German Politician Hit With Hate Crime Investigation For Demanding Migrant Criminals Be Deported

A CDU politician in Germany is under investigation for hate crimes after he reacted to a knife attack by an Afghan migrant by calling for the expulsion of foreign criminals from the country.

On the opening day of the Euro 2024 football tournament, a knife-wielding Afghan migrant went on a stabbing spree in Wolmirstedt which left one person dead and multiple others injured.

Detlef Gürth, a state lawmaker for the Christian Democratic Union (CDU) in Saxony-Anhalt, reacted by posting on X, “This pack has to get out of Germany.”

And that was literally it.

That’s all he said before subsequently deleting the tweet.

However, it was enough for left-wing state politician Henriette Quade to file a criminal complaint against Gürth for allegedly committing a hate crime, which is now being investigated by the Halle public prosecutor’s office

“The description of Afghans as a ‘pack’ who are denied the right to live in Germany is an insult to parts of the population,” Quade ludicrously claimed.

“Those designated in this way are denied their basic right to life as equal individuals in the community and their human dignity is thus attacked. Furthermore, the post cannot be interpreted with any understanding other than that all Afghans living in the country are (potential) murderers. The post also incites hatred against parts of the population,” she added.

Gürth was clearly referring to migrants who engage in violence, not all Afghans, but his relatively tame comment was reported to authorities anyway in another stunning example of how many in the German political establishment are more concerned about not hurting the feelings of migrants than they are stopping the wave of migrant-driven violence that has plagued the country for years.

Keep reading

US Army Revises Standards On Prohibited Extremist Activity

The U.S. Army issued new, more specific guidance on Wednesday to address extremism within its ranks and ensure disciplinary action against those who engage with or promote extremist views.

Secretary of the Army Christine Wormuth signed off on a pair of memos, published on June 26, that refine how the service will handle protests and extremist or gang activity within the ranks, and report suspected prohibited behavior. One memo a directive for “Handling Protest, Extremist, and Criminal Gang Activities“ and the other is a directive for ”Reporting Prohibited Activities.”

The memo on Handling Protest, Extremist, and Criminal Gang Activities states that prohibited activity within the Army can include distributing extremist materials online. This new Army memo reinforces a policy approach articulated by the U.S. Department of Defense in a November 2021 memo, which states that “an action taken to replicate content from one online location to another” can qualify as distributing extremist content online. The new Army memo now states the prohibited online distribution of extremist activity can include liking, sharing, and “re-tweeting” said content.

“Military personnel are responsible for the content they publish on all personal and public internet domains, including social media platforms, blogs, websites, and applications,” the memo states.

The Army’s existing policy, updated in July of 2020, had previously said prohibited online conduct could include “hazing, bullying, harassment, discriminatory harassment, stalking, retaliation, or any other types of misconduct that undermines dignity and respect” but was less specific about online extremist activity, stating only that “military personnel must reject participation in extremist organizations and associated cyber activities.”

The new memo on Handling Protest, Extremist, and Criminal Gang Activities also states soldiers who “knowingly” display paraphernalia, words, or symbols in support of extremist activity, including on flags, clothing, tattoos, and bumper stickers—whether on or off a military installation—can run afoul of the Army’s prohibitions on extremist behavior.

Keep reading

Welsh Police Pay Home Visit to Man For Displaying Reform UK Political Sign

A video shows Welsh police visiting a man’s home because he displayed a Reform UK political sign on the wall, despite this being a completely normal sight during election season.

Voice of Wales posted a clip to X showing an officer at the man’s house talking about how “concerns” had been expressed about the sign and that he needed to take a photo of it.

The officer also took a photo of another Lest We Forget Flag that is sometimes displayed outside homes to honor Britain’s war dead.

Apparently, such signs are apparently offensive and worthy of police investigation based on a single complaint, despite the fact that people in the UK routinely display signs of parties they support outside their homes during election season.

Such “concerns” were deemed a potential threat despite the fact that, according to polls, around 15-20 per cent of the British population is set to vote for Reform UK in the national election on July 4th.

According to Voice of Wales, the complaint was made by the charity which who owns the house next door, which is set to be turned into accommodation for asylum seekers (economic migrants).

As part of its manifesto, Reform UK has pledged to drastically cut mass migration and stop the flow of small boats containing illegal immigrants entering Britain.

This is by no means the only example of Brits receiving home visits from police over their political views.

Keep reading

The U.S. Power Structure is Blindly Dedicated to Israel

Recently there was an important event at Columbia Law School. The school’s law review published a piece on a sweeping legal theory of the Nakba by Harvard law student Rabea Eghbariah — and the board of the law review stepped in in unprecedented fashion to shut down the publication online. After the Intercept reported that the website had been “nuked,” the authoritarian move became an embarrassment; and the piece was restored. Though students obviously feel chilled.

This story reminds us that the U.S. establishment is firmly and blindly pro-Israel. The board that squashed the students included operators of the highest order: professor Gillian Metzger, who also serves in the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel; Justice Department senior counsel Lewis Yelin; and Ginger Anders, a former assistant to the U.S. Solicitor General.

We used to call people like this the ruling class. These high appointees understand what American values are, and today American values are standing by Israel even as it massacres thousands of children. These values surely have to do with the importance of Zionist donors to Joe Biden and universities, but they go beyond that to the makeup of the U.S. establishment. Pro-Israel voices — including Jewish Zionists — are a significant element of corporate culture. They are a generational force. Young progressives and young Jews are rejecting Israel. But they aren’t in the power structure.

One of the most telling stories about the establishment came and went last November. Two dozen leading law firms sent a letter to the leading law schools, including Harvard and Columbia, saying that they would not hire students from law schools that failed to crack down on antisemitism. And one of those firms, Davis Polk, rescinded job offers to three students who had taken part in pro-Palestinian protests. The letter said:

“We look to you to ensure your students who hope to join our firms after graduation are prepared to be an active part of workplace communities that have zero tolerance policies for any form of discrimination or harassment, much less the kind that has been taking place on some law school campuses.”

A partner at Sullivan & Cromwell told the New York Times that Jewish students feel “actually scared,” “threatened,” and “betrayed.” 

The letter was a shot across the bow of prestige schools well before Congress brought down the boom on the Harvard and Penn presidents in December. After all, the function of these schools — the reason young people clamor to get into them — is to gain employment in prestigious jobs upon graduation.

Just a week after the letter — shockingly — Columbia suspended the Palestinian solidarity groups Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) and Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP).

The law firms’ letter was “spearheaded,” the firm Paul, Weiss bragged at the time, by two Jewish chairs at two white-shoe firms (Joe Shenker, former chair of Sullivan and Cromwell, and Brad Karp, current chair at Paul, Weiss).

The letter was published at a time when many corporate leaders were issuing condemnations of the Hamas attack on Israel. Paul, Weiss chair Brad Karp explained to the Times that he was disappointed that more leaders weren’t doing so — and that being for Israel was no different than other great progressive causes, civil rights and women’s rights included.

Keep reading

Bankruptcy Trustee to Shut Down Infowars, Liquidate Its Assets to Pay Sandy Hook Families

A bankruptcy trustee on Sunday filed an emergency motion to shut down Infowars and Alex Jones’ parent company Free Speech Systems and liquidate its assets to pay the Sandy Hook families.

Earlier this month a federal judge ordered the liquidation of Alex Jones’ personal assets.

Judge Christopher Lopez approved Alex Jones’ request to convert a Chapter 11 business reorganization bankruptcy to a Chapter 7 personal bankruptcy.

However, a couple of weeks ago the judge dismissed the bankruptcy reorganization of Infowars and its parent company Free Speech Systems.

Legal experts said the Sandy Hook families could go back to the bankruptcy court and demand Alex Jones liquidate his company to pay off the Sandy Hook debt.

On Sunday the bankruptcy trustee said he intends to conduct an “orderly wind down” of Alex Jones’ media company.

Keep reading

Wales Moves Forward With Plan To Punish Politicians For Telling Lies

Will Rogers once said that “if you ever injected truth into politics, you’d have no politics.” In Wales, it appears that the government is challenging that assessment. However, if the new legislation criminalizing political lies is successful, the Welsh are likely to find themselves with the same abundance of lies but little free speech.

A proposal in the Welsh parliament (or the Senedd) would make it the first country in the world to impose criminal sanctions for lying politicians. Adam Price, the former leader of the liberal Plaid Cymru Party is pushing for the criminalization, citing a “credibility gap” in UK politics.

Astonishingly, this uniquely bad idea has received support from a key committee. Once on track for adoption, this is the type of law that can become self-propelling through the legislature. Few politicians want to go on record voting against a law banning political lies. The free speech implications are easily lost in the coverage.

The new law would make it a criminal offense for a member of the Senedd, or a candidate for election to the Senedd, to wilfully, or with intent to mislead, make or publish a statement that is known to be false or deceptive. There is a six-month period for challenges to be brought.

The law allows a defense that a statement could be “reasonably inferred” to be a statement of opinion, or if it were retracted with an apology within 14 days. If guilty, the politician would be disqualified from being a Senedd member.

The defense is hardly helpful.

It creates an uncertainty as to which statements would be deemed an opinion and which would be treated as a statement of fact. It invites selective and biased prosecutions. After all, what does it mean to accuse a politician of trying to “mislead” the public?

Keep reading

DHS ‘Intelligence Experts Group’ Classified Military Service, Religion, & Trump-Support As Indicators Of Domestic Extremism & Terrorism

A now disbanded group in Joe Biden’s Department Homeland Security (DHS) classified Trump supporters, members of the military, and people with religious views as persons likely to commit “domestic violent extremist” attacks, newly released internal files show.

DHS announced the formation of the “Homeland Intelligence Experts Group” in September 2023 to “provide advice and perspectives on intelligence and national security efforts” to the Department, but according to America First Legal, “it was a completely partisan group designed to provide top cover for the Department’s radical agenda

AFL and former Ambassador Richard Grenell filed a lawsuit against the Homeland Intelligence Experts Group soon after the group was announced, and spurred Republican members of Congress to take action against it.

AFL alleged that the group comprised of partisan actors violated the Federal Advisory Committee Act for various reasons – including its lack of balance, the Biden Administration’s inappropriate influence over it, and its lack of public notice and participation, among other things.

To avoid further litigation and scrutiny, the Biden regime agreed in May to disband the illegal group and provide its records to AFL. However, the group may have been active for a year before it was pressured to shut down.

“By the time the Homeland Intelligence Experts Group was announced in September 2023, the group had already been meeting for as long as four months,” AFL reported.

Members of the deep state cabal included former Obama intelligence officials and Russia collusion hoaxers John Brennan and James Clapper—both signatories of the infamous “Letter of 51,” which mislead the American public on the veracity of the Hunter Biden laptop story ahead of the 2020 election.

Also included in the unit were former Obama official Francis Taylor,  Asha George, Rajesh De, Caryn Wagner, and Elisa Massimino, all of whom contributed exclusively to Democrat candidates for political office.

During a meeting in September on “Collection Posture and Associated Challenges,” the partisan group discussed ways to get around the Constitutional limits to their domestic intelligence gathering goals.

Keep reading

World Economic Forum Pushes For AI Use and Collaboration in Fighting “Misinformation”

The dual approach of talking up the benefits of AI when it comes to using this still very much emerging tech to combat “disinformation,” while warning against the perils of AI in creating that same “disinformation” – continues.

The point at which these two approaches converge is censorship – “both disinformation warriors” who want to use AI in their fight, and AI doomsayers who claim deepfakes will destroy democracies, work towards “monitoring,” “labeling,” and ultimately, controlling content.

And sometimes they’re the same informal but powerful groups, or government agencies and legacy media.

In this “installment” of the AI story coming from the World Economic Forum (WEF), authored by heads of AI, Data, and Metaverse Cathy Li and Global Coalition for Digital Safety Project Lead Agustina Callegari, we learn that WEF would like policymakers, tech firms, researchers, and civil rights groups to all band together and push for deployment of advanced AI-driven systems combating “disinformation and misinformation.”

The technique they would like explored, developed, and used would rely on pattern, language, and context analysis “to aid content moderation.”

The two authors of the post published by WEF are optimists: they think (or say they do) that AI-driven content analysis is at a level where it is capable of “understanding” context almost perfectly – or as they put it, understanding “the nuances between misinformation (unintentional spread of falsehoods) and disinformation (deliberate spread).”

The article speaks favorably about authenticity and watermarking of content – such as is done by Adobe, Microsoft, et al., through their Coalition for Content Provenance and Authenticity (C2PA), throwing the obligatory bone in the direction of those worried about privacy and protecting journalists from persecution “in conflict zones” (but what about journalists in all the other zones?)

Keep reading

Feds Building Massive Detention Facilities IN ALL 50 STATES to Imprison Political Dissidents, Documentary Claims

The US federal government is in the process of building a massive network of internment camps spanning all 50 states intended not to house illegal aliens, but political dissidents, a shocking documentary claims.

Speaking to Redacted’s Clayton Morris, former Customs and Border Protection agent J.J. Carrell revealed a whistleblower in his upcoming documentary, “Treason,” exposes the scheme to build massive facilities that can house tens of thousands of people in every state.

“It’s not for these illegals,” says former federal contractor Kristi Hutcherson in an excerpt from the documentary.

“I believe it’s…kind of like what Nazis did with the Jews, concentration camps, processing facilities. They’re going to need somewhere to process the dissidents,” she says.

The 24-year CBP veteran went on to tell Morris that Hutcherson has access to federal databases where bids are placed for a variety of contracts.

“But… she says to me there’s bids for detention facilities being built in all 50 states in America,” he said.

Carrell notes despite hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants entering the US, he’s been informed by sources that the facilities, many of which are on the southern border, contain as many as 40,000 empty beds.

According to Carrell, Hutcherson explains in the interview the facilities are for dissidents who disobey the federal government, which may include people who refuse to take mandated jabs, defiant MAGA supporters, or members of militias.

Asked what the facilities look like, Carrell described, “I think they’re going to look like just the facilities that we’re seeing where the children are being held in, those FEMA camps.”

“That’s what they’re building. They’re building FEMA camps,” Carrell said, describing soft-sided large white tents surrounded by barbed-wire like those seen in New York City to house the migrant influx.

Keep reading

Australian Premier Creates Ministry In Charge Of ‘Changing Men’s Behavior’

The development of totalitarian governments always coincides with sweeping efforts to socially engineer the population to adhere to less rebellious behaviors.  Specific groups that present a threat to the regime are usually identified and targeted with propaganda or indoctrination.  In tandem, the rest of the population is also conditioned to fear those groups and treat them with suspicion.  In this way the establishment elites mold the more submissive public into a shield that protects them from the revolutionaries that might dethrone them.

But what happens when the social engineers want to create tyranny on a global scale?  The list of possible rebels grows exponentially larger and efforts to control them all or demonize them all become far more complex.  How can the elites simplify their agenda and suppress the public with more efficiency?  

The only answer is to attack and cripple the largest subset of the population that is most likely to give them problems in the future.  Which monolithic group is more likely to fight back against the system?  Obviously, the answer is masculine men.  Therefore, this new global regime seeks to undermine and sabotage men, labeling masculinity an existential danger to society, like nuclear weapons or global warming.

In recent years Australia has been at the forefront of many authoritarian experiments.  Their egregious violations of citizen liberties during the covid hysteria were astonishing.  Perhaps even worse has been the complete takeover of DEI within the Australian government along with the infestation of radical feminism.  Australia, it would seem, is all but lost to the nightmare of the woke religion.  

That’s why it’s not at all surprising that the the Premier of the Australian state of Victoria has created a new ministry tasked with the purpose of changing and perhaps even controlling men.

Jacinta Allan announced this month that state MP Tim Richardson would serve as the inaugural Parliamentary Secretary for Men’s Behavior Change – the first position of its kind in the country.  The appointment was in response to Prime Minister Anthony Albanese calling gender-based violence a “national crisis” and promising greater government action.  First, Australia blamed guns for violent crime; now they are blaming men in general.

Keep reading