Cologne?

This year, 1,500 police officers will be patrolling the streets in Cologne on New Year’s eve. Ten times more than last year. But how many police officers will be needed next year? And the year after that? And what will happen when they are outnumbered? What is needed are not just more police officers; what is needed is a democratic political revolution.

The Politicians Are Guilty

Let no-one tell you that only the perpetrators of these crimes are to blame. The politicians, who welcomed Islam into their country, are guilty as well. And it is not just Frau Merkel in Germany, it is the entire political elite in Western Europe.

Out of political-correctness, they have deliberately turned a blind eye to Islam. They have refused to inform themselves about its true nature. They refuse to acknowledge that is all in the Koran: the permission to kill Jews and Christians (Surah 9:29), to terrorize non-Muslims (8:12), to rape young girls (65:4), to enslave people for sex (4:3), to lie about one’s true goals (3:54), and the command to make war on the infidels (9:123) and subjugate the entire world to Allah (9:33).

Instead of informing themselves, they have opened their country’s borders to mass immigration and invited asylum seekers in, despite the fact that IS had announced that it would send terrorists to the West as asylum seekers.

They even allowed Syria fighters to return to Europe, instead of denaturalizing them and blocking their re-entry. They have not even imprisoned them. In short, they are guilty of serious negligence. They have betrayed their own citizens.

The asylum tsunami of 2015 has only exacerbated an already terrible situation. Almost a decade ago, in 2008, a study by the (very leftist) University of Amsterdam revealed that 11% of all Muslims in the Netherlands agree that there are situations in which they find it acceptable for themselves to use violence for the sake of their religion.

This means that, in my country, the Netherlands, alone, there are 100,000 Muslims who are personally prepared to use violence. The Dutch army, however, is less than 50,000 soldiers strong. Hence, even if we deploy the entire army to protect Christmas markets, theaters, night clubs, festivals, shopping malls, churches and synagogues, we cannot guarantee the safety of all our citizens.

That is why there is little doubt that 2017 will bring Germany and the entire West more violence, more attacks on our women and daughters, more bloodshed, more tears, more sorrow. The terrible truth is that, in all likelihood, we ain’t seen nothing yet.

But this does not mean that there is no hope.

Just as the present dangerous situation has been created by politicians refusing to see the horrible reality of Islam and refusing to do their duty, the solution to the gigantic self-inflicted problem the West is currently suffering from, needs to be a political one.

Fixing a broken Europe

We will have to de-islamize our societies. Indeed, every single measure we take to achieve this goal, from ending all immigration from Islamic countries, to preventive detention of radical Muslims, to the promotion of voluntary remigration, to the denaturalization and expelling of criminals with dual nationality, will be a step towards a safer society for ourselves and our children. But it all begins with politicians with the courage to face and speak the truth.

More and more citizens are aware of that. This is why a political revolution is brewing in Europe. Patriotic parties are rapidly growing everywhere. They are Europe’s only hope for a better future.

We have to drive politicians, such as Angela Merkel, my own weak Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte, and their like minded colleagues in other countries, from power. We must liberate our countries.

And believe me, my friends, that is exactly what we are going to do. Terrorists, who hope to break our resolve with bloody atrocities will not succeed. We will choose new and brave leaders, we will de-islamize, we will win!

Categories: Europe, Geert Wilders, Islam in Europe, Islamic integration, Islamic invasion, Islamic terrorism, Islamisation, Political establishments
Tags: , , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

To Islamists, the Germans are a bunch of cowards

December 21, 2016

To Islamists, the Germans are a bunch of cowards, Israel National News, Giulio Meotti, December 21, 2016

It is no secret that Islamists consider the Germans as a bunch of cowards. “You love life, we love death”, they continue to repeat. Because wherever they look, the combatants of Allah see only people and governments only too ready to capitulate.

And Germany is Europe’s soft underbelly. The Bundeswehr, Germany’s army, already belongs to history; the country has welcomed more than one million Muslims; German ministers envision the creation of an “official Islam”, while German churches are closing at weekly rhythm; the Sharia courts are already operating; comedians such as Jan Bohmermann are criminalized and the “night of Cologne” with its mass sexual attacks on women has already been justified by feminists and multiculturalists.

We could have hailed a meaningful change in the German policy toward Islamic terrorism if the day after the carnage at the Christmas market in Berlin, a couple of German war planes had bombed the Islamists’ bases in the Middle East and pulverized a few dozen of them.

Nothing happened. Nothing will happen.

Through these random attacks, Muslims are now trying to understand if and how they can defeat the West. They poured into the streets to demonstrate against the caricatures of Mohammed and found themselves at movie theaters to celebrate the defeat of the Americans in Iraq. They understood that they can succeed.

Following the appeal launched by Günter Grass following the terrorist attack of September 11 (“the West should wonder what went wrong”), German “civil society” preferred to criticize itself rather than questioning the tangle of feelings that animates the warriors of Allah. They reacted like someone who is threatened by a hurricane does: accumulating supplies, nailing doors and windows and praying that the storm will end as soon as possible.

But Islamic fundamentalists are different: if they don’t encounter any resistance, they will act and strike in a more resolute way. And in this sense, they have every reason to consider the West and Germany to be weak, decadent and incapable of defending itself. If you are targeted by beheadings and kidnappings, bombings and shootings, and you react through hysterical outbursts about a “dialogue between cultures,” you will get more violence.

Twelve good Germans have just been assassinated during the Christmas holiday. The day after the carnage, the multicultural festival resumed as if nothing bad had happen. Christian leaders called for more “dialogue” (Italy’s head bishop, Monsignor Galantino, said that religion has nothing to do with the attack).

But it is also very ironic: the dialogue these drunken multiculturalists want so establish with the Muslim world will have to take place over orange juice and mineral water. Teetotal submission.

Categories: Berlin, Christmas market attack, Cowardice, Germany, Islamic attacks on Christians, Islamic integration, Islamic invasion, Islamic supremacy, Islamic terror groups, Islamisation, Multiculturalism
Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

Merkel Government Still in Denial

December 20, 2016

Merkel Government Still in Denial, Gatestone Institute, Vijeta Uniyal, December 20, 2016

Islamic State took responsibility for the December 19 Berlin truck-ramming attack that killed 12 people, similar to the July 14 attack in the French city of Nice, and countless car-rammings in Israel. Now Europeans feel what Israelis live with every day.

This month, the police union in the German state of Thuringia issued an open letter to the state’s Interior Minister, describing the crumbling law-and-order situation amid the rising migrant crime: “[You] are abandoning us completely helpless to a superior force… But what changes? Nothing. One instead gets a sense of uninterest.”

Meanwhile, representatives of Arab community were reported telling the police in Ruhr, “The police will not win a war with us because we are too many.”

Chancellor Merkel, Germany’s ruling elites and the media can continue putting a happy face on uncontrolled mass-migration from Arab and Muslim lands, or suppress news reporting on rising migrant crime, but they cannot wish away the country’s deteriorating law and order situation.

It should be evident to even a casual observer that her government still does not care about the victims of its own failed “refugee” policy.

 

Monday’s terrorist attack on a Berlin Christmas market killed at least 12 people and injured 50 others. Islamic State took responsibility for the truck-ramming attack, as recommend by the al-Qaeda magazine, Inspire, and similar to the July 14 attack in the French city of Nice, and countless car-rammings in Israel. Now Europeans feel what Israelis live with every day.

2140Police confer at the site of the December 19 car-ramming attack at a Christmas market in Berlin. (Image source: RT video screenshot)

Earlier this year, Germany was hit by a series of ISIS-inspired attacks and failed terror plots. Despite that almost all the perpetrators were recent Syrian or Afghan migrants, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, in the middle of a re-election bid, has stuck to her claim that there is “no connection” between terror attacks in the country and uncontrolled mass migration from Arab and Muslim lands.

Ahead of an election year, Merkel and her coalition partners also want to avoid another mass sexual attack — in Cologne.

Adding insult to injury, the Mayor of Cologne, Henriette Reker, is planning to put on a big show this coming New Year’s Eve in the city’s main square. After an elaborate year-long cover up, the city will be lighting up the crime scene as part of a multi-media show. “The City of Cologne has announced plans for a spectacular multi-media show in the area immediately surrounding the famous Gothic cathedral, close to the main train station,” state-run broadcaster Deutsche Welle reported.

“Cologne will send good images to the world,” says the city’s mayor. The taxpayer-funded spectacle has been named “Time Drifts Cologne.” The “light artist” running the show, Philipp Geist, considers last year’s crime scene “a fantastic place for an art installation.”

Of an estimated two thousand exclusively Muslim men who raped, assaulted and robbed more than 1200 women, almost all the attackers have managed to walk free. Ralf Jäger, Interior Minister of North Rhine-Westphalia, admitted recently that “most of the cases will remain unsolved.”

An estimated 1,800 police officers will be on duty in Cologne on New Year’s Eve, compared to just 140 last year. Barricades have been erected in the city center to check the flow of the crowd. The city’s historic cathedral and adjoining area have been placed under a crush barrier. Police will man observation posts and fly helicopters to monitor the crowd, and deploy mounted police and six armoured vehicles for riot-control. “No expense will be spared,” assured the mayor. In an important election year, the government wants to defend the city to the last taxpayer dime.

Even before it can face any real onslaught, however, Merkel’s fortification is showing some serious cracks.

Just days ahead of the News Year’s Eve, the police union in the eastern German state of Thuringia has issued an open letter describing the crumbling law-and-order situation amid the rising migrant crime. “[You] are abandoning us completely helpless to a superior force,” says the desperate note addressed to the Interior Minister of Thuringia. The union claims that politicians have been repeatedly briefed on the deteriorating conditions under which police have been working. “But what changes? Nothing. One instead gets a sense of uninterest.”

Unwilling to acknowledge the breakdown of law and order in face of the rising migrant crime wave, the German media and politicians are going after the messenger.

Their latest target is the head of German Police Union, Rainer Wendt. Wendt’s crime, after a series of rape crimes this December, was to speak the obvious truth. “The criminals are using open borders,” he said.

Ralf Stegner, deputy leader of Social Democratic Party (SPD) and a fervent supporter of Merkel’s “Refugees Welcome” policy, denounced Wendt’s statement as “politically disgusting and stupid as one can get.”

Wendt has also been attacked for questioning the customary kid-glove treatment given to violent and criminal “refugees” by German courts. Sven Rebehn, Chairman of the German Association of Judges, called Wendt, “the Donald Trump of domestic politics” — apparently the biggest insult a German liberal can come up with these days.

The Merkel government can turn the center of Cologne into an impenetrable fortress for a day or two, but the threat is not going away. The problem lies in the Ruhr region that encircles Cologne. “Have foreign clans turned Ruhr region into a No-Go-Area?” asks the leading German newspaper, Die Welt, just days ahead of News Year’s Eve.

Meanwhile, representatives of Arab community were reported telling the police in Ruhr, “The police will not win a war with us because we are too many.”

Chancellor Merkel, Germany’s ruling elites and the media can continue putting a happy face on uncontrolled mass-migration from Arab and Muslim lands, or suppress news reporting on rising migrant crime, as much as they want, but they cannot wish away the country’s deteriorating law-and-order situation.

As the desperate plea of the police union shows, the Merkel government has decided to ignore the plight of law enforcement, at least for now. It should be evident to even a casual observer that her government still does not care about the victims of its own failed “refugee” policy: Germany appears to be heading toward another rough year.

Categories: "Far right" parties, Germany, Germany open borders, Islamic integration, Islamic invasion, Islamic refugees, Islamic supremacy, Islamic terrorism, Law enforcement, Merkel
Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

Sharia Councils: Taking Liberties

December 19, 2016

Sharia Councils: Taking Liberties, Gatestone Institute, Robbie Travers, December 19, 2016

A report by Machteld Zee, a Dutch Academic raised the issue that sharia councils “frustrate women in their requests [for divorce], especially if the husband is unwilling to co-operate,” and she also suggested that women are treated as “second-class citizens.”

Sharia councils, however, can demand that the parties involved in a dispute sign contracts beforehand, demanding that women agree to the results of the arbitration. To force a woman, who has been denied rights to any legal representation, to agree to an illegal or wrongful contract before trial, is a travesty that the British justice system cannot allow to continue.

As Dr Taj Hargey, Imam of the Oxford Islamic Congregation argues, “Sharia is not divine law, it is just medieval opinion.”

Is Britain really agreeing to allow women to be sentenced in England, then to be stoned to death elsewhere?

This ruling actually reveals to the husband the process required to have his wife stoned to death. It arguably even encouraging men to have their wives taken abroad and have them murdered. The court has therefore condemned someone to murder solely the words of her husband without allowing her a chance to speak.

How can these groups that not only fail to protect the rights of women but actually undermine them, be considered charitable organisations, funded by British taxpayers?

It is considered a fundamental principle in liberal democracies that individuals should have equality under the law, with equal access to justice, despite race, gender, or religious belief and that the same laws of a single legal system should apply equally to everyone.

To have two simultaneously functioning rules of law, applied on differing judicial bases, would create a challenge of which precedents to follow, or why individuals from different groups should be treated differently. How long before people form one group would claim to be from a different group to be exempt from the first group’s laws? Such a system invites abuse.

Dealing with minorities by differing legal systems rather than creating a more pluralist utopia simply leads to a divided society in which minorities and majorities have justified mutual distrust.

Sadly, these principles which have sculpted a strong judicial system in the United Kingdom for so long are now facing a significant threat.

In Britain, the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA) recognises and protects women’s rights to equality, and not to be discriminated against in legal proceedings. But the rule of law in Britain is being eroded by the legitimisation of sharia councils. This has occurred under the Arbitration Act (1996), even though their operation in the Britain has been recorded since 1992.

There are valid reasons why sharia councils and sharia itself should not be given any legitimacy under British law.

First, these alternative judicial systems can mislead Muslim women to believe that sharia, and the fatwas pronounced by clerics, are binding and that such a marriage is recognised under UK law. In fact, it is estimated that 70-75% of all Islamic marriages in Britain are not recognized, according to the findings in the Dame Louise Casey report.

Islamic women also might be misled into believing that they have more marital rights than they actually have – a cruel deception that must end. And they further seem misled into believing they are compelled to approach a sharia council, rather than a UK civil court, for a divorce.

Second, these sharia councils often offer themselves as “an alternative,” to people seeking a civil law judgement, but the elders who hold the proceedings do not use juridical standards compatible with existing British legal ones. In cases arbitrated by sharia councils, as opposed to British law, for example, women lack the legal ability to initiate any divorce proceedings without the explicit agreement of her husband, and often women have no legal representation at these trials.

With little ability even to mount a legal defence, there is always the probability that Muslim women are not receiving equal justice under the law.

A report by Machteld Zee, a Dutch Academic raised the issue that sharia councils “frustrate women in their requests [for divorce], especially if the husband is unwilling to co-operate” and she also suggested that women are treated as “second-class citizens.”

sharia councils can also fundamentally attack the rights of women in arbitration, a device meant to be facilitate resolving issues. sharia councils, however, can demand that the parties involved in a dispute sign contracts beforehand, demanding that women agree to the results of the arbitration. To force a woman, who has been denied rights to any legal representation, to agree to an illegal or wrongful contract before trial, is a travesty that the British justice system cannot allow to continue.

Is it really acceptable that these sharia councils are granted authority under the Arbitration Act of 1996 when they treat women in such a way?

Dr Taj Hargey, Imam of the Oxford Islamic Congregation argues, “Sharia is not divine law, it is just medieval opinion.”

The right of a woman to be free from abuse should be a paramount consideration. Therefore, a parallel legal system that declines to recognise the law of the land on the abuse of women is fundamentally incompatible with our legal system.

Third, which law? A trial can be considered just in terms of sharia law might well not be considered just under another form of law. Even if women are allowed to attend sharia councils in Britain, their submissions in sharia law are considered worth half of the submissions of a man — not exactly fair.

Fourth, a recent report compiled by Dame Louise Casey suggests that the growth of sharia councils in Britain have increased division and segregation in communities.

What if a woman wishes to appeal the verdict? There is no right to appeal. What if she feels there was irregularity or corruption in the process? As there exists no regulator, Muslim women seem trapped in a system the outcome of which they have to accept, even when there may not even be fleeting chance of justice.

Read this ruling from a British sharia council:

1) Adultery is one of the most heinous crimes in Islamic law, the punishment for which is death by stoning. But as Britain is not a Muslim state such a punishment may not be carried out here. This punishment can only be administered in a Muslim state after due process.

This is cause for concern. This ruling actually reveals to the husband the process required to have his wife stoned to death. It arguably even encouraging men to have their wives taken abroad and have them murdered.

Is Britain really agreeing to allow women to be sentenced in England then to be stoned to death elsewhere? The ruling should instead be considered incitement to violence and reckless endangerment.

The judgement continues to state that, “Allah will punish her for her immorality.” This presumes that the wife is guilty without even hearing her testimony. The court has therefore condemned someone to murder solely the words of her husband without allowing her a chance to speak. This sort of trial has no place in a modern democracy.

It is also hard to hold sharia councils accountable: they do not record their judgements, or transparently display a record of council rulings. Why would an organisation wish not to make its rulings publicly available unless it I trying to hide something?

If cases are arbitrated on any basis that that withhold full transparency or that promotes inequality for women, it is the duty of the state not only to criticise these trials, but to withdraw any legislation that gives these laws legitimacy.

Sharia councils have been known completely to disregard the decrees of civil British courts; some councils are even suggesting that women comply with abusive husbands. More dangerously, sharia councils have even made private statements, supposedly hidden by court decree, concerning individuals in abusive relationships, public. Sharia councils have put these statements on court documents and sent them to the abuser – a practice that has led to death threats, children kidnapped, and even to women being violently raped in retaliation for seeking justice.

1013-1Haitham al-Haddad is a British shari’a council judge, and sits on the board of advisors for the Islamic Sharia Council. Regarding the handling of domestic violence cases, he stated in an interview, “A man should not be questioned why he hit his wife, because this is something between them. Leave them alone. They can sort their matters among themselves.” (Image source: Channel 4 News video screenshot)

To add insult to injury, these unaccountable courts that offer judgements which sometimes incite violence and often disadvantage women, are often registered charities that charge around £800 for a divorce. How can these groups that not only fail to protect the rights of women but actually undermine them be considered charitable organisations, funded by British taxpayers?

Even more problematic is this excessive fee, when Islamic women often coming from economically disadvantaged backgrounds, and who perhaps have been discouraged from earning a living outside the home and may therefore have no funds to buy her freedom? Muslim women within abusive marriages can therefore be imprisoned by a process that is unattainable. One might even deduce that perhaps that is the purpose of the fee?

Elham Manea, author of the book Women and Sharia Law, argues that the first Sharia councils were established by Islamists. She also notes that Sharia councils have “been working with a kind of a tacit approval of British establishment. There is a certain kind of hesitancy from British institutions to interfere in what they consider is internal affair to the Muslim community.”

We can no longer be afraid to speak out against a legal system that disadvantages women because of the religion of those who run it, or that criticism may be perceived as hateful.

More alarming is that views on Sharia amongst the UK Islamic community are favourable towards this judicial practice. Sharia is now even being promoted as a solution that should be considered by the British Government. In polls conducted for the Police Exchange: 43% said they supported “the introduction of Sharia Law.” And 16% of British Muslims “strongly support” the “introduction of aspects of Sharia law into Britain”

What aspects of the Sharia do they support? How you can support only “aspects” of Sharia, when Sharia is designed to be followed in its entirety, without concession. Even then, which aspects do they support? Those that instruct that “women are restricted in leaving their homes and driving cars”? Or that “a man may coerce his wife to have sex”? Or the “recommendation of severe punishments for homosexuals?”

48% of the respondents said they would not turn someone they know with links to terrorism in Syria over to the police.

As Denis MacEoin illustrates, Sharia even justifies jihad:

In Sharia Law or One Law for All, I drew attention to another level of sharia rulings that provide fatwas for numbers of British Muslims, in particular of the younger generation. These are online sites: “fatwa banks.” Individuals or couples send questions to the muftis who run the sites, and receive answers in the form of fatwas that are considered authoritative. The questions and answers are preserved in galleries of rulings, which can be browsed by anyone seeking advice. The sites are by no means consistent, differing from one scholar to another. But they do provide an insight into the kinds of rulings that may be given in the sharia councils.

Among the rulings MacEoin details is that “fighting the Americans and British is a religious duty.” Such a ruling, sadly, could be delivered on British soil.

Sharia councils and Sharia both clearly restrict the rights of women, homosexuals, Christians and Jews, and are therefore incompatible with a diverse and tolerant society. They should be granted no legitimacy by the state.

The cessation of Sharia councils in the UK is not Islamophobic, or an “attack on Islamic rights to freedom of expression or belief”. It is the defence of a just legal system that respects diversity but judges all equally. If we are to have a society in which all are equal, then all law must be derived from a single system that applies to all.

Categories: Britain and Islam, British law, Islam - submission, Islam and females, Islamic integration, Islamic invasion, Islamic supremacy, Islamisation, Islamists in Britain, Sharia courts, Sharia law and females
Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

Australia: Muslim migrant mob beat beachworkers “senseless”

December 18, 2016

Australia: Muslim migrant mob beat beachworkers “senseless”, Jihad Watch, , December 18, 2016

It isn’t enough that Muslim migrants are sexually assaulting children, seniors and scores of women throughout Europe, now in Australia,  “a rampaging mob of 30 African migrants beat two men senseless during an unprovoked and horrifying attack on a beach.”

In recent years, gangs of mostly Sudanese men have terrorised Melbourne suburbs with a spate of burglaries, rape, assault, and carjackings.

Police have said the gangs seem to be motivated by pleasure, warning: “Drugs or money aren’t the driver. It’s purely for the fun. They’re getting off on humiliating their victims.”

Apparently nothing else is expected of these “wild animals” having their “fun,” so citizens of Western countries have to suck it up when the migrants’ urges get the better of them, as to even discuss it or call it out is “Islamophobia.”

migrants-ceuta-1

“They were like WILD ANIMALS’ Migrant mob beat workmates SENSELESS in horror beach attack”, by Simon Osborne, Express, December 17, 2016:

The 21-year-old said the gang said nothing before the attack, in which he received a sudden punch to the head before being kicked, stamped on and whipped with a belt.

He sustained multiple facial injuries and his colleague, named only as Nathan, had his nose broken by the youths.

Andrew said: “Nathan was up against the wall getting beat up. He tried to grab somebody attacking me from behind and then a group of the people attacking me turned on him.”

Both men were taken to hospital by paramedics.

According to local reports, the African teenagers had been terrorising people enjoying the beach for hours, stealing phones, bikes and other possessions.

Police were called to the south-east Melbourne beach on a number of occasions throughout the day but each time the gang would just disperse before joining up again to continue their campaign of intimidation.

Melbourne Police Inspector Jason Kelly said: “I want to provide some reassurance to the community that what occurred was not acceptable.

“The matter will be fully investigated and those responsible will be identified”.

In recent years, gangs of mostly Sudanese men have terrorised Melbourne suburbs with a spate of burglaries, rape, assault, and carjackings.

Police have said the gangs seem to be motivated by pleasure, warning: “Drugs or money aren’t the driver. It’s purely for the fun. They’re getting off on humiliating their victims.”…..

Categories: Australia, Islamic fun, Islamic immigration, Islamic integration
Tags: , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

Report: Migrant-Heavy French Suburbs No-Go Zones for Women

December 13, 2016

Report: Migrant-Heavy French Suburbs No-Go Zones for Women, Breitbart, Virginia Hale, December 13, 2016

saint-denis-street-640x480YOUTUBE

Women are invisible in public spaces and are unwelcome in cafés and bars in France’s migrant-heavy suburbs, a shocking report broadcast on France 2 last week revealed.

Reporting from Saint-Denis, a commune where 36 per cent of residents were born overseas, journalist Caroline Sinz narrates: “The café terraces and the streets have something in common: women seem to have been erased. In some neighborhoods, men occupy public places and women suffer.”

Footage taken with a hidden camera captured how patrons react when women entered a café in the area. Two activists are shown walking into the venue, on the pretext they’re looking for a friend, but are told “It’s best to wait outside” by a customer, while another tells the women that “in this café, there is no diversity”.

The manager, asked by the activists to imagine he wants to bring a cousin or a female friend to the venue, explains that his cousin would be at home, adding “She does what she wants but she does not come here with me”.

“In the café there is no mixing. We are in Sevran [Saint-Denis], we are not in Paris. In 93 [Saint-Denis] it’s a different mentality — it’s like back home”, he tells the women.

Brigade of Mothers activists, who speak out against Islamic extremism, told Ms Sinz that conservative Muslim men took hold of heavily migrant suburbs in France following urban riots in 2005. Routinely threatened for opposing religious fundamentalism, the women decide to stop the interview when someone stops the car, to watch them.

The France 2 journalist then travels to a neighbourhood in Lyon, where the streets are apparently shown to be occupied almost solely by Muslim men. A young, white woman who works as a childminder says she wouldn’t dream of wearing a skirt or make-up outside in the area, and that she does her best to go unnoticed. Asked why, she tells the programme: “Simply, we are afraid”.

Secretary of State for Digital Affairs and Innovation, Axelle Lemaire, said the newscast shows “intolerable” examples of “discrimination against women”. On Sunday night Labour Minister Eric Woerth said scenes uncovered in the report “plant a dagger in the heart of the Republic”, and urged new Prime Minister Bernard Cazeneuve to take action.

Speaking on the decision to author the report, Ms Sinz said she felt driven “to break the law of silence” surrounding women in public spaces in certain areas of France. The biggest obstacle to creating the piece, she revealed, was finding women who would agree to be filmed voicing their concerns.

The France 2 journalist told franceinfo: “They are afraid, they have already spoken out in many cities, and were insulted and assaulted. So now to avoid threats, and being put under pressure, they censor themselves and keep quiet.”

Categories: Feminists, French suburbs, Islam - submission, Islam and females, Islamic integration, Islamic invasion
Tags: , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

The Dutch Death Spiral

December 11, 2016

The Dutch Death Spiral, Gatestone Institute, Giulio Meotti, December 11, 2016

“It would have been better if the Dutch state had sent a clear signal [to terrorists] via a Dutch court that we foster a broad notion of the freedom of expression in the Netherlands.” — Paul Cliteur, Professor of Jurisprudence, Leiden University.

The historic dimension of Wilders’s conviction is related not only to the terrible injustice done to this MP, but that it was the Netherlands that, for the first time in Europe, criminalized dissenting opinions about Islam.

“I will never be silent. You will not be able to stop me… And that is what we stand for. For freedom and for our beautiful Netherlands.” — Geert Wilders, Dutch MP and leader of the Party for Freedom (PVV).

“We have a lot of guests who are trying to take over the house.” — Pym Fortuyn, later shot to death to “defend Dutch Muslims from persecution.”

Before being slaughtered, clinging to a basket, Theo van Gogh begged his assassin: “Can we talk about this?” But can we talk?

A country whose most outspoken filmmaker was slaughtered by an Islamist; whose bravest refugee, hunted by a fatwa, fled to the U.S.; whose cartoonists must live under protection, had better should think twice before condemning a Member of Parliament, whose comments about Islam have forced him to live under 24-hour protection for more than a decade, for “hate speech.” Poor Erasmus! The Netherlands is no longer a safe haven for free thinkers. It is the Nightmare for Free Speech.

The most prominent politician in the Netherlands, MP Geert Wilders, has just been convicted of “hate speech,” for asking at a really if there should be fewer Moroccans in the Netherlands. Many newly-arrived Moroccans in the Netherlands seem to have been responsible for a disproportionate amount of crime there.

Paul Cliteur, Professor of Jurisprudence at Leiden University, who was called as an expert witness, summed up the message coming from the court: “It would have been better if the Dutch state had sent a clear signal [to terrorists] via a Dutch court that we foster a broad notion of the freedom of expression in the Netherlands.”

Here are just a few details to help understand what Wilders experiences every day because of his ideas: No visitors are allowed into his office except after a long wait to be checked. The Dutch airline KLM refused to board him on a flight to Moscow for reasons of “security.” His entourage is largely anonymous. When a warning level rises, he does not know where he will spend the night. For months, he was able to see his wife only twice a week, in a secure apartment, and then only when the police allowed it. The Parliament had to place him in the less visible part of the building, in order better to protect him. He often wears a bulletproof vest to speak in public. When he goes to a restaurant, his security detail must first check the place out.

Wilders’s life is a nightmare. “I am in jail,” he has said; “they are walking around free.”

The historic dimension of Wilders’s conviction is related not only to the terrible injustice done to this MP, but that it was the Netherlands that, for the first time in Europe, criminalized dissenting opinions about Islam.

The Netherlands is a very small country; whatever happens to this enclave is seen in the rest of Europe. The Netherlands refused to surrender to the Spanish invasion. It was from Rotterdam, the second-largest Dutch city, that the Founding Fathers left to create the United States of America. It was to the Netherlands that some of the most brave, original European philosophers and writers — Descartes, Rousseau, Locke, Sade, Molière, Hugo, Swift and Spinoza — had to flee to publish their books. It is also the only corner of Europe where there were no pogroms against Jews, and where Rembrandt painted Jesus with the physical traits of Jews.

Take Leiden: “Praesidium Libertatis” (“Bastion of Freedom”) is the motto of the Netherlands’ most ancient university. Leiden was the university of Johan Huizinga, the great historian who opposed the Nazis and died in a concentration camp. Leiden was also the university of Anton Pannekoek, the mentor of Martinus Van der Lubbe, the Dutch hero who torched the Nazi Parliament in 1933.

In Leiden today, you meet brave intellectuals such as Afshin Ellian, an Iranian jurist who fled Khomeini’s Revolution in Iran and who also now lives under police protection for his observations on Islam. Ellian’s office is close to the former office of Rudolph Cleveringa. When the Nazis invaded the Netherlands and called on Dutch public officials to fill out a form in which they had to declare whether they were “Aryans” or “Jews”, everyone but Cleveringa capitulated. He understood the consequences of such commands.

Twelve years ago, the Netherlands was again plunged into fear for the first time since World War II. In Linnaeusstraat, a district of Amsterdam, Mohammed Bouyeri, a Muslim extremist, ambushed the filmmaker Theo van Gogh and slaughtered him, then pinned on his chest a letter threatening the lives of Geert Wilders and Ayaan Hirsi Ali. Before that murder, Pim Fortuyn, a professor who had formed his own party to save the country from Islamization, was shot to death to “defend Dutch Muslims from persecution.”

2117Twelve years ago, Dutch filmmaker Theo van Gogh (left) was assassinated by an Islamist who pinned on van Gogh’s chest a letter threatening the life of Geert Wilders (right). Today Wilders, the most prominent politician in the Netherlands, lives in hiding under round-the-clock protection.

Fortuyn had said, “We have a lot of guests who are trying to take over the house.”

Since then, many Dutch artists have capitulated to fear.

Sooreh Hera, from Iran, submitted her photos to the Gemeentemuseum Museum in The Hague. One of these works depicted Mohammed and Ali. After many threats, the museum proposed that it would acquire the photos without publishing them and that one day, perhaps, when the situation was calmer, they might show them then. Hera refused: it would have been self-censorship, a sad day for the West. Rants Tjan, director of Museum Gouda, bravely offered to exhibit her censored images, but that event was later cancelled, too. Hera was forced to go into hiding.

Paul Cliteur, a critic of multiculturalism, announced that he would no longer write for Dutch newspapers about Islam, for fear of reprisals: “With the murder of van Gogh, everyone who writes takes a certain risk. That is a scary development. What I am doing do is self-censorship, absolutely….”

Then a columnist, Hasna el Maroudi, from the newspaper NRC Handelsblad, stopped writing, after receiving threats.

The Dutch artist Rachid Ben Ali, irreverent about Islam, no longer satirizes Muslims.

Amsterdam, a city famous for its exuberant cultural life, had already lived through threats to artists: the occupation by the Nazis during World War II.

Several artists still refuse to mention Theo Van Gogh, so as not to “contribute to… divisions”, according to the New York Times. Translation: They are afraid. Who would not be?

In the Oosterpark, a steel sculpture by the artist Jeroen Henneman, dedicated to Van Gogh, is entitled “De Schreeuw” (“The Scream”). But it is a scream you hardly hear in the Dutch society.

What you do hear is the defiant protest after the conviction of a brave MP, Geert Wilders: “I will never be silent. You will not be able to stop me… And that is what we stand for. For freedom and for our beautiful Netherlands.”

Before being slaughtered, clinging to a basket, Theo van Gogh begged his assassin: “Can we talk about this?”

But can we talk?

Ask Geert Wilders, just the latest brave victim of Europe’s Bolshevik thought police.

Categories: Censorship, Europe, Freedom of speech, Geert Wilders, Hate speech, Islam - submission, Islamic integration, Islamic invasion, Islamic supremacy, Islamisation, Multiculturalism, Netherlands, Thought police
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

France: Decomposing in Front of Our Eyes

December 7, 2016

France: Decomposing in Front of Our Eyes, Gatestone Institute, Yves Mamou, December 7, 2016

Four officers were injured (two badly burned) when around 15 “youths” (Muslim gang-members) swarmed their cars and hurled rocks and firebombs at them. Police were aggrieved when the minister of interior called the attackers “little wild ones.” Police and opposition politicians replied that the attackers were not “little wild ones but criminals who attacked police to kill.”

Two students at a vocational training school in Calais attacked a teacher, and one fractured the teacher’s jaw and several teeth — because the teacher had asked one of the students to get back to work.

“This is a warning. These young people did not attack the school by chance; they wanted to attack the institution, to attack the State.” — Yacine, 21, a student at the University of Paris II.

The riot, which lasted for four nights, broke out after the arrest of a driver who did not stop when asked to by a policeman.

This revolt of one pillar of French society, the police, was the biggest that ever happened in modern France. Yet, virtually no one in France’s mainstream media covered the event.

“Everything that represents state institutions (…) is now subjected to violence based on essentially sectarian and sometimes ethnic excesses, fueled by an incredible hatred of our country. We must be blind or unconscious not to feel concern for national cohesion”. — Thibaud de Montbrial, lawyer and expert on terrorism.

 

France will elect a new president in May 2017. Politicians are already campaigning and debating about deficits, welfare recipients, GDP growth, and so on, but they look like puppets disconnected from the real country.

What is reality in France today?

Violence. It is spreading. Not just terrorist attacks; pure gang violence. It instills a growing feeling of insecurity in hospitals, at schools, in the streets — even in the police. The media does not dare to say that this violence is coming mainly from Muslim gangs — “youths,” as they call the in the French media, to avoid naming who they are. A climate of civil war, however, is spreading visibly in the police, schools, hospitals and politics.

The Police

The most jolting evidence of this malaise was to see more than 500 French police officers demonstrating with police cars and motorcycles on the night of October 17, without the backing of labor unions, without authorization, on the Champs Elysées in Paris. According to the daily, Le Figaro, “the Interior Ministry was in panic,” frightened by a possible coup: “Police blocked access to the Avenue Marigny, which runs beside the Presidential Palace and overlooks the Place Beauvau.”

On October 18, when Jean-Marc Falcone, director-general of National Police, met the leaders of the protest, he was surrounded by hundreds of police officers urging him to resign.

The main cause of their anger seems primarily the violence often directed against police, and terrorist attacks. On the terrorist level, two policemen were stabbed to death in Magnanville in June 2016 by a Muslim extremist, Larossi Aballa. This spring, more than 300 police officers and gendarmes were injured by demonstrators. In May, police unions demonstrated in the streets of Paris to protest “anti-police hatred.”

This autumn, the last straw was an attack on a police patrol in the Paris suburb of Viry-Châtillon. Four officers were injured when a group of around 15 “youths” (Muslim gang-members) swarmed their cars in the town and hurled rocks and firebombs at them. Two policemen were badly burned; one had to be placed in an induced coma. The same scenario took place a few days later: a police patrol was ambushed in another no-go zone in the “sensitive” area of Val-Fourré.

2103Four police officers were recently injured (two badly burned) when a group of around 15 “youths” (Muslim gang-members) swarmed their cars and hurled rocks and firebombs at them, in the Paris suburb of Viry-Châtillon. (Image source: Line Press video screenshot)

Police were also aggrieved by Bernard Cazeneuve, the minister of interior, who called the attackers “sauvageons” (“little wild ones”). Police and opposition politicians replied that the attackers were not “little wild ones but criminals who attacked police to kill.”

“Police are seen as an occupying force,” declared Patrice Ribeiro of the Synergie Officiers police commanders’ union. “It is not surprising that violence is spiking.”

On October 18, Le Figaro launched an online poll online with one question: “Do you approve the protest by policemen?” Ninety percent of the 50,000 respondents answered “yes.”

Since then, police demonstrations have spread to other cities. More than a month after the start of the discontent, police officers were still protesting in every big city. On November 24, two hundred police officers demonstrated in Paris between Place de la Concorde and the Arc de Triomphe, to express their “anger.” Police in civilian clothes, some wearing orange armbands, some hidden under a scarf or hood, supported by citizens, gathered in the evening at the Place de la Concorde, before walking the length of the Champs Elysée up to the Arc de Triomphe, where they formed a human chain around the monument and sang La Marseillaise (France’s national anthem).

This revolt of one pillar of French society, the police, was the biggest that ever happened in modern France. Yet, virtually no one in France’s mainstream media covered the event.

Schools

Tremblay-en-France (Seine-Saint-Denis close to Paris): The headmaster of the Hélène-Boucher training school was attacked on October 17 by several individuals outside the school. Some “youths” were attacking the building with firebombs, and when the headmaster tried to calm the situation, one of the “youths” answered with blows. Fifty unidentified people were involved in the incident. This was the third episode of violence to occur in the vicinity. Four days earlier, two vehicles were torched.

One month later, the daily Le Monde held a meeting with several students, The goal of this meeting was to try to understand the cause of the violence in in Tremblay. Yacine, 21, a student at the University of Paris II, said: “This is a warning. These young people did not attack the school by chance; they wanted to attack the institution, to attack the State.”

Argenteuil (Val d’Oise, suburb of Paris): A teacher at the Paul Langevin primary school, was beaten up in the street, on October 17, while leading children back to school from tennis courts a kilometer from the school. After hearing the teacher raise his voice at a child, two young men stopped their car, told the teacher he was a “racist” and beat him in front of the children. According to Le Parisien, one of the attackers justified his actions by accusing the professor of “racism”. “You are not the master,” said the man. “The only Master is Allah”.

Colomiers (Toulouse, south of France). A physical-education teacher was assaulted by a student on October 17, when the teacher tried to stop the student from leaving the school through a prohibited exit.

Calais (Pas-de-Calais): Two students at a vocational training school in Calais attacked a teacher, and one fractured the teacher’s jaw and several teeth on October 14, according the local paper, Nord-Littoral. The students attacked the electrical engineering teacher because he had asked one of the students to get back to work.

Saint-Denis (Seine Saint-Denis, suburb of Paris): On October 13, a school headmaster and his deputy were beaten by a vocational student who had been reprimanded for arriving late.

Strasbourg: A mathematics teacher was brutally attacked on October 17 at the Orbelin school. The headmaster of the institution told France Bleu that a “youth,” who is not a student at the school, had beaten the teacher. This was not the first time that the “youth” had entered the building. Earlier, when the teacher asked him to leave his class, the “youth” delivered several blows to the teacher’s face before fleeing.

All these attackers were not terrorists, but like Islamic terrorists, they apparently wanted to destroy “attack the institution, to attack the State.”

Hospitals

On October 16, fifteen individuals accompanying a patient sowed terror in the emergency department of Gustave Dron Hospital in Tourcoing, according to La Voix du Nord. A doctor was severely beaten; another pulled by the hair. Doctors and nurses told the newspaper they were still in shock. Said a nurse:

“Ten people forced their way into the heart of the ER. The doctors asked them to leave… When everything stopped, I realized that the ER was ravaged, patients terrorized, relatives of patients crying.”

The attackers were from the district of La Bourgogne, an area essentially populated with North African immigrants. Three people were arrested.

In the same area of La Bourgogne, there was a riot on October 4. Fourteen cars were burned and 12 people arrested. The riot, which lasted for four nights, broke out after the arrest of a driver who did not stop when asked to by a policeman.

Politics

On October 14, Nadine Morano, deputy of the opposition party Les Républicains, tried physically to prevent an Algerian businessman, Rachid Nekkaz, from entering the Center of Public Finance of Toul, in the east of France. Nekkaz is known for paying fines of Muslim women arrested because they were wearing a burqa in public, banned by law since October 2010. Police came to protect the right of Mr. Nekkaz to pay the fine. An amendment to the finance law is currently under discussion to block and punish practices, like those of Nekkaz, that circumvent the law.

President François Hollande is currently under fire after the publication of a book, A President Should Not Say That… In it, he is reported to have said, “France has a problem with Islam,” and “there are too many migrants in France” — remarks Hollande claims he never made. Another quote in the book that Hollande denies saying:

“We cannot continue to have migrants who arrive without control, in the context of the attacks… The secession of territories (no go zones)? How can we avoid a partition? Because it is still what is going to happen.”

President Hollande spends his time apologizing for things he never said, but should have said because they are true.

French People

French Chinese: The French Chinese live in the same suburbs as Muslims and are attacked and harassed, to the general indifference of police.

As crime against community members has spiraled, about 50,000 ethnic Chinese staged a protest march in Paris on September 4, after the fatal mugging of a Chinese tailor.

The protesters, all of them wearing white T-shirts reading “Security for All” and waving French flags, rallied at the Place de la République. They had organized the demonstration by themselves and were not supported by the traditional “human rights” groups, which prefer to help Muslim migrants.

Public Opinion: In January 2016, Cevipof, a think tank of the Paris Institute of Political Studies (Sciences Po), released its seventh Barometer of Political Trust, a poll published annually to measure the values of democracy in the country, and based on interviews with 2074 people:

  • What is your current state of mind? Listlessness 31%, Gloom 29%, Mistrust 28%, Fear: 10%
  • Do you trust government? Not much 58%, not at all 32%
  • Do you trust lawmakers? Not much 39%, not at all 16%%
  • Do you trust the president? Not much 32%; not at all 38%
  • Do politicians care about what the people think? Not much 42%, not at all 46%
  • How democracy is working in France? Not well 43%, not well at all 24%
  • Do you trust political parties? Not much 47%, not at all 40%
  • Do you trust the media? Not much 48% not at all 27 %
  • What do you feel about politics? Distrust 39%; disgust 33%, boredom 8%
  • What do you feel about politicians? Disappointment 54%; disgust 20%
  • Corruption of politicians? Yes 76%
  • Too many migrants? Yes, plus tend to agree: 65%
  • Islam is a threat? Yes, plus tend to agree: 58%
  • Proud to be French? Yes 79%

What this poll shows is the gap between people and politicians has never been so vast.

Thibaud de Montbrial, lawyer and expert on terrorism, declared on October 19 to Le Figaro:

The term “dislocation” of French society seems appropriate. Violence against police, hospitals, attacks that multiply against schools and teachers… are attacks against pillars of the ruling domain. In other words, everything that represents state institutions (…) is now subjected to violence based on essentially sectarian and sometimes ethnic excesses, fueled by an incredible hatred of our country. We must be blind or unconscious not to feel concern for national cohesion.”

Categories: France, Islamic integration, Islamic invasion, Islamist terrorists, Law enforcement, Lawlessness, Public opinion
Tags: , , , , , ,

Comments: 1 Comment

Angela Merkel: False Prophet of Europe

December 4, 2016

Angela Merkel: False Prophet of Europe, Gatestone Institute, Vijeta Uniyal, December 4, 2016

With his initiative for tighter gun laws, to prevent weapons getting into “the wrong hands,” Justice Minister Maas does not mean to target the Islamists who pose an existential threat to Germany, but an obscure German group called the “Reichsbürger.”

As the German newspaper Bild describes the law proposed by Maas, “a 13-year-old child bride would have to testify against her husband, saying that her well-being as a child is under threat. If neither the child nor the Child Welfare Service lodges a complaint, for all practical purposes the marriage would be declared legitimate.” This law clearly does not take into account the possibility of private coercion against a child, let alone the blinding likelihood of outright threats.

Justice Minister Maas evidently cares more about “gender image” than he cares about truly oppressed women and vulnerable children. In a recently drafted new law by his ministry, Mass refused to ban child marriage.

With both France and Germany going to polls next year, there is the possibility of a democratic, peaceful “European Spring.”

 

In her first message to President-elect Donald Trump, German Chancellor Angela Merkel lectured him on gender, racial and religious equality. As the New York Times put it, Merkel “named a price” for Germany’s cooperation with the Trump-led administration, namely the “respect for human dignity and for minorities from a man who has mocked both.”

If this was anything more than political posturing, and Chancellor Merkel truly cared about “human dignity” or the rights of those most vulnerable, she might have started closer at home.

After a year-long investigation into the mass-sexual attacks in Cologne, where an estimated 2,000 migrant men — mostly from Arab and Muslim countries — molested at least 1200 women, almost all the men have managed to walk free.

Last week, the Interior Minister of North Rhine-Westphalia, Ralf Jäger, confirmed this outcome when he said that “most of the cases [of rape and sexual assault in Cologne] will remain unsolved.” Similar coordinated sexual assaults by migrants also took place in other German cities, including Hamburg, where over 500 such cases were reported. They are expected to remain “unsolved” too.

Merkel, who lectured Trump on gender, did not even bother to visit the women who were raped and assaulted in Cologne or other German cities — even though these women were victims of her own failed open-border policy.

As New Year’s Eve approaches again, Merkel’s “Multikulti” paradise looks more and more like a police state. According to leaked, confidential police reports published by Germany’s Expressnewspaper, Cologne will be turned into a fortified city to avoid a repeat of last year’s mass sexual assaults. Security forces will monitor the streets with helicopters, surveillance cameras, observation posts and mounted units. The city of Hamburg has also reportedly taken similar steps.

While the Merkel government arms the police, efforts are underway to tighten gun laws for the citizenry. As the German state-run broadcaster Deutsche Welle reported on November 28: “Justice Minister Heiko Maas called for tighter weapons laws to prevent guns from falling in to the wrong hands.” With this latest initiative, Minister Maas does not mean to target the Islamists who pose an existential threat to Germany and the rest of the Western World, but an obscure German group called the “Reichsbürger.”

The Justice Minister apparently shares Merkel’s skewed worldview. After the New Year’s Eve sexual assaults in Germany, Maas, to “cure” the country’s rape epidemic, proposed a ban on “sexist advertising.” In April, Deutsche Welle reported:

The aim of the proposal – which is reportedly in response to the sexual assaults in Cologne on New Year’s Eve – is to create a “modern gender image” in Germany… In future, posters or ads which “reduce women or men to sexual objects” could be banned. In the case of dispute, a court would have to decide.

Justice Minister Maas evidently cares more about “gender image” than he cares about truly oppressed women and vulnerable children. In a recently drafted new law by his ministry, Mass refused to ban child marriage. Official German statistics estimate the number of married children in Germany at 1,475, of whom 361 are under the age of 14 — a rising trend thanks to uncontrolled migration from Muslim countries.

As the German newspaper Bild describes the law proposed by Maas:

“a 13-year-old child bride would have to testify against her husband, saying that her well-being as a child is under threat. If neither the child nor the Child Welfare Service lodges a complaint, for all practical purposes the marriage would be declared legitimate.”

This law clearly does not take into account the possibility of private coercion against a child, let alone the blinding likelihood of outright threats.

In Merkel’s Germany, the rights of an able-bodied migrant man trump the rights of a sexually assaulted woman and subdued child.

Following the electoral victory of Donald Trump, liberals all over are pinning all their hopes on Merkel. The “orphaned” liberals, in essence actually authoritarian, are probably looking for a new leader behind whom to rally. Many in the mainstream in the West are already calling the German Chancellor the “Leader of the Free World.” Following Clinton’s loss, the U.S. online magazine Politico described Merkel in almost messianic terms as “Global Savior.”

As Merkel seeks re-election to a fourth term in the autumn of 2017, she is counting on extremely favourable media coverage and glowing celebrity endorsements to enable her to win again.

2094(Image source: Tobias Koch/Wikimedia Commons)

After Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton’s presidential bid went south, President Barack Obama flew to Germany to endorse Merkel’s re-election bid. After Britain’s Brexit vote and Trump’s White House win, the liberal establishment and its rank and file in the mainstream media seem frantic to keep Merkel in power. Merkel’s defeat at the hands of a resurgent nationalist party such as the Alternative for Germany (AfD) would strike their “globalist project” right at the heart of Europe.

Next year’s German elections will be first and foremost a referendum on Merkel’s open-border policy. It was her suspension of border controls — or the Dublin Protocol — in September 2015 that opened the floodgates for Arab and Muslim mass-migration in the first place.

If Merkel’s Christian Democrats (CDU) emerge as the largest party and she manages to head the next ruling coalition, it will be sold by the media and the elites as a vindication of her “Refugees Welcome” policy.

An upset defeat for Merkel, however, could spell doom not only for her policy of mass-migration but for the entire Brussels-based “European project” — a German “Brexit” (“Dexit”?).

With both France and Germany going to the polls next year, there is the possibility of a democratic, peaceful “European Spring.”

Categories: "Far right" parties, European spring, Gender image, Germany, Globalism, Gun control, Islam and females, Islamic integration, Islamic invasion, Merkel, Politics, President Elect Trump
Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

Georgetown University prof: “Islamophobia” causes jihad terror, white supremacists greater threat than jihadis

December 2, 2016

Georgetown University prof: “Islamophobia” causes jihad terror, white supremacists greater threat than jihadis, Jihad Watch, , December 2, 2016

Tucker Carlson does a good job here calling out Georgetown University professor Engy Abdelkader on her deflection, dissembling, and dishonesty, but he does let one massive lie go by: that the FBI has said that “white supremacist groups” are more of a terror threat than Islamic jihadists. The FBI is not actually the source of this claim. It actually comes from the George Soros-funded New America Foundation, which back in June 2015 published a study that purported to demonstrate that “right-wing extremists” and “white supremacists” were a larger threat to the U.S. than Islamic jihadis. But the study was obviously skewed, as it was based on the number of those killed by jihadis and by right-wing extremists since September 12, 2001, leaving  out 9/11. The study also ignored the many, many foiled jihad plots, and the fact that jihadis are part of an international movement that has killed many thousands of people, while right-wingers and white supremacists are not. It stated that right-wing extremists had killed 48 people from September 12, 2001 to June 2015, while Islamic jihadists had killed only 26 people in the U.S. in that span. If 9/11 had been added, the tally would have been 3,032 killed by Islamic jihadists and 48 by purported right-wing extremists.

And even by the New America Foundation’s rules counting the Orlando jihad massacre, which took place after the study was concluded, but leaving out 9/11 as the NAF study did, the death toll now stands at 76 killed by Islamic jihadis, and 48 by purported right-wing extremists (I repeat “purported” because to get to its count of 48, the NAF counted as “right-wing” attacks killings that were perpetrated by people who were obviously deranged psychopaths devoid of any ideology).

Abdelkader also claims that Muslims routinely aid law enforcement in apprehending jihad terrorists. She didn’t mention that A California chapter of the Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) distributed a poster telling Muslims not to talk to the FBI, and a Florida chapter distributed pamphlets with the same message.

So this Georgetown University professor — a university, by the way, that receives millions from Saudi Arabia — is making wholly false claims.

Categories: "Far right" terrorism, Christian terrorism, Islamic integration, Islamic terrorism, Islamists in America
Tags: , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »