Daniel Pipes: Three possibilities for Europe’s future as Islamization rises

160714184008-08-nice-truck-deaths---restricted-super-169

The Rebel, July 15, 2016:

At least 84 people were murdered yesterday in France’s third major Islamist terrorist attack in less than a year. In our latest video collaboration with the Gatestone Institute, Daniel Pipes talks about Europe’s crossroads:

Will Europeans succumb to Islamization, or will they rise to fight radical Islam and hold onto Western values? How it looks so far?

“Sheer Horror” in Paris

blackoutCounterJihad, July 11, 2016:

Ben Judah is a journalist who comes especially well-recommended.  His two books, one about Russia and the other about London, have been hailed for their shockingly honest accounts of unpleasant truths.  Of his work on London, the New Statesman reviewer wrote:  “Every MP should be given a copy immediately. On every page lies an uncomfortable truth, in every paragraph sheer horror.”

Now he has turned to the rapid shift towards Islam in France.  Brought on by mass immigration and hardline Islamic preachers, Judah finds a neighborhood in the shadow of the tombs of French kings that is no longer French.

“The French are too scared to come and shop in Saint-Denis since the attacks. There’s fear. There’s less order — less police, more druggies, more dealers and more thieves. It’s getting worse. I tell you — ten years ago it was not this bad.”

How does the French state explain all this? I take the butcher’s accusation to the prefect. Grey-haired Philippe Galli is Saint-Denis’s most powerful official and the president’s envoy to the department of Seine-Saint-Denis. His throaty, gravelly voice is accustomed to power.

“Those same people who say there is a lack of authority,” snaps the 60-year-old prefect, “are the same ones who refuse the police access when they try and enter. Those from the Maghreb, by origin, permit themselves to behave in ways that would be unthinkable where they came from.”

He tells me that the secret services are currently monitoring 700 people at risk of radicalisation in Saint-Denis, and the police are too frightened to enter alone most areas under his control.

The whole of his piece should be read.

The French government has been drawing up counter-insurgency plans against those al Qaeda and the Islamic State (ISIS) have been recruiting.  Last year’s multiple major terror strikes in Paris not only led to the deaths of hundreds, but also highlighted the failure of European police authorities to handle the problem of rising Islamic radicalism.

Meanwhile, with French native birthrates continuing to be below replacement level, mass immigration has continued apace.  A quarter of teenagers in France are now Muslims, implying a future in which any radicalized Islam poses only a greater threat to the stability of the Republic.  Second generation immigrants, according to several major inquiries, seem to be the ones most inclined to radicalization.  The problems of France today may well pale in comparison to the problems of a generation from now.

Already Judah’s article identifies a rising Antisemitism that is driving French Jews from their homes.  But it is also driving non-Jewish French from their homes, and making those who continue to live in the changing neighborhoods feel besieged.

The response by the French has been a rising nationalism.  Even al Qaeda’s top figure in charge of recruting from France has endorsed the National Front.  “If the French don’t want war, they should vote Marine Le Pen,” he said. “OK, she’s a woman, and one can call her a racist.  But at least she defends the true values of France.”

Does she?  Judah cites a gay leftist who has come to feel inclined towards a more nationalist politics.  “I realised… my error of interpretation on immigration and Islamisation, which is a danger to liberty…. [A]ll around us this rise of halal, this halalisation of France through its dishes, it’s a conquest of France through its dishes, if you look closely.”

That has parallels in Germany, where nationalism is also rising as a response.  These stories may not be pleasant to read, but every wise person should consider them, and ponder what is to be done.

Also see:

VIDEO — Geert Wilders: Stand for Freedom!

stop-global-islamization (1)Gatestone Institute, June 30, 2016:

Dutch opposition leader Geert Wilders discusses the dangers of the Islamization of the West and the growing influence of Sharia law. He outlines his plans to defend the identity and civilization of the West from indoctrination.

ESW in Dallas: “Europe is Careening Over the Multicultural Cliff”

esw-dallas-201604Gates of Vienna, by Baron Bodissey, April 28, 2016:

Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff has just returned to Austria after an extended visit to the United States, where she was invited to speak by various anti-Islamization groups in different cities.

On April 21 Elisabeth spoke in Dallas, Texas at an event sponsored by the Dallas chapter of ACT! For America. She was introduced at the event by Lt. Col. (ret.) Allen West. Below is the prepared text for her speech.

(L-R) Lt. Col. (ret.) Allen West, Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff, Rabbi Jon Hausman, Dallas, April 21 2016

(L-R) Lt. Col. (ret.) Allen West, Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff, Rabbi Jon Hausman, Dallas, April 21 2016

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Thank you for inviting me to speak to ACT! for America here in Dallas, Texas. These are perilous times we are living in. Advocates for freedom on both sides of the Atlantic need to stand together!

For the past nine months Austria and the rest of Western Europe have undergone a profound transformation, one that will inevitably change the face of Europe permanently. I refer, of course, to the migration crisis, which began in earnest last summer, and is continuing as I speak to you. As the weather warms up and spring gives way to summer, we may expect the crisis to intensify even further. More than a million immigrants arrived in Austria and Germany via the “Balkan route” last year, and at least as many are expected to come this year — probably significantly more.

These migrants are generally referred to by our political leaders and the media as “refugees”, but this is hardly the case. Not only are most of them from countries where there is no war to flee from, but they are also overwhelmingly young Muslim men, of fighting age. In other words, the current crisis is actually an instance of Islamic hijra, or migration into infidel lands to advance the cause of Islam. The hijra goes hand in hand with jihad — once enough Muslim migrants have settled in the target country, violentjihad can begin.

It should be quite clear by now that the jihad phase has already begun in Western Europe. The most recent instances were the massacres in Paris and Brussels, which were acts ofjihad carried out by Muslims. Some of the terrorists were in fact “refugees” who had pretended to be “Syrian” and came in with the migrant wave.

And all of them were fighting jihad in the way of Allah, as instructed by the Koran.

I could take up my entire time slot tonight talking about the European migration crisis, and never do more than scratch the surface. However, I’d like to discuss one aspect of the crisis that is very important: the manipulation by the mainstream media of the news about the migrants.

A single example from a beach in Turkey will help give you an idea of what is going on. The image that sparked Western interest in the crisis was the widely-publicized photograph of the dead toddler on the beach in Turkey. That photo is an example of media manipulation. Not about the fact of the baby’s death, but what was done with his little body once he was dead. There is now ample evidence that the body was moved and arranged in place so that the most heart-wrenching photo could be taken. Furthermore, the father of the child was not a poor helpless refugee trying to escape to freedom, but an accomplice of the people smugglers who piloted the boat, who irresponsibly brought his family with him.

For journalists working for Der Spiegel or Le Figaro or The Guardian or CNN, the media narrative is more important than the truth. And the media narrative was (and is) that poor innocent refugees are drowning because they are left to die by evil Europeans.

Those facts about the incident never made it into public consciousness. Not like the image of the pitiful corpse at the edge of the waves — that’s the kind of story that the Western media love to dish out, especially when it promotes the media narrative. It’s also the kind of story that Western audiences love to lap up — it’s what Gates of Vienna, the website I’m associated with, calls “Dead Baby Porn”.

Dead Baby Porn tugs the heartstrings of well-meaning Westerners. It reinforces all their presuppositions about current events. It gives them a vicarious frisson about the poor, suffering child. And, in their response, it makes them feel morally superior when they join the clamor to open their country’s borders to the unfortunate “refugees”.

The media feed the public a steady stream of photos and videos that feature pitiful migrant women and children. We see them looking through the razor wire towards “freedom”, weeping, cooking their food over a campfire, and being pushed back by border guards. Yet these images are so misleading that they constitute disinformation.

The ugly fact is that the overwhelming majority of the “refugees” are healthy young men who either have no wives and children, or left them behind to seize the opportunity forhijra into Europe. They come from Afghanistan, Morocco, Eritrea, and Pakistan, but they acquire forged or stolen Syrian passports so that they become “Syrian”, and thus qualify for VIP status in the flood of refugees.

isisrefugees

We are being deliberately manipulated. The Western public is being manipulated into supporting the migration of fighting-age Muslim men into Europe. They are being manipulated into joining the crowd of starry-eyed people holding up “Welcome Refugees” signs in European train stations. And they are being manipulated into paying for all of it through their donations to various NGOs whose mission is to aid the “refugees”.

Yet their donations do not cover the entire cost. It’s a very expensive proposition to send refugees from Anatolia to the Greek islands, and then through Macedonia, Serbia, Croatia, Slovenia, and Austria to Germany. It’s not just the payment to the people-smugglers who take them across a few miles of the Aegean and dump them just off the beach on Lesbos, although that is expensive enough. From there they are carried by ferry to the mainland, housed, clothed, and fed. When they continue their journey, they ride on buses and trains almost the entire distance — they walk only a few hundred yards to cross each border, getting out of a bus in one country and boarding another one in the next.

This is yet another way in which you, the Western public, are being manipulated by the media. All those photos and videos of endless columns of refugees walking along dusty roads carrying their children and pathetic belongings — those are not representative of the migrants’ journey. A typical shot would show hundreds of young men sitting on buses with air conditioning and upholstered seats. But you don’t see many of those, do you?

Someone is paying the costs of all this. Public donations cover only a small portion of the billions of dollars paid out to transport migrants. The governments of the countries involved pay some of the cost. And the European Union pays some of it. And there are multiple indications that George Soros and his Open Society Foundations are bankrolling a lot of the process, including the printing of maps and helpful instructions for the “refugees” in multiple languages.

Make what you will of all of this. No matter what their motives are, the internationalists who push for global governance and a borderless world are expending vast amounts of money to fool the European public and move millions of Muslim immigrants into Western Europe. Europe will become more “diverse”, whether it likes it or not.

And if, as a consequence, terror attacks have to kill hundreds or thousands of people, and women have to be gang-raped, why, those are just unfortunate side-effects.

You can’t make an omelet without breaking eggs, you know. Especially white European eggs.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

The migrant crisis is just the beginning of what might be called the “kinetic phase” of the deconstruction of European nation-states. Last summer’s events were not a new crisis. They were simply a continuation of an ongoing long-term process.

The constant flow of migrants across the Mediterranean into Europe has been going on for at least a decade. It picked up speed after the “Arab Spring” began in 2011, and especially after Moammar Qaddafi was murdered. Then the flow of migrants accelerated greatly last summer because President Erdogan of Turkey stopped interfering with the boats of the people-smugglers.

And now the European Union has paid an enormous amount of protection money to Mr. Erdogan in return for his promise to do what he used to do for free — stop the traffickers’ boats from crossing the Aegean to Greece.

There is no doubt whatsoever that the flow of migrants into Europe is an intentional process on the part of EU leaders. Many of them —especially German Chancellor Angela Merkel — are on record saying how important it is to invite all this “diversity” into Europe. The recent tsunami has obviously taken them by surprise, but it is exactly what they wanted — just not this fast.

They didn’t want the immigrants entering this quickly because the indigenous people of Europe might become alarmed by the influx and take action to throw their leaders out of office. This would not do. Those leaders want native Europeans to remain asleep so that the process of population replacement can be completed before they realize it.

No, it wasn’t supposed to happen this way. But now the European people are waking up, and change is in the air. It may be too little, too late — but awareness is finally dawning.

Population replacement is only one of the strategies employed by those who want to deconstruct the nation-states of Europe. In order to complete the process without a hitch, the native populace must be kept under control. Existing cultural institutions such as the Church and patriotic organizations must be discredited and weakened so that people are unable to form networks and organize against what is being done to them. Ideally, they would be unaware that such organizing is even possible. They must remain atomized, divided from one another, and under the full control of the state — the EU superstate, that is.

As the situation has worsened for the last decade or so, the European Union and its member states have cracked down on free speech. Bringing in so many migrants has accelerated the Islamization of Europe, which tends to be unpopular. Increased crime, more rape and harassment of women, the insistence that schools must serve halal foods and male students receiving permission to refrain from shaking their female teacher’s hand — these are all things that citizens dislike. But from the point of view of EU leaders, there is no going back — the migration must proceed; it’s a necessary part of the plan. Therefore, people must not be allowed to discuss these things nor urge their leaders to make changes. Instead, the criticism of Islam and Islamization must be forbidden. The Organization of Islamic Cooperation and the United Nations call it “defamation of religion”, and it has now been criminalized all across Europe. The EU is for all practical purposes enforcing sharia law on its indigenous residents.

Ten years ago, when I first began this work, the number of political prosecutions for “hate speech” in Europe was very small — the cases could be counted on the fingers of one hand. But that number has been increasing steadily ever since, and is now rising exponentially. There are now hundreds, perhaps thousands of cases every year in which people are prosecuted for racism, incitement, and discrimination simply for criticizing Islam or mass immigration. Unfortunately, many of those prosecuted are being convicted and fined. And, horribly enough, some are being sent to prison.

There are many, many cases of people being prosecuted for speaking the truth about Islam. Far too many for me to tell you about them all. I’ll discuss my own case in a few minutes, but first I’d like to say a few words about two friends of mine.

The first case is that of Geert Wilders, the leader of the Party for Freedom — the PVV — the most popular political party in the Netherlands. If an election were held today, the PVV would win at least twice as many seats in parliament as any other party. After the current government falls, Geert may very well become the next prime minister.

Yet the government is prosecuting him for what he said about Moroccan immigrants. His first court appearance was last month, but the trial was postponed until next fall.

He is being charged with “discrimination” for asking his supporters at a rally whether they wanted “more or fewer Moroccans in the Netherlands”. The charges against him were brought after thousands of complaints had been filed with the police — on pre-printed forms that police themselves had handed out in Muslim neighborhoods, and that imams had distributed to their illiterate congregants, many of whom had no idea what they were signing.

In other words, Geert Wilders was set up. His outspoken opinions about Islam, immigration, and the EU are considered unacceptable by the Powers That Be, and he must be stopped at any cost and by any means. His trial is a travesty, a farrago of justice. To call it a “kangaroo court” would be an insult to the world’s marsupials. A more fitting term would be “show trial”, just like those ordered by Stalin in the 1930s against his political enemies.

This is not the first political trial that Geert Wilders has had to endure, nor is it the second. This is the third time that the Dutch state has prosecuted him for “hate speech”. The first ended in a mistrial due to prosecutorial misconduct. In the second he was acquitted. But the establishment will not be satisfied until it has convicted him and ended his political career, so it is putting him on trial again.

Another friend who is being persecuted by the state is Tommy Robinson, who was one of the founders of the English Defence League and was its leader for five years. Tommy has been brought to court by the British government numerous times. All of those prosecutions — the “hate speech” charges and all the others — were trumped-up affairs carried out for political purposes.

Tommy’s most recent conviction was for “mortgage fraud”, a minor crime for which no one else has done jail time. In fact, members of parliament have done exactly the same thing, but were never even charged. Tommy, on the other hand, was sentenced to eighteen months in prison.

While Tommy was inside, he was locked up with hardened Muslim criminals who wanted to kill him. He was repeatedly attacked and beaten up, and ended up in the prison hospital more than once.

On one occasion he was locked in a cell with several Muslim prisoners. Tommy had learned beforehand that one of them was planning to throw a mixture of boiling water and sugar in his face. This nasty brew is called “napalm” by the criminals who use it, and it can cause horrible burns, much worse than those caused by simple boiling water. Tommy acted pre-emptively and beat up the man who intended to throw it on him.

It is this incident for which he was recently charged. Thanks to the efforts of a group of women who through crowd-funding raised more than enough money, Tommy was for the first time able to retain a top-notch lawyer. He was acquitted and is now a free man.

The real issue behind all these arrests is that Tommy speaks the truth about the danger to the British people posed by Islam. But he is no longer being prosecuted for “hate speech” offenses — the state does not want the substance of what he says to aired in an open courtroom and discussed in the national media. Therefore other types of infractions must be found and other charges brought. The current case against him is simply the latest example of the repressive tactics being employed by the totalitarian British state.

So here’s the plan: Lock up the most charismatic leader the British Counterjihad has. Put him in with his most dangerous enemies — Muslim criminals who have promised to kill him. Make sure that the guards are absent or looking the other way when the trouble starts. Then, as far as the sharia-compliant British state is concerned, the problem has been solved.

The UK, like all the other enlightened governments of Western Europe, has abolished the death penalty. But there’s more than one way to kill a political nuisance — you don’t have to march him up the steps to the gibbet, put the noose around his neck, and open the trapdoor under him.

What is happening to Tommy Robinson is capital punishment by alternative means.

Read more

First Christian Lashed for Violating Islamic Law in Indonesia

0032db7a00000258-2923527-image-a-55_1422024528536

Frontpage, by Daniel Greenfield, April 22, 2016:

How long until it’s the first Christian lashed for violating Islamic law in Malmo or Dearborn?

For her crime, violating the tenets of a faith she does not observe, the courts offered two punishments.

Option one: time in a grim jailhouse. Option two: nearly 30 lashes with a cane wielded by a anonymous man, hooded and clad in black robes, as her neighbors watched.

She chose the latter.

Such was the fate of Remita Sinaga, 60, a rare Christian living in Aceh, one of the most stridently Islamic corners of Asia.

Each blow is dealt by an official, robed in dark cloth from head to toe, who humiliates the accused on a public stage. Crowds are invited to jeer and film beatings with their mobile phones.

Sinaga, however, simply bowed her head. Clad in a lavender-colored hood, she stared at her feet as the flogger landed 28 blows on her back.

This is Islam. This is Islamic law. Beneath all the lies and spin, it’s this simple. And it’s spreading. Just as it spread to Indonesia, it can spread to Europe and America.

But I’m sure if the mainstream media gets around to covering this in any depth or range, the angle will be “Indonesia Muslims Fear Backlash”.

A 1979 Time Magazine Article about Islam


By Ileana Johnson, APRIL 21, 2016:

Thirty-seven years ago, Time magazine dedicated its cover to “Islam, The Militant Revival,” and published a lengthy article, “The World of Islam,” in which John A. Meyer wrote, “We want to examine Islam’s resurgence, not simply as another faith but as a political force and potent third ideology competing with Marxism and Western culture in the world today.” It was April 16, 1979.

The editor, Marguerite Johnson, penned the cover story because “the Iranian revolution has made it especially important for Westerners to understand the driving energy and devotion Islam commands from so many.”

Senior editor John Elson indicated that “Islam has been frequently misunderstood, partly because so many people have tried to apply terms from Christianity and Judaism to it.” In writing this article, the editors have attempted to draw a picture of Islam for what it really is, “a way of ordering society.”

According to Time magazine, there were 750 million Muslims and 985 million Christians in 1979, a large group ready to assert the “political power of the Islamic way of life.” The people of Iran apparently voted overwhelmingly to create an Islamic republic, the nation’s first “government of God,” as Ayatullah Khomeini declared.

This theocratic and freedom-stifling government replaced, after one year of revolution, “a dynastic autocrat who dreamed of turning his country into a Western-style industrial and secular state.” Changing a westernized society into a government by religious mullahs was described as “a new dawn for the Islamic people.”

Time magazine quoted the Cairo’s magazine Al Da’wah (The Call): “The Muslims are coming, despite Jewish cunning, Christian hatred, and the Communist storm.”

And it came to pass – the Muslims are really coming, by the millions, invading Europe and America, welcomed with open arms by a senescent and suicidal Europe ruled by technocrat elitists who are only interested in failed multi-culturalism, their power, control of the emerging tower of Babel, and their bank accounts.

Time magazine described the revival of Islam in the 70 countries around the world, reflected in the hajj, the pilgrimage to Mecca, unchanged for 14 centuries; this alleged revival took place among the young who desired sharia law, burkas, hijab and other forms of enslaving women to their half-person status, genital mutilation, and harsh punishments in cases of rape, divorce, adultery, and abortion.

Time magazine assumed that this alleged revival had taken place for decades because “Islam is no Friday-go-to-mosque kind of religion. It is a code of honor, a system of law and an all-encompassing way of life.”

This resurgence was inspired and fueled by a “quest for stability and roots,” a deep-seated hatred for Western values, and “the population explosion in those Islamic nations where birth control is little practiced.”

Marvin Zonis is quoted that “Islam is being used as a vehicle for striking back at the West, in the sense of people trying to reclaim a very greatly damaged sense of self-esteem. They feel that for the past 150 years the West has totally overpowered them culturally, and in the process their own institutions and way of life have become second rate.”

“Islam is a political faith with a yearning for expansion,” said Marguerite Johnson. And the history of its expansionist desires is quite telling, an expansionism that necessitated the Christian Crusades in order to regain territories occupied by Islam.

Arabs raided and conquered many lands and their traders carried Islam with them; the Persian Empire, the Byzantine Empire, North Africa into Spain, the Middle East, Malaysia, Indonesia, Singapore, the Philippines, the black tribes in Africa south of the Sahara Desert, were all forced into submission and conversion to Islam. Time magazine added that, “On the Indian subcontinent, in Southeast Asia, in Africa and the Pacific, millions of Muslims were under colonial rule.”

Time magazine remarked that “Islam is frequently stereotyped as unmitigatedly harsh in its code of law, intolerant of other religions, repressive toward women and incompatible with progress.” No mention is made of the Koranic quotes which advise their faithful to kill the infidels.

Salem Azzam, then Saudi secretary-general of the Islamic Council of Europe, was quoted as saying that seeing this Islamic resurgence in a negative light is nothing but a “return to colonialism – indirect but of a more profound type.”

Other Muslims and their defenders claimed that “Islam is not monolithic, that it is compatible with various social and economic systems, and that far from being a return to the Dark Ages, it is wholly consonant with progress.” The reality is that the Taliban had oppressed and regressed a thriving Afghan society.

The “war refugees” from Syria, who have invaded welfare-generous European countries and are raping and pillaging the host societies, have gravely affected the very tolerant and multi-cultural nations who foolishly invited them in with open arms.

Devout Muslims are described in this article as opposed to the “materialism of the West and the atheism of Communism.” But they welcome “individual initiative, respect private property, and tolerate profits.” But moderation and “communal responsibility” are most important. Usury is forbidden but interest is allowed if used for the “common good.” Community and the common good are communist tenets.  A zakat of 2.5%, levied against individual assets, was allowed for the benefit of the community.

A devout Muslim objects to the evils associated with modern life but enjoys everything free that the west must provide, such as welfare, housing, TVs, cell phones, cable, cars, electricity, A/C, etc. The Time article stated that Islam objects to “liquor factories,” to the “breakdown of the family structure, the lowering of moral standards, [and] the appeal of easygoing secular life-styles.” But Muslims “are demanding the best of the West: schools, hospitals, technology, agricultural and water development techniques.”

Devout Muslims, no matter where they live, are required to abide by Sharia Law, “the path to follow.” The consensus of Islamic scholars in charge and the deeds and sayings of Muhammad become an “all embracing code of ethics, morality and religious duties.” It is thus a complete control of one’s life.

Once entrenched in the western civilization, Muslims start chiseling at its foundation in an effort to turn it into Sharia-compliance; everything that made western schools, hospitals, agriculture, military, and technology great in the first place, will be replaced with what is approved by the Islamic theocracy.

No matter how the media spins Islam then and now, Sharia Law and our U.S. Constitution are not compatible. Moral relativism and tolerance to the point of ignorance will result in national suicide.

The Citadel considers first-ever uniform exception: allowing a Muslim hijab

citadel2

Washington Post, by  April 14, 2016:

The Citadel is considering a request from an admitted student that she be allowed to wear a hijab in keeping with her Muslim faith, a move that would be an unprecedented exception to the school’s longstanding uniform requirements.

If the request for the traditional Muslim hair covering is granted, it apparently would be the first exception made to the Citadel’s uniform, which all cadets at the storied public military college in South Carolina are required to wear at nearly all times. (At beaches, for example, college rules stipulate that, “Cadets will change into appropriate swimwear upon arrival and change back into uniform when departing.”) A spokeswoman said that to her knowledge, in its nearly 175-year history, the school has never granted a religious, or other, accommodation that resulted in a change to the uniform.

As word spread on social media, students, alumni and others responded strongly to the idea of an exception being made at an institution where uniformity, discipline and adherence to rules are defining values, where loyalty to the corps is paramount and individual preferences are trivial.

That the first exception might be for a Muslim student was an additional provocation for some — and welcome symbolism for others —  in the midst of a national discussion about Islam in U.S. culture.

Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump has called for strict limits on Muslims entering the U.S. because he considers the religion one of hatred and violence, while President Obama has said the fight against extremist terrorism is not a fight against one of the world’s largest religious faiths.

Nick Pinelli, a cadet working in marketing and DJing who is expecting to graduate in May, wrote a long post about the issue on Facebook Wednesday with his objections, including:

The Citadel should be able to tell the prospective student to wear what they tell her to wear. Not because they are concerned with the religion she is trying to practice or the speech expressed by doing so, but because they are concerned with the execution of an essential part of the system the Citadel puts in place. Agree or not with the system, this institution has that system for a reason (that most maintain has worked exceptionally for almost 200 years) and the disruption of that system by exempting those who don’t wish to conform is legally pronounced a slippery slope that will lead to the further disintegration of said system. Unfortunately, after seeing what has happened in the military in similar cases, the school is being financially responsible in not fighting it.

He pointed out that he doesn’t speak for the Citadel (which he doesn’t blame for considering the request) or for the Trump campaign, for which he is an intern, and wrote:

If I valued liberal ideology, I would go to UC Berkeley. I’d wear, say, and do whatever I wanted and it wouldn’t cost the university any time or money for me to do so. If I valued conservative ideology and wanted to challenge myself in a military environment, I would go to the Citadel. It’s no secret that you can’t wear what you want when you’re at the Citadel. You’re punished even for wearing what you want when you’re not on campus. But, those who come here are signing up for that, no matter how much they hate it (we do). So it’s not unfair to those people who want to join an organization with the intentions of excluding themselves from the regulations, it’s unfair to those who practice within the realms of those regulations. It’s unfair to the school having to change rules and adjust to the individual, when the individual could’ve gone to USC without incident. Your expression of self shouldn’t place a burden of cost on others.

This girl should be welcomed to the Corps with open arms, as should any person of any religion, race, gender, or identity. That’s equality. It’s not equality to let one of those groups follow a different set of rules

Pinelli wrote about a cadet whom he admires, a young man with cerebal palsy. “As you can imagine, one with such a physical condition would face challenges meeting the standard for physical fitness. Instead of showing up seeking a different set of rules, he jumped right into a challenge that was a perpetually uphill battle. Instead of saying he shouldn’t have to pass the PT test because of his disability, he failed it time and again and suffered the ramifications of holding himself to the same standard as the rest of the Corps.” He did not give up, and ultimately passed the test.

Pinelli wrote that another cadet had called him a bigot for objecting to the idea of an accommodation for a Muslim student. But it was not her religion but her “sense of entitlement” in asking for the accommodation that bothered him, he wrote.

Someone wrote in response to his post that if the rules were not changed, “she would either have to break the rules of the Citadel or the rules of her religion.” Another wrote, “… I  hope the best for this young lady. … I applaud our school and administration.”

But many voiced strong opposition to the idea of altering the college’s traditions. One cadet responded:

It doesn’t bring harm to the school. But it is a blatant disrespect to what a military school stands for. We come here and willingly give up our individuality and become a part of a group that upholds the time honored traditions of this school. So for anyone to come, not even walk through our hallowed gates, and force the school to go to extreme lengths both financially and resourcefully, to accommodate one person, isn’t right. I can’t wear a tshirt around campus that says “I love Jesus”. Why? It’s not because of religious intolerance, it’s because it does not meet uniform requirements that all 2400 of us are held to. Am I offended that I can’t wear a religious tshirt? Nope. Why? Because I accepted the system that I have become a part of, and I’m willing to let it change me and join a long line of men and women who I will be honored to call my brothers and sisters.

The college, founded in 1842, has won praise for its academics as well as the leadership skills taught to its 2,300 or so undergraduates, about 170 of whom are women (the school began admitting women in 1996). The college has several Muslim students enrolled now, a spokeswoman said.

Sweden and the Consequences of Emigration to Spread Islam

2713762293Center For Security Policy, April  14, 2016:

On Secure Freedom Radio yesterday, Frank Gaffney spoke with Ingrid Carlqvist about what’s happening in Sweden with regard to the dramatic rise in the country’s Muslim refugee population. Carlqvist is a senior fellow at the Gatestone Institute and the Editor-in-Chief of Dispatch International.

Gaffney brought up the subject of Hijra, which is the idea of spreading Islam through emigration.

Carlqvist describes a situation where Sweden has been overrun with refugees who falsely claim to be escaping war and lie about their age in order to exploit greater benefits.

“The problem in Sweden is that nobody talks about Hijra, nobody knows about it, I try to make it known but the politicians, the leftists, the journalists, they’re all covering this migration wave, this Hijra as it were, you know, poor people fleeing from bombs and wars and they’re fleeing for their lives. Even though we all know that not even a majority of the persons that come here, they’re not even from Syria, they’re not coming from the war, they’re just economic migrants. So it is Hijra but no one is talking about it in Sweden, except me.”

Carlqvist notes that while Sweden has been largely exempt from terror attacks, they have been subjected to a form of “rape Jihad” at the hands of the refugee community.

“This has been manifesting itself in the last half a year or so in the public swimming pools. We had a lot of these so-called unaccompanied refugee children… They come and they claim to be 16 or 17 because then you will have more money, you will be fast tacked through the asylum process… Some of them are 30 or 35 and they claim to be 17. If they say to the authorities that their parents have been killed, they can go to the pension authority in Sweden and get a pension… But we have seen these so-called Afghan children running rampant at the public swimming pools. A lot of women or girls have been groped at, they have been harassed, they have even been raped in the public swimming pools.”

Gaffney notes that boys have also been the victims of sexual assault in these situations. Carlqvist agreed and said that many Swedes have simply stopped going to the public swimming pools as a result.

Gaffney and Carlqvist then discussed the fact that the vast majority of migrants are in fact military-aged men and that the disproportionate number of males has created an environment which is threatening to Swedish women.

The situation has gotten so bad that some Swedish men have taken action in the form of vigilantism in a group called Soldiers of Odin. Gaffney and Carlqvist agreed that vigilante groups aren’t a good thing but Carlqvist explained the thinking behind it:

“They are in very many cities right now and they try to protect women but the mainstream media portray them as Nazis, and the police are very afraid of these vigilante groups, but I think, I don’t like a society where it has vigilante groups but when the police can’t protect women out in the street, what can you do?”

Carlqvist also suggests that an industry has grown out of creating asylum houses for migrants. Apartment buildings and inns, even in the countryside, have been converted to refugee housing because the landlords receive economic benefits from the government to do so.

This has in turn, led to creation of exclusion zones, entire areas where local fire departments can’t enter without a police escort for fear of violence .

Proponents of Sweden’s migration policy may believe they’re doing humanitarian work in the name of diversity.

Others would call it the suicide of a nation.

***

INGRID CARLQVIST, Distinguished Senior Fellow at the Gatestone Institute, Editor-in-Chief of Dispatch International: Podcast: Play in new window | Download

  • Hijrah to Sweden
  • Sexual assaults perpetrated by migrants

(PART TWO): Podcast  Play in new window | Download

  • Majority of migrants to the European Union are military-aged men
  • Migrant-related crime causing Swedish citizens to commit vigilante-style action
  • Expropriation of privately owned homes to house refugees

(PART THREE): Podcast  Play in new window | Download

  • “Exclusions zones” in Sweden
  • Freedom of speech limitations for those criticizing Islamization of Sweden
  • The political response to the migrant crisis

(PART FOUR): Podcast  Play in new window | Download

  • Will the Swedish government deport Syrian refugees?
  • Muslim Brotherhood infrastructure in Western societies

(PART FIVE): Podcast  Play in new window | Download

  • concerning migrant repatriation
  • Visa-free access to Europe for Turkish citizens?
  • Obama’s inability to combat Shariah

The West’s War on Jihad Begins at Home

EDL-protestor-holds-a-banne-009American Thinker, by Raymond Ibrahim, April 1, 2016:

As someone specializing in Islamic jihadism, one would expect I’d have much to say immediately after jihadi attacks of the sort that recently occurred in Brussels (35 killed), or San Bernardino (14 killed), or Paris (130). Ironically, I don’t: such attacks are ultimately symptoms of what I do deem worthy of discussion, namely, root causes. (What can one add when a symptom of the root cause he has long warned against occurs other than “told you so”?)

So what is the root cause of jihadi attacks? Many think that the ultimate source of the ongoing terrorization of the West is Islam. Yet this notion has one problem: the Muslim world is immensely weak and intrinsically incapable of being a threat. That every Islamic assault on the West is a terrorist attack — and terrorism, as is known, is the weapon of the weak — speaks for itself.

This was not always the case. For approximately one thousand years, the Islamic world was the scourge of the West. Today’s history books may refer to those who terrorized Christian Europe as Arabs, Saracens, Moors, Ottomans, Turks, Mongols, or Tatars — but all were operating under the same banner of jihad that the Islamic State is operating under.

No — today, the ultimate enemy is within. The root cause behind nonstop Muslim terrorization of the West is found in those who stifle or whitewash all talk and examination of Muslim doctrine and history; who welcome hundreds of thousands of Muslim migrants while knowing that some are jihadi operatives and many are simply “radical”; who work to overthrow secular Arab dictators in the name of “democracy” and “freedom,” only to uncork the jihad suppressed by the autocrats (the Islamic State’s territory consists of lands that were “liberated” in Iraq, Libya, and Syria by the U.S. and its allies).

So are Western leaders and politicians the root cause behind Islamic terrorization of the West?

Close — but still not there yet.

Far from being limited to a number of elitist leaders and institutions, the Western empowerment of the jihad is the natural outcome of postmodern thinking — the real reason an innately weak Islam can be a source of repeated woes for a militarily and economically superior West.

Remember, the reason people like French President Francois Hollande, U.S. President Barack Hussein Obama, and German Chancellor Angela Merkel are in power — three prominent Western leaders who insist that Islam is innocent of violence and who push for Muslim immigration — is because they embody a worldview that is normative in the West.

In this context, the facilitation of jihadi terror is less a top down imposition and more a grass root product of decades of erroneous, but unquestioned, thinking. (Those who believe America’s problems begin and end with Obama would do well to remember that he did not come to power through a coup but that he was voted in — twice. This indicates that Obama and the majority of voting Americans have a shared, and erroneous, worldview. He may be cynically exploiting this worldview, but that doesn’t change the fact that it’s because this warped worldview is mainstream that he can exploit it in the first place.)

Western empowerment of the jihad is rooted in a number of philosophies that have metastasized into every corner of social life, becoming cornerstones of postmodern epistemology. These include the doctrines of relativism and multiculturalism on the one hand, and anti-Western, anti-Christian sentiment on the other.

Taken together, these cornerstones of postmodern, post-Christian thinking hold that there are no absolute truths and thus all cultures are fundamentally equal and deserving of respect. If any Western person wants to criticize a civilization or religion, then let them look “inwardly” and acknowledge their European Christian heritage as the epitome of intolerance and imperialism.

Add to these a number of sappy and silly ideals — truth can never be uttered because it might “hurt the feelings” of some (excluding white Christians, who are fair game), and, far from suspecting them, the West should go out of its way to appease Muslims until they “like us” — and you have a sure recipe for disaster, that is, the current state of affairs.

Western people are bombarded with these aforementioned “truths” from the cradle to the grave — from kindergarten to university, from Hollywood to the news rooms, and now even in churches — so that they are unable to accept and act on a simple truism that their ancestors well knew: Islam is an inherently violent and intolerant creed that cannot coexist with non-Islam (except insincerely, in times of weakness).

The essence of all this came out clearly when Obama, in order to rationalize away the inhuman atrocities of the Islamic State, counseled Americans to get off their “high horse” and remember that their Christian ancestors have been guilty of similar if not worse atrocities. That he had to go back almost a thousand years for examples by referencing the crusades and the Inquisition — both of which have been completely distorted by the warped postmodern worldview, including the portrayal of imperialist Muslims as victims — did not matter to America’s leader.

Worse, it did not matter to most Americans. The greater lesson was not that Obama whitewashed modern Islamic atrocities by misrepresenting and demonizing Christian history, but that he was merely reaffirming the mainstream narrative that Americans have been indoctrinated into believing. And thus, apart from the usual ephemeral and meaningless grumblings, his words — as with many of his pro-Islamic, anti-Christian comments and policies — passed along without consequence.

Once upon a time, the Islamic world was a superpower and its jihad an irresistible force to be reckoned with. Over two centuries ago, however, a rising Europe — which had experienced over one millennium of jihadi conquests and atrocities — defeated and defanged Islam.

As Islam retreated into obscurity, the post-Christian West slowly came into being. Islam didn’t change, but the West did: Muslims still venerate their heritage and religion — which impels them to jihad against the Western “infidel” — whereas the West learned to despise its heritage and religion, causing it to become an unwitting ally of the jihad.

Hence the current situation: the jihad is back in full vigor, while the West — not just its leaders, but much of the populace — facilitates it in varying degrees. Nor is this situation easily remedied. For to accept that Islam is inherently violent and intolerant is to reject a number of cornerstones of postmodern Western thinking that far transcend the question of Islam. In this context, nothing short of an intellectual/cultural revolution — where rational thinking becomes mainstream — will allow the West to confront Islam head on.

But there is some good news. With every Islamic attack, the eyes of more and more Western people are opened to the true nature of Muhammad’s religion. That this is happening despite generations of pro-Islamic indoctrination in the West is a testimony to the growing brazenness of the jihad.

oo

Yet it still remains unclear whether objective thinking will eventually overthrow the current narrative of relativism, anti-Christianism, and asinine emotionalism.

Simply put, both celebrating multiculturalism and defeating the jihad is impossible.

However, if such a revolution takes place (sooner rather than later), the Islamic jihad will be easily swept back into the dustbin of history. For the fact remains: Islam is terrorizing the world, not because it can, but because the West allows it to.

25% of French Teenagers now Muslims

unnamed (10)

By Counter Jihad, March 15, 2016:

There is a general danger to mass immigration and a danger specific to Islamic immigration.  France is facing destruction because it has chosen to combine the two.

In terms of Islamic immigration, the danger is that it comes with a mandate to change the civilization to which it moves.  Mohammed said to his followers, ““I charge you with five of what Allah has charged me with: to assemble, to listen, to obey, to immigrate and to wage Jihad for the sake of Allah.”  In this they are emulating Muhammad himself.  He left his home town of Mecca in a migration known as the hijra. He did so with intent of establishing a base of operations from which to return and conquer.

Figures across the Islamic world proclaim their intent to conquer through the process of Muslim migration.  These include Yousef al-Qaradawi, the senior jurist of the Muslim Brotherhood, and Anjem Choudary, the outspoken jihadist imam in the U.K.  The danger of Islamic immigration is most evident in Western Europe.   The results of misguided “multicultural” experiments, lax immigration policies and indifference to assimilation are sharia and clashes with police.

In terms of mass immigration, the danger is that civilizations depend on their members upholding the values of the community.  Even in terms of mass immigration from Latin America to the United States, where mass immigration is from Christian nations to a majority-Christian nation, the challenge to the values of the civilization is intense.  The United States of America was founded on a particular view of human liberty protected in part by strict Constitutional limits on the powers of government.  Latin American immigrants come from cultures favoring much stronger government models, even socialist models, that are not compatible with the United States Constitution.  As mass immigration empowers this community with more and more votes, it becomes more and more likely that the traditional civilization will wither away.  Such voters elect Congressmen who anoint judges who rewrite the Constitution in court to make way for socialism.

Now put the two together, and consider a rapidly-growing mass immigrant population of Muslims:

Over two decades, the French Muslim population is thus supposed to have increased by 25% according to the lowest estimations, by 50% according to median estimations, or even by 100% if one compares the INED and government figures of 1997 to those of 2014, from 3 million to almost 6 million.

This is respectively almost two times, three times, or six times the French average population growth.

France stands on the edge of destruction by such immigration.  The France of the future, should this not change, will not be the land of liberty, equality, and fraternity.  It will be a land harboring an unassimilated Islamic majority.

Also see:

France: Jihad Infecting Army, Police

Gatestone Institute, by Yves Mamou, March 16, 2016:

  • Some police officers have openly refused to protect synagogues or to observe a minute of silence to commemorate the deaths of victims of terrorist attacks.
  • That police officers are armed and have access to police databases only intensifies anxiety.
  • In July 2015, four men, one of whom is a Navy veteran, were called in for questioning. They had planned to penetrate a Navy base in the south of France, seize a high-ranking officer, decapitate him, and then spread photos of the decapitation on social media networks.

According to a confidential memo, dated January 2015, from the anti-terrorist unit of the French interior ministry, France is already host to 8,250 radical Islamists (a 50% increase in one year).

Some of these Islamists have gone to Syria to join the Islamic State (IS); others have infiltrated all levels of society, starting with the police and the armed forces.

A leaked confidential memo from the Department of Public Security, published by Le Parisien,details 17 cases of police officers radicalized between 2012 and 2015. Particularly noted were the police officers who listen to and broadcast Muslim chants while on patrol.

Some of these police officers have openly refused to protect synagogues or to observe a minute of silence to commemorate the deaths of victims of terrorist attacks.

In addition, the police were alerted to a policewoman who incited terrorism on Facebook, and called her police uniform a “filthy rag of the Republic” while wiping her hands on it. In January 2015, immediately after the attacks on Charlie Hebdo and the Hypercacher kosher supermarket in Vincennes, which had left 17 people dead, she wrote on her Facebook page: “Masked attack led by Zionist cowards… They need to be killed.”

That police officers are armed and have access to police databases only intensifies anxiety.

Although police headquarters in Paris claims that these cases are rare, they have decided to review on a weekly basis any behavior that oversteps the principle of separation of church and state, such as that of Muslim officers who appear to be leaning toward radicalization. Patrice Latron, who manages the office of the Paris police prefect, told Le Parisien that these phenomena are “very marginal.”

The police are not the only ones who are anxious; the French military is concerned as well. There are no statistics for the number of Muslim soldiers in the French armed forces, but it is commonly thought that there are many, and that they are vulnerable to Islamist influences, given that France in engaged militarily in Africa, against Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) and against the Islamic State in the Middle East. Since the Charlie Hebdo attack in January 2015, however, France’s largest military operation has been on national soil: 10,000 armed soldiers are now deployed in France to protect synagogues, Jewish schools, train and subway stations, and also some mosques — to show Muslims that the French Republic does not see them as enemies. Their mission is no longer to be simply a complementary force but, as Le Figaro explained, to “deploy, on a permanent basis, interior military operations.”

As early as 2013, during the fifth national security parliamentary conference, Colonel Pascal Rolez, adjunct to the assistant director of the counter-intervention unit of the Defense Security Protection Department (DPSD), declared, “We are witnessing an increase in radicalization among the French military, notably since the Merah affair.” Recall that Mohammed Merah, a young French Muslim, murdered three French soldiers in Toulouse and Montauban, as well as murdering four French Jews at a school in Toulouse.

In 2012, Mohammed Merah, a French Muslim, murdered three French soldiers, as well as four French Jews at a school. Today, with many cases of French Muslim soldiers and police becoming radicalized, the security services worry about the risk of “having agents of security forces attack their colleagues.”

In order to identify members of the armed forces who are being radicalized, the DPSD takes into account changes in dress, recurrent sick leave, travel, or theft of supplies or materiel.

Since the January 2015 attacks on Charlie Hebdo and the kosher supermarket in Paris, the media have noted several indications of radicalization in the French army.

On January 21, 2015, the radio station RFI announced that about 10 French soldiers deserted and joined the Jihadist fight in Syria and Iraq. Jean-Yves Le Drian, Defense Minister, has confirmed this, although with the caveat that these are “extremely rare” cases. Apparently, one of these veterans holds the position of “emir” in Deir Ezzor in Syria, and leads a group of around 10 French combatants whom he has personally trained. The other French deserters are explosives experts or paratroopers; some come from commando units in the French Foreign Legion.

Also in January 2015, after the Paris attacks, police discovered that “Emmanuelle C,” a 35-year-old female gendarmerie (paramilitary national police) adjunct, had converted to Islam in 2011, and had a relationship with Amar Ramdani, who was wanted for weapons and drug trafficking. Ramdani is a confederate of Amedy Coulibaly, who perpetrated the murderous Montrouge and Hypercacher attacks in Paris. Ramdani had been observed by the police department’s intelligence division (DRPP) in the “public” area of the fort in Rosny-Sous-Bois (Seine-Saint-Denis). This fort houses the gendarmerie’s scientific branch. As for Emmanuelle C, she was accused of having committed more than 60 security breaches of the suspect persons’ file (FPR). She was sentenced to one year of probation and expelled from the gendarmerie.

In July 2015, the press revealed that approximately 180 detonators and 10 bricks of plastic explosives had been stolen from an army depot near Marseille. The investigators naturally suspected internal complicity, as the perpetrators had seemed to be well informed. They are following two possibilities, Islamic terrorism or grand theft; the investigation continues.

On July 16, 2015, President François Hollande revealed that an attack on a French military base had been foiled. Three days earlier, four men, one of whom was a Navy veteran, were arrested. They confessed that they had planned to infiltrate a Navy base in the south of France, seize a high-ranking officer, decapitate him and spread photos of the decapitation on social media.

On March 6, 2016, a “radicalized” military veteran, Manuel Broustail, was arrested while getting off a plane in Morocco. According to the French newspaper, Presse Ocean, Broustail was carrying in his suitcase a machete, four kitchen knives, two pocket knives, a retractable baton, a black hood, and a gas canister. A French military veteran and convert to Islam, Broustail had previously been placed under long-term house arrest in Angers (Maine-et-Loire), days after the horrific attacks in Paris, in which 130 people were murdered. Discharged from the army in 2014, he had been under surveillance by French security agencies. The media seem concerned that such a person, carrying such weapons, could walk through airport security controls, board a plane and leave the country.

According to Thibaut de Montbrial, a terrorism specialist and president of the Center for Internal Security Studies, the risk is,

“having agents of security forces attack their colleagues. Someone in uniform attacks another person, wearing the same uniform. In France, such a scenario is not impossible. Security forces must keep this risk in mind.”

Yves Mamou, based in France, worked for two decades as a journalist for Le Monde.

Sharia Law or One Law for All?

Qaradawi and al-AlwaniGatestone Institute, by Denis MacEoin, March 12, 2016:

  • Here is the fulcrum around which so much of the problem turns: the belief that Islamic law has every right to be put into practice in non-Muslim countries, and the insistence that a parallel, if unequal, legal system can function alongside civil and criminal law codes adhered to by a majority of a country’s citizens.
  • Salafism is a form of Islam that insists on the application of whatever was said or done by Muhammad or his companions, brooking no adaptation to changing times, no recognition of democracy or man-made laws.
  • The greatest expression of this failure to integrate, indeed a determined refusal to do so, may be found in the roughly 750 Muslim-dominated no-go zones in France, which the police, fire brigades, and other representatives of the social order dare not visit for fear of sparking off riots and attacks. Similar zones now exist in other European countries, notably Sweden and Germany. According to the 2011 British census there are over 100 Muslim enclaves in the country.

As millions of Muslims flow into Europe, some from Syria, others from as far away as Afghanistan or sub-Saharan Africa, several countries are already experiencing high levels of social breakdown. Several articles have chronicled the challenges posed in countries such as Sweden and Germany. Such challenges are socio-economic in nature: how to accommodate such a large influx of migrants; the rising costs of providing then with housing, food, and benefits, and the expenses incurred by increased levels of policing in the face of growing lawlessness in some areas. If migrants continue to enter European Union countries at the current rate, these costs are likely to rise steeply; some countries, such as Hungary, have already seen how greatly counterproductive and self-destructive Europe’s reception of almost anyone who reaches its borders has been.

The immediate impact, however, of these new arrivals is not likely to be a simple challenge, something that may be remedied by increasing restrictions on numbers, deportations of illegal migrants, or building fences. During the past several decades, some European countries ­– notably Britain, France, Germany, Sweden, and Denmark — have received large numbers of Muslim immigrants, most of them through legal channels. According to a Pew report in 2010, there were over 44 million Muslims in Europe overall, a figure expected to rise to over 58 million by 2030.

The migration wave from Muslims countries that began in 2015 is likely to increase these figures by a large margin. In France, citizens of former French colonies in Morocco, Algeria, and some sub-Saharan states, together with migrants from several other Muslim countries in the Middle East and Asia, form a population estimated at several million, but reckoned to be the largest Muslim population in Europe. France is closely followed by Germany – a country now taking in very large numbers of immigrants. There are currently some 5.8 million Muslims in Germany, but this figure is widely expected to rise exponentially over the next five years or more.

The United Kingdom, at around 3 million, has the third largest Muslim population in Europe. Islam today is the second-largest religion in the country. The majority of British Muslims originally came from rural areas in Pakistan (such as Mirpur and Bangladesh’s Sylhet), starting in the 1950s. Over time, many British Muslims have integrated well into the wider population. But in general, integration has proven a serious problem, especially in cities such as Bradford, or parts of London such as Tower Hamlets; and there are signs that, as time passes, assimilation is becoming harder, not easier. A 2007 report by British think tank Policy Exchange, Living Apart Together, revealed that members of the younger generation were more radical and orthodox than their fathers and grandfathers – a reversal almost certainly unprecedented within an immigrant population over three or more generations. The same pattern may be found across Europe and the United States. A visible sign of this desire to stand out from mainstream society is the steady growth in the numbers of young Muslim women wearing niqabs, burqas, and hijabs – formerly merely a tradition, but now apparently seen as an obligatory assertion of Muslim identity.

In Germany, the number of Salafists rose by 25% in the first half of 2015, according to a reportfrom The Clarion Project. Salafism is a form of Islam that insists on the application of whatever was said or done by Muhammad or his companions, brooking no adaptation to changing times, no recognition of democracy or man-made laws. This refusal to adapt has been very well expressed by Iran’s Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini:

“Islam is not constrained by time or space, for it is eternal… what Muhammad permitted is permissible until the Day of Resurrection; what he forbade is forbidden until the Day of Resurrection. It is not permissible that his ordinances be superseded, or that his teachings fall into disuse, or that the punishments [he set] be abandoned, or that the taxes he levied be discontinued, or that the defense of Muslims and their lands cease.”

The greatest expression of this failure to integrate, indeed a determined refusal to do so, may be found in the roughly 750 zones urbaines sensibles in France, Muslim-dominated no-go zones, which the police, fire brigades, and other representatives of the social order dare not visit for fear of sparking off riots and attacks. Similar zones now exist in other European countries, notably Sweden and Germany.

In the UK, matters have not reached the pitch where the police and others dare not enter. But in some Muslim-dominated areas, non-Muslims may not be made welcome, especially women dressed “inappropriately.” According to the 2011 British census there are over 100 Muslim enclaves in the country. “The Muslim population exceeds 85% in some parts of Blackburn,” notes the scholar Soeren Kern, “and 70% in a half-dozen wards in Birmingham and Bradford.” There are similarly high figures for many other British cities.

Maajid Nawaz of the anti-extremist Quilliam Foundation has spoken of the growing trend for some radical young Muslims to patrol their streets to impose a strict application of Islamic sharia law on Muslims and non-Muslims alike, in direct breach of British legal standards.

In Britain “Muslims Against the Crusaders” have recently declared an Islamic Emirates Project, in which they are seeking to enforce their brand of sharia in 12 British cities. They have named two London boroughs, Waltham Forest and Tower Hamlets, among their targets. Little surprise then that in these two boroughs hooded “Muslim patrols” have taken to the streets and begun enforcing a strict view of sharia over unsuspecting locals. The “Muslim Patrols” warn that alcohol, “immodest” dress and homosexuality are now banned. To add to these threats, all this is filmed and uploaded onto the internet. Now, in East London, some shops no longer feel free to employ uncovered women or sell alcohol without fear of violent payback.

Nawaz goes on to write: “[T]he Muslim patrols could become a lot more dangerous and, perhaps willing to maim or kill if they are joined by battle-hardened jihadis.” Muslims have been beaten up for smoking during Ramadan; non-Muslims have been forced to leave for carrying alcohol on British streets.

A recent report by Raheem Kassam cites British police officers who admit that they often have to ask permission from Muslim leaders to enter certain areas, and that they are instructed not to travel to work or go into certain places wearing their uniforms.

Here is the fulcrum around which so much of the problem turns: the belief that Islamic law has every right to be put into practice in non-Muslim countries, and the insistence that a parallel, if unequal, legal system can function alongside civil and criminal law codes adhered to by a majority of a country’s citizens. More than one non-Muslim has been ordered to leave “Islamic territory,” and some radicals have attempted to set up “Shariah Controlled Zones,” where only Islamic rules are enforced. Stickers placed on lampposts and other structures declare: “You are entering a Shariah Controlled Zone,” where there can be no alcohol, no gambling, no drugs or smoking, no porn or prostitution, and even no music or concerts.

***

Matters are far from as simple as the government would like them to be. Sharia law is not a cut -and-dried system that can be easily blended with Western values and statutes. There is no problem when imams or councils hand out advice on the regulations governing obligatory prayer, fasting, pilgrimage, alms-giving, the appropriateness or inappropriateness of following this or that spiritual tradition, or even whether men and women may sit together in a hall or meet without a chaperone. For pious Muslims, those are things they need to know, and although the advice they may receive on some rulings will differ according to the school of law or the cultural practices of their specific community, that has no bearing whatever on British law.

But much more goes on beneath the surface. One problem is that it is difficult if not impossible to reform sharia. Legal rulings are fossilized within one tradition or another and given permanency because they are deemed to derive from a combination of verses from the Qur’an, the sacred Traditions, or the standard books of fiqh or jurisprudence. It is, therefore, hard to restate laws on just about anything in order to accommodate a need to bring things up-to-date within terms of modern Western human rights values. Many Muslims today may be uncomfortable about the use of jihad as a rallying cry for terrorist organizations such as the Islamic State, but no single scholar or group of scholars is entitled to abolish the long-standing law of jihad. Innovation (bid’a) is tantamount to heresy, and heresy leads to excommunication and hellfire, as has been stated for centuries. The growing influence of Salafi Islam is based precisely on the grounds that any revival of the faith means going back to the practices and words of Muhammad and his companions, not forwards via reform.

In the sharia councils there appears to be no formal method for keeping records of what is said and decided on. There is next to no room for non-Muslims to sit in on proceedings, and, as a result, neither the government nor the legal fraternity has any regular means of monitoring proceedings. Even Machteld Zee, whose forthcoming book, Choosing Sharia? Multiculturalism, Islamic Fundamentalism and British Sharia Councils, will be the first academic analysis of what happens in the councils, only spent two afternoons at a council in Leyton and an afternoon at one in Birmingham. Unannounced spot checks by qualified government-appointed personnel are not permitted. There is nothing remotely like the government schools inspection body, Ofsted, which has periodically (albeit not always correctly) gone into Muslim schools. So there is really no way of knowing just what happens, apart from the testimonies of women who have reported abusive or illegal practices.

Read more

Meet the NEW political dissidents: Europeans fighting against “the million Muslim march”

Ezra Levant show

The Rebel, by Ezra Levant, Mach 8, 2016:

Over the past week, we’ve shown you the massive wave of Muslim migration that’s changing Europe. Tonight, political dissidents fighting back: in Parliaments, in the media and even in synagogues and churches.

Let’s start with Danish psychologist Nicolai Sennels, who has had over a hundred Muslim patients. He explains that a deadly mixture of honour and shame is at the heart of radical Islam.

We’ll introduce you to Aia Fog of the Free Press Society in Copenhagen. That’s also where we also spoke with Tania Groth, who is setting up a pro-Danish, pro-freedom NGO called PEGIDA.

What irony that PEGIDA has been described as fascist by its opponents. I’ve never seen a group more concerned about being peaceful — Tania literally kicked someone out of a march once for giving the finger to screaming leftist protesters. It’s radical Islam, and its theocracy, that’s fascist. But funny enough, hard-left-wing anti-fascists in Europe have sided with radical Islam.

We talked with Danish journalism Mikael Jalving, who works at the Jyllands Posten, the newspaper that published the “Mohammed cartoons” in 2005. He tells me what that’s like today — are they safe? Are they afraid of being the next Charlie Hebdo massacre target?

Jalving is lucky enough to still have a job in journalism. Popular blogger Peter Jensen was drummed out of a job, and even out of Norway, for daring to stand up forcefully to political Islam.

We also talked with journalist turned activist Ingrid Calrqvist who was also our interpreter in Malmo, Sweden.

Ingrid pulled together a dinner for us in Copenhagen, where many of these people came to meet us. I felt like it was an underground meeting. In that room were half the anti-Islamization activists in Copenhagen.

But it also felt underground in that no-one there had real power — those with power, the power to do things, were frozen with indecision, or more accurately, frozen in fear of being called political incorrect, or the ultimate four-letter word in Scandinavia, being called racist.

Then we flew next to Stockholm, Sweden. Our guide was Jan Sjunnesson. He led the perfect liberal Swedish life — he married a woman from India; he taught at university. But when he started speaking out against the ideological threat posed by political Islam, he was let go from the university…

There are seeds of hope, politically, in Europe. I think the European Union is going to break up, for one thing.

Is it too late, though? It’s not too late for us here in Canada and the United States. But what can you do in a place like Sweden, that has major cities that are now nearly 50% Muslim?

We asked a Swedish parliamentarian, Kent Ekeroth. His opposition party, the Swedish Democrats, has as its central campaign platform restricting immigration.

He’s a smart guy. I think his party will form government one day. But will it be too late?

Go see the Eiffel Tower now, before it gets the World Trade Center treatment. Go see the great cathedrals of Cologne, Germany, and Notre Dame in Paris, go see them now while they’re churches. They’ll be mosques, like the Hagia Sophia became, soon enough.

Also see:

WATCH: Geert Wilders speaks in Brussels: Threats to his life, resisting Islam and the establishment

Geert_Wilders_image

The Rebel, by Victor Laszlow, March 06, 2016:

On Friday March 4, 2016 Geert Wilders spoke at an event in Brussels at the invitation of Vlaams Belang (Flemish Interest, i.e. the Flemish separatist party)

Geert Wilders is one of the few politicians brave enough to speak clear and obvious truths about what is happening to Europe and lead a fight-back against it. This is one of the best speeches he has given to date in which he discusses the current round of criminal prosecutions against him, and compare the charges against him to what other politicians say about him, for which they never seem to be arrested, despite the implicit death threats they sometimes contain.

German Elections Post Huge Right-Wing Gains

German Beerby CounterJihad, March 7, 2016:

In what is becoming a familiar headline, recent elections in central Germany led to a surprisingly strong performance by hard right wing political parties.  Both of Germany’s major political parties lost substantial support compared with previous elections, while parties opposing mass immigration rose sharply.  One such party, the Alternative for Germany party, is now the third largest in this German region.

Commentators on the election were stunned by the shift because it happened in and around Frankfurt, a major economic center deeply tied to international trade and finance.  Up until now, these right-wing parties have been in favor mostly in economically poorer regions, or more disconnected rural regions, especially in East Germany.  The shift in Frankfurt proves that the concerns about Germany’s acceptance of mass immigration are becoming mainstream among German voters.

Though the major parties and their allies attempt to paint these concerns as merely fear-driven, in fact there is a rational core to the concerns about the threat posed to German civilization by the wave of immigration.  Especially Islamic immigrants in Germany have not assimilated in recent generations, but have used their status as residents to import wives from the third world, especially Turkey.  That means that German culture is not receiving an infusion of immigrant blood or culture, as the Pope seems to believe it will, but is instead being supplanted by an alien culture.

Pope Francis’ remarks that the current wave represents “an Arab invasion” are bracketed by remarks that this invasion will be a good thing for Germany.  When Pope Francis says that Europe will “find itself enhanced by the exchange among cultures,” he is missing the fact that the “exchange” is mostly proving to be an exchange of one culture for the other.  That would be a legitimate concern for German voters under any circumstances, as the purpose of a nation includes the protection of a community of values and an agreed-upon way of life.  Just as it makes sense for the French to want a France that honors French culture and cuisine and values, or for the Irish to want an Ireland that honors Irish culture and cuisine and values, so it makes sense for any nation to treat its culture as a treasure to be added to rather than washed away.  While it is possible for immigrants who assimilate to add to the treasure-store, as the Irish and German immigrants to America enriched American culture while becoming Americans themselves, that requires the immigrants to take assimilation seriously.

In this case, the Islamic cultures in Turkey and Syria clash even with each other, let alone with German culture.  To import two such cultures is to import the civil war these factions are waging in the Middle East.  To import two such cultures that refuse to assimilate is to make that civil war a permanent feature of German society for future generations, while throwing away the German culture that the nation ought to defend.

As long as that rational concern is treated as mere prejudice and bigotry by the major parties, parties that take the concerns seriously will profit.  That is true in Germany as elsewhere.