My Opinion

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 Saudi Arabian Sheikh Saleh bin Saad al-Luhaidan needs to be happy that stupidity does not hurt, because otherwise he would yell day and night.

The useless Sheikh Saleh bin Saad al-Luhaidan, a Private Attorney General and the Psychological Advisor of the Psychological Association in the Gulf states, stated:

Driving could have a reverse physiological impact. Physiological science and functional medicine studied this side [and found] that it automatically affects ovaries and rolls up the pelvis. This is why we find for women who continuously drive cars their children are born with clinical disorders of varying degrees.

Such a statement shows the missing and miserable education from Sheikh Saleh bin Saad al-Luhaidan. I wonder myself how he is able to survive with such a mental illness, which seems to be a result of inbreeding and child marriage. Buy the way in the civilized world gets a sexual interaction between an adult and a minor called and prosecuted as a rape. Only in stone age cultures is such an interaction between adults and minors allowed.

Arabic newspaper Sabq reported in this case:

Al-Luhaidan stated that in the days of Prophet Muhammad (Peace be upon him), muslim women who were his companions used to ride horses and camels as means of transportation but never rode alone and were always accompanied by a ‘mahram’.

Al-Luhaidan further explained that there are exceptional cases that allow women to drive in Saudi Arabia such as when a husband is driving accompanied by his wife and daughter and an accident occurred. It is then allowed for women to drive due to the urgency of the situation.

Al-Luhaidan added that driving could have a reverse physiological impact on women and could affect her ovaries and push the pelvis higher as a result of which their children are born with clinical disorders of varying degrees.

He further stated that 33% female drivers caused car accidents in Arab countries as opposed to 9% male.

If I read such statements then I think that I need to include into my next prayer: "Oh God, please throw brain from heaven. Here are some people who need it very urgently".

The kingdom "reduces women to the status of children, unable to make important decisions about their lives," Human Rights Watch said in a statement and Amnesty International said that the driving ban is "discriminatory and demeaning to women and must be overturned immediately".

Here is a video about this sensational proof of missing intelligence:

Transcription of the video:

a saudi arabian sheik as noted a study from a religious organization indicating
that women in Saudi Arabia shouldn't drive because they don't damage their
pelvis and their
ovaries these are simple have to bear children I mean that's the only thing
they're good for
so we can't have them driving in cars that's terrible
up now of course this study has absolutely no
scientific research or scientific merit but the ship did say
that yet of course physiological signs and functional medicine study decided
found that
automatically affects over reason rules up the pelvis
I roles up but I love for me to get pregnant this is crazy
this is why we find for women who continuously drive cars their children
are born with clinical disorders a varying degrees
well look this he's very very scientific its varying degrees of disorder
okay so let me take your chances you roll your ovaries and pelvis
you never know what comes up when america little difference over there K
he said the Rebbe is the only country in the world that doesn't allow a manager I
know it's incredible I mean you have so many other countries that
severely violate human rights and especially women's rights
yet Saudi Arabia still the only country that doesn't allow women to drive any
women have been protests in Saudi Arabia for the last four years
for the ability to drive and some have been arrested someone has dealt with
lashings as a result and I hope we continue to fight back
but I just find it laughable that anyone in Saudi Arabia would take this study
from a religious organization seriously no one's buying it oh why would even try
so several things on that first will the person you're alluding to shine my
just the Neo's 34 who sent us that 10 lashes they whipped her
for the grave offense of driving a a car
but that was all the way back in 2011 okay so just two years ago that happen
and then the Saturday be amazingly
only finish the 130 other 134 countries
on gender parity cheeses who's worse on gender parity the Saudi Arabia
so that's amazing but so in order to avail this
if you will a.m. the the cloak of sigh so they could say like alter scientific
study
over a sprawling over is gone damage trade
they brought in former professor at King Fahd University so you know is that
biased
come also be he didn't think I'm opposed to be the guy was valued at over so
there's that they're fucked
didn't well in order to get pregnant I guess they're packed
pedicure a it's a 0 this is the same
alleged for professor who earlier had testified that
well if you allow women to drive obviously we will have increases in
prostitution
pornography and homosexuality and that's usually how it works he's got got a
point there
whenever I see a woman driving I lean over to bob and I see guys wanna make
out
you how insane is that
if you let women drive well obviously
dudes will turn your no but thank you how easily emasculated and how terribly
weak
the men in saudi arabia I mean I'm sure there are men in saudi arabia that are
in favor of allowing women to drive
I'm talking about the religious leaders that are so scared the think that if
they give their women a little bit of freedom
there immediately gonna do crazy shit because they're so unhappy with the
relationships they have with these pathetic losers
if they think they'll turn to prostitution doctor for Tyree because I
was they would want guys who wanna porn
and then a it's a will lead to more divorces another thing by
alleged professor sue be %uh okay and
and then ultimately they'll turn to other women because I like well
obviously since we're pathetic
and we can never keep a woman all this week keeper literally wrapped up
and literally in the home so she can even runaways Cape to the mall
okay but will obviously she leave us cuz we suck
an that's what the leadership saturday via saying love course among the young
Saudi Arabia
as in a lotta countries they rebel against the speakers so
they find it out as outrageous as we do an egg I have to live in it let not just
the women but the men as well
I'll but this is it that to catch it in science
is whole larisa layers in just one final thing that they like to fear monger
about within 10 years the ban being lifted
the report's authors others claimed there would be
quote no virgins in the Islamic Kingdom
I you thought I it's
in space I'm not sure they understand what the word virgin its
you see when I what happens as soon as the baby is born
feel like ten years ago we let somebody drive
I expect
hug every no more purchase its its it's absurd on two fronts yes because of what
you're saying
and also because I mean it lot just the idea that
being able to drive is gonna convince women to go out there and just have sex
with everyone
and that's the only word that they have if they're not virgins well then they're
worthless
right that's the only thing that you should emphasize about that and one
final point
apparently they believe that they're wrong that
if you if they do not restrict your freedom
that you will choose an alternative path if they believe that if you're
completely free
then you would follow the path that they have laid out the mission be worried
about cars or kinda clothing et cetera
women would naturally be just as religious as Saudi Arabia wants them to
be there were following the path of God et cetera right
apparently you think well they're not going to do that cuz obviously were
wrong
and so we can allow them to have any freedom
because if we do then they'll realize were jackasses and then what was in
there was any more
can you imagine not being able to go anywhere unless you have some sort of
like chauffeur
or some some guardian who like takes you to where you need to go
and a look super final point that's exactly
the subjugation that they desire that everything that a woman does she must
check with either husband her father
her brother like so you must get permission for
every single thing you do and
to these prophetic guys editors
interim leadership is an area where they think well
I mean that's only going get them to ever love us right
I like if we give them a choice they obviously wouldn't choose us
so weak

Here another video about the same case:

Like all other "holy books" the Quran got written by humans after the death of Mohammed. Only the mighty ones and the savants have been able to write in ancient time. So you find the influence and interpretation of such people inside the "holy scripts". Think about the value from quotes transported by mouth. Everybody forwards only these content what he has understood by himself. Errors and misunderstandings are inevitable in such a procedure. You only need to remember the kids game called silent message. Very seldom matches the result to that what has been provided to the start of the chain. Such a suspicious source got used for writing "holy scripts". Until here is no difference between the Islam and other religions.

The result has been that all these codices had differences in the same way like the content got transported from mouth to mouth by the people. The third Caliph, Uthman ibn Affan (644-656), burned all previous existing scripts and established a standard version known as Uthman's codex, which is generally considered the archetype of the Quran known today.

In the year 1389 the Muslim savant Ibn Khaldun wrote (Berkley Center for Religion, Peace and World Affairs):

In Islam, the person in charge of religious affairs is concerned with "power politics," because Islam is "under obligation to gain power over other nations"

(Muqaddimah, trans. Rosenthal, p. 183).

and

In the Muslim community, 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.

No other religions had no such universal mission and the holy war was not a religious duty to them apart from self-defense. This fact shows clearly that the Islam is nothing else than a dangerous teaching made from humans and not from any God. If a belief needs to get distributed by force, then this belief has no value because thoughts and opinions of people cannot get controlled. A God, however his name is or however you are calling him, is omniscient and omnipotent. For what does he need other humans to bring his rules and teachings by force to other people?

The mighty ones in ancient time have known this fact too and have decided by themselves to use troops instead of sending missionaries to other regions of the world. That shows that these mighty ones used their influence to get their wishes written into the "holy book" and not the truth. They are only using the Quran for hiding their own power hungry wishes from others. The Quran is nothing else than a excuse or a pretext for filling the pockets of the mighty ones without making themselves responsible for anything.

Another excuse get heard from time to time, that the Christians have loaded a lot blame with the Crusades. What is not known to many people but is the fact that it came only to the Crusades after the Muslims have almost 500 years (exactly 464 years long, from 635 until 1099 AD, (1099 = start of the first crusade)) invaded the Christian countries, they have robbed, terrorized and plundered. There were very many Christians murdered, raping their wives or sold together with their children into slavery. Christian churches were destroyed, burned down the houses of Christians and Christians had only to chose to convert to the Islam or to get killed by the Muslims.

For almost over 500 years, Muslim troops attacked formerly Christian countries such as Palestine, Syria, Jordan, Israel, Morocco, Egypt, Tunisia, Algeria, Libya, Iran, Iraq, Spain, Portugal, parts of France, Sicily, Greece, Bulgaria, Yugoslavia, Romania, Armenia, Turkey (Byzantium), Cyprus, India, China and Pakistan. Not less cruel behave Muslims today towards the Muslims, who turn away from Islam: "whoever changes his religion ever, kill him."

For almost 500 years the Muslims in Christian countries left a wide trail of blood before Pope Urbans II 1095 called in Clermont to the liberation of Jerusalem and of the "holy land" (Israel) from the hands of the Muslims. During the reign of the Fatimid Caliph al-Hakim occurred 1009 the destruction of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem, one of the largest sanctuaries of Christianity, which should be located at the historical place of the crucifixion and the tomb of Jesus.

When we talk about the Crusades, then you should familiarize yourself very well with the causes of the Crusades and study the historical process very carefully. Therefore historical events should be displayed now more detail. Of course, there were cruel excesses of all kinds by the Crusaders. It should be at all not secretive, glossed over or endorsed. They happened only after the Muslims had almost 500 years terrorized and murdered Christians. The Christian Crusades were essentially nothing more than the Christians attempting finally to put an end to the cruel terrorist of Muslims. This was achieved but only temporarily, namely at the time of the Crusades. After the Crusades, the Muslims blithely continue the conquest of Christian, Buddhist and Hindu countries with the same cruelty until today.

For a better understanding of historical events, I would like to insert two pictures representing very vividly the Muslim conquests:

• Expansion under Muhammad, 612-632
• Spread under the first three Caliphs, 632-655
• Spread under the Umayyad Caliphate 661-750

The above map shows the Islamic expansion during the time of Muhammad from 622 until 632 (dark). After the death of Muhammad ruled the 4 rightly guided Caliphs Abu Bakr, 632-634-Umar ibn al-Khattab, 634-644 - Uthman ibn Affan, 644-656 - Ali ibn Abi Talib, 656-661. The red area shows the expansion in this period. After the 4 rightly guided Caliphs, the Umayyads came to power. Their reign stretched from 661 to 750. The ocher-colored area shows the areas that they captured.

The next picture shows an overview of the Islamic expansion up to 1500:

Here is a list that shows that the Quran has been nothing else that "holy scripts" where the warlords could hide themselves behind it:

• 632 A.D. (467 years before the start of the Christian Crusades): Death of Muhammad
  At this time, Islam was already spreaded by raids across large parts of the Arabian peninsula. These aggressions continued after the death of the "prophet" and turned into a scene of constant wars throughout the Mediterranean for centuries. The subjugated were not allowed to carry any weapons, they were incapable of military service, therefore no full men. Christians and Jews had to wear clothing or special colors (this discrimination led to the Jewish star), to be marked as "Dhimmi" (non-believer or Protectee).

  They needed to accept to get hits from Muslims and have not been allowed to defend themselves. If a "dhimmi" struck back, then his hand got hacked off or he got executed. Any testimony of a "dhimmi" could not really got used against Muslims. Muslims needed to bear only half of their penalty for offenses of a "dhimmi" and they could never got executed. Conversely, the most cruel forms of executions have been mainly reserved the "dhimmi".

  They were not allowed to ride horses, but only on donkeys, so they were constantly reminded of their humiliation. (In the 19th century were Christian Copts in Egypt, after all, using horses, but only if they have been sitting backwards, facing backwards.) They paid a tribute (jizya), which needed to get paid in person, where they received a blow on the head.

• 635 A.D. (464 years before the start of the Crusades): a Muslim army conquered the Christian Byzantine Empire, Damascus, the capital of the former Christian Syria.

• 637/638 A.D. (462 years before the Crusades): a Muslim army conquered the Christian Byzantine Empire, Jerusalem. Capture of Jerusalem by Caliph Omar

• 642 A.D. (457 years before the Crusades): a Muslim army conquered the Christian Byzantine Empire, Alexandria, the capital of Christian Egypt.

• 645 A.D. (454 years before the Crusades): a Muslim army conquered the Christian Barka in North Africa (Libya).

• 674 A.D. (425 years before the Crusades): A Muslim attack on Constantinople (capital of the Christian Byzantine Empire and seat of the Christian emperor) got fended off

• 708 A.D. (391 years before the Crusades): The Muslim expansion to capture the Christian North Africa reached the Atlantic Coast (Spain).

• 710 A.D. (389 years before the Crusades): With the conquest of the last Christian town in North Africa is the entire former Christian North Africa is islamized. Nearly all of the 400 Christian dioceses in North Africa go down. North Africa was once a flourishing Christian world, has produced significant theologians of Christian antiquity: Tertullian, Cyprian, Athanasius, Augustine.

• 711 A.D. (388 years before the Crusades): Desecration of the Christian basilica located on the Temple Mount Santa Maria to the al-Aqsa Mosque by Abd el-Wahd. Today, the mosque there is considered third important on in Islam because Muhammad there allegedly prayed there on his "Heavenly journey", but he was at this time already buried 79 years in Medina. This magnificent Church was built once by the Christian Emperor Justinian (527-565). For Islam, converting a famous Church means also always win over Christianity. Legend formations are more important than historical facts in Islam.

  Qur'an (17: 1) gets used as an indication that the "prophet" made in the year 621 a "Night journey to Jerusalem" and was taken from there until the seventh heaven (maybe it has been a drug trip). In fact, there is no historical evidence that Muhammad ever has been in Jerusalem. Since the Prophet of Islam already died in 632, the Koran cannot mean the Church St. Maria, because the church got converted in the year 711, so 79 years after his death, to the el-Aqsa Mosque. The dome of the rock is also not in question, because this building was not even built at this time.

  One may assume that the rise into seventh heaven is rather a dream or imagination from Muhammad and cannot be regarded as a real event. The problem is that the Muslims consider this alleged journey to heaven as a real event. But something like this you can find in all religions. You can tell to the believers the biggest nonsense and the crowd believes it. The same is valid for the resurrection of Jesus after his death and ascension into heaven at Pentecost.

  Muslim armies crossed the Strait of Gibraltar and invade Europe. Andalusia is Arab (Islamic) after its Christian population was subjected to a bloody campaign and continuously suppressed. Just as in present-day Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Libya, Egypt, Syria and Turkey today, all of which were once Christian countries. The Islamic Dhimmisystem (system of government) should thereby have been even worse than the South African apartheid system. Domination and not integration or tolerance was the goal of Islam. Not only in mission, but also by wars. Two powerful military conquests penetrated Islam after they had won before in the Middle East and in Africa, 711 they have been coming to Spain and at 1453 from Constantinople to Vienna. True to the alleged words of the prophet or the interpretation of the Koran by the respective caliphs and sultans foreign nations were either forcibly islamized, with all the consequences for the most oppressed women, or made to second class subjects with greatly restricted human rights.

• 712 A.D. (387 years before the Crusades): the conquest of southern Spain is completed. The Muslims were the last Arab rulers in Al-Andalus, Muhammad XII. more than 800 years in Spain, until finally needed to capitulate on January 2, 1492 before the two Christian (Catholic) armies of Ferdinand II. (the King of Sicily and Sardinia) and Isabella I (the Queen of Castile, the northern Spain).

  Parallel with the conquest of Spain the Arab Muslims in the East penetrated until 712 A.d. up to the borders of China, India and Pakistan. In Uzbekistan they conquered Turkish territories, coupled with their momentous Islamization, the Uzbeks the Arabs partly stubbornly opposed resistance. Soon the Arabs also undertook first forays to India and Pakistan. Another reaching out to Western and Central India was prevented by the defeat of 738 against the Indian regional rulers, whose armies had grown the Arab troops well. The conquest of India by Muslims claimed the lives of 80 million Indians and to have been the largest genocide (genocide) in the history.

  751 the Arabs defeated finally in the Battle of Talas a Chinese army since allegedly saw much of the Chinese troops, the Arabs as liberators and ran to them. As a result, the Chinese influence in Central Asia has been pushed back in favor of the Arab-Islamic.

• 713 A.D. (386 years before the Crusades): The Arabs conquer Barcelona, crossing the Pyrenees and begin the conquest of southern France. Around ninety years after Muhammad's death are Muslim armies (not missionaries!) In the Christian kingdom of the Franks (now France).

• 720 AD (379 years before the Crusades): The Arabs conquer Narbonne in southern France and besieging Toulouse

  From al-Andalus Arab troops conducted regular raids from deep into the outbacks of Christian France. They looted repeatedly by the Rhone valley, terrorized southern France, occupied Arles, Avignon, Nimes, Narbonne, which they set 793 on fire, devastated 981 Zamora and deported 4,000 prisoners. Four years later they burned down Barcelona, killed or enslaved all the inhabitants, devastated 987 Portuguese Coimbra, which then remained uninhabited for seven years, León destroyed along with environment. Responsible for the latter operations was the Amiriden ruler al-Mansur, "the Victorious" (981-1002) made sure that he all philosophical books that he could find got burned. and who led fifty wars during his reign, regularly one in spring and one in autumn. His most famous was that of 997 against the holy pilgrimage town of Santiago de Compostela. After they had razed it to the ground, a few thousand Christian survivors needed to went into slavery.

• 732 A.D. (376 years before the Crusades): Great decisive defensive battle by Charles Martel, the "hammer" of Tours (now France), the European armies won over the Mohammedan aggression. After that, the Christians had 123 years resting from Muslim attacks.

• 846 A.D. (253 years before the Crusades) Muslims pillage Rome. The attacks on Rome began in the seventh century A.D. The prototype of a Muslim invasion occurred in the year 846 as a fleet of Arab jihadists landed at the estuary of the Tiber River, marched to Rome, occupied the city and took all gold and silver from the St. Peter Basilica. This is the reason why the Vatican, due to the repeated attacks of the Muslims (Saracens), to a fortified "city within a city" in Rome. Following the devastation performances of the Saracens in the St., St. Peter's Basilica, which deeply shook the Christian world, was decided to secure the area around the tomb of Saint Peter. The completed area got the status of a city with its own right, which was separated from the Roman Forum, the Center of political, economic, cultural and religious life in Rome.

• 1009 A.D. (90 years before the Crusades): Caliph al-Hakim ordered the systematic destruction of all Christian sanctuaries, including the Church of the Holy Sepulcher in Jerusalem. 1009 the Church of the Holy Sepulcher in Jerusalem by Muslims is destroyed, like so many others before. The plunder and expropriation of Christian churches is attributed to the Caliph al-Hakim, who also began at the beginning of the Millennium, to coerce the mainly Christian officials in his territory to the adoption of Islam.

• 1066 A.D. (33 years before the Crusades): held the first Jewish pogrom of in European history in the Spanish Granada (!) in the "Muslim-tolerant" Al Andalus. The Muslim masses, which at that time romp through the ghetto, call themselves "Muhadjirun" (faith fighters in exile).

• 1070 A.D. (29 years before the Crusades): the Seljuk Turks, a Turkish nomadic people from Central Asia, which itself had converted in the 10th century A.D. to Islam gains control of Jerusalem. The peaceful Christian pilgrimage to the Holy places is hampered increasingly in a massive way.

• 1071 A.D. (28 years before the Crusades): Battle of Manzikert, a Christian Byzantine army is defeated by a Muslim army. The Seljuk Turks conquer the core area of the Christian Byzantine Empire in Asia minor.

• 1095 A.D. (4 years before the Crusades): the Christian Byzantine Emperor Alexios I. Komnenos sends an letter to Pope Urban II. asking for military help. At the Council of Clermont, the first crusade in history gets decided.

• 1099 A.D. - 1293 A.D.: After almost four hundred and seventy years Mohammedan expansion by the sword followed by two centuries of Christian defense and (re) conquest in the form of various crusades.

• 1389 A.D.: Battle of Kosovo (Kosovo). A Christian army of Serbs, Bosnians and Bulgarians is destroyed by a Muslim army. The Christian Balkan states are Muslim vassals. Even during the 14th century the famous Muslim savant Ibn Khaldun wrote, although Judaism is able politically to survive in this world, but there was no universal claim, conversely, did Christianity although a universal claim, but it has not been following him with political and military means. Islam is superior to both religions, because he clubs both: "In Islam, jihad (holy war) is required by law, because it has a universal mission and is maintained, voluntary or forced to convert the whole world to the Islam" (The Muqaddima).

• 1423 A.D.: Venice, as a leading commercial and naval power in the Mediterranean, began with the help of his mercenaries to oppose the Ottoman Empire, when it saw threatened by the expansion of the Turks towards Adriatic Sea its trade interests. To secure its trading privileges in the Ottoman Empire, but it closed soon peace and Thessaloniki ceded to the Turks.

• 1453 A.D.: conquest of Constantinople Opel (now Istanbul) by Fatih (after him are named mosques in Europe), the center of the Eastern Roman Empire and the Orthodox Church. The Christian emperor falls in battle. End of the Christian Byzantine Empire. Mehmet II Fatih ("Mehmet the Conqueror") was a wise leader of the Ottoman Empire. A truly kind man, and made for his people, he always wanted only the best. Throughout Europe, name the Turkish citizens in memory of Mehmet "Fatih" mosques. The list of "Fatih"-mosques is long.

  But there is also another side of Mehmet II .:
  The Serbian author Konstantin Mihailovic writes in his "Memoirs of a Janissary" about him: "Sultan Mehmed had after his father Murad a happy reign. But he was also very cunning and deceiving if he could - even with the truce. Religion has not been important for him, but he was a famous man of war and had a lot of luck. He had no loyalty. If someone rebuked him, therefore, he roared like a madman. His handling of persons subject was ambivalent. So on the one hand reports of generous gestures and protection decrees, on the other hand writes Konstantin Mihailovic an eyewitness: "The entire army of the Sultan murdered and massacred on the streets, in the houses and in the churches."

  With the conquest of Constantinople there were also individual murders, such as on Megadux (Byzantine dignitary) Lukas Notaras, the Mehmed wanted previously used as a governor of Konstantin Opel. He made him and his sons executed because Notaras refused to provide his (pretty) 14 year old son to the Sultan as catamite. The Ottoman chronicler Dervish Ahmed (1400-1486) reported similar: "The Giauren (Christians) of Istanbul were turned into slaves and the pretty girls were taken from Gazi (Muslim holy warriors) in arms."

• 1463 A.D.: After the fall of Constantinople (May 29, 1453), the Turks began the conquest of Greece and expelled the Venetians from the Greek mainland.

• 1480 A.D.: a Muslim army conquered Otranto in Italy. 1481 reconquest a Christian army.

• 1499 A.D.: Internal disputes the Ottomans took Venice to acquire 1489 Cyprus. Despite the support of Spain, Portugal, France, the Papal States and the Johanniter Venice had to give up more Greek cities and pay tribute.

• 1521 A.D.: a Muslim army conquered Belgrade.

• 1522 A.D.: The Order of St. John (cf.. Knights Hospitaller) had settled in 1309 on the island of Rhodes and controlled from there the sea trade in the eastern Mediterranean. After a first unsuccessful siege in 1480 ended 26 June 1522 great Ottoman invasion army on the island to conquer dominion over the eastern Mediterranean for the Ottoman Empire. The up to 160,000 invaders faced few thousand defenders. After heavy fighting the Knights capitulated on 22 December and departed on 1 January 1523

• 1526 A.D.: Battle of Mohacs (Hungary). A Christian army is beaten by a Muslim army. Muslim armies conquered most of Hungary and threaten Vienna.

• 1529 A.D.: The first siege of Vienna by a Muslim army fails.

• 1565 A.D.: After 1522 the Turks had chased away the Order of Saint John from Rhodes, offered the Emperor Charles V to the Order the island of Malta as a new residence. Johanniter settled down in 1530 on the island. On May 18, 1565 40,000 Turks began to command Süleyman the Magnificent with the siege of Malta. The approximately 9,000 Teutonic Knights held the siege until the Ottomans had to break off the siege due to the imminent autumn storms on September 8, after losses of an estimated 20,000 man.

• 1566 A.D.: The occasion was an uprising of the Transylvanian prince Johann II. Sigismund Zápolya. 1566 came to a successful Ottoman siege of Szigetvár. In the first peace of Adrian Opel loss Szigetvárs was recognized, restored otherwise the status quo.

• 1569 A.D.: After the Russian conquest of Kazan and Astrakhan Khanate, the Ottoman Empire wanted to bring these former Muslim empires in the Volga area back into its sphere of influence and undertook together with the Crimean khanate a campaign against Astrakhan. In order to use the Ottoman fleet for troop transport, was begun with the construction of a canal between two tributaries of the Don and Volga. However, the siege was unsuccessful.

• 1570 A.D.: The Turks conquered Cyprus; Spain, the Papal States and Venice joined on 20 May 1571 together to the Holy League. Its fleet under Don Juan de Austria defeated the Turks on 7 October in 1571 in the Battle of Lepanto. Despite the victory, Venice concluded in 1573 a separate peace, renounced Cyprus and paid 300,000 ducats to the Ottoman Empire.

• 1593 A.D.: Defense War of the Austrian, founded by almost annual Turkish invasions; 1606 Peace of Zsitvatorok, the Emperor was recognized by the Sultan as an equal negotiating partner, one-time payment of 200,000 florins ended the annual tribute.

• 1620 A.D.: Polish attempts to gain influence in Transylvania and Moldova, led to the posting of an Ottoman army which was victorious at Tutora on Prut end 1620. The following year, led Sultan Osman II. personally an army to Moldova, which unsuccessfully besieged Chotyn. In the peace treaty Poland renounced his claims on Moldova.

• 1633 A.D.: After the death of the Polish King Sigismund III. Wasa, Russian troops attacked Poland-Lithuania. Mohammed Abazy, the Turkish Pasha of Vidin, saw his chance and also invaded Poland. The Polish Hetman Stanislaw Koniecpolski organized a rapid and vigorous defense and hit back the Ottomans.

• 1645 A.D.: The war took place mainly from Crete. After the Turks had begun on 24 June 1645 to conquer the island, they besieged from 1648 for 21 years, the heavily fortified, defended by mercenaries capital Candia (today's Heraklion) before it was conquered 1669.

• 1663 A.D.: After tensions in Transylvania, the Turks in 1663 began an offensive against Emperor Leopold I and conquered several fortresses in Upper Hungary (among others Neuhäusl). 1664, however, they were governed by the imperial troops in Levice and St. Gotthard an der Raab. The quickly following the Peace of Vasvár confirmed the status quo, including the Turkish possession of Neuhäusl.

• 1672 A.D.: The Cossacks in the Polish-dominated right bank Ukraine under the leadership of Hetman Doroshenko placed themselves under the protection of the Porte; which demanded that the cession of the territories of Poland; 1672 began the Ottoman Empire to war; after heavy defeats led Sobieski, the Poles on 11 November 1673 at the Battle of Khotyn victory; Sobieski was then the Polish King John III. Sobieski selected. The war ended after eventful successes in the Treaty of 1676, in the Podolia with Kamieniec Podolski and most of the right bank Ukraine the Ottoman Empire was awarded.

• 1676 A.D.: After the conquest of Podolia in the war against Poland the Ottomans wanted to extend their domination on the Ukraine east of the Dnieper. The Cossacks, especially from the left-bank Ukraine under Hetman Ivan Samoylovich allied with Russia and sold with their help the turks friendly Hetman Doroshenko from its capital Chihirin in the right bank Ukraine 1674. Doroshenko recaptured him loyal Cossack troops Chihirin 1676, but was shortly thereafter besieged by the Cossacks from the left-bank Ukraine and the Russians again and this time jailed. Then sent the Turkish Sultan Ibrahim Szejtan and Yuri Khmelnitsky as his vassal in the Ukraine in 1677 with a 120,000 strong army towards the left-bank Ukraine in March, which was defeated in a battle, however. 1678 renewed the Sultan his will to subdue the entire Ukraine and sent up to 200,000 troops under Kara Mustafa against about 120,000 Russians and Ukrainians in Chihirin. The Russian army broke out of the siege, cross the Dnepr and ward off further Turkish attacks. Finally, a peace agreement was signed, which confirmed the Dnepr as a border again.

• 1683 A.D.: The second siege of Vienna by a Muslim army fails. Europe therefore remains essentially Christian to the present.

• 1710 A.D.: After Peter I the Swedes under Charles XII. had defeated in the Battle of Poltava in 1709, these fled to the Ottoman Empire. The Russian troops occupied Bessarabia were, but included the Prut and capitulated on July 22 in the Treaty of the Pruth; Azov and parts of the Ukraine were again Ottoman, Karl could peel back.

• 1714 A.D.: First Venice lost 1715 Peloponnese; Croats held successfully Sinj; 1716 called for the Austrians, the return of the territory of Venice; on August 5, 1716 suggested Prinz Eugen the Ottomans at the Battle of Petrovaradin, 1717 he conquered Belgrade; in peace Passarowitz from July 21, 1718 Austria received Belgrade and some other areas; Venice no longer participated from now on the Turkish wars.

• 1736 A.D.: War Austria to conquer Bosnia; Wins the Turks in Serbia; 1735 Crimea was devastated by the Russians; 1737 Bessarabia was occupied by Russia; on September 18, 1739 Peace of Belgrade, Austria lost the conquests of the last war again, Russia was unable to enforce the desired right to free passage for its ships on the Azov and Black Sea. Despite a 1738 closed alliance with the Ottomans Sweden remained neutral at first; only after the conclusion of peace it attacked the Russians and therefore hoped in the war over Finland in vain for a two-front war. However, France received 1740 additional privileges (capitulations) for his successful military aid against the Austrians.

• 1768 A.D.: In the Polish Civil War, the Turks have been called by the Confederation of Bar to help Russia occupied Moldavia and Wallachia, 1770 the Turkish fleet in the port of Çesme was destroyed by the Russian, 1774 victory of the Russians at Shumla; July 21, 1774 Treaty of Küçük Kaynarca, the southern Ukraine with the mouths of Bug, Dnieper and Don came to Russia, the Crimea became independent and annexed in 1783 by Russia, Russian ships were allowed to pass through the Straits, Russia received protectorate rights over Orthodox in the Ottoman Empire , first partition of Poland.

• 1787 A.D.: War to divide the Ottoman Empire, August 24, 1787 declaration of war of Turkey in Russia, February 9, 1788 entry into the war of Austria, 1789 Austrians conquered Belgrade and Bucharest, Russians occupied the Principality of Moldova, 1790 Austrian victory at Kalafat, a 1790 against Russia and Austria closed Ottoman-Prussian alliance forced Emperor Leopold II on August 4, 1791 peace of Sistova with the Sultan. January 9, 1792 Treaty of Jassy, Dnepr was border between Russia and the Ottoman Empire; Austria took distance from the plan to destroy the Ottoman Empire, since it was more and more in competition with Russia; Prussia gave Russia a free hand to the second partition of Poland; 1787 took Catherine II. An inspection tour to the newly conquered Crimea

• 1798 A.D.: Formally, to restore the authority of the Sultan and to rid the country of feudal Mameluke rule, the French Republic occupied in contrast to the traditional alliance policy of the kingdom under Napoleon Egypt. The Ottoman Empire joined under pressure from the British fleet off Istanbul in 1799 an alliance with Great Britain and the multiple-war Russia, a French advance into Syria failed before Akko the Turkish-British resistance. A full British-Turkish reconquest of Egypt failed despite battles with Aboukir before Anglo-French peace treaty of Amiens 1802.

• 1806 A.D.: The Serbian uprising of 1804 came to Russia help, it occupied the principality of Moldavia and Wallachia; on 28 May 1812 had to close Russia peace of Bucharest in order to focus on the expected attack of Napoleon. Russia received Bessarabia, the Prut, the new border between the two kingdoms; 1813 Serbia was conquered by the Turks again, the South Slavs, in their quest for independence, translated from now on Russia and not on Austria.

• 1828 A.D.: Encouraged by the Serbian Uprising, also rose the Greeks in 1821; Russia occupied Moldavia and Wallachia in 1829 the Russians crossed the first time the Balkan Mountains; September 14, 1829 Second Peace of Adrian Opel; Russia received territories south of the Caucasus; Moldova, Wallachia and Serbia became autonomous and came under Russian influence, the Straits were free for all ships.

• 1853 A.D.: The demand of the Russian Tsar Nicholas I on a protectorate for its Orthodox brethren in the Ottoman Empire has been rejected by the Sublime Porte, Russia occupied the principalities of Moldavia and Wallachia; Britain and France supported the Turks and conquered the Crimean Sevastopol; the Treaty of Paris March 30, 1856 came Moldavia and Wallachia under a protectorate of the Western powers, Southern Bessarabia fell to the Vltava River, the Danube was internationalized, demilitarized the Black Sea; the internal crisis in Russia came to the fore and leading to reforms, including the abolition of serfdom.

• 1877 A.D.: After the defeat of Serbia in the Serbian-Turkish War (1876-1878) Russian troops led away to war, in the meantime to Romania federated former principalities of Moldavia and Wallachia occupied again, conquered Pleven and stood in front of Constantinople, on 3 March 1878 as it peace San Stefano came: The Ottoman Empire had to bend a favorable for Russia dictated peace. Since this increase in power the great powers Austria-Hungary, Britain and France went too far, the Balkans was divided again at the Berlin Congress on July 13: Romania, Serbia and Montenegro became independent, Bulgaria received a special status, but remained the Ottoman Empire against tributary , Austria-Hungary was allowed Bosnia and Herzegovina occupy, UK received Cyprus while Raszien, Albania, Macedonia and Rumelia the Ottoman Empire remained.

• 1969 A.D.: Nations illegal annexation of West Papua (the western half of New Guinea island) by the Islamic Indonesia, followed by forcible and serious human rights violations against Christian aborigines to today, and tolerated by the UN. Renaming the country in Irian Jaya ("Victorious Irian")

If I take a look at the above list then I see how peaceful the Islam is. In such a case I don't like to know what the Muslims are understanding under the word war.

Has anybody seen an Islamic missionary? I mean a real one without guns and bombs. I think it would not make any sense because everybody who has all his senses together would not submit himself voluntarily into a totalitarian religious dictatorship.

The following video shows an interview from Mullah Krekar given to a Norwegian TV station. It shows clearly the the intentions from the Muslims to rule the world and how they are using the Quran for their own purpose. Instead of integrating themselves into the community of the country where they have been coming they try to bring their system from which they have been running away to their destination country and expect that others have to respect their beliefs and their stone-age system. Such people are not accepting other cultures or beliefs but this narrow-minded people are expecting that the other 70% of the world will respect them. The Muslims have even not learned until now that respect has to get earned and cannot get demanded. Respect can get only earned with good deeds and by respecting the local law.

These people are nothing else than parasites, which like to get all the advantages from the Western World and like to give terror, war and killings in exchange. Are the Muslims thinking that the Western World has only perverts living there?

If the Mullah Krekar and his followers are enjoying the Sharia, then they have to relocate to a country where the Sharia is state law and not to a country with a different law system. I would recommend to bring him immediately to such a country for the reason of peace in Norway.

Here is the interview wit Mullah Krekar from the Norwegian TV station:

Here is a transcription from the questions (Q) and answers (A) given in the video:

Q: For someone who burns the Koran, the punishment, according to Islam, is death, is that correct?

A: If you burn the Koran, which is an insult, then the answer is clearly yes.

Q: You sat in prison for threatening [?] and the Prime Minister, now one of the [?] says that you have threatened him again. Is that correct?

A: No, that is not correct. He can go the way of the courts and try to prove that.

Q: But that man who has burned the Koran, would it be right that he loses his life even though he lives in Norway?

A: I know absolutely that he has committed a criminal offense where the punishment is death.
The responsibility for carrying out the punishment is on the Ummah, our Muslim brotherhood (Ummah).
Regardless if he lives in Norway or if he is Barack Obama. I am not myself threatening the person. I am telling you what is stated in the law. I have told you what is in the Koran and in the Hadith. I have not pointed at one specific person and said “You we must kill.”

Q: One of those who burned a Koran is afraid because somebody who listens to you might want to kill him. Because you have said that that is the punishment according to the Koran, isn’t there the risk that somebody would listen to you?

A: He must fear the Somalis, the Indonesians, the Africans, the Chechens – anybody who follows the Koran. He doesn’t have to be afraid of me, but will have to fear – the crime he has committed and fear that his punishment will be executed.

Q: Doesn’t that mean that you, with your religious interpretations, as a matter of fact sentence him to death, even if you won’t personally do the deed then somebody else will do it?

A: Not only those who listen to me. Anybody who knows of his punishment can kill him. Anybody. We will defend our religion with your own blood. Our only limits are limits of blood, limits made of explosives. Those who insult our religion must know that one of us will die. Those who insult our religion and our honor must understand that this is a matter of life and death.

Q: But would you be satisfied if this man gets killed?

A: Yes, I would send a gift to the person who kills him. Why wouldn’t I be happy about that?

Q: Does that mean that you are happy about the attack on Charlie Hebdo in France and also the attack against Lars Vilks in Denmark?

A: I know little about the attack in Denmark. But of course I am happy about what happened in France.

Q: Those who attacked Charlie Hebdo, how would you describe them?

A: They were defending their honor, they were defending their holiness.

Q: Those who attacked Charlie Hebdo in France, where they heroes?

A: Yes, of course. They where Jihadists.

Q: Would you wish to also find heroes like that in Norway?

A: No, I don’t hope for that. Not because I live in Norway, but because France deserve it. But if the Scandinavians also go down the same path as France, then they would deserve it.

Q: If, for example an artist draws a Muhammad cartoon in Norway, for the first time, that is, the first one to make it, would it then be all right for an Islamist to find that person and blw himself up to kill the cartoonist?

A: It is not I who gives permission to do this. But the cartoonist would have become an infidel warrior whom it is then permitted to kill. Still, explosives must not be used as it could also then kill innocents.

Q: But if he is alone then that is OK?

A: Wipe him out, wipe him out. Because he has stepped on our dignity our principles and our belief, he will have to die. Those who do not respect 30% of the earth’s population (Muslims) have no right to live.

Q: But there are also Norwegian newspapers and TV stations amongst others, who have published some of these cartoons!

A: It is the first action that matters. For example, when Jyllands-Posten published those despicable cartoons in 2005 in Denmark, then those are the ones that count. Later 13 other countries who also published the drawings to lessen the pressure on Denmark. This is also not the right thing to do but still is the first action that deserves a reaction. We live in an open time. Those who mock our religion have to know that we are not like the Jews – who keep silent and bow down before international “drawing-terror”. No. We will die for our religion and we live for our religion. Nothing is more holy than our religion. Those who insult our religion must know that we will meet them with our bombs. There will be no indulgence, no understanding or negotiations in this case. We do not live for the sake of our own lives, we do not live for our wives. We live only for our religion.

Q: Is it good that Norwegian Islamic youth travel abroad to strengthen both their belief but also to learn fighting skills in order to fight for Islam?

A: Youth, girls and boys who take off to do Jihad should carefully consider and study the fighting, and the area he is going what he wishes to accomplish there. Then he should go. And if he goes he should not regret it. If he comes back after six months then he would be looked upon with suspicion even if he just went down to be a street sweeper. Those who leave to do Jihad must not return but have to stay. If he comes back, there will be lots of trouble and difficulties for Muslims and international intelligence will scrutinize him. And the pressure on the Muslims here will increase. I don’t support that.

Q: The war that right now is happening in Syria and Iraq, is it important?

A: Yes, of course it is important. What is happening in Syria is right. The people want to remove the old regime which has done criminal things nobody had ever done before. The West stood silent and watched while their consciences were either dead or on vacation. So the only real thing for Syria is Jihad, despite what the West might think.

Q: How important is the establishment of a Caliphate with a Caliph that is of Muhammad’s own family?

A: This is an important point which I do no think the West fully understands. Some politicians understand but they do not really wish to understand. And that is that Islam is not like Christianity. Our Islam is a political movement. The Bible is not the same as the Koran. The Koran has 500 verses about politics and ruling, about its Sharia laws and its justice system. You don’t find that in the Bible. There is a big difference; therefore we cannot in Islam separate politics on the one side and religion on the other. Religion and politics go hand in hand in Islam. So, the establishment of a Caliphate is both a legal and a religious event. From the deepest part of our religion. What is happening in Syria where Dr. Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi proclaimed the establishment of a Caliphate, a regime the West fears. Two important points about al-Baghdadi: Firstly, Obama and all who are with him fear the Caliphate because we Muslims support it, right from Indonesia to Morocco, from Chechnya to South Africa if we think he is the rightful Caliph. Because that would mean that the old borders are wiped out. The Sykes-Picot-line that we do not acknowledge.

Q: Are you ready to swear allegiance to the Caliph?

A: I am not yet ready. This is because I don’t know him and the Caliphate well enough. Which rules they follow. In our religious books there are seven conditions for a Caliphate. But if I recognize him as the Caliph then yes, I would swear allegiance to him in front of the Norwegian parliament and I would endure and accept all sorts of reactions from the rest of the world.

Q: Do you think that this Caliphate or another Caliphate will take over dominion of the world?

A: Not the whole world. But I think that within the next 20 years we will again have our Caliphate. And it will play a big role in the international community. I mean that our Islamic community (Ummah) has reached 70%. We need then only 30%, and in my opinion we will reach this within 20-25 years. God willing, then we will our own Islamic state which everybody will have to swear allegiance to whether the West likes it or not.

Freedom of speech was won for criticism of religious authority.
Without that freedom, all other freedoms will be labeled as a religious matter and will be lost to us.
Criticizing religion, and even ridiculing it, is not just a freedom. It is a profound obligation.

Already the fact that not one original version from the Quran is today available makes it impossible to find out the original teaching and what has been added by other humans. The Quran was recorded on tablets, bones, and the wide, flat ends of date palm fronds. Most suras were in use amongst early Muslims since they are mentioned in numerous sayings by both Sunni and Shia sources, relating Muhammad's use of the Quran as a call to Islam, the making of prayer and the manner of recitation. However, the Quran did not exist in book form at the time of Muhammad's death in 632. There is agreement among scholars that Muhammad himself did not write down the revelation. More information about the history of the Quran can get found at WikiPedia.

Nobody needs to wonder himself that such people like Mullah Krekar are not getting welcomed in the Western World. Such people are only depress the hospitality underfoot.

Which people the Muslims are get shown in their deeds and war crimes. They have even destroyed in the last days the truck convoy which should bring help to the innocent people from the Syrian conflict. The trucks have been marked with the Red Crescent and Red Cross. Even their own people are not counting for these power horny leaders who are only using the religious beliefs of the crowd in their own favor. In reality they are nothing else than barbarians.

Has the Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan forged his college diploma? After several media reports the title is older than the university that issued it. The Turkish Constitution stipulates that the president must present a high school diploma.

His diploma is issued in 1981 by Marmara University, now doubts as to its authenticity have risen. The problem: The University was founded in the 1982. Even the dean and the rector, who allegedly signed, got hired 1982. Graphic artists took the floor that the font in which the diploma is written, was not on the market in the year 1981. In addition, the public transport company of the city of Istanbul provides proudly at their website that Erdogan has been working until 1981 as a full-time worker at their company.

The allegations accompanied Erdogan his entire presidency, but would probably be without the opposition pro-Kurdish "Democratic Party of Peoples" (HDP) forgotten. Their steady demand to the Election Commission to submit the diploma from Erdogan, led last week to success.

"There are allegations of forgery," says the deputy Idris Baluken of the HDP. "It would be easy to refute it: date of enrollment, the list of the awarded diplomas and the original of the diploma." But President and Commission would give "not satisfactory answers".

Yusuf Hallacoglu, deputy leader of the right "Nationalist Action Party" (MHP), was incensed: "I say to the President: Your diploma is a fake and what is he doing? He is even not pulling me in front of the law court?" Hallacoglu was among the first who declared publicly that Recep Tayyip Erdogan did not meet the requirements to hold the office of Turkish President.

According to the Turkish Constitution only candidate can be elected president, who are older than forty years old and be able to prove a university degree with a minimum of four years of study. But Erdogan attended only one educational institution that issued diplomas after two years and possesses no admission as University explains MHP politicians Hallacoglu. This seems more likely, as Erdogan graduated from the religious Imam Hatip schools. At that time, graduates from religious schools did not got accepted from universities.

Before the presidential elections of 2014 finally the wind was taken out of the sails of the allegations. The Rector of Marmara University, Zafer Gül, a loyal follower of the ruling AKP and a friend of Erdogan, published a photograph of Erdogan's diploma. Erdogan was a graduate of Marmara University - he had studied at the Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences.

Critics fear that the debate about Erdogan's diploma will remain without consequences. The Electoral Commission rejected requests for checking the authenticity of the diploma. The strongest opposition party in parliament, the Republican People's Party (CHP) has even tabled a motion to remove the university degree as a prerequisite for president under the Constitution. The reasoning is remarkable: “Not only Erdogan’s reputation gets damaged from the speculation about his diploma, but Turkey and the office of the president”.

Elsewhere gets such a behavior called ad hoc legislation. My opinion is that the reputation from Erdogan, the office of the president and the Turkey got already damaged because the law existed and got broken already.

And yet, although the country's media avoid the subject, it spreads through the social networks. Erdogan is not squeamish when it comes to libel. Even students, who post on Facebook anything critical about him, need to fear the revenge of the president. He has placed thousands of lawsuits since he got elected, but that the President has no university degree, it may be said with impunity, as already Yusuf Hallacoglu of the MHP has done it.

If it would come to a trial, the diploma would probably need to get presented as a proof for Erdogan.