Illustration. A mosque in Berlin’s Kreuzberg district opposite the underground railway Google Maps
A scandal at a Berlin youth center has escalated after a sworn affidavit alleged that staff failed to report serious sexual assault claims to police over concerns about “stigmatizing” Muslim suspects.
The affidavit, submitted to Senate and district authorities, was filed by employees of a neighboring facility who said they repeatedly urged staff at the Wutzkyallee youth center in Neukölln to contact police. According to the document, staff declined to act despite being told that a 16-year-old girl had been raped and that videos of the assaults were being used to blackmail her. A coordinator reportedly justified the decision by saying the “Muslim boys” involved were already known to police and that further reporting could contribute to their marginalization.
The girl was allegedly raped at the youth center in November and later sexually assaulted again by a group of up to eight teenage suspects. The affidavit also describes a wider pattern of misconduct over several months, including groping, unwanted physical contact, and girls being pulled onto boys’ laps.
According to the allegations, the suspects filmed the assaults and used the footage to blackmail the victim, including attempts to contact her younger sister.
The affidavit suggests that both the youth center and the local youth welfare office were aware of the incidents for weeks without informing police. Authorities only became involved after media reports brought the case to light.
Prosecutors have since launched an investigation into multiple suspects aged 15 to 19 and are examining whether staff may have breached their legal obligations by failing to report the alleged crimes. Neukölln youth councilor Sarah Nagel of the Left Party has denied any cover-up, saying the suspects’ background played no role in decision-making, although, according to BZ reporting, she had been informed of the situation weeks before action was taken. Calls for her resignation have since emerged, and a possible no-confidence vote is under discussion.
In a narrow 3–2 decision, the Finnish Supreme Court has found parliamentarian Päivi Räsänen guilty of “hate speech” on one charge relating to the expression of her beliefs on marriage and sexual ethics in a 20-year-old church pamphlet.
Räsänen has been criminally convicted for publishing the 2004 pamphlet for her church, alongside Lutheran Bishop Juhana Pohjola. The conviction is for “making and keeping available to the public a text that insults a group.” The Supreme Court unanimously acquitted Räsänen for her 2019 Bible verse tweet.
Räsänen was previously unanimously acquitted on all charges by two lower courts.
The long serving parliamentarian and former Minister of the Interior has been convicted for “hate speech” under a section of the Finnish criminal code titled “war crimes and crimes against humanity.” The medical doctor and grandmother of 12 was tried in early 2022 and again in 2023 for expressing her beliefs in a 2019 tweet, which included a Bible verse, in addition to a 2019 radio debate and 2004 church booklet.
After the prosecutor appealed for a third time, the Supreme Court, which heard the case in October 2025, has now ruled on two of the three original charges: concerning the tweet and the church booklet. The Supreme Court was not asked to rule on the radio debate as the prosecution did not appeal it, so Räsänen’s acquittal for the debate stands.
“I am shocked and profoundly disappointed that the court has failed to recognize my basic human right to freedom of expression. I stand by the teachings of my Christian faith, and will continue to defend my and every person’s right to share their convictions in the public square,” stated Räsänen after receiving the judgment.
“I am taking legal advice on a possible appeal to the European Court of Human Rights. This is not about my free speech alone, but that of every person in Finland. A positive ruling would help to prevent other innocent people from experiencing the same ordeal for simply sharing their beliefs,” added Räsänen.
Summary of judgment
The court found Räsänen and the Lutheran bishop guilty for having “made available to the public and kept available to the public opinions that insult homosexuals as a group on the basis of their sexual orientation.” It held that: “It must be taken into account that the text forming the basis for the conviction did not contain incitement to violence or comparable threat-like fomenting of hatred. The conduct is therefore not particularly serious in terms of the nature of the offense.”
The pamphlet was authored by Räsänen in 2004. The court convicted her on the basis that: “after a preliminary investigation into the matter was launched in 2019, Räsänen continued to share the article on her own internet and social media pages in 2019 and 2020.”
With regard to the 2019 Bible verse tweet in which Räsänen questioned her church leadership’s decision to sponsor a Pride event, the court unanimously held that it did not meet the criteria for the offence of incitement as she “justified her opinion by citing a biblical text,” among other things.
The Supreme Court has imposed criminal fines of several thousands of Euros and ruled that the impugned statements must be “removed from public access and destroyed.”
A modern-day heresy trial
The high-profile trial received significant global attention, particularly after the prosecution attacked core Christian teachings and cross-examined Räsänen and the bishop on their theology.
Before the Court of Appeal, the Finnish state prosecutor, Anu Mantila, claimed that, “You can cite the Bible, but it is Räsänen’s interpretation and opinion about the Bible verses that are criminal.”
Coordinated by ADF International, Räsänen’s legal defense highlighted the strong protection that freedom of speech enjoys in international law, in addition to being integral to Finnish democracy.
“Freedom of speech is a cornerstone of democracy. It is right that the court has acquitted Päivi Räsänen for her 2019 Bible verse tweet. However, the conviction for a simple church pamphlet published decades ago – before the law under which she has been convicted was even passed – is an outrageous example of state censorship. This decision will create a severe chilling effect for everyone’s right to speak freely,” stated Paul Coleman, executive director of ADF International.
“This ruling is a stark reminder that no democracy is immune from the erosion of fundamental freedoms. Punishing peaceful expression, especially when it is based on deeply held religious convictions, undermines the very foundation of free societies,” said Kristen Waggoner, CEO, president, and chief counsel of Alliance Defending Freedom.
Press conference at 14:00 CET (9:00 EST)
ADF International will host a press conference on March 26 at 2 p.m. CET. Dr. Päivi Räsänen MP, Finnish criminal defence lawyer Matti Sankamo, Rev. Bishop Juhana Pohjola, and Paul Coleman, executive director of ADF International, will be available for questions after their statements. Please register here to access the link.
Valdo Calocane killed three people in Nottingham. NOTTINGHAMSHIRE POLICE
The mother of Nottingham attack victim Barnaby Webber has accused Nottinghamshire Police of deliberately concealing details about killer Valdo Calocane’s background from grieving families.
Emma Webber told an inquiry she has no clear memory of officers mentioning Calocane’s mental health during their first meeting after the June 2023 attacks.
“I believe and this is my opinion that the Nottinghamshire Police force actively chose not to tell us that information,” she stated.
Mrs Webber said the family were instead presented with a misleading picture of the killer as a drifter who wandered between locations.
She said “That was actually repeated right up until we were finally told in our meeting on December 7 that he’d actually had premises in Nottingham and he’d been evicted on November 11.”
Dr Sanjoy Kumar, father of 19-year-old victim Grace O’Malley-Kumar, expressed outrage at the inquiry over what he viewed as a fundamental failure in forensic procedure.
The GP and forensic medical examiner with the Metropolitan Police said he found it “quite disgusting” that both his daughter and Barnaby Webber were subjected to drug and alcohol testing while their killer underwent no such examination.
Barnaby Webber and Grace O’Malley-Kumar were killed by Valdo Calocane | NOTTINGHAMSHIRE POLICE
Dr Kumar questioned why investigators failed to obtain a hair sample from Calocane during his time in custody, noting that such testing would not have required the killer’s consent.
“It may have proved nothing but it may have proved everything,” he said, emphasising that basic forensic evidence gathering should be standard practice for any detective.
The bereaved families described their profound shock when prosecutors announced they would accept Calocane’s guilty plea to manslaughter rather than pursue murder charges.
Mrs Webber told the inquiry she had been assured by former chief constable Kate Meynell that the force had “got [Calocane] and he’ll go down” for murder.
She said: “We had been very much led to believe the murderer of our child was going to be done for murder and, at the 11th hour, that was turned into a manslaughter plea,” she said.
When the families learned of the decision, Mrs Webber recalled witnessing Dr Kumar’s reaction: “I saw Sanjoy’s face the reaction and the, I suppose, unfolding horror.”
David Webber said the families were given no opportunity to discuss what he called a “complete U-turn” on the charges.
Dr Kumar delivered a scathing assessment of the Independent Office for Police Conduct, branding the watchdog “unprofessional and nothing but a joke.”
Dr Kumar recounted an extraordinary incident during a meeting with the organisation that left him bewildered.
“We had a meeting and the decision-maker held a prayer in the room when we walked in. It was the most absurd thing I have ever seen in my life,” he told the inquiry.
The father said the family had approached the IOPC with genuine faith in its ability to provide answers, only to be left dismayed.
“We were asking serious questions and the decision-maker said ‘let’s say a prayer’. It was absurd,” Dr Kumar added, concluding that those who claim the body is not fit for purpose are correct.
The Webber family also expressed fury over the conduct of individual officers following the attacks. Mrs Webber revealed that police personnel had accessed footage from the incident and exchanged WhatsApp messages discussing her son’s injuries.
She described one of the messages as “disgusting and grotesque.”
David Webber told the inquiry that his son’s right to privacy appeared to have been completely disregarded by those who should have protected it.
“It does seem to me that, again, in this case, my son, who was the victim here, his privacy was not taken into consideration,” he said.
The couple stated they will “never forgive” the police for this breach of trust.
A Brownies group in London, England Elena Rostunova/Shutterstock
If you had told me a decade ago that organizations in the UK would be the first to begin rejecting gender ideology, I wouldn’t have believed it. But here we are.
In December, Girlguiding—the UK’s largest “girl-only organization” with roughly 300,000 young members—announced that their membership will now be “restricted to girls and young women.” One might be forgiven for thinking that was already the case, but Girlguiding, like so many other organizations, had been conquered by trans activists, and began admitting trans-identifying boys in 2017.
In fact, Girlguiding’s most controversial policy held that the male identity of trans-identifying members—who would accompany girls on camping and outdoor adventures—could not be disclosed, including to the parents of girls. The policy emphasized that trans-identifying boys could use changerooms and showers with the girls. In 2018, a Girlguide leader was fired for saying she would want to tell parents if a trans-identifying boy was on a Girlguiding trip.
Girlguiding emphasized that the decision to exclude boys was a “difficult one,” and has now followed it up with another decision: all trans-identifying boys must leave the organization by September 6. The organization stated that it is unaware of precisely how many trans-identifying members and volunteers it currently has.
Girlguiding, after exploring “detailed considerations, expert legal advice, and input for senior members, young members,” and the council and board of trustees, concluded that the deadline would help those impacted by the decision have “time to plan, access support, and decide when—between now and September—they feel ready to leave.” Trans-identifying volunteers will also have to move out of female-only roles into roles open to all—that is, male and female—volunteers.
The decision was made as a result of the 2025 UK Supreme Court ruling affirming that in equality law, “sex” refers to biological sex. Girlguiding stated that the decision was necessary to ensure that they were “operating lawfully” under its governing charity documents, “which effect how our membership eligibility is defined.”
According to Sky News, Girlguiding emphasized that they are “committed to standing up for the rights, safety and dignity of girls and women, and to supporting marginalised communities, including LGBTQ+ people, to improve the lives of girls”—but those rights no longer include permitting males into female spaces. Helen Joyce of Sex Matters noted that the “news will come as a relief to many girls and their parents, who greatly value single-sex provision.”
Predictably, LGBT groups have been outraged, and after the December decision, Guiders Against Trans Exclusion organized protests in some UK cities. Trans+ Solidarity Alliance claimed that the announcement is “heartbreaking for the children and volunteer leaders that hold Girlguiding together.”
Girlguiding was held together for over a century by girls and women, so I’m sure they will be just fine.
Most Islamic terrorist attacks start out as mysteries and end up as unsolvable enigmas that are put down to mental illness, random circumstances or the phases of the moon. But sometimes an Islamic terrorist inconveniently explains in great detail exactly what he did and why he did it.
Last summer the Dublin pub owned by Conor McGregor, an MMA fighter and vocal critic of Islamic mass migration to Ireland, caught on fire. Despite a previous firebombing, the media initially blamed “an electrical fault” even though the terrorist later told police that when he went to the pub and poured gasoline on the door and windows before setting it on fire, he didn’t hide.
Conor McGregor in the Black Forge Inn (Image: Instagram/ Conor McGregor)
“On Friday, I went to the Black Forge and I set it on fire. My face should be on the tape.”
Friday is the Muslim holy day of the week which just means more pub burnings than usual.
But it’s easy to confuse an unmarked man setting fire to a pub with an electrical fault or mental illness when the perpetrator is a Muslim terrorist. So he decided to make his position clearer.
The electrical fault then took the form of stabbing a Garda, a police officer, with a knife while shouting “Allahu Akbar”. Since the usage of the phrase is often seen as mysterious by the media, the stabber and arsonist who goes by the typical Celtic moniker of Abdullah Khan, helpfully explained that he was shouting “Allahu Akbar” to clarify that he was a terrorist.
“Khan also admitted that him shouting ‘Allahu Akbar’ as he attacked the garda was part of his terrorism. ‘I totally agree,’ he said, adding ‘that is undeniable, Allahu Akbar, that doesn’t come out at random’”. No it doesn’t. But you can’t tell that to the authorities or the media who are convinced that “Allahu Akbar” is just something you randomly shout unrelated to the stabbing.
Those same authorities also insist that ISIS, or the Islamic State, and Islamic terrorism have nothing whatsoever to do with Islam, which is a bit like arguing that the British government has nothing to do with Britain, and the Anglican Church has nothing to do with England or churches. On second thought you can see why this line of thought makes perfect sense to the authorities.
But while the pope may not be Catholic, Islamic terrorism is as Islamic as public beheadings.
“I support them, I have always been a spiritual person,” Khan told the police, explaining why he backed ISIS, set a pub on fire and stabbed a police officer. While being a ‘spiritual person’ in more progressive circles may involve exploring auras and going vegan, in Islamic circles, it involves acts of violence with perhaps a side order of rape to establish Allah’s authority.
Khan was filled with wrath over ‘people with a right-wing mindset’ insulting his spiritual religion’s prototypical warlord, killer and paedophile. “When it comes to Prophet Muhammad, we don’t see it as a matter of freedom of speech,” Pakistan’s latest gift to Ireland explained. “I felt the prophet Muhammed had been insulted by people with a right-wing mindset and the State allowed this to happen as free speech”.
In the modern multicultural utopia that has Khans with sensitive spirits and sharpened knives roaming about the old stomping grounds of Joyce, Beckett, and Swift (whose wildest satire couldn’t have envisioned this dystopia), free speech and religious criticism is a “right-wing mindset” while foreign barbarians trying to impose theocracy with the sharp end is progressive.
“I was angry, I was going to stab a guard. I was angry at the State. I wanted to make a protest, I felt the prophet was insulted, look that’s a red line I don’t want that happening,” Khan told the cops. “You become a target if you insult the Prophet Muhammad.” That is also true in the UK where burning a koran gets you sent to prison while stabbing someone over it gets you out.
Despite Khan explaining in great detail that he is an Islamic terrorist, Ireland’s authorities and the media (who are almost as Catholic and the pope and Khan) have taken to insisting that he was suffering from a “mental health crisis” whose symptoms are shouting “Allahu Akbar”, setting fire to pubs and stabbing police officers. Curiously, despite no lack of madmen, Dublin and the rest of Ireland had gone for over 1,000 years without such a very specific form of mental illness.
Even Buile Shuibhne who was nearly as hostile to Christianity didn’t shout “Allahu Akbar”.
“I always call myself a Salafi jihadist”, Khan told the police. Good thing, Ireland’s ‘The Journal’ had previously rushed out a ‘fact check’ headlined ‘DEBUNKED’ blaming ‘social media misinformation’ for giving anyone the idea that Khan was a foreigner. “Posts on the social media platform X alleging that the suspect was a non-Irish person had been viewed more than 100,000 times”, it darkly declared. However the “suspect was an Irish person”. An Irish Jihadist.
Or as Irish as an Abdullah Khan who studied in Pakistan, pledges allegiance to ISIS, calls himself an Islamic terrorist and sets fire to a pub owned by a man named McGregor can be
“We have some people with their own agenda try and inflame situations like this,” Paul Cleary, the Dublin Assistant Commish, had fussed. And then again we have some authorities with their own agenda who try to pretend that a literary inflammatory situation is just a misunderstanding among two Irishmen. Or perhaps a subset of the mental illness and homelessness crisis.
Contrary to the official wisdom of the fact checkers, shouts of “Allahu Akbar” don’t come out at random. And if the authorities won’t listen to the counterterrorism experts like Robert Spencer, perhaps they can try listening to the terrorists themselves who will explain what they’re about.
Instead, the authorities pack them away, insisting that they’re suffering from mental illness.
But who’s really crazy, the terrorists stabbing people, or the authorities who are letting them in?
Meanwhile the police officer who was stabbed still suffers from trauma. He now associates the term ‘Allahu Akbar’ with terrorism, ‘as a war cry’”.
It won’t be long before he’s locked up for ‘Islamophobia’ while his attacker is let go.
The good-news pieces are too far and few between, but this is one of them: Kenny Torrella at Vox (via Mother Jones) reports that the bugs-for-food industry is in a death spiral, and things are “collapsing” in grand fashion.
Feeding us bugs was “supposed to be the future,” a perfect humiliation ritual and solution to decimate what health we have left (water laced with microplastics and synthetic hormones and skies sprayed with a range of chemicals anyone?) all rolled into one, but the “global market” never showed up:
Of the 20 or so largest insect farming startups, almost a quarter have gone belly up in recent years, including the very largest, Ÿnsect, which ceased operations in December.
All told, shuttered insect farming startups account for almost half of all investment into the industry. “Things have gone from bad to worse for the big insect factory business model,” one insect farming CEO said late last year in a YouTube video.
And Vox can exclusively report that plans to build a large insect farm in Nebraska—a joint project between Tyson Foods, America’s largest meat company, and Protix, now the world’s second largest insect farming company—are indefinitely on hold.
(I wrote on that Tyson-Protix deal in 2023, an essay which can be found here.)
Now, I thought the bugs-for-food campaign was going to be successful—I’m happy to have been wrong thus far—because I’m well aware that the minds behind the scheme have an absolute arsenal of tools at their disposal to force our hands, and all the money in the world to see it through. However, I never thought the global market would come to the table willingly, and neither did Andrea Widburg, who quipped: “Bugs are for starving people living marginal existences. We’ll eat them after they make us starve; not before.”
But did they actually expect something different? How is that possible? Save a few self-loathing leftists, who in the first world prefers bugs to filet mignon or a ribeye?
Anyway, this is all well and good that things are going to poorly for the WEF crowd, but there’s another nugget in Torrella’s report that deserves attention, because it’s a good reminder that “progressive” ideas deserve no consideration or regard, and they really are the most abhorrent group of individuals:
Beyond the financial woes of the insect farming industry, some philosophers worry about the ethical implications of potentially farming tens of trillions of bugs for food, as emerging research suggests insects may well have some form of consciousness and hold the capacity to feel pain and suffer.
‘Evidence is building that there’s a form of sentience there in insects,’ Jonathan Birch, a philosopher at the London School of Economics who leads the Foundations of Animal Sentience project at the university, told me last year.
For context, we’re talking about “fly larvae, mealworms, and crickets.”
Do these two individuals lamenting over a filthy little grub’s alleged sentience and supposed “capacity to feel pain” possess the same empathy to the lives of other nascent and developing creatures? Namely…humans?!
Since Torratella works for Vox, I highly doubt it.
What kind of deluded sicko considers it a worthier crusade to defend a bug’s right to life than a precious baby’s? I could be wrong, but after a quick search online, I could not find a single defense of the unborn written by Torratella.
Now I get it, most of us probably don’t need the reminder that the left and their ideas are completely idiotic and unworthy of recognition, but I feel compelled to routinely address it lest our considerate sides get the better of us, and we get sucked into believing we’re simply all informed and well-meaning, albeit with different, but equally valid perspectives and opinions; the two sides are not equal, and these people are completely unable to positively participate in the real world.
France’s education minister Edouard Geffray. Screengrab youtube
After introducing emotional, relational and sexual education (EVARS), nutrition education, and education on ecological transition, the French Ministry of National Education is now turning its attention to information—at the expense of teaching core academic subjects. On Monday, March 23rd, Minister Edouard Geffray announced his intention to make “media education” one of his new priorities. Behind this new fad lies a new project designed to mould young minds under the guise of education.
The ministry has announced the signing of an agreement with Arcom, the independent media regulatory authority, to implement a series of educational initiatives aimed at young people.
Media, information, and digital citizenship education is described as “a key challenge to enable every pupil to better understand the flow of information, develop their critical thinking, and adopt responsible digital practices.” The aim for French schools must be to “train enlightened, free and responsible citizens in the digital world.”
Once again, the Ministry of National Education is targeting teaching that does not fall within the scope of basic skills—reading, writing and arithmetic—even as young French people continue to fall behind in international rankings across all subjects.
Moreover, the use of Arcom as an educational partner in this field raises questions—just as emotional education programmes deliberately choose to cooperate with activist organisations whose progressive stance is well established, such as Planned Parenthood. Arcom is supposed to guarantee neutrality and objectivity in the media but has, on numerous occasions, demonstrated its bias through its ideological condemnations, targeting media in particular for conservative or simply right-wing positions or guests. We can therefore trust it to ensure a perfectly monolithic approach in this ‘media programme,’ which will, in all likelihood, take the form of a politically correct propaganda lesson.
The tools for truly shaping “enlightened, free, and responsible” citizens are, however, well-known: the teaching of the country’s language—in this case, French—to a high standard, so that young pupils master the content they read and hear and are able to reproduce and comment on it with the precision afforded by a sound knowledge of the language, syntax, and vocabulary; and the teaching of the humanities—literature, philosophy, history—which gives children and teenagers the means to think, critique, and evaluate in the light of the experience and knowledge of the great authors.
But these tools have been devalued for several decades within the education system on the grounds that they were discriminatory and encouraged the reproduction of bourgeois, not to say fascist, patterns.
Critical thinking can develop only when it rests on guidance, authority, and truth—solid points of reference that allow one to judge the value of information. Yet these very foundations have been so thoroughly criticised that they are today largely absent from pupils’ minds. As a result, students are left without clear standards of truth and justice with which to evaluate the flood of information they face every day.
Through a proliferation of participatory workshops and the haphazard construction of knowledge by children themselves, we have diligently trained generations to challenge authority, if not mock it outright. And yet we are surprised today that the younger generations are no longer able to separate the wheat from the chaff, allowing themselves to be swept up by ‘fake news’ and other forms of conspiracy theories. They cannot see why they should give more credence to Descartes than to a TikToker or why an article in Le Monde would be more relevant than a video posted on Snapchat by their girlfriend’s brother. Is it any wonder, when their teachers have explained to them in class that Balzac was an old fart and that the rapper Jul is a musical icon every bit as worthy as Mozart?
This decision by the Ministry of National Education is, ultimately, cut from the same cloth as the repressive arsenal designed to control social media. Regulating X and Facebook is supposed to prevent the spread of fake news, but no one is thinking of restoring to the humanities, classical culture, and mastery of language the status that once made them the ultimate bulwarks against manipulation. For we must harbour no illusions about the exact motivations of the promoters of this “media education”: it is not a matter of combating obscurantism, but of ensuring that the education system retains, according to its own criteria, a monopoly on manipulation.
As Joachim Le Floch-Imad put it—a teacher and one of the last whistleblowers warning about the collapse of the school system—when this ‘discovery,’ namely the media studies classes, was announced: “Education has definitively become the exception, and re-education the norm.”
Nottingham Forest’s Nigerian striker, Taiwo Awoniyi, is once again at the center of football conversation, though this time not for his performance on the pitch. The forward could face disciplinary action from the English Football Association (FA) after celebrating a goal by revealing an undershirt with the message: “God is the greatest .”
The incident occurred during his team’s last match, when Awoniyi scored a crucial goal and, overcome with emotion, lifted his official jersey to reveal the religious text. A spontaneous gesture, common among many footballers, but one that directly contradicts FA regulations, which prohibit any political, religious, or personal messages on clothing during official matches .
The referee took note of the incident, and according to sources close to the organization, the Disciplinary Committee is already reviewing the case. The sanction could range from a fine to a formal warning, depending on the interpretation of the rules and the player’s record.
A footballer marked by faith
For those who follow Awoniyi’s career, his gesture was no surprise. The Nigerian has openly expressed his faith since the beginning of his professional career, and his celebrations are often laden with religious symbolism. On this occasion, however, the excitement of the goal ended up clashing with a rule that many consider excessively strict.
Inside the Nottingham Forest dressing room, the atmosphere is one of total support. Teammates and coaching staff acknowledge the striker’s spiritual commitment and maintain that his celebration was a personal expression with no intention of causing controversy.
A debate that reignites
The Awoniyi case reopens a recurring debate in England and European football: where is the line between personal expression and strict adherence to the rules? For some fans, banning a positive religious message is unnecessary and disproportionate. For others, the rule is clear and should be applied equally, regardless of the message’s content.
Meanwhile, Awoniyi has not made any public statements, although sources close to the player say he remains calm and that his intention was never to provoke.
The FA will announce its decision in the coming days, but the incident has already sparked a wave of reactions on social media, where hundreds of fans, especially from Nigeria, have shown their support for the striker.
What is clear is that, beyond the sanction, Awoniyi has once again shown that he plays with heart… and with faith leading the way.
Newly elected mayor of Saint-Denis, Bally Bagayoko, of the far-left La France Insoumise (LFI) has confirmed that he will align with the LFI campaign promise of disarming municipal police. This refers to calls to remove the less-lethal riot guns used, which typically fire projectiles such as rubber bullets, sponge bullets, beanbag rounds, pepper spray or tear gas.
“We are going to enter a disarmament process, but it’s not urgent,” Bagayoko told France 2, where he also discussed making Saint-Denis “a political laboratory for LFI.”
Calling the French LBD (less-lethal defense launcher) “a very difficult-to-control weapon,” the mayor of Saint-Denis advocated for a realistic approach to disarmament. “You don’t run a city of 150,000 inhabitants the same way you run one of 2,000. Besides, before 2020, the municipal police were unarmed. If disarmament is to be considered, it must be part of a thoughtful and gradual process,” he said.
Cnews reminds that last July, the demands from Mathilde Panot, LFI president in the National Assembly, for the disarmament of the municipal police sparked an outcry from across the political spectrum, from the Greens to the right wing, with parties uniting to defend the police’s right to carry a weapon. Even some LFI politicians have sought to distance themselves from this stance.
Meanwhile, Saint-Denis Mayor Bagayoko does not seem inclined to be pushing for any compromises or alliances, telling Cnews that “Those who are not aligned with our political project will leave of their own accord.”
Upon winning the election, he entered the local Town Hall and greeted the cameras by showing his middle finger.
🇫🇷Paris, France
Bally Bagayoko, the new mayor of the multicultural Saint-Denis neighborhood, gives a "victorious middle finger gesture" upon entering the Town Hall.
As to what his political project for LFI in his city may entail, one can look to LFI’s leader, the controversial Jean-Luc Mélenchon. He is known for his increasingly violent rhetoric, including threatening state officials with prison if his party takes power and blasting an anti-migration feminist group as the guilty party after an LFI member was arrested in the death of Quentin Deranque.
In one recent tirade against Whites, Mélenchon said: “We are destined to be a Creole nation and so much the better.”
🇫🇷"As White as you are, as ugly as you are."
French far-left leader Jean-Luc Mélenchon has once again resorted to anti-White racism, calling Whites "ugy" while claiming the Goth Europeans only destroyed.
This comes after his promotion of a "creolized France."
Turning back to the issue of disarming police, Bagayoko also had an interesting take on those police officers who do not get on board with his agenda. “We also know that some public servants will, at some point, find it difficult to support a policy they have opposed. (…) But it will not be possible, for example, to remain in a public service responsible for public safety while seeking to promote a political agenda that has been defeated at the ballot box.”
Posting to X, National Rally (RN) spokesman, bluntly stated the result of Bagayoko’s implementation of the LFI program so far, i.e., the disarmament of police. “Out of 140 officers, 90 have already requested their transfer! This announcement is a real license to kill for the traffickers and the thugs.”
