Pro-Freedom Websites come under Surveillance in Germany
The quran calls for jihad and the slaughter of the kuffar. Do we hear calls to censor, ban, expunge or surveil those who read that book? There have been 18,255* Islamic attacks since 911, each one with the imprimatur of a Muslim cleric, each one compelled and prescribed by the quran. Where are the calls for "greater scrutiny" of that book?
The premise is shocking, the anti-logic staggering. German authorities have announced a plan to place anti-Islamic websites under surveillance because of growing concern that they are becoming more radical and fomenting right-wing violence. Here it comes -- the suppression of freedom and denial of the truth by twenty-first century fascists.
The domestic intelligence agency, the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution, said last week it had set up a working group to assess whether German-language sites such as Politically Incorrect and Nürnberg 2.0, whose stated aim is to oppose the "Islamisation of Europe" are in breach of the constitution.Politically Incorrect is an excellent counter-jihad site that reports little covered news of jihad across Germany, Europe and the world.
This is enforcement of sharia and restriction of free speech. In the Breivik lie, the left has finally found their bogeyman. No one is responsible for Breivik's insanity. No one in the counter-jihad movement advocates violence. Ever. But that is of no import. Facts are irrelevant in the low state of the world. One evil, insane monster is all the fascists need to shut down freedom and the fruit of centuries of toil, blood and intellectual wrestling for enlightenment.
Brievik was a madman. He speaks for no one. Imagine a scientist who vigorously agreed with Einstein. If he targeted for death and killed scientists that didn't, would that make Einstein responsible?
Jihad, on the other hand, is prescribed, commanded by Islamic teaching. And that is ... sacrosanct and protected by their useful knaves in politics and media?
[Please see Norway, Free Speech, and the Counterjihad, Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer]
Anti-Islamic websites come under greater scrutiny in Germany David Crossland, The National Jan 9, 2012No, they are fighting for the rights of all people.
BERLIN // German authorities have announced a plan to place anti-Islamic websites under surveillance because of growing concern that they are becoming more radical and fomenting right-wing violence.
The domestic intelligence agency, the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution, said last week it had set up a working group to assess whether German-language sites such as Politically Incorrect and Nürnberg 2.0, whose stated aim is to oppose the "Islamisation of Europe" are in breach of the constitution.
The attack by Anders Behring Breivik, the Norwegian extremist who killed 77 people in July and posted a "manifesto" on the internet, threw a spotlight on the role played by websites as a forum for spreading hatred of Muslims in Europe.
Right-wing populists and websites condemned Mr Breivik as a crazed loner. But many of the arguments in his 1,500-page declaration matched their own rhetoric, sparking accusations that they have been breeding violence by railing against Muslims.
In Germany, calls for greater scrutiny of the far-right intensified after the revelation in November that a neo-Nazi terrorist cell murdered at least 10 people, eight of them Muslim immigrants of Turkish origin, in a killing spree spanning more than a decade. The case has embarrassed German authorities and exposed them to criticism that they have been blind to the threat posed by racists.
The head of the Hamburg branch of the intelligence agency, Manfred Murck, said there were clear signs that the operators of many anti-Muslim sites "had a disturbed relationship with the democratic rule of law" and often espoused "infringements of human rights protected under our constitution".
A member of parliament for the opposition Left Party, Ulla Jelpke, said closer supervision of such sites was long overdue. "Blogs and websites such as Politically Incorrect or Nürnberg 2.0 clearly promote a racism that extends deep into society," said Ms Jelpke.
"They call into question the dignity and the rights of a whole group of people solely because of their origin or their faith. They thereby clearly run counter to core values of the constitution."
She said it was "scandalous" that authorities had been ignoring such sites, and alleged that institutional racism may be to blame for the lack of determination to crack down on them. "Prejudice against Muslims isn't a problem of the periphery but of the heart of society. That's why it's so dangerous."
Separately, the state prosecutor's office in Munich said last week it had launched an investigation into Michael Stürzenberger, a politician who has written blogs for Politically Incorrect, on suspicion of incitement to racial hatred.
Mr Stürzenberger, a former spokesman for the conservative Christian Social Union party, wrote on January 5: "The totalitarian claim to power inherent in Islam and its legitimisation of violence and killing cannot have a place in a democratic and free society."
Politically Incorrect was founded in 2004 by Stefan Herre, 46, a physical education teacher based in Cologne who insists his site doesn't breach the constitution. He has said it caters for peaceful people and is dedicated to publishing opinions and articles that other media do not want to cover.
With more than 60,000 readers per day, the website is one of Europe's largest anti-Islamic sites. Its operators say they don't tolerate defamatory or insulting commentaries but that they don't have enough staff to delete every problematic comment posted in its forums.