Macron Threatens US With “Unprecedented” Consequences If It Moves on Greenland

France’s lame duck, globalist President Emmanuel Macron has issue a ‘sharp warning’ over Washington’s renewed push to bring Greenland under US control, claiming the idea a direct threat to European sovereignty.

Remarks from Macron, widely despised in France and hardly taken seriously abroad, reflect growing unease in Europe over how utterly dependent the continent has become on American military power—and how little leverage it has when Europe’s interests diverge from US interests.

Macron told his cabinet that any violation of a European ally’s sovereignty would trigger consequences without precedent. France, he said, would stand in full solidarity with Denmark, even as the episode exposes Europe’s strategic weakness.

The warning came in response to President Donald Trump’s insistence that US control of Greenland is “vital” to American national security. Trump has framed the Arctic island as essential to his planned Golden Dome missile defense system.

According to Trump, Greenland’s location is indispensable to countering Russia and China in the Arctic. He has argued that NATO itself would be stronger if the island were directly under US authority rather than Danish sovereignty.

That argument has unsettled European capitals, not least because it lays bare an uncomfortable truth. When Europe relies on Washington for defense, Washington sets the terms.

Macron’s language was unusually blunt, suggesting, perhaps, that Paris sees this as more than diplomatic theater. Critics, of which there is no shortage, however, note that France and the EU lack credible military autonomy to back up their rhetoric.

The European Commission, the EU’s executive body, echoed Macron’s concerns, with its president emphasizing that Greenland has a close relationship with the EU. Brussels insisted that Greenlanders can count on European support, though what that support entails remains unclear.

Behind the statements lies a deeper anxiety about Europe’s role in its own defense. For decades, EU governments have deferred hard security questions to the United States while investing political capital in regulation, social welfare for illegal migrants, climate policy, and other left-liberal globalist ideological projects.

Trump’s posture has undeniably forced those contradictions into the open. If the US decides an action is necessary for its security, Europe appears to have little capacity to resist beyond diplomatic protest.

Danish officials have sought to calm tensions by traveling to Washington for talks with senior US officials. Copenhagen insists it is boosting its military presence in Greenland and remains committed to NATO obligations.

Denmark’s defense minister has emphasized ongoing discussions about expanding NATO’s Arctic footprint. That, too, highlights Europe’s dependence: even reinforcement comes through NATO, not European command.

Trump, however, has dismissed half-measures, warning that if NATO does not act decisively, rival powers will fill the vacuum.

Macron’s threats come after last month’s Danish intelligence assessment that, for the first time, cast the United States as a potential security concern, reflecting European elites’ unease with an administration in Washington that is once again unapologetically asserting its national interests.

Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen, a social democrat, has warned that NATO would collapse if the United States were ever to move militarily against the Arctic territory.

Russia and China, meanwhile, have increased Arctic activity. Still, the situation highlights how strategic geography is once again driving great-power politics.

Macron’s call for solidarity may resonate domestically, but it does not resolve the structural problem. Europe cannot demand sovereignty while remaining militarily dependent.

thegatewaypundit

Criticise Starmer, Lose Your Visa? UK Blocks Eva Vlaardingerbroek

Eva Vlaardingerbroek
Gage Skidmore from Surprise, AZ, United States of America, CC BY-SA 2.0, via Wikimedia Commons

The British government has revoked the travel authorisation of Eva Vlaardingerbroek, a Dutch conservative political commentator, prompting fresh accusations that the UK is cracking down on free speech and dissenting voices.

Vlaardingerbroek revealed on X on Wednesday, January 14th, that her electronic travel authorisation (ETA) had been withdrawn, preventing her from travelling to the UK without a visa.

Sharing an official notification from the British authorities, she wrote: “Holy sh*t. I’ve been banned from traveling to the UK. They revoked my ETA.” The notice stated: “Your presence in the UK is not considered to be conducive to the public good.”

According to the document, the decision took effect on January 13th and cannot be appealed.

Vlaardingerbroek drew a direct link between the decision and her recent criticism of Prime Minister Keir Starmer. “Three days after posting this about Starmer,” she added, referring to a tweet published on January 9th in which she accused the Labour leader of hypocrisy over online regulation.

In that post, she wrote: “Keir Starmer wants to crack down on X under the pretense of ‘women’s safety,’ whilst he’s the one allowing the ongoing rape and killing of British girls by migrant rape gangs. Evil, despicable man.”

The move seems to be yet more evidence of an increasingly hostile environment for free speech.

British political commentator Matt Goodwin reacted on X by writing:

Wow. The UK will not ban Muslim Brotherhood, will not ban Iranian Revolutionary Guard, will not stop Egyptian bomb-makers, ISIS sympathisers, and Iranian terrorists crossing in the small boats … but will ban conservative influencers!

Vlaardingerbroek, who is known for opposing illegal immigration and supporting European farmers affected by green policies, is the latest high-profile figure to be punished for expressing her views.

Last September, Irish comedy writer Graham Linehan was detained at Heathrow airport over gender-critical posts. Linehan said he had been “treated like a terrorist for speaking [his] mind on social media” and described Britain as a “dystopian clown show.”

The case sparked widespread condemnation, with figures including J.K. Rowling and Elon Musk accusing Britain of becoming a “police state”, while Reform UK leader Nigel Farage warned of “a war on freedom in the UK.”

The controversy comes amid wider concerns about Labour’s plans to tighten control over online platforms, including threats to ban X and demands for access to encrypted messages.

europeanconservative

Britons Now Watch More YouTube Than BBC, Yet Government Persists With Mandatory ‘TV Tax’

Lense View – Google Maps

YouTube has more viewers than all BBC channels combined, industry figures reveal, yet Britain’s TV tax — even payable by those who don’t watch the BBC — seems unlikely to be abolished.

51.9 million people watched Google-owned video platform YouTube in December, fractionally more than the 50.8 million who watched all BBC output, the Broadcasters Audience Research Board (Barb) has found. Being overtaken by free-choice internet watching in December is particularly damning for the BBC, given it is traditionally the peak television-watching month and when the big broadcasters release some of their most premium content.

The Daily Telegraph notes YouTube had already overtaken Britain’s second broadcaster, ITV, the previous year, and that the BBC itself challenged these latest figures, offering its own spin on events. Complaining that Barb — for decades the standard for measuring television viewing in the UK and the national equivalent of Nielsen Ratings — counts short-form video watching as short as three minutes in its data, the state-backed broadcaster said that by only counting shows longer than 15 minutes, “the BBC continues to lead the way”.

Satisfied with its own performance or not, the increasing move away from the BBC’s content and the fall in the number of households feeling obliged to pay the legally enforced Licence Fee levied by the government that funds it come as the renegotiation of its charter looms. Governing what the BBC does and how it is funded, the present charter expires at the end of 2027, and will see greater pressure than ever to rethink the Corporation’s income.

Already due to be price-hiked again to £181 this year, the move away from the BBC’s traditional television content could give the UK’s present left-wing government the pretext it needs to transform the licence fee, known as the TV tax, yet again. First created as a radio licence in the 1920s, it was remodelled post-war into a Television Licence in 1946 as television began to take over.

The process to turn it into an internet licence is already underway, with Britons liable to prosecution if they stream certain content online — like some live television, even if it isn’t BBC television — without a licence. A more overt internet licence has long been discussed to improve falling uptake and revenue.

Non-payment of the TV Licence is one of the largest single sources of court cases in the UK, with over a thousand people a week rushed through conveyor-belt ‘SJP’ courts and fined. In some cases, dedicated refuseniks are even jailed over it.

While Britain’s previous Conservative government said it wanted to abolish the Licence, the new Labour government, which replaced it last year, has made clear it wishes to cling to the idea.

breitbart

Poland’s Trump-Allied President Nawrocki Vetoes EU’s Infamous ‘Digital Services Act’ – Brussels Moves To Impose Multimillion Euro Fines

From May 2025: Polish President Nawrocki visits Donald J. Trump in the oval office – Wiki Commons, The White House, PD US Government

The EU keeps trampling on European States’ sovereignty.

Poland lives a power struggle between the Liberal-Globalist coalition led by Euro-fanatic Donald Tusk and the right-wing President – and Donald J. Trump ally – Karol Nawrocki.

A clash between these political forces is complicated by the European Union’s meddling in their internal legislation.

Now, the veto by Nawrocki of the EU’s infamous ‘social media law’ puts the country at risk of multimillion euro fines from Globalist Brussels.

Politico reported:

“President Karol Nawrocki is holding up a bill that would implement the EU’s Digital Services Act, a tech law that allows regulators to police how social media firms moderate content.

Nawrocki, an ally of U.S. President Donald Trump, said in a statement that the law would ‘give control of content on the internet to officials subordinate to the government, not to independent courts’.”

“Deputy Digital Minister Dariusz Standerski said in a TV interview that, ‘since the president decided to veto this law, I’m assuming he is also willing to have these costs [of a potential fine] charged to the budget of the President’s Office’.”

Nawrocki (pictured) is in a struggle against Eurofanatic PM Tusk – Wiki Commons,Marsilar, CC-BY-SA-4.0

The European Commission would not comment ‘on national legislative procedures’, but added that the Digital Services Act will allow users in Poland ‘to benefit from the same DSA rights’.

“’This is why we have an ongoing infringement procedure against Poland’ for its ‘failure to designate and empower” a responsible authority, the statement said’.”

Female prisoners are now being punished for reporting rapes by ‘transgender’ men

AI generator

In a searing report for The Hill, investigative journalist and mental health professional Forest Romm detailed the horror show unfolding in American women’s prisons, where trans-identifying “violent male inmates have their way” with female inmates who cannot escape. Romm detailed the state of affairs in MCI-Framingham, the state women’s prison in Massachusetts.

Since the 2018 Criminal Justice Reform Act came into effect, male convicts who identify as transgender are being sent to MCI-Framingham, and extensive interviews with female inmates revealed that the prison has become “a haven for sexual predators who pretend to be transgender.” Romm lists the following male inmates who have been sent to MCI-Framingham since 2018 and emphasized that this list is merely a small sampling:

One trans-identified inmate held at Framingham is Kenneth Hunt, who now goes by “Katheena.” He was convicted of sexually assaulting and murdering two women – one of them his own cousin – in a crime whose details are simply too grisly to recount here.

Charles “Charlese” Horton, previously convicted of kidnapping and assaulting a child, was arrested again in 2019 on multiple charges, including repeatedly abducting and raping a 14-year-old at gunpoint. This time facing prison, he declared a transgender identity and, voila, was sent to MCI-Framingham in July 2025.

Robert “Michelle” Kosilek is serving a life sentence for nearly decapitating his wife with a piano wire before stripping and abandoning her body in a shopping-mall parking lot.

Wayne “Veronica” Raymond, incarcerated for life for raping children, was permitted to live among the women at MCI-Framingham despite being denied parole six times for failing to “demonstrate a level of rehabilitation” making him “compatible with the welfare of society.”

Justin “Taylor” Shine pleaded guilty to kidnapping and assualt. He bound and assaulted a six-year-old girl, who escaped only when police knocked on his door.

Many of these convicts identified as transgender merely to get sent to a women’s prison; Romm says that after arriving at MCI-Framingham, many “discontinued the cross-sex hormone treatment” they had started taking to persuade authorities that they were authentically transgender. “The female inmates I interviewed said that nearly all of them retain intact male genitalia,” Romm noted. In any case, in Massachusetts men can simply “self-identify” as women to receive formal recognition of that new identity.

Once safely incarcerated in a female prison, Romm reported, “male inmates learn to frame their demands as discrimination claims, guided by a well-resourced network of legal advocates. Sensitive to litigation risk, prison administrators comply, even extending preferential treatment.”

Female inmates are “required” to share communal showers with male prisoners; female prison staff are also legally required to perform strip searches of male convicts, who frequently demand they be done by officers with the same “gender identity.” Even more brutal is the predictable sexual assaults that have occurred as a result, with female inmates often declining to speak out for fear that they will be punished for it. Romm writes:

Most women I interviewed said prison officials routinely minimize sexual-assault allegations against trans-identified inmates, while female accusers are dismissed, discredited, or punished. Some alleged victims gave me detailed written statements supporting their accounts.

One woman incarcerated at MCI-Framingham told me she was raped by a male prisoner in November, and that authorities responded to her complaint by placing her in restrictive housing. She is now confined to a locked cell and permitted to leave only once per day, briefly, to shower.

“It feels like I’m being punished for speaking up,” she said. “They are treating me as if I should have kept my mouth shut – as if it’s my fault, or as though I should have defended myself.”

Despite this, there is no record of any trans-identifying convicts being transferred out of female prisons in the state, and Romm noted that the Massachusetts Department of Corrections did not respond to requests for comment and did not answer any submitted questions.

Romm’s report is horrifying, but not surprising. We have covered many similar stories over the past decade at LifeSiteNews. In Illinois, a female inmate was raped by a trans-identifying convict; when she spoke out, the man’s lawyer accused her of transphobia. A similar situation occurred in Washington. Revelations of sexual assault perpetrated by trans-identifying men in female prisons have become routine wherever transgender policies have taken effect.

Any sane person immediately understands that sending convicted male sex offenders to female prisons with vulnerable populations will result in the victimization of female inmates. Despite that, Democrat lawmakers actively work to block the removal of these dangerous men. As Forest Romm put it: “Under the banner of progress, child rapists, serial sex-offenders, and wife-killers can now secure access to one of our most vulnerable populations – female prisoners – by uttering five magic words: ‘I identify as a woman.’”

lifesitenews

EU bans ‘biased’ words like ‘Englishmen’ and ‘lady’ in major woke drive

A new EU-funded guide has placed words such as “motherly,” “Englishman,” “maiden name” and “masterpiece” on a banned list.

The 38-page document aims to promote gender-neutral language across Europe – and offers alternative phrases for each prohibited word.

It targets terms deemed “biased, discriminatory or demeaning” by suggesting one sex is the standard.

“Loving” or “nurturing” should replace “motherly,” according to the recommendations.

“Native tongue” is preferred over “mother tongue”, while Europeans are told to say “the English” rather than “Englishmen”.

Those seeking a neutral option for “maiden name” are directed to use “birth name.”

Even the term “masterpiece” has been banned in favour “work of genius.”

The document, titled “Guidelines for the use of language as a driver of equality and inclusivity,” was produced by UN Women with EU funding.

“Using gender-fair and inclusive language helps reduce gender stereotyping, promotes social change, and contributes to achieving gender equality,” the guidance states.

It warns that stereotyping and casual sexism create conditions where women face diminished status and limited opportunities.

The document argues such behaviour affects women across professional, personal and digital spaces.

“The internet has provided a new dimension for the expression and transmission of sexism,” it adds.

Etymologists have criticised the approach, warning it would erase the historical origins of words like “masterpiece.”

And top Tory Chris Philp weighed in, too.

“We’ve all had enough of this politically correct nonsense,” he said.

“With Russia menacing Europe’s borders, a cost-of-living crisis, floods of illegal immigrants entering Europe and the potential collapse of the regime in Iran, the last thing anyone needs to worry about is banning these long-standing phrases,” Mr Philp added.

“We should keep our language and keep our culture and not have faceless bureaucrats interfering. This is another reason why going back into the orbit of the EU is a bad idea.”

The guidance advises against using “female” and “male” when referring to people, arguing these terms reduce individuals to biological characteristics.

“Woman” and “man” are the correct terms to indicate personhood, the document states.

It recommends phrases such as “women farmers” rather than “female farmers” and “men in parliament” instead of “male parliamentarians.”

Gender-neutral job titles are also encouraged, with “chair” replacing “chairman” and “police officer” preferred to “policeman.”

gbnews

Sweden: Eritrean migrant attacked three people at random on the street, telling police he could not control urges to hurt others

A 28-year-old Eritrean man who indiscriminately targeted three people in the street, including an elderly woman, told Swedish police that he attacked his victims because he sometimes had uncontrollable thoughts and urges to hurt others, a court in Eskilstuna has heard.

The migrant, Ahmed Mohammed Omar Salim, is on trial for a series of assaults in the Skiftinge district of Eskilstuna. He has confessed to the attacks, which prosecutors say were carried out without provocation, and a verdict is expected next month following a trial held at Eskilstuna District Court.

According to court documents and testimony cited by Samnytt, the first incident took place on June 19 last year, when Salim kicked a man who was cycling with his children. Police were called, questioned Salim at the scene, and released him. In a later interview conducted with an interpreter, Salim admitted that he “was out for a walk to get some fresh air and wasn’t feeling well mentally, and that’s when it happened.”

The second attack occurred on Dec. 7 and targeted a 75-year-old woman who was waiting for a bus. Salim kicked her on the knee, causing her to fall forward and sustain a head injury that left a hole in her forehead and substantial blood spatter on the sidewalk. She was taken to hospital by ambulance and required several stitches. Since the assault, the woman has reportedly become anxious and constantly looks around when she is outside.

Just one day later, despite increased police presence in the area, officers witnessed Salim pass a woman in the street moments before hearing her cry out. When they looked back, the 42-year-old victim was on the ground. Salim attempted to flee but was arrested shortly afterward. Police established that he had kicked the woman in the stomach.

During questioning after his arrest, Salim told police, “I don’t want to say anything. Sometimes I get sick when I walk next to people, and something comes to my head and I can’t control myself.”

Salim admits carrying out all three attacks but denies intent. The charges include two counts of assault and one count of minor assault. All three victims are plaintiffs in the case.

While in custody, Salim underwent an initial psychiatric assessment and will now be subjected to a full forensic psychiatric examination. Under Swedish law, a finding that he suffered from a serious mental disorder at the time of the offenses would preclude a prison sentence.

The defendant reportedly arrived in Sweden back in 2018 — it is unclear whether he claimed asylum, but he told the court he had come to work. He has, however, been receiving sick pay most recently for stress and insomnia.

rmx

Fast-food giant KFC to offer 24 halal-only restaurants in France

KFC – Google Maps

US fast-food chain KFC has announced that 24 of its restaurants in France will switch to offering exclusively halal-certified chicken from January 21.

This represents about 6 per cent of the chain’s total network of 404 outlets across the country.

The move follows months of rumours circulating on social media about a broader shift to halal but KFC has confirmed it is a targeted adaptation rather than a company-wide change.

In a statement provided to several media outlets yesterday, including Le Figaro and Le Parisien, KFC France explained the decision as a response to market trends.

The company said it made the move “to accompany the evolution of the market and satisfy a growing demand from a portion of consumers”.

The chain emphasised its commitment to inclusivity: “At KFC France, we are keen to respond to the diversity of expectations of all our customers. Our ambition is to bring together the greatest number around our tables, in respect of everyone’s choices and diversity.”

It highlighted that it had introduced options for various dietary preferences in recent years, such as fish-based products and an expanded vegetarian range.

For the halal outlets, KFC will work exclusively with certified suppliers to ensure compliance with halal standards.

Customers will be able to identify the specific restaurants through clear signage in-store and on the official KFC website and app.

The full list of the 24 locations is expected to be published on the site later in January, with some regional media outlets reporting suspected locations offering halal fare. They included three in the Nord department (Maubeuge, Lille-Roubaix on boulevard Gambetta, and Tourcoing) and others including one in Perpignan.

This is not the first fast-food chain to take such a step in France.

Competitors such as Quick have offered fully halal menus in many outlets since 2021, while Five Guys converted several of its French restaurants to halal-only in recent months. Popeyes has followed a similar path in select locations.

These changes often reflect demographic demand in urban areas with significant Muslim populations, helping to tap into a growing segment of the fast-food market.

KFC stressed that the vast majority of its French restaurants will continue to serve non-halal chicken as before, maintaining its “universal” offering.

The announcement has sparked mixed reactions, with some welcoming greater choice and others debating the implications for the chain’s traditional model.

brusselssignal