One Day Our Children Will Ask Us: Why Didn’t You Put a Stop to That?

The following op-ed is from the conservative online daily newspaper Many thanks to JLH for the translation:

One Day Our Children Will Ask Us: Why Didn’t You Put a Stop to That?

by Klaus Kelle
April 8, 2017

Anyone who paid attention in history class knows how often horrifying political developments were not stopped because there was no determined resistance by the decent people, and no leaders who had the confidence to stand up and protest loudly. There are many examples of that, if you think for instance of the failure of the middle class in the Weimar Republic, squeezed between communists and the National Socialists, who both had only contempt and mockery for democrats. Or take the appeasement policy of the Western powers toward Hitler. When it had long before become obvious that National Socialist Germany would assert and follow through on territorial claims, there were still negotiations, implausible ultimatums, and palaver, palaver, palaver. How the brownshirt rulers must have laughed at the Daladiers and Chamberlains, who believed, in all seriousness, that they could appeal to Hitler’s discernment and desire for peace. The price of this miscalculation was 55 million dead around the world. A consistent course of action by the other European powers could have stopped the madness.

But no one was prepared to take responsibility for such action. As Robin Alexander unsparingly described it in his bestseller Die Getriebenen (“The Driven”): the decision to close the German borders had already essentially been made in Berlin in the autumn of 2015; units of the federal police had been posted to Bavaria. All that was needed was a responsible person who would say “Go!” And who would accept the fact that, in the following days videos and pictures would go around the world, showing a country systematically enforcing its laws — and, as Wolfgang Bosbach[1] so aptly put it — returning to an “orderly procedure.” But there was no one like that, so our borders were open for many weeks to an unregulated and — to a great extent — uncoordinated mass immigration from the Islamic world. Messrs. Erdogan and Orban have eventually brought it about that Mrs. Merkel’s regime was able to step forward and brag that the number of immigrants coming to Germany had considerably lessened. Although she herself had nothing to do with that.

The consequences of the failure of state rules and institutions, the inability to control a major crisis which is gripping all of Europe and which more than a few people regard as an approaching war of Islamist fanatics against us all, are obvious. It is obvious in the increasingly frequent terrorist attacks, as recently in Stockholm. In London, Paris, Brussels, Nice, Berlin, Ansbach, Würzburg — all forgotten again? Honor killings in residences in Germany and hate preaching in mosques everywhere in Europe — are they all just regrettable incidents? North African hordes attacking hundreds of women on New Year’s Eve. Was it “only” in Cologne, or also in Hamburg, Bielefeld, Düsseldorf, Stuttgart? Why do the country’s elites close their eyes to what is happening here? The German security services know of around 500 “likely threats.” These are Islamists who are prepared to commit the most heinous crimes here, while roaring “Allahu Akbar.” There are said to be 800 of them in the Brussels area. In the banlieues of Paris and Marseille and in Swedish suburbs, cars are burning. Almost all the rapes of women in Norway — according to official statistics three years ago — were committed by men from that certain “cultural circle.” Of course, when speaking of these incidents, one does like to not mention “culture.”

Last weekend, camping on the Rhine near Bonn, a young women was dragged out of her tent and raped by “a dark-skinned man” with a machete. The perpetrator has not yet been caught. Last year, our daughter was on a class trip to London and found herself alone in an area with a high proportion of Muslims. She called me on her cell phone, in tears, and said she was afraid, because because grinning “young men” were coming too close to her. She ran to a police car in the area and stayed near it for a quarter of an hour before daring to run for the closest subway station and escape. In the Fall of 2016, a neighbor of ours wanted to gather chestnuts with her daughter in our quiet little, out-of-the-way city park. She didn’t last a minute, because dark-skinned men were drinking there in broad daylight, and making obscene gestures to her. The two of them ran from that nightmare.

Do our elites see none of this? Are they just too cowardly to accept responsibility? Are they perhaps helpless in the face of these challenges? I don’t know, but it has to stop. Soon! It is destroying our societies and trust in our governments. Anti-Semitism is spreading all across Europe, especially in Germany. And it is not the anti-Semitism of the Right, but the anti-Semitism of Islamic fanatics. Not MUSLIMS altogether, naturally, but the insane among them.

Last night I was a guest at a discussion in Düsseldorf. There were also immigrants in the audience, who had lived here a comparatively long time and were well-integrated. One woman who had come from Russia twenty years ago related that she had wanted to leave there, because she had lived under Communism in the Soviet Union and hoped for a good future in Germany. And she asked: “What’s up with you Germans? Why are you allowing your country and your freedom to be destroyed?”

Our West European societies are in a warlike evolution. Anyone who watches the news or can read a newspaper can see it. One day, our children will ask us “Why did you allow that? Why didn’t you do something against this attack on our free and open societies?”

1.   Long-serving CDU member of the Bundestag, retired this year because of bad health to become a staff writer for Bild.

38 thoughts on “One Day Our Children Will Ask Us: Why Didn’t You Put a Stop to That?

  1. The elites do not try and stop or oppose tbe islamization of Europe because that is the end result that they are trying to achieve; maybe they think they can co-opt the monster they have created before they are gobbled up too. I think they secretly loathe themselves, and that is why this is being allowed to happen. The average person is most likely too distracted to notice the problem, or too brainwashed to think islamization is a problem. Those who do notice are mostly powerless to do anything with lasting results. Voting is a rearguard action; a recourse of the powerless, since voting does nothing if you cannot win majorities. And the precious few who take direct action, burning down the rapefugee centers, are the equivalent of the brave three hundred at Thermopylae who held back the hordes to buy precious time with their lives, but were ultimately betrayed and killed to the last man. It takes much courage to defy the full power of the state, and most have too much to lose and not enough conviction to embark on such a course of defiance.

    The failure to act is both a measure of the futility of individual acts in the face of the power of the elites and their willing accomplices, and the lack of will to confront both the state and islam. The war against islam could be won in a single afternoon; every muslim center of population from Islamabad to Riyadh vaporized in a single afternoon, and the survivors starved to death over the next several months by an embargo on all shipments of food to islamic lands. Such would require us to become as cruel as them, and to harden our hearts to the human tragedy it would undoubtedly be. That we do not do so as Westerners when we have the ability to do so is both our biggest strength and our biggest weakness. The mullahs would most certainly do the same to us if they had the means to.

    In the end it is a value judgement; is it better to sacrifice the bravest and best among the youth of the West in an interminable war to go after the truly evil for decades or even centuries of conflict while many innocents on both sides are killed? Or strike quickly and decisively with all of our strength even if it meant slaughtering millions of innocents in order to spare many more millions on both sides?

    • I think the elite is realized the generic population IQ still too high (despite efforts to “relax” education). Also they looking for an ideology which encompasses the whole life of the masses and one which is resistant to change. (Well islam is unchanged for 1400 years, which is a record, after all Christianity is toothless now).
      I have a great comment I found some time ago under an article about islam connection to the elite:

      “The globalists LOVE Islam. It’s everything they could possibly want in a false religion. They love its brutality, the way it viciously polices its own and crushes dissent from within. They love its dehumanization, how it turns its followers into little more than human ammunition, eager to be spent in the slaughter of infidels. They love its crushing of spirit, how it keeps entire populations ignorant of history and science while living in destitute poverty, convincing them that fighting the infidels is more important than civilian infrastructure. They love its real rape culture, the way it reduces women and girls to mere livestock, to be raped or beaten or killed or sold on a whim. But most of all, they love its system of unquestioning loyalty, how its followers wouldn’t dare think twice if their imams told them to butcher that person or blow up that kindergarten or beat their own daughter to death. This is why the demonic death cult of Islam has been chosen by the globalists as the official false religion of their new world order.” – cyberjacques

      • Don’t forget the consumerist aspect of the ideology either-

        I can remember newspaper articles in Algeria estimating 50% of all food prepared nightly for Ramadan was thrown out…what a selling opportunity!

    • Your solutions are crazy.

      Why attack every Muslim population center in every Muslim country? It’s insane. Also totally immoral. Also, totally ineffective. The Muslims in Muslim countries aren’t any danger. It’s the Muslims in our countries. So, you would kill the Muslims who aren’t a threat, and are pretty fuzzy on your actions towards the Muslims who are a threat.

      • Not every Japanese in Hiroshima and Nagasaki were evil either, most likely very few were guilty or complicit in the war their leaders herded them into; the destruction of both cities ended a war and saved the lives of far more on both sides who would have died had it been necessary to invade the home islands.

        I do not disagree that vaporizing centers of population is an immoral act. My view is coldly logical; leaving alone an enemy who would undoubtedly harm you in the same way if it could, will one day result in exactly such actions being taken against you when the day arrives that your enemy has aquired the means to do so. It is not possible to reform islam; certainly not under duress were we to make the threat. Such action by the forces of islam against us does not need to take the form of vaporized cities either; an incurable genetically engineered plague is certainly within reach of the more advanced islamic countries, and it is only a matter of time before groups such as Hamas, Hezbollah, and ISIS also have such capability. A totalitarian theology that believes it is the duty of every member to slaughter infidels, and that death during jihaad will lead to an eternity of sexual debauchery in paradise, cannot be deterred by the logic of MAD. The threat becomes existential, and to save billions, the deaths of many millions becomes necessary. And then repeated as often as necessary should such violent ideology as islam survive and persist in it’s threats to nonbelievers.

        As to whether it becomes preferable to either engage in religicide and the deaths of many millions, to fight endless war with an enemy who is seeking the means of slaughtering the entire West with no qualms about doing so either were to aquire such means, or to roll over and accept living under the islamic boot to avoid such bloodshed, is a value judgement the individual reader must decide. Because ultimately, one of those three options are the only choices available to the Western world whether it wants to accept it or not.

        • My dad was an American combat veteran of the Army; a
          hardened soldier of battles against the Nazis in N. Africa,
          Italy and Germany.

          As such, he would have most assuredly had to keep on
          fighting, landing on the shores of Japan … IF President
          Truman hadn’t had the guts to use what he had to end
          that damned war!

          I’m sorry it had to be done; but it had to be done . . and
          Truman did it – and he slept soundly that night after
          making the decision.

        • The Hiroshima bomb completely wiped out the entire Southern Command of the Honshu military (those we would have had to deal with in an invasion) – a fantastic blow. The Nagasaki bomb was landed right between the two largest remaining war material factories left in Japan including Mitsubishi.

        • Furthermore, the idea of nuking every Muslim country is simply insane.

          You want to nuke Indonesia, the country with the largest Muslim country in the world, and totally nonthreatening to the US? Want to nuke Bosnia and Kosovo, wiping out Serbia, Bulgaria, Croatia, etc? You want to wipe out Chechnya, sending nuclear missile or bombers over Russia? I’m sure Putin would be fine with that. You want to nuke Iraq, Syria, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia and wipe out Israel as collateral damage? I’m sure Israel Prime Minister Netanyahu would sympathize with your desire to sterilize the world.

          Send nuclear missiles to Xinjiang, China to wipe out the Unghars? I’m sure China would be inconvenienced, but not too upset at a nuclear attack on its territory. All for a good cause.

      • I agree that moslems here in western countries are the problem, so the obvious solution would appear to be to get moslems in the west to ‘go home’, because they are never going to integrate and become patriotic, contributing citizens in any western country, and in fact as long as they follow their terror manual (koran) they will never be anything other than deadly trouble in western countries.

        Where did the moslems currently invading the west come from? You know they came from islamic countries, where they read the koran (if they can) and hate us, therefore, Moon does have a point–they are the enemy, and always will be; and they are in our countries, and can be radicalized anytime, by a visit to any mosque.

        And this is the ‘future’ for the west?

      • because its war, the main capabilities of the most dangerous islamic states need to be destroyed and more if needed.

        would you prefer that more muslim countries get nukes? if you don’t prevent a holocaust on the world. history won’t judge you well.

        • History will not judge you at all because there will be no one left alive to judge.

      • Yup, no point in bombing Japan from 1942 to 1945, the bad Japanese were someplace else: Singapore, Okinawa, etc.

        Glad you were not around then running the Army Air Force.

      • Sorry Ronald B, I have to agree with “The Moon is a Harsh Mistress”…
        War is always a dirty business, but there is simply no other way. Just pushing back islam to its already conquered territories do nothing but pushes this curse into our children’s care.
        We must deal with this issue NOW! We cannot leave this festering boil to anybody else. Our job as the present generation is to rid of humanity from this cancer, so next generations can be live in peace!

        • Let it not be forgotten that the influx of Muslims into Europe and problems it produced is first and foremost the fault of European elites.

          On the one hand, they imposed the ideology of multiculturalism and political correctness, thus encouraging Muslim migrants to misbehave.

          On the other hand, on the pretext of imposing ‘democracy’ on Islamic countries, they destroyed the stable secular authoritarian regimes, which fought Muslim extremists and provided safe space for Christians and other religious minorities, as well as relatively decent living standards (Iraq, Libya, and Syria), thus sending millions of Muslim refugees to other countries, including their own.

          Is it a crime or a blunder, I wonder?

      • I don’t take disagreements personally, but continue to deal on a logical basis.

        I will send a $100 check to anyone showing any posting I made critical of the bombing, conventional and otherwise, of Japan in World war II. It was a war, and the first priority of war is to save your own people. If that means killing enemy soldiers or enemy civilians, it would be immoral for a commander to not do so. This means, the death of enemy civilians has to directly benefit your war effort; not a vague “lower morale” rationale.

        It’s true that if the US had waited a bit, Japan may have surrendered. That’s not our affair. It was a war.

        Now, here’s the crux: would bombing and obliteration of Muslim countries benefit the US and other Western countries?

        Again, if we’re going to take drastic action, which is easier, more controllable, and less risky by far? The expulsion of Muslims, of course. Bombing Muslim countries, including countries not a present military threat, like Saudi Arabia, or Indonesia, would for 100% certain bring loads of Muslim refugees into the country.

        Just keep them out, you say? You could do that without the bombing.

        There is the argument that the Muslim countries will eventually gain the means to launch nuclear weapons, and will do so when they can, so let’s have a prevention holocaust and wipe them out before they get the chance.

        Well, you had exactly the same arguments with the USSR: some people in the military wanted to erase the threat. It does have a certain appeal: assure your own safety by wiping out any potential enemy in the world before he gets a chance to develop.

        Would such a strategy assure our survival?

        Consider this: civilizations rot from the inside; they aren’t generally overrun from the outside while they’re at full strength. This is definitely true in the case of the Muslim conquests of the Byzantine Empire and the Middle East. It is true in the case of the western Roman Empire, where the Germanic tribes just moved in, because the Roman empire had depopulated.

        Law of Civilization and Decay … An exposition of the tendency of civilizations to die of natural causes

        The strategy of wiping out any country that may become a threat in the future sounds to me like a solution of desperation, ultimately ending in suicide, like living in a sterile bubble for fear of getting infected by some outside bug. If we removed all outside threats, our own population would deteriorate in quality. This is a natural biological process: population characteristics deteriorate in the absence of environmental stresses.

        Stephan Molyneux interview with Michael Woodley … researcher par excellence on evolutionary intelligence

        So, the choice seems to be, shore up our own defenses, the quality of our population and our resistance to infectious organisms (like Muslims, a virulent infectious organism indeed), or surround ourselves by an environmental bubble by trying to kill all the pathological organisms in the vicinity. I myself think the only way to go forward is to take the risk of improvement and engagement, rather than isolation and sterility.

        • At what point do they become an existential threat?

          After they continue to breed like muslims for another generation or two and they have majority population in every western country? Or when they reach 90 percent population everywhere?

          Islam is a threat because it is unreformable, and it functions like a virus in that once a locality has been infected by muslims, they continue to expand and multiply until every resource has been consumed and the host has been killed. The reason for wiping out entire countries is that we have the ability to do so and they do not yet have such abilities; if we do not while we are strong then they will do so to us as soon as they are able to. It is not enough that most muslims are peaceful (debateable); their leaders most certainly are not, and the only thing necessary for terrorist attacks of increasing intensity is a muslim population.

          Detente and MAD worked with the Soviet Union because their leaders also loved their children and were somewhat rational; they didn’t want to slaughter every non-communist in the same way that islamists want to slaughter every non-muslim.

          The end goal, in my opinion, is eliminating islam as a political, religious, and cultural power. If populations of muslims are willing to voluntarily do so or even under duress, that is certainly preferable to vaporizing cities. But they absolutely cannot be allowed to remain in their own countries to fester and metastasize.

          Attempts to modernize them such as in Turkey under Attaturk did not even last a full century, as Turkey slips back into a new caliphate, but with modern weapons and the tools of western science at its disposal. No one wants to use weapons of mass destruction, but there is rapidly approaching a time (if we have not already passed it) when we will have no other option except to submit to the muslim conquerors.

  2. As Hungary and Poland have shown all it takes is the people rising up and electing nationalist leaders who will, in turn, protect the nation and end the migrant crisis (including sending most of those who’ve arrived illicitly back).

    But, what you see is most of the European people are still too committed to the program of the Left, which includes dysgenic immigration, utopianism and pathological altruism to take the simple life affirming act of voting for the sane Rightist candidates that almost every country in Europe has. Le Pen, Gert Wilders, the AfD, the UKIP.

    Everyone is celebrating LePen finishing second in 6 or 7 person race, where she got 21% of the vote. This after monthly killings since the Charlie Hebdo massacre, and thousands of small daily provocations from the muslim groups in France already.

    It’s amazing and pathetic at the same time. So strong is the ideology and virtue signaling of the Left that entire nations will allow themselves to be brought to ruination rather than reject it.

    It’s interesting that the only nations in Europe that are effectively standing against it are former Communist ones. It’s almost like they have been immunized against PC BS by their decades under USSR domination.

    • Yes, the communists and the terror of living under communism crushed our souls and made us immune to [propaganda].We had to fight every day against the brainwashing and we had to maintain inside the free spirit that we could not expose to others and even to ourselves.
      People here they have no idea .
      Read The “Gulag Archipelago” by Soljenitzin and I am sure you will not be so amazed anymore.
      Then think about the fact that we in the east where conquered for hundred of years by mahomedans and we fought forever against them.
      While the west was sleeping and was able to evolve culturally and economically. Because of the Eastern Europe sacrifices the west could stay in peace.So now is the time for the west to [wake up] but they do not have the strength to do it.They lost their resolve.
      I am not surprised.I see it every day.
      Frankly, I live in Western Europe, Canada and USA and the only country that still has some testicles is USA.
      Canada is full of PC zombies and Europe does not have real men anymore.
      We lost the battle in Europe.
      We lost Austria, Holland and we will loose France.Germany is already lost, they will vote that criminal again.
      So say your good byes.

  3. I have often thought of the same thing, what will future generations have to say about the West’s out-and-out collaboration with the Jihad, and their alliance to destroy the West? As with the past, our generation (in the broad sense) will simply lie and cover up its crimes. The pervasive insanity that gave us World War 1 for example is glossed over. I could cite so many other examples and from the twentieth century alone.

    The answer to the question: why didn’t you put a stop to that? Lefties – assuming they are still around or any of us are still around, and the West hasn’t collapsed completely – will just lie, and say it wasn’t us, we opposed the Jihad. Or they will blame their leaders and media (who they voted for, and the latter whose lies they echo and fawn over). Not themselves. They will pretend innocence. Now you may object: they could never get away with such bald-faced lying. You want to bet? Future generations will have no real way of knowing any better, unless they take an interest in getting to grips with even a recent past (to them). And people generally have no interest. None of this collaboration and surrender to the Jihad by the Left, will be taught in schools. There will be no films about it really. It will be covered up. I reckon so. But who knows if the West will even survive, to cover anything up in the first place…

  4. Cyberjaques summed it up perfectly. Please wake up. The US was” head faked” by a fraud with a bag of lies. Let us hope that France elects Le Pen….and the French people rise to their past glory. Unfortunately the Faux Pope is continuing the destroy any remaining authority the Catholic Church has . Pray for Victor Orban and Geert Wilders….and most of all Vladimir Putin; who will save Christianity.

  5. Civilisations inevitably collapse. The effort to domesticate a still primitive ape is enormous and ultimately unavailing. Eventually all faith in the doomed endeavour evaporates, and everyone just succumbs to existential disillusion and wanders off back to the jungle. Once a critical number decamp, even the most determined hold-outs cannot maintain the illusion of humanity.

    And so the culture of being ‘human,’ that has been so painfully constructed over aeons, will simply vanish overnight.

    That’s if we’re lucky: A last whimper from the primaeval darkness of the spreading wilderness is infinitely to be preferred to that brief enlightenment of nuclear obliteration.

    At least the degenerate apes lost in the primal bloody squalor of their jungle will live to re-evolve another day. Because after the almost interminable passage of many more aeons, it is possible that human beings will emerge from the darkness, blinking on the sunlit horizon of their rebirth.

    But, for now, the triumph of soulless, alienating globalisation is the sign for us all to return, for the foreseeable future, to our humble home in dirt and dismal obscurity.

    Only the meek know how to survive.

  6. No welfare benefits to any immigrants…..No visas from Islamic countries…and shut down All Mosques ; since the Quran teachings are in direct opposition to Western values. Nuke them only if this does not do the job.

  7. Just as the U, S, of A is never going to lose to a traditional MILITARY invasion–neither would Western Europe.
    Instead, we/they have a weird combination of hostile, illiterate, male “adult” juvenile delinquents mixed in with a mess of FACELESS overfilled wombs invading us.

    AND………..(need I say it )……….a hostile, welcoming ‘aristocratic’ class of traitors FUNDING it all with our $$$$$$$$$$$$$.

    Without a pitiless attack to destroy them, they will all arm up and it will be too late.
    But–can we harden enough to go after them like Canadian baby seals?
    I doubt it. We of the West are too good for our own good.

  8. What is really sad (and terrifying) is the hold of leftism on people, whether concsiously or not. When PC is so strong that people are afraid to express their thoughts — that is when things start sliding downhill even faster.

    The other problem is that people have little knowledge of history. This has happened before and the aptly named Gates of Vienna has a story behind it — of a time when the muslims were fought and beaten back to their own territory.

    That time has arrived again. But. . . is everyone too chicken to fight back these days? To me, that is the important question. Merkel saying we can do this is probably the most stupid leader in Europe (despite her degrees) and some of the other countries have squishes for “leaders” instead of real leaders.

    I pray for Europe but I’m getting very discouraged every time I read the news.

  9. THe horror of it all, is that, IF the islamics take over, “our children will NEVER ask why….” because they will be islamics, themselves.

    If you’ve seen that Bulgarian film, set in the 1700s, “In The Time of Violence” -

    where the Turks practiced the custom of taking the christian children to raise them as islamics, this will be the case.

    May the Creator of ALL, protect us!

  10. Geez, all these comments are so good today and so filled with deep truths, it is almost impossible not to be depressed. Gloom reigns.

    But, Islam has suffered losses before and has been a cyclical historical force, not inexorable; and the West has often been dominant. And we have great inspiring courage today in Wilders, Le Pen, Tommy Robinson, maybe Trump?, and all over on these pages. Thank god for Robert Spencer. And we are seeing a few more powerful apostates speak out.

    We have to be smart and shrewd to survive. Thus, depression to the point of immobility is self destructive. So we must be sunny enough to be fully sharp and functional….even if we fake it a bit. This is like behavioral therapy (I think).

    • “We have to be smart and shrewd to survive”.
      That isn’t enough. we also need to be brutal, hard and unforgiving.
      We need desperately to see islam for what it is–the enemy; as our ancestors did.
      Instead, we just vote for ‘more of the same’, as I’m quite sure France is about to do.

      • Ditto; we have to become even more brutal than them to have any chance at winning. It is not enough to beat them back around the margins, the fight must be taken to them, [redacted], because they all are carriers of the same violent ideology. The danger of leaving enemies at your rear becomes even greater in this day and age where genetically engineered biological weapons give peoples not socially advanced from marauding desert tribes the power to end all human life on earth. That is why we must be even more brutal than them to have any chance at leaving this world intact to our children and grandchildren.

  11. Can’t we do some sort of population trade?

    The lefty, multi-culti, socialist, islam hugging Americans can come live in Europe.

    The sane Europeans who are tired of all this idiotic socialist leaders go to America.

    Who’s in?

    • Why Europe? Let them go live in the middle east and african societies they profess to love. Save the accomplishments of our ancestors for those of us who can appreciate them.

  12. The elites will go on. Unless for instance, they are given a signal loud and clear, such as for instance [intemperate suggestion about Angela Merkel redacted]. I’m all in favour of it.

  13. The goal is to raise a generation that won’t ask “Why didn’t you put a stop to this?” but will rather say “Thank you for the rich multicultural tapestry that is our society. Now, I’m headed for the mosque, so cough up that jizya!”

Comments are closed.