FRANCE SLIPPING INTO THE DAR-ES-SALAAM.

French Car-B-Q update, via the blog Le Salon Beige:

"Le nombre de « violences urbaines » commises en 2007 en France a été discrètement publié par le ministère de l’Intérieur. Il s’élève à 93 016, dont 37 359 incendies de véhicules, soit 102 par jour ! Le reste se répartit entre 26 217 incendies de poubelles, 7 955 dégradations de mobilier urbain (recensées dans la même catégorie, que celui-ci soit juste endommagé ou totalement détruit), 6 856 jets de projectile (les destinataires étant principalement les policiers et les pompiers), 5 658 rodéos automobiles et 4 101 « violences collectives à l’encontre des forces de sécurité, de secours et de santé », à distinguer des « jets de projectile » qui sont des actes individuels…"

I won't bother you with a translation of the whole text, just the first two sentences will do: "The number of "urban violence incidents" committed in 2007 in France has been discreetly publicized by the Interior Ministry. It amounts to 93,016, of which 37,359 car torchings, or 102 per day!"

Being a European, and a citizen of a neighbouring country at that, I have been following the phenomenon of French car torchings with a keen eye over the past three years, and posted now and then some updates when violence flared up exceptionally. From the information I was able to gather, it would transpire that over the two-year period spanning 2005 and 2006 alone, roughly 60,000 vehicles, almost exclusively cars but also buses, vans etc... were torched by "youths". Given the fact that these figures, even when obtained from reliable, sober French online magazines like Figaro, seem so fantastic one would be tempted to catalogize them as gross exxagerations, it is easy to put them aside and soothe the mind into assuming that it can't impossibly be that bad. An attitude in no small part helped by the scarce, and if forthcoming very discreet, down to earth, matter-of-factly and above all scant coverage by mainstream French media channels. "Surely, if really 30,000 cars were torched in a country like France, it would be on TV and in the newspapers all day, but it's not, so it can't be true, right?"

Wrong, apparently.

The French news blog Rue89 which, as far as I could discern, takes no particular political stance, comes up with an account of some newsgathering at the French Interior Ministry, see below. Those who read the comments section, may recall that I provided some links at the occasion of the 600 cars torched on the night of 13 to 14 July and the subsequent night as well (July 14 is the French National Holiday). A Rue89 editor, Zineb Dryef, recounts how his efforts to obtain meaningful stats from the Ministry met with an undeniable unwillingness to share information to which each and every (decent) French citizen should have access (the translation is of the cadre to the right):

On July 15, I contact the Ministry to try to get some information. I get some very courteous answers, I obtain some weird ciphres. After this phone call, I called several times more, sent a couple of emails, and pressed on before finally getting an evading [?] answer: "But what do you want with these numbers? We already made them public. Those of July 2007 and those of December 2007. So then, there is no reason to compare these very different events. We are not going to give you stats that you cannot analyze." Las [can't translate that]. I say that I'd really like them to process them by a qualified person. The morning after, I get a harsh reply from the ministry: "We have communicated on the matter already thoroughly. We will say nothing".

Mesdames et messieurs, there you have it. Am I preposterous to state there is an official taboo on the subject? I don't think so. How else would you explain the eardeafening silence surrounding the colossal, horrifying fact of CLOSE TO 100,000 CARS TORCHED IN FRANCE BY "YOUTHS" IN THE SPACE OF THREE YEARS?????? Extrapolate this to the United States, which has 300 million inhabitants compared to France's 60 million. It would mean that in the States, over 2005, 2006 and 2007 5 x 100,000 or 500,000, HALF-A-MILLION, vehicles had been set alight!!!

And it's not only cars. Take a close look again at the screenshot I took from Rue89, the paragraph to the left below: "In Gonesse (Val d'Oise), a gymnasium has been set on fire. In the town hall, one deplores the destruction of this 3,500 square meters space destined for the town's youths [what a howler! MFBB] "The demolition has now been completed, works [on reconstruction] are to commence in September. The criminal nature of the arson has been confirmed by the police."

We all know that the perpetrators of these crimes are France's famous "youths". As Mark Steyn once aptly remarked: "Youths, huh? Like Francois, Jean-Marie or Philippe?" The truth of the matter is of course that the "youths" in question are Alis, Saids, Zyads and, in more than one case, Mohammeds. I don't buy all that crap anymore about islam having nothing to do with it, the youths not being from madrassas, them being secular and listening to rap and using drugs and being simply unemployed and generally bored. If that is so, then why are the authorities enlisting the help of imams to calm those bozos down? The "youths" act like they do because they are raised in an environment where hatred of the infidel is cultivated and because they are taught to laugh at our laws. In 2006, in Clichy-sous-Bois, the locality where a year before Zyed Benna and Bouna Traore foolishly electrocuted themselves in a power station while hiding for the police, a monument was erected to commemmorate them. I suppose that the fella in the djellaba and the skullcap on the photo is a rocket technician.

The truth is as simple as it is inevitable. Islam has EVERYTHING to do with France's Car-B-Que plague. As of today, 10% of France's population is muslim already, and the riots and the violence we see, well, that's simply a dynamic that has always been there once muslims started to reach that peculiar treshold. A while back, Pamela Geller from Atlas Shrugs linked to a most interesting graph, see her post Islam: what it is, what it shall be:

As long as the Muslim population remains around 1% of any given country they will be regarded as a peace-loving minority and not as a threat to anyone. In fact, they may be featured in articles and films, stereotyped for their colorful uniqueness:

United States -- Muslim 1.0%
Australia -- Muslim 1.5%
Canada -- Muslim 1.9%
China -- Muslim 1%-2%
Italy -- Muslim 1.5%
Norway -- Muslim 1.8%

At 2% and 3% they begin to proselytize from other ethnic minorities and disaffected groups with major recruiting from the jails and among street gangs:

Denmark -- Muslim 2%
Germany -- Muslim 3.7%
United Kingdom -- Muslim 2.7%
Spain -- Muslim 4%
Thailand -- Muslim 4.6%

From 5% on they exercise an inordinate influence in proportion to their percentage of the population.

They will push for the introduction of halal (clean by Islamic standards) food, thereby securing food preparation jobs for Muslims. They will increase pressure on supermarket chains to feature it on their shelves -- along with threats for failure to comply. ( United States ).

France -- Muslim 8%
Philippines -- Muslim 5%
Sweden -- Muslim 5%
Switzerland -- Muslim 4.3%
The Netherlands -- Muslim 5.5%
Trinidad &Tobago -- Muslim 5.8%

At this point, they will work to get the ruling government to allow them to rule themselves under Sharia, the Islamic Law. The ultimate goal of Islam is not to convert the world but to establish Sharia law over the entire world.

When Muslims reach 10% of the population, they will increase lawlessness as a means of complaint about their conditions ( Paris --car-burnings). Any non-Muslim action that offends Islam will result in uprisings and threats ( Amsterdam - Mohammed cartoons).

Guyana -- Muslim 10%
India -- Muslim 13.4%
Israel -- Muslim 16%
Kenya -- Muslim 10%
Russia -- Muslim 10-15%

After reaching 20% expect hair-trigger rioting, jihad militia formations, sporadic killings and church and synagogue burning:
Ethiopia -- Muslim 32.8%

At 40% you will find widespread massacres, chronic terror attacks and ongoing militia warfare:

Bosnia -- Muslim 40%
Chad -- Muslim 53.1%
Lebanon -- Muslim 59.7%

From 60% you may expect unfettered persecution of non-believers and other religions, sporadic ethnic cleansing (genocide), use of Sharia Law as a weapon and Jizya, the tax placed on infidels:

Albania -- Muslim 70%
Malaysia -- Muslim 60.4%
Qatar -- Muslim 77.5%
Sudan -- Muslim 70%

After 80% expect State run ethnic cleansing and genocide:

Bangladesh -- Muslim 83%
Egypt -- Muslim 90%
Gaza -- Muslim 98.7%
Indonesia -- Muslim 86.1%
Iran -- Muslim 98%
Iraq -- Muslim 97%
Jordan -- Muslim 92%
Morocco -- Muslim 98.7%
Pakistan -- Muslim 97%
Palestine -- Muslim 99%
Syria -- Muslim 90%
Tajikistan -- Muslim 90%
Turkey -- Muslim 99.8%
United Arab Emirates -- Muslim 96%

100% will usher in the peace of 'Dar-es-Salaam' -- the Islamic House of Peace -- there's supposed to be peace because everybody is a Muslim:

Afghanistan -- Muslim 100%
Saudi Arabia -- Muslim 100%
Somalia -- Muslim 100%
Yemen -- Muslim 99.9%

Of course, that's not the case. To satisfy their blood lust, Muslims then start killing each other for a variety of reasons.

We are in the middle of a massive, global ideological contest, whereby one part of the West, the most vigorous one, the United States, embarked on a quest of trying to implement democracy in the heart of the muslim countries. The ever bolder influx of muslims in western countries and their very obvious efforts to impose their inhumane sharia law in them constitute the muslim world's answer. In this scheme, the other part of the West, Europe but also Canada and Australia, is totally clueless as to the nature of the cancer eating them away from within. It is possible that even America does not understand yet that the strategic weapon which it wields, implentation by force of western values, is the West's main tool to try to bring some sorely needed human decency to islamic countries, and thereby dry up the influx of muslim immigrants. But when it does, it will appreciate it HAS at least a tool in its hands. Clueless Europe on the other hand more and more resembles a flock of sheep heading straight into the flesh mill. Even as a fool can see the islamic nature of the grave internal threat the French nation is facing, French President Sarkozy is embarking on a plan of creating some sort of Mediterranean Union between Europes southern countries and... Morocco, Algeria and Tunisia. More immigrants, of which the majority will be inevitably be muslims, must enter France even as their co-religionists already on the spot openly challenge the French State.

At this crucial point in time, I cannot but feel elated about the emergence of more and more groups of concerned indigenous European citizenry, no racists as the idiotic and intellectually dishonest liars and self-haters of the left want us to believe, but decent, informed people who appreciate the tremendous western heritage of which we are the custodians, and are not prepared to waste it all without a fight. Their case is gaining attention, and I am pleased that influential American intellectuals and commentators are beginning to pay attention - some intensely so, and Diana West, who even undertook some "field research" here, comes to mind. They are right. They realize that America, and by extension every self-respecting civilized nation, may in time face the same predicament which now rages in Europe. There was a time France had the same percentage of muslims as the US has now, 1%. As the graph above shows, a seemingly peace-loving minority. I can only hope the States won't wait till that peace-loving minority has grown to a level where it has the clout to torch half a million Chryslers, Buicks, Dodges and Cadillacs in the space of three years.


MFBB.

BETTER LATE THAN NEVER.

Last Friday, August 8, a 40-strong detachment of pioneers drawn from a Bevekom-based Field Accomodation Unit (a Flemish unit) and Amay-based 4th Pioneer Battalion (a Walloon unit) departed for Kandahar in South Afghanistan. They are to prepare accommodation and infrastructure for a wing of four F-16 fighter bombers plus their ground personnel, which will be actively engaged in fighting missions in Afghanistan. Although a 300-600 strong Belgian contingent has been in Afghanistan since 2002, guarding Kabul International Airport (KAIA), and a small demining detachment is active in Kunduz, North Afghanistan, with German forces, the current operation will be the very first fighting mission for Belgium in the WOT... almost seven years after 9/11. In 2006, Belgian F-16 jets were already in Afghanistan but under the then Secretary of Defense André Flahaut anything beyond patrol flights was out of the question. Small as the contribution may be, the current mission marks a sea change compared to the Flahaut era, and that is largely the work of one man, Pieter De Crem, the new SecDef (CD/V, the Flemish Christian Democrats). Indeed, the four F-16 fighter-bombers will be heavily armed and paricipate in ground attacks against Taliban forces. This basically on the request of ISAF troops, but even in the event of an Enduring Freedom operation, the deployment of the fighters is possible.





Currently, our own C-130 transport planes and hired Antonovs are airlifting basic matériel to Kandahar. Material which is too heavy left from the port of Antwerp on board a Karachi-bound containership on August 9. From Karachi, Pakistan, this material will be transported over land to Afghanistan. During the last days of August, the F-16's will fly to Afghanistan, probably refuelling somewhere over the Caspian Sea like in 2006. They should be operational in the first days of September. The operation, dubbed "Guardian Falcon", will last at least six months, but can be prolonged if necessary. The cost of the operation for the rest of 2008 is budgeted at 14.31 million EUR, or some 23 million US$.


It was about time.


MFBB.

PICTURES OF THE LEFT. PLUS SOME THOUGHTS.

A.) 2002. PRIOR TO THE US LIBERATION OF IRAQ.





B.) 2008. AFTER THE RUSSIAN INVASION OF GEORGIA.






To be sure, I am not particularly enamored with Georgia's President, Mikhail Saakashvili. There's a couple of good observations over at The Brussels Journal, and I would wager they pretty well hit the mark. Most of the articles come to the same basic conclusions. Yes, Saakashvili has himself to blame for Russian retaliation. Yes, Saakashivili is a bad gambler and an even worse strategist. Yes, several hundred people may have died in the initial attack by Georgian forces on South Ossetia's capital Tshkinvali - and these people are dead because of Saakashvili. Yes, despite his charm and good looks the Georgian president was unable to hide his dictatorial traits, notably last fall. All that is true.

Another good observation is that Georgia would have done far better to concentrate on attracting foreign investments and creating a favorable environment for companies, using whatever financial means it had to that purpose. If the Georgians had really wanted South Ossetia back, which is a dirt poor 3,600 square kloms "big" stretch of land draped on the southern side of the Caucasus, inhabitated by perhaps 70,000 people - then they would have stood a far better chance to get their house in order and wait for the South Ossetians to come begging to join them again. Douglas Muir of A Fistful of Euros gives a very apt description of the breakaway republic's economy: it’s populated by peasants who drive sheep uphill in summer, and downhill in winter. But instead Georgia raised its military expenses from 30 million US$ yearly to 1 billion (more than a thirtyfold increase) for... what? To end up with a military that is STILL by no means a match for the Red Army. A leader of a country with 5 million people should have known better. So far, it is safe to say that Saakashvili does actually not deserve to be supported - were it not for his people and for the West's strategical interests.

But no matter the many faults and shortcomings of Georgia and its government, it is clear that none of that takes away the quintessential guilt of Russia and the Medvedev/Putin government. If you take into account the massive scale of the Russian response, it is clear that they actually wanted Georgia to try to take back South Ossetia by force - and Saakashvili stepped into the trap. Saakashvili may, apart from his looks, not be your ideal son-in-law. He may even be an operette dictator. But compared to the Kremlin tandem he's a choirboy. One should not forget that in Putin, Russia's "new" Prime Minister who used a trick so obvious that we all have to call ourselves fools to once believe he'd really disappear from the political scene, Russia has an evil, megalomaniac head of state who is prepared to literally go over the dead bodies of thousands of his compatriots to bring back USSR "glory". Putin's Russia is not interested in a handkerchief of land inhabitated by a handful of goat herders. It wants Georgia to become a docile satellite republic again - at least. And at the same time it wants to send a stark message to other NATO flirters that playing time is over. This scenario means regime change in Tbilisi. Saakashvili must hang, and if that is not possible, make him wet his pants so much that for the rest of his tenure he will limit himself to cutting ribbons and frolicking with his Dutch wife. And that is why we are currently witnessing a show of force not seen since Afghanistan. TBJ's Joshua Trevino nails it when he writes:

Still, the ultimate responsibility is Russia’s, which is now a plainly and violently revisionist power. No amount of Western naivete, ignorance and self-regard, nor Georgian blundering, could create this war without Russia’s will to strife. That will springs from multiple causes, some rooted in the nature of autocracy, and some rooted in the nature of the Russian national character; and it is directed toward the overturning of what is, for Russia, the central strategic outcome of the Cold War’s end.

It would be tempting to limit this post to the subject of the Left's abysmal hypocrisy. But that would be too much honour for leftozoid loons. Is it better then to ask oneself how the West should react to the looming crisis? I don't know. The picture is so chaotic that it makes as much sense to assess the situation by reading "informed men" as by trying to gauge the outcome by upturning coffee puss. We have already seen and heard the answer from the Left. A big fat ZERO. That is not to say that any force, party or personality on the Right has the correct answer or attitude - so fraught with uncertainty and dangers is the Georgia conundrum. But at least we rightwingers have the satisfaction to once again being able to conclude that it's OUR SIDE coming up for Freedom. One sign among many? Poland's President, Lech Kaczynski, lent his own personal website to the Georgian government to bring the world news and photos of Russia's latest invasion - after Russia blocked Georgia's online portals. Kaczynski is of the Polish conservative party Law and Justice. When it comes to your freedom, always trust a rightwinger. Americans should think about that in November.


MFBB.