Globalist Dutch PM Announces He Will Not Stand for Re-Election After Facing Threat of No-Confidence

The longest-serving prime minister in Dutch history, Mark Rutte, has announced that he will not seek re-election following threats of a vote of no-confidence to push him out of office before the November elections.

Appearing before the House of Representatives, Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte announced his eventual retirement from politics, saying that he will not seek to form another government and that he will step down as leader of the People’s Party for Freedom and Democracy (VVD). His government collapsed on Friday, allegedly over differences within the ruling coalition over migration policy.

Rutte will remain as a caretaker PM until after the results of the coming elections later this year in November are finalised, however, the national Congress has the authority to designate any issue as “controversial” thereby mandating that a decision not be made until the next government is installed.

While the globalist PM claimed that he made the decision to leave politics on Sunday, it appears that his hand may have been forced, with opposition parties readying a vote of no confidence vote on Monday marshalled by Party for Freedom (PVV) leader Geert Wilders. However, the motion was withdrawn following Rutte’s speech announcing his retirement.

Rutte said per Algemeen Dagblad: “I made this decision on Sunday morning. I have thought about it I’ve been doing this for 17 years now. I love the club dearly, but it feels good to pass the baton now.”

“There has been speculation in recent days about what would motivate me. The only answer is: the Netherlands,” the outgoing leader added. “My position to that is completely subordinate. On Sunday I decided that I will not be available as a leader of the VVD in the upcoming elections.”

Rutte also claimed that he does not have an interest in becoming the Secretary General of NATO to replace outgoing chief Jens Stoltenberg.

The Dutch PM, who after 13 years in power has become the longest-serving leader in the country’s history, abruptly announced the fall of his cabinet and his resignation on Friday. The collapse of the government reportedly came amid disputes within the coalition on asylum policy and migration.

However, many political observers are pointing out that the coalition was ultimately untenable regardless, and elections would likely have been forced to occur one way or the other.

One such person to have correctly predicted that elections would come this year was Caroline Van der Plas, the outspoken leader of the populist Farmer-Citizen Movement (BBB), which became the largest party in the Senate and in regional governments earlier this year on the backs of a large protest movement against the Rutte government for trying to impose EU green agenda rules to shut down thousands of farmers throughout the Netherlands.

Commenting on the end of Rutte’s political career, Van der Plas said that she hopes his departure will allow the Dutch people to “start to believe in politics again,” adding: “A generation has grown up that doesn’t know any better, that thinks that Rutte has been prime minister for a hundred years.”

As to whether she would like to become the next prime minister, the Farmer-Citizen Movement leader said that the only scenario she would consider is if she could serve as the “prime minister for the Netherlands” and only focus on domestic issues, while empowering the Minister of Foreign Affairs to handle the international stage.

This perhaps was a signal to PVV leader Geert Wilders, a longtime campaigner against the influx of immigrants from Muslim countries, who has openly said himself that his party is looking for a coalition partner to govern with. Wilders has also been an opponent, like the BBB, of Rutte’s crackdown on nitrogen emissions and his plans to shut down thousands of farms.

“The PVV wants to co-govern! We are desperately needed to implement a strict asylum policy. So voters, make the PVV so big that no one can ignore us!” Wilders wrote on Twitter on Monday.

https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2023/07/10/globalist-dutch-pm-announces-he-will-not-stand-for-re-election/

Over 1 in 5 newborns given Islamic first name in France last year, almost 60% in Parisian suburb

The number of newborn babies given an Islamic first name in France rose in 2022 to 21.8 percent nationally, up 1.1-percentage points on the previous year.

Birth name data published annually by the National Institute of Statistics and Economic Studies (INSEE), has been analyzed for eight consecutive years by the Fdesouche press review site which highlights the growing rise in births registered across France under an Islamic first name.

Since 1997, the figure has more than trebled from 7 percent of all newborns to 21.8 percent last year, but the rise is far more pronounced in certain concentrated areas of the country.

For example, in Île-de-France, the most populous of France’s 18 regions, the number of newborns registered with an Islamic first name was 33.6 percent last year, up 7.7 percent in a decade. A deeper dive shows the department of Seine-Saint-Denis, a Parisian suburb to the northeast of the French capital, is the most highly concentrated with 58.3 percent of all newborns given a Muslim name.

Val-d’Oise, also a department in the Île-de-France region to the north of Paris, recorded a figure of 40.8 percent, while Val-de-Marne, to the capital’s south, recorded 38.2 percent.

Île-de-France as a region reported the highest average figure of 33.6 percent, followed by Provence-Alpes-Côte d’Azur, which comprises the city of Marseille, came second with 23.4 percent.

Meanwhile, the region of Bretagne, or Brittany, to the country’s northwest, recorded the fewest births with Muslim names at 8.9 percent, up from 4.6 percent in 2012.

The department of Cantal, located in the heart of The Alps in the Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes region, had the smallest concentration of Islamic births with just 2.1 percent.

The analysis, validated in 2019 by Jérôme Fourquet, a French political scientist and the director of international polling and market research firm IFOP since 2011, identifies two categories of Islamic names. The first is known as “strict Muslim first names” as outlined in the Quran, in addition to a second category labelled “Islamo-compatible first names” for which half of this figure is included in the count.

Examples of strict Muslim first names include Mohamed and its variations, Ibrahim, Younes, Imran, Youssef, Ismael, Ahmed, and many more.

Ethnic statistics are not available in France, so researchers must look into factors like how many people are born with Muslim names to determine demographic trends.

https://rmx.news/france/over-1-in-5-newborns-given-islamic-first-name-in-france-last-year-almost-60-in-parisian-suburb/

Old Joe Is Completely Lost: King Charles Visibly Frustrated, Has Trouble Urging Joe Biden to Move On During Honor Guard Inspection (VIDEO)

It is pure statistical garbage when we are told what the average global temperature is and that it is a heat record

Graphic credit: DFL-Denver Pixabay license

By Jack Hellner

We are seeing daily scare stories that the Earth is setting record highs for average daily temperatures. These reports base their talking points on taking the average temperature from what appears to be around 11,000 weather stations, and it seems they just add those temperatures up and divide by 11,000.

Earth’s global mean temperature (GMT) is determined by averaging measurements of air temperatures over land ocean surface temperatures. Thousands of weather stations spread over land surface worldwide measure the local air temperatures while thousands of ships and buoys measure the local sea surface temperatures. 

A mathematician or statistical analyst would tell these people that is not a proper way to calculate the average annual temperature of anything because the weather stations aren’t divided evenly. A proper statistical way would be placing weather stations based on square miles of area.

For example:

The Earth covers around 197 million square miles and there are 11,000 weather stations.

Siberia has 5.1 million square miles and only 59 weather stations when a proper statistical sample would be over 250 stations

Antarctica has 8.5 million square mile and only 57 weather stations when a proper statistical sample would require over 450 stations.

Why is there such an obvious underrepresentation in cold areas? Could it be the leftist agenda?

The 48 contiguous states in the U.S cover around 3.8 million square miles, which is only 2% of the Earth’s area yet it appears we have 1,218 weather stations or over 10% of total stations.  Why is the sample skewed so much?

There are very few weather stations covering the oceans despite over 70% of the Earth being covered by water. If the scientists actually wanted an average global temperature, over 7,000 of the temperature stations would be in or over the oceans, instead of just a few ships.

About 71 percent of the Earth’s surface is water-covered, and the oceans hold about 96.5 percent of all Earth’s water  (source)

It is not generally realized that twelve ships, representing eight nations and acting as floating weather observation stations, are pinpointed over the 3,000 miles of rough water between North America and Europe. (source)

It is statistically impossible to calculate an average daily global temperature and misleading to tell the public that they do that every day in order to scare them into capitulation to the green pushers.

It is blatantly misleading to pretend we can tell what the average temperature on Earth was 100 years ago or 125,000 years ago. There is also no way to tell what causes temperatures to fall or rise, which they have done many times throughout history.

The climate is fluctuating and has always fluctuated cyclically and naturally. It is arrogant to believe politicians and bureaucrats can control temperatures, sea levels, and storm activity if we allow them to destroy industries that have greatly improved our quality and length of life.

On a side note: In Springfield, Illinois, where I live, the warmest day ever was July 14, 1954, during a global cooling period. This year we will be about 30 degrees cooler than 69 years ago. I guess our coal fired power plant hasn’t killed us.

These records were observed at Springfield’s Abraham Lincoln Capital Airport and go back to 1901. The highest temperature measured during that time was 112 degrees Fahrenheit (44 Celsius) on July 14, 1954

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2023/07/it_is_pure_statistical_garbage_when_we_are_told_what_the_average_global_temperature_is_and_that_it_is_a_heat_record.html

Besieged France Bans Fireworks Ahead of Bastille Day

Chief Petty Officer Michael McNabb, CC-PD-Mark

France banned the sale of fireworks from Sunday through July 15 amid concerns about renewed turmoil around the Bastille Day celebrations on Friday.

“In order to prevent the risk of serious disruption of public order during the July 14 festivities, the sale, transportation, and use of pyrotechnic articles and fireworks throughout the country are prohibited until July 15 inclusive,” according to a decree published in the French official gazette on Sunday. The measure came into effect “immediately,” it said.

The French government wants to avoid further episodes of violence after the riots that followed the death of Nahel M., who was killed by a policeman in Nanterre.

Prime Minister Elisabeth Borne anticipated the measure in an interview with Parisien on Saturday, calling the ban part of “massive means to protect the French” during the July 14 weekend.

Sales of fireworks will only be allowed to professionals working for municipalities and public shows, according to the decree.

https://www.politico.eu/article/french-government-banned-fireworks-until-july-15-bastille-celebrations-parade/

‘We use nature as if it were a supermarket’ – Under left-wing German government, a record amount of forest wood burned up

Despite Germany casting itself as a nation pursuing a sound environmental policy designed around reducing CO2 emissions, the country’s forest are suffering due to the ruling government’s policies.

Germans are now burning record amounts of wood in response to sanctions on Russia that saw energy prices soar, while cleaner burning energy sources that Germany long relied on, like Russian natural gas, are increasingly unavailable.

The news comes at a time when Germany’s forests are on the brink, with four out of five trees in the country suffering from a disease and a third featuring clear damage. According to the latest survey of trees, only one out of every five oaks, a tree typically seen as a symbol of Germany, are healthy.

Although researchers say drought and climate change have contributed to the dire state of Germany’s forests, one of the major problems is soaring demand from Germans for firewood, with many rushing to buy wood stoves when energy prices first exploded following sanctions on Russian energy. In addition, power plants also turned to burning wood, considered by experts to be one of the dirtiest energy sources available, with Sami Yassa, a senior scientist with NRDC’s Climate & Clean Energy Program, stating, “wood emits more carbon dioxide than coal for every unit of electricity produced.”

As German news outlet Bayischer Rundfun 24 notes, “With the Ukraine war and the resulting energy crisis came a turning point. Even chimney stoves that had been shut down have been reconnected. This had consequences: never since German reunification has so much wood been felled in German forests for energy production as in the past year. It was 13.8 million cubic meters, an increase of 17.3 percent compared to 2021, as reported by the Federal Statistical Office.”

With the German Greens in power, there are questions as to what purpose the environmental party is serving in protecting German forests when trees are being felled in record numbers. However, the Green party was arguably the most adamant about pursuing harsh sanctions on Russia that led to the record tree feeling at a time when German forests are already suffering immensely.

Other experts across German go so far as to state that nothing pollutes more than wood burning. “Nothing burns dirtier and more harmful to the climate than wood,” said Achim Dittler, a researcher from the Karlsruhe Institute of Technology. Dittler stated that burning wood releases “many more pollutants than burning oil or gas, including carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, methane and soot.”

Should wood burning for energy be banned?

In fact, the burning of wood is seen so harmful to not only air quality but also to forest habitats, that Pierre Ibisch from the Eberswalde University for Sustainable Development says he would propose a complete ban on the practice.

In an interview with German newspaper Welt, a debate was conducted between Ibisch, and the owner of numerous forest properties and aristocrat, Carl-Anton Prinz zu Waldeck und Pyrmont about why the forests are so diseased and what can be done about it.

Ibisch notes that even in protected areas of Germany, dead wood is being harvested for various purposes, including for energy production. He laments that in Germany, the country is even converting coal-fired plants into wood-burning plants.

Ibisch and Waldeck hotly debate the use of forest plantations during the interview, with the forest researcher arguing:

“We use nature as if it were a supermarket. Not only are resources becoming ever scarcer, the fundamentals that supply these resources are also changing, i.e. the soil and biological diversity. As an ecologist, it worries me greatly to see what is expected of the forest and what it can achieve. In order to be able to use wood, the forest must first function. We are currently entering an age in which one cannot assume that forest will grow back on every deforested area. I am amazed that foresters often resist talking about plantations. Douglas firs and larches planted in rows, which are then harvested by machine, are exactly that.”

Ibsich argues that the deterioration of the forests are not only due to climate change, but also how forests have been mismanaged. He claims that the problems seen in forest management date back decades and have a lot to do with the monoculture forest plantations. He argues that forests should “manage themselves” and not be planned, even if such planning is the common practice in forestry operations.

“What we are seeing now is not solely the fault of climate change. If forestry had relied much more consistently on deciduous trees in the past decades instead of monocultures with conifers, we would not have the large-scale forest damage. The story that spruce and pine only existed because the area had to be reforested quickly after the war is only partially true. For a long time, it was easy to make good money with it,” said Ibisich.

Waldeck, who owns various forest plots, responded that although forest owners are “self-critical,” softwood, such as pines, “will continue to account for a large proportion of our forests in the future because it is economically important for forestry operations. Like other industries, we too have to economize. Of course, no forester knows what the weather and climate will look like in 2050 or 2100. There is therefore a range of tree species that we will line up with.”

Waldeck sees it in economic terms, stating: “The less land a private forest owner uses, the more it costs him. In addition, the wood will have to come from somewhere in the future. Added to this is the CO₂ storage. Softwood grows faster than hardwood and absorbs more CO₂ accordingly. If we reforest, we increase the storage capacity of the forest.”

Welt newspaper argues that wood will always need to be burned, in which case, Ibesch counters that the problem is the scale of wood burning in the country and its rapid growth despite the state of the forests.

“The burning of wood has long been encouraged. I consider that irresponsible in times when the future of the forest is completely unclear. It is not a law of nature to use wood, especially when it makes forests even more vulnerable.”

As Remix News reported, Germany had the second-highest level of “dirty energy” usage in all of Europe last month, producing 472 grams of greenhouse gases per kilowatt-hour.

https://rmx.news/article/we-use-nature-as-if-it-were-a-supermarket-under-left-wing-german-government-a-record-amount-of-forest-wood-burned-up/

Suspended BBC presenter, accused of paying money to a teen for sexually explicit images, made “panic calls” to the victim asking – What have you done

On the 8th of July, The Sun published the shocking story of an unnamed BBC presenter who allegedly paid a teen 35,000 Pounds over a period of three years for sexually explicit images. The publication cited the victim’s mother’s version while publishing the story against the BBC presenter.  

Now, in its exclusive report, the Sun has said that the BBC presenter called the young man twice after the allegations were published in the publication. The report adds that the BBC ‘star’ asked the victim to drop their complaint or stop the ongoing investigation. 

The now-suspended TV star was later identified as a male staffer of BBC. The Sun claimed that he called the victim and asked, “What have you done?”

Reporting on the BBC presenter scandal, the newspaper added that the BBC presenter also asked the victim to call their mother and get her to “stop the investigation”.

BBC suspended the accused presenter and launched an internal investigation

Earlier, the BBC confirmed the reports that it had known about the complaint way back in May, this year. However, the state-run British Broadcaster claimed that the new allegations were of a “different nature”. It added that it has suspended the male staffer accused of these wrongdoings. 

According to Leading Britain’s Conversation (LBC), BBC said, “The BBC first became aware of a complaint in May. New allegations were put to us on Thursday of a different nature and in addition to our own enquiries, we have also been in touch with external authorities, in line with our protocols. We can also confirm a male member of staff has been suspended.” 

However, The Mirror report says that till the time news broke out, the BBC executives were partying with the presenter weeks after allegations were first made in May this year.

Notably, the creation, distribution, possession, or exhibition of any explicit images involving individuals under the age of 18, even if the content was created with the consent of the minor is illegal as per the Protection of Children Act 1978. It’s also illegal to “ask a child to send a sexual image of themselves”.

As per further information, Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Lucy Frazer spoke to BBC Director General Tim Davie about the facts of the case. 

Secretary Frazer said, “I have spoken to BBC Director General Tim Davie about the deeply concerning allegations involving one of its presenters. He has assured me the BBC is investigating swiftly and sensitively.”

She added, “Given the nature of the allegations, it is important that the BBC is now given the space to conduct its investigation, establish the facts and take appropriate action. I will be kept updated.”

Victim’s Mother accused the BBC presenter of ruining her child’s life

It all started on the 19th of May when the family informed the state-run broadcaster about this BBC Presenter scandal. They said that one of their “famous” presenters paid around 35,000 Pounds over a period of three years for sexually explicit images. The Corporation claimed to launch an investigation into the matter which was headed by a cyber-crime expert. 

However, it is said that the presenter stayed on air and allegedly kept sending money until the family approached The Sun. 

The young person’s mother told The Sun, “All I want is for this man to stop paying my child for sexual pictures and stop him funding my child’s drug habit.”

As per The Sun’s report, when the victim’s mother found out about the alleged exchange of money for sexually explicit images, she begged BBC to make the famous presenter stop sending cash to her child. She also said that the BBC presenter destroyed her child’s life and fed his “spiralling” crack cocaine habit. 

She said, “I blame this BBC man for destroying my child’s life — taking my child’s innocence and handing over the money for crack cocaine that could kill my child.”

She also added that her child was happy-go-lucky but changed to a ghost-like crack addict after the money started pouring in.

The mother further said that she saw a picture of the presenter having a video chat preparing for a “show” while in his underwear. 

Despite all these claims and allegations, the Police have not received any formal referral or allegation from BBC’s side. 

On the 9th of July, a Met Police spokesperson said, “The Met has received initial contact from the BBC in relation to this matter, but no formal referral or allegation has been made. We will require additional information before determining what further action should follow.”

https://www.opindia.com/2023/07/suspended-bbc-presenter-panic-calls-teen-victim/

Erasing Innocence – Gender ideology is a war on reality

Political language, George Orwell wrote in his essay “Politics and the English Language,” “is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind.” That has never been a more apt description than with the sophistry of today’s Left. Their woke lexicon takes the political corruption of language to a whole new level of mendacity and windiness.

The Left insists, for example, on substituting such euphemisms as “birthing parent” for “mother”; “gender-affirming care” for the surgical mutilation of confused, manipulated children; “reproductive rights” for infanticide; “anti-racism” for anti-white racism; “anti-fascist” for fascist; “undocumented immigrant” for illegal alien; “justice-involved person” for convicted felon, to name a few. Such terminology is carefully crafted to dilute if not pervert the truth, and then given a coordinated push via all the Left’s media outlets to dominate our political and cultural discourse. Too often, conservatives end up embracing such language instead of always pushing back with the truth.

Sometimes the Left’s subversive language constitutes nothing less than a full-frontal assault on reality itself. In the latest example, Breitbart News reports that the dark, satanic mill of abortion, Planned Parenthood, has gotten behind an idea that is gaining legitimacy among young people, especially Generation Z (those born in the late 1990s and early 2000s). Last Thursday the organization claimed on Twitter that virginity is nothing more than a meaningless “social construct.”

“The idea of virginity comes from outdated — let’s be real, patriarchal— ways of thinking that hurts everyone,” Planned Parenthood tweeted over a picture of a billboard that stated, “Virginity is a social construct.”

Whenever the Left wants to deny a commonly-accepted reality that inconveniences their agenda, they dismiss it as a mere “social construct,” because in our society, which they believe to be built on oppression, exploitation, and bigotry, commonly-accepted realities – e.g., heterosexuality, traditional masculinity, the nuclear family – are in their view complete fictions imposed upon the powerless by the powerful. And if something has been socially constructed, it can and must be deconstructed in order to throw off the enslavement of social conventions and liberate the oppressed in the name of social justice.

Hence, in the Left’s view, traditional binary sex roles are mere social constructions that serve the “hetero-normative” patriarchal power structure and that oppress purportedly marginalized groups like the LGBT community (which of course is anything but marginalized).

And so Planned Parenthood has begun promoting the propaganda that “virginity” – the state or condition of sexual innocence – is an outmoded “concept” that no longer has relevance in our sexually sophisticated (read: jaded and degraded) society. This is another of the Left’s attempts to redefine words to push the postmodern world view that reality is malleable and relative. If we deconstruct definitions and unmoor words from the reality they describe, then we can jettison inconvenient truths and replace them with convenient lies.

Let’s unpack, as the current lingo goes, the idiocy behind PP’s desperate assertion. First, virginity is not an “idea.” It is a word that, for at least 700 years in English (the Oxford English Dictionary cites Chaucer as one of the word’s earliest users), has described a very real state of sexual innocence. Everyone knows that a virgin is someone who has not had sexual intercourse (or in a metaphorical sense, someone who is new and inexperienced at something).

Second, it’s unclear how the term “virginity” “hurts everyone,” as Planned Parenthood put it. In fact, it doesn’t hurt anyone; it simply describes a state of chastity. Perhaps PP means that people in our decadent modern era are embarrassed to be labeled a virgin. That is a sad commentary on our sexually jaded society, because there was a time when virginity was valued, not something to be mocked or shed of like a humiliating skin condition. Since the Sexual Revolution, though, women have been encouraged to hurry to leave innocence behind and embrace the “liberation” of promiscuity (in truth, though, who has benefited most from the so-called sexual liberation of women? Hint: not women).

This wasn’t the first time Planned Parenthood has argued that virginity isn’t a real thing. Breitbart News notes that PP previously conceded the existence of virginity but considered it a “concept” for years. Then, in 2019, PP tweeted, “Idk [I don’t know] who needs to hear this but virginity is a made-up social construct, and it has absolutely nothing to do with your hymen” – ignoring the fact that males can be virgins too. The next tweet in that thread proceeds to acknowledge the definition of virginity but then subverts it by claiming that different people define the word differently or dismiss it altogether as meaningless:

A virgin is someone who’s never had sex. But “sex” means different things to different people, so “virginity” does too. Many don’t care what it means or think it matters. Whatever you believe, the fact is you can’t tell if someone’s had sex by checking their hymen.

Fact check: virginity does not mean different things to different people. There has never been any confusion about its meaning. It always, to everyone, has meant the state of not having had sexual intercourse. But Planned Parenthood and its ideological comrades want to gaslight gullible youth into believing that the word, like every word the Left reframes, means whatever one wants it to mean at any given moment, or nothing at all. To quote Orwell again, “language can corrupt thought.” Words can liberate and empower as truth, or be weaponized to confuse and enslave as lies.

Social media lit up in response to Planned Parenthood’s tweet, with Twitter users overwhelmingly and righteously slamming PP for its claim that virginity is a meaningless fiction.

“Groomers,” one commenter accurately responded.

“Either you’ve had sex or you haven’t. How is that a ‘social construct?’” another user observed.

“Me thinks someone must be losing business or why the hell would they be tweeting something like this?!” yet another commenter wrote.

Tragically, they’re not losing business, except in states where abortion restrictions have been implemented, denying the infanticidal Left its precious freedom to discard an unborn child up to the moment of birth, if not beyond. According to the organization’s annual report released last April, Planned Parenthood performed the second-highest number of abortions (374,155) in its history and saw record-high revenue during its 2021-2022 fiscal year (the previous year saw the highest number of abortions in PP’s history: 383,460).

Planned Parenthood tweeted that message about virginity because family-annihilating gender ideology is the tip of the spear of the Left’s assault on normality – indeed, its war on reality. Because that’s what this ultimately comes down to: not simply the dismantling of our culture’s every norm, institution, and tradition, but the dismantling of reality itself and its replacement with political language that conforms not to reality but to ideology.

The Left wants to render the word virginity meaningless because they want to remove every barrier to a thoroughly sexualized culture. They want young people to believe chastity itself is not only passé and pointless, but that there is literally no such thing, that it was made up to keep young girls and women under the boot heel of an archaic, patriarchal, bourgeois social structure that devalued women and sought to suppress their sexual pleasure and expression. How can the Left insist that sexuality is at the core of one’s unique personal identity if a culture prizes virginity in both men and women prior to marriage?

The Left’s political manipulation of the language – especially the language of gender ideology – is a subversive campaign to replace reality with a fantasy universe of our own making, without any limits on our transgressive desires. It promises to make us gods. Instead, it will make us slaves to our own worship of the self.

https://www.frontpagemag.com/erasing-innocence/

UK: Afghan migrant deported for raping 12-year-old girl got £20K in taxpayer-funded legal aid to try and overturn conviction

An Afghan migrant caught trying to sneak back into Britain received taxpayer-funded legal help to try and overturn his conviction after being jailed for raping a 12-year-old girl.

Emal Kochai, 29, was deported from Britain in 2019 after serving half of a nine-year prison sentence for raping his victim at a house in Reading, Berks in 2014.

But he made his way back to the Channel in March 2022 where he was found by a reporter in a tent at the Grande Synthe camp, near Dunkirk, claiming he had ‘changed his ways’.

The convicted paedophile admitted tying to board a boat to Britain, but his crossing failed after police arrived and punctured the vessel with a knife.

Now new Freedom of Information figures show the child sex offender received taxpayers’ cash to pay for a solicitor to challenge his conviction prior to being booted out of Britain in 2019.

The asylum seeker turned rapist received a total of £19,395.02 in legal aid cash to pay for his defence at trial plus a further £1,752.31 for a solicitor to work on a Criminal Cases Review Commission application.

The CCRC investigates potential miscarriages of justice.

Kochai has previously claimed his rape conviction was, ‘all a misunderstanding’.

His victim, told police that Kochai had raped her at a house where there were six or seven other men.

She said that Kochai, known to her as AK, had pushed her on to a bed, pulled off her clothing and raped her.

The other men had knocked on the door and Kochai had opened it, then locked it again and resumed his assault, his trial heard.

Kochai, who was 20 at the time of the offence, denied rape but told police he had been told the girl was 17 and that he would not have touched her if he had known her real age.

David Spencer of the Centre for Crime Prevention, said: ‘This case is yet another example of taxpayer money being put straight into the pockets of lawyers tasked with trying to defend the indefensible and mounting frivolous cases to try and keep immigrants in the UK.

‘It is wholly wrong that taxpayer money should be used in this way and this case adds yet more grist to the mill that legal aid is long overdue widespread reform to prevent this sort of abuse of the system.’

The CCRC told us that ‘no application had been received’ from Kochai despite preliminary legal work on a case being undertaken.

The Ministry of Justice, added: ‘Legal aid is not paid directly to defendants. Legal aid is paid to legal representatives to ensure a fair trial.’

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12270129/Afghan-migrant-deported-raping-12-year-old-girl-got-20K-taxpayer-funded-legal-aid.html