That’s what has been attempted against the writer Michael Stürzenberger. Up until now, the lawfare against him has failed. But the Guardians of Received Wisdom haven’t given up.
JLH has translated a report on the persecution of Mr. Stürzenberger, and includes this note:
Hard on the heels of the sinister threat of physical violence to Marc Doll, co-founder of Die Freiheit, here is a different story from across the country about another technique of intimidation — one we know well through Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff and others: what some call “lawfare” as warfare.
Michael Stürzenberger is an enthusiastic speaker for Freiheit and proponent of the petition for a plebiscite in Munich to prevent the building of a gigantic European Islamic center. At the failure of the first attempt to incriminate his speech, he talks about what is at stake and offers some vivid quotations from historic figures.
The translated article that was published last week in Politically Incorrect:
Research Paper — Investigation Halted
The Munich state attorney’s office has announced that it has ended the investigations occasioned by the complaint of the extreme leftist Dietmar Näher against independent journalist and PI author Michael Stürzenberger on suspicion of persecution of a people. Näher had made his complaint in October of last year, after Stürzenberger published his “Research Paper against Islam.” In the meantime, daily developments in Islamization seem to be slowly catching up with the paper.
The first point in the paper — the call for “open discussion about Islam” took third place with 150,000 votes in Chancellor Merkel’s [internet] Dialogue on the Future.
Meanwhile, an Islamic organization was banned and two others are being observed closely, following a great raid today in seven federal states with more than 800 officials in 82 different mosques, club houses and residences. The noose is tightening around Islam. The Salafists are only the visible tip of the iceberg of this dangerous ideology.
The extreme leftist, Dietmar Näher, who daily deals with PI on his internet blog, ‘Politblogger,” has already made the second complaint against Stürzenberger. Maybe he is hoping for a volume discount at the state attorney’s office. This time, it seems to be about Stürzenberger’s article “Discussions with Muslims” in which he describes what the political and intellectual model of the Left already knew over 150 years ago. As is well-known, in his book “Declaration of War,” Karl Marx wrote, on the history of the Middle Eastern Question:
“The Koran divides the world into believers and unbelievers. The unbeliever is ‘harby,’ that is, the enemy. Islam despises the nation of unbelievers and creates a condition of permanent hostility between Muslims and unbelievers.”
Over to you, Dietmar Näher. Lodge a posthumous complaint for folk persecution against Karl Marx. And at the same time, one against the French writer, politician and historian, Alexis de Tocqueville:
“I have studied the Koran intensively. My studies convinced me that there have been few religions in the world which were as deadly for humanity as the religion of Mohammed.”
The most important British Islam scholar, William Muir seems also to have been a serious folk persecutor:
“Mohammed’s sword and the Koran are the deadliest enemies of civilization, truth and freedom ever encountered by humanity.”
Also the British writer Hilaire Belloc:
“Since the religion of Islam appeared in the world, its adherents have been to all other nations as wolves and tigers, tearing and rending everything that fell into their merciless paws, grinding it up with their iron teeth.”
Are we up to half a dozen yet? Maybe one more; for instance, the French philosopher and writer Voltaire:
“The Koran teaches fear, hate, contempt for others, murder as a legitimate means of spreading and preserving this satanic religion; it speaks badly of women, divides people by class, demands blood and more blood.”
In conclusion, something for the Turks. Their great national hero Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, too, did not seem to have the best opinion of Islam:
“Islam — this abstruse theology of an immoral Bedouin — is a rotting corpse which is poisoning our lives.”
The difference in attitude toward Islam in previous centuries and today can be described quickly. Previously, clear human reason was employed. Today, the brain cells are glued together by political correctness. No one may speak the truth anymore, or the opinion snoopers immediately come out of hiding and begin defaming and slandering. As a final means of preventing the speaking of truth about Islam, charges of folk persecution are laid. But the truth cannot be stopped, especially when it has been known for 1400 years. Since Christians, Jews and members of other religions expelled the Prophet Mohammed from Mecca in 622, humanity has known what it was dealing with in Islam. After a phase of mass media whitewashing since 9/11 and after the intentionally false information from politicians like NRW interior minister Ralf Jäger (“The Koran is the work of a peaceful religion”) forward to the chancellor who has been stubbornly silent on the leading subject of her “Dialogue of the Future” (Open Discussion on Islam), now the truth is coming out, bit by bit.
It will be a historical irony that the clear facts about Islam could be suppressed for so long in an enlightened, knowledge-based society. Regarding Islam, Germany — like half of Europe — is in a state of paralytic shock. Most politicians are pursuing an incomprehensible appeasement toward Islam, which peaked in the outright suicidal statement of the former federal president Wulff, that Islam “belongs in” Germany. The CSU politician and finance minister Söder seconded him recently, saying that Islam is “a component” of Bavaria. All of these politicians are apparently counting on keeping things calm in the Muslim parallel societies and at the same time siphoning off some voters — a pure power calculation.
However, if it becomes clear to the citizens of Germany that the Salafists are just obediently carrying out the dictates of the Islamic sacred writings, there will be shift in the public debate which will sweep away the taboos that have held until now more swiftly than the Dietmar Nähers of this land would like.