On tonight’s #NCFDeprogrammed, hosts Harrison Pitt and Connor Tomlinson are joined by Carl Benjamin, founder of the Lotus Eaters platform.
‘Islamophobia’: The Death Knell for Free Speech?
The defining question of our time is surely whether Islam will adapt to Western values—or whether our cowardly leaders will force Western values to adapt to the 7th century barbarism they seem determined to import. Mohammedanism may have been spread by the sword, but as Liberals never tire of reminding us—the pen is supposedly mightier. That may be so, but as the great Mark Steyn once put it, “the pen is only mightier than the sword, if you’re allowed to use the pen!” Alas, we live in a world where increasingly few are prepared to unsheathe the ultimate weapon.
Instead of fostering dialogue, investigation, and critique, Western civilisation stands illiterate; poised on a knife-edge (or perhaps that should be scimitar?) thanks to the juxtaposition of two evils: the desire of Western leaders to downplay the more violent aspects of Islam, and the insistence of Islamic extremists to ensure their work is kept in the public domain.
The tragic case of Samuel Paty perfectly illustrates this tension. Paty was beheaded by a jihadist, Abdoullakh Anzorov, in France back in 2020 for the ‘blasphemy’ of showing images of the Prophet Muhammad in a lesson on freedom of speech. What makes the case of Paty more egregious still, is the fact that the teacher was rumoured to have excluded a Muslim student from the class (a lie stemming from the student’s suspension and fear of her parents’ reaction). The full story was covered by Hélène de Lauzun with her customary precision on Wednesday. This is set against the backdrop of France, which prides itself on the robust right to blaspheme, as President Macron had argued only months previously: “The law is clear: We have the right to blasphemy, to criticise, to caricature religions.”
The disconnect between the idealised version of Islam and its real-life manifestations is not lost on Western leaders, who maintain that the problem is not Islam itself, but simply its adherents who do not understand it. Particularly chilling in this regard are the words of the matriarch of European destruction, Angela ‘Mutti’ Merkel, who stated back in 2017: “It is not Islam that is the source of terrorism, but a falsely understood Islam.” Despite efforts to promote a sanitised version of Islam, many followers evidently prefer the traditional brand.
The solution it seems is straightforward—simply ban discussion of Islam full stop, through the term ‘Islamophobia’; a concept popularised in Britain back in 1997 by Runnymede Trust chairman, Trevor Phillips. Two decades later, and the All-Party Parliamentary Group on British Muslims (APPG) proposed a broad definition:
Islamophobia is rooted in racism and is a type of racism that targets expressions of Muslimness or perceived Muslimness.
A definition this vague can only be intentional. Thankfully, the authors of the report do give us some examples of what Islamophobia might look like:
- The myth of Muslim identity having a unique propensity for terrorism, and claims of a demographic ‘threat’ posed by Muslims or of a ‘Muslim takeover’.
- Accusing Muslims as a group, or Muslim majority states, of inventing or exaggerating Islamophobia, ethnic cleansing or genocide perpetrated against Muslims.
- Accusing Muslim citizens of being more loyal to the ‘Ummah’ (transnational Muslim community) or to their countries of origin, or to the alleged priorities of Muslims worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations.
- Using the symbols and images associated with classic Islamophobia (e.g. Muhammed being a paedophile, claims of Muslims spreading Islam by the sword or subjugating “Islamophobia is rooted in racism and is a type of racism that targets expressions of Muslimness or perceived Muslimness.” minority groups under their rule) to characterize Muslims as being ‘sex groomers’, inherently violent or incapable of living harmoniously in plural societies.
What this means, at least in theory, is that it would potentially be illegal to criticise ISIS or Hamas, notice the overrepresentation of Muslims in certain fields, suggest that 9-years-old is a little young for a bride, or indeed even question the notion of Islamophobia itself. Besides which, a phobia is an ‘irrational fear’—and there is nothing remotely irrational about the fear of being gang-raped, acid-attacked, thrown off a building, blown up, or merely decapitated in the name of multiculturalism.
To illustrate the ridiculousness of the term, a 2016 freedom of information request found that over 25% of ‘Islamophobic hate crimes’ recorded by the Met Police are committed against non-Muslims or people of unknown faith. In other words, thanks to the ill-defined terms, it is quite feasible that not only could one be Islamophobic towards non-Muslims, but that Muslims themselves could be ‘guilty’ of the offence!
While never openly stated as a means to stifle debate, the effect of the term Islamophobia has been just that. Most tellingly and ironically, is the case of Phillips himself—who, having popularised the term, was then suspended by the Labour Party for the very same offence, after he came to realise that perhaps the religion was a little less peaceful than he’d first thought.
It is the Labour Party however, who we must now watch very closely. Having adopted the APPG’s definition of Islamophobia in its own code of conduct back in 2019, Keir Starmer repeatedly promised to formalise the definition if elected prime minister. Despite obvious concerns that this would be a blasphemy law in all but name, Starmer has shown no sign of a rethink.
Asked earlier this week at PMQS by Labour MP Tahir Ali whether he would commit to “prohibiting the desecration of all religious texts and the prophets of the Abrahamic religions,” Starmer replied:
Desecration is awful and I think it should be condemned. We are committed to tackling all forms of hatred and division including, of course, Islamophobia in all of its forms.
While I have every confidence that Starmer is ideologically-wedded to the criminalisation of Islamophobia, there are much more concrete reasons to believe he will push this through. After just four months in office, Starmer has shown himself to prioritise Muslims at every opportunity: including his petulant, two-tier response to the Southport riots, his promise to the Muslim community that “I am with you,” and the obvious need for Labour to shore up its haemorrhaging Muslim vote.
If such a definition or law ever gets through Parliament, the implications for free speech would be disastrous. It’s also safe to say that teachers would be left navigating classrooms with the caution of a bomb disposal expert.
The proposed definition of Islamophobia does not combat hatred; it invites it. Instead of facilitating debate and reform, it provides extremists with a legal framework to silence critics. It’s not about tackling Islamophobia; it’s about preventing Islam from being critiqued at all.
The great irony of Samuel Paty’s tragic demise is that the claim of his ‘Islamophobia’ was unfounded—but what difference does that make? If the interpretation of Islamophobia is open-ended (which it is), and if there is no paucity of those looking to enforce it (which there is), then all such legislation will mean is the legalisation of full Sharia, blasphemy laws, and in effect a death sentence on the likes of Paty, Rushdie, Charlie Hebdo, and any others ‘foolish’ enough to test them.
It might be time to stop worrying about those holding the pen, and start worrying about the guy holding the sword.
https://europeanconservative.com/articles/commentary/islamophobia-the-death-knell-for-free-speech/
BBC journalists resign from union over Palestinian colors directive
The National Union of Journalists (NUJ) in Britain confirmed on Wednesday that BBC journalists have quit the union after receiving directives from the Trades Union Congress (TUC) encouraging workers to dress in Palestinian Arab colors or wear a keffiyeh for a “Day of Action for Palestine”, the UK-based Jewish News reported.
The TUC’s call aims to advocate for a permanent ceasefire, an end to the violence in Gaza, and secure the release of all hostages. However, the recommendation to wear Palestinian Arab dress at the event, scheduled for Thursday, has prompted some NUJ members at the BBC to feel that the union has overstepped its boundaries.
A BBC staffer expressed significant concern, telling The Times, “BBC journalists, who pride themselves on impartiality and who fought to keep their NUJ free of politics, are being encouraged to break the BBC’s editorial guidelines by supporting a political cause”. The staff member further described the action as “hypocritical and antisemitic” and is reconsidering their NUJ membership.
Jewish employees at the BBC have reportedly alerted Nigel Lewis, the broadcaster’s HR director, who has raised the issue with HR leads across the BBC, according to the Jewish News. BBC Security has also been made aware of potential conflict situations that could arise from wearing Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) flag colors or headscarves.
The NUJ has since issued a message to its members acknowledging that those working in public service broadcasting have critical impartiality responsibilities and should not breach social media guidelines.
The union appears taken aback by the strong response, with Jewish chat groups speculating that potentially a dozen more members might resign.
When questioned, the TUC could not confirm whether it had previously requested workers to wear national colors during other conflicts. The organization explicitly stated it had never asked members to wear Ukrainian-colored clothing during the Russia-Ukraine conflict.
The Board of Deputies issued a statement criticizing the guidelines and accusing trade unions of “playing student politics on a conflict on whose facts they appear to be plainly ignorant”, rather than focusing on workers’ protection.
“Whatever the stated intent, attempts to bring this issue into the workplace in such a fashion will undoubtedly add to the belligerent atmosphere which many Jewish staff have been facing,” it added.
The BBC has repeatedly been criticized for the blatant anti-Israel bias in its reporting and this criticism has increased since Hamas’ October 7, 2023 attack on Israel and the war in Gaza which followed.
In November of 2023, the corporation published an apology after falsely claiming that IDF troops were targeting medical teams in battles in and around the Shifa Hospital in Gaza.
Before that, the BBC falsely accused Israel of being responsible for an explosion at a hospital in Gaza, which the IDF proved was caused by an Islamic Jihad rocket.
The network later acknowledged that “it was false to speculate” on the explosion.
In wake of the criticism, BBC Chair Samir Shah said last December that he intends to review the corporation’s reporting guidelines on the Israel–Hamas war.
In August, more than 200 people from Britain’s TV and film industry called for an urgent investigation into allegations of antisemitism at the BBC.
A month later, a report found that the BBC violated its own editorial guidelines more than 1,500 times during the first four months of the war between Israel and Hamas, and noted “deeply worrying pattern of bias” against the Jewish state during that period.
Western Europe’s Muslim Problem
By Joseph Puder
Radical Muslim gangs who harbor hatred for Western culture and believe that Islam is the answer for all bear a visceral and violent antisemitic hatred for Israel and Jews. The pogrom perpetrated by Arab and Turkish Muslims earlier this month on Israeli and Jewish fans of Maccabi Tel Aviv, a leading Israeli soccer team, in the streets of Amsterdam illustrates the point. The local (Amsterdam) authorities feigned efforts to contain the Muslim horde, which did not prevent the beating of scores of Israelis and Jews and the hospitalization of six. For many, it conjured up images of the evil perpetrated by the SS of Nazi Germany and the Kristallnacht pogrom of 1938. Attacks on Jews and Israel are now widely evident in other major western European cities, including Berlin, Brussels, London, Madrid, and Paris.
Referring to the recent pogrom, there were kind words from the king of the Netherlands, Willem-Alexander, who told Israel’s President Isaac Herzog, “We failed the Jewish community of the Netherlands during World War II, and last night we failed again.” Geert Wilders, leader of the largest party in the Dutch parliament, blamed Moroccan Muslims for the attack on the Israeli Maccabi Tel Aviv fans. He noted that the Muslims do not hide the fact that they want to destroy Jews and recommended the deportation of those people convicted of involvement in the pogrom if they have dual nationality.
Muslim migrants arrived at the industrialized Western European states after WWII, many from the countries that were their former colonial possessions. Thus, Algerian, Moroccan, and Tunisian Muslims landed in France and in Belgium (since French was also widely spoken there). Turkish Muslim temporary laborers were brought to Germany and never left. The Netherlands became home to Indonesian Muslims. South Asian Pakistani and Bangladeshi Muslims settled in Britain. Many of those early Muslim settlers sought a quiet life, economic betterment, and freedom.
The revival of Islamic sense of power, with Saudi Arabia accumulating unimaginable oil riches and power in the 1970s, created an initial stirring, followed by the 1979 Islamic (Shiite) revolution in Iran and the defiance against the Western world and its culture. The mayhem in Iraq and the endless terror in the aftermath of the Bush Jr. administration’s 2003 war that deposed Saddam Hussein eliminated the secular Sunni-Muslim rule in Iraq and led to Shia Muslim supremacy and Iran’s stranglehold on Iraq.
Then came the civil war in Syria a decade later, which created millions of refugees. The guilt-ridden European and former colonial powers opened their doors to hordes of Muslims from Iraq, Syria, and Afghanistan. Angela Merkel’s misplaced guilt about the Holocaust invited over a million Syrian and Iraqi Arabs and Afghan Muslims to Germany. Most of these had been brought up to hate Jews and Israel.
For the new arrivals in particular, the Western practice of separation of church and state is unfamiliar and unacceptable. Islam is the state religion in most Arab states and, especially, in Iran. The majority of recent Muslim immigrants express less attachment to their western European host countries and greater loyalty and attachment to their country of origin. This situation is exacerbated by the fact that the host countries do not promote assimilation into the culture. The Muslims have separate communities, separate schools, and separate rules of law.
Europe used to have a “Jewish problem” and still does, but not for the same reasons as their “Muslim problem.” The Jews integrated well and enriched European culture in multiple ways. Many European Nobel laureates were Jews. Today’s Muslim immigrants commit a large percentage of the violent crimes, whereas crime coming out of the Jewish communities was virtually nonexistent. In most cases, Jews spoke the native tongue better than the Christian natives. The problem, until the late 18th Century, was religious animus and discrimination, which later transformed into antisemitic racism. In Europe, Jews became the scapegoats for the ills of their societies.
The late Oriana Fallaci, famed Italian journalist and author, who later in life became a staunch defender of Israel and Jews, famously stated, “I stand with Israel, I stand with the Jews.” “I defend their right to exist, to defend themselves, and not to allow themselves to be exterminated a second time.”
While earlier in her career Fallaci defended the Palestinians and Muslims, she was subsequently quoted as saying, “The Muslims refuse our culture and try to impose their culture on us. I reject them, and this is not only my duty toward my culture — it is toward my values, my principles, my civilization.”
Fallaci made no secret of her hatred of the way Islam enforced passivity and submission of women through sharia law. She famously ended an interview with Iran’s Ayatollah Khomeini by ripping off the chador she had been obliged to wear — yelling about “these medieval rags!” She wrote of “the monstrous darkness of a religion which produces nothing but religion .. secretly envious of us, confessedly jealous of our way of life. … [I]n Europe the mosques literally swarm with terrorists or candidate terrorists.”
In Europe today, Islamists and the radical left have allied themselves in the Green-Red alliance with a common antisemitic agenda under the guise of anti-Israelism. Their vocal demonstrations in the streets of Amsterdam, Berlin, Brussels, London, and Paris have intimidated the governments, who have done little to stem the gushing hate displayed and the violence accompanying such events, as demonstrated earlier this month in Amsterdam. Whereas peaceful demonstrations are a given in western democracies, incitement to violence is proscribed.
With the Muslim population in Europe swelling into double-digit percentages, and stagnant native European birthrates, it is only a matter of a generation or two before radical Islam truly becomes dominant in Europe. In her 2005 book titled Eurabia: The Euro‐Arab Axis, Bat Yeor, the pen name for Gisèle Littman, pointed out that Europe has surrendered to Islam and is in a state of submission (described as dhimmitude) in which Europe is forced to deny its own culture, stand silently by in the face of Muslim atrocities, accept Muslim immigration, and pay tribute through various types of economic assistance.
Incoming U.S. president Donald Trump, by acting on his unintimidated commitment to deport illegals and criminal aliens from the U.S., may just show the Europeans how to save their culture. It is time for the European elites to consider acting aggressively on behalf of their survival.
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2024/11/western_europe_s_muslim_problem.html
Germany: Victim of Islamic terrorism in Mannheim and critic of Islam Michael Stürzenberger convicted of incitement to hatred
The critic of Islam Michael Stürzenberger, who was seriously injured with a knife by an Afghan in Mannheim at the end of May, has been convicted of incitement to hatred.
At the end of May, the well-known critic of Islam Michael Stürzenberger was stabbed with a knife and seriously injured by an Afghan in Mannheim’s market square. The attacker injured other people, including a police officer, who eventually succumbed to his injuries. The suspected Afghan, who is also considered an IS sympathiser, was charged with murder, among other things. Stürzenberger has been warning of the dangers of Islamism for years. But now he has been convicted of incitement to hatred.
The judgement is said to have been handed down on Monday at the Hamburg district court and refers to a rally at which he is said to have denigrated Muslims and migrants, as documented by a left-wing blog on X. Stürzenberger had previously been sentenced to prison in the first instance, but the regional court suspended the sentence on probation. Due to a formal error by the court, an appeal was allowed and the case had to be retried. The public prosecutor’s office had pleaded for 120 daily rates of 40 euros each, the court sentenced Stürzenberger to 120 daily rates of 30 euros each, i.e. a fine of 3,600 euros. Both parties accepted the judgement in the courtroom. It is therefore legally binding.
In the responses, some users were outraged by the judgement: ‘Didn’t an Islamist want to kill him – and thus confirm Stürzenberger’s theories?’ asked one user. ‘The man is almost massacred by a Muslim in this country and convicted of incitement to hatred. You can’t make this stuff up,’ writes another. Yet another user explains that Stürzenberger has proven ‘that he is right’. One user even describes Stürzenberger as a ‘hero in the fight against Islamisation’. His educational work in relation to political Islam is ‘unparalleled’. The fact that he is being covered in ‘ludicrous accusations and judgements’ is ‘ an irony of history’.
The free world is collapsing
by Giulio Meotti
With Hague’s Court mandates to arrest Netanyahu and Gallant we are witnessing the collapse of the free world.
Hamas celebrates.
Iran rejoices.
Turkey is ready to do its part with Sultan Erdogan who always gets away with bombing Kurds, Armenians and other peoples sacrificed to his Ottoman expansionist aims.
The European Union, through the mouth of the useless Spanish socialist Josef Borrell, says it is faithful to international law.
China is tempted to celebrate, but cannot do so fully since it has not signed the Rome Statute on the Court of The Hague.
Donald Trump, who is putting together the most pro-Israel administration in American history, has already made it known that he will impose sanctions on the Hague Court.
Orban’s Hungary is the most pro-Israel. Orban also invited Netanyahu to Budapest.
Belgium, with its subjugation and Qatari penetration, is for arresting him (there is something rotten in Brussels).
Norway, with its progressive quislings, is the country with the fewest number of Jews in Europe and is the most pro-Hamas. The Norwegian Foreign Minister, Espen Barth Eide, is more pro-Hamas than the Arab countries and was photographed alongside the daughter of the Palestinian Arab terrorist involved in the Paris attack in which six people were killed at the Jewish restaurant Jo Goldenberg.
In Vichyist France, Islamogoscism will play its part.
Holland, with its pogroms, is for arresting Netanyahu. But Geert Wilders distances himself and writes: “The world has gone mad.”
Dhimmi-Labour England is for arresting the Israelis. London has enough problems with Islamists to alienate them even more. Not only because the Muslim population of the United Kingdom is growing ten times faster than the general population. Prime Minister Starmer also fears the rise of the “Communists for Islam” party led by Corbyn.
Social-communist-Eta Spain is for arresting Netanyahu. The Spanish left is with Cuba, Iran and Hamas.
Germany and Italy are taking their time.
The Canada of the super woke Trudeau wants to arrest Netanyahu (the Conservatives are against). In the streets of Canada, people are marching now shouting “Jihad Jihad Jihad”.
The Argentina of the heroic Javier Milei is with Israel. Afuera!
The Brazil of the communist Lula is for the arrest (when will Jair Bolsonaro return?).
The Colombia of the communist Gustavo Petro is for the arrest.
Chile too. “Forward to the Bolivarian revolution!”. This is how the young and woke Chilean president Gabriel Boric supported the regime of Nicholas Maduro in Venezuela. “I die as I lived… my respects, Commander”, wrote Boric upon the death of Fidel Castro. The same Boric who promised to “bury liberalism”. Like when he calls Greta Thunberg “the best thing that has happened in a long time.”
Everything is connected: wokists, socialists (welfarists are natural allies of Islamists), Peronists, multilateral sepulchres, radical ecologists, useful idiots of the BRICS.
And so in the end, what the mainstream media calls the “populist international” (Milei, Wilders, Trump, Orban etc) in the end turns out to be the last political trench in defense of a people who refuse to be subjugated by Islamic terrorism and the alliance between Eurabia, communist remnants and satrapies. And the Western dhimmis who fall to their knees.
Hague: the countries who attack Israel and those who defend it | Israel National News – Arutz Sheva
‘Secret letter’ reveals German Greens minister asked France for nuclear energy support
Feathers have been ruffled by the unearthing of a secret letter from the German Vice-Chancellor and Greens party member Robert Habeck to the then-French energy minister Agnès Pannier-Runacher in the summer of 2022.
It revealed that the German nuclear phase-out was only conceivable for Habeck at that time if his country could lean on French nuclear power.
The letter was revealed by the magazine Cicero on November 27.
Habeck, who as economy and climate minister presided over the nuclear phase-out, had written: “Dear Agnes, on the fringes of the Council of Energy Ministers, we discussed the energy situation in our countries.”
“You said that the French Government’s goal is to have 40 gigawatts of nuclear power on the grid by November 1, 2022 and 50 gigawatts by January 1, 2023. Can you confirm that I remembered that correctly?”
With the letter, he appeared to some to be fishing for more information about the French output, knowing that German energy production was set to take a heavy hit as a result of closing down its nuclear power plants.
Geheimbrief an Amtskollegin in Paris: Im Sommer 2022 fragte Habeck nach französischem Atomstrom, um den deutschen Atomausstieg zu retten. https://t.co/k9LOSAEl6k pic.twitter.com/COQGEa7ax5
— Daniel Gräber (@dg_graeber) November 27, 2024
Pannier-Runacher struck a different tone in her response to Habeck. Rather than “Dear Robert”, she opted for “Monsieur le Vice-Chancelier” (Mr Vice-Chancellor).
In her reply, she also pointed out her country’s disagreement with Berlin on how, she said, it tried to disadvantage nuclear power in the European regulatory framework in favour of “renewable energies”.
“In the same spirit of solidarity and mutual recognition of the different paths taken by our two states to achieve CO2 neutrality, the French authorities would like to see closer co-operation with their German partners in order to create a fair and balanced regulation in European law,” Pannier-Runacher wrote.
“The decarbonisation of the European energy mix must be a priority and at the same time strengthen our energy independence.”
In later interviews the former French energy minister pointed out: “The Greens [are] never troubled to use French nuclear power.”
“Each country must assume its responsibility to ensure its own supply and contribute to the stability of the European network,” she told German newspaper Handelsblatt in July 2023. “Germany risks becoming increasingly dependent on the nuclear energy of its neighbours.”
Habeck’s letter was seen as an embarrassing admission on the Greens’ part as it seemed the party wanted to keep the letter under wraps.
It only became public because Habeck’s ministry had to provide the letter to the current German Committee of Inquiry into the nuclear policy of the traffic-light government.
The committee was established to investigate Germany’s nuclear policy in the face of significant changes in the geopolitical landscape, particularly following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
Officially known as the Second Committee of Inquiry, it was formed on July 4, 2024, tasked with examining the German government’s decision-making processes regarding the national energy supply and the potential continued operation of nuclear power plants in light of these recent geopolitical developments.
Habeck had told the public in the summer of 2022 that Germany had a gas supply problem, not an electricity one.
But the letter seemed to underscore his acute awareness of the danger of an electricity shortage.
Ever since the 2010 adoption of the German “Energiewende” (energy turnaround) policy — the country’s long-term plan to transition to a climate-neutral energy system by 2045 — it has significantly increased its import of electricity from France, which gets 70 per cent of its electricity from nuclear sources.
At the same time as Germany was completing its nuclear phase-out, France had many reactors go off the grid for necessary repairs and updates.
Greens politicians jumped on this, alleging that nuclear power was unreliable but behind the scenes, it seems the Greens in the German Government were in 2022 pleading with the French to secure electricity from nuclear power plants in the upcoming winter.
Habeck’s office manager had also written: “I ask that the letter be treated confidentially and not forwarded.”
On November 27, Professor Manuel Frondel, an energy economist at the Leibniz Institute, told news outlet Bild that the German nuclear power plant exit was problematic “if you want to achieve the climate protection goals cost-effectively”.
On November 28, the Bundestag Committee of Inquiry into the 2022 energy crisis will summon the then-bosses of three nuclear power plant operators to answer questions about what they may have discussed with Habeck. The company heads are Markus Krebber (of RWE), Frank Mastiaux (formerly of EnBW) and Guido Knott (of Eon subsidiary Preussen-Elektra).
There are many doubts about whether the companies wanted to stick to the nuclear phase-out plan as Habeck and other Greens politicians portrayed it.
Experts have said they believed it would have been wiser to continue operating the safe and reliable nuclear power plants for several years given the war in Ukraine, which many predicted would lead to Germany being cut off from Russian gas and thus exposed to rising electricity prices.
In April, Cicero magazine said it found evidence that Habeck’s ministry used manipulated information to close down the last working nuclear power plants in Germany.
It claimed officials from the ministries for economics and environment advised the that continued operation of the atomic facilities should be considered but “green” activists within the ministries allegedly “played dirty games” to have such advice buried, the magazine claimed.
Can’t Take a Joke? German Social Democrats Seek Harsher Penalties for Insults
Photo: @Bundeskanzler on X, 25 October 2024
The German political establishment wants to impose even stricter punishments on ordinary citizens who dare to criticise the ruling elite on social media.
Lower Saxony’s Justice Minister, Kathrin Wahlmann, a social democrat, has presented a proposal that would give prosecutors more leeway in prosecuting “insults” that target politicians. The proposed amendment would make it easier for the judiciary to take more comprehensive action, and the penalties imposed would be harsher.
Wahlmann said she found some of the “disgusting hate comments” that politicians have had to endure “unbearable.” The current rules have “not proven to be sufficiently effective,” she added.
Wahlmann’s comments come after a series of incidents where ordinary citizens were harassed by law enforcement for simply criticising leading politicians in social media posts.
A 64-year-old pensioner’s house was raided by police, after a complaint by Vice Chancellor Robert Habeck, who was upset that the pensioner had called him an imbecile on social media. A woman had her house searched and was fined €900 for sharing a meme that made fun of leading government politicians. The editor-in-chief of the conservative news website Deutschland-Kurier was heavily fined and could even face prison time for mocking Interior Minister Nancy Faeser in a couple of satirical memes that he shared on his X account.
The prosecutors had taken action based on a law introduced by the previous Angela Merkel-led German government, according to which politicians have the right to file a criminal complaint if they believe that they have been the target of defamatory comments in relation to their official duties. Someone found guilty of such a crime can be fined or imprisoned for up to three years.
In the three year-period since the law came in, more than 1,300 citizens in Germany have faced legal proceedings for allegedly insulting public officials.
The cases highlight how German politicians are unable to handle criticism, and that authorities seem incapable of making a distinction between satire and real crime.
Instead of apologising to the distraught citizens who have been harassed by law enforcement, the government wants to crack down even harder on people whose views they find “unbearable.” Vice Chancellor Robert Habeck has called for tighter regulations surrounding social media, saying that “freedom of expression” must abide by “the rules of decency and democracy.”
Wahlmann claims that the “harsh tone” politicians are being targeted with is leading to “more and more people not getting involved in politics for fear of hatred.” Her latest proposal would remove the legal pre-condition for an insult to be punishable, which is that the insult has to be in connection with the politicians’ official duties.
Child Rape in Islamized Germany
As Germany succumbs to the moonbat–Muslim alliance, the punishment Islamic colonists receive for raping children may be milder than what natives get for complaining:
A man was ordered to pay a fine of 5000 euros because he had criticised a judge in an email as being ‘obviously mentally disturbed’. The reason for his anger: the judge had only imposed a suspended sentence on a 30-year-old Syrian man who had raped a 15-year-old girl in Osnabrück in 2022. … The perpetrator only had to pay 3000 euros to the victim.
Speaking of raping children,
The Omar Al Faruq Center in Mannheim … used a flyer to advertise a ‘girls’ evening in the mosque’. This alone is cause for concern, but the event was also explicitly aimed at ‘girls and women aged 13 and over’ and was garnished with the statement: ‘Whoever gets married has completed half of their faith’.
In other words, children were to be prepared for marriage – according to Islamic tradition with a man chosen by their own clan, usually a much older man, following the example of the Prophet Mohammed.
If the worm is ever going to turn in Germany, it will have to be soon, before Muslims achieve majority status and turn the whole country into Syria. The moonbat establishment is trying to snuff out AfD for putting up resistance.
A group of Muslim ‘youths’ beat up a young gay German politician – he was taken to hospital with serious injuries
The CDU youth organisation is in shock!
The treasurer of the Junge Union Lüneburg, Simon Schmidt (24), was assaulted.
According to a police spokesman, the hunting instructor was beaten up in the playground of a comprehensive school in Lüneburg-Kaltenmoor on Monday evening. ‘A group of youths are said to have attacked the 24-year-old. The man was injured in the face during the physical altercation. He was taken to hospital in an ambulance,’ according to a report by the Lower Saxony police.
Reporters from tabloid BILD contacted the young politician after he was allowed to leave the university hospital in Hamburg-Eppendorf on Tuesday evening. He was treated there for a facial injury. He is due to have an operation on his cheekbone before Christmas.
Schmidt explains: ‘It was an anti-gay attack. I had arranged to meet a man on a dating app. The meeting place was an ambush.’ When he arrived at the meeting point, Schmidt says, ‘a horde of seven or eight migrants from Syria or Afghanistan came out from behind bushes and attacked me with fists and kicks’. Schmidt was insulted because of his homosexuality. ‘When I was lying on the ground, one of the attackers pulled out a black penknife. Another shouted: ‘We’ll stab you! A pedestrian came to my aid. The gang ran away.’
There is great concern among party members of the Junge Union. The district association informed the press today: ‘Our esteemed board member was severely beaten up and attacked with a knife by a group of young men with a migration background in a heinous attack.’ The district executive condemns ‘this outrageous act’ in the strongest possible terms.
‘Our thoughts are with our loyal friend who is suffering terrible pain due to unnecessary excesses of violence in our city,’ said district chairman Leander Zeletzki.
The young politicians lament the ‘lack of willingness to integrate on the part of certain people with a migration background, who do not shy away from brutal violence against German citizens’. They will campaign for the police to be strengthened.