''ESTONIA'' (15) "Hindenburg" (2) “Yom Kippur” War (1) 2017 Westminster attack (1) 20th_Century (3) 7/7 London bombings (38) 911 (389) A.H.M. RAMSAY (2) Abu Ghraib (1) ADL (1) ADOLF_HITLER (22) ADVENTURE (1) Affirmative Action (1) Afghanistan (7) AFRICA (45) Agriculture (3) AIDS (23) Al Azhar University (1) Alain de Benoist (15) Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn (22) AMAZONIA (3) America (4) American Islamization (15) American Universities (1) American_Indian (1) ANCIENT_CIVILISATIONS (2) Animal_Rights (6) ANTEDILUVIAN_CIVILISATION (15) Anthony Blunt (1) Anthony Ludovici (3) Anti-Semitism (1) Antifa (1) AR. LEESE (4) ARCHAEOLOGY (3) Argentina (1) Armenia (4) Armenian Genocide (1) Art (15) Arthur Koestler (1) Astronomy (30) AUSTRALIA (1) AUSTRIA (1) Ayaan Hirsi Ali (3) BALI (1) Balkans (4) Bangladesh (1) banned_weapons (1) BELGIUM (2) Benjamin Freedman (1) BENJAMIN SOLARI PARRAVICINI (11) Beslan (1) Bill Clinton (1) Biological Warfare (2) BLOOD PASSOVER (12) BOLSHEVIK REVOLUTION (14) Book purge (1) Brigitte Gabriel (1) British politics (1) Buddhism (5) California (1) Cambodia (8) CANADA (7) CANCER (40) Carolina bays (1) Celebrities-Show Business (3) Cell Phone towers (6) Censorship in Europe (6) CENTRAL_ASIA (1) Central/South America (1) Ch. Bollyn (30) Charles Tart (8) Charlie Hebdo (1) Che Guevara (2) CHEMTRAILS (13) CHINA (6) Christian Zionism (1) CHRISTIANISM (45) Churchill (6) Circumcision (10) CLIMATE (6) Climate Change (1) cluster bombs/mines (2) COLD_FUSION (1) COLONIALISM (1) Colonization of Europe (19) Commerce (1) Communism (48) CONGO (5) Consciousness (9) Conspiracies (8) Consumerism (1) contemporary society (8) COPTS (1) Cosmogony (1) Crime (5) Criminal_Sciense (1) crop circles (5) CUBA (16) DARFUR (3) Dead Sea Scrolls (1) Death penalty in ISLAM (1) Death-Bed Visions (1) DECADANT_ART (1) Deir Yassin (8) DENMARK (2) Depleted uranium (6) DIAMOND CARTELS (1) DIANA (10) DIETRICH ECKART (1) DILUVIUM (5) Disney (2) DOGS (1) Donald TRUMP (3) Dönmeh (1) Doppelgangers (1) Dresden (6) DRUG ADDICTION (1) E.U. (11) Eastern Europe (1) ECHELON (1) ECONOMY (14) EDUCATION (4) Egypt (7) Eisenhower (2) El Inglés (2) Elite_Child_Sex_Rings (16) Elizabeth Taylor (1) ENERGY (8) Enoch Powell (1) environmentalism (3) Ernst Zundel (1) European Parliament (1) EUROPEAN UNION (10) EUROPEAN_IDENTITY (3) Eustace Mullins (10) Evidence for the Afterlife (1) EVOLUTION (5) EXPLORATIONS (1) Ezra Pound (1) FALSE_HISTORY (1) Fascism (3) Female Genital Mutilation (2) FEMINISM (11) FINLAND (1) Fjordman (6) Flight 007 (1) Fluoride (1) Food (8) FRANCE (23) Francis P. Yockey (3) Frankfurt School (1) Franklin D. Roosevelt (5) freedom of speech (1) Fukushima (2) Gaza (1) Geert Wilders (9) genetically modified organisms (GMO) (8) Georges Bensoussan (2) German National Socialism (13) GERMANY (35) Gilad Atzmon (11) Globalism (4) Great Britain (46) Great Pyramid (16) GREECE (2) Guatemala (1) Gulag (3) Gulf War (1) Gulf War Syndrome (1) Guylaine Lanctot (2) HAARP (10) Harry Potter (1) HEALTH (114) HEMP (1) Henry Makow (2) Hidden History (15) HIDDEN HYPNOSIS TECHNIQUES (1) Hiroshima (3) Historical Review (63) History_of_IDEAS (1) HMS Hampshire (3) Hollow Earth (22) Hollywood (9) Holocaust (137) HOLODOMOR_1932-33 (17) Homosexuality (2) Horst Mahler (4) Howard Hughes (1) HUMAN_RIGHTS (1) Humorous (2) HUNGARY (2) HYPERBOREA (7) IAN STEVENSON (13) Immigration (15) IMPORTANT (5) INDIA (24) IndoEuropean (9) Indonesia (2) Infrasound Weapons (1) Intellectual_freedom (1) Intelligence (14) International Criminal Tribunal (3) INTERNET (2) INTERRACIAL_RELATIONS (1) INTIMIDATION (2) INVENTIONS (3) IRAN (9) IRAQ (21) IRAQ_war (10) IRELAND (1) ISLAM (303) Islam in Europe/America (75) ISLAM in RUSSIA (1) ISLAM propagandists (4) ISLAMIST INTIMIDATION (20) ISLAMIST_VIOLENCE (13) ISLAMIZATION OF EUROPE (43) Islamophobia (4) ISRAEL (124) ISRAEL-ARAB RELATIONS (8) ISRAEL's_ATOMIC_BOMB (4) ISRAEL/EU RELATIONS (1) ITALY (5) J.Kaminski (4) Japan (2) JEWS (97) JEWS/ISRAEL-USA_relations (47) JFK Assassination (27) JFK/RFK (1) Jihad (2) Jo Cox (6) Joe Sobran (4) John Bryant (17) John Lear (3) Journalists (2) Julius Evola (38) Jyllands-Posten newspaper (1) Kafirs (1) Karl Marx (1) Katie King (1) Katyn (11) Kevin MacDonald (28) KHAZARs (1) Knut Hamsun (1) Kurdistan (1) KURDS (1) Lasha Darkmoon (3) Laurel Canyon (4) Layla Anwar (4) LEBANON (3) LEFT (16) Lord Kitchener (4) Lord Northcliff (1) Lost Civilisations (2) Lost Technology (1) LYDDA (1) MADELEINE McCANN (4) Magic (1) Magnesium (7) Mahathir (1) Mahatma Gandhi (4) Malaysia (2) Manipulation (66) MAPS (1) Mark Weber (10) Mass immigration_Multiculturalism (18) Mass_Media (2) Mass-Psychology (3) Massacres (1) METEMPSYCHOSIS (16) MEXICO (1) MH370 (2) MIDDLE EAST (44) Military Tribunal at Nuremberg (8) MIND CONTROL (23) MONEY-Banking (8) Monsanto (9) Mormonism (1) Mortacracy (6) MUSIC MAFIA (2) Muslim Brotherhood (5) Muslim Persecution of Christians (1) MUSLIMS IN EUROPE (59) Mussolini (2) Mysterious (69) Mysterious_SKY (1) Nathuram Godse (3) Native Americans (1) Neapolis (1) NESSIE (17) Netherlands (10) New World Order (4) NEW_ZEALAND (1) NGOs (2) Nicolai Sennels (1) no-go zones (1) NOAM CHOMSKY (4) Nonie Darwish (10) North Africa (3) NORWAY (1) Norway massacre (5) NUCLEAR (11) Nutrition (20) Obama (2) Occult Symbols (21) Oklahoma City bombing (7) OLYMPIC_GAMES (13) OPINION (9) Orel_Yiftachel (5) P. Buchanan (23) PACIFISM (1) PAEDOPHILIA (15) Paganism (2) PALESTINE 1944-1948 (1) Palestinians (17) PARIS (1) Patrice Lumumba (1) PATRICIA HEARST (2) Patton (2) Paul Craig Roberts (1) Paul Weston (9) PEARL HARBOR (1) Persecuted Christians (7) PERSONALITIES (1) Photographic_Archive (1) Photography (2) Physics (9) POLAND (5) POLAR REGIONS (30) Poliomyelitis (8) Political Thought (50) Pollution (3) Polynesia (25) Pope Benedict (1) PORTUGAL (5) PREHISTORY (28) propaganda (3) Prophecies (12) Psychedelics (64) PSYCHIATRY (10) Psychical Research (122) Psychology (5) QATAR (1) QUEBEC (1) Queen Victoria (1) R.R.Rife (10) Race (119) Racism (2) RED_Alert (4) Religion (23) René Guénon (1) Revilo Oliver (11) Richard Dawkins (1) Rockefellers (1) Roger Garaudy (6) Roman Catholic Church (8) Ron Paul (7) Rudolph Hess (1) Ruling_by_CORRUPTION (14) RUSSIA (8) RUSSIAN REVOLUTION (1) RWANDA (31) S. H. Pearson (1) Sabra-Shatila massacre (10) Sandy Hook (1) Sanskrit (1) SAUDI ARABIA (5) Savitri Devi (27) Scandinavia (1) SCIENCE (42) Secret Military Technology (14) Secret weapons (10) Sedition Trial (1) SERBIA (1) sexual freedom (1) Skepticism (1) Slave trade (1) SOUTH AFRICA (2) Space/Apollo_Hoax (54) SPAIN (2) Spengler (6) Spirituality (1) Srebrenica (1) State_criminality (8) Steganography (16) Steven Yates (7) STRANGE SOUNDS (4) Subterranean_world (10) SUDAN (2) Surveillance (1) SWASTIKA (33) SWEDEN (8) Switzerland (1) SYRIA (8) Taj Mahal (13) Ted Kaczynski (1) Terrorism (24) TESLA (6) The 1001 Club (1) The Celts (1) The Frankfurt School (1) The Great Flood (8) The Nuremberg Trials (2) The plutonium injections (4) Theo van Gogh (1) Thought of the Right (63) TITANIC (72) Tommy Robinson (1) Torture (1) Tradition (5) Transcendent Experience (6) Tunguska (1) Tunisia (2) TURKEY (7) TWA flight 800 (1) U.S.A. (142) U.S.A. ARMY CRIMINALITY (18) U.S.A. Foreign policy (11) U.S.A. Military (2) U.S.A._HISTORY (2) U.S.A._POLITICS (3) U.S.A._SOCIETY (3) U.S.A.-CIA (12) U.S.A.-Power Structure (4) U.S.S. Liberty (7) UFOs (166) Ukraine (15) United Church of Christ (1) United Nations (3) UNKNOWN_EARTH (2) USA (3) USA_Press (2) USA/USSR_relations (2) USS San Francisco (1) USSR (51) Vaccination (1) VATICAN (11) Vatican II (2) VELIKOVSKY (2) Vernon Coleman (14) Voynich_manuscript (15) WAFA SULTAN (1) War Crimes (30) water (2) Wayne MADSEN (2) WEST (9) WEST/ISLAM Relations (16) WESTERN_ELITES (1) White phosphorous (1) WILD_LIFE (1) Wilhelm Reich (4) William Gough (10) wind farms (1) Wm F. Koch (8) Women in Islam (4) World Wildlife Fund (8) WORLD_ORDER (57) WWI (6) WWII (89) WWII Aftermath (34) Younger Dryas Ice Age (4) Yugoslavia (7) ZIONISM (10)

Saturday, April 1, 2017

Fjordman : Importing Islamic Nightmares -- While Denying Them

Importing Islamic Nightmares -- While Denying Them

The horror caused by mass Third World Muslim immigration will not go away by censorship and self-delusion.

A report prepared by groups in the various Nordic countries has proposed instituting a legal ban on anti-Feminist “hatred,” comparing this to “racism.” Representing the left-wing coalition government in Norway, Ahmad Ghanizadeh from the Socialist Left Party (SV), the State Secretary in the Ministry of Children, Equality and Social Inclusion, was positive towards the proposal, and promised that the government would look into it.

My initial thought upon hearing this is that Leftism is now officially a religion, and that its proponents desire a “blasphemy statute” to ban any serious discussion of left-wing doctrines and their consequences as “hate speech.”

Writer and fellow online dissident Takuan Seiyo commented that not even George Orwell could have come up with anything that tops this scenario. Yes, there is a serious proposal afoot in Norway to ban “anti-Feminist hatred”. Yes, the ministry really has the Orwellian name of Ministry of Children, Equality and Social Inclusion. And yes, this State Secretary in Norway really is called Ahmad Ghanizadeh, originally from Iran.

In 2013, Norway’s Minister of Culture is Hadia Tajik, whose Muslim family came from Pakistan. One must assume that Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg of the Labour Party appointed her partly to remind the native population that they no longer have a culture, only “Multiculture,” but mainly in order to appeal to the Muslim and other Third World immigrant voters whose support his left-wing coalition depends upon in order to stay in power.

PM Stoltenberg in his prestigious New Year’s Speech for 2013 promised that his government would seek to ban “hateful utterances” on the Internet. The year before, Stoltenberg used his New Year’s Speech, always broadcasted on prime-time national TV and watched by a large proportion of his countrymen, to launch a frontal attack on alleged “totalitarian seducers” who use the Internet to spread unfounded “hatred.”

I was shortly afterwards contacted by the journalist Ragnhild Sleire Øyen from the state broadcaster NRK, the local equivalent of the BBC, who considered it obvious that the Prime Minister was referring to me personally. I’m sure many other citizens got the same message, and that may well have been intentional.

The PM didn’t mention any names explicitly, but then he didn’t have to, since so many others had done that dirty job for him. His right-hand man in Labour, Party Secretary Raymond Johansen, has singled me out for public attack by name several times, both before and after the Prime Minister gave this speech, as one of the individuals spreading irrational “hate” against Islam and therefore holding me partly responsible for the mental climate that allegedly created Anders Behring Breivik. I wasn’t the only name on that short list, but I usually topped it.

Norway is a small country, but I still find it unhealthy that a sitting political head of state uses his most prestigious annual speech addressing the nation to launch a thinly veiled attack on individual citizens who have done nothing criminal. 
An analogy for Americans would be if the President of the United States used his State of the Union speech to launch a thinly veiled attack on writers who use the Internet to publish ideas he dislikes, for instance the conservative author Michelle Malkin, or Glenn Reynolds with his major blog Instapundit. Even Obama hasn’t gone that far, at least not yet.
The Social Democratic Prime Minister of Norway has.
Who gets to define “hate,” and do negative feelings always come out of nowhere? What if public anger, assuming it exists, actually has a cause that needs to be addressed? For example, being displaced in one’s own country by often hostile tribes? Should we simply ban any real discussions of this problem instead of dealing with the actual cause of public frustration? If so, what will be the long-term results of such a policy?

Elisabeth Skarsbø Moen is the debate editor and a regular columnist in VG, one of Norway’s two largest newspapers, and the largest one with a truly national readership. She writes in positive terms about Feminism, while at the same time championing the continued mass immigration of people from cultures that are extremely hostile to women. Like most other Western Feminists of her ilk, she sees no contradiction in this.

In October 2012, Skarsbø Moen wrote a deeply emotional column in VG entitled “Our children”, where she lamented that her society sometimes makes a distinction between “our” children and “other” children, that is, people born in other countries. She chastised her own country for not treating all children born anywhere on the entire planet as equally ours. The occasion concerned two young male Muslim asylum seekers from Afghanistan.

I don’t know these specific individuals, but it’s a fact that quite a few of the young asylum seekers who come to Europe from Afghanistan are actually young adults who lie about their age; so they are in fact neither children, nor are they “ours.” Skarsbø Moen thereby managed to tell two blatant falsehoods in just two words.
It also must be mentioned that these “children” usually bring with them an Islamic culture that is often violent and usually extremely hostile to women’s liberties. Yet this self-appointed Feminist does not seem to care much about that, or worry about the future consequences of allowing such a culture gain a foothold in her own country. Skarsbø Moen’s column was pure emotional pornography about how cruel and evil we are for not allowing potentially violent and generally hostile Muslims into our countries.

Neighboring Sweden has in little more than three decades metamorphosed from a safe country into being flooded by street crime and having one of the world’s highest recorded rape rates. Young blond girls in Stockholm suburbs are getting used to being called “whores” on a daily basis, and sometimes dye their hair in an attempt to avoid sexual harassment in the streets of what once was their own country.

Coincidentally, this transformation all took place at the same time as the largest wave of mass immigration in recorded history, much of it from brutal and repressive male-dominated cultures. Yet most of the left-wing or Marxist Feminist activists and journalists in Scandinavia strenuously deny that there is any connection between these two phenomena, and will aggressively attack as “racists” those who dare to suggest that the mass immigration they support has caused any of this.

In December 2011 a Swedish mother-of-two was subjected to a brutal gang-rape by perhaps a dozen young male asylum seekers from Afghanistan in a refugee camp in Mariannelund, Sweden — although only seven of them were convicted for this gruesome crime. Swedish newspapers such as Aftonbladet systematically conceal the ethnic identity of the perpetrators in cases involving immigrants, though, and only show photos featuring white criminals.

Reports stated that “The rape was oral, anal and vaginal sometimes with three rapists inside her at the same time while everybody was cheering and clapping. The gruesome rape marathon lasted for 7 hours. 11 suspects may have been involved, taking turns while drinking and getting high on drugs. The asylum seekers were cheering and clapping their hands during the rape marathon while calling the victim ‘whore’ and ‘slut’.”

The Swedish victim went into shock and has naturally become heavily traumatized. She is now subject to panic attacks and lives in a psychiatric clinic. She is also bound to a wheelchair due to the damage to her abdomen. The main perpetrator – Rafi Bahaduri, 25 – had already committed four other rapes in Sweden that we know of.

Despite this, Elina Gustafsson, a local member of the Swedish Social Democratic Youth League (SSU) who defines herself as a “proud Feminist,” thought it would be “racist” to expel these convicted Muslim criminals.

I’m reminded of another left-wing politician from Sweden. The Marxist Feminist Gudrun Schyman, then the leader of the “reformed” Communist party, in a speech in 2002 suggested that Swedish men are just like the Taliban. Fredrik Virtanen, a male columnist for the national newspaper Aftonbladet, immediately agreed with her that yes, Western men are just like the brutal Taliban regime and other Muslims from Afghanistan.

The young woman from Mariannelund, Sweden who just had her life ruined might disagree with this claim. Even native-born psychopaths rarely behave in this manner, yet such a treatment of women is unfortunately not rare in the most repressive parts of the Islamic world, whose primitive tribal cultures Western authorities insist on mass-importing to our cities.

Gang rapes and certain other types of violent crime were exceedingly rare in the Nordic countries a few decades ago, but are currently in the process of becoming routine.
 In Trondheim, Norway, on the 28th of May 2011, a young girl named Eva Helgetun took her own life. She was just 14 years old, and had been gang-raped by immigrants a few weeks before. Too many others share her fate.

In the 1960s when the so-called Second Wave of Feminism began, often with strong Marxist inspirations, Western women were relatively safe compared to women in other parts of the world.
Half a century later, Western women have never had more Feminism, yet they and their children have also never been less safe.
Perhaps pointing out this fact constitutes “hate” in the eyes of some people, but that doesn’t make it any less true.

The problems caused by Third World mass immigration will not go away if we ban people from speaking truthfully about them. How hard can it be for members of the ruling elites to grasp this simple fact?


Fjordman : Two Terrorists and a Double Standard

Two Terrorists and a Double Standard

Fjordman’s latest essay concerns the contrast between media coverage of the massacre in Norway by Anders Behring Breivik, and the kid-glove treatment granted the Toulouse murderer Mohammed Merah.

This text will form a part of Fjordman’s upcoming book about the Breivik case, “Witness to Madness”, which should be in circulation in the second half of 2013.

Two Terrorists and a Double Standard
by Fjordman

The mass murder committed by Anders Behring Breivik during his twin attacks in Norway in 2011 understandably attracted a lot of media attention. ABB claimed to represent a much larger organization called the Knights Templar, which triggered a massive hunt for potential accomplices at home and abroad. Not a single trace has been found of this organization, which is most likely a figment of Breivik’s vivid imagination.
While it is understandable that such a claim had to be checked, in hindsight it comes off as highly questionable that the mass media in multiple countries launched a veritable witch-hunt on named individuals based on nothing other than the word of an obviously deranged mass murderer who clearly enjoyed being at the center of attention. It is instructive in this regard to compare the Breivik case to the rather different behavior displayed by the mass media when dealing with another terrorist in Western Europe some months later, Mohammed Merah.
In March 2012, in the Toulouse region of France a young Muslim man named Mohammed Merah committed a series of three gun attacks targeting French soldiers and Jewish civilians, some of them children. He murdered seven people, including three Jewish children, and was eventually killed resisting arrest after a 36-hour police siege.

In January 2013, French police arrested two men in connection with the attacks carried out by Mohamed Merah. Police officials say they doubt whether the killer acted alone. His brother Abdelkader has been charged as an accomplice and remains in custody.
In February 2013, the Jewish community in Toulouse suffered an unpleasant flashback to the previous year’s killings. “Fear is everywhere,” said Arie Bensemhoun, the chairman of Toulouse’s Jewish community. “With every passing day we become more convinced of this: that Mohamed Merah, there was not just one of him.”
The case keeps expanding. In late March 2013, more than a year after Mohammed Merah’s death on 22 March 2012 following a standoff with French police, a French soldier was arrested in connection with the shootings. Merah told negotiators during the siege that he was a member of al-Qaida. He expressed no regrets other than “not having claimed more victims” and said he was motivated by the fate of the Palestinians, the French military presence in Afghanistan and France’s ban on the full veil.
In other words, Mohammed Merah openly cited a perfectly straightforward Islamic justification for his terrorism. Yet in many news reports, Merah is still simply referred to as a “gunman” of no specific beliefs, whereas Breivik is nearly always labeled a “right-wing extremist terrorist” espousing “Islamophobic” views.
The French intelligence services downgraded an investigation of Merah just five months before he opened fire on a crowd of parents and children outside a Jewish school in Toulouse, according to leaked intelligence documents. He had been under surveillance since 2006 and was identified as a “privileged target” in 2011 upon his return to France from a trip to Afghanistan. Agents intercepted Merah in 2011 after he returned from another trip to Pakistan. Despite evidence that he had been in regular contact with “the radical Islamist movement in Toulouse” and was receiving funds from known extremists, the agency concluded that his surveillance could be curtailed. French authorities later admitted to “flaws” in the way the authorities dealt with the terrorist Merah.
Needless to say, with millions of Muslims in France, it is nearly impossible to keep track of all potential Jihadist threats. This problem continues to grow in all Western countries every single day, alongside Muslim immigration.
Abdelghani Merah, the oldest brother of the Toulouse killer, in a book denounces the role of his own father, mother, sister and brother in spawning a “monster,” claiming that the youngest of his four siblings was raised in an “atmosphere of racism and hatred”, but also of violence and neglect. He has written the book Mon Frère, ce terroriste (“My brother the terrorist”) to try to counter hero-worship of Mohamed, 23, among young Muslims.

He recalls visiting his mother’s house for a wake for Mohamed, where he was met with whoops of joy for the mass murderer from many local Muslims. People were congratulating his mother and saying “Be proud. Your son brought France to its knees.” Abdelghani screamed: “My brother is not a hero. He is a common assassin.”
Their sister, who was known to French intelligence services for being close to extreme Salafi Muslims and attending classes to study the Koran, as a devout Muslim believer has proclaimed great “pride” in her murderous brother and professed strong hatred of Jews and other non-Muslims: “Mohamed had the courage to act. I am proud, proud, proud… Jews, and all those who massacre Muslims, I detest them.”
Yet despite all of this, the then-French president Nicolas Sarkozy, allegedly a conservative, declared with confidence that “The Islamic faith has nothing to do with the insane motivations of this man.” Really?
Merah’s attacks were far from the only time Jews, some of whom are now leaving France for Israel or North America, have been attacked by Muslims in France. One of the most horrific such cases was the young Ilan Halimi, who in 2006 was tortured over a period of weeks near Paris and eventually killed by a Muslim gang. They kidnapped Halimi, a 23-year-old cell phone salesman, because he was Jewish and they thought Jews were rich. They subjected his family and a rabbi to hundreds of abusive phone calls and e-mails demanding ransom.
As journalist Nidra Poller comments in The Wall Street Journal, “The murder of Ilan Halimi invites comparison with the November 2003 killing of a Jewish disc jockey, Sébastien Selam. His Muslim neighbor, Adel, slit his throat, nearly decapitating him, and gouged out his eyes with a carving fork in his building’s underground parking garage. Adel came upstairs with bloodied hands and told his mother, ‘I killed my Jew, I will go to paradise.’ In the two years before his murder, the Selam family was repeatedly harassed for being Jewish.”
The Koran and other Islamic texts teach Muslims to despise and hate non-Muslims in general, although Jews may be slightly more hated than other infidels. In France and other European countries, Muslim immigrants have already progressed beyond attacks on the Jewish minority to verbal and physical harassment of the Christian majority population, including acts of vandalism against churches and abuse of worshippers.

Racist attacks or violence against white natives, ranging from robberies to gang rapes, are all too common and seem to be increasing. In certain lawless areas, ambulances or fire brigades risk being attack by young immigrants for no other reason than doing their job. In urban areas in Sweden, Denmark, Germany, Belgium and the Netherlands to England, France, Greece and Spain, immigrant gangs — often Africans or Muslims — engage in street crime against the native population or even against other immigrants as well as tourists.
In early 2013, Chinese authorities publicly made a complaint directed to France that many tourists from China had been robbed of their personal belongings in the streets of Paris. Previously, the Socialist mayor of two local districts in the increasingly Arab-dominated city of Marseilles, herself of immigrant origins, pleaded that the French army must be set in against armed criminal gangs there, since the local police are overwhelmed and no longer capable of maintaining a bare minimum of order. This request has so far been rejected.
The overwhelming number of cases of what could be deemed racist violence in Europe these days thus tend to involve immigrant perpetrators and white victims. Despite this, many Western media outlets in the spring of 2012 automatically assumed that these violent attacks in France were carried out by a white native person.

The Norwegian dissident writer Nina Hjerpset-Østlie, who has a sharp pen, noted that the left-wing newspaper Politiken in Denmark, a rough equivalent to The Guardian in Britain, before the terrorist’s identity become known asked about the sources of “right-wing extremist hate.” After it became clear that the terrorist had a Muslim immigrant background, the same newspaper suddenly changed its tune and now stated that “the tragedy of Toulouse should not be misused politically.” Apparently, ideology is deemed to be of tremendous importance if the perpetrator is a European, but of little or no importance if the perpetrator is a Muslim. Hjerpset-Østlie noted the huge double standard displayed by Western mass media, which was embarrassingly obvious in this case.
While Western mass media and the political establishment still thought the perpetrator of Mohammed Merah’s terror attacks was a white, native European neo-Nazi (despite having no real evidence indicating this), the New York Times ran a prominent story which inferred that the killings were a byproduct of anti-immigrant sentiment and European so-called xenophobia. Yet after it was revealed that the killer was a Muslim who supported al-Qaida, left-wingers and so-called progressives went into overdrive to dissociate the violence from Islam.
Yes, I know that shortly after Breivik’s bomb in central Oslo, many people thought it was carried by an Islamic group. Yet I remain firmly convinced that had this truly been the case, the mass media would have gone out of their way to disassociate terrorism or violence from Islam, as they nearly always do, and would instead have emphasized more Western outreach to Muslims to improve “integration,” understanding” and “dialogue.” This is largely what they did after the Islamic terrorist bombings in Madrid, Spain, and London, England.
In contrast, after Breivik the mass media assumed that he was part of a wider movement among native Europeans. I felt the negative effects of this myself, but the media harassment went far beyond Scandinavia to Switzerland and the USA. Even in England, people who had never met Breivik lost their jobs simply for being peaceful, conservative critics of Islam and Muslim immigration, as the case of Chris Knowles demonstrates.

Tariq Ramadan, a notorious professor of Islamic studies at Oxford University in England and the grandson of the founder of the internationally powerful Muslim Brotherhood, pretended that the terror attacks had nothing to do with Islam. Ramadan instead portrayed Merah as a victim of alleged anti-Muslim discrimination in France and Europe.
The Sydney Morning Herald columnist Paul Sheehan was one of the more sensible voices, warning that it’s wrong to make a victim of a child killer: “His killings were premeditated. He filmed the murders as he did them, a tactic frequently used and advocated by al-Qaeda. He had a history of crime and a collection of weapons. He told police he had travelled to Afghanistan and Pakistan to train as a jihad fighter. He had been on a watch list of Muslim extremists, one reason the police found him quite quickly. When they approached he opened fire. His film of the shootings was mailed to the al-Jazeera TV network for dissemination. The footage depicted all seven murders, taken with a camera slung from the gunman’s neck. The film had been dubbed with verses from the Koran invoking jihad and the greatness of Islam.”
The media were quick to portray Merah as a victim of circumstances or a mentally disturbed “lone wolf,” an isolated psychiatric case. I suppose the “wolf” analogy is easy to grasp for journalists, who often hunt their prey in packs themselves. Perhaps Merah really was a mentally unbalanced individual, but so was Breivik whom the mass media desperately wanted declared sane, so he could be used as a tool against opponents of Islamization.
Moreover, while they may have been mentally unstable, both Mohammed Merah and Anders Behring Breivik were influenced by the Jihadist network al-Qaida when carrying out their terror attacks; Merah possibly with direct ties to them, Breivik at least as an admirer and copy-cat. al-Qaida in turn base their ideas and methods on the Koran and other Islamic texts, plus the Sunna or personal example of Islam’s founder Mohammed.
On July 23 2011, the day after Breivik’s twin attacks in the Oslo region, the commentator Nicholas Kulish wrote in the internationally influential American newspaper The New York Times that “The attacks in Oslo on Friday have riveted new attention on right-wing extremists not just in Norway but across Europe, where opposition to Muslim immigrants, globalization, the power of the European Union and the drive toward multiculturalism has proven a potent political force and, in a few cases, a spur to violence.”
Notice that there is no hint of any possibility here that Muslim immigrants, the European Union, Multiculturalism or open-border policies themselves might represent problems; only opposition to this does.
The writer proceeded to lament that so-called populist parties in Europe who are critical of the above-mentioned wonders have created “a climate of hatred in the political discourse” that may encourage violent individuals. Kulish went on to state that “In the United States the deadly attacks have reawakened memories of the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995, where a right-wing extremist, Timothy J. McVeigh, used a fertilizer bomb to blow up a federal government building, killing 168 people. That deadly act had long since been overshadowed by the events of Sept. 11, 2001.”
The attacks in New York City and other locations in the USA on September 11th 2001 were Jihadist acts of war, according to their Islamic perpetrators from al-Qaida. They murdered about 3000 unarmed civilians, and tried to murder tens or even hundreds of thousands. Yet to this writer in a New York-based newspaper, these were merely unfortunate “events,” carried out by people with no particular ideological or religious affiliation.
Kulish wrote about various allegedly right-wing extremist or populist parties, among which he counted the Sweden Democrats, the Danish People’s Party, Norway’s Progress Party, the True Finns in Finland, Marie Le Pen of the Front National in France as well as Geert Wilders’ Party for Freedom in the Netherlands. As proof of the alleged extremism of Wilders was mentioned that he has compared the Koran to Adolf Hitler’s autobiography Mein Kampf. Mr. Wilders has indeed made such a comparison, but so has the former British Prime Minister Winston Churchill, without being labeled a “right-wing extremist” or potential terrorist for doing so.
The front-page headline in The New York Times on July 24th 2011 was stunning: “As Horrors Emerge, Norway Charges Christian Extremist.” As the American television host and author Bill O’Reilly asked at Fox News, on what grounds did the NYT brand Breivik a Christian? He has no history of extensive Christian activity and has partly admitted to committing acts counter to all Christian teaching. According to Bill O’Reilly, “Breivik did not kill in the name of Jesus. He was not a member of a Christian-based al-Qaida-like group. He was not funded by Iran or enabled by Pakistan. It seems he is simply a murderer, a man devoid of any spiritual conscience.”
It is thought-provoking that Western mass media, which are often very reluctant to label somebody “Islamic terrorists” even in cases where their Islamic motivations are openly stated, were quick to seize the Breivik case to launch an attack on alleged right-wing extremists and “Christian terrorists.” In Norway, the powerful state broadcaster NRK on national television branded Breivik as one of several “Christian terrorists.” They eagerly embraced a suggestion by the American writer and alleged terror expert Mark Juergensmeyer that Breivik is a “Christian terrorist,” even though Anders Behring Breivik himself admits that this is not the case.
ABB made a number of references to both Christianity and Islam in his manifesto, but these are incoherent, as are most other things there. Not a single piece of evidence indicates that he was a devout, practicing Christian prior to his attacks. On the contrary, ABB states explicitly on page 1344 of his so-called manifesto that “I’m not going to pretend I’m a very religious person as that would be a lie.” Even his main defense lawyer Geir Lippestad admits that ABB admires the violent methods employed by the Islamic terror network al-Qaida.

There is stronger case for an Islamic link than for a Christian one, given Breivik’s great admiration for Jihadist terrorists. I am on the record as stating that I will not be surprised if Breivik converts to Islam in prison, yet although I am willing to discuss the matter, I remain unconvinced that he was a convert prior to his attacks.
Mohamed Merah claimed to “love death” more than life, a common slogan among Islamic Jihadists, and he did actually embrace death when he was killed during an armed standoff with the police. Anders Behring Breivik could easily have done the same thing and embraced “martyrdom” as he suggested, but he didn’t. That’s probably because Breivik loved fame more than death. To the extent that Breivik and his highly confused mind belonged to any “religion” at the time of his terror attacks it was the Cult of Celebrity and Narcissism.
Active support for the murders committed by Breivik in Norway was minuscule in right-wing circles; with the possible exception of extremely marginal figures or fringe neo-Nazi groups — if one classifies such Socialists as “right-wing.” The investigation and trial revealed no connections whatsoever between ABB and any wider movement. This is in sharp contrast to the attitude about Mohamed Merah among quite a few Muslims.
Several otherwise well-meaning people have suggested that “the Koran is what Muslims make of it,” which seems to imply that the text is nearly infinitely elastic and that it’s therefore largely irrelevant what it actually says. I happen to disagree with this assertion, and I’m not the only one doing so.
In Denmark, the linguist Tina Magaard has concluded that Islamic texts encourage terror and fighting to a far greater degree than the texts of other religions. She has a PhD in Textual Analysis and Intercultural Communication from the Sorbonne, Paris and spent three years on a research project comparing the original texts of ten religions. “The texts in Islam distinguish themselves from the texts of other religions by encouraging violence and aggression against people with other religious beliefs to a larger degree. There are also straightforward calls for terror. This has long been a taboo in the research into Islam, but it is a fact we need to deal with.”
Moreover, there are hundreds of calls in the Koran for fighting against people of other faiths. “If it is correct that many Muslims view the Koran as the literal words of God, which cannot be interpreted or rephrased, then we have a problem. It is indisputable that the texts encourage terror and violence. Consequently, it must be reasonable to ask Muslims themselves how they relate to the text, if they read it as it is,” says Magaard.
After Breivik’s attacks, some of the peaceful authors who were cited in his confused manifesto, such as Bat Ye’or, Robert Spencer or me, were accused by members of the press of inspiring terrorism. Yet not one journalist could come up with a single quote where these Islam-critical authors have encouraged terrorism.
At the same time, we are told by members of the press to ignore references to Jihad or Islamic teachings invoked in countless Islamic terror attacks around the world, even though the Koran and Islamic texts contain many explicit and graphic references encouraging aggression or violence against non-Muslims. Such a blatant lack of logic does not stand up to closer scrutiny, but has nevertheless become surprisingly widespread.
In January 2013, Muslim Jihadist terrorists with links to the al-Qaida terror network took hundreds of people hostage at a natural gas facility near In Aménas, Algeria. Algerian Special Forces soon raided the site, but many hostages were killed by the Islamic hostage takers.
It later turned out that at least two of the Muslim terrorists who died in Algeria were Canadian citizens. One of them was a convert to Islam of European origins who “came from a comfortable middle-class neighbourhood.” It is strange how converts to Christianity or Buddhism hardly ever behave in this manner, whereas converts to Islam often do, disturbingly often. Why is that?
One Algerian who managed to escape told France 24 television that the kidnappers said, “We’ve come in the name of Islam, to teach the Americans what Islam is.” The kidnappers then immediately executed five hostages who, sadly, got to learn what Islam is in the most brutal manner possible. They also separated Muslims from non-Muslims and systematically targeted non-Muslims, following a perfectly traditional Islamic pattern of Jihad warfare. The suspected leader of this extremely brutal and highly organized attack, Mokhtar Belmokhtar, was a committed Jihadist warrior who named one of his sons after Osama bin Laden, the long-time leader of al-Qaida.
Sonatrach, the Algerian state oil company running the Ain Amenas site along with Britain’s BP and Statoil, Norway’s most powerful company by far, confirmed the refinery had been mined. The terrorists had planned to kill more people and blow up the entire gas plant. In Britain, the reliably pro-Islamic public broadcaster BBC was criticized for calling the murderous thugs behind the hostage killings “militants” rather than “terrorists.”
What is disappointing, but not the least surprising to those who actually understand what’s going on, is that some of these Islamic terrorists apparently had weapons and equipment that were supplied to Jihadist groups in North Africa with Western backing, when NATO and Western governments from Britain and France to the USA supported Islamic rebel groups in their overthrow of Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi during the so-called Arab Spring in 2011.
Some of the more sensible voices, for instance the eloquent American author and newspaper columnist Diana West, have consistently warned against the dangerous lack of wisdom in supporting armed Jihadist groups who might well target Westerners in the future. These timely warnings were, as usual, not heeded by the arrogant and stupid Western ruling class. They have learned absolutely nothing from this strategic blunder, either, and are currently in the process of repeating the exact same mistake, arming enemies and potential terrorists among the Jihadist so-called rebels in Syria, who are known to include al-Qaida sympathizers within their ranks.
Several of the murdered victims of the Islamic terrorists in Algeria were Norwegians and other Europeans, yet Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg of Norway nevertheless officially stated that while these violent acts were reprehensible and must be condemned, we do not known the motivation the terrorists had for doing this.
Actually, we do: it’s called Jihad, and has been an inseparable component of Islamic teachings and practice for well over a thousand years. Whatever other faults these Jihadists have, they can sometimes (if not always) be quite open about their intentions. The same Mr. Stoltenberg and other representatives of his coalition government have indicated that “anti-Islamic forces” were partly to blame for Breivik, even after the police indicated that he had carried out his attacks alone and the first psychiatric evaluation indicated that he is insane.
Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg and his government thus don’t want to link aspects of Islamic culture to terrorism even when such links are glaringly obvious, but have been quite aggressive in pointing fingers at allegedly anti-Islamic connections to terrorism when these were dubious at best. The hypocrisy is staggering, but unfortunately not surprising. Most of the Western ruling elites now behave in largely the same manner.

Let’s make a summary:
Breivik’s sister and other family members were horrified by his terror attacks, which they had nothing to do with. Mohammed Merah’s sister is on the record as praising her brother for his mass murder, and one of his brothers has been charged with actively aiding these murderous attacks. Except for some extremely marginal figures, no one on the “right wing” in Europe has supported Breivik’s terror attacks. Mohammed Merah has become a hero for an alarming number of young Muslims in Europe because of his terror attacks.
Immediately after his identity became known, many Western mass media claimed that Breivik’s terror attacks were ideologically motivated by anti-Islamic writings. Immediately after his identity became known, many Western mass media claimed that Merah’s terror attacks were not ideologically motivated and had nothing whatsoever to do with Islam or Islamic writings. In other words: Terrorism has nothing to do with being Islamic, but a great deal to do with being anti-Islamic.
After his attacks, the media indicated that while Breivik may have carried out his attacks alone, he was sane and came from a big flock of supporters. The same people indicated that Merah was a lone wolf and possibly insane. Yet years later, the police have found to trace of Breivik’s alleged “flock,” whereas Merah probably did come from a flock of supporters, and may have been aided by others in an organized manner prior to his attacks.

The very different treatments these two terrorists have received reveal a sometimes staggering double standard in the mass media and academia, not just in one nation but in multiple Western countries on both sides of the Atlantic.

This finding says a lot about the sorry state of Western civilization in the early twenty-first century. It is in many ways more significant and interesting than the mind of the deranged sadist Anders Behring Breivik.


Fjordman : Europe: Combating Fake News

  • If present demographic trends continue, in a few decades, native Swedes could easily become a minority in their own country.
  • Swedish ambulance personnel want gas masks and bulletproof vests to protect their staff against the escalating attacks, similar to equipment used by staff working in war zones.
  • Most dangerous, however, is our inability to deal forcefully with problems undermining Western societies, because some Western media refuse to admit that the problems exist.
In January 2015 The New York Times denied that there are "no-go-zones" -- areas that are not under the control of the state and are ruled according to sharia law -- dominated by certain immigrant groups in some urban areas in Western Europe. The American newspaper mentioned this author, alongside writers such as Steven Emerson and Daniel Pipes, for spreading this alleged falsehood. The article was published shortly after Islamic terrorists had massacred the staff of the satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo in Paris on January 7, 2015. Other established media outlets such as the magazine The Atlantic also dismissed claims of no-go-zones.
Fox News issued an unusual on-air apology for allowing its anchors and guests to repeat the suggestion that there are Muslim "no-go zones" in European countries such as Britain and France.

Regarding the subject of "no-go-zones," this is largely a question of semantics. If you say that there are some areas where even the police are afraid to go, where the country's normal, secular laws barely apply, then it is indisputable that such areas now exist in several Western European countries. France is one of the hardest hit: it has a large population of Arab and African immigrants, including millions of Muslims.

I have been writing about the problems in Sweden and the rest of Europe for many years. The problems are unfortunately all too real. Here are a few facts:
Sweden surpassed ten million inhabitants in early 2017. The recent population growth is almost entirely due to mass immigration. If present demographic trends continue, in a few decades native Swedes could easily become a minority in their own country. The economist Tino Sanandaji suggests that this transformation could happen within the coming generation.

Statistics from January 2017 indicate that for people born in Sweden, the unemployment rate is 4.3%. Yet for people born abroad, the unemployment rate is a staggering five times higher, at 22.1%. This constitutes a huge economic and social burden for the taxpayers. The famous Swedish welfare state has been quietly cut back for many years.

In an essay published in February 2016, Stockholm police inspector Lars Alvarsjö warned that the Swedish legal system is close to collapse. The influx of asylum seekers and ethnic gangs has overwhelmed the country and its understaffed police force. In many suburbs, criminal gangs have taken control and determine the rules. The police, fire brigades and ambulance personnel in these areas are routinely met with violent attacks.

Malmö, Sweden's third-largest city, houses over 300,000 people, as of 2017. Despite its modest size, the town has a crime rate equal to that of vastly larger cities. The local police are barely able to investigate murders. Less serious crimes often go unpunished. Malmö probably has the highest percentage of Muslim immigrants of any city in Scandinavia. The most Islamic city in Scandinavia also happens to be the most criminal and the most violent.

In November 2016, Malmö's chief prosecutor Ola Sjöstrand publicly admitted that his office was approaching a total collapse in terms of criminal investigations. "If people are hit by crimes which then aren't investigated, they will lose faith in the rule of law," Sjöstrand told the regional newspaper Sydsvenskan.

During New Year's Eve celebrations at the beginning of 2017, parts of central Malmö resembled a war zone. Young immigrants shouted "Jihad!" while throwing fireworks at people. Swedish teenagers gathered in a large group to avoid being robbed.

A janitor in Malmö was shot and sustained life-threatening injures while clearing snow in February 2017. Police detained several suspects, understood to be linked to gang violence, for questioning. A 15-year-old boy was arrested on suspicion of attempted murder.

Meanwhile, officials at a local electrical firm announced that they would no longer expose their staff to risk by taking jobs in Malmö; there is just too much violent crime in the city.

Beginning in March 2017, the emergency ward at the hospital in Malmö will lock the doors at night. This is a security precaution that became necessary due to repeated violent threats from certain gangs or clans against patients and staff.

In July 2015, the police in Malmö asked for assistance from the national police to stop the wave of violence. Apparently, even that response was not enough. In January 2017, the police chief, Stefan Sintéus, publicly appealed to residents in Malmö for help in containing violent crime and deadly gang shootings: "Help us to tackle the problems. Cooperate with us."

Peter Springare, a police officer in the town of Örebro in central Sweden, finally vented his frustration in February 2017. Migrants are to blame for the vast majority of serious crime in Sweden, causing the police force to become overloaded, he wrote on Facebook. When dealing with drug crimes, rapes, robberies, aggravated assaults, murders, extortion or violence against the police, the suspected perpetrators very often have names such as Ali, Mahmoud or Mohammed. They usually have a family background from Iraq, Turkey, Syria, Afghanistan or Somalia. Others do not have valid papers.

Gothenburg, Sweden's second largest city, has been for several years one of the most important recruitment centers in Europe for jihadists seeking to join the terrorist group Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS). A survey carried out in 2016 showed that about one in nine school students aged 12-18 in certain Gothenburg suburbs openly expressed sympathy with militant Islamic groups.

Nordstan in Gothenburg is one of the largest shopping malls in Sweden, located in the heart of the city. 3,250 crimes were reported to the police from Nordstan in 2016. That number is from a single shopping mall in one year. Aggressive groups of Muslim immigrants, especially young men from North Africa, Syria or Afghanistan, partly dominate the mall. "I've had people in front of me that look like they are 35, but who claim to be 15. I can't prove they're lying so we have to release them," Rikard Sörensen from the police said.

Stockholm suburbs such as Husby, Rinkeby and Tensta house large concentrations of recent immigrants. These districts are riddled with crime, violence and social problems. The Swedish police have repeatedly been attacked by criminal gangs there, even with hand grenades.

One day in December 2016, shopkeepers in Husby closed their stores as a protest. Salam Kurda is the chair of the local shopkeepers' association. He says he has had enough after his shop was burgled. Politicians and the police have abandoned Husby to the criminals, states Kurda, who plans to give up his shop. He says it is not profitable and he doesn't feel safe.

In December 2016, the American Jewish documentary filmmaker Ami Horowitz told the story of his venture into Husby. A few seconds after they arrived, five men approached them. They said "You guys gotta get out of here right now." The film crew, being Swedish, turned around and ran for it. Horowitz decided to stay and try to figure this thing out with the men.
The five men then immediately attacked Horowitz, punching, choking and kicking him. Nobody came to his aid, even though this attack took place in a public area outside Stockholm. Horowitz recalls his assailants saying something in Arabic as they beat him to the ground.
"Let's define what a 'no-go area' means, really, at least in Sweden," Horowitz says.
"What's interesting is, there's an actual debate out there whether or not these places even exist, right? You go to CNN, the BBC, and you listen to people discuss no-go areas in France, in Belgium, in Sweden, in Germany. And there's an actual debate whether this is real or the figment of the conservative imagination. I can tell you for a fact they exist. And in Sweden what that means is, and this is what the police tell me, they use the words 'no-go area.' They said, in their words, 'If we're chasing a suspect, and they cross into this no-go area, we simply stop pursuit.' And if we want to enter this area, we have to go in with an armed convoy, as if you're going into like the kill zone in Afghanistan."
In 2014, the Swedish police themselves estimated that there were 55 areas in which they are no longer able to uphold law and order. That number is increasing. The country also experiences shocking levels of violence against ambulance personnel in some areas. Swedish ambulance personnel want gas masks and bulletproof vests to protect their staff against the escalating attacks, similar to equipment used by staff working in war zones.
In February 2017, the local police chief Erik Åkerlund in Botkyrka near Stockholm denied that "no-go zones" exist in Sweden. This claim does not sound very credible.
When dissident writers such as this author wrote about these issues 10-15 years ago, the real problems we raised were falsely dismissed as the "xenophobia" of alleged "right-wing extremists."

Unfortunately, the "multicultural" problems in Sweden have grown so large and visible that some international media now regularly write about them. Swedish authorities apparently find this hugely embarrassing. They try to conceal this unpleasant reality as much as possible. In 2016, the Swedish embassy in London complained that Britain's Daily Mail newspaper was running a campaign against Sweden's immigration policy.

In February 2017, U.S. President Donald Trump made some critical remarks about the situation in Sweden, regarding immigration and security. This triggered protests from the Swedish government and the mass media. At the same time, violent riots once again erupted in Rinkeby, a Stockholm suburb with many Muslim immigrants. A Swedish press photographer was assaulted by around 15 people when arriving in Rinkeby to report on the riots.

Cars burn during a riot in Stockholm, on February 20, 2017. (Image source: YouTube/gladbecker82 video screenshot

Two leading politicians from the Sweden Democrats supported Trump's comments in the Wall Street Journal. Immigration, they argued, has indeed caused major problems in Sweden.
In Malmö, violent crime is no longer limited to districts such as Rosengård. Gang-related shootings happen in different parts of Malmö, and in other cities such as Gothenburg.

A survey from 2016 indicated that nearly half of all Swedish women are afraid to go outside after dark. 46% of women feel very unsafe or somewhat unsafe when they exercise alone in the dark -- an indication that there is a widespread sense of fear and uncertainty across much of the country, not just in a few urban areas. "Feminist" Sweden has very high rape rates.
Swedish women have never had more feminism, and have never been less safe.

In January 2017, Magnus Olsson, a politician from the Sweden Democrats in Malmö, suggested that the military should be deployed in the city. "There is a great lack of police officers in Sweden and Malmö. For this reason, it is perhaps time to let the military and police stand together to reestablish order in the country," he said.
Sweden's military forces have been drastically reduced since the Cold War. However, the authorities suddenly seem to have realized that there could be potential for armed conflict in the future. There are now plans to reintroduce compulsory military service.

In early 2017, the Swedish police were instructed to increase their preparations for war. They were not told who this potential war would be against, although the authorities like to talk about an alleged threat of an invasion from Russia.
It is not, however, the Russians who now routinely burn cars and commit gang-rapes in Swedish cities. These crimes are largely committed by recent immigrants, many of them Muslims coming from war zones. These immigrants have for decades been allowed in by the ruling political elites, applauded by the mass media and supported by the EU and the UN.

The Islamic terror threat in Western Europe is now endemic. In late 2016, the police at Brussels International Airport detained 30 terror suspects in one month. That is one potential terrorist per day, at one European airport. Belgium's highest-ranking police chief warned in February 2017 that the terror threat remains "grave" after the Brussels bombings on March 22, 2016. Because of the many radical Muslims living in Belgium, the authorities are concerned that Belgian citizens may lose their visa-free access to the United States.

Due to the threat of terrorism, robberies and street crime, many Chinese, Japanese and Korean travelers have dropped their holiday plans in France. Chronic instability and violence have damaged the country's reputation as a travel destination. Even a prolonged state of emergency and large numbers of police and soldiers deployed in the streets are not enough to uphold law and order.

In February 2017, Paris and other French cities were once more rocked by days of rioting by Muslim and African immigrant. The trigger was an allegation of police violence. However, discontent seems to be endemic. Riots among immigrants could erupt again at any moment.

After a firebomb attack on four police officers near Paris in 2016, France's prime minister insisted there were no no-go zones in the country. However, this is not what the police themselves say.

"Of course there are no-go zones in France where the police cannot intervene and do their jobs in safety," says Denis Jacob from the union Alternative Police-CFDT.
"And it's the same for fire fighters or pretty much any representative of the state. The police can't apply the law in these areas, they are attacked. If the police can't do their work it's because there are criminals and delinquents who don't respect the law."
Yet it would be very bad for business and tourism if the authorities openly acknowledged this. "Governments will never admit there are no-go zones because it's a sign of a failed state," Jacob adds.

As Soeren Kern writes at Gatestone Institute:
"The problem of no-go zones is well documented, but multiculturalists and their politically correct supporters vehemently deny that they exist. Some are now engaged in a concerted campaign to discredit and even silence those who draw attention to the issue."
What does it take for the New York Times and other established media to define an area as a no-go zone?
It is an indisputable fact that a number of areas exist in several Western European countries where criminal ethnic gangs dominate the streets and where even the police find it very difficult to walk in safety. The number and size of these areas, fueled by mass immigration, seems to be growing.
If the New York Times and other mass media deny this fact, then they are engaged in producing "fake news." People who truthfully warn about these problems thus risk being unfairly vilified and smeared for doing so.

Most dangerous, however, is our inability to deal forcefully with problems that are undermining Western societies, because some Western media refuse to admit that the problems exist.

Mass immigration from incompatible cultures, particularly from the Islamic world, is gradually undermining law and order in many Western cities. If Western media refuse frankly to acknowledge this fact, they are putting the long-term survival of our societies seriously at risk.
Fjordman, a Norwegian historian, is an expert on Europe, Islam and multiculturalism.

Martin Witkerk : Roll Over, JIHAD—There’s Also HIJRA, Muslim Conquest By Immigration

Roll Over, JIHAD—There’s Also HIJRA, Muslim Conquest By Immigration

Another day, another Muslim atrocity—and another Ruling Class rush to cover it up. No surprise to veteran newspaperman Leo Hohmannn [Email him] who has covered the issues of immigration and Islam at WND.com for years. In Stealth Invasion: Muslim Conquest Through Immigration And Resettlement Jihad, his first book, Hohmann explains that the biggest mistake Christians and Jews make in regard to Islam is to assume it is “just another religion seeking a place in society on equal footing with the other great faiths.” Which is why Muslim immigration is everywhere and always problematic.

Unlike Christians and Jews, Muslims have a religious duty to impose their faith upon the entire world through a combination of force and fraud. And if they are allowed, they will transform the United States of America into just another outpost of the Dar al-Islam.
Muslim authorities stress that the concept of jihad (literally “struggle”) does not refer only to fighting. It covers many kinds of apparently peaceful behavior. However, all of these behaviors contribute to the forcible conquest which is the ultimate goal of the faith.

One of the most important “non-violent” components of jihad: Hijra, or migration by Muslims to infidel lands. Muhammad himself set the example by migrating from Mecca to Medina in order to spread his message. The Koran advises Muslims that “Whoever leaves his home as an emigrant to Allah and His Messenger and then death overtakes him, his reward has already become incumbent upon Allah (4:100).”

Dying as a warrior engaged in violent jihad may be Number One in the merit it gains a believer after death, but hijra comes in a close second. If a Muslim migrates to help spread his religion and dies away from his hometown, even comfortably in his bed, he is considered a martyr and is guaranteed of going to paradise.

Of course, it doesn’t hurt when the prospective migrant also knows of the cradle-to-grave benefits in Europe and America. Such persons may see their income increase by a factor of ten—without even having to get a job.

Before America’s immigration floodgates were opened in 1965, there were about 150,000 Muslims in the entire country. Today, America has about 3.3 million Muslim citizens and permanent legal residents, with nearly a quarter of a million newcomers arriving every year.

We cannot know for sure how many are coming for the easy life and how many to promote Islam, but many tell pollsters they would prefer to be back home. If they nevertheless stay, it could be because they are practicing hijra.

A second nonviolent component of jihad: da’wah— “summoning” or “inviting.” This can refer to Islamic proselytizing, but also includes the formation of alliances with non-Muslim groups that may prove useful for promoting Islam. As Hohmannn explains, such overtures “are nothing but a clever ruse meant to weaken the resolve of the unbelievers.”

But you do not have to take his word for it. Documented proof has been found.
In 2004, FBI agents raided Safe House belonging to the Muslim Brotherhood in northern Virginia. Among the evidence they seized was a document entitled An Explanatory Memorandum: On the General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America, [PDF] written in 1991 by a Brotherhood operative named Mohamed Akram. This document described Muslim settlement of the United States as a “civilizational jihad process”—
The brothers must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying Western Civilization from within and sabotaging its miserable house by their hands… so that it is eliminated and Allah’s religion is made victorious over all other religions.
Akram explained that “the heart and core of this strategy was contingent on these groups’ ability to develop a mastery of the art of coalitions.”

Such coalitions can even be formed with Christian churches. The Islamic Society of North America, one of 29 organizations unmasked by the Explanatory Memorandum as a front for the Muslim Brotherhood, practices da’wah through its Office of Interfaith and Community Alliances.

In January 2016, that organization’s national director, Dr. Sayyid M. Syeed, participated in a Catholic-Muslim interfaith conference at the University of San Diego. He spoke of:
…a new millennium of alliance-building for common values of mutual respect and recognition. All faiths are striving to promote those divine values enshrined in our sacred texts and scriptures, so that those who exploit them for reinforcing hate, extremism, violence and instability are identified as the enemies of all faiths.
Mr. Syeed clearly knows what an American audience wants to hear. Yet even as he dishes out this pabulum to naïve Americans, his own chief sponsor, the Muslim Brotherhood, is busy supporting Hamas, al-Qaeda, ISIS and other violent jihadi organizations around the world!

This might not matter so much if influential Americans were not listening to him. But there on the stage beside him sat San Diego’s Catholic Bishop Robert W. McElroy (email him).

Instead of challenging Dr. Syeed on his terrorist connections, the good bishop rose to denounce the “scourge of anti-Islamic prejudice.” “We are witnessing a new nativism,” he told his listeners, “which the American Catholic community must reject and label for the religious bigotry that it is.”

Bishop McElroy is a member of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops, one of nine voluntary agencies, or VOLAGs, working as government contractors to resettle Muslim “refugees” in America. Although five of the VOLAGs are affiliated with Christian churches, they are not engaged in missionary work: the law forbids them from proselytizing the new arrivals. Nor is such resettlement charitable work: the government pays VOLAGs $2025 for every person they sponsor.

Nor do most of these refugees even fit the 1951 Geneva Convention definition of “refugee”—persons displaced by a well-founded fear of persecution due to their religious, political, or ethnic affiliation. That is a strict standard, which even many persons fleeing war zones do not qualify.

The original intent of America’s refugee program was to provide safe haven for people fleeing Communism. But today all this has been forgotten. Ninety-five percent of those coming to the US as “refugees” are hand-picked by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, and we simply accept whoever they send. According to the U.S. State Department, more than one million Muslims have been legally transplanted into over three hundred American cities and towns through this program.

As Hohmannn explains:
Those who enter as refugees immediately qualify for a full slate of government goodies that aren’t offered to most other immigrants. Everything from subsidized housing to food stamps, aid to families with dependent children, cash stipends and Medicaid are part of the prize. Within five years they can apply for citizenship and full voting rights.
Hohmannn stresses the irony that perhaps no class of people in the world today fits the Geneva definition of refugees better than the persecuted Christian minorities in today’s Middle East. But it is their Muslim persecutors who are given the green light to come to America. For example, despite making up 10 percent of Syria’s population before the war, only 0.5 percent of the Syrians allowed into the US as refugees have been Christian.

The Obama Administration has done everything in its power to prevent any Christians from entering the US as refugees over and above the tiny number chosen by the UN High Commissioner. In the spring of 2015, a group of 27 Iraqi Christians set out to cross the border and were detained and held for six months. Five of them were charged criminally with falsifying their asylum applications and the rest were promptly deported. Robert DeKalaita, A lawyer who specialized in helping Iraqi Christians find refuge in the United States was charged by the Obama administration with “falsifying and embellishing” applications, facing up to thirty-five years in prison. (After the book went to press, he was sentenced to fifteen months.)

It is hard to believe that an attorney representing Muslim migrants would have been subject to similar scrutiny from the Obama administration.
Besides the VOLAGs and naïve men of God like Bishop McElroy, the most important targets of da’wah, outreach to non-Muslim allies, are the globalist Left with their vision of a borderless world controlled by unelected technocrats. For decades, this elite faction has been promoting birth control, abortion, homosexuality and female careerism—in a word, sterility—across the West. At length, they have succeeded in creating an apparent shortage of native-stock young entering the workforce and paying taxes into the system. As the shortage becomes acute, these same people are coming forward to promote massive outsourcing of good-paying jobs to the Third World and massive immigration of Third World labor to the West as a “solution” to the problems they themselves have created.
Common sense would suggest that intelligent, educated persons of mainly European descent would make the most desirable candidates for immigration to the United States. But importing such people would do nothing to further the globalists’ goal of forcible equalization of material conditions around the world. It is precisely Third World Muslims’ alien-ness, poverty and lack of skills which makes them attractive to the globalists.
It is obvious, however, that the vision being pursued by the globalist Left has nothing in common with the plans of radical Islamists themselves. Many have been puzzled by their willingness to embrace such allies. Hohmannn’s diagnosis is certainly correct: globalists feel certain that Christianity and the inherited institutions of the West are the greatest obstacles in the way of fulfilling their plans. Islam, on the other hand, they see as “the perfect tool, a battering ram, for [the] brutal task… of tear[ing] down what is left of the old world order.”
Never was any political alliance more cynical than this one between Islam and globalism. Each party feels certain it will succeed in using the other for its own purposes, and God alone knows which of them is right. The only thing they agree on is the need to destroy the West thoroughly before turning upon one another.
Patriots are stuck with the job of fighting both enemies at once, for no wedge can be driven between them until we are gone.
The most important globalist force working to maximize Muslim immigration to the US in recent years: the administration of President Barack Obama. In November 2014, as he announced his (unconstitutional) plan to grant amnesty by Executive Order to over five million illegal immigrants, Obama also created a “White House Task Force on New Americans.” In subsequent weeks, the co-chair of this task force, Cecilia Muñoz—former executive of the National Council of La Raza—hosted three conference calls between White House officials and representatives of various Open Borders groups.
Baltimore talk-show host Susan Payne managed to infiltrate these conference calls, and reported what she heard to radio host Mark Levin:
  • Participants were planning for 13-15 million legalizations rather than the five million announced to the public.
  • The placement of these immigrants was compared to “planting seedlings” into the “soil” of receiving communities, which “soil” was to be adapted to accommodate the needs of the “seedlings”—and not the other way around.
  • The newly-amnestied immigrants were expected to “navigate, not assimilate;” one task force member spoke explicitly of “developing a country within a country.” Like seedlings, these new immigrant communities were meant to grow and gain strength until they could come out of the shadows and overtake the receiving communities: in effect, pushing older Americans into the shadows from which they had emerged.
  • A key part of this plan: granting all 13 million or more newly legalized aliens all the benefits hitherto reserved for refugees—courtesy of the same American taxpayers whom the newcomers are meant to replace.
Most immigrants to the US are not Muslims, of course. But the Muslim proportion continues to rise. John Guandolo, a former FBI counterterrorism specialist and the author of Raising a Jihadi Generation, estimates that the US is ten to fifteen years behind Europe in terms of the advancement of Islam and the eventual subjugation of its non-Muslim population.
American public school children are already being taught a sugar-coated version of Islam that portrays Muhammad as a swashbuckling Robin Hood character. As one of Hohmannn’s interviewees explains:
He’s this amazing guy whose message was spread around the world, and he to take from the rich and give to the poor. Very few details are given of any of his conquests, the beheadings, the taking of female sex slaves, nothing.
The Ten Commandments and the Lord’s Prayer remain strictly off-limits in Americas public schools, of course, Separation of church and state applies only to Christianity.

A 2015 study commissioned by the Center for Security Policy found that 51 percent of American Muslims would prefer to live under sharia law rather than the US Constitution. Among Muslims under 30, the figure rises to 60 percent. Nearly a quarter of Muslims in America are willing to tell pollsters openly that they consider the use of violent jihad justified in order to establish sharia.

It is not even clear that Americans are allowed to disagree publicly with Islam any more. In the spring of 2016, the pastor of a small church in Oregon posted the following messages on his church’s marquee: “Wake up Christians; Allah is not our God; Muhammad not greater than Jesus; Only the Bible is God’s word… Koran is just another book” [‘Wake Up Christians. Allah Is Not Our God…’ Church Billboard With Controversial Message About Jesus, Muhammad and the Koran Sparks Outrage, by Billy Hallowell, The Blaze, May 13, 2016]. The pastor estimates that on a good day, perhaps thirty cars would drive by and see this simple statement of Christian belief.

Within days, word had gotten out and liberal “Christian” groups descended on the church to protest [Tiny Christian Church In Holy War With Islam, by Leo Hohmannn, WND, June 7, 2016]. The largest newspaper in the state, The Oregonian based out of Portland, reported on the “controversy.” Even the Mayor of Portland intervened, describing the incident as “ugly” and “bigoted.”
One night the church’s sign was vandalized, but the newspapers did not see fit to report this. As one observer pointed out, if Christians had defaced a mosque’s marquee it “would have been all over the news, and you probably would have had Obama out here with the Department of Justice filing hate-crime charges.”

Liberal “Christian” allies such as these reliably come to the aid of expanding Islam whenever called upon. And this is precisely the plan set forth by the Muslim Brotherhood in its “Explanatory Memorandum:” viz., “sabotaging [Western civilization’s] miserable house by their [own] hands.” As the author explained, “If you can find someone within your enemy’s own camp who is willing to be used and who will do your bidding, that’s always more effective than if you pleaded your own cause.”

Leo Hohmannn’s Stealth Invasion went to press before last year’s presidential election, and it remains to be seen to what extent Donald Trump can reverse the immigration disaster Barack Obama sought to “institutionalize” as a permanent part of the government bureaucracy. But this book—packed with more information and real-life stories than any review can summarize—will remain relevant for as long as appreciable numbers of Muslims remain settled in the United States.

In the eyes of our enemies, immigration is a tool not just of war, but of holy war.
Stealth Invasion is an invaluable tool to ensure Americans start getting the message.

Martin Witkerk [Email him] is an independent philosopher.


John Derbyshire : Absimilation On Westminster Bridge: The Japanese Were Right. The British Were Wrong.

Absimilation On Westminster Bridge: The Japanese Were Right. The British Were Wrong.

[Adapted from the latest Radio Derb, now available exclusively on VDARE.com.]

This week our subject is “Life in Derbistan” or London as it used to be. I’m going to indulge myself in some nostalgia. It’s geezerish, I know. But reading about the terrorist attack on London’s Westminster Bridge this Wednesday got me thinking about London, and I began to nostalge.
(Is that a verb, “nostalge”? “I nostalge; you nostalge; he, she, or it nostalges?” If it isn’t, it ought to be.)
So here goes with a trip down Memory Lane.

I was raised in a sleepy small provincial town whose natives referred to London, seventy miles southeast of us, as “the Smoke.” I only really got acquainted with London when I went to college there, from 1963 to 1966.

The colleges of London University didn’t have much residential accommodation. I lived for those three years in rented rooms, in private houses owned by Londoners. My very first semester’s landlord was an employee of Pentonville Prison in north-central London. He had fun stories about executions, capital punishment being then still on the books in England.

Not wanting to pay rent while back in my home town for vacations, I changed lodgings every semester, and sometimes mid-semester. So I got a good random selection of Londoners as landlords, or more often landladies.

A single rented room in a private house was called a “bedsitter,” and that’s what I lived in those three years. There was a whole bedsitter culture back then. Spike Milligan wrote a play titled The Bedsitting Room. Quentin Crisp described the bedsitter environment in his memoir The Naked Civil Servant.

London in the early 1960s wasn’t very diverse by current standards. My landlords and landladies were mostly English, or in one case Welsh. I did have a West Indian landlady for half a semester: a plump Trinidadian mulatto, pleasant enough when not in a mood, but a terrible housekeeper, with a host of men friends who shared her intimate favors serially on some schedule I never figured out.

The only other non-British foreigner was a Greek Cypriot, who threw me out summarily because he thought, mistakenly, I’d made a pass at his wife. People who knew Greek-Cypriot culture told me I was lucky to get away with all my parts still attached.

The modern immigration boom was well under way, but in London there were only a few small concentrations of blacks, and light scatterings of others like the Cypriots and Chinese.

The city had had its first black race riot in 1958. A poll taken five years later would I am sure have shown that most English people would have preferred the blacks to leave. But it wasn’t something people thought about much, so nothing was done. There was even some plantation-style paternalist affection towards blacks—on TV, The Black and White Minstrel Show was very popular.

Islam was even less of an issue. Muslim countries themselves were either keen to modernize or sunk in medieval apathy. For those trying to modernize, Islam was a dusty relic of the past that was only holding them back. That’s why you had these secular dictatorships like Nasser’s Egypt or Ba’ath Syria.
Nobody in London spoke or thought about Islam.

Notwithstanding which, Pakistani immigrants were deeply unpopular. Blacks, with all their faults, were at least cheerful, colorful, and musical. Pakis were none of those things, and were widely disliked. There was a genre of Paki jokes going round, some of them quite nasty. Here’s one of the milder ones:
A Pakistani is at London airport for a trip home. He’s sixpence short of the air fare, though. He approaches an English traveler. “Excuse me, Sir,” he says the Paki, “Could I ask you for sixpence, please? I’m trying to get home to Pakistan.”
The Englishman reaches into his pocket and brings out a half crown [equivalent to five sixpences]. “Here,” he says, “take four of your pals with you.”
There was some diversity in the student body of course. My math class contained a Chinese lad from Hong Kong, an early instance of the Asian math nerd. He introduced us to ngau-yuk-gon, the Cantonese version of beef jerky, which I still have a taste for.

In the Muswell Hill district, where I lodged for a year, there was also a clique of West African students, twenty-something guys from well-off families in Ghana, at that time under the dictatorship of the buffoonish Kwame Nkrumah, whom they all despised.
I hung out with them for a while, and learned some scattered things about West African culture. Tribalism, for example: One of them would say of another, “Oh, Kofi’s all right, but it was his people that put my father out of business …” Naming customs, too: If I were Ghanaian, my name would be Kwasi, because I was born on a Sunday—it goes by day of the week.
And drugs, of course. The Ghanaians all smoked hash in their leisure hours. I tried to join in for the sake of companionship, but it made me throw up.

I’ve never since bothered much with recreational pharmaceuticals. I didn’t cut much of a figure as a bohemian.

The Britain of fifty-odd years ago was a high-trust society. I had a girlfriend in my home town, and weekends I’d go home to see her. My normal mode of travel for those seventy miles was to hitch-hike. I’d take the subway out to Hendon Central, walk a half-mile to the on-ramp for the M1 (Britain’s first expressway, then new), and stand there with my thumb out, trying to look pleasant. Some truck driver or traveling salesman would pull over seeking some conversation on his drive, and an hour and a half later I’d be home.
It was the standard way of getting around if you had no money: not just in Britain, either, but all over Europe. In my 1964 summer vacation I hitch-hiked clear across the continent, to the Black Sea and back.

That was the London I knew, in the England I knew, in my salad days. It had plenty of blemishes, of course. There was terrific class snobbery and a smug, stuffy Establishment, not many of whom practiced noblesse oblige. A few years later, Irish terrorism came up, and made a nuisance of itself—sometimes a lethal one—to Londoners.

Still it was a country, whose various classes and subgroups knew each other—and close neighbors like the Irish—from long acquaintance, even if they didn’t necessarily like each other. Occasionally lunatics did crazy horrible things. But they were our lunatics and we dealt with them our way.

I’m aware that I approach National Question issues with that lost England in mind. I want to live in a country with a big solid majority of one race, one culture. I don’t mind there being others around, and in fact think it’s a healthy thing—salt in the stew. Foreigners can be interesting and amusing.

It’s all a matter of numbers, numbers and concentrations. Don’t take in too many, and discourage clustering—especially in this age of modern communications, when immigrants can bring their native country with them.

Is such an arrangement actually possible in this world today, though, with cheap air travel and low trade barriers?
It surely is: Japan, for example, is a pure Derbistan, as I just described the ideal.
That brings Japan in for a lot of scolding from the Open-Borders mob.
 Mass-immigration fanatic Bret Stephens [Email him] was lecturing them in The Wall Street Journal the other day:
On current trend the population will fall to 97 million by the middle of the century. Barely 10 per cent of Japanese will be children. The rest of the population will divide almost evenly between working-age adults and the elderly.
[Other People’s Babies, Wall Street Journal, March 20, 2017 ]
That doesn’t sound so bad. Late 20th-century Japan was very overcrowded. A population drop to 97 million would be good; 50 million would probably be better. The age distribution doesn’t much matter, with modern healthcare and productivity. Once the baby-boomers have died off and it’s these smaller age cohorts that are aging, it will matter even less.
Or if the Japanese want to get their population back in nine digits via mass immigration, it’s a democratic country and they can elect politicians who’ll take care of that.
But the Japanese show no inclination to do so, for all Bret Stephens’ hectoring.
Is it too late to get Britain back to the Derbistan ideal? My guess would be that it probably is. The place—that’s what it is now: a place, not a country—the place is irrevocably wrecked.

Still, something is owed to honesty. The Brits should at least admit—some national figure, a member of the Royal Family, for example, should publicly admit—that in the matter of mass immigration, the Brits long ago made a horribly wrong decision, while the Japanese made the right one.
The Brits destroyed their country. The Japanese preserved theirs.

All that was brought to mind by the incident in London on Wednesday.

A Muslim terrorist, of the “lone wolf” variety so far as we know, drove his car into pedestrians strolling on Westminster Bridge, killing three and wounding forty. When he arrived at the north end of the bridge, he jumped out and ran into the Houses of Parliament yard, brandishing a knife. He stabbed a policeman to death before being shot dead himself. The killer was identified as Khalid Masood. [From smiling Kent schoolboy to murdering jihadi: Police release mugshot of Westminster terrorist as schoolfriend reveals popular footballer suffered ‘mild racism’ for being the only black student, By Martin Robinson, UK Chief Reporter and Alex Matthews and Gareth Davies and Thomas Burrows for MailOnline,  March 24, 2017]

The Main Stream Media, terrified that anyone might make an immigration connection, went to much trouble to emphasize that he was “British-born.”

He was indeed, but there is more to be said. In fact Masood was black, or at any rate mulatto, born to a 17-year-old English mother and an unknown but presumably black father 52 years ago—just when I was sampling hashish and hiding from enraged Cypriots in North London bedsitters. [ Khalid Masood: Everything we know about the London attacker, By Robert Mendick, Telegraph,  March 24,  2017]
When he was two years old his mother married a Nigerian gent, surname Ajao, who may or may not have been his biological father—nobody seems to know. He was thereafter raised as Adrian Russell Ajao. A career petty criminal, the future Khalid Masood was apparently converted to Islam in jail.

That seems to happen a lot, especially to blacks. Being in jail sure happens to British blacks a lot: Ten percent of inmates in British jails are black, though they are less than three percent of the general population.[UK Prison Reform Trust— Race And Prisons]

For all the MSM’s glee about him being British-born, Masood actually illustrates a thesis I’ve been arguing for years: that it’s not the first generation of immigrants you need to worry about so much as the second and subsequent generations.

As I have argued, some assimilate, some ab-similate. Some immigrant lines become more like us while some go the opposite way, becoming more alienated—they ab-similate. Ab-similation is especially probable when there is a deep difference in race or religion, with blacks and Muslims being the most likely to ab-similate.

The human tragedies of Masood’s victims make sad reading. One of those killed on the bridge was an American tourist, on a European vacation with his wife to mark their 25th wedding anniversary. The wife was badly injured. Another fatality on the bridge: a woman on her way to pick up her kids from school. She was thrown in the path of a double-decker bus and crushed to death. The third bridge fatality was a 75-year-old working-class Londoner, native English. [Killed on his way a hospital appointment, By Mark Duell for MailOnline, March  24 2017]
Many of those not actually killed will have had their lives destroyed. A 29-year-old Romanian tourist, celebrating her birthday in London with her fiancé, was thrown off the bridge into the river, suffering serious head injuries and damaged lungs.

Aside from the personal human dimension, the attack was a strike at English culture, at Englishness itself. Westminster Bridge stands at the heart of Englishness. On the north bank is the Palace of Westminster, where England’s laws have been made for 750 years. Next door is Westminster Abbey, built almost a thousand years ago, for centuries the last resting place of England’s kings, queens, heroes and poets.
On the south side of the bridge is St. Thomas’ Hospital, whose origins go far back into the unknown past, and Lambeth Palace, London residence of the Archbishop of Canterbury, who leads the Church of England.
If you hate England and the English and want to hit them where it hurts most, this is the place to strike.

It’s hard to believe Khalid Masood didn’t have that in mind.

Britain’s elites responded to the attack in General Casey style“As horrific as this tragedy was, if our diversity becomes a casualty, that would be worse.”

The worthless, dithering Prime Minister, Theresa May, who was in charge of U.K. immigration policy for six years without making any perceptible dent in the numbers flooding in, summoned up the spirit of the Blitz, assuring her countrymen that “values of freedom of speech, liberty and democracy” would prevail.
I wouldn’t bet on it. Freedom of speech already effectively abolished in Britain by the Racial and Religious Hatred Act of 2006. Diversity is not strength. You can’t have deep differences of race and religion while maintaining the kind of liberties Englishmen traditionally enjoyed.

And while it’s certainly stirring for a British politician to summon the spirit of the Blitz, that leads to the awkward reflection that the Blitz was an attempt by foreign would-be conquerors to bend the British to their will.

The Brits of nowadays bend way more easily than their grandfathers did. They have reacted in good General Casey fashion, with floral tributes to the dead, moments of silence, and, yes, candlelight vigils all decorated with assurances of national unity and respect for Islam.

London’s Mayor Sadiq Khan, an Islamic supremacist of the stealth variety, presenting a calm, reasonable manner for the TV cameras while his people quietly infiltrate and take over, told viewers that “We won’t be cowed by terrorists.”[Donald Trump Jr criticises London mayor after terror attack, BBC, March 23, 2017
Who do you mean by “we,” Kemosabe?

The Mayor’s comments have an American dimension. Last September, after a bombing by an Afghan immigrant in New York City, Mayor Khan told a British newspaper that the threat of terror attacks is “part and parcel of living in a big city.” [Sadiq Khan: London mayor says terror attacks ‘part and parcel’ of living in a major city, By Gabriel Samuels, Independent,  September 22  2016].
Well, Donald Trump Junior, our President’s son, tweeted that quote following last Wednesday’s Westminster attack, garnished with the comment, “You have to be kidding me.”
That raised gasps of horrified outrage from Goodthinking Americans. Several of them noticed a previous connection between the Trumps and London’s Mayor [London mayor couldn’t care less about Donald Trump Jr.’s tweets,By Yaron Steinbuch, NY Post, March 23, 2017]. The Goodthinkers have quoted with approval the Mayor’s comment last May that Donald’s father, now President Trump, was “ignorant” about Islam. [Sadiq Khan: Donald Trump’s views on Muslims are ignorant – video, May 16, 2015]

The definitive response to that is the one tweeted by the blogger Iowahawk a few months ago when TV talking head Piers Morgan opined that jihadi terrorists were not practicing true Islam.

I’ll adapt Iowahawk’s remark to the current situation, thus: Sadiq Khan has a law degree from a British university, ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi has a Ph.D. in Islamic theology from the Islamic University of Baghdad. In the matter of what is true Islam, which one should we believe?

All the soothing words and earnest declarations of national unity have worked their magic, though. Everyone’s feelings have been soothed—everyone’s feelings except, of course, the feelings of those bereaved or crippled by Mr. Masood’s actions.
Now the Brits can relax, sink back into their lotus dreams of prosperity and racial harmony——until the next Islamic—immigration—atrocity.

John Derbyshire [email him] writes an incredible amount on all sorts of subjects for all kinds of outlets. (This no longer includes National Review, whose editors had some kind of tantrum and fired him. ) He is the author of We Are Doomed: Reclaiming Conservative Pessimism and several other books. He’s had two books published by VDARE.com: FROM THE DISSIDENT RIGHT (also available in Kindle) and From the Dissident Right II: Essays 2013. His writings are archived at JohnDerbyshire.com.