In Germany, these past weeks, we have been treated to a back-and-forth among politicians about Islam and whether it should be considered “part of Germany.” Some say yes and some say no. Angela Merkel, doing her imitation of Molly Bloom, keeps saying “yes I mean yes I said yes” to Muslim migrants, and has stirringly claimed for several years that “wir schaffen das” — “We Can Do This” — meaning we Germans can successfully integrate more than a million Muslim migrants. Even though she has stopped repeating that particular phrase (no doubt sensing it sounds ridiculously pollyannish in light of current problems), her “yesses” to the question of whether islam is part of Germany have continued.
Many, however, are not convinced. Horst Seehofer, the Minister of the Interior and Heimat [Homeland], a member of Merkel’s own cabinet, and also an important member of the Bavaria-based Christian Social Union, has declared with a certitude to match that of Merkel, that “Islam is not part of Germany.” He went on to say, according to the report from Deutsche Welle, that certain “Christian-inspired aspects are part of daily life and culture in Germany, naming examples such as shops being closed on Sundays and public holidays that correspond to church holidays like Easter, Pentecost and Christmas.” Sunday closures and official observance of church holidays are surely not the most important evidence he could have adduced of Germany’s deep connection to Christianity, but they have the advantage of being easily grasped in a way that appeals to history, theology, and political theory are not.
Seehofer also hastened to add that while Islam is not “part of Germany,” people who practice Islam are, of course, part of Germany: “The Muslims who live with us obviously belong to Germany,” he noted, adding that “false consideration for others clearly does not mean we give up our country-specific traditions and customs.” To which one is tempted to say: Not so fast. The “Muslims who live with us” do not obviously belong to Germany. They are in Germany, in great numbers — an additional one million since 2015 alone, thanks to Madame Merkel — but do not necessarily belong to, or are part of, Germany in any significant sense. The texts and teachings of Islam teach murderous hostility to the Kuffar, and the ability of Muslims to integrate into German society depends mostly on whether they are able to reject, rather than take to heart, the hostility toward Infidels that is everywhere in the Qur’an. There are 109 verses in the Qur’an commanding Jihad warfare against the Infidels. How many Muslims can reject that inculcated hostility? And how many Muslims in Germany will continue to regard Muhammad as “the Perfect Man” and “Model of Conduct,” worthy of their emulation, even though he consummated his marriage to Aisha when she was nine years old, was pleased when his followers murdered people who had criticized or mocked him, and praised the use of deception (“war is deceit”), and of terror (“I have been made victorious through terror”)? Should Muslims be considered a welcome “part of Germany” if they believe those jihad verses, take Muhammad’s praise of terror and deception to heart, and demonstrate contempt and hatred of Infidels, summed up in Qur’an 98:6, which describes them as “the most vile of creatures”? Finally, and this ought to be a special concern of Germans, what do they think of the dozens of horrific antisemitic verses in the Qur’an, such as these compiled by Robert Spencer:
The Qur’an depicts the Jews as inveterately evil and bent on destroying the wellbeing of the Muslims. They are the strongest of all people in enmity toward the Muslims (5:82); as fabricating things and falsely ascribing them to Allah (2:79; 3:75, 3:181); claiming that Allah’s power is limited (5:64); loving to listen to lies (5:41); disobeying Allah and never observing his commands (5:13); disputing and quarreling (2:247); hiding the truth and misleading people (3:78); staging rebellion against the prophets and rejecting their guidance (2:55); being hypocritical (2:14, 2:44); giving preference to their own interests over the teachings of Muhammad (2:87); wishing evil for people and trying to mislead them (2:109); feeling pain when others are happy or fortunate (3:120); being arrogant about their being Allah’s beloved people (5:18); devouring people’s wealth by subterfuge (4:161); slandering the true religion and being cursed by Allah (4:46); killing the prophets (2:61); being merciless and heartless (2:74); never keeping their promises or fulfilling their words (2:100); being unrestrained in committing sins (5:79); being cowardly (59:13-14); being miserly (4:53); being transformed into apes and pigs for breaking the Sabbath (2:63-65; 5:59-60; 7:166); and more.”
Shouldn’t these hate-filled texts and teachings of Islam lead to legitimate doubts, and forebodings, about just how Muslims can possibly be “part of Germany” if they are now the chief carriers of antisemitism, the pathological condition that decent Germans, for obvious reasons, are most concerned to keep out of their country?
Angela Merkel, in her retort to Seehofer, insisted yet again, and without more, that “Islam is part of Germany.” But what does this mean? The statement that “Islam is part of Germany” is a religio-politico-cultural claim. In what sense is it true? Islam has not shaped or contributed to German values, laws, customs, understandings, nor to the political system, nor have Muslims left any mark on German culture — its literature, its music, its art, its film. Islam has left no mark on German philosophy. The dismal treatment of women in Islam, the ferocious punishments for homosexuals, the hatred of non-Muslims that the Qur’an commands — all this is part of Islam but not (save for that Hitlerian interlude), if Germans have their say and way, part of Germany.
Muslims — not Islam — are “part of Germany” only in the most obvious and least meaningful sense: they are physically present, and apparently, if Merkel and her supporters have their way, will not be subject to deportation even if it turns out, as seems likely, that 90% of those who claimed refugee status as “Syrians” fleeing a war zone, were not Syrians at all, and even if many of those Muslim “refugees” claiming to be “children” have turned out to be men in their twenties. The disruption, expense, and physical insecurity that Muslim migrants have caused both non-Muslim indigenous Germans, and non-Muslim immigrants too, is likely to continue, as long as most Germans are more afraid of being thought “racists” and “islamophobes” than they are fearful of the increasing menace, of the Muslim presence in Germany.
The haunting memory of the Nazi murders of European Jews has made Germans hypersensitive about “racism.” They have, however, chosen the very worst way to make amends to the murdered Jews, by admitting into their country several million Muslims, who are today’s most virulent carriers of antisemitism. Not a political figure, but the couturier Karl Lagerfeld, on French television in November 2017, put his finger on the problem. Evoking guilt for the Holocaust as the impetus for Merkel to invite unlimited numbers of Muslim asylum seekers into Germany during the migrant crisis, Lagerfeld said: “One cannot – even if there are decades between them – kill millions of Jews and then bring millions of their worst enemies in their place.”
Michael Hesemann, a German historian, has also entered the lists, writing that “Islam always plays only one role in the 1700-year-old history of the Christian Occident: the role of the sword of Damocles which hung above us, the threat of barbarism against which one needed to unite and fight,” according to NRW Direst. “In this sense, Islam is not part of German history, but the defense against Islam!” For saying what three-quarters of Germans believe to be true — that “Islam is not part of Germany” — Hesemann has now been banned by Facebook. (Facebook’s most insidious behavior has to do not with its exploitation of private data for profit but with its role as censor of islamocritics, including Jihad Watch). Of course, if your mind is made up, and you insist on welcoming millions of Muslims into your midst, despite their being carriers of antisemitism, homophobia, misogyny, despite their declaring themselves to be “Syrian refugees” when they are neither “Syrians” nor “refugees,” because you believe, with Angela Merkel, that “we can do this” — that is, successfully resettle and integrate all these Muslims — then 1400 years of conflict between Islam and the Christian West are unlikely to convince you otherwise. Michael Hesemann bluntly stated a historical truth which the merkels of this world ignore, at all our peril: Islam is in a state of permanent war, though not necessarily of open hostilities, with all non-Muslims.
Those living in Europe, including the territory that we now call Germany, often lived in fear of Muslims, even if they were not near the front lines, because of the perceived constant pressure from the forces of aggressive Islam. In the west, the Islamic advance was stopped by Charles Martel at Poitiers, but it took more than 700 years of the Reconquista to completely end Islamic rule in Spain. In the east, between 780 and 1180 a series of Arab-Byzantine wars led initially to Arab Muslim victories, which were later undone, in the late 10th and early 11th centuries, by a string of Byzantine victories. Centuries later, the Ottoman Turks conquered both the Byzantine Christians and the Arab Muslims. Twice during this period, the Turks lay siege to Vienna, in 1529, at the height of Ottoman power, and again in 1683. Both times the Christians fought off the forces of Islam.
Meanwhile, Islamic corsairs based in North Africa attacked Christian ships in the Mediterranean, seizing cargo and kidnapping sailors. Muslim sailors also attacked and razed European coastal villages, up and down the coasts of Italy, France, and Spain, but also all the way up to Cornwall, Ireland, and in one celebrated raid, even Iceland, seizing both loot and villagers whom they took back to Muslim lands as slaves. Hesemann’s history holds up: Islam has been Christian Europe’s enemy for centuries, on land and sea.
The latest addition to this debate about Islam’s place, if any, in Germany, has been the interview given by Alexander Dobrindt, the leader of the Christian Social Union’s (CSU) parliamentary party, who instead of simply limiting himself to the claim that “Islam is not part of Germany” laid out what he thinks should be done from now on.
Speaking with Funke media group, Dobrindt said:
“Muslims who want to integrate into our society are part of our country, but Islam is not part of Germany.”
Dobrindt was careful not to say that all the Muslims in Germany are by that fact alone “part of Germany,” but that only those “Muslims who want to integrate into our society are part of our country.” Those who “want to integrate” would, by that very definition, not want to take over Germany, and to transform it, by imposing Islamic laws and customs, but desire rather to become a part of the country as it is. That is what “integration” into a host country means. True integration would require Muslims to support freedom of speech and belief, which are basic rights for Germans, and to oppose any punishment for blasphemy and apostasy. It would require them to ignore the 109 verses in the Qur’an that command jihad warfare, and the verses explicitly calling for them to “strike terror” in the hearts of the Infidels. It would require them to oppose, rather than, as the Qur’an does, to promote antisemitism. It would require them to accept full equality for women, and to practice tolerance toward homosexuals. As for those Muslim immigrants who do not wish to, or are unable to, integrate, they are not part of the country and, though this is not said explicitly by Dobrindt, he clearly thinks they ought to be removed.
“Islam ‘has no cultural roots in Germany and with Sharia as a legal system, it has nothing in common with our Judeo-Christian heritage.’”
The burden of proof is on those who claim Islam does have “cultural roots in Germany.” Muslims, in the form of Turkish Gastarbeiter (Guest-workers) only began coming to Germany in the 1960s. That’s far too short a time to plant and cultivate “cultural roots’” in German soil. Sharia, the legal system of Islam, in its system of criminal punishments (hudud), by comparison with Western legal systems, remains barbaric. It treats as deserving of capital punishment many practices which are not punished at all under the Western criminal codes, such as adultery, apostasy, and blasphemy. The sources of the Sharia are the Qur’an and Sunnah, that is, the faith itself, while the Western legal codes today are secular, based on man-made legislation although, of course, Christianity has helped to shape the views of those legislators.
“Islam ‘doesn’t culturally shape our country’ and ‘it should not’ be culturally influential in Germany.”
Islam has had no discernible effect historically on the laws, customs, values, understandings of Germans. But the presence of so many of its adherents has rightly alarmed many Germans, though not, of course, Chancellor Merkel. The freedom of speech and religion, equality of the sexes, tolerance for homosexuality — all of this remains unaffected so far in Germany. Nor has Islam as yet “culturally shaped” Germany in its art, literature, music, film, or in any other form of artistic expression. Much of German (Western) art — that which depicts living creatures, such as portraits, or statues — is forbidden, haram, in Islam. But those paintings and statues are still on display all over Germany, and still being made by German artists.
German writers need not worry for now about censorship by, or on behalf of Muslims. That’s because they are doing such a good job of censoring themselves. Major publishers are generally unwilling to publish islamocritics. One exception was the publication, four years ago, of a truth-telling book, Thilo Sarrazin’s Deutschland schafft sich ab (Germany Abolishes Itself), which struck a nerve in the German public, and provoked a salutary debate. Sarrazin wrote that Islamic immigrants threatened Germany’s freedom and prosperity because Muslim migrants were unwilling to integrate and relied overwhelmingly on welfare benefits. Nothing he said was false. That was all the more reason for the media to try to keep it from being read, by denouncing it as “nonsense,” “racist,” “islamophobic.” Thankfully,and despite that campaign, Sarrain’s book sold more than two million copies.
German journalism is, when it comes to covering Islam, in a parlous state. The German media — print, television, and online journalism — is overwhelmingly under the control of Defenders of the Faith, that faith being Islam. Soon we can expect the last Internet redoubts of islamocriticism to be closed down by Facebook and Twitter and other social media giants that believe they have a duty to censor “hate speech,” which nowadays, for them, mainly means any speech critical of Islam.
As to music, there is a debate within Islam as to whether it is haram or halal, with some Muslims claiming that all music is forbidden, while others insist that only musical instruments are forbidden, and still others believe that music, with instruments, can be allowed, but it must be islamically acceptable in its lyrics, and in the deportment of its singers.
Films should be censored, Muslims believe, as to content (nothing sexually explicit, nothing that might show non-Muslims, especially Jews, in a favorable light, nothing making fun of, or the slightest bit critical of, any aspect of Islam). So far neither German music nor film has had to change to meet Muslim strictures, but what will happen as the percentage of the German population that is Muslim increases, as it inevitably will?
“No Islamic country on earth has developed a comparable democratic culture like the ones we know in Christian countries.”
This is a plain statement of fact. In the Western democratic condition, the legitimacy of any government depends on how well it represents the will of the people expressed, however imperfectly, through elections. In Islam, the legitimacy of any government depends on how well it expresses the will of Allah, as revealed in the immutable Qur’an. A ruler, even if a despot, should be obeyed as long as he is a good Muslim.
Dobrindt also defended a plan to dramatically limit refugee family reunifications, saying:
“Refugees should return to their home countries whenever this is possible. Family reunifications can also take place in pacified home regions and not only in Germany.”
Since most of the Muslim migrants who in the last six-seven years were admitted to Germany because they claimed to be “refugees” fleeing fighting in Syria and seeking asylum, it makes sense to have those “refugees” return to that country (Syria) once the fighting has ended or been greatly reduced. Now that the Islamic State has been crushed in both Syria and Iraq, and in addition, other fighting in Syria is now confined to a very small area — Assad’s forces have largely won — it should be possible, even without total pacification having been achieved, to send those “refugees” back to Syria, which is where so many of them claim to be from. And if these same refugees now admit that they actually came not from Syria but from other countries, that is even more reason to expel them, and send them back to their real countries of origin. In Iraq, another major supplier of asylum seekers to Europe, major hostilities have ended almost everywhere, with ISIS destroyed, the Kurds relatively quiescent, and the Sunni Arabs cowed by the Shi’a militias backed by Iran. Therefore, Iraqi “political refugees” should also be sent home to a pacified Iraq: Sunni Arabs to the Sunni-dominated north, Shi’a Arabs to the Shi’a-dominated south, and Kurds to Iraqi Kurdistan.
As for those Muslims who claim to be seeking asylum as “refugees” from such places as Morocco (which has sent large numbers to France, Belgium, and the Netherlands) and Tunisia, these are countries currently without internal strife. Those who choose to leave do so only as economic migrants.
There is, of course, one group of people in the Middle East who are genuine refugees and should be taken in by Germany and other Western states. These are the Middle Eastern Christians: the Chaldeans and Assyrians in Iraq, the Greek and Syrian Orthodox and Armenians in Syria, the Copts in Egypt. There are as yet no signs that these Christian refugees are being given the swift and favorable treatment they deserve in being granted asylum. Could it be that Western countries fear that privileging the Christians would only increase Muslim resentment against them at home? The resentment, or rather the extreme hostility toward Christians, can hardly get worse. But even if that hostility could get worse, that should not be a reason to keep Christians from escaping the clear and present dangers of living in Muslim lands.
Dobrindt suggests that the policy of “family reunification” as it is now practiced should end. Until now, “family reunification” has always involved bringing over many relatives of “refugees” who have been admitted to Western countries, to be “reunified” with a family member or members. One “refugee” might start a chain-migration, whereby 5 or 10 or 20 others, claiming to be relatives, are admitted as part of family reunification. There has been so much fraudulent exploitation of this policy by people who falsely claim to be related, that DNA testing is now being used, but not widely enough, to detect such fraud and deny many of these “family” claims. And even DNA testing will not detect false claims of marriage (with the records supposedly lost by some office in Syria, Iraq, or a dozen other places), and polygamous practices can make for a large “family.”
Dobrindt suggests that there is another way to further family reunification: instead of adding to the German state’s welfare and civilizational burden by admitting many supposed “relatives,” why not have the “asylum seeker” who is in Germany return home to be reunited with his family in the country he came from, instead of having all those claimed relatives arrive in Germany for family “reunification” and, of course, to settle in? How much easier to have one “refugee” return home from Germany rather than to have a dozen or more Muslim “relatives” move to Germany to be “reunified” with him or her.
Alexander Dobrindt makes eminent good sense. That’s why his proposals have little chance of being adopted by Angela Merkel. But that does not mean the German public, weary of Merkel’s obstinate insistence that “Islam is part of Germany,” can’t begin to openly discuss that question now that it has been raised by several senior political figures, including a member of her own cabinet. Horst Seehofer, Michael Hesemann, and Alexander Dobrindt remain steadfast, unwilling to agree with Merkel’s follies. What exactly is it, she and her ilk must repeatedly be asked, that makes Islam, or Muslims, “a part of Germany”? What German laws, customs, values, understandings, what modes of artistic expression, what philosophy, what political theory, make modern democratic Germany and immutable Islam the least bit compatible? Islam is not “part of Germany” even though Muslims are now “in Germany.” If the Seehofers and Hesemanns and Dobrindts and Sarrazins prevail over the Merkels while there is still time, Islam will never be “part of Germany” and more importantly, Germany will never be part of Dar al-Islam.
Ole Pederson says
This is just campaigning on the side of these poiticians. On the morning after the election all is forgotten, and muslim mass invasion will continue. Pepper spray sales are on an all-time high, but most Germans still keep their mouths shut fearing the “racist”, “Nazi” labeling.
Wellington says
Islam in no way is part of Germany except in the sense than cancer is part of a person in which it has taken root.
Rather, the exact opposite is the case, to wit, per malicious Muslimthink and foolish dhimmithink, Germany is part of Islam—at least eventually as the Land of Islam (dar al Islam) takes more and more territory from the Land of War (dar al harb) and makes it into the former rather than the latter. For instance, Germany. All of it.
C’mon. Every last non-Muslim, even the most foolish of Western leftists, excuse the redundancy here, should have figured out by now that Mo’s creed is iniquitous to its core. Islam is bad news for ALL non-Muslims, whatever their political persuasion. By now, there are zero excuses to knowledgeably and ethically assert otherwise. Yeah, none.
Save Europe says
?
mortimer says
Wellington is correct: more than 16 and 1/2 years after 9/11, there is NO EXCUSE for politicians not to realize that Islam is a dangerous SUPREMACIST IDEOLOGY.
Tapeworms, hookworms and scabies mites are common parasites found in humans, but they are not ‘part’ of the human.
Islam parasitizes the host society, takes it over politically and then slowly exploits the host until the host dies a slow death.
Michael Copeland says
Islam part of Germany?
Islam was part of Hitler’s forces – The Bosnian SS Handschar.
Pulay says
You Germany,Don’t commit crime again and again,Islam is part of Germany since ever before.if Islam had never been part of Germany,Jews wouldn’t have been killed at the concentration camps. Hitler and its party members were inspired and captivated in Islam extremism value and ideology.therefore they had a strong interest and relationship with Muslim leaders at that moment….
gravenimage says
Hugh Fitzgerald: Is Islam Really Part of Germany?
……………………..
Until the 1970s with the importation of Turkish Muslim “guest workers”, Islam had virtually no presence in Germany–nor had it ever.
Martin Luther recognized the threat of Islam to the Christian world–but Muslims had not previously directly threatened Germany until just recently, when foolish Infidels invited them in.
Michael Copeland says
“When I have time, I must put it into German so that every man may see what a foul and shameful book it is.”
Martin Luther, on the Koran
https://libertygb.org.uk/news/book-reviews-koran
garbut says
When is someone with expert legal integrity going to file a case against the koran as a piece of
hate speech/terrorist literature and actually have it tried in the highest court possible?
Save Europe says
No.
The European says
Dobrindt and Seehofer? Not even for a second would I believe anything they say about Islam, immigration and family reunification. Dobrindt had been secretary of transportation from 2013 to 2017, being a member of Merkel’s cabinet. During that time nobody heard him making any critical remarks about Islam and illegal immigration. Why now? And Horst Seehofer, the leader of the CSU? Sometimes he voiced protest against Merkel’s policy, but then he always agreed with her on everything. Sometimes he says, Islam belongs to Germany, sometimes he says it doesn’t. He is a turncoat, he changes his mind three times a day ( We call him Seehofer-Drehhofer, a play on words, designing somebody who is not trustworthy at all). No, their “patriotism” is a phony patriotism, a stratagem they have devised to win back people who now vote for the AFD. They are still Merkel’s stooges, putting up a big show.
Hugh Fitzgerald says
I am chastened by your comments. I don’t follow, nor of course can I possibly know, German politics as you do. Still, I wonder if it is possible that Dobrindt (I think Seehofer is a different kettle of fish) was silent until 2017 precisely because he was in the cabinet, and as soon as he was out, felt he could, and did, speak his mind?
I also wonder who, other than Thilo Sarrazin, and Karl Lagerfeld (!), you think can be trusted on the matter of Islam in Germany? I would like a list, so I can start looking into them.
Thank you for your comment and, I hope, guidance. .
andra says
@ Hugh Fitzgerald
I am sure that Dobrindt wants to become a member of the next Bavarian cabinet. The votes are coming October and the AfD is threatening the CSU´s power in Bavaria. Dobrindt is as much untrustworthy as Seehofer or Merkel or all the other submissive lefties.
If the Germans do not stand up soon against these genoziders we will be lost.
Michael Stürzenberger and Thomas Böhm, two popular conservatives have called the patriots to ralley German-wide on June 17th against Merkel, islamization and imported violence. I wonder if we will be on the streets.
DFD says
Careful about Stürzenberger. He and Lachman could be working, or are suspected by some to be working, for the VS. Look at what happened to Pegida in Germany thanks to Lachman, reduced to neigh irrelevancy. Refer here also to Tatjana Fensterling – and she is definitely above suspicion. Another long term anti Islam fighter, about two decades, well informed and also connected with various gov sources, is Michael Mannheimer, as knowledgeable about Islam as Robert Spencer, though also heavily into the background politics. Like Tatjana, Michael had to flee Germany and lives now under protection – now look at them and the combination of Stürzenberger and Bachman … and the actions of the VS! Remember the NPD? They are truly right wing, but all the Nazi ‘stuff’, calls to violence etc., that has been done by VS agents, infiltrating the NPD! Proven fact. Same happened to the Republicans when they were on the rise – and like the AfD, the Republicans were slightly to the left of the original CDU. Remember: The original CDU existed until recently, until the Merkel/Soros subversion.
Are you aware that there are constant calls to to place the AfD under VS – observations? Not only by Die Linke, Die Grünen and others of similar ilk, but also by Seehofer and Co? Should ring a bell, shouldn’t it.
Also, have a look of the last connections had by all those anti Islam and anticommunist fighters or activists which have CONVENIENTLY died in recent – of ‘natural’ causes, deseases, suicides (why?) etc. Begin with Dr. Ulfcotte.
The European says
Well, I think things are different with Thilo Sarrazin. In 2010 he published his book “Deutschland schafft sich ab” (Germany abolishes herself). He was the first to break the “law of omerta,” talking publicly about the costs and risks of mass immigration from Third-World countries, about higher crime rates and higher unemployment rates among Muslim immigrants, about inbreeding, differences in intelligence between Turks and Germans, the poor performances of Musilm immigrants in school and academia and the rise of Islam, its implication for our civil society and the dangers of communitarianism. Unable to refute his statements for which he, being a brilliant Analyst, always provided conclusive statistics, mainstream media launched a witchhunt on him, almost tearing him to pieces. But he stood his ground and I admire him for that, he is sincere and trustworthy.
This is not the case with Horst Seehofer. He is still a member of Merkel’s cabinet, she even appointed him home secretary and, of course, did he sign the coalition agreement (Koalisationsvertrag) which enacts family reunifications. The new law on family reunifications will come into force in August 2018. From there on, every month 1000 and more ( emphasis should be put on the word “more”) family members of Muslim immigrants from Syria and other Muslim countries will be free to join their relatives who are already living in Germany.
I prefer judging politicians by their deeds rather than by their words. Telling the public that Islam is not part of Germany and then signing a law that allows Muslims to pour into Germany by the thousands is just double-crossing the people. He takes us for a ride, that’s all. As for Dobrindt, one might be tempted to believe him, if he had left the CSU and joined the ranks of the AFD. Has he done such a thing? No. Will he ever do it? Very unlikely.
DFD says
@Hugh Fitzgerald
I prepare a list for you, plus commentary upon the individuals concerned.
DFD says
The European
Indeed so, it’s a good cop – bad cop routine. Plus some electioneering (Bavaria) thrown in.
elee says
“Allah in heaven and Hitler on earth”
Does Germany want a part of its being that stands for the above? It did in the 30’s and 40’s.
mortimer says
Migration without assimilation is INVASION.
The political Pollyannas who claim (based on their authority) that Muslims can be assimilated, are speaking through their hat. They do not know even the NAMES of Islam’s primary source texts (let alone what is in them), and yet, preposterously, they CLAIM to be SPONTANEOUS EXPERTS on Islamic law, culture and MINDSET.
Muslims INSTINCTIVELY KNOW that they must HATE THE DIRTY KUFAAR ‘for the sake of Allah’ and never befriend them … they know it from their babyhood, since it inculcated from birth.
If there is NO GENUINE FRIENDSHIP possible between a Muslim and the DIRTY KUFAAR, then … SO MUCH FOR INTEGRATION or ASSIMILATION.
mortimer says
Bavarian Horst Seehofer has finally said it:
THE EMPEROR HAS NO CLOTHES … ISLAM IS NOT A PART OF GERMANY.
The TRUTH/REALITY dam has been breached in Germany and now anyone whoever speaks the truth will NOT BE SHOUTED down with taunts of racism. The dam will continue to leak a little and first and then the pent-up energy will burst forth in a stream of verbal opposition to Islam.
The facts of VICIOUS DAILY ISLAMIC ATTACKS are now there for all Germans to see. Muslims are not going to assimilate but remain SEPARATE and SUPREMACIST. Muslims will not change to lambs when Islam commands them to be wolves and ‘ISALMIC LIONS’ tearing the German sheep apart.
The only way to respond to UNRELENTING SUPREMACISM is to exclude the supremacists. It will be easier to do it now, rather than later. Germany should start to use its intellectual community to debunk Islam and discourage Muslims to stay in it. Once the intellectual atmosphere against Islam is unbearable and laws make it impossible to practice most of Islam, the most fanatical Muslims will mostly leave on their own.
jewdog says
Germany has been repentant and has assumed responsibility for her role in Nazi crimes, but seeing as repentance and self-criticism are so uncharacteristic of the Master Faith, it should be evident that Islam is not a part Germany. It bears a closer resemblance to Nazism in its supremacism, so perhaps it’s part of Germany’s dark side.
Granddaddy says
“What German laws, customs, values, understandings, what modes of artistic expression, what philosophy, what political theory, make modern democratic Germany and immutable Islam the least bit compatible?”
You could say the same thing about the US.
Relic says
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LKpsmA9cLu0
DFD says
“…Hugh Fitzgerald: Is Islam Really Part of Germany?…”
Is the Andromeda system part of Germany? Well, it certainly is more likely.
Ole Pederson says
Hugh Fitzgerald said Apr 13, 2018 at 7:05 pm
“I don’t follow, nor of course can I possibly know, German politics as you do”
Unfortunately, there are no politicians outside the AfD who can be trusted in this matter in Germany.
The only persons to be trusted in this way are not politicians or ex-politicians.
Michael Stürzenberger, formerly Christian Social Union (CSU) party has a Christian bias and is a bit pushy so some in his audiences may be repelled.
Hartmut Krauss from Münster University had a leftist background but is one of the few not silent, he writes books and articles – a bit too much academic language for the public. (I wish there was someone like the Austrian Ronald Bilik from a humanist free thought magazine).
AfD politicians are widely held to be Nazis or at least right-wing, because of the MSM (a few weirdos can be found in any party).
Gottfried Curio does some of the best speeches in the new Bundestag.
Carol (the 1st) says
Another fine article by Mr. Fitzgerald and the state of affairs these politicians describe is accurate and quite worth noting and repeating. Why even Martin Luther managed to roll over and contribute! (how about a campaign to nail his words to every front door! – we needn’t reveal WHO said it!)
The shocking downside is that we’ve accidentally unearthed a nest of vipers! – self-serving political lackeys who have undoubtedly taken a page from the Islamic “stacked-deck” playbook! Hugh has saved the day by humbly asked for more insider input from the natives, and, happy to say, many are pulling through for him. His next article about German politics should be interesting.
All of this reminded me of a video wherein a German former Iranian muslima describes her experiences and opinions.. She strongly trusts and believes in the AfD party as the main hope for Germany:
Expat Iranian explains Islam to germans
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u3FOz6M4l_c&t=658s