‘Brave German Woman’ Rebukes Islam’s Lie

 

by Dale Hurd:

SPEYER, Germany — Islam continues to grow in power and influence across Europe. But at a recent concert in Germany, one Christian woman decided to stand up to it.

“The Armed Man: A Mass for Peace” by Welsh composer Karl Jenkins was supposed to be an interfaith event to bring Christianity and Islam together.

But when the Muslim imam began his call to prayer during the concert, he was interrupted by a small woman in the balcony proclaiming that “Jesus Christ alone is Lord of Germany,” and shouting, “I break this curse.”

She also invoked the name of Martin Luther and warned the audience that what was happening was “a lie.”

The video went viral.

‘Brave German Woman’

The mysterious Christian lady became known on the Internet simply as the “brave German woman.”

It happened on Nov. 10, 2013 at the Memorial Church of the Reformation in the Rhineland city of Speyer, built to honor Martin Luther.

It isn’t just any church. It’s a monument to the Protestant Reformation and a memorial to the spiritual transformation of Germany.

It was at this spiritual landmark that a Muslim imam was invited to give the call to prayer. When the brave German woman, whose real name is Heidi Mund, heard about the event, she prayed.

“I was asking Jesus, ‘Lord, shall I go there?’ So, when I have to drive one and half hours, you know, I think, ‘Is it worth it to go or can others go?’ So, this is human laziness, yeah?” Mund recalled.

She grabbed her German flag emblazoned with the words “Jesus Christ is Lord” and headed for the concert, still not sure what she would do when she got there.

“Until the imam started with his shouting, I did not really know what to do. I was just prepared for what God wants me to do,” she told CBN News.

Then the Muslim call to prayer began, and Heidi said she felt something rising up inside her.

A Holy Anger

“I would call it a holy anger,” she recounted. “And then I rose with my flag and I was calling and proclaiming that Jesus Christ is Lord over Germany.”

“My purpose was, I broke this curse because [Muslims] say, ‘Only Allah is the Lord. He is God, the only God.’ And I broke this curse in this church and I broke it over my country,” she continued.

And she repeated the words of Martin Luther in 1521 after he refused to recant his faith in scripture alone: “Here I stand. I can do no other” and “Save the church of Martin Luther!”

Video shows another concert-goer trying to calm her by saying, “This is a concert for peace.”

Mund can be heard responding in German, “No it’s not! Allahu Akbar is what Muslims scream while murdering people! Don’t be fooled! Don’t be fooled! This is a lie!”

She was thrown out of the church.

“They should have thrown the imam out and not me because I am a believer in Jesus Christ, but he serves another god. This Allah is not the same god. And this is not the truth.”

“This ‘allahu akbar,’ they use it when they kill people,” she argued. “This is, for me, worship to an idol, to their god. And when a Muslim calls ‘allahu akbar’ in a church, that means this church is not a church anymore, it’s a mosque.”

Read more at CBN

MOSQUE BUILDING FOR ISLAMIFICATION IN GERMANY

 

Tundra Tabloids:

Sabatina James is a Pakistani-German apostate from Islam gives her analysis of the role played by mosque-building in Western societies, and particularly in Germany.

Vlad Tepes subtitling & Oz-Rita translation:

Are Muslim Immigrants Good for Your Country?

German_MuslimsBy Y.K. Cherson:

Some people have a deep animosity toward immigrants, but I am not one of them. I do not like nor dislike immigrants; for me they are just strangers who live in my country. And my attitude toward them is conditioned by just one simple criteria: if they make my life and my country better- or worse. On the other hand, immigrants who come to my country do not come out of some deep love for the nation or culture. They come for money and for a better life for themselves and their families. So we are even, and nobody owes anything to anyone else- which is, in most cases, the best pattern of any relationship.

Money and a better life are quite an incentive. Those who think immigrants, especially immigrants from Muslim countries, come because they admire Western democracy should take a look at the situation in Germany.

Data taken from: Citizen Times: “Turks in Germany 2012″:

According to the study of the Interior Ministry, in 2009, Germany was home to around 4.3 million Muslims, which equates to a population share of 5.2%. Of them, the largest group consists of just under 2.7 million people of Turkish descent. A recent poll by Information GmbH has investigated what these Turkish immigrants think about Germany and Germans.

Attitudes Toward Germany

Regarding the respondents’ attitudes toward Germany and Germans, at least in terms of the stated desire for integration, 95% of the Turks in Germany find it important to preserve their Turkish culture in Germany, and 87% (2010: 83%) think that Germans ought to be more considerate of the particular circumstances of the Turks. For crying out loud, why in the world should 80 million Germans who created Germany be “more considerate of the particular circumstances” of some 2.7 million Turks?

Read more at Cherson and Molschky

The Islamization of Germany in 2013

A screenshot from the video of "Abu Azzam the German", threatening attacks on Germany and Chancellor Merkel.

A screenshot from the video of “Abu Azzam the German”, threatening attacks on Germany and Chancellor Merkel.

by Soeren Kern:

In December, two new studies, one funded by the German government, found that the majority of Muslims believe that Islamic Sharia law should take precedence over the secular constitutions and laws of their European host countries.

“Critics of Islamic ideology and its organizations are constantly confronted with lawsuits and have to legally defend themselves against the accusations of blasphemy or incitement-to-hatred. Even if it does not come to a conviction, such processes cost a lot of time and money…Thus… we are experiencing a de facto application of Islamic law.” — Felix Strüning, Gustav Stresemann Foundation Report.

“[It] must be recognized: democracies must beware of those who believe a free society is something that needs to be vanquished.” — Die Welt.

What follows is a chronological review of some of the most important stories about the rise of Islam in Germany during 2013:

In January, the Turkish-run Kuba Camii Mosque in Eschweiler, a city situated along the German-Belgian-Dutch border and about 50 kilometers (30 miles) west of Cologne, for the first time began publicly calling Muslims to prayer.

The call to prayer was described as an “historical event” and was attended by numerous dignitaries, including the Turkish consul and the Turkish attaché.

The Turkish imam of the Kuba Camii Mosque, Bahri Ciftci, declared his hopes that “the public prayer call will be a symbol of a tolerant, intercultural and interreligious common coexistence.”

The mayor of Eschweiler, Rudi Bertram, said, “Tolerance must be practiced on a daily basis. We are all responsible for ensuring that there is a co-existence.”

The mosque is one of a growing number of Islamic institutions in Germany publicly calling the Muslim faithful to prayer—five times a day, seven days a week—with cries of Allahu Akbar! (“Allah is Greater!”).

The sonorous prayer calls (known in Arabic as adhan) can be heard from great distances when amplified through electric loudspeakers. Critics say some German towns and cities are beginning to evoke the sounds and images of the Islamic Middle East.

On January 14, the City-State of Bremen signed a so-called state treaty with city’s 40,000-strong Muslim community. The agreement guarantees the protection of Muslim community properties, the approval of the construction of mosques with minarets and domes, the allotment of land for Muslim cemeteries, the supplying of halal food at prisons and hospitals, the recognition of three Muslim holidays, Muslim representation in state institutions and several other rights and privileges.

According to Erol Pürlü, the spokesman of the Koordinationsrat der Muslime [Muslim Coordination Council], a Turkish-Muslim umbrella group, the treaty with Bremen “sends a clear signal that Islam belongs to Germany.”

Bremen is the second German state to sign a treaty with local Muslim communities. Hamburg, the second-largest city in Germany, concluded a “historic treaty” with the city’s 200,000-strong Muslim community in November 2012.

Critics say the agreements do little to encourage Muslim integration into German society and instead will boost the growing influence of Islam in the country by encouraging the perpetuation of a Muslim parallel society.

Also in January, a court in Berlin convicted two Islamists of being members of al-Qaeda and sentenced them to a combined 15 years in prison.

Yusuf Ocak, 27, from Lübeck, Germany, and Maqsood Lodin, 23, an Austrian of Afghan background, were assigned by al-Qaeda to collect money and recruit members for the terrorist group in Europe. Ocak was arrested in Vienna and Lodin in Berlin in May 2011.

At the time of their arrest, police uncovered a treasure trove of intelligence, including more than 100 al-Qaeda planning documents that described some of the terror group’s most audacious plots and a road map for future operations. Future plots include the seizing of cruise ships and carrying out other large-scale terrorist attacks in Europe.

Read more at Gatestone Institute

 

Excerpt of interview with German apostate on mosques in Germany:

Bonn imam tells boys to cut off heads of chicks in preparatiohn for decapitating Jews

Germany’s Sharia No-Go Zones

f5fb0eabefc48b7b9aaedb1aa38f647b-450x337By :

“To mark No Go Areas, that is to say law-free areas with high danger potential, is nothing unusual,” Rüdiger Franz of Bonn, Germany’s General Anzeiger (GA) newspaper wrote, as travel guide entries for cities such as Detroit, Istanbul, Johannesburg, or Mogadishu show.  Considerable controversy, however, ensued after a language school posted an Internet No Go Area map of Bonn and environs, drawing ongoing, often unwelcome attention to the problems Germany’s once serene former capital faces from newly arrived Muslim immigrants.

The No Go map at the website of the Steinke Institut (SI) language school’s Bonn branch first drew significant public interest at the conservative German website Politically Incorrect (PI) with a July 18, 2013, entry. Attention only grew in the following weeks with an “unexpectedly large echo” of about 50 Bonn residents contacting SI with approval, queries, and criticism, as an SI Internet statement at the beginning of September noted.

SI explained therein the school’s emphasis on teaching German as a foreign language to students “from the entire world.”  The No Go map resulted “exclusively” from some 250 such students reporting in the last six years “extremely negative experiences”  in various Bonn neighborhoods, with over 80% of the reports agreeing upon the map’s red-marked problem zones.  SI elaborated that these “negative experiences” entailed harassment of women, theft, robbery, break-ins, assaults, and insults.

In contrast to the suspicions of “some concerned callers” at SI, these experiences had no “Neo-Nazi context.”  Rather, “above all” East Asian and East European students “had made pertinent experiences with adolescents, who almost exclusively seem to have an immigration background.”  A landlord from Bonn’s Bad Godesberg (BadGo) suburb confirmed in an October 23, 2013, GA article that many of her young renters suffered harassment from immigrants, particularly women, for “supposedly too short skirts and the wearing of shorts.” SI teaching personnel, many of whom “themselves live in these same city areas and are very often themselves connected with a partner with an immigrant background,” likewise agreed with the students, SI noted.  On the other hand, the “overwhelming majority of the language students had a thoroughly positive impression of the German and/or as German perceived citizens of Bonn and confirm therefore the image of Bonn as a tolerant and cosmopolitan city.”

For each red zone on SI’s map, SI sought confirmation in the media and linked many of these articles to the statement.  A subsequent PI entry criticized that SI “did not trust itself to name clearly what special kind of immigrants are responsible” for a “negative Germany image” among “peaceful and diligent foreign German learners.” Yet the linked “gruesome news reports” allowed an “unbiased observer” to surmise that the criticisms “all somehow had something to do with the I-word,” namely Islam.

Read more at Front Page

Germany and Syria: A Case Study in Jihad

by Andrew E. Harrod
Special to IPT News
October 30, 2013

Freedom Fighters at the 2013 OSCE Human Rights Dimension Implementation Meeting in Warsaw, Poland

Gates of Vienna:

The Human Dimension Implementation Meeting of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) convened in Warsaw last week. A team of liberty-loving people from Austria, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Poland, the UK, and the USA was in attendance. They represented the International Civil Liberties Alliance (ICLA), Bürgerbewegung Pax Europa (BPE-Austria and -Germany), ACT! for America, ACT! for Canada, the Center for Security Policy, the Stresemann Foundation, and Women for Freedom.

A group photo of the core team is below:

oscewarsawteam2013

Back row:

  • Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff (Austria), Bürgerbewegung Pax Europa (BPE-Germany)
  • Polish representative, International Civil Liberties Alliance (ICLA)
  • UK representative, International Civil Liberties Alliance (ICLA)
  • Alain Wagner (France) , International Civil Liberties Alliance (ICLA)
  • David Erzet (Belgium), International Civil Liberties Alliance (ICLA)
  • Henrik Ræder Clausen (Denmark), International Civil Liberties Alliance (ICLA)
  • Chris Knowles (UK), International Civil Liberties Alliance (ICLA)
  • Felix Strüning (Germany), Stresemann Foundation — A Lobby for Freedom

Front row:

  • Ned May (USA), International Civil Liberties Alliance (ICLA)
  • Stephen Coughlin (USA), Center for Security Policy
  • Valerie Price (Canada), ACT! for Canada
  • Marie-Luise Hoffmann-Polzoni (Germany), Women for Freedom
  • Liz Schmidt (Germany), Bürgerbewegung Pax Europa (BPE-Austria)
  • Dave Petteys (USA), ACT! for America 5280 Coalition

The team worked with tireless dedication all week.

******

Henrik R Clausen describes the OSCE as follows:

OSCE, the Organisation for Security and Coorperation in Europe, is an organisation created to follow up on the Helsinki Accords and ensure their full implementation in Europe and related countries. This is a noble purpose, but since organisations like this have an inherent risk to become narrow worlds of professionals, a watchful eye from the public may be useful to uphold the ideals…. OSCE is one of those great, classical organisations that listeners to news know about quite well. Statements and recommendations from OSCE weigh in heavily in political decision-making and it is thus quite an influential organisation. Participants are 56 countries, which includes Europe, Central Asia and North America, as well as large and small NGO’s from the area.

via ICLA:

Elisabeth Sabaditch-Wolff, Liz Schmidt, Ned May, and Stephen Coughlin attended the OSCE Human Dimension Implementation Meeting in Warsaw this week. They took some time out to appear on Secure Freedom Radio.  The International Civil Liberties Alliance was represented by Ned May.

The radio interviews can be found HERE and are well worth listening to.

Reference was made to the ODIHR side event at which the OSCE’s controversial booklet Guidelines for Educators on Countering Intolerance and Discrimination against Muslims: Addressing Islamophobia through Education was discussed.  It was noted that this booklet used the word “Islapmophobia” including in its subtitle, but some of those who had put the booklet together were unable to come up with a coherent definition of the term.  As many will realise, the lack of a precise definition will inevitably result in abuse by state authorities and will be used to undermine the basic human rights of those who voice concerns about sharia law.

*********

According to The Center For Security Policy these OSCE meetings “are heavily influenced by Soros funded groups on the one hand and OIC influenced entities on another”. To ensure monitoring of basic rights and freedoms, and to register concerns, “interventions” were formally given on 4 subjects.

The interventions by Stephen Coughlin representing CSP are below. For full coverage and more videos go to Gates Of Vienna and International Civil Liberties Alliance.

———————————————————

OSCE Human Rights Dimension Implementation Meeting

Working Session 1

Tolerance and Non-Discrimination

Warsaw, 23 September 2013

Thank you Mister Moderator,

This intervention concerns the Annotated Agenda that makes generous use of the term “aggressive nationalism”.

CSP would like a clarification of the term “aggressive nationalism.”  Is there such a thing as “non-aggressive nationalism?”  Is any assertion of national identity per se aggressive?

In addition, words such as “racism”, “xenophobia”, “intolerance”, and “discrimination” are biased terms that are not adequately defined.  CSP is of the opinion that their purpose is to shut down debate by stigmatizing, marginalizing, and intimidating people who hold certain opinions.  These words should be avoided unless they can be defined in such a manner that enjoys the consensus of all participants regardless of their political, social and cultural views.

Recommendation to ODIHR and Participating States: To refrain from using these terms until they are precisely and officially defined and accepted by the consensus of all participating groups holding diverse views.

###

Working Session 2

Tolerance and Non-Discrimination

Warsaw, 24 September 2013

Thank you Madam Moderator,

While we appreciate the width and the severity of topics discussed here, the Center for Security Policy sees a need to object to the use of terms, which are undefined, ill defined, or defined by non-OSCE entities and whose purpose is to stigmatize, marginalize, and intimidate those holding dissenting opinions.

Examples include, but are not limited to; “intolerance”, “discrimination”, “racism”, “hate”, “xenophobia”, and “Islamophobia” without reference to any underlying claims or facts.

The use of controversial undefined terms to attack citizens has been a notorious strategy employed by oppressive and totalitarian political regimes seeking to silence dissent.

CSP Recomends that the OSCE and ODIHR suspend this practice until a published definition of terms is provided that meets EU Human Rights and U.S. Civil Rights scrutiny.

Thank you for your time and attention.

 ###

 

Working Session 6

Freedom of Religion or Belief

Warsaw, 26 September 2013

Thank you Madam Moderator,

Center for Security Policy is concerned with how emerging definitions of “incitement” can be open to permissive interpretations that include claims of being incited by the free and open exercise of one’s faith both individually and as a group.  Increasingly, there is a trend to associate incitement with the harsh responses of others that have the effect of blaming the victim for the hostile responses of the abuser.  This cannot be allowed to establish itself as an international legal standard.

Related concerns are expressed with regard to the emerging use of terms like “intolerance” and “discrimination” when applied to the free exercise of one’s faith.

CSP Recommends that the ODIHR ensure that terms like “incitement” not be allowed to have open-ended definitions that can be foreseeably used to cause a chilling effect on what would otherwise be protected speech and faith.

Thank you for your time and attention.

 ###

Working Session 8

Freedom of Assembly & Association

Warsaw, 27 September 2013

Thank you Madam Moderator,

Center for Security Policy

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Please note that the right is to assemble peaceably.  I would submit that this was the gold standard when implemented in 1791 and remains so today.  The right to peaceably assemble was put at parity with the other rights enumerated in the First Amendment.

The right to associate includes the right not to associate or not to be compelled to do so.  This simply recognizes that association is itself a form of expression.  Where the state can compel association, it undermines the right.

Rights granted by the state are no rights at all.  Basic rights are capable of being expressed in basic terms.  When the expression of basic rights are recast in tortured language that can only be comprehended by individuals credentialed by elite organizations operating in elite forums, the very nature of what it means to be a basic right loses meaning.  When the citizen loses the ability to maintain subject matter awareness of the very meaning of those basic rights, they are diminished and made subject to those who have the power to influence rarified narratives.  This comes at the cost of those basic rights’ very meaning.  Citizens are becoming increasingly dispossessed of their rights by the very process of making them incomprehensible.

One way of demonstrating the efficacy of “new understandings” of “cutting edge” work being done by “experts” on basic rights such as freedom of expression is that they make reference to a myriad number of forums producing numerous “cutting edge” theories requiring a full-time commitment to monitoring them just to remain aware.

There was a time when basic rights could be expressed in as basic terms as this:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

It is as basic as that.  In more ways than one, it was the gold standard then and remains so today.  Simplicity is inherent in the expression of a basic right.  An indicator that basic rights are at risk is that they have been made subject to such “cutting edge” analysis.  New is not always better.  Cutting edge legal analysis can be used as much to deconstruct one’s rights as to build them up.

CSP Recommends that the ODIHR ensures that the treatment of the expression of basic rights not lose sight of their basic meaning by expressing them in commonly understood language using commonly defined terms.  This includes the right to peaceably assemble.

Thank you for your time and attention.

 

European Jihad in Syria

874_largeby Andrew E. Harrod:

Algerian Mosque Terror Financing Draws Scrutiny

Tarawih___Hamza_324936347by IPT News:

 

The Lessons of History: Kristallnacht in Egypt

pic_giant_081913_SM_Coptic-KristallnachtBy Hans A. von Spakovsky:

As the military (with the support of secular groups that don’t want an Islamist state) battles the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and Americans argue over how to react, we should look back at history to understand why we should support the military as the lesser of two evils and hope for its success.  Those who know the history of the Muslim Brotherhood and see the murderous attacks it has launched on the homes, businesses, schools, and churches of Coptic Christians, who represent about 10 percent of the population, will recognize that we have seen this type of behavior before.

images (11)The Brotherhood is simply using the same tactics and ideology of the political party that it allied itself with in the 1930s and 40s: the Nazi Party.  What is happening to the Coptic Christians being beaten, kidnapped, and killed all over Egypt is similar to [1] what happened to Jews in Germany during Kristallnacht [2] on November 9-10, 1938, when Jews were killed and beaten and their homes, stores, schools, and synagogues ransacked, looted, and demolished in Germany and Austria.

The Muslim Brotherhood was founded in Egypt in 1928 by Sheikh Hassan al-Banna, who was a great admirer of Adolf Hitler and who formed an alliance with the Nazis.  The Brotherhood helped distribute translated copies of Mein Kampf and other Nazi propaganda.  The ideology of the Muslim Brotherhood is eerily similar to Nazi fascism, including its ultimate objective of world conquest and a new caliphate.  The only difference is it believes in the supremacy of Islam instead of the supremacy of the Aryan race.

The Nazis even helped fund the Great Arab Revolt of 1936-1939 against the Jews and British in Palestine, which was led by Hajj Amin al-Husseini, the grand mufti of Jerusalem, and one of the leaders of the Muslim Brotherhood.  It was al-Husseini who met with Hitler in 1941 [3] and helped augment the traditional Arab hatred of Jews with plans for a genocidal campaign against Jews.

The fascist origins of the Muslim Brotherhood are fully ingrained in everything it does.  Its hatred for Jews has migrated into a hatred of all non-Muslims, particularly Christian Arabs.  In the Muslim Brotherhood’s eyes, Coptic Egyptians are traitors to their race and the only true religion, Islam.  Many Americans refuse to understand that jihadists like the Brotherhood do not accept any separation between church and state — the only acceptable government is a Muslim theocratic state based on Sharia law.

There is another parallel to Nazi Germany in the situation in Egypt that Americans should also keep in mind.  Adolf Hitler and the Nazis were democratically elected in the 1932 elections just like Mohamed Morsi was in 2012.  Hitler then set out to destroy Germany’s democracy [4] and make himself and the Nazi Party its supreme ruler.  Morsi has spent the past year taking the same type of steps, slowly throttling his opposition and media critics, and working to make his formally banned fascist party, the Muslim Brotherhood, sovereign over all of Egypt.

Just like Hitler and the Nazis, the Muslim Brotherhood wants full dictatorial control of the country and the elimination of Jews, Christians, and all non-Muslims. There is no question that if they can gain control of the military, they will do everything possible to prepare for and launch a war to destroy Israel.  That is a fundamental tenet of their ideology.

Many forget that Hitler had a very uneasy relationship initially with the German military.  It was the only viable force in Germany that could have deposed Hitler and the Nazis as they started to consolidate power.  But the military never did so and Hitler acted quickly to take control of the military to prevent any such opposition from developing.  It was only late in the war in 1944 that a small number of senior military officers finally tried to assassinate Hitler to get rid of him and end the war.

But what if the German military had acted much earlier?  Hitler in essence consolidated his power [5] in the two years from 1932 to 1934 through a complicated series of actions, including plots like the Reichstag fire, the Night of the Long Knives, and the passage of various laws that effectively swept away all of his opposition.  If the German military had crushed Hitler, his SA Brownshirts, the Hitler Youth, the SS, and all of the other Nazi Party affiliates in 1933, perhaps millions of people would not have died in a genocidal war and Nazi concentration camps.  The history of Europe might have been completely different.

Fortunately, the Egyptian military has acted before Morsi and his own Muslim Brotherhood Brownshirts had the full opportunity to consolidate their power.  Morsi and his clan are thugs with views no different than those who stood in the docks at Nuremberg from 1945 to 1949.  If we can learn anything from the history of the 1930s and Nazi Germany, we should be hoping that the Egyptian military is successful in crushing the new version of the Nazis in the Middle East.  That is the only way that a real democracy will ever have a chance to be born in Egypt.

Read more at PJ Media

 

Obama opens the gates to Syrians

 

Yippee! We are coming to America! Thank you President Obama!

Yippee! We are coming to America!
Thank you President Obama!

Refugee Resettlement Watch, by Ann Corcoran:

Here they come—the first 2,000 Syrian refugees (some of the most difficult refugees in the world!) will be processed into the US in the coming months.

We will be waiting to see if the US Catholic Bishops, Church World Service and the Lutherans demand that only the beleaguered Christians be allowed to enter.   (But, we won’t be holding our breath!)

From Foreign Policy (hat tip: a friend from Tennessee):

With conditions continuing to deteriorate in Syria, the Obama administration is making a major policy shift by agreeing for the first time to allow thousands of new Syrian refugees into the United States,The Cable has learned.

The numbers are relatively small: just 2,000 refugees, compared to an estimated two million peoplewho have fled Syria during the civil war. But it’s a significant increase from the 90 or so Syrian refugees who have been permanently admitted to the U.S. in the last two years. And it’s not entirely uncontroversial. The refugees, mostly women and children, will be screened for terrorist ties — a process that could take a year or more to complete.

Unlike previous efforts by the Department of Homeland Security to give temporary protected status to Syrians already in the United States, the State Department effort will bring in Syrians from overseas for permanent resettlement in America.

“Referrals will come within the next four months. We will need to interview people and perform security and medical checks,” Kelly Clements, the State Department’s deputy assistant secretary for Population, Refugees, and Migration, tells The Cable.

[.....]

By Clements’ own admission, given application processing times, “We’re not likely to see Syrian refugees into those numbers before well into 2014.”

Ah, the truth!

Despite their vulnerable condition, even the youngest of children will be thoroughly vetted to ensure they do not pose a national security threat. It’s not that they’re worried about infants enlisting in al Qaeda. The worry is that terrorist relatives can more easily enter the United States, once they have relatives in America. “Refugees are subject to an intensive security screening process involving federal intelligence, law enforcement, defense, and homeland security agencies,” a State Department official said. “The U.S. government makes every possible effort to uphold and enhance the security screening aspects of the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program. Refugees are among the most carefully screened of individuals traveling to the United States.”  [One day I'll make a list of all the refugee terrorists and criminals that got through the screening!---ed]

Wow!  I didn’t know that Germany sends them back!

Other major resettlement countries, such as Germany, have pledged to bring in up to 13,000 refugees since the fighting began. However, unlike in the U.S., refugees to Germany are required to return after the fighting subsides. “We’re very proud of the fact that the U.S. judges applicants on need and seek out the most needy cases,” Erol Kekic, director of immigration at the Church World Service, tells The Cable.

If you are concerned about the Obama Syrian resettlement plan be sure to let your Senators and Member of Congress know of your concerns!

It’s yet to be seen if Congress will push back against the Obama administration’s acceptance of the Syrian refugees.(Ordinarily, the U.S. only admits refugees after a conflict has gone on for five years or longer.) Though the State Department’s refugee admission program is authorized by a presidential determination, it does involve consultation with Congress.  [Consultation is a joke!  Congress let's them do whatever they want!----ed]

For more, our complete Syrian refugee archive is here.

The photo is from this story.  They really aren’t saying yippee, but they could be!

Also see: UNHCR Guterres looking to resettle tens of thousands of Syrians ….

*****************

via Creeping Sharia:

Taxpayer burdens.

It’s yet to be seen if Congress will push back against the Obama administration’s acceptance of the Syrian refugees. (Ordinarily, the U.S. only admits refugees after a conflict has gone on for five years or longer.) Though the State Department’s refugee admission program is authorized by a presidential determination, it does involve consultation with Congress.

Of course, admitting 2,000 Syrians won’t even begin to ease the suffering of Syria’s refugees…

In fact, the notion that U.S. refugee resettlement impacts the global problem at all is preposterous. Watch:

At a minimum any importation should be offset by deporting 2x the number of illegal immigrants and visa scofflaws from Muslim countries.

No One Would Listen

Elie Wiesel speaking at NYU, April 2011

Elie Wiesel speaking at NYU, April 2011

Citizen Warrior:

If you haven’t read the powerful book,Night, by Elie Wiesel, you really should. It is his account of what happened to him during WWII. He was a young teen living in a small village in Hungary when, in 1942, the Hungarian police arrived to announce that all foreign Jews had to leave. The police loaded them all into trains and took them away.

The people in the town were disturbed, of course. It was a sad day. But after a few months, the memory began to fade, and life eventually returned to normal. They felt they were far enough removed from the war that it would end before it ever came to their remote village.

Then one day, one of those foreign Jews found his way back to the village. His name was Moishe. He was an old man, but the young Elie Wiesel had known him fairly well. Moishe had an extraordinary story to tell. He said when the trainload of Jews crossed the border into Polish territory, the Gestapo loaded them into trucks and took all the Jews into a forest where they were forced to dig huge trenches, and then they were all shot! Moishe himself was shot in the leg and left for dead. But he escaped and had been struggling to get back to the little village so he could warn people of what happened. He was urging everyone to flee; to get away before the Germans came.

He went “from one Jewish house to the next,” wrote Elie Wiesel, “telling his story…” And he repeatedly and urgently told his story at the synagogue.

But nobody believed him.

They thought he must have lost his mind. Why would the Germans just kill Jews like that? Germany was a modern, industrialized, enlightened country. They wouldn’t simply murder people so heartlessly and for no reason. Moishe must have lost his mind.

Moishe was insistent. He begged people to listen to him. He cried. He pleaded. But not one person believed him. They didn’t want to believe him, and that’s a formidable barrier to communication.

Our message — that what is written in Islamic texts is dangerous to non-Muslims — is also something many people do not want to believe. The implications are too heavy. The people of Elie’s village didn’t want to contemplate what it would mean if Moishe’s story was true. It would mean tragedy and heartache and a loss of faith in humanity. It would mean a drastically different future for everyone. If they believed Moishe, the wise course of action would be to immediately pack up or sell everything they own and move somewhere they’d never been before. They’d have to start over. The journey would be fraught with uncertainty and danger. Most of them had lived their whole lives in that little village.

Read more

 

Obama Doctrine: Back Middle East Radicals Despite Ten Previous Western Failures

172_largeBy Barry Rubin:

There is a long history of Western powers believing that they could manipulate or work with radical Arabic-speaking states or movements to redo the regional order. All have ended badly.

– During the 1880s and 1890s, Germany became convinced that it could turn the forces of jihad against British, French, and Russian rivals. The kaiser presented himself as the Muslim world’s friend, and German propaganda even hinted that their ruler had converted to Islam.

– In World War One, the Germans launched a jihad, complete with the Ottoman caliph’s proclamation. Wiser heads warned that the Ottoman ruler didn’t have real authority to do so, or that the raising of the jihad spirit could cause massacres of Christians in the empire. They were ignored.

As a result, few responded to this jihad; Armenians were massacred, at times with at least the passive complicity of the German government.

– Nevertheless, Adolf Hitler, whose close comrades included many veterans of the earlier jihad strategy, tried the same approach in World War Two. This time, the Jews in the Middle East were to be the massacred scapegoats. Yet despite close collaboration by the leader of the Palestine Arabs Haj Amin al-Husseini and the Muslim Brotherhood, among others, the defeat of the German armies along with other factors (incompetence, unkept Arab promises, and German priorities) prevented this alliance from succeeding.

By the way: the Nazi collaborators were the same Muslim Brotherhood to which the United States is allied today. There are huge amounts of archival evidence, including documents showing not only Nazi payments to the Brotherhood but also that the Nazis provided them with arms for a rebellion to kill Christians and Jews in Egypt.

There is no evidence that the Brotherhood has changed its positions. The story above is told in a new book I wrote with the brilliant scholar Wolfgang G. Schwanitz — Nazis, Islamists, and the Making of the Modern Middle East – which will be published by Yale University Press in January 2014. It will be an explosive rethinking of Middle Eastern history which could not be more timely.

Incidentally, might one think that the Western mass media should mention that the chief U.S. ally in the Arab world — one of whose branches is now receiving American weapons — were Nazi collaborators who have never abandoned their anti-Western, anti-Christian, anti-Jewish views? How much has the Brotherhood visibly reconsidered its ideology since the man who is still its leader, Muhammad al-Badi, explained in October 2010 that the Egyptian regime would be overthrown and then the Brotherhood would wage jihad on a weak and retreating America?

Read more at PJ Media

 

Islamic Law’s Foothold in German Legal System

Debatte nach Schweizer Minarett-Abstimmungby Soeren Kern:

A growing number of German legal exerts are now sounding the alarm about the rise of a parallel Islamic justice in Germany. “It follows its own rules. The Islamic arbiters aren’t interested in evidence when they deliver a judgment, and the question of who is at fault doesn’t play much of a role. Islamic conflict resolution, as I’ve experienced it, is often achieved through violence and threats. It’s often a dictate of power on the part of the stronger family.” — Joachim Wagner, German legal expert, author.

An appeals court in northwestern Germany has decided a contentious divorce case based on Islamic Sharia law.

The ruling is the latest in a growing number of court cases in Germany in which judges refer or defer to Islamic law because either the plaintiffs or the defendants are Muslim.

Critics say the cases — especially those in which German law has taken a back seat to Sharia law — reflect a dangerous encroachment of Islamic law into the German legal system.

In the latest case, the Appeals Court [Oberlandesgericht] in Hamm, a city in German state of North Rhine-Westphalia, ruled on June 2 that whoever marries according to Islamic law in a Muslim country and later seeks a divorce in Germany must abide by the original terms set forth by Sharia law.

The case involved a 23-year-old Iranian woman who married a 31-year-old Iranian man in Iran according Sharia law in 2009. The couple later immigrated to the German city of Essen, gave birth to a daughter but then separated in 2011. A lower court in Essen granted the woman a divorce in November 2012 and the husband appealed the decision.

The appeals court in Hamm sided with the woman because, according to the German judge, the couple agreed to abide by the principles of Sharia law at the time they were married and thus the case should be decided according to Islamic law, regardless of whether the couple was now living in Germany.

The court ruled that the woman was legally entitled to talaq, an Islamic means of obtaining a divorce by reciting the phrase “I divorce you” three times. The court also said the husband had violated the original terms of the Islamic marriage agreement by failing to provide financial support for his wife for a period of six months.

The ruling has opened another round in a long-running debate about the role of Islam in German jurisprudence.

Read more at Gatestone Institute

 

Same thing is happening in England: 

Britain’s Sharia Courts: “You Cannot Go Against What Islam Says”

Nasim Ben Iman, Apostate from Islam in Germany warns the West

22685-Heute-liebt-er-die-die-ihn-hassenGates of Vienna:

The following video from Germany, originally posted at Politically Incorrect, contains excerpts from an interview with an apostate from Islam.

Nassim Ben Iman warns his audience that Westerners are being dangerously naïve about Islam and blind to the Islamization of Europe, which has been planned for a long time and is now well underway. As PI notes:

Nassim Ben Iman is one of the best-known apostates of Islam in Germany.

He has written a book of his own experiences entitled: “Der wahre Feind… warum ich kein Terrorist geworden bin” / “The true enemy…why I did not become a terrorist”. In view of the present Islamic terror threat in Germany, his statements about the danger of Islam are more topical than ever.

This ex-Muslim of Arab origin has a lot to tell, and offers us a deep insight into the most peaceful of all religions. As one of only a very small number, he managed to extract himself from the strict Islamic indoctrination. He tells brutal truths such as “Every Muslim is a potential terrorist”. We have distilled the most important points of an extensive interview with this courageous man which we conducted in May of this year into a ten-minute video, because of the acute terrorism danger.

Warning: this video is not recommended for “do-gooders” whose carefully constructed worldview could, when they watch this film, disintegrate.

Many thanks to Oz-Rita for the translation, and to Vlad Tepes for the subtitling:

 

Go to Gates of Vienna for the Transcript