New in PJ Media:
Here is a story that neatly encapsulates the threat that the West faces, and the weakness of its response to that threat. In Germany, a vociferous critic of jihad violence and Sharia oppression of women and others, Michael Stürzenberger, was stabbed several months ago by a jihadi precisely because of his opposition to those evils. Now, a German court has added insult to injury, convicting Stürzenberger of “incitement to hatred” and fining him €3,600 ($3,800). So it has come to this: what the jihadi began, the German government is now continuing. What will be the effects of this on the freedom of speech in Germany? That’s obvious: if this continues, Germany is dead as a free society.
In Spiked Wednesday, the publication’s Germany correspondent Sabine Beppler-Spahl was generally sympathetic to Stürzenberger, but added a significant and telling caveat. She asserted that “there’s little doubt that Stürzenberger can be offensive. He claims that his criticism only applies to ‘political Islam’, calling it a threat to democracy and an ideology that oppresses women. But he has also compared parts of the Koran with Hitler’s Mein Kampf, and – while saying that not all Muslims are rapists – has talked of ‘thousands of women’ who have been sexually assaulted by Muslims from Northern Africa and Arabia.”
Here yet again we see how unpopular and unwelcome truths are stigmatized as “offensive” even among people who should know better; but does that make them any less true? Sabine Beppler-Spahl appears to be unaware of the fact that the Qur’an contains numerous passages (not just one or two) that are profoundly and disturbingly antisemitic.
The Jews in the Qur’an are called the strongest of all people in enmity toward the Muslims (5:82). They are accused of hiding the truth and misleading people (2:109; 3:78); staging rebellion against the prophets and rejecting their guidance (2:55); being hypocritical (2:14, 2:44); giving preference to their own interests over the teachings of Muhammad (2:87); and being arrogant about their being Allah’s beloved people (5:18). They are depicted as slandering the true religion (Islam) (4:46); killing the prophets (2:61); being merciless and heartless (2:74); and never keeping their promises or fulfilling their words (2:100). Allah transforms the disobedient Jews into apes and pigs for breaking the Sabbath (2:63-65; 5:59-60; 7:166). They are under Allah’s curse (9:30), and Muslims should wage war against them and subjugate them under Islamic hegemony (9:29). And there is much more of this, making Mein Kampf look practically benign by comparison.
And as for “‘thousands of women’ who have been sexually assaulted by Muslims from Northern Africa and Arabia,” take just one British city as an example. The BBC reported in 2014 that “at least 1,400 children were subjected to appalling sexual exploitation in Rotherham between 1997 and 2013,” and British officials did nothing; they “described their nervousness about identifying the ethnic origins of perpetrators for fear of being thought as racist; others remembered clear direction from their managers not to do so.”
There is more. Read the rest here.
Troybeam says
Insulting Islam is the number one tool of Islam to achieve actions against non Muslims. It enables Islam, a theocracy to receive monies and have a person received jail and or fines once Islam establishes itself in a nation as a “religion”.
Nations like England, Germany and others have put Islam before the nations citizens allowing for Islam to gain more and more power against the citizens.
Statler says
I seem to recall a very Anglosaxon, actually Christian (I would venture to say), proverb that reads: two wrongs don’t make one right. I happen to subscribe to this rule. Having said that, I see no harm in telling the truth, even though in a significant number of penal codes openly accusing someone of committing a criminal act is qualified as libel (when what is said is untrue), or slander (when what is said is true) which, it would appear, is what this case should be all about. Two remarks, mind you: (1) it is indeed very likely that the judge(s) presiding over this case has(/have) no inkling concerning orthodox mohamedanism, in which case his (their) judgement that it is a case of libel would not only be incorrect, but formed upon totally misinformed judgment(s) (meaning that this judgement can be struck down in appeal on the grounds that it is incorrect because of its incorrect substantiation) and in which case, in appeal the (ultimate) outcome would ultimately most likely be upheld, but on the ground that this is not a case of libel, but of slander. It’s what you call a case of: ‘heads you win, tails I loose’.
So the judgement is dissatisfying to the max, but: ‘dura lex, tamen lex’.
But now let’s look at the opposite case: let’s take a mohamedan insulting Christ and Christians, or, even better: Jews and Judaism (antisemitism), which is part and parcel of mohamedan orthodoxy. Then the judge(s) would claim freedom of religion and freedom of speech, even in case these would be provided with a provision that these freedoms are limited by the law (read, most significantly, the applicable penal code).
Again: ‘heads you win, tails I loose’.
I resent having to rest my case, but, even so, I do.
Statler says
The ‘duralex’ (pun intended with vigor) part is for Mr. Hugh Fitzgerald.
Clem Alford says
Islam is ‘incurable’. It’s like a terminal illness. If a cure is possible the Jihadi comes along to strike the finishing blow knowing he will be set free by either the Sharia or the absurd kaffir”s law!!
No wonder the crazy Islamist thinks he (or she) can walk on water!!
Clem Alford says
Islam is ‘incurable’. It’s like a terminal illness. If a cure is possible the Jihadi comes along to strike the finishing blow knowing he will be set free by either the Sharia or the absurd kaffir”s law!!
No wonder the crazy Islamist thinks he (or she) can walk on water!!
DOUG PERLE says
Germany, back to the neo-Nazi regime
Andrew Blackadder says
Meanwhile muslims around the World are laughing at what they see as the weakness of Western Men as revenge is an important Tenet in islamic teachings and so when they see zero or at least very little,reactions to their vile violent actions at us then they see this as our weakness and laugh in the face of the person they stabbed.
Merket brought them in and most Germans agreed with her and now they pay the price for bringing millions of young men into Germany that love Hitler and hate Jews…
This shit is about to get even worse.
jerry glenn says
Germany surges in the international Islamopandering derby