The German mistake
What a mistake!!! Many Germans believed in the smooth integration of migrants. They will be surprised, and moreover, they will be putting the European Union into serious trouble.
At present, in almost all of Europe especially in Germany, Islam migration topics have dominated the public discussion. The claim that the ongoing Mass Immigration is composed of asylum seeking refugees rather than “economically motivated migrants” is irresponsible, misleading and exaggerated by those claimants’ so called political correctness; it’s even suicidal. Not just financially, as 800000 migrants per year will cost the state 10 billion Euros per year, but it will also negatively affect the harmonious stable existence of people in society specially if there were clashes between two of the most opposite systems – Islam and Democracy.
Today's debate on immigration ignores these elementary facts. Those who are befuddled by the ideology of multiculturalism see the ongoing influx of migration as a problem. But politicians believe that it is possible to replenish the population of the individual states of Europe without any problems by allowing the entry of these migrants. This might sound somehow xenophobic, many would say, but I would choose not to allow the people from the many peaceful Middle East countries pretending to be refugees who would bring with them the Islamic culture to enter. And that’s why I want to continue on this path. Were these migrants from non-Muslim countries, the discussion would more or less end with the financial side of it and how to handle the crisis. But what we have to deal with now is not a racial or ethnic issue. It is about Islam and the tribal disputes they would bring with them to Europe, the dishonesty about being a refugee and its consequences. It is already well known that roughly 40% of the people streaming into Europe are not from Syria, but have possessed false Syrian passports, that are selling like hot cakes, or those who take a chance for a better life, coming in from the Balkans or Africa. And then we have the ones who are coming from Syria, but have been residing in Turkey for years but now coming to Europe for reasons other than the threat of life, endangering their children when crossing the waters. And still the largest group of those coming are men. And finally, instead of telling the European society when and how they are going to send those economic migrants as soon as possible back to Syrians when the war is over, those politicians are talking about full integration, job offers and housing. And even if there are some qualified people, they comprise a small percentage of the migrants. Jobs must first be available to the nearly 3 million unemployed in Germany plus the 3.5 million underemployed. And further, the language barrier would be a tough task.
“Germany has a problem with differentiating between xenophobia – racism, and anti-Islam (the warning about islamisation and criticising Islam)”
Why is that so? At first sight, it’s the easiest way to draw people into that concept of creating an enemy. Nearly nobody likes to be called a racist or xenophobe in Germany, as the Germans are too aware of their past, and with that, the so called do-Gooder (Gutmenschen Kultur) culture has developed. The fact that criticising Islam and pointing out the creeping islamisation of Europe is far from being a racist or xenophobe is simply because Islam is not a race, and a couple of million Germans already belong to Islam within the country. If being against Islam is considered racist, then basically all Atheist and even Humanists should be called racists because they also criticise Christianity and other religions, and Islam before it started to become a threat. But funny enough being anti-Christian has never raised an eyebrow. The most absurd comparison is Nazism, as that represents a fascist and totalitarian system, something that people defending European values, freedom and Human Rights, are far away from. Therefore, calling this opposition of the present EU and German national politics “far right” lags totally. There is only one thing to admit in this case, and that is having the same opinion as that of a small group of Nazis in Germany who unfortunately ride onto the same train because they see this from a xenophobic point of view. They do not represent the entire group of people demonstrating and talking out against Islam and its creeping influence!
Germanyis thereby the ideal breeding ground for the Islamization. In short, it builds on the guilt mentality using Germans history, building on the main stream press and its inattentive and mainly well off society. “Wir schaffen das schon.” (We can do it), is a slogan we hear, as if the issue is not a crisis but some kind of a football match to win. Europe has been out of war for 70 years, and war in its former ways is no longer a method and way. Wars are fought differently nowadays, and sometimes not even with weapons.
“Muammar Gadhafi’s speech to heads of justice of the Jamahiriya (20 May 2009)
We have 50 million Muslims in Europe. There are signs that Allah will grant Islam victory in Europe—without swords, without guns, without conquest—will turn it into a Muslim continent within a few decades.”
The purpose of the present German welcome policy, which would not be farfetched to claim, could be to destroy the cohesion of the existing structure in Europe because these politicians can only build their "new Europe" on ruins (ruins as the result of war), and of course without us, without those who are satisfied with the existing Europe. The migrants will be the first members of this new European nation.
This is one scenario, but there are other possibilities in the minds of the EU politicians.
Another reason for the behaviour of many Europeans and especially German politicians could be the naive idea that the massive immigration is in the short term unpleasant and coupled with some consequences, but on the long-term will create positive results. This would also be a fatal mistake.
The adoption of these German politicians, Mr Gauck and Mrs Merkel, is that Germany is welcoming motivated migrants who are intelligent, educated and a turnkey to labour, which could replace the aging German workers is ridiculous. Markel wants for example the car industry to support refugees: http://www.dw.com/en/merkel-wants-car-industrys-support-for-refugees/a-18719816
Germanyhas experienced the guest workers from Turkey during the 50s. And as the word say, guest workers are people who return home after having worked for a while. This of course has never happened, as guest workers became permanent settlers, and with these settlers, Islam had its first door opened to the West. Nowadays, politics don’t even use the word guest workers anymore; they jump to total immigration and integration. Whetherthere really is a massive shortage of workers in Germany, the change of policy is quite controversial. Due to the political megaphone, there is a supposedly high demand in engineering profession, yet thereis more of an oversupply at the moment. In some other occupations, it does not look different, among painters and bricklayers; the unemployment rate is in the high double-digit range. Also digitization and mechanization could make many jobs obsolete, without the economic performance falling here. All this does not speak against the influx of qualified immigrants and their integration into the labor market. Only there's no point to speak indiscriminately of "skilled workers". An oversupply of labor helps in the end only companies that want to reduce wages.
It is known that each person acquires his basic patterns of behaviour during the youth, and the most important coinage is received mostly in the family. It is therefore also possible that the proponents of massive immigration believe in the power of re-education, of manipulation and indoctrination that they dream of creating a new man who, in the tradition of Aldous Huxley's ingenious book "Brave New World", and is shaped entirely by those ideas.
Last but not least, it is important to think about why the wave of migration is taking place right now. What has happened that is so dazzling is that 40 percent of non-Syrian migrants who came to Germany came from Kosovo? There is no longer war in Kosovo for15 years. And why does Germany get another 40 percent from Afghanistan, where the armed conflicts in one form or another have already lasted decades? And finally the migrants from Africa, and we are not talking about Libyans, but people who used the route through Libya, yet coming from mainly peaceful countries as Nigeria, The Gambia and Senegal.
Several prominent politicians of the CDU and CSU went on a distance from Chancellor Angela Merkel. There was partly undisguised criticism regarding their decisions and opinions.
"Of course I would not have taken the decision to allow the refugees from Hungary to enter Germany, the weekend before last." said CSU chief Horst Seehofer to the "Passauer Neue Presse". "I'm saying: That was a mistake that must not to be repeated." Merkel approved the largely uncontrolled entry of refugees from Hungary in consultation with Vienna and Budapest and harvested international praise for that.
The small businesses association of Union warned about problems in bringing refugees to work. "It is understandable that the Chancellor these days wide spreads optimism," wrote the chairman Carsten Linnemann (CDU) in a commentary for the "Handelsblatt". "But it is important that we remain realistic and not sugar-coat the difficulties." Most of the refugees have, in a short to medium term, no chance to establish themselves in our labour market." A large majority will for long be permanently depending on assistance from the state."
Next to Mr. Linnemann, Thomas Bareiss, a CDU MP also stressed that the demand for skilled workers will not alone be met by the refugees. "15 to 20 percent cannot read or write," said the Chairman of the CDU district Württemberg-Hohenzollern to the German Press Agency in Stuttgart. A large number can only write the Arabic script.
"We cannot cope with every year between 800 000 and one million refugees.” Mr. Bareiß said. He separated with Merkel on that issue, who had rejected the criticism of the bureaucratic reception of refugees in Germany. "Germany now has to send a clear signal to the countries of origin that we cannot take them all and won’t do so" Mr. Bareiß expressed.
Mr. Barieß expressed understanding for the internationally highly controversial behaviour of Hungary in the refugee crisis: "Hungary safeguards the EU's external border and trying to handle the flood of refugees.”
CSU-Chief Horst Seehofer said what many don’t like to hear among the politicians who are playing the crisis down: "I know from many conversations with displaced persons that they do not like to hear such comparisons. The are other causes, now it is also about massive abuse of asylum." Further he stated: "The EU Commission, which indeed is so concerned about our toll road issue, should strive to the same extent to improve theprotection of Europe's borders."
The UN Refugee Agency has up to date figures and statistics about the influx of migrants: http://data.unhcr.org/mediterranean/regional.php
Misbehaving migrants and criminal migrants are not much of a billboard on daily news. Toilsome one has to find and extract these publications from the media ocean. Most people don’t have time for that, and so the main stream media can keep on showing what it wants its viewers and readers to see, favouring the EU politics at work.
SinceApril this year, at least twelve asylum seekers have been arrested for a perfidious scam in Munich. As the "Süddeutsche Zeitung" reported they are said to have tricked other refugees and sold timetables as train tickets for a lot of money.
We all criticise Saudi punishing Islam critiques, but the same people that criticise that, now want to punish Islam critics in Europe.
German politicians have long time ago started to play into that split role, scraping at the surface of the free Europe and Germany, where mocking of the Pope and Christianity has no longer been a problem. But now with the absorption of Islam their true faces reflect.
"Insults and denigration of religion is always bad"
Peter Friedrich: Let us discuss a fundamental question. I believe that it's never good when you attack or hurt the religious feelings of people. Of course it happens, no doubt about that. Of course, people also have the right to do so in a free society, to be funny about religion.
Insults and denigration of religion is always bad, it does not serve peace in a country, and therefore we have the blasphemy law, and I think you also have to think about it, if there are not any limits reached, that no more in order.
Christopher Hitchens yet once said that “Mockery of religion is one of the most essential things…one of the beginnings of the human emancipation is the ability to laugh at authority. It’s indispensable.”
Is it political suicide or becoming a promising calculus when German politicians like SPD Siegmar Gabriel announced in a Cologne mosque, that criticism of Islam should be criminalized, just like Islamic states want this already officially to succeed through the UN?
Literally he stated: "It's one of the great shame of this republic."
And he promised to promote more initiatives against the right, to punish anti-Islamic ideology harder, regarding to §130. More interesting is to know is what Mr. Gabriel thinks as right. We are of course not talking about violence like the burning down of refugee camps and homes, or physical attacks against people belonging to Islam. That is of course to be condemned. We are just talking about the pure verbal and written criticisms of Islam and the expression of it through text, cartoons or speech. If he is talking about the latter, then truly he is also opposing democracy with its freedom of speech and expression.
Koran Content: Those who leave Islam, those kill. Punishment for conversion to another religion or just leaving it, results into the death penalty, and it is still regarded in many Islamic countries.
From the Koran:Qur'an 4:89 - "They wish that you should disbelieve as they disbelieve, and then you would be equal; therefore take not to yourselves friends of them, until they emigrate in the way of God; then, if they turn their backs, take them, and slay them wherever you find them; take not to yourselves any one of them as friend or helper."
From the Hadith:Bukhari (83:37) - "Allah's Apostle never killed anyone except in one of the following three situations: (1) A person who killed somebody unjustly, was killed (in Qisas,) (2) a married person who committed illegal sexual intercourse and (3) a man who fought against Allah and His Apostle and deserted Islam and became an apostate."
al-Muwatta of Imam Malik (36.18.15)- "The Messenger of Allah said, "If someone changes his religion - then strike off his head."
Reliance of the Traveller (Islamic Law) o8.1- "When a person who has reached puberty and is sane voluntarily apostatizes from Islam, he deserves to be killed." (o8.4 affirms that there is no penalty for killing an apostate).
Koran contents are hence, according to current legislation incitement to murder, even a murder within the meaning of §§ 211, § 130: Incitement to hatred of the Criminal Code.
§ 211: Murder (under aggravating circumstances) The intentional, successful killing of another person, with at least one of the aggravating circumstances mentioned in § 211 sec.2 fulfilled. Those circumstances concern base motives, criminal aims or cruel ways of committing the crime. An intentional killing that does not qualify for Mord is called Totschlag (§ 212). § 211 is the only crime within the Strafgesetzbuch that carries a mandatory sentence of life imprisonment (a sentence of life without parole does not exist in German law.
§ 130 make it a crime to:
- incite hatred against segments of the population or call for violent or arbitrary measures against them in a manner capable of disturbing the peace
- to insult, maliciously malign, or defame segments of the population in a manner capable of disturbing the peace
- disseminate, publicly make accessible, produce, obtain, supply, stock, offer, announce, commend, undertake to import or export, or facilitate such use by another of written materials that assaults the human dignity of others by insulting, maliciously maligning or defaming segments of the population or a previously indicated group
- approve of, deny or downplay an act committed under the rule of National Socialism in a manner capable of disturbing the peace
As Islam is more than a religion, it’s the dictate on how to live, how to do business and generally an entire law system and we have to see it as such. The call to kill, or amputate, or lash people for certain things done, is not conforming to a democratic system, and hence must be regarded as not respecting European laws.
Crime laws should not therefore be criticized? The most shocking collection of statements come from politicians whom the Germans had voted for their ideologies that they used to stand for that no longer conform to the politics that they now represent.
Sigmar Gabriel SPD, is a German politician who has served as Minister for Economic Affairs and Energy and Vice Chancellor of Germany since 2013. Since 2009 he has been chairman of the Social Democratic Party of Germany.
Trying to attract Muslim and specially Turkish voters he said: "Those who live in Germany ten or twelve years must be able to vote here and even in the parliament and in the Bundestag"
Gabrieldemands Turkishlessonsat German schools! (Instead of German lessons for all only)
http://www.bild.de/politik/2010/fordert-spd-chef-sigmar-gabriel-12000706.bild.html
Cem Özdemir (Die Grünen), is a German politician and the son of a Turkish-Circassian gastarbeiter from Tokat, Turkey. Since 2008 he is co-chairman of the German political party Alliance '90/The Greens, together with Simone Peter.
"We wantthatGermanybecomesIslamic"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jjFCt3Uv3Tk&feature=player_embedded
"The political instrumentalizationof Islam..."
Claudia Roth (Die Grünen), is a German Green Party politician. She was one of the two party chairs from 2004 to 2013 and currently serves as one of the vice presidents of the Bundestag.
Roth about the Day of German Unity: "One could not only celebrate German unity, but also the start of EU accession negotiations with Turkey on 3 October." Her vision: "On National Day of German streets drowning in a sea of red Turkish flags and a couple of black-red flags."
http://www.welt.de/print-wams/article122863/Hinter-List.html
"We must finally naturalize Islam in our country."
Angela Dorothea Merkel (CDU),is a German politician and former research scientist who has been the Chancellor of Germany since 2005 and the Leader of the Christian Democratic Union since 2000. She is the first woman to hold either office.
"Islambelongs to Germany. There is not by the way 'the' Islam"
http://www.shortnews.de/id/856132/bundeskanzlerin-angela-merkel-der-islam-gehoert-zu-deutschland
"Mosques will be part of our urban landscape"
http://www.faz.net/aktuell/politik/inland/angela-merkel-im-f-a-z-gespraech-moscheen-werden-teil-unseres-stadtbildes-sein-11036846.html
Ina keynote speech on 17 June 2005 Merkel said: "Because we have truly no legal claim to democracy and social market economy for all eternity."
http://artikel20.com/00.wiki/01/m/MerkelAngela/05_06_16_Rede_Merkel_60_Jahre_CDU.pdf
Hans-Christian Ströbele (Die Grünen), is a German politician and lawyer. He is a member of the German Green party.
"A public holiday would be a good sign that we accept Islam as a world religion seriously"
RAF Ströbele to "Islam belongs to Germany": "I would have liked, that would have been addressed twenty years ago in Germany."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sk6oSaZlFbo
Renate Künast(Die Grünen), is a German politician of Alliance '90/The Greens. She was the Minister of Consumer Protection, Food and Agriculture from 2001 to 2005 and subsequently served as chairwoman of the her party's parliamentary group in the Bundestag.
"We need to naturalizeIslam"
http://www.zeit.de/politik/deutschland/2010-09/kuenast-sarrazin-integration
"Therefore, Islam belongs to Germany." It should not go reverse now, said Künast. "That would be detrimental to Germany."
http://www.welt.de/politik/deutschland/article12695633/Friedrich-nach-Anti-Islam-Aussage-schon-in-der-Kritik.html
Christian Wilhelm Walter Wulff (CDU) is a German politician and lawyer. He served as the President of Germany from 2010 to 2012. A member of the Christian Democratic Union, he served as Prime Minister of the state of Lower Saxony from 2003 to 2010.
"Islam belongs to Germany"
Another group are the ex-Muslims speaking against islamisation, and they know best, as they come from the cave of the lion:
The veilwas her hiding place and prison. One day, she thought to herself: "There is no God." Then she waited. God's punishment didn’t come. Mina Ahadi is ex-Muslim. She cannot understand the position of those who don’t see the danger. She struggles against Islamization in Germany. Ahadi is the head of the "Central Council of Ex-Muslims". The association sees itself as the name suggests, as a contrast to the "Central Council of Muslims in Germany". The native Algerian Belaid Nadia, who is responsible for the website of Ex-Muslims told at a discussion entitled "Tolerance between religions", which she attended: "If Islam is tolerant: Why can’t I get married as a woman to someone of another faith?" The Imam replied that he would like to tell her that in the break. She asked: "I know what the reason is. Many others here don’t. He should please explain it now!” A listener rebuked: "If he says, during the break ', then respect that!"
This is the answer from the Koran:
“… (lawful unto you in marriage) are (not only) chaste women who are believers, but chaste women among the People of the Book, revealed before your time, – when ye give them their due dowers, and desire chastity, not lewdness, nor secret intrigues if any one rejects faith, fruitless is his work, and in the Hereafter he will be in the ranks of those who have lost (all spiritual good).” – [Qur'an 5:5]
So basically it is demanding to keep the belief system pure and clean. Any interaction with non-Muslims would make the faith worthless, as it would be fruitless.
Now before we discuss about the ordinary citizens being scolded for opposing Islam, here are some recognised people who opposed Islam too, or criticised it. Would these now also have to bear the label of racism and xenophobia?
Zafer Senocak (Turkish writer): "Even if it does not want to admit it, most Muslims, the terror comes from the heart of Islam; it comes directly from the Koran."
Voltaire (French philosopher and writer): "The Koran teaches fear, hatred, and contempt for others, murder as a legitimate means for the dissemination and preservation of Satan doctrine, he persuaded the women badly, classifies people into classes, calls for blood and again blood.
Alice Schwarzer (German feminist): "The headscarf is the flag of the Islamic crusade. These Islamist crusaders are the fascists of the 21st century. "
William Muir (one of the leading British Islamic scholar): "Muhammad's sword and the Koran are the deadliest enemies of civilization, of truth and freedom, which has been experienced humanity."
Dr. Younus Shaikh (Indian Rationalist and reconnaissance): "Islam is an organized crime against humanity!"
Oriana Fallaci (Italian journalist and writer): "Europe is no longer Europe; it is Eurabia, a colony of Islam, where the Islamic invasion does not only physically progresses, but also on the spiritual and cultural level. Subservience to the invaders has poisoned democracy, with obvious consequences for the freedom of thought, and for the concept of freedom itself. "
Cahit Kaya (chairman of the Central Council of Ex-Muslims Austria): "There are very serious active mosque associations who proselytize massively among youth and spread extremely racist and anti-Semitic ideologies. With democracy, this has nothing to do. These clubs will i.a. fomented the hatred of the West and led by Turkish Islamists Islamic Mr. religion propagated. Integration is totally rejected, actively engaging them. "
The Salafi movement or Salafist movement is an ultra-conservative orthodox movement within Sunni Islam that references the doctrine known as Salafism. Germany houses such a group, and up till now, although under the observation of authorities, it has not been prohibited. Estimates by German security police show that it grew from 3800 members in 2011 to 7500 members in 2015. They reject religious innovation, or bida, and support the implementation of sharia.
They have recently come into the media, because of the issue trying to recruit refugees into their group.
Even death threats seem not to be off their agenda. Becausethe Mainzer FDP politician Tobias Huch's commitment to Israel and to the victims of the IS, he is threatened by Salafists in a hate video, where Mr. Huch is now verbally abused to the worst. Also in writing, he received a message saying: "We will cut off your head, when we see you; we will break your neck."
Islamists threats are on European soil, and politicians like Hans Peter Friedrich seem to ignore that completely, even playing down the threats through statements like: “I cannot determineIslamization inGermany"
Geert Wilders, the Dutch politician and head of the Dutch PVV, is not within the German politics, but he does give support to the Germans and visited Germany several times. Germany seems petrified when it comes to the threat of Islam, with no rubber bands closing the wide open gates towards Germany. Germany has one of the toughest immigration laws in Europe, and German embassies are known to be hard and even arrogant when it comes to granting an entry visa. But now, it seems that when it comes to a rubber boat, German faces are in tears and are ready to welcome and accommodate anybody.
Where is the line between legal immigration and unwanted illegal influx? Germany is just limited to words like “welcome”, “we will make it” and “everyone opposing us and Islam is a racist, xenophobe, Nazi or far right extremist”. Is this the end of democracy? Maybe yes, as even the ones in strong defence of the European values, like Human Rights, equality, LGBT, woman and child rights are standing with open arms towards a system that does not comply to their principles.
If Islam were a religion of peace, why does a politician as Geert Wilders have to wear a bullet proof vest, have 24/7 body guards and live in a safe house?
If Islam were a religion of peace, why can’t it just laugh about the cartoons made to the image of Muhammad and get over it, instead of threatening critics with terror and death?
How come that all countries where Islam is the state religion, the government is a dictatorship? That shows that Islam is not compatible with democracy.
If Islam were a religion of peace, why is apostasy or exit from Islam subject to the death penalty according to the Islamic law?
If Islam were a religion of peace, why does it not allow freedom of speech and expression and freedom of religion or non-religion?
The Koran states it clear, as it calls for fight and the domination of the world until Islam is the one and only religion. Only then can be peace.
Qur’an:9:5 - “Fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them, take them captive, harass them, lie in wait and ambush them using every stratagem of war.”
Qur’an:9:112 “The Believers fight in Allah’s Cause; they slay and are slain, kill and are killed.”
Qur’an:8:39 “Fight them until all opposition ends and all submit to Allah.”
Qur’an:8:39 “So fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief [non-Muslims]) and all submit to the religion of Allah alone (in the whole world).”
If the threat comes only from so called extremists or Islamists, what is the Koran to the nowadays moderate Muslims called? Is the same book still considered moderate to them? Germany is committing one of its greatest mistakes.
By Thomas Fleckner
Comments powered by CComment