The Innocence of Sadiq Khan

Londoners just elected Sadiq Khan as their mayor, the first Muslim mayor of any Western capital city. Paul Weston has some thoughts about what this milestone event means for the future of Britain.

The Innocence of Sadiq Khan
by Paul Weston

When the prevailing ethos of a country’s political and media class is one of insanity and/or national suicide, no one should be too surprised when what was once thought unthinkable becomes a sudden and shocking reality. A good example of this is the crowning of Sadiq Khan as Mayor of London, which could be compared in terms of lunacy to the appointment of Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn as Chairman of the Friends of Israel Society.

I don’t necessarily think the smoothly urbane and thoroughly slippery Sadiq Khan is a potential leader of armed Islamic insurrection in London, but nor do I believe he is the benign and unthreatening sort of awfully-nice-Muslim-next-door-chappy that the BBC et. Al. would like us to believe. After all, if judged by the company Sadiq Khan has kept, he would appear to be yet another one of those Muslim politicians who say one thing to their Eloi English audience and quite another to their own community when well out of infidel earshot.

Consider the following: Mr Khan’s brother-in-law, Makbool Javaid, was a supporter of the terrorist organisation Al-Muhajiroun which became notorious for its September 2002 conference “The Magnificent 19” praising the September 11, 2001 attacks. Mr Javaid appeared alongside some of the country’s most infamous hate preachers, and in 1998 his name appeared on a fatwa calling for a “full-scale war of jihad” against Britain and the US.

Mr Khan’s brother-in-law went on to become head of Litigation Services at the Commission for Racial Equality… the further one looks down the multicultural rabbit hole of Britain, the more surreal the whole thing becomes. Mr Javaid is currently a partner at legal firm Simons Muirhead and Burton and lists amongst his Facebook friends CAGE director Moazzam Begg and fellow director Asim Qureshi, who described the Islamic State butcher Jihadi John as a “beautiful young man”. Sadiq Khan is intimately connected with all of these people, which is not something that could be said of Boris Johnson, London’s previous and altogether different type of Mayor.

Sadiq Khan was on the board of the “civil liberties” pressure group Liberty (NCCL) for three years, along with a certain Mr Azad Ali, who has excused the murder of British soldiers and was involved with the extremist organisations Islamic Forum of Europe and Jamaat e Islami. Azad Ali is currently Head of Community Development & Engagement at the organisation MEND which seeks to undermine the British government’s counter-terrorism strategy. And speaking of going down surreal rabbit holes, Azad Ali is an adviser to the police and Home Office on police procedure, a member of the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) and sits on the Home Office’s Trust and Confidence Community Panel… and last but not least is a board member of the extremist boot-boy outfit Unite Against Fascism, which is also supported by the British Prime Minister David Cameron…

The Mayor of London has peculiar friends, it must be said, but who could possibly know just how many? Sadiq Khan has represented the Nation of Islam’s Louis Farrakhan, who — just in case people have forgotten — called for the mass murder and destruction of the white race. In addition, Khan has defended the Taliban supporter Babar Ahmad, the Saudi Arabian “charity worker” Shaker Aamer and the spiritual leader of the Muslim Brotherhood Yusuf al Qaradawi, who called the murder of Israeli civilians a legitimate act. Strange bedfellows all, it really has to be said.

Sadiq Khan explains all this away as part and parcel of life within the civil rights world, but all those he defends seem to have a particular set of political ideals and a particular religious/racial background. I have searched for details with regard to the Mayor of London ever having defended the human rights of Sgt Blackman (Marine A) or Tommy Robinson, but my searches have sadly come to nought. Sadiq Khan has no time for patriotic Englishmen, it would seem, which is somewhat unfortunate for the non-Muslim population of London…

Mr Khan’s speechwriter Shueb Salar has finally been sacked for all sorts of vile outbursts on Twitter concerning homosexuality and women (faggots and ho’s as described by Mr Salar) and other such bugbears of Islamic prejudice — which included the suggestion that Fusilier Lee Rigby’s murder had been faked. But Sadiq Khan only got round to sacking him after the media shamed him into doing so. Considering London has more than its fair share of “faggots and hoes’ in Islamic eyes, one can only wonder how the new Mayor will treat them…

The Mayor of London has so many links to so many unpleasant people and organisations, it becomes incredibly boring transcribing them in their entirety. I suggest people read this one article which covers Sadiq Khan’s alliance with the extremist Islamic student organisation FOSIS, his praise for the Islam Channel despite its being constantly fined for promoting radicalisation, and his apparent inability to recognise the black flag of Islam as a terrorist symbol after it was waved by an audience member during a Sadiq Khan speech.

In 2004 Sadiq Khan was Chairman of the Muslim Council of Britain’s (MCB) legal affairs committee. Those in the know were already talking about the MCB as a front for the Muslim Brotherhood, but it took another five-years before the Labour government finally got around to recognising it as such and dropping it like a hot potato.

There is far more out there about Khan’s strange past if you are prepared to search for it, but I think we can reasonably concur that whilst he may not actually be a supporter of Islamic terror, he is most certainly not the sort of man who should be Mayor of London. The fact that he took his oath on the Koran when he was first elected as an MP tells us all we need to know about his true allegiance, as does his attitude toward moderate Muslims, whom he described on Iran’s Press TV channel as Uncle Toms.

And so the previously unthinkable has become the present reality. A Muslim man with way too many extremist links to be entirely coincidental is now the Mayor of London. I suppose this is hardly a shock, though. The native English are a demographic minority (and a rapidly dwindling one) in London, whilst Muslims from Pakistan and Bangladesh are a rapidly expanding demographic.

In a couple more decades Britain may well have its first Muslim Prime Minister, and I think we can safely assume he will be of the same ideological stock as Sadiq Khan. Reality cannot argue with demographics, so the realistic future for Britain is Islamic, which doesn’t bode well for the Jews and Christians, or indeed anyone not actually Muslim. They might wake up in time, but I rather doubt it.

Why do I rather doubt it? David Cameron was denounced as a racist by white native Britons for raising concerns about Sadiq Khan’s past, and I will leave you with a taste of our probable future courtesy of Andrew Boff, Conservative leader of the Greater London Assembly, who stated that criticism of Mr Khan’s myriad links with extremists was:

“Effectively saying that people of conservative religious views are not to be trusted and you should not share a platform with them. That’s outrageous… I do believe it’s going to affect Conservatives at the sharp end, especially in those parts of London where there is a high Muslim population.”

Do you understand what he means by this? I do. He is saying the Conservative Party is aware of the growing power of Islam in Britain, and that rather than confront the extreme elements of it, politicians should instead get on their knees before it.

And until there is a revolution (or more accurately a counter-revolution) in Britain, that is exactly what will happen. We will continue to submit, even as we watch France, Germany, Holland, Sweden and ALL the ex-Communist Central European countries currently rising up in a concerted and organised political manner against Islam.

In order to fully lose your country, you first have to lose your capital city. Sadiq Khan, a Muslim with countless extremist links, won 44% of the vote. UKIP won a mere 4%. We have now lost London in religious, racial, political and cultural terms, so it is up to us as to whether we go on to lose our country. What are you going to do about it?

In point of fact, what is Nigel Farage and UKIP going to do about it? Write a letter to The Daily Telegraph?

Even better, how about writing a letter to the new Mayor of London?

Paul Weston is a British-based writer who focuses on the damage done to Western Civilisation by the hard left’s ongoing cultural revolution, which seeks to destroy the Christian, capitalist and racial base of the West. He is now one of the leaders of PEGIDA UK, and is also the leader of Liberty GB. His website may be found here, and his political Facebook page here. For links to his previous essays, see the Paul Weston Archives.

70 thoughts on “The Innocence of Sadiq Khan

  1. Just absolutely unbelievable, that they could be so stupid to have elected him!!!

      • Didn’t Labor back during the Blair years say they were going to “rub the Right’s nose in diversity”?

        • Not quite; Peter Mandelson (cabinet minister under Blair) admitted it after they were out of office.

    • My worst fears are realized.

      An elected government by muslims, for muslims, and the NATIVES are left in the cold. They have no control over what was their country.

      Hurrah! democracy at work. The most advanced level of civilization is when you turn yourself into a jizya-paying zombie.

      Yeah don’t worry be happy because khan was elected democratically. Shame on you Stalin you did not surrender your country in a civilized way.

      How many hours does the sun shine over the Caliphate Empire?

      Ye half an hour. Londonistan is always in the dark.

      To hell with Traitors who do not distinguish between citizens and jihadis.

      Hey muslims of the planet . . . have you heard about your Pirate promised land? Hurry occupy yourself a corner.

      Congratulation Traitors . . . your strategic plans and think tanks are giving fruit.
      Let other EU countries imitate you in your infinite wisdom.

      Turks . . . prepare to hijra to Europe to fulfill your old dream, which Kara Mustapha was unable to carry out.

      • That’s the problem with democracy versus a republic. And the problem with universal suffrage. There ought to be some benchmarks for voter eligibility. But then that wouldn’t be “democratic”. The irony being that as soon as they’re totally in charge the democracy part will disappear.

        • If by “democracy” you mean a state of ongoing insurrection and warfare, such as the ISIS (or ISIL) entities, then it does not merit comparison with a “republic” or any other reasonably well organised polity.

          By “republic” I presume you mean something like the US or Latin American style of elective dictatorship? Under this system, the elected monarch, El Presidente operates on the principle of: Stroke of a pen, law of the land. Kinda cool.

          Or as the former Prime Minister of Luxembourg, Jean-Claude Juncker so eloquently stated, in context of the European Union method of passing laws:

          We decide on something, leave it lying around and wait and see what happens. If no one kicks up a fuss, because most people don’t understand what has been decided, we continue step by step until there is no turning back.

          It was ever thus.

          Benchmarks of eligibility for voters are not a solution. No matter how intelligently a vote is cast, the voter’s power, such as it is, disappears a microsecond after the vote is cast.

          As for people being tested for their suitability to vote, what sort of test do you have in mind? It is a conceit to expect someone who resides in a safe seat for one party or another to waste precious time and energy delving into an individual “representative’s” record, so most people, being realistic, practice “rational ignorance” and cast their vote for one party platform or another in all elective dictatorships, where most people happily treasure the illusion that they have representation.

        • The cause of the problem could be democracy if we lived in one. We have representative democracy – choose the representative you hate the least.

      • Churchill spoke of this , Churchill enlightened the threat of this Churchill wrote of this , 100ears ago it’s all recorded and available online .
        London Stinks of Stupidity and other Nationals of Threat .

      • Even if you take away the Muslim vote (12.4% of London were Muslims in 2011 census) Khan would still have won. Voting was more along racial lines ie White/non White.
        Compare London borough results:,_2016#/media/File:London_mayoral_election_by_borough_2016_map.png

        with white/non white ethnic distribution in this map:

    • Why is it stupid to elect someone of the same ethnic, religious, and political ideology as yourself?

    • nail on the head from Weston, but better is David Vincent’s book “2030: Your Children’s Future in Islamic Britain” which gives an incredible blow by blow account of events and processes leading up to a Muslim majority Britain circa 2050 and the terrible consequences for the native whites that remain.

  2. Well, who knows. Maybe it will be good for London to be taken over by Islam for a while. Once the place looks like Egypt under Morsi for a bit, perhaps some of the zombies will wake up.

    They should have just elected Anjem Choudry as a write in. That would probably get it over with faster.

      • In what way does it look like Egypt? Who is picking up the trash? Who are getting the vendors licenses and taxi medallions? Is it dangerous there?

        • I remember someone showing me a video of their holiday years ago, they’d gone to Egypt. When they put it on their TV I announced, that looks like Leeds … with palm trees.

        • The problem is that this is a long, slow process, not an Either/Or of a done deal or not.

          Since it’s a long, slow process, the ostensible data can simultaneously corroborate a perspective that thinks the fears are being exaggerated, and the perspective that is becoming increasingly alarmed & appalled at the prospect of a destruction of our society. When that destruction is in slow-mo, however, and arguably will take decades to transpire, it’s a different kind of alarm. It does no good when the Counter-Jihad has no real platform but only has a mish-mash of feelings, attitudes, thoughts, jostling elbows with more refined & learned reports & analyses — among which are Chicken Little “the sky is falling” doomsaying in the present tense, predicated upon an uncouth disrespect for a reasonable casuistry of details and trends that operate with real limitations and real freedom in the real world; rather, on the contrary, often intertwined with a profoundly dark and alienated (if not at times downright Manichean) conspiracy theory irresponsibly contiguous with an amorphous sense that practically everything that’s wrong and crummy about life is the direct and willful result of a Dastardly Cabal hatching plans in smoke-free rooms (formerly smoke-filled) which they deploy diabolically around the globe that has become their spider egg.

          • You refer to ” a long, slow process”.
            I’d call it a decidedly short fuse! There is an extremely urgent requirement to act NOW to prevent Islam taking over the UK, Europe and, the rest of the world.

    • Yes, I tend to agree. It should be noted London has had a pro muslim mayor before (Livingston). Let’s now watch and see his every move. Does he act for all communities or will his religion beat the drum. He will be under media scrutiny, not to mention counter Islamists, so he had better walk carefully or he will be exposed. The scandal over the Tower Hamlets council is still fresh in the memory.

      • The reasonable assumption — and the Counter-Jihad Principle (which only I’ve ever articulated) — should be that if Mayor Khan does anything bad, it’s because his mask is slipping; and if he ostensibly doesn’t do anything bad, it’s not because he doesn’t want his Islam to destroy our society — but only because he realizes, along with his co-religionists, that the time is not yet ripe to come out of the shadows of stealth.

        I say this not because I have, or need, any data at all about Khan — other than the mere fact that he’s a Muslim. If the West doesn’t cultivate a rational prejudice against all Muslims, it will be destroyed by them probably before this 21st century is over. When I see in Counter-Jihad rhetoric, in 1,001 different ways, a lack of a healthy sense of the aforementioned rational prejudice, it only underscores my gloom.

        For if the West is going to grow the proper antibodies for a healthy sense of alarm at the actual nature of the danger — rather than a problem whittled down into more manageably comfortable dimensions — it is reasonable to assume it would begin in this still preciously small (and still largely disorganized) nucleus called “the Counter-Jihad”. When, however, I see instincts & impulses reflecting the opposite, reflecting an inability or even an actual disinclination to be prejudiced against all Muslims (likely the result of varying degrees of residues of politically correct multi-culturalism residing like dormant viruses in their hearts and minds), it is reasonable to assume that the distance we the West have yet to go to save ourselves from the global train wreck of a Mohammedan conquest down the pike will probably turn out to be too far, and we won’t arrive at our defense on that fateful day, though we may slip-slide on the blood, flesh and broken bones of our own as we try desperately to get there, only tragically too late, in that state of lucid horror that comes to a person when he knows death & destruction is at hand.

        • The first paragraph seems to be an unfalsifiable hypothesis.

          • Given that the problem is of such magnitude quantitatively (1.3+ billion Muslims in some 100 countries around the world, including millions roiling and percolating and bubbling throughout our Western societies) and qualitatively runs up against the brick wall of the fact that we currently don’t have a mind-reading machine (though perhaps Stephen Hawking is working on that); and throwing into the mix that the problem includes the fact that innumerable Muslims among this complex mass demographic have been killing us and (it is reasonable to assume) are plotting to kill us in ever more horrific and efficient ways in the coming decades on their fanatical goal to destroy our societies — we are then faced with a dilemma where we have only two options, both options indulging in an unfalsifiable hypothesis:

            1) assume that any given Muslims by virtue of superficial criteria — wearing blue jeans and a sports coat, smiling at us (“ooh! a Brown Person likes me! I must not be a bigot and a racist after all…!”), cracking secular jokes, taking the kids to soccer practice, etc. — are really harmless in their hearts & minds (meanwhile excluding certain other Muslims who by equally superficial criteria — glowring faces, bushy beards, hijabs, signs saying “We will behead you“, etc. — are dangerous.


            2) Assume that all Muslims are equally suspect; then get on with the more important business of protecting our societies from Muslims, rather than doing their job for them of elaborating a complex taxonomy differentiating Muslims Who Want To Keel Us from Muslims Who Just Wanna Have a Sandwich (with perhaps a complex granularization of wonderfully diverse shadings in between).

    • Bethnal green is a booming integrated Islamic Bethnal Green State, all the shops street sellers gangs underworld and politics are well taken care of by this London Bethnal Green State, the Islamic woman is covered and oppressed into servitude
      They–the Bethnal Green Politics of old, put away the Cray twins their organization and their operations for much less.
      The war generation of Bethnal Green are now beaten and have given up –Something a doddle bug , a V1 Rocket and a million German Hitler bombs could not do to their Bethnal Green Cockney Politics ,

  3. I’m afraid there’s something wrong with the article. Mr. Khan IS indeed a moderate Muslim. It’s the right label.

    Of course, there’s people coming from Muslim communities that are integrated in the western world and support their core values. But the those people are not labelled as “moderate Muslims”, but as “ex-Muslims”.

  4. Why didn’t Paul Weston write this article about this man’s affiliations BEFORE the election? What use is it telling us this now?
    It is all so depressing!

    • You mean you didn’t research the candidates yourself? Maybe telling you NOW will encourage the habit of research BEFORE the next election? How many non-Muslims didn’t bother to vote?

      • Excellent point. The muslim vote was drummed up from mosques and community centres and these people do whatever they are told. The apathy of those Londoners who “didn’t bother” to vote because “what was the point?” may yet prove their undoing under Khan.

        I am more worried lest this embolden the extremists and/or set a precedent.

        I wouldn’t trust Khan as far as I could throw him

    • Cynic: It was all over the British press day after day in the run up to the election.

      • The Conservative party and a significant part of the press promoted the same line as Mr Weston. However it appears that it backfired.

        • Did it backfire? It seems more that the demographics were such that the people who voted for Khan and put him in couldn’t care less about what was revealed about the man. For those people saying that Khan’s a devious sort adept at lawfare and with tons of connections to really repulsive Muslims is a RECOMMENDATION.

  5. Dear non-Muslim Londoner zombies, exhilarated by multiculturalism and environmentalism, intoxicated by marxism and palestinism, stoned by egalitarianism and relativism… useful dhimmies, go ahead with your Muslim mayor!

  6. Considering that Pakistan was in many ways an Anglo-American creation (a bastard child if you like) and the kind of dirty politics that the british played when they were leaving India, to give an example helping Pakis takeover what is now called Azaad or Pakistan-occupied Kashmir, or later looking the other way when the Pakistan army slaughtered its way through East Bengal, & of course consistently supporting Pakistan etc. So I can only say, its chicken’s coming home to roost. BTW, sorry for being mean.

    • It’s not mean to point out history and the karmic effects down the road of actions taken earlier. Not chickens coming home to roost, more like vultures.

    • The operative word there is “left”.

      ….and they also left some things of use- do they have a karmic payback also or just the ‘nasty’ tricks?

      Where does that idea stop?

      The Turkish army committed horrendous crimes when it invaded Cyprus- some of the perpetrators are probably still alive- would you seek them out and demand their descendants atone?
      Or perhaps parts of the Arab Middle-East is suffering karmic payback, for the violent conquest of India under the auspices of Islam? or is it just the British that deserve ‘chickens coming home to roost’?

      The idea of collective guilt for the actions of long-dead countrymen is a pernicious one.
      One that is leading various EU countries to their own demographic and cultural demise and only the Swedes deserve that. (only joking, mostly)

  7. Given the population of London compared with the number of votes cast, the turn-out doesn’t appear to be that high.

      • Indeed, with a secret ballot, they shouldn’t be able to. (I voted for the Lib Dem candidate; I’ve never voted Tory, and Zac Goldsmith is a particularly repugnant example).

      • Good point, I suspect there was a high turnout of muslim voters, voting for Mr Khan because of his religion and/or ethnicity rather than policies. I object to his deliberate introduction of religion to London politics. Religion should be kept out of political discourse. Inauguration at Southwark Cathedral in a ‘multi faith’ service seemed to rub our noses in it.

        • Wow. A cathedral for his inauguration! What cheek.

          I agree with you re religion and political discourse. Which is why, besides the fact that his peers thought him a slimeball, I didn’t like the cut of Ted Cruz’s jib.

          • It may well have been deliberate, Dymphna. Under sharia muslims are commanded to humiliate those they conquer but nowhere is it written that the various other religious leaders in London should be party to their own humiliation.

  8. The “null-vote” … a concerted refusal to Consent. A modern-day “declaration of independence”.

    Refuse to Register as an elector. Refuse to Consent to the governance of Parliament.

    A few thousand men, doing this in an orchestrated and public fashion, puts the Establishment in the position of having to explain how they can govern in the evident absence of Consent.

    They will be forced to admit that they mean to govern, either with, or without your Consent. In other words, they must admit that you are their Property.

    It’s a start. It’s something that I’ve done as an individual, and the State has chosen to simply ignore me. It couldn’t ignore 10,000 or more.

    Crazy? Maybe?

    Not crazy enough to harbour any hopes of “voting myself free”. You must try a new tactic. Voting and street-violence are exactly what “they” want from you. Either of those will do very nicely.

    Well, that’s my ha’porth.

  9. The truth is that imams throughout greater London would have instructed their flocks to vote for Khan or else! Out of interest I wonder that there is any caucasian candidate, of the Christian faith, who has ever been elected to such an equivalent high office in a Muslim state?
    There will now be a rapid domino effect and we will see further such results in other major cities in the UK. Meanwhile the indigenous populace will continue to gorge on fast food and argue about X Factor and Strictly come dancing – literally turkeys voting for Christmas!
    There is a conspiracy, the press have enough dirt on this man to destroy any aspiration he may of had to high office, WHY are they not doing so?
    Dreadful days ahead for the UK now.

  10. Hitler made the mistake of not pushing on and taking Moscow during his assault on Russia during WW2. If he had taken the nation’s capital …

    • Hitler wanted to push on and take Moscow .But he was overcome by “General Winter”.Most of the German army simply froze to death clad as they were in inadequate summer uniforms in the -40 degree Centigrade of a Russian winter.

  11. “London has fallen”,without a shot being fired unlike the film.
    The end came not with a bang but a whimper.

  12. If the people don’t force the government to secure borders, the politicians over time can essentially mold the voting population to the shape they want.
    It may be too late for Christians to save London but perhaps we still have a chance in America.

  13. I was asked today about my view on the new mayor and I replied:

    “Well looks like a snake oil salesman allegedly moderate member but in reality is not of the religion of xenophobia and death, which is sure not to end well, but the good news is that at least it starts the ball rolling sooner rather than later.”

    What more can ones say…

  14. So the new mayor hangs out with extremists/jihadis and their supporters and people want to know if he secretly supports them.You can tell what a man is truly like by the company he keeps, the friends he makes. Birds of a feather flock together.I would have thought his remarks when he was not speaking to dhimmis but to his own people would have been proof enough.But there are none so blind as those who will not see.

    A sort of hysterical wilful blindness has seized the populace of Britain .They do not see that the mayor is a traitor and dangerous fanatic simply because they do not want to see .The evidence is clear enough for those who do not bury their heads in the sand like ostriches offering themselves up to marauding lions as a tasty snack.

  15. Paul did not mention Red Ken Livingston, who was kicked out of the Labour party for declaring his intention to stand for election as Mayor against the Party’s preferred candidate. Livingston was a typical communist in disguise. His loyalty was never to Labour but to the Workers Revolutionary Party, a Trotskyite collection of Luddites, strike mongers and losers with a few champagne socialists and luvvies like the Redgraves thrown in for good measure. Never the most truthful or sensible of beings, he has currently been suspended from the party for a series of comments that the leadership considers unacceptable (see below).

  16. The Labour Party’s official candidate was one (dim) Frank Dobson, former leader of the London Borough of Camden when it was considered to be a far left rotten borough. He subsequently became Member of Parliament for St Pancras, a traditionally left wing constituency within Camden. He retired at the last general Election. He will not be missed.

  17. “I don’t necessarily think the smoothly urbane and thoroughly slippery Sadiq Khan is a potential leader of armed Islamic insurrection in London, but nor do I believe he is the benign and unthreatening sort of awfully-nice-Muslim-next-door-chappy that the BBC et. Al. ”

    Those aren’t the only two options. Jihad is a many-splendored thing, and includes a broad spectrum that has come to be known as stealth jihad. Muslims seem to realize two things which even the Counter-Jihad Mainstream (much less the broader Western Mainstream) doesn’t seem to have clearly grasped:

    1) they can’t conquer the West frontally with a formal military invasion (the masthead and original raison d’être of this very blog here commemorates one of the last times Muslims attacked the West brazenly & massively — the Siege of Vienna involving an investment of over 300,000 Mohammedan troops in broad daylight) — not because they don’t want to but because they are comparatively far inferior & weaker in terms of the frontal style of jihad of the sword in comprehensive terms (as opposed to the stillicidal sidération of randomly punctuated terror attacks; see #2)

    2) but they can conquer us through a “jihad of everything but the kitchen sink” — including many styles & tactics, with perhaps the most important being a long, slow, generalized process of Invasion-as-Insinuation: a gradual percolation into every social, cultural and institutional nook & cranny of our societies, and a concomitant aggrandizement of numbers and influence. This of course needs adjunct tactics, adjunct jihads:

    Jihad of Criminality

    Jihad of the (seemingly) Random Terror Attack (this style having many subsets, on a range from the spectacularly massive (911) to the seemingly unrelated “Sudden Jihad Syndrome” of a supposed “lone wolf” suddenly stabbing or shooting kuffar around him or her).

    Jihad of the Pen & Mouth (all the various styles & flavors of taqiyya, from public propaganda to interpersonal relations amongst the Infidel populations being infiltrated in various ways)

    Jihad of the Feet — immigration (they must be thanking Allah for how the West has been opening up the gates more and more after 911).

    Jihad of Lawfare

    Jihad of the Publicity Stunt

    Jihad of Grievance

    And, perhaps the subtlest Jihad of all, the Jihad of Just Being Here — merely settling in, setting down roots, getting jobs, raising families, having sandwiches, walking around in the streets, shopping, going to school, attending college, joining gyms, etc., all non-verbally telegraphing the overall message: “We’re here, we’re growing, we are insinuating our threads into your cultural fabric, get used to it.”

    Which wouldn’t be a problem, if Muslims didn’t have a detailed plan to destroy our way of life and supplant it with theirs, along with a psychotically fanatical inspiration & resolve to fulfill that plan.

    More details:

    • Very good post.I agree with all your points.However I am unfamiliar with the phrase stillicidal sideration. Could you perhaps explain it?

      According to the Collins dictionary
      stillicide is

      (1)archaic; a continual dripping
      (2) Roman,civil and Scots law:the servitude of eavesdrop binding a servient tenement to receive from the dominant tenement rainwater from the eaves of a building located on the latter.

      According to Collins dictionary sideration is

      (1) sudden paralysis of a part of the body
      (2)the striking of plants or trees.

      Do you use the phrase to mean :
      a slow drip of lightening , paralyzing attacks meant to exhaust ,demoralize and cripple the population thus eroding their will to resist ?

      This could I suppose encapsulate in in one phrase two ideas
      (1)The idea of attacks as dripping water eroding the rock of the victim society’s resistance over time.
      (2)The idea that each individual attack is sudden and paralyzing,demoralizing ,lethal ,crippling and altogether devastating.

      This would leadover time to a slow bleeding away of the victim society’s lifeblood -a death by a thousand cuts or a thousand suicide bombings.

      • “Do you use the phrase to mean :
        a slow drip of lightening , paralyzing attacks meant to exhaust ,demoralize and cripple the population thus eroding their will to resist ?”

        Yes, that’s pretty much what I was intending; though I’d add not only eroding our will to resist, but also sowing disarray and anxiety (which has had unexpectedly beneficial effects for the Muslim goal — with every attack by Muslims, the West reacts perversely, anxiously defending Muslims more, not less, and anxiously fretting about a “backlash” by evil white right wing Christians that, of course, never occurs).

        I got the term sidération from French counter-terrorism analyst Alexandre Del Valle. For more details, see:

        The Strategy of Sidération

        • Ah I see.But the West has no option.It is hamstrung by its own P.C dogma.P.C dogma which states that other races,other religions all minorities in fact must be treated as though they are the eternal victims.And as eternal victims minorities are incapable of harming others and therefore entitled to endless deference sympathy protection and respect..

          The West is as it were defeated because it has come to believe in it’s own P.C propaganda.

          And the West will collapse under the weight of the internal contradictions of P.C .For the P.C dogma causes its defenses to be futile ,counterproductive and disorganized and ineffectual.

          P.C is the downfall of Britain in particular and the West in general.It is the West’s greatest weakness and our enemies use it mercilessly against us.

    • The Jihad of Just Being Here is the most effective and insidious.

      Every person with any semblance of a normal life can conclude that in the long term their country is toast. Known fact.

      However, this particular weekend there’s the car that needs to be serviced and taxes to be done. Next weekend’s booked with a visit to Gran in Boxley-on-Thames. Maybe the weekend after that is good for smuggling automatic weapons in from Brixham, organizing a covert cell for direct action, and possibly an armed assault on Mr. Siddiqi’s kebab restaurant weather permitting.

      The reality is such that — given that Muslims and Western civilization are incompatible and deeply programmed to take over and destroy it — only one action will avoid destruction, to wit, repatriation. However, the halfwits and sexually-confused morons that staff the government and the press go into spasms if the Archbishop of Cadbury even clears his throat and will never in a hundred years sign on to such a draconian but essential step against the beloved foreigner.

      Repatriation cannot be considered in the paradigm of today whose boundaries are set by elite opinion and centuries of law intended for reasonable and civilized people. As long as the paradigm doesn’t change, as long as force is not embraced as the only solution that will work, the West will wobble down the road to destruction at the hands of its obvious inferiors.

  18. people, people………….just look who we elected President of the United States!

    • Not to mention who you might elect in November!
      That any thinking American could possibly entertain any thought of voting for the sleazy, lying distaff Clinton when the U.S. is in such a mess with the military gutted, about 94 million on food stamps and therefore over 20% unemployed, with moslems being dragged in as fast as the impostor in the white mosque can manage it, leaves me with a feeling of overwhelming gloom.

  19. It is terrifying to see people like yourself allowing their minds to be changed. This implies a very powerful teaching or drug or trance or some unearthly force…something strange we are not used to. It is like you find that your spouse is becoming involved with voodoo….a sense of loss is occurring all over the world–we are losing England! My god.

    And, all these advances in Islamic influence, you know, are going to take so much effort to undo. It may be impossible. Think of the work this is going to take and the wars and the killing. It is like you go from a cavity to a root canal to a dental extraction. The route back is so difficult.

    This has got to be in the annals of the worst news of all times.

  20. An expose about Khans character brings no surprises. Nor does the fact that Britain’s non British majority capital city voted him in. Its just more evidence that Islamic culture and attitudes are rapidly taking over our nation. Fight or flight, what a fantastic choice.

    • “Fight or flight, what a fantastic choice.”
      A simple choice, and an easy decision.

  21. The West has been committing suicide for about 100 years, increasing the speed post WWII and the speeding up again in the last 10 years. The decay just is getting faster and faster.

    Calgary, Alberta – Canada’s 3rd largest city already has a Muslim mayor.

    The US has (2) Muslim Congressmen, a Muslim President in not so much of a disguise. In H Clinton and B Sanders the Democrats have two potential presidents who detest Israel and love Muslims and Islam.

    Only Eastern Europe is so far coming to its senses. I don’t like Trump much but he was the only sane candidate saying something about Islam and Muslims, so he gets my vote easily.

  22. As I told my friend who was boasting of his up coming summer trip to France, “There is no France”

    There is no England

    • Neighbors of mine, an American couple who have vacationed in France often over the years (and who are Left-leaning) recently decided to relocate to France because of what they thought were ominous signs of Trump winning. (I first got the impression of their Leftishness when I asked the husband what he thought of the Charlie Hebdo attack — for they had been in Paris during that time — and he showed me an article he had written for a local Parisian paper on it, and it was riddled with the usual PC MC nonsense about how “most Muslims are decent citizens” etc.)

  23. Imagine —-A new Massive Mosque with prayer mat production and an Islamic Nodding School for central London on the Planning schedule , right on the nodding River Thames on the reclaimed site of Westminster Cathedral
    Is this Do -Able
    The answer lies in the soil of souls

  24. Let me be an “apologist” by saying that I am neither (not even in the closest possible sense) of the Western stock nor the Islamic stock, whether by birth, belief or bearing, so perhaps my “outsider” observation may be of some worthwhile consideration here. I have been following this thread and others closely and I think I have some thoughts to share on this rather “worrying” trend on Britain/European/Western discourse: Muslims and Islamisation of Britain/Europe/the West. I believe that the pertinent question is:

    “How does Britain/Europe/the West get to the point where Muslims and Islamisation do not get rid of the former’s own identity (social, political, religious etc)?”

    This, in my view, is multifaceted and seemingly almost impossible to achieve or realise, given the point to which western civilisation has come to. Since this particular thread is about a “British” (or is he rather a Muslim?), I will restrict myself to the United Kingdom. Will London ever have voted/elected/nominated a Muslim (or a minority, if that be the case) hundreds of years ago? Certainly not! And why wouldn’t they have? Because they had an ‘identity’ that made it not possible to do just that. Today’s London (and this is true for many other cities in Britain and in the West in general) prides itself (at least at the governmental level) in an identity that makes it possible to do anything, of course as long as the courts cannot strike it down. Let’s ask ourselves, how many non-indigenous British elected Mr. Khan? We must not deceive ourselves to think that non-indigenous anti-islam British voted him, unless of course he was the least ‘hated’ of the candidates. So the truth is that Britain currently has the identity (among its own indigenous people) to both nominate a candidate and to elect a candidate as long as they (sincerely or stupidly) believe he/she shares that identity. To get straight to the point, if Muslims and the Islamisation of Britain is a real threat to Britain (perhaps, indigenous Britain), then there must be a recognition of this threat in the first place; but my case is that Britain does not have an identity to recognise such a threat! Certainly Britain has the tautological identity of being British (as it is now legally, not ‘indigenously’, understood), but that trivial identity is dry hay against a threat that is fiery. There is an ‘economic’ and a ‘military’ identity, but the larger threat of Muslim influence and Islamisation is albeit an aggressive but a non-economic and non-military one (the ‘lesser’ threat of terrorism is what Britain’s economic and military identity can quell or manage to get rid off, given the right political leadership).

    (Hardened, anti-western, moderate, assimilated) Muslims sincerely know that they cannot truly defeat Britain (and the West, in general) at the present through an economic or military identity, but they have a more powerful identity: the politico-religious one. Usually, to defeat an enemy or quell a threat, you need to assess your own strength (which comes from an identity) to do just that; and this strength must be an opposing strength supra the enemy’s or the ability to translate the enemy’s weakness to face your strength. But Britain does not have a politico-religious identity to quell the threat they face from Muslim influence and Islamisation of the United Kingdom! Oh, yes, they (the West) had such an identity a long time ago and they were able to quell the Muslim influence and Islamisation that long time ago. Because the politico-religious always seeps down to the social unit structure in a pyramidal form—that is, the individuals, superseded by the family, superseded by the extended family, superseded by the clan/tribe, superseded by the sects, the (politico-religious) leaders—the effort must be to try to destroy that basic structure. The West destroyed its own such basic structure by the naturally-consequential well-known “separation of state and religion” doctrine. I say ‘naturally-consequential’ because the historical religion of the West—Christianity I mean—truly has the separation clause in its Writ until the millennial period spanning the Medieval times when it was clouded and fused with the political. Once enlightenment allowed the environment for separation to truly take force, there has never been (and will most surely never be) a going back on that. Quite to the contrary, the (historical) religion of Muslims truly has no such separation clause and there truly has never been (and might surely never will be) a going away from that. (of course on both sides, respectively, there is a going back or a going away from this separation, but those voices are small and stilled or presently being forcefully silenced). This is where and why the course of western civilisation and islamic civilisation has been generally incompatible (besides scientific development). This truly general incompatibility is the reason why any so-called ‘assimilation’ measures require Britain to also compromise its already faded religious identity into obscurity or a multi-faceted one in order to accommodate the assimilation: on other words, you cannot assimilate an incompatibility without losing yourself somewhere.

    To therefore quell this perceived threat (at least by those on this platform and those who believe their indigenous identity is at stake), there must needs be a way to defeat that politico-religious identity ingrained in Islam or to translate that identity as an opposing threat to the current economic-military identity of Britain (the West) and defeat it from there: the extreme scenario, as someone put it on this thread or elsewhere, is that this will need to be ‘sorted by means of a war’, which may come, but not in the foreseeable future, until the status quo becomes unbearable for a majority of the ‘indigenous’ people. The structure of the governmental structure in Britain, however, means that at the present, separate endeavours like Pegida etc, while gaining more and more voices, find themselves somehow estranged as well. To me, it will require the dissenting voices in Britain (or Europe/the West) to either be part of the system and quell the threat from within it or to gradually amass an outstanding number to stage a ‘revolt’, not necessarily a military one, but an aggressive one on the same scale as the perceived infiltrating threat. Because as it stand now, Britain (and the West in general) does not have a ‘religious’ or ‘quasi-religious’ or an ‘in-loco-religious’ identity to be infused with the political in order to quell the stronger politico-religious identity present in Islam.

Comments are closed.