The megalomaniac Habeck projection at the Siegestor in Munich has now been stopped by the police. Screenshot
“Hands off our Democracy” has now become the rallying cry of the German ruling establishment and press. In a recent interview with the German magazine, Spiegel, Green chancellor candidate Robert Habeck was asked if he believed Musk to be a danger to Germany. He responded with the following.
He [Musk] will do anything to push through his interests. The combination of immense wealth, control over information and networks, the use of artificial intelligence and the will to ignore rules is a frontal attack on our democracy. Just because he comes across as relaxed and builds electric cars, we should not be deceived. There is only one answer: Hands off our democracy, Mr. Musk! We cannot afford to be careless or naive. Germany has long been in the sights of foreign actors – especially now during the election campaign. They see Germany as an easy target. Unfortunately, disinformation campaigns have a relatively easy time of it here.
I guess from Habeck’s viewpoint, it is just fine for a European billionaire like George Soros, with murky ties to the Nazis in his youth, to interfere in U.S. politics, but it is intolerable for a U.S. billionaire to tweet a few words about the current German ruling establishment. It seems a little unfair to Musk. After all, it is not like Musk is funding a paramilitary group such as ANTIFA to stir up trouble prior to the presidential election. Moreover, as far as I know, Musk is not pouring millions into the campaign coffers of prosecutors who will go on to unleash a crime wave across their country. Musk is just stating the obvious that the current German ruling elites are fools.
Life is full of ironies though and one might live to see the next German Chancellor award said U.S. billionaire with the Medal of Freedom just as our fading, feckless leader has done for said European billionaire.
Attempt to reach out to young voters by UK’s ruling Labour Party spectacularly backfires after attempt to latch onto TikTok trend sees lyrics about sex with “young girls” posted just as the government tries to persuade an angry public it’s definitely taking child sexual exploitation by ‘grooming gangs’ seriously.
While figures like Nigel Farage have shown a strong social media game can translate into real-world support among younger voters, the governing UK Labour Party have learnt to their cost the dangers of engaging with content trends they don’t fully understand. Posting what is known as ‘A.I. slop’ — low-effort artificial intelligence-generated video for engagement — the video was meant to show “This Labour Government’s plan to change Britain for the better”.
Yet over the images of animals wearing clothes and messages like “you’ll feel safer with more police on the beat” was Brazilian musician DJ Holanda’s song Montagem Choral, and its explicit lyrics. While probably not appropriate at the best of times, the thuggish lyrics describing sex assaults on “young girls” come as the decades-long scandal of very young English girls groomed into gang rape by migrant communities explodes into the mainstream.
In Portuguese, the song proclaims: “Sit on the pot-crazy dick… Perfect combination is sex, beer and marijuana, The young girls are addicted… Just a punch in the young girl’s pussy”.
The video was posted on Sunday and was later deleted after internet users pointed out the lyrics. The Guardian cites a government spokesman who said: “This post is an adaptation of a viral social media trend and contains a mix of two music tracks. We acknowledge the translation of the lyrics is completely inappropriate. We apologise and the video has now been deleted.”
Citing a “specific risk”, the Chinese-developed video-sharing app TikTok has been banned from UK government devices “with immediate effect.” https://t.co/4OuLqXKyAr
Newly published data shows that nearly 40 percent of the suspects arrested in connection with Berlin’s New Year’s Eve riots do not hold a German passport, a figure significantly exceeding the city’s 24-percent foreign population.
Moreover, a recently released list of their forenames suggests that the majority of those implicated have immigrant backgrounds, underscoring concerns that the official statistics may understate the role of foreigners by not distinguishing between naturalized and German-born citizens.
The Berlin Police have updated their figures on the New Year’s Eve unrest, reporting a revised injury list of 44 police officers and a total of 1,453 recorded crimes with 670 suspects identified.
Of those suspects, 406 hold a German passport and 264 are foreign nationals — but this doesn’t tell the whole story.
Although official crime statistics count suspects as “German” if they have a German passport — regardless of whether they were naturalized — the newly released forename list published by the Nius outlet suggests a predominantly migrant background among those arrested who are officially recorded as German. According to the site, the roster includes names in the German passport-holding cohort like Abdul Kerim, Abdulhamid, Abdulkadir, Ali, Hassan, Mohammed (12 occurrences, in various spellings), and Youssuf.
Nius’ analysis of the list of forenames concluded that at least 65 percent of the German suspects “have first names that are clearly of non-German origin.”
Die Liste der Vornamen der Tatverdächtigen aus der Silvesternacht in Berlin spricht für sich… pic.twitter.com/ZCP8HYMnNZ
Among the foreign national suspects, Turks and Afghans are disproportionately represented. One high-profile case involves 23-year-old influencer Atallah Younes, a West Bank-born Palestinian with a Jordanian passport, who stands accused of firing a rocket into a child’s bedroom in Berlin. Younes was arrested by federal police at Berlin Brandenburg Airport on Saturday and is now in pre-trial detention on suspicion of attempted arson and attempted bodily harm.
Speaking to the Bild newspaper ahead of his arrest, Younes claimed he had only intended to celebrate the festivities, saying, “I didn’t know it was so dangerous. I went to sleep and the next day I saw that the video had 10 million views.”
Viral footage on social media captured the mayhem across the German capital, where fireworks were deployed against police and bystanders, and in some cases fired indiscriminately at residential buildings.
🔥🇩🇪WAR ZONE BERLIN 🇩🇪🔥
Germany's capital city descends into mayhem during New Year's Eve.
🧨 36 apartments uninhabitable due to massively destructive "ball" bomb explosions 🚨 400 arrests 👮 670 investigations opened
State Health Senator Ina Czyborra of the Socialist Democratic Party (SPD) confirmed 23 known cases in which healthcare workers were physically or verbally attacked, labeling such incidents as “the usual level” of violence.
Members of the Alternative for Germany (AfD) party swiftly called for disclosure of the suspects’ forenames to clarify the apparent mismatch between official nationality data and actual migrant backgrounds. While the state constitutional court rejected the AfD’s request to force the government to publish this information, the leaked list from Nius has provided greater clarity on the origins of the perpetrators and fueled further debate.
JUST IN: 🇩🇪 More footage from New Year's attacks in Berlin, including police being targeted and arson attacks on vehicles.
AfD co-leader Alice Weidel said in response: "Civil war-like conditions in the usual Berlin districts: attacks with ball bombs, 15 injured officers and 390… pic.twitter.com/jjQwY0GFkK
Berlin AfD parliamentary group leader Kristin Brinker criticized what she called a “sham debate” on the chaos, insisting the violence was not caused by simple celebration but by “certain, apparently immigrant groups from problem areas.” She argued the violence spotlights “the real causes of violence and lawbreaking” tied to “wrong migration policy.”
AfD co-leader Alice Weidel also weighed in, sharing the leaked name list on social media and stating that “foreign violent criminals” who endanger lives have “forfeited their right to hospitality and must be deported.” She further described the New Year’s unrest across major German cities as “civil war-like conditions” and called for stricter immigration policies and enforcement.
The violence in the German capital mirrors a broader challenge in integrating newcomers and responding to pockets of elevated crime in immigrant-heavy neighborhoods, fuelling a debate just weeks before a hotly-contested federal election in which the AfD is expected to become the second-largest party in the Bundestag, although unlikely to assume power if the cordon sanitaire imposed by Germany’s legacy parties remains intact.
Clip from our recent interview with Peter Hitchens in which he argues that the British right simply don’t understand the battle they are fighting. Watch the full episode please click here: • Starmer is MORE EXTREME than Corbyn. …
Less than a year before the end of World War II, then U.S. Secretary of the Treasury Henry Morgenthau drew up a nightmarish plan to punish postwar Germany.
After the serial 1870-1871 Franco-Prussian War, World War I, and World War II—along with the failed Versailles peace treaty of 1919—the Allies in World War II wanted to ensure there would never again be an aggressive Germany powerful enough to invade its neighbors.
When the so-called Morgenthau Plan was leaked to the press in September 1944, at first it was widely praised. After all, it would supposedly render Germany incapable of ever starting another world war in Europe.
Morgenthau certainly envisioned a Carthaginian peace, designed to ensure a permanently deindustrialized, unarmed, and pastoral Germany.
Postwar Germany would have resembled something akin to the ancient, pre-civilized frontier that the first-century AD historian Tacitus wrote about in his Germania.
The plan would have ensured that within six months of Germany’s surrender, all of its industrial plants and equipment were to be dismantled.
The Ruhr, the renowned center of European industrial strength, was to be permanently neutered, starved of its energy, raw materials, and infrastructure.
After the war, the plan demanded virtual complete disarmament of Germany. Its once-feared armed forces were to be rendered nonexistent.
There were also promised massive reductions in Germany’s borders. Various countries, such as the Soviet Union, Poland, and France, were to be given large slices of the old Third Reich.
Future German security would hinge only on the power and goodwill of the victorious United States and its allies.
When the dying Nazi Party got wind of the plan, Hitler’s propaganda minister Joseph Goebbels had a field day. He screamed to Germans that they were all doomed to oblivion if they lost the war, even growing opponents of the Nazi Party.
Even many Americans were aghast at the plan.
Gen. George Marshall, the Army Chief of Staff, warned that its mere mention had galvanized German troops to fight to the end, increasing American casualties as they closed in on the German homeland.
Ex-president Herbert Hoover blasted the plan as inhumane. He feared mass starvation of the German people if they were reduced to a premodern, rural peasantry.
But once the victorious allies occupied a devastated Germany, witnessed its moonscape ruined by massive bombing and house-to-house fighting, and discovered that their “ally” Russia’s Joseph Stalin was ruthless and hellbent on turning all of Europe communist, the Truman administration backed off the plan.
There is a tragic footnote to the aborted horrors of the Morgenthau Plan. Currently, Germany is doing to itself almost everything Morgenthau once dreamed of.
Its green delusions have shut down far too many of its nuclear, coal, and gas electrical generation plants.
Erratic solar and wind “sustainable energy” means that power costs are four times higher than on average in the United States.
Once-dominant European giants Volkswagen, BMW, and Mercedes are now bleeding customers and profits. Their own government’s green and electric vehicle mandates ensure they will become globally uncompetitive.
The German economy actually shrank in 2023. And the diminished Ruhr can no longer save the German economy from its own utopian politicians.
The German military is all but disarmed and short thousands of recruits.
German industries do not produce enough ammunition, tanks, ships, and aircraft to equip even its diminished army, navy, and air force.
Just a few hundred miles from Germany in Ukraine, more than a million Ukrainians and Russians are dead, wounded, or missing—in the costliest European battle since the horrors of Stalingrad.
Yet the once postwar German dynamo nation now lacks the manpower, munitions, and money to aid Ukraine in any meaningful way against an ascendant Russian invader.
More than 1 million immigrants have entered the country illegally, the vast majority of them from the Middle East. Many of them are hostile to European values and culture, as recent terrorist killings have shown. One-fifth of the population was not born in Germany.
The shrinking German people are growing angry, divided, and depressed. Their 1.4 percent fertility rate is one of the lowest in the Western world.
A tragic irony now abounds.
After World War II, the Truman administration rejected the notion of a pastoral, deindustrialized, and insecure Germany as a cruel prescription for poverty, hunger, and depopulation.
But now the German people themselves voted for their own updated version of Morgenthau’s plan—as they willingly reduced factory hours, curtailed power and fuel supplies, and struggled with millions of illegal aliens and porous borders.
Germans accept that they have no military to speak of that could protect their insecure borders—without a United States-led NATO.
Eighty years ago, Germany’s former conquerors rejected wrecking the defeated nation as too harsh. But now Germany is willfully pastoralizing, disarming, deindustrializing—and destroying—itself.
A violent gang rapist hailing from the African country of Eritrea cannot be deported from Germany despite a series of heinous crimes, including gang rape, assaults, threats, property damage, and a whole litany of other crimes. The fact that he and many other serial criminals cannot be deported is highlighting just how far the German government has failed to remove illegal migrants who represent a major threat to Germans.
The 27-year-old Eritrean, Yonas A., was first arrested in 2017 for participating in a gang rape. He and three other friends brutally raped a 56-year-old woman in Dessau. During the attack, the court found that Yonas A. held a broken beer bottle to the woman’s neck and threatened to stab her if she stopped the men from raping her.
Yonas A. should have been deported after serving his six years in the Burg correctional facility, but almost immediately upon his release, he began a reign of terror. Within nine weeks of his release in the summer of 202, he committed ten crimes before finally being locked up again.
Among his crimes included threatening employees of a supermarket with a kitchen knife after they apprehended him while he was stealing alcohol. When officers arrived, he spat at them and fought them. He also “rioted” in an electronics store.
In another incident of May 2024, a German father, Matthias K., slammed on his brakes after nearly hitting Yonas A. because the Eritrean drove his car through a red light. The Eritrean showed no remorse though and began attacking Matthias K. The police stated that he pulled a hairpin from his hair and threatened to gouge out the man’s eye. He then kicked the door and screamed, “I’ll cut off your head.” Matthias K. recorded the incident on his cell phone.
In the report from Bild, the judge asked the Eritrean why he was conducting himself in such a manner, to which Yonas A. responded: “I was sad about my homeland.”
So far, deportation efforts have failed, with the authorities citing personal rights and data protection as reason for why he cannot be sent back to his homeland.
Notably, Eritrea is among the many countries that make it extremely difficult for European countries to deport anyone. The country refuses to issue replacement passports for people who do not want to return voluntarily, and without these documents, deportations are nearly impossible, legally speaking.
Daniel Cohn-Bendit addresses the migration crisis in Mayotte, shocking the left. In a debate with former Education Minister Luc Ferry on LCI on Sunday January 5, the former student leader of May 68 referred to the ‘exceptional’ migration situation on the Indian Ocean archipelago, which was devastated by Cyclone Chido just over a fortnight ago, claiming at least 39 lives. While Daniel Cohn-Bendit fought against this type of hypothesis until recently, he adopted the discourse of part of the right on Mayotte, which called for ‘slowing down and making impossible this immigration, which leads to a great upheaval, a great exchange of populations’. For him, the overseas territory is no longer France: ‘You can’t discuss the problem ideologically, you have to see Mayotte, it’s not France, you can’t confuse it.’
🔴 Mayotte
Daniel Cohn-Bendit : "Il faut freiner et rendre impossible cette immigration, qui est un grand remplacement de la population"
He also referred to the recent article published in Le Figaro by the three ministers Bruno Retailleau, Manuel Valls and Sébastien Lecornu, in which they call for a ‘firm hand on migration’, otherwise ‘Mayotte will be rebuilt as a sort of sanctuary’. ‘If it is effective, it is a bulwark’, says Daniel Cohn-Bendit. The 68-year-old’s comments triggered an outcry on the left. Green MP Sandrine Rousseau wrote on the social network X: ‘Shame on you, Dany’. For her part, Sarah Legrain, a member of the La France insoumise (LFI) party, referred to the concept of the great replacement, a theory by Renaud Camus: ‘Cohn-Bendit is calmly adopting the concept of the “great replacement” for himself. But he will probably soon be giving us lessons on how best to defeat the far right in the next elections.’ Finally, her colleague from the LFI, Arnaud Saint-Martin, judged that Daniel Cohn-Bendit was a ‘’68 boomer on the road to fascist radicalisation’.
An armed man was arrested this morning after entering 16 Rue de la Loi, Brussels police and a spokesman for Prime Minister Alexander De Croo have confirmed.
According to reports, the suspect – who is said to have already been the subject of a Nixon procedure, a psychiatric observation requested by the judicial authorities – came with a steak knife and shouted ‘Allah Akbar’. ‘He is said to be radicalised and has already been arrested for making a threat against the US embassy,’ said an informed source.
According to the HLN news agency, the VTM news camera crew was asked to wait in the house ‘due to a threat’. A man armed with a knife was arrested when he attempted to enter the residence of Prime Minister Alexander de Croo. This was reported by Barend Leyts, communications director of the resigned prime minister, and the information was confirmed by the Brussels police.
This incident occurred while the federal negotiations were continuing.
Questioned by one of our journalists, the Director of Communications, Barend Leyts, stated. ‘ A man armed with a knife was overpowered by the military police. The man was taken to the police station. The military police officers were not injured in the incident’. Police told VRT that the man allegedly made threats against the soldiers present. ‘They overpowered him while waiting for our police, who are also in charge of the investigation.’
The Prime Minister nevertheless stated via Barend Leyts that he was ‘shocked by the incident’. ‘We would like to expressly thank the officers of the military police. We are monitoring the situation very closely together with the police. We are relieved that no one was injured in the incident,’ the Prime Minister replied to Belga via his communications director.
On X, the Prime Minister expressed his thanks to the military police for their efforts.
France is facing a new wave of farmers’ protests in defense of their livelihood and way of life. Roads leading to the two main cities of Paris and Lyon have been partially blocked by tractor-led ‘snail operations.’ The demonstrators want to take advantage of the elections to the chambers of agriculture, scheduled for January 7th, to make their voices heard.
The protest is being led by the Coordination Rurale (CR), France’s second-largest farming union. Calls for action have been going out for several days, and blockades were staged between the evening of Sunday and the morning of Monday on the main roads leading to Lyon and Paris.
“It’s not a question of blocking the people of Paris or the Ile-de-France,” explained the union delegates to reassure the public, but of getting their message across. The CR reiterated its main demands: Its members want an end to the excessive implementation of EU regulations into French law, and better control of international trade to protect the interests of French farmers. Sophie Lenaerts, the union’s vice president, told AFP that her organisation was calling for “controls on imports rather than on farms.” The CR also opposes the final ratification of the free trade agreement with the South American Mercosur bloc—a deal pushed by the EU Commission against strong opposition in France. French farmers and politicians alike have warned that the agreement could devastate the agricultural sector, undermine environmental protections, and compromise food quality.
The farming world was deeply dismayed by the ousting of Prime Minister Michel Barnier in December. The change in government has delayed the implementation of the aid measures that French farmers have been demanding for many months, with no new timeline in sight.
The new prime minister, François Bayrou, has scheduled a meeting with representatives of the four main farming unions for Monday, January 13th. But the unions find this date to be too late.
Elections to the chambers of agriculture are due to start on Tuesday, January 7th. These are currently dominated by the FNSEA union (Fédération Nationale des Syndicats d’Exploitants Agricoles), traditionally the government’s main negotiating partner, with a centrist, even left-wing, stance. The FNSEA is now facing competition from the Coordination Rurale, a more recent union (founded in 1991) with a more clearly right-wing stance. Developing an anti-system, sovereignist rhetoric opposed to ultra-liberalism, it also attacks the productivist model—which prioritizes maximizing production over other concerns— defended by the FNSEA since the end of the Second World War.
The CR has distinguished itself in recent months through spectacular actions: a demonstration at the warehouses of the Rungis market in January 2024; the dumping of tonnes of waste in front of the prefecture in Agen; the covering up of speed cameras in the Manche department, etc. The offensive strategy has borne fruit, since the CR has recorded a spectacular increase in membership.
The mainstream press, echoing President Macron’s accusations that “these people are here with a political project to serve the Rassemblement National,” is denouncing the CR’s links with the ‘far right’, citing the many cordial exchanges between CR trade unionists and the leaders of the Rassemblement National (RN) or Reconquête, especially during the agricultural crises of recent months. However, the president of the Coordination refutes any political affiliation: “Not a single CR leader belongs to the RN, LR [Les Républicains], or any other political party,” she asserts.
Elections to the chambers of agriculture begin on January 7th and are due to be held across the country until January 31st. More than 2.2 million farmers and professionals are called upon to choose their representatives. Their choice will determine the direction taken by French agriculture in its dealings with the public authorities over the coming months.
A recent case from the UK’s High Court presents a bewildering mess of contradictions. According to The Times:
A British sharia council was given credibility by the High Court when a judge used one of its fatwas to decide a case. The Islamic Council, founded by the hardline preacher Haitham al-Haddad, issued a religious ruling forbidding a health trust from allowing a brain-damaged child to die. Secular campaigners said using fatwas in civil courts undermined liberal democracy.
The story is getting a lot of attention as American influencers seem to have discovered the horrifying story of the Rotherham rape gangs in the UK for the first time. The grotesque details of the systematic rape of thousands of white British girls by primarily Pakistani gangs is sparking intense outrage despite the scandal being several years old and reigniting the debates about multiculturalism and Islamic immigration that always smolder just beneath the surface of society.
Thus, the cultural context of this case is fascinating. Sharia courts — which are made up of panels of paid Islamic scholars who issue religious rulings on a variety of cases — have become a growing phenomenon in the UK. According to a recent investigation by The Times, Britain is the Western capital for “sharia councils” and has more than 100 of them. The Islamic Council, the sharia “court” cited by the High Court, handles up to 900 cases each year and “has expanded into Germany and North America.” From The Times:
Haddad’s sharia council issued a fatwa which was used by an English judge in a life-or-death decision involving a sick child. Tafida Raqeeb, then five, was suffering from brain damage with no chance of recovery and was facing withdrawal of treatment by Barts Health NHS Trust in London which would have led to her death.
Her Bangladeshi parents obtained a fatwa from the Islamic Council of Europe, as it was then called, in 2019 that it was “absolutely impermissible for the parents, or anyone else, to give consent for the removal of the life-supporting machine from their child … This is seen as a great sin that has a multitude of grave consequences for them (in) this life and the hereafter.”
In response, Mr. Justice Macdonald stated that he accepted the fatwa, as prolonging treatment for the girl “permits Tafida to remain alive in accordance with the tenets of the religion in which she was being raised and for which she had begun to demonstrate a basic affinity.” The child was then flown to a Vatican-owned hospital in Italy for treatment. Haddad’s sharia court was triumphant, calling the judge’s acceptance of their fatwa (or ruling) a “landmark case” for the Islamic Council on an issue of “deep ethical and religious concern.”
The Islamic Council noted that “The fatwa issued was based on the sanctity of life, a fundamental principle in Islam. The advice provided sought to protect the child’s life while respecting the family’s wishes, consistent with Islamic ethics and compassion.” This has predictably bothered atheist activists such as Stephen Evans of the National Secular Society, who told the Times that “Fatwas issued by Islamic councils must not hold any authority in English courts. Allowing harmful ideologies to gain legitimacy in our legal framework would fundamentally compromise secular law and the liberal democratic values upon which UK society is built.”
Other critics pointed to the misogyny inherent to sharia courts; feminist writer Rahila Gupta asked whether the High Court’s use of the fatwa constituted an undue respect for religion. “Would the case of a secular family similarly arguing for the extension of a child’s life, be weaker?” she asked. It is a good question — although the problem is not that the Islamic view on the sanctity of life was taken into account but because the sanctity of life is so frequently ignored by the UK courts more generally. The parents of infant girl Indi Gregory, for example, were not permitted to take her to Vatican City’s hospital for treatment despite the support of Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Melonia. She died last November.
In 2018, in a case that attracted international attention, the parents of Alfie Evans were also blocked from taking their little boy to Italy for offered treatment; they were even denied the right to take him home to die after he stunned doctors by surviving for four days without a ventilator. He died held captive in Alder Hey Children’s Hospital on April 28, 2018. The year before, 11-month-old Charlie Gard was blocked from going to the United States for therapy trial that his parents had fundraised for; doctors would not permit him to leave. He died on July 28, 2017. In another case, 12-year-old Archie Battersbee died after UK courts denied his parents the right to take him for treatment offered by doctors in both Italy and Japan.
This makes the case of Tafida Raqeeb stand out. Why did her parents succeed in taking her out of the country where so many others failed? It appears that the fatwa from the sharia court had a lot to do with that. I’m happy that her parents succeeded, but the double standard being exposed here is justifiably concerning. Unlike the atheists and immigration critics sounding the alarm over “what this means,” however, I would say that devout belief in the sanctity of life should be carefully considered in all cases, not ignored in most cases but treated with respect when it comes from an Islamic “court.”
This story lends itself to a host of possible “takes”: The Islamization of the West; the prioritizing of foreign religions over Christianity; the battle to defend the sanctity of life in a secular society; the fact that Muslim newcomers often hold views on moral issues that hew closer to traditional Christian norms than liberal ones. Ultimately, this single story contains many of our post-Christian era’s most potent contradictions.
