The 26-year-old Syrian migrant Karam Kanjo has been convicted and issued a deportation order after being filmed pushing a 91-year-old Swedish woman down a flight of stairs and stealing her necklace — a necklace the widow received from her late husband.
Kanjo was 17 when he first arrived in Sweden from Syria in 2015, and since then, he has been a serial menace. He never finished school, began abusing drugs, and fell into a life of crime that saw him arrested for violent assault, theft, and sexual harassment. In his first five years, he was convicted for eight different cases. During his entire time in Sweden, he has been punished for 19 different crimes.
The first time he served prison time was in 2020 for assault, in which he ripped money right from a woman’s hand. Despite the crime, deportation was not even raised, according to Expressen.
🇸🇪‼️ Outrage after a Syrian asylum seeker robs a 91-year-old Swedish woman of her necklace – the same one her husband gifted her 50 years ago.
The 26-year-old Syrian asylum seeker, Karam Kanjo, was out on probation after assaulting and raping a woman on the street. pic.twitter.com/DG4HYUAGHV
Just the next year, he was convicted of raping a woman in a bush in Sollentuna and sentenced to 2.5 years in prison. However, the prosecutor in the case did not demand deportation, even though Kanjo only had a residence permit at the time.
Now, only after his arrest and conviction for assaulting and robbing a 91-year-old woman in a Sollentuna train station, is he finally issued a deportation order. The victim’s stolen necklace was reportedly given to her by her late husband 50 years ago.
When he assaulted the woman, he was still on parole for rape.
“According to the Probation Service’s investigation, he lives under destructive social conditions without his own accommodation and is unemployed. In light of the seriousness of the crime he is convicted of, the court judges that his connection to Sweden is not such that it prevents deportation,” wrote the district court.
Whether Sweden can actually manage to deport the man is another question. Given his Syrian background, getting him on a plane and sending him back will be difficult due to the failure of EU migration policy.
A 43-year-old Algerian man was arrested on Monday November 11 at around 7pm by the Service interdépartemental de sécurisation des transports en commun (SISTC). He is suspected of having vandalised the stele in honour of the victims of the attack at Saint-Charles station in Marseille, as Valeurs actuelles learned from a police source. As he is in France illegally, he is already known to the police.
The victims of Islamist terror: Laura and Mauranne. Screen grab X
He was taken into police custody and has admitted to the offences. He hates France,’ a police source told Valeurs actuelles. At Franceinfo’s request, the Marseille public prosecutor’s office announced the opening of an investigation into ‘intentional damage to property by arson and theft’. The stele honouring the victims of the attack on the Saint-Charles train station in Marseille was vandalised on the morning of 11 November, a day of remembrance. The main memorial plaque was stolen. The French flag was scratched and part of the plinth was burnt.
La stèle en hommage à Laura et Mauranne, victimes de l’attentat islamiste de la gare Saint-Charles à Marseille, vandalisée : la réaction de la mère de Laura pic.twitter.com/wCh1GPGqzc
— Fdesouche.com est une revue de presse (@F_Desouche) November 12, 2024
Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby, the day-to-day leader of the Church of England, has resigned, following a damning report on his handling of child abuse cases involving prominent Church member John Smyth.
The report, commissioned by the church’s national safeguarding team and led by former social services director Keith Makin, found that Welby had failed to pass on information that could have led to an earlier investigation of Smyth’s abuses.
John Smyth, a barrister and prominent evangelical Christian, was revealed to be one of the Church of England’s most prolific serial child abusers, reportedly subjecting as many as 130 victims to severe and illegal treatment. The Makin Report found that Smyth’s “abhorrent abuse” could have been exposed as early as 2013, had Welby taken further steps to ensure the police investigated initial concerns.
Smyth’s abuse, primarily occurring through Christian summer camps, went unpunished during his lifetime; he died in Cape Town in 2018 while under investigation by Hampshire police.
In a statement on Tuesday afternoon, Welby acknowledged that it had become evident he “must take personal and institutional responsibility” for the “long and retraumatising” period following his awareness of the allegations in 2013, during which Smyth was not held accountable and survivors were repeatedly let down by the Church of England.
The case prompted widespread condemnation from both government officials and senior clergy. Before Welby’s resignation, UK prime minister Keir Starmer addressed the situation at the COP29 summit, stating that the victims had been “very, very badly” let down. While he acknowledged that the Church would ultimately decide Welby’s fate, Starmer stressed that victims’ suffering should remain central to the conversation.
Welby also faced backlash from within the church itself. The Bishop of Newcastle, Helen-Ann Hartley, publicly called for his resignation, stating his leadership had lost the confidence of the clergy. Adding to the pressure, Stephen Cherry, dean of King’s College Chapel at Cambridge, criticised Welby’s failure to uphold the Church’s trust and confidence, pointing to a growing rift between the archbishop and the community he leads.
Reform UK leader Nigel Farage was among the outspoken critics, condemning Welby’s tenure as a “complete catastrophe.” He told The Telegraph:
If I had a member of staff in parliament who I knew was committing sexual crimes and I chose to turn a blind eye to it, then I think the [House of Commons] standards committee would suspend me within a week and there’d be a by-election. I’d be forced to resign.
Justin Welby was appointed Archbishop of Canterbury in 2013. The position is the most senior in England’s established church, after the monarch. The archbishop is also the symbolic head of the worldwide Anglican Communion.
During his tenure, Welby has been criticised for taking liberal-left political positions on contentious issues. In 2018—two years after the Brexit referendum—Welby praised the European Union as “the greatest dream realised for human beings since the fall of the Western Roman Empire” and condemned rising nationalism and Brexit as threats to peace and unity in Europe. He implied that Brexit supporters were susceptible to “fear of the other,” a comment criticised as out of touch with the sentiments of those who voted to leave the EU.
A year earlier, Welby linked the Brexit referendum and Donald Trump’s election as U.S. president to fascism, asserting that these developments were part of a “nationalist, populist, or even fascist” political tradition.
Meanwhile, earlier this year, Welby referenced the Nazis during a House of Lords debate on the previous UK government’s Rwanda immigration scheme.
Throughout his tenure, Welby’s propensity for politically charged and sometimes inflammatory comparisons has drawn criticism, often sparking debate about the role of Anglican clerics in political matters.
Now, amid declining church attendance, Welby leaves a legacy clouded by scandal and missteps.
2011…It seems like a century ago. I could dig through the archives for more similar headlines. But it has actually become annoying to be right in hindsight. Last week’s pogrom in Amsterdam should be the final wake-up call for Dutch Jews, but I doubt it will be.
The Chief Rabbi of the Great Synagogue of Paris, Moshe Sebbag, recently called for departure: “There is no future for Jews in France. I tell all young people to go to Israel or to a safer country.”
Last year, 1,100 French Jews left for Israel. This year, there will be 4,500. Since 1972, over 100,000 French Jews have left (out of half a million). Before 2012, 500 Jews left France every year. Tenfold numbers.
These are impressive numbers, but not enough. I really wonder what a Jew with children and grandchildren has left to do in Europe.
The Chief Rabbi of Barcelona, Meir Bar Hen, also invited the Jews to pack their bags. “This place is lost. Better to leave sooner rather than later” to Israel. Our community “is condemned” both because of radical Islam and the reluctance of the authorities to confront it. “I encouraged them (the Jews) to buy a house in Israel”.
“The Jews have no future in Europe”, echoed Avraham Gigi, Chief Rabbi of Brussels.
What remains of Jewish life in Europe today works like this: synagogues are protected fortresses, schools have no signs but they do have many private police and security guards, houses have removed the outside mezuzah, Jews do not wear a kippah in the street or a necklace with the Star of David, they do not give their Hebrew surname to taxis, they tell their children not to speak Hebrew in public, there are no Israeli flags in their windows.
Is this Jewish life?
Meanwhile, Frederik Sieradzki, spokesman for the Jewish community of Malmö, says that Sweden’s third largest city could lose all its Jews by 2029.
Samuel Hayek, president of the Jewish National Fund, predicted: “Jews have no future in the United Kingdom.” This was said by Hayek, who has lived in the United Kingdom for 40 years and is one of the country’s most famous philanthropists.
What was unthinkable yesterday is plausible today and will be certain tomorrow.
Jüdische Allgemeine is the newspaper of German Jews. Editor-in-chief Philipp Peyman Engel said in an interview with the Welt that “Jewish in Germany is becoming invisible.”
A civilization that loses its Jews inevitably condemns itself to death. But as Ayaan Hirsi Ali wrote in the Die Welt, “the West is on the road to submission”.
Before the Holocaust, the pessimists ran away and were saved. The optimists stayed and were killed. Who really wants to bet on optimism anymore?
A Hampshire primary school has sparked controversy after requesting all Christmas references be removed from its festive pantomime production to make it more inclusive.
The headteacher of Wherwell Primary School in Andover sent a letter to parents of 126 children, announcing that their upcoming performance of Jack and the Beanstalk would exclude any mention of Christmas.
The decision was made to ensure children whose families do not celebrate Christmas could attend the pantomime performance, irrespective of their religious beliefs.
The letter sent to parents read: “As this is not a Christmas event, but a pantomime, it can be enjoyed by everyone wit the changes we have requested.
The headteacher of Wherwell Primary School in Andover sent a letter to parents of 126 childrenGoogle Street View
“We are keen that ALL of our children should enjoy the pantomime and for it to be a fully inclusive event, have removed Christmas songs from the production.
“Children will continue to enjoy our usual Christmas events as we progress through the remainder of this term.”
Following backlash from angry parents, headteacher Mandy Ovenden issued a second letter this week explaining the school’s position on making the event “fully inclusive.”
In her letter to parents, Ovenden explained that discussions with the pantomime company revealed Christmas songs were included in their standard performance.
“We have a number of families who either do not celebrate Christmas or do so in a different way. The children of these families are removed from events such as this, at the request of their parents,” she wrote.
The headteacher emphasised that as this was not specifically a Christmas event, it could be “enjoyed by everyone” with the requested changes.
She assured parents that traditional festivities would continue, stating: “Children will continue to enjoy our usual Christmas events as we progress through the remainder of this term.”
Parents have expressed outrage over the decision to remove Christmas references from the pantomime.
One parent told the Daily Mail: “This shouldn’t be allowed.
“Christmas is celebrated all over the UK and the world, and you just can’t eradicate it so a few people will not be offended.”
They added: “A pantomime is only ever held at Christmas, but it’s crazy that there can be no mention of the word.”
Another parent criticised the headteacher’s approach, stating: “The head is wrong pandering to the whim of a small minority of parents.
“She or the panto company should have said ‘no’. You cannot eradicate our history and culture.”
A spokesperson for Chaplins Pantos, the Essex-based company staging the production, confirmed they typically include festive elements in their shows.
“We don’t always mention Santa Claus, but there would usually include a Christmas song and there would be reference to Christmas.
“On this occasion, the school asked us not to include any reference.”
A Wherwell Primary School spokesperson said: “We are very excited to be able to treat our pupils to a fully inclusive pantomime this year.
“As we do every year, we are also running a range of Christmas celebrations across the remainder of the term, ensuring that overall our planned schedule of events is well-balanced and reflects our whole school community.”
What if you threw a big green party and nobody came?
The 2024 United Nations Climate Change Conference or Conference of the Parties or COP29 is happening in glorious Azerbaijan but the usual folks flying huge jets to warn us about the danger of using fossil fuels are mostly staying home.
Except for the Taliban who showed up to demand money. (Not a joke.)
Biden has trouble walking across sand. Xi has better things to do with his time. About the only G7 leader to show up is UK PM Keir Starmer (unless you want to pretend that Italy’s Meloni is a world leader) who waddled around like a ridiculous dark and mumbled something about the importance of being green so all the old white British pensioners freeze to death over the winter.
‘I have repeatedly emphasised the importance of global leadership when it comes to the climate challenge, and therefore it is very important for me to come to Cop,” PM Starmer whined. He said there was ‘a global race’ to be the leader on renewable energy, adding: ‘I want us to win the race.’
That’s like wanting to win the world curling championship. Nobody else is even showing for this one.
Of Mr Trump’s remarks on climate change, Sir Keir said: ‘I’m not going to comment on his views, I am very clear in mine which is that the climate challenge is something that we have got to rise to and that’s why I’ve repeatedly said we’ve got to show leadership.’
And you know how to show leadership… by constantly talking about showing leadership.
But the Starmer regime, which panders to Islamists, is in good company at COP29, with the Taliban.
Never has Starmer better resembled Boris Johnson’s description of him as a “a bullock having a thermometer unexpectedly shoved in its rectum”.
All religious affairs of Islam in Austria are now managed in this building near Reumannplatz. Photo: unzensuriert
The left-wing-led city government has apparently lost the battle against parallel societies. The opening of a propaganda centre for political Islam in the Favoriten district of Vienna is evidence of this failure.
This centre for all religious affairs in Austria has been opened in the former Generali building near Reumannplatz. The institution operates under the name ‘Centre of the Islamic Federation Vienna (IFW)’. It is said to be the extended arm of the Turkish nationalist movement Milli Görüş. Such an administrative building of the Milli Görüş offshoot IFW has no place in Favoriten; instead, Vienna must massively counteract the further development of parallel societies, demanded the chairman of the FPÖ Favoriten, MP Stefan Berger, and the chairman of the FPÖ Favoriten club, Christian Schuch, since the establishment at Reumannplatz became known.
In a statement they said:
According to the Krone.at report, the primary goal of Milli Görüş is to enforce ‘just order’ in Turkey. The ‘Islamic civilisation’ should replace the ‘Western civilisation’ in supremacy in order to then spread the mission to the world.
Both FPÖ politicians ask themselves: What is such an organisation supposed to be doing here? Especially in a district where integration is already a problem? Berger and Schuch emphasised that it is unacceptable that increasingly strong structures are being built up that do not mean well for Austria and that do everything in their power to ensure that immigrant groups continue to isolate themselves in counter-societies.
In fact, there is already a lot of trouble in the education system in Favoriten. More and more pupils are already drifting into a parallel society in which our values, our language and our traditions play little or no role. If the IFW now also has an ever-increasing influence on the development of pupils, anyone can imagine what this means for the future of Vienna’s 10th district and the city of Vienna.
Teresa Ribera Photo: Ministry of the Presidency. Government of Spain, via Wikimedia Commons
Clean-up from the catastrophic flooding that devastated several towns, including the city of Valencia, and wreaked havoc further inland is still underway. At the same time, discontent continues to mount against Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez and his government as details emerge showing their failures to warn the population of the danger of flooding and deal with the aftermath.
On Sunday, approximately 130,000 people took to the streets in Valencia to express their disgust with the government. The demonstration was organized by leftist groups, La Razón reports, and was initially intended as a silent gathering in honor of the dead but the crowd erupted in anger, shouting “Murderers!”
They marched from the city hall to the headquarters of the regional government where they placed mud-covered boots and a red t-shirt at the doorstep. Some protestors became violent, attempting to burn the door and force their way in. Police made several arrests.
The demonstrators also called for the resignation of Carlos Mazón, the president of the Valencia region.
Mazón has been locked in a battle of blame with Spain’s environment minister Teresa Ribera since Spanish media revealed that, while the livelihoods and lives of many Valencians were being carried away by the water on the night of October 29, Mazón was dining with a journalist. Ribera claimed to have made four calls to the regional president that night to offer help. Mazón claims Ribera only sent him a single text message which he published on social media. Ribera has made no response. The central government left the emergency management completely in the hands of the regional government, a move that analysts say was both a political calculation to avoid blame and illegal under Spanish law.
VOX has also filed a complaint accusing Sánchez, several government ministers including Ribera, and and the president of the meteorological service of imprudent manslaughter for the failure to alert the public of the grave danger of flash flooding.
Ribera faces the EU Parliament on Tuesday as she attempts to gain a seat on the European Commission. Ribera will likely face some tough questions from the opposition Spanish MEPs on her government’s response to the flooding and her role as minister in particular. The ministry she technically still heads in Spain—though her presence has been noticeably scarce since summer—is responsible for two of the agencies with responsibilities related to the recent historic flash floods in Spain that left at least 200 people dead.
NCF Senior Fellow Dr. Philip Kiszely joined GB News to discuss whether Justin Welby should resign as Archbishop of Canterbury over claims he knew about one of the Church of England’s most horrific child abusers since at least 2013 and did nothing at the time.
In a crushing blow to free speech in Australia, the lower house of federal parliament has passed an amendment, known as the Misinformation and Disinformation Bill, to the Broadcasting Services Act 1992. It imposes obligations on digital communications platform providers to prevent the dissemination of content “that contains information that is reasonably verifiable as false, misleading or deceptive, and is reasonably likely to cause or contribute to serious harm of a specified type (misinformation and disinformation).”
Several dissenting politicians have expressed outrage and incredulity at the legislative move. Nola Marino, a member of the right-wing opposition Liberal Party said that she did not think that Australia, a liberal democratic society, would ever be “debating a bill that is explicitly designed to censor and silence the Australian people.”
National Party member Keith Pitt described the legislation as a “yawning chasm that is incredibly … dangerous to this country.” He expressed shock that the amendment was being put forward, adding that Western democracies such as Australia have been built on freedom of expression and freedom of religion. Such principled objections were ignored, however. The legislation now has only to pass in the Senate (the upper house) to become law.
The first and most obvious criticism of the law is that it puts the government authority, the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) in the ridiculous position of deciding what is and isn’t “false” information. That is not only absurd – how could ACMA, for example make judgements on subjects like vaccines or viruses – it means that the law cannot be applied universally.
Governments routinely put out false information, arguably more often than they put out true information. Will they be penalized? Of course not. Advertizers present information that is false. Will they fall under his law? No. It will only be directed at people who are saying things that the government does not like, especially in relation to health policy. It is politics, not law.
When governments distort the law for political ends, it inevitably ends up in badly crafted legislation, and that is what has happened here. The law depends for its integrity on clear semantics, words whose definition is clear. But two key words, “misinformation” and “disinformation” are misleading at best.
They are variants of the word “information”; the prefixes “dis” and “mis” have been added to create the impression that what is at issue is objective truth (“information” being something objectively observable). It is a diversion. What is happening instead is that the law will target the intent of the writers.
Disinformation is defined as information that is “intended” to mislead and to cause harm. With misinformation there is no such intent; it is just an error, but even there it requires determining what is in the author’s mind. The aim is to outlaw thinking that is not congruent with the governments’ official position.
Determining a writer’s or speaker’s intent is all but impossible, however, because we cannot get into another person’s mind, only speculate on the on their motivations. Thus, someone who produces content that is deemed to be false and have caused damage could say that it was meant as irony, not literally. How is it possible to prove otherwise?
Pointing out this definitional slipperiness could be the basis for an effective rebuttal of the legislation. Courts are very poor at establishing intent.
A second problem: How do we know what meaning the recipients will get? Glance at the comments on social media posts and you will see an extreme array of views, ranging from approbation to intense hostility. To state the obvious, readers think for themselves and inevitably derive different meanings. Anti-disinformation legislation, which is justified as protecting people from bad influences for the common good, is not merely patronizing and infantilizing, it treats citizens as mere machines ingesting data – robots, not humans. It is legislation that is not just aimed at controlling the thoughts of the producers of the content, it is targeted at the thoughts of the recipients: two layers of absurdity. The result would be like targeting the “thought crimes” depicted in George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty Four.
Censorship regimes operate on the assumption that if a sufficient proportion of the available content is skewed towards pushing state propaganda, then the audience will inevitably be persuaded to believe the authorities. But what matters is the quality of the content, not the quantity of the messaging. Repetitious expressions of the government’s preferred narrative eventually become meaningless, while sound analyses will cut through.
The main purpose of the legislation is to silence critics of the Australian government’s response to the COVID-19 crisis. The aim is to ensure that in future health authorities and the political class are immune from scrutiny and criticism. It is unlikely to be effective. What they have done instead is demonstrate that Australia does not have adequate protection for free speech, nor is it genuinely a democracy.
