The German authorities have been infiltrated, in many ways. On the one hand, by civil servants from different backgrounds, who have long since stopped caring about everything. They are demotivated and are waiting for their pensions – or for the next political change. On the other hand, by multicultural criminals who simply take everything they are offered on a silver plate: For example, formally legal residence permits that fetch a high price on the black market.

In Berlin, a 36-year-old Bosnian employee of the municipal office has now been arrested, who in addition to being a citizen of Bosnia-Herzegovina also holds a German passport. She is accused of having sold residence permits for 5000 euros each. Police found 28,000 euros in cash in her apartment. A 43-year-old Pakistani who is suspected of being the head of the gang that traded in residence permits was also arrested. According to a press release by the police, the accused are suspected in at least seven cases of having “jointly and collaboratively manipulated and organised passports on behalf of foreign ‘clients’ in such a way that previously stolen blank residence permits could be provided with pseudo-legal residence permits by the accused employee of the municipal office”. The residence permits in question here allow the holder to stay in Germany for an unlimited period of time. They are the first step towards the acquisition of German citizenship, which the holder can apply for after a few years.

According to a report in the newspaper “Welt”, the Berlin administration alone has so far been missing about 20,000 blank residence permits.

Rather reluctantly, the Berlin Senate had admitted the loss of the documents in July 2019 in response to a request by the AfD faction, stating that 1,500 copies of the papers that have disappeared since 2017 had been seized by the police in recent years. “A further 330 documents have so far been found in the case of (attempted) illegal entry and other abusive uses in the Federal territory,” the Senate’s statement states.

pi-news.net/2020/02/auslaender-im-staatsdienst-verkaufen-aufenthaltstitel/

At least eleven people were shot dead in the German city of Hanau, located near Frankfurt, on Wednesday night.

Deutsche Welle reported that the shooter opened fire at a shisha bar in Hanau’s downtown, killing three people.

He then drove to the neighborhood of Kesselstadt and opened fire at the second shisha bar, where five people died.

German police said early Thursday morning that the man suspected of carrying out the shooting has been found dead at his home.

Police said in a tweet Thursday that officers also found another body at the same address. No details were released on the other person.

The motive for the incident is not yet clear.

Germany has been on a high level of alert due to a series of terrorist attacks in the country in recent years, including a 2016 attack on a Christian market in Berling in which 12 people were killed by an Islamic State (ISIS) terrorist who rammed into a crowd of civilians.

In January, six people were killed and another two wounded in a shooting in the southwestern German town of Rot am See. Police said they believed that incident was “family drama” and not an act of terrorism.

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/276240

An eleven-year-old schoolgirl was looking for tenderness, closeness, recognition. But the girl’s innocent feelings were badly exploited by young men: they abused the child!

A perpetrator has been standing trial at the district court of Hanover since Monday. During the trial, defendant Khudai R. (22 years old) made a confession.

At the very first meeting in Langenhagen (Hanover region) at the beginning of September 2018, the refugee from Afghanistan ( who arrived in Germany in 2015, four aliases, lives in Hesse) made it clear what he expected from the schoolgirl in love, whom he had met a few weeks earlier by chatting. R.: “I simply asked her if she wanted to have sex with me.” She had consented. In a forest at the Langenhagen suburban train station he molested her. Three times there were sex meetings, on two of them Khudai’s buddies Ezatullah N. and Siya A. (both 19 at that time) from Hessen participated.

The last time Khudai and Ezatullah took turns and took pornographic photos with their mobile phones. Later, the duo made a selfie with a stick out tongue in front of the minor. One of them is said to have thrown a stone at her.

According to Khudai’s lawyer, the accused suspected that the girl was younger than 14. The learning disabled pupil turned to her guidance counsellor. Her mother (36, single parent geriatric nurse) told the judge: “She was a happy girl before. After that, no more.” Her daughter had been suicidal, had cut herself, and is now living in a therapeutic living group.

The charges of abuse against the other two Afghans were dropped by the public prosecutor’s office. They did not know the true age of the girl, according to a spokeswoman for the newspaper BILD.

The trial will continue on Wednesday.

https://www.bild.de/regional/hannover/hannover-aktuell/maedchen-schwer-missbraucht-fluechtling-gesteht-sex-mit-elfjaehriger-68860346.bild.html

By Andrea Widburg

The largest cohort of people treated in any medical system is the elderly. In England, beginning in April, those elderly had better watch their mouths or they’re going to find themselves denied the healthcare that they paid for with their taxes.

The problem with socialized medicine is that, when it runs out of money (as it invariably does), the system has no alternative but to start rationing. Britain, which is saddled with the National Health Service, long ago began contemplating death panels. For example, Baroness Warnock, a well-known British medical ethicist (hah!), suggested denying all care to elderly people with dementia.

In Liverpool, the NHS began stealth death panels that massively over-identified elderly people as being near death, justifying palliative care, and then drugged and dehydrated them to make those fake diagnoses a reality. By 2012, a doctor estimated that the NHS was killing around 130,000 elderly patients a year because of management difficulties or bed shortages. Things went downhill from there.

The NHS has now decided on a different way to rid itself of the elderly – a method, moreover, that meets all political correctness metrics:

Sexist and racist patients could be barred from non-emergency care at NHS trusts, under new rules to be enforced from April.

Currently, staff can refuse to treat non-critical patients who are verbally aggressive or physically violent towards them.

But these protections will extend to any harassment, bullying or discrimination, including homophobic, sexist or racist remarks.

Health Secretary Matt Hancock wrote to all NHS staff on Tuesday to announce stronger measures to investigate abuse and harassment towards staff, saying “no act of violence or abuse is minor”.

[snip]

“All assault and hate crimes against NHS staff must be investigated with care, compassion, diligence and commitment,” he said.

England does not have a First Amendment. Hate crimes can include being mean on social media about someone’s sexual orientation or gender identification, race, or sex. In 2017, a preacher was locked up for quoting the Bible’s words about homosexuality. Just last week, a teenager with Asperger’s asked a “transgender” police officer “is it a boy or is it a girl?” Because that question made this representative of the law “upset and embarrassed,” the boy was placed under house arrest. 

Elderly people make up most of the patients in any healthcare system. They are also the people least likely to be “woke.” Without malice, they may use old-fashioned phrases that are now considered offensive when referring to women, homosexuality, or race. They probably don’t even have a vocabulary for “non-binary” people.

In addition, elderly people often lack filters. One of the signs of dementia is a lessening of inhibition, both verbal and physical. An elderly person’s early-stage dementia may not be obvious, except that the person might start saying things he or she would never have said if fully mentally competent.

And now, thanks to the new policy at the National Health Service, any employee whose feelings are hurt can ban a patient, elderly or not, from receiving-taxpayer funded healthcare. Think about this care situation and a confused older patient:

“In late 2017 an NHS patient who requested a female nurse to carry out a cervical smear complained when the hospital sent a person with “an obviously male appearance… close-cropped hair, a male facial appearance and voice, large number of tattoos and facial stubble” who insisted “My gender is not male. I’m a transsexual.”

In addition to squeezing out elderly people, the whole system represents a further attack on free speech in Great Britain:

The line between critical and non-critcal care is also up for debate. Will refusal to treat a patient because they said something someone deems offensive result in accidental deaths?

This is even worse than China’s social credit score, which hasn’t yet gone so far as to punish people by withdrawing medical treatment if they engage in wrongthink.

Two more things to mull: First, Britain was the cradle of the rights we Americans take for granted. The Founders took those rights so seriously they fought a revolution to retain them, and then enshrined them in our Bill of Rights. Second, if it can happen there, it can happen here. The left never tires of the fight. If we give them an inch, they will always take a mile, or preferably a thousand miles.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2020/02/britains_health_services_will_not_give_nonemergency_care_to_nonwoke_people.html

We recently witnessed two events that indicated the possible demise of liberal democracy. The implications should frighten supporters of democratic forms of government in which individual rights and freedoms are officially recognized and protected, and the exercise of political power is limited by the rule of law.

The growing intolerance of many “left-wing” groups is apparent in the uproar of the democratic election of the state premier of the German state of Thuringia as well as in the performance of the Speaker of the US House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi, publicly ripping up US President Donald J. Trump’s State of the Union address. It was an official document that belongs not to her but to the public, and of which she was merely its custodian.

That does not even start to mention the entire sham “impeachment” of President Trump, in which centuries of accepted due process were thrown in the gutter. The Senate “trial,” which probably should have been dismissed from the get-go as the “fruit of the poisonous tree” — a legal metaphor meaning that if any evidence is found to be tainted or violates a defendant’s constitutional rights, whatever “fruit” follows from it must be thrown out. The House, however, like the Inquisition, is allowed make up its own rules, and make them up it did. Another central problem seemed to be that a US president is obligated by law — under Ukraine (12978) – Treaty on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters, signed in 1998 — not to hand taxpayer money over to the Ukraine without first checking to see that there is no corruption. Trump did, there was not, case closed. Trump was not only totally acquitted in a show trial that should not have existed in the first place, but his accusers seemed more guilty of what he was accused of — the non-crimes of “abuse of power” and “obstruction of Congress” — than he was.

Currently, there is growing concern on both sides of the Atlantic that the ability of many on the political “left” to accept the democratic process and the rights of those with whom one disagrees is becoming increasingly rare. According to Andreas Unterberger, Austria’s most widely read political blogger:

“The left exhibits mocking scorn or even aggressive violence. If a relevant part of the population is unwilling to respect democracy and those with dissenting opinions, then the constitutional state will necessarily implode.”

Sometimes it seems as if the underlying intention is actually to dismantle democratic norms and replace them with authoritarian ones. The thinking seems to be: If you vote any way other than for what we want, the result is automatically illegitimate and need not be accepted. In the US, this view had been evident in the three-year refusal to accept the election of President Trump by the “wrong” people”, as well as a refusal by many last year to accept the vindication of US Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh in yet another show trial devoid of evidence , and most recently warnings about a refusal to accept President Trump’s acquittal. The title of the latest book by the noted defense Attorney Alan M. Dershowitz, Guilt by Accusation, seems to be fast becoming the norm.

In Germany, the media establishment as well as Chancellor Angela Merkel were shocked to the point of demanding the reversal of the vote for the “wrong” premier of the state of Thuringia because the election came as a result of the “wrong” votes, namely those from the Alternative for Germany party (AfD). Baron Bodissey of the blog Gates of Vienna provided background information:

“The FDP (Freie Demokratische Partei, Free Democratic Party) is a relatively minor conservative business-oriented party in Germany. Nowadays it would be described as “classical liberal” if it were in an American context. In last fall’s state elections in Thuringia, the FDP just barely surpassed the threshold to seat representatives in the state parliament. The Left (Die Linke) gained the greatest share of the vote, but the constellation of leftist parties did not have enough seats to automatically form a government.

“Since then there has been wheeling and dealing by all parties in an effort to establish a viable coalition. Yesterday came a big surprise: with the support of the CDU (Christlich Demokratische Union, Christian Democratic Union) and the AfD (Alternative für Deutschland, Alternative for Germany), Thomas Kemmerich of the FDP was elected minister president (the equivalent of premier or governor) of the state of Thuringia…

[I]t seemed the cordon sanitaire against the AfD had been breached. Up until now, all across Western Europe the major immigration-critical populist parties had been kept out of government: the Sweden Democrats, the PVV in the Netherlands, Vlaams Belang in Belgium, and the AfD in Germany. Even though those “xenophobic” parties are quite popular, they have yet to obtain a majority of the vote in their respective countries, and the other parties simply agree never to join a coalition with them. Did yesterday’s events in Thuringia signal a change?”

Not quite. The cordon shuddered a little bit, but remained intact. It seems the FDP never asked for the support of the AfD, and received it unexpectedly. Mr. Kemmerich and his party were just as appalled by the AfD as [the] leftist parties were. And Mr. Kemmerich announced he would resign his position to force new elections.

Mr. Kemmerich’s announcement of resignation came as a result of massive intimidation against his family, his children requiring police protection, and “Antifa” protests outside Thuringia’s parliament building. In this context, it is important to note the irony of the political left. The Left Party (“Die Linke”), the successor party of the SED, the Socialist Unity party of the communist German Democratic Republic (DDR), accused the Free Democrats of believing that it was “better to rule with fascists than not to rule at all.” Indeed, there are grounds to argue that it is the Left Party, exhibiting the intolerance of fascists as the predecessors of the Left Party, that was responsible for the cold-blooded murder of Germans trying to escape East Berlin by breaching the Berlin Wall. Even more ironic, it was on the 31^st anniversary of the execution of 17-year-old Chris Gueffroy, guilty in the eyes of the ruling elite of wanting to leave the DDR, that the German mainstream media began its campaign of hatred against a democratically elected official.

Adding insult to injury, the strategist of the Left Party had the gall openly to insinuate that Mr. Kemmerich was voted into office “by the grace of those who murdered liberals, commoners, leftists and millions more in Buchenwald [concentration camp] and elsewhere.” In saying this, the strategist and others used what is currently the most potent weapon in political discourse: the instrumentalization of Nazi crimes as a weapon against political competitors. According to the German political analyst Vera Lengsfeld, politicians and media are employing psychological terror by igniting the “Nazi nuclear bomb” and by suggesting that the election of Mr. Kemmerich occurred thanks to a “Nazi party”, namely the AfD. Lengsfeld adds:

“What has taken place in Germany in the past three days can be considered a breach of the dam. Germany is witnessing the gradual erosion of democracy and the rule of law, a process that began in 2015 [during the migrant crisis] and which has become even more visible since and has ended in putsch against democracy.

“Overnight, Germany has turned into an open dictatorship of convictions. Unless true democrats display resistance and firmly defend democracy and the rule of law, it will once again become cold and dark in Germany.”

Dushan Wegner, another political commentator, asks whether a country can call itself a democracy if its chancellor demands the annulment of the election and the Free Democrats buckle in the face of disagreement, only because of the election of a state minister with the help of votes of a party behind a cordon sanitaire. Wegner argues:

“From faraway South Africa, Chancellor Angela Merkel said something very painful and simultaneously very frightening and shocking: ‘The election of the state minister was unforgivable and the vote must be reversed.’

“The chancellor openly demands the annulment of a democratic vote, one that she is unhappy about, and politics remains silent. I find it difficult to call those democrats that do not use all democratic and legal means to remove the chancellor from office.

“Germany currently fluctuates between democracy and absolutism thanks to Angela Merkel. Why bother exercising the right to vote when the ‘wrong’ choice can be annulled by the media and the chancellor through propaganda and veto?

“A Chinese proverb says: ‘May you live in interesting times.’ Yes, these are interesting times, and yes, it is a curse. What is positive about interesting times is that they force us to define our stance. Do we stand for democracy or for elections until the results suit the ruler?”

Josef Hueber explains in a commentary how in a pseudo-democracy, elections mean voting until the result is “correct.” Moreover, it is important to use the right words: the undesirable democratic election is a “political Fukushima”, a breach of the dam, a catastrophe. The consequence of elections can be an “undesirable” or unexpected result for one political side; some will be elated, others disappointed. One could argue that this is democracy; this is how it is supposed to be. The understanding of democratic processes was unveiled with what recently transpired in the Thuringian parliament.

The situation in the United States is not much different. Th recent State of Union (SOTU) address demonstrated clearly what the Democrats’ view of tolerance and respect for the office of the president looks like. What began with the absence of self-avowed democratic socialist Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ayanna Pressley, Maxine Waters and others ended in Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi ripping up a copy of the speech at the end of the State of the Union address delivered by democratically elected President Donald Trump. By doing so, Pelosi disdained all America, not just the president.

Pelosi disdained the president’s supporters as well as a black girl who wants nothing more than a choice in education; she disdained the Tuskegee airman honored by the president; she disdained the great economic performance of the country. She acted in a petty and classless manner, unfitting for someone holding one of the highest offices in the United States. When asked by a reporter why she tore up Trump’s speech, Pelosi shot back, “Because it was the courteous thing to do considering the alternatives.” What are the alternatives, Madam Speaker? The legal scholar Jonathan Turley, who disagreed with some aspects of the SOTU, said:

“She represents the House as an institution — both Republicans and Democrats. Instead, she decided to become little more than a partisan troll from an elevated position. The protests of the Democratic members also reached a new low for the House. Pelosi did not gavel out the protest. She seemed to join it.

“It was the tradition of the House that a speaker must remain in stone-faced neutrality no matter what comes off that podium. The tradition ended last night with one of the more shameful and inglorious moments of the House in its history. Rather than wait until she left the floor, she decided to demonstrate against the President as part of the State of the Union and from the Speaker’s chair. That made it a statement not of Pelosi but of the House.”

Pelosi’s behavior shows a disappointing lack of argumentative abilities. If tolerance is to mean anything, Pelosi and her fellow Democrats should have exhibited just that. Instead, she, as a role model, did the opposite by engaging in petty and irresponsible behavior, followed by days futilely trying to have her outburst scrubbed from social media.

The entire episode fits seamlessly into a series of illiberal actions by the left in recent times. Consider the shutting down of debates on college campuses, thereby restricting freedom of speech. Or the attack on people wearing MAGA (Make America Great Again) hats. The author Kim R. Holmes explains the left’s increasing intolerance as follows:

“What we call a ‘liberal’ today is not historically a liberal at all but a progressive social democrat, someone who clings to the old liberal notion of individual liberty when it is convenient (as in supporting abortion or decrying the ‘national security’ state), but who more often finds individual liberties and freedom of conscience to be barriers to building the progressive welfare state.”

Seldom has the left on both sides of the Atlantic exhibited its increasing intolerance of dissenting opinions in a more concentrated manner than these past weeks. The foundations of liberal democracy are shaking noticeably. We are presently faced with yet more politically-based show trials: of the parliamentarian Geert Wilders in The Netherlands and of Matteo Salvini in Italy. It is up to the population and voters to decide whether liberal democracy is worth fighting for.

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/15600/intolerant-left-liberal-democracy

The University of Trier in the German state of Rhineland-Palatinate is facing allegations that it is mainstreaming Iranian regime-sponsored antisemitism and terrorism by accepting an academic award from the President of the Islamic Republic of Iran.Last week, Iranian President Hassan Rouhani presented his nation’s “World Award for Book of the Year of the Islamic Republic of Iran” to the University of Trier philosopher Andreas Lammer. The academic was honored for his dissertation on the Islamic philosopher Avicenna, who died in 1037 in Hamedan, Iran.

A commentary in the weekly left-wing publication Jungle World cited Rouhani’s “antisemitic anti-Zionism, adding “after all, it is Rouhani who calls Israel a ‘cancerous ulcer,’ interprets Iranian protests as a conspiracy, and during his reign the number of executions increased and the human rights situation even worsened.” The Jungle World commentary was authored by the following groups: Rosa Salon Trier, the Initiative of Interdisciplinary Antisemitism Research and Shalom Israel.Dr. Susanne Schröter, an expert on Islamism and Gender at Goethe University Frankfurt, told The Jerusalem Post that “The award was not given by a dissident academic association, but by the leading elite in the form of their president. This has nothing to do with educational openness, but only with a clever move by the regime to restore its crumbling international legitimacy. Academics should not take part in this game.”She said that currently the “Islamic Republic of Iran is one of the worst dictatorships” and is listed on Amnesty International’s 2018 ranking as the nation with the most second most number of execution, including children. She noted that the executions target members of the LGBTQ community and religious minorities like Baha’is and Sufis.According to a 2008 British WikiLeaks cable, Iran’s regime executed 4,000-6,000 members of the LGBTQ community since 1979.Schröter said that “Added to this is the declared will of the Iranian leadership to destroy Israel, unprecedented antisemitic agitation and the military build-up of combat groups across the Middle East to be deployed against Israel.”

The academic also said Iran’s regime persecutes women, citing the case of Nasrin Sotoudeh, an internationally renowned human rights lawyer, who was imprisoned in Iran  for 38 years and ordered to receive 148 lashes. Sotoudeh represented women prosecuted for removing their mandatory headscarf.Dr. Elvira Grözinger, deputy director of the German branch of Scholars for Peace in the Middle East, told the Post that “The famous Persian scholar and physician Avicenna was temporarily persecuted and imprisoned. Today, he would have been executed in Iran as he was not abstinent from wine, not always loyal to his rulers and spread revolutionary ideas.”She added that “The resident of the University of Trier praises the openness and cosmopolitan spirit of his university embracing cooperation with international scholars and rejecting xenophobia. When, however, at the same time he has no objection towards a scholar from his institution accepting an award from the president of Iran, the president like, the award winner, contradict these very virtues.”The Iranian Islamic regime is one of the most murderous ones in our days, it terrorizes its own people and spreads terror throughout the world. Accepting this award from the bloodstained hands of a dictator is an utterly unethical kowtow! It slams the humanistic ideals of scientific cooperation between scholars and demonstrates a decay of academic standards both on the part of the university and the scholar.”Last month, during a US congressional hearing, Jonathan Greenblatt, CEO of the Anti-Defamation League, termed Iran’s regime the leading state-sponsor of Holocaust denial and antisemitism.The US State Department under both the Obama and Trump administrations classified Iran’s regime as the worst state-sponsor of terrorism. Dr. Michael Jäckel, president of University of Trier, told the Post that Lammer was with an internationally recognized book award. This is the third time that his work has received recognition.”An international educational award is always an opportunity to get in touch with scientists from other countries and to start an exchange,” he explained. “For us, that was the decisive factor.”When pressed about Rouhani’s antisemitism, Jäckel said “The university is committed to combating all forms of discrimination,” citing nationalism and xenophobia. When asked why he did not cite antisemitism and what the university’s definition of contemporary Jew-hatred is, Jäckel did not comment.Jäckel said his university is a “open to the world.”The Jungle World commentary disputed the university’s contention about the Iranian regime award being prestigious. The article said that one cannot assume an impartial and factually sound jury “in the case of Islamic fascist, totalitarian regimes like the Iranian one, in which basic conditions for the awarding of a literary prize such as the right to freedom of expression do not exist.”Lammer declined to answer a Post media query.

https://www.jpost.com/Diaspora/Antisemitism/German-university-under-fire-for-accepting-award-from-Irans-regime-617996