State Department Applauds President Trump as Paris Boards Up Its Windows

France's President Emmanuel Macron is currently learning a hard lesson in global governance: ignoring reality does not stop shop windows from being boarded up with plywood. Following a weekend where over 3,000 shops were looted and 2,500 people arrested across France, the U.S. State Department has officially declared that President Donald Trump was entirely correct in his assessment of the chaos.

Trump pointed out the obvious during a recent rally, stating that the nation is being "looted and burned to the ground by migrants, jihadists and communists who hate Christianity" and "the Western civilization itself." He added that "the migrants have taken over France" and that the country needs to finally secure its borders. Of course, he repeated each point at least three times, but that's Trump for ya.

Predictably, Paris reacted not by securing the streets, but by clutching its collective European pearls and having the vapors. 

Macron lashed out at foreign leaders, labeling their remarks "unacceptable and stupid comments" while whining about phantom AI-generated misinformation. He insisted that claims of the country being overrun by hordes of migrants are completely false.

State Department spokesperson Tommy Pigott gave a much-needed dose of common sense in response to Macron's temper tantrum, telling Fox News Digital that Trump "is on point as he is consistently on point."

"He has been clear about the dangers of mass migration for years, especially since the beginning of this administration, but certainly long beforehand as well. The president has secured the border on day one when it comes to the United States of America," Pigott said. "But we've also been clear from the State Department's perspective that we are going to oppose international institutions, for example, that seek to impose an agenda upon sovereign nations to encourage mass migration."

While European technocrats continue to lecture everyone else on utopian multiculturalism, the Louvre and major museums in Paris are shutting their doors in preparation for yet another weekend of civil unrest.

Pigott emphasized that open-border policies carry a heavy, undeniable price tag.

"Mass migration is inherently destabilizing. It is inherently destabilizing. It is something that we don't believe solves problems, but actually creates problems. And this is something the president has raised time and time again. He's raised it in reaction to these recent protests," Pigott added.

"He's also raised it directly to world leaders at the U.N. General Assembly. Two years in a row raising this issue, calling for an end to the destructive policies of illegal amassed migration. Illegal amassed migration that, by the way, only helps criminal cartel groups. That's something we see in our own hemisphere, for example," Pigott continued. "The fact that cartel groups have traveled along these migration pathways. So the president is spot on, he's bringing attention to this issue, he is taking action to address this issue and, from the State Department's perspective, we have also taken concrete action to end the era of mass migration."

Amid the burning barricades and shuttered storefronts, the State Department offered practical advice for any American citizens currently trapped in the European capital of lights and riots.

"One of things that we really stress to Americans is that when they're traveling abroad, if they could please register for the Smart Traveler Enrollment Program (STEP). That program lets you tell us which countries you're going to so that we can provide real-time information to Americans in the country that have registered," Pigott told Fox News Digital.

"Speaking generally, when it comes to Americans that need assistance, we have personnel across the world at the State Department, at embassies and consulates that are working 24/7 to help the American people. If you have an issue when you're abroad, please contact the embassy or consulate," he added. "There are people that are there to help you that can provide information. Everything from a lost passport to responses to a security situation, that is something that is hugely important and a huge factor for the State Department."

I hope you will take the time to click on any of the ads on this page--it's one way to support my work and you don't need to purchase anything just to look. Of course, you can Buy Me A Coffee at any amount if you want to support me directly, but no pressure. And finally, consider subscribing if you enjoy the blog--it's free, and totally worth the cost.

Tweet

France Confronts an Uncomfortable Truth as Students Celebrate a Terrorists Who Murdered Children

Myriam Monsonego

A rap song invoking the jihadists responsible for some of France’s most notorious terrorist atrocities has surfaced in videos filmed during student protests at a French high school and inside a church. The incidents raise questions that French officials appear considerably more comfortable avoiding than answering.

The track, “MRH” by rapper BORO700, references Mohamed Merah, who murdered a rabbi and three children at a Jewish school in Toulouse in 2012, and Salah Abdeslam, who was convicted for his role in the November 2015 Paris terrorist attacks. The lyrics also invoke the Bataclan concert hall, where 90 people were slaughtered.

The victims murdered by Merah outside the Hatzolah Jewish school in Toulouse were Rabbi Jonathan Sandler, his two sons, Gabriel and Arieh, aged four and five, and eight-year-old Myriam Monsonego, the daughter of the school’s principal.

These were not anonymous casualties of some distant conflict. They were children attending school, a rabbi and a father, people whose lives were ended by a man who had made the murder of Jews his objective. One might reasonably expect their memory to command a degree of respect, even among those who have little regard for France’s Jewish community. Apparently, that expectation is too ambitious.

One video circulating on social media shows students singing the track at François-Villon high school in Beaugency, in the Loiret region, during a school blockade on October 1.

The students could be heard shouting French lyrics translated into English as: “Like Mohamed Merah, dodging the cameras,” and “Bataclan, I shot him with my eyes, manhunt, Salah Abdeslam.”

The Orléans prosecutor’s office opened a preliminary investigation into suspected “apology for terrorism.” According to French media reports citing the prosecutor, three minors were placed in police custody on October 7. The term “apology for terrorism” refers to the public presentation or justification of terrorism, or the favorable portrayal of terrorist acts or their perpetrators, in circumstances that may constitute a criminal offense.

The investigation concerns the song’s lyrics and does not, by itself, establish the intentions of the students who sang them. That distinction matters. But it does not make the content any less disturbing.

The song also appeared in a video filmed on October 4 inside Saint-Hilaire church in Soullans, in western France. This was a separate incident, unrelated to the high school blockade.

A group of Muslim teenagers entered the church, where they sang and danced to the rap track celebrating Mohamed Merah and Salah Abdeslam. The church was subsequently closed following the incident, which was described as a desecration.

The municipality confirmed that the young people involved were minors. It urged residents not to circulate the footage, warning that doing so could expose the teenagers and inflame tensions.

“There is every reason to believe that the young people concerned did not fully appreciate the impact of their actions or the meaning of some of the words that were broadcast,” Soullans Mayor Vincent Jolly wrote on Facebook.

This is a remarkable degree of solicitude for the possible innocence of those involved, particularly when set against the complete absence of any comparable innocence in the crimes being celebrated.

One can understand the desire to prevent minors from being publicly identified and subjected to harassment. That is a legitimate concern. But protecting young people from online vigilantism is not the same thing as pretending they could not have understood the significance of their behavior.

They entered a church and danced to a song invoking men responsible for the murder of Jews and the slaughter of concertgoers. Perhaps some of them did not understand every word. Perhaps some were simply following their friends. The investigation may establish more about their motives. But the instinct to explain away the incident before those facts are known is itself revealing.

At a time when European governments repeatedly insist that social cohesion is paramount, one might ask why the burden of demonstrating tolerance so often appears to fall on the people whose institutions have been violated and whose communities have been targeted.

Between March 11 and 19, 2012, Mohamed Merah, a French citizen of Algerian origin, carried out a series of jihadist attacks in Toulouse and Montauban. He killed seven people, including two soldiers, a rabbi and three Jewish children aged three, five and eight.

Merah, human post-digestive matter

“The Islamic faith has nothing to do with the insane motivations of this man,” former French President Nicolas Sarkozy said in response to the murders.

Merah had used a GoPro camera to record his attacks, producing footage set to music and verses from the Qur’an.

Sarkozy’s declaration belongs to a long tradition of political reassurance in the face of Islamist violence. The intention is understandable. No serious person should hold every Muslim responsible for the crimes of a jihadist. But the sweeping insistence that Islam has nothing to do with the motivations of an Islamist terrorist is not a serious way to understand the problem.

It recalls George W. Bush’s remarks less than a week after September 11, when he assured the American public that “the face of terror is not the true faith of Islam. That’s not what Islam is all about. Islam is peace.”

Such statements may offer immediate political comfort. They also risk closing down the very inquiry that a democratic society needs to conduct. If a terrorist invokes religious ideas, identifies himself with an Islamist cause and deliberately targets Jews, it is not enough to declare that his actions have nothing to do with religion. One must examine what the perpetrator believed, how he interpreted those beliefs and why others might find his example worthy of imitation.

The alternative is to substitute comforting declarations for an understanding of the forces at work.

The wording of “MRH” employs slang and is difficult to translate precisely, but its references to Merah, Abdeslam and the Bataclan are explicit.

Mohamed Merah was the man who attacked the Ozar Hatorah Jewish day school in Toulouse. Salah Abdeslam was a participant in the November 2015 Paris attacks, in which gunmen and suicide bombers killed 130 people across several locations. Ninety people were murdered at the Bataclan concert hall, while others were killed at restaurants and outside the Stade de France.

These are not obscure historical figures whose names have been repurposed in some incomprehensible artistic exercise. They are among the most recognizable perpetrators of mass murder in modern French history. Their victims included Jews murdered because they were Jews and ordinary people enjoying an evening of music.

When their names appear in a song performed by students in a school protest and in a church, the obvious question is what the performers understand themselves to be celebrating.

That question becomes particularly uncomfortable against the wider background of unrest in France. School protests, confrontations with authorities and episodes of violence have intensified the debate over immigration, integration and the ability of the French state to maintain order. Some reports have described students engaging in destructive behavior and confrontations with teachers and police. Such incidents should be assessed on their individual facts, rather than automatically attributed to the religious or ethnic backgrounds of those involved.

But neither should those backgrounds become unspeakable when they are relevant to a discussion of ideology, integration or political intimidation.

There is a persistent tendency in parts of the European political establishment to treat these questions as inherently suspect. To raise concerns about Islamist radicalism is to risk being accused of stigmatizing Muslims. To question the consequences of mass immigration is to invite accusations of xenophobia. To suggest that some forms of religious extremism are incompatible with liberal democracy is to be told that one is endangering social cohesion.

The irony is that social cohesion cannot be preserved by refusing to discuss the things that undermine it.

President Donald Trump addressed the unrest in a post on Truth Social, writing: “What’s happening in France is nothing less than out-of-control mass migration. This isn’t about schools; this is about Islam wanting to take over a once great country!”

Trump’s formulation is sweeping and politically charged. It does not establish that every protest, every act of vandalism or every incident involving Muslim youths can be explained by immigration or Islam. Nor does the appearance of a single rap song prove a coordinated effort to impose religious rule on France.

Yet it would be equally foolish to dismiss every concern about immigration and Islamist influence simply because Trump expresses those concerns in provocative terms. His language is not the whole argument, and rejecting his rhetoric does not absolve French leaders of the responsibility to confront the underlying issues.

The French government, for its part, has pushed back against outside interpretations of the protests.

Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot told a parliamentary committee: “You’ll get the Iranians’ version, perhaps the version from some Israelis, perhaps the version from some Americans.”

He said French diplomatic missions were working to communicate the country’s own account of events “so that we have our own narratives to disseminate, rather than being subjected to those of others.”

The language of competing narratives is revealing. A government is entitled to correct inaccurate accounts of events in its own country. It is not obliged to accept every interpretation offered by foreign politicians. But there is a difference between correcting falsehoods and seeking control over the interpretation of uncomfortable facts.

The question is not whether France should allow Iran, Israel or the United States to dictate its understanding of French society. It should not. The question is whether French officials are prepared to examine the evidence without treating criticism from abroad as the principal problem.

Students have been filmed singing lyrics that explicitly reference men responsible for terrorist atrocities. Teenagers have been filmed dancing to the same song inside a church. Prosecutors have opened an investigation into suspected public justification of terrorism. These are the facts as currently reported. Their significance deserves examination, not dismissal as a foreign narrative.

And if the song is merely an instance of youthful provocation, the authorities should be able to establish that through evidence and appropriate investigation. If it reflects something more serious, they should be prepared to confront that possibility as well.

The danger is that France's political leadership will become so preoccupied with managing the language of the debate that it neglects the substance of the problem.

France has a substantial Muslim population, estimated at around one-tenth of the country, although precise figures vary and religious affiliation is not comprehensively recorded in French census data. The overwhelming majority of French Muslims are not terrorists, and their rights must be protected as fully as those of any other citizens. But a government that takes integration seriously must also be willing to discuss the challenges posed by religious extremism, the persistence of antisemitism and the consequences of failing to enforce common civic standards.

These are not mutually exclusive obligations. A country can defend Muslims against collective blame while insisting that the murder of Jewish children is not a subject for celebration. It can protect minors from public harassment while holding them accountable for misconduct. It can oppose anti-Muslim prejudice while confronting Islamist extremism.

Indeed, a liberal democracy that cannot make these distinctions is in danger of surrendering both its moral clarity and its authority.

The history of Europe offers ample warning about the consequences of political leaders who believe that an uncomfortable problem can be managed by avoiding its name. The lesson of Munich is not that every contemporary crisis resembles the appeasement of Hitler. It is that the pursuit of immediate reassurance can become a substitute for confronting a genuine threat.

France does not need theatrical denunciations or simplistic explanations. It needs a government willing to establish the facts, enforce the law and defend the principles on which its republic rests.

The proper response to a song invoking the men who murdered Jewish children and massacred concertgoers is not to leap to conclusions about every Muslim in France. Nor is it to explain away the incident before the investigation has run its course.

It is to ask, without embarrassment and without intimidation, why these men are being invoked at all, what their names signify to those singing about them, and whether France's institutions are prepared to confront the answers.

A republic that cannot ask those questions for fear of offending its own citizens has a much deeper problem than an offensive rap song.

Dear readers, please take time to give a click on the ads on this page--it's one way to support my work and you don't need to purchase anything just to look. Of course, you can Buy Me A Coffee at any amount if you want to support me directly, but no pressure. And finally, consider subscribing if you enjoy the blog--it's free, and totally worth the cost.

Tweet

WORLD LEADERS IN DISBELIEF: Brilliant French Visionary Solves Middle East Conflict By Erasing Hamxs From West Bank With Mind Power

Has the intelligence of gum

NEW YORK — French President Emmanuel Macron stunned the diplomatic world on Tuesday during his speech at the 81st session of the United Nations General Assembly, where he courageously used the power of pure, unadulterated European sophistication to simply wish terrorism out of existence. Dolt.

Standing before the world's premier debating club for wealthy dictators, the French leader boldly unveiled a revolutionary geopolitical strategy: if you just pretend a ruthless terrorist organization does not exist in a specific geographic area, peace will instantly break out.

“Look at what is happening in the West Bank, where every day violations are committed. In whose name?” Macron asked the assembly, adjusting his impeccably tailored suit while presumably imagining a world where reality bends to French intellect. “Hamas has never operated in the West Bank!”

The groundbreaking declaration immediately sent shockwaves through Jerusalem, where Israeli leaders were forced to process the fact that decades of documented terrorist attacks, rocket caches, and intelligence reports were actually just a collective hallucination caused by a lack of fine wine and baguettes . . . unless Macron was either lying or is, what some Jewish people might call him, a schmuck.

Official sources in Jerusalem immediately pushed back against the French president's bold reality-warping experiment, pointing out that reality stubbornly exists regardless of what is said at a UN podium.

“The grotesque absurdity of Emmanuel Macron’s statement is staggering,” the Prime Minister’s Office said.

Israeli officials specifically referenced the tragic death of Netanel Shukrun, a French-Israeli citizen who was murdered earlier in the week in a terrorist attack that apparently occurred in a fictional dimension.

“On Sunday, the eve of Yom Kippur, just two days ago, Netanel Shukrun, a FRENCH CITIZEN and father of six, was murdered in his car by a Hamas terrorist in Judea and Samaria,” the Prime Minister’s Office said. [For those new to Israel geography, Judea and Samaria is what Arabs and their ilk call the West Bank.]

“With his final breath, he [Netanel] told his son to run.”

The Israeli government expressed deep frustration with Western leaders who insist on lecturing democratic nations about counterterrorism while operating with the historical awareness of a goldfish, or better still, a blowfish.

“Hamas terrorists carry out attacks against Jews almost every day,” the statement continued. “They have murdered countless Israeli civilians in Judea and Samaria.”

“Ignorance is NO EXCUSE for erasing their blood,” it concluded.

Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich also jumped into the fray, taking to social media to offer a concise, direct peer-review of Macron's geopolitical thesis.

“President Macron is lying,” Smotrich wrote on X.

“This is just one attack out of hundreds of attacks led by Hamas, which fuels Arab terrorism in Judea and Samaria,” he added.

Undeterred by basic facts or recent events, Macron, ever the scumcrumpet, continued his passionate defense of moral clarity as defined by the French diplomatic core.

“What we need is respect for the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people, for their legitimate right to exist,” Macron said. “This is a necessary condition for the security of the people of Israel and for the very existence of their state, to which we are deeply committed.”

The French president went on to lecture Israel about its own national defense strategy, assuring the room that giving violent terrorists a sovereign state right next door is actually the best way to keep Israeli families safe.

“All those who claim that Israel’s security comes through violating the sovereignty of all its neighbors are making a fatal mistake,” Macron, a total liar said. “They are weakening Israel’s security.”

He also took time to scold critics who suggested that passing UN resolutions and issuing diplomatic statements might not actually stop armed militants who want to destroy the Jewish state.

“Last year, right here, there were about a dozen countries that recognized Palestine,” Macron said. “I hear the cynicism of some people: ‘Recognition on paper, look at the reality.’ But what is our credibility if we continue to remain inactive in the face of Gaza?”

At press time, French diplomats were reportedly working on Macron's next big UN address, which is slated to announce that ISIS was merely a performance art troupe and crime in Paris is completely solved because everyone agreed to stop talking about it.

Hey guys, please take time to check out the sponsors on this page--it's one way to support my work and you don't need to purchase anything just to look. Of course, you can Buy Me A Coffee at any amount if you want to support me directly, but no pressure. And finally, consider subscribing if you enjoy the blog--it's free, and totally worth the cost.

Tweet

CBC Orders Reporters to Stop Calling 9/11 Terrorism, Says “Some Very Unfortunate Aviation-Related Things Happened”

Canadian public broadcaster unveils new journalistic standard requiring typists to avoid words that might accidentally describe reality.

TORONTO, Canada — The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation has issued a stern warning to its typists: under no circumstances should they refer to the September 11, 2001 attacks as “terrorist attacks,” because that would risk introducing dangerous quantities of meaning, politics, emotion and, worst of all, facts into the story.

Instead, CBC typists have been instructed to describe 9/11 as “a situation where some folks did stuff in America as a prescient sign that one day Donald Trump would be President.”

The memo, authored by CBC News senior director of journalistic standards and public trust Basem Boshra, was considerably less colorful but no less bewildering.

“Do not refer to the Sept. 11 attacks as terrorist attacks,” the memo said.

The directive instead recommends describing the attacks as hijackings that led to passenger jets crashing in Washington, D.C., Pennsylvania and Manhattan.

The World Trade Center was also destroyed, apparently by forces that CBC typists are not at liberty to characterize.

CBC officials defended the policy by explaining that the word “terrorist” is simply too emotionally loaded.

“It is the practice of the CBC to exercise extreme caution before using the words ‘terrorist’ and ‘terrorism,’” CBC Public Affairs Director Kerry Kelly said.

This is understandable.

After all, imagine the emotional trauma a CBC reporter might experience by typing the words “19 al Qaeda terrorists hijacked four airplanes and deliberately murdered nearly 3,000 people.”

That is an awful lot of adjectives.

Much safer to write:

“Nineteen individuals participated in an aviation-related disagreement that unfortunately resulted in several buildings becoming unavailable for future occupancy.”

CBC editors reportedly rejected the phrase “mass murder” because it was considered “judgmental.”

“Death,” meanwhile, is apparently acceptable because it can happen naturally.

“Premeditated murder” remains under review.

“Islamist terrorism” has been referred to the CBC’s Department of Extremely Careful Feelings.
CBC: We Don’t Call Terrorists Terrorists Because That Would Be Taking Sides

CBC News general manager and editor-in-chief Brodie Fenlon previously explained that the organization prefers to “bear witness” rather than independently determine whether acts are terrorism.

“We bear witness. But CBC News does not itself designate specific groups as terrorists, or specific acts as terrorism, regardless of the region or the events, because these words are so loaded with meaning, politics and emotion that they can end up being impediments to our journalism,” Fenlon said.

Which is an impressive position for a news organization.

It is roughly equivalent to a weather forecaster saying:

“We don't independently designate rain as wet because ‘wet’ is such a loaded term.”

Or a hockey announcer saying:

“We cannot characterize the puck as having entered the net because the phrase ‘goal’ carries political and emotional implications.”

Or a coroner saying:

“We can confirm that the individual is no longer participating in the ongoing experiment known as life.”

The CBC is simply committed to maintaining neutrality.

Even when neutrality requires pretending everyone else hasn't already figured out what happened.
New CBC Style Guide Released

Sources say CBC editors are now considering a comprehensive update to their style guide.

Under the proposed rules:

Terrorist attack: “An event involving unexpected violence.”

Suicide bomber: “A person experiencing a severe disagreement with mortality.”

Hostage-taking: “An involuntary relocation experience.”

Murder: “An unauthorized termination of another person's biological processes.”

Massacre: “A gathering that ended with an unusually high number of people no longer gathering.”

Hamas: “A group whose designation as a terrorist organization should be attributed to Canada, Israel, the United States, Australia, the United Kingdom, Germany, France and approximately half the planet.”

9/11: “The Sept. 11 attacks.”

Actual terrorism: “Please consult Legal.”

The CBC is particularly sensitive about the word “terrorist” because it might imply that someone who deliberately murders civilians for political purposes is, in fact, a terrorist. And once journalists start making those kinds of obvious connections, there is simply no telling where it could lead.

Soon they might start saying that criminals commit crimes.

Or that people who intentionally kill innocent civilians are responsible for killing innocent civilians.

Then civilization itself could collapse.

There is, admittedly, one small problem with the CBC's position. The FBI describes 9/11 as the most lethal terrorist attack in history.

Nineteen al Qaeda terrorists hijacked four airplanes, killed nearly 3,000 people and triggered the largest investigation in FBI history.

Canada itself lists al Qaeda as a terrorist entity and states that the organization perpetrated the attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon. But CBC journalists remain bravely unwilling to reach the same conclusion without first consulting someone who has already reached it.

This creates the fascinating possibility that a CBC reporter could stand outside the wreckage of a terrorist attack and say:

“According to witnesses, the FBI, the Canadian government, the American government, the Israeli government, the British government and virtually everyone who has ever looked at this event, this may have been terrorism.”

“But I wouldn't want to speculate.”

New York City Councilwoman Vickie Paladino condemned the guidance, accusing the broadcaster of disregarding the victims and deliberately undermining the historical record.

“The CBC guidance is frankly outrageous and insulting, but it stands as a stark warning for what happens when you allow institutions of public trust to be taken over by leftists and foreign interests,” Paladino said.

“This is not merely a callous disregard for the memory of those who perished on 9/11, it is a deliberate effort to undermine the fundamental truth of what happened that day in direct service to Islamism, as Europe, Canada, and the United States become increasingly overwhelmed by Islamist politics. We must not tolerate it any longer and dedicate ourselves to fighting this poison with every tool we have available before it’s too late,” she continued.

Conservative Canadian MP Rachael Thomas called the guidance “absolutely shameful.”

“The CBC is choosing to redefine terrorism in a way that downplays the atrocity of 9/11. Refusing to call it an act of terrorism dishonors the victims, their families, the survivors, and the first responders who witnessed the horrors of that day. 9/11 was an act of terrorism. Full stop,” Thomas said.

The Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs likewise accused the CBC of “sanitizing” history and presiding over a “collapse of journalistic standards.”

CBC responded that it was merely following its longstanding policy.

Because apparently the collapse of a building is tragic, but the collapse of a journalistic standard is merely a longstanding practice.

The policy is not limited to 9/11. CBC faced similar criticism following Hamas' Oct. 7, 2023 attack on Israel, when journalists were instructed not to independently call militants or soldiers “terrorists” and instead treat the designation as an attributed opinion.

Which raises an obvious question:

If Hamas murders civilians, kidnaps children, takes hostages and deliberately attacks Israeli communities, when exactly does CBC believe the word “terrorist” becomes appropriate?

Apparently, after the reporter has obtained a notarized affidavit from someone willing to accept responsibility for the adjective.

Perhaps the CBC could establish a new editorial hotline.

CALL 1: “Was someone intentionally trying to terrorize civilians?”

CALL 2: “Did they kill people?”

CALL 3: “Does Canada officially designate the organization as terrorist?”

CALL 4: “Is the answer to all three yes?”

CALL 5: “Sorry, we can't make that determination. Please hold for 45 minutes while we locate a sufficiently neutral adjective.”
CBC's New Definition of Journalism

The CBC's position ultimately leaves Canadians with a remarkable picture of modern journalism.

The journalist sees the plane.

The journalist sees the building.

The journalist sees the fire.

The journalist sees the bodies.

The journalist sees the terrorist organization that planned the attack.

The journalist sees the government's official designation.

The journalist sees the FBI's determination.

And then the journalist looks directly into the camera and says:

“Some things happened.”

This is apparently what “bearing witness” means in Canada.

Not telling people what happened.

Not describing what happened.

Certainly not using words that might help people understand what happened.

Just standing there solemnly while history happens nearby.

And if anyone asks whether 9/11 was terrorism, the answer is simple:

According to the FBI, yes.

According to the Canadian government, yes.

According to the historical record, yes.

According to the victims, their families and the first responders, obviously yes.

According to the CBC?

“The Sept. 11 attacks.”

Because apparently after 25 years, nearly 3,000 deaths, four hijacked aircraft and the destruction of the World Trade Center, the most dangerous thing about 9/11 is still the possibility that a CBC reporter might accidentally call a terrorist a terrorist.

Thanks for following Brain Flushings. Please take time to check out the sponsors on this page--it's one way to support my work and you don't need to purchase anything to do so. Of course, you can Buy Me A Coffee at any amount if you want to support me directly. And finally, don't be afraid to subscribe if you enjoy the blog--it's free, and worth the cost.

Tweet

POTUS says the US is "starting the process of clearing out" Strait of Hormuz

The United States is beginning to clear sea mines laid by Iran in the Strait of Hormuz as the two-week ceasefire remains in effect, President Trump announced on Saturday morning.

Trump said the only threat that Iranian forces had left was that a ship may “bunk” into their sea mines, which the Islamic regime apparently can’t locate. Trump suggested this was the case because Iran doesn’t have the means to retrieve them.

“All 28 of their mine dropper boats are also lying at the bottom of the sea,” he wrote on Truth Social. [You gotta love 'mine dropper boats'. Technically they're called minelayers.]

“We’re now starting the process of clearing out the Strait of Hormuz as a favor to Countries all over the World, including China, Japan, South Korea, France, Germany, and many others,” he said. “Incredibly, they don’t have the Courage or Will to do this work themselves.”

Shortly before the announcement, Axios reported several U.S. Navy ships crossed the strait on Saturday in a move that was not coordinated with the Islamic regime.

Iranian state media reported that Tehran threatened to attack a U.S. destroyer if it continued sailing toward the Strait of Hormuz, communicating their warning to a mediator in Pakistan. The U.S. did not receive word of such a warning, according to an Axios reporter.

Both sides are engaging in peace talks in the Pakistani capital of Islamabad on Saturday after a tentative deal to pause the fighting was made earlier this week. Vice President JD Vance is heading the U.S. delegation.

A U.S. official said the operation was “focused on freedom of navigation through international waters,” referring to the sea mine recovery efforts.

Trump continues to boast that much of Iran’s military capabilities are destroyed and its senior leaders, including Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, have been killed.

“Their Navy is gone, their Air Force is gone, their Anti Aircraft apparatus is nonexistent, Radar is dead, [not Radar O'Reilly from M*A*S*H* since capitalizing that word might have confused older readers] their Missile and Drone Factories have been largely obliterated along with the Missiles and Drones themselves and, most importantly, their longtime ‘Leaders’ are no longer with us, praise be to Allah,” he said in a comment appearing to mock Islam.

Look, this is classic Trump, turning a military mop-up into a global public service announcement while the mullahs are still pretending they have a navy. The Iranians spent years bragging about their "asymmetric warfare" with those cheap little mine boats, and now all 28 of them are decorating the seafloor like some kind of underwater parking lot for losers.

The man is out here doing the world a solid, clearing the Strait of Hormuz so China and Europe do not have to get their soft little hands dirty, and they are still too cowardly to say thank you. 

Meanwhile, Tehran is issuing threats through Pakistani middlemen like it's 1979 all over again. Newsflash, guys, your destroyers are at the bottom of the ocean, your leaders are checking in with Allah and the Goats, and nobody in Washington even got the memo on your big scary warning.

This is what winning looks like when you actually have a president who is not interested in managed decline. The mullahs are finished, their toys are smashed, and Trump is out here mocking them in their own holy language. Praise be, indeed.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Thank you for following Brain Flushings. Please consider to support my work simply by checking out the sponsors on this page. It really helps. You can even click on Buy Me A Coffee in the sidebar if you want to show your appreciation. It helps to keep me going, but really, there's  no pressure.

Tweet

Arc de Triomphe terror: police officers targeted in mass stabbing

A mass knife attack targeting police officers unfolded near the iconic Arc de Triomphe in Paris on Friday evening, right during the solemn rekindling ceremony of the Flame of the Unknown Soldier. The Islamist suspect, identified as Brahim Bahrir (or Brahim Bahri in some reports), a known radical with a violent history, tried to stab a gendarme with a knife and scissors. Another officer quickly opened fire, hitting the attacker multiple times. He was rushed to the hospital but later died from his injuries and is currently on his way to Jannah where his 72 virgins await him.

This wasn't the scumcrumpet's first rodeo against law enforcement. Back in 2012, he carried out a stabbing attack on police in Belgium, seriously injuring one officer, and got slapped with a 17-year prison sentence tied to terrorism charges. Yet somehow, he was released early just a couple of months ago and allowed back on the streets in order to make liberals feel good about themselves. 

France has turned the country over to Islamic supremacists, and what do they get? More terror.

The attacker targeted an officer securing the ceremony for relighting the eternal flame honoring unknown soldiers at the Napoleon-era landmark, according to a Paris police official. Another officer shot the attacker, who was hospitalized, the official said.

No bystanders or police officers were injured in the incident, the official told The Associated Press.

The French counterterrorism prosecutor's office has taken over the investigation and sent personnel to the scene. A heavy police presence locked down the area around the monument Friday evening, closing it to the public while the traffic circle stayed open for vehicles. The nearby metro station was also shut down at police request, per the RATP transport operator.

The incident has reignited fierce debate over how France handles repeat violent offenders, especially radicalized ones fresh out of prison, and the glaring security gaps at these major national ceremonies. Investigators are digging into the motive and any deeper extremist ties, but the pattern here is painfully familiar: a known threat gets released, strikes again at a symbolic site, and the public is left wondering why basic common sense wasn't applied sooner.

If you enjoy  Brain Flushings and would like to subscribe or Buy Me a Coffee, or even check out the sponsors on this page, I would appreciate it, as it supports my work and my coffee drinking habit. No pressure and subscribing is free.

Tweet

France Reels Under a Tide of Antisemitic Outrage

France, that cradle of enlightenment, now finds itself submerged in a rising flood of anti-Semitic vitriol, a grim reminder that the oldest hatreds never truly fade. The Jewish community, battered yet resilient, stands appalled at the surge of hostility targeting their institutions, their faith, and their very existence. This is no mere flare-up of prejudice; it is a calculated assault on the soul of a nation that once prided itself on liberty and fraternity.

In recent days, France has been convulsed by a series of anti-Semitic incidents, each more brazen than the last, despite the government’s impotent attempts to bolster security around Jewish sites following last month’s anti-Semitic shooting in Washington, DC. The Jewish community, weary of platitudes, now demands action, not words, as the specter of violence looms ever larger.

On Friday, in the Normandy town of Deauville, Rabbi Eli Lemel, a towering figure in French Jewry, was set upon by three s**t-faced thugs. At 3:30 pm, they descended upon him, fists raining blows to his stomach, their mouths spewing anti-Semitic slurs. 

According to local police, no arrests have been made, a fact that speaks volumes about the state’s faltering resolve. Rabbi Lemel, undaunted, called for spiritual fortitude in the face of this growing malice. “I’m deeply moved by the outpouring of support following the attack. 

Thank God, I’m okay,” he wrote on X. “I was struck and verbally abused in a language I didn’t understand.” His words carry the weight of a man who knows that silence is complicity.

In another grotesque display, a 21-year-old man, already known to authorities for prior offenses, scaled a synagogue in Conflans-Sainte-Honorine, tore down an Israeli flag, and attempted to set it ablaze. The suspect, reportedly intoxicated, confessed to his crime, now facing charges of trespassing in a place of worship, theft by climbing, and causing damage to property on religious grounds. 

One wonders what emboldens such acts if not the creeping normalization of hatred in a society too timid to confront it.

The mayor of Poissy, Sandrine Dos Santos, offered her support, declaring, “[my] solidarity, as well as that of the city, toward the Jewish community directly targeted by these unacceptable antisemitic acts.” She added, “Faced with the increase in violence, our commitment against discrimination remains unwavering and will not waver. We repeat it loud and clear: no form of racism or rejection of others has a place in Poissy.” 

Stirring words, but one cannot help but question their efficacy when the streets tell a different story. It's the old "my heart goes out to them, yadda yadda."

The desecration continued unabated. In southeastern France, near Antibes, three Serbs were apprehended, suspected of defacing Jewish community buildings in Paris with green paint, an act now probed as possible foreign interference. 

Last weekend, the Paris Holocaust Memorial, three synagogues, and a Jewish restaurant were similarly vandalized, the green paint a grotesque signature of contempt. The French government, to its credit, denounced the acts, but denunciations alone do not stem the tide, action does, action with strength.

On Monday, an elementary school in Lyon, unconnected to the Jewish community, was torched and defaced with anti-Semitic and pro-Palestinian slogans, alongside the chilling emblem of the swastika. The fire, mercifully confined to outdoor bathrooms, caused minimal damage, but the graffiti, scrawled across three classrooms, reveals a deeper rot. Local police are investigating the motive, as if the intent were not plain as day, but they'll get down to the bottom of it. Gee, what could it possibly be?

Yonathan Arfi, president of the Representative Council of Jewish Institutions of France (CRIF), minced no words: “The Palestinian cause is used as justification for burning down a school,” he declared, noting that the “Nazification of Israel serves as fuel for crass antisemitism.” 

In a searing post on X, he added, “When a populist pro-Palestinian narrative is allowed to take hold, it is French Jews who ultimately pay the price. The twisted use of the Palestinian cause is turning into a rallying cry of hatred against both Jews and the Republic itself.” His words cut through the fog of moral equivocation, exposing the ugly truth: a cause, however noble in origin, has been hijacked to fuel a vendetta against an entire people.

This contagion is obviously not confined to France. Across Europe, the same poison spreads. 

On Monday, a Jewish cemetery in a Belgrade suburb was desecrated, headstones defiled in the second such incident in Serbia in recent weeks. The pattern is unmistakable: a resurgent anti-Semitism, cloaked in modern grievances, threatens to unravel the fragile threads of civility.

France, and indeed Europe, stands at a crossroads. The Jewish community, voicing “deep concern,” sees these acts not as isolated but as part of a broader surge in hostility. They are right to do so, for when a society permits the vilification of one group, it sows the seeds of its own destruction. 

The question is not whether France will act, but whether it will act before the hatred consumes what remains of its moral credibility.

Hey guys, if you like my blog,  feel free to toss a virtual coffee my way on Buy Me a Coffee  It’s like a high-five with caffeine, and coffee keeps me focused, albeit somewhat hyper. No pressure, it's your call.

Tweet

Bibi responds to UK, Canada, and France's support of Hamas

The UK, Canada and France are supporting Hamas and Britain's Keir Starmer [not to be confused with "Der Stürmer"] is asking Israel to surrender to the terror group. The UK foreign office is cutting ties with Israel and now they cannot hide their anti-Zionist, Jew-hatred.

However, Israel's Prime Minister, Benjamin 'Bibi' Netanyahu has more guts than any UK, Canadian and most EU politicians and has responded in kind to the threats from those disgraceful governments who threaten Israel as it continues to defend itself against Hamas, Hezbollah and Islamists who would commit the genocide they falsely accuse Israel of performing.

Isn't it weird how the Gazan population has grown. Before the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, the population was between 60,000 to 80,000. After the war, about 200,000 refugees tripled the population. Between 1950 to 1967, the population was estimated to be about 245,000 due to the refugee influx, and by 1967, the census was recorded to be 394,000. By 1980, the population hit 431,000 and in 2000 it soared to around 1,100,000 and hit 1,500,000 by 2010. By the end of 2024, the population was estimated to be around 2,100,000, hardly genocide.

Kier Starmer

On Monday, Bibi issued a response to UK, Canada and France's ultimatum to Israel to end the war in Gaza or face sanctions.

“By asking Israel to end a defensive war for our survival before Hamas terrorists on our border are destroyed and by demanding a Palestinian state, the leaders in London, Ottawa and Paris are offering a huge prize for the genocidal attack on Israel on October 7 while inviting more such atrocities,” Israel's Prime Minister said.

“The war began on October 7 when Palestinian terrorists stormed our borders, murdered 1,200 innocent people and abducted over 250 more innocents to the dungeons of Gaza,” he added.

Isn't it noteworthy how the world remained mute about the atrocities committed against Jews, Christians, Muslims and Hindus by Islamists in places such as Somalia, Libya, South Africa, and Nigeria and not a word by the media. But when it comes to the, you know, Jews, well that's a different story.

Anti-Semitism must be defeated and Israel must never surrender to it like Kier Starmer did to the Muslim population whose votes he counts on. Hopefully Britains will wake up.

If you enjoy my blog, feel free to toss a virtual coffee my way on Buy Me a Coffee – it’s like a high-five with caffeine, and coffee keeps me focused. No pressure, it's your call.

Bibi Netanyahu asserts that Macron is "standing with Hamas"

The latest diplomatic spat between Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and French President Emmanuel Macron is a stark reminder of the moral chasm that divides those who confront evil head-on and those who prefer the luxury of posturing from afar.

On Wednesday, the two leaders exchanged sharp condemnations over Israel’s siege of the Gaza Strip, a blockade tightened after Hamas, those scumcrumpets of barbarism, scuttled a six-week ceasefire on March 2, refusing to extend it with further hostage releases. Israel’s response was to bar aid transfers to Gaza, a move it deems essential to squeeze the Islamist terror group. Predictably, this has drawn the ire of certain Western leaders, none more vocal than Macron, whose sanctimonious pronouncements have become a tiresome feature of his presidency. 

It seems that Israel is the only country in the world where once attacked, they should not attack back so hard. Must Israel kill the same number of terrorists, kidnap the same number, mutilate, burn, torture the same number of Gazan civilians as Hamas, et al, did on October 7, 2023? The world loves dead Jews and hates us when we fight back, especially when we're winning.

Macron, garbage human that he is, is never one to miss an opportunity for grandstanding. He unleashed a tirade against Israel, singling out Netanyahu with a venom that betrays more than a hint of personal animus. “What the government of Benjamin Netanyahu is doing is unacceptable,” he declared on TF1, his voice dripping with the self-righteous indignation of a man who has never faced an existential threat.

“There is no water, no medicine, the wounded cannot get out, the doctors cannot get in. What he is doing is shameful.” Think about this: what country on earth is expected to feed the enemy? Did England do that after they bombed Dresden in WW2? Did we do it after we dropped the big bombs on Japan? The West had intentionally killed civilians to end the war, while Israel bends over backwards not to kill civilians because like Hebrew National hotdogs, they must live up to a higher standard.

Not content with this, Macron called on the Trump administration to wield its influence—read: American weapons—to force Israel to relent. “We need the United States. President Trump has the levers. I have had tough words with Prime Minister Netanyahu. I got angry, but they don’t depend on us; they depend on American weapons.” 

One can almost hear the Gallic shrug, as if the complexities of a multi-front war could be reduced to a transatlantic arm-twist. Where was he when the United States saved France from the Germans? Oh, yes, he wasn't born then so it didn't happen.

Netanyahu, to his credit, did not mince words in return. “Macron has once again chosen to stand with a murderous Islamist terrorist organization and echo its despicable propaganda, accusing Israel of blood libels,” he fired back in a statement from the Prime Minister’s Office. 

And of course Bibi isn't wrong. 

Israel, let us not forget, is fighting for its survival after the unspeakable atrocities of October 7, when Hamas butchered and kidnapped scores, including French nationals. “Instead of supporting the Western democratic camp fighting the Islamist terrorist organizations and calling for the release of the hostages, Macron is once again demanding that Israel surrender and reward terrorism,” Netanyahu’s statement continued. “Israel will not stop and will not surrender.” 

Nor should it. To do so would be to capitulate not just to Hamas but to the very ideology that seeks to annihilate the Jewish state and, make no mistake, the civilized world beyond.

And yes, they'll be coming for Christians too and then the gays, atheists, and all who don't pray to the pagan Mecca stone.

This is not the first time Macron has indulged in such moral equivocation. Just a month ago, he took to Twitter—sorry, X—to proclaim France’s position: “Yes to peace. Yes to Israel’s security. Yes to a Palestinian state without Hamas.” 

The naivety is breathtaking, as if a Palestinian state could simply materialize without the taint of terror, and as if Hamas’s removal could be achieved by fiat rather than force. Netanyahu rightly called this “severely mistaken,” warning Macron in a phone call that such a state would be nothing less than a reward for the October 7 savagery. 

Less diplomatically, Yair Netanyahu, Bibi's son, took to X with a blistering retort: “Screw you! Yes to independence of New Caledonia! Yes to independence to French Polynesia! Yes to independence of Corsica! Yes to independence of the Basque Country! Yes to independence of French Guinea! Stop the neo imperialism of France in West Africa!” 

Crude, perhaps, but it exposes the blatant hypocrisy of a garbage French president who lectures Israel on sovereignty while clinging to France’s own colonial relics.

If you enjoy my blog, feel free to toss a virtual coffee my way on Buy Me a Coffee – it’s like a high-five with caffeine, and coffee keeps me focused. No pressure, it's your call. 

What we see here is a familiar pattern: a European leader, insulated by geography and history, casting judgment on a nation under siege. Macron’s words are not just misguided; they are dangerous, lending succor to those who would see Israel erased. 

Netanyahu’s resolve, by contrast, is the bulwark of a nation that knows the cost of weakness. In this clash of worldviews, the choice is clear: stand with the defenders of civilization or with those who, wittingly or not, abet its enemies. 

Macron has made his clear anti-Semitic choice. Let us hope others choose more wisely.

Am Yisrael Chai!

Tweet

France starts proceedings to end anti-Semitic activist group

French Interior Minister Bruno Retailleau 

In a move that reeks of both necessity and nuance, French Interior Minister Bruno Retailleau has announced his intention to dissolve two groups teetering on the edge of public order: Urgence Palestine, a collective that has orchestrated a slew of anti-Israel protests and pushed for a boycott of the Jewish state, and Lyon Populaire, an ultra-right outfit whose own brand of mischief requires no further elaboration. 

The announcement came on Wednesday, and it carries the weight of a government no longer willing to tolerate the fringes that threaten to unravel the republic’s fabric.

Speaking on CNews/Europe 1, Retailleau didn’t mince words when it came to Urgence Palestine. “We must hit the Islamists,” he said, with the precision of a man who knows the difference between a faith and its perversion. “Islamism is an ideology that tries to exploit a religion. There is a disfigurement of faith.” 

These are not the words of a man blindly swinging at shadows; they are a calculated strike at those who would hijack a cause for their own venomous ends. Yet, in the same breath, he extended an olive branch to reason: “We must not disfigure the just cause of the Palestinians,” he said, affirming that “many of our fellow Muslims profess a faith that is perfectly compatible with the values of the Republic.” Except for the part in Islam that calls for the death of Jews and unbelievers.

Urgence Palestine, born in the chaotic aftermath of Hamas’s barbaric attacks on southern Israel on October 7, 2023, and Israel’s subsequent offensive in Gaza, styles itself as a noble coalition of “citizens, associations, trade unions and political organizations and movements mobilized for the self-determination of the Palestinian people,” a people determined to destroy the Jews and take the Jewish State for its own global endeavors. 

The actions of Urgence Palestine betray a darker impulse. The group has churned out demonstrations across French cities, some of which have been rightly banned for their blatant anti-Semitic bile and incitements to violence. It trumpets the faux “resistance of the Palestinian people” and rails against “colonial oppression and imperialist wars,” while accusing France of “complicity in Israeli crimes.” 

Its calls for boycotts and sanctions against Israel, paired with rhetoric about ending the “genocide” in Gaza, reveal a worldview less concerned with peace than with provocation. There is no genocide in Gaza, although the Gazans would like to see it happen to the Jews.

Retailleau’s move is not a blanket condemnation of dissent but a surgical response to those who cloak their extremism in the garb of righteousness. Let's be clear: Islam is a geopolitical movement that has conquered the Middle East and committed genocide of Jews in most Middle East countries.

The dissolution of Lyon Populaire alongside Urgence Palestine signals a government unwilling to play favorites with chaos, whether it comes from the far left or the far right. 

France, it seems, is finally waking up to the reality that tolerating the intolerable only emboldens those who would tear it apart.

If you enjoy my blog, feel free to toss a virtual coffee my way on Buy Me a Coffee – it’s like a high-five with caffeine! No pressure, it's your call.

Tweet

IDF strikes Beirut for first time since ceasefire: anti-Semites fume

 The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) just dropped a hammer on Beirut, lighting up a Hezbollah hotspot in the Lebanese capital. This was the first time they’ve blitzed that town since a truce shut down over a year of slugging it out with the Iran-backed crew.

 
Israel’s war machine rolled into action Friday, zeroing in on a building in Beirut’s southern suburbs—a retaliation punch, they say, for rockets raining down from their northern neighbor. The IDF’s got their story straight: they were hunting a Hezbollah drone stash. Lebanon’s National News Agency backed it up, reporting, “Israeli warplanes struck the Hadath neighborhood in Beirut’s southern suburbs.” 

Meanwhile, Israel kept the heat on, pounding Hezbollah targets down in southern Lebanon like they’re settling an old score.

Over in Paris, French President Emmanuel Macron wasn’t having it. Standing shoulder-to-shoulder with Lebanese President Joseph Aoun, he called the Beirut strike “unacceptable,” growling that it’s the kind of move that “plays into the hands of Hezbollah.” He's obviously stupid or a terrorist sympathizer.

France, part of the ceasefire watchdog crew, is clearly itching to keep this powder keg from blowing sky-high again.

 
But Israel’s Defense Minister Israel Katz isn't backing down. He’s pointing the finger square at Lebanon’s government, saying they’re on the hook for this mess. His warning? “If there is no quiet in Kiryat Shmona and the Galilee communities, there will be no quiet in Beirut either.” Straight-up, no-chill vibes. 

The UN’s Lebanon point person, Jeanine Hennis-Plasschaert, chimed in too, calling Friday’s cross-border fireworks “deeply concerning.” You can almost hear the collective groan—here we go again.

Hezbollah, though? They’re playing the “not me” card. 

The terrorist group denied any hand in Friday’s rocket show—or last Saturday’s, for that matter. They’re swearing up and down they’re still cool with the November ceasefire, the one that was supposed to cap off months of bloody chaos with Israel. And if you believe that, you might think chickens have lips.

Flashback: the group started lobbing rockets and shells Israel’s way right after Hamas kicked off their October 7, 2023, terror spree. That lit the fuse for all-out war—Israel hit back hard, turning Beirut into a punching bag and rolling tanks across the line. This, of course, pissed off the anti-Semite communities in Europe and the USA.

 
The truce deal was the off-ramp: Lebanese troops beefing up the south, Hezbollah pulling its fighters and toys out, and Israel easing back a bit. But with bombs dropping again, it’s looking like that ceasefire’s hanging by a damn thread. Stay tuned—this ain’t over.

Am Yisrael Chai, baby!

"Hey, if you’re enjoying this blog as much as I enjoy writing it, feel free to fuel my caffeine addiction over at Buy Me a Coffee – no pressure, just good vibes!"

Tweet

BREAKING: Jihad attack in France: "Allah akbar" shouted the attacker

France knife attack: One dead and two injured in horror stabbing with suspect on 'terror prevention watchlist' which is as useful as a cloth Covid mask.

One person has died and at least two 'police officers' have been seriously injured in a stabbing in a picturesque French town.

The attack took place at a market in the eastern city of Mulhouse, on the border of Germany, on Saturday afternoon.

The suspect, a 37-year-old man, possibly from Syria, was arrested at the scene. He reportedly yelled "Allahu akbar," which means Allah is greater [although many will deny that exact translation] during the stabbing spree. 

One person has died and at least two have been seriously injured in a stabbing. The seriously injured is believed to be police officers.

The watchlist, called terrorism and radicalization prevention file (FSPRT), uses data from numerous authorities on individuals in the hopes of preventing "terrorist" radicalization, which once again proves that it's as useful as in-line skates for a blowfish.

The list was launched in 2015 following a series of attacks on satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo's offices, as well as a Jewish supermarket where Jews were targeted by the anti-Semitic 'religion of peace.'

The suspect also reportedly has a previous conviction related to advocating terrorism, according to Le Parisien, so this is further proof of how Europe has looked the other way by releasing potential terrorists rather than deporting them in order to protect your own citizens.

Three additional officers were lightly injured in the attack, which occurred during a demonstration, the local prosecutor said.

Mulhouse mayor Michele Lutz said on Facebook: "Horror has seized our city."

She said that the incident was being investigated as a terror attack, though added "this must obviously still be confirmed by the judiciary".


France's useless President Emmanuel Macron reacts after having a phone call with France's Interior Minister about a knife attack in Mulhouse. One can suspect that his heart goes out to the slain victim's family.

Interior Minister Bruno Retailleau is expected to travel to the scene of the attack later today.

France’s national anti-terror prosecutors unit (PNAT) said it was taking charge of the investigation.

Does anyone have doubt about what inspired this latest attack?

Tweet

France's 'Christian terrorist' is not Christian

A crazed stabber in France shouted "In the name of Jesus Christ" as he went about his nefarious business of indiscriminately stabbing people and claiming to be Christian. Finally, the Left had the Christian terrorist they were looking for and the Western media went full-bore into the story.

But . . . the media's narrative got destroyed.

A Frenchman, Henri d'Anselme, heroically intervened to stop an attacker's stabbing rampage. In a recent episode of the popular French podcast, Legend, d'Anselme explained that a magistrate informed him of the attacker's true identity. The magistrate stated, "The perpetrator was not a Christian but a Muslim who had previously served in Bashar al-Assad’s army in Syria and later with the Islamic State." 

The attacker had deceitfully claimed to be a Christian in order to secure asylum in Europe but his jihadi tendencies kicked in and he couldn't help himself.

Below is a rough translation of what d’Anselme says in this video, starting at 56:41. D’Anselme began by recounting his encounter with the attacker in mid-attack:

…so he shouts “in the name of Jesus Christ,” he starts to say, “My wife, my —” I don’t really know what, finally, I don’t remember very well, and I answer, “No, no, no, not Jesus Christ, you have nothing to do with Jesus,” just, in fact, I tell him NO, I shout that. “To me, you have nothing to do with Jesus Christ, you are the devil,” I said that “you are the devil,” and that’s what I said.

That was true enough, but the next day, d’Anselme woke up to find himself in the media crosshairs. They had found their Christian terrorist at last and were anxious to get the word from someone who had been on the scene. D’Anselme recounted:

The next morning, when I was asked, “But what do you think of a Christian who shouted ‘In the name of Jesus Christ?’” I told them then, “I don’t know if he is a Christian or not, it’s almost — don’t look at — what I know is that what he did is fundamentally anti-Christian. We can’t kill children, who are innocence and purity, especially in the name of Jesus Christ, who offered himself as a sacrifice for you. See, it’s not possible, it’s against everything, it’s against the whole Bible.”

This response, of course, made no impression on the media at all. Le Monde’s headline displayed their true fake news agenda: “Annecy knife attack: Suspect Abdelmessih H. is a Christian Syrian refugee who arrived from Sweden.” 

Henri d’Anselme, however, was later given additional information that wasn’t given to the media. He continued:

"We had answers to this question since then. Yes, yes, the guy’s file is known now. I met, moreover, the magistrate who had taken care of his file. He was a former member of Bashar al-Assad’s army, a deserter, affiliated with the Islamic State, who did stupid things with the Islamic State, who found after a while that it wasn’t very funny, who therefore wanted to ask for political asylum in Europe. But he was told that to be able to have political asylum in Europe, you have to be either an Eastern Christian or homosexual, declaring as an Eastern Christian or declaring as homosexual will make the process easier for you. Therefore, he declared himself an Eastern Christian, so in fact he faked his identity in Turkey, and in fact, after that, he began a relationship with a real Christian. Suddenly he rebuilt his life with her in Sweden, but after a while the girl realized the deception. They still had a kid together and so on, but he never went to mass…."

So here we see taqiyya in full swing. Say anything, any lie, as a way to further Islam.

Tweet