Category Archives: infidels

The Veil, The Mask of Islamic Supremacy, Folly, and Failure

beautiful-football-fan

Beautiful Soccer Fan (No Veil)

The polarized debate over full-face veils in Great Britain is turning ugly. “This could be the trigger for the grim spiral that produced riots in the north of England five years ago,” says Trevor Phillips, head of the Commission For Racial Equality in the UK.

Jack Straw, Leader of the House of Commons, recently sparked a media debate by saying he preferred women not to wear full-face veils at meetings in his constituency because he believed they made communication difficult.

After years of western leaders bending to Muslim demands, British leaders are daring to suggest theat the polarised situation over race and religion is riskeing a repeat of the Burnley and Oldham riots, adding: “We saw it in France last year where the French allowed north African communities to grow up completely separately, not feeling French.”

“Eventually that frustration, that exclusion boiled over into the kind of car burning we saw last year—I do not want that for Britain.”

Of course, any Muslim response is typically self-serving and one-sided. Massoud Shadjareh, from the lobby group the Islamic Human Rights Commission, told the BBC that “ministers after ministers after ministers” had been attacking the Muslim community recently, which was unfair and “not a means of respectable dialogue”.

“I have to say the Muslim community really has been extremely calm, and extremely responsible,” he said. Muslim Council of Britain secretary general Muhammad Abdul Bari said the integration debate had become “increasingly shrill and ugly”, accusing Phillips of having a “poor track record” on this issue and criticised him for not mentioning recent attacks against Muslims which “accompanied this so-called debate”.

Muslim Council of Britain secretary general Muhammad Abdul Bari said: “We have seen veils being forcefully pulled off Muslim women and Muslim individuals, including an imam in Glasgow, badly beaten up by thugs.

Reality check. Unfamiliar customs do make people uncomfortable. People of all tribes and tribulations. So Muslim women who live in Europe should strongly consider the consequences of wearing the veil before they pick up and tear across the globe seeking asylum. There seems to be a groundswell of well-intentioned folks who are sick of this acquiescent multicultural crap at the cost of all common sense.

Melanie Phillips, in her book, “Londonstan: How Britain Is Creating A Terror State Within” is not shy in assailing the damage multiculturalism and uncontrolled immigration has done to England and its once proud institutions, now paralysed by political correctness and the fear of being labelled racist and xenephobic.

If one is to survive in a modern society then one must expect to to make accomodations to it just as those of us who live in modern societies make accomodations to backward, sexist, pre-industrial conventions when we travel. No one is forcing these women to dress like Madonna the Material Girl, but it is not unreasonable to expect people to be recognizable on the street, in the courts, and on pieces of identification like a driver’s license.

But over and over again, we are told how “uncomfortable” certain immigrants with a certain religious purity feel when encountered with the strange stares they receive. We are not talking about violent attacks here. Nothing of that sort should be tolerated, on either side of any divide. But time and time again, in one European country after another, it is the Muslims who are demanding peculiar accommodations and psychological crutches, while also committing the most atrocious crimes against host nation citizenry and getting away with it while natives are prosecuted with impunity for the so-called “hurt” feelings of an Islamic passive aggressive. This is called extortion. Here’s an example:

A Muslim teaching assistant who sparked a political storm after she refused to remove her veil during lessons, has won her employment tribunal case for victimization against the school which suspended her but lost her claims for discrimination and harassment. Ms Azmi was awarded £1,000 for “injury to feelings” after she succeeded in her claim of victimization. But her claims of direct and indirect discrimination, and her claim of harassment, were dismissed.

Burqa

Woman In Burqa

Let’s review: when one moves to a new culture, guess what? You should expect to feel uncomfortable once in a while. Hell—I feel uncomfortable in too damn many places right here in America. Should I have the right to riot or sue the britches off the social stratum that makes me feel isolated, inferior, or downright scared?

And how about all these Western visitors to Muslim countries forced to take to scarf, et cetera.

If these Muslim women and their husbands and religious leaders find the idea of leaving one’s face uncovered in public and during conversation unthinkable then they should be escorted to a part of the world where a gal can get back to basics and throw a burkha over herself and enjoy regular public beatings when she exposes an ankle.

If one is to survive in a modern society then one must expect to to make accomodations to it just as those of us who live in modern societies make accomodations to backward, sexist, pre-industrial conventions when we travel. No one is forcing these women to dress like Madonna the Material Girl, but it is not unreasonable to expect people to be recognizable on the street, in the courts, and on pieces of identification like a driver’s license.

That’s the least one can do, or else we might ALL be facing this very soon with grave consequences.

As one wit put it, “There are perfectly reasonable, modern ways for a woman who wants to make a display of her piety to cover herself, but when it comes to completely blocking but for a narrow slit the loveliness that is woman, there are a million places on this planet where this behavior is welcomed and most of them are served by non-stop daily flights. By all means, get on one, now. And the kicker. Covering one’s whole body with a burqa or one’s face with a veil is not even mentioned in the Qur’an, but is an extreme version of an indoctrinated and ruthlessly enforced modesty. That uncomfortable black (usually) stretch of cloth is a social weapon and a psychological result of a misogynous culture notoriously called Islam, The Religion of Submission.

Originally published on October 23, 2006. A Project Scenewash repost.

Name This Manifesto The Old Millstone Around My Neck

Aisle 6

All or Nothing, Aisle 6

WASHINGTON, DC—DATELINE OCTOBER 27, 2003. Forging an identity in these uncertain times is not an easy task for someone who has prided himself on his independence, first and foremost, from most of the reckoning powers pursuing his support or demise, whichever comes first. As a result of this hesitancy, the Scenewash Project has little to promote but is simply a slowly developing critical work-in-progress concerned foremost with identifying in fresh terms the strategic forces now influencing the corrosive state of American politics, its public policies, both foreign and domestic, and in postulating, after careful consideration of the formidable body of evidence, a compelling worldview better suited to these uncertain times which try humanity’s collective soul, contaminate our air, corrupt our speech, implode our habits, regale our future, and break our very wills to contribute to a sane and friendly but progressive and fearless community.

We have considered this task a worthy occupation to the end of our lives, if need be, because we believe that the original promises of these United States of America still beckon, and that the American political experiment, despite its follies and excesses which certainly require checking, is superior to any the world has yet seen. We will not prepare for a collapse of the West, just because a few malingering malcontents clamour for world revolution, whether it be from a Marxist, Maoist, or an Islamist perspective, but shall fight these perspectives while calling for a more focussed revitalization of America’s own backyard.

Now more clearly understood as a rather ordinary attempt to peel back the layers of a conflicted mental landscape where art and politics beat each other up while few are they the wiser, we will express ourselves in terms of the past and the present, and will not appeal to an uncertain future which fatalists of every tradition, especially those of religion, of politics, and of science, pay homage to and usually broker every prejudice and every pride in vainglorious attempts to thrust the spirit of humanity onto the flaming pyres of god, gold, state, and imperialist superstition.

These dialecticians who worship the binary while faithlessly praising the unitary, operate on misguided principles which presume dialectics is an inclusive exercise of expression rather than the polarizing noise only well-entrenched and sometimes well-meaning fools and their followers, unquestionably trapped in status and nuance, can embrace.

Originally conceived as a wrecking ball to schoolboy aspirations, this site has no choice but to erupt from the silent passages of time and truth by urging a return to those same aspirations, reflecting a growing inversion of the individual artistic urge and its involuntary suppression by the forces of a co-opting culture. This culture is a mythology in which the artist, the politician, the ordinary citizen and varied patrons are forced by necessities of survival to conspire with lessons and insults to separate the vigorous mind from the expansive spirit with shop-worn tautologies and fantasy, eschewing the everyday, the mundane, the merely indifferent, rendering as obsolete the witnesses of this takeover.

A fading youth spent in ceaseless searching, knocking, seeking, and digging only to discover little of lasting value is one whose only inspiration translates an energy dedicated to the enumeration of differences between zero and nothing, self and the other, in recovering value and anti-value based not on a system of indulgences, individually or collectively wrapped, but on an absolute proof that language is mere alphabet dirt and slogans are only wordsuck. Languages run amuck become dangerous constructs perhaps of better service when fashioned into ploughshares of silence than into callous weapons of feathering alienation and mass confusion. Unless followed by actions appropriate to productive language, language has become nothing more than a functionary of aesthetics, and its practitioner, a co-opted pretender.

To that end, we offer few strategies or discernable guideposts to the currently self-enchanted. We have no use for those satisfied warriors of the establishment, those who wear the stripes of our enemies, smile the crooked smile, and walk the crooked mile beautifully camouflaged behind the mysteries of selfishness. We shall show how they also have no use for us. With a multitude of theories calling for bombs and abortion, no one is safe in this calculating world. Of course, we—the radical centrists— refuse to be pigeonholed, not by the haranguing extremists nor by the denizens and addicts of apathy. If we are a hybrid breed of political creature, so be it.

We, however, boast of a singular aim. To articulate a well-considered argument describing what we believe to be the only hope for America and the world, and that hope, in a phrase, is progressive centrism. The center is nearly always dismissed by the polarizing POWERS OF ENTRENCHMENT as mushy or wishy washy, unable to make up its minds. We however, believe that it is these polarizing powers of the Left and the Right, who fight false wars on false battlegrounds, who make well-choreographed concessions in lucrative soundbytes and photo op activities merely for appearances sake who have truly betrayed this country, and this planet.

In the United States with its two party system, the aggragate lobbies and special interests attest plainly to this phenomenon of hypocrisy which disrepects and excludes (while still clamouring for its vote) the progressive centrist. These dialecticians who worship the binary while faithlessly praising the unitary, operate on misguided principles which presume dialectics is an inclusive exercise of expression rather than the polarizing noise only well-entrenched and sometimes well-meaning fools and their followers, unquestionably trapped in status and nuance, can embrace.

The byword is moderation in all things but truth. Extremism is killing us all. Polarization is the sword that fertilizes the fields of plenty with the blood of innocence, and rots the crops of destiny. Our manifesto is not the place for specific criticism, but the Scenewash Project web site will by the best laid plans of mice and men, embrace this dialectical mission.The Left and the Right must be reeled in.

We believe that the Declaration of Independence, the US Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the writings and spirit of Thomas Paine are a good place to start.

The greed of the right and the stupidity of the left have rendered the vast majority of us useless, oppressed by the perfumed stench of their theories and their actions. The salt of the earth purifies and preserves. Where do we begin this purification process? Who will be our leaders? Is it possible that a renewed sensibility can arise from the falsifying political landscape now pulled taut like a rubber band by the existing powers that be? We don’t know, but we insist on trying.

We are reminded of this metaphor. Jesus of Nazareth was walking along the road to anywhere. The mother of two of his disciples who were brothers, rushed up and voiced her desire that he grant her wish that one of them sit on their master’s left hand (wing) and the other to sit on his right. The Nazarene’s reply was simple and to the point: “You don’t know what you are talking about. He went on to describe that the rulers of the heathen exhibit hierarchies of the strong who oppress the little ones, but it must not be so among them, the chosen. I add a footnote. Among the common folk there is a general consensus that politics is the mother of all harlots. Thus, I derive my notion of the “progressive centrist” as originating with this tale.

There must be a better way to fix what ails us than rupturing the rubber band while trying to maintain the status quo or sending the globe into unfathomable chaos as many on the far left and far right would advocate, each according to their own specific madness.

In another of the synoptics, the story is retold without the mother’s presence, but it is the brothers themselves who approach their teacher with this request for special position and honors. The remainder of the incident is identical to the other.

It is clear. The Left and the Right each boast a portion of the TRUTH, which can be likened to a rubber band that has no beginning and no end. The progressive centrist inhabits the area within the circle created by the band itself, open and free space loosely formed and with equal access to the truth which lies along the circumference of the band. Both parties in the extreme meanwhile haplessly mark battle lines shouting war cries and stretch the band of truth as far as they can by pulling it deep and taut into their own camps, tightening and oppressing the more central and observable truths and those populations which dwell inside the once freely-circulating circle.

Once the tightened rubber band has been pulled to its extreme limit and has been popped, truth no longer exists in its most perfect sense with no beginning and no end, of equal benefit to all, but becomes the ultimate weapon of deception, far worse than the chartable deceptions of the band-tightening oppositional parties in their constrained tugs of war. Surely we can recognize the political landscape in this metaphor.

There must be a better way to fix what ails us than rupturing the rubber band while trying to maintain the status quo or sending the globe into unfathomable chaos as many on the far left and far right would advocate, each according to their own specific madness. So while we recall that the life and works of Thomas Paine are a good place to begin analyzing the difference between zero and nothing, the left and the right, extremism and moderation, life and death, we acknowledge that we do not live in his time, and therefore, must invent new methods to render equality, peace and plenty equitably upon the earth.

What say ye?

So, there is much work ahead of us, and we promise only this:

To experiment with the strident advances of web technology and design, deploying each to an oddball degree, while avoiding the genuflection of a generic stylism which furnishes the cynic with a strategic mouthful of pleasure while leaving us sad and purposeless. We will commit to compiling a point and counterpoint latticework mapping the existing political schematic as we find it. We shall then parse, and emerge with what we consider to be the radical centrist position along this latticework.

To furnish enough raw material to keep us busy through the thick years of our recorded visitation. To live the literary life along the bold, new terms of hypertextual reality, scratching out both an artistic body of visual work to match the music in our heads, keeping our eyes on our own pages and thus working to defeat the demons of boredom that envy and indifference can frequently induce and inadequately generalize while keeping free from the entanglements of frenzy the world mandates with its emphasis on competition and so-called originality. To work the gravitational pull of our own simple orbit, one field of inertia at a time…

Scouts Honor: Afghanistan Is No Place For Americans

LET’S DROP THE PLUMB BOB HERE, talk some straight talk, and rid ourselves of mixed emotions on all this war effort hubris. Attempting to transform the wild west of Afghanistan is much too expensive, much too depleting, of Western resources—perhaps not as much as the fiasco in Iraq, but it is simply the same kind of misguided belief in the mutability of Muslim man that pays insufficient attention to the permanent hold of Islam, and what it means for the West.

Resources are limited. Men of valor, war and peace material, morale. They have been squandered, in Afghanistan, as in Iraq. The belief that Afghanistan must be occupied directly by Western troops, that it is a choice of either of keeping those troops, and at the same time curing poverty or remaking, at horrific expense, the hopelessly backward unrepentant country of Afghanistan, or validate the terrorists.

We should not confuse the smooth Karzai, with his Western experience and connections, or a handful of others at the top, with the tribes of Afghanistan. And we should not avail the Afghan-Americans who are involved in “reconstruction” hopes and schemes and dreams who are similarly entirely unrepresentative of the real Afghanistan that Infidel countries must keep steadily in mind.

Wherever Obama Goes, There He Is

America should have as little to do directly with Muslim states as possible. No more messianism. No more spending of American or NATO funds. Let Saudi Arabia fight its own battles and be forced to share with the less fortunate Afghani Muslims, fellow members of the Umma. Let the Camp of Islam take care, if it so chooses, of its own. America should stop enouraging the Karzais of this world to talk wistfully of how they wish they could have that $300 billion spent in Iraq spent, rather, on them—tell them to stop counting on the Americans or other infidels, and if they wish, to go hat in hand to fellow members of the Umma.

Long live Afghanistan, but there is little need to patrol the entire country on a fool’s errand. In fact, the extreme mountainous terrain and fractured nature of its tribal peoples make these logistics an impossible task. Despite the recent resurgence of Taliban forces, the notion that somehow the place is indispensable to Al Qaeda is nonsense.

Al Qaeda operatives can train, and are training, in Pakistan, or for that matter, Al Qaeda sympathizers, those who have the same goals, prompted by the same texts, can train with Hezbollah in southern Lebanon, or with Hamas in Gaza, or with Jemaah Islamiyya on this or that Indonesian isle, or with Gemaah Islmayyah in a village in Lower Egypt, or with Jaish-e-Muhammad almost anywhere they choose in huge Pakistan. The American government seems to believe that because Al Qaeda once had camps in Afghanistan, this is the only place it can have camps. And it further seems to believe that Al Qaeda is the only or main terrorist threat. But they are all threats, and furthermore, terrorism is not the most effective weapon in the Jihad.

All of this needs somehow to penetrate the seemingly impenetrable skulls of official Washington.

Fight From Afar—Telemachy—should be the motto. Supply first this ruthless warlord, and then that. When necessary, enter the country intermittently, keeping enemies under surveillance and always off-guard. This has been America’s foreign policy mistake over for fifty years. The US once backed Saddam Hussein, then turned on him. The US once backed Manuel Noreiga, a former strong ally who worked for the CIA, then turned on him. Yet the US has propped up many a dictator who agreed the do our bidding. No wonder theere is so much distrust of American motives across the globe.

“Bottle up the Camp of Islam, to the extent possible, and exploit, to the greatest extent possible, the sectarian, ethnic, and economic divisions that divide the Camp of Islam. And then turn the attention of Infidels to the instruments of Jihad other than Terror.”

According to Kamram Memon a civil rights attorney writing for the “Muslims For A Safe America” website, “For decades, the U.S. government has provided economic and military aid to dictatorships in the Muslim world, on the theory that dictators would provide stability and protect American interests in the Muslim world. When Muslims tried to pick their own leaders, the U.S. government was unsympathetic. The CIA helped overthrow the democratically-elected president of Iran in 1953. President Bush’s father stood silently by as the Algerian military prevented democratically-elected leaders from taking power in the early 1990s.”

Memon continues, “After 9/11 highlighted anti-American feeling in the Muslim world, President Bush declared in November 2003 that the U.S. would reverse its policy. “Sixty years of Western nations excusing and accommodating the lack of freedom in the Middle East did nothing to make us safe — because in the long run, stability cannot be purchased at the expense of liberty. As long as the Middle East remains a place where freedom does not flourish, it will remain a place of stagnation, resentment, and violence ready for export. And with the spread of weapons that can bring catastrophic harm to our country and to our friends, it would be reckless to accept the status quo. Therefore, the United States has adopted a new policy, a forward strategy of freedom in the Middle East.”

President Bush has partly justified the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq on the grounds of spreading “freedom and democracy. But of course these two wars are about oil, but this motive is always denied while democracy is touted as America’s sole export. But make no mistake about this. I believe that there is a large very dangerous sector of the Muslim war that will NEVER be deterred from its jihad against the West, NEVER, unless it is soundly defeated. But this winning the hearts and minds approach is hogwash. According to one writer the US should:

“Bottle up the Camp of Islam, to the extent possible, and exploit, to the greatest extent possible, the sectarian, ethnic, and economic divisions that divide the Camp of Islam. And then turn the attention of Infidels to the instruments of Jihad other than Terror. Start with those campaigns of Da’wa, and the demogrpahic conquest that has already made the countries of Western Europe much more unpleasant, expensive, and physically dangerous than they would be without a large-scale Muslim presence.

And then like any true eagle scout “be prepared” for the next jihadist move.

But speaking of the Boy Scouts of America, there is more nonsense everyday popping up in this country. According to “The Militant Islam Monitor” the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has signed a lease for up to 25 years with a group that wants to build a Muslim youth camp at Lake Coralville near North Liberty, Iowa. The lease allows the Cedar Rapids-based Muslim Youth Camps of America to build on 114 acres of federal land. Construction can start once the group works out details with county and state regulators, the corps reported in March, 2006.

While the ACLU feels it necessary to take action against symbols of the Christian faith, it seems they do not attribute the same set of standards to Islam.

Plans for the $934,000 camp north of North Liberty call for lodging up to 60 campers ages 10 to 17 in cabins and tents plus staffers during the summer and up to 40 per night in the offseason. When completed, the camp will include a 2,400 square-foot lodge, a beach, recreation trails, five cabins, five tent pods and a bathroom. The initial plan, submitted in 1999, called for a 17,500-square-foot lodge, 12 camping platforms, 10 cabins, bathrooms, trails and a beach. The scaled back plan was presented after an environmental assessment.

Do you think everyday Americans would be alarmed? Think again. Neighbors who had been opposed to the camp said they no longer were as concerned as they had been. Rick Hollis, whose property adjoins the land, said he could live with the scaled-down version. He said it is closer to the size of a Girl Scout camp there previously. “I like the quiet neighborhood the way it is, but if they really keep it the size of the Girl Scout camp, it should not be a big intrusion on the neighborhood,” Hollis said.

In July of 2002, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) won a long fought battle to remove a cross from the Mohave Desert public preserve, as a Federal judge ruled that it was in breach of the “establishment” clause of the Constitution.

Of the case, Peter Eliasberg, an attorney at the ACLU stated, “The federal government should not offer public land—owned collectively by people of every faith and of no faith—as a site for the advertisement and promotion of Jesus Christ, Buddha, Pope John Paul II, or any other particular religious figure. Contrary to what some believe, it is not the role of the federal government to advance Christianity or any other sectarian belief.” He further stated, “The courts have consistently held that a permanent religious fixture on federal land is a violation of the U.S. Constitution.”

While the ACLU feels it necessary to take action against symbols of the Christian faith, it seems they do not attribute the same set of standards to Islam. The group that wants to use the Iowa site calls itself Muslim Youth Camps of America, Inc. (MYCA). Organizers of MYCA say they purposely chose the name so that it would resemble that of the YMCA, the well-known Christian nationwide health and fitness center. “It is not exclusively for Muslims, just like YMCA is not exclusive to Christians,” states Manzoor Ali, the Chairman of MYCA. But this statement doesn’t exactly jibe with some of the other statements made by the group. Read more.

And yet there have been several well-publicized cases where the Boy Scouts of America have been denied permits for a permanent camp or even a single event on public land. City officials in Norwalk, CN were recently considering denying a permit for the Boy Scouts to use a beach for a recruitment drive based on the parent organization’s policy of barring homosexual members.

Norwalk’s mayor has asked the law department to determine whether there is legal precedent to deny a Boy Scouts troop use of Shady Beach. He made his request after members of the Common Council’s parks committee told the scoutmaster last week that they would vote against issuing her a permit for a three-hour campfire and recruitment program. The continuing controversy about Boy Scouts of America membership arose a few years ago after the organization expelled James Dale, an Eagle Scout and assistant scoutmaster in New Jersey for 10 years, because he is gay. Dale sued and won reinstatement but the Scouts took their case to the US Supreme Court and, in 2000, prevailed.

But there is still something wrong here, folks. Wake up!

War Records: July 17, 2003

State Speech

State Speech

No war is good, when taken from the prospective that a single lost life is a life never again capable of enjoying the fruits of endless debate on the simplest of matters.

But the vital point, or damn well ought to be, is this: The case in favor of overthrowing Saddam’s regime was overwhelming, even without a frosting of yellowcake. Despite the UN’s weakness. That’s why members of Congress from both parties voted to authorize the President to use military force against Saddam more than THREE months BEFORE the State of the Union.

Which of these smartie britch politicians would change their vote now?

In retrospect, the implicit case for overthrowing the Saddam (imagining himself the reincarnation of old Nebuccanezzar) remains persuasive. As days pass, more US soldiers and Iraqis are killed and maimed, and that is a sad fact of life outside the Gates of Eden.

Here in the US, soldiers remain safe, but the general population does not, where madmen and mother nature armed with weapons of mild destruction roam and spit and spar, and shit as they say, simply happens, and happens often. Tis true that these hyped and horrendous weapons of mass destruction have not yet been found in a nation the size of California, most of it dry indistinguishable sand swept by the winds, even more difficult to parse than haystacks, despite technology. Nor have we found Saddam Hussein. Or Osama bin Laden. But Saddam and Osama exist. They were a threat to every one of us. They still are, though less so now that they hide and seek more of the same in safe-houses and caves.

The matrix of rogue dictators, terrorists and WMD is the gravest menace faced by Americans and other free (or unfree) peoples alive in the 21st Century. That is why we so-called Independent thinkers, Republicans, Democrats, Americans, America’s old allies and new (e.g. free Iraqis) have our work cut out for us in the years ahead. And while I am an enemy of this pre-emptive strike doctrine, and fear the worse in historical terms, what’s done is done.

Let’s move on, fight the battle at hand to clear the decks for the future.

Germany In The Grip Of Muslim Terror

A Matter of Time - Khilafah

A Matter of Time – Khilafah

MUSLIMS WANT REVENGE ON German who killed Muslim in self-defence — ‘This is a separate universe with its own laws. I recently reported about the 18-year-old Yusef Al-Abed, who was stabbed to death as he and twenty of his armed Turkish and Arab friends attacked a collapsed German man: “Berlin: ‘tense armed calm’ after German killed Muslim in self-defence“. The German, known as Sven N., is to be acquitted, since he clearly acted in self-defence against the twenty Muslims, who were armed with knives and daggers. While Sven N. is recovering from having his skull fractured during the attack, tensions rise in the neighbourhood of Neukölln, Berlin, as ‘anti-German insults’ and talk about ‘burning down the neighbourhood’ and ‘riots’ is spreading in the Muslim dominated area…

The news out of Germany is piecemeal since the media is throttled by political correctness. Read more here.

Top