Month: February 2022
France: Aurélie, who miraculously survived 59 stabbings by Mohamed, who was ” hurt in his pride as an Algerian “, must pay the €32,000 outstanding rent of her ex-life partner – His lawyer warns against Islamophobia
Who is the man who stabbed his ex-girlfriend 59 times in the car park of a school in Toulon on December 13, 2017? Mohamed Meghraoui was sentenced to 30 years in prison on appeal on Friday.
The second trial in Aix-en-Provence allows insight into the motive of the family man found guilty of the “attempted murder” of Aurélie , the mother of their three children.
That day, the nurse went to pick up her youngest son from the kindergarten “Les Œillets”.
She had just buckled him into his car seat when she was stabbed several times. Miraculously, Aurélie survived her injuries.
“They were empty words from her,” defended the man for whom Aurélie had “accepted religious marriage and wearing the veil” .His lawyer, Pavel Debanne, warns the jury against xenophobic or Islamophobic prejudices.(…) Nice Matin
Overrepresentation of and favoritism toward Muslims in the Scottish arts world
SICKENING Failed 📻 Dopes Harry & Meghan BLACKMAIL Spotify To Silence Free Speech & Sack Joe Rogan
Germany: Islamist mad driver who wanted to kill as many people as possible once again meets with a lenient judge
After a mad drive on the A100 motorway with several people seriously injured, the Berlin Regional Court ordered the further placement of the accused in a psychiatric hospital.
The presiding judge justified the decision on Monday, saying that the man had acted out of a pathological mania. The man, who had acted while incapable of contracting guilt, continued to pose a high risk to the general public due to a serious illness.
The Iraqi is alleged to have first rammed his car into several vehicles and then hit three motorcyclists on the Berlin city motorway in August 2020.
“He intended to kill accidental victims,” the senior prosecutor’s plea said. The 31-year-old drove at breakneck speed and “deliberately hunted down motorcyclists” with his car.
Legally, these three cases are to be considered attempted murder. Some of the victims had suffered life-threatening injuries and are still suffering physically and psychologically from the consequences.
“People were meant to die”, the judgement continued. An Islamist motivation had not been established. However, the man’s madness “contained religious and Islamist elements”.
Because the 31-year-old was not willing to take medication, he could “be expected to become acutely psychotic again at any time”. The court also imposed a five-year driving ban.
With the sentence, the judges essentially followed the motions of the representative of the Attorney General’s Office. The defence lawyers had argued against a further placement in the so-called “Maßregelvollzug”. The decision is not yet final.
Austrian Constitutional Court demands real Covid data from government
On Wednesday, the Austrian Constitutional Court sent the Ministry of Health a list of questions about the pandemic that the official media and their henchmen have considered taboo.
The Constitutional Court sent Austrian Health Minister Wolfgang Mückstein some questions about the alleged “burden on the health system”. The background is an ordinance review procedure regarding the Corona measures taken by the government in Vienna. The catalog of questions can only be described as explosive due to the political narrative that has been cultivated in the Alpine republic.
The court wanted to know if the figures for deaths and hospitalizations during the pandemic cover all infected people. The question points to the typical manipulation of the data confounding the dead and hospitalized “with Covid” or “from Covid” that has also been used in Austria. “If so, why was this counting method chosen?” the judges demanded.
In addition, the court wanted a breakdown of Covid deaths and hospitalizations, specified by age. Was Covid the cause of the hospitalizations? Had they unnecessarily hospitalized healthy people, due to a positive test exclusively?
Another set of questions was devoted to the effectiveness of wearing the so-called protective masks. Against the background of the spreading Omicron variant, Austria tightened restrictions at the beginning of January. These now also provide for wearing an FFP2 mask outdoors if the minimum distance, which has long been mandatory, cannot be maintained.
The constitutional judges wanted to know from the Minister of Health: “By what factor does wearing an FFP2 mask indoors or outdoors reduce the risk of infection or transmission?”
The Constitutional Court has calculated the risk of mortality “due to Covid” at 0,15 percent and demanded to know how the reduction in risk – absolute and relative – of vaccines should be understood. The Court wanted to know what the absolute risk reduction was after one, two or three injections. These questions underscore the doubt of the judges regarding the official propaganda that the vaccines have been 95 percent effective.
“What does a specified vaccination effectiveness of, for example, 95 percent refer to? What does absolute and relative risk reduction mean in this context?”
The Ministry of Health must also answer to what extent vaccination reduced the risk of contagion of the virus, since vaccinated people also transmit it, no matter how much official propaganda insists on claiming the opposite. “What is the risk of transmission in a person infected with SARS-CoV-2 with a second vaccination three, six or eight months ago compared to an unvaccinated person whose PCR test was negative 24 hours ago?”
In another section of questions, the Court wanted to know the risk of hospitalization after becoming ill and after vaccination, broken down by age groups and number of doses in order to highlight the side effects of vaccinations, which have so far also been ignored in Austria.
Another question that the Court posed was about the excess mortality in 2020 and 2021: Have there been fewer deaths in 2021 than the previous year and if, despite vaccination, was there still excess mortality?
In short, the Austrian Constitutional Court asked the questions that any person capable of thinking for himself, would like answered,
The Corona crisis has already lasted almost two years and Austria has distinguished itself by calling for the most extreme measures. The measures were justified by claiming that they would be the only way to avoid an excessive burden on the healthcare system and especially on hospitals filled with “Corona patients”.
Dissenting voices and questions about real data have so far been dismissed as inappropriate and reprehensible objections by “Covidiots” and “Corona deniers” to suffering and dying. Politicians had to stick to the advice of “science”. An open-ended discussion of critical questions or opposing positions in the struggle for the most appropriate policy was simply banned.
Many observers were therefore stunned in reading the Austrian Constitutional Court’s relevant questions almost two years after the start of the massive health crisis.
The 47-year-old Mückstein now has until February 18 to adequately answer the 10 questions that are as fundamental as they are detailed.
Just a few weeks ago, politicians and the media and government officials insisted on the “pandemic of the unvaccinated” and imposed a “lockdown for the unvaccinated” on November 15 last year.
From that day on, all residents over the age of twelve were only allowed to leave their own four walls for work or education, shopping for daily needs, visiting the doctor or for physical recreation without proof of their vaccination or recovery. According to a media report on January 15, Mückenstein was certain that “an early relaxation for the unvaccinated […] could quickly lead to an uncontrolled spread of the virus and to an overload of medical care facilities”.
For the judges, however, some questions remained unanswered in this context. By how many percentage points did the prescribed lockdown for the unvaccinated reduce “the risk of infection of an unvaccinated person”.
Are All Politicians Spineless Snakes? 🐍 Canada 🇨🇦 Fallen Trudeau Exposed Clips Slamming Truckers
French council slammed for €5.2 million taxpayer-funded facility to house young, unaccompanied migrants
A French municipal council has been criticized for the construction of a reception facility due to accommodate young, unaccompanied migrants, after it emerged the cost to taxpayers will be €5.2 million and it will only house 28 minors, less than half than originally planned.
Local officials defended the building of the child protection establishment in Vern-sur-Seiche, near Rennes on Monday evening at a council meeting.
Anne-Françoise Courteille, vice-president of the Ille-et-Vilaine Departmental Council and delegate for child protection, insisted that it is a “mandatory mission to meet the basic needs of a child,” and explained that in Ille-et-Vilaine alone, 743 isolated young people are cared for, including 358 minors and 385 young people under 22 years of age.
“They come from Morocco, Guinea, Côte d’Ivoire, Algeria, Afghanistan… and more than 97 percent of them are men,” she noted.
Initial proposals showed that the new facility would be equipped to accommodate 66 minors, with the local mayor learning of its drastically reduced capacity via the press back in November of last year.
As well as the economical cost to the council, the societal impact of accepting unaccompanied migrants was also considered at the meeting, with opposition politicians calling on other areas to take on their fair share.
“There should be a fairer distribution according to the population. Vern should accommodate six minors,” objected Laurence Mercier, departmental councilor, highlighting that local young people in need of assistance “would like to have identical conditions.”
Didier Moyon, the former mayor of the town insisted that the “mixing of societies is an opportunity.
“Welcoming refugees is a value that we have made ours,” he added.
Construction of the facility is expected to be completed in April.
Freedom convoys revving up in the Netherlands for ‘prelude to national action’
Dozens of trucks and tractors kicked off a series of freedom convoys in Leeuwarden on Sunday morning. The Dutch action is a follow-up to the Freedom Convoy in Canada with tens of thousands of truckers protesting against Corona measures.
In Zeeland, the activists gathered in the parking lot of the ANWB near Kapelle. After consultation with the police, the procession, the ‘Freedom Convoy Zeeland’, left for a tour through the province.
A procession of truckers and motorists also travelled on the busy A59. The convoy departed from the carpool area at Maarheeze to pass through the province of Brabant. The participants fear that they will lose their freedom and the vaccine will be used as a means of coercion. They carried banners stating “We are not an experiment”.
The IKEA in Zwolle was designated as the collection point for the Overijssel region. Via the Telegram group “Convoy NL Overijssel”, truck drivers were called upon to gather befor lunch for a tour of the province.
Truckers and sympathizers also made a tour through the province of Flevoland on Sunday afternoon as a protest against the Corona dictates. The group gathered around at the De Aalscholver parking lot along the A6.
A demonstration which started at 13:00 in Harselaar in Gelderland, drove through Stroe, Harskamp, Otterlo, Voorthuizen and Barneveld. In the course of the afternoon there were major traffic jams on the route.
The organization behind Convoy Nederland says that the provincial freedom convoys are the prelude to a national action, which should take place on February 7 when truckers will drive to the capital and from there to Brussels. The demonstrations are organized via Telegram groups, where tens of thousands of people have already registered in a few days.
The organisers of the Dutch convoy told broadcaster Ongehoord Nederland that everyone would be welcome to demonstrate. “We won’t allow people to be pigeonholed,” said the initiators. They emphasized that the action was a call on governments to respect the fundamental rights of citizens.
The truckers can look forward to a lot of support. “We must not forget how essential transport traffic is to our society. If these people no longer accept it, they [truckers] really have the power to change something,” said lawyer Raisa Blommestijn.
In the Netherlands, it’s “Civilized” to Empower Terrorists
by Bruce Bawer
Her name is Soumaya Sahla. Born in The Hague in 1983 to Moroccan immigrants (her father was the founder of a mosque in that city), she joined a jihadist terror organization, the Hofstad group, at a young age, and along with another member of the group, Noureddine el Fahtni, to whom she’d been married in an Islamic ceremony, acquired an Agram 2000 submachine gun, which they were reportedly planning to use, at the direction of the leaders of the Hofstad group, to kill various politicians. Among their intended victims were Geert Wilders, then a relatively new member of the Dutch lower house, the Tweede Kamer, who’d made a name for himself as a critic of the Islamization of the Netherlands, and the Somali-born Ayaan Hirsi Ali, who’d rejected her Muslim faith after 9/11 and been elected to the Tweede Kamer in 2002.
The year was 2005. The previous few years had been a busy time for assassination and assassination plots. On May 6, 2002, nine days before a general election from which he was expected to emerge as prime minister of the Netherlands, Pim Fortuyn had been murdered by an activist named Volkert van der Graaf who was appalled by his criticisms of Islam. In the summer of 2004, Sahla’s husband, Fahtni, had been arrested in Portugal on suspicion of planning to kill that country’s then prime minister, José Manuel Durão Barroso, but there had not been sufficient evidence to hold him. A few months later, on the morning of November 2, 2004, a fellow member of the Hofstad group, Mohammed Bouyeri, had slaughtered the celebrated writer and filmmaker Theo van Gogh – perhaps the Netherlands’ most prominent critic of Islam – on a busy street in Amsterdam.
Sahla and Fahtni’s plans, however, did not prove as successful as Bouyeri’s. On June 22, 2005, they were both arrested by Amsterdam police.
Fahtni ended up serving six months. Sahla spent nine years in and out of court. First, she was convicted by a Rotterdam court of illegally possessing weapons and of membership in a terrorist organization with the intent to commit murder. Later, the Court of Appeal in The Hague found her guilty, in addition, of planning to murder Wilders and others. In 2011, however, the Supreme Court annulled that ruling and transferred the case to the Amsterdam Court of Appeal, which in 2014 found Sahla guilty of membership in a terrorist organization and possession of firearms but not of intention to kill anybody. Although sentenced to three years, she didn’t have to spend any time in prison because of the time she’d already served in detention.
During that long trial period, Sahla had studied political science, African Studies, and Islamic theology. She’d also, curiously enough, become the protegée of Frits Bolkestein, a legendary figure in the center-right VVD (People’s Party for Freedom and Democracy). As the newspaper Het Parool put it the other day, Bolkestein “led her into the party” in 2011 – that is, while her case was still under adjudication – “unseen and without causing a fuss.” It’s been established that Bolkestein knew about her history. So did other VVD leaders. Not one of them, apparently, considered it a reason not to give her a responsible party position. Sahla began her career in the VVD as head of its deradicalization and terror group; as of the beginning of this year, she’d risen in the party ranks to become – simultaneously – head of the VVD’s security and justice division, chair of a party advisory committee on deradicalization and terror, and “right-hand” woman to Bolkestein.
It’s worth noting that the current head of the VVD, Mark Rutte, is also prime minister of the Netherlands, a position he has held since 2010.
Not until January 18 of this year did Sahla’s past become a problem. On that day, during a discussion in the Tweede Kamer, the lower house of the Dutch parliament, Wilders, who since 2006 has been head of the PVV (Freedom Party) and who since 2004 has had to live with round-the-clock security owing to jihadist death threats, raised the subject of Sahla, saying that someone who’d been issued a gun with which to kill him and Ayaan Hirsi Ali had no business in a leading position in the country’s ruling party. Wilders also mentioned Sahla’s sister Fonda, who, as it happens, is a politician for the centrist D66 and a colleague of Wilders’s in the Tweede Kamer, where she routinely wears a hijab.
Did representatives from other parties join Wilders in expressing outrage over the VVD’s employment of a woman who’d actively sought his death? No. They protested his bad manners. Rutte, obviously a man of exquisite sensitivity, said Wilders’s behavior had been uncivilized.
Still, the VVD knew this didn’t look good for them. On January 23, Claudia Kammer wrote in NRC Handelsblad that in the wake of Wilders’s criticism, VVD felt “ongemak” – discomfort – about her role in the party. (Not profound shame or self-disgust or a sense of mortification – discomfort.) On January 25, VVD was described as “embarrassed.” Part of the problem for the VVD was that Sahla had never really disavowed her terrorist history. On the contrary, in a 2019 interview with the newsmagazine Elsevier she’d called the long years of legal actions against her a “show trial.” It’s also relevant to note that in the last few years, when not seeing to her VVD duties, Sahla has been engaged in Ph.D. research, her objective being to determine whether “liberal Western thinking” is preferable to the “orthodox world view” of Islam. In other words, Sahla still doesn’t seem to have figured out whether she’s put the ideology of jihad behind her.
Well, she’ll have more time hereafter to ponder that question. On January 26, after a few days of intense intraparty debates, Sahla quit her position at the VVD – but not her party membership – and, for the first time, explicitly professed to regret her terrorist background. In an op-ed for NRC Handelsblad, Gerard Spong, a lawyer in Amsterdam, lamented her resignation, saying that Wilders had “overdramatized” the situation and criticizing both Wilders and VVD leaders for failing to recognize that “in a constitutional state, a convict who has served his/her sentence and who has been rehabilitated cannot be punished twice for a wrong step in the past.” Spong compared Sahla to Nelson Mandela: “He was also convicted of participating in a terrorist organization (the ANC). After 27 years in prison, he was released and for many years held South Africa’s highest office.”
NRC Handelsblad cartoonist Siegfried Woldhek, too, considered Sahla a victim of injustice. Naming her his “woman of the week,” he complained that “three years in prison and a public expression of regret were apparently insufficient for the VVD to want to keep her on.” In an angry op-ed, Andreas Kinneging, a professor of legal philosophy and Sahla’s Ph.D. supervisor, described her as the victim of “a witch hunt” of a kind that is unworthy of “a civilized country.” The editors of the daily newspaper Trouw stood up for her, too, insisting that in a country like the Netherlands people like Sahla deserved to get “a second chance.”
This coming May 6 will be the twentieth anniversary of the assassination of Pim Fortuyn, who promised to save the Netherlands from a process of Islamization that he viewed, quite rightly, as an existential threat to the individual liberty of which the Netherlands had been a beacon for centuries. Three years after Fortuyn’s death came the butchering of Theo van Gogh. Not long afterward, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, whose criticism of Islam was seen as particularly potent since she herself had been raised in the religion – was driven out of parliament and obliged to emigrate to the U.S. Since then, the struggle to preserve Dutch liberty in the face of the increasingly powerful Islamic enemy within has been led by Wilders, abetted, since 2017, by Thierry Baudet of the FvD (Forum for Democracy). But the progress made by Fortuyn two decades ago, and instantly lost by his murder, has never been recovered.
On the contrary, this beautiful little country which, two decades ago, seemed to be on the verge of a remarkable rescue from a nightmarish fate, has become steadily more Islamized – which has meant, among much else, violent crime (especially against Jews, gays, and women). It’s meant increased self-censorship and cultural appeasement. And it’s meant that Dutch citizens who have the same understanding of Islam that Fortuyn did twenty years ago are even more reviled by their nation’s elites than he was, and – as evinced by Wilders’s multiple prosecutions for hate speech – are subject to judicial punishment for voicing objective truths about the Religion of Peace.
Meanwhile, a former terrorist like Sahla has been able to walk the corridors of power for over a decade – and even now is, almost certainly, viewed by most Dutch journalists, academics, and politicians as the virtuous victim of this recent episode, while Geert Wilders, the man she planned to kill, is the villain of the piece. Given the current atmosphere in the Netherlands, it seems safe to say a couple of things: first, that Wilders hasn’t seen his last “hate speech” trial; and second, that Sahla will soon enough find an even better job than the one she had with VVD. Because in a “civilized” country like the Netherlands, you see, involvement in Islamic terrorism is the act of a misguided soul who’s eminently deserving of forgiveness and rehabilitation (including employment on the highest level), whereas criticism of Islam is the act of an unrepentant boor whom enlightened citizens should do everything possible to marginalize, silence, and crush.
https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2022/02/netherlands-its-civilized-empower-terrorists-bruce-bawer/