Tim Burton on the Tommy Robinson Appeal

The British anti-sharia activist Tim Burton has appeared in this space a number of times in the past. He has been tried twice for “hate speech”, and was convicted the second time — for sending emails that offended Fiyaz “Fizzy Bollocks” Mughal, of Tell MAMA fame. He served six weeks in one of Her Majesty’s prisons. You’ll have to ask him how he survived his stretch in a prison with so many Muslims in it — I don’t know how he did it.

So Tim has been there, done that. He’s talked the talk AND walked the walk.

In the following interview with Vlad Tepes, Tim Burton discusses yesterday’s appeal by Tommy Robinson’s defense team against Tommy’s continued detention (Tim was present in the courtroom), and the larger social and political context of what is happening now in Britain:

Social Justice: An Analysis (Part 1)

Below is the first part of a four-part guest essay by Richard Cocks about Social Justice (and also, of course, Social Justice Warriors).

Social Justice: An Analysis

by Richard Cocks

Part 1

Cosmic justice: infantile and nihilistic

Social class, home environment, genetics and other factors all contribute to differences between individuals. People differ in looks, height, income, social status, morality, various kinds of intelligence and athleticism, musical ability, industriousness, discipline, and every other human characteristic. Differences in culture, history, and geography generate differences between groups. Being born into a culture that emphasizes hard work, education, conscientiousness, and thrift is a tremendous advantage.

“Social justice” advocates describe the resulting disparate achievements as “inequalities” with the suggestion that these represent some kind of injustice. Unequal achievement is treated as though it must be the result of discrimination, “privilege” or some other unfairness, while it is in fact the inevitable consequence of differences between individuals and groups. These differences will exist no matter how a society is organized, barring a race to the bottom where the laziest, least talented individual set the bar and every achievement that surpasses that pitiful measure gets confiscated and distributed — removing any incentive to do anything much at all.

Very young children and even some animals[1] have a sense of justice or fairness. In humans this starts out with an intuitive perception, later gets modified by reflection and culture, which in turn influences what gets perceived as just or unjust. Iain McGilchrist describes this as right hemisphere perception, left hemisphere mid-level processing, returning once more to the right hemisphere.[2]

An egocentric child, without prompting, can perceive that receiving a small ice cream while his brother gets a large one is unfair and unjust.[3] However, he is also likely to think that the fact that his older brother has fewer restrictions on what he can do than he does is unfair. Both cases generate resentment. However, only one is justified.

In the second case, being older and thus a little wiser, the older brother does not need as much supervision. He is more capable, self-sufficient and responsible, and therefore has more privileges. These privileges might seem unfair and unjust in some “cosmic” sense, but they are in fact perfectly reasonable.[4] His parents are not being unjust at all. It is merely that age and experience are on the side of the older brother. To harbor resentment at the parents is unreasonable, unfair and unjust. They are blameless. To resent the brother is also ridiculous. There will always be an older sibling as long as siblings exist. The protest is misguided.

Part of the maturation process is learning to distinguish between events that are due to favoritism, attempts to solicit elicit sexual favors, or some other inequity and occurrences that are the result of relevant differences between people. To feel resentful towards someone merely because he is better in some way, such as in looks, status, wealth, or popularity, is in some sense natural. It is also puerile and undeserved. It is a sin in the literal sense of missing the mark. Certainly the envied person is not at fault simply for being superior. The defect is in the heart of the malicious resentful one.

It is true that even a relatively happy, mature person will almost inevitably suffer occasionally from this kind of inappropriate resentment, but he recognizes that the fault lies in his own breast, not in the other person.

By failing to distinguish between deserved resentment and inappropriate hatred towards someone or some group simply for being superior in some way, “social justice” returns people to an infantile inability to differentiate between resentment based on actual unjust treatment, and resentment that is generated simply by the desire to have or be what someone else has or is.

If the universe itself can be considered unjust in some way, due to the unequal distribution of admirable characteristics, it is not the fault or responsibility of man and it is not in man’s power to fix. It is certainly not the fault of “society,” which the phrase “social justice” implies. Justice and fairness appropriately considered enter the picture only with regard to human institutions and rules.

To reject inequalities is to rebel against reality itself. All people bar two are superior to some and inferior to others in any conceivable characteristic. To reject that fact is to renounce the character of existing at all.

One response to existence and Being is to reject it; to decide that it is better never to have lived and then, having lived, to end it as soon as possible. Mass shooters act out the intention not just to end their own lives, but to kill as many as they can in a rejection of Life itself.[5] Social justice warriors are engaged in a similar kind of nihilism. Scapegoating and killing the “kulaks”[6] in the manner of Stalin has no logical end. Since differences of achievement are unavoidable, the logic of social justice is the complete destruction of the human race. By encouraging undeserved resentment against individuals and whole sectors of society, “social justice” activists ramp up intergroup hatreds that promote internecine conflict and, if unchecked, will lead to more horrible violence than simply one individual picking up a gun. Once the scapegoated group is murdered, differing levels of success within the persecuting group remain, and the process will continue.

To reward merit or productivity?

In thinking about economic success, Thomas Sowell recommends simply jettisoning the notion of merit. He argues that “the concept of merit brings an insult to misfortune and arrogance to achievement.”[7] It is impossible to separate how much achievement is the result of talent, for which a person can take no credit, and how much is the result of industriousness. On the face of it, hard work seems meritorious. However, even industriousness tends to be highly affected by familial and cultural influences; an unearned advantage. This means that it is not possible to assess merit. What can be rewarded — what is known how to reward — is productivity.

Rewarding productivity creates an incentive to be productive, and all tend to benefit. They benefit because rewarding productivity encourages using the latest technology and most effective methods, raising the quality of products while reducing their cost. Simply rewarding effort would not be optimal for that reason.

Continue reading

Robert and Emmanuelle Ménard on Immigration, Part 2

The following video is a follow-up to the one we posted on Sunday. It’s a continuation of a TV panel discussion about immigration featuring Robert Ménard (the mayor of Béziers in southern France) and his wife Emmanuelle (a member of the Chamber of Deputies).

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

Video transcript:

Continue reading

The End Times of Albion: Tyranny and Ineptitude in High Places

The essay below by Seneca III is the latest in the “End Times of Albion” series. Previously: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5, Part 6A, Part 6B, Part 7A, and Part 7B.

Tyranny and Ineptitude in High Places

The End Times of Albion, Part 8

by Seneca III

May the Good Lord save us all

Preamble

At 1300 hrs BST on Saturday 14th July 2018 I sent this to GoV:

Baron,

It looks as if the Met may be setting up a confrontation between ‘Stand up to Racism’ and the ‘Welcome Trump’ marchers combined with the ‘Free Tommy Robinson’ rally. The last will already be established in Whitehall coming in from the North whilst the ‘Welcome Trumpers’ have been directed to join up with them via a roundabout route and also approach from the North; the ‘Stand up to Racism’ lot have been given free rein to approach however they wish from the South along Whitehall from their assembly point in Palace Yard.

Quote: Chief Superintendent Elaine Van-Orden said: “Our message is simple: if you wish to protest peacefully, that is your right and we want to work with you. If you commit criminal acts or breach the conditions of the event, you are liable to be arrested.”

I suspect the plan may be to let ‘Stand up to Racism’ kick off against the other two groups at the junction of Whitehall with Horse Guards and who will, naturally, defend themselves and thus give Plod the chance to wade into them and set them up as the fall guys.

I do hope not, but if that is the case I hope that at least some of the good guys read and digested Part 6B.

Seneca III

As it happened

It has long been understood in certain quarters that the collective IQ of the senior ranks in the Met is nothing to write home about. Apart from a significant percentile of them being career-box-ticking graduates of the Common Purpose Collective with degrees in politics, sociology, underwater basket-weaving, or with an affirmative-actioned Master of Philosophy degree in criminology from Fitzwilliam College, Cambridge, there aren’t too many creative free-range neurons bouncing around.

Essentially, impartial planning is not their forte, although they do pretty well at buggering about those people whom they have been conditioned to regard as ‘Deplorables’. Hence on Saturday out came the threatening flyers concerning Section 12 of the Public order Act 1986, together with the route to be taken by the Welcome Trump crowd when they joined up with the Free Tommy Robinson rally.

This is the Met’s original plan:


(Note the last line)

The planned route for the Welcome Trump march. It is not the shortest 0.8 blue dotted one but the longest grey one possible bringing them in from the North via St. Martin-in-the-Fields — the one and only route the Welcome Trump Rally could take to join up with the Free Tommy Robinson protest.

[N.B. I recall from years ago that there was once a requirement for a senior officer to take over command of the (traffic?) planning unit. This required some ability in mathematics. The guy who was eventually promoted was the only officer who, in those pre-calculator days, could handle simple arithmetic using a pencil and paper — he held the highest mathematics qualification of all the candidates at the required (high) rank…it was a GCE in Maths (Junior High School Diploma in the US) and he got the job. London traffic has never been the same since.]


The planned route for the ‘Stand up to Racism’ rabble

However, to add insult to injury, the delegation of authority to localised commanders contained in the last line in the flyer shown above is probably what was utilized when the Welcome Trump gathering were told that they were now forbidden to march as planned and authorised, but that they must make their way individually in groups no larger then two, displaying neither banners nor flags, or they would be arrested, prosecuted and heavily fined.

Yet, the Met had already promulgated that the Section 12 provisions DID NOT APPLY TO ‘STAND UP TO RACISM’ AND THEY WERE FREE TO PROCEED HOWEVER THEY WISHED, the inevitable result of this favoured status was to make it possible for these masked Antifa to attack the peaceful Free Tommy/Welcome Trump combined group sometime later in the proceedings…

…when at least a few of the Plod must have realised that the whole mess they had organised had gone pear-shaped, thanks to the incubus and succubus of Londonistan…

…Caliph Khan and the Epithet Redacted.

Continue reading

Robert and Emmanuelle Ménard on Mass Immigration

Robert Ménard is the outspoken mayor of Béziers in southern France, and his wife Emmanuelle is a member of the Chamber of Deputies. Both represent the Rassemblement National (formerly Front National), and both are vociferous opponents of mass immigration into France.

The following discussion featuring the Ménards took place recently on a talk show on French TV. Many thanks to Ava Lon for the translation, and to Vlad Tepes for the subtitling:

Video transcript:

Continue reading

The MSM Pushes Back Against the #FreeTommy Movement

One of our anon commenters left a link to an unusually vile “news” report on Tommy Robinson. Gone is the news from real journalists who limited their reports to who, what, when, where, eschewing purported motives. Now MSM jornolistos comment mostly on the various aspects of “why”. For example, there is the description of Tommy:

Robinson, whose real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, though he also uses other aliases, is a founder of the English Defense League, which has organized violent demonstrations against Islamic immigrants in the UK in the past decade. More recently, Robinson has branded himself a journalist and campaigner against Islamic extremism, a move that won him contacts with American anti-Muslim activists.

Robinson was arrested in late May outside a courthouse in Leeds, England, while making video recordings about a trial related to child molestation and jailed for 13 months for violating English law limiting publicity during criminal trials.

The real point of this slam by Reuters — aside from its snarky condescension toward TR — is its questioning of the probity of inquiries formally made to the U.K. ambassador in Washington by America’s Ambassador (at-large) for International Religious Freedom. Those queries center around concern for Tommy’s safety while in prison.*

Furthermore, since when does Reuters, infamous for using non-accredited news stringers worldwide, get to decide who is a reporter and who is not? Tommy’s “credentials” would stand up well against those of Reuters’ boys and girls. Tommy Robinson has often been a lone voice raised against Islam’s depredations in his beloved country; who better to report on the story than one of the leading voices crying out for justice?

Certainly, Reuters and the rest of the MSM cabal had set up a wall of silence to not cover this MSM soi-disant “child molestation” story. The collusive, ringing silence allowed Britain’s national shame of horrors to grow unchecked for decades. Had it not been for the UK’s near-total fear of being publicly perceived as “racist”, the massive drugging and grooming of thousands of young British girls, tacitly allowed by cowardly local government agencies (including police), would not have been possible. The pusillanimous MSM went along to get along. It was only with the rise of alternative journalism — e.g., Tommy Robinson, et al. — that the exposure of these grisly crimes became possible. Yet how many hundreds of families’ lives were ruined over the years because of this concatenation of evil and cowardice?

Why are organizations like Reuters permitted to twist reality to suit their own purposes?

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

Another alternative news source has stepped into the breach to make certain there is adequate coverage of Tommy’s new hearing.

Ezra Levant reports:

I am glad he is traveling to once-Great Britain for this hearing; we made a small donation toward his flight. But while it is important to shed as much sunlight on these proceedings as possible, I have little hope that the hearing will change much. There is now a panel of three judges for the new hearing — rescheduled yet again, this time moved to July 18th — and presided over by Sir Ian Burnett, the Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales. Mr. Levant says this is akin to a small case in the U.S. being brought before the U.S. Chief Justice. But his analogy limps (as do they all). While he’s right about the new gravitas, things are different here. In America, no matter its notoriety, any legal case would have to work its way through the python; there might be intense oversight, but it would have to go through each judicial step. [Remember the Supremes’ refusal to hear the Elian Gonzalez case when Clinton and Janet Reno were pressing to send him back to Cuba? That’s an example.] The UK system appears to be less insulated from quotidian political pressure. If that weren’t the case, why is Britain playing switchies with court dates, judges, and prisons, while stonewalling?

How high-handed can you get?

Continue reading

Geert Wilders to the #FreeTommy Rally: “We Are Tommy’s Band of Brothers”

Geert Wilders had been scheduled to speak at today’s #FreeTommy rally in London. However, the British government refused to allow his bodyguards to carry guns while in the UK, and the Metropolitan Police declined to provide him with a protection detail, so he was unable to attend.

Mr. Wilders sent the following video message to be shown in his absence to Tommy Robinson’s supporters in London today:

Below is the transcript of Mr. Wilders’ message, including the text of the speech he would have given if he had been able to attend the rally:

Continue reading

The “Gender Dimension” of Mass Migration into Europe

The priorities of the Austrian Presidency of the EU Council of Ministers were presented in a series of meetings in the European Parliament last week. On Tuesday Chancellery Minister Juliane Bogner-Strauss presented the presidency’s priorities to the Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality (FEMM).

Below is the relevant snip from the press releases of the European Parliament posted last week:

Women’s Rights and Gender Equality: raising awareness among young Europeans

On Tuesday, Juliane Bogner-Strauβ, Federal Minister within the Chancellery for Women, Families and Youth, told Women’s Rights MEPs that gender equality was at the top of Presidency’s priorities. A conference on the future of gender equality will be held in Vienna in October, with a focus on youth, as well as smaller events in schools throughout Europe. Among the other priorities of the Austrian Presidency: the opportunities of digitalisation for young girls and boys, gender mainstreaming, work-life balance and the implementation of the Istanbul Convention on preventing and combatting violence against women.

MEPs welcomed the organisation of this conference on gender equality and urged Austria to encourage the 10 member states that still have not done so to ratify the Istanbul Convention.

Krisztina Morvai is a member of the European Parliament for Hungary. During the meeting chaired by Juliane Bogner-Strauss, Ms. Morvai asked some pointed questions about the treatment of women by recently-arrived migrants in Europe. She wanted to know: Will the Austrian presidency protect European women from violence by migrants?

The following video includes Krisztina Morvai’s questions (in English), followed by excerpts from Minister Bogner-Strauss’ reply (in German, with English voice-over):

For those who read Hungarian, in an entry on her blog, Krisztina Morvai asks her readers to share this video.

Qassam Rockets and Incendiary Kites

I received an email this morning from our Israeli correspondent MC, who lives in Sderot:

Hi Baron,

The noise started around 2:00am last night with a couple of explosions which could have been ours or theirs; there was no alarm. That came later, and in spades.

It is Shabbat, so the news desks are not working to full capacity, and we just don’t know.

We have had incoming missiles and Iron Dome intercepts all morning. It is seven o’clock, and we have had seven intercepts just in Sderot.

We have also had the outgoing artillery. It is very reminiscent of 2014: I expect Hamas is broke again and needs to kill a few joooz in order to get a top-up of blood money from the likes of Norway and Qatar.

Conditions in Gaza must be appalling. Their lifeblood is being spent by their feudal landlords chasing a (pseudo-religious) pipe dream.

The government here must now make up their minds. After weeks of provocations, they must do something. Their predecessors made a deal with the devil and we have all suffered as a consequence.

The Hamas leadership cowers under a hospital, defended by world opinion, yes, the opinion of American (liberal) socialists and fellow travellers, the Hillaries and Bernies and their ilk. They may not be lighting the blue touch paper, but when they scream “disproportionate response,” they enable war crimes. Whilst the Europeans send in the resources under the disguise of “humanitarian aid”. In the hope that the crocodile will eat them last.

In the warped world of leftist politics, Jews, especially Israeli Jews, are not human. If you prick them they do not bleed. Because they are Untermenschen they have no human rights, so the idea of self defense has no credibility.

So Hamas reverts to 8th-century crop burning and the world applauds their inventiveness. When Sherman marched to the sea, his aim was to destroy the economy of the Southern states, to cause starvation and lawlessness. This was a huge war crime, the nuances of which were hidden behind the self-righteousness of the ‘emancipation’. Did anybody stop to count how many of those ‘liberated’ slaves starved to death?

And all the time that Hamas throws its childish tantrums, Israel is supplying food, natural gas and electricity.

It really is time to throw the switches.

News stories about the latest Israeli response:

MC lives in the southern Israeli city of Sderot. For his previous essays, see the MC Archives.

Welcome to the Islamic People’s Republic of Amsterdam

Our Dutch correspondent H. Numan sends this report on the latest political news from The Netherlands: the appointment of a commie chick as the mayor of Amsterdam.

Welcome to the islamic people’s republic of Amsterdam

by H. Numan

Amsterdam lost its mayor Eberhard van der Laan; he died last year. Eberhard was temporarily replaced by Jozias van Aartsen. This gentleman was the mayor of The Hague. Under his capable administration that city acquired its first banlieues. He continued the good work in Amsterdam. Until a new mayor was appointed, which is now. Habemus papam, we got one! It will be Femke Halsema. She was leader of Green Left, and that party won the elections.

Now, that looks clear enough, and democratic on first sight. But in Holland most things are somewhat different on second sight, especially in politics. Not everything is what it seems. We have municipal elections, and you vote for persons, not for parties. So far, so good. Here comes the snake in the grass: you can’t vote for a mayor. Or even which alderman actually represents you in the city council.

That is decided beyond firmly closed doors by the parties. Yes, it’s possible for a popular politician to be elected with preferential votes, but that’s not the norm. Everybody in The Netherlands knows “had-je-me-maar”. Roughly translated as ‘you wished you got me’. His real name was Cornelis de Gelder, and he was a tramp with a severe alcohol problem. He ran in 1921 for office, more or less as a joke. He was elected nevertheless. Back then the people were just as fed up with back-room politics as we are today. (He never took his seat in the council, as he was sentenced for drunkenness to a rehabilitation clinic prior to his election.)

So it does happen, just not often. The normal procedure is that the most the likely parties get together and negotiate a deal. As long as it pleases the lords regent, that is. In Rotterdam the party Leefbaar won by a landslide and was boycotted out of office. That’s how the council is formed. Electing a mayor is a very different story. Mayors in The Netherlands aren’t elected, but appointed by the king. The king himself doesn’t decide who becomes mayor; he merely appoints the preferred candidate. Not even the national parties do that. Though they, of course, are in the know. It’s the local parties who decide. Again, behind firmly closed doors. Who, what and how that is decided is none of your business! In fact, when a journalist got hold of information about the new mayor of ’s Hertogenbosch, the city filed criminal charges with the Rijksrecherche (our FBI).

Amsterdam has always been a bit different. It was the last city to join the revolt against Spain, for example. It always had strong communist and socialist parties. Since WW2 the mayor has always been a socialist. That’s a bit difficult now that party is in severe decline. The new kid on the block is GreenLeft (former communist party), which won the municipal elections.

The results: GreenLeft 10 seats, D66: 8 seats, PvdA: 5 seats, Socialist Party: 3 seats, Conservatives (VVD): 6 seats, Forum for Democracy (FvD): 3 seats, Denk (a branch of the Turkish AK party): 3 seats, the other parties combined (including the CDA): 7 seats.

GreenLeft calls the shots. They immediately boycotted a council with FvD and the VVD in it. They wanted, and got, a near-communist council. Of course they invited everybody who cared to apply for the position of mayor. In real life, Rutger Groot-Wassink, the leader of GL Amsterdam, is the kingmaker. He decided the next mayor must be a socialist or better, and a woman. No one else needed to apply. With hope of succeeding, that is. Who is Groot-Wassink? If you search online, you won’t find much. He prefers to operate in the shadow behind the scenes. He represents the extreme left wing of GL. If you’re looking for a possible/likely link between Antifa, anarchism, vegan terrorism and jihad, look no further. I can’t accuse the man of anything, but he’s a very likely candidate to begin your research with.

Continue reading

Angela Merkel: Europe’s Basic Message is “Humaneness”. Viktor Orbán: Close the Borders.

Earlier this month Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán met with German Chancellor Angela Merkel in Berlin. Hungary and Germany are polar opposites on the migration issue, so it’s no surprise that the two leaders could agree on only blandest of generalities concerning immigration into Europe.

The following video shows the press conference held by Mrs. Merkel and Mr. Orbán after their discussions. If you can dig your way through the Mutti-speak used by Angela Merkel, you’ll notice the essential difference between the two leaders: Chancellor Merkel’s most important concern is “humaneness” towards the migrants, while Prime Minister Orbán focuses on national sovereignty, border security, and the protection of the Hungarian nation.

Many thanks to Ava Lon for translating the German, to CrossWare for translating the Hungarian, and to Vlad Tepes for the subtitling:

Video transcript:

Continue reading

The Seehofer-Salvini Summit

As a follow-up to the video from earlier tonight, the following clip reports on discussions between the interior ministers of Italy and Germany, respectively Matteo Salvini and Horst Seehofer.

Messrs. Salvini and Seehofer “agree on most of [their] aims, especially on an effort to control the outer border of Europe”, but what they do not agree on is the disposition of the million+ migrants who have accumulated like storm debris in Germany, Austria, the Netherlands, and points north. Northern Europe would send the wretched refuse back to Italy, whence it registered and came, but Mr. Salvini is having none of that.

Neither minister will let such differences get in the way of a good photo-op, however.

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

Video transcript:

Continue reading

EU Interior Ministers Agree: The Great Migration Must Be Stopped

With Italian Interior Minister Matteo Salvini leading the way and Germany and Austria close behind, the interior ministers of the European Union agreed that the outer borders of the EU must be secured, and all illegal immigrants must be sent back.

At this point the whole thing is elaborate theater with no relation to reality, since Italy — which recorded the initial asylum claims for many (if not most) of the migrants who registered — refuses to take any migrants back from countries further north. Any agreement that requires migrants to be sent back to the country that first registered them would place enormous burdens on Italy, Greece, and Malta, and very little on any other countries.

Furthermore, all North African countries have refused to agree to any holding camps — “debark platforms” in the parlance of this confab — so all discussions about housing migrants outside the EU are no more than idle parlor chatter. It just won’t happen, at least not until the EU agrees to pay the asking price for establishing such camps — presumably in the many billions of euros.

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

A little background on Italy’s situation: The boats have landing at Lampedusa for as long as I’ve been tracking the relevant news stories, going back to at least 2007. The flow accelerated dramatically in 2011, after the “Arab Spring”, and then became a tsunami after the Great Migration Crisis kicked in during the summer of 2015.

The judicial system of the EU — I can’t remember whether it was the ECJ or the ECHR — ruled that Italy could not turn the boats away, but had to rescue them. Italy demanded, pleaded, and begged for help from Brussels to cover its costs, but never received more than about a third of the required reimbursement.

As the independent smugglers’ flotilla morphed into the NGO “rescue” ferry service, Italy’s burden increased even further. The Italians dealt with the impossible situation by loosening their official procedures for dealing with “refugees” — they just gave them food and shelter for a few days, after which they received residency permits and could proceed northwards as they wished, legally or otherwise. I’ve always assumed that many thousands have passed through without being registered at all.

And now the EU, which in its infinite wisdom required the Italians to allow the migrants to land, is demanding that Italy take all those culture-enrichers back. But Matteo Salvini is in charge of migration-related matters now, and will never agree to such an outcome. So, regardless of the optimistic, heartening words being spoken into the microphones, negotiations on the fate of migrants Europe are at an impasse.

At some point the stalemate will be broken. There is too much pent-up force against the status quo for the current situation to continue indefinitely, but there’s no telling when the final resolution will come, nor what form it will take.

Video transcript:

Continue reading

The “Refugee” Tide Ebbs in Bulgaria

The following video from Bulgarian TV discusses the recent massive reduction of the flow of migrants into Bulgaria. We know there are still hundreds of thousands of “refugees” eager to get to Western Europe, particularly Germany, but they’re no longer using Bulgaria as a transit camp. So where are they?

The Great European Migration Crisis began in 2015 with a huge flow of illegal immigrants through the Greek islands to the mainland, and thence to Macedonia, Serbia, Hungary, Austria, and Germany. When Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán closed his southern borders, the flow was temporarily stymied, but soon took a detour through Croatia and Slovenia to get to Austria. Over the next year or so Austria worked with Slovenia and the Balkan countries to cut off that route, too. But the people-smugglers were not deterred; they rerouted their charges to the longer and more expensive route across the Mediterranean to Italy, using the (free to them) NGO “rescue” vessels to ferry their charges on the last leg of their journey.

The Italian political system was unable to withstand the migrant load, and this year an anti-immigrant coalition was finally ushered into office by the voters. Italian Interior Minister Matteo Salvini is currently living up to his campaign promises and refusing to allow the NGO ships to land in Italy. The flow of migrants into Italy has been reduced by 80% so far this year.

Recent news stories indicate that at least some of the flow has been redirected to Spain, aided and abetted by the new leftist government in Madrid. However, there have been warnings for months that a huge cohort of migrants had assembled in the Balkans — some reports put the number at 80,000 — in the expectation of getting to Austria by passing through Albania, Montenegro, Bosnia, Croatia, and Slovenia. That new route may well be where most of the Bulgarian traffic has relocated to.

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

Video transcript:

Continue reading