Tag Archive for: Europe

Smart, Safe, and Supervised: Rethinking AI and Online Safety for Children

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

The increased overreliance on chatbots for companionship and social media feeds for information is tearing apart our interpersonal relationships, with children being particularly vulnerable. Researchers found that high or increasing trajectories of addictive use of social media, mobile phones, or video games were not only common in early adolescents but were frequently associated with suicidal behaviors or worsening mental health.

Disturbing Trends

A 2025 report from Internet Matters reveals that 12% of children say they use AI chatbots because they have no one else to talk to (23% among vulnerable children). Moreover, 35% feel like they’re talking to a friend when engaging with chatbots (50% for vulnerable groups). Fifty-eight percent believe using a chatbot is better than searching for information themselves, and 40% have no concerns about following chatbot advice at all.

This trend is deeply troubling, thus, delaying children’s exposure to addictive digital experiences might be prudent so that they are better equipped to manage their emotional responses around chatbots and the internet at large.

Without proper safeguards, adult supervision, and emotional support, AI-powered social media sites or products can magnify children’s existing vulnerabilities and social isolation. Many platforms currently lack meaningful guardrails for young users, and parents are often unprepared to intervene. However, developing AI skills and AI literacy have already become vital requirements not only in the workforce, but also in everyday life.

With the rise of deepfakes, scammers, and AI-powered addictive algorithms, children need guidance more than ever. Social media has become the go-to place for connection and flow of information, which is why both social media literacy and AI literacy — for children, parents, and educators alike — must be a global priority. Children need to be empowered to understand how algorithms shape their online experiences, when to question advice, and how to protect themselves from manipulation and misinformation — whether it comes from a human or a machine.

The question becomes: how do we ensure that they are not harmed while taking advantage of the opportunities that technology provides?

Three Different Approaches

Opinions and approaches differ on this point. Countries such as the United States are promoting “early learning and exposure to AI concepts,” ultimately trying to increase AI literacy and proficiency in younger populations. This process must be done responsibly and with safeguards in place, which is why it is commendable that the proposed 10-year moratorium on the enforcement of state-level AI regulations in the U.S. was ultimately removed from the final One Big Beautiful Bill Act by the Senate. Despite this removal, the U.S. still largely wishes to focus on remaining a global leader in AI technology, taking a very pro-innovation and quite anti-regulation approach.

On the other end of the scale is the European Union, with a rich legal framework around AI, social media, and children. In fact, the European Commission recently released guidelines under the Digital Services Act (DSA) to better protect minors online. These include: setting children’s accounts to private by default, modifying recommender systems to avoid harmful content rabbit holes, empowering children to block users and control group adds, disabling exploitative features like “read receipts,” autoplay, and push notifications, prohibiting downloads/screenshots of content from minors, strengthening moderation, reporting tools, and parental controls, and using age assurance methods that are effective, but also non-invasive and fair.

While these initiatives are undoubtedly safety-focused, they are often hard to implement. Furthermore, AI systems enhance algorithmic feeds to an increasingly high degree, making it difficult for a child to control their own online experience.

Drawing on the Convention on the Rights of the Child, UNICEF’s policy guidance on AI for children offers a separate approach. Nine requirements are named for child-centered AI, including: supporting children’s development and well-being, ensuring inclusion of and for children, prioritizing fairness and non-discrimination for children, protecting children’s data and privacy, ensuring safety for children, providing transparency, explainability, and accountability for children, empowering governments and businesses with knowledge of AI and children’s rights, preparing children for present and future developments in AI, and creating an enabling environment.

UNICEF also provides implementation tools like policy roadmaps, an AI guide for teens, and design templates for developers. Real-world examples underscore the stakes — such as chatbots that mishandle disclosures of harm or automated systems that restrict access to social services. A case study involving social robots for autistic children shows how these principles can guide inclusive, ethical design.

The report’s key recommendations call on governments and tech providers to integrate a child-rights lens into every stage of AI development, involve children meaningfully as co-designers, not just users, conduct Child Rights Impact Assessments (CRIAs), improve international coordination and accountability, and expand research in underserved communities.

Conclusion: Family and Guidance First

While these approaches utilize different tools to navigate the increasing presence of social media and chatbots in children’s lives, their ultimate goal is the same: young children should not be left alone with AI systems. They need trusted adults, informed policies, and child-centered technologies that put their mental health, safety, and rights first.

I highly agree with America’s focus on AI literacy and competitiveness, but guidelines should exist to better inform platforms, AI developers, and stakeholders of what pro-children innovation can look like.

Today’s youth need both personal and systemic support to navigate the harms of chatbots, smartphones, and social media in ways that protect their mental health. These efforts should be grounded in family-centered policies that address the social, environmental, and economic foundations of well-being and resilience. As AI reshapes childhood, the question is no longer whether children should engage with these technologies — but how we ensure they do so safely, ethically, and with support.

AUTHOR

Monika Mercz

Monika Mercz, J.D.,is a visiting researcher at The George Washington University in Washington, D.C. A graduate of the University of Miskolc with a degree in law, she specialized as an English legal translator and holds a degree in AI and Law from the University of Lisbon. She is currently working for the Public Law Center of Mathias Corvinus Collegium and has previously worked for The National Authority for Data Protection and Freedom of Information, The Office of the National Assembly, and the Miskolc Regional Court.

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2025 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Europe veers Right—Towards Israel and Trump?

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

There are accumulating—albeit belated—signs of a new political assertiveness in Europe, together with a growing appreciation of Israeli resolve and Trumpian toughness

“…this concept [of multi-culturalism] has failed, and failed utterly.” —Former German Chancellor Angela Merkel, 2010

Winds of change are finally beginning to blow in Europe.

With them, they carry potential implications not only for the European continent itself but for Israel and the wider Middle East—as well as for relations with Washington, particularly with the current Trump administration.

A stiffening of political will?

A clear indication of the stiffening of political will was reflected in a recent conference held in Vienna.

Under the auspices of former Austrian Vice-Chancellor Heinz-Christian, and with the participation of Members of European Parliament from Germany, Holland, and Belgium, as well as prominent guests of honor from across the continent—including France, Hungary and the UK, the conference focused on “Peace, Freedom, and Security.”

Billed as “The Vienna Conference of European Patriots”, it evinced the ominous banner, “Europe on the Brink – Between Self-Denial, Islamism, and Geopolitical Irrelevance”, reflecting the sense of concern that prevailed at the event. Speakers warned that what once was celebrated as “multicultural open-mindedness” is increasingly proving to be myopic political naivety. Several speakers expressed alarm at what they perceived as an “urgent threat”—i.e., the looming spectre of a steadily creeping transformation of European social order into “Islamist authoritarianism”. The overall sentiment was that the real threat menacing Europe today is not an external one, but more an internal one—eroding the very core of European society.

A threat to national cohesion

This perception dovetails well with the perturbing findings of a government-commissioned probe into the activities of the Muslim Brotherhood in France. The report warns that “The Muslim Brotherhood movement is a “threat to national cohesion” in France and action must be taken to stop the spread of “political Islamism.”

Indeed, there was particular disapproval of France, which, it will be recalled, granted the Ayatollah Khomeini political asylum. It was here that he spent his last months in exile under the benign neglect of the French authorities, before returning triumphantly to Iran, where hordes of his devotees, inflamed by his corrosive credo, swept the radical Islamists to power, later to be “exported” globally.

Moreover, along with a considerable body of expert opinion, blame was also attributed, in large measure, to France for the turmoil in Libya and the overthrow of a then much chastened Gaddafi. Paris’s rash haste in siding with the rebels precipitated the current chaos and subsequent flow of migrants into the EU. According to one 2020 study of events in Libya, “Paris soon became the most intransigent power in international efforts to foster negotiations between the Gadhafi regime and the leadership of the revolutionaries…The result of this policy is clearly visible: What has ensued is almost ten years of conflict and social distress.

Significantly, the failure of the current French administration, under Emmanuel Macron, to control the still ongoing tide of Muslim migrants and their overflow across the Channel into the UK has earned the ire of his British neighbors, even eliciting calls for his recent—and unduly ostentatious—state visit to be cancelled.

Flaccid France

Indeed, at the Vienna conference, Macron was taken severely to task for blunders at home and abroad.

Indeed, the French daily, Le Monde, recently outlined the pervasive domestic strife afflicting the country: “There is a rise in bankruptcies and restructuring plans, alongside calls for strikes at Air France, the national rail company …and within the civil service. Additionally, a new wave of unrest is spreading among farmers. [with] this unrest, stemming from economic difficulties and budgetary austerity measures”.

Yet, with the home-front in turmoil, Macron chose to commit his foreign policy to what is increasingly becoming a forlorn anachronism–a Palestinian state—and one likely to place him in direct confrontation with an increasingly assertive and proactive Trump administration. Moreover, in view of the appalling atrocities of October 7, together with the overwhelming support they received from the Palestinian public, both in Gaza and the West Bank, this policy would be an unconscionable reward for blood-curdling terror. As such, it is not only practically unfeasible, but morally bankrupt as well.

In contrast to the censure of the flaccid EU policy, there was praise for both Israel and the Trump administration. Israel was lauded for conveying a clear message with its resolute military action and pinpoint intelligence that left the Iranian nuclear program largely in ruins. Likewise, President Trump was commended for launching his B-2 bunker-busting bombs and Tomahawk missile strikes on the Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan facilities in support of Israel’s action, and for laying the foundation for a restructured Mid-East via the “Abraham Accords.

A new European assertiveness

There are accumulating signs of a new political assertiveness and a growing appreciation of Israeli resolve to resist, and stare down what, until recently, seemed to be intimidating radical Islamist threats. With it, a grudging appreciation of Donald Trump may also be emerging, together with a budding acknowledgement of the efficacy of his tough stance on issues his predecessors eschewed. Hopefully, the recent Vienna conference is a sign that the edifice of Europe’s socio-cultural heritage can still be salvaged.

©2025 . All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLE: A new era for Europe?

Norwegian Journalist Rebecca Mistereggen on the state of Norway (and Scandinavia) thanks to Islamic immigration

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

In a fearless and deeply personal interview with RAIR Foundation USA, Norwegian journalist Rebecca Mistereggen exposes how mass Islamic immigration, weaponized hate speech laws, and enforced multiculturalism have turned Europe into a censored, unsafe, and unrecognizable continent – where truth-tellers are silenced, women are stripped of freedom, and national identity is collapsing.

Mass immigration. Exploding crime. Government-enforced silence. Rebecca Mistereggen knows what’s destroying Europe, and she’s naming it. In her exclusive interview with RAIR Foundation, the Norwegian journalist exposed the raw reality of life under Europe’s new regime: fear, censorship, and a continent slipping into chaos. As a leading voice at Norway’s Document Media, Mistereggen is doing what the legacy press won’t: telling the truth while it still can be told.

“Islamic immigration began long before 2015,” she explained. “It started in the 1960s. But the damage accelerated with mass migration—first a demographic shift, then a cultural collapse.”

Mistereggen was clear: what’s happening in Norway and across Europe is not mere cultural transformation. It is civilizational dismantling. She described a Norway that no longer resembles the country she grew up in—a nation where women are afraid to walk freely, crime surges are covered up, and even the police remain silent for fear of offending migrants.

“There were attack rapes in Oslo happening every summer. I felt stripped of my freedom as a teenage girl. I had to constantly look over my shoulder just to go outside.”

She pointed to chilling statistics. “Somali men in Oslo are 15 times more violent than ethnic Norwegians,” she revealed, citing an official report. Other high-crime migrant groups include those from Ethiopia, Iraq, Eritrea, Afghanistan, Syria, Pakistan, and Russia. Yet the state remains willfully blind.

“We have open borders with Sweden, where you can now hire a 12-year-old as a mercenary. That’s how bad it’s gotten.”

But even worse than the violence is the silencing.

“We don’t have free speech anymore. Norway has a ‘racism law’—Paragraph 185—which means minorities can’t be prosecuted for hate speech, but the majority can.” She recalled calling the police after someone graffitied a church with “Kill the Whites.” The response? “They told me it wasn’t hate speech. Just vandalism. Imagine if I wrote ‘Kill all the Muslims’ on a mosque. Do you think that would be vandalism?”

Rebecca described the two-pronged assault on free society: a state-sponsored regime of “positive discrimination” that punishes native citizens while coddling migrants, and a cultural witch-hunt against dissenters who are socially destroyed for telling the truth.

“If you post support for Trump, criticize COVID policies, or question climate change, you can be de-banked, de-platformed, or fired. You can be ostracized by your family. People are terrified.”

She shared a disturbing case: an elderly man in a Norwegian town asked a migrant gang to stop intimidating shoppers. He was knocked unconscious. “The police ignored the case until media pressure forced an investigation. Then, a peaceful parade against violence was cancelled after threats. The next day, someone spray-painted ‘Kill the Whites’ on the church. Still no hate crime investigation.”

Mistereggen emphasized how Quran-burning protests—an act of free expression—are now criminalized in parts of Europe.

“In Sweden, Salwan Momika was murdered for burning a Quran. His friend was fined the next day for the same act. The case went cold almost immediately, despite the fatwa against Momika. Sweden now has a de facto blasphemy law.”

She emphasized how Islamic immigration and EU centralization have destroyed Europe’s uniqueness.

“Europe used to be the most diverse continent on Earth. You went to Paris, you felt French culture. Now it’s just like Oslo. The continent has become one uniform gray zone.”

Even worse, she warned, is the coordinated effort to glorify Islam while erasing Christianity.

“Our state church reads from the Quran on Good Friday. Schools are now required to teach how beautiful Islam is. Meanwhile, Christianity is gone.”

And in Sweden? “There’s already a Sharia Party. Yes, you heard that right. They’ve even won elections in some areas.”

When asked how her work has affected her personally, Rebecca was candid.

“People have tried to ruin my life. But I’ve always spoken my mind. I’ve had supportive friends and family. Islam hasn’t crushed me yet. COVID was harder – I had to fight everyone over that.”

But she made her stance crystal clear: “I’d rather die than let my country become Islamic. It’s not going to happen. Europe has kicked Islam out twice before. There will be a third time.”

Her message to Americans was blunt: “Don’t think this can’t happen to you. It’s already begun. Learn from Europe’s mistakes – before it’s too late.”

RAIR Foundation thanks Rebecca Mistereggen for her courageous work and truth-telling, and looks forward to future collaborations as the fight for freedom continues.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Trump’s Gulf Tour? Thank Israel for making it possible

Trump calls out the Palestinian Death Cult!

Hamas confirms Sinwar, other commanders killed in IDF strike

As the world turns its back, these Christians still stand with Israel

The secret mediator between Hamas and Trump revealed: The story of Bshara Bahbah

EDITORS NOTE: This Vlad Tepes Blog column with video posted by is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Legendary geopolitical cycle analyst Martin Armstrong says ‘Europe is committing suicide’: The question is why?

/in , , , , , , , /by

Why are European leaders so desperate for war with Russia?

If the US remains in NATO and defers to the Washington neocons, it will be dragged into the same catastrophic war scenario. Let’s pray President Trump gets us out of NATO before it’s too late. 

The article below, based on an interview with economist and global financial analyst Martin Armstrong, confirms everything I’ve been saying for three years. The war in Ukraine has nothing to do with preserving liberal democracy as we’re told by the media and everything to do with regime change in Russia and installing a Western puppet. The West, particularly Europe, wants to steal Russia’s vast natural resources, monetize them, and stave off its self-inflicted economic collapse under the weight of its flawed green economic agenda.

Below is an article by Greg Hunter at USA Watchdog.com based on his interview with Armstrong.

Legendary financial and geopolitical cycle analyst Martin Armstrong (pictured above) is back with an update on his big turn toward war in Ukraine with Russia. Two weeks ago on USAWatchdog, Armstrong predicted, “After May 15, war is turning up (in Ukraine) and it will be turning up into 2026.”

That prediction paid off to the exact day as peace talks between Russia and Ukraine ended on May 15 after just two hours, and neither side agreed to meet again. War is already here, and there is no stopping it with peace talks.

Armstrong says, “Putin knows and understands this is not a just a war with Ukraine, this is a war with NATO. If Putin agrees to a 30-day ceasefire with Ukraine, what’s that going to do? Absolutely nothing.”

You have every European country reinstituting drafts.

In Germany, even people 60 years old have been told to report. Poland has ordered every able-bodied man to show up for military training. They want war. Their economy is collapsing. You hear about this de-dollarization, and it’s not happening. The capitalization of just the New York Stock Exchange is worth more than all of Europe combined. That’s just the New York Stock Exchange. . . . You’ve got Macron in France, they call him the “Petite Napolean.”. . . Without war, Europe is going to collapse. It’s in a sovereign debt crisis. They have done everything against the economy.”

Armstrong thinks Russia will finish off Ukraine sometime in 2027 and Europe a year or two after that. And, Yes, Armstrong still thinks Ukraine will disappear from the map.

Armstrong urged his contacts in Washington to “Get the hell out of NATO.” It seems some in the US government are considering this warning as this headline breaks today: “US to Begin European Troop Withdrawal Talks, NATO Ambassador Says.”

Armstrong says, “I have been told by some very influential people on Capitol Hill ‘you’re right, we agree.’ That’s what I have been told. . . . I have been complaining about this for months, and my view is Europe is committing suicide, and let’s not be part of it this time.”

Is President Trump getting this message? Armstrong says, “Yes, I believe so. . . . Trump also said a peace deal does not seem likely, the hatred is too great on both sides.”

The neocons back home also want war with Russia and have wanted it for a very long time. Trump is either going to make peace or walk away and not participate. Maybe this is why former FBI Director James Comey put out his not-so-cryptic call to assassinate President Trump with his “86 47” now deleted Instagram post. Comey was the man who held Armstrong in prison illegally for contempt for 7 years.

Armstrong says, “Comey has always been part of it. Just for the record, he was the US Attorney in New York. He’s the one who kept me in contempt until the Supreme Court said what the hell is going on? Then, they had to release me.”

How did Armstrong land in jail? Armstrong says, “They asked me to put in 10 billion dollars . . . to take over Russia, and I refused. It was Comey that was the US Attorney for New York, and he kept me in civil contempt, which has a maximum sentence of 18 months, and he kept me in for 7 years. He kept rolling it and rolling it and rolling it. . . . I was told if I put in $10 billion, I would get $100 billion back. They intended to have all the assets of Russia going through the trading desk of New York. All the oil, gold, diamonds, platinum, you name it, they would have it all. And I said, no, I’m out. I am not into regime change.”

Fast forward to today, and the powers in Europe still think they can take Russia and steal their assets to fix the extreme financial problems in Europe. Pensions, banks and bonds are in deep financial trouble in Europe. Stealing from Russia and gaining control of $75 trillion in natural resources is why they want and need war.

Armstrong says, “They went to negative interest rates in 2014. I warned them. I said listen; you are out of your minds. You are syphoning money out of the bank reserves and pension finds. It’s a basket case. It really is. They have no appreciable economy. . . it’s shrinking, the number of actual businesses has shrunk in Germany. (Germany is 25% of the EU economy.) This is why they need war.”

Armstrong says Europe is going to lose and lose badly in a war with Russia. He says if Trump gets out of NATO, the US will thrive and do much better financially than Europe. Let’s all hope President Trump gets us out of NATO before it’s too late.

There is much more in the 60-minute interview.

©2025 . All rights reserved.

RELATED VIDEO: The Suicide of Europe

Please visit Leo’s Newsletter substack.

The West’s Churches Are Under Attack — Who’s Responsible?

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

The Church of the Immaculate Conception in France went up in flames at the start of September, becoming the latest classic church in Europe to burn. Authorities are trying to determine what is driving the attacks, and data points to anti-Christian radicals and Islamists as the primary culprits.

A suspect with a history of allegedly committing arson attacks on churches was arrested for allegedly setting fire to the Saint-Omer church last week, according to France Bleu. He had recently been released from prison and allegedly targeted churches multiple times.

The suspect, Joel Vigoreuz, reportedly had posts sympathetic to left-wing views and videos of Islamic preachers on his social media.

“There is a general anti-Christian sentiment in France, from its anti-clerical and radical secularist history, which has gone unchallenged for years,” Anja Hoffmann of the Observatory on Intolerance and Discrimination against Christians (OIDAC) in Europe told the Caller. “It should not come as too much of a surprise that these attitudes might at some point translate into violent action.”

She stated an “increasing number of perpetrators” of the crimes targeting Christians are members of anti-Christian “ideological, political or religious groups.”

Hoffmann pointed to examples of vandalism from both radical Islam and the far left. During 2024, OIDAC Europe has recorded the defacement of one church, two chapels, five crosses, and over 50 graves with phrases like “Submit to Allah and “I will make war on the Christian world,” according to Hoffmann.

In July 2024, the Notre-Dame-du-Travail church in Paris was vandalized with “Submit to Allah,” and a knife was driven into the wooden throat of a statue of the Virgin Mary, La Croix reported.

In March, an Egyptian national with ties to the Islamic State was arrested for planning an attack on the Notre-Dame-de-Paris Cathedral in France, LeJournal du Dimanche reported. That same month, an Albanian man was arrested for interrupting a Holy Thursday mass and shouting “Allahu Akbar” in the Sainte-Eulalie church, according to Midi Libre.

In May, a Turkish man reportedly with psychological issues shouted “Allahu Akbar” after knocking over a Catholic cross with his van, according to the outlet FDS.

“In short, it would seem that a full-blown jihad has been declared on the churches of France, and its godless leadership is looking the other way when not actively providing cover,” Raymond Ibrahim, author of Defenders of the West, states on his website that documents Islamic attacks against Christians.

Hoffmann noted how the church of St. Bernadette in Montpellier was vandalized with the slogan “the only church that illuminates is the one that burns.” Photos show an anarchist symbol graffitied next to the ominous threat, reported Midi Libre.

OIDAC Europe collects data on anti-Christian hate crimes, and Hoffmann says France “consistently” ranks in the top three countries in the continent.

The group documented 106 anti-Christian hate crimes in its 2022 report, with only Italy and Germany having higher numbers.

The report defers to the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe’s (OSCE) definition of a hate crime: “a criminal act motivated by bias or prejudice towards particular groups of people.”

OIDAC Europe’s report says the majority of hate crimes were committed by far-left groups, but there were also attacks by “far-right groups, satanist groups, and radical Islamist groups.”

The two main causes of church burnings are arson and “disrepair from neglect,” The Catholic Arena told the Caller. One of the most common attacks on churches is the destruction of tabernacles, according to the outlet.

The Catholic Arena noted it is the state’s responsibility to protect most churches. French President Emmanuel Macron promised last year to increase funding for repairing churches, but the destruction of churches has still not stopped, the outlet told the Caller.

From Aug. 25 to Sept. 1, OIDAC Europe documented six arson and attempted arson attacks on churches in Europe.

AUTHOR

Eireann Van Natta

General assignment reporter.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Authorities Search For Answers As France’s Classic Churches Keep Burning Down

Macron Strikes Faustian Bargain With Far-Left To Keep French Right Out Of Power

Olympics Takes Down Opening Ceremony Videos Starring Drag Queens Mocking Christianity

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

The Knife Did It!

/in , , , , , , , , , , /by

Germany Chancellor Olof Scholz is calling for greater “knife control.”

That’s right. When a Syrian Muslim illegal migrant slashed the throats of several middle aged Germans at a “diversity festival” recently, it was the fault of the knife, not the Muslim.

We’ve seen this movie before.

Now the German government wants to ban German citizens — who, let’s remember, weren’t the ones on a slashing spree — from carrying knives over 2.4 inches long. That’s down from the current ban on knives over 4.5 inches.

I wonder, will the German police start frisking German citizens to test the size of their concealed knives? What other concealed parts will they also begin to measure?

I can just about guarantee you that they won’t be measuring those Muslim “migrants” for anything, let alone the size of their Korans. That would be racist and discriminatory.

Instead, let’s have more “knife control.”

Perhaps the Chancellor should leave his kitchen knives lined up outside his bedroom door to see what crimes they will commit overnight? (But perhaps he doesn’t dare to….)

Also this week, Pope Francis called on governments around the world to welcome migrants, because it was the right thing to do. I guess he failed to consult with Cardinal Fernando Vérgez Alzaga, who as president of the Pontifical Commission for the Vatican City State, actually runs the Vatican and has authority over its immigration laws.

There are currently 618 citizens of the Vatican, and a total of 764 residents. To protect them, Cardinal Alzaga retains 104 Swiss Guards, and another 130 gendarmes tasked with ensuring “internal security.”

Don’t get me wrong. I’m not saying the Pope shouldn’t be protected better than former president Donald Trump. But I don’t want to live in a country where every third person is an armed agent of the government.

Even the family members of the Vatican’s Mercenary Army don’t get to keep their citizenship forever. Once their children turn 18, they become stateless.

How’s that for Christian charity?

You’ll be relieved to note that another week has gone by without a major regional war in the Middle East, just your average bombings and missile strikes and Israeli raids to catch terrorists plotting to kill Jews. Meanwhile, the International Atomic Energy Agency tells us that the Iranian regime continues to enrich uranium to 60%, which is essentially weapons-grade.

I’m sure you will be especially relieved to learn that Kamala Harris’s presumed Secretary of State nominee, Philip Gordon, helped negotiate the failed 2015 Iran nuclear deal and has co-authored opeds with members of the pro-Tehran lobby in Washington, DC. More about that in my upcoming book, The Iran House.

But hey, no one cares until Labor Day, right?

Until then, I remain yours in freedom,

©2024. Kenneth R. Timmerman. All rights reserved.

RELATED VIDEO: Comrade Kamala, “With a stroke of my pen I could have someone arrested.”

I discuss these and more in my weekly segment on geopolitics on Prophecy Today Weekend. As always, you can listen live at 1 PM on Saturday on 104.9 FM of 550 AM in the Jacksonville, Florida area, or by using the Jacksonville Way Radio app. Or listen to the podcast later.

U.S. military bases in Europe put on heightened alert, jihad attacks on personnel or installations ‘likely’

/in , , , , /by

Not that any Biden regime officials mentioned “jihad,” of course, but that’s why the bases are on heightened alert. Contrary to all the rhetoric from regime top dogs, the threat isn’t coming from “right wing extremists.”

Europe Military Bases Go on Heightened Alert as Pentagon Officials Cite Olympics, Euro Cup

by Konstantin Toropin, Military.com, July 1, 2024:

U.S. military bases across Europe were put on heightened alert over the weekend due to concerns that terrorist activity or attacks on personnel or installations are “likely,” according to an Army explanation of the threat level.

However, Pentagon officials said Monday that the move to put all Europe bases on the second-highest alert status was not done out of any specific threat but rather an abundance of caution, given several major public events happening over the summer on the continent, including the Euro Cup soccer tournament and the Olympics.

“It was due to a combination of factors potentially impacting the safety and security of service members stationed in the European theater,” Sabrina Singh, Pentagon spokeswoman, told reporters Monday. “I’m not going to get into more specifics on the intelligence itself, but it’s not a single threat — it’s a combination of different factors.”

Stars and Stripes was the first outlet to report that over the weekend U.S. European Command ordered bases on the continent to force protection condition “Charlie” — the second-highest state out of five.

Army websites say that that condition is imposed when there is intelligence that suggests “some form of terrorist action or targeting against personnel or facilities is likely.”…

Continue reading.

AUTHOR

ROBERT SPENCER

RELATED ARTICLES:

How One Israeli Peace Activist Changed Her Mind

Israel: Muslim stabs two off-duty Israeli soldiers at shopping mall, killing one

Texas: Imam tells Muslims to stop using WhatsApp, as it passes info on to the IDF

Why Can Heathrow Arab-Language Staff Wear Flags of Palestine While On Duty?

Iranians: ‘No to Islam, no to Qur’an’

Geert Wilders’ Party Takes Over Dutch Immigration Ministry

Muslim Terrorists Unveil World’s First Suicide Baby

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Geert Wilders Represents the Rescue of Europe from Socialist Open-borders Disasters

/in , , , , , , , , /by

The drift of European countries away from the failed immigration policies of their socialist predecessors reached the Netherlands with the election of Geert Wilders as their new leader.

Wilders will lead a coalition of four parties with a clear agenda of sweeping away the disastrous results of an open border that has flooded the Netherlands with a mass migration from the Middle East. That in turn has brought lawlessness from the rising migrant count leaving the silent majority exposed to behavior that they objected to with their votes.

Wilders announced that his country is in an asylum crisis which requires stronger border controls and internal changes.

The Netherlands will opt out of the E.U. open border asylum system.

It will introduce a tougher approach to terrorism including local street terrorism. That will include deporting criminal migrants in order to make life safer for the Dutch people.

Wilders announced that he will set his country on a new course based on “Hope, Courage and National Pride.”

Geert Wilders is also a longtime friend of Israel. He has announced that he will move his country’s embassy to Jerusalem.

©2024. Barry Shaw. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLE: Report: 84% of Chicago’s Measles Cases Traced to Venezuelan Migrants

RELATED VIDEO: Tom Trento Interviews Geert Wilders on January 20, 2009

Today’s Anti-Capitalists Want to Regulate What You Can Eat, How Often You Drive, and the Size of Your Home

/in , , , , , , , /by

It may sound cruel to say so, but such thinking closely mirrors that of the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia.

Planned economics is enjoying yet another revival. Climate protection advocates and anti-capitalists are demanding that capitalism be abolished and replaced with a planned economy.

Otherwise, they claim, humanity has no chance of survival.

In Germany, a book called Das Ende des Kapitalismus (English: The End of Capitalism) is a bestseller and its author, Ulrike Hermann, has become a regular guest on all the talk shows. She openly promotes a planned economy, although this has already failed once in Germany—just like everywhere else it has been tried.

Unlike under classical socialism, in a planned economy, companies are not nationalized, they are allowed to remain in private hands. But it is the state that specifies precisely what and how much is produced.

There would be no more flights and no more private motor vehicles. The state would determine almost every facet of daily life—for example, there would no longer be any single-family houses and no one would be allowed to own a second home. New construction would be banned because it is harmful to the environment. Instead, existing land would be distributed “fairly,” with the state deciding how much space is appropriate for each individual. And the consumption of meat would only be allowed as an exception because meat production is harmful to the climate.

In general, people should not eat so much: 2,500 calories a day are enough, says Herrmann, who proposes a daily intake of 500 grams of fruit and vegetables, 232 grams of whole meal cereals or rice, 13 grams of eggs, and 7 grams of pork.

“At first glance, this menu may seem a bit meager, but Germans would be much healthier if they changed their eating habits,” reassures this critic of capitalism. And since people would be equal, they would also be happy: “Rationing sounds unpleasant. But perhaps life would even be more pleasant than it is today, because justice makes people happy.”

Such ideas are by no means new. The popular Canadian critic of capitalism and globalization, Naomi Klein, admits that she initially had no particular interest in climate change. Then, in 2014, she wrote a hefty 500-page tome called This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs. the Climate.

Why did she suddenly become so interested?

Well, prior to writing this book, Klein’s main interest was the fight against free trade and globalization. She says quite openly: “I was propelled into a deeper engagement with it partly because I realized it could be a catalyst for forms of social and economic justice in which I already believed.” She calls for a “carefully planned economy” and government guidelines on “how often we drive, how often we fly, whether our food has to be flown to get to us, whether the goods we buy are built to last … how large our homes are.” She also embraces a suggestion that the most well-off 20 percent of the population should accept the largest cuts in order to create a fairer society.

These quotes – to which many more such statements in Klein’s book could be added – confirm that the most important goal of anti-capitalists such as Herrmann and Klein is not to improve the environment or find solutions for climate change. Their real goal is to eliminate capitalism and establish a state-run, planned economy. In reality, this would involve the abolition of private property, even if, technically, property rights continued to exist. Because all that would be left is the formal legal title of ownership. The “entrepreneur” would still own his factory, but what and how much it produces would be decided by the state alone. He would become an employed manager of the state.

The biggest mistake planned-economy advocates have always made was believing in the illusion that an economic order could be planned on paper; that an authority could sit at a desk and come up with the ideal economic order. All that would be left to do would be to convince enough politicians to implement the economic order in the real world. It may sound cruel, but the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia also thought that way.

The most radical socialist experiment in history, which took place in Cambodia in the mid to late 1970s, was originally conceived in the universities of Paris. This experiment, which the Khmer Rouge leader Pol Pot (also referred to as “Brother 1”) called the “Super Great Leap Forward,” in honor of Mao’s Great Leap Forward, is most revealing because it offers an extreme demonstration of the belief that a society can be artificially constructed on the drawing board.

Today, it is often claimed that Pol Pot and his comrades wanted to implement a puritan form of “primitive communism,” and their rule is painted as a manifestation of unrestrained irrationality. In fact, this couldn’t be further from the truth. The Khmer Rouge’s masterminds and leaders were intellectuals from upstanding families, who had studied in Paris and were members of the French Communist Party. Two of the masterminds, Khieu Samphan and Hu Nim, had written Marxist and Maoist dissertations in Paris. In fact, the intellectual elite who had studied in Paris occupied almost all of the government’s leading positions after the seizure of power.

They had worked out a detailed Four-Year Plan that listed all the products the country would need in exacting detail (needles, scissors, lighters, cups, combs, etc.). The level of specificity was highly unusual, even for a planned economy. For example, it said, “Eating and drinking are collectivized. Dessert is also collectively prepared. Briefly, raising the people’s living standards in our own country means doing it collectively. In 1977, there are to be two desserts per week. In 1978 there is one dessert every two days. Then in 1979, there is one dessert every day, and so on. So people live collectively with enough to eat; they are nourished with snacks. They are happy to live in this system.”

The party, the sociologist Daniel Bultmann writes in his analysis, “planned the lives of the population as if on a drawing board, fitting them into pre-determined spaces and needs.” Everywhere, gigantic irrigation systems and fields were to be built to a uniform, rectilinear model. All regions were subjected to the same targets, as the Party believed that standardized conditions in fields of exactly the same size would also produce standardized yields. With the new irrigation system and the checkerboard rice fields, nature was to be harnessed to the utopian reality of a fully-collectivist order that eliminated inequality from day one.

Yet the arrangement of irrigation dams in equal squares with equally square fields in their center led to frequent floods, because the system totally ignored natural water flows, and 80 percent of the irrigation systems did not work—in the same way that the small blast furnaces did not work in Mao’s Great Leap Forward.

Throughout history, capitalism has evolved, just as languages have evolved. Languages were not invented, constructed, and conceived, but are the result of uncontrolled spontaneous processes. Although the aptly named “planned language” Esperanto was invented as early as 1887, it has completely failed to establish itself as the world’s most widely spoken foreign language, as its inventors had expected.

Socialism has much in common with a planned language, a system devised by intellectuals. Its adherents strive to gain political power in order to then implement their chosen system. None of these systems have ever worked anywhere—but this apparently does not stop intellectuals from believing that they have found the philosopher’s stone and have finally devised the perfect economic system in their ivory tower. It is pointless to discuss ideas like Herrmann’s or Klein’s in detail because the whole constructivist approach—i.e. the idea that an author can “dream up” an economic system in their heads or on paper—is wrong.

The historian and sociologist Rainer Zitelmann is the author of the book IN DEFENCE OF CAPITALISM which is being published in 30 languages.

AUTHOR

Dr. Rainer Zitelmann

Dr. Rainer Zitelmann is a historian and sociologist. He is also a world-renowned author, successful businessman, and real estate investor. Zitelmann has written more than 20 books. His books are successful all around the world, especially in China, India, and South Korea. His most recent books are The Rich in Public Opinion which was published in May 2020, and The Power of Capitalism which was published in 2019.

RELATED ARTICLE: New Hampshire Bakery Ordered to Remove Mural Because It Depicts Pastries

EDITORS NOTE: This FEE column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Political and Scientific Censorship Short-circuits the Quest for Truth

/in , , , , , , , /by

Those who seek to streamline online discourse, according to “official standards”, end up impoverishing public debate.

Over the course of the past decade, numerous regulatory authorities, both public and private, have increasingly positioned themselves as guardians of the integrity of our public sphere, standing watch over the content of information, and flagging or suppressing information deemed to be harmful, misleading, or offensive.

The zeal with which these gatekeepers defend their power over the public sphere became evident when billionaire Elon Musk promised to undo Twitter’s policy of censoring anything that contradicted leftist ideology or questioned the safety of Covid vaccines. There was an uproar, a wringing of hands, and lamentations, as “experts worried” that Twitter would collapse into a den of “far right” extremists and misinformers.

Sound and fury

Threats by the EU Commission to fine Twitter or even completely ban the app in Europe, if it did not enforce EU regulations on hate speech and misinformation, show that the hand-wringing over Twitter’s potential embrace of free speech is much more than empty rhetoric: the European Commission has declared its intention to force Twitter to revert to its old censorship policies if it does not play ball. According to Euronews,

The European Commission has warned Elon Musk that Twitter must do much more to protect users from hate speech, misinformation and other harmful content, or risk a fine and even a ban under strict new EU content moderation rules.

Thierry Breton, the EU’s commissioner for digital policy, told the billionaire Tesla CEO that the social media platform will have to significantly increase efforts to comply with the new rules, known as the Digital Services Act, set to take effect next year.

Censorship has recently occurred principally on two fronts: Covid “misinformation” and “hate speech.” Some forms of censorship are applied by agencies of the State, such as courts and police officers; others by private companies, such as Twitter, LinkedIn and Google-YouTube. The net effect is the same in both cases: an increasingly controlled and filtered public sphere, and a shrinking of liberty of discussion around a range of topics deemed too sensitive or “dangerous” to be discussed openly and freely.

Censorship, whether public or private, has proliferated in recent years:

  • First, there was Canada’s bizarre claim that people had an enforceable human right to be referred to by their preferred pronouns
  • Next, UK police were investigating citizens for using language the police deemed “offensive”
  • Then, we saw Big Tech giants, in particular Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube, censoring perspectives that dissented from their version of scientific and moral orthodoxy on issues such as transgender rights, vaccine safety, effective Covid treatment protocols, and the origins of SARS-CoV-2.

Now, advocates of censorship have argued that it is all to the good that vile, hateful and discriminatory opinions, as well as every conceivable form of medical and scientific “misinformation,” are shut out of our public sphere. After all, this makes the public sphere a “safe” place for citizens to exchange information and opinions. On this view, we need to purge the public sphere of voices that are toxic, hateful, harmful, and “misleading” on issues like electoral politics, public health policies, and minority rights.

Thin ice

While there is a strong case to be made for censorship of certain forms of manifestly dangerous speech, such as exhortations to suicide or direct incitement to violence, the hand of the censor must be firmly tied behind his back, so that he cannot easily decide for everyone else what is true or false, just or unjust, “accurate” or “misleading”, innocent or offensive.

For once you hand broad, discretionary powers to someone to decide which sorts of speech are offensive, erroneous, misleading, or hate-inducing, they will start to purge the public sphere of views they happen to find ideologically, philosophically, or theologically disagreeable. And there is certainly no reason to assume that their judgement calls on what counts as true or false, innocent or toxic speech will be correct.

The fundamental mistake behind the argument for aggressive censorship policies is the notion that there is a set of Truths out there on contested political and scientific questions that are crystal clear or can be validated by the “right experts”; and that anyone who contradicts these a priori Truths must be either malicious or ignorant. If this were true, the point of public discussion would just be to clarify and unpack what the “experts” agree are the Truths of science and morality.

But there is no such set of pristine Truths that can be validated by human beings independently of a free and open discussion, especially on difficult and complex matters such as infection control, justice, climate change, and economic policy. Rather, the truth must be discovered gradually, through the vibrant back-and-forth of dialogue, debate, refutation, and counter-refutation. In short, public deliberation is fundamentally a discovery process. The truth is not known in advance, but uncovered gradually, as an array of evidence is examined and put to the test, and as rival views clash and hold each other accountable.

If we empower a censor to quash opinions that are deemed by powerful actors to be offensive, false, or misleading, we are effectively short-circuiting that discovery process. When we put our faith in a censor to keep us on the straight and narrow, we are assuming that the censor can stand above the stream of conflicting arguments, and from a position of epistemic and/or moral superiority, pick out the winning positions in advance.

We are assuming that some people are so smart, or wise, or virtuous, that they do not actually need to get their hands dirty and participate in a messy argument with their adversaries, or get their views challenged in public. We are assuming that some people are more expert and well-informed than anyone else, including other recognised experts, and may therefore decide, for everyone else, which opinions are true and which are false, which are intrinsically offensive and which are “civil,” and which are “facts” and which are “fake news.”

Needless to say, this is an extraordinarly naïve and childish illusion, that no realistic grasp of human nature and cognition could possibly support. But it is a naive and childish illusion that has been enthusiastically embraced and propagated by Big Tech companies such as Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn in their rules of content moderation, and it is a view that is increasingly finding its way into the political discourse and legislative programmes of Western countries that were once champions of freedom of expression.

It is imperative that the advocates of heavy-handed censorship do not win the day, because if they do, then the public sphere will become a hall of mirrors, in which the lazy, self-serving mantras of a few powerful actors bounce, virtually unchallenged, from one platform to another, while dissenting voices are consigned to the shadows and dismissed as the rantings of crazy people.

In a heavily censored public sphere, scientifically weak and morally vacuous views of the world will gain public legitimacy, not because they have earned people’s trust in an open and honest exchange of arguments, but because they have been imposed by the arbitrary will of a few powerful actors.

This article has been republished from David Thunder’s Substack, The Freedom Blog.

AUTHOR

David Thunder

David Thunder is a researcher and lecturer at the University of Navarra’s Institute for Culture and Society. More by David Thunder

RELATED VIDEO: Lib Gets OWNED When GOP Rep. Uses Her Own Testimony Against Her In Real-Time

EDITORS NOTE: This MercatorNet column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Europe To Rely More On Coal As Natural Gas Demand Fades

/in , , , /by

Gas-to-coal switching. 

Europe is set to rely more heavily on coal production in 2022 as liquified natural gas demand decreases due to heightened tensions with Russia, according to an International Energy Agency (IEA) report published Monday.

Natural gas demand across Europe is expected to decline by 4% compared to 2021, according to the IEA report. Coal demand is expected to continue to increase even after consumption of the fossil fuel surged 11% last year.

“Gas-fired power generation is expected to decline amid the strong expansion of renewables, while high gas prices continue to weigh on its competitiveness vis-à-vis coal-fired generation,” the report said.

European gas prices hit multiple record highs over the last several months as demand increased and Russia, the largest exporter of natural gas to Europe, abruptly altered flows into the continent. Overall, European gas demand increased about 5.5% last year, the IEA report said.

The spike in demand largely resulted from declining energy output from wind farms in Germany, which has led an aggressive push toward renewables.

But the higher prices led to greater reliance on coal, from which nations have attempted to distance themselves due to its high carbon emissions when burned.

“Record-high gas prices supported gas-to-coal switching, coal-fired power plants increasing their output by 20% (year-over-year),” the IEA said.

The U.S. power sector also turned back to coal beginning in December 2020 when demand spiked 8%, the IEA report said. Between January 2021 and October 2021, demand skyrocketed 19% relative to the same period in 2020.

Coal-powered electricity generation increased for the first time since 2014 in 2021, according to the Energy Information Administration.

COLUMN BY

THOMAS CATENACCI

Energy and environment reporter. Follow Thomas on Twitter

RELATED ARTICLE: ANALYSIS: Biden’s Nord Stream 2 Move Opens The Door To A Russian Invasion Into Ukraine

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

After Iran occupies Syria, it will destroy Europe and North America

/in , , , /by

There is a long term plan at work here aimed at destroying the West and it can work.

Iran and Russia plan to destroy Western Europe, the U.S. and Canada by means of a new wave of millions of Syrian Sunnis fleeing to the West to escape the Shiite takeover of Syria.

In my weekly column two months ago, I claimed that Iran is the real victor in the Syrian civil war. Using the war against ISIS as a smokescreen, it is taking over large swathes of Syrian territory, mainly in the scarcely populated middle and eastern parts of the country. In the more fertile and densely populated west of Syria, there are Iraqi, Afghan, and Iranian Shiite militias augmenting Lebanese Hezbollah fighters who were given carte blanche to do whatever Hassan Nasrallah decides to do there.

Assad’s strength continues to increase as ISIS and the other rebel forces lose ground. The brutality of Russian involvement and the cruelty of Shiite militias overcame the anti-Assad forces, the turning point occurring when in 2015, Turkey’ s Erdogan was forced by Russia to cease his aid to the rebels and ISIS. Today, although Erdogan is an unwilling ally of Russia, Alawite Assad still sees him, justifiably, as an Islamist enemy.

The Kurds of northeast Syria, treated as below third class citizens until 2011, will never agree to live under Arab mercy once again and it is reasonable to assume that should Syria remain an undivided country under Assad’s rule, the Kurds will preserve relative autonomy in their region – or fight the regime for their rights.

That is certainly a problem, but the main issue facing a united Syria is going to be the drastic demographic changes the country is going to face.

First of all, about half of Syria’s citizens – close to 10 million – are refugees, half located in Syria and the other half in Jordan, Turkey, Lebanon, other Arab countries, Europe, North and South America, Australia and even Israel. Syrian refugees who reached points outside the Arab world will in all probability stay put, benefiting from the secure and orderly lives they can now lead. On the other hand, the 3.5 million now in Jordan, Lebanon and Turkey are awaiting the end of hostilities in order to return to their homes.

Those expectations may be dashed, however, because Syrian reality is totally changed, and large parts of its cities are in ruins after six and a half years of a cruel and bloody war. Countless bombs dropped from planes and helicopters, artillery and tank barrages, mines and explosives planted by both sides have made much of urban Syria, where most of the fighting took place, unsafe to live in. In Homs, Aleppo, Adlib, Hamat and many other cities, entire neighborhoods will have to be razed and their infrastructure rebuilt from scratch.

Decades and billions of dollars are needed to rebuild the country and I, for one, do not see the world’s nations standing on line to donate the necessary funds. Refugees will not agree to switch their tents in Jordan for ruined buildings lacking basic infrastructure in a desolate and destroyed Syria.

The other reason the refugees will not return is their justified fear of the new lords of the land – the Shiites. Iran has been moving Shiites from Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan to Syria for a long time in a clear attempt to change the demographic makeup of the country from the Sunni majority it had before the civil war broke out in 2011. The issue could not be more clear because it is no secret that the pre-civil war Sunni majority considered the Alawite rulers heretic idol worshippers who had no right to live in Syria, much less rule over it.

The Alawites know well that the Sunnis rebelled against them twice: The first time was from 1976 to 1982, a rebellion that took the lives of 50,000 citizens. The second time, slowly drawing to an end, has cost the lives of half a million men, women, children and aged citizens of Syria. The Alawites intend to prevent a third rebellion and the best way to do that is to change the majority of the population to Shiites instead of Sunnis. They will not allow the Sunni refugees to return to their homes, leaving them eternal refugees whose lands have been taken over by the enemy. Iran, meanwhile, will populate Syria with Shiites from Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan.

This ethnic cleansing is the Ayatollah’s dream come true, the dream that sees a Shiite crescent drawn from Iran through Iraq and Syria to Lebanon and the Mediterranean Sea. This will cover the eastern Arab world from the north, while the war in Yemen is being fought in order to create a parallel southern crescent, entrapping Saudi Arabia and Jordan between the two. With the help of Allah, both those countries and Israel, the Small Satan, will soon fall into the hands of the Shiites, while Europe and America do nothing because who cares when Muslims fight other Muslims?

The Shiite majority in Syria will play along with Lebanon’s Hezbollah, their natural allies, and it is possible that some form of federation might be created between the two in order to push the Lebanese Christians out of the picture, “persuading” them to flee to other countries, leaving Lebanon to its “rightful” Shiite masters. This explains Nasrallah’s eager willingness to fight on Syrian soil as well as the opposition of those against Nasrallah to his involvement there.

The new demographic situation in Syria will convince the Sunni refugees that they have no place to which to return. They will try their best to be allowed to leave Jordan, Lebanon and Turkey for any country, preferably North America and Europe, willing to allow them entry. I predict a process that is the exact opposite of the one the world expects to take place when “peace” breaks out in Syria: Instead of refugees returning to their birthplace, expect the mass flight of Sunni refugees from the region, and expect a heightened incidence of Islamist terror in the countries that allow them in.

The reasons are obvious:

1. Former ISIS and rebel forces will infiltrate along with the refugees, because they, too, are Sunni. They are filled with fury and hatred for the Western countries who were part of the coalition that fought ISIS or stood by without aiding the rebels. Some of them will continue their Jihad on European and North American soil. Expect shootings, explosives and ramming attacks against citizens of these countries.

2. Some of the refugees will not find work and live on the economic and social fringes of society, in poverty-stricken Islamist neighborhoods which have already existed for years in many European cities, and where the local police fear to tread. Poverty and life on the fringe of society will turn some of the Muslim young people into easy prey for terrorist organization recruiters who arouse the desire for Jihad by describing the accepting host countries as decadent societies infected with permissiveness, prostitution, alcohol, drugs, materialism and corruption. They present the countries that allowed the immigrants entry as having done so to take advantage of them as industrial slaves, garage hands, cashiers and other degrading occupations, while the privileged citizens are lawyers, accountant, businessmen and homeowners w ho take advantage of the migrants in humiliating ways. It is only a matter of time until young Muslims, especially those who were taught that “everyone is equal” in Western schools, enlist in terrorist organizations.

3. Countries which allow in refugees will suffer a higher crime rate as a result, including violence in public places, sexual attacks and harassment, housebreaking, car theft, substance abuse, unreported work to avoid paying taxes and illegal construction. This will all occur at the same time these countries expend a larger part of their budgets on social services for the refugees, from child allowances to unemployment, health and old age benefits. At this point in time, the percentage of second and third generation immigrants populating the prisons in Western Europe is significantly larger than their percentage in the general population.

4. Increased economic, social and security problems in Europe and North America as a result of the rise in the number of migrants will lead to a rise in the strength of the right and the extreme right. This will in turn lead to more social tensions in the West. Members of Parliament whose only wish is to be re-elected will adapt their parliamentary activity – especially the laws they promote – to the expectations of the rapidly Islamizing constituencies, sacrificing their own people’s interests on the altar of their political careers. Many Europeans, aware of their elected leaders’ betrayal, will despair and leave those socially and economically deteriorating countries. This will increase the rate at which Europe turns into an Islamic region.

And that is how the agreements Iran and Russia will soon coerce Syria into accepting are going to start a chain reaction increasing the number of refugees and pulling Europe down to a point of no return, without the world understanding what is going on. The Atlantic Ocean is not wide enough to protect North America from this debacle crossing the sea.

This is how the Iranian Ayatollahs intend to destroy the heretic, permissive, drunk and materialistic West. More of the unfortunate Syrian millions will find themselves exiled to the heretic countries hated by the Ayatollahs, and Iran will operate from Syrian soil to vanquish Europe and America.

Written in Hebrew for Arutz Sheva, translated by Rochel Sylvetsky, Senior Consultant and op-ed editor of Arutz Sheva English site.

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is a of Iran’s national flags are seen on a square in Tehran February 10, 2012, a day before the anniversary of the Islamic Revolution. REUTERS/Morteza Nikoubazl/File Photo.

Muslims at the Hajj are worried about Donald Trump and his policies

/in , , , , /by

…..but, not a word about the responsibility of Muslims to rein-in their terrorist element.

Screenshot (808)

These Hajj Muslims seem to think our concern about Muslim migration is completely lacking in any rational calculation. Don’t miss Raheem Kassam’s good report on Islamic terrorism attacks in ‘welcoming’ Europe and how more Americans need to wake up.  …And, here they are in Saudi Arabia which will never let them stay and become citizens of that Muslim country!

Victims, always victims!

Reuters:

MECCA/RIYADH (Reuters) – Even at Islam’s holiest sites and during the most sacred time of year for Muslims, some people cannot stop talking about Donald Trump.

Among one group of American, Canadian and British pilgrims in Mecca this week for the annual haj, the U.S. president and policies they say target Muslims and immigrants are a regular conversation topic.

“People are irritated, angry, somber, a little bit worried,” said Yasir Qadhi, an Islamic scholar who traveled from Tennessee for his fourteenth pilgrimage.

Haj

“No one that I know is happy at the current circumstances or the current administration. No one, not a single person in this entire gathering.”

As a candidate, Trump proposed barring Muslims from entering the United States. In office, he ordered temporary bans on people from several Muslim-majority countries, which have been blocked by courts that ruled they were discriminatory.

His administration has denied any intention of religious discrimination in the travel ban, saying it is intended purely as a national security measure.

But sharp rhetoric about the threat posed by “radical Islam” which was a central part of his campaign has also drawn accusations he risks alienating more than three million Americans who practise Islam peacefully. [So where are the peaceful Muslims standing up at the Haj to to speak against and discourage the violent ones?—ed]

Many American Muslims say his stance has fueled an atmosphere in which some may feel they can voice prejudices or attack Muslims without fear of retribution.

‘STOP ATTACKING ISLAM’

Reuters apparently didn’t find anyone to speak up against their own terrorist element, but they found this guy!

Baha al-Deen, a pilgrim from ex-Soviet Georgia, said any labeling of Muslims as terrorists should stop.

“God gave us minds and tongues so we can understand each other and talk about our problems,” he said. “Otherwise we will fight like animals.”

Oh, that is going to inspire communication—NOT!

More here.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Trump Administration has kept refugee flow relatively low, but real test coming

Here is what the ‘Refugee Act of 1980’ says the President and Congress must do right now…

New Charleston, WV refugee resettlement office will not open

What about America’s own refugees!

Moroccan Muslim asylum seeker was targeting women, slashing their throats

/in , , , , , , /by

“Then a person ran towards us shouting ‘He has a knife’, and everybody from the terrace ran inside. Next, a woman came in to the cafe. She was crying hysterically, down on her knees, saying someone’s neck has been slashed open.” – A witness

Surely you know what happened in Finland on the heals of Barcelona, but here from Reuters we get more facts on the killer and the poor innocent women who were sadly in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Over the years we have written a few posts on Finland, but it isn’t as easily accessible (or slovenly welcoming) as other Scandinavian countries like Sweden and Norway.

This Reuters story is surprisingly unrestrained and relatively free of whitewash (or is that because those quoted weren’t pulling punches and speaking in politically correct terms?):

HELSINKI/TURKU, Finland (Reuters) – Finnish police said on Saturday that an 18-year-old Moroccan man, arrested after a knife rampage that killed two people and wounded eight, appeared to have targeted women and that the spree was being treated as the country’s first terrorism-related attack.

Finland’s loss of innocence. Photo: Inquirer.

The suspect arrested following the attack on Friday after being shot in the leg by police in the city of Turku had arrived in Finland last year, police said. They said they later arrested four other Moroccan men over possible links to him and had issued an international arrest warrant for a sixth Moroccan national.

Finnish broadcaster MTV, citing an unnamed source, said the main suspect had been denied asylum in Finland. The police said only that he had been “part of the asylum process”.

The case marks the first suspected terror attack in Finland, where violent crime is relatively rare.

“The suspect’s profile is similar to that of several other recent radical Islamist terror attacks that have taken place in Europe,” Director Antti Pelttari from the Finnish Security Intelligence Service told a news conference.

[….]

Both of those killed in the Turku attack, and six of the eight who were wounded, were women, the police said. The two who died were Finns, and an Italian and two Swedish citizens were among the injured.

Ville Tavio (Finns party): Asylum system is primary means of entry for terrorists.

“It seems that the suspect chose women as his targets, because the men who were wounded were injured when they tried to help, or prevent the attacks,” said Crista Granroth from the National Bureau of Investigation.

“The act was cowardly … we have been afraid of this and we have prepared for this. We are not an island anymore, the whole of Europe is affected,” Prime Minister Juha Sipila said. [Well, maybe not Poland and Hungary that have closed their borders to Muslim migration!—ed]

[….]

Some members of the nationalist Finns party, which was kicked out of the government in June for their new hard-line anti-immigration leadership, blamed the government for what they said was too loose an immigration policy.

“The asylum system is the primary road for illegal immigration, used also by the terrorists. Harmful immigration can be controlled only by reducing Finland’s attractiveness, or by border controls,” said Finns party lawmaker Ville Tavio.

Much, much more here.

What is asylum? (As opposed to refugee resettlement)

In the refugee resettlement process, wannabe refugees must prove they are persecuted, the UN screens them (supposedly!) and a country accepts them and flies them in.

For asylum, the wannabe refugee makes his or her way to a ‘safe’ country and then applies for asylum (or often called political asylum). They are supposed to make a case that they would be persecuted if returned home. Europe is dealing with mostly asylum seekers (many are phony and are really economic migrants) who are basically loose in the country until their cases can be processed.

And, are often loose because they have been rejected and no one has made them leave!

So, it is a misnomer when you hear the Left and political leaders refer to asylum seekers as refugees. They are not legitimate refugees until their cases have been processed and the governmental body responsible has granted them asylum.

See my Finland files here. Invasion of Europe archive is here.

RELATED ARTICLE: Syrians struggling with basic needs in Edmonton, Canada