Opening the news this morning, one could not help but see reported that an IED (improvised explosive device) detonated in the Chelsea neighborhood of Manhattan, a pipe bomb exploded in Seaside Park, NJ, shortly before the third annual Semper Fi Run, and a mass stabbing occurred in St. Cloud, Minnesota’s Crossroads Mall where reports indicated the suspect made references to “Allah.” While the only incident that does not have any reference made to Islam is the New Jersey one, it would not surprise many if a connection to Islam were discovered there. This on the cusp of 110,000 Syrian refugees to be admitted to this republic beginning on October 1, by the current Islamist-in-Chief, Barack Hussein Obama Soetoro Soebarkah.
Many supporting this “invasion” would argue it would be racist, Islamophobic or xenophobic to assume the majority would be Muslims and imply these individuals are would-be terrorists. However, Hussein Soetoro’s administration has repeatedly denied entry into this republic to persecuted Middle Eastern Christians or admitted so few it points to blatant discrimination. As the world has witnessed in the European invasion, it is mostly young, adult, military age men who have flooded the borders to gain access to the West. Along with the increase in the Muslim population, the number of violent acts has increased as well – cause and effect.
The nation of Germany has become so overrun with Muslims, television ads are now running to encourage German women to wear the hijab.
Germany appears to have given up on integrating the millions of Muslim migrants pouring into the country and is instead encouraging German citizens to submit to Islam.
A television ad currently airing in Germany invites blonde-haired, blue-eyed women to embrace “tolerance” by wearing the Muslim hijab head dress.
The commercial begins with the text “Turkish women wear the hijab,” as a veiled woman is seen with her back to the camera.
However, when she turns around it immediately becomes clear that the woman is a white, blonde-haired German, before she states, “Me too! It’s beautiful!”
“Enjoy difference – start tolerance,” states the woman.
The campaign is funded by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, as well as German taxpayers, who are forced to obtain a state television license or face prison time.
The video can be viewed here.
Germany’s immigration policy has now led to the government encouraging its own female citizen population to “submit” to part of Sharia law in order to stem criminal activities in the form of sexual assaults by Muslim male invaders. Instead of reversing their failed policies, deporting invaders, and dealing with criminals, Merkel’s administration is attempting to “brainwash” Germany’s female population into submitting to Islam by wearing a hijab to stem sexual assaults. However, as we all know, Islam is Islam and even Muslim women are second class citizens to be raped and assaulted at will. This will stem nothing.
Germany’s previous campaign to stem sexual assault by Muslim male invaders failed miserably. It relied on women “holding rapists at arms’ length, not wearing provocative clothing, or wearing sneakers so they could run away.” The German government’s advice to women set attitudes on sexual assault back 100 years, when the pervasive societal thought process blamed women for the violent crime of rape or sexual assault instead of the perpetrator by claiming “women asked for it” by the type of clothing they wore, the mannerisms used or the very idea of initiating the violence.
And, in another stellar display of insanity, a German Muslim “scholar” actually perpetuates the idea that being German will no longer mean being “blue-eyed and blonde-haired” but will be dark-eyed, dark-haired, have an immigration background and wear a hijab. Incredulously, the German audience applauded the demise of their own culture. The scholar, Lamya Kaddor, introduced the teaching of Islam to German students in public schools, produced the first German translation of the Qu’ran for children and adults, and enjoyed such success that five of her students went on to fight for the Islamic State.
Green Party leader Stefanie von Berg celebrated the fact that in a few short decades an end to German majority populations in cities will be ended. She called this “a good thing” specifically targeting “right-wingers.” An Islamic imam is calling for Muslim invaders to “breed with Europeans to conquer their countries.” The imam claims that Europeans have lost fertility and Muslims should bring fertility to Europeans. Gregor Gysi, a known left wing politician, claims those opposed to this “migrant” invasion and culture change were “Nazis.” He stated, “Because of our history between 1933-1945, we are obliged to treat refugees properly. Oh and by the way: Every year more native Germans die than there are born. That is very fortunate. It’s because Nazis are not very good at having offspring. This [decline of Germans] is why we are so dependent on immigration from foreign countries.”
You can view the video here or at the source article.
According to the founder of the Muslim Reform Movement, Asra Q. Nomani, women wearing headscarves as an interfaith solidarity are well-intentioned. However, she writes, “to us, they are standing on the wrong side of a lethal war of ideas that sexually objectifies women as vessels for honor and temptation, absolving men of personal responsibility.”
In her commentary article at the New York Times on January 6, 2016, Nomani wrote:
This purity culture covers, segregates, subordinates, silences, jails and kills women and girls around the world. Recently, in Bareilly, India, a father killed his daughter, 4, smashing her head against the floor when her scarf slipped from her head during dinner. In Ontario, a few years ago, a man strangled his 16-year-old sister when she defied their father, including by refusing to cover her hair. In November, a former University of Missouri instructor dragged a female relative, 14, out of school “by the hair” when he discovered she hadn’t covered her hair. Today, in Iran, friends of the journalist Masih Alinejad dodge batons as they shoot photos of themselves, hair bare, in a campaign Alinejad started, #MyStealthyFreedom, to protest Iran’s mandatory headscarf law.
This is what the politicians and the leftists in Germany are condoning, supporting, and encouraging. Why is this important to those here in the republic of the united States? If, after the election regardless of who is elected, the Congress continues with its sustainment of the unilateral, unconstitutional, unlawful, criminal policies of Hussein Soetoro, the “push” to “submit” will grow only stronger as the population of Muslims increases.
Inforwars.com concluded correctly when the article stated, “The German television ad is extremely revealing. ‘Tolerance’ means submission. ‘Diversity’ means the willful extinction of German culture.”
It will be the same here should unfettered importation of illegal Muslim invaders, disguised and incorrectly termed “refugees,” continue.
One must ask why the populations of Western nations are on the decline to the point that politicians proclaim, as Gregor Gysi has, that nations are dependent on immigration from foreign countries. Nothing is further from the truth as Western nations are filled with women of reproductive age. Are we to believe Western nations incapable of producing offspring because of “lost fertility” or being “Nazis?” Again, all hyperbole with not a speck of truth to back it up.
While many have their theories on why birth rates in western civilized nations are on the decline and many articles, papers and websites discuss birth rates and pregnancy prevention, a recurring theme develops – women’s rights. The use of birth control methods to avoid pregnancy has been around for thousands of years when the use of fish bladders to make condoms was present in 3,000 B.C. So, the idea of birth control is not a new one. What is new is the introduction of “women’s rights” and the brainwashing by the femi-nazis that the partaking of women in their traditional role amounted to oppression.
This closely paralleled the contested political issue of birth control in 19th century England where economist Thomas Malthus introduced the idea of birth control as a preventive check on population expansion, keeping the population within the resource limits of the country. It emphasized the woman’s right to control their own reproduction with the coining of the term “voluntary motherhood” in the 1870s by feminists. Several materials published led to an increased interest in contraception leading to a 29 percent decrease in the birth rate in Victorian England by 1900. This idea of “population control to preserve limited resources” entered the world stage especially in western civilization in order to “preserve” the world’s resources for future generations.
Looking at the US, contraception was legal in the 19th century until the unconstitutional Comstock Act in the 1870s and the adoption of unconstitutional Comstock laws by various states. During the period from 1800 to 1900, the contraception use contributed to a 50 percent drop in the fertility rate in the United States, particularly in urban areas. Notice a drop in the birth rate despite contraception being made illegal by an unconstitutional government law in the 1870s. The use of contraception during this time was discovered by the only known survey conducted in the 19th century on contraceptive habits using upper class and middle class women as subjects. As we all are aware, the Comstock laws are no more.
Fast forward to 1914 and enter one Margaret Sanger. No need to discuss her motives for birth control and promotion of eugenics. Move on forward to the era of World War I, when US service men were diagnosed with venereal diseases, the response of the US government was to initiate a campaign framing sexual intercourse and contraception as public health issues and legitimate scientific research topics. In summation, what followed was a society more accepting of sexual permissiveness. As a result, the birth rate in the US declined 20 percent between 1920 and 1930, all due to the increased use of birth control arising from a more sexually permissive society.
The birth control issue removed the discussion of having children and how many from a discussion between husband and wife to the sole discretion of the wife and women, in general. Due to the “outbreak” of venereal disease among military service men in World War I, the government identified it as an area of “scientific” study. With the advent of a more sexually permissive society, the movement toward “women’s rights” emerged stronger, making “motherhood” more or less a dirty word through encouraging women to seek careers and independence. Seizing on this “movement,” the government stepped in to declare war on the traditional family. Through its manipulation of inflation and jobs through increased rules and regulations by unconstitutional agencies, promotion of birth control, eugenics and abortion, and “intruding” into society to “provide” for the nontraditional family, the stage became set for death rates to exceed birth rates. More and more women opted to delay marriage and childbirth until later in life in favor of careers, opting to have fewer children. Likewise, married women opted to have fewer children due to the increasing financial burdens placed on traditional families just to make ends meet. Both married and unmarried women also opted to murder their unborn as a means of reducing the number of children.
The ultimate lies perpetuated by all of this were that women had no say in their own reproduction and contraception improves the quality of life of women and stimulates economic development. It has and always will be a choice to engage in sexual intercourse, barring rape or sexual assault, for either reproduction or otherwise for both women and men. The choice has always been there to use methods or not to use them to determine the number of children a married couple decided to have. The problem arose when government and other “do-gooders” stuck their nose into the business of child-bearing under the ruse of population control to preserve resources, “women’s rights” and the explosion of the “feminist” movement declaring war against men and traditional women’s roles. Couple this with the movement away from Christian principles and Biblical teachings and add the importation of Muslim foreigners who reject western society and the recipe for disaster is complete. In Islam, women have zero rights, even in discussing anything related to reproduction.
The answer to population perpetuation is reproduction among the native population of a nation, country or republic, not immigration of foreigners or importation of foreigners. It requires a government that supports, encourages and actively works to produce a robust economy for its own population through limited laws and regulations, not stifle it through oppressive rules, regulations, and supporting the exportation of jobs to second and third world nations. It requires a government committed to the support of the family unit instead of one that penalizes it. It has nothing to do with “treating immigrants properly” because of the history of a nation or republic. It has nothing to do with 20th century politics or the ability/inability to reproduce. It has everything to do with the brainwashing of western civilization into contributing to its own demise in favor of balkanization on a global scale in preparation for a global government going back generations. The only thing accomplished by importation of Muslim foreigners, for this is the issue, to add to the native population while discouraging reproduction among the native population is the desecration of that native population.