“It’s one thing to fight a war and lose it. It’s quite another to willingly surrender without a struggle.” — Cal Thomas
“The Congress should look to increase exploration inside the United States. It is strange to ask what I should produce. It’s an issue of sovereignty.” — Qatar Deputy Premier and Minister of Energy and Industry H.E. Abdullah bin Hamad Al Attiyah in response to Democrats’ plans to sue OPEC
“How do we define competency and leadership when a war veteran is set against an anti-war idealist, when one who has seen it all is challenged by one who still wants to see it all, when experience and deliberation are set against hope and change?” —Victor Davis Hanson
“Obama’s seasonally adjusted principles are beginning to pile up: NAFTA, campaign finance reform, warrantless wiretaps, flag pins, gun control. What’s left? Iraq. The reversal is coming, and soon.” —Charles Krauthammer “Obama’s constant policy adjustments tend to be admired for their alleged deftness rather than condemned for their obvious cynicism, while his liberal primary positions are presumed to be sincere—the shifts being carried out just to trick the foolish old people who wouldn’t vote for such an obvious liberal.” — Tony Blankley
“When we go to the polls in November, we should beware of any candidate promising that government will solve all our problems. We need to work to keep government doing its right roles and no more, because if we do not, it will eventually cease to function at all.” — Chuck Colson
“While the media may treat the elections as being about Democrats and Republicans... elections were not set up by the Constitution of the United States in order to enable party politicians to get jobs. Nor were elections set up in order to enable voters to vent their emotions or indulge their fantasies. Voting is a right but it is also... a duty not just to show up on election day, but a duty to give serious thought to the alternatives on the table and what those alternatives mean for the future of the nation.” — Thomas Sowell
“Nothing just happens in politics. If something happens you can be sure it was planned that way.” —Franklin D. Roosevelt “Politics, and the fate of mankind, are shaped by men without ideals and without greatness.” — Albert Camus [the unbearable lightness of French idealism?]
“The problem isn’t a shortage of fuel; it’s a surplus of government.” — Ronald Reagan
“The Obamans insist that mentioning any of the man’s disreputable friends and religious mentors is a no-no that smacks of McCarthyism. This is an odd complaint because, one, McCarthy was right when he pointed out that the folks who associated with other people at Communist cell meetings were in fact Communists, and, two, every child is told that he’s going to be judged by the company he keeps. So, let’s face facts—John Dillinger ran with a nicer crowd than this guy.” — Burt Prelutsky
“Liberals, it has been said, are generous with other peoples’ money, except when it comes to questions of national survival when they prefer to be generous with other people’s freedom and security.” — William F. Buckley Jr.
“It’s time for rage—good, old American rage aimed at those elitist Democrats who prefer to see the folks beggared by soaring fuel prices rather than take the action this very real economic crisis demands. Drill... A partial answer to our immediate problem is at hand. The steady increase in pump prices can be halted and prices somewhat rolled back to a more acceptable level. Yet those Democrats who the people elected to Congress are turning their backs on the voters who sent them to Washington and coldly refusing to lift a finger to help the American people, preferring instead to lay the blame for the problem on big oil, speculators and every place but where it belongs. On themselves. If that doesn’t enrage you, nothing will. Payback time comes in November. Drive them out of office and elect people who will do what needs to be done. Drill, Drill, Drill! Are you listening, John McCain?” —Michael Reagan
“Don’t think that a few years of liberals in charge is that dangerous? Just take a moment to consider what liberals dream of doing once they gain absolute power. There is no aspect of our lives—none—that today’s liberals concede is off limits to the meddling use of government power. In their vision there is no dividing line between the public sphere and the private sphere. Limited government is a concept that makes no sense to them... Energy policies are just the tip of the iceberg—although control over energy gives government control over pretty much the entire economy already. In a world run by liberals literally no aspect of our lives will be outside the legitimate regulation of government. That is because anything—even what temperature you like to keep your house—can be turned into a matter of legitimate public concern. Everything we do, including breathing, eating and of course procreating, can be argued to have an impact on those around us or the great mother earth. And if it affects others, it can and should be regulated by those who know best, at least according to the liberals. Liberals want to regulate just about everything: where we live, what fuels we use, what car we drive, whether we can drive or be forced to use government mass transit, where we send our kids to school, what doctor we see, and even to what extent we express our approval or disapproval of others’ lifestyles. It’s hard to find something liberals don’t want to regulate. Is that a world you want to live in?” — David Strom
Stephen J Carter | SF Novelist
Wednesday, July 16, 2008
Wednesday, July 9, 2008
El Ingles: A Crystal Ball for Britain (part 3)
This is our third glimpse through El Inglés’ crystal ball on Britain's possible future. It's by far the most enjoyable to read. Segment 2 presents a milder version of British dhimmitude, while segment 1 presents a kumbaya version of sweetness and light in which British aboriginals & Muslim immigrants & their progeny live in multiculti bliss. That's good for a laugh too, because of its sheer implausibility. Earlier predictions in this series may be found here and here.
-----------
The following was originally published in April, 2018 on Twisted Meanderings, an irreverent political commentary website in the UK.
Cutting the Gordian Knot of Islam
It was far from obvious that the UK would be the country to generate the most ostentatiously bizarre ideas in attempting to solve the problems posed by its rapidly metastasising Muslim problem. On the contrary, the surreal string of developments that resulted in the creation of the Muslim Autonomous Zone in the north of England displayed a level of political naivety that even the most jaded Islam-watchers in the UK could not have predicted.
Other strong competitors for the position of Most Hopelessly Islamized Country, such as Sweden and Belgium, could only look on with envy as the UK steered boldly into the uncharted waters of complete religious accommodation, valiantly striking one iceberg after another. Only the Dutch have so far taken bolder steps than us in confronting Islam head-on, and theirs, though more effective, have shown a disturbing lack of creativity. Internment is just so quaint.
Arguably, the UK is actually fortunate to be faced with such a stark departure from the normal modes of running a state, as it is left with very little leeway in which to perform complex self-justification manoeuvres. In other countries across Europe, the balance of power between Muslims and their host societies changes quickly enough to cause alarm, but slowly enough to allow political and media elites to deny it.
“Feast your eyes on our colourful urban scenes,” they cry to an ever angrier electorate, strangely unimpressed by its exposure to the glories of Islamic culture. “Gaze on,” they exhort, “as Muslim immigration leavens the tasteless bread of our bland, white, Europe.”
Sliding ever further into the quicksand of Islam, they slap each other on the back at EU summits and meetings with concerned representatives of the OIC, in Europe to receive progress reports on anti-Islamophobia initiatives. Let us give thanks in Britain that, irrespective of the outcome of our struggle with Islam, we will have offered spectators something other than such a lethargic and self-congratulatory slide into dhimmitude.
Even after the 7/7 Tube bombings in 2005 (perhaps especially after them), it was far from obvious that anything as outrageous as a Shari’a-enforcing Muslim Autonomous Zone could possibly be on the cards, not least to those in the north of England who would discover that they were to end up living in it. Arguably, however, it was only a matter of time before a man as divorced from reality as Gordon Brown stumbled upon what undoubtedly seemed like a good idea at the time.
Clinging onto power in the 2010 general election by the slimmest of margins, thanks to an unprecedented series of Tory gaffes, blunders and skeletons stumbling out of closets, Brown essentially abandoned his earlier attempts at comprehensive immigration reform. Declaring instead that Britain had been immeasurably enriched by the vast influx of third-world immigrants in the latter half of the 20th century, the Prime Minister ran for cover on the issue, with immigration remaining essentially constant as a result.
As Muslims immigrants continued to flow into the UK, the problems associated with their presence, which need no elucidation here, grew ever more prevalent. Pessimists argued that the country was on an irreversible slide into the foul-breathed maw of the Religion of Peace, but Gordon Brown, belying his reputation as the dullest of dull men, outdid himself by deciding to dive into it headlong and take the country with him.
The formation of the Islamic Party in April 2013 made possible an unholy alliance of the most egregious ankle-grabbing dhimmitude and the most opportunistic, cynical Muslim expansionism. Friction generated by Muslim demands for the implementation of aspects of Shari’a law had risen to new levels by the time the party emerged. Opinion polls showed significant support amongst Muslims for the separatist Islamic Party, which demanded in its manifesto a combination of an almost complete freedom from the legal strictures of the iniquitous British state with the continued receipt of significant tax revenues from it. The publication of this document was the cause of some alarm for the usual assortment of knuckledraggers and xenophobes (who now seemed to make up a clear majority of the British population), but evoked many a hallelujah from Gordon Brown. Convinced as he was that the fruitless search of the government for a ‘partner for peace’ in the Muslim community had finally come to a successful conclusion, he now attempted to settle upon a modus vivendi with British Muslims. After the disappointing start to his premiership, could his legacy turn out to be the ushering in of a glorious new era of multi-religious harmony, half Albion, half Al-Andalus?
In early 2014, Brown, to a chorus of shock, fear, and disgust (to which he appeared largely oblivious) announced his intention to turn the UK into the first genuinely multi-cultural, multi-religious society in 21st-century Europe. In consultation with the Islamic Party, he declared, Britain would throw its arms wide open and embrace Islam like never before by allowing Muslims to attain a degree of autonomy in a manner to be decided over the next two or three years.
The notion that the UK had already embraced Islam slightly more openly than it should have was vocally expressed by a not inconsiderable segment of British society. However, the long-term trajectories of many European countries with respect to Islam were looking gloomier by the day, especially in France and the Low Countries. Brown’s plan to cut the Gordian knot of British Islam developed substantial momentum more quickly than might have been expected.
Initial consultations with the Islamic Party went on throughout 2014. Against this increasingly surreal backdrop, Muslim crime, demands for concessions, and general all-round unpleasantness actually reached new heights as Muslims smelled victory. What sort of victory it would prove to be was still difficult to say, but some sort of Shari’a-lite options for local authorities, enforceable on a geographic basis, was clearly on the cards. As the debate bulldozed its way through the various outraged parties opposing the entire initiative (no small number of them Muslims themselves), it became increasingly clear that allowing local authorities to implement aspects of the Shari’a anywhere in the country would be impossible. If this were allowed to happen, one could inadvertently stroll back and forth between the Dar-al-Islam and the Dar-al-Harb, flitting between jurisdictions without realizing it. The likely consequences of a situation of this sort were clear to all, and not reassuring to consider.
Accordingly, the debate gradually shifted to the idea of declaring this sort of autonomy to be obtainable in a part of the country with an already-high Muslim population. The presumption was that the region would not only attract Muslims from across the country, but that it would, to be delicate, fairly quickly see the departure of large numbers of non-Muslims, thereby creating a Muslim bloc. At the same time, Muslims would be granted no Shari’a-based concessions at all outside of this area. Gordon Brown, understandably excited by his new Dr. Frankenstein role, argued that the plan was the best road ahead for Britain. The increasingly vocal demands for autonomy amongst British Muslims, combined with spiralling Muslim crime (which some claimed to be organized for the purpose) and the more clearly visible disintegration of other European countries in the face of Islam, resulted in remarkably steady support for the plan, given the inevitable outcome. Brown was not alone in his delusions.
Of course, Labour would have to stay in power in 2015 to even have a chance of pushing the initiative through. The election campaign of that year was widely considered the dirtiest in living memory. Claims of gerrymandering and political corruption had dogged Labour increasingly since the previous election, and whatever substance there was behind these claims was supplemented by the flinging of vast amounts of money at any political constituency that pulled a face at the party. This shameless behaviour, coupled by a genuine feeling on the part of large segments of the electorate that the Gordian knot of Islam must be cut one way or the other, allowed the Labour-Islamic Party coalition to scrape through with a tiny minority, tiny enough, it should be noted, for the government to be brought down as and when the Islamic Party willed it.
The gradual outflow of non-Muslims from certain parts of North-West England, which had already been mentioned as the likely site of the Muslim Autonomous Zone — as the soon-to-emerge entity quickly came to be called — picked up pace rapidly after the elections. London and Birmingham were ruled out as potential hosts for the Zone on the grounds of their being the capital and the second-largest conurbation in the country respectively. This left only the north of England, and Northerners knew it. As the government assured the country that relocation assistance and compensation would be forthcoming (which it was), a steady trickle of refugees turned into a flood as 2016 came and went. House prices in the north of England plummeted as people fled south. Muslims did start to relocate north, snapping up properties at bargain basement prices, but not as quickly as the government had hoped.
In March 2017 the government finally announced its plans at a huge press conference featuring many beaming members of the Islamic Party and other Islamic organizations and lobby groups. A section of North-West England, sweeping across from Bradford in the east, through Burnley and Blackburn, to Preston in the west, was to be designated as the Muslim Autonomous Zone. Local councils in the zone would be entitled to pass local legislation permitting many of the provisions of the Shari’a to be applied in their jurisdictions. Although UK law would continue to obtain with respect to serious crimes, and Islamic punishments such as execution, flogging, and amputations would be prohibited, those councils which chose to could adopt Shari’a law with respect to the sale of alcohol, pork products, modesty in dress, segregation of the sexes in public facilities, and so forth. At the same time, councils would be able, in cooperation with the police, to deputize willing members of the public to enforce these laws, infractions against which would be punishable by fines and community service. Islamic courts could also be established by councils, which would be able to make legally binding rulings on issues related to marriage, divorce, inheritance, civil disputes, and so on, as long as all parties consented to the process.
So it was that the country as a whole plunged into the unknown on August 16, 2017, as all local councils in the zone had the new Shari’a-based options opened to them. A large number of Muslim-dominated councils (in, needless to say, Muslim-dominated areas) in the zone immediately introduced as many of the newly available provisions as quickly as they could. Certain less heavily Muslim areas introduced some of them in an attempt to appease their newly demanding Muslim populations.
Vast numbers of non-Muslims, white or otherwise, completed the exodus of those who refused to stay in the area, with nearly all others hunkering down together in council areas where they could predominate. Muslim demonstrations, processions, and general all-round gloating were evident everywhere there were Muslims, with many of the more inconsiderate believers declaring the foundation of the Islamic Republic of Britain. Civil disturbances flared up throughout the entire country, though the situation was kept under control by heavy police presences in critical areas.
Events disintegrated so quickly after the initiation of the new plan that a chronological account is impossible here. In February of this year, however, by the time six months had passed, certain key trends had emerged. Firstly, the extent to which Shari’a was implemented had gone far beyond that officially allowed by the plan. The police presence in the Zone rapidly dwindled to nothing in Muslim dominated areas, with the long arm of the law deciding that harassing old-age pensioners over the placement of their wheely-bins was a lot safer than fighting Muslim thugs armed with a full range of blunt and bladed objects. Scattered attempts by individual police officers to actually do their jobs in ‘difficult’ parts of the Zone received no back-up from those higher up in the force, making in very clear which way the wind was blowing politically. That the jizya should be being demanded of, and paid by, many non-Muslims in Muslim-dominated areas of the Zone soon after its creation was testament to the unchanging nature of Islam, as were the public beatings of the less-than-completely devout by enforcers and the public beheading in Bradford of a Muslim man accused of selling alcohol illegally.
Secondly, the flight of businesses and the educated from the area, which had commenced years before, had reached a point where economic activity in the Zone fell away at a great speed. It was always clear that the Zone would never be economically viable in its own right, but the extent to which it would have to be propped up by the British taxpayer had been underestimated. Even non-Muslim areas saw steep economic and demographic decline as the Zone and neighbouring areas were abandoned by vast numbers of people who had effectively been turned into refugees in their own country. A mere six months had resulted in scenes of squalor, filth, and decay across large parts of the Zone, as the builders and maintainers of public infrastructure and sanitation stayed away or were kept out. This decay compounded and was compounded by the economic difficulties.
Thirdly, the geographical stability of the Zone itself was shown to be very limited. It probably goes without saying that the rule of Shari’a, once established in a given jurisdiction, had a tendency to bleed across into non-Shari’a-enforcing jurisdictions within the Zone, as enforcers and other random groups of Muslim thugs endeavoured to claim more territory for Allah. However, the rapid drop in population in and around the Zone allowed ambitious Muslims to slowly colonize them, resulting in a de facto spread of the Zone itself, resulting in more flight on the part of non-Muslims. The suddenly availability of large amounts of underused housing motivated many Muslims to head up north, thereby reinforcing the entire dispossession dynamic. Calls for newly occupied areas to be formally incorporated into the Zone are already heard with some frequency.
Though it is much too early to try and predict exactly how events will develop over the next year or two, it can already be said with some confidence that nothing in the history of politics bears comparison with such a carefully-planned destruction of a polity by its own leaders. Such fascinating political theatre is something that we should feel privileged to have been a part of.
In stark contrast with the unimaginative approach adopted by the Dutch since their military coup of last week, our national eccentricity has given the world something to smile at in these dark times. While our cousins across the English Channel have been locking down Muslim ghettos, interning Muslim men, and shooting any slave of Allah who complains, we have been involved in the largest piece of performance art in history.
Of course we must adopt the Dutch approach eventually. But, as Rossini would remind us, sometimes the overture is remembered after the opera has been all but forgotten. We are confident, here at Twisted Meanderings, that the prelude to the real battle with Islam on this sceptred isle will prove to be equally memorable, and equally capable of provoking amazement centuries after the larger drama has been forgotten.
---------
Admittedly this is a bit on the long side. Partly it's a matter of Britain having made itself so mind-numbingly irrelevant with PC-dementia, that anything longer than a few paragraphs on Britain seems too long. El Ingles is one of Britain's few intellectual treasures.
-----------
The following was originally published in April, 2018 on Twisted Meanderings, an irreverent political commentary website in the UK.
Cutting the Gordian Knot of Islam
It was far from obvious that the UK would be the country to generate the most ostentatiously bizarre ideas in attempting to solve the problems posed by its rapidly metastasising Muslim problem. On the contrary, the surreal string of developments that resulted in the creation of the Muslim Autonomous Zone in the north of England displayed a level of political naivety that even the most jaded Islam-watchers in the UK could not have predicted.
Other strong competitors for the position of Most Hopelessly Islamized Country, such as Sweden and Belgium, could only look on with envy as the UK steered boldly into the uncharted waters of complete religious accommodation, valiantly striking one iceberg after another. Only the Dutch have so far taken bolder steps than us in confronting Islam head-on, and theirs, though more effective, have shown a disturbing lack of creativity. Internment is just so quaint.
Arguably, the UK is actually fortunate to be faced with such a stark departure from the normal modes of running a state, as it is left with very little leeway in which to perform complex self-justification manoeuvres. In other countries across Europe, the balance of power between Muslims and their host societies changes quickly enough to cause alarm, but slowly enough to allow political and media elites to deny it.
“Feast your eyes on our colourful urban scenes,” they cry to an ever angrier electorate, strangely unimpressed by its exposure to the glories of Islamic culture. “Gaze on,” they exhort, “as Muslim immigration leavens the tasteless bread of our bland, white, Europe.”
Sliding ever further into the quicksand of Islam, they slap each other on the back at EU summits and meetings with concerned representatives of the OIC, in Europe to receive progress reports on anti-Islamophobia initiatives. Let us give thanks in Britain that, irrespective of the outcome of our struggle with Islam, we will have offered spectators something other than such a lethargic and self-congratulatory slide into dhimmitude.
Even after the 7/7 Tube bombings in 2005 (perhaps especially after them), it was far from obvious that anything as outrageous as a Shari’a-enforcing Muslim Autonomous Zone could possibly be on the cards, not least to those in the north of England who would discover that they were to end up living in it. Arguably, however, it was only a matter of time before a man as divorced from reality as Gordon Brown stumbled upon what undoubtedly seemed like a good idea at the time.
Clinging onto power in the 2010 general election by the slimmest of margins, thanks to an unprecedented series of Tory gaffes, blunders and skeletons stumbling out of closets, Brown essentially abandoned his earlier attempts at comprehensive immigration reform. Declaring instead that Britain had been immeasurably enriched by the vast influx of third-world immigrants in the latter half of the 20th century, the Prime Minister ran for cover on the issue, with immigration remaining essentially constant as a result.
As Muslims immigrants continued to flow into the UK, the problems associated with their presence, which need no elucidation here, grew ever more prevalent. Pessimists argued that the country was on an irreversible slide into the foul-breathed maw of the Religion of Peace, but Gordon Brown, belying his reputation as the dullest of dull men, outdid himself by deciding to dive into it headlong and take the country with him.
The formation of the Islamic Party in April 2013 made possible an unholy alliance of the most egregious ankle-grabbing dhimmitude and the most opportunistic, cynical Muslim expansionism. Friction generated by Muslim demands for the implementation of aspects of Shari’a law had risen to new levels by the time the party emerged. Opinion polls showed significant support amongst Muslims for the separatist Islamic Party, which demanded in its manifesto a combination of an almost complete freedom from the legal strictures of the iniquitous British state with the continued receipt of significant tax revenues from it. The publication of this document was the cause of some alarm for the usual assortment of knuckledraggers and xenophobes (who now seemed to make up a clear majority of the British population), but evoked many a hallelujah from Gordon Brown. Convinced as he was that the fruitless search of the government for a ‘partner for peace’ in the Muslim community had finally come to a successful conclusion, he now attempted to settle upon a modus vivendi with British Muslims. After the disappointing start to his premiership, could his legacy turn out to be the ushering in of a glorious new era of multi-religious harmony, half Albion, half Al-Andalus?
In early 2014, Brown, to a chorus of shock, fear, and disgust (to which he appeared largely oblivious) announced his intention to turn the UK into the first genuinely multi-cultural, multi-religious society in 21st-century Europe. In consultation with the Islamic Party, he declared, Britain would throw its arms wide open and embrace Islam like never before by allowing Muslims to attain a degree of autonomy in a manner to be decided over the next two or three years.
The notion that the UK had already embraced Islam slightly more openly than it should have was vocally expressed by a not inconsiderable segment of British society. However, the long-term trajectories of many European countries with respect to Islam were looking gloomier by the day, especially in France and the Low Countries. Brown’s plan to cut the Gordian knot of British Islam developed substantial momentum more quickly than might have been expected.
Initial consultations with the Islamic Party went on throughout 2014. Against this increasingly surreal backdrop, Muslim crime, demands for concessions, and general all-round unpleasantness actually reached new heights as Muslims smelled victory. What sort of victory it would prove to be was still difficult to say, but some sort of Shari’a-lite options for local authorities, enforceable on a geographic basis, was clearly on the cards. As the debate bulldozed its way through the various outraged parties opposing the entire initiative (no small number of them Muslims themselves), it became increasingly clear that allowing local authorities to implement aspects of the Shari’a anywhere in the country would be impossible. If this were allowed to happen, one could inadvertently stroll back and forth between the Dar-al-Islam and the Dar-al-Harb, flitting between jurisdictions without realizing it. The likely consequences of a situation of this sort were clear to all, and not reassuring to consider.
Accordingly, the debate gradually shifted to the idea of declaring this sort of autonomy to be obtainable in a part of the country with an already-high Muslim population. The presumption was that the region would not only attract Muslims from across the country, but that it would, to be delicate, fairly quickly see the departure of large numbers of non-Muslims, thereby creating a Muslim bloc. At the same time, Muslims would be granted no Shari’a-based concessions at all outside of this area. Gordon Brown, understandably excited by his new Dr. Frankenstein role, argued that the plan was the best road ahead for Britain. The increasingly vocal demands for autonomy amongst British Muslims, combined with spiralling Muslim crime (which some claimed to be organized for the purpose) and the more clearly visible disintegration of other European countries in the face of Islam, resulted in remarkably steady support for the plan, given the inevitable outcome. Brown was not alone in his delusions.
Of course, Labour would have to stay in power in 2015 to even have a chance of pushing the initiative through. The election campaign of that year was widely considered the dirtiest in living memory. Claims of gerrymandering and political corruption had dogged Labour increasingly since the previous election, and whatever substance there was behind these claims was supplemented by the flinging of vast amounts of money at any political constituency that pulled a face at the party. This shameless behaviour, coupled by a genuine feeling on the part of large segments of the electorate that the Gordian knot of Islam must be cut one way or the other, allowed the Labour-Islamic Party coalition to scrape through with a tiny minority, tiny enough, it should be noted, for the government to be brought down as and when the Islamic Party willed it.
The gradual outflow of non-Muslims from certain parts of North-West England, which had already been mentioned as the likely site of the Muslim Autonomous Zone — as the soon-to-emerge entity quickly came to be called — picked up pace rapidly after the elections. London and Birmingham were ruled out as potential hosts for the Zone on the grounds of their being the capital and the second-largest conurbation in the country respectively. This left only the north of England, and Northerners knew it. As the government assured the country that relocation assistance and compensation would be forthcoming (which it was), a steady trickle of refugees turned into a flood as 2016 came and went. House prices in the north of England plummeted as people fled south. Muslims did start to relocate north, snapping up properties at bargain basement prices, but not as quickly as the government had hoped.
In March 2017 the government finally announced its plans at a huge press conference featuring many beaming members of the Islamic Party and other Islamic organizations and lobby groups. A section of North-West England, sweeping across from Bradford in the east, through Burnley and Blackburn, to Preston in the west, was to be designated as the Muslim Autonomous Zone. Local councils in the zone would be entitled to pass local legislation permitting many of the provisions of the Shari’a to be applied in their jurisdictions. Although UK law would continue to obtain with respect to serious crimes, and Islamic punishments such as execution, flogging, and amputations would be prohibited, those councils which chose to could adopt Shari’a law with respect to the sale of alcohol, pork products, modesty in dress, segregation of the sexes in public facilities, and so forth. At the same time, councils would be able, in cooperation with the police, to deputize willing members of the public to enforce these laws, infractions against which would be punishable by fines and community service. Islamic courts could also be established by councils, which would be able to make legally binding rulings on issues related to marriage, divorce, inheritance, civil disputes, and so on, as long as all parties consented to the process.
So it was that the country as a whole plunged into the unknown on August 16, 2017, as all local councils in the zone had the new Shari’a-based options opened to them. A large number of Muslim-dominated councils (in, needless to say, Muslim-dominated areas) in the zone immediately introduced as many of the newly available provisions as quickly as they could. Certain less heavily Muslim areas introduced some of them in an attempt to appease their newly demanding Muslim populations.
Vast numbers of non-Muslims, white or otherwise, completed the exodus of those who refused to stay in the area, with nearly all others hunkering down together in council areas where they could predominate. Muslim demonstrations, processions, and general all-round gloating were evident everywhere there were Muslims, with many of the more inconsiderate believers declaring the foundation of the Islamic Republic of Britain. Civil disturbances flared up throughout the entire country, though the situation was kept under control by heavy police presences in critical areas.
Events disintegrated so quickly after the initiation of the new plan that a chronological account is impossible here. In February of this year, however, by the time six months had passed, certain key trends had emerged. Firstly, the extent to which Shari’a was implemented had gone far beyond that officially allowed by the plan. The police presence in the Zone rapidly dwindled to nothing in Muslim dominated areas, with the long arm of the law deciding that harassing old-age pensioners over the placement of their wheely-bins was a lot safer than fighting Muslim thugs armed with a full range of blunt and bladed objects. Scattered attempts by individual police officers to actually do their jobs in ‘difficult’ parts of the Zone received no back-up from those higher up in the force, making in very clear which way the wind was blowing politically. That the jizya should be being demanded of, and paid by, many non-Muslims in Muslim-dominated areas of the Zone soon after its creation was testament to the unchanging nature of Islam, as were the public beatings of the less-than-completely devout by enforcers and the public beheading in Bradford of a Muslim man accused of selling alcohol illegally.
Secondly, the flight of businesses and the educated from the area, which had commenced years before, had reached a point where economic activity in the Zone fell away at a great speed. It was always clear that the Zone would never be economically viable in its own right, but the extent to which it would have to be propped up by the British taxpayer had been underestimated. Even non-Muslim areas saw steep economic and demographic decline as the Zone and neighbouring areas were abandoned by vast numbers of people who had effectively been turned into refugees in their own country. A mere six months had resulted in scenes of squalor, filth, and decay across large parts of the Zone, as the builders and maintainers of public infrastructure and sanitation stayed away or were kept out. This decay compounded and was compounded by the economic difficulties.
Thirdly, the geographical stability of the Zone itself was shown to be very limited. It probably goes without saying that the rule of Shari’a, once established in a given jurisdiction, had a tendency to bleed across into non-Shari’a-enforcing jurisdictions within the Zone, as enforcers and other random groups of Muslim thugs endeavoured to claim more territory for Allah. However, the rapid drop in population in and around the Zone allowed ambitious Muslims to slowly colonize them, resulting in a de facto spread of the Zone itself, resulting in more flight on the part of non-Muslims. The suddenly availability of large amounts of underused housing motivated many Muslims to head up north, thereby reinforcing the entire dispossession dynamic. Calls for newly occupied areas to be formally incorporated into the Zone are already heard with some frequency.
Though it is much too early to try and predict exactly how events will develop over the next year or two, it can already be said with some confidence that nothing in the history of politics bears comparison with such a carefully-planned destruction of a polity by its own leaders. Such fascinating political theatre is something that we should feel privileged to have been a part of.
In stark contrast with the unimaginative approach adopted by the Dutch since their military coup of last week, our national eccentricity has given the world something to smile at in these dark times. While our cousins across the English Channel have been locking down Muslim ghettos, interning Muslim men, and shooting any slave of Allah who complains, we have been involved in the largest piece of performance art in history.
Of course we must adopt the Dutch approach eventually. But, as Rossini would remind us, sometimes the overture is remembered after the opera has been all but forgotten. We are confident, here at Twisted Meanderings, that the prelude to the real battle with Islam on this sceptred isle will prove to be equally memorable, and equally capable of provoking amazement centuries after the larger drama has been forgotten.
---------
Admittedly this is a bit on the long side. Partly it's a matter of Britain having made itself so mind-numbingly irrelevant with PC-dementia, that anything longer than a few paragraphs on Britain seems too long. El Ingles is one of Britain's few intellectual treasures.
Tuesday, May 20, 2008
Oriana Fallaci Square, Verona
From over at Gates of Vienna blog, here, heartening news for the CounterJihad out of Italy.
----------
Oriana Fallaci Square
by Baron Bodissey
With the ascendance of Lega Nord in the recent elections, good news emerges from Italy fairly frequently.
The latest is this story from La Repubblica, kindly translated into English by Gates of Vienna's Gaia.
Oriana Fallaci Square in place of the mosque
VERONA — Goodbye mosque. In its place, Oriana Fallaci Square.
This decision was taken by the committee of Oppeano (Verona), where yesterday morning a building used by Muslims for prayer was bulldozed. In its place, the Municipality will create a public square named after the writer of The Rage and the Pride, which promoted a bitter campaign against Islam.
The decision to raze the structure which had been opened by ONLUS [translator’s note: Organizzazione Non Lucrativa di Utilita’ Sociale, a non-profit registered Italian charity] “For the success of Muslims”, was taken by the municipal administration, which acquired the area for €70,000 in order to transform it into an open area for parking and green space.
“My citizens did not want this takeover,” explained the mayor, Alessandro Montagnoli, deputy of the Lega Nord, “above all because it could create problems of practicability and cohabitation with the residents.”
------------
Wednesday, January 30, 2008
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)