On February 4, a court in Antwerp, Belgium, announces a verdict in a trial of three conspirators on suspicion of terrorism with Assadollah Assadi, a senior diplomat at the Iranian embassy in Vienna.

On July 1, 2018, Asadi was arrested and charged with giving an Iranian / Belgian couple 500 grams of TATP high explosive and a detonator from Antwerp. He handed the bomb to Amir Saadouni, 40, and his wife, Nasimeh Naami, 36, at the Pizza Hut restaurant in Place d’Armes, Luxembourg. Both are from Iran.

Asadi instructed them to detonate a bomb at a major rally of the National Council of Resistance of Iran, which was attended by tens of thousands of people in Bilpunt near Paris. Another conspirator, Mehrdad Arefani, was posted as a lookout for the rally. The event was addressed by key politicians and government officials, including former Speaker of the United States House Newt Gingrich, former British Cabinet Minister Teresa Villas, and former Prime Minister Stephen Harper.

“The plan for the attack was devised under the guidance of Iran, not a matter of Asadi’s personal initiative,” said Jaak Raes, head of VSSE at the State Security Service of Belgium. If the bombing project was successful, it could have killed hundreds of men, women and children in European soil.

https://newyorknewstimes.com/irans-mullah-faces-european-justice/85883/

The most important lesson to be drawn from the Corona crisis appears that it has become a great risk to be a retirement home resident. If one is assigned to such an institution, one invariably gives up basic human rights. At first it was “only” the restrictions on freedom of movement and contact with loved ones that the elderly had to endure, but now it is the Corona vaccination, which one can hardly avoid in these custodial institutions.

There have been increasing reports of deaths in old people’s homes following the mass vaccinations of residents. Some 23 cases were recently reported from Norway. Nursing home residents accounted for nearly half of the dead in Sweden at one point. In Germany, a series of deaths in a nursing home in the Miesbach district in Upper Bavaria has been noted.

As the Miesbach district office reported, 41 residents in a senior citizens facility had tested positive for the Coronavirus. As in Norway, 34 of these had previously received a vaccine from BioNTech/Pfizer. Seven of the vaccinated residents died, and among the non-vaccinated there was only one fatality. Before the vaccination campaign, there were only five corona fatalities in the old people’s homes in the Miesbach district from March to December.

“Due to the short time between vaccination and outbreak, it can be assumed that the vaccinated had already been infected at the time of vaccination,” the official statement read. In addition, the district office pointed out that “full vaccination protection” only occurs after the second vaccination.

Does the vaccine promote the onset of the disease? It is more obvious, however, that the vaccination in the presence of Corona viruses in the subject’s body promotes the outbreak and subsequent fatal course of Covid-19.

And before this suspicion is completely dispelled, it borders on gross negligence to continue to carry out mass vaccinations in old people’s homes. However, political interests stand in the way of such an investigation, so there will likely be many more victims before anything in this direction is done.

The Moderna and Pfizer trials have explicitly acknowledged that their untested gene therapy technology has no impact on viral infection or transmission whatsoever and merely conveys to the recipient the capacity to produce an S1 spike protein endogenously by the introduction of a synthetic mRNA sequence. It should be underscored that the term “vaccine” means a specially prepared antigen which, upon administration to a person, will result in immunity.

The German anti-vaccine journalist Boris Reitschuster, pointed out on his website that there has been no evidence that either the BioNTech vaccine or the Moderna helped people over 74 years of age.

Vaccination, according to politicians and the media, is currently the most important strategy in dealing with the Coronavirus. But there are three sober facts to be considered: Firstly, according to the German government itself, it is not yet known whether a vaccination protects against the transmission of the virus at all. Secondly, it does not protect against an illness itself, but against a severe infection. And thirdly, that these severe, life-threatening infections are very rare in younger to middle-aged people. However, this is not the case with the elderly and especially the very old, for whom SARS-CoV-2 can pose a fatal risk in many cases. The logical conclusion: especially the elderly must be vaccinated. And that is exactly what the vaccination recommendations are based on.

But in the 74-page “Epidemiological Bulletin 2/2021” of the Robert Koch Institute (RKI) from January 14 on page 27, it states: “The age-stratified analysis also showed comparably high effectiveness estimates, which, however, with decreasing age groups or case numbers, in some cases showed wide confidence intervals or were no longer statistically significant. In the highest age group (≥ 75 years), therefore, a statement about the effectiveness of the vaccination is fraught with high uncertainty.”

This “high uncertainty” is mainly due to the fact that not even five percent of the 40 000 participants in the study were older than 75 years. Curious, when one considers that the vaccine is especially recommended for this group.

There remains great fear in Europe of genetically modified maize. In contrast, a vaccination strategy that introduces artificially generated genes into the organism, is poorly researched, and carries the risk of serious side effects, is somehow acceptable.

Chancellor Angela Merkel (CDU) has meanwhile suggested that the reintroduction of border controls to neighboring countries could become a reality. “If countries decide to go completely different ways, which I don’t see at the moment, but could eventually happen, then you have to be ready to the extreme and say: Then we have to reintroduce border controls,” she said on Tuesday evening after the Consultations with the prime ministers of the federal states.

Meanwhile, the AfD criticized the extensions and tightening of the Corona measures. The chairman of the parliamentary group, Alexander Gauland, announced: “Continuous school closings, arbitrarily imposed mask requirements and home office regulations that cannot be implemented in practice bring no improvement to the protection of the particularly endangered elderly and nursing home residents, which has been neglected for months.” Politicians accused the grand coalition of having also failed in the vaccination organization.

Co-parliamentary group leader Alice Weidel spoke of a “vicious circle of ever new extensions and tightening of the ineffective lockdown”. In this way school and university students, children and families, workers, middle classes and businesses were the main victims of a failed policy.

Christian Lindner, chairman of the FDP, was also skeptical. In a statement he said: “We will be in the pandemic for almost a year. The lockdown, intended as a breakwater, has been in place since November. Who actually thinks that it will be lifted on February 14?” A step-by-step plan and clear alternative concepts are finally needed.

The Greens co-chair Annalena Baerbock emphasized on the one hand the need for further measures. At the same time, she criticized the lack of solutions for the children in view of the extended school closings. It is not clear how the students who cannot study from home could be reached, she told the broadcaster n-tv. She called on Health Minister Jens Spahn (CDU) to allow Corona rapid tests for citizens.

Left party leader Katja Kipping praised the commitment to home office as a result of the conference between the federal government and the states. However, it should have been clearer. On the other hand, the continued school closings exacerbated social problems. In addition, the federal government has so far not been able to provide children from socially disadvantaged families with devices for distance learning.

The steps to combat the pandemic decided on Tuesday include, in addition to continuing the school closings and extending the lockdown until mid-February, a stricter mask requirement. Private gatherings are limited to your own household and one other, external person.

https://freewestmedia.com/2021/01/21/seven-dead-after-corona-vaccination-in-german-old-peoples-home/

January 2020. One year ago.

It was the decisive month to stop the infection. But “for the whole month of January”, the Associated Press said that WHO officials have repeatedly complained that the Chinese authorities did not share material on the virus and the epidemic. But they did their complaining “in private”, in internal communications, while in public they praised the Chinese regime.

Not only AP. Taiwanese officials warned WHO as early as December 31 that they saw evidence that the SARS-Cov2 virus could be transmitted from human to human. But the UN agency, bowing to Beijing, ignored Taiwan. And in a note dated January 14, WHO explained: “The preliminary investigations conducted by the Chinese authorities have found no evidence of human-to-human transmission”.

A year later, December 2020, WHO arrives in China to ascertain the origin of the pandemic. But, writes the New York Times, the UN agency has given the Chinese the reins of the investigation.

It was January, we said, and seated next to Chinese President Xi Jinping in the Great Hall of the People in Beijing, the Director General of the World Health Organization, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, said: “We appreciate the seriousness with which China is dealing with this outbreak and the transparency it has shown”.

Seriousness and transparency? Did he mean censorship and lies?

By that time, China had reported more than 4,500 cases and over 70 people in other countries had fallen ill. Meanwhile, more than 5 million people had left or fled Wuhan, including the patient who is the first confirmed case of the virus in the US.

Tedros was a controversial choice. In Ethiopia he served as Health Minister (2005-12) and Foreign Minister (2012-16). In those years, China invested in Ethiopia and lent it billions of dollars. On February 20 at the Munich Security Conference, Tedros again paid tribute to Beijing, stating that “China has bought the world time.”

On January 23, the WHO emergency committee split over whether to declare Covid a health emergency. Tedros chose to wait. The virus had already spread to several countries and making such a statement would have let the world prepare better.

A week later he was forced by the evidence to declare an emergency. But by that time, confirmed Covid cases had increased tenfold. And all this time the WHO has been asking European countries to leave flights to and from China open.

Donald Trump was right about the WHO, calling it a “puppet of China”.

Not only that, but Taiwan, which has been very successful in stopping the epidemic, cannot speak about it in WHO meetings. China would be furious. The WHO would declare the coronavirus a pandemic only on 11 March. But at that point the official case count worldwide was 118,000 people in 114 countries. It was out of control.

The ongoing outbreak will offer many lessons on what to do to save more lives and do less economic damage during the next pandemic. But there is already a way to ensure that future pandemics are less deadly: abolish the World Health Organization.

https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/295274

The Court of Appeal of the French city of Bordeaux last month granted “sick foreigner” status to a Bangladeshi man suffering from a respiratory illness, taking into account air pollution from his country of origin, thereby potentially having created legal precedent for a new category of refugees, French portal InfoMigrants writes.

After having lived in France for nearly a decade, Sheel, a Bangladeshi man suffering from a difficult respiratory disease, obtained his first residence permit for a sick foreigner in 2015. The unremarkable forty-something migrant living in Toulouse, in the Haute-Garonne, and suffers a severe form of asthma requiring heavy treatment as well as a strong sleep apnea forcing him to sleep under respiratory assistance every night.

Despite his fragile state of health, he was refused a renewal of his residence permit in June 2019 the and risked deportation. The French prefecture involved in his case stated that the applicant could obtain appropriate treatment in Bangladesh. His request for family reunification to find his wife back home was also rejected.

A year later, the administrative court canceled the prefect’s decree, arguing that while medicine to relieve asthma attacks are indeed available in Bangladesh, the basic treatment does not exist. But the prefect did not stop there and brought the case before the Bordeaux Court of Appeal which confirmed, on Dec. 18, the first judgment and even added a criterion unprecedented in France: that air pollution in Bangladesh has a bearing on whether a migrant can remain in France.

“This is the first time in France that a court has taken into account the climatic criterion to justify that a person should benefit from the status of sick foreigner,” said Ludovic Rivière, lawyer at the Toulouse bar and representative of Sheel. “Because it is obvious that the environmental conditions in Bangladesh today allow us to say that it would be illusory for my client to be treated there, it would amount to sending him to certain death.”

“In the same way that we do not send an AIDS patient to a country where he cannot be treated or a death row inmate to a state which practices capital punishment, Sheel cannot be deported to Bangladesh. But we are still far from setting a precedent and creating a real status of climate refugee in France,” Rivière said, who now hopes that the public authorities and the courts will consider the climate issue more systematically.

“The candidates for climate exile will be more and more numerous, the politicians will have no other choice but to take an interest in it quickly.”

The threat of left-wing parties using climate change as a pretext to accept millions of migrants into Europe is a real one. For example, the German Green Party released a proposal to accept 150 million climate refugees to live in Germany, which would amount to nearly double Germany’s current population. 

https://rmx.news/article/article/in-new-precedent-french-court-allows-bangladeshi-migrant-to-remain-in-france-as-climate-refugee

They came to the Canary Islands as “protection seekers” and behave like bulls in a china shop. In the tourist communities of Mogán and San Bartolomé de Tirajana on Gran Canaria, hardly a day goes by without reports of vandalism, burglaries, thefts, fights or robberies committed by young Moroccan migrants.Apartment complexes have to enforce the protection of their tenants and gates have to be kept locked already during the day. Such a thing has never happened before. For a long time, the problem was denied by some local politicians, but now the violence has reached the communities. Citizens are afraid and feel abandoned by the state. Because of yesterday’s brawl in the Plaza del Hierro in San Fernando de Maspalomas, a meeting is being held today with Mayor Conchi Narváez and the government delegation. Various police chiefs will also take part in this meeting.After the brawl, the North Africans then moved towards the Centro Comercial Anexo II in Playa del Inglés where there were further attacks on tourists.

https://www.kanarenmarkt.de/165968/migranten-chaos-auf-gran-canaria-die-stimmung-kippt.html?fbclid=IwAR1_BJWAnyfTntGXYaGmpwq83PKZKpKBQguLgQHuLDcQjvtnGZ11jl9-8QQ

Ali R. has been on trial since the beginning of January. According to the indictment, he tried to rape a girl in Meißen in the summer of 2020, even dragging her into the river Elbe. So far he has remained silent.

On Monday he suddenly declared: ” Dear judge, I am much younger.” Now the question is how old the accused really is and whether he must be sentenced according to adult criminal law (up to five years in prison) or juvenile criminal law (educational measures).

So far, all documents available state that Ali R. was born in June 1997. As an Afghan citizen in Tehran. That would make him 23 years old. Now he suddenly claims to have been born in 2000, i.e. 20 years ago.

He says he confused his date of birth with that of his sister. In addition, his real birth date is in a document that the Office for Foreigners’ Affairs (BAMF) has on file.

Immediately, the chamber did some research. And lo and behold: this Persian document, which was specially checked by experts from the Federal Office for Migration and Refugees, states that Ali was “estimated” to be 13 years old in 2013.

However, the experts also say that this is not an official document, but rather a copy with ” redrawn” stamps. The Federal Office for Migration and Refugees thus never saw any reason to change the recorded date of birth from 1997 to 2000.

His brother Hussein, who was born on the same day in the same town according to the documents, could have made things clearer. He is currently being tried at the district court in the same building. So he was questioned. His answer: “We are only twins when we are in Germany”.

They had not fled, by the way, but had come to Germany “to have a look”. Now the court had to commission an elaborate age test involving three clinics before the trial against Ali R. could continue.

https://www.tag24.de/justiz/gerichtsprozesse-dresden/geburtstags-ueberraschung-im-vergewaltigungs-prozess-wie-alt-ist-der-angeklagte-wirklich-1803828