Is China Going to Trigger a World War?

Our Bangkok correspondent H. Numan sends his take on the ChiCom flu and related matters.

Is China going to trigger a world war?

by H. Numan

We don’t quite know (yet) what caused the Chinese virus. Probably it comes from an infected bat, butchered and sold for food on an extremely unhygienic open air market. I know all about street markets. We have plenty of them in Thailand. Only with some standards of hygiene. You cannot butcher on the spot for example. In China, no such rule. Hygiene was never butchered. You can’t butcher what ain’t there, right?

We hear plenty of silly conspiracy theories these days. I get really sick of all the nonsense people dump online about Bill Gates, Soros and NWO. If aforementioned were only 5% as effective as those really dumb people claim, they would have achieved their goals a long time ago.

Another theory is that this Chinese virus didn’t start on a market, but in a nearby laboratory. Not impossible, but highly unlikely. Given that the POTUS makes such claims, I very humbly have to debunk it. I attended the NBC (Nuclear, Biological and Chemical warfare) school in the army. My instructor began by telling us how truly horrible those weapons are and how little we can do against it. Actually only against N weapons. Only within the army itself, and with very limited effect. Forget the civilian population. Y’all gonna die. Sorry about that.

It is technically impossible to prevent. We simply don’t have the resources for it. What we learned is how to detect it, and how to clean up yourself and your equipment after an N or C attack. There is no protection against B weapons at all. None whatsoever.

He told us that compared with chemical weapons, nukes are just firecrackers. Chemical weapons are almost innocent compared with biological weapons. All three are the stuff of horrors. You even imagine how truly horrid they are, not even in your worst nightmares.

A nuke explodes, that is it. Huge damage, and for a limited time, radiation. You can treat survivors immediately, and some infrastructure will remain intact. Large scale chemical attacks (most of them) cover large areas for weeks up to months. Whole areas or even entire countries will biologically die. Most life dies. Plants, insects and animals. Everything. For example, a large scale chemical attack on military installations in Germany would basically exterminate all life in central Europe. The unlucky survivors would slowly die of starvation and lack of medical facilities. Even clearing paths to walk on safely would be a huge effort. Months later gas would still stick to fences, leaves, in puddles, in houses and in cellars. Merely touching it would kill you. All life, plant life, insects and animals would have to be re-introduced to start life again. Forget about restarting civilization. Europe would be a literal valley of death.

The worst of all are biological weapons. This Chinese virus is relatively mild. Moderately contagious, but not very deadly. Yet this relatively mild virus spread like wildfire around the globe. The real danger is in overloading the medical system. Once you catch it, you need to be hospitalized. We simply don’t have that many hospitals or equipment to help everyone. That’s why this pandemic is so deadly and dangerous.

Again, this is a fairly mild virus. Imagine — better not do that — something designed in a lab that’s not so innocent and much more contagious. Such a virus would not be easy to counter. Designing a deadly virus is one thing. Designing one that only kills what you want or to have an antidote for your own population is quite another. Even if a vaccine is possible, inoculating 1.5 billion people is a massive undertaking.

Continue reading

A New Conservatism: Nationalist, Populist and Converging

Dr. Turley sums up the realignments that even the New York Times is admitting. From India to Australia to Japan, a form of “Trumpism” is coming into being. And the EU is trembling as it feels the earth moving under its old globalist certainties:

That doesn’t mean the realignments don’t hurt. Some people will be discombobulated; change is inevitable and rocky. Those who can see their loss as an opportunity will flourish. Others, like PM May in Great Britain, could be looking at the end.

With these changes, Gates of Vienna needs to update its categories. No longer is it enough to have the “EU” without naming its constituent nation-states. We will probably have to list “globalism” as a thing, even as it shrinks into something less…well, less global.

Thailand After the Elections

Thailand held its election, but the results are, well, hard to explain. But H. Numan gives it a go for Gates of Vienna readers.

Thailand after the elections

by H. Numan

Last Sunday Thailand went to vote, for the first time in four years. The generals staged a coup in 2014 ‘to combat corruption and institute more transparency.’ I reported about the coming elections, and you probably want to know the outcome. Well, I don’t know. Nobody knows. Rest assured, Prayuth won, and will almost certainly head a new government. Why don’t we know the outcome after a full week?

That’s because the official outcome cannot be published until after the king’s coronation on 5-7 May. Actually, the elections should have been held on the 24th of February, but had to be postponed due to the king’s wish to be crowned on 4-6 May. That date was already past the deadline set for it in the new constitution, but barely. The 24th constitution of Thailand stipulated that elections must be held within 150 days after they are announced. It also gives a timeframe when elections must be called for. The government literally waited until the last possible second to comply with the law. And then some more.

What the law doesn’t specify is when the final results must be announced. ‘When hell freezes over’ seems the correct answer. One would get the strange impression that the current military government is quite happy where they are and don’t want to give up their comfy seats.

There were no foreign observers present. Many organizations and governments (the EU for example) wanted to send observers, but nobody replied to their requests. During the elections irregularities were reported. Nothing new in Thailand; I know of no election without any irregularities since the beginning of democracy here.

The election committee, which is in charge of the elections, is now in deep, deep trouble. Most parties weren’t particularly happy that the election committee — read: the government — postponed the election until the last moment possible under the constitution. Much less so when those postponed elections were postponed again. Do note that the generals announced immediately after the coup they would call for elections as soon as possible. That’s four years ago. The postponements were postponed many times already.

I reported about a Thai princess who wanted to run for prime minister and was told not to do that by her brother, the king, the same day. The party, The Future Forward Party, had to withdraw from the elections. Right after the elections the chairman was accused of sedition for something he did four years ago.

This party is closely allied with the Pheu Thai party of the ex-prime minister and now fugitive Thaksin Shinawatra. A deliciously juicy incident happened in Hong Kong during the elections: princess Ubolrattana, the one who was explicitly forbidden to run for prime minister, attended the wedding of the Thaksin’s daughter in Hong Kong. There is no law forbidding her to do that, and all of Thailand smiles. Why? Because Thailand is the land of smiles, of course. We always smile. Why else would we smile?

The sedition charge against Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit is rather dated. He committed his offense in 2015, on the first anniversary of the coup. He visited a police station where he transported fugitives from the police to safety. That’s the charge. He himself says that he did visit the police station, where a demonstrator was released by the police. He merely offered him a ride home. Who’s right? I don’t know. What I do know is that the chief prosecutor has been replaced three times already.

Continue reading

Culture-Enriching Kidnapping and Rape in Yakutsk

The following report comes from the autonomous Republic of Sakha, also known as Yakutia, in the Far East of Russia. Its population is 300,000, 47% of which is Yakut and 38% Russian. The Yakuts are a Turkic people, and speak a Turkic language, but they are not Muslims. The Kyrgyz enrichers are also Turkic, but they are Muslims.

Many thanks to RR translating this article from the Rosbalt news site:

In Yakutsk, About a Hundred Buses Out of Service Due to Anti-Migrant Sentiments in the City

Nearly 100 bus drivers of migrant origin were afraid to go to work because of the hostile attitude of citizens to migrants after the kidnapping and rape of a local woman by a labor migrant born in Kyrgyzstan. This was announced to the media by Andrei Sharygin, the director of the United Dispatch Service.

According to him, this halted service for 90 buses, out of 430 working in the city. Sharygin noted that drivers are worried about their safety. All vegetable kiosks [a type of “farmers’ market” entirely controlled by migrants from Central Asia] all over the city of Yakutsk [capital of the autonomous Republic of Sakha] are closed for a second day.

The head of the SoyuzAvto partnership, Andrei Kositsky, said that passengers got into numerous confrontations with migrant bus drivers yesterday, refusing to pay and insulting drivers.

In addition, local media reported yesterday that that there were clashes between citizens and kebab shop owners and staff [again predominantly migrants]. On Monday a video appeared, showing a man with a gun dragging a native of Central Asia to an unknown location.

Yesterday tens of thousands of residents of Yakutsk and the nearest uluses [clan groups] met with the authorities in the city. Officials assured the protesting crowds that they would conduct mass raids to identify illegal migrants and illegal businesses, and then deport violators.

A very brief video of the demonstration is here.

An afterword from the translator:

Continue reading

Drink Up, Kiddies! It’s Educational!

Many thanks to Nash Montana for translating this article from Politically Incorrect:

Templin: “Chaperoned boozing” as an experiment at school

After mandatory porn class fitting into the scheme of early childhood sexualization of six- to ten-year-olds, our children now are going to have to learn how to booze at school. The red-red state government in Brandenburg wants to teach the “correct” drinking of alcohol in a tax-financed project.

As Nordkurier reported earlier, at the beginning of this week, outraged parents called into the editor’s desk. Their children had brought home a paper from school for parents to give their consent for a “school experiment”. In it parents were expected to give written consent that during class their minor children would be given alcohol under the guise of a “drinking experiment”.

The grammar school of Templin on the Uckermark had invited 90 students from the 9th class for this “experiment” in getting kids drunk, chaperoned by the school.

It was explained that for those under 16 years old, a maximum of three Trinkeinheiten (TE) is optimal. This corresponds to about 0.6 liters (1.25 pints) of champagne or wine. And the highest amount that is given to the minors corresponds to up to four TE, which is about 0.8 liters (1.7 pints) of wine or 1.3 liters (2.75) pints of beer, which the “youths” are supposed to drink under supervision.

Even though the school principal Barbara Liedtke admitted that even she would basically be “flat on the floor” after one liter of beer, she defended the boozing class. Because, after all, this was about observing the consequences.

So now students have to play at being guinea pigs for the country.

“First we’re supposed to teach our kids about the damaging effects of alcohol and drugs. And now they’ll get the booze handed to them by their teachers at school!,” says one angry mother.

The medical insurance company DAK has also reported concerns. Rüdiger Scharf, a spokesperson for DAK, is outraged: “Children are not guinea pigs;” this can be done without alcohol. In a similar project conducted by DAK, the subject group was given so-called intoxication goggles which simulate a high alcohol level, Scharf explained.

According to the people responsible, this joint-joint-scholastic getting hammered on command is supposed to promote the “responsible handling of alcohol” in the future.

Continue reading

Alain Wagner to the OSCE: We Need Referenda to Restore Popular Sovereignty

2018 Human Dimension Implementation Meeting
Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe
Monday, 17 September 2018

Working Session 10
Fundamental Freedoms I, Including Freedom of Expression

Intervention read by Alain Wagner, representing International Civil Liberties Alliance (ICLA)

Note: The intervention is in French, with a simultaneous voice-over translation.

Many thanks to Vlad Tepes for uploading this video:

For links to previous articles about the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, see the OSCE Archives.

What Mohammed? What Koran? What Mecca?

The following video is an excellent introduction by Dr. Jay Smith to the deconstruction by Western scholars of the Koran, Mohammed, and Islam itself. Using hermeneutics, textual analysis, archaeology, and other modern disciplines, he demonstrates that the three principal elements of Islam could not possibly be factually true in the way they are traditionally expounded:

1.   Mohammed                                                            
2.   The Koran
3.   Mecca

The archaeology and relevant historical documents simply do not support the traditions of Islam. Something happened in Arabia between the 7th and 10th centuries, but it certainly wasn’t what is described in the Koran, the Hadith, and the Sira.

A large part of Dr. Smith’s analysis focuses on the qiblas in the oldest mosques, which did not point to Mecca, but to Petra, in what is now Jordan. He explains the likely significance of the switch from Petra to Mecca, which was prompted by the conflict between the Abbasid and Umayyad dynasties in the late first millennium. He also explains the political necessities that likely motivated Abd al-Malik to invent and backdate Mohammed, the Koran, and Islam itself:

Hat tip: acuara.

The Red Evolution IV: The Subversive Left, the Destabilising Left, the Antecedents of Generation Snowflake and the Ultimate Surrender of Rationality (Part One)

The essay below is the latest in an occasional series by our expatriate English correspondent Peter on the history of the Socialist Left in Britain.

The Red Evolution IV: The Subversive Left, the Destabilising Left, the Antecedents of Generation Snowflake and the Ultimate Surrender of Rationality

by Peter


Having lived through it, I believe the period from 1960 to 1975, commonly known as the ’60s, was a carefully devised trap into which we all propelled ourselves, willingly and of our own volition, a knot with a multitude of apparently loose strands which, when drawn tightly together, ensnared us all. The summer of peace and love did not happen, at least, not the way they said it did. With the wisdom of hindsight, I believe that what did happen in the 1960s was mass-indoctrination; the first of a succession of generations to move into Communism, not by force, but by stealth, subversion, sex, drugs and rock and roll by way of a process which began many years before.

World War II finally ended on 2nd September 1945 with the signing of the Peace Treaty with Japan on the deck of the USS Missouri in Tokyo harbour, Germany having surrendered to the Allies four months earlier, after Hitler had thoughtfully put himself out of everyone’s misery. As a result, the Soviet Union had acquired East Germany and much of Eastern Europe, upon which by means of the eradication of political institutions, terror campaigns, purges of dissidents, mass murder and other tried and tested methods of enforcing totalitarian control, the Soviet dictator Josef Stalin ruthlessly imposed communist rule in defiance of assurances extracted from him by his allies at Yalta in February 1945 that free elections would be held. He guessed rightly that Western leaders had had enough of war and would not take up arms again — at least, not then, and not over Eastern Europe.

Stalin and his cronies had planned the Communist takeover of Eastern Europe well before 1939, so that when the Red Army had ‘liberated’ those countries, police forces, both conventional and covert Communist party structures were already in place and awaiting activation. In the late 1940s, with the Soviet Empire now a work in progress, Stalin was intent on extending Soviet influence, believing it was only a matter of time before Western Europe fell into its clutches, but there were several restraining influences.

While Western Europe was nearly destitute and primarily engaged on rebuilding what remained of its society and its cities, thanks in a large part to the Marshall Plan, it was still prepared to defend itself, and if it were to fall short in this enterprise, then America stood ready, willing and able to pick up any deficit. Additionally, the Soviet Union had paid a terrible price for its own role in what it called The Great Patriotic War, far greater than any other participating country. Stalingrad was not the only Soviet City to have been reduced to rubble during hostilities. In Western Russia alone, the degree of desolation caused by a scorched earth policy exercised by both sides had all but obliterated 1700 towns and approximately 70,000 villages, along with 32,000 factories and 65,000 kilometres of railway track. In addition, the loss of life suffered by the population of the USSR as published by the current Russian Government totals 26.6 million people, two thirds of which were civilians, but this has been called a conservative estimate by Russian scholar Boris Sokolov, who believes there were around 43.3 million Soviet lives lost, 27 million of which were civilians.

Therefore Stalin’s options for Soviet expansion through direct assault appeared limited, but there was one option, a proxy war in the east. This would require a minimal call on Soviet manpower while ascertaining firstly whether the West still had the stomach for a fight, and secondly whether his newly-acquired Chinese allies would rally to the cause. The Korean Peninsula had been occupied by the Japanese since 1910, and following their surrender in 1945 had been divided along an area just north of the 38th Parallel between the Soviet-backed north ruled by the Communist Kim Il-Sung and the US backed south led by President Syngman Rhee. It would be fair to say that Soviet support for the North Korean leadership was lukewarm, while the Americans regarded Rhee as the best of a particularly nasty bunch, whose only positive characteristics were his fluency in English and his aversion to communism.

Throughout 1949 and 1950 the North Korean military had been receiving large quantities of Soviet tanks, artillery and aircraft as well as intensive combat training, while its numbers had been enhanced considerably by the return of battle-hardened veterans who had fought on the Communist side in the Chinese civil war. By contrast, the South Korean army had little more than small arms with which to defend itself. A North-versus-South conflict appeared to be a very unequal contest, and this encouraged Stalin to give the word for his North Korean client to invade the South, which it did on 25th June 1950.

Although the invasion caught the Americans by surprise, the UN reacted with amazing speed, compared to the lethargic Arab-dominated talking shop it has now become. On 27th June it authorized a US-led multinational force from what would eventually become twenty-one countries to repel the North Korean invasion. After the first months of the conflict, coalition troops were very much on the back foot until a seaborne UN counter-offensive landed at Inchon cut off North Korean troops and effectively altered the course of the war. The retreating North Korean forces were pursued northwards to an area close to the border with China, whereupon in response to an earlier commitment made to Stalin, Mao Zedong ordered the Communist Chinese army into the war, dispatching a massive force across the border into Korea, compelling the UN armies to retreat in the face of its ferocious advance.

Continue reading

The German-Language Press Reacts to Donald Trump’s Speech at the UN

JLH has compiled and translated a set of headlines from the German-language press reacting to yesterday’s speech at the United Nations by President Donald Trump.



Donald Trump Threatens North Korea with Total Destruction

The US President spoke before the UN and his speech was a singular plea for nationalism in accord with his motto, “America first.” This focus did not, however, prevent Donald Trump from making dire threats against North Korea.


Trump at the UN
America, America, and then the rest of the world

In his first speech at the UN, US President Donald Trump threatens North Korea, condemns Iran and praises himself. Nonetheless, his appearance is the most conclusive one thus far, and that includes various broken taboos.


Trump before the UN
No power that wants to lead morally can talk like that

With his first speech to the UN, Donald Trump dashed all hopes that he might be tamable. His threats against North Korea are beyond measure and dangerous. And so the world stumbles on from crisis to crisis.

Welt [again]

US president at the UN
Another Trump is heard from

In his first speech at the UN, the US president attacked “rogue states” from North Korea to Iran to Venezuela. But he also struck other notes. His speechwriter is responsible for that.

Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung

Trump’s UN Speech
Fiery words and fatal misconceptions

Donald Trump emphasizes the significance of “sovereign national states” and speaks against North Korea. UN General Secretary Guterres urges unity — with a dig at the US president.


US expert[1] analyzes Trump’s UN speech
“That will not intimidate Kim”

US President Donald Trump’s debut at the UN, where he spoke of the “total destruction” of North Korea,” was not well-received.

1. Devin Hayes Ellis, director of the think tank “ICONS”

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *


Neue Zürcher Zeitung

The new Trump Doctrine could do serious damage to America’s interests

The American president’s declaration of war against North Korea caused excitement. What is more important is his foreign policy concept. It has serious weaknesses.


Continue reading

Germany — Land of Milk and Honey

What is the effect of immigration of people from collapsed states or states incapable of development? Are they importing that collapse to this society? Are they destroying here the cultural and institutional prerequisites of industrialization which they never had and could not create in their homelands?

The following brilliant and comprehensive article about Modern Multicultural Madness was the last one published before his death by the German scholar Rolf Peter Sieferle. Among other things, it provides a useful synonym for multiculturalism: “multi-tribalism”.

JLH, who translated the piece for Gates of Vienna, includes this introduction:

This article was recommended to me by Egri Nök.

Rolf Peter Sieferle took his own life on September 17, 2016, at age 67.

It is clear from the “in memoriam” comments in Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung as well as in assorted other articles, that he provoked strong feelings — affection and respect among friends, colleagues and students; bitter criticism from others, especially of his book Finis Germania, published post mortem, which is a miscellany of the thoughts and writings in his remaining manuscripts and journals. He has been characterized as a “right-radical” by many, for the obvious reason that he was a clear-eyed historian who provided a close look at what is happening today.

The last thing published before his death is the long article, Deutschland, Schlaraffenland, translated below. It is long, but worthwhile. With calm, relentless logic, he guides us through the rise of the industrialized, capitalist state and inexorably leads us through the causes and results of its dissolution in terms of universal history. He may be a latter-day Spengler, or a fact-based Nostradamus. Whatever he is, when I read his words, I find myself thinking that the real reason Donald Trump was elected is because many people went to the polls thinking, “Make us trust again!”

The translated article from Jürgen Fritz’s blog [pdf]:

Germany — Land of Milk and Honey

On the path to the multi-tribal society

by Rolf Peter Sieferle

At this point in time, a wave of immigration of unprecedented magnitude is inundating Europe. On the periphery, millions are setting out for the promised land. Europe is surrounded by collapsing states and hopeless areas. The population of Africa, presently circa one billion, is growing annually by 3%, that is, 30 million, of which several million yearly can set out on the way to a better, promised land. Add to this the emigration from the civil war areas of the Near East. Some of the earlier barriers to this migration have disappeared. In Libya alone, a million migrants await a space on a boat which will transport them on the dangerous passage across the Mediterranean Sea.

In this respect, Europe is in an unusual situation, due to its geographical location. Other industrial areas in the world are threatened by immigration, but none as extensively as Europe. Latin America has a population of about 400 million, that is, the number of potential emigrants is approximately the same as that of the resident population of North America (USA and Canada). The ratio in Europe is three times as great (1500 million vs. 500 million). The US border with Mexico is relatively small and can be relatively easily secured, since there is only one country from which immigrants can flow into the USA. It is quite different in Europe. It is realistically impossible to screen off the outer borders. And in the border areas of North Africa and the Near East, there are more and more unpredictable states which cannot be counted on to cooperate.

Other industrial countries such as Japan, South Korea, Australia, New Zealand are so far from possible origin lands of immigration that the trip by boat people is risky and relatively easy to monitor. It is more problematic in the emerging countries of Southeast Asia (Thailand, Singapore, Vietnam, etc.) which are eligible goals for immigrants. Other countries such as China and Russia are difficult to reach and are not (yet) attractive for immigration. That leaves Europe as the place where we can expect the greatest immigration pressure. Europeans must be paralyzed with fear at this development. They are facing a folk migration comparable to the one in late antiquity.

Why do so many people want to immigrate to countries like Germany? The reasons are obvious: here there is prosperity and security, a functioning constitutional state; there are no wars or civil wars, no epidemics; the health system is excellent and free; unemployment is low; the social nets are lush — it is a land of milk and honey, and you would have to be a little dim not to recognize that. The reasons for immigrating, for the wish to immigrate, are easy to understand.

It is somewhat harder to understand why conditions in Germany are so much better than in, for instance, Iraq. That was no always the case. A thousand years ago, it was not clear where living conditions were better, and three thousand years ago, the standard of living, i.e., the civilizational niveau in Europe was without doubt lower than in Mesopotamia. Something has changed drastically here in recent millennia. The question is, what? This question is the same as the one about the reasons for “Europe’s unique path” — that is, why Europe succeeded in breaking out of the model of agrarian civilizations and bringing forth a new kind of economy, state and society, which combines prosperity and security for all. In asking this, we come upon three complexes of factors which have instigated Europe’s advance into the constitutional industrial society (a.k.a. “the modern age”): they are by nature technical-industrial, cultural-intellectual and political-institutional. What element played what role is a very thorny question. Thus far, there is no agreement on what was decisive. But it is certain that a process of positive feedback has built up in Europe in the last 300 years, and the result is the “land of milk and honey” we see before us.

Undisputed though it may be that the development into an industrial society radiated outward from Europe, it is also clear that the imitation of it in other regions has proceeded with greater or lesser success. This was simplest in the neo-European colonies (USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand) which effortlessly adopted or even took part in shaping the European model. Examples of success may be found in Asia, in Japan, South Korea, Taiwan — presumably also sooner or later in mainland China and India. These countries did not develop their own version of industrialization, but succeeded in a relatively short time in joining the parade.

Other countries were less successful, even though they could observe Europe’s unique progress from closer at hand. This is especially true of Russia, which has tried to keep pace with Europe for 300 years, and yet continually regresses to its old plight. That is also true of the Ottoman Empire, of which only one province was truly successful — Palestine/Israel, and in fact because of the Zionist immigration from Europe. It must be emphasized here that Judaism was not a decisive factor. If someone (for instance, Werner Sombart [1]) should wish to trace industrial capitalism to the Jews, the geographical location of its inception would have to be sought in Galicia,[2] rather than in the north of England, where there were hardly any Jews in the 17th and 18th centuries.

From Tribal Consciousness to Industrial Nation

So we confront the problem that a successful industrialization is based on certain historical, especially cultural and institutional preconditions which are not easy to imitate or create. People like living in the promised land, and are moved to immigrate to industrialized countries, but something is keeping them from establishing this paradise at home. Apparently, immigrating to an already existing utopia is easier. Why? If industrialization and democratization, the creation of a constitutional order and implementation of rational ways of thinking are natural characteristics of “modernization,” then why is it so much more attractive to undergo the rigors of migration, than to transform one’s own native land according this model? The reason, in general, is that the assumptions of modernization theory are false. Ours was a highly improbable process, shaped by many contingencies which had over centuries created ways of thinking and institutions, the results of which are evident today in zones of prosperity and security. This model of success cannot simply be copied. Transferring technology is easy; transferring institutions is difficult; transferring cultural-intellectual paradigms is practically impossible or at least a very lengthy process.

Continue reading

Justice for the Chinese, But Not for the Germans

Many thanks to JLH for translating this article from Michael Mannheimer’s website:

Germany Sentences Refugee to 11 Years in Prison for Attack on and Rape of Chinese Students

that is:

(Pressure From China Causes German Judges to do What They Ordinarily Refuse to Do)

For justice to be done in Germany, the intervention of a world power is required. A Muslim invader (code name “refugee”) sexually assaulted two Chinese female students in Bochum. That was last year. The incident had wide media exposure among the 1.6 billion people of China.

It is known that Chinese diplomats personally intervened to demand a severe punishment. And that happened. This is indirect proof that our system of justice is not independent, but directed from “above.”

We may be sure that if the victim of this Muslim invader had been a German woman, he would have gotten off with a light sentence. Examples of this can be found by the hundreds.

Only the fear of international loss of face caused this stern and just sentence against the rapist.

Germany apparently feared that its image would suffer among one-quarter of the world’s population. That alone was the cause for a comparatively just sentence.

On the occasion of German state visits to China, the precarious condition of human rights there is routinely noted. In the future, German politicians can save themselves the trouble of these remarks. Now the Chinese know very well how basic rights in Germany are: not much better than in China.

For links to previous articles by or about Michael Mannheimer, see the Michael Mannheimer Archives.

Viktor Orbán: The Silk Road and New Models of Globalization

The “Silk Road” has been in the news a lot lately — the Chinese initiative to update the old trading routes from the Far East across the steppes of Central Asia to the Caucasus and Europe.

In the following excerpt from his recent remarks during the Silk Road negotiations, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán talks about a new model of globalization that is replacing the old, worn-out one.

Many thanks to CrossWare for the translation, and to Vlad Tepes for the subtitling:

Video transcript:

Continue reading

Macron Won: Nowhere Left to Run and Everything Will Burn

A snip from Wretchard’s analysis.

He is describing the Hell that has become the 21st Century:

Although Macron’s victory and Moon’s [South Korea] likely triumph will likely be portrayed as a return of electoral politics to the globalist mainstream — a reversal of the Brexit/Trump trend — they are actually the opposite. Both are attempts to solve challenges that have baffled the elite.

Hillary Clinton in her latest attempt to reinvent herself revealed an off-beat turn. “I’ve spent decades learning about what it would take to move our country forward, including people who clearly didn’t vote for me. To try to make sure that we dealt with a lot of these hard issues that are right around the corner, like robotics and artificial intelligence, and things that are really going to be upending the economy, for the vast majority of Americans, to say nothing of the rest of the world. So, I’m now back to being an activist citizen, and part of the resistance.” [Italics are in the original]

Macron is going down the same old, same old. Globalization, social media, scientific revolutions are still taking the world order apart. At least Hillary’s at the point where she’s changing the talking points to see what happens. The hurricane which began with Brexit and Trump, far from dying down, is amping up as the local elections in Britain suggest. The working class has been orphaned by the Left and Macron claims to be the Center. The winds are coming from another quarter. [and they carry with them the smell of smoke and burning flesh… – D]

It’s possible the ‘responsible’ plan is to rely on a Macron or Hillary to guide us into a future they alone understand, but not likely. Perhaps what is happening is partly explained by Venezuela, which exhibits an eerie stability even as it sinks into chaos. A New York Times article explains Venezuela’s calm as a case of stress aggregation rather than conflict resolution. The Venezuelan elites have not won and [are] sitting on their laurels; they are just deadlocked waiting for someone to break ranks to show which way to run.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

Only Richard Fernandez could manage to envisage stable chaos. No doubt there’s a mathematical term for that?

Especially see his analysis in this essay of South Korea’s young. We have the virulent evils of 1950s Communism to thank for their predicament.

Welcoming the Caliphate to Brazil

The following article about Brazil’s new open-borders law was published last night at Vlad Tepes.

New immigration law opens Brazil’s borders to drug trafficking and the Islamic Caliphate

by José Atento

This article deals with the situation of the Islamization of Brazil in light of the new Law of Immigration, approved by the country’s Senate and sent for presidential signing. It highlights steps that have been taken to increase the nonexistent Islamic presence in Brazil into become an influential power. To understand the situation one needs to understand the deterioration of the political landscape of the country, which is briefly discussed in the course of the article (keeping in mind that politics in Brazil has a huge complicating factor: endemic corruption).

During an Islamic conference in Chicago in 2008 I heard the audio of a speech from an Imam in which he described how Brazil would become an Islamic nation within 50 years. I was aware of what was happening in the West but I thought that Brazil would not be in the axis of Islamic interest. I was wrong. After all, Brazil is the powerhouse of South America not just due to the size of the country (remember, Brazil is larger than the US without Alaska) but also due to the size of its economy and influence. It is said that where Brazil goes so goes South America. Indeed.

In 1964 a democratic but USSR-leaning government was overthrown by the Brazilian military under the pretext of keeping Brazil from becoming a “New Cuba.” The military regime remained in power, relinquishing it slowly under pressure from a democratic front that encompassed politicians, civil society and the Brazilian Roman Catholic bishops, most of them adherents of the Liberation Theology. During this time communist-style guerrilla warfare took place and several of the guerrilla leaders ended up deported, mostly to Chile (under Allende), Cuba or France. In 1988, a new Constitution was promulgated and in 1989 presidential elections were held. The guerrilla leaders returned to the country under an amnesty law and joined a number of pro-Socialist parties. The most notable of them was the Labor Party (PT), led by the union leader Lula da Silva, who was compared by many to Lech Walesa and Václav Havel. The difference is that unlike Walesa and Havel, Lula wanted Socialism and Globalism.

The new civilian regime reached its apex during the presidency of Fernando Cardoso (1995-2003), of the also Left-leaning Social Democrats (PSDB). He controlled inflation and led the country to phenomenal growth, even though under accusations of rampant corruption. Lula da Silva was elected in 2003, remaining in power until 2011. He used the economic legacy of his predecessor, creating his own corruption base in an attempt to solidify power. His goal was to keep the Labor Party in permanent control of the Federal Government. He was followed by Dilma Roussef in 2012, but the economy did not survive 8 years of Lula da Silva and corruption that reached unprecedented levels. The corruption was made public by a few young and courageous judges in what has been know as Operation Car Wash. Dilma Roussef was impeached, being replaced by her vice-president, Michel Temer.

It should be mentioned that since Fernando Cardoso’s presidency, Brazil has turned towards the Left and several former guerrilla members have become Ministers of State. It continues up to today under the current president.

Then enters the unholy alliance between the Left and Islam, Brazilian style.

Most of the Left in Brazil is anti-Semitic, anti-Israel and Pro-Palestinian. Add to the equation the inherent animosity against the USA (accused of helping the military in 1964) and the overthrow of Saddam Hussein and al-Khadafi, as well as their sympathy for Iran, and you have open doors for any Islamic leader to the high echelons of power.

Since the late 1990s there has been a growing presence of Saudi and UAE support for an exponential effort in building mosques and madrassas, even though the number of Muslims remains small (official records mention fewer than 100,000 whereas Islamic leaders mention two million).

There has been also an increase in the number of visits by Islamic leaders of any kind to government officials at state, municipal and federal levels. There has also been increasing activity dealing with public safety, including the arrest of several Muslims accused of terror plots, as well as increasing activity of Hezbollah in connection with organized crime.

But Islam has not made an impact on the local population as its leaders would like. The only way for a faster growth is by fostering Muslim immigration to Brazil. There has been a concerted effort linking government officials, NGOs (e.g., funded by the likes of George Soros’ Open Society Foundation and the Ford Foundation), Christian groups and Islamic leaders to open the doors for more immigrants and refugees. The halal industry is a door, but not to import enough Muslims. Meet the new Law of Immigration.

Senator Aloysio Nunes, himself a former guerrilla fighter, now Minister of Foreign Affairs, is the author of this legislation that, among other things, destroys the borders of the country. The main intention of the Brazilian Left is the “continental integration”, i.e., that South America becomes a single Socialist entity (they have Venezuela as a model, seriously). So, the new legislation targets primarily the free transit of foreigners from bordering countries, giving them full citizenship rights. But anyone who comes to Brazil, even as tourist, can claim the same. The doors are open to anyone, from anywhere.

Continue reading