RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2020/01/chilly-winter-norway-bruce-bawer/

Once upon a time, Norway’s Progress Party was anti-establishment. Founded in 1973, it stood for individual liberty, lower taxes, and fewer regulations in a country whose postwar welfare state had been built on collectivism, high taxes, and ubiquitous government intrusion into every aspect of life. In later decades, as the perils of mass Muslim immigration became more and more obvious, only the Progress Party opposed the nation’s self-destructive policies on this front. Some Progress Party politicians even said that if handed power, they’d seek to end the state monopoly on liquor sales and to privatize NRK, the taxpayer-funded government broadcaster and Labor Party propaganda organ.

For years, establishment parties and mainstream media dishonestly painted the Progress Party as a bunch of far-right Islamophobes; but for a growing number of Norwegians who were unimpressed with the twin faiths of statism and Islam, it stood for freedom and competition, law and order, and common sense about the Religion of Peace.

In September 2013, the day of which Progress Party voters had dreamed finally arrived: a general election swept the Progress Party into the government for the first time, as the junior partner in a coalition with the Conservatives. While Conservative leader Erna Solberg became Prime Minister, Siv Jensen, head of the Progress Party, was named Minister of Justice. Writing at this website shortly thereafter, I discussed a recently published anthology about Norwegian society and politics that contained essays by both women. Solberg’s “toothless” essay, I wrote, painted an absurd, PC picture of “innocent Muslims being denied social acceptance by bigoted Norwegians”; Jensen’s, by contrast, was “a call to arms” in which she “tackle[d] head-on the Muslim leaders in Norway who spread conspiracies about Jews and who refuse to reject the death penalty for gays.” I called Jensen Norway’s “Iron Lady.”

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/15496/iran-lobbyists

Recently, three Republican senators, Ted Cruz (TX), Tom Cotton (AK) and Mike Braun (IN) have called on the U.S. Department of Justice to open an investigation into the National Iranian American Council (NIAC).
According to the Iranian American Forum: “Some of these documents are posted here and reveal NIAC’s relation and collaboration with Iranian officials and business interests inside Iran. They show that NIAC coordinated its lobby with the Iranian ambassador to the UN to influence the US policy with Iran.”
Why do those who may lobby for the mullahs attempt to fly under the radar, act less conspicuously and fail to register?
Now is the time for the US and other Western governments to investigate and closely watch those who beat the drum for the anti-American and anti-Israeli Islamic Republic of Iran.

Iran’s leaders have freely admitted that they have lobby groups and operatives in the West, including the US, working hard to advance Tehran’s anti-Western, anti-American, fundamentalist ideas. Iran’s Intelligence Minister Mahmoud Alavi even boasted that Tehran runs a lobby group in Washington that promotes the hardline agenda of his country’s ruling mullahs. According to the Washington Examiner:

“A ‘lobby group for the Islamic Republic of Iran’ is actively bolstering Tehran’s status in the international stage and helping to sell and legitimize its nuclear ambitions as just causes to the globe, Alavi claimed.”

The chairman of “Oil Contracts Restructuring Committee” in Iran, Mehdi Hosseini, when asked whether there are Western entities that pressure their governments on behalf of the Islamic Republic, stated: “Yes. They have done this in the past.” These efforts, he added, “will help us and we should exploit these opportunities.”

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/15291/germany-antisemitism-selective-fight

“[T]here is no reason to give the all-clear. The threat situation in Germany remains tense; it has stabilized on a high level…Germany continues to be a target of jihadist organizations such as ISIL or al-Qaeda. Consequently, Germany as well as German interests in various regions in the world are facing a constantly serious threat, which may any time manifest itself in terrorist attacks motivated by jihadism.” — 2018 Annual Report on the Protection of the Constitution, Germany.

The new governmental initiative, however, appears to be directed only against anti-Semitism committed by right-wing extremists.

The question, then, is why jihadi anti-Semitism does not appear to have been included in the German government’s package of initiatives to combat anti-Semitism?

Given the official threat scenario, the German government owes all its citizens an explanation as to why it is so “selective” in its response to anti-Semitism.

The German government recently announced that it would be cracking down on free speech, with Justice Minister Christine Lambrecht claiming that the German government “is confronting right-wing extremism and anti-Semitism by all means enabled by the rule of law.” The government presented a package of measures, including some that will limit free speech. According to German news outlet Deutsche Welle:

“[O]nline service providers, such as Facebook, YouTube and Twitter will be obliged to report hate speech to German authorities, and also pass on the IP address of the conspicuous user. Until now, such social media giants have only been required to delete hate speech within a certain time period.”

Germany’s controversial censorship law, known as NetzDG, which came into effect on October 1, 2017, requires social media platforms to delete or block any online “criminal offenses” such as libel, slander, defamation or incitement, within 24 hours of receipt of a user complaint. Social media companies receive seven days for more complicated cases. If they fail to do so, the German government can fine them up to 50 million euros for failing to comply.

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/15478/turkey-truthophobia

The ways through which the Turkish state silences dissent are typical of the unfree world.

A clear majority of Turks think that their rights are systematically violated and that they are not equal before law. Then half of them keep voting for Erdoğan (and his allies). These two facts point to a third, and unpleasant conclusion: Millions of Turks know that their country is not free and just, but they keep voting for the leader who is responsible for the gross democratic deficit…

This is a bad message to Erdoğan: You will keep winning votes no matter how maliciously you crush dissent. We are with you and your undemocratic rule.

In 2014 the government of Turkey’s strongman Recep Tayyip Erdoğan banned YouTube and Twitter, fearing that millions of young Turks could otherwise read “dangerous content” on social media. The Constitutional Court declared the bans unconstitutional. In 2017, the Turkish government banned Wikipedia. That ban was removed only recently, after two and a half years. It is not that Wikipedia is a reliable source of information. Banning it altogether is a rogue state behavior. It is not, however, only about Wikipedia: in Turkey, truth, regardless of its source, is feared and often banned.

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/15483/animal-cruelty-beheaded-christians

The Bishops’ Conference of Nigeria described the area as “killing fields”, like the ones the Khmer Rouge created in Cambodia to exterminate the population.

“We are Aramaic people and we don’t have this right to have anyone protect us? Look upon us as frogs, we’ll accept that — just protect us so we can stay in our land”. — Nicodemus Daoud Sharaf, the Syrian Orthodox Archbishop of Mosul the capital of Iraqi Kurdistan, home to many of the Christians who fled jihadis, National Catholic Register, April 7, 2017.

In an era of round-the-clock information… the abominations suffered by Christians have been left without images, while the brutality against the Chinese pig was streamed all over. Christians are an endangered species; pigs are not.

One of the last Nigerian Christians was executed by an Islamic State child soldier. Slaughterhouses’ workers go on trial in France for abuses to animals. But the same France has already repatriated more than 250 ISIS fighters, the same people who turn Iraqi churches into slaughterhouses.

First there was the beheading of 11 Nigerian Christians during the recent Christmas celebration. The next day, a Catholic woman, Martha Bulus, was beheaded in the Nigerian state of Borno with her bridesmaids, five days before the wedding. Then there was a raid on the village of Gora-Gan in the Nigerian state of Kaduna, where terrorists shot anyone they met in the square where the evangelical community had gathered, killing two young Christian women. There was also a Christian student killed by Islamic extremists who recorded his execution. Then pastor Lawan Andimi, a local leader of the Christian Association of Nigeria, was beheaded.

https://www.bbc.com/news/health-51048366?utm_source=pocket-newtab

A virus – previously unknown to science – is causing severe lung disease in China and has also been detected in other countries.

More than 80 people are known to have died from the virus, which appeared in the Chinese city of Wuhan in December.

There are already almost 3,000 confirmed cases, and experts expect the number will keep rising.

A new virus arriving on the scene, leaving patients with pneumonia, is always a worry and health officials around the world are on high alert.

Can this outbreak be contained or is this something far more dangerous?

Coronavirus: Your questions answered

Wuhan: The London-sized city where the virus began

China coronavirus: What we know so far

What is this virus?

Officials in China have confirmed the cases are caused by a coronavirus.

These are a broad family of viruses, but only six (the new one would make it seven) are known to infect people.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome (Sars), which is caused by a coronavirus, killed 774 of the 8,098 people infected in an outbreak that started in China in 2002.

“There is a strong memory of Sars, that’s where a lot of fear comes from, but we’re a lot more prepared to deal with those types of diseases,” says Dr Josie Golding, from the Wellcome Trust.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/chinas-censorship-helps-spread-the-virus-11580071968?mod=opinion_lead_pos5

Xi Jinping has acknowledged that the “accelerating spread” of a new coronavirus from the central Chinese city of Wuhan is a “grave situation.” To stop the virus’s spread, the Chinese government has barred residents of Wuhan and nearby cities from traveling and blocked outbound flights, trains, buses and ferries. But if this develops into a catastrophe, the cult of personality around Mr. Xi and the Communist regime’s efforts to control information will deserve much of the blame.

For a precedent, look back to 1918, when the Spanish flu broke out amid World War I. In the U.S., government officials and the press did all they could to play it down lest it hurt the war effort. While the Los Angeles health chief declared there was “no cause for alarm” and the Arkansas Gazette described the disease as the “same old fever and chills,” people were dying by the thousands.

The name “Spanish flu” was a misnomer. In the countries where it originally surfaced—France, China and the U.S.—the news was suppressed by censorship and self-censorship to maintain wartime morale. (China sent only civilian laborers to the battlefield, but it declared war on Germany in August 1917.) Not until King Alphonse XIII of neutral Spain fell ill did news of the virus spread widely.

Between the spring of 1918 and early 1919, three waves of Spanish flu tore across the planet, facilitated by censorship and secrecy. The results were catastrophic: 50 million people were killed world-wide, including nearly 700,000 Americans.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2020/01/the_obamaclintoninduced_mess_in_libya_continues_to_grow.html

The chaos that the Obama-Clinton diplomacy unleashed in Libya continues to grow. It started when U.S.-French-NATO-led military intervention toppled Col. Moammar Qaddafi in 2011. After his government fell, Qaddafi was then beaten and sodomized with a bayonet by an irate mob of Libyans before being shot to death. This prompted our illustrious Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to show the class she is noted for by crowing, “We came, we saw, he died.”

Yes — Qaddafi, who was no threat to America, died. But so did any semblance of stability in Libya and the ensuing chaos still reverberates to this day. Due to the power vacuum created by Qaddafi’s abrupt removal, Libya has now become a battleground for proxies motivated by Libya’s oil wealth and fighting for geopolitical influence and over ideological differences. The country is a confusing mess. Here is a thumbnail sketch to sort out the parties currently involved.

Tripoli is the seat of the provisional government. It is backed by the United Nations and is supported by Turkey, which has over 1,000 troops there along with another 1,200 or so battle-hardened Syrian fighters. 

On the other side is the warlord Khalifa Hifter, a former Libyan army general. He is backed by Russia, Egypt, and the United Arab Emirates (UAE). It is reported that Russia has brought in about 1,500 mercenaries. These include skilled snipers and personnel to guide artillery and air support.  This situation is dangerous and could lead to a direct conflict between Turkey and Russia.

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/15376/eu-integration-report

It is worth noticing that the European Commission places the responsibility for integration of third-country nationals exclusively on the shoulders of EU member states.

The most conspicuous aspect of the report is how it insists that integration of people who have come mainly from the Middle East and Africa is merely an issue of ensuring that the rights that they are entitled to under EU and national laws be fulfilled and everyone will live happily ever after. It takes a lot of denial of the facts to reach such a conclusion….

First, the report appears to operate on the premise that EU countries have unlimited resources at their disposal with which to care for third country nationals. It completely ignores, for example, that countries such as Sweden, as a result of the high number of migrants that they have taken in, are now experiencing financial hardships that make it difficult even properly to take care of their own nationals.

Second, the report completely disregards how poorly the project of multiculturalism in Europe, including the integration of people from the Middle East and Africa, has fared until now.

The Six Country Immigrant Integration Comparative Survey… conducted 9,000 telephone interviews in Germany, France, Netherlands, Austria, Belgium and Sweden. The respondents were Turkish and Moroccan immigrants. Two thirds of the Muslims interviewed said that religious rules were more important to them than the laws of the country in which they lived.

The EU’s Agency for Fundamental Rights instead has chosen to ignore reality. The question is why.

The European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights recently published a report in which it warned Europe against creating a “lost generation” of migrants aged 16-24, who had arrived in Europe between 2015 and 2018. The report focuses particularly on the experiences of those young people who arrived in 2015-16 and looks specifically at the five EU member states with the most asylum applicants: Austria, France, Germany, Italy and Sweden. The report also includes Greece, as it is a first EU member state of arrival.