This week, the Dutch Party for Freedom (PVV) presented its electoral program for the elections of March 2021 to elect the 150 representatives of the 38th legislature of the Lower House, for a four-year term.

In this sense, the conservative political formation has introduced several new features to its anti-migration and anti-Islam programme. The party led by Geert Wilders wants to establish a ministry of “immigration, remigration and de-Islamization”, advocating the end of asylum and detention and opting for “the expulsion of irregular migrants” from the Netherlands .

According to the Dutch newspaper Trouw, the opposition party’s electoral program mainly focuses on measures to “safeguard the culture, way of life and fundamental values” of the Netherlands. The political party also believes that “street terrorists, migrants, often Moroccans, terrorize the Dutch”.

The party also attacked Islam, denouncing “the politically correct destruction of the country’s own identity”. In addition, the PVV called for schools not only to hoist the Dutch flag every day, but also to pay close attention to “acquired western freedoms” in the classroom, the newspaper reported.

The Netherlands has meanwhile been shocked by the news of a 35-year-old man who stabbed a 16-year-old girl in Montfoort in the night from Saturday to Sunday. He is, according to the local political party Lokaal Montfoort, a Syrian “refugee”. The girl is currently in hospital.

The Mayor of Montfoort Petra van Hartskamp said in a response to Hart van Nederland that she was shocked by what had happened. She did not want to comment however.

https://freewestmedia.com/2021/01/11/wilders-wants-to-establish-ministry-of-immigration-remigration-and-de-islamization/

by Giulio Meotti‏

Twitter is just like Pravda. It is a monopoly. There is no other place to go.In the USSR, they had to invent ‘samizdat’ (self-publishing) to get around it. This is the comment on Twitter’s closing of Donald Trump’s account by a leftist economist, Branko Milanovic.

That the largest social networks in the world have banned the president of the United States speaks much about the problem of freedom of thought we have created.

Because we created it. We have given all this power to some Californian kids and their start-ups and we have allowed them to become a monopoly, the “Gafa”, and now they are chasing those who are ideologically opposed to them, becoming publishers.

They created a brilliant and infernal mechanism: censorship in the name of freedom, exclusion in the name of inclusion, discrimination in the name of the fight against discrimination, hatred in the name of the fight against hatred, intolerance in the name of tolerance.

Soon there will be no more mis-steps on race, gender, Islam, climate and much more. They will also check for commas. And they will also banner people on the left who are not entirely aligned, as is already happening.

“Cancel culture” is a leftist creation attacking many on the Left as well, like J.K. Rowling.

Twitter and Facebook have become political tools: Trump is censored, Ayatollah Khamenei is not; pro Israelis are attacked, pro Palestinians are welcomed.

Here, in fact, there is no left or right, there is the mental health of Western societies in the grip of conformity, the lack of pluralism, political homologation, the crisis of alternatives, a gigantic Netflix of information and entertainment.

And their answer is even unquestionable: “It’s the market, beauty”. In fact George Orwell when he wrote “1984” did not imagine that the dictatorship of thought, Newspeak, the Ministry of Information and the antiphrasis would come not from the state, but from private individuals. And that is why it is all the more difficult to fight them.

They are doing and will do a great deal of cleaning up of accounts, books, articles, journalists, ideas and words “for our good”. Social media, conceived as places of emancipation, have become machines for producing extreme thinking, marginalizing nuances. Minorities organize themselves in herds to silence the opposition. The hyper-democracy produced by digital technology will lead to dictatorship. It is no longer conceivable to utter a speech contrary to their leftist “doxa”.

Any debate is immediately disqualified. To doubt is to be a racist. Progressive discourses have gradually become an arsenal that claims to prohibit any alternative discourse. Reality is called to bow to the hegemony of the moral of the moment.

Faced with this shipwreck of postmodernity, a phrase by the Russian philosopher and writer Nicolaj Berdjaev comes to my mind:

“Utopias seem to be much more achievable than previously believed. And currently we are faced with a much more distressing question: how to avoid their realization and return to a less utopian and ‘perfect’ but freer society?”.

https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/294643

Dresden police arrested a 29-year-old man on Tuesday morning who is said to have threatened two women aged 32 and 35. The man kicked in the doors of two flats in an apartment building on Leipziger Street in the Dresden district of Trachau at around 10.20 a.m. and threatened the two women with a knife.

Police officers were alerted and were able to arrest the suspect in the courtyard of the house.

The 29-year-old had allegedly taken drugs. A test was positive for amphetamines. Blood was then taken from the Tunisian.

https://www.tag24.de/dresden/crime/mann-bricht-in-wohnungen-zweier-frauen-ein-und-bedroht-sie-mit-einem-messer-1786996

It really is a thing to behold the Left’s active effort to send all the riots, unrest, and fires of the past several years down the memory hole. When Ferguson, Missouri, was set on fire by Black Lives Matter and Lisa Fithian-trained shock troops, no one called for Barack Obama to be taken off Twitter, Facebook, or any other social media.

However, his wife, Michelle Obama, this week called for the permanent removal of President Trump from all social media platforms because of Wednesday’s siege at the Capitol Building.

The next day he was.

Mrs. Obama took to Twitter, from which Trump is now banned from two accounts, to complain about how her heart was hurting that people laid siege to the Capitol Building. Mind you, a woman who only became proud of her country for the first time only because millions of Americans voted for her husband had a sudden pang of civic concern over Wednesday’s riot. We share your disgust, but were just wondering where she’s been for the last ten years.

She attempted to draw distinctions between the antifa and Black Lives Matter riots over the summer with what took place on Wednesday.

Seeing the gulf between the responses to yesterday’s riot and this summer’s peaceful protests and the larger movement for racial justice is so painful. It hurts.

There were some moments of peaceful protest during the riots of last spring, summer, and fall, but they were usually followed up by riots, a fact which she oddly never pointed out.

Kenosha.

Portland.

Seattle.

There were other cities laid waste by BLM and antifa, but these examples will suffice.

But Mrs. Obama went on to blame President Trump for the riot Wednesday because she said it was racist. 

The day was a fulfillment of the wishes of an infantile and unpatriotic president who can’t handle the truth of his own failures. And the wreckage lays at the feet of a party and media apparatus that gleefully cheered him on, knowing full well the possibility of consequences like these.

What if these rioters had looked like the folks who go to Ebenezer Baptist Church every Sunday? What would have been different?

Well, there was a black antifa member inciting rioting inside the Capitol if that will make you feel better, Mrs. Obama.

She said this riot was racist to demand Silicon Valley shut up the president.

Now is the time for Silicon Valley companies to stop enabling this monstrous behavior—and go even further than they have already by permanently banning this man from their platforms and putting in place policies to prevent their technology from being used by the nation’s leaders to fuel insurrection. And if we have any hope of improving this nation, now is the time for swift and serious consequences for the failure of leadership that led to yesterday’s shame.

Her solution to stopping such riots is to shut up the president and anyone else who agrees with him, just like other people we’ve seen through history.

On Friday, Facebook throttled Rush Limbaugh because he was purveying opinion which they called fake news. Limbaugh also left Twitter. Apple and Google attacked Parler for not censoring speech that the companies claimed without proof incited the riot at the Capitol Building on Wednesday.

Big Tech’s got the green light to lay waste to conservative thought because, after all, what pushback can they expect from a Biden administration – especially since so many of his staffersare expected to come from their cushy tech jobs in Silicon Valley?

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/victoria-taft/2021/01/09/michelle-obama-gave-the-order-for-big-tech-to-delete-president-trump-from-social-media-platforms-n1325526

By Monica Showalter

Was banning President Trump good for Twitter, given its pious partisan reasons? Trump, after all, had tens of millions of followers, and getting rid of him means less traffic to the site. Did banning Trump enhance Twitter’s shareholder value? Or did it put Twitter a few steps closer to going the way of MySpace?

It’s too soon to say at this point, but there’s oodles of evidence that the picture isn’t pretty.

Take the company’s stock price. Which way did it go after they banned Trump? Down.

Here’s a thumbnail from a Google search of how its stock performed:

It went down 1.61% at the close of business yesterday, shortly after the news of its ban came out, and then went down nearly three times as much, losing 3.77% in the overseas and after-hours markets. This, on a day when most social media companies were neither in a down day or a downtrend. Facebook, which also banned Trump also lost some share value. Snapchat, which also banned Trump, but I believe in afterhours, ended up. Nearly all other social media and tech sites such as Ali Baba, were actually up. And while we are talking about tech, Tesla soared 7.84%. You can see this stuff easily with a Google Finance search like this one here.

A tiny stock drop is nothing without context, without studying the company’s fundamentals and technicals, without weighing flukes and unrelated motives from buyers and sellers, but if you look at that, you’ll see some definitely cautionary flags.

Investor’s Business Daily, where I worked for 14 years until 2016 as an editorial writer, has some expert financial analysis on Twitter as a stock dated Dec. 28, 2020, in a neutrally reported story targeted at investors. 

One of IBD’s portfolio managers (an ace trader named Scott Lehtonen I don’t actually know) investigated the state of the stock, and neutrally reported both the positive and negative signals.

The Dec. 28 analysis, which can be read without a subscription here, points to flat earnings growth and a company that is failing to attract new users. I boldfaced the interesting parts:

In the most recent quarter — reported on Oct. 29 — the company reported better-than-expected Q3 results, but weak user growth. Twitter ended the quarter with 187 million daily active users, well below estimates of 195 million. It added just 1 million new users, vs. 20 million in the previous quarter and 6 million in the year-ago period.

Driven by a rebound in advertising demand, revenue climbed 14% to $936 million, above consensus of $777 million. Adjusted earnings of 19 cents per share topped views of 14 cents.

(We can draw our own conclusions as to why.)

Lehtonen finished his Dec. 28 report with this:

In conclusion, Twitter stock is trading in the 5% buy zone above a new buy point during the current stock market rally. But weak earnings growth could deter growth investors.

So Twitter isn’t attracting new users, and undoubtedly lost some with the banning of President Trump, who had 80.46 million followers. Banning Trump means at least some may have, and probably have, moved to other platforms, such as Parler, or else just grown bored and departed. 

Two other trouble points were noted in a couple of IBD proprietary ratings — in Twitter’s earnings per share (EPS), which looks at quarterly and annual earnings growth (it rated 26 out of a possible 99, which is really wretched), and in its relative strength rating, which is how it stacks up to comparable companies (85 out of a possible 99, not the star in the bunch).  

I’m not a stock trader, but based on the figures cited, this doesn’t look like an auspicious picture for the Twitter stock. Multiple factors included, it might still be a star performer, but it clearly has some weakness.

And amazingly, it was a self-inflicted wound, given that Twitter banned Trump on its own volition, chasing more users out. Smart companies don’t alienate and lose customers. Memo to Twitter: Remember MySpace.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2021/01/did_twitter_cut_its_own_throat_in_banning_president_trump.html#ixzz6j4W9uf00