By Raymond Ibrahim

A few days after Muslim migrants firebombed an 800-year-old Swedish church twice over the course of four days — once on Jan. 20, 2021 and another on Jan. 24 — a Feb 4 report came out saying that 829 “hate crimes” against churches in Sweden have been reported between just 2012-2018, or about 138 attacks on average every year.

Thus, the churches of Sweden join those of other Western European nations that have taken in sizeable Muslim migrants. In France, for example, two churches are vandalized every day.  According to a 2019 PI-News report, 1,063 attacks on Christian churches or symbols (crucifixes, icons, statues) were registered in France in 2018.  This represents a 17 percent increase compared to the previous year (2017), when 878 attacks were registered — meaning such attacks are only going from bad to worse.

They are also getting increasingly vile.  As one example, vandals used human excrement to draw a cross on the Notre-Dame des Enfants Church in Nimes in 2019; consecrated bread was also found thrown outside among garbage. One week later, vandals desecrated and smashed crosses and statues at Saint-Alain Cathedral in Lavaur; they mangled the arms of a crucified Christ in a mocking manner and burned altar materials.

Similar reports are coming from Germany.  After reporting how four separate churches were vandalized and/or torched over the course of four weeks in 2019, PI-News, a German news site, explained: “In this country, there is a creeping war against everything that symbolizes Christianity: attacks on summit crosses,  on holy figures on the way, on churches and recently also on cemeteries.”

Although mainstream media regularly claim that the vandals — who are seldom caught to verify their identities — are “mentally ill” or part of “right-wing extremist” groups, as the recent Swedish report states, PI-News offers a hint: “Crosses are broken, altars smashed, Bibles lit, baptismal fonts overturned, and the church doors smeared with Islamic expressions like ‘Allahu Akbar.’”

Similarly, another German language report from late 2017 noted that in the Alps and in Bavaria alone, some 200 churches have been attacked and many crosses broken: “Police are currently dealing with church desecrations again and again. The perpetrators are often youthful rioters with a migration background.”

Another telling indicator is that those European regions with large Muslim migrant populations often see a concomitant rise in attacks on churches and Christian symbols.  Before Christmas, 2016, in the North Rhine-Westphalia region of Germany, where more than a million Muslim migrants reside, some 50 public statues of Jesus and other Christian figures were beheaded and crucifixes broken.

In 2015, following the arrival of another million Muslim migrants to Dülmen, a local newspaper said “not a day goes by” without attacks on Christian statues.

France, where one of Europe’s largest Muslim populations resides — and where churches are attacked every single day — is also indicative that where Muslim numbers grow, so do attacks on churches.  A January 2017 study revealed that “Islamist extremist attacks on Christians” in France rose by 38 percent, going from 273 attacks in 2015 to 376 in 2016; the majority occurred during Christmas season and “many of the attacks took place in churches and other places of worship.”

As a typical example, in 2014 a Muslim man committed “major acts of vandalism” inside a historic Catholic church in Thonon-les-Bains.  According to the report with pictures (since removed) he “overturned and broke two altars, the candelabras and lecterns, destroyed statues, tore down a tabernacle, twisted a massive bronze cross, smashed in a sacristy door and even broke some stained-glass windows.”  He also “trampled on” the Eucharist.

For examples of Muslims being caught red-handed desecrating churches in other European nations, see here, here, here, here, and here. 

Should there still be any doubt concerning the true identity of those most responsible for vandalizing churches throughout Europe, one need only turn to the treatment of churches in the Muslim world itself, or even in areas that have very large Muslim populations.

Thus, Muslims in Kenya torched five separate churches between Jan. 20 and Jan. 24 — the very same days Muslims twice firebombed an 800-year-old church in Sweden.  “A majority of the church members were afraid to attend services [in or near the ruins] in the aftermath of the burning of the churches, fearing that the arsonists might follow them right into their homes, risking the lives of their families,” a local source said. 

As occurred when vandals in France used human excrement to draw a cross on the Notre-Dame des Enfants Church in 2019, so these Kenyan arsonists also “committed the heinous acts of scooping human feces onto the buildings,” thesource added.

The fact is, the vile desecration of churches has for centuries been a Muslim trademark — a sort of “Islam was here.” As copiously documented in Sword and Scimitar: Fourteen Centuries of War between Islam and the West, during their invasions of Christian nations, Muslims ritually desecrated hundreds of thousands of churches (Caliph Hakim b’amr Allah alone reportedly destroyed 30,000 churches during the early eleventh century). Think what ISIS did but on an exponential level — and not for a handful of years but for over a millennium in dozens of nations spread out over three continents.

Most recently, according to a Feb. 17, 2021 report, the ninth church to be torched in Muslim-majority Sudan recently occurred.  Before it was set aflame, local Muslims shed light as to why they attack churches: “In every city or village where Muslims live, they should not allow anything that belongs to infidels such as church buildings to be there,” one Muslim wrote on social media; another insisted that, wherever Muslims allow the existence of a church, that place becomes “disgraced.”  In short, and in the words of  the Rev. Kuwa Shamal, of the Sudanese Church of Christ, “They targeted the church because they do not want to see any sign of the cross in the area.”

As seen from what is happening to churches throughout Western Europe, at least some Muslim migrants feel this way even when they are the minority in and guests of the West.

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2021/03/_church_desecration_in_europe_under_islam.html

If anyone could more perfectly personify teachers’ unions than Sarah Chambers, who defended pointless school closures from a beach in San Juan while indulging in “yummy seafood mofongo,” it would be Berkeley Federation of Teachers President and coronavirus hypocrite Matt Meyer, who has been caught on video dropping his 2-year-old off at a private preschool for the in-person instruction that public school students have been denied, thanks to unions and the Democrats who are owned by them.

Compliments of guerillaMomz:

Can’t a white guy in dreadlocks and a hoodie be brought up on charges of cultural appropriation?

Fox News reports:

The Berkeley Unified School District reached a tentative agreement with the Berkeley Federation of Teachers earlier this month to reopen public schools in March and April, contingent upon staff members receiving COVID-19 vaccinations.

By March, they mean March 29. Most grades would not open until mid-April at the soonest.

Meanwhile, teachers identified as high-risk individuals who document that they have condition’s [sic] on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s high risk list, who live with someone who has those conditions, or who is a caretaker as defined by a medical professional for someone with these conditions, will be allowed to continue to work remotely.

The CDC list is extensive. Is someone in your household obese (almost half the populationsupposedly is)? If not, does someone smoke, or have high blood pressure? Then you shouldn’t have to come to work.

These schools never should have closed. The only reason they are not already open is that powerful unions prefer teachers to do a minimum of work for a maximum of pay.

https://moonbattery.com/watch-teachers-union-president-drop-kid-off-at-open-private-preschool/

“My personal living situation has nothing to do with the political decision of the green-red district coalition not to allow single-family houses in new development areas in the future,” declared a German Green party politician.

From the green belt of Hamburg where he lives, Michael Werner-Boelz, the Green party head of the northern district of the Hanseatic city, demanded a ban on the construction of single-family houses and terraced houses. His hypocrisy sparked a lively debate nationwide in Germany.

Werner-Boelz, one of the leading Green politicians in Hamburg, lives with 340 000 inhabitants a large area of its own within the cosmopolitan city of Hamburg. The sociologist has lived comfortably in a single-family house with a cellar and garden for 30 years in one of the few remaining homes of this kind.

Werner-Boelz’s house is fittingly owned by Saga, the largest German municipal housing company owned by the City of Hamburg. Perhaps that’s why Werner-Boelz pays a remarkably low rent: €650. This is almost free by Hamburg standards.

When he took office in 2020, Michael Werner-Boelz demonstratively declared that he no longer wanted to allow a new single-family home in his district. The building type is inefficient and takes up too much space. In fact, no new single-family houses and terraced houses have been allowed to be built in the Hamburg-Nord district for a year. The state chairman of the CDU economic council, Henneke Lütgerath, explained this ban: In the Hanseatic city of Hamburg “a dream of left ideologues has come true”.

At the beginning of February 2021, Werner-Boelz stated once again: “The decision that no single-family or terraced houses will be approved in new development plans in the north was an important step.” The German daily Bild Zeitung commented in its regional publication: “Sounds like a typical case of ‘blinking left and turning right’.”

Why doesn’t Werner-Boelz live in an apartment? Can a politician demand of others to forego something that he himself enjoys? The Green member was unimpressed by this question. Actually, Werner-Boelz thinks such a question is wrong: “My personal living situation has nothing to do with the political decision of the green-red district coalition not to allow single-family houses in new development areas in the future.”

Allegedly, according to Werner-Boelz, it is possible to continue building single-family houses on areas previously designated for this purpose. At least in theory. The district office manager continues: “But we have to acknowledge the fact that the building areas in the district are finite. It’s not a pipe dream, it’s a real problem in many metropolises.”

The fact remains: “The green-red district coalition de facto prohibits single-family houses”. This is a quote from the coalition agreement for the metropolitan Hamburg district, which the ruling Greens and the SPD have decided.

Hamburg is by no means an isolated case. In Cologne, for example, the Greens want to “replace” the single-family home with radical plans. The Kölner Stadtanzeiger reported on this in detail as early as 2019. In the city “as many apartments as possible should be built on already used surfaces such as industrial areas”. From now on, parking lots, streets, tracks and supermarkets could demolished for high density housing. High-rise buildings in particular are being traded as an additional alternative.

“Under the term downsizing, the Greens are demanding that people be content with less living space.” One suggestion from the Greens is: “Pensioners could, for example, live in shared apartments”.

The Greens do not say that the housing shortage in Germany is primarily related to the fact that the population is increasing from year to year due to the immigration of millions of “people in need of protection” who are in fact not political “refugees” at all. Above all, they are promoting multiculturalism.

https://freewestmedia.com/2021/03/01/green-politician-supports-ban-on-single-family-homes-in-hamburg-while-enjoying-the-luxury-of-one/

They used kicks and sticks to drive him out of his tent and set it on fire: A homeless man was brutally attacked by youths in a Britz park in Berlin. After the attack, the three perpetrators set fire to his belongings and the tent of another victim!

The attack happened around 8 p.m. in a green area on Gutschmidtstraße behind the Britz-Süd underground station. The 59-year-old Latvian was first kicked out of his tent and then beaten with sticks. He then fled the scene.

When he returned to his tent some time later, it was ablaze. The fire brigade, which had been alerted in the meantime, was able to put it out, but all that remained of the victim’s belongings were a few charred remains.

The man was injured but did not want to be taken to hospital. The police are investigating for dangerous bodily harm and damage to property, but rule out a right-wing extremist background. The perpetrators are described as being of Mediterranean descent.

Only two hours later, they set fire to the next dwelling of a homeless man behind the underground station. Again the fire brigade was called in. At least the man (49) escaped the blows of the attackers. He was not present when his tent was set on fire.

https://www.bz-berlin.de/berlin/neukoelln/trio-verpruegelt-wohnungslosen-und-zuendet-zelte-an