ISIS, London, 2015.

Tags

America, BBC, Brit, Britain First, Civilisation, Cops, Counter-Jihad, Counterjihad, Defend the modern world, Demographics of Europe, Facebook, guns, ISIS, ISIS GB, ISIS London, Islam, Islamic State, Jihad, Jihadism, Multiculturalism, No to Turkey in the EU, Police, Race and ethnicity in the United States Census, Rihanna Muslim, Twitter, UK, United States

In case you are unaware – and it’s possible that large numbers of people are unaware given the lack of reportage in the media – ISIS Jihadists are clearly preparing to attack the British capital.

Three stories in particular lead me to this conclusion.

On Armed Forces Day (the 27th of June) a plot by ISIS fanatics to bomb a military parade in the borough of Merton, South London was foiled by police working in league with an undercover agent. A week later, on the 4th of July, Pakistani intelligence reported the capture of 3 militants in Peshawar, among whose possessions were detailed maps of London, ISIS materials and documents describing the most heavily populated areas of the city. And finally, about a week ago, a man (as yet unidentified) was photographed carrying a large ISIS standard down a street opposing the Houses of Parliament.

You don’t need to be Sherlock Holmes to put the pieces together here. We are due for a bloody nose; something along the lines of 7/7 and possibly worse. And as efficient as our security services have proven over the past ten years, if ISIS are determined to strike London, there is little that can be done to stop them. Eventually they will succeed. And then what?

If or when the attack comes, what will be the aftermath? I truly hope it’s more substantial than the passive aggressive silence that followed Lee Rigby’s slaughter. That is far from a given though, and so, if they are needed, here are some suggestions:

1. Surround and protest the Mosques connected with the perpetrators and petition for their closure/destruction.

2. If you have any Muslim friends on social networks who do not condemn the attacks, delete them and encourage friends to do the same with their own contact lists. Be brave and inform them why they are being shunned.

3.  If you haven’t already, ‘like’ the LibertyGB and EDL facebook pages and share their messages.

4. Talk to a liberal friend about Islam and provide them with the Quranic verses promoting violence against non-believers (and introduce them to this blog or like-minded sites like VladTepes, Gates of Vienna etc…).

5. Send a (polite, non-aggressive) email your local MP favouring hard and immediate measures against any organisation or ‘charity’ connected to Jihad. I have emailed MPs many times. All of them read and replied to my messages. It is worthwhile. Even if your MP is a sponge-brained liberal, they cannot ignore the majority indefinitely. It is vital to make use the power of the majority while we still have it.

6. Befriend an ex-Muslim.

7. Support local campaigns against the construction of Mosques.

I strongly believe that these measures over time can yield tangible results.

I understand that none of them have the thrilling glamour of civil war or terrorism, but then the defence of the status quo is always less glamorous than the initiatives of revolution.

We are at war with madness. A consistent and boring stupidity, unwilling and unable to recognise its ugliness and distance from the truth. The glamour it possesses is the glamour of the vandal; the dazzle of the rough and dreadful destroying the precious and worthwhile. It is not a glamour worth having.

D, LDN.

Jihad vs. McWorld.

Tags

9/11, American Liberty, Benjamin Barber, Big Mac, Christianity and Islam, Civilisation, Counter-Jihad, Counterjihad, Defend the modern world, Jihadism, Lexus vs the Olive Tree, Multiculturalism, New York, New York holidays, NYT, Race and ethnicity in the United States Census, Terror, Thomas Friedman

It’s been a full ten years since the publication, originally to much derision and apathy, of American political scientist Benjamin Barber’s book ‘Jihad Vs. McWorld: Terrorism’s Challenge to Democracy’.

Seen by some as a dumbed-down popularisation of Samuel Huntingdon’s ‘Clash of Civilisations’ thesis, this slim volume (and especially its title) has always seemed to me a more accurate framing of the same struggle.

The struggle with/against Islam is a clash of civilisations (in that Islam is a civilisation and that there is a ‘clash’ involved) but not entirely in the way Huntingdon predicted. The war is not Islam pitched against the West specifically, but Islam versus the modern age and all who aspire to dwell in it. Muslims are as hostile to Kenyans and Japanese as they are to Brits and Americans. The Jihadi elite correctly identify the modern ideal of globalisation as a lethal threat to the integrity of Islamic culture. This is not then a clash between ‘East and West’, but a battle between progress and the 6th century, between Starbucks and the Mosque, the Lexus and the Olive Tree (to quote the title of an excellent book by Thomas Friedman).

Islamism derives it energy from the same place as neo-Nazism. Those who pine for ancient castles, Germanic runes and maidens milking cows are one and the same with those who pine for the tent-life of ancient Arabia. Though officially opposed to one another, Islamists and Nazis alike share a burning disgust at the golden arches of McDonalds, at the white tick of Nike sportswear, at the homogenisation of the global high street and of national cultures. Both long for a misty utopian past; an older, simpler way of living that was cruelly interrupted by industry, but that is recoverable if only the capitalists (Jews) can be brought down from their dominant position.

This is what Barber meant by ‘Jihad’ – the poisonous ideas that appeal to those ill-equipped to compete in a meritocratic world. This is broader and more interesting than the crude differences Huntingdon presented us with. As Barber’s definition allows us to see, we have our own Jihadis in the West, and not all of them are Islamic.

The modern world needs to be defended from all its enemies, whatever they look like and whatever language they speak. We would be fools to presume, like Huntingdon, that the battle lines will fall neatly on the borders of cultures and languages.

D, LDN.

ISIS: al-Qaeda on Steroids.

Tags

Al-Qaeda, America, American Liberty, Barack Obama, Beheading, Civilisation, Counterjihad, Cultural Marxism, Defend the modern world, Desert, Europe, Failed State, Iraq, Iraqi Army, ISIL, ISIS, Jihad, Jihadism, Kurds, Obama, Salafism, Soldiers, Syria, Terrorism, Terrorist

The status of al-Qaeda as the leading edge of Islamist terrorism is at an end. Enter ISIS – the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (al-Sham loosely denoting the Levant). It is no exaggeration to say that this organisation, a military in all but recognition, is the gravest manifestation of Jihad in modern times.

For the past few months, ISIS has swept through deserts of Syria and Mesopotamia, beheading anyone who opposed them, and mutilating anyone who fell short of its understanding of Sharia law. The formerly Iraqi city of Mosul was for a period of days subjected to the meanest hell. It takes energy even to imagine it – the bleeding necks and purple heads, the screaming children and crackling gunfire.

Al-Qaeda wouldn’t have dared to dream this. No effort of Hezbollah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad or a thousand other outfits has conquered this size of territory, acquired this much modern weaponry, or achieved this level of consistency in battlefield success. What we are witnessing is unprecedented.

In Slate magazine, Daniel Byman described the accomplishments of ISIS as follows:

“The territory already under its control is larger than (the State of) Israel, and it is not some barren desert: It includes oilfields, electrical grids, prisons, small manufacturing centers, and the weapon depots abandoned by the Iraqi military, including arms provided by the United States. When ISIS fighters conquered Mosul, they seized the central bank—and its reported $425 million. By comparison, al-Qaida’s budget before 9/11 was about $30 million—and we called it rich.”

Those who have ever wondered what society would be like under a Bin Laden-approved government need wonder no more. The pre-medieval has returned, but – like a steampunk horror movie – the barbarian hordes now posses M16s, Jeeps and video cameras on which to record their deeds.

To list all the macabre events individually would be a Marquis De Sade novel and end up just as long (and unreadable), so let’s isolate a few especially horrid cases:

Yesterday, a video emerged of ISIS fighters spraying gunfire at random civilians from a Humvee on their entrance into Iraqi villages. The organisation also boasted of killing 1,700 US trained Iraqi soldiers during the same invasion. Since then, it’s been reported that an ISIS member has posted a photo of a decapitated head on twitter along with the devilish caption “This is our football. #Worldcup2014”.

That should be enough to communicate the point. These truly are a new breed of monster, lacking in whatever qualities separate us from animals.

What is all this cruelty aiming at exactly? Well, the Independent Newspaper has helpfully translated a manifesto published locally by ISIS fighters.

• “People have tried secular rule – now it is time for an Islamic state.
  
• Women should wear loose-fitting clothes and leave home only when necessary.
  
• Shrines and graves should be destroyed.
  
• Only flag allowed to be carried is the ISIS one.
  
• Places have been opened for police and soldiers of the ‘unbelievers’ to repent.
  
• Drugs, cigarettes or alcohol (are) banned.
  
• Tribal leaders must not become traitors by working with the government.
  
• All Muslims (are) to pray at the mosque at the correct time.
  
• Money we have stolen from the government is for the public. Only the imam of mosques can spend it – thieves will have their hands cut off.
  
• We are the soldiers of Islam and we have taken on the responsibility of re-establishing the caliphate.”

This is fairly generic Islamism. A gun-sight trained on all that makes life worth living. 

So what are we to do? Obama and Cameron have so far behaved like headless chickens. It is likely that there will be drone strikes at some point. Boots on the ground are unlikely. Iran is offering help, but this should be declined.

A fundamental impotence confronts the West, largely of our own making. We simply haven’t got the military bases or the number of personnel to engage ISIS directly. Only the US base in the Gulf is well positioned enough for Western intervention. Other possibilities are mostly wishful thinking. Israel  – for example – could conduct (heroic) air raids, but this would probably result in protests from our effete ‘leaders’ and the harem of anti-logic that is the United Nations. Turkey meanwhile is not our friend, has never been our friend, and will never be our friend where it counts. Jordan isn’t strong enough to repel an army the size of ISIS, and finally, Britain’s army has been stripped to its bare bones and cannot conceivably act alone.

We are left in the position of a mere observer to world-history. That is what happens when military budgets are decimated.

In the unlikely event that Downing Street telephones me for advice, my policy would look something like this – We should be dropping thousands of explosives on any ISIS position cleanly separated from civilians. In Syria, a massive bombing campaign should commence against the ‘rebels’. Assad should not be armed further by NATO but the creaking equipment he has employed thus far will need spare parts, compatible ammunition (only Russia can supply this) and fuel. NATO should not obstruct the supply of these materials.

Although in reality none of us will ever be consulted for our views on this unsightly morass, we must nevertheless stay interested in its outcome.

The ISIS climacteric is fundamentally a pitched battle between the future and the past. Only a fool would say we have no dog in that fight.

D, LDN.

There Are No ‘Moderate’ Muslim Countries.

Tags

Christianity and Islam, Civilisation, Counter-Jihad, Islam, Islam and the West, Islamism, Jihadism, Moderate Muslims, Multiculturalism, No to Turkey in the EU, Rihanna Muslim, Tunisia

Like the world of Christianity, the world of Islam is more culturally diverse than many observers give it credit for.

There are countries with an Islamic majority that are in many ways ‘European’, or at least insofar as their architecture, language and colonial history are concerned. Such countries include Tunisia, Algeria and Morocco.

Other Islamic countries – by contrast – are identifiably foreign and third-world. The nightmare-states of Pakistan and Afghanistan for example, are totally devoid of Western influence, and look today, with the odd exception of a ceiling fan or satellite dish, much as they looked one hundred years ago. Women there are afforded no liberty whatsoever. Murder is considered morally equal, if not superior to adultery. Rape is not always punished, and is even deployed as a punishment (including mind-bendingly enough, as a punishment for rape, should the victim be judged to have encouraged the assailant).

And then there are countries, like Iran or Uzbekistan, which fall somewhere in-between.

Responding to such realities, a few optimistic observers suggest that we create a distinction between a category of ‘moderate’ Islamic countries, and a separate category of ‘hardline’ ones.

This distinction will achieve, they say, two things –

Firstly, it will serve to isolate the more problematic countries the West must deal with most urgently. And secondly, it will spare the reputation of those countries (and peoples) judged to be more moderate.

I’m sure this is a perfectly well-intentioned enterprise but for me at least, it has too many flaws to be taken seriously.

For a start, what exactly are we to mean by the word ‘moderate’? Are we suggesting that the Muslims of such places do not take the threat of hellfire or the promise of paradise as seriously as in others? Surely not.

I think what people really intend by this phrase, is ‘more like us’.

By ‘moderate’ they mean countries in which there are as many cafes as there are mosques, and where European languages are spoken by the natives.

But surely the error in all this is clear.

No adaptation to Western secular culture makes for ‘moderation’ in religious culture. Secular culture (cafes, television, newspapers), fills spaces religion doesn’t fill. But the spaces religion does fill remain filled by the same religion as existed in the 7th century.

Think of it this way – There are millions of Muslims living with us right now in the West, many of whom speak fluently the languages of their adopted lands, and who spend hours each week not only in cafes, but in Tesco, ASDA and other places we might recognise too. They are, in this respect ‘like us’. They may even live next door to us… But as the 7/7 bombers showed, this is no guarantee against the most radical religious fervour and extreme behaviour developing in those internal spaces still occupied by their religion.

Since the 7/7 bombers were born and raised in a Western environment, and still emerged as terrorists, why should the presence of a few Western characteristics in North Africa or Anatolia reassure us that such places are themselves peopled by moderate Muslims?

Islam of the most extreme variety can co-exist (or co-develop) quite smoothly with some aspects of modernity, but only up to a point. At such a point radical Islam feels compelled to demonstrate a moral supremacy over it. The perceived moral laxity of the modern world acts as fuel to the Islamist fire. Our freedom is a provocation.

Just the other week, one of the countries most often suggested as a beacon of moderation, Tunisia, saw an outbreak of Islamist violence as well as the assassination of an elected official. Another commonly suggested ‘moderate’ state, Turkey, has an Islamist government apparently determined to roll the clock back a century at a time. I seem to remember even Egypt being suggested as an example of Muslim modernity, just a few months before the ‘spring’ which set in motion the Muslim Brotherhood’s seizure of power.

Even if you call a spade a rake, it remains a spade. So let’s dispense with the lies.

There are no moderate Muslims, and as importantly, there are no moderate Muslim countries either.

D, LDN.