Think Tanks | Policy Institutes - Paul Labarique Article, 2004

ministry of tokyo Paul Labarique SOURCE http://www.voltairenet.org/article30072.html ARCHIVE http://archive.is/lVMfV The Manhattan Institute, Neoconservatives’s Lab by Paul Labarique Antony Fisher founded 90 institutes around the world with the purpose of disseminating libertarian ideas. One of them is the Manhattan Institute of New York, whose objective is to [comment:  word missing] taboos. The “neoconservative Revolution” promoted by the institution intended to eliminate the counterculture of the 60’s and feminism, but above all, to destroy social services and get African-Americans and poor people out of the big cities. The speeches on modern intolerance of African-Americans inadaptability, the “zero tolerance” on improper social behavior and “compassion-based-faith” were written by members of the Manhattan Institute. Republican politicians of the Eastern coast like Rudolf Giuliani were also the Institute’s creation. Voltaire Network | 15 September 2004 British multimillionaire Antony Fisher, born in 1915, was one of the most influential actors in the rise of libertarian think tanks (a usually political center of research, propaganda and spreading of ideas) during the second half of the XX century. Fond reader of Friedrich von Hayek [1] since 1945, he met him that year and the economist convinced him of the need to create a think tank network to support the project on society’s changes. Thanks to his huge fortune and the network he had created in Mont Pelerin, Fisher worked on this. In 1955, along with Ralph Harris, he founded the Institute of Economic Affairs in London. In 1977, and with the help of the eminent American lawyer William Casey, who would become later CIA director [2], he founded the International Center for Economic Policy Studies (ICEPS) in New York. According to Loic Wacquant, both men wanted the Institute «to apply the principles of the market economy to social problems» [3]. At the same time, Sir. Antony Fisher opened an institution to advise and finance the libertarians of the world so that they could found similar think tanks in their own countries. The International Institute for Research engendered the Atlas Economic Research Foundation in 1980 and the International Policy Network in 2001. In about 30 years, Fisher founded 90 research centers in 39 countries [IMAGE] William Casey ICEPS’s [comment:  International Center for Economic Policy Studies (New York)] board of directors included Lewl Lehrman [4], Irving Bristol [5], Ed Feulner [6] and William Casey. Under the influence of Charles H. Brunie [7] and William Hammet, who would become President of this think tank at the beginning of the 1980s, the ICEPS changed its name and its purpose. By becoming the Manhattan Institute, its main target was the intellectual elites of New York who had to be convinced of the goodness of Reagan’s policies. Indeed, America was working on the future “conservative revolution” while democratic President Jimmy Carter was living his final hours at the White House. Neoconservatives under Ronald Reagan [8] and George H. W. Bush, who were about to substitute him, were trying to develop an ideological arsenal to legitimate the desired destruction of the welfare state. The Manhattan Institute’s role was to officially provide this liberal-conservative ideology which was based on curious mixture of pseudo economic and sociological anticipations, as was reflected in one of the first works published by the Institute signed by George Gilder. This former Henry Kissinger’s student at Harvard wrote several speeches for well-known political republican personalities such as Nelson Rockefeller, George Romney and Richard Nixon. In the 1970s he suddenly drew his attention to the causes of poverty and richness in the U.S. Then, in 1972, he published Sexual Suicide where he explained that women’s liberation would lead to the end of the human race. According to him, unmarried men were essentially unstructured and those who did not follow a “traditional” sexual practice were deviant. [comment:  a number of post-WWII (i) social changes & (ii) factors particular to (and heavily promoted in) the capitalist West (eg women driven into the workforce); the capitalist attack on a number of European social traditions and norms; the promotion of the 'feminist' ad-man mythical female supremacy 'carrot', over the span of vital decades during which European birthrates dwindled; and the wide availability of contraception and abortion (along with 'no fault' divorce and the assault on the the European male (commonly referred to as the 'white man'), via the 'feminist' (and other) ideological deconstruction & indoctrination vehicle (among numerous other associated factors), have all led to the DEADLY DECLINE in EUROPEAN BIRTHRATES - so much so that indigenous GERMANY has been in a demographic DEATH SPIRAL *for decades*.  The European demographic in United States is set to become a MINORITY in their own homeland in the near future; Canada is likewise replacing their European population with mass immigration from third world regions, and this is a program that has been in effect in ALL European established (Western) capitalist nations, on the basis that this is advantageous for the ECONOMY and is promoted as  (a) 'diversity' and (b) aliens economically intended to support what is held out as the DYING OUT EUROPEANS, who apparently failed to reproduce in sufficient numbers (while 'having it all'):  and thus, having subsequently failed to meet the DEMANDS of the GLOBAL ECONOMY and its economists, the Europeans, will disappear from the nations that their forefathers founded because the economists and the powers that be consider the GLOBAL ECONOMY and ECONOMIC GROWTH (rather than securing a nation for an indigenous or founding people of a nation) of paramount importance in a capitalist system, where the PEOPLE ARE INTERCHANGEABLE and the nation is consigned to history.  Therefore, these conservative think tanks had some point in terms of the commentary on what is sold as 'feminism', whatever their motives were originally. ] In Visible Man, published in 1978, Gilder affirmed that there was no racism in the American society, that it was a “post-racist” society and the worst enemy an African-American could have was himself due to his way of living, his dispersed family and his «ghetto image». This rhetoric supported his allegation on federal subsidies as a tool for perpetuating a society in which African-American “lived a lost life while waiting for the governmental green checks” [9]. This was the type of discourse the Manhattan Institute was trying to promote. So, in 1981 George Gilder was given a scholarship at the Smith Richardson Foundation [10] through the Manhattan Institute to write Wealth and Poverty where he explained his extreme right-wing theories. Based on what he said, the cause of American misery could be found in «the family anarchy of the poor living in the inner city» which was favored by the social assistance whose only effects were «undermining the working desires, the patriarchal family and the religious fervor which were the three reins of prosperity» [11]. Thanks to the support of the Manhattan Institute, the extremely liberal press did welcome the book and even The Economist wrote an article titled “Blessed those who make money”. Quickly, the book became a best-seller, although its main achievement was that it became Ronald Reagan’s most important book. According to study made on his speeches, George Gilder was the former American President’s most quoted alive author. [IMAGE] George Gilder The Manhattan Institute repeated the experience the following year. While Ronald Reagan was successfully implementing its extremely liberal conservative revolution, the think tank where George Gilder was hosting a seminar, was looking for a new promoter of its racial-economic theories. It chose an unknown university student named Charles Murray who had sent one of his articles to Irving Kristoll. Kristoll, interested in the demagogic style of the text, contacted Michael Joyce, President of Olin Foundation, and tried to raise funds to transform the article into a book. William Hammet, who had become President of the Manhattan Institute, agreed to hire Murray. According to an internal memo written by him, «every generation produces a number of books with a lasting impact, books that change the basic ideas about the way the world function (or should function...). Charles Murray’s Losing Ground could be one of these books and in that case it would change the debate of what may be the most important political matter of our time: the modern welfare state» [12]. Consequently, the institute paid the author 30 000 dollars and two years to work in peace. Thus, in 1984 he published Losing Ground: American Social Policy, 1950-1980 which according to Loic Wacquant «appeared in the right moment to in a pseudoscientific way approve the strong cancellation of social commitments carried out by the Republican government (with the support of the democratic majority of the Congress)». The explanation was simple: «the excessive generosity of the policies to assist the poor was to be blamed for the increase of poverty in the U.S. because they favored inactivity and the moral degeneration of popular classes, especially the “illegitimate” unions as the main cause of every social problem in modern societies, including ‘urban violence’» [13]. Despite a huge number of obvious nonsense and empirical mistakes pointed out by sociologist Christopher Jencks, economist Robert Greenstein and even Nobel Prize James Tobin [14], the media turned the pamphlet into a “classic” and made it the central issue on the debates about social assistance in the U.S. On its side, the Manhattan Institute made an enormous promotion of the book: William Hammet sent 700 copies to journalists, political and “university” personalities in America and hired an expert on public relations to turn the unknown Charles Murray into a “media-related phenomenon”. Its purpose was not selling the book but made it the core of every political debate. Months later, the Institute held a symposium on Losing Ground whose participants,whether they were journalists, public policies experts or social sciences specialists, received between 500 and 1500 dollars. Charles Murray’s career had begun. In 1994 he published The Bell Curve: Intelligence and Class Structure in American Life, [15] an «authentic treatise on scientific racism (...) which affirmed that class and racial inequalities in the U.S. reflected the individual differences of ‘cognitive capacity’» [16]. He wrote that the intelligence quotient (IQ), genetically inherited, would be then the leading factor for social success, the capacity to maintain marriage, for properly educating children and being a good citizen: «the most intelligent children of every social class, including the poorest ones, quickly learned how the State functioned and were more capable of informing themselves and debating political matters than participating in them». On the other hand, a low IQ increased the possibilities of committing a crime, and therefore, the possibility of being imprisoned. So, a person is not a criminal due to his deprivation but to his moral and mental depravation. This statement led to two conclusions: first, the reason why ethnic minorities were the majority of prisoners was due to their low IQs and not to the inequalities of the American society. Second, «the State had to stop intervening in social life by reducing ‘natural’ inequalities or it would make things even worse by perpetuating ‘the aberrations of the egalitarian ideal of the French Revolution’ because ‘Jacobites, or Leninists, egalitarian tyrannies were worst than non humanitarian because they were inhumane» [17]. [IMAGE] Charles Murray But this time, Charles Murray went too far and the Manhattan Institute refused to join the project, though this did not mean it was not interested in the debate. Then, Murray sought refuge in the American Enterprise Institute, with Irving Kristoll’s blessing. In 1994, some time after the publication of his book, the think tank hosted a dinner to honor Murray and his last work. When he was given the floor, he explained the 15 differences between African Americans and whites’ IQs and criticized the positive discrimination programs. The Manhattan Institute then drew its attention to the “urban violence” issue by popularizing for the first time the “broken windows” questionable doctrine, formulated in 1982 by James Q. Wilson, the theorist of conservative criminology, and George Kelling in an article published by the Atlantic Monthly [18]. According to the authors, by fighting minor disorders (currently known as “incivilities”) great criminal pathologies were reduced. This thesis got the attention of New York’s attorney, Rudolf Giuliani who, as a result, attended a conference hosted by the Manhattan Institute by the mid 1990s. The main topic of the conference was “the sacred character of public spaces” as indispensable for public life for the “disorder” of poor classes was, by nature, a fertile terrain for “crime”. The future mayor of New York, who has lost municipal elections to democrat African-American David Dinkins, found there the topics for his victorious campaign of 1993. The “zero tolerance” doctrine was born out of this thesis which affirmed that any misdemeanor had to be sanctioned; otherwise, the minor offender would become a criminal sooner or later. In real life, this doctrine was a relentless hunting of minor offenders and a policy to maintain beggars and homeless in poor neighborhoods, out of the big city. This program of Giuliani was welcomed by New York middle and upper classes, the true voters, and was quite published by City Journal, the new magazine of the Manhattan Institute. It was actually the program that gave Giuliani his victory. However, “zero tolerance” meant giving up a fair proportion between the misdemeanor and the means to repress it. Therefore, the doctrine provoked a spiral of public violence that affected individual liberties. Once in power, Giuliani applied the elaborated ideological arsenal designed, in part, by the Manhattan Institute. He was assisted by William Bratton, the man in charge of the security of New York’s metro, later appointed chief of municipal police [19]. In five years only, New York Police’s budget was increased 40%, amounting to 2 600 million dollars. The city hired also 12 000 new policemen whereas social services lost a third of its budget and 8 000 employees. This spectacular deployment of resources to repress every infraction (such as the use of helicopters and several police cars to stop and fine a driver for a minor offense) left memories on people’ minds but kept the police away from real crimes. The most amazing thing was that the result of this policy was less impressive than the arsenal it demanded. By comparing New York to San Diego which used only its “local police”, we could find out that «between 1993 and 1996, Californian metropolis showed a decrease in crimes similar to New York’s but with an increase of only 6% of its police force. The number of arrests dropped 15% in three years in San Diego whereas in New York it increased 24%, amounting 314 292 arrested people in 1996 (...) finally, the number of complaints against the police reduced 10% in the Pacific Coast whereas in Giuliani’s city» it increased 60%.  [comment:  without seeing how the statistics are categorised etc, there is no telling how the respective statistics were compiled.  It is worth noting that govt is good at hiding facts, by creative classification of stats - as is motivated to do so for both political and ideological reasons.] This distrust of New York’s population, especially among African-American, against its own police revealed the existence of a “social war” atmosphere as a result of the “zero tolerance” doctrine. But these negative results did not prevent its followers from exporting the New York model to the whole world. Once William Bratton was fired by the Mayor of the city -it seemed that Bratton overshadowed Giuliani- he became a consultant of the Manhattan Institute and of several cities around the world. During the 1990s, the authors of the Manhattan Institute continued developing their neo-conservative ideology based on ethnocentric and racial prejudices, especially on the superiority of the white Americans way of life. Their discourse was similar to those of numerous journalists and French experts of the time on the “unassimilation” of Islam and the “invasion” threat immigration represented. In the U.S., African-American and Latino populations have been the most attacked ones.   [comment:  the writer may have a left-wing take on the issues that arise from unique social and criminal problems pertaining to various non-European demographics, which ought to be dealt with in line with specific issues that attach to those populations, rather than authorities taking the approach that doing so is 'inequitable', per the leftist and 'progressive' viewpoint.  Whatever the fashionable ideology of the day, all things are not equal and should be dealt with according to logic - rather than (politicised & manipulated) emotion and the rush on preservation of mere ideas / prevailing ideology (in my opinion). ] Abigail Thernstrom, member of the Manhattan Institute, coauthored with her husband, Harvard professor Stephan Thernstrom, America in Black and White: One Nation Indivisible [20], a book on the disastrous effects of positive discrimination. It was financed by the John M. Olin Foundation, the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation, the Smith Richardson Foundation, the Earhart Foundation and Carthage Foundation. Another member of the Manhattan Institute, Tamar Jacoby, wrote about the futility of American integration in Someone Else’s House: America Unfulfilled Struggle for Integration, a book financed by the John M. Olin Foundation, the Joyce Foundation and the Smith Richardson Foundation. In 1993, Myron Magnet blamed in The Dream and Nightmare the counterculture of the 1960s for the creation of the urban underclass [21]. The Manhattan Institute financial sources are varied but funds usually come from even more reactionary hypothetically philanthropic organizations [22], mainly the Olin Foundation [23]. Its influence is quite notable in Washington where this think tank is an ideological guarantee and a mentor of ideas. Thanks to its promoting abilities, the Manhattan Institute prepares the media and the public opinion for extremely liberal and socially retrograded thesis. The White House pays attention to its theories on social matters and George W. Bush asked John J. Diulio Jr. and Stephen Goldsmith, both members of the Manhattan Institute, to apply one of the ideas the Institute has defended for a long time, that is, the elimination of the commitments of the State on social work and their transfer to religious orders. This doctrine was recently brought back by influential Myron Magnet of the Manhattan Institute, in a work titled What Makes Charity Work? A Century of Public and Private Philanthropy published in 2001. This book defended a system of social assistance based on charity and not on solidarity by saying that it would be more effective, cheaper and above all, more magnanimous. This was a “compassionate program” the Bush Administration quickly implemented when it took power and after the opening of a Faith Initiative Office [24] in the White House. By promoting the reduction of the State, the Manhattan Institute has shown the true image of libertarianism while justifying the elimination of the commitments of the State in social matters and its expansion of repression.  [comment:  social assistance provided by charity versus state responsibility is a stupid idea.  But maintaining a welfare state or a state welfare system is inherently a battle in (a) a capitalist system, in which power rests with capital; and class 'solidarity' is likely even more difficult to maintain in (b) a non-homogeneous state (a state with a diverse racial make-up), I would think, as a diverse demographic has diverse characteristics (and needs), instead of the bonds of similarity and of social 'solidarity' of a homogeneous class.   ] Paul Labarique SOURCE http://www.voltairenet.org/article30072.html ARCHIVE http://archive.is/lVMfV ALL of the above general principles apply to capitalist-funded think tanks (or policy institutes), be it funded by wealthy, ostensibly 'philanthropic', individuals; funded by foundations or corporations; that are founded to promote and to echo 'progressive', socially Marxist, yet capitalist serving, pseudo 'left' ideology (eg. the many projects of billionaire George Soros and others like him). More on think tanks here. Very interesting article.  The list of source material relied on by the author is available at the link to the article.

Feminism is Deader than Europe

ꕤ Article SOURCE http://quillette.com/2016/01/18/after-cologne-feminism-is-dead/ Feminism is Deader than Europe Published on January 18, 2016 comments 32 After Cologne, Feminism is Dead written by Phillip Mark McGough   If German history in general is short on laughs (even Schopenhauer’s explanation of the psychology of humour in The World As Will and Representation is unrelentingly miserable) the period 1933 to 1945 is emphatically joyless. Though one of the few tragi-comic chapters in the horror story of Nazism concerns a strange little organization called the Association of German National Jews. They were a pro-National Socialist Jewish group whose membership not only welcomed Hitler’s accession but actively promoted the self-eradication of Jewish identity and its absorption into the new, heroic, master-culture represented by the Nazis (it was said of them, tongue only partly in cheek, that their motto was “down with us”). In 1935, predictably and forcibly, the group was disbanded. Whereas Stalin had his useful idiots, for Hitler there could be no useful Jews. With the above in mind, Marx needs revision. History repeats itself: First as farce, then as tragedy. No longer the unofficial motto of a handful of obscure pre-war self-hating Jews, Down With Us has latterly been adopted (or so it seems) as an official article of policy by the German government itself. Here is a country whose improvident approach to Near Eastern immigration these past few months is quite literally threatening its future as a liberal, progressive, democratically-viable European nation-state. It wouldn’t take an especially imaginative political cartoonist to show Frau Merkel as Frankenstein- throwing levers and blowing fuses as she botches an attempt to graft a million (and counting) Muslim refugees onto the body politic of an increasingly mutilated society. In politics as in cheap Gothic literature, such experiments breed monsters. Some of us are old enough to remember when refugees consisted almost entirely (and by definition) of the most vulnerable members of any given country in crisis: Women, children, the elderly, and so forth. Today, on the other hand, most of the Muslims arriving in Europe from the Near East seem to be young men of fighting age: Young men whose views regarding Jews, gays, and of course women are completely at odds with Europe’s liberal tradition as it’s evolved these past few centuries; a liberal tradition which Germany, for obvious reasons, has sought to reify in its approach to domestic and international affairs ever since the end of the war. But thanks in no small measure to mass Muslim immigration, antisemitism in its most predatory incarnation is once again the norm on German streets, while misogyny is more or less accepted, even expected. It is to choke on the irony of it all. In the name of a long-cherished tradition of tolerance, Germany is becoming savagely intolerant: Totally unsafe for Jews who dare to display their Judaism in public, and increasingly unsafe for women who dare even to go out in public at all after nightfall (or use a swimming pool; or attend a carnival; or do pretty much anything short of redacting their identity behind a hijab and never leaving the house again). The details of what exactly went on in Cologne and other German cities on New Year’s Eve 2015 are too horrible and by now too well-known to merit repetition. What deserves to be iterated and reiterated by way of a cautionary tale is the story of the shameful reaction of the German authorities (both local and national) to an unprecedented outbreak of mass sexual truancy among highly organized sections of the migrant community: A reaction which went through textbook stages of denial, cover-up, and, eventually, victim-blaming (in the immediate aftermath of the assaults, the [female] Mayor of Cologne sprang into action with a set of guidelines for women on how best to behave in public so as not to inflame the migrant libido). Lie back and think of multiculturalism, German women were effectively being told. Then came the equally wearily predictable warnings of what we were to understand was the real problem here: Not Muslim misogyny, but Islamophobia. Ralf Jaeger, Minister of the Interior for North Rhine-Westphalia, famously drew moral symmetry between the sexual assaults and the reaction of the commentariat: “What happens on right-wing platforms and in chatrooms is at least as awful as the acts of those assaulting the women” he said. And this wasn’t just a German issue. We now know that law-enforcement authorities throughout Europe have been conniving for some time in similarly clumsy attempts to neutralize news of the scale of the violence (particularly sexual violence against women) at large within certain sections of newly-arrived migrant communities. Across Europe, citizens are being asked by their own governments to accept that complicity in a conspiracy of silence is the highest form of tolerance. Fortunately, most people aren’t buying into it. Sadly, however, some people are: And, oddly enough, not a few of them are women. If the response of European governments to the continent-wide crisis figureheaded by Cologne was by turns disappointing and disgusting, the response of the feminist left was soul-crushingly depressing- a thesaurus of hypocrisies which went beyond self-parody, untethered itself from rational thought, and proceeded to float around the comment pages and the Twitter feeds like a rogue blimp. It might seem invidious to draw attention to the unintentionally hysterical (in both senses of the term) remarks of just one feminist commentator when there are so many others to choose from, but there was something about the events in Cologne that seemed to send Laurie Penny stark raving mad. From her Harvard redoubt- with the depth and breadth of the Atlantic Ocean between her and reality- the true, ideological nature of the crisis facing Europe suddenly became terribly clear. In a New Statesman piece with the urgent title “After Cologne We Can’t Let The Bigots Steal Feminism”, we learned from Laurie that the whole sorry situation wasn’t about the myopic stupidity of governments importing (and importing wholesale) a hyper-masculine, misogynistic, patriarchal, unassimilable culture into Europe; instead it was about “the theft of feminist rhetoric by imperialism and racism.” Laurie also reminded those of us who thought we were appalled by events in Cologne that we’re not really appalled by events in Cologne: We’re only pretending to be appalled by events in Cologne so that we can indulge in a spot of good old-fashioned Muslim-bashing. “White supremacist patriarchy only concerns itself with women’s safety when rape and sexual assault can be pinned on cultural outsiders” she thundered, while also speculating (in curiously feverish language) that not a few white people who claim to be opposed to Islamic sexual violence are secretly turned on by the idea of savage brown men doing unspeakable things to helpless white women. To be fair, and in the same article, Laurie graciously concludes (doubtless after long and hard consideration) that rape is never excusable — not even when the perpetrators “are really angry and disenfranchised” (which sounds a bit like an excuse to me). We could go on. We could mention Deborah Orr in the Guardian, who somehow managed to link events in Cologne to the historical failings of European (and British) criminal justice systems; or Gaby Hinsliff (also, coincidentally enough, in the Guardian) who contrasted the “expensive smartphones” of the assaulted German women with the miserable lives of “young male migrants…scraping by at the bottom of Europe’s social and economic food chain” (query: what’s the Arabic for “with that iPhone she was asking for it”?). Suffice to say that to endure the Krakatoa-like eruption of cognitive dissonance from the feminist left in the aftermath of the obscenity of Cologne was to have a whole new dimension of unpleasantness added to what was an already thoroughly unpleasant ordeal: A bit like being hectored by One Flew Over The Cuckoo’s Nest’s Nurse Ratched during a particularly difficult colonoscopy. We really could have done without it. As a general point, it really is astonishing the extent to which the feminist left (in fact, the left in general) is prepared to veto entire chapters of its own otherwise Inquisitorially-enforced ideology in the interests of maintaining 100% solidarity with Islam — the most ruthlessly misogynistic force in the world today. The same people who see and hear rape culture literally everywhere (on University campuses, in wolf-whistles, on saucy t-shirts worn by rocket scientists, etc) somehow suddenly can’t see or hear it at all when it involves feral mobs of migrants assaulting women en masse in public in major European cities. Amid a miasma of double standards and self-contradictory froth, what’s clear is that the left is only opposed to evils like misogyny, homophobia, and racism inasmuch as they can be bundled into a knout and wielded without mercy to give white, western, man a damn good thrashing. Ever since the rise of Islamism in place of Communism as the chief ideological antipode of western values, the left has sunk lower and lower into moral insolvency in its pathological urge to aid, abet, and excuse the actions of the enemies of tolerance. Until recently, the more recklessly optimistic among us thought there might be a turning point. Perhaps after Paris January 2015, or after Paris November 2015, or after Cologne, or after [insert any given Islamist transgression against basic decency here] … perhaps then we would witness some sort of renaissance of sanity, a resurrection of reason, when the left would rediscover its social justice-based roots and surprise us with outright condemnation of the horror, with no plea of mitigation. We must now accept that this turning point will never come; indeed, that for the European liberal left in general, and for the feminist left in particular, a point of no return has been reached. Axiom: After Cologne, feminism is dead. Europe must now focus on the more important issue of women’s rights. Phillip Mark McGough is a UK-based writer, lawyer and blogger for the Huffington Post and the Jerusalem Post. Follow him on Twitter:  @PMMcGough http://quillette.com/2016/01/18/after-cologne-feminism-is-dead/ ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- COMMENT This was a very good article.  Not sure what I think overall. As I see this, the key issue is that these people are not European and that their homeland is not Europe. The matter of religion and of culture can therefore be set aside as an irrelevant debate:  if the aim is to remedy the problem at its foundation.  And that problem is:  invasion Europe.   Religious and cultural factors remain material and key in terms of comprehending and discussing events and criminal incidents, which now span decades in Europe.  But understanding differences in the hope of finding solutions is an exercise in futility that could span decades more of discussion, programs, interventions, debates and so on. Europe does not have decades to waste in social experiments destined for failure.  Europe is finished if Europe does not awake:  now. I liked the 'down with us' and the 'with the depth and breadth of the Atlantic Ocean between her and reality' in the article above. 'Down with us' makes me think of those naive modern-day 'hippies' holding up the 'refugees welcome' signs in Europe, welcoming the invasion of their ancestral homelands. Feminism's just another way for segments of Western intelligentsia to wallow in their self-importance, while whining, critiquing, pontificating, soap-boxing and, eventually, brainwashing the gullible by way of world-wide professional media platform dissemination of self-indulgent fantasy, when not churning out outright tailor-made propaganda, and progressively more and more insane 'PC policing' and utopian social engineering directives, or victimising some poor bastard (or group) that's become the target of smear or intended political suppression. In my view, 'feminism' is whatever Western society will indulge. The bulwark of that society is the maligned 'white men' who happen to be the only barrier that stands between the order of Western civilisation and its alternative:  chaos & barbarity. Feminism is a PR lie that's exploited by politicians, Western institutions, media and intelligentsia whose members: DO NOT CARE for the safety of European women; DO NOT CARE for the welfare & integrity of European societies;  DO NOT CARE for squandering the heritage of  European nations; DO NOT CARE for having initiated the destruction of Europeans. Politicians and their advisers are well aware of the social costs associated with mass non-European population intake, yet successive politicians have knowingly and actively facilitated the rape of European women and the destruction of European societies over at least the last five decades. ꕤ

German 'Feminism' & 'Journalism' is A Joke: Germans Deserve the Truth

ꕤ Article SOURCE http://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/rape-culture-germany-cologne-new-years-2016-876 Rape Culture in Germany Is Not an Imported Phenomenon By Stefanie Lohaus and Anne Wizorek January 8, 2016 This article was originally published on VICE Germany Ever since New Year's Eve, German media have largely been discussing the violence at Cologne's central train station in terms of a rape culture that was imported into Germany – simply because the perpetrators in this case looked "Arab" or "North African", according to witnesses. The only point being, of course, that the men weren't white.   That's an idea that renders sexualised violence and theft harmless by trivialising and exorcising both notions. The fact that our society and its institutions aren't in any position to protect those affected by the violence and identify its culprits doesn't in any way mean that there's never been sexualised violence in Germany before. In fact, Germany's rape culture is deeply rooted in our collective psyche.  [comment:  The last time German women were raped en masse was when Hitler was defeated.] Sexual assaults and even rape happen every year at big events like Oktoberfest. "The way to the toilet alone is like running the gauntlet: within 50 feet, you can be sure to tally three hugs from drunken strangers, two pats on the ass, someone looking up your dirndl and some beer purposely splashed right down your cleavage," wrote Karoline Beisel and Beate Wild in 2011, in the Süddeutsche Zeitung. An average of 10 reported rapes take place each year at Oktoberfest. The estimated number of unreported cases is 200. A 2004 study on the living conditions, security and health of women in Germany, showed that 13 percent of German women have experienced a form of criminal sexualised violence. The scandal is that only 8 percent of these women filed a complaint with the police. If you include multiple complaints, then the figure decreases to 5 percent. That means that an incredible 95 percent of women in Germany who experience sexual violence don't report it to the police. According to German law, in order to get a conviction for sexual assault, the victim must prove that they resisted the violence. Yet the media would still rather talk at length about false accusations, even if they are rare. Depending on the statistics and the country, they account for between 1 and 9 percent of all reported cases – in Germany that number lies between 3 and 5 percent. The reason behind all that is that in German law, the victim's behaviour plays a big role when it comes to sexual assault. In order to get a conviction, the victim must prove that they resisted the violence. This is a completely absurd requirement, largely based on numerous myths about how sexualised violence is carried out. That's why staring in shock – a common and natural reaction to violence – often leads to the perpetrator being acquitted. Just imagine that the burden of proof for theft lay on whether the person robbed had adequately defended themselves: "Sorry Miss, you didn't hold on to your purse tight enough, it's your own fault." Amid all this, the perpetrator's skin colour or religion is irrelevant. With what happened in Cologne, we'll have to see whether those sexual assaults end up being as thoroughly investigated as the property theft that occurred simultaneously. To date, 90 women have filed complaints according to Zeit Online, with 75 percent of them concerning sexual offences. Two of them are rape cases. Nobody's denying that people with immigrant backgrounds or of the Muslim faith are also guilty of committing sex crimes. But to act as if their cultural background has "programmed" them to do so, while making all sorts of excuses and downplaying the crimes of white Germans, will always be racist rabble-rousing. The clearest thing to come out of the debate around what happened in Cologne as of yet is that Germany has a sexism issue and a racism issue. Both are deep-rooted and were not "imported". It's our responsibility as a society to move towards a culture that celebrates mutual consent and respects boundaries. And that applies to all people, because one sexual assault is one too many – no matter where it took place and who it involved. http://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/rape-culture-germany-cologne-new-years-2016-876 ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- COMMENT I've only just begun looking at the Cologne Rapes articles. Got sidetracked having a look at and marking up the UK, Sweden & France (NATO sidekicks, although Sweden isn't official) propaganda via a Frankfurt Germany newspaper, citing experts who are talking piles of steaming manure. Just when I thought I couldn't possibly find anything more preposterous, I came across this article, quite by chance. I think there's steam coming out of my ears right now, like in the cartoons. This is so disgusting and false, that I could just burst ... or cry. The German public -- and the public at large -- don't deserve these lies. It matters very much who the raping mobs are, when you are being raped by a mob of immigrant marauders on a rampage in Europe. That aside, the colour of a rapist's (or any other criminal's) skin and their religion (or lack thereof), their affiliations, and any other key features (place of birth, family origins, gender, markings, sexual preference, family constellation etc), matter a great deal as these factors help with crime analysis, profiling and crime fighting etc. Adequate records should be kept, made public and examined by law enforcement, by experts, by academics and anybody else interested in crime and associated analysis. Not keeping such records in an adequate state, and not providing such records for inspection, is negligent of law enforcement and negligent of government. What has taken place has taken place precisely because of origins (which includes factors of race, religion, culture and psychology), that cannot be ignored. As far as I am aware, there is no crowd of 1,000 marauding Italians or Spaniards raping (or if one prefers a little minimising spin:  'sexually assaulting') German women, as a thank-you for German hospitality. That's all I have to say on this at the moment. Example of Joke Western 'Feminism' Swiss artist stages nude protest in Cologne after NYE assaults https://www.rt.com/news/328348-protest-nude-cologne-assaults/ ꕤ

Britain: Feminist Intelligentsia Hypocrisy Serves Corrupt State Powers

ꕤ Article SOURCE https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2016/01/feminism-a-neo-con-tool/ https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2016/01/feminism-a-neo-con-tool/ Craig Murray Vauntie Cybernat, Former Ambassador, Human Rights Activist https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/ Feminism A Neo-Con Tool by craig on January 7, 2016 6:01 pm Catching up on a fortnight’s news, I have spent five hours searching in vain for criticism of Simon Danczuk from prominent or even just declared feminists. The Guardian was the obvious place to start, but while they had two articles by feminist writers condemning Chris Gayle’s clumsy attempt to chat up a presenter, their legion of feminist columnists were entirely silent on Danczuk. The only opinion piece was strongly defending him. This is very peculiar. The allegation against Danczuk which is under police investigation – of initiating sex with a sleeping woman – is identical to the worst interpretation of the worst accusation against Julian Assange. The Assange allegation brought literally hundreds, probably thousands of condemnatory articles from feminist writers across the entire range of the mainstream media. I have dug up 57 in the Guardian alone with a simple and far from exhaustive search. In the case of Danczuk I can find nothing, zilch, nada. Not a single feminist peep. The Assange case is not isolated. Tommy Sheridan has been pursuing a lone legal battle against the Murdoch empire for a decade, some of it in prison when the judicial system decided his “perjury” was imprisonable but Andy Coulson’s admitted perjury on the Murdoch side in the same case was not. I personally witnessed in court in Edinburgh last month Tommy Sheridan, with no lawyer (he has no money) arguing against a seven man Murdoch legal team including three QCs, that a letter from the husband of Jackie Bird of BBC Scotland should be admitted in evidence. Bird was working for Murdoch and suggested in his letter that a witness should be “got out of the country” to avoid giving evidence. The bias exhibited by the leading judge I found astonishing beyond belief. I was the only media in the court. Yet even though the Murdoch allegations against Sheridan were of consensual sexual conduct, Sheridan’s fight against Murdoch has been undermined from the start by the massive and concerted attack he has faced from the forces of feminism. Just as the vital messages WikiLeaks and Assange have put out about war crimes, corruption and the relentless state attack on civil liberties have been undermined by the concerted feminist campaign promoting the self-evidently ludicrous claims of sexual offence against Assange. As soon as the radical left pose the slightest threat to the neo-con establishment, an army of feminists can be relied upon to run a concerted campaign to undermine any progress the left wing might make. The attack on Jeremy Corbyn over the makeup of his shadow cabinet was a classic example. It is the first ever gender equal shadow cabinet, but the entire media for a 96 hour period last September ran headline news that the lack of women in the “top” posts was anti-feminist. Every feminist commentator in the UK piled in. Among the obvious dishonesties of this campaign was the fact that Defence, Chancellor, Foreign Affairs and Home Secretary have always been considered the “great offices of State” and the argument only could be made by simply ignoring Defence. The other great irony was the “feminist” attack was led by Blairites like Harman and Cooper, and failed to address the fact that Blair had NO women in any of these posts for a full ten years as Prime Minister. But facts did not matter in deploying the organised feminist lobby against Corbyn. Which is why it is an important test to see what the feminists, both inside and outside the Labour Party, would do when the leading anti-Corbyn rent-a-gob, Simon Danczuk, was alleged to have some attitudes to women that seem very dubious indeed, including forcing an ex-wife into non-consensual s&m and that rape allegation. And the answer is …nothing. Feminists who criticised Assange, Sheridan and Corbyn in droves were utterly silent on the subject of Danczuk. Because the purpose of established and paid feminism is to undermine the left in the service of the neo-cons, not to attack neo-cons like Danczuk. Identity politics has been used to shatter any attempt to campaign for broader social justice for everybody. Instead it becomes about the rights of particular groups, and that is soon morphed into the neo-con language of opportunity. What is needed, modern feminism argues, is not a reduction of the vast gap between rich and poor, but a chance for some women to become Michelle Mone or Ann Gloag. It is not about good conditions for all, but the removal of glass ceilings for high paid feminist journalists or political hacks. Feminism has become the main attack tool in the neo-con ideological arsenal. I am sceptical the concept can be redeemed from this. https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2016/01/feminism-a-neo-con-tool/ ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- COMMENT Professional / paid and associated, middle-class intelligentsia feminism isn't feminism at all, by the look of things.  It's about privilege for the few, hypocrisy, & hoodwinking of the many, to the advantage of corrupt and criminal state powers that are publicly and politically aided in wielding the force of undemocratic (and thus illegitimate) state power against targets of political persecution  -- such as WikiLeaks journalist-publisher, Julian Asssange -- that have had the courage and determined will (in the face of danger) to challenge the corrupt state, that is inflicting injustice and destruction on a global scale. Julian Assange Editor, WikiLeaks Justice4Assange WikiLeaks Site WikiLeaks Twitter BOOK:  The WikiLeaks Files (2015) Link | here ꕤ

The Rape of Germany - German Women Urged by Cologne Mayor: to Alter Their Behaviour & Culture To Accommmodate Foreign Rapists

ꕤ Article SOURCE AS MARKED https://www.rt.com/news/328045-cologne-women-sexual-violence/ Hundreds rally against sexual violence after NYE attacks in Cologne Published time: 6 Jan, 2016 04:15 Several hundred people have rallied in Cologne in protest against heightened trouble stemming from the migrant community, and the authorities’ failure to intervene and prevent the dozens of sexual assaults which took place during wild New Year celebrations. Organized via social networks, hundreds of men and women demonstrated against the intolerable levels of abuse witnessed by women at the hands of the male refugee community at Cologne’s main train station on New Year’s night. So far some 90 women have reported being sexually molested, threatened and robbed outside Cologne Cathedral by men of “Arab or North African” origin, police said on Tuesday. READ MORE: Locals voice fears, minister vows punishment after 'Arab' crowd blamed for sex assaults in Cologne Addressing a crowd of up to 500 citizen activists, speakers took turns raising their concerns to the public, urging authorities to defend female integrity. Again and again the question was raised of what was law enforcement had been doing on that night to allow such large scale attacks to happen. Those gathered at the scene of the crimes slammed the government's open door refugee policy, enacted by German Chancellor Angela Merkel in September. Women held up signs reading, “Mrs Merkel – Where are you?” and “Thank you [Cologne Mayor] Mrs. Reker. Arm Cologne.” The mass attack on women in the middle of the city around Cologne Central Station on New Year's happened to the loud cheers of festivities. Up to 1,000 men could be suspects in what the authorities called a “crime of a whole new dimension.” To quell the New Year’s disturbance in the city, authorities eventually deployed more than 200 officers, involving 143 local policemen in addition to 70 federal officers. So far fewer than a dozen arrests have been made. Tuesday’s rally to protect women’s rights came after Mayor Henriette Reker held a crisis meeting with Chief of Police, Wolfgang Albers, and head of federal police, Wolfgang Wurm, where she urged women to adopt a “code of conduct.” “It is important to prevent such incidents from ever happening again,” Reker said according to RP Online. The code includes advice to maintain a distance of an arm’s length from strangers, not to walk alone at night, to conjugate with a team of friends, to ask bystanders for help and to inform the authorities of an assault. Reker also called for a “better explanation” of acceptable behavior at public gatherings to the city’s migrant community, as she pledged to step up security ahead of next month’s Cologne Carnival. “We need to prevent confusion about what constitutes happy behavior and what is utterly separate from openness, especially in sexual behavior,” she said, promising to beef up security at mass events. The mayor also called for new regulations requiring event organizers to place temporary video surveillance at public gatherings. The mayor also revealed that the same kind of New Year’s chaos in Cologne has also happened elsewhere in Germany. “We have heard by now that they [the attacks] have occurred in other cities. This of course is not comforting to us.” In addition to Cologne attacks by migrants on women were apparently reported in Hamburg. At least ten cases were reported over the night of New Year in the St. Pauli district. According to the city’s police, victims had been approached by several men of “southern or Arab appearance” on Beatles Platz and in the Grosse Freiheit, who sexually harassed women aged 18 to 24. Assaults on women have also taken place in Stuttgart where two 18-year-old women had reportedly been sexually abused and robbed by a group of over a dozen men on New Year’s Eve. https://www.rt.com/news/328045-cologne-women-sexual-violence/ ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- COMMENT This is f%$#@%g outrage. German authorities opened their doors to mass third world population transfer that has flooded Europe for (a) economic reasons and (b) displacement due to serial American, Western European, and Arab allied military interventions in a string of Middle Eastern and African countries, spanning decades. Western working classes have borne the brunt of the many and enduring (and irrevocable) costs (along with persistently raped women and girls of Europe) on a long-term basis AND not just on New Year's Eve in Cologne:   while the European politicians, European police and complicit media have covered up what is an ongoing pattern of migrant sexual assault  crimes targeting European women. Anti-immigration public protests in the many thousands have been been ignored by warmonger and corporate/banker serving European politicians. Europe’s Rape Epidemic: Western Women Will Be Sacrificed At The Altar Of Mass Migration by Anne-Marie Waters  |  6 Oct 2015 http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/10/06/europes-rape-epidemic-western-women-will-be-sacrificed-at-the-alter-of-mass-migration/ The New Year's Eve mayhem, when taking into account a consistent pattern of non-European migrant violence and sexual assault upon European women (and other criminal mayhem) -- often immediately upon arrival in Europe and, known for generations beyond -- should have been anticipated by the grossly negligent German authorities. http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/1754 Raped in Oslo From the desk of Fjordman on Wed, 2006-12-13 08:23 The number of rapes in the Norwegian capital Oslo is six times as high as in New York City. I’ve written about the issue of rape and Muslim immigration so many times that I am, quite frankly, a bit tired of the subject. But as we all know, problems don’t disappear just because you are tired of talking about them, so here goes. There has been an explosive increase in the number of rape charges in the city of Oslo, but both the media and the authorities consistently refuse to tell us why. They did do so, however, in 2001, when two out of Norway's three largest newspapers, Aftenposten and Dagbladet, reported that most of these rape charges involve an immigrant perp, which again mostly means Muslims. Both newspapers have since then conveniently “forgotten” about this, and have never connected the issue to Muslim immigration although the number of rape charges has continued to rise to historic levels. They are thus at best guilty of extreme incompetence, since their former articles about this issue are still available online. Norway’s Minister of Justice from 2001 to 2005, Odd Einar Dørum, mentioned the problem in 2001 but has later gone quiet about the issue. The reported number of rapes in Oslo is now six – 6! – times as high per capita as in New York City, yet the media keeps warning against Islamophobia. According to Aftenposten, the clinic (voldtektsmottak) at the emergency hospital known as Legevakt has never had so many rape victims to treat. Its ability to care for them all is being severely tested. The number of reported rapes has skyrocketed this year. Two out of three charged with rape in Norway’s capital are immigrants with a non-western background according to a police study. The number of rape cases is also rising steadily. Unni Wikan, a professor of social anthropology at the University of Oslo, in 2001 said that “Norwegian women must take their share of responsibility for these rapes” because Muslim men found their manner of dress provocative. The professor’s conclusion was not that Muslim men living in the West needed to adjust to Western norms, but the exact opposite: “Norwegian women must realize that we live in a Multicultural society and adapt themselves to it.” http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/1754 It's appalling that the civil liberties of Europeans are being eroded and infringed upon by the authorities, and that German authorities are demanding that German women restrict their freedoms in order not to get raped by foreigners.  But this violation, outrage, and insult to European women has not been publicly uttered for first time in Europe:  see article re this exact issue and this exact response by an academic in Norway (article above & here) -- as far back as 2001. Hello?  In 2001, when the academic advised Norwegian women to adapt to rape by foreigners,  there was war on Afghanistan (commencing 2001).  At the time of the 2006 article the professor is mentioned in, there was war in Afghanistan as well as Iraq, following illegal invasion of Iraq (2003). Actually, the US had been supplying and backing the Taliban mujahadeen (same 'difference' ... militant Islamists) versus the Russians (who were backing the then, Russian aligned, Afghan government 1979-1989), as I understand, and what followed (after Russian withdrawal in 1989) was civil war in Afghanistan (the result of power vacuum, manifested by USA interference & arming of Taliban mujahadeen opposition) -- so those rapists of Western European women are the result of American interference in Afghanistan & European complicity & open-door policy, I gather.  Civil war in Afghanistan (1996-2001) - here. mujahadeen = plural for 'mujahid':  one who engages in jihad (holy war) - here & here CIA:  Operation Cyclone -- CIA program -- to arm & finance Afghani mujahadeen -- prior to & during -- Soviet war in Afghanistan (1979-1989) -- CIA supported militant Islamic groups -- favoured by neighbouring Pakistan -- versus: Marxist-oriented Democratic Republic of Afghanistan Operation Cyclone -- longest & most expensive CIA operations EVER -- $20-$30 milllion per year, commending 1980 -- $630 million per year, at 1987 -- funding continued after 1989 -- throughout Afghan civil war (1989-1992) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Cyclone THEREFORE:  America has been involved in destabilising Afghanistan (and the region, no doubt) for over 37 successive years -- and has invested a lot of US taxpayer money in securing the spoils of the region (on behalf of US elite interests that are being served:  paid for by generations of masses (ie debt-slaves)).  Europe is the mop-up man who gets the human 'blow-back' from the American (& European elite's) Middle Eastern decades long take-over enterprise agenda. Does that look about right? It does to me. As CIA (America) began arming Islamists before the Soviet Afghan war, I'm guessing that CIA was engineering their speciality in Afghanistan before the 1979 Soviet invasion:  regime change. So, however you look at this, the women of Cologne and the women of Western Europe (who have been raped for decades) continue to be raped, while Europe itself is about to be raped and destroyed:  thanks to America & its partners.  And the Americans (& elite friends) can also take a bow for the subsequent emergence of mass surveillance and totalitarianism in the West, along with the emergence of CIA funded & supported militant Islamism across the Middle East (& Africa, no doubt). Probably additional third world targets during those periods also, but I've not checked. Anyway, here's the non-European third world war and sundry displacements being imposed on Europe.  By 2001, there was already a problem in northern European countries (hence the Norwegian academics two bob's (input)). Therefore, European politicians, law enforcement and complicit media (and Western intelligentsia generally), were not only sitting on this problem and hushing it up for 15 YEARS now, but were/are also party to CREATING this problem & forcing it upon the vulnerable public of Europe (women, working classes & the vulnerable in the community), in the first place. The German public (as a whole) are also expected to be subjected to additional surveillance.  In this case, video cameras at public events.  However, the mass surveillance regime (in wider terms) is a consequence of the insanity of simultaneously permitting mass non-European immigration from backward, religiously fanatic and militant regions (thus potential terrorists), that Western European authorities also happen to be party to militarily assaulting, along with their Gulf Arab and American allies, rendering the said potential terrorists likely terrorists among the host populations (I'm referring to percentages of such populations).  The proposed 'acceptable' behaviour lessons are a f%$#@%g joke, Germany. As if these disgusting creatures don't know that it's unacceptable to rape and assault women, for which they'd probably be beheaded, hanged, or stoned in their homelands -- if not carved up, or dragged around the streets by rope & motor vehicle, by displeased vigilante families. It is an act of violence and an act of gross disrespect to the host communities. These people should have been assisted in situ, well away from European shores.  As for those that were permitted onto European soil, quarantine apart from host communities should have been put in place from the onset, until such time as processing (or deportation) has been completed. Instant deportation is the only sensible course of action for violators of any local laws, but, of course, Germany hasn't the will or the balls -- and deportation is almost impossible to effect, once foreign invasion is permitted onto one's soil. Cologne Mayor Henriette Reker  has been stabbed in the neck over support for the unwanted mass, non-European immigration that has resulted in ongoing chaos, violence, and rapes by foreigners in Germany, and more widely in Western European host communities -- for years. It's not merely 'right-wing' supporters (as spun in the corporate media) that object to imposition of inassimilable, foreign mass population transfer on their homelands (de facto invasion):  everyday Europeans have been fed up for years. I'm surprised Europeans haven't taken up arms yet, and that there isn't a civil war over the potentially irreversible destruction that Western European politicians have imposed upon European nations. Going by the Sydney Morning Herald article (Australia), it looks like Australians don't even get the full news -- Australians get news lite, minus key facts. It should be pointed out that the issues at stake go well beyond the rape of European women:  this the path to rape and destruction of Europe itself. Europe is finished if Europe does not act now. Cologne mayor candidate stabbed in Germany, police say Date  |  October 18, 2015 Attacked: Cologne mayor candidate Henriette Reker Berlin: An independent candidate running for mayor of the German city of Cologne was stabbed in the neck and severely wounded on Saturday while she was campaigning in the city, police said. Henriette Reker and an aide were both severely injured by the attacker, a 44-year-old man, police said. Three other people who came to their assistance were also injured, though not severely. Police said the attacker stabbed Reker and her aide about 9am (6pm AEDT) at an information stand for the Christian Democrats (CDU), Chancellor Angela Merkel's party. The other three people were injured immediately afterwards. [ ... CONTINUED ... ] http://www.smh.com.au/world/cologne-mayor-candidate-stabbed-in-germany-police-say-20151017-gkbrw2.html Cologne mayor candidate stabbed in Germany, police say German politician stabbed in the neck over liberal immigration views Jen Mills for Metro.co.uk   |  Sunday 18 Oct 2015 1:10 pm A German politician active in helping refugees was stabbed and seriously wounded yesterday in a ‘racist, political’ attack. Henriette Reker, a mayoral candidate known for her liberal views on immigration, was targeted on Saturday in the middle of an open air market in Cologne. Her assailant is said to have told police he stabbed her in the neck because he was angry she supported asylum seekers coming to Germany. In a press conference, police official Norbert Wagner said the 44-year-old attacker was arrested at the scene and admitted he had a ‘a racist motivation for committing this act’. German leader Angela Merkel expressed her ‘shock’ over the attack, CNN reported. It came as Merkel, who has pushed for a fairer distribution of refugees across the EU, prepared to travel to Turkey for talks with the country’s president Recep Tayyip Erdogan. More than 630,000 people fleeing war and poverty in the Middle East and Africa have made the journey to Europe this year, many risking crossing the Mediterranean by boat. Germany has said it will accept Syrian refugees and expects to take in one million this year. But the policy has not been welcomed by all in Germany and has been greeted by a growing number of far-right protests. http://metro.co.uk/2015/10/18/german-politician-stabbed-in-the-neck-over-liberal-immigration-views-5446755/ NOTE: REFUSAL TO ACCEPT INVASION IS NOT MERELY A 'FAR RIGHT' ISSUE (as consistently & fraudulently portrayed in corporate Western media). ꕤ