Tag Archives: Freedom of Religion

In Ancient Egypt, at any given moment, there was never one Egyptian Religion

Excerpts from my correspondence with a Tunisian reader about the ‘Ancient Egyptian Religion’

Question

Many thanks dear Friend for your long email,

I’m from Sfax, and by chance I worked about Ramsenites a kind of stories widely spread in north africa. You are specialized also in old languages and I have a question about the representation in old egypt about Amoon sun-rise coming from the east Arabia? with smell of perfume and myrrh, is it true that rulers of old egypt were from yemen? So by the way what is the new traduction of this word in hieroglyphic (Cf. enclosed)

Response

You ask me about Ancient Egypt and Amun of Thebes.

I believe sometimes many Orientalists trying to do the best did the worst! And the result is that they confused the rest of the world.

So, I fully agree with Edward Said’s criticism and even I wrote about it.

I feel sorry that Egyptologists flooded the world with wrong terms, really! No bad intentions involved, but when someone is not attentive and watchful, misreading is caused with incalculable consequences. Very simple terms are very mistaken indeed. You say ‘Ancient Egyptian Religion’ (I don’t speak of you but in general): first mistake!!!!

Today, we distinguish Christianity, Hinduism, Islam, Buddhism, etc.

In Ancient Egypt, at any given moment, there was never one Egyptian Religion.

Different priesthoods developed tremendously divergent interpretations of the Divine Order, the Spiritual Universe, the Creation, the Material Universe, and the human society; in doing so, they had contradictory world views, moral and spiritual principles, and narratives; they then conceptualized the reality in opposite manners.

Yes, there is one Egyptian Civilization, one Egyptian Culture, but many Egyptian religions; and by this of course I don’t mean Aten, Akhenaten and the Atonic Religion, but the systems that antedated Akhenaten for more than two millennia and which survived the Amarna revolution.

Aten.png

Akhenaten,_Nefertiti_and_their_children.jpg

There were different religious (and imperial) capitals, opposite centers of spiritual-religious systems, and conflicting priests and followers.

It is very wrong to describe the totality of the Ancient Egyptian religions as polytheistic. There were several monotheistic systems for which there were no gods, but one God and many attributes of God. This is very different from what modern concise presentations of the Ancient Egyptian faiths state. And of course there were also polytheistic systems in Ancient Egypt, and there were constant clashes among the followers of the opposite systems. In those fights, all the monotheists sided together against all the polytheists, but this does not mean that there was just one monotheistic and one polytheistic systems; there were more.

Because of this, initiation rites helped all those priesthoods solidify and perpetuate themselves through the ages by hiring new adepts who would then become high priests, generals, land lords, prominent noblemen, top administrators, and pharaohs.

And by using a sophisticated language, which contained a vast field of semiotics, they set up systems of perception and understanding that were impressively and incredibly multilayered: these supreme spiritual and mental constructions that are unmatched by today’s top scientific disciplines, philosophies and ideologies were the original forms of the Ancient Myth.

Then, an agricultural laborer perceived one myth as x; but an initiated priest, scribe, general, administrator perceived the same myth (i.e. the same narrative) as x2; then a higher initiate perceived the same myth as x3; an even higher initiate as x4; a great mystic as x105; and the great high priest as x100.

The Heliopolitan system (Ennead) was a markedly monotheistic system in its origin and until the crepuscular times of the Egyptian civilization.

ennead.jpg

If one only studies the names of the divine aspects that are the elements of this system, one understands immediately that they were not conceived as ‘gods’; example: Osiris, Wser, meant ‘the Well Being’. Of course, it was cut to pieces by Satan, i.e. Seth; and it disappeared among men. This is exactly what the Bible and the Quran describe as our Forefathers’ expulsion from the Paradise. The Well Being is not anymore with us. But the Biblical and Quranic descriptions are lower, poorer and weaker.

osiris.jpg

Ignorant or devious scholars of our times insist that Hathor is a … goddess! How silly! This aspect of the Divine Order may well have been perceived as a ‘goddess’ in late times of the Egyptian civilization (such as the 1st millennium BCE), but in the original myth – which represents the absolutely truthful perception of the spiritual and the material reality – Hathor was not a goddess. How silly is it to consider as ‘goddess’ an entity whose name in Egyptian Hieroglyphics meant exactly “the House of Horus”?

hathor.jpg

The same concerns the Hermupolitan system (Ogdoad).

Ogdoad.jpg

Contrarily, the Memphitic theology (around Ptah) was totally polytheistic.

Ptah.png

And so was the Theban Trinity, which is the aboriginal Trinity in the History of the Mankind.

amunritual.jpg

As I already said, there were many clashes among the various Ancient Egyptian systematic theologies; as the different religious – spiritual systems were structured with impenetrable temples, initiates, adepts and followers, the only chance to harm an opposite system was either to elaborate composite forms of the Divine (in order to acquire the credibility of another theological system’s element and in the process alter the original faith of the system in which the targeted element belonged), such as Amun Ra (of the Theban priesthood), or to attribute deviate characteristics or different, degraded perception to an element of the opposite priesthood’s system.

In this manner, and with the progressive rise of polytheism, the earlier aspects of the Divine ‘became’ gods for most – but all – of the Ancient Egyptians during Ancient Egypt’s later periods.

But at the very original stage, anthropomorphism and zoomorphism in the conception of the divine world related to the lower spiritual (or astral) sphere and had nothing to do with primitive tribes’ totems and polytheistic rituals, as materialist propagandists claim while impersonating professors and academicians to the detriment of the Mankind.

amun.jpg

Only deep and extensive experience in the spiritual spheres can allow someone understand what it means – as example – that the Divine Aspect of Wisdom (i.e. the Wisdom of God) has to represented as a human’s body with an ibis’ head (like Djhawty – Thot). Material(istic) scholarship is genuinely incapacitated to understand – let alone explain – this theoretical approach, which originates entirely from spiritual spheres.

Thoth.jpg

So, what you ask me about Amun Re is a later (dating back to the times of the New Empire at the middle of the 2nd millennium BCE), composite form and has no originality in the 3rd millennium. In its origin, Amun as a Theban polytheistic god has no relationship with solar ideologies. When the Theban priests composed the form Amun Re, they did it in order to set up an imperial ideology and doctrine, while at the same time isolating / alienating the Heliopolitan monotheistic priesthood from the imperial headquarters at all levels, spiritual, theological, administrative and local. During most of the 2nd half of the 2nd millennium BCE, Iwnw (Heliopolis) was a marginal and destitute religious center; however, it managed to keep polytheists at bay.

Amun Re certainly appropriated solar attributes of the Heliopolitan Ra, and was therefore said to rise in the Orient.

 

Advertisements

Alternative für Deutschland – Comments on Positions about Islam

Commenting on selected excerpts, I attempt to bring to the attention of any person concerned several points that will prove to be of seminal importance in AfD’s effort to change misperceptions and to correct grave political errors committed over the span of several decades in Germany and across Europe. I therefore quote in German language some of the most renowned statements of Alternative für Deutschland and declarations made by first rank AfD party members, offer an English translation, and then expand.

 

 

  1. Der Islam ist an sich eine politische Ideologie“.

(Islam is in itself a political ideology.)

That’s right! Historical Islam and today’s “Islam” are two different entities. Whereas the former constitutes a religion and civilization, the latter is formed out of the succession of three theological systems (those of Ibn Hanbal, Ibn Taimiyya, and Abdulwahhab – all Sunni), which in their times (respectively in the 8th – 9th, 13th – 14th, and 18th c.) were rejected by Muslims as heretic, un-Islamic, and barbaric.

 

Today’s problem of the entire Islamic World hinges on the fact that, due to sociopolitical developments, the theological system of Ibn Taimiya prevailed and its gradual prevalence caused the elimination of other opposite systems and the confiscation of political institutions, including even that of the Ottoman Empire.

 

Another dimension of the problem is that Ibn Taimiya’s theological system affected all the denominations of Islam and, today, it is accepted by all Islamic religious authorities. As a theological system, it definitely contains a part concerning “political ideology”, which -at the times of Ibn Taimiya- was a catastrophic innovation in striking opposition to the earlier Caliphatic – Imperial Doctrine. The collapse of the Ottoman Caliphate is partly due to the propagation of Ibn Taimiya’s political ideology, which was the main reason for the erosion of the Imperial Doctrine within the Islamic World.

 

The discourse in which many Westerners try to polarize today’s Islamic religious authorities around ‘extremists’ and ‘moderates’ is nonsensical, as long as ‘extremists’ are defined as ‘Salafist’ or ‘Wahhabi’ (from the aforementioned Islamic theologian Abdul Wahhab) elements, and inasmuch as ‘moderates’ are identified as those rejecting the 18th c. theologian.

 

For Islamic ‘moderates’ to be truly moderate on the basis of evidence drawn from the Historical Islam, the condition sine qua non is total rejection of the theological systems of Ibn Taimiya and of Ibn Hanbal. There the dreams of the European and North American establishments will come to crash, because all the Islamic religious institutions that Westerners love to define as ‘moderate’ (ex. Al Azhar, Cairo) will have difficulty to reject and denounce Ibn Taimiya’s system.

 

 

  1. “eine politische Ideologie, die mit dem Grundgesetz nicht vereinbar ist”.

(A political ideology that is incompatible with the Constitution)

This is also very correct; in support of this claim, one has only to collect a plethora of statements, discourses, khutbas (Friday sermons before the Islamic prayer), interviews and publications of various ‘extremists’ and ‘moderates’ residing in Germany. One only risks coming up with the longest encyclopedia in the History of the Mankind!

 

However, this is a type of work that AfD has to carry out meticulously, because more people will be convinced in Germany and across the European Union, if abundant documentation comes to surface. This activity should not be left entirely in the hands of independent activists in the social media, because this effort will not gain momentum; contrarily, if a political party sets up a group of members tasked with the collection of documentation and the group committee highlights every week and every day the menacing words uttered on German and European soil against the German Nation, its Identity, Integrity, and Tradition, and against the European Civilization in its totality, things will change more rapidly.

 

 

  1. “Der Islam ist keine Religion wie das katholische oder protestantische Christentum, sondern intellektuell immer mit der Übernahme des Staates verbunden”.

(Islam is not a religion like the Catholic or Protestant Christianity but intellectually always associated with the takeover of the state.)

This is not very solid for various reasons.

 

First, Christian Orthodox, Catholic and Protestant History are full of evidence whereby “the religion is intellectually related with the takeover of the state“. This is very much part of the European past. From the Eastern and the Western Roman Empire, to the Holy Roman Empire, the State of the Teutonic Order and the kingdoms of Asturias and Aragon, religion was the quintessence of the state in Europe for almost two millennia.

 

Second, it is true that historically all the Islamic Caliphates, empires, kingdoms, sultanates, emirates, and khanates were states of divine rule, but this does not make them similar in anything with the form of state that today’s Islamists, Salafists and all other branches of Political Islam want to set up. Whatever major Islamic historical state one may study (Umayyad – Abbasid – Ottoman Caliphate, Andalusia, Fatimid Egypt, Safavid Iran, Mughal India, etc.), one will soon reach the conclusion that the Imperial Islamic Rule and Doctrine was very different from modern Political Islam. Pretty much like in the Eastern Roman Empire, there was no political life or “political ideology” properly speaking in the Ottoman Caliphate, the Safavid Empire or Mughal India.

 

To draw a parallel with the modern Christian World and help readers understand clearly this critical point, I would say that, if radical Evangelicals obtain political control in a Christian country tomorrow, their new regime will have a “political ideology”, but it will be very different from Justinian’s or Heraclius’ Eastern Roman Empire that did not have any ‘political’ life or ideology, being a ‘universal’ state and consisting in a real ‘Oecumene’.

 

So, the main problem of the above statement is that, in an indirect manner, it allows Salafists and all branches of today’s Political Islam “represent” the Islamic Past, whereas they do not; they oppose it! This is a colossal error from the part of Western intellectuals and political theoreticians, because by this they offer Islamic legitimacy to those who totally distort Islam.

 

 

  1. “Deswegen ist die Islamisierung Deutschlands eine Gefahr”.

(Therefore the Islamization of Germany is a danger.)

Yes, this is certain, but I am not quite sure what is herewith meant as “Islamization”. I am afraid this is again a truly great present made to all the extremists, radicals, terrorists and sympathizers. It is as I just said in the previous paragraph.

 

By identifying either Islamists and Political Islam or fake moderates (followers of Ibn Taimiya across the Muslim World) with Islam (which is only the evidenced Historical Islam), AfD gives them much wanted political accreditation and theoretical-ideological legitimacy. This is a calamitous, double mistake.

 

More precisely, it is historically inaccurate and politically catastrophic, because it gives the impression that AfD is directed against Islam, which in historical depth is not true, because AfD real opponents (i.e. Salafi – Wahhabi Islamists, Political Islam, and fake moderates) are not true Muslims.

 

I am afraid that, due to precipitated and incompletely assessed political developments (2001-2016), Western ideological confusion, and Orientalist academic biases, AfD makes the double error of

  1. seeing as Muslims those who are not true Muslims (i.e. Salafi – Wahhabi Islamists, Political Islam, and fake moderates) and
  2. considering Terrorism as the main characteristic of this realm or as the more threatening element of their beliefs, which is also false.

 

By getting rid of Orientalist fallacies, by reassessing the enormous documentation gathered in Western universities about the Islamic civilization as part of the Oriental civilizations, and then by contrasting the true historical data with the – only partly – assessed present political situation, one can easily conclude that things are very different.

 

It is not Terrorism that constitutes the main characteristic of, or the major threat emanating from, the Salafi – Wahhabi Islamists, Political Islam, and fake moderates; it is Barbarism.

 

To understand the extent of the danger that is currently menacing Germany and Europe, one has to make a working hypothesis; eliminate from the scene (in Europe and in Islamic countries) all those, who demand anything from Islamic states in Europe, brutal Islamization, and Islamic Reconquista to ‘mere’ Western respect for ‘religious freedom’, and replace them with all those, who reject Islamic extremism, radicalism and terrorism!

 

There are hundreds and hundreds of millions across the Islamic World, who are truly peaceful and definitely unpretentious; they want to live calmly and peacefully their simple daily lives in Pakistan, Egypt, Turkey or Germany. But, at the same time, they also

  1. force their wives to stay at home under the threat of a divorce (which is quite easy to arrange, as per the misinterpreted Sharia law: it is enough for a husband to say to his wife “I divorce you” three times!)
  2. force their wives to get dressed in niqab, when out of home
  3. teach their young boys to insult any uncovered young Muslim girl
  4. accept as normal that any Muslim man can get married with up to four women, when he cannot already fully address the needs of his family with the first wife
  5. develop and show great contempt with any Muslim who does not comply with his own lifestyle and breaks away from the socially imposed uniformity
  6. find it normal that a Muslim man makes a fake and deceitful marriage with a Western woman (at her unbeknownst), in order to move to Europe and within few years gather a targeted amount of money, and then divorces his cheated European wife, in order to return back to his country or origin and get married in the ‘true’, ‘Islamic’ fashion
  7. disregard practically speaking every form of Islamic Literature, Art, Philosophy, Science and Culture, viewing education as having only two legs, namely ‘Islamic’ (by which it is only meant the religious systems emanating from Ibn Taimiya’s theological system – as per the customary descriptions of the uneducated sheikhs belonging to either Salafi – Wahhabi Islamists and Political Islam or the fake moderates) and modern Western technological (in fact, their “Education” leaves 99.9% of true Historical Islam out of today’s pedagogical systems in the Islamic / Muslim countries.)
  8. have a total lack of interest or respect for the ‘other’, which ends up with the lack of a real civil society, and with the production of a very filthy material environment in their neighborhood
  9. reject to send to school their girls, while they find it normal to arrange profitable marriage deals for them (the bridegroom has to pay for the dowry) at a very young age
  10. are ready to literally kill their child if he/she decides to reject Islam and adhere to another religion
  11. deeply desire the establishment of a state that fully abides by the so-called theological principles of the Islamic terrorists and is governed as per the misinterpreted Sharia law, and
  12. want to remain out of the influence of any other idea, ideology, theory, philosophy, and way of life.

 

If I expand so much, giving few examples of life plunged in utter barbarism, I do it because I want to ask a simple question now:

 

  • Does it really make a difference that the “peaceful” and “unpretentious” person of my example totally and fully rejects Islamic Terrorism as an international political phenomenon, denies all brutal acts of war in Syria, Yemen and Libya, and dismisses the perspective of Islamic states as proclaimed by extremists in Europe and elsewhere?

 

I am sure that everyone will agree that it does not make any difference. Most of today’s Muslims live in Barbarism, Ignorance, Negativity, Counter-productivity, Apathy and Misery that they draw to themselves. This is the hotbed of the Islamic Terrorism.

 

It is therefore high time for people in Europe and worldwide to perceive the reality as it is and to evaluate the existing threat accurately in its real dimension: Barbarism, not Terrorism, is the core nature of the outright majority of today’s fake Muslims.

 

Today’s fake Muslims’ barbarism hinges very much indeed on total ignorance of the Islamic Civilization; this is a key point in understanding what has truly happened to two billion of Muslims.

 

Their religious authorities – all of them (Salafi – Wahhabi Islamists and Political Islam or the fake moderates) – keep the masses of today’s Muslims systematically disconnected from Islamic History, Philosophy, Art, Architecture, Science, Literature, Music, Spirituality and in the process they obliterate almost all elements of the Islamic Civilization, as it has been historically known. This is the main reason of the darkness that prevails in the minds of today’s average Muslims.

 

Why the religious authorities proceed so is easy to understand. As I already said, Historical Islam totally contradicts and opposes the nonsensical, tenebrous theological system of Ibn Taimiya that they know. First, today’s religious authorities do not know this material and they never studied it. Second, if Muslims have access to this material, the religious authorities will totally lose their influence on them, looking ignorant and incompetent to the eyes of the awakened Muslims.

 

This point must become a key tool of AfD policy in order to bring firth drastic change and serious damage to the plans or wishes of all Islamic terrorists, radicals and extremists or – to put it more accurately – of all pseudo-Muslim barbarians.

 

 

  1. “Symbole des Islams aus der Öffentlichkeit zu verbannen”.

(Symbols of Islam must be banned from public places.)

This is also correct. Furthermore, today’s Muslims know quite well that throughout Islamic History, whenever Muslims for various reasons (such as trade) lived in non-Muslim countries (like the Eastern Roman Empire and China), they were offered a small, separate district to stay, but outside that location they honestly and fully abided by the local rules.

 

However, it will be essential in this regard to interpret the demand of many Muslims for public display of their religious symbols. With the exception of Muslims in the Balkan region (Bosnia, Albania, Kosovo, Macedonia, Bulgaria, Greece and Turkey) whereby the Muslims are part of the native populations, Muslims in Europe are migrants who arrived to countries in which the symbols of the local religion were not (anymore) stressed. Their stance would be very different, if the European countries were more markedly Christian.

 

 

  1. “Wir sind für ein Verbot von Minaretten, von Muezzins und für ein Verbot der Vollverschleierung”.

(We are for a ban on minarets, muezzins, and full-face veil.)

Υour position is very right. Almost all the measures that AfD party members suggest here were implemented in a secular Muslim country, i.e. Turkey, at the times of Kemal Ataturk. Do not confuse the present situation in Turkey, when Political Islam managed to effectuate a strong and dangerous comeback through simulation policies and procedures, with the secular society policies that had been implemented in Turkey as early as the 1920s and the 1930s and which prevailed for many long decades. Turkey 2002-2016 proves very well that the entire Western system of Democracy and Civil /Human Rights is ill-defined and that freedom of religion can eventually be interpreted as Tyranny of Theology. If Erdogan manages to achieve his publicly undisclosed targets, he will still offer extensive ‘explanations’, pretending that the eventual Islamist Turkey is still a country that respects the freedom of religion!

 

In my proposals below, I will expand further on this point. European and American intellectuals, politicians, statesmen and analysts make a colossal error in this regard; the real criterion to evaluate the freedom of religion is not to be established by the conditions under which live the diverse, officially recognized, religious minorities of a country (ex. Christians and Jews in Turkey or Egypt). This is only a secondary criterion.

 

As litmus paper should be used the following three cases:

  1. non-officially recognized religious minorities (examples: 1-Alevis in Turkey; 2-Shia in Egypt: their situation is even worse because they make ca. 20-25% of the country’s Muslim population, but are not allowed to openly declare their identity), and more importantly,
  2. the irreligious people (in Turkey, they are about 10% of the population)
  3. the non-practicing followers of a religion (ex. secular Turks or Egyptians or citizens of any other Muslim country who find it quite pertinent to drink alcohol in Ramadhan, to walk by the seaside while wearing only their bathing suit, and to politely flirt with a girl in the streets). Because they don’t want to practice their religion, this does not mean that

– they should not deserve the same right (freedom of religion) as the rest,

– they should not be considered as relevant to this religion (Islam in Turkey) or as undeserving of proper representation at all levels, and

– they should not be asked to evaluate their country’s sociopolitical conditions and to state what they demand as an independent group.

 

When in Egypt, it is impossible to buy alcoholic drinks during the entire month of Ramadhan, one has to consider the local authorities as a terrorist Islamist government whatever the present administration may pretend in the international fora. In fact, their practices are mostly identical with that of the Fake Caliphate at Mosul-Raqqa.

 

When it comes to Turkey’s Muslims, “freedom of religion” for Erdogan in Turkey is the freedom of practicing Sunni Muslims.

 

But in real terms, when it comes to Turkey’s Muslims, “freedom of religion” – as they perceived it in their outright majority – is the freedom of the Alevis, the freedom of the irreligious, and the freedom of the non-practicing Muslims, for they constitute the absolute majority of the Turkish population.

 

Viewed through this perspective, which is the only real, “freedom of religion” has been uninterruptedly and shockingly violated for 14 years in Turkey (2002-2016) without anyone in Europe reacting!

 

What does “freedom of religion” mean for Turkey’s irreligious and non-practicing Muslims?

 

This is simple to answer by giving just one example whereas there are thousands of examples available! It means that we do not accept to wake up at 4:30 am because of the deliberate, vicious screaming of the muezzin, who invites the practicing Muslims for prayer.

 

Of great importance is therefore the Alevi judgment of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) which in its 66th paragraph states: “They maintained that this refusal implied an assessment of their faith on the part of the national authorities, in breach of the State’s duty of neutrality and impartiality with regard to religious beliefs“. (http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{“itemid”:[“001-162697”]} /  CASE OF İZZETTİN DOĞAN AND OTHERS v. TURKEY – Application no. 62649/10)

 

What happened in Turley over the past 14 years is this:

 

A political minority (i.e. the practicing Muslims who total ca. 15-25% of the entire Turkish population – Turkey’s Muslims total 99.8% of the country’s entire population) imposed their will on the outright majority (i.e. the Alevis, the irreligious, and the non-practicing Muslims) by usurping the political power (because many Alevis, irreligious and non-practicing Muslims voted for Erdogan for a wide array of reasons) and by pursuing extensive simulation policies and procedures, in view of the prospect establishment of an Islamic Republic of Turkey.

 

And this is exactly what the tenebrous and perverse followers of Salafism – Wahhabism, Political Islam and the fake moderate Islam want to implement in Germany and Europe over the next few years.

 

 

  1. “… wandte sich gegen die Vorstellung, dass es neben der fundamentalen Ausrichtung des Islams auch einen aufgeklärten Islam gebe, der mit der freiheitlich-demokratischen Grundordnung vereinbar sei”.

(Objected to the idea that, in addition to the fundamental orientation of Islam, there is also give an enlightened Islam, which is compatible with the free democratic basic order.)

This is partly correct. Yes, there is no “Enlightened Islam” … as a currently organized political force, and as an opposition (either in Europe or in the Islamic / Muslim World) to Salafism – Wahhabism, Political Islam and the fake moderate Islam.

 

However, there is a great number of uncoordinated elements of “Enlightened Islam” that AfD should first identify, second cooperate with, and third help rise in power. The most problematic point in this regard is neither the Western failure to take note of them nor the evident lack of coordination that does characterize these elements; in fact, due to the prevailing troubles caused by the rise of Salafism – Wahhabism, Political Islam and the fake moderate Islam, these elements have presently the tendency to be rather ‘dormant’. The reason is very obvious: they feel they are more endangered than AfD party members and followers, Germany in its entirety, and Europe.

 

By failing to identify the uncoordinated elements of “Enlightened Islam”, AfD only deprives itself of its right arm! This is definitely calamitous – anytime anywhere and under any circumstances whatsoever.

 

I could come up with a long list of names, but I am sure that AfD leadership and members are certainly aware of the subject. If Benazir Bhutto is not anymore among the Living today, former Turkish Premier Tansu Çiller is very much alive, but inactive: a mere member of the Council of Women World Leaders. The same concerns another former Turkish Premier, Mesut Yılmaz. The same is also true for Mohamed ElBaradei, the former Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency. I would similarly name Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu, the incumbent leader of the major opposition party in Turkey, Selahattin Demirtaş, another opposition leader in Turkey, award winning authors like Orhan Pamuk and Kerem Işık, and many others.

 

My statement about the existence of uncoordinated elements of “Enlightened Islam” is also correct when it comes to masses. Already in Germany there are more than 1.5 million Turks; if AfD leadership sees them all as being pro-Salafist – pro-Wahhabi, pro-‘Political Islam’, and pro-‘fake moderate Islam’, AfD as a German political party commits a grave error; by so doing, they drastically weaken their own position and appeal, and this attitude will not help them achieve much in the direction they wish to go. A great number of Turks currently living in Germany are secular and very westernized; they have a totally different vision of Islam (than that of Erdogan’s AKP party), and they represent an Oriental-Occidental cultural amalgamation that has been quite typical of Turkish supporters and fans of the secular state of Kemal Ataturk.

 

Similarly, one can find in Italy, France and Spain hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of secular, westernized Maghrebins (Tunisians, Algerians, and Moroccans). Last but not the least, there are numerous secular, westernized Muslims in England either they originate from India or they come from the Black Continent.

 

Only AfD worse enemies would like AfD leadeship to make the mistake of considering the great number of secular, westernized, non-practicing or irreligious Muslims as definitely non-ascribed to an Enlightened Islam. They certainly are not coordinated; they do not represent one group; their opinions vary; their viewpoints diverge, but they all reject the fake Islam of the Salafi – Wahhabi Islamists, of the Muslim Brotherhood (Political Islam), and of the fake moderates.

 

 

  1. “Einen Euro-Islam gibt es in Wirklichkeit nicht”.

(In reality, a Euro-Islam does not exist.)

My comment here is similar with that in the previous point; yes, at this moment, there is no Euro-Islam, but all the constituent elements of a forthcoming Euro-Islam do exist, and AfD will greatly promote their own targets by contacting these people and by helping them setup an organizational structure and thus start challenging their monstrous opponents, who happen to be AfD adversaries as well, namely the Salafi – Wahhabi Islamists, the Political Islam, and the fake moderates.

 

 

  1. “Viele Muslime gehören zu Deutschland, aber der Islam gehört nicht zu Deutschland”.

(Many Muslims belong in Germany, but Islam does not belong in Germany)

This is also correct. Islam does not belong in Germany, pretty much like Shintoism does not belong in Germany either. However, at this point, there has to be a remark; the sentence makes clear that “many Muslims belong in Germany”, which automatically means that “not all the Muslims belong in Germany“. This is very correct indeed, and more particularly in view of the aforementioned; irreligious and non-practicing, secular Muslims definitely belong in Germany. It is therefore evident that, in the near future, AfD needs to provide people with a definition stating explicitly who among the Muslim Gastarbeiten truly belongs to Germany, and who do not. This will help AfD in the years ahead, because I am convinced that the departure of extremist elements from Germany and Europe must start before major disasters occur and irrespective of their official status or place of birth. And I want to believe that AfD definitely understands the need of perhaps kicking out of Germany up to one million people or even more. Being born in Germany, having German citizenship, and speaking German fluently are null in case of deeply anti-German and un-German mentality, mindset, attitude, behavior, and ideology.

 

 

  1. “Es ist notwendig, den Wildwuchs von islamischen Religionslehrern und Koranschulen, die privat finanziert werden, zu stutzen. Es muss Kontrollen geben, wer das finanziert und wer dort lehrt”.

(It is necessary to trim the proliferation of Islamic religious teachers and Islamic schools that are privately financed. There must be controls about who finances them, and who teaches there.)

This point is the very epicenter of the problem. If one fails to accurately perceive what happens, one will definitely be unsuccessful in contravening the ongoing phenomenon of gradual, almost indiscernible Islamist radicalization.

 

Before speaking about ‘religious teachers’, one has to clearly define the existing groups of Muslims; by this I do not only refer to denominations like the Shia, the Sunni, the Alevi (Turkish Alevis are not Shia: it is essential to avoid the confusion), etc. There are more groups concerned and I already mentioned them: irreligious Muslims are still Muslims. Non-practicing Muslims are also Muslims.

 

The past wrong assumption must take an end; it was a terrible mistake that allowed the problem get worse. By consciously becoming irreligious or by preferring not to practice their religion, Muslims do not go out of Islam. They simply take another stance toward established religion; but their stance is a different religious stance. As such, it must be viewed as one of today’s Islam’s components or constituent parts. Useless to add, this part of Islam must be fully represented and respected too, at all levels anytime anywhere.

 

It is therefore absolutely totalitarian and deeply undemocratic to send all Muslims’ children to religious schools whereby the teachers are either Salafi – Wahhabi Islamists or adherents the Political Islam or fake moderates.

 

As a matter of fact, in Germany, in Turkey, in every Muslim country, and in every country with a major number of Muslim immigrants, there have to be established religious-educational-cultural organizations of irreligious and non-practicing Muslims whereby they will promote, diffuse, teach and explain their vision of Islam, which is the hitherto missing “Enlightened Islam”.

 

These sociopolitical organizations must subsequently launch their educational institutions, and it goes without saying that with the necessary support, they will come up with schools, libraries, curricula and teachers in no-time. How will they achieve it? The answer is simple: by mobilizing the still lethargic masses of irreligious or non-practicing Muslims. It goes without saying that not one graduate from hitherto existing religious schools (either in Germany, Turkey, Egypt, Saudi Arabia or anywhere else) will be incorporated into the new organizations and institutions.

 

One has to anticipate that this development will create a “Great Schism” within Islam. The moment this schism is declared will be the beginning of the End of the Islamic Terrorism phenomenon.

 

Do not misread the above statement! The eradication of the evil phenomenon is not imminent and it will not be imminent, even when in every Muslim country a new pole of socio-political, educational, cultural, academic, intellectual, theoretical, ideological, political, artistic, religious, spiritual identification will appear in force. It is evident that strong Western support will be needed in many cases.

 

But then, the true battle will be engaged, and the conflict will stop being misplaced, as it will be duly and effectively contextualized. This clash is not a clash of civilizations or a clash of religions, but an internal clash between Barbarism and Civilization within Islam. And it was so for many centuries as one can understand, due to historico-religious and socio-political studies and researches focused on the gradual collapse of the historical Islamic Civilization during the times of the Ottoman Empire.

 

The evil phenomenon of gradual Islamist radicalization has also an important financial dimension, which can help explain much about how it has spread enormously within few decades. In every Muslim country, there is a Ministry of Awqaf (Religious Endowments) to which the governments allocate an at times enormous budget. Certainly, governments use these ministries as tools of internal security and control, but hidden amounts of money can be thence easily transferred to unknown recipients. In secular, Kemalist Turkey, the corresponding term is the so-called Diyanet, i.e. the Presidency of Religious Affairs (that does not have the status of a ministry).

 

There are many critical parameters in this regard, but here I mention it in order to show the abuse of public money made in still nominally secular Turkey. Although, Diyanet was established by Kemal Ataturk to encompass all the religions that exist in Turkey, it presently – under terrorist Erdogan – acts as presidency of Sunni affairs, because it finances only Sunni Muslim worship.

 

This means that Alevi, Bektashi, Câferî, irreligious, and non-practicing Muslims

  1. a) are not recognized officially,
  2. b) must ensure a financially self-sustaining running,
  3. c) don’t receive any funding, and – even worse –
  4. d) are forced to participate in the financing of the mosques and the salaries of Sunni imams, which is an outrage!

 

Now, one must not get confused with the term ‘irreligious’ (din karşıtı or dinsiz in Turkish); this represents only the average Turk’s profound and overwhelming, political – ideological rejection of the West-supported Islamist terrorist government of Erdogan. These ‘irreligious’ Turks have still Muslim personal names and, when dying, are buried in Muslim cemeteries. This reality imposes therefore that they also contribute to the shaping of Diyanet’s targets and policies.

 

In fact, the extraordinary Diyanet scandal must be internationally denounced and obliterated. An internationally supervised census should therefore take place in Turkey and the percentage of each socio-religious group specified; then, Diyanet budget should be allocated proportionally.

 

The extent of the problem is highlighted by the following data:

 

As of 2012, the budget of the crypto-terrorist organization Diyanet totaled more than US$ 2.5 billion!

 

In 2013, Diyanet’s budget represented

23% of the budget of the Turkish Army (NATO’s second largest standing army)

31% of the budget of the National Police

57% of the budget of the Public Hospitals

67% of the budget of the Ministry of Justice

79% of the budget of the Police

 

The budget allocated to Diyanet was

3.4 times larger than the budget allocated to the Ministry of Economy

2.9 times larger than the budget allocated to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs

2.5 times larger than the budget allocated to the Ministry of Culture and Tourism

2.4 times larger than the budget allocated to the Ministry of Environment and Urban Planning

1.9 times larger than the budget allocated to the Ministry of Industry, Science and Technology

1.8 times larger than the budget allocated to the Ministry of Health

1.6 times larger than the budget allocated to the Ministry of the Interior

 

More:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Turkey#Secularism

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secularism_in_Turkey#Criticism

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidency_of_Religious_Affairs

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ministry_of_Awqaf_(Egypt)

 

 

  1. “Das gelte insbesondere für Moscheen, in denen Imame aus Saudi-Arabien predigten und die von dort auch bezahlt würden. Nur wenn diese Verbindungen offengelegt werden, können die Verbindungen zu den Befürwortern einer strengen Religionsausübung in Saudi-Arabien gekappt werden”.

(This applies more particularly to the case of mosques where imams from Saudi Arabia preached and would be paid from there. Only when these connections will be disclosed, the links to the advocates of strict religious practice in Saudi Arabia will be restricted.)

 

Surely this statement brings owls to Athens! Saudi Arabia is the Islamist terrorist state par excellence. Every imam, German citizen or not, who set foot in Saudi Arabia must be immediately removed from his post and immediately expelled with his family to his father’s country of origin. The same should apply to imams who studied in Kuwait, Qatar, UAE, Egypt, Algeria and Pakistan.

 

While new religious – educational institutions with new, different curricula must be set up by irreligious and non-practicing Muslims, the existing schools should either be closed down or staffed with Russian, Azeri, Kazakh or Uzbek imams. Germany and other European should work closely with aforementioned Christian or Muslim countries that managed to drastically contain and effectively eliminate Islamic extremism, radicalism and terrorism.

 

It is also essential to understand that the Western concept of freedom of religion must be wholly reassessed in the light of its effective use by Islamists of all types, who through simulation policies and procedures have used freedom of religion in order to promote a fake-religion that rejects freedom altogether.

 

If Islamists managed to unleash an overwhelming tsunami of moral darkness and foremost barbarism, this is due to the fact that they played without opposition. Engaging irreligious and non-practicing Muslims against Islamists in Germany first will bring a colossal change and will stop Germany’s descent in the Nether World.