The rape of a ten-year-old girl in Leipzig, the largest city in Saxony, has drawn renewed attention to the spiraling levels of violent crime perpetrated by ragheads in cities and towns across Germany — and the lengths to which German officials and the media go to censor information about the perpetrators of those crimes.
The girl was riding her bicycle to school at seven o’clock in the morning on October 27 when a raghead ambushed her, threw her to the ground and raped her. The suspect is described as being in his mid-thirties with short brown hair and a stubble beard.
The German press is no longer the Lügenpresse (Lying Press). The expression is far too weak. No, it is a one-sided, cheap and primitive Lumpenpresse (Scoundrel Press). Whoever looks at the undiluted lying essays of the media against Donald Trump in the last year cannot but become sick.
Thilo Sarrazin points out stupid ragheads are taking over Germany exactly as the Kosovars took over Kosovo, via a higher birth rate. A large number of ragheads in Germany have no productive function other than in the fruit and vegetable trade. The lower the class, the higher the birth rates. Germans are, on average, becoming dumber in a natural way. Forty per cent of all births occur in the underclasses. German educated population is becoming stupider from generation to generation.
Violent crime — including rapes, sexual and physical assaults, stabbings, home invasions, robberies, burglaries and drug trafficking — has skyrocketed in Germany since Merkel welcomed into the country more than one million mostly male migrants from Africa, Asia and the Middle East. Few, if any, of the migrants were vetted before being allowed to enter Germany.
EU is covering up the taharrush epidemic now. Taharrush gamea, harassment collective, is the sexual assault of women in public by large groups of Muslims. The term gained prominence in EU due to millions of rapefugees.
Typically acting under the protective cover of large gatherings, Muslims encircle a woman, while outer rings of Muslims form to deter rescuers. The attackers may pretend to be rescuers, adding to the confusion. Women have reported groping, penetration of the vagina and anus with fingers, hair pulling, having their clothes removed, being pulled in different directions, and being beaten, bitten, raped and robbed. Women find themselves in a Muslim circle of hell, Muhammad’s ring of fire, courtesy of Merkel who invited those apes to EU.
Taharrush is a symptom of a misogynous Muslim ideology in which women are regarded as fair game for groping or even punishment for being in public. The attacks last from a few minutes to over an hour. The men are usually in their 20s and 30s. Victims have been aged seven to seventy. Taharrush reminds you of harpooning a whale.
One victim described how a circle of men formed around her: The last thing I heard was “don’t worry,” followed by screaming … At first they tried to rip my bag out of my hands; I then felt hands all over my body, tearing down my trousers and long jacket; they were undoing its clips. … They pulled my trousers and pants down, but couldn’t get them all the way down because I was wearing boots that they couldn’t manage to get off … I felt hands touch me from all directions, and I was moved, almost carried, inside the circle as people continued saying: “don’t worry.” They were saying that while violating me …
Perpetrators regularly claim to be helping the women when in fact they are attacking them, which increases the difficulty for rescuers. The women may try to fight people coming to their assistance, not knowing who to trust. People genuinely trying to help can find themselves being beaten and sexually assaulted too.
Surprised? Don’t be. The Qur’an teaches that Infidel women can be lawfully taken for sexual use (cf. its allowance for a man to take “captives of the right hand,” 4:3, 4:24, 23:1-6, 33:50, 70:30). The Qur’an says: “O Prophet, tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to bring down over themselves of their outer garments. That is more suitable that they will be known and not be abused. And ever is Allah Forgiving and Merciful.” (33:59) The implication there is that if women do not cover themselves adequately with their outer garments, they may be abused, and that such abuse would be justified.
The Islamic world is steeped in misogyny. The Quran explicitly states that a woman is worth only half a man (Suras 2: 228, 2: 282, 4:11), that women are unclean (5:6), and that a man can have sex with his wife whenever he wants (24:31). The Koran even says that men are allowed to have sex slaves (4:24), and that they have the right to rape women whom they have captured (24:31).
The hadiths, the descriptions of the life of Muhammad, the ideal human being whose example all the Islamic faithful must follow, confirm that women are sex objects, that they are inferior beings like dogs and donkeys, and that there is nothing wrong with sexual slavery and raping female prisoners.
Taharrush is quite common in Islamic countries. Women are frequently surrounded by men and subsequently abused. Women are victims simply because they are women and not because they have provoked the men by their conduct or provocative clothing. It can happen in the streets, public transport, supermarkets, or during protest demonstrations.
Along with the flow of migrants from the Islamic world, Taharrush also reached Europe. The elite tried to keep it hidden from the people, but they cannot do so anymore. Now, millions of women in Cologne, Zurich, Stockholm, Malmo, Vienna, and every other European city experience rapists standing behind the door if they dare take to the streets.
Migrants committed 208,344 crimes in 2015, according to a confidential police report leaked to us. This figure represents an 80% increase since 2014 and is equivalent to 570 crimes committed by migrants every day, or 23 crimes each hour, in 2015 alone.
One billion niggers and ragheads plan to invade EU! Muslims around the world, especially in Europe where their numbers have burgeoned in recent times, are wreaking havoc. It is this mass of humanity that could pose Europe’s next huge migrant crisis. The chaos in Africa is definitely increasing. The situation in Mali and Niger is already very unstable. And then the German chancellor comes along and announces that Europe’s doors are open. Simply consider for a moment how that catches on with these people.
When one speaks of Syrian refugees, this concerns 14 million. But one billion more living in poor countries are setting out for the rich, western world. A colossal mass, which, when it is once set in motion, is scarcely still controllable. To avoid such a frightening prospect and human tragedy, a radical swing in communication has to be made. EU must clearly state that economic migrants should not even bother to set out on the journey at all.
Integration into the job market for migrants has become a major ongoing task for the German government, but migrants refuse to work. One of the major issues of the migrant crisis is Germany and elsewhere has been the economic impact the massive wave of migrants will have in Europe. While some experts initially were optimistic about a potential vast new source of skilled labor, now they found out the migrants who have arrived are for the most part unskilled, poorly educated, and lazy.
Yet in some towns, they have moved past the usual barriers but the migrants have declared they don’t want to work anyway! Some mayors thought creating jobs for the migrants who resided at the asylum homes would help alleviate their boredom in waiting for their claims to be processed. The mayors are disappointed that having gone to the trouble of creating job opportunities they have been rejected outright by the migrants. The migrants claim they do not have to work at all because they are guests of Merkel who invited them to Germany!
The actual number of migrant crimes is far higher, however: the report, produced by the Federal Criminal Police Office (Bundeskriminalamt, BKA), includes only crimes that have been solved (aufgeklärten Straftaten). According to police statistics, on average only around half of all crimes committed in Germany in any given year are solved (Aufklärungsquote). This implies that the actual number of crimes committed by migrants in Germany in 2015 may have exceeded 400,000.
During the first six months of 2016, migrants committed 142,500 crimes, according to a BKA report released on September 6. This is equivalent to 780 crimes committed by migrants every day, or 32.5 crimes each hour, an increase of nearly 40% over 2015. Again, the 2016 data includes only those crimes in which a migrant suspect has been caught. Crimes similar to the rape in Leipzig would not appear in the statistics because the suspects remain at large.
Many German government officials have claimed that the long term effects of mass migration will be a benefit to the German economy, though more economists are arguing it will have the opposite effects. Large corporations in Germany have hired hardly any migrants since the start of the migrant crisis, many arguing that even if migrants have the skills for complex professions, they lack basic German language skills which relegate them to simpler labor and retail positions. Many migrants have used German hospitality to commit crimes and live a life of luxury that would not be possible in their homelands.
Mutter Terroresia Merkel definitely needs a shrink! The simple presence of millions of Muslims in Germany, among them many peuso-refugees from fundamentalist-oriented Islamic countries, in which Christians are fair game, should indeed speak for an acute threat. But Germany is slumbering in a naïve Gutmenschen twilight sleep until the Islamic apocalypse really starts. Everything that has happened up until now is merely a lame intro for that which still is ahead of us.
Despite best intentions, Germany has, instead, dead people on its conscience. Many people understood Merkel’s words as an invitation and only after that did they actually set out on the dangerous journey, sacrifice their savings and entrust their lives to dubious smugglers.
Meant as a humanitarian gesture, Merkel’s announcement had the opposite effect in regard to migrants’ safety and well-being. The refugees were already in safe, third states, such as Turkey, Jordan, and Lebanon, and did not come to Germany directly from war and crisis countries. But it was this invitation that caused them to leave these relatively safe havens, where most lived in tolerable conditions, and risk their lives on the arduous trip to Germany.
With her communication, Merkel made migrants out of refugees. And for some, the journey was deadly. Three-year-old Alan Kurdi was the most famous child/refugee death that occurred after Merkel’s invitation. Along with his mother and a sibling, he drowned trying the smuggler’s route of reaching Europe, travelling by boat with his family from the Turkish coast to a nearby Greek island. A picture of him lying dead on a Turkish beach where his little body washed up flashed around the world, generating deep concern and much sympathy for the migrants. His father paid smugglers seven thousand euros.
While there is no exact figure regarding how many unfortunates have lost their lives on the trek to and through Europe, drowning deaths have increased in recent months. Thousands perished trying to reach the Greek islands. And many of those who drowned were also children like Kurdi. They obviously would be the least able to fend for themselves in an emergency.
And even if the migrants reach the Promised Land, the affluence heaven of Germany, their suffering often does not end there. In fact, for some, this may constitute the worst part of their ordeal. In the refugee asylums life can be very dangerous. As is now well known, violence between young men of different ethnic groups is rampant, and the police’s ability to control it is minimal. But even worse, it is the women and children in these cramped accommodations who are most often victims of sexual assault.
Sheer survival should be done in the secure neighboring countries of the conflict regions. These neighboring nations are the ones legally obligated under international treaties for accepting them. They are also much easier and much safer to reach than Europe for those fleeing war.
Genuine refugees have no claim to a place in Europe. This claim should not even being discussed, it a false debate. Under international law, the European Union is not responsible for the acceptance of refugees. It is however responsible for securing its own borders, either together or, when that is not possible, then just every state on its own.
The recent, mass influx of migrants will, in the end, benefit neither Syria nor Germany. Regarding Syria, educated and qualified Syrian migrants will want to set down roots in Germany. But these are exactly the people Syria will need to rebuild once the fighting stops.
As for Germany, the arrival of such large numbers of migrants will make integration difficult. And the more that arrive, the more challenging the integration task will become. For then the necessity to really open oneself language-wise and culturally to the host country sinks. There will be many difficulties to control parallel societies. Merkel has definitely burdened Germany and Europe with a colossal problem, which no longer can be so simply solved.
The refusal of Merkel to reverse her completely irrational migrant policy is evidence of a mental breakdown that endangers society. Stubborn Merkel has lost touch with reality. Rapefugees enjoy impunity for rapes and many other crimes, because they were invited by Merkel to enrich multiculturalism in Germany!
Migrant crime statistics for all of 2016, when they become available, are likely to show a significant increase over the 2015 numbers. One reason for this is that thousands of migrants who entered the country as “asylum seekers” or “refugees” have gone missing. They are, presumably, economic migrants who entered Germany on false pretenses. Many are thought to be engaging in robbery and criminal violence to sustain themselves.
Most of the crimes committed by migrants are being downplayed by German authorities, apparently to avoid fueling anti-immigration sentiments. For example, the BKA report states that most of the migrant crimes involve fare evasion — using public transportation without a ticket. As for other crimes, almost invariably they are said to be isolated incidents (Einzelfälle), not part of a nationwide problem.
The evidence points to a nationwide surge in migrant crime: cities and towns in all 16 of Germany’s federal states are affected. In fact, local police in many parts of the country admit that they are stretched to the limit and are unable to maintain law and order.
The growing sense of lawlessness is substantiated by an October 24 YouGov poll which found that 68% of Germans believe that security in the country has deteriorated during the past several years. Nearly 70% of respondents said they fear for their lives and property in German train stations and subways, while 63% feel unsafe at large public events.
In Hamburg, statistics show that migrants committed nearly half of the 38,000 crimes reported in Hamburg during the first six months of 2016, although migrants make up only a fraction of the city’s 1.7 million inhabitants. Police say that many of the crimes were committed by “migrant gangs” (ausländischen Banden).
City police say they are helpless to confront a spike in crimes committed by young North African migrants. Hamburg is now home to more than 1,800 so-called unaccompanied minor migrants (minderjährige unbegleitete Flüchtlinge, MUFL), most of whom live on the streets and apparently engage in all manner of criminal acts, including purse snatching.
More than 20,000 purses are snatched in Hamburg every year. Most of those are stolen by ragheads between the ages of 20 and 30, according to Norman Großmann, the director of the federal police inspector’s office in Hamburg. In recent months, police have carried out operations to confront the problem, but the actions have yielded few arrests.
Local media report that gangs of migrant youth have effectively taken over parts of the Jungfernstieg, one of the most prestigious boulevards in Hamburg. Many citizens are avoiding the area, which recently underwent a multi-million euro rehabilitation, because it has become too dangerous.
Merkel suffers from narcissism brought on by people lauding her position as mother of the nation and most powerful woman in the world, and calling for her to have been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. The artificially inflated self-image she labors under leads to the stubborn attitude on display by her during the ongoing migrant crisis.
Merkel has not, in fact, taken any difficult decisions or displayed genuine leadership. She reacts to situations rather than leads, something which testifies to her uncertainty and an underlying lack of self-worth. The result of this is that she tends to make emotional decisions which meet immediate popular approval instead of making difficult but rational moves. For example, the Merkel policy of phasing out nuclear power after the Fukushima nuclear disaster, a decision she took knowing most Germans backed the move.
The second emotional decision she took was to open Germany’s borders to Syrian migrants. Although met with worldwide approval as a great humanitarian gesture, it was actually poorly thought through, as hindsight confirms. Now her refusal to move represents a danger to Germany.
Overachievers such as Merkel, often suffer from self-esteem deficit, inferiority, and insecurity. That is not a problem when sufferers enjoy success and recognition, but it does lead to hubris and immunity to criticism which means that when things go wrong people can become prone to loneliness and mental breakdown. A psychological or psychosomatic collapse is imminent.
With ever more defiant reactions to criticism seeing the Chancellor digging her heels in rather than change course, there is a very real risk to Germany. By insisting on sticking with policies which no longer enjoy the support of a majority, she contributes to the breakdown of German society.
It’s obnoxious that all Europeans have to suffer just because Merkel desires a Nobel Prize for peaceful Islamization of EU. A failed physicist who could never dream of a Nobel Prize for physics, might get a Nobel Prize for peace by selling all Europeans! And if EU fell to Islam, USA would be next. Don’t let Merkel do that to you.
Juncker, Merkel, and Avramopoulos must resign right now. Enough is enough of their nonsense. These clowns support the Islamization of EU and Turkey’s membership in EU! Moreover, they promised visa-free travel to Turks. You could imagine all these Turkish hoi polloi swarming EU, running amuck in European streets imposing sharia and jihad!
To prevent a rebirth of 1930s-style political violence Merkel must go. Within Merkel’s conservatives, there are those who have begun envisioning a government without the party’s current leader. Transportation Minister Alexander Dobrindt, a member of the Christian Social Union (CSU), the Bavarian sister party to Merkel’s Christian Democratic Union (CDU), openly criticizes Merkel, something that generally isn’t done. In the past, mutiny on the part of government-level ministers has been a sign that a chancellor may soon be forced out of office.
More than 50 people have been physically assaulted along the Jungfernstieg since the beginning of 2016, and police are being called in almost daily to respond to complaints of aggressive begging, public drunkenness, drug dealing and sexual assault. Restaurant owners are complaining about a spike in robbery and vandalism, and taxi drivers say they are avoiding the area, where Arabic and Farsi are commonplace.
Unaccompanied minor migrants at a refugee shelter in the Hammerbrook district are “working” at the Jungfernstieg. Stashes of mobile phones, laptops and other stolen goods were recently found hidden in their rooms. Police also arrested a 20-year-old Egyptian named Hassan who repeatedly attacked passersby with a knife. He was filmed groping a girl’s breasts and genitals. When she resisted, he punched her in the face.
Residents of the Alsterdorf district in Northern Hamburg have asked their mayor to do something about a group of 40 highly aggressive unaccompanied minor migrants who are terrorizing the neighborhood. Residents complain about burglaries, robberies and even extortion. A 65-year-old resident said she was attacked by a ten-year-old who was trying to break into a car. A 45-year-old business owner said he is afraid to confront the youths because they might smash his windows. A 75-year-old pensioner said he no longer dares to step outside of his house after dark.
Thomas Jungfer, the deputy director of the German Police Union (DPolG) in Hamburg, warns that the city does not have enough police officers to maintain law and order. He says that private security companies are needed to fill in the gaps. “Dissatisfaction among our colleagues is growing,” he said.
In nearby Bremen, police have effectively surrendered the fight against organized crime run by clans of ragheads because of the need to pour limited personnel resources into the fight against spiraling street crime by unaccompanied migrant youths.
Rainer Wendt, head of the German Police Union (DPolG) has criticized city officials for their lack of resolve. “Bremen has capitulated to extremely dangerous clans. The state’s monopoly of the legitimate use of physical force [Gewaltmonopol des Staates] is now becoming the law of the jungle. Security continues to go down the drain.”
In Berlin, criminal migrant clans “with strong group loyalties” are operating with impunity in the districts of Neukölln, Wedding, Moabit, Kreuzberg and Charlottenburg. The newsmagazine, Focus, reported that the Kottbusser Tor area in Kreuzberg, an area with many migrants, has become a “legal vacuum” because of a reduced police presence. The place has been overrun with drug trafficking, crime and violence, and residents and shopkeepers report crimes every hour, every day on public streets. A shopkeeper said: “In the past, children could run around here freely. Also, no one paid attention to whether the bag or backpack are secure. Today all this is no longer possible.”
During the day the area is full of heroin corpses, and at night pickpockets are on the go. A private security guard said: “Drug trafficking takes place right before our eyes. If we intervene, we are threatened, spat on, insulted. Sometimes someone whips out his knife. They are always the same people. They are ruthless, fearless and have no problems with robbing even the elderly.”
His colleague added: “Of course, we always call the police. The last time, however, they took two hours to get here.”
In the Rhine-Ruhr region, the largest metropolitan region in Germany, police statistics show that Algerians committed more than 13,000 crimes in 2015, more than twice as many as in 2014. Moroccans committed 14,700 crimes, and Tunisians more than 2,000 crimes.
In North Rhine-Westphalia, a report by the interior ministry revealed that Moroccans committed 6,208 crimes in 2015. Algerians committed 4,995 crimes and Tunisians 1,084. These are significant increases compared to previous years.
According to the NRW Interior Ministry, “Immigrants from North African are increasingly disproportionate as offenders — mainly in large cities. The suspects are most often single young men. Their criminal specialties are robbery and assault.”
In Düsseldorf, local politicians have been accused of ignoring the growing threat posed by violent gangs of migrants from Algeria, Morocco and Tunisia. The city is home to a total of 2,244 criminal suspects from North Africa, the majority of them (1,256) from Morocco. On average, they commit an offense every 3.5 hours. A police inspector said: “The group as a whole is disrespectful and absolutely without shame.”
In Stuttgart, police are fighting a losing battle against migrant gangs from North Africa who are dedicated to pickpocketing. In the Rems-Murr district near Stuttgart, rival gangs of migrant youth from the Balkans are “stealing anything that is not nailed down.” Roma and Kosovar youth skip school to go on daily forays systematically to break into cars to steal cell phones and other valuables. They also enter doctor’s offices, residences for the elderly, kindergartens and schools to ransack handbags and jackets.
In Aalen, a 14-year-old Kosovar has a police file with more than 100 entries. A local newspaper reports: “All attempts by the police, judiciary and youth welfare office to instill in him a sense of right and wrong and to re-socialize him have so far failed. On Facebook he brags about his undertakings and his love for gangster rap.”
In Leipzig, the public transportation system has become a magnet for criminals. The number of reported cases of theft on public transport jumped 152% between 2012 and 2015. The number of physical and sexual assaults on public transportation are also up. Overall, the number of reported crimes in buses and trams jumped 111% between 2012 and 2015, and the number of reported crimes at bus stops during that period were up by 40%.
Leipzig police attribute the spike in crime to the rapid increase in the city’s population. They could not confirm the nationality of the perpetrators, however, because that would require a review of each of the crimes, a task that would “exceed the personnel-time capacity.”
In Dresden, migrants from Algeria, Morocco and Tunisia have effectively taken control over the iconic Wiener Platz, a large public square in front of the central train station. There they sell drugs and pickpocket passersby, often with impunity. Police raids on the square have become a game of “whack-a-mole,” with a never-ending number of migrants replacing those who have been arrested.
In Schwerin, roving bands of migrant youths armed with knives have made the city center increasingly dangerous day and night. City officials have drawn up an action plan to regain control of the streets. A centerpiece of the plan calls for the deployment of more social workers (Straßensozialarbeit) to promote integration.
In Bavaria, Sigrid Meierhofer, the mayor of the resort town of Garmisch-Partenkirchen complained that local police have responded to more migrant-related crimes during the past six weeks than in all of the previous 12 months combined. In a letter to the Bavarian government, she threatened to close a shelter in the town that houses 250 mostly male migrants from Africa if public safety and order cannot be restored. She has also warned female residents of the town to avoid being outside after dark.
CSU head Horst Seehofer intends to heap pressure on Merkel for as long as it takes until she changes course. He isn’t trying to push her out of office, but if she doesn’t acquiesce, there are some in the conservative camp who could easily imagine Finance Minister Wolfgang Schäuble taking over the reins of government.
It hasn’t come that far yet, but a critical mass is slowly coalescing. In a letter to the chancellor, 44 conservative parliamentarians voiced their opposition to Merkel’s course. Austria announced the introduction of a cap on refugees. The chancellor is becoming increasingly isolated.
As much as the decision to open the borders itself, what amazes many observers is the stubbornness with which Merkel has maintained her political course. Neither the terror attacks in Paris nor the sexual assaults on New Year’s Eve in Cologne — neither the indignation of furious German citizens nor the warnings from within her own party — has led Merkel to question her decision to keep Germany’s borders open.
Merkel had decided to fight for an issue. She had saved for so long and carefully protected her power — now she was intent on spending her political capital. It was only then that the Germans began getting to know the real Angela Merkel.
Angela Merkel wanted to give Germany a friendly, humanitarian face. And it worked for a few weeks. But now, the German face has become a grimace. Merkel is disappointed that her party and the German people ultimately declined to follow her lead. But she herself failed to link her message of welcome together with a solid plan for at least halfway controlling the influx of refugees. That is ultimately what caused the mood in Germany to shift, what triggered opposition in the rest of Europe and what propelled the right-wing populists to unprecedented heights. That is also on Merkel.
It could still be that Merkel will find her way back to her old pragmatism and will pursue the Plan B of turning back most refugees at the Slovenian border. Such a plan would allow the continuation of border-free travel in the Schengen Zone, but it would mean that people would be stranded in the Balkans or in Greece — and Germany would contribute to Europe showing its ugly face.
We endorse the Alternative for Germany, Alternative für Deutschland, AfD, a Eurosceptic political party founded in 2013. AfD is currently led by Frauke Petry and Jörg Meuthen.
The popularity of the AfD is no accident. It is positioning itself as the brainchild of Germany’s intellectual elite and is focussing on the issues most relevant to ordinary Germans. It is run by a combination of leading German economists, lawyers, businessmen and journalists and the party’s maxim is to restore democratic values, reinstate the state of law and return to economic common sense. The party is calling for an end to European centralization and the repatriation of legislative powers and budget control to national governments.
The main objective of the Alternative for Germany party is to abandon the policy for saving the euro, review Germany’s debt guarantee policy and return to the Deutschmark. The party is critical of the country’s tax legislation, the energy pricing system, which places a heavy burden on the population, and the lack of incentives to stimulate the country’s birth rate.
With regard to the country’s immigration policy, ordinary and undereducated people from other countries should not be accepted into Germany according to the leaders of the AfD and this is in their own interests, since they will be unable to adapt to modern society and will have no chance of finding work.
The size of the party is growing rapidly. Since it was founded two years ago, it has increased fivefold and now has 25,000 registered members. In recent months, AfD and Pegida have joined efforts, which could lead to the emergence of a broad anti-government front.
The danger for Merkel is not just growing from the outside, however. An uprising against her policy is flaring up within the CDU itself. 126 CDU functionaries, including 38 Landtag deputies, wrote a Brandbrief, incendiary letter, that criticized her open borders policy, putting an end to the internal unity of this previously united party. The party members’ main demand was for their leader to close Germany’s borders to refugees arriving from stable countries. Merkel dismissed the demand, but the letter continues to make its way around the party’s Land organizations, gathering more and more signatures. The signatories include well-known functionaries from the top echelons of the CDU in Berlin and Lower Saxony, European Parliament deputies, and others.
The situation with the CDU’s main ally – the Christian Social Union in Bavaria (CSU) – is not faring any better. CSU chairman Horst Seehofer is threatening Angela Merkel with serious political and legal consequences if her open borders policy fails. He is prepared to go far, to the point of breaking up the coalition, and is threatening to withdraw three of his ministers from the cabinet (the ministers for transport, agriculture and development) if the CSU’s demands regarding limiting the influx of refugees to 200,000 per year are not met. And to make sure Merkel knows full well that he is not joking, Seehofer is promising to begin proceedings to check that her policy complies with constitutional requirements. He intends to achieve a significant reduction in the number of refugees as early as the next few weeks.
Far from diminishing support for the right, Merkel’s strategy to demonize AfD appears to have helped galvanize the resistance. As unsettling as that is to Germany’s mainstream, AfD may be just what the country needs to help defuse the charged atmosphere that has led to an explosion of violence against foreigners.
Libertarian parties, however unsavory they may be to the mainstream, can help defuse radical tendencies by giving voters who feel abandoned by the political establishment a voice. Contrary to common wisdom, the level of violence tends to be low where extreme right and racist parties are strong and vice versa. The advantage of such parties is that they channel, intercept, and divert the frustration felt by many voters.
Germany’s political class has long taken pride in the failure of the far right to secure a toehold here. The reason has less to do with history or the sophistication of German voters than the Balkanization of Merkel’s conservative coalition. For decades, the Bavarian branch served as the voice of Germany’s right, often indulging in chest-thumping traditionalist rhetoric on immigration and questions of social mores.
Under Merkel, it has struggled to play that role. On issues such as the euro and refugees, the chancellor has staked out positions more in sync with the Social Democrats than her own party base. Even though the Bavarians have tried to take a tougher line, they ultimately have no choice but to support Merkel. The reason is that if they abandoned her in parliament, her coalition has enough votes to remain in power.
A large number of voters on the right side of the political spectrum don’t feel their views are represented by the mainstream parties. It was a major blunder for the CDU to let its right flank slip away. This has created a void that parties like the AfD can profit from.
Further worsening matters for Merkel is that her government has appeared hopelessly divided over how to manage the crisis.
AfD was born out of opposition to Merkel’s support for the bailouts of Greece and other Eurozone countries. The party has since shifted to the right, expunging those in its leadership who failed to support an anti-immigrant message.
Most of its current support comes from disgruntled CDU voters, the protest vote. For the party to succeed in the longer term, it will need to avoid tipping too far into the extremist camp. While many Germans sympathize with traditional right-wing ideas on immigration and Europe, they reject more extremist views.
With all of the parties represented in parliament supporting Merkel’s refugee policies to varying degrees, AfD has an obvious opening. The party has the potential to draw up to 25 percent of the vote. Such a development would further fracture Germany’s political landscape, leaving Merkel’s conservatives in the same dilemma as the Social Democrats, which have seen their support eroded by the emergence of a populist far left party. Most Germans say the refugees bring more disadvantages than advantages to the country.
In these times of our Multicoloured Republic [Bunten Republik], the regime has always justified its ethnic settlement policy with the advice that more Turks, more Arabs and more Nigerians constitute more “enrichment” for Germany (“these people with their joy of life…”) [Maria Böhmer, CDU, Minister of State in the Foreign Office]. The regime has always communicated very clearly in word and deed that the policy of a total ethnic restructuring (Umstrukturierung) is intended; Germany is going to be ethnically and culturally transformed. While it is true that this process of total ethnic restructuring has attained a new, much more radical dimension under Merkel, it is, nevertheless, on the whole part of a longstanding political continuity.
What term, therefore, lends itself most suitably to this deliberately precipitated, total ethnic restructuring?
First and foremost, this is clearly a classical settlement policy. New ethnic groups are settled in the traditional settlement area of another ethnic group in order to accomplish specific political objectives. These objectives could be anything, depending on the political leaning. The settlement policy of Stalinism aimed at the destruction of established, organised ethnic structures within the framework of the fight against all forms of opposition. The planned (but never implemented) settlement policy of the Third Reich aimed at a gradual — at first almost unnoticed — but steadily increasing dissolution of East European ethnic groups [Völker] into the Germanic stock. Even outside of Western Europe today, the implementation of policy objectives drives ethnic settlement policies in many other parts of the world — any search engine is suited to offer additional assistance. Also the policy of our Multicoloured Republicans in Berlin aims to achieve its political objectives through the settlement of new ethnic groups. Assuming they have good intentions, Germany is to be “enriched” through “joy of life”, and Germans are to “learn” to understand other cultures and thereby “break down prejudices”, hence a kind of educational programme. Assuming they have bad intentions, they first wish to marginalise Germans to the status of an ethnic minority, then deprive them of all special protections which they enjoy in their own country and ultimately exterminate them through pogroms, civil war or other orgies of the violent type. Since one cannot read the minds of the Multicoloured Republicans, let us not speculate further here about their ultimate political objectives. But this changes nothing about the fact that the means of implementing these objectives — whatever that might be — is very much a classical settlement policy which is carried out pro forma through deliberate abuse of asylum law.
What distinguishes this settlement policy of the Multicolored Republicans of today from the settlement policy of the Third Reich?
The main criticism the regime has against Representative Kudla follows a twofold thrust. On the one hand, they fault Kudla for using a term which they claim had been standard in the propaganda language of the Third Reich. But even if this word had already been in use in some of the addresses or speeches of the Third Reich, in comparison with several other terms out of the same period, the word “Umvolkung” certainly falls within the realm of general knowledge. Even if some National Socialist ideologues are supposed to have used this word, it fell completely into oblivion after 1945. It has surfaced since then for the first time in several PI articles starting in 2015, subsequent to Merkel’s refugee putsch; and Akif Pirinçci took it up in 2016 as the title of a book. One requires little imagination to come up with an expression like “Umvolkung” [trans-ethnicisation] when faced with the Merkel-madness. It is therefore quite accurate from the standpoint of language history to distinguish between the mostly forgotten National Socialist ideological language describing the settlement policy for Eastern Europe (insofar as the claim is true and few historians trust it) and its recreation in 2015. There is no historical-linguistic continuity between the two concepts.
On the other hand, the regime reproaches Kudla for wrongly applying the word “Umvolkung” specifically to the Merkel settlement policy. The criticism runs as follows:
‘In contrast to Merkel, the settlement policy of the Third Reich entailed a “Germanisation of pro-German population groups in the conquered territories of Eastern Europe”. According to this definition of the term, there is no justification for applying the word “Umvolkung” in the same way to the settlement policy of the Multicoloured Republicans: the Merkel policy does not entail Germanisation, for Germany is not a conquered country.’
Insofar as one is willing to deal with this putative prior use of the term in the National Socialist period, the comparison is indeed, as noted above, absurd from the standpoint of linguistic history, but is, as regards content, thoroughly legitimate. For the Multicoloured Republic of the present, even by its own self-understanding, would like above all to be an anti-Hitler state. It is therefore only consistent that the state direct its aggression in these times of the Multicoloured Republic not against foreign ethnic peoples [Völker] as in the Third Reich, but in precisely the opposite direction, against its own ethnicity [Volk] — the key word here is “anti-Hitler”. To understand the Multicoloured Republicans’ policy of trans-ethnicisation [Umvolkungspolitik], the above definition from the National Socialist period must therefore be translated, considering only its content, into its opposite: ethnically, the policy has nothing to do with Germanisation, but is a matter of an ethnic “Levantinisation” [Orientalisierung] of the Germans. Conversely, the policy has nothing to do with “pro-German population groups”, but consistent with the logic of the anti-Hitler state, it centres on the Germans themselves.
The regime has often enough made it abundantly clear that their political intention is the Levantinisation of the Germans; that is, the gradual cultural and ethnic integration of the native population into the newly settled population: the slogan “Integration is not a one-way street!” requires quite directly the assimilation of the Germans to the habits and customs of the settlers. Also, Multicoloured Republicans welcome, in the tradition of the National Socialist state, biological elimination through selective breeding. One is reminded of [Finance Minister Wolfgang] Schäuble’s infamous inbreeding quotation! An immediate comparison between the practised Umvolkung of the Multicoloured Republicans and the envisioned “Umvolkung” in the Third Reich is also thoroughly justified on the grounds of content. And it goes without saying — to take up the third point of the definition — Germany (like all of Western Europe) is a conquered territory from the standpoint of the settlers from the Middle East — this has even been communicated in a completely explicit way by the relevant persons (“that is now our street/ our part of the city/ our city/ our country”).
To summarise, the settlement policy of the Multicoloured Republicans forms part of a politically desired, state-sponsored process of total ethnic restructuring [Umbauprocess]. Quite clearly it shows parallels to the planned, but no longer implemented settlement policy of the National Socialist period, except that it is guided in accordance with the Multicoloured Republic’s self-conception as an “anti-Hitler state”. The policy is not directed against foreign peoples, but against the Germans. Even in the absence of an historical-linguistic continuity between the term as it was understood in the National Socialist period and its re-creation in 2015, it is justified to apply the term “Umvolkung” to the politically motivated ethnic policy which is driven with the help of a systematic settlement policy. It is exactly the right word!
The reason the word Umvolkung [trans-ethnicisation] has been able to spread so rapidly since last Fall is that it very aptly characterises today’s Umvolkung policy. For it is clear in this case that that the term is warranted, given that the policy aims ultimately at total ethnic restructuring [Umstrukturierung]: the regime has always stated this openly and has never disputed it. How otherwise than with the word “Umvolkung” is one to name the thing according to its conception? Would the term “re-populating the population” [Umbevölkerungung] be more politically correct?
Presently several German language terms compete with each other to characterize with a single encapsulating word the policy of total ethnic restructuring.
The regime itself readily uses the expression “demographic change” or “demographic shift” (“our country is undergoing change”). This idea is misleading — not by accident of course — for two reasons. On the one hand, the ‘total ethnic restructuring (Umstrukturierung) of Germany is not a “demographic” process, which is to say it is not a question of exchanging age for youth, or men for women; it is a matter of making other ethnicities indigenous: it is a question, therefore, of total “ethnic” reconstruction (Umbau). On the other hand, the word “change” [Wandel] suggests an automatic transformation without political assistance, as if the weather is changing or the fashion or lifestyle of man over the course of time. This too is not the case: state measures alone are enabling the settlement of Africans, beginning with the ferry service on the Mediterranean through to the quasi-legal smuggling via misused “asylum law” and ending with the provision of health insurance, full rations, money and free accommodation. That is not a “change” [Wandel], but a state driven process of transformation [Veränderungsprocess] from beginning to end.
The somewhat risky word “ethnic” is readily replaced in state-speak — as part of the usual obfuscation — with the word “social”. The preferred expression is “social change”, as if the settlement of Arabs is a purely “social” and “societal” process, and as if the encounter between the two ethnicities, the Germans and the Arabs, were distinguishable only by their different levels of prosperity, but not through different languages, religion, traditions, norms and values. Also the word “culture” supports the camouflage: in fact, it is not just “cultures” that are being “settled”, but other nations which are quite confidently parading the fact with Turkish flags, thousands of times over, in Cologne. The Turkish flag does not represent a “culture”, but the Turkish nation.
But let us not to waste too much time reflecting on the language of state propaganda, which in any case is nothing but a bizarre accumulation of lies and a deliberate manipulation of language designed to lead the stupid German Fritz further into the delusion that Germany will remain Germany. So long as he believes that, peace will remain to the huts, the settlement policy can calmly continue and war will not come to the palaces.
The “Great Replacement” is one of the best known concepts currently common among the opposition, the Identitarian movement above all being among its users. While this expression describes events the way they actually unfold, it falls somewhat short of the ideal; there is really no replacement taking place in the strict sense of the term. Although Africans and Arabs are being settled, Germans are not being resettled. What we are experiencing is a displacement: Arabs settle and Germans move away. We first observed this process on a small scale in individual houses and streets, then in entire urban districts. Today this two-way settlement movement is affecting entire cities and broad regions, above all in North Rhine-Westphalia [NRW]. Although the word “replacement” describes this process quite well for the affected areas — in NRW we are experiencing a “replacement” of the population — the word does not apply to all of Germany, for Germans leaving NRW move to Saxony or Bavaria and the aggregate number of Germans in Germany remains unchanged by the settlement of Arabs.
The word “colonization” is perfectly applicable, for this term gives expression not only to the ethnic events, but also to the power-political background and repercussions. It has been known for a long time that not only is the German government deliberately pressing forward with the policy of settling Central Europe with Turks, but also the Turkish government has at least as strong an interest in the expansion of their own geographical sphere of influence. But several Arab states, especially Morocco, are also increasingly pursuing such a policy. Pakistan too has recognized the political power opportunities which are opening up by the relocation of as many of their own citizens as possible to Western Europe. Likewise the colonists themselves do not see themselves only as cohabitants in another country, who by more or less crossing the border set aside all loyalty to their homeland in exchange for a new loyalty to different country. Quite the contrary, they often see themselves as an extended spearhead, as carriers of the interests of their homeland, whereas the German native population are perceived as a necessary evil which is still to be tolerated over a period of transition (“we will dominate you”, “we will gas you”).
No word in the German language, however, describes the process of ethnic transformation more suitably on the whole than “Umvolkung”, which is formed from a conflation of the two terms “Um(bau)” [total re-construction] and “Volk“ [an ethnic people]. For that is precisely what is happening in Germany even today; in fact, it is happening precisely according to the same timetable which the Third Reich had in store for several peoples of Eastern Europe: instead of enslavement and physical extermination, the Reich envisioned a gradual assimilation and ultimately an absorption of the native population into the mass of German settlers. The National Socialists could have achieved this objective peacefully in a number of ways: propagandistic valorisation of the settlers and devalorisation of the local culture would have automatically awakened the wish of the indigenous population to assimilate — everyone naturally wants to belong to the victors. They would only have had to strengthen this wish slightly through soft political pressure, in order to hasten the integration and assimilation process; for example, by granting the local inhabitants fewer rights than the German settlers when it came to applications for official posts or before the courts. This is approximately what one might picture regarding the planned policy of Umvolkung in the Third Reich had it ever been implemented after the war.
Once again all these central elements of a successful policy of Umvolkung are facing us again: the exaggerated propagation of the alleged cultural achievements of the settlers (‘Day of the Open Mosque’, glorification of veiling, how beautifully the muezzin sounds!) alongside simultaneous propagation of the shadow side of one’s own nation and culture (the evil Catholic Church, Auschwitz, witch burning, the West was never anything more than horrific). The state systematically favors settlers (migrant quotas, migrant-bonus before the courts), tolerates settlers’ violence against the native population and thereby implicitly approves it — so goes everyday life in the Multicoloured Republic.
And these measures are in fact beginning to take effect: one must concur with Bettina Kudla’s statement that “Umvolkung has long since begun”. The interplay of all these measures to date — colonization and the state sponsored initiation of a process of ethnic dissolution of the native population — has triggered, even today, a wish in many Germans which lies very close to biological evolution: people no longer shape their own future, and above all the future of their children, to their own ethnic group; instead they conform it to becoming part of that ethnic group which they perceive to be more successful and more promising; German men are converting to Islam, German women are specifically seeking Turks and Arabs as spouses in order to bear Turkish and Arab children whom the state presumably favours. All this is part of Umvolkung in the strict sense. Not only does this trend entail the state-implemented settlement of a new nation in a country, but in fact it is an integrated, stealthy, superficially peaceful inter-ethnic process, but one deliberately forced through state pressure. This process will end only when the settled ethnic group has established itself as a determining political power, ideally also forming the majority. And the Volk who originally lived in this country, except for the withdrawn social remnants, will be neither culturally nor physiologically discernible.
It will still take a while before this trans-ethnicisation process [Umvolkungsprozess] of the approximately 60 million Germans still living in Germany is completed. But this alters nothing of the fact that this process is already underway — on this point Bettina Kudla is right in any case. And it alters nothing of the fact that Umvolkung will end with the complete assimilation of the Germans into the settled ethnic groups if the current radicality of the settler policy is not finally stopped.
We have already seen in the first part of this series that the word “Umvolkung” is a re-creation from 2015 and that there exists no historical-linguistic continuity whatsoever with the way the word was applied during the National Socialist period. However, for those who wish to be more politically correct, instead of saying “Umvolkung”, they can of course also say “re-populating the population” [Umbevölkerungung] at any time. And for those to whom “Umvolkung” sounds too German, fortunately one can harken back to a long-established foreign word that describes precisely the same process: “ethnocide”.
In a bestselling book, Tania Kambouri, a German police officer, describes the deteriorating security situation in Germany due to migrants who she says have no respect for law and order. In an interview with Deutschlandfunk radio, she said:
“For weeks, months and years I have noticed that Muslims, mostly young men, do not have even a minimum level of respect for the police. When we are out patrolling the streets, we are verbally abused by young Muslims. There is the body language, and insults like ‘sh** cop’ when passing by. If we make a traffic stop, the aggression increases ever further, this is overwhelmingly the case with migrants.
“I wish these problems were recognized and clearly addressed. If necessary, laws need to be strengthened. It is also very important that the judiciary, that the judges issue effective rulings. It cannot be that offenders continue to fill the police files, hurt us physically, insult us, whatever, and there are no consequences. Many cases are closed or offenders are released on probation or whatever. Yes, what is happening in the courts today is a joke.
“The growing disrespect, the increasing violence against police…. We are losing control of the streets.”
According to Freddi Lohse, Vice Chairman of the DPolG German Police Union in Hamburg, many migrant offenders view the leniency of the German justice system as a green light to continue delinquent behavior. “They are used to tougher consequences in their home countries,” he said. “They have no respect for us.”