Muslims and Antifas vs. Heidi Mund in Frankfurt

March 8th was International Women’s Day. In the midst of all the celebrations of gynicity, Heidi Mund — a well-known activist in the German Counterjihad — and her “right-wing extremist” allies staged an anti-sharia rally in downtown Frankfurt.

The following video shows some excerpts from what happened that day. Frankfurt is one of the most culturally enriched cities in Germany, so it’s no surprise that Muslims turned out in force to oppose the “Islamophobes”. However, what’s interesting is that the Antifas — most of whom were ethnic Germans — took the lead in screaming, blowing whistles, throwing objects, and spitting on the speakers. It was a textbook example of the Red-Green Alliance in action.

Heidi Mund is a very courageous woman, and very inspirational. Most people would have hurried to get away from what she had to face that day in Frankfurt.

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

Below are the notes accompanying the video, also translated by Nash:

Spat on, Threatened and Attacked: Women’s Day in Frankfurt — Antifa Escalates

Women’s day in the Antifa heartland, Frankfurt am Main, the first city in Germany with a quotient of migrants of more than 50%:

ANTIFA storms the stage and riots! We are spat on, cursed and threatened, and stuff is thrown at us!

Police do nothing — Heidi Mund: “The police at this very moment are committing a crime! They have a duty to protect this event!”

Unmasked: High ranking SPD-Bundestag representatives are among the violent demonstrators!

Heidi breaks out in tears: “These were people, they were alive, and they have lost their lives because of this s*** government!”

Exposed: This is how German-born muslims think: “We love allah. When one isn’t quiet, or complains, then one deserves to be punched in the mouth!”

Inge Steinmetz: “Are you not ashamed?!” and Iris Swoboda (Mothers Against Violence): “Where is your empathy, you are applauding all of this?!” “End Antifa!”

Expressions of Gratitude

Heidi Mund (for organizing and for her powerful speeches), Iris Swoboda — Mothers Against Violence (for her honest words and for discussing with demonstrators), Inge Steinmetz (for her moving speech), Ute Biena-Habrich AfD (for her strong words and for flying in from Bremen on her own dime), Robert — Line of Horrors, the folders, the spontaneous appearances of passers-by (for their courage to speak up), police individuals (who can’t be blamed for the insipid attitude of the police president) and to all present supporters on location and on livestream!

Video transcript:

Continue reading

“Mohammed’s Koran” is Now Available for Purchase on a Non-Amazon Site

The transatlantic Powers That Be are doing their mightiest to make Tommy Robinson into a non-person. Following his banishment by numerous social media sites (Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and possibly others that I’m not familiar with), Amazon recently banned sales of Tommy’s book Mohammed’s Koran.

Peter McLoughlin, Tommy’s co-author, has now set up a website where people can purchase Mohammed’s Koran. He sends along this explanation of what happened, what he is doing now, and the significance of the affair in the larger scheme of things:

I’m sure you know that Tommy has been banned from Facebook and Instagram. In addition Amazon have banned Mohammed’s Koran and deleted it from their database (which means even second-hand copies cannot be sold).

Can you think of another scholarly book on Islam that has been banned by Amazon? Mein Kampf is for sale on Amazon. As are books like the terrorist manual called The Anarchist Cookbook.

My recent research shows that the content of Mohammed’s Koran is being taught in universities across the West; that is, they are teaching the chronological order of the Koran and what this means with respect to abrogation. However, the academics are using a 1953 book which is being reprinted every two years. Clearly they know this subject is important (or else an obscure scholarly book from 1953 would not be reprinted every two years).

Having spent far too many years doing research in universities, I know how they desperately scrabble around for subjects on which to write books and articles. So if this was any other subject than one which truthfully explains the pervasive and perennial problem of Islamic terrorism, then there would be half a dozen books published on it over a couple of decades. But I suspect no academic dares to write an updated account on this topic for fear that either a) Muslims will kill them or b) the general public might get wind of the importance of the issue.

We live in dark times. I suppose I should take some pride in having written a book with 600 footnotes that is worth banning.

I have asked Amazon for an explanation why they have banned the book, but I’ve no idea if any explanation will be forthcoming.

Now for the good news: I’ve made arrangements for a new site where people can place orders for Mohammed’s Koran. The direct address is www.mohammeds-koran.com/store/.

Continue reading

“I Fought Back”

The article below by Michael Copeland was originally posted in 2014 at the LibertyGB website. It is being republished here in honor of the 15th anniversary of the murder of Kriss Donald.

“I Fought Back”

by Michael Copeland

One evening in August 2010 a fourteen-year-old schoolboy in Glasgow was walking home after playing with friends. In his own words:

“I turned a corner and these three Asian guys were standing just outside their car smoking. …They came at me with metal poles and shouted, ‘See you, you wee p***k! You’re going to be the next Kriss Donald! We’re going to murder you!’ …They punched me in the face about six times and I fell to the ground before they hit me over the head with the poles and spat at me. …Then they tried to drag me into their car… I’m quite a big lad for my age and I fought back with all my strength, and I struggled free and ran for my life. …They got back in the car and raced off but I managed to get some of their registration number… It all happened so quickly and I still can’t believe it. I’d never seen these guys before so I don’t know why they targeted me.” (DailyRecord.co.uk 6-8-2010).

That incident could have become much uglier. Kriss Donald, a fifteen-year-old also from Glasgow, had been abducted from the street in 2004 by several men of Pakistani background — complete strangers to him — and bundled into their car. He was driven around for some hours, the men torturing him in the back of the car. Eventually they drove to some waste ground in Glasgow. He was subjected to multiple stabbings, had petrol poured over him and was set on fire. He managed to crawl a few feet before succumbing to his injuries and later dying. He had been castrated and had had his eyes gouged out. His killers were later traced to Pakistan. With the noble help of a local Asian M.P. (for which he was much criticised by local muslims) they were brought to Scotland, tried, and imprisoned.

Why did they kill? Why at random? They are muslim. Are there Islamic teachings that influenced them?

“As a muslim,” explains Anjem Choudary, “I must have hatred for everything which is non Islam”. Islam indoctrinates hatred and contempt for non-muslims. They are labelled with a special pejorative term — kafir (Arabic plural kuffar): “We hate the kuffar,” stressed Usamah Ath Thahabi (Channel 4 Undercover Mosque, 2009). The Koran, which forms part of Islamic law, gives the instructions. Kafirs are “unclean” (9:28), “the vilest of beasts” (8:22), on a level with faeces, urine, corpses, blood, semen, pig and dog (islam-laws.com). Jews and Christians follow “remnant cults” of no validity (Manual of Islamic Law, w.4), and are as “apes and pigs” (5:60), “the most despicable” (98:6). Women are instructed not to shake hands with a kafir.

Muslims inhabit “Dar al Islam”, the House of Islam. Kafirs, on the other hand, inhabit “Dar al Harb”, the House of War: Islam is in a permanent state of war with kafirs. “Kill them… Fight them,” says the Koran, over and over again (www.TheReligionOfPeace.com). The Koran claims that the Jews did “alter the Scripture” (3:78), and the Christians “forgot a portion… so We caused among them animosity and hatred.” (5:14) Both have thus “chosen” not to follow the true path (Arabic “sharia”, path) and are therefore not innocent. If he does not embrace Islam the kafir is available to be killed, his property appropriated, his womenfolk and children enslaved (Koran 9:29; Bukhari 1: 2: 25).

Islam’s texts are not optional: there is no pick and choose, no freedom of conscience: “When a matter has been decided by Allah and his messenger the muslim man or woman has no choice,” says Koran 33:36. “None may change his words” (18:27) or deny them: the penalty is death, as it is for leaving Islam (Manual of Islamic Law o8.7(7)). “Whoever ceases to be a member of Islam, kill him,” said Mohammed (Bukhari 9.84.57). The Koran is promoted as “valid from eternity to eternity”, explains Sam Solomon, a former professor of Sharia Law. Islam — the word means “submission” — is a doctrine of supremacism by force.

Continue reading

The Killer Children of the Islamic State

The following interview with an alleged former emir of the Islamic State was published in Sweden. If Abu Abboud al-Raqqawi really did repudiate ISIS, it’s presumably because he realized that the Caliphate was about to go down in flames, and wanted to save his own skin.

Many thanks to Tania Groth for translating this article from the Swedish daily Expressen:

ISIS saves its children’s army for war against the West

A group of children, dressed in camouflage outfits, stand with knives in their hands ready to cut the neck of their victims. The victims are adult men forced to kneel. They are murdered to the sound of the children’s cries:

“Allahu Akhbar! Allahu Akhbar!”

There are a plethora of these horrible movies on the internet, posted by ISIS propaganda centers.

But, for the first time since the Islamic State was founded in the summer of 2014, a high-ranking emir now reveals details of the IS children’s army.

“They are called Ashbal al-Khilafa. Most are children of Syrians, but there are also foreign members,” says Abu Abboud al-Raqqawi.

[Video]

In ISIS-controlled areas, all schools have been closed. Parents living there have two options to choose for their sons: Koran studies in the mosque or Ashbal al-Khilafa.

Ordinary Muslims who go to schools do not need to be members of the Islamic State. There they learn about Islam based on ISIS’ interpretation. Or they can choose Ashbal al-Khilafa camp. It is voluntary, says al-Raqqawi.

Those who go to Koran studies do it for a few hours every day. It works just like the Koran schools during the Taliban era in Afghanistan and Pakistan. You do not have to stay in camps to attend the courses.

But Ashbal al-Khilafa is something completely different.

“In Raqqa alone were built at least 15 training camps for Ashbal al-Khilafa. In each city and in every village and community that ISIS controls, such camps are established. Each camp receives between 600-800 children. There they live for six months — completely isolated from the outside world and from their parents. They are being prepared to become future soldiers — not to participate in the fighting now, but as a reserve army,” al-Raqqawi says.

The training consists of practical and theoretical parts. ISIS films circulating on the sect’s propaganda channel Amaq show how a small group of child soldiers are searching through a “bombing house” for their victims. The victims are kidnapped people who have to hide in the house for the children to find and kill. It is part of the children’s education.

“The most dangerous ones are the children who are taught to perform secret assignments.”

[Photo caption (at the top of this post): According to Abu Abboud al-Raqqawi, ISIS saves its children’s army for future war missions against the West. The pictures are from one of the ISIS propaganda films.

“These children are not used in the war now. A few are selected as suicide bombers, but the rest are saved for the coming war against the West. They are more brutal than the adult members. Several of them volunteer to participate in battles, but they cannot, they say,” al-Raqqawi

Continue reading

Running While Veiled

Earlier this week the French sportswear company Décathlon caused an uproar by announcing its release of a garment designed for the use of female Muslim runners. Dubbed the “running hijab”, the suit resembles a “burkini”, the full-body bathing suit worn by some Muslimas. The blowback for Décathlon was so intense that it withdrew its new product before it went on sale.

Zineb el-Rhazoui is a French writer and a former staff member of Charlie Hebdo She was born in Morocco and apostatized from Islam in her youth. At the time of the jihad attack in 2015 she was visiting Morocco, and thus escaped death.

In the following video Ms. El-Rhazoui takes part in a panel discussion about the running hijab on French TV. Her principal interlocutor is Aurélien Taché, a member of the National Assembly for President Macron’s party.

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

Below are excerpts from a report on the Décathlon controversy by the BBC:

Decathlon cancels sports hijab sale in France

French sportswear retailer Decathlon has scrapped plans to sell a hijab for women runners in France following a public outcry.

The firm said it had decided to suspend the product following “a wave of insults” and “unprecedented threats”.

French politicians said the “running hijab” contradicted the country’s secular values, and some lawmakers suggested a boycott of the brand.

Decathlon initially stood by the hijab, which is already for sale in Morocco.

The issues of how Muslim women dress in public has often stoked controversy in France.

“We are making the decision… to not market this product in France at this time,” Decathlon spokesman Xavier Rivoire told RTL radio on Tuesday.

He had earlier told AFP news agency that the initial decision was to “make sport accessible for all women in the world”.

The plain, lightweight headscarf, which covers the hair and not the face, was to go on sale in 49 countries from March.

[…]

The French-owned company said it had received 500 calls and emails to complain about its “running hijab”, with some of its staff in stores being insulted, and even physically threatened.

Health Minister Agnès Buzyn told RTL that although such a product is not prohibited in France, “it’s a vision of women that I don’t share. I would prefer if a French brand did not promote the headscarf”.

The spokeswoman for President Emmanuel Macron’s La République en Marche party Aurore Bergé also weighed in on the issue on Twitter, suggesting a boycott.

“My choice as a woman and citizen will be to no longer put my trust in a brand that breaks away from our values,” she said.

Replying to Ms Bergé on Twitter, Decathlon said: “Our goal is simple: to offer [women who run with an often unsuitable hijab] an adapted sport product, without judgement.”

Later, the sporting goods giant said it wanted to restore peace after the “violent” reaction “went beyond our desire to meet the needs of our customers”.

Video transcript:

Continue reading

A Regional Counselor for National Rally Confronts Macron About Immigration

French President Emmanuel “Toy Boy” Macron has organized a series of public appearances across France that are being billed as a “National Debate”. His willingness to show his face in public where he can be confronted by critics is reportedly in response to the unprecedented street protests by the Yellow Vest movement, which have been going on every weekend since November.

Edwige Diaz is a Regional Counselor for Rassemblement National (National Rally, formerly Front National). In the following video Ms. Diaz asks the president questions about FGM, mass Muslim immigration, and the implementation of sharia in French ghettos. I don’t have any illusions about this having any measurable effect on Mr. Macron; still, it’s bracing to hear a head of state or government having to sit through such pointed questions. To my knowledge, Theresa May and Angela Merkel have never had to endure anything similar.

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

Video transcript:

Continue reading

Learning to Love Big Brother

If you want to retain your posting privileges on Facebook, you’d better not link to any videos by Tommy Robinson. And don’t post any photos of him. Make sure you don’t like anything by him. And don’t even mention his name, except to tell all your “friends” that he’s a horrible racist and fascist and you hope he gets his face gnawed away by tapirs.

Matt Bracken didn’t follow that advice, and look what happened to him:

Here’s what Matt says about this latest installment of his Facebook ordeal:

On February 27, I posted the YouTube link to Tommy Robinson’s powerful new documentary “Panodrama” on Facebook. (If you have not seen it yet, I cannot recommend it highly enough.) Shortly after the video’s release, Tommy Robinson’s account was deleted by Facebook and Instagram. Tommy had already been banned from Twitter for his earlier thought crimes.

Taking their PC restrictions a major step further, Facebook is now banning or suspending anyone who posts supportive links or messages about banned thought-criminals.

In my case, this means I am now on my eighth 30-day suspension from Facebook in the past year and a half. I was already permanently banned from Twitter for posting an anti-burka meme that did not even mention any religion.

Matthew Bracken was born in Baltimore, Maryland in 1957, and attended the University of Virginia, where he received a BA in Russian Studies and was commissioned as a naval officer in 1979. Later in that year he graduated from Basic Underwater Demolition/SEAL training, and in 1983 he led a Naval Special Warfare detachment to Beirut, Lebanon. Since then he’s been a welder, boat builder, charter captain, ocean sailor, essayist and novelist. He lives in Florida. Links to his short stories and essays may be found at EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com. For his previous essays, see the Matthew Bracken Archives.

Vlad’s YouTube Channel Has Been Taken Down

For the last few days there has been a concerted push by Google to age-restrict dozens of videos on Vlad’s channel, some of them years old. He also got a “community guidelines” strike, which is more serious. When the second such strike came in early this morning, YouTube pulled his channel.

We don’t know what caused this sudden wave of persecution. His videos have become more popular lately, and have been embedded at several major sites, so that may be part of the reason — he grew so tall that his head had to be cut off.

Anyway, for many months everything he has posted on YouTube has been mirrored on his BitChute channel. I don’t have time to go back and replace all the YouTube embeds in our posts, but if you’re looking for a particular video, you can find it at the BitChute Channel. And visit Vlad Tepes for more information and updates.

Mosques: Learning Curve Needed

Mosques: Learning Curve Needed

by Michael Copeland

The leader of Worcester City Council, Marc Bayliss, happened to be passing when Britain First, a young political party, held a day of campaigning in Worcester city centre against the planned large new mosque there. When he confronted Britain First’s leader, Bayliss revealed quite how much of a learning curve yet awaits him and is needed. Importantly, his outlook is almost certainly shared by millions, in what can be called the Normal Assumed View. This is the British goodwill/fair play view which, not being very interested in religion, relies heavily on assumptions, and is not strong on facts. Bayliss’s arguments make a useful and telling exposure of an urgent need nationwide. The exchange was recorded and can be seen on Britain First’s Facebook page.

Bayliss said there were churches in Saudi Arabia. Not so. No church is permitted. No Bible may be brought into the country, and no cross may be displayed. When a former Archbishop of Canterbury, George Carey, was on a flight that was diverted to Saudi Arabia he was instructed to remove the pectoral cross he was wearing. Saudi Arabia, the home of Islam, is strongly anti-Christian. This is because Islam itself is strongly anti-Christian, and, for that matter, strongly opposed to all other religions and to atheism. No temples are permitted, and no synagogues. No Jew may even enter the State. No non-muslim may set foot in Mecca. Saudi Arabia is a hard-line observer of Islam’s restrictions.

Bayliss was critical of Britain First’s campaign. Evidently he regarded it as a needless provocation:

“I am very proud of a mosque in Worcester, which is a peaceful, loving community where people get on.”

“Tell me why you are opposing a mosque,” said Bayliss. This question was not answered, but some observations may be made here.

In the Normal Assumed View, like Bayliss’s, a mosque is on a par with a church, or a synagogue. Not so. A mosque, as former professor of Islamic law, Sam Solomon, explains, is NOTHING LIKE A CHURCH. Every mosque is modelled on Mohammed’s first mosque in Medina. It is where military training takes place, where punishments are decided, where jihad plans are made and expeditions launched; it is a court, a school, a forum where news of sex-slaves can be exchanged, and where a market can be set up for forged passports and the like. It is an assembly space where tabs can be kept on others: members can observe who is failing to attend; pressure can be put on any brother whose daughter is not wearing Islamic attire, or being too Western. It is a place for reinforcing Islamic apartheid. Non-muslims are NOT PERMITTED in the worship, where the fiery sermons instructing hatred are given. “Between us and you enmity and hatred forever…” says Koran 60:4, part of Islamic law. The mosque is the place for furthering Islam’s commanded mission — to make all people everywhere Islamic, by force if needed, in the commanded Global Caliphate.

“Does Islam or does it not force people by the power of the sword to submit? Yes,” explained Osama bin Laden. The commanded imperative is that Islam Must Dominate. Muslims should not accept rule by non-muslims. Islam has to prevail over all, and Islam is in “a permanent state of war” with all non-muslims, who have to be hated. Muslims inhabit Dar al-Islam, the realm of Islam: non-muslims, “filth” in Islam’s teachings, inhabit Dar al-Harb, the Realm of War. It is very political. Well over half the Koran concerns non-muslims, and how they must be hated and overpowered.

Continue reading

ESW Files an Appeal With the European Court of Human Rights in Islam

On January 22 lawyers for Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff filed an appeal of her “hate speech” conviction with the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights.

Before I go any further, I must remind readers that Elisabeth incurred enormous legal expenses to put together and file this appeal with the ECtHR. To contribute to Elisabeth’s legal defense fund:

Elisabeth’s seminar on Islam was infiltrated by a leftist journalist in October of 2009. A year later she was indicted in an Austrian court for her “hate speech” about Mohammed. She was eventually convicted, and appealed at various levels, until finally her conviction was upheld by the European Court of Human Rights in October of last year.

In other words, the entire process has consumed a full decade of Elisabeth’s life.

So far.

To help new readers get an idea of what happened here’s a timeline of events:

January 2008   ESW began series of three-part seminars on ideology and effect of Islam, particularly in Europe. At first, attendance was about ten people per session. Later it increased to 35.
October 2009   Infiltration of leftist magazine journalist in two seminars.
November 2009   The story broke in NEWS magazine. ESW was reported to the authorities.
February 2010   Interview with Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution and Terrorism Prevention.
April 2010   ESW submitted extensive written answers to questions from Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution and Terrorism Prevention.
October 2010   ESW was informed via NEWS magazine of indictment and impending trial.
Nov. 23, 2010   First day of the trial. 2.5 hrs of intensive questioning by the judge
Jan. 18, 2011   Court reconvened, new charges of “Denigrating the teaching of a legally recognized religion” introduced by the case judge. No verdict; the trial was adjourned until February 15th.
Feb. 15, 2011   Verdict:
    On the original charge of “incitement to hatred”: Not guilty
    On the new charge of “denigration”: Guilty
Dec. 20, 2011   Verdict upheld by the appellate court, noting that her statements constituted “an excess of opinion” punishable under Austrian law.
Dec. 11, 2013   Verdict upheld by the Austrian supreme court, noting that Article 9 (freedom of religion) of the European Convention of Human Rights overrides Article 10 (freedom of expression)
Oct. 25, 2018   The European Court of Human Rights upheld the decision of the Austrian Supreme Court.
 

For a fuller account, see the ESW archives. But I must warn you: there’s a lot of material in those 123 posts.

The full text of ESW’s appeal to the ECtHR is available here in PDF format. In the text below, I’ve formatted the first 38 points for HTML. Those sections are the most interesting part of the document, but the rest is well worth reading. The appendices containing opinion pieces from major media outlets are particularly notable. Elisabeth has no support at the governmental level, but opinion writers — even liberal ones — are largely behind her.

Before you lay into all this in the comments: Yes, I’m aware that these proceedings are truly Orwellian in nature. I’m aware that the European legal structure is appallingly oppressive. And I’m very aware that Elisabeth would never have been put through a legal ordeal like this in the USA. It just wouldn’t have happened, not even under Obama.

However, European laws, and Austrian laws in particular, are what she is subject to. And that’s the framework within which her lawyers must craft their arguments.

The rest of this post consists of excerpts from the appeal document. The footnotes and footnote references are not included.

Note: The acronym ECtHR is used to refer to the European Court of Human Rights, while ECHR is reserved for the European Convention on Human Rights.

Also note: The title of this post contains a sardonic reference to the Cairo Declaration of Human Rights in Islam. It is not the actual name of the ECtHR.

1. Facts

1   The applicant was convicted of publicly “denigrating a person who is an object of veneration”, namely “Muhammad” the Prophet of Islam, in a way likely to arouse justified indignation, in violation of Article 188 of the Austrian Criminal Code.
2   The contentious remarks were made during a series of lectures entitled “Basic Knowledge on Islam” at the Institute of Education of the political party “Bildungsinstitut Freiheitlichen der Partei Österreichs” (FPÖ, the Austrian Freedom Party), which had thirty participants.
3   The applicant was alleged in substance to have said that Mohammad had pedophile tendencies (he “enjoyed doing it with children”) because he married a girl of six (Aisha) and consummated that marriage when she was nine – which is, according to the majority of traditional hadith sources, an accepted fact.
4   The applicant had not been advocating violence, hate or discrimination against Muslims. Quite the contrary, the Courts acquitted her of the initial charge of Incitement to Hatred (Article 283 of the Austrian Criminal Code).
5   A criminal case was initiated by the Prosecutor of Vienna, following a complaint from a journalist.
6   The Regional Court of Vienna on 15 February 2011, distinguishing between child marriage and pedophilia, considered that the applicant intended to wrongfully accuse Muhammad of having pedophile tendencies, that her remarks were not factual but offensive value judgments, beyond permissible limits, made without the intention of approaching the topic objectively but to denigrate Muhammad. Sanctioning such remarks was considered “necessary” to protect the religious sensibilities of Muslims and “religious peace” in Austria. The applicant was ordered to pay 480 euros or serve sixty days in prison in default of payment.
7   The Court of Appeal of Vienna, on 20 December 2011, rejected the appeal of the applicant, saying her remarks showed her intention to denigrate and ridicule Muslims unnecessarily, exceeding, according to the Court, the permissible limits of freedom of expression regarding religious belief or a person who is an object of worship.
8   The Supreme Court, on 11 December 2013, upheld the judgment of the Court of Appeal. It held that the interference pursued the legitimate aim of ensuring the protection of religious peace and the religious feelings of others. It concluded that in this case the remarks were not intended to help open a serious debate, but simply to defame Muhammad and portray him as unworthy of worship. A criminal conviction was therefore considered necessary in a democratic society within the meaning of Article 10 of the Convention.
9   By judgment of 25 October 2018, no. 38450/12, the Fifth Section of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) held that the applicant’s complaint was admissible, but that there was no violation of Article 10 ECHR.
 

2. Legislation concerned

2.1 Article 10 ECHR

10   Freedom of expression constitutes one of the essential foundations of a democratic society and one of the basic conditions for its progress and for each individual’s self- fulfilment. Subject to § 2 of Article 10 ECHR, it is applicable not only to “information” or “ideas” that are favourably received or regarded as inoffensive or as a matter of indifference, but also to those that offend, shock or disturb. The ruling of 25 October 2018 constitutes an ideological straitjacket in that it proscribes the mention of factual occurrences. Yet the quest for and treatment of historical truth indisputably involve freedom of speech. Article 10 ECHR protects not only the substance of the ideas and information expressed but also the form in which they are conveyed. This freedom is subject to the exceptions set out in Article 10 § 2 ECHR, which must, however, be construed strictly.
11   According to the generally accepted jurisprudence of the ECtHR, people involved in public life can legitimately be the subject of more critical remarks. To this category of “public figures” belong also legal persons and communities such as religious communities.
12   The right to freedom of expression can however be restricted when it is necessary in the spirit of a democratic society.
13   This necessity requires an essential social demand for a restriction of this sort. The exceptions to article 10 section 2 ECHR are therefore to be interpreted very narrowly.
 

2.2 Article 9 ECHR

14   Article 9 ECHR protects the right of every person to practise his religion freely.
15   It is possible for two freedoms of the ECHR to clash. In such cases, the national authorities are obliged to carry out a particularly precise balancing of interests.
 

2.3 Balancing Article 10 ECHR and Article 9 ECHR

Continue reading

Generation Retreat

The following article was published at Alexander Wendt’s website. It points out that the only kind of “integration” that occurs in Germany is when immigrants overwhelm, drive out, or absorb the native German population. In Berlin, “integration” means turning Germans into Turks.

Many thanks to Nash Montana for the translation:

Generation Retreat

by Air Tuerkis*

What happens in schools in which Turkish and Arab youths are already in the majority? Assimilation is in reverse: it is the “Almans” who are adjusting themselves.

I am 16 years old and I live in Berlin-Kreuzberg. I grew up between Görlitzer Park, Warshaw Street und Kottbuss Gate. At my elementary school the percentage of foreigners was past the 70% mark.

I experienced what the words “integration difficulties” really meant: A third grader sitting on the floor, crying and hitting at the teacher who tries to soothe him; a fellow student storming angrily out of the classroom after a warning and can only be brought back with much difficulty. Another who’s taking a nap during German class. And ultimately, a fourth-grader who visits the local mosque regularly and babbles on to me about good and evil angels sitting on my shoulders. It was a crazy time; the educational level was beyond ridiculous. I have learned absolutely nothing in elementary school. Nada y niente.

And still — and, yes, this may sound crazy — I was better friends with the Turks, the Kurds and the Arabs than I was with German students. Because most German students in Kreuzberg are just insanely dumb: They have been brought up anti-authoritarian; achievements and performance were foreign concepts to them, but their mommies were sure that something was going to come from them — something about painting pretty pictures or maybe music. The child could jam away on the drums so well…

When I got older, I went to grammar school, out and away from Kreuzberg. The older I got, the more things changed around us. Those Germans with the last bit of common sense left. Those who remained at the Kreuzberg schools soon only had two options left: Either they were excluded, and ridiculed as “Almans” — or they assimilated. They adjusted themselves. They assimilated so that they could belong to a deeply Islamic-shaped youth culture. There everything was about honor and family, and whoever said anything against it or just generally was of different opinion than the leader of the group got punched in the face. Sure, as far as alcohol and girls went, things weren’t so Islamo-puritan, unless it was about your own sister, so help us allah, because then it was a matter of honor. Shisha was all the latest rage, music came from rappers who were rapping things in broken German about punching people in the face and boxing. This culture reacted allergically to everything German, Western, and against everyone who didn’t immediately shed themselves of it.

I’ve watched how the assimilating Germans started to talk in slang. They took up the mannerisms of their migrant friends, and in order to try and completely evade the slightest accusation of Almandome, they would try to exceed and surpass their migrant friends in things such as aggression and the propensity to use violence.

The fact that culture functions in this way here is known by everyone, whether a student at Waldorf, SPIEGEL online reader, a Green Party member/fan, or just generally a tolerance-loving diversity fan: to accuse a migrant gang of cheating at soccer by Bolzplatz? Better not. To flirt with a girl with darker skin? Rather keep your distance.

Continue reading

Splitting Hairs

In his latest essay, our Israeli correspondent MC wades into the murky cultural waters where shariah advocates and social justice warriors converge.

Splitting Hairs

by MC

The Hebrew ‘shalom’ is translated as ‘peace’, but that is not particularly accurate. It actually describes an ‘inner peace’, which comes with a personal relationship with the Creator, in this case Yahovah. ‘Peace’ is essentially a manmade thing (or not, as the case may be), but shalom comes through keeping the Commandments of Yah.

In this day and age this kind study of is considered to be ‘splitting hairs’, just as the difference between quoting a hadith about Mohammed’s sexual proclivities and accusing him of paedophilia is ‘splitting hairs’, since the one makes the other obvious.

The problem about a sex act with a 9-year-old is not so much the gross physical intrusion as the potential for damage to the child both physical and — especially — emotional. This is true particularly when considering the case of Mohammed, a religious icon whose every act is to be emulated by the faithful.

A 9-year-old is a child, and it thus vulnerable. Because a child is, by definition, not yet physically or emotionally mature, he or she cannot be considered able to give any kind of informed consent to a sex act. Any sex act.

Islam, being a male fantasy-oriented religion, takes no account of consent from either mature or immature women. On the other hand, the Judeo-Christian religions regard the woman as the ‘life-giver’, as the name Adam gave to Eve (Chava) implies. The woman is thus a pivotal player in the commandment to go forth and multiply, and we build our Western culture around the need to support this life-giver and her offspring — or rather we did until Roe vs. Wade.

Thus, because paedophilia is an intrinsic part of Islam, any judgement comes down to a matter of who can get away with offending whom. Muslims become violent when offended and start murdering people, but since Christians are mainly ‘white supremacists’ and need to be taught a lesson anyway… or so it seems to go these days. But just when did emotion and politicking creep into the modern law-making and its associated executive process?

So the recent European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) decision that to call Mohammed a paedophile is ‘hate speech’ is fraught with implications. In itself, the idea behind ‘hate’ speech is to provide a means to demonize free speech. Bur free speech is only really proven to be free when somebody is offended by it. So just how do we define hate speech in a ‘free speech’ context, if the two are so mutually incompatible?

Is it when free speech causes harm, as in falsely shouting FIRE in a crowded cinema?

To tip the scales of justice, the difference between ‘good’ and ‘bad’ must be clearly delineated, and must be able to be applied in all circumstances to all people, both equally, and across the board.

Do Muslims have an existential problem with paedophilia? Does the rest of society therefore have to give way to these Muslim sensitivities? Is there therefore a different law for Muslims — ‘Yes’, ‘Yes’ and ‘Yes’, it would appear.

Continue reading

Judge Jeanine Talks to Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff

Earlier this month Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff appeared on Judge Jeanine Pirro’s show on Fox News. ESW discussed the verdict in the “hate speech” case against her, and how it relates to UN Resolution 16/18 and the Islamic law against slander:

When Muslims accuse someone of slander, they don’t mean what we do when we use the term. This is from Reliance of the Traveller,* Book R. “Holding one’s Tongue”, § 2.0, “Slander (Ghiba),” r2.2:

Slander and talebearing are two of the ugliest and most frequently met with qualities among men, few people being safe from them. I have begun with them because of the widespread need to warn people of them.

[…]

Slander (ghiba) means to mention anything concerning a person that he would dislike…

r2.3:

As for talebearing… it consists of quoting someone’s words to another in a way that worsens relations between them.

As you can see, the factual truth of any given statement is irrelevant; what matters is whether a Muslim would dislike hearing it spoken.

To contribute to Elisabeth’s legal defense fund:

For previous posts on the “hate speech” prosecution of Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff, see Elisabeth’s Voice: The Archives.

*   In full, ’Umdat al-salik wa ’uddat al-nasik, or The reliance of the traveller and tools of the worshipper. It is commonly referred to as Reliance of the Traveller when cited in English.

The Revised Edition (published 1991, revised 1994) is “The Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law ’Umdat al-Salik by Ahmad ibn Naqib al-Misri (d. 769/1368) in Arabic with Facing English Text, Commentary, and Appendices”, edited and translated by Nuh Ha Mim Keller. The publisher is listed as amana publications in Beltsville, Maryland.

This is an authoritative source on Sunni Islamic law, because it is certified as such by Al-Azhar University in Cairo. There is no higher authority on Sunni Islamic doctrine than Al-Azhar; it is the closest equivalent to the Vatican that can be found in Islam.
 

Off With Their Heads!

I first became aware of the Muslim fad for beheading infidels when Daniel Pearl was executed in Pakistan back in 2002. Over the years I saw a few more beheading videos, especially after the practice really began trending during the heyday of the Islamic State in 2014. I hated watching them, but it seemed a sort of duty, to be aware of what Islam is based on what it does. Eventually I realized that I’d had enough, and I quit watching them. I’ve seen what a beheading looks like now, many times over. I’m old, and my limbic system can’t take that much horror anymore.

Videos of beheadings and other gruesome types of execution constitute a form of Islamic porn. Devout Muslims get off on that sort of thing the same way a voyeur gets off on peeking through a lady’s bedroom window.

Muslims aren’t the only ones who like beheadings, of course. People with a taste for sadistic violence — most of them probably psychopaths — are drawn to such videos. I wouldn’t be surprised if jihad porn were the stimulus behind a lot of Western conversions to Islam. Just think — I’ll get to do all that cool stuff, and God approves of it!

The German news report below discusses the most recent Islamic beheading to gain notoriety: the slaughter of two young Scandinavian women in Morocco.

NOTE: The Moroccan government spokesman’s words might be more accurately rephrased: “We frown upon the murder of infidels on Moroccan soil, because it interferes with the tourist industry, which is how we extract money from the infidel. Mujahideen are required travel abroad if they wish to kill infidels.”

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

Video transcript:

Continue reading