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

Who were the victims? and why?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Previous article about this subject:

» Honor Killings – In Canada?

Posted by Anders Denken

“country that prizes multiculturalism.”

or so the article says.

The article mentions some interesting facts about the accused. The father/husband was called a ‘polygamist.’ That he is accused of murdering his first wife and three daughters. The son who is 20 years old and the father’s second wife, who is the mother of the three girls that were killed, are also up on these four counts of murder.

Also interesting, is that the article continues on about honor killings elsewhere, as well as other crimes committed by members of The Religion of Peace™.

This among others should be another eye-opener for those on the western rim of the Atlantic Ocean.

Posted by Anders Denken

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

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

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

(Hat Tip: Wächter der Wüste)

Posted by PI / Translation: Anders Denken

The Berlin police are looking for this man. He allegedly raped a 65-year-old woman. This is how we have always imagined Böhmer enrichment. The young man rides leisurely home or through the area nightly around 4 a.m. on line 2. He doesn’t have to work; his livelihood is paid for by the German taxpayer. A 65-year-old woman who has to go to work climbs aboard at the Eberswalder Street subway station!

This is namely because we have billions for the EUSSR and millions for parasitic southlander intruders, but the homegrown now has to work until 68 or 70 to pay for everything. And what happens? The foreign criminal in the picture rapes the German on the way to work! This example illustrates the totally perverse organization of this country. It’s not just this poor woman that’s getting raped!

By the way, we support the idea that Merkel and Böhmer ride everyday on the subway and the street tram to work and home – alone! That should lead to a few enriching experiences!

Posted by kewil on PI / Translation: Anders Denken

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

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

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

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

(By Michael Böthel / Translation: Anders Denken)

The SHZ (Schleswig-Holsteiner Zeitung) reports:

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

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

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

Under pressure from the mother, the younger sister broke silence

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

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

The sentence is expected on Wednesday

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

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

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

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

(Translated by Anders Denken, original German “Zwei Zuwanderer – Eine wahre Geschichte” posted at www.pro-sarrazin.net on February 10, 2011)

We will call the characters in our story Vladimir and Aykut. Vladimir came from Moscow to us, Aykut from a village in Anatolia. Vladimir married a German, Aykut also. In reality, this is where things in common come to an end. We’ll take a closer look at Aykut first.

Aykut is 18 years old as he marries the German Ayse and immigrates to our country. Ayse’s father is a devout believing Muslim and prays 5 times a day toward Mecca, and Ayse’s family lives in the Hamburg township Veddel. Here is where Ayse also enjoyed her schooling, at the Slomanstieg school, where for decades there have hardly been any German pupils. Now, Ayse is 16 and will enhance the Turkish community through the in-marriage with Aykut who possesses perhaps the educational level of a fourth-grader. Aykut speaks German at the so-called B1 (Intermediate 1) level. Aykut has neither the capacity nor the education or even work experience in any kind of profession vital to Germany.

The wedding is organized by the Yildirim family. They incidently happen to run a wedding plannning business. They have rented a hall and regularly make it available for Turkish weddings. And since Mrs. Yildrim, a German convert to Islam who married a Turkish immigrant, works in the local Hamburg-Finkenwerder agency, she often finds out who is marrying whom and who intends to import, and she doesn’t earn too badly either. Mrs. Yildirim then also helps newcomers with all kinds of tricks.

But let’s get back to Aykut. Aykut, thus, marries German Ayse and gets her pregnant on the wedding night. On the Monday after the wedding it heads next to the agencies and authorities. The new family is well prepared, thanks to Mrs. Yildirim! The new bliss for starters requires, in particular, a proper apartment and money, lots of money. There was money for the bridal couple at the wedding. But the German authorities don’t necessarily need to know anything about it. Cousin Ali and cousin Yusuf educate Aykut in the secrets of hiding assets. At the agency there are all kinds of stamps, a Paragraph 5 certificate (government housing) and a certificate of payment for the first money to Aykut. The first ultrasound pictures of Fatima, Ayse’s and Aykut’s first daughter, follow three months later. And even better, the couple have found an apartment right near to Ayse’s parents! That’s really practical because Aykut, as before said, speaks only on a B1 level. Therefore, he cannot effectively make himself understood. The Job Center has meanwhile registered him; he receives welfare (German Hartz IV) for himself and the future mother. With rent, that comes to 1,284 Euro. Therefore, Aykut is now supposed to attend an “integration and language course.” However, Aykut has no desire to do this. Cousins Ali and Yusuf tell Aykut how to get around the integration course. They know a Turkish physician there who certifies that Aykut has become ill. Meanwhile, winter has come to Germany and Ayse is near to giving birth. In the hospital, she appears to bring a healthy child into the world. That’s fortunate because Ayse and Aykut are first degree cousins. But this fortune is lovely for the dear couple.

By now, Aykut has been in Germany for 10 months. He has gotten married, started a family, procured an apartment, installed a satellite dish on the balcony so that he can receive Turkish TV in Hamburg-Veddel. Married couple Ayse and Aykut used some of their wedding money for the wonderful 127 cm (50 inch) flat screen TV and satellite system. And since they live frugally, Aykut can still give 150 Euro in aid to his father and mother. Aykut is a family man. Aykut likes it in Germany. By now he has been here 12 months, and Ayse is pregnant again. Ayse, who actually has a secondary school diploma but wasn’t allowed to participate in biology, swimming and sex education because she was either sick or on her period, was looking forward to the second child. This time it’s to be a boy! Aykut still doesn’t speak any German. But this isn’t necessary anyway. For in Veddel or in neighboring Wilhelmsburg German is not necessary. Aykut wants was any upstanding Turk in Germany wants: a 3 Series BMW! But for that he needs a driver’s license. No problem in Germany. Because he can do his class work and test in Turkish also. But he can also buy a driver’s license or he could also simply drive without one. Cousin Yusuf provides him first of all with a BMW 3 model and cousin Ali talks with a good friend, a Lebanese, who owns a driving school. So everything is taken care of. In his second year in Germany, Aykut has accomplished the following:

Married Ayse and fathered two children, Fatima and Songül, both girls. Secured an apartment with satellite system and flat screen TV, a BMW 3 and a driver’s license. And for that, he didn’t have to lift a hand, that is, physical exertion required for sex with Mrs. Ayse notwithstanding. Aykut is liking Germany more and more. The Germans, of whom he has seen only a handful up until now, seem to be nice people. Aykut, along with his family, has received 47,808 Euros in the last 24 months (the amount is made up of rent, standard rate I, standard rate II + standard rate for 2 children + 2 x 12 months parental money provision) and didn’t have to move a finger for it. And that was only the beginning! Also, he is no longer summoned too often to the agency. Aykut still hasn’t received a single job offer and it isn’t even expected of him to get a job. Aykut has gotten around the language course successfully and without penalty.

Five years later

By now Ayse and Aykut have 5 children. Daughters Fatima, Songül, Gülcan and sons Mohammad and Djihad. Aykut still hasn’t been required to have a job. Meanwhile, he is a zealous mosque attendant and very religious. Today is registration for the Slomanstieg school, and Fatima and Songül are going to school. They speak broken German. Both already wear a headscarf. Just like mommy! The last five years were exciting. There was a larger apartment, Aykut nearly got a job, and of course the other children. After 7 years in Germany, Aykut is not happy. He somehow doesn’t feel at home or welcomed. And now he is being summoned more often to the agency, that is 2-4 times a year and has to listen to unintelligible things that an interpreter translates for him. Besides, his monthly needs and the money therefore flowing into his account have drastically increased. His family now receives 2,576 Euros a month in contributions of Germany’s treasuries. Aykut isn’t good at math. Therefore, we’ll break down the nice little gifts up to this point:

First and second year together 47,808 Euros.

The third year nothing changes, but the childcare money drops off. Therefore, 3,600 Euros less money in the account. This amounts still only to 20,304 Euros in social funds for the family. For this Aykut decides, all the while being the good businessman, to get Ayse pregnant again.

Thus, in year four this leads to an increase in income: 26,352 Euros received by the family in that year.

In the fifth year child number 4 comes along, then a full 28,800 Euros in social money. And then a new, larger apartment is needed. That now costs not just 600 but 800 Euros more.

Then for year number 6 comes child number 5. With that, the payment amount rises to 33,648 Euros.

In year seven, with both older girls registered in school, the payment then falls once again because of no pregnancy this year to 30,048 Euros.

Up until now, Ayse with Aykut and children have therefore cost the public 186,960 Euros.

Until Fatima’s 18th year, the firstborn, this payment will increase to approx. 560,000 Euros (including standard rate increases for the children), assuming that Aykut will not at anytime find employment that begins to cover the family’s needs.

Let’s move on to Vladimir

Vladimir is of Moscow. He is the son of a Russian engineer and teacher. He took German as an advanced course at his Russian high school, which his parents encouraged. His father is using all his savings to send Vladimir to a boarding school in Germany. Here he takes advanced courses and receives a subsidy that is available only as long as he himself continues to cover half of the board and tuition. Vladimir spoke practically fluent German when he arrived here continues to improve his accent and grammar so much so that, after a few years, he is better than many “Bio-Germans.”

In spite of all efforts and the fact that he isn’t incurring any costs and is even bringing financial support with him, Vladimir must get an extension of his residency permit every two years. He has to prove that he does in fact live at the boarding school, and that he has sufficient financial means available for the next 2 years. That includes such things as pocket money and health insurance, which he of course must provide by his own means. In 1996, Vladimir went back to Russia for half a year to get his diploma. In 1999, in spite of already having an existing Russian diploma, he also received a German one. After graduation, Vladimir has to leave Germany in order to apply for a study position in Russia. He is approved the same year for a study position in business administration in Hamburg. After he has proven that he had enough of his own finances available, after three months he receives a visa for 3 months. After three months he has to bring all his documents by again, confirm that he is financing everything himself and he is really living where he lives. He cannot claim student financial assistance. He then receives another residency permit for 2 years. Interning is extra, since the residency permit expires immediately when the study is finished. At this point, Vladimir has been in Germany for 6 years, hasn’t cost the state one cent and studies diligently. He defrays the costs himself for his stay and speaks and writes fluent German. He has a German girlfriend and is working on top of his studies, paying social insurance fees and is already a practical German. After 2 more years Vladimir changes his major to computer science. He is a computer specialist. Vladimir finishes a self-financed education then in 2008.

After his study, Vladimir receives a one-year residency permit without claim to benefits until he gets employment. He immediately finds work, pays taxes, dues and fees without ever having received a cent taxpayer funds. In 2009, he marries his longtime girlfriend – they’ve been a couple for more than ten years now. Shortly after the wedding, Vladimir starts his own business in the data processing branch and has since been a successful net contributor. However, his wife had to verify beforehand that she herself has a job and could take care of Vladimir should something happen. Vladimir is also not allowed to make a social benefits claim for three years. Both work hard, would like to have a child, but they don’t know whether they can afford it financially and due to time constraints. Because the burden of taxes and dues is constantly increasing.

In closing, a question occurred to me in the composition of this contrast between two real cases of immigration of whether I landed in the right motion picture drama of Germany. By whom are we receiving enrichment? You yourself can answer this best. And don’t be outraged because this is everyday life in Germany. Those who help us and want to live with us are treated like Vladimir. Those who behave like Aykut are being courted.

Vladimir is proud to be German, Aykut isn’t…

In so many words, Jung said:

“We need a public that deals confidently and calmly with the phenomenon of immigration and that doesn’t see a burden in it first of all, but rather a human gain and an enhancement in the cultural diversity that also benefits a country. They are actually young people for the most part that have a promise of something in life, that are setting out to achieve something. Too easily missed in the debate is that there isn’t only immigration but also emigration. Many of the Tunisian refugees will actually not remain for the long term, rather they will move on or return to their homeland to help in the rebuilding of a new Tunisia. Others would like to remain for good reasons and use their energy and skills to forge an existence here among us – if we will let them. Our land needs such motivated young people, that hsould not be forgotten.”

In light of the clear facts regarding the immigrant portion of social aid, criminality, etc. and the fact that there is an issue among the Tunesian refugees of overwhelming unemployment, this naïveté is incomprehensible.

» volker.jung@ekhn-kv.de

(Hat Tip: Samiel)

Here are three such instances – found totaly by accident in research regarding the Berlin subway attack:

In Heidelberg two schoolchildren were brutally attacked by three assailants, threatened with knives and club, beaten, kicked and mugged. The police are searching for the perpetrators with a photofit image, one of which spoke German with a Turkish accent.

In Goeppingen near Stuttgart, an Arabic-speaking man sought out a part-time employment agency – not necessarily in the search for employment, but with a mask and pistol. He forced an employee of the company to hand him money and then fled.

In Dossenheim near Heidelberg back in January, a 29-year-old man was brutally beaten up by two 17-year-olds in a streetcar. He had noticed that the two thugs were provoking another rider and had sat himself next to the man in order to relax the situation. The civil courage then ended up with the two provocateurs letting loose on the helper. First there were slugs to the face, then one of the assailants held fast on the holding rail and kicked with momentum with full force against the chest of the victim. After that they together attacked the injured one calling for help with kicks and punches. When two other men came to the aid of the victim, they left off from him. The police were able to arrest them shortly after debarking from the streetcar and gave them over to the charge of their parents.

(Photo above: Photofit image of one of the three fleeing assailants in Heidelberg)

Together with Jerusalem and Athens, Rome is the cradle of our Western civilization – the most advanced and superior civilization the world has ever known.

As Westerners, we share the same Judeo-Christian culture. I am from the Netherlands and you are from Italy. Our national cultures are branches of the same tree. We do not belong to multiple cultures, but to different branches of one single culture. This is why when we come to Rome, we all come home in a sense. We belong here, as we also belong in Athens and in Jerusalem.

It is important that we know where our roots are. If we lose them we become deracinated. We become men and women without a culture.

I am here today to talk about multiculturalism. This term has a number of different meanings. I use the term to refer to a specific political ideology. It advocates that all cultures are equal. If they are equal it follows that the state is not allowed to promote any specific cultural values as central and dominant. In other words: multiculturalism holds that the state should not promote a leitkultur, which immigrants have to accept if they want to live in our midst.

It is this ideology of cultural relativism which the German Chancellor Angela Merkel recently referred to when she said that multiculturalism has proved “an absolute failure.”

My friends, I dare say that we have known this all along. Indeed, the premise of the multiculturalist ideology is wrong. Cultures are not equal. They are different, because their roots are different. That is why the multiculturalists try to destroy our roots.

Rome is a very appropriate place to address these issues. There is an old saying which people of our Western culture are all familiar with. “When in Rome, do as the Romans do,” it says. This is an obvious truth: If you move somewhere, you must adapt to the laws and customs of the land.

The multicultural society has undermined this rule of common sense and decency. The multicultural society tells the newcomers who settle in our cities and villages: You are free to behave contrary to our norms and values. Because your norms and values are just as good, perhaps even better, than ours.

It is, indeed, appropriate to discuss these matters here in Rome, because the history of Rome also serves as a warning.

Will Durant, the famous 20th century American historian, wrote that “A great civilization cannot be destroyed from outside if it has not already destroyed itself from within.” This is exactly what happened here, in Rome, 16 centuries ago.

In the 5th century, the Roman Empire fell to the Germanic Barbarians. There is no doubt that the Roman civilization was far superior to that of the Barbarians. And yet, Rome fell. Rome fell because it had suffered a loss of belief in its own civilization. It had lost the will to stand up and fight for survival.

Rome did not fall overnight. Rome fell gradually. The Romans scarcely noticed what was happening. They did not perceive the immigration of the Barbarians as a threat until it was too late. For decades, Germanic Barbarians, attracted by the prosperity of the Empire, had been crossing the border.

At first, the attraction of the Empire on newcomers could be seen as a sign of the cultural, political and economic superiority of Rome. People came to find a better life which their own culture could not provide. But then, on December 31st in the year 406, the Rhine froze and tens of thousands of Germanic Barbarians, crossed the river, flooded the Empire and went on a rampage, destroying every city they passed. In 410, Rome was sacked.

The fall of Rome was a traumatic experience. Numerous books have been written about the cataclysmal event and Europeans were warned not to make the same mistake again. In 1899, in his book ‘The River War,’ Winston Churchill warned that Islam is threatening Europe in the same way as the Barbarians once threatened Rome. “Mohammedanism,” Churchill wrote – I quote – “is a militant and proselytizing faith. No stronger retrograde force exists in the World. […] The civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome.” End of quote.

Churchill is right. However, if Europe falls, it will fall because, like ancient Rome, it no longer believes in the superiority of its own civilization. It will fall because it foolishly believes that all cultures are equal and that, consequently, there is no reason why we should fight for our own culture in order to preserve it.

This failure to defend our own culture has turned immigration into the most dangerous threat that can be used against the West. Multiculturalism has made us so tolerant that we tolerate the intolerant.

Ladies and gentlemen, make no mistake: Our opponents are keenly aware of our weakness. They realize that the pattern which led to the fall of Rome, is at play today in the West. They are keenly aware of the importance of Rome as a symbol of the West. Over and over again they hint at the fall of Rome. Rome is constantly on their minds.

• The former Turkish Prime Minister Erbakan said – I quote: “The whole of Europe will become Islamic. We will conquer Rome”.

• Yunis al-Astal, a Hamas cleric and member of the Palestinian Parliament said – I quote: “Very soon Rome will be conquered.”

• Ali Al-Faqir, the former Jordanian Minister of Religion, stated that – I quote: “Islam will conquer Rome.”

• Sheikh Muhammad al-Arifi, imam of the mosque of the Saudi Defence Academy, said – I quote: “We will control Rome and introduce Islam in it.”

Our opponents are hoping for an event that is akin to the freezing of the Rhine in 406, when thousands of immigrants will be given an easy opportunity to cross massively into the West.

• In a 1974 speech to the UN, the Algerian President Houari Boumédienne, said – I quote: “One day, millions of men will leave the Southern Hemisphere to go to the Northern Hemisphere. And they will not go there as friends. Because they will go there to conquer it. And they will conquer it with their sons. The wombs of our women will give us victory.” End of quote.

• Libyan dictator Kadhafi said, I quote: “There are tens of millions of Muslims in the European continent today and their number is on the increase. This is the clear indication that the European continent will be converted into Islam. Europe will one day soon be a Muslim continent.” End of quote.

Our opponents are aiming for a repetition of the fall of Rome in the 5th century and want to use exactly the same methods. “The strategy of exporting human beings and having them breed in abundance is the simplest way to take possession of a territory,” warned the famous Italian author Oriana Fallaci.

However, the situation today could be worse than it was when the Roman Empire fell. The Germanic Barbarians who overran Rome were not driven by an ideology. After having sacked Rome, they eventually adopted the Judeo-Christian civilization of Rome. They destroyed Rome because they wanted its riches, but they realized and recognized that Roman civilization was superior to their own Barbaric culture.

Having destroyed Rome, the Germanic tribes eventually tried to rebuild it. In 800, the Frankish leader Charlemagne had himself crowned Roman Emperor. Three hundred years later, the Franks and the other Europeans would go on the Crusades in defence of their Christian culture. The Crusades were as Oriana Fallaci wrote – I quote – a “counter-offensive designed to stem Islamic expansionism in Europe.” Rome had fallen, but like a phoenix it had risen again.

Contrary to the Barbarians which confronted Rome, the followers of Muhammad are driven by an ideology which they want to impose on us.

Islam is a totalitarian ideology. Islamic Shariah law supervises every detail of life. Islam is not compatible with our Western way of life. Islam is a threat to our values. Respect for people who think otherwise, the equality of men and women, the equality of homosexuals and heterosexuals, respect for Christians, Jews, unbelievers and apostates, the separation of church and state, freedom of speech, they are all under pressure because of islamization.

Europe is islamizing at a rapid pace. Many European cities have large islamic concentrations. In some neighbourhoods, Islamic regulations are already being enforced. Women’s rights are being trampled. We are confronted with headscarves and burqa’s, polygamy, female genital mutilation, honour-killings. “In each one of our cities” says Oriana Fallaci, “there is a second city, a state within the state, a government within the government. A Muslim city, a city ruled by the Koran.” – End of quote.

Ladies and gentlemen, make no mistake: The multiculturalist Left is facilitating islamization. Leftist multiculturalists are cheering for every new shariah bank, for every new islamic school, for every new mosque. Multiculturalists consider Islam as being equal to our own culture. Shariah law or democracy? Islam or freedom? It doesn’t really matter to them. But it does matter to us. The entire leftist elite is guilty of practising cultural relativism. Universities, churches, trade unions, the media, politicians. They are all betraying our hard-won liberties.

Ladies and gentlemen, what is happening in Europe today has to some extent been deliberately planned.

In October 2009, Andrew Neather, the former advisor of British Prime Minister Tony Blair, confirmed that the British Government had deliberately organized mass immigration as part of a social engineering project. The Blair Government wanted to – I quote – “make the UK truly multicultural.” To achieve this end, 2.3 million foreigners were allowed to enter Britain between 2000 and 2009. Neather says this policy has “enriched” Britain.

Ordinary people, however, do not consider the decline of societal cohesion, the rise of crime, the transformation of their old neighborhoods into no-go zones, to be an “enrichment.”

Ordinary people are well aware that they are witnessing a population replacement phenomenon. Ordinary people feel attached to the civilization which their ancestors created. They do not want it to be replaced by a multicultural society where the values of the immigrants are considered as good as their own. It is not xenophobia or islamophobia to consider our Western culture as superior to other cultures – it is plain common sense.

Fortunately, we are still living in a democracy. The opinion of ordinary people still matters. I am the leader of the Dutch Party of Freedom which aims to halt the Islamization process and defend the traditional values and liberties in the Netherlands. The Party of Freedom is the fastest growing party in the Netherlands.

Because the message of my party is so important, I support initiatives to establish similar parties in other countries, such as Germany, France and the United Kingdom, where they do not yet exist. Last month, a poll in Britain showed that a staggering 48 percent of the British would consider supporting a non-fascist and non-violent party that vows to crack down on immigration and Islamic extremists and restrict the building of mosques. In October last year, I was in Berlin where I gave a keynote speech at a meeting of Die Freiheit, a newly established party led by René Stadtkewitz, a former Christian-Democrat. German polls indicate that such a party has a potential of 20 percent of the electorate.

My speech, in which I urged the Germans to stop feeling ashamed about their German identity drew a lot of media attention. Two weeks later, German Chancellor Angela Merkel stated that multiculturalism is “an absolute failure.” Horst Seehofer, the leader of the Bavarian Christian-Democrats, was even more outspoken. “Multiculturalism is dead,” he said.

Last month, French President Nicolas Sarkozy said: “We have been too concerned about the identity of the immigrant and not enough about the identity of the country that was receiving him.” – End of quote.

Five weeks ago, British Prime Minister David Cameron blamed multiculturalism for Islamic extremism. “We have allowed the weakening of our collective identity,” he said. “Under the doctrine of state multiculturalism, we have encouraged different cultures to live […] apart from the mainstream.” – End of quote.

In his speech, David Cameron still makes a distinction between the Islamist ideology, which he calls extremist and dangerous, and Islam, which he says is peaceful religion. I do not share this view, and neither did Cameron’s great predecessor Winston Churchill. Stating that Islam is peaceful is a multiculturalist dogma which is contrary to the truth.

Politicians such as Merkel. Sarkozy and Cameron still do not seem to have understood what the problem really is.

Nevertheless, the fact that they feel compelled to distance themselves from multiculturalism is a clear indication that they realize they need to pay lip-service to what the majority of their populations have long understood. Namely that the massive influx of immigrants from Islamic countries is the most negative development that Europe has known in the past 50 years.

Yesterday, a prestigious poll in the Netherlands revealed that 50 percent of the Dutch are of the opinion that Islam and democracy are not compatible, while 42 percent think they are. Even two thirds of the voters of the Liberal Party and of the Christian-Democrat Party are convinced that Islam and democracy are not compatible.

This, then, is the political legacy of multiculturalism. While the parties of the Left have found themselves a new electorate, the establishment parties of the Right still harbour their belief that Islam is a religion of peace on a par with peaceful religions such as Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism and others.

The problem with multiculturalism is a refusal to see reality. The reality that our civilization is superior, and the reality that Islam is a dangerous ideology.

Today, we are confronted with political unrest in the Arab countries. Autocratic regimes, such as that of Ben Ali in Tunisia, Mubarak in Egypt, Kadhafi in Libya, the Khalifa dynasty in Bahrain, and others, have been toppled or are under attack. The Arab peoples long for freedom. This is only natural. However, the ideology and culture of Islam is so deeply entrenched in these countries that real freedom is simply impossible. As long as Islam remains dominant there can be no real freedom.

Let us face reality. On March 8, the International Women’s Day, 300 women demonstrated on Cairo’s Tahrir Square in post-Mubarak Egypt. Within minutes, the women were charged by a group of bearded men, who beat them up and dragged them away. Some were even sexually assaulted. The police did not interfere. This is the new Egypt: On Monday, people demonstrate for freedom; on Tuesday, the same people beat up women because they, too, demand freedom.

I fear that in Islamic countries, democracy will not lead to real freedom. A survey by the American Pew Center found that 59 percent of Egyptians prefer democracy to any other form of government. However, 85 percent say that Islam’s influence on politics is good, 82 percent believe that adulterers should be stoned, 84 percent want the death penalty for apostates, and 77 percent say that thieves should be flogged or have their hands cut off.

Ronald Reagan was right when he called Kadhafi a “mad dog.” However, we should not harbor the illusion that there can be real freedom and real democracy in a country where Islam is dominant. There is no doubt that the results of the Pew survey in Egypt apply in Libya, too. It is not in our interest to bring the Muslim Brotherhood to power in Tripoli and install a khalifate in Libya.

Of course, the world has to stop Kadhafi from killing his own people. However, as UN Resolution 1973 stated last week, this is primarily the responsibility of – I quote – “in particular [the] States of the region.” End of quote. Why does a country like the Netherlands have to contribute six F16 fighter jets to enforce the arms embargo in Libya, while Saudi Arabia does not contribute a single plane from its fleet of nearly 300 fighter jets? Arabs are dying, but the Arab countries are shirking their responsibilities.

And one of the major threats of the current crisis is not even addressed by our leaders: How are we going to prevent that thousands of economic fugitives and fortune seekers cross the Mediterranean and arrive at place like Lampedusa? Now that Tunisia is liberated, young Tunisians should help to rebuild their country instead of leaving for Lampedusa. Europe cannot afford another influx of thousands of refugees.

Ladies and gentlemen, It is time to wake up. We need to confront reality and we need to speak the truth. The truth is that Islam is evil, and the reality is that Islam is a threat to us.

Before I continue I want to make clear, however, that I do not have a problem with Muslims as such. There are many moderate Muslims. That is why I always make a clear distinction between the people and the ideology, between Muslims and Islam. There are many moderate Muslims, but there is no such thing as a moderate Islam.

Islam strives for world domination. The koran commands Muslims to exercise jihad and impose shariah law.

Telling the truth about immigration and warning that Islam might not be as benevolent as the ruling elite says, has been made a hate speech crime in several EU member states. As you probably know, I have been brought to court on charges of hate speech. That is the paradox of the multicultural society. It claims to be pluralistic, but allows only one point of view of world affairs, namely that all cultures are equal and that they are all good.

The fact that we are treated as criminals for telling the truth must not, however, deter us. The truth that Islam is evil has always been obvious to our ancestors. That is why they fought. It was very clear to them that our civilization was far superior to Islam.

It is not difficult to understand why our culture is far better than Islam. We Europeans, whether we be Christians, Jews, agnostics or atheists, believe in reason. We have always known that nothing good could be expected from Islam.

While our culture is rooted in Jerusalem, Athens and Rome, Islam’s roots are the desert and the brain of Muhammad. Our ancestors understood the consequences very well. The Koran, wrote the historian Theophanes, who lived in the second half of the 8th century, is based on hallucinations.

“Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new and there you will find things only evil and inhuman,” the Byzantine Emperor Manuel II said in 1391, adding: “God is not pleased by blood – and not acting reasonable is contrary to God’s nature.”

For 1,400 years, Westerners have been criticizing Islam and its founder because they recognized evil when they saw it. But then, suddenly, in the last decades of the past century, especially from the 1970s onwards, Western intellectuals stopped doing so.

The moral and cultural relativism of Marxism led the West’s political and intellectual elites to adopt a utopian belief in a universal brotherhood of mankind.

Multiculturalism is a culture of repudiation of Europe’s heritage and freedoms. It weakens the West day by day. It leads to the self-censorship of the media and academia, the collapse of the education system, the emasculation of the churches, the subversion of the nation-state, the break-down of our free society.

While today – at last – our leaders seem to realize what a disastrous failure multiculturalism has been, multiculturalism is not dead yet. More is needed to defeat multiculturalism than the simple proclamations that it has been an “absolute failure.” What is needed is that we turn the tide of Islamization.

There are a few things which we can do in this regard.

One thing which we should do is to oppose the introduction of Sharia or Islamic law in our countries. In about a dozen states in the United States, legislation is currently being introduced to prevent the introduction of Sharia. In early May, I will be traveling to the U.S. to express my support to these initiatives. We should consider similar measures in Europe.

Another thing which we should do is support Muslims who want to leave Islam. An International Women’s Day is useless in the Arab world if there is no International Leave Islam Day. I propose the introduction of such a day in which we can honor the courageous men and women who want to leave Islam. Perhaps we can pick a symbolic date for such a day and establish an annual prize for an individual who has turned his back on Islam or an organization which helps people to liberate themselves from Islam. It is very easy to become a Muslim. All one has to do is to pronounce the Shahada, the Islamic creed, which says – I quote “There is no god but Allah, and Muhammad is the messenger of Allah.” It should be equally easy to leave Islam by pronouncing a counter-Shahada, which says “I leave Islam and join humankind.”

A third measure to turn the tide of Islamization is to reemphasize the sovereignty of the nation-state. The peoples of the free world will only be able to fight back against Islam if they can rally around a flag with which they can identify. This flag, symbolizing pre-political loyalty, can only be the flag of our nation. In the West, our freedoms are embodied in our nation-states. This is why the multiculturalists are hostile to the nation-state and aim to destroy it.

National identity is an inclusive identity: It welcomes everyone, whatever his religion or race, who is willing to assimilate into a nation by sharing the fate and future of a people. It ties the individual to an inheritance, a tradition, a loyalty, and a culture.

I want to elaborate a bit on this since we are gathered here today in Rome. Again, it is appropriate that we are in Rome. In this city, in 1957, and – what an ironic coincidence – on this very day, the 25th of March, the Treaty of Rome was signed. This Treaty obliges the member states of the European Union to aim for “an ever closer union.”

Unfortunately, this union, like other multinational organizations, has become one of the vehicles for the promotion of multiculturalism. The EU has fallen in the hands of a multiculturalist elite who by undermining national sovereignty destroy the capacity of the peoples of Europe to democratically decide their own future.

The new government in my country, which is supported by my party, wants to restrict immigration. That is what our voters want. But we are confronted by the fact that our policies have to a large extent been outsourced to “Europe” and that our voters no longer have a direct say over their own future.

On account of international treaties, EU legislation prevails over national legislation and cannot be reversed by national parliaments. Indeed, in 2008, the European Court of Justice, the highest court in the EU, annulled both Irish and Danish immigration legislation. The Court stated that national law is subordinate to whatever is ruled on the European level. In March 2010, the European Court of Justice annulled Dutch legislation restricting family reunification for immigrants on welfare.

The ease with which Europe’s political elite conducts an immigration policy aimed at the deracination of Europe shows the insensitivity of this elite. It willingly sacrifices its own people to its political goal, without any consideration for the people involved.

Lower class blue-collar people have been driven from their neighborhoods. There is no respect for their democratic vote. On the contrary, people who do not agree with the multiculturalist schemes are considered to be racists and xenophobes, while the undefined offence of “racism and xenophobia” has been made central to all moral pronouncements by the European Union, the Council of Europe, the United Nations, and other supra-national organizations. This represents a systematic assault by the elite on the ordinary feelings of national loyalty.

In 2008, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe stated that the member-states must – I quote – “condemn and combat Islamophobia” and ensure “that school textbooks do not portray Islam as a hostile or threatening religion.” – end of quote.

In March 2010, the United Nations Human Rights Council passed a resolution criminalizing so-called “defamation of religions.” The resolution, authored by Pakistan, mentions only one religion by name: Islam. With its 57 member states the Organization of the Islamic Conference systematically uses its voting power in the UN to subvert the concept of freedom and human rights. In 1990, the OIC rejected the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and replaced it by the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam, which states in articles 24 that – I quote – “All the rights and freedoms stipulated in this Declaration are subject to the Islamic Sharia.” – end of quote.

This “human rights” charade has to stop if Western civilization wants to survive. Human rights exist for the protection of individuals, not religions and ideologies.

The EU’s aim, meanwhile, seems to be to destroy the old sovereign nations and replace them by new provincial identities, which are all clones of each other. Britanistan will not differ from Netherlandistan, nor Germanistan from Italiastan, or any other province of the European superstate in the making.

We must reclaim Europe. We can only do so by giving political power back to the nation-state. By defending the nation-states which we love, we defend our own identity. By defending our identity, we defend who we are and what we are against those who want to deracinate us. Against those who want to cut us from our roots, so that our culture withers away and dies.

My friends, Twenty years after the ordinary people, Europe’s mainstream conservative leaders, such as Merkel, Sarkozy and Cameron, have finally – better late than never – come to the obvious conclusion, namely that multiculturalism is a failure. However, they do not have a plan to remedy the situation.

Ladies and gentlemen, it is time for change. We must make haste. Time is running out. Ronald Reagan said: “We need to act today, to preserve tomorrow”. That is why I propose the following measures in order to preserve our freedom:

First, we will have to defend freedom of speech. It is the most important of our liberties. If we are free to speak, we will be able to tell people the truth and they will realize what is at stake.

Second, we will have to end cultural relativism. To the multiculturalists, we must proudly proclaim: Our Western culture is far superior to the Islamic culture. Only when we are convinced of that, we will be willing to fight for our own identity.

Third, we will have to stop Islamization. Because more Islam means less freedom. We must stop immigration from Islamic countries, we must expel criminal immigrants, we must forbid the construction of new mosques. There is enough Islam in Europe already. Immigrants must assimilate and adapt to our values: When in Rome, do as the Romans do.

Fourth, we must restore the supremacy and sovereignty of the nation-state. Because we are citizens of these states, we can take pride in them. We love our nation because they are our home, because they are the legacy which our fathers bestowed on us and which we want to bestow on our children. We are not multiculturalists, we are patriots. And because we are patriots, we are willing to fight for freedom.

Let me end with a final – and a positive – remark: Though the situation is bad and multiculturalism is still predominant, we are in better shape than the Roman Empire was before its fall.

The Roman Empire was not a democracy. The Romans did not have freedom of speech. We are the free men of the West. We do not fight for an Empire, we fight for ourselves. We fight for our national republics. You fight for Italy, I fight for the Netherlands, others fight for France, Germany, Britain, Denmark or Spain. Together we stand. Together we represent the nations of Europe.

I am confident that if we can safeguard freedom of speech and democracy, our civilization will be able to survive. Europe will not fall. We, Europe’s patriots, will not allow it.

Thank you very much.

For example, the rights of abused women are being sacrificed for the sake of “tolerance.” The generation of unreserved appeasers has buried freedom of speech under the “cultural pollution” of multiculturalism.

See Pat Condell’s newest escapade with German subtitles here:

Again on Friday, the Kieler Nachrichten headlined “Knife stabbing in Gaarden: Attorney remains silent” – today, three days later, after more details about the horrible crime are available, the headline reads “A full-blown execution”:

“This was not a stabbing, but a full-blown execution.” With these words, an expert on the Kiel immigrant scene explains why great anxiety has spread among immigrant circles, since a man was murdered in front of a business in the township of Gaarden. The worries are going around that this situation could escalate.

Official posts are as stingy as ever with information about this case; random witnesses of the crime reported to our above-cited informant, however, of a horrible scene. According to them, the victim, a roughly mid-30s Kurd from Iraq allegedly knelt before his pursuers in the area behind the bakery before his throat was slit in cold blood. “Such a thing holds a new quality,” a Turkish resident of Kiel states in horror. This kind of brutal approach brings to mind the methods of the Lebanese terror organization Hezbollah and by far crosses the bounds of the normal level of quarrels between clans or cliques.

Meanwhile, the concern that the fatal conflict needs to be explained in the context of a national or ethnic background is unwarranted. According to all of our newspapers, present information deals much more with a crime of passion. About a half year ago, a conflict arose because a deserted husband didn’t want to accept the fact that his the woman who was still his wife had entered a new relationship with the man who has now lost his life.

Sensible forces are meanwhile warning of further escalations. “I detest such actions; these people have nothing to do with our association,” stresses Dr. Hussein Anaissi, head of the Arabian Society in Kiel. He is calling on the prosecuting authorities to proceed with all determination against such brutal expressions of private differences in opinion: “The law must show its full severity here.”

“It can’t be this way,” said the supervisor of the local Gaarden SPD advisory board, Bruno Levtzow. Nobody is allowed to dismiss the law in order to exercise feelings of frustration and jealousy in such barbaric ways, and put the rest of the population in fear and trembling by doing so. In Levtzow’s opinion, the people’s feeling of security is being impaired because the perpetrators are acting in groups and out in the open. However the supervisor insistently warns against hasty generalizations that might unjustly affect the great majority of law-abiding immigrants: “I see the danger that now anybody with black hair will be thrown into the same pot.”

Einzelfaelle.net has more information regarding the progression of events:

We found out from our scout what the police and press are suppressing: In Kiel-Gaarden, an Iraqi Kurd who worked as a hairdresser at the Vinetaplatz was executed by Lebanese Kurds that allegedly were members of the Kiel Miri clan while he was being held down by several individuals. The victim had had an extramarital affair with the wife of the perpetrator! The victim had been asked many times beforehand to put an end to it. At the same time, the wife was the cousin of the husband.

(Photo above: The Iraqi Kurd was executed in the Kiel pedestrian passage between Karlstal and an inner court in Gaarden on Friday / Hat Tip: Michael B / Translation: Anders Denken)

(Hat Tip: Kitman)

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)

All of thes are insights from the TV Total Integration Check…

The question is, whether tanks and blue helmets will be sent in the direction of the Alps to defend the “young people” against democracy?

The Zürcher Tagesanzeiger reports:

The SVP (Swiss Peoples’ Party) initiative for deportment was undertaken six weeks before the referendum on November 28th according to a survey. 58 percent would cast a ‘yes,’ 36 percent, a ‘no.’ 6 percent declined to say.

41 percent were for the counterproposal. If the vote had happened in previous weeks, 49 percent would have rejected the counterproposal to the SVP initiative. 10 percent had no opinion regarding the counterproposal. The SRG SSR idée suisse published the survey by the research institute gfs.bern on Friday.

Survey graphic:

To find out in detail what Switzerland will decide in November, and which countermeasures for opposing the will of the people have been planned, you can read in the statement of position by the SVP here.

(TV critique by “HT” regarding Hart-aber-fair-Talk from October 13, 2010 / Translation: Anders Denken)

The Plasberg show, above all, was intentionally the kind in which people spoke with each other, pretty interesting, the usual emotion-laden vitriol and extreme poliarization were missing, which most of the time accompany the subject of integration. With the really rational way everyone dealt with each other it became recognizable that the political winds of Germany have changed somewhat in recent times, and one came to the realization that for politicians it just isn’t convenient anymore to fully unleash their multicultural dreams at the cost of the grassroots population. Thus accordingly, a moderate conversation, here and there a consensus as well. However, what exactly was the issue with the individuals?

Die Islamfreunde e.V. (The Friends of Islam, a non-profit) was represented this time by the national head of the Turkish Community in Germany, Kenan Kolat, and Berlin Mayor Klaus Wowereit. Kolat mimed, as often before, the offended Turks and expected apologies from all over and saw himself in the classic role of victim. And so the muzzle of racism was swung around again, and at the same time many told of this or that contribution to the development integration on his part, of which hardly anything could be heard or read.

Wowereit stated to the contrary that a calmer look should be taken at the integration debate, a favorite policy that, considering the catastrophic circumstances in Berlin, would cause one to take him at his word. Again, things related to this issue were relativized here in the typical leftwing manner. And so the debate over hostility to Germans in problem areas was right away watered down to the level of “discrimination against minorities,” so that he, by his presence as a homosexual, ultimately had the opportunity to push himself into the role of victim, as if to say, “Hey, aren’t we all discriminated against for something against which something must be done?.”

There was hearty laughing, especially when, as an example, he supported the influx of immigrants from Islamic countries or Turkey by a “desire for advancement”… he would cast a light here and there on the usual employment statistics and didn’t walk through his town with closed eyes, as he confidently remarked that Germany is attractive for completely different reasons.

The debate regarding compulsory education was just as interesting. Here, Wowereit mentioned that there would be a broad spectrum of governmental means to compel families of Turkish or Arab origin to adhere to the same, and if these wouldn’t work, then it would be necessary “to consider something else.” It was this “something else” that has been mentioned so plausibly and believably in Sarrazin’s hated book, especially when in some one-way talk rounds about the subject of Sarrazin one liked to say that he “had no solutions available, only that he fostered fear and hate.”

Also, in the “Hard but Fair” debate, the volume of words and the angle of view were deciding factors. Wowereit, for example, spoke in reference to the unspeakable whistling at the German National Hym and the “traitor to the fatherland” Özil of “emotions” that simply belong to a football game. CSU politician Alexander Dobrindt saw the spectacle from a totally different perspective, namely in the tradition of Erdogan’s Cologne address there was a standing opposition to integration, that was being clearly revealed here one more time. Also, in reference to the debate over mosque building there were various views represented here; Nathanael Liminski talked about “fears of the people” that needed to be taken seriously by the politicians. Woweriet, however turned the tables and tried to show the ridiculousness of the issue; he talked about the “fueling of fears” in the case that the public needs to be informed in advance about building plans and included in the decision. One could say that this was the only score; and here, yet again, is where the irresponsible attitude of many politicians comes to the forefront, determining against the will of the responsible citizen what the best thing is for him (we saw this already in the Swiss minaret debate!). The fear of reality plays a key role all through Wowereit’s statement.

US journalist Heather de Lisle also ended up in a backfire. Various points were throughout agreeable, but ultimately these were preprocessed and like old wine in new skins, for example, like the usual muzzle of “one is automatically a Nazi in Germany, if…” She was nonetheless zealous in comparing or connecting each little detail of the discussion in some way with her homeland. Dear Madam de Lisle, Chinatown most likely became a tourist attraction because the average American tourist wasn’t insulted as a “sh—- American,” and didn’t have to take into account possible physical confrontation. She also disqualified herself by letting herself get heated up during the Mesut Özil debate because he was still not recognized as a “normal” German even though he is the third generation living here. One could answer her with: Plainly because he prays the verses of the Quran instead of singing the German National Hymn. Plainly because he is a devout Muslim. Plainly for the reason that he doesn’t assimilate into the “dominant culture” that is all to often frowned upon here at home that, in contrast to the immigrant land of the USA, has developed over centuries (a good counter from Mr. Drobrindt).

This evening ultimately offered a less heated, and therefore a substantial and information-rich debate with new faces, and one would hope that this current culture of debate and choice of subjects doesn’t turn out to be – as feared – a one-day excursion, and that the subject of integration would ultimately establish itself as a solid component of grassroots policy in the heads of the ones that govern.

Video of the “Hard but fair” show:

Aside from the SVP, that is practically singular in its opinion that Islam doesn’t belong to Switzerland, most parliamentarians harbor a “Yes, but…” opinion.

The Weltwoche reports:

It has once again been confirmed that the SVP holds a clear opinion about Islam. “Islamic persuasions diametrically oppose the values that make up Switzerland,” or so Lukas Reimann believes, and names rights of freedom, democracy or separation of church and state as examples. A single SVP politician accepts Islam as a part of Switzerland; Andreas Brönnimann answers the appropriate question shortly and concisely with a “yes.”

Islam as a part of Switzerland? The usual parties tend to say, “yes, but . . .” Especially windy are the Greens. They indeed affirm the thesis that Islam does belong to Switzerland. But at the same time, they distance themselves from their statement and raise that which is implicit to a categorical imperative in order to exclude the radical currents of Islam. …

But in the FDP, there are also voices that intend to ban the settling of Muslims in Switzerland. A profiled whistle blower about Islam is Philipp Müller who years ago concluded, “The current law regarding foreigners should have been retired ten years ago.” Now he advocates for “a massive limitation of immigration by those outside of our cultural circle,” as a reaction against the increasing number of Muslims in Switzerland.

One part of the SVP sees in the halt of immigration a chance of once again achieving a new freedom of action regarding immigration, Toni Brunner says, for example. And, Jean-Pierre Graber argues, few seeking asylum in Swizerland would come because they would be persecuted because of their religious belief or because of their political opinion; therefore Switzerland would be able to conduct a more restrictive immigration policy without harm.

Surprisingly, the Left itself is sympathetic toward control of the Muslims. “The mosques should be monitored to determine whether hate preachers are active there,” the Basel SP representative Anita Fetz said. And her party colleague in Fribourg, Jean-François Steiert, is calling for monitoring measures where the collective security is threatened. The Greens also are signaling mistrust – for example, the Waadtländ resident Luc Recordon. The monitoring of “potentially violent persons (not just among the Muslims) has to be continued,” he writes.

Nobody would like to have anything at all to do with “potentially violent persons.”

On the new portal Kopp Online, the following can be read:

Since the debate regarding immigrants from the Islamic culture group started by Thilo Sarrazin, there is now talk over many facets of an alleged enrichment by immigration. Only one subject has been excluded here, the humiliating “marriage to relatives” that are called weddings by people from the Islamic culture circle who before the marriage are already closely related to each other. And the low IQ of many “enrichers.” We all pay a high price for the consequences.

Do you also have just an approximate idea of what we taxpayers have to pay for the trivialized “marriages of relatives,” called unions of incest, and the children that come from them? As we will see in this report (with numerous scientific sources), an often low IQ and serious psychological disorders are a couple of the many results of such incest marriages. In Germany it is currently the modern thing to break taboos. So let’s break this taboo.

In German cities like Duisburg, every fifth matrimonial bond that is made in Turkish communities is between cousin and cousin. According to reports by the Essen Centre for Turkish studies (ZfT), they comprise even a quarter of the marriages by those of Turkish origin in Germany. This is risky: If cousin and cousin in the first rank bear a child, the probability of the worst anomalies and illnesses for the child are twice as much as in a usual marriage. Turks have made incest the normal case not only in their “relative marriages” gossiped about by us in cities like Duisburg, but also among certain other immigrant groups in the meantime. And who pays for the consequences stemming from that? We taxpayers?

Those further interested can read more here…

(Hat Tip Quantas P. / Translation: Anders Denken)

The appeal to love, peace and sympathy among people shows just what was expected to take place, like a shot in the oven. Again, hundreds of young people with southern immigrant background came to beat up whites , work French people over, and to pit themselves against the police. In the Place de la Bastille above all, it eventually led to violent fights. Numerous clueless guests who had come to the event just to have some fun were injured.

Back last year, the Parisian “Identitaires” had warned about the increasing racism against whites, which nobody wanted to hear. Whoever has been a victim of this new form of racism themselves must absolutely not keep quiet, they admonish. Sooner or later, the victims will no longer be ignored.

The following pictures make it very clear what happened at this year’s Paris Technoparade: