Islamic Terrorist Convicted of Plot to Bomb British Consulate Runs for Office to “Unite” UK – Only in the UK

The UK arrests 30 people a day, 12,000 a year, for online posts, especially those critical of Islam and Muslim mass migration. When a Kurdish man burned a Koran in front of the Turkish consulate and a Muslim man stabbed him, the UK police let the stabber out on bail and locked up the Koran burner on the charge of having “intent to cause against the religious institution of Islam.” Jewish and non-Jewish people have been arrested for condemning Hamas and Hezbollah.

So you can understand why Shahid Butt is the candidate of the moment to “unite” the United Kingdom.

An activist who was jailed for his part in an armed terror plot is seeking election. Shahid Butt says he believes he is the ‘ideal candidate’ to unite a divided community and city, push back against the far right and defeat Labour in one of its traditional strongholds.

“Activist” is that what we’re calling Islamic terrorists now?

In a launch video for his campaign with the two men, he tells people that he will be relying on the ‘support of Allah, these guys and you’ to win the seat.

Butt was convicted on terror charges in 1999 amid claims he was part of a terrorist enterprise conspiring to terrorise Yemen. He was found guilty of forming an armed gang and conspiring to bomb the British consulate, an Anglican church and a Swiss-owned hotel in Yemen.

The group was supposedly linked to Islamic radicals who kidnapped 16 Westerners in 1998, four of whom were killed. They were accused of being sent to Yemen by radical cleric Abu Hamza.

I still remember Don King’s, ‘Only in America’. But only in the UK can a Muslim terrorist plot to bomb the British consulate, move there and run for office to destroy the UK.

From the UN’s cheerfully upbeat summary…

In the early 1990’s Shahid travelled to Bosnia as an aid worker, and on seeing the terrible situation he stayed and joined the foreign fighters brigade of the Bosnian army.

During the next 8 years he travelled to Afghanistan and Kashmir

So much ‘activism’.

Butt comes up again in a terrorism welfare fraud case, ubiquitous among Pakistan Muslim settlers in the UK.

Islamic extremists with links to Osama bin Laden have raised hundreds of thousands of pounds by defrauding taxpayers in a string of sophisticated benefit swindles across Britain.

Money from the frauds has been traced to al-Qa’eda bank accounts used to fund fighters in conflicts around the world, including Afghanistan and Kashmir.

Police have also reopened the file on Shahid Butt, a convicted terrorist from Birmingham who has been accused of siphoning money to accounts linked with terrorist groups.

In the early 1990s an accomplice stole National Insurance numbers belonging to immigrants and people who had died and Butt then made claims under their names.
Some of the stolen cash went to the Supporters of Shariah. Significantly, Butt was one of five British Muslims jailed for five years on terrorism charges in Yemen in October 1999.

Four years earlier, in June 1995, Butt, then 23, was sentenced to 18 months in jail at Birmingham Crown Court after pleading guilty to four counts of dishonestly obtaining property by deception.

Butt’s conviction in Yemen, along with his accomplices, came after they were found with mines, rocket launchers, and communication equipment in Aden. They were accused of plotting to blow up a hotel, a restaurant and a church.

But apart from that, Butt seems to have a very promising agenda.

Before that he had been jailed in Birmingham for violence and was in trouble regularly through the 1980s linked to his role in the notorious Lynx gang, a street gang of mainly Pakistanis

He has openly encouraged the city’s Muslim youth to ‘work out at the gym and learn to fight’ in readiness for potential attacks, and urged Muslims to stand together and hold their ground against people of other faiths, who he describes as ‘disbelievers’.

Ahead of the Villa match against Maccabi Tel Aviv last November he had called on Muslims from around the country to head to Birmingham to show solidarity for Palestine and prevent the Israeli team’s fans from ‘desecrating’ and ‘dirtying’ the city, claiming ‘IDF babykillers’ were set to be in the city.

He also posted a video from a protest at the match saying: “Muslims are not pacifists…if somebody comes into your face, you knock his teeth out, that’s my message to the youth.”

The only people who believe Muslims are pacifists are the kinds of lefties who let the Butts take overs.

frontpagemag

UK PM Starmer Worked With Disgraced Lawyer in ‘Witch Hunt’ Against British Soldiers: Report

British human rights lawyer turned Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer and his controversial attorney general worked with a disgraced solicitor on a legal case that led to hundreds of British soldiers being hounded through the courts over war crimes allegations, a report states.

Sir Keir Starmer worked with Phil Shiner, the infamous leader of the now-closed ‘Public Interest Lawyers’ firm, who was struck off for misconduct in 2017 and narrowly avoided prison in 2024, court documents published by The Daily Telegraph revealed. Starmer’s work was Pro Bono — voluntary and without payment — and the case led to what has been called a “witch hunt” against British soldiers that saw them dragged through lengthy court battles thanks to a successful appeal to the European Court of Human Rights.

The case of Al-Skeini and others v Secretary of State for Defence 2007 eventually “triggered years of criminal investigations into soldiers who had been wrongly accused, at enormous cost to the taxpayer”, The Telegraph reports. The case proceeded for years after Starmer moved on, having been awarded one of the top legal jobs in Britain as director of public prosecutions the following year.

Nevertheless, former government minister and pro-veterans advocate Johnny Mercer said this was a process the Prime Minister “fought for” in his previous life as a human rights lawyer.

In one case, a British soldier was under suspicion for 13 years and had to be cleared by the investigation three times over the fatal shooting of an Iraqi schoolteacher in 2003. The teacher had been armed with an AK-47 and the British soldier was repeatedly found to have acted in legitimate self-defence. The daughter of that soldier questioned why Starmer had felt motivated to work for free on the case, The Telegraph said.

Per the report, Starmer represented a group of interveners in the case that included human rights charity the Advice on Individual Rights in Europe Centre, the Association for the Prevention of Torture, the Bar Human Rights Committee, the British Irish Rights Watch, Interrights, Justice, the Kurdish Human Rights Project, the Law Society, Liberty, and the Redress Trust. The legal, campaigning, and charity groups said they were motivated to become involved in the case over “grave concerns” about human rights and said they believed “the outcome of this appeal will have profound and lasting implications”.

A government spokesman responded to the story to emphasise that Starmer had not directly represented the Iraqi families in the case but rather had represented other interested parties. Yet the substance of the story, that Starmer had worked pro bono — and therefore voluntarily — on the case went unchallenged.

Brexit pioneer Nigel Farage responded to the report and said “Keir Starmer does not support our country, or its people. He should apologise to British soldiers for the role he played in allowing their false persecution.”

Mercer said: “It’s clear Keir Starmer was personally involved in unleashing the witch hunt against British troops that I’ve spent the last 10 years dismantling. He believes in prosecuting British soldiers so much that he insisted on doing it for free.”

Starmer went from this 2007 case to become the Director of Public Prosecutions in 2008, a role he held until 2013. Two years later he was elected a Labour Member of Parliament for a north London seat and became party leader in 2020.

Disgraced human rights lawyer Phil Shiner was handed a suspended jail sentence in 2024 for legal aid fraud. Legal Futures reported at the time that “his firm, Birmingham-based Public Interest Lawyers in Birmingham, had engaged an agent to cold call clients in Iraq and had also paid referral fees”.

His company was responsible for huge numbers of allegations against British soldiers and it was stated by a lawyer defending some of them: “As a result of Shiner’s criminal conduct, thousands of British soldiers were falsely and maliciously accused of war crimes. He instigated a witch hunt based on deceit. The accusations against British troops were totally false, and Shiner illegally pocketed millions of pounds of taxpayers’ money pursuing them.”

Robert Jenrick, then the Conservative shadow Lord Chancellor and now Reform UK Member of Parliament said of Shiner then: “Shiner’s bogus claims destroyed the lives of so many British soldiers for years”.

As reported in 2016:

Mr Shiner became known as the “scourge of the army” for his actions, and his firm was condemned by former Prime Minister David Cameron and the Ministry of Defence.

A five-year inquiry ruled in 2014 that the firm’s clients made claims that were “wholly without foundation and entirely the product of deliberate lies, reckless speculation and ingrained hostility”.

Speaking on the firm’s closure, Defence Secretary Michael Fallon said: “This is the right outcome for our armed forces, who show bravery and dedication in difficult circumstances. For too long, we’ve seen our legal system abused to impugn them falsely. We are now seeing progress and we will be announcing further measures to stamp out this practice.”

breitbart

Immigration Figures: Why the Invasion of France Isn’t a Fantasy

The 2025 immigration figures for France have just been published, and, unsurprisingly, they paint a catastrophic picture, with a constant and sustained increase in arrivals on French territory. However, these figures only cover legal immigration: if we add estimates of illegal arrivals, it becomes clear that the feeling of being overwhelmed by an invasion experienced by many French people is not just a figment of their imagination.

France issued 384,230 first residence permits—valid for up to 12 months—last year, an increase of 11.2% over the previous year. This figure is essential because it is the ultimate indicator for measuring legal immigration, as Nicolas Pouvreau-Monti, director of the Observatory of Immigration and Demography, points out in an interview for Atlantico. It does not include renewals of residence permits, European foreigners, or minors, which means that it is actually a low estimate of the number of arrivals.

The increase, which is substantial over one year, is even more impressive from a long-term perspective. The number of residence permits granted in 2025 is about three times higher than the number of new residence permits granted 30 years ago.

Emmanuel Macron is not solely responsible for this situation. The increase in immigration began well before he came to power. However, there has been a clear acceleration since he took office.

Structural characteristics specific to France make the cost of immigration particularly difficult for the country to bear.

France is characterised by immigration that is, on average, poorer than in most other European Union countries and with higher unemployment. The employment rate of immigrants in France is one of the lowest in the EU. In addition, France is clearly the European country with the highest proportion of African immigrants: the share of immigrants born in Africa in the total immigrant population is about three times higher than the European Union average.

Inevitably, the country cannot fail to be affected by these massive population inflows. While the official line praises the indispensability of immigration to compensate for the falling birth rate and preserve the French ‘model’ of social benefits through an influx of contributors, the reality is quite different. As analyst Marc Vanguard reveals on X, so-called ‘work’ immigration is in decline. ‘Work’ immigration accounts for only 13% of residence permits granted in 2025, compared to 17% in 2024. On the other hand, the number of residence permits granted on humanitarian grounds has literally exploded: +65% in one year. Humanitarian reasons now account for a quarter of residence permits, proving that the people arriving in France are not coming primarily to contribute to the national wealth but rather to take advantage of social benefits financed by the nation’s citizens.

Today, there are 4.3 million residence permits in France—equivalent to the combined populations of Paris, Lyon, Marseille, and Toulouse.

As for arrivals, according to Pouvreau-Monti, Macron’s direct responsibility for the figures shown must be qualified. The spectacular increase in asylum seekers is a real problem because it is an area in which international law tightly constrains national leaders, who cannot oppose it as much as they would like. However, there are other channels of immigration that do depend directly on political will: in France, student immigration has increased considerably since Macron came to power, by choice, and without this policy being accompanied by a qualitative selection of the profiles of young people coming to study in France: quantity has been given priority over quality.

The presence in the government for many months of a right-wing minister from the Les Républicains party, Bruno Retailleau, who has been vocal about the need to reduce migration flows and implement a firm policy of deportation, has had little concrete effect. The only indicator showing a positive trend is asylum applications: for the first time, a 10% decline was recorded between 2024 and 2025. However, this decline is offset by the increase in favourable responses to asylum applications: Acceptance now exceeds 50%, compared to 39% four years ago. The number of illegal immigrants regularised has fallen slightly—3,000 fewer in one year—but this remains anecdotal.

These figures do not inspire optimism. The situation is alarming, says Pierre-Marie Sève of the Institute for Justice, who sees a country “in mortal danger,” especially as any attempt to combat the harmful effects of immigration is met with resistance from a whole range of public institutions—and foremost among them, the Constitutional Council—that have become accustomed to breaking all laws designed to curb lax immigration policies. Private actors also play a role, encouraging it for their own needs. Responsibility therefore extends far beyond the government alone to include magistrates who encourage this laxity, business leaders who take advantage of cheap immigrant labour, and media outlets that promote pro-immigration discourse.

According to Pouvreau-Monti, however, fatalism and defeatism are not appropriate in the face of a seemingly irreversible situation. Citing the example of Denmark, he points out that between 2014 and 2024, the annual number of new asylum applications there fell by 85%, while, in France, it rose by 120%. Political will is the key: it should be all the easier to implement as it is now in line with the wishes of the majority of the French people.

europeanconservative

Britain and the Crisis of National Identity

by Lars Møller 

England, one of the world’s oldest nation-states, has long stood as a symbol of continuity, tradition, and cultural propriety. From the consolidation of the monarchy to the expansion of the British Empire, it helped shape Western civilization, anchored in Christian heritage and legal principles (Magna Carta). It also historically protected minority communities, including Jews, from persecution. Yet in the twenty-first century, England (and Britain) faces unprecedented internal crises—in governance, national identity, and cultural cohesion—that suggest, not just a period of transition but the possible unraveling of a once-cohesive civilization.

With opposing feelings of sadness and schadenfreude, respectively, friends and enemies of Britain are following developments. The country is in the grip of a national identity crisis complicated by institutional decay and cultural fragmentation. A pressing question is whether Britain is dismantling itself as a nation, abjuring its civilizational heritage, and losing the will—and ability—to uphold the very foundations of its social order. 

England today exists in an uneasy union with Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland. While historically dominant within the United Kingdom, England’s role is increasingly uncertain as Scottish nationalism and regional devolution gain momentum. The unity of Britain—once a symbol of imperial strength—now appears fragile. 

Although England remains politically and economically central to Britain, rising regional identities and constitutional confusion suggest a fracturing of the very concept of a unified British (or even English) nation. This development goes beyond political decentralization; it represents a deeper existential uncertainty about what Britain is and whether it has the cohesion to survive as a unified entity. 

Post-war mass immigration has dramatically reshaped English society. Cities like London, Birmingham, and Leicester are now hubs of global diversity, home to communities from South Asia, Africa, the Caribbean, and Eastern Europe. This transformation has created parallel societies with limited integration, linguistic separation, and competing value systems. 

In urban centers, the prominence of foreign religious rites and festivals—alongside the visible retreat of Christian traditions—signals a civilizational turning point. The public square once shaped by Anglican values and Western customs is now defined by religious pluralism, which, while legally protected, has disrupted a shared cultural narrative.

For many natives—especially in working-class and rural areas—this shift is experienced as alienation rather than enrichment. The disappearance of familiar norms, the marginalization of the English language in some neighborhoods, and the rise of identity politics contribute to a growing sense of “cultural exile” in one’s own country. 

Mistaken for “bigoted nostalgia”, this actually reflects a “psychological crisis”. Feelings of dislocation, economic insecurity, and cultural displacement have fueled political resentment, manifesting in populist movements, culture wars, and, notably, the Brexit referendum—a desperate, though ambiguous, attempt to reclaim sovereignty and identity.

The central challenge that Britain faces is how to sustain a coherent national identity amid disruptive pluralism. Multiculturalism tends to replace unity with a patchwork of isolated identities. Without a common cultural or moral framework, society becomes atomized—a collection of individuals and groups with competing loyalties and little shared meaning. 

The emotional fallout is evident. Many natives no longer recognize their own country. Their history, faith, and customs are derided or erased in public discourse. National holidays, language, and historical monuments are increasingly contested. Once-proud symbols of identity are rebranded as sources of shame.

If left unaddressed, this erosion of cultural cohesion risks social fragmentation degenerating into civilizational collapse. No society can endure without a shared story about who it is and what it stands for. Britain risks becoming a country in name only—administratively functional, but spiritually and culturally adrift.

The claim that Britain has “given up fighting for Western civilization” is not hyperbole. This civilization—rooted in Greek philosophy, Roman law, Christianity, and the Enlightenment—was once proudly championed by British institutions. However, the core values of this tradition are increasingly viewed with suspicion or outright hostility.

Secularism, postmodern relativism, and cultural guilt have replaced moral clarity with ambiguity. The very concept of “Western civilization” is now deemed exclusionary or oppressive in elite discourse. Britain, which once exported its institutions and values globally, now hesitates to defend them at home.

This loss of civilizational confidence is visible in education, media, and public institutions. Classical literature, Christian teachings, and national history are sidelined in favor of a fragmented, grievance-driven curriculum. The result is a generation alienated from its own heritage, lacking a coherent moral compass or sense of national purpose.

Historically, Britain’s treatment of its Jewish population mirrored the broader trajectory of Western civilization—from medieval persecution to legal emancipation and protection. Yet recent years have seen a resurgence of anti-Semitism, particularly in political and academic spaces. Despite legal protections, Jewish communities increasingly question whether British society retains the will to defend them.

This trend is emblematic of a wider failure to uphold civilizational responsibilities. A nation that once prided itself on defending minority rights now struggles to confront “hate” when it contradicts fashionable ideological narratives. If Britain cannot protect one of its oldest minority communities, what does that reveal about its commitment to the values that it claims to uphold?

Christianity has long underpinned England’s legal system, ethical norms, and cultural rituals. Yet the Church of England is in steep decline, and public life is rapidly secularizing. Church attendance is collapsing, and a growing majority now identify as non-religious or affiliated with non-Christian faiths.

To many, this secular shift represents moral progress. However, critics argue that the abandonment of Christianity is leaving a spiritual vacuum—one that cannot be filled by consumerism, state ideology or cultural relativism. The ethical roots of law, justice, and personal responsibility—long nurtured by Christian teaching—are being severed. 

This spiritual disintegration poses a profound civilizational risk. Without a moral anchor, societies devolve into moral subjectivism. The rise in crime, family breakdown, mental health crises, and civic disengagement may not be symptoms of isolated issues, but of a deeper loss of collective purpose. 

Britain’s state institutions—Parliament, police, judiciary, and civil service—once admired for their stability and impartiality, are now widely viewed with suspicion or contempt. A series of political scandals (e.g., rape gangs), the Brexit debacle, and media portrayals of MPs as unserious or corrupt have eroded public trust. 

The police face mounting criticism over their inability to maintain public order, perceived bias in enforcement, and a retreat from traditional community policing. Meanwhile, rising crime, especially violent and antisocial behavior, contributes to the perception of a society in decline. 

The judiciary, though formally independent, is seen by many as out of step with public morality. Legal rulings that appear to prioritize abstract rights over common-sense justice further alienate ordinary citizens, reinforcing the sense that the system no longer works for them.

Parliament itself suffers from a perceived decline in merit. Many legislators appear more interested in media performance or ethnic-ideological signaling than principled governance. The House of Lords, unelected and increasingly populated through opaque patronage, exemplifies the disconnect between institutional authority and democratic legitimacy. 

These trends, if unchecked, threaten the legitimacy and functionality of the state. A society without faith in its institutions loses the capacity for collective action, creating fertile ground for civil war or authoritarianism. 

Britain is in turmoil. Its challenges—demographic transformation, loss of identity, institutional decay, and civilizational uncertainty—are not isolated issues but interconnected symptoms of a deeper malaise. The nation that once led the world in law, liberty, and learning now struggles to define itself, govern effectively, and protect its foundational values.

To avoid disaster, Britain should recover a sense of historical continuity, moral purpose, and cultural cohesion. This means reasserting the legitimacy of its civilizational heritage, not as a weapon of exclusion but as a foundation for integration and renewal. It means defending the values of democracy, liberty, and justice by law and in spirit. 

Without this renewal, Britain risks a “slow-motion collapse” because of internal erosion, cultural amnesia, and moral confusion rather than military invasion or economic ruin. The collapse of civilizations is rarely sudden. It begins with the loss of confidence, the fraying of institutions, and the surrender of identity. Britain is not there yet—but it is dangerously close.

americanthinker

Homeless Afghan man detained for arson spree directly behind Montpellier opera house in latest attack on French culture

AI generator

A 33-year-old Afghan migrant has been placed in pretrial detention in Montpellier after being arrested on suspicion of deliberately starting several fires in the city center, directly behind the Opéra Comédie.

According to investigators, the incidents occurred in the early hours of Sunday. At around 5:40 a.m., officers monitoring the Montpellier urban surveillance system observed an individual igniting a garbage container on Rue de la Maréchaussée, directly behind the opera house. After setting the fire, the suspect walked away from the scene and fled on foot.

Midi Libre reported how police patrols were alerted by radio and quickly located a man matching the description a short distance away on Rue des Étuves. He was arrested without incident and later identified as a 33-year-old Afghan national who told officers he was homeless.

The investigation found that three garbage containers were set on fire on Rue de la Maréchaussée before the suspect moved to nearby Rue Richelieu, where three scooters were deliberately torched. Four additional scooters parked close by were damaged as the flames spread.

The fire also blackened the rendering of nearby residential buildings, with authorities saying the blaze came close to spreading further.

The suspect was brought before the Montpellier public prosecutor on Monday and has been ordered to undergo a psychiatric evaluation.

He will remain in pre-trial detention pending an expedited hearing.

Arson attacks by migrants have become somewhat commonplace across France in recent years. In July last year, a 51-year-old Moroccan migrant was convicted for an arson attack that destroyed four acres of forest in Saint-Gilles. Despite the severe arson attack and a lengthy criminal record, he was only given a suspended sentence and will serve no jail time unless he reoffends.

One high-profile case involved a Sudanese migrant who nearly killed dozens of people in a series of arson attacks across the French city of Pau in 2022. In total, he burned down 16 apartments, multiple cars, and part of a church, while one student caught up in one of the blazes was forced to jump from her apartment window, resulting in her breaking both of her ankles and needing semi-permanent use of a cane.

Despite being convicted of the mass arson, he was not ordered to be deported, as he claimed his life would be under threat if he returned to Sudan.

In July last year, two French churches were hit with arson attacks in what authorities considered to be religiously-motivated offenses, while in May, a group of young men stormed another church in Avignon, shouting “Allahu akbar” and threatening to burn the church down.

The intimidation led to police officers guarding the building during Sunday morning masses.

rmx

Tusk’s Polish courts ‘are tearing down justice’

AI generator

In Poland governed by Donald Tusk’s coalition, the justice system no longer operates independently in political cases. It has been brought under the control of left-liberal politicians and turned into a tool of repression against political opponents. This is no longer just a “rule of law crisis” ongoing since December 2023, but a deepening, systemic transformation of the state into a crypto-dictatorship. Within the next three months, the governing majority plans to take over additional constitutional institutions.

A decisive moment exposing the scale of lawfare and the weaponisation of the judiciary against the opposition in Poland came just before Christmas, when a widely respected, highly experienced judge, Dariusz Łubowski, overturned a European Arrest Warrant issued against me. In a detailed justification, he described today’s Poland as a crypto-dictatorship—one in which formal democratic institutions still exist, but the executive systematically violates constitutional principles by subordinating the prosecution service, the courts, and the media. The ruling identified a radical breach of the constitutional order: Unprecedented executive interference in judicial independence, public political attacks on judges, and the instrumental use of law enforcement against the opposition. This was not merely a finding in my case, but a diagnosis of the State itself.

Judge Łubowski also based his ruling on two circumstances of an international nature. First, he relied on Interpol’s decision refusing to issue a Red Notice against me, citing violations by Tusk’s prosecution service of Interpol’s principles and the standards of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Under Polish criminal procedure, courts are obliged to reassess a European Arrest Warrant when negative premises arise—such as a conflict with the interests of justice—nd the judge held that Interpol’s decision constituted precisely such a premise.

Meanwhile, despite possessing this document since April, the prosecution failed to submit it to the court, in breach of its legal duty—a violation explicitly identified by the court. At the same time, the prosecution publicly lied by claiming that Interpol’s decision contained no reasoning. It is therefore hardly surprising that the grounds set out in that decision are devastating for Tusk’s regime.

Even more scandalously, prosecutors also failed to submit to the court an official communication from the Secretary-General of the Council of the EU dated March 5, 2025, confirming that Hungary had granted me political asylum. The court obtained this document only upon formal request and concluded that Hungary’s decision was lawful under EU and international law, properly notified to EU institutions, not challenged by any of them or by any Member State, and well-founded—confirming the absence of a fair trial and the existence of systemic, politically motivated repression in Poland.

The authorities responded immediately. First, the Minister of Justice publicly launched a harsh attack on the judge (notably, just one month earlier he had publicly praised him for a ruling in another case). Then, in blatant violation of the ne bis in idem principle (similar to the prohibition against double jeopardy), based on the same facts and identical evidence, a new EAW application was filed over a single weekend. Judge Łubowski, who for years had been the sole specialist handling international criminal matters under the court’s internal rules, was removed, effectively because of the content of his prior final ruling. Random case assignment was unlawfully suspended, and a ministerial nominee illegally hand-picked a “proper” judge at the last minute. These steps were taken to ensure that a pre-written decision drafted in the offices of the Minister of Justice would be signed. This became possible because the Minister of Justice in 2024 unlawfully replaced court leadership in Warsaw, in defiance of statutory law and Constitutional Tribunal rulings, purging lawfully appointed presidents and side-lining independent judges. 

Manipulating judicial panels, however, pales in comparison to what has occurred in recent days around the National Council of the Judiciary—the constitutional body tasked with safeguarding judicial independence, issuing opinions on judicial appointments, and overseeing promotions. Under the law governing the system of ordinary courts, the Council is also responsible for providing administrative support for judges serving nationwide as public prosecutors in judicial disciplinary cases. Control over disciplinary proceedings against judges is a powerful tool for persecuting independent judges and shielding loyalists involved in illegal subordinating the justice system to a liberal autocracy; that is why the Minister of Justice unlawfully cut short the statutory fixed terms of office of the disciplinary judges and installed his own political nominees, in open defiance of prior Constitutional Tribunal rulings and later confirmed as unlawful by the Supreme Court.

And since the disciplinary judges did not submit to these unlawful decisions and continued to conduct proceedings before the Supreme Court (which refused to admit the usurpers appointed by the minister), the executive opted for the use of force. On 21 January 2026, there was a brutal, forceful entry into the headquarters of the National Council of the Judiciary. During the operation, violence was used against judges and administrative staff, and their freedom was unlawfully restricted. Around one hundred police officers, led by two military prosecutors acting on political orders, stormed the building and broke into armoured safes to seize disciplinary case files—including those concerning the Minister of Justice himself, who before taking office had been a judge accused of falsifying judgments, allegedly issued on days when there is evidence that he was abroad.

There are serious concerns that the Supreme Court will be the next target. All indications point to preparations for a police intervention intended to prevent the election of a new First President, scheduled for late February or early March. Such a scenario has already been attempted once, with aggressive activist groups mobilised to serve as a pretext. And in February, Tusk intends to fill a majority of seats on the Constitutional Tribunal. This body, composed of fifteen judges appointed for nine-year terms, in the hands of the globalist camp would become a powerful instrument for transforming democracy into an oligarchic juristocracy and for blocking, for years to come—even against the will of parliament—any changes, under the pretext of “unconstitutionality”.

Over the past two years, liberals have shown the extent of abuses they are capable of. In many parts of the world, juristocracy in their hands has become a tool of autocratic power. Finally, in April, the term of the National Council of the Judiciary expires. Its takeover will deepen chaos in the courts and completely devastate the third branch of government. The ultimate target remains the presidency—its removal under the pretext of an allegedly improperly constituted Supreme Court is not an implausible scenario.

Justice in Poland is no longer blind—today, crowbar in hand, it is tearing down the foundations of the rule of law. All of this is happening with the silent consent of Europe’s left-liberal establishment, increasingly irritated by Tusk’s incompetence but still backing him. More than two years have passed, and Poland has not been fully subdued. The presidential election was won by the conservative Karol Nawrocki, European censorship under the DSA was blocked in Poland, social resistance is growing, and conservative media are expanding.

Political refugees from Tusk’s crypto-dictatorship in Hungary—a bastion of freedom and normalcy—including the author of these words, are exposing the scale of liberal lawlessness. Brussels and Berlin understand perfectly well that sovereign, pro-Atlantic states with strong Christian national identities—such as Poland and Hungary—pose a threat to the EU centralisation project. That is why they are deploying all means to break them, and why, despite their impatience, they continue to support Tusk’s political repression—even when it relies on concealing decisions of international organisations, and the EU itself, as in the case of the December court ruling annulling the EAW.

Marcin Romanowski is a Doctor of Law, university lecturer,  former Deputy Minister of Justice in the Law and Justice government, currently a Member of the Polish Parliament in exile in Hungary and Director of the Hungarian-Polish Institute of Freedom in Budapest

brusselssignal

Muslims want to ban pig figurines in butcher shops and restaurants in Italy and anything else that does not conform to Islam

The restaurant ‘Mortadella e non solo’ in Padua Giulio Bonet Facebook

In Padua, controversy has arisen over a recently opened shop in Piazza dei Signords that specialises in paninis and cured meats. To make it clear what it sells, the shop displayed a plastic pig figurine in its window, a visual symbol of the products on offer (photo above).

What was perceived by shop owners and some customers as a mere advertising gimmick has become the subject of a public inquiry by some representatives of the local Islamic community. Salim El Mauoed, a doctor and regional vice-president of the community, demanded the removal of the figure, describing its presence as ‘tasteless’ and potentially offensive to Muslims visiting the city centre.

Demonstration in support of preserving the pig sculpture in front of the restaurant ‘Mortadella e non solo’ in Padua

The municipality has not taken any official measures. There is no regulation prohibiting the use of pig images as commercial symbols. However, the request has provoked mixed reactions in Padua and beyond, with several politicians and citizens condemning it as an attack on freedom of trade and civil coexistence.

@natyygonzalezt Fui a la apertura de Mortadella que está en Piazza di Signori y me encanto ❤️ @lamortadellaofficial definitivamente si quieres comer algo rico, rápido y súper fresco vayan aprobar sus rosette 🥪✨. #padova #erasmusstudent #latinoseneuropa #foodie #mortadella ♬ Moves like Jagger – s0ng4y0uu

The controversy has taken on a larger dimension. According to proponents of the censorship measures, symbols that contradict Islamic religious precepts should be avoided in public. Other observers, however, warned of the risk of setting a precedent that would influence religious claims on legal and long-standing business practices. Some Muslim employees of the shop also supported keeping the figure, as it was seen as compatible with the shop’s identity and not offensive.

Il Giornale

UK: Afghan national appears in court to deny raping two teenage girls

The charges relate to an incident said to have taken place at a flat in Bolton | Google Maps

An Afghan national has appeared in court to deny raping two teenage girls.

Sultani Bakatash, 28, is charged with two counts of rape, two counts of assault by penetration and one count of sexual assault.

These charges relate to an incident said to have taken place at a flat in Bolton, Greater Manchester on December 6, 2025.

It allegedly involved two girls who are both aged 14, who cannot be legally identified due to their age.

Bakatash appeared at Bolton Crown Court via video link from HMP Forest Bank in Salford, with a person present in the courtroom to assist with Dari translation.

Each of the five counts was put to the defendant one by one, with details given for each.

When asked for his pleas on each of the five charges, Bakatash, of Georgina Court, responded he was not guilty.

The court then dealt with several administrative matters which cannot be reported ahead of the trial.

The defendant was represented by Paul Becker, while the prosecution was headed by Harriet Lavin.

A previous hearing heard Bakatash arrived in Britain two years ago and had been granted indefinite leave to remain, with his mother, two brothers and two sisters also living in the UK.

The trial has been scheduled to begin on June 8 and is expected to last for five days.

Until then, Judge Nicholas Clarke KC, Honorary Recorder of Bolton, has remanded Bakatash in custody.

Chief Superintendent Helen Critchley previously stated: “We’ve been using all available resources to understand what has happened and help this case progress through court.

“We remain firmly committed to protecting young girls in Bolton and across Greater Manchester and to help people feel safe in their neighbourhood.

“As criminal proceedings are now active, I urge the public not to speculate so that the legal process can take its proper course and the dignity of the girls is maintained.”

She also stated the alleged victims were being supported by specialist teams.

gbnews

Sharia in UK and Facebook Confessions; Britons whisper about a country in crisis

I took a little look — my first — at Facebook, and I immediately came upon a site where the posters, all from the UK, were expressing great unhappiness over the Muslim presence in Great Britain. The tone was one of frustration, and even anger, with the government’s failure to act, and with the reluctance of individuals to speak out about the matter for fear of being accused of “racism” and “Islamophobia.” And several referred to the predictions about the Muslim invasion that they had made long ago. One woman said that in 2013, as her father lay dying, he told her he was glad he would not live to see the final triumph of Islam in Britain, that he had been warning about for years. His final words were “this will be a Muslim country!”

Here are those posts:

1. I wrote this 5 years ago.

This will upset a few people, but here goes.

We are, as a nation, getting exactly what we deserve. We sit on closed groups on Facebook and type how disgusted we are, but we will never go out and protest. We, myself included, are cowards. We don’t want to be branded “racists” or “islamophobic” and risk losing our jobs, nor do we want to lose the respect of our friends and wider community, so we keep our true thoughts to ourselves, and they know it. That’s why they will win. This country, and the rest of Western Europe, is lost, because the radical left insist we continue down this road of “multiculturalism” while ignoring the fact that it is NOT increasing integration but is encouraging the “islamification” of our country, only mass deportations will return the balance and no one will do anything about it.

2. Look what happened last year when ppl protested . It’s our governments are the ones to blame we have to put up with the s##t and it will only get worse .

3. Perfect no one has the balls to protect our country since Margaret Thatcher !

4. On my father’s death bed he spoke these words:

“Natalie I am so thankful that I was born the year WW2 ended…. I will be happy to be gone because the eastern world has infiltrated every aspect of Great Britain and it will be a Muslim country! He died in 2013!

He knew…..

5. Well me and hubby have been on the London rallies alongside thousands of people but what can you do when no one in government listens or cares or even acknowledges that people are even there, there’s no MSM acknowledgment, politicians know how the public…

6. That’s why Starmer came out calling people far right and having them arrested, silencing and shaming people, I’ve been saying what you’ve said for the last 30 odd yrs and now I watch people who didn’t like what I had to say now thinking what I said all them yrs ago

7. Today we’ve become an Orwellian type dictatorship, and we’ve let it happen.

Enoch Powell was correct.!!

8. I could stop the boats but I’m not allowed and I’m not going to prison for these leaches, so who is really wrong, I have got the spine to go and make a stand on stopping it but why should I end up in prison?

9. We the people see it but it’s the kalergi plan this government wants. I actually don’t know which way to turn; it’s becoming orwellian dictatorship.

10. I talked for a decade on Islamic invasion of europe,and its intentions. I’m reminded every day that I’m a racist bigot

11. Bang on the nail with the help of anti-white working class uni party politicians we gave our country away

These are the people who cannot bear to see their country being slowly taken from them by Muslims, both through demographic conquest, and through the behavior of pusillanimous political leaders who refuse to tell the country the truth, and instead allow that Muslim invasion to continue. And ordinary citizens, too, have been afraid to speak their minds because they are fearful of being tarred with accusations of “racism” and “Islamophobia.” Several of those who provided comments on this thread have been warning for many years about the rising Muslim sea in Britain. One woman said her own father on his deathbed in 2013 told her he was glad he would not live to see Islam take over the country. This desperate situation may change if the Reform Party gains power. That could be the UK’s last best hope.

frontpagemag

Germany: Cardinal Woelki refuses to attend last assembly of heretical Synodal Way

Rainer Maria Woelki, © Raimond Spekking / CC BY-SA 4.0 (via Wikimedia Commons)

Cardinal Rainer Maria Woelki has said that he will not participate in the last synodal assembly of the heretical German “Synodal Way.”

In an interview with Domradio published on Tuesday, the archbishop of Cologne was asked why he decided not to attend the sixth synodal assembly of the Synodal Way taking place in Stuttgart at the end of January.

“For me, the Synodal Way is over. It was originally agreed that there would be five meetings, and I took part in all of them,” he said. “In my opinion, this body also does not have the mandate to evaluate what an individual local bishop or diocese has or has not implemented from the decisions of the Synodal Way.”

The sixth synodal assembly will take place three years after the conclusion of the first five assemblies and is meant as an opportunity to evaluate the “reform process.”

The German Synodal Way is infamous for proposing heretical changes to immutable Catholic teaching. The heterodox “reform” project was launched by the German Bishops’ Conference and the Central Committee of German Catholics, a laity organization, in December 2019.

By 2023, an overwhelming majority of the members of the Synodal Way, including more than two-thirds of the German bishops, voted in favor of heretical documents calling for “women deacons,” “blessings” of homosexual relationships, changing Church teaching on the sinfulness of homosexual acts, and even “transgender” priests in a text replete with gender ideology.

Cardinal Woelki added that “other important issues were not addressed during the Synodal Path either, such as the question of evangelization, which Pope Francis emphasized in his 2019 letter ‘to the Pilgrim People of God in Germany.’ I see this as a major shortcoming of these five plenary assemblies.”

The cardinal, who was part of the minority of bishops who opposed the heretical documents of the Synodal Way, did not call out his brother bishops directly for their errors but instead said, “All I can say is that I am accountable for my ordination vows.”

“I promised to protect the faith of the Church and to walk the path in my diocese in unity with the Pope. I would like to continue to do so in the future.”

“I have the impression that, at a certain point, the Synodal Path in Germany became primarily about implementing certain church policy positions,” the archbishop of Cologne stated.

“My great concern is that there is currently a creeping attempt in Germany to implement a new ecclesiology and a new anthropology that are no longer in harmony with the faith and teaching of the universal Church,” he concluded.

Cardinal Woelki also commented on the plan of the majority of the heterodox German bishops, together with the Central Committee of German Catholics (ZdK), to give the laity greater executive power in the Church through the establishment of a permanent Synodal Council.

“As Catholics, we live in a hierarchical, sacramental Church,” he stressed. “This is not simply a question of organization, but a question of the very nature of the Church. And this is the basis on which we must walk a common Synodal Path.”

“In this Church, the bishop has ultimate decision-making authority for his diocese, which is conferred on him by Christ himself. In this respect, I find it difficult to accept the idea of being part of a body in which 27 diocesan bishops, 27 members of the ZdK, and another 27 members who have yet to be elected deliberate and decide together. And that is ultimately what it is all about, even if attempts are made to describe it in other terms.”

According to an Italian journalist and Vatican insider, Nico Spuntoni, the Holy See is concerned that a Synodal Council that gives authority reserved for bishops to the laity could lead to a schism of large parts of the German Church.

lifesitenews