It was a typical hot summer weekend in Modern Multicultural Europe. Riots in Grenoble. Riots in Malmö. EDL demonstrators hunted by Muslim packs in Dudley.
Wait a few days, and there will probably be riots in Slotervaart. Or shootings in Brussels. Or car-burnings in Berlin.
Vandalism, larceny, and low-level violence are routine in the culturally enriched suburbs of major European cities. Most of the incidents merit only a brief mention in the back pages of the news, if they are covered at all. This has become the new norm: Muslim immigrants in their ghettoes regularly riot and throw rocks and burn cars. It’s just what they do, so it’s what everyone expects.
The French have an official bureaucratic designation for these malignant urban neighborhoods: zones urbaines sensibles (“sensitive urban zones”), abbreviated ZUS. In English they are commonly referred to as “no-go zones”, highlighting the fact that white people — or at least non-Muslim white people — are not welcome there. Within the no-go zones infidels cannot expect to be protected by the representatives of the state. Often the fire brigade and ambulance services refuse to enter such areas without a police escort, and the police themselves stay away unless they have a compelling reason to go in — plus plenty of backup.
However, a more appropriate term for these blighted zones would be sharia enclaves, because they are not merely immigrant enclaves, but microcosms of the Ummah, little pinched-off pieces of Dar al-Islam ruled by Islamic law.
The idea behind sharia is very simple: domination.
Sharia is all about Muslims achieving and maintaining a dominant position. This is the expression of the attitude and culture of sharia, the “mythology” underlying it (as opposed to simple practical jurisprudence, which is also part of sharia).
These enclaves in our cities all have something in common: sharia courts and sharia “police” who patrol the neighborhood, forcing Muslim women to wear the hijab and making sure that merchants sell no alcohol or pork. They even have armed Muslims acting as guards at the entrances to the enclave (Norrebrø in Copenhagen is an example).
Calling them “sharia enclaves” is accurate, because Muslims in them have taken over a territory in which they subsequently enact sharia. They have carved out a little piece of Dar al-Harb and turned it into Dar al-Islam.
The riots — the stone-throwing, the arson, etc. — have one thing in common: they are all directed against non-Muslims in general, and the infidel authorities in particular.
Israel experienced this with the successive intifadas by the Palestinians: an intifada is a throwing-off of non-Muslim authority over Muslims.
The street violence in the European sharia enclaves is the same thing: an intifada whereby Muslims shake off non-Muslim authority. The riots are a collective message of defiance to the infidel authorities: “You do not rule us. Kuffar law has no power here. In our enclaves we are governed solely by Allah.”
Understood in this way, Muslim enclaves and street crime are part and parcel of the Islamic drive to enforce sharia by coercive means.
This is useful to our understanding unfolding of events in Europe, and may help guide the strategy of the Counterjihad, since it explains why Muslims in the ghettoes behave the way they do. Sharia really is the heart of the problem. It is the thing that we — and the political authorities in our countries — need to focus on.
In this context it’s also worth recalling that the Islamic authorities draw much of their power from their ability to stop street crime. When Lord Ahmed issued his implicit threat to send “ten thousand Muslims” into the streets of London to protest against Geert Wilders, he was reminding the putative civil authorities that he and other Muslim leaders have the capacity to unleash a violent mob at a moment’s notice.
Every message from a Muslim leader about “community cohesion” and “the sensibilities of Muslims” is thus an implicit threat of more crime and violence. When leaders issue such messages, they are serving notice that if the demands of Muslims are not met, we can expect more dangerous and expensive mayhem when they release the intifada shackles and loose the dogs of jihad upon us.
– – – – – – – – –
The authorities already “solve” violent crime through the blood money system in the UK and Denmark. In this way the police have effectively ceded authority to the ulemas in the sharia enclaves.
What we are witnessing is the ongoing piecemeal dilution of secular law, with the establishment of theocratic sharia law in its stead.
The sharia enclaves in France are already officially mapped and monitored. One presumes that the civil authorities in Germany, Austria, Belgium, the Netherlands, Denmark, Sweden, Norway, and the UK have similar maps that are tacitly circulated among police officials and the emergency services. Such guidebooks are absolutely necessary if you don’t want to lose personnel by sending them unsuspecting into a ZUS.
Picture a huge map of Europe like the one of Paris at the top of this post. Each enclave is marked out and color-coded for the severity of its sharia — blue for mild, yellow for moderate, and red for Total Ummah. Now run the map forward through time in a rapid stop-frame animation, one frame per month.
If you were to begin in, say, 1970, and continue the animation up to today, the entire process would take about twenty seconds to view. In the beginning there would be just a few blue spots here and there — in London, Rotterdam, Marseilles, Paris, Berlin, etc. As immigration from Africa, the Middle East, and South Asia increased, you would see new spots appear, and the old ones would enlarge and turn yellow and then red. Neighboring dots would merge and become blotches taking up whole suburbs of major cities. Little orange tendrils would snake out along major traffic arteries to engulf satellite cities. Sweden, Norway, Denmark, and Switzerland would become infected.
Now fast-forward the animation for the next two or three decades. See the larger sharia enclaves encounter each other and merge to form entire bright-red sharia provinces within what used to be the heart of Christian Europe.
We may presume that the rule of Islamic law in such zones will be unabashed and complete. If the police and the secular courts can be kept completely out of the picture, hands and feet may be severed as demanded by the fiqh. Young women may be thrown out of windows or stoned to death when appropriate. The call of the muezzin will resound unhindered from the minarets that spring up like toadstools all over the landscape. Sheikhs and emirs will be able to exercise local governance without interference, issuing fatwas and executing sentences as demanded by the law of Allah.
This is the real future that awaits all of Western Europe — provided that the infidel continues to supply the money and expertise required to keep the cities functioning. As long as the kuffar are willing to send in the repairmen and the construction crews, truck in the halal food, and continue to issue the welfare payments, there’s no reason why all of this can’t become a reality.
Many of the ideas expressed in this post were derived from a lengthy discussion with Henrik Ræder Clausen and Reinhard of FOMI. Thanks, guys.
Greek Blogger Assassinated
How ironic that, waaayyyyy back in the 40’s and 50’s, when Communist insurgents were running wild all across Europe and the colonies/pre-3d world, one country pioneered the study of its ways, in particular how the embryonic Red statelets set up “parallel hierarchies” –tax-collector, policeman, judge, executioner, governor– to displace legitimate authority. Yes, by now you’ve probably guessed the country that began this analysis was none other than “la France,” the authority of which has now been shoved aside by these crass loser-dropouts of la mission civiliatrice.
Who have imported their evil but organic and robust system from the roots to the leaves into the bosom of European civilization, what used to be called “Christendom.”
How the mighty have fallen, now the great-grandchildren of the same Legionaires who thought nothing of shooting 30 or 40 Algerian villagers pour encourage les autres, now they pick wide paths around entire Parisian neighborhoods for fear that the jihad will liquidate THEM.
Doesn’t anyone in France see a problem w/this? I know Sarkozy was elected to some extent because HE recognized it as intolerable, but he really hasn’t done a damn thing about it, has he?
Sharia really is the heart of the problem. It is the thing that we — and the political authorities in our countries — need to focus on.
It is impossible to overstate the importance of this strategy. Attention must be directed away from religiously protected Islam and fixed upon seditious and abusive shari’a law.
Shari’a violates univerally accepted human rights on so many different levels at once whereby it is stark testimony to the spinelessness of Europe’s political leadership that they have not seen fit to counteract it sooner.
Clearly, there is volitional culpability involved in that the EUnuchs actually desire shari’a to be imposed upon indigenous populations as tighter crowd control becomes necessary for when these waning Socialist Ponzi schemes begin to run out of steam.
When Lord Ahmed issued his implicit threat to send “ten thousand Muslims” into the streets of London to protest against Geert Wilders, he was reminding the putative civil authorities that he and other Muslim leaders have the capacity to unleash a violent mob at a moment’s notice.
Reminding? Maybe so. But what Lord Ahmed really was doing was blackmailing the British government and he should have been charged with incitement and extortion as a result of his barely veiled threats.
The authorities need to consider recommissioning the Tower explicitly for this scum bag.
Bottom Line –
The EU could use a “Second Amendment”
Badly at that.
Notice that US Jihadis do NOT attack targets like the Carolinas, Georgia, Texas or Arizona. They are SCARED POOPLESS, and rightfully so, that their nonsense will NOT be tolerated in those jurisdictions.
Napoleon I once commented as how a “whiff of grapeshot” put down a rebellion. For Jihadis, that same whiff would be a “welcome home” smell, sending them back to plot their glory in their cellars as they do in the “dar al islam” for the next several hundred years. By then they might become the materiel of citizenship in the west. ‘Nuff Said I think. -S-
And when the Precious Muslims start chopping heads off, will that be the end of the holier-than-thou attitude of Europeans who condemn some of the states in the USA for executing FIRST-DEGREE MURDERERS?
Europe is going to have a 1000 Gazas.
The only solution is a complete cordoning off of the afflicted areas (it is an affliction after all, no?). Build a giant wall and no one can escape, no food would be allowed in (to do so would be akin to paying jizya as no payment would be forthcoming from them), no infusion of fresh blood from the savage well springs nor of arms from traitorous elements without. The final piece would be a electronic signal jammer, thereby completely isolating the wretched in their local paradises. I suppose the only downfall of such a solution would be the isolation of a disease prone people.
The South in the US is not invulnerable.
The Jamaat ul-Fuqra compounds?
How about the mosques springing up everywhere? Look at the push back that the New English Review is discussing about Mufreesboro, TN:
Threats Against Those Who Oppose Mosque.
To really keep up with the situation, look at Refugee Resettlement Watch. It’s on our sidebar. Her information is peerless.
Picture ‘Escape from New York’
If you look back at old apocalyptic movies, some show a hint of prophecy…
I always seem to return to ‘Children of Men’ when I picture such a scenario.
Escape Velocity said:
Europe is going to have a 1000 Gazas.
But they will not last much after they start to target the government or the general population.
You want to call them “sharia enclaves,” which is a start, but “sharia” means “revealed law” (revealed by “Allah”) while they are lawless & there is no Allah & so he has never revealed anything. Also an enclave is “A tract of land or a territory inclosed within another territory of which it is independent,” (sorry, not interested in modern, fuzzified definitions) but these places, which have not declared independence & have not been officially ceded by their governments, suck resources from the surrounding areas, thus they are not independent. Therefore, we have civil war (which the governments of the countries where it is taking place have facilitated). I’m sorry I don’t have a perfectly descriptive phrase. Such a phrase would make clear that these places have been infiltrated by enemies who had no business being in said country, citizens & the country as a whole were threatened, & that they were not independent, neither did they deserve to be.
Furthermore, I believe you will want to adopt the terms “Mohammedan” & “Mohammedanism.” “Islam” means “submission [to God]” & “Muslim” means “one who submits [to God],” in Arabic, but these people defy, rather than submit to, Him. These are terms of dhimmitude! We have been bullied into using them since the original words were called “offensive.” “Mohammedan” means “follower of Mohammed” & “Mohammedanism” means “state of following Mohammed,” & we know Mohammed was only a evil, murderous, & duplicitous child-molester, so the terminology is entirely apt.