Below is the third of four parts of the appearance by Thilo Sarrazin on the TV program “Talk in Hangar 7” (previously: Part 1, Part 2). In this segment the argument becomes really heated.

To recapitulate the cast of characters: in addition to Mr. Sarrazin, there is a Viennese schoolteacher named Susanne Wiesinger, who has also written a book, an imam named Abdul Adhim Kamouss, and the host, whose name I forget.

Many thanks to MissPiggy for the translation, and to Vlad Tepes for the subtitling:

Video transcript:

00:03 “Germany needs this piece of work as urgently as an Ebola outbreak,”

00:06 explains the Süddeutsche Zeitung.

00:09 The Frankfurter Allgemeine newspaper headlines: “Hair-raising about Islam”.

00:13 “Hate preacher or enlightener?” asks Stern Magazine, and states in the lead-in

00:18 that the author has declared war against Muslims.

00:24 The daily paper Taz says about Sarrazin’s book: “Nobody needs it.”

00:29 The Courier headlines with, “Another scandal!”

00:33 While The Standard sees the book as a “Love affair with prejudice”

00:38 We are directly back to the topic of which we spoke previously.

00:41 It obviously seems as though those who reviewed what you

00:44 have written, your prognosis, and your position; they believe you have

00:49 crossed a boundary when it comes to criticizing Islam.

00:54 Why do you think that is? —So, first of all, there are other completely different reviews.

00:59 Secondly, there was apparently

01:04 an implicit arrangement in the German media, in which the contents of my book

01:09 should not be acknowledged. In every one of these

01:15 reviews, nothing is mentioned about the contents, but instead just wild insults.

01:21 And nowhere have any false facts been proven.

01:28 I had, or actually we counted, four and a half insignificant fact errors

01:34 that were named in all these reviews. What the media

01:40 dislikes is the question I pose with my book: whether Islam from its creation,

01:46 and how it has developed, is compatible with

01:52 modern society. I answer in the negative, and as a result the media reacts indignantly.

01:57 This occurs for a totally banal reason. They are

02:03 unable to rebut my arguments, and they don’t. They are afraid

02:07 these arguments could be used in the present political climate

02:11 by those considered “wrong”. Along the lines of: what Sarrazin writes

02:18 could be used by the AfD, and so what he writes must be declared

02:25 false, and should under no circumstance be spread. —You have experienced

02:29 the same? —Yes, yes. You are right about that.

02:34 It is an absolutely unreasonable argument not even to ask if something

02:41 is right or wrong, whether the context is right

02:49 or wrong, or is incorrectly presented. Instead their only concern

02:53 is how this will contribute in the momentary debate to their

02:58 advantage or disadvantage. A purely opportunistic review to say this book

03:02 is not politically favorable. —You are correct. And I will

03:05 go so far to say that you are right about being placed automatically

03:11 in the far right corner. In Germany the AfD, in Austria the FPÖ.

03:18 This happens as Islam gains more influence, the conservative Islam,

03:23 and you dare to criticize it. —He isn’t criticizing

03:28 conservatives, he is criticizing all of Islam. For him the entirety of Islam

03:33 is spoiled goods, right? —Yep. —Exactly —May I finish?

03:38 —No, you haven’t read my book. —I did. —No. —Excuse me,

03:41 but you both have just interrupted me, please let me finish.

03:44 Please. Then I will also let you speak. Thank you. So, what I really find problematic

03:50 about your book is that it is too pessimistic.

03:56 It also criticizes Muslims globally. That’s just too far, and

04:00 that was my feeling as I read it, even with your first book.

04:14 Naturally, that alienates many who would perhaps sympathize

04:20 with your theories or some of the elements

04:27 that I also share. It is offensive, I think. —That could be.

04:32 —You need to bring the people on board.

04:37 —That’s not the… —If you criticize… —You brought me here to give my opinion.

04:41 But I would like… —It’s my turn. —Frau Wiesinger asked

04:45 Mr. Sarrazin something; I brought you here so that you would follow the rules of discourse, too.

04:49 Not now. He is speaking. —I would just like an answer and then… yes?

04:57 I would like to have made it more optimistic, but those are the facts

05:05 as they were and how I evaluated them. If someone were to come and say,

05:09 ‘I have other facts that show a different

05:14 situation’ or rightly came to a different conclusion, I would say that’s fantastic.

05:19 I am someone that hopes that through

05:25 a political debate, derived from common findings which are alarming enough,

05:31 that it results in action to change, which is a necessity.

05:38 I’m not a man of absolutes saying this way or no way. —Muslims are here,

05:42 and they’re staying, Mr. Sarrazin —Right, right.

05:47 They are going to stay and they will be the majority.

05:52 I also speak about immigration and so forth.

05:57 I think we will only be able to change something when we address it clearly.

06:03 I know many Muslims that share my opinion, and

06:09 they all say, for example Seyran Ates, whom you have probably heard of,

06:14 and appreciate among others. They all tell me

06:20 that German mainstream society, or Austrian or European society, is far too yielding.

06:23 It needs to handle these matters in a tougher and more direct manner,

06:26 otherwise it will not be able to cope. —Now you will hear from a Muslim something else,

06:32 as an imam I will tell you. You write in your introduction… incidentally,

06:36 I only got your book three days ago from the editorial team, and

06:40 have been reading and reading up until today. —OK, that’s good. —I’m not finished,

06:43 but I read the most important part for me,

06:46 as a theologian. Mr. Sarrazin you write… —Are you trained as a theologian?

06:51 I thought you were an electrical engineer. —My entire

06:56 life has been a study of theology, and I mention that in my book. I wrote

07:00 in the introduction more than 70 pages about my

07:03 theological background. —I read it. —I would like to tell you, when you say

07:09 you read the Quran from the beginning to the end.

07:15 The German version. —Exactly, a German version and now you think

07:20 you can make a review about Islam in order to

07:25 explain what Islam is. I’m telling you, you are

07:29 making yourself look stupid in front of the entire world.

07:34 When you speak about finances, then I would tip my hat to you. I would hold you in high regard.

07:42 However, when you enter this arena, then I must ask if you

07:48 have ever heard of the terms: Occasions of Revelation or

07:54 Abrogated Verses? Have you heard that there are equivocal and

07:58 unequivocal verses in the Quran? Have you heard

08:03 of which are specific and which are generally valid?

08:08 Or about the restricted wording or unrestricted wording?

08:13 Have you read about Hermeneutics? What do you know about the

08:16 canonization of the Quran? Do you know about

08:19 the methods of exegesis of the Quran? You know what I noticed?

08:23 I noticed that ISIS members apply the words

08:28 of the Quran literally and the radical liberals; that’s what I call

08:32 them. That includes Mrs. Ates, and by the way,

08:37 yes, I know her and she is not a friend of mine in a theological sense.

08:41 They practice an orderless “whateverism”

08:44 in respect to the Quran, and you combine both. You read the Quran superficially.

08:49 You have no knowledge. You have

08:54 no fundamental knowledge, and think you can paint all of Islam and

08:59 paint our god of Islam. You tear the verses of the Quran

09:04 out of their historical context and play with them as you wish.

09:09 I am telling you, you have pronounced judgment upon yourself.

09:14 When Mr. Noeldeke, the imam of all orientalists, was alive, although

09:18 he was somewhat hostile toward Islam; he would have wept

09:23 about the way you treated the Quran. At the moment, I have the feeling

09:27 that many Islamic scholars are smirking and

09:32 would confirm what I’m saying. You have no clue and are an illiterate

09:36 when it comes to Islamic theology. You are not permitted and

09:40 when we ask how far can one go with criticism of Islam…

09:46 Let him answer now. You reproached him, let him answer.

09:52 About how far criticism can go? Go ahead. —I’d like to answer.

09:56 First, several Islamic scholars expressly agree with me.

10:01 For example, Dr. Tilman Nagel, who recently wrote a review.

10:07 Secondly, I read the Quran the way I learned to read the Bible.

10:14 I believe the text, it is in German — not in Arabic and I admit that.

10:19 It is a deficit, but I read it. —That is not enough.

10:24 I understood as well as I could and read additional texts.

10:32 My summary of the Quran and how I evaluated it,

10:40 are in every single point accurate. —You have your own instrument…

10:44 For someone who complains about being

10:49 interrupted, you interrupt quite often. —And I stand by what I wrote. Incidentally, I would like

10:53 to ask you, if I as an educated man read 600 pages of the Quran and

10:59 occupied myself with it for months, and you say, “You are unable to understand.”

11:06 And when you say my expertise is insufficient, then how should

11:11 millions of Muslim believers who also can’t read Arabic,

11:16 and are often illiterate — they all can’t understand either, then?

11:19 I’ll give the answer. —I asked when…

11:22 —You just asked me something. —Yes. —How does the Muslim community

11:27 handle this? First of all, we are talking about

11:33 criticizing Islam and not about how the religion is practiced.

11:37 Someone who is Muslim… —Mr. Kamouss, when we are

11:42 discussing criticism of a religion, we also automatically speak of

11:46 how it is practiced. —Mr. Moderator, please allow me to share

11:49 my opinion. I say what I want and not what YOU want me to say.

11:53 —But you won’t say anything unless I let you, and I’m not

11:56 going to allow you to ruin this conversation. Absolutely not.

11:59 —I am not ruining it. —Answer the question. —I explained my methods. —You complain

12:03 about being interrupted and you interrupt constantly. You are trying to destroy this conversation.

12:07 I have the feeling that I am being discriminated against on this show,

12:11 and you accuse me of interrupting the entire time.

12:16 The one the speaks the most and the loudest is being discriminated against, is that right?

12:20 Just now he interrupted me multiple times and you did nothing. I’ll say it again, we’re talking

12:25 about criticizing Islam. If you are entering this arena,

12:29 then you must use the instruments. —Uhh? Excuse me. You wanted to

12:32 answer differently before. How should normal Muslims

12:35 understand these texts when they can’t read Arabic. —If I read something, then I can understand it.

12:38 I just answered that. —May I please interrupt you gentlemen? I want an answer, I want the answer

12:43 from you, because it totally interests me. How can

12:48 someone that is not able to read Arabic, as you said, someone that is not

12:52 trained theologically able understand the Quran?

12:58 What if they speak Turkish or Albanian? If the Quran can only be understood

13:03 in Arabic, how is it possible? I ask this in the interest

13:09 of my pupils. How is it possible to really understand Quran verses when it is