Pakistani Tribes set up house in England!

Most citizens of the United States of America (as in contrast to the North American Union) know that the American Indian tribes are nations unto themselves and special laws govern their relations with the United States of America. But that's where the extra-internal nations begin and end. Any group that declares itself a "nation" within our sovereign borders can't set up its own laws and punishments or get special treatment. In America, one can't have it both ways. If you are a religion, fine - the doctrine of separation of church and state applies, and you get to follow secular law - we are all "equal" under the law regardless of our religion, right? Mark Steyn, as always, points to the "nations" or groups functioning like independent nations that currently sovereign nations are allowing to build and develop within their borders under Shariah Law - most notably but certainly not alone - England and Pakistan. His piece, Playing for keeps: Not Quite Cricket, addresses the issue head on. Steyn has such a way with words and with what would otherwise be humor if the stakes were not so high when he says,

"The other day Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf took time off from his hectic schedule of trying to survive assassination attempts to pay tribute to someone who, alas, had been less successful at dodging the attentions of his killers: A week ago, during the cricket World Cup, Bob Woolmer, the coach of the Pakistani national cricket team, was murdered in the Pegasus Hotel in Kingston, Jamaica, in what Mark Shields (not the American TV pundit but the veteran Scotland Yard man leading the police investigation) called "extraordinary and evil circumstances." ....

Steyn continues,

"Anyway, I thought of this strange death as I followed the rest of the week's news from Pakistan. Gen. Musharraf has had a good innings but stands at an ever lonelier wicket: he suspended his country's chief justice the other day. The biggest parliamentary faction, the Muslim League, has turned against him. So have the country's three warring intelligence agencies. And in the badlands up by the Afghan border, more and more villages are being annexed by the Taliban, which the general doesn't mind terribly much but his friends in the White House do...."

As always, Steyn's column is worth the time and the thought because he speaks to the tribalism (my characterization) that is occurring in England today.

"From the Northwest Frontier Province, the Saudi money and Wahhabist ideology seeped through the country, into the mosques of the cities, radicalizing a generation of young Muslim men. From there it moved on to new outposts of the jihad, to Indonesia, Thailand and beyond. The flight routes from Pakistan to the United Kingdom are now the most important ideological conduit for radical Islam. The July 7, 2005, London bombers were British subjects of Pakistani origin. Last week, two more were arrested in connection with the Tube bombings at Manchester Airport as they prepared to board a plane to Karachi. Meanwhile, flying back from Karachi and Islamabad to Heathrow and Manchester are cousins, lots and lots of them. Roger Ballard, in a very detailed study of Punjabi marriage, writes that "brothers and sisters now expect to be given right of first refusal in offers of marriage for each others' children."

In his research of the Mirpur district in Pakistan, he estimates at least half and maybe up to two-thirds of those living in Britain of Mirpuri descent marry first cousins. This is a critical tool of reverse-assimilation: Instead of being diluted over the generations, tribal identity is reinforced; in effect, Pakistani tribal lands are now being established in parts of northern England --

Pakistan exports the fruit of its radical madrassahs in ideology and personnel to Britain and beyond... We're all inclined to be deferential to multiculturalism these days: When imams get turfed off a flight in Minneapolis, it's easiest to tut-tut and demand sensitivity training for the cabin crew so next time round, no matter what they do, we'll know to look the other way. The Quebec government, which mandates verifiable picture ID in order to vote, has just waived the requirement for Muslims: Show up at the polls in a burqa or niqab and no one will be so insensitive as to insist on checking whether your face matches that on the driver's license. And so it goes -- creeping Shariah, day by day, further insulating communities already prone to self-segregation, but nothing too big or startling to ruffle the scene. In Britain, the authorities can tell you (roughly) the number of jihadist cells and the support they command in the Muslim community. But doing anything about it is far more problematic. Wouldn't be cricket, old boy."

[My apologies to Mr. Steyn if I quoted too much of his article. Read it all. He is too good and so clear in his observations.] The left always has an answer and that answer is always, "Let's sit around have a beer, smoke a pipe, and talk" as the world spirals inevitably toward a boiling confrontation. Suzanne Fields adds one more coat of icing to the mix in Moral equivalence revived:

Establishing "dialogue" between the West and moderate Islam is a good thing to do, but talk cannot succeed with extremists who start the conversation with murder. Theo Van Gogh's death at the hands of an Islamist radical in Amsterdam is a dramatic metaphor for the impossibility of reasoning with a terrorist. Just before he died on a darkened street a witness heard him plead with his assailant. "Don't do it! Don't do it!" he cried. "Surely we can talk about this."

I have to wonder what our leaders are thinking: law-abiding citizens are treated as the "threat"; different cultures are allowed and encouraged to build their own enclaves to make assimilation impossible; "minorities" are given all kinds of points for "diversity" but only based on third-world nation of origin or skin color. Both Steyn and Fields hit upon the same issue here but perhaps from a different tact. Western Civilization - whatever that has meant for centuries - is being systematically dismantled by the governments sworn to uphold our nations and their respective sovereignty. At least, as they are marched off to the chopping block, the Europeans were allowed to vote. Those in the North American Union have not even had the chance. If you vow to kill me and my family, I am not obliged to let you. Neither am I obliged to allow you to change my laws, change my way of life, and carve up my nation with sub-nations of your own.