19 thoughts on “Tatjana Festerling: “Islam Already Has Europe Under Control””

1. If one were to proclaim on a Europe-wide TV broadcast that Islam has Europe under its control, the majority of people and the vast majority of the commentariat, the academy and, of course, the political establishment, would howl with derisive, condescending laughter.

   Yet let us examine the realities. Voltaire once said: identify who you are not allowed to criticize, then you have identified the people who rule you. What is the scope in 2017 for Europeans to criticize Islam? Next to none. A man in Germany jailed for six months for comparing Islam to National Socialism? If in 1987, an elderly European had been told: “In 30 years time, THE most sensitive and dangerous subject to raise will be the extent to which Islam dominates Europe, they would have responded that such a notion was preposterous. Yet here we are.

   • This is almost the same psychological process determined on from the Wannsee conference 1942 that let to the the ‘Final Solution’ of removing the ‘Untermenschen’ from Greater Germany, even down to the subtleties of not alerting the intended victims through the use of disinformation.

     For example; Arbeit Macht Frei and other intended subtleties, designed to defuse concern through doubt the already obvious to some, of what the ‘Final Solution’ was all about.

     And so has Europe now become the next contender for mass genocide, but this time of the entire white population, and not just the ‘Untermenschen’. In fact, those once referred to as the Untermenschen are now preparing themselves to literally fight back against the Fourth Reich, in order to survive.

   • M.Stürzenberger is sentenced to 6 months on probation and going to appeal.No panic.

2. Outstanding post. She is absolutely right. Europe is killing itself. A few hundred years ago they were smart enough to fight muslims off but today they are lying down and taking it. Sad. Very sad.

3. “A man in Germany jailed for six months for comparing Islam to National Socialism.”

   – – – – – – – – – – –

   https://samnytt.se/mattias-karlsson-sd-jamforde-koranen-med-
   mein-kampf/

   Mattias Karlsson (SD) compared the Quran with Mein Kampf

   8 September, 2017

   ISLAM / NAZISM Britain’s legendary prime minister, including Nobel laureate Winston Churchill, has done so. The Dutch Freedom Party leader Geert Wilders has done so. Now the Swedish Democrat’s group leaders in the Swedish parliament, Mattias Karlsson, are singing to those who equate Islam with Nazism.

   On an event last Saturday in Gothenburg’s concert hall in front of the present church hall, Mattias Karlsson spoke of the importance of Swedes being influenced by the Church of Sweden. One of the problems Karlsson raised with the church in Sweden is that it has become “a force for Islamization of Sweden”.

   The criticism of Antje Jackelén became tough after her refusal as archbishop to refuse to hold Jesus as a major prophet for Christians than Muhammad. She also accepted the “Allahu akbar” of Muslim creed as her motto. [this stupid woman did not know that the meaning of the credo was ‘comparative’]

   Mattias Karlsson criticized in his speech how priests in the church of Sweden invited Muslim imams to read high of the Quran in the churches. Something similar – that Christian priests were given access to mosques to read Bible texts do never occur.
   Karlsson called reading from the Quran in Swedish churches for “absurd, abominable and disgusting”.

   – To read high of the Quran in a Christian church when the Quran says that Christians should be killed is like reading out loud from Mein Kampf in a synagogue, Karlsson thundered before the gathered listeners.

   To the media, Karlsson motivates his comparison with the existence of hateful, abusive surprises in the Quran, calling on right-wing Muslims to “kill, throatcut, crucify, capture and defile” non-Muslims.

   Karlsson also recalled the genocide and expulsion of Christians in the Islam-dominated parts of the world – crimes that the Church of Sweden ceeps quite about and turns their backs to in order not to annoy Muslims in Sweden and complicate the interreligious project one drives as part of their leftliberal political position for continued and increased asylum immigration to Sweden from the Muslim world.

   Karlsson, however, stated that there are Muslims who do not support these hate speeches in the Quran or the acts of violence it is legitimizing. But a book that contains such hate messages and violence-inducing calls is problematic, even if you choose not to read just these.

   Karlsson made it clear that Swedish democratic influence over the Church of Sweden was a guarantee that church money was not used to “propagate for mass immigration which means that refugees most vulnerable in the world can not be helped because we can not afford it for the mass immigration that jeopardizes our welfare so that the weakest, the sickest can take a bang, a mass immigration that means that society is torn apart, becomes colder and more fragmented, segregated. ”

   “There is also another more direct link between the Quran and Mein Kampf. In parts of the Muslim world, Mein Kampf is the second best-selling book after the Quran, and Adolf Hitler, the second most celebrated Prophet after Muhammad.”

   The Swedish Democrats invest in this year’s church election and put up with over one thousand candidates, which is almost ten times more compared to the last church hall.

   • A very detailed comment that exposes what is most obvious to many, but has yet to gel with the majority. Those to whom you have referred to as Christian are not Christian – they are Marxists who infiltrated the influence of the Church some decades ago.

     Marxists, Fascists, Nazis, Communists, Islam, Fascists, Liberals, Progressives, Neo-Conservatives, Neo-Nazis (have I left any out?) are all totalitarian ideologies that have no tolerance to any competitor, even those amongst themselves.

     If, Islam is successful within the West, and I doubt that will occur, what we will then see is one totalitarian sect trying to dominate the other totalitarian sects – the same as what occurred between the Nazis and the Soviets during WW2.

     And after all the killing, there will only be one totalitarian system allowed to control – but which one will that be?

     • Though prediction is hard, something tells me that Muslims will not share their victory with others and they will devour Marxists alive as soon as their support is not needed.

       But let’s hope those days will never come. The People of this world still carry some weight, otherwise there were no fake news agencies to paralyze the public opinion. You see: fortunately public opinion still counts and not all hope is lost. The People are the winners if they use their power wisely.

       • I think so too, but I’m sure things will get worse, much worse, before they get better.

4. There must be something wrong with me. I don’t feel guilty about any of the things she mentioned and I just can’t see why any thinking person would. She is wrong about the ‘neurotic’ or ‘narcissistic’ ruling class also, they are working to a programme. While they will remain fair of skin, hair and eyes, the browning of Europe will take place as planned. European women are the ultimate prize – why else would hundreds of thousands of single men be imported in white countries? Then the Arabianisation of rape – the woman will be forced to marry her attacker and live under a burka. No penalty for the man. European men will be left with the solace of drugs, homosexuality or transgenderism, and humiliated, hunted and eventually annihilated. Islam is the perfect answer for the control of serfs in the totalitarian new world order.

   • You don’t believe that the current crop of Western politician is actually vetted on their psychopathy, in fact, has been selected that way for decades now?

     Festerling sees it.

     • An interesting thought. Buy I can’t envision the mechanics of it.

       • One only need a few minutes in an interview to determine which candidates are for the ‘collective’ and which candidates are against the ‘collective’. Pretty simple really.

       • Negative selection. If you create a totalitarian political system ( or a radical democracy ), you will attract psychopats and mean, cruel, criminal people, and they will in turn be replaced by even meaner, more ruthless people. A downward spiral of moral and intellectual regression.

5. How much did the king of Saudia Arabia pay Muti Merkel? What was the bribe? European whites are toast. We ain’t coming this time either. We were there twice before, and twice you Euroweenies blew it. At least the Jews have a place to escape to.

6. The EU has so weakened Western European countries that Muslims especially can once again dream and act out, rape, rob, torture, slaughter, pillage, plunder and burn the Crusader homelands. Their is something seriously wrong with the kaffirs. Get your [derriere] over here now Ali. AA.

7. Festerling is a grand lady, magnificent person, not bad to look at either.

   I can’t shake a feeling we, meaning anti-Jihadists, pro-West people, are barking up the wrong tree. We seem to address ourselves in large part to two entitities:

   1)the bureaucrats and politicians in power, on the grounds that once they have the correct information, they will make good decisions;

   2) the general electorate, on the grounds that given good information, they will elect responsible leaders.

   You can begin to see my unease. There is little evidence that leaders change their policies because of reasoning, evidence, or bad results. In the case of the Islamization of the West, the leaders seem to not react to the real effects at all. I would argue there’s a lot of historical evidence that most leaders pursue short-term gains to the total exclusion of any concern with long-term consequences.

   Similarly, with the general electorate. The general concept of democracy is appealing, theoretically, but once you get a truly diverse society, which includes totally different ideas of what a good government and good society entails, election results may depend on very small population shifts or population quirks. For example, the blacks voted in less numbers with Hillary running than when Obama ran. The obvious reason is that blacks voted out of tribal impulses and Hillary, who claimed to have the same policies, was not of their tribe.

   The cultural Marxists gained the power and influence they have through tactics more akin to Saul Alinsky than to, say, Roosevelt. That is, the left is less concerned with votes than with power, and they adapt their tactics accordingly. Nobody really knows what Hillary Clinton stands for. But she gained the popular vote, because of big-city and immigrant demographics, and lost power because of her gross incompetence in actually organizing an effective campaign.

   My point is that popular opinion in the US is unlikely to ever have a clear direction. Appeals to popular opinion are explicitly focused towards some demographic group. Hillary thought she could scope out the black vote by sucking up to Black Lives Matter, and left it at that.

   Trump won the Presidency by a last-hurrah appeal to the demographic of productive, not-very-urban white voters, with a contingent of productive black and brown voters going along. But, we can see in the Trump administration, winning the election and exercising power are two very different things.

   I would like to see a more Alinsky-style approach with one difference. Alinsky held the truth to be fluid in comparison to victory. The means justified the ends, and it didn’t matter too much who lied and who got hurt as long as victory was achieved. We would be throwing away the baby with the bathwater to adopt this philosophy. We in the populist, nationalist right value truth, and actually value all people, even if we don’t particularly want to live next door to some.

   We need our own “march through the institutions”. Provide a network of support for nationalist fellow-travelers, research institutions for logical, factual and intellectual support, and pathways to power not necessarily involving the popular vote. Let me suggest a good beginning is to push the idea of freedom-of-association. This is a non-racist idea as appealing to black and Mexican nationalists as to white nationalists. The subversive aspect would be to set it up so it appeals to everyone or no one. Break up the Nation of Islam if they don’t have white employees, or get their support for not breaking up white organizations that don’t have black employees.

   I will summarize my ideas. General appeals involving facts, logic, or pointing out consequences are relatively ineffective in the polity of today, in spite of their eloquence or truth. It’s time to look at subversion in a benign sense, where nationalists advance their agendas by focusing on the points of weakness of the opponent, rather than trying a head-on campaign.

   • Excellent comment, RonaldB.

     “ The general concept of democracy is appealing, theoretically, but once you get a truly diverse society, which includes totally different ideas of what a good government and good society entails, election results may depend on very small population shifts or population quirks.”

     Welcome to the wonderful world of diversity (is our strength).

     A given society or culture only can withstand just so much diversity before disparate political, economic, and social goals cause irreparable fragmentation to the electorate.

     The myth of Multiculturalism—especially that of the “separate-but-equal” variety (as opposed to genuine assimilation)—is pure poison for a nation which depends upon elected representation.

     Just as “special interests” (and their campaign contributions) have come to dominate the decisions of corrupt career politicians, so has the creation of mendicant voter plantations—as in impoverished urban cores—become a highly destructive election strategy.

     America’s once-bright future has been waylaid by all of this “enrichment”.

     • I’m afraid I can’t take credit for the concepts.

       El Ingles hammered out the details in GoV years ago.
       https://gatesofvienna.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/El-Ingl%C3%A9s-Ethno-Religious-Diversity-and-the-Limits-of-Democracy.pdf

       • Great post

Comments are closed.