Bullying – picture: Gerd Altmann / pixelio.de

Bullying is intentionally causing emotional or physical hurt or harm to another person with the intention of gaining power. To have more power, you must convince someone else that they have less or no power. This is done through violence.

Families of bullies often use a power dynamic. Power determines who is in charge and who gets the largest share of available resources. In a power dynamic, some family members are led to believe that they are less important than others. They are not allowed a voice. This is enforced by power and violence. It is very old in terms of male dominated societies and ethnic groups that fight for scarce resources. Having the eldest brother engage in bullying is a common strategy used in patriarchal shame honor cultures.

It has been reported that Tamerlan Tsarnaev (one of the alleged Boston bombers) used violence against a girlfriend and had a volatile temper.  If this is so, it was likely used to maintain his position of power in the family dynamic. This is no different than a drug dealer or, bank robber or other criminal exercising power over another. Tamerlan is reported to have had criminal activity, as well, in the form of selling drugs. Moreover he had a repeated history of motor vehicle violations. Timothy McVeigh was caught after the Oklahoma City Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building bombing when he was pulled over because he car lacked a license plate. These are not benign insignificant violations. They are signs of a deeply troubled and potentially violent behavior.

Tamerlan is now under investigation post Mortem for three murders in Waltham MA. One was Christian and the other two victims were Jews, making them, kufars, or infidels. The triple homicide was committed on 9/11 the Tenth Anniversary 2011. Their throats were slit. This is called qital in Arabic, slaughter and it is considered jihad. One of the murder victims was a friend of Tamerlan who also did not attend his friend’s funeral. The crime scene seemed to be staged as drug related.

Tamerlan Tsarnaev also bullied his brother into becoming more religious. It is an indicator which the FBI must more monitor closely with regard to any reported history in a family or a report of bullying in the school.

Someone who uses a violence power dynamic in his family will choose the most vulnerable person or group, the most “hated” person or group, or someone that has something they want.  In the case of Tamerlan, it is reported that his boxing career was thwarted by his lack of US citizenship.  In joining other radicals, the US became the most hated group. Those at a sporting event in an open society, such as America are vulnerable to a bombing attack such as the one that occurred.

It is possible that someone that uses a power dynamic in relationships and has a history of violence should be looked at more closely when their names come up on a terror watch list.

We recommend that records of criminal assault as well as domestic violence charges, and even motor vehicle incidents be filed with information on anyone on a terror watch list. Furthermore for those foreign students holding visas to study here in the U.S. and elsewhere throughout the global, we recommend to other countries that they consider such violations and that they be entered into the database monitoring their foreign students’ visas and travel. These factors of criminality, domestic violence, motor vehicle violations and bullying can assist law enforcement in profiling.

Dr. Kathryn Seifert, CEO of Eastern Shore Psychological Services, has worked for over 30 years in the areas of mental health, criminal justice, and addictions.   She is a certified forensic psychology expert. Her books are the award winning, How Children Become Violent, the Amazon Best Selling Book, Youth Violence, CARE2: Child and Adolescent Risk and Needs Evaluation, and Relaxation Journals and MP3’s.

Dr. Nancy Hartevelt Kobrin is a psychoanalyst and Arabist with a specialisation on Islamic terrorism. She is the author of The Banality of Suicide Terrorism. The Naked Truth About the Psychology of Islamic Suicide Bombing and has been interviewed by Citizen Times in 2010 and 2012.

Two explosions at the finish line of the Boston Marathon 2013 – picture: screenshot from youtube

Cole and Connell are to be congratulated for a reader handbook, a compilation of essays running the entire spectrum of emergency team players who must in a moment’s flash meet head on a  Major Casualty Event (MCE) either a terrorist attack (bioterrorism or cyber terrorism as well) or a natural disaster. These essays are the outcome of two conferences bringing together a distinguished set of experts who cover a variety of events. However, these essays are not your mundane volume of conference proceedings. The editors have gone to great lengths and have taken great care in selecting the authors who contribute and have expertise in the subject matter.

One of the greatest challenges they bring to our attention is maintaining a balance between living within a hair’s breath of death daily and at the same time the ability to embrace life. Ironically, in the midst of reading Cole’s and Connell’s book, I received an email from a mutual colleague, Dr. Robbie Friedmann, notifying his colleagues of his just published book, 28 Letters. Full disclosure, I met both Dr. Cole and Dr. Friedmann through the annual counter terrorism conference in Herzliya, Israel at the Interdisciplinary Center for Counter Terrorism. I highly recommend the conference and both of the following books but here I am getting ahead of the story.

Local Planning for Terror and Disaster. From Bioterrorism to Earthquakes does a great service in describing and outlining a history of how to deal with major trauma episodes. As the author of The Banality of Suicide Terrorism, my forthcoming book Cracking the Code to Global Terrorism, as well as an expert on PTSD, I read the book with great interest.

I found the essays to be insightful ranging from underscoring the failure to hear and understand the “chatter” and also a warning before the catastrophe of 9/11 as well as a failure of imagination by counter terrorist experts. Terror and disaster are fundamentally horrifying and hence not only concretely chaotic but psychologically disorganizing. Planning for terror means being proactive. One must be on the offense.

As a kid I learned first aid in school and in Girl Scouts, knowing that it can save lives. Education is key as an ongoing effort along with repeated drilling and exercises which should involve the entire spectrum of players in the community including bystanders. What follows are some examples of some significant contributions.

The introductory essay by Cole on Preparedness, Uncertainty and Terror Medicine drives home the point of the difficult taste at hand to think outside the box of the most horrendous scenarios in order to save lives. It is a mind boggling paradox. Connell along with Cole conclude with Preparedness, Black Swans and Salient Themes. Panayotis Yannakogeorgos’ essay on cyber terrorism is a must read for it is much more difficult to conceptualize for many cyber attacks.

Steve Crimando’s essay concerning the radiation emergency in Goianas, Brazil clearly stresses the challenging set of problems of an emerging society and diverse cultures where literacy is not a given. It is understandable how a disaster spreads so quickly without a given infrastructure to meet such a disaster head on. As the world becoming increasingly more mobile and global, connectedness is both a plus and a minus also entailing the real necessity of communicating across a multitude of languages. One point which could have been made is when working in developing countries, we are often confronted with the illiteracy of shame honor cultures. A dynamic where terror is intimately intertwined with shame and loss of honor and an automatic trigger for uncontrollable rage.

A gem of an essay is penned by David L. Glazer concerning the role of the dentist in a terror event. While we all may know of the importance of forensic dentistry in the identification of victims especially for 9/11, few of us probably know about the heroic efforts which two dentists played as first responders at the suicide truck bombing of the  U.S. Marine Barracks in Beirut in 1983. The physician on site, Dr. Hudson, was murdered in the blast. Drs. Ware and Bigelow were tasked with setting in motion the medical plan in which they had been previously trained by Dr. Hudson and give him credit for helping them save lives. Yet the story does not end here as Glazer maps the importance of dentists as considered to be first responders on the first line of defense in terror related MCE, especially bioterrorism. Because of their expertise and diverse knowledge, they can be easily mobilized for they are well versed on diseases and lesions. In their offices, for example, they are like mini-hospitals which could serve as a great help with a surge of patients that have to be triaged in a rapid manner. In addition, he proposes a special curriculum be developed and students trained in it. This is innovative thinking which should not go to waste. The public needs to be aware with such a plan so that there is no resistance to dentists as first responders and they will facilitate rapid implementation of strategic responses to protect the public.

Shmuel Shapira and Limor Aharonson-Daniel sketch out the role of the manager of mass casualty and disaster events. They remind us of the Wedding Hall Collapse of May 2001 in Jerusalem at the height of suicide bombings which initially lead to responders thinking that it was a terrorist attack. The distinction had to be made quickly for if this were a suicide attack, it would involve a different complex intervention and treatment from that of a disaster, which this was. The authors also raise the painful yet realistic issue of dealing responsibly with a threshold for avoiding treatment. While the Wedding Hall tragedy was not a radiological event, the authors discuss such a possible that  patients “would receive only palliative care. That is because no matter what manner of care whole body exposure to such radiation levels means almost certain death in a matter of weeks.” Their essay also discusses “When a Hospital is directly affected by an event” in the case of Hurricane Katrina.

Bruria Adini’s contribution – The Role of the On-Scene Bystander and Survivor by referring to the suicide bombing outside the Dizengoff Shopping Mall March 4, 1996 here in Tel Aviv. She develops sixteen functions that bystanders and survivors can perform: reporting an event, reconnaissance, assisting in the triage of casualties, caring for the walking wound just to list a few. We often underestimate what we are capable of doing in the moments of MCE.

Response remains crucial for it involves strategical planning with a heavy dose of improvisation. If there is one thing that is missing from this volume, it is a needed essay on how first responders and potential victims themselves must be trained in remaining calm under the most adverse circumstances. This should be an important and required teaching component, say for example, imaging to calm one’s self if the MCE begins to trigger and flood a first responder with extraordinary disorganizing anxiety.

In short, Local Planning for Terror and Disaster. From Bioterrorism to Earthquakes, is required reading for anyone involved in responding to MCE which means all of us, because we could all become first responders. Their advice: never stop training, fantasizing, thinking and planning outside the box for the worst case scenarios to improve on delivery of medical and emergency care.

I now must turn your attention to Dr. Robbie Friedmann’s book: 28 Letters. The Short Life Of Renée (Baba) Friedmann On Not So Calm Waters. Many Israeli studies were cited in Cole’s and Connell’s book. While there was no mention of Holocaust in Local Planning for Terror and Disaster, the Holocaust made Israel become the leader in trauma and terror medicine research. The Holocaust left its imprint on the surviving generations, many of whom chose medicine, psychology and other helping professions. Functioning “behind the scenes” is the trauma and the terror of the murder of six million Jews and those who survived the concentration camps. Friedmann’s parents were survivors though we learn tragically that his mother died six days after he was born.

The number 28 refers to 28 letters which survived of correspondence from his mother to her sister. It is a one way correspondence because we do not know how the sister replied. However it is an exceptional epistolary experience as the letters provided the avenue for the son to discover his mother as a mature adult. He had been raised by his step mother and the secret of his mother dying post partem was kept from him for many years. Friedmann shares with us poignantly, the beauty and the pain of discovering his mother through her correspondence with her sister who was in Israel while she remained trapped in Cluj, Romania awaiting for papers to immigrate to Israel to be reunited with her.

Friedmann relates how it took ten years to compile all the documents including precious photographs as well as the task of translating the letters. This is a unique source for scholars, students and the general public. Friedmann’s story is universal. It is humbling and eloquent. It is a reminder that we must not only try to prepare and plan for the unexpected but in the end we must find truth and freedom. 28 Letters was an enormous undertaking to translate, edit, analyze and write – the book is in Hungarian, English and Hebrew with all documents scanned and presented. I asked Friedmann in an email why he had chosen Blurb to publish his book through the platform of iBooks. He replied that Yad Veshem said there were many memoirs like his and that he could just wait in line to publish it due to the backlog. Fortunately for us, he had the fortitude to self-publish so that no more precious time has been wasted.

By remembering and commemorating past sorrow and tragedies, we free ourselves to recommit to educate the public, plan better and more wisely for future terror and disasters. Our task is to mourn the loss while still embracing life and meeting Mass Casualty Events head on. 28 Letters is an antidote to such wanton mass murder.

Leonard A. Cole and Nancy D. Connell (2012): Local Planning for Terror and Disaster. From Bioterrorism to Earthquakes. Hoboken (U.S.): Wiley-Blackwell, 260 pages, 81.99 Euro. Buy at Amazon.

Robbie Friedmann (2012): 28 Letters. The Short Life Of Renée (Baba) Friedmann On Not So Calm Waters. Available as eBook (11.99 Euro) or printed version (87.03 Euro).

United Airlines Flight 175 crashes into the south tower of the World Trade Center complex in New York City during the September 11 attacks – picture: UpstateNYer / Wikipedia

Breaking News: Adam Lankford has finally debunked and demystified the idiocy, the claim that suicide bombers are martyrs for the greater cause. My colleague Joan Lachkar and I have for years been trying to show how early childhood development and its cultural child rearing practices directly influence the psychopathology and dynamic operative in the making of suicide bombers, mass murders and rampage shootings. While Lankford touches on some of the early childhood experiences of these cold blooded murderers, he masterfully critiques many of the proffered ridiculous, “out of touch” theories concerning these kinds of disavowed, enactments of highly dissociated aggression and rage.

Unfortunately in the case of Islamic suicide terrorism (although the book is not limited just to this crucial subject) what we have had is the naked emperor riding on top of the elephant which could hitherto-fore only be identified in bits and pieces, lumbering around the room destroying everything in its path for far too long a time.

I have always held that Adrian Raine’s classic text, The Psychopathology of Crime, published in 1993 is key to the argument because if you consider suicide bombing a crime, than you have psychopathology and it is not just a benign case of agoraphobia. It is hard core psychopathology – malignant narcissism, malignant borderline psychopathology with psychotic self states, severe problems in attachment etc.

Lankford stresses the important point that Islam is not exactly a religious culture in which one can talk about being unhappy, let alone suicidal because of shame, that most painful emotion. Ironically there is a stigma attached to committing suicide. The cultures of a large segment of the religious believers who are extremists have not modernized. Yet we also know that suicide bombing is more than just suicide as it involves the murder of the innocent other. Lankford does not buy into Pape’s idea that the problem arises from the alleged occupation. Instead he shows how cases in these instances were carried out by people who had significant mental problems. For example Wafa, the Palestinian suicide bomber, was completely abused by her father.

Few academics and policy makers have been willing to risk looking at the stark reality of the Islamic suicide attack which has been cloaked in the pseudo myth of martyrdom. Could it be that this is part of our counter transference to the seduction of suicide and murderous rage and a denied fascination with its sadomasochism? I think so.

Lankford relates his uphill battle and puts the truth on the table that these bombers, mass murderers and rampage shooters have significant psychopathology. He writes of his struggle:

[I] began with no grant funding no research assistants, no government connections, no security clearance, and no privileged access [...]. The fact that it’s played out this way seems like a frightening condemnation of the systems we depend upon for knowledge. After all, these are the leaders we count on to keep us safe so we can sleep at night. I never anticipated that they could be so wrong, or worse yet, so closed-minded to the seemingly obvious possibility that suicide terrorists are suicidal.”

In deference to many experts and their theories as well as political leaders who blindly and willingly bought hook, line and sinker such espoused skewed findings whom Lankford debunks, I will not name names. However, the list is long so more importantly – buy the book, read it, tell others to buy it as well, invite Professor Lankford to be a scholar in residence for an evening and support his outstanding, brave much needed research. These alleged experts wanted a quick fix rather than thinking critically about what has been going on and they have taken the masses to be fools.

Ironically, academics and policy makers also operate in an unrecognized miniature shame honor culture which parallels Arab Muslim culture. This causes a series of blind spots. As an outsider, he was able to effectively deal with such a toxic environment. As a criminologist he conducted a labor intensive investigation of these crimes and found many patterns that others had failed to see.

Lankford’s exceptional writing style keeps us intrigued and the reader engaged along with a dry sense of humor while tearing down each argument and obstacle that has hindered seeing the stark reality of these murderers, be they suicide bombers, rampage shooters or mass murderers.

It was a relief to read of Lankford’s position concerning the short comings on the subject of prison interviews and interviews of others which counter terrorism venerates to a fault and upon which it has too heavily relied. Having conducted prison interviews myself, I completely concur with him. Many who conduct them are poorly trained in critical thinking and depth psychology. Lankford writes that you can’t believe everything you hear and even though:

Respondents [the interviewees] may give consistently unreliable answers for many reasons. They may be influenced by social and cultural biases. They may be lying, with ulterior motives. They may be in psychological denial [emphasis mine] because admitting the truth, even to themselves would be far too painful. Or they may simply lack the knowledge or information to provide accurate answers. If you asked ‘everyone’ in the 1400s whether the Earth orbited the Sun, or the Sun orbited the Earth, you would get a very consistent answer. And much like the answer researchers often receive when they simply ask about the motives of suicide terrorists, it would be consistently wrong.”

And then Lankford hits the nail on the head: “Sometimes the truth does not simply jump from the tips of respondents’ tongues to the pages of our articles and books, sometimes we have to dig for it.” And he does just that. He has put together a narrative which is coherently consistent and parses out the facts.

In his Appendix A Lankford offers a long list yet stresses it remains partial of suicide terrorists with risk factors for suicide. Here the obvious is apparent. I see Lankford putting the pseudo hysterical borderline bravado aside of the suicide bombers and their nefarious cronies. He proceeds to demonstrate how they are actually terrified of death. Elsewhere I have written that suicide bombers function like a death anxiety emollient for those who send them. They are all actually terrified of death and yet seek it because they cannot conceive of maturely facing their emotional problems.

Appendix B presents a list of different types of suicide attackers in the United States, 1990-2010 with appendix C noting the breakdown of types of suicide terrorists: conventional, coerced, escapist and indirect (the latter being suicide by cop which reminds me of the Filipino Moro, fight to the death in the tradition of classic jihad.)

The Myth of Martyrdom has entered the canon of studies in suicide terrorism at the top of the list. Anyone who comes close to dealing with the subject of terrorism must read it. It is crucial if we are to get a handle on the problem and stop suicide bombings insidious mushrooming which in turn also influences other types of mass murderer and rampage murders. These kinds of massacres do not occur in a vacuum – one influences the other. The next step that needs to be taken is factoring in the critical importance of early childhood development, the time frame during which children learn to hate and the time when the brain of the baby is made by his or her devalued female horribly abused mother with help from the father.

Lankford’s final caveat is that we must save them from themselves for the sake of our own selves. I agree. There is no question that they have degraded their own cultures. We must stop them before it further erodes ours. Aggression breeds aggression. Limits must be sent and boundaries observed. Education, education, education remains the key. This book makes a major contribution toward that end.

Guess what? Suicide bombers are actually suicidal. They are the elephants in the room with sheikhs riding on top yet cleverly disguised as alleged martyrs. Thanks to Lankford we can see what and whom we are dealing with and we come to know their “true colors.”

Adam Lankford (2013): The Myth of Martyrdom. Palgrave Macmillan, 272 pages, 18,95 Euro. Buy at Amazon.

Demonstration in Kairo, January 29, 2011 – Picture: Ramy Raoof / Wikipedia (CC-License)

Since the “Arab Spring” came to Egypt and the Muslim Brotherhood assumed power, sexual harassment, abuse, and rape of women has skyrocketed. This graph, which shows an enormous jump in sexual harassment beginning around January 2011, when the Tahrir revolts began, certainly demonstrates as much. Its findings are further supported by any number of reports appearing in both Arabic and Western media, and from both Egyptian and foreign women.

Hundreds of Egyptian women recently took to the streets of Tahrir Square to protest the nonstop harassment they must endure whenever they emerge from their homes and onto the streets. They held slogans like “Silence is unacceptable, my anger will be heard,” and “A safe square for all; Down with sexual harassment.” “Marchers also shouted chants against President Mohamed Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood group from which he hails,” wrote Al Ahram Online.

The response? More sexual harassment and rapes.

One woman recently appeared on Egyptian TV recounting her horrific experiences. On the program, she appeared shaded, to conceal her identity—less because she felt personal shame or guilt at what happened and more to protect her and her family from further abuses. She recounted how she had seen a Facebook notice that Egyptian women were going to protest the unsafe conditions for women on the Egyptian street and decided to join them on their scheduled march in Tahrir Square on January 25, the anniversary of the revolution. “I did not realize I would become the victim,” she lamented. When it started to get dark, her group heard that “strange looking men” were appearing and that it was best to leave the area.

During some chaos she was lost from her group. One man told her “this way,” pretending to help her to safety—”I was so naïve to believe him!”—only to lead her to a large group of men, she estimated around 50, who proceeded to encircle and rape her. “This was the first time someone touched me” quietly recounted the former virgin: “Each one of them attacked a part of my body.” Several pinned her down while others pulled off her pants and stripped her naked, gang-raping her for approximately 20 minutes. She explained how she truly thought she was going to die, and kept screaming “I’m dying!” In response, one of her rapists whispered in her ears: “Don’t worry. Take it,” even as the rest called her derogatory names she would not recite on the air.

Considering that in late November last year, when many Egyptians, including women, were protesting President Morsi’s Sharia-heavy constitution and the Muslim Brotherhood responded by paying gangs and thugs to rape protesting women in the streets, anecdotes like the above are becoming commonplace. Indeed, to appreciate the regularization of sexual harassment and rape in Egypt, consider the words of popular Salafi preacher Abu Islam, who openly, and very sarcastically, blamed the victims:

“They tell you women are a red line. They tell you that naked women—who are going to Tahrir Square because they want to be raped—are a red line! And they ask Mursi and the Brotherhood to leave power!” Abu Islam added that these women activists are going to Tahrir Square not to protest but to be sexually abused because they had wanted to be raped. “They have no shame, no fear and not even feminism. Practice your feminism, sheikha! It is a legitimate right for you to be a woman,” he said. “And by the way, 90 percent of them are crusaders [i.e. Christian Copts] and the remaining 10 percent are widows who have no one to control them. You see women talking like monsters,” he added.

No doubt some will argue that Abu Islam is just a “radical” who speaks for himself. Yet many more formal bodies made similar observations, including the new Egyptian parliament’s Shura Council’s “human rights committee,” whose members said

that women taking part in protests bear the responsibility of being sexually harassed, describing what happens in some demonstrators’ tents as “prostitution.” Major General Adel Afify, member of the committee representing the Salafi Asala Party, criticized female protesters, saying that they “know they are among thugs. They should protect themselves before requesting that the Interior Ministry does so. By getting herself involved in such circumstances, the woman has 100 percent responsibility.”

These sentiments are widely shared in Egypt. A study by the Egyptian Center for Women’s Rights said that 62% of men admitted to harassing women, while 53% blame women for “bringing it on.” Nor is this phenomenon limited to Egyptian women: while 83% of Egyptian women have experienced sexual harassment, so have 98% of foreign female visitors.

After describing her own personal experiences with sexual harassment in Egypt, Sarah A. Topol asserts that “Sexual harassment — actually, let’s call it what it is: assault — in Egypt is not just common. It’s an epidemic. It inhabits every space in this society, from back alleys to the birthplace of the newest chapter of Egyptian history.… For the 18 days of protest last year, for me, Tahrir Square was a harassment-free zone. I noticed it, everyone did. But as soon as President Hosni Mubarak stepped down, the unity ended and the harassment returned.”

Journalists Sophia Jones and Erin Banco also elaborated on the epidemic of sexual harassment in Egypt:

It’s difficult to write about sexual harassment and assault in Egypt without sounding like Angry White Girls. But as journalists, it is not merely our job to report in such an environment, it is an everyday psychological and sometimes even physical battle. We open our closets in the morning and debate what to wear to lessen the harassment—as if this would help. Even fully veiled women are harassed on Cairo’s streets. As one young Cairo-based female reporter recently remarked, “it’s a f–ked-up reality that we will be touched.”…. Like hundreds of other countries around the world, sexual harassment and assault happens everyday in Egypt. It happens to both Egyptian women, and to foreign women. It happens at all times of the day, despite what some may think, at the hands of men—young boys, grown men, police officers, military officers, and almost everyone in between.

The journalists then offer an all too familiar story:

Nor is this merely limited to sexual harassment, but it often, under the right circumstances—few witnesses, the availability of dark allies—culminates into fullblown gangrape. For example, Natasha Smith a young British journalist covering Tahrir Square, was dragged from her male companion into a frenzied mob in the hundreds. “Men began to rip off my clothes,” she wrote on her blog. They “pulled my limbs apart and threw me around. They were scratching and clenching my breasts and forcing their fingers inside me in every possible way … All I could see was leering faces, more and more faces sneering and jeering as I was tossed around like fresh meat among starving lions.”

All this is yet another indicator of the true nature of the Obama-supported “Arab Spring.”

Raymond Ibrahim is a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center and an Associate Fellow at the Middle East Forum. First published at FrontPageMagazine.com and MEF.

Lars Hedegaard, president of International Free Press Society

Der dänische Historiker und Journalist Lars Hedegaard, Vorsitzender der Danish Free Press Society und Preisträger des „Defender of Freedom Award“ der International Civil Liberties Alliance (ICLA) überlebte heute knapp, aber unverletzt einen Mordanschlag. Die Polizei ermittelt auf Hochtouren.

Um 11:21 Uhr Ortszeit klingelte ein junger Mann an der Tür der Privatwohnung von Hedegaard und gab vor, ein Paket abliefern zu wollen. Nachdem er dieses überreicht hatte, zog er eine Pistole und schoss zweimal, verfehlte aber sein Ziel. Danach blockierte die Waffe. Nach einem kurzen Handgemenge versuchte der Attentäter erneut seine Waffe abzuschießen, die aber wieder versagte. Daraufhin floh der Angreifer.

Hedegaard, Gründer der Wochenzeitung Dispatch International konnte unverletzt in Sicherheit gebracht werden. Die Polizei hat mir rund 30 Beamten das Haus abgeriegelt und sucht nach dem Attentäter. Dieser wird beschrieben als ca. 25 bis 30 Jahre alt, arabisches Aussehen mit dunklem Haar. Er trug zum Tatzeitpunkt eine rote Jacke im Stil der Post.

Weitere Updates lesen Sie bei EuropeNews.dk.

• Citizen Times interview with Lars Hedegaard: “We need a real press”
• More about Lars Hedegaard at Citizen Times/Mehr über Lars Hedegaard bei Citizen Times (Deutsch & English)

Germans are overwhelmingly mistrustful of Islam and Muslim immigration – Picture: Gerd Altmann / pixelio.de

As the rapidly growing Muslim population makes its presence felt in towns and cities across the continent, Islam is transforming the European way of life in ways unimaginable only a few years ago. Some of the more notable Islam-related controversies during 2012 occurred in Germany, where the Muslim population has jumped from around 50,000 in the early 1980s to more than 4.5 million today. What follows is a brief chronological review of some of the main stories involving the rise of Islam in Germany during 2012.

In January, German authorities welcomed the start of the New Year by officially confirming that they are monitoring German-language Internet websites that are critical of Muslim immigration and the Islamization of Europe.

In a January 4, 2012 interview with the Berliner Zeitung and the Frankfurter Rundschau, Manfred Murck, the director of the Hamburg branch of the German domestic intelligence agency (the Bundesamt für Verfassungsschutz (BfV)), said his organization was studying whether German citizens who criticize Muslims and Islam on the Internet are fomenting hate and are thus criminally guilty of “breaching” the German constitution.

The BfV’s move marked a significant setback for the exercise of free speech in Germany and came amid a months-long smear campaign led by a triple alliance of left-wing German multicultural elites, sundry Muslim groups and members of the mainstream media, who have been relentless in their efforts to discredit the so-called counter-jihad movement (also known as the “Islamophobes”) in Germany.

In a country stifled by decades of political correctness, the counter-jihad activists and bloggers have been giving a voice to millions of frustrated Germans who see the harm being wrought by the cult of multiculturalism.

Opinion polls consistently show that growing numbers of ordinary German citizens are worried about the consequences of decades of multicultural policies that have encouraged mass immigration from Muslim countries. Germans are especially concerned about the refusal of millions of Muslim immigrants to integrate into German society, as well as the emergence of a parallel legal system in Germany based on Islamic Sharia law.

Also in January, Muslims in Duisburg, one of the most Islamized cities in Germany, clamored for the right to turn empty churches into mosques. All of the churches are located in the gritty Hamborn and Marxloh districts in northern Duisburg where Islam has already replaced Christianity as the dominant religion, and where several Catholic churches have been abandoned.

In Germany as a whole, more than 400 Roman Catholic churches and more than 100 Protestant churches have been closed since 2000, according to one estimate. Another 700 Roman Catholic churches are slated to be closed over the next several years.

By contrast, Germany is now home to more than 200 mosques (including more than 40 mega-mosques), 2,600 Muslim prayer halls and a countless number unofficial mosques. Another 128 mosques are currently under construction, according to the Zentralinstitut Islam-Archiv, a Muslim organization based in Germany.

Meanwhile, on January 16 one of the oldest universities in Germany inaugurated the country’s first taxpayer-funded department of Islamic theology. The Center for Islamic Theology at the University of Tübingen is the first of four planned Islamic university centers in Germany.

The German government claims that by controlling the curriculum, the school, which is to train Muslim imams and Islamic religion teachers, will function as an antidote to “hate preachers.” (Most imams currently in Germany are from Turkey and many of them do not speak German.)

But the idea has been fiercely criticized by those who worry the school will become a gateway for Islamists who will introduce a hardline brand of Islam into the German university system.

In February, the interior minister of the German state of Rhineland-Palatinate, Jochen Hartloff, said he favored the introduction of Islamic Sharia law in Germany. In an interview with the German newspaper Süddeutsche Zeitung, Hartloff, a Socialist, said that using the Islamic moral code “is certainly conceivable when it comes to questions pertaining to civil law.” Hartloff said using Sharia law to resolve family law issues such as alimony, divorce or financial contracts “could have a pacifying effect” in Germany.

Hartloff’s comments were seconded by Michael Frieser, an expert on integration issues for the Conservatives in the German parliament. He told the Süddeutsche Zeitung that he has nothing against Muslim immigrants seeking judgments according to their own legal systems. “That can ultimately serve the cause of integration,” Frieser said.

In March, Muslim mobs in Berlin threatened to “burn down the neighborhood” after a German fatally stabbed an 18-year-old Muslim, in what police deemed was an act of self defence. The March 9 incident occurred in the heavily Islamized Berlin neighborhood of Neukölln, when the German, Sven N., tried to stop a fight between two groups of Turks over who should get a football that had been kicked over a fence. The Turks quickly turned their anger against the German. After a group of 20 Muslims armed with knives and daggers challenged Sven, he stabbed one of the attackers, Yusef Al-Abed, in the heart. More than 3,000 Muslims attended Yusuf’s funeral, evoking scenes of the Gaza Strip (photos here).

In April, Islamic radicals launched an unprecedented nationwide campaign to distribute 25 million copies of the Koran, translated into the German language, with the goal of placing one Koran into every household in Germany, free of charge.

The mass proselytization campaign — called Project “Read!” — was organized by dozens of Islamic Salafist groups located in cities and towns throughout Germany.

Salafism is a branch of radical Islam practiced in Saudi Arabia that seeks to establish a Sunni Islamic Caliphate (Islamic Empire) across the Middle East, North Africa and Europe, and eventually the entire world. The Caliphate would be governed exclusively by Islamic Sharia law, which would apply both to Muslims and to non-Muslims. Salafists believe, among other anti-Western doctrines, that democracy, because it is a man-made form of government, must be destroyed.

Although Germany’s domestic intelligence agency, the BfV, regards the Salafist groups as a threat to German security, Salafists have free reign in the country, and Salafist preachers are known regularly to preach hatred against the West in the mosques and prayer centers that are proliferating across Germany.

In May, more than 500 Salafists attacked German police with bottles, clubs, stones and other weapons in the city of Bonn, to protest cartoons they said were “offensive.” Rather than cracking down on the Muslim extremists, however, German authorities sought to silence the peaceful critics of multicultural policies that allow the Salafists openly to preach violence and hate.

The clashes on May 5 erupted when around 30 supporters of a conservative political party, PRO NRW, which is opposed to the further spread of Islam in Germany, participated in a campaign rally ahead of regional elections in the western state of North Rhine-Westphalia (NRW).

Some of those participating in the rally, which was held near the Saudi-run King Fahd Academy in the Mehlem district of Bonn, the former capital of West Germany, had been waving banners depicting the Islamic Prophet Mohammad (see photo here), to protest the Islamization of Germany.

The rally swiftly disintegrated into violence (photos here and here) when hundreds of angry Salafists, who are opposed to any depiction of their prophet, began attacking the police, whose job it was to keep the two groups apart.

In the final tally of the melee, 29 police officers were injured, two with serious stab wounds, and more than 100 Salafists were arrested, although most were later released. According to Bonn’s police chief, Ursula Brohl-Sowa, “This was an explosion of violence such as we have not witnessed in a long time.”

In June, German authorities launched a major crackdown on Salafists suspected of plotting against the state. In nation-wide raids on June 14, over 1,000 German police searched about 70 Salafist homes, apartments, mosques and meeting places in seven of Germany’s 16 states, in search of evidence that would enable the German government to outlaw some of the dozens of Islamist groups operating in the country.

In a June 8 interview with the newspaper Die Welt, Interior Minister Hans-Peter Friedrich said: “Radical Salafism is like a hard drug. All of those who succumb to her become violent.”

Also in June, German Defense Minister Thomas de Maizière announced his intention to “multiculturalize” the German Armed Forces (Bundeswehr) by recruiting more Muslims into its ranks.

Germany formally discontinued compulsory military service on July 1, 2011 as part of a comprehensive reform aimed at creating a smaller and more agile army of about 185,000 professional soldiers. But Germany’s new all-volunteer army has been unable to meet its recruiting goals, and military manpower prospects look dim for the foreseeable future.

In a desperate search for soldiers, German military officials have now identified Germany’s Muslim Turkish population (3.5 million and counting) as a new source for potential recruits.

In August, German Intelligence Chief Gerhard Schindler issued a warning saying that Europe is at great risk of terrorist attacks by Islamic extremists.

In a wide-ranging interview with the German newspaper Die Welt, Schindler said the German foreign intelligence agency, the Bundesnachrichtendienst (BND), is particularly concerned about the threat posed by homegrown terrorists, individuals who were either born or raised in Europe and who travel to war zones like Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia or Yemen to obtain training in terrorist methods.

Schindler’s warning came amid the backdrop of a high-security court trial of four suspected Al Qaeda members, which began in the German city of Düsseldorf on July 25. German public prosecutors say the defendants — three homegrown Islamists born in the German state of North Rhine-Westphalia and one Moroccan national — were planning to stage a “sensational terror attack” in Germany.

Also known as the “Düsseldorfer Cell,” the defendants were also accused of plotting to assassinate the former commander of German Special Forces (KSK Kommando Spezialkräfte) as well as to attack the US Army base in the Bavarian town of Grafenwöhr.

Also in August, a new survey of Turkish-German mores and attitudes found that nearly half of all Turks living in Germany say they hope there will be more Muslims than Christians in Germany in the future.

The 103-page study, “German-Turkish Life and Values” (abridged version in German here), found that Islam is becoming an increasingly important component of the value structure of Turks in Germany, especially among the younger generation of Turkish-Germans, who hold religious views more radical than those held by their elders.

In September, a German court in Kassel refused to allow a Muslim student to skip co-ed swimming lessons based on her religious beliefs.

The closely watched case highlighted the growing number of conflicts between German school officials and Muslim parents who, for religious reasons, want to keep their children from participating in sports activities, biology classes and field trips.

The presiding judge, Hans Rothaug, declared: “The applicant should have attended swimming lessons. In this particular case, there are no grounds for exemptions.”

In October, a court in Bonn sentenced an Islamist radical to six years in prison for stabbing two German police officers during the protest against “offensive” cartoons in Bonn.

Murat K, a 26-year-old German-born Salafist of Turkish heritage from the western state of Hessen, openly admitted that he had attacked and wounded the two police officers with a kitchen knife during the cartoon riots in May. He showed no remorse during his trial, saying only that he had been morally obligated to follow Islamic Sharia law.

Murat, whose last name has not been made known to the general public due to German privacy laws, claimed that the attacks on the police officers were justified because the German state had allowed offensive images of the Prophet Mohammed to be shown in public.

Murat responded to the verdict by declaring German courts to be illegitimate. He said: “I do not accept this court as legitimate. I am not sitting here voluntarily. Only Allah alone has the right to decide what is right and what is wrong, what is good and what is evil, what is moral and what is immoral.” Murat added: “I will answer only to Allah.”

In an October 19 interview with the German newsmagazine FOCUS, the Secretary General of the ruling Christian Democratic Party (CDU), Hermann Gröhe, said the conviction of Murat makes it clear that Germany will not allow radical Muslims to “lead a religious war on German streets.”

In November, Hamburg, the second-largest city in Germany, concluded a “historic treaty” with its Muslim communities that grants Muslims broad new rights and privileges but does little to encourage their integration into German society.

The November 13 agreement, signed by Hamburg’s Socialist Mayor Olaf Scholz and the leaders of four Muslim umbrella groups, was praised by the proponents of multiculturalism for putting the northern port city’s estimated 200,000 Muslims on an equal footing with Christian residents.

The most controversial part of the accord involves a commitment by the city government to promote the teaching of Islam in the Hamburg public school system. The agreement grants the leaders of Hamburg’s Muslim communities a determinative say in what will be taught by allowing them to develop the teaching curriculum for Islamic studies.

On November 30, the northern German city of Bremen followed Hamburg’s lead by concluding its own treaty [Staatsvertrag] with the local Muslim community. The Socialist mayor of Bremen, Jens Böhrnsen, said the treaty reflects “mutual recognition and respect of mutual values.”

Critics, however, say the agreements, the first of their kind in Germany, will boost the growing influence of Islam in the country by encouraging the perpetuation of a Muslim parallel society.

Also in November, a new research survey found that Germans are overwhelmingly mistrustful of Islam and Muslim immigration.

The 28-page study, “Fear of the East in the West” (Die Furcht vor dem Morgenland im Abendland), was produced by the Allensbach Institute for Public Opinion Research, and was published by the center-right German newspaper Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung on November 21.

The research showed that more than half of the German population believes that Islam is prone to violence (64%); has a tendency toward revenge and retaliation (60%); is obsessed with proselytizing others (56%); and strives for political influence (56%).

More than 80% of Germans believe that Islam deprives women of their rights, and 70% say Islam is associated with religious fanaticism and radicalism. By contrast, only 13% of Germans associate Islam with love for neighbors, 12% with charity and 7% with openness and tolerance.

The study concluded that the image of Islam in Germany is “devastating.” The findings — which corroborate the conclusions of other recent studies — underscore a growing divide between ordinary Germans, who are concerned about the consequences of mass immigration from Muslim countries, and Germany’s political elites, who are determined to build a “multicultural” society at any cost.

In December, German authorities said Islamic extremists were behind a botched bomb attack at the main train station in Bonn. In the December 10 incident, a man allegedly linked to Al Qaeda left a bag containing a bomb on a platform at the train station. Authorities say the detonator was activated, but failed to cause an explosion.

Also in December, a militant Salafist group released several videos calling on its followers to take German hostages in an effort to secure the release of Murat K, the Islamist who is currently serving a six-year prison sentence for stabbing two policemen in Bonn in May.

The videos promise that “we will not rest until we have freed you from captivity.” In one of the videos, a man speaking German with a foreign accent says: “Everyone who offends the Prophet will be slaughtered, whether near or far. And know this, brother, the Germans are easy enough to reach. We will take them prisoners, until you are free for your noble deed.”

First published at the New York-based Gatestone Institute where Soeren Kern is a Senior Fellow. He is also Senior Fellow for European Politics at the Madrid-based Grupo de Estudios Estratégicos / Strategic Studies Group. Follow him on Facebook.

Picture: Gerd Altmann / pixelio.de

A detailed analysis of FBI statistics covering ten full calendar years since the 9/11 terrorist attacks reveals that, on a per capita basis, American Muslims, contrary to spin, have been subjected to hate crimes less often than other prominent minorities. From 2002 to 2011, Muslims are estimated to have suffered hate crimes at a frequency of 6.0 incidents per 100,000 per year — 10 percent lower than blacks (6.7), 48 percent lower than homosexuals and bisexuals (11.5), and 59 percent lower than Jews (14.8). Americans should keep these numbers in mind whenever Islamists attempt to silence critics by invoking Muslim victimhood.

The federal government defines a hate crime as a “criminal offense against a person or property motivated in whole or in part by an offender’s bias against a race, religion, disability, ethnic origin, or sexual orientation.” Though statutes mandating harsher punishments for hatred-inspired acts raise the specter of thought crimes, emphasize group identity over the individual, and seemingly favor certain victims over others, the FBI’s tracking of such deeds shines important light on the state of the nation. Annual reports assembled from local law enforcement data are accessible on the website of the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting Program. Especially useful is Table 1 of each compilation, which summarizes the number of incidents, offenses, victims, and known offenders for hate crimes committed against members of different groups.

No class of hate crimes has seen more fluctuation than anti-Muslim ones. The norm was a few dozen incidents per year in the late 1990s, but the number jumped from 28 in 2000 to 481 in 2001, a spike attributed to post-9/11 backlash. However, it dropped to 155 in 2002 and held remarkably steady through 2006, before falling again to 115 in 2007, 105 in 2008, and 107 in 2009.

Anti-Muslim incidents rose to 160 in 2010, an increase that Islamists and their mouthpieces eagerly blamed on rampant “Islamophobia,” particularly opposition to a proposed giant mosque near Ground Zero. Based on freshly released FBI data, there was little change in 2011, with 157 incidents, 175 offenses, 185 victims, and 138 known offenders. Mark Potok of the reliably leftist Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), which puts foes of radical Islam in the same category as Klansmen and neo-Nazis, has declared that “hate crimes against perceived Muslims … remained at relatively high levels” as a result of “Islam-bashing propaganda,” anti-Shari’a legislation, and ongoing resistance to new mosques, relaying that “several were attacked by apparent Islamophobes.” Note the key word: “several” in a country with at least 2,106 mosques, a few million Muslims, and 300 million–plus non-Muslims.

As hinted above, the dark portrait of America as a nation of violent bigots uniquely hostile to Muslims does not withstand quantitative scrutiny. To smooth out year-to-year variations, consider the past decade (2002–11) of FBI-recorded hate crimes. There were 1,388 incidents against Muslims during this span, compared with 25,130 against blacks; 12,030 against homosexuals and bisexuals; 9,198 against Jews; and 5,057 against Hispanics. Even majority whites endured 7,185 incidents, while Christians (Protestants and Catholics combined) were targeted in 1,126 incidents. Adherents of “other religions” faced 1,335, very close to the anti-Muslim tally.

Due to the different sizes of minority groups, however, raw numbers cannot tell the complete tale. More insightful are per capita rates. Some back-of-the-envelope calculations follow.

The U.S. Census Bureau derived the total, Hispanic, and black populations for 2000 and 2010 from direct counts. Approximating their evolution with linear models, one can obtain estimates for any non-census year and, most important, the 2002–11 averages: total (299.2 million), Hispanic (45.2 million), and black (37.4 million). Surveys indicate that around 3.5 percent of American adults identify as homosexual or bisexual; applying this percentage to the total population gives a 2002–11 average of 10.5 million. Two studies have pegged the number of American Jews at about 6.5 million in 2010. Figures for 2000 vary (5.3–6.2 million), so for simplicity we set the average Jewish population between 2002 and 2011 at 6.2 million to account for moderate growth. As for Muslims, whose population estimates have a convoluted history, reputable recent numbers have been provided by the Pew Research Center (2.75 million in 2011) and the Association of Statisticians of American Religious Bodies (2.6 million in 2010; full data extractable here), which agree on the current size and growth rate (around 100,000 per year). The 2002–11 average is roughly 2.3 million Muslims.

Adding the FBI data yields per capita frequencies of hate crimes for the past decade. Of the five main minority groups discussed above, Jews were most likely to experience hate crimes, with 14.8 incidents per 100,000 Jews annually. Homosexuals and bisexuals (combined) came next (11.5), followed by blacks (6.7), Muslims (6.0), and Hispanics (1.1). Rates for majority whites and Christians were much smaller.

With hate crimes befalling Muslims far less often than they do Jews or homosexuals and bisexuals and slightly less often than they befall blacks, it is clear that anti-Muslim incidents are disproportionate to those targeting other minorities only in terms of the hype generated on their behalf. A closer look reinforces this conclusion.

First, despite claims about a surge of prejudice, anti-Muslim hate crimes in 2010 and 2011 merely returned to the typical post-9/11 (2002–06) pace of 150–160 incidents per year. Further, a similar number of hate crimes in 2002 and 2011 implies a lower per capita rate in 2011 because of strong population growth.

Second, what of the Muslim population estimate? In hopes of inflating their presumed clout, Islamist groups routinely assert the existence of around 7 million American Muslims, three times as many as the more objective measurements. Note, however, that this Islamist-promoted figure actually would weaken their narrative of anti-Muslim hate crimes, because a higher population reduces the per capita frequency, thus painting them as even less significant in a statistical sense.

Third, though 2001, whose rash of hate crimes against Muslims was an outlier tied to a unique event, has been excluded from the above analysis, the 2001–11 rate for Muslims was just 7.4 incidents per 100,000 per year, still far short of that applying to Jews or homosexuals and bisexuals. Self-pitying Islamists also want us to forget that in spite of 9/11-related anger, anti-Jewish hate crimes outnumbered anti-Muslim hate crimes that year by more than two to one.

Fourth, could incomplete data affect the finding that Muslims are victimized less often than many non-Muslim minorities? Theoretically, yes, but evidence for this is scant. SPLC talking heads regularly cite a 2005 Justice Department study, using surveys of victims’ perceptions of whether prejudice had motivated crimes against them, to argue that the FBI underestimates overall hate crimes by an order of magnitude. Yet even if those claims are valid, nothing suggests that anti-Muslim crimes are more or less likely to be ignored than others, which would be necessary to alter the relative frequencies of hate crimes against different groups. Another source of incompleteness is that not all local law enforcement agencies take part in the FBI’s tabulation, but once again there is no obvious bias here that would preferentially diminish hate crimes against Muslims. Also note that the percentage of participating agencies (see the FBI’s Table 12) is large and slowly climbing, covering 86 percent of the U.S. population in 2002 and 92 percent in 2011, meaning that improved reporting could have helped elevate the number of FBI-recorded hate crimes in later years. Although this impact is probably small, it further chips away at the meme of rising hate.

Fifth, consider hate crimes with the worst possible outcome: death. The subject has been in the headlines after a deranged woman suspected of murdering a Hindu man, Sunando Sen, by pushing him from a New York subway platform on December 27 told police that she “hate[s] Hindus and Muslims,” whom she collectively blames for 9/11, and that she believed Sen to be Muslim. Following the initial rush to label Sen’s murder a hate crime, journalists have learned that the alleged murderer had a long history of severe mental illness, had received only intermittent treatment despite numerous pleas for help and warnings from the family, and had repeatedly gone off her medication.

As the usual voices fault “our oversaturated Islamophobic environment” and “growing anti-Muslim hate,” they neglect to mention how rare it is for an actual or perceived Muslim to die in a hate crime. By the FBI’s count, 74 people were killed in hate crimes (“murder and nonnegligent manslaughter” in Table 4) from 2002 to 2011, but not a single one in an anti-Muslim incident. Indeed, the FBI lists no anti-Muslim fatalities since 1995, corresponding to the earliest report available.

Why do Islamists obfuscate? The false picture of an epidemic of physical assaults on Muslims distracts Americans from Islamist hatred and enshrines Muslims as the country’s leading victim class, a strategy intended to intimidate citizens into remaining quiet about Islamic supremacism and lay the groundwork for granting Muslims special privileges and protections at the expense of others. In short, anti-Muslim hate crimes are a powerful Islamist weapon.

At its extreme, the desire to achieve victim status in this manner has fueled the phenomenon of fake hate crimes, through staging, blatant misrepresentation, or both. An illustrative example is the March 2012 murder of Shaima Alawadi, a hijab-wearing California woman found beaten to death at home with a note calling her a terrorist beside her body. Islamists and their credulous media allies pounced at the opportunity to condemn the supposed tidal wave of “Islamophobia,” even as marital problems emerged as a potential motive. In November, police arrested Alawadi’s husband.

Genuine hate crimes committed against any group are deplorable, but they must be placed in the proper context. First, hate crimes are uncommon across the board. Second, despite hyperbole about “anti-Muslim violence spiralling out of control in America” and producing “one of the most hostile moments that the Muslim American community has ever experienced,” the real story is the amazing tolerance and restraint of the American people. Imported Muslim fanatics murdered thousands on 9/11, the threat of homegrown jihad has crystallized, and Islamists abroad continue to slaughter innocents daily. Though Americans could find no lack of excuses to strike out at their Muslim neighbors, almost nobody does — and thankfully so. As such, the annual victims of anti-Muslim hate crimes average between three and four per U.S. state and would have trouble filling a decent-sized jetliner.

Many Americans take a critical view of Islam, but virtually all restrict their negative sentiments to the domain of words and ideas, as civilized human beings should. People are free to have opinions, including anti-Islamic ones, regardless of how Islamists long to muzzle them. Islamists, in turn, are entitled to their own opinions about life in America. But they are not entitled to their own facts.

David J. Rusin is a research fellow at Islamist Watch, a project of the Middle East Forum. First published at National Review Online and Islamist Watch (January 11, 2013).

Symbol of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation

It was the 3^rd of October 2010. Germany’s collected media attention was directed toward Bremen, where the German President at that time, Christian Wulff (CDU), led the celebrations of the 20^th anniversary of German reunification. He spoke of unity, justice and freedom, of a united people and values. He spoke of changes of the late recognition of being a country of immigration and the problems associated with it. And then he said that one sentence, for which he will probably be remembered in the history books: “But, Islam, in the meantime, also belongs to Germany.” ¹

The ensuing debate on talk shows, the arts section of papers and especially the comments areas of online media couldn’t have been more vehement. Ultimately the sentiment, due to the publication of Thilo Sarrazin’s book Deutschland schafft sich ab [Germany is doing away with itself], did not calm down until the summer of the same year.

But why did Wulff’s statement spark such an outrage and discussion? Whether Islam belongs to Germany and is thus a part of our culture is obviously not a question that politicians can answer – not even if they are our Heads of State. On the occasion of this turmoil, it is definitely worth getting to the bottom of the relationship between the West and Islam.

Initially, it appears necessary to agree on what we mean by culture and identity so that we can even speak productively about Germany and Islam.

Culture can be viewed in its broadest sense as the whole complex of distinctive spiritual, material, intellectual and emotional features that characterize a society or social group. This includes not only the arts and literature, but also modes of life, the fundamental rights of the human being, value systems, traditions and beliefs.” ²

That is how UNESCO roughly defines the term “culture,” which has been and will be greatly disputed. If we conceive of culture as a conglomerate, then we can speak of a European culture, of an Arab, Asian, etc. ³ Finer subdivisions are also conceivable, which play no major role for our discussion since the similarities between German and Dutch culture should far outweigh the respective differences.

Cultures differ in various ways, especially with respect to their values and concept of humanity. If we now want to examine what happens when Western and Islamic cultures clash, we must first work out their central properties. This can only freely happen here, however fragmentary, to convey the respective important developments.

The West: a Culture of Freedom and Equality

The roots of European culture can be traced back to the great philosophers of ancient Greece. Markedly simplified, one could say that already at that time humanistic and rational thinking was developing. Thus, worldly power could no longer be religiously legitimized, whereby questioning it became possible. But above all, the sovereign was now subject to the same laws as ordinary citizens. From today’s perspective, we call this the rule of law, a necessary condition for democracy. ⁴

These developments of ancient Greece had a strong influence on the Roman Empire. There this body of thought mingled with the ideas of Judaism and nascent Christianity. Expressed briefly, primarily the idea of charity, the foundation of our modern welfare state, and the god-like concept of humanity were added. The latter in turn enabled two things: on the one hand, it was the basis of universal human rights that apply to everyone regardless of gender or ethnicity; on the other, it gave people the opportunity to act in the spirit of God or against him. Thereby, with the interaction between the humanistic thought of ancient Greece, the essential cornerstone for free will and personal responsibility of the individual was laid. ⁵

Parallel to the rapid increase of technological developments, the Age of Enlightenment began in 18^th century and reinforced these intellectual developments. Humans freed themselves from their increasingly “self-inflicted immaturity” (Immanuel Kant).

As a result of these processes, we can describe our Western culture in Europe today as largely individualistic one, in which the maximum development of the individual is paramount. In our laws and standards, this right to self-development is expressed especially through the abstract notion of “human dignity.” ⁶ And this in turn consists of freedom and equality before the law. ⁷ All other normative aspects can be derived from this.

The European concept of humanity is therefore primarily one of a free individual who is responsible for his/her actions. This freedom is actually only limited by the same freedom of others, as all are to be treated equally before the law.

Islam: A Culture of Submission

But what about the culture of Islam? In order to clarify this, initially a justification is needed for why Islam is to be considered a culture; and here, Arab culture, Turkish culture, etc. will not be addressed.

To some extent, we can understand all religions as culture, as they are usually required to regulate the lives of the faithful, also concerning ritual precepts and theological content. With Islam, this is especially true because it stipulates strict and specific standards for its followers for almost every area of life, of religious practice, on all matters of law up to and including politics and sexual morals. A subdivision of the spheres of religion, politics, economy, private life, etc., is completely foreign to Islam.

As an additional argument, we can note that countries that belong to the Islamic cultural sphere are often more than 90 percent Muslim. In Europe, however, there is a wide variety of creeds and lifestyles, which is for example why one could hardly speak of a purely Christian culture of the West.

Finally, several studies have shown that, on the one hand, Muslim immigrants in the West tend to place being Muslim above the nationality of their country of origin, and on the other hand, they also see both as directly related. In other words: because I am a Turk, I am also a Muslim, but above all I am the latter.

Now let’s consider the core values of Islamic culture. The term “Islam” itself means in its literal translation “submission” or “surrender to God.” This principle of submission applies to all types of authorities, such as the father, the tribal or clan leaders and ultimately Allah.

Submission means to comply with the decisions of another person or – in its transcendental form – a principle, God or even a party, without questioning them. A person who completely submits to another or to a principle, or is subjugated by the same, thus lacks the freedom to determine his/her own life. For the one to whom the person submits himself/herself, he/she is anything but equal. Theologically, this subjugation in Islam goes so far that God arbitrarily decides whether the person will go to hell or paradise. So there is no guarantee for the believer that she/he will be rewarded in the afterlife for a particular behavior. Through this absolute predestination by Allah, all free will of the human being is negated.

The concept of humanity of such a collectivist culture is rather that of a link in a functional chain: one is born into a certain position and has to arrange himself with the resultant tasks. A deviation from the planned route is not only difficult for the individual but also has consequences for everyone connected with him/her, especially relatives. Among other things, this explains why it is so vitally important for Muslims to protect the female family members’ “honor,” however they understand that term. This is because the “stained honor” of a family member also has an impact on the reputation of all the others.

Foreseeable conflicts

But what happens now, when Islam enters the West with via immigrants from Islamic countries? Then, as the information above has made clear, two completely different cultures meet that differ not only in their core values and their concept of humanity but are also contradictory in almost every aspect. Thus, if Islamic culture is to be preserved by immigrants, it must necessarily lead to conflicts.

And in fact, the situation in Europe has developed such that the integration of the ever-growing Muslim populations has gotten worse. The more they see themselves as Muslims, the greater is their distance from the host societies and the more probable conflicts become. As early as 2007, a study in the Netherlands on the Turkish immigrants living there indicated that the more they identified with their Turkish and concurrently Muslim culture, the less they identified with the Netherlands and the more they rejected the Netherlands (which makes quite a difference). This rejection was even clearer among the respondents who practiced Islam daily and were strong supporters of Islamic organizations. ⁸

Also, a study published in the summer of 2012 on Turks in Germany showed that 62 percent of the respondents prefer only to be together with Turks, which is one and a half times as much as two years ago. Furthermore, almost half of the Turks want a Muslim majority in Germany, and 55 percent want more mosques. While nearly three-quarters of respondents believe Islam is the only true religion, they particularly view atheists, Jews and homosexuals as inferior human beings. ⁹

Additionally, there is the marked over-representation of Muslims involved in violent crime. In the meantime, several surveys of young people have pointed out a positive correlation between high religiosity among Muslims and frequent violent crime with concurrent poorer integration, while exactly the opposite was found among adolescents of the Christian faith. ¹⁰ Beyond that, especially the study of the interior ministry (Bundesinnenministerium) entitled Muslims in Germany indicated numerous fundamentalist believers in this country, which should not be underestimated. ¹¹

At the same time, on the side of organized Islam, we have seen the attempt to “take the institutional route” for years. In this way, the Islamic associations in Germany, and also international lobbyists such as the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), attempt to brand any criticism of Islam as racism. They make it easier for Muslims living here to exempt their children from sports, swimming and sex education and instead to provide them with an orthodox education in matters of the Koran. Simultaneously on the political level, they constantly present themselves as victims of discrimination, as economically disadvantaged and the like.

In contrast, if one asks Germans what they think about Islam, almost every survey of the last decade has shown most notably that the ideology is rejected, not Muslims as believers. Concerning substantive issues, a somewhat similar Islam-critical attitude is present among approximately 80 percent of the respondents, primarily with regard to the degradation of women, homosexuals and other non-believers by Islam. This Islam-critical attitude of the German population is by the way completely independent of prejudice toward other groups of people, e.g. what is conceived as “Islamophobia” or also xenophobia and anti-Semitism. ¹²

Does Islam, in the meantime, also belong to Germany?

When we consider all of these preconditions and developments together, of which only a small portion could be examined here, not only does it seem impossible to bring the cultures of Islam and the West together – or the values of submission and freedom/equality into harmony – but it also seems more than questionable if the integration of Muslims into our value system can even be successful at all.

We cannot stipulate that Muslims love freedom because that would not only contradict the principle of freedom itself but also any value. One does not get values from the outside, neither from a president nor from a host society. One learns, acquires and develops them by oneself.

However, what we can require of living Muslims is that they adhere to the most basic of our rules: everyone is equal before the law. It does not matter if the person is a man or woman, a believer or unbeliever. Whoever cannot accept this has no future here.

A few years ago, the Danish psychologist Nicolai Sennels aptly stated: we should help “the Muslims who do not want to integrate themselves to lead to a new life in a society that they understand and in which they can be understood. In other words, we should help them to start a new life in a Muslim country.” ¹³

So what to do?

The most important task is to ensure that people understand what Islam means. [...] Until we have truly understood this, we will have no idea how we can help Muslim immigrants to integrate and assimilate themselves even in the countries that have taken them in.”

That is what Lars Hedegaard, Chairman of the International Free Press Society (IFPS), once said in a Citizen Times interview. ¹⁴ Here it is not important how someone views Islam and which suggested solutions he would like to impose on it. It is important that that we begin to think for ourselves. It is important that we get a clear picture for ourselves – both of Islam and also of the West.

This essay is a translation (by Carter Communication) of the introduction of the recently published book: Felix Strüning (ed.) (2012): Islam and the West. Berlin Berlin/Jena: Stresemann Foundation, 140 pages, 9.90 euros. With contributions from Daniel Pipes, Sabatina James, Ali Sina, Paul Scheffer, Nicolai Sennels and many others.

The “Centrum Mosque” in Hamburg, Germany – pictures: left: public domain / right: Staro 1 / Wikipedia

Hamburg, the second-largest city in Germany, has concluded a “historic treaty” with its Muslim communities that grants Muslims broad new rights and privileges but does little to encourage their integration into German society.

The November 13 agreement, signed by Hamburg’s Socialist Mayor Olaf Scholz and the leaders of four Muslim umbrella groups, is being praised by the proponents of multiculturalism for putting the northern port city’s estimated 200,000 Muslims on an equal footing with Christian residents.

But critics say the agreement, the first of its kind in Germany, will boost the growing influence of Islam in Hamburg and will encourage the perpetuation of a Muslim parallel society in the city.

The most controversial part of the accord involves a commitment by the city government to promote the teaching of Islam in the Hamburg public school system. The agreement grants the leaders of Hamburg’s Muslim communities a determinative say in what will be taught by allowing them to develop the teaching curriculum for Islamic studies.

Moreover, Muslim officials will also be able to determine who will (and who will not) be allowed to teach courses about Islam in city schools. In practice, this means that only Muslims will be allowed to teach Islam and that pupils will not be exposed to any critical perspectives about the religious, social and political ideology of Islam.

Under the wide-ranging accord, Muslims in Hamburg will also have the right to take three Islamic holidays as days off from work. Up until now, it has been up to individual employers to decide whether or not to grant Muslim staff religious days off on a case-by-case basis. In addition, Muslim students will be exempt from attending school on Muslim holidays.

The agreement also includes provisions for the construction of more mosques in Hamburg, the upkeep of cultural Islamic facilities, the authorization for Muslims to bury their dead without the use of coffins, as well as the counseling of patients and prison inmates by Muslim clerics.

Hamburg has also pledged to incorporate Muslim broadcast slots alongside Protestant and Catholic broadcasts on public and private radio and television, as well as broadcasting council seats for Muslims with the northern Germany’s NDR public broadcaster and Germany’s federal ZDF television channel.

Muslims for their part undertake to respect fundamental rights and support equality between the sexes, although the document provides no specifics on how these notions are defined or how they will be enforced.

Mayor Scholz, who is a former federal labor minister of the opposition Social Democrats (SPD), described the signing at the Hamburg city hall as a “milestone” for integration, adding: “With the signing of these agreements, we are strengthening the societal foundation of our city: we are all Hamburg.”

Hamburg’s agreements were made with the city’s Alevi community (Alevis are a liberal sect within Islam based mostly in Turkey) and three Muslim umbrella organizations: the DITIB Turkish-Islamic Union (DITIB), the Council of Islamic Communities (Shura) and the Federation of Islamic Cultural Centers (VIKZ). Together these four groups are said to represent about 90% of the Muslims living in Hamburg.

Zekeriya Altug, chairman of the Hamburg branch of the DITIB Turkish-Islamic Union (DITIB is actually a branch of the Turkish government’s Ministry of Religious Affairs), called it a “historic day” for both Hamburg and Germany. In a statement Altug said: “With it, Hamburg has today set a precedent for the future of our country. Many Muslim employees didn’t dare ask for days off on those days for fear of being seen badly. Now they will be able to say: ‘It’s my holiday, it’s governed by law.’ That makes an enormous difference.”

The agreement still requires final approval by Hamburg’s Parliament, in which Scholz’s Social Democrats hold a majority. Mayor Scholz said he hoped for a “broad consensus.” The opposition Greens have welcomed the accords; Green Party spokesperson Christa Goetsch called them “a new chapter in the history of equality.” And Hamburg’s Protestant Bishop Kirstin Fehrs said the agreement proved that Hamburg was “open to the world and tolerant.”

Nevertheless, SPD parliamentary leader Andreas Dressel urged caution. In an interview with the German newspaper Die Welt, he said political leaders should “take their time before approving such important matters.” He said the Hamburg Parliament’s Constitutional Committee will convene an expert hearing on the agreement and that a vote will not take place until the spring of 2013.

The leadership of the opposition Christian Democrats (CDU) has also expressed skepticism about the agreement. Party leader Marcus Weinberg and party chairman Dietrich Wersich issued a joint statement saying that although they welcome the conclusion of the talks, after six years of negotiations there are key issues that remain unresolved: “The agreements contain a number of points, the implementation of which need to be clarified. For this reason, the CDU will not take a final position on the matter until it concludes discussion with representatives of the churches, with scientists and with lawyers. The unresolved questions involve detailed issues such as the regulation of the school day, the teaching of religion in public schools and the holidays.”

The agreement has also been met with vociferous opposition from the classical liberal Free Democratic Party (FDP). In a statement, FDP Deputy Anna von Treuenfels characterized the agreement as “an unnecessary and imprecise treaty unacceptably negotiated behind the backs of the citizenry.” She added: “Moreover, this agreement is totally imprecise when accuracy is required more than ever. On the issue of wearing religiously motivated clothing by public servants, especially teachers [sic]. Even the future of the heretofore successful interdenominational model of religious education in Hamburg is being jeopardized. Plus the fact that the lengthy negotiating process and final signature has been carried out without parliamentary involvement is also unacceptable, yet another reason why the FDP rejects this treaty.”

The Central Council of Ex-Muslims, a Cologne-based group representing former Muslims who have been sentenced to death for apostasy, said the signing of the accord on November 13 represented a “black day” for Germany. Chairperson Mina Ahadi said: “The city of Hamburg has bowed to pressure Islamic organizations and has made concessions that are a step backwards and do not improve the rights of women.”

Muslims for their part hope the Hamburg treaty will establish a precedent for the rest of Germany to follow. The spokesperson for the Alevi community in Germany, Aziz Alsandemir, says: “We hope that this accord will be viewed as a trigger by other provinces.”

Bremen, the second-largest city in northern Germany, is close to finalizing its own treaty with local Muslim umbrella groups. According to the Socialist mayor of Bremen, Jens Böhrnsen, “Muslims form a significant part of the population of Bremen.” The German states of Baden-Württemberg and Schleswig-Holstein, both of which are run by Socialist governments, are also looking at negotiating treaties with the Muslims in their regions.

At the national level, the SPD has said it would like to see Islam recognized as an official religion in Germany. In an interview with the newspaper Neue Osnabrücker Zeitung, SPD politician Dieter Wiefelspütz said: “It would be an important signal to the four million Muslims in Germany, if the state recognizes Islam as a religious community.” He added: “Islam needs a fair chance in Germany.”

Why are Germany’s Socialist politicians, who are usually militantly proud of their secular credentials, bending over backwards to accommodate Islam? The SPD hopes to unseat German Chancellor Angela Merkel in the German elections in the fall of 2013, and Muslim voters may very well determine the outcome.

First published at the New York-based Gatestone Institute where Soeren Kern is a Senior Fellow. He is also Senior Fellow for European Politics at the Madrid-based Grupo de Estudios Estratégicos / Strategic Studies Group. Follow him on Facebook.

Cartoonist Kurt Westergaard – Picture: Claus Sjodin / cspress.dk

The world famous Mohammed cartoonist, Kurt Westergaard, 77, recently suffered a serious double pneumonia that almost succeeded where terrorists have failed. Today he is too old, ill and tired to promote his own book, which has recently been published in English. Of the 82 drawings in the book, the Danish Security and Intelligence Service and the Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs fear that at least seven could generate renewed unrest among extremist Muslims

A cartoon Kurt Westergaard already made in 1994 – photographed by: Claus Sjodin / cspress.dk

Kurt Westergaard and journalist and author John Lykkegaard were invited to attend two major events at Soho House in London and New York to launch the English version of Kurt Westergaard’s autobiography, The Man Behind the Mohammed Cartoon – which is now available worldwide as an e-book and in paperback.

“The plan was to be in London on 19 November and then proceed directly to New York. Invitations were sent out, and the publishing world and the media from all over the world showed considerable interest. However, it turned out that the chosen venue was too small, and we were offered larger premises,” says the Danish publisher.

John Lykkegaard received the first request in May 2012, but due to the European Football Championships, the Olympic Games in London and the Tour de France, he consulted the Danish Security and Intelligence Service, and chose to postpone the event until November 2012. Now, though, because of Mr. Westergaard’s health, they have had to cancel altogether.

Another cartoon by Kurt Westergaard

“Kurt Westergaard was to have signed his book and promoted it in the Anglophone world, but now he is now regrettably too weak to travel. We started by cancelling New York, hoping he would still be able to manage the event in London and had planned to fly home immediately after the presentation, but we have had to cancel this event as well,” John Lykkegaard explains.

“When you have spent quite some time in intensive care on oxygen and suffered occasional bouts of unconsciousness, you tend to think that there are only two options. At my age I could not help thinking that I was heading in the wrong direction. At one stage we feared I might have cancer. It all began with double pneumonia, but the doctors were puzzled by subsequent complications that led to a continued worsening of my condition. Over the last few months I have undergone numerous examinations and been hospitalized on several occasions. Luckily, I did not have cancer, but my illness has weakened me so much that I was unable to walk for a time and had to use a Zimmer frame. Although I am undergoing rehabilitation, I feel my health is deteriorating from one day to the next,” says Kurt Westergaard.

Yet another cartoon by Kurt Westergaard

“There is a prize totaling 11 million dollars on Kurt Westergaard’s head. At one point it seemed the terrorists would miss out,” the Danish publisher comments sarcastically, and continues: “On the other hand the Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs, as well as the Danish Security and Intelligence Service (PET), will probably breathe a sigh of relief after the cancellation of the trips promoting the English version of the book on Kurt Westergaard – whose drawing of the prophet Mohammed with a bomb in his turban inflamed the Middle East.”

Kurt Westergaard/John Lykkegaard (2012): The Man behind the Mohammed Cartoon. Tilst: Forlaget Mine Erindringer, 274 pages, 82 cartoons, 49.47 euros. Buy at Amazon.

John Lykkegaard (left), Danish author and journalist, and Kurt Westergaard – picture: Claus Sjodin / cspress.dk