Category Archives: social security

Extraterritorial Molenbeek

Screen Shot 2015-11-21 at 09.18.29The jihad capital of Europe

Brussels is slightly more than a quarter Muslim, Dalrymple points out, and nearly all Molenbeek residents are Muslims of North African background. The place, he writes, is

virtually extraterritorial as far as the Belgian state is concerned—apart from the collection of social security, of course.

Screen Shot 2015-11-21 at 09.16.08

A popular bar in the quarter. Mine host: Ibrahim Abdeslam

Dalrymple lists some of the features of the terrorist haven:

  • all women wear headscarves
  • young men dress like American rap music fans
  • police rarely enter and are far more concerned not to offend Muslim sensibilities—for example, by not being seen to eat during Ramadan—than to find or capture miscreants who make the area dangerously crime-ridden
  • businesses pay no taxes but are not investigated for evasion by the tax authorities: it is the tax authorities who do the evading
  • Islamist preaching and plotting is rife, but nothing is done to stop it, in order to keep the tense and fragile peace going as long as possible
  • sympathy for terrorism is the norm—or, it would be more correct to say, no one dares publicly voice opposition to it

Screen Shot 2015-11-21 at 09.18.01Incubator of Islamist evil

Molenbeek, Dalrymple explains, is thus

the perfect place for psychopaths with an illusion of purpose to flourish and make plans undisturbed by the authorities, while being supported by the welfare state.

The Belgian prime minister, Dalrymple reports,

The young people of Molenbeek warmly welcome you

The young people of Molenbeek

has virtually admitted that the area was extraterritorial to Belgium, and out of all control. The time had come ‘to focus more on repression’, he said.

But

whether the determination or sufficient political unity necessary to carry it out will last is doubtful. Repression requires discrimination; we live in a regime in which murderers may come and go, but social security goes on forever.

Screen Shot 2015-11-21 at 08.58.19

Molenbeek folk

Screen Shot 2015-11-21 at 08.58.02

Molenbeek: a vibrant community

Screen Shot 2015-11-21 at 09.10.58

Molenbeek as it was

Screen Shot 2015-11-21 at 09.10.26

Molenbeek past

Islamism is for the feeble-minded and vicious

Screen Shot 2015-11-20 at 09.23.38The continuation of criminality by other means

The story of Omar Ismail Mostefai, the first of the perpetrators of the Paris attacks to be named, is, writes Dalrymple,

depressingly familiar. One could almost have written his biography before knowing anything about him.

A petty criminal of Algerian parentage from the banlieue, he was sustained largely by the social security system, an erstwhile fan of rap music, and

a votary of what might be called the continuation of criminality by other means, which is to say Islamism and the grandiose purpose in life that it gives to its adherents. For feeble minds, the extremity of the consequences for self and others serves as some kind of guarantee that their cause is just.

Avian jihad

Anjem Choudary: 'the normal situation is for you to take money from the kuffar. So we take Jihadseeker's allowance'

Anjem Choudary: ‘the normal situation is for you to take money from the kuffar. So we take jihadseeker’s allowance’

As chilling as any horror story

Dalrymple points out that Muslim clerical fanatics in England

receive social security payments even as they call for the destruction of the society that pays them.

In this, he notes, they resemble the honeyguide or jihadi-bird, which

lays its egg in a nest of bee-eaters [kafir-birds], which are in a tunnel underground.

The kuffar do not see what is going on, and feed them

Killer chick: ‘grabs a host chick using its bill tip, then repeatedly bites and shakes its victim for up to four minutes at a time’

Killer honeyguide jihadi-chick: its bites lead to haemorrhaging; bee-eater [kafir] chick victims can take up to seven hours to die

Dalrymple quotes from a book by the naturalist Nick Davies:

The honeyguide [jihadi-chick] grabs a host chick using its bill tip, then repeatedly bites and shakes its victim for up to four minutes at a time. The bites rarely cause open wounds, but lead to haemorrhaging under the skin and heavy bruising. From the time of the first attack, they take from nine minutes to seven hours to die.

Because of the darkness, Dalrymple explains, the bee-eaters or kafir-birds

do not see what is going on, and feed the honeyguide chick even as it is killing the bee-eater chicks.

(a) Hatching lesser honeyguide, showing fully developed bill hooks; (b) greater honeyguide chick with three recently killed little bee-eater hatchlings; (c) biting human hand; (d) biting unhatched swallow-tailed bee-eater egg; (e) aged about 8 days.

Angry jihadi-bird: (a) Hatching, showing fully-developed bill hooks; (b) with three little bee-eater kuffar hatchlings it has killed; (c) biting the hand that feeds it; (d) biting unhatched swallow-tailed bee-eater [kafir] egg; (e) aged about eight days

Thatcher’s effect on the size of the state was nil

Screen Shot 2013-04-06 at 00.24.31Dalrymple points out that despite her reputation as a prudent or even savage cutter of public services, Margaret Thatcher failed to roll back the state, as it was her intention and vocation to do. In 1979 the public sector’s proportion of Gross Domestic Product was 44.6 per cent; in 2009, 47.7 per cent.

She did nothing to reduce dependence on the state as a source of primary income.

On the contrary, during her period in office, spending on social security increased. It was ethically, socially, and politically impossible to drive down the income of the unemployed to the value of their labour to employers. Government spending having declined as a proportion of GDP, social security increased proportionately even more. Mrs Thatcher did not, because she could not, effect any fundamental change in the model of the welfare state. That model, in democracies at least, has a one-way ratchet.

Thatcher left no scratch on the British state

By every measure, the public sector looms larger in Britain today than it did in 1979. Dalrymple puts it this way: Margaret Thatcher found the public sector inefficient

and left it inefficient and corrupt.

Her strident rhetoric against the state

disguised the fact that under her…the…state remained as preponderant…as ever…Government expenditure…increased, above all in areas such as social security.