Radicalism: The Real Shock Was the Reaction of the Americans…

Gatestone Institute, by Majid Rafizadeh, 

  • Many extremist Muslims believe that their religious desire is coming true in in the US. Religiously speaking, for extremist Muslims, ruling America is Allah’s (God’s) word. To them, a sacred promise is coming to fruition.
  • What does being the second-largest religion in a country mean? Voters impact local and national politics, swing domestic elections, elect more representatives from the same religious affiliation, are influential enough to determine who the next president of the United States may be, and change the laws of the land.
  • This sense of immunity and dismissal led to the downfall of many countries throughout time.

“Soon,” said the letter, “America Will Be Ours”.

“Ours?”

The writer, it became clear, was an extremist Muslim in the U.S. who claimed to be a reputable religious preacher. With each new word, concern grew.

He pointed out, throughout the letter, the “sinful” ways of the West: dancing, drinking, dating…

He expressed disgust that most women did not wear the hijab or participate in prayer five times a day. Then he got straight to the point: “Ours,” he explained, represented Muslims like him.

The sentiment is hardly a new one. A person hears similar proclamations from many Muslim extremists throughout the years. The real shock was not letter but the reaction of many Americans after seeing it.

Such a thing, they said, could never happen. The writer’s words were “just bluster,” nothing to be taken seriously. Most surprisingly, they stated — honestly — that Muslims who speak of such intentions do not really mean what they say, so these threats should not be cause for concern.

The history of the two nations where I grew up — Iran and Syria — taught all of us there a big lesson about living in this kind of ignorance: the reality of how quickly a nation can be consumed by the philosophies of a religious state. An authoritarian and malicious regime, as exists now in Iran — the world’s leading sponsor of terrorism and brutal even to its own people — is something we cannot forget.

In a few centuries, in Syria, where more than 90% percent of the population were Christians, and in Iran where an overwhelming majority of citizens were Zoroastrians, the demography drastically shifted to majority-Muslim. Neither nation could have anticipated such a change.

While many may underestimate the radical preacher’s claims that “Soon, America Will Be Ours”, for extremist Muslims these beliefs are strongly and deeply rooted.

Many extremists believe that their religious desire — for a “Muslim takeover of the White House, a directive from Muhammad himself ” — is coming true in the US. Religiously speaking, for these Muslims, ruling America is Allah’s (God’s) word, a sacred promise is coming to fruition.

A recent survey and demographic research released by the Pew Research Center found that Muslims will soon overtake members of other religions, including Jews, as the second-largest religious group in the United States.

This issue should not be taken lightly. What does being the second-largest religion in a country mean? Voters impact local and national politics, swing domestic elections, elect more representatives from the same religious affiliation, are influential enough to determine who the next president of the United States may be, and change the laws of the land. All it takes is a subtle shift in power for the entire society, political system and culture of a nation to be changed.

The number of Muslims in the US has increased by 40% in just five years — between 2010-2015 — while in the same period the non-Muslim population of the US has grown by only five percent. This means that the Muslim population is growing almost eight times faster than the non-Muslim population in the US.

As an adult, in the Muslim world, I came to hear verses and hadiths frequently used by extremists and carved into their minds. To them, these are the true instructions and predictions of the most powerful being. Those Muslims strongly believe that these verses and hadiths (sayings of Muhammad) will come true because they are issued by Allah (God) or by his messenger, Muhammad. Allah, for instance, says in the Qur’an Chapter (9:33) sūrat al-tawbah (The Repentance):

“It is he (Allah) who has sent his Messenger with guidance and the religion of truth (Islam), in order for it to be dominant over all other religions, even though the Mushrikoon (disbelievers) hate it.”

A popular hadith is:

“Verily Allah has shown me the eastern and western part of the earth, and I saw the authority of my Ummah (nation) dominate all that I saw”

Some extremist Muslims believe that Allah and Muhammad predicted that they would rule over America even before America was discovered by Europeans. As a certain radical Muslim activist said on ABC news, “Indeed, we believe that one day, the flag of Islam will fly over the White House.” He quoted a saying of Muhammad, from the Muslim scholar Al-Tabarani in the 10th-century. “The final hour,” he said, “will not come until Muslims conquer the White House.”

Many extremists also insist that Muslims do not need to be the majority in a country in order to take over the government: “A small portion of Muslims will rise and conquer the White House.”

In the belief of fundamentalist Muslims, it is the obligation of every Muslim to pave the way for Islam to dominate America. They are encouraged to use various methods to ensure that this occurs — these include force, violence and waging jihad (holy war).

Any action taken for the purpose of accomplishing that goal is applauded by Muslim extremists worldwide. Islamists and Islamist states, for instance, heavily praised, and quoted Louis Farrakhan when he predicted that, “God will destroy America at the hands of the Muslims. God will not give Japan or Europe the honor of bringing down the United States; this is an honor God will bestow upon Muslims.”

There is historical proof of great nations succumbing to the ideals of extreme and determined radical groupsy. History has often taught hard lessons to powerful nations. Before one dismisses the danger America faces, take the time to learn about the past and just how easily and swiftly irreversible changes can happen: Russia in 1917, Germany 1933, Egypt in 1952, Iran in 1979, and so forth. Do not underestimate the ability of radical Islam to take over your government and impose Sharia law throughout this once free nation.

Americans should not think that they will somehow be an exception to that historical rule. This sense of immunity and dismissal led to the downfall of many countries throughout time. If Americans do not take the issue seriously, history may teach them the hard way that what once seemed impossible is here.

Dr. Majid Rafizadeh, is a business strategist and advisor, Harvard-educated scholar, political scientist, board member of Harvard International Review, and president of the International American Council on the Middle East. He has authored several books on Islam and US Foreign Policy. He can be reached at Dr.Rafizadeh@Post.Harvard.Edu

Europe: Safeguard Values or Disappear

Gatestone Institute, by Giulio Meotti, 

  • We no longer replace our numbers; instead we rely on immigration to compensate for the shortfall in births. This immigration is for the most part Muslim; the effect of our demographic decline is, therefore, the Islamization of Europe.
  • The response of members of the political class, at least in Italy, is to shrug their shoulders, and say, “So what?” European elites believe that religion is private. However, most Muslims do not believe that religion is private, and some are working hard to create a state in which Islamic law is the legal foundation for everyone. The effect of this is already being felt across the European continent. We have more Islamic veils and mosques, and fewer cartoons of Mohammed.
  • Without the courage to insist on safeguarding our values, and passing our inheritance on to our children, we Europeans will simply disappear — as many groups have before. With us, however, will disappear the most enlightened civilization the world has ever known.

“We have to decide if our ethnicity, if our white race, if our society continues to exist — or if it will be wiped out.” This observation was recently made by Attilio Fontana, a politician with the anti-immigrant Northern League, who is running to govern the Italy’s northern region of Lombardy. Fontana’s remarks sparked quite a political storm. He may not have chosen the most delicate words, but he was right in pointing out the potential suicide of Europe. Italy’s problem, in fact, is not the word “race”, but the empty cradles and the crowded boats which have brought in 500,000 African migrants in a relatively short time

In Milan, Italy’s financial district and second-biggest city, there are more dogs than newborns. The city has literally “lost” half its births in a mere ten years. From 2006 to 2016, the number of children born in Milan has declined from 17,000 a year to fewer than 10,000. By comparison, in 1880 Milan had a population of 350,000, and that year, 10,000 children were born. Today, Milan is inhabited by 1,362,000 people with fewer than 10,000 new births. So, relatively, 138 years ago Milan had proportionately four times as many children as today. That is how Europe’s indigenous population will die out.

A new report by the Dutch organization Gefira analyzes the future of the “incredibly shrinking Italian population“. The number of indigenous Italians is diminishing at an astonishing rate: a quarter of a million a year. This decline is expected to accelerate:

“If the official Eurostat forecast is correct, then within 60 years or, taking into consideration the current pace of migration even sooner, 50% of Italy’s inhabitants will be of African or Asian descent”.

To acquire a better understanding of the demographic future of Europe, the Gefira team developed a software for demographic simulation, called Cerberus 2.0. With no immigration and the current birth rate, Cerberus 2.0 predicts that in 2080 the Italian population will be reduced to about 27 million, and in 2100 further reduced by 60% to 20 million — the same result as Japanese statisticians predict for Japan. Despite this data, the Italian government and Eurostat expect that by 2080 there will be 53 to 60 million inhabitants in Italy. “This can only be true if the indigenous population is replenished with 25 to 30 million first-generation migrants and their offspring from Africa or Asia”. That process is underway.

Gefira explains:

“German, Spanish, Norwegian, Irish and Dutch NGOs as well as the European Navy have ferried a shocking 600 thousand non-Western migrants from Libya to Italy since 2014. This has been done with the full complicity of the current Italian authorities. The grand replacement is no accident nor is it intended to be stopped. It is a well designed, devious program without the European natives having a say”.

A similar scenario was also forecast by an Italian think tank. If current trends continue, according to a report by the Machiavelli Center, by 2065, first- and second-generation immigrants will exceed 22 million, or more than 40% of Italy’s total population.

Migrants wait to be rescued by crewmembers from the Migrant Offshore Aid Station (MOAS) Phoenix vessel on June 10, 2017 off Lampedusa, Italy. (Photo by Chris McGrath/Getty Images)

The statistical projections about the alarming future of the demographic decline of the indigenous European people appear irrefutable. The vice president of the European Central Bank, Viktor Constancio, called it the “demographic suicide” of Europe’s aging society. The ten countries that are home to the fastest shrinking populations are all in Eastern Europe. By 2050, Bulgaria, Latvia, Moldova, Ukraine, Croatia, Lithuania, Romania, Serbia, Poland, and Hungary are likely to see their population shrink by 15% or more.

We no longer replace our numbers; instead, we rely on immigration to compensate for the shortfall in births. This immigration is for the most part Muslim; the effect of our demographic decline is therefore the Islamization of Europe. The response of the political class, at least in Italy, is to shrug their shoulders, and say, “So what?”. European elites are multiculturalist and seem to think all facts are merely relative. They also believe that religion is private and that the state requires us to maintain the same level of the population as earlier. Most Muslims, however, do not believe that religion is private; some of them are working hard for a state in which Islamic law, sharia, will be the legal foundation for everyone.

The effect of this effort is already being felt across the European continent. We have more Islamic veils and mosques, and fewer cartoons of Mohammed. Italian archbishop Luigi Negri just expressed his concern over “Islam’s tendency to break down the values ​​of Western civilization, especially that of the essential distinction between politics and religion” — a key fundamental of Western rule of law.

Our failure to reproduce is not due to poverty or genetic weakness. Milan, Italy’s demographic ground zero, is the country’s richest city. Instead, it is due to our indolence, the advent of birth control and a loss of confidence in our Western, Judeo-Christian values.

What can be done?

Religion in the West is no longer a private matter. The values of Western civilization are now being undermined in schools, universities, the media and cultural spheres. One thing is sure: Without the courage to insist on safeguarding our values, and passing our inheritance on to our children, we Europeans will simply disappear — as many groups have before. With us, however, will disappear the most enlightened civilization the world has ever known.

Giulio Meotti, Cultural Editor for Il Foglio, is an Italian journalist and author.

Also see:

***

More than 90 Muslims, nearly all Democrats, running for public office across the U.S.

Creeping Sharia, April 17, 2018:

9/11 was just the first notable battle in the Islamic takeover of the United States. As we noted a few weeks ago, the Ongoing Islamization of America – Muslims Going Hyper Political. It’s much worse than expected.

Source: The blue Muslim wave: American Muslims launch political campaigns, hope to deliver ‘sweet justice’ to Trump – The Washington Post

Fayaz Nawabi has never met President Trump. But he credits the president with convincing him to run for office.

Nawabi, a 31-year-old candidate for San Diego City Council, supports almost everything that Trump opposes: He is pro-affordable housing, pro-environment, pro-immigrant and pro-refugee. That makes him part of the blue wave of new liberal candidates spurred to run by Trump’s election and policies.

But Nawabi is also part of a notable subset: the blue Muslim wave.

More than 90 American Muslims, nearly all of them Democrats, are running for public office across the country this year. Many are young and politically inexperienced, and most are long shots.

Although their number seems small, the candidacies mark an unprecedented rise for the nation’s diverse Muslim community that typically has been underrepresented in American politics.

There are more than 3.3 million Muslims living in the United States, but Muslim Americans hold just two of the 535 seats in Congress. And the Muslim community’s voter participation pales in comparison to the general public’s.

The rise of Muslim candidates coincides with the growth of the predominantly immigrant population and a partisan shift that has played out over a generation. In a 2001 Zogby poll of American Muslims, 42 percent said they voted for Republican George W. Bush in the previous year’s presidential election, while 31 percent said they voted for Democrat Al Gore. By last year, just 8 percent of voting American Muslims in a Pew poll said they voted for Trump, while 78 percent said they voted for Democrat Hillary Clinton.

While Clinton’s campaign never garnered broad enthusiasm from Muslim communities, Trump’s campaign — which called for the monitoring of mosques and a ban on Muslims entering the United States — delivered a jolt on election night that some American Muslims likened to the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

“It woke everyone up,” Nawabi said.

Now, Muslim candidates are running for a wide range of offices across the country, from local school boards to the U.S. Senate. Some are making their Muslim identity central to their campaigns.

“When you put someone in a corner and they’re in survival mode, they have a tendency to come out and speak more prominently about their beliefs,” said Nawabi, who considers himself an “unapologetic Muslim” who can quote the Koran from memory and moonlights as a “freelance imam.”

In Michigan, where 13 Muslim candidates are running for office, physician Abdul El-Sayed is hoping voters will elect him to be the first Muslim governor in the United States and has used his religion in campaign ads against Republican front-runner Bill Schuette, whom Trump has endorsed.

“Donald Trump and Steve Bannon would love to see a right-wing radical like Bill Schuette elected in Michigan,” reads a Facebook ad for El-Sayed, who faces a Democratic primary in August. “You know what would be sweet justice? If we elected a 33-year-old Muslim instead of Bill Schuette. Send a message and help elect the first Muslim governor in America.”

Asif Mahmood, a 56-year-old pulmonologist, would be the first Muslim insurance commissioner in California. Deedra Abboud, 45, in Arizona, or Jesse Sbaih, 42, in Nevada, could be the country’s first Muslim senator.

And any one of four Muslim women — Nadia Hashimi, 40, in Maryland; Sameena Mustafa, 47, in Illinois; or Fayrouz Saad, 34, and Rashida Tlaib, 41, in Michigan — could be the first in Congress.


Read it all, and weep.

This is why there was only one issue in the 2016 presidential election and there remains only one issue today: immigration.

Without a dramatic shift, a halt to Muslim immigration, and a return of tens of thousands of so-called Muslim refugees – the demographics in America will be forever changed. They will never be reversed and it will only be a matter of time until what has happened in dozens of countries in the world will happen here. The long game does not bode well for non-Muslims.

Also see:

Emerging Islamist Political Clout Accelerates Europe’s Self-Islamization

by Abigail R. Esman
Special to IPT News
April 17, 2018

Forget the beheading videos, the ISIS propaganda on social media, even the terrorist attacks themselves. Europe, sayscounterterrorism expert Afshin Ellian, is Islamizing itself, and in the process, the Western values on which its democracies are built are increasingly put at risk.

Take, for instance, Belgium’s ISLAM Party, which now hopes to participate in the country’s October local elections in 28 regions. (Its name serves as an acronym for “Integrité, Solidarité, Liberté, Authenticité, Moralité.)

Its ultimate aim: transforming Belgium into an Islamic state. Items high on its agenda include separating men and women on public transportation, and the incorporation of sharia law – as long as this does not conflict with current laws –according to the party’s founder, Redouane Ahrouch. His own behavior, however, suggests that his respect for “current laws” and mores has its bounds: He reportedly refuses to shake hands with women, and in 2003, he received a six-month sentence for beating and threatening his wife. Currently, the Islam Party has two elected representatives in office – one in Anderlecht, the other in Molenbeek – both regions that happen to be known as hotbeds of extremism.

Or consider DENK, Holland’s pro-Islam party founded in 2015 by Turkish-Dutch politicians Selçuk Ozturk and Tunahan Kuzu. The party platform, which supports boycotts and sanctions against Israel, also discourages assimilation, calling instead for “mutual acceptance” of multiple cultures. Non-Muslims, for instance, would apparently be required to “accept” the Muslim extremist father who beats his daughter for refusing an arranged marriage, or for becoming too “Westernized” for his taste. It’s his culture, after all.

DENK also calls for a “racism police force” to monitor allegedly racist comments and actions. Those found guilty would be placed in a government “racism register,” and banned from government jobs and other employment.

So far, such pro-Islamist views have served the party well. In local Dutch elections last month, DENK (which means “think” in Dutch) gained three seats in Rotterdam, totaling four seats among 45 total and edging out Geert Wilders’ far-right Partij voor de Vrijheid(PVV), which fell from three seats to one. In Amsterdam, which also has 45 seats, a full 50 percent of Dutch-Moroccans and about two-thirds of Dutch-Turks gave the party a three-seat win in its first election there, as well. Many of these voters, according to post-election analyses, moved to DENK from the center-left Labor Party (PvdA), clearly feeling more at home with a more overtly pro-Muslim politic.

Similarly, France’s Union of Muslim Democrats (UDMF) has taken a number of voters from the Green Party by promising to defend Muslims. UDMF’s online program statement condemns burqa and headscarf bans. What’s more, in its pretense of supporting what it calls the “sweet dream of Democracy, Union and Human Rights,” the party loudly (though rightly) condemns “anti-Muslim speeches” that “lead the most psychologically fragile people to commit acts of unprecedented violence.” Examples of such “unprecedented violence” follow: a German white supremacist, who killed an Egyptian woman wearing a veil in 2009, and the stabbing of a French Muslim in Vaucluse. “Heavy weapons attacks have exploded in Europe since the beginning of the year against Muslim places of worship,” the statement reads.

What the party statement does not mention anywhere are the attacks by Muslims in Paris and Nice that together killed 240 people between January 2015 and July 2016; the attack by a Muslim extremist on a Jewish school in Toulouse in 2012; and the kidnapping and heinous torture of Ilan Halimi, a 23-year-old Jew, in 2006. These are among other acts of “unprecedented violence” by Islamists.

UDMF also calls for protection of the family and its “essential role in the education of children,” while citing Article 14 of the International Convention on the Rights of the Child which calls for respecting “the right of the child to freedom of thought, conscience, and religion.” From here, the party demands the “right and duty of parents….to guide the child in the exercise of the above-mentioned right.” Implied here is the demand that parents be allowed to treat their children as they see fit according to their religious beliefs – including to beat daughters who refuse an arranged marriage, becoming “too Westernized,” and so on.

Most disturbing are the large numbers of Muslims who have all flocked to parties like DENK and UDMF throughout Europe. Rather than moving towards more secular, traditionally democratic political movements, Europe’s Muslims are apparently increasingly distancing themselves from the “European” side of their identity and identifying more with Islam and the Muslim community. And this, too, is part of Europe’s “self-Islamizing,” the result of taking too unsure a hand, too ambivalent a position, on the issue of assimilation.

Indeed, as Ellian points out, European institutions have enabled this cultural separation. Photographs taken last November during a meeting of the Muslim student union at Amsterdam’s Vrije Universiteit revealed that men and women sat on opposite sides of the auditorium aisle. Such events are common, according to journalist Carel Brendel, who first reported on the incident. “Yet the administrations [of these schools] do little or nothing about it, despite the fact that their own rules forbid” such gender separation,” he told the Investigative Project. Brendel has also exposed links between the Amsterdam police and Abdelilah el-Amrani, a Muslim Brotherhood-connected imam invited by the police department to lead last year’s annual Iftar dinner marking the end of a day’s fast during Ramadan. El-Amrani, Brendel said, also oversees a group of interconnected organizations, including an Islamic school that came under investigation last year for having separate entrances for boys and girls.

Worth noting about the event, according to Brendel, is that no other government body sponsors a religious ceremony. Nor does any Dutch government agency, let alone the police, host a Passover Seder or observe any other religious event with the public.

In addition, and perhaps more alarming, a spokesperson for the Rotterdam police posted to Twitter that day that “police will be difficult to reach tonight, due to various Iftar meals.” City security and the safety of citizens, in other words, was being compromised in the name of a religious celebration.

Elsewhere, other signs of self-Islamization can be found in the rise of other Muslim parties in Austria as well as a failed effort in Sweden; a proposed ban on the British press against identifying terrorists as Muslim; the proliferation of sharia courts in the UK; and the repeated efforts by some Canadian officials to legalize sharia – a debate that recently has been revived.

While all of this involves political movements, it stands as a reminder of what the ideology behind the “war on terrorism” is really all about: an attack against our culture. We need to do better at protecting it.

Abigail R. Esman, the author, most recently, of Radical State: How Jihad Is Winning Over Democracy in the West (Praeger, 2010), is a freelance writer based in New York and the Netherlands. Follow her at @radicalstates.

 

Christopher Hull: Who is Breaking Europe?

Sovereign Nations, by James Manning, March 12, 2018:

The Center for Security Policy’s interim Executive Vice President, Christopher C. Hull, Ph.D, speaks at the Sovereign Nations Conference, which took place at the Trump International Hotel.

The conference confronted the issues, debated the consequences and explored the causes of things that are destroying our liberty in the United States.  Specifically, it explored the foundation of, on one hand, George Soros‘ view of the world, in which all individuals and freedoms are ultimately subordinate to and guaranteed by government, and on the other hand, Donald Trump’s view as articulated in his Warsaw speech, with independent sovereign nations acting within constitutional constraints to guarantee rights granted by God to free citizens.

Dr. Hull’s presentation, ‘Who Is Breaking Europe?’ can be found in the video above.  In it, he argues that the answer is threefold:

  1. The European illegal immigration crisis, driven at least in part by Islamic holy war, or Jihad;
  2. Politically correct EU leaders and globalist elites like Soros, driven at least in part by cultural Marxism; and
  3. Vladimir Putin’s Russia, driven at least in part by a simple desire to weaken its adversaries by exploiting the divisions among and between them.

***

For more on cultural Marxism see Jordan B. Peterson: Identity Politics & The Marxist Lie of White Privilege

Is the United Kingdom an Islamist Colony?

Gatestone Institute, by Tom Quiggin, 

  • If the gang members were “Asian,” records were not kept. Such is the cowardice and criminal negligence of the police involved.
  • These Sharia courts mean that the legal system of a foreign political ideology, Islam, has created a parallel legal system in which Sharia is placed above English common law. It is thought that some 30 to 85 Sharia courts are operating in England and Wales alone.
  • “The Muslim Brotherhood’s foundational texts call for the progressive moral purification of individuals and Muslim societies and their eventual political unification in a Caliphate under Sharia law. To this day the Muslim Brotherhood characterises Western societies and liberal Muslims as decadent and immoral. It can be seen primarily as a political project.” — Prime Minister David Cameron, 2014, regarding a report withheld from the public [Emphases added].

The United Kingdom, once an imperial power, now sounds more like a colonial vassal. The actions of British government officials suggest that the will of the government has collapsed in the face of terrorist and ideological assaults by the forces of political Islam. The ideology is being spread by, among others, the Muslims Brotherhood, according to a major report of the British government itself. A number of Muslim Brotherhood front groups have been identified as such by government reports such as those of the United Arab Emirates. These include the UK based Cordoba Foundation, the Muslim Association of Britain, and Islamic Relief UK. All three of these organization are listed as terrorist entities in the United Arab Emirates as well.

Those officials who have submitted to the Islamist cause include Prime Minister May, formerly the Home Secretary, who had responsibility for police, immigration, and intelligence activities. Having been Home Secretary from May 12, 2010 to July 13, 2016, she cannot argue she is unaware of the UK’s internal problems. She was also Home Secretary when the damning Jay Report on the mass rape of girls in Rotherham was made public.

The problem has become so widespread, it can now be asked if the British government has moved into a colonial mindset. In other words, the UK now appears to have the status of a dhimmi: those who live in Islamist conquered lands but through submission are allowed to keep their original faith. The British government appears more willing to respond to the demands of the Islamist ideological offensive than it does to protecting its own subjects against mass rapes, honour killings, Female Genital Mutilationterrorist attacks and the generalized oppression of women by Sharia councils (courts).

After the June 2017 Islamist terrorist attack, which killed seven persons, Prime Minster May appeared in public and stated that “enough was enough.” She said that there was “far too much tolerance of extremism.” On the surface, it appeared that the Prime Minister had actually had enough of the Islamist ideology, extremism and terrorism in the UK.

Alas, the words turned out to be just the usual empty platitudes from No 10. Shortly after the PM’s statement, Hezbollah and Hamas flags were openly flown in London during the Al Quds Day March on June 18, 2017. Not only did the UK government fail to attempt to stop this Hezbollah inspired march; the UK police assisted them by providing security and protection.

It is not just the Prime Minister who is the problem. In Manchester last May, after the suicide bombing which killed 22 and injured hundreds at the door of a music concert, the mayor, Andy Burnham, had some advice: what was needed was for everyone to “work together” and “terrorists will never beat us.” Mayor Burnham also said that the best plan was to “carry on with day to day life“. How come he failed to say that the best plan was not to “carry on”; that perhaps the best plan was to cease submitting to the will of a foreign ideology and act to counter its schools, proxies, fundraisers, apologists and front groups?

The problem in the UK is not just the fear instilled in the body politic by terrorist attacks. The well-documented sexual assaults by South Asian and Muslim mass-rape gangs attacking children in the UK is another major crime wave crushing the confidence of the British in their own government.

In March of 2018 another coverup was exposed concerning a series of mass rapes, druggings, sex trafficking and murders in Telford. The report identifies that the problem began in the 1980s, was identified by social workers in the 1990s; and only in 1996, a resident went to police with information about a key abuser who was selling underage girls for sex Police, social workers, and the town council covered up the widespread abuse for decades as they were afraid of being called “racist.” The eleven-year-old girls involved were identified as “prostitutes” as though children can even be said to make such a choice. If the gang members were “Asian,” records were not kept. Such is the cowardice and criminal negligence of the police involved.

The counter-extremism think-tank Quilliam, run mainly by Muslims of South Asian origin, says that 85% of those convicted of mass rape are of South Asian origin. Seven in ten of those convicted are believed to be of Pakistani-Muslim heritage. Of note, Asians make up only 7% of the total UK population.

The first major case of rape gangs grooming children apparently took place in Rotherham, UK. The Jay Report noted that some 1,400 mainly white children, aged 11 to 14, had been drugged, raped, and forced into sexual slavery while being trafficked throughout the region between 1997 and 2013. A variety of civic officials, town councilors, police, and the local Member of Parliament had evidently been aware of the abuse for years but had remained silent. Those who spoke out were silenced.

In the English town of Rotherham (population ca. 258,000), at least 1,400 children were sexually abused by a gang of Muslim men of Pakistani descent. (Image source: Wikimedia Commons)

Three of the previous inquiries from 2002, 2003 and 2009 had found similar issues, but those reports were “effectively suppressed.” At the time, UK Home Secretary Theresa May described it as “institutionalized political correctness.” The Member of Parliament for Rotherham, Denis McShane, said that as a “Guardian reading lefty,” he thought that there was a culture of not wanting to rock the multicultural community boat, if I may put it like that.

The mass rape problem is endemic but is not limited to Rotherham and Telford. It has also affected, among others places, Bristol, Derby, Rochdale, PeterboroughNewcastleOxfordshireBradfordKeighleyBanburyHalifaxLeeds, Birmingham, Norwich, Burney, High Wycombe, Dewsbury and Middlesbrough.

The common link in all these cases is that the grooming gangs are of south Asian origin and that the responsible authorities chose silence over the risk of “offending” them by appearing racist or “Islamophobic.” If mass rape of a country’s children over a period of decades is not enough to force a government to act, the question is, what is?

Silencing Dissent

Meanwhile, as reports of the latest mass rape scandals in Telford were spreading, Brittany Pettibone and Martin Sellner were attempting to enter the United Kingdom. They had planned to present themselves at the Speaker’s Corner in London’s Hyde Park and to interview Tommy Robinson, the former leader of the English Defence League. Martin Sellner is a well known Austrian activist and student who is also the leader of the “new right” Identitarian Movement. Brittany Pettibone is a self-described “American nationalist”. Both were refused entry by UK officials on suspicion of “inciting hatred and tension between local communities”.

The eminent scholar of Islam Robert Spencer was also banned from entering England in 2013, at the same time as “the UK Home Office admitted the Pakistani Muslim cleric Syed Muzaffar Shah Qadri, whose preaching of hatred and jihad violence is so hardline that he is banned from preaching in Pakistan.

Dr. Martin Parsons, head of research at the Barnabas Fund, which helps Christians escape persecution, pointed out that Britain grants visas to Islamic leaders who demand the execution of Christians accused of blasphemy against the Islamic faith, and it routinely grants asylum to senior members of the Muslim Brotherhood despite the fact that they repeatedly incite violence against the Egyptian Coptic Christians.

This month, Canadian citizen Lauren Southern was also detained. Ms. Southern is a political activist and Internet personality with known right wing views. She had run for the Libertarian Party in the 2015 Canadian federal election and worked for Rebel Media. Her entry to the UK was refused as she poses a threat to the “fundamental interests of society” and was further identified as a threat to the “public policy of the United Kingdom.” She was denied entry under anti-terrorism legislation (Schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act of 2000) even though no association to terrorism was made.

The UK government seems incapable of tackling the mass rape gangs in the UK and yet they willfully allowed Youssef Zaghba to enter the UK, despite his being on a security watchlist and authorities warned that he was a terrorist. Mr. Zaghba then proceeded to help carry out the terrorist attack in June of 2017 on a London Bridge.

The same UK government, however, stops journalists and activists from entering as they are supposedly a threat to the “fundamental interests of society.

Women and Power

Ironically, even women in positions of power such as Prime Minister May submit to jihadi threats and aid in silencing the ensuing criticism. Another example, Joyce Thacker, was the £130,000-a-year (USD $180,000) Strategic Director of the City of Rotherham’s children’s services department for five years, while the ongoing rapes and sex trafficking of eleven to fourteen-year-old girls was proceeding apace. Not only did the child services department do nothing to help the 1400 girls being raped and forced into prostitution, she and others went out of their way to silence anyone who tried to speak out against it. The reason for the enforced silence over a period of years was identified in the UK government report as “institutionalized political correctness.” Of note, Joyce Thacker, after being exposed, received a £40,000 pay-off from the local Labour-run authority when she left her position.

Female Labour Member of Parliament Naz Shah also apparently supports the position of the rapists over that of girls who were raped. In a rather startling tweet, she stated that the abused girls in Rotherham and elsewhere just need “shut their mouths for the good of diversity.” For her, the ideology of diversity is more important than the mass rape and trafficking of girls.

The female head of the London Metropolitan Police Force, Cressida Dick, has also tried to downplay the mass rape of girls by stating that rape gangs have “been part of our society for centuries.” The problem with her statement is that no evidence exists to support her position.

In addition to women in government who hold such toxic positions on the rape of girls, it seems that Lily Allan, a British singer, actor and TV presenter, also does. When she was questioned on the idea of whether thousands of young British girls (11 to 14) would have avoided being raped if their rapists had not been allowed to immigrate into the UK, she replied, “Actually, there’s a strong possibility they would have been raped and abused by somebody else at some point. That’s kind of the issue.”

Free Speech Crushed

The Lord Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, claims that the London Met Police are heavily engaged in the attacking hate crimes. This appears to have been confirmed by the London Met who stated on their own website that “Currently, we have over 900 specialist hate crime investigators working across London’s dedicated hate crime Community Safety Units (CSUs).” These officers are apparently working on “hate crimes” such as Facebook postings and other social media platforms, while London suffers from terrorist attacksacid attacksmoped gang swarmings and an increasing number of young people dying in the emerging plague of knife crimes. The question must be asked about priorities here and whether the Mayor and the London Met are more interested in tackling real crimes or in suppressing the blow-back they create.

The UK’s Two Legal Systems

It has become a common practice that marriages in some mosques in the UK are not registered with the civil authorities. When Muslim women living in the UK are faced with issues of child support, divorce and wife beating, they often find that their marriage was not legally recorded.

When they try to work with Sharia tribunals, these women then find out they have few rights and are often told that the fault is their own and they need to return to their abusive husbands. As reported in The Telegraph:

“When Aisha approached a Sharia council in the UK about divorcing her husband, she faced a barrage of questions. ‘Have you been supportive to him?’ she was asked. ‘Are you meeting his needs? Cooking and cleaning?’ She was told to go back and be ‘a better wife’. Her husband had repeatedly assaulted her.”

These courts mean that the legal system of a foreign political ideology, Islam, has created a parallel legal system in which Sharia is placed above English common law. It is thought that some 30 to 85 Sharia courts are operating in England and Wales alone.

Female Genital Mutilation

Girls in the United Kingdom are being taught to put spoons down the front of their underwear if they fear they are being shipped to Africa or South Asia to suffer Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) at the hands of their parents. The spoons will trigger metal detectors at the airport and allow the girls to explain to security (in private) why they fear going abroad.

Thousands of cases of FGM have been reported with little being done. Some 5,500 cases of FGM were reported in 2016 alone, including 1,268 newly recorded casesfrom October to December of 2016 compared with 1,240 in the previous quarter. No cases have been successfully prosecuted and only one has gone to trial, despite the practice being banned more than 30 years ago. Why does the UK government fear attacking such an issue, given that young British girls are being sexually mutilated? Votes?

An Assault on the Basic Principle of the State

Emanuel Kant believed that the “safety of the republic is the highest law” (Salus Rei Publicae Suprema Lex Esto). John Locke argued that what is most important is the security of the people. Jean-Jacques Rousseau believes that the object of government is the good of the people and that a social contract is required to defend and protect the common good.

The foundation of international law says that each country, or nation state, has sovereignty over its own territory and domestic affairs, to the exclusion of all external powers. The basics of the Westphalian state are that two factors are incumbent on a sovereign state: defense of the national territory and defense of the population. This, of course, means enforcing and defending the borders while maintaining in the country an effective security, police and justice system.

Conclusions

When government leaders from the town council to the Westminster Parliament prefer the mass rapes of their own girls to the possibility of “offending” rapists, it can be safely stated that a corrosively submissive attitude has taken over the government. When girls are being advised to put spoons in their underwear to avoid FGM, social standards in the UK have clearly collapsed. When police refuse to record the names of suspected rapists because they are “Asian the outcome of criminal investigations is being enforced not by law but by political correctness. When terrorism rips open the bodies of children and civic officials say that the inhabitants of the town should just “carry on,” it is a sign that politicians can no longer govern.

The long-term plan of the Islamists, led by the organizations such as the Muslim Brotherhood –the full report on which was suppressed and withheld from the public is coming to fruition.

The UK government is aware of these issues as its own investigation into the Muslim Brotherhood revealed as much. Theresa May was the Home Secretary when this report was released.

Prime Minister David Cameron’s statement in 2014 on this issue was:

“Aspects of the Muslim Brotherhood’s ideology and activities therefore run counter to British values of democracy, the rule of law, individual liberty, equality and the mutual respect and tolerance of different faiths and beliefs. The Muslim Brotherhood’s foundational texts call for the progressive moral purification of individuals and Muslim societies and their eventual political unification in a Caliphate under Sharia law. To this day the Muslim Brotherhood characterises Western societies and liberal Muslims as decadent and immoral. It can be seen primarily as a political project.” (Emphases added)

The Muslim Brotherhood does not attempt to hide this objective. Yusuf Qaradawi, identified as the leading inspirational cleric of the Muslim Brotherhood, makes this clear when he states:

“This means that Islam will come back to Europe for the third time, after it was expelled from it twice… Conquest through Da’wa, that is what we hope for. We will conquer Europe, we will conquer America! Not through sword but through Da’wa.”

When Theresa May, the Prime Minister and former Home Secretary of the UK, will not take substantive action against any of this ideological and physical assault, it is reasonable to say that the decades long incursion on the British government by Islamist ideologists is likely gaining ground. Little to no action is being taken against the proxies, charities, fundraisers and front groups, even though they are generally well known and have even been identified by other governments which are well placed to make the assessments.

With Westminster brought to its knees, the drive to reduce the United Kingdom to a colonial satrapy seems well underway.

Tom Quiggin is a former military intelligence officer, a former intelligence contractor for the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and a court appointed expert on jihadist terrorism in both the Federal and criminal courts of Canada. Much of the material for this article comes from the recently published book, “SUBMISSION: The Danger of Political Islam to Canada – With a Warning to America“, written with co-authors Tahir Gora, Saied Shoaaib, Jonathon Cotler, and Rick Gill with a foreword by Raheel Raza.

***

Political Islam, by Bill Warner, Mar 22 2018

Lord Pearson: “Can We Talk about Islam?”

Lord Pearson: My Lords, I beg you to ask the questions standing in my name on the order paper.

Lord Apologist: My Lords, the government funded Center of Expertise on Child Sexual Abuse is working to build a more informed picture of the scale of these crimes and preventing them is a priority for the government. The independent Office for Police Conduct is currently conducting investigations into 33 police officers of varying ranks for potential criminal offenses and breaches of the standards of professional behavior linked to the Rotheram case.

Lord Pearson: My Lords, I fear that reply is shamefully inadequate, because these girls are usually raped several times a day, and so if we accept the views of our lead police officer for child protection, of Rotheram’s MP, and of the recent JM Quilliam reports, we seem to be looking at millions of rapes of white and Sikh girls by Muslim men. Only 222 of whom have been convicted since 2005. So my Lords, will the government ask our Muslim leaders whether the perpetrators can claim that their behavior is sanctioned in the Koran, and to issue a fatwa against it? And second, my Lords, will the government encourage a national debate about the various interpretations of Islam? Can we talk about Islam without being accused of hate crime?

Lord Apologist: My Lords, child sexual exploitation is a vile crime and it is not exclusive to any one community or culture, or race, or religion. Political sensitivities or cultural sensitivities should not get into the way of tracking down offenders and preventing future abuse. Can I say to noble Lords that I think we should be careful about our language on this matter because I’m … not least because I’m about to repeat a statement about inflammatory letters inciting a Punish a Muslim Day on April the 3rd. And so I think we need to be careful of how we approach this.

On the Koran, there’s nothing in the Koran that encourages the sort of activity that the noble Lord has referred to. In any case, the Koran would be trumped by the law of the land. Islam, like all world religions, neither supports, nor advocates, nor condones child sexual exploitation. Indeed, respect for women is inherent in its faith. And as my noble friend Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon has just told me, one of the praises is, “Paradise lies at the feet of the mother.”

So far as encouraging a debate as Islam is concerned, the government is supporting an initiative by British based Islam leaders of all denominations to dispel the poisonous interpretations of Islam that are peddles by Al Qaeda and Daesh (ISIS). And we’re taking a number of other initiatives in order to minimize the exposure of children to sexual abuse from whatever source.

Also see:

100 French Intellectuals Denounce Islamist Separatism

Supporters of French President Macron celebrate his victory (Illustrative photo: Jeff J Mitchell/Getty Images)

Clarion Project, by Leslie Shaw, March 21, 2018:

A group of 100 diverse French intellectuals denounced Islamist totalitarianism in the newspaper Le Figaroon March 19, 2018. The following is a translation of their statement made by Clarion contributor Leslie Shaw:

We are citizens of differing and often diametrically opposed views, who have found agreement in expressing our concern in the face of the rise of Islamism. We are united not by our affinities, but by the feeling of danger that threatens freedom in general and not just freedom of thought.

That which unites us today is more fundamental than that which will undoubtedly separate us tomorrow.

Islamist totalitarianism seeks to gain ground by every means possible and to represent itself as a victim of intolerance. This strategy was demonstrated some weeks ago when the SUD Education 93 teachers union proposed a training course that included workshops on state racism from which white people were barred.

Several of the facilitators were members or sympathizers of the CCIF (French Collective Against Islamophobia) or the Natives of the Republic party. Such examples have proliferated recently. We have thus learned that the best way to combat racism is to separate races. If this idea shocks us, it is because we are Republicans.

We also hear it said that because religions in France are trampled on by an institutionalized secularism, everything that is in a minority — in other words Islam — must be accorded a special place so that it can cease to be humiliated.

This same argument continues by asserting that in covering themselves with a hijab, women are protecting themselves from men and that keeping themselves apart is a means to emancipation.

What these proclamations have in common is the idea that the only way to defend the “dominated” (the term is that of SUD Education 93) is to set them apart and grant them privileges.

Not so long ago, apartheid reigned in South Africa. Based on the segregation of blacks, it sought to exonerate itself by creating bantustans (territories set aside for black South Africans) where blacks were granted false autonomy. Fortunately this system no longer exists.

Today, a new kind of apartheid is emerging in France, a segregation in reverse thanks to which the “dominated” seek to retain their dignity by sheltering themselves from the “dominators.”

But does this mean that a woman who casts off her hijab and goes out into the street becomes a potential victim? Does it mean that a “race” that mixes with others becomes humiliated? Does it mean that a religion that accepts being one among other religions loses face?

Does Islamism also seek to segregate French Muslims, whether believers or otherwise, who accept democracy and are willing to live with others? Who will decide for women who refuse to be locked away? As for others, who seemingly do not deserve to be protected, will they be held under lock and key in the camp of the “dominators”?

All of this runs counter to what has been done in France to guarantee civil peace. For centuries, the unity of the nation has been grounded in a detachment with respect to particularities that can be a source of conflict. What is known as Republican universalism does not consist in denying the existence of gender, race or religion but in defining civic space independently of them so that nobody feels excluded. How can one not see that secularism protects minority religions?

Jeopardizing secularism exposes us to a return to the wars of religion.

What purpose can this new sectarianism serve? Must it only allow the self-styled “dominated” to safeguard their purity by living amongst themselves? Is not its overall objective to assert secession from national unity, laws and mores? Is it not the expression of a real hatred towards our country and democracy?

For people to live according to the laws of their community or caste, in contempt of the laws of others, for people to be judged only by their own, is contrary to the spirit of the Republic. The French Republic was founded on the refusal to accept that private rights can be applied to specific categories of the population and on the abolition of privilege.

On the contrary, the Republic guarantees that the same law applies to each one of us. This is simply called justice.

This new separatism is advancing under concealment. It seeks to appear benign but is in reality a weapon of political and cultural conquest in the service of Islamism.

Islamism wants to set itself apart because it rejects others, including those Muslims who do not subscribe to its tenets. Islamism abhors democratic sovereignty, to which it refuses any kind of legitimacy. Islamism feels humiliated when it is not in a position of dominance.

Accepting this is out of the question. We want to live in a world where both sexes can look at each other with neither feeling insulted by the presence of the other. We want to live in a world where women are not deemed to be naturally inferior. We want to live in a world where people can live side by side without fearing each other. We want to live in a world where no religion lays down the law.

 

Waleed al-Husseini, writer

Arnaud d’Aunay, painter

Pierre Avril, academic

Vida Azimi, jurist

Isabelle Barbéris, academic

Kenza Belliard, teacher

Georges Bensoussan, historian

Corinne Berron, author

Alain Besançon, historian

Fatiha Boudjahlat, essayist

Michel Bouleau, jurist

Rémi Brague, philosopher

Philippe Braunstein, historian

Stéphane Breton, film maker, ethnologist

Claire Brière-Blanchet, reporter, essayist

Marie-Laure Brossier, city councillor

Pascal Bruckner, writer

Eylem Can, script writer

Sylvie Catellin, semiologist

Gérard Chaliand, writer

Patrice Champion, former ministerial advisor

Brice Couturier, journalist

Éric Delbecque, essayist

Chantal Delsol, philosopher

Vincent Descombes, philosopher

David Duquesne, nurse

Luc Ferry, philosopher, former minister

Alain Finkielkraut, philosopher, writer

Patrice Franceschi, writer

Renée Fregosi, philosopher

Christian Frère, professor

Claudine Gamba-Gontard, professor

Jacques Gilbert, historian of ideas

Gilles-William Goldnadel, lawyer

Monique Gosselin-Noat, academic

Gabriel Gras, biologist

Gaël Gratet, professor

Patrice Gueniffey, historian

Alain Guéry, historian

Éric Guichard, philosopher

Claude Habib, writer, professor

Nathalie Heinich, sociologist

Clarisse Herrenschmidt, linguist

Philippe d’Iribarne, sociologist

Roland Jaccard, essayist

Jacques Jedwab, psychoanalyst

Catherine Kintzler, philosopher

Bernard Kouchner, doctor, humanitarian, former minister

Bernard de La Villardière, journalist

Françoise Laborde, journalist

Alexandra Laignel-Lavastine, essayist

Dominique Lanza, clinical psychologist

Philippe de Lara, philosopher

Josepha Laroche, academic

Alain Laurent, essayist, editor

Michel Le Bris, writer

Jean-Pierre Le Goff, philosopher

Damien Le Guay, philosopher

Anne-Marie Le Pourhiet, jurist

Barbara Lefebvre, teacher

Patrick Leroux-Hugon, physicist

Élisabeth Lévy, journalist

Laurent Loty, historian of ideas

Mohamed Louizi, engineer, essayist

Jérôme Maucourant, economist

Jean-Michel Meurice, painter, film director

Juliette Minces, sociologist

Marc Nacht, psychoanalyst, writer

Morgan Navarro, cartoonist

Pierre Nora, historian, editor

Robert Pépin, translator

Céline Pina, essayist

Yann Queffélec, writer

Jean Queyrat, film director

Philippe Raynaud, professor of political science

Robert Redeker, writer

Pierre Rigoulot, historian

Ivan Rioufol, journalist

Philippe San Marco, author, essayist

Boualem Sansal, writer

Jean-Marie Schaeffer, philosopher

Martine Segalen, ethnologist

André Senik, teacher

Patrick Sommier, man of the theater

Antoine Spire, vice-president of Licra

Wiktor Stoczkowski, anthropologist

Véronique Tacquin, professor, writer

Pierre-André Taguieff, political scientist

Maxime Tandonnet, author

Sylvain Tesson, writer

Paul Thibaud, essayist

Bruno Tinel, economist

Michèle Tribalat, demographer

Caroline Valentin, essayist

David Vallat, author

Éric Vanzieleghem, documentalist

Jeannine Verdès-Leroux, historian

Emmanuel de Waresquiel, historian

Ibn Warraq, writer

Yves-Charles Zarka, philosopher

Fawzia Zouari, writer