In the Chapelle-Pajol neighborhood of eastern Paris, local women fear to venture outside because of the extreme harassment coming from the new residents, namely Muslim men with misogynous beliefs that come from the Koran and other religious texts.
France has been invaded before, but this time American soldiers won’t be coming to the rescue.
President Macron is apparently a post-sovereignty fellow who cares more about the diversity religion than the safety of his own citizens.
Below, In the Chapelle-Pajol district, foreign men have marked the streets as their territory, and women have become unwelcome and unsafe in their homeland.
While we’re on the subject of diverse immigration, why does America continue to admit supremacist Muslims when their cultural values are repulsive and some of them aim to kill us? It’s silly to believe that violent, misogynist Muslims will readjust their thinking just because of a change in locale. When their numbers increase to a larger percent of the population, they will become more bold in their hostility. Why import trouble?
Women in this part of eastern Paris complain that they can not move about without being subjected to comments and insults from men.
They are several hundred square meters of road abandoned to men alone, and women are no longer entitled to be there. Cafes, bars and restaurants are prohibited, as are the sidewalks, the subway station and the squares. For more than a year, the Chapelle-Pajol district (10th-18th administrative districts) has completely changed its face: groups of dozens of lone men, street vendors, aliens, migrants and smugglers hold the streets, harassing women.
Disgusted, the inhabitants of the neighborhood decided to launch a large petition to denounce the situation. Every day becomes more and more oppressive. Young girls, who can no longer go out alone, cannot wear a skirt or trousers that cling too close to the body without receiving a lash of insults: one of them tells of having her hair lit up by a cigarette.
“Continuous unkind remarks”
“We are all subjected to unbearable treatment,” says Nathalie, 50, who has lived in the neighborhood for thirty years, and a “hostile” climate in recent months: “These are insults, incessant unkind remarks. The atmosphere is agonizing, to the point of having to modify our itinerary, our clothes. Some even have given up going out,” such as the old lady of 80 years who was sexually assaulted as she returned to her building, and is now entrenched in her apartment. Continue reading this article
With the French election coming up where Marine Le Pen looks like a contender, Islam diversity issues are front and center. A English-language news website for France recently reported on a December incident that bodes poorly for the future of French women in an increasingly Islamified nation: two women were told to leave a Muslim bar because of their gender.
Women simply cannot live according to western values of freedom in Muslim neighborhoods without endangering themselves.
Islam cannot be fixed because it regards itself as perfect; therefore it can only be quarantined, and immigration from Muslim nations should end.
The video following is an English explanation of the bar incident:
Muslim immigration has changed France profoundly.
The Local report on the No-Go Bar started out well enough, but had to finish the piece with complaints of how Muslims residing in France feel “besieged” because of unfair stigmas being attached to them. They should return to Islamistan if living in France is so objectionable, but they won’t.
And if these men are such great Muslims, why are they hanging out in a bar and drinking alcohol which is forbidden by Islam?
France has been left divided after hidden cameras footage revealed men in an “Islamic” bar in Paris telling women they weren’t welcome.
Amar Salhi is still amazed at how his scruffy bar north of Paris sparked an election scandal after it featured on national television in December during a report about Islam and women.
In footage shot with hidden cameras and broadcast during prime-time by state media giant France 2, two women activists were seen facing a hostile welcome as they tried to go for a drink in the Jockey Club.
“There’s no mixing in this bar,” one client was heard saying.
“You’re not in Paris here… it’s a different mentality, it’s like the village back home (in north Africa),” said another.
One of the women left disgusted, comparing the situation in the multi-ethnic suburb of Sevran to Saudi Arabia.
In a matter of hours of the report airing, social media lit up with comments, from members of the far-right National Front but also others across the political spectrum appalled by the sight of women’s rights being trampled.
In the minds of some, the report appeared to crystallise widespread fears about the impact of immigration or Islamists imposing their rules in a country traumatised by a series of deadly terror attacks since 2015.
“Here’s the result of decades of submission,” wrote National Front vice-president Florian Philippot.
Salhi’s business became a punching bag as the Socialist party selected its presidential candidate in January, and has been a feature in speeches and debates ever since. Continue reading this article
In the spirit of No Good Deed Goes Unpunished, the New York Times bashed Hungary and its Prime Minister Viktor Orban for defending the nation’s freedom and sovereignty.
On Wednesday, the Times dedicated a big chunk of its above-the-fold real estate to picturing an Afghan family who experienced Hungary’s policy of detaining Muslim foreigners rather than welcoming Europe’s historic enemy.
If Hungary is indeed “hostile to migrants” as the Times says, that opposition has a deep historical cause of war and oppression.
But even as the Times criticizes “authoritarian” Orban, it admits “the rest of Europe is coming around to his approach.” Familiarity breeds contempt — particularly when the subject is barbarian Islam!
HORGOS, Serbia — Double rows of razor-wire fences. High-tech watch towers equipped with search lights, motion sensors, cameras and loudspeakers. Hungary’s border with Serbia, specially fortified in the last two years to keep out migrants and refugees, is anything but a welcome mat.
Now, add to those deterrents detention camps — small container villages surrounded by razor wire, with a tiny playground for children.
Hungary, which already had one of the toughest immigration policies in the European Union, last month rolled out a draconian new asylum procedure that will reduce applicants to a trickle — 10 people a day — and essentially put them in prison camps for months while their cases are decided. Even after that, if the recent past holds true, more than 90 percent are likely to be rejected.
By May, several hundred asylum seekers already in Hungary may also be relocated to the detention camps, evoking ugly and unavoidable echoes of rounding up Jews, Roma and others during World War II.
But if Hungary’s authoritarian prime minister, Viktor Orban, provoked a loud outcry from his European peers by slapping up a razor-wire border fence two years ago as hundreds of thousands of migrants flooded into Europe, this time the condemnation, at least from his political peers, is more muted.
It is a measure of just how much the winds have shifted in his favor and against asylum seekers in Europe as nationalist, populist, far-right movements present a potent threat in a year filled with important elections, next in France and Germany.
If anything these days, Mr. Orban feels a sense of vindication and insists that the rest of Europe is coming around to his approach. He may be right. Continue reading this article
Sunday’s Washington Post had a major front-page story highlighting Wednesday’s election in the Netherlands and how immigration is an important issue with voters.
Naturally, the Post is shocked that liberal Holland would reject open borders and Muslim diversity. It regards any deviation from the one-worlder doctrine to be “far right.” The paper observes, “the Netherlands has been relatively insulated from mass immigration” — but that’s only in comparison with neighbors like France that have turned into armed camps to keep their streets safe.
The article was clearly written before violent protests broke out among Turkish residents who were angered at the Netherlands blocking the Turkish foreign minister from visiting. The official intended to promote homeland politics among dual citizens to increase voter interest in an upcoming referendum that would give more power to President Erdogan. Dutch riot police used batons and water cannons to break up the thousands of Turks who had responded to social media calls for them to complain at their embassy in Rotterdam about the alleged insult. Erdogan called the Dutch “Nazi remnants” over the affront, so the situation is a diplomatic stinker.
The chaotic scene did not reflect well upon diverse immigration a few days before the Dutch election. The mess won’t hurt the candidacy of Geert Wilders, who fired off a strong message to Turkish citizens, telling them to forget about EU membership and an open border to the continent:
The Post clings to the liberal belief that people wanting to maintain their culture and public safety are somehow “fringe” when those values are entirely normal.
RISING RIGHT | A periodic examination of the people and pressures driving European politics away from the mainstream — and toward the fringe.
AMSTERDAM — Xandra Lammers lives on an island in Amsterdam, the back door of her modern and spacious four-bedroom house opening onto a graceful canal where ducks, swans and canoes glide by.
The translation business she and her husband run from their home is thriving. The neighborhood is booming, with luxury homes going up as fast as workers can build them, a quietly efficient tramway to speed residents to work in the world-renowned city center, and parks, bike paths, art galleries, beaches and cafes all within a short amble.
By outward appearances, Lammers is living the Dutch dream. But in the 60-year-old’s telling, she has been dropped into the middle of a nightmare, one in which Western civilization is under assault from the Muslim immigrants who have become her neighbors.
“The influx has been too much. The borders should close,” said Lammers, soft-spoken with pale blue eyes and brown hair that frames a deceptively serene-looking face. “If this continues, our culture will cease to exist.”
To Europe’s powers that be, the threat looks dramatically different but no less grave: If enough voters agree with Lammers and support the far right in elections here on Wednesday and across the continent later this year, then it’s modern Europe itself — defined by cooperation, openness and multicultural pluralism — that could come crashing down.
The stakes have risen sharply as Europeans’ anti-establishment anger has swelled. In interviews across the Netherlands in recent days, far-right voters expressed stridently nationalist, anti-immigrant views that were long considered fringe but that have now entered the Dutch mainstream. Continue reading this article
Today’s anti-American mainstream media is a far cry from the patriotic press that boosted US efforts during WWII. The current crop of journalists live in thrall of diversity ideology, even when the foreigners in question have been the historic enemy of Western civilization for over a thousand years.
The recent weeks’ shrieking about the rights of unscreened Muslims to enter America at will were particularly disturbing. President Trump was bashed by the media for protecting national security with his time-out for immigrants and visitors from several sketchy Islamic nations. For example on January 28, the New York Times editorial board opined, Donald Trump’s Muslim Ban Is Cowardly and Dangerous.
The pause wasn’t a Muslim ban, since it didn’t effect the vast majority of allah acolytes across the globe. But what would be wrong with a Muslim ban anyway? America didn’t have German immigrants during WWII even though not every German was a Nazi. And make no mistake, jihadist Islam is at war with us.
Don’t New York City scribblers ever reflect upon the big hole in the ground where the World Trade Center once stood? Can they not remember that the 2001 attack that took nearly 3,000 lives was an act sanctioned by Islamic scripture? (Perhaps the next jihad will hit the New York Times building.)
Robert Spencer recently considered the state of media today, when the jihadist enemy facing civilization is every bit as evil as the Nazi one of the previous century. Would the New York Times have fretted about anti-Nazi bigotry among xenophobic Americans then? Probably.
What if World War II had been reported the way the establishment media writes about the global jihad today? The question is pertinent in light of the ongoing demonization of Trump adviser Steven K. Bannon, who is now being vilified by establishment media for a ten-year-old unproduced film project discussing the jihad threat.
Matea Gold of the Washington Post described the film in lurid terms:
The flag fluttering above the U.S. Capitol is emblazoned with a crescent and star. Chants of “Allahu Akbar” rise from inside the building.
That’s the provocative opening scene of a documentary-style movie outlined 10 years ago by Stephen K. Bannon that envisioned radical Muslims taking over the country and remaking it into the “Islamic States of America,” according to a document describing the project obtained by The Washington Post.
San Ramon, California is a suburban community of around 72,000 located 34 miles east of San Francisco. The city is the first place in the nation where self-driving vehicles are allowed to function without a backup human driver in the seat, albeit in a limited situation. The shuttles scoot along at a safe 12 miles per hour on a pre-determined route in a business park — but this is a major step into the brave new automated world within the vehicle category.
For more on advanced bus technology, see Robotic Buses Leapfrog Self-Driving Trucks in Autonomy Revolution.
Driver is a job category that employs over three million workers in the United States, and those jobs are about to be made obsolete for humans over time because the machines coming on line are said to be safer and are certainly cheaper to run.
There needs to be a discussion in Washington of the approaching social earthquake when a substantial portion of the American workforce is no longer employable because of smart machines. For starters, America can stop importing immigrant workers, because they are not needed now and even less so in the automated future.
SAN RAMON — Vehicles that make steering wheels, accelerators, brake pads — and even human drivers — obsolete made their debut Monday at an East Bay business park.
The futuristic cubes get around using 21st Century technology, including lasers on all four corners, GPS navigation, and sensors that detect obstacles.
And the sensors work. At least they did during a demonstration at Bishop Ranch business park in San Ramon when Habib Shamskhou, who is working with the pilot program, stepped in front of a moving shuttle to prove a point.
The shuttle lurched to a stop, prompting a confident Shamskhou to raise his hands above his head and beam with a smile that read “See, told you.”
The shuttles, made by the French company EasyMile, are in the second phase of a pilot program that began last summer with testing at Concord’s GoMentum Station. Now, two of them are transporting workers within the Bishop Ranch complex of office parks. They are expected to be on public streets surrounding the office park by the end of the year, said Randy Iwasaki, Executive Director of the Contra Costa Transportation Authority.
Although other driverless cars (Google for example) exist and have been testing on public roads, they require a steering wheel and driver behind the vehicle during tests. Thanks to recent California legislation, these shuttles would be the first driverless shuttles in the nation to be operating on public roads. Continue reading this article
The Los Angeles Times is astounded that President Trump wants immigration to be a legal process, and admitting foreigners should not endanger the safety of Americans.
In short, immigration should not be a suicide pact, but the Times finds that notion to be radical. The Times rejects out of hand the many arguments to restrict immigration both by numbers and culture. Many Americans have noticed the various negative symptoms arising from excess: too many immigrants lower American wages, some diversity (Muslim!) is dangerous, surplus population draws down water supply, worse traffic happens, creeping bi-lingualism pops up, schools are flooded with non-English speakers, criminal gangs infiltrate, free speech is crushed because “sensitivity” etc. ad nauseum.
We get regular sermons from the elite media about the joy of diversity because humans normally prefer to around those who share the same values, language and culture. The article under consideration must be considered to be a rather scolding sermon.
The Times’ Tuesday front page revealed their shockeroo discovery: the Trump administration regards immigration enforcement seriously.
Actually, the Times gets spun up in its diversity ideology with the typical liberal lie of conflating legal and illegal immigration: in fact, there’s no indication from President Trump that he intends to round up millions of legal immigrants, which would unlawful. The invaders may want to avoid driving drunk and other crimes, though.
The piece also claims that no terrorists have come from the seven countries covered by the temporary travel ban, but investigation has found 72 active jihadists from those places.
Behind President Trump’s efforts to step up deportations and block travel from seven mostly Muslim countries lies a goal that reaches far beyond any immediate terrorism threat: a desire to reshape American demographics for the long term and keep out people who Trump and senior aides believe will not assimilate.
In pursuit of that goal, Trump in his first weeks in office has launched the most dramatic effort in decades to reduce the country’s foreign-born population and set in motion what could become a generational shift in the ethnic makeup of the U.S.
Trump and top aides have become increasingly public about their underlying pursuit, pointing to Europe as an example of what they believe is a dangerous path that Western nations have taken. Trump believes European governments have foolishly allowed Muslims with extreme views to settle in their countries, sowing seeds for unrest and recruitment by terrorist groups.
“Take a look at what’s happening in Sweden. Take a look at what’s happening in Germany. Take a look at what’s happened in France. Take a look at Nice and Paris,” Trump said Friday during a speech to the Conservative Political Action Conference, referring to riots last week in a predominantly Muslim neighborhood in Stockholm, as well as attacks and unrest in similar neighborhoods in Germany and France over the last few years.
Trump is also expected to talk about the need for stringent security during his address to a joint session of Congress on Tuesday night. And he is likely to issue a new travel ban this week, White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer said Monday. Continue reading this article
It’s refreshing to hear a clearly cultural defense of the newly revived nation state from Nigel Farage. It is widely recognized that a smaller, local government tends to be more responsive to citizen needs, and the US system of federalism balancing national and state government power reflects that philosophy. As former Czech President Vaclav Klaus remarked in 2003, “You cannot have democratic accountability in anything bigger than a nation state.”
Nigel Farage was derided by media and liberal elites for demanding that Britain get a divorce from the open-borders European Union, and then he won.
But Farage got down to the social aspect in his recent chat with Tucker Carlson. He emphasized that a nation is not a rough geographical boundary enclosing an economy, as many Democrats believe, but is a community of shared values among culturally similar people who agree to them. That’s the reason why unwise immigration can be so destructive — each aggressively non-assimilated alien, such as Raza types, is a disruptor to the domestic tranquility that comes from a shared culture.
In addition, Farage’s CPAC speech [WATCH] included a shout-out to the Anglosphere, based on the English language, a cultural unifier that is not appreciated enough.
Farage chatted with Tucker Carlson following his well received CPAC speech:
NIGEL FARAGE: (:57 — clip from CPAC) I always believe we should be free to reach out and make our own deals with our real friends in the world, and it’s funny — our real friends in the world speak English, have common law and stand by us in times of crisis.
TUCKER CARLSON: You may recognize that man: that was Nigel Farage, who knows quite a bit about running a successful nationalist movement. He once headed the UK Independence Party and was a top backer of the 2016 BREXIT referendum that demanded Britain’s withdrawal from the European Union. Nigel Farage joins us now.
Thanks for coming on. I think it’s fair to say it’s official — nationalism is now global, it’s obvious, there’s no denying it with the president’s speech. Why?
FARAGE: Well you say “nationalism,” I actually call it “nation-ism” — we believe in the nation state. That is the unit we identify with; that is what we feel part of; that is what we cheer for in the Olympics; and if necessary that is what we are prepared to fight for. It embodies our values, our families, our communities, our heritage, our identity, maybe even our tribe. And I think what happened in 2016 with BREXIT and with Trump, and I believe is going to roll out through 2017, is a return to normality.
What the globalists tried to do was to destroy the nation state, and what those two big events of ’16 did was to re-establish the democratic nation state, and that is right and proper and normal. Continue reading this article
President Trump made some disparaging comments about France in his CPAC speech on Friday while discussing the general topic of jihad terror and public safety, which upset President Francois Hollande and other French officials.
At the same time, we fully understand that national security begins with border security. Foreign terrorists will not be able to strike America if they cannot get into our country. (Applause.) And by the way, take a look at what’s happening in Europe, folks. . . Take a look at what’s happened in France. Take a look at Nice and Paris.
I have a friend — he’s a very, very substantial guy. He loves the City of Lights. He loves Paris. For years, every year, during the summer, he would go to Paris — it was automatic — with his wife and his family. I hadn’t seen him in a while. And I said, Jim, let me ask you a question: How’s Paris doing? “Paris? I don’t go there anymore. Paris is no longer Paris.” That was four years — four, five years — hasn’t gone there. He wouldn’t miss it for anything. Now he doesn’t even think in terms of going there. Take a look at what’s happening to our world, folks, and we have to be smart. We have to be smart. We can’t let it happen to us. (Applause.)
The last months have seen a number of public events cancelled because of security concerns. France is being strangled from within by diverse Muslim immigration, but Hollande doesn’t want anyone to notice. Someone should tell him that denial won’t help.
French President Francois Hollande fired back at Donald Trump on Saturday after the U.S. president remarked in a speech that a friend thought “Paris is no longer Paris” after attacks by Islamist militants.
Hollande said Trump should show support for U.S. allies.
“There is terrorism and we must fight it together. I think that it is never good to show the smallest defiance toward an allied country. I wouldn’t do it with the United States and I’m urging the U.S. president not to do it with France,” Hollande said. Continue reading this article
On Sunday, a gaggle of diversity enthusiasts met up in Manhattan’s Times Square to celebrate a rally dubbed “I Am A Muslim Too” — a vile sentiment to be expressed just blocks from the site of the worst jihad mass murder in America, where 2,606 died in the World Trade Center on 9/11.
How quickly these lefties forget the 9/11 terror attacks. Perhaps the jihad will provide an updated reminder to New York City some day soon, courtesy of Muslim diversity.
Below, liberal women in New York City demand more Muslim immigration apparently so America can import misogyny, polygamy, child marriage and slavery.
At least the Fox report grasped the anti-Trump aspect of the protest, rather than any profound love of Muslims. Imagine if President Obama had instituted a temporary travel ban regarding the sketchy Muslim countries he had listed — would there have been weeks of noisy protests and lies? Very unlikely.
The Muslim call to prayer rang out through Times Square in New York City on Sunday afternoon as a large, mixed-faith crowd of merchandise hawkers, social activists, organizers, curious tourists – and genuine protesters – declared their allegiance with Islam.
“I am a Muslim, too!” the group chanted several times at the anti-President Trump rally organized by hip hop mogul Russell Simmons and a local rabbi and imam. . .
In addition, welcoming refugees, of whom Muslims accounted for 46 percent in 2016, is not cheap. Breitbart reported yesterday that “American taxpayers will spend more than $4.1 billion in the 2017 budget to support the 519,018 refugees who have been resettled by the federal government in the United States since October 2009.”
Meanwhile across the pond, normally liberal Europeans have rethought open borders welcoming Islam, and now a healthy majority want an end to Muslim immigration entirely — not a little pause as President Trump mandated. A recent poll from the highly respected Chatham House think tank found that 55 percent of Europeans surveyed in 10 nations think a permanent halt is necessary.
European leaders were quick to denounce President Trump when he advocated a temporary ban on all Muslim immigration to the U.S. during the presidential campaign, but a new poll shows their own constituencies strongly support the idea.
The Chatham House survey published on Tuesday found 55 percent of Europeans from 10 different nations agree that Muslim immigration should be stopped. Just 20 percent say they want migration from the Islamic world to continue, while 25 percent neither agree nor disagree.
Majorities in all but two of the 10 states surveyed agree that “further migration from mainly Muslim countries should be stopped.”
The poll caught the attention of Mr. Trump, who tweeted out the results of the poll on his own, closely followed Twitter account Wednesday afternoon.
The country most opposed to continued Muslim immigration is Poland, where 71 percent of those polled say it should be halted, compared to 19 percent who favor allowing inflows to continue.
Sixty-five percent of Austrians also agree Muslim immigration should be stopped, along with 64 percent in both Belgium and Hungary, 61 percent in France, 58 percent in Greece, 53 percent in Germany and 51 percent in Italy. Continue reading this article
It’s good news that the populist principle supporting nation-state government and rejecting globalism is sweeping Europe.
The European Union mega-state has been a dismal failure, particularly its Schengen rule of dissolving borders which allowed illegal aliens from the Middle East to swarm throughout the continent. Smaller, more local government is looking very appealing to voters sick of the distant, bureaucratic EU.
As a result, so-called “far right” candidates who have been dismissed for years by the media as fringe characters — particularly Geert Wilders and Marine Le Pen — are now coming on strong in upcoming elections. Even Angela Merkel, facing elections later in the year, has recently sought to mitigate the open borders disaster she created in Europe by promising increased deportations.
The Dutch election takes place in one month, and Geert Wilders is leading. The winds of change truly are blowing.
Campaigning for the Dutch election began on Wednesday with anti-Islam leader Geert Wilders frontrunner in a vote that will test the anti-establishment sentiment that swept Britain out of the European Union and Donald Trump into the U.S. presidency.
Wilders, a eurosceptic, anti-immigration fan of Trump, has dubbed the March 15 parliamentary election the start of a “Patriotic Spring” in Europe, where French and German voters go to the polls in May and September.
Wilders and his Party for Freedom has led in opinion polls for most of the past two years, but the fragmented political landscape means a coalition government of four or more parties is all but inevitable.
Dale Hurd sat down for an interview with the candidate last week. Wilders described the social conditions affecting politics, for example the crazy hate speech conviction foisted upon him (for suggesting fewer Moroccans) from activist judges, sending the message that any speech critical of Islam may be punished. In addition, the Dutch people have suffered under extreme austerity measures, such as pensions and healthcare for elderly being cut, while great sums have been spent on welfare for illegal aliens, aka “refugees.” The oppression of lawless immigration and its cultural consequences are what Geert Wilders plans to change.
AMSTERDAM – Some say he will be the next nail in the European Union’s coffin. Dutch politician Geert Wilders’ anti-EU, anti-immigration Party for Freedom is on track to win national elections in March. But he told us why a victory still might not make him the next prime minister. He also calls his conviction on a hate speech charge, for saying there are too many Moroccans in the Netherlands, “ridiculous.”
He still lives under 24-hour police protection from death threats. And whatever you do, don’t call him the Dutch Donald Trump. Geert Wilders emerged from his trial more defiant and more popular than ever. And he granted this exclusive interview to CBN News.
Dale Hurd: After your recent conviction for hate speech, you didn’t sound very repentant, very sorry.
Wilders: No I’m not, you know, how can I be? I really said nothing wrong and the crazy Dutch jurisprudence – it’s not even our law – I think I’m the first Dutchman who was convicted for something that is not in the law because the judge decided that Moroccans, which as you know is a nationality, has to be seen as a race. Dale, the reason I said it was because 80 percent of the Dutch jihadists who go to fight in Syria are Moroccans. 80 percent. They are 22 times over represented when it comes to street crime, and 60 percent of the Moroccan youth under the age of 23 has been arrested at least once, so in any poll it proved that the majority of the Dutch people agreed with me about the Moroccans, and the judge said because of international jurisprudence, once again not even in the Dutch law, that Moroccans had to be seen as a race. So if you are in Holland, be careful not to say tomorrow that you don’t like French, German or Swedish food or people, you could be called a racist. Of course this is ridiculous. I did nothing wrong and that’s why I will appeal this crazy verdict.
Surely another nail in the coffin of France is the plan to build a wall — called an “esthetic perimeter” by Paris’ deputy mayor — around the Eiffel Tower to protect it from a jihad attack. The idea of the iconic structure falling to earth like the World Trade Center towers on 9/11 must be a top fantasy for violent Islamists.
Apparently armed soldiers guarding the tower are not thought sufficient to ward off allah’s little helpers.
Paris is spending 20 million euros ($22 million) to build a protective barrier around the Eiffel Tower to replace temporary structures that were put up after a series of terror attacks.
“Sadly, the risk of terrorism hasn’t gone away,” deputy mayor Jean-François Martins said at a Paris press conference. “It’s not a wall, it’s an aesthetic perimeter.” Continue reading this article
Fair Use: This site contains copyrighted material, the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of issues related to culture and mass immigration. We believe this constitutes a "fair use" of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information, see: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode17/usc_sec_17_00000107----000-.html. In order to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond "fair use", you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
