Antisemitism, Antizionism, Jihadism and the Reunited Germany. News by Fred Alan Medforth
The police of Verona and Milan are currently analysing hundreds of videos from social networks and images from surveillance cameras. But with the help of witness statements, the authorities have already been able to reconstruct what happened last Thursday between Peschiera del Garda, Castelnuovo and Desenzano: a mob moved through the narrow streets of the villages, destroying shop windows, attacking tourists and women tourists, harassing women and insulting passers-by.
Around 1500 people from North Africa, as well as some black people, gathered around the lakeshore shouting “This is Africa” and “We have come to take back Peschiera.” They waved flags of different African countries. Most of them were between 16 and 20 years old, witnesses also reported very young people between twelve and 14 years old. Many of the participants arrived by train from Milan, Brescia and Bergamo. 20min.ch
Turkey has set Sweden and Finland 10 conditions for lifting the veto on NATO membership. They are published by the Turkish newspaper Yeni Ćafak.
1. Support for Turkey in its fight against terrorist organizations, including the Kurdistan Workersâ Party, DHKP/C, DAESH, FETO (Gulenists) and their affiliates;
2. Establishment of âlegal normsâ and âlegal infrastructureâ in Sweden and Finland to combat terrorism;
3. Countries should stop attempts to open representative offices of Kurds in their countries;
4. To prevent the activities of FETO and close the media affiliated with the organization;
5. Comply with the requirements to freeze the assets of organizations associated with terrorism;
6. Fulfill the requirements for the extradition of persons associated with terrorism;
7. Prohibit organizations like the PKK from holding demonstrations;
8. Sharing intelligence with Turkey;
9. Remove restrictions from the Turkish defense industry;
10. In case of joining NATO, commit to comply with these requirements.
In short, it appears that Sweden and Finland will struggle to become members of NATO.
Germanyâs federal LGBT commissioner, Sven Lehmann, of the left-wing Green party, has sharply criticized a guest opinion piece in Germanyâs influential Die Welt newspaper. In his article, he harshly critiqued the sexualizing and pro-transgender content increasingly featured on childrenâs television programming.
The commissioner reacted harshly to the original Die Welt article, writing via a commentary response, also published in Die Welt, that anyone who spreads the idea that there are only two sexes is guilty of discrimination and enmity against a minority group.
In the original op-ed, five authors, made up of doctors and biologists, analyzed programming on Germanyâs public service media, which features a wide range of pieces focused on pro-transgender content. These experts concluded that a small number of activists with a woke, pro-trans ideology, are subverting the German public broadcaster ĂRR, spreading misrepresentations about the realities of gender transitions and permanently damaging the lives of children and young people.
Lehmann countered that their opinion piece was representative of âincreasingly aggressive agitation, especially against trans people.â He described it as âbigotedâ that the article was published at the very beginning of Pride Month and noted that the Springer group, to which DIe Welt belongs, had even raised the LGBT rainbow flag at its building on the same day.
âMore devaluation is not possible because the piece is dripping with homophobia and transphobia, is not scientifically sound, and works with fake news,â he wrote.
The prevalence of transgender and pro-LGBT content has increased in recent years in Germany, as in other Western European countries. However, Lehmann defended such programming on taxpayer-funded public television, including the popular childrenâs shows Die Maus (âThe Mouseâ) and the Quarks, which the researchers referenced in their original piece in Die Welt.
Much of the pro-transgender content does not address the serious side effects and irreversible changes that come about due to transitioning, especially in young people. While some health authorities have fully embraced transitioning and surgery to resolve gender dysphoria, other medical authorities are coming to the conclusion that puberty blockers and surgeries related to transgender issues represent a major medical threat. Swedenâs Board of Health, for example, came to this conclusion, leading it to reverse its previous recommendation, warning people that puberty blockers in young teens do more harm than good and stating they could no longer recommend such drugs. Side effects from the drugs include osteoporosis, cancer, infertility, stunted growth, and severe psychological problems.
Nevertheless, Lehmann defends the prevalence of LGBT topics featured on the childrenâs shows, saying they contribute to learning about homosexuality, sexual diversity, and transgender issues.
With a view to the authorsâ assertion of the scientific knowledge behind dual genders, Lehmann wrote that at this point, this research should be ignored, accusing it of being a âquasi-creationist product.â
Lehmann also pointed out that the World Health Organization officially removed being transgender from its list of diseases in 2018. It is âjust like intersex or a non-binary variant of gender development.â In addition, the Federal Constitutional Court ruled in 2017 that gender identity is a core area of âpersonality that needs to be protected, he wrote.
If the LGBT commissioner had his way, the scientistsâ characterization of the gender debate as a âtrending topicâ would also be categorized as an anti-trans statement. He said one of the most important elements of society is dividing people into men and women, which begins before a child is even born.
âAnyone who does not fit into these categories has a problem in this binary society,â warned the Green politician.
He also accused the researchers of spreading false reports about government policies, saying there are no plans for 14-year-olds to be able to undergo sex reassignment without their parentsâ consent. He wrote that such interventions are still not regulated by law but are a decision between patients and doctors.
The federal government is only preparing to abolish the relevant law, which requires a person must undergo a psychological assessment before changing their gender on their government identification and other official documents.
âThese procedures are lengthy, expensive, and humiliating, featuring the most intimate questions about underwear and masturbation,â said Lehmann.
He wrote that his response was made not only as a government official, but that he is also publishing it as a gay man and as someone who stands in solidarity with all discriminated minorities.
Shortly after the publication of the guest contribution by researchers in Die Welt, the LGBT job fair of the Uhlala Group uninvited the Springer Group. Although they stated that they are grateful to the media company for years of support, they felt they were compelled to uninvite the company because they resolutely oppose hate and hate speech, according to a statement on its website.
Springer CEO Mathias Döpfner responded with a letter to all company employees, which also appeared on the Die Welt website. He states that he regrets the articleâs timing at the beginning of Pride Month, emphasizes that the guest authors do not reflect the editorsâ opinion, and calls the articleâs tone superficial, condescending, and aggrieved. In terms of content, he writes that it was allegedly mostly one-sided at best.
While addressing the Uhlala Groupâs decision to ban Springer, Döpfner wrote that exclusion hindered debates, insights, and development, which is the exact opposite of inclusion and diversity. It is an almost tragic punch line when the fight for diversity and inclusion, tolerance, and freedom of life forms is waged via exclusion, intolerance, and oppression, he said.
Döpfner asked to be invited to the fair again: âWe would certainly like to be there because the matter, which the fair represents, is close to my heart.â
In addition, Döpfner offered the Uhlala CEO and organizer of the Sticks & Stones job fair, Stuart Bruce Cameron, to publish a counter opinion piece in Die Welt, an offer he has yet to accept.
By Russell Cook
When John Kerry, President Biden’s special envoy for climate, lamented that the Ukraine war situation would distract the public from the ‘climate crisis’ and then doubled down later on how ‘climate change refugees will outnumber Ukrainian refugees, he seemed to have no awareness of how ludicrous his statement was. NPR and CNBC have both trumpeted the same theme about the war distracting the public from the “true crisis.” Then there’s Biden’s Commerce Secretary, Gina Raimondo, who reacted the following way to Rep. Ben Cline’s “distraction” that the proposed 2023 budget “doesn’t really help families put food on the table or clothes on the back.”
“…we believe climate change is an existential threat so, you know, children won’t — [shrugs, pauses]. Forget about clothes on their back. They’re not going to be able to have a life if we don’t deal with climate change.”
Add Navy secretary Carlos Del Toro saying climate change — not hostile foreign adversaries — is an existential threat to America.
It’s as though Kerry, Raimondo and Del Toro are so assured of their own importance that they actually believe they can sell global warming to Eskimos.
That’s a paraphrase of a line from the sales industry; a guy’s sales talk skills are so good that “he can sell refrigerators to Eskimos.” Many arrogant salespeople describe themselves this way, oblivious to how big the backlash might be if purchasers realize that they’ve been conned into buying something they absolutely don’t need. Sell Eskimos refrigerators and you risk being vilified so thoroughly that you’ll never be allowed to set foot in their territory again.
That’s essentially what the “climate change” issue is, a charismatic smooth-talking sales campaign selling the world the notion of catastrophic man-caused global warming via an endless string of deceptive narratives. Even the name of the issue, “climate change,” is deceptive. Al Gore’s movie An Inconvenient Truth, taught around the world from the grade school level through college, used the “global warming” phrase a minimum of 25 times while never mentioning “climate change” once. Why change the name? When ‘man-caused global warming‘ pauses instead of continually rising as more atmospheric CO2 irrefutably rises, the public starts asking questions.
No problem. Switch to “Climate Changeâą” and blame it for last year’s seven million acres of U.S. wildfires, while crossing your fingers that nobody recalls the nearly 22 million acres burned in 1937.
When objective, unbiased observers examine the issue, they find no end to disingenuous imagery and misleading narratives. Case in point: media don’t use clear, midday photos of coal-fired power plants, they instead show views taken at sunset or sunrise where the always-backlit harmless steam emissions resemble sinister pollution clouds. News reports imply the colorless carbon dioxide in the steam is a pollutant, despite the fact that commercial greenhouse growers pump CO2 into their buildings to help their plants and flowers grow bigger and faster. Beyond that, news outlets simplify the name of that odorless, colorless trace gas as “carbon pollution,” evoking mental images of smokey black soot.
If the public is not being presented with accurate depictions of just those few items, how many others are misrepresented?
Massachusetts Institute of Technology scientist Dr. Richard Lindzen authored a 2008 paper titled “Climate Science: Is it currently designed to answer questions?” A simple answer: no, it is not. Despite widespread talking points about too much “equal time” in news reporting being given to skeptic scientists like Lindzen, news outlets such as the âPBS NewsHourâ have never once had a skeptic scientist on the program over the last 25 years to dispute what was said during 97 appearances of scientists associated with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, NASA, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
The public is largely unaware of how climate experts question the notion of global warming: temperature data-gathering methodology/ocean ‘acidityâ/polar bear populations/glacial retreat/the ‘scientific consensus’/sea levels/weather intensity, on and on. At one climate conference I attended, when banquet workers were clearing away dishes, one of the remaining audience members asked a worker if she had listened to the skepticâs presentation. She loudly proclaimed, “I’ve never heard any of this before!!”
Accusations of corruption by oil companies has played a major part in keeping the issue alive for 30 years now. Its specific claim is that âleaked industry memosâ proves the fossil-fuel industry paid skeptic scientists to “reposition global warming as theory rather than fact.” Those âleaked memosâ were first floated as evidence by environmentalists in June 1991, and the “reposition” strategy goal was most famously spelled out full screen in Al Gore’s movie, in an apples and oranges comparison to a leaked tobacco industry document. This same supposedly sinister set of leaked memos is the cornerstone evidence for disinformation campaign accusations in most of the “Exxon Knew”-style global warming damages lawsuits (e.g. City of Hoboken, NJ v Exxon), and this same memo set was once again cited in a November 2021 UK Guardian article about oil industry disinformation campaigns, where the article went so far as to additionally post scratchy copies of newspaper ads that supposedly accompanied the ‘disinformation campaign’⊠but it turns out that those ads were never used in the genuine campaign, which was a short-lived public relations effort to tell the public what Al Gore and the IPCC wasn’t telling them.
Worse, the leaked memo set, with the “reposition global warming” strategy targeting a gullible audience of “older, less educated males” and “young, low income women,” was only a strange proposal that was rejected by the industry group it was sent to. It’s worthless as evidence, but it is still clearly the ‘most viable-sounding evidence’ the global-warming alarmists have ever had to convince the public to ignore skeptic scientists and other experts.
As complex as the science is after 30 years, the elemental fatal fault in the global warming issue is how the whole issue still boils down to just a one sentence talking point:
Exxon and the rest of the fossil fuel industry knew the science was settled, but paid shill ‘experts’ to reposition global warming from fact back to uncertain theory, and that’s why everyone can ignore those skeptics and move forward to stop the climate crisis.
Maybe an ordinary hotel banquet room worker isn’t qualified to judge the science, but that person doesn’t have to be either a rocket scientist to commit an elemental act of due diligence by asking the most basic questions: “What is your evidence proving those skeptics knowingly lie and are paid illicit money to do that?”
The global warming issue is bigger than just the science, it’s a window into the world of how big the mainstream media journalism malfeasance may be in this issue.
Why do we have every appearance that there is no actual climate crisis, while seeing growing evidence of where the actual disinformation is found in this issue?
Because prominent enviro-activists, along with unquestioning policymakers, both enabled by a complicit mainstream media, are not providing fact-based information that fully informs the public. They are instead selling all of us one of the most false premise, deceptive, and disingenuous narratives in history. Selling refrigerators to all of us Eskimos, in other words.
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2022/06/selling_global_warming_to_eskimos_.html
