The Arabs are Taking Over from the Europeans
The Muslims made their first attempt to conquer Europe in 711. Al-Andalus was the Arabic name given to those parts of the Iberian Peninsula governed by Muslims, the Moors (mostly Berbers mixed with some Arabs), at various times between 711 and 1492. These Moors were never able to get past the Pyrenees Mountains into France and from there into the remainder of Europe. (Ironically, in terms of today's realpolitik, the largest part of the Spain not overrun by the Moors was the Basque country.)
The mountain range was too formidable for the Moslem forces and by 1236 the Reconquista (gradual Christian reconquest) under the forces of Ferdinand III of Castile, progressed as far as the last remaining Islamic stronghold, Granada. This remained a vassal state to Castile for the next 256 years, until January 2, 1492, when Boabdil surrendered complete control of Granada to Ferdinand and Isabella, Los Reyes Católicos ("The Catholic Monarchs" whose marriage in 1469 united Castile with Aragon, forming the nucleus of modern Spain). [Of course the reward for the support of the Jews of these Catholic monarchs earned them their expulsion from all of Spain just six months later.]
The Portuguese Reconquista culminated in 1249 with the conquest of Algarve by Afonso III. Here too the Jews were eventually expelled, leaving the Iberian Peninsula judenrein.
On the eastern side of Europe, southern Italy already fell to Moslem forces in the 9th century. Via the Ottomans, the Islamic successors to the earlier Roman Byzantine empire, the conquest reached up to the gates of Vienna. By the 18th century, the superior fire power of the Austro-Hungarians was able to push the Ottomans out of central Europe (though they left us with the mess we now have in the Balkans).
This Islamist push into Europe was carried out on the battlefield -- the power of the sword -- "religion" spread by sword. Now don't think that Christian Europe was much better; even as part of Europe was fighting off the Islam aggression, other European armies were off conquering whatever parts of the world they could (remember "the empire on which the sun never sets", or the agreement, brokered by the pope, between Portugal and Spain, to divide the entire non-European world). Now I am not here to judge who is better, Christian Europe or Moslem Arabia (though I do have strong ideas), but that is the picture we have been left by history.
It now seems that Christian Europe has decided that the way to rule the world is via economic domination. And they have developed the tools with which to achieve this. The playing field is not level. But Islam is taken a different tack to flattened the pitch -- creeping population takeover. They have the British model for usurping the control of Spanish Florida as an example to follow. It all confirms with international law. You legally bring the "conquerers" into the targeted territory. Today it has been made easy for them -- modern Europe is proud of having reached and gone below "Zero Population Growth" (Z.P.G.) whereas Moslem the birthrate is way above that. And "aging" Europe needs someone to do their "dirty" work (if the Moslems are prepared to do it, Europeans don't seem to care too much that it will cost them their lifestyles). Of course with all this, added to family reunification, the percentage of Moslems living in Europe is increasing rapidly.
So I was intrigued to read this morning that Switzerland was to hold a referendum to determine if "building tall mosque towers should be illegal" under Swiss law. According to the party which initiated this motion, the tall towers of Mosques across Switzerland "testify to the growing Islamicization within our country." My, they are observant.
Swiss Foreign Minister, Michelin Calmi-Rey, warned that such a motion, prohibiting the building of towers, could be a security risk for Switzerland and would arouse anger across the Muslim world. That would be terrible! -- the Arabs might be angry. How terrible -- imagine the consequences of Arab anger!
Well why do politicians care about Arab anger? I think two principal reasons. First, the Arabs own a hell of a lot of the oil in the world -- and a lot of that which they do not have is controlled by another madman, Hugo Rafael Chávez Fras, president of Venezuela.
Second, Muslims vote, a problems with democracies. Switzerland has approximately 310,000 Muslims out of a total population of 7.5 million -- that's over 4% of the electorate and, as noted above, growing daily. The French and Belgians (who may make great chocolate but because of their history, I will lose no sleep over this) already have a much larger (mathematical, demographic) problem. By most estimates, France has 4.5 million Muslims out of a population of 62 million -- and growing -- and that is the number legally in France. Estimates vary on the number of "illegal" French Muslims.
England is long gone. What was at the time of its building the largest mosque in Europe, shadows the hallowed Lord's Cricket Ground in St John's Wood, London. Lords is owned by the Marylebone Cricket Club (M.C.C.), the guardian of world cricket. This is a flashpoint, a clash of culture. But don't worry, it's OK -- the Archbishop of Canterbury, has already accepted the inevitability of at least aspects of Moslem rule in England. On 7th February this year he said, "as a matter of fact certain provisions of sharia are already recognised in our society and under our law" . When the question was put to him that, "the application of sharia in certain circumstances -- if we want to achieve this cohesion and take seriously peoples' religion -- seems unavoidable?", he indicated his assent. Who is he that makes his opinion important? Well he is only the chief bishop and principal leader of the Church of England and the symbolic head of the worldwide Anglican Communion, the international association of national Anglican churches. Quite a powerful bloke I would say. Approximately 77 million members. Of course, since Henry VIII's rejection of the Pope in Rome, the Supreme Governor (though I think this is more titular) of the Anglican was (and remains) the British monarch, namely today, Queen Elizabeth II, and if they let him, to be followed by Charles III or whatever name he ultimately chooses for himself. (I image it won't be Charles because the last two Charleses were claimed to be Catholic sympathisers at the least, not too good for the head of a church that is a break-away from the Roman Catholic Church; Charles I actually lost his head in the process. Charles II converted to Roman Catholicism on his deathbed, and his brother and successor, James II was "the last Roman Catholic monarch to reign over the Kingdoms of England, Scotland, and Ireland".)
It seems that the Aussies are the only ones that are prepared to stand up to a Moslem takeover. Recently Camden City Council in Sydney's far west, rejected a planning application for an Islamic school in their area. They officially claimed that the rejection was on traffic and planning grounds, but it was obvious that the intention of the Arabs was territorial. They want to establish a school there of over 1,200 students, with the nearest student living at least ten kilometres away!
The Australians get very annoyed when the Moslems fly trial balloons on "religious" issues such as separate music classes for the sexes and head scarves. Their response goes something like, "this is our country -- we were here first and you knew you were coming to our country with our rules and laws-- based on our Judeo-Christian, not Islamic, culture". The okkers have a bit of oil down there in Bass Straight, between Victoria and Tasmania, so on that aspect they may be covered for a while. It'll be interesting to see how long before demographics change their attitude, maybe the last vestige of sanity remaining in the west.