I Know Jihadi John’s Swamp.

Tags

Civilisation, Counter-Jihad, Counterjihad, Defend the modern world, Extremism in London, Hezbollah, ISIS, ISIS brits, Islamic Extremism, Islamism, Jew 9/11, Jews 9/11, Jihadi John, London Metropolitan, London University, Middlesex, Mohammad Emwazi, Muslims, Palestine, Religion, The Beatles ISIS, United Kingdom, Universities, Westminster

The revelation that the frozen-blooded ISIS executioner ‘Jihadi John’ was until recently a ‘normal, quiet’ student at Westminster University couldn’t have surprised me less. I am very intimate with the state of London Universities and the close, sinister relationship many of their students have with radical Islam.

I didn’t attend Westminster, but my own University was just a few miles from it. Along with Greenwich, London Metropolitan and my own, Westminster University is part of an ever-growing variety of crowded, multicultural colleges popping up around the English capital like Starbucks restaurants.

Given their demographic profile (the Islamic percentage of the intake is often as high as 50%) all of these institutions are sharply Left-wing in political orientation, with some of them allied to the wild extreme.

At my own place of study, I don’t remember a week going by without a demonstration for ‘Palestine’, against blasphemy or in favour of immigration. During these events, bearded enforcers in white dresses (some of whom came in from other colleges) would stalk the halls of the campus, its library and halls of residence. To have been openly critical of Islam at this time would invite the same consequences as in ISIS-controlled Syria.

It has been noted before (including in the excellent book ‘Londonistan’ by Mail columnist Melanie Philips) that the Muslim youths of London are particularly devout, even by the standards of other European cities like Paris and Berlin. Consequently, at demonstrations by my college’s Islamic Student Union, leaflets spoke openly of Jihad, ‘infidels’ and religious para-militarism. Some Muslim students blamed the Jews for 9/11, others took credit for it proudly.

The non-Muslim students were mostly shy and timid, bullied into silent acquiescence by a thick atmosphere of violent potential. Once, on my way to a lecture, I saw a student in front of me wearing a Hezbollah hoodie (‘Hezbollah’ in roman script, lest there be any confusion) and when I promptly pointed this out to a fellow non-believer from my class, he said he thought it was ‘cool’…

Despite having been established as places of free-thought and learning, the Universities of London have more-or-less adapted to suit the bigotries of the fanatics. The year before last, London Metropolitan University banned the consumption of alcohol on its campuses due to complaints from Muslim students, thereby radically altering the traditional student experience for those from other backgrounds.

At my own place, a harmless ‘Valentine’s Day Singles’ Ball’ at the local nightclub was abruptly cancelled after complaints from the Muslim Union alleged that it might ‘promote un-Islamic behaviour’. Never did it seem to cross the minds of the student office that non-Muslims still (at least officially) have rights in the UK; that the UK is a modern, secular country, and that Islam is foreign to it.

This atmosphere of censorship quickly developed to affect the process of education itself. During my first month of study, I noticed there was a small section of books in the library devoted to atheism (‘The God Delusion’, ”The End of Faith’, ‘Letter to a Christian Nation” etc…). As months turned into years, that section of books seemed to mysteriously disappear. Perhaps that attests to a booming atheism on campus; perhaps they were being borrowed continuously by eager secularists. Or perhaps something else was occurring… Perhaps unbelief was being rooted out, just like alcohol, pork and innocent social gatherings before it.

For all their faults, the Conservative Party has sought to address the London University problem in the last few years, albeit in a very light-handed and incomplete fashion. MPs, including cabinet members, have acknowledged that some places of study are functioning as immigration waiting camps, in which people from the worst countries in the world use their brief window of legal residence to apply for permanent residency, and failing that, a life of illegal settlement.

Certainly, many of the students in my accommodation professed a will to remain beyond their graduation, or even if that day never came. The countries of their descent were all plagued with sadness or barbarity – one guy was from Sudan, another from Pakistan, one hailed from Iran, another from Albania. What do we expect these people to do? Is it not fair to say that allowing a Black man from Sudan to study in Britain in the era of the Janjaweed is to make certain he never leaves? It is obvious what is going on in London and it is going on right under the noses of the powerful.

What can we do about it? Here are a few common sense suggestions:

• Close down any college or ‘language school’ that fails to attract students from inside the EU.
• Block (through legislation at the governmental level) any attempt to ban alcohol, pork or other Haram products at British universities.
• Rigorously enforce the intermingling of the sexes. Never allow sexual segregation in lectures, places of rest or in common areas.
• Expel any student who actively promotes terrorism or anti-Semitism.
• Ban the Niqab on all University grounds.
• Offer security services to Christian and Jewish student unions and provide guards at pro-Israel or anti-Jihad events.
• Create a branch of student services dedicated to helping the victims of Muslim grooming or intimidation.
• Redefine the talk of ‘infidels’ for what it is – hate speech.

Despite how bad all this must sound, it is still too early to despair. While Jihadi John is undeniably a product of London’s degraded environment, so – in many ways – is this author. I went into higher education as a damp liberal, but emerged as something different. Perhaps the swamp, as well as being a factory-line of violent Jihadis, will also turn out radicals of the other direction.

We must hope so.

D, LDN.

Advertisement

Are Terror Groups Becoming More Powerful Than Nation-States?

Tags

4chan, America, anti-tank missiles, Assad, Britain First, Caliphate, Civilisation, Counter-Jihad, Defend the modern world, Hezbollah, IS, ISIS, Islamic State, Lebanon, Obama, Russia nuclear, Russians, Serbs, Syria, Terrorists, Ukraine, US, War, War with America, War with Islam, War with Syria, War with Turkey

The terrorist ‘rebel’ forces of Syria, who – even if combined – number less than 25,000 men, have fought the million-man army of the Syrian State to a bloody stalemate. Despite the thousands of tanks, APCs, missiles, chemical warheads, fighter-bomber jets, and trained soldiers at Assad’s command, he has failed to prevent massive swathes of his nation falling into the hands of a rugged, relatively disorganised opposition.

In Iraq, another terror group, ISIS, has held its ground against the US, Saudi and Jordanian air forces, the Iraqi army, and various Kurdish paramilitaries.

And finally, in Ukraine, the pro-Russian separatist militias of the Donetsk People’s Republic have held off the armed forces of NATO-backed Western Ukraine whose ranks, even accounting for Russian counter-measures, dwarf the resources and technologies of the opposing side.

What does this tell us about our world?

For me, it raises the vitally important question as to whether the power of terror groups are evolving to a state of parity with national armies. It certainly seems that way, looking at the evidence.

Much of the improvement in guerrilla warfare over the past ten years is due to the development of one particular weapon – the mobile anti-tank missile. Once so large, they had to be hauled about on wheels, modern variants of these weapons are so small they can be carried like a rucksack.

It is a well-grounded fact that anti-tank missiles are cheaper to produce and more efficient in operation than the vehicles they destroy. If they are effectively designed and accurately deployed, 1000 anti-tank missiles can theoretically go against 1000 tanks and triumph.

The Israelis don’t need to be told this. Their brief and unsuccessful war against Lebanon in 2006 is judged in retrospect to be a Hezbollah military victory (a military victory, I emphasise, not an abstract ‘ideological’ or ‘moral’ victory – a military victory by Hezbollah over the Israeli army).  How did the Lebanese movement achieve this? In the main, it was via anti-tank missiles, the latest, most upgraded type used by the Russian military. Hezbollah is rumoured to possess many thousands more.

To understand this requires counter-intuitive reasoning. We naturally assume that a huge, hulking Israeli tank is more likely to triumph over a single Shia terrorist, however well he is armed. But that’s not what happened on many occasions.

It is suspected that the Syrian state has passed more varieties of Russian equipment on to Hezbollah since the beginning of the Syrian implosion. This fact, along with the ghost of the 2006 war, goes some way to explain why Israel has not displayed enthusiasm for a rematch.

By way of conclusion, there is no reason, no reason at all, why a terror group cannot triumph over a modern nation state, and we are seeing them do so in many parts of the world today. That these groups are often only 10 or 20 thousand man strong, should give us all cause for concern, especially at a time when Muslims flow into Europe by the million.

D, LDN.

Are Shia Muslims an Exception?

Tags

Are shia more moderate?, Civilisation, Counter-Jihad, Defend the modern world, Hezbollah, Iran, Israel, Lebanon, Middle East military balance, Nuclear program, Persia, Persians, Shia vs Sunni

It has been put to me more than once that Shia Muslims represent a more civilised portion of the Islamic multitude than the Sunni majority. For evidence, those who hold to this argument present the cases of Iran and Lebanon.

Despite their troubles and imperfect governments, it is undoubtedly the case that these two countries enjoy a higher and more recognisably (to a European) civilised form of social order that the lowly standards of the Islamic world. Iran, regardless of its theocratic state, rarely experiences beheadings and terrorism. Lebanon, despite Hezbollah, has retained a level of social peace conducive to a flourishing tourism industry. It is less surprising to hear of an Iranian or Lebanese intellectual being nominated for a Nobel prize than it would be to hear of the same honour bestowed on a Saudi or Afghan. And when one looks at a photograph of Tehran or Beirut, it is easy to imagine one is looking at a city in Eastern or Southern Europe.

In Iraq, where 70% of the population is Shia, the civil war further revealed this distinction. During Abu Musab al-Zarqawi’s reign of terror, almost all of the acts of terrorism in the conflict were Sunni against Shia. And when the Shia did respond, it was more often with law and state, rather than bomb and machete.

It’s all very convincing isn’t it? To be sure, an increasing number are very convinced of it. I’m not yet one of them though and I have 3 reasons to support this stubbornness:

1. Despite the undeniably unique aspects of their religious system, Shia Muslims nevertheless revere and follow the Qur’an as their infallible manifesto of life and behaviour.

2. Despite the moderation of the Iranian population, the Iranian state continues to stone women and hang gays for explicitly Shia Islamic reasons.

3. (related to No. 2) Shia Islam exercises Sharia law just as fervently as Sunni Islam and believes it should supersede civil legislation.

I’m not saying we shouldn’t add greater nuance to our dealings with Shia countries than with Sunni ones, because we probably should. But I don’t believe (or have yet to be convinced) that a Shia country can serve as a reliable ally of the West. Too much separates us and that which does so is of crucial importance.

D, LDN.

Turkey: The Islamic Superpower.

Tags

Air force, Battle, Defend the modern world, Hezbollah, IDF, Israel IDF, Israel military, Lebanon, NYT, NYT cartoon, Polizei, Syria, Times, Turkey military prowess, Turkey vs Israel, War, World politics

Should they desire it, the modern Turkish army could storm Europe up to the borders of Paris. None of the countries separating France from Erdogan’s Islamic republic are capable of opposing the Turkish military even if they acted in concert. In both quality of arms and manpower, the Turks are superior. Hard to believe? Let’s look at some statistics:

The Turkish armed forces have at their command over 800,000 troops. The army is equipped with over 10,000 tanks and APCs. The air force flies over 400 warplanes (mainly upgraded F-15/16s) and 450 modern combat helicopters. The Turkish navy has over 168 war vessels. As part of NATO, the Turkish air force also administers 200 ‘shared’ US nuclear missiles.

Compared to the militaries of the UK or Germany, Turkey is a superpower.

Turkish strength matters for two reasons; first, its neighbourly position to Europe. Second, because any deportation or change in the status of Muslims in Europe will inevitably tread upon Turkish toes.

A clear majority of Germany’s Muslims are of Turkish descent. Unlike the Algerians of France, these migrants are therefore backed and supported by a near-by state with a modern military. Germany’s own military is nowhere near as large. For an equivalent situation, imagine if Pakistan was in the same geographical position as the Czech republic and had a military larger and more powerful than the UK. Could Britain afford to address the Pakistani situation in its own territory without taking into account the strength and nearness of the Pakistani state? Of course not.

Turks are loudly offended by even the slightest gesture of support for the Kurds and Armenians and have successfully bullied Germany on both of these issues. Imagine how much more virulent and threatening its anger would be in the case of explicitly anti-Turkish measures by the German state…

Alongside its military prowess, the Islamic superpower has a very dynamic economy. Unlike the struggling nations of Europe, the Turkish economy has experienced rapid growth in recent years. Unemployment, once a massive domestic problem, is now dwindling to a manageable intensity.

On the back of this growth, the movie industry in Turkey is also beginning to flourish and has led to some calling the country the ‘Hollywood of the Islamic world’. Sophisticated blockbusters are being produced which depict America, Israel and the Jews as evil and the Palestinians and Muslims as saintly victims.

Ever since the flotilla raid in which Turkish Islamists were killed by IDF commandos, Israel and Turkey, once in (awkward) alliance with one and other, have been in a state of cold hostility. While it seems next to impossible that the two countries will ever exchange direct blows, Israel has reason to feel nervous over the Turkey’s switch to pro-Palestinian advocacy in international diplomacy.

What should the West do about Turkey? Well, for one, I suggest the country is removed from NATO at the first opportunity. The cold war is dead now and the logic of the alliance died with it. While the West is kind and generous to Ankara, we rarely see kindness flowing the other way. When ISIS besieged the Kurdish town of Kobane, the inaction of the Turkish military (stationed only a few miles to the North) was chilling to the blood. Turkey also continues to occupy Northern Cyprus in contravention of international law and against Western demands for negotiations.

If we need to have an alliance in Asia Minor, I suggest we switch our focus to Turkey’s greatest historic victim – Armenia; the first Christian majority country in history and a genuine oasis of Western civilisation in a swelling sea of Islamic hatred.

D, LDN.