Month: March 2022

A 49-year-old woman has been convicted of war crimes and violations of international law, Le Figaro reports. On Friday March 4, the Swedish woman, who had joined the Islamic State (IS) organisation in Syria, was sentenced to six years in prison. She was accused of having her son, aged 12 to 15, recruited as a child soldier for the jihadist group. This was announced by the court in Stockholm in a press release.

Specifically, the teenager, named Joan, had died in the conflict as a 16-year-old in 2017, as we had reported in an earlier article. However, his mother had “not acted appropriately to prevent the boy’s recruitment”, “nor did she want to prevent it, his role as a child soldier was in line with her religious beliefs”, the court stated, whose remarks were quoted by the newspaper.

It was the first time that a case of the recruitment of a child soldier, i.e. – according to Swedish law – a child younger than 15, was tried in the Nordic country. Most Swedes or Swedish residents who have joined IS – their total number is estimated at around 300 – cannot be prosecuted for their mere association with the jihadist organisation. This is because the Swedish law criminalising this crime was only passed after the wave of departures to Syria, the national newspaper reminds us. In this way, convictions remain rare when other charges can be investigated. The first “returnee” of the terrorist organisation convicted in Sweden was sentenced in March 2021 for taking her son to the Levant.

https://www.valeursactuelles.com/monde/suede-une-femme-condamnee-a-six-ans-de-prison-pour-avoir-laisse-son-fils-devenir-enfant-soldat-de-letat-islamique/

By Vasko Kohlmayer

It is hard not to be deeply shaken by the unfolding tragedy in Ukraine. Terrible though it may be, it was not, however, unexpected. By taking matters into his own hands, Vladimir Putin did what he had warned he would do in the years leading up to this crisis. Putin has always made it clear that NATO in Ukraine was a red line for Russia. Having realized that his concerns would never be properly addressed by his western counterparts, Putin decided to take radical action to stop the alliance’s expansion.

The Ukrainian people have already paid a heavy price, which will almost certainly grow much greater if this conflict is allowed to continue. And even though there is now no intention among the players involved to broaden the field of military operations, there is always a very real danger of escalation as these kinds of contingencies tend to be highly unpredictable.

There is, however, an easy way to put an end to this calamitous situation. This can be done by western guarantee that Ukraine will stay militarily neutral for the foreseeable future.

This is the only reasonable and moral course to take under present circumstances.

It is important to acknowledge the hard reality that Ukraine will not become part of NATO anytime soon. Vladimir Putin has made it sufficiently clear that he is not going to allow this to happen, and he is willing to fight to the death over this issue. It is not a fight we want to get pulled into, not least because America does not have a vital national interest in Ukraine as such, much less in Ukraine being part of NATO. That by itself should suffice to keep us from confronting Putin over this matter.

Ukraine has never been part of NATO. Have we suffered some hardship, danger, distress, disadvantage, or loss because of it? Things were just fine for us – as well as the rest of the world – with Ukraine not being in NATO. Why should we now suddenly risk a conflict with Russia over Ukraine’s entry into that organization?

We also need to keep in mind that if we should foolishly engage Putin in some kind of military fashion, such a clash could easily escalate into a nuclear exchange which would almost certainly end in mutual annihilation or something close to it.

By guaranteeing Ukraine’s military neutrality, we would not lose anything we did not have before. The fact is that for much of their history Ukrainian territories have either been part of Russia or within Russian sphere of influence. Ukraine has never been an integral part of the western military apparatus. To insist that it becomes part of it at this point in time is irresponsible and reckless.

By agreeing to Ukraine not being part of NATO, nothing would be taken away from us. We would neither be militarily weakened, nor would we be impoverished economically. Ukraine’s absence from NATO does not put us in any worse position than we were a week ago, a year ago or a decade ago. Has Ukraine not being in NATO ever been a serious problem for us?

Everything considered, the status quo has been very good. Since the fall of the Berlin Wall nearly thirty-three years ago, most of Europe felt safer than ever before. It is difficult to remember any period in history when the majority of Europeans felt so safe and secure. This happy state of affairs, however, has been needlessly undermined by the notion of expanding NATO all the way to Russia’s lengthy border with Ukraine. It is because of this misguided idea and the insensitivity with which it has been pursued that large areas of Europe now justifiably fear the possibility of war. Europe suddenly does not feel so safe and stable anymore.

It is, however, not only the safety of Europe that has been deeply shaken. Americans should start worrying too as Putin has begun rattling his nuclear sabre. We have all heard that he has placed Russia’s nuclear armaments on high alert. What you have probably not heard is that the other day a Russian nuclear submarine suddenly emerged off the coast of the United States. It apparently arrived there undetected by U.S. tracking systems. This submarine carries 150 nuclear warheads. Just the payload of this one Russian underwater craft could end the United States as we know it.

Given that Ukraine is not of vital national interest to America, we need to seriously ask ourselves this question: Do we want to be potentially annihilated over the issue of Ukrainian NATO membership?

The expansion of NATO to the Russian border is an overreach by western globalists. Seeking to tip the existing balance of power between the West and Russia, it is a provocation that could not but invite a response. John F. Kennedy was seen as a national hero by his firm stand against the Soviet Union when it sought to establish a military base in Cuba. Cuba does not even have border with the United States and our capital is much further from the edge of that country than Moscow is from the Ukrainian border. And yet we could have not tolerated Soviet presence on that island.

When Putin pleaded with and then warned NATO not to seek a similar arrangement for Ukraine, he was haughtily dismissed by western elitists such as Joe Biden and NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg, former Prime Minister of Norway. And now they claim they are shocked and repulsed by Russia’s actions. They are either naïve or disingenuous. I suspect that latter is the case.

Keeping Ukraine neutral does not mean that Ukraine will somehow be lost to the West. It will continue to be a part of the global community and member of many of its organizations, associations and arrangements. Ukraine’s international situation will be as it was before.

It also does not mean that Ukraine may not be able to eventually enter the western military alliance. The neutrality agreement can include provisions that would allow for this issue to be revisited and renegotiated at some point in the future.

Be that as it may, it is highly irresponsible now to insist that Ukraine retain the option of joining the alliance in the short or medium term, because the Russians have made it amply clear that they will simply not allow this to occur. This is the red line for them, which is something we should respect, especially since their position is not at all unreasonable. We must understand that the Russians feel the same about NATO in Ukraine as we would feel about a Russian base in Cuba.

The world is on the edge now and the Ukrainian people are experiencing the agony of suffering and death. They stand no chance against the onslaught of the much superior Russian forces, which have been so far acting with relative restraint. Contrary to what we have been hearing from the media, Putin has been trying to minimize the loss of life. Once the Russians switch into full fire mode, however, the Ukrainian people will be dying by tens of thousands.

This can be prevented by granting Ukraine military neutrality.

We must seek peace in the world and cessation of the suffering of the Ukrainian people. It would be immoral not to act this way, especially because we do not have to give up anything that we had before.

Not agreeing to Ukraine’s neutrality will cause untold suffering to the brave people of Ukraine in a war they cannot win. It also runs the risk of a wider military confrontation with potential for a nuclear flare up.

To pursue anything other than peace in this situation would be an act of great moral, human and strategic failure.

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2022/03/guarantee_ukraines_neutrality_and_stop_the_senseless_carnage.html

While Emmanuel Macron’s government is increasingly cracking down on fundamentalist mosques, there are still places that escape state attention. In hospitals in particular, warnings are piling up. The emergency doctor Patrick Pelloux, former columnist for “Charlie Hebdo”, has submitted a report to the government on this issue.

(…) “What you also have to understand is that the staff who work in the hospital have a deep tolerance and are very resilient. So when they are confronted with this kind of assault, whether it is from the Islamic, Catholic or Protestant faithful, they don’t necessarily act on it. During our hearings, a nurse in a hospital in the west of the country told us that one of her colleagues, a fundamentalist Muslim, was proselytising and trying to convert his colleagues. Nobody knew what to do: the directors of the regional health agencies (ARS) often think that the issue is too complex and sensitive. Of course, a section of the left and Islamist activists have been working for years to reverse the issue: Anyone who talks about these issues today is considered a racist. However, this report highlights the religious aberrations, it has nothing to do with “races”.”

And what undesirable developments and dangers were you made aware of?

“The first expression of these radicalisations among hospital staff, external staff or chaplains is sexism and homophobia, even before anti-Semitism, which is never very far behind. These kinds of problems lead doctors to refuse to treat or to use certain techniques, which fortunately is still a very marginal phenomenon. In particular, we had the case of a doctor who refused to perform an organ transplant because it was haram.

“If we are not careful, we may end up with very dangerous, radicalised people in hospital.”

Would you say that the hospital today is a target for fundamentalist or proselytising religious groups?

“Yes, of course the hospital is a target! Look at Baraka City, a humanitarian organisation that was disbanded by the government because of its proximity to Islamist circles, they were based at the hospital! Never forget that the main means of Daech in Syria was access to free healthcare for the population. Free healthcare is not a trifle! Zineb El Rahzoui, who has translated political letters from the Muslim Brotherhood, has shown that their aim, especially in France, was to use the social system and conquer the hospital system.

Marianne

In his report, the emergency doctor warns: “The health and social system is a target of religions, especially of a part of so-called political Islam”. And he gives the example of the Saint Camille hospital in the Val-de-Marne department, which is facing a real problem: “After the closure of a mosque ordered by the Ministry of the Interior, 200 Salafists came to pray in the corridors of the hospital,” the doctor reports.

Religious counsellors were also able to “overstep their role of accompanying the patient to exert influence on staff and patients”, the report says. “Paediatrics, the cancer ward, this is their terrain,” the emergency doctor argues. “Radicalised imams could preach anti-French rhetoric to vulnerable patients, as in psychiatry,” he adds. Le Figaro

https://www.fdesouche.com/2022/03/05/patrick-pelloux-denonce-la-montee-du-radicalisme-religieux-a-lhopital-on-peut-se-retrouver-avec-des-gens-tres-dangereux-a-lhopital-des-imams-radicalises-ont-preche-un-discours-anti-franc/

Conservative candidates Marine Le Pen and Éric Zemmour, if elected, will not be able to end mass immigration to their country without the Senate’s approval, the president of the Constitutional Council, France’s constitutional court, has warned. The news that French courts will block a democratic referendum related to immigration reveals just how powerless people across Europe have become to decide the demographic fate of their countries, as the severe watering down of Switzerland’s referendum vote to implement immigration quotas previously showed.

The idea that France’s top court can decide against the will of the people despite a popular referendum is a perversion of what the court originally stood for. In fact, in 1962, the French constitutional court declared itself incompetent to rule over the constitutionality of laws “adopted by the people following a referendum” since they “constitute the direct expression of national sovereignty.” However, in 2000, the French Constitutional Court partly reversed its 1962 decision by limiting its scope. It marked one of the many decisions that have transformed France from a semi-presidential democratic regime to what looks more and more like a government by judges.

The 2000 ruling is especially notable given what is at stake in the upcoming election. Both Le Pen and Zemmour have declared that they will hold a referendum on ending mass immigration. Perhaps even more importantly, a majority of French say they support such a referendum. Given polling showing seven out of ten French citizens are in favor of ending immigration, there is also a good chance such a referendum would succeed in favor of Le Pen or Zemmour.

The Constitutional Council’s decision to block such a referendum even before it has taken place has been confirmed by Laurent Fabius, who was appointed to the post of president of the Constitutional Council by his friend, Socialist President François Hollande, in 2016 when he was Hollande’s foreign minister.

The Constitutional Court would not only squash an immigration referendum, but would also block the project of the VI^th Republic, which is promoted by the best-placed left-wing opposition candidate, Jean-Luc Mélanchon.

In France, the constitutional court is highly politicized, much more so than in Poland, which is nevertheless the country accused by the EU institutions of having a constitutional court that is too politicized and therefore not independent enough to make it legitimate.

In Poland, the Constitutional Tribunal judges are elected for a nine-year term by a simple majority vote in the Sejm, the lower house of parliament, from among persons with legal education and recognized professional experience in the legal field. In France, the Constitutional Council judges are appointed in groups of three for nine years by the President of the Republic, the President of the National Assembly, and the President of the Senate, each of whom alone decides on the choice of his or her own Constitutional Council judges. Those judges are not required to have any knowledge, competence, or experience in the legal field.

The incumbent president of the Constitutional Council, Laurent Fabius, is an old socialist apparatchik. The institution he presides over has authorized, despite their obvious unconstitutional nature in some cases, all the restrictive and discriminatory measures imposed by Emmanuel Macron and his government as part of their strategy against the Covid-19 pandemic.

Even today, France is one of the few EU countries to still make extensive use of a vaccine pass scheme, despite such apartheid-style scheme having proved useless during the current Omicron wave of the pandemic. At the same time, the French branch of the American company in charge of advising the French government for its strategy against Covid and its vaccination campaign, the McKinsey firm, is directed by Victor Fabius, Laurent Fabius’ son.

The first step of the Constitutional Council’s ongoing judicial putsch on the democratic institutions of the Fifth Republic that had been drafted by General de Gaulle and confirmed by the French people in a referendum was carried out in 1971 when the Constitutional judges integrated the preamble of the 1958 Constitution, the preamble of the 1946 Constitution and the 1789 Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen into what they called the “constitutionality block.” This way, those judges transformed the Constitutional Council, without asking the French people or its elected representatives, into the guardian of fundamental rights and freedoms based on the general principles it would from that point on derive from those documents.

In 2018, under Laurent Fabius’ presidency, the Constitutional Council further extended the “constitutionality block” to the principle of “fraternity” contained in the motto of the French Republic: “Liberté, Égalité, Fraternité.” The case it was ruling over was about aiding illegal immigration for humanitarian purposes. Thus, France’s Constitutional Council has now made it illegal for the legislative and executive branches of power to punish citizens and organizations engaged in supporting illegal immigration when their activity is non-profit related. The guardians of the French constitution thus decided, without having been elected and without having presented their proposals to the voters, to give legal force to the Republic’s motto, considering that the word “fraternity” in that motto implies “the freedom to help others, with a humanitarian aim, regardless of the legality of their stay on the national territory.”

The French Constitutional Council has thus become an American-style Supreme Court, which was not its role under the 1958 Constitution. This was done without a vote of the people, only by virtue of decisions made by politicians appointed to their positions by their political friends, and without introducing the democratic process that presides over the nomination of Supreme Court Justices in the U.S.

Today, as reported in the weekly L’Express on Feb 23, “for candidates with ‘breakthrough’ programs, the obstacleswill not stop after the presidential election (…): Even if he or she has the 500 endorsements required to run for president and wins the election and then the legislative elections in the wake of it, the new president could find himself or herself prevented from implementing his or her project if it is Marine Le Pen, Éric Zemmour or Jean-Luc Mélenchon.”

Whether it is a matter of deporting illegal immigrants or abolishing family reunification, it goes against the principles recognized as “constitutional” by the French Constitutional Court, even though such decisions are not covered in the 1958 Constitution which was approved by a vote of the French people. They are indeed covered by the “constitutionality block” invented by the Constitutional Council. Therefore, the laws promised by Le Pen and Zemmour, who planned to bypass the Constitutional Council using a referendum like General de Gaulle once did, amount, in the eyes of Laurent Fabius and his colleagues, to changing the French Constitution, which means that a vote of both houses of parliament is required first.

The problem is that the upper house, the Senate, is not elected by direct universal suffrage. It is made up of representatives of local elected officials — the electors — with a six-year term.  It is renewed by half every three years.

As a result, even after a landslide victory for his or her party in the June legislative elections, the new president elected in April could see his or her reforms, particularly in the area of immigration, blocked by a Senate populated by the cronies of the major parties that have alternated in power for decades and have transformed France into a multicultural and increasingly Islamic society.

No wonder a majority of citizens consider that democracy does not work well in France. According to a December poll, half of the French people even think that the state of democracy has deteriorated further under the presidency of Emmanuel Macron, himself a former socialist minister under François Hollande, just like his fellow crony Fabius. Even The Economist, the English liberal weekly, ranked France as a “failing democracy” for the second year in a row in 2021.   Facebook   Twitter   Reddit

https://rmx.news/france/french-constitutional-court-vows-to-block-zemmour-or-le-pens-immigration-laws-if-either-wins/

Especially in times of war, it would be important to get the most reliable and factual information possible, but, “the first casualty of war is always the truth”, as US Senator Hiram Johnson stated in 1914. Today, German public broadcaster ARD in particular relies almost exclusively on “experts” from the Open Society Network in its reporting, which is financed by George Soros to the tune of 32 billion dollars.

Experienced war correspondents are in short supply at ARD right now. On 1 March, ARD reporter Danko Handrik preferred to report from the Slovakian border, where Arabs and Africans are conspicuously over-represented among the “Ukrainian refugees”. Medieninsider.com called ARD “only willing to report under certain conditions”.

Reporting from Kiev was journalist Anna Kosstutschenko from the English-language Ukrainian foreign channel UATV, who joined in from her bathroom. UATV belongs to the oligarch Ihor Kolomoisky, patron saint of Ukrainian President and clown by profession, Vladimir Zelensky.

In ARD’s “Brennpunkt” on Tuesday, presenter Ellen Ehni conducted a tearful interview with Darya Romanenko, head of the civil society NGO “Drukarnia” from Kiev-occupied Slavyansk in eastern Ukraine. Drukarnia is part of the “Deutsch-Russischer Austauschs e.V.” from Berlin, which works closely with other civil society NGOs and was banned from Russia in 2021 for exerting “foreign influence”, a euphemism for regime change operations. Romanenko was identified by ARD only as “an employee of a peace organisation”.

Afterwards, “ARD-Brennpunkt” featured the Ukrainian MP and former education minister Inna Sovsun, who at length reported from Kiev on Russian special forces allegedly shooting children. “Whenever Putin opens his mouth, he lies,” Sovsun declared. Putin wants to destroy “Ukraine” and “the idea of democracy in the world”. It is not clear what kind of audience this child-like depiction was intended for.

Sovsun is a staff member of the think tank CEDOS, which in 2020 received $115 000 from George Soros’ International Renaissance Foundation and $17 000 from the German Green Party’s Heinrich Böll Foundation. In 2016, CEDOS received 124 000 US dollars from the Open Society.

On “ARD-Brennpunkt” on 28 February, presenter Ellen Ehni spoke with Gwendolyn Sasse from the Centre for Eastern European and International Studies ZOiS, who was allowed to speculate about Vladimir Putin’s state of mind. Sasse was an assistant professor at George Soros’ Central European University and met with Goran Buldioski, head of the Open Society Think Tank Fund, and other CEU leaders in 2014, for example, for Merkel advisor Gerald Knaus’ European Stability Initiative.

Ehni then spoke with Giessen-based lawyer Ario Dehghani of the law firm Redcliffe Partners, who lives in Ukraine. Dehghani works with the Anti-Corruption Research and Education Centre (ACREC), which received US$200 000 from Open Society in 2017-2020.

On Monday, Tagesschau interviewed Rebekka Krauß from the association “Space-Eye Regensburg”, an offshoot of the Open Borders NGO “Sea-Eye”, which was launched in November 2018 by Sea-Eye founder Michael Buschheuer.

None of the guests interviewed were labelled as employees of George Soros’ controversial Open Society Foundation.

https://freewestmedia.com/2022/03/04/german-public-broadcaster-leaves-ukraine-coverage-to-open-society/

Because of drawings found in his cell in the Centre de rétention administrative (administrative detention centre) Mesnil-Amelot, the arrested man stood trial in Meaux for publicly glorifying terrorism.

Sadiq was accused of glorifying terrorism and damaging his room at the CRA (Centre de rétention administrative) in Mesnil-Amelot. He was taken into police custody and brought before the Criminal Court in Meaux on Wednesday February 23, 2022 to stand trial on immediate summons. He was eventually acquitted but fined.

The Moroccan national, who was staying illegally in France, was placed in the Mesnil-Amelot CRA on Monday February 14, 2022. Three days later, a search of his room revealed several suspicious facts, some of which came under the category of “criminal offences”.

The alerted police officers made the findings and then the seizure: a small drawing of the DAESH flag stuck to the top of the door, a drawing and inscriptions in Arabic scratched on the cupboard door, and numerous sketches of people and weapons (Kalashnikov, knife…) found on him.

In the dock, the accused remained consistent in his statements. He admitted to having made the drawings – Japanese comic book heroes according to him – but denied being the author of the flag and the inlays in the cupboard.actu.fr

https://www.fdesouche.com/2022/03/04/le-mesnil-amelot-juge-pour-avoir-dessine-un-drapeau-de-daesh-au-centre-de-retention/

Human tragedies are taking place at the Kiev train stations and the Ukrainian-Polish border crossings: while Africans report being discriminated against when entering the EU, videos show men preventing Ukrainian women from boarding the train and even pulling them out again.

Another video even shows a man standing in front of a train door with a knife and only allowing certain people to board.

A photographer told the newspaper Heute about the Polish border: “There are quite a lot of people of Arabic origin and black Africans. Like a man from Cameroon who worked in Ukraine.”

In one video, an Arabic-speaking man can be seen “selecting” the travellers and preventing many people by holding a knife from boarding. At the train stations, there are increasing conflicts between Ukrainians and migrants. The latter feel disadvantaged when leaving the country and speak of racism.

Several Polish media reported protests by the local population against the entry of the migrants. More than half a million refugees from Ukraine have arrived in Poland since the war began – some also continued their journey to Austria and Germany. In Berlin, almost one thousand people are said to have registered at the first arrival centre so far. In Vienna, 1600 people from Ukraine have arrived so far. However, considerably more are expected.

Gudrun Ensslin, co-founder of the “Red Army Faction” (RAF) and one of the most important terrorists of the Federal Republic of Germany, was one of the leading cadres of the so-called “May Offensive” of the RAF, a series of attacks that claimed four lives and injured 74 in 1972. Federal President Frank-Walter Steinmeier apparently has a different view of the left-wing extremist, who was sentenced to life imprisonment for multiple murders and took her own life in Stammheim prison in 1977: In a congratulatory letter on the 80th birthday of the director Margarethe von Trotta, who made the benevolent film “Die bleierne Zeit” (The Leaden Time) about Ensslin’s biography, he counts Ensslin among the “great women of world history” who had a “pronounced will to change”. Steinmeier’s letter states:

“‘Film is part of life for me – I film to survive’, you once said. With your own characteristic style, you make new perspectives possible, especially on great women in world history who faced the fractures and impositions of their respective times with great intelligence, personal strength and a pronounced will to change social as well as political conditions. Be it the lives of Gudrun Ensslin, Rosa Luxemburg, Hildegard von Bingen or Hannah Arendt – you have dedicated unforgettable cinematic portraits to all these women and many others. Films like ‘Die bleierne Zeit’ or ‘Die verlorene Ehre der Katharina Blum’ have become milestones of German cinema history. They will remain in our cinematic memory forever. With your work, you have contributed to the cultural reputation of our country. For that I say thank you today.”

The corresponding tribute to Rosa Luxemburg is also hardly fitting for a head of state: Luxemburg was one of the communist functionaries who led a coup in Germany in 1919 to establish a communist dictatorship on the Soviet model.

The Federal President’s Office’s handling of the congratulatory letter is also embarrassing. The Federal President’s page does list it as a catchword.

When you click on it, however, the text no longer appears – but only the message: “Error 404 – Page not found.

Steinmeier’s spokesperson said after the first protests, which were spread via social media: “This is clearly a mistake. A convicted murderer does not belong among these people. We apologise and will correct the congratulatory letter.” Rosa Luxemburg, however, obviously continues to belong to the great women of world history.

Das ist ganz klar ein Fehler. Eine verurteilte Mörderin gehört nicht in diese Reihe. Wir entschuldigen uns und werden das Glückwunschschreiben korrigieren.

— Anna Engelke (@EngelkeAnna) March 3, 2022

After his re-election as Federal President, Steinmeier had exclaimed: “I am not neutral when it comes to the cause of democracy.”

https://www.tichyseinblick.de/daili-es-sentials/bundespraesident-ensslin-wuerdigung/

Russia, with a birth rate of 1.5 children per woman, has invaded Ukraine, where the birth rate is 1.2 children per woman, to determine which nation with below replacement birth rates will go extinct the fastest. In the long run the only winners of the war to determine whether Ukraine will belong to the 1.2 or 1.5 people will be the Chechen and other Muslim soldiers doing the fighting.

The Chechens have a birth rate of 2.5. Their religion and mosques are more likely to inherit the territories they are fighting over than either the Russian or Ukrainian Orthodox churches.

Medieval Europe was able to recover from devastating wars and plagues, and a life expectancy rate of around the age of a postmodern grad student, because of high birth rates. But just as the Europeans discovered how to fight truly catastrophic wars, birth rates declined. World War II broke Europe when the previous world war didn’t because the dead were never replaced.

The UK birth rate during WWI looked like the Chechen birth rate. By WWII, it dropped below replacement rate. Today, like so much of Europe, it’s artificially bolstered by the British version of the Chechens, Pakistanis and other Muslim immigrants. Germany went into WWI fueled by an aggressive birth rate of 3.5. By the end, despite desperate Nazi eugenics, it had dropped below replacement rate. It looked like the Ukranian one until the Muslim birth rate kicked in.

Russia went into WWI with a birth rate of around 7, by the time the Soviet Union collapsed it had also fallen beyond replacement rates. Like the Europeans, its birth rate is artificially inflated by a growing Muslim population, legal or illegal, even in major cities like Moscow.

Every Ukrainian and Russian death is another loss that will never be demographically replaced.

Western Europe and Russia have dueling visions for Ukraine and the territories of the former Soviet Union. Europe would like them to join a wonderful union based around peace, tolerance, and importing millions of Muslims to balance out all the peaceful tolerant Europeans. Putin would like to induct them into Greater Russia which will unite Islam and Christianity.

Europeans claim that they can have a tolerant society built around the demographic growth of a religion that murders unbelievers. Putin claims that a new Christian Russian empire will be built on a multifaith alliance with a religion that has spent centuries destroying Christian empires.

Putin contends that, “we have Eastern Christianity and certain theoreticians say that it is much closer to Islam than Catholicism is.”. The Communist era left more “certain theoreticians” than dead dogs in Russia. Historians might point out that Islam destroyed far more of Eastern Christianity than of the Catholic world. But, much like the Europeans, a childless Russia has to turn to Islam to get the proles and the cannon fodder to keep the lights and the wars going.

Vladimir Putin likes to play the defender of Christianity. A defender of Christianity wouldn’t send Muslim soldiers to invade a fellow Christian country. But then again the Europeans pretend to be defenders of tolerance and yet they’ve filled the continent with a religion of intolerance.

So there’s plenty of suicidal hypocrisy to go around from London and Berlin to Moscow..

Putin argues that, “Russia was built up as a multi-national and multi-confessional state.” The European Union contends the same thing about its own goulash of nations. The problem is that the “multis” will ultimately give way to just one uni. Or, more accurately, one ummah.

Germany welcomes in a million Muslim migrants and Putin’s puppet in Belarus imports Iraqi migrants by the thousands and orders them to invade Poland. It’s as if the Gates of Vienna were being recreated by manics competing to burn their own civilization down the fastest.

Three years ago, the Chief Mufti of the Council of Muftis of Russia told a conference held in the Russian parliament on the subject of the “History of Islam in Russia: Understanding With a Look into the Future,” that the Muslim ”population will increase to 30 percent in a decade and a half.”

Dimitry Smirnov, Chairman of the Patriarchal Commission on Family Affairs, Protection of Motherhood and Childhood for the Russian Orthodox Church, agreed with the Chief Mufti. “Muslims have more children. Not Tatars, but Caucasians. The Chechens have eight children and the Ingush. The Russians will run out by 2050. Other nations will live here: Chechens, Ingush, Arabs.”

Asked if there was any hope, the archpriest said, it was “already too late.”

Time to invade Ukraine then. And then the Europeans and the Russians can argue over which future Islamic bloc, Greater Muslim Russia or Greater Muslim Europe, should control Ukraine.

Whatever casualties the current war will bring, the Russians and Ukrainians are killing themselves much faster than each other with over 600,000 abortions per year in Russia and under 75,000 in Ukraine. Both countries also have some of the worst suicide rates in the world.

Russia has the third highest suicide rates in the world and Ukraine has the seventh highest suicide rate for men. These are not the characteristics of people who believe in the future.

Behind the dueling campaigns of propaganda, the total saturation of lies, are these grim realities of despair and death. The spurious nationalism is a facade for the hard realities that Ukrainian and Russian boys are dying in a pointless war whose only winners will be the migrant hordes flooding out of the ‘Stans’ and out of Asian and Muslim Middle Eastern nations to replace them.

In the short term, European and Russian leaders and oligarchs expect to derive some temporary benefit from this latest episode in the death throes of our civilization.

In the long term, they are dooming us all.

Whatever the various sides claim to be fighting for, a Greater Russia, democracy, or nationalism, the only thing they’re really doing is accelerating their own defeat.

China and the Islamic Ummah need only watch and alternately cheer both sides on.

Much of Russia’s land, like America’s land, has already been leased out to China. While Putin chases Ukrainian territory, Russia proper is owned by China and colonized by Muslim migrants. Russia’s takeover of Crimea spurred Chinese investment in the area. Whatever Ukrainian territory Putin takes will ultimately benefit Chinese industries and their Russian middlemen.

But there’ll probably be a board seat in there somewhere for Hunter Biden or Neil Bush.

America, like Europe, Russia, and the rest of what once passed for the civilized world, have become profoundly unserious, crowded into social media echo chambers, shouting trending hashtags, and refusing to think in any terms longer than their attention deficit disorders.

There are always distractions to pass the time, to funnel away our outrage into the things that don’t matter to avoid thinking about the truly big things that do. Wars are wonderful distractions. Especially wars that don’t involve us and in which our only stake is a hashtag and a position.

But unless we start thinking seriously about the future, we won’t just lose, we will cease to exist.

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2022/03/islam-only-winner-ukraine-war-daniel-greenfield/