A Cambridge University-hosted project run by Ahmed promotes an “Islamic curriculum”
Isaac Newton. James Maxwell. Jason Arday. Farah Ahmed.
Which of these is not like the other? Cambridge has had better years. These days it’s a grim DEI joke aimed at achieving national suicide. This of course makes it no different than Harvard, Columbia or Yale, but Europe and the UK are still ahead of the Yanks.
Cambridge University’s education faculty – former home of Jason Arday – has appointed as assistant research professor a woman who wrote that Muslims should study engineering and computers “to produce advanced weaponry for Jihad in order that the deen [Islam] may dominate over all other deens.”
That means all other religions, cultures and civilizations.
Ahmed co-wrote a chapter calling for a Caliphate and an Islamic educational system in which “nothing will be contained within the curriculum that contradicts with Islam, such as the teaching of the ideas of freedom, nationalism, democracy or evolution in a positive light.”
“Nor can there be any schools established on any other religion, sect or race… Even the non-Muslims need to be educated under the educational curriculum of Islam… by pushing them to think about the correct belief in life.”
…a Cambridge University-hosted project run by Ahmed promotes an “Islamic curriculum” which tells 12-year-olds that Hamas is an “excuse that Israel uses to justify its attacks on the Gaza Strip”, calls the civilian hostages taken by the terror group on October 7 “prisoners of war” and publishes in pupils’ course material a map of the region from which Israel has been erased.
Universities have gone from being centers of knowledges to centers of enemy operations aimed at our own destruction.
Either we deconstruct and fundamentally reconstruct higher education or this is our future.
Third-worldism is a mental illness, and I can prove it—at least, if the word of progressive governments is to be trusted. (Stay with me, we’ve got them in a catch-22 of their own making.) The thought came to me today as I read another horrific near-murder of a mother and her son, this time in Melbourne, Australia. Before I continue, both parents and child are expected to survive.
Anyway, in the last day or so, a mother was reportedly standing with her three children on a Melbourne sidewalk, when a random man came up and punched her little 10-year-old boy, somewhere in the upper body. At this point the mother intervened, and the man walked away for a moment, but then quickly turned around, grabbed her, put in her a headlock, and started viciously stabbing her with a pair of scissors. Thank God for the masculine men in the area who immediately came to the woman’s aid and wrestled the psycho to the ground, until he could be arrested by law enforcement.
The suspect, a black migrant type, can be seen being hauled off by cops here:
🚨BREAKING: In Melbourne, Australia a 10 year old boy was punched by a migrant in the street, the man then grabbed his mother in a headlock before repeatedly stabbing her while her son watched in terror
You already know how this is going to go: the scissor-wielding man, who was already “known to authorities” in multiple jurisdictions and who had “a history of family violence and assault charges,” was experiencing “mental health” issues before his rampage. Here’s this, from a report at The Guardian:
Police said there was ‘nothing to suggest there was any motivation’ behind the incident and suspected it may have occurred during a mental health episode.
Other outlets are reporting the would-be killer as a “Sunshine West” man, intimating he’s Australian, but they always do that to hide foreign origins. Sure, he might be currently residing in Sunshine West, wherever that is, but he’s clearly an African, maybe Haitian, or possibly even Papua New Guinean (given the relatively close distance between the two nations). And, given the fact that multiple local outlets (at least three) refused to show his face or identify him and his origin, it’s a given he’s a third-world migrant.
Now, this happens frequently, close to what seems a daily basis: A third world migrant randomly attacks a Westerner with a knife, a machete, or in this case scissors, and the local progressive governments, in an effort to detract from the obvious, chalk it up to “mental illness.”
If we are to believe them, that it’s always (and that’s not hyperbole) a “mental health episode” with these individuals, then we can equate third worldism (or is it Islam?) to being a mental illness. We can spot a pattern when we see one. When someone other than a third-worlder commits a crime like this—which I honestly can’t even think of a single instance in recent history—it’s an act of terrorism. It works a little something like this:
So progressives, should we take you at your word and assessments, that third worldism is a mental illness? Or, do we maybe want to acknowledge that third world culture is completely incompatible with the West?
As the Alternative for Germany (AfD) continues to lead the polls in Germany, the establishment parties and left-wing NGO network are in full panic mode. Now, German Soros NGO “Campact” has issued a blacklist of “right-wing” news sites, podcasters, and YouTubers, and threatened advertisers unless they join their boycott.
The way it looks now, history will be made in the East German state of Saxony-Anhalt on Sept. 6 when voters elect a new state assembly. The right-wing AfD party is leading the polls at 43% with their extremely likable and personable candidate Ulrich Siegmund, who gathered thousands of supporters over the weekend in a rock-concert style atmosphere.
This is Ulrich Siegmund, a German patriot of @AfD. He is widely supported by Germans, and in two weeks, he could win in Saxony-Anhalt and change course of history in Germany and Europe. We support him; you can too, if you wish. Remember, only AfD can save Germany and Europe. pic.twitter.com/XoqKz43TE2
If the AfD wins an absolute majority in Saxony-Anhalt in two weeks and Ulrich Siegmund becomes the first AfD state governor, it will mark a historic shift in European politics. Not only will the AfD be able to demonstrate whether they can govern a state effectively, but they will also be able to ditch the state broadcast treaty that underlies the German BBC-style public broadcasting network. Left-wing German pubwebs ARD and ZDF have long abandoned any pretense of objective reporting and campaign outright against the largest opposition party, the AfD.
Over the weekend, charming man-of-the-people Ulrich Siegmund was able to completely disarm ZDF TV “comedian” Fabian Köhler, who tried to frame him with asinine “Gotcha” questions – such as asking if Siegmund “prefers the Hitler Youth anthem to the East German communist anthem?”, or if he would “wait for a blonde, blue-eyed doctor” if he had a heart attack.
“Are you serious? Is this supposed to be funny?” Siegmund roasted the left-wing comedian to the jeers of his supporters and voters. This exchange was widely distributed on X by alternative media channels, backfiring completely and making the leftie reporter look like the fool he is.
So now the lead Soros-funded NGO “Campact” (fashioned after Podesta/Soros-funded “MoveOn”) has unleashed a boycott campaign against those pesky alternative media channels, calling for advertisers to boycott a list of 62 successful channels it views as “far-right”. The evidence is usually only a link to an AfD-related report or a left-wing Antifa hit piece.
The list published by Politico sister newspaper “Welt” includes virtually all major alternative media sites: NIUS, ApolloNews, Kontrafunk radio, Epoch Times Germany, Tichys Einblick, Swiss Weltwoche, as well as prominent AfD politicians including Alice Weidel, Ulrich Siegmund, Beatrix von Storch, Maximilian Krah, Petr Bystron, and Martin Sichert, a Bundestag delegate who is being excluded from running for office in Lower Saxony on Sept. 13 due to spurious allegations of extremism.
Establishment parties have unleashed a campaign to exclude at least 4 AfD candidates from running in local elections in Lower Saxony, home of Volkswagen (The Gateway Pundit reported.) Yesterday, the local administrative court in Wilhelmshaven rejected an emergency stay on the ban of AfD mayoral candidate Thorsten Morisse. This is in addition to constant threats of violence AfD candidates face from masked “Anti”-Fascist street militias, plus debanking, deplatforming, canceling, loss of jobs and livelihood, and character assassination via mainstream media hit pieces.
In August, the vice-chair of the German police union GdP Sven Hüber warned that police may have to “prepare to restore constitutional order” by declaring a “state of emergency” in Saxony-Anhalt should the wrong party win: A clear call to “insurrection”.
Then it was revealed that Hüber is a former East German border patrol commander and Communist “political officer” accused of ordering the abuse of dissidents and refugees before the Fall of the Wall in 1989.
Campact reports it has put pressure on 90 advertisers to join the boycott, of which 30 companies have already agreed to join the blacklist of patriotic media.
The companies joining the boycott include major corporations which do business in the United States: Procter & Gamble, discount retailer ALDI, and French insurance corp. AXA (US: Equitable Insurance Co.), DEVK Insurance Corp, US jobs website Indeed, and “Resident Evil” producer Constantin Film. The Gateway Pundit readers are encouraged to politely inform these companies that Free Speech is not optional in the United States of America and consider taking their business elsewhere.
“Campact” received $300,000 from George Soros’ Open Society Foundation 2021, including $150,000 for the censorship NGO “HateAid”, of which it owns 50% of. Its censorship subsidiary “HateAid” works closely with the German federal government and received €2,516,218.80 in the years 2021-2023 from the Justice Ministry and Family Ministry.
Campact insists that it is not federally funded, but its subsidiary HateAid acknowledges it receives 21.4 % of its funding from the German government (2024). HateAid has been designated a “Trusted Flagger” by the German federal network agency Bundesnetzagentur, and HateAid Co-GM Josefine Ballon sits on the Bundesnetzagentur advisory board. On Dec 23, 2025, the US State Department imposed sanctions on HateAid Co-GMs Anna-Lena von Hodenberg and Josefine Ballon.
Since Open Society explicitly channels funding to HateAid via Campact, it seems hard to argue that the organizations are not co-funded, meaning the German federal government is funding an NGO complex that is trying to influence elections, censor free speech online and boycott conservative media.
“The legacy parties and their taxpayer-funded NGO network are panicking ahead of two major state elections in eastern Germany, where the AfD is the most popular party and may even assume the State government,” AfD vice-chair in the Bundestag Beatrix von Storch told The Gateway Pundit.
“As with Donald Trump’s elections, they will resort to all sorts of underhanded machinations to prevent the voters from getting what they want. They say they are afraid for Democracy, but they are actually afraid of Democracy. Fortunately, the German voters have seen through this charade, and there’s nothing they can do to stop the people from getting their way.”
From Left: Skeggi Hildof Katrinssonr, Andrew Kennedy, and Szeth Aslan Magnus. All photos courtesy of the WADOC.
Three depraved criminals housed in a Washington state prison are suing the Department of Corrections for human rights violations after they say they were deprived of adequate “gender affirming” care and treatment. Reduxx can name the inmates involved in the suit as Michael R. Caldwell, who raped two children, Hunter S. Christian, who raped multiple dogs, and Andrew S. Kennedy, who murdered an infant.
In the men’s original 324-page complaint, which was filed in December of 2025, the three men separately outline their grievances against the state’s Department of Corrections, and attempt to leverage the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) to make their case that the denial of “gender affirming” care and treatment is unlawful, using a recent precedent set by Autumn Cordellione, another transgender inmate convicted of murdering a baby who successfully argued that the state of Indiana should have to pay for his “gender affirming” care.
The complaint, obtained by Reduxx, is opened by Caldwell, who now goes by the name Skeggi Hildof Katrinssonr or “Hildi.” Caldwell was convicted in 2014 of raping two young girls trusted to his care, and was handed a 26.5 year sentence for the crimes. During the trial, it was revealed that he had initially blamed one of the children for seducing him and provoking the sexual abuse.
Michael Caldwell, who now goes by the name Skeggi Hildof Katrinssonr. Photo courtesy of the Washington Department of Corrections.
In his list of complaints, Caldwell reveals that his facility has a personal laser hair removal device for transgender inmates to use, and that the inmates were allowed to use the device in a private room within the medical clinic once or twice per week. But in 2024, the clinic discontinued access to the private room, and told transgender inmates they would have to use the device in their own cell. Caldwell deems this unacceptable, writing: “My cell door has a 34×34 [inch] window where any male inmate or officer can see inside my cell and watch me use the device on my maturing female body.”
Caldwell refers to this lack of privacy as “sex discrimination,” and says his proposed remedy – which was to use the device in the shower area – was rejected or ignored.
Caldwell goes on to claim that not being able to use the device in a private area constitutes the Department of Corrections delaying or depriving him of “prescribed medical treatment,” emphasizing that his “gender dysphoria” is impacting his mental health and ability to perform his daily errands.
“I seclude myself from having to associate with anyone,” Caldwell complains. “My mental health has regressed, elevating anxiety, depression, skipping meal times, no appetite, becoming overwhelmed in my daily activities where I at times cry … The Defendants expect me to consent to relinquish my right to privacy. I will not consent to any relinquishment of my Fundamental Rights.”
In another complaint, Caldwell states that he was hired at the correctional textile shop, where inmates are expected to wear a specific uniform, and that not being provided a separate changing room from the other male inmates represented a breach of his constitutional rights.
“This process of men and trans-women stripping in the same area together is undignified, sex discrimination, practicing conversion tactics, and shocks the social conscience. The lack of any protocol fosters discrimination across the board.”
Caldwell says he forfeited his job at the shop as a result of the changing room policy, in order to “protect” his “mental health and well-being.” He then goes on to outline additional complaints, including alleged violations of his First Amendment rights.
The complaint continues with the declaration of Hunter S. Christian, who changed his name to Szeth Aslan Magnus. Christian identifies as “non-binary” and “intersex,” and declares he/him and they/them pronouns in the document.
Hunter Scott Christian, also known as “Szeth Aslan Magnus.”
Christian was arrested in 2018 on charges related to bestiality and possessing child sexual abuse material. Christian raped at least three dogs, including a Rottweiler, an older Chihuahua mix, and a black Labrador. He filmed the sexual acts and was found in possession of the videos, along with depictions of a minor engaged in sexually explicit conduct. In 2019, he was convicted on multiple felony charges, including 1st Degree Animal Cruelty With Sexual Motivation.
In his grievances, Christian claims that he was denied access to Minoxidil treatments for head hair growth because he had no diagnosis for gender dysphoria and no desire to start feminizing hormone therapy. Christian also claims he was denied access to low-dose testosterone, which he wanted to begin to address his shrinking testicle size.
Like with Caldwell, Christian also notes he was eventually given access to a personal laser hair removal device for his body, but refused to use it due to a lack of privacy in his cell.
“I have suffered not only setbacks in my prescribed treatment plan, but reversal of effects of the prior treatments, mental anguish, exacerbation of depression, anxiety, PTSD, and a loss of the forward momentum in maintaining the delicate balance between my masculine and feminine sides …” Christian wrote in his declaration.
The final complainant in the case is Andrew Steven Kennedy. Curiously, Kennedy identifies himself as “non-binary” and “two-spirit.” Two-spirit is an identity associated with some of the Indigenous peoples of Canada and the United States, but there is no evidence Kennedy himself is Indigenous. Kennedy also identifies as “intersex.”
Kennedy is serving a sentence of 31 years for the murder of an 11-month-old relative for whom he was the primary caregiver. According to the Washington Supreme Court’s account, the infant girl suffered repeated abuse and torture while in his care, including episodes in which Kennedy intentionally caused her to stop breathing, a broken arm, bruising, and multiple head injuries.
Andrew Kennedy. Photo courtesy of the Washington Department of Corrections.
The child ultimately died of a head injury, and Kennedy was charged and subsequently convicted of homicide by abuse in 2007. The details of the case were so horrific that the court imposed an “extraordinary” sentence above the standard sentencing range.
In his declaration, Kennedy claims to have been repeatedly misgendered by a medical specialist at his facility, with the doctor treating him “as a cisgender man” on the basis of his overtly masculine appearance before denying him access to the “gender affirming” care he was requesting.
Kennedy says that at one point, he raised the possibility of being intersex and requested DNA/blood testing to investigate that possibility, but that a medical care provider within the facility refused. That same provider also allegedly told Kennedy that he was not eligible for “gender affirming” care because he had no desire to undergo physical or hormonal interventions. Kennedy characterizes this denial as a violation of his human rights and as contributing to a deterioration of his mental health.
Kennedy ends his declaration with an appeal to his “divine rights.”
“I see my curves and hips as a gift from the Goddesses and my masculine traits as a gift from the Gods. I was, from birth, granted the boon of seeing feminine and masculine within myself, yet too blind and misled to truly see them,” Kennedy writes.
From Kennedy’s declaration.
“I am being told I must either be a man or woman and identifying as two-spirited/nonbinary/intersex is not an option that is allowed. This immoral disregard for my Divine Rights granted to me by my Creators, to be who and what I am, shows blatant disregard for the law, for my authenticity, for my sovereignty, and to my Divine Rights to be me.”
All three men are currently housed at the Coyote Ridge Correctional Facility, a medium security men’s prison.
In January, the court identified a number of issues with the original complaint and invited the three men to re-file. They did so in June, expanding their claims and listing specific remedies including concrete orders concerning gender-affirming-care policy, psychological evaluation, electrolysis, body-contouring services, and related “gender affirming” treatment, as well as significant monetary compensation.
But in an August 11 order, U.S. Magistrate Judge S. Kate Vaughan said the amended complaint still presented significant problems.
The judge said the amended pleading effectively contains three separate sets of claims. Although the plaintiffs raised some common legal issues, each plaintiff has different factual allegations and individual claims that would require separate evidence and analysis. The court said allowing all three to proceed in a single case could create “delay and confusion.”
The court therefore ordered the plaintiffs to show cause as to why Christian and Kennedy should not be dismissed from the lawsuit without prejudice, allowing them to pursue their claims in separate civil actions.
The judge also criticized the substance and organization of the amended complaint, finding that it does not provide the “short and plain statement” required by federal rules. According to the order, the pleading contains lengthy and confusing descriptions, vague and conclusory allegations, extensive legal argument and case citations, but too few clear and specific facts connecting individual defendants to the alleged violations.
The court has not ruled on the merits of the men’s underlying allegations. Instead, the current dispute concerns whether the claims have been properly pleaded and whether they can proceed together in the same lawsuit.
Illustration: The inner-German border between Brome-Zicherie and Parsau-Kaiserwinkel. – A commemorative plaque for Kurt Lichtenstein bearing the inscription: “Here, on 12 October 1961, a German was treacherously murdered by Germans on Ulbricht’s orders.”Bundesarchiv, Bild 175-P05-00002-0001 / CC-BY-SA 3.0
Sven Hüber, deputy federal chairman of Germany’s largest police union, the Gewerkschaft der Polizei (GdP), chairman of the Federal Police’s main staff council and a staunch critic of Alternative for Germany (AfD), has faced serious new allegations over his time as a political officer in the East German border troops.
According to exclusive reporting by Apollo News published on August 25, 2026, a contemporary witness, Axel Krause, has given a sworn statement accusing Hüber of personally mistreating a would-be escapee from the German Democratic Republic (GDR) and of helping to enforce the shoot-to-kill order along the inner-German border in the late 1980s.
The outlet cites files of the Ministry for State Security (Stasi) and the witness’s detailed account of an incident involving a Mauerflüchtling (wall refugee). Hüber rejects the allegations.
Hüber, born in 1964 in Görlitz, eastern Germany, trained at the border troops’ “Rosa Luxemburg” officer school in Suhl and served from 1987 until the fall of the Wall in Border Regiment 33 in Berlin-Treptow, first as political officer and deputy company commander, later as youth instructor.
His role involved the political indoctrination of conscripts.
According to the sworn eyewitness account published by Apollo News, Hüber is alleged to have forced a pistol into the mouth of a captured wall refugee who was lying restrained on the ground, causing the man to wet himself in terror.
The same witness states that Hüber then kicked the prisoner three times in the face as a Stasi transporter arrived to take him away.
In political instruction sessions he is further accused of telling soldiers that the word Vernichtung (annihilation) kept its validity after the standing border order was reworded in 1988 to drop it, and of publicly humiliating border soldiers who missed their shots.
The same regiment held the sector in which Chris Gueffroy, the last person killed at the Berlin Wall, was shot dead in February 1989.
Apollo News has reported that the regional court in Berlin found in two sets of proceedings that Hüber was neither directly nor indirectly connected to that killing, while holding that he could not disclaim a share of responsibility for sustaining the GDR border regime.
Hüber has long denied any personal involvement in shootings and has repeatedly gone to court to restrict public references to his GDR service.
Hüber continued his career after reunification in the Federal Border Police (now Federal Police) and rose to become one of the most influential figures in German police unionism. He has chaired the Federal Police main staff council since 2000 and has been a GdP deputy federal chairman since 2022. Aged 62, he is close to retirement.
Through his lawyer, Hüber has rejected the new allegations in a six-page written response to Apollo News.
The lawyer, though, prohibits quoting from the letter or “using it in any other way journalistically”.
Other outlets have also covered his East German past since the start of August 2026, particularly after he published an article urging police officers to prepare for possible resistance against an AfD-led government in Saxony-Anhalt.
In an article published in the GdP members’ magazine, Deutsche Polizei, in August 2026 (titled “Richtig Nein sagen”, or “Saying no properly”), he argued that police officers’ oath to the Basic Law (Grundgesetz), Germany’s constitution, makes support for the AfD incompatible with their duty.
He wrote that officers “cannot vote for, support or join a constitutionally hostile party” and coined the phrase “No-Go mit der AfD”. He also described a possible AfD win as a “Machtergreifung”, the term used for the Nazi seizure of power in 1933.
He went further, warning of a possible “internal state of emergency” under Article 91 of the Basic Law if an AfD-led government in a State such as Saxony-Anhalt were to undermine the constitutional order.
In that scenario, he said, readiness police from other States and the Federal Police must be prepared, on the instruction of the federal interior minister, to restore the constitutional order by police means. Saxony-Anhalt goes to the polls on September 6, 2026.
Several regional branches of the GdP, among them North Rhine-Westphalia, Bavaria, Baden-Württemberg, Berlin and Saxony-Anhalt, publicly distanced themselves from the wording and legal conclusions, stressing that the official oath does not remove officers’ right to vote and that the union should not engage in party-political instruction. Hüber’s own local group did the same.
The rival German Police Union (Deutsche Polizeigewerkschaft, DPolG) has declined to judge the internal GdP dispute, its federal chairman Heiko Teggatz telling t-online that officers were free to decide their own political engagement provided the oath and official neutrality were preserved.
GdP federal chairman Jochen Kopelke has defended Hüber and the union has acknowledged editing his Wikipedia entry during the dispute. The GdP, which has around 200,000 members, is affiliated to the German Trade Union Confederation (DGB).
During Social Democratic Party (SPD) politician Nancy Faeser’s time as federal interior minister, he was regarded as a close and influential interlocutor on Federal Police and personnel matters.
He has previously spoken out against measures that would expand the Federal Police’s role in deportations, telling taz in 2019 that “we are not the deportation police”.
At the heart of the European Union, Belgium exemplifies better than perhaps any other Western European country the extent to which political elites seem to almost relish the degree to which Europe is being Islamized.
In July 2026, Israel’s Channel 12 News aired a report warning that Hamas terrorists, including high-ranking members of the organization’s Al-Qassam Brigades, now live in Antwerp — some of whom, according to local Gazans opposed to Hamas, are receiving Belgian citizenship.
“Little Gaza,” as the neighborhood in northern Antwerp is called in the report, has a large population of Gazans from Khan Younis, a major Hamas stronghold. Hamas-linked residents there traffic in illegal narcotics, run shops and restaurants, and send the proceeds to Hamas in Gaza, according to the interviewed Gazans, who only dared speak anonymously out of fear of revenge from local Hamas supporters.
“You feel as if you are visiting Palestine”, one Arab said. The local baker, who sells only Gazan specialties, agreed that walking on that street was like “walking in Khan Younis.”
According to the Channel 12 report:
“In little Gaza in the heart of Antwerp you get the scent of the Strip, literally. From restaurants… to shops and supermarkets, most business owners come from Khan Younis. The names of the stores also reflect the character of the immigrants here: From ‘Haifa market’ on the way to ‘Rafah Market’, and, of course, ‘Al Quds….’
“Some people here in the street support Hamas, they are also from Gaza. Others say it’s a terrorist organization. But no one dares to say that out loud, because they know that this terrorist organization can get anybody through their people, who are also here…voices against Hamas are only a whisper in Gaza because of fear from the threats of the terrorist organization. But the strange thing is that they are also afraid here in Antwerp, in Belgium, in Europe…”
The journalist, an Israeli, asked a Gazan whether he personally knew anyone from Hamas living in Antwerp. The man responded:
“The man who investigated me when I was in Israel is in Antwerp…and now has a Belgian citizenship. He was even a leader in Hamas in the regiment of Din Al-Qassam… he collects money…. all these businesses they [Hamas] opened here. Donations are collected through banks. They have businesses here, they have drugs.”
“They send money to Hamas and support them,” said another local Gazan. He mentioned fundraisers for the children of Gaza as one way to drive donations.
“Europe should wake up. If they remain silent it will be destroyed from within. It is almost already destroyed. If Europe does not wake up and prosecute these people… these people are not only Hamas. These people are against freedom, against democracy, against secularism, they are against the basic principles of the country they live in.”
Belgian politicians, however, do not appear particularly bothered by this increasing political, cultural and demographic threat. After the report was issued, Belgian federal MP Sam van Rooy, who also serves as a representative in the Antwerp City Council for the Vlaams Belang party, requested a city council emergency session, but could not find enough votes to get one.
“This particularly worrying report shows that Hamas members and terrorists not only live in Antwerp and operate shops and restaurants, but also sponsor Hamas in Gaza and threaten opponents of Hamas,” They have no place in our city and must be tracked down, detained, and deported.”
No meeting was held; no other party found it necessary.
This indifference to the security of the local Christian and Jewish communities, the city and country at large, is particularly jarring after documentation exposed that Hamas was planning an October 7-style mass attack against Jewish and Israeli targets in Europe, scheduled to coincide with the second anniversary of the October 7, 2023 atrocities.
Already in February 2024, Belgium’s Minister of Justice Paul Van Tigchelt confirmed that Belgian authorities are fully cognizant of Hamas’ activities in the country. He implicitly made it quite clear that no one could care less. “So far, we know that Hamas is active in Belgium through various companies. The activities (…) focus on lobbying and fundraising,” he remarked at the time.
Hamas, in fact, has much more than shops and restaurants in Belgium. It has front companies operating next to the European Commission and the EU Council.
Perhaps one might argue that the Belgian government, which has shown itself to be extremely anti-Israel, does not care that Hamas raises funds in the country: the victims are “only” Israelis and Jews. So far.
Europe’s status, however, has changed. German Federal Prosecutor General Jens Rommel – whose office has been arranging the arrests of nine of the Hamas suspects behind the European October 7 terrorist plot – warned in June that Europe no longer mainly serves as a place where terrorist organizations generate funds to finance their terrorism.
“Rather, Germany and other European countries are now increasingly being viewed as operational areas for possible attacks. This becomes particularly evident in the case of Hamas. To prepare attacks in Europe, their foreign operatives, sympathizers, or individuals connected to organized crime acquire and smuggle weapons. They often hold European citizenship, or residence permits within the Schengen Area, allowing them to move freely. They are highly mobile and extensively networked, and some possess significant financial resources.”
In Belgium, however, such concerns seem to play no role whatsoever. In 2024, the country received half of all Palestinian asylum applications submitted in the entire EU. In that year alone, 3,281 Palestinians were granted formal refugee status by Belgium.
A Hamas terrorist from Khan Yunis, Mohannad al-Khatib, who participated in the October 7, 2023 massacre but calls himself as a freelance journalist, was able freely to enter Belgium to claim asylum there. Belgian authorities were only alerted to his terrorist background because the Antwerp-based Jewish Information and Documentation Center (JID) compiled information about him appearing in footage inside or near Israeli territory during the Hamas invasion.
“It is incomprehensible that volunteers and citizens could identify this man through open sources, while our security services apparently never noticed him. The material clearly shows that he filmed the violence, applauded it, and openly expresses support for Hamas, rocket attacks, and martyrdom.
“Anyone in Europe who wants to protect synagogues, schools, churches, metros, or events has every interest in ensuring that terrorists do not enter unnoticed. This is not a Jewish problem, but a European problem. We demand full transparency about how such individuals gained access to Europe, and immediate security checks by the competent authorities.”
Although Al-Khatib’s application was ultimately rejected by Belgium, he remained in the country — where he apparently continues to live — and is free to travel throughout the EU. Nobody cares.
Twice already, Hamas has thanked Belgium for its support. Perhaps Belgium and other countries that align with and harbor terrorist groups should be viewed as security threats to Europe?
The title of this article may immediately invite accusations of racism. Since nothing could be further from the truth, in my case, than such an accusation, let me begin with a crucial distinction, which I shall then explain: that between racial realism and what I will call ethnic memory. This distinction can help clarify a number of political disputes. Leftists will argue, for instance, that the United States and even European countries have always been multicultural. There is some truth to this in the American case, but ‘multicultural’ meant something different in the late 18th century than it does today. In those times, ‘multicultural’—the physical reality, not the later term—might mean Englishmen and Frenchmen, rather than Englishmen and Pakistanis, living side by side and creating a new nation. So one must be precise in one’s use of terms.
This then leads to the question of what it means to be an American, Englishman, Australian, and so on. And here we find that there must be, in these cases, a dominant Anglo culture for such identities to have any meaning. But that is not all: one must also understand the role that ethnicity plays in the formation and maintenance of national identity. People may acknowledge the importance of culture but wonder what the color of one’s skin could possibly have to do with it. In and of itself, it ought to have nothing to do with it, but de facto it does, and for quite cogent, defendable reasons. An example of the confusion caused by unclear use of terms took place recently during a discussion in the UK between journalist Julia Hartley-Brewer and Restore Britain spokesman Charlie Downes, which made the rounds on social media. Hartley-Brewer, while sharing Downes’ concern about the Islamization of Britain, seemed to reject the notion that whiteness was a part of British identity, while Downes felt that preserving the white nature of Britain was important. When Hartley-Brewer wondered why whiteness would be a determining factor in who should be a part of the British fabric, Downes seemed incapable of offering a clear answer. Had Downes been able to explain the philosophical basis underlying (one may hope) his position, Hartley-Brewer might have been more receptive. Instead, the exchange devolved into the usual insults. The subject has become increasingly topical, especially as waves of immigration have transformed Western societies, particularly in Europe.
So let me explain the philosophical distinction. Racial realism is the racist notion that a person’s race is the deciding factor of his character, that it makes him in some way intrinsically better or worse than a person of another race. Defenders of racial realism will sometimes point out, for example, that the average black person scores lower than the average white person in the United States on IQ tests (although the average white person scores lower than the average American of Asian or Jewish Ashkenazi extraction). The answer is that, although the IQ scores of some ethnic groups cluster higher or lower than those of others, there is considerable overlap between them. Many individuals in a lower-scoring group will score higher than many individuals in a higher-scoring group. This is why, for example, the black ethnicity in the United States, while having a lower cluster of IQ data points than many other ethnicities, still produces men like Frederick Douglass, Thomas Sowell, and Clarence Thomas. And so regardless of differently located clusters of data points, one should still treat people of various ethnicities as individuals and reject the racial realism that would seek to definitively define them.
Then we get to ‘ethnic memory.’ By this term, I mean that different ethnicities bring with them various memories, or stories, about themselves. Some are based on real events and things, while others are imagined or invented, but all can function as important identity markers. These memories often compete with those of other groups, and when they do, social cohesion can begin to disintegrate. Groups can become so attached to their own memories and heritage that they define themselves in opposition to other parts of society or simply become less able to form a cohesive polity with them. So when politicians say that they are fine with multiethnic or multiracial communities but want monocultural ones—as, for instance, Pauline Hanson, leader of the Australian One Nation party, recently said—they miss the fact that multiethnic communities lead to multicultural communities. But advocating for a monoethnic community is then confused with racial realism by both Right and Left. The latter assume that everything is crass racism, while the former either slip into actual racism or are unable to explain why their essentially sound sense of social and demographic self-preservation is legitimate. The distinction between racial realism and ethnic memory is thus lost on both sides. Ethnic memory is more than outward expressions of culture; it is a feeling of difference that a group’s surface ethnicity will so often call forth and that, by dint of that immutable surface, will continue to insist upon itself. So, while it may be an unpleasant truth that some do not wish to hear, a well-ordered Western society does de facto need a predominant ethnicity in order to survive.
In these contexts, the terms ‘cultural memory,’ ‘collective memory,’ and ‘social memory’ have often been used in the scholarly literature to describe the sets of traditions that different groups keep alive across generations. These terms are certainly legitimate and hermeneutically useful, but the term ‘ethnic memory’ should grow in acceptance, because the former three sometimes obscure what the latter reveals, namely that ethnicity itself often plays a formative role in the perpetuation of such memories. Making this point explicit is required for us to understand contemporary social issues.
A further distinction, namely that between politics and ethics, is also important here. Ethics is about individual behavior; politics is about mass behavior. It is true that a particular individual of a minority ethnicity in a society can be perfectly in tune, culturally speaking, with the majority of that society. Ethically, such an individual is therefore no different from the majority or from society as a whole. A monoethnic society does not therefore mean that subgroups cannot exist. It means only that they must remain relatively small minorities within a predominantly monoethnic society. But on a mass level, politically, it nonetheless happens that the different subgroups, especially when present in sufficient numbers, will insist on their ethnic memories, on their own historical roles and trajectories, and will over time grow suspicious of the broader community. Many members of the subgroup, even when born in the society of a different ethnic majority, will often hearken unto a perceived past that will turn against the host society, as we see with ease all over the Western world.
When we talk about these various ethnic memories, we are of course dealing with a continuum and not with absolutes. The ethnic memory of an Irishman will generally be closer to that of the Anglophone society in which he lives, given their shared history and religious overlap. An Italian’s may be somewhat more distant but still much closer to Anglo-ethnic memory than that of, say, a Papua New Guinean. The smaller cultural differences among these European groups are also easier to overlook when differences in surface ethnicity are smaller. So when proponents of multiculturalism point out, for example, that Americans used to be up in arms about Irish or Italian or Slavic immigration and that being concerned about Islamic or African immigration is therefore also overblown, they ignore the fact that ethnic memories fall on a spectrum and are in some cases so far removed from those of the host civilization that, on a mass level, rapprochement becomes difficult. (Why Islam, specifically, is incompatible with Western civilization I have discussed in philosophical detail elsewhere.)
People will sometimes hold up Israel as a counterexample of a flourishing multicultural and multiethnic Western society. Indeed, even though Judaism is ethno-religious as opposed to purely creedal, it has over time still found space for many ethnicities, and Israel is multiethnic: there are Russian Jews, Ethiopian Jews, and everything in between. But the members of these various ethnicities are Jews, and religion is the strongest force, bar none, of communal cohesion in the world. So the fact that Israel is multiethnic is outweighed by the fact that it is monoreligious, with non-Jews being confined to a relatively small minority of about 20%. As long as a society is predominantly monoreligious, it can ‘ afford’ to be multiethnic (although one does sometimes also find tension among different ethnicities of co-religionists).
This state of affairs no longer obtains in other Western countries. The United States, for instance, used to be a Protestant country but is today in large parts hardly recognizable as such. The decline of Christian faith is even more pronounced in western and northern Europe. In Israel, not only is the religious proportion of the population growing, much to the chagrin of the Israeli Left, but even among secular Israeli Jews there is still a prevailing sense of being part of an island of Jewish identity in a sea of hostility. Israel is thus ultimately not a counterexample—or at least is an explainable counterexample—to the importance of social monoethnicity. That is, Israel demonstrates that religion can ensure the sort of social integration that otherwise only ethnicity provides. When a democratic, Western society has neither of these, social upheaval follows.
A better understanding of the distinction between racial realism and ethnic memory could clarify much of the debate around these issues. The Left will always, of course, call anything it does not like ‘racist,’ but at least it would be useful for thoughtful and intellectually open members of the Right to sort out their own philosophical confusion and for moderates to understand that it need not entail any perniciousness to advocate for the predominantly monoethnic character of one’s own society.
How many migrants remain in Spanish territory? A whole lot.
How many migrant invaders are there still in Ceuta after tens of thousands of Muslim migrants invaded the Spanish territory?
While the Sanchez regime has insisted they’re mostly gone, as I discussed in my latest article, they are very much around and being harbored, fed and sheltered in large numbers. I’ll have a bigger update on the invasion crisis and the lies of the Spanish government later this week, but for the moment here’s an interesting data point that can help us get a sense of how big the problem in Ceuta really is.
The invasion by as many as 80,000 migrants led to a disease outbreak in Ceuta and now Spain is rushing in 45,000 vaccine doses.
The Ministry of Health and the regional governments will send 45,000 vaccines to Ceuta to prevent the spread of infectious diseases among the migrants who arrived at the end of July, as well as to protect the local population. The Public Health Commission, which met this Monday, agreed to activate the solidarity mechanism to provide up to 15,000 doses of MMR (measles, mumps, rubella), 10,000 doses of diphtheria-tetanus, and 10,000 doses of chickenpox and polio vaccines.
What experts categorically rule out is a general lockdown of immigrants, as suggested this weekend by the leader of the People’s Party (PP), Alberto Núñez Feijóo . Epidemiologist Adrián H. Aginagalde argues that public health measures must be adapted to the specific transmission mechanism of each disease, and “not simply apply solutions used against other pathogens.”
So we appear to be looking at between 10,000 and 15,000 invaders still active in Ceuta.
While the Sanchez regime has claimed that most have gone home, the scale of the vaccine rush shows otherwise, and it also reveals the bigger picture here.
If they were on the verge of being sent home, they wouldn’t be getting vaccinated. They’re being vaccinated with vaccines that have a duration of 4 weeks to 6 months because they’re staying.
Usman Khan, the London Bridge attacker, was known to force conversion while in prison Screengrab youtube
White Britons have been forced to convert to Islam by organised Muslim gangs in the nation’s prisons.
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has been urged to investigate a surge in conversions after data revealed one in five Muslims in prisons is white – four times the rate of 5.8 per cent in the general population.
Nick Timothy, the Shadow Justice Secretary, disclosed the startling figures, saying the data highlighted a growing problem.
“The percentage of Muslims who are white in our prisons is so vastly higher than in the general population it raises serious questions.
He told The Telegraph: “The percentage of Muslims who are white in our prisons is so vastly higher than in the general population it raises serious questions.
“We know that experts have warned repeatedly about forced conversions taking place behind bars, driven by Islamic gangs.
“We need to be honest that something is not right here – Labour must urgently investigate and stamp out forced conversions in prison.”
Fears have also been raised over the rise of Muslim gang conversions by the Government’s anti-terror chief Jonathan Hall KC.
Mr Hall said he found evidence of Islamists serving as “self-styled emirs”, controlling prisons through “leadership and recruitment”.
The details, included in his report, noted the recruitment of “vulnerable or lonely prisoners, using guidance, sharing of food or material gifts” and “conversion backed by implicit or actual violence”.
He pointed to Usman Khan, who killed two students in an attack at London Bridge in 2019, as an example of someone who had threatened other inmates to convert while behind bars between 2010 and 2018.
Khan was shot dead by police during the attack, as was Sudesh Amman, who similarly threatened inmates to convert, Mr Hall said.
And Ian Acheson, who led an independent review of Islamist extremism for then-Justice Secretary Michael Gove, said prisoners had converted as a “pragmatic response” to conditions including space and power.
“This seems to be the case in high security prisons, in particular, where safety is at a premium and there are also large numbers of violent young men entering custody searching for meaning and belonging. So Islam in this case has gang characteristics,” he said.
A third review, conducted by Government adviser Colin Bloom, revealed that if a prisoner did not identify as a Muslim, they would be “denied ‘protection’ from the dominant Muslim gang” or face violence.
Mr Bloom also wrote that Muslim gangs regularly used “the phrase ‘convert or get hurt’” and that “copies of the Quran would be left on the beds of new prisoners”.
He called for a review into the issue of forced conversion in the report, published in 2023.
The number of Muslim inmates in England and Wales has risen from 14,037 in 2022 to 16,051 as of June 30, 2025, – 14 per cent.
An MoJ spokesman said: “We do not tolerate intimidation, gang activity or faith-based coercion of any kind in our prisons.
“Prisons and staff act swiftly to clamp down on all threatening behaviour from any groups or individuals.”
The ability to speak freely on important or controversial issues without “facing legal consequences” and faith in the government to protect speech have fallen over the two years of Labour rule under Sir Keir Starmer and now Andy Burnham, polling claims to have found.
Polling for Human Rights NGO group Liberty finds public sentiment in Britain is very much against the notion of the left-wing Labour government being a defender of liberal values like Freedom of Speech. A majority, at 51 per cent, are reported by The Daily Telegraph to say confidence in the government protecting the right to express views — even if those views are contrary to what the government believes — has fallen over the last two years of Labour rule.
Just one in ten of respondents said they felt their confidence in the government looking out for freedom of speech rights had improved these past two years.
The polling also asked some other very specific questions on freedom of speech issues. Aside whether the government was doing enough to protect rights, on the straight matter of whether the respondent felt their ability to speak freely on important issues had worsened in the past two years, 39 per cent said it had got worse, compared to ten per cent who said it was better.
Underlining the threat to freedom of speech isn’t just from intolerant neighbours or professional consequences, and comes explicitly from the government too, a parallel question asked what those interviewed felt had happened to their ability to “express controversial political opinions without facing legal consequences”. An even larger 42 per cent said it was worse, compared to nine per cent who think things are getting better.
Campaign group Liberty blamed this worsening of public faith in Britain’s tradition of free speech and the government’s role on policy decisions by the left-wing Labour government of Sir Keir Starmer, including banning foreign speakers from travelling to Britain to address events or conferences, arrests of pro-Palestine activists, and threats to ban Palestine protests.
They said former Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer had failed to show “leadership and consistency” and had fuelled the perception of “two tier” policing in Britain with his words and actions. The NGO said the findings should be a “warning” to the new Prime Minister Andy Burnham and called on him to “adopt a non-partisan approach to free speech and move away from greater restrictions”.
If Britons have noticed the sudden acceleration in erosion of their inherited freedoms, then foreign observers definitively have. Opposing the threat to liberty in Britain and Europe has been a small but consequential foreign policy focus of the Donald Trump Presidency, with his emissaries calling out egregious free speech failures and telling allied governments to do more to defend common values.
Vice President JD Vance and U.S. Undersecretary of State Sarah B. Rogers have been particularly active on this beat. In 2025, Vance warned Europe is at risk of “civilizational suicide” over both open borders policies and speech restrictions, and said: “I want Europe to thrive. I want them to be an important ally. Part of that is going to be Europe respecting its own people, respecting its own sovereignty, and America can’t do that job for them”.
