republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
“The government has long struggled with foreign involvement when it comes to the education of imams who lead Muslim communities across Germany. Now, a new educational association, with start-up funding from Germany’s interior ministry, is set to launch at the University of Osnabrück.”
The German Ministry of Education and Research has already invested $49.5 million USD to finance seven Islamic theology institutes across the country, courtesy of German taxpayers who have nothing better to do with their money.
There are many unanswered questions in this expensive proposition. Who is doing the teaching? If the teachers were taught by foreign influencers, they will simply pass on the same theology. Is Germany also prepared to dismantle all foreign-funded Islamic schools, mosques and Islamic centers that are currently in existence?
In another case of wishful thinking (or political posturing), Angela Merkel said: “These Muslims belong to Germany and in the same way their religion belongs to Germany, that is to say Islam.” But then she added that “the form of Islam practiced must conform to the country’s constitution.”
Germany has served as an example of how not to manage migration. Its leaders have offered no suggestions on how they intend to make sure that Islam conforms to the German constitution. One thing for certain: imams will not take instruction from kaffirs on how to teach Islam.
Germany has irrationally swung its doors open to mass and unvetted Muslim migration, and intends to do more of the same. The country’s migration and assimilation plans have no rhyme or reason to them: Germany has even lost track of a significant number of its asylum seekers. This latest venture “to take charge of imam education locally” is a face-saving gesture to appease the public, which is increasingly dissatisfied with Merkel’s mass migration policies. Germany is lost. Its public schools are already teaching Islam to students. Its future is clear.
“Germany set to take charge of imam education locally,” by Seda Serdar, DW, November 19, 2019:
The government has long struggled with foreign involvement when it comes to the education of imams who lead Muslim communities across Germany. Now, a new educational association, with start-up funding from Germany’s interior ministry, is set to launch at the University of Osnabrück on Thursday.
Even though some Muslim organizations have been training imams for their own communities in Germany, the majority of imams working in the country are affiliated with the Turkish-Islamic Union for Religious Affairs (DITIB).
Among Germany’s nearly 4.5 million Muslims, around 3 million are of Turkish origin.
Long awaited financing
It was precisely this influence that moved the German government to take such a bold step, Green party parliamentarian Filiz Polat told DW. It was a measure her party “had long been asking for,” she added.
DITIB is Germany’s largest Islamic umbrella group, with 900 affiliated mosques. Its imams are educated, financed and sent from Turkey….


republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
This is a lot closer to happening than most people realize. In October 2009, the Obama administration joined Egypt in supporting a resolution in the UN’s Human Rights Council to recognize exceptions to the freedom of speech for “any negative racial and religious stereotyping” (a highly subjective category). Approved by the U.N. Human Rights Council, the resolution called on states to condemn and criminalize “any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence.” Then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton affirmed the Obama administration’s support for this on July 15, 2011, when she gave an address on the freedom of speech at an Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) conference on Combating Religious Intolerance. “Together, she said, “we have begun to overcome the false divide that pits religious sensitivities against freedom of expression and we are pursuing a new approach. These are fundamental freedoms that belong to all people in all places and they are certainly essential to democracy.”
But how could both religious sensitivities and freedom of expression be protected?
Clinton had a First Amendment to deal with, and so in place of legal restrictions on criminalization of Islam, she suggested “old-fashioned techniques of peer pressure and shaming, so that people don’t feel that they have the support to do what we abhor.” She held a lengthy closed-door meeting with OIC Secretary-General Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu in December 2011 to facilitate the adoption of measures that would advance the OIC’s anti-free speech campaign. But what agreements she and Ihsanoglu made, if any, have never been disclosed. Still, the specter of an American secretary of State conferring with a foreign official about how to restrict the freedom of speech in order to stifle communications deemed offensive to Muslims was, at the very least, chilling.
Nor was that a singular case. In July 2012, Thomas Perez — then the assistant attorney general for the Civil Rights Division, was asked by Rep. Trent Franks (R-AZ):
Will you tell us here today that this administration’s Department of Justice will never entertain or advance a proposal that criminalizes speech against any religion?
Perez could have simply answered yes, and maybe even cited the First Amendment. Instead, Perez refused to answer the question directly. Franks persisted, ultimately asking it four times. Perez at one point responded that it was a “hard question.” He simply refused to affirm that the Obama Justice Department would not attempt to criminalize criticism of Islam.
This is today’s Democratic Party. If a Democrat wins the presidency in 2020 or thereafter, will that President advance the Left’s assault on the freedom of speech and move to implement Sharia restrictions on criticism of Islam in the United States? You can bet on it. In that eventuality, I hope some of y’all will visit me in prison.
“OIC chief demands international law to criminalize Islamophobia,” by Mohammed al-Kinani, Arab News, November 21, 2019 (thanks to The Religion of Peace):
JEDDAH: Muslim leaders on Thursday demanded the introduction of an international law to criminalize all acts of Islamophobia.
Announcing plans for the celebration of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation’s (OIC) 50th anniversary in Jeddah on Monday, its secretary-general called for a global crackdown on individuals or groups responsible for “insulting religions or prophets.”
Dr. Yousef Al-Othaimeen told Arab News: “There are laws against anti-Semitism and racism. So, we request a law against mocking religions.”
In a report released by the OIC, he said that modernization and the Internet revolution had turned the world into a “global village” where religions and cultures should coexist, and races and nations must live side by side as neighbors.
“Islamophobia is a sentiment of excessive fear against Islam that is transformed into acts of intolerance and discriminations against Muslims and even violent crimes against people with Islamic attires.”…
On Islamophobia, Al-Othaimeen said that the behaviors of some Muslims who did not truly represent Islam, had brought prejudice to the surface….
“These issues are of great importance, to be worked on in collaboration not only with governments, but also with people and non-profit organizations, to prove to everyone that Islam is the voice of mercy, moderation and coexistence with Muslims and non-Muslims,” he added.
 Yeah, sure, that’s the ticket.