German Cops Detain Asylum-Seeking Teen Over Plot to Blow Stuff Up

Andrew Anglin
Daily Stormer
May 31, 2017

You do have to wonder what the situation would be like if Germany didn’t have a gigantic 1984-type surveillance apparatus.

They catch these people planning this stuff all the time. Like, several times a week. I usually don’t bother to report on it. There are things that come across my news feed that I pretty much automatically filter out – number one is anything to do with North Korea, number two is “suspect planning terrorist attack arrested.”

But I’ll cover this one, just as an example.

To prove a point.

RT:

A 17-year-old “jihadist” has been detained in northeast Germany, local police said. He is reported to be a Syrian national suspected of planning a terrorist attack, officials announced, according to DPA news agency.

The suspect was allegedly planning to carry out a suicide bombing attack in the German capital, DPA reports, citing the interior minister of the state of Brandenburg, Karl-Heinz Schroeter.

In a tweet with an attached statement, law enforcement authorities said they had detained a “jihadist” in the community of Uckermark, north of Berlin on the border with Poland.

Police followed a tip-off from the federal authorities, which discovered that the suspect had bid farewell to one of his relatives in a message and said that he had “joined jihad,” the statement reads.

According to DPA, the suspect bid farewell to his mother in a WhatsApp message and “clearly stated” that he was planning a terrorist attack.

It is so far unknown how close the suspect was to carrying out a potential attack, police said, adding that investigators have not yet found any evidence proving that he was preparing for a specific assault.

Police also raided the refugee center where the teenager lived, and are questioning the suspect.

Police then said in another Twitter post they have been unable to confirm that the suspect was indeed a Syrian, and said they still had no evidence of any “specific attack plans.”

They can’t confirm anyone is a Syrian.

The EU says 20% of the invaders are “Syrians” – which is an extremely low percentage, given that the entire excuse for the “migrant crisis” when in 2015 Merkel unilaterally abolished the Dublin Accords and told third world people from across the Islamic and African world to illegally traffic themselves into Germany was the “brutal civil war in Syria” – but that number is based on the number holding Syrian passports.

Syrian passports are being mass-manufactured in Turkey.

ISIS itself also has Syrian passport factories. Allegedly.

According to the German government itself, a third of Syrian passports are fake.

And it is beneficial for the German government to lie about this, as the German government has the singular goal of destroying the ethnic make-up of Germany through population replacement.

Despite the fact that they’ve given the “official estimate” of 1/3rd being fake, forgery experts working for the government admit that it is impossible to spot a fake, due to the low quality of real Syrian passports.

In reality, the actual percentage of the migrants who have entered Europe since 2015 that are Syrian is probably around 5%, maybe even less.

But Back to My Original Point: This is Why We Can’t Have Nice Things

All European countries are reporting non-stop that they are thwarting terrorist attacks.

Probably, most of the thwarted attacks don’t even get reported in the media at all, certainly not in the English media (RT and Breitbart are the main sites doing translations of local reports, and they can only do so much – and often they are reporting on the same stories, indicating that one or the other is initially translating the story and the other is picking it up).

This is to say: the massive surveillance state is absolutely necessary. If it did not exist, these attacks would be happening multiple times per day.

There is serious doublethink going on here on the part of leftists who protest the surveillance state and also support mass Islamic immigration. Several leftish human rights groups are actually actively campaigning both against domestic surveillance and for Islamic immigration.

Human Rights Watch, for example.

Here they are protesting surveillance:

And here they are protesting for mass Islamic immigration:

This is obviously insane, on the face of it.

There is no way to interpret this other than as insanity.

The only way it could not be insane is if they actually wanted nonstop terrorist attacks to be happening in Europe, which they obviously do not want, as terrorist attacks tend to turn public sentiment against their race-replacement agenda.

Realistically, you can be for both mass domestic spying and mass Islamic immigration, or you can be against both.

I am of course against both. The fact that liberals tend to be against mass domestic surveillance and for mass Islamic immigration shows, yet again, that their entire worldview is fundamentally dishonest, or, at the very least, logically incoherent.

There are six million different places you can see this.

The above mentioned “we have to have mass immigration because of the brutal Syrian civil war” combined with “only 20% of these people are from Syria” is another such place.

Support for homosexual rights and feminism while also supporting Islam and Islamic courts is another such place.

The Bottom Line

The bottom line here is that right wing and left wing ideologies are not equal. One is based on feminine emotionality (or emotionalism) and the other is based on masculine logic and reason.

This fact is born out not only in the data which shows that women are much more likely than men to be left-leaning, but also in the fact that higher testosterone males are more likely to be right-leaning than lower testosterone males.

Right wing: Masculine men

Left wing: Women and feminine men

This is why the debate must be shut down and freedom of speech silenced. Because debate is – in its ideal form – a scientific method to come to logical conclusions.

Everything in life should be as scientific as possible. That is to say, logic and data should be used to draw conclusions about the way things should be done.

All of our political battles come down to the conflict between masculine worldview and the feminine worldview – logic verses emotion.

If this framework is used, the political landscape is much easier to understand.

It is extremely ironic that we on the right are accused of being “driven by hate” – an emotion – when in fact all that we are demanding is that logic – the opposite of emotion – be applied to the global decision-making process.

Join the discussion at TGKBBS