The Boiling Point Inside And Outside The Burqa and Hijab

moprotest
Women in Burqa and Politics
WRITES WALLACE, A STRIDENT FELLOW, choosing his words carefully, as he outlines his recent travail:

"Now I don't want to sound like a racist, but I was shocked when I moved to England and discovered that my new neighborhood was majority Muslim—mosques, hijabs, halal shops, etc...

"I am all for diversity, but if you want me to be tolerant, I expect the same in return. Don't get me started on this topic. Anyway, when I walked to the marketplace and realized I was the only one NOT wearing hijab, and was being ogled by stall keepers who claimed they didn't know English—I made a comment later about feeling like I had wandered all the way to Pakistan, and my Pakistani ex accused me of being racist for saying that, so tell me, am I a racist based on this simple remark? or was I merely observing the obvious?

"Pfff... I don't think any race is better than another—its oppressive cultural and religious practices I have a problem with... "

I don't know where that fellow had originally lived before taking off to England, but he should consider Dearborn, Michigan in the good ole USA. The blighted streets lined with hourly-rental motels that lead from Detroit into the suburb of Dearborn gradually give way to busy avenues dotted with mosques and thriving small businesses. Arabic signs advertise attorneys and physicians, passers-by speak Levantine and Gulf dialects of Arabic, and on the sidewalks women wear the colorful headscarves of hijab.

Dearborn is a microcosm of the Middle East planted in the Midwestern United States. The roughly 40,000 of Dearborn's 100,000 residents that are Arab American defy the myth many Americans hold of a unified Muslim world, filled with parading masses bearing the likeness of Ayatollah Khomenei. While there are some radical Islamists, Dearborn's growing Muslim population runs the gamut from international traders to educated professionals to local business owners.

Every Arab nationality and religious sect is found here, from Yemeni traditionalism to secular modernity. The development of Dearborn seems like that of any other American city in which there has been a large influx of immigrants. The development of the mosques tells another story.

After a series of conflicts and scandals traced to radicalized leadership in the mosques, tensions have escalated and continue to poke holes in the fabric of an integrated Dearborn. Race isn't the issue, the issue is the forced accommodation to Muslim customs. Earlier in the 20th Century, Muslims attempted to moderate and integrate, to forge a community uniquely both Muslim and American, but the effort was sabotaged by extremist elements.

Muslims have been establishing themselves in western countries for at least 35 years. The terror plot in England to blow up planes was not among native Pakistanis but among youths who were born in the west. The spreading of the jihadist problem is much worse than most in the west believe, as some polls indicate that 70% of Muslims worldwide support Hezbollah and Hamas. They are not all extremists or fascists, but most rank and file Muslims certainly sympathize with them.

That's a problem. Why did Nasrallah apologize for killing Arab children in Nazareth? It wasn't because they were Israelis, it was because they were not Jews. If every Jew in Israel would convert to Islam, there would be no more war with Israel so it is definitely not about land. The issue is religion. The holy war is a religious war. Mainstream media hates to see it characterized this way, but it's the raw, unvarnished, politically incorrect truth. But of course we all know the media cares nothing for the truth.

There is concern on the wires that every time someone of a certain stature has the gall to speak out against this Muslim usurpation of Western generosity "big oil money will take over and flood the air with propaganda" against this person. Or if a book critical of Islam is published, both this book and its author are routinely ignored by the media powers.
Britain is a right mess in places. According to one Brit, writing on the Apostates of Islam BBS, there are no white zones in Oldham and one can't find a English corner shop hardly anywhere in the cities nowadays.

He goes on to lament that there are "no pig ornaments in windows, and Brits are not allowed to say Christmas holidays (instead it's winter fest), and Easter is almost non existent. Whites [historical Brits] can't fly the Union Jack and if you dare speak out you may get arrested.

Well, I don't know anything about pig ornaments hanging in the windows, but there is a strong odor of political correctness in sublimating traditional Western holidays while simultaneously the apotheosis of Muslim ones jar local sensitivities worldwide, even here in America.

"When will they realize it's not about the color of their skin (unless they already do) but their religion and culture. There's a big difference in being a racist and being anti-religious and they are just playing on the fact they have a different skin color and now are trying to make out that anyone who speaks against Islam is a racist and inticing religious hatred and the whites have fallen for it, too. I think that if white people became Muslim they would never be fully accepted and if Islam does take over I would not have any sympathy for the whites who joined them. They've had plenty of warnings."

Sounds like the boiling point is getting closer.

Sadly, even should public opinion shift considerably the civil rights laws protect Muslims in jobs, government positions, and our military—and the prisons are a veritable recruitment center for them.

The first amendment is construed by most as a blanket right to this religion by most lawmakers today. It's a sacred cow on both the right and the left.

abdullahdelancey
Abdullah Delancey
Areas like Dearborn, Lodi and large areas of most big cities have large populations of them; as they know they can coerce their brethren more easily in this land of "sin". It's also foolhardy to openly wear a t-shirt that has one of those cartoons of Mohammed upon it in those areas and Canada, where 40,000 this past year were made citizens. A Muslim with former ties to Nation of Islam is in a run for Congress representing a large Islamic constituent in Minnesota, where in the year 2000 only 9% of the population classified themselves as non-white. People change. Maybe. Maybe not.

But population changes are natural and vital, yet the sheer speed of the population surge, and the forces behind these swift changes are the disturbing factor for many observers, including this humble blogger. And that force—in a phrase—is illegal and unchecked immigration of all sorts of people, changed and unchanged.

US college towns are swamped with foreign students and most major universities are given huge endowments to basicly bribe the academics to speak highly of them; with the attendant online student associations and web sites—often paid with government money. Georgetown University, a prestigious Jesuit school in Washington, DC is the latest to sell its soul to the Muslim invaders.

Sounds like the boiling point is getting even closer.

There is concern on the wires that every time someone of a certain stature has the gall to speak out against this Muslim usurpation of Western generosity "big oil money will take over and flood the air with propaganda" against this person. Or if a book critical of Islam is published, both this book and its author are routinely ignored by the media powers.

islamcrescent
Islamic Crescent
Deepening the mistrust is the notion that once the West does awaken from its slumber, all religion will be persecuted, particularly Christianity, as if this were not already the case. The Left has long waged war against Christianity, and now seems to have found a temporary ally in Islam, strategic for the moment, until the time arrives to execute its final solution: have all religion either abolished or amalgamated into a single world religion.

Sounds like the boiling point is getting even closer.

Another voice pipes in: "Only a few of the major editorialists actually give Islam any negative attention, Malkan, Charon, Coulter, Buchanan and some off them are nuts—most others compromise shamelessly—even that mouthy bastard O'Reilly on the "No Spin Zone" hasn't either the brains or guts to say Islam has a problem&151;even though he claims he's on a hit list from Al Qaeda. And neither Hannity or Colmes is much better. It makes me wonder who the major shareholders are."

I'll tell you, my friend. Saudi Arabia is the 4th largest shareholder in Fox News. Yep, feels like the boiling point is getting even closer, too.

The Cracking Left As Evidenced By Odd Bedfellows

Jolly Nick Cohen has said it so well, I won't even begin to add to his eloquent insights into the confusion of the Old Left with the New Reality in his bruising piece originally reposted here on Oct 24, 2006, called: "Where Have All The Pacifists Gone?" Now if only the Left will crumble into dust and blow away. Here are the first few paragraphs of the right persuasive piece.

Nick Cohen
"You Can't Read This Book" by Nick Cohen
BEFORE YOU GO TO A LEFT-WING meeting, brace yourself for the likelihood that everyone you meet in the hall will be standing on their heads. Do not be surprised to see communists supporting fascism, feminists throwing their arms around misogynists and liberals volunteering to be advocates for tyranny. It’s been like this since 9/11 turned the world upside down, and the temptation for a journalist is to play the cynical reporter and pretend to be unshockable. I try my best to be a hard man, but the shocks keep on coming. Take the fates of two venerable left-wing institutions, the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament and Searchlight.

For 18 months I’ve had CND workers telling me how they have been forced out by the same people who disgraced the anti-war movement – the Socialist Workers Party, Ken Livingstone’s homeboys from Socialist Action, the Jeremy Corbyn wing of the Labour Party . . . the friends of the indefatigable George Galloway, in short. I couldn’t see how to write about it. How could I prove that they were victims of a political purge rather than guilty of poor performance? In any case, there was always an element of a Quaker-communist alliance about the old CND, and the ideas it produced weren’t always wrong. CND’s policy of unilateral nuclear disarmament was political poison for Labour because it was so clearly in the interests of the Soviet Union, but CND had a second argument that was truer than its legions of critics in the 1980s admitted. Nuclear power breeds nuclear weapons and nuclear weapons breed more nuclear weapons, CND’s argument ran. Unless proliferation stops, they will get into the hands of men who are prepared to use them.

That was then. Anyone who now believes CND is as much against proliferation as for unilateral disarmament would have been surprised by this autumn’s annual conference. Among the guests was the startling figure of Dr Seyed Mohammad Hossein Adeli, the then Iranian ambassador. Iran is building the nuclear power stations CND once protested against – an odd project for a country with one of the largest reserves of oil in the world. Not only the US government but the United Nations and the European Union suspect the Islamic Republic wants the bomb. The obvious course for those sincere about nuclear disarmament is to oppose Tehran as vigorously as they oppose a replacement for Trident. But there’s the rub. Standing by its principles would, if only for a moment, have put CND on the same side as George W Bush and Tony Blair, and that would never do.

Betrayal has defined the liberal left since Iraq because anti-Americans find their comrades in the Kurdish socialist movement or the Iraqi Communist Party or Arab liberal parties an embarrassment and cannot stick by them or even acknowledge their existence. Given that record, I guess it was inevitable that CND, whose governing council is stuffed with people who call themselves “socialists”, “workers” and “communists”, would take the next step and betray the Iranian left.

Read it all.

Fit In Or Fly Out

stuart-varney
Stuart Varney
BRITISH EXPATRIATE AND AMERICAN citizen Stuart Varney, a financial commentator on Fox News noted on one of their Saturday morning programs that Britain is beginning to "push back" at Muslims. Stating that he sensed a change in the British demeanor toward Muslims on the heels of the current veil controversy, Varney suggested a new tone was emerging, indicating "no more bending over backwards, no more appeasement." He also stated that a British politician had recently told him "it's either fit in or fly out".

Now that's all the news fit to print!

(Originally published here on October 24, 2006, and now residing in the archives ready for our WordPress reposting engine. And not to be overlooked, obviously our cause for enthusiasm with regard to British sovereignty pushing back at the Islamic invaders was mere flirtation, and unfortunately for many British neighborhoods, some six sharia-creeping years later—gravely exaggerated.)

Culture Shock In Scotland

M
Kriss killer
Kriss killer
ayhem, fooking bloody mayhem, perniciously instigated "once again" by Muslims (or Asians, as the British press likes to straddle it), and while it may have just been a pothole in the road of expanding documentation in the clash between the West and those more fiercely devoted followers of Mohammed, the debate over just what is to be done to stabilize these rising concerns is still rather muted, and nearly always neatly packaged in broad but rather simplistic terms. After all goes the party line, it was merely one white teenager who lost his life, however gruesome the attack. But let's be fair. Actually, this time, this place, the callousness of the brutal murder of an innocent fifteen year old boy did arouse the community from their politically correct slumber. Here is a reprise of that disgusting story from overseas:

Recently, forensic scientist Ruth Ramage testified in Scotland court that Glasglow youngster Kriss Donald was probably still alive when he was burning and had made his way down the grass to where he finally lay. He may have tried to extinguish the flames by rolling in the mud on the Clyde walkway before his death. The 15-year-old's body was found by the walkway, near London Road on 16 March 2004, a day after he disappeared.

At the High Court in Edinburgh Mohammed Faisal Mushtaq, 27, Zeeshan Shahid, 28, and his brother Imran Shahid 29, deny racially aggravated murder. Ms. Ramage had been called to the Clyde walkway and described her findings to the court.

"A smell of petrol was noted, particularly when the deceased was turned over onto his back," she said, noting that there were a number of stab wounds on his back and blood stains and scorch marks to logs about 50 yards away. His body was also heavily stained with soil on top of the burn marks.

Originally republished here on October 23, 2006. Here is an update. News of the original crime was major news in the anti-jihad circles, but there were some surprises along the way to justice for this young Scottish native where three of his Muslim attackers were given life sentences. Read on:

Three Muslim gang members were jailed for life yesterday for the "savage and barbaric" racially motivated murder of a schoolboy in Glasgow who had been singled out because he was white. Kriss Donald, 15, from Pollokshields, was abducted, stabbed repeatedly and then doused in petrol and burned to death by five men of Pakistani descent in March 2004, apparently in revenge for an earlier incident at a city centre nightclub.

The prosecution said four of the men then drove their captive on a 200-mile journey via Motherwell and Dundee, phoning friends and underworld associates for advice about what to do next; their journey was traced for the court by tracking some 200 mobile telephone calls.
The judge, Lord Uist, told Imran Shahid, 29, his brother Zeeshan, 28, and Mohammed Mushtaq, 27, that their "pre-meditated, cold-blooded execution ... truly was an abomination".

As he sentenced the men to minimum sentences of 25, 22, and 23 years respectively, the schoolboy's mother, Angela, shouted out: "You bastards!"

During the six-week trial the high court in Edinburgh heard graphic and often harrowing testimony from forensic experts that the victim was probably alive when he was set on fire, and had tried vainly to douse the flames by rolling on the ground.

His charred and semi-clothed body was found in the foetal position the following day, on a walkway on the bank of the Clyde. Prosecutors said the murder was "one of the worst and most appalling crimes of inhumanity against an effectively defenceless boy".

The jury of nine women and six men heard that Mr Donald had been singled out by Imran Shahid, 29, known as "Baldy", after Shahid had been hit with a bottle or glass at Victoria's nightclub on Sauchiehall Street in central Glasgow the previous evening.

Shahid, a bodybuilder who at the time sported a distinctive part-shaven, bleached-blond haircut, had pledged to seek revenge for the assault, which he blamed on a rival gang. "Boys from McCulloch Street" had attacked him, the court heard, and he wanted to know which "white bastards" had injured his pride.

Shahid and his four friends set out in a stolen silver Mercedes, cruising the streets of Pollokshaws with a knife, hammer and screwdriver; they came across Kriss Donald, who was a friend of the white men being sought but who was unconnected with the nightclub incident.

The prosecution said the car contained Imran Shahid, his brother, Zeeshan Shahid, nicknamed "Crazy" who was driving, their cousin Daanish Zahid, Mohammed "Becks" Mustaq and Zahid Mohammed. Their victim was first thrown into the rear footwell of the car despite his vain attempts to grab hold of the car doorframe, and threatened with a knife, punched and kicked, as Imran Shahid shouted: "I'm Baldy, nobody fucks with me."

A friend who narrowly escaped from the gang, Jamie Wallace, said the schoolboy cried out: "I'm only 15, what did I do?"

The prosecution said four of the men then drove their captive on a 200-mile journey via Motherwell and Dundee, phoning friends and underworld associates for advice about what to do next; their journey was traced for the court by tracking some 200 mobile telephone calls.

Eventually they drove back to Glasgow after a white associate suggested that the Clyde walkway was a quiet spot useful for "sorting" someone out. At the riverside, it was alleged, the 15-year-old was held down, stabbed 13 times and set alight.

The men's mobiles had fallen silent just after 7pm, and started up again about 20 minutes later, when the Mercedes was driven to a back lane near Glasgow University and set on fire.

kriss_donalds_killers
Kriss Donald's Murderers
Later that evening clothes from the attack were burned in another alley by Mushtaq and Zeehan Shahid. The wreckage of the Mercedes held vital forensic evidence, the court heard, including traces of Kriss Donald's blood and one of his trainers, and Imran Shahid's leather jacket, which had been preserved only because firecrews had arrived in time to prevent the car being destroyed by the fire.

Community leaders were extremely worried about the risks of an explosion of racial violence, with accusations that the British National party was stoking up tensions. Mrs. Donald intervened with an appeal for calm, stating: "It doesn't matter to my family what colour these men are. Kriss is gone because of gangs, not just in Pollokshields but every area of our communities."

The gang members escaped to Pakistan. It emerged in court that Mohammed Sarwar, the Pakistani-born MP who represents the Pollokshields area, had played a pivotal role in bringing the three men to justice, backed-up by the then foreign secretary Jack Straw.

Mr. Sarwar lobbied the Pakistani president, Pervez Musharaff, to introduce a one-off extradition treaty to secure the men's return. One meeting took place at the funeral in Cairo of the Palestinian leader, Yasser Arafat. The three eventually agreed to return voluntarily in October last year.

Read more.

The Veil, The Mask of Islamic Supremacy, Folly, and Failure

beautiful-football-fan
Beautiful Soccer Fan (No Veil)
The polarized debate over full-face veils in Great Britain is turning ugly. "This could be the trigger for the grim spiral that produced riots in the north of England five years ago," says Trevor Phillips, head of the Commission For Racial Equality in the UK.

Jack Straw, Leader of the House of Commons, recently sparked a media debate by saying he preferred women not to wear full-face veils at meetings in his constituency because he believed they made communication difficult.

After years of western leaders bending to Muslim demands, British leaders are daring to suggest theat the polarised situation over race and religion is riskeing a repeat of the Burnley and Oldham riots, adding: "We saw it in France last year where the French allowed north African communities to grow up completely separately, not feeling French."

"Eventually that frustration, that exclusion boiled over into the kind of car burning we saw last year—I do not want that for Britain."

Of course, any Muslim response is typically self-serving and one-sided. Massoud Shadjareh, from the lobby group the Islamic Human Rights Commission, told the BBC that "ministers after ministers after ministers" had been attacking the Muslim community recently, which was unfair and "not a means of respectable dialogue".

"I have to say the Muslim community really has been extremely calm, and extremely responsible," he said. Muslim Council of Britain secretary general Muhammad Abdul Bari said the integration debate had become "increasingly shrill and ugly", accusing Phillips of having a "poor track record" on this issue and criticised him for not mentioning recent attacks against Muslims which "accompanied this so-called debate".

Muslim Council of Britain secretary general Muhammad Abdul Bari said: "We have seen veils being forcefully pulled off Muslim women and Muslim individuals, including an imam in Glasgow, badly beaten up by thugs.

Reality check. Unfamiliar customs do make people uncomfortable. People of all tribes and tribulations. So Muslim women who live in Europe should strongly consider the consequences of wearing the veil before they pick up and tear across the globe seeking asylum. There seems to be a groundswell of well-intentioned folks who are sick of this acquiescent multicultural crap at the cost of all common sense.

Melanie Phillips, in her book, "Londonstan: How Britain Is Creating A Terror State Within" is not shy in assailing the damage multiculturalism and uncontrolled immigration has done to England and its once proud institutions, now paralysed by political correctness and the fear of being labelled racist and xenephobic.

If one is to survive in a modern society then one must expect to to make accomodations to it just as those of us who live in modern societies make accomodations to backward, sexist, pre-industrial conventions when we travel. No one is forcing these women to dress like Madonna the Material Girl, but it is not unreasonable to expect people to be recognizable on the street, in the courts, and on pieces of identification like a driver’s license.
But over and over again, we are told how "uncomfortable" certain immigrants with a certain religious purity feel when encountered with the strange stares they receive. We are not talking about violent attacks here. Nothing of that sort should be tolerated, on either side of any divide. But time and time again, in one European country after another, it is the Muslims who are demanding peculiar accommodations and psychological crutches, while also committing the most atrocious crimes against host nation citizenry and getting away with it while natives are prosecuted with impunity for the so-called "hurt" feelings of an Islamic passive aggressive. This is called extortion. Here's an example:

A Muslim teaching assistant who sparked a political storm after she refused to remove her veil during lessons, has won her employment tribunal case for victimization against the school which suspended her but lost her claims for discrimination and harassment. Ms Azmi was awarded £1,000 for "injury to feelings" after she succeeded in her claim of victimization. But her claims of direct and indirect discrimination, and her claim of harassment, were dismissed.

Burqa
Woman In Burqa
Let's review: when one moves to a new culture, guess what? You should expect to feel uncomfortable once in a while. Hell—I feel uncomfortable in too damn many places right here in America. Should I have the right to riot or sue the britches off the social stratum that makes me feel isolated, inferior, or downright scared?

And how about all these Western visitors to Muslim countries forced to take to scarf, et cetera.

If these Muslim women and their husbands and religious leaders find the idea of leaving one's face uncovered in public and during conversation unthinkable then they should be escorted to a part of the world where a gal can get back to basics and throw a burkha over herself and enjoy regular public beatings when she exposes an ankle.

If one is to survive in a modern society then one must expect to to make accomodations to it just as those of us who live in modern societies make accomodations to backward, sexist, pre-industrial conventions when we travel. No one is forcing these women to dress like Madonna the Material Girl, but it is not unreasonable to expect people to be recognizable on the street, in the courts, and on pieces of identification like a driver's license.

That's the least one can do, or else we might ALL be facing this very soon with grave consequences.

As one wit put it, "There are perfectly reasonable, modern ways for a woman who wants to make a display of her piety to cover herself, but when it comes to completely blocking but for a narrow slit the loveliness that is woman, there are a million places on this planet where this behavior is welcomed and most of them are served by non-stop daily flights. By all means, get on one, now. And the kicker. Covering one's whole body with a burqa or one's face with a veil is not even mentioned in the Qur'an, but is an extreme version of an indoctrinated and ruthlessly enforced modesty. That uncomfortable black (usually) stretch of cloth is a social weapon and a psychological result of a misogynous culture notoriously called Islam, The Religion of Submission.

Originally published on October 23, 2006. A Project Scenewash repost.

Introducing Fjordman As A Man Of Integrity And Insight

islam-West Scrapfest
Islam-West Scrapfest
The next three articles are written and distributed freely by a Norwegian chap writing under the name of Fjordman, who once kept a well-received blog covering Islam, Scandanavian affairs, and global politics. We thank him for both his insight and his generosity. He has since closed down that blog but writes that he occasionally contributes to other blogs or websites such as Gates of Vienna, Viking Observer, and Jihad Watch.

UPDATE: The announcement above, and the articles which follow are reposted from several sources, including Jihad Watch and the Project Scenewash, the latter on October 20, 2006. What follows below will be dated appropriately, consigned to this update.

Peder Are Nøstvold Jensen (born 11 June 1975) is a Norwegian far-right anti-Islamic blogger who writes under the pseudonym Fjordman. Jensen wrote anonymously as Fjordman starting in 2005, until he disclosed his identity in 2011. He has been active in the counterjihad movement, which argues that multiculturalism, particularly Muslim immigration, poses a threat to Western civilization. According to The Independent, Jensen "has written numerous screeds accusing Muslims of secretly planning to take over Europe." Notably, he has advocated the 'Eurabia' conspiracy theory in a self-published book titled Defeating Eurabia, and argued that all Muslims should be deported from Europe. The Norwegian terrorist Anders Behring Breivik quoted him extensively in his manifesto. According to the Norwegian Broadcasting Corporation, Fjordman is "considered a 'hero' among the bloggers and debaters constituting the new far right.

Fjordman: The Eurabia Code, Section 3

IN MARCH 2006, the two-day plenary session of the Euro-Mediterranean Parliamentary Assembly, held in Brussels approved a resolution which "condemned the offence" caused by the Danish cartoons of the prophet Muhammad as well "as the violence which their publication provoked." These MEPs and national MPs from the EU and Arab countries also urged governments to "ensure respect for religious beliefs and to encourage the values of tolerance, freedom and multiculturalism."

During the parliamentary assembly, Egyptian parliament speaker Ahmed Sorour insisted that the cartoons published in Denmark and other recent events showed the existence of a "cultural deficit." Jordanian MP Hashem al-Qaisi also condemned the cartoons, claiming that it is not sufficient to deplore the cartoons as these things might occur again in another country.

This lexicon would set down guidelines for EU officials and politicians prohibiting what they may say. “Certainly ‘Islamic terrorism’ is something we will not use … we talk about ‘terrorists who abusively invoke Islam’,” an EU official said.
And European Parliament president Josep Borrell referred to the Mediterranean as "a concentrate of all the problems facing humanity." He said that after one year presiding over the assembly he "still did not fully understand the complexities of the Mediterranean." Following the cartoons affair, EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana had travelled to the Middle East and made joint statements with Islamic leaders that "freedom of the press entails responsibility and discretion and should respect the beliefs and tenets of all religions." Solana said that he had discussed means to ensure that "religious symbols can be protected." He held talks with Sheikh Mohammed Sayed Tantawi of Al Azhar University, the highest seat of learning in Sunni Islam, and Arab League Secretary-General Amr Moussa.

Solana also met with the leader of the Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC), Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu.

Islam Conflict
Conflict in the streets of Eurabia...
Following their discussion, Solana "expressed our sincere regret that religious feelings have been hurt", and vowed "to reach out… to make sure that people's hearts and minds are not hurt again."

Only a few years earlier, Mr. Solana, then Secretary General of NATO, in a speech stated that "the root cause of conflicts in Europe and beyond can be traced directly to the absence of democracy and openness. The absence of the pressure valve of democratic discourse can lead these societies to explode into violence." The irony that he himself is now trying to curtail the democratic discourse in Europe through the promotion of Islamic censorship apparently did not occur to him.

Meanwhile, the tentacles of the vast, inflated EU bureaucracy insinuate themselves into regulations on every conceivable subject. Some of the examples of the bureaucracy are ridiculous; some are funny. But it is the sinister side to the European bureaucracy:

1. The promotion of an official, "EU federal ideology" advocating Multiculturalism;
2. The denunciation as "xenophobes" of all those who want to preserve their democracy at the nation state level; and
3.Calling those who would limit Third World immigration "racists."

A report from the EU's racism watchdog said that more must be done to combat racism and "Islamophobia." One method of accomplishing this is the promotion of a lexicon which shuns purportedly offensive and culturally insensitive terms. This lexicon would set down guidelines for EU officials and politicians prohibiting what they may say. "Certainly 'Islamic terrorism' is something we will not use ... we talk about 'terrorists who abusively invoke Islam'," an EU official said.

Early in 2006, the EU's human rights commissioner Alvaro Gil-Robles's criticized a plan to revamp Christianity as a school subject in elementary schools in Denmark. Gil-Robles said doing so went against European values. "Religion as a school subject should be a general course that attempts to give students insight into the three monotheistic religions," he said. The "three monotheistic religions" means Christianity, Judaism and Islam.

As I see it, there are several possible ways of dealing with the issue of education about religion.

1. Teach the traditional religions within a particular country, which in Europe means Christianity and Judaism.
2. Teach all the major world religions.
3. Leave religion out of the curriculum.

What the European Union does, however, is to treat Islam as a traditional, European religion on par with Christianity and Judaism. This is a crucial component of Eurabian thinking and practice. Notice how EU authorities in this case directly interfered to force a once-independent nation state to include more teachings of Islam in its school curriculum in order to instill their children with a proper dose of Eurabian indoctrination.

Most of the documents about the Euro-Arab Dialogue place particular emphasis on working with the media, and the Eurabians have played the European media like a Stradivarius. Aided by a pre-existing anti-Americanism and anti-Semitism, European media have been willing to demonize the United States and Israel while remaining largely silent on the topic Eurabia.
Notice also that they didn't ask for more teaching of Buddhism or Hinduism. Only Islam is being pushed.

In another case, the European Commission rebuffed a call by the Polish president for an EU-wide debate on reinstating the death penalty. "The death penalty is not compatible with European values," a Commission spokesman said. Again, the issue here is not your opinion regarding the death penalty. The real issue is that the metasticizing EU has already defined for you what constitutes "European values." Thus, major issues are simply beyond public debate. This innocent-sounding phrase "European values" cloaks a federal, Eurabian ideology enforced across the entire European Union without regard to the popular will.

Perhaps the most shameful and embarrassing aspect of the history of Eurabia is how the supposedly critical and independent European media has allowed itself to be corrupted or deceived by the Eurabians. Most of the documents about the Euro-Arab Dialogue place particular emphasis on working with the media, and the Eurabians have played the European media like a Stradivarius. Aided by a pre-existing anti-Americanism and anti-Semitism, European media have been willing to demonize the United States and Israel while remaining largely silent on the topic Eurabia.

In May 2006, a big conference was held in Vienna involving media figures (journalists) from all over Europe, who met with partners from the Arab world as a part of the Euro-Arab Dialogue.

European officials responded publicly with "regret" to Israel's ambassador to Austria Dan Ashbel's decision to boycott the conference on racism in the media because of concern in Jerusalem that anti-Semitism was getting short shrift at the meeting. Speaking for the conference—entitled "Racism, Xenophobia and the Media: Towards Respect and Understanding of all Religions and Cultures"—an official claimed that anti-Semitism was not taken off the agenda. This official countered that the meeting was "primarily a dialogue between the media representatives of all the Euro-Med partners on the problems that beset their profession. These include xenophobia, racism, anti-Semitism and Islamophobia [my emphasis]."

Writer Bruce Bawer thinks that many Europeans recognize that "multiculturalism" is leading their societies to disaster. But they've heard all their lives from officially approved authorities that any concern about multiculturalism and its consequences is tantamount to racism:

Eurasian Linkage
Eurasian Linkage

"There's a widespread resignation to the fact that multiculturalists control the media, academy, state agencies, and so on. They know very well that if you want to get ahead in European society, you don't take on multicultural orthodoxy. The political establishment seems solidly planted, unmovable, unchangeable. There may be a widespread rage, in short, but it's largely an impotent rage. Europeans today have been bred to be passive, to leave things to their leaders, whose wisdom they've been taught all their lives to take for granted. To shake off a lifetime of this kind of indoctrination is not easy."

According to Bat Ye'or, fear of awakening opposition to EU policy toward the Arab Mediterranean countries led to the repression of all discussion of the economic problems and difficulties of integration caused by massive immigration. Any criticism of Muslim immigration is basically brushed off as being "just like the Jews were talked about in Nazi Germany," a ridiculous but effective statement.

Bat Ye'or agrees with Bawer's analysis "concerning the totalitarian web cohesion of 'teachers, professors, the media, politicians, government agency workers, talking heads on TV, the representatives of state-funded "independent" organizations like SOS Racism' to indoctrinate the politically correct. This perfectly expresses the political directives given by the European Commission to coordinate and control in all EU member-states the political, intellectual, religious, media, teaching and publishing apparatus since the 1970s so as to harmonize with its Mediterranean strategy based on multiculturalism."

Professional harassment, boycott and defamation punish those who dare to openly challenge the Politically Correct discourse. According to Bat Ye'or, this has led to the development of a type of "resistance press" as if Europe were under the "occupation" of its own elected governments. This free press on the Internet and in blogs has brought some changes, including the rejection of the European Constitution in 2005. Despite overwhelming support for the Constitution by the governments in France and the Netherlands and a massive media campaign by political leaders in both countries, voters rejected it. Blogs played a significant part in achieving this.

Only a few months later, EU authorities lined up together with authoritarian regimes such as Iran, Saudi Arabia, Cuba and the Chinese Communist Party in favor of "more international control with" (read: censorship of) the Internet.

According to Richard North of the EU Referendum blog, "The most dangerous form of propaganda is that which does not appear to be propaganda. And it is that form at which the BBC [the British Broadcasting Corporation] excels. Perhaps the biggest sin of all is that of omission. By simply not informing us of key issues, they go by default, unchallenged until it is too late to do anything about them."

Vladimir Bukovsky is a former Soviet dissident, author and human rights activist who spent a total of twelve years in Soviet prisons. Now living in England, he warns against some of the same anti-democratic impulses in the West, especially in the EU, which he views as an heir to the Soviet Union. In 2002, he joined in on protests against the BBC's compulsory TV licence. "The British people are being forced to pay money to a corporation which suppresses free speech—publicising views they don't necessarily agree with." He has blasted the BBC for their "bias and propaganda," especially in stories related to the EU or the Middle East.

Conservative MP, Michael Gove and political commentator Mark Dooley also complain about lopsided coverage: "Take, for example, the BBC's coverage of the late Yasser Arafat. In one profile broadcast in 2002, he was lauded as an "icon" and a "hero," but no mention was made of his terror squads, corruption, or his brutal suppression of dissident Palestinians. Similarly, when Israel assassinated the spiritual leader of Hamas, Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, in 2004, one BBC reporter described him as "polite, charming and witty, a deeply religious man."

Yasser Arafat Waves
PLO Leader Yasser Arafat
This despite the fact that under Yassin's guidance, Hamas murdered hundreds."

Polish writer Nina Witoszek, now living in Norway, warns that people who have lived under Communist regimes are struck by a strange feeling of dejá vu in Western Europe:

"Before formulating a sentence, you put on a censorship autopilot which asks: Who am I insulting now? Am I too pro-Israeli, or maybe anti-Feminist, or - God forbid—anti-Islamic? Am I "progressive" enough? Soon we shall all write in a decaffeinated language: We shall obediently repeat all the benign mantras such as "dialogue," "pluralism," "reconciliation" and "equality." Norway has never been a totalitarian country, but many people now feel the taste of oppression and of being muzzled. I know many wise Norwegians—and even more wise foreigners—who no longer have the energy to waste time on contributing to a castrated, paranoid democracy. We prefer safety above freedom. This is the first step towards a voluntary bondage."

She quotes follow writer from Poland Czeslaw Milosz, who won the Nobel Prize in Literature in 1980 for books such as The Captive Mind, where he explained the seductiveness of totalitarian ideology.

One essay by Milosz is titled "Ketman." "Ketman" or "kitman" is an Islamic term brought to Milosz's attention by Arthur Gobineau's book Religions and Philosophies of Central Asia. He had noticed that the dissidents in Persia, long accustomed to tyranny, had evolved a style of their own. The need for survival often involved more than just keeping your mouth shut, but of actively lying in every way necessary. This strategy of dissimulation and deceit, which is especially pronounced by Shia Muslims but also used by Sunnis, is primarily used to deceive non-Muslims, but can also be used against other Muslims under duress.

Native Europeans and indeed some non-Muslim immigrants are quietly leaving in growing numbers, gradually turning the continent into a net exporter of refugees rather than an importer of them.
According to Milosz, a very similar strategy was used in Communist countries. Similar to Islam, those practicing dissimulation felt a sense of superiority towards those who were stupid enough to state their real opinions openly. In Communist societies, dissimulation was just as much a technique of adaptation to an authoritarian regime as a conscious, theatrical form of art that became increasingly refined.

It is frightening to hear people who have grown up in former Communist countries say that they see this same totalitarian impulse at work in Western Europe now. According to them, we in the West are at least as brainwashed by Multiculturalism and Political Correctness as they ever were with Communism. It is frightening because I believe they are right. Have we witnessed the fall of the Iron Curtain in Eastern Europe only to see an Iron Veil descend on Western Europe? An Iron Veil of EU bureaucracy and Eurabian treachery, of Political Correctness, Multicultural media censorship and the ever-present threat of Muslim violence and terrorism that is gradually extinguishing free speech. The momentum of bureaucratic treachery is accelerating.

Native Europeans and indeed some non-Muslim immigrants are quietly leaving in growing numbers, gradually turning the continent into a net exporter of refugees rather than an importer of them. When large parts of Europe are being overrun by barbarians—actively aided and abetted by our own trusted leaders—and when people are banned from opposing this onslaught, is Western Europe still a meaningful part of the Free World? Have the countries of Eastern Europe gone from one "Evil Empire" to another? Are they—and we—back in the EUSSR?

Vaclav Klaus, the conservative President of the Czech Republic, has complained that: "Every time I try to remove some piece of Soviet-era regulation, I am told that whatever it is I am trying to scrap is a requirement of the European Commission."

In an interview with Paul Belien of the Brussels Journal in February 2006, Vladimir Bukovksy warned that the European Union is on its way to becoming another Soviet Union. Mr Bukovsky called the EU a "monster" that must be destroyed, the sooner the better, before it develops into a fully-fledged totalitarian state.

"The ultimate purpose of the Soviet Union was to create a new historic entity, the Soviet people, all around the globe. The same is true in the EU today. They are trying to create a new people. They call this people "Europeans", whatever that means. According to Communist doctrine as well as to many forms of Socialist thinking, the state, the national state, is supposed to wither away. In Russia, however, the opposite happened. Instead of withering away the Soviet state became a very powerful state, but the nationalities were obliterated. But when the time of the Soviet collapse came these suppressed feelings of national identity came bouncing back and they nearly destroyed the country. It was so frightening."

Timothy Garton Ash is considered a leading expert on Europe's future. Bruce Bawer views Garton Ash as typical of Europe's political élite. Ash mistrusts national patriotism but adores the EU. He writes about the need for a factitious European patriotism ("flags, symbols, a European anthem we can sing") to encourage "emotional identification with European institutions." And just why does Europe need the EU? Garton Ash's answer: "To prevent our falling back into the bad old ways of war and European barbarism." Among his suggestions is that Europe encourage "the formation of an Arab Union." He makes no mention of Arab democracy. Imagining "Europe in 2025 at its possible best," he pictures it as a "partnership" with Arab countries and Russia that would extend "from Marrakesh, via Cairo, Jerusalem, Baghdad, and Tbilisi, all the way to Vladivostok."

Wars have existed for thousands of years before the advent of the modern nation state. It is far more likely that weakening nation states will end our democratic system, a system which is closely tied to the existence of sovereign nation states, than that it will end wars.
The European Commission proposed the controversial idea of a singing event in all member states to celebrate the European Union's 50th "birthday," the 50th anniversary of the 1957 Treaty of Rome. Commissioner Margot Wallstrom was lobbying for big-style birthday celebrations to "highlight the benefits that European integration has brought to its citizens." Diplomats said the idea had sparked feelings of disgust among new, formerly Communist member states such as Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic, which were reminded of "Stalinist times" when people were forced by the state to sing. Brussels also intended to spend around €300,000 on the appointment of 50 citizen "ambassadors," dubbed the "Faces of Europe," who are supposed to "tell their story" throughout the year on what the EU means to them in their daily life. Germany will go ahead with its own idea to let thousands of its bakeries bake 50 sorts of cakes with recipes from all 25 member states.

Commissioner Wallstrom in 2005 argued that politicians who resisted pooling national sovereignty risked a return to Nazi horrors of the 1930s and 1940s. Her fellow commissioners also issued a joint declaration, stating that EU citizens should pay tribute to the dead of the Second World War by voting Yes to the EU Constitution. The commissioners gave the EU sole credit for ending the Cold War, making no mention of the role of NATO or the United States.

Is the EU an instrument to end wars? In October 2006, Michel Thoomis, the secretary general of the French Action Police trade union, warned of a civil war in France created by Muslim immigrants: "We are in a state of civil war, orchestrated by radical Islamists. This is not a question of urban violence any more, it is an intifada, with stones and Molotov cocktails. You no longer see two or three youths confronting police, you see whole tower blocks emptying into the streets to set their 'comrades' free when they are arrested."

These Muslim immigrants were allowed in by the very same European elites who now want European citizens to celebrate their work through cakes and songs. While civil society is disintegrating in Western Europe due to Islamic pressures, EU authorities are working to increase Muslim immigration, while congratulating themselves for bringing peace to the continent. What peace? Where?

The Peace of Westphalia in 1648 ended the Thirty Years' War, the last major religious war in Europe, and helped lay the foundations for modern nation states. Before nation states, we thus had a pattern of borderless religious wars and civil wars. This is what we have returned to, full circle, only this time a borderless Jihad is triggering civil wars in Europe. While the EU may help prevent wars between nation states with old grudges, such as Germany and France, it may also actively cause other kinds of wars. It accomplishes this by increasing Multicultural tensions and a dangerous sense of estrangement between citizens and those who are supposed to be their leaders.

islamist-gone-headless
Brainless. Dead spirits. False piety.
Wars have existed for thousands of years before the advent of the modern nation state. It is far more likely that weakening nation states will end our democratic system, a system which is closely tied to the existence of sovereign nation states, than that it will end wars.

When asked whether the member countries of the EU joined the union voluntarily, and whether the resulting integration reflects the democratic will of Europeans, Vladimir Bukovksy replied, "No, they did not. Look at Denmark which voted against the Maastricht Treaty twice. Look at Ireland [which voted against the Nice treaty]. Look at many other countries, they are under enormous pressure. It is almost blackmail. It is a trick for idiots. The people have to vote in referendums until the people vote the way that is wanted. Then they have to stop voting. Why stop? Let us continue voting. The European Union is what Americans would call a shotgun marriage."

In 1992, Bukovksy had unprecedented access to Politburo and other Soviet secret documents, as described in his book, Judgement in Moscow. In January 1989, during a meeting between Soviet leader Gorbachev, former Japanese Prime Minister Nakasone, former French President Valéry Giscard d'Estaing, American banker Rockefeller and former US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, Giscard d'Estaing supposedly stated: "Europe is going to be a federal state and you have to prepare yourself for that. You have to work out with us, and the European leaders, how you would react to that."

This was in the 1980s, when most of the media still dismissed as scaremongering any talk of a political union that would subdue the nation states. Fifteen years later, Valéry Giscard d'Estaing became the chief drafter of the truly awful EU Constitution, an impenetrable brick of a book, hundreds of pages long, and lacking any of the checks and balances so crucial to the American Constitution. Giscard has argued that the rejection of the Constitution in the French and Dutch referenda in 2005 "was a mistake which will have to be corrected" and insisted that "In the end, the text will be adopted."

Giscard has also said that "it was a mistake to use the referendum process" because "it is not possible for anyone to understand the full text." Does it instill confidence among the citizens of Europe that we are supposed to be under the authority of a "Constitution" that is too complex for most non-bureaucrats to understand? According to Spain's justice minister Juan Fernando Lopez Aguilar "you don't need to read the European constitution to know that it is good."

Jean-Luc Dehaene, former Belgian Prime Minister, said that "We know that nine out of ten people will not have read the Constitution and will vote on the basis of what politicians and journalists say. More than that, if the answer is No, the vote will probably have to be done again, because it absolutely has to be Yes."

Journalist Nidra Poller, however, is more skeptical. Commenting on the debate prior to the EU Constitution referendum in France, she noted a submissive attitude among EU leaders towards Muslim demands: "The Euro-Mediterranean 'Dialogue' is a masterpiece of abject surrender." The European Union functions as an intermediate stage of an ominous project that calls for a meltdown of traditional European culture, to be replaced by a new, Eurabian cocktail. And she asks: "When subversive appeasement hides behind the veil of 'Dialogue,' what unspeakable ambitions might be dissembled by the noble word 'Constitution'?"

—Fjordman

Peder Are Nøstvold Jensen (born 11 June 1975) is a Norwegian far-right anti-Islamic blogger. Jensen wrote anonymously as Fjordman starting in 2005, until he disclosed his identity in 2011. He has been active in the counterjihad movement, which argues that multiculturalism, particularly Muslim immigration, poses a threat to Western civilization.