Germany Experienced 'Drastic Increases of Sexual Violence Since 2015', the NZZ Reports
Everybody is in agreement--it's 'horrific'--but nothing is done about it, and at this late hour, the main question is: can the West avoid its seemingly inescapable fate, Lebanisation?
A follow-up to the German—really: Berlin*—Greens’ demand for women-only metro and train cars as a response to the rising incidence of sexual assaults on girls, teens, and women.
* Note that (West) ‘Berlin is different’ than the rest of former West Germany: politics and corruption from 1949 through 1989 never were really accountable to anyone, and incompetence and wasteful spending was the city’s mojo, mainly because West Berlin was a ‘Western’ outpost surrounded by Soviet territory and whatever crap happened, it was covered up. Moreover, West Berlin fell down very hard from being the capital of Germany—Europe’s most powerful national state until WW2—to a minor satrapy of the US. No amount of f****** up was too big to be covered up, and that kind of attitude has, it would seem, survived the end of the Cold War. Those who’ve been to the city’s old airport Berlin-Tempelhof, used public bus services (ahem) to get to the city centre, and then walked around esp. Berlin-Mitte with all its Americanised fake buildings know; if you haven’t been to Tempelhof, think JFK Int’l minus subway connection.
None of this is somehow ‘new’ or ‘surprising’, especially as ostensibly ‘better’ legacy news outlets, such as the Neue Zürcher Zeitung, have accurately reported on the main drivers almost a year ago.** Today, I shall provide you with such a piece of reporting from early January 2024 that ‘splains some of the madness we’ve discussed two days ago:
** Like most other German-speakers, I was quite in awe of Switzerland before I moved there in 2010. The Swiss are very orderly and life is very well-ordered esp. in the main cities—and having lived in Zurich for a decade, I could share tons of anecdotes about it, but the main point I wish to bring up is quality of media: as these and many other pages often sardonically relate to ‘legacy media’—for which most of its practitioners across German-speaking places use the term Qualitätsjournalismus or ‘quality journalism’ to self-identify what they’re doing (no worries, irony and self-awareness among these ‘journos™’ is expectably low-to-non-existent). True, the Neue Zürcher Zeitung is qualitatively better than virtually all its German-language peers (although, to be fair, some other papers are also quite useful, and all of them are so under specific conditions), if only because it has more money and continues to afford foreign correspondents. Hence, the NZZ’s foreign reporting is often among the best in German-speaking contexts (while its domestic sections are similarly below average to bad), and the below piece shows this without a shadow of a doubt.
So, without much further ado, here’s their piece in my translation, with emphases, and [snark] added.
At Least 7,000 Women Were Sexually Assaulted by Refugees in Germany Since 2015
The almost unchecked migration of young men has led to the immigration of numerous sexual offenders. This is one of the reasons why the CDU wants to reduce asylum numbers—the Greens remain silent on the issue [that is, until they started calling for women-only train cars].
By Beatrice Achterberg, Neue Zürcher Zeitung, 7 Jan. 2024 [source; archived]
Irregular migration to Germany [as a thought experiment, insert your country’s name here and in the following] has a negative impact on safety in public spaces. Women and girls are particularly affected. In addition to the violence they already experience at the hands of nationals, they are also at risk from sex offenders who came to the country with [or masquerading as] asylum seekers.
This is shown by the police crime statistics. Between 2015 and 2022, there were more than 8,590 reported cases of rape, sexual assault, and sexual assault by immigrants. The Federal Criminal Police Office [Bundeskriminalamt, or BKA, Germany’s FBI] uses the term ‘immigrants’ to refer to people who have come to Germany via the asylum system. Over 90% of victims of sexual offences are female [this is horrifying, but it’s also expectable given what the rest of the piece explains].
In an article for the NZZ, migration researcher Ruud Koopmans describes the risks of European asylum policy. Koopmans sees an urgent need for reform in order to end the deaths in the Mediterranean and the Sahara [something no-one talks about any more, ‘not even’ (sic) the Greens; in that piece, by the way, Prof. Koopmans refers to ‘25,000 dead’ in the Mediterranean—you may ‘compare’ this number with the approx. 12,000 civilian deaths in Ukraine since Feb. 2022 (numbers via the UN/OHCR), but that would also mean to finding out that not all deaths are weighed evenly, but I digress]. But irregular immigration is also dangerous for the indigenous population of the destination countries, says the migration expert [which is why his voice won’t be heard by the powers-that-be].
Most Rape Victims are German
This has cost thousands of women in Germany their sexual integrity. Koopmans writes that between 2017 and 2020, over 3,000 women fell victim to rape by one or more refugees. Most of them are German nationals [despite their relatively high quality, the NZZ, too, engages in shady things and obfuscation: go back two paragraphs and note that the dates and number given is a different one; here, the reader is presented with a smaller timeframe and a different number and an allegation (which, personally, I don’t doubt, but it’s a core weakness as the other piece by Prof. Koopmans doesn’t speak about this issue at-all, which begs the question: is this a correct number (keep this in mind)?].
Immigrants are defined as people with the residence status of ‘asylum seekers’, ‘persons entitled to protection and asylum’ as well as asylum seekers with a tolerated status and also those who are in the country without authorisation in the Federal Criminal Police Office’s annual report ‘Crime in the context of immigration’, which has been published since 2015.
BKA Uses Misleading Terminology
Not every individually reported rape corresponds to a female victim. A sexual assault can have several perpetrators, for example in the case of gang rape, so that the number of female victims is slightly lower than the number of cases.
Exactly how many women are victims of rape, sexual assault or sexual assault is not publicly available [see, it’s technically hard to know for a variety of reasons cited]. However, the NZZ has access to figures from a special analysis carried out by the BKA for the Federal Ministry of the Interior [which is to say: trust us, but not the German gov’t or police on this one].
They show that more than 1,000 women have experienced sexual assault by immigrants every year since 2017 [that’s a sexual assault by ‘immigrants’ (thus defined as above) every 2-3 days per year]. It can therefore be assumed that there have been at least 7,000 female victims since the crisis year of 2015 [oh, now the assertive headline doesn’t read like a fact anymore, who would’ve thought…].
The term ‘immigrants’ used by the BKA is misleading in that it conceals the fact that this is irregular migration. The term ‘refugees’ is more commonly used [oh, now the NZZ is kinda admitting that governments are monkeying with the terms, hence it’s virtually impossible to know if the above numbers are all there are (I doubt it), it begs the question of how does the—in this case NZZ—understand and use the terms (look again, if you must, at their terminological paragraph above to find out that Ms. Achterberg already mentioned this definition, told everyone she’s privy to otherwise unavailable data, and now she’s saying ‘oopsie, there’s something else to consider’: Qualitätsjournalismus, no doubt]. Migration experts refer to asylum seekers who come to Europe from Africa to improve their economic situation as ‘economic migrants’.
Less Than 2.5% of the Population are Asylum Migrants*
[* if you thought the piece wouldn’t get worse, the term used here is another one yet again: neither ‘immigrants’ as defined by the BKA or ‘asylum seekers’ are discussed—if you lost track, I wouldn’t blame you, but image you’re consuming some sound bites, legacy media ‘debates™’, or the condensed tabloid version of these things…]
The figures are also explosive in context. According to police crime statistics, there were almost 12,000 reported cases of rape and sexual assault in 2022. Of the approx. 10,000 suspects, 6,366 were German and 3,679 non-German. Immigrants accounted for 1,155 of the suspects. This means that they [who is meant? ‘Immigrants’, ‘asylum seekers’, or ‘asylum migrants’? This piece gets worse with every line] are overrepresented in offences against sexual self-determination, measured against their small share of the population.
This is because asylum migrants [however defined, I suppose] accounted for less than 2.5% of the total population in 2022. They are strongly overrepresented not only in rape [roughly by the factor 4], but also in other violent offences such as murder and manslaughter [no data provided here, so trust™ the NZZ who’s ‘reporter™’ fudged the terms and claims special access to data funded by the German taxpayer that is otherwise unavailable to the German public—I do wonder what de Tocqueville would say about this…].
There is a huge underreporting of the offence of rape. Experts estimate that only 20% of all offences against sexual self-determination are reported [which means that we can’t just multiply the ‘asylum migrants’’ share by the factor 5 because we don’t know if ‘asylum migrants’ are greater sexual predators than Germans (which I think is a fair assumption, but I suppose it would be worth a paragraph or two here); for the sake of the argument, let’s assume that to be the case and multiply the factor 4 differential by half the given share (2.5)—and we get a sexual assault differential of a magnitude (factor 10) between ‘asylum migrants’ vs. Germans: either way, this doesn’t look very good]. Criminologist Christian Pfeiffer told the German [state broadcaster ARD’s flagship nightly] news programme ‘Tagesschau’ that the low number of convicted rapists is due to the fact that ‘85 percent of women do not report the crime and then there are no convictions’. Assaults in the home, in the family, and in partnerships are usually not reported [this is crucial, it applies also to—in this case Germans but equally across ‘the West’—and it’s another crucial detail lacking from the NZZ’s piece and public debates on the subject matter].
Since 2015, it is Mainly Young Men Who Come
Anyone who thinks that the high proportion of young, single men among migrants is a cause of the many sexual offences is right [which is why it might be better to call them ‘immigrant-invaders’]. While 49% of the total population is male (and many are older or younger than the average asylum migrant), men make up around two thirds of irregular migrants [again Ms. Achterberg obfuscates the importance of this by fudging the terms—here, within the same paragraph (I’ve used Italics to highlight this)], excluding Ukrainians. However, this alone does not explain the overrepresentation in criminal offences [oh, look at that: Ms. Achterberg notes that sex isn’t the only determinant here, but why would women-only railroad cars do much, if anything, about the rape crisis?].
When it comes to rape, the overrepresentation of male refugees really stands out. In 2020, refugees were five times more likely to commit rape (14%), as Koopmans writes in his book Die Asyl-Lotterie [lit. The Asylum Lottery]. For sexual offences overall—including sexual harassment and sexual abuse—they are 3.3 times more likely to be suspected of committing an offence [would that also mean that they are 3.3 times as often found to have committed such a crime? Why muddy the waters here? Don’t we have crime statistics for that? Oh, I forgot, the NZZ might have access but hedges the outcry behind such formulations] than their share of the population would suggest.
The reasons for this are both the men’s own experiences of violence [a fair assumption, which merely begs the question: shouldn’t we then compare the incidence of sex crimes committed by ‘immigrant-invaders’ with, say, military veterans returning home from service abroad as the next-best comparison?] in their childhood and youth, which make violence seem like a legitimate means for them, as well as the sometimes archaic structures in their countries of origin [oh, lol, now we mention the places of origins—buckle up].
The Country [but not their culture] of Origin Plays a Role
Islamic countries such as Afghanistan, Iran and Syria are—in contrast to Western nations [I almost fell off my chair reading this: take that, woke morons]—characterised by their patriarchal structure. Women and girls are systematically belittled and treated as second-class citizens. Women in refugee shelters or on their way to Europe are also exposed to danger and are often defenceless when travelling alone [all of this is true; if in doubt, consider the following thought experiment: if you’re a man with kids, would you like to live in Islamic countries, such as Afghanistan, Iran, or Syria? If you’re a woman reading this, ask yourself the same question; if you’re a Western parent, would you like your children growing up in the Sudan, Saudi-Arabia, or Pakistan? I’m not saying this to be either racist or condescending, I’m bringing this up as the father of two girls, and I’m quite sure I don’t want to even go on vacation to places that force my wife or children to wear such headgear (sun-blocking caps or hats are an altogether different issue)].
According to the German Federal Office for Migration and Refugees (Bundesamt für Migration und Flüchtlinge, BAMF), Syrians submitted 33% of asylum applications in 2022. As refugees fleeing civil war, they are almost always granted subsidiary protection [the next legalistic category used; sigh]. Although the situation has calmed down in parts of Syria, the Federal Foreign Office still advises against deportations.
The difference between the countries of origin is very noticeable in the crime statistics. Koopmans notes that Syrians are not suspected of sexual offences twice [that factor was 2.5 a few paragraphs ago] as often as the total number of offences, but three times as often [which isn’t that much more, relatively speaking]. Migrants [next category used; sigh] from Afghanistan and Pakistan—both countries with very high gender inequality [hahahahaha, is this what Afghanis and Pakistanis call this?]—are also strongly represented as suspects in sexual offences.
CDU Calls for Deportations to Syria and Afghanistan
The NZZ asked all parties represented in the Bundestag for comment on these issues. Despite several enquiries, including to members of the Committee on Internal Affairs, there was no response from the Greens.
CDU MP Christoph de Vries, member of the Committee on Internal Affairs, states: ‘It is clear that the risk of women becoming victims of rape or other sexual offences in Germany has increased significantly in recent years due to asylum migration [triple sigh, not ‘even’ MPs get this right] from the Arab [why the ethnic designation here?] region and the Maghreb [vs. the geographical indicator here?] states.’
Asylum numbers must be permanently reduced and criminals consistently deported—including to Syria and Afghanistan, the CDU politician demands [for what it’s worth (less-than-nothing), this is also the official policy of the leftist Scholz gov’t, which hasn’t done anything about it for years]. The protection of women must ‘take priority over the protection of sex offenders and other criminals’.
Federal Ministry of the Interior Calls Offences ‘Abhorrent’
It is unacceptable that ‘women are increasingly avoiding public places such as Jungfernstieg in Hamburg in the evenings because they are regularly harassed there by young refugees’, the Christian Democrat told the NZZ [is it too soon to bring up the CDU’s very own Angela Merkel who invited so many of these ‘migrants’ to Germany in 2015?]. De Vries demands that ‘the Greens and SPD, who usually raise their voices loudly in favour of quotas for women and gender-appropriate language, should also commit themselves to protecting women in this area’. [ah, there’s nothing better than deflecting from an—really: any—issue by scape-goating one’s political opponent]
FDP MP Ann-Veruschka Jurisch [until a few weeks ago, the FDP was a member of the German governing coalition, jus’ sayin’] also said that it was unacceptable for asylum seekers to ‘abuse the right of asylum and commit criminal offences, in particular offences against sexual self-determination’. The Liberal refers to the ‘Repatriation Improvement Act’ of the traffic light coalition: ‘The new regulations are aimed at swiftly implementing the deportation of offenders.’
When confronted with the figures, the Federal Ministry of the Interior, led by Social Democrat Nancy Faeser, responded: ‘These offences are abhorrent. That applies regardless of the nationality of the suspects.’ Each of these offences must be investigated and ‘punished with the full rigour of the rule of law’, a spokesperson told the NZZ [but it hasn’t, and that’s kinda the issue here, isn’t it?].
AfD Co-Chair Alice Weidel Considers the Number of Cases ‘Unbelievable’
The co-chair of the Alternative for Germany (AfD), Alice Weidel, calls the figures ‘unbelievable’. Weidel told the NZZ: ‘Behind every case is a terrible personal fate.’ Women in Germany have to fear for their physical integrity due to the ‘politically desired lack of control’.
The ‘disproportionate share of “refugees” among suspects’ in offences against sexual self-determination is ‘the frightening result of the irresponsible policy of open borders since 2015’, criticised Weidel [which, of course, means this fact—borne out by available data—is anathema to the powers-that-be that exclude the AfD from polite discourse because of its alleged ‘racism™’].
Like the Federal Ministry of the Interior, the AfD co-leader is calling for the ‘full rigour of the rule of law’ and, in addition, the subsequent deportation of convicted offenders [do you consider this tragicomic or just too stupid to believe it?]. The focus in future should not be on ‘misguided tolerance towards foreign criminals, but on protecting our own citizens’, said Weidel.
Perpetrators are Often Known to the Police
The first deputy chairman of the German Federal Police Union, Manuel Ostermann, told the NZZ: ‘The perpetrators are often known to the police and enjoy temporary protection status in Germany.’ Ostermann calls for the immediate deportation of migrants, including those with subsidiary protection, who have been legally convicted [see, even police noticed reality-as-it-is and calls for essentially the same as both the gov’t and its ‘loyal opposition™’—and thus the question becomes: why isn’t anything done?].
If there are no identity documents required to deport a person, detention pending deportation for up to six months would be legally possible, explains Ostermann. ‘Anyone who commits offences against sexual self-determination must not have the right to stay in Germany.’ [and this is an issue, because the question is: would that also apply to German citizens? I mean, with the Self-Determination Act (Selbstbestimmungsgesetz), which permits sex change in public documents and registration once a year, the number of sex-related incidents reported to police (for, e.g., ‘misgendering’ someone) is poised to increase manyfold]
The federal police officer also said: ‘We are experiencing a collective loss of freedom in Germany, especially for women.’ It is ‘not uncommon for women to avoid public places or festivities because the objective and subjective risk of becoming a victim of violence is constantly increasing’. [see, this is the Merkel’s legacy of ashes in domestic affairs, which was proudly continued by her political opponents who since 2021 govern the country; so far, it’s only the AfD that has not been in office at the federal level, hence it would be interesting to see if their doing so would change anything].
Many crimes could have been avoided
Migration researcher Ruud Koopmans writes in his book The Asylum Lottery:
The victims, only a small minority of whom have been mentioned in this chapter, were not simply unlucky enough to have been in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Koopmans concludes that many of the stories of suffering could have been avoided if Germany had had a different migration policy.
It is a consequence of the policy of open borders since 2015, for which former Chancellor Angela Merkel is [co-]responsible [guess who her governing partner was: the Social Democratic Party…], which has exposed thousands of women in Germany to this danger. But even after the end of the Merkel era, there is no improvement in sight. In a summer interview, Interior Minister Faeser said: ‘We have to save the Europe of open borders.’ The only question that remains is at what price.
Bottom Lines
I suppose that a fuller picture of what Europeans have been subjected to since 2015—and, arguably, for the 20 years before—is emerging:
We’ve seen massive increases in cross-border migration, a sizeable share of which was EU nationals moving to other EU countries; while fear-mongering about ‘Easterners taking our jobs’ played a huge role in the run-up to the 2004/07 accession of most of the former Soviet bloc, many countries have absorbed = awarded citizenship to sizeable chunks of immigrants since the turn of the millennium. This is the only way to explain, e.g., the fact that according to official data, Austria took in more than 3m migrants since 2000 and has an official share of some 20% of non-citizen residents:
The great, untold story of these mass migrations—that are, let’s not mince words here, unprecedented in human history—is that most migrants who’ve come so far (until 2015) are, although not assimilated, at least nice enough people who are seeking to get ahead and the like, for otherwise 2015 wouldn’t be such a stark divider in terms of crime, crapification, and morass.
One of the core issues of mass immigration is, of course, the massive dislocation this brings with it: housing shortages, dirty streets, overcrowded tenements, and the massive downward pressures on wages and working conditions are, both contemporary and historical consequences. As to the latter issue, I suppose that reading the Johnson-Reed Act of 1924 and esp. media coverage of mass immigration into the US before its passing (see here for the ‘official’ version via the Pew Research Center) should be mandatory for everyone who engages in these debates whether it’s journalism, commentary, or politicking. Alas, it isn’t, hence we do see virtually the same problems and issues re-surfacing today.
Then there’s the question of who’s paying for this? I mean, even legacy media reporting abounds with horror stories about excess payments: take, e.g., the case of a Syrian man (62) who received almost 200,000 euros in support/transfer payments from the City of Vienna; or the fact that Norway is paying Ukrainian refugees about US$ 50,000 annually in subsidies (which is about the median income for a year of full-time work in the West outside Switzerland).
Why should you and I go to work and pay extortionate amounts of taxes to do so? Why should anyone get through the trouble of legal and lawful immigration if you could just burn your papers and cross borders as a ‘refugee’?
I bring this up because this kind of misplaced, if not suicidal, empathy will cost us dearly; heck, it’s price tag is quite staggering already, and it will only explode before too long.
This report by Dutch researchers about the purely fiscal side of mass immigration should make everyone think:
Next to these ticking time bombs—whose fuse has long been lit—falling quality of school education, public services, and the looming cuts to pension funds, the big worry is what the most likely outcome will be:
Lebanon’s sad and tragic history of the past 50 years is the most likely future for the West. It won’t be pretty, the road will be bumpy but surely leading to increased strife, ethnic and religious tensions (mostly due to, and with Islam), and lots of suffering.
I suppose that at some point we’ll need to talk about remedies, although I’m unsure any will bring about a turn-around at this late hour.
Yet, if we don’t even try, our fate is sealed.
The options available are as obvious as the are currently impossible:
1) Peaceful mutually respectful co-existence in a multicultural society. Has never, ever, existed anywhere in the world ever unless under a totalitarian and authoritarian militaristic dictatorship able to recruit from all group children into a protective cadre tasked with keeping the rulership in place, and then only briefly as the Mamluks, Janissaries, Varangian Guards, Palatines, Schutzstaffel, NKVD, et cetera become the de facto rulers, and devolve into corruption along racial/religious lines anyway.
Not viable in any way beyond ideological, i.e. fantasy.
2) Apartheid and segregation. Eventually leads to chaos and ethnic cleansing of the least numerable and least violent groups, as those groups who proliferate the fastest will run out of Lebensraum and demand all kinds of things of the other more responsible and succesful groups, evetually turning any nation into Zimbabwe/South Africa rather than Rhodesia.
Looks viable but is only an illusion, slowing down the inevitable genocide of minority-groups.
3) Ethnic cleansing, removing the invading groups by any means, forcing them to repatriate en masse: ideally, to their point of origin. More realistically, just outside the border will have to do and the neighbouring nation will have to deal as best they can, picking option 1-3 on their own accord.
Is currently politically impossible due to Americanisation and US influence, and is also ideologically impossible due to people living in fantasy-land inside their heads.
Appendix:
It is however the only option materially possible, and is a one-time cost which is more of an investment as all the costs assiciated with bad migration and bad migrants goes away immediately after, as does the cost of the process itself. Once done, the materiel and resources used can easily be converted to border security and normal police, and lowered taxes on domestic goods/production.
But it comes down to Will, and Courage, and deciding if one loves one own family and people more than strangers or not.
Almost hurts too much for words…
As an ex-pat Swede my sadness is around the similar situation there and the added extra of organised crime gangs and the “normalisation” of shootings and bombings.
Currently living in England it’s more around the (politicians) urgency to get the maximum amount of “dinghies” in to the country. I’m still unsure of their endgame though.