Racist Britain

As any fule (or, which is much the same thing, any good liberal) kno, racism is inherent in British society. Non-whites, we are given to believe, are at constant risk from the massed ranks of barbaric natives, who are just itching to tear them limb-from-limb in an orgy of genocidal bloodlust. Muslims, goes the traditional media narrative, are particularly at risk, and "Islamophobia" is now reaching record levels. Even such fair and impartial representations of Muslims and natives as "White Girl" can do nothing to stem the tide of hatred and bigotry. Knowing all this, it will come as no surprise to anyone to hear of two more horrendous racist attacks.

First up, a race hate incident:

A TERRIFIED pensioner and her grandson had a lucky escape when a gang of yobs threw a brick and a wrench through their window.

Around 15 youths shouted rascist abuse and attacked 74-year-old Jean Mills’ home in Victoria Walk, Chadderton, after threatening to burn it down.

The ordeal happened when her 13-year-old grandson, who she does not want to name, was sitting on the garden wall with a friend at around 8.45pm on Sunday.

They were called “white b*******”. The gang chased them into the house and threatened to torch it.

Half of the thugs stayed at the front of the house and threw a brick and a wrench through a window.

The others went to the back of the house where they kicked in the back door, smashing another window.

Around £400 of damage was caused and Mrs Mills said: “I was very shaken and my grandson was frightened because apparently two of them go to the same school as him.”

Her grandson, who lives with her, has been chased several times by the gang which the family says has been causing havoc in the area.

On Friday Mrs Mills asked them to stop destroying plants in her garden. A neighbour had a fence kicked down and a car was scratched

Her daughter, Janet Mills, said: “The wrench could have hit my mother or my nephew.

“It seems there’s a gang going round causing havoc. People are being confronted by these youths. The fact is if you are white you are going to be in trouble. That’s not good for Chadderton.”

A police spokesman said the gang was made up of white and Asian youths, and that no allegation of racism had been made.

Hmm, even if the gang was made of "white and Asian [sic] youths", that does not prevent it being a racist incident. At least, it didn't when the Stephen Lawrence memorial was vandalised by a black man...

Second, religious hatred. "Islamophobia", no doubt?

PARISHIONERS were in shock this week after thugs attacked a leading East End clergyman in the grounds of his church.

Two youths described by police as Asian attacked Canon Michael Ainsworth at St George-in-the-East Church in Shadwell, Scotland Yard confirmed this evening (Friday).

Police are treating the attack on the 57-year-old clergyman as an alleged 'faith hate' crime.

So, not Islamophobia then (except in the sense that attacks by Muslim terrorists are now designated as "anti-Islamic actions" - in that sense, this was clearly an instance of extreme Islamophobia). Rather, a Christianophobic attack, carried out by "Asians" - a favourite euphemism for 'Muslims'.

Of course, these cases don't fit the liberal paradigm of whites/Christians as oppressors and bigots, and Pakistanis/Muslims as poor oppressed victims. But then, as I have said time and time again, the majority of racist crimes don't fit that model - for a start, most race crime is directed against whites. The cases highlighted above provide further evidence that the hackneyed image of white racists going out "Paki-bashing" is a complete inversion of reality, and that it is, in fact, the "Asians" themselves who have a disproportionate propensity to indulge in racist and sectarian violence.

Hat-tips: Green Arrow (first case) and David Vance (second case)

The Religion of Peace and death threats, part 2

Now, as we all know, Islam is a Religion of Peace. And this is something for which we must all be eternally thankful. After all, just imagine what its adherents might be like if it wasn't a RoP!

From today's Times:

The Bishop of Rochester, Dr Michael Nazir-Ali, is under police protection after he and his family received death threats over his claim that parts of Britain had become “no-go areas” for non-Muslims.

[...]

Dr Nazir-Ali was in India when staff at his home in Rochester took a number of phone calls threatening his family and warning him that he would not “live long” if he continued to criticise Islam. He has been given an emergency number at Kent Police, along with other undisclosed protection measures, and said that the threats were being taken “seriously”.

So: Nazir-Ali suggests that Muslims have established no-go areas in some cities, into which it is unsafe for non-Muslims to venture. Muslims get upset about the imputation that some among them have a tendency to indulge in violence against non-Muslims. Some of them are so outraged by the association of Islam with violence that they...threaten to kill anyone who suggests that such an association exists. Hmm...

Mega mosque death threatener arrested

Remember "abdullah1425"? He was the rather disturbing (and, as it turned out, disturbed) individual responsible for the posting on YouTube of a video containing an apparent death threat directed at Alan Craig, the Newham local councillor who has been leading opposition to the East London mega mosque.

Well, I now discover, via Jihad Watch, that "abdullah1425" has been arrested by police, presumably in connection with the threatening video. I am not aware of any details beyond this, but it would appear that he has since been released, since he logged onto his YouTube account just four hours ago, at the time of writing (i.e. at around 7pm, on Saturday).

Personally, I am pleased - and somewhat surprised - to see that the police are actually responding to this incident. Clearly, the video, which I and many others were able to see before YouTube took it down, did merit investigation, at least. It will be interesting to see what action the police take next.

The Religion of Peace and death threats

Opposing Islamification can be a dangerous business. Readers will probably recall the horrific attack on Danish SIOE activists last month, as well as the threats of violence made against British SIOE demonstrators on the MPACUK forums, and the arrest and prosecution of a seventeen year-old Pakistani for plotting to murder BNP members. Now I read that Councillor Alan Craig, who has been leading the campaign against the East London Mega Mosque, has contacted police after discovering a video on Youtube which he believes contains an implicit death threat against him.

The video, which has been up on Youtube since June, and which may be viewed here, is entitled "In memory of Councillor Alan Craig", is just under two minutes long, and consists primarily of a series of photographs of Mr Craig, his wife, and their two young daughters, set to Elvis's song, You Were Always On My Mind. Clearly, the imputation that Alan Craig is dead, when he is in fact very much alive, is somewhat sinister, and could certainly be construed as a statement that "you are a dead man". Given the less-than-total aversion of some followers of the Religion of Peace to the use of violent methods in the pursuit of their goals, I think that it is quite understandable that Mr Craig is concerned.

The video was put up on Youtube by user "abdullah1425" (see his account here), who has also uploaded a number of other videos, some of which relate to the Mega Mosque. Some of his other videos are...interesting, to say the least (this one, for example, compares the relationship of Mohammed and Aisha to the relationship between Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes, on the grounds that both involve age differences, which rather ignores the fact that Katie Holmes was a responsible adult when she married Cruise, while Aisha was a 6 year-old child when she married Mohammed), but, to be fair, I am not aware that he has made any implicit or explicit threats of violence in any of his other videos. And perhaps that was not his intent with this video, although I struggle to think of any other reason for implying that a political opponent was a "dead man", unless one's intention was to intimidate. Certainly, Mr Craig was, I think, right to take the matter up with the police, and hopefully they will make some efforts to clear up the situation, and possibly to take action against the man who has posted these apparent threats.

Update: YouTube has now taken down the video.

Legitimate targets

Via North East Scotland Nationalists, the following story:

A British teenager who is accused of plotting to blow up members of the British National Party appeared in court today.

The 17-year-old, who cannot be named for legal reasons, appeared at Westminster Magistrates Court in London to face two charges under the Terrorism Act 2000.

It is alleged that he had in his possession a copy of the "Anarchists' Cookbook", containing instructions about how to make home-made explosives.

The charges are that he was in possession of material for terrorist purposes in October last year and that he collected or had information useful in the preparation of an act of terrorism.

The teenager, who is a British national but has dual nationality with Pakistan, stood in the dock wearing a baggy, blue hooded top.

"Dual nationality with Pakistan". No religion mentioned, but I wouldn't mind betting that he isn't a Pakistani Christian.

I am not at all surprised to see that BNP members are now being targeted by Muslim terrorists. Not only is the BNP the only British party of any significance that is prepared to come out and challenge Islam, but it has also been subjected to an unprecedented campaign of demonisation by all three major parties, and the MSM. There have also been a number of cases in which public figures have openly advocated the use of violence against members and supporters of the BNP. For example, in November 2004 the "alternative" (as in "alternative to funny") comedian Jeremy Hardy expressed the view that those who support the BNP "should be shot in the back of the head". Earlier in the same year, the singer Billy Bragg announced that he was "in favour" of "duffing [BNP members] up in the street". This constant drip feed of anti-BNP propaganda is in many ways comparable to the campaign of vilification with which the Dutch establishment targeted Pim Fortuyn. And we all know what happened there.

Of course, many Muslims are quite capable of behaving in a violent manner against any non-Muslim, and especially against one who opposes them, straight off their own bat. They do not need the encouragement of the likes of Billy Bragg in order to get aggressive. But the vitriolic and hysterical anti-BNP language of many in the British media-political elite does often imply that anti-BNP violence is justified - that the BNP are legitimate targets - thereby reinforcing the views of those who would like to commit violence against the BNP anyway, and perhaps encouraging others, who would not otherwise wish to commit anti-BNP violence, to seek do so. If - perhaps when - a BNP member is murdered solely for being a member of this legal political party, then people like Billy Bragg and Jeremy Hardy will have blood on their hands (of course, being communists, they'll probably regard that as a point of pride).

Postscript: Laban Tall points out that al-Beeb is once again spinning for Islam and the left in its coverage of this story. Their report of this trial completely fails to mention either that BNP members were the intended targets of the alleged plot, or that the defendant in this case has dual British-Pakistani nationality. As with the case of Nicholas Roddis, the BBC is doing all it can, short of actually telling outright lies, to imply that this is just another one of those white British Christian terrorist plots. They really have given up even trying to be fair and impartial purveyors of fact, and the sooner the whole corporation is shut down the better.

al-Beeb: Biased beyond redemption

From the BBC:

A man has appeared in court accused of preparing acts of terrorism in his home town in South Yorkshire.

Nicholas Roddis, of Reedham Drive, Bramley, Rotherham, appeared at London's Old Bailey on Friday by video link from custody.

The 22-year-old was remanded in custody for a plea and case management hearing on 21 November.

At his next court appearance, the charge of preparing acts of terrorism will be put to him.

Another Robert Cottage, perhaps?

Well, no, actually. Because al-Beeb appears to have left out a rather salient detail regarding Mr Roddis. Thankfully, other, more reputable, news outlets were not quite so reticent. Here's the South Yorkshire local paper, The Star:

A WHITE Muslim convert has appeared in court accused of plotting to bomb his hometown of Rotherham.

Nicholas Roddis, aged 22, allegedly kept a list for attacking Rotherham, along with chemicals for making explosives and bomb-making recipes.

Counter terrorism police claim he also kept extremist propaganda including beheadings at his then home during a two-and-a-half year period.

This is not the first time that the BBC has deliberately misled licence fee payers in this manner. Some readers may have come across the Wroughton Hammer Attack case, in which a white schoolboy was subjected to a racist assault by a large gang of Pakistani thugs. Mysteriously, al-Beeb omitted to make any reference whatsoever to the case's racial aspect, only reporting the fact that an assault had taken place.

The BBC is supposed to be an impartial news organisation. Indeed, as the price for its guaranteed licence fee income, it has a positive obligation to be impartial imposed on it by its charter. However, it now has a liberal bias so deeply ingrained, that it is actively misrepresenting the facts that it reports, in order to avoid doing harm to its liberal agenda. The bias now goes so far, that it is too late to talk about reforming the corporation: the only solution is to close it down.

Hat-tip: Biased BBC

Muslim-only jails?

I read that the government is considering building a Muslim-only prison, in order to better ensure the safety of Muslim prisoners, particularly those of the terrorist persuasion. This follows attacks on the jailed terrorists Dhiren Barot (which I discussed here) and Hussein Osman, and the alleged receipt of death threats by Omar Khyam. Aside from protecting these terrorist lowlife from the justified anger that they arouse even in criminals' hearts, it is expected that the special Muslim-only prisons will enable staff to better cater (or should that be pander?) to Muslims' dietary and prayer requirements.

Well, screw that! Personally, I really couldn't care less if "people" like Barot or Osman are getting attacked - indeed, as my comments following the attack on Barot show, I am more supportive of than opposed to prisoners (or anyone else) giving such creatures the beating of a lifetime. So what if they suffer in jail: it's no more than they deserve.
Neither do I see why Muslims, or anyone else, should have their unusual dietary requirements catered to. If you're a law-abiding person, you have every right to insist on keeping Halal, or Kosher, or on being a vegetarian. But when you're in prison, then your right to deviate from the expected norm vanishes: beggars can't be choosers, and neither should prisoners. That's one of the purposes of having prisons, and punishments for those who break the law: you lose some of your rights, and some of your freedoms. In my opinion, prisoners should be given the cheapest, most low-quality food available, and told that if they don't like it, they can, to coin a phrase, lump it.
Equally, while I would generally say that religion in prisons is a good thing, I think that it is clear to all thinking people, that Islam is an exception to this rule. After all, if you've been sent to jail because of terrorist offences committed because you are a Muslim, then I would think that the last thing anyone should want is for you to be further exposed to the religion that has driven you to commit such actions. The worryingly high number of young Muslim men who are radicalised while in prison is a further reason to be suspicious of a plan to put them in an environment where their religious demands are catered for in every conceivable way, and where, indeed, they would only be in the company of their fellow Muslims.

Indeed, the only possible reason that I can think of for wishing to segregate Muslim prisoners from non-Muslims, is to protect the non-Muslims. After all, there have been reports of Muslim inmates forcibly converting non-Muslim prisoners to Islam. But a better solution to that problem would be to simply split up Muslim prisoners, so that, rather than mixing exclusively with other Muslims, as the government seems to wish, they mix almost exclusively with non-Muslims. Then, not only would they be unable to form themselves into gangs and intimidate other inmates into converting, but they would also be unable to radicalise young Muslim inmates, or to plan further terrorist atrocities. And if Dhiren Barot gets his neck broken, well, that's just a price we'll all have to pay.

Postscript: Some readers may recall that in the aftermath of the latest efforts by followers of the Religion of Peace to slaughter hundreds of people, Yusuf al-Qaradawi's favourite dhimmi, Ken Livingstone, claimed that "Muslims are more likely to be law-abiding than non-Muslims". I wonder, in that case, how he accounts for the fact that, while Muslims currently make-up for just 3% of the total UK population, they constitute fully 12% of the UK's prison population. Don't seem to be quite so law-abiding after all, do they?

Brilliant!

American talk-radio host Neal Boortz chews up and spits out a whining Muslim, who called into his show to complain about criticism of Islam. It's seven and a half minutes long, but it is well worth taking the time to listen to:



Hat-tip: Jihad Watch

Robert Spencer Interview

The Catholic Herald has an interview with Robert Spencer, editor of Jihad Watch. Those readers who are regular readers of JW will already be familiar with much of what Mr Spencer says, but I would still recommend the interview as being well worth a read.

Hat-tip: Damian Thompson (editor-in-chief of the Catholic Herald, incidentally) at Holy Smoke.

The M word

In March I wrote that the EU was instructing politicians to avoid describing Muslim terrorists as 'Muslim terrorists', in favour of the catchy phrase "terrorists who abusively invoke Islam". Now, via Dhimmi Watch, I find that Gordon Brown has taken the advice to heart:

Gordon Brown has banned ministers from using the word “Muslim” in ­connection with the ­terrorism crisis.

The Prime Minister has also instructed his team – including new Home Secretary Jacqui Smith – that the phrase “war on ­terror” is to be dropped.

The shake-up is part of a fresh attempt to improve community relations and avoid offending Muslims, adopting a more “consensual” tone than existed under Tony Blair.

[...]

Officials insist that no direct links with Muslim extremists have been publicly confirmed by police investigating the latest attempted terror attacks. Mr Brown himself did not refer to Muslims or Islam once in a BBC TV interview on Sunday. Ms Smith also avoided any such reference in her statement to MPs yesterday.

She said: “Let us be clear – terrorists are criminals, whose victims come from all walks of life, communities and religions. Terrorists attack the values shared by all law-abiding citizens. As a Government, as communities, as individuals, we need to ensure that the message of the terrorists is rejected.”

Tory backbencher Philip Davies said: “I don’t know what purpose is served by this. I don’t think we need pussyfoot around when talking about ­terrorism.”

But former Tory homeland security spokesman Patrick Mercer said: “This is quite a smart idea. We know that the vast majority of Muslims are not involved in terrorism and we have to accept there are sensitivities about these matters.”

No doubt Mercer is desperately trying to get back into David Cameron's good books after the "black bastard" incident.

As I've stated before, I am heartily sick of the way in which, after Muslims attempt to murder potentially hundreds of people, all our politicians bend over backwards in order to avoid hurting the feelings of the coreligionists of these terrorist scum. The fact is, that these people are Muslims, that their terrorist behaviour is due to the fact that they are Muslims (regardless of whether other Muslims carry out terrorist attack), and that no good will come of sticking our collective head in the sand and pretending that things are other than as they are. The problem of young men going out and trying to blow other people up is one which almost exclusively affects the Muslim community, and that community needs to take responsibility for the actions of its members. But it will not do that, until it accepts responsibility, something which will not happen if they are shielded from the attribution of responsibility in this manner.

Postscript: In a rather amusing display of liberal dhimmitude, al-Beeb has drawn attention to the common ties linking the eight people arrested in connection with the recent terrorist incidents. No, they haven't mentioned that they're all Muslims; indeed, they've studiously avoided acknowledging that uncomfortable fact. Rather, the BBC has proudly revealed that they're all "linked to" the NHS! Now, I know that NHS staff are often overworked, but I hadn't realised that they were turning to terrorism in protest! Thanks to Stan at ATW for this development. And remember, the vast majority of GPs and surgeons are law-abiding people, who should not be blamed for the actions of a few fanatics.

Poor Oppressed Victims

Via Jihad Watch, I come across the following tale of woe. Readers of a sensitive disposition may wish to skip this post, lest the harrowing descriptions of torment contained within cause them to suffer nightmares:

Name-calling, anxiety, fear and anger rippled through Britain on Sunday after three failed bomb attacks in London and Glasgow. Government and religious leaders appealed for calm, but some Muslims braced for a backlash — while some non-Muslims looked for someone to blame.

The attacks sparked scattered incidents of racist abuse on the streets of London, with young white men targeting Muslim taxi drivers and others of South Asian appearance. Glasgow lawmaker Mohammad Sarwar said some Muslims in Scotland had been threatened or targeted with abusive graffiti.

"Scattered incidents of racist abuse", "abusive graffiti": even if these claims are true (and so far it seems that we only have the worthless word of Muslims to go on) then that hardly compares to what would have happened had the coreligionists of these poor oppressed victims succeeded in their various attempts at terrorism. Wouldn't it be nice if, just for once, the Muslims though about that, before whining at the tops of their voices about their victimhood?

"I have spoken to a number of people from the Muslim community and the Asian community who feel very angry," [Sarwar] told British Broadcasting Corp. radio.

He said Scottish Muslim leaders were meeting in Glasgow to discuss the attacks' impact on their community.

"They're concerned about a backlash and that's why the emergency meeting has been called."

Muslim anger was directed at the terrorists — but also at a society some felt singles Muslims out for scrutiny whenever there is a terrorist attack.

How odd. Muslims try to kill people, and society singles out Muslims. When really, as the Muslim Council of Britain says, it's those pesky Buddhists we should be looking out for.

"We are seething with anger about this," said Osama Saeed, Scottish spokesman for the Muslim Association of Britain.

Hmm, Muslims seething with anger. Now, where have I heard that before?

"As a community not only are we just as likely to be victims as anyone else, but we are also looked to in order to provide direction and in some respects take responsibility for this," he added.

"We are sick of being defined as a community by terrorism and having to answer for it."

The Muslim Association of Britain, of which Saeed is a leading member, is led by Azzam Tamimi, a man who has expressed a desire to become a suicide bomber himself. Perhaps if the Muslim community want to avoid being associated with terrorism they could refrain from designating such people as their leaders and representatives. Perhaps they might also consider giving some thought to the question of why it is almost always Muslims who carry out, or attempt to carry out, these kinds of atrocities. If, rather than whining and blaming everyone else for their problems, they were actually prepared to take responsibility for the fact that it is their community which is the problem here, and to take steps to correct that problem, then they might not get, or deserve, so much of the blame. But I wouldn't hold your breath waiting for Muslims to acknowledge any of this. Playing the oppressed victim group is so very much more their style.

Muslim Anger Watch

First there was Cartoon Rage.

Then there was Pope Rage.

Now, we have Knighthood Rage, and all because of us.

Seeing all those angry Muzzies makes you feel proud to be British, doesn't it?

It's also interesting to note that Lord Ahmed, a Muslim who has apparently made such a vast contribution to British society that he has been awarded a peerage, is actively siding with Britain's enemies over this. He has even accused Sir Salman of "having blood on his hands".
Further evidence, if any was needed, of where the loyalty of even the most ostensibly integrated Muslims truly lies.

The Enemy Within

A British Army officer has been abused by Asian women while on a hospital visit to troops injured in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Company Sergeant Major Neil Powell was surrounded and heckled by three young women in the unprovoked verbal attack at Selly Oak Hospital in Birmingham.

The women, in traditional Asian dress, ranted about the presence of British troops in Muslim countries.

[...]

A colleague said: "He is normally a very placid character, a gentle giant. But he was fuming, understandably, after what happened.

"He couldn’t believe it. CSM Powell just had to stand and take abuse from these screaming and very aggressive women. I don’t think a guy would have got away with it."

Personally, I think he should just have thumped them anyway. But then no doubt we'd be hearing all sorts of whining about "Islamophobia".

What this does demonstrate, once again, is that Muslims are not loyal to Britain, whatever protestations their leaders, and their leftist abettors, may make. People who are loyal to a country do not scream abuse at those who put their lives at risk to defend that country. Be under no illusions that these women were an anomaly: they simply did what most Muslims want to do.

Hat-tip: Jihad Watch

Postscript: Note, also, how the Daily Mail refers to these women as being "Asian". While this is no doubt accurate, nonetheless they did not do this because they are Asian but because they are Muslim. Accordingly, it would make more sense to describe them as such. But, of course, to call a spade a spade in this manner would be "Islamophobic".

How to win a Journalist of the Year Award, in 3 easy steps

1. Become a BBC reporter, spouting pro-terrorist propaganda for a living.

2. Get kidnapped by the same terrorists that you thought were your friends.

3. Sit back and wait for your award.

Note: For best results, attempt to keep your head and body from becoming separated. Otherwise, your award may be a posthumous one.

Muslims and leftists celebrate democracy

Last month, I wrote that Muslims in France were threatening to riot if Nicolas Sarkozy was elected president of the country. Segolene Royal made the same threat a few days ago, as did a number of French "intellectuals". Now Sarkozy has beaten Royal by 53% to 47%, and the threats are being carried out.

At this stage it's unclear what, precisely, is going on. The MSM aren't reporting much, although Sky News has acknowledged that riot police have been firing tear gas at "crowds". The best English language source at the moment is No Pasaran!. They are updating their news on the riots as reports come in, so I would simply direct readers towards their main page. They have obtained a number of photographs and videos depicting the violence, as well.

Further proof, if any was needed, that Islam and civilisation just don't mix. Perhaps someone could remind me, once again, why every nation in Western Europe is allowing itself to be taken over by these "people".

Terrorist attack in Britain?

AL-QAEDA leaders in Iraq are planning the first “large-scale” terrorist attacks on Britain and other western targets with the help of supporters in Iran, according to a leaked intelligence report.

Spy chiefs warn that one operative had said he was planning an attack on “a par with Hiroshima and Nagasaki” in an attempt to “shake the Roman throne”, a reference to the West.

Another plot could be timed to coincide with Tony Blair stepping down as prime minister, an event described by Al-Qaeda planners as a “change in the head of the company”.

The report, produced earlier this month and seen by The Sunday Times, appears to provide evidence that Al-Qaeda is active in Iran and has ambitions far beyond the improvised attacks it has been waging against British and American soldiers in Iraq.

There is no evidence of a formal relationship between Al-Qaeda, a Sunni group, and the Shi’ite regime of President Mah-moud Ahmadinejad, but experts suggest that Iran’s leaders may be turning a blind eye to the terrorist organisation’s activities.

It follows revelations last year that up to 150 Britons had travelled to Iraq to fight as part of Al-Qaeda’s “foreign legion”. A number are thought to have returned to the UK, after receiving terrorist training, to form sleeper cells.

(Hat-tip: Jihad Watch)

Another reason why, as I've written before, Britain, or Israel, or America, or someone, should be prepared to hit Iran hard. Really, this is the war that should have been waged instead of attacking Iraq, which, although a threat, was a much less significant one.

Non-inverted Paris-style riots in Sweden

Jihad Watch is reporting that Muslims in the city of Malmö, Sweden are rioting this evening. Why they are doing this is unclear, but since when have Muslims needed an excuse to get violent?

And just a few days ago I was reporting that Mandaeans fleeing persecution in Iraq are settling in Sweden, to get away from Muslim violence. As I predicted then, they will now be finding out that, with the World as it is today, no matter how far you run, you can never get away from Islamic aggression.

Gates of Vienna in particular seems to pay quite a bit of attention to Sweden, as well as Scandinavia in general. Their figures for the number of immigrants in Sweden are instructive, as is this article by Fjordman. Finally, from a Fjordman article in the Brussels Journal, consider this quote from a former Swedish government minister:

We must be open and tolerant towards Islam and Muslims because when we become a minority, they will be so towards us.

And aren't they just showing their openness and tolerance tonight?

Such are the rewards of dhimmitude.