Zware oorlogswapens bij moskee ontdekt; Experts: Topje van de ijsberg

Openbaar ministerie Hamburg: Aantal moslims dat gewelddadige jihad steunt, neemt snel toe – Greep uit schokkende lijst van ‘Eén maand (buigen voor de) islam in Duitsland’ – Protestantse Kerk Hamburg houdt rouwdienst voor in Syrië omgekomen ISIS-terrorist – Dalai Lama: Duitsland laat teveel migranten toe


De ME zal straks weinig kunnen uitrichten als (tien)duizenden als vluchtelingen vermomde, door oorlog geharde moslimstrijders het startsein krijgen voor massale terreuraanslagen op de Europese bevolking.

Een speciale ME-eenheid van de politie in onze ‘buurstaat’ Nordrhein Westfalen heeft vorige week een geheime operatie bij een moskee uitgevoerd waarbij een groot aantal zware oorlogswapens in beslag zijn genomen. Volgens experts waren deze nog maar het topje van de ijsberg, en wordt gevreesd dat tal van andere moskeeën in Duitsland en Europa illegaal vuurwapens en mogelijk ook explosieven hebben opgeslagen. De lang gevreesde islamitische terreuroorlog tegen de Europese bevolking lijkt dan ook steeds dichterbij te komen.

De ‘top secret operatie’ werd wereldkundig gemaakt door het Hessische CDU lid Ismail Tipi. De oorlogswapens werden verborgen in de koelruimte van een groentehandelaar, die vlak naast de moskee woont. Tipi: ‘Het gevaar dat fundamentalistische, tot geweld bereid zijnde Salafisten zich bewapenen is zeer groot. Dat maakt deze geheime operatie meer dan duidelijk.’

De extremisme-expert van Turkse afkomst vermoedt dat moskeeën ook in andere steden hele wapenarsenalen hebben ingeslagen. Het openbaar ministerie in Hamburg wees er onlangs niet voor niets op dat het aantal moslims dat de gewelddadige jihad ondersteunt, toeneemt. In alleen al Hamburg zijn er meer dan 300 bekend, hoogstwaarschijnlijk slechts het topje van de ijsberg.

‘In heel Europa grote terreuraanslagen op komst’

Volgens Tipi zijn er ook sterke aanwijzingen dat terroristische ‘slaap’cellen en ISIS-terroristen door buitenlandse geheime diensten worden ondersteund. Het gevaar dat er in de komende jaren steeds meer islamitische aanslagen met almaar groter wordende aantallen slachtoffers zullen worden gepleegd, neemt daarom hand over hand toe. Specifieke landen worden niet genoemd, maar er zijn al geruime tijd sterke aanwijzingen dat ISIS-terroristen met name door Turkije, Saudi Arabië en de Verenigde Staten naar Europa worden gestuurd, en tevens door hen worden getraind en bewapend.

Het Turkse CDU-lid waarschuwt dat de ontdekte zware oorlogswapens erop wijzen dat er grote terreuraanslagen worden voorbereid, niet alleen in Duitsland, maar in heel Europa. Groot probleem zijn moslims die naar Syrië zijn gegaan om daar mee te doen met de jihad, en bomvol agressie en oorlogservaringen weer terugkeren naar Europa, dat nog steeds weigert zijn grenzen te sluiten of zelfs maar afdoende te bewaken. Ook liften veel terroristen vermomd als vluchtelingen mee op de nog altijd aanzwellende migrantenstroom.

Tipi, die voor zijn uitspraken reeds met de dood is bedreigd door moslims, eist dat de politiek de bevolking van alle gevaren en bedreigingen op de hoogte stelt, en oproept om zeer waakzaam te zijn, en alles wat maar een beetje verdacht lijkt bij de politie te melden. ‘Als we niet allemaal reageren wordt het probleem met het Salafisme en de IS-terreur steeds groter. Hier wordt de inzet van ieder persoon gevraagd.’ (1)

Voorkeursbehandeling voor moslims, autochtone Europeanen 2e-rangsburgers

Ondertussen krijgen moslimmigranten overal in Europa nog steeds een voorkeursbehandeling, en worden autochtonen almaar vaker als tweederangsburgers in een hoek gezet. Zo werden twee migranten die midden in de nacht een Duits AZC met 100 slapende inwoners in brand staken vrijgelaten, maar werd een Duitse oma van 87 in de gevangenis gegooid omdat ze de boete voor zwartrijden in de tram (€ 400,- op een AOW’tje van € 560,-) niet kon betalen (2).

Een 45 jarige Turk kreeg eveneens de inmiddels overal toegepaste speciale ‘migrantenbonus’: na twee vrouwen, waarvan één ernstig zieke die op dat moment weerloos was omdat ze een astma aanval had, te hebben verkracht, hoeft hij desondanks niet de gevangenis in. De rechter veroordeelde hem slechts tot het betalen van € 2400,- smartengeld, iets dat hij lachend aanvaardde.

Eén maand (buigen voor de) islam in Duitsland:

Het Gatestone Institute plaatste eergisteren opnieuw een ‘Eén maand islam in Duitsland: Mei 2016’ overzicht. De belangrijkste, vaak schokkende punten:

* Een hoofdinspecteur van de politie in Köln bevestigde dat hij van hogerhand de opdracht had gekregen om in het onderzoek naar de beruchte seksmisdadengolf door moslims tijdens oud-en-nieuw de term ‘verkrachting’ te schrappen. Tot nu toe is nog niet één dader veroordeeld;

* Het federale bureau voor Migratie en Vluchtelingen zegt dit jaar opnieuw meer dan 1 miljoen asielaanvragen te zullen behandelen. Tot nu toe zijn er amper migranten teruggestuurd;

* Vele duizenden christenen in AZC’s worden straffeloos mishandeld en vervolgd door moslims, niet zelden door moslimbewakers die door de autoriteiten zijn aangesteld;

* Het parlement van de deelstaat Baden-Württemberg heeft zijn eerste moslima als voorzitter. Mutherem Aras is voorstander van het geven van kiesrecht aan alle migranten, ook als die niet het Duitse staatsburgerschap hebben;

* Een 26 jarige Afghaanse migrant kreeg 2,5 jaar gevangenisstraf omdat hij de Duitse vrouw die hem via de website ‘Refugees Welcome’ onderdak had aangeboden, had verkracht;

* De Duitse binnenlandse veiligheidsdienst houdt zeker 90 moskeeën in de gaten waar moslims door hun imams worden opgeroepen tot de gewelddadige jihad;

* Het aantal Duitsers dat gelooft dat de islam bij hun land past, is in één jaar tijd gedaald van 37% naar 22%. Inmiddels vindt 60% dat de islam niet in Duitsland en Europa thuishoort;

* Eén misdaad die het nieuws haalde was de moslim die op een station bij München een aantal reizigers neerstak, waarvan er één overleed. Politie en getuigen bevestigden dat de man ‘Allahu Akbar’ en ‘alle ongelovigen moeten sterven’ schreeuwde;

* Tijdens een muziekfestival in Berlijn werden 11 vrouwen tussen de 16 en 48 jaar oud beroofd en aangerand door migranten;

* In het winkelcentrum Boulevard Berlin hangen grote groepen jonge migranten rond –tot wel 35 tegelijk- die regelmatig passerende meisjes en vrouwen aanranden; beveiligers krijgen hen niet weg omdat de migranten dan onmiddellijk hulp van tientallen vriendjes inroepen, en hen vervolgens aanvallen;

* De Beierse minister van Binnenlandse Zaken Joachim Herrmann gaat moslimmigranten als politieagenten inzetten, ook als ze niet de Duitse nationaliteit hebben. Hermann noemde niet de islamitische terreurdreiging, maar die van ‘extreemrechts’ als belangrijkste reden;

* Een 26 jarige Pakistaanse migrant werd gearresteerd na de moord op een 70 jarige vrouw in Heilbronn. De in een AZC wonende moslim had in het huis van de bejaarde een groot aantal Arabische en Engelse lectuur ‘met een overweldigende religieuze toon’ achtergelaten;

* Een 19 jarige Irakees werd veroordeeld tot 2 jaar gevangenisstraf voor het verkrachten van een 21 jarige vrouw op het station van Bad Schwartau. De man kreeg de absolute minimumstraf omdat hij een moslimmigrant is;

* Steeds meer Duitsers met een beetje spaargeld verkassen naar Hongarije omdat ze vinden dat Angela Merkels open-grenzenbeleid hun land naar de ondergang helpt;

* Het hoofd van de Protestante Kerk in Duitsland wil dat de islam verplicht wordt onderwezen op scholen. Daarvoor zou de overheid met uitgerekend Turkije en Saudi Arabië moeten gaan samenwerken;

* Een protestantse kerk in Hamburg hield een rouwdienst voor een tot de islam bekeerde Duitser die omkwam als ISIS-terrorist in Syrië. Pastor Sieghard Wilm zei dat hij de kerkgangers hiermee ‘respect voor andere religies’ wilde bijbrengen;

* Ook in Hamburg: Stefanie von Berg, politicus namens de Groenen, wil dat er in ieder district van de stad –met belastinggeld- nieuwe moskeeën voor de circa 150.000 moslims (and counting…) worden gebouwd;

* In Darmstadt werden minstens 18 vrouwen op een festival aangerand of verkracht door groepen Arabische migranten;

* Migranten in het AZC van Dolberg blijken het gratis internet te misbruiken om op kosten van de gemeenschap betaalde pornovideo’s te downloaden (4);

* Zelfs de Dalai Lama verklaarde in een interview met de Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung dat Duitsland ‘teveel migranten’ heeft toegelaten. ‘Duitsland kan geen Arabisch land worden. Duitsland is Duitsland,’ zei hij. (3)

Xander

(1) Epoch Times
(2) Michael-Mannheimer
(3) Gatestone Institute
(4) Epoch Times

Bron: http://www.xandernieuws.nl

 

Turkije’s Nepoorlog tegen Jihadisten

door Burak Bekdil
21 Mei 2016


  • Afgelopen jaar concludeerde een peiling dat een op de vijf Turken van mening was dat de aanval op Charlie Hebdo te Parijs een natuurlijke reactie was tegen mannen die profeet Mohammed beledigden.
  • “Afvalligen, die de vijand van de islam zijn, dachten dat ze de islam in de dieptes van de geschiedenis hadden begraven toen zij het Kalifaat op 3 maart 1924 ontbonden… Zo’n 92 jaar later… schreeuwen we het uit dat we het Kalifaat zullen herstellen, hier, direct naast het parlement.” — Mahmut Kar, chef persvoorlichting Hizb ut-Tahrir Turkije.
  • Tijdens een meeting met hoge vertegenwoordigers van de VS in maart, beschuldigde de Jordaanse koning Abdullah Turkije ervan terroristen naar Europa te exporteren. Hij zei: “Het feit dat terroristen zich naar Europa begeven is onderdeel van Turks beleid. Turkije blijft tikken op de vingers krijgen, maar uiteindelijk laat men ze er altijd mee wegkomen.”
  • En Turkije is het land waar westerse bondgenoten op rekenen in hun strijd tegen jihadisten? Veel succes!

In theorie maakt Turkije deel uit van de internationale coalitie die tegen IS strijdt. Sinds Turkije zich in de strijd mengde heeft het een veelheid aan IS-militanten gearresteerd, heeft het zijn best gedaan de poreuze grens met Syrië te dichten en heeft het IS aangemerkt als terroristische organisatie. De Turkse politie is de huizen van verdachte IS-strijders binnengevallen en heeft deze doorzocht. Recenter heeft Turkije’s ministerie van Binnenlandse Zaken hun lijst met “meest gezochte terroristen” ge-update met 23 IS-militanten, en beloningen uitgeloofd van meer dan $14 miljoen voor tips die tot aanhoudingen leiden. Maar dit is slechts een deel van het verhaal.

Op 24 maart sprak een Turkse rechtbank zeven IS-leden vrij, waaronder de commandant van IS-jihadisten op Turks grondgebied. Meer dan 96 mannen stonden terecht, waaronder de zeven die opgepakt, maar vervolgens vrijgelaten werden. Nu zijn ze allemaal op vrije voeten, ondanks dat de aanklacht tegen hen luidt dat zij:

“betrokken waren bij de terroristische activiteiten van IS. De verdachten strijders naar conflictgebieden hadden gestuurd, dat ze druk, dwang, dreigingen en geweld hadden uitgeoefend in naam van een terroristische organisatie, en dat ze leden hadden voorzien van logistieke ondersteuning.”

De vrijlating van terreur-verdachten stond in schril contrast met een andere beslissing van de rechtbank, namelijk, dat vier academici die, terwijl ze in hechtenis zaten een petitie tekenden voor vrede in het Turks-Koerdische conflict, voor zouden moeten komen. In tegenstelling tot de IS-strijders, zitten de academici nog altijd achter de tralies.

De Turkse overheid, die een nagenoeg complete controle over het rechtssysteem heeft, rekent op de steun van verscheidene islamitische grassroots-bewegingen. Van islamisten en jihadistenlight tot radicalen.

Afgelopen jaar concludeerde de peiling MetroPOLL dat een op de vijf Turken van mening was dat de aanval op Charlie Hebdo te Parijs een natuurlijke reactie was tegen mannen die profeet Mohammed beledigden [slechts 16.4% van de Turken zag dit als een aanval op de vrijheid van meningsuiting]. Onder de Turken die op de AK-partij stemmen keurden 26.4% de aanvallen goed, slechts 6.2% zag het als een aanval op de vrijheid van meningsuiting. Slechts 17.8% van de AKP-achterban dacht dat de aanval het werk was van radicale islamisten. Drie kwart van de AKP-achterban was van mening dat moslims de dupe waren van de aanval, terwijl slechts 15.4% van mening was dat de vermoorde cartoonisten het slachtoffer waren. Tweederde van de AKP-achterban is van mening dat aanvallen tegen de islam door christelijke kruisvaarders nog altijd doorgaan.

Het feit dat IS-verdachten nu op vrije voet zijn omdat de overheid vreest voor de gevolgen vanuit de islamistische achterban als ze hen te hard behandelen, verklaart de rechtelijke uitspraken over jihadisten en academici maar deels. “De verdachten moet de Turkse overheid in gijzeling houden … Wat als ze aan het adres van de autoriteiten dreigen de overheidssteun aan hun organisatie in het verleden kenbaar te maken? Normaal gesproken ga je niet vrijuit na zulke ernstige aanklachten,” zei een westerse diplomaat in Ankara.

Rusland claimt dat Turkije IS steunt door met hen te handelen in olie, IS’ grootste inkomstenbron. Een nieuw rapport claimt dat de totale aanvoer naar terroristen in Syrië afgelopen jaar bestond uit 2500 ton ammonium nitraat, 456 ton potassium nitraat, 75 ton aluminiumpoeder, sodiumnitraat, glycerine en salpeterzuur. Het rapport stelt:

“Om de grens ongeschonden over te kunnen steken, in feite met de medeplichtigheid van de Turkse autoriteiten, worden producten verwerkt voor bedrijven die ogenschijnlijk in Jordanië en Irak geregistreerd staan… Registratie en verwerking van de vracht wordt georganiseerd door douaneposten in de [Turkse] steden Antalya, Gaziantep en Mersin. Zodra de nodige bewerkingen zijn toegepast, kunnen de goederen de grens ongeschonden oversteken bij Cilvegozu en Oncupinar.”

Turkije blijft bezig met een nep-oorlog tegen jihadisten. Tijdens een maart-bijeenkomst met hoge vertegenwoordigers van de VS, beschuldigde de Jordaanse koning Abdullah Turkije ervan terroristen naar Europa te exporteren: “Het feit dat terroristen zich naar Europa begeven is onderdeel van Turks beleid. Turkije blijft tikken op de vingers krijgen, maar uiteindelijk laat men ze er altijd mee wegkomen.”

In feite is de geheime affaire tussen de Turkse overheid en verscheidene islamistische groeperingen vaak lang zo geheim niet. In maart verzamelden duizenden aanhangers van Hizb ut-Tahrir, een wereldwijde islamistische groepering — met dank aan de Turkse overheid — zich bij een publieke sporthal in Ankara, om de herstichting van het Kalifaat te bespreken. In zijn speech zei Mahmut Kar, chef persvoorlichting Hizb ut-Tahrir Turkije:

“Afvalligen, die de vijand van de islam zijn, dachten dat ze de islam in de dieptes van de geschiedenis hadden begraven toen zij het Kalifaat op 3 maart 1924 ontbonden… Zo’n 92 jaar later… schreeuwen we het uit dat we het Kalifaat zullen herstellen, hier, direct naast het parlement.”

(Hizb ut-Tahrir, Rusland en Kazachstan aangemerkt als terroristische organisatie, beschrijft zichzelf als een politieke beweging die er naar streeft “de Ummah te leiden” naar de hervestiging van het Kalifaat, waar de sharia heerst.)

En raad eens wat Turkije nog meer doet terwijl het de wereld voorhoudt tegen jihadisten te strijden? Erdogan heeft zijn zelfverklaarde politieke ambitie uitgesproken “toegewijde generaties op te voeden” een hoop kracht bijgezet. De Diyanet, Turkije’s hoogste religieuze autoriteit, bracht onlangs een serie stripboeken uit die ’s lands kinderen vertellen hoe prachtig het is een islamitische martelaar te worden.

De Diyanet, Turkije’s hoogste religieuze autoriteit, publiceerde onlangs een serie stripboeken die vertellen hoe rpachtig het is een islamitische martelaar te worden.

Een strip-dialoog is er eentje tussen een vader en zijn zoon. “Wat is het toch prachtig een martelaar te worden,” zegt de vader. Niet overtuigd, vraagt de zoon: “Zou iemand een martelaar willen worden?” De vader antwoordt: “Ja, dat wil men. Wie zou de hemel niet willen winnen?”

En Turkije is het land waar westerse bondgenoten op rekenen in hun strijd tegen jihadisten? Veel succes!

Burak Bekdil, gevestigd in Ankara, is een Turkse columnist voor de Hürriyet Daily en een Fellow bij het Middle East Forum.

Bron: http://www.nl.gatestoneinstitute.org

gatestone-logo-1000

Jihad on Christian Church Tents

by Raymond Ibrahim
May 15, 2016 at 4:15 am


  • After waiting 44 years, the Christians of Nag Shenouda were issued the necessary permits to build a church. Because of this, local Muslims rioted and burned down their church tent they had been using. Then, when a Christian allowed some of the congregation to use his home, a Muslim mob attacked it.
  • Sometimes when the mob does not torch the church tents, the authorities do it themselves: Egyptian police destroyed the tent structure of St. Joseph Church under the pretext that it was built without a license.
  • In Indonesia in 2012, the St. Johannes Baptista church tent was sealed off by authorities. The congregation had been using it since 2006 as a temporary location, as they had not received a church permit since they applied in 2000.
  • In Pakistan, Muslim students sprayed bullets on Christian homes, shouted, “Convert to Islam or leave this neighborhood,” and sexually harassed Christian girls as they left after services.

A Christian church in Egypt was just torched to the ground at the hands of “extremists” on May 12. A video shows the structure burning as Christians scurry to throw pails of water on it.

The church consisted of a large tent that had been consecrated and contained all the material of a “normal” church — an altar, icons, and crosses — and was led by Fr. Jonathan Adel. The Christians of the region had been meeting there for all regular church services, functions, and celebrations, and authorities had agreed to its existence and use as a church.

A statement condemning this attack, written by Bishop Macarious, closed with: “May God protect the Church, and preserve Egypt and Egyptians from all adversity.”

The church tent in Egypt that belonged to the congregation of Christian priest Fr. Jonathan Adel is pictured as it burns on May 12, 2016.

Why were these Christians meeting in a large “church tent” in the first place? Because the church they had built in 2009 was sealed off by authorities after local Muslims protested and rioted.

The Virgin Mary Church is not the first congregation in Egypt to be denied a church building, forced to worship in a tent, often to be attacked again.

According to a 2010 report, “Since March 16, 2010, after the demolition of the old church [as in Minya], the Bishop and the congregation have been celebrating mass in a linen tent erected on the courtyard where the new church is planned, under the summer heat exceeding 113 degrees Fahrenheit.”

After waiting 44 years, the Christians of Nag Shenouda were issued the necessary permits to build a church. Because of this, local Muslims rioted and burned down the church tent they had been using. Then, when a Christian allowed some of the congregation to use his home, a Muslim mob attacked it. Denied a place to worship, the determined Christians of Nag Shenouda celebrated Easter 2015 in the middle of the street.

Sometimes when the mob does not torch the church tents, the authorities do it themselves:Egyptian police destroyed the tent structure of St. Joseph Church, in another village in Minya, under the pretext that it was built without a license.

As usual, this chain of events — Christian minorities having their churches closed and being forced to meet in tents, only to be persecuted again by police or mobs — are not “aberrations” limited to the experiences of Egypt’s Christians but occur across the world, wherever Christians live under Muslim rule:

Kenya (November, 2015): After rioting Muslims burned down two church buildings, the congregations were forced to erect church tents, some of which were flooded by strong rains, which carried away five people.

Indonesia (January 2015): Authorities in the Sharia-governed province of Aceh began to remove tents built by Christians for worship after their churches were torn down by authorities responding to Muslim violence against churches that left one dead and thousands Christians displaced. At least two church tents were torn down. Earlier, in 2012, the St. Johannes Baptista church tent was sealed off by authorities. The congregation had been using it since 2006 as a temporary location, as they had not received a church permit since they applied in 2000.

Sudan (June 2014): After authorities in North Khartoum demolished another church building that had stood since 1983, the pastor said “We will have to pray in a makeshift tent [along the road] next Sunday.”

Pakistan (September 2012): Soon after a madrassa (Islamic school) was opened near where churchless Christians held their tent services, Muslim students began harassing the Christians. They shot bullets at their homes, shouted, “convert to Islam or leave this neighborhood,” and sexually harassed Christian girls as they left after services.

Raymond Ibrahim is the author of Crucified Again: Exposing Islam’s New War on Christians (published by Regnery in cooperation with the Gatestone Institute, April 2013).

Bron: http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org

gatestone-logo-1000

How Western ideology empowers the jihad

The US military made news recently when it adopted the Israeli tactic of ‘roof knocking’ – detonating a small explosion above a building that is about to be bombed in order to give civilians that may be present a warning to evacuate – in its operations against the Islamic State.

Israel used the roof-knock technique to reduce civilian casualties in several recent wars, beginning with Operation Cast Lead in Gaza in 2008-9.

One of the tactics that the radical Islamist enemies of the West have adopted as part of the paradigm of asymmetric warfare that they are waging is to use their own civilian populations as human shields. Hamas launches its rockets from school courtyards, and Hezbollah has constructed a massive, dispersed rocket-launching facility embedded in the Shiite villages of southern Lebanon. If Israel has to neutralize this, it’s likely that many Lebanese will be killed.

The human shield tactic is effective because Western military and political leaders are highly sensitive to the charge of unnecessarily hurting civilians in warfare.

There are both practical and ideological reasons for this. In Israel’s case there are possible economic and diplomatic consequences when it is accused of disproportionate response, including cutoff of essential supplies in wartime. But that isn’t true of the US. Nobody will boycott the US or force it to give Texas back to Mexico, and it manufactures its own munitions.

Western populations empathize strongly with “innocent victims.” The effect is even stronger when those who empathize are not threatened; so Europeans (or American presidents) who don’t have to face Hamas and Hezbollah rockets can be highly critical of Israel’s attempts to defend herself.

There are two important things to note: 1) this is a relatively recent development, historically speaking; and 2) this practical/moral/political pressure in the West to behave in a particular way actually enables its enemies to effectively wage asymmetric war against it.

The change in Western sensibility occurred sometime after WWII. Not only were both sides relatively insensitive to collateral damage, the Allies even pursued a policy ofstrategic bombing of non-military targets both to reduce the enemy’s economic capability but also to sap his “will to resist.” Dresden, Hamburg and other German cities were targets of firebombing that killed tens of thousands.

But one raid on Tokyo stands out, even compared to the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. On March 9-10, 1945, 1,665 tons of napalm-loaded bombs were dropped on the city, creating a massive conflagration that reduced about 16 square miles and 100,000 people to ashes.

It is hard to imagine any Western nation in almost any circumstance today even contemplating such an operation.

What changed?

The answer is “a lot of things,” some of them obvious and others more subtle.

Nationalism was blamed for the series of European wars that culminated in WWII, and was emphatically rejected in favor of a universalist ethic in which all humans are seen as part of one human race. It was recognized that every person had human rights that should be respected, even in time of war. But at the same time the collective rights of national groups were deemphasized. National rights in the West were considered dangerous.

At the same time, the great colonial empires began to break up. During the colonial period, there was an assumption of cultural superiority. With the dissolution of the empires, this too went away, replaced with cultural relativism and feelings of guilt for the mistreatment suffered by the former colonial subjects.

The American civil rights movement spotlighted racism as a fundamental evil. But people began to conflate any form of tribal feeling with racism.

At this point, the ideological process took a more dangerous and destructive turn, viapostcolonialism. The appeal of universalist ideals and human rights and the rejection of racism was initially limited to the first-world nations. Somewhat later they penetrated to the less-developed world, but along the way underwent a transformation in which the language used to express important concepts was radically redefined. In the world of postcolonialism, only oppressed peoples have rights and only oppressors are capable of being racists.

‘Racism’ now means the oppression of ‘People Of Color’ by ‘whites’ (the actual skin color of the people involved is irrelevant, and placement into these groups is purely ideological).

Violence by whites against POC, (even, in the case of Israel, self-defense) is called ‘terrorism’.

Violence by POC against whites is called ‘resistance’ and, by misinterpretation of the UN charter, is said to be a human right.

Although nationalism and tribalism among Westerners has been condemned as the main cause of war, postcolonialism gives POC the right of self-determination as peoples.

This revolutionary logic is taught in Western universities. What has happened has been a kind of ideological disarmament by Western national groups. In effect, there has been a military disarmament as well, because the use of force by the West against POC is considered a violation of their human rights that is not balanced by any collective right that we possess.

The Israeli-Arab conflict is the paradigm case of this. The Palestinian Arabs do not recognize the Jews as a people, but do insist that there is a ‘Palestinian people’. They call Arabs killing Jews with knives, rocks or firebombs ‘nonviolent resistance’ and say that even armed attacks are justified resistance. They describe any action by Israel to protect herself – border controls, the security barrier – as a violation of their human rights, while the state of Israel has no collective right to exist.

In recent years, although the great power struggle between Russia and the West remains in an attenuated form, a new source of conflict has appeared: the decentralized Islamic jihad, aimed to expand dar al Islam at the expense of the rest of the world.

Much has been written about possible reasons for the newfound aggressiveness of Muslims in confronting the West. But the explanation is not to be found in any new Islamic doctrines.

Islam was always expansionist and confrontational. What has changed is us. In the past, the West didn’t hesitate to employ its vast military superiority when confronting a less-capable adversary. This was understood by everyone. The forces of jihad were deterred from attacking us.

But now, like Israel, the West finds itself concerned that using our power would abrogate the essential human rights of its adversaries – defined as People of Color –  while ‘white’ nations have no rights. We are allowed to protect individuals, but not nations or cultures. Defined as the ‘racist oppressor’, we have no right to object to their racism, while they are permitted to ‘resist oppression’ with violence.

As a result, the jihad continues to press forward on multiple fronts and the West retreats, paralyzed by its ideology and unable to use its power.

Bron: http://www.abuyehuda.com

 

Europe: Suicide by Jihad

by Guy Millière
April 16, 2016 at 5:00 am


  • In the last two decades, Belgium has become the hub of jihad in Europe. The district of Molenbeek in Brussels is now a foreign Islamist territory in the heart of Belgium. It is not, however, a lawless zone: sharia law has effectively replaced Belgian law.
  • One of the organizers of the Paris bombings, Salah Abdeslam, was able to live peacefully in Molenbeek for four months until police decided to arrest him. Belgian police knew exactly where he was, but did nothing until French authorities asked them to. After his arrest, he was treated as a petty criminal. Police did not ask him anything about the jihadist networks with which he worked. Officers who interrogated him were ordered to be gentle. The people who hid him were not indicted.
  • Europe’s leaders disseminated the idea that the West was guilty of oppressing Muslims. They therefore sowed the seeds of anti-Western resentment among Muslims in Europe.
  • Hoping to please followers of radical Islam and show them Europe could understand their “grievances,” they placed pressure on Israel. When Europeans were attacked, they did not understand why. They had done their best to please the Muslims. They had not even harassed the jihadists.

The March 22 jihadist attacks in Brussels were predictable. What is surprising is that they did not take place sooner. What is also surprising is that more people were not killed. It seems that the authors of the attacks had larger projects in mind; they wanted to attack a nuclear power plant. Others may succeed in doing just that.

In the last two decades, Belgium has become the hub of jihad in Europe. The district ofMolenbeek in Brussels is now a foreign Islamist territory in the heart of Belgium. It is not, however, a lawless zone: sharia law has effectively replaced Belgian law. Almost all the women wear veils or burqas; those who do not take risks. Drug trafficking and radical mosques are everyplace. The police stay outside and intervene only in cases of extreme emergency, using military-like commando operations. Other areas of Belgium, such as Shaerbeek and Anderlecht have the same status as Molenbeek.

The Belgian authorities have allowed the situation to deteriorate. The situation in the country now is virtually equivalent to a surrender.

They seemed to hope that willful blindness and accepting the unacceptable would permit the country to be spared. It did not.

The attack on Belgium’s Jewish Museum on May 24, 2014 should have served as a warning. It did not. That “only” Jews were the target led the Belgian government to underestimate the threat. The jihadi who wanted to kill passengers on train from Amsterdam to Paris, on August 21, 2015, prepared his attack in Brussels. That three American heroes neutralized him before he could start shooting again led the Belgian government to think the danger was not large.

The jihadis who struck Paris on November 13, 2015 had also organized their attacks from Molenbeek, but the blood was not spilled in Belgium. Belgian authorities perhaps assumed that Belgium would be spared. They spoke of “imminent danger” for a day or so, but never increased security.

One of the organizers of the Paris bombings, Salah Abdeslam, Europe’s most wanted terrorist criminal, was able to live peacefully in Molenbeek for four months until police decided to arrest him. Belgian police knew exactly where he was, but did nothing until French authorities asked them to. After his arrest, he was treated as a petty criminal, not a jihadi terrorist. Police did not ask him anything concerning the jihadist networks with which he worked. Because he was hurt during police operations, officers who interrogated him were ordered to be gentle. The people who agreed to hide him for so long were not considered suspects and were not indicted.

The Brussels jihadist attacks took place two days later.

Despite the worst attacks on Belgium soil since World War II, Belgian authorities do not seem ready to change their behavior.

Abdelhamid Abaaoud (left), one of the planners of the November 2015 terrorist attacks in Paris, was — like many terrorists in Europe — from Molenbeek, Belgium. Philippe Moureaux (right) was mayor of Molenbeek for 20 years, thanks to his alliance with radical Islamists.

After the attacks, Belgian Prime Minister Charles Michel denounced “violent and cowardly acts” and stressed his “determination,” without saying what he intended to do. He did not speak of the necessity of changing the Belgian laws to make them more effective. He did not mention any enemy. He never used words such as “jihad” or “radical Islam.”

He behaved and talked as most of his European counterparts did. French Prime Minister Manuel Valls used more courageous words and said many times he is fighting “radical jihad” and “Islamism.” The French parliament passed laws allowing what is still impossible in Belgium:police searches at night. But France stands alone, and effectively the situation in France is no better than in Belgium. Islamist enclaves exists in many suburbs. Whole cities are controlled by thugs and radical imams: cities such as Roubaix, Trappes, Aubervilliers and Sevran in the northeast of Paris.

Islamist enclaves also exist in other European countries: Spain, the Netherlands, Germany, theUnited Kingdom and Sweden.

European leaders have been making choices. After World War II, they decided Europe would be a region of the world where war would be banished and all problems solved through diplomacy and appeasement. They gradually abandoned financing defense and security activities. Instead, they built welfare states. They thought that taking care of people from cradle to grave would suppress anger and conflicts. They denied the existence of totalitarian dangers and the necessity of showing strength. To this day, their statements indicate that European leaders thinkboth the Berlin Wall and the Soviet empire fell thanks to the benevolence of Mikhail Gorbachev, not thanks to the determination of Ronald Reagan. To this day, they seem to think that Islam is essentially a religion of peace and that the jihadis belong to a tiny, marginal sect.

Decades ago, Europe’s leaders adopted a general policy of “openness” to the Islamic world in general, and the Arab world in particular. They decided to welcome migrants from the Muslim world by hundreds of thousands but without asking them to integrate. They made cultural relativism and multiculturalism their guiding principles. They acted as if Islam could mingle in the Western world harmoniously and without difficulty. Europe’s leaders disseminated the idea that the West was guilty of oppressing Muslims and had to pay for its sins. They therefore sowed the seeds of anti-Western resentment among Muslims in Europe.

When in the Muslim world jihadis started to kill, Europe’s leaders wanted to believe that the attacks would take place in the Muslim world only. They thought that by not interfering with what European jihadis were planning, they would not risk jihadi attacks on European soil.

When Jews were attacked, Europe’s leaders decided that the problem was not jihad, but Israel. They stressed the need not to “export Middle East conflict in Europe.” Hoping to please followers of radical Islam and show them Europe could understand their “grievances,” they placed increasing pressure on Israel. They also increased their financial and political support for the “Palestinian cause.”

When Europeans were attacked, they did not understand why. They had done their best to please the Muslims. They had not even harassed the jihadists. They still do not know how to react.

Many of them now say privately what they will never say in public: it is probably too late.

There are six to eight million Muslims in France, and more than thirty million in Western Europe. Hundreds of jihadis are trained and ready to act — anytime, anyplace. European intelligence services know that they want to make “dirty bombs.” Surveys show that tens of thousands of Muslims living in Europe approve of jihadi attacks in Europe. Millions of Muslims living in Europe keep silent, behave as if they see nothing and hear nothing, and protest only when they think they have to defend Islam.

European political leaders know that every decision they make may provoke reactions among the Muslims living in Europe. Muslim votes matter. Riots occur easily. In France, Belgium, other European countries, Islamists are present in the army and police forces. In the meantime, Islamist organizations recruit and Islamic lobbies gain ground.

European governments are now hostages. The European media are also hostages.

In most European countries, “Islamophobia” is considered a crime — and any criticism of Islam may be considered “Islamophobic.” People trying to warn Europe, such as the Dutch MP Geert Wilders, despite an apparently biased judge and forged documents against him, are now on trial.

Books on radical Islam are still published but surrounded by silence. Books praising the glory of Islam are in every bookstore. When Bat Ye’or’s Eurabia was published in Europe, she was denounced and received hundreds of death threats. Bruce Bawer’s While Europe Slept, published in the U.S., was not even available in Europe. Ten years later, the situation is worse.

Political movements expressing anger and concerns are rising. All are demonized by political power holders and the media. They have almost no chance of gaining more influence.

Populations are gnawed by fear, frustration and impotence. They are looking for answers, but cannot find them. A few hours after the attacks on Brussels, a man on Belgian television said that Europe is on the verge of suicide.

Europe looks like a dying civilization. European governments created a situation that can only lead to more attacks, more massacres, and maybe unspeakable disasters. Europe’s leaders continue to react with speeches and a few police operations.

If some European governments decided to restore their abolished borders, it could take years, and most European leaders would probably disagree with such a policy. Meanwhile, millions more “migrants” will enter Europe, and among them many more jihadis. In spite of the mayhem created in Germany by “migrants” who arrived in 2015, Angela Merkel said she would not change her decisions. No Western European government dared to disagree with her, except Viktor Orbán in Hungary, a lone voice of dissent.

In Brussels, as in Paris earlier, people gathered where the attacks took place. They brought candles and flowers to mourn the victims. They sang sentimental songs. They cried. There were no shouts of revolt against jihad. Members of the Belgian government called on the Belgian people to avoid reactions of violence, and declared that Muslims are the main victims of terrorism.

In Europe’s near future, more people will bring candles, flowers and songs to mourn victims. Another two or three jihadists will be arrested. But nothing will be done.

Dr. Guy Millière, a professor at the University of Paris, is the author of 27 books on France and Europe.

Bron: http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org

gatestone-logo

Revive Clear Thinking and the Jihad Dies

April 2, 2016 by Raymond Ibrahim

Note: An earlier version of the following article was first published by PJ Media.

Because it is my field of study, one would expect I’d have much to say immediately after jihadi attacks of the sort that recently occurred in Brussels (35 killed), or San Bernardino (14 killed), or Paris (130). Ironically, I don’t: such attacks are ultimately symptoms of what I do deem worthy of discussion, namely, root causes. (What can one add when a symptom of the root cause he has long warned against occurs other than “told you so”?)

So what is the root cause of jihadi attacks? Many think that the ultimate source of theongoing terrorization of the West is Islam. Yet this notion has one problem: the Muslim world is immensely weak and intrinsically incapable of being a threat. That every Islamic assault on the West is a terrorist attack — and terrorism, as is known, is the weapon of the weak — speaks for itself.

This was not always the case. For approximately one thousand years, the Islamic world wasthe scourge of the West. Today’s history books may refer to those who terrorized Christian Europe as Arabs, Saracens, Moors, Ottomans, Turks, Mongols, or Tatars — but all were operating under the same banner of jihad that the Islamic State is operating under.

No — today, the ultimate enemy is within. The root cause behind nonstop Muslim terrorization of the West is found in those who stifle or whitewash all talk and examination of Muslim doctrine and history; who welcome hundreds of thousands of Muslim migrants while knowing that some are jihadi operatives and many are simply “radical”; who work to overthrow secular Arab dictators in the name of “democracy” and “freedom,” only to uncork the jihad suppressed by the autocrats (the Islamic State’s territory consists of lands that were “liberated” in Iraq, Libya, and Syria by the U.S. and its allies).

So are Western leaders and politicians the root cause behind Islamic terrorization of the West?

Close — but still not there yet.

Far from being limited to a number of elitist leaders and institutions, the Western empowerment of the jihad is the natural outcome of postmodern thinking — the real reason an innately weak Islam can be a source of repeated woes for a militarily and economically superior West.

Remember, the reason people like French President Francois Hollande, U.S. President Barack Hussein Obama, and German Chancellor Angela Merkel are in power — three prominent Western leaders who insist that Islam is innocent of violence and who push for Muslim immigration — is because they embody a worldview that is normative in the West.

In this context, the facilitation of jihadi terror is less a top down imposition and more a grass root product of decades of erroneous, but unquestioned, thinking. (Those who believe America’s problems begin and end with Obama would do well to remember that he did not come to power through a coup but that he was voted in — twice. This indicates that Obama and the majority of voting Americans have a shared, and erroneous, worldview. He may be cynically exploiting this worldview, but that doesn’t change the fact that it’s because this warped worldview is mainstream that he can exploit it in the first place.)

Western empowerment of the jihad is rooted in a number of philosophies that have metastasized into every corner of social life, becoming cornerstones of postmodern epistemology. These include the doctrines of relativism and multiculturalism on the one hand, and anti-Western, anti-Christian sentiment on the other.

Taken together, these cornerstones of postmodern, post-Christian thinking hold that there are no absolute truths and thus all cultures are fundamentally equal and deserving of respect. If any Western person wants to criticize a civilization or religion, then let them look “inwardly” and acknowledge their European Christian heritage as the epitome of intolerance and imperialism.

Add to these a number of sappy and silly ideals — truth can never be uttered because it might “hurt the feelings” of some (excluding white Christians, who are fair game), and, far from suspecting them, the West should go out of its way to appease Muslims until they “like us” — and you have a sure recipe for disaster, that is, the current state of affairs.

Western people are bombarded with these aforementioned “truths” from the cradle to the grave — from kindergarten to university, from Hollywood to the news rooms, and now even in churches — so that they are unable to accept and act on a simple truism that their ancestors well knew: Islam is an inherently violent and intolerant creed that cannot coexist with non-Islam (except insincerely, in times of weakness).

The essence of all this came out clearly when Obama, in order to rationalize away the inhuman atrocities of the Islamic State, counseled Americans to get off their “high horse” and remember that their Christian ancestors have been guilty of similar if not worse atrocities. That he had to go back almost a thousand years for examples by referencing the crusades and the Inquisition — both of which have been completely distorted by the warped postmodern worldview, including the portrayal of imperialist Muslims as victims — did not matter to America’s leader.

Worse, it did not matter to most Americans. The greater lesson was not that Obama whitewashed modern Islamic atrocities by misrepresenting and demonizing Christian history, but that he was merely reaffirming the mainstream narrative that Americans have been indoctrinated into believing. And thus, apart from the usual ephemeral and meaningless grumblings, his words — as with many of his pro-Islamic, anti-Christian comments and policies — passed along without consequence.

***

Once upon a time, the Islamic world was a superpower and its jihad an irresistible force to be reckoned with. Over two centuries ago, however, a rising Europe — which had experienced over one millennium of jihadi conquests and atrocities — defeated and defanged Islam.

As Islam retreated into obscurity, the post-Christian West slowly came into being. Islam didn’t change, but the West did: Muslims still venerate their heritage and religion — which impels them to jihad against the Western “infidel” — whereas the West learned to despise its heritage and religion, causing it to become an unwitting ally of the jihad.

Hence the current situation: the jihad is back in full vigor, while the West — not just its leaders, but much of the populace — facilitates it in varying degrees. Nor is this situation easily remedied. For to accept that Islam is inherently violent and intolerant is to reject a number of cornerstones of postmodern Western thinking that far transcend the question of Islam. In this context, nothing short of an intellectual/cultural revolution — where rational thinking becomes mainstream — will allow the West to confront Islam head on.

But there is some good news. With every Islamic attack, the eyes of more and more Western people are opened to the true nature of Muhammad’s religion. That this is happening despite generations of pro-Islamic indoctrination in the West is a testimony to the growing brazenness of the jihad.

Yet it still remains unclear whether objective thinking will eventually overthrow the current narrative of relativism, anti-Christianism, and asinine emotionalism.

Simply put, both celebrating multiculturalism and defeating the jihad is impossible.

However, if such a revolution takes place soon, the Islamic jihad will be easily swept back into the dustbin of history. For the fact remains: Islam is terrorizing the world, not because it can, but because the West allows it to.

Bron: http://www.raymondibrahim.com