“The Burkini is a Visible Sign of This Declaration of War”

The following discussion of the context of the burkini controversy was written in German and mainly concerns recent events in France. Many thanks to Nash Montana for translating this post from Gudrun Eussner’s blog.

Visit the original article to find the rest of the links and images:

The Burkini is the Islamic Declaration of War

In France and Germany, the debate around the burkini is causing waves, over there high ones; over here small ripples. The arguments against the burkini are numerous, but most of them miss the target.

That piece of fabric does not infringe on secularism. Hygiene also isn’t a good enough argument. It is opposing the peaceful coexistence of (still) non-Islamic states, in which it is being paraded on women’s bodies at the beach and at public pools.

Next to the headscarf, the hijab, the niqab, the burka, next to beard and nightgown and crochet cap, the burkini is one more uniform of these religious warriors. The so-called disguises show a worried and increasingly baffled society the status of their Islamization, and to the Muslims they signal how far they can go without meeting any opposition.

The Left and other Islamophilic media sources take the side — due to their ideology and/or their business interests with Islamic-ruled states — of the critics of a burkini ban: Force (SPIEGEL), Hysteria (WELT), Police intervene (ZEIT), not the Burkini but the judiciary splits society (ZEIT), police heat up burkini debate (FAZ). Italy won’t even begin to try to ban the burkini, purely out of fear of terrorist attacks by Muslims. Le Figaro reports about the debate neutrally. Refreshing!

The shares of Arabic investors of German and French companies, media and/or advertising revenues of the U.A.E. and others cannot be compromised. To that end, one gladly sells out our Western values, and puts an end to the roots of our common mutual norms! Those values stymie the manipulation and domination of our citizens anyway. Away with the Ten Commandments, bring us the rules of Islam!

Such shares are meaningless? Never laughed harder! In Manhattan, Qatar Investment Authority (QIA) just bought 10% of the Empire State Building! Islam also buys into symbols and pillars of Western culture and civilization, see the “Day of the Open Mosque” during our National Holiday. In French we call that “faire de l’entrisme”, a “tactic employed by certain organizations (unions, political parties) with the intent of planting members into another organization in order to change their methods and goals.”

Hello, Shariah Party Germany!

Kuwait has had a 6.8% share at Daimler for decades. Now one can finally figure out why the Daimler boss Dieter Zetsche, the guy with the funny white mustache, is so enthusiastic about Muslim immigrants. And besides, who of all the institutional and private investors are Muslims has not been shown with this, either. But it’s entirely plausible that Daimler is going to soon add to their star the Arabic half-moon. Allahu Akbar!

How could it be any other way than that George Soros’ hands are directly or indirectly involved in this? In France there exists an Islamic association which files suit against the Burkini ban in all cities and towns, and on all levels of court: The Comité contre l’Islamophobie en France (CCIF) is financed by that friend of mankind George Soros. You can see the logo of the CCIF is below right. The association has worked for the Islamization of France since 2003. Their representative, Marwan Muhammad, who is coordinating all the lawsuits, explained during a conference in the year 2002, in a mosque in Orly:

Qui a le droit de dire que la France dans trente ou quarante ans ne sera pas un pays Musulman? Personne n’a le droit de nous nier cet espoir là!

“Who has the right to say that France, in thirty or forty years from now, isn’t going to be a Muslim country? Nobody has the right to deny us this hope.”

Jean-Patrick Grumberg spent some time with the logo of the CCIF on DREUZ.info, on January 11, 2013. He asks, “Qui est vraiment cet étrange CCIF qui poursuit Ivan Rioufol en justice.” Who is really this weird CCIF that persecutes Ivan Rioufol? Ivan Rioufol is a journalist and columnist at the ‘Le Figaro’. Grumberg begins the examination of the logo in the form as it is posted on the website of the CCIF. One wonders about the order and the composition of the letters, but both C’s, the smaller one mirror-inverted below the bigger C, could be read as an S, and pronounced that would be “sif”, سَيْف, ‘The Sword’. This is a popular first name with radical Muslims.

Then Jean-Patrick Grumberg turns the logo 90 degrees to the right, so that the “f” turns into a stylized Arabic sword in the way that it is shown on the national flag of Saudi Arabia, the shahada flag: La ilaha illahah Muhammadur Rasulullah. It means the spreading of Islam with the sword.

In Western countries we call this sword swung by religious warriors a “machete”, just like in France the suicide murderers aren’t called assassins, after the Muslim Assassins of Hasan-e Sabah, but kamikaze. The redirection away from Islam as the source of terrorist actions.

The website of the CCIF has been redesigned in the meantime and has been freed of its logo. The name has also been slightly changed; the committee is now a collective, which works a lot better for the enrollment of a leftist clientele. Ultimately Marwan Muhammad, born in 1978, father Egyptian, mother Algerian, author and statistician, has worked himself into the ranks of the OSCE, which will strengthen the CCIF’s position in France. Said association has, according to their executive director, 5,000 members by now who have dedicated themselves — to the benefit of a smooth Islamization of France — to make criticism of Islam based on scientifically-funded expression of opinions into an offense that can be legally prosecuted (Picture of Marwan Muhammad with zebiba — banged forehead — symbol of practicing Muslims).

The project CCIF can be documented with various concepts from the world of conquerors: ‘taqizza’ or ‘mudarah’ — the deception towards unbelievers, in the Sunni Islam also known as ‘kutman’ — the hiding of one’s own position. Sunni Muslims use their diaspora to deceive. It is seen as a legitimate means of deceiving unbelievers. This particular behavior is called ‘iham’ — the deception towards unbelievers. From the word ‘kutman’ comes in French the word ‘Catimini’ — secretiveness.

Governments, authorities, institutions and the media of (not yet) Islamic States refuse to see the Islamic declaration of war and to meet it appropriately.

The Burkini is a visible sign of this declaration of war.

24 thoughts on ““The Burkini is a Visible Sign of This Declaration of War”

  1. I am kind of torn in the case of the ban of burqa and burkini. Not because I think they right, far from it, but it is a visible symptom of a much larger problem. By suppressing the symptom the “disease” is not cured just hidden while it continue to progress until the “host” cannot be saved.

    • good point. same do I. islam shall be outlaw at all with no excuse. mosquees closed down. islamic culture and studies associations and schools too. all the islamic propaganda terminated. to do this there is need to fight back.but no political forces on the ground want right now.

  2. I think we should pick our battles. Issues like the burka, the face veil, sharia courts and extremist education should be the focus, not what women swim in. France has reached the point where it punishes school girls who wear dresses below the knees or Christians who wear modest swim wear. If the burkini is banned, it will only hurt Muslim women who will not be allowed to swim at all and increase the dominance of male relatives.

    • The Muslim women are already under the domination of Muslim males. It’s part of the culture.

      The point of the article is, the aggressive display of Muslim culture is part of the conquest of their host society. It sets the stage for further demands, such as time off for prayer, halal food, suppression of disrespect for Islam and the like.

      The French culture has certain facets, such as the way beaches have traditionally looked. It is a valid viewpoint that French citizens should not have to be subjected to a Moroccan beach when they are in France. If the Muslim women want to be completely Muslim, why did they come to France in the first place? If they are unwilling to change any aspect of their existence to adapt to their host country, they can stay away from the beach.

      A country has a right to maintain its culture, identity and people. Migrants should accept that or not come at all.

      • Those Indian Islamic mongrels migrants are just using their inferior Islamic culture to perpetuate more discrimination against us nonbelievers.

        They don’t belong to Western countries.

        Those Islamic mongrels who are already well-off are getting even more filthy rich and disgustingly inconsiderate in imposing and pushing their substandard way of life and inflicting all sorts of inconveniences and hardships onto us nonbelievers.

        It is time those Islamic mongrels put a stop to all their nonsense.

      • It is also another one of their attention seeking scam that seek to enrich their own Islamic coffers and thus enable to have an “upper hand” to impose their endless unpleasant Islamic culture onto the free world.

      • Those Islamic women should not expect us nonbelievers to follow blindly their “fashion”. They may desperate to sell or profit from their so-called fashionable dressing but they should not force it onto the free world.

      • Why do they come? Because we pay them handsomely to come. That’s why. Why would they not come? We don’t care about us. Why should they? They are Muslims. We are infidels. We know what the Koran says. We hear what they rage and rant about from the mosques we give them licence to build everywhere. They make no secret of their ideological obligation to kill us off, They lie, cheat, steal, rape, plot and plunder. They carry out every threat with bulletins, bombs, bullets, machetes, knives, gang rapes and bloody massacres. We have the problem. If we don’t take responsibility then we succumb. “Islam is Islam”.

    • I see no problem with burkini. Let’s face it, swim wear was much more modest in the West until Bardot made the bikini famous. Many westerners would prefer more modest coverings for various reasons: one being a body that no wants to see in any case; 2. exposure to UV can be dangerous to many people; 3. Many Christians would prefer a more modest alternative to beachwear. Women seem to enjoy fashion no matter what their backgrounds. Creating “fashionable” burkinis could be a very small step to liberalization.

  3. Part, not all, of the vulnerability of France and the other Western countries, stems from their refusal to live within their means. When their governments bloat their budgets through politically-popular welfare measures, or by direct spending such as bloated bureaucracies, excessive building, vanity projects such as the Olympics, or subsidies on common items. they have to find the money somewhere: and where are there larger pools of cash lying around than in the Muslim oil states?

    The country that just outright bans foreign investments in important areas of the economy, such as communications, education, religious institutions, automatically cuts down on the amount of deficit spending it is able to accomplish. This is extremely difficult for a political system in which politicians buy the favor of their voters.

    I think direct payments of political leaders is becoming more common. The Clintons are probably the most sophisticated example. The direct pay for favors model is dead or irrelevant. If there is explicit bargaining, there is too much risk in being taped.

    This network of corruption gives the Islamists a great deal of latitude to carry out the culture wars described by Gudrun Eussner. The Islamists have access to lawyers and the courts. Their political pressures prevent the parliaments, or congresses, from passing unambiguous legislation forbidding the Islamic symbols in public. In the US, the Justice Department actually throws its legal resources into making sure no locality or state asserts its own identify against the cultural invasion.

  4. The burkini is not the problem. Islam is the problem. I frequently drive through a very strictly Jewish suburb, where the married women cover their hair completely, the older ladies with wigs, the younger ones with veils that are a little like large hairnets that you can’t see through and generally dress modestly to the point that many modern Australians would regard as overdoing it on a hot day. The men always dress in dark suits, whatever the weather, and wear beards and often large and characteristic hats. In their dress and no doubt in many other areas of these lives, these people set themselves apart from the generality of society. But they don’t try to force their beliefs or practices on the rest of us, they stay out of trouble at least as much as the general population and most of all they never, ever try to blow us up! Fact is, with elements of our Jewish community we in the West have had a visibly different minority living among us for centuries and I think it fair to say it’s been our fault, not theirs, when there have been pogroms and worse. Back to the burqini–being fair (in a country not made for white people, hence the skin cancer rates), fat and well over 40, I’d be covering myself up rather a lot at the beach or the swimming pool, and at the latter that might even include a bathing cap that would (agh!) cover my hair. The French force burqinis off the beach–and somewhere I read that they’d begun doing the same to nuns. Well, I suppose it beats chopping their heads off, which they did only a couple of centuries ago. Honestly, that’s as oppressive as requiring people all to dress like Muslims. Let’s pick the battles that matter–the problem is with Islam. Banning a harmless outward manifestation of it while otherwise proclaiming how wonderful and peaceful it is, and inviting more of its practitioners in, only breeds resentment and doesn’t deal with the real problem. (Full face coverings, I hasten to add, are not harmless.) We need to confront the core of the belief system head on, and explain that when Muslims blow people up it isn’t a fault of ‘religion’ in general, but of that very specific belief system that is Islam. And then we’ve got to work out what to do about it.

    • Without their so-called oil wealth or so-called dominance, they would not even dare to terrorize or impose any of their inferior filthy Islamic nonsense onto the free world.

      There is nothing great about their Islam or their Islamic culture.

      People in the free world should be free to wear modestly or what is most suitable for the environment.

      • The West made a deal with the Devil in their desire for cheap oil. The US now has the capability of producing ALL the oil and natural gas it needs. It will soon be able to abandon mid-east oil. When Germany shut down its nuclear power to ‘go green’, they made themselves more dependent on Russia and the mid-east.

    • Context matters. The context in France is: ‘we just showed you jihad in Nice, and we will show you jihad at the beach’.

      I very much doubt that the French authorities would have had any problem with bathers, male or female, who wanted to wear a long-sleeved shirt for sun protection. There are many things of the sort for surfers. With exposed hair and legs at least partly exposed, one can still be sun-safe while obviously not trying to rub in islamic dress.

      Btw, even if orthodox Jews don’t plan to inflict their clothing on others, I’ve read articles about women ‘incorrectly’ dressed being abused and spat at in orthodox suburbs in Jerusalem. Rather weakened my normally pro-Israel stance. Why stand up for yet another ideology that treats women as second-class?

      All these views of women’s bodies and hair being somehow sinful and shameful are a complete insult to all women.

    • well, as for the jewish orthodox habits, I could not agree more.But one should not misinterpret their inoffensive behaviour. Thanks for not blowing me up.
      As a matter of fact “we”, the christians and/ or secular westerners are as much miscreants to them as we are for muslims. I was told by a person of jewish descent that the orthodox look on us with disdain and do consider us as not worthy human beeings. They don’ t even call Christ by his name but use nicks like ” the you know who” or ” ist nisht gestaign und ist nisht geflogn”( the one who did neither climb nor fly, to heaven that is).

  5. The thing to ask your lefty bleeding heart liberal friends (that’s if you have any) is this:

    Is Islam a good thing?

    Do you want more of it in Europe?

    Sit back and watch them squirm for an answer.

    • del-

      Many leftists are so mentally-challenged that they would vehemently answer “YES!” to both questions you pose.

  6. Salome, I agree with most of what you said. Everyone has or should have, the right to dress as they wish on the beach or at the lake or the swimming pool. However, this has somehow gotten yanked into the culture war (or clash of religion war).

    When I had a sunburn but still wanted to go to the pool, I covered up — not out of modesty or stinking Islam, but to protect my skin.

    Oh, I am so discouraged these days. During the crusades, people knew what was happening and fought back. Today it’s so different that people probably don’t know what to do (besides, in Europa they are unarmed).

    Islam is the problem. It will not go away by itself. It will have to be escorted (or driven violently) back to its home, which is somewhere in the middle east.

    • There is definitely a chance for swimwear designers to get creative here and promote Sexy Suncover Swimsuits that clearly show the lovely female form in nice colours while protecting our arms and torsos. Zippers please, for easy changing.

      Free hair and partly uncovered legs will differentiate us from those who think there is something indecent about female beauty.

  7. ….. and, from the 1.9 million immigrants who are to re-energize Europe’s lacklustre economies, how many has Mercedes actually employed, I wonder ?

    • they gave a chance to 8 trainees, I heard. Other companies were not very happy with their new colleagues, due to their zealous peformance and their problem to get […] out of bed in the morning, not to mention to stand through the murderous 9- 5 workday pattern.

  8. Everything they do in dress, actions, public behavior and interactions with others is geared towards Islamic supremacy.

  9. This “forum” of commenters is, quite possibly the most intelligent and highly educated group of people, when it comes to the politics of islam, that I encounter in my roaming about the “web”; However, It seems to me that there is a severe lacking in the understanding of the “religious”, and military elements of Islam.
    Islam cannot be separated into the three elements of human interaction mentioned above. The political, religious, and military elements MUST be distinguished, and WE must use our own language to make the delineation, not in the words they have “told” us we must use to describe each of them.
    Until the “west” begins using the language we have developed to categorize the different elements, we will never begin to defeat the take-over which is well underway.
    Anyway, back to my original point, which I have yet to mention.
    The “dress” of muslims/islamists, is a uniform of their cult, and should be understood as such. It is no different than that of a Nun or a Priest, or the Jewish faith, or even Mormons. They wear the uniform of their “faith”, and by their colors we will know them.
    There is more to this, but I haven’t the time to evaluate and post it all now.

Comments are closed.