(Posted on this blog on July 27, 2009.)
"frequently insisted that he had thought reported a delegation of Arab nobles, reflecting how he conceived the state church, in the eighth century when Muslims tried to advance towards Central Europe through France, were defeated at the Battle of Poitiers. If the Arabs had won that battle, the Muslim world would be now, it would have imposed a doctrine Germanic peoples, spread by the sword the faith and bring to all peoples to it, which would have been tailor-made. Because of their racial inferiority, the conquistadors could not have ultimately prevail over the people of the north, strong and accustomed to the rough nature of the terrain, so they would not have been Arabs but the Germans Muslims, who have led the global Islamic empire.
(...) I used to close this account with the following consideration:
- And, finally, we have the misfortune that our religion is not the best. Why not be like the Japanese, who consider that the higher the sacrifice for the motherland? Even the Muslim religion would have been much better for us than Christianity, weak and tolerant ".
who often repeated that thought, and concluded with this consideration, he did after expressing his idea of \u200b\u200bbeing able to specify a type of" Church "commensurate with its political goals. Not taken seriously, as these reflections who entered a "new religion of the party" it would be a "return to the mysticism of the Middle Ages."
So Muslims have won the battle of Poitiers (thanks, Charles Martel, as by then the Habsburgs, but now St. Peter's in Rome would-ya-the Great Mosque in Europe), the Reich would be universal German as well as Muslim.
already have guessed who thought so. (The ellipsis in parentheses in the quote, omitting only the name.) Adolph Hitler.
I guess the "noble Arab delegation" refers to the encounter in 1941 with the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem (a charge disastrously invented by a British Mandate times), which revealed that the visit to Berlin, the Mufti, who claimed descent Yasser Arafat was not only to join in the Endlösung Führer but the affinity between the two found other common paths: that of what today is often called Islamofascism, term where "fascism" generalizes the inclusion in it of "Nazism".
one would find the source and conceptual, primitive, the islamonazismo.
I read in the "Memoirs" by Albert Speer. Two
ideological structures, the radical Islam and Nazism, which sought the last and first looks the same: world dominance.
Führer himself recognized the "superiority" of Islam and religious ideology, but of course, could not compromise on its credo of "superior" Germanic, hence gave it the "Germans Muslims."
A look at how Speer - in whom, of course, can not be trusted, but this did not have to lie, "he notes," often repeated "the thought of yore.
is often noted that Islamic Jihad is a threat as or larger than it was Nazism.
true, and hope, especially the West has been saved from then until now due to be best able to produce more efficient weapons, and technology in general. This is the only "superiority."
But Iran is about to get nuclear weapons (if not already have it), a product of the West (and make no mistake: the mullahs would not hesitate to die millions of Arabs and other Muslims, if that is the price for them to assure them of the intended domain), and who only come to meet you, ready to help, is the same goal of annihilation that had the Fuehrer and the Mufti of their "noble Arab delegation" Israel.
0 comments:
Post a Comment