The AfD party in Germany has scored a major court victory against opposition to its association with the anti-Islamization group PEGIDA (Patriotic Europeans Against the Islamisation of the West).
A Reuters article last week described PEGIDA as a grassroots movement that holds regular events to protest against “Islamisation.”
PEGIDA has been a major target of globalists, along with other groups (or individuals) that oppose the Islamization of the West, jihad, the Muslim Brotherhood and irresponsible immigration policies that allow for the spread of political Islam in the West. When any of its members step outside the boundaries of civility — which happens much more frequently, and indeed, has become commonplace at leftist protests, and is far more severe among leftists — the entire organization is branded.
Pro-democracy demonstrators against Islamization are deemed to be “racist,” “far right,” “Nazi,” “white supremacist,” “Islamophobic,” “xenophobic” and “intolerant,” but as far as authorities in Europe and North America are concerned, it is perfectly acceptable for the Muslim Brotherhood to spread its Sharia principles in their countries.
The message to Westerners is to submit or be branded. Unfortunately, the phobia about being branded has led leaders to betray the founding principles of their own nations.
It is groundbreaking that Germany’s highest court has ruled “that a former cabinet minister had breached neutrality rules that apply to government members when she accused members of the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) of promoting radicalization.”
The anti-suicidal immigration AfD, which is routinely branded as “far right” solely for wanting to protect its nation, has been growing in popularity. It is becoming an increasing threat to Merkel’s CDU party, which has plans to bring in 300,000 more migrants annually, plus over thousands of others via chain migration.
“German far-right wins court case over ex-minister’s barb”, Reuters, February 28, 2018:
BERLIN (Reuters) – Germany’s highest court ruled on Tuesday that a former cabinet minister had breached neutrality rules that apply to government members when she accused members of the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) of promoting radicalization.
The ruling underscores the challenges facing politicians trying to take on the AfD, which won nearly 13 percent in a Sept. 24 election at the expense of Chancellor Angela Merkel’s conservatives and the center-left Social Democrats (SPD).
In 2015, at the height of a large influx of Muslim migrants, Johanna Wanka, then education minister, responded to an AfD slogan at a Berlin protest rally that read: “Red card for Merkel – asylum needs borders.”
Wanka issued a statement on the ministry’s website saying the red card should be shown to the AfD, not Merkel, adding:
“Bjoern Hoecke and other party spokespeople are contributing to social radicalization. Right-wing extremists who openly incite hatred and violence, like the head of (anti-Islam grassroots movement) PEGIDA boss Lutz Bachmann, thus receive intolerable support.”
Hoecke, a senior member of the AfD, has described the Holocaust memorial in Berlin as a “monument of shame” and wants German history books on the Nazi era to be rewritten.
The Constitutional Court said on Tuesday that Wanka had “violated the AfD’s right to equal opportunities of political parties” as her remarks may have negatively affected voters’ view of the party….