Mission Europa Netzwerk Karl Martell

Archive for January, 2011

Criticizing Islam Successfully to People Who Don’t Want to Hear It

Posted by paulipoldie on January 24, 2011

Criticizing Islam Successfully to People Who Don’t Want to Hear It

Posted: 16 Jan 2011 10:33 AM PST

WHEN SOMEONE you’re talking to turns against the idea of criticizing Islam, switch to talking about Scientology. Talk about Scientology’s Fair Game policy for awhile, and once your listener agrees with you that the policy is unacceptable, make these points:

1. not all religions are the same

2. not all religious doctrine should be free from scrutiny

3. there is a useful division we can make between the political teachings of a religion and the religious teachings of that religion

In case you don’t know about Scientology’s Fair Game policy, here it is in a nutshell: It is a written doctrine of the Church of Scientology that enemies of Scientology are “fair game” and may be (in the words of the founder of Scientology, “deprived of property or injured by any means by any Scientologist without any discipline of the Scientologist. May be tricked, sued, lied to, or destroyed.”

This policy has been carried out by the Church of Scientology many times, often destroying peoples’ lives, and Scientology’s criminal actions (and its written policies supporting those actions) have often been documented in court. You can read more about it at Wikipedia: Fair Game (Scientology). Also, you can find good information about it at the Scientology Critical Information Directory: Scientology’s “Fair Game” Doctrine. And also check out the Suppressive Person Defense League: Scientology’s Suppressive Person Doctrine.

Islam has successfully gathered a cloak of protection around it, making it difficult to talk about this subject with many people. People don’t have the same knee-jerk defense of Scientology, and yet many of Scientology’s teachings are similar to Islam’s. So learn something about Scientology, and when you meet resistance when talking about Islam, switch to talking about Scientology.

Once you’ve made some good points, come back around and make the same points about Islam. I think you’ll find this a powerful new strategy.

Posted in Islam, Islam - What can we do? Was können wir tun?, Islamkritik | Leave a Comment »

Conditions of Dubai’s immigrant workers highlighted

Posted by paulipoldie on January 22, 2011

It is hard to fathom why on earth people still want to vacation in this hellhole… one of many in the Middle East.



Dark side of the Dubai dream


Migrant workers in Dubai


By Lila Allen

It is a place in the sun for over a million of us who holiday there every year. It boasts a host of luxury apartments that has celebrities flocking. But behind the glitz and glamour of Dubai often lies a murky world of exploitation and an immigrant work force living on the breadline.

Hit by the credit crunch, Dubai’s economy has taken a turn for the worse reliant as it is on tourism, financial services and real estate. For those labouring to make the Dubai dream a reality, building the homes for the rich and famous, are facing greater pressures than ever.

Dubai night view

Ben Anderson investigates the working conditions for some construction workers

But despite the slump, the pressure on would-be buyers is still healthy. A Panorama reporter posing as a potential buyer and kitted out with a secret camera, met with a company endorsed by celebrities. Footballer Michael Owen is a paid ambassador along with England cricketer Freddie Flintoff and golfer Sam Torrance.

A sales representatives from The First Group said now was a great time to buy property. She also allayed any concerns about the wellbeing of the company’s construction workers.

Offering a purchase that would see a £438,000 apartment rise to £1.33m in just 10 years, the sales reps also said they believed the workers were happy to be there.

“It’s much more difficult to earn some money in Pakistan or India, so people actually save by living for free in proper housing, eating for free in the canteen, using the transport and sending something to their families,” she said.

It is the promise of a land of opportunity that has brought an estimated one million migrant workers to Dubai. Most come from areas of extreme poverty in the Indian sub-continent where they are easy prey for recruitment agents. Paying up to £2,000 to make the trip, the sum often has to be borrowed or family land sold in the belief that within 18 months the debt can be repaid.

30p overtime

Instead on arriving in Dubai they are met with shanty town conditions hidden from public view. In a country that penalises journalists reporting stories which negatively reflect the economy or insult the government with massive fines and even imprisonment, it was important to maintain a low profile.

Andrew Flintoff and Michael Owen

Ambassadors for a development: Freddie Flintoff and Michael Owen

In secret, we followed a group of workers home from work. Employed by The First Group’s sub-contractors United Engineering Construction, they were working on a development due to be finished in June ready for England striker Michael Owen to move in.

Back at the worker’s camp we were soon rumbled and asked to leave. Returning over the next few days we managed to speak to some of the men living there on condition of anonymity.

They told a grim tale. None had been paid the money they were promised by the recruitment agencies, and many said they couldn’t afford to eat properly, living on a diet of potatoes, lentils and bread. Average salaries are often no more than £120 a month. This for a six-day week, often working up to 12-hour shifts. One company paid approximately 30p an hour for overtime.

UNEC said that its minimum basic salary and overtime rate were significantly higher and that employees only worked 12 hour days in exceptional circumstances. It said its workers were fully aware of their proposed terms of employment before travelling to Dubai and that it “wholly disapproved” of workers paying recruitment agents. It said it only recruited through one agency in India, but the workers we spoke to came from elsewhere.

The First Group said its own checks had confirmed that the pay and conditions at the camp were legal.

One of Dubai’s biggest new developments is The Jumeirah Golf Estates, which will host the climax of the European Golf championship in November. The main developer is Leisurecorp, which also owns the championship golf course at Turnberry in Scotland, and has a stake in Troon.

Jumeirah Golf Estates has attracted an incredible array of celebrities who are named as ambassadors on its website, including TV chef Jamie Oliver and golfers Greg Norman, Vijay Singh and Sergio Garcia.

Camp overcrowding

Once again we followed workers back to their accommodation. This time they were employed by one of Dubai’s biggest construction firms Arabtec, to work on a part of the development that had been sold to a sub-developer, but the picture was familiar.

Living quarters for the labourers

After an hour-long journey back to their gated and guarded labour camp, the men agreed to speak to us if their identities were kept secret.

“The latrines are so filthy we cannot use them, we are so disgusted. The roads are full of garbage and waterlogged. Living and moving about here is a great problem. We suffer greatly,” one of the workers told us.

We decided to find out for ourselves.

Armed with a secret camera we sneaked into the camp to be met with the smell of raw sewage. Sewage had leaked out all over the camp, and workers had to create a network of stepping stones to cross it and get back to their accommodation blocks. One toilet block had no water supply and the latrines were filled with piles of raw faeces.

Documents obtained by us showed that a month previous to our visit, the Dubai authorities described the sewage situation at the site as critical. Arabtec had been fined 10,000 dirhams, approximately £2,000, for allowing sewage to overflow into workers’ accommodation.


The authorities also reported that the camp was overcrowded with 7,500 labourers sharing 1,248 rooms with poor ventilation.

But with the downturn in the economy, the workers feel less able to complain as the consequences are graver.

“They are telling, now that you have come, you stay and work. If we find any mistake in your work then finish – back to Bangladesh. We will no longer keep you,” one Arabtec worker told us.

Earning just £140 a month for a six day week, he hasn’t told his family at home about the reality of his situation.

“We have not told them because if we do, our wives and our children will start crying, so we have told them we are doing well.”

The Dubai Municipal government said regular inspections are carried out of migrant workers’ living conditions and fines levied for substandard housing.

Arabtec said it did not accept that there were unsanitary conditions at any of its camps’ toilets. It blamed the workers, saying, despite training, their “standards of cleanliness and hygiene are not up to your or our standards” and that the toilet block we had filmed in may have been a block that was meant to be closed.

It now says it is concerned about the situation, and despite originally blaming the problems on a nearby sewage plant, admitted sewage in the camp was a constant problem it was battling to resolve. They said the camp was a temporary one and all workers will be moved out in eight months.

It said that its wage levels were the Dubai norm and the basic working week was 48 hours and overtime was paid for any hours over that.

In a statement to Panorama, Jamie Oliver Enterprises said they were disturbed by the issues raised: “When we started work with our partner in Dubai, we were informed of their strict contractual guidelines which are in place with sub-developers to protect the rights of migrant workers and provide for good living and working conditions. While we are satisfied that the sub-contractors employed directly by our partner to work on Jamie Oliver projects meet the regulatory requirements and are fair, we have been given further assurances that the claims made by employees working on a sub-developer’s project will be investigated.”

Panorama has also been told that Jamie Oliver now wants to come up with more accurate wording to describe his business relationship with Jumeirah Golf Estates.

In the meantime, the celebrity chef’s name has been removed from the list of ambassadors on the company’s website.

Here a selection of comments:

I’ve lived in Dubai and now live in Doha and the situation is really depressing. All the workers are so low paid, the construction workers get the worst of it but cab drivers, shop and restaurant workers and service people get a bad deal too. I’ve spoken to many who were tricked into coming to the Middle East and are now trapped due to visa regulations and sponsorship laws (as well as not being able to afford a flight home). Businesses here totally take advantage, yet everything costs about the same as in the West – how does that add up?
Jill, Doha, Qatar

I totally agree, being an expat here in Dubai for the past three years, I must say I agree completely. Dubai is a brilliant place for the rich but the poor have very little to reap from it. The poverty gap in Dubai is massive, and I myself am quite disgusted in how the public treat the low pay workers. For instance, there are security guards constantly asking the labourers to leave the public beach when it is crowded by tourists. I find this totally unacceptable as a public beach should be accessible to all.

The bottom line is, I find that Dubai is so concerned about creating this “fairy-tale” image and you will find this place to be very materialistic and pretentious- don’t get me wrong, a bit of bling in a city is fun – but when it is at the expense of others it gets ugly.
Sue , Dubai, UAE

Facts and figures are worse than highlighted in the story. It’s not only Dubai, but the same story is everywhere in the country. It is good for the BBC to highlight such things, local media can not highlight these issues.
Naveen Kumar, Dubai UAE

A friend of mine recently returned from Dubai having quit her job there in disgust at the way that the poorer immigrant workers were treated. According to her, it is not only the big corporations who exploit said workforce: the expat Britpack is not without criticism, employing such workers as servants for the most meagre of pittances- wage slavery by any other name. The Brits there even have a derogatory quasi-racist nickname for these immigrants: they call them “Yik-Yaks”, and treat them with contempt and disdain.
Simon, Southampton

Having lived and worked in Dubai, everyone out there knows that Dubai is built on the modern day equivalent of slave labour. It is not a secret, is not hidden, and anyone who tells you different is lying. Whether you choose to ignore it or not is up to you, but do not pretend not to be complicit, when their poor wages subsidise your lavish lifestyle, gas guzzling car, swimming pool, school fees etc etc Hopefully now with the recession even the Brits are realising it is no longer the safe haven cash-cow that they think they are entitled to, by luck of birth.
Anon, Glasgow

I have been a frequent recent visitor to Dubai and to Sharjah. There are certainly the conditions you describe. Further, there is also the issue of the “servant class” – mainly made up of young girls where some of the stories and experiences can be shocking. Important too is the fact that similar conditions/experiences also exist in their home countries. However, I have seen examples in Sharjah of companies having a very different attitude to their workers. Accommodation camps with proper amenities, the provision of computing and internet facilities, medical care and more. There the workers (mainly South Asian) are able to keep in touch with family, get paid visits to return home and are treated in a humane way including better salaries than are available elsewhere.
Pol , London

Posted in Dhimmitude, Diskriminierung/Discrimination, Human Rights - menschenrechte, Islam, Islamization | 2 Comments »

The Jihad of the Cradle

Posted by paulipoldie on January 22, 2011

by Roland Shirk, Jihadwatch

As those who have read me here before will remember, I think that the first task for Western countries threatened by jihad and Islamic expansionism is to get immigration under control. Islam is not a problem in Europe because Islamic Billy Grahams or Francis Xaviers arrived in Paris, London, and Copenhagen, and won millions of native-born Europeans over to the faith of Muhammad by their native eloquence and its intrinsic appeal. Sure, there are converts every now and then, and they are often the most violent jihadis whom we face; the fervor of recent converts compared to cradle believers is one feature that probably crosses all religious boundaries. As Robert Spencer said in a talk I was privileged to hear, people who have spent much of their lives listening to the violent rhetoric of the Qur’an, and the urgings of imams, are often inured to it–just as Christians can become jaded at their own religion’s mysteries. But those who have experienced some kind of emptiness in their lives, who find it suddenly filled by an-all encompassing worldview, are often more likely to take its claims to heart, and act on its more extreme demands.

That much helps explain the behavior of traitors like Adam Gadahn and shoe-bomber Richard Reid, not to mention the otherwise unmarriageable British women who wed themselves to Pakistani zealots. But there is no Islamic Paul of Tarsus, traveling Europe and America attracting thousands of converts to the flock. The most common source of Muslim converts in America, from what I have seen, is prison evangelism–a dangerous phenomenon in itself, but statistically insignificant. No, the problem with Islam is immigration, and much of the problem with immigration is Islam. Past politicians in Western Europe, motivated by post-colonial guilt, the lure of cheap labor, and a post-Marxist hatred for organically functioning societies, imported millions of highly fertile Muslims in the 1960s and 70s, and the floodgates are still mostly open. Combine this fact with low Western fertility, massive Saudi funding for extremist (that is, orthodox) catechesis on Islam and jihad, and one has paved the way for the success of the conquest strategy warned of by Sam Solomon & Elias Al Maqdisi in Modern Day Trojan Horse: The Islamic Doctrine of Immigration. In case you missed my previous column on this important new book (which I’m reading now and will review at length later this month), its thesis is this: Islam expands primarily by emigration, and only secondarily by conquest. The hijra itself, the authors point out, was an act of emigration, and the duty to emigrate and spread Islam is fundamental to that faith:

I charge you with five of what Allah has charged me with: to assemble, to listen, to obey, to immigrate and to wage Jihad for the sake of Allah. …So Hijra or migration is binding on all Muslims for numerous reasons; the most important being that migration is preparatory to jihad with an aim and objective of securing victory for Islam and Muslims either in another country or generally as a community.

Seeing how helpless the West has left itself to this concrete, clearly defined strategy on the part of Islamic leaders to encourage their flocks to flood the West–not that most Muslim migrants have this conscious intention, but that is irrelevant–I am flabbergasted at how little attention anti-jihadists pay to blocking this mass colonization. Just as the English and French fought for control of North America by trying to encourage emigration of their nationals to their colonies, so Islamic leaders today extend their influence in wealthy, prosperous countries (two of which, Britain and France, have nuclear arsenals) by sending forth strong backs and fertile wombs, to enact the “revenge of the cradle.” Compared to Islamic immigration, terrorism itself is an ugly distraction. The real jihad is the stealth jihad, and it happens in bedrooms and nurseries. If we don’t want to end up like the Cherokees or the Hurons, we’d better do something about it.

I’m reminded of an old Ronald Reagan campaign quote: “There’s already an arms race on, but only one side is running.” We have seen the massive success of this Islamic strategy, but we’re hardly pushing back. It is time we started. But we have to fight smart.

It’s just a fact that we will not be able, in any Western country I can think of, to muster the candor to selectively exclude Muslims from entering our countries. Given that this is true, it’s the duty of every civilizational patriot to get involved in reducing the total numbers of migrants into our countries–large percentages of whom are going to be Muslims. Even if on every other ground one favored open borders, huge population growth, cheap labor, and multiculturalist diversity, one would have to in the current situation put those considerations aside and join the immigration restrictionist movement. There is already strong and broad-based support from a majority of Americans to reduce legal immigration totals and crack down on illegal entrants. We need not climb the precipitous learning curve it often takes well-meaning people to see that Islam is inherently intolerant; opponents of jihad can piggyback on the strong, aggressive lobbying efforts of existing groups that oppose mass immigration for a wide variety of non-racial reasons. The best group I know of is NumbersUsa, which emphasizes the economic and environmental costs of mass migration, gathering support from all across the political spectrum. That group has a highly effective system that alerts the general public about upcoming votes in Congress on immigration issues, and an automated system for flooding congressional offices with faxes and phone calls opposing bad legislation. Please, if you care about this issue, visit their website, and register so you can be alerted and take action. Read the reports of the Center for Immigration Studies, an academically reputable thinktank based in D.C. that produces airtight policy papers urging lower migration totals, and a shift away from policies (like the degrading and suicidal visa lottery) that privilege poor countries with large extended families (i.e., most Muslim countries) over Western Europe and Japan. In your own mind, remember that the cause of stopping Islam can only be achieved by stopping Muslims. We aren’t threatened by Islam’s crude and repulsive doctrines; ideas can’t kill us, or vote in sharia laws. Only people can. So the people are the problem. No one wants to harm Muslims, sterilize them, or deport those who are legally present in our societies. But we have the perfect right to say to future migrants: “Enough!”

The more committed you are to fighting jihad, the more you should put energy into passing laws that keep out jihadists. It might take 10,000 peaceful Muslims living in a given city to produce a single terrorist. But we have imported, and are still importing, those tens of thousands. Their imams are radicalizing them, and our engines of cultural assimilation broke down 30 years ago. There is no other way to keep our societies safe, and give the West the breathing room it needs to raise its birth rate again to a sustainable level of self-replacement. Our civilization, which brought the world individual liberty, the extraordinarily open societies we all enjoy, and the broad tolerance that Ibn Warraq lovingly details in Defending the West, deserves at least this chance to revive itself. It doesn’t deserve to be drowned by inhuman ideas carried in by a human wave.

Posted in Islam, Islamization | 2 Comments »

Europe’s Muslim Lobby

Posted by paulipoldie on January 22, 2011

Hudson New York

by Soeren Kern
January 20, 2011

Europeans often fantasize about America’s so-called Jewish lobby, which they claim has a chokehold over American finance, media and politics and is responsible for all manner of conspiratorial evil. But few Europeans like to talk about the growing influence of Europe’s Muslim lobby, a conglomeration of hundreds of Muslim political and religious organizations — many of which are media-savvy mouthpieces for militant Islam that openly pursue anti-European, anti-Western and anti-Semitic agendas and often receive financial support from Islamic fundamentalist countries like Saudi Arabia.

In a Europe where Islam is the fastest-growing religion, and where the number of Muslims has tripled over the past 30 years, Europe’s Muslim lobby is becoming increasingly assertive and skilled at pressuring European policy-makers into implementing countless pro-Islamic policies, especially ones that institutionalize Islamic Sharia law. Muslim lobby groups are, in fact, transforming European society in ways unimaginable only a few years ago; critics say their ultimate goal is nothing less than the Islamification of Europe.

Some of the most effective Muslim lobby groups are located in Britain, home to one of the largest Muslim communities in Europe, and include organizations such as the Muslim Council of Britain [MCB], Britain’s largest Muslim umbrella body with around 500 affiliated national, regional and local organizations, mosques, charities and schools. It recently pressured the British government into adopting Islamic law and giving Sharia courts full powers to rule on Muslim civil cases.

The British government has quietly sanctioned the powers for Sharia judges to rule on cases ranging from divorce and financial disputes to those involving domestic violence. Whereas previously, the rulings of Sharia courts in Britain could not be enforced, and depended on voluntary compliance among Muslims, rulings issued by a network of five Sharia courts are now enforceable with the full power of the judicial system, through the county courts or High Court. Sharia courts with these powers have been set up in Birmingham, Bradford, London and Manchester and the network’s headquarters are located in Nuneaton, Warwickshire; and two more courts are being planned for Edinburgh and Glasgow.

Overall, at least 85 Islamic Sharia courts are now operating in Britain, almost 20 times as many as previously believed. A study by the Civitas think tank found that scores of unofficial tribunals and councils regularly apply Islamic law to resolve domestic, marital and business disputes, many operating in mosques. The study warns of a “creeping” acceptance of Sharia principles in British law.)

Although the MCB, which represents half of the country’s 3 million Muslims, presents itself as the moderate face of Islam in Britain, the group has its origins in the extreme orthodox politics of Pakistan. The MCB and some of its affiliates sympathize with, and have links to, conservative Islamist movements in the Muslim world, particularly the Muslim Brotherhood and Pakistan’s Jamaat-e-Islami, a radical party committed to the establishment of an Islamic state in Pakistan ruled by Sharia law.

Far from promoting moderate Islam, the MCB’s real objective, critics say, is to help Muslims in Britain become more radical in their beliefs.

Among other positions, the MCB believes death is the appropriate penalty for apostasy and homosexuality. The group recently endorsed a pro-Hamas declaration that calls for Jihad against Jews and Israel, and condones attacks on British troops. The MCB also regularly makes headlines for boycotting Holocaust Memorial Day ceremonies in Britain; it is also campaigning for the establishment of an alternative Genocide Memorial Day that will “incorporate similar tragedies.”

Another Muslim group, the Muslim Public Affairs Committee of the United Kingdom (MPACUK), has the outspoken aim of mobilizing Muslim voters to affect the outcome of British elections. During the general elections in 2010, MPACUK was pivotal in de-seating six members of parliament (MPs) who were perceived as being not sufficiently pro-Muslim.

During the 2005 general elections, MPACUK launched a smear campaign against Labour Party MP Lorna Fitzsimons. MPACUK distributed a leaflet claiming that Fitzsimons had done nothing to help the Palestinians because she was Jewish. Another leaflet said: “Lorna Fitzsimons is an ardent Zionist and a member of the most powerful anti-Muslim lobby in the world, the Israel lobby.”

Fitzsimons is not in fact Jewish, and MPACUK later withdrew the leaflet. But MPACUK did succeed in unseating Fitzsimons; ever since then, many British MPs have been bending over backwards to appease Muslim voters.

MPACUK recently worked with Britain’s Channel 4 television to produce a documentary titled “Operation Muslim Vote.” With the aim of pressing for a larger participation of Muslims in British politics, the documentary tells the story of two MPACUK activists who head to northern England to take on the safe seats of several “pro-Zionist war mongering MPs.”

MPACUK’s website says its work is defined by the core principle of anti-Zionism: “MPACUK opposes the racist political ideology of Zionism and aims to counter the influence of the Zionist lobby. Openly available evidence demonstrates a Zionist agenda to dominate the Middle East and push a ‘clash of civilisations’ between Islam and ‘The West’. We therefore believe that anti-Zionism is a strategic priority to counter the greatest and most urgent threat facing the Ummah [the Muslim Diaspora].”

Its website also says Muslims in Britain should be pro-actively engaged in mainstream media and politics as the most effective way to “reviving the fard (obligation) of Jihad.”

Muslim lobby groups have also pressed the British government to enact the Racial and Religious Hatred Act, which creates a new crime: intentionally stirring up religious hatred against people on religious grounds. Predictably, the new law has established new limits on free speech in a country where the politically correct elite routinely seek to silence public discussion about the escalating problem of Muslim immigration.

The growing power of Europe’s Muslim lobby was most recently demonstrated by the European Union’s decision in mid-December to quietly abandon a new measure that would have required halal (religiously approved for Muslims) meat products to carry a label to help non-Muslim consumers identify their origins. With the exponential growth of Europe’s Muslim population, thousands of tons of religiously slaughtered halal meat is now entering the general food chain, where it is being unwittingly consumed by the non-Muslim population.

By bowing to Muslim pressure groups — such as the World Halal Forum Europe and the Halal Monitoring Committee — and dropping the halal labelling requirement, the EU is effectively establishing Sharia law as normative for Europe’s meat industry. The halal controversy, in which Muslim lobby groups are seeking to impose the requirements of Islam, not just on their own people, but also on the rest of society, illustrates how the rise of Islam is influencing the daily lives of hundreds of millions of non-Muslim Europeans.

In France, which has the second-largest Muslim population on the continent after Germany, several Muslim lobby groups are vying to represent the country’s estimated 4.1 million Muslims. The French Council of the Muslim Faith (CFCM) serves as the official interlocutor with the French state in the regulation of Muslim religious activities, and as such it is the de facto representative of all French Muslims before the national government. The other main Muslim lobby groups are the Rally for French Muslims (RMF),backed by Morocco, and the Union of French Islamic Organisations (UOIF), close to the Muslim Brotherhood.

In Germany, home to Europe’s largest Muslim population in absolute terms, the powerful Turkish-Islamic Union for Religious Affairs (DITIB), itself a branch of the Turkish government’s religious affairs authority, has succeeded in persuading the city of Cologne to approve the construction of a new mega mosque. The futuristic mosque will hold up to 4,000 worshippers, and will have a large dome and two 55-meter (180 feet) minarets, each as tall as 18-story office towers. The 4,500-square-meter (48,000-square-foot) mosque, which has a price tag of €20 million ($26 million), is being financed by donations from more than 800 Muslim groups inside and outside Germany. Critics of the project say the mosque is a deliberate effort to spoil Cologne’s skyline by taking attention away from the city’s Gothic cathedral, a globally famous Christian landmark.

In recent months, Muslim lobby groups have also persuaded the German government to adapt Germany’s secular education system so that it caters to Islamic preferences. The German Education Ministry has, for example, agreed to fund Islamic studies at several state universities to train Muslim prayer leaders and religion teachers. Germany’s Education Minister, Annette Schavan, says: “We want as many imams as possible to be educated in Germany. Imams are bridge builders between their congregations and the communities in which their mosques stand.” She states further that Germany would need 2,000 imams and teachers if all 16 states offered Islam courses.

Elsewhere in Germany, in the state of Rhineland-Palatinate, Muslim lobby groups are working with the Culture Ministry to design Islam-friendly classes for public schools. The new guidelines recommend cancelling all school trips during the month of Ramadan; taking into account the sensitivities of Muslims when planning internships and school events; and assigning less schoolwork during Ramadan because fasting could lead to loss of performance and concentration among Muslim students.

In the German state of Lower Saxony, the German Muslim Central Council is urging the Education Ministry to include Islam in its schools’ core curriculum as part of a politically correct initiative to counter growing anti-Islam sentiments in the country. In Berlin, the Ministry for Education, Science and Research recently published a guide called “Islam and School,” which gives teachers practical advice on how to avoid offending Muslim students.

In Scandinavia, the Muslim Council of Sweden, an umbrella organization of Islamic groups in the country, is pressuring the Swedish government to implement special legislation for Muslims in Sweden. The demands include: the right to specific Islamic holidays; special public financing for the building of mosques; a demand that all divorces between Muslim couples be approved by an Imam; and that Imams should be allowed to teach Islam in public schools.

As Europe’s Muslim population grows, Muslim lobby groups are also exerting significant influence on European policy in the Middle East, resulting in a notable hardening of official European attitudes toward Israel. Several European countries, for instance, eager to maintain good relations with local Muslim communities, are laying the political groundwork for the EU to recognize a Palestinian state, possibly as early as October 2011,even if negotiations for a permanent settlement between Israel and the Palestinian Authority are not concluded — a total abrogation of the UN’s signed Oslo accords.

In December 2009, the EU adopted a resolution that for the first time explicitly calls for Jerusalem to become the future capital of a Palestinian state. The move not only reflects the EU’s efforts to prejudge the outcome of issues reserved for permanent status negotiations, but in December 2010, an influential group of former EU leaders and officials published a letter urging the EU to implement sanctions against Israel.

Europe has also been “ground zero” for a series of anti-Israel lawsuits which exploit the legal principle of universal jurisdiction in order to harass current and former Israeli political and military leaders, with the twin aims of tying Israel’s hands against Palestinian terror and delegitimizing the Jewish state. Such “lawfare” is often aided and abetted by Muslim lobby groups in Europe by means of financial and logistical support.

The steady demonization of Israel by European officialdom is also affecting the European street, where the line between valid criticism of Israel and anti-Semitism is becoming dangerously blurred. A survey conducted by the University of Bielefeld, for example, shows that more than 50% of Germans equate Israel’s policies toward the Palestinians with Nazi treatment of the Jews, and that 68% of Germans say that Israel is waging a “war of extermination” against the Palestinian people. In terms of Europe as a whole, an official EU poll shows that the majority of Europeans regard Israel as the greatest threat to world peace.

Another report commissioned by the EU’s Monitoring Center on Racism and Xenophobia (now called the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights) found that Muslim immigrants are largely responsible for the sharp increase in anti-Semitic violence in Europe.

Predictably, Muslim lobby groups pressured the EU into preventing that report from being released to the general public.

Posted in E.U., Eurabia, Islam, Islamization | Leave a Comment »

The Party of Knowledge and the Party of Ignorance

Posted by paulipoldie on January 15, 2011

The Party of Knowledge and the Party of Ignorance

January 14, 2011

There is a false dichotomy about Islam. Some think that only conservatives are critical about Islam and the liberal/progressives/Democrats/leftists are supportive of Islam. But there are very conservative Christians who admire Islam and stand up for it. There are left-of-center types who abhor Islam because of its doctrine and treatment of women. There are people from both camps who support and condemn Islam.

Islam has little to do with left/right and liberal/conservative split. Islam is another axis and does not share the normal political divisions. Now it is true that the Democrats are the current benefit of Islamic support, but during Bush’s first election, Muslims in Florida claimed it was their support that tipped the election to Bush. Muslims have voted for both parties.

Although there are more conservatives who are critical of Islam than liberals, the correlation is not so strong as to be useful. There is another political axis that predicts whether someone supports or criticizes Political Islam. That axis is knowledge, knowledge about the doctrine and history of Political Islam.

Whether a Kafir (non-Muslim) supports or criticizes Islam is not classical left/right politics, but knowledge. There are two separate Kafir parties—the Party of Knowledge and the Party of Ignorance.

The Party of Knowledge has learned about the political doctrine and political history of Islam and knows about words such as jihad, Sunna, dhimmi and Kafir. Members of the Party of Knowledge know that the Koran is a dualistic document and contains “good” and “bad” verses that are both true. The Party of Knowledge also knows that the biggest key to understanding Islam is knowing Mohammed, not the Allah of the Koran.

The Party of Ignorance draws its arguments from what Muslims say about Islam. They use the voice of Muslims to repeat apologies for Islam. The Party of Ignorance is always attacking the members of the Party of Knowledge with insults, put downs, mocking tones and allusions to the Party of Knowledge being bigots and hate-speechers. In short, the Party of Ignorance repeats what Muslims say and uses personal attacks against the members of the Party of Knowledge. Knowledge is evil; ignorance is good.

The true foundation of the Party of Ignorance is that they absolutely refuse to read any of the biography of Mohammed, the Sira, nor his traditions, the Hadith. The Party of Ignorance holds the Koran in high esteem, but no one in the Party of Ignorance has any understanding of it. Since it is impenetrable it must be profound. Since it is not understood, it can mean anything you want to project onto it.

What are we to call the members of these two parties? Derivative names such as Knowers and Know-nothings suggest themselves, but there is already a classical set of names taken from Islamic doctrine. Members of the Party of Knowledge are Kafirs and members of the Party of Ignorance are dhimmis. Naturally the Kafirs know who they are and the dhimmis have not clue as to what their name means. Poetic justice?

A dhimmi is a creature created by Mohammed when he subjugated the Jews of Khaybar. Dhimmis can live under Sharia law, because they have agreed to never publicly oppose Islam and practice their beliefs in private. Today, the name dhimmi refers to an uncritical apologist of Islam.

How does this play out in real life? Here is the language of the Kafirs: Koran, Sira, Hadith, and Sharia. Their language uses terms like Sunna and abrogation. Kafirs use details about the history of jihad and the dhimmi.

Dhimmis quote a Muslim or an apologist professor. But the favorite dhimmi talk is about how Kafirs are stupid and evil. Dhimmis always move away from the subject of Islam as soon as possible and start deprecating/trashing Christians and Western culture. Dhimmis tend to never use technical words such as jihad, but use words such as terrorist. Just as soon a terrorist is mentioned, then comes the example of that Christian terrorist, Timothy McVey. Of course, he was a self-avowed atheist, but that matters little to a dhimmi. The only Islamic history the dhimmi knows is a censored version of the Crusades and the fabricated Golden Age of Islam.

Analytic thought brings up the question of a Muslim being in the Party of Knowledge. There are two types of people in the Party of Knowledge—Kafir and Muslim. How do we distinguish them from each other? Simple, how does a Muslim and a Kafir react to Kafir suffering? One fine day, Mohammed sat beside his 12 year old wife and watched as jihadist beheaded 800 male Jews. For a Muslim, this was as day of joy and triumph. The Kafir sees the deaths of 800 Kafir Jews as a war crime and an act of evil.

There are two types of people in the Party of Knowledge, but only one kind of person in the Party of Ignorance. If you are confused, then you are a member of the Party of Ignorance.

Bill Warner, Director, Center for the Study of Political Islam
Permalink http://www.politicalislam.com/blog/the-party-of-knowledge-and-the-party-of-ignorance/
copyright (c) CBSX, LLC, politicalislam.com

Posted in Islam, Islam - What can we do? Was können wir tun?, Must Read, Sharia | Leave a Comment »

Christlich-wertkonservative Islamkritik?

Posted by paulipoldie on January 10, 2011

Von Hendrick Busman, Weihnachten 2010.

Islamkritiker empören sich berechtigt über gelegentlich vermutbaren kulturellen Rabatt im Bereich von Rechtssprechung und Strafmaß, das muss entsprechend auch für religiösen Rabatt gelten, denn die Hütchenspieler der Scharialobby berufen sich abwechselnd auf Kultur und Frömmigkeit, wie es gerade besser passt. Das wiederum verdeutlicht, dass der säkulare Staat den Stadtbürger und Staatsbürger überhaupt nicht religiös zu klassifizieren hat, denn hier gilt die Straßenverkehrsordnung und nicht das Alte oder Neue Testament. Der Kölner und Islam-Missionar Pierre Vogel bleibt bei Rot an der Ampel ebenso stehen wie seine iranischstämmige Mitbürgerin und Ex-Muslima, die den Islam genau so gut kennt wie er.

Was wir zu verteidigen haben, ist die Rechtseinheitlichkeit. Unser geplantes Positionspapier sollte daher vor der Rechtsspaltung warnen, die Mustafa Cerić, der den Islam richtig, nämlich als diskriminierend und die Seele rettend, verstanden hat, bekanntermaßen über das Familien- und Personenstandsrecht einzuführen gedenkt: the Muslim law to be recognized in matters of personal status such as the Family Law.

Wenn wir plausibel argumentieren wollen, können wir zudem weiterhin die Standards der Alice Schwarzer verwenden, die gleichheitsfeministischen Standards also, schließlich will der Islam die theologische und juristische Herabsetzung der Frau. Den Islam lediglich als faschistoid oder faschistisch zu bezeichnen, islamkritische Atheisten würden diese Strategie vermutlich bevorzugen, wird nicht erfolgreich sein, denn der Islam sieht sich, ob uns das passt oder nicht, als Religion und er ist, ob völkerkundlich oder psychologisch gesehen, funktional natürlich Religion. Mit „Religion“ (christlicher, jüdischer) aber lässt sich eine Religion nicht abwehren, jedenfalls nicht bei beibehaltenem Grundgesetz (GG).

Die meisten von uns sind mehr oder weniger tiefgründig christlich sozialisiert worden. Andererseits tritt, wo auch immer in Europa wir hinsehen, organisierte christlich-konservative Islamkritik weder als christlicher Verein noch als Gemeinschaft von Christen auf (und ist damit konfessionell ungebunden, nicht überkonfessionell). Konservative Netzwerke von islamkritischen Aktivisten bestehen üblicherweise aus Christen, Juden, Pantheisten, bekennenden Neuplatonikern und bekennenden Atheisten und bestehen vor allem aus uns allen, uns freiheitlichen Demokraten, die keine Bevormundung durch den derzeitigen, bekanntermaßen islamverliebten christlichen Klerus wünschen, die aber sicherlich überhaupt keinen Klerus wünschen, der AEMR und GG für alle oder für die Menschen ihrer Glaubensnation (Milla, türk. millet) außer Kraft setzt. Wir verteidigen also nicht das (womöglich zur Spätgotik, um 1350 n. Chr., untergegangene) famose Abendland, sondern das auf Rationalität, nicht auf Seelenrettung, begründete einheitliche Recht. Unsere Gesetze und Verordnungen regeln das irdische Zusammenleben, nicht den dauerhaften Verbleib in Paradiesgarten oder Höllenfeuer.

Was Europa droht, ist eine Neuauflage der erwiesenermaßen zur Staatszerschlagung hoch wirksamen Zwei-Nationen-Theorie (,uslimisches Pakistan bzw. Bangladesch versus hinduistisches Indien). Jedes schwammige „europäische Werte“ (bitte, welche? Fleiß, Ordnung, Pünktlichkeit – hat der fraglos nichteuropäische Chinese diese Werte denn nicht?) ist zweckmäßigerweise durch das Zitat zu ersetzen, mit dem am 08.09.1948 Carlo Schmid für die wehrhafte Demokratie eintrat:

„Soll diese Gleichheit und Freiheit völlig uneingeschränkt und absolut sein, soll sie auch denen eingeräumt werden, deren Streben ausschließlich darauf geht, nach der Ergreifung der Macht die Freiheit selbst auszurotten? Also: Soll man sich auch künftig so verhalten, wie man sich zur Zeit der Weimarer Republik z. B. den Nationalsozialisten gegenüber verhalten hat? Ich für meinen Teil bin der Meinung, dass es nicht zum Begriff der Demokratie gehört, dass sie selber die Voraussetzungen für ihre Beseitigung schafft: Demokratie ist nur dort mehr als ein Produkt einer bloßen Zweckmäßigkeitsentscheidung, wo man den Mut hat, an sie als etwas für die Würde des Menschen Notwendiges zu glauben. Wenn man aber diesen Mut hat, dann muss man auch den Mut zur Intoleranz denen gegenüber aufbringen, die die Demokratie gebrauchen wollen, um sie umzubringen.“

Mich freut immer, wenn sich wertkonservative oder christliche (oder gar heutige sozialdemokratische) Kreise zu diesem Zitat bekennen.

Ob ein Bekenntnistext christlich oder konservativ argumentierender Islamkritiker nun drei, zwei oder eine Seite umfasst oder auch nur eine halbe Seite, es muss dort im ersten Absatz das unmissverständliche Bekenntnis zur Allgemeinen Erklärung der Menschenrechte (vom 10.12.1948) ebenso in Erscheinung treten wie das klare Credo zum Grundgesetz für die Bundesrepublik Deutschland (GG, 23.05.1949). Mit dem tief empfundenen (frommen) oder aber politisierten (missbrauchten) Wörtchen christlich ist wenig bis gar nichts gesagt, denn dass der Genfer Herr Calvin beliebte, den spanischstämmigen Trinitätsleugner und Arzt Michael Servetus auf nassem Laub zu Ehren Gottes zu verbrennen, ist schließlich völlig evangelisch.

Das bedeutet: Ohne die Nennung von AEMR 1948 und GG 1949 können christlich-wertkonservative Islamkritiker kein Thesenpapier und schon gar kein Positionspapier aus der Hand geben, denn jeder halbwegs kluge Reporter oder Journalist wird innerhalb von einer Millisekunde sagen: „Ihr nennt kein Grundgesetz – ihr wollt also das Grundgesetz überwinden“ und wird, er muss dazu gar nicht linksradikal sein, in der Presse schreiben: „Euer Verein hat also mit der AEMR keinen Vertrag, sondern will das abendländisch bzw. völkisch definierte Mehrklassenrecht – ihr seid bekennende Sezessionisten und arbeitet auf einen Staatsstreich hin – euer Gefasel vom europäischen Werteverbund ist also lediglich Synonym für arische Rasse.“ Daher noch einmal, und ganz deutlich: Jedes Positionspapier christlich-wertkonservativer Islamkritiker muss sich in den ersten drei oder vier Sätzen unmissverständlich zu AEMR 1948 und GG 1949 bekennen.

Ein bewusstes Anknüpfen an die Tradition selbstbewusster Bürgerlichkeit läge in einer Bezugnahme auf das Hambacher Fest vom 27. bis 30. Mai 1832, dem Urmodell des Bürgerprotests gegen Pressezensur, ein anderer Weg des die Demokratie bewahrenden Argumentierens ist das Bekenntnis zum wissenschaftlichen Denken. Wissenschaftliche Erkenntnisse und die Naturgesetze gelten schließlich überall auf der Welt, universell, in Köln, Minsk, Mekka oder Pjöngjang.

Uns sollte stören, dass gewisse Teile der europäischen islamkritischen Szene im relativ stark missbräuchlichen Namen des Europäischen, des Abendländischen oder gar des Christlichen so etwas wie eine Neuauflage der hindu-nationalistischen Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) anzustreben scheinen, während andere das Werk der Islamisten kongenial dadurch mit betreiben, dass sie irgendwelche Kulturkreistheoretiker propagieren, die den so genannten Morgenländern kalkuliert verunmöglichen, jemals Teil des Deutschen Volkes oder des Europäertums zu sein. Unser Patriotismus hat nicht rassisch begründet zu sein, sondern verfassungsrechtlich. Gleichberechtigter Staatsangehöriger ist daher nicht der „Christ“ oder der „Europäer“, sondern der Bürger. Bürgersinn und Verfassungspatriotismus haben unser Credo zu sein, nicht Bibel oder blonde Haare.

Im Übrigen ist Religion erst dann frei und reif und human (und christlich), wenn sie nicht den ökonomischen, rechtlichen oder gesundheitlichen Status des Gläubigen als vom Ungläubigen verschieden definiert. In einer freiheitlichen Demokratie kann jeder von uns ein paar Jahre lang Atheist sein oder mit dem Dalai Lama meditieren, ohne sein Wahlrecht oder sein Recht auf Leben zu verlieren. Umgekehrt entbindet begeisterte Koranlektüre nicht von der Einhaltung der Schulpflicht oder des Baurechts. „Ein Recht für alle!“, wie es einer unserer Mitstreiter unlängst sinnvollerweise betont hat.

Zusammengefasst: 1. Das Islamische Gesetz ist kein rein diesseitiger Faschismus, sondern (schlechte, mag sein) barbarische, revolutionär-gegenmoderne Religion: Die Scharia ist Religion. 2. Nein zur Rechtsspaltung! Das Bestehen auf der Unteilbarkeit der Menschenrechte und (damit) auf der Gleichberechtigung von Mann und Frau allein kann uns zum Erfolg führen. 3. Zivilisation im Plural anzunehmen (The Alliance of Civilizations (AoC); The United Nations Alliance of Civilizations (UNAOC)) oder in der Manier von irgendwelchen braunen oder bibelbewegten Esoterikern den abendländischen Kulturkreis oder das christliche Europa (bzw. das christliche Amerika) zu verteidigen, wird geeignet sein, im Sinne der südasiatischen Two-Nation Theory die bürgerliche Kultur erfolgreich zu beenden und dürfte rasch entweder das Kalifat an die Macht bringen oder den rassisch reinen Führerstaat.

Israel liefert uns hochwertige, empfehlenswerte Produkte und ist für Touristen immer eine Reise wert. Indien und Israel, Griechenland und Großbritannien aber sind auf dem sprichwörtlichen Holzweg, solange sie die Scharia im Familienrecht nicht außer Kraft setzen.

Menschenrecht gibt es weltweit und nur im Singular – entweder Allahs Menschenrecht oder das von 1948! Auch die menschliche Zivilisation ist unteilbar und auf Individualität, Solidarität und Unveräußerlichkeit begründet, der Scharia-Islam hingegen ist vorzivilisatorisch (magisch) und gegenzivilisatorisch (antisozial), okkult und stammeskulturell.

Die Scharia ist nicht „anders“, sondern undemokratisch, brutal und territorial expansiv. Die Scharia muss nicht deshalb weg, weil sie „morgenländisch“ (orientalisch) ist, sondern weil sie auf Ungleichbehandlung (und vermeintlicher Seelenrettung) beruht. Nur eine sehr säkulare Gesellschaft kann eine freiheitlich demokratische Gesellschaft sein.

Weltzivilisation, „zivilisierte Welt“ gibt es nur einmal, und irgendwann und möglichst rasch müssen das Recht auf Leben und die Pressefreiheit auch in Teheran gelten.

Dass die kulturelle Moderne, unter schariabefördernden Kulturkreistheoretikern fälschlich genannt der Westen, keine Hände und Köpfe abhackenden Gottesdienste feiert und keinen Gott zu integrieren braucht, der mit fliegenden Steinen tötet, mag uns zu Weihnachten besonders klar werden.

Und zu unserem demokratischen Glück kennt oder benötigt die Ethik des Jesus von Nazareth weder Arier noch Abendländer und klassifiziert den Menschen eben nicht juristisch folgenreich in schwarz- und weißhäutig, orientalisch und okzidental. Und so lässt sich gleichsetzen:

One Law For All = Frohe Weihnachten,

Hendrick Busman

Posted in Islam, Islamisierung, Islamkritik | Leave a Comment »

If we don’t defeat Islam as an ideology it will exterminate us culturally and physically

Posted by paulipoldie on January 3, 2011

Found here

If we don’t defeat Islam as an ideology it will exterminate us culturally and physically

Islam is an utterly ruthless totalitarian political system disguised as a religion. Islam will literally stop at nothing to achieve its objective of world domination, with all non-Muslims exterminated or enslaved. Muslims who deny this are lying (Muslims are encouraged to tell lies to further the expansion of Islam). Terrorism is an intrinsic and inseparable part of Islam.

Consequently, the ideology of Islam MUST be defeated. It must be consigned to the dustbin of history along with those other vicious totalitarianisms – Nazism and Communism. The alternative is our extermination as a civilisation, and the whole world being plunged into an endless theocratic Dark Age.

There can be no violent solution
In an age of nuclear weapons, the option of exterminating Islam the way we exterminated Nazism – by world war – is unthinkable. Apart from anything else, there is no guarantee that the West could win an all-out World War III against Islam. Our infrastructure, government and military have been too far infiltrated by jihadists. There would be thousands of Fort Hood style massacres of our troops if a war broke out between Dar al-Harb and Dar al-Islam, not to mention massive sabotage of military and civilian infrastructure and violent intifadas in Muslim-dominated cities throughout the West.

This is not to say that the Muslims would win a World War either. The victors of WWIII would be well-organised authoritarian states with small Muslim populations who would be prepared to be ruthless in keeping their Muslims in order. China springs to mind.

A new cold war
The only option for defeating Islam is to undermine it in the same way we undermined communism – by a slow process of ideological warfare.

Altering the spiritual and material cost/benefits of being a Muslim
Like other religions, Islam promises spiritual benefits from being a member of the cult – namely avoidance of hell and entry into paradise, which in Islam’s case is a well-appointed brothel in the sky. But unlike other religions, Islam also offers material benefits in the here and now, for example immunity to normal laws, superior status to all non-Muslims (dhimmis) and sanctified rape and pillage where the victims are non-Muslims.

Adherence to any belief system usually has two components – faith and conformity. In Islam, as with communism, the forces of conformity are very strong and are imposed with murderous ruthlessness. Nevertheless, once the faith has gone, the habits of conformity will become an empty shell, which will eventually implode.

So we need to attack Islam on both fronts, by demonstrating that the spiritual benefits of the ‘faith’ are bogus – Islam is confidence trick set up by a ruthless megalomaniac, we also need to decrease the benefits of conformity by increasing the costs and reducing benefits of being a Muslim in the material world here and now.

Destroying and replacing Muslim beliefs
Islam may appear hard, but it is also brittle. A small crack anywhere in the structure can spread throughout. Islam claims that the Koran is the literal word of God, which was dictated to, but not written by, Mohammed.

So it’s an all-or-nothing cult. Any fault in the Koran, or doubts as to the truthfulness of Mohammed, can cause the whole system to disintegrate. Muslims already subconsciously realise this, because they fly into tantrums whenever either Mohammed or the Koran is ‘disrespected’ . Under Sharia law any criticism or either Mohammed or the Koran is blasphemy which is punished by death.

This paranoid, hypersensitive defensiveness and outrage at criticism are not the reactions of a confident belief system, but of an information-control cult. These reactions are evidence of an attempt to protect a fatal vulnerability, an attempt to cover an Achilles heel.

The location of that Achilles heel was amply demonstrated by the Satanic Verses affair, the Motoons rage, and by the OIC’s insidious attempts to introduce global laws against ‘blasphemy’ of Mohammed. The Muslims themselves have shown us their most vulnerable spot, which is the questionable (though unquestioned) character of the ‘Prophet’ himself. We need to satirise and ridicule baby-bonking Mo until the Muslims fly into uncontrollable tantrums, then ridicule them even more for their tantrums, and repeat the process until they froth at the mouth and steam comes out of their ears.

Jesus, Buddha and Mohammed.
Unlike the two other religions that have a single founder, Islam is uniquely and solely dependent upon the truthfulness of that founder.

Christianity is based on a long tradition of Jewish religion ( Christians would say it is the culmination of that tradition ), and the Bible was written by numerous authors . Jesus himself did not produce the Christian scriptures. His teachings were independently recorded by his disciples.

Buddhism has philosophical and yogic foundations which are claimed to be independently reproducible by anyone who follows the Buddha’s reasoning and instructions ( ‘Four seals of Dharma’ ). “Anyone who accepts these four seals, even independently of Buddha’s teachings, even never having heard the name Shakyamuni Buddha, can be considered to be on the same path as he.

In contrast everything in Islam originates from the uncorroborated testimony of one pedophile, and pedophiles are notorious liars and conmen. Despite the Muslims trying to pull the ‘Abrahamic Religions’ taqiyya tactic, Islam is not a continuation of Judeo-Christian religion, it is a garbled plagiarism of Jewish and Christian scriptures which is in many respects a contradiction and corruption of the originals.

If you destroy the credibility of Mohammed, you destroy Islam.
The primary target of the propaganda counterjihad must be Mohammed. If Mohammed is revealed as an imposter, a fraud and a conman then the Koran and Hadiths are worthless raving and ramblings, mere sound and fury signifying nothing. Muslims revere Mohammed because very few know the truth about him. . The effectiveness of the direct attack on Mohammed has been demonstrated by father Zakaria Botros, a Christian Priest who broadcasts the truth about Mohammed, based on the Muslims’ own scriptures:

“It’s not enough that al-Qaeda has called Fr Zakaria Botros “one of the most wanted infidels in the world,” issuing a 60 million dollar bounty on his head, or that popular Arabic magazines call him “Islam’s public enemy #1”; now, as expected, CAIR is getting in on the action, calling for a “national alert” — as in umma alert, eerily reminiscent of a fatwa — against him. Apparently his last few shows dealing with Muhammad’s questionable sexual habits, including necrophilia – are irking CAIR.

Why do radical Muslims, such as CAIR, hate — and fear — Zakaria Botros so? The problem Muslims have with Fr Botros is that they simply cannot refute him: everything he says — no matter how scandalizing to Islam — is always based on, often revered, Islamic sources. Moreover, Fr Botros rarely makes any claims about Islam: he only exposes; he only raises questions and then invites Islam’s ulema to respond and “clarify” the matter. However, as this story indicates, their response is only to have him censored — or, for the more radical, killed.” http://www.jihadwatch.org/2009/01/father-zakaria-botros-on-cairs-radar.html

Providing an alternative to Islam
The Muslims who have abandoned Islam will need somewhere else to go. Some will abandon religion altogether and become secularists, but as most people need some sort of religious belief in their life an alternative must be provided. This means that apostates (people who have converted out of Islam) will need protection from the murderous intentions of their former co-religionists . Attempts to intimidate apostates must be treated as serious hate-crimes and punished with the utmost severity.

Of the two ‘universal’ religions – Buddhism and Christianity – the most suitable Islam-substitute is probably Christianity and is better fitted to Muslims’ intellectual capacities than the more philosophical Buddhism. The churches must therefore be encouraged to minister to Muslims, protect apostates, and even set up covert online churches where Muslims may privately convert to Christianity without taking the risks of ‘coming out’ by declaring their true faith while thy are still vulnerable.

Destroying Mohammed’s street cred among ‘jihadi cool’ youths.
‘Jihadi cool’ Muslim youths in the west are a thuggish, predatory and parasitic criminal underclass of gangstas. Our normal standards of rationality and morality do not apply to them. They are also severely inbred which means that most of them are of low intelligence if not actually psychopathically insane. They have no loyalty to their country of residence nor any intention of obeying its ‘man-made laws’, just an arrogant sense of unearned entitlement and the Allah-given right to rape and pillage at will.

Consequently, the psychopath Muhammad is in many respects an ideal role-model for them, and his robberies, rapes and massacres (especially of the Jews) are seen as ‘cool’ by most Muslim teenagers. Terrorists such as Bin Laden are idolised by Muslim youth. Mohammed’s sexual perversions are also widely approved of, as Muslim communities are the only ones in which paedophilia is an acceptable pastime. Many young Muslim boys are involved in pimping kuffar children by befriending them before handing them over to older ‘cousins’ for prostitution.

The Muslim mind is pre-rational, predatory and tribal. Appeals to reason are no use because they believe that faith is superior to reason, and the fact that the Koran is full of contradictions doesn’t bother them in the slightest. Islam hasn’t had an enlightenment and is still in the Dark Ages. In fact, the cult justifies itself in terms of a power-structure maintained by physical threats and lynch-mobs rather than reason or spirituality.

Appeals to normal human decency as an antidote to Islam are pointless. Muslims believe it is their duty to kill, maim, rape, swindle and rob the kaffir (unbeliever) – this is an intrinsic part of their cult. The ‘Golden Rule’ – ‘do unto others as you would they do unto you’ , does not extend beyond the boundaries of the Ummah-tribe. So, for example, displaying pictures of the aftermath of Muslim atrocities is a waste of time – this will actually encourage them. Many Muslim men and boys get sexually aroused by watching jihad-snuff videos of kaffirs being tortured and beheaded.

Pointing out that Muslims are useless parasites on the West is also not going to make them change their ways, because that’s what they are unashamedly here for.

The way to get at them, is to damage their inflated and fragile egos. Because Muslims are at a tribal state of pre-civilised development, they venerate the totems of their tribe, and will go into tantrums if these are ‘disrespected’. Unstable adolescents are constantly seeking ‘significance’ and ‘respect’.

Mohammed is of course one of the main totems, so one of the ways to discredit him is to turn him into a laughing stock. No cool teenager will follow a figure of ridicule, which is why the Muslims got so enraged when the Motoons came out. Ridicule is one of the most effective weapons against Islam.

No streetwise adolescent delinquent likes to be conned. So if you can also show Mohammed as the conman he was, then this is likely to have a far greater effect on ‘jihadi cool’ young Muslims than his violence and criminality (which they admire). They may approve of him conning his contemporaries, they may approve of him duping the hated kuffars with taqiyya, but they will be very sure not to let him con themselves. More at http://crombouke.blogspot.com/2010/01/exorcising-mohammed-conman-from-minds.html

Removing the benefits and increasing the costs of being Muslim
The second line of attack on Islam should be to make make belonging to the Ummah costly and unattractive in a material sense.
At present Muslims are pandered to and given special privileges just because they are Muslims. They believe that ‘Islam must dominate and must not be dominated’. For example:

– Muslims are given priority for social housing. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manchester/5213588.stm

– Muslims are exempted from paying bank interest charges on overdrafts. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1208204/An-overdraft-Thatll-200-Lloyds-TSB-15-youre-Muslim.html

– Muslims enjoy immunity from hate-crime legislation http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/personal-view/4975163/Stop-pandering-to-enemies-of-our-way-of-life.html

– Muslim communities are given vast sums of protection money (jizya) to try and buy off terrorist attacks. http://uppompeii1.uppompeii.com/2009/03/12/i-would-like-to-help-the-government–but-you-cannot-fix-stupid.aspx

– Courts automatically award Muslims huge sums in compensation for damages for ‘hurt feelings’ on trumped up charges of discrimination. http://crombouke.blogspot.com/2010/01/muslim-litigation-jihad-and-lawfare.html

– Muslims are allowed to practice polygamy and receive benefits for each wife http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1154789/Polygamy-UK-This-special-Mail-investigation-reveals-thousands-men-milking-benefits-support-wives.html and http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-557331/Muslim-spared-speeding-ban-drive-wives.html

– Muslims are encouraged to live as welfare parasites http://crombouke.blogspot.com/2010/01/islamic-parasites.html

– Muslims are allowed to operate pedophile rings without fear of prosecution lest it damages ‘community cohesion’.
and http://www.jihadwatch.org/2004/05/uks-channel-4-pulls-child-sex-documentary-on-racial-fears.html and http://isupporttheresistance.blogspot.com/2007/09/asian-paedophile-prositution-network.html

– Muslims demand Muslim-only prayer rooms at taxpayers’ expense. http://www.jihadwatch.org/2009/03/australia-muslim-university-students-demand-muslims-only-prayer-rooms.html

– Muslims are allowed to dictate who may visit Parliament http://archbishop-cranmer.blogspot.com/2009/01/lord-ahmed-threatens-parliament-into.html

– Broadcasters must never upset Muslims http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/religion/3198804/BBC-boss-says-Islam-should-be-treated-more-sensitively-than-Christianity.html and http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jonathanwynne-jones/5501911/Sony_confirms_Muslims_can_expect_better_treatment_than_Christians/

– Muslim students are given religious benefits that aren’t given to members of any other religion http://friendlyatheist.com/2007/07/31/is-this-preferential-treatment-for-muslims/

– Muslims expect to be given free land to set up Mosques http://swindonnf.blogspot.com/2008/09/muslims-in-my-area-are-asking-local.html

– Muslims get public money diverted from churches http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/religion/5803962/Church-accuses-Government-of-favouring-Muslims.html

– Muslims get preferential treatment in hospital http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/27213/Nurses-told-to-turn-Muslims-beds-to-Mecca
– Muslims get Muslim-only swimming sessions at public expense http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-560231/Public-pool-bars-father-son-Muslim-swimming-session.html

– Muslims are allowed to part illegally near Mosques http://theopinionator.typepad.com/my_weblog/2009/01/just-another-example-of-muslims-expecting-preferential-treatment-when-it-comes-to-local-or-national-laws-and-nothing-like-th.html

– Muslims can expect lenient sentences for traffic offenses http://isupporttheresistance.blogspot.com/2009/03/so-lord-slaughter-is-freed.html and http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-557331/Muslim-spared-speeding-ban-drive-wives.html

– Muslim criminals cannot be deported. http://theopinionator.typepad.com/my_weblog/2010/12/muslim-man-who-killed-12-yr-old-seeks-to-remain-in-uk.html

The Strong Horse effect
All pandering, appeasement, legal immunities and special privileges contribute to what Bin Laden calls the ‘strong horse effect’, which makes them confident of winning the Stealth Jihad.

So as a first measure, all special treatment should be withdrawn.

Secondly, Muslims should not merely be treated the same as everybody else, but should be made to pay the price of their totally negative antisocial and damaging presence in our countries.

– Muslim immigration must be stopped.

– Muslims must be regarded as enemy aliens and banned from sensitive occupations where they may be a security risk.

– All illegal Muslim immigrants must be deported, or if they can’t be sent back to their countries of origin they must be held in internment camps until some country will accept them.

– All Muslims guilty of serious crimes must be deported.

– Translation at public expense must be stopped.

– All Muslim clergy must be put under surveillance and deported at the first sign of trouble.

– Muslims who leave the country should not be allowed back in unless they can prove they were here legally in the first place.

– Cousin marriage must be banned to disrupt their breeding cycle and spare the Health Service the cost of their inbred offspring.

– Muslim welfare parasitism must be clamped down on rigorously. Hopefully they may move elsewhere once they realise they’re no longer going to get a free ride.

– We need to get out of the EU to prevent other EU countries ‘Muzzie-dumping’ on us.

– Remains of terrorists should be buried in pigskin, Russian style, to prevent them entering paradise.

– Extended families of terrorists should be rounded up and deported as accomplices, since family members often encourage terrorism in the hope of a free ride to paradise.

– Kuffars should boycott Muslim businesses and products.

– To reduce our dependence on Muslim oil we should encourage the development of rail transport as it is inherently more efficient than road (due to the much lower rolling resistance of steel wheel on steel rail ) and can be electrified to run on other fuels. We should also develop our coal and nuclear industries.

Posted in Fight back!, Freedom of Speech/Redefreiheit, Islam, Islam - What can we do? Was können wir tun?, Islamization | 1 Comment »