- Jens Spahn, a member of Chancellor Angela Merkel’s conservative CDU party.
Migrant Sex Attacks in German State Double From Last Year
Sascha Schuermann/Getty Images
The number of sexual assaults by asylum seekers recorded in the German state of Baden-Württemberg in 2016 close to doubled from the 2015 recorded figure.
According to the Ministry of the Interior, the number of crimes of a sexual nature committed by asylum seekers in the state rose from 256 in 2015 to 482 in 2016, with the majority of offenders in this category hailing from Afghanistan and Syria.
The figures come after a traditional German festival in the state descended into chaos at the weekend as groups of young men — many of them migrants according to police — rioted, attacked officers, and launched sex attacks.
During its opening weekend on 15 and 16 July, nine sexual assaults were reported to have taken place at the folk fair in Schorndorf Castle, Baden-Württemberg, for which police were investigating suspects from Iraq and Afghanistan.
Clashes broke out on Sunday evening between two groups of youths with migration backgrounds, according to the festival organiser.
When police arrived, they were showered with glass bottles and had to equip protective clothing and call for reinforcements from neighbouring counties, while six police cars were vandalised and sprayed with graffiti.
“The level of violence faced by police was frightening,” said a force spokesman, adding: “What really struck us about the event was the aggression, which was completely unprecedented.”
Earlier in the week, police president Roland Eisele refused to disclose what proportion of the rampaging crowds were foreigners, and while police later insisted that some German youths were involved in the disorder, they admitted that a large share of the group were from “migrant backgrounds”.
“Schorndorf is a symbol of what is happening on a daily basis in many places in Germany,” said Jens Spahn, a member of Chancellor Angela Merkel’s conservative CDU party.
“It is becoming ever more clear how big the task of integration is. Too many people are of the opinion that every other culture is an enrichment. I do not feel that the everyday debasement that women experience is an enrichment,” he added.
:)
ReplyDeleteYe olde left hook.
He really decked him.
DeleteProbably end with the Public Prosecutor bringing some charge against the Catholic fellow.
ReplyDeleteOr, moslem riots.
DeleteThere will be blood. The level of anger amongst ordinary real Europeans is startlingly high. Two years ago, few people mentioned it. They are certainly mentioning it now.
ReplyDeleteThere is something seriously wrong with the German elite.
ReplyDeleteThat last guy was crazy as hell.
ReplyDeleteGermany's media failed in their duty to cover the migrant crisis responsibly and treated anyone critical of Merkel's open door policy as racist, influential German institute study finds
ReplyDeleteStudy claims some German newspapers took on the role of 'public educators'
Those critical of Merkel's open-door policy treated as racist, researchers said
Otto Brenner Institute studied thousands of articles during 2015 refugee crisis
By Julian Robinson for MailOnline
Published: 10:34 EDT, 21 July 2017 | Updated: 14:28 EDT, 21 July 2017
Germany's media failed in their duty to cover the migrant crisis responsibly and treated anyone critical of Angela Merkel's open door policy as racist, an influential German institute study has claimed.
Researchers at the Otto Brenner Institute said they studied thousands of articles published by daily newspapers during the mass influx of refugees in 2015 and 2016.
Hundreds of thousands of asylum seekers arrived in the country before the German Chancellor closed the border in March last year when Balkan states cut off the migration route.
{...}
{...}
ReplyDeleteAccording to Die Zeit, the study said newspapers appeared to take on the role of 'public educators' during the crisis instead of objective critics of public policy.
The report, to be published next week, said some publications had treated people who criticised government policy as being potentially racist.
It suggests some of the reporting 'massively contributed' to a split in German society and loss of confidence in the media.
Former Die Zeit editor Michael Haller, who led the research, told the newspaper: 'Most journalists failed in their job as someone who is supposed to objectively explain the world to readers.'
Opinions of experts, German citizens and asylum seekers themselves were often ignored, Haller added, according to The Local.
At the height of the refugee influx, thousands were crossing into Germany everyday having made their way up through southern and central Europe.
At the same time, there was a rise in support for far right Alternative for Germany (AfD) party which opposed Merkel's open-door policy.
But its support has recently plummeted as the refugee influx to Germany has slowed, and it is polling at around seven per cent nationwide.
Merkel's CDU party meanwhile has strongly regained ground, with polls showing it mustering close to 40 per cent of support, leaving the second most popular party SPD trailing at around 24 per cent.
{...}
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4718318/Merkel-critics-treated-racist-study-claims.html
ReplyDelete10 - 20 years from now, there will be hell to pay.
ReplyDeleteBy the way the Frauleins there are quite beautiful.
ReplyDeleteIf the German men won't fight to keep those they don't deserve to survive.
German men seem to be partial to dick.
ReplyDeleteJuly 22, 2017
ReplyDeleteA New Look at the Death of Europe
By Rael Jean Isaac
With the publication of The Strange Death of Europe, Douglas Murray has made a significant contribution to a crucially important, if still niche genre: the Islamization of Europe. A small number of writers (given the huge impact of this development) have focused on the issue: Bat Yeor, Oriana Fallaci, Mark Steyn, Christopher Caldwell, Bruce Bawer, Soeren Kern, Giulio Meotti, Guy Milliere, Ingrid Carlqvist. This small band is all that confronts the blatant and pervasive coverup by politicians and mainstream media.
Murray’s contribution takes several forms. He brings the story of Europe’s civilizational suicide up to date. He provides a chronological tale of the debacle from the post-World War II importation of what were imagined at the time to be temporary workers from Muslim countries needed to fill labor shortages to the disastrous decision by Angela Merkel in August 2015 to throw open Germany’s borders without limits, with the slogan “We can do it.” He sets forth Muslim terrorist actions in Europe in punctilious sequence, including those targeting individuals, like the murder of Theo van Gogh and the Charlie Hebdo staff; the attacks against Jews, and the terror aimed at the general public, for example, the Bataclan massacre and the mowing down at random of people celebrating Bastille Day at the Nice beach. He describes the broader challenge to European society posed by Muslims who do not resort to terror, but espouse values wholly at variance with those of their host countries. Most important, he seeks to explain Europe’s “strange” behavior, why Europe is committing suicide with its elites leading a reluctant but passive public over the cliff.
In part, Murray’s explanation does not differ much from that advanced by several of those cited above. In Murray’s words, “The world was coming into Europe at precisely the moment that Europe has lost sight of what it is.” It was a Europe that had lost faith in its beliefs, traditions, its very legitimacy. But Murray is especially good in focusing on the importance of guilt, what he calls Europe’s “unique, abiding, and perhaps fatal sense of and obsession with guilt” in shaping its behavior. While not ignored by others, the role of guilt has not been given the attention it deservedly gets here.
To this reviewer, that the Holocaust should shake Europe’s faith in its civilization is only right and fitting. In the current issue of Commentary Terry Teachout points out how Europe’s great orchestras dutifully fired Jewish members and banned music by Jewish composers even as the music-loving Hitler in 1938 declared “Germany has become the guardian of European culture and civilization.” It can be no surprise if Europeans ask, “How could what Hitler conceived himself as zealously guarding be worth preserving?”
But as Murray sees it, guilt has become a “moral intoxicant” -- Europeans have become “high” on it. They cannot fall back on their Christian faith because their “foundational story” was fatally weakened in the nineteenth century by the combination of Biblical higher criticism and Darwinism. The replacement beliefs in multiculturalism (and Murray quotes Samuel Huntington’s apt observation that multiculturalism is essentially an anti-Western ideology), tolerance, diversity, and “human rights” (as those who have seized control of the issue define them) are no substitute for the fervent divinely-grounded convictions of Islam.
DeleteMurray addresses the puzzling question: why there has been so little pushback from Europeans as they have been inundated by millions committed to ideologies anathema to their own? One reason is that the penalties for speaking out are high. Murray writes that those who have shouted fire over the years have been treated as arsonists. They have been “ignored, defamed, prosecuted or killed.” The media has been swift to silence those among them who dared to so much as raise the issue. Murray cites the fate of Erik Mansson, editor-in-chief of the Swedish paper Expressen, who as far back as 1993 published the results of an opinion poll showing 63% of Swedes wanted immigrants to return to their countries of origin. Noting the difference between those in power and public opinion, Mansson said he thought the subject should be discussed. The only result was that the paper’s owners promptly fired Mansson.
Being fired is the least of it. Those who are deemed to have “blasphemed” against Islam, whether cartoonists or filmmakers or forthright politicians, are hunted down by Islamists. All the government does in response is put them in hiding, provide guards or force them out of the country. The last is what the government of Holland did to Ayaan Hirsi Ali by taking away her citizenship. As far as government elites are concerned these people are not heroic champions of free speech but nuisances who have brought their troubles on themselves. Indeed the government is likely to join in the persecution, as Tommy Robinson of the English Defense League discovered in Britain and Geert Wilders in Holland, where he has twice been prosecuted by the state for “inciting discrimination and hatred.”
And the Holocaust again intrudes. When movements or political parties form to challenge the establishment parties on immigration, they are promptly labeled “racist” and “anti-Semitic” by the media and as a result neo-Nazis flock to them, making them off-limits to decent people. Murray points out that Geert Wilders is the only member of his party for precisely this reason. He fears that if he makes it a membership party skinheads will join and although he forfeits state funding (which depends on party size), he sees it as a necessary price to prevent neo-Nazis from possibly ruining the party.
DeleteThe leadership of a few EU countries (all of them in Eastern Europe) have dared to confront the majority on Muslim immigration. Hungary, Poland, Slovakia, and now, the Czech Republic, have all refused to take in what the EU has determined is their “quota” of immigrants. The most articulate member of the dissidents, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, has been defiant and blunt, saying the immigrant wave masquerades as a humanitarian cause but its true nature is occupation of territory. And he reminds the EU (although Murray surprisingly does not mention this) that Hungary was dominated by Islam for 150 years -- and knows far better than Western elites what it is like to live with Muslim communities. The response of EU leaders is to treat Orban as a moral pariah and to punish the rebellious countries financially in the hope of forcing them to back down.
Murray is not optimistic about the future. He offers reforms -- for example, finding ways to settle would-be migrants closer to their home countries, processing asylum requests abroad, evicting those whose claims to asylum have been rejected (most remain after they have been ordered to leave), ceasing and desisting the automatic demonization as “racists” of any party that raises objections to existing policy, among others.
But Murray sees scant chance of the reforms he suggests being enacted. Instead he sees the gap between political leaders and public opinion becoming more explosive. Murray reports on a survey of public opinion in 10 European countries released by the British think tank Chatham House in February 2017. In eight out of the ten (including Germany) a majority agreed with the statement “All further migration from Muslim countries should be stopped.” In Britain, one of the two where the majority disagreed, “only” 47% were in favor of halting all Muslim immigration. Ignoring public opinion as morally deficient, the governing elite go on its merry way. Murray offers a telling anecdote from the small city of Kassel in the state of Hesse. Eight hundred immigrants were due to be deposited on Kassel and residents organized a meeting to ask questions of their politicians. A video of the meeting shows calm, polite but concerned citizens. At one point, the district president Walter Lubcke tells them that anyone who does not agree with the policy “is free to leave Germany.” Like those assembled who gasp and then hoot in anger, Murray is astounded: “A whole new population is being brought into their country and they are told to leave if they don’t like it?”...........
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2017/07/a_new_look_at_the_death_of_europe.html#ixzz4nXfpAkwZ