This is not a prophecy.
This is a description of what has actually
in the UK, the US, France, Spain, Belgium, Australia
- and almost everywhere in the West.
Now I believe in treating people as individuals.
Many or most immigrants come to the West precisely because they have some admiration
for its freedoms,
and want to escape failed states ruled by clerics and Islamic dictators.
Western Muslims are the most liberal, tolerant, pro-democracy Muslims in the world.
All the dissidents are here
- the religious dissidents,
the political dissidents,
the feminist dissidents, and
the gay dissidents.
All the dissident works
- such as criticism of Islam and
- are published in the West.
There is also an argument that if there is ever to be a liberal Islamic reformation,
it will come from the western Muslims,
who are free to speak and question,
rather than from the Muslims living in unfree states.
However, there is a substantial minority
who threaten our western freedoms.
Who agitate for sharia.
Who carry out jihad abroad.
And who carry out jihad attacks on the West itself.
What to do about these aggressors is one of the questions of our time.
Islam v. the West.
Photo in the English Garden,
Munich, on a hot summer's day in 2010.
Actually, it's not so much that the immigrant women dress like this.
It is that they have to dress like this,
or they will face consequences, up to and including death.
Amazing picture from Blick
Around the world,
millions of people who live in tyrannies
long for freedom and democracy.
We have a duty to give pro-democracy activists,
and western freedom-lovers a haven.
The west is the natural place for them to set up their opposition
parties, newspapers, websites
and governments-in-exile, which we should support.
We have a duty to give a haven to people
fleeing genocide and persecution.
I despise anti-immigration movements that are based on ethnic purity.
Some of the
seem to be in or near this territory.
the desire for ethnic purity
is one of the single worst ideas in human history.
My country, the Republic of Ireland, is
far too ethnically pure already,
having lost most of its ancient
Protestant and Anglo-Irish population.
In general, ethnic purity is a sign of failure.
Immigration is a sign of success.
Having said all that, there is one troubling issue:
How about letting in people who hate you
and threaten you?
To oppose immigration per se
(or be against all immigrants once they are in)
But the western left ignores the fact
that immigrants may hate western freedoms,
and want to end them,
and force their primitive, barbarous ideas on me.
Obviously, not all immigrants have been threatening like this,
so we must be careful to focus on the ones who have issued such threats.
At the moment this category consists almost entirely
of Islamists who openly want to destroy our freedom
and some day set up sharia law in Europe.
My response to the existence of such appalling people is as follows:
Let in freedom-lovers, exclude freedom-haters.
- Yes, I agree that people
who hate western freedoms should not be allowed in.
Islamist activists should not be let in, even if they are
West-haters can be hard to identify on arrival, though.
You need to be careful that your rules and checks
do not exclude democracy-loving Muslims who are fleeing
Islamist religious states.
These are exactly the people you want to let in.
Islam v. Islamism
makes the same point,
about how many Muslims and ex-Muslims in the West are our allies:
"Remember that most Muslims who emigrated to the United States did so to get
away from "cultures" and "societies" (I use the terms very loosely)
like the ones that are described below, much as Judeo-Christian immigrants came here
to get away from European monarchies, religious despotisms, and feudal lords."
- Inevitably, you will let in some freedom-haters by accident.
If they are serious, they will eventually do something,
at which point they can be identified.
Then you have the problem of: Can they be deported?
native born people are allowed hate the west.
Are we making immigrants second-class citizens,
with less freedom of speech than natives?
It's certainly a difficult issue. I think they can be deported,
on the grounds that letting them in was clearly an error at the time.
So I think, yes, an immigrant can be a second-class citizen
in this sense
for n years, until they have proved they are not an enemy
of the country.
This is not a restriction that will bother any immigrant
who does not actually hate the west.
Native born people cannot be deported,
even if they hate the west and its freedoms.
They must be first-class citizens.
In a free society,
we tolerate citizens who hate tolerance
and want to end it.
for people who want to end free speech,
such as fascists, communists and Islamists.
But the point is:
We can be relaxed about this when they are powerless cranks.
But what if there is a growing number of such people
who want to end freedom?
My response would be that
we should still have free speech,
but a free society has every right to try to survive.
It must do everything possible to
reduce the numbers of such people, and not let any more in.
Germans to put Muslims through loyalty test
- The German state of Baden-Wurttemberg
is to test whether incoming Muslims believe in western values
of religious freedom and a tolerant society.
If not, they are denied citizenship.
Even better, if you answer the test correctly, but it is found out later
that you do not really believe in western values,
you can have your citizenship removed.
Those who support 9/11 will be denied citizenship.
This is the future. This is what all of Europe should do.
If immigrants do not believe in western values of tolerance and freedom,
they should not be let in to Europe.
Fascists seek asylum in Norway, Aug 2011.
Islamic fascists attack apostates at an asylum-seekers' centre in Norway.
They don't even wait until they're in the country before revealing their true face!
Fascists seek asylum in Germany, May 2016.
They threaten Christians while they are still in refugee centres awaiting processing.
What kind of insane country would give these people asylum?
Four refugees arrested in terror plot in Sweden, Sept 2011.
Sweden - out of kindness - let in these child refugees from Somalia and Iraq in 1991, 1993, 1996 and 1999.
In 2011 they are arrested for allegedly plotting an Islamic terrorism attack against Sweden.
This is the nonsense that comes from the lack of clarity in the law.
We provide asylum to fascists just as easily as
to people fleeing fascism. The law seems to make no distinction.
Don't be surprised if in the next few years
some of these "refugees" bomb a British city.
Refugees have already tried to bomb London.
Islamic Fascism in Belgium:
Abu Imran (Fouad Belkacem)
declares that he wants to basically destroy all of Belgium.
Well what a lovely immigrant to have!
He says he will demolish the
I notice that this barbarian uses infidel inventions like video, however.
And did I spot a mobile phone?
What a vile hypocrite.
In 2015, Belkacem was sentenced to 12 years' imprisonment.
should then be deported from the West and never allowed to return.
Islamic Fascism in Holland: Den Haag Connection (DHC),
a Moroccan immigrant fascist rap group in Holland.
(The very idea that immigrants might be fascists never occurred to anyone promoting mass immigration in the
1960s and 1970s.)
"Fuck them Jews, those dirty Jews, the immigrants will come to kill you
... Jews must be killed.
Hamas, Hamas, Jews to the gas."
Den Haag Connection also threatened the
educated, intelligent, articulate
Ayaan Hirsi Ali
"Hirsi Ali Diss"
(and English lyrics):
"Fucking bitch, fucking whore ... I'll smack you in the mouth, break your neck.
Cos you make me tired, you know what I'll do? I'll slice you in two and dump you in one of the seven seas.
You dirty foul filthy fucking tiny cockroach I'll kick you to death."
Den Haag Connection should be deported to Morocco
and banned from ever entering the EU again.
Islamic Fascism in Norway:
"Peace Conference Scandinavia 2013"
in Norway, March 2013.
The audience all say they are regular Muslims, not extremists.
And then they all declare support for
segregation of men and women, sharia law (death for gays and apostates)
and stoning for adultery.
They declare that all of Islam is extremist like this, not just a fringe.
It is a thoroughly depressing video.
However, there is a counter argument.
only an extremist Muslim would go to an Islam Net conference.
Will Muslim immigrants really threaten our liberties?
I'm fairly relaxed so far, but that situation may of course change.
have achieved little so far, though there are some worrying signs.
"British" Muslim cleric
sums up the mind of
immigrants who do not understand the West.
He and his sons were
convicted in July 2012 of assaulting and threatening his daughter for resisting a forced marriage.
The brave girl went to the police and
got her father served with a "Forced Marriage Prevention Order",
which meant her passport was confiscated to stop him taking her to Pakistan.
He was furious at this, which he saw as a
"combination of her and the UK judicial system depriving him of
his right to choose her husband within his own family".
Why would an immigrant who believes in such ideas
choose to emigrate to a country where they are illegal?
What an idiot.
Good for the girl for not taking any crap
and going to the police.
Her father and her brothers are not British, but she is.
women married to men of Muslim background
are 8 times more likely to be killed by their husbands
than other women.
Is this true?
If you have evidence to the contrary, tell me here.
The Conflict at Home
- Immigrants in the west are denied education
and forced into marriage
- and the western left doesn't care.
When Islam Breaks Down, Spring 2004
- "Here, for once,
are instances of unadulterated female victimhood, yet the silence of the
feminists is deafening. Where two pieties - feminism and
multiculturalism - come into conflict, the only way of preserving both is
It is comic really:
Sharia transforms countries into hellholes.
Muslims then leave those countries to go to countries that actually work.
Then some of them try to introduce sharia in those countries, so they can wreck them as well.
expressed well the raw anger after 9/11,
but ultimately I am not a fan. (*)
The Rage and The Pride
by Oriana Fallaci, September 29, 2001,
expresses well the anger at 9/11.
Every time I think about it,
I can't believe those murdering bastards did that.
And in 2002
my rage at
the European left:
"the singing crickets and buffoons
who used to lick Pol Pot's feet".
I think this dislike of the left is something I will now feel
all the rest of my life.
(*) Why I am not a fan:
Her writing is sloppy and emotional.
And it is devoid of hope.
She talks as if all of Islam is the enemy,
rather than the (huge) Islamist movement within Islam.
She talks as if Islam can't be liberal and tolerant.
But the same could have been said about Christianity or Judaism in the past.
People change. And religions change. Nothing is fixed, no matter how permanent it looks.
She talks as if
the problem is bad races.
But this is a philosophy of despair.
The problem isn't bad races.
The problem is bad ideas.
The solution is for the same races to adopt new ideas.
For their traditional cultures to die.
He notes that Fallaci was anti-American in the past.
Whether she was even pro-Islamist back then
- with that trendy
left-wing sympathy for Ayatollah Khomeini -
I do not know.
Amir Taheri says she was:
"Her praise of Khomeini, and her vicious attacks on the late Shah,
are still part of the official literature of Iran."
She changed of course since, and
said about Khomeini in 2006:
"What a pity that, when pregnant with him, his mother did not choose to have an abortion."
The interview confirms again for me
that she is generally sloppy, emotional and illogical.
The question of immigrants and rape (or immigrant attitudes to women and sex)
is a sensitive issue.
Islamic countries have
some of the worst records in the world on women's rights.
Many Islamic clerics and other public figures justify
the sexual harrassment and rape of unveiled women, non-Muslims and minors.
There is often a special hostility towards non-Muslim women.
Have some Muslim immigrants brought these toxic attitudes with them
to the West?
Yes, of course some have.
There are Muslim clerics in the West
who justify rape.
There is also some evidence that Muslim immigrants are over-represented in rape statistics.
The Quran is also pro-rape.
says it is ok to rape female captives and slaves:
"And all married women (are forbidden unto you) save those (captives) whom your right hands possess.
And whoso is not able to afford to marry free, believing women, let them marry from the believing maids whom your right hands possess."
The difference is that the pro-rape verses of the Quran
are actually promoted by some clerics and others today.
Is there a problem with immigrants and attitudes to women?
There is some evidence in Europe of an unusually large number of
rapes by Muslim immigrants of native European women.
The cultural attitudes illustrated
would certainly help to explain this,
as they make excuses for the
rape by frustrated males of
scantily-dressed infidel women.
that the official stats in Sweden show immigrants commit 77 percent of all rapes.
The official stats are in Swedish
so it is hard for non-Swedes to judge the truth of these claims.
I would say one thing:
If the claim that Muslim immigrants are over-represented in rape stats is false,
wouldn't the government produce stats showing that?
Norway police report 2005:
In 2004, non-western immigrants were 14 percent of Oslo's population,
but 65 percent of its rapists.
80 percent of victims were native Norwegian women.
Norway police report 2010:
Every single assault rape
in Oslo in 2006-09
was by a non-western immigrant.
That's 100 percent of assault rapes.
Again, if all this is nonsense, and in Norway,
non-western immigrants are under-represented in rape,
wouldn't the government produce stats showing that?
mass sexual assault of women by male mobs in the Arab world.
New Year's Eve sexual assaults in Germany.
Mass sexual assaults during New Year's Eve 2015-2016,
apparently mainly by Muslim immigrants.
This caused much debate about the attitudes to women held by some immigrants.
Egyptian Muslim female lawyer
says Muslim men should rape Jewish women.
Al-Azhar Professor of Theology Suad Saleh
says Muslims can rape female captives
Kuwaiti female Islamist
Salwa al Mutairi, May 2011,
says Muslim men should buy non-Muslim women as slaves to rape.
"The face of a woman is like her vagina"
says popular Salafi Egyptian preacher
Abu Ishaq al-Huwaini,
Libyan sex attacker
could be a poster boy for the screwed up attitudes to sex in Islam.
He got a Libyan government scholarship to study in Australia.
"upset and sexually aroused at the way women in Australia dressed and behaved".
So he started sexually assaulting them.
"Atagore told police he didn't know the country's laws prevented women being assaulted."
He was convicted in 2011 and got 5 years in jail,
and when released will be deported.
The West Australian.
This ranting Islamist preacher was born in Egypt, yet shamefully he was allowed into Australia.
October 2006 sermon:
Australia's most senior Muslim cleric blames women for rape
(because of their immodest dress).
"In his literature, writer al-Rafee says, if I came across a rape crime,
I would discipline the man and order that the woman be jailed for life.
Why would you do this, Rafee? He said because if she had not left the meat uncovered,
the cat wouldn't have snatched it.
If you take uncovered meat and put it on the street, on the pavement, in a garden, in a park, or in the backyard, without a cover and the cats eat it, then whose fault will it be, the cats, or the uncovered meat's? The uncovered meat is the disaster. If the meat was covered the cats wouldn't roam around it. If the meat is inside the fridge, they won't get it.
If the woman is in her boudoir, in her house and if she's wearing the veil and if she shows modesty, disasters don't happen."
A 23-year-old Syrian-born immigrant to New Zealand defends the cleric:
"The argument that men should control themselves is ludicrous.
It is just like saying thieves should not rob houses whose doors and windows are left wide open."
I would deport this young man without hesitation.
Such an immigrant should not be allowed into any western country.
Letting him in was clearly a mistake.
I would deport the cleric too.
Letting him in was also clearly a mistake.
If you don't believe in western values, you shouldn't be allowed in.
More quotes from this prick:
"The Jews' struggle with humanity is as old as history itself".
"September 11 is God's work against oppressors."
The Holocaust is a "Zionist lie".
Feiz Muhammad says:
"Every minute in the world a woman is raped, and she has no one to blame but herself,
for she has displayed her beauty to the whole world.
Strapless, backless, sleeveless - they are nothing but satanical.
Mini-skirts, tight jeans - all this to tease men and to appeal to (their) carnal nature."
"Jews are pigs that will be killed at the end of the world".
This enemy preacher was born in Australia
to a Lebanese immigrant family.
He moved to Lebanon in 2005,
came back to Australia.
Why do feminists support disgusting, rape-defending men like this,
instead of supporting their enemies?
Four Pakistani brothers
were sentenced to between 15 and 24 years
for raping unveiled girls.
Their father, Dr. "HMK"
said about the victims:
"What do they expect to happen to them? Girls from Pakistan don't go out at night."
The eldest rapist son, "MSK"
he thought he had a right to rape girls who did not wear headscarves, drank alcohol,
and went to his house unaccompanied.
Well he's got lots of time to think about it now.
He won't be eligible for parole until 2026 (when he will be 47).
What a high price they are paying for imposing the moron ideas of their native culture onto Australia.
They could have taken some time to learn about western culture, integrated, and dated western girls,
and they could be having sex by consent now,
instead of being celibate and beaten by gangs in prison.
Even if freedom-hating immigrants
never succeed in actually changing our laws,
there is another threat, which is that of
sporadic violence and terrorism.
Importing Muslims means inevitably importing some jihadis.
Even if you only let in freedom-loving, democracy-loving Muslims
(as discussed above),
their children may be jihadis.
This seems to be the case with the
2005 London bombings.
The simple act of letting in Muslims at all
increases the number of jihadis who will try to kill you.
it seems that
the second London bombing attack of 2005
was by refugees, on the country that took them in.
They came to Britain as child refugees from war-torn Africa.
And they repaid British generosity by trying to slaughter its people.
As I said above, it is
true that the west is the heartland of truly moderate Islam.
Western Muslims are far more moderate than
Muslims in the Islamic world.
There are millions of Muslims and lapsed Muslims in the west
who believe in democracy and freedom,
and are in the west precisely because they do not wish to live under Islamic law.
At the same time, many Muslim leaders
promoted by the media as "moderate" Muslims
turn out to be anything but.
hate-filled extremist jihadis,
are simply described as "moderate".
More often, "moderates" turn out to be religious ultra-conservatives
who have crackpot views on Israel and America,
and who seem incapable of condemning Islamism.
Certainly, nobody who believes in Islamic law,
or subscribes in any way to Islamism,
could possibly be described as a "moderate".
Nobody who supports attacks on Israeli civilians
could possibly be described as a "moderate".
Any time I hear the left describe some Muslim,
as a "moderate",
I now assume they are lying.
And finally, it is also true that 10-20 percent of western Muslims
do support the global jihad.
is a conservative religious Muslim from Lebanon,
who moved to Australia in childhood.
She says that criticism of
the alleged prophet Muhammed is a
About her religion's alleged "prophets", she says:
"They are not just like you and me,
they have special status - you're supposed to show respect.
There have to be boundaries in how far you go in respecting other's beliefs."
If this is what she thinks, then she does not belong in the West.
She does not understand our society.
And maybe, rather than trying to end our ancient, hard-won freedoms,
she should instead move somewhere
for her primitive beliefs about free speech
and the place of religion in society.
It's illegal to criticise alleged prophets in much of the Middle East, for example.
Actually moderate Muslims
What I mean by actually moderate Muslims
are Muslims who oppose jihad, sharia and Islamism.
For 1,400 years, Islam never had to face criticism, mocking and satire like this.
Now it cannot stop it.
Back in the 1980s and 1990s, before jihadis and Islamists started attacking the West,
nobody would have bothered making videos like this.
Back then, no one in the West was interested in the boring religion of Islam.
Now this kind of stuff is everywhere.
Jihadis and Islamists have only themselves to blame.
They made this happen.
And this will change Islam forever.
Especially in the West.
The West will not become Islamic.
Rather, Islam in the West will slowly become Western.
Who I block:
I will debate almost anyone.
I love ideas.
I will not debate (and will block) people who do the following:
(a) Make threats.
(b) Accuse me of crimes.
(c) Comment on my appearance.
(d) Drag in stuff about me not related to the topic. (My professional career, my personal life.)
(e) Complain to my employer.
Yes, people do all these things.