Skip to main content

The CDU and Islam (an oxymoron if ever there was one!)

I am struggling to understand why the Christian Democratic Union (Angela Merkel's party) is so keen to keep taking in migrants from the Middle East and Africa when the majority of these follow Islam, in one form or the other.   

Islam is a theocracy, the law that Muslims live by is that laid down by God, the law of the land (or country that they inhabit) is second to this.   The followers of Islam do not believe in democracy, so just using this example alone they are incompatible with the CDU and Western Europe in general.

The Christian Democratic Union was created after the Second World War to unite the conservative parties across Germany.   They failed to unite under the Weimar Republic after the First World War, and this subsequently lead to Hitler's rise to power, which plunged Germany into conflict again some thirty years later.

The CDU were literally a "union" of conservative parties who realised that together they were a stronger political power than as separate entities.   The "Christian" part of their name comes from the unification of the Catholic and Protestant party members.   This alone should highlight the incompatibility of Islam and the CDU.   Islam does not recognise any other faith.   It categorically states that anyone who is not a follower of the Prophet Mohamed is an infidel (a non-believer in Allah) or a kafir (an arabic word which is used in Islamic doctrine to describe someone who does not believe in Allah) and their teachings state that the subjugation of all infidels is the ultimate goal of Islam.

So my question is this; Why would the leader of a political party [Anglea Merkel - CDU] invite hundreds of thousands of people, the majority of whom follow Islam, to live there [Germany], when the ideology of Islam is in direct conflict with the host country?

By doing so you are asking your own citizens to accommodate, and pay for via the tax system, people who have nothing in common with the culture, belief system or heritage of the host country.   In addition, you are exposing the migrants to a culture that is diametrically opposite to their own.   You instantly put the migrants at a disadvantage and you make the chances of integration almost impossible.   Therefore the only reasoning for this mass migration has to be the de-stabilisation of Europe, but WHY?

 
 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Demographic suicide of Europe - Can it be reversed?

There is no doubt, to any rational, critical thinking person in the Western world, that Europe is going through as big a crisis as those of WW1 and WW2.   Unfortunately, the crisis we currently find ourselves in has been created or at least abetted by our own political leaders. There has been much talk of the Frankfurt School and the Coudenhove-Kalergi plan, cultural marxism and the creep of Islamism within the West and Europe specifically. We are told that we need to import immigrants from the third world countries in order to fill the demographic hole created by Europeans not breeding sufficiently.   The Coudenhove-Kalergi plan openly advocates the destruction of the European race, or at the very least its dilution.   So for decades, various countries have made it fiscally less and less desirable to procreate.   The married person's tax allowance was removed from UK citizens way back in the nineties, child benefit, in countries where it is paid, has...
Post a Comment
Read more

Lord Taverne slams the will of the people.

Last night (13 March 2017) the House of Commons voted on the Bill to trigger Article 50 of the Lis bon Trea ty .   This Bill allows the government of the UK to set in motion the process of separation from the European Union, nine months after the people of the UK voted, via a referendum, to leave. Despite the best efforts of Gina Miller (a Soros stooge) and a cabal of self-interested parties to block the UK government from trying to exit without parliamentary approval; a move that was upheld by several self-interested High Court and Supreme Court Judges were proven fruitless.   In compliance with the court directive, the UK government tabled a Bill laying out the specifics of exiting the EU.   Passed by the House of Commons, it went up to the House of Lords, who rejected the Bill and returned it to the elected House with amendments.   The amendments were overturned by the elected House of Commons and it has since passed in the House of...
Post a Comment
Read more

Pot and Kettle!!!

It never fails to amaze me that some people in positions of power have the nerve to judge countries when their own home nation is not known for banging the same drum..... The UN Human Rights Chief, Zeid Ra'ad Al Hussein from Saudi Arabia, has drawn the world's attention to the horrendous behaviour of the Turkish Authorities.    He, quite correctly, has stated that the shooting at unarmed people protesting in Cizre, Turkey, was against their fundamental rights.   This throws up two issues for me; Saudi Arabia has an appalling human rights record and the fact that a Saudi citizen is the head of the UN Human Rights is laughable.    Does he criticise Saudi Arabia or are they off limits? Everyone has known about the flexible way that Turkey deals with the issue of human rights, but they have been assured that the EU will look again at their application to join....surely this should be the nail in the coffin of their ambition to join?   ...
Post a Comment
Read more