Tag: Clash of Civilizations

See, THAT is why they hate you

A Jewish woman in Britain worried about anti-semitism in the UK inadvertently demonstrates one reason many decent individuals in Britain are increasingly inclined to dislike the Jews in their midst:

There may
be only 260,000 of us in the UK but if we don’t lead, how can the rest of
society follow?

It’s just so hard to imagine why so many of the 64 million people in the UK might not want this woman living among them and so graciously deigning to lead them. I wouldn’t be at all surprised if most of them would now like to punch her in the face.

“If we don’t lead, how can the rest of
society follow?” How indeed. Pat Buchanan asked a pertinent question in his article on Unz: “Muslims in the banlieues wonder why insulting the Prophet is a protected freedom in France, while denying the Holocaust can get you a prison term.”

Speaking of the Islamic banlieues, across the English Channel the failure of French diversity and multiculturalism is highlighted by the reaction in them to the ridiculous “unity” march meant to defend the tottering status quo:

The sense of marginalization did not disappear with the massive solidarity march across Paris on Sunday, which drew more than one million people and 40 presidents and prime ministers to Mr. Hollande’s side. For some banlieue residents, it seemed an almost surreal display that had nothing to do with them.

In Vaulx-en-Velin, the only Charlie reference to be seen was a sign for the Charlie Chaplin cultural center across the street from City Hall, which is topped with a drawing of a flag of its sister city, the West Bank town of Beit Sahour.

Residents there ridiculed the “I am Charlie” marches. Some said the terrorist attacks had been staged. While many strongly condemned the attackers for the murders, others insisted the cartoonists had gotten what they deserved….

“I totally feel cut off from France,” said Karim Yahiaoui, 15, who added that he had not left this suburb more than twice in the past year. Over the past few decades, the Muslim community in Vaulx-en-Velin has become increasingly insular. “Many people only believe their own values now, not those of the republic,” said Anne Dufaud, director of the Mission, a nonprofit organization. She has worked in the community for 20 years. When Mr. Hollande led a moment of silence across France last Thursday for the victims of the attacks, two students and a teacher at a local high school, who declined to be identified, said many students refused to stand.

Patrick Kahn, a manager at the International League Against Racism and Anti-Semitism in Lyon, who operates a weekly tolerance program in the schools of Vaulx-en-Velin, said simply, “The integration policy failed.”

Integration has failed. Diversity has failed. Multiculturalism has failed. What options does that leave?

The troubling math

Percentages are not the only problem. Quantities matter too. Ian Tuttle points out the troubling math on National Review:

Demographics may not be the whole of destiny, but they are certainly a good part, and across the Atlantic, the United States seems increasingly to be turning toward Western Europe’s most undesirable demographic trends.

In 1992, 41 percent of new permanent residents in the United States — green-card holders — hailed from the Asia-Pacific region, the Middle East and North Africa, or sub-Saharan Africa, according to the Pew Research Center. A decade later, the percentage was 53 percent. Over that same period, predictably, the number of Muslim immigrants coming to the United States annually has doubled, from 50,000 to approximately 100,000 each year. In 1992, only 5 percent of Muslim immigrants came from sub-Saharan Africa; 20 years later, it was 16 percent. Of the 2.75 million Muslims in the United States in 2011, 1.7 million were legal permanent residents.

There is no official estimate of Muslims in the U.S.; religious affiliation is not tracked by the Census Bureau. However, Pew’s estimate of 2.75 million seems to be on the lower end. The Council on American-Islamic Relations says there are approximately 7 million Muslims in the country.

Now consider the following information about France:

According to the French Government, which does not have the right to ask direct questions about religion and uses a criterion of people’s geographic origin as a basis for calculation, there were between 5 to 6 million Muslims in metropolitan France in 2010. The government counted all those people in France who migrated from countries with a dominant Muslim population, or whose parents did. Only 33% of those 5 to 6 million people (2 million) said they were practicing believers. That figure is the same as that obtained by the INED/INSEE study in October 2010…. A Pew Forum study, published in January 2011, estimated 4.7 million Muslims in France in 2010 (and forecasted 6.9 million in 2030).

Translation: there may already be more Muslims in the USA than in France. (NB: metropolitan does not mean urban France, but continental France.) And in percentage terms, if one uses the maximum reported numbers on both sides, the Muslim population is 2.1 percent of the US population, versus 7.6 percent for Europe. However, the European total includes Albania, Russia, Kosovo, and Bosnia; which are either Islamic nations or contain vast semi-autonomous Islamic enclaves. Once those are removed, as Chechnya is no more properly part of Europe than Turkey or Saudi Arabia, the Islamic percentage of the European population falls to 3.9 percent. Note that about half of all Muslims resident in “Europe” are in Russia.

As one of my friends from Minnesota noted, she sees considerably more Muslims in Minneapolis than she saw in Rome last summer. I was in a moderately sized Italian city last week and I saw precisely zero. The reason for the false impression is twofold. First, Europeans keep Muslims in what are essentially Islamic ghettos in the major cities, the notorious no-go zones. Second, with the exception of the British, the Europeans are much more openly nationalistic and few consider Muslim residents to be of their nation.

But percentages are not magic. There is no precise quantity of individuals required to produce two, or ten, or one hundred, who are willing to engage in direct action. If the nation of Europe enjoy the advantage of their greater sense of nationalism and parliamentary systems that permit the rapid growth of non-mainstream parties, the American advantages are its stronger Christianity and its heavily armed population. But on neither side of the Atlantic should the pro-civilization forces assume that their eventual victory over the invasion is guaranteed. All civilizations fall in time, and the fact that the first two waves of Islamic expansion were turned back does not necessarily mean the third will be.

The strategist’s warning

George Friedman, the head of StratFor, sheds additional light on the long-term European situation:

Europe’s hidden secret: The Europeans do not see Muslims from North Africa or Turkey as Europeans, nor do they intend to allow them to be Europeans. The European solution to their isolation is the concept of multiculturalism — on the surface a most liberal notion, and in practice, a movement for both cultural fragmentation and ghettoization….

The European inability to come to terms with the reality it has created for itself in this and other matters does not preclude the realization that wars involving troops are occurring in many Muslim countries. The situation is complex, and morality is merely another weapon for proving the other guilty and oneself guiltless. The geopolitical dimensions of Islam’s relationship with Europe, or India, or Thailand, or the United States, do not yield to moralizing.

Something must be done. I don’t know what needs to be done, but I suspect I know what is coming. First, if it is true that Islam is merely responding to crimes against it, those crimes are not new and certainly didn’t originate in the creation of Israel, the invasion of Iraq or recent events. This has been going on far longer than that. For instance, the Assassins were a secret Islamic order to make war on individuals they saw as Muslim heretics. There is nothing new in what is going on, and it will not end if peace comes to Iraq, Muslims occupy Kashmir or Israel is destroyed. Nor is secularism about to sweep the Islamic world. The Arab Spring was a Western fantasy that the collapse of communism in 1989 was repeating itself in the Islamic world with the same results. There are certainly Muslim liberals and secularists. However, they do not control events — no single group does — and it is the events, not the theory, that shape our lives.

Europe’s sense of nation is rooted in shared history, language, ethnicity and yes, in Christianity or its heir, secularism. Europe has no concept of the nation except for these things, and Muslims share in none of them. It is difficult to imagine another outcome save for another round of ghettoization and deportation. This is repulsive to the European sensibility now, but certainly not alien to European history. Unable to distinguish radical Muslims from other Muslims, Europe will increasingly and unintentionally move in this direction.

The fact that the Europeans view nationality in a fundamentally different matter than Americans is hardly hidden. They have never bought into the myth that paperwork determines nationality. I’ve lived in Europe for more of my adult life than I’ve lived in the USA and I’ve been pointing this out to my American readers for years.

Forget nationality. One of my neighbors had lived in our town for 30 years and she still considered herself, and was considered by the other townspeople, as a resident of the next town over. As for us, we have been “gli americani” for more than 15 years; for the last decade “nostri americani”. And this is despite our being fully integrated into the community, speaking the language, attending the church, and so on.

Now, imagine how those townspeople regard even second- or third-generation Muslims, who look, act, think, believe, and behave differently. To believe that they will be able to distinguish radical Muslims from non-radical Muslims, much less bother to do so, defies all credibility.

Those anti-semitic Israelis

Is it not remarkable how, when the Israeli Prime Minister said Jews living in Europe should move to Israel, he was not attacked as being anti-semitic in the way everyone else who wishes the Jews well and advises precisely the same thing is?

Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu has invited Jews from France and the rest of Europe to immigrate to the state of Israel, referring to what he sees as a “rising tide of anti-Semitism” there. The statement comes in the wake of the Charlie Hebdo attacks.

“To all the Jews of France, all the Jews of Europe, I would like to say that Israel is not just the place in whose direction you pray, the state of Israel is your home,” Prime Minister Netanyahu said in a televised statement on Saturday, referencing the Jewish tradition of facing Jerusalem when praying.

Netanyahu called on lawmakers to alter the existing immigration laws to make it easier for Jews to permanently move to Israel.

So, what do we conclude from this, that Benjamin Netanyahu hates the Jews? I note that absolutely none of my previous critics have remarked upon the fact that I was absolutely correct to have warned the Jews of the changing mood in Europe, and to have urged them leave Europe and emigrate to their homeland. Had the Jews in Paris done so sooner, they would not have been murdered by Muslims as they were in Granada and eventually in every Muslim-controlled city in Spain and the Maghreb.

Reports from the period describe that, after an initial 7-month grace period, the Almohads killed or forcefully converted Jewish communities in each new city they conquered until “there was no Jew left from Silves to Mahdia”

A man cannot have two masters, and the French Prime Minister Valls (who is a Spaniard) was absolutely incorrect to claim that France requires Jews any more than it requires Spaniards, Germans, Russians, or Turks. France without Jews is France. It is the Israeli Prime Minister who is correct. Israel is their home. The various nations of Europe are not, and it is time for everyone to stop pretending that they are. The diversity concept is dead. It has failed, and failed spectacularly.

It is not necessary to love or hate anyone to recognize that a group of people whose foremost concern is “is it good for the Jews” is never going to be entirely acceptable to those whose primary concern is “is it good for the French”. That is straightforward logic, it is simple set theory, and in a time of rising nationalism around the world, from the Islamic State to Germany, non-nationals everywhere would do well to either a) fully convert or b) return to their home nations.

Especially when one of the historical lessons of al-Andalus is that when Muslim and Western cultures clash, the Jews tend to end up as collateral damage. For the European Jews, emigrating to America instead of Israel looks rather like the Medieval Jews fleeing from the Almohads to what eventually became the Spanish Inquisition. And given the economic trend of the last 60 years, I very much doubt it will take another 345 years for Americans to begin doubting the loyalties of the USA’s Jewish residents, as the Spanish Christians eventually came to do.

NB: When considering these large-scale movement of people, try to recall that the significant changes tend to take decades, even centuries, to play out, even though the obvious turning points can often be identified at specific moments in time. As Guy Gavriel Kay’s novel shows, we often tend to look at certain sections of history while ignoring the relevant sections that immediately preceded or followed it, and thereby reach erroneous conclusions.

Pegida rises

As expected, the Paris attacks have caused German nationalism to continue growing, from 500 marchers to 25,000 in only three months:

A record 25,000 people joined an anti-Islamic march in Germany on Monday, claiming their stance was vindicated by last week’s Paris jihadist attacks. However, the impressive turnout was dwarfed by 100,000 counter-demonstrators calling for tolerance nationwide.

Chancellor Angela Merkel earlier stressed that “Islam belongs to Germany” and announced she would on Tuesday join a Muslim community rally in Berlin against extremism, along with most of her cabinet ministers.

Undeterred, supporters of the self-styled Patriotic Europeans Against the Islamisation of the Occident, or PEGIDA, gathered for their 12th rally since October in their birthplace of Dresden in former communist east Germany.

The marchers waved the German national flag and held up placards that read “Fight Islamisation, stop the flood of foreigners now” and “Stop multiculturalism. My homeland will stay German”.

The “counter-demonstrators” are irrelevant. They’re just the usual suspects who will turn out for any leftist cause. They won’t fight when the time comes; once the nationalists outnumber them they will disappear. What matters is the way Pegida is forcing the treasonous German elite to show its true anti-German colors.

Come election time, I imagine Merkel is going to be seeing a lot of pictures of herself in a burqah, talking about how “Islam belongs to Germany”. Germans can be so tone-deaf it is hysterical; imagine how that assertion is going to go down in Iraq, Pakistan, and Egypt. I don’t know enough about German politics to know if this will be enough to sink her yet, but it is clear that she’s determined to go down with the transnational ship. Furthermore, given the media’s obvious sympathies, it wouldn’t be at all surprising if there were already more Pegida marchers than tolerance losers.

Tolerance, multiculturalism, and diversity are all dead. They’ll twitch for a while, but no one with more than half a brain can still seriously claim to buy into the concepts. I note that Pegida is already spreading into Austria and Switzerland as well.

Mailvox: deportation is not war

Asked asked about the abandonment of multiculturalism:

Vox, your position seems to abandon multi-culturalism.. how do you envision this practically? France has 4-5 million Muslims, it’s not possible to deport them without a MAJOR war. The other alternative would be forceful conversions to Christianity/atheism… yeah.. be ready to strike France out of the map.

This is a false dichotomy. Of course it is possible to deport 5 million people. It’s neither difficult to accomplish nor likely to inspire war, let alone a MAJOR war. The oft-heard insistence that mass deportation is either a) impossible or b) necessarily violent is intrinsically ignorant. One has to literally know nothing about 20th century history in order to make the assertion, as one’s knowledge of the subject does not even rise to the level of Wikipedia.

  1. Eastern Europe, 1945: German Reichsdeutsche and citizens of other European states who claimed German ethnicity were forced out of many Eastern Europe countries to Germany and Austria, and to Australia or the United States from there for many, during the later stages of World War II and the post-war period. The areas of expulsion included former eastern territories of Germany, which were transferred to Poland and the Soviet Union after the war, as well as areas annexed or occupied by Nazi Germany in pre-war Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Romania, northern Yugoslavia and other states of Central and Eastern Europe. By 1950, a total of approximately 12 million Germans had fled or been expelled from east-central Europe into the areas which would become post-war Germany and Allied-occupied Austria. Some sources put the total at 14 million, including migrants to Germany after 1950 and the children born to expelled parents. The largest numbers came from territories ultimately ceded to Poland and the Soviet Union (about 7 million), and from Czechoslovakia (about 3 million).
  2. Soviet Union, 1932: Population transfer in the Soviet Union may be classified into the following broad categories: deportations of “anti-Soviet” categories of population, often classified as “enemies of workers,” deportations of entire nationalities, labor force transfer, and organized migrations in opposite directions to fill the ethnically cleansed territories. In most cases their destinations were underpopulated remote areas (see Forced settlements in the Soviet Union). This includes deportations to the Soviet Union of non-Soviet citizens from countries outside the USSR. It has been estimated that, in their entirety, internal forced migrations affected some 6 million people.
  3. USA, 2011: Nearly 400,000 people were deported from the United States in the past
    fiscal year, the largest number in the history of the U.S. Immigration
    and Customs Enforcement agency, the government announced Tuesday. Overall in fiscal year 2011, immigration officials said, 396,906 individuals were removed.
  4. USA, 1954: Overall, there were 1,078,168 apprehensions made in the first year of
    Operation Wetback, with 170,000 being captured from May to July 1954.

It is simply false to claim that it is impossible to deport 5 million people from any country without a war. It can certainly be argued whether a mass repatriation policy is desirable or not, and it can be debated precisely how such a policy would be best and most civilly enacted, but it’s utterly ridiculous to claim that such a policy would necessarily lead to war when it has never before done so in all of military history. In general, mass deportations tend to be a postcursor to war rather than a precursor. Note that an immigration regime no stricter than that presently practiced by the current US ICE agency could send every Muslim in France back to the Dar al-Islam by 2025. That’s hardly a blueprint for Armageddon.

Of course, the first step in abandoning multiculturalism is to stop the bleeding. Which is to say, shut down all immigration immediately. Shut down all income redistribution from the native population to the non-native population. That alone will address one-third to one-half of the problem. Then the question of repatriation can be reasonably debated.

The alternative is not much of an option, as it should be abundantly clear by now that going further down the multiculturalism and diversity path will lead to civil war followed by vicious and violent ethnic cleansing. If you genuinely wish to avoid violence across the West, an approach that involves closing the borders, ending the income subsidies, and repatriation is the only civilized answer.

It takes two to tango

But only one party to wage war. This is honest, but remarkably stupid commentary on the current European situation from the Mayor of London:

About 10 years ago, the whole Danish cartoon controversy blew up – and I remember distinctly concluding that I would never have published them in The Spectator, which I edited, not just because they were gratuitously inflammatory, but because I didn’t see how I could justify my decision to the widows and orphans of my staff, in the event of an attack on our offices (and I note that one of the German publications to use the Charlie Hebdo cartoons has just been fire-bombed).

It is essential to admit this element of fear (and several editors have been candid enough to do so), because fear is a very bad and corrosive thing. Fear leads to anger. Fear leads to mistrust. Fear can make you irrational, and in the case of Islamist terrorism, the resulting fear can obviously encourage prejudice and division. Fear leads to hatred – and that is exactly what those terrorists hope to provoke. They want to see anti-Muslim marches of the kind that are now appearing in Germany; they want an anti-Muslim backlash; they want war; and it would be absolutely fatal if we were to allow ourselves to fall for it.

Imagine if, instead of his famous call to “fight them on the beaches”, Winston Churchill had said something like this back in 1940. “Fear leads to hatred and that is exactly what the Nazis hope to provoke. They want to see us sending out warships to guard the Channel. They want an anti-German backlash; they want war and it would be absolutely fatal if we were to allow ourselves to fall for it.”

The astonishing thing is that Boris Johnson knows his history. He and other self-admitted cowards know that Chamberlain was wrong to attempt to appease Hitler, just as FDR was wrong to attempt to appease Stalin, and yet they are making precisely the same mistake by trying to pretend that Islam can be won over if they are sufficiently accommodating.

Everything about the multicultural status quo is a lie. The headline in the Telegraph says: “Paris march of unity: after a minute’s silence the crowd roared ‘We are not afraid!'”

They lie. They are most certainly afraid. They are afraid of the Muslims in their midst, and they are afraid of the nationalist forces that are rising. They are right to be afraid, because it is primarily their fault that the Reconquista 2.0 is now both necessary and inevitable.

Multiculturalism’s last gasp

The march in Paris today is a pathetic and pointless globalist fart in the wind of the resurgent nationalism that will scour Europe in the next decade:

One million people were today preparing to march through the streets of Paris in tribute to the 17 victims of massacre in the city. British Prime Minister David Cameron was one of approximately 40 world leaders scheduled to take part in the solidarity march in the French capital. In a show of support for the French people, Mr Cameron was to stand alongside French President Francois Hollande in sympathy for the victims executed by terrorists….

Security services across the world have reportedly received intelligence that more terror attacks are ‘highly likely’, as a ring of steel was placed around the French capital for today’s march. There are fears that Al Qaeda and Islamic State-linked terror cells will be activated as the city prepares to host the rally this afternoon.

By mid-morning, approximately 2,000 police officers and 1,400 soldiers were deployed across Paris in an atmosphere described by one officer on the scene as ‘extremely tense’. French Interior Minister Bernard Cazeneuve said ‘exceptional measures’ were being taken to try and prevent further attacks, including deploying snipers on roofs.

This is nothing more than a futile demonstration meant to prop up the failing status quo, which is so fragile that a single jihadist could render it all moot in seconds today. None of this will end until the genie is again returned to the bottle, which is to say, until Islam has been forcibly expelled from the continent for the third time.

The multiculturalist position consists of lies stacked upon more lies. When Angela Merkel claims there is no place for anti-Muslim intolerance, she is attacking more than TWO-THIRDS of the German electorate that is not Muslim. In a November poll by the Bertelsmann Foundation, 61 percent of the German people said: “Islam has no place in the West”.

61 percent is not an outlier. That is the mainstream position. That is the will of the people. That was before PEGIDA, before the Charlie Hebdo massacre, and before the Jewish deli murders. It is probably over 70 percent by now. What there is no place for is traitorous, anti-democratic “leaders” like Merkel, Hollande, Cameron, and the other anti-nationalists who are marching in Paris today.

Islam is not compatible with the West. Islam is literally at war with the West, which is part of the Dar al-Harb, “the House of War”. As Mizanur Rahman has declared, Britain is the enemy of Islam. So is France. So is Germany. So is Italy. So is the United States of America. Samuel Huntington warned of this coming great clash of civilizations back in 1993. Enoch Powell warned of the rivers of blood that would flow if mass immigration from non-European countries was permitted back in 1968.

That long-predicted day has finally arrived. If the situation is not adequately addressed in the next decade, then the Rotherhams and Parises will eventually become Peshawars and Bagas. Now the victims of Islam in the West are numbered in double-digits, eventually they will be numbered in the hundreds and the thousands, if the Reconquista 2.0 does not begin sooner rather than later.

Sooner or later, it will begin. All of this could have been easily prevented, but the Left preached its lies of open borders and immigration and tolerance and diversity, and the people of the West stupidly believed them. Some fools still believe them, although most who claim to do so primarily cling to them out of fear and desperate hope against hope. But prevention is no longer an option. The choice is now between Charlie Hebdo and Charlie Martel.

As for those who claim that we cannot hold all Muslims responsible for the actions of their military wing, I will remind them that the free people of the West had absolutely no problem holding all Germans responsible for the actions of a few National Socialists. I note that the French Prime Minister, Manuel Valls, has already declared that France is at war with “radical Islam”, even though the vast majority of radical Muslims did not kill anyone in Paris this week.

The fact is that Islam is already at war with the West, regardless of what its “moderate” Fifth Columnists falsely claim. It has always been at war with the West, it simply hasn’t always had the ability to effectively wage that war. But the West gave it that ability and now the people of the West are paying the price through fear, crime, taxes, the loss of liberty, and blood.

“This bloodbath proves that those who laughed at or ignored the fears of so many people about a looming danger of Islamism were wrong,” said Alexander Gauland, a regional leader of AfD, which has its roots in the euro crisis and is currently riding at 25% in nationwide polls, on the day of the Charlie Hebdo attacks. “This gives new weight to Pegida demands.”

In France the leader of the far-right Front National, Marine Le Pen, went further. “We must be in a position to respond to the war that has been declared by Islamist fundamentalism,” she said after a meeting on Friday of party leaders called at the Élysée Palace by the president, François Hollande.

“I regret that word has not been uttered by [Hollande] nor other politicians. The first thing when one is fighting a war is to be able to know what we’re fighting. We’re fighting an ideology, Islamist fundamentalism. Not to say it is a proof of weakness.”

Cracks in the narrative

The transnational establishment is deeply worried about the way the most recent Muslim murders are upsetting the electorate:

Farage cannot divide us: Fury at ‘sickening’ attempt by Ukip to use Paris shootings to score political points on multiculturalism. Britain must stand united against attempts by Nigel Farage to use the Paris terror massacre to score political points, senior politicians said today. Tories including David Cameron, Eric Pickles, Theresa May and Grant Shapps joined Labour’s Ed Miliband and Dame Tessa Jowell and Lib Dem Nick Clegg in condemning the ‘sickening’ attempt to exploit the atrocity in which 12 people died.

The reason the atrocities can be effectively exploited by UKIP is because they only happened due to the immigration policies of the French parties that happen to be very, very similar to the policies of the Tory, Labour, and Liberal Democrat parties. The European establishment parties are afraid, and rightly so, that the attacks are assisting the gradual redrawing the European political lines where they rightly belong: between the pro-EU, pro-Muslim, pro-immigration forces and the more numerous nationalist, anti-Muslim, anti-immigration forces:

A day after terror struck Paris, Europe’s resurgent far-right and anti-immigrant parties trumpeted a unified message: I told you so.

Populist movements warning of the “Islamization” of Europe have been gaining ground across the continent, in small countries like Denmark and large ones like Britain, Germany and France. The attack on satirical newspaper Charlie Hebdo could win more supporters to their cause.

Fears of precisely the kind of commando-style attack that struck the newspaper on Wednesday, killing 12 people, have risen sharply in recent months as home-grown fighters return from Syria and Iraq. Such warnings have been aired across the political spectrum, but it’s the anti-immigrant parties that have reaped the biggest benefits. 

What has been ruled out of bounds for more than three decades is finally becoming the political fault line. And the line is not going to be drawn in the favor of those with blood on their hands, in the favor of those whom history will one day damn far more fervently than the Chamberlains and Quislings of a previous generation. Names like Merkel, Hollande, Cameron, and Blair will be reviled across Europe as long as they are remembered.

At the train station, I heard one schoolgirl telling her friends that World War III has started and she doesn’t care if anyone calls her racist. There is a perception that something has dramatically changed in the last week, and indeed, the way in which people are not being hysterical about it over here, but are speaking out rather calmly, strikes me as being all the more ominous for the establishment. As is the fact that #JeSuisCharlieMartel is beginning to trend.

The more the politicians of the major parties attempt to pressure the people into accepting the unacceptable, the more likely it is that the major parties will be replaced by true people’s parties. And I suspect Marine Le Pen’s protests at Front National being excluded from tomorrow’s French “unity” rallies are about as serious as Bre’r Rabbit’s pleas not to be thrown in the briar patch.

All of the nationalist parties will do well to turn their backs on the false, antinational unity being offered by the champions of diversity. Consider the PEGIDA statement leading up to what looks to be a record rally on Monday: The Islamists, which PEGIDA has been warning about for 12 weeks, showed France that they are not capable of democracy but rather look to violence and death as an answer,” it said. “Our politicians want us to believe the opposite. Must such a tragedy happen here in Germany first???” 

“61 percent of non-Muslim Germans said Islam had no place in the West according to the study released by the Bertelsmann Foundation think tank.” And that was prior to the Paris murders.

NYT covering for Islam

The mainstream media in the USA and Europe are absolutely desperate to maintain the myth of the “Islamic radical” and hide the fact that it is the jihadists who are the Islamic reformers, not the so-called moderates:

Here’s the latest example of the New York Times censoring itself to avoid offending Muslims after an act of Islamic terror. This morning, BenK at Ace of Spades quoted an NYT story by Liz Alderman titled “Survivors Retrace a Scene of Horror at Charlie Hebdo.” Take note of these two paragraphs from that story:

    Sigolène Vinson, a freelancer who had decided to come in that morning to take part in the meeting, thought she would be killed when one of the men approached her.

    Instead, she told French news media, the man said, “I’m not going to kill you because you’re a woman, we don’t kill women, but you must convert to Islam, read the Quran and cover yourself,” she recalled.

I was intrigued by this quote, and it seemed worth exploring, so I went to the NYT story to quote it. But guess what?

Here’s what it says now:

    Sigolène Vinson, a freelance journalist who had come in that morning to take part in the meeting, said that when the shooting started, she thought she would be killed.

    Ms. Vinson said in an interview that she dropped to the floor and crawled down the hall to hide behind a partition, but one of the gunmen spotted her and grabbed her by the arm, pointing his gun at her head. Instead of pulling the trigger, though, he told her she would not be killed because she was a woman.

    “Don’t be afraid, calm down, I won’t kill you,” the gunman told her in a steady voice, with a calm look in his eyes, she recalled. “You are a woman. But think about what you’re doing. It’s not right.”

Nothing about telling her to convert to Islam. Nothing about telling her to read the Quran. Nothing about telling her to cover her face.

Nothing about the very reason these animals did this.

It sounds like the New York Times might have downright substituted their own words for those that Ms Vinson reported as well. Trust NOTHING that comes out of the mainstream press at face value. If they could get away with it, you know they’d blame the Charlie Hebdo attack on right-wing Christian militias.

Remember, as long ago as 2006, FORTY PERCENT of British Muslims were calling for the establishment of Sharia in the UK. There can be no compromise between Islam and the West, because one is either part of the Dar al-Islam or the Dar al-Harb.

Unfortunately, the idiots on the Left have learned nothing. On Slashdot, various leftists are pointing to the Crusades, to the 30 Years War, falsely claiming that the atheist Anders Breivik was a Christian, and in short, doing everything they can to keep their heads planted firmly in the Sand of Religious Equivalence.