European Humanism derailed - What is Humanism?
“Humanism is a philosophical and ethical stance that emphasizes the value and agency of human beings, individually and collectively, and generally prefers critical thinking and evidence (rationalism, empiricism) over established doctrine or faith (fideism). The meaning of the term humanism has fluctuated according to the successive intellectual movements which have identified with it. Generally, however, humanism refers to a perspective that affirms some notion of human freedom and progress. In modern times humanist movements are typically aligned with secularism, and today "Humanism" typically refers to a non-theistic life stance centred on human agency, looking to science instead of religious dogma in order to understand the world.” (Source Wikipedia)
Humanism is not similar to someone opening a fridge and offering everything that is in it. But humanism is like someone opening a fridge to offer what is possible without having to give out everything in it.Hence, valuing a human being does not mean losing one’s own value, or even more, losing the value of the society which one wants to defend, or at least, live in.
Welcoming those who reject Atheism, Humanism and other religions like Christianity and Jewism, such as those extremists who belong to certain religions, who will possibly become the majority of the population, which will have potentially harmful effects against value of human lives of today is not the solution to dealing with the present refugee and migration situation. If Europe wants to help, it has to help bring down those corrupt regimes of those immigrants’ originating countries and build up stability and positive possibilities for those people to have a better future in the homelands. But Islamization is a different cup of tea whose motivation will not be halted by such. It would be as useless as pouring tea into a chocolate tea pot.
This article will not only reflect my own view on the illegal immigrant crises in Europe but it will also point out more prominent people who share similar views yet adored by those who criticize my honest views on what is happening right now in Europe and other western countries.
Christopher Hitchens expressed it blunt and clear already in 2009: “Don't pay for the rope that will choke you.”
The number of asylum seekers has risen to a level not foreseen for a long time worldwide. The UN Refugee Agency UNHCR counted last year 2014, that the industrialized countries had to deal with 866000 asylum seekers. This represents an increase of 45 percent compared to the year before and the highest number in 22 years.
Germany takes on most:
Germany was the preferred destination during the past year. 173000 people lined up, according to the UNHCR, for asylum in the Federal Republic - or in other words, about one fifth of all requests. Other first choice affluent States for refugees are the USA, Turkey, Sweden and Italy.
Overall, the Federal Office for Migration and Refugees reported last year 173072 first and then 29762 Initial and subsequent applications for asylum - a total of 202,834. That's a total 59.7 percent increase compared to 2013. The number of asylum seekers rose to a record high.
However, of course, there is a law system accepting refugees and granting asylum if considered necessary.
According to the Geneva Convention a refugee is a person who resides outside of their home country because he or she is under threat due totheir ethnicity, religion, nationality, political opinion or membership of a particular social group.
This definition also applies largely to German law. In Clause 3 of the Asylum Procedure Act, people are recognized for reasons of persecution, the application of physical or mental violence, including sexual violence. Likewise, disproportionate or discriminatory prosecution or punishment is called "acts of a gender-specific or child-specific nature".
Further and more precise:
Asylum Procedure Act (AsylVfG)
Full citation: Asylum Procedure Act (AsylVfG) in the version promulgated on 2 September 2008 (Federal Law Gazette I, p. 1798), last amended by Article 4 of the Act of 22 November 2011 (Federal Law Gazette I, p. 2258)
Translation provided by the Language Service of the Federal Ministry of the Interior (Germany).
Recognition of refugee status
(1) A foreigner is a refugee within the meaning of the Convention related to the status of refugees if in the country of his citizenship or in which he habitually resided as a stateless person he faces the threats listed in Section 60 (1) of the Residence Act.
(2) A foreigner does not qualify as a refugee under (1) where there are serious reasons for considering that he
1. has committed a crime against peace, a war crime or a crime against humanity as defined in the international instruments drawn up to make provision for such crimes,
2. has committed a serious non-political crime outside the Federal territory before being admitted as a refugee, in particular a cruel act, even if it was intended with an allegedly political aim, or
3. has acted in violation of the aims and principles of the United Nations
The first sentence shall also apply to foreigners who instigated others or otherwise participated in the commission of the crimes or acts mentioned therein.
(3) Nor shall a foreigner be a refugee under (1) if he enjoys the protection or assistance of an organization or institution of the United Nations, with the exception of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees under Article 1, section D of the Convention relating to the status of refugees. (1) and (2) shall apply if such protection or assistance is no longer provided, without having finally clarified the situation of the person affected in accordance with the relevant resolutions of the General Assembly of the United Nations.
(4) A foreigner who is a refugee under (1) shall be granted refugee status unless he fulfils the prerequisites of Section 60 (8) first sentence of the Residence Act.
The main country of originwas in Syria during the last year: Of the hundreds of thousands of civil war refugees more than 41,000 applied for asylum in Germany. This was followed by Serbia, Eritrea, Afghanistan, Iraq and Kosovo. At the seventh place Macedonia followed before Bosnia and Herzegovina, Albania and Somalia. With 3.700 applications, Syrians formed the largest group of asylum seekers in The Netherlands (http://www.iamexpat.nl/read-and-discuss/expat-page/news/asylum-seeker-numbers-netherlands-thirteen-year-high#sthash.UG5vDwwy.dpuf)
I myself have travelled to Damascus in Syria in 2003 during the time when the country was stable and under the rule of Assad when it was still secular, where Muslims, Christians, Jews, other religions and also non-religious were able to live peacefully next to each other. I want to express that I find Syrians one of the least problematic people in the discussion about refugees or illegal immigration. Syrians are proud and grounded people who are leaving their country due to no choice. I am sure that these people will return to their homeland if peace comes back to their country (but of course, I couldn’t speak for all Syrian refugees due to secondary motivations that may arise during their stay in Europe which may be influenced by the local Muslim community in Europe). The only thing I can fully criticize is that the European politics has failed to accommodate the refugees in the entire Europe who are in real need. The burden remains in some countries, one of them particularly is Germany.
Now let’s go back to those refugees who subscribe to the Islamic religion. Christians, Jews and Atheists are often victims of persecution, discrimination or even execution in Islamic countries. The moderate Muslims’ desire is basically tolerance which they don’t achieve from the regimes of those countries where they came from. This is, of course, because of the fact that Islam is interwoven into the political system in most of these Muslim dominated countries. Democracy is difficult to grow in those countries when the book imbedded, the Koran, is basically non-democratic, dictatorial, intolerant and violent to an extent. (I have to mention also that Christianity was equally violent, intolerant and dictating, but it went through the process of enlightenment after having been watered down to an extent resulting to the separation of church and state where criticisms has been allowed and religion eventually has become a private issue and has not been part of the rules of the state they are in.)
Interestingly we can observe that many rich Gulf States are not accepting refugees from Syria whilst one would expect that, as Muslims, they should be closer to each other and should provide brotherly help. That is yet not the case due to Islam not having a single steam direction. During his last years in life, Muhammad united the tribes of Arabia into a single Arab Muslim religious polity. With Muhammad's death in 632, the Split between Shia and Sunni began and disagreement broke out over who his successor would be, and the descendants of Mohammed have sparked this diversion till today making it a tribal problem for the religion itself.
What Sunnis Believe
- Sunnis share the basic beliefs of Islam with Shia, including the authentic teachings of the Quran and the five pillars of Islam: Shahadah (professing Muhammad as God's true messenger), Salat (the five daily prayers), Sawm (fasting), Zakat (tithing and giving alms) and Hajj (the pilgrimage to Mecca). Sunnis also believe in hadiths, which are other writings of the wisdom of Muhammed. They believe that two hadiths, the Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim, are the most authentic. Sunnis are the more orthodox of the Muslim tribes; Sunnis disagree with Shia on the identity of the final imam.
What Shias Believe
- Shia's believe in the basic tenants of Islam, including the Quran, but there are significant differences in their belief in the clergy and in the ultimate fate of the world and the religion. At the end of the world, the Shias believe that Muhammad ibn Hasan Al-Mahdi will return to Earth, along with Jesus, to rule as Islam's final imam. Shias also believe that spiritual leaders cannot be elected by men, but must be chosen instead by God. This stems from the division between Ali and the other leaders which led to the original split in the faith.
Returning to the Gulf States accepting no refugees, rich Arab countries are the ones with a Bedouin tribal culture. In that type of culture, your worth is determined by the reputation of your tribe. If you're a foreigner you are considered worthless by default.
However, other countries like Russia, Japan, Singapore and South Korea have also stated to receive zero percent of the Syrian refugees.
Another reason for certain Islamic States to refuse refugees could simply be of course, because these countries are already Islamized. Islam thrives for world domination and the destruction of the western world, Christianity, Jewism and of course Atheism. The Koran states it clear and crisp:
“Sura 61:9 He it is Who has sent His Messenger (Muhammad) with guidance and the religion of truth (Islamic monotheism) to make it victorious over all (other) religions even though the Mushrikûn (polytheists, pagans, idolaters, and disbelievers in the Oneness of Allah and His Messenger Muhammad) hate (it). (Hilali and Khan, The Noble Qur’an, Riyadh: Darussalam, 1996)”
“Sura 61:9 It is He Who has sent His Messenger forth with the guidance and the religion of truth, to make it triumph over every religion, even though the idolaters may be averse. (An Interpretation of the Quran, New York: NYUP, 2004)”
More about the tactics of Islam and domination here:
From the Christian side of the issue the Vatican, for example, does not even make room for one refugee yet they make loud and direct calls for countries to welcome them. This is what I call false Humanism: A false Humanist act is to tell others to open their fridge, give them the contents, but leaving his own fridge closed. (This is also my observation with some non-religious Humanists, especially the academics among them.) Pope Francis said, “We pray for the many brothers and sisters who seek refuge far from their native lands who seek a home where they can live without fear: that they might always be respected in their dignity.” Basically he didn’t ask for action, reasoning or initiatives from his organisations’ side.
And again many asylum seekers do come from countries where there is currently war or civil war – but a lot also come from Balkan countries where there is no war.
Overall in Germany 128 911 decisions on asylum applications were made in the past year. In the comparable period last year there were 80,978 decisions which increased by 59.2 percent. In 2004 a total of 33,310 people were recognized and entitled to political asylum or as refugees under the Geneva Convention, which was 25.8 percent of all asylum seekers.
However, many other illegal immigrants are not running from war but they come for a better life hence out of economic reasons. There were considerably in relative terms, increasing in numbers from several African countries like The Gambia, Eritrea, Senegal, Mali, Sudan and Nigeria. Now countries like Senegal or The Gambia and Nigeria are surely no countries of war. Even looking at Boko Haram in a huge country like Nigeria, they control a tiny area within the country; hence it is not a national countrywide threat. Boko Haram, is an Islamic extremist group based in north eastern Nigeria with membership between 7,000 and 10,000 fighters. The group initially had links to al-Qaeda, but in 2014, it expressed support for the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant before pledging formal allegiance to it in March 2015. In mid-2014 the militants gained control of swathes of territory in and around their home state of Borno which is estimated 50,000 square kilometres. People in Europe often are misled by media and are getting a wrong impression of the size and influence within the area.
Map of Nigeria, showing the area of influence by Boko Haram:
Syriais experiencing war, yes, but we can’t see any limitation or guarantee made to the European citizens that they will have to leave back to Syria after the war. (Even though I think most will, as already stated before.) Europe keeps itself busy talking about how to take care of the refugees, how to house them and even on the longer run how to allocate jobs for them. No statements were heard about any plans to return them back to their native countries as soon as possible. Certain groups have even set up websites openly welcoming ALL refugees without differentiating. There are NO feedbacks about how this can be financed. There are NO statements about the dangers of Islamization by those who are welcomed by the so called social or humanist people, about things that may happen after those immigrants have settled and entered mosques and gained more power and become the majority in population percentage where they would eventually oppose freedom of speech, same sex marriage and humanist and Atheist values. Exactly those self proclaimed liberal people have called opponents and critics of the present EU politics racists and or far right. I have encountered those attacks from fellow non-religious, but in defence of our group, those attacks came only from mostly those who have never travelled and those academics who have only studied theoretical subjects, and have never left the local community or University compounds. Most of them have never heard about the motivations of illegal migrants from other parts of the world. I have resided in West Africa for 7 years of my life, from 2002 till 2009, and I have witnessed first-hand the motivations and reasons for people wanting to leave their countries. And those reasons were surely not because of war or persecution. The very few ones, and they were really few, would have received my full support.
Let me explain the general term of racism to them:
“Racism is the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races.”
So to make it clear; dealing critically with illegal immigration, migration and the clash of civilisations and religions (non-religions) has nothing at all to do with racism. It is just basically the discussion about European, and other countries with the same dilemma, capacities; differentiating the reason for migration and the difference in handling of those; the spending of tax money (having already internal problems with Greece, youth unemployment and education and healthcare).
The free world has come a long way and European politics can’t turn a blind eye on the dangers of its destruction. When it comes to the topic of Islamization, this is not about mocking or discriminating the individual believer. Of course many Muslims today have integrated themselves in Europe and obey its laws. That is truly not the problem. The problem is when Islam becomes a powerful regime in Europe in the future with its doctrine and its aims. Islam goes much further than just telling people what to believe in, it sets up the system on how to live, what is allowed and what is not, but worst of all, how to expand and overrule and demolish other beliefs and non-belief systems. Of course a Muslim in Europe today most likely won’t have a problem with homosexuals who are even being allowed to marry. But what if a European country flips in favour of a Muslim governance making homosexuality illegal and refute the same sex marriage laws, those moderate Muslims would not protest as it just follows the doctrines of the Koran and it would not bother them anyway. I wonder how loud would the screams of those Humanists, Green or Social Party politicians and members and even other non-religious be, who now with open arms welcome everybody, when that Islamization happens in the future when it is already too late?
Islam about Homosexuality:
Qur'an (7:80-84) - "...For ye practice your lusts on men in preference to women: ye are indeed a people transgressing beyond bounds.... And we rained down on them a shower (of brimstone)" - This is borrowed from the Biblical story of Sodom. Muslim scholars through the centuries have interpreted the "rain of stones" as meaning that homosexuals should be stoned.
Qur'an (7:81) - "Will ye commit abomination such as no creature ever did before you?" Homosexuality is called the worst sin, while references elsewhere describe other forms of non-marital sex as being "among great sins."
Qur'an (26:165-166) - "Of all the creatures in the world, will ye approach males, "And leave those whom Allah has created for you to be your mates? Nay, ye are a people transgressing"
And what happenedafter two decades discussing a plan about the Islamization of Europe with migratory flows? According to the German Federal Office for Migration in 2013, 64.9 per cent of all refugees who were received in Germany are Muslims (Source: "The Federal Office figures in 2013").
It stateson page 24 above:
The consideration of the asylum applications of 2013 from the point of religion shows that 64.9 percent of members of Islam constitute the largest percentage of first time applicants.
Few politicians, I would not say have seen, but have directly pointed towards the problem of Muslim immigration. One is the leader of the Dutch Party PVV (Partij voor de Vrijheid – Party for Freedom) Geert Wilders. He clearly stated and warned, not only the Dutch population, but the entire of Europe.
Mr. Wilders said: “Islamic militants are everywhere”
"Unfortunately most Western leaders are weak," he said. "They hope that if they ignore the threat, the threat will simply disappear, but it will not. It will only get worse."
"Not all Muslims are terrorists but almost all terrorists are Muslims," he said, adding that in his native Netherlands three quarters of Muslims sympathize with jihadist ideas.”
The German HVD (Humanistischer Verband Deutschland - Humanist Organisation Germany) on one hand engages in protecting the non-religious refugees, which is good, and in my opinion they should limit it to exactly that group. But they actually don’t differentiate who are the extremists and who are the moderates. They help everyone while hiding behind their non-religious stance, and yet turn a blind eye on Muslim policy and aims. How many bloggers and human rights activists in Muslim countries have been killed and jailed, and those are the ones in need of organisations like the HVD.
Links lead to German web sites where they do good:
The areas where humanist organisations should do better are in the fields concerning the LGBT community. Refugees out of that community deserve to have their political support. Unfortunately LGBT refugees can run into problems if they encounter an official who is homophobic who will reject the reason for asylum. Understandable rejections happen to homosexual immigrants from countries like Mexico, Peru or Brazil where there is no need for asylum for the LGBTs. But denying LGBT asylum seekers from Russia may be controversial as homosexuality there is not totally illegal but only the promotion or mentioning homosexuality to minors is the one that is forbidden there. Nevertheless, homosexual people may still encounter discrimination or even violence as the acceptance in the society is broadly being deprived. Same sex marriage is where help is needed the most. Outstanding are the American and British Embassies where same sex marriage can be performed, an act that is totally missing at German Embassies (as far as to my researched and experienced knowledge is concerned), and of course in many other European countries. I think that these are the areas where humanist groups should act instead of just welcoming everybody who made it to the shores of Europe without questioning the reason and motivation.
Germanyunfortunately houses a large group of so called Do-gooders (Gutmenschen), they even unconsciously carry the burden of the past. Guilt is their motivation to want to do everything better nowadays. Precisely that is what Islamists capitalise on. Germany and Europe need immigrants, but legal ones, ones that can fill the gaps of labour needs as in service, health and elderly care. They can come the legal way and stay in peace. But what we observed here is a tsunami of immigrants coming the illegal way often without any perspective or need. They come to either have a better life or help strengthen the Islamic long term goal of dominance over the free world.
I already pointed out that I will mention the heroes of non-religion, Atheism and Humanism, and point out their stance so that the opponents of my criticisms against EU policy would know that their role models’ opinions oppose theirs but agree with mine in certain aspects of the issue.
Here is Richard Dawkins reacting to the short Film made by Geert Wilders, Fitna:
Dawkins wrote: “Geert Wilders, if it should turn out that you are a racist or a gratuitous stirrer and provocateur I withdraw my respect, but on the strength of Fitnaalone I salute you as a man of courage, who has the balls to stand up to a monstrous enemy.”
Here is the entire comment after watching Fitna:
The full comment of Dawkins on Fitna and Wilders being put on trial:
“have just watched Fitna. I don't know whether it is the original version, but it is the one linked by Jerry Coyne. Maybe Geert Wilders has done or said other things that justify epithets such as 'disgusting', or 'racist'. But as far as this film is concerned, I can see nothing in it to substantiate such extreme vilification. There is much that is disgusting in the film, but it is all contained in the quotations, which I presume to be accurate, from the Koran and from various Muslim preachers and orators, and the clips of atrocities such as beheadings and public executions. At least as far as Fitna is concerned, to call Wilders 'disgusting' is surely no more sensible than shooting the messenger. If it is complained that these disgusting Koranic verses, or these disgusting Muslim speeches, or the more than disgusting Muslim executions, are 'taken out of context', I should like to be told what the proper context would look like, and how it could possibly make any difference.
To repeat, Wilders may have said and done other things of which I am unaware, which deserve condemnation, but I can see nothing reprehensible in his making of Fitna, and certainly nothing for which he should go on trial. Like the film of Theo van Gogh and Ayaan Hirsi-Ali, the style of Fitna is restrained, the music, by Tchaikovsky and Grieg, is excellently chosen and contributes to the restrained atmosphere of the film. The horrendous execution scenes are faded out before the coup-de-grace; all the stridency, and almost the only expressions of opinion, come from Muslims, not from Wilders.
Why is this man on trial, unless it is, yet again, pandering to the ludicrous convention that religious opinion must not be 'offended'? Geert Wilders, if it should turn out that you are a racist or a gratuitous stirrer and provocateur I withdraw my respect, but on the strength of Fitna alone I salute you as a man of courage, who has the balls to stand up to a monstrous enemy.
The warning against the Islamization of Europe and other countries is not a new call. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has warned about a “wave of Islamization” across Europe. Further; “Western Europe is undergoing a wave of Islamization, of anti-Semitism, and of anti-Zionism. It is awash in such waves, and we want to ensure that for years to come the state of Israel will have diverse markets all over the world”he was reported having said.
Christopher Caldwell and Mark Steyn, have gone into remarkable detail about the highly recognized fact, that low birth rates among ethnic Europeans, high birth rates among European Muslims, and the continuously arrival of Muslim immigrants on the continent will mean an increasingly Muslim Europe in the decades to come, and ultimately a majority Muslim population in one country following another.
Former Danish Foreign Minister Per Stig Møller, Jyllands-Posten 24 June 2015: “In all of Africa south of the Sahel, the population will increase by up to a billion more people over the next 30 years. In Nigeria the population will increase from 200 million to 500 million people during the same period. If we imagine that we in Europe receive all of them Europe will no longer be “the Europe we know.” Europe will have very different demographics than today.
There will no longer be a European culture, but a conglomerate of cultures, which can cause clashes between communities on a scale we have never seen. The terrorism Europe has already experienced will then only a fledgling.”
After the terror attack on the satirical French magazine Charlie Hebdo, we should be warned again and again. Yet France, Germany, Greece, the United Kingdom and even the traditionally-tolerant Sweden are experiencing the rise of far-right political forces. But why point out always the words “far right”? Isn’t it just a natural reaction that people and certain politicians call for change, stricter rules and the pointing out of the arriving, no, the already arrived dangers towards democracy and non-Islamic people? Do those who not dare criticise hide behind that term and try to project away from the problem of Islamic invasion?
The French president Hollande, just like chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany, have only tried to discuss the issue of immigration in a moderate way despite the urgent call for conversation about the place of Muslims in French and German society within their midst.
The Daily Mail 8 July 2015: James Brokenshire, UK immigration minister, warned: “In terms of the mix of people who are seeking to make that journey, our estimate is that the majority of those are probably economic migrants, rather than those who are fleeing persecution or some sort of civil conflict.Therefore it is to try to make a better life in the EU rather than on that greater humanitarian side.” Mr Brokenshire was grilled on the Government policy when he appeared in front of the EU home affairs sub-committee. (Why? Just for telling the truth?)
Let’s look at how other countries deal with the inflow of illegal immigrates.
In Australia there is a clear line of dealing with illegal refugees. Prime Minister Tony Abbott said in those first few months of his government to the illegal immigrants arriving in Australia to have two options: “You’ve arrived in Australia illegally. As a result, you will never get to stay here. You will never get to be an Australian. So, you have two options- we will take you to a processing center, and you will wait in detention for your asylum application to be processed. Or we will fly you home free.”
Australiaknows its limits and is reacting straight forward. As a result, illegal immigration has gone down to zero.
Let me go back to the so called Do-gooders in Germany and their weak and soft stance against Islamization, even not caring about what will happen to the values achieved over decades and centuries.
Rita Süssmuth, President of the Bundestag, a retired former chairman of the Advisory Council on the immigration and integration and a very naïve woman about Islam said: "These new results of the Religion may break many stereotypes now, for example, the religiosity of Muslims was perceived as very political, but actually among Muslims, politics and the political setting has a very subordinate role.”
Of course she will say that, because she does not know that Islam is political already, and many Muslims are also not aware of that. In a comment on TV, she even said that when one day we will have to wear a head scarf then that’s how it will be. This is a stance of giving up and accepting the conquering of Islam over the West.
Thespeech of the former Federal President Christian Wulff received a lot of encouragement from politicians, yet many citizens however did not want to accept the statements of its head of state. He stated: “Islam belongs to Germany.” A controversial and untrue statement, as Islam has not any route in Western Europe. We could call this “hug tactics”.
Worse has become the Green Party of Germany and the social democrats and even the conservative Party CDU under Angela Merkel. Here some clear statements from all 3 sections:
CDU electionposter with Merkel: "Islam is a part of us", leaning on the before mentioned expression of Christian Wulff, "Islam belongs to Germany"
Steinbrück, SPD leader (Social Democratic Party Germany) said in 2013: “Yes, Islam is already a part of our society.”
Mr. Oppermann, another politician of the SPD wants any criticism of Islam
to be punishable by law.
Europeis devoured by Islam
In 1945, about 600,000 Muslims resided in Europe but today there are already more than 50 million.
Because of the Lisbon Treaty, Europe has committed to take an additional 50-100 million Muslims into Europe.
No later than 2050 a full 90 percent of those who would have migrated to Europe would have come from the North African countries and from the sub-Saharan regions of the so-called sub-Saharan Africa since the 90s and are Muslim immigrants.
With all this, Islam can lean back, relax and take their time over a few generations to take power in the free world. As the Nazis have taken advantage of democracy, now Islam is taking advantage of easy entrance, pointing on Human Rights, that they will abuse when in power, and giving a damn about western values.
There are voices where immigration politics have failed because of placing Muslim migrants in to ghetto-like communities. But by observing the structure of how they organize their lives, the ghetto-like living conditions are with intention. In Germany and also other European countries we can observe that many remain speaking their language, shop in their own shops and build community centers and mosques nearby. A sub community is born. Integration is a delusional dream of many western politicians. There is no integration in Islam, and the Koran states it plain and clear:
Sura 3:85; Anyone who accepts other than Islam as his religion, it will not be accepted from him, and in the Hereafter, he will be with the losers.
Sura 5:52: O ye who believe! take not the Jews and the Christians for friends. They are friends one to another. And whoso among you takes them for friends is indeed one of them. Verily, Allah guides not the unjust people.
Sura 5:58: O ye who believe! take not those for friends who make a jest and sport of your religion from among those who were given the Book before you, and the disbelievers. And fear Allah if you are believers.
And again, after having all this said, there are too many naïve people in Europe and especially Germany who openly welcome, yes open the gates of medieval times, to allow the wave of Muslims in. And yes they are crying, they don’t understand why some European countries resist, but one thing is normal; the protection of ones boarders and integrity. Countries that at least differentiate and know the danger on the horizon are countries like Slovakia.
This article shows straight forward the truth about the aims of Islam and why countries like Slovakia are right.
"Slovakia right tp reject Muslims"
Slovakiahas announced that it does not want to accept Muslim refugees on the grounds that there are no mosques in the country. The left-leaning daily Duma understands the Slovakians' fear and believe the tolerance limit will soon be reached in the rest of Europe: "The Muslims want to maintain their culture, language, customs and religion in their 'new home' at all cost. They seal themselves off and see themselves as a separate, independent society. There are endless examples of this in Europe which has recently reacted with growing annoyance to this trend. Instead of welcoming Islam with open arms, things will no doubt cool off in the weeks and months to come. This tendency can already be felt. Sooner or later the Europeans will wake up and see that they are the victims of a doctrine that no longer has anything to do with the idea of the European Union as a community of sovereign states. Hopefully Slovakians won't be forced to build mosques, but who knows."
Let me come back to the heroes of Atheism and Humanism and bring an example of Sam Harris, who also backs politicians like Geert Winders.
Again, the article is made extreme, calling Geert Wilders a far right racist.
Sam Harris wrote even a longer assay about Fitna and Geert Wilders:
“It is perverse for the western media to lament the lack of an Islamic reformation and wilfully ignore works such as Wilders' film, Fitna. How do they think reformation will come about if not with criticism? There is no such right as 'the right not to be offended; indeed, I am deeply offended by the contents of the Koran, with its overt hatred of Christians, Jews, apostates, non-believers, homosexuals but cannot demand its suppression.”
Read the entire article here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sam-harris/losing-our-spines-to-save_b_100132.html
After all this, it may seem that the West and other countries in similar situations are hopeless and lost. Not yet I must say. It is now a matter of politics to correct their course and also a matter of Do-gooders to overthink that what they are doing is really good on the longer run, or was it just a short term solution to satisfy an emotional need for the need to ALWAYS do well is always there. At the moment, welcoming and saving illegal migrants may seem a heroic act, an act of solidarity and humanity; but on the longer run, and I dare claim that this is right, it is the beginning of the destruction of Human Rights and European values which was fought for over centuries.
I do subscribe that the idea of Eurabia exists, and here are more details about it here:
Eurabiais a political neologism. The concept was coined by Bat Ye'Or in the early 2000s. Bat Ye'Or (pen name of Gisele Littman) claims a conspiracy of Europe, allegedly led by France and Arab powers, to Islamise and Arabise Europe, thereby weakening its existing culture and undermining an alleged previous alignment with the U.S. and Israel.
Let me therefore conclude this about what the world is confronted with:
We have a group of refugees, especially from Syria, who are true war refugees.
We have a group of refugees coming from West Africa and the Balkan, who are definitely not in need of asylum.
We have refugees from Islamic states as Afghanistan, Iran and so on, who are not being taken cared of by their fellow Muslim countries like Saudi Arabia, and whose refugee status is questionable.
Fact is that illegal immigrants come as victims, it is even often enough stated that they are risking their lives, but the risks that they are taking is by choice in many cases. Who is the victim? On the longer run I think the victim is Europe. And that is where we bring up the issue of derailed Humanism.
I would like to give a final example of derailed Humanism that NO Humanist is speaking up about. (Please run the articles through a website translation program)
AThuringian CDU District has declared a school for children with learning difficulties for refugee home. Hence the children must go.
Nursing homemust giveasylumaccommodation way.
Thenursing home "Marie Schlei" in Berlin-Reinickendorf, will become a home for asylum seekers. 75 people have to move out by the end of March.
Asylum seekers, even illegal ones, are getting more attention and help than local children and elderly in need. There is something not right, and there will be a reason for that.
Let me finally focus on the claim of critics of EU immigration politics to be far right politicians. Let’s first define that term:
Far-right politics or extreme-right politics are right-wing politics to the right of the mainstream centre right on the traditional left-right spectrum. They often involve a focus on tradition as opposed to policies and customs that are regarded as reflective of modernism.
Now this cannot be the case with Islam opponents or supporters of politicians like Geert Wilders. Religion is not a tradition; it is a doctrine and in many parts of the world an import overruling the true traditions of the country. As for The Philippines, paganism was the historical tradition. Islam is opposed to western politics, but Islam is not a tradition and it is surely not modern to accept Islam into a modern world.
So, is criticizing EU immigration politics racism? No, of course not, as the definition of racism, as mentioned before in this article, does not fit the description.
Does criticizing Islam and European immigration dealings offend, or even contradict Humanism? No, of course not, as Humanism is an ideology about not dealing with superstition, and criticizing immigration dealings has nothing to do with such. It’s political, and in regards to Humanism, caring for the Humans and needs of the local citizens and tax payers should be prioritized first.
Is helping Muslims into the European system an act of Humanism? No, as Muslims want their rights always and they will use their given rights to succeed. And although there are many moderate Muslims who do not call for Islamization when receiving them, we still don’t know their future intentions. But if it comes to the rights of non-religious or other religions, those rights will be thrown overboard if those Muslims are given the power.
I have to round up with what I began with: Humanismis a philosophical and ethical stance that emphasizes the value and agency of human beings, individually and collectively, and generally prefers critical thinking and evidence (rationalism, empiricism) over established doctrine or faith (fideism).
We should value of Human beings, yes, but should we value the ones who don’t value the worth of a human life?
But: generally prefers critical thinking and evidence (rationalism, empiricism) over established doctrine or faith (fideism).
Oh yes, exactly that is what Muslims don’t do, yet the Do-gooders welcome with open arms in the name of Humanism.
I call to not misuse Humanism and also to not act in the name of Humanism when basically many don’t act for the cause of humanism. Unfortunately many Humanists don’t understand Humanism, they tend to interpret it in a way that satisfies them on a short run, gives them positive press coverage and satisfies their guilty conscience.
Humanism is derailing at this moment and RIGHT NOW!
By Thomas Fleckner
Epilogue:I, Thomas Fleckner, the writer of this article have been accused and attacked with the most unrealistic terms, like racist for example. For 27 years of my 45 years of my life I have lived in foreign countries, six to be precise (United Kingdom, Belgium, The Netherlands, Germany, The Gambia (West Africa) and The Philippines (Asia). I have been employed by foreign firms and had private relationships with foreigners. I am a gay man, and stand for legal travel and migration. The goal of this article is to help point out the dangers of Islamization, to protect the values and the borders. My objective is the protection of Human Rights and Freedom of speech and expression and the pointing out of people and politicians who deliberately delude society with false facts and playing down of dangerous reality. I distance myself from any political right or left labelling, as politics with all of its topics is too complex for me and my opinions to be labelled into one direction. We have just broken through with same sex marriage, and before that, with women and child rights. We cannot with open eyes see this being threatened or destroyed without taking action.
By Thomas ByBy