RUTHFULLY YOURS

A reasonable question that many Europeans might ask would be whether it is not perhaps time to review priorities?

Perhaps the time has come to look at whether it remains worth it, in terms of the potential loss of human life, to remain party to the 1961 Convention, which would prohibit a country from stripping a returning ISIS fighter of his citizenship in order to prevent him from entering the country?

The terrorist as poor, traumatized victim who needs help seems to be a recurring theme among European politicians. But what about the rights of the poor, traumatized citizens who elected these politicians?

Roughly 30,000 foreign and European Islamic State fighters from around 100 different countries, who have gone to Syria, Iraq and Libya, could spread across the continent once the terror group is crushed in its Iraqi stronghold, warned Karin von Hippel, director-general of the UK military think tank, Royal United Services Institute, speaking to the Express on October 26:

“I think once they lose territory in Iraq and Syria and probably Libya… they will likely go back to a more insurgent style operation versus a terrorist group that wants to try and hold onto territory… There has been about 30,000 foreign fighters that have gone in from about 100 countries to join. Not all of them have joined ISIS, some have joined al-Qaeda, Kurds, and other groups, but the vast majority have gone to join ISIS. These people will disperse. Some of them have already been captured or killed but many will disperse and they’ll go to European countries…They may not go back to where they came from and that is definitely keeping security forces up at night in many, many countries”.

Perhaps these scenarios are really keeping security forces up at night in many countries. Judging by the continued influx of predominantly young, male migrants of fighting age into Europe, however, one might be excused for thinking that European politicians themselves are not losing any sleep over potential new terrorist attacks.

According to a report by Radio Sweden, for example:

“Around 140 Swedes have so far returned after having joined the violent groups in Syria and Iraq. Now several municipalities are preparing to work with those who want to defect. This could include offering practical support to defectors.”

The municipality of Lund has dealt with this issue, and Malmö, Borlänge and Örebro have similar views. As Radio Sweden reports:

“Lund’s conclusion is that defectors from violent extremist groups should be handled like defectors from other environments, such as organized crime. After an investigation of the person’s needs, the municipality can help with housing, employment or livelihood.”

According to Sweden’s “national coordinator against violent extremism,” Christoffer Carlsson:

“…You need to be able to reintegrate into the job market, you may need a driver’s license, debt settlement and shelter. When people leave, they want to leave for something else, but they do not have the resources for it, so it is difficult for them to realize their plan. If they do not receive support, the risk is great that they will be unable to leave the extremist environment, but instead fall back into it.”

n an interview this week with the Australian media, Jordan’s King Abdullah became the latest Arab leader to express hope that President- elect Donald Trump and his team will lead the world’s to date failed fight against jihadist Islam.

Like his counterparts in Egypt and Saudi Arabia, Abdullah effectively ruled out the possibility that President Barack Obama will take any constructive steps to defeat the forces of global jihad in his last months in power. Speaking of the humanitarian disaster in Aleppo for instance, Abdullah said, “I don’t think there’s much we can do until the new administration is in place and a strategy is formulated.”

Egyptian President Abdel Fatah al-Sisi was among the first Arab leaders to welcome Trump’s victory.

Sisi has been largely shunned by the Obama administration.

President Barack Obama supported the Muslim Brotherhood regime that Sisi and the Egyptian military overthrew in 2013.

Sisi was the first foreign leader to speak to Trump after his victory was announced. He released a statement to the media saying that he “looks forward to the presidency of president Donald Trump to inject a new spirit into the trajectory of Egyptian-American relations.”

The support that the incoming Trump administration is garnering in the Arab world stands in stark contrast to the near wall-to-wall opposition to Trump expressed by the American Muslim community.

According to a survey of Muslim American opinion taken in October by the Council for American Islamic Relations (CAIR), 72% of American Muslims supported Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton. Trump was supported by a mere 4% of the Muslim community.

If confirmed by the United States Senate, South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley will become the next ‎American ambassador to the United Nations, replacing Samantha Power in that role.‎

Because the U.N. has become worse than a bad joke — giving despotic regimes a say and vote on ‎issues the international body was established to tackle — its U.S. representative has the particularly ‎tricky and important job of leading the West in setting the right moral tone

It is thus not a diplomatic position in the conventional sense. On the contrary, the best U.S. ‎ambassadors have those who make repeated and concerted efforts to put their ill-deserving ‎counterparts in their place, not only through votes and vetoes, but rhetorically, from the podium.‎

Daniel Patrick Moynihan, Jeane Kirkpatrick and John Bolton are prime examples of shining beacons in ‎the Midtown Manhattan snake pit. Whether Haley lives up to that standard is anyone’s guess. But ‎there is reason to hope that she might, in spite of what critics are pointing to as her lack of experience ‎in matters of foreign affairs.‎

It is clear from Haley’s record, and meteoric rise to her position as the youngest serving governor in ‎the U.S. at the moment, that she possesses the kind of clarity on controversial issues that is required ‎in an arena filled with people whose key purpose is to cloud the distinction between good and evil. ‎

She is a fierce opponent of raising taxes, including — get this — on cigarettes. ‎

She supports school choice and monetary incentives for teachers, to foster excellence.‎

Instead of acknowledging the strengths and benefits of a heritage dating back to ancient Greece and Rome, the Left rails against a culture it denigrates as eurocentric, misogynist, imperialistic, racist and rapaciously self-serving. Is it any wonder common cause has been made with Islam?
What makes Western culture unique and is it worthwhile defending? Given events, both foreign and domestic, the question is a vital one as the answer will determine whether countries like Australia survive and prosper — or whether, as we currently know them, they cease to exist.

T. S. Eliot in Notes Towards a Definition of Culture defines culture as “a way of life of a particular people living together in one place” and includes a people’s social system, habits, customs and, most importantly, religion. More recently, in his 1996 Boyer Lecture, the Australian academic Pierre Ryckmans describes culture “as the true and unique signature of man” and, in the same way a garden is cultivated, it is vital that society cultivates the young to enable them to preserve and enrich the culture in which they are born. Based on the example of China, Ryckmans goes on to argue it is impossible to understand a foreign culture unless you have a “firm grasp of your own culture” and, as a result, “the luxury which no country can ever afford, in any circumstances… is to dispense with its memory and its imagination”.

One only has to study history or be aware of current events around the world to appreciate that cultures rise and fall and that Western culture, in particular, is under attack by enemies both foreign and domestic. The violence and terror associated with Islamic fundamentalism and illustrated by attacks in London, Paris, Nice, New York, Boston, Melbourne and Sydney represent an external threat that strikes at the heart of our way of life. Indiscriminate and random acts where innocents are killed and maimed, in addition to creating an atmosphere of intimidation and fear, lead to governments introducing security laws that are in danger of compromising the freedoms and rights so often taken for granted.

As noted by the Somalian activist Ayaan Hirsi Ali in her recent book Heretic, Islam is not a religion of peace and terrorist groups like ISIS, in addition to waging violent jihad against the West, are committed to establishing an Islamic caliphate where non-believers face conversion, subjugation or death. The mass migration of Muslims from the Middle East and Northern Africa to England and Europe also represents a clear and present danger to the liberties and freedoms central to the West’s way of life. Whether it is Islamic youth rioting in the suburbs of Paris, German women being physically and sexually accosted in Cologne and Hamburg during New Year, the incidence of female genital mutilation in England or the ever increasing incidence of rape in Sweden by Islamic men, the reality is that our way of life is under threat.

France did not perceive it at the time, but it placed itself in a trap, and the trap is closing.

In 1970, The Palestinians began to use international terrorism, and France chose to accept this terrorism so long as France was not affected. At the same time, France welcomed immigrant population from the Arab-Muslim world, evidently as part of an Arab wish to expand Islam. The Muslim population has since grown in numbers while failing to assimilate.

Polls show that one third of French Muslims want the full application of Sharia law. They also show that the overwhelming majority of French Muslims support jihad, and especially jihad against Israel, a country they would like to see erased from the face of earth.

“It is better to leave than flee.” — Sammy Ghozlan, President of the National Bureau of Vigilance against Anti-Semitism. He was later mugged, and his car was torched. He left.

Villiers…also mentions the presence in “no-go zones” of thousands of weapons of war. He adds that weapons will probably not even have to be used ; the Islamists have already won.

Originally France’s dreams might have been of displacing America as a world power, inexpensive oil, business deals with oil-rich Islamic states, and the prayer of no local terrorism.

France is in turmoil. “Migrants” arriving from Africa and the Middle East sow disorder and insecurity in many cities. The huge slum commonly known as the “jungle of Calais” has just been dismantled, but other slums are being created each day. In eastern Paris, streets have been covered with corrugated sheets, oilcloth and disjointed boards. Violence is commonplace. The 572 France’s “no-go zones,” officially defined as “sensitive urban areas”, continue to grow, and police officers who approach them often suffer the consequences. Recently, a police car drove into an ambush and was torched while the police were prevented from getting out. If attacked, police officers are told by their superiors to flee rather than retaliate. Many police officers, angry at having to behave like cowards, have organized demonstrations. No terrorist attacks have taken place since the slaughter of a priest in Saint-Etienne-du-Rouvray on July 26, 2016, but intelligence services see that jihadists have returned from the Middle East and are ready to act, and that riots may break out anywhere, any time, on any pretext.

Although overwhelmed by a domestic situation it barely controls, the French government still intervene in the world affairs : a “Palestinian state” is still its favorite cause, Israel its favorite scapegoat.

Last Spring, even though both France and the Palestinian territories were in terrible shape, French Foreign Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault anyway declared that it was “urgent” to relaunch the “peace process” and create a Palestinian state. France therefore convened an international conference, held in Paris on June 3. Neither Israel nor the Palestinians were invited to it. The conference was a flop. It concluded with a vapid statement about the “imperative necessity” to go “forward”.

Mr. President, Members of the Court,

When I decided to address you here today, by making a final statement in this trial against freedom of speech, many people reacted by telling me it is useless. That you, the court, have already written the sentencing verdict a while ago. That everything indicates that you have already convicted me. And perhaps that is true. Nevertheless, here I am. Because I never give up. And I have a message for you and the Netherlands.

For centuries, the Netherlands are a symbol of freedom.

When one says Netherlands, one says freedom. And that is also true, perhaps especially, for those who have a different opinion than the establishment, the opposition. And our most important freedom is freedom of speech.

We, Dutch, say whatever is close to our hearts. And that is precisely what makes our country great. Freedom of speech is our pride.

And that, precisely that, is at stake here, today.

I refuse to believe that we are simply giving this freedom up. Because we are Dutch. That is why we never mince our words. And I, too, will never do that. And I am proud of that. No-one will be able to silence me.

And the slow German national suicide continues, as prosecutors have tried but failed to build a case against a fundamentalist Muslim group patroling German streets enforcing sharia law.

The self-styled vigilantes, wearing orange vests marked “Sharia Police,” walked the streets of the western German city of Wuppertal in September 2014, telling nightclub-goers to refrain from drinking alcohol and listening to music, and arcade customers not to play games for money.

The city’s district court ruled that the vests worn by seven accused members of the group did not breach a ban on political uniforms. Judges said there could only be a violation of the law – originally aimed against street movements such as the early Nazi party – if the uniforms were “suggestively militant or intimidating.” In this instance, the judges declared the vests to be non-threatening, noting that one witness even thought the men were part of a bachelor party.

The same court had already thrown out the case last year, but was overruled on appeal by a higher court which agreed with prosecutors that the ban on uniforms could be applied in this case. Monday’s verdict is not yet final and may still be appealed.

So-called “sharia patrols” by sometimes violent radical young Salafists have also been seen in other European cities such as London, Copenhagen and Hamburg.

The Wuppertal group is under the leadership of German Salafist convert Sven Lau, one of Germany’s most controversial and best known Islamist preachers, according to The Local website in Germany. He is currently on trial in a separate case on charges of backing a terrorist group fighting in Syria.

Check out the video above about the Sharia police, from Ezra Levant at The Rebel Media.

There are various ways of quashing social and political dissent, some more effective than others. The “Soviet method” practiced in stringently repressive regimes—torture, imprisonment, the ever-expanding Gulag, summary execution—works extremely well in the shorter historical timeframe, until a people rise up in revolt or such demonic societies collapse from their own internal contradictions. Of course, the truly Stygian regimes, closed to the world, indifferent to economic pressures, and under the heavy boot of unbroken military control, such as North Korea, may persist indefinitely or until defeated in war. But generally speaking, the tried-and-true methods of political oppression are sufficient to the task of keeping a population in a state of enslavement for a prolonged historical period.

In the sphere of the liberal West, however, there are other means of subjection to the will of increasingly centralized governments. Because they tend to function gradually and under the radar, these tactics are enormously efficient in their deadening effects, going unrecognized until it is often too late to mount significant resistance. They operate through a process of curricular distortions, social pressure and incremental legislation targeting speech habits, facets of normal behavior, assumptions of what counts as morally legitimate, and financial and job security.

A useful technique for anaesthetizing the individual citizen and rendering him compliant is the erasure of authentic historical knowledge. We’ve remarked the success of this approach in the U.S. with the “history from below” or “people’s history” movement, associated with Howard Zinn, and the foregrounding of a bowdlerized version of Islamic history in American schools. Canada is no different. Eric McGeer, author of Words of Valediction and Remembrance: Canadian Epitaphs of the Second World War, writes: “In my last years of high school teaching I was increasingly infuriated and disgusted at the portrayal of Canada in the history textbooks assigned for use in our courses. There was no sense of gratitude in the textbooks, no empathy with the people of the past or an attempt to see them in their own terms, no sense of the effort people made to create one of the few truly liveable societies on earth. You would have thought that this country was nothing more than a racist, bigoted, this or that-phobic hotbed. My first lesson involved taking the book and dropping it into the waste paper basket and advising the students to do the same.” (personal communication). The study of history, McGeer concludes, is nothing now but a progressive morality tale and a mechanism of social engineering. Sounds a lot like Title IX. Pride in one’s nation, its accomplishments and sacrifices, is contra-indicated. There is more than one way of burning the flag.