The Süddeutsche reports:

The SPD Party head Sigmar Gabriel has announced that he will examine the new, controversial book from SPD politician and Bundesbank committee member Thilo Sarrazin. He will check to see if Sarrazin makes character judgments about foreigners in his book. ‘If he did that, then it is certainly racist,’ Gabriel said in Worms. As far as expulsion proceedings by the party, Gabriel didn’t want to state any details. Such a decision has to be able to stand up in court. In his book on the subject of integration, the former Berlin Finance Senator Sarrazin charges many immigrants of not intending to integrate into German society and bring more expenses than benefits.

In Spring he said that Arabs and Turks had ‘no productive function other than for the fruit and vegetable trade.’

Bet Dr. Christian Pfeiffer gets a well remunerated commission very soon…

BILD Series on the new Sarazin book “Germany is Dismantling Itself”:

» Every pupil should wear a uniform!
» We’re becoming foreigners in our own country
» Germany is becoming more impoverished and stupid!
» Why Islam makes integration so difficult

(Hat Tip: M.S. / Translation: Anders Denken)

Return to the Mobile Edition.

“Junge Freiheit” (Young Freedom) reports:

Hopeless Battle Against Wikipedia

The “Outraged Citizens” (Bürger in Wut) group is upset at Wikipedia. At the online-encyclopedia site, until last week, there was a statement about the nationwide voter coalition stating they were “right-wing populist.” The “Outraged Citizens” do not agree with this evaluation.

In addition, they reject the statement in the Wikipedia article that the group arose from the Schill party. This couldn’t be, since “Outraged Citizens” had already been founded in 2004, however, the Schill party dissolved only in 2007. The voter alliance, therefore, is calling for an appropriate change in the Wikipedia article. But this will only happen with difficulty.

Basically, any user of Wikipedia can put together articles and change texts. Thus, even “Outraged Citizens” have started to try and change the article according to their ideas. The new version, however, was reformulated an hour later back to its original version by another author — a common and often criticized practice with Wikipedia.

The approach on the discussion page at Wikipedia about the BIW article is, in fact, incredible. It seems especially important to Wikipedia author ‘häuslebauer’ to press the stamp of “right-wing populist” on various political groups…

It appears important to that populist practice be recognized and shut down.

Let’s look and see what the “populist” future has in store for us…

Return to the Mobile Edition.

Rationally speaking, one could say that the utopian, unbased left-wing have lost a spiritual leader. We remember that it was the left-wing MSM that fueled the flames when patriotism, national flags or national language were mentioned as intelligent aids for integration. Today, the same papers in condescending arrogance sell neo-conservative concepts as successful multi-culti assimilation. No problem — we already know where it originated. Neo-conservative thinkers entertain themselves in keeping right with the good conscience against an overpowering armada of left-wing journalists and politicians, and having presented the better concepts of society. Please!

However, in the head of a left-wing individual, this has long since not been reason enough to put his approaches on the testing bench. He also cannot. The Left has long since worked this way: The others have created something new, and the Left has then sold it as his own brainchild, or catastrophically distorted it. Intellectual copyright? That alone shows the incompleteness of the Left’s concept of thought. Ignorance is bliss. Therefore, the Left holds tightly onto its course of appeasement for Islam, while it’s the new-conservative thinkers that (attempt to) maintain Western societies and (attempt to) liberate the people within the Islamic sphere of influence. Just as a ’68 revolution against Capital was possible only inside the confines of a capitalistic state of prosperity, so the next experiment of the Left, of giving Islamic monoculture the label of multi-culti, is again possible only within the confines of neo-conservative societal order because of the massive possibility of collapse. It totally appears as though the Left is entertained by this, that it is a bully based on a robustly new-conservative foundation.

How pathological this Left worldview is in the meantime; the purely perverse reporting of the death and burial of the terrorst Fadlallah through the editorial being carried out by the left-wing ideologues and Islamofascists of the mass media (for example, BBC: “Fadlallah was an important man,” for whom? For the victims of the the assassin from Hezbollah?) Muslim Octavia Nasr is an emblem of this idiocy and its accompanying clique. Nasr is deified by a world of do-gooders not having a working knowledge of cultures, and has been heaped upon with accolades. In this the patrons hope for a blessing from the god of egotism. The spraying of a hint of “pseudo-holy Islamic monoculture/multi-culti” serves only as an appeasement for their own psychological shortcomings coming from a lack of genuine culture. After all, one builds only on the intellectual foundation of another. However, since CNN woman Nasr wears no head scarf, this allows the (secret) left-wing propensity toward the collectivistic totalitarianism of Islam for its own egotistical self-adulation to be well hidden. At least from the masses of their own dumbed down clientele.

It is only stupid that Mrs. Nasr apparently laid down an early start as regards the public disclosure of her radical Islamic persuasion. She doesn’t worship the left-wing synchretic ego-god, rather Allah, and thereby she commits a capital crime against her multi-culti promoters

On her Twitter account octavianasrCNN, Nasr has it reported after the announcement of the death of the Islamic stringpuller for terror (see picture), that she is “sad” about the passing away of the sacred Hezbollah leader. He was “one of the giants of Hezbollah whom they respected greatly”… Put it together: “Moderate Muslim” who is fostered by the Left intelligentsia, “respected” an Islamofascist terrorist? Moderate Islam + Left = Terror?

Honoring Fadlallah is no sign of advance, independent thought or a substantial distinction. Praising Fadlallah simply shows that mainstram Islam cannot be distinguished from “Islamic terrorists” in its strategic goals either. Just as mass murder by the terrorists is indeed rejected (merely) by the cultural Muslim on tactical grounds because it could shake up the masses in the West and it incidentally affects Muslims, so also the public disclosure of individual radical Islamic beliefs held by the Muslims is for the most part held back in editorial bureaus or given in a well packaged admission (“I am against terrorism!”). It is possible this way to put the achievements of Islam in the West in danger due to carelessness in. Ayaan Hirsi Ali calls these radicals the undercover Islamofacists, like “showcase moderate” Tariq Ramadan is also one, for an example. The goal remains the same for the bulk of the Muslims: The West has to become an autocratic Sharia society. Such is demanded in Islamic writings, in Islam.

In closing, we would therefore like to delight the Left of Europe with a truism: Only because something is new, different or “foreign” doesn’t mean it is positive per se for the coheision of a society. In reference to Islam, we would suggest to you with wise foresight that you separate from your Islamic and left-wing hate preachers and terrorist admirers. Then they could in a few years sell it as “their” success and “their” world view… Paying homage to terrorists is not progressive, it is only naive, stupid or otherwise calculated intention. Something like that should have been learned from characteristic socialist history with Stalin or Che Guevarra, don’t you think?

CNN, by the way, has fired Octavia Nasr.

(Guest Contribution by die Realität)

Return to the Mobile Edition.

In Hamburg left-wing extremists demonstrated in usual peaceful fashion against “police violence” and the State that supports them. That couldn’t occur without injured police officers. The Hamburger Morgenpost reports:

Unidentified individuals attacked the assignment forces with fireworks and bottles, set garbage bags on fire and smashed through the glass of the Hamburg Sparkasse bank. The police believe that the attackers come from the left-wing scene.

Twelve police officers were hit and injured. Three others were injured by flue gas. The police arrested two rioters under preliminary suspicion of vandalism. Four other people were taken into custody. Only in the early morning hours did the situation calm down around the “Rote Flora.”

With that, the demonstration against police violence and State repression began to proceed peacefully overall. Around 800 participants were present until around 5:30 p.m. marching from the Landing bridges in the direction of Sternschanze.

And by the same token, we are astonished how the Journalists of Quality at the Morgenpost and the police experts even had the suspicion that the matter could have been an event by left-wingers. Who would have thought of that!

Return to the Mobile Edition.

(Hat Tip to Thomas D. / Translation: Anders Denken)

Return to the Mobile Edition.

(By the Editrix)

His babblings about the Jewish perpetrators of Stalinism who had been no real Jews because they didn’t believe in God, and the Nazis who didn’t believe in God, so the Germans were no “people of perpetrators” either, revealed more about the state of the nation than about him or the Holocaust. Nobody laughed, instead, he was expelled from his parlamentiary group and later stripped of his party membership as well. All of Germany was split in two factions. One thought that he was quite right and that the Jews get away with everything, the rest felt noble.

Things were a bit different, when Annette Groth and Inge Höger, two German Bundestag backbenchers from the post-Stalinist Left party joined the recent terrorist-aid convoi to Gaza. It was, after all, about Jews who are still alive.

Being safely home and dutifully fussed over, they were eager to convey their message. “We have a moral and Christian commitment to speak out aloud against any sort of human rights violations,” said Groth, who used to work for ecumenical institutions and an organisation linked to the Evangelical Church in Germany (EKD), Germany’s main Protestant umbrella, before becoming a member of the Bundestag.

Groth said she had been on the women’s deck (sic!) of the Mavi Marmara, having joined the Muslim women for their morning prayers (sic!) as every good Protestant Christian ought to, when Israeli special forces attacked. “There were soldiers everywhere, heavily armed and pointing their guns at us,” she said. “There was an attitude of terror and humiliation. They did not allow old men to go to the toilet … It was mere terror, creating a situation full of anxiety.”

Her colleague Höger said the women on the ship were quickly (sic!) shut in at a lower level of the ship, the so-called “women’s deck” (sic!) during the night and that they “… couldn’t get out, we didn’t know what was going on above because we were locked in,” she said. “We put on our life vests and eventually we figured out that the ship was occupied, that the Israelis had taken it over”, which doesn’t quite go together with Groth’s vivid description of heavily armed soldiers everywhere who pointed their guns at them and didn’t allow old men to go to the toilet, but whatever.

Different from Hohmann, who had been torn to shreds seven years ago, there was a fussing and clucking and general “there there I can relate yo you” over the two “visibly shaken” victims of Israeli savagery all through the media, because — did I say this already? — this was about Jews who are not yet dead.

There is a petition online to have the Stalin-sisters expelled from the Bundestag with, while I am writing this, 1820 signatures. Will it bring about anything? No, but I signed nevertheless because I thought everybody who got his knickers in a knot over Martin Hohmann seven years ago is somewhat morally obliged to do so.

In the meantime, the German mainstream is eagerly awaiting that the poor, beleaguered Pals and their assorted cronies in the Middle East will finish what had to be cut short 65 years ago in Europe, so that they can go on standing in firm solidarity side by side, upright, solemn and serious, with dead Jews again.

Return to the Mobile Edition.

The blogkeepers from the ranks of the apologetics scene are no longer enough. But the statements thus aren’ t any more competent than before, rather they keep the same vagueness, or are kept vague, in order to support the idea of supposed racism. In the headline, Cigdem Akyol already makes it clear: One is only capable of thinking, if the result of the process necessary for doing so is the same as the one the author has come to. This is a traditional practice with the Left, who likes to put “deviants” in lunatic asylums. For whoever doesn’t think the same as we do is either stupid and/or crazy. The kinds of errors in thinking that can be made as deemed by the left-wing powers remain unclear in the context of the article.

And thus, the idea that “critical Islam scholars” have also turned against “this” criticism ends up getting lost in vagueness:

Critical Islam scholars like Ursula Spuler-Stegeman are surprised at how heated the debate has become about Muslims in Germany. Spuler-Stegemann is recognized for her harsh criticism of Islamic associations, however she warns against the populist actions because of fears. “Being critical is OK, but this exaggerating of the situation, it just can’t be.”

Unfortunately, the reader is left alone guess what Mrs. Spuler-Stegeman means by criticism and “this (?!) exaggeration of the situation.” It should be assumed that she means any group that is mentioned by critics, and even the content of their criticism as well. Or did the author possibly put the stamp “Approved by Islam Critics” on her whole article by one of these unintended amplifications here?

We would like to deal primarily with the assertions of the article with relation to PI!

Just one word about the outrage stated in the taz article concerning the approach of the Cititizen Movement Pax Europa to the incompatibility of Islam in letting itself to be tested in court by the constitutional values of a peace-loving democratic society. On the one hand, this outrage is already unfathomable, since this appears to be a discussion in harmony with rule of law. On the other hand, it would already serve to complete the picture by mentioning that the “World Week” already dealt with this very theme a few days before, and introduced Islam scholar Lukas Wick’s dissertation. In his dissertation, e finds “precious few criteria” for the above-mentioned compatibility, and for the ability of Muslims in integrating with a constitutionally ordered state. Incitement? Racism? What the taz author thinks about this doesn’t get disclosed. Thus, she remains in the company of her universally recognized experts.

Of course, Mathias Rohe, who feels he has been pilloried by PI, is certainly not to be missing from this group. It’s possible that Rohe feels this way when Nassim ben Iman asks himself in an interview with PI from where Rohe got his apologetic thesis that the Quran is to be read historically. Rohe is also not asked by the taz author why he isn’t defending his assertion in the discussion. But since that’s not to his liking, he would rather complain to taz about his alleged agitators. But one should show sympathy for that because at the taz it has been decided that no critical questions are to be asked dealing with the uniqueness of “Islam expert” Rohe’s thesis (see interview starting at 8:40).

Unfortunately, neither Nassim ben Iman nor the taz reader can gather from the article where Rohe draws his crude theories, and therefore one has to accept that he relies on his own isolated opinion — as some jurists do — in some aspects of his lectures and presentations. He also understands how to do this rather creatively, as if the agent of this opinion would
a) propagate all his theses in the Islamic World b) and as if he were one of many agents. This he achieves by constantly invoking “for example…” in the course of his lecture. After all, he is aware of his function. Concerned individuals come to him WANTING to be informed that Islam means peace so that they can once again sleep well. Thus, in the respective lecture, his catalog of problems with Islam has the effect of objectivity. But he returns very quickly to the point that Euro-Islam is right at the door. And that is just about as true as it would be with Santa Claus.

“Islamism expert” Claudia Dantschke determines the feeling of “Islamism hostility” with connection to the increase in the number of “PI Action Groups.” Whether the “Islam expert” can really say something about the subject of Islam is questionable, since Islam and Islamism have no real points of connection. But Mrs. Dantschke doesn’t seem to be so ceartain about this. According to Wikipedia, she calls Islamism a religious ideology in her essays. Perhaps “one” might ask, could it be possible that hostility to Islam is directed against a religious ideology rooted in Islam? And this “one” apparently doesn’t buy into the taz author’s ideas.

However, in all seriousness, one has to credit taz for the fact that these individuals — even Dantschke — are dedidicating more and more critical time to the worst excesses of Islam. However, they refuse to take the step of recognizing that these excesses themselves are rooted in Islam, and that the difference between Islam and Islamism is only an artificial one. This is also true when someone — like PI — recognizes that there are Muslims who simply have a mystical approach to their religion or are simply Muslim on paper. In the conclusion of Nassim Ben Iman, it remains that the Muslims spreading terror are exercising their faith from A to Z. The constantly invoked expression, “abuse” of Islam, which thankfully isn’t used in this article, is a chameleon. See Nassim Ben Iman regarding this aspect right here (after 1:00 min).

Yet, a discussion about the content of the criticism cannot be found in this article. Otherwise it wouldn’t be so easy to push all the differing opinons from taz’s into the corner of right-wing extremism.

And of course, Edathy, in his demand that PI be watched for Constitutional Protection, should not be excluded from this group. Since Edathy — in accordance with his basic attitude about policy — wishes to hand everything to the State, including political debate. We recommend a look at this text and the videos corresponding to it here in which a demonstration by the “League for Freedom of Thought” is shown where “We don’t want any Christian pigs” is being chanted. It could be a conviction, considering his desire for balance, that a letter of complaint should be filed and the demand made for surveillance under Constitutional Protection. But possibly, Mr. Edathy — as well as PI — looks at this as a indication of a free society when somebody is allowed to desecrate a crucifix with something like a multiple-headed phallus. Nobody has to like it, but in a free society, one must live with such things. Or is it the case in a certain religion that this Constitution is somewhat invalid? Let us take a guess, Mr. Edathy, one has to differentiate, right? (We hope, Mr. Edathy, that you have not somewhat overlooked the articles at your obviously zealous PI lectures?! We had hoped for your outrage.)

And because Edathy and taz are in agreement that they are the ones to determine who should be allowed to speak out about a societal question, they get upset when not everyone sees it their way. Thus they find it completely monstrous when citizens in fact do join in a debate. What would we come to, if the Sovereign would also join in the political discussions of this country? They would have to be totally and completely involved in financing of billions for the Euro-Misery that they have never been able to inquire about.

So that there are no misunderstandings: every thought about, moreover, every actual threat, act of violence or suppression of debate will be most harshly rejected on the side of PI. Such a debate can only happen in an atmosphere totally free of fear. It is only sad that the Religion of Peace™, with over 14,000 attacks since September 11, 2001, doesn’t contribute to this debate. Therefore, it is especially regrettable that some Islam critics — especially when they are also still apostates — must fear for their lives in palpable measure. But we cannot forget: It is clear once and for all, with the murder of the Egyptian woman Marwa El Sharbini, from whom the danger truly originates. How simple, though, the world is. At least for those who assume that nobody besides them is capable of thinking.

Return to the Mobile Edition.

(By the Editrix / Big hat tip: Rainer Bonhorst)

Return to the Mobile Edition.

(By Yorck Tomkyle / Translation: Anders Denken)

I see, one says to himself. From an occupying regime occupied by one man at the top, who has at least 20 million people on his conscience, a system is called to life that robbed hundreds of thousands of their possessions, tens of thousands were imprisoned for political reasons and some tortured, a system that had more than 1,000 people shot simply because they wanted to leave the country, and that locked all residents behind barbed wire to keep them in, simply because there was no other reason to do so.

A system that installs the most effective monitoring apparatus in the world for for spying on its citizens. A system that satisfied a great part of its hunger for currency by the sale of its detained citizens. A system that viewed itself during its existence as part of the ideological and intellectual tradition of the second worst mass-murderer in world history (see above). This system, therefore, is not supposed to be a system of injustice. Who are really the ones making this assertion?

Is it a certain Gysi, who as Stysi (var. of Stasi) laid the foundation for this system and profited from it; who only wishes to know now about mountains of records? Perhaps, a certain Wagenknecht, who is now sits on any talk show and makes herself electable for the people by means of our Media of Quality, even though she is an avowed Stalinist (“Stalin did what was politically necessary”) and friend of caviar? And a few old West German communists who were kept afloat with Stasi funds, and thus having been unfettered from their retirement wouldn’t now bite the hand that once fed them? Those are the same dubious types with loads of skeletons in their closets who wish to whitewash the Nazis in the young, post-WWII German Federal Republic. Back then, it initially worked pretty well, until the whole thing finally imploded.

After seeing the SED-Left Party courted so zealously by their supporters in the Media of Quality, an honest person shouldn’t expect the true profession of dictatorship and mass murders to be announced in this same media. Therefore, we will take over that for them. We will demand very clearly that a dictatorship having such a contempt for human beings should be named as such, so that there is finally an end to the hypocritical relativism and to the use of Nazi horrors for the propagandistic embellishments of their own misanthropic ideology.

Whoever doesn’t brand the SED dictatorship as an unlawful regime is a hypocrite if he does describe the Third Reich as one, because to him it has nothing to do with condemning totalitarianism, rather it is simply another ideology. Such types would seek to reestablish such conditions once again, if they could. With their ‘no’ to the condemnation of the Stasi regime, this party has once again shown what it really wants: another country. A country with concentration camps, spies, draconian penalties for independent thinkers, and a political caste that drinks the wine it withholds from the people.

What’s piquant in this whole process is that it really has nothing to do with the the subject itself, for large sections of the Greens and SPD really do see it the same way as the SED successors. But Greens from the east, especially, have many more party members in their ranks who recruit from the GDR resistance movement. A merger with those who deny the State of Lawlessness would therefore put the party before a crucial internal test for which it (still) has not matured enough. However, this problem may be demographically solved within time.

Just as the impotence of the Sovereign (the people) has been seen in the past months in the face of the cold-hearted decisions of the political class, one must acknowledge that the way of democracy has, in the sense of the word, been pushed back to at least an authoritarian partial state within the mob-ruled EU Super-State. Will we recognize these warning signs and resist these obvious beginnings this time, or will Germany be savagely torn from its social(ist) dreams yet again.

(Photo, left to right: Hannelore Kraft, SPD – Bärbel Beuermann, Left-Wing – Sylvia Löhrmann, Green)

Return to the Mobile Edition.

In yesterday’s votes, the admitted Israel hater garnered an overwhelming rejection. Galloway will not be able to take a seat in the British Parliament any more in the future. In Germany, Galloway was supported above all by the extremist network “Marx21” (previously “Linksruck (Slide Left)” within the left-wing.

(Contributor: HaGanah / Translation: Anders Denken)

Return to the Mobile Edition.

A Dutch film-making outfit known as Red Rebel Films has recently approached various European and American anti-jihad activists and asked to interview them for a documentary about Geert Wilders. The filmmakers have described their project as an objective look at the Dutch politician, and not an attack piece.

By Sukarno

So who are Red Rebel Films? What do we know about their objectivity when it comes to the subject of their upcoming documentary?

According to the Red Rebel website:

RedRebel Films is dedicated to filmmaking that promotes change. We uncover stories that need to be told and produce cutting edge programmes that enlighten, challenge, and provoke opinion.

[…]

RedRebel Films is a multi award winning documentary company formed in 2007 by filmmakers Mags Gavan and Joost van der Valk.

Nothing alarming here so far. They are based in London, Cardiff, and Amsterdam. Their experience in film is outlined on their “About” page:

When Mags eventually left BBC and joined forces with Joost, they dedicated their careers to making hard hitting films with a purpose, and set up RedRebel.

[…]

Immediately they began making cutting edge current affairs documentaries such as Kashmir’s Missing Men (about the independence struggle in Indian Kashmir).

Their site, however, fails to mention that the film about Kashmir has a pro-Muslim point of view. Does this provide a clue about Red Rebel’s attitude towards Wilders?

When he sent emails to people that he wanted to interview, Joost van der Valk explained that his film company was working on a programme for Dutch Television (VPRO) about the PVV and other similar parties which strongly oppose Islam in Europe.

This may not have been the whole truth, or perhaps it was a way or cover up their intentions. The film or documentary will be only about the PVV and Geert Wilders. There is no other topic.

How do we know this?

On her curriculum vitae, Annemiek van der Hell (annemiek@hell-o.nl) reports that she has been working since “April 2010 — Present (1 month) on a documentary by Joost van der Valk on the PVV of Geert Wilders.” [emphasis added, source 1 and source 2, in Dutch]

Red Rebel Films wants its interview subjects to believe that it is planning to make an unbiased documentary that presents only the facts, in an impartial manner. But this is plainly not the case, because at the IDFA (Documentary Film Festival in The Netherlands) they had already made a call for a politically-motivated anti-Wilders film:

Dutch society has experienced some major upheavals in recent years. As Ally Derks, director of IDFA, points out, subjects like the assassinations of Pim Fortuyn and Theo Van Gogh or the political scaremongering of contemporary politicians such as Geert Wilders have been largely ignored by Dutch documentary makers. Nor has there been much drive among filmmakers to explore the problems of immigration, or the growth in support for the right wing. Derks notes that Frans Bromet [well-known Amsterdam-based documentary maker for the VPRO] is currently working on a film about Pim Fortuyn. Even so, she believes that “we [Dutch] don’t have films that deal with hard issues in Holland. [emphasis added, source, English]

So Joost van der Valk and Mags Gavan already regarded Geert Wilders as a “scaremonger”, even before interviewing a single person for their new film.

Despite their assertion that Dutch filmmakers have “ignored” Geert Wilders, a “documentary” had already been made on such an issue in 2005: Welterusten Wilders [Goodnight Wilders or Have a Good Sleep Wilders] by Peter de Baan (2005 / 4min.) [source 1, English, and source 2, Dutch]

Of this film, Peter de Baan said: “Frightened men, who act brave, I hate them. A man like Geert Wilders consists of borrowed emotions, and this movie reveals that not even his hair is real.” [source, Dutch]

This is in the same spirit as the recent (outrageous) “documentary” by the Dutch state broadcaster. On Sunday 25 April, the left wing TV programme Zembla aired Wilders, Prophet of Fear:

While the integration problems of Muslims in Netherlands are decreasing, Wilders radicalises ever further in his remarks about Islam. His dark fear-fantasies about the advance of Islam and his dreams of war and deportation appeal to many citizens. How unrealistic they are; they lead to a climate in which people on the street are about to clash. Few dare to speak out about that, because Wilders has the country in the grip of fear. [source, Dutch]

All the people who make these films are connected in one way or another. People such as Pieter van Huystee, for whose company someone even used the nickname “Wilders” when updating information on LinkedIn.

At this point it should be clear that they all are all Antifa-types and Wilders haters. Their attempts to damage Wilders have so far failed, and now, with their to approach to various anti-jihad activists, they may well be aiming for a film that will smear Wilders’ contacts and supporters abroad, especially in Germany, the UK, and USA.

Expect a Red Rebel hit job on Wilders that tries to discredit him based on the people who support him.

Sukarno is the pen name of a Dutch writer and researcher who regularly investigates the activities of the extreme Left in Europe.

Return to the Mobile Edition.

In a quiet tone, clear and persuaded in the subject. And thus everything remained calm. No trace of physical aggression.

Until the Antifants came. About two hours after the rally began a group of young, aggressively inclined people arrived, that had little in mind for any discussion. They wanted to cause a ruckus. And thus they began to chant their rehearsed phrase, “Nazis get out.” Since we were of the same opinion with them in this point – and certainly only in this point – we joined with them in their chant. Just like last year in Berlin on German Unification Day, when a pack of left-wing reactionary do-gooders and long-bearded fundamentalist Muslims encircled us. Back then, though, this response unleashed a great confusion among our opponents.

However, as our way is, we tried to enter into conversation with these young people. For that which we have to present should itself usually find hearing even in the most deeply ingrained ideologies. Who could be of a different opinion about the subjects: oppression of women, hostility to democracy, and human rights violations?

Now, to the Antifants (translator note: “antifascist” demonstrators, truly an apparent misnomer). In their extreme left opinion, they have a purpose: to abolish the “system” they hate so much and the democracy to which it belongs. In this, Islamic ideology appears to them as a welcome ally, and therefore they attack Islam critics. There are totally simple thought patterns ticking in the Left-warped corridors of their brain. In this, they have learned nothing from history because such a coalition failed in 1979 with the Islamic Revolution in Iran. As soon as Ayatollah Khomeini was in power, he delivered his useful left-wing helpers to the knife, for Muslims savor atheists even less than those of other faiths. But this wasn’t taught to the Antifants in history class. To argue with them rationally would be like trying to kick a lamppost over to make it move. It is futile and a pure waste of time. These young people are so ingrained, so solidly driven in their ideology, so brainwashed, so aggressive and agitated to such a high degree, that the wave they unleash can be outdone every time.

And so the lid eventually flew off the boiling cauldron. A young Antifant girl slapped one of our peaceful demonstrators, thereby breaking his glasses.

The police officers, who had restrained themselvs in an exemplary un-escalated way, now stepped in, as it is their duty to protect the sound physical condition of the participants in a registered demonstration. Thus they arrested the young lady in the blue T-shirt.

An especially aggressive Antifant then tried to free the young lady and turned violent, thereby injuring a police officer.

This young man was so highly aggressive and apparently battle-ready. Numerous officers were needed to calm him down, but then more people from the crowd tried to free him:

But the police still kept the situation under control and were able to secure the place. The officers warned the enraged Antifants again to behave calmly and not exercise violence.

But more attacks on the officers freshly ensued:

The situation threatened to escalate, and so reinforcements were called in. Within minutes, around a dozen other cruisers arrived with about 40 officers from the task force:

A few officers additionally stood prepared in the background:

Since there were a surprising number of young women among the aggressive counter-demonstrators, female task force officers were carefully employed to take care of them:

There were also mounted officers at the assignment:

The aggressive nature of the Antifants can be seen very well in the video:

It became really comical when the Antifants chanted: “We are peaceful, what are you?” That brought the saying “Islam means peace” quickly to mind. The peacefulness of these people was expressed in physical attacks, a crushed pair of glasses and an injured police officer. That criminal offenses might be recorded was, of course, not even recognized by these crazy-heads. “1-2-3 — set the people free.” In an absurd twist of reality, the officers on site were accused of hitting a “poor, defenseless girl.” A compatriot with an accent even remarked: “What kind of country is this where a person can let loose on young people with a club? And then even against a woman?”. This principle is familiar: By completely twisting the facts, the perpetrators are made into victims.

This incident can be read with total objectivity in the police report, and indeed exactly as it occurred:

Rally interrupted

Downtown Stuttgart: On Saturday (April 24, 2010) at a rally at the Schlossplatz, there arose disturbances against the event and also attacks against police officers. The meeting, which had started at 3:30 p.m., and in which around 800 persons participated, was interrupted by a large group of people. The approx. 25 persons provoked and insulted the participants in the rally with chants. The leader of the meeting was pulled out of the by a 17-year-old and slapped. When police officers came between and arrested the perpetrator, she struggled fiercely. Her companions tried at the same time to free the girl again. In order to protect themselves against the attacks until reinforcements arrived, the officers had to resort for a short while to duty clubs.

An 18-year-old attacker who also exercised opposition was able to be detained. After the arrival of police reinforcements, the group scattered. During the assignment, a 35-year-old police officer received a light injury to the hand. Further background information about the altercation is still unknown.

Further investigations were taken over by the criminal police.

We made ourselves available as witnesses to the officers still on site, just in case there might be some kind of crazy charge brought up against them. This police service ran optimally. The officers could not have behaved better on this afternoon. One could see that they were well educated for situations such as this.

Our thanks goes to all the officers who were there. They have once again protected democracy and free speech — against fanatical crazy-heads who have no sense about all of this.

» Stuttgarter Nachrichten: Skirmish at the Edge of a Rally

(Text & Video: byzanz / Photos: RChandler – Munich PI Group / Translation: Anders Denken)

Return to the Mobile Edition.

During her service time from 2005 to 2007 with the military (also during the Lebanese war), she stole a total of over 2,000 documents classified as top secret, among them were detailed plans for military operations, the arrangement of troops, situational reports and evaluations. A few of the top-secret documents are still with Ha’aretz accomplice Uri Blau who is presently out of the country.

(Translation: Anders Denken)