Here are links regarding the case:

- Daily Mail
- Asian Image
- Euro Weekly

Really, what good are all the cumbersome ground controls when islamists sit in the cockpit? And you’re not at all allowed to consider all the transportation workers and sanitation forces on the ground. Also, in Heathrow, hundreds of illegals are already employed at the airport! They haven’t had the first passport! With unidentified religion in any case!

Posted by kewil on PI / Translation: Anders Denken

Posted by PI / Translation: Anders Denken

Posted by byzanz on PI / Translation: Anders Denken

(By Michael Stürzenberger)

According to Conny Axel Meier, managing director for the Pax Europa Citizens’ Movement (BPE), the OIC has for two years been operating an office for the battle against “islamophobia.” Sören Kern reports the following at europe news about the wheeling and dealing by the internationally well networked islamic organization:

The European Union has offered to be host for the next meeting of the so-called Istanbul Process, an aggressive attempt by the islamic countries to make criticizing Islam an international crime.

The announcement followed less than a month after the United States hosted their own conference over the Istanbul Process in Washington, DC.

The Istanbul process – whose explicit goal it is to anchor a global ban into international law against any critical examination of Islam and the islamic Sharia – is promoted by the Organization for Islamic Cooperation (OIC), a block of 57 islamic countries.

Located in Saudi Arabia, the OIC has longed pressed the European Union and the United States to impose limits on the freedom of opinion and speech regarding Islam.

But now, the OIC has doubled its efforts and finds itself in a diplomatic offensive to convince the Western democracies to enforce Resolution 16/18 of the UN Human Rights Council that calls for all countries to battle against “intolerance,” negative stereotyping and stigmatization of … religions and faiths.”

The plan, therefore, is to make this UN Resolution 16/18 flow into a law of the EU so that it is possible to muzzle all Islam-critical people in Europe. This censorship, this massive restriction of free opinion and speech, this backslide into dictatorial practices of oppression is getting, in all seriousness, diplomatic support:

Resolution 16/18, that was adopted at the main headquarters of the UN Human Rights Council, plays a pioneering role in the efforts to advance the international legal concept in connection with the denigration of Islam.

However, the HRC resolution – and likewise the OIC promoted resolution 66/167 that was quietly approved by the 139-member UN General Assembly – remain inefficient as long as strong support in the West is missing.

Therefore, the OIC landed a political coup when the Obama administration agreed to set up a three-day conference on the Istanbul Process in Washington on December 12-14, 2011. In this, the US gives the OIC political legitimacy that it has sought for the initiative to globalize the ban against critique of Islam.

Following Obama’s lead, the European Union wants to bring itself into the activities by serving as host for the next Istanbul Process summit in July 2012.

The EU appears to be caving in, and OIC-”General” Ihsanoglu is exulting:

Up to this point, the European Union has kept the OIC initiative at arm’s length. But Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, the General Secretary of the OIC, states according to the view of the International Islamic News Agency (IINA), that the offer to set up the meeting represents a “qualitative change” of the activities toward the phenomenon of islamophobia.

The direction of impact for these plans to muzzle is obviously against the strengthening Islam-critical parties in Europe:

The “Istanbul Process,” by means of the meeting taking place in Europe, which is more strongly smitten by the phenomenon of islamophobia and antagonism against Islam, has gained additional momentum.”

The OIC is especially irritated over its incapability of silencing the increasing number of democratically elected politicians in Europe who are expressing concerns about Muslim immigrants’ refusal to integrate in their countries and the consequent establishment of parallel islamic societies in many parts of Europe.

Following IINA, “Ihsanoglu said that the growing role of the extreme right in the politics of numerous European lands has become stronger than the capacity of the organization (OIC); he explained that the extreme right, which hates Muslims, has become leverage in the hand of politicians. He also added that the climb of the extreme right through elections has become a issue that cannot be opposed when considering the democratic way by which these extremists achieve their positions. As an example, he referred to the referendum that was held in Switzerland and which, through the voting decision of the Swiss citizens, ended in a ban against the erection of minarets.

In other words, the OIC is now looking for support from the unelected bureaucrats, in the headquarters of the European Union in Brussels, to issue a pan-European law over “hate speech” (national incitement), to regulate through decree what 500 million European citizens – including their elected politicians – can say about Islam and what they can’t.

The OIC, therefore, intends through undemocratic means to bring critique of Islam to silence. Here is a short interview with BPE director Conny Axel Meier:

How large do you estimate the danger to be that the OIC can come through with the “Istanbul Process”?

Now, the idea that the Istanbul Process will lead directly to the desired result, that is the prohibition of blasphemy and criticism of Islam, is rather improbable. However, only so much a result as is fought for in the diplomatic arena with which both sides can live and sell as a success. It was that way as well in December at the 2nd Conference of the Istanbul Process in Washington where Hillary Clinton buckled and guaranteed future accommodation on the part of the US regarding this issue, even though the First Amendment of the US Constitution point-blank codifies freedom of speech and allows little wiggle room for interpretations.

How would this affect German law if this UN Resolution 16/18 would be implemented?

The danger appears more to be that a decree or edict on the part of the EU, which has been placed over national laws, will lever out the national laws and thereby render them useless. With a so-called EU guideline, as was often the case before, they won’t hold back, and the national legislature will not be asked first. This will then come directly out of the EUSSR politburo.

Would this be the end of Islam critique?

Certainly not. There have been many prohibitions in recent history that punished unfavorable opinions. And there were and are more attempts to do so. Sooner or later they have altogether failed or will threaten to fail. However, the fear is that the persistent appeasement of the educational elite will soon be able to degenerate into tyranny, and critics of Islam will have an even worse position and have to employ even more public courage for democracy, freedom and human rights. We will do everything in our power to prevent legitimate criticism of a totalitarian ideology from being punished as “racism” or “blasphemy.”

Posted by byzanz on PI / Translation: Anders Denken

‘Foreign man in long white robe’ stabbed three people at random yesterday in a coffee shop.

From Joost Niemöller, Dagelijkse Standaard

Update: Other than first reported, none of the three victims died.

Yesterday in the Piramide coffee shop in Bussum, three random people were stabbed. One of the three allegedly died, although, the one didn’t according to the politically attached report in the Bussums Niews. The report about the perpetrator is much shorter in many newspapers.

De Telegraaf simply reports:

Bystanders describe the perpetrator as a man in a white robe.

Het Parool is even shorter:

a man

At NOS, they found that to be too much information. They ended up with:

The perpetrator

We become a little more knowledgeable with the local press. The Gooi- en Eemlander gives a somewhat more precise description of the man’s appearance:

He was clothed in a white robe with a black jacket over it.

In an earlier report by De Gooi- en Eemlander is the description:

The likely perpetrator, a foreign man in a white robe and black jacket

The fact that this has to do with a foreign man, and that he wore a white robe (in other places, we also read about a long white robe) and a black jacket, is kept out of the newspaper in the later reports. Why is that? We can think of a very good reason. We are not allowed to think bad things of foreign men in long white robes, thus we, in any case, had better not know.

From the descriptions by witnesses of the incident, it appears that it was the matter of a wild, random stabbing spree in which three persons turned out injured.

A eyewitness report in the Gooi- en Eemlander:

The somewhat older man is a regular visitor of the coffee shop on the Kapelstraat. There were around ten, fifteen people sitting in the coffee shop when the knife bearer ran in. “The atmosphere was very relaxed, as usual.” According to the man, there was no noticeable speaking before the stabbing spree. “He simply stabbed someone twice in the chest. A friend of mine tried to overpower him and was stabbed in the back. They weren’t very well off.” How the third man came to be injured is unknown by the regular customers. “I fled to the bathroom amid all the tumult. ‘Get the cramps, though, I’m not going to let myself be stabbed,’ I thought.”

From an audio recording by RTV Noord Holland it has just recently come out, according to two girls speaking for a friend who was there, that it was somebody ‘not of Dutch origin.’ According to them, the perpetrator ran in but sat inside. He stabbed one of those present directly in the heart.

In another audio fragment on the RTV Noord Holland site, a speaker for the police said that the perpetrator was ‘somebody from Bussum.’ So, there we have to deal for the time being with official position.

A puzzling incident. According to Het Hart van Nederland, the man in question was supposedly schizophrenic, but didn’t give a source.

The Islam-critical website Vlad Tepes, however, gives an explanation that is possibly not quite so strange:

My Dutch source on all this tells me that all cases of ‘Sudden Jihad Syndrome’ by Moroccan Muslims is always referred to as by “schizophrenics”.

Islam critic Daniel Pipes has given this name to sudden outbreaks of Jihad for which a number of examples exist and that are for the most part covered up by the media.

It doesn’t look to me at all like such a strange idea is spoken of here. The long white robe. The dark jacket. The foreign background. The relatively young age. There’s still hope that the authorities and the media won’t stay stuck too long in their politically correct spasms and come out with the facts.

Source: “Was steekpartij in Bussum uitbarsting Jihad?” in the Dagelijkse Standaard / Translation: Anders Denken

(By Michael Stürzenberger)

The Harburger Nachrichten communicates the following:

For the planned Firdaus-Center, Noura A. is looking for “islamic entrepreneurs,” as it shows on the poster hanging in the picture window. Space is being offered for offices, business and restaurants. The E-mail address of the Muslim internet shipper “Mumin-Shop” has been given for contact. Advertisements are also being shown here for the new business: “Looking for islamic businesses that want to move into a large islamic center with us. There is plenty of space for offices, stores, restaurants, drug stores, etc.” In addition, the note: “Only Muslims!!!!” Furthermore, it says: “Don’t be afraid to advance the Dawa in Germany!” With ‘Dawa’ the appeal is made to take on the Muslim faith.

On the internet shipping site, A. offers above all long black garments – so-called Khimars. In the veil is partly only a slit for seeing available. A. also wears such a veiling garment. Over one of the clothing pieces offered over the internet is the note: “Please be take care to be clothed correctly according to Islam when on the street!”

It’s nice to know where one stands. The first signs of mistrust among the Hanseatic people:

The member of an association visited most of all by Turkish Muslims judged the Internet site as “strictly religious, but not radical or dangerous.” The things offered here are oriented primarily toward Arabic people. “This type of veiling is not usually worn by Turks.” He considered it “a provocation” that the new owners of the former “Shamata” hung a black flag with the islamic confession of faith in the window as one of the first businesses. He could understand how passers-by would feel insecure about this.

The Harburg Muslims are letting the mask fall so far that critical tones are even starting be heard from one of the local SPD politicians:

The head of the SPD faction, Jürgen Heimath, admonishes quietly in the meantime: “One should wait before making a judgment, until the spaces have been either partly or completely filled.” Of the veil outfits being distributed on “Mumin Shop,” he says: “Offerings of this kind contradict the efforts of this society toward the integration of everyone.”

CDU faction head Ralf-Dieter Fischer states it similarly: “We are striving across party platforms for integration. We just don’t want to create these parallel and special societies.” And he says regarding the shopping center: “That is unambiguously a demarcation. Such a thing doesn’t belong coming to Harburg.” Fisher is an attorney by profession and sees the poster hanging in the picture window in Krummholzberg as “on the edge of legality”: “We are in an area here in which EU provisions for the prevention of discrimination have been touched. It is not allowed that certain religious groups – in this case all non-Muslims – be excluded in the search for tenants.” A. is not known by Constitutional Defense. “An assessment is supposed to be carried out” after first disclosure.

Then make an assessment, worthy Constitutional Defense. We in any case can predict where the road will lead: In the direction of counter-society, which is claiming more and more room in Harburg for itself. Until it is sooner or later islamized. It’s all only a question of time.

The Elbe-Wochenblatt reports in an article called “Islam-Center at Krummholzberg”:

The two Muslimas are, according to their own statements, happy about those who are interested, “however preferably with Muslim faith.” The speaker for integration policy from the SPD citizens’ faction, Kazim Abaci, consider such an offering in a part of town like Harburg with a high amount of immigrants to be “thoroughly sensible.” However, nobody should be excluded. “We don’t want a parallel society, we want permeability,” Abaci says.

It’s good to know that “integration” politicians in Germany are apparently often Muslims themselves – what was that about the “goat becoming the gardener”? Also extremely informative is which process of thought is coming to the surface by the operators of this shopping center:

The [female] operators of the islamic shopping center, which is to be developed at Krummholzberg between the “Center of Integration for the Foreign Workers’ Citizens Initiative” (Partner: the Catholic Church among others) and the El-Iman mosque o the Islam Association, have up until now not answered inquiries by the media. Instead, they are making statements on the Facebook social network.

Thus, there is no excuse when a woman will not wear clothing such as the hijab: “even if the woman covers her aura by the wearing of pants or a calf-length skirt and opaque socks, she is full of sin.” The two women from Harburg apparently know about the media reports regarding their project. However, they don’t appear to be too surprised: “Many Muslims believe in an undamaged, German and agitation-free world.

welt online writes: “Shopping Center for Muslims Causes Irritation:

To be sure, nothing is being said that people of other faiths are unwelcome. However, it is questionable whether Harburg’s average citizens will be found shopping among the assortment at the Firdaus Center. Thus the palette of products from “Mumin Shop” give an idea that the appeal will be more for the followers of fundamental Islam than for moderate Muslims or even non-Muslims because emphasis is being placed on islamically correct clothing: The assortment covers Muslim everyday and prayer clothing for men and women. Among other things, a “ninja nikab,” a head covering will be for sale that leaves only a small slit for the eyes, as well as a “Charshaf,” a black, broad full-body garment where only the hands and parts of the face can be seen.

Lower Saxony DIE FREIHEIT (Freedom Party) reports [6] that there is a procedure being carried out against this shopping center:

Die Freiheit is currently reviewing the first legal steps against the center. We believe that a purely islamic center does not conform to the Constitution. Imagine what would happen if somebody would look specifically for German or Christian entrepreneurs for a planned business. That would be called racism. It is of precisely this that we are accusing Mrs. Noura Abdi. Her venture is racism and an offense against the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Germany.

Someone notices the black and white flag in the upper left part of the picture window – this is the jihad flag of Islam:

Contacts with SPD & CDU factions in Harburg – the faction heads mentioned in the articles, Jürgen Heimath and Ralf-Dieter Fischer would certainly be glad to receive relevant tips – their E-mail addresses are as follows:

» spd-bezirksfraktion.harburg@arcor.de

» cduharburg@t-online.de

Note: Many thanks to our vigilant readers – in the first version that we released this evening around 12:20, we mislocated this Sharia zone in Swabian Harburg.

Many thanks to our news finders Rheinlaenderin, brazenpriss, Saubermann and stepidort who have provided us with valuable additions of information!

Posted by byzanz on PI / Translation: Anders Denken

First, they ask a Turk who is right on his way into the mosque directly next to the Laar cathedral. There’s where it starts already! Why do the mosques always have to stand next to the churches if that is the wish of the Turks? That’s a model throughout the whole country, where the mosque-building associations don’t get embarrassed about building the minaret five meters higher than the church tower, much the opposite, they would do it right away if the were allowed!

Now, mosque visitor Altintas says that’s impossible; Islam is tolerant and would never throw rocks at churches; that can be seen in Turkey where not one church has ever been desecrated. Now whether Altintas is only well indoctrinated or whether he is consciously playing the strings of peaceful Islam for us is still to be seen. In any case, this is how it stands with Oriana Fallaci regarding the conquest of Constantinople in 1453 by Sultan Fatih:

He had all altars destroyed, all church bells melted down, every church converted into mosques or bazaars. Oh yes. This is how Constantinople became Istanbul…

And the people who had fled into the Hagia Sophia were beheaded, even babies! But let’s forget that. Altintas, today, wants to defend the Duisburg church as well as the mosque, and then:

“There are people here who do nothing but cause trouble,” Senol Atintas says. Then he points to an pub where a Lebanese flag hangs in the window. Five men are standing in front of the entrance, two of them apparently still minors.

Lebanon! At that point, WAZ turns to the Lebanese:

“Yes there are problems,” Omar finally states, “if you want to know exactly what the problem is, it’s that there’s nowhere in Laar to play football.

OK, there has to be football, but where?

Reverend Andreas Rose didn’t find it funny at all when on Thursday he reported to the editorial what he experienced when he nicely asked a small group of football players not to disturb the ongoing mass with shots at the church: “I was insulted in the worst way, and they became enormously aggressive. Bad,” Rose says, “bad and sad.”

The incident might seem harmless for some, who in cities doesn’t kick balls against walls? But why do the young Lebanese kick against the church during worship service where the old Germans are sitting? And why don’t they ever once happen to kick balls at least against the door of the mosque when the imam calls?

There are some who have a hazy imagination about the takeover of a society. They think of a military invasion and therefore think that the islamization of Europa is a pipe-dream from crazy people. But that is not the case. Islamization is happening in a sneaky way and it shows in apparently small details such as the disturbance of Christian churchgoers by followers of the conqueror’s religion.

(Hat Tip: Sincimilia)

Posted by kewil on / Translation: Anders Denken

The father, Bjoern Vesten, said to this – the decision doesn’t come unexpectedly, but it is outdated to allow religious head covering but not secular. Hats and caps are an important expression of identity for many children and young people; the get no support there. The regional council’s answer: Even when many pupils see the wearing of hats and caps as a part of their youth culture, this custom is not protected by rules of religious freedom.

Through this, the regional council has avoided any conflict through political correctness, but papa Vesten now intends to bring the issue before the civil ombudsman: “My primary objective is not that the children will be allowed to wear head covering in the classroom. But I am reacting to the customary practice that a controversial head covering such as the hijab is being allowed while other head coverings are prohibited.

Blond Kristina Lund says to this: “For me it has become a morning practice to put my hat on. Head covering is a part of my identity, either a hat or cap. I am downright irritated when I can’t find my hat in the morning.” – “Do you wear head covering inside?” – ”Yes. That is part of me. But at school I have taken it off when teachers ask. I understand those who see it as unjust that differing rules exist for hats and hijabs. I feel that my hat is more than just a head covering, and I feel naked without it.”

Hijab-covered Iram Abbas with her hidden hair thinks: “In my school class there are five girls who wear hijabs, and we have never received any comments about them. Most teachers don’t accept the other kids wearing caps in the classroom.” – “Do you believe the teachers are discriminating against them?” – ”The cap is external and has more to do with fashion, while the hijab is a religious symbol. There is no comparison. But I personally have nothing against a hat or cap.” – “Could the hijab also be a fashion accessory?” – “Hijab is first and foremost a religious symbol, but it could be connected in different ways, and in this fashion create various hijab styles. Perhaps there can be both.”

Unfortunately, Iram was not asked whether she would remove the hijab if the teacher would ask her to do so. Perhaps the interim SPD president Aydan Özoguz should start up a hijab debate with her criminal brothers in Oslo because we have truly had abundant discussion about the islamic jihadist separating sexual symbol.

(Source: Aftenposten / German Translation: Alster, Hamburg PI / English Translation: Anders Denken)

A short afterword from the Christmas season: At the school in Drammen, Norway, the otherwise usual Christmastime traditional cornered hats (Nisseluer) along with the traditional Christmas clothing was prohibited out of respect for Muslim students. This has to do with traditional Scandinavian dress, which well-known Carl Larson has drawn for us here (Picture left: Carl Larsen’s daughter Brita in Christmas attire with a cornered hat).

(From GO)

In the print edition, Angelika Wölk (the name is routine) reports about the well-enough known infirmity of the Catholic church in this region. Marxloh has been hard hit by it. Three to five church buildings are threatened with closings. No wonder when one considers that only 3000 Catholics live in this part of town. As always in such cases those affected are offered something more digestible, only half of the eradication. Say – two buildings should continue to be used, then later the information from the church leaders would be shared regarding the total degree of the devastation; all five are to be closed. The Duisburg Catholics can’t accept this at all; three closings might be reasonably acceptable, but this complete eradication, that goes too far. People chains, bell-ring protest, occupied churches.

Now comes the hour of the medicine man, or better yet, the medicine woman. Author Angelika Wölk reports how exemplary the Muslims are behaving side-by-side with the Catholic remnant in this battle for the local culture. IN a mutual letter to the bishop, they wrote, “We are impressed and we have shared our feelings with him.” Along with this, the reader gets a sense of a broadside “successful integration” that truly isn’t without tensions (like now then, successful or full of tension) but how can it be any other way, thus it goes on in the article, “in this part of the city riddled with social problems.” Both sides, Christians and Muslims, fear in any case that the future will find its place on the side of the stately mosque without a Catholic church.

The report was even announced on the front page in the following way. “Duisburg Muslims battle for Catholic church.” This headline is a slap in the face of persecuted Christians worldwide and a further building block with which the natural sense of the people about this religion is to be walled in.

Of course, PI has already reported in other places about this very thing, however, this infamous keeping of the people in the dark by the WAZ should not be glossed over. Citizens be vigilant, you are being sold the goat as the gardener. How can a mosque that has contact with the Grey Wolves contribute to the general welfare? Pope attacker Mehmet Ali Agca, for example, is a figurehead for the Grey Wolves.

And here is where we come full circle, the article is embarrassing and typical for our situation here in Germany. The real problems are being suppressed, trivialized, spun, distorted. How will our grandchildren ever cope with all the problems?

» Contact: zentralredaktion@waz.de

Guest Contribution on PI / Translation: Anders Denken

Bild writes:

Airport – Ashot Sogamanian (59, Armenian) sits in desperation in his apartment. His complete family – wife Walja (48), sons Migran (26) and Mamikon (20) – were put under arrest in a dubious action by authorities.

Everything started on December 14th in Altenstadt: Mother and sons were summoned by the immigrant authorities to Büdlingen for the tolerance of residence extension.

Mamikon stayed home due to illness. When the mother and brother appeared at the agency, their cellphones were confiscated.

At the same time, the police were pulling Mamikon out of bed. To the airport in handcuffs – lightning deportation.

The younger son collapsed; the mother fainted from high blood pressure – hospital in Moscow.

The authorities accuse the family of providing falsified information regarding their origin (they classified themselves as Azerbaijanian since they came from the border region) and names (maiden name of the mother on the marriage certificate).

“Not true,” said the severely handicapped father who needs care and has a residency permit.

An application for asylum was rejected in 1997. The objection has sat in the regional court – for 14 years!

The Sogamanians, an integrated family. The sons are employed as security personnel at the airport and in the main tower, are basketball coaches and referees for soccer. The mother is a cleaning maid. The father: “My boys think only in German.”

Friends and politicians only wish to obtain their return by means of a petition in the state assembly. Former Postal Minister Christian Schwarz-Schilling is also getting involved.

Ashot Sogamanian, a devout Christian, prays alone at home. That he can soon see his loved ones again.

This case is another one belonging to the developing “Eurabia.” Soon there will be absolutely no more place for Christians and Jews there.

(Photo above: Ashot and Walja Sogamanian who suffered a heart attack in the airplane)

Posted by PI / Translation: Anders Denken

The story is told quickly: The two go cheerfully to the local mosque and wash their hands and feet first according to prescribed guidelines. They then enter the instruction area where they already expect to see their veiled teacher and many head-covered girls sunken deep into the Quran. Everyone is friendly and kind, and of course both of them put a veil over their head and focus on the Quran. Then, at sometime the Quran instruction is over and the two buoyantly leave the mosque. The message to be conveyed to all of the clueless children in front of the television goes: Such a Quran school like this must certainly be cool!

But see for yourself:

» E-mail the NDR (producer of the Sesame Street): ndr@ndr.de

Posted by PI / Translation: Anders Denken

(By Michael Stürzenberger)

Istanbul-born Necla Kelek has experienced the multifaceted islamic enrichments in her own body and vehemently disagrees with the politically correct denial of the connection between forced marriage and Islam:

The legend propagated by Islamic associations, immigrant associations and immigrant researchers that forced marriages are the stuff of isolated cases will be laid to rest here. They are mostly young women who go to school; they are migrants of the X Generation and Muslims. And often they are kidnapped to be married in their parents’ homeland. And yet this is only the tip of the iceberg.

Kelek points out that the transitions of the usual “arranged” marriage in Islam and forced marriage are fluid. There is an urgent need in the public discussion for the curtain to be raised that presently blocks the relentless look into the system of Islam. It is a regularly occurring crime against hundreds of thousands of Muslim young girls and women among us, who through the rigid rules of a man-dominated and misogynous ideology are being robbed of their freedom and self-determination. The “politically correct” join in the blame for the immense human drama that is playing out among us here in Germany through the organized looking away and the ideologically pre-scripted trivialization of Islam.

It is tremendously important that believable secular Muslims like Necla Kelek get actively involved in this hitherto dishonest debate:

The fact that there is a proven “coercion to marry” in the islamic culture is being denied by these scholars. Sexuality is known to be legitimate only in marriage. and – willingly or under pressure – the parents have fulfilled their religious duty only when they have married off the children.

Anyone that negates the societal dimension of religion makes a methodical mistake, comes to skewed results in the analysis and draws incorrect conclusions. I am sure the result of an emperically clean inquiry about forced and arranged marriages with this questioning would be far more dramatic than the study now presents.

Kelek makes it clear with her explanations that healthy common sense in this shadow debate is being collectively shut off and is giving way to a nearly obsessive-neurotic campaign of denial. Victims of these politically correct hypocrites should well become the German Minister of Families. Kelek outs these double moralists:

Even the researchers at the Lawaetz Foundation have apparently been unable to defend themselves against this peer group. The monocausal definitions of the study show just how much this immigration research lobby is in the position of ideologizing science and as always reducing integration problems initially to a social one, and when this doesn’t help to an economic one and then to an educational deficit.

And when this doesn’t help, they carry on about “tribal customs” as the cause without questioning where tradition comes from and who legitimizes it. And why the situation of the women and the practice of marriage in islamic societies are so similar throughout the world. Do they all belong to a single tribe? A naïve/romantic idea of societal structures and activities that are being propelled to new heights in German universities.

For the sake of factual enrichment in the discussion, it would be recommended for all Islam trivializers that they take the Quran to heart . It is not just a dusty book from the Arab wilderness of the 7th century, but the Holy Book of the Muslims, valid for all time, not to be questioned, full of directions and commands. Here is where clear guidelines regarding forced marriage can be found, for example in Sura 2, Verse 221:

“and do not marry any devout women with infidels”

Or in Sura 24, Verse 32:

“And marry those still single among you and righteous ones among your male and female slaves. If they are poor, Allah will make them rich through his favor.”

In Germany, such a razor-sharp analysis of the problem can be undertaken only by a citizen with migrant background, otherwise the media censor sentinels of censorship will jump immediately in to action and swing their crushing Nazi muzzle. How intellectually derelict this former land of poets and thinkers has become is more than clearly revealed by the idiotic discussions about Islam. A blessing as a contrast in this ideological journey are Kelek’s clear words:

In spite of this: The study is to be lauded because it initially shows that, in the area of forced marriages, we are dealing with abuse and crimes against women, that they are subject to violence in families, that not just economically weak and not just the uneducated are criminals as much as victims.

And she makes it clear that neither German citizenship nor the German language is protection against forced marriage or even necessarily suitable as a parameter for integration. At least – and this is a small comfort – language abilities put those concerned better in the condition for getting help.

It’s getting to be time that politicians and media join the flaming appeal from Necla Kelek: Address the abuses clearly that are caused by Islam in our country, and work pragmatically on solutions. In connection with this, the root of the problem needs to be addressed, and that is just simply islamic teaching. It is yet to be seen who in this land still has courage and who cowardly swims with the current of political correctness. Note well:

Only dead fish swim with the current

In the case of the subject of Islam, there are almost only dead and apparently dead fish in Germany. These are the unbearable hypocrites who by instrumentalizing a rightwing radical gangster trio in the course of the past six years have demonstrated their dismay in the Bundestag because of nine murders of individuals of Turkish and Greek descent (each dead being scandalous and one too many!), but in the same breath they consistently look away when the issue involves more than 150 documented (!) deaths during the same span of time as the result of “honor” murders in the heart of Germany.

The Representative for Integration Maria Böhmer and the Minister of Families Kristina Schröder want to set up a help line and strengthen education above all in schools.

That to be much lauded because encouragement, education, knowledge of one’s rights, and the security that teachers, police, friends and neighbors understand and will protect someone is enormously important for enforcing that every person has the right to decide whether, when and whom he will marry.

And from the leftwing/Green politicians of the ilk of Claudia “Fatima” Roth & cohorts, who would otherwise give a yelp of total shock when they smell even the slightest discrimination against women in our society, there is only shameful silence in this case. A notable sign that this ideologically pigheaded group is none other than a collection of hypocritical double moralists who look at their swiftly growing Muslim electoral potential with total calculation.

This country needs once again to be turned on its head. And for this, courage, engagement, determination and action are needed. By people of the kind as Necla Kelek who have more than earned the admiration and support of all of us.

I had the great pleasure of speaking extensively with her July 7th at the Muffat Café on after her lecture in the Munich Gasteig on the theme of “Freedom in Islam – Can Muslims in Europe integrate?”. The Muslim future in our country should include her outlook: Neither the Quran nor the prophet Muhammad are authoritative for her, rather she sees herself as a “cultural Muslim.” Such people, like Hamed Abdel Samad who also calls for the “post Quranic discourse,” might be able to accomplish showing Islam the way into the modern day. But as long as they, as overall rare “isolated cases,” continue not to be accepted at all as Muslims by the entire islamic associative power – not even by one like the oh, so “modern,” “cosmopolitan” and “democracy-loving” Imam Bajrambenjamin Idriz – then the outlook is bleak with the deceptive hope for a “moderate Euro-Islam,” which so far has been nothing more than a mirage and a wishful fabrication by the naïve do-gooders of this country.

The ideology-free analysis of the study on forced marriage by the social and educational scientist Hartmut Krauss, “Forced Marriage Amongst Empirical Reality and Ideological Obscuration” offers further insights. And the book “The Foreign Bride” by Necla Kelek is absolutely read-worthy as it is useful as an introduction to the subject.

Posted by PI / Translation: Anders Denken

Welt Online published a highly interesting article yesterday (26 Nov.) with the enlightening headline “Slitting the Throat in the Name of Honor“. We are interested to see sometime in the distant future when it won’t be politically incorrect among just us to say “in the name of Islam” – but, of course, violence against women, forced marriages and murders of (honor) shame have nothing to do with the most Peaceful of all Religions™. Certainly, the fact that this very thing is prescribed and commanded in the Quran and the Hadiths can be traced back to banal errors in translation and interpretation.

(By Michael Stürzenberger)

The examples presented on Welt Online are startling, particularly because they occurred not in Afghanistan or Iran, but right here among us. Following is a small assortment from the islamic horror show in Germany (all emphases by PI):

It borders on a miracle for Serap Y. that her little daughter is alive and well. For in October 2010, her brother Ibrahim Y. sought out the woman well-advanced in pregnancy at her apartment, threw her on the floor, kicked her in the belly and back and finally laid into her. Because her child came from an extra-marital relationship with a Kurd, she offended the family honor.

All in accordance with Islam. “Kill the one who departs from the religion,” the prophet demanded. It is also erroneous to say that forced marriages result in the name of “honor” but not in the name of the religion:

And forced marriages as well can be attributed as an outcome of this idea of honor. A new study that for the first time examined the phenomenon of forced marriage shows that they are often a precursor to full-blown violence. According to the study, two-thirds of those involved in forced marriages have already been subject to violence in their upbringing.

Violence against recalcitrant women is regularly called for by Islam in Sura 4 Verse 34 (“beat her”). And forced marriages have had a long tradition since Muhammad. The six-year-old Aisha would hardly have been willing to marry the 53-year-old Muhammad. The immensely high rate of violence in Muslim forced marriages according to Welt Online is extremely troubling:

More than half experienced physical violence in connection with the forced marriage. Almost every third individual was threatened with a weapon or murder. In the worst case, such an attack that the culprits commit in an alleged restoration of the “family honor” ends up being fatal for the woman involved.

For these women, Islam truly means “peace,” then, because in death there can be no more bullying. The message that all of the occurrences of violence, force and murders actually might have something to do with the religion is more hidden in the conveyance of the Welt article:

The patriarchalism is not a phenomenon of the past,” says Heidemarie Grobe of Hamburg Terre des Femmes. “Live according to its traditional pattern of values restricts the free development of many girls even today, and especially that of the female immigrants of Muslim faith living in Germany.” The problems show up at the latest when the issue is that of self-determination and the question of marriage.

Now, in the examples mentioned there is not a single one that can point to non-Muslims:

January 2010: One-and-one-half years after the murder of his cousin, a 21-year-old Syrian from Wuppertal was sentenced to 14 years incarceration. He shot the 20-year-old because her western lifestyle didn’t conform to the moral ideas of the family. The body was discovered in a parking lot by the A45 freeway.

These, also, are in no way just the agonizingly contrived “isolated cases,” as one study shows:

Such engagement will also be necessary because the results of the study are alarming according to experts: In 2008, 3443 nationwide (Germany) individuals who had been threatened with forced marriage or were persons affected thereby received counsel.

The hidden numbers are probably much higher. Also alarming is the good degree of integration of those affected:

The noticeable thing is that the affected individuals are reputed to be well integrated. 32 percent were born in Germany, and 44 percent have a German passport. But their future is not in Germany: more than 52 percent of forced marriages take place abroad or are planned there. 43 percent of those affected are afraid of being taken to someplace abroad and having to live there long-term.

Especially startling is the example of what Ceylan Yildrim of East Anatolia had to live through:

In spite of this, she had to make up her school diploma. She constantly fled to shelters for battered women, however, for many years she didn’t feel well about leaving the Turkish husband. Until the day she was at a wedding with him and a strange man made a pass at her. “My husband caused a rage and it ended in a mass brawl. Because he assumed that I as the woman had provoked the situation, he intended to slit my throat before the eyes of 200 people,” Yildirim said. “I survived only because my son defended me. The rest of my family wanted to see me dead.”

In Islam, beheading is a favorite practice, as even this view in the “holy book” shows:

Sura 8, Verse 12: “Truly, I will cast fear into the hearts of the infidels. So cut them in the throat and cut every one of their fingers off.”

In this fashion, back in the year 627, under the eyes of the prophet, around 800 captured Jews in Medina had to end their terrestrial presence. Allahu Akbar.

The well-known journalist Michael Mannheimer wrote a perfectly outstanding essay regarding the subject “honor killings and Islam” in which he works through the history of misogyny in the Arab world that had already existed before the appearance of Islam but was thoroughly kept up by Muhammad. He did actually put an end to the perverted methods of Arab fathers of burying their partly alive newborn daughters, and to that effect improved the situation of the women who were totally without rights by at least granting them at least half the rights of men. But Islam, however, has remained at this level, and in the modern view is totally unacceptable. And Muhammed expressed contempt for women in many places in the Hadiths, which Michael Mannheimer presents in his essay. He quotes the Iranian feminist Mehrangiz Kar who wrote the following about honor murders in Iran:

“Honor murders are as old as they are patriarchal structures. However, what makes them interesting in the majority of Islamic societies is that the lawgiver of those societies defends murder with reference to quotes from Sharia and Islam.”

Furthermore, he quotes women’s rights activist and author Nekla Kelek who points out the conclusion of an October 2003 conference carried out by the British Council,

“that most of the crimes committed ‘in the name of honor’ were legitimized through Fatwas, Islamic legal opinions.”

Mannheimer also quotes some of the misogynous sayings of the prophet in the Hadiths that shape the view of women to this day:

“I have found no greater misfortune for humanity than women.” 23 and “An evil omen can be found in a woman, a house and in a horse.”

The fact that such unusual views by the 7th century prophet of the Arab Bedouin society should still find respect in modern islamic societies can be seen among other places in the counsel given by Muslim scholars such as the Algerian imam Abdelkader Bouziane who suggested his followers beat their women in the following way,

“so that the infidels are not able to see the results.27 According to the authors, “there are clear indications of how ubiquitous beating is in many Muslim marriages: According to experts, there is a disproportionally great number of women in the Muslim faith who must flee to shelters for battered women.”

Also disturbing is a 1987 sentence from the highest court of appeals in Tunisia, which had the following words:

“Beatings and light injuries to the woman by the husband are part of the nature of a normal life of marriage.”

Mannheimer quotes female Islam scholar Schirrmacher who sees in the islamic religion an important, if not central factor, for the thousands of murders committed yearly in the name of honor:

“A traditional-conservative opinion of the woman’s role based on Islamic values creates, therefore, a favorable climate for control over the woman, for the legitimization and application of violence and, along with it, “honor murder” in a certain fashion.

Necla Kelek, Turkish-born and a social scientist, comes to the following unambiguous conclusion:

“… The perpetrators and victims of “honor” killings are Muslims – regardless of school of thought. And in the Quran and through the prayer leaders is where they find the legitimization for their actions. Sunnis are involved just as much as Alevites and Shiites, not just in the east but in all of Turkey.”

Those who know all of these facts know how to arrange the nebulous statements of islamic representatives in this country properly, who assert in prayer-mill fashion that women hold an equal position in Islam and stereotypically reiterate that honor murders, forced marriages and violence against women have nothing to do with Islam. This hogwash is being believed by fewer and fewer people, since the knowledge is slowly trickling through that fibbing is allowed in Islam so that this religion can be better spread among infidels.

(Hat Tip Mannheimer Essay: Sausewind / Translation: Anders Denken)

Image of woman in burqa above reads, “Condemned to matrimony.”

The foreign is the good, the native is the bad. The specter of the antagonistic German is the favorite image to portray and bring subliminally into the discussion. When the 60s liberal generation staged protests against the alleged and factual repressions of the young Republic, they wanted to air out the stuffiness of a thousand years and not only from under the robes. A march began through the institutions, a long march.

(By Eternia, PI-Koblenz)

Their success lies last but not least in the constant retreat of the conservatives and liberals. With the aid of empowered speech, they crafted new prohibitions of thought. Suddenly, such political terms as homeland, nation, mother and family became suspect. The political Right didn’t join this language battle but took on many of these new rhetorical neologisms or alterations in the language and the general thought as well.

Minorities suddenly became the persecuted, and they found themselves in great number. This support for minorities got out of hand when as a result of recruiting foreign workers more and more new minorities came with them for which one could become involved.

The Constitution, under Article 16a, contains the right to political asylum. Besides this right of legal immigration, the right to the joining together of families is one of the rights in Germany that is responsible for an influx in our country. If these laws would be strictly applied, Germany would have no problem with excessive foreign influx and islamization. In the year 2008, for example, there were 20,817 applications for asylum in Germany, of those a whole 233 applications were approved. That is only 1%. For other years, the percentages look similar. Thus it can be recognized that the massive influx, that is from the Arab states, did not come about through proper processes of asylum. However, if one insists that people who have no right to prolonged residency in Germany should return to their homelands, then that person is readily rubber-stamped as “xenophobic.” Along with this, it is only necessary to employ applicable law, and that only too willingly, perhaps followed up with help from the Hardship Commissions, Church Asylum, etc.

Today, around 15 million people with immigrant background live in Germany. An enormously great number that holds within itself the danger of ethnic conflicts all the way to civil war. A visionary who foresaw the swelling problems through mass immigration back in his time was the British conservative Enoch Powell. In his now world renowned “Rivers of Blood” speech (see the BBC documentation on YouTube: Part 1 – Part 2 – Part 3 – Part 4 or a transcript of the speech can be found here.), he warned that a small number of immigrants (he mentioned 50,000 per year) could take the ethnic structure of Great Britain out of balance if this influx would become a permanent condition. “In this country in 15 or 20 years’ time the black man will have the whip hand over the white man,” Powell said back then. Samuel Huntington refined Powell’s views when he substituted the ethnic tensions with the battle of the differing cultures. Right here is where we find ourselves today. There are still only a few years left, before we become the minority in our own country. This will lead to a loss of sovereignty for the German nation. Since such a thing is not so easy to accept, this proves the law of nations, which recognizes the right of a people to self-determination. This right to self-determination applies not just culturally but also ethnically.

It is astounding, but the Greens actually advocate for this right of the people to self-determination. In the proposal “Improving The Human Rights Situation in Tibet”, which was also supported by the Greens, it states among other things that the Tibetans have a right to political, ethnic, cultural and religious self-determination. In this proposal from April 23, 1996, a “sinification of Tibet” is also spoken of, that is, an excess of foreign influx by Han Chinese. Turning to the situation in Germany, such a demand, whose outcome would be a stop to immigration, would be classified as racist and possibly unconstitutional. Thus, the same people who concede a right of self-determination to the Tibetans do not do so when it has to do with the German people and other European nations.

The Left Party’s Günther Grass explained this paradox in the following way: “Against each one out of spirit, forced trend by means of propaganda, against the buying power of the West German eonomy – unity is even to be had for hard Deutschemarks – yes, even against the right to self-determination that belongs undividedly to other peoples, against all of this Auschwitz speaks because one of the requirements for the monstrosity, besides other older driving forces, a strong one, was the unified Germany. (…) We have every reason to fear ourselves as an entity capable of action.” (The subject of discussion here was the institution of the Euro).

The self-determining right of the people doesn’t apply for the German people – because of Auschwitz. Forever, unalterable, for the children and children’s children as well. This is the declaration that Grass only put into words, being representative for the German Left Party.

The answers to this by the Right and liberals have, however, been the wrong ones so far. Möllemann and Hohmann, in a fatal way, made this leftwing view of history their own and attempted to develop an argumentation from it that could only end in an antisemitic way of thinking. They fell into the trap that was set for them. Anyone who uses words such as ‘collective guilt’ or ‘nation of criminals’ without inquiring into what is behind them and then comes to the conclusion that such terms are to be rejected, has not understood the Left’s approach to debate and will not win any arguments.

Because of this, the answer to this leftwing writing of history and seizure of the language can only succeed when one breaks through them. No, there is no existence of collective guilt, much less an inherited guilt. Any claim that uses this argumentation must be rebutted. Anyone who argues in this fashion as Grass and the leftwing political elite do, has exposed himself as pretending to be an ethnic and moral superior that needs no logical arguments to support a position in the political establishment. Because, among all the sham debates and mock indignation of the Left, it ultimately boils down to the positions of power and the money.

PI articles on the subject:

» A Specter is Haunting Europe
» We Nationalists

(The photo shows among others the current Green president Claudia Roth in a May 1990 demonstration in Frankfurt)

The banner above reads:
Never again Germany!
[] Against the annexation of the GDR!
[] Against German nationalism!

(Posted on PI / Translation: Anders Denken)

On the Bavarian TV show “Controversy” (German “Kontrovers”) yesterday evening, a sensitive report was delivered about Hesham Shashaa alias Sheikh Abu Adam, who back in the past has come under suspicion of having beaten one of his three wives to the point of needing hospitalization. However, this didn’t lead to any condemnation, since those involved didn’t press charges in court. Now, it apears that the Palestinian imam is apparently rendering ongoing judgments according to Sharia, which leads to a parallel legal system right in the middle of Munich. And, such wonder, nobody is doing anything about it; everyone is looking away. In other cases, that would also be a sign of intercultural incompetence.

(By Michael Stürzenberger)

The mosque, where only long-bearded and scarf-wearing devout individuals attend, calls itself “House of the Quran.” Imam Abu Adam is lord here in this house. His followers say he lives an example of “unadulterated” Islam, however, they are against violence and terror. How that pars with the Quran, however, is in real need of explanation. Abu Adam is a “peacemaker,” a Muslima says in the interview where she actually hides her hand under material. Another bearded Muslim says that the meaning of life is to serve Allah, as it says in the Quran. Another bearded one, apparently a Bio-German convert, finds that Islam is imparted “in a very authentic way” there.

In the conversation with the TV team, there is the constant ringing of one of his 10 cellphones, one for each of the children he has brought into the world, which bring him 1900 Euros monthly in child subsidies. One has to live on something after all. Now, we really don’t know whether one of his Muslim offspring is also called “Jihad,” like the 6kg bundle of joy born lately in Berlin – who in that case was already the 14th stroke in the spirit of Allah. Abu Adam, apparently, renders for Munich Muslims constant Islamic legal consultations, so-called Fatwas, and even originally according to the Sharia, since after all, thousands of devout believers need direction for their lives.

The article according to BR appears under the title:

Allah’s Peacemaker – Islamic Judge and the Rule of Law

The Book of Criminal Law doesn’t count for them, only the Sharia. So-called peacemakers are passing their own laws in our midst, outside the realm of German rule of law. The authorities know about it – and most only look on!

Here is the must-see, six-minute video of an Islamic counter-society right in the middle of Munich.

The TV report was produced by freelance journalist Ahmet Senyurt, who for Cosmo TV has also produced a portrait of the German Islam-critical scene including PI. He is considered to be a so-called “moderate” Muslim, but absolutely does not get along with clear critique of Islam à la Michael Mannheimer. At least he appears for the moment to be against the application of the Sharia in Germany – after all, that something anyway. The “dokzentrum” reports the following about him:

The Cologne journalist grew up in the area where he reports. He possesses a large network of contact people and information sources, and sees his skills in the Turkish language and mentality today. He doesn’t sit at his desk first for stories, rather he goes to the site. Explores the social environment and living conditions of the personal groups before he finishes his article. This proximity demands a balancing act between his daily life and the world from Ahmet Senyurt into which he dives for journalism: “When I sleep in mosques, I look like a Taliban. I don’t shave then; I’m just that way. My problem is that it’s sometimes difficult to distinguish between inner and outer world.”

The main thing is that the inner and outer world do not grow together within in the context of investigative reporting.

Photo: Roland Heinrich / Translation: Anders Denken

A video that was published on the video portal Liveleaks was passed on to the PI editorial . It portrays how Islam endoctrination is being carried out in a German kindergarten. Women wearing scarves give the little ones a liquid that they can rub on and even use for cleaning so that they can prepare for Muslim prayer. A Muslim, apparently an imam, shows the children the Quran and whispers in front of them how Muslims pray and all the things Turkish children use for play. The young generation is being influenced to think with such methods how peaceful and likable Islam must be.

Here is the video:

Now, it would be important to find out in which state and city this kindergarten is located so that the appropriate minister of education can be contacted. Perhaps one or another reader might have an idea…

UPDATE: The Muslim who is extoling the Quran to the German children is most apparently Ömer Akbulut, who has engaged himself as the speaker of the Islamic community for the building of a mosque with minaret in Wertheim. It can also be assumed that the kindergarten is located somewhere in the vicinity of Wertheim. (Thanks to PI reader 1Eternia)

(Source: Liveleak / Hat Tip: Timo)

At this point, German newspapers have reported nothing about this, and only a precious few from Switzerland and Austria:

Most of the illegal immigrants came by way of sea to Italy and Malta. This can be traced back to the revolutions in Tunisia and Libya. In addition, a good third of the illegal immigrants tried to come over the Turkish-Greek border into the EU, it said.

Frontex accused Greece of providing too few reception camps and not enough return agreements with the countries of origin. According to the organization, the way into the EU over a first stop in Turkey is especially appealing, since the country doesn’t require a visa of many foreign citizens.

Since Frontex doesn’t know the number of unrecorded cases, and the Muhammadan Spring in North Africa is still reasonably current, the numbers are sure to grow soon. The idea that the Islamic “democracies” there will accomplish something economically can be for the most part discarded. They will receive billions in developmental aid from us, and as a small thanks, they will send us their unskilled and unemployed.

(By kewil for PI. Translation by Anders Denken)

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.

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!)

(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