German Leftist Hoped Berlin Pride Attacker Was “White Christian” and “Not Arab Muslim”

At a vigil for the Berlin Pride parade victims, an LGBTQ+ speaker says she had hoped the attacker was “not an Arab-Muslim, but a White Christian person”. Screengrab X

“I hoped it was not an Arab Muslim but a white Christian.”

The remark was made during a vigil held in Berlin for the victims of the attack on the Christopher Street Day (CSD) parade on Saturday. The woman who spoke revealed something more telling than a mere emotional reaction: a desire for the terrorist to fit a politically convenient frame.

She was not hoping that the attacker did not exist. She was hoping he was someone else.

The attack took place on July 25th in Berlin’s Tiergarten park. A man drove into the crowd, and then attacked people with a bladed weapon. One woman was killed and another 29 people were injured.

The suspect was later identified as Abdul B., a 21-year-old German of Lebanese origin known for his Islamist connections. German authorities classified the incident as Islamist terrorism. The attacker was shot dead by police the following day.

The facts forced part of the Left to confront its own reflection. A white Christian attacker would have allowed the assault to be presented as a direct consequence of supremacism, the far Right, or Western intolerance. A radicalised Islamist, by contrast, forces an acknowledgement that there are religious and political currents incompatible with the rights the LGBT movement claims to defend.

The CSD organisers, predictably, called for the attack not to be politically “instrumentalised” and insisted that no community should be placed under general suspicion. The principle is reasonable: no citizen should be held responsible for another person’s actions because of their origin or religion. The problem arises when caution is used to prevent any discussion of the terrorist’s specific ideology.

The attack must not be politicised, they say—except to decide in advance which interpretation is forbidden.

The episode reinforces a familiar pattern. When an attacker happens to belong to the far Right (a much less common occurrence in Germany than violence committed by Islamists or left-wing extremists), the Left demands an examination of the political climate, “hateful” public rhetoric and speaks of collective responsibility. When the perpetrator is an Islamist, the debate shifts towards Islamophobia, social exclusion, or the danger that the Right might exploit the facts. Sometimes, a veil of silence is simply drawn over the incident in the hope that it will be forgotten.

The identity of the perpetrator ends up mattering the most, lest it further shatters the diversity myth. 

Those attacked in Berlin were not victims of an abstraction. They were attacked by a radicalised individual whose ideology regarded violence as legitimate. Acknowledging that does not criminalise all Muslims. Denying it is a disservice to all Germans.

europeanconservative

German Government ‘tried to cover up Syrian migrant’s attack on Good Samaritan tourist’

 John Rudat. Screengrab .youtube

An American tourist who was left disfigured after intervening in an assault on a woman aboard a German tram has claimed the country’s Government tried to cover up his attack.

John Rudat, a 21-year-old model, was slashed with a box cutter when he tried to protect two women from being “assaulted and harassed” in Dresden last August.

The attack left him with a scar stretching from beneath his eye, across his nose and through his upper lip, requiring extensive surgery.

The 21-year-old Syrian national who inflicted the life-changing injuries was handed a three-year youth prison sentence, while his accomplice, who also assaulted Mr Rudat, was suspended on probation for a year and eight months.

Speaking exclusively to GB News, Mr Rudat claimed a minister ordered him to “keep quiet” about his ordeal while he was in hospital.

He said the minister visited him in hospital and advised him to stay silent in the media.

The politician is also alleged to have promised that his attacker would face a “hard sentence”.

“The minister spoke to me off the books for about an hour in a private room in the hospital… he said: ‘John, we’re going to give them a hard sentence, don’t you worry but here’s what I need you to do.’

“I need you to keep quiet about it… Stay out of the media light and just let us handle it for you.”

Mr Rudat also slammed his attacker’s “lenient” sentence, branding it “insane.”.

Both he and his accomplice were sentenced under Germany’s youth criminal law.

“What everybody was really confused about, including my lawyer when I went over there to testify, was why these grown men were being tried under juvenile law. It doesn’t make sense.”

The two defendants had prior convictions including assaults on police officers and drug trafficking.

Both had subsidiary protection status in Germany at the time of the attack but this has since been revoked.

It remains unclear whether they will be deported.

Both defendants expressed remorse and apologised for their actions, claiming they had been drunk at the time of the attack.

“These two individuals had 10 prior accounts each… It’s insane,” Mr Rudat told The People’s Channel.

“Three years is very lenient. One year and eight months on probation suspended for the man who was assaulting the woman, with 100 hours of community service.

“What kind of verdict is that?”

Mr Rudat suggested that he had no regrets over intervening to try and defend the frightened girl.

When asked what he would like others to learn from his ordeal, he encouraged them to “step in no matter what.”

“I would be grateful if, the next time they saw violence or injustice happening in public, they stepped in no matter the consequences.

“Because the moment people refuse to stand up for each other as citizens is the moment we lose the sacred moral fabric of society.

“I hope people stand up for one another, both in Europe and here in America.”

GB News has approached Germany’s Interior Ministry for comment.

gbnews

With the Berlin Pride parade attacker dead, I guess we’ll never know his motives

Composite image from here and here.

by Andrea Widburg 

Yesterday, a German-born man named Abdul Ballout—and when I wrote “German-born,” I bet you were expecting a name like Fritz Shlangenbaum—drove a rented car into a huge Pride parade in Berlin, after which he attacked attendees with a machete. Ballout killed a woman and injured 29 others, many seriously.

Even though Ballout was a known Islamic terrorist sympathizer and used a preferred terrorist method for attacking a crowd, Berlin police were mystified as to his motive. And now that Ballout is dead, I guess we’ll never know.

The attack needs little description: Ginormous parade with out-and-proud LGBTQ+ attendees, car driven right into the parade, man jumps out with a big knife. We’ve seen it before. And every time we’ve seen it, as the meme goes “…and it’s Islam.”

What’s a little more interesting in this case is the attacker and what the German authorities knew about him before he went on a rampage:

Although the 21-year-old Ballout was born in Germany, he came from a Lebanese family.

Ballout had an extensive youthful criminal history.

In 2024, he was distributing Islamic State propaganda on Instagram.

In 2025, he headed to Lebanon intending to continue to Syria, where he could join ISIS. The Lebanese arrested him, and Germany, because he was a citizen, took him back.

In May 2026, the police arrested him for his efforts to join ISIS. Ballout was eventually sentenced to almost two years in prison, but he got a suspended sentence. Because he’d been held in prison in both Lebanon and Germany before his trial, and because he promised he’d distanced himself from ISIS, the authorities let him walk.

As part of this suspended sentence, Ballout was sent to an extremism-prevention or deradicalization counseling program. He’d attended two sessions and was due for another session tomorrow. His first two sessions were unsatisfying, for he was hard to assess and gave clearly rehearsed responses to the counselors.

In sum, Ballout was a first-generation German, a home-grown radical Islamist, a man anxious to shed blood, and a career criminal. But there he was, out and about, driving a rental car around, and ready to commit jihad. Such is the state of modern Germany.

The police soon announced that they suspected Ballout might be a terrorist, but they were never ready to commit to that conclusion. They eventually located him in Spandau (the location of the prison in which convicted Nazis were held after the war). When Ballout saw police approaching, he attacked them with a knife, earning a bullet that killed him.

In other words, it’s a typical story, one we’ve read and seen over and over. It’s what the West has become since it made porous the border between the West and the Islamic world.

And yes, most Muslims are peaceful, but 10% are not, and 10% of 1.6 billion is a very big number (160 million), especially because, in some places, as many as 90% of “peaceful” Muslims support the same goal as the violent ones: The establishment of a global caliphate controlled by sharia law.

But here are a couple of thoughts for you. Across the West, LGBTQ+ people tend to be leftists—although certainly not all. Brave people like Scott Bessent, Scott Presler, Dave Rubin, and others think with their brains, not the contents of their undies. But there are the brainless ones…so many brainless ones, like this man at Berlin’s Pride parade before the jihad attack:

I wonder if this man is still locked in his pro-Islam, antisemitic delusion or if he’s struggling with cognitive dissonance. The best-case scenario is that he’s heading for the nearest AfD headquarters.

For those who don’t pay close attention to German politics, AfD stands for Alternative für Deutschland or “Alternative for Germany.” One of its founders is Alice Weidel, a lesbian, who concluded that unlimited Islamic and other Third World immigration was destroying Germany and putting people like her at risk.

The German establishment has relentlessly castigated the AfD as a Nazi-style party and has worked hard to make it illegal. What the establishment really objects to is AfD’s core stance: It’s opposed to unlimited Middle Eastern and African immigration, which has changed Germany into a place unrecognizable from what it was a mere 30 or more years ago.

And while it’s true that Germany successfully had mass Turkish immigration in the 1960s, because it needed people to do its scut work, those Turks were secular and mostly assimilated well. The newer immigrants have not assimilated well, and they’ve managed to radicalize many of the descendants of those original Turks.

Despite government efforts, the AfD is the largest opposition party in the Bundestag, with 151 members out of a total of 630. I suspect its numbers will grow in the next election.

But meanwhile, the German police will just be left guessing as to what really drove Abdul Ballout to target a gay Pride parade.

americanthinker

Breaking: Police Shoot Dead Terrorist Abdul Ballout in Garden Shed – The Islamist Who Rammed His Car into Berlin Gay Pride Parade, Killing 1 and Injuring 29

21-year-old Muslim of Lebanese descent named Abdul Ballout, already known to authorities and linked to Islamist circles, drove a van into the crowd at Berlin’s LGBTQ+ Pride event.

Via Nius.de:
Terrorist Abdul Ballout was shot dead today during a police operation in Berlin. This was confirmed by the Senate Department for the Interior.

According to reports, police surrounded a garden plot before moving in and killed the Islamist who drove through the gay pride parade in Berlin on Saturday.

According to Bild.de the terrorist was killed at 6:34 PM German Time.

Abdul attempted several times to join the Islamic State.

On Saturday a suspect believed to be tied to Berlin’s “Islamist scene” plowed through the Berlin Gay Pride Parade killing at least one person and injuring 16 others. The Berlin Christopher Street Parade is one of the largest annual LGBT events in Europe.

The killer rammed his car into revelers at the annual Christopher Street Day celebration.

The Sun reported that the suspect then left the vehicle with a bladed weapon and attacked people in the park near the end of the parade route.

According to Bild.de, the man, currently at large, is known to be a member of the Islamist scene. He is believed to be Abdul B., 21. The manhunt for him is currently underway.

Hours later the media admitted Abdul Ballout was linked to Islamist groups and was on the authorities’ radar.

Abdul was born in Germany but left the country for Lebanon.

According to Drew Pavlou:

Germany identified him as an Islamist threat, so they had him arrested in Lebanon and FLEW HIM BACK TO GERMANY to put him on trial for plotting terror attacks.

He was convicted and sentenced for terrorism offences in May 2026 but released on time served.

By July 2026 he was back on the streets.

German authorities told him to attend de-radicalisation counselling sessions.

He responded by carrying out a jihadist terrorist attack on a pride parade.

Obviously, the authorities dropped the ball on this one.

Abdul finished his de-Islamization counseling two months ago. On Saturday he drove his car through the Gay Pride Parade.

Via Adrian Shtuni:

– In May 2026, the Amtsgericht Tiergarten in Berlin sentenced him to a youth sentence of 1 year and 10 months for preparation of a serious state-endangering violent act.
– He was released from juvenile detention in May 2026 on probation and ordered to attend a deradicalization programme.
– Of the 26 scheduled appointments, he is reported to have attended only 2.
– Despite prior violent offenses, documented ISIS affinity, and a concrete attempt to join the group, he was released on probation with minimal oversight.
– Roughly 2 months later he is alleged to have carried out a vehicle-ramming attack.

thegatewaypundit

If the perpetrators are migrants, then their female rape victims don’t count. And there are horrifying numbers of these victims

Medforth AI

The constant recourse to “patriarchy” serves to dilute culturally alien responsibilities into a universal broth of “male violence.”

Chilling data from the German government capture this dramatic reality.

In 2025, Germany recorded 751 gang rapes.

If my math is correct, that is two gang rapes a day. One cannot say that multiculturalism has not enlivened life in European societies.

And we are talking only about gang rapes, not rape in general.

A sophisticated form of nihilism: one that, in order not to break the taboo of mandatory migration, accepts that two gang rapes a day become a mere statistic.

Or, as the excellent Ulf Poschardt of the liberal newspaper Welt put it, “if the perpetrators are migrants, then the victims don’t count.”

Poschardt writes:

“The current feminism is one of the leading disciplines of selective empathy. After the atrocious crimes of Pakistani gangs in Britain, with mass rapes and unbearable accounts of abuse of young girls, one would have expected a clear and decisive feminist reaction. Instead, it was completely absent. To be cynical, one could say that these victims had the misfortune of not being entertainment stars who had previously posed in bikinis for men’s magazines – and of not having public-funded NGOs to bring their demands to ministries and the media.

“The same applies to the victims in Nuremberg. There, numerous young girls were seduced, made dependent on drugs, abused, raped, and forced into prostitution. The alleged perpetrators come from Syria, Iraq, Pakistan, and North African countries. Here too, there is feminist silence. Even worse: according to the session record, the left-wing deputy Katrin Fey laughed when Alice Weidel said: ‘At Nuremberg Central Station, the hometown of CSU president Markus Söder, migrant gangs drug underage German girls to abuse them as sex slaves.’

“If the perpetrators are migrants, then the victims don’t count. The silence on the mistreatment of women in Iran when they dance without a veil, on the rapes and murders of Jewish girls perpetrated by Hamas barbarians, on the fate of girls in Afghanistan who live like animals, speaks for itself.

“Meanwhile, public television airs reports in which the veil and the covering of the female body are idealized and even interpreted as a feminist gesture of self-determination. The last feminists who are not blind to that barbarism, which also has a religious-cultural dimension, come from the heroic generation of Alice Schwarzer, who debated with icons of the movement like Simone de Beauvoir. Today’s feminism is largely an Instagram perfume: it doesn’t contain even a shred of thought.”

It is a failure by which one measures the moral bankruptcy of contemporary liberalism: “women’s rights” are exalted, but their concrete safety is sacrificed on the altar of “diversity” understood as a non-negotiable, almost theological value.

53 percent of the 574 suspects do not hold German citizenship, and for the others, any possible migrant background is not specified. Syria tops the list with 110 suspects, followed by Afghanistan with 64, Iraq with 46, and Turkey with 44.

Friedrich Merz said this as opposition leader, but now that he is Chancellor, he does not yet seem willing to change policy.

The victims, in 80 percent of cases, are German citizens.

These figures put Western society in a dead end: it values women’s rights but imports millions of men from countries and cultures that subjugate them. It is difficult to raise the issue without being shouted down with cries of “Islamophobia.”

The same is true in other European countries.

In Sweden, the homeland of sexual freedoms, the BBC (not some right-wing site) reports that 80 percent of rapes are committed by foreigners.

Data from the Paris police show that 77 percent of solved rape cases in the capital are committed by people without a French passport.

In England, 84 percent of men convicted as members of grooming gangs are Pakistani.

We have seen no shortage of feminists justifying and relativizing the gang rapes committed by jihadists against Israeli women.

But the fear of racism now prevails even over the defense of European women. Ralf Jaeger, Interior Minister of North Rhine-Westphalia, said about the Cologne rapes: “What happens on right-wing platforms is at least as terrible as the acts of those who assault women.”

Thus, the mainstream prefers collective gaslighting: “it’s just poverty,” “it’s migrant trauma,” “it’s universal patriarchy.” As if the rate of native sexual violence were comparable to that imported from tribal and Islamized societies. As if they did not know about “taharrush gamea,” the rape game in which men surround women, strip them, and rape them.

Until a few decades ago, “gang rapes” did not exist in Europe, except in the darkest corners of crime news. Now we have ended up like the boiled frog.

In Germany, a couple of Islamists who, with ISIS, had kidnapped and enslaved two Yazidi girls and brought them to Germany – where they continued to keep them as slaves – have just been convicted.

Is this also “patriarchy”?

If the lukewarm water suddenly boiled, the frog would jump out of the pot. But if the temperature is raised little by little, imperceptibly, it will even be pleasant – and when the frog realizes it is too hot, it will be too late.

israelnationalnews

Trans-Identified Male Sues Women-Only Dance Studio After Being Denied Membership, Seeking $30k

The owner of a women-only pole dancing studio in Australia’s Gold Coast is facing litigation from a trans-identified male who claims he was discriminated against due to the facility’s single-sex policy. Nomes Witney, owner of Helensvale and Coomera-based business Queens of Pole, told The Australian that the man, who claims to be “female,” was denied membership in March, and subsequently lodged a complaint with the Queensland Human Rights Commission seeking $30,000 in damages.

The man, who has not been identified by Australian press, had attended a pole dancing class in February under the pretense of being a woman. In the middle of the class, Witney says, he disclosed that he “identified as a woman.” The knowledge that a man had been participating in the class, despite the studio’s promise to customers to provide a “female-only environment,” caused an immediate shift in the comfort levels of women in attendance.

“They tried to make their shorts longer than they were, that sort of thing,” Witney said. “Usually we have a really high success rate for membership conversions from trial classes, but this particular class, radio silence.”

The dance studio owner added that some of the attendees, which included a mother and her young adult daughter, became “visibly uncertain”.

In early March, the trans-identified male filed an incomplete membership application stating that his sex was female.

“I sent an email saying we were unable to accommodate the trans community at this time,” Witney told the outlet. Two days later, on March 12, he filed a formal complaint against her, though Witney wasn’t notified of the claim until April 22.

The Queensland Human Rights Commission sought mediation and sent Witney a letter from the trans-identified male that demanded an undisclosed payout. However, the conciliation meeting, held on July 13, was unsuccessful, and Witney refused to accept his request for membership and access to the female-only lessons.

Witney says that granting membership to the man in question is not a political move, but a choice she made to honor her commitment to providing a women-only space to her clients.

Queens of Pole has operated as a female-only studio for 9 years and accommodates women and girls of all ages, from children of 14 to women in their 60’s.

“I’ve spoken to my staff. I myself come from a domestic violence and sexual assault background, and there are staff and clients with a similar history,” she said. “I asked, ‘What are we thinking? Do we have the resources available to accommodate this person?’, and it just came down to the fact that the standard of class we would be able to deliver wouldn’t be the same.”

“Having this women-only space to do that in isn’t saying all men are bad men,” Witney added. “It isn’t about politics or hostility against gender ideology, it’s about being able to let our hair down without the male gaze. The whole vibe shifts, even if that person identifies as female.”

As a result of the failed mediation conference, and Witney’s decision to deny membership to the male applicant, the case has been forwarded on to the Queensland Civil and ­Administrative Tribunal.

The Queensland Civil and ­Administrative Tribunal (QCAT) handles disputes and discrimination complaints involving issues of “gender identity,” in adherence with Australian law. In 2002, under the Labor government led by Premier Peter Beattie, the nation’s Anti-Discrimination Act 1991 was amended to add “gender identity” as a protected characteristic.

Section 7 of the Anti-Discrimination Act lists a series of attributes that are protected against discrimination under the law, including both sex and “gender identity,” which the Act defines as a “person’s internal and individual experience of gender, whether or not it corresponds with the sex assigned to the person at birth.”

Significantly, there are no administrative or medical requirements associated with the Anti-Discrimination Act’s definition of “gender identity,” meaning that an individual need not undergo any surgeries or hormone interventions. Neither is a person claiming discrimination on the basis of “gender identity” is required to formally alter their identifying documents.

There have been several lawsuits filed against women as a result of the amendments to the Anti-Discrimination Act. At least three women are currently involved in costly litigation to defend themselves against accusations of discrimination, and all of the complaints have been lodged by men who claim to identify as transgender women.

One high-profile case, known in the courts as Tickle v Giggle, has dragged on for several years, and is expected to be debated in Australia’s Supreme Court. Entrepreneur and founder of a women’s-only networking application, Sall Grover was ordered to pay $20,000, with an additional maximum of $100,000 in court fees, to a trans-identified male after he was denied access to the platform. Grover, CEO of Giggle for Girls Proprietary Limited, was also found to have “discriminated” against Jason “Roxy” Tickle by recognizing him as a male in a selfie he submitted for on-boarding.

The ruling, handed down in May after more than four years of litigation, was a response to an appeal lodged by Tickle in August 2024 to a decision made by Justice Bromwich stating that Grover was guilty of “indirect discrimination.” At the time, Grover was ordered to pay $10,000 in compensation to Tickle and to pay his court costs up to $50,000. Dissatisfied with the outcome, Tickle further pursued litigation seeking a verdict of direct discrimination.

In the most recent ruling, Justice Melissa Perry sided with Tickle, doubled the compensation payout from $10,000 to $20,000, found Grover guilty of direct discrimination, and ordered her to pay court costs for Tickle up to $100,000. In her decision, Justice Perry cited the Sex Discrimination Act of 1984, which was significantly amended in 2013 to include explicit protections for “gender identity.”

The May 15 ruling states that Grover discriminated against Tickle because she recognized him to be male, and in a bizarre reasoning, argued that having “male facial features” is a protected characteristic of “transgender women”.

In a similar case, a woman who criticized the inclusion of trans-identified men in female sports was ordered to pay out a combined total of $95,000 AUD to two male athletes participating in women’s soccer teams. Last December, Kirralie Smith was found guilty by a New South Wales court of “unlawfully vilifying” the two men for simply having referred to them as being males.

Smith was ordered to hand over $55,000 to Nicholas “Stephanie” Blanch, and another $40,000 to Justin “Riley” Dennis. Magistrate Freund also directed Smith to “refrain publishing anything that identifies the plaintiff or their football team,” and to “publish a public statement of apology.”

Somewhat confusingly, as Smith has pointed out, the public apology she has been ordered to issue is to be in the form of “a pinned post that must go on all my social media pages… [Yet] the pinned post I have been ordered to make names both of them… Make it make sense.”

Smith has filed an appeal, which is set to be heard tomorrow, July 24.

reduxx

The Market Has Reached the Womb

Greg Munroe, CC-BY-2.0, Wikimedia Commons

The controversy surrounding German politician Jens Spahn has been framed as a story about political hypocrisy. A senior Christian Democrat, whose party has long opposed surrogacy, has become a father through a surrogate in the United States. Critics have accused him of saying one thing while doing another.

Perhaps. But the real question is not whether one politician has been inconsistent. It is what the episode reveals about the direction of Western civilisation.

Surrogacy is increasingly presented as a compassionate solution to an understandable human longing. The desire to have children is among the deepest we experience. The pain of infertility is real and deserves both sympathy and support. Yet compassion alone cannot settle every ethical question.

At its heart, surrogacy asks us to rethink the nature of parenthood itself. It asks us to believe that pregnancy can be separated from motherhood, that a child’s first human relationship can be defined by contract, and that what has always been understood as a gift may now be arranged as a service.

That should concern us all.

We often hear surrogacy described in the language of generosity. But the legal and commercial reality tells a different story. There are intended parents, agencies, contracts, donors, payments, parental orders, and delivery dates. The vocabulary is revealing. Reproduction increasingly resembles a marketplace.

Pregnancy, however, is not a service. It is a relationship.

For nine months, a mother and her unborn child exist in a unique biological bond unlike any other in human life. Long before birth, the child recognises the mother’s voice, responds to her movements, and develops within a relationship that is not merely biological but profoundly personal. To treat that relationship as something that can be contracted in advance and transferred at birth is not simply to alter legal procedure. It is to redefine motherhood itself.

Britain illustrates the point. Campaigners are pressing Parliament to reform surrogacy law so that commissioning parents become the legal parents from the moment a child is born. They describe the current system as outdated and unnecessarily complicated. But what critics dismiss as bureaucracy is, in fact, one of the law’s most important moral safeguards.

Today, British law recognises the woman who gives birth as the child’s legal mother. This is not an administrative quirk. It reflects a reality that no legal document can erase. The woman who carried the child is not a stranger simply because another agreement exists.

That friction in the law is not a flaw. It is a safeguard.

The law acknowledges something that modern culture is increasingly reluctant to admit. Pregnancy creates obligations and relationships that cannot simply be wished away. By requiring the transfer of legal parenthood only after birth, the law recognises that something morally significant has taken place during those nine months.

Once motherhood becomes something that can be transferred by agreement, it becomes something that can be negotiated. Once it can be negotiated, it can be bought.

Some will object that this criticism applies only to commercial surrogacy. But the distinction is less clear than it first appears. Even so-called altruistic arrangements require the law to separate pregnancy from motherhood and to assume, before a child is even born, that the bond between mother and child can be dissolved by prior agreement.

That is not merely a procedural question. It is a philosophical one.

We already recognise that some things should never become commodities. We prohibit the sale of organs because the human body possesses a dignity beyond price. We do not allow consent alone to determine what may be bought and sold. Why should pregnancy be different?

The international surrogacy industry makes the ethical problem even harder to ignore. Across the world, wealthy individuals commission children through women whose financial circumstances make surrogacy an attractive source of income. The contracts may be lawful. They may even be entered into willingly. But a market sustained by profound inequalities should make us pause before celebrating it as an expression of freedom.

Lost amid these debates is the person whose interests receive the least attention: the child.

The conversation revolves around the wishes of adults. Those longing for children. Those willing to carry them. The agencies facilitating the arrangements. Yet every child has an interest in knowing his or her origins, in not being the object of a commercial arrangement, and in never being regarded as the fulfilment of a contractual entitlement.

Children are not products. They are persons.

This debate is about more than surrogacy. It reflects a broader tendency in modern Western societies to believe that every deeply held desire should be capable of satisfaction through technology, law, or the market. If something can be done, we increasingly assume it ought to be done.

But civilisation depends upon recognising limits. Not every desire creates a right. Not every contract reflects justice. Not every technological advance represents progress. And not every market serves the common good.

The question is not whether surrogacy can be regulated more effectively. It is whether the law should facilitate a practice that begins by separating motherhood from pregnancy and ends by treating parenthood as something that can be assigned through legal agreement.

Law does more than process private wishes. It teaches society what is worth protecting. When it recognises the birth mother as the legal mother, it is not making a bureaucratic choice. It is affirming a truth about human relationships that exists before politics and before legislation.

To abandon that principle would be more than a legal reform; it would be a cultural declaration.

It would tell us that motherhood can be separated from the body, that pregnancy can be treated as a service, and that children may be planned, commissioned, and transferred like the subject of any other agreement.

The Jens Spahn controversy will soon pass. Another political storm will replace it. The questions it has exposed, however, will remain.

Every civilisation must eventually answer whether there are some things that money should never buy and contracts should never govern.

The womb is one of them.

europeanconservative

Muslim Terror Attack at Berlin LGBTQ Parade Wounds 16 – Tolerance wins again

Medforth AI

Berlin wants to be known as a city of tolerance and pride parades. And as a city that welcomes Muslim mass migration. And like London, New York, Paris and countless other cities, it got another reminder that it can’t do both.

A car driven by a Muslim terrorist rammed into the Berlin Pride Parade wounding 16 and killing 1, as of now, the suspect reportedly has ties to ‘Islamist Circles’ which means he’s been on the radar for some time now.

This certainly isn’t the first time that Muslim terrorists have plotted attacks against LGBTQ events. Or the first time it’s been covered up.

The Pulse Massacre attack in Florida by a Muslim terrorist continues to be commemorated as an anti-gay attack rather than a Muslim terrorist attack even though Omar Mateen, the Afghan Muslim terrorist responsible, reportedly didn’t realize that it was a gay nightclub.

The Muslim terrorist in the Berlin Pride attack presumably knew what he was doing, but we won’t know for sure until the authorities arrest him and then pretend that his real motive was… ‘mental illness’.

frontpagemag

Migrant boat ‘carried suspected killers to Britain’ after fatal French beach stabbing

Illustration. Screengrab

Suspected killers are believed to have fled to Britain aboard a small boat just hours after a young man was fatally stabbed on a French beach.

The victim, believed to be in his 20s, was found dead on Terminus Beach in the seaside town of Berck-sur-Mer on Thursday morning.

Witnesses reportedly saw him attacked by fellow migrants among the dunes at dawn.

French authorities have so far been unable to identify the victim, who was carrying no identification documents.

The killing took place shortly before a record-breaking “mega dinghy” carrying 165 migrants launched from the same stretch of beach bound for Britain, raising fears those responsible may now be on UK soil, according to The Sun.

The newspaper, citing a French investigation source, reported the fatal stabbing followed a violent altercation.

“There was a fierce argument, and fighting. A young man was stabbed by at least one attacker,” the source said.

The victim’s body reportedly lay undiscovered for several hours.

“A knife was close to his dead body in the afternoon, many hours later,” the source added.

One person familiar with the investigation described the injuries as “brutal”.

Investigators are said to believe his killers already boarded one of the migrant boats heading for Britain by the time the body was discovered.

“By this time it is believed those responsible got on a boat and escaped to England,” the source said.

French police are said to have been attempting to prevent migrants from launching boats from the area earlier that morning.

The 13-metre inflatable dinghy, comparable in length to a bus, had suffered a puncture and was taking on water before leaving the beach with 165 people on board.

French rescue vessels shadowed the boat across the Channel, handing out lifejackets before it was escorted into Dover, where all those on board were brought ashore for processing.

The National Crime Agency (NCA) confirmed it was aware of the incident.

A spokesman said: “We are aware of an incident on Thursday, July 23, in which an individual died in French waters. French partners are leading the investigation into the circumstances.”

British police forces are understood to have been placed on alert, with the NCA co-ordinating with its French counterparts.

Shadow Home Secretary Chris Philp said: “It is shocking that suspected murderers are now believed to have entered the UK on a small boat.

“This shows the kind of dangerous illegal immigrants the Labour Government is letting into our country daily.”

Reform UK leader Nigel Farage said: “I’ve warned for years of the dangers of allowing young men to enter Britain illegally without basic checks proving who they are or where they’re from.

“Andy Burnham’s been Prime Minister for less than a week and already an estimated 880 people have arrived in Britain illegally by boat. Rapists, terrorists and murderers are probably among them.”

He described the reports as “deeply troubling”, saying they reflected widespread public concern over unchecked Channel crossings.

gbnews