Europe

I decided to write this essay following the riots in Malmö this weekend. Malmö is Sweden's third largest city and by far the worst city in Scandinavia when it comes to Muslim aggression. I read recently that an Arab girl interviewed in Malmö said that she liked it so much there, it felt almost like an Arab city. Native Swedes have been moving away from the city for years, turned into refugees in their own country by Jihad, not too different from the non-Muslims in some regions of the Philippines, southern Thailand or Kashmir in India, or for that matter Christian Serbs in Kosovo.

Sweden was presented during the Cold War as a middle way between capitalism and Communism. When this model of a society collapses – and it will collapse, under the combined forces of Islamic Jihad, the European Union, Multiculturalism and ideological overstretch – it is thus not just the Swedish state that will collapse but the symbol of Sweden, the showcase of an entire ideological world view. I wrote two years ago that if the trend isn't stopped, the Swedish nation will simply cease to exist in any meaningful way during the first half of this century. The country that gave us Bergman, ABBA and Volvo could become known as the Bosnia of northern Europe, and the “Swedish model” will be one of warning against ideological madness, not one of admiration. I still fear I was right in that assessment.

Jonathan Friedman, an American living outside Malmö, mentions that the so-called Integration Act of 1997 proclaimed that “Sweden is a Multicultural society.” Notes to the Act also stated that “Since a large group of people have their origins in another country, the Swedish population lacks a common history. The relationship to Sweden and the support given to the fundamental values of society thus carry greater significance for integration than a common historical origin.”

Native Swedes have thus been reduced to just another ethnic group in Sweden, with no more claim to the country than the Kurds or the Somalis who arrived there last Thursday. The political authorities of the country have erased their own people's history and culture.

Jens Orback, Minister for Democracy, Metropolitan Affairs, Integration and Gender Equality from the Social Democratic Party said during a debate in Swedish radio in 2004 that “We must be open and tolerant towards Islam and Muslims because when we become a minority, they will be so towards us.” (This statement is clearly not based on any historical FACT or past experience !! )

This is a government that knows perfectly well that their people will become a minority in their own country, yet is doing nothing to stop this. On the contrary. Pierre Schori, Minister for immigration, during a parliamentary debate in 1997 said that: “Racism and xenophobia should be banned and chased [away],” and that one should not accept “excuses, such as that there were flaws in the immigration and refugee policies.” In other words: It should be viewed as a crime for the native population not to assist in wiping themselves out.

Orback's attitude is what follows once you declare that culture is irrelevant. Our culture, even though we try to forget it, is steeped in a Judeo-Christian morality based on the Golden Rule of reciprocity: “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” (Luke 6:31)

Muslims, on the other hand, are steeped in an Islamic tradition based on Muslim supremacy. Muslims view lack of force as a sign of weakness, and they despise weakness, which is precisely why Adolf Hitler stated his admiration for Islam, and thought it would be a better match for Nazism than Christianity, with its childish notions of compassion.

A Swedish man was nearly killed for the crime of wearing clothes with his own national flag while Sweden was participating in the 2006 football World Cup. Some “Multicultural youths” found this to be an intolerable provocation, and the 24-year-old man was run down by a car in Malmö, where Muhammad is becoming the most common name for newborn boys.

Feriz and Pajtim, members of Gangsta Albanian Thug Unit in Malmö, explain how they mug people downtown. They target a lone victim. “We surround him and beat and kick him until he no longer fights back,” Feriz said. “You are always many more people than your victims. Cowardly?” “I have heard that from many, but I disagree. The whole point is that they're not supposed to have a chance.” They didn't express any sympathy for their victims. "If they get injured, they just have themselves to blame for being weak," said Pajtim and shrugged.

The wave of robberies the city of Malmö has witnessed is part of a “war against the Swedes.” This is the explanation given by young robbers from immigrant background in interviews with Petra Åkesson. “When we are in the city and robbing we are waging a war, waging a war against the Swedes.” This argument was repeated several times. “Power for me means that the Swedes shall look at me, lie down on the ground and kiss my feet.” The boys explain, laughingly, that “there is a thrilling sensation in your body when you're robbing, you feel satisfied and happy, it feels as if you've succeeded, it simply feels good.” “We rob every single day, as often as we want to, whenever we want to. The Swedes don't do anything, they just give us the stuff. They're so wimpy.”

“Exit Folkhemssverige - En samhällsmodells sönderfall” (Exit the People's Home of Sweden - The Downfall of a Model of Society) is a book from 2005 about immigration and the Swedish welfare state model dubbed “the people's home,” written by Jonathan Friedman, Ingrid Björkman, Jan Elfverson and Åke Wedin. According to them, the Swedish Multicultural elites see themselves first of all as citizens of the world. In order to emphasize and accentuate diversity, everything Swedish is deliberately disparaged. Opposition to this policy is considered a form of racism.

The authors fear that the handling of the immigration policies has seriously eroded democracy because the citizens lose their loyalty towards a state they no longer consider their own. “Instead of increasing the active participation of citizens, the government has placed clear restrictions on freedom of thought, freedom of speech and freedom of congregation.”

Mona Sahlin has held various posts in Social Democratic cabinets, among others as Minister for Democracy, Integration and Gender Equality. Sahlin has said that many Swedes are envious of immigrants because they, unlike the Swedes, have a culture, a history, something which ties them together. Notice how Swedish authorities first formally state that Swedes don't have a history or a culture, and then proceed to lament the fact that Swedes don't have a history or a culture. A neat trick.

Sahlin has also stated that: “If two equally qualified persons apply for a job at a workplace with few immigrants, the one called Muhammad should get the job. […] It should be considered an asset to have an ethnic background different from the Swedish one.” In 2004, she was quoted as saying that “A concerted effort that aims at educating Swedes that immigrants are a blessing to their country must be pursued,” stressing that her compatriots must accept that the new society is Multicultural. “Like it or not, this is the new Sweden.”

Mona Sahlin was elected leader of the Social Democratic Party, as thus a future contender for the post of Swedish Prime Minister, in 2007.… under the leadership of PM Carl Bildt from 1991 to 94, they presided over massive immigration, and have not been vocal in their opposition to the Multicultural policies since. The new Foreign Minister Bildt as a UN Commissioner to the Balkans called for recognizing Islam as a part of European culture.

PM Reinfeldt has stated that the original Swedish culture was merely barbarism: “It can sometimes be good to humbly remind of the fact that a great deal of what constitutes Sweden has been created in [a process of] evolution, exactly because we have been open to accept other people and experiences.”

Reinfeldt said this following a visit to an area called Ronna in Södertälje, near Stockholm. One year earlier a police station in Södertälje was hit by shots from an automatic weapon following a major confrontation between immigrant youths and police. The trouble in Ronna started after a Swedish girl had been called a “whore” and reacted to this. Ethnologist Maria Bäckman, in her study “Whiteness and gender,” has followed a group of Swedish girls in the immigrant suburb of Rinkeby outside Stockholm. Bäckman relates that several of the blond Swedish girls stated that they had dyed their hair to avoid sexual harassment.

I have called Sweden a soft-totalitarian country, but I am sometimes not so sure about the “soft” part. Opinion polls have revealed that two out of three Swedes doubt whether Islam can be combined with Swedish society, and a very significant proportion of the population have for years wanted more limitations on immigration. Yet not one party represented in Parliament is genuinely critical of the Multicultural society.

Is it just a coincidence that the one country on the European continent that has avoided war for the longest period of time, Sweden, is also arguably the one Western nation where Political Correctness has reached the worst heights? Maybe the prolonged period of peace has created an environment where layers of ideological nonsense have been allowed to pile up for generations without stop. I don't know what Sweden will look like a generation from now, but I'm pretty sure it won't be viewed as a model society. And if the absence of war is one of the causes of its current weakness, I fear that is a problem that will soon be cured.

As a wide-eyed youth I loved everything about England. It seemed a world so different from the bigotry, insecurity and ethnic strife of my native Belfast.

But in recent years my attachment to England has faded. My sense of connection, so powerful 20 years ago, has become frayed. I increasingly feel as if I am living in a foreign land, having nothing in common with large numbers of my fellow citizens – not even a language or a shared set of values.

When I go to parts of London, Manchester or Birmingham I am struck by a sense of being in the Third World, with all its attendant chaos and tension. This is not the England that I once loved.

Yet I am told by Government and civic institutions that I am not allowed to harbour such dangerous sentiments. Instead, I should be overjoyed at the changing face of our country. In the twisted logic of the modern British state, my devotion to England – the reason I settled here – is a cause for suspicion. I should be embracing cultural diversity, not clinging to an England that is being systematically demolished.

To me this is a morally reprehensible argument. If you genuinely love something then it is grotesque to be asked to celebrate its demise. Furthermore, the demand for change only ever works one way. The indigenous population is constantly urged to adapt to the ways of migrants, who seem allowed to import their lifestyles, customs and languages wholesale into Britain without any official challenge or disapproval.

Thanks to the twin malign forces of mass immigration and multi-culturalism, the scale of England’s transformation is alarming. Though the collapse of our borders has made records unreliable, it is probable that more than 700,000 immigrants are arriving here every year.

Before the end of this decade the majority of London’s residents will be from non-white ethnic groups. Other cities will soon follow. On even a conservative estimate, the indigenous population of England will be in a minority before the end of this century. And the pace of change is being accelerated by the ruthlessly enforced official ideology of cultural diversity, which holds that any manifestation of traditional patriotism is akin to racism.

It is often said that Labour’s policy on immigration has been a failure. But for the ruling metropolitan elite it has been a huge success. The promotion of influxes of Third World and Eastern European migrants has been the central part of a deliberate strategy to change England for ever. Full of loathing for their own country, Left-wingers recognised that they could not bring about their revolution by economic means after the downfall of communism. So instead they have cynically used mass immigration as a battering ram against old England – turning this once proud nation into little more than a landmass full of conflicting minorities.

MUSLIM radicals have established their own draconian court systems in Britain.

Controversial Sharia courts have been set up in major towns and cities to impose Islamic law and enable Muslims to shun the legitimate British legal system. Last night religious leaders and politicians expressed outrage that Sharia law is gaining an increasing foothold in our society.

Critics insisted that the Government is allowing a two-tier legal system to flourish in the name of political correctness and that the authority of UK justice is being undermined.

The Daily Express can reveal that one of the controversial courts has been set up in the home town of the 7/7 London bombings ringleader. Mohammed Siddique Khan was responsible for the Edgware Road Circle Line explosion which killed six people and injured 120. Our investigation has found that the Sharia court system has been set up in the heart of Dewsbury, West Yorkshire, and that it is a model for others across the country which are operating outside the British legal process.

The Dewsbury court is called the Sharee Council – another term for Sharia – and operates as a Muslim judiciary making decisions by which attendees must abide.

In many countries, hard-line interpretations of the Islamic law allow people to be stoned to death, beheaded or have their limbs amputated.

Last night the Sharia courts were blasted by both Christian and Muslim groups for their non-democratic attempts to establish their legal system.

Mark Wallace, campaign manager of the Freedom Association said: “British society must be one of free speech, free personal choice, democratic freedom and fairness.

“If individual Muslims wish to inform their decisions by the teachings of Sharia, that is fine, but they must do it within the structures of British law and they must understand that sharia will never be acceptable as the legal system of the UK.”

His views were echoed by the Muslim Council of Britain, whose spokesman Inayat Bunglawala said: “We believe one legal code should apply for all citizens of the UK. There is no place for multiple legal systems for people of different religious or ethnic backgrounds.” Dewsbury councillor Imtiaz Ameen, a Muslim, said: “Some people advocate total Sharia law but you cannot have it being the case in any country that there is one law for one and one law for another.”

Critics say the Government has not done enough to stop radical Muslim groups establishing their brand of law. Liberal thinkers in the Government claim that the law enables full-face veil-wearing Muslim women who are afraid of British courts to gain justice the “traditional way”.

But one insider told the Daily Express that the Sharia court, which is run from the backroom of a Madrasa – an Islamic education centre – in Dewsbury is just one of “dozens” operating in Asian communities. And a leading Muslim commentator claimed similar courts exist in every major city across Britain.

The Madrasa – which is a former pub situated less than a mile from the one-time home of London bombing mastermind Khan – sits as a court every other weekend and hears up to 10 cases a day.

Four Muslim scholars, who have spent their life studying and preaching the Koran, sit in judgment on an array of cases alongside a Muslim solicitor whose role is to advise on the implications of their rulings in British law.

The operation is headed by prominent scholar Sheikh Yaqub Munshi. Accounts for the Dewsbury court’s parent company the Islamic Research Institute of Great Britain, show that it was registered in Dewsbury as a charity in 1996 with the ethos of promoting the advancement of Islamic religion and education in the United Kingdom.

Charitable status allows the organisation to claim tax relief and apply for government grants and trustee funding. Between April 1999 and April 2004 its gross annual turnover rocketed from £2,500 to above £177,000. At the end of the last financial year it recorded total funds of £255,000 but it is not known if or how it charges for use of the service.

At the moment, the leaders insist they only deal with civil matters such as Muslim divorces, wedding dowries and asset sharing. But the secretive Muslim-only nature of the dealings will provoke fears that radical Sharia law could be allowed to spread across the Muslim population. The source said: “These courts take the law into their own hands and dish out punishment for bad behaviour.

Sheikh Yaqub admitted that introducing Sharia law into the UK has been his goal since moving to Britain from Pakistan in the 1960s. But he insisted its main aim is to help repressed women who are trapped in bad or violent marriages and who dare not use British law. He said: “Ever since I arrived here in the 1960s there has been a case of women being forced to get married, others forced to get married, but unhappy afterwards. Until now there was no organisation which could Islamically solve their problems.”

Sharia is derived from the Arabic translation Sariah and outlines Islamic law according to the Koran. The term means “way” or “path” and gives the Islamic framework within which people must regulate their lives according to the Muslim faith.After the Sharia court has ruled in judgment, solicitors process matters officially through UK courts on their clients’ behalf.

Dr Patrick Sookhdeo, of the Institute for the Study of Islam and Christianity, said: “Sharia courts now operate in most larger cities, with different sectarian and ethnic groups operating their own courts that cater to their specific needs according to their tradition.”

Philip Davies, the Tory MP for Shipley, said: “I am absolutely appalled and find the prospect of such courts totally terrifying. Places like this should be closed down or else everybody will want to establish their own courts.

“How many more places like this are there in the UK? Who knows where it could all end? It simply cannot be tolerated.”

A part of europe islamification

http://washingtontimes.com/op-ed/20070315-082220-8641r.htm

Europe, as we may readily observe, is very far along in an accommodation with its still-increasing Muslim immigrant population that is resulting not
in the Europeanizing of Islam, but rather the Islamizing of Europe.

As Bernard Lewis declared in 2004, Europe will have an Islamic majority by the end of the 21st century at the latest. As Vlaams Belang's Mr. Dewinter recently put it, "We are becoming foreigners in our own land." Such tragic pronouncements turn conversation with Vlaams Belang into a kind of political free verse -- sadly evocative but rooted in a desperate reality that should shake American complacency. That is, "foreigners in our land" is poetry; Mohammed as the most popular boy's name in Brussels for six years running is implacable fact. The idea that "We are living on a dying continent but we are not dead yet," as Mr. Dewinter has explained, is metaphorical.

His citation from Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi that "Allah is mobilizing Muslim Turkey to add... 50 million more Muslims" to the European Union augurs world-class revolution.Is such a revolution desirable? After writing nearly incessantly about Islamization since September 11, I won't surprise anyone by saying no -- not if freedom of conscience, religious equality or women's rights are your bag (not to mention the glorious representational artwork Europe's museums are stuffed with). Besides, the strategic implications for the United States are, in a word, bleak.
In multiculturally totalitarian Belgium, however, you make such judgments at your own risk. Vlaams Belang, a conservative, free-market party that stands for Flemish secession from the French-speaking part of Belgium and opposes continued immigration, now stands trial in a Belgian court for a comment -- a comment! -- Mr. Dewinter made in 2005 to a New York publication, The Jewish Week. When asked why Belgian Jews should vote for a party that espouses "xenophobia," Mr. Dewinter replied: "Xenophobia is not the word I would use. If [it] absolutely must be a 'phobia,' let it be 'Islamophobia.' Yes, we're afraid of Islam. The Islamization of Europe is a frightening thing."

If convicted of the "crime" of "Islamophobia" ("1984," anyone?), the party would lose its state funding. In a country that effectively prohibits
private political fund-raising, Vlaams Belang -- the largest party in Belgium -- would ultimately cease to exist. And so, too, would free speech
in the center of Europe.

Before I met Vlaams Belang's Frank Vanhecke and Filip Dewinter in Washington, I believed Europe's rush to Islamize itself was a stampede, its
transformation all but inevitable. Now, I think these men have at least earned Europe the benefit of the doubt. Studying their various statements
and interviews, I found no evidence to support the crude slanders to which they are continually subjected in the media for being a right-wing party
opposed to the massive Islamic immigration now transforming traditional European culture. Indeed, their statements on Israel are more supportive
than any European party I know of.

As Mr. Vanhecke put it in a recent speech, "They call us 'intolerant' because we oppose intolerance. They call us 'fascists' because we oppose
Islamofascism. They call us 'the children of holocaust perpetrators,' because we oppose Islamists who are preparing a new holocaust against the
Jews."

List of articles

Islam is Taking a Grip on Europe

Why Muslims Object to 'Piggy Banks'
By Wolfgang Polzer
http://www.spcm.org/Journal/spip.php?article7249

WETZLAR — Islam is slowly but surely taking a grip on the European culture, warns the German journalist and university lecturer Udo Ulfkotte.

Traditional values, customs and judicial standards are gradually customized to meet Muslim requirements.
As Ulfkotte explained at a meeting of Christian Democrats in Wetzlar, March 8, more and more institutions are making allowances for Muslims. Many banks, he said, are abandoning the so-called piggy banks, because they are afraid of losing Muslim customers. Muslims regard the pig as an unclean animal.

German butchers who sell pork are targeted by Muslim extremists, according to Ulfkotte. Muslims occasionally spit on sausages on sale at open-air markets.In some European cities Muslim taxi drivers refuse to transport dogs, even blind persons with guide dogs. Two schools in Berlin have installed two separate entrances – one for German Christians and Jews and the other for Muslim Arabs and Turks.

The Muslim Sharia law is also beginning to take hold. Banks are Sharia-friendly investments, Ulfkotte said. Authorities in Berlin have
recognized a Sharia lawyer, who settles family feuds.

According to the journalist many German politicians turn a blind eye to the gradual Islamization. They often emphasize that the vast majority of the 3.5 million Muslims in Germany are peaceful citizens. But, says Ulfkotte, 40 percent are convinced that the German constitution is incompatible with Islam.

According to the journalist many Muslims in Europe show a lack of tolerance. For their integration to be successful they would have to adapt to basic European values.Hindus, Ulfkotte said, are a good example that this is possible. They accept that Europeans eat beef, although Hindus regard cows as sacred animals.

List of articles