Month: February 2025

Russia praised the first round of Ukraine war talks with the United States as “very useful”, while the American delegation said both sides had committed to “make sure the process moves forward in a timely and productive manner” and will work towards a Presidential meeting soon.

U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio met with his Russian counterpart Sergei Lavrov in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia on Tuesday for the first in-person talks of high-level delegations since Russia invaded Ukraine almost three years ago in 2022. After four and a half hours of talks the meeting broke, with both sides relating they felt it had been productive.

In terms of normalising diplomatic relations between Russia and the U.S., both sides are said to have agreed to return to staffing their embassies in the respective nations.

One of the intended outcomes of the talks was apparently laying the groundwork for an in-person meeting between U.S. President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin for the actual war-ending negotiation process. No date has been set for that meeting, but it was said work was happening to enable it.

Advisor to President Putin and former Russian ambassador to the U.S., Yury Ushakov, who sat around the table with Rubio and Lavrov, said after leaving the meeting that it was not likely Trump and Putin would meet within the next week but that both wanted to meet eventually. He said: “The delegations of the two countries have a lot of work to do. We are ready for this but it is still difficult to speak about the specific date of the meeting between the two leaders… The issue was discussed. We are working out the terms of this meeting”.

While he said the meeting “went well” and there was “a serious conversation on all issues”, Ushakov noted it was “difficult to say” if there was any convergence of views between the U.S. and Russia so far.

The U.S. delegation also tamped down any hope for a rapid end to talks, making clear there was much work to do. Mission leader Rubio said the discussion had been “the first step of a long and difficult journey” and emphasised that “in order for a conflict to end, everyone involved in that conflict has to be okay with it, it has to be acceptable to them.”

One major feature of the discussion around the talks so far has been the apparent upset felt in European capitals, Kyiv included, that they were not included in today’s discussion. Ukraine has gone so far as to say it would ignore any peace deal it wasn’t involved in negotiating. Perhaps conscious of this, Rubio threw a bone to the European political class by saying they would be invited to the table when the time was right.

“There are other parties that have sanctions, the European Union is going to have to be at the table at some point, because they have sanctions as well that have been imposed,” he said.

Going into the talks, Russia had set out a hard-bargaining initial position that it would not consider giving up any Ukrainian territory. But Mike Waltz, who sat beside Rubio in the talks today, made clear the U.S. saw this merely as a place to be negotiated from, and that Russia withdrawing from parts of Ukraine was inevitable.

“We know just the practical reality is that there is going to be some discussion of territory, and there’s going to be discussion of security guarantees”, Waltz said, continuing: “Those are fundamental basics that will, that will undergird and underlie any type of discussion.”

Waltz also did happy talk for European partners but tempered this with warnings that if European states wanted a place at the top table, they would simply have to do more to contribute to the NATO alliance. He said: “If you’re going to bring both sides together, you have to talk to both sides. And we’ll continue to remind everyone, literally, within minutes of President Trump hanging up with President Putin, he called [and] spoke with President Zelensky.”

But reminding Europe that many of its countries don’t even meet the NATO minimum of two per cent of GDP on defence, he continued:

The fact that a third of our NATO allies still do not contribute the minimum of 2% of their GDP to defence a decade after we all collectively made that agreement isn’t acceptable

… This is a common effort. This isn’t just about what the United States is going to continue to contribute and what we are going to continue to ask of the American taxpayer. We all have to make those tough decisions.

We all have to contribute to our common defence, and we expect that this to be a two way street for our European allies, and the fact that both the United Kingdom, France, and others are talking about contributing more forcefully to Ukraine’s security, we think is a good thing.

Russia has also nettled Europe, saying including them in peace talks is pointless as the European Union is so dead-set on continuing the war. Indeed, as talks progressed, Russia’s Deputy Foreign Minister spoke in Moscow and said he believed Europe’s real war aim in supporting Ukraine was to “inflict a strategic defeat on Russia.”

He also said Russia was against the European plan to deploy NATO soldiers to Ukraine as peacekeepers, saying Moscow would view this as escalatory.

https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2025/02/18/u-s-and-russia-take-first-step-with-very-useful-ukraine-war-talks

A Scottish newspaper has been reported to the police after they referred to a trans-identified male doctor as a “man” in articles covering an Employment Tribunal case centered around his gender identity.

The Scottish Daily Express has been one of the outlets covering the progression of a tribunal being held against Sandie Peggie, a nurse who had been employed at the Victoria hospital in Kirkcaldy, Scotland. The case relates to interactions between Peggie and Dr. Theodore “Beth” Upton, a male doctor who had begun using the women’s facilities after beginning to identify as transgender.

As previously reported by Reduxx, despite being a biological male, who Peggie asserts “looks like a man” to hospital patients, the two encountered each other in the female changing rooms at the hospital multiple times after they first met in August 2023.

On at least one of those occasions, Peggie had been in a state of undress, and felt extremely uncomfortable when Upton entered the changing rooms and saw her. During another interaction on Christmas Eve of 2023, Upton declared that he had “as much right” to be in the women’s locker rooms as Peggie did, leading to an argument that resulted in the nurse being suspended from work and an investigation being launched into her for “bullying.”

The case has continued to make headlines over the past two weeks, with Peggie being supported by a number of pro-women organizations outside the court. Peggie’s legal team has been referring to Upton as a man throughout the tribunal hearing, something that the opposing legal team had initially attempted to block them from doing.

Just prior to the start of the tribunal hearings, the lawyer representing NHS Fife and Upton demanded that Peggie and her legal team not be allowed refer to Dr. Upton with male pronouns at any point. The lawyer has claimed that her “gratuitous misgendering” of him had caused him “pain” and “harm.”

Jane Russell urged employment judge Sandy Kemp to force Peggie and her legal team to refer to Upton in “neutral terms” throughout the case. She claimed it was “simply a matter of courtesy” to use the preferred pronouns of someone, and that it was “troubling” to have Upton “repeatedly and deliberately” misgendered.

“I’m afraid the way the claimant and her representatives are conducting this case is a form of activism, that in my submission, is contributing to a climate of hostility and hatred towards trans people, which is actively harmful and has actively harmed the second respondent. It shouldn’t be allowed,” Russell argued. But NHS Fife’s argument was rejected by the tribunal after Naomi Cunningham, representing Peggie, argued that the fact of Upton’s biological sex is “right at the heart” of her case.

During the course of proceedings, Upton has attempted to argue that he is “biologically female” as a result of taking cross-sex hormones, and that sex has “no defined or agreed meaning in science.”

But as part of their coverage, the Scottish Daily Express chose to refer to Upton as a man, issuing a statement that Upton’s biological sex was a simple fact.

“In court stories, accuracy matters above all else (as I and many other journalists before me have found out to our cost) and so we believe the most accurate way of describing Dr. Upton is as a man, albeit one who is choosing to live as a woman,” editor Ben Borland wrote in the statement.

Because of this editorial decision, Borland was reported to Police Scotland by the SEEN Police Official Open Public Network, an account on X which claims it is dedicated to “challenging illegal policing decisions motivated by fear, hate, laziness or incompetence.” However, the Network has claimed that Police Scotland have yet to sufficiently action on the report.

Note that SEEN Police Official Open Public Network has no relation to Police SEEN UK, an advocacy group which serves officers and police staff who “hold lawful sex realist and gender critical beliefs” and seeks to remove ideological influences from policing.

We have submitted a second report to Police Scotland of targeted harassment of Dr Beth Upton by the Scottish Daily Express editor, Ben Borland.

This links to our first report, which Police Scotland are currently REFUSING to deal with. In this new incident, Borland explains..

— SEEN Police Official Open Public Network (@SEENpoliceUK) February 15, 2025

“This links to our first report, which Police Scotland are currently REFUSING to deal with. In this new incident, Borland explains his reasons for intentional and gratuitous misgendering and deadnaming are ‘simply stating a fact’ and other well-worn ‘gender critical’ tropes.  Yet, he is fully aware he is causing harassment and distress,” the account claims.

They suggest that if Police Scotland don’t act, it will “end badly” for them, as not arresting Borland would be tantamount to a “breach of the Equality Act,” despite UK law recognizing the rights of gender critical people under the act.

“We are ready to apply for judicial review if this continues any longer. We will not allow Police Scotland to go on excluding the trans section of the public from the protection of a police service – which is effectively what they are doing, and have been doing since their infamous cowardice with JK Rowling,” they continued. The account was likely referring to the refusal of Police Scotland to charge JK Rowling last year under the country’s new hate crime law, which created a new offence of “stirring up hatred” related to protected characteristics such as gender identity.

“They are fobbing us off and know they are wrong,” the account concluded. “FAFO [f**k around and find out] Police Scotland. FAFO.”

Despite the threatening conclusion of their public statement, a Police Scotland spokesman told the Scottish Daily Express that they had “received a report on Friday, 7 February and a further report on Saturday, 15 February,” but that “on both occasions the information was assessed and no further police action was required.”

The SEEN Police Official Open Public Network account has repeatedly engaged in conspiratorial posting. According to the account, the assassination of Donald Trump was “staged,” and the President was never hit, and that criticizing transgender ideology is tantamount to “Christo-fascism.”

https://reduxx.info/scottish-newspaper-reported-to-police-after-referring-to-trans-identified-male-doctor-by-he-him-pronouns/

A shift in Dutch asylum policy is causing unrest in small towns like Doezum, where plans to house 100 refugees in a temporary settlement have sparked local opposition.

With the government ending the automatic priority of status holders — asylum seekers granted residence permits — for social housing, municipalities are now scrambling for alternatives. One such measure, so-called “transfer locations”, is drawing backlash from residents concerned about social tensions and lack of integration.

The village of Doezum, Groningen, home to just 700 residents, has suddenly found itself at the center of a national debate over asylum accommodation. The municipality of Westerkwartier is planning to construct dozens of chalets on an estate at the village’s edge to accommodate 100 status holders.

Local residents, who only found out about the plan through a letter, say they were blindsided by the decision.

“My 25-year-old son has been trying to find a place to live for years, but there’s nothing available,” village resident Sonja told De Telegraaf newspaper. “Yet housing for people from far away appears overnight. How is that fair?”

Others worry that the majority of the new arrivals will be young, single men.

“That’s just asking for trouble,” one concerned villager remarked.

Tensions escalated when a municipal information meeting was abruptly canceled due to overwhelming public interest.

“Of course, the whole village wants answers,” said one elderly resident. “This is the biggest change we’ve seen here in 35 years!”

Under Dutch law, municipalities must house a certain number of status holders every six months. Westerkwartier must find housing for at least 42 refugees by April 1 or risk having the province assign them housing locations elsewhere in the municipality.

However, many local governments are struggling due to the nationwide housing shortage. Last year, around 50 municipalities met their quota, while nearly 300 fell behind. With social housing in short supply, municipalities are forced to find alternatives — including hotel accommodations and temporary “transfer locations” like the one proposed in Doezum.

The Dutch government, which swung considerably to the right after Geert Wilders’ Party for Freedom (PVV) won the most seats in November 2023, has vowed to implement the strictest asylum policy ever seen in the Netherlands, but to date, few radical measures have been implemented after necessary coalition talks with more centrist parties watered down plans.

In attempts to deprioritize asylum seekers from social housing registers, while easing pressure on packed asylum centers, the government announced transitional housing units as a viable short-term solution.

Under plans announced by Asylum Minister Marjolein Faber, local authorities that establish this type of accommodation receive an annual bonus of more than €21,000 per asylum seeker in government funding.

Critics, however, argue that the plan simply moves large cohorts of asylum seekers from one place to another, creating migrant communities in new areas that will not assist with assimilation and will exacerbate social tensions.

“If you put a few hundred people in one place, it starts to feel like a new type of asylum center,” warned Mark Boumans, vice president of the Association of Dutch Municipalities (VNG) and mayor of Doetinchem. “What will the atmosphere be like? Will they learn Dutch, find jobs, or simply remain isolated? What will it mean for nearby communities?”

“I support housing refugees, but not by cramming 100 people together on the edge of the village,” added local Doezum resident, Peter. “In the past, they arrived in smaller numbers and became our neighbors. Now they’ll be stuck together, separated from us.”

Plans remain afoot in the Netherlands for sweeping reforms, and the Dutch government insists this is a short-term measure ahead of widescale changes to the country’s asylum policy.

“I am the minister who is taking concrete measures to really get a grip on migration. We must do whatever it takes,” Faber said in an address to the Dutch parliament in November last year.

Legislation has been proposed to end the automatic transition to permanent residency for asylum seekers after five years, implement stricter family reunification rules, ramp up deportation powers, construct more detention facilities, and scrap dispersal laws regulating the distribution of asylum seekers across Dutch municipalities.

Earlier this month, the plans were criticized by the Council of State advisory body report, but Faber insists she has little intention of making significant adjustments to the legislation.

“Maybe a point and a comma, but that’s it,” the PVV minister states. “I am convinced that my lawyers have made a good proposal. The advice is not binding — I can do what I want with it.”

https://rmx.news/article/dutch-town-of-700-residents-to-receive-100-asylum-seekers-as-promised-strictest-ever-asylum-policy-remains-unrealized/

It was the most brutal attack on a trade union event in the history of post-war Germany. Last Thursday, just days before the general election, a man drove a car into a group of striking members of the service workers’ union Verdi in Munich. The attack has so far claimed the lives of a mother and her two-year-old daughter, and injured at least 30 others.   

The suspect is a 24-year-old Afghan national who arrived in Germany eight years ago as an unaccompanied minor and was subsequently granted residence status. According to police reports, he had previously shared Islamist content on social media. Upon his arrest, he shouted “Allahu akbar”, leading authorities to classify the incident as “most likely” Islamist-motivated.

Anger is surely the right response to such a barbaric attack on workers and their families who were exercising their democratic right to campaign for better working conditions. Yet, almost immediately after the incident made headlines, the Verdi leadership issued a statement condemning any “misplaced passion” that might arise from the act:  “We stand for solidarity and togetherness. In its darkest hour, ver.di defends itself against the attack on ver.di colleagues during a token strike in Munich being used for division, hatred and incitement,” the statement said. A statement by Frank Werneke, the Verdi leader, which carefully avoided any mention of the word ‘Islamism’, was similarly muddled.

This is no coincidence. Werneke is a member of the ruling SPD, and the brutal attack has intensified pressure on Germany’s coalition government, once again exposing critical failures in security and the asylum system. Just days earlier, following another deadly attack by an Afghan asylum seeker that claimed the lives of a toddler and a man, Chancellor Olaf Scholz (SPD) himself admitted being “fed up with such acts of violence happening here every few weeks.”

Yet now, government allies like Werneke appear determined to silence legitimate concerns, suggesting that anyone who points to specific migration issues is somehow exploiting tragedy. The public messaging, both by the union and sectors of the media, quickly emphasized that the murdered trade unionist, an engineer, had a “migration background” herself (having arrived in Germany at age four from Algeria) and that her family requested “restraint,” noting her advocacy for tolerance.

All this manoeuvring is deeply disingenuous. It shouldn’t matter whether the victims have a migrant background or not—this distraction misses the fundamental point. It’s not about identity; it’s about the basic duty of the state to protect all its citizens. 

In truth, even before last Thursday, migration had become the dominant and most controversial election issue. The growing pressure on the government was reflected in its announcement, after the Aschaffenburg incident, that it would speed up deportations and extend the border controls introduced last September for another six months. 

Polling suggests these measures have failed to restore public confidence. The ruling SPD now struggles below 15%, battling its coalition partner, the Greens, merely for third place.

The public’s distrust of the government on migration issues isn’t hard to comprehend. The reactions to this latest attack have followed a predictable and revealing pattern: despite expressions of shock after each incident, there’s always a coordinated effort from establishment voices to control the public narrative and deflect criticism of migration policies. Their primary concern appears to be containing populist pressure rather than honestly and seriously addressing the underlying issues that fuel it.

For many weeks now, pro-government demonstrations have swept through German cities, directed against the right-populist AfD, and campaigning to exclude both the party and its voters from government participation. There’s a stark and dark irony in the fact that, just days before Thursday’s violence, some 250,000 people gathered at nearly the identical location in Munich, rallying for the “democratic firewall” against the AfD under the slogan “Democracy needs you.” 

Verdi was prominently among the organizers supporting this demonstration, which was triggered after Friedrich Merz (CDU), the opposition leader, introduced bills in Parliament to strengthen immigration controls. Merz’s initiative was sharply attacked by the government, with Scholz declaring, “He can’t be trusted” and the SPD parliamentary group leader hysterically claiming that Merz had “opened the gates to hell“. Maintaining the firewall has become the main election message of the government since then. 

There should be no doubt in most voters’ minds that these demonstrations are essentially pro-government rallies. An investigation by the German newspaper Die Welt revealed that every single NGO mobilizing the demonstrators had received either direct or indirect funding from government ministries—specifically from the Family Ministry under Lisa Paus (Greens), the Interior Ministry under Nancy Faeser (SPD), or Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s own office. Verdi, which represents workers in the public sector, media, health, and finance is also closely linked to the Social Democratic (SPD) and Green or Left parties. Mobilising for the demonstrations, its website states: “ver.di calls for resistance against the AfD. We stand against the enemies of democracy. We are the firewall”.

The fact that the demonstrations continued this weekend shows the extent of the fear on the pro-establishment side. This fear was blatantly expressed a few weeks ago, by one of the organisers, a spokeswoman for a group called Omas Gegen Rechts (Grannies Against the Right): “Never before has the danger been so great that our democratic achievements and thus the basis of our social coexistence could be endangered by new majorities in the Bundestag,” she said.

There were moments of silence for the victims at last this weekend’s demonstrations, but combined with the predictable message that there must be no hate even after Munich. A trade union spokeswoman at the Berlin rally said: “They have the hate, we have the attitude.” Of course, she was not referring to the hatred of the Islamist attacker, but to the alleged hatred of those who would now ‘exploit’ the incident.

It would be wrong to believe that these rallies have no impact. Their aim is to stifle crucial debates on asylum, migration, and Islamism—topics that desperately need open examination. The establishment’s strategy of deflection and moral posturing—showing “attitude” as the activists call it—betrays a deep distrust of voters’ capacity to engage with complex issues. It also reveals a fundamental contempt for ordinary citizens, treating them as potential extremists who must be monitored and managed lest they transform into “crazy racists.”  This Sunday’s election will reveal what voters think of all this. 

https://europeanconservative.com/articles/commentary/dont-mention-islamism-deflection-and-moral-posturing-rule-in-germany/

A Sunday episode of 60 Minutes highlighted repressive German hate speech laws that have led to the arrests of citizens for posting speech deemed false or “hateful,” such as “racist” cartoons or “fake quotes.”

CBS opened with footage of six state police officers raiding a suspect’s home at 6 a.m. and seizing his laptop and cellphone for “posting a racist cartoon online,” as “more than 50 similar raids” simultaneously played out across Germany, according to the news outlet.

Three German prosecutors explained that hate speech laws target far more than violent threats. “Malicious gossip” and “insults” are deemed hate speech – both in person and online – and “fake quotes” are illegal as well, under the assumption that the government is the arbiter of truth. 

Those found breaking these laws usually face steep fines and sometimes lose their personal devices, including cell phones and laptops. Repeat offenders are threatened with jail time. One prosecutor, Frank-Michael Laue, noted that the seizure of personal devices is considered even worse than the fine. 

Laue, who leads the Lower Saxony prosecution unit, told Alfonsi they work on “about 3,500 cases per year” and receive “hundreds of tips a month from police, watchdog groups and victims.”

Germany’s law against insults traces back 154 years with origins in an 1871 law. Prosecutions against offenders took on teeth in “a precedent-setting 1995 ruling” in which a Schwaebisch Hall court awarded a man 460 euros over “racist comments” against his black wife, according to the Los Angeles Times. 

CBS correspondent Sharyn Alfonsi also noted that it’s illegal in Germany to display Nazi symbolism, such as a Swastika, or to deny the Holocaust, as it has been for 40 years. 

Remarkably, CBS appeared to portray German speech laws in a sympathetic light. No critics of the laws were interviewed, and the anti-free speech laws were framed as attempting to “bring civility” to the internet.

In a statement of stunning irony, Josephine Ballon, a CEO of HateAid, lamented to Alfonsi that half of Germany’s internet users “are afraid to express their political opinion, and they rarely participate in public debates online anymore.” 

Instead of pointing to the country’s chilling anti-free speech laws, Ballon cited fear that they will be attacked online. Her organization is dedicated to supporting victims of online “hate speech.” 

Critics consider Germany’s current laws to be a violation of human rights and acknowledge the role it plays in quashing public discourse. U.S. Vice President JD Vance, who rebuked Europe a few days ago at the Munich Security Conference for their free speech crackdown, reposted the 60 Minutes episode to X on Monday morning, denouncing the laws as “Orwellian.”

Insulting someone is not a crime, and criminalizing speech is going to put real strain on European-US relationships.

This is Orwellian, and everyone in Europe and the US must reject this lunacy. https://t.co/WZSifyDWMr

— JD Vance (@JDVance) February 17, 2025

Germany has even overstepped its already-oppressive laws by conducting sweeping arrests of protesters, even of those calling for peace. 

German-Israeli activist Iris Hefets told Al Jazeera last year how she was arrested twice for holding a sign that read, “As a Jew and Israeli, stop the genocide in Gaza.” The first time, she was released shortly after, and the second time, she was charged with “inciting racial hatred.” The charge was later dropped. She was arrested a third time for holding a sign that read, “Zionism kills.” She was again released, but her sign was then confiscated.

A former air force programmer remarked on X that “Germany has lost its mind,” screen-shotting a story about the country’s conviction of a woman who insulted a gang rapist and outrageously was sentenced to a weekend in jail while the gang rapist spent no time in prison due to his age.

Germany is arresting people for ‘racist’ cartoons and ‘fake quotes’: 60 Minutes report – LifeSite

A German left-wing extremist who attacked multiple innocent people in Budapest after mistaking them for “Nazis” claimed to be “non-binary” in an effort to avoid extradition to Hungary. Simeon Ravi Trux is now demanding to be returned to Germany on the basis that Hungary is “gender-, homo-, and trans-hostile.”

Trux, 23, is a member of a left-wing militant group called “Hammerbande,” which was established in Leipzig, Germany, in 2017. The group is known for assaulting individuals they label as “right wing” with hammers and batons. Often, they have no basis for associating their targets with the “far-right” beyond unconfirmed assumptions.

On February 9, 2023, Trux travelled from his home in Jena, Germany, to participate in an assault on three people in front of a café in Budapest, Hungary. The attackers injured the victims by bludgeoning them with their weapons, causing them to suffer bruises, contusions, and fractures. 

Simeon T. (alias #FreeMaja) und seine #Hammerbande hatten in Budapest einen angeblichen Rechten mit einem Hammer verprügelt. Deutschland hat den #Antifa Schläger jetzt an Ungarn ausgeliefert. @DieLinke und andere Linksradikale toben https://t.co/JPz4MCXYcM https://t.co/zEkfPZmcJ7

— Andreas Hallaschka 🇮🇱 🇺🇦  (@Hallaschka_HH) June 30, 2024

These attacks occurred around the so-called “Day of Honor” in Hungary, when neo-Nazis and right-wing extremist groups from all over Europe travel to glorify the failed breakout attempt by the German Wehrmacht and Waffen-SS from Budapest, besieged by the Red Army in 1945. However, Trux and his associates are said to have assaulted random people who they believed to be far-right simply on the basis of their clothing colors.

Following the attack, Trux fled back to Germany.

Hungarian law enforcement issued a European arrest warrant against Trux for membership in a criminal organization and grievous bodily harm. He was finally apprehended by German law enforcement in December of 2023 and placed in pre-trial detention in Dresden. At that time, public broadcasters like Tagesschau reported him as being a “man” named “Simeon T.”

In February of 2024, the Federal Prosecutor’s Office took over the investigation against “the German national Simeon T.” and obtained an arrest warrant from the Federal Court of Justice against him. The case was taken over by federal prosecutors due to its particular significance, as Trux is a member of a criminal organization which, according to the investigative authorities, promotes a “militant left-wing extremist ideology” that sought to use “violence against members of the political right-wing spectrum.”

However, during his pre-trial detention, Trux began claiming to be a “non-binary person” and using the name “Maja.”

Trux’s lawyers submitted a comprehensive statement arguing that Trux would not receive a fair trial in Hungary due to his gender identity. Trux’s attorney, Maik Elster, obtained an interim injunction from the Federal Constitutional Court in June 2024, preventing Trux’s extradition to the Republic of Hungary, arguing that Hungary has “gender-, homo-, and trans-hostile policies.”

The court responsible for Trux’s extradition to Hungary was urged to not rely on “information provided by the Hungarian authorities,” and stressed that the Hungarian prison system “does not maintain a register of prisoners’ gender identity,” but only records their sex. They argued that Trux would be classified as a male in the system, placing him at risk of harm.

However, the injunction from the Federal Constitutional Court was granted slightly too late, and was imposed just a few hours after Trux had already been transferred to Austria as the first leg of his transport to Hungary.

According to Die Welt, Trux was flown to Austria by helicopter at 2 AM by the State Criminal Police Office because authorities feared attacks by militant left-wing extremists who had threatened to prevent his extradition “by any means.”

Sächsischen Behörden gelingt spektakulärer Coup: Ungarische Polizei verhaftet Antifa-Mitglied Simeon "Maja" T.!https://t.co/IxtI1a8pVd
Das Bundesverfassungsgericht wollte die Auslieferung von Simeon T., der in der Haft sein Geschlecht aufgegeben hat und sich nun "Maja" nennt,… pic.twitter.com/WUcwA5olLP

— 爪卂ㄒ丂ㄩ卄丨爪乇 Expertin für alles und jeden. (@Shinsho_ni) June 28, 2024

As reported by Tagesspiegel, left-wing extremists called for violence against judges and officials following the news Trux had already been sent to Hungary. The activists claimed that “the time for demonstrations was over,” and that no one involved in the process “should be able to sleep peacefully.”

Since Trux was extradited to Hungary, there have been repeated marches by violent left-wing extremists, particularly in strongholds of left-wing autonomists like Hamburg, Berlin, and Leipzig.

They have adopted the chat “Free Maja,” referring to Truss’s newfound “non-binary” identity, and are accusing the German state of putting him in harm’s way by sending him to a country that does not recognize his gender identity.

"Whether East or West, whether Budapest, down with the Nazi plague."

Hundreds protested today in Leipzig in solidarity with #MajaT.#FreeMaya #FreeAllAntifas #le0607

🎥@DunyaCollective pic.twitter.com/pyf45yGztj

— the brake (@TheBrakeNet) July 6, 2024

Trux’s lawyers have also successfully filed a constitutional complaint, claiming that the extradition was a violation of Article 4 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (CFREU), as determined by the Federal Constitutional Court in its decision on February 6, 2025. According to the ruling, the court did not do enough to assess whether or not Trux would be safe, as a non-binary person, in a Hungarian prison.

The first Hungarian hearing in the Trux case is scheduled for February 21, 2025, and, after a possible conviction, he may be returned to Germany.

When Trux was arrested and extradited to Hungary, the Self-Determination Act had not yet come into force in Germany, meaning he would have been charged under his birth sex and name. But since November 1, the process for changing legal name and sex markers on official documents has been dramatically eased, and even criminals are able to obtain new documents upon request.

„Maja T.“ hat meiner Meinung nach einen etwas männlichen Gang und Erscheinung. Aber wo kämen wir hin, wenn Medien und Nachrichtenagenturen die Selbstauskünfte von offenbar gewaltbereiten Linksextremisten hinterfragen würden. pic.twitter.com/DfSEpoOxuY

— Beatrice Achterberg (@BeaBovary) July 4, 2024

Since the implementation of the Act, almost 15.000 individuals in Germany have altered their legal sex, a figure which significantly surpasses the initial estimate of 4,000 total changes per year. 

https://reduxx.info/non-binary-german-anti-fascist-who-went-on-hammer-rampage-in-budapest-claims-extradition-to-hungary-is-transphobic/

Recorded for our acclaimed new documentary: IMMIGRATION & THE RISE IN RAPE. Watch the documentary here:    • EXPOSED: How Immigration Has Caused a…   Talk TV presenter Alex Phillips interviews ex-Muslim Yasmine Mohammed, author of “Unveiled: How The West Empowers Radical Islam” and founder of “Free Hearts Free Minds”, a charity dedicated to offering support to those who renounce Islam. This full-length interview was recorded for episode 14 of the New Culture Forum’s landmark documentary series “Heresies” (#NCFHeresies). Written & presented by Alex Phillips, “Immigration and the Rise in Rape” may be seen here (and features excerpts from this interview):    • EXPOSED: How Immigration Has Caused a…  

Robert Ménard, the Conservative Mayor of Béziers, is looking at a possible prison term for refusing to officiate the marriage of an illegal Algerian migrant subject to deportation.

He was said to face up to five years in prison, a $75,000 fine and a ban from holding office.

The hearing of his case, relocated to the city of Montpellier, has been scheduled for February 18 under a fast-track guilty-plea procedure (CRPC), meaning there will be no full trial. Instead, Ménard will negotiate a sentence directly with the public prosecutor.

On July 7, 2023, Ménard had refused to marry “Mustapha”, an Algerian national under an OQTF order (Obligation to Leave French Territory) and his fiancée Eva.

Days later, Mustapha was arrested and deported to Algeria. Eva has since become a plaintiff in the case against the Mayor.

Despite facing legal consequences, Ménard remained defiant.

“As Mayor, I must officiate marriages. But as a judicial police officer, I must uphold public safety. This man was in an irregular situation and was unfavourably known to the police. I couldn’t marry them — it’s common sense.”

Ménard has argued that he was not in the wrong.

“I’m flabbergasted. I’ve done nothing wrong — I’m just caught in a contradiction,” he said.

Ménard’s refusal was illegal, as marriage was a fundamental right protected under Article 12 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

While he said he initially suspected a sham marriage, an investigation by public authorities found no evidence of fraud.

Ménard’s case has ignited debate over France’s immigration policies. French interior minister Bruno Retailleau said he understood Ménard and hinted at a potential change in the law.

On February 16, Retailleau expressed support for a draft law that would prohibit marriage when one spouse was in France illegally.

“We all know that marriage can be used to give immigrants legal status,” he said, signalling a possible shift in policy.

“I think that when a rule is wrong, it should be changed. The bill will be backed by the government, through the Minister of Justice”, he added.

The French Senate was due to examine this bill, put forward by the Centrist Stéphane Demilly, on February 27.

https://brusselssignal.eu/2025/02/french-mayor-faces-prison-for-refusing-to-marry-illegal-migrant-under-expulsion-order

Even before I had heard JD Vance’s speech, I knew it must be something special simply from the horrified reactions of the EU elites and their media allies. 

We publish the US Vice President’s speech to the Munich security conference in full on europeanconservative.com, because we recognise that it marks a dividing line in Western politics. And because we agree with pretty much every word of it.

Since the moment he stopped speaking on Friday, Vance has been loudly accused of “attacking Europe”. No, he didn’t. He gave a devastating critique of the EU and UK leaders who have themselves betrayed the foundations of European democracy and Western civilisation. They are the ones who are attacking what Europe should stand for.

As he said, the most worrying threat to Europe now “is not Russia, it’s not China, it’s not any other external actor. What I worry about is the threat from within, the retreat of Europe from some of its most fundamental values, values shared with the United States of America.” 

Vance’s extraordinary speech was aimed against Europe’s ‘enemy within’— the ruling elites who do not believe in their own nations, peoples or history. Far from being “anti-European”, he came down on the side of the millions of people across Europe who are revolting against the bankrupt old political establishment. 

Vance outlined a hit list of the key issues on which Europe’s leaders are betraying Europeans—much the same issues you will find at the top of our agenda.

He slammed official Europe for retreating on free speech and imposing censorship by branding dissident views as “so-called misinformation”. He attacked the EU and European governments for an open borders policy which has exposed their people to the sort of terrorist attack that struck Munich last week. “No voter on this continent went to the ballot box to open the flood gates to millions of unvetted immigrants”. But, he observed to the delight of this veteran Brexiteer, “In England, they voted for Brexit. … And more and more, all over Europe, they’re voting for political leaders who promise to put an end to out-of-control migration.” 

He expressed near-disbelief at the attacks on democracy which mean EU officials can boast of cancelling an election result in Romania, while German politicians demand a ban on the second-most popular party before their general election.

As Vance summed all of this up: 

Now, to many of us on the other side of the Atlantic, it looks more and more like old, entrenched interests hiding behind ugly Soviet era words like misinformation and disinformation, who simply don’t like the idea that somebody with an alternative viewpoint might express a different opinion, or, God forbid, vote a different way, or, even worse, win an election.

Mr Vice President, it looks a lot like that to many of us on this side of the Atlantic, too!

What brings these issues together is the EU elites’ fundamental fear and loathing of the demos—the people. As Vance said, “what no democracy, American, German or European, will survive, is telling millions of voters that their thoughts and concerns, their aspirations, their pleas for relief are invalid or unworthy of even being considered. … To believe in democracy is to understand that each of our citizens has wisdom and has a voice”. 

Five hundred years after NiccolòMachiavelli wrote that “The multitude is wiser and more constant than a prince,” it somehow sounds revolutionary once more to hear a Western leader praise the wisdom of the masses. And how startling to hear that in Europe, at a time when the anti-democratic EU elites prefer to put their faith, not in princes, but in equally unelected judges, commissioners and experts.

Since Munich was a security conference, Vance brought the issue back to the question of defence. “But what has seemed a little bit less clear to me—and certainly I think to many of the citizens of Europe—is what exactly it is that you’re defending yourselves for.” In other words—what is it that Europe’s leaders want to fight for? The answer to that question could decide the future of NATO and much more. 

“Europe faces many challenges, but the crisis this continent faces right now, the crisis I believe we all face together, is one of our own making,” said Vance. “If you’re running in fear of your own voters, there is nothing America can do for you, nor, for that matter, is there anything that you can do for the American people who elected me and elected President Trump. You need democratic mandates to accomplish anything of value. “

Vice President Vance has gone back to face the “many challenges” his own country faces, of course, But in hurling those political grenades at the crumbling walls of fortress Europe, he exploded some history-defining questions that we cannot allow to be swept back under the plush carpets of Brussels. 

At the time of the European elections last year, I wrote a Democracy Watch Column entitled (with reference to U.S. author John Dos Passos), “All Right, We Are Two Europes”. It highlighted the divide between official Europe, where the elites were clinging to power, and the real Europe where millions of ordinary are in revolt against their policies and rule.

All right, now, maybe even more: we are two Wests. The divide is not America versus Europe, nor just Vance versus Von der Leyen. It is the people versus the elites, the oligarchs versus the demos, the cancel culture warriors versus those who believe free speech is the lifeblood of our civilisation. 

We know where we stand. Whose side are you on?

https://europeanconservative.com/articles/commentary/we-stand-with-jd-vance-versus-europes-enemy-within/

German AfD leader and Chancellor candidate Alice Weidel had a long interview with German paper BILD.

Needless to say, it was quite adversarial.

But you will not see it below, because I think the real fire was in Weidel’s statements: clear, unambiguous and unafraid.

Hatred towards her has become common-place, as she has to send her family to live in Switzerland, and can’t live in her house, having a high-risk level, can’t even go shopping.

Weidel approached CDU’s Friedrich Merz, supposed favorite for next Chancellor, with ‘an open hand’ and a warning: doing a coalition with current government’s Greens and Olaf Scholz’s SPD is VOTER FRAUD.

Weidel: “We have two large bars in the polls – the black [CDU] and the blue [AfD]. It is the will of the voters that we have a blue-black coalition. Then we would also have stable majorities and could finally make politics for our country and not against it. Since Friedrich Merz has ruled out a coalition with the AfD, he can only work with the Greens and with the SPD. In other words, what he is doing right now is nothing more than voter deception, even voter fraud. (…) Voters simply have to know that if they vote for Friedrich Merz, that they will get the Greens, a Habeck as Minister of Economic Affairs – that’s just part of it.”

The reporter wants to bully her for the common-sense policies of wanting ‘undisturbed trade with Russia’, lifting of the sanctions and repairing the Nord Stream pipelines.

Weidel: “We want to have very good relations with our European neighbors. (…) But we also want to have a very good relationship with the great powers. This includes Russia. (…) Until two years ago, we purchased cheap natural gas from Russia through a Nord Stream consortium. (…) What we want is to end a sanctions policy that is above all one thing: damaging to our country. We have the highest energy prices in the world. We are no longer competitive.”

Reporter insists that she denounces the Russian threats to Germany.

Weidel: “But we did it the other way around all the time. Friedrich Merz has threatened to deliver Taurus. He used it to advertise. […] Donald Trump doesn’t have [a critical word for Russia] either. You have to sit down at the negotiating table. You have to talk to each other. We as the AfD have said nothing else, that we must enter into peace negotiations. And I think that alone is serious politics. And above all, we must end a self-damaging sanctions policy at all costs.”

The reporter wants to talk about ‘remigration’, that for some groups it means to also expel Germans with a migration background.

Weidel: “The term remigration means the implementation of law and order. Since 2015, for ten years, the government has been violating the law here. People can come to our country illegally. They are not deported, even though they are here illegally and/or commit crimes. And we say very clearly: We have to close the borders. We must control our borders and reject illegals. We have to expel criminals. Right away. They are not allowed to be here at all. And so do illegal residents. Nothing else means remigration. There is no talk of [legal migrants turned citizens] at all. (…) People who go to work here, who pay taxes here, are very welcome. We are also happy to give them citizenship.”

One good question: AfD wants more money for the Bundeswehr, more money for pensions. They also want to reduce income, corporate, sales and energy taxes, as well as abolish property tax, acquisition tax, and real estate transfer tax.

How on Earth do you make this work financially? Unfortunately for the reporter Weidel had a good answer.

Weidel: “We also want to abolish the CO₂ levy. Above all, we want to abolish the Renewable Energy Sources Act, the EEG, which has so far cost us around 500 billion euros. That is about 20 billion annually in the budget. Then there is also the fact that the network has to be expanded – according to estimates by institutes, this is around 460 billion euros. That would bring us to almost a trillion euros in subsidy payments for unprofitable renewable energies. If you delete that, you will have almost financed it. If you then no longer pay citizen’s money and social benefits to foreign citizens who have never paid into our coffers, then you come to about 135 billion in savings, then they even have a surplus.”

Read more:

German AfD’s Weidel in Fiery Exchange With BILD: Merz Refusing AfD Alliance for Greens Is ‘Voter Fraud’ – Wants To Have Good Relations With Russia – Mass Deportation of Illegals