Saturday, January 9, 2016

Covering Up the Truth in Germany

The crime was one thing. The cover-up is quite another. Here, from the Daily Mail, we read a report on the struggle against the Merkel government’s efforts to cover up what happened in Cologne and in many other German cities. Mrs. Merkel and her government want to absolve themselves of all responsibility for the horrors they have visited on Germany:

Many Germans, including some of the victims themselves, have accused authorities of a conspiracy of silence over the assaults to stop criticism of the mass immigration policy pursued by Mrs Merkel and her politically-correct supporters. The mainstream media in Germany has, until recently, toed the Government line; a top public broadcaster, ZDF, recently refused to run a segment about a rape case on its prime-time ‘crime-watch’ show because the ‘dark-skinned’ suspect was a migrant.

The programme’s editor defended her decision, saying: ‘We don’t want to inflame the situation and spread a bad mood. The migrants don’t deserve it.’

Cracks only began to show just before New Year. Bild, Germany’s largest daily newspaper, broke ranks by accusing officials of conducting a campaign of deception on a ‘massive scale’ by burying bad news on migration. It reported that drug gangs involved in organised crime were actively recruiting newly-arrived migrants from the vast temporary camps where they live.

The Cologne police force has also been accused of deliberately hushing up the New Year scandal. It issued an official press release the following day describing the celebrations as ‘exuberant, but mostly peaceful’. The release has since been retracted, and last night it emerged that police chief Wolfgang Albers is to resign.

Broadcaster ZDF had to apologise for a ‘cover up’ after it failed to report the Cologne story for three days, even though it knew about it.


Andrew_M_Garland said...

Why have socialist politicians (I include Obama) decided to admit refugees from tribal, non-democratic, totalitarian societies, in the rough number of millions? These politicians are not screening for immigrants who admire work, capitalism, and democracy. They seem to simply want immigrants and refugees, no matter their beliefs.

I don't have a likely, rational reason for their actions. I admit the following is a thoery, just a story. It is thin, but it is what occurs to me.

The socialist dream is dying yet again. Europe is running out of money (goods and services) to support its socialist promises. Greece has already crossed the line. Too many citizens have chosen welfare and subsidy rather than work under high taxation. European politicians have promised leisure and subsidy as the reason to elect them. Massive debt and spending has not ignited the utopian spiral of increasing wealth which Marx proposed would happen.

Socialists could not switch to capitalism after demonizing it, and they don't believe in it. They chose to import refugee and immigrant labor to revitalize production. Most of the immigrants will vote socialist, and some crime and atrocity will be tolerated to achieve the larger goal. Supposedly, a win overall.

Their error here would be semantic. A politician could look at the positive results from immigration (type-1) recorded from the history of US immigration, especially from 1880-1920. So, this episode of immigration (type-2) should have similar, good results.

These are both called "immigration", but to me are quite different. Is it possible that the plans of european, socialist elites rest on this semantic confusion?

I'm open to suggestions as to what is really motivating Obama and european politicians.

Marsh said...

What's motivating them? OWG. Globalization.

Dennis said...

I would suggest that much of what one sees in Europe can be explained by Europe's own history. Especially that of Germany and others who supported them in the extermination of Jews and others who did not fit the mold of Hitler, et al. There is also a history of Europe being closely allied with ME countries. It should not surprise that some of the language and justifications by both sound some what alike.
There is a natural human condition that wants to atone for past sins by trying to move as far away as possible. It also helps that Europe has not had to do much to protect their own freedoms by spending any of their own manpower, resource, et al. This can afford them the luxury of inattention to what their ideas can result in. Words and feelings take the place of action and dealing with the world as it really exists. It is easy to be courageous when one does not have to actually do whats required to maintain a society.
What one sees in Europe, and here as well, is a desire to feel good about oneself both as an individual and as a society. Further, because of that desire there is a need to condemn those , like the military, police, et al, who have to do the dirty, to those who consider themselves as betters, work of perpetuating the dream of utopia.
So what one gets is "We are good people so lets have open borders" and not take the time to ensure that the people we allow in really want to become Americans (Europeans) and all that entails. It also leads to the idea that every problem that exists in the world is our fault or poverty, given that most of the terrorists come from people who have money, or some justification that appeals to feeling good. Our politician have much in common wit Nero.
So given that feelings seem to trump (Trump) logic is it any wonder that these problems exist and will become worst? I believe if one looks at the history of this country one will find that we did not have quotas on the people coming here until the 1920s, this was because we were slowly reaching the point where people could compete effectively given the growing numbers, so it is disingenuous to use immigration before that time as an example.
Just as those who existed during Hitler's time chose not to expose one has the same thing happening from the opposite direction. PC has a strong desire for those who want to feel good. One only needs to look at Obama, the mayor of Philadelphia, and others covering up the crimes, stopped terrorism and the ideas behind that terrorism. How many terrorist actors have been stopped in the last few years and why do you not know? Why would any president act as a recruiting agent for the terrorists by releasing people who would improve their leadership and number? We are good people so by extension everyone else is by virtue of their being part of the human race.
Interesting that we are so enamored of feelings that we would vote for someone because of the color of their skin or the fact they have female genitalia? And one wonders why we have problems because we are fast becoming our own enemy by not dealing with the challenges and the realities of life.

Anonymous said...

The German people (whom I basically admire) are still working very very hard to live down their "troubled past" as they themselves express it.

But - I think everyone knows that you can push the German people only so far. I see "Mein Kampf" is experiencing a resurgence in interest and sales. Might be nothing, or maybe the Germans are looking to revisit their old playbooks.

AAB said...

Anothern cover-up, this time in Sweden:

Swedish police face allegations of a cover-up for failing to inform the public of widespread sexual assaults against teenage girls at a music festival last summer. (..)Mr Gyllander could not confirm the ethnicity of the alleged attackers in Stockholm but said "this involves young men who are not from Sweden".