Posted by kewil on PI / Translation: Anders Denken

*Translator’s Note: A Swabia is a region in the German state of Bavaria with a rich historical background. A Swabian is a person from that region, and a Swabophobe is one who holds a hatred for Swabians. In this context, Swabian is being used as a natural born German.

**Translation of poster: Swabians in Prenslauer Berg / Narrow-minded, crazy about surveillance in the neighborhood and no mind for Berlin culture / What do you really want here???

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)

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:

(By the Editrix)

The exhibit covers the immensely topical issue “The Third World during the Second World War” and three of 96 exhibit panels are dedicated to the REALLY topical issue of the mufti’s collaboration with the Nazis who had a decisive influence on the Holocaust (we reported many
times already). Ebéné stated that she refused to display the information on Husseini out of respect for joint Arab organizations. Her decision was supported by migration commissioner of the Berlin Senate, Günter Piening. In a neighborhood (heavily dominated by Muslims) like Neukölln a “differentiated presentation” was paramount, Piening stated.

“Not differentiated enough”.The mufti and his German buddies.

Maya Zehden, a spokeswoman for the Berlin Jewish community, termed Piening’s statement “an appeasement attempt” to ignore the fact that “there was no official resistance from the Arabic world against the persecution of Jews” during the Shoah. She accused Piening of showing a false tolerance to German-Arabs in a heavily Muslim-influenced neighborhood.

In an e-mail to the JPost, Heinz Buschkowsky, the district mayor in Neukölln, wrote that it is a sign of “anticipatory obedience to avoid probable protests. I do not consider this position to be good”, notabene pointing out that Piening’s statement is a “repression of the facts dealing with anti-Semitism.”

Meanwhile, Ebéné denied that there was an “agreement” with the local Muslim community to censor the exhibit. She termed media queries regarding an agreement as “Eurocentric.” The Jerusalem Post was informed that the exhibit was intended as a “homage to soldiers from African” countries who fought against the Nazis. Indeed, a crucial aspect of WWII so far totally neglected.

When asked about her opposition to the inclusion of the mufti panels, she asked, “was there ever a commemoration event in Israel to honor the [African] soldiers?” In an Interview with Radio Berlin Brandenburg Ebéné, who has a German mother and a father from Cameroon and is thus, so to say by birth and per definitionem, on the right side, stated: I am not white. I have no reason to be afraid of Arabs”, which is rather endearing for somebody who is allegedly heavy into informing the world about the African slave-trade.

My take on all this? This is so rock-solid, die-hard, intransigently and impregnally stupid and so full of the usual German “antifa”, politically correct, “fight against the right”, “multiculti”anti-West and racist crap, that it defies any serious comment, because that would lend her antics a credibility they don’t possess. That Ebéné is first confusing Fascism and National-Socialism and then, when challenged, peddling her family’s (the German side, that is) history of saving Jewish children to show that she is by birth DOUBLY on the right side, is only the icing on the cake.

Of course, the reaction of the public, the political classes and the media, or the question how Ebéné could end up in such a position at all, are a different matter.

Cross-posted at Roncesvalles

(By the Editrix)

Indeed, the media echo is stunning. A quick Google-search just for the name of the victim reveals amazing results. “Martyr”,”headscarf” and “pregnant” are the feeds that mainly catch the eye. Of course, the German results are almost identical, with the German equivalents of “hate crime” and “racism” thrown in.

All of Germany is wallowing orgasmically, like swine wallow in dirt, in their own moral squalor. They love that.

And moral squalor it is indeed, just not in the way they see it.

The secretaries of both, the Central Council of Jews, convert Stephan Kramer, and the Central Council Muslims in Germany, Aiman Mazyek, had the mutual enemy quickly identified and visited the widower together to express their sincere hypocrisy.

The French Figaro, so Gudrun Eussner informs me, quotes in today’s print issue on page 7 the same Aiman Mazyek who states that “total (sic!) religious freedom” must be defended, part of which is the wearing of the headscarf:…”liberté réligieuse totale, dont fait partie le port du voile.”

Has anybody still any doubt that we in the West are in a total (sic!) and global war with Islam?

Even such experts on human rights like Mahmud Ahmadinejad and the Iranian Supreme Council of Cultural Revolution (SCCR) chimed in, the latter issuing a statement saying the murder of Marwa al-Sherbini in Germany demonstrated the West’s disrespect to human rights.

And nobody laughed.

The most revealing aspect was, however, that even such an obscene extravaganza of German self-hatred and submission wasn’t enough for the trailblazing whips (or rather: “whippettes”) of dhimmitude. Andrea Dernbach, who has proven her ethical depth and moral prowess already by a justification of sex with children to clear Islam of the suspicion of homophobia, asked under the header “Germany’s new hatred”: “Why does the death of a woman wearing a headscarf – who wasn’t the victim of a so-called “honour killing” – spark so little interest in Germany?”

So far, so bad, but lately we seem even to export that specific brand of Islam-adoring journalettes, maybe because whatever Germans do, they do thoroughly. And indeed, under the even more incredible header “A murder that Germany ignored” a woman with a German-sounding name whines (in the Al Guardian, no less!) about what must be, I don’t have any other explanation, the figment of an estrogen-addled brain, and is even repeating an outlandish, preposterous accusation by the Muslim media:

They [the German media] could have asked – as an Egyptian did – why Marwa’s husband, while he was trying to help his wife, was shot and wounded by a policeman in the courtroom. Because he was not blond-haired?

I am not a prolific letter-to-the-editor-writer, but this time I couldn’t help myself:

Your name suggests that you can read German. So you either have an agenda or you are out of your mind. The German media is,
since that crime happened, in an orgiastic, self-hating frenzy. “Germans! She died for your sins!” And you are SERIOUSLY selling the
above drivel to an unsuspecting Guardian readership? The day the countless ethnic Germans who are beaten to a pulp or killed by our
Muslim culture enrichers get at least a fifth of the media attention this case got and it still getting, I will stop worrying what makes
people like you tick.Elsewhere, in Iran, the 31-year-oldmother of two, Mohabat Mahmodi, will be executed within the next couple of days, because she killed her rapist in self-defense.*

And nobody cares. They are all too busy being outraged by German islamophobia.

* Information out of an email by Mina Ahadi, exile-Iranian and secretary of the Central Council of Ex-Muslims in Germany.

Cross-posted at Roncesvalles.

In the following you see two videos. The first about Ahmadinejad’s “mission” and secondly his full speech at the UN-conference “against racism” in Geneva.

(By the Editrix)

To summarize: Frightening the living daylight out of Salman Rushdie and the stupid, white- and colonial guilt-ridden Brits in the same process was a good thing because it paved the way to the total submission we now see in Britain and what Hundal calls “remarkable civility”. The entire comment is so incredibly full of politically correct leftist-liberal bullshit that it could as well be published at The Onion as a travesty and nobody would notice.

It has become such a frequent occasion that some profiteer from the fact that the Brits once, long ago, shouldered The White Man’s Burden spits on that very tradition, that I have given up following it. However, Hundal didn’t limit his bias to the country that gave him his passport and that irritated me:

Despite the rows and arguments, the British experience has been much better than that in Europe. France sticks to its official colour-blind approach but it has failed to make minorities feel that they have a stake in mainstream society. Germany has yet to shake off its history of associating nationality with bloodline and makes it difficult for even third or fourth-generation Turks to be full citizens. The Netherlands has careered from extremely liberal attitudes to much more xenophobic ones. Britain, in marked contrast, has conducted itself in remarkable civility.

Does this Times columnist really not know that France did not fail “to make minorities feel that they have a stake in mainstream society” but that the problem lies just with one of several minorities that prefers to burn cars instead of taking up its stake in mainstream society? That the Netherlands have not “careered from extremely liberal attitudes to much more xenophobic ones”, but are trying to make up for their past mistakes, namely confronting a minority, that considers any liberal attitude as weakness, with such a despised and, at the same time, easily exploitable concept?

And Germany? Does it really have “yet to shake off its history of associating nationality with bloodline” that “makes it difficult for even third or fourth-generation Turks to be full citizens”? The cliché of the “racist” German is always gladly taken up, but that doesn’t make it any more real. Germans are probably less racist than those European people with a colonial past — or most third-worlders, for that. Germans are traditionally antisemites. That is a huge difference, which is hardly ever acknowledged. Germany, the only major European country without much of a stake in colonialism, is deeply provincial, always has been and after reunification even more so.

Any cosmopolitanism is a totally alien concept to us, as is thinking in international terms. When the first Turks arrived in larger numbers in the early Seventies, nobody bothered to waste much thought on them because they were supposed to go back to their native country sooner or later anyway. They didn’t, but at first it seemed as if Turks, coming from a secular country, didn’t do so badly in the field of assimilation, no bearded men, no burqa-wearing women, they kept themselves to themselves, but their children, so it seemed, were going to do well.

And then, somewhere along the way and the Germans being tired of being branded forever as the world’s premier racists, the suicidal family reunion schemes were started and instead of sending those who hadn’t grown any roots in Germany, back, spouses from the deepest Anatolian sticks were imported while at the same time the alarming signs of a re-Islamisation of the Turkish minority were ignored. Again, at the same time, our little country took in Asians, Russians and other immigrants from non-Muslim countries without major problems, with the result that a Sikh in a British newspaper may ride now the old nag of German “racism” to death and nobody laughs.

Angry, I commented at the Times website:

This is an insult to your readers. How can one write a sensemaking, literate and informative comment covering such a complex topic having just 300 characters at one’s disposal? But then, “You have no idea about what you are talking” only needs 40 odd characters and says it all.

I think I was wrong. Some hours and a bit of online search later, I have to concede that Sunny Hundal knows very well about what he is talking. He is a man with an agenda.

Cross-posted at Roncesvalles.