At first sight, it seems difficult to imagine: the broadcast of a Dutch news program had indirectly caused the enormous commotion in France, forced the Minister of Education and the Minister of the Interior to respond and ultimately also reached President Macron.

The Trappes affair involving French teacher Didier Lemaire, has occupied nearly all TV channels and the written press for days now, and sparked heated debates leaving the French public with even more questions.

Since philosophy teacher Didier Lemaire from the town of Trappes (near Paris) told his story to the weekly Le Point on February 5, he has appeared on every conceivable TV and radio program and has given numerous interviews to newspapers and magazines. He is being threatened by Muslim residents of Trappes and is now protected by the police. This is due to his outspoken stances against the Salafists who he believes are taking over power in Trappes. He said he feared for his safety and eventually decided not to return to the school.

Trappes is indeed known and infamous as a Salafist stronghold from which more than sixty young people left for Syria and Iraq as jihadists.

But doubts were soon expressed in the mainstream French press: was Didier Lemaire too energetic with his media appearances and did he not exaggerate the threat? This philosophy teacher from the Plaine-de-Neauphle high school in Trappes, has consistently denounced the rise of Islamic fundamentalism. The answer from the teacher: he did not receive those threats himself. They had been received by a journalist working for Dutch television, from the Nieuwsuurprogram.

Dekkers decided to inform the French police of the threats against her. The threats were received five days after January 22, in the wake of a report from Saskia Dekkers about Trappes, in which the teacher was interviewed. According to the French journalists who contacted her, Dekkers considered it her duty to inform the French police about the threatening atmosphere surrounding Didier Lemaire. But because she refused to disclose her sources, French Education Minister Blanquer said he could do little. On January 26, the police thus started an investigation and Minister Darmanin of the interior offered teacher Lemaire police protection.

In the Netherlands this huge upheaval has remained completely unreported. And when the public radio station FranceInfo asked Nieuwsuur for information about the threats, the French received a laconic answer: “In our report we dealt with our subject to inform the Dutch TV viewer about a current event in a European country. We have nothing to add to this.”

Dutch media broadcast the documentary on Trappes as an update of a first film shot in 2017 on Islamism in the city, directed by journalist Saskia Dekkers and in which Didier Lemaire already appeared. In this second report, which combines images from the previous documentary and reactions to the French bill on integration, Saskia Dekkers again questioned Didier Lemaire, but also Ali Rabeh, mayor of Trappes, and even Naila Gautier, a Muslim member of a local association, allegedly fighting against radicalization.

Gautier however contacted the Dutch journalist on several occasions, deploring an “unbalanced report” on Trappes, in particular because of the comments made by Didier Lemaire. Worried for the safety of the philosophy teacher, Dekkers decided to notify the police. Dutch media even took the decision to suspend the publication of the documentary. It was then that the police protection of Didier Lemaire was extended and that the media surge began. On January 26, behind the scenes, the judicial police of Versailles opened an investigation. Naila Gautier was summoned by the police, questioned and later released.

Yannick Jadot, figurehead of Europe Ecology – The Greens, and who hopes to be a candidate for the French presidency, meanwhile defended the radical mayor of Trappes who had stormed into a school to distribute religious pamphlets, Ali Rabeh.

Didier Lemaire gave an interview to Le Figaro, on Friday February 19, in which he reiterated his remarks: “For my safety, for the well-being of my students and the safety of my colleagues, it is reasonable that I do not continue to teach. […] But we must admit that the Islamists won a battle at Trappes. It will take time to push them back,” he lamented.

“We are no longer in France. We are no longer in a Republic. Neither freedom of conscience, of the use of one’s body, nor equality are guaranteed.” Lemaire gave an example: “A North African woman sits at a men’s coffee table, and she has to endure comments made to her. Then in the street, men spit on her, insult her, or threaten her with rape.”

The teacher added that “certain media constantly relativize the seriousness of attacks on the principles of freedom and equality”. He therefore estimated: “By participating in denial, [the media] end up giving these kind of malicious individuals [Islamists editor’s note] credit.” It is clear to this teacher that France is “at war” and is “facing an enemy which is not an army”.

What is becoming increasingly evident in France is the violent atmosphere and the far-reaching Islamization with which many neighbourhoods or zones such as Trappes are confronted.

https://freewestmedia.com/2021/02/21/the-dutch-broadcast-on-trappes-which-caused-a-commotion-in-france/

The mainstream media consistently report in a concealed manner on the brutal double murder committed by a 21-year-old guest of Merkel in Lüneburg in the early hours of the morning on ( halal) Friday: At the psychiatric clinic “Am Wienebütteler Weg”, first a 54-year-old patient was massacred by another “patient” at around 2:10 am.

According to initial police findings, the young man killed the 54-year-old by ” violent impact on the neck”, usually an investigator’s euphemism for the slaughter of a victim. The perpetrator injured another 56-year-old fellow patient in his ward so severely that he later died in hospital. A 61-year-old female nurse was seriously injured by the ” refugee”. The perpetrator also threw objects at the emergency services and injured another 42-year-old female nurse and a police officer.Several police officers were deployed to subdue and restrain the perpetrator.The officers had to use pepper spray against the guest of the ruling parties and as well of the German taxpayer.According to the hospital, the escalation of violence occurred “out of the blue” at around 2:10 a.m. in a ward of the adult psychiatric hospital. Senior public prosecutor Jan Christoph Hillmer: “The 56-year-old died due to blunt force to the head, the 54-year-old due to force to the neck.” Senior prosecutor Hillmer sums up, “He has not admitted to the charge of the crime.” According to the public prosecutor’s office, however, the Syrian had already been charged with assault and threatening behaviour. According to the public prosecutor’s office, it is “completely unclear” why the refugee suddenly killed two people on a Friday.The 21-year-old Syrian lived in a small town in the district of Lüneburg at public expense until the crime. He had only been admitted to the psychiatric ward on Thursday. There were no indications of danger to others or to a self-endangerment. Spokesperson Angela Wilhelm: “The patient had come voluntarily for inpatient treatment. At night, there was an escalation of violence without any foreshadowing.”

This is the second case of a large-scale police operation at the psychiatric hospital in Lüneburg that has become public knowledge within four months. In mid-November, the police arrested two perpetrators who had escaped from the psychiatric hospital’s forensic psychiatric unit. The two men, aged 29 and 36, had threatened a staff member in the kitchen with a knife in November and “fled”. Initial search measures were unsuccessful, so that targeted search measures were initiated. The ” fugitive” men, who had been in the Lüneburg prison for a number of robbery offences, were later brought back to the more or less open prison.

The weekly magazine Der Spiegel reports on the double murder under the heading “Panorama”, but conceals any details from its few remaining readers – also a case for the loony bin!

http://www.pi-news.net/2021/02/lueneburg-syrer-toetet-zwei-patienten-in-psychiatrischem-krankenhaus/

A 24-year-old man went berserk in front of an office building in Vienna’s Leopoldstadt district on Friday morning, threatening to kill several people.

In front of an office building in the Lassallestraße area in the second district, an argument apparently broke out between a currently unknown elderly person and a 24-year-old Afghan man at around 9.15 am on Friday. The 24-year-old allegedly threatened to kill the man.

A 39-year-old witness called the police and took a photo of the suspect. When the 24-year-old became aware of the 39-year-old, he allegedly threatened to kill the man as well. The 39-year-old went back into the office building and locked the door.

The 24-year-old then allegedly hit the door several times and threatened to kill a 48-year-old woman who was also present in the office.

The Vienna police were then called in and arrested the suspect after he briefly tried to escape. The man was taken to a prison.

https://www.heute.at/s/mann-rastet-vor-buero-aus-bedroht-personal-mit-dem-tod-100128941

A political quarrel should end because the means to solve it is provided by law. Health has nothing to do with it – at least one should hope so. But the case of an AfD candidate in the Bundestag in Baden-Württemberg has raised serious doubt.

Andrea Zürcher was nominated two weeks ago by AfD members from the districts of Waldshut and Breisgau-Hochschwarzwald as constituency candidate for the federal election. The 37-year-old has been with the AfD, deputy chairwoman of the Konstanz district association since 2016 and works for the AfD parliamentary group leader Alice Weidel, among others.

The trained business woman suffers from a chronic illness and therefore has to see a doctor on a regular basis. This week, she said in an interview with Berlin weekly Junge Freiheit, she had a scheduled medical visit with a family doctor in Stühlingen, where she has been a patient for two years. The doctor suddenly terminated her appointment for her visit. The reason: her political opinion.

It seems that when a relatively new political force threatens to take away votes from the established parties during election campaigns, even the ordinary becomes fraught with danger.

Zürcher explained that he learned from the newspaper that his patient was running for the AfD. “He said that the relationship of trust was destroyed and that he could no longer give 100 percent to my treatment.” He would only intervene in medical emergencies, otherwise she should look for another family doctor.

“I’ve never been so shocked in my life. I was in tears,” says Zürcher. Up to now no one would ever have never imagined that there would be anything like this happening in Germany. “It is equally shocking and sobering to see the openness with which the supposedly tolerant – speaking of itself as the middle class – society unabashedly and in front of an audience makes medical care dependent on its own political and ideological ideal,” complained the AfD politician.

Does a doctor actually terminate an appointment with a patient who is regularly present because she is running for what he sees as the wrong party? A request from the JF to the doctor in question yielded nothing. The call ended after a few seconds with the words: “No comment.” Even further inquiries did not change anything.

Meanwhile, the AfD candidate reported the doctor to the police on Friday for discrimination and a host of other crimes. According to the Basic Law, nobody in Germany may be discriminated against because of their political views.

It is unusual for a doctor to terminate a contract with a patient since family doctors and health insurance companies benefit from such agreements. The former receive premiums from the health insurers if they can retain patients for a longer period of time. And the latter save because the patients do not do “doctor hopping”, ie go from one specialist to the next, but first to their family doctor, who then specifically forwards them to a colleague. An answer to a request from JF to the relevant health insurance company from Andrea Zürcher is still pending.

The fact that the AfD is directly and indirectly disadvantaged is nothing new. Especially since it has been represented in the Bundestag and in all 16 state parliaments, cases have repeatedly come to light in which previous political practices are thrown overboard if the AfD could benefit from them. The currently largest opposition party in the Bundestag has also been hardest hit by attacks on people, real estate or election posters for years.

But the fact that even doctors now refuse treatment because a patient is a candidate for the AfD, is a new frontier.

https://freewestmedia.com/2021/02/20/medical-treatment-for-chronic-patient-refused-for-political-reasons/

French President Emmanuel Macron’s attempts to institute an early voting amendment in France shortly before 2022 presidential elections have been dashed by a French Senate committee over fraud concerns.

“The senators will not appreciate at all that the amendment was submitted so late, and they will reject it,” predicted a minister to the LCI news channel on Tuesday.

And it did not take long for senators to confirm that, as on Wednesday, Feb. 17, the Senate Law Committee rejected the government’s amendment to allow early voting for the 2022 presidential election.

In a press release, the committee explained that it is “unthinkable to radically modify rules of the presidential election by an amendment submitted at the last minute and towards the end of the parliamentary term, without either political forces or the State Council voting on it.”

“From a substantive point of view, it is believed that the government’s amendment would probably raise suspicions about the trustworthiness of the presidential election and call into question the legitimacy of the elected president. In fact, voting machines have been subject to a moratorium since 2008: only 66 municipalities are equipped with them, and other municipalities prohibit acquiring voting machines,” added the committee in the press release.

Concerns over fraud

Furthermore, the committee members put forward several counterarguments, including the risk of fraud. Opponents of the amendment share concerns of fraud, as well.

“The week before the poll, voters would go to an office equipped with a ‘voting machine’, the count would take place on Sunday. Why do that if not to commit fraud?!” tweeted the former member of the National Front (FN).

The Senate Law Committee also brought up the argument of lack of information as the election campaign end 24 hours before voting day, but it would have been possible to vote up to a week earlier.

“A voter who voted in advance could no longer change his vote, even if he would like to do that in the light of new information,” the committee wrote. “If a part of the French public votes eight days earlier, can you imagine the leaks likely to undermine the trustworthiness of the voting? It is surreal and not desirable,” said French Communist Party (PCF) deputy Sébastien Jumel.

Opponents of the government also see the proposal as a way to favor urban and easy-to-get voters who incline to the current government parties.

“The government’s initiative has enough potential to feed all the fantasies of electoral manipulation,” pointed out the rapporteur of the commission Stéphane Le Rudulier.

https://rmx.news/article/article/fears-of-fraud-french-senate-rejects-macron-s-push-for-early-voting-in-2022-presidential-election