Rape-Gangs Revisited: Third-World Pathology Triggers First World Pathology, as British Authorities Ignore Asian Sex Trafficking of Children for Fear of Racial Unrest

Rape-Gangs Revisited: Third-World Pathology Triggers First World Pathology, as British Authorities Ignore Asian Sex Trafficking of Children for Fear of Racial Unrest

January 18, 2020/30 Comments/in Featured Articles /by Tobias Langdon

 

 

When I was a leftist, I used to sneer at Christianity for being irrational and mandating belief in impossible things. Well, let’s compare the cults. Christianity mandates belief in a single miraculous birth 2000 years ago in Palestine. Leftism — the religion of the well-educated, morally superior elites who run the West — mandates belief in billions of miraculous births over many millennia and much of the earth’s surface. Clearly, leftism is by far the more irrational cult.

One human race, one human brain

But why does leftism believe in billions of miraculous births? Because it insists that human beings didn’t evolve different brains and psychologies as they migrated into different environments, stopped inter-breeding, and differentially acquired new genes from separate human species like Neanderthals, Denisovans, and ghost populations in Africa. According to leftism, there is only one human race and only one human brain. Swedes and Somalis, Tibetans and Tongans, Moldovans and Māori – they’re the same under the skull. They’re all capable of exactly the same high performance in all fields of intellectual endeavour.

The reality of race vs the lies of leftism

Or so leftism claims. This makes it by far the more irrational cult. Christianity has a mechanism for the miraculous virgin birth of Jesus Christ, namely, divine intervention. Leftism has no mechanism for its billions of miraculous births, because it doesn’t believe in the supernatural. Instead of supplying a mechanism, it simply insists that we’re all the same under the skull. And when Somalis and other Blacks don’t match Swedes and other Whites in intellectual endeavours, leftism dishonestly updates concepts from Christianity. Why do Blacks fail? Because Whites wilfully and wickedly prevent them from realizing their sky-high potential. In short, Whites are guilty of the sin of racism. And some Whites are also guilty of blasphemy, in that they deny leftist dogma and attribute Black failure to Black genetics. Here at the Occidental Observer, for example, we blasphemously believe in racial differences and claim that different races are genetically adapted to different environments and cultures.

Insist on the biologically impossible

But that doesn’t plumb the full depths of leftist irrationality and belief in biological impossibilities. Leftism doesn’t only insist that brain-evolution was miraculously prevented among human beings. It also insists that brain-evolution was miraculously reversed. Somehow human beings have abolished the neurological and psychological differences that had previously existed between the males and females of our ape-like ancestors. And so leftism proclaims that women are capable of exactly the same high performance as men in all fields of intellectual endeavour. When women fail to match men, leftism again attributes this to sin and blasphemy. Men are guilty of sexism and some men blasphemously believe that women’s brains are different for genetic reasons.
Yes, the cult of leftism has a two-step recipe for creating a better world. First, insist on the biologically impossible. Second, bash the unbelievers. If it weren’t for racism and sexism, non-Whites and women would be performing at exactly the same high level as Whites and men. But as I’ve often pointed out, leftists are not genuinely interested in creating a better world and improving the lives of non-Whites and women. Leftists are interested in power and privilege for themselves, which is why they abandon their own principles whenever reality contradicts leftism. For example, the small Yorkshire town of Rotherham is a stronghold of leftism. It is also a stronghold of rape-culture, where the Labour council and the very pro-Jewish Labour MP, Denis MacShane, ignored the organized rape and sexual trafficking of working-class girls by grossly sexist men who embodied the very worst aspects of misogynistic patriarchy.

A simple choice: admit the truth or censor it

How could this happen? It happened because the girls were White and their abusers were brown-skinned Pakistani Muslims. This contradicted leftist ideology, which pretends that women and non-Whites are all victims of brutal White men and their hate. Leftists in Rotherham had a simple choice: they could either admit the truth and help the victims or deny the truth and help the cause of leftism. They didn’t hesitate: they denied the truth and allowed the Muslim rape-gangs to flourish. But Rotherham is, as I’ve said, a small Yorkshire town. In my article “Rape-Gangs Unlimited,” I predicted “that much bigger scandals remain uncovered in cities like London, Manchester, Birmingham, Sheffield and Bradford.”
Sure enough, in 2020 there’s a reluctant report in the Guardian about a small part of the non-White rape-culture that flourished in the northern city of Manchester, another stronghold of leftism:

Victoria Agoglia, killed by leftism and Islam

Up to 52 children may have been victims of a sex abuse scandal in Greater Manchester, with most offenders getting away with their crimes because of errors by police and children’s services, the Guardian has learned.
Some of the police officers involved in the 2004 case are still serving and the police watchdog has been called in to re-examine if there was any wrongdoing. The revelations came as an independent report found that the police investigation into child sexual exploitation failed vulnerable girls in care after being shut down prematurely — partly because senior officers prioritised solving burglaries and car crime.
Operation Augusta was launched in 2004 by Greater Manchester Police (GMP) following the death of 15-year-old Victoria Agoglia, who died of an overdose in 2003 after being injected with heroin by a 50-year-old man. …
The report found that although Augusta identified 16 child victims and 97 potential perpetrators — mostly men working in the restaurant trade — only three were convicted at court. The operation was shut down prematurely in July 2005, with the force blaming a lack of resources. As a result, most of the affected children — white girls aged 12 to 16 in care in Manchester — were “failed” by police and children’s services, the authors concluded.
[Greater Manchester police assistant chief constable Mabs Hussain] denied any suggestion that the original inquiry was inadequate because offenders were mostly from an Asian background: “There was no suggestion that there was any fear, from the evidence I have seen.” [This is false; see below]
The report suggested GMP failed to learn lessons from the curtailed operation, noting that nine years after Victoria’s death, nine Asian men in Rochdale were found guilty of sexually exploiting vulnerable young white girls. Burnham commissioned the research after Margaret Oliver, a detective on the Augusta team, went public criticising GMP in the aftermath of the Rochdale case.
“Don’t believe any of this rubbish that police have learned from their mistakes. I worked on an almost identical operation in 2004, Operation Augusta, which had identified dozens of young victims and dozens of suspects,” she said in a media interview in 2017. …
Operation Augusta identified various restaurants and takeaways in south Manchester where suspects were employed. Intelligence suggested that offenders were targeting care homes within the city of Manchester area, particularly one home used as an emergency placement unit for children entering the care system, which the report authors said “maintained a steady supply of victims” for the perpetrators, who befriended the girls as soon as they arrived. …
Joanne Roney, chief executive of Manchester city council, said: “This report makes for painful reading. We recognise that some of the social work practice and management oversight around 15 years ago fell far below the high standards we now expect. We are deeply sorry that not enough was done to protect our children at the time. While we cannot change the past we have learned from it and will continue to do so to ensure that no stone is left unturned in tackling this abhorrent crime.” (Police errors may have let abusers of up to 52 children escape justice, The Guardian, 14th January 2020)

In fact, a senior police officer from Rotherham has said that “With it being Asians, we can’t afford for this to be coming out,” admitting that the force ignored sex abuse by grooming gangs for 30 years for fear of stoking racial tensions — glaring testimony to the complicity of British elites in the immigration catastrophe.
And who can believe that their leftist enablers are sincere in their sorrow over what happened? Joanne Roney and her fellow leftists aren’t “deeply sorry” about the consequences of their own ideology. Nor was the leftist Joanna Simons, “the chief executive of Oxfordshire county council,” after a very similar scandal in the southern city of Oxford back in 2013. Simons said: “We are incredibly sorry we were not able to stop it any sooner. We were up against a gang of devious criminals. The girls thought they were their friends. … These are devious crimes that are very complicated.”

 

One of the victims told a trial how she was made to have sex with ‘at least 100 Asian men’. Asif Ali and Tanweer Ali (right) got terms of terms of 10 years and 14 years respectively. (Daily Mail caption)

“B” is for Brazen

In Oxford, one of the devious criminals, Mohammad Karrar, covered his tracks by ringing social workers and threatening violence against his victim, his victim’s family and the social workers themselves if he was prevented from seeing her and carrying on his abuse. An official report said that Karrar was “brazen in his exploitation of Girl D and acted in the belief that the authorities would never challenge him.” The b-word also appears in the Manchester scandal, where the death of Victoria Agoglia “exposed a network of paedophiles brazenly abusing young people in care… [who] should have been brought to justice but, appallingly, most [of them] escaped and some were left to reoffend.”
Of course the rape-gangs were – and are – “brazen.” There is a lot of inbreeding in Britain’s vibrant Muslim communities, which reduces their average IQ even further, but non-White rapists don’t have to be intelligent to understand how leftism works. If you’re non-White, you’re a victim and leftists will allow you to express your vibrant culture as you please. Then the leftists will pretend that they’re “deeply sorry” and “incredibly sorry” about allowing you to rape, torture and run child-prostitution rings.

No martyr-cult for White girls

But leftists are not sorry and have not abandoned the lies and irrationality that allow rape-gangs to flourish. As you can see above, the leftist Guardian is still weaselling about the crimes in Manchester. It says “Up to 52 children” when it should say “100s or 1000s of White girls.” It says that the authorities made “errors” when it should say that the authorities made deliberate, Guardian-approved choices to ignore crimes of which they were fully aware. It uses the generic term “man” and “men” to conceal the full truth. Who was responsible for the sexual abuse? Why, it was “men working in the restaurant trade.” And who injected 15-year-old Victoria Agoglia with a fatal overdose of heroin in 2003? Why, it was “a 50-year-old man.” The Guardian is happy to reveal the sex of the criminals, because that assists the leftist lie that women are the helpless victims of brutal sexist men. But it conceals the race and religious background of the criminals, because that contradicts the leftist demonization of White men and White Christianity.
But it wasn’t Christianity that killed Victoria Agoglia: it was an alliance between leftism and Islam. She was fatally injected with heroin by a non-White Pakistani Muslim even as the leftist authorities in Manchester were fully aware that she was “being repeatedly abused, raped and plied with drugs by predatory paedophiles.” The leftist authorities – police and social services – did nothing to help her. That is far worse than the murder of Stephen Lawrence, the Black teenager who was stabbed to death by a White gang in London in 1993. The police in London allegedly failed Stephen Lawrence after his death. The police in Manchester indisputably failed Victoria Agoglia for many months before her death. But only Stephen Lawrence has become the centre of a leftist cult that incessantly bewails the racism of the White British and the “institutional racism” of the British police.

Laura Wilson, killed by leftism and Islam

Laura Wilson was also ignored. She was the 17-year-old White girl stabbed to death in Rotherham in 2010 by two Pakistani Muslims whose activities, once again, were fully known to the leftists responsible for what they would laughably call Laura’s “welfare.” And there have been many other White women and girls in many other British towns and cities who have died at the hands of non-Whites even as the leftist authorities knew that they were being harmed and were at risk of murder. But none of those White victims have leftist martyr-cults because their deaths don’t assist the cause of leftism and the leftist pursuit of power
.

The life-cult and the suicide-cult

On the contrary, their deaths flatly contradict leftism. We are not all the same under the skin and non-White failure is not caused by White racism. Mass immigration from the corrupt, tribalist and highly illiberal Third World causes huge and growing harm to Britain and all other White nations that are subject to it. Christianity believes that “the truth shall make you free.” Leftism believes in lies, censorship and enslavement.
When the Western world was Christian, it achieved astonishing things in art, literature, music and science. When the Western world turned leftist, it began to die. Leftism is a suicide-cult that has to be destroyed. And it will be destroyed, because the truth about racial and sexual differences won’t be suppressed for very much longer. An ideology built on fantasies and lies is like a house built on sand. When floods sweep away the sand, the house will fall. When science sweeps away the fantasies and lies, the ideology will fall.

Melbourne Terrorism and Truth Denial

Melbourne Terrorism and Truth Denial

Dec 22, 2017

https://billmuehlenberg.com/2017/12/22/melbourne-terrorism-truth-denial/

 

As I said at the end of my article yesterday about the latest terror attack in Melbourne, it is interesting how it always seems to boil down to one common factor: no, not Islam, but mental illness! This is the new catch-all cause for all terror attacks it seems.
It does not matter in the least if the guy who did the slaughter was a Muslim from a Muslim country talking about Islam, it of course has NOTHING to do with Islam – it must just be a mental illness. That is the new mantra we all must now run with in the West.

 

Islam is never the fault – mental problems explain everything. So today with more info available on the attacker, we read this: “The suspect has some mental health issues, a range of matters in his past, including drug use. He has made utterances, speaking of voices and dreams, attributing his actions to the treatment of Muslims around the world.”

Um, so here the Muslim even admits that this is all about Islam, but we still must not believe him. Whenever a Muslim acting according to his Islamic beliefs does something fully in line with the tenets of his faith – and even says so – he is NOT to be believed.

No matter how much he states that he does this because of concern for Islam or out of Islamic ideology, that CANNOT be the real reason why he did it. Islam is just not capable of generating Islamic terrorism and Islamic terrorists, so we must find another reason for all this.

So mental illness will have to do the trick. And just imagine if a devout Christian had done this, claiming it was for “the treatment of Christians around the world.” Would everyone still be talking about mental health and no connection to terrorism? Um, I don’t think so.

Thankfully I am not alone in being very concerned about all this. Others are also asking some hard questions here. For example, columnist Andrew Bolt, who gets it right on most things – while most political and religious leaders do not – said this:

All the bollards put up after six people were killed in Bourke St Mall in January have not stopped this. You cannot put up bollards at pedestrian crossings, a blindingly obvious point I made six months ago when the State Government was putting up what I called these stones of stupidity – bollards meant to falsely reassure us our politicians would protect us. But our reckless immigration and refugee policies may well have played a role here, though, although we do not yet know the identity of the people in the car. Add this to the Sudanese riots and we have a very, very serious topic that needs debating.
UPDATE:
Sure enough, the 32-year-old driver was an Australian citizen of Afghan descent, yet police say only that he has a history of drug use and mental illness and there is no known terrorism link.
(Does having a mental illness exclude the possibility of also wanting to kill for your faith?)

And Mark Steyn has just written a ripper of a piece on the latest Melbourne jihad attack. He is worth quoting at length. He begins:

So there will be more empty seats round the Christmas table this year, after an “Australian citizen” mowed down pedestrians at the junction of Flinders Street and Elizabeth Street in Melbourne. The casualties include “a pre-schooler with serious head injuries”. The “Australian citizen” (I presume this designation is being used to emphasize that he’s entirely eligible to serve in Mr Turnbull’s cabinet) did it deliberately, but relax, lighten up, there’s no need to worry because, according to Victoria’s police commissioner, all this terrifying terror is “not terror-related”.
So he’s not a crack operative with the Islamic State’s Australian branch office, he’s just, as The Age’s cheery headline writer puts it, “of Afghan descent and mentally ill”. A second man, arrested while filming the scene and found to have three knives in his bag, is believed to be nothing to do with the first man. Just another Australian citizen taking his knife collection out for a stroll.

He reminds us that the last Melbourne terror attack spurred the government to take the bollard steps. A lot of good they have done. As he rightly reminds us in his title, “We Are the Bollards”. He continues:

One of the problems with bollarding off pedestrians behind a wall of Diversity Bollards is that they still occasionally have to emerge from behind the bollards to cross the street, and it’s hard to bollard off a pedestrian crossing. In this case, the non-terror-related Australian citizen simply waited until the little green sign indicated it was safe for pedestrians to cross the street and then floored it. In an amusing touch, his car eventually came to a rest against a bollard.
What’s the solution? Maybe automobile manufacturers could replace airbags with Diversity Bollards timed to inflate whenever non-terror-related drivers with mental-health issues accelerate near pedestrian crossings. Or perhaps it would be easier to issue citizens of western nations at birth with an individual ring of bollards to wear about their persons at all time, starting with when they leave the maternity ward.
Alternatively, instead of attempting to ring-fence every potential target – ie, everything and everyone – with Diversity Bollards, we could try installing bollards where they matter – around the civilized world. To reiterate what I reiterated last time:
I don’t want to get used to it – and I reiterate my minimum demand of western politicians that I last made after the London Bridge attacks: How many more corpses need to pile up on our streets before you guys decide to stop importing more of it?
If your congressman or senator says that’s not on his agenda, what he means is he’s willing to sacrifice you and your loved ones in the suicide lottery of diversity.

He closes by pointing out the irony of it all. Please click on the photo that I have accompanying this article, and notice what is in the top right corner of the picture. Says Steyn:

That’s the scene in Melbourne. At street level, the area is cordoned off. Thousands of law-abiding citizens are disrupted in their daily business by an Australian citizen “of Afghan descent and mentally ill”. At the far corner, that’s St Paul’s Cathedral. Can you see the banner they’re displaying three days before Christmas? Anything about Jesus? Christianity? No. Instead:
WELCOME REFUGEES
In that post-Christian void – the shell of a church with faith in everything but itself – a very merry Muslim Christmas makes a perverted kind of sense.

Yep, that about says it all. The West is committing hari kari as it jettisons and demonises its own past, welcomes in zillions of people who do not share – and even detest – our way of life and its Christian foundation, and have declared war on us.
Yet our leaders insist that we take in more such folks, no questions asked. Oh, and if they do go on a killing rampage, we know it must be due to mental illness. It certainly has absolutely nothing to do with a political ideology which has slaughtered hundreds of millions of people over its 1400 year history.
That is now the new normal in the West. Our craven and compromised leaders can no longer deny that Muslims are those doing almost all of the terrorism on our streets. So their new spin on things is that they are all mentally ill. Yep, that makes it all OK then. We can go back to sleep now.
As I wrote late last night in my first piece on this horrific incident of Islamic Christmas cheer:

I wonder how many genuinely mentally ill people have deliberately ploughed down innocent people on footpaths with cars and trucks before IS said this would be a terrific way to slaughter the infidels. Maybe the MSM or police can answer that question for us.

Somehow I don’t expect they will.

www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/pedestrians-hit-in-melbourne-cbd/news-story/0793771ddb8f4d79ec660e0d1c4735d5
www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/pedestrians-hit-in-melbourne-cbd/news-story/0793771ddb8f4d79ec660e0d1c4735d5
www.steynonline.com/8340/we-are-the-bollards

===================

Islam and Western Dhimmitude: This is How Revolutions Begin

Islam and Western Dhimmitude: This is How Revolutions Begin

Dec 23, 2017

 https://billmuehlenberg.com/2017/12/23/islam-western-dhimmitude-revolutions-begin/

 

 

The formula is now down pat and fully predictable: another terror attack; usually by an Islamic refugee; Western leaders strenuously deny it is terror- or Islam-related; ‘It was a lone wolf attack by someone with mental problems’; soon enough the blood is cleaned from our streets; we await the next instalment.
Over and over it goes – the same old same old. Our spineless leaders, a complicit lamestream media, and some utterly clueless Christian leaders all follow the piper in regurgitating the same script: ‘This has nothing to do with Islam; Islam is a religion of peace; and what really must be dealt with is “Islamophobia”.’

 

After hearing this tired routine countless times now, many Westerners are unsurprisingly getting a bit upset with all this. So where will it all lead to? While I am not a big fan of conspiracy theories, I do try to be a student of history, and what I see unfolding right now has me really worried.

What happens when ever larger portions of the population suspect that their leaders (politicians, police chiefs, media outlets, etc) are actually lying to them about crucial things like national security? What will happen to a culture when the masses suspect their leaders are far more interested in defending those who hate them than in protecting its own citizens?

I fear we are increasingly moving in this direction. This can be true on various fronts, but overwhelmingly we find what seems to be lies, obfuscations and deliberate deception when it comes to the ever-related issues of Islam and terrorism. Our leaders for the most part seem intent on denying reality here, and are more concerned to protect and make excuses for Islam than they are in defending their own populations.

As the body count rises and more and more blood flows on Western streets, the masses are increasingly getting unhappy about this. They are getting restless. They are getting ticked off. They do not want to be treated like fools. They do not like to be lied to. They do not like to be kept in the dark as to what is really going on.

All this makes for fertile soil not just for all sorts of conspiracy theorists, but for a population that will eventually snap and begin to take matters into their own hands. I am not advocating any of this. I am not fomenting revolution. I am not demanding that we take to the streets.

I am simply pointing out what I see currently happening. And as I tie this in to the lessons of history it is not looking good. Indeed, all this has me quite worried. This sort of stuff just cannot continue. Something eventually has to give. And the latest attack in Melbourne just offers us more of the same.

Our dhimmi leaders, cowardly politicians, clueless media personnel, and gullible Christians are all still insisting this was not about terrorism and Islam, even as the evidence mounts up to the contrary. As I have stated in earlier articles on this, the attacker listed the conditions of Muslims elsewhere as a reason why he did this. And today we learn further about this:

“Flinders St attacker Saeed Noori rambled about Allah and the nation’s top security agency after mowing down 18 people. Acting Chief Commissioner Shane Patton has revealed that Noori made the comments from his hospital bed in the hours after his rampage which left three people on Friday night fighting for life.”

Let me point out this home truth: there are plenty of abused, misused and aggrieved Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Sikhs, Hindus and so on – and some would even be mentally ill – yet we don’t read about them driving vehicles on to crowded sidewalks, slaughtering as many innocents as possible. Why is that?

The “mental illness” mantra is already wearing a bit thin. If they were actually trying to tell us all Muslims are mentally ill, that might be one thing. But that is not what they are trying to say. What they are saying is this: “A good Muslim is one who does not act according to his own faith, nor take it seriously. The devout, obedient Muslim, on the other hand, is mentally ill.” Problem solved!

I think the millions of people who do suffer from genuine cases of mentally illness who have NOT mowed down innocents on sidewalks in speeding vehicles are owed a massive apology from our dhimmi leaders and authorities. They are being painted with a really bad brush here.

While I make no claim to being an expert on mental illness, nor want to belabour all this, a few quotes from those who are experts may be of use here:

There is little consensus in the literature regarding the importance of mental illness in lone-actor terrorism. However, the evidence suggests that mental illness is not a key factor contributing to acts of violence in these cases. It is therefore erroneous to insinuate that psychiatrists have a role in identifying these individuals. It is also highly questionable whether a ‘future potential Breivik’ would – or could – be identified by psychiatrists. In the case of Breivik, the forensic psychiatric evaluation concluded that although he has narcissistic personality disorder, he was not affected by a serious mental disorder when committing the act of terrorism, nor at the time of the evaluation.

Or as one person told me just recently:

A short time ago on Sky News a mental health expert said it was wrong to blame mental health patients for atrocities like Flinders Street. He said statistics show that it is very rare for a mental patient to do such crimes. Mental health people are statistically far more likely to be victims of crimes than perpetrators of crimes. This crime was done by a person who knew exactly what he was doing and he has indicated to police that one of his motives was the treatment of Muslims around the world.

And one more:

What is it about terrorism that people fail to grasp? I’ll put it as simply as I can: there are individuals (and groups) out there that plan and carry out heinous acts of violence we label as terrorism because they really believe in what they are doing. Whether it is divinely inspired (or mandated) or self-styled legitimate action to right a wrong, some people will engage in these acts out of a sense of justice or to impose on the rest of us what they see as the only way to conduct our lives. There is nothing inherent in any of this that points to mental illness. We really need to stop leaping to the conclusion that perpetrators are suffering from psychological imbalance just because we don’t understand why they are doing these kinds of attacks.

It is simply part of the accepted PC narrative in the West that Islam is just peachy and terrorism cannot be Islamic-based, so we must find another excuse. And right now playing the mental illness card seems to be working just fine for our elites.
Today Chris Kenny said what needs to be said:

The police arrested an Afghan migrant who according to their own reports cited the treatment of Muslims as his grievance and his motivation. Yet Victoria Police waited five hours before sharing any of the detailed information and even then denied any link to terrorism.
This denial is so worrying so ignorant and so dangerous, yet even the Prime Minister adopted this same ridiculous line. They tell us a Muslim migrant from Afghanistan has mown down people and raved about the treatment of Muslims yet they say there is no link to terrorism.
How can the public feel safe if the authorities and politicians won’t even confront the very real enemy of Islamist extremism terrorism. This is the evil whose name they dare not speak — they are in jihad denialism.

Let me finish with a few quotes from commentator Brendan O’Neill. His views sum up what a good many of us are thinking right now. He reminds us that

terror has become a normal part of everyday life. It has contributed to today’s weird acceptance, almost, that strange violent incidents, the occasional truck attack or stabbing rampage or bomb, are part and parcel of living in the West in the 21st century. This strange, muted sense that terror is like the weather — always there and beyond our control — has become more and more pronounced during the past year.

And he points out that another casualty of all this Islamic terror is the death of truth. We are just not supposed to talk about the obvious:

We’re discouraged from asking difficult questions. Debate is frowned on. Wonder if radical Islam is a major problem for the West and you’ll be branded “Islamophobic”. Ask if it was wise of Angela Merkel to welcome hundreds of thousands of migrants from the Middle East into Europe in 2015 and you’ll be called racist.
Even to argue that there are certain French, British, American or Australian values that are good, and that we should encourage newcomers to adopt, is to risk being viewed as a sinner against the multicultural idea that all values are equally valid.
We always see this post-terror: the chilling of debate. The aim is to tame moral thought, dampen dangerous emotions. It sometimes feels like the political and media elites fear us, the public, more than they do the apocalyptic terrorist. After every attack their first response is to say: “There had better not be an Islamophobic backlash in response to this.”
It is becoming clear that the perversely chilled response to terrorism is not an act of defiance. Rather, it speaks to a reluctance in the West to engage in robust debate about terror, religion, immigration and values. It speaks to such a deeply entrenched culture of relativism, PC offence-avoidance and intellectual and moral cowardice that some now think occasional acts of barbarism are a price worth paying if it means we can avoid asking deep, difficult questions about Western society, Islam and multicultural tensions in the 21st century.
We need to change this post-terror culture. We need to recognise that a society that will not even permit anger or moral soul-searching when an eight-year-old girl at an Ariana Grande concert is blown apart is a society that has already been defeated. It is a society that is already dead.

Such cultures will either be dead, or become the ideal fertile soil for an ugly and perhaps violent revolt from the masses. Neither outcome is looking very good.
===========
www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/pedestrians-hit-in-melbourne-cbd/news-story/0793771ddb8f4d79ec660e0d1c4735d5
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5288096/
www.hilltimes.com/2017/11/16/go-mental-health-terrorism/125792
www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/columnists/chris-kenny/call-it-for-what-it-is-an-islamist-terror-attack/news-story/5f82ebf458f46ff3f98d5f6fea883b58?nk=4eb9eec5ef94761caf7b0f3843fb713f-1514001482
www.theaustralian.com.au/news/inquirer/west-needs-a-new-response-to-terror/news-story/c5875ce2fbe753a2a4d8a1db7101fd51
================

Yves Mamou : France: "Jihad by Court"

France: "Jihad by Court"

by Yves Mamou
July 10, 2017 at 5:00 am

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/10606/france-courts-jihad

• The goal of this trial is to create judicial precedent: to ensure that in the future, any criticism or insult against Islamism must be considered "racism".
• Valentina Colombo, a professor at the European University in Rome, warned early on about jihad by court. In 2009, she wrote that, "The lawsuit that was initiated by The Union of the Islamic Organizations of France and the Great Mosque of Paris against the satirical magazine 'Charlie Hebdo' for republishing the Danish cartoons about Muhammad is one of the most recent examples of this kind of jihad." But nobody paid attention to the warning. And when jihadists came in 2015 to murder eight journalists and cartoonists, nobody understood that "jihad by court" is only the first step.
• "Legal action has become a mainstay of radical Islamist organizations seeking to intimidate and silence their critics." — Steven Emerson, Founder and President of The Investigative Project on Terrorism.

A silent jihad is under way in France. Spread by a constellation of Muslim organizations allied to powerful (non-Muslim) "anti-racist" associations, "jihad by court" is attacking freedom of press, and freedom of speech. Any journalist, politician, lawyer or intellectual who talks or writes either about Islam or some of its representatives in a critical way, is at risk of being taken to court for "racism" or "outraging a group of people because of their religion."

The so-called "jihad by court" began in an experimental way in France at the beginning of the century. In 2002, the famous French writer Michel Houellebecq was sued for "incitement to hatred" by Islamic organizations allied to the Ligue des droits de l'Homme, ("Human Rights League"), a prestigious "anti-racist" organization. Houellebecq was sued for having said in an interview with Lire magazine that, "of all existing religions, Islam is the dumbest. We read the Coran, we all collapse." Houellebecq was acquitted.

In 2007, a similar lawsuit was initiated by the Union of the Islamic Organizations of France (UOIF) and the Great Mosque of Paris against the satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo, because it republished the Danish Muhammad cartoons. The plaintiffs accused Charlie Hebdo of "racism". Charlie Hebdo was acquitted.
In 2011, unknown arsonists burned Charlie Hebdo's offices. The magazine was sued again in 2012 and in 2013.
Each time, the plaintiffs were different Muslim organizations claiming different instances of "racism" or "blasphemy".
January 7, 2015, two Muslim terrorists stormed into the offices of Charlie Hebdo and murdered 12 people.
Two years after that, jihad by court is everywhere.

Against Intellectuals and Journalists

Éric Zemmour, a writer and journalist, was sued in February 2011 for "racial incitement". He said on television that "most dealers are blacks and Arabs. That is a fact". He was fined €2,000. In May 2012, Zemmour was sued for defamation by Patrick Lozes, president of Council of Black Associations (CRAN). Zemmour had written in 2008: "Patrick Lozes said 'Obama is our president', which proves that for him, racial solidarity is superior in his enamored eyes than national solidarity". Zemmour was acquitted.

In 2014, Zemmour was sued again because he said, "The Normans, the Huns, Arabs, the great invasions after the fall of Rome are now replaced by gangs of Chechens, Roma, Kosovars, North Africans, Africans, who rob, abuse or strip your belongings." He was released in September 2015. The appeals court reconfirmed his release in 2016.

In December 2015, Zemmour was again fined €3,000 because he had declared to the Italian daily Corriere della Sera that the "deportation" of five million French Muslim seems "unrealistic", but is comparable to "the five or six million Germans who had to leave eastern Europe after World War II".
Zemmour succeeded in proving that the word "deportation" was added by Corriere della Sera, but the judge did not take that into consideration, and Zemmour's conviction was reaffirmed after an appeal in November 2016.
In June 2017, Zemmour was fined €5,000 after saying on television in September 2016, that "jihadists were considered by all Muslims, good Muslims." The plaintiff was a pro-Palestinian association, CAPJPO-EuroPa­les­tine.

Pascal Bruckner, an author and essayist, was sued in December 2015, by the Islamic, "left-wing" associations, Les Indivisibles and Les Indigenes de la République. Bruckner had said on television that the plaintiffs had "ideologically justified the murder of Charlie Hebdo's journalists". Bruckner was acquitted in 2016.

In January 2017, all "anti-racist" associations and the Islamist CCIF (Collective Against Islamophobia) sued Georges Bensoussan -- an award-winning Jewish French historian, born and raised in Morocco -- for racism. He had said on the radio that "in France, in Arab families... anti-Semitism is imbibed with one's mother's milk." He was acquitted, but the prosecutor has filed an appeal.

Against the "Fachosphère"

The fachosphère (combination of "fascist" and "sphere") is the term that the mainstream media are now calling a collection of websites -- such as the Riposte Laïque, Resistance Republicaine and many others -- that warn of the dangers of being overrun by radical Islam. Between 2012 and 2017, Riposte Laïque alone was sued "no fewer than 43 times" its editor-in-chief, Pierre Cassen, told Gatestone. This time, the plaintiffs were not only "anti-racist" associations (LDH, SOS-Racisme, le MRAP, la LICRA and Islamist CCIF) -- but also the mayor of Paris, Anne Hidalgo; former Interior Minister Bernard Cazeneuve, and various Islamic associations such as L'Aube du Savoir ("Sunrise of Knowledge"), journalists from the mainstream media (Libération, Le Monde), the Ligue de Défense Judiciaire des Musulmans ("Muslim Judicial Defense League"). These libel and racism suits asked for fines from €5,000 to €40,000.

Against Officials

On March 30, 2016, Laurence Rossignol, then Minister of Families, Children and Women's Rights and known to be a fierce critic of the omnipresence of the Islamic veil in public places, was interviewed by the radio station RMC. She compared veiled women to "American negroes ["nègres américains"] who supported slavery". 
Rossignol apologized for using "negroes", but possibly too late. The Islamist Collectif Contre L'islamophobie en France (CCIF) and the Frantz Fanon Foundation launched a class action suit for "insult of a racial nature" and announced their intention to submit a complaint to the Cour de Justice de la République, a court empowered to adjudicate lawsuits against members of the government. The plaintiffs also threatened to sue the minister appointed to the Correctional Court and the Administrative Court of Paris.

In June 2017, Véronique Corazza, Head of Elsa-Triolet secondary school of Saint-Denis (a suburb of Paris), was sued by Majid Messaoudene, an official of the municipality of Saint Denis, because she republished on her Facebook page dozens "shameful tweets" of Messaoudène in which he supported BDS against Israel and mocked the secularist imam of Drancy, Hassen Chalghoumi.

On June 20, 2017, the jihadi terrorist Salah Abdeslam sued Member of Parliament Thierry Solère, for "breach of privacy". Abdeslam is the only survivor of the Islamist terror cell that murdered 130 people and wounded 430 others on November 13, 2015 in Paris. Exercising his right as a member of parliament to visit prisons, Solère described to two journalists the life of the prisoner, from brushing his teeth to doing exercises in his cell.

Salah Abdeslam (left), a member of the Islamist terror cell that murdered 130 people in Paris on November 13, 2015, filed a lawsuit against Member of Parliament Thierry Solère (right), for "breach of privacy". Solère had described to journalists the life of Abdeslam in prison. (Images source: Wikimedia Commons)

On June 22, 2017, Pierre de Bousquet de Florian, head of the new anti-ISIS task-force created by president Emmanuel Macron, was sued and fined €500 euros for "defaming" Imam Mohamed Khattabi. In 2015, Bousquet de Florian said that Khattabi was a Salafist and a hate-preacher.

Against Secularist Muslims

On February 6, 2015, Soufiane Zitouni, a professor of philosophy, published an op-ed in the daily, Libération, questioning the Islamist style of Averroes Muslim College, which was employing him. He described the college as "Muslim territory under contract with the State" and criticized an incipient anti-Semitism in the school. He was sued for defamation by Amar Lasfar, president of Union des Organizations Islamiques de France (UOIF), an umbrella organization said to be "in conformity with" the Muslim Brotherhood. Zitouni was acquitted.

Between 2015 and 2017, Mohamed Louizi, author of Pourquoi j'ai quitté les Frères Musulmans ("Why I Quit the Muslim Brotherhood") was sued four times. In May and July 2015, he was sued for defamation because he published six articles on his blog about Sofiane Zitouni's case with Averroes College (see above). In these two cases, Louizi was acquitted.

Then, in 2017, Louizi again shed light on arrangements made behind closed doors between some Socialist officials heading the city of Lille and Islamists accused by Louizi to be members of the Muslim Brotherhood. He was sued twice. Judgement is pending.

On June 6, 2017, Ahmed Meguini, secularist activist and founder of LaïcArt association, said on Twitter that Marwan Muhammad was "a son of a b**ch Salafist" and a "small sh**t". Marwan Muhammad, an Islamist and Executive Director of CCIF was not angry at all. He simply picked up his phone and called his lawyer to sue Meguini -- not for having insulting him, but for "racism". The goal of this trial, according to Causeur magazine, is to create a judicial precedent: to ensure that in the future, any criticism or insult against Islamism must be considered "racism".
These lists are not comprehensive; the trials above are just the most visible part of the iceberg.

A "Modern and Aggressive Form of Jihad "

Valentina Colombo, a professor at the European University in Rome, warned early on about "jihad by court". In 2009, in Gatestone, she wrote:

"The lawsuit that was initiated by The Union of the Islamic Organizations of France and the Great Mosque of Paris against the satirical magazine 'Charlie Hebdo' for republishing the Danish cartoons about Muhammad is one of the most recent examples of this kind of jihad."

But nobody (in France) paid attention to the warning. And when jihadists came in 2015 to murder eight journalists and cartoonists, nobody understood that jihad by court is only the first step. When people persist in what other people regard as "Islamophobia", murderers have shown up to make sure the message sticks.

In another article, Colombo writes: "Jihad by court is another form of 'intermediate' jihad and is a modern and aggressive form of jihad through legal means."

Jihad by court is one of the favorite means of the organizations and individuals ideologically linked with the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) in the West and sometimes is connected with the accusation of Islamophobia. The strategy is clear: any journalist, writer, intellectual, academic, activist or any newspaper, organization, association criticizing or exposing a Muslim Brotherhood individual or organization is very likely to be sued for defamation. The Legal Project of the Middle East Forum, based in the U.S., has given a very useful definition of this tactic:

Such lawsuits are often predatory, filed without a serious expectation of winning, but undertaken as a means to bankrupt, distract, intimidate, and demoralize defendants. Plaintiffs seek less to prevail in the courtroom than to wear down researchers and analysts. Even when the latter win cases, they pay heavily in time, money, and spirit. As counterterrorism specialist Steven Emerson comments, "Legal action has become a mainstay of radical Islamist organizations seeking to intimidate and silence their critics." Islamists clearly hope, Douglas Farah notes, that researchers will "get tired of the cost and the hassle [of lawsuits] and simply shut up."

French intellectuals, journalists, officials do not yet understand that they must organize, raise funds and elaborate strategies with lawyers to counter this threat. No one can compete individually against court by jihad. If an organized counter-strategy is not elaborated, the prediction of Yusuf al-Qaradawi, the Egyptian Islamic cleric and chairman of the International Union of Muslim Scholars -- "We will colonize you with your democratic laws" -- will come true.

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

• Follow Yves Mamou on Facebook

Giulio Meotti : The West: Too Tired to Defend Freedom?

The West: Too Tired to Defend Freedom?

by Giulio Meotti
June 29, 2017 at 5:30 am

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/10593/defend-freedom

• "We are kidding ourselves if we think we yet live in a tolerant, liberal society" — UK Liberal Democrats party leader Tim Farron, who resigned after giving "politically incorrect" answers on homosexual sex and abortion.
• Wherever he went, Jeremy Corbyn seemed as if he were a voluntary collaborator with an Iranian regime that executes gays. But Corbyn was never questioned about this affiliation the way the media obsessively questioned Farron.
• Muslim supremacists murder gays in Orlando? Instead of being proud of an open society, defending it from Islamic jihadists, and accepting the freedom to be homosexual as a positive difference between the West and Islam, our liberals make it a case for more "inclusion".

After the recent terror attacks in Britain, The Spectator wrote: "After five centuries, religious war has returned to England". The reference is to 1535, when Thomas More was executed for his Catholic beliefs. Tim Farron, a British MP and party leader of the Liberal Democrats who, after refusing for several days to state whether he considers homosexual sex a sin, and gave ambiguous answers on abortion, was not brought to the Tower of London for a public execution. However, almost 500 years after More, Farron saw his political career sacrificed on an almost identical ideological altar as More.
Farron resigned his position as party leader with a dramatic speech. The Daily Mail condemned the "liberal fascism" of the "moral pygmies". The progressive New Statesman headlined its story on Farron's resignation as the "decline of liberalism". Farron said: "We are kidding ourselves if we think we yet live in a tolerant, liberal society".
It does not matter that Farron had, on gay rights, a 90.4% "positive score", according to the Public Whip. Or that he repeatedly defended the right to abortion. What was intolerable was that Farron could have nourished, in his Christian conscience, even a minimal doubt.

Liberal Democrats party leader Tim Farron saw his political career sacrificed because the British media found it unacceptable that, in his Christian conscience, he could have considered homosexual sex a sin. (Image source: Liberal Democrats/Flickr)

Western liberalism seems to have eliminated the so-called "corridor" that had guaranteed a right to existence to those ideas that did not conform to relativism. It is bizarre that this demonization has been consumed in the Liberal Democrats, the party that has borne the torch of classic liberalism.

Perhaps Farron thought that his progressive ideas on climate change, the protection of minorities and the European Union would protect him from such vicious attacks. He was wrong. His inquisitors in the media wanted to talk about his personal social ideas, not Brexit.

The Wall Street Journal told the whole story. After taking over the leadership of the party in 2015, Farron was asked whether, as a Christian, thought that homosexuality is a sin. "We are all sinners", he said. That was not enough. During a television interview on April 18, 2017, Farron was pressed four times to respond again and four times he refused. Silence was not enough. The next day, at the House of Commons, Farron said that homosexuality is not a sin. That, too, was not enough. The media had to be sure that Farron believed it in his heart as well. So a BBC interviewer asked him again a few days later. It was a campaign to smear Farron, an easy scapegoat for a phony concept of liberalism.

Journalist Nick Cohen, writing in The Guardian noted a further paradox. Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn worked for state-owned Iranian television and spoke at the Khomeinist rally in London. Wherever he went, Corbyn seemed as if he were a voluntary collaborator with a regime that executes gays. But Corbyn was never questioned about this affiliation the way the media obsessively questioned Farron.

At a time when Islamic supremacists attack the symbols of Western liberalism, liberalism shows a dangerous emptiness. Liberalism has been turned into a caricature made of mandatory gender ideology, blind multiculturalism, defeatist pacifism, anti-Zionism, feminism and critical studies. "An orgy of liberal sex and liberal guilt".

The result is what Douglas Murray called a "tiredness" of the civilization, a cultural chaos which turned into an apathy. In one month, Western Europe has been hit by four major terror attacks: Manchester, London, Paris and Brussels. Sholton Byrnes wrote in an article published by The National:

"...the definition of the West consists of far more than the security alliance that underpins it. Does it not also mean Shakespeare and Schopenhauer, liberal democracy, a progressive interpretation of human rights, all springing from the soil of centuries of Roman-Judaeo-Christian tradition? The West was once the inheritor of Christendom. Today, it is not entirely sure what it is, with many voices violently clashing over their views of what it should be. It lacks the certainty in its own civilisation that Russia and China, for instance, possess. If it is too tired or unwilling to defend itself, the US will survive for sure; but the concept of 'the West' will have dissolved through the apathy of societies who will have shown they have no courage – and not many convictions either".

That is why, if we, the West, do not take our culture more seriously, Islamic terrorists will easily be able to destroy it. Every time Western symbols come under attack, the Western relativists rapidly accommodate the attackers.

Salman Rushdie is threatened with death and a $6 million Islamic bounty on his head, or Muslims supremacists attack because of cartoons of the Islamic Prophet Mohammed? 
Instead of defending freedom of expression, our liberals submit to Islamic blasphemy laws. 
Two years and a half after the massacre at Charlie Hebdo, not a single European newspaper has again drawn Mohammed.

Muslim supremacists slaughter French Jews? Instead of defending them as a post-Holocaust treasure, our liberals scapegoat Israel's security policies, as did the European Union's former foreign minister, Catherine Ashton.

Muslims supremacists submit their own women to burqas and niqabs and home-confinement? Instead of protecting equality, our liberals defend the veils as symbols of "cultural diversity".

Muslim supremacists murder gays in Orlando? Instead of being proud of an open society, defending it from Islamic jihadists, and accepting the freedom to be homosexual as a positive difference between the West and Islam, our liberals make it a case for "Love wins" and "Hate will not divide us".

A year after the massacre at the Pulse gay nightclub, the mainstream media constructed a new narrative, as if murdering 49 gay people were not the product of ISIS, but of "hate". That is why the question is repeatedly asked: "Why did this happen?"

Contemporary liberalism is exhausted and irritated by the very idea of a common civilization to be defended. 
In a weak conception of "liberalism", the supreme goal for liberals seems to be "peace", whatever it costs -- in other words, surrender. 
This is how Western liberalism has become fragile, like a tree corroded by a lethal fungus.

Fifty years ago, James Burnham understood that liberalism had become "an ideology of suicide" of Westerners "who hate their own civilization, readily excuse or even praise blows struck against it, and themselves lend a willing hand, frequently enough, to pulling it down".

Civilization is not a gift; it is a breakable achievement that needs to be defended from inside and out from the many who would destroy it. Let us take the freedoms we value more seriously; they are being taken from us as we speak.

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

Nima Gholam Ali Pour : Sweden's Multicultural Apartheid

Sweden's Multicultural Apartheid

by Nima Gholam Ali Pour
June 7, 2017 at 4:00 am

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/10452/sweden-multicultural-apartheid

• Swedish politicians keep trying to portray Sweden as a liberal and tolerant paradise. Experience from the suburbs, however, where most of the migrants are, shows that a large part of Sweden's population is not part of Sweden's liberals and feminists. They, in fact get harassed by Islamists every day. In those communities, there is a lack of tolerance.
• These women are not some right-wing pundits who criticize Islam. Instead, they are simply Muslim women who are denied fundamental rights in Sweden because they are women and happen to live in communities where parallel Islamic social structures have been created.
• The problem is that those who govern Sweden do not originate from, or have any deeper knowledge about, the immigrant suburbs, where people cannot live as free citizens, and clearly have no interest in these suburbs. The LGBT movement and the feminist movement prefer to silence those who protest Islamic oppression in Sweden's immigrant suburbs.

In Sweden, as in many other suburbs throughout Europe, the repression from which many refugees are fleeing, instead seems to be following them there. 

Nalin Pekgul, who defines herself as a practicing Muslim and has served as a politician in the Social Democrat Party, stated that in immigrant-settled areas, such as Stockholm's Tensta suburb, where she lives, the self-appointed "morality police" gather outside assembly rooms to prevent young people from entering if they try to organize parties with music.
Islamist organizations in Sweden, Pekgul says, have strengthened their position through support from Saudi Arabia and Sweden's government agencies, media, political parties and so on.

In Stockholm's Tensta suburb, the self-appointed "morality police" gather outside assembly rooms to prevent young people from entering if they try to organize parties with music. (Image source: Holger.Ellgaard / Wikimedia Commons)

According to Pekgul, there are many Muslims in in Sweden who have become fundamentalists. For calling public attention to these changes, Pekgul has been called an "Islamophobe". When, in protest against the extremist Muslims, she began wearing short skirts in Tensta, she was harassed.

Another Muslim, Zeliha Dagli, who came to Sweden from Turkey in 1985 and was an elected representative of the Left Party in Sweden, has fought for women's rights in Stockholm's immigrant suburbs for 25 years. In 2015, she wrote:

"Once upon a time I ran away, terrified of my childhood imams in our former homeland. Some of them controlled the girls in the village. Older girls were not allowed to pass through the square in the village, but had to sneak and take detours and make themselves 'invisible'.
"That shadow persecuted me, and in Sweden I tried to get peace and quiet. But in the city of Uppsala, where I first arrived, my life continued to be controlled by my countrymen, and I fled from that shadow to Stockholm.... Even there I was persecuted by the 'shadow' and I now live in Husby. Still, even here I see all the 'shadows' you can imagine, and I do not have the right to an open and independent life: I am constantly monitored.
"I want a sanctuary, and I want to have a glass of beer with my friends, Lars, Hassan, Maria, Osman.... I also want to go to the senior citizen's association and listen to jazz and dance. I want to grow vegetables on my allotment while wearing and hang out with my friends and go to the bathhouse in a bikini.
"In my neighborhood, I would like to escape the judgmental eyes of staring men. I want to bring home whomever I want, but today I cannot because my rights are limited and controlled in my own neighborhood. All these bearded 'shadows' scare me."

For speaking out, Dagli, too, was harassed. This year, she was forced to move from Stockholm's immigrant suburbs:

"Now I have moved from my beloved Husby suburb. I miss it a lot, but I grew tired of constantly explaining to myself completely obvious things about my privacy, and being questioned because I do not use a veil despite being a Muslim, and being called a whore."

These women are not some right-wing pundits who criticize Islam. Instead, they are Muslim women who are denied fundamental rights in Sweden because they are women and happen to live in communities where parallel Islamic social structures have been created.

Such parallel Islamic social structures also affect the LGBT community. In Tensta, local politicians decided that the Gay Pride flag will be raised in the city center in August every year, when the Gay Pride week takes place. When the flag was hoisted in Tensta last year it was torn down after a few hours, and both the flag and flagpole were stolen. One of the local politicians who put forward the proposal to raise the flag said: "There are cultural, and certainly even religious, beliefs that believe that LGBT should not be in public space."

Rissne is a district in the municipality of Sundbyberg, just north of the capital Stockholm. The majority of the residents in Rissne are either immigrants or born to immigrant parents. When a park bench in the center of Rissne was painted the colors of the rainbow flag, it was burned down and a message was scribbled on the wall: "[Gay] Pride is not for Rissne". Because there were no witnesses, the police chose not to investigate the incident.

That homosexuality creates unrest in some immigrant areas is not a secret. It is precisely this situation, however, that led an activist, Jan Sjunesson, in 2015, to stage Gay Pride Järva (Järva is a district of Stockholm), a Gay Pride parade through Stockholm's immigrant suburbs. While many apparently considered Sjunesson's parade to be a provocation, Sjunesson believes he is fighting for the rights of LGBT people there. No one knows how some Muslims in these immigrant areas will react. The parade creates a lot of nervousness in the Swedish media every year because of hostile reactions from the local Muslim population.

In April, the Swedish media reported how the Al-Azhar Islamic charter school in Stockholm separates boys and girls on the school bus. The girls enter through the back door, while the boys enter through the door at the front. The history of U.S. civil rights is probably not mentioned in Al-Azhar's history class.

It is impossible now to say that Sweden is an ultra-liberal country while there are areas in Sweden where women with short skirts and LGBT citizens are harassed because of their clothes and sexual orientation. Intolerance has simply become part of today's multicultural Sweden.

The lesson to be learned from these contrasts is to see through the Swedish politicians who try to portray Sweden as a liberal and tolerant paradise. Experience from the immigrant suburbs of Sweden's cities shows that a large part of Sweden's population is not part of the feminist and liberal Sweden.

Liberals are harassed by Islamists every day because in their communities, there is a lack of tolerance.

The problem is that those who govern Sweden do not originate from, or have any deeper knowledge about, the immigrant suburbs where people cannot live as free citizens, and clearly have no interest in these suburbs.
The LGBT movement and the feminist movement prefer to silence those who protest Islamic oppression in Sweden's immigrant suburbs. They want to silence it to the extent that even Muslims are portrayed as "Islamophobes."

Unfortunately, immigrants in the suburbs will live under this Islamist plague until the Islamists grow so strong that they become a threat to the liberal values of the elites. 

When the Islamists begin to disturb the liberal elites and their cultural sphere, the liberals in Sweden may see them as a problem. Ironically, for these liberal elites, who not long ago wanted to save the world through a liberal refugee policy, their primary motivation now seems simply to be self-interest.

Nima Gholam Ali Pour is a member of the board of education in the Swedish city of Malmö and is engaged in several Swedish think tanks concerned with the Middle East. He is also editor for the social conservative website Situation Malmö, and is the author of the Swedish book "Därför är mångkultur förtryck"("Why Multiculturalism is Oppression").

• Follow Nima Gholam Ali Pour on Twitter and Facebook