Thilo Sarrazin, Part 3: Muslims Are Going to Become the Majority

Posted on by

Below is the third of four parts of the appearance by Thilo Sarrazin on the TV program “Talk in Hangar 7” (previously: Part 1, Part 2). In this segment the argument becomes really heated.

To recapitulate the cast of characters: in addition to Mr. Sarrazin, there is a Viennese schoolteacher named Susanne Wiesinger, who has also written a book, an imam named Abdul Adhim Kamouss, and the host, whose name I forget.

Many thanks to MissPiggy for the translation, and to Vlad Tepes for the subtitling:


Video link

Video transcript:

00:03   “Germany needs this piece of work as urgently as an Ebola outbreak,”
00:06   explains the Süddeutsche Zeitung.
00:09   The Frankfurter Allgemeine newspaper headlines: “Hair-raising about Islam”.
00:13   “Hate preacher or enlightener?” asks Stern Magazine, and states in the lead-in
00:18   that the author has declared war against Muslims.
00:24   The daily paper Taz says about Sarrazin’s book: “Nobody needs it.”
00:29   The Courier headlines with, “Another scandal!”
00:33   While The Standard sees the book as a “Love affair with prejudice”
00:38   We are directly back to the topic of which we spoke previously.
00:41   It obviously seems as though those who reviewed what you
00:44   have written, your prognosis, and your position; they believe you have
00:49   crossed a boundary when it comes to criticizing Islam.
00:54   Why do you think that is? —So, first of all, there are other completely different reviews.
00:59   Secondly, there was apparently
01:04   an implicit arrangement in the German media, in which the contents of my book
01:09   should not be acknowledged. In every one of these
01:15   reviews, nothing is mentioned about the contents, but instead just wild insults.
01:21   And nowhere have any false facts been proven.
01:28   I had, or actually we counted, four and a half insignificant fact errors
01:34   that were named in all these reviews. What the media
01:40   dislikes is the question I pose with my book: whether Islam from its creation,
01:46   and how it has developed, is compatible with
01:52   modern society. I answer in the negative, and as a result the media reacts indignantly.
01:57   This occurs for a totally banal reason. They are
02:03   unable to rebut my arguments, and they don’t. They are afraid
02:07   these arguments could be used in the present political climate
02:11   by those considered “wrong”. Along the lines of: what Sarrazin writes
02:18   could be used by the AfD, and so what he writes must be declared
02:25   false, and should under no circumstance be spread. —You have experienced
02:29   the same? —Yes, yes. You are right about that.
02:34   It is an absolutely unreasonable argument not even to ask if something
02:41   is right or wrong, whether the context is right
02:49   or wrong, or is incorrectly presented. Instead their only concern
02:53   is how this will contribute in the momentary debate to their
02:58   advantage or disadvantage. A purely opportunistic review to say this book
03:02   is not politically favorable. —You are correct. And I will
03:05   go so far to say that you are right about being placed automatically
03:11   in the far right corner. In Germany the AfD, in Austria the FPÖ.
03:18   This happens as Islam gains more influence, the conservative Islam,
03:23   and you dare to criticize it. —He isn’t criticizing
03:28   conservatives, he is criticizing all of Islam. For him the entirety of Islam
03:33   is spoiled goods, right? —Yep. —Exactly —May I finish?
03:38   —No, you haven’t read my book. —I did. —No. —Excuse me,
03:41   but you both have just interrupted me, please let me finish.
03:44   Please. Then I will also let you speak. Thank you. So, what I really find problematic
03:50   about your book is that it is too pessimistic.
03:56   It also criticizes Muslims globally. That’s just too far, and
04:00   that was my feeling as I read it, even with your first book.
04:14   Naturally, that alienates many who would perhaps sympathize
04:20   with your theories or some of the elements
04:27   that I also share. It is offensive, I think. —That could be.
04:32   —You need to bring the people on board.
04:37   —That’s not the… —If you criticize… —You brought me here to give my opinion.
04:41   But I would like… —It’s my turn. —Frau Wiesinger asked
04:45   Mr. Sarrazin something; I brought you here so that you would follow the rules of discourse, too.
04:49   Not now. He is speaking. —I would just like an answer and then… yes?
04:57   I would like to have made it more optimistic, but those are the facts
05:05   as they were and how I evaluated them. If someone were to come and say,
05:09   ‘I have other facts that show a different
05:14   situation’ or rightly came to a different conclusion, I would say that’s fantastic.
05:19   I am someone that hopes that through
05:25   a political debate, derived from common findings which are alarming enough,
05:31   that it results in action to change, which is a necessity.
05:38   I’m not a man of absolutes saying this way or no way. —Muslims are here,
05:42   and they’re staying, Mr. Sarrazin —Right, right.
05:47   They are going to stay and they will be the majority.
05:52   I also speak about immigration and so forth.
05:57   I think we will only be able to change something when we address it clearly.
06:03   I know many Muslims that share my opinion, and
06:09   they all say, for example Seyran Ates, whom you have probably heard of,
06:14   and appreciate among others. They all tell me
06:20   that German mainstream society, or Austrian or European society, is far too yielding.
06:23   It needs to handle these matters in a tougher and more direct manner,
06:26   otherwise it will not be able to cope. —Now you will hear from a Muslim something else,
06:32   as an imam I will tell you. You write in your introduction… incidentally,
06:36   I only got your book three days ago from the editorial team, and
06:40   have been reading and reading up until today. —OK, that’s good. —I’m not finished,
06:43   but I read the most important part for me,
06:46   as a theologian. Mr. Sarrazin you write… —Are you trained as a theologian?
06:51   I thought you were an electrical engineer. —My entire
06:56   life has been a study of theology, and I mention that in my book. I wrote
07:00   in the introduction more than 70 pages about my
07:03   theological background. —I read it. —I would like to tell you, when you say
07:09   you read the Quran from the beginning to the end.
07:15   The German version. —Exactly, a German version and now you think
07:20   you can make a review about Islam in order to
07:25   explain what Islam is. I’m telling you, you are
07:29   making yourself look stupid in front of the entire world.
07:34   When you speak about finances, then I would tip my hat to you. I would hold you in high regard.
07:42   However, when you enter this arena, then I must ask if you
07:48   have ever heard of the terms: Occasions of Revelation or
07:54   Abrogated Verses? Have you heard that there are equivocal and
07:58   unequivocal verses in the Quran? Have you heard
08:03   of which are specific and which are generally valid?
08:08   Or about the restricted wording or unrestricted wording?
08:13   Have you read about Hermeneutics? What do you know about the
08:16   canonization of the Quran? Do you know about
08:19   the methods of exegesis of the Quran? You know what I noticed?
08:23   I noticed that ISIS members apply the words
08:28   of the Quran literally and the radical liberals; that’s what I call
08:32   them. That includes Mrs. Ates, and by the way,
08:37   yes, I know her and she is not a friend of mine in a theological sense.
08:41   They practice an orderless “whateverism”
08:44   in respect to the Quran, and you combine both. You read the Quran superficially.
08:49   You have no knowledge. You have
08:54   no fundamental knowledge, and think you can paint all of Islam and
08:59   paint our god of Islam. You tear the verses of the Quran
09:04   out of their historical context and play with them as you wish.
09:09   I am telling you, you have pronounced judgment upon yourself.
09:14   When Mr. Noeldeke, the imam of all orientalists, was alive, although
09:18   he was somewhat hostile toward Islam; he would have wept
09:23   about the way you treated the Quran. At the moment, I have the feeling
09:27   that many Islamic scholars are smirking and
09:32   would confirm what I’m saying. You have no clue and are an illiterate
09:36   when it comes to Islamic theology. You are not permitted and
09:40   when we ask how far can one go with criticism of Islam…
09:46   Let him answer now. You reproached him, let him answer.
09:52   About how far criticism can go? Go ahead. —I’d like to answer.
09:56   First, several Islamic scholars expressly agree with me.
10:01   For example, Dr. Tilman Nagel, who recently wrote a review.
10:07   Secondly, I read the Quran the way I learned to read the Bible.
10:14   I believe the text, it is in German — not in Arabic and I admit that.
10:19   It is a deficit, but I read it. —That is not enough.
10:24   I understood as well as I could and read additional texts.
10:32   My summary of the Quran and how I evaluated it,
10:40   are in every single point accurate. —You have your own instrument…
10:44   For someone who complains about being
10:49   interrupted, you interrupt quite often. —And I stand by what I wrote. Incidentally, I would like
10:53   to ask you, if I as an educated man read 600 pages of the Quran and
10:59   occupied myself with it for months, and you say, “You are unable to understand.”
11:06   And when you say my expertise is insufficient, then how should
11:11   millions of Muslim believers who also can’t read Arabic,
11:16   and are often illiterate — they all can’t understand either, then?
11:19   I’ll give the answer. —I asked when…
11:22   —You just asked me something. —Yes. —How does the Muslim community
11:27   handle this? First of all, we are talking about
11:33   criticizing Islam and not about how the religion is practiced.
11:37   Someone who is Muslim… —Mr. Kamouss, when we are
11:42   discussing criticism of a religion, we also automatically speak of
11:46   how it is practiced. —Mr. Moderator, please allow me to share
11:49   my opinion. I say what I want and not what YOU want me to say.
11:53   —But you won’t say anything unless I let you, and I’m not
11:56   going to allow you to ruin this conversation. Absolutely not.
11:59   —I am not ruining it. —Answer the question. —I explained my methods. —You complain
12:03   about being interrupted and you interrupt constantly. You are trying to destroy this conversation.
12:07   I have the feeling that I am being discriminated against on this show,
12:11   and you accuse me of interrupting the entire time.
12:16   The one the speaks the most and the loudest is being discriminated against, is that right?
12:20   Just now he interrupted me multiple times and you did nothing. I’ll say it again, we’re talking
12:25   about criticizing Islam. If you are entering this arena,
12:29   then you must use the instruments. —Uhh? Excuse me. You wanted to
12:32   answer differently before. How should normal Muslims
12:35   understand these texts when they can’t read Arabic. —If I read something, then I can understand it.
12:38   I just answered that. —May I please interrupt you gentlemen? I want an answer, I want the answer
12:43   from you, because it totally interests me. How can
12:48   someone that is not able to read Arabic, as you said, someone that is not
12:52   trained theologically able understand the Quran?
12:58   What if they speak Turkish or Albanian? If the Quran can only be understood
13:03   in Arabic, how is it possible? I ask this in the interest
13:09   of my pupils. How is it possible to really understand Quran verses when it is
13:13   only for those who read Arabic? —Understood. —Good.
 

9 thoughts on “Thilo Sarrazin, Part 3: Muslims Are Going to Become the Majority”

  2. I greatly admire Dr. Sarrazin. He is a Social Democrat, by the way. He has shown great courage and initiative in warning the German public of the dangers of Islam and mass immigration. Like Martin Luther, he has asserted the right of lay people and non-believers to study and analyze the scriptures, here Islamic scriptures, in the vernacular language. The noisy, abusive imam, of course, asserted that only properly vetted specialists can interpret the Koran.

    • 100% correct. Shia is founded on the assumption that ordinary people are ignorant, and they will spout it directly to your face by putting forward the famous proposition “Knowledgeable man does not need to follow, but ignorant man will go astray if fails to follow the versed man”. So everyone must follow a certified imam. Deaf, dumb and blind or sword of Islam will cut you into pieces.

      The original Islam seems to be no different and even a glimpse of The Reliance of The Traveler is much too telling. And that’s what they have practiced in last 14 centuries.

  3. The imam is really lost at his line of work, he should go for comedy. Islam in itself prohibits theology, so him saying he’s a theologist is blasphemy in their own rules, hypocrisy at its finest.

    Good thing the moderator finally spoke up. Love how the imam keeps saying “you are rude for not letting me speak” yet he’s the one who keeps interrupting everyone constantly. Truly incredible.

  4. The imam uses the often use [the] excuse that the Koran can only be read and understood in Arabic. The majority of the Islamic world does not read or write in Arabic. He also uses the [..] excuse it must be understood in the time it was written context, the Koran according to Mohammed is written for all times never changing always taken word for word what is written there must be followed to the letter as the words of god unchanging. Ask the imam on that show what part of the Koran should be followed and what part discarded, that would shut him up.

  5. ..hushed, and tiptoeing round the self-victimizing, spinning, aggressive man. Default aggression. That of course no one but vetted specialists could possibly comprehend – like that one book on his shelf.
    She looked very uneasy throughout, fearful, unsurprisingly

  6. *She looked very uneasy throughout, fearful, unsurprisingly* Who? The teacher?

    I hope there’ll be a part IV, in which the dreadful man will give a civilised, reasoned answer to what he’s been asked. Yeah, pigs might fly.

    And he even plays the victim card! (Sorry, my exclamation mark is superfluous. To do so is the norm for these people.) He’s just the kind of “cultural enrichment” we really need in Europe. However could we manage without people like him?

    • Yes, the teacher. It struck me how discomfited she was in her facial expressions, and very careful with phrasing when speaking directly to the iman.
      Would such discussion be open within the classroom, or best avoided for personal safety …

  7. Sheesh, what a food fight!
    And yes, the last defense always seems to be “you don’t understand the nuance because you didn’t read it in Arabic.”
    The Imam also brought up the theory of abrogation in a condescending way, assuming the others don’t know what that means. I actually don’t think that works in his favor as the more peaceful verses were abrogated by more violent passages. Best he kept that to himself…

Comments are closed.