Der SPIEGEL demonstrates most superbly on a consistent basis how brainwashing can be carried out in quality fashion, even how a brutal and completely unproductive totalitarian sect like Islam, which busies itself with the various orifices of the woman, violence and striving toward world dominance, can be sold as culture. In its online edition, it celebrates most innocently a somewhat crazy naïveté for its unbelievably valuable photo prize. The deception of the readers functions most of all through what is not said:
Most honored Pastor Olaf Latzel,
The debate over your sermon on 1/18/2015 makes it clear that Germany finds itself in a cultural conflict with Islam. The Evangelical Church has very clearly positioned itself in this cultural conflict on the side of Islam, which like National Socialism fights against the Jews. There is much evidence for this. The reaction of the Evangelical Church to the Christian sermon was therefore to be expected.
On 2/5/2015, the “Neue Westfälische“ newspaper published an interview with Pastor Eberhard Helling (photo), Islam commissioner for the Lübeck Evangelical Church group, regarding the attacks in Paris. Helling sees no connections between Islam and the terror. Immediately after the Charlie Hebdo editors were killed, he went to the mosque of his confidence in order to assure the Koran followers that “the church” rejects Pegida and “the Muslims can rely on our support.” Eberhard Kleina, retired career school pastor from Lübbecke, like Pastor Olaf Letzel, is also apparently one of the last with backbone in his professional group. He didn’t want to let the interview fall as it is, and in an open letter to his fellow believer, which we will reproduce uncut here, he took a clear stand regarding this issue.
We hear ever and again from so-called “Islam experts” that the Koran and the islamic religion based on the Koran are peaceful and compatible with democracy and tolerance.
God knows I’m no expert in terms of islamic theory rather, if anything, somewhat knowledgeable as pertains to islamic practice. I was simply a Moslem from modern day Iran and left Islam only when here in Germany because this decision carries the death penalty in my homeland.
While Mohammedans in every place can roar without retribution their “Allahu akbar” which as much as means “Allah is greater (than other gods),” a pastoral instruction that Christians must not blur the difference between Christianity and Islam has led to investigations of “incitement” by the district attorney in Bremen against Evangelical Pastor Olaf Latzel (photo).
(By Hinnerk Grote)
Within the conservative/freedom-oriented opposition, especially the AfD (Alternative for Germany Party), there is no unity regarding the subject of “Diverse Republic.” On the one hand, the diversification of Germany is also definitely appreciated, on the other, the islamization that comes along with it is deplored. The application: “Yes to döner, no to Sharia.” This “Yes, but” that is typical especially for the AfD doesn’t accomplish very much: diversification and islamization are inseparably bound to each other. Those who reject islamization must at the same time question what is behind the whole “Diverse Republic” project.
(By C. Jahn)
The total islamization of Turkey is advancing, and its endeavor to be cutting edge is growing at the same pace. Also, the alleged “liberal” web doesn’t appear to be spared. That is only consistent. Scary, though, is the speed at which the large western businesses are bowing to the islamic dictatorship.
Frenchmen who have been condemned for terror acts can lose their citizenship. The French Constitutional Council in Paris made this judgment and declared a corresponding passage in the book of civil law as constitutional. Die ZEIT reported yesterday regarding this interesting possibility with our French neighbors. Even if such a thing is presumably (still) undoable among us, we should give thought to how we want to proceed in the future with foreign felonious or terrorist perpetrators of violence.
To learn who rules over you, simply find out whom you are not allowed to criticize. –Voltaire
After the islamic terror in Paris, public debate could give the impression that the heart of free speech was solely the right to offend religions such as Islam. Satire and humor were emphasized as essential elements of a society of free speech. Paris had the effect of causing media and politicians to stand in long lines in order to protect the free expression of opinion: “The murders were an attack against all of us!” “They were an attack on our values.” “The free word is the foundation of open society!” “Europe must show that we stand on the free word.” The handling of Pegida in Dresden showed in truth just how these politicians and media deal with freedom of speech and what they mean by it.
Before there’s a shot, there’s a warning. Islam is “peace”! And constantly, when an islamic act of terror happens, leaders, governing organizations, the leftists and Green media, politicians and parties of Europe blow loudly from the same horn: “Don’t worry: none of this has anything to do with the true Islam!”
(By Pastor Fouad Adel M.A., Islam Scholar)
As muscles atrophy when not exercised anymore, likewise our feeling toward “freedom” has atrophied – because we haven’t demanded it and put it to the test. “Freedom” never makes it easy for us because it ever demands that positions be accepted that are not our own. This most certainly is the reason why the clear stand for “freedom,” even in enlightened societies, has become somewhat rare, and a parliamentary representation of “freedom” more the exception than the rule. The website of the German Association of Employers will in the future be presenting on a regular basis texts by authors that are closely tied with the debate about the question “What is freedom and how much of it can we stand?”, from Roland Baader to Sloterdijk to Müller-Armack. Roland Baader takes up the beginning with the text “The Cobbler, the Farmer and the Prince (Link to German original).” Translation below.
In the Daily Mail can be read today that the publishers of the Oxford University Press (OUP), one of the largest and most renowned publishing houses in Europe have forbidden their schoolbook authors from using pigs or pork themes in their books, since these could offend Jews and Muslims. According to Daily Mail, this venture was announced Tuesday during a program on “Radio 4 Today” regarding the subject of free speech.
As citizens of the Republic of Diversity, we have become very jaded – but we still continue to be surprised. Simple people bring totally simple desires to the street: It’s possible to distinguish between refugees and immigrants. One can can only guess who, as a refugee, is truly also persecuted and outcast. The asylum law should not be warped so much as to become the back door for unqualified mass immigration. Attention should be given to immigration so that those who come here fit in with us. Excessive demand by difficult immigrant groups should be avoided. What of all this is so difficult to understand?
I am a religion-friendly atheist. I don’t believe in God, but Christianity, Judaism and Buddhism don’t bother me either.
It’s just Islam bothers me much more and more. The broad, disproportionate criminality of young men with a Muslim background bothers me. The Islam’s murderous disregard for women and homosexuals bothers me.
Forced marriages, “peace judges,” “honor killings” bother me.
And antisemitic pogroms bother me more than producing reasonably civilized words.
Now I ask myself: is religion an obstacle to integration? My impression: not always. But with Islam, definitely so. With asylum and integration, this should be of particular consideration!
I don’t need any imported racism, and neither do I need whatever else Islam stands for.
Translation of the BILD Commentary “Islam als Integrationshindernis” by Nicolaus Fest at www.bild.de
This past weekend, anti-Israel demonstrations took place again all over Germany [and the US, see here and here, among other small(!) towns]. When researching the social networks, one encounters a multitude of video and photo material that doubtlessly remind one of civil war. In Mannheim, around 3000 demonstrators gathered to vent their hate of Jews. Mannheim mayor Peter Kurz leading up to the demonstrations stirred representatives of the Jewish community, representatives of islamic associations, church people, etc. to make a mutual declaration and in doing so hopes that at least a part of the organizers felt obligated to a peaceful demonstration process.
It was only a question of time as to when Turkish prime minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan (photo) would chime in with the disgusting Moslem anti-Israel = anti-Jewish concert going on. But the extermination of every Jew is the highest duty of a devout apostle of Allah. Thus the Turkish Obernazi seized the Nazi muzzle and reviled Israel as being worse than Hitler: The Israelis have “no conscience, no honor, no pride.”
Die WELT reports:
Attacking Israel is currently en vogue. Anyone can do this apparently, at least verbally. The ready argument is that the “Israel conflict is complicated.”Pat Condell states it in two sentences: “Everything one needs to know about the Middle East conflict is: The Jews want peace, the Arabs don’t because the Arabs hate the Jews for religious reasons and want them dead.” And he asks: “What would you do if you were the Israeli prime minister? How would you deal with people who want you and your entire population dead?”
Original on PI-German / Translation: Anders Denken
All do-gooders listen up because the time is getting closer for special consideration for our beloved Muslim citizens on all sides. Starting June 28 it is once again Ramadan. You must show strong nerves when the devout, starving and half thirsty colleagues race away from the workplace. The fact that they aren’t as resilient as a person who eats and drinks properly is a given in itself, therefore you can then take over a part of their work right along with yours.
This brutal attack took place in a card playing room in the city of Hotan in the western Chinese province of Xinjiang. Three Waziri Moslems suddenly attacked seveal players with knives and axes. Four people were injured in the action.
(By Michael Stürzenberger)
Motive #1: Gambling is prohibited in Islam. Motive #2: Casting Koran-conforming terror and fear into the hearts of the infidel Chinese to intimidate them. Motive #3: Forcing their Waziri-islamic theocracy in the province of Xinjiang.
Something positive from the incident: Two of the attackers were killed by Chinese security forces before they could do anything worse, one injured.
previous posts »