Politically Incorrect - English Version » Leftists

Left Extremism – Underestimated Danger?

freethink — Mon, 23 Jan 2012 23:35:51 +0000

So-called autonomes who threw paving bricks at police on May 1st, heads of a party represented in the Bundestag that congratulate Fidel Castro on his birthday, or foreign terrorists that send letter bombs to Chancellor Angela Merkel and Deutsche Bank chief Josef Ackermann: In Germany, there is no lack of material to look at about leftwing extremism. In contrast to rightwing extremism, this dangerous phenomenon only seldomly receives attention. A new book will change this.

“Extreme Left – Germany’s Underestimated Danger?” is the name of a work by the two researchers on extremism, Harald Bergsdorf and Rudolf van Hüllen. With 200 pages, the authors inform us about the various ideologies and customary argumentation models of the scene. At the end, the work provides “arguments against extreme leftwing ‘catchphrases’,” which could furthermore prove to be useful in practice. A single chapter also covers the leftwing extremism of party politics in the form of the SED leftists [Transl. note: SED = Socialist Unity Party of the former GDR, and now the Left Party].

In order to make it clear to our fellow citizens that our democracy is endangered not only by rightwing extremism but also leftwing extremism, there is need of a certain background knowledge. A good way to obtain this knowledge is to purchase said publication. Eckard Jesse, also, an eminent authority in research on extremism and co-publisher of the standard reference “Extremism & Democracy Yearbook (German: Jahrbuch Extremismus & Demokratie)” comes to a favorable opinion in a review for Die WELT.

Harald Bergsdorf and Rudolf van Hüllen: Extreme Left – Germany’s Understimated Danger? Between Incendiary Attack and Bundestag Mandate. Schöningh, Paderborn. 200 pages, 24,90 Euro.

Left Extreme – Underestimated Danger?

(hpd)The two political scientists Harald Bergsdorf and Rudolf van Hüllen deliver an overall picture in their book regarding this political camp by dealing extensively with the sensitivities and thought structures present there. This is a thought-provoking, informative and important book with quotes worth reflecting upon regarding the sensitivities and motives for engagement in leftwing extremism.

While “left extremism” steered by the activities of the GDR-controlled DKP and the attacks by leftwing terrorist groups was of great significance in the public and science in the 1970s and 1980s, interest in it also disappeared in the 90s and especially with the development of stronger threats by Islamism and right extremism. Totally different phenomena, such as the acts of violence by autonomes and the debates about “The Left” party have recently swung the issue once again back into the focus of political and scientific interest. Political scientists Harald Bergsdorf and Rudolf van Hüllen play on these two dimensions in the subtitle of their book “Left Extreme – Germany’s Underestimated Danger? Between Incendiary Attack and Bundestag Mandate.” It is, in their words, “conceived primarily for political education, concentrated on mentalities, motives and environments of left extreme groups and parties” (pg. 7).

The two authors right away undertake an explanation of the term “extremism”, afterward they devote themselves extensively to the sensitivities and thought structures in left extremism by dealing with anarchism, communism, views of people and themselves, aesthetics and environments. After this follows an overview of organizations, strategies and political fields, on one side in relation to the autonomes as an expression of anarchism, and on the other side related to DKP, MLPD and Trotzkists as representatives of communism. In following, Bergsdorf and van Hüllen present extensive extensive descriptions and commentaries about the party “The Leftists,” which is located in a “grey area” somewhere between democracy and extremism, for it is “neither a perfectly extremist, nor a clearly democratic party” (pg. 92). And finally thre is a presentation on argumentation and agitation techniques of leftwing extremists, as well as an overview of arguments against extreme leftwing “catch phrases.”

The authors make it clear that the intended camp conveys an ambivalent image: “The noise-making and violently-active autonomic scene can actually endanger the public safety for lack of strategically applied concepts for a ‘systematic transformation’, but under no circumstances Constitutional law. In any case, it is as good as a ‘armed weapon’ for long-term working extreme leftwing structures that are interested … in an escalation of social conflicts. On the other hand, the classic ML organizations are about ready to die off. In their place, a multifaceted “holding party” steps in with the ‘Left’ party, that has an effect like a center of gravity for extreme left protagonists, ideas and mentalities. This party is not unambiguous, however its internal pluralism stretches only in part around political currents that truly are leftwing, … , but not extremist. The remaining parts … presents itself as a beneficial collaboration of Stalinists, SED nostalgists, traditional communists, Trotskiites and autonomes inclined to use violence …” (pg. 179ff)

Since the last overall presentation about leftwing extremism having a political-scientific claim was released in 1996, the publication alone such a work on the basis of the current state of information is welcome. The chapter on the thought structures in leftwing extremism makes an impression through the textual critical analysis of significant ideologies and structures; however such a thing has been absent in literature regarding this subject up until now. The work on autonomes was too brief, after all, their history and understanding of policy (“Policy of the First Person”) deserved greater attention. For this reason that they are given attention by “The Left” party where they are located in a “grey area,” but at the same time they believe they “intend to do away with the libertarian community (pg. 116). The arguments against the “catch phrases” at the end are somewhat irritating, since they are nonetheless targeted from time to time with a one-sided relation to sociopolitical and economic questions. In the broad overall picture, this is a stimulating and important book.

Armin Pfahl-Traughber

Harald Bergsdorf/Rudolf van Hüllen, Linksextrem – Deutschlands unterschätzte Gefahr?, Paderborn 2011 (Ferdinand Schönigh-Verlag), 200 pages, 24,90 €

Vulgar? Maybe. Uninhibited? Yes. Racist?Absolutely not!

freethink — Wed, 18 Jan 2012 19:25:27 +0000

It seems that the German Office for Constitutional Protection (Bundesamt für Verfassungschutz) is caving in to the leftwing media barrage against those on the right who are trying to make sure the truth stays before the eyes of the public. Of late, they have begun to monitor such organizations as PI because certain media outlets have accused PI of being racist and of stirring up hate against foreigners. Such is the stuff of an article from the Stonegate Institute titled “Germany Attempts to Silence Criticism of Islam.” One article mented by the Stonegate Institute that comes from the Frankfurter Rundschau and titled “Politically Incorrect: Vulgar, Uninhibited, Racist,” says that

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Posted by PI

The Racism of the Left

freethink — Fri, 02 Dec 2011 18:58:22 +0000

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)

We Nationalists

freethink — Fri, 02 Dec 2011 17:37:18 +0000

“We have the setback of the 70s not the least [...] to thank for the fact that the others have taken possession of the language, have used the language as a weapon, that they have created ideas, filled others with different meaning and then used them all at once as a projectile against us, and not without success. Therefore, for me, the battle for the language is one of the most essential requirements for intellectual self-assertion.

(By Rosinenbomber, PI-Münster)

The quote above comes from no less than CSU bedrock Franz Josef Strauss. His rise from son of a butcher to one of the most polarizing politicians in modern German history would have been unthinkable without a well-contrived speech agenda. And Strauss’ estimation has lost none of its validity to this day: Anyone who wishes to bring about political changes must occupy ideas and defend the dominance of the airspace around them. If their spokesman had ignored this mantra – the 60s-Liberal ideology would have failed in grand style and would never have been able to penetrate even the tiniest pores of our society. In this article, we would like to take a linguistic inventory and develop strategies for the reacquision of linguistic dominance.

Tolerance, integration, sustainability, social justice – in the country there rules no lack of political ringing of words that present an unhealthy mixture of conceptual obscurity and leftwing connotations. The greatest success of the socialists doubtlessly stems from having achieved that the terms “right” and “extreme right” are now being used synonymously. This is so devastating and disgraceful because by this means anything outside of leftwing ideology can be branded as illegitimate. And so, really only one civilizational certainty should be offered: that along with a democratic leftwing way, there is also a democratic rightwing way that has its place in the politcal landscape. Anyone who denies this has understood nothing about democracy, which depends on the contest for the better argument.

Also, in this place it needs to be emphasized that the position of “political moderate” – readily used by the CDU as a self-description – is subjective and therefore unsuitable as a description. The right-left pattern is not revised, despite all the assertions to the contrary by CDU representatives who shy away from the term “right” as much as the Devil does from holy water. There is simply no convincing alternative. The clear one-dimensionality of this yardstick of political position determining can be easily broken apart when the categories “socio-political (social)” and “economic-political (fiscal)” are added. For Germany, elevations are constantly being produced, for example, since many citizens think socially somewhat to the right while at the same time they can be found to be relatively left, fiscally speaking. The CDU, in its entirety, is an (extremely moderate) rightwing party because it doesn’t represent decidedly leftwing positions in every point.

Now, the one who still doesn’t always want to declare himself publically as rightwing can participate more subtly in the reacquisition of linguistic dominance: by constantly referring to “Neonazis” as “Neo National Socialists” and thereby exposing their socialist character. And by NEVER, NEVER, NEVER calling them “rightwing” or “rightwing radicals,” but rather “rightwing extremists.” By the use of this term, it will become automatically clear that a difference exists between “rightwing” and “extreme rightwing.” The term “rightwing radical,” however, is unsuitable because it sounds too mild and is used in political science (in any case among the followers of the totalitarianism theory) for the characterization of positions that are actually radical and rightwing (see horseshoe diagram).

Another example for the intentional distortion of language is shown by the term “nationalism.” I assert: The majority of the German nation is comprised of nationalists. Don’t you think? Then you ponder for a moment how a nationalist is defined from the pure meaning of the word: According to the definition, it has to do with a person who – in opposition to the communistic utopia of an international state – advocates for the existence of national states and would like to see the interests of his own protected. And note here: The advocates of the national state model have absolutely nothing at all to do with ultranationalists of the NPD ilk.

When you, dear reader, soon fall once again into a heated debate, instead of speaking about “integration,” calmly use “assimilation” (adaptation), and instead of “social equity or justice” use “equity or fairness of achievement.”

(Posted on PI November 10, 2011 / Translation: Anders Denken)

Dieter Kunzelmann and the “Judenknax”

PI — Sun, 12 Jun 2011 14:31:17 +0000

Once again, the Left has something to read about antisemites and Jew haters that of course denies everything. A house in the Jewish community in Berlin was smeared with symbols of anarchy. Thus we can see that the red hate of Jews hasn’t completely disappeared. After Israel had so brilliantly won the Six Days War, the Left changed sides. The letter from terrorist Dieter Kunzelmann regarding Jew-phobia is legendary yet still hardly familiar. In November 1969, he wrote a letter to “Szeneblatt 883″ from an Al Fatah camp in Jordan where he finished an internship in his advanced education as a terrorist. Here, we read:

Palestine for Germany and Europe is like Vietnam for the Americans. And the Left still hasn’t understood this. Why? Jew-phobia. “We gassed 6 million Jews. The Jews are called Israelis today. Those who battle against fascism are for Israel.” It’s that simple, and yet on all sides it doesn’t hold true. When we have finally learned to understand the fascist ideology of “Zionism,” we will no longer hesitate to turn our simple philosemitism into a definite solidarity with Al FATAH, who have taken on the battle against the Third Reich of Yesterday and Today and its consequences in the Middle East. What does solidarity mean? ACCEPT OUR BATTLE.

He came back to Germany sometime so he could put what he learned into practice and participated in a terror attack on the Jewish Community Center in Berlin with the with the Tupamaros for which Wolfgang Kraushaar has blamed him. Here is the complete letter and further links as well! The red-colored Wikipedia today calls the 72-year-old arsonist, who also has even sat in the House of Representatives for the alternatives, a “political activist” and an “event performer.” Yes, the activists of last night were actually just harmless event performers.

(By Kewil)

The Antifascist Cross of Free Expression

Guest — Sat, 01 Jan 2011 19:48:20 +0000

On October 30th, the annual prayer vigil “1000 Crosses for Life” organized by the EuroProLife Alliance took place. The counter-demonstration, in addition, delivered once again an outstanding spectator lesson about what leftwing disturbance troops will think of in order to terrorize dissident thinkers.

It truly takes pure gall to represent the opinion at a demonstration that it is better to deal with a child than to abort it to begin with. The height of insolence, however is when such an opinion still yet is stated by Catholics that were a greater part of the participants and with whom the author of this article professes his allegiance.

However, one female represent of the Munich PI group showed that it isn’t necessary to be member of a church in order to advocate for the protection of life. Let it be said at the address of our atheist and agnostic readers that it is far from me, as with most other members of my church, to want to compel those of different thought to accept our ethical fundamentals by means of law or even with violence – which is often what it boils down to. But in things regarding abortion logical arguments, outside of the ethical ones, can be brought into consideration as well.

The 1,000 crosses stand for the thousand abortions that are carried out each day in our country. In order not to fall under the suspicion of advocating Christian fundamentalist positions, I will leave of from the ethical-religious arguments here and attempt a common sense approach to things. If we lay the foundation of a five-day workweek for the abortion clinics, we come to 5,000 abortions per week, reaching a sum of 20,000 each month. This is the population of a small city. This fact must certainly be taken into consideration if one is searching for the reasons of our demographic problems that indeed make up the main issue of the Islamic threat of our country as well as the all of the Western world. Besides that, the desire for progeny is one of the most natural instincts which explains why the propagation of abortion not only runs counter to religious commands, but also human nature.

In the invocation of the event was said:

We cannot silently look on when innocent babies are murdered in the womb because the mother is of the opinion that “my belly belongs to me.” If the child under her heart could speak, it would say, “And my life belongs to me, mom! Please let me live! I am dependent on you for my survival. Mom, I implore you, please bring me into the world and not to my grave!” Children are having to die, who would want to be loved, who want to live, who need a place in our society, who would give their parents a sense in life and with their unique and unmistakable talents and capabilities would have contributed to the well being of the general population. Germany will have a future only if we build up a culture of life instead of destroying human life en masse.

However one might usually stand on the issue of abortion: for a democratically minded individual it should be natural that the freedom of expression guaranteed by the Constitution also applies to opponents. A friend from Spain stated with astonishment that opponents to abortion in Germany can do so only under massive police protection.

Participants who were at this event last year indeed stated that the number of counter-demonstrators had decreased. But they overall understood that their small numbers could compete by means of a loudspeaker and underscored this with an outfit that they considered to be really original and creative.

A “demon” shot a bird, whose middle tip of his trident was decorated by a condom and who was flailing this in our direction. One day before Halloween, his costume was at least appropriate for the season. The fact of a person who would otherwise perhaps advocate views that we would most likely call “do-gooder” here appearing in the costume of the devil doesn’t go without a certain amount of irony.

Otherwise, the phrases which the counter-demonstrators reserved for us weren’t features of imagination. It is only astonishing that they never represent their “values” with respect to Muslims. In this case, the principle of respect and tolerance applies to these hypocrites and individuals with double standards.

As a musical program, a whistle concert of undistinguishable tone form, however presented with a devotion that excluded any virtuoso mastery of the instrument. The totally thought out message that was imparted to us along the way was, “Whether children or not, should for only women be the thought,” “No God, no State, no Patriarchate,” “Crucify the Christians!”, “Fascist Pack,” and the obligatory as well as the original from such circles: “Nazi’s leave!”.

Out of respect for the organizers’ request to remain in prayer and not allow oneself to be provoked by the counter-demonstrators, I forwent an answer to these as well as on October 3rd in Berlin.

A few waved the rainbow flag of the homosexual movement, which brought up the question of how homosexual sex can lead to a situation in which an abortion would be necessary. But logic is not necessarily the strongest side of our revolutionary friends. However, one argument for abortion was almost able to stir up a hard-shelled Catholic like myself:

“Your children will become just like us!”

This phrase was surpassed in its overwhelming power of persuasion only by the eggs that were thrown at us.

The Munich police, as is to be expected from them, stopped any form violence right at its beginning.

One of the counter-demonstrators snatched up a wooden cross in an unobserved moment and then demonstrated all that unlived activity which lie dormant within him:

The right of filming and photographing a public event is apparently nothing to these companions:

In the face of these leftwing opinion guerillas with their highly intellectual chain of argumentation and totally unique behavioral pattern, one almost had to feel sorry that their parents apparently didn’t consider prevention too important…

Video of the event:

(Text: Florian Euring “La Valette” / Translation: Anders Denken / Photos: Roland Heinrich / Camera & Video Editing: Manfred Schwaller – Munich PI Group)

Turks Start Their Own Party in Bremen

PI — Sun, 21 Nov 2010 19:46:40 +0000

For the “integrated Turks” in totally leftwing dominated Bremen, integration hasn’t gone far enough. For this reason, they have now joined together and started the “Bremische Türk Partei (BTP) (Bremen Turkish Party).” The leap into the regional assembly should be successful as an “immigrant quota.”

The Frankfurter Rundschau reports:

To Parliament With the Subject of Integration

Bremen Turkish Party plans to appear at the citizen election in the Hansa city of Bremen in 2011. Their main focus is the integration of immigrants for which, as an example, they will call for an immigrant quota.

For the first time in Germany, a party founded by German-Turks only will participate in a regional election. They call themselves “Bremen Turkish Party (BTP) and hope to appear in the citizen election in May 2011. Their main focus is the integration of immigrants.

Back in the NRW regional assembly election already, someone candidated from “Bündnis für Innovation & Gerechtigkeit (BIG) (Alliance for Innovation and Justice)” which was founded by immigrants. The difference from Bremen was that not only did those of Turkish background participate, and BIG, in addition, was seen as heavily influenced by Muslims. The BTP, in contrast, is “not at all” religious, their leader Levent Albayrak (38) said to the Frankfurter Rundschau on Friday. “We are people who have successfully integrated,” said the gasoline station owner who was born in Germany. The 60 founders are made up of scholars, information scientists or craftsmen, among whom were longtime SPD, CDU and FDP members. A fifth of the committee people are women.

Migrant Quota Demanded

According to Albayrak, the new party would like to “take those in need of integration by the hand and help them” — for example, they will persuade them to learn German and to stay in school as long as possible. The party would like to see, for example, an integration quota in majority society in public service, and anonymous applications for employment so that foreign-sounding names don’t end up getting sorted out.

The BTP sees itself as a bridge and interface between majority and minority, but also as a mouthpiece for immigrants — not just those from Turkey. Albayrak: “We are open for all.” Unfortunately, the BIG Party is over the new founding because they themselves, with their Bremen Regional Association, would like to be candidates for the township.

» BILD: Auto Sales Boss Starts First Turkish Party (in German)

(Many Thanks to all Contributors / Translation: Anders Denken)

Bern: Target Practice on SVP Figures

PI — Fri, 15 Oct 2010 19:24:02 +0000

Where there is much light, there is also a lot of shade. When we in Germany look jealously at Switzerland with its open culture of discussion, we tend to forget that there are also forces that would like to see an authoritarian state set up according to the Communist model – and are willing to go over dead bodies to see it through.

In Bern, there was an unregistered, and therefore illegal, demonstration by the Stalinist Antifas, in which public target practice was carried out on figures of the not-so-liked SVP (Schweizerische Volkspartei – Swiss Peoples’ Party) politicians. The authorities looked the other way, just like what happens for leftwing crimes in Germany. The Berner Oberländer Zeitung reports:

Christian Wasserfallen is outraged. The FDP (Liberals) National Assembly were witnesses of the unpermitted Antifa demonstration at the plaza of the Bern train station. Around 300 demonstrators shot Gotcha Pistols among other things at SVP target figures. “If our party would want to have a booth promotion at the train station plaza to sell gingerbread, then our people would have to have a permit. But this Antifa pack simply does what it wants,” Wasserfallen said.

Criticism of Nause and Käser

For the National Assembly, it is clear that the police should have stepped in. “The rule of law applies to everyone. It should not be that we allow these people to cause more aggravation just because someone is afraid of them. That is tantamount to capitulation.” The rule of law is being slowly eroded away step by step and lately applies only to those who fundamentally follow the rules.

Wasserfallen expresses harsh criticism against Municipal Security Director Reto Nause (CVP – Christian Democratic Party). “Unfortunately, Mr. Nause is playing the game with the Antifas, which disappoints me greatly for a civic council. His party colleague, the police director for the canton, Hans-Jürg Käser, has failed. “It is the duty of a State of Law to dispense justice,” Wasserfallen said.

Nause: “Less Damage”

In yesterday’s edition of the BZ, Reto Nause defended the city’s policies. The facts will speak for Bern’s Demonstration Management. “If you add up the total damages of the past two years and compare it with the previous years, then the conclusion can be made that still very little has happened,” Nause said.

The CVP Community Council sharply condemned the Antifa activists. Their actions were “stupid,” he said.

That isn’t right. The actions of the Antifas weren’t stupid; they were criminal. What’s stupid is when someone retreats for fear of damages from a riot, and then criminals become encouraged to become even bolder in their actions.

(Hat Tip: Reno / Translation: Anders Denken)

Opposition Calls for Equal Treatment of Islam

PI — Wed, 13 Oct 2010 21:21:01 +0000

There is no value in the Constitution and humanism that is allowed to contradict the Religion of Peace™ in a fundamental way. But, because this religion, which the SPD was first to see as victims of the Germans that cannot be trusted by the party leadership, has come to our country, a conflict of interests has opened up for the lonely little-people party. In a reflex action, the SPD has decided in favor of Islam and against the Constitution by not letting their speaker for domestic policy in the Bundestag fraction, Dieter Wiefelspütz, call for equalization with the religions of the West.

For the SPD would rather vote together with the Greens for gender apartheid and for the subjugation of all mankind to the values prescribed by Islam than to distance themselves from the victim status of the Muslims.

While Jews, which according to the Quran are apes and pigs, are currently being driven out of the first European cities because of Islamic hate against them, the SPD is turning a “never again” into a “now it’s justified.” Being incapable of advocating for the non-Muslim children who because of their Kuffar (infidel) status and for being German are getting mobbed, beaten up and robbed in the school according to the regulations of the Quran, the SPD is standing on the side of the pseudo-victims of Islam, an ideology that, in the words of the former president of the Muslim Central Council, Ayyub Axel Köhler, is antagonistic to democracy.

In the debate about the role of Islam in Germany, the SPD and Greens are calling for a national acceptance of Islam as a state religious community. The speaker for domestic policy in the SPD fraction, Dieter Wiefelspütz, said to the “Neue Osnabrücker” newspaper, “It would be an important signal for the four million Muslims in Germany, if the State would accept Islam as a religious community.”

Now is the time to force dialog with the major Muslim associations in order to produce the necessary legal requirements. “Islam needs a fair chance in Germany,” said Wiefelspütz.

However, a societal form the 7th century that has called for perpetual religious war is, for Wiefelspütz, neither antiquated nor offensive, rather, for him it is a debate in which some truly see Islam as not irretractable and incontrovertible as a part of Germany, most deeply embarrassing and from a bygone era. Thus, it appears for Wiefelspütz, therefore, in the clan wars of 7th century Arabia to let the modern lie when he slaps the face of non-Muslims with such a means of thought.

He (Wiefelspütz, PI note) attested to the CDU and CSU to be waging the debate of yesteryear in the subject of integration. Islam is irretractably and incontrovertibly a part of Germany. “It is most embarrassing for the Union, and a slap in the face for Muslims, that this reality still hasn’t been accepted,” the SPD politician criticized.

The only ones whom the Union is slapping in the face are – completly contrary to what Wiefelspütz surmises – the potential voters in a Union that appears to be too weak, and which were the ones to heave a Christian Wulff into the office of the Federal President, who himself already regards Islam as a part of Germany. The Germans of whatever origin or background aren’t so stupid that they can’t recognize that the parties are presently runing a race to get Muslim votes for which the interests of the non-Muslims are being sold down the river. The only ones having a problem with acceptance are the members of the elite. These profess themselves as having accepted the true character of Islam’s hate ideology.

Wiefelspütz himself is unable to distinguish between Islam, Islamic associations and Muslims – Muslims, by the way, to whom the right of asylum is conferred all the time in Germany if they don’t intend to return to a societal form that Wiefelspütz, in contrast, regards as reconcilable with ours. The State, who stands for the equality of all, is now supposed to recognize a society in which all are inferior in value to the Muslim man, and for which he is prepared at any time to defend it?

Of course the Greens – having ever been interestded in the demise of the German society of citizens, even if one himself is heavily oriented in civics – are, by hook or crook, in favor of the idea of the equalization of Islam.

The Greens’ Bundestag fraction speaker for integration policy, Memet Kilic, said to the paper, “The acceptance of Islam as a justified religious community would convey the feeling to Muslims of being welcome and having finally arrived in Germany.” That can only help in the advancement of integration. The current debate in the Union about the role of Islam in Germany is unfortunately having the opposite effect. “The Union must end its neurotic preoccupution with itself as quickly as possible,” he demanded.

It is not the debate in Germany causing the opposite effect on integration, rather the fact that simply the immigrant group of the Muslims in greater part is incapable of accepting society, its people and their essential differences. This is what conveys the feeling to non-Muslims of being rejected – and robbed in addition – and of being betrayed by the body politic. Those who wish to be welcomed must show that they want to be long. Islam, in which no criticism of itself can usually be found among all the apparent convenient attributions of course, is not and will not become a part of Germany. At any rate, not of a Germany that has its roots in humanity and enlightenment. A thought process that scares away the courage to employ one’s own reasoning. An audacity that should bring the SPD and Greens to be able to decide which world view is closer to them.

» dieter.wiefelspuetz@bundestag.de

Note:

Die WELT again published the graphic “Foreigners in Germany – Germans abroad” in their article. In this one, the immigration from Turkey is listed with a continuous bar:

Up until now, Die WELT has consistently left out the bars for Turkey:

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

Do These Boozers Determine What We Read?

PI — Wed, 29 Sep 2010 21:21:06 +0000

It used to be said, “there’s a policeman in every German.” However, nowadays it could be better said, “there’s a thought police…” Spurred on by hysterical campaigns “against the Right,” some contemporaries feel prompted to show their unusual courage in a non-dangerous way. Especially popular is the desire to determine what others are allowed to say, think or read.

On the Ottenser Hauptstrasse in Hamburg, baker André Krause (left), of the City Bakery, and the failed engineer turned kiosk manager, “Blue Haze” Winifred Buck, decide what their compatriots are still allowed to read, and what is no longer allowed. From this point on, the BILD newspaper has been crossed out because the Control Center has found that the reporting on the content of a bestseller is racist. Erich Mielke sends greetings from the grave, and the taz, who just lately has cut back on pay of its own journalists because it is anything but a bestseller, proudly reports that the voice of the people is now taking censorship into their own hands:

A week ago, a kiosk and a bakery in Ottensen no longer sell a “Bild” newspaper. They are using this means to protest against populism hostile to foreigners. (…)

Winifried Buck: The reasons for this come from the edition from Saturday before last, with Sarrazin on the front page, and what one really should be allowed to say in Germany. The statements were so extremely racist, populist and hostile to foreigners that, out of rage, I immediately took the Bild newspaper out of the selection.

André Krause: The Bild newspaper, to me, has the quality of an attacker. They are always coming out against the welfare recipients and the migrants. I had intended to take the newspaper out of the selection back two years ago, but I was relatively new here and continued to sell it with a balled up fist in my pocket. But when I saw the action of my neighbor, it became clear to me that now it was enough.

Winfried Buck: As an alternative, I considered taping up a page of the Bild newspaper with the words “This is the worst paper you could ever buy here.” above it. The Bild newspaper customers will themselves demonstrably say, “A stupid newspaper, please, a liespaper, please, a scandal sheet, please. Nobody would ever go to the baker and say, ” I would like a sh– roll, please.”

André Krause: The reactions by the customers are as much as 99.5% positive. And many passers that read my poster come in and hold up one or both thumbs and leave again. One customer stared cluelessly for a good while at the poster. Two young women came in and said, “Wow, we never considered that.” And all the neighbors say, “Happy birthday! Lot’s of luck!” Perhaps five or six people have ever complained.

Winfried Buck: My case is similar. Some people leave this shop completely confused because the newspaper is no longer here. Shockingly enough, some customers have also said, “It really is true that we have too many foreigners here.” What the newspaper intends to achieve is apparently accomplished among them. And along with that they then go to the baker, but they don’t get the Bild newspaper there either. That has a greater effect than when only one person does it alone.

André Krause: Along the paved part of the Ottenser Hauptstrasse there are absolutely no more Bild newspapers. The first one can be found only at the kiosk with Turkish owners at the beginning of the street. Now, that is the irony of history.

The restriction on the clientèle doesn’t violate free speech in the opinion of the two experts because the BILD newspaper, after all, is just acting under the “covering of free speech” in order to divide what perhaps used to be cultivated as the national community. Since the demise of the “GDR (German Democratic Republic),” left-wing logic has not developed any further. Of course, this boycott will continue “to the end of life.” Faithfulness to ideology to the death — not even a red coated Nazi lives under that. And for the left-wing taz, free speech ends where opinion no longer is one’s own.

(Hat Tip: HBS, Glaubensspinner / Photo Montage: PI / Translation: Anders Denken)

“What you say will be edited out anyway”

Guest — Mon, 27 Sep 2010 19:27:54 +0000

In Germany, an enormous witchhunt is taking place that Henry M. Broder justly calls “the first witchhunt since the 17th century.” It is now even more important to stand behind Sarrazin and support him. A single individual did this at the book launch in front of the House of the National Press Conference in Berlin.

The Sarrazin supporter held up a simple sign with the words “Thank you Thilo” together with the address of the largest political blog in Europe — and right away the horde of hypocritical journalists and Left/Green twisted deniers of reality turned pitted themselves against him. Only the police were able to prevent them from going at his throat.

Here is a report from eyewitness Bärchen:

I was already irritated. First there was an acute toothache early Monday morning, then in the waiting room there was the “Berliner Zeitung” newspaper with certain articles about the Sarrazin subject, but all were oriented in the same way, just as in the old German Democratic Republic (East German) times. They called him an “inciter” and were themselves practicing incitement in unacceptable ways:

[...] he sits on committee at the Bundesbank and insults peaceful citizens, neighbors, steps all over them as though they were grapes from which juice is made. Immigrants are stupid. Stupid f—s well. Those who f— well multiply like rabbits. Rabbits make Germany stupid. That is the lowest level. Doesn’t he have any honor in his body? Where were his manners?

Indeed an infamous high point of the days long and ever more strident witchhunt — all across the media and political statements — against Thilo Sarrazin, who dared to express a different opinion than those responsible for the disastrous immigration and integration policy in Germany that is riddled with mistakes. So much demagoguery hurts — worse than a toothache.

When this was sealed, I looked at the clock and noticed that I could still make the House of the National Press Conference, where on the occasion of Sarrazins book an “alliance against right-wing populism” intended to demonstrate against “racists” that was put together by the usual suspects from the LEFT, SPD, Greens and Antifa.

At the site of the event there was gathered a multitude of around 100 persons who were holding up red flags and banners. I identified “The LEFT” and “MLPD” as well as various Antifa pennants, but then my attention was turned to something else. A few meters to the side, a single counter-demonstrator stood leaning against a banister that led to the Spree, on his self-made cardboard sign he had written with an Edding marker, “Thank you Thilo!” and right under even “www.pi-news.net”. However, I was not the only one who caught sight of the man. Two women went up to him and tried to pull the sign away, thereby tearing it, “Those are right-wing positions!” Right away, a group thronged around him, a reporter shoved a microphone under his nose, and the following Inquisition-like conversation played out in which a good example of what “left-wingers” understand about “discussion” and “freedom of speech” could be seen.

Reporter: “Why are you standing here? Are you against Muslims?”

Sarrazin supporter: “Of course not. They were born into their religion and aren’t ever allowed to leave it.”

Heckler: “You have read ‘Mein Kampf’ too much, I believe that is your biggest problem!”

Sarrazin supporter: “I find ‘Mein Kampf’ and the Quran to be very similar, that is actually the problem we have.”

Reporter: “And the Bible?”

Sarrazin sympathizer: “I am not a Christian.”

Reporter: “But that means then that everyone who reads the Bible, even all those people stand closer to ‘Mein Kampf’, right?”

Sarrazin sympathizer: “No. That is nonsense… I am member of a group that intends to express its opinion, and it is undoubtful that we have big problems, not with foreigners because Germany has no problem with foreigners, but Germany has an increasing Islamic problem as does all of Europe.

Reporter: “A problem with Islam or with Islamism?”

Sarrazin supporter: “It is not against the individual Muslims…”

Reporter: “The question was, ‘a problem with Islam or with Islamism?’”

Sarrazin supporter: “No, I…”

Reporter: “Answer the question, ‘with Islam or with Islamism?’”

Sarrazin supporter: “I said…”

Reporter: “Hello! Islam or Islamism?”

Sarrazin supporter: “It is not against the Muslims…

Reporter: “Problem with Islam or with Islamism? What you are saying now will be edited out anyway.”

Sarrazin supporter: “Then I’m not interested anymore in this interview.”

Reporter: “Yes, then we’ll quit. Problem with Islam or with Islamism?”

The viewer of the video can judge for himself about the further, increasingly heated process of the “discussion.” The thing worth noting is the objectivity and calmness with which the lonely Sarrazin supporter put forth his arguments, even though he was surrounded and hassled by antagonists who had a totally different idea of “Nazi” and whose string of patience was suddenly broken.

“It’s hard to believe that you are offering a forum for this Nazi pig!” one darkly apparelled Antifa fighter roared, a second one shouted “Throw him off the bridge!” A woman began to scream hysterically with a overpowering voice, “Nazis raus! (Nazi’s leave!), it occurred to some that the situation was becoming threatening until the fortuitously large number of police covered the courageous one and suggested it would be better to leave the area.

I introduced myself to the young man and expressed my amazement at his courage, and asked him why he had exposed himself in this fashion. His answer, “The greater part of the people are behind Sarrazin’s issues. He has justified concerns for the future of our country. We cannot expect that a Sarrazin will address all of our problems for us or even solves them, therefore we have to accept the responsibility ourselves, we all have to be a Thilo Sarrazin, a Geert Wilders, an Alan West — or become one, of course, to each his own.”

The PI supporter was expressly thankful for the cooperative and competent protection by the police which he later thanked with a handshake. YouTube videos gave the impression he was led away. That isn’t correct. As soon as the mob was on the “Nazi” trip (nonsense, of course), the situation could no longer be remedied, and for his safety, the police led him away. Nevertheless, he was able to stand on the other side of the street and continue what he was doing! Only when this was a possible threat did things come to an end — but that was right away clear to me as well.

Meanwhile, we stood at a safe distance from the protest. A young woman came up behind us and said that she also had gone to the protest out of support for Sarrazin and had hoped to find like-minded individuals. Another man who stood on the other side addressed her about Sarrazin and answered, “He could have held back on the thing about the Jewish gene, otherwise I share his opinion.” A police officer who also heard this raised his thumb in agreement.

Phoenix also reported:

The picture of the valiant supporter of Sarrazin is meanwhile rushing through the paper forest. The Swiss newspaper “Blick am Abend,” for example, presented their 339,000 readers yesterday with this article (see lead story above). This one courage man demonstrated civil courage that is constantly being required by the citizens of this country. He stood with backbone before a mob of journalists that intended to show fault in him with their almost Inquisition-like interrogation. In addition the hate-filled hysterical cries of the Antifascists that saw the incarnation of a Fourth Reich in him. The man stood firm in spite of it. He wouldn’t let himself be intimidated and planted an unmistakable sign: Islam criticism must become more visual — not just on the Internet, but on the street as well!

(Michael Stürzenberger / Video processing: TheAnti2005 / Translation: Anders Denken)

Thalia Consultants: Don’t Buy Sarrazin’s Book

Guest — Sun, 26 Sep 2010 19:15:42 +0000

I experienced a special event in the exertion of left-wing ideological influcence over public opinion in Berlin last Saturday. In the late afternoon at the Thalia bookseller in Spandau Arkaden, I was a witness as to how a bookseller stridently talked a female customer out of buying the Sarrazin book.

(By Sabine F. / Translation: Anders Denken)

The book wasn’t available because the purchase numbers of 250,000 copies blew all records in the first week. The customer, a pleasant woman, who could be recognized as not a regular customer in the book store, absolutely intended this time to buy the Sarrazin book in order to read it.

In spite of the ostentatious instruction by the sales representative that the Sarrazin book was “biologically inclined” and that Minister Schäuble had criticized the book (“irresponsible nonsense”), the customer stuck to her decision and wanted the book.

I joined in and interrupted the sales representative when the name Schäuble was brought up. Minister Schäuble led the first Islamic conference with remarkably purposeful ignorance about Islam and defended it as being normal. Therefore, Schäuble would now lie, since he’s a part of the hounding by the media/politicians.

Excerpt from the interview back then with Vanity Fair:

Vanity Fair: Have you really read the Quran?

Schäuble: I am not an Islamic expert. But meanwhile, I have learned more about Islam than I knew two years ago, and back then I didn’t know any less than the average. There is no need of more. I am not the Grand Mufti.

I told the customer somethings about my experiences with politicians and media and their duplicity and hypocrisy in the Islam debate. The sales clerk was speechless, walked away, and the customer and I continued to discuss. She remained determined to buy Sarrazin’s book. I also gave her the E-mail address of Sarrazin so that she could send a letter of encouragement to him. She left smiling.

The scandal was that of the Thalia personnel whom I have already observed as being politically weighted to the left and prejudiced

Contact:

» Bookstore Manager Michael Busch: m.busch@thalia.de

Nobody Intended to Build a Wall

PI — Sun, 29 Aug 2010 11:42:02 +0000

The ruling mayor of Berlin, Klaus Wowereit, of all people, who entered into a regional parliament coalition with the Party of Wall Murderers without any kind of political expediency, on the occasion of the anniversary of the wall’s erection has found some rather unimpressive words for the people whom his coalition partners have murdered.

Die Morgenpost reports:

Berlin’s ruling mayor, Klaus Wowereit (SPD), has called for a vigil to commemorate the erection of the Berlin Wall and the division of the city. The remembrance of this would sharpen our sense of the value of freedom, democracy and the rule of law, Wowereit stated on the anniversary of the wall’s erection 49 years ago.

On August 13, 1961, the GDR government began to raise up the wall. The German-German division lasted more than 28 years. On November 9, 1989, the wall fell. “It is always important to intervene against authoritarian regimes’ and dictatorships’ undisputed party,” Wowereit declared. “History teaches us that.”

At least 136 people died at the Wall by means of the left-wing fascist “GDR.” In the torture prisons of the SED regime, way more than 1,000 others have been estimated. The regime party currently calls itself “Die Linke (The Left)” and governs in conjunction with Wowereit’s Berlin SPD (Socialist Party of Germany) to the detriment of the citizens. In West Germany also, the left-wing fascists in the mean time have been able to count on impressive election results. Left-wing voters, however, are totally confident that “Nobody intends to build a wall.”

Are the Murderers at the Wall Killing Again?

PI — Fri, 20 Aug 2010 20:12:34 +0000

“German weapons, German money are joining in murder all over the world,” the (German) Left likes to put in a rhyme at the right time. As touching murders in Germany, such accounts can be demonstrably seen: RAF murders in the West, dead from the Wall, from tortures, from executions in East Germany. Now, in a case under the trading sign XY, a functionary of the Left party is unmasked as the weapons dealer in an actual murder case.

Die Rheinische Post reports:

The Mönchengladbach District Attorney’s Office offered for help from the viewers. A key to understanding was the discovery of the murder weapon. The machine gun was delivered by Manfred Hämmerle , according to statements by the investigators. The man is fraction president of the Left Party in Hückelhoven. “He is charged with the procurement of several illegal arms,” the district attorney stated.

“At the beginning of the year we were informed by the criminal police that an investigation of Manfred Hämmerle was underway,” Bernd Jansen, the mayor of Hückelhoven, confirmed yesteray. According to the district attorney, the politician committed an offense against the war weapons law. However, he is not suspected of murder.

The Chief of the Left Party fraction in the regional assembly, Wolfgang Zimmer, looked surprised. As in any investigational procedure, innocence has been presumed here also. But should it happen that the charges stick against Hämmerle is hard for him to imagine “that he could remain a member of our party. The Left is a party of peace. Members involved in weapons trading have no place with us.”

Peter Biesenbach, internal expert for the CDU fraction of the regional assembly, stated that the case demonstrates thath the “Left Party is a collection basket for extremists.” The party “grew too quickly.” Apparently the party leadership is not in the position to stop questionable members from occupying office. Arndt Klocke, head of the Green fraction in the regional assembly said in contrast, that it was “nonchalant” to project the shortcomings of members upon the party and thereby carry on with “cheap political propaganda.”

The left-wing politicians and the murder victim were apparently friends and took motorbike tours together. According to the investigations, the weapon was in possession of the victim before the act. Hämmerle supposedly procured the machine gun. The ophthalmologist supposedly attempted to sell the weapon to an Albanian. The weapons business could itself be the motive for the murder.

(Hat Tip: Markus P, Hans / Translation: Anders Denken)

Is This Man the Berlin Terrorist Bomber

PI — Thu, 17 Jun 2010 21:58:56 +0000

On June 12th, a bomb attack was carried out (PI reported) at a demonstration against the German government’s austerity package. After analysis of the video — especially in slow motion — there is the suspicion that the alleged attacker in the video published by PI is recognizable. Somewhat after the 42nd second, a young woman in a blue T-shirt comes into the picture like a photograph, who could have something to do with the case, or could serve as a valuable witness.

Here is the video of the scene:

The photographer is wearing a baseball cap turned to the back, has on a leather jacket and a carrying back hanging around him. Whether he is taking a picture of the young woman by request, and whether she is with the photographer, are unclear. After evaluation in slow motion and at high resolution, the impression can be gained that both know each other. At least it seems like he is speaking with her; from about 1:21 minutes, the lip motions of the supposed photographer are finally recognizable in the slow motion sequence that follows. However, a definitive statement regarding this is not possible.

He takes a picture, bends over, straightens out, then leaves quickly. The woman stays at the scene and appears to be looking at her notepad. When the camera swings right, right away (at sec. 50) smoke appears next to a parked car, and then an explosion occurs (sec. 52-54).

The explosion happens in a distance of a few meters to the right (out of the camera’s view) at the former position of the photographer. The bomb — if it came then from the photographer — would have to have been the “roll bar” type.

At 1:58 Minutes, the young woman appears yet again in the video. One gets the impression by this that she wasn’t without a certain sympathy for the demonstration.

Screenshots from the video:

Photographer bending:

Photographer quickly leaving the scene of the incident:

In addition, here is an enlargement of the young woman smiling and hanging around in the left block shortly after the explosion:

(Hat Tip & Video Processor: Antivirus, additional Hat Tip: Nockerl / Translation: Anders Denken)

Greens: No More “German Nation” in Oath

PI — Thu, 17 Jun 2010 20:28:34 +0000

The the freshly elected representative for the Greens to the Northrhein-Westphalia (NRW) State Assembly, Arif Ünal (photo) let the cat out of the bag right at the beginning of the constitutional session of the newly elected assembly. Ünal, who has lived 30 years in Germany, would like that in the future instead of “for the well-being of the German people,” rather “for the well-being of the residents of NRW” – for the sake of the two million immigrants in NRW.

Videos of the full session say more than a thousand words:

After Ünal’s speech, the President of the Assembly, Regina von Dinther (CDU), puts the proposal to a vote:

“Ladies and gentlemen, the procedural order didn’t forsee a statement of this… um… this… uh… opinion. Therefore, we can vote. Whoever wishes to empower this preliminary procedural order, please show by sign of handraising. … Thank you very much. All opposed? Abstainers? Good, then we are now in agreement for inclu… uh… concluding.

What does “conclude” now mean, Ms. Assembly President? But, of course, that has nothing to do with us…

(Hat Tip: nurednal / Translation: Anders Denken)

Gordon Brown: Faux Pas before Election

PI — Fri, 30 Apr 2010 18:09:20 +0000

Just a week before the elections in Great Britain on May 6th, the sitting Prime Minister Gordon Brown (photo right) called 65-year-old voter Gillian Duffy (photo left) “bigoted”, who had asked him critical questions among other things about immigration and national debt at an election campaign event in Manchester.

He made the remark during the return trip in his car, when he thought the lapel mike that came from the sending radio transmitter Sky and was hanging on his shirt was turned off. Whether the offended lady will still give him her vote is more than uncertain. In any case, the appearance will have given occasion to think for some who have seen the embarrassing pictures. The Tories can lean back and watch while Labor makes a laughingstock of itself.

Brown says in so many words:

That was a disaster…should never have put me with that woman. Whose idea was that? Sue’s I think Just ridiculous. … She was just a sort of bigoted woman who said she used to be Labour. I mean, it’s just ridiculous. Sue pushed her up towards me.

You can see the scene here:

The disappointed and furious reaction of the lady:

SpOn reports:

The radio establishments transmitted the outburst of the prime minister in full detail. The retiree who was suddenly brought out into the open reacted indignantly when she heard Brown’s statements and demanded an apology. “He is an educated man. Why does he use such words?”

The PM showed remorse thereupon: “I ask this lady repeatedly for forgiveness,” he said on BBC Radio. He doesn’t actually think the things that he said about her. According to a report from his speaker, Brown personally contacted Duffy by telephone and excused himself personally.

On top of that, he later had himself brought by his service Jaguar to Duffy’s house and personally excused himself in her living room. After the conversation, he exited the door smiling and said that he had “misunderstood” Duffy. He is a “repentant sinner.” Duffy herself didn’t appear again in front of the house. She only gave notification that the media must disappear from her entryway.

“I blame myself,” Brown said according to the British news agency PA. “One should also point out that I was helpful to the radio people, that I had hurried in my car with an active microphone to the next appointment, and it was a private conversation that they sent out.” He had gotten irritated about the question of immigration. The retiree had asked the governing head among other things what he would think of doing in the face of record debt, the immigration from East Europe and university tuitions.

A simple little citizen with inconvenient questions has been able to bring the governing era of Labour in Great Britain down, all because of a tiny microphone button.

(Translation: Anders Denken)

Minister Compares Israel with ZA-Apartheid

Guest — Tue, 06 Apr 2010 18:03:34 +0000

Frida Rothe (photo), Minister and spouse of the Islam representative for the State Church in Baden-Württemberg Heinrich Georg Rothe, while dealing with the situation in Gaza and the Palestinian areas of autonomy, compared the State of Israel with the past Apartheid regime in South Africa in a clerical contribution in the local newspaper Der Teckbote. Nobody is speaking of “Kairos Palaestina,” a pamphlet that is circulating around extreme Left circles.

I don’t want to link to everything, but it seems that Rev. Frida Rothe had this document in mind in her reference this past Saturday. In doing so, she compared Gaza and the Palestinan autonomic regions directly to the former Apartheid regime in South Africa, and thus equated Israeli government with that regime.

Excerpt:

Today Christians from Palestine are succeeding. From suffering under the occupation, they make — so they say — a cry of hope. They call it “Kairos Palestina.” They hope that God will free their people from occupation and the seizure of land just like he freed the people in South Africa from Apartheid. The expect that Christians in the whole world will take up their cry in the spirit of Easter faith of love and reconciliation.

And we? Will we recognize the determining moment?

I don’t want to go into complete detail; others can do that much better. On Israelaktuell, they show among other things the massive pressure and threat of violence by Hamas of signing such a document. PI readers have already received enough examples of this kind, where persons who have pitted themselves against Hamas have been shot in the knees as warning. Those individuals have, therefore, come to understand what it means to stand against Hamas. Israelaktuell phrases it a little more politely.

There was an interesting lecture from even this same Rev. Frida Rothe on July 1, 2008, in the church of Kohlesbach in Weilheim-Teck. The title of this lecture was “60 years of the establishment of the State of Israel — 60 years of Nabka of the Palestinians.” Truly a praiseworthy, neutral title, however since both viewpoints were mentioned in the title, then it seems that a neutral lecture would have been given. The worst expectations that some participants had in spite of that — since we know the kind of people we’re dealing with here — were well exceeded. First, she mentioned her desire of telling about her last trip to visit Palestinian friends in Ramallah. The CD, stupidly enough, didn’t function with the pictures; however, she had an older CD with her that contained previous visits. After these beginning problems, she finally was able to get on with the presentation. In a word, it was the typical antisemitic method used by our leftwing and extreme Left.

My definition of antisemitic is this: when equal results from identical treatment receive differing evaluations, regardless of whether one is Palestinian or Israeli. It became clear in a very short time that the Israeli was to blame for everything, the old well-known antisemitic method. Of course, she showed pictures from the border fence for proof, or she called it the border wall. She then showed a picture from the middle of the Old Quarter where the wall is nine meters tall. The indignant whispering of the older listeners could not be overheard, even though some of the ideology of the Hitler Youth era certainly came to mind in some listeners. One listener indicated that about 95 to 98 percent of the fence’s length exists right where the TV team had been invited by certain appointments — and where the exposed area in this photography was taken — in order to stage the gleeful throwing of stones at Israel through effective media coverage. He also pointed out that the wall was nine meters tall right in these places so that stones can’t be thrown over, since some Israelis had suffered from fractured skulls from such stone throws. Furthermore, she was informed that the real reason of the border fence’s erection was because of the suicide attackers from Gaza and Western Jordan, that indeed 211 Israelis had been killed by them in 2002, and that after the building of the protection fence, the count of those who were murdered fell to six in 2006 and to one in 2007. The minister pushed this objection aside with the words that a wall or a fence was no solution for the conflict.

Then she took a mental jump and started reporting about Ahmadinejad’s rumored speech: the old, well-known, extreme left version, where he absolutely did not say that he would drive the Israelis into the sea, but that his speech had been incorrectly translated. Which begs the question, whether this splitting of hairs is really so decisive, for it is simply undeniable that he is a most vicious anti-Semite. And any ally is justified in her antisemitism. Next came the story of the alleged robbery of land by the Israelis. That this is the direct result of the attacks from the Arab countries was, of course, kept quiet. Then she told next of a Palestinian wedding to which she was invited and was able to participate in. Of course, the Apartheid of the sexes was the rule, men and women were strictly separated in the celebration, and she stressed as well, how nice it was to celebrate without the men around.

The most impressive thing was when she recounted, with a glimmer in her eyes, how her daughter — apparently, very much the mother — wanted to buy and wear a Hijab, and she reported how nice, enthusiastic and friendly the lady of the shop was, and especially how happy the daughter was about her new head covering.

At the end, another listener asked, that since she had lived a good while in Jerusalem, whether she had also found Israeli-Jewish friends, or perhaps gotten to know some then. The answer wasn’t surprising anymore by that time. No, she lived in the Arab part of Jerusalem, and therefore she had Arab friends exclusively, and had also not sought out any Israeli ones, since by that time “she had already stood on the side of the oppressed, defenseless, and those without rights.”

Aha, the world is so simple.

P.S.: I heard later on, that a participant had offered to do a presentation from the Israeli viewpoint to Pastor Brigitte Turnacker of the corresponding church. He is still waiting to this day for an answer to his letter.

» Email Frida Rothe at: pfarramt@kirche-gutenberg.de

(By Anonymouse / Translation: Anders Denken)

Public Hostility to Jews in Norway

PI — Thu, 25 Mar 2010 22:43:52 +0000

Hostility to Jews in Scandinavia is becoming ever more menacing with the swelling of the Muslim population there (PI reported). Only around 1,300 Norwegians are of Jewish faith (in contrast to 150,000 Muslims), however they are seen as the root of all evil, and therefore they are mortally threatened, as even the report on Deutschlandfunk now reveals. Above all, Jewish schoolchildren are becoming victims of discrimination, racism, threats, harassments and mobbing.

Here is what Jewish parents report about their daily routine — not far away or somewhere in the Middle East, but right in the middle of the streets of Oslo:

“My son was on the way to the school to meet a friend there. A few Muslims stopped him and asked, are you Jewish, which he confirmed. With that the seized him and wanted to hang him. Somehow though, he was able to tear himself away from them — to this day he doesn’t know how — he then ran home and cried out of panic. That was the starting point of the nightmare.”…

“My child received death threats; his schoolmates say that he is a Jewish pig and should be shot down.

“There is a notorious denunciation of Jews — from jokes all the way to public death threats.” …

“Many immigrants bring antisemitism with them from their homelands. The embarrassing thing is that there is nobody here who will stand against them.”

The open hostility against Jews in Norway can now no longer be covered with the fig leaf of “Israel criticism.” The discrimination against Jews just because they are Jews is too visible. Nobody is really resisting it as well. Politicians don’t want to know anything about antisemitism in Norwegian society and disavow themselves of any common blame.

That fact that Norwegian politicians have belonged precisely to the sharpest international critics of Israeli policy pertaining to the Palestinians has nothing to do with the intimidation of Norwegian Jews. Such connections are repudiated by (Education Minister) Kristin Halvorsen who occupies the direction of the Socialist People’s Party while at the same time is considered as one of the central stakeholders in the Norwegian government, and in the past had already called for a boycott of Israeli goods.

Finally, the Muslims are a blessing, and Battle against Israel is Battle against the Right™, and therefore hostility against Jews is apparently OK in the reckoning of the Education Minister, even if she wouldn’t openly admit to this.

(Translation: Anders Denken)

New Wilders Film Splits taz Openly

PI — Thu, 25 Mar 2010 21:54:59 +0000

Geert Wilders’ new film with the gripping title “Rising Islam. Geert Wilders’ Warning to the West” to be presented May 1st in Los Angeles splits taz open in their Leser und Schreiber (Readers and Writers) section. Since there is nothing else with factual basis that can be pitted against Islam criticism, taz author Falk Madeja takes pride in finding out that certain individuals who before have expressed contempt for homosexual marriages were also participants in the production of the film.

From the taz:

Geert Wilders goes to America! The leader and sole member of his own PVV Party (Partij vor de Vrijheid – Party for Freedom) is looking to conquer LA. On May 1st, a documentary film with the title “Warning to the West” will be shown. The film comes from “PRB Films in collaboration with the Christian Action Network.”

Geert Wilders considers it a “great honor” and if the filmmaker is against homos as well as homo marriages as well, that’s all OK.

The readers of left-wing bourgeois sheet in chronic need of money certainly are becoming sick and tired of all the oppressive parochialism from the Leftwing-Green authors as well. Here are a few readers’ opinions from the taz:

The great German Islam associations are also against homos and homosexual marriage (I recommend a look at websites and publications from the associations). That, however, still has never held Greens and left-wing individuals back from exercising solidarity with the representatives of these associations in talk shows. (…)

Funny that Mr. Madeja doesn’t make any negative statements regarding Islamic associations that would most gladly condemn gays with Sharia.

But no, that doesn’t work because it would require courage, how easy is it though, to bark with a pack that labels everything right-wing that doesn’t think according to the commands of the Opinion Dictatorship.

I have been a 30-year follower of the Greens now. I was multiculti, tolerant and cosmopolitan. I always believed that everyone wants to live the way they wish.

But when my Muslim neighbors become more radical and intolerant, I started to have my first concerns.

The women suddenly started traipsing around in burkas in my yard, and the men declared to me that Sharia was now in force in my yard.

Since then, I have been a follower of Geert Wilders. We must ultimately take some kind of measures against the islamization of Germany.

For wherever Islam has the say, that is the end of multiculturalism. The only thing that rules there is Muslim monoculturalism. And wherever the Imams or the Ayatollahs have the say, that’s where tolerance ends.

And Geert Wilders has recognized that! One cannot react against intolerance with tolerance.

Geert Wilders recognized that progress cannot be made with tolerance. Even Adolf Hitler and his Nazis could not be stopped with tolerance!

One cannot stand for the freedom to take our freedom away. And interestingly enough, the Muslims do not have the tolerance that they demand from us.

And whoever doesn’t believe this needs to take a look at any Muslim land of their choice (…)

Exactly, the self-image of the journalists of the taz is that simple. One doesn’t want to inform, but rather agitate.

It’s a shame then, when the Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan says such things about moderate Islam:

“These descriptions are very ugly, it is offensive and an insult to our religion. There is no moderate or non-moderate Islam. Islam is Islam and it holds its own.”

Since the interesting authors have long since left the taz, there aren’t any more readers left to spoon out the pie-in-the-sky ideological brew without complaint. Nowhere else is it more clear: The ’68 generation is dying out

Here is the trailer for Wilders’ new film: