As Germany struggles to cope with its Muslim migrant problem, the Interior Ministry has launched an ad campaign to pay migrants to go back home. This move is a retreat from the globalist utopian vision of open borders and the goal of bringing migrants into Europe as workers and taxpayers to compensate for the low birthrates in Western nations.
Back in 2017, Berlin offered compensation to rejected refugees who wouldn’t fight deportation. Every volunteer returnee normally gets some €1,200 from the German authorities but, according to German media, under the new program they could get up to €3,000.
And while reports (consistent with the globalist agenda) are circulating about public opposition to the idea of paying migrants to go home, that claim is not realistic. Germany has experienced chaos because of the migrant influx, prompting even Angela Merkel to flip-flop on her own views toward migrants. Merkel has even acknowledged the rise of Islamic anti-semitism in her country. Meantime, when a Muslim migrant beheaded a 1-year-old infant, Merkel banned media reporting. The report below minimizes the fallout from the migrant crisis in Germany, and asserts about the Interior Ministry ad campaign:
Ordinary people seemingly did not appreciate the initiative either, with many interpreting the true message behind the slogan as: “Germany is not your land and your future is not here.” Others simply called the campaign “horrible”while slamming the very idea of such initiative as “inhumane.”
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu’s appeal to Yukiya Amano, Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), at the UN General Assembly in New York in September was met with a cold shoulder. The latest IAEA report claims that Iran continues to be in compliance with the 2015 JCPOA deal restricting its nuclear activities, despite the revelations by Israeli intelligence this year that showed Tehran’s clandestine military nuclearization. The Trump administration has promised that it will press the IAEA to examine the Israeli revelations.
Notwithstanding the US withdrawal from the JCPOA nuclear deal with Iran and restoration of sanctions on Tehran, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) confirmed in its most recent quarterly report (November 12) that Iran continues to comply with the JCPOA. The report is an almost word-for-word copy of last year’s quarterly reports on nuclear verification and monitoring in Iran. It takes no account whatsoever of the revelations earlier this year by Israeli intelligence about Iran’s covert nuclear weaponization. Those findings were presented to the international community by Benjamin Netanyahu on April 30 and at the UN General Assembly in New York on September 27.
In his speech at the UN General Assembly, Netanyahu demanded that IAEA Director General Yukiya Amano dispatch inspectors to a second secret facility exposed recently in Tehran. According to Netanyahu, the facility has been identified by Israeli intelligence as an atomic warehouse in which massive amounts of equipment and material for Iran’s secret nuclear weapons program are stored. Netanyahu urged Amano, “Go and inspect this atomic warehouse immediately before the Iranians clean it out… While you’re at it, inspect the other sites. Once and for all, tell the world the truth about Iran.”
One of the many ways that Muslims manage to enter and settle in the West is by marrying a Muslim who is already living in the West as a legal migrant or even as a citizen.
One version is that where Pakistani-British men return to Pakistan to find a bride, most often a cousin, who will be unused to Western ways, unlike Pakistani-British girls brought up in the U.K. For the Muslim girl, this arranged marriage appears not much different from the arranged marriage her family would otherwise make for her to a husband in Pakistan. In fact, she will come out ahead, because when her new husband brings her back to the U.K as his wife, even though she may live in a Muslim neighborhood, she will have more freedom of movement than would ever have been possible in Pakistan. She may acquire a better knowledge of English, offered by the generous welfare state of Britain. She may then have the further possibility of being able to work outside the house, depending on how liberal her husband is, and how great is the family’s need for money. She and her children will receive medical care far beyond what would have been possible in Pakistan. Her children will receive educations superior to anything they could get in Pakistan.
And in this way, many thousands of Pakistani girls and women are allowed into the U.K. each year — no one seems to know exactly how many — as the wives, in arranged marriages, sometimes forced, of Muslim men already living in the country legally, thereby helping to increase the number of Muslims in Britain.
At the start of this decade, a minor story occurred that set the scene for the years that have followed. In 2010, a Saudi lawyer named Faisal Yamani wrote to the Danish newspapers that had published cartoons of Islam’s prophet, Mohammed. Claiming to act on behalf of 95,000 descendants of Mohammed, the Saudi lawyer said that the cartoons were defamatory and that legal proceedings would thereby begin.
However, everything about the supposed legal claim reeked. How had Mr Yamani located all these descendants? How had he come up with exactly 95,000 of them? And how could you claim that a statement about somebody who died 1,400 years ago was “defamatory”? Legally, one cannot “defame” the dead.
Everything about the claim was laughable Yet it had its desired effect. At least one Danish paper — Politiken — swiftly issued an apology for republishing the cartoons. So Mr Yamani got what he wanted. He had (one might suggest) conjured up a set of alleged victims and cobbled together an alleged offence, but no matter, because he also got a European newspaper to fold in no seconds flat. It was an interesting probe of the European system of justice — and a good example of submission. And a fine scene-setting precedent for the decade that has followed.
Now, eight years later, an even greater act of submission has come along. This one not imposed from some dodgy Saudi lawyer, but from the highest court in Europe.
At the end of last month, the European Court of Human Rights issued its ruling in a long-running case involving an Austrian woman named Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff. Way back in 2009, in Vienna, Sabaditsch-Wolff (who has lived in several Muslim countries) gave two seminars entitled, “Basic Information on Islam.” During these talks, in the words of the ECHR:
“Happy Birthday, Muhammad,” the New York Times proclaimed happily last Tuesday in a propaganda piece by Haroon Moghul, the author of a book confidently entitled How to Be a Muslim. I’d say it was a new low for the Times if the Gray Lady didn’t keep stooping lower every day.
Moghul details how he rediscovered Muhammad during a time of doubt, marveling “that he buried the least loved of his fellow Arabs with his own hands. That he put two of his fingers together and promised that he and the orphan would be that close in the life to come. That he so loved the vulnerable that God loved him in turn.”
Laying it on even thicker, Moghul continues: “He was an outsider like me. Being an orphan from age 6 in a very patrilineal, very patriarchal and very tribal society must have been a social death sentence. Muhammad could have reacted by seething with resentment and lashing out at the world. He could have turned on himself. Instead he became a paragon of compassion.”
Why should we believe Moghul? Because he knows: “I’d memorized Muhammad’s life story in Sunday school, cramming facts, dates, lineages into my head as if I was preparing for an A.P. exam, a good Muslim like my parents wanted me to be.”