Allah's Willing Executioners

A prestigious French academic publisher, Presses Universitaires de France (PUF), has halted the release of a book criticising “woke ideology” in Western higher education, citing an increasingly hostile political climate.

“We believe that the necessary conditions for a calm and reasoned reception of this collective work are no longer in place,” PUF stated in announcing the suspension on March 10.

The book, titled Face à l’obscurantisme woke (In the Face of Woke Obscurantism), argued that wokism, originating in university humanities departments, was a “militant pseudo-science” that suppressed dissent through intimidation and fosters a “moral panic”.

It further said wokism “fuels communitarianism and fractures the nation [France] into a kaleidoscope of competing identities”.

Backlash from journalists and academics intensified ahead of the book’s planned release and PUF then opted to suspend its publication.

In a message to the book’s co-editors, Emmanuelle Hénin, Xavier-Laurent Salvador and Pierre Vermeren, PUF director Paul Garapon justified the decision as an effort to protect the publisher’s reputation.

“This matter has clearly become political,” Garapon wrote. “In these circumstances, my role is to safeguard PUF from anything that could harm it, and I am therefore compelled to suspend publication.”

Criticism of the book gained traction after historian Patrick Boucheron, speaking at the Collège de France on March 7 during an event for the Stand Up for Science movement, targeted the tome.

“A large part of the media is now dominated by entrepreneurs of inaccuracy and distortion, who claim that the greatest threats we face today are ‘Islamo-leftism’ and ‘wokism’,” Boucheron said.

“There are even some useful idiots within academia. Books continue to be published, including one by PUF titled Face à l’obscurantisme woke, ” he added.

The Stand Up for Science movement was launched to counter the influence of US President Donald Trump and “Trumpism” in science in the US.

For Garapon, the political climate surrounding the book had become too controversial to proceed with its release.

According to him, some critics had targeted PUF due to links the co-editors of the book allegedly had with French Catholic and Conservative billionaire Pierre-Édouard Stérin through his Périclès organisation.

Garapon’s message to the book’s editors underscored the pressure PUF faced: “Some journalists, and not the least influential ones, view the support given by Périclès to the Observatoire de l’éthique universitaire, of which some of you are members, as justification for waging war — not just against the book, but against PUF itself.”

Hénin, Salvador and Vermeren are affiliated with the Observatoire de l’éthique universitaire, formerly known as the Observatoire du décolonialisme, founded in 2021. This initiative, supported by Stérin’s Périclès, advocates academic freedom, secularism and ethical integrity in higher education.

The Observatoire de l’éthique universitaire has positioned itself as a wall against the influence of “decolonial” studies in French academia, which it argued were primarily a vehicle for anti-Western ideology.

According to the group’s website, decolonial movements sought to “dismantle white hegemony in Western civilisation” and serve as the “armed wing of a holy war against the West”.

In France, Sérin has been labelled by left-wingers as the “right-wing George Soros”.

The Périclès’ initiative has funded right-wing organisations and groups such as the magazine L’Incorrect.

In an interview with L’Incorrect on March 11, Hénin explained that the editors wanted to document ideological excesses in research and higher education and publicise the work of the Observatoire de l’éthique universitaire. 

With growing scrutiny over its affiliations and political implications, the book has remained in limbo, caught in a broader cultural battle over free speech, academic integrity and ideological influence in France’s higher-education institutions.

https://brusselssignal.eu/2025/03/french-publisher-halts-book-criticising-woke-ideology-amid-political-backlash

Dismantling Capitalism, Transferring Wealth, Dismantling the West

At the World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos this January, Klaus Schwab’s wife, Hilde Schwab, opened the annual meeting with the assertion that Antarctica is melting.

“Antarctica, which holds 91% of the world’s glaciers, faces catastrophic ice loss, contributing to rising sea levels,” she claimed.

That statement is simply not true. According to a recent study, Antarctica gained 661 billion tons of ice during 2009-2019. “The Antarctic continent,” in fact, “has not warmed in the last seven decades.” A December 2024 study, in addition, concluded that “iceberg calving, the detachment of ice blocks from ice sheets and glaciers… a primary process in mass loss from ice shelf systems in Antarctica and a major source of uncertainty in future projections of sea level rise” is not necessarily a consequence of climate change, not even when we’re talking about “extreme calving events”.

The study looked at 47 years of satellite data of Antarctica and found it did not show any trend of increased calving. In plain English, when icebergs break loose in Antarctica, even “extreme calving events should not automatically be interpreted as a sign of ice shelf instability, but are instead representative of the natural cycle of calving front advance and retreat.”

The history of the climate change hoax is littered with lies and predictions that never came to pass. In 1989, for instance, climate hoaxers hyperventilated that, by the year 2000, the Maldives would sink due to rising sea levels. Associated Press, quoting Noel Brown, director of the New York office of the UN Environment Program, reported at the time:

“A senior U.N. environmental official says entire nations could be wiped off the face of the Earth by rising sea levels if the global warming trend is not reversed by the year 2000….

[Brown] said governments have a 10-year window of opportunity to solve the greenhouse effect before it goes beyond human control.

As the warming melts polar icecaps, ocean levels will rise by up to three feet, enough to cover the Maldives and other flat island nations, Brown told The Associated Press….”

Not only are the Maldives still here, but Saudi Arabia, which itself pays lip service to the climate scam, has been heavily investing in airports and other infrastructure in the Maldives. No one invests in sinking islands.

Former US Vice President Al Gore, the High Priest of the climate cult, has been announcing the end of the world for more than four decades now, while becoming increasingly hysterical, culminating at the WEF meeting in 2023 with an outburst in which he claimed, “[Greenhouse gases are] now trapping as much extra heat as would be released by 600,000 Hiroshima-class atomic bombs exploding every single day.”

Fortunately, the world does not appear to be burning up Hiroshima-style, and the climate apocalypse is nowhere to be seen. Perhaps the climate hoax is actually not about saving the environment? What is it, then?

The answer was supplied as early as 2015 by Christiana Figueres, executive secretary of the UN’s Framework Convention on Climate Change:

“This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the Industrial Revolution.”

That would mean the destruction of capitalism and the world economy, however long that takes. Figueres continued:

“That will not happen overnight and it will not happen at a single conference on climate change, be it COP 15, 21, 40 – you choose the number. It just does not occur like that. It is a process, because of the depth of the transformation.”

When you consider that the purpose is to dismantle capitalism — and the West in the process — the exorbitantly expensive goals of net-zero make sense. The method, in the words of WEF founder and boss Klaus Schwab, is to have “a great reset.” In 2020, his WEF, unelected and aggressive in shaping agendas as the partner of the UN, linked every actual and potential crisis in the world to “climate action failure.” Failure to address climate change, according to the WEF, would lead to food crises, weather crises and natural disasters, water crises, global governance failure, unemployment and basically the end of the world.

Some environmental problems of pollution are clearly caused by man; the effect of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), as in certain hairsprays for instance, on the ozone layer over the Antarctica. CFCs thin, or make a “hole,” in the planet’s ozone layer that protects the people from harmful ultraviolet rays. There is also the very real man-made problem of insoluble trash in the oceans. Generally, however, the problems of pollution are separate from those of climate change. Whatever can reasonably be done to curb man-made pollution should, of course, be advanced, but sometimes climate change and pollution overlap – seen by many, apparently, as an invitation to muddle and conflate them.

Climate change is largely caused by solar flares. So far, at least, there is not a blessed thing anyone can do about them. Many industries offer grants for papers that support the efficacy of their products that relate to climate change. Solar flares, regrettably, do not offer grants.

Over the past several decades, despite the false predictions, climate hysteria has continued to reach new and unprecedented peaks. In 2019, US House Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez postulated that “the world will end in 12 years unless we address climate change.” In November 2024 former Special Presidential Envoy for Climate John Kerry said that a “climate emergency” had to be declared because the “climate crisis” was killing people.

“I think, personally, we’re on the brink of needing to declare a climate emergency, which is what we really have,” Kerry said.

“The climate crisis is killing people. It is knowingly… allowing people to die and affecting them with disease… Every year, millions of people around this planet are dying because fossil fuel and methane emissions [caused] by the way we choose to fuel our vehicles, heat our homes, light our factories.”

Kerry was, by his own logic, willingly “killing” people with his family’s private jet — until August 2022, when he sold it after facing accusations of hypocrisy. Kerry and his family flew on 48 trips and emitted more than 300 metric tons of carbon dioxide in just the 18 months between January 2021 and July 2022. Private jets “are 10 times more carbon intensive than airliners on average, and 50 times more polluting than trains,” according to a 2021 report. Kerry justified his polluting by declaring, unfortunately without a trace of irony, that private jets were the “only choice for somebody like me.”

Some of the world’s foremost climate scam propagandists, in fact, continue to prove with their actions that they actually do not believe the climate hoax: Billionaires Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg both fly private jets and own multiple huge, energy-guzzling mansions. Zuckerberg flying on his private jet was found to be emitting 70 tons of CO₂ in just two days last November (equivalent to 15 years of driving for a single car) when flying between his home in California and his new home being constructed in Hawaii. When the global elites arrived in Davos, Switzerland, in 2023 to discuss the urgent need to declare climate emergencies, they did so using more than 150 private jets.

Despite the huge discrepancies between the words and actions of the elites, the legacy media, for decades, has pushed the climate hoax. Anyone who dares to disagree with it is shunned or risks losing their job, including scientists who refuse to adhere to the new orthodoxy. Climate change has become a sort of mandatory cult or, in the words of former Czech President Vaclav Klaus, “a new religion.” As early as 2007, Klaus, who experienced life under communist rule and therefore might have had a heightened sensitivity to attempts at suppressing freedom, warned that not only the climate change cult, but environmentalism in general posed threats to freedom:

“Environmentalism only pretends to deal with environmental protection. Behind their people- and nature-friendly terminology, the adherents to this ideology make ambitious attempts to radically reorganize and change the world, human society, all of us and our behavior, as well as our values.

“There is no doubt that it is our duty to protect rationally the nature for the future generations. The followers of the environmentalist ideology, however, keep presenting to us various catastrophic scenarios with the intention to persuade us to implement their ideas about us and about the whole human society. This is not only unfair but extremely dangerous. What is, in my view, even more dangerous, is the quasi-scientific form that their many times refuted forecasts have taken upon themselves.”

Klaus stressed that environmentalism disguises itself as science. Under this disguise, it attempts to force its precepts on humanity. When it comes to global warming or climate change, that process is made easier: the topic is scientifically complex, which makes it hard for most people to refute the climate scammers:

“[E]nvironmentalism – unlike scientific ecology – does not belong to the natural sciences but is to be classified as an ideology. This fact is, however, not understood by the common people and by numerous politicians.

“The hypothesis of global warming and the role of man in this process is the last and till this day the most powerful embodiment of the environmental ideology. It has brought along many important ‘advantages’ for the environmentalists:

“- an empirical analysis of this phenomenon is very complicated due to the complexity of global climate and the mix of various long-, medium-, and short-term trends (and causes);

“- their argumentation is not based on simple empirical measurements or laboratory experiments, but on sophisticated model experiments working with a range of ill-founded assumptions that are usually hidden and not sufficiently understood…

“What I find much more important is to protest against the efforts of the environmentalists to manipulate people. Their recommendations would take us back into the era of statism and restricted freedom.”

Any journalists or commentators who dare to question or oppose the climate change orthodoxy are immediately shunned as “climate deniers” and met in the legacy media with an instant end to their careers.

In 2013, English botanist David Bellamy spoke out about how he lost his job at the BBC after rejecting the man-made climate change narrative as “poppycock” nearly two decades ago:

“‘From that moment, I really wasn’t welcome at the BBC. They froze me out, because I don’t believe in global warming. My career dried up. I was thrown out of my own conservation groups and I got spat at in London…. And it’s just nonsense. For the last 16 years, temperatures have been going down and the carbon dioxide has been going up and the crops have got greener and grow quicker. We’ve done plenty to smash up the planet, but there’s been no global warming caused by man…. I still say it’s poppycock! If you believe it, fine. But I don’t and there’s thousands like me.”

It is no wonder that the climate change scam won the day. Few people have been willing to risk their livelihoods to fight against the manipulation. Back in 2013, it was still allowed at least to offer facts. According to the Daily Telegraph, the UK’s national meteorological service that year “downgraded its forecast for global warming to suggest that by 2017 temperatures will have remained about the same for two decades.”

Meanwhile, at the latest UN Climate Conference, COP29, which took place in Baku, Azerbaijan in November 2024, the agenda to destroy the world’s economy and the West by forcing wealth redistribution made new strides. Wealthier nations pledged to transfer “at least” a record $300 billion every year to developing countries in their “fight against climate change” by 2035.

That decision was met with derision by developing countries. They apparently demanded $1.3 trillion annually. In the words of energy expert Alex Epstein:

“The basic idea here is what they call ‘climate reparations,’ which is the idea that the US and others have ruined the world with fossil fuels, and so we have to pay a trillion dollars a year to make up for it, which, by the way, if the US paid that, that’s $7,700 per household per year.”

Notably, China retained its status as a “developing country” at the COP29, thereby exposing the enormous extent of the climate hoax. According to the International Energy Agency, “China’s total CO₂ emissions exceeded those of the advanced economies combined in 2020, and in 2023 were 15% higher.” In addition, while China continues to build more coal-fired power plants than the rest of the entire world combined, the West continues on the path of deindustrialization in the name of the climate.

Thankfully, President Donald Trump, once again, has withdrawn the US from the 2015 Paris Agreement on climate change. As the past has shown, however, such a withdrawal holds no future guarantees. Trump also withdrew the US from the Paris Agreement during his first term, but President Joe Biden then brought the US back the first chance he got. For this reason, it is crucial that the current US administration do all it can to publish the truth about the climate scam and work towards ending it across the board.

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/21454/climate-change-grift

Germany has warned its gender-confused citizens that they will experience difficulty entering the United States if their sex designation listed on their passport does not match the sex on their original birth certificates.  

A German official advised the LGBTQ+ media outlet the Advocate that “transgender and nonbinary individuals traveling from Germany to the United States should contact the responsible U.S. authorities prior to travel to the U.S. to inquire about current entry regulations.”  

In response to Germany’s announcement, another LGBTQ+ media outlet claimed that it was an example of Donald Trump continuing to “terrorize the [so-called] trans community.” 

In February, the U.S. State Department revised policies issued during the Biden administration that accepted designations other than “male” or “female” in the travel documents of foreigners traveling to the U.S.   

Now, those who seek to circumvent the stringent new rules recognizing only two sexes risk not only being denied entrance into the U.S., but a permanent U.S. travel ban.   

“In cases where applicants are suspected of misrepresenting their purpose of travel or sex, you should consider whether this misrepresentation is material such that it supports an ineligibility finding,” Secretary of State Marco Rubio has instructed consular staff. 

When Trump issued an executive order in early February banning men from women’s sports, he authorized Rubio to inform the International Olympic Committee that “America categorically rejects transgender lunacy. We want them to change everything having to do with the Olympics and having to do with this absolutely ridiculous subject.”   

He further directed Homeland Security head Kristi Noem to “deny any and all visa applications made by men attempting to fraudulently enter the United States while identifying themselves as women athletes to try and get into the Games.” 

While at first aimed at foreign athletes seeking to participate in the 2028 Summer Olympics in Los Angeles, the directive is being applied more broadly to all gender-confused foreign travelers seeking to enter the U.S. 

“Each visa applicant is required to establish his or her credibility, identity, and purpose of travel to the satisfaction of the consular officer,” and that consular officers “have the authority to request any information or documents necessary to establish the applicant’s identity and qualifications for the visa,” a U.S. State Department spokesperson told the Advocate.  

“This includes any time there is a discrepancy in the identity documents that an applicant provides,” continued the spokesperson. “To verify an applicant’s sex at birth, the consular officer may consider documents provided by the applicant, including his or her passport or birth certificate and any others as needed.” 

Not only are visas coming under increased scrutiny, but the State Department will also no longer issue U.S. passports with an X gender marker.  

“We are only issuing U.S. passports with a male or female sex marker that matches the applicant’s biological sex as defined in the Executive Order,” said the spokesperson, although “U.S. passports previously issued with an X marker will remain valid for travel until their expiration date.” 

Soon after taking office, Donald Trump signed a sweeping executive order (EO) to rid federal government agencies of gender ideology and another ending diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs, both of which took hold and metastasized throughout the government on all levels under Joe Biden’s tenure in office.   

During his inauguration speech in the U.S. Capitol rotunda, Trump said, “I will end the government policy to socially engineer race and gender into every aspect of public and private life.”   

“As of today, it will henceforth be the official policy of the United States government that there are only two genders; male and female,” he proclaimed. 

The first EO, named “Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government,” seeks to restore “sanity” and “reality” to how the federal government interprets laws and conducts day-to-day business.   

“What we’re doing today is defining that it is the policy of the United States to recognize two sexes: male and female. These are sexes that are not changeable, and they are grounded in fundamental and incontrovertible reality,” a Trump official told reporters.  

Germany issues ‘warning’ about US travel due to new transgender policies – LifeSite

Conservatives and traditionalists in the Catholic Church still have hope that the next pope will restore Church traditions lost under Pope Francis.

These include the end of the suppression of the Traditional Latin Mass and a less ambiguous papacy when it comes to matters of faith and morals. This hope exists even as a very ill Pope Francis meets with his hospital advisers to craft even greater, radical reforms. His latest edict, for instance, was a letter to liturgists reminding them that the liturgy should be kept simple and that ceremonial pomp should be avoided at all costs.

Simplifying the already Protestantized Mass would reduce it to a ceremonial on a par with Unitarian or a United Church of Christ services.

But what of the pope that will come after Francis, the iconoclast?

It is unlikely he will be a conservative but rather a pope who will further Francis’ revolution in ways that will shock the Catholic world. Francis’ revolution has already been won; the Church just needs a pope who will varnish the woodwork and transform it into a permanent ceramic.

Prophets, psychics, mystics, pundits: all have their views on who will be the next pope. St. Malachy’s (1094-1148) 112 Latin descriptions of future popes from the time of Pope Celestine II (1143-1144) to the present, has Pope Francis as the last pope although the counting from the 12th Century onward gets complicated when one considers the various “anti-popes” in between; this throws Malachy’s prediction off-kilter.

So there may be many popes after Bergoglio. Just because Malachy couldn’t “see” anyone after the last pope on his list, Peter the Roman, doesn’t mean the line of succession ends. The “ending” the saint sees is more likely a foreshadowing of a change in the nature of the papacy, a change so radical that the Chair of Peter becomes unrecognizable in the traditional sense.

What’s most likely to happen is a change in the pope’s role: A switch from sovereign pontiff to mere figurehead with zero administrative power and no say over faith and morals.

Confession: I play psychics like some people play horses. I think I’ve gotten good at it. Most psychics – especially when it comes to politics – are embarrassing; they can’t help but play partisan favorites when they allow their ideological beliefs to influence predictions. The web is full of these charlatans, especially woke women readers who convinced their subscribers that Kamala Harris would coast to victory back in November, or that Donald Trump wouldn’t survive his Inauguration.

Craig Hamilton-Parker, a psychic-medium in the UK, has been right about Donald Trump since 2015. He’s right more than he’s wrong. His impeccable Trump record got me listening to his recent Pope predictions. These predictions confirmed more or less what I felt anyway: He predicts enormous, shocking changes in the Catholic Church sometime after a new pope is elected in 2025.

Though Parker cautions that these changes won’t happen immediately – they will occur over the reign of several popes – when the cycle is complete, the Catholic Church will have reconsidered all of the doctrines developed since the Council of Nicaea while incorporating much of the (formerly rejected) Gnostic Gospels in its belief system.

The end result will be a “democratic” Catholic Church that will draw in large numbers of people of other faiths, “a Church completely transformed.”

Parker has no stake in anything Catholic. He’s more or less an ashram-oriented Hindu, oddly conservative in many ways but true to what he sees whether or not it fits into his belief system.

He sees a future pope kneeling before a saint from the East. He says the saint could be a non-Christian holy person – Pachamama in the flesh? – although he never mentions the possibility of a saint from Eastern Orthodoxy, which makes sense especially if the role of the papacy is reduced to a figure head or a “first among equals,” as it was in the first centuries of The Church.

He believes the next pope will speak German, meaning he could be German, Swiss or Austrian.

“I saw a new pope in 2025,” he says.

“Visions come to me in a flash. They can come unconsciously as a flash. I saw the future pope and I saw that he was speaking in German. He is also associated with the image of a swan. That’s an odd symbol because I’ve never seen swan symbolism associated with the papacy.”

Early last year Parker predicted that Francis would start to become very sick in January 2025. Since he is not one to predict death, he only says that there will be a new pope sometime in 2025.

When he started to name possible new popes he began with a blunder.

He mentioned Cardinal Christoph Schonborn, OP, Archbishop of Vienna from 1995 to 2025. Schonborn retired in January of this year at 80 years old, so his participation in a future papal conclave is not possible.

(Schonborn, it should be noted, was famous for his ecumenical Masses in Vienna’s historic St. Stephen’s Cathedral, where priests and lay participants beat drums and did dances around the high altar.)

While a non-Catholic can be excused for not recognizing when a cardinal is no longer pope material, the prelate Parker puts his money on is Reinhard Marx, Archbishop of Munich and Freising, 71, former head of Germany’s bishops who became controversial when he openly questioned Catholic doctrine.

While Marx’s name should give Christians pause – adult porn meets communist super hero – the ex-theology professor started out as a conservative when he was made a metropolitan-archbishop by Pope Benedict XVI in 2007. Marx was then elevated to the cardinalate in 2010. With the election of Pope Francis in 2013, Marx shed his conservatism and became a radical proponent of welcoming migrants and heralding the dangers of climate change. On a 2016 trip to Israel as head of Germany’s bishops, he hid his pectoral cross — an action that many critics called a “denial of faith.”

Marx’s critics say he has a “history of opportunism” and that he’s “driving the Church into schism and secular meaninglessness.” Bishop Joseph Strickland of Texas said in 2022 that “Cardinal Marx has left the Catholic faith.” Marx is famous for his statement that the Catholic catechism “is not set in stone.” In May 2015 he hosted the “secret synod” at Pontifical Gregorian University in order to sway the larger Synod on the Family to accept his contention that homosexuality is not a sin and the Church must “normalize same-sex relations based on a theology of Love.”

Marx also believes the Church should sanction same-sex encounters, like chance meetings in bars or steam baths.

He believes the question of women’s priesthood should remain open.

In Germany he is a vocal critic of that country’s conservative Alternative for Germany Party. The year 2018 saw him celebrating the 200th birthday of Karl Marx. On many occasions he has stated that Catholic teaching owes a lot to the writings of Karl Marx.

Parker also mentions papal contenders Cardinal Kurt Koch of Basel, Switzerland, a noted ecumenist, Cardinal Willem Jacobus Eijk of the Netherlands, and Cardinal Rainer Maria Woelki of Cologne.

Cardinal Woelki, although head of the conservative minority of bishops in Germany, has stated that same sex couples in long faithful relationships should be able to have their relationships blessed by a priest in the same manner as heterosexual couples. Woelki, however, once reprimanded a priest for blessing same sex couples and he once preached that homosexuality was against “the order of creation”. The theological struggle going on in Woelki’s head is more than obvious; the switch-hitting is perhaps the result of the pressure he was under from the German media to be more like Cardinal Marx.

As for the two remaining German speaking cardinals, only one is authentically conservative, Cardinal Eijk, who has a license in moral theology and a doctorate in philosophy. He also happens to be a physician of internal medicine and has a special devotion to the Blessed Virgin Mary. A truly saintly intellect, in 2001 he suffered a cerebral hemorrhage. Some believe the hemorrhage was caused by his intense work in attempting to stem the tide of the increasing secularization and loss of faith in Dutch society.

But according to the Hindu sage Parker, it is definitely Marx who will win the crown, the cardinal who has been called “a lightning rod in Francis’ papacy.”

https://www.frontpagemag.com/the-next-pope/

By Olivia Murray

The German progressives, who have already been famously scolded by President Trump for their short-sighted and suicidal reliance on Russian energy—which led to a historical energy crisis—are reminding us how slow on the uptake they really are as news emerges that their dependence on hostile foreign nations for crucial infrastructure needs is once again biting them in the rear.

Credit to Jo Nova, who came across the story first, but according to an article at Politico, a new report commissioned by the German government concluded that buying wind turbines for their “green” energy schemes from China wasn’t such a great idea—the threat of political coercion and sabotage is so high, that the recommendation is to restrict Chinese turbine use, and halt a new project currently underway. Nova perfectly summarizes Germany’s late-to-the-party epiphany:

After six separate incidents of underwater cables being sabotaged in the Baltic Sea, the German Defense Ministry is wondering if it is wise to buy Chinese wind turbines with all their electronic parts.

(Of course, this isn’t to suggest that wind turbines are necessary components in an energy grid, but they are when you’ve essentially banished reliable and affordable energy like gas, oil, and coal.)

Victor Jack, author of the Politico item, includes a passage from the government’s report:

‘A destabilization of both the political system, the business model of German industry and social cohesion cannot therefore be ruled out due to a lack of or insufficient planning security in the energy sector,’ it [the report] adds.

Oh, you mean to tell us that the “green” energy “transition” wasn’t exactly “sufficiently” planned or considered? Well I’ll be!

Eliminating reliable and affordable energy, at a time of historically high (government-created) inflation, using public money to prop up an energy industry to the tune of billions? I mean seriously, how failed do ideas have to be in the energy sector to be unsuccessful? It’s a product/service that essentially everyone in the world, developed and undeveloped alike, uses.

Transitioning from reliable and affordable energy to technologies that are basically still in the prototype stage as they’re all too often rife with design and material problems?

I could go on… and on… and on.

What’s most tragic is the supreme idiocy of the German progressives isn’t contained to Germany, or even the European continent—it’s the common thread of all leftist greenies—and we have to personally contend with these asinine policies and ideas too.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2025/03/report_chinese_wind_turbines_purchased_by_the_west_may_become_weapons_of_coercion.html

Protesters in Poland including politicians from the Conservatives (PiS) blocked a bridge on the border to voice their opposition against the transfer of migrants from Germany to Poland. 

The March 8 protest “Stop Germany from flooding Poland with migrants” took place the Polish side of a bridge that connects the Polish town of Słubice with the German city of Frankfurt on the river Oder.

Several hundred demonstrators managed to block the bridge for a short period. According to the Conservative portal Niezależna.pl, there were some scuffles with police. 

The demonstration took place despite the local mayor’s refusal to allow it on the grounds of “public safety” and a court’s refusal to overturn the local official’s decision. 

The protesters held banners opposing the European Union’s Migration and Asylum Pact, approved last year. That introduced the requirement for member states to either accept asylum seekers or provide financial support for migrants they refused to admit. 

“The European Union and Germany, in co-operation with the Tusk government, want to bring millions of culturally alien migrants to Poland!” wrote the organisers in their announcement of the event, referring to Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk and his centre-left administration. 

“Mass migration is associated with a huge increase in the number of rapes, murders, and acts of terror. We must not let such a fate befall Poland,” added the campaigners. 

Germany has, in line with the Dublin Regulation, been sending back hundreds of asylum seekers who have applied for protection in Poland before illegally crossing into Germany while their claims were still being processed. 

The Dublin Regulation is a European Union ruling that determines which member state processes asylum applications.

Since reintroducing border controls with Poland in 2024, Germany has been turning back thousands of migrants at its border with the country for not having the legal right to stay in Germany. That was despite the fact that many had not not applied for asylum in Poland.

The Tusk government has criticised Germany for these push-backs and has itself introduced measures to tighten the border between Poland and Belarus through which many migrants have been able to make their way into the EU. 

The PiS has argued that the government was not doing enough and has demanded a national referendum. 

In 2023, a referendum on the issue asked Poles if they wanted to accept reallocated migrants from other EU countries.

More than 90 per cent responded that they did not but the referendum failed to meet the statutory turnout level of 50 per cent for the result to be mandatory on the government.

The shortfall was primarily becuase the then Tusk-led opposition had urged people not to participate in what it considered a plebiscite with “loaded questions”. 

Polish anti-migrant protesters block bridge on border with Germany – Brussels Signal

The coach of French RC Champigneulles’ reserve team (Meurthe-et-Moselle), Mohamed Bousbaa, has stepped down following what he describes as an Islamophobic incident. In solidarity, more than a dozen players are boycotting training sessions and matches.

The incident dates back to a tournament where Bousbaa’s wife and son, both Muslim, were served sandwiches containing pork. He claims the act was deliberate, orchestrated by club members with whom he had ongoing tensions.

«Not even a simple apology! I ordered two sandwiches from people who knew me but didn’t like me. When my wife and son took a bite, we realized they had been served pork», he told L’Est Républicain.

With the club remaining silent and taking no disciplinary action, Bousbaa decided to leave. He criticized the management for failing to address the issue, allowing it to go unresolved. In response, several players from the reserve team have stopped training and participating in official matches in protest.

https://en.yabiladi.com/articles/details/161196/france-pork-served-muslim-child.html

A young man was left in critical condition on Friday last week after being assaulted by a Tunisian migrant in the center of Clermont-Ferrand, a small city in central France. He was injured while defending a female friend, who was also present, after the migrant insulted her, according to the newspaper La Montagne.

A charge of committing an act of violence resulting in disability is being considered against the Tunisian suspect, who is 20 years old. The migrant already had a court date scheduled for December as the result of another act of violence he had earlier committed.

At around 4:15 a.m. on Feb. 28, the victim, who is 25 years old, was standing in front of a kebab restaurant with a female friend. The prosecution has accused the migrant, who was working as a delivery man, of making an insulting comment about the young woman’s dress and appearance. Her friend stood up for her and got into an argument with the migrant, after which the latter is accused of hitting him in the face, causing him to fall to the pavement and hit his head. This resulted in serious injuries.

By the time police responded to the scene, the migrant had fled, leaving behind his scooter and other equipment. The victim was taken by ambulance to a nearby hospital.

Based on a description of the Tunisian’s appearance, however, officers were able to locate him on Tuesday afternoon and take him into custody.

As of Wednesday, the young man was still in the hospital and listed as being in critical condition.

https://rmx.news/article/france-young-man-in-critical-condition-after-defending-female-friend-who-was-insulted-by-tunisian-migrant-delivery-man/

On Saturday evening, at around 6 p.m., three Syrians (19, 20, 21) spat on photos and candles for hostages of Hamas and killed Israeli soldiers placed on the ground in the area of the Jewish Museum at Sankt-Jakobs- Square, as the police reported on Sunday. They also made ‘verbally aggressive’ comments.

Two security guards noticed the outrageous incident and tried to detain the three aggressive men, who live in Austria.

The 19-year-old then kicked one of the two security guards with his leg and pulled out a knife.
The security staff therefore threatened to use their firearms. Police officers on the scene, who had become aware of the situation, also threatened to use their firearms.

Finally, the 19-year-old dropped the knife.

The three Syrians were provisionally arrested. They are now being investigated for threatening behaviour, assault, insult and defamation of the memory of deceased persons

The police were deployed in large numbers. According to reports, nobody was injured.

https://www.tag24.de/muenchen/crime/maenner-spucken-auf-bilder-von-hamas-geiseln-als-security-einschreitet-zueckt-einer-ein-messer-3366614

Every Republican president is Hitler, of course, but Donald Trump is somehow even Hitlerer than all of them. It was a theme in his first term, but during this election, even the corrupt eggplant masquerading as the incumbent got into the act. Trump was Hitler – no, he was Super Hitler. He was more Hitler than Hitler. And it’s a constant theme among the lesser lights of the Democrat Party. “This is what fascism looks like,” intone very serious politicians who seem to have no idea what fascism looks like. And the Trump/Hitler thing is all over social media. Every day, as Trump exercises the legitimate powers granted to him by the American people via winning the election, another leftist mediocrity with a five-digit follower account figuratively throws up his, her, or their soft, girlish hands and says, “OK. I’m calling it – he’s Hitler.”

A different news organization than the Associated Press gets to ask Trump questions. Hitler!

Layout do-nothing government flunkies get asked to give five bullet points about what they’ve done in the last week to demonstrate their value to the American people. Hitler!

He lets feminine euroweenies know that the United States is no longer going to pick up the tab for their national defense so they can focus on giving free stuff to Third World invaders even as they arrest their own people for the crime of speaking freely. Hitler!

Elon lifted his right arm. Oh yeah, Hitler!

Whatever. It’s all stupid, and it doesn’t work anymore if it ever worked at all. You can’t call Trump “Hitler” for the nearly ten years since he came down the escalator in the farthest thing ever from a Leni Riefenstahl rally and, after he fails to grow a tiny mustache, start wearing Hugo Boss uniforms and invade Poland, expect people to take it seriously. And people don’t care. It’s now just background noise. Trump is Hitler. What else is new? What else you got?

“He’s Hitler” is a shorthand for leftist disapproval, much like the term “racist.” If you’re not a leftist – and sometimes if you are – you’re a racist. It’s not what you’ve done. It’s who you are. And the term is tossed around so promiscuously no one respects it. It doesn’t matter if you do thing X that they say is racist because you’re still going to be racist anyway. You can’t win. And when you can’t win, it’s not fair. And when it’s not fair, no one takes it seriously. It becomes a joke. No one cares. It’s like the boy who cried wolf, except they don’t teach that story in schools anymore because it privileges the male gender experience. And no, the story wouldn’t work if the boy who cried wolf were the she-male who cried wolf because the trans folks are often the ones crying “wolf,” and they hate irony almost as much as using the right restroom.

There’s no point in explaining that America First people aren’t racist, just like there’s no point in demonstrating that Donald Trump is not only not literally Hitler, but not Hitler in any sense of the word, nor Hitler adjacent in any way, shape, or form. Trump is a lot of things, but a disciplined, hard-core ideologue who obsesses over the lives of others to the point of starting programs against them is not one of them. It’s all of a kind with the mental defectives who don those red handmaiden costumes to warn of the Trumpian sexual repression that awaits them at some date that is ever receding into the future. Yeah, there’s nothing Donald Trump hates more than a beautiful, uncovered woman. That’s why he spent the first 40 years in the public eye, wandering around Manhattan with his burka-clad concubines.

That it is all so embarrassingly stupid may actually be the point of the exercise. Remember that the leftists have this thing demonstrating their fealty to the movement by loudly and publicly proclaiming that which is obviously, utterly untrue. By abdicating any shred of dignity in this way, they sacrifice their own integrity on the altar of Marxist nonsense. “Look at me! Look what I’m willing to do for the cause! Trump is Hitler! Men can have vaginas! Joe Biden is honest and not at all demented! I will say what must be said to prevail! This is the depth of my commitment!”

It’s easy to see this as insane, but it should be seen as insidious. Certainly, there are stupid people who believe this nonsense. Rep. Jasmine Crockett comes to mind, as she always does when the word “stupid” gets tossed around. But others aren’t so dumb. They’re intelligent in the sense that they’re able to process information and do not need to be reminded to breathe. They understand that no, Donald Trump is not Hitler or even Hitlerish. They just don’t care. They assume that those listening to them are either stupid enough to believe them, which is a satisfactory outcome, or, better, that the listeners will appreciate the depths of their commitment as demonstrated by lying, loudly and publicly, for the good of the party.

Normal people just think it’s stupid, and that’s kind of a problem. All the people susceptible to this nonsense have long ago been self-selected and enlisted in the struggle. The challenge now is to appeal to the masses, and the masses don’t see stating obvious mistruths as either persuasive or honorable. Why would they listen to someone who’s telling them that Trump is a dictator when they just voted for Trump? The underlying premise is that Trump’s rule is illegitimate, but a plurality and near majority of Americans voted for Trump, meaning when you call Trump “Hitler,” you’re basically telling nearly half of Americans that they have no legitimate claim to participate in their own governance via elections. A lot of Americans, particularly those of us who escaped from communist countries like my wife or served their country in war like me, take that personally. It stops being funny when the real message becomes clear – that our attempts to act as American citizens are morally illegitimate, not because of anything we’ve done or Trump did, but because the Hitler hollerers are mad that they’re not in office anymore.

So, what do they do? They can hardly go harder. What’s harder than the malignant Austrian housepainter? What are they going to say, that he’s Double Secret Hitler? When you cross the Hitler line, there’s not much of anywhere else to go. They could focus on his personal proclivities, and they have, and Americans have made their peace with those allegations that they believe and ignored the ones they don’t. But when calling somebody a sex pervert, racist, reincarnation of Hitler only earns a shrug, you can’t really double down. You’ve already tripled down.

Now, they could go in the other direction. They could attack Trump and his policies substantively. But this has several problems, not the least of which is that his policies are substantively awesome. One is that they don’t know how to do this. Leftists haven’t had to argue for decades. It’s the “The Daily Show” effect. They are smart, you see, so they don’t contend with the ideas of the bad people; they mock the bad people. The bad people are unworthy of having their ideas refuted. They should simply accept that they suck and submit. But what happens when the normal people stop caring about your insults and jibes? Then you’ve got nothing.

Plus, there’s another problem – if you meaningfully contend with the views of the bad people, your own side is going to accuse you of normalizing them. This is weird because these people are normal. But the left’s strategy in this century has been to place every idea besides those it embraces outside of the allowed range of views. The natural response of the American populist movement has been to accept that challenge – we’re not going to argue with them either. We’re just going to take power, use it to the fullest, and let them cry about it, because they’re going to cry one way or the other.

That’s the Hitler part, the part where we win an election and dare to impose our policies. That’s what Trump’s done in the last couple of months. He’s made no apologies for using the powers the Constitution invests in the presidency. This freaks out the left because they’ve been able to browbeat past Republicans, including Trump during his first term when he was surrounded by squishes for much of it, into not using the full scope of their authority. Perhaps having the left try to put him in jail for the rest of his life, if not murder him, gave Trump a different perspective this time. Now, he’s using his constitutional powers as intended, which doesn’t make him Hitler. It makes him worse than that to the left. It makes him effective.

https://www.frontpagemag.com/where-do-you-go-after-literally-hitler/