Ontario Ambulance Ride Cost

Islamization and duty of the opposition Democrats

missile deployment ISLAM & INSTALLATION
- which connects the two threats

"That what matters is only the case of conflict." ran high
-Carl Schmitt

As in the arms race debate of the early 1980s, the waves in the face of an imminent missile deployment, which declined in all surveys show that 75% of the population, by renowned thought leaders on what the issue of the right and the duty to resist. Results of this discussion was made that in matters of destiny of the nation, as a result of irreversible intervention in the lives of future generations and their Survival would be adversely affected in irrevocable ways, the political representatives are not allowed to flout the will of another without "original sovereign." The people as a "last guardian of the Constitution 'does in such an emergency the right, indeed the moral duty to combat decisions of government and parliament through civil disobedience, if these decisions are considered by the majority as a serious threat to the survival of the community. Civil disobedience is in this situation "element of a mature political culture" and as "a form of active protection of the constitution" to be considered.

state at the time of the missile deployment, the physical Survival of the nation at stake, today's cultural survival qua Islam installation against the will of the majority. For this purpose, the rulers have no mandate 90% of the German population are opposed to continuing the installation Islam. De facto, this is but in the overwhelming majority hostage multicultural illusionists who seek to make any resistance with the help of their cronies in the media, abuse of the terms "racism" and "radical right" silenced.

FROM this authoritarian paternalism TO FREE IS THE MAIN TASK OF THE WORLD IN THE COMING YEARS.

This paternalism is von Leuten aus, die aus dem 68er-Milieu stammen und in der Friedensbewegung aktiv waren. Daß diese ehemaligen "Antiautoritären" heute, nachdem der lange Marsch durch die Institutionen sie an die Schaltstellen des Systems geführt hat, das autoritärste Regime im demokratischen Deutschland seit 1949 errichtet haben, ist nicht nur ein Treppenwitz der Geschichte. Er wirft auch Fragen auf, Fragen nach dem Motiv. Bassam Tibi hat hierfür eine entlarvende Antwort gefunden: Die mit ihrer Illusion von der klassenlosen Gesellschaft gescheiterte Linke habe auf ihrer Suche nach einem Ersatzproletariat die Ausländer als neues Hätschelkind entdeckt. Durch Öffnung der Grenzen für die Massenzuwanderung nicht integrierbarer sozialer Kräfte - und insbesondere Muslime verweigern aufgrund ihrer intoleranten religiösen Ideologie jegliche Integration - sollte ein Sprengsatz in Gestalt einer multikulturellen Gesellschaft installiert werden, dessen Dynamit die Muslime sind. "Diese sollen nun schaffen, was bislang fehlschlug: Das System zu stürzen " (Tibi im Focus 22/1996).

90% sagen hierzu: NEIN! - und finden kein Gehör. Nicht die Islamkritiker geben in den Talkshows den Ton an, sondern die Islaminstallateure. Das ist ein Skandal, der nicht nur zum Himmel, sondern nach einer Veränderung des Systems schreit. Mit anderen Worten: Wir befinden uns mitten in einem KULTURKAMPF.


Schauen wir einmal, wie seinerzeit, argued for the missile deployment was, and how can these arguments apply to the analogous case of Islam installation. At that time, recognized and still prominent personalities took the floor and called for hearing to the majority opinion:

Peter Glotz example, noted that "the legitimacy of proceedings" (parliamentary majority decision) "alone is not enough anymore" when it comes to existential matters which are seen by the majority of the population other than by their elected representatives. For, "law, which in the majority of the population would find no echo more, would not enforce law."

And the current EKD chairman WOLFGANG HUBER , then social ethics professor at the University of Marburg saw in the aiming at the preservation of the community of civil disobedience, "a form of active intelligence service." Huber claimed that time even a ethical "duty to disobey" , because: "The state exceeds his limit set, if it will accept any decision or take, which resulted in irreversible intervention in the lives of future generations made, and affect their life chances in irrevocable ways to be. " For the real thing for the ethical justification of civil disobedience saw Huber then come when "it can be argued with good reasons, that are conjured up by government decisions serious threats to future life ... and if the opposition to it otherwise finds no reasonable hearing. "

Does not that from something? Find the 90% Islamisierungsgegner about proper hearing?

said Given such a situation Habermas at the time by a decision of conscience, in which only "drastic measures" were available to "in order to raise the readiness for renewed and Will Sens education and applicable standard or a legally adopted policies and to provide the impetus for the revision of a [parliamentary] majority opinion." The people have a "last guardian of the Constitution" the right of the original sovereign, "majority to overturn decisions of Parliament, when it views these as fatal errors. Compared with the "authoritarian legalism" of the government with its "law-is-law" view of civil disobedience "element of a mature political culture" is. The key for today's situation at the time was set.

• "If the representative constitution failed with challenges that affect the interests of all must be allowed to people in the shape of its citizens, including individual citizens, to join the original rights of the sovereign, the demokratische Rechtsstaat ist in letzter Instanz auf diesen Hüter der Verfassung angewiesen." (Habermas: Ziviler Ungehorsam; in: Glotz (Hg.): Ziviler Ungehorsam im Rechtsstaat, S. 41

Heute sind wir wieder in einer solchen Situation, nur dass der Konfliktsfall nicht Raketenstationierung, sondern Islaminstallation heißt.

Heute wie damals warnen maßgebliche Experten davor, Richtungsentscheidungen der Politik hinzunehmen, die fatale Folgen haben könnten. Die entscheidenden Punkte, die gegen eine Fortsetzung der Islaminstallation in die demokratische Gesellschaft sprechen, sind laut Expertenmeinung:

• Der Islam ist inkompatibel mit einer demokratischen Gesellschaft Western character;
• Muslims have the religious duty to Islamize, host companies, and has given them any means to be right;
• to adapt to the norms of a Western-style liberal-democratic society is believing Muslims prohibited.

Muslims can integrate and not have to look at as enemies, their fight against religious duty.

is interesting to note two things:

1. Islamists openly acknowledge that democracy is their declared enemy, those Islamists who deny this do so only in order to deceive the host society;
   
   
2. the required behavior of Muslims in blatant violation of other faiths environment against the universally accepted rules of hospitality that the host is not allowed to usurp the rights of the landlord.

In any culture, and certainly not in the Islamic, the guest has the right to soar to the home side. But Muslims do exactly as they occur in significant numbers in host societies. According to the universally valid standards of hospitality Muslims therefore try to install wrong.

against this insult, we have to defend ourselves. This is our country and we are not prepared to a foreign, against freedom, democracy and human rights left wing ideology to simply the field. The politically active Muslims have declared war on us - we take the fight.

REFERENDUM ON OTHER COURSE AS TO ISLAM INSTALLATION!

NO cozying with Islamists!

Islamism = FASCISM