A Tale of Two 31-Year Old Mothers

The repercussions for all of Germany following the murder of a 31-year old Muslim woman from Egypt by a passport-German from Russia in a German courtroom are remarkable and dramatic and remarkably dramatic. All honour killings and other crimes within the Muslim counter-culture, all killings, mutilations and beatings-up of Germans by our Muslim "culture enrichers" are, as far as they got any attention at all, forgotten. They were "isolated cases" anway, whereas for this, really isolated, case all Germans are held responsible, a crime committed by a man who wasn't even socialised within the evil "islamophobic" German culture.

Indeed, the media echo is stunning. A quick Google-search just for the name of the victim reveals amazing results. "Martyr", "headscarf" and "pregnant" are the feeds that mainly catch the eye. Of course, the German results are almost identical, with the German equivalents of "hate crime" and "racism" thrown in.

All of Germany is wallowing orgasmically, like swine wallow in dirt, in their own moral squalor. They love that.

And moral squalor it is indeed, just not in the way they see it.

The secretaries of both, the Central Council of Jews, convertite Stephan Kramer, and the Central Council Muslims in Germany, Aiman Mazyek, had the mutual enemy quickly identified and visited the widower together to express their sincere hypocrisy.

The French Figaro, so Gudrun Eussner informs me, quotes in today's print issue on page 7 the same Aiman Mazyek who states that "total (sic!) religious freedom" must be defended, part of which is the wearing of the headscarf:..."liberté réligieuse totale, dont fait partie le port du voile."

Has anybody still any doubt that we in the West are in a total (sic!) and global war with Islam?

Even such experts on human rights like Mahmud Ahmadinejad and the Iranian Supreme Council of Cultural Revolution (SCCR) chimed in, the latter issuing a statement saying the murder of Marwa al-Sherbini in Germany demonstrated the West’s disrespect to human rights.

And nobody laughed.

The most revealing aspect was, however, that even such an obscene extravaganza of German self-hatred and submission wasn't enough for the trailblazing whips (or rather: "whippettes") of dhimmitude. Andrea Dernbach, who has proven her ethical depth and moral prowess already by a justification of sex with children to clear Islam of the suspicion of homophobia, asked under the header "Germany's new hatred": "Why does the death of a woman wearing a headscarf – who wasn’t the victim of a so-called “honour killing” – spark so little interest in Germany?"

So far, so bad, but lately we seem even to export that specific brand of Islam-adoring journalettes, maybe because whatever Germans do, they do thoroughly. And indeed, under the even more incredible header "A murder that Germany ignored" a woman with a German-sounding name whines (in the Al Guardian, no less!) about what must be, I don't have any other explanation, the figment of an oestrogen-addled brain, and doesn't even shy away from repeating an outlandish, preposterous accusation from the Muslim media:

They [the German media] could have asked – as an Egyptian did – why Marwa's husband, while he was trying to help his wife, was shot and wounded by a policeman in the courtroom. Because he was not blond-haired?

I am not a prolific letter-to-the-editor-writer, but this time I couldn't help myself:

Your name suggests that you can read German. So you either have an agenda or you are out of your mind. The German media is, since that crime happened, in an orgiastic, self-hating frenzy. "Germans! She died for your sins!" And you are SERIOUSLY selling the above drivel to an unsuspecting Guardian readership? The day the countless ethnic Germans who are beaten to a pulp or killed by our Muslim culture enrichers get at least a fifth of the media attention this case got and it still getting, I will stop worrying what makes people like you tick.

Elsewhere, in Iran, the 31-year-old mother of two, Mohabat Mahmodi, will be executed within the next couple of days, because she killed her rapist in self-defense.*

And nobody cares. They are all too busy being outraged by German islamophobia.

---

*Information from an email by Mina Ahadi, exile-Iranian and secretary of the Central Council of Ex-Muslims in Germany.

About Brainwashing and Conveniently Sticking Libel

At a time where Christians are killed by Muslims, copiously in the Third World and, yet and just, separately elsewhere and both without much interest from public and media, where the world got its collective knickers in a knot that the pope is Catholic, the following from the information site "Katholisches – Magazin für Kirche und Kultur" is of particular importance. "Katholisches" (which means something like "Catholic matters") introduces a book "Toleranz und Gewalt ("Tolerance and Violence") and forwards some details about the dreaded Inquisition, evil incarnate and second only to the 20th century Holocaust of the Jews (if that), in a historical context: Informationen und Zahlen über die Heilige Inquisition aus dem Buch "Toleranz und Gewalt".

According to that book, the Spanish Inquisition has, within the 160 years between 1540 and 1700, passed 44,674 sentences. Of those sentenced, 826 were executed. The book compares this to the Spanish Civil war, where Communists murdered within a time span of six years more than 7,000 priests and monastics. The Roman Inquisition had, between 1542 and 1761, exactly 97 people executed. Another example: Secular jurisdiction executed within the same time span 939 people in the city of Nürnberg alone.

Burning of witches was almost unknown and strictly rejected by the popes. In the 17th century, when all over the Protestant regions north of the Alps the stakes were burning (there is an estimation of 25,000 victims), not a single witch trial was performed. In Spain, about 300 "witches" were burnt at the stakes, in strongly Catholic Ireland 2.

The frequently traded number of 9 million victims can, interestingly, be traced back to Heinrich Himmler, the second most powerful man in the "Third Reich", who intended to fuel thus anti-Catholic resentments. In fact, even his "research team" couldn't fabricate more than 30,000 victims.

Geneva, home of Calvin, was infamous for its witch trials as well.

The article ends with a quote by Martin Luther, including a litany of supernatural evil powers witches possess and the calling to kill them.

Now my intention is not to offend all those brave Protestant Christians, my intention is to deflate official, open or implicit, Protestant smugness. A smugness, that suggests that the followers of that denomination are somehow in possession of a more advanced truth and that Catholics have to bear the brunt (better: make that "all") of Christian misdoings, real or perceived, in the past. If anything, the above ought to make clear that Luther's motives for breaking away from the Catholic Church did certainly not include the defence of freedom of individual thought of which only too many Protestants are only too proud.

At a time where a pope who dares to do away with revisionist history by suggesting that it is perhaps not necessary to "apologise" for the crusades, is branded a reactionary instead of being hailed as a truth seeker, such information is important.

At a time where a pope, who lifts the excommunication of a priest who happens to be a Holocaust denier, is branded a Holocaust denier, such information is important.

At a time where a pope who represents all Catholics worldwide, including the many victims of Nazi barbarism, doesn't, really or perceived, grovel to an extent that is expected of him -- a German -- during a visit to Israel, such information is important.

In a century, where another pope was denounced as a supporter of the Holocaust, Nazi-accomplice and antisemite by a KGB-agent, a libel that was enthusiastically taken up by the masses and their media, in a century where evidence that reveals all that is doggedly ingnored by the same masses and the same media, such information is important.

And finally: Why, I am asking myself (somebody whose egalitarian instincts are not all that pronounced), is nobody, at a time where egalitarianism is the only accepted world view, praising the Catholic church as the only powerful institution in the world on the strength of its radical egalitarianism. Where else would the son of a piss-poor policeman from the deepest Bavarian backwaters called Ratzinger be allowed to walk in the shoes of Colonnas, Medicis, Borgheses, Orsinis, Odescalchis and Pignatellis? But it isn't really about what the Catholic church actually IS, or is it? Apart from matters of family -- and thus GOD -- the Catholic church is egalitarian and leftist, and as long as they won't give up those core matters, give up itself, it will be hated by the world and any (but ANY!) libel will stick.

Happy Fourth of July

No-go area for Americans:

From the website of the U.S. Army garrison Hohenfels:

Garmisch-Partenkirchen travel warning
July 3-6: U.S. personnel in the Garmisch-Partenkirchen area on the Fourth of July weekend are advised to maintain an elevated situational awareness and increased vigilance in and around areas where U.S. and other military personnel are known to gather, such as restaurants, bars or other venues which coincide with ongoing celebrations.

Background: Authorities are worried that a "German group" might be going to "seek revenge" for an "incident" at a local nightclub. US-citizens are asked by the Munich Consulate General and the German police to, so to say, watch their backs this weekend. A speaker of the Polizeipräsidium Oberbayern-Süd at Rosenheim stated that the situation is "being taken seriously" and that the security measures will be stepped up accordingly.

What had happened? According to information from the magazine "Focus online" and the daily "Münchner Merkur", the "incident" late in June had in fact been an encounter between a civilian employee of the U.S. Army and a, as the politically correct jargon goes, "German of Turkish origin". One of the "Germano-Turks" involved was said to have threatened the American to come back within the next couple of days and to take revenge.

And that's why Americans better avoid now one of the most gorgeous holiday resorts in Europe.

I've Got A New Blog

I've headed it The Most Destructive Single Cause and it's about (now who would have thought so regarding the title?) feminism and a spawn of my two other blogs The Editrix' Roncesvalles and The Evil Style Queen. I am not a Renaissance polymath and I have found that if I try to cover too many topics at once it doesn't become a coherent overview of the woes of our times but an unstructured mess. I have weeded those posts that are germane to the topic of the new blog, even if only peripherally so, from my other blogs and put it there to give the new effort some substance to start with. Roncesvalles will now focus on the Islamisation of the West and its related phenomena,The Evil Style Queen's focus will return to, well, style. Feminism permeates every single aspect of our daily life and thus needs dedicated analysis and not just some blog entries, which are soon drowned by a flood of other information or laments.

Thanks to Blogger, one of the most unfairly badmouthed organisations on earth, for the excellent import- and export functionality without which I couldn't have done this.

All Rights for Everybody

SPON tells us about yesterday's Christopher Street Day in Berlin and can't, of course, RESIST to pepper the report with lots of juicy photos.

"Stück für Stück ins Homoglück - Alle Rechte für Alle" [something like "step by step towards homo-happyness -- all rights for eveybody, and no, that is NOT a joke] is the motto of this year's Christopher Street Day (CDS) parade in Berlin. Up to 250,000 people are partying in the capital, according to the organizers.

The parade, which is the 31st of its kind, took off at the Kurfürstendamm [Berlin's boulevard landmark]. Tenthousands of gays, lesbians and transsexuals started out at 12.30h with 55 floats or banded together on foot towards Siegessäule, where the final rally will take place.

Numerous participants were wearing colourful costumes and brandishing rainbow-banners. The organizers are demanding the inclusion of the protection of homosexuals in the constitution.

(Mixed times in the original!)

Berlin's (openly gay) mayor Klaus Wowereit with Renate Künast, a prominent Green politician.




Oppressed gay men are having at last (for the 31st time) some innocent fun.

Those are, mind you, the MSM-approved pictures.

Here we have some from the renowned daily Süddeutsche Zeitung under the header "Bunt als Lebensgefühl" [something like: "Multicolour as a way of life"]:


This is a picture from the Hamburg 2005, not of the Berlin 2009 event because, so we can only presume, this year's pictures from Berlin weren't swinish enough for the quality journalism for which the Süddeutsche stands.

Homosexuals against "right wing extremism": "Bend over Skin[head]", the placard says.

One can now be, as I am, disgusted by those pictures and the depravity of the media, and I have yet to find a single critical account of this debased spectacle pretending that it's the outcry of an "oppressed minority". On second thought, however, it may be not all bad. It will cure the odd wellmeaning liberal from the false perception that homosexuals are doing, as one often hears, "no damage". Wellmeaning liberals, who have never seen homosexuals save the nice, middle class, quiet, sober, unobtrusive couple from next door, tend to think that. I was once one of them. After all, those inoffensive mild excentrics have a nice house with a garden and wouldn't a child better grow up there than in an orphanage, and why shouldn't they have a sort of civil union so that the surviving one will get his "widower's pension"? It would only be fair and do no harm, won't it?

And then one sees those pictures, hears those strident demands for equality and one starts to think. There hasn't been any discrimination against homosexuals for decades, neither legal nor factual. Yet now they are demanding the inclusion of the "protection of homosexuals" in the constitution. What does that imply? They are saying it quite openly: All rights for everybody. Now a man demands to be able to legally "marry" a man based on the principle of "legal equality". Next he wants to "marry" a minor. Why not? Doesn't the setting of an age of sexual consent limit the "legal equality" of minors and, not to forget, of those who would like to have sex with them? I am talking rubbish? The Green Party has never credibly renounced their goal to legalize sex with minors, a party that once took off as a pro-homosexual, pro-immigration, feminist, enviromentalist and pacifist organisation with a few old "blood and soil" Nazis thrown in who have long left or died out. Based on that logic from hell, they could as well demand that a blind man must be granted a driving license. All rights for everybody!

Homosexuals are a minority that should be accepted and respected by the majority were it not for the fact that they see themselves as a pressure group hell bent not just on equality but on replacing the majority. They are known to form "rope teams" and thus claim a societal and political importance based on nothing but their, to all "normal" intents and purposes, unimportant sexual orientation. They, as I wrote in an earlier entry, are claiming an importance they don't possess and an attention they don't deserve. In that, they are demonstrating a frightening affinity to Islam in our Western culture, an affinity that, not so amazingly, transcends matters of politics and mentality to fulfill itself somewhere very real in North Africa.

This is incredible! Must watch!

An Arab tells what is wrong about the Arabs!

Memri TV is down, so I've uploaded it.

Algerian author Anwar Malek on Al-Jazeera TV, Quatar, on March 3, 2009.

Edited to add:
I cross-posted this at IBA. Somewhat naturally, Wafa Sultan was mentioned. For me, the old anti-feminist diehard, it's not amazing that Wafa Sultan made (justifiedly so) headlines and this man remained (unjustifiedly) largely unrecognized.

Another thing Pastorius brought up:

The distinct difference between this guy and Wafa is that Wafa defended the Jews. This guy buys into the Palestinians as oppressed narrative. That will probably spare him the death threats.

And...

...it would be unreasonable for him to buy into the Palestinian story given his otherwise reasonable take on the Arab world.

He recognizes the inherent problems, so why would he not recognize that in the Palestinian territories they don't even keep their streets nice, they don't plant trees, they don't keep businesses going, etc. (Particularly in Gaza, from what I understand.) So, why would he observe that and think, well, in that case it's not the Arab's fault but the Jews fault.

I wonder what will follow. There is remarkable little about Anwar Malek in the Internet and even less in the blogosphere.

A Plea for Mendacity

Sometimes, I dislike America intensely. Maybe it's partly a matter of linguistics, but still...

South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford's mother said yesterday that she was praying for her son as pressure mounted for a criminal probe into his secret trip to visit his lover in Argentina. "I love him and support him," Margaret Sanford, 83, said while sitting on a wooden picnic bench outside her home.

After going missing for days, the married father of four admitted Wednesday to a yearlong affair with a woman who lives in Argentina. In a tearful news conference, the two-term Republican asked for forgiveness and explained that a friendship with the woman had blossomed into romance a year ago, around the time of a state-funded trip to South America.

For Heaven's Sake, can't she pray in privacy? Certainly her brand of Christianity hasn't done much for the son she (presumably) brought up. Alright, we Europeans (at least we Germans and certainly the English) are a stuck-up bunch when it comes to religion, but this is obscene.

But what I find even worse is to describe the making of an adulterous relationship as "a friendship with (a) woman (that) had blossomed into romance." Romance? BLOSSOMED? Pukebags anybody?

Not that politicians at this end (or people generally) do not commit adultery. But at least it isn't hyped to the max (to use another disgusting Americanism) or maybe they are just not as often found out, be that because they are less dumb than their American counterparts or because there is just less interest in other peoples' sex lifes. Whatever, so far we have been spared that cheesy view of adultery, the snivelling of the perpetrators and, thank God for small mercies, Mum's sanctimonious drivel as the icing on a turd that tries to sell itself as a chocolate truffle.

There IS, after all, a difference between mendacity and hypocrisy. The former can sometimes be necessary for sanity's sake, the latter destroys it.

The rest of the tripe is here.