The TV programme ‘Bürgeranwalt’ showed that a lorry could no longer drive up to the company because of parked cars. Screenshot / ORF ON
A suddenly removed ‘loading zone’ in front of a business on Koloniestraße in Vienna’s Floridsdorf district made headlines on the Austrian Broadcasting Corporation’s (ORF) programme ‘Bürgeranwalt’ (Ombudsman) thanks to Ombudsman Christoph Luisser. The programme raised suspicions that the nearby Islamic Cultural Centre needed parking spaces. Was a ‘loading zone’ stolen from a business owner with 20 employees because a nearby mosque demanded parking space for its visitors? The Ombudsman’s Office had evidence that a neighbouring mosque was behind the residents’ complaint that led to the removal of the loading zone, Luisser said on the ‘Bürgeranwalt’ programme on February 14.
The representative of the MA 46 (transport affairs) authority did not contradict this account, but said that it was not actually a loading zone that had been removed, but a delivery zone. This had been set up to improve visibility at the intersection. However, following measures taken by the transport authority, this delivery zone was no longer necessary. ‘That’s not true,’ said Stefan Just, managing director of Franz Just & Söhne, on the ‘Bürgeranwalt’ programme. Since the delivery zone was removed, there have already been two accidents at this intersection.
For Stefan Just, the situation following the dissolution of the delivery zone is unacceptable. Lorries have to stop in the second lane when making deliveries, and it is dangerous for employees to leave the company premises due to poor visibility caused by parked cars. Just said that when he asked the City of Vienna why the ‘loading zone’ had been closed without notice, he was told that his company had not existed for 20 years anyway. In fact, however, the man has been supplying the City of Vienna, among others, to date and has always paid municipal tax to the municipal authority over the past 20 years!
The entrepreneur (a fourth-generation stamp factory) now has to fork out a lot of money for the incomprehensible actions of MA 46. According to the transport authority, Mr Just would have to pay €4,000 for signs and road markings for the newly requested delivery zone, which would be approved. ‘There is currently a wave of bankruptcies sweeping the country, so a business-friendly approach towards a family business that has been in existence since 1912 would be appropriate,’ demanded Ombudsman Luisser.
The case is also causing a stir in the Floridsdorf district of Vienna. FPÖ district party chairman and member of the state parliament Wolfgang Irschik told unzensuriert:
The fact that the City of Vienna apparently assumes that a business has closed down, even though it has been in operation for decades, is a bureaucratic farce. This incident also fits in with the scandalous destruction of parking spaces by the red-pink city government.
Berlin’s police union representatives have pushed back against the local Green Party’s election pledge to abolish the city’s neutrality law and permit police officers to wear headscarves on duty, warning that such a move would blur the line between personal faith and state authority.
Angélique Yumusak, women’s representative of the German Police Union, sharply criticized the proposal in comments to the Berliner Kurier, arguing that visible religious symbols have no place in policing.
“Headscarves have absolutely no place in the police force. Religion and state must be kept strictly separate,” she said.
“Women who choose to wear this religious symbol of their own free will are free to do so in our country,” she said, but warned, “They have no place in a uniform. Anyone who chooses this profession knows the rules. I’m applying for a job, and the requirements are very clearly defined.”
„Das Kopftuch hat in der Polizei überhaupt nichts zu suchen. Religion und Staat sind ganz streng auseinanderzuhalten", sagt Angélique Yumusak, DPolG-Frauenbeauftragte im #BerlinerKurier. Wer Uniform trage, repräsentiere den Staat – nicht sich selbst 1/3 https://t.co/OAZLh6Zcna
“Ideologies regarding religion are particularly pronounced here,” she said, warning that such a move could affect police operations in a city already fractured by political and religious tensions.
In further comments from the German Police Union Berlin (DPolG), published on social media, the organization said the “headscarf-Islam obsession of the Berlin Greens is counterproductive for women. It suggests a moral code exclusively for women.
“It is not in the interest of the state, but rather a fatal sign for our democracy, to use patriarchal oppression for votes,” it added.
The renewed debate follows the Green Party’s election platform, which calls for the abolition of Berlin’s neutrality law governing religious symbols in public service. In its manifesto, the party writes, “We want to enable all people to live their religious convictions publicly and without discrimination,” adding that, “Regarding the neutrality law, we are following the jurisprudence of the Federal Constitutional Court and will finally abolish it.”
The neutrality law still applies to police officers and members of the judiciary, even after recent legal changes affecting schools. In 2023, Germany’s Federal Constitutional Court overturned a blanket ban on teachers wearing headscarves, and since December, teachers in Berlin have officially been permitted to wear them in classrooms.
Berlin’s governing CDU and SPD have so far defended maintaining neutrality requirements for police and courts, arguing that visible religious symbols could undermine public trust in state impartiality.
Internal police estimates have found that Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez’s amnesty scheme for illegal migrants could see more than double the number of people granted residency than the Socialist-led coalition government has told the public.
A risk analysis paper produced by Spain’s National Immigration and Borders Centre ( CNIF ) in conjunction with the General Immigration and Borders Commissariat of the National Police has warned that up to 1.35 million illegal migrants may be granted residency under amnesty plans announced by Madrid last month.
This comes in contrast to public proclamations from Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez, who wrote in the New York Times that the scheme would see around 500,000 illegals granted amnesty.
The CNIF report, published by the El Confidencial news website, predicted that between 750,000 and one million illegals currently present in Spain could receive residence permits under the plan, while a further 250,000 to 350,000 asylum seekers could also attempt to gain residency.
It comes on top of warnings that the amnesty plan could act as a “pull factor” for more prospective illegals. Concerns have also been raised that illegals living in other EU nations may seek to gain a Spanish residence permit, which would allow them to remain in their country of choice in the internal open borders Schengen zone.
The CNIF further warned that, on top of the residence permits handed out, the amnesty could increase overall immigration to the country due to an “international perception of Spain as a more permissive country with irregular immigration,” noting that the amnesty plan has already seen a “very intense media impact, especially in Latin America.”
The move by the Socialist prime minsiter comes despite widespread public opposition to the amnesty plan, with a survey last week from pollster SocioMétrica finding that nearly seven in ten Spaniards are opposed to granting illegals residence permits.
Opposition is fiercest among the youngest cohort of voters, who will face the most significant ramifications, including lower wages and higher housing costs. According to the poll, over 89 per cent of Spaniards between 17 and 35 are opposed to the plan.
However, the left is apparently unconcerned by the backlash, with the radical Podemos party hailing the “replacement” of native conservatives with foreign migrants, while vowing to fight for migrants to be given the right to vote in federal elections regardless of citizenship.
Podemos MEP said: “I wish for replacement theory, I wish we could sweep this country of fascists and racists with migrants, with working people… Of course, I want there to be replacement: replacement of fascists, replacement of racists, replacement of freeloaders, and that we can do it with working people, whatever their skin colour may be.”
Péter Magyar, leader of Hungary’s Europhile Tisza Party and a member of the centrist-liberal European People’s Party, talks broadly about ending alleged corruption in Budapest and restoring freedoms so that “everyone can live in peace.”
Yet his critics say the actions he would undertake as prime minister would actually result in conservatives having their freedoms restricted.
Magyar is hoping to replace Viktor Orbán in elections that are taking place in April. He has declared that if this is the case, his government will extradite Zbigniew Ziobro, a key figure of Warsaw’s former conservative Law and Justice (PiS) government who is being targeted as part of leftist Polish PM Donald Tusk’s pursuit of his rivals, “on the first day.”
The accusations levelled against Ziobro, which could land him in prison for up to 25 years, have been dismissed as “the terror of political revenge”—hence why Orbán’s team last month granted him international protection and political asylum in Hungary.
Unsurprisingly, Magyar’s announcement followed his recent meeting with Tusk. It serves as an early indication that he would adopt the Tusk playbook on how to deal with political rivals.
Responding, Ziobro said on Monday that a Magyar victory “would mean a Moscow-style scenario for Hungary: internet censorship, repression of the opposition, the end of independent courts,” adding:
However, Hungarians are too smart and proud to entrust you with power and hand over their sovereignty, wallets, and freedom into the clutches of Brussels.
Panie @magyarpeterMP – to Pańskie zwycięstwo oznaczałoby dla Węgier moskiewski scenariusz: cenzura internetu, represje opozycji, koniec niezależnych sądów.
Ale Bruksela nie dała rady, obalić premiera Orbána, więc Węgrzy mają sieć bez lewackiej cenzury, szkoły wolne od… pic.twitter.com/1RvDVOPPku
Marcin Romanowski, a former Polish conservative deputy justice minister who was likewise granted asylum in Hungary before later having a European Arrest Warrant lifted by a Warsaw court, also jibed that Magyar seems “to be overdosing on the ‘white powder’ of a warped imagination.” Romanowski may have phrased what he said also as an allusion to the drug scandal Magyar has been embroiled in.
Indeed, as one of Ziobro’s lawyers helpfully pointed out, “the decision on extradition in Hungary is made by a court, not by a politician.”
You can see why Silence of the Lambs rang so true that Hollyweird has to apologize for it. Again, already, less than a week after the butchery at Tumbler Ridge Secondary School in Canada, yet another transsexual maniac has gone berserk.
A suspect accused of shooting and killing two people [make that three] at a Rhode Island ice rink on Monday before killing himself was identified as transgender and had a history of past family conflict over his gender identity…
Today’s entry into the Transsexual Violence Hall of Horrors is named Robert Dorgan (a.k.a. Roberta Esposito). Family tensions escalated after he underwent sex change surgery. Relatives failed to affirm him as a woman. So he shot his wife and three of his children during a high school hockey game at Dennis M. Lynch Arena in Pawtucket.
His wife and one child died at the scene. A second child died at the hospital.
A society warped by wokeism eggs on lunatics to indulge in their delusions until their psychosis results in violence. But the takeaway for liberals will be that he killed himself too, confirming that transsexuals are victims and ought to be further affirmed in their imaginary identities.
Transgender father Robert Dorgan ID’d as RI hockey shooter who gunned down family https://t.co/ELXxMkzgBm
Wikimedia Commons, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, PD US DHS
Germany’s ZDF public broadcaster has come under fire over an episode of its flagship heute journal news programme after it emerged it broadcast an AI-generated video clip to illustrate alleged brutality by US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers.
The footage, clearly bearing the watermark of OpenAI’s Sora text-to-video tool, was used without proper labelling as synthetic content, prompting accusations of journalistic malpractice and fuelling wider debate over the use of generative AI in news reporting.
The incident occurred during the heute journal broadcast on February 15. Presenter Dunja Hayali introduced a segment criticising ICE practices under the US President Donald Trump administration, stating that officers were “leading parents away in front of their children’s eyes”.
To underscore claims of excessive force during arrests and deportations, the programme aired a short clip depicting dramatic scenes of detentions.
Viewers quickly noticed the prominent Sora watermark superimposed on the footage, a telltale sign that the material had been created by OpenAI’s generative video platform rather than captured in reality.
Independent outlets, including Apollo News, NIUS and the ÖRR Blog, were among the first to highlight the discrepancy, pointing out visible AI artefacts such as inconsistencies in uniforms, hands and logos that only loosely resembled actual ICE insignia.
The clip’s inclusion appeared deliberate, as it aligned with the report’s narrative, yet no on-screen disclaimer identified it as artificial.
Following public outcry and media scrutiny, ZDF withdrew the full episode from its online archive and YouTube channel before it airbrushed the episode and re-uploaded it, without fake videos and adding the editorial note: “Video subsequently changed for editorial reasons”.
In response to queries from Apollo News, a ZDF spokesperson acknowledged that the broadcaster had intentionally used the material for illustrative purposes, showing “that a climate of fear is created with both real and AI-generated images” but admitted a failure in labelling, describing the omission as an oversight.
ZDF maintained that the segment’s overall reporting on ICE operations remained factually grounded in documented cases, although critics argued the synthetic clip undermined credibility by presenting fabricated visuals as representative.
Particularly embarrassing is the fact that Hayali, first warned viewers that not all videos published on social media about ICE missions were real, only for the broadcaster to unintentionally use such AI created imagery itself.
Das ZDF Heute-Journal berichtete gestern über die "ICE Truppen" in den USA. Wieso verwendet das ZDF Heute-Journal ein Video, das ein Wasserzeichen der SORA KI Video App hat? #OerrBlogpic.twitter.com/RBLZFt8a3U
The affair has drawn sharp criticism from conservative commentators and media watchdogs, who accused ZDF of attempting to sensationalise US immigration enforcement to fit an anti-Trump narrative.
This is not the first time generative AI has intersected with ICE-related reporting.
Since OpenAI’s Sora tool became widely accessible in late 2025, social media platforms have been flooded with synthetic videos purporting to show extreme ICE raids, often featuring dramatic arrests in public spaces.
Fact-checkers from AFP, Reuters, and others have repeatedly identified such clips as AI creations, many bearing Sora watermarks or exhibiting classic generation flaws such as unnatural movements.
In the US, viral Sora-generated footage has depicted raids in supermarkets and streets, stoking both outrage and scepticism about mass deportations.
Guidelines from bodies such as the European Broadcasting Union emphasise clear labelling of AI-generated content to preserve trust, yet enforcement remains inconsistent.
The British historian David Starkey has long maintained that Tony Blair’s assumption of power in 1997 marked an all-encompassing upheaval of British society. Nothing, he argues, is the same as before. The old Britain has been uprooted; its legal system and top management have been comprehensively remade. Where once a relatively homogeneous nation allowed its citizens to “govern themselves,” in Starkey’s memorable phrase, today they stand profoundly alienated from their government, police, and courts.
This is no ordinary political shift. Britain as we once knew it—a united kingdom of England, Scotland, Wales, and Ireland, the cradle of modern civilization— is being deliberately eradicated as a coherent entity possessing institutional continuity and a legitimate claim to historical recognition. Politicians in Westminster inhabit privileged bubbles, remote from the voters that they ostensibly serve. The police and courts have been politicized to an extent incompatible with any genuine Western democracy. On the streets of London, riots now threaten to metastasize into the civil war so presciently diagnosed by war studies scholar David Betz.
For more than two centuries, since the eighteenth century, Britain stood as a stronghold of Western civilization: a constitutional monarchy that offered stability while continental Europe convulsed in wars between autocratic monarchs, absolutist regimes, and revolutionary ideologies. It gave the world parliamentary government, the rule of law, the Industrial Revolution, and the liberal order that eventually triumphed over tyranny. Today, that same Britain has been reduced to a bridgehead for Islamist vanguards—an advanced outpost in a slow-motion civilizational conquest enabled by its own governing class.
Eight governments in a row have methodically restricted the British people’s ancient freedoms, above all freedom of expression. Speech codes, hate-crime legislation, and online regulation have created a climate of fear in which candid discussion of demographic change or cultural incompatibility is treated as “extremism.” It is as though the state itself is engaged in a conscious project to bury Britain as a nation that has any right to exist on its own historic terms.
The political elite has betrayed the British people. State institutions are riddled with corruption, including Islamist infiltration. The total collapse of society and outright civil war no longer seem remote possibilities; they feel like logical culminations of laissez-faire and incompetence.
The mechanisms of this betrayal are now clear. Thirty years of misgovernment have permitted a deeply politicized civil service to entrench itself. This “deep state,” in natural alliance with an academy that serves as its ideological nursery, meets any assertion of popular will—including the demand for zero net immigration—with bureaucratic obstruction, legal sabotage, and moral condemnation. The people’s preferences are treated, not as sovereign commands but as regrettable atavisms to be managed, diluted or ignored.
Blair’s revolution was constitutional vandalism on a grand scale. The Human Rights Act 1998 imported a continental rights culture that subordinated parliamentary sovereignty to judicial interpretation, often favoring claimants from minority groups over the historic nation. Devolution fragmented the unitary state. Quangos and regulatory bodies proliferated, shifting power to unaccountable experts. Management of public institutions was “modernized” through diversity mandates that prized representation over competence and national loyalty.
Demographically, the transformation has been revolutionary. Net migration, negligible for centuries, exploded after 1997. What began as economic policy morphed into a deliberate remaking of the population. Parallel societies emerged, particularly in Muslim communities where integration failed. Rape gang scandals in Rotherham, Rochdale, and elsewhere exposed not only horrific crimes but also the institutional reluctance to confront them for fear of “racism” accusations. No-go zones, Sharia patrols, and Islamist preaching became integrated features of British urban life.
The legal and administrative overhaul reinforced this process. Top management in the civil service, judiciary, BBC, and major corporations was recast in the image of the new order. “Diversity, equity, and inclusion” supplanted merit. The old governing class, rooted in a sense of British exceptionalism, was displaced by a cosmopolitan elite contemptuous of the nation’s past and eager to atone for empire through self-erasure.
Citizens feel this alienation acutely. The police, historically personified by the incorruptible and unarmed Bobby, once emblematic of impartial British justice, now practice two-tier policing: robust action against native protesters (i.e., even motionless individuals in silent prayer) contrasted with hesitation when dealing with violent minority unrest. Courts, constrained by human rights law and progressive jurisprudence, frequently frustrate deportation, leniently sentence serious offenders, and appear more concerned with the sensitivities of perpetrators than the safety of victims. Trust in institutions has collapsed.
The Islamist vanguard exploits these weaknesses. Britain has become a sanctuary for political Islam. The Muslim Brotherhood and affiliated networks have established influence in mosques, charities, universities, and even parts of government. “Trojan Horse” scandals in Birmingham schools revealed systematic attempts to Islamize education. Foreign funding from Gulf states has shaped academic discourse and public institutions. Terror attacks from 7/7 onwards, combined with rape gangs and street-level intimidation, demonstrate that the threat is not theoretical.
Freedom of expression has withered. Citizens self-censor on immigration, Islam, or cultural replacement lest they face professional ruin, police investigation or mob violence. The very act of defending Britain’s historic identity is pathologized as “far-right.” This is not liberal tolerance; it is cultural surrender dressed in the language of compassion.
David Betz has charted the strategic realities of this descent. In his analyses of emerging civil conflict in the West, he identifies the lethal combination of (a) elite detachment, (b) cultural fragmentation, (c) demographic rupture, and (d) loss of state monopoly on violence. Recent riots—marked by burning vehicles, attacks on police, and communal clashes—illustrate how quickly tensions can ignite.
Betz warns that such episodes are precursors. Vulnerable infrastructure, targeted disruption, and the erosion of social trust create conditions for protracted low-intensity war. Britain’s cities, with their stark ethnic enclaves and mutual suspicions, are particularly susceptible. The 2024 disturbances following high-profile crimes and perceived injustices offered a grim preview.
The deep state’s resistance is systemic. Academia produces graduates steeped in critical theory, postcolonial guilt, and identity politics; these enter the civil service and perpetuate the ideology. When voters demand border control or cultural preservation, the response is delay, dilution, or denunciation. Brexit, which expressed a desire to reclaim sovereignty, was met with years of obstruction. Demands for zero immigration are dismissed as unrealistic or bigoted, even as public services buckle and native working-class communities feel replaced.
This is not mere incompetence. It is the outcome of an ideological project that views the historic British nation as an obstacle to a borderless, multicultural future. The elite’s privileged insulation allows them to celebrate “diversity” from gated communities and private schools while the costs—crime, strained welfare, lost cohesion—are borne by ordinary citizens.
The trajectory is towards collapse. Thirty years have embedded the rot too deeply for incremental reform. Corruption and infiltration have compromised the state’s legitimacy. Islamist networks operate with relative impunity. The native population’s patience is exhausted. Riots are symptoms; civil war is the potential syndrome.
Restoration is the only alternative to catastrophe. It demands the repeal of Blair’s constitutional innovations, the restoration of parliamentary sovereignty, rigorous border control aiming at zero net immigration, a purge of ideological capture in the civil service and academy, and an unapologetic reaffirmation of Britain’s historic identity and Christian-influenced culture. The Human Rights Act must go. Devolution’s centrifugal forces must be countered. Institutions must once again serve the people who built them.
The British people retain the right to exist as a distinct nation with continuity to its past. Starkey’s diagnosis and Betz’s warnings are not counsel of despair but urgent calls to action. Britain is being eradicated by design. The politicians’ betrayal, the institutions’ corruption, the streets’ growing anarchy—all point to the same conclusion: without radical reversal, civil war and societal implosion are not possibilities but probabilities.
The hour is late. The old Britain is dying; a new, fractured, and subjugated entity is being born in its place. Whether the British people will permit this suicide or reclaim their birthright will determine if the cradle of modern civilization becomes its grave.
To reclaim Britain, its people must overcome the deep state’s inherent resistance to democracy.
In the early morning hours of January 3, 2026, a reportedly “leftist” radical network, “Volcano Group” (Vulkangruppe), committed an arson attack against the power grid in Berlin, Germany, causing an electricity blackout that left 45,000 households and 2,000 businesses – approximately 100,000 people – without heat and light during freezing winter temperatures for up to five days. It was reportedly the longest blackout in Germany since World War II.
The radicals in Volcano Group claimed responsibility for the attack. In a statement, they said that the network had aimed to “cut the juice to the ruling class” and claimed that the attack was about action to protect the climate from fossil fuels, artificial intelligence and a “greed for energy.”
Among those “ruling class” people who suffered the consequences of this terrorist attack were four hospitals, 74 care homes, and 20 schools. It has been more than a month since the attack, yet the authorities have arrested no one, seem bewildered, and are apparently so desperate that they have finally offered a million-euro reward to anyone with information that leads to the arrest of the attackers.
Volcano Group, far from being new, has, since 2011, perpetrated several other terrorist attacks “on critical points of public infrastructure,” according to Germany’s domestic intelligence service (Bundesamt für Verfassungsschutz, or BfV).
“In Berlin and Brandenburg, arson attacks have been committed at irregular intervals on… public infrastructure since 2011. After the crimes, anonymous authors who describe themselves as ‘Volcano groups’ publish letters of responsibility on relevant internet platforms. The attacks often have a noticeable impact on the population. For example, there have already been several power and telecommunications failures as well as disruptions to public transport. It can be assumed that there is a network behind the ‘Volcano groups’… Ideologically, [they] can be assigned to the violence-oriented anarchist spectrum.”
Despite these attacks occurring in Germany at intervals for more than a decade, including one against the Tesla factory in Brandenburg, curiously, no one has ever been arrested. It seems almost unbelievable that the German state, which intensely surveils citizens’ every word on the internet, does not have the faintest clue who might be behind these terrorist attacks.
These are the same authorities, after all, who send law enforcement to raid the homes of ordinary citizens for posting satirical comments about leading politicians, and for supposedly “inciting hatred”. Approximately every six months, most recently on June 25, 2025, German police, under the coordination of the Federal Criminal Police Office (BKA), carried out its “12th Day of Action to Combat Criminal Hate Postings“. On this exalted occasion, it carried out a total of 46 searches, 66 interrogations, and 26 other measures nationwide, targeting suspected authors of “online hate speech and incitement.”
Authorities, however, are unable to find or arrest a single perpetrator from the Volcano Group, which conducts actual terrorism?
In an interview for broadcaster ZDF, German Minister of the Interior Alexander Dobrindt said:
“We see very clearly that attempts are being made here to carry out attacks against infrastructure, against our economy, against the population, against society, which are ultimately intended to massively harm people and could even cost them their lives.”
ZDF summarized Dobrindt’s belief that far-left extremism in recent years has not been taken sufficiently seriously in Germany:
“In recent years, left-wing extremism has not received much attention and has no longer been seen as the threat of our time. There has also been ‘a high degree of trivialization.’ For example, the chairman of the Left Party said that left-wing crimes serve the common good.”
That is quite an understatement. German authorities, in fact, appear to have been hyper-focused on eliminating what they seem to see as political threats to their power, instead of catching terrorists from the “left”. In May 2025, Germany’s domestic intelligence agency classified Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) — the party with the second-largest number of seats in parliament — as a “confirmed right-wing extremist organization” after an “intense and comprehensive” examination, which included authoring a staggering 1,100-page report. Imagine if that same sort of dedication had been expended on arresting terrorists from Volcano Group.
As US Secretary of State Marco Rubio bluntly said at the time, this classification of AfD gave the BfV intelligence agency “new powers to surveil the opposition. That’s not democracy – it’s tyranny in disguise.”
Since the classification, the AfD has been under expanded surveillance by authorities. This new snooping potentially includes the use of wiretaps, monitoring electronic correspondence and communications, and undercover informants to spy on party officials and anyone else connected with the AfD.
Even the BfV’s former president, Hans-Georg Maassen, is under surveillance by the agency for being a “right-wing extremist.” He lost this job in 2018 after expressing concern about the obvious Islamist threat from then Chancellor Angela Merkel’s policy of flooding Germany with Muslim migrants and for, ironically, refusing to put the AfD under surveillance. He said, “I am not a tool of the governing parties, nor is it the BfV’s job to undermine their political competitors.”
Perhaps if the German government had been more concerned with fighting terrorism and less with fighting legitimate political opposition, it might have been able to locate the actual terrorists?
Muslim migrants have swarmed across Europe, killing, robbing and raping at will. The question is where does the indigenous Christian population go for ‘refuge’?
This is just the latest incident in the wave of Muslim ethnic cleansing, soon likely to escalate to genocide, across Europe.
Ahmed Mohammed, 35, attacked Daniel Ayettey as he preached to a crowd at Speakers’ Corner, in London’s Hyde Park in May last year.
Mr Ayettey’s sermon descended into violence when Mohammed asked ‘what would you like to happen in my life?’ and he responded: ‘I would like to have the Lord in your life’.
This seemed to trigger Mohammed who ‘very quickly’ became angry and started to threaten Mr Ayettey, telling him: ‘I’m going to stab you’.
The Sudanese national, who has 29 previous convictions for 67 offences since arriving in the UK in 2012, tried to force his victim off a ladder before brandishing a knife.
‘There were a number of people, including Muslims, who were aware of Mr Mohammed and they tried to persuade Mr Ayettey not to call the police.’
Mohammed – who applied to the Home Office for indefinite leave to remain in the UK – was convicted of threatening a person with an offensive weapon in a public place.
As sentencing was passed down, Judge Martin Griffith told him: ‘You’ve got a shocking record of convictions’.
Mohammed admitted three separate counts of theft from a shop from Sainsbury’s in Marble Arch on May 3, just weeks before the attack.
Judge Griffith said: ‘I hope [the suspended sentence] could be a sign for you that you should not be back with your friends in Westminster doing nothing and drinking and stealing from shops.”
People have faced significant jail sentences for expressing negativity toward Muslim mass migration.
The Starmer regime has watched as over 1,000 people have been arrested a month for speech offenses. Lucy Connolly, an indigenous mother, was jailed for 31 months for expressing her outrage after a Muslim terrorist stabbed little girls to death. There was never any real prospect of her attacking anyone. Mohammed got a suspended sentence for threatening to stab a Christian preacher despite a “shocking record of convictions”.
“Lucy Connolly, 41, received a 31-month prison sentence after calling for “mass deportation now” in a social media post to her 10,000 followers”
At what point do we start offering refugee status to people in the UK who are fleeing Muslim violence and terror?
The question is now being seriously mulled by the Trump administration.
Hamit Coskun was stabbed by a Muslim while burning a Koran in protest. He was sent to jail while his Muslim assailant got bail. Coskun was charged with offending the ‘religious sensibilities’ of Islam. Now there’s talk he may get political asylum in America.
The Trump administration is in discussions about potentially assisting a British resident who burned a Quran outside the Turkish Embassy in London and later faced prosecution, according to a report Sunday in The Telegraph.
Coskun told the newspaper that if he loses the case, he may be forced to “flee” Britain and seek protection in the United States. “As a victim of Islamic terror, I cannot remain silent,” he said. “I may have no choice but to leave Britain and move to the United States, where President Trump has stood firm for freedom of speech and against Islamic extremism.”
He added that if he is compelled to leave, it would signal that Britain has “fallen victim to Islamism and the restrictions on expression they seek to impose on the non-Muslim world.”
The report comes a month after The Telegraph said the Trump administration was discussing the possibility of offering asylum to British Jews amid a rise in antisemitism in the country.
Christians should also receive political asylum. As is anyone seeking refuge from the Islamic-Marxist tyranny overtaking the UK.
Two Irish dancing organizations are being called to change their policies allowing transgender-identifying athletes to compete in the girls’ category after a biological boy has won several competitions.
In a letter to the Irish Dance Teachers’ Association of North America and the An Coimisiún Le Rincí Gaelacha, which are described as being “two major governing bodies for Irish dancing,” the Concerned Women for America (CWA) called for them “to remedy their participation policies,” Fox News reported.
Maggie McKneely, who serves as the Director of Government Relations for CWA, explained to the outlet that a “boy won in the girls’ category for the very first time back in 2023,” adding that he had “been Irish-dancing for a long time and had gone to the World Championships as a boy” before “identifying as a girl.”
After “competing in the girls’ division” in 2023, the transgender-identifying individual “won a regional title for the first time, and he has since gone on to win two more times,” McKneely told the outlet.
Per the outlet, McKneely described a “ripple-effect” that is “caused by the male dancer” competing in girls’ competitions:
Speaking to Fox News Digital, McKneely lamented what she described as a “ripple-effect” caused by the male dancer being allowed to continue competing in the girls’ division.
“Not only did a boy win the girl’s title for his age category, placing the girl who got in second who should have been in first, but that also means that the girl who got in 11th did not qualify for Worlds because the top 10 dancers qualify for worlds. It means the girl who got 26th did not qualify for nationals because the top 25 qualify for nationals,” she said. “You have a boy on top of the podium and all these girls who have dreamed and have set goals for different placements in their age category who were not able to make them because of this one boy disrupting the entire category.”
In an article on the CWA website from December 2025, McKneely wrote that “competitive Irish dance is extremely rigorous and time-consuming.”
“It is difficult enough for a girl to win when she is competing against fellow female dancers,” McKneely added. “It’s nearly impossible when pitted against a biologically advantaged male who can jump higher, move faster, and naturally has more stamina to make it through his rounds.”
