Displaying posts categorized under

WORLD NEWS

Does The Netherlands Have a Problem? by Judith Bergman

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/13362/netherlands-problem

“The number of Dutch victims of grooming gangs has risen sharply in recent years”. It is estimated that rape-groomers force around 1400 under-age girls into sex-slavery every year. — Dutch newspaper Algemeen Dagblad.

“Despite stagnating growth, the size of the Dutch jihadist movement is cause for concern.” — Terrorist Threat Assessment for the Netherlands (DTN), published by the National Coordinator for Security and Counterterrorism.

It is estimated that 140 mosques in the Netherlands are affiliated with the Religious Affairs Directorate of the Republic of Turkey (Diyanet). One sermon, given in the city of Hoorn, was about jihad and martyrdom: “The one who dies in the way of Allah, never call him dead, but call him alive”.

“Right-wing extremists are growing more confident. They continue to focus on protesting against the perceived Islamisation of the Netherlands, the arrival of asylum seekers and the perceived loss of Dutch identity…” [emphasis added] wrote Dutch authorities in a September threat assessment.

Islamization in the Netherlands, however, is not merely a “perception” of “right-wing extremists” but an increasingly established trend. The threat assessment by the country’s National Coordinator for Security and Counterterrorism, for example, shows that Islamic terrorism has been growing for several years. “Despite stagnating growth, the size of the Dutch jihadist movement is cause for concern,” it wrote.

Academic Stabbed to Death for ‘Insulting Mohammed’ During Lecture By Jack Crowe

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/academic-stabbed-to-death-for-insulting-mohammed-during-lecture/

An Irish lecturer was stabbed to death by a student outside the Paris university where he taught on Wednesday for allegedly insulting the prophet Mohammed by displaying a drawing of him during class.

John Dowling, 66, was speaking with a student, identified by authorities only as Ali R., following a lecture when the 37-year old student fatally stabbed him 13 times in the throat and chest.

The suspect, who is set to be indicted for murder on Friday, told the authorities that, while he killed Dowling to defend his faith against a perceived slight, he has also long maintained a personal grudge against the lecturer, the Daily Mail reported Friday.

Government prosecutor Catherine Denis said that Ali has nurtured an ‘obsessive resentment’ against the university since it expelled him in September 2017.

“He came to France two years ago to join the management school, but did not pass his first year,” she said. “Since then he had been returning to the college, and had become unwanted to the point that he was not allowed in any more.”

Ali’s explanation for carrying out the murder, however, cited Dowling’s display of a drawing of the prophet Mohammed during class.

Brendan O’Neill: France Revolts Against the Tyranny of Environmentalism

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/12/in-praise-of-the-gilets-jaunes/

At last, a people’s revolt against the tyranny of environmentalism. Paris is burning. Not since 1968 has there been such heat and fury in the streetsThousands of ‘gilets jaunes’ stormed the capital at the weekend to rage against Emmanuel Macron and his treatment of them with aloof, technocratic disdain. And yet leftists in Britain and the US have been largely silent, or at least antsy, about this people’s revolt. The same people who got so excited about the staid, static Occupy movement a few years ago — which couldn’t even been arsed to march, never mind riot — seem struck dumb by the sight of tens of thousands of French people taking to the barricades against Macronism.

It isn’t hard to see why. It’s because this revolt is as much against their political orthodoxies as it is against Macron’s out-of-touch and monarchical style. Most strikingly this is a people’s rebellion against the onerous consequences of climate-change policy, against the politics of environmentalism and its tendency to punish the little people for daring to live relatively modern, fossil-fuelled lives. This is new. This is unprecedented. We are witnessing perhaps the first mass uprising against eco-elitism and we should welcome it with open arms to the broader populist revolt that has been sweeping Europe for a few years now.

The ‘gilet jaunes’ — or yellow-vests, after the hi-vis vests they wear — are in rebellion against Macron’s hikes in fuel tax. As part of his and the EU’s commitment to cutting carbon emissions, Macron is punishing the drivers of diesel vehicles in particular, raising the tax by 7.6 cents for every litre of diesel fuel. This will badly hit the pockets of those in rural France, who need to drive, and who can’t just hop on buses as deluded Macronists living in one of the fancy arrondissements of Paris have suggested they should. These people on the periphery of French society — truck drivers, provincial plumbers, builders, deliverymen, teachers, parents — have rocked up to the centre of French society in their tens of thousands three times in recent weeks, their message the same every time: ‘Enough is enough. Stop making our lives harder.’

It is a perfect snapshot of the most important divide in 21st-century Europe: that between a blinkered elite and ordinary people who’ve had as much bossing about, tax rises, paternalism and disdain as they can take. So from his presidential palace in Paris, Macron decrees that the little people of the nation must pay a kind of penance for the eco-crime of driving diesel-fuelled cars, like a modern-day Marie Antoinette deciding with a wave of the hand what is good for the plebs. It’s little wonder that the graffiti left behind following the latest uprising in Paris at the weekend compared Macron to Louis XVI and demanded that he resign.

Macron’s Warning to America’s Ascendant Left The French president thought he could steamroll the rural minority on fuel taxes. Riots ensued. By Joseph C. Sternberg

https://www.wsj.com/articles/macrons-warning-to-americas-ascendant-left-1544139254

The most common explanation for France’s gilets jaunes protests against fuel-tax hikes is that they arise from too little democracy. Lower-income and rural citizens feel left behind by President Emmanuel Macron’s aggressive economic reform agenda, which ignores their interests and benefits an urban elite. The opposite is true. The protests are happening because France has too much democracy. What it’s lacking is politics.

Mr. Macron’s political movement was born of the notion that France needed to become more democratic. As a young technocrat-in-training and junior government minister, he became convinced that special interests within the traditional parties obstructed national progress.

As Economist correspondent Sophie Pedder notes in her illuminating biography of the president, the premise is that as a numerical matter there are enough actual or potential winners from economic reform and globalization that a leader could cull those voters from the old parties and unite them under a new banner. It would then be possible to steamroll minority opposition.

Which is precisely what Mr. Macron did. It helped that his rise came in an era when French politics was becoming steadily more democratic overall.

A 2000 constitutional amendment shortened the presidential term to five years from seven—explicitly to align the presidential and legislative election calendars. This amplifies a president’s mandate (already bolstered by a runoff voting system meant to exaggerate electoral support for the eventual winner) by reducing the risk that he might have to “cohabit” with a National Assembly controlled by the opposing party. Mainstream parties have adopted the U.S. style of intraparty primary campaigning, allowing party members to pick who leads them into general elections. CONTINUE AT SITE

EDWARD CLINE: NO PLATFORM FOR DISSENTERS

https://edwardcline.blogspot.com/2018/12/no-platform-for-dissenters.html

“Angela Merkle has not only fouled up Germany, but has stated that nations with borders must do away with them to allow the free invasion of their countries by “migrants.” Their sovereignty must be declared “obsolete.” And be seen as “patriotic.”

No internet platform for anyone or any organization that dissents from the mainstream verdict on anything. The Global Compact and the tech giants will naturally agree on that point.

Tim Cook, CEO of Apple said,

“And as we showed this year, we won’t give a platform to violent conspiracy theorists on the App Store. Why? Because it’s the right thing to do. We only have one message for those who seek to push hate, division, and violence: You have no place on our platforms. You have no home here.” [Applause. Brackets mine]

The Clarion Project reported:

On December 3rd, 2018, Apple CEO Tim Cook announced that tech needs to take a moral stand against hate speech, in a move that sounded very much like a nouveau form of fundamentalism. Speaking to individuals and groups believed to push hate, division and violence, Cook said, “You have no place on our platforms. You have no home here.”

Canada: Opposition, Protests and a Petition Against the UN Migration Pact A Canadian movement rises against globalist Trudeau.Christine Williams

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/272173/canada-opposition-protests-and-petition-against-un-christine-williams

The UN Migration Pact represents a catastrophic dismantling of key components of democratic institutions by the United Nations, a body that has increasingly allied with the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC). The Pact — officially named the “Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration” — indicates that it “offers a 360-degree vision of international migration and recognizes that a comprehensive approach is needed to optimize the overall benefits of migration, while addressing risks and challenges for individuals and communities in countries of origin, transit and destination.” It also states that “No country can address the challenges and opportunities of this global phenomenon on its own.”

This means (sarcasm warning ahead) that all countries must depend on the competent, just and democratic United Nations to guide them to enjoying the benefits of mass migration. To do this, one would have to turn a blind eye to the globalist vision of open borders that has plunged Europe into crisis, a crisis that has led in turn to the rise of the so-called “populist” movement. Contrary to the media’s labeling of it as “racist” and “Nazi,” this movement supports democracy, supports Israel, and aims to defend free societies, marginalize Islamic supremacists, and stop their incursions into Western countries. So-called “populist” leaders have also sought to protect their citizens from the damage of unlimited, unvetted migration.

Canada, in contrast, has offered to “lead the charge” on the UN Migration Pact.

As a concerned, patriotic Canadian citizen and Royal Canadian Air Force F18 retired combat pilot, Major Russ Cooper — co-founder of the group Canadian Citizens for Charter Rights and Freedoms — wrote a summary of his concerns about the UN Migration Pact:

Objective 2 which commits destination nations to the elimination of poverty and social inequity in originating nations;
Objective 5 requirement to assist migrants with identifying the best host country for their needs;
Objective 7 stipulation that calls for “irregular” status migrants to be considered for “regular” status;
Objective 16 direction to accommodate family reunification programs thereby expanding, exponentially, the flow rate of migration;
Objective 17 requirement to eliminate “all forms of discrimination” in the host population including those that call into question the political opinions of migrants. Here we can see Motion M-103 as a precursor for a larger, more comprehensive Global Compact initiative;
Objective 17 direction to tightly control criticism of migrants and migration programs;
Objective 17 restrictions on media outlets and professionals to ensure they are properly “sensitized” and “educated” in matters pertaining to migration;
Objective 20 stipulations that faster, better, more efficient remittance programs be developed to funnel monies out of destination and into originating nations; and
Objective 22 requirement to make all migrant-gained social benefits and pensions portable to any other jurisdictions of his or her choice.

Italy Adopts Hardline Immigration Law by Soeren Kern

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/13392/italy-immigration-law

Under the new law, the Italian government will only grant asylum to legitimate refugees of war or victims of political persecution. Asylum seekers may now lose their protection if they are convicted of crimes including: threat or violence to a public official; physical assault; female genital mutilation; and a variety of theft charges.

“I wonder if those who contest the security decree have even read it. I do not really understand what the problem is: it deports criminals and increases the fight against the mafia, racketeering and drugs.” — Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of the Interior Matteo Salvini.

Italy will not sign the United Nations Global Compact for Migration, nor will Italian officials attend a conference in Marrakech, Morocco, on December 10 and 11 to adopt the agreement. The Global Compact not only aims to establish migration as a human right, but also to outlaw criticism of migration through hate crimes legislation.

The Italian Parliament has approved a tough new immigration and security law that will make it easier to deport migrants who commit crimes and strip those convicted of terrorism of their Italian citizenship.

Italy’s lower house of parliament, the Camera dei Deputati, voted 396 to 99 on November 28 to approve the new law, which was sponsored by Interior Minister Matteo Salvini. The law had previously been approved by the Italian Senate on November 7. The measure was promulgated by President Sergio Mattarella on December 3.Also known as the “Security Decree” or the “Salvini Decree,” the new law includes several key provisions:

Eliminates Humanitarian Protection. A primary objective of the new law is to limit the number of migrants granted asylum in Italy. To achieve this aim, Article 1 of the decree abolishes residence permits for so-called humanitarian protection, a form of security available to those not eligible for refugee status.

Trump administration touts fossil fuels at U.N. climate summit By Geoff Hill

KATOWICE, Poland – President Trump may be pulling the United States out of the global Paris Accord on global warming, but the administration is making a hard sell for its side of the story at the giant UN climate summit now underway in the heart of Poland’s coal-producing region.

With delegates from rich and poor nations struggling to reach a consensus on writing the rule book for reducing emissions and battling climate change, U.S. officials and private-sector representatives are organizing a major side event Monday on the continued role of fossil fuels and nuclear power. The presentation is similar to one a year ago that angered many green groups that have clustered here.

Energy Department official Wells Griffith III will lead the event, billed as a showcase of “ways to use fossil fuels as cleanly and efficiently as possible,” along with nuclear energy.

An event at last year’s gathering in Germany, led by then White House energy adviser George David Banks, drew a protest from environmental groups. Protesters stood in the audience while singing and waving placards.

Mr. Banks told The Washington Times that many of those advocating an end to fossil fuels “do not understand the political reality facing much of the world.”

COP-24, as this year’s summit is officially known, has attracted more than 30,000 delegates from 196 countries but fewer heads of state than other years.

Tony Abbott: Australia is prepared to offer asylum to persecuted Pakistani mum

Tony Abbott: Australia is prepared to offer asylum to persecuted Pakistani mum

Former prime minister Tony Abbott says the Australian government is prepared to offer a persecuted Pakistani Christian mother asylum.

Asia Bibi spent eight years on death row in Pakistan for blasphemy against Islam.

The mother-of-five was recently acquitted in the country’s supreme court, sparking major protests.

Asia has faced ongoing threats and her family fears attacks.

Several countries have offered her asylum and Mr Abbott says “of course” Australia should too.

“It was very disappointing to me that the British government, who you’d think would be the first Western government to take this matter on, squibbed it because of ridiculous concerns about what local Muslims might think,” he tells Ben Fordham.

Civic Virtues and the Future of the Centre-Right :Tony Abbott

https://quadrant.org.au/magazine/2018/12/civic-virtues-and-the-future-of-the-centre-right/
Anthony John Abbott is an Australian politician who served as the 28th Prime Minister of Australia from 2013 to 2015 and Leader of the Liberal Party from 2009 to 2015. He served as Leader of the Opposition from 2009 to 2013. Abbott was first elected Member of Parliament for Warringah in 1994.

As our ideas have multiplied, our beliefs have diminished. That’s the big gap in Centre-Right politics which former Canadian PM Stephen Harper knows we must strive to fill. People crave a moral purpose, and if we don’t offer them any inspiration, others will fill that vacuum, but not necessarily to our countries’ good.

This is the age of disruption, in politics as much as in business, and political parties must respond or fail. In France and Italy the long-established big parties, of the Left and of the Right, have largely been swept away. In Germany, the main parties, of the Right too but especially of the Left, are much diminished. In the United States, Donald Trump smashed the Republican establishment to grab the nomination, and then smashed the Democrat establishment to grab the presidency—after the Democrat establishment had itself been rocked by Bernie Sanders. In Britain, the governing Conservatives are convulsed over Brexit; while an out-and-out Marxist has taken over the Labour Party, and quite conceivably could become prime minister. Even here in Australia, more than a quarter of the electorate is refusing to support the two main parties that, in one guise or another, have always held office.

Post-GFC low economic growth and quantitative-easing-induced asset price inflation have meant stagnant wages, less affordable housing—and more cranky voters. The big political fights are now about cultural and identity issues, not just economic ones; and the fights within political parties are becoming just as intense as those between them. On the Left, the supporters of bigger government and the opponents of tradition seem everywhere ascendant. Even on the Right, there seem to be fewer economic liberals; and, at least among the establishment, more social progressives. The decline of traditional media and the rise of social media make it easier than ever to live in echo chambers of the Left or the Right, so that anyone who doesn’t share your view seems not just wrong but alien, even immoral. In this fragmented and polarised discourse, antagonists advance alternative facts, not just competing interpretations. “Things fall apart”, so it seems, and “the centre cannot hold”. Our challenge is to re-create some common ground, as did the generations after Yeats.

Back in the Reagan–Thatcher era, it was easy enough to know what characterised the Centre-Right of politics, at least in the English-speaking world: lower taxes, smaller government and winning the Cold War. In the face of suffocating officialdom and punitive tax rates, it seemed that the conservative side of politics had become free marketeers. Only now, we conservatives can’t decide whether it’s more important that trade is free or that it’s fair. Then, there was near unanimity on the need to oppose communism; and few things unite people like a common enemy. Today, even an increasingly cold peace with China and with Russia has yet to reproduce that glue. Fading memories of “real existing socialism” plus the excesses of big business, the perceived limitations of markets, and declining trust in institutions have sapped enthusiasm for limited government. In these more trying times, what might the Centre-Right collectively stand for?