Thank you for inviting me to Berlin. It is an honour to be here in this beautiful city of Berlin. When I was here last year I emphasized how important Germany is for all of us. We all benefit from a healthy, democratic, self-confident Germany.

(By Geert Wilders)

Much has happened since my last visit. In the Netherlands we were able to achieve many amazing things. We have successfully started to roll back the process of Islamization in the Netherlands.
We have done so in a peaceful way and through the democratic process. Recently, a deranged narcissistic psychopath from Norway committed a horrible crime. In cold blood he murdered nearly eighty innocent fellow citizens. The assassin pretended to be a concerned European. He said that he had committed his atrocity because “It is meaningless to participate in the democratic process.”
But he is wrong! The mass murderer from Oslo murdered and maimed, and he justified his heinous crime by denying – I quote – “that it is remotely possible to change the system democratically.” – end of quote.
But he is wrong! The Oslo murderer falsely claims to be one of us. But he is not one of us. We abhor violence. We are democrats. We believe in peaceful solutions.
The reason why we reject Islam is exactly Islam’s violent nature. We believe in democracy. We fight with the force of our conviction, but we never use violence. Our commitment to truth, human dignity and a just and honourable defence of the West does not allow us to use violence nor to give in to cynicism and despair. We cherish the tradition of Aleksander Solzhenitsyn, Jelena Bonner, Lech Walesa and Ronald Reagan. These heroes defeated a totalitarian ideology by the power of their conviction and without firing a single shot. As the ex-Muslim and Islam-critic Ali Sina said in a reaction to the Oslo atrocity: “We don’t raise a sword against darkness; we lit a light.”
So it is. We lit the light of the truth. And the truth will set us free.
The truth is that Islam can be successfully fought with democratic means. We do so in the Netherlands. You can do so, too, in Germany! Let me tell you what we have achieved in the Netherlands since my last visit to Berlin, less than one year ago. It will encourage you. What can be done in the Netherlands can also be done in Germany.
My party, the Party for Freedom, which has 24 seats of the 150 seats in parliament, supports a minority government of Liberals and Christian-Democrats. We do this in return for measures to restrict immigration, roll back crime, counter cultural relativism, and restore our traditional Western freedoms, such as freedom of speech.
The Party for Freedom has been in this position for less than a year, but we are achieving great things.
We have achieved that the Netherlands will soon ban the face-covering Islamic burkas and the niqabs!
We will restrict immigration from non-Western countries by up to 50% in the next four years!
We are going to strip criminals who have a double nationality and who repeatedly commit serious crimes, of their Dutch nationality!

The Party for Freedom is bringing a message of hope to the Netherlands.
The new policies will place more demands on immigrants.
Integration will not be tailored to different groups anymore.
There will be a tougher approach to immigrants who disobey the law.
Those who lower their chances of employment by the way they dress, will see their access to welfare payments diminished.

We have also achieved that anti-Israeli activities will no longer be funded with Dutch taxes.
So-called humanitarian aid organizations that directly or indirectly support anti-Israel boycotts, divestments and sanctions and that deny Israel’s right to exist will no longer get government funding.

The Dutch government will boycott the United Nation’s Durban III meeting against racial discrimination because it has been transformed into a tribunal for accusations against Israel.
The government will strengthen our political and economic relations with Israel. Investment rather than divestment will be our policies towards Israel.

We stand with Israel. We love Israel. Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East. Israel is part of our civilization.

My friends, what the Party for Freedom has achieved, shows that it can be done. To borrow a phrase from President Obama: Yes, we can! We can stop the islamization of our societies. The Dutch example shows that we can win. David can defeat Goliath!

Last July, the Dutch government even did something which not a single nation has dared to do before. It spoke out firmly against the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation. The OIC is an international organization of 57 Islamic countries, most of them barbaric tyrannies. This OIC constitutes the largest voting bloc in the United Nation. It had criticised the fact that Dutch judges had acquitted me of all charges of group insult and incitement to hatred and discrimination. But the Dutch government made it clear to the OIC that freedom of speech will not be muzzled in the Netherlands. It told the OIC very bluntly: “The Dutch government dissociates itself fully from the request to silence a politician.” – end of quote.
We will never submit to the Islamic OIC bullies!

As you probably know, for almost two years I went through the ordeal of being a suspect in a criminal case. I was dragged to court in Amsterdam on the accusation of hate speech crimes. Last June, this legal charade ended with a full acquittal.

The Dutch people learned through my acquittal that political debate has not been stifled in their country. My acquittal was a victory for freedom of speech. The Dutch people also learned that they are allowed to speak critically about Islam. They learned that resistance against Islamization is not a crime. They learned that there is hope and that liberation is near.

My acquittal marks the turning of the tide. Not only in the Netherlands, but in the whole of Europe. It is the first breach of the dyke. We have started the roll-back operation. We have sent a message to the ideologues of Islam: Don’t tread on us!

My acquittal has a significance which far surpasses the Netherlands. It has a meaning for the whole of Europe and the free world. My acquittal marks the end of an evolution whereby our civil liberties in Europe are constantly being restricted in order not to offend Islam and anger Islamic fanatics.

My acquittal legitimizes criticism of Islam. It does so also in Germany and everywhere else.

Indeed, why should you Germans not enjoy the same rights as the Dutch! If peaceful and democratic resistance to Islamization is not a crime in the Netherlands, it should not be a crime in Germany either.

So, here is my message to you: Continue your fight for freedom and freedom of speech!
Do not let your politicians and judges grant you fewer rights than the Dutch!

Do not let yourselves be intimidated by Islamic or leftist opponents who shriek and yell. Do not let yourselves be intimidated by media who claim that a murderer who has lost his belief in the democratic process has anyhow been influenced by us.

My friends, when I visited you last year, even in my wildest dreams I could not have imagined that we would have been able to influence government policies in the way we have done.
That is why I tell you: Never give in to the bullies! Never give up hope. Never despair! You can still turn the tide! One can always turn the tide!

It is true: Germany has been less fortunate than the Netherlands.

When I was here last year, Tilo Sarrazin had just published his book “Deutschland schafft sich ab.” Sarrazin’s book was a bestseller. It hit a nerve. It sold over one-and-a-half million copies. This shows that German society is ripe for change. But politically Sarrazin’s book has changed nothing yet. On the contrary, the German political elite raised the speed of Islamization in Germany. Bundespresident Wulff said “Islam is a part of Germany.” Chancellor Merkel said that multiculturalism is an absolute failure, but she continues to defend Turkey’s entry into the EU. The spread of Islam continues unabated in the German class rooms, on Germany’s streets, through the construction of new mosques, etcetera, etcetera.

Your situation has worsened because you do not have a party – yet – with enough electoral support to influence German politics for the better. Germany needs a rightwing party that is not tainted by ties to neo-Nazis and by anti-Semitism, that is decent and respectable, but also firm.
René Stadtkewitz is working very hard to make Die Freiheit as successful as the Party for Freedom in the Netherlands. René, we are here to help you! Because Germany deserves better than what it gets today!
My friends, your country is the political backbone of Europe.
Germany is the most populous country in Europe. Germany is the economic motor of Europe. If Germany is sick, we are all sick.
Last year, I urged you: Stop being ashamed of Germany. It is unfair to reduce German patriotism to national-socialism, just as it is unfair to reduce Russia to Stalinism. Be proud of your country. Only if the Germans have pride in Germany, they will be prepared to stand for Germany and to defend Germany. And you must stand for Germany, just as the Party for Freedom in the Netherlands stands for the Netherlands. We must all stand for the survival of our nation-states because our nation-station states embody the democratic liberties which we enjoy.
Without the nation-state there can be no real national political freedom. That is why we must be good patriots. Patriotism is often branded as fascism. But patriotism is no fascism. On the contrary. Every democrat and defender of freedom must by definition be a patriot. A soul needs a body. The spirit of political liberty cannot flourish outside the body of the nation-state. The nation-state is the political body in which we live. That is why we must preserve and cherish the nation-state. So that we can pass on the liberty and the democracy which we enjoy to our children.
Without a nation-state, without self-governance, without self-determination there can be no security for a people nor preservation of its identity. This was the insight which led the Zionists to re-establish the state of Israel. Theodore Herzl said that there had to be a Jewish state because – I quote – “what we want is a new blossoming of the Jewish spirit.”
Dear friends, we urgently need a new blossoming of the German spirit. For decades, the Germans have been ashamed of themselves. They preferred to be Europeans rather than Germans. And they have paid a heavy price for it. We have all paid a heavy price for it.
Europe is not a nation; it is a cluster of nations. The strength of Europe is its diversity. We are one family but we live in different bodies. Our cultures are branches of a common Judeo-Christian and humanist culture, but we have different national cultural identities. That is how it should be.
Uniformity is a characteristic of Islam, but not of Europe. Islam eradicated the national identities of the peoples it conquered. The Coptic identity of Egypt, the Indian identity of Pakistan, the Assyrian identity of Iraq, the Persian identity of Iran, they were all wiped away, cracked down upon, or discriminated against until this very day. Islam wants all nations replaced by the so-called Ummah, the common identity of the Nation of Islam to which all have to be subservient and into which all national identities have to vanish.
Islam tried to conquer Europe, but never succeeded so far. That is why we Europeans were able to develop our different identities as nation-states. If we want to hold on to these we must stand together against the forces which threaten our identities. Today we are confronted by two dangerous forces: Islamization and Europeanization.
When I was here last year, I spoke a length about the threat of Islam. Today, I want to draw your attention to the threat of Europeanization. By Europeanization I mean the ideology which posits that our sovereign nation-states have to submerge in a pan-European superstate.
The European Union’s Founding Fathers held that in order to avoid a future war in Europe, Europe’s nations, and especially Germany, had to be encapsulated in what the Rome Treaty called “an ever closer union among the peoples of Europe.” Robert Schuman said that the EU’s aim was – I quote – “to make war not only unthinkable but materially impossible.” – end of quote.
The Eurocrats think that nation states in general – and especially Germany, Europe’s largest nation-state – are the problem. They are wrong. The real cause of the Second World War had not been the German nation state – it had been Nazi totalitarianism.
There is nothing wrong with Germany. The cause of the war was the Nazi ideology. The remedy against totalitarianism is not building a superstate. The remedy is introducing more direct forms of democracy at the lowest possible levels. Instead of depriving Germany and other nation-states of their sovereignty, the post-war leaders should have introduced a Swiss-like system in our countries. Small units should have a large degree of local sovereignty. The individual citizen should be given a direct democratic say over his own fate and that of his community.
Instead, the peoples of Europe were robbed of their sovereignty, which was transferred to far-away Brussels. Decisions are now being taken behind closed doors by unelected bureaucrats. This is not the kind of government we want!
We want less bureaucracy! We want more democracy!
We want less Europe! We want to hold on to our sovereignty. We want home rule! We want to remain independent and free! We want to be the masters in our own house!
In December 1991, the Maastricht Treaty called for a single European currency. The Dutch guilder and the D-mark were sacrificed on the altar of European unification. Helmut Kohl sold this project to the German people as – I quote – “a matter of war or peace.” – end of quote. The euro was presented as “an angel of peace” which the Germans had to sponsor by giving up the mark. During the past six decades German politicians have told the Germans that the nation state, and especially Germany, was so dangerous that it had to be emasculated. The Germans had to become Europeans instead of Germans. To achieve this political project, national and monetary sovereignty was relinquished. Economic and national interests were sacrificed on the political altar of so-called Europeanization.
All the countries which joined the euro lost the power to adjust their currency to their own economic needs. They have all suffered as a consequence. The currency of some countries is undervalued, the currency of others is overvalued; they all have to share in carrying the burden of other countries, even if the latter are suffering from self-inflicted policies, corruption or fraud. The European monetary system has allowed some countries to get a free ride at the expense of others, while those who cheat are in a position to blackmail those who have to foot the bill. This charade has to stop!
The European monetary system is deeply flawed. It is also immoral. As Theodore Herzl said “The character of a people may be ruined by charity.” This applies for those at the receiving end of charity, but also for those who donate it. The so-called pan-European solidarity is literally ruining us! Germany has paid enough for Europe already!
The same applies for the Netherlands. Our citizens do not have to pay the debts of others!
My friends, your party Die Freiheit embodies the best hope for Germany. Because your party is the only party in Germany which has the courage to state loud and clear that countries which cannot pay their debts should leave the euro. I fully agree.
My friends, time is running out. We have to act for the sake of democracy and the future prosperity of our children. The former Soviet dissident Vladimir Bukovsky warns that rather than preventing war, the European project makes conflicts more likely. He draws a parallel between the EU and the former Soviet Union which also suppressed feelings of national unity. When economy reality defeated the Soviets’ political project, the suppressed feelings of national identity bounced back with a vengeance and destroyed the Union. Bukovksy fears that if we do not stop the European moloch from expanding the same thing might happen in Europe.
The European leaders state that the only way to solve the current crisis is more European governance. They advocate more powers for Brussels. They are wrong. More Europe only makes matters worse. We have to oppose their attempt of further centralization.
We do not want more Europe! The EU lacks democracy, accountability and transparency. That is why we reject it. We want less Europe! Let us hope that next Wednesday the German Constitutional Court protects national sovereignty.
As a national legislator in the Netherlands I experience day by day how little we still have to say about our own fate. We are expected to rubberstamp laws which have been made by the EU Council of Ministers. The 27 EU commissioners convene behind closed doors with their colleagues. They negotiate in secret and then emerge to announce their agreement and present it. That is how the system works.
Recently, your Chancellor, Frau Merkel, went to Paris. Together with President Sarkozy she announced plans for an economic government of the eurozone.
We oppose this. We want the national parliaments to decide about our economic policies. We do not want to spend our taxpayers’ money on eurozone countries, such as Greece. Let those who have cheated us, who have mismanaged their economy or who have foolishly lived beyond their means, take care of themselves.
Moreover, the EU treaties forbid bailouts.
The Party for Freedom opposes every bail out. The Dutch minority government will never be able to count on our support in this regard. Today its wrongheaded euro policies are supported by the europhile leftist parties. I repeat: We will never support the Dutch government’s approval of the bailouts, not even if the government would lose the support of the left.
We have voted, and we will vote, against every plan to bail out other countries. Sovereign countries have to take care of their own needs. That is what sovereignty is about: freedom and the ability to take care of oneself.
Our peoples resent the fact that they have to pay for others. Our peoples resent the permanent alienation of power from their nation-states. They care about their nation because they care about democracy and freedom and the wellbeing of their children. They see their democratic rights and their age-old liberties symbolized in their national flag.
But there is more. National identity also ties an individual to an inheritance, a tradition, a loyalty, and a culture. National identity is also an inclusive identity: It considers everyone to be equal, whatever his religion or race, who is willing to assimilate into a nation by sharing the fate and future of a people.
My friends, we need to give political power back to the nation-state, in the name of democracy, in the name of freedom, in the name of human dignity. By defending the nation-states we defend our own identity. By defending our identity we defend our liberties. By defending our liberty we defend our dignity.
I urge you: Stand up for the nation-state. Be proud of your country!
In his Farewell Address as American President, Ronald Reagan said that the thing he was most proud of in his presidency was – I quote – “the resurgence of national pride that I called, ‘The New Patriotism.’” – end of quote.
Europe needs new patriotisms. Europe needs dozens of new patriotisms. We need True Finns, and True Danes, True Frenchmen, and True Irishmen, True Dutchmen, and, my friends, we need True Germans!
Reagan said that we had to teach our children what our country is, what it stands for and what it represents in the long history of the world. He said that Americans need – I quote – “a love of country and an appreciation of its institutions.”
Reagan’s words apply to us, Europeans, too. We need a resurgence of national pride, a love of country and institutions. Our national parliaments are our democratic institutions. We must defend them.
Ladies and gentlemen, dear friends, I have said enough. It is time to act. We must make haste. Time is running out for Germany, for the Netherlands, for all the other great nations of Europe. As Ronald Reagan said: “We need to act today, to preserve tomorrow”.
Here is a short summary of five things which we need to do in order to preserve our freedoms.
First, we must defend freedom of speech. It is the most important of our liberties. Second, we must end cultural relativism. Our Western culture is far superior to other cultures. Third, we must stop Islamization. More Islam means less freedom. There is enough Islam in Europe already. Immigrants must assimilate and adapt to our values. Fourth, we must restore the right to decide about our own money. We should not pay the debts of others. The survival of the euro should not be used as an excuse to reward countries which have shown that they were not worth to belong to the eurozone. Fifth, we must restore the supremacy and sovereignty of the nation-state. Our nations are the legacy which our fathers bestowed on us and which we want to bestow on our children. We are the free men and women of the West. We are the true men and women of the West. We do not stand for a superstate. We stand for our own country.
You stand for Germany. I stand for the Netherlands. Others stand for Switzerland, Denmark, Finland, France, Spain, and all these other beautiful freedom-loving nations of Europe. Together we represent the nations of Europe. Together we stand.
We will stand firm. We will survive. We will defend our freedoms. We will remain free.
Thank you very much.

This thanksgiving by the Junge Welt lets a little slip out from the catalog of demands by the DGB (German Union Federation) – if only this wouldn’t be so honest – how the people need to be walled in against such fortunes.

In this place we’ll simply say: Thanks for 28 years of securing peace in Europe

for 28 years without the participation of German soldiers in war missions

for 28 years without welfare and unemployment

for 28 years without homelessness, soup kitchens and “panels”

for 28 years of provisions with places for nursery and kindergarten

for 28 years without neonazi “give GAS” posters in the capital city

for 28 years of historical scholarship instead of Guido Knopp documentaries

for 28 years of Club Cola and nude colonies

for 28 years without hedge funds and private-equity grasshoppers

for 28 years without co-payments and second-class medicine

for 28 years of Hohenschönhausen without Hubertus Knabe

for 28 years of perky sex without “wetlands” and Bild expertise

for 28 years of universal education

We also say thank you – to Junge Welt – for the honesty of the long-time fighters against the Right and for religious tolerance – at least or continuously glamorized Islam – that the newspaper so openly expresses the political tastes of the Left Party (photo) which is advertising right next to the picture of the wall murderers.

» Interview with Wolf Biermann about the Left Party:

Biermann in the Interview

Wolf Biermann belongs to those communists because of whom some who are now active in the area of conservative critique of Islam previously felt drawn to the Left. Because Biermann was basically honest, and where could one or can one find this both then and now in politics? The best: He has remained this way. Here is the interview with Wolf Biermann about the Building of the Wall on Deutschlandfunk (Radio Germany) in its entirety. There are texts for which there is no further need of comment:

Christoph Heinemann: 50 years ago tomorrow, the people in the GDR were walled in: August 13, 1961 – clattering pneumatic hammers, GDR troops at the Brandenburg Gate, barbed wire was rolled out, people waving to one another. We asked songwriter Wolf Biermann before this program what goes through his mind when he hears and sees sounds and images from back then.

Wolf Biermann: A feeling of shame passes through my soul because back then, I was among those – this must stay among us and so I’m also saying it on the radio – who were for the building of the wall.

Heinemann: Why?

Biermann: Because back then, I as you know even went from Hamburg to the GDR (East Germany) at 16 years old and was of the opinion that the GDR could become the better Germany, in comparison with the time of the Nazis in any case, but also with West Germany. Indeed, a more just society was supposed to be set up there under the name of socialism. And certainly you know that I come from a communist labor family, that my people were almost all killed during the time of the Nazis, but my mother did survive and had the ambition of making me into a little communist – I was supposed to rescue mankind and for that reason I went to the East at 16 years of age. And then I really saw that socialism didn’t even work in the GDR. Then, of course, I began to criticize them and was of the opinion that the building of the Wall was our fault, not that of the West, not the fault of the headhunters as they were called. And because of this, I was of the opinion that this wall was an act of defeat for us from which we should learn painful lessons. And with this position, as you already darkly suspect, I was not in sync with the party line, the official line of the powers in the GDR.

Heinemann: Which had consequences a late as 1976 for you. Now, back to the explanation: Gesine Lötzsch, the president of the Left Party, has now said that the wall was the result of the Second World War and the German raid on Russia. In a pointed question: Is Hitler responsible for the Wall?

Biermann: Then let’s start with the Thirty Years’ War and Adam and Eve. That is the typical historical view from people with no history, who want to hide, cover up or embellish something and look for anyone to blame in world history, but the most important ones they should find they don’t, namely, they themselves. And this Gesine Lötzsch is, of course, a political heiress of the powers that were to blame for the building of the Wall. That, indeed, is the heritage of this old Stalinist Pact. Also, without Stalin, and without Ulbricht, and without Honecker, they are in my opinion reactionaries, stupid people, who play no good role for the development of mankind and for their own people.

Heinemann: Mr. Biermann, which intentions do you suspect are behind Mrs. Lötzsch’s statements?

Biermann: Of lying her and her party’s way out of the liability that has historically burdened these people. Those are the heirs of the GDR nomenclature, and in truth, financially and politically and morally, or more accurately put, amorally. This is the degenerate pack that oppressed us for decades in the GDR, and of course they’re doing anything they can to piece together a historical image where they can get by with a black eye rather than lose their head.

Heinemann: Berlin historian Hubertus Knabe, on the topic of piecing together a historical image, has accused the West-German sixties liberals that many of them collaborated with the Stasi (translator note: East German State Security), and he talks about the most fruitful reservoir for Stasi informants in the West. Why of all things was this movement so susceptible to this totalitarian way of thinking?

Biermann: Because people are always that way, we know that already. One tries to get out of a certain mire only to fall into the next one. People, unfortunately, are always this way, they can’t do it differently. These sixties liberals wanted to put distance between themselves and the debt-ridden generation of their parents, position themselves against them, ultimately stand bravely for antifascism – and then they fall into the arms of the new, the second dictatorship, as Ralph Giordano rightly called it, and lie in bed with them and go, so to speak, from one hardship and lie to the next hardship. Unfortunately, that’s how it often is in history. And because of this, we apparently need one, two or three, four generations after the collapse of the GDR and Reunification before these drunken swings from one stupidity to the corresponding opposing stupidity … that takes a while.

Heinemann: Mr. Biermann, the signs and support of communist or GDR-socialist organizations, should they be subject to punishment?

Biermann: Oh, I don’t know. Of course, that was criminals; of course, they’re not only guilty before history but most of all before living people whose lives they have destroyed, whom they killed, tortured, humiliated and mutiliated. But: Where does that bring us if the emblem of the GDR is forbidden like the swastika from the Nazi times? The embarassment that happens when such a symbol of criminal power shows up should be grabbed by the horns and used as an opportunity to mingle with the fight of the world over the truth of the process of history, even in the sense of enlightenment.

Well, just lately I experienced it – in the train, a young man addressed me, Mr. Biermann, I am a national socialist, thus a young Nazi, and you were formerly a communist, so we really do belong together. Look, we want the same thing, I only want national socialism and you likewise want international socialism or the like. I tried as well as I could to explain to him that symbols or even slogans – thus phrases are just like symbols, right – keep their significance in the process of history through that which actually happened within these symbols or names.

Look, my father was detained in Nazi times because he was a communist and was tortured and bravely stood against the Nazis, and then was murdered in Auschwitz. For him, the word communism was a holy word. And thus I was raised by my mother as an example, therefore I went at 16 years of age to the GDR. But meanwhile the word communism has come to mean that cynical opposite to a better, more just society for normal people with whom we live here. And because of this, this word has been nailed fast for all time to such historical truths as oppression, muzzling, torture, lies, hypocrisy double and triple exploitation and mass murder of millions of innocent people because Hitler had only twelve years of time and murdered six million Jews, a half-million gypsies that we must not forget in a hurry – but Stalin, the historians disagree whether he murdered only 20 or 80 million innocent people.

Heinemann: Back to the Wall: If the GDR had survived, do you believe that the Wall would have ever become a normal national border?

Biermann: No, no, I don’t believe that at all. With walls that tear a nation apart in time, where humanity needs to grow together as a whole, not only Europe, but the whole world – we are even now painfully experiencing with the whole global crisis –, that would never have been able to continue to exist. And I am glad that I have so wonderfully erred. Namely, I always believed that the Wall would last longer than Wolf Biermann and knew exactly that I would not outlive it. But I am glad that I was able to contribute something with my songs and poems in the GDR, that I was so wonderfully wrong in my determination, that the wall, therefore, did actually fall before I died. That is really wonderful! Nobody could ask more from world history.

Heinemann: We recorded the conversation with Wolf Biermann before this program; you can listen to or read this interview again at dradio.de.

Statements of our interview partners are reproductions of their own opinions. Deutschlandradio does not accept responsibility for the statements of its interview partners in interviews and discussions.

» The interview on Audiostream

The artist Wolf Biermann – timeless, then as now: “I have had enough”

(By Team Quotenqueen for PI. Many thanks to all contributors! Translation: Anders Denken)

(Comment by Frank Furter / Translation: Anders Denken)

Let’s be honest: the have always been, there are, and there will always be bad politicians who simply are overwhelmed with the task governing. But the current generation appears to be a special one, no matter where one looks. Shallowness, cluelessness and platitudes are the rule of the day.

For years now crisis has ruled: financial crisis, economic crisis, Eurocrisis, debt crisis. Was all of this unforeseeable in the light of rampant inflation of real estate value and skyrocketing national debt? Hardly.

The last true economic crisis the Germans in the West experienced was in the years right after the war. Everything that happened after that and that carried the name “crisis” was – without trying to embellish it – a hiccup of the greatest magnitude. The situation was different in East Germany: the economy there disintegrated into a longlasting crisis at the latest with the building of the wall. The fact that the same situation, after a decades-long shift to the left, has come upon the whole country as well as the rest of the West is more than a coincidence.

Of course, the Germans still have it pretty good, if one considers the situation in other countries as a standard. However, the Federal Republic is sapping the power of those structures and reserves that were developed a long time ago. The actual situation is truly something different: “That which the southern European countries have been accused of, that is, constant consumptive expenditures by the state that have been financed for years with credits also applies to Germany,” Walter Hamm affirmed in a FAZ commentary well worth reading. And he’s right. Were it not for the balancing of finances among the states, for example, then some parts of the Republic, above all the capital city of Berlin, would be in as bad a fix as Greece.

And in fact, that which has long been proven in the small things is demonstrated in the big things: the leftwing dogma of well-being and aid harms way more than it helps. When a society offers to take over practically all expenses for its unemployed and pay an amount – not necessarily royal, but sufficient – then it begs the question for those affected: “Why be employed full-time, for just 100 Euros a month more? Of course that doesn’t apply to everyone and should not change the suffering that many people feel and experience who are on the welfare level. The viewpoint here applies more to the system that burdens low wage earners with relatively high expenditures and encourages unemployment to such a degree that it fundamentally provides false incentives.

These same false incentives also exist on the state level. Why should Berlin try to position itself better economically when the result is that it receives no money, but actually in the worst case must pay money out? And the effect has long been recognized on the Europen level. Back when the EU planned the expansion in the East – long before the economic crisis – the great fear went around in Spain, Portugal and Greece: “Does that mean then that we will soon be net contributors and no longer net recipients?”

With the institution of a long-tem transfer union, these destructive misadjustments anyway by the European system should absolutely not be strengthened. In this way the causes for our current problems would be changed in an absurd way into a solution.

Meanwhile, in the US it doesn’t seem any better. It has been long revealed how hopelessly overburdened the government, especially President Obama, is with the current problems. And so the increace of the debt limit is being discussed as a solution for threatening default. That might possibly be the only immediate way to head of the default. However, even there the question is being asked whether a problem that exists because of too many debts can be solved with more debt. Thus it is conclusively demonstrated how little has happened in domestic policy during the era of Obama. The doctoring up of socio-political elite projects such as the healthcare reform has cost must time and resources, similar to the debate here over the departure from nuclear energy. The basic structural problems have remained unaddressed, however – on that side as well as this side of the Atlantic.

Thus the Chinese appear to be the great victors in the current decline of the West. And without a doubt, the realm of the middle-class in the past year has increased considerably in significance, economically as well as politically. Above all, the US, whose largest creditor is the Chinese, is increasingly falling into a relationship of dependence that a few years ago would have been unthinkable. And thus, globalization takes its revenge: with dumping loans and cheap energy, China has managed to lighten the load for the West in considerable parts of its economic production. That, however, puts the Chinese central government under pressure. For with increasing prosperity, the country is losing its ability to compete in the world market. China is ultimately experiencing for itself that which the Japanese, Koreans and the United States before have already experienced: production, especially that in the low-cost segment, migrates to yet cheaper countries like Vietnam and India.

This effect would already be much stronger, if the Chinese government wouldn’t keep the exchange rate of the Yuan artificially low. This way they guarantee, with a well-formulated but tricky means, a good portion of their competitiveness. But that goes contrary to the growth of prosperity of the population, especially on the other side of the booming metropolises in the eastern and southeastern part of the country. The fact is that today hundreds of millions of people in China still live at the Third-World level. Especially threatening in the meantime is the fact that a skyrocketing real estate bubble is developing that could surpass many times the degree of the bubble that burst just recently in the US. The necessary corrections in the Chinese real estate market as well as in the stock market that is driven somewhat by euphoria are not being allowed by the central government. Whether that is the right way, only the future will tell. And already possible difficulties in payment by the Americans could lead to enormous economic faults in China. The bursting of the real estate bubble there, anyhow, appears to be only a question of time.

That in turn for the German economy is also more than a threatening scenario, and it’s thanks to the latest upswing, above all however to the growth in Asia. The domestic market, in contrast, sits idle; the purchasing power of the domestic population is being stifled these days by exorbitant tax and social dues from which the prices of bailout packages of billions for European member states still to this date have not been determined. Moreover, the high and present burden owes itself to our own national system of redistribution. And the federal government can not service this very thing – in spite of the high taxes – without incurring new debt.

This allows no good hope for the future. And nothing else causes more concern than the blatant abuses in German schools and universities. It is there that that generation that is to produce future prosperity for Germany shows its weakness. The combination of decreasing performance by German pupils, and the anticipated increasing burden of costs from pensions, retirement and health and care make for an economic horror scene whose heading off needs to be the highest priority of the political agenda.

However, instead of actually having any discussions over these essential threats against the prosperity of future generations, the body politic here is actually increasing the anticipated burdens through astronomic bailout packages for the debt states in the Eurozone. In this context, the planned implementation of the debt brake appears almost cynical: just like the withdrawal from nuclear energy, this is no “benefit” from current policy, rather a dictation for future generations who will have to do what nobody now is in the position of doing.

It remains to be seen how future generations will deal with the political heritage of their ancestors. And there’s still hope that a generation of statesmen, and of course stateswomen, will follow the generation of losers. For the failure of the present “political elite” is not based on sex, color or nationality, but much more on the encrusted structures that result from devastated conditions and iron-clad insider parties, from extreme neurosis over one’s image and a conscience lacking in responsibility, from exaggerated ideologies and lack of pragmatism, from a false sense of pride and lack of honor, from denatured values and lost morals.

It is “time to awaken“, Walter Hamm said in his said FAZ commentary. That is well put. However, in the face of the present generation of politicians – in the government as well as the opposition – one would be inclined to answer: “Let them sleep. That way they’ll do less damage!”

Recording of the Monitor report on the Berlin school conflict:

The forced consolidation of those unwilling to learn with normal pupils by means of administrative acts, it appears to be the last means of choice not just in Berlin, where Reds and Greens make the decision. In northern Cologne, in spite of the decision by the local representative assembly, a secondary school in Worringen was closed and consolidated of all things with the secondary school in Seeberg where a pupil was beaten to death on the playground (we reported). The GREENS remark cynically that the incident could even reasonably affect the reception of the new students:

SPD and Greens voted for the closure of the school in Worringen and its fusion with the secondary school in Seeberg. With this, the majority of the commitee followed the wish of both schools, but voted against the decision of the local Chorweile representatives. They had demanded that the consolidation of the schools be delayed after the death of a pupil in Seeberg. The ninth-grader had been beaten into a coma by a fellow student on the playground at the end of May and died a few days later.

In the special situation with which the Seeberg school had to deal, there was no doubt in the decision of the school committee. The brutal attack, however shouldn’t be an obstacle for the consolidation. By means of this, a “high sensitivity” has developed that could even facilitate the acceptance of the new students, so the Greens believe.

(By Team Quotenqueen for PI / Translation: Anders Denken / Many thanks to all contibutors!)

He is known for the publishing of horror scenarios and panic mongering. And any skeptic was gagged and – where possible – covered up in complaints. Der “Spiegel” writes:

Several billion (Brit. milliard, and thus as follows) Euros are at play: A UN panel is deciding on the prognosis regarding the increase of the oceans – they determine how much taxpayer money the states will have to pump into coastal protection. Hundreds of studies are being dealt with, it’s going on like at a bazaar.

One number is cause for unrest in science and politics. This number decides the fate of several billion Euros of taxpayer funds. The number will be determined inthe next UN climate report that will appear in two years: It will tell how much the oceans are expected to swell before the year 2100. 146 million people live less than a meter above sea level. The greater the expected increase of the oceans, the more countries will have to shell out for dikes and protective walls for the coast and the more people will have to relocate. That is why this number is so heavily debated.

18 choice scientists from ten countries will decide which results from the research about the sea level will be considered in the UN climate report. One of the most important questions of the future is at stake here: How much is the sea level rising? The UN task group is under increasing stress because the results of the studies on the subject deviate from each other by up to five meters – but the UN report has to come to a clear result: it is supposed to give a range for the anticipated increase of sea level. One of the deciding factors is the maximum amount, which will describe the worst-case scenario – and it is about this number that the greatest amount of wrestling is going on.

The last UN report predicted an increase of the seas of up to 59 centimeters before the end of the century. Now the UN experts have to view hundreds of studies again for the next report – but the selection seems more difficult than before. The haggling over the results can be likened to the bargaining at a bazaar: on one side the researchers have published alarming sea level prognoses that far exceed the statements in the last UN climate report. On the other hand, actual measurements of the sea leve disagree: to this point no extreme increase has been detected.

“Who offers more?”

There is one simple certainty: (…)

This week, the discussion escalated. The geologist Jim Houston of Engineer Research Center in Vicksburg and Bob Dean of the University of Florida in Gainesville in the USA made a surprising statement in the scientific paper “Journal of Coastal Research” that the sea level during the last century had remained seemingly at a steady pace – an acceleration was not to be seen.

However, the retort came promptly: Houston and Dean came to their results because the authors started their computations only in the 1930s, Stefan Rahmstorf of the Postdam Institute for Climate Research (PIC) writes, who also often publishes alarming studies regarding the sea level. If one would arbitrarily chose another point of origin in the previous century, that would in contrast show an accelerated increase, Rahmstorf stressed with a colleague in his reply in the same professional magazine.

Of course the point of origin for “scientific” examination is chosen so that the most taxpayer money possible can flow for one’s own project. Anything else would be unscientific.

(By Team Quotenqueen for PI / Translation: Anders Denken / Hat Tip: Lupulus Lotarius)

(By Michael Stürzenberger / Translation: Anders Denken)

Up until now, one could generally be of the opinion that Alevites weren’t really proper Muslims, that they had moderate religious views, behaved appropriately, were well integrated, were active participants in the labor market and joined well in society. But after this appearance, one seriously has to reconsider.

“Primaverablog” reports of the incidents:

According to statements by the head of the association, Ahmet Taner, who read the official position of the association from a paper, nobody could reach Mr. Sarrazin in the morning and therefore tell him that the association, only after a long internal debate, came to the conclusion that they should turn down an interview with the ZDF team. After the position had been read, the visitors chanted again: “Beat it! Beat it!”, to which Sarrazin countered: “This is an antidemocratic way to behave; they aren’t doing anyone any good, and are thereby confirming their prejudices.”

Figen Izgin, co-founder of the immigrant organization “Allmende e.V.” and member of the state committee of the Berlin Left Party, said: “Only yesterday did I hear of it and am happy that the association has put up resistance. The Cem homes are open for everyone, though not for racists, and therefore I find it good that somebody has showed him rejection; that has made me very happy.” Turgut Altug, Kreuzberg’s Green candidate for the House of Representatives showed no appreciation at Sarrazin’s visit: “After all that has happened and that he has said so much, it makes no sense for him to come here.”

Here is the video:

Afterward, the ZDF team travelled further with Sarrazin through Berlin’s minefield terrain. It continued to be turbulent, as Primaverablog reports:

When Sarrazin and the ZDF team visited the “Hasir” restaurant on Oranienburger Street, the manager Hikmet Kundakci refused to serve them. In front of the restaurant there was a battle of words between him and two upset citizens that had no appreciation for these subjects. Also at the Turkish weekly market on the Maybach bank, he debated with some of the vegetable traders, to whom he said: “Those who work have my respect!”

There is a video for this as well:

When one looks at the aggressiveness, the lack of insight and the resistance to the facts by these people – as well as the leftwing Bio-Germans and the immigrant citizens from the Turkish-Arab region – one can only fret and worry in light of the demographic development. Berlin will be the first city to fall. Neighborhood by neighborhood. None other than little Gaza strips will come into existence. In just a afew years, Thilo Sarrazin will not be able to enter such areas without danger to his life. His book “Germany Is Dismantling Itself” has actually confirmed itself of this sad reality with this visit. The question is only whether it is five before midnight or five after.

ZDF broadcasted the report about the Sarrazin visit in Kreuzberg on July 22 in their show “aspekte” (11:15 pm – 11:45 p.m.):

» BZ: Sarrazin in Kreuzberg unerwünscht
» taz: Pöbeln und sich anpöbeln lassen in Kreuzberg und Neukölln

Der SPIEGEL reports:

It has become known that the 51-year-old previously convicted of being a sex offender abused a seven-year-old girl at the end of January. According to statements from the police, the man spoke to the child on January 26th on her way home from school. Then he lured the girl into an underground parking garage and committed the act on her there. The crime occurred in downtown Dortmund.

The 51-year-old, according to a report from “Der Westen”, was sentenced in 1992 for multiple abuses on boys. After a judgment handed down by the European Court for Human Rights (ECHR), he had to be released from preventive detention. In September 2010, he moved to Dortmund.

The ECHR had objected to the prescribed or extended security detention in Germany as withdrawal of freedom contrary to human rights. The Supreme Court therefore decided at the beginning of May in the context of the ECHR that the regulations were unconstitutional and violate the fundamental right to freedom.

Since the girl could not give a dependable description of the man, the investigations didn’t lead to the arrest of the perpetrator. It was only after the evaluation of a saliva sample by the regional criminal investigation bureau that a DNA match could be determined.

The man, who had lived in the Düsseldorf region before moving to Dortmund, admitted to the crime while accompanied by his attorney. He is to be brought before the magistrate on Friday.

According to reports in “Der Westen,” the man was considered a model example of resocialization by police and therapists, which is why the observation ceased at the end of 2010.

Critical bloggers warned of the possible consequences of the buckling by German Supreme Court judges. Are the ladies and gentlemen in the red robes still judges, or is it necessary now to speak of accomplices in bowing to a foreign justice decision to the detriment of one’s own people, even though just a few months after a sex offender was sentenced to fines for the now exposed crime in another case in Germany (we reported)?

(By Team Quotenqueen for PI / Translation: Anders Denken)

Objections that nothing remains secret in the US, that President “Tricky Dick” Nixon lost his office in the Watergate affair, and that Monica Lewinsky’s blow jobs in President Clinton’s White House flashed through press and TV in every prairie village find no fruit among obsessed conspiracy theorists. And so it remains a fact for them that it wasn’t Islamic terrorists that pulverized the twin towers of the World Trade Center, but the CIA or the Mossad or President George W. Bush, or all three together; in any case, not Muslims, for Islam is Peace. It wouldn’t get any worse if such rubbish weren’t broadcast with the aid of our media taxes. Broder writes about this in the WELTWOCHE:

Last Monday, the Regensburg district court sentenced British bishop Richard Williamson in his absence to a fine of 6,500 Euros because of Holocaust denial. Williamson, in 2008 in an interview with Swedish television held in Regensburg, called the number of Holocaust victims “exaggerated” and questioned the existence of the gas chambers. Williamson belongs to the species of “old revisionists,” a breed that is dying out. Anyone who asserts today in Germany that there was no Holocaust, that it was an invention of the Jewish (or Zionist) “lobby,” only makes themselves look ridiculous.

Now, that doesn’t mean that historic revisionism itself is dead. Just as the good, old antisemitism masks itself in antizionism, so has revisionism itself also tried on a new outfit. Where it was better before to prove the nonexistence of gas chambers in order to liberate Germany from the charge of genocide, now its better to step in to save the honor of Mohammad Atta and Osama Bin Laden. 9/11, the new revisionists say, was not the work of Islamic fanatics, but that of the US Secret Service in order to justify the “occupation” of Afghanistan and the “attack” on Iraq.

The farther 9/11 is in the past, the more such constructs look appealing. For the tenth anniversary of 9/11, there are more than a dozen books coming to the market whose authors are obsessed with the selfsame idea: It was the CIA! Or the Mossad! Or the CIA and the Mossad. However, not one case of Mohammed Atta and his gang. Last Sunday, one of these books was featured in ARD’s culture magazine “Titel, Thesen, Temperamente (Titles, Themes, Temperaments).” In summary:

“The government of the US remains silent to this day as to how and who planned and carried out the attacks of 9/11.” The author made a name for himself as an expert for the cultivation and use of cannabis, published a book about the history of absinthe and wrote a novel about 9/11. Just the right man to ask “uncomfortable questions” and answere them right there on a publicly funded television program.

(By Kewil for PI / Translation Anders Denken)

One of his core circle – Judas Iscariot – misunderstood Jesus. He tried to force Jesus to call for an uprise against the Romans and hence, to start a revolution. Judas did this by betraying the one he allegedly believe in.

Anders Breivik refers in his over 1500 pages manifest he wrote under the pseudonym Andrew Berwick – and which is linked in the new English Wikipedia entry on him – to statements of several Islam critics he obviously misunderstood as much as he misunderstood Christianity, he believed fighting for. He saw himself as a crusader of Christian anti-jihad (picture – from his manifest). Breivik writes in his text, on which he must have worked for several years, about eschatological plans, crusades against Islam, the reconquista of Europe like it probably never existed and about “false prophets”. Probably he read the Quran, but did he read the bible? Did he know anything about the God he believe fighting for?

When Judas Iscariot had betrayed Jesus to his persecutors with a kiss, Jesus didn’t call for a revolution. We read in the gospel of Matthew 26,50-52:

And Jesus said to him, “Friend, do what you have come for.” Then they came and laid hands on Jesus and seized Him. And behold, one of those who were with Jesus reached and drew out his sword, and struck the slave of the high priest and cut off his ear. Then Jesus said to him, “Put your sword back into its place; for all those who take up the sword shall perish by the sword.

The grace of God isn’t to find in killing people in his name, but in love towards all other people. Their life is precious and and worth saving, even if they don’t share our opinions. Jesus asks a lot from us, if we take his statements seriously: No cheap appeasement, but real reconciliation, forgiveness and true peace, not only on paper, but with ourselves and each other. For whomever Anders Breivik believes fighting for, it’s not the God manifested in the bible.

We pray for the victims and their families and we ask our readers to please do the same.

A female journalist from the Norwegian radio network NRK at the site said she saw people lying “in blood in the street.” Several office buildings were evacuated. Streets in the area were blockaded for fear of further explosions, the newspaper “Aftenposten” wrote. Pictures were spread on Twitter (photo) in which thick pillars of smoke could be seen rising from the middle of the city area. Film recordings show people running down streets scattered with rubble. So far, no group has laid claim to the attack

Original videos of the incidents in Oslo:

According to the press reports in the afternoon, people were still locked in the destroyed buildings that were apparently rocked by two different explosions – one from a car bomb in front of the government building and one by a package bomb inside.

In the meantime, according to reports, shots were fired on a summer camp for youth organized by the Norwegian Labor Party in Utoya, an island on Lake Tyrifjorden near Oslo. Whether the shots are connected with the attack is still not clear. According to BBC the gunman was disguised as a policeman.

At the attack on the youth camp 80 people were killed and more injured. Prime minister Jens Stoltenberg said the “situation in Utoya was critical”.

Pictures from Utoya:

Sky-News was amongst others drawing links to the religion of peace:

(By Michael Stürzenberger / Translation: Anders Denken)

One of the fatal victims of 2008 was Munich resident Ralph Burkei (photo left), former vice president of [sports club] TSV 1860 Munich, president of the VfB Leipzig, treasurer for the Munich CSU [political party] and head of the Bavaria Journal (Bayern Journal) – and a personal acquaintance of this author for 20 years. Burkei fulfilled a life dream with his trip to India, but it was to become a nightmare. Ten Muslims had been drilled with Quran verses for their operation, and they carried it out three days long like mind-numbed robots.

This time, the (alleged) devout ones attacked at three different positions. As an exception, this time it wasn’t time-delayed in the same place, which has become popular lately among Muslim activists for the sake of increasing the intensity of effect: After the first explosion, the second suicide bomber waits until aid personnel and paramedics as well as gawkers are on the scene, and then he blows himself up so the number of casualties can be massively increased. The motto of the Quran, “kill the infidels wherever you meet them,” that is woven like a red thread throughout the “holy book” of Islam is celebrated day in and day out in religious devotion.

The world looks on and is silent. After all, it isn’t allowed to say anything against religious acts. That would actually be discriminatory and racist. The insanity is running its course, and neither ox nor ass can stop it…

(By Michael Stürzenberger / Translation: Anders Denken)

It is in this activity that they are an an intensive course of propaganda. In Munich, they often spread out in the shopping zone in Munich and on the subway so that they can pass out their flyers and seek out conversations with people. In doing this, they punch just the right buttons of naïve and clueless do-gooders, and for such citizens it is proof enough: Islam really is different than what is shown in the news of the daily horror tales of suicide bombings, terror, killing, discrimination and persecution.

The flyer “Peace – Freedom – Loyalty” is a parading example of the most brazen propaganda that has, absolutely nothing, to do with the facts about Islam. Imagine this: they refer to the “holy prophet Muhammad” and actually assert that his example proves that women are “treated well” in Islam. Not one word is mentioned of the fact that they are to be beaten for insubordination (Sura 4, Verse 34), that they are worth half in an inheritance (4:176) and as witness before the court (2:228), must be sexually available at any time for the men (2:223), are to be killed for infidelity (4:15), that men are to clean themselves after contact with them if they had been on the toilet (4:43) and that they are unclean during their menstrual cycle (2:222).

Things become especially “misogynous” when one checks out Muhammad’s sayings in the Hadiths. There it says, for example, that the majority of dwellers in Hell are women, and that they ruin prayer like a donkey or a dog if by doing so they walk past a devout man. In the photo on the left, one can see (click to enlarge) what Ahmadiyya – in spite of knowing the true facts – is spreading among the people.

When a do-gooder German woman informed about Islam sees such a flyer, she is happy and certainly for the building of a megamosque in her neighborhood as soon as possible. It is in this fashion that the ground is being laid for an Islam to creep in. In principle, the Ahmadiyyas are carrying on just like other representatives of totalitarian ideologies: They babble constantly of peace. Just like Hitler who in the 30s had this so beautifully sounding word on the tip of his tongue more than any other politician of Europe, but already had in his head the warring conquest of “Lebensraum im Osten (living space in the East).”

Islam possesses similar imperialist objectives. It is to “have victory over all other religions” (48:28) and to seize international power over all the earth (3:189). Therefore, the statement of “love and loyalty to the State” by the flyer (photo left) is completely absurd. Not intentionally suggesting malice among the Ahmadiyyas: Anyone having knowledge the violence-glorifying Quran and Muhammad’s life history which oozes of blood could not seriously speak here of a “peaceful” religion.

But they do so here. And, in all seriousness, by actually appealing to their god of vengeance and murder who, according to the Quran, kills by means of their own hands:

“It is not you who have killed, but Allah has killed them.” (Sura 8, Verse 17)

It is almost paranoid to say when exactly peace should take place in the world with this god. Do the Ahmadiyyas mean for the infidels to have rest in the graveyard, or do they expect that each one will convert to Islam and then the legendary peace will reign? Just as absurd would be, if nowadays “moderate” National Socialists were to run around and “invoke Hitler and Mein Kampf” and speak of a “peaceful ideology.”

Well, Hitler always caressed children so nicely after all, treated his female colleagues courteously and was good to his dog. Such figures would indeed be committed to the looney bin.

But the Ahmadiyyas are dealing with a “religion,” and thereby the license of fools comes into play. The statements of this flyer that are dripping with peace have such a weird unintentional effect that they could easily be used in a Carnival speech. And of course, the Ahmadiyyas attempt to attach them at first look to harmless sounding Quran quotes, like the classics with “no compulsion in faith” (photo left). Pure window dressing because they failed to quote Verse 257 of the second Sura completely.

Along this line, the text is known to follow with:

“since the true faith can clearly be separated from heresy.”

And directly following in Verse 258, those who refuse to believe are threatened with Hell-fire. And those who wish to leave Islam shall, as Muhammad said, be killed. The Ahmadiyyans know all of this, but they intentionally keep it silent or push it under. It’s no wonder that they, with these positions, aren’t recognized as Muslims by the Sunnis and Shiites and are not seldom persecuted. But with their transfiguring propaganda, they make Islam presentable and aid in its speedy expansion.

Unlike the Alevites who distance themselves from the Quran and Muhammad, the Ahmadiyyas invoke it. They describe Islam as “a further advancement and perfection of the message of the preceeding prophets.” It is in Islam that “the Divine message reaches its zenith and perfection.” At the same time, they describe themselves as a “reform community,” and this makes them extremely dangerous because through this they give the impression of going back to a peaceful “origin” of this ideology.

However, unlike Luther, who relied upon the truly peaceful Jesus and was able to effect a true reformation in the church, the Ahmadiyyas support themselves with a warrior, conqueror and murderer. And so, they are propagating a confusing illusion. And if Islam would find itself sometime in the position of majority, then the “infidels” would come to know the true Islam.

Those who would like to take these Ahmadiyyas to task with the real facts can find plenty of contact addresses here. The answers will show what is hiding under the shell of harmlessness. With probing, fact-supported inquiries, this carefully crafted, Islamically peaceful Fata Morgana of a proselytizing group might detonate.

» kontakt@ahmadiyya.de

The creators of the internet site have arranged the subject in a easily visible way:

It could be generally said that deutscheopfer.de is the best on all sides that are oriented to this subject. It is professional and user friendly. And it is updated daily.

In the book “German Victims, Foreign Criminals” the subject of daily violence is dealt with that is being brought to Germany, whether by foreigners, mostly those of Muslim origin, unwilling to assimilate or those incapable of doing so. This problem has meanwhile become one of “hostility to Germans in Germany” – long since recognized by our readers through means of our daily reporting. The book on the subject “German Victims, Foreign Criminals in Germany. Background – History – Prognosis (bound edition)” can be ordered here or at Amazon.

For all PI readers in Hamburg and Berlin: The authors and creators of the website will be hosting two initial readings which will be held on July 15th in the evening in Hamburg and July 16th in afternoon in Berlin. PI readers especially are cordially invited (More information here)!

(By Michael Böthel / Translation: Anders Denken)

The SHZ (Schleswig-Holsteiner Zeitung) reports:

It’s a solid case for the Kiel district attorney: an accused father has murdered his daughter in order to cover up the fact that the child is his. In the trial against the 69-year-old on Monday before the state court, the district attorney called for a life sentence. It was demonstrated that the man of Turkish origin killed his 29-year-old daughter the beginning of February 1996 in Trappenkamp (Segeberg district) and buried the body in a garage.

With the murder, he intended to cover up the fact that the victim was pregnant by him, District Attorney Achim Hackethal stated Monday before the state court.

Hackethal also proposed the assessment of an exceptional severity of guilt because the accused took not just one life but two. In addition he made his younger daughter an unwilling accomplice for almost 15 years. He forced her to remain silent and threatened her with death if she would reveal the secret.

Under pressure from the mother, the younger sister broke silence

Only the sister of the murder victim can be thanked that the horrible deed was ever brought to light, the prosecutor said. For the 29-year-old wasn’t missed because she was living illegally with her family after the expiration of her tourist visa. Thus, her death would not have caught the attention of the authorities. Her father explained her disappearance to her mother by saying she was picked up by the police and was deported to Turkey.

He carefully sent the mother on a convalescence vacation during the time of the crime, Hackethal stated. After that she asked about her child year after year and would not let up. Under pressure from the mother, the younger sister broke silence and filed a complaint. The accused was placed two days before Christmas 2010 under arrest. Two teeth and a few bone remnants were found in his garage. The accused apparently overlooked them when he exhumed the daughter and got rid of her elsewhere

The sentence is expected on Wednesday

Hackethal has called the statements by the sister completely verifiable. In contrast, the assertions of the father that he knew nothing of the pregnancy and hadn’t planned the crime were refuted by the hearing of evidence. The accused intended to cover-up the crime of “sleeping with relatives.”

The victim was a very shy woman leading a withdrawn life with psychological issues, Hackethal said. Due to illegal residence, she remained constantly out of sight. During the trial, the other daughter, the son and the wife had described the accused as the violent family tyrant who grossly abused the oldest daughter and the son. His brutalities against the victim had already early on reached such a degree that the mother, out of concern for her life, took her to relatives in Turkey back in the 1980s.

The defense called for acquittal on the grounds of “reasonable doubt for the accused.” Up to murder and homicide, all crimes have a statute of limitations. If what the accused asserts is true, then he must be acquitted. The verdict is expected Wednesday.

A(n immigrant) person, who continues in such activity should not be kept in a German detention hotel. Halfway proper followup for this would be an operative intervention to free him from his perversion along with subsequent deportation. The verdict is expected on Wednesday. PI will report on this.

Next to you are sitting two dark-skinned southlanders of unknown origin and they’re carrying on in an unknown language; in front of you to the left, a Turkish young man is sitting with two female Turks and they’re chattering Turkish with little hints of German. These aren’t flight passengers, but “locals”! No tram car without any blacks headed to the main train station. At each stop, more foreigners are standing; at the university stop, you’re happy just to see Asians. You can hear and see everything – just not Swabian. You are not at home.

Three weeks of Spanish didn’t bother you, you were happy to hear and learn English every day for half a year, Italian is like music to your ears anyway. But when you come back to your homeland, you would like to hear a few sounds in your mother language. There aren’t any. At least, not in Stuttgart, the large German city with the most foreigners. More than 40 percent. Berlin is crap and even provincial by comparison.

The thing that disturbs you is not the foreigners themselves. The Vietnamese students are learning something, the Chinese business is bringing money to the country, the executive from New York works at Daimler in Untertürkheim, the engineer from India at Porsche in Zuffenhausen.

I have nothing against it when twenty more of this sort of foreigners would sit in my compartment, but to the homeward bound rider, the feeling is creeping in that the casual southlanders in his compartment who are lazily shining his shoes in the seat across from him have lived for a long time in Stuttgart already, do nothing the whole day, at least nothing good, but rather dwell here and laze around to all eternity at cost to the taxpayer.

That is the thing that irritates one. Why do we give foreigners for inactivity and give away our homeland to them. I am not a xenophobe, islamophobe or racist, and just like the ridiculous campaign slogans all say, I’m only Swabian who turns wild when he sees how our politicians are squandering the money of the true locals on those who bring no benefit but only costs to the country! And that is exactly what politicians have so successfully done for decades so that Germany is no longer recognizable! And the crash is moving closer. We aren’t any better than the Greeks. We are just as rotten and lazy. (The photo shows Robert Bosch in 1936 with an intern in Feuerbach.)

(By Kewil for PI / Translation: Anders Denken)

(By Frank Furter / Translation: Anders Denken)

In what seemed appropriate for today’s anniversary of the Berlin Airlift of 1948, the new citizens’ rights party DIE FREIHEIT (FREEDOM) staged a “political festival” in Berlin at the location of the airlift. Under the shadow of the monument the jubilation over the acquittal of the Dutch ally Geert Wilders was especially great. “It is unbelievable that in the 21st century somebody among us in the West should be dragged into court because of stating his opinion about Islam,” a Berlin party member opined. “It would interest me just how such a trial in Germany would have turned out. Are our courts still independent as well?” another asked.

The spirits were dampened only by the changing weather. Nonetheless, around 100 party members and a good number of interested citizens could be found at the venue. In addition, at least one member was present from the most recently established regional affiliates. With Christian Jung (Bavaria), Thomas Jung (Brandenburg) and Jens Eckleben (Hamburg), there were even three newly elected regional heads who travelled to Berlin to speak to the members.

Moreover, the members of the national committee, René Stadtkewitz, Marc Doll, Dr. Karl Schmitt, Felix Strüning and Yorck-Alexander Mayer held speeches regarding the party’s key issues and introduced the program for the Berlin election campaign, which is available for download at www.wir-lieben-diefreiheit.de.

All around the “Political Festival” it was quiet. Leftwing extremists and antifascists were not to be seen. Before and after the event even more supporters and signatures were gathered for the approval of the local assembly election in September. “Of course, because of our numerous activities and most of all the establishment of our regional affiliates, we have started a little late with the gathering [of supporters],” René Stadtkewitz said on the outset of the event. “But now, in the shortest time, we have gathered the majority of the 2,200 signatures necessary, and this will already be taken care of within the next few days,” the visibly delighted national head stated. “In this place, I would like to thank the members who have put their lifeblood into the concern. That makes me very proud. We are on the right path!”

At the activity, experiences that the Berlin members had in the street were exchanged. “I myself am surprised how well we are accepted by many people,” one young female Berliner said. More than anything, demand for direct democracy and more participation by citizens is touching a nerve of the times. “Many people feel like they’re ignored and they have lost confidence in the parties,” she said and added: “The people ultimately want to be part of determining the future of our country!” Of course, there were also less pleasing episodes in the street. A few weeks ago, for example, a FREEDOM booth was attacked by leftwing extremists and a party member injured.

Of course we don’t intend to let that discourage us, so went the undisputed opinion. “Quite the opposite,” a Hessian who was present said, “if we give up the field to those whose only arguments are violence and terror, then we have lost our country.”

And so, the FREEDOM Party sets out to enter the challenge of its first election campaign. It is a definite sign that the party, with its choice of a positively oriented slogan “We love freedom,” intends to be more than just a political gripe club. “Those who are always fighting against something will in the long run be unsuccessful,” national secretary Felix Strüning said in support of the slogan’s choice. “We are first of all fighting FOR something: that is, FOR more freedom and democracy, for precisely that for which our party is named.”

(A Comment by Frank Furter / Translation: Anders Denken)

Dear PI Community,

We finally made it! The movement for Islam criticism is celebrating a great, and even historic, victory. Let’s thank those who dragged Geert Wilders into court. Those who were recruited primarily by various Muslim organizations were holding a gun to the heart of the Dutch judiciary. And the judges had to decide which values, which rights and which law was to apply in the Netherlands. Is it that law that is written down in the constitution of their land? Or that law that is gaining entry into the West with the influx of Muslims? They decided for Western law. Anything else would have been scandalous and would have forced the question of whether our Western ideas concerning law and order were only a collection of empty phrases.

The trial against Geert Wilders clearly brought to light just how greatly Western and Islamic values differ from each other. The supporters of multicultural society believe that all cultures lend themselves to combining into a flourishing society of diversity. On the surface, this seems to function where culture overflows in tradition and folklore. However, at the roots of a culture is more than just the question of what one should wear, eat and celebrate, and when, where and how. At their roots, cultures open up to the elementary questions of what one may do and not do, what is permitted and what is forbidden, what is right and what is wrong, what is good and what is evil.

And ultimately here is where Islam collides with the Western principle of free and basic democratic order. Indeed even parts of it are completely and diametrically opposed to this order. We, the readers and writers of the PI community have sufficient knowledge regarding this. The refusal of Islamic countries to recognize the human rights declaration formulated in the West already gives more than clear reference to all the facts that we never tire of stating again and again here: Islam is first and foremost a political ideology that is – as shown here today – irreconcilable with the values of our Western system of government. And it is this very ideology that stands in the way of integration with our free society by many Muslims. Islam stands on the principle of enslavement, strives for control, for uniformity, for society’s conformity to its own values and norms. Islamization is not just a rumor or invention by rightwing spin doctors, rather a menacing process of the worst kind to be fought against by anyone that holds the freedom of future generations near to their heart.

Wilders was accused because he said and did things that were completely normal according to the consensus of values in the Western world. He criticized Islam, perhaps even coarsely as is currently indicated in various media. But that is the perfect right of any single individual in the realm of our culture to do so!

We are allowed to criticize democracy, socialism, communism and national socialism anyway. We can even criticize Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism, Atheism and even Judaism, in spite of all the historic crimes of the Germans against the Jewish people. Why then should criticizing Islam be forbidden?

It is not forbidden! Religious freedom, which the leftwing enemies of Islam criticism like to advance in order to criminalize this very criticism of Islam, describes the individual right of a person literally to believe what he wishes. Or maybe not. A right not to be criticized cannot be derived from religious freedom. Quite the contrary, the prohibition against criticizing a religion would actually be a clear violation against the right to free speech that is no less elementary.

And the prohibition against criticizing a religion that currently is based upon a totalitarian political ideology and one hostile to freedom could be compared to historical idiocy what we here in the West should never commit again. For that is how the heritage of the many millions that fell victim to our own totalitarian and freedom-hostile ideologies admonishes us.

Anybody can criticize anything as long as it’s not offensive. And right here is where the Western viewpoint collides with the Islamic viewpoint because many Muslims perceive any factual criticism of Islam right away as an offense. Somebody ultimately needs to tell these Muslims: If you can’t stand this form of criticism, then you have sought out the wrong country for yourselves! Or as Goethe used to say: “Those who don’t wish to adhere to the laws should leave the place where they apply.”

Our laws are still in effect in our countries! And that’s only right, for we can see the situations in control where the law of Islam applies. And we don’t want these situations here because, in our opinion, they are a backwards step into times before democracy existed! Our ancestors had to fight and battle so that we, their descendants, could live in freedom here in the West. Now it is contingent upon us, the descendants, to advance this battle against anyone who would threaten our freedom!

An important signal is being sent to the world from the Netherlands: We, the rational; we, the critics of Islam; we, the governors of law and order; we, the defenders of human rights and Western values; we will fight for as long as it takes. And we will battle if necessary. And all of us would rather die together than find that the great heritage of our ancestors, our basic free and democratic order has fallen victim to the funeral pyre of false tolerance and foolish ideology.

“…And dying in your beds many years from now, would you be willing to trade all the days from this day to that for one chance, just one chance to come back here and tell our enemies that they may take our lives, but they’ll never take OUR FREEDOM!” (William Wallace, played by Mel Gibson in the film ‘Braveheart’)

Links to Wilders’ acquittal:

» DIE FREIHEIT: Stadtkewitz zum Wilders-Freispruch: Der Islam ist das Problem – nicht die Muslime
» BILD: Freispruch für pöbelnden Islamgegner (Frage an BILD: Wo hat Wilders je “gepöbelt”?)
» FAZ: Rechtspopulist Geert Wilders freigesprochen
» Neue Zürcher: Freispruch für den Rechtsextremisten Wilders (Emails an: leserbriefe@nzz.ch)
» Spiegel: Rechtspopulist Wilders feiert seinen Freispruch
» Süddeutsche: Wilders’ Handschrift

Short News reports:

In Spanish Almeria, a man was brought to the Torrecardenas Clinic because he had been kicked in the face by a horse – the man had intended to sexually abuse the beast located in the town El Ejido.

The man had to undergo an emergency operation on his face because of the many broken bones he suffered when the horse kicked him. In addition he also received bruises and a hemorrhage in the brain.

The owner of the horse disclosed that the man had been caught several times in the stalls, however, he didn’t report him. In the meantime, it has been made know that the man is living illegally in Spain. He will most likely be deported from the country.

(By Team Quotenqueen)

The Tagesanzeiger writes:

Wilders wants to be inspired by Switzerland. “We want to multiply our initiatives. We are the beginning of something really great,” the Dutch politician said. The minaret initiative especially has affected him. Both politicians not only made shots at Islam this time, but also the debt states of Greece and Portugal receive their digs as well. At the meeting, there was also the discussion of a possible future collaboration. There was talk of a mutual Europe tour, for example. First of all though, Freysinger still plans to bring the Dutchman to Switzerland in September.

For starters, the two will be seen on September 3rd in Berlin at a big event put on by the FREIHEIT (Freedom) Party as part of the election campaign there. It appears that kindred spirits are growing together here. A mass movement in Europe could be formed along the axis of Wilders, Freysinger and Stadtkewitz.

Meanwhile, it is being very carefully observed in Switzerland how SVP politician Oskar Freysinger is deepening his contacts with Islam-critical parties. The Neue Zürcher newspaper reports under the headline “The Self-Appointed Exterior Minister of the SVP” of his appearance at the founding of the Bavarian State Affiliate of the FREIHEIT (Freedom) Party.

At the Unterhaching sports center near Munich, Valais SVP national councilman Oskar Freysinger scored very well. He had been invited as a guest to the inaugural meeting of the new Bavarian affiliate of the anti-Islamic “Die Freiheit” Party. Before around 70 listeners, Freysinger portrayed pleasurably “the crucial experience of my life” when he was able to celebrate the adoption of the minaret initiative on November 23, 2009. Everyone had expected to see a defeated xenophobic and racist Freysinger on TV, “behind him progressive longbeards in the service of religious freedom and women’s, homosexuals’ and human rights,” Freysinger.

Many things bond the Swiss Freysinger, the Dutchman Wilders and the German Stadtkewitz together. They have recognized Islam as the greatest danger to democracy and freedom and share similar views about Europe’s future. The NZZ writes further:

Oskar Freysinger stresses that there is much space to the right of the citizen parties because they have drifted to the left. A few years ago, he rejected contact by a rightwing national group abroad because at that time there were trends toward totalitarianism and much influence by the neonazis. The program of the “Freiheit” Party is “almost congruent” with that of the SVP, Freysinger affirmed. In addition he has encountered interest abroad if he would propagate the Swiss model of direct democracy as a counterpart to the EU’s system.

Freysinger sees unsuspicious companions in Wilders and Stadtekewitz. “I have no reservations of rightwing extremism with them.” The national councilman also plans an appearance with Wilders in The Hague since the planned visit in Wallis by the Dutchman fell through.

Freysinger does not intend to collaborate with the French Front National and Austrian Nationalists. He has concerns about them.

The Berner Zeitung newspaper is also interested in Freysinger’s foreign policy activities and reports on the association between the two Islam-critical politicians:

After the media conference in The Hague, Freysinger and Wilders will return to discuss further collaboration. Both rightwing politicians are planning a European network with like-minded individuals. Also among the leading heads of this developing movement are René Stadtkewitz, head of the newly founded Freedom Party in Germany. Last Saturday, the Valais national councilman was a celebrated guest speaker at the inaugural assembly of the Bavarian affiliate for the Freedom party in Munich. Furthermore, Freysinger is maintaining contacts with Islam-critical groups in France. He distances himself from Front National and Marine Le Pen.

The Freysinger and Co. network intends not only to push back against Islam in Europe. He is also propagating a new system for the EU – and indeed more direct democracy and a confederation according to the Swiss model.

Meanwhile, Heinz-Christian Strache with his FPÖ (Austrian Freedom Party) are entangled in totally unnecessary discussions regarding Hitler’s supposed honorary citizenship in various Austrian cities. This past Wednesday he was at a mutual press conference by the Front National and the FPÖ arranged by Andreas Mölzer where he disparaging remarks about Wilders (”the man is a flash in the pan,” “self promoter,” “undistinguished positions,” “his statements do more damage to a critical debate about Islam more than they help it”) and positive statements about Islam have caused proper confusion. For example, he said this at the end of January 2010:

“Islam is one of the great world religions and deserves the greatest respect and greatest recognition.”

As long as the FPÖ and the Front National find no clearly Islam-critical course or one that is clearly limited from the extreme right, then a closer collaboration with these parties is impossible. It looks quite different with the Swedish Democrats, the Danish People’s Party and the “True Finns,” who would rather strike a common line with Wilders, Freysinger and Stadtkewitz. Belgian Vlaams Belang (Flemish Interest) also has similar Islam-critical positions, just as a PI interview with Filip Dewinter documented on December 8, 2010, in Jerusalem. However, the Vlaams Belang had has since appeared on May 8th in Cologne at a “March for Freedom” along with PRO and the FPÖ.

In light of an increasing islamization of Europe and the effects of the Islamic world view becoming more and more open, it’s only a matter of time before movements that represent a clear opinion about Islam catch on in all of Europe’s countries and become a part of a European alliance with Wilders, Freysinger, Stadtkewitz & Co.

(A Photoreport from New York City by Mr. Merkava and PI-News)

But also in New York City the police takes comprehensive precautions so that not one day the Islamic or the leftist enemies of Israel conclude a murderous attack. As a minuscule pathetic bunch of turbid counter-demonstrators are they tolerated with police protection – in the name of western freedom of speech – outside the happy parade and disseminate their malign, aggressive slogans. PI-Germany happily retorts their vileness with an own banner with a clear statement for Israel

Led by New York’s dignitaries the giant parade gets going: during five hours a wide variety of groups are proudly marching one after the other, some on huge floats, down the 5th Avenue: The New York Fire-brigade, Jewish Yeshivot (bibel schools), Jewish relief organizations as well as other NGOs, local dancing groups and even American-Jewish motorbike freaks. Greatly cheered at are also the El Al crews who use their layovers in New York City (NYC) to trundle down the parade’s path as the „Dancing Captains“.

Many tens of thousands participants are marching down the 5th Avenue along Central Park – cheered at by hundreds of thousands of spectators of whom many indulge in fanciful Israel outfits.

Even when celebrating in an ebullient mood: those who gave their lives or their freedom for Israel are never forgotten. Posters which remind the crowds on Gilat Shalit or Jonathan Pollard are present.

Celebrating – a good keyword: the one and only democracy in the Middle East is harried by many enemies and today even by so-called friends. But despite all concerns the parade’s evening is meant to be a most gladsome one: PI, too, was invited to the evening’s post-parade-celebrating-party in the Edison Ballroom near Broadway. In the fancy ambience of a ballroom everybody could enjoy a much cheered at video message from the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin „Bibi“ Netanyahu and a live speech by his Minister for Diaspora Affairs.

Both of them pointed out that we were celebrating here in this ballroom the only democracy in the Middle East with unbelievable social, scientific and cultural achievements. Both thanked all the organizations, supporters and particularly all Americans for their genuine friendship, but that evidently does not apply to one particular American.

Then the great party continued with an Israeli Rock-band. Inspired by free drinks the evening developed into a long, wonderful and relaxed Israel-party. Israel Am Chai!

And by the way: the whole day it had, of course, not even rained one tiny little drop…

PI-Video from the Celebrate Israel Parade 2011: