My Opinion

Unlike the fact that Muslims have not killed all non-Muslims in their territory, there is very little else that they are proof that Islam is a peaceful, tolerant religion. Where Islam dominates (as in the Middle East and Pakistan), religious minorities suffer brutal persecution and have little support. Where Islam is in the minority (as in Thailand, the Philippines and Europe), the threat potential is high due to the violence of the Muslim minority as long as their demands are not fulfilled. Every situation seems to be a justification for religious terrorism, which is persistent and endemic to Islamic fundamentalism.

The reasons are obvious and can be found in the Koran, the Holy Scripture of the Muslims. Few verses of the most Islamic sacred text can be interpreted as corresponding to the contemporary virtues of religious tolerance and universal brotherhood. They are the early "Meccan" verses, which are obviously lifted by later ones. They can serve as an example that Islam is a religion of peace when Muslims do not have sufficient power and are in the minority. As soon as this situation changes, their behavior also changes.

Many Muslims are peaceful and do not want to believe what the Koran really says. They prefer a closer interpretation closer to Jewish-Christian ethics. Some ignore harder passages. Others reach the "textual context" over various surprises to subjectively mitigate these verses with others so that the message corresponds to their personal moral preference. Although the Koran itself claims to be clear and complete, these advocates speak of the "risks" of the attempt to interpret verses without their "help". These idiots attribute to an omniscient and omnipotent God that the latter is incapable of expressing himself clearly and clearly so that everyone can understand it. But the truth is elsewhere. The Koran was not written by Muhammad himself, since Muhammad himself was an illiterate, but by his successors. This also contains the reason why the Koran contradicts itself. It was written by man and man, and therefore contains the power of the ruling class and not the words of God.

The violent verses of the Koran played a key role in the very real massacres and genocide. This includes the brutal murder of a hundred million Hindus over five centuries, beginning around 700 AD with Mahmud of Ghaznis of bloody conquest. Both he and the later Tamerlane (Islamic Genghis Khan) murdered an innumerable number, only to defend their temples from destruction.

Buddhism was almost exterminated by the Indian subcontinent. Jews and Christianity suffered the same fate, even slower, in areas conquered by Muslim armies. Including the Middle East, North Africa and parts of Europe, including today's Turkey. Zoroastrianism, the ancient religion of a proud Persian people, is despised by Muslims and can hardly survive in modern Iran.

Violence is so deeply rooted in Islam that it has never really ceased to be in war, whether it be with other religions or with itself.

Muhammad was a military leader, besieged cities, massacred the men, raped their wives, enslaved their children and took the property of others other than his own. On several occasions, he rejected offers of capitulation from the beleaguered inhabitants and even murdered captives. He inspired his followers to fight, if they did not feel that it was right to fight, he promised them slaves, spoils, and threatened them with hell. Muhammad allowed his men to rape traumatized women, who were caught in battle. This usually happened the day their husbands and family members were massacred.

It is important to emphasize that, in most cases, Muslim armies have undergone aggressive assault wars and dramatic military conquests in the name of religion by the actual followers of Muhammad in the decades after his death.

The early Islamic principle of warfare was that the civilian population of a city should be destroyed (men got killed, women and children ended up as slaves) when defending themselves and resisting Islamic hegemony. Although modern advocates of Islam often argue that Muslims are only "attacking in self-defense," this oxymoron is clearly disproved by the reports of Islamic historians and others reporting from the time of Muhammad.

Some modern scholars are more honest than others. One of the most respected Sunni theologians is al-Qaradawi, who justifies terrorist attacks against Western goals by noting that there is no civilian population at a time of war:

It has been determined by Islamic law that the blood and property of people of Dar Al—Harb [ie. non-Muslim people who resist Islamic conquest] is not protected... In modern war, all of society, with all its classes and ethnic groups, is mobilized to participate in the war, to aid its continuation, and to provide it with the material and human fuel required for it to assure the victory of the state fighting its enemies. Every citizen in society must take upon himself a role in the effort to provide for the battle. The entire domestic front, including professionals, laborers, and industrialists, stands behind the fighting army, even if it does not bear arms.

Consider the example of the Qurayza Jews, who were completely extinguished five years after the arrival of Muhammad in Medina. Their leader decided to stay neutral as their city was besieged by a Meccan army, which was to take revenge for Muhammad's deadly caravan raids. The tribe did not kill anyone from either side and even surrendered peacefully to Mohammad after the Meccans were repulsed. But the Prophet of Islam had decapitated every male member of the Qurayza tribe, enslaved every woman and child, even raped one of the prisoners themselves (which Muslim supporters could call "marriage on the same day").

One of the most revered modern scholars of Islam, Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, openly condemns jihad:

In the Jihad which you are seeking, you look for the enemy and invade him. This type of Jihad takes place only when the Islamic state is invading other [countries] in order to spread the word of Islam and to remove obstacles standing in its way.

Islam has the right to take the initiative…this is God’s religion and it is for the whole world. It has the right to destroy all obstacles in the form of institutions and traditions … it attacks institutions and traditions to release human beings from their poisonous influences, which distort human nature and curtail human freedom. Those who say that Islamic Jihad was merely for the defense of the 'homeland of Islam' diminish the greatness of the Islamic way of life.

The widely acclaimed dictionary of Islam defines jihad as:

A religious war with those who are unbelievers in the mission of Muhammad.. It is an incumbent religious duty, established in the Qur’an and in the Traditions as a divine institution, and enjoined specially for the purpose of advancing Islam and of repelling evil from Muslims ...

Quoting from the Hanafi school, Hedaya, 2:140, 141:

The destruction of the sword is incurred by infidels, although they be not the first aggressors, as appears from various passages in the traditions which are generally received to this effect.

Dr Salah al-Sawy, the top member of the Assembly of Muslim Jurists in America, declared in 2009 that "the Islamic community does not possess the strength to engage in offensive jihad at this time," and reaffirmed legitimacy The cause of violence of Islamic rule - tied only by the ability to succeed. (Source)

Muhammad's mistake to leave a clear line of succession led to an eternal internal war after his death. Those who had known him best fought to prevent distant tribes from leaving Islam and returning to their favorite religion (ridda or "apostasy wars"). The spiral of violence continued to turn.

Early converted Meccans fought later as an enmity had developed between those immigrants who had traveled with Muhammad to Mecca and the Ansar in Medina. Finally, there was also a violent struggle within Muhammad's family between his favorite wife and his favorite daughter - a jagged schism that has left mutual traces on the shafts of the Shiites and Sunnis.

The most alien and untrue thing that can be said about Islam is that it is a religion of peace. If every standard by which the West is judged and condemned (slavery, imperialism, intolerance, misogyny, sexual oppression, war ...) is equally applied to Islam, the verdict would be devastating.

Islam never gives what it has conquered, be it religion, culture, language or life. Neither does he make excuses nor does he make real efforts in moral progress. Islam is the least open to dialogue and mostly self-absorbing. Islam is convinced of its own perfection and prevents brutal self-examination and suppresses criticism immediately.

This is the reason why the Koran verses are so dangerous. They are given the weight of the divine command.

While Muslim terrorists, like everything else in their holy book, literally take, they understand that Islam is incomplete without jihad. The moderates offer little to disagree with their personal opinions. What do they really have? Speaking of peace and love one can win ignorant. But if every twelfth verse of Islam's holiest book either speaks about Allah's hatred of non-Muslims or calls for their death, forced to convert or subjugate, it is hardly surprising that the sympathy for terrorism is so deeply rooted in the broad community. Unfortunately, this also works if most Muslims personally prefer not to interpret their religion in this way.

Also scholars such as Ibn Khaldun, one of the most respected philosophers in Islam, has understood that "the holy war is a religious duty, because of the universalism of the Muslim mission and (the obligation to) convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force". Many other Muslims are either unaware or intentionally ignorant of the lack of verses in universal non-violence in the Koran. Their understanding of Islam comes from what they are taught by others.

In the West it is typical for the faithful that their religion must be like Christianity - preaching the New Testament virtues of peace, love and tolerance - because Muslims are taught that Islam is superior in every respect. They are then surprised and embarrassed to find out that this is disproved by the Koran and the bloody history of the emergence of Islam.

Others simply accept violence. In 1991, a Palestinian couple in America was condemned to have stabbed her daughter because she was too westernized. A friend of the family came to their defense and clarified the jury that they did not understand the "culture" and claimed that the father was following "the religion" and said that the couple "had to discipline their daughter or lose respect." (Source).

In 2011, the Palestinian terrorists who were expressly responsible for the brutal murder of civilians, women and children in the name of Allah were rewarded by the Saudi king with a luxurious "holy pilgrimage" to Mecca. Not a single Muslim voice rose to protest.

The most prestigious Islamic university in today's world is the al-Azhar University of Cairo. While the university is very fast with the condemnation of secular Muslims criticizing religion, it has never condemned the Islamic state (IS) as a group of infidels, despite the terrible slaughter in the name of Allah. When asked about Why, the Great Imam of the University, Ahmed al-Tayeb declared: "Al Azhar cannot accuse any [Muslim] of being a kafir [infidel], as long as he believes in Allah and the Last Day -- even if he commits every atrocity."

The Western liberals would do well not to sacrifice critical thinking to the God of political correctness, or to search for reasons to degrade other religions to the level of Islam, just to avoid the existential truth that this is both different and dangerous.

There are just too many Muslims who take the Koran literally ... and too many others who care less about the violence done in the name of Islam.

The results of a youth study commissioned by the City of Vienna on the topic of identity and radicalization are alarming: 27 percent of Muslim respondents reject the West and make their religion through the laws in force in Austria. Homosexuals and Jews are also denied.

On behalf of the City of Vienna, young people aged between 14 and 24 were interviewed. More than half of the young people are Muslim, 36 percent are Christians. There are two similarities: They are getting accustomed in youth centers and are from socially weak families. Therefore, the study is also not representative for Vienna. The numbers are speaking for themselves anyway.

59 percent of Muslims reject homosexuality. Among the Catholics there are 24%, the Christian-Orthodox 50%.

A total of 33% were negative about Jews. Among Muslims, anti-Semitism is seriously high (47%).

Female adolescents evaluate according to the survey of rare and less strong than male. Young people with higher education are also more tolerant. Clear correlations shown therefore between the tendencies of prejudice and concern for the future of vocational and scholastic education.

One focus of the study was the radicalization of the Muslim teenagers. 27% therefore sympathize with jihadism, affirmative violence and hostile to the West.

Should someone soothe that it is only 27%? These are those who are cared for in youth centers, how does it look with those who are not looked after? They openly reject the West. Why are not their applications for asylum rejected? Why these stupid Muslims have been going to a country which they hate and not respect the culture? What are they doing in Europe? What attracts them to the "unbelievers"?

It looks like these uneducated people don't know that they have to accept the local law and order of their host country. They like to take the system with them from which they have been escaping. It looks like they are so perverse and in need to get suppressed and cannot handle any freedom.

The city councilor Sandra Frauenberger said: "Young people talk about things, which they have not yet grown. No risk out of them, on the contrary, they are endangered. We must give protection".

In view of the results, Frauenberger now wants to consider how to reach those affected even more - so that they can defend themselves against the calls of radical adults. The instruments already exist, they should now be sharpened. Thus, topics such as anti-Semitism and homophobia are to be dealt with more strongly by young people.

In addition, young people who were previously difficult to reach, will be addressed by using their community. Especially young people from Chechnya or Afghanistan fall into this group, as it was called. The contact with the parents should get also intensified. The work has been coordinated since 2014 by the Viennese network for deradicalization and prevention.

27% it should be according to a much-publicized study in Vienna. So every fourth. Endangered to slide down in the violence, murder, terror, Jihad. Seduces and indoctrinated, but always voluntarily. Well, and since I now have a problem...

With the term "endangered". For example doctors without borders in war zones and areas of the disease are endangered for me. Or buddy's outdated mines. Or Red Cross workers in Iraq, in Syria. And more recently dealer in Manila.

But not every fourth Vienna Mohammedans, who whistles on integration, our culture neither accepted nor respected and is of the opinion that Islam must defend themselves against his "subjugation" by the "West" by all means. No, these people are not endangered. We are it. Their host country, their fellow citizens, their neighbors, perhaps even our friends.

Because these people, namely plain and poignant - are dangerous. This is the only correct term. But: Endangered sounds just less threatening as dangerous. And, of course, the old left-lined position is based on the fact that the victims are the perpetrators.

The survey, with the result that 27% of Muslims place religion above national laws is a confirmation of a similar survey from Germany. In Germany, naturalized migrants (i.e. German) Turkish origin were interviewed and the result was still devastating with 37%. For realists, there is no question in which direction the train will take in the future. The political leaders will find themselves again only in the history books if there will be this freedom still available.

These migrants are against the West and against the western culture. But they have no problem to take the money from unbelievers which they receive as social assistance. Send them back home if they are not happy here. Oh, yes, there the religion has already destroyed everything or is just happens now. Their rules do not work in their countries of origin (uprisings, civil war, etc.) and will also tear the Western World into the abyss.

But at some point must it even get the dumbest one, that the Western World is sitting on a powder drum where fuse is already burning a long time. The spiral of violence turns faster and faster since the Muslims arrived in the Western World.

The lack of common values makes integration of Muslims almost impossible and their self-imposed demarcation probable.

As the first refugees arrived, many welcome clappers stood at the stations and cheered the new arrivals as a great enrichment. Many of these refugees got teddy bears as a gift, because teddy bears are probably exactly what people need most, after crossing the entire Balkan part by foot.

After all, most of the refugees thought they would be given a house, a car, and a well-paid job right away, and they would soon catch up their families. The whole Refugees Welcome banner, the self-esteem with the German Chancellor, their promise to let everyone into the country and no one to control, while no one will be pushed off, even if his asylum application is rejected, has helped to attract more to Germany as Germany and other EU countries can cope.

In order to increase acceptance, for the millions of refugees, nice stories or better described as simple lies got designed to calm down indigenous people. Supposedly, only academics and highly trained specialists would be the ones who would catapult Germany's economy to the world's peak. So to speak, each Syrian an atomphysicist. It turned out, however, that very many of them were neither atomphysics, nor Syrians. After it became known that Syrians no longer get deported, everybody wanted to be a Syrian and purchased a Syrian Passport at the black market. Syria is therefore probably the only country on this planet, where a quarter of a million people have been murdered in the last few years by Assad's regime and Islamic groups, but the number of citizens is still rising sharply.

In order to take the fears of the population, police reports are being dressed. Thus it is stated that 10% of all refugees (in Germany) are punished at least once, but one should not be worried, because these are only minor offenses, such as black riding or shoplifting. Ten percent of a million will be a whole lot! In other places, there is talk of organized prostitution in some refugee shelters. At the very least, they have learned quickly that supply and demand are related and how to implement it properly. Some of them are business-minded, yes, but someone should finally explain to them that they can not claim to be recognized as a refugee, to flee from the Islamic state, who also kidnapped girls and made women to sex slaves, by doing here exactly the same.

If 80% of all refugees are men, the refugee women will not have it easy. Especially here one can see the differences in the way of thinking. While in Europe women are legally equal in all respects (although some men may see differently, the woman can fight well against real oppression), many of the refugees are thinking that women are subordinated to men and considered of having a lower value. Since fewest of these refugee men are feminists, their image of women should be so simple. Here the man, there the submissive woman who serves the man. So how has it been with Mama always, when they did not have to bend at home a single finger. In refugee shelter, this image is continuing partially. Volunteers, many of them are females, smearing breads and hand out clothes during their leisure time. Many refugee men get boring in the meantime and are making nonsense.

Formed in their home country from Mommy spoiled and disfigured, it continues in Europe. Even the refugee women are even consider as too stupid for such a job and not one even trust them to introduce themselves and to make themselves useful. Smearing sandwiches and distribute donated clothes may seen by some men as low activity. As long as there are Eurpean women who intensify this attitude (unconscious?), we cannot expect that the image of women will get modernized quickly. The angry awakening will come. For the most European (and other living women here) it is indeed too stupid to wear his ass behind the man. Welcome to the Western World! This is usually the case here, even though some refugee assistants may declare the refugees as immature and try to stifle independent behavior from the outset, only for the reason to self congratulations and to celebrate themselves to be a good human, who help these savages not to starve, Because they are probably would go in their home with bow and arrow for hunting and would immediately starve here, if not getting spoiled from prosperity children who are smearing bread for them.

As said already, among the refugee men, not all, but probably damn many from them, are the gender roles simply knitted. The hetero-man and the hetero-woman, who serves him because the hetero-man got already raised from his hetero-mother to be dependent on his mother, who is therefore afraid of women because he is dependent on her care.

And that is only the beginning of all these reasons, why especially immigrants from patriarchal and archaic (Islamic) societies are even not trying to integrate themselves here or somewhere. Either because they are not understanding it all (what you can understand well) or because they feel it ridiculous and cling rather to old traditions or Islam and there get their simple answers to complex questions. There is the man still man and the woman just woman. Everything else is simple and easy to understand.

Rarely has a piece of clothing provided for more conversation and was so vehemently controversial - the burka. But what has driven the online-shop giant Amazon recently on its British Web site, meets with many skepticism. So there was actually a "sexy burka" offered as a party outfit. Muslim believers romped up.

This fact shows already the intolerance and the missing integration capability from the Muslims in Europe. Why have they been coming here if they cannot adapt themselves to the culture here? They are bringing their problems from which they have been escaping to others and think that others have to respect their believes and wishes. Sorry, but if you cannot accept the Western culture why the Western culture shall accept yours?

Actually, the burka should serve the full veil of the body, but the offered "clothing piece" would obviously not have been able to fulfill this purpose. The tight dress covers just the most necessary here, leaves a lot of leg freedom and also gives deep insights at the level of the cleavage. Just the arms are comparatively chaste hidden under long sleeves.

For the one or the other perhaps quite amusing - glances attract the piece of fabric with certainty - but for believers, the orderly "sexy Burka" was a very big affront.

Some Muslim Amazon customers placed displeasure immediately in the reviews below of the product. "You’re all disgusting racists. My culture is not your costume", was to read in one of the reviews.

Another commented: "A person’s culture is NOT a fancy dress costume".

Whereas another user took the item for sale very personally, commenting: "Whoever you are fear Allah. It’s not a joke."

If the outfit already stands on the wish list for the upcoming Halloween party, then you have to be disappointed at this point. For the "sexy Burka" has now been removed from the Amazon side, but you can order the sexy burka at AliExpress. The case can have some consequences for the third-party supplier, who placed the outfit on the sales platform. A spokesman for the online giant told to the British news agency SWNS: "All Marketplace sellers must follow our selling guidelines and those who don’t will be subject to action including potential removal of their account."

However, if you do not want to miss a costume for Halloween, a completely unholy nun costume or a seductive priest's outfit is still available:

Here gets shown the double standard from Amazon. It looks like that Amazon is a Muslim shop, so don't buy in such a shop. If they like to make business and respect only the Muslim culture then they have to make their business only with Muslim buyers. In such a case they will get removed from the market very fast. Even Amazon needs to understand the basic rule in business the customer is king. If only the Muslims are their kings, then they should take only the money from Muslims.

Thousands civil rights activists in Saudi Arabia have demanded in a petition of King Salman abolish the guardianship system in the ultra-conservative kingdom which allows men extensive rights over women.

They demanded in the petition, the king should establish "an age of majority of women", "from which they are grown up and take responsibility for their actions," the retired academic Asisa al-Yusuf said on Tuesday. Nearly 15,000 people have signed the petition calling for the "fully as citizens" to deal with tens of millions of women in the country. Their attempt to present the petition to the Royal Cabinet failed. Jusuf said. Instead, they now will send them by E-Mail.

Women are dependent on male relatives

In Saudi Arabia, a particularly strict interpretation of Islamic law, the Sharia law. For women, this means that they need even for everyday trifles the consent of their legal male guardian, may not work or travel. Until they are married, the father takes over this function, then the husband. Widows depend on the decisions of her son or another close male relative.

Already this rules are showing that the Quran did not get written on the command from any God. God, however you'll call him, will never differ between the genders. These stupid fundamentalists are only hiding themselves behind a religion for dominating the women. This fact shows that the women had in the old time more intelligence then the men and the men have been afraid losing all their possibilities in dominating the females. For this reason they have invented the religion called Islam where they like to suppress all others. It shows how stupid and stubborn these Islamic fundamentalists are and nobody will miss them and their stone age culture if they will disappear from the world. In the rest of the world are such people called "eternally yesterday's people" or "stupid born and nothing learned". As the Islam is nothing else than only a form of totalitarian regime, worse than a dictatorship, should get the recognition as a religion removed from the Islam.

A in the summer from the human rights organisation published a report on the current situation of women in Saudi Arabia. Human Rights Watch (HRW) stir and prompted a group of activists to launch the petition of "#IAmMyOwnGuardian" (I am my own guardian).

According to Jusuf, the petition was signed by some religious leaders believe that the strict laws in Islam are anchored, but assumed in the Royal House. There again, there are some open entirely for reforms family members, which would however be outvoted by conservative leaders, citing the Koran.

Small steps towards more rights

"#IAmMyOwnGuardian" is not the first spectacular initiative, in addition to international protests resistance against this system, around 2013, when petitioned in vain for the right of women to drive a car, was formed in Saudi Arabia in the past again and again. In March 2014, a similar initiative had pointed to the unequal treatment and called, inter alia, to proceed against the marriage of minors, as well as sexual harassment.

Even though it is still a very long way to equal rights for Saudi women, but small improvements are characterized. Since the end of last year the Royals granted also women who were completely excluded from political processes, the right to vote. But in a very restricted democracy: the men can cast their vote only since 2005, and only in municipal elections. The influence of the elected bodies is low, the powers extend beyond little road construction, public facilities, and garbage disposal. Political parties and even demonstrations are banned in Saudi Arabia.

Rights of religious police restricted

During spring time Saudia Arabia earned a rare praise of the human rights organization HRW for reducing the rights of the religious police. The dreaded moral guardians who are monitoring compliance with the strict rules in the general public, though are still active, but may since this year they are not allowed to arrest somebody, they need to report violations to the police.

HRW called it a "positive step for the people of Saudi Arabia", but called on the Saudi Government to curtail the rights of authority for the promotion of virtue and prevention of Vice.