German Interior Minister Hans-Peter Friedrich says Muslims must fight against "radicalization" in their own communities. In response, Muslim leaders in Germany pledged full, open, and honest cooperation with law enforcement -- naaah, just kidding! In reality, they whined about "Islamophobia," complained that the whole community was being victimized by the fight against jihadists, and demanded that the government work to make Muslims "feel at home" in Germany. Do they need to do anything to demonstrate their loyalty to the state and rejection of all areas of Sharia that contradict German law? Why, of course they don't, you greasy Islamophobe.
"German interior minister urges Muslims to combat militancy," from Deutsche Welle, June 25:
Germany's interior minister met with Muslim community leaders to discuss how they can prevent youth radicalization. Muslim leaders countered that the responsibility lies with the government.German Interior Minister Hans-Peter Friedrich urged the country's Muslim community on Friday to do more to prevent the spread of radicalization among its youth. He told Muslim leaders at a meeting in Berlin that families must act early to prevent young boys from turning into jihadists.
"Neither the security authorities nor ordinary Muslim citizens can do much to help," when youths radicalize, he said. "It is up to the parents and the rest of the family to be observant about what their children are up to and how they are changing." [...]
"We want to stand up to the radicalization and misuse of religion together," he said. "All citizens of this country, no matter what our political tendency or religion, must take on the fight against radicalism and terror."
During the three-hour meeting, Friedrich referred to 21-year-old Arid Uka, a Kosovar man brought up in Germany, who killed two US airmen on March 2 when he attacked a bus of American military personnel at Frankfurt Airport.
Friedrich said Uka was radicalized "not in the classical environment of a mosque or Muslim society but on the Internet."
'Stigmatizing' Muslims
Germany's political opposition denounced the meeting, saying the government ran the risk of stigmatizing all Muslims.
"If we want to isolate extremists who are prone to violence, we must support moderate Muslims and make them feel welcome in Germany," said the center-left Social Democrats parliamentary leader Thomas Oppermann.
The head of the Central Council of Muslims in Germany, Aiman Mazyek, attended the meeting, but said he thought it had the wrong focus.
"We have over 2,500 mosques and there aren't even a dozen fringe groups," he said. "We have to make it clear they are a small and dwindling group and that by talking about them and hyping them, we just strengthen them.
"That should not be the aim of a conference like this," he added.
Mazyek said the government needed to work harder on making Muslims feel at home in Germany and to campaign against Islamophobia. He said lack of integration into society was the main cause for radicalization of Muslim youths.
Mazyek added that Muslim groups had already been cooperative in the government's bid to prevent terrorism. He said that the effort should not be a "one-way street."...
German Interior Minister Hans-Peter Friedrich says Muslims must fight against "radicalization" in their own communities.
This is like a dog lover throwing a slab of read meat down in front of her two dogs, dogs she hadn't fed for a few days, and telling them to settle their differences like gentlemen.
A 2007 study from the University of Hamburg says that 14% of Muslims in Germany prefer Sharia to Democracy and believe that politico-religious motivated violence is legitimate. Among Muslim schoolchildren it is 29.2%, among University students 16.4%.
Words matter.
Mis-naming it "radicalization" (implying an erroneous and objectionable stretching or torturing a concept or ideology) leads to the errors in judgement and analysis that we see here.
If the effect were correctly named, and the perpetrators were correctly characterized not as "radicals" but as "devout" or "orthodox" then the understanding of the phenomenon and crafting a response have a chance of being accurate and effective. Misnaming it forecloses any chance of a proper understanding and response.
These Muslim fanatics never blame themselves if Muslims commit evilness under Islam - but keep claiming pathetic victimisation if asked to correct their evilness! So, what about all those widespread savage Muslim terrorists and fanatics who're raping, torturing and murdering women/girls, non-Muslims, converts form Islam and so on, in Germany and globally? It doesn't concern the Muslims in Germany? Well, how come they can protest so violently against Robert here in Stuttgart and have the Sunday protest for Israel cancelled, in supporting Palestine for example? So, the Muslims in Palestine (or globally) concern them but not all those evil committed by Muslims everywhere? Liars as usual, these Muslim fanatics!
And then the future winning/ruling German Left Coalition wants more Islam and Arabic/Turkish Muslim migrants, including for Turkey to be accepted into the EU (such as being championed by Joschka Fischer, former vice-Chancellor and Green party strongman)! The coalition of the Islam-loving Left/Centre-Left Greens and SPD might win the next election in Germany. See the slavery mentality of the Western Left movement to Islam in Germany at http://islamineurope.blogspot.com/2011/01/rhineland-palatinate-ministry-wants.html
Monday, January 17, 2011
Rhineland-Palatinate: Ministry wants schools to be Islam-friendly
The Culture Ministry of the German state of Rhineland-Palatinate, led by the SPD, plans Islam-friendly classes, reports news magazine Focus, based on a circular currently being distributed to teachers.
The guidelines recommend offering sex-ed in gender-homogeneous groups and segregated gym and swimming classes from puberty. School trips should, as much as possible, not be planned for the month of Ramadan. The sensitivities of Muslims should be taken into account when planning internships and school events. Fasting could lead to loss of performance and concentration among the students, the authors warn. It is difficult if they have to deal with a lot of schoolwork during Ramadan, and so flexible solutions should be found.
Malte Blümke, head of the state's teacher's association criticized the project and said it was anti-enlightenment and anti-emancipation, and that it's given up on the tradition of learning together.
The new guidelines were not discussed with the schools, teachers' associations, and school boards.....
The new guidelines were not discussed with the schools, teachers' associations, and school boards.....
"In reality, they whined about "Islamophobia," complained that the whole community was being victimized by the fight against jihadists, and demanded that the government work to make Muslims "feel at home" in Germany."
==============
If they really wanted to 'feel at home' anywhere they'd take a firm stand against terrorists using their prophets name to justify murder FIRST. And they shouldnt have to be TOLD to do so.
Christians PUBLICLY denounce hate mongers calling themselves "christian" like Fred Phelps daily.
But Muslims in non Muslim countries just stick their heads deeper into the sand and then whine when they get included in the verbal assaults against Islamic terrorists...or so they claim.
IF they arent going to take a public stand against extremists, being of the same religion as the terrorist, by default they are going to have to take partial responsibility for the actions of these extremists because they have done NOTHING to either stop the extremism, or denounce it.
You are perfectly right.
Mazyek said the government needed to work harder on making Muslims feel at home in Germany and to campaign against Islamophobia. He said lack of integration into society was the main cause for radicalization of Muslim youths.
So called "moderates" and Jihadis are distinct groups but they work in tandem - its the equivalent of the good cop bad cop routine. Each reinforcing demands for more accommodations by the non-Muslim society, or demands for sharia.
Once again --- there's no Radical Islam, it's just ISLAM!
"Germany's political opposition denounced the meeting, saying the government ran the risk of stigmatizing all Muslims."
I suppose this is coming from Labour and the Greens.
Excuse me, but what a lame reaction! Muslims stigmatize themselves! There is all this evidence, pointing towards Muslims being loyal to countries of origine and other Muslims and many of them being hostile to the West, and some of it's laws and principles. Like those of autonomy for persons, so women also, and freedom of speech to the point of insulting.
This is a lame reaction of this German opposition, because how the hell can they expect people who are well informed about Islam to shut up, especially when Muslims continue to behave as they do?
I mean, crime is ubiquitous, among all groups of people, but some crime and terrorism originates from hostility to and contempt for Western host-nations and their laws and their citizens. And many Muslims seem to be disloyal to the Western nations they live in.
Stigmatisation, if it would happen, would be justified in the sense that Muslims do admit to belong to a big powerful organisation that has in it many anti-democratic powerful leaderships, who adhere to laws and principles definitely in contradiction with Western laws, which were decided upon by representatives of the majority of Western citizens.
I hope Western society or a big part in it evolves towards the position that Islam is towards Western law a law-breaking organisation. And that adherence to Islam alone suffices to consider a person aiding and abetting a law-breaking organisation.
Yes, in this way, by all means, stigmatize all Muslims, under condition that they are given notice and choice to be loyal to democratic nations and laws. Then it would be up to Muslims to re-establish their trustworthyness which they have forfeited to so many citizens already. And trustworthyness is something to be deserved by actions, not something that can be demanded for nothing, in the face of a lot of evidence, like the Muslims and German opposition do here.
Certainly, of only those who would openly admit it.
Islamize the world today (by any means), and watch every single Muslim on Earth take joy in it.
Islam is the bane of freedom, of civility, of humanity.
"A 2007 study from the University of Hamburg says that 14% of Muslims in Germany prefer Sharia to Democracy".
I for one don't give a hoot for any of these 'studies'. The doctrine of Islam is clear: those who are not ready for the ultimate sacrifice are equal to apostates, and even if they're not killed, they will receive no rewards in the afterlife.
The reality is that all Muslims have to participate in jihad, in deception and in da'awa, and in financing it.
But the article boils down to this:
Muhammad said, “I have been ordered to fight against people until they say that “there is no god but Allah”, that “Muhammad is the messenger of Allah”, they pray, and pay zakat (religious taxes.) If they do that, their lives and property are safe.” (Only temporarily…/ed)
Muslim scholar Bassam Tibi explains:
Those who oppose Islam cause wars and are responsible for them..
At its core, Islam is a religious mission to all humanity. Muslims are religiously obliged to disseminate the Islamic faith throughout the world. ”We have sent you forth to all mankind” (Q. 34:28). If non-Muslims submit to conversion or subjugation, this call (dawa) can be pursued peacefully. If they do not, Muslims are obliged to wage war against them. In Islam, peace requires that non-Muslims submit to the call of Islam, either by converting or by accepting the status of a religious minority (dhimmi) and paying the imposed poll tax, jizya. World peace, the final stage of the dawa, is reached only with the conversion or submission of all mankind to Islam. Muslims believe that expansion through war is not aggression but a fulfillment of the Quranic command to spread Islam as a way to peace. The resort to force to disseminate Islam is not war (harb), a word that is used only to describe the use of force by non-Muslims. Islamic wars are not hurub (the plural of harb) but rather futuhat, acts of “opening” the world to Islam and expressing Islamic jihad. Relations between dar al-Islam, the home of peace, and dar al-harb, the world of unbelievers, nevertheless take place in a state of war, according to the Quran and to the authoritative commentaries of Islamic jurists. Unbelievers who stand in the way, creating obstacles for the dawa, are blamed for this state of war, for the dawa can be pursued peacefully if others submit to it. In other words, those who resist Islam cause wars and are responsible for them. Only when Muslim power is weak is temporary truce (hudna) allowed (Islamic jurists differ on the definition of temporary).
More>>
http://sheikyermami.com/2010/02/04/those-who-oppose-islam-cause-wars-and-are-responsible-for-them/
From the article:
"If we want to isolate extremists who are prone to violence, we must support moderate Muslims and make them feel welcome in Germany," said the center-left Social Democrats parliamentary leader Thomas Oppermann."
________________
Godda888t!! When are these euroweenies 'gonna get it straight?!
There never has been, nor shall there ever be anything such as a MODERATE MUSLIM.
It, like moderate islam, is a fantasy.
From the article, the Muslim Ayman Mazyek trots out the 'tiny minority of extremists' canard:
"We have over 2,500 mosques and there aren't even a dozen fringe groups," he said. "
Suuuure.
Well, if all those mosques are just as peaceful as churches or synagogues or Buddhist temples, I'm sure he wouldn't object if the German police and army proposed to make a thorough search of **all** those mosques, like, today. And I mean a *thorough* search.
Failing that: I wonder whether the Resistance in Germany has got a 'Mapping Sharia' project underway, such as has been done in the USA?
Addedum to remarks of Islam_Macht Frei and Steffen Larsen:
Words do matter, but rather than subsitute "devout" or worse yet, "orthodox", for the word "radical" in describing Islamist activists, terrorists, mujahdeen, apologists, and useful fools, I think the word "pious" is apt.
There is no recognized division within Islam of orthodox, conservative or reformed. Ask Erdogan of Turkey or any one of the numerous Islamic scholars. There is but one Islam, immutable by scriptural interpretation, and therefore immune to reform.
p.s. Let's not alienate us "leftists" by accusing only us of failing to see the emperor is nude.
We've heard this Islamic gobbedly-gook before:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2009/03/pakistani-muslim-cleric-us-shouldnt-resist-jihad-because-doing-so-will-only-lead-to-more-jihad.html
Mazyek said the government needed to work harder on making Muslims feel at home in Germany and to campaign against Islamophobia. He said lack of integration into society was the main cause for radicalization of Muslim youths.
See the contradictions? They want muslims to be integrated, yet making them feel at home.
I believe muslims are doing that already. They are integrated in that they are taking full advantages of the all the freebies that the west offers that they don't get at home. Free welfare, free education for their brood, free healthcare, free money and support for all those “sister cousins” who appear to be moms with kids. Yes the muslim are fully integrated when sponging off the stupid gullible westerners.
However to really feel at home the west needs to do more. A mosque in every neighborhood, freedom to wear sharia compliant dress, sharia banks, halal food everywhere including in all restaurants, no reporting of any so called muslim crimes. Light or no sentences for honor killings, gay bashing, Jew bashing, Christian bashing, and women bashing if done by muslims. If done by a non muslim to a muslim the book must be thrown at him/her. Yes, the west has a lot of work to do to make the muslims feel at home.
Think about it! If they felt at home in Germany, they would leave Germany as enthusiastically as they left their previous home.
I agree to make the muslims really feel at home take away all those freebies. Once they learn they have to work hard for a living and that the state will not subsidize their wives and broods they will feel at home.
I too believe words matter Islam_Macht_Frei I posted some of my thoughts on this subject recently at JW:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2011/06/you-knew-this-was-coming-arrested-jihadists-families-and-friends-shocked.html
I may have misunderstood where you were going with your argument so if I'm taking you totally out of context, my apologies.
If I have understood what you were saying then I have to object to it because your specific suggestion would actually make the matter worse.
Why? Words have context. For example 'terrorist' has a pejorative context whereas 'freedom fighter' has a positive context. The left has used this as a linguistic trick for supporting their theories on 'moral relativism' ("One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.)
In your example you suggest replacing 'radical' with devout or orthodox.
Those two words in English have a positive connotation. They are almost never used as a pejorative.
So, here's the problem: If you try to convince the man in the street that it is imperative to take action against 'devout Muslims' or 'Orthodox' Muslims you are going to lose him.
His brain has been trained to think: 'devout Christians = Good' or 'Eastern Orthodox Christians = good' or 'devout Jew' = Good' or 'Orthodox Jew = Good (but dresses funny)'.
He will extend this line of thinking to Muslims albeit subliminally. If he does, he will not believe you if you start pointing out Muslim atrocities and attributing them to devout people. He will also suspect you have questionable motives for doing so.
If you don't think so, consider one of the things that happened during the US invasion of Iraq after 9/11.
When the US entered Baghdad, they ran into a lot of resistance from a Muslim cleric by the name of Moqtada al-Sadr.
This maggot hid out in mosques and other 'holy sites' all of which he had previously filled with guns, ammo and portable missiles.
The US military could have easily blown this guy sky high in any of the several sites in which they 'caught' him; but they didn't. They kept negotiating him out of the sites to preserve them.
Why? Because they knew there would be a public backlash if they intentionally destroyed even one mosque while trying to take out Sadr. They knew the man in the street would make the following analogies:
Mosque = Church = (House of GOD)
Cleric = Priest = (GOD's representative)
Allah = GOD = (GOD of love peace truth)
Qur'an = Bible = (book of love and peace)
As all Jihad Watchers know, the above equivalencies are ridiculous but the 'man in the street' makes them because that is how he has been conditioned to view religion.
Sadr was aware of the above and was able to use it to his advantage so that he never got caught.
Now, lets revisit the title of this article and make the appropriate adjustment. Doing so we get:
German Interior Minister says Muslims must fight devoutness;
OR
German Interior Minister says Muslims must fight orthodoxy;
Now, if you use such a title you are going to get it from both sides, Muslim and non-Muslim alike.
This is going to be especially true from any of the non-Muslim side who consider themselves as devout in their religion.
I'm for 'calling a spade a spade'. We have allowed too many in our society to hide the real meaning of a state, thing or action in non-meaningful jargon.
For example I prefer using the term 'massive and deadly military retaliation' as opposed to 'kinetic response' as the army spokesmen are fond of using.
To me, using devout or orthodox isn't going to clarify things to people like Jihad Watchers but it does run the risk of obfuscating the real problem to those who haven't read very much on Islam. Those who don't understand the issues will likely believe you are misattributing heinous acts to 'good' people or more likely that you are misattributing heinous people to a good segment of a religion.
The other part of the problem, is once you abandon the meaningful words like radical and extremist, it may not be too easy to go back to using them at a later time, possibly a time when you most need to use them.
Maybe the greatest reason for retaining the use of radicalism and extremism and terrorist etc. is the fact that CAIR and other similar organizations fight to remove them from the dialog. That very fact tells me we are doing the right thing in enshrining them as tools to fight Islamization.
Regarding Islamophobia, I think Islamorealism or Islamopragmatism is probably the best term to be applied to those dedicated to resisting Islamization.