I have used to translate this article from "international politics" the google-language tool. The article is too long to translate it by hand. I have read the most of the translation and i think it is not perfect, but i can understand it.
You should read this interview! Here you can see that a non-western woman want to save us and a western woman betrayed us to the nazi-murdermuslimes.
Barbara John is an CDU (Conservative) politican. But she is the chiefdhimmi of whole Germany. Here is a picture of this beast:
Mina Ahadi fleed from the murdermuslimes in Iran. She said the truth about islam. Here is a picture of this noble woman:
” A good Muslim must be anti-western “
Discussion by Barbara John and Mina Ahadi
Appeared in: Edition September 2007
Is our country too tolerant? Who threatens, who defends our values? Does the Koran with the Basic Law get along? A dispute over the danger of an Islamic Gegenkultur, the radicalization by religion and zerplatzte dreams of the multi-cultural society.
IP: Lives Mrs. Ahadi, Sie in Cologne, where a hysterische debate raves at present around the building of a large mosque. Are you for it or against it?
Ahadi: I am absolute against it. All these topics, like building of mosques or head cloth, are affected of a certain policy. The political Islam tries to play in the European countries a role and one of its power instruments is the mosque. It gives here already over 2000. Who defines the mosques only as prayer houses, an important problem in Germany plays down.
IP: , You divide Mrs. John this opinion?
John: No, I see that exactly differently around. For me it is natural that humans of each religion have an authentic fundamental right to practice their religion. In addition also places of worship belong. A Verweigerung would mean that the state makes itself and determines a superordinate secular convicition anheischig as state religion, in which form religion is exercised. That is a Taliban style, which I reject totally.
IP: Why do you want to forbid their prayerprayer prayer to the Muslims, Mrs. Ahadi?
Ahadi: If in the prayerprayer prayers a certain policy is publicised and called to the murder against disbelieving ones, to have we a serious problem. A crucial question is, where the money comes: Whether humans decide or whether some political federations organize a building of mosques. Because those are not humans, but remote controlled organizations of some governments in the Near East. One must look exactly: From where do they get their money, a which political goal here they would like to achieve?
IP: Does the state have to examine, where the money comes?
John: That is not affair of the state. The Christian churches and the Jewish municipality are not supported, but the Muslims. And for me it is natural the fact that the Muslims, who live here and on the average much less earns support from Islamic countries as Germans, gotten. There in this case it is the Turkish-Islamic union DITIB, which builds, and the Turkish state to money will naturally donate. But why not? Why aren't those to give money for a building of mosques to their faith brothers?
IP: They do not have any doubts?
John: I would find precarious, if they said: Here are five million and we require that a certain Imam is there, which says certain things. Therefore am I also for the fact that we strengthens Imame train, which are educated in Germany and on German to preach. Also, so that the suspicion disappears that an influence is exerted there, which does not correspond to our legal order.
IP: Mrs. Ahadi, who influence the mosques exert on the Gläubigen?
Ahadi: If in a road a mosque is built, some men begin after three or four months to be interested and regularly gone in it. Then something begins itself to change in the family. The mosque has a completely clear effect. They obtain a patriarchales system: anti-west, anti-woman, anti-more secular. The women are pressurized, whom radicalizes men. The mosque is not only a prayer house, but it implements an ideology. And in Germany - a scandal!
IP: Do the mosques have to be supervised?
Ahadi: Yes, I believe already.
IP: , You can follow Mrs. John?
John: If you would be right, the Imame humans became radical convictions near-brings. I am sure me that it like that is not. But if it like that were, one would have to observe it. And happened also, so far I know. The protection of the constitution is in different mosques present, also with appropriate languagewell-informed coworkers. But we can live only peacefully and in a well-meaning manner with one another, if our attitudes are based on value conceptions, and many of these value conceptions are in religions to find. I am convinced that also the Islam these values obtain - mercy, friendship, love for humans. Religions must preach in a pluralistischen society tolerance, if they want to be treated with tolerance.
IP: Mrs. Ahadi, Sie accuse to mosque associations and Islam federations to do the opposite - to preach the radical Islam and fundamentalisieren thus „the normal “Muslims.
Ahadi: Completely exactly. The Islam does not have positive values, like all other religions also. One can discuss at a university theoretically over the Koran. Some my acquaintance for example are gläubig, they pray, but they make also jokes over G-d and the prophets. And they go without head cloth on the road! However it concerns to me the Islam as political movement. I ask you, Mrs. John: In which world do you live? Did you hear of the Islamic terror? Of Iran? Of Steinigungen? How do you think of this political phenomenon?
John: I notice everything that you mentioned, naturally with frightening. If one picks out from the Koran, then we can to be in agreement with it and not have it to fight. If humans represent this opinion, then we must argue with them. We may not do also giving way, if parents say: My Imam said, my daughter must starting from tenth or twelfth Lebensjahr a head cloth carry. It does not want, but it must! Or it may not participate in the Schwimmunterricht or ride along on class travel - there we must negotiate with parents.
IP: Mrs. Ahadi, is the head cloth for you exactly the same a symbol of the political Islam like the mosque?
Ahadi: Naturally, that is a clear indication of the political Islam and the woman suppression. Why does it give ever more masked women on the roads? Step by step the Islamics fight here for more head cloths and for stricter religious traditions.
IP: , We must forbid the head cloth to Mrs. John?
John: I hold neither something of it if a state says: You must wear a head cloth, as in Iran, nor hold I which of it if he forbids carrying the head cloth. In both systems the liberty and self-determination are hurt by humans, in this case by women.
IP: What do you mean, why ever carry more Mrs. Kopftuch?
John: Because there is reliably a stronger movement, which says: We must point a public confession as Muslims flag and to the Islam placing, evenly because we are regarded everywhere with distrust.
IP: Doesn't this public confession obstruct the straight integration to the Islam?
John: If we say, who carries a head cloth, it cannot myself integrate then these women have an integration problem. They might not sit times in the department store at a sewing machine and not work in the hospital only quite.
IP: Only the head cloth, then the integration problem or nevertheless differently around?
John: By carrying the head cloth a woman solves with those, which assume that them are from any Islamic movement, a clear reaction out: „I do not want those, that am a cut Terroristin. “Of the three million Muslims, who live here, the few practice at all their religion. But the state must embody religious Pluralität in its rules. And in addition it belongs that Muslims can wear head cloths and build representative mosques, in order to show: We are here, we for this country will argue, we are good democrats.
IP: How does one get the people to be argued for a country as ours?
John: The attractiveness of a liberal society pulls everyone into its spell. That applies also to admitting Muslims. I am convinced that the best, what we have, which is liberty of the individual. None can extract itself from this liberty, and who enjoyed those once, which will argue also for her - if he her does not experience and we to him prohibitions to impose upon. I have the feeling that Mrs. Ahadi does not believe in Kraft of a free society.
IP: Mrs. Ahadi, Sie appoint yourself also to the liberty of the individual…
Ahadi: Crucially the civil laws, are all the same which religion and nationality have humans. We came from Iran, the Iraq or Turkey here, because we thought, here can we better live, economically as democratic. One can quite criticize and demand the Basic Law to improve it but it must apply to all. Nobody can come and require that it may strike its children, only because it a Muslim is. And nobody may force its daughter to wear a head cloth…
IP: … which you subordinate to parents thereby.
Ahadi: But that is nevertheless like that, that is a child law breaking! A child can decide such a thing not even. Do not play down please! There the state must interfere and forbid that. And the head cloth for adults must be forbidden in public institutions. Labour office and hospital must be neutral.
IP: Then you in addition, a problem with our churches have.
Ahadi: Yes. In Germany state and religion are not really separate. I do not only criticize the Islamic religious education, but I have also a problem with the CDU. It defends mosques and the Islam only, because it defends crucifix and church in truth.
John: Mrs. Ahadi has the conception of another society, which rejects and denationalizes religion. But we do not have a French laizistisches system or a Turkish, where the Ministry provides the lecturelecture lectures. With us the State of all religions is opposite neutral. And we have now new religions, as the Islam, which are not yet grown into this system.
Ahadi: One can land thereby also in a dead end. And Germany already landed in this dead end. Because the Islamic organizations use exactly this slip hole: They demand that they are likewise a right to financial support, because also the churches get money. One cannot undertake anything against these organizations, as long as one does not intersperse clear secular. The Islamic organizations act politically very intelligently and strategically. And now they demand still Imamunterricht!
IP: The Islam is for you never only religion, but always politics?
Ahadi: Above all politics. It is also a religion, but for 30 years the aggressive, political Islam dominates in the west. And completely particularly in Germany.
IP: Since then you created the Central Council of the ex Muslims, you are threatened.
Ahadi: Yes. I get threatening letters and stand under police protection. There milli Görüs does not stand more drunter. But it stands in it that they will settle me. Milli Görüs is an Islamic terrorist organization, which wants to islamize the German society. We live nevertheless in a democracy! And I do not know, why you do not take position as a politician in addition, Mrs. John.
John: The fact that you have police protection, shows nevertheless the sense of responsibility of a liberal society. Their fears of milli Görüs hold I however for unfounded.
IP: , You get Mrs. Ahadi these threats, because you abgeschworen from the Islam have?
Ahadi: Yes. We have abgeschworen, because we had to do something. We criticize the official German policy and want thereby to be finally noticed.
IP:But Schäubles conference of Islam would have been the correct place. Why does the German Minister of the Interior talk with the topic integration particularly about the Islam, Mrs. John?
John: A conference of Islam gives it, because we must experience world-wide tremendous crimes in Islamic name. And then we have England, where Muslims grown up there are inclined to acts of violence, which one could not at all introduce oneself.
IP: And in the Netherlands…
Streitgespräch_5_2.gif John: Yes, also in the Netherlands, the murder of Theo van Gogh. There naturally the conception develops, should the Muslims, who live here, also in this direction develop, must we that prevent. The sky is thanks it yet did not occur. Schäuble did not introduce the conference of Islam in vain with the fact that the Islam must find a homeland here.
Ahadi: I would not be gone, even if they had invited me. Religion has to look for there nothing, only quite no reactionary Islamic groupings. The signal of the conference of Islam is that the wrong organizations are recognized. The government talks with the Islam federations, because it wants to prevent that a notice takes place here. That is the wrong policy.
IP: Why is it wrong to merge these organizations?
Ahadi: Because those, which speak there in our name, were selected not by us. A large part of the local, Muslims so mentioned is more secular and integrated. But Schäuble talks with these federations, although they are ideologically seen toward integration. Understand, it give a difference between humans, who are Muslims, and such terror organizations, who try, to specify Muslimsein as an indication of the main identity of these humans.
IP: They call the Islam federations terror organizations. Is that not excessively exaggerated?
Ahadi: No. We defended and practiced it today with a movement to do, the Steinigung, death penalty, murder and suicide assassination attempts. Did you ever hear that these people protest against honour murders? They would like power at any price. If someone liked to practice everything that stands in the Koran, then it is already a radical Muslim. And today we have to do it with milli Görüs and other organizations, which try, to inform the Koran. Better, creditor Muslim must be therefore anti-western.
John: They would state thus, the Islam are always radical?
Ahadi: Yes.
IP: What is her attitude, Mrs. John?
John: That contradicts my life experience. I have contact to young Muslims, and there nothing is from Radikalität. Which I determine, completely different movement, is i.e. that the religion separates slowly from its cultural, Turkish-Arab background, in which it grew. In an inquiry I examined recently, how the faith practice of the young people differs from that of their parents. And there is answers come how: „I use the German language in the mosque. “Or: „I am open for new interpretations. “There a freely floating Religiosität develops. I do not want to say that that is unproblematic, but straight therefore we must embed her here into the western culture.
IP: But that did not function nevertheless so far. Over years under the banner of the tolerance and the reality - keyword parallel company - was away-looked was denied. Didn't Multikulti emerge as life lie?
John: When, but those, which were very close to, as I by my vocational practice, do not have already noticed life lie that certain things in the public did not play a role, for instance the treatment of girls. We placed some there on the legs, but that generally hardly interested. There was also the left one, which said: „To foreigners, leave us with this Germans not alone! “Natural was a tendency: The foreigners are in principle the good ones and the Germans are in principle the bad ones.
Ahadi: Exactly that is the social direction, which wrong tolerance and Multikulti until today gave. We women should talk finally about it, like this religion, as the political Islam made our life broken. They worked in Berlin, where there are most honour murders. But the media hardly reported on it.
John: On it nevertheless always one reported!
Ahadi: Only, when from us pressure came. This Multikulti illusion is, it now past a bad influence had. Therefore I criticize also German politicians, who talk in each case about the girls, who want to go allegedly with a head cloth on the road. But I talk about the 90 per cent, which do not want that! Those are pressurized, that become each year more badly.
John: But in many families with the Islam the nothing at all does not have to do! The men never went into a mosque. Separate they from cultural traditions acted. Therefore I stress also that we should talk particularly with the second and third generation, which is well trained, which separates from these roots. There the Islam is differently interpreted.
IP: Koran and Basic Law fit thus?
John: Yes, naturally, the Muslims live nevertheless here and do to nobody which.
Ahadi: You say! And which is with honour murders, obligation marrying?
IP: Mrs. John, where is the red line, where we must say stop?
John: , Where our laws are hurt. If a child, a daughter or a son, are to be married, we cannot tolerate that. Also not, if they are to be brought into Turkey or into Lebanon.
Ahadi: But if one practices the Scharia, then one is against this system. Because G-d decided everything, and which one must accept. The religion wants to interfere into the policy and decides on everything, even over my bed. The religion says, how we have to sleep with our married men. That is a totalitarian religion. I would like here no Scharia!
John: I also not.
IP: Do you see this danger at the Turkish municipalities?
Ahadi: Not only there, but everywhere in the parallel company a radicalization and a stabilization of the patriarchalen system.
John: Then you tell us once, how it will look here in ten years.
Ahadi: If this politics one continues, then there is a mosque at each corner and in the streetscape everywhere head cloths. And slowly a process will begin that the Scharia is permitted here, not for all, only for the Muslims. In Sweden and Canada Islamic organizations said: If we have family problems, we can call our own court. I am afraid that I am pressurized a daily. If in my environment a mosque is and the women with head cloth rumlaufen, the men will say: Why does the one head cloth carry and does work as a lady doctor - and you not?
John: There I would say, that am not not your thing, I carry it not.
Ahadi: But you would defend the head cloth woman nevertheless, not me!
John: No! I defend the self-determination of concrete humans! Erstmal I would not marry so a man at all. And if me came in such a way, I would say: Then let you separate, you can for me remain stolen.
Ahadi: Thanks, a good way out, but the woman one kills before at home. My fear is the fact that in Germany a woman is gesteinigt sometime, if we do not do anything and plays down everything in such a way like you Mrs. John.
John: I do not divide this horror vision. I believe that we should less pay attention more here to the Islamic organizations, but the development with the young Muslims. I am convinced that the most valuable members and defender of a democratic society are.
IP: But why there are parallel companies, which isolate themselves from the majority then in large cities such as Berlin or Cologne?
John: What is called isolate?
IP: Quarter one with Turkish infrastructure, women, who do not speak German, schools with high foreigner portion, at which hardly still German is spoken.
John: Those are partially naturally house-made problems. The fact that some children on the road can learn German hardly still in uncontrolled way is connected with the living situation. Because the children at the age from zero to six are the most strongly segregierte group. Therefore one must offer German promptly in the kindergartens and train the educators. But all this does not have to do anything with an intended isolating. I do not know anybody, which wants to isolate itself consciously.
IP: Integration, assimilation, parallel company - where we stand?
Ahadi: There is a clear parallel company. Reactionary one of forces from the Islamic countries very much power won. This politics caused with the German rage, which one cannot do them evils. When we created the Central Council of the ex Muslims, we got thousands of Mails from them, in which they thanked you us. It does not concern that the Germans do not want Muslims. But if the Islamic fundamentalists pulls up walls here, then they are right with their skepticism.
John: I believe that we have lack with the structural integration still, particularly with the ascent by education and over sharing at the job market. That is because of the fact that the system is here so inflexible. But it breaks straight open. A larger problem is our conception of homogeneity. The best foreigner is one, to which one does not regard that. Only if one is no more Muslim, one is a good Muslim. If we deplore ourselves only over the fact that they have another religion and culture and to also show, we do not become an attractive immigration company.
Achim Rust held the conversation
and Dinah Stratenwerth
Download as pdf As pdf download (9.037.855 bytes)
Mina Ahadi
geb. 1956 in Iran, fought against the Mullah regime, before which she fled 1990 to Europe. Since 1996 it lives in Cologne. It created 2001 the international committee toward Steinigung and at the beginning of this yearly the Central Council of the ex Muslims.
Barbara John
geb.1938, was from 1981 to 2003 Commissioners for Foreigners citizen of Berlin of the senate. Zurzeit is it chairmen of the welfare organisation in equal numbers Berlin and Koordinatorin for language promotion in the senate administration for education, science and research.
Here you can read the Original-German articel:
http://www.internationalepolitik.de/archiv/jahrgang2007/september2007/download/338b9a8e521a11dcbaa0757a5bfe41864186/original_ip_9-streitgesprach.pdf
Topic: Barbara John - This beast is much worse than Hillary Clinton (Read 2560 times)