A dialogue with the Islam is senselessly, so for a long time the Islamic world the taboo of the Islam criticism does not give up. The Islam is however structurally so put on that it cannot permit criticism in principle. A religion ideology like the Islam, which defines itself as perfect, only legitimate social order, would give its universal truth and requirement for rule up, became an analysis Islam certified. Refusal and inability to the critical self reflection penetrate the entire Islamic society - of the individual over Islamic organizations, Islamic states into theokratische instances.

Criticism at the prophet is tabuisiert

Religions are in principle efficiency factors in the Sozialisationsprozess of the individuals of a society. The standards obtained in the Sozialisationsprozess determine the scope of action of the individuals within a society.

The Islam it obtain the standard that any criticism at the Islam, the Koran and the prophet are not only tabuisiert, but also to be pursued must. Murder threats against Islam critics are around it from Islamic view a matter of course. They go back on the model of the prophet. For this two case examples:

Abu Afak, a man very high age, was killed, because he had written anecdotes over Muhammad. Salem ibn Omayr killed it on behest of the prophet, which had asked the question before: „Who becomes for me with this rogue finished? “The murder of a in such a way betagten man induced Asma bint Marwan to expressing irreverent words over the prophet. But also it was punished with death. (Ali Dashti: 23 years „the career of the prophet Muhammadas page 161, publishing house Alibri, Aschaffenburg 2003)
And:

Ibn Chatal possessed two Singsklavinnen, Fartana and their friend, which sang over the prophet mockery songs. Mohammed arranged therefore to kill these two together with Ibn Chatal. (out: Ibn Ishaq, the life of the prophet, T5ubingen/Basel 1976, P. 218/to the information: The author actual born beside Ibn Hisham - the classical bio graph „of the prophet “, 808 died in Mekka, 873 in Bagdad)
Intolerance in relation to Islam criticism is inseparably connected with the model role of the prophet Mohammed undisputed in the entire Islamic world, whose behavior in the consent is admired as „perfectly “. Therefore criticism at the prophet and the Islam is a facts constituting an offence in all Islamic countries. Only the measures of punishment vary.

Murder threats against Islam critics

Murders and murder threats against Islam critics in the west are around it an inevitable consequence of the propagation Islam in Europe. Recent example are the murder threats against members of the Central Council of the ex Muslims.

An intolerant attitude in relation to Islam criticism as well as the will lacking to critically analyze even the Islam are normative embodied in the Islamic Sozialisationsprozess. That applies also on Muslims in frightening high measure, living in Germany. Already 1997 resulted in a questioning of altogether 1221 young people of Turkish origin at the age between 15 and 21 years the following:

“If it the Islamic community serves, is ready I to insert me by physical force against disbelieving ones” or: “If it the Islamic community serves, is ready I to degrade others” or: “Force is justified, if it goes around the penetration of the Islamic faith” and finally: “If someone against the Islam fights, must kill one it”. The portions of the agreement to the specified Items of the questionnaire lie (…) between 32,2 per cent for and the 35.7 per cent for the first position, specified last

In the meantime the Islamic Indoktrination in Germany progressed enormously and with it the switching and internalizing of Islamic intolerance. New studies to this explosive topic are not however even accomplished of the per-Islamic establishment (or published), in order not to block itself the authentication for per-Islamic policy.

Uncritical solidarity

Islamic Sozialisation does not remain however „only “on the religious-ideological level. It works as basic pattern on entire living together in Islamic coined/shaped communities. It works exaggerated community and solidarizing opposite members of the own community opposite persons outside of the own reference's group, and in particular opposite non--Muslims. Therefore nearly always is uncritical solidarity, if members of the self-'s group aggression show outward. About if members of Islamic socialized and socializing families become criminal:

The thing with the measurer happened on a road celebration. „We were suspected to steal, but nothing was “, says to one from Tareks road course there. „You held us, which wanted to get the police, we have yourselves resisted and with those flogged us. “Then they Tarek are knocked off, only could not from the grasp of its opponent not withdraw itself and pulled its measurer, „everyone of us are armed, that are nevertheless completely normal “. The other one did not relent, Tarek stung to and disappeared. Two weeks later the police did not stand before the door, for parents had it anything said, only the oldest brother knew it, had however been silent: „My brother is anyway responsible for me in the family “, says Tarek. He came four weeks into youth arrest. When the mother visited it once, the father never came, said her: „Already well, that was self-defence. “

The value system Islam differs profoundly of the Christian-enlightened code of conduct.

From Islamic view everything is good, which is useful to the Islam with the keeping in power and the expansion. Mohammed fallow a peace treaty with his enemies in Mekka, it attacked caravans also in the months, in which it was tabuisiert up to then in the consent of all Arab trunks. Mohammeds rule was based to a substantial portion on enriching its supporters by the prospect on war and robbery booty. That includes humans as slave booty expressly also. Example 1, the conquest of the fortress Khaibar, example 2, the Jew massacre of Medina.

Force history Islam

Western advocates Islam refer here mostly on comparable crimes of Christian conquerers and clerics. They misjudge however, or suppress purposefully and consciously that in the today's west e.g. opposite the crusades and the Inquisition a very much critical-rejecting attitude is taken. Completely differently however the relationship is to the force history Islam in its hemisphere.

Thus allegedly so modern western Turkey, entry desire candidate of left parties does in Europe, extremely heavily to admit the genocide at the Armenians as crimes. This attitude corresponds to the Islamic justified tradition, own conquest to glorifizieren war and crime history exclusive. There are only very few voices, which condemn the genocide at the Armenians in Turkey, then a critical view of the destruction does not take place itself of Konstantinopel by Islamic-Ottoman armies. On the contrary. Also in Germany of the annihilator Konstantinopels, Fatih (conquerer) is reminded Sultan Mehmet I, by the naming more numerously „Fatih mosques “.

Also „progressive Muslims “like Bassam Tibi spare the Islam before criticism

Would be inconceivable in the west to designate churches after the largest conquerers and butchers in the indication of the Christianity. Likewise any memory and intending culture are missing opposite the victims Islam in the contrast to the west in the Islamic world. All the same whether it concerns here the disbelieving ones or Muslims represented extremely negatively in the Islam. A self-critical attitude as in the west in relation to the crusades is perfectly unknown in the Islam - and also inconceivablily. Because it would thus stand contrary to the before-lived behaviors of the prophet, and to the nuclear message Islam.

Unfortunately e.g. also a very progressive Muslim shows such as Bassam Tibi, to which one has to owe much with the critical analysis modern Islam and its expansion strategy, the desire for criticism sparing Islam in its central statements:

What says Hirsi Ali about the Islam, is simple both for Islam connoisseurs and for Muslims an imposition. If it states about that our prophet and our holy book, which are Koran, a fiction insults and brings it each Muslim each Islam historian to the Schmunzeln.

Islam analysis, particularly a critical of feeling as „offense “shows an unreflected, deeply internalized basic attitude of very many Muslims. Here a taboo zone of the criticism is to be established, because insults is considered as arbitrary, aggressive act of the ill will. However „the offense develops “only in the head of that, which interprets a certain statement as insulting. The dangerous to the fact is that the verbal attack „of the offense justifies “a certain Gegenaggression at the same time. We see on the basis the Prophetenvorbildes, how „offenses “Islam and the prophet were punished, and to punish is!

Force at women in the Islam

Some Muslims acquired themselves nevertheless western values. They e.g. reject in the Islam and in the Koran justified force to the will refraction of the woman. Knowledge (or it does in such a way) however not that the Koran does not only permit explicitly this force in Sure 4.34, but even to it calls.

One cannot justify force at women with the Koran, because no right plans on physical encroachments

the Party of Democratic Socialism delegate Dagdelen means, and the woman divorce-willing in the recent Koran scandal judgement means likewise:

„All this is that the Richterin interpreted the Islam wrong. Our prophet did not certainly strike women. The prophet gave Mrs. Rechte and it as something special treated, not like a piece to dirt. But the Richterin sees that obviously differently. “

These attitudes are typical for Islamic socialized Muslims, who deny even still the facts if they are present in the Koran in the plain language, and in which entire Islamic world are understood also in such a way and converted.

Indeed the prophet in the holy Koran specified that women are not to be regarded like dirt, but like a field. Sure 2,223:

Your wives are a seed field for you; therefore your seed field orders like it wants.

Some Muslims created themselves an idealized ideal of the Islam, which follows similar principles of the humanity as the Christianity and from the idea would be compatible with the human rights. Unfortunately this personal Islam does not have to do anything with the Islam, how it stands in the Koran and was converted of the Prophetenvorbild.

System-critical argument with the Islam is missing

An uncritical identification with a world view, which is directed against the own interests, is not by any means limited to the Islam. Remarkably however it is that the Islamic culture brings out and/or permits only so little opposition against itself, while in the comparison to it a system-critical argument is everyday in the west.

Islamic organizations however show the usual attitude of the Taqiyya, the purposeful deception of the disbelieving ones in the case „of the Koran judgement “in a position of the weakness, in order not to endanger the final goal of the establishment of Islamic rule. Sure 3,29:

You like to keep secret, what preserves it in your inside, or it kundtun, Allah knows it.

Thus e.g. the Central Council does not admit itself of the Muslims openly to the Koran, which it regards as the genuine message Allahs, but one winds oneself - as usual - word-rich around a clear statement:

If the Richterin wanted to deal with some Koranvers, where alleged striking opposite Mrs. the word one talks, then the spokeswoman for Islamic woman research means today in Cologne: „One regards this place historical-scientifically, does not mean her not that men may use the opposite opposite Mrs. Gewalt, but. It expresses that man and woman speak with one another, and, if no agreement is obtained, a distance between itself to put, different ways are to hit are “. The Arab word for „“have five meaning meanings strike.

Particularly in the Arab area, where the Koran without translation problems is authentically consumed, a pronounced tendency shows up to the discrimination of the woman, internal-family force and serious intolerance and political unfreeness. Clear indication for the fact that over the understanding Koran and the Islamic social order broad consent prevail. The argumentation of the ZdM has the goal of strewing us „disbelieving one “sand into the eyes. To talk us, which is Islam in reality humanly, which stands in the glaring contradiction to Mohammeds behavior and its statements in the Koran.

Regulation „of the disbelieving society “is to be weakened

Furthermore the representation of the understanding „of the Prügelsure is “the most improbable in accordance with 4.34 the ZdM only one possibility, because most complicated. Those besides everyone untouched „to interpretation “of the plain language lets. And around it is exactly the ZdM. The Prügelsure 4.34 is to remain further in circulation, and be able at the latest their effectiveness to unfold if the regulation of the disbelieving society is weakened or overcome. (Note: Islamic federations will interpret the Koran correct remarkably actively for our western ears „“whenever the inhumanen aspects Koran and Islam again for public discussion provide. Into the direction of the Islamic world, where the Islam shows its inhumanen negative sides, this self-appointed „Koranversteher is amazingly silent “).

Even in the accepted ideal case that the Islam actually force to the refraction „of the female stubborn “in accordance with Sure 4,34…

The men manage the women within responsibility, because Allah distinguished the one before the other one and because it of its fortune hang-evenly. Therefore virtueful women are the obedient ones and those, which (their husbands) protect secrets with Allahs assistance. And those, whose stubborn fears it: if she admonishes, she avoids in the marriage bed and strikes her! If they obey you then, then no excuse searches against them. Indeed, Allah is raised and large.

…, would have the Islam thus does not mean at all as society model to prevent internal-family force since totally fails to its emergence.

But in no direction the Islam criticized in the Islamic world. Thus neither as inhuman to also convert nor as unfit its alleged (human) ideals. The Islam did not malfunction those to an extremely intolerant, repressive company form however with the establishment, is incompatible with the human rights. If one follows the argumentation of the advocates one „human “Islam, the Islam would have been interpreted practically since its emergence, even by the prophet, completely wrong. Such a conclusion is announced however of the representatives one „human “Islam neither, nor opposite the Islamic world the view of Islam is designated since Mohammed as wrong track. But that would be the logical consequence, would be seriously meant the argument, which is human the Islam „actually “. As it serves it is up-to-date used

* the deception „of the disbelieving ones “over the actual Inhumanität Islam
* the refusal of humanly oriented Muslims to analyze their Islamic Sozialisationskultur critically. Because the acknowledgment of the facts means the logical consequence for a humanistic adjusted Muslim practically to loose-assure itself of the Islam because personal ideals are incompatible with the principles Islam.

It is particularly paradoxical to appoint itself on the prophet as benefactors of the women:

In the 7th century the revealed verses must be regarded in their respective context. To the interpretation of the verses historical are to make linguistic and koraninterne analyses. For the quoted Koranvers 4:34 leads this analysis to the fact that the Arab word may not be translated „daraba “in the case of a conjugal crisis situation with „striking “. Because striking the woman contradicts clearly the cause of this revealing like also the behavior of the prophet Muhammad. And it stands contrary to other Koranversen, which concern themselves with the relationship of man and woman. Even traditional interpretations of the verse 4:34 come to the result that it may act with striking the woman if necessary around one „easy flip “.

Applicable at this statement it is only that do not flog of the prophet against women is delivered. However Mohammed slaves held itself. Whether those wanted to probably have all voluntarily with it Sex?

Here the case example of the Jewish „booty woman “Raihana:

Recognized Mohammed Biograph Ibn Ishaq reports to the earlytemporal, and world Islamic in which (P. 181): „One of the caught Mrs., Raihana bint Amr, kept the prophet for itself (note: of its booty portion it sold the other women). It remained in its possession, until it died. When he suggested it, she to marry and her requested to carry the veil asked her him, he might have kept her rather than slave in its possession, since this is simpler for both. With its capture it showed its dislike in relation to the Islam and kept firm at the Judentum “.

Before Mohammed had let the head reduce in the context of the Jew massacre of Medina Raihanas man and their father. Which woman in the world would like probably gladly Sex with someone, which added it and their members on the same day such a cruel suffering?

This case example shows, how absurd the thesis is of „the woman friend Mohammed “. As arbitrarily Islamic organizations state, which prophet would have the situation of the women improved, where it enslaved it at the same time sexually. And beyond that in various way legally disadvantages and discriminates against. For instance in the marriage right, vomit and witness box before court, where a statement of the Mrs. only half is valid for that of the man, or the veiling obligation.

The inability to self-criticism in the Islam is deeply embodied

The today's Islamic world is not only completely uncritical in relation to its historical crimes, but also in relation to bad states in the present. Anywhere in the Islamic world there are not „peace demos “because of the sequential massacres in Darfur, the thousands honour killings annually, the pursuit and murder of disbelieving, the lack of individual freedom. While one defames US president Bush in the west on most violent criticized and as „World terrorist No.1 ″, nothing comparable is Beherr against Mullahs, Imame or other rulers and in the Islamic world.

If Islamic federations point to Germany refusal against Islamic behavior such as honour killings and forced marriages, then this happens only for the purpose of the deception „of the disbelieving ones “- not however from selfinitiative and a human being-legal motivation. Because otherwise these federations would be active in a way like the Central Council of the ex Muslims, Necla Kelek or Hirsi Ali.

The west has obligation to defend its humanistic standards

As for a long time the Islam in the same way concerned with its history and his cultural contents critically as the today's west, does not make itself a dialogue for sense only if the west calls exactly this self-criticism in. On the other side the west has the moral obligation to defend its humanistic standards and to the Islamic world a way out of the mental-cultural captivity of the Islamic self-restraint of thinking point out.

Religion criticism made an expiring possible of the heaps of failure with the Christianity only. Religion criticism with the Islam means however to shake the Islam in its foundation. Despotism is a deviation of the Christian teachings. With the Islam are force, suppression and discrimination however a central component of the religious theory with the goal, worldly, of establishing and of receiving political and legal power. But differently than in a direct confrontation with these facts and the means of the clearing-up elementary human rights leave themselves such as Meingungsfreiheit, freedom of religion, equal rights etc. do not defend - and for the Islamic world to open.

The Islamic world is due to their self-criticism tabuisierenden Sozialisationsstruktur almost unable to free itself from the chains Islam. This succeeds to only very few individuals. For the west it means conversely that any per-Islamic attitude keeps the screen of the Muslims upright of their most elementary human rights - and thus a counter productive attitude to basic and human rights implies.

Pünktchen: Anita

Perhaps you concern yourselves times somewhat more thoroughly with constitutional law and democracy theory! Of the internal barriers of the fundamental rights you had heard obviously still nothing! Who calls to force, may not appoint itself in Germany to the liberty of opinion!

That is valid also in many other liberal states!

Anita Berber †: @ Pünktchen

If it would like that be, then liberty of opinion would be only one grace act a few chosen one is permitted.
Freedom is always the freedom of the other-thinking one!

Pünktchen: Also fundamental rights

have in Germany (and nearly all other democratic countries) certain condition-immanent and also express barriers. These barriers are to be seen with fundamental rights, where their demand endangers the fundamental rights of others or the free democratic order than whole ones.
„No freedom the enemies of the freedom “
This principle can be directed also against communists or neo-Nazis: if a prohibition request is successful against extremist political parties e.g., then such parties are forbidden in Germany…

The condition enmity of the Muslims comes quite also into illegal actions to the expression: Forced marriages, genital mutilating (in Great Britain one estimates: in 66,000 cases, thus by all means none „Petitesse “!), Obligation disguise of the Mrs., obligation stupefying of the women (through männl. Family heads circumcised entrance to educational facilities), force against Mrs., e.g. honour killings, after the Koran permissible „striking “of the Mrs. etc., terror against Islam critics and renegades of the Islam, terror and murder threats against lawyers, the divorce-willing women represent etc. and so on.

The thoughts are free, but their expression may not be directed against the fundamental rights other one, e.g. it may not people-rushing or force-wonderful-end its. We come too much also here in case of Islam zwiespältigen findings…

Anita Berber †: Who our heavily fought for on the right of and constitutional system - and are it out „religious “reasons…

IN GERMANY LIBERTY OF OPINION PREVAILS!
It does not come on it at which it THINKING, but which it DOING!
THE THOUGHTS ARE FREE!
As long as they may not to throw bombs it think and to say which always they would like!
Or don't they want reeducation camps for communists, Muslims and all put on those their definition to correspond?

Pünktchen: Where „the Appeasement leads “opposite Islamic/Islamist terrorists,

brings up for discussion time then LINE in

>>>> this <<<< articles! „Muslim Britain is becoming one big NO-go AREA “

As Churchill marked the attitude of the Appeasement politician nevertheless:

It resembles humans, the one crocodile feeds in hope, it thereby of the crocodile is last eaten.

Conclusion with the appeasement! Who does not respect and affirms our heavily fought for on the right of and constitutional system - and is it out „religious “reasons -, which is not to be allowed to do also into our country zuwandern or enjoy permanent stay!

Pünktchen: In this article it concerns that Muslims

about are to create by force and threat of force an aura of the non--criticizing barness to fulfill in each critical remark as such the offense facts is and thus an uncalculable escalation justified. It continues to go in the article therefore, how the public in the west behaves to it. Does it bend itself the force threat or not? Does it let wring itself out the right on free expression of opinion again by the harbingers of a new theokratischen regime?

The Islamic/Islamist violent criminals receive support and - more and roughly of „Multikultis “and left-wing intellectuals, which talk gladly and vollmundig of „human rights “, these however in case of emergency over board throw: whenever the perception of a human right with culturalcauses competitive conceptions of a strange culture area in conflict turns out. In the perspective this attitude a hurrying ahead subjecting represents gewalttriefenden Islam, which is beklatscht of this gladly as „intercultural sensitivity “, „tolerance “or „Friedfertigkeit “.

In truth it acts however around a reflection loss in the association with cultural and religious ignorance. One talks oneself the Islam beautifully and peacefully (Anita B.: Those are nevertheless all soooo nice!) and refuse at all, system-dependent Theokrati and Gewaltförmige Islam, the Koran taking to the knowledge. Rather one projects the own religious Wurschtigkeit on others…