There's one thing you have to admit about the President of Estonia, Toomas Hendrik Ilves: he hasn't lied, he has made exactly what he promised he would do during his Presidency of Estonia:
"In foreign policy, he thinks he can fill an important void, serving as the voice for new EU entrants who want to push the EU in two important directions: towards more liberal economics -- he points out that his Estonian Social Democratic Party votes more liberally on economic issues than the German CDU -- and a more pro-U.S. foreign policy." [Cable 06TALLINN582]
And this is exactly what he has done. Of course you could argue that he didn't tell the Estonian citizens, but only the American Embassy, but you can not say he lied...
Ilves is a man of the Elites, and his Presidency has been devoted to work for the Elites.
Well, he has also done two more things: to criticize/attack Russia, sometimes even becoming an obsession (as the President of Estonia, Ilves has mentiones more times Russia than Estonia, in Twitter!), and to defend inmigration. Both things also in the name of the Elites, and both things copying word by word George Soros' discourse, what is not a suprise, as we will say later.
The only question is, now that his Presidency ends, how will the Elites reward him? With the Secretary General of NATO, some position at the European Union or some position in any of their lobbies (Bilderberg, Trilateral -again-, CFR...)?
Ilves attended, George Soros' wedding. [The Baltic Times]. He, like Soros, demanded of the Eastern Europe countries to accept "its" share of refugees in a speech titled "Europe, tear down your walls!" [Politico], in a conference in the Aspen Institue (a think tank, by the way, funded by Carnegie Corporation, the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, the Gates Foundation, the Lumina Foundation, and the Ford Foundation[Wikipedia]).
Ilves said after the Ukraine crisis: "The world order found after the Cold War has been destroyed". [Die Welt]
In the Financial Times article "Estonia president criticises mainstream anti-immigrant sentiment", he praised Merkel's open borders politics: "When I talk about absence of leadership, she [Merkel]’s one of the few people in European politics who’s doing more than sticking her finger in the air to see which way the wind is blowing, (...) Clearly, she’s taken a risk on the refugees issue. But why do you have elected politicians? If you just do politics by poll numbers, then a priori you’re not going to get leadership."
In spanish public opinion, there is the common believe that islamic terrorism started with the invasion of Iraq. It was an illegal stupid move, but islamic terrorism is quite much older. At least, in its current form, its origin can be traced to another american intervention, in Afghanistan, against the USSR.
But the funny point, is how spanish public opinion believe that those people, the ones who "create" wars, oppose opening doors to refugees, when the fact is, that truth is exactly the opposite.
We have written here about many examples of Bilderberg promoting inmigration in Europe (also in the sahpe of refugees) (the most obvious and undeniable is Peter Sutherland), but let's put it in a simple image:
Catalan newspaper Ara brings a photo gallery of children refugees' life with the title "Síria, una guerra amb rostre d'infant" (Syria, a war with children's face), which is an interesting title; does it mena that Syria's war is worst for children than other wars? Or is it referring to refugees? Then it is important to remind that during 2015, only 16% of refugees were children.
But one these photos used, as all those photos of refugee children that we see daily, to convince European citizens of accepting all refugees, shows something that skeptics with the official data have been denouncing: one of the photos shows what many claim are false minors/children among the refugees.
The title says "Adnan, 16 years old..."
...But Adnan is not the only one that looks like an adult in this children's class.
If you want to read more about this subject:
This is one of those photos that from time to time shock the world. They are published in the cover of many newspapers, apear in the news, and are shared in Twitter and Facebook. Usually, there is only a headline with the photo.
You can not imagine anything more sad than what we see in this photo. So it is human, to want to stop it. And here is were propaganda comes in, when the headline is shaped, usually by mass media.
But, for some unknown reason, when we dig behind these iconic photos, we usually find stories that differ from the headline
"2 September: pictures of three-year-old Aylan al-Kurdi, drowned in his Syrian family’s attempt to reach Greece from Turkey, provoke a wave of public sympathy for refugees.
3 September: the slogan ‘refugees welcome’ goes viral; 250,000 people in 48 hours back an ‘Independent’ petition calling for Britain to take its fair share of refugees. Mr Cameron says Britain will fulful its ‘moral responsibilities’."
But, as usual, the complete story was hidden from the public.
1. Abdullah Kurdi was living and working in Istanbul before the sea crossing
2. He and his family were renting a small house paid for by his sister
3. Kurdi worked for £5.50 a day supervising women making Islamic garments
4. A passenger on the doomed boat claims Kurdi was working with the gang
"But once the family settled in Turkey nearly a year ago, could the Kurdis still truly be classed as refugees in the same plight as those sheltering in a dusty tented city?"
So they were not refugees fleeing from death and destruction but migrants looking for a better life. A better life or better teeth for his father...?
I have read many times that the real reason the family took this dangerous trip was because the child's father, Abdullah Kurdi, wanted new teeth. But I couldn't find the source of this version, so I didn't want to publish it.
But here is the source: child's aunt, Teema Kurdi explains in Sky News:
“The situation is that Abdullah does not have any teeth. Another story about it. So I been trying to help him fix his teeth. But is gonna cost me 14,000 and up to do it. He need teeth implant. So when I told him there is now way I can get you the money in one time because dentist need to get paid right away and Western Union usually – if I send them the money – they only allowed 1,000 at a time – not under their name of course – has to be a third person to collect the money and give it them. So I said to him, actually my dad, he come up with the idea, he said to me, "I think if they go to Europe for his case and for our future, I think he should do that, and then we’ll see if he can fix his teeth." And that’s what I did three weeks ago.”
We talked about the counterbalancing of the negative effects on public opinion of the NYE's sex attacks scandal by mass media. In the article from Financial Times that we mentioned, "Women and children refugee numbers crossing into Europe surge", it is told that only 3 of the 58 suspects of the NYE's sex attacks in Cologne were refugees. Like if that made anything better.
As I wrote in January: "Although finally it was admitted that mostly refugees had taken part in the attacks, in the beginning, that much was denied. Like if the possibility that the attacks were committed by previous migrants and not refugees was better... It is better for those, like Merkel, who have opened the doors of Europe to muslims, but not for the common citizens." Now they tell us again they were not refugees.
That shows how silly they think common readers are. So they are not new migrants, they are "old" ones, "locals"... What's the idea that they are trying to sell us? "Don't worry about more refugees coming, we are already fucked up"?
If they were not refugees, how came there were a thousand men celebrating New Year's Eve alone? Where were their wifes and girlfriends? Because some of them must have wifes or girlfriends... They had to be at home. How can this be? Because that's what women do in Islam; stay at home.
And as I wrote in the same article in January: "One way or the other, one truth stands: the rights of women in muslim societies, are worth nothing. One could argue "They are not muslims, they were drinking and partying", yet they come from Muslim countries, and Islam and women rights are just not compatible; just like Islam and democracy are not compatible."
In the last days we have had several examples of how mass media are trying to counterbalance the bad effect on public opinions that had the leaking (because they tried to hide them) of the New Year's Eve sex attacks.
If you needed a prove of the mass media manipulating the public opinion, here you have it.
But what I wanted to take a look at, is the inmigrant sex ratio, mentioned in the first article:
Only adults
Men .....................
73%
................ 86,90%
Women ................
11%
................ 13,10%
Children ..............
16%
Why 86,90% of the refugees were males? Of course they can say that it is a very dangerous journey and that's why men take the risk alone... But that contradicts the official theory: aren't we told that refugees are fleeing from destruction and a certain death in Syria? If that is true, how can these men live their families there to look for a better life. If they are fleeing from war and death, it doesn't make sense the theory that they pretend to bring their families to Europe later, because it could be already too late.
If it was me, I would surely never leave my wife and children in such situation, if it was a matter of life and death, as we are told.
Or maybe just not all the refugees fleeing from war and destruction...?
"IMF says refugee influx could provide EU economic boost.
Migration into Europe could lift GDP via greater state spending and long-term boost to jobs market with negative effects short-lived, says report.
The IMF called on EU governments to help refugees into the job market by easing restrictions on taking up work during the asylum application. Other suggestions include wage subsidies to private employers and temporary exceptions to minimum or entry-level wages, as well as startup funds for immigrant entrepreneurs." [The Guardian]
This links with two previous articles we wrote: about Refugees (read the reference about Peter Sutherland) and about Merkel being praised by the elites media.
What happened in Cologne (and other German cities) in New Year's Eve is the biggest warning we had about the dangers of Europe's current changes. Unlike the terrorists attacks that have shaken several european cities in the past, Cologne's events involved hundreds of men, in absolute impunity. But not only that, they also involved cover-up, and bizarre reactions from politicians.
Because not only the events that took place that night on those German cities were a warning, but even more, what has happened since then.
Just to refresh our memories, let's read how Wikipedia describes the "New Year's Eve sexual assaults in Germany": "During the 31 December 2015 New Year's Eve celebrations, widespread theft, alleged sexual assaults including groping, and at least two alleged instances of rape were reported across Germany, primarily within Cologne. There were also several incidents in Hamburg, several in Frankfurt, one in Stuttgart, theft in Bielefeld, and alleged sexual assault in Düsseldorf. The German Federal Criminal Police Office stated on January 9, the incidents were a phenomenon known in the Arab World as taharrush gamea.
The assaults were unreported by the national media for days and many outlets only started reporting on the incidents on January 5, after a wave of anger on social media made covering the story unavoidable."
So we have around 1,000 North Africans and Arab men in front of one of the most important monuments of Germany (Cologne's Cathedral), harassing women with complete impunity on one of the year's most popular festivities.
"They grabbed our arms... pushed our clothes away, and tried to get between our legs or I don't know where. "They got everything we had in our pockets." She said German police needed to provide more protection for women and girls. "We are all really shocked that something like this could happen, especially at an event like New Year's Eve."
"All of a sudden these men around us began groping us," she said. "They touched our behinds and grabbed between our legs. They touched us everywhere. "So my girlfriend wanted to get out of the crowd. When I turned around one guy grabbed my bag and ripped it off my body." She said she felt in extreme danger, but there were no police officers to help. "I thought to myself that if we stay here in this crowd they could kill us, they could rape us and nobody would notice. I thought we simply had to accept it. "There was no one around us who helped or was in a position to help. All I wanted was to get out. "I was scared that I wouldn't leave this crowd alive. I was scared that if someone showed up with a knife I could be raped in the middle of the street."
I really think people have not comprenhended the importance of what happened: women being attacked with absolute impunity in New Year's Eve in one of the most popular touristic spots in Germany. This reminds me of those ghettos in Belgium were is said that the police just never enter... Only that this happened, as we said, in one of the most popular touristic spots in the whole Germany.
But, if this was not enough, other things happened after the attacks that are not as horrible, but as worrying, as the attacks themselves: "Police and media accused of cover-up to avoid stoking anti-immigrant feeling after witnesses say men who carried out attacks were of Arab appearance". [The Guardian] "German authorities accused of migrant attack cover up." [The Telegraph]
I always been obsessed with how the powers that be deal with information, and how they have manipulated in the past, and still manipulate our perception of events. Our perception of WW2, of the War of Kosovo, and of the conflict in Syria, are being modelled by TPTB and mass media constantly. It's not a coincidence that these events are hidden from the public, because one of the essential elements of democracy is information; if the cititzens go to vote without the whole (important) information and a deformed picture of reality, democracy is just a fiction as matrix.
But surprisingly, the Cologne attacks had the effect of un-covering similar attacks that had already taken place but hid from public knowledge: "As it turns out, the Cologne attacks were not an isolated incident. Once the story started making international headlines, reports began to trickle in from Austria, Finland, and Switzerland where women reported similar attacks perpetrated by apparent refugees.
But none of this would surprise police in Stockholm. According to Swedish media, “hordes” of young men harassed and groped young women at a youth festival and concert in central Stockholm’s Kungsträdgården last August. Those attacks were reported to police who, according to Nyheter Idag, were willing to talk to prominent daily Dagens Nyheter. Unfortunately for the victims, the paper deliberately covered up the story in an effort to avoid triggering an anti-migrant backlash - or at least that’s what Nyheter Idag alleges. Here are some excerpts from the piece entitled “Exposing Major PC Cover-up in Sweden – Leading Daily Dagens Nyheter Refused to Write About Cologne-like Sex Crimes in Central Stockholm”." [Zero Hedge]
So it seems European policitians, police and media have been covering these kind of "events" to "avoid anti-migrant backlash". That's the official explanation. Truth is likely to be that the public knowledge of everything that happens around Islam would surely make their agenda ("EU should 'undermine national homogeneity' says UN migration chief") more complicated.
But if all that didn't seem scary enough, the "cherry of the pie" came with Cologne's Mayor, Henriette Reker, statements after New Year's Eve attacks: "“This means, they [women] should go out and have fun, but they need to be better prepared, especially with the Cologne carnival coming up. For this, we will publish online guidelines that these young women can read through to prepare themselves”." [Breitbart]
So this, dear readers, is the beginning of European women's rights narrowing.
Update:
We are reading lately that the attacks were coordinated. Maybe politicians think that describing these events as a terrorist attacks will make them more isolated and less frightful for the public. I don't agree at all, but we will wait to see what they come up with.
Update:
Although finally it was admitted that mostly refugees had taken part in the attacks, in the beginning, that much was denied. Like if the possibility that the attacks were committed by previous migrants and not refugees was better... It is better for those, like Merkel, who have opened the doors of Europe to muslims, but not for the common citizens.
One way or the other, one truth stands: the rights of women in muslim societies, are worth nothing. One could argue "They are not muslims, they were drinking and partying", yet they come from Muslim countries, and Islam and women rights are just not compatible; just like Islam and democracy are not compatible.
More from Wikipedia on the Cologne attacks:
"On New Years Eve witnesses reported that firecrackers were thrown into a crowd from a group of people of around 500, later in the evening more than 1000, at the square in front of Cologne's Central Station. Following this event, alleged perpetrators exploited the confusion to rob and sexually assault persons in the area and within the station. According to witnesses the alleged attackers surrounded women in groups of 30–40. According to the Cologne police report on 2 January, the suspects mostly used sexual assault (including groping) to distract victims while they robbed them of items such as mobile phones and wallets. The Police indicated that the sizes of the groups ranged from 2 to 20 people.
While Cologne mayor Henriette Reker said in a press conference on January 5, there was "no evidence, that people who are residing in Cologne as refugees are amongst the perpetrators", police president Wolfgang Albers said: "the police has no knowledge about the offenders". To some including the German Minister of justice Heiko Maas, the assaults appeared to be coordinated, the perpetrators having arrived in large groups.
On January 7, several anonymous police officers from Cologne denied statements that the police did not know the nationality of the perpetrators; they told the press that "most of them" would have been freshly immigrated asylum seekers. Contradicting statements from Cologne police leaders, these officers said that the identities of many people, including arrestees, had been thoroughly checked, so that police knew which groups of people were involved. Around 70 people had been checked, and several brought to police stations or taken into custody. The majority of those in detention were Syrians. Also, they denied information that the sexual harassments were only incidental, saying that the truth was "exactly the opposite": Most Arab perpetrators sought primarily to commit sexual offenses, or in their words "sexual amusement". Arnold Plickert, North Rhine Westphalia's representative of German police union Gewerkschaft der Polizei confirmed that asylum seekers were "definitely" involved."
Other cities: "Similar events took place in Hamburg—specifically Reeperbahn, St. Pauli—, where 53 women reported being sexually assaulted or robbed. By January 7 the number of complaints to the police in Hamburg increased to 70, by January 8 to 108, by January 12 to 153.
Crime was also reported in Düsseldorf and Frankfurt (40 complaints), as well as one crime in Stuttgart. In Düsseldorf 41 complaints of sexual assaults and theft were made to the police, after 15 were reported earlier. In Bielefeld several young women were reported to be robbed by men of North African origin in and around a discotheque.
In addition, similar assaults in Austria, Finland, Switzerland, and Sweden were reported."
About what happened in Berlin: "This was Apparently Berlin New Year's Eve. Where they got the Guns is anyone's guess but there was reports of 2 incidents of people shot by stray bullets, at least one death of a girl. A film crew from TV Channel Speigil TV were caught up in filming the incident. They released their video on 3/1/2016. 3rd of January 2016."
It might seem a taboo subject. It is an inappropriate question. But, nevertheless, it remains there: can a migration of the magnitude that we are witnessing in the recent months from Syria to Europe occur spontaneously? And this question needs to be raised.
In our society, there are everyday more taboo subjects, and this is one of them. If refugees came from Eastern Europe we could easily raise this question, but as they are mainly Muslims simply asking this question, it is an act of xenophobia/racism...
But when some issues are swindled from the public, certain groups "fish in troubled waters" and take advantage of them. Depriving society of a serious debate on inmigration has enabled far-right groups to appropriate of this debate and make it theirs. So an "official truth" and a "the alternative truth" have been created; perhaps the two concepts further from the real truth.
Iker Jimenez, Spanish journalist, head of "Milenio 3" radio show and "Cuarto Milenio" tv show, can be criticized for many reasons, but there is a merit that he takes pride of, and that can not be denied: he has touched many issues that never appear in other programs in Spanish mass media, simply because they are uncomfortable. It will do better or worse, but he dares with them. Surely his aura of "freakism" plays against him in terms of credibility, but it also protects him from corporate censorship (official line of the company you work for), and political correctness censorship.
Thus, it appears that is the only known journalist (famous or notorious), who dared to ask this question. In the debate on the refugees drama held in "Cuarto Milenio" (video at the end of this post), some wild ideas were raised, and at some point, some reprehensible statements, but there was also interesting information, such as the reference to Peter Sutherland (that we will discuss later).
So the big question is, who would want this massive refugee arrival?
There is an obvious answer: those Muslim countries that promote Islam in the world. The existence of these countries and their willingness for global Islamisation is undeniable:
"...the best known mosque in our country [Spain], colloquially dubbed as the "mosque of the M-30". A luxury complex of 12,000 m2 and 6 plants built entirely with Saudi money. The Arab country gave 12 million euros to erect its most faithful representation in Spain: gleaming marble walls, a splendid minaret and exhibitions of the prophet's life or the different versions of the Koran. Several guards guard the premises and men in suits come and go without stopping. The center management is provided by the Arabic country that sends its own staff and teaches its doctrine to interpret Islam.
And it is that Saudi Arabia has financed several mosques in our country. Some of the most luxurious are located in Malaga, Fuengirola or Marbella, the prince himself Abdul Aziz Al-Saud had built it to pray during his vacation. But within the community, many fear that the petrodollars bring with ideological wills, that is, the spread of the Wahhabi current: a very conservative vision of Sunni Islam,"
[¿Quién paga las mezquitas? Las finanzas del islam en Europa.]
Is it the same in other European countries? Obviously yes:
"According to the French newspaper Le Figaro, "the public authorities contribute 30% of the construction of places of worship", according to an estimate from the French Interior Ministry. 70% is distributed among the faithful and "the great patrons," reveals Jalul Siddiq El Confidencial, a worker at the Great Mosque of Paris, "governments like Algeria, Morocco and Saudi Arabia paid great works".
(...)
Yahya Birt, director of "City Circle", an association of Muslim professionals in England, said that "the Saudi religious abroad spending is between 2 and 3 billion dollars per year. (...) That has been invested in 1,500 mosques, 210 Islamic centers, schools and Muslim schools”.
(...)
In other European countries with large Muslim communities, such as Belgium and Germany, they receive large sums of nationalities of its immigrant community and the Maghreb and Turkey, respectively."
[¿Quién paga las mezquitas? Las finanzas del islam en Europa.]
This article from El Confidencial updates what already was denounced in the the article by Juan de la Cal in El Mundo in 2005 "El promotor de mezquitas".
To end this subject, two stories that have taken place in recent days, in relation to the arrival of refugees:
But that doens't answer another question, probably more intriguing: why European governments are so ineffective in front of a disaster of the magnitude of this one (and has no prospects of being solved, but on the contrary, as the New York Times noted, and we will explain later)? Moreover, are the Western powers collaborating in this movement?
Let's remember what happened in Spain during the housing boom: the false Spanish economic growth (based on the housing bubble) was made possible by the arrival of immigrants, who, as was repeated insistently, came to develop "the jobs that Spaniards didn't want to do" and "were essential to sustain that growth". In retrospect, it is clear that this arrival, that supported this false growth, (which was actually only inflating the bubble), was a mistake, Therefore, the arrival of immigrants was not only unnecessary, but counterproductive.
Was it simply an act of political and economic blindness, or was something else? We might think that it was the former (the Spanish government has given big evidence of political blindness with subsequent consequences (see its management of "the Catalan question"), but relevant events in other countries, make us suspect that it may be the latter.
The arrival of immigrants in recent months, and the response of Germany, welcoming immigrants without even considering any measures to stop this migration (as did, right or wrong, Russia), and deciding to force all countries in the EU to "take over" "a proportionate share", leads us to think not.
And here is where the aforementioned reference to Peter Sutherland, that can be checked from the BBC, can bring a new light on this matter:
- Special Representative for Migration, of the United Nations.
- Honorary Chairman of the Trilateral Commission (2010 -).
- Director-General of the World Trade Organization (formerly G.A.T.T.).
- Non-executive Chairman of Goldman Sachs International.
And formerly:
- Chairman of the Committee that produced The Sutherland Report on the completion of the Internal Market of the EEC.
- Non-executive chairman of BP.
- He served on the steering committee of the Bilderberg Group, until May 2014.
- European Commissioner for Competition (1985-1989).
- Attorney General of Ireland (1981-1982).
- Chairman of the Trilateral Commission (Europe) (2001–2010).
- Vice chairman of the European Round Table of Industrialists (2006–2009).
The big question is, why the powers that be would want to destroy the homogeneity of the European countries? The economic arguments do not hold up at all.
is unfounded: for these three countries are former colonial countries, countries of immigration since its formation, that is, beyond which the identity their "founding fathers" wanted to create, they never had a previous identity to its creation as states.
So if the economic explanation is not real, what is the real reason? Hard to imagine, but here's a theory, similar to what I've been thinking, but better exposed:
"So if radically open borders make no sense in terms of prosperity, then why push for them? Perhaps it's a case of multinational big business chafing against any types of restrictions on its operations. Perhaps those who see themselves as international movers and shakers see the more closed loyalties of the nation state as limiting the control of a globalist bureaucracy. Perhaps too it's the enduring influence of a right liberal ideology in which what is thought to matter is a self-determining life and so it's thought to be immoral for something predetermined, like ethnicity, to influence where we might choose as individuals to live or to work." [Mark Richardson]
Peter Sutherland is the head of the Global Forum on Migration and Development (GFMD), a "UN initiative" that has been proposed to carry out the goal stated by Sutherland:
"The Civil Society sub-committee of the GFMD meeting in Istanbul has already been tasked with achieving that ambition. According to its published five-year plan, the committee will work towards enhancing migrant labour “mobility”, “migrants’ rights protection” and “regulation of migrant labour recruitment processes”.
Defusing “tensions between the Western and the Islamic worlds” is another key theme of GFMD while “eliminating hate speech” is also high on the agenda.
It would be easy to dismiss the GFMD as a spectacularly funded debating society with little prospect of influencing national policies but it does have the ear of the UN and is granted its own special envoy in the form of Mr Sutherland.
Given that Turkey now plays host to an estimated 2 million migrants en-route to new homes in Europe, courtesy of the illegal migration path across the Mediterranean and Angela Merkel’s offer of a home in Germany to anyone who turns up on that country’s border, don’t be surprised if some of the ideas discussed in Istanbul quickly turn up on the UN’s own agenda." [Breitbart]
"There are more displaced people and refugees now than at any other time in recorded history — 60 million in all — and they are on the march in numbers not seen since World War II. They are coming not just from Syria, but from an array of countries and regions, including Afghanistan, Iraq, Gaza, even Haiti, as well as any of a dozen or so nations in sub-Saharan and North Africa. They are unofficial ambassadors of failed states, unending wars, intractable conflicts.
The most striking thing about the current migration crisis, however, is how much bigger it could still get.
While the flow of migrants to Europe this year already represents the biggest influx from outside the Continent in modern history, many experts warn that the mass movement may continue and even increase — possibly for years to come. “We are talking about millions of potential refugees trying to reach Europe, not thousands,” Donald Tusk, the president of the European Council, said in a recent Twitter posting."
Cuarto Milenio: Refugiados, La realidad oculta 25-10-2015.
