Gottfried Curio: The Koran Creates a Legal Conflict With Our Liberty-Oriented Democratic Constitution

Gottfried Curio is an up-and-coming politician for the AfD (Alternative für Deutschland, Alternative for Germany). In the following video he discusses the ghastly anti-liberal aspects of Islamic religious education.

Nash Montana, who translated the video for subtitling, also includes this summary from Politically Incorrect:

Dr. Gottfried Curio is the district chairman of the AfD in Steglitz-Zehlendorf, and on Saturday he was put in second place on the list in Berlin for the coming national elections. On February 16th he gave an extraordinary speech at the Berlin House of Representatives. Crystal-clear analysis, factual, and incontestable. There were people who constantly wanted to pose questions and interrupt his speech, most likely hyperventilating green-left dream dancers, to whom such a clear use of language on the topic of Islam must have seemed like some kind of heresy to their reality-denying tolerance-above-all-dogma. Curio was completely correct not to let these cement-ideologues steal his valuable time, and to stand tall while pushing through with his speech.

Many thanks to Vlad Tepes for the subtitling:


0:04   Dear presidents, dear representatives,
0:07   Religion can bring peace, but it can also radicalize.
0:10   Certain statements, for example, in the Koran,
0:13   endowed with direct divine authority,
0:16   and the exact wording “immutable”,
0:19   create a legal conflict with our liberty-oriented democratic Constitution,
0:22   the penal code, and our education act.
0:25   Our minor students have to be safeguarded from this conflict.
0:28   The AfD therefore requests that the Senate ensure that
0:31   anti-Constitutional instruction in religious education
0:34   of all denominations is barred.
0:37   What is this mainly about?
0:40   First, it’s about the division of the world, anchored deeply
0:43   in the Koran, into believers and so-called unbelievers, which is a word
0:46   that does not belong in a religious education that supports integration,
0:49   this with the stipulation of bringing Islam
0:52   out of the existing ‘house of Islam’
0:55   and into the ‘house of war’, into the world of the ‘unbelievers’,
0:58   even with the use of violence.
1:01   Textual sample: “Kill them wherever you find them;
1:04   it is a duty to fight, he has sent his prophet
1:07   with the one true religion so that he may have victory over all the religions,
1:10   seize them and kill them wherever you may find them.
1:13   Don’t grow weak in the persecution of the unbelievers;
1:16   fight until all worship is directed towards Allah alone;
1:19   kill the heathens wherever you find them,
1:22   smite the necks and hack off the fingers of those
1:25   that are the unbelievers; down with them.”
1:28   Do we want this, endowed with divine authority,
1:31   to be conveyed by a person commanding respect
1:34   as does a teacher, to underage children?
1:37   We have 12- to 15-year-old perpetrators!
1:40   Dr Curio, will you grant a question by representative Kabek? —No.
1:43   Or, we also have intolerant, integration-hostile
1:46   religious discrimination, textual sample:
1:49   “Do not make friendships except with your own kind;
1:52   they will not hesitate to corrupt you and to wish your demise.
1:55   Do not take unbelievers as friends, do not take Jews
1:58   and Christians as friends, do not take my and your enemy for a friend.
2:01   Allah has cursed the unbelievers and he has
2:04   prepared the flames for them.” This exceeds sedition!
2:07   “Those that are unbelievers
2:10   are the most vile of all of creation, worse than…
2:13   – Dr. Curio will you grant a question by Herr Dr. Altug? —No.
2:16   Or by Herr Walther? —No.
2:19   Worse than cattle are those in the eyes of Allah who are unbelievers.
2:22   The Jews speak of Uzair (Ezra) as Allah’s son;
2:25   the Nazarenes speak of the Messiah as Allah’s son.
2:28   May Allah strike them dead!”
2:31   Do we want this to be imparted to our underage children?
2:34   Or, concerning the treatment of women, for example:
2:37   “If you fear that women are rebelling, you warn them,
2:40   then you avoid them in the marital bed, and beat them.
2:43   Your women are for you a fertile field, go to that fertile field
2:46   whenever and however you want.” Mind you,
2:49   the beating of women is not only permitted, but it is required,
2:52   as is equally the sexual objectification of women to be a fertile field,
2:55   including marital rape. Or is this all not meant in that way?
2:58   Yes it is. The Koran itself already has built in a ban
3:01   on the possibility of a relativizing interpretation of it. For instance,
3:04   “There is no one who may change the words of Allah…” — There is another request to pose
3:07   a question from Frau Güttler… —No. “There is no one who may change the words of Allah.
3:10   This is the book of Allah; there is no cause
3:13   to argue that anyone could change Allah’s words.”
3:16   With this it is clear, Euro-Islam or Democratic Islam…
3:19   I am asking again: there is another question,
3:22   should I in general not approve them? —In general! —OK…
3:25   …are political wishful thinking that cannot be made into reality,
3:28   because the Koran itself does not admit a reinterpretation of its words.
3:31   In no way is a verbatim understanding of the Koran
3:34   to be considered Islamism; no, it is the meaning the Koran itself that demands
3:37   it be applied Islam, and not without good reason.
3:40   In 2008 Erdogan said words to the effect that
3:43   there is no Islam and Islamism, there is only one Islam,
3:46   and whoever says anything different insults Islam.
3:49   This dichotomy in the world, the treatment of the unbelievers,
3:52   the violent global missions, these aren’t some historical stories.
3:55   No, they are instructions
3:58   of permanent validity,
4:01   because they are immutable due to divine authorship.
4:04   And this also how it is understood and lived
4:07   by the believers. For 55% of European Muslims
4:10   religious commandments are more important
4:13   than the law of the land. And Islamic representatives
4:16   confirm the contradiction to our Constitutional law in the
4:19   Cairo declaration of human rights, such as:
4:22   “There are no crimes and punishments except for those determined in the Shariah;
4:25   it is forbidden to take the life of another,” except, of course, when the Shariah demands it.
4:29   And Michael Müller (in Berlin) employs State Secretary Sawsan Chebli
4:32   who thinks that Shariah is compatible with our Constitution!
4:36   Teachers of religion are to be compelled
4:39   not to treat such texts
4:42   only respectfully with reference
4:45   to their unlawful contents!
4:48   Whoever does not adhere to this obligation
4:51   is breaking the law. Anis Amri learned
4:54   ‘Kill the unbelievers’. Should this be taught?
4:57   It is our responsibility! Thank you.

15 thoughts on “Gottfried Curio: The Koran Creates a Legal Conflict With Our Liberty-Oriented Democratic Constitution

  1. The shouts in the background – I’d be interested to know what the objections were. The establishment always shies away from examining the meaning of Islam: It is one more factor that threatens their house of cards.

      • someone wanted to recall the trumpets of Jericho and the biblical violence that made the walls tumble down, maybe.

    • No, I don’t want to know what feeble excuses for islam they wanted to waste his time with. I absolutely love the way he immediately and calmly says ‘Nein!’ to all objections. That’s the way to treat them. We already know everything they are going to say. He did not say a single incorrect or racist thing, and everything he said needs to be known.

  2. Dr Curio actually stated that it was 65% of European Muslims who considered the Sharia to trump national law. 55% (as per subtitles/transcript) would be worrying enough, but let’s be accurate.

  3. Yes, that is so. (65%, he said.)

    Dr. Curio is telling the truth about the Koran and asking, rhetorically, entirely valid questions. But he’s “a right-wing extremist”etc. etc. In fact he’s a defender of Germany, a patriot. There is no-one so deaf as those who refuse to have ears. How long will it be before these refusers say “Why didn’t we listen?”

    • Yep, opposing misogyny, homophobia, antisemitism and hatred of ‘infidels’ is right-wing extremism these days. Every true liberal is thus a right-wing extremist.

    • Tragically, by the time they actually say “Why didn’t we listen?” the rot will have already be so deeply entrenched that it will be nigh on impossible to reverse the catastrophic damage done to the likes of Germany/France and Sweden. At least the Netherlands has a small chance of reversing the rot but only if the heroic Geert Wilders has success.

  4. Yes. And what has Germany learnt so far. Nothing apparently because they are ready to either Schulz or Merkel. Schulz who is worse than Merkel is currently ahead.
    – What concerns me about Germany is not its desire to commit suicide but rather the use of its economic power to force others in the EU to commit suicide, as well.

  5. “the koran creates a legal conflict with our liberty-oriented democratic constitution.” it is the same conflict communists have with it, that is why they are colonizing your countries with muslims.

  6. It is uncommon hearing a German politician speaking up so loud and clear against the threat of islam’s ideology, and resisting bravely attempts of many Quislings to silence him.

  7. It is indeed heartening to hear a German speaking so decisively, what is dismaying is the reaction of the listeners; from those who would rebuff his comments, to those who smiled and looked around in embarrassed stupidity.

    What on earth is wrong with Germans-are they blind to what is happening around them?
    (not only Germans!)

Comments are closed.