An original translation by JLH

From PI News:

by Christian Zeitz, Official in charge for Islam,

Wiener Akademikerbund

Dear Mr. Fellner,

After the devastating attacks in Brussels, on Tuesday, you set off a verbal bomb with considerable power and reach.  Even considering the bitter situation in Europe, that is a courageous act, and I can add only my congratulations.  At any rate, only recently my Islam-critical friends and I would have been hailed into court for hate speech for such a statement, and the media would have applauded enthusiastically if we had gotten some grief from that.

Isn’t it odd?  Serious Islam-critical organizations (like, for instance, the Wiener Akademikerbund, for which I have worked voluntarily in this area for a  long time) have proven with painstaking exactitude, that

–“Emigration” (i.e., migration and “flight”) is a variation of Islamic jihad.

–the paradigm of Islamic terrorism has an established, Koranic base (e.g., in the Battle of Badr),

–the struggle (to the death) against “infidels” is Islamic normalcy,

–Islam’s domination of the world is a commandment of Allah,

–integration of Muslims into a society that is not organized according to shariah is a serious crime,

–Christians and Jew may only live in Islamic societies under restrictive  (and de facto inhumane) conditions as dhimmis,

–women are unclean and second-class human beings,

–“infidel” women may be taken as slaves who may be  raped without  penalty,

–Mohammed himself sexually abuses a child then further harms a child,


A close friend of mine was convicted for establishing this last point.  For the dissemination of the otter points, we were regularly reviled as being Islamophobic, extreme rightist populists, racists and Nazis.

Exactly a year ago, I had the dubious pleasure, as a parliamentary expert, of working for weeks with the new Islam Act–its drafts and its development as a law.  At that time, we warned and predicted that the execution of this law would protect and strengthen (political) Islam and undermine religious peace and the interests of the Austrian people.

All of our predictions have unfortunately proven true.  The so-called “disclosure of the doctrine” presented by the IGGiÖ (Islamic Religious Community in Austria) is a nine-page mockery of vulnerable Austrians.  The requisite translation of the Koran, of course, was not done.  Both of them would have been indispensable for checking the legal conformity  of the religious doctrine.  And the “constitution of the IGGiÖ” continues to expand, strengthening the base of believers and pushing Islam’s influence into all aspects of Austrian life (army, universities, “halal”food, cemeteries, etc,).  Both the doctrine and the constitution were accepted on the 27th of February of this year by the responsible ministry.  But who is bothered by it?

The responsible minister–and in fact the entire political class–are interested in appeasement, cooperation and favorable business with Islam. We conduct dialogues, and chase after the phantom of “Euro-Islam”.   Critics are annoying troublemakers.  They could, indeed, question the shaping of the EU, which means to accelerate the  superstate project by pushing the multicultural society (and thus Islam and mass migration).

The effects of programs that spread out across decentralized organized structures cannot be limited merely by legal prohibitions,  Islam, Mr. Fellner, can be banned as well or as poorly as a computer virus.  That does not mean that there would be no applicable instruments of de-Islamization and protection of the vulnerable public.  And it is high time to attempt both, for the attacks of Brussels are only a modest foretaste of what awaits us.

So, are you serious about your demands?


About Eeyore

Canadian artist and counter-jihad and freedom of speech activist as well as devout Schrödinger's catholic


  1. I really don’t think that banning Islam will do anything good. The question is not of banning Islam, but of acting in such way that the Muslims will not be able to change our way of life, that that will not be able to do terrorists act in our country, that they will not be able to use our law to instill their law and their rule, and that they will follow our law. If we do that the banning Islam will be redundant.
    To do that there are many things to do, but the 1st one is to enforce law which should be equal for everybody, enforce the spirit of law for all, with no exception. Presently the law is enforced differently for different people. There are some communities for whom law is lenient, for one reason or another. That means that if someone is talking about breaking the law one would be treated exactly the same iregardless whether one is white, black, chinese , christian, jew muslim or green man from Alpha Centauri. The second thing is to get good information, good intelligence on communities who may be prone to terrorists acts. That also means invigilation of these communities, good knowledge of these communities and acting on that knowledge.
    That’s just for a start.
    I acknowledge that the present government will, may not, be able to do that. Unfortunately. Similarly to Belgium, politicians in many democracies prefer to buy votes at the cost of safety of their citizens, and they look at the short-term gain. Sometimes actually believing, that they are doing good, when in fact they are destroying the fundamentals and the the welfare of their country.

    • There is one problem with you idea, that is the Koran. The Torah and the Bible are the inspired word of God and we can debate what was meant and change the interruption if we want. The Koran (according to the Koran) is the literal word of God, this can’t be changed or re interrupted, thus the Moslems will still follow the Koran and Sharia when their percentage of the population reaches a high enough figure. This is the one sticking point no has managed to figure a way around.

      If you find a way around that sticking point please let the world know.

      • I understand that, but how do you want to do it? Are you really prepared for the consequences of that law?
        Look, at present problem only partially exists because the certain segment of population follows certain religion. The present problem exists because majority of the population have no will to make their elected government to enforce the law equally for everybody. The present problem also exists because majority of population thinks that some minorities should be treated leniently, because of their views, or their history, or their skin colour, or simply because there are less of them in Canada. That is the main problem. If that problem will not be resolved, if the way of thinking will not change, the proposed by you law will never became reality. Because really,the introduction of the law itself will do nothing if the law will not be enforced and if there will be large segment of the population who will be against the law (I am talking about non- Muslims here, because, naturally, Muslim population will not support it).
        The thing is to make as soon as possible such condition that people who will not want to follow our law will voluntarily leave the country or will not come to our country. That means some changes in the law and hopefully change in peoples behaviour. But it does not necessarily means to ban the religion.

        • The war that would result from a banning of Islam is coming no matter what we do, I really don’t want to see it but consider it the lesser of the two evils. We either recognize that this is a war of survival, and a long term war at that, or we are destroyed as a culture and freedom disappears from the world for a long time.

          Your idea of making things so hard for them that they will leave on their own is how the outlawing of Islam will probably start. With the pressure gradually growing. Of course this all is based on the idea that major land war doesn’t start this year. From the indications either major land war will start of your idea will be implemented in some western nations.

        • I hate the way the weather fronts are moving through so fast, they make my various age related pains worse.

          Yes the major problem (for the moment) is the way the people as a whole are refusing to insist that the laws be followed Given what I am seeing in the news this will change soon, in some nation for the better in some for the worse. The far left set things up so that the majority of the West will return to strong man rule. They thought it would be their strong men rather then that the ordinary people would start insisting on their own strong man. With the right Strong Man the rule of law will return. What is more probable is that in some if not most the return of the rule of law may have to wait until after the war is over.

          While I don’t doubt that the west will eventually win the war against Islam I am less certain that civilization and freedom (in most nations) will survive.

    • I think you have to close borders and stop any further immigration, then you have to change how Islam is perceived, in other words you make it socially unacceptable to be a Muslim, in other words you look down on them for following a barbaric ideology.

      You expose its core texts to open ridicule and point out its xenophobic nature, you give it no respect at all.

      What will that do, well all those Muslims will have a choice, walk away and join the rest of the human race or go back to a Muslim country. There will be a wave of attacks but taht is happening anyway, hearts and minds is key to winning this and as such Islam is truly an easy target to hit open because if you do any serious study of it you soon realise just how bad it is.

      Warfare is understanding the enemies weak spot and it has always been exposing Islam for what it really is and protecting those that leave it in disgust. That is why they are so desperate to close down freedom of expression and that is why people refusing to talk about Islam as the issue and those people going after people who tell the truth are just as big an enemy as the Jihadists.

      • Your tactic is one that will probably be used in conjunction with Kathy’s of making things so difficult for the Moslems they leave. The peace at any price people are going to protest both moves and until we manage to convince people th at this is a war of survival many Judges will side with the Moslems and peace at any price.

  2. Making sure that our laws are enforced equally upon all residents would be one of the best ways to defeat Islam. The second – and equally necessary means – of combatting this evil is to insist that the ugly truth about Islam be taught at every level in our schools and voiced by our leaders and politicians. The idea that Muslims can STILL get away with proclaiming that “Islam is peace”, “Islam honors women”, “Islam abhors slavery”, “Islam respects all religions”, “terrorists don’t practice true Islam”, “Islam forbids the killing of innocents”, etc., after ALL we have witnessed to the contrary over the past 13 centuries, simply makes my blood boil. A combination of truth about Islam and enforcement of our laws equally on everyone will go far to eradicate the threat that Islam poses to our way of life. Let’s protect Universal human rights.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *