We find that it took a jury 15 hours to determine the guilt of Mohammad Shafia, his (second?) wife Tooba Yahya, and their son Hamed on four counts of first-degree murder. In Canada, first-degree murder fetches a sentence of life with a chance of parole at 25 years.

Who were the victims? and why?

The answer to the first question: Zainab, Sahar, Geeti, and Rona Amir Mohammad. All women.

The answer to the second question is a little more difficult to make out when looking at mainstream media (MSM) outlets. Readers on the North American continent need to get these three little letters – MSM – fixed in their mind, for the MSM will report what’s happening, but they tend to be selective in which parties they disclose that might be involved in the situation.

Looking at the articles, like in HuffPo, for example, we find that the three sisters, all in their teens, were murdered for defying their family’s rules of discipline regarding dress, whom they might date, with whom they might socialize, and what they would access on the Internet. HuffPo fails to tell us where these disciplinary rules come from.

In the HuffPo Article, however, was no mention of why the (first?) wife was murdered. Could it be that she was childless? This wasn’t in the HuffPo article, but it was in the New York Daily News. Apparently Mr. Shafia married his second wife because his first couldn’t bear children, but he kept both wives. Or, maybe she supported the Western lifestyle that is so despised by the unmentioned, so-called religion, as the prosecutors believed. NY Daily News doesn’t tell us why this Western lifestyle is so hated, either.

HuffPo doesn’t mention Islam at all in connection with these murders. We find the word Islam mentioned only when scrolling down to the comments, which themselves are pretty dicey, and surprisingly still there. They only talk about “family discipline rules.” HuffPo does give a little history of what led up to the murders, though, without stating the driving force behind the rage. So, were these arbitrary rules that this father fashioned just for his family. How is it that there are so many families that adhere to a certain unmentionable religion that have the self-same rules?

NY Daily News does give a little more through the information obtained by wiretap.

CNN took the feminist approach in the last paragraph of the article by attributing it to male sexuality and power and control over the woman’s body.

Interestingly, when scanning the CNN article, other devices of taqiyya (‘deception’ for those who haven’t read through other PI articles yet) can be found in the article. For example, Shafia swore on the Quran and said it doesn’t “condone killing people” to preserve the honor of the family. However, in Islam, many times the Quranic passages are supported by the Hadiths (for those who aren’t familiar with these writings, they are commentaries made by Islamic scholars throughout the centuries after Muhammad’s death), which are also considered dogma by Muslims. A good article to read for a quick introduction can be found at islam-watch.org. Also on the right sidebar of this PI page are good downloadable PDF articles that can give you more information regarding this strange ideology accused of being a religion.

By the way, in the quick scan of MSM (remember MainStream Media) articles, I didn’t find the word ‘Islam’ in any of the articles. They reported the court proceedings, some with more detail, some with less. The truth can be told, but it can also be twisted until there is no way to understand what it really is. Obviously, the western Western media have learned well from their European colleagues.

In Europe, they’ve already been told that such violence has nothing to do with Islam, or Islam is peace. But what has been said in the MSM, and what the complete reality of the matter is can be two totally different things.

Also, did anyone hear that the trial had to be delayed because of a bomb threat? Thanks to Pamela Geller, we are able to obtain this information. Something that wasn’t readily reported about in the M–S–M!

The verdict in the trial? Guilty of four counts of murder. The verdict for the MSM? Guilty of suppressing an important part of the truth.

Previous article about this subject:

» Honor Killings – In Canada?

Posted by Anders Denken

the Internet portal ‘Politically Incorrect’ is part of an international network of Islam haters and Muslim stalkers. This is confirmed by research conducted by the Frankfurter Rundschau.

Vulgar? Sometimes. When the truth is shown, it can sometimes be a bit vulgar. One only has to look through the pages both on PI German and PI English to see this is the case. But when reading the articles in which vulgar material might be portrayed, the nasty truth about the parties involved is also portrayed. Also, it would be recommended to take a good look at where and who the vulgarity is coming from. One can only act or react properly to a situation when presented with all of the facts. Sadly, however, the left-wing media like to leave out that which doesn’t fit into their paradigm of beauty, and thus the whole truth doesn’t get said, or it becomes seriously twisted so that the words may be true, but in an alter-universe.

Uninhibited? Yes. When informing the public, the truth should be uninhibited. Period. End of story.

The reports and contributions that PI posts are well-documented – most of the time from the left-wing media itself. PI simply finishes the job of making sure the truth is presented – completely. Again, one only has to look at the articles on PI in both languages to see the documentation behind the articles posted here. And if the media wish to accuse PI of fostering hate, then by transitive logic, they are attacking their own reporting which has been used in documenting many of the articles on this site.

Racist? Absolutely not. As PI has shown countless times, it stands against racism and oppression, and for freedom of speech. And yes, PI does stand against systems that present themselves as religions, but in reality and practice function like a rogue state bent on world domination. Islam is a fine example. It is supraracial. There are Indonesians, Malaysians, Chinese, English, Americans, Europeans, Africans, etc. who are Muslims. Thus to question the principles that Islam lays down is simply not racist. It is also not hate speech to show when a system such as Islam abuses its followers. Consider the following practices in Islam: stoning, honor killing, hanging of homosexuals, deceit, fraud. All of these are allowed to further the gospel of Islam according to the Qur’an, not to mention the issue of forced marriages as well. This is information that can be obtained from well-documented articles on PI.

Again, there are many well-documented articles and downloadable essays that show forth this fact. The MSM simply gets in a dither because PI does not mince words about what is really going on in the world. Thus, they must categorize us in the camp of the extreme Right so that they can accomplish their objective of silencing us and others from standing up against their leftist campaigns.

Perhaps BfV should also monitor the MSM as well. They just might find out who is telling the unadulterated truth, and who is telling the truth to fit their comfort zone. They will also find out that the motto under our banner is just that: “Against the Mainstream, Pro-American, Pro-Israel, Against the Islamization of Europe,” and furthermore: “Against the Islamization of Europe,” and, for that matter, Islamization anywhere because of the destruction it brings, and “For Fundamental Laws and Human Rights.”

Freedom of speech is an elementary right. If PI, along with others who are telling the rest of the story, is suppressed, then we are one more step toward totalitarianism in Europe and in the world.

Check us out. You will find that the information conveyed under the banner is the unadulterated truth. Pretty or not.

Posted by PI

One would like to help oneself often to these – which, of course, is not allowed. A Muslima (Muslim woman) named Ayesha Hübsch, apparently the daughter of Hadayatulla Hübsch, did it anyway and thus she along with her [female] companion got into a quarrel the employee in charge of security at the time. In a following conversation with the manager, the two head-covered women felt unsatisfied. After the Lübecker Nachrichten newspaper let Ayesha Hübsch make an incredibly long complaint about her suffering, watchman Manfred Buchholz was finally allowed to give his version of the story:

Kruse and Buchholz confirmed that some customers reached into the fortune cookie pot and that it wasn’t always noticed. In this concrete case, Buchholz became very watchful of the two female customers because the older one of the two had already taken a cookie. On the accusation by Ayesha Hübsch that he held the hand of her aunt back when she reached into the drum, Buchholz countered: “I didn’t touch the lady.” Incidentally, the two lady customers didn’t welcome any discussion, he was offended most seriously – with scatological language. Ayesha Hübsch furthermore refuted this: “I never say anything like that. That is not my style.” She did, however, admit to having screamed.

Ayesha Hübsch did, however, receive a coupon from manager Peter Kruse as compensation for the trouble she suffered. However, a cheap coupon is truly not worth the words in light of the hellish torture from Miss Hübsch. Therefore, here is our recommendation: Let Ayesha Hübsch fill her hijab with fortune cookies. Because if a devout Muslima supposedly berated an infidel Harbi “in the worst way” – and that in scatological language – that for the sake of us at PI is too hard to imagine.

(Hat Tip: Wächter der Wüste)

Posted by PI / Translation: Anders Denken

(By Felizitas Kueble, leader of the Catholic KOMM-MiT publishing house in Muenster / Translation: Anders Denken)

Apparently one was ahead of his time in the Westphalian metropolis of Muenster: An “especially multi-religious celebration” had already taken place back in mid-January 2011, or such was the title in the “Wesfälischen Nachrichten” (WN) newspaper on January 21, 2011.

Furthermore, the newspaper article complete with a photo of this “celebration” says:

The participation by the Dutch Imam Suat Aydin imparted the title of “unique” to the multi-religious celebration at the 1st German/Dutch corps. Together with religious leaders from France, Spain, Italy, Greece, the Netherlands and Germany, Suat Aydin celebrated the Mass. Soldiers from twelve nations and civilian members of the staff tracked this multilingual service of a unique sort.

The same article along with photo was afterward found verbatim on the internet portal of Das Deutsche Heer.

The newspaper image from the WN shows an altar with candles, flowers and cross surrounded by a half dozen “officials,” among which was an imam on the right, on the left a Protestant pastor – in between five Catholic and Anglican ministers of which one blessed one of the present soldiers with the sign of the cross. A Jewish rabbi was apparently not one of the representatives at this “celebration of a special kind.”

Who here isn’t rubbing his eyes and raising the question: “How can the imam, a religious representative of Islam, ‘celebrate the mass’?” as cited verbatim in the newspaper report.

The Catholic publicist Rudolf Willecke from Muenster wrote a critical letter to the “Westfälische Nachrichten” that was also published on January 27, 2011. It says:

Wasn’t the rabbi from Muenster invited? Did the imam celebrate the Mass according to ordained or unordained ritual? Can an imam celebrate a “mass”?

You call this unique, multilingual service of a special kind a “mutual, multireligious celebration”; everyone is praying at the same time in one room.

To which God then are the 7 religious ministers along with the soldiers and civilian staff members praying? Each to his God, all to a certain God – or “mutually” to “a God of the Jews, Christians and Muslims” who we know doesn’t exist? Was the celebration in truth multireligious, interreligious or irreligious?

Counterfeiting of the Sacrament as Sacrilege

In a further statement as yet unpublished, Rudolf Willeke in addition talks about what follows from this “multireligious celebration”:

I am neither philosopher nor theologian nor Islam scholar. In order to understand the “Westfälischen Nachrichten,” one simply needs common sense to recognize and be able to assert that this article is full of contradictions and that it reflects a “Babylonian confusion of tongues” and a counterfeiting of the Sacrament as a sacrilege.

How can an imam celebrate a “mass” or a “service of special nature”: co-celebrated and assisted by 6 ministers? Did the ministers and the soldiers know w h a t the imam prayed or sang? What was so “special” about this multireligous celebration?

The co-celebrating ministers didn’t make known to the public which faith or which “God” they were confessing or which “common elements” tied them with the Quran and Islam: perhaps in respect to the Person of Christ as the Son of God and Messiah or with reference to Cross and Resurrection, or with reference to the Trinity?

The “god” of the Quran (Allah) is not identical with the God of the Holy Scriptures (Father, Son and Holy Spirit in one Deity), rather fully and completely unidentical.

Christians profess the Three-in-One, the trinitarian God whom the Muslims reject and fight against – and Christians hold – supported by the Holy Scriptures (1 John 2:22) – with all respect to the Muslims (2nd Vatican) that Quranic Islam is a heresy, and the one who rejects Jesus Christ the Messiah as a liar and antichrist.

This precise statement by Rudolf Willeke, in my opinion, brings the theological state of affairs to the point and accomplishes clarity in the important “essentials.” In contrast, this “soldiers’ mass” in Muenster was only cause for confusion and led the participants of this “service of a special kind” down detouring paths of synchretism heading toward religious mixing in the spirit of error.

» Official page of the German-Dutch Corps in Muenster
» Contact: pao@1gnc.org

(Photo above: The Dutch imam Suat Aydin at the multireligious “celebration” of the First German/Dutch Corps in Muenster)

The Austrian Krone newspaper reports about this unimaginable scandal of justice:

Helmut G. (picture) was busy mowing the grass in his yard on a Friday afternoon. “And because I was simply in such a good mood, I began to yodel and sing a few songs,” the retiree said in a conversation with the “Steirerkrone.” That didn’t please his neighbors – devout Muslims – at all. At the time, they were together at their house for prayer time because of the call on the loudspeaker in the courtyard.

“Didn’t want to sound like the muezzin”

A few felt their practice of religion was being disturbed by the lawn-mowing 63-year-old – and promptly registered a complaint with the police. “The reason stated was that my yodling sounded like the call of the muezzin,” Helmut G. shook his head in disbelief. “I had absolutely no intention of imitating it,” the lawn-mowing senior reaffirmed.

The court, however, didn’t believe him and sentenced him to a hefty fine – on Friday, the appropriate statement rolled into view. Helmut G.: “The Muslims don’t comply with any rules; unfortunately, we neighbors constantly have problems…”

So, this is just how it is in the Europe of the 21st century – and even yodeling retires will have to get used to that little by little.

(Found on SOS Austria)

At the same time, the immigration into the social system is to be limited. How that is supposed to happen is not clear.

Die WELT reports, in an article decorated with the picture of a “well integrated,” head-covered woman:

“The learning capacity of immigrants from Muslim countries is not automatically worse than that of other immigrants,” Zimmerman further said. “People with a greater cultural difference also have a greater willingness to reduce this difference.” From that standpoint it would be wrong to carry on debate.

OK, then, fix your lack of skilled laborers with people from Islamic countries who, as you know, don’t really stick out in a negative way and never have special requests…

» kzimmermann@diw.de

(Hat Tip: schmibrn, John A., Freak / Translation: Anders Denken)

Die Tagesschau writes:

The Education Ministers of the countries have spoken out clearly against mandatory German on the playgrounds. They rejected the suggestion of a conversation with immigrant associations in Berlin. By doing so, the department heads positioned themselves against the plea of leading coalition politicians, such as the integration commissioner for the German government, Maria Böhmer (CDU).

A comprehensive requirement of German in playground areas is unthinkable, stressed the president of the Education Ministers’ Conference (EMC), Ludwig Spaenle (CSU) after the meeting. This applies even if voluntary regulations in certain schools could be “overall of interest.” The Rheinland-Pfalz education minister Doris Ahnen (SPD) said the idea was “in no way likely” to solve integration problems. It is “sad” that the same useless suggestions pop up with constant regularity. Berlin’s education senator Jürgen Zöllner (SPD) called the push “unhelpful.” The implication of learning German was indeed undisputed. The “top down” forbidding that young people speak their mother language in the schoolyard is, of all things, unsensible.

The Turkish community in Germany reacted with relief regarding the position of the national ministers. “There was the need of a signal from the EMC,” said chairman Kenan Kolat, “a ban against native language is not acceptable.” This would be a “signal for subjection” and a “stigmatization” of young people with foreign roots. The demand from Böhmer and others is “scandalous,” Kolat criticized. The education ministers have given the right answer for the “unspeakable discussion” of the past few weeks.

Of course, it’s clear. The Turks are against it because whoever is against integration will, of course, be against mandatory German, regardless of who is involved and what the rest of the German population says. And the German dhimmi, who himself doesn’t offer any “helpful suggestions,” gives a nod to the Turks and is silent.

» ludwig.spaenle@csu-landtag-news.de

(Hat tip: Ulrich K. / Translation: Anders Denken)

PI shows the video, in which can be seen how the Californian Rabbi Nachum Shifren (photo above) was hindered by the police from going to Speakers Corner while accompanied by 50 EDL followers to hold a speech.

As Rabbi Shifren came close to Speakers Corner, he was prevented by the police from reaching his destination. He had to hold his speech in the park where the police held him back and had blocked him.

(By Amirkabir / Original appeared on Tangsir 2569 / Translation: Anders Denken)

About the History of ISLAM’S Tolerance

“We then want the flag of Islam to fly again over these lands that have had the fortune of being under the government of Islam and hearing the call of the muezzin to praise God. Then the light of Islam died out, and they returned to infidelity. Andalusia, Sicilia, the Balkans, southern Italy and the Greek isles are all Islamic colonies that must return to the shot of Islam. The Mediterranean and Red seas must once again become inland seas of Islam as they were before.”

These statements don’t come from, say, al-Qaeda, rather they are found in the program that the Muslin Brotherhood founder Hassan Al Banna formulated in a speech. The Brotherhood numbers millions and has spread out far beyond Egypt. Its intellectuals are active in Europe and in the United States; they are seen as “moderate” are treated accordingly by the media. A planned recapturing of “lost” areas is part of the programs of states fighting for territorial exercise of power, and therefore, of political alliances. How do they belong in the program of a religion.

Dar as-Salam and Dar al-Harb

Since the beginning of the classical era between the ninth and eleventh centuries, Islamic jurists have divided the world into two parts, that is to say into the “House of Islam” and the “House of War.” This division doesn’t depend on where Muslims might live in great numbers or even represent the majority, rather where Islam governs – in the form of Sharia – or where it doesn’t govern. This dichotomy, therefore is not a religious one but a political one. Between these two divisions of the world war naturally governs until the House of War has been destroyed and Islam rules over the world (Sura 8:39 and 9:41). Therefore, according to classical doctrine, a duty for the Muslim world community exists to wage war against the infidels until they either repent or submit.

Jihad

This war is called Jihad. The Great Commission of Jesus calls for all people to repent at his teaching, but permitting their political order, thus the goal of Islam is comprised of politically subduing all non-Muslims, but permitting their religion, in case they are book religions. The general command from God for Jihad is taken from Sura 9:29. Certainly, tiny pacifist currents in Islam have not accepted this interpretation. The Shiites do accept it, but require that a genuine Imam will lead the Muslim community, and they have waited more than thirteen centuries for such an Imam, so for them only defensive Jihad is in effect for the time being, that is, in the case that the Muslim community is attacked. In contrast, the other currents, for example, the so-called Harijites, have radicalized the statement in Sura 9:29: In Jihad, they see an individual duty for each suitable Muslim, which stands as a sixth pillar next to the other five cardinal duties. The results of this doctrine: If anyone has to participate in the collective waging of war against the infidels or anyone – in the case that the Muslim community is for the time being too weak for it – has to take matters into hand alone, or in groups, then assassinations and terror attacks, and thus asymmetrical waging of war is the correct approach. What the Harijites require for offensive Jihad is considered by most representatives of the orthodox teaching of the Sunna as defensive: If Islam is attacked or Islamic territory is occupied by infidels, then Jihad becomes individual duty; a 1948 fatwa from the Grand Mufti of probably one of the most influential teaching spots in Islam, the Al-Azhar University in Cairo – targeted against Israel – leaves no doubt about this. Whatever enemy power that holds to the Hague Ground War Ordinance and makes strong distinctions between combatants and non-combatants ends up in great difficulties because of this.

Permanent State of War

The state of war lasts until the House of War has been destroyed and the world is conquered. Therefore, Majid Khadduri calls Islam a “theistic monocracy based on imperialism.” Peace accords that Islamic governments make with non-Islamic governments are only seen as cease fires; therefore, as a rule, they are concluded for at the most ten years; two legal schools allow only three to four years of peace. The short timeline makes it possible for the militarily superior Muslims to perform uninterrupted extortion against the other side; in this fashion great sums of money and people have flowed to the Muslim side during the course of the centuries. When the balance of power shifted, the Muslim rulers had to change their practice. Thus, in 1535, Suleyman “The Magnificent” made a pact of peace with the French king that was in effect as long as the Sultan lived – a break with tradition. Christian theologians attempted – in the light of plurality of nations – to define what a “justified” war was, and what wasn’t; wars waged solely for the sake of faith were overwhelmingly seen as not justified. For Muslim scholars, however, the “House of Islam” is a political unit, which can bear no internal war; therefore, the only legitimate war and highest duty is that which leads to the subjugation of the infidels, just as the famous scholar Ibn Khaldun categorically stated in the fourteenth century, “Jihad is legally prescribed in Islam because it has a universal commission and is kept to convert all of mankind, whether willingly or unwillingly, to the religion of Islam.” Jihad’s rules of war are flexible, from the preservation of mass slavery to mass murder, according to Chaudhuri everything is possible, just like it was with the Greeks and Romans. This is what fundamentally distinguishes the holy war of Islam from those of Old Testament Israel, which provided for the killing of all males outside of Israel, on the other hand, every living thing on Israeli soil was to be destroyed (Deuteronomy 20:10-20). We tend to get upset over what the Crusaders wreaked in Jerusalem in 1099. However, the Crusaders acted according to martial law of the time; Muslim conquerers acted unaffected by such law and everywhere: In 651, it reached Iran – in the conquest by Istakhr alone more than 40,000 Iranian civilians were killed and hundreds of thousands sold into slavery, in 698 it reached Carthage, 838 Syracuse; the notoriously famous vizier of the Córdoba Caliphate, Al Mansur in only twenty-seven years led twenty-five campaigns against the Christian kingdoms of northern Spain, – enslaving, devastating, annihilating; it reached Zamora (981), Coimbra (987), León, Barcelona twice (985 and 1008), then Santiago de Compostela (997). The Jihads wreaked the most horrible devastation back then on Byzantine Anatolia, rich with cities; the massacre of Amrum (838) remained a signal for a long time; the civilized culture of Anatolia never recovered from that. The Turkish Seljuk Alp Arslan had complete Armenian cities massacred, the most horrible was in 1064 in the capital city Ani. The judgment by Bat Ye’or is more than justified: “The excess, the regularity and the systematic characteristic of the destruction considered norm by Islamic theologians distinguishes Jihad from other wars of conquest.” Certainly, the mass slavery remained the favorite goal of war. Thus, back in the eighth century, the largest slave-holding society in world history came into being; it required the constant influx of new slaves; it transformed the African continent into the largest provider of slaves, a fate that Europe only barely escaped. The keeping of slaves is legitimate in Islamic doctrine and therefore requires understanding of Islamic law. The enormous speed with which an Arabic empire between southern France and India came into existence is peculiar, and not one single conquer was at the helm of the expansion. The most successful imperialism in world history attracted no less than the amazement of Hegel: “Never before did dedication accomplish such great deeds.”

Martyrdom

If “dedication” could do such things, what is it rooted in? The answer is simply, in martyrdom. An event in the year 963 in Constantinople illustrates this: Emperor Nikephoros Phokas had just driven out the Arab occupiers from Crete; then he planned a great war to liberate eastern Anatolia and northern Syria from Muslim rule. A council was supposed to aid him; he insistently asked the assembled bishops to raise the soldiers that would fall in the upcoming war to the status of ‘martyr.’ These soldiers, therefore would be certain of Paradise. However the patriarch withstood the emperor: “No ecclesiastical council is in the position to anticipate God’s purposes, only God can decide salvation.” A key scene in world history. The emperor know what was at play. The Byzantines constantly had to experience the bravery with which the Muslim troops fought against which the Christians were incapable. Fallen Muslims were seen as martyrs for the faith, and as fallen they march straightway into Paradise. The concept of martyr is fundamentally different between the two religions. Christian martyrs imitate the suffering of Jesus, passively suffer torture and death; Muslim martyrs are active warriors, according to the prophet’s model, undaunted in the face of death. As Hassan Nasrallah, the General Secretary for Hezbollah in Lebanon, said in a speech, “You love life, but we love death.” Significant for the willingness of the warriors to die is the unbreakable promise that whoever dies for his faith receives eternal salvation (Sura 4:74-76). Muslims were supposed to withstand a power ten times greater (Sura 8:66-67); later legal scholars allowed a retreat, as Chaudhuri writes, in case of coming up against at least an enemy force twice as great. Since the deciding resources of that war were the fighting man and his readiness to sacrifice his life, it was of no help to the Byzantines to be technically equal to the Arabs and Turkish Seljuks; they had to succumb for the long term in case their fighting morale didn’t reach the same level. Greater willingness to die brings enormous advantages into the battle situation: thus more daring operations can be tackled and bolder maneuvers can be initiated that will astonish and confuse the enemy; thus victories can be forced that would have appeared technically and materially impossible, and battles won that would normally be lost under normal conditions. Nikephoros was aware of the military consequences of Sura 4:74-76; he was the first to attempt a correction in the principally inferior war capability of the Christian religion. However, the bishops of the eastern Church saw it beyond their theology to manipulate things so that a warrior martyrdom could exist. Thus the situation remained as it was, and the Byzantine emperors had to wage their heavy defense against the constant Sarazen and Seljuk aggressions without religion helping them where help was needed the most.

The Crusade

The western Church altered the theopolitical situation first: when Pope Urban II called for the first Crusade in 1095, he promised the Christian warriors the absolution of sins. Fallen crusaders would in this fashion pass up Godly judgment; they were placed at the level of martyrdom even though this name was withheld from them. The Pope, as head of a monarchially organized Church did precisely what a council of eastern bishops couldn’t: He made a ruling on salvation. Only then could the popish Church wage “holy war,” like Islam had fostered for centuries. In what way are the Crusades and Jihad distinguished from each other? Only the Pope could call for a crusade; therefore they occurred only occasionally – in comparison with the countless, unending and ubiquitous Jihads of the Islamic world. And the objectives of the Crusades were limited to a precise scope; in November 1095, Pope Urban II stated in Clermont the basis and the objective of the Crusade:

“Bringing aid most expeditiously to our brothers in the Orient is unavoidable. The Turks and Arabs have attacked them and are pushing forward in the area of Romania (Constantinople); and while they push even deeper into the country of these Christians, they have overcome them these seven times in battle, they have killed and taken a great number of them captive. If you do not put up a resistance to them, then the faithful servants of God in the Orient will no longer be able to handle their assaults.”

The first Crusades were intended either to come to the aid of the beleaguered Christians or the holy places in Palestine, or to liberate the Christians in subjection under the Muslims. In contrast, the Muslim legal scholars held consistently to the ultimate objective of conquering the “House of War” and bringing all infidels into subjection. Pope Urban II saw correctly. If Constantinople had fallen back in 1100, then the enormous military power of the Turkish hordes would have struck Central Europe four hundred years earlier. And then, the enormous multifaceted European probably would not have developed: no free civilized constitutions, no constitutional debates, no cathedrals, no Renaissance, no democracy, no rise in the sciences; for in the Islamic areas, free thought – the Greek and the tolerant Persian – disappeared even in those epochs. Jacob Burckhardt’s judgment – “a fortune, that Europe resisted Islam as a whole” – also means that we have a lot to thank the Crusades for even today. However, weren’t the Crusades often abused? Certainly. Crusades “derailed” and became “alienated from their purpose,” for example, like the one that led to the conquest of Christian Constantinople.

The Slave Society

When the slaves of the Islamic world became too few, Emirs wouldn’t only wage Jihads against non-Muslim people which were available for enslavement, rather they were waged more and more against Islamized people under the disguise that they weren’t true Muslims. This happened primarily in Africa against black Africans, thus, just as Songhay in 1468, and then the Moroccans in 1552 invaded Mali, so also since the eighteenth century, when religious reformers in Sahel waged their Jihads against the Islamized Haussa cities from which the Sokoto Caliphate developed – which had the third largest number of slaves going to Brazil and the southern American states. Africa still suffers today from the consequences of these ever spreading Jihads with their genocides and mass enslavements. However, for which political order did the Muslims wage their holy wars with such vehemence and consequence? For Sharia. A political order that, in the first place, strictly separates lords and serfs, secondly, that overall revokes the political and social order of humane regulation. Let’s remain with the first aspect: In Sharia, the Muslims are the lords, and the followers of other book religions – Christians, Jews, Pharsi, Buddhists – are serfs, “dhimmi”; herein is the issue not that of religious minorities, rather of violent majorities, above all in Syria, in Anatolia or against the Christians in North Africa, and, at one time, the Zoroastrians in Iran. The serfs are not allowed to carry weapons, they would be defenseless, and therefore not men of full value. Christians and Jews were required to wear special colors or garments (this type of discrimination led to the Jewish star) in order to be recognized as “Dhimmi”; they weren’t allowed to ride on horses, only on donkeys, so that they would be constantly reminded of their humiliation; they paid tribute (Jizya), that they would pay in person and thereby received a blow to the head. They had to allow themselves to be beaten by Muslims without defending themselves; if a “dhimmi” would strike back, then his hand would be cut off, or he was killed. The testimony of a “dhimmi” was invalid against Muslims, which would only be punished half as much in an action against a “dhimmi”; and for such a serf they could never be punished by death.

Conversely, the most gruesome forms of execution have been attributed overwhelmingly to the “dhimmis.” Even to the point of discrimination against the Jews, to which the Western Church stepped six hundred years after Islam at the 4th Lateran Council of 1215 and that appeared so barbaric to us, aimed at and achieved no such extent of humiliation. The Turkish rulers brought a special concentration: since 1360, up to a fifth of all Christian children were sent in irregular intervals into slavery. They were forced to convert. This multitude of slaves was able to reach into the millions in the course of six centuries; of those, hundreds of thousands of chosen boys were raised to become fanatic Muslims and elite warriors, in the notorious Janit troops: a policy of systematic multiplication of the Muslim population and for the gradual elimination of the Christians. It was successful. “Dhimmitude” displaced the non-Muslims in a radical differentiation: Designating the people in this condition onl as “second class citizens,” as some Islam scholars do, is demagoguery. Just as National Socialism divided the people into Master humans and as subhumans on a racist basis, Sharia has done the same on a religious basis. As the first world religion to do so, Islam created an apartheid in which the areas with Christian or Parsee-Zoroastrian population majorities were colonized and gradually forced into Islam. Islamic tolerance simply means: tolerance of those subjugated as abased and humiliated.

Dhimmitude

This is all understood by studies on “dhimmitude.” But who wants to hear from the many millions of victims? Islam has religiously “sanitized” giant territories: the Second Caliph made the Hijaz, that is Arabia not including Yemen, “free of Christians and Jews”; the alternative meant either conversion or being driven out. Hundreds of thousands of Zoroastrians fled from Iran to India, where their descendants today still live under the name Parsee. Such a thing – from Old Testament considerations – has never before been done by a religion. Likewise, the Almohads and the Almoravides “sanitized” their Spain after the collapse of the Caliphate in 1031: Tens of thousands of Jews and Christians either had to convert or flee to the Christian area of northern Spain or the Levant regions. Certainly, English and French kings, and then the kings of Spain themselves did the same later on; in this they applied an older well-known Muslim formula. And the pogroms? Since the time of the Caliph Al-Mutawakkil, persecutions have swept ever and again over the Orient and North Africa, in which Jews and Christians were forced to convert, driven out or massacred. The constant destruction of churches continued into the century before last (In Turkey churches today are still being burned and destroyed). Gradually the florid colors which European antiimperialism had created in the nineteenth century melted over the transfigured image of Muslim Spain. Careful reconditioning of documents brings with it a different image to light. In 889 in Elvira and 891 in Sevilla, comprehensive pogroms were exercised against Christians. In Moroccan Fez in 1033, over 6,000 Jews were massacred. In 1058, Christian Antioch was made Muslim under persecution and threat of death.

The first great pogrom against Jews on European soil took place in 1066 in Muslim Granada; in that one, 1,500 Jewish families lost their lives. In 1135, the Jewish quarter of Córdoba was burned down, the count of those massacred is unknown and might be pretty healthy in number. All the Christians in Tunis were given the choice in 1159 to convert or to die. It is at this time that Christendom, which had formerly thrived in North Africa, was totally annihilated. The pogroms in areas governed by Christians is certainly no glorifying chapter for European culture; but their extent remains without doubt far behind those of the Islamic world. We urgently need a comparative history of religious subjugation, something that historians vehemently fight against. Do we really speak about integration of Jews? Nowhere under the government of Islam, and especially not in the Spanish Caliphate, were Jews citizens of their city; they constantly remained as serfs. In many German cities, such as Worms, Augsburg and other cities of the High Middle Ages, Jewish citizens received special rights, they had the right to carry weapons, they were better positioned than many poorer Christian inhabitants. They were far better integrated, up until the fourteenth century when their situation deteriorated, than the Jews in Muslim Spain could ever be. Those who consider political integration as most important cannot but place Augsburg over Córdoba. All this has been scientifically recognized for over fifteen years. But who wants to hear it? Each century of Islamic history has its own fill of horror stories. At this point, lets come to the first great Holocaust in world history, which took place in Iran: From the tenth century, when the Turks and Mongols begain to invade Iran, to the fifteenth century, they murdered an estimated ten million Iranians, more than 50% of the population at that time.

All of eastern Iran, that is to say, Greater Khorasan liquidated, Neyshapour simply swept away, Hamadan, Rey and Ardabil have long remained as a signal. No century passed, from the shores of Al Maqreb to Córdoba to India, where Jews, Christians, Zoroastrians, Hindus, Buddhists and Gentiles weren’t exposed to persecution and oppression, or were forced into conversion. Earth-shaking tax burdens, inequality before the law and whims of various Turkish, Arab and Mongolian rulers in all of the Islam region of power saw to it that not all of the non-Islamic religions there were wiped out altogether.

Not knowing its past means to have to repeat it. Furthermore, those who spread the fable of Islamic tolerance are robbing the Muslims of the Chance to overcome a religion and their past that are threatening to become a hideous present.

The following happened in Erbach (Baden-Württemberg):

The “Week of Understanding” ending on October 16th didn’t end without an event in which the young citizens of Erbach were an integral part. Yesterday, for children from the age of four to eight years in the Erbach kindergarten there was a German-Turkish reading hour in the Erbach city library. The parents were also allowed to be present or relax with coffee and tea in the background in a reading café. “The Little Polar Bear” from Dutch author Hans de Beer was the story Hafize Oguz and city library head Marianne Schneider (pictured) read to some twenty children switching back and forth between German and Turkish. The adventure of the little polar bear Lars could be seen in slides so that the children could imagine a properly large iceberg. The young listeners listened spellbound to the story, whereby the Turkish children must certainly have gotten a double joy out of it; particularly because the understood the German as well as the Turkish edition. After the story “Dornröschen (Little Thorny Rose),” or in Turkish, “Uyuyan güzel,” the children could once again grab a prayer rug and hear a couple of lessons on Islam.

Now that’s what we call exemplary integration!

(Hat Tip: sobieski_król_polski)

The first surprise was already at the beginning: at the question of a Sparkasse employee as to how many of the 100 persons present could show an immigrant background, only five or six raised their hand, two of those were Muslims. Those around whom the subject was to revolve were, therefore, in below-average numbers in the party. In the face of the high proportion of immigrants (one could also say: Muslims) in relation to Wiseloch’s population and the towns in the vicinity, this was a message hardly ignored. Are there Muslims, for example here in our country, to whom integration and participation in society (of the majority) is simply and grippingly unimportant?

After Gert Weisskirchen let loose with a few introductory empty phrases, Rita Süßmuth began her lecture on the subject. For the most part, she supported the following positions:

1. Germany is a country of immigration, the Germans have long refused to recognize this.

2. All the problems we have with immigrants today (with which immigrants, she couldn’t say), are as a result to be causally traced back to the Germans

3. Fortunately, the situation that Germany is an immigrant country has meanwhile become accepted, and the measures that have been undertaken for the integration of the immigrants would perform veritable miracles.

As Rita Süßmuth often expressed it on this particular evening, we are “on the way.” Whether she herself in any case knew where this way led, was unfortunately not to be discerned.

For instance, while she, being visibly touched, brought the example of a Turkish mother into the discussion, whose four children had managed to find their way into career life, and tried to use this to make it clear that generally all immigrants (she constantly used examples of only Muslims – why not?) are willing to assimilate, she also tried at the same time to warn of the dangers arising from German society as an immigrant society.

After she had warned among other things about rightwing populism and the “steps backward” coming from the current discussions started by Thilo Sarrazin (“of course, there are only negative examples given!”), she struggled to make the following statement, “There are always many things being told about the Quran, that simply are not in there. The Quran teaches peacefulness and humility!”.

By this time many present were already shaking their heads in disbelief. Did the former Federal President show in this expression that she is incapable of reading, or rather that she really had not read the Quran? How could the following by chance have come from her in a lecture about this book:

“And slay them, wherever you run into them, and drive them out from the places where they have driven you out; for the seduction to unbelief is worse than killing. And don’t battle against them at the holy mosque until they battle against you there. However, if they fight against you, then kill them. Such is the reward of the infidels.” (Sura 2, Verse 191)

It continued outrageously further. In the question hour, now moderated by Gert Weisskirchen, the question, for example, whether the people that like to call the Germans “sh— German potatoes” are really supposed to become integrated, was answered only so far as Rita Süßmuth truly admitted, that “occasionally” such insults occur, but at the same time spoke of the evil, evil discrimination that “migrants” have to endure.

Then a man answered with the question whether she (Rita Süßmuth) didn’t also see that with even the overwhelming number of immigrants not the slightest problem existed, but Muslims, however, often drew attention to themselves through criminality, unemployment and a disregard for German society. The imprecise answer by Süßmuth was limited to playing up the integration problems of other immigrant groups. By not dealing one single time with Muslims at all in her demonstrations, she answered this question only indirectly, if even with an unwilling “yes.” Such a thing could justifiably be called “beating around the bush.”

Still a few questions of the same kind were asked, and overall, the remark could be made that a good number of listeners were anything but satisfied with the multiculti smoke and mirrors routine by Süßmuth.

What once again heated up the ire of many who were present at the end of the question time was the fact that, throughout the whole discussion time those “uncomfortable” questioners of Gert Weisskirchen were constantly being stifled out, while at the same time the two Muslims present were allowed a full thirty minutes of speaking time. No – not time for asking questions, rather time for tying up those present in a long horror story of alleged discrimination. Thus, for example, one of the Muslim speech brawlers, who according to her own statements is an employee of Heidelberg University and is still horribly discriminated against, broke into tears with the sentence “I have to fight for a lot of things that really should be normal course,” as if on cue for a film.

Thus, at the end, the SPD man ended up not being spared the accusation from the public of being abandoned; not only did he steer the discussion along party lines, but he also paid the two Muslim wailers as well.

In spite of the ensuing conversations in which the effort was made to smooth out some of the waves, the two representatives of the “peoples’ parties” had to go home on Wednesday with the unsettled feeling that their Islamophilic and Do-Gooder course didn’t successfully get through to the citizens that were present.

So that still many other politicians can achieve the enjoyment of the new freedom of speech and discussion in Germany, all PI readers are herewith called upon yet again to join with their local PI groups.

(Text und Photos: Vaterrhein, Rhein-Neckar PI Group / Translation: Anders Denken)

In so many words and the usual bold-faced nonsense notwithstanding, he says:

This year in Sahlkamp, it has been shown that things can lead to increasing conflict between demographic groups. Children of Arab descent threw stones at Jewish dancers at a culture festival. Is a new antisemitism springing up in a certain area?

Back then, the incident shocked me. But now, after careful examination, we are able to see more clearly. The attack stems from the environment of a precious few families; therefore, it cannot be attributed to the social structure of a whole township. This form of antisemitism has to do very much with the conflict in the Middle East, and above all is the expression of a routine racism that is unfortunately getting spread around. In order to counter this, an association of various institutions in the township is putting together various activities under the heading of “respect.”

“Racism,” against whom and from whom? Is the Jew indeed racist against the immigrant, who, in reality, doesn’t exist? And now, the incident doesn’t shock him (PI reported) any more? No, because now Stephan Weil has recognized the Isolated Case™ and who’s really to blame.

So perhaps the main thing is that he will shout out “never again” at the next Holocaust memorial service.

(Hat Tip: Obama im Laden / Translation: Anders Denken)

The Recklinghäuser newspaper didn’t report with complete neutrality either:

The party extended invitations to a presentation with scientist Dr. Thomas Tartsch in the Lindenhof restaurant. Instead of the expected 40 listeners, around three times as many people thronged into the much too small room. Also among the visitors were both pastors Bernhard Lübbering and Dr. Jürgen Schwark who with their clear pro-mosque position in the RZ provided for sensation.

UBP head Tobias Köller described his party’s line at the beginning. “We are for freedom of religion in the country, but against the construction of mosques.” With this statement, he met not just with agreement. Some residents came to make it clear that they didn’t have anything against the construction of a new cultural center. “The mosque has been here for 33 years. Up till now, there haven’t been any conflicts. Why should that change with a new construction,” one neighbor lady said. It was expressed in several ways that there was nothing against a mosque, however a residence home for children was rejected.

The VIKZ (Verband Islamischer Kulturzentren – Association of Islamic Cultural Centers) has for years already fallen under criticism quite often because children in its homes have been indoctrinated against the Western system of values (RZ reported). Speaker Tartsch admonished in his presentation that residents are often not questioned regarding construction projects by cultural associations. “Building law is often unfortunately bent by the authorities.” He cited in particular the VIKZ opinion of Prof. Dr. Ursula Spuler-Stegemann accusing the association of disintegration. Tartsch, however, didn’t remain silent about the fact that there is currently a study from Prof. Dr. Ursula Boos-Nünning (Duisburg University) that gives the youth work of the association a positive assessment (…)

» Recklinghäuser Zeitung: Pastors mobilize against the UBP

The Merkur writes:

For the longest time it has been dreamed of, the dream of many Muslims of their own house of worship in the inner city: The project “Sendlingen Mosque” was seen as a failure because the Ditim Mosque Association didn’t have the necessary funds for the building. Back in February, the head of the association at the time had already given the announcement that it was off.

The new Ditim leader since then has constantly made new attempts at gathering up new donors — however without concrete results. With great patience, Mayor Christian Ude and the city administration granted the association a long extension, however, they have now had enough of the back and forth of things. The city decided to retract the sale of the city’s Areal at Gotzinger Platz to Ditim. The municipal committee intends to recommend this to the city council — this was confirmed by the speaker for the city on Tuesday. The loss of the Areal would of course be the end for the project.

Working up to the session, there was hardly any doubt that the city council would agree to it. Mayor Christine Strobl (SPD) made the solid assumption, and the Greens also joined in, that the decision not to grant an extension for the mosque project would be made with a “heavy heart.” “Someone has to make a point sometime,” said councilwoman Gülseren Demirel. The CSU is against the mosque anyway.

But just now, where the city has had an emotional separation from the project, a new player has appeared in the plan: Egemen Bagis. He is Turkey’s European minister and leads the negotiations for joining with the EU for his country. Bagis shared with our newspaper from Brussels that he intends to help with the mosque project. “A mosque in Munich would be an important message for world peace. I would like to support the project,” said Bagis. The Turkish state truly doesn’t finance mosques directly, but there is the possibility of drawing up the necessary means.

The Turkish religious authorities have at their disposal donations from Turkish mosques that can be applied to a multitude of beneficent purposes — even for the building of a mosque in Munich. “There have been similar cases.” On being asked whether an contribution amounting to millions would be thinkable, Bagis said, “For the victims of the catastrophe in Pakistan, Turkish Mosques gathered 30 million euros on a single Friday.” He affirms that “The Muslim world will not abandon the Muslims in Munich.”

The sudden engagement by Bagis of course yields certain conundrums. Ditim members had already attempted before to receive help from Turkey — however without success. Also, Bagis’ engagement apparently didn’t happen because of a nudge from the head of Ditim, rather by means of a letter from a Munich journalist, Rahmi Turan, chief editor of the Turkish-German magazine “Sultan,” who had sent a description of the project to Bagis.

Now the question is before the city as to how serious Bagis is in his promises. Ude reacted with great reservation on Wednesday. Friendly words from Turkey would not be enough, the mayor said. Only a “written, legally bindable declaration” regarding the appropriation of funds could still change anything. In any case, Ude said there is still a purely theoretical possibility that after the city’s decision a cancellation of the cancellation could happen, if in fact a concrete promise would occur.

The municipal committee of the city council should come to a conclusion today. This has to be approved by October 6th in a plenary session.

Egemen Bagis, Turkish state minister for Europe and negotiations leader in the talks for joining the EU, in a March interview with SPIEGEL:

“Believe me, the day is coming when the Europeans will court the Turkish public for business.”

The day is already long since here…

(A reflective discussion — by “Wegbereiter” / Translation: Anders Denken)

What really happened? What was so horrible that compelled politicians all over the Western world with sharp tongue and and chopping block rhetoric to disassociate themselves from one man whom they had never before heard of? The answer to this is obvious. Somebody did that which according to an unwritten law should have been strictly kept from happening. Somebody exercised unnecessary as well as distasteful provocation against Islam. Not a sympathetic caricaturist that could be brought in for the purpose of free press and free speech, but a madman who wanted to burn a couple hundred copies of the holy book of the Muslim world.

All of us know what would happen, some Mullah in Somalia announced the burning of a couple hundred editions of the New Testament. Apart from a marginal note on the back pages of the average local paper and a request by the Pope for forbearance — nothing! This situation should really surprise us. And, in fact, regardless of whether three workers in a Bible publishing house were massacred in the Turkish city Malatya “for the homeland,” whether Sunni terrorist groups are on the hunt for those of other faiths in Irak, whether dozens of Christians are on death row awaiting their execution in Pakistan because of offenses against the “blasphemy law,” or a Catholic priest in Trabzon on the Black Sea or an Italian nun is shot in Somalia, or perhaps whether a Yemeni farmer is executed because he departed from the “true faith” and converted to Christianity — the reaction is pretty much the same: a mixture of indignation, ignorance and trivialization spreads out far and wide among us. But no German chancellor, no US president or vice-vresident has come before a camera in any one of these cases with the same enthusiastic indignation or threatening speeches to announce their contempt.

And the leaders of the Muslim world have done just as little — with great difficulty would they ever find the time to follow up on the affairs of their governments. In the Arab as well as in the Western world, the protest of the Muslim people is more notably absent. There aren’t any mass protests by peaceful Muslims against the gruesome acts of Islamic fundamentalists, whether in progressive Beirut or in front of the Brandenburg Gate in Berlin. Actually the behavior is different as soon as an Israeli tank rolls into the Gaza Strip. Why shouldn’t the impression of quiet tolerance spring up on the side of the majority of peaceful Muslims for their radical brethren in the faith? This happened, as is too well known, when the peaceful citizens, the civilians, also made the Holocaust possible only through their tolerance. Because, sometimes even doing nothing can be sinful! Perhaps, even this defines the often lacking difference between Islam and Islamism because the image, however, seems notorious: On the one side there are millions of Muslims who within hours organize in worldwide protest marches as soon as they think they’ve been wronged. On the other side, however, there is unimaginable silence, the sinister lack of surprise over monstrous beheadings before running cameras after the butchering of Western aid personnel and complete families in the Middle East.

And even in this, the circle is drawn around Pastor Jones. Because among us here in the West things remarkably seem to be conducted in the opposite way. We ignore the injustice against members of our culture on the part of Islamic fundamentalists, and with a shrug we declare it to be one unexplainable isolated case after the other, not worth a further look — however we spit poison and gall when one of ours sets out to perform a similar act of barbarity. Just how is this to be explained? Do we keep a different standard for Muslims than for ourselves? Do we consider those to be noble savages whom we can’t expect to live by our fundamental values and on whose level we don’t want to be placed?

This viewpoint would be most profoundly racist, and in fact an extremely rude insult to all peaceful and well-integrated Muslims. And anyway, since not everyone in the West can be racist, starting with Angela Merkel and all the way to Barack Obama, then there must be another explanation. Do we feel that we are endebted or under obligation to them? Have we not simply made ourselves into slaves of political correctness and made this into an end in itself? Are we tolerant to the point of sainthood, or week and decadent? Who is capable of producing the correct answer to this?

One thing, however, seems certain: while we turn xenophobia in a great style into a phobia against ourselves, produce prohibitions of speech and thought against ourselves, concede to ourselves hardly a fraction of tolerance that we show to others, we are harming our Western society and rule of law. We have managed to achieve the opposite of that which we intuitively hope to achieve through our attitude.

(Photo © www.islamisofthedevil.com)

The Leipziger Volkszeitung reports:

Islam Critic Ulfkotte: Sarrazin is Right — “A completely absurd immigrant industry has come in to being”

Islam critic and book author Udo Ulfkotte sees an “increasing ignorance of politics” in the majority of opinions by German citizens in the sharp criticism of the immigration issues by Bundesbank head Thilo Sarrazin (SPD). “We are seeing again in surveys that people like Thilo Sarrazin have two-thirds of the population behind them. But all of the leading politicians are calling him crazy. It is a pure question of how much time before this is avenged,” Ulfkotte said to the “Leipziger Volkszeitung” (Friday edition). Before as now, it is not the desire for ruthlessly naming the problems of immigrant policy and putting a stop to undesirable mistakes. “Instead, we are probing further into the enactment of the story ‘The Kings New Clothes.’ The simple citizen is not allowed to say that the king is naked; as simple citizens one can only gossip. So this is how it is in modern Germany, but sometime the story will come to an end.

The harsh chastisement of immigrants reluctant to work, without German language ability, and defrauders of social aid must not be misconstrued as an undifferentiating blanket statement. “Even the immigrant citizens who are assimilating as much as they can, living properly, going to work and paying taxes ask themselves why we don’t do something to remove these black sheep from our ranks, and even favor them,” Ulfkotte said. In truth, they are the disadvantaged ones of the desirable developments coming from immigrant policy.

Ulfkotte supports the substance of Sarrazin’s controversial themes regarding immigrant problems and the outgrowth of Islam. It must eventually be discussed that, up until 2007, a deficit of more than one billion euros has arisen solely due to immigrants in the German social systems. “We have let a completely absurd immigration industry come into existence. A net of 1252 euros could conceivably be put back into the pocket of every German taxpayer if we wouldn’t expend these crazy sums for immigrants who are resistant to education and behind the times. Immigrants who have no German language skills and are perpetually dependent on social transfers due to their education level are criticized by Ulfkotte as “destroyers of prosperity.” The Islam critic also supports Sarrazin in criticism of Muslims. Islam, above all is an aggressive ideology “that should not be allowed a place among democracies in Europe,” Ulfkotte said. (…)

Meanwhile, the SPD is now starting another procedure to throw Sarrazin out of the Party of Comrades. The CDU is going a step further and would like to see Thilo Sarrazin removed from the Bundesbank.

» LVZ: Extensive interview with Udo Ulfkotte on the subject

(Many thanks to all contributors)

Some tips sniffed out in Germany are difficult for even hardshell PI authors to believe. When a reader reported to us about a toilet only for Muslims on the Zugspitze, we thought it was a joke at first. The following excerpt from the BILD am SONNTAG newspaper from August 22, 2010 still couldn’t convince us completely:

A personal call at the Marketing Division of the Bayerische Zugspitzbahn Bergbahn AG (Bavarian Zugspitz Rail and Cable Car) created certainty: The reality has overtaken any possible satirical fantasy in Germany. Germany’s highest lying restaurant possesses a special toilet for the Devout. Their needs can be learned about on Pflege-Wiki:

After using the toilette, a Muslim often doesn’t use toilet paper, but rather cleans his private area with running water and the left hand. The left hand is considered unclean and is therefore not used for eating or greeting.

At the Zugspitze, it is hoped with the little holy place having Arab placards and a Muslim prayer room constructed directly next to it that rich Arabs will be drawn in. For what’s the oh so nice saying? “Money doesn’t stink.”

(Hat Tip: Koltschak and Bernd / Translation: Anders Denken)

Whether the rape of little girls forced into marriage with old geezers can be experienced in a playful way, the report makes no mention of that.

Ad hoc News writes:

The first five book titles will appear in the Fall.

Questions will be posed by “Der kleine Hassan (Little Hassan)” about the prophet Muhammad just as they are about Jesus, about the Islamic Victim Celebration (Eid al-Adha) and Christmas. In “Fayzal der Krebsfänger (Fayzal the Crab-Catcher),” a young person will learn to deal with his illness (Translator note: ‘Krebs’ is German for ‘crab’ or for ‘cancer’ thus the fun title of ‘crab-catcher’). “Mein erstes Gebetbuch” (My First Prayerbook) playfully guides by means of cheerful images into Islamic prayer ritual being accompanied by kittens that also take a try at bows. “Arabisch lernen mit Simsim” (Learning Arab with Simsim) is a teaching book for elementary pupils. Here the teaching pattern pursues new ways of imparting language for Muslim children growing up in Germany. “Das Geschenk” (The Gift) imparts the value of the word as a special gift to a young boy as given by the grandfather or prophet Muhammad.

For Salam Publishing head Ahmad Milad Karimi, who in 2009 was the first to bring the Quran poetically and true to the original text into the German, and is publisher of literature and art periodical “Kalliope”, this new form of publishing has the meaning of “pioneer work at every level,” as he stresses. The goal in this is not “to spread Islamic body of thought, “rather to support Muslims in Germany in their own religiosity and complexity.”

Christian Zell, interim head of the Pastoren city kindergarten facility in Bremen, in which “70 to 80 percent are mostly Islamic immigrant children” being cared for would “heartily welcome” it, if he had a better selection of literature geared toward children that covered Islamic celebrations and intercultural subjects. He remembers, however, when at the last Victim Celebration Turkish mothers from the Kita advisory council went around with self-authored writings from group to group in order to explain the meaning of the Muslim holidays to the children.

We find it fantastic that it is a whole-society edition that brings children closer to Islam. It is really an encouragement that Muslim parents themselves have to explain the butchery of the Victim Celebration to their children!

The publisher’s idea “is more than overdue,” said Sineb El Masrar, producer and head editor of the “Gazelle” in Berlin, the only intercultural women’s magazine for immigrants. The daughter of Moroccan immigrants has known nothing of any German children’s literature up until now dealing with life in the new cultural circle and especially with the “integration of Muslim girls.” She herself “often missed out” as well. The 29-year-old creates a great demand for the books today not only for families rather in elementary schools and kindergartens as well. As member of the German Islamic Conference (DIK), she sees an important mission in all of this as first of all to awaken interest in this literature.

Bülent Uçar, German-Turkish professor for Islamic Religious Pedagogy at the University of Osnabrück and author of the teaching book “Mein Islambuch” (My Book of Islam) developed for German elementary schools, complains that up until now there has been “only sparse materials” in tis country for the purpose of “strengthening” the coexistence of “Muslims and Christians.” The scholar welcomes the reasons of the publishing house. They take up subjects of the Islamic Conference and “meet the demands” for doing more “for the normalization of Islam” in Germany.

Milad Karimi called in a “scientific advisory council” to accompany his publishing idea. Besides Sineb El Masrar, Bülent Uçar, as well as co-publisher and Islam scholar Nora Hodeige, he was also able to get the distinguished German-Iraqi author with Christian-Aramaic roots, Rafik Schami, and the Austrian human rights advocate Alfred Zauner.

In order to first be able to bring the small production of 2000 to 3000 copies for each title to the market, Andreas Hodeige — Rombach publisher and main owner of the Salam publishing house as well as several booksellers — intends to deliver to the place “where the people are.” For this, he has put views on German and Muslim schools, mosques, Imams and kindergartens. However, not booksellers because in his experience Muslim parents only seldom visit one, since up until now there were hardly any books in German geared to children with Islamic background.

Aha! So that is the reason. Not exactly, say, because of a complete inability to speak German, or being unacquainted with reading.

(By the Editrix / Picture: Head of a Japanese, Burma 1945)

What does Google, always so helpful, say? If one googles for “trophy photos soldiers” one gets 531,000 hits, some as interesting as this one or this one. And no, they are not about Israeli soldiers.

Life Magazine,May 22 1944

Arizona war worker writes her Navy boyfriend a thank-you note for the Jap skull he sent her.
Defense worker N. Nickolson writes to her sweetheart thanking him for his letter and “souvenir.” This skull of a Japanese soldier bears the inscription: “Here is a good Jap — a dead one!”

As it ought to be, and I am serious here, those pictures are put in a historic perspective by many contemporary and more recent commenters. It is an enlightening lecture about history and human nature. If one goes then on googling for “trophy photos soldiers -israel -jews” one gets 322,000 hits, for “trophy photos soldiers -israel -jews -iraq” only 242,000. What conclusion can be drawn from that? I’m not 100% sure, but a possible one would be that American war crimes, real or perceived, only started to become truly interesting for a wider public, and not even mainly in Germany, when America had mutated in the public eye to the Ersatz-Jew, acting as proxy for Israel, the Über-Jew.

This is the execution of Sergeant Len Siffleet of the Australian Z Special Force Unit on October 24, 1943, at Aitaoe beach, New Guinea, performed by a Japanese civilian. Such a duty was considered an honour. Japanese have immaculate manners.

The faded photograph was found in a Japanese soldier’s pocket and yet still chills the heart of Australians.

I’m sure the Australians wouldn’t have gotten their knickers in such a knot had they only known, what Israelis would do to their prisoners sixty-odd years later.Not to forget the recent cases, but they are part of the culture of the performers and thus above criticism per se. Culture is wonderful, as long as it’s not Western. Never forget, too, that they are deeply traumatized by the cruel treatment they received from the West. And who are we, anyway, with our past and present, capitalism, imperialism, White Supremacy, colonialism, not to speak of the Holocaust, to be arrogant enough to lecture them what is wrong or what is right.

That, we must only do to the Jews.

(By the Editrix)

Not quite. Cordoba stands for many other things as well. It was the name of the Islamic empire’s center, from where Islam ruled most of the then known world. It’s stands for one of the grandest mosques of that time which was, notabene, built on the ashes of a Christian Visigoth church. It stands, too for a massacre of the Jews of Cordoba in 1011 (yes, Al-Andalus wasn’t quite what Muslims and their enablers would like us to believe) and for the rape of the city by the Almohades in 1148. Some websites claim that the year 1011 carries some symbolism as well, but while that is entirely possible, it is too far-fetched to make it a point here.

To understand the full implications one has to know two basically simple things:

First, Christians and Jews build their places of worship to, well, worship. Muslims build mosques to symbolize Islamic supremacy over others, to proselytize, to politicize, as an arsenal.

Second, Muslims act on symbols.

The Al-Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem on top of the Jewish temple symbolizes Islamic supremacy over Judaism, the Ummayyad Mosque in Syria is built on top of St. John the Baptist, Hagia Sophia in Constantinople was converted into a mosque as a symbol of Islamic supremacy over Christianity. The Cordoba Initiative mosque will be built on the ashes of almost thousand Americans who couldn’t be recovered after September 11, 2001. An innocent naive fallacy? Maybe, but I doubt it.

Here are some examples from Germany, my country, a country with, as of 2009, 4.3 million Muslims (5.4% of the population). Of these, 1.9 million are German citizens (2.4%). As of 2006, there were about 15,000 ethnic German converts. The large majority are of Turkish origin. Most Muslims live in Berlin and the big cities of former West Germany, mainly in the those of the industrial stronghold along the rivers Rhine and Ruhr.

The Yavuz-Sultan-Selim mosque in Mannheim is one of the biggest in Germany. Its patron, Selim I was the Sultan of the Ottoman Empire from 1512 to 1520. Selim carried the empire to the leadership of the Sunni branch of Islam by his conquest of the Middle East. On the eve of his death in 1520, the Ottoman empire spanned almost 1 billion acres.

More than 50 mosques in Germany are called Fatih. Fatih means conqueror and refers to Mehmet II who was Sultan of the Ottoman Empire for a short time from 1444 to September 1446, and later from February 1451 to 1481. At the age of 21, he conquered Constantinople in a bloodbath, bringing an end to the Byzantine Empire. Mehmet continued his conquests in Asia, with the “Anatolian reunification”, and in Europe as far as Belgrade.

Other popular names for mosques in Germany are:

Aksa/Aqsa means “farthest”, and in this context the “farthest [so far] from Mecca”. The Muslim claim to Jerusalem and the Holy Land comes in here as well.

Ayasofya is emblematic for and purposefully reminiscent of Christian humiliation.

Hicret (arabic hidschra) refers to Mohammeds flight from Mekka to Medina in 622.

Imam Ali.

Al-Quds stands for Jerusalem. (It was an Al-Quds mosque in Hamburg from where Mohammed Atta set out to promote his very own brand of conquering.)

Selimiye refers to the megalomaniac Selimiye mosque in Edirne:

Then we have the Merkez mosque in Duisburg (Merkez means stronghold in Turkish), currently the biggest in Germany and probably in Europe as well. I discussed it previously for example here and here.

The controversial projected mosque in Cologne is called “Merkez” as well, which is (politically correct) translated not as “stronghold”, but as “center”. Everything not to let Muslims appear in a less than angelic light. I have covered the interesting and complex controvery that was triggered by the Cologne mosque, but went far beyond, it here:

» 02/17: What Americans don’t twig
» 04/26: Innocents Abroad
» 04/30: The Unembarrassables
» 05/10: Loose Apes with Razors
» 05/10: Shameless Cologne
» 05/13: The “Fission Fungus”
» 05/15: Rent-A-Nazi
» 10/02: German Patriot now Muslim

Another popular name for mosques in Germany is Bilal. No, this has no apparent, blatant connection to Muslim conquest, however, it is interesting in a different sort of way. The Ethiopian Bilal ibn Ribah was the first Muezzin in the history of Islam and called from the rooftop of the first mosque, no minaret in sight. Until today, minarets are not mandatory in Saudi Arabia and many minaret-less and relatively inornate mosques among the older ones, some of them very important, can be seen there. Why? What about “symbolism”? Saudi Arabia was, and is, Muslim heartland and needed no “spearheads” to impress and bully infidels.

Ask for the name of the mosque next to you and do a quick Google search. The result might be interesting.

One more word about the Cordoba Initiative. Granted for argument’s sake that the Ground Zero mosque, pardon me, the Cordoba outreach center to make better people of infidels, was planned and is being realized in good faith. Then we still have to deal with the sensitivity aspect, haven’t we. Wasn’t it abundantly clear in the first stages of the planning process already that only too many Americans wouldn’t react kindly to a project like that? It seems that the sensitivity and respect Muslims are always so stridently demanding for themselves is utterly missing when they are addressing non-Muslims. Is it too far fetched to speculate how the idea of a German cultural center together with Protestant church, theater, swimming pool, the lot, as a gesture of reconciliation at the Westerplatte would be received by the Poles? Or why the Japanese did never propose a center for the promotion of their culture at Pearl Harbor?

I will never forget where I have been when 9/11 happened and how long it took for the reality of WHAT had happened to seep in — and the horror when it finally had. Shortly after 9/11, an anonymous New Yorker released a Macromedia Flash presentation with a collage of news photos from the attacks and the victims. “Only Time” by Enya (which I hadn’t heard before) was used as a soundtrack. The Flash presentation spread rapidly over the internet and it is still available. I don’t know how many times I’ve watched it during the days and weeks following 9/11, bawling my eyes out. 30 times? 50 times? How can I ever forget the pictures of those who chose to fall to their death rather than to burn or to suffocate. Some choice. How the thought of the hundreds of firefighters who rushed to the scene to never come back? How the face of the gallant Father Mychal Judge who died, 68 years old, in a hail of steel and concrete as he administered the last rites to a firefighter and an office worker. And you, you who have been there, allow THEM to build one of their disgusting symbols of heathen supremacy over YOUR culture on the ashes of the victims.

What else do you need to know about Islam?