A Month of Islam and Multiculturalism in Britain: August 2016

1885

Tanveer Ahmed (right), a Sunni Muslim, was sentenced to 27 years in prison for the murdering Asad Shah (left), who belonged to the Ahmadi branch of Islam. Ahmed confessed to killing Shah in Glasgow because he claimed Shah had “disrespected the Prophet Mohammed.”

Gatestone Institute, by Soeren Kern, September 19, 2016:

  • “To use the term ‘honor killing’ when describing the murder of a family member — overwhelmingly females — due to the perpetrators’ belief that they have brought ‘shame’ on a family normalizes murder for cultural reasons and sets it apart from other killings when there should be no distinction.” — Jane Collins, MEP, UK Independence Party.
  • Voter fraud has been deliberately overlooked in Muslim communities because of “political correctness,” according to Sir Eric Pickles, author of a government report on voter fraud.
  • “Not only should we raise the flag, but everybody in the Muslim community should have to pledge loyalty to Britain in schools. There is no conflict between being a Muslim and a Briton.” — Khalil Yousuf, spokesman for the Ahmadiyya Muslim community.
  • Only a tiny proportion — between five and ten percent — of the people whose asylum applications are denied are actually deported, according to a British asylum judge, quoted in the Daily Mail.
  • Police in Telford — dubbed the child sex capital of Britain — were accused of covering up allegations that hundreds of children in the town were sexually exploited by Pakistani sex gangs.

August 1. Nearly 900 Syrians in Britain were arrested in 2015 for crimes including rape and child abuse, police statistics revealed. The British government has pledged to resettle up to 20,000 Syrian refugees in the UK by the end of 2020. “The government seems not to have vetted those it has invited into the country,” said MEP Ray Finch. The disclosure came after Northumbria Police and the BBC were accused of covering up allegations that a gang of Syrians sexually assaulted two teenage girls in a park in Newcastle.

August 1. Male refugees settling in Britain must receive formal training on how to treat women, a senior Labour MP said. Thangam Debbonaire, chairman of the All Party Parliamentary Group on Refugees, called for a “refugee integration strategy” so that men “understand what is expected of them.” She said it could help prevent sexual harassment and issues “including genital mutilation.”

August 2. Jane Collins, MEP for the UK Independence Party (UKIP), launched a petition calling for the BBC to stop using the term “honor killing.” The petition says the term “cultural murder” should be used instead. It states:

“To use the term ‘honor killing’ when describing the murder of a family member — overwhelmingly females — due to the perpetrators’ belief that they have brought ‘shame’ on a family normalizes murder for cultural reasons and sets it apart from other killings when there should be no distinction.

“Murder is murder, whether it be for cultural excuses or others. The term ‘honor killing’ is a euphemism for a brutal murder based on cultural beliefs which have no place in Britain or anywhere else in the world.”

August 3. Zakaria Bulhan, a 19-year-old Norwegian man of Somali descent, stabbed to death an American woman in London’s Russell Square. He also wounded five others. Police dismissed terror as a possible motive for the attack, which they blamed on mental health problems. But HeatStreet, a news and opinion website, revealed that Bulhan had uploaded books advocating violent jihad on social media sites.

August 4. A public swimming pool in Luton announced gender-segregated sessions for “cultural reasons.” The move will give men exclusive access to the larger 50-meter pool, while women will have to use the smaller 20-meter pool. The gender-segregated sessions are named ‘Alhamdulillahswimming,’ an Arabic phrase which means “Praise be to Allah.” UKIP MEP Jane Collins said the decision to have segregated times for swimming was “a step backwards for community relations and gender equality.” She added:

“The leisure center said this is for cultural reasons and I think we all know that means for the Muslim community. This kind of behavior, pandering to one group, harms community relations and creates tension. Under English law we have equality between men and women. This is not the same in cultures that believe in Sharia Law.”

August 5. Egyptian members of the Muslim Brotherhood may be allowed to seek asylum in Britain, according to new guidance from the Home Office. The document states that high profile or politically active members

“may be able to show that they are at risk of persecution, including of being held in detention, where they may be at risk of ill-treatment, trial also without due process and disproportionate punishment…. In such cases, a grant of asylum will be appropriate.”

The new guidance contradicts previous government policy. In December 2015, then Prime Minister David Cameron said Britain would “refuse visas to members and associates of the Muslim Brotherhood who are on record as having made extremist comments.”

August 5. Stephen Bennett, a 39-year-old father of seven from Manchester, was sentenced to 180 hours of community service for posting “grossly offensive” anti-Muslim comments on Facebook. One of the offending comments: “Don’t come over to this country and treat it like your own. Britain first.” He was arrested under the Malicious Communications Act. The judge said Bennett, whose mother-in-law and sister-in-law are Muslims, was guilty of “running the risk of stirring up racial hatred.” He described it as “conduct capable of playing into the hands of the enemies of this country.”

August 6. British MPs face a six-year alcohol ban when the Palace of Westminster, which has dozens of bars and restaurants, undergoes a multi-billion-pound refurbishment beginning in 2020. They will move to an office building operating under Islamic Sharia law. Their new home, Richmond House, is one of three government buildings which switched ownership from British taxpayers to Middle Eastern investors in 2014 to finance a £200 million Islamic bond scheme — as part of an effort to make the UK a global hub for Islamic finance. Critics say the scheme effectively imposes Sharia law onto government premises.

August 8. Lisa Duffy, a candidate to succeed Nigel Farage as leader of the UK Independence Party (UKIP), called for a ban on Muslim women wearing a veil in public buildings, shopping centers and on buses and trains. She also demanded that Islamic faith schools be closed to combat radicalization, as well as a “complete and comprehensive ban” on Sharia courts in the UK. She said the veil is “a symbol of aggressive separatism that can only foster extremism” and claimed that it is often “forced on women by men who view them as their property.”

August 8. Stanley Johnson, a former Conservative MEP and Chairman of the European Parliament’s Intergroup Group on Animal Welfare, called for all halal meat offered for sale in the UK to be clearly labeled as such. He wrote:

“The halal market is worth £2.6 billion in Britain alone, and the export market is also growing particularly in the Middle East. Most of us eat halal meat unwittingly on a daily basis, since it is sold in most major outlets, including big brand-name supermarkets, without being labelled as such.”

August 9. Tanveer Ahmed, a 32-year-old taxi driver from Bradford, was sentenced to 27 years in prison for the “barbaric, premeditated” murder of a shopkeeper in Glasgow. Ahmed admitted to repeatedly stabbing Asad Shah to death outside his shop in March 2016 in a sectarian attack motivated by hatred of Shah’s religious views.

Ahmed, a Sunni Muslim, confessed to attacking Shah, who belonged to the Ahmadi branch of Islam, which believes Mohammed was not the final Muslim prophet. As he was led from the dock, Ahmed raised a clenched fist and shouted in Arabic: “Praise for the Prophet Mohammed, there is only one Prophet.” His cry was repeated by supporters in the public gallery.

Read more

Soeren Kern is a Senior Fellow at the New York-based Gatestone Institute. He is also Senior Fellow for European Politics at the Madrid-based Grupo de Estudios Estratégicos / Strategic Studies Group. Follow him on Facebook and on Twitter.

New show at The Rebel: Culture Wars with Tiffany Gabbay

unnamed (6)

Islam and terror: Smashing the “small minority of Muslims” MYTH

By Tiffany Gabbay, @Tiffany_Gabbay, April 19, 2016:

Tonight’s program will shatter the “small minority of Muslims” misconception peddled by the mainstream media, Hollywood and the Left in general.

Using hard facts and statistics, we show that the carnage the world has been experiencing at the hands of terrorists is VERY much about Islam, the religion, and that the number of radicals is not a “tiny minority,” as we’re told by the Ben Afflecks of the world.

Truth told, hundreds and hundreds of millions of Muslims, including many in the West, hold radical beliefs. Author Raheel Raza, a practicing Muslim, is honest and open about this on the show.

PLUS: We tackle the refugee issue with terrorism expert Andy McCarthy – Yes, Trump’s proposal to bar Muslims from entering the U.S. is constitutional

***

“Since 9/11, there have been 28,000 Islamic terror attacks” — each one followed by “meaningless renditions of John Lennon’s ‘Imagine’”

Islamic Refugees Riot Because Woman Refuses Hijab

refugee riotCounter Jihad, Feb. 26, 2016:

A riot between Iraqi, Afghan and Syrian refugees was sparked when a female migrant from Syria refused to wear a headscarf as required by the Islamist readings of sharia law.  The mass violence led to nearly a dozen arrests as camp furniture was turned into makeshift weapons by the sudden mobs.

The Daily Mail (UK) reports:

Footage of the fight at the migrant centre showed members of the two groups using everyday items against one another during the riot.  Theo Francken, secretary of State for asylum and migration, said: ‘I find it totally unacceptable that some young Afghans find it necessary to tell them to wear a headscarf and that they should not dress against western Syrian girls.  They come here, they are guests here. We are not with them. They have to adapt to our rules.’

Unfortunately, the violence highlights the risk of refugees from the Middle East as a vector for hardline Islamist attitudes and interpretations of sharia law.  Nor are the attacks likely to end with fellow refugees from Muslim-majority nations.  Though establishing control and enforcing sharia on that community is certainly the goal of radical factions, they are unlikely to be satisfied with that.  Such control over a sharia-compliant community can be used as a base from which to expand efforts to require submission from the rest of the population.

These attacks on the freedom of women do not require any formal infrastructure.  Attitudes towards women in the host nations, especially Afghanistan and the tribal or Shi’a Islamic regions of Iraq and Syria, are sufficient to provoke violence against women who do not submit to their norms.  This was most obviously seen during the recent attacks in Cologne, and indeed across Germany, against hundreds of women engaged in ordinary Christmas celebrations.

Though recent arrivals in the West, these attackers are somehow conscious of the protections extended to them by political correctness.  It is as if they have somehow been briefed on the limits police will face in trying to restrain Muslims:

The Muslim men used a tactic… well known to those of us who’ve followed the scant reports on the rape jihad as it has proceeded from Tahrir Square to Malmö to Rotherham: A group of men encircles the targeted woman or girl, trapping her while walling off police and other would-be rescuers. Knowing they are a protected class, the Muslim men have no fear of the cops — “You can’t do anything to me,” and “Mrs. Merkel invited me here,” are just some of the reported taunts. By the time “help” reaches one victim, the assailants have moved on to the next.

The question must be asked: has the fame of the Western fear of offending Islam flown so far, or are they in fact being briefed by someone? If the latter, who is telling them that they can prey on Western women and stand up to our police without fear?

Our governments must be made to understand we insist on police who will not back down to these assaults. The handcuffs should be on those raping and assaulting women, not on the police.

Dominance and Submission in Cologne and the Persian Gulf

Mideast-Iran-US-sailors-660x350-1453185532

Crisis Magazine, by William Kilpatrick, Jan.

Under the Islamic dhimmi system, when Christians paid the jizya tax, they were often required to kneel before the local Muslim dignitary as a sign of submission. Sometimes the tax collector would deliver a slap to the face as an added humiliation. This was in accordance with the Koranic injunction that non-Muslims must not only pay the tax, but also “feel themselves subdued” in the process (9:29).

What is the meaning of the word “Islam” again? “Peace?” Er, no. That was what the vast majority of Americans thought it meant circa 2001. But since then, most of us, with the exception of a couple of presidents and Secretaries of State, have discovered that it actually means “submission.”

Islam is a very tolerant religion. It doesn’t require that you convert to it as long as you submit to it. All they are asking for is a little groveling. Thus, if you are a Christian living in the Ottoman Empire you kneel while you pay the eighty-percent tax, and if you’re a sailor in the U.S. Navy whose boat mysteriously falls into Iranian hands you kneel and then offer apologies for your behavior while thanking your captors for their “fantastic” hospitality. Oh, and if you’re a female sailor, all you have to do is don a hijab as a sign of respect for, and submission to, the codes of Islam.

In the meantime, be assured that your Secretary of State will back you up by offering his own profound appreciation for “the quick and appropriate response of the Iranian authorities.” At the same time, your president can be relied on not to mention the incident at all, he having made some sort of gentleman’s agreement with the Iranians which requires him to pretend that everything they do is both fantastic and appropriate.

About two weeks prior to the naval incident, the German nation was subject to another form of humiliation. On New Year’s Eve, a group of 1,000 North African and Arab men sexually assaulted women outside the main train station in Cologne. The total number of victims who were either robbed or sexually assaulted was about six hundred. Many of the women were forced to run through a gauntlet of their tormentors. Similar occurrences took place in about 17 other major European cities that night.

In a sense, this was the logical conclusion to Europe’s inability to resist other Islamic advances. European leaders had opened their borders, their welfare coffers, and their public housing to well over a million Muslim immigrants (seventy percent of whom were male) in less than a year. Coming from cultures where yielding is a proof of weakness, the Muslim invaders concluded that they could take what they wanted—both the welfare and the women.

A large part of the West’s difficulty in dealing with Islamic aggression can be traced to a massive identity crisis. Having traded its traditional identity markers for multicultural ones, the West no longer knows how to act when it is threatened. Being multicultural means being tolerant of every diversity. But if you’re tolerant of everything, the end result is that you stand for nothing.

More and more, it seems that Westerners will stand for just about any humiliation. While Muslims in madrassas are learning that they have the superior culture and the superior religion, Western students learn that no Western value is worth defending—including the traditional notion that women should be protected from rampaging males. At one time, both men and women acknowledged that there are differences between the sexes, that one of those differences is physical strength, and that, as a consequence, there are circumstances where male protection is desirable. Having dispensed with that “quaint” notion, Western societies seem to have fallen back on the notion that, given the right multicultural conditions, people will naturally behave in harmonious ways. When you put that assumption into practice, what you get, of course, is smaller, more multiculturally sensitive police forces.

According to one report, police in Cologne were unable to control events because they were “overwhelmed.” In other words, they lacked the manpower to be of much help that winter’s night. “Manpower.” It’s a curious word. Even today it would seem odd to say that a police force lacked “womanpower,” although men-only police forces are a thing of the past. Women do have various kinds of power, but it’s still understood that “manpower” and “womanpower” are not quite the same thing.

In any event, the Cologne police lacked manpower in both senses of the word. They were lacking in numbers that particular night, but even when in full force they seem to lack the instinctive masculine response that was once expected of civilized males. As I have written elsewhere, “the multiculturalist code is essentially an emasculating code. It has the effect of paralyzing the normal masculine response of coming to the protection of those in danger.”

In the case of the Cologne police and other state authorities, this lack of response would include not having the foresight to anticipate that German women would be at heightened risk once a million-man army newly arrived from misogynist cultures made its appearance. The problem is that European authorities are more committed to protecting multicultural pieties than to protecting ordinary citizens from Islamists gone wild. Thus, the initial police report of the evening’s events read: “A mood of exuberance—largely peaceful celebrations.” That’s “largely peaceful” if you don’t count the thousand marauding Muslims outside the train station and the cathedral. Anyone who follows the goings-on in Europe knows that the authorities’ top priority is to protect the sensitivities of the newcomers from the outrage of “Islamophobia.” As for the common folk, they are expected to do their best to understand the other culture and adjust to it. If they protest, the penalties can be severe. In the UK, when Tommy Robinson, the leader of the counterjihad movement in England, was jailed, it was for the horrific crime of having exaggerated his income on a mortgage application. When he arrived in prison, he was thrown into a cell containing several Muslims who brutally beat him—as the prison warders knew they would.

No doubt there are some tough fellows in the Cologne police force, but their toughness has been enlisted in the service of political correctness. When, a week after the New Year’s Eve assaults, the anti-immigration group, PEGIDA, rallied to protest the attacks, a massive force of Cologne police wearing riot gear broke up the demonstration using water cannons and pepper spray. The PEGIDA people have become used to that sort of treatment. They have been repeatedly attacked by German politicians and the German press as “extremists,” “xenophobes,” “racists,” and “Nazis.” And German police have on several occasions left them to the mercy of the brutal and usually much larger leftist or “anti-fascist” gangs.

The police and the politicians can be quite tough in enforcing multicultural codes, but their toughness is in the cause of cultural soft-headedness. That’s because multiculturalism is basically the process by which a culturally confused society surrenders itself to a more confident and aggressive culture. You can call the current conflict between Islam and the West a “clash of civilizations,” but that’s rather like describing the encounter between a sadist and a masochist as a clash. As I wrote a few years ago:

It’s difficult to conceive of a more disastrous combination of events than the simultaneous emergence on the world stage of a fiercely passionate ideology dedicated to conquering the West, and of another, dangerously naïve ideology, eager to dismantle it from within.

What the West sees as signs of tolerance and sensitivity are seen by Muslims as signs of submission and also as a validation of their belief that theirs is indeed the superior culture. Western appeasement will not garner more respect from the Muslim world, but it will bolster the jihadi recruitment campaign. After the navy crew surrendered in the Persian Gulf, an Iranian commander remarked:

I saw the weakness, cowardice, and fear of American soldiers myself… American forces receive the best training and have the most advanced weapons in the world, but they did not have the power to confront the Guard due to weakness of faith and belief.

Gestures of compliance do not convince Islamists that we are an admirable people, it only convinces them that they have the winning hand. Unless Western leaders get a better grip on the realities of Islamic culture, they will continue to set up their own citizens for one humiliation after another. The only consolation is that after a while, they may learn to adjust to their dhimmi status. When they kneel to pay the jizya, it may well be with expressions of gratitude for the “fantastic” and “appropriate” behavior of their masters.

Also see:

Full Extent of Germany Migrant Sex Attacks Revealed – Incidents in 75 Per Cent Of The Country

Reuters/Wolfgang Rattay

Reuters/Wolfgang Rattay

Breitbart, by DONNA RACHEL EDMUNDS, Jan. 25, 2016:

Cologne-style sex attacks by migrant gangs occurred in 12 of Germany’s 16 states, or 75 per cent, on New Year’s Eve, as revealed by German police. Although localised reports of attacks emerged almost immediately via social media, the full scale of the phenomenon is only now becoming clear – and it’s having a devastating effect on German society.

Some 1,049 men and women were victimised in Cologne on New Year’s Eve, subject to a litany of crimes ranging from pickpocketing to gang rape at the hands of migrants and asylum seekers.

It was by far the most widespread example of migrant crime on New Years Eve, but a report by the German Judicial Police (BKA), obtained by news daily Sueddeutsche Zeitungand the NDR and WDR television stations, reveals that it was far from unique, the Localhas reported.

A state by state breakdown shows that almost all of Germany was affected by the crime spree. North Rhine-Westphalia, where Cologne is located, suffered the heaviest bout of migrant crime, registering some 1000 individual complaints.

Next on the list is the city-state of Hamburg, where 200 complaints were made.

At the other end of the scale are Lower-Saxony, Brandeburg, Saxony, Rhineland-Palatinate and Saarland, which all received one complaint each. As in Cologne, in almost all cases the

Yet whether it was one incident or one thousand, the people of Germany are increasingly feeling unsafe in their own neighbourhoods, putting pressure on the government to reverse their open door immigration policy which has so far been championed by Chancellor Angela Merkel.

Mrs. Merkel, who is ideologically wed to the idea of an open Europe, is resisting all efforts to close the borders, instead lobbying for other European countries to take in more migrants to spread the load. Her obstinance is causing others within her party to look for ways to control the flow of migrant into Germany without shutting the borders – yesterday Julia Kloeckner, leader of Merkel’s Christian Democrats in the western state of Rhineland-Palatinate suggested setting up a series of “border centres” along the border with Austria in a bid to speed up the processing of migrants and deportation of those rejected.

But Mrs. Merkel’s political opponents have been more forthright. Speaking on TV last night, Beatrix von Storch, chairman of the anti-immigration Alterantive for Germany (AFD) party said Mrs. Merkel had “ruined” Germany like no other leader since the end of WW2.

“I bet you that when this is all over and she has left office she will have to leave the country on security grounds. She will have to go into exile in Chile or some other place in South America,” she added.

Meanwhile the people of Germany are left pleading for more protection from the migrant gangs roaming their streets.

Last week Breitbart London reported on 16 year old Bibi Wilhailm, who uploaded a twenty minute plea for help in the face of the increasing Islamisation of her neighbourhood. Describing how she and a friend witnessed a protest by Muslims calling for death to infidels, she asked: “Why is Germany standing by, watching, and then doing nothing? Please explain, why. Men of Germany, these people are killing your children, they are killing your women. We need your protection.

“The politicians live alone in their villas, drink their cocktails, and do nothing. They do nothing! I do not know what world they live in, but please, people, please help us! Please, do something!”

***

WATCH: ‘Angela Merkel You Have Killed Germany!’ – 16 Year Old Girl’s Migrant Fears Video That Some Claim Facebook Are ‘Censoring’

***

Also see:

Fascinating commentary from a Russian who notes for all the oppression of communist times, Russian men would never allow women & girls to be assaulted & raped in front of their eyes w/o going to their defense. But Europeans have been utterly dehumanized by the post-modernist, value-neutral mentality that says all cultures must be accepted as of equal value, no matter that Muslim men prey compulsively on non-Muslim women because the doctrine of Islam tells them it’s OK – and so the men of Austria, Germany, Sweden stand by doing nothing as savage hordes of Muslim men attack their women – while European women rush to take sides w/the attackers. This is how a civilization dies. – Clare Lopez facebook comment

Jihad: “All the Fault of the West!”

Gatestone Institute, by Lars Hedegaard, December 26, 2015:

  • As long as we in the West are not prepared to take Muslims at their word when they claim to be waging bloody jihad because it is their religious obligation, we have no chance of repelling the current onslaught on the West.
  • First to go will be the welfare states. Shrinking native populations cannot generate enough taxes to accommodate masses of immigrants with so few skills as to be effectively unemployable, or who do not want to contribute to “infidel” societies. Well before mid-century, the number of Muslims in Denmark will be large enough irreversibly to have changed the composition and character of the country.
  • In the United States, a House of Representatives bill, H. Res. 569, has been sponsored that would censor one of the few countries left with freedom of speech. The bill, in accordance with the 10-year plan of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), would criminalize all criticism of Islam, worldwide.
  • Will Muslim non-integration spell the end of the secular state as we have known it? Probably. Religion – or more accurately, Islamic ideology, which knows no distinction between religion and politics – is on the ascendant.

It was not supposed to have happened this way. In 1995 a number of EU member states signed the Schengen Agreement, integrated into European Union law in 1999. The signatory powers promised to abandon their internal border protection in exchange for a promise by the EU authorities that they would police Europe’s external borders. Then the EU authorities, while demanding that the Schengen states keep their borders open, spectacularly failed to honor their part of the agreement. There can be little doubt that the EU packed up, walked out and left its populations to their own devices.

Sadly, their policies have achieved the exact opposite of what they claimed to strive for. Instead of tolerance, we have witnessed division and irreconcilable enmity between cultures and ethnicities that often have nothing in common except a desire to squeeze as much out of the public coffers as they can. Instead of “inclusion,” Europeans have seen exclusion, low-intensity warfare, terror, no-go zones, rape epidemics, murder and mayhem.

Governments, parliamentary majorities and the stars of academia, the media and the commanding heights of culture cannot have failed to notice that their grand multicultural, Islamophile game did not produce the results they had promised their unsuspecting publics. Yet to this day, most of them persist in claiming that unfettered immigration from the Muslim world and Africa is an indisputable boon to Europe.

Recently, in the wake of the so-called “refugee crisis,” some of these notables have thrown out the script and are expressing concern that immigration is out of control. European governments are still allowing millions of so-called refugees to cross all borders and settle anyplace. According to the EU agency Frontex, charged with protecting Europe’s external borders, more than a million and a half illegals crossed Europe’s frontiers between January and November 2015.

Thousands of migrants cross illegally into Slovenia on foot, in this screenshot from YouTube video filmed in October 2015.

Right now there is an ever-widening gap between the people and their rulers. In a conference recently organized by the Danish Free Press Society to commemorate the tenth anniversary of the famous Muhammed cartoons, the British political analyst, Douglas Murray, noted that the European populations are reacting to decades of lies and deception by voting for political parties which, just a few years ago, were vilified as “racist” and “fascist.” Marine Le Pen, of the National Front party, has emerged as a strong candidate in France’s 2017 presidential election.

Perhaps the most momentous political earthquake in Europe was the recent 180-degree about-face by the Danish Social Democratic Party. Only a few years ago, it was a staunch proponent of Muslim immigration, and hammered away at anyone daring to deny the “cultural enrichment” brought about by the spread of Islam.

The leader of Denmark’s Social Democratic parliamentary group, Henrik Sass Larsen MP, on December 18 wrote:

“The massive migration and stream of refugees now coming to Europe and Denmark are of a magnitude that challenges the fundamental premises of our society in the near future… According to our analysis, the stark economic consequences of the current number of refugees and immigrants will consume all room for maneuver in public finance within a few years. Non-Western immigrants have historically been difficult to integrate into the labor market; the same applies to the Syrians that are now arriving. The more, the harder, the more expensive… Finally, it is our analysis that given our previous experience with integrating non-Western people into our society, we are facing a social catastrophe when it comes to handling many tens of thousands that are soon to be channeled into society. Every bit of progress in terms of integration will be put back to zero. … Therefore our conclusion is clear: We will do all we can to limit the number of non-Western refugees and immigrants coming to the country. That is why we have gone far — and much farther than we had dreamed of going… We are doing this because we will not sacrifice our welfare society in the name of humanitarianism. For the welfare society … is the political project of the Social Democratic Party. It is a society built on the principles of liberty, equality and solidarity. Mass immigration — as we have seen in, for example, Sweden — will undermine … our welfare society.”

Clearly, the Danish Social Democratic Party — the architect of Denmark as we have known it — has understood that there is political capital to be defended. It seems finally to have realized that it cannot persist in whittling away its accomplishments if it wants to keep its dwindling share of the votes.

One may speculate that if the Social Democratic Party means what it says, it might have an impact among Social Democratic and Socialist parties in other European countries.

However, as Douglas Murray also pointed out, Westerners suffer from the notion that regardless of how many jihadis, murderers and terrorists claim that their actions are motivated by their love of Allah, they cannot possibly mean it. There must be some other underlying “root cause” that the men of violence are not aware of, but which well-meaning Westerners are keen to tell them about: old Western imperialism, centuries of humiliation, racism, Israel, the Crusades, poverty, exclusion, the Muhammad cartoons, etc. And, of course, that it is all the fault of the West!

As long as we in the West are not prepared to take Muslims at their word when they claim to be waging bloody jihad because it is their religious obligation, we have no chance of repelling the current onslaught on the West. The latest sighting of this shift was just this week, in the form of a U.S. House of Representatives bill, H. Res. 569, to censor one of the few countries left with free speech. The bill, in accordance with the 10-year plan of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) to implement UN Human Rights Council Resolution 16/18, would criminalize, worldwide, all criticism of Islam. [1]

As long as the authorities are unwilling to protect their own populations from being overrun by foreigners, many of whom seem prepared to do them harm, we are likely to see the natives take protection into their own hands. On December 16, for instance, there was a violent protest in the small Dutch city of Geldermalsen, as the local authorities were trying to set up an asylum center behind the backs of the local population. No doubt the authorities were taken aback by the activism.

Western societies are based on an implied contract between the sovereign and the people: The sovereign — the king, the president, the government — promises to uphold law and order, protect his people from violence and foreign encroachment and apprehend and punish criminals. In exchange, the citizens promise not to take the law into their own hands. It follows that if the state fails to uphold its part of this social bargain, then the right — indeed the obligation — to protect oneself, one’s family, neighbors and the community, returns to the citizens.

There was also the recent spate of asylum-house burnings in Sweden. According to the Danish-Swedish website, Snaphanen, there have been 40 occasions during the past six months in which buildings intended to house asylum seekers have mysteriously burned to the ground — without anyone being hurt or killed. None of the perpetrators has been caught; no one has claimed responsibility. It all appears organized quite well.

Will citizen activism save Europe? Probably not. Vast areas are too far gone to be saved. Sweden is a broken country, as pointed out by Ingrid Carlqvist in several articles at Gatestone. By 2020, Germany may have 20 million Muslim residents.

We are probably beyond the point where effective change can be obtained by politics in the old sense, for the simple reason that central authorities are not strong enough to make their writ run throughout their national territories. This will spell the end of Europe as we know it, and people who cannot leave, or who choose to stand and fight, will be left to their own devices — and quite possibly entirely new modes of social organization.

First to go will be the welfare states. Shrinking native populations cannot generate enough taxes to accommodate masses of immigrants with so few skills as to be effectively unemployable, or who do not want to contribute to “infidel” societies.

What might post-European Europe look like? Think of Northern Ireland in the time of the Troubles or of ex-Yugoslavia during the civil wars of the 1990s.

When states break down, people’s first concern will be security. Who can and will protect my family and me?

For a long time in Europe there has been talk of “parallel societies” — in which the state ceases to function as a unitary polity — due to the cultural, religious and politico-judicial separation of non-Muslims and Muslims into incompatible and antagonistic enclaves.

There appears to be a growing realization among Danish demographers that third-world immigrants and their descendants, with or without citizenship, will constitute the majority of the Danish population before the end of the century.[2] A sizable segment of this third-world population will be Muslim, and well before the middle of the century, the number of Muslims will be large enough irreversibly to have changed the composition and character of the country.

Will Muslim non-integration spell the end of the secular state as we have known it? Probably. Religion — or more accurately, Islamic ideology — which knows no distinction between religion and politics, is on the ascendant as the constitutive principle among Danish Muslims. As Muslim institutions grow stronger, the Islamic court is bound to become even more powerful as the organizing principle of the Muslim parallel societies.

How will the old Danish, and nominally Christian, population react to this metamorphosis? To a large extent, that will depend on what organizing principle will determine the character of the Danish parallel society. Two possibilities stand out: “Danishness” and “Christianity.” “Danishness” would probably entail a society founded on a nationalistic or ethnic myth, whereas “Christianity” might be more ethnically inclusive and stress society’s Judeo-Christian and humanistic roots.

In either event, it is difficult to see how the secular state could survive, because the parallel societies will not be free to define themselves or determine their political systems or modes of governance. They will constantly be forced to maneuver in response to “the other’s” long-term objectives and immediate actions — as has been seen, for example, in Bosnia, Kosovo, Lebanon, Northern Ireland and the Basque provinces.

Under these conditions, the modern system of sovereign territorial states is likely to break down. We can only guess at what will replace it.

Lars Hedegaard, a Danish historian, journalist and author, established the Danish Free Speech Society in 2004.

.


[1] In accordance with the 10-year plan of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) to implement U.N. Resolution 16/18 and criminalize all criticism of Islam worldwide, a group in the U.S. House of Representatives has sponsored H. Res. 569, in condemnation of violence, bigotry and “hateful rhetoric” toward Muslims in the U.S. This bill comes on the heels of Attorney General Loretta Lynch’s post-San Bernardino attack statement to the Muslim American community that she will prosecute anyone guilty of anti-Muslim speech. Passage of this legislation will be the death knell for the First Amendment and the end of any and all discourse and education about the threat posed by the global jihad.

[2] See, for example, the calculations of the Copenhagen University demographer Hans Oluf Hansen, Berlingske Tidende, August 21, 2005.

The ISIS Threat Represents a Clash of Civilizations, and Hillary Won’t Admit It

Clinton at cfrNational Review, by Fred Fleitz — November 30, 2015:

Has Hillary Clinton separated herself from President Obama by taking a tougher and more realistic position on the threat from ISIS? That’s what many in the news media are saying based on some of her recent foreign-policy statements, such as her remarks in a November 19 speech to the Council on Foreign Relations:

ISIS operates across three mutually reinforcing dimensions: a physical enclave in Iraq and Syria; an international terrorist network that includes affiliates across the region and beyond; and an ideological movement of radical jihadism. We have to target and defeat all three, and time is of the essence.

This portrayal of the ISIS threat sounds like an improvement over the awkward rhetoric used by President Obama to discuss what he insists on calling ISIL or Daesh, and his refusal to use words such as “jihad” and “jihadism.” But Hillary’s rhetorical improvements were offset by caveats indicating that she actually has not moved very far from the president and has a worldview that is just as incoherent.

For example, Clinton criticized “the obsession in some quarters [meaning Republicans] with a clash of civilizations.” Clinton also echoed Obama’s frequent claims that the United States is not at war with Islam when she said, “I don’t think we’re at war with all Muslims. I think we’re at war with jihadists.”

RELATED: Why Does the Left Continue to Insist that Islamic Terrorism Has Nothing to Do with Islam?

Clinton’s dismissal that the threat from jihadist groups represents a clash of civilizations is troubling because it indicates that while she says ISIS is motivated by a radical ideology, she does not understand what this ideology is. Its adherents — including many authorities of Islam — believe in sharia, which amounts to a global operating system for jihad, a holy war with infidel societies explicitly seeking to impose, by violent or stealthy means, an Islamic caliphate worldwide.

Clinton also apparently does not realize that the clash-of-civilizations concept is not a Republican talking point but a well-known theory developed by two giants in the history of the Middle East and political science, Drs. Bernard Lewis and Samuel Huntington.

RELATED: After Paris, Obama Refuses to Lead

This term, first used by Lewis in a 1990 Atlantic Monthly article and then by Huntington in a famous 1993 Foreign Affairs article, exactly describes sharia ideology. Believing that this ideology is a war being waged against the West by Islamic fundamentalists in retaliation for purported efforts to undermine Islam and the Muslim world through secularism and modernity, Lewis concluded that:

We are facing a mood and a movement far transcending the level of issues and policies of governments that pursue them. This is no less than a clash of civilizations — the perhaps irrational but surely historic reaction of an ancient rival against our Judeo-Christian heritage, our secular present, and the worldwide expansion of both.

Huntington discussed several coming clashes of civilizations in his Foreign Affairs article but highlighted a potential clash between the West and the Muslim world as the most serious. According to Huntington:

The centuries-old military interaction between the West and Islam is unlikely to decline. It could become more virulent.

President Obama’s approach to the threat posed by ISIS, al-Qaeda, and other jihadist groups — including the Muslim Brotherhood — is doomed to fail to protect this country and its interests insofar as it refuses to recognize that they are all based on a global ideology at war with Western civilization.

Clinton’s dismissal of the clash-of-civilizations concept indicates she is also adhering to Obama’s erroneous view and that her reference to an “ideological movement of radical jihadism” is as meaningless as “violent extremism,” the euphemism the president uses to lump together perceived threats from veterans, Constitutionalists, Tea Party members, anti-abortion activists, conservatives, and foreign or domestic Islamist terrorists.

Clinton’s statement, “I don’t think we’re at war with all Muslims. I think we’re at war with jihadists,” is similar to President Obama’s claims that global jihadist groups and their ideologies have very little support in the Muslim world. Last week, the president said 99.9 percent of Muslims reject terrorism.

Obviously the U.S. is not at war with all Muslims. But by making this false argument, Obama and Clinton are ignoring the reality that the global jihad movement is such a difficult threat to counter because it has the support of more than a small minority of the world’s Muslims.

Josh Gelernter addressed this in an excellent November 21, 2015, National Review article in which he debunked President Obama’s “99.9 percent” claim. Citing Pew Research polling figures, Gelernter wrote:

In surveys of the Muslim populations of nine majority-Muslim countries, plus Lebanon, Gaza, and the West Bank, an average of 57 percent have an unfavorable view of al-Qaeda, not 99.9 percent. Thirteen percent have a favorable view of al-Qaeda, not 0.1 percent.

There also are disturbingly high levels of support for the global jihadist ideology among Muslims in the United States. According to a June 2015 online survey conducted by The Polling Company and sponsored by my organization, the Center for Security Policy, a majority (51 percent) agreed that “Muslims in America should have the choice of being governed according to shariah” and nearly a quarter believe “it is legitimate to use violence to punish those who give offense to Islam by, for example, portraying the prophet Mohammed.” The survey also found that 25 percent agreed fully or in part that “violence against Americans here in the United States can be justified as part of the global jihad.”

RELATED: Obama’s Increasingly Surreal War on ISIS

By claiming the United States is at war only with jihadists, Clinton is making the same mistake as President Obama by ignoring the sizeable number of the world’s Muslims who sympathize with them and their ideology. They are ignoring how this reality is a clash of civilizations and that the real war is an ideological one.

To win the war against the global jihad movement, the United States needs to combine military, diplomatic, and intelligence measures with aggressive efforts to challenge and discredit the jihadist ideology worldwide. This must include embracing and empowering Muslim moderates who want to reform Islam, such as Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser, president of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy, and Egyptian president Abdel Fattah al-Sissi as well as Muslims and former Muslims who have been persecuted by jihadists such as Ayaan Hirsi Ali.

It is outrageous that President Obama has never invited President Sissi, Dr. Jasser, or Ms. Hirsi Ali to the White House to discuss the threat from ISIS and the global jihad movement. Instead, he relies on counsel from American Muslim Brotherhood front groups such as the Islamic Society of North America and the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), an organization with connections to Hamas that has, according to Daniel Pipes, a “malign, terroristic quality.”

At the last Democratic presidential debate and in recent foreign-policy speeches, Clinton defended her decision not to use the term “radical Islam” because she does not want to offend Muslim societies or make it appear the United States is at war with Islam. This was the wrong answer, since defeating ISIS and the jihadist ideology requires risking offending some in the Muslim world by pressing for reform of Islam and promoting Muslim reformers.

Moreover, given that this is a problem within Islam, it’s absurd to avoid using terms that label it as such, a point Senator Marco Rubio made in this brilliant retort to Clinton:

That would be like saying we weren’t at war with the Nazis, because we were afraid to offend some Germans who may have been members of the Nazi party but weren’t violent themselves.

Repairing the damage done to international security and America’s global security interests by President Obama’s feckless “leading from behind” foreign policy will take a new president with leadership, vision, and an understanding of global threats. Defeating ISIS will require a new president who will acknowledge that ISIS is simply one manifestation of the larger problem we face from Islamic supremacism, a sharia-driven movement that is very much at war with Western civilization, and who will fight it on that basis.

Hillary Clinton’s recent statements about the ISIS threat fall far short of these requirements and suggest that, although Clinton wants to sound tough on how she would deal with ISIS, her approach would be just as dangerously ineffective as President Obama’s.

 — Fred Fleitz is senior vice president for policy and programs for the Center for Security Policy. He followed the Iranian nuclear issue for the CIA, the State Department, and the House Intelligence Committee during his 25-year government career. Follow him on Twitter @fredfleitz.

Barbie Dolls in burqas: These futuristic novels depict Islamic theocracies in the West

fiction

The 9/11 Commission report said that the biggest failure of counterterrorism policy was the “failure of imagination”. Well here is a little something to stimulate your imagination and perhaps inspire you to DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT.

The Rebel, by DAVID MENZIES, Nov. 29, 2015:

I’m a big fan of speculative fiction, a highly imaginative genre that brings possible futures to life.

It might be something like the flying car in The Jetsons that still hasn’t become reality yet, or it can be something that isn’t quite so far-fetched, as is the case with novels that visualize the rise of an Islamist theocracy in the West.

One novel on that theme is Prayers for the Assassin, set in 2040. America is split into a new Bible Belt and an Islamic theocracy, where Barbie Dolls wear burqas. Lots of people converted to Islam out of fear or even trendiness, looking at Islam as no different than Scientology.

And then there’s Michael Houellebecq’s new novel Submission, about a near-future France with a radical Muslim president.

Again, craven “enlightened” leftists are quick to convert to Islam in this novel, all the better to get ahead in their careers (and get four pretty wives in the bargain.)

Considering the French reaction to the Paris terror attacks, is this really so far-fetched?

We’ve already seen elements of sharia creeping into our real world so I’d suggest that these novels should be looked at as warnings of what can happen if we don’t heed the wise words of Edmund Burke who famously said, “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”

Also see:

In Photos: Inside the Al Nusra Academy Training the Next Generation of Jihadis

Vice News, By Sally Hayden, Nov. 11, 2015:

In a classroom in northern Syria’s Aleppo province a teacher begins a lesson by saying: “Today we will learn about faith and beliefs.”

Abu Baser questions the assembled boys — all in khaki green — on the meaning of the word “faith,” before having them repeat: “The war gains belong to God and the messenger.”

This is the Lion Cubs Religious Academy, one of several schools run by al Qaeda’s Syrian affiliate, the al Nusra Front. VICE News filmmaker Medyan Dairieh gained exclusive access to the group earlier this year, spending time with the militia’s current leadership and the younger generation being groomed to replace them.

His footage shows children singing songs with lyrics like: “Oh mother, don’t be sad, I’ve chosen the land of jihad. Wipe your tears, I only went to fight the Jews,” and “Our leader [Osama] bin Laden who scares America with the power of his faith and his PK gun.”

In unison, they later chorus together: “All the Christians and a message to America, your grave is in Syria, our Front is victorious.”

Boy from Idlib. (Photo by Medyan Dairieh)

Boy from Idlib. (Photo by Medyan Dairieh)

Not all of the children in the ‘Lion Cubs Religious Academy’ come from families affiliated with al Qaeda, but the majority do. Trained to believe dying in jihad will make them a martyr, they could join the tens of thousands of child soldiers being used and abused in conflicts around the world.

Abu Anas — a student recently arrived from Uzbekistan — is still learning Arabic. He told VICE News that he misses his relatives in his home country, but doesn’t miss Uzbekistan itself because “they don’t approve of jihad and they call us terrorists. They’re frightened by us. They don’t want jihad. They don’t want Allah’s laws.” Questioned again later, he says his father “died as a martyr,” but won’t disclose where.

Another classmate said he had been forced to attend the school because his family wanted him to train to be a mujahideen fighter.

The students of the 'Lion Cubs Religious Academy' go on a school trip. (Photo by Medyan Dairieh)

The students of the ‘Lion Cubs Religious Academy’ go on a school trip. (Photo by Medyan Dairieh)

Al Nusra now control territories in Aleppo and Idlib provinces. The group is currently fighting on three fronts: against the Syrian regime, Kurdish forces, and the Islamic State.

“Youths will establish a caliphate, following the prophet’s traditions, and they will carry the message of jihad,” the children’s teacher tells VICE News.

Growing up surrounded by war, the young boys still experience many of the fixtures of a regular childhood. They play sports. They go on a school trip to an old amusement park where they push bumper cars rendered static without electricity. The children swim in a pool, some diving confidently, some clinging to rubber rings.

Many of the children have seen horrific acts. A boy from Idlib said: “I witnessed the Nusayris (Alawites) kill the men and slaughter the women and children.”

“There are many without any religious knowledge,” he continued. “I’ll teach them and invite them, but if they don’t listen, then I’ll use the sword.”

Read more

***

Also see:

With Open Gates: The forced collective suicide of European nations

Getty Images

Getty Images

The Final Solution to the European Problem

Gates of Vienna, by Baron Bodissey, Nov. 10, 2015:

The following video is a compilation of footage related to the European “migration” crisis taken in the last five or six years. I’ve seen most of these clips before, and Vlad and I have done our own subtitled versions of some of them. The person who put the video together recommends that viewers download it and mirror it, because it probably won’t stay up on YouTube for very long.

Yes, I know it’s got a section with Nick Griffin ranting on about Zionists and banks and whatnot. But not counting that, it’s a pretty good collage of what’s been going on:

***

The Glazov Gang-Sweden: On the Verge of Collapse:

Why Other Cultures Are Welcome, But Islam Is Not

thai girlsBy Citizen Warrior, June 1, 2015:

I am an American. My ancestors were almost entirely Northern European. Tonight I was at a graduation ceremony for an American university. The party was to celebrate the graduation of fifteen students who were all born in Thailand but are now Americans. Almost everyone in the room was a student at the university and also born in Thailand but raised in America by their Thai parents. They all spoke Thai.

As I looked around the room, I saw people who retained much of their former culture, but also embraced American culture. I have no problem with these people. I welcome them to this country. Almost every culture that has moved to America has done the same thing — Irish, Italians, Japanese, Koreans, Buddhists, Hindus, Jains, Sikhs, Taoists, atheists, etc. — they bring their own culture, but also enjoy what’s good about American culture. They are all welcome here.

But the political ideology of Islam is dangerously domineering. For that reason, it is not welcome. Among its core tenets is a mission to make Islam the dominant religious and political system wherever its believers live, using peaceful means if possible and violent means if necessary.

The Thai students may retain some of their former culture, but they do not try to impose it on anyone else. They don’t protest or riot if anyone does something their culture disapproves of. They don’t sue people or assassinate them if they criticize Thai culture.

I’m not a racist or a xenophobe. I enjoy people from all cultures and religions, except those who are committed to eliminating all other cultures, religions, political systems, and ways of life but their own — a principle that is not only part of Islamic doctrine, it is Islam’s prime directive.

42% of Canadian Muslims Admit Islam and West ‘Irreconcilable’

Female-Madrassa_Reuters-640x480Breitbart, by Jordan Schachtel, April 14, 2014:

Two recently-released polls found that 42 percent of Canadian Muslims agree that Islam is “irreconcilable” with Western society.

The surveys also found that over 60 percent of Jewish and Christian Canadians believe that Islam is incompatible with the West. Among secular Canadians, 46 percent shared the “irreconcilable” viewpoint, the Vancouver Sun reported.

The polls asked 2,000 individuals and its surveying took place in 2013 and 2014.

Jack Jedwab, who’s Association for Canadian Studies commissioned the poll, said of its results: “It’s quite disconcerting that our poll results consistently show about 60 percent of Canadians see the West and Islamic society as ‘irreconcilable.’ It puts you up against a dead end.”

“It’s a huge blow to interfaith dialogue,” he added.

Jedwab discussed the “Clash of Civilizations” that occurs when people from Islamic cultures have to blend into Western society, citing Koranic mandates that require women to cover themselves. “Some people say the niqab reflects the oppression of women. Others say it’s just a piece of clothing. My view is it does represent the oppression of women,” he said.

Ezra Levant of Rebel Media said that the poll was important because it discussed a “sensitive subject” matter that is largely avoided by “politically correct journalists.”

The polls were conducted before a series of Islamic terror attacks against Canadian officials in late October. The first attack was carried out by an Islamic State supporter, who proceeded to run over two police officers with his vehicle before police shot the jihadi dead. The second attack targeted Canada’s Parliament Hill in Ottawa. The jihadi gunman, Michael Zehaf-Bibeau, killed a Canadian soldier before being shot dead by the House of Commons Sergeant-at-Arms.

Impressions of PEGIDA in Dresden

pegidadresden20150112-2Gates of Vienna, by Fjordman, Jan. 19, 2015:

Starting in 2014, the German movement PEGIDA (Patriotische Europäer Gegen die Islamisierung des Abendlandes, or Patriotic Europeans Against the Islamization of the West) has created headlines. It has gradually spread to other cities and even beyond Germany, but the first PEGIDA rallies began in Dresden. Some Scandinavian friends of mine wanted to go there. I decided to join them, to see this new phenomenon for myself.

On January 12 2015, the PEGIDA rally in Dresden in which I participated turned out to be even more significant than expected. In Paris just a few days earlier, staffers from the French satirical paper Charlie Hebdo were massacred by Islamic Jihadist terrorists. Their crime? Among cartoons mocking many people and religions, they had also made some cartoons making fun of Islam’s founder Mohammed.

In solidarity, the PEGIDA demonstrators in Dresden carried banners showing the names and photos of the Charlie Hebdo staff who were murdered by militant Muslims. Next to German national and regional flags, the French flag was the most prominent one in the rally. I did see at least one Israeli flag, one English flag, a couple of Swedish flags, several Danish flags, plus one or two Norwegian flags, among others.

The lowest estimate for the number of people who participated in the rally this day was 25,000 people. The highest estimate was 40,000 people. It was apparently the biggest crowd so far. The number of people was so large that if you lost sight of your friends, you might not see them again for several hours.

The largest number of participants were undoubtedly local residents of Dresden or Saxony. However, there were also visitors from other parts of Germany and a few international visitors who came specifically to take part in the PEGIDA rally. I was one of them.

I talked to some friends from Denmark afterwards. It is noteworthy that so many people displayed the German national flag, openly and with pride. This would have been taboo some years earlier. Germans were then still too weighed down by guilt from the Second World War. For historical reasons, neighboring countries which have been invaded by Germany in the past view their large neighbor with some suspicion. Despite this, my Danish friends concluded that they were fine with what they had seen in Dresden.

PEGIDA is not about aggressive German nationalism. It is about the normalization of Germany. Germans should not invade Poland or other countries for Lebensraum. However, they have the perfect right to reject Arabs, Turks or others from expanding their own Lebensraum in Germany.

I had a good look at thousands of people. There were hardly any skinheads present. I saw more grandmothers. The people who participated in this peaceful demo were simply normal, concerned citizens, many of them well-dressed. The only tensions I registered were triggered by some rather few left-wing counter-demonstrators who shouted senseless slogans.

While looking at the different slogans and banners, many of them were indeed related to Islam and Islamization. However, some people in the PEGIDA demo carried posters denouncing biased mass media or the EU. PEGIDA is anti-Islamic, but it is also anti-totalitarian, anti-establishment and in favor of traditional European culture.

Read more 

Also see:

Immigration and Islam: Europe’s Crisis of Faith

The terrorist assault on the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo on Jan. 7 may have been organized by al Qaeda’s affiliate in Yemen. But the attack, along with another at a Paris kosher market days later, was carried out by French Muslims descended from recent waves of North African and West African immigration. Well before the attacks, which left 17 dead, the French were discussing the possibility that tensions with the country’s own Muslim community were leading France toward some kind of armed confrontation.

Consider Éric Zemmour, a slashing television debater and a gifted polemicist. His history of the collapse of France’s postwar political order, “Le suicide français,” was No. 1 on the best-seller lists for several weeks this fall. “Today, our elites think it’s France that needs to change to suit Islam, and not the other way around,” Mr. Zemmour said on a late-night talk show in October, “and I think that with this system, we’re headed toward civil war.”

More recently, Michel Houellebecq published “Submission,” a novel set in the near future. In it, the re-election of France’s current president, François Hollande, has drawn recruits to a shadowy group proclaiming its European identity. “Sooner or later, civil war between Muslims and the rest of the population is inevitable,” a sympathizer explains. “They draw the conclusion that the sooner this war begins, the better chance they’ll have of winning it.” Published, as it happened, on the morning of the attacks, Mr. Houellebecq’s novel replaced Mr. Zemmour’s at the top of the best-seller list, where it remains.

Two days after the Charlie Hebdo killings, there was a disturbing indication on Le Monde’s website of how French people were thinking. One item about the killing vastly outpaced all others in popularity. The reactions of Europe’s leaders was shared about 5,000 times, tales of Muslim schoolchildren with mixed feelings about 6,000, a detailed account of the Charlie Hebdo editorial meeting ended by the attack, 9,000. Topping them all, shared 28,000 times, was a story about reprisals: “Mosques become targets, French Muslims uneasy.” Those clicks are the sound of French fear that something larger may be under way.

Marine Le Pen of France’s Front National acknowledges supporters on Nov. 30. Populist parties are rising across Europe as voters feel abandoned by the mainstream political class. GETTY IMAGES

Marine Le Pen of France’s Front National acknowledges supporters on Nov. 30. Populist parties are rising across Europe as voters feel abandoned by the mainstream political class. GETTY IMAGES

France’s problem has elements of a military threat, a religious conflict and a violent civil-rights movement. It is not unique. Every country of Western Europe has a version. For a half-century, millions of immigrants from North and sub-Saharan Africa have arrived, lured by work, welfare, marriage and a refuge from war. There are about 20 million Muslims in Europe, with some 5 million of them in France, according to the demographer Michèle Tribalat. That amounts to roughly 8% of the population of France, compared with about 5% of both the U.K. and Germany.

Read more at WSJ

****

via Gates of Vienna:

The Surge of the Anti-Islamization Movement in Europe

Jerry Gordon sends this useful graph from The Wall Street Journal showing the latest poll results for various immigration-skeptical parties in Western Europe:

eunationalistsNotice that the WSJ, like the rest of the MSM, can’t restrain itself from editorializing that the parties “are using fear of terrorism and unease about Islam” — as if these weren’t urgent, important issues, but simply irrational fears of the lumpenproletariat to be exploited for electoral gain.

The graph captures an extraordinary moment in recent European history: Three anti-Islamization parties in three major countries poll at #1 among their respective voters. We can all celebrate this unprecedented situation.

But the static nature of the result misses some aspects of current political trends, such as the recent tremendous surge by UKIP in the run-up to the general election in May.

It will be interesting to see what this graph looks like in six months’ time.

The Islamist Threat – Is Europe in Denial?

The UK, France Holland and many other European countries are suffering a tide of Islamic extremism unprecedented in living memory. Is Europe’s culture and way of life in danger? Will the governments wake up and act or continue to bury their heads in the sand, living in denial. Clarions Project’s film, The Third Jihad, predicted this tide of violence and extremism now gathering momentum as seen in France, the UK, Holland and across all of Europe.