Coffee House

Can the West solve a problem like Mali?

19 January 2013

I fear that we are all going to have to learn a lot about Mali and the Sahel—and fast. It is rapidly becoming the latest front in the war on terror. Or, to be more precise, the West’s attempt to prevent the emergence of ungoverned spaces that can be exploited by Al Qaeda and its offshoots.

The New York Times today has a good primer on the challenge facing the French in Mali:

“The French are fighting to preserve the integrity of a country that is divided in half, of a state that is broken. They are fighting for the survival of an interim government with no democratic legitimacy that took power in the aftermath of a coup.”

Claim your gift

It is a sign of how difficult this task is that the French are briefing out that success will require Mali to be reconfigured with far more autonomy for the Tuaregs in the north.

There’ll be those who argue that these kind of interventions merely move the problem elsewhere or have unintended consequences. They have a point: much of the trouble we’re seeing at the moment stems back to the fall of the Gaddafi regime in Libya. But, equally allowing a terrorist safe haven so close to Europe’s borders would be extremely dangerous.

How to navigate this situation is going to be one of the major strategic debates of the next few years; Cameron himself seems more and more committed to interventionism. One thing is for certain, though: there are no easy answers.

Give the perfect gift this Christmas. Buy a subscription for a friend for just £75 and you’ll receive a free gift too. Buy now.

Show comments
  • CharlieleChump

    Time to take the international development budget and buy some jolly old drones.

  • SirMortimerPosh

    I’d happily pay another five pence in the pound in tax if it were spent on armed drones sent to cruise the skies of North Africa picking out the armed pickup trucks of these bandits and destroying them.

    We MUST exact maximum pain from these brigands and ensure that wherever extremist Islamic riff raff seek by violence to dominate areas of this planet, we wipe them out. There can be no compromise on this; we already know how they abuse and ruin the lives of ordinary people wherever they are. Northern Mali has a music ban and women have fewer rights than camels or horses.

    For the idiots who welcomed the Arab Spring with such naive delight, I submit that we now see the results.

  • Samuel Pepys

    Paulus, it may well be that the Spectator wishes to censor the fact that it removes those commenters and comments which seem critical of their publication. Such an approach is not usually the best way, generally speaking, to deal with customers and potential customers.

  • the viceroy’s gin

    “Can the West solve a problem like Mali?”

    Well, since they caused it, by taking out Colonel Clown in Libya, I doubt they have the savvy to “solve” this problem, but maybe they do.

    The Tauregs sided with the Colonel, and that kept the islamofascists from getting a toehold in Northern Mali, up in the desert. But with the Tauregs fragmented and returning to more nomadic and fractured political arrangements, the islamofascists are now making hay.

    Mali is about 95% Muslim, but Southern Mali is nothing like the islamofascists. No forced burqa wearing by headchopping bewhiskered nutters there. And there’s a racial component here, which the islamofascists are going to find troublesome. The blacks understand the islamofascists are nutters. They hate them.

    I’d say the brief is probably on target. Mali needs to be split along racial and tribal and religious sect lines. Let the islamofascist nutters have the desert, out in the dry, open spaces, where they can be tracked and bombed as necessary.

    • Daniel Maris

      I didn’t know you were an expert on the demography and cultural practice of the Sahel, Viceroy. What are your qualifications in this area?

      • the viceroy’s gin

        Well, certainly more than yours, son. But then, that requires something far less than expert knowledge, as you don’t seem to understand anything
        about the area, judging by your previous blather in here about the Tauregs.

        You best stick to your windmill blather.

  • eeore

    “It is a sign of how difficult this task is that the French are briefing
    out that success will require Mali to be reconfigured with far more
    autonomy for the Tuaregs in the north.”

    I’m not sure why this should be a problem, Mali’s borders were established by colonial powers during the 19th century Scramble for Africa. At least this time the process of dividing up territory will be based on information about the people who live there, the economic resources, and what might form the basis of a stable country.

  • paulus

    What happened to my post? I was just defending Fraser on another post saying he doesn’t censure comments and mine has disappeared.

    Any way as I said, Mali is a desert, with nomads, on camel and in tents, How does this pose a threat. by definition they are in the middle of no where. This is the best place for them.

  • Tom Tom

    Maybe Britain and France could have intervened to keep Ghadaffi in power ?

  • Alexandrovich

    “…these kind of interventions merely move the problem elsewhere.” Well, follow ’em there and hit them again, only harder. Then follow ’em again and hit them even harder. Then there will peace. Shame nobody has the stomach for it.

    • Colonel Mustard

      Yes, that’s about it. War with trepidation in case the press cut up rough or the Greenham Common women march. Began with Suez but was best demonstrated by LBJ in Vietnam. Resolve undermined by the cancerous gang within that always seems to worry more about the rights of the enemy than the countrymen in harm’s way and no-one courageous enough to give them a whiff of grapeshot.

      • Tom Tom

        There was no real protest movement against Vietnam until the Graduate Draft Deferment was ended 1967 and a Random Lottery introduced 1969 made children of the affluent liable to be drafted. Only 23% students were called up and only 45% high school graduates…… it is less of an issue when the children of the vociferous middle class can remain spectators

        • the viceroy’s gin

          Actually, re the Vietnam War, US public opinion held up until the early 70’s. But it collapsed soon after.

          • Colonel Mustard

            You need to distinguish between “public opinion” and the orchestrated protest movement. In reality opposition began as early as 1964 and escalated quite rapidly year on year but polling in 1968 already showed 50% disapproved of the handling of the war vs only 35% in approval. There was a dramatic step change after the Tet offensive in 1968 which despite being a US military victory was widely characterised as a setback by the influential anti-war lobby within the media.

            • the viceroy’s gin

              All likely true, particularly re the “handling of the war” question. But after all that was said and processed, the question became, then as now: “Is it time to significantly change course?” That question’s answer remained “no” until the early 70’s. That public sentiment held firm during and beyond Tet, fyi.

              • Colonel Mustard

                Your comment presumes that the administration were pursuing a consistent strategy which had been successfully communicated to the public – neither of which was true. Opposition to the war rose incrementally and was cynically manipulated by the left within the USA (and by North Vietnam) to the point where it adversely influenced the strategy of US leaders.

                How was holding firm measured? The Nixon Doctrine of troop withdrawal and “Vietnamisation’ began after Tet and before 1970. The percentage of those who “agreed” with the war dipped below 50% in 1967 and after Tet dropped rapidly to 32% but then actually rose to 36% in 1970. The course of the war was significantly changed in both US strategy and public opinion before 1970. Your assertion that public opinion “held firm” after Tet and turned only in the early 1970s is absolutely invalid.

                No evidence in either of your comments – just opinion. Evidence in both mine.

                • the viceroy’s gin

                  No, my comment presumes nothing. It says what it says, and not what you fantasize it says. It speaks nothing about or to “administration strategy”.

                  Drop your fantasies.

                  Tet occurred in January 1968, and the policy of Vietnamization was broadcast during the 1968 presidential election that year, and said policy was executed following Nixon’s victory that November.

                  You see, “public opinion” is best measured by, well, public opinion… as in the voters’ opinion. They CHOSE Nixon. Get it? We don’t need to bother with your fantasy of “public opinion”, and not some addle brained academic’s, either.

                  Always best to go to the source, and not fantasists. You’re pulling numbers out of the air, and meaningless numbers at that. The only appropriate question, as mentioned above, was: “Is it time to significantly change course?” And also as mentioned, the answer to that question remained “no” until the early 70’s.

                  In fact, had Nixon not been rousted and caused such a turnover in Congress, I’m not sure the answer to that question would have ever become “yes”, at least not enough to swing the Congressional vote away from the Nixon program, after his resignation.

                • Colonel Mustard

                  So, now we get to the abuse which is your habitual refuge in these threads and well known to many. And which doesn’t alter the fact that you are wrong.

                  You have now, by your deft dodging, managed to conflate a generalisation about public opinion about the Vietnam War with the election of Nixon as president as though he stood on that ticket alone.

                  Too easy for you just to dismiss anything that doesn’t agree with your exquisitely inflated opinion as “fantasist”, etc. and to reinforce it with an imperial command. I have to remind myself not to get into any kind of online “discussion” with you again as it is such an unpleasant experience, as others here have discovered.

                  You can have the last word. I won’t be returning to this thread and don’t have notification set up so I won’t see it anyway.

                • the viceroy’s gin

                  Well, it’s “abuse” if you’re a victimologist, as you appear to be.

                  But in addition to being a victim, you’re a fantasist, and that is to be called out. Always. And again, as apparently your fantasy world now expands to conflation fantasization, and that Nixon’s campaign strategy is wrapped up in my blogpost.

                  You are a fantasist.

                  And you whimper when called on it.

                  And amusing you’re whimpering about “imperialism”, as your last whimpering slog was wrapped around precisely that. 😉

                  I do recommend you follow your own advice and avoid my posts. They are quite upsetting to you, apparently. And as you’re pretty much a blowhard fantasist, and a whimpering one at that, it’s not likely I’ll be at any great loss.

                  Oh, and you’ll be reading this post, son. Every word of it. Your whimpering denial is mere confirmation of that.

      • eeore

        Isn’t grapeshot more a naval thing?

        • Colonel Mustard

          It references the phrase coined by Thomas Carlyle iro 13 Vendémiaire.

    • eeore

      But arm them in Libya and Syria?

  • Augustus

    While the French did receive a green light from the international community to go to war, they flew to Mali alone. Their European ‘brothers’ stayed behind. And yet, the murder of foreign civilians in Algeria does obligate the West to intervene in a conflict against their wishes. President Barack Obama needs to wake up. It has been the al-Qaida terrorists who have successfully turned this conflict into a war between radical Islam and the infidels.

    While the French campaign in Mali might pit the Mirage 2000 fighter jets against terrorists on the ground, they are playing on their home turf. France will win the campaign only if it wins the support of the locals. It will be impossible for it to win on its own otherwise. In the meantime the fighting in Mali fits nicely with the new world dis-order; the unspoken problem of the Arab-Muslim world in which Muslims have turned Islam into an arid and intolerant religion and taken the spirit out of the Qur’an as the word of God, reflecting much more than merely politics and economics. While the West’s embracing of those new leaders in the Middle East who refuse to meet some minimal
    international standards is certainly the fastest way to create the pre-conditions for
    international chaos that will only continue to increase the risk of armed conflict in those regions
    in the future.

    • chan chan

      Islam is the cause, Muslims are the effect. It’s not the other way around.

      “Muslims have turned Islam into an arid and intolerant religion and taken the spirit out of the Qur’an as the word of God,”
      This is nonsense, Augustus. You clearly have no idea how Islam works, like most westerners.

      • Augustus

        Once European colonialism ended, post-colonial elites schooled in various forms of Marxism robbed their people and wrecked their countries. Algeria is an example of a failed state, as is Robert Mugabe’s Zimbabwe. A half-century and more since colonialism ended in North Africa, the so-called Arab Spring has been a movement once again fuelled by collective resentment and
        frustration against the inept rule of corrupt despots. It has been the people’s
        verdict against their own post-colonial elites. The question, however, remains:
        Has the present bunch of North Africans and Arabs learned to embrace freedom and democratic principles, or brought North Africans and Arabs to discard one form of failed totalitarian
        politics with a half-century of self-inflicted misery and wars only to embrace
        another form of much the same? If this means progress they couldn’t do worse by wishing for a return of the colonizers!

        • Colonel Mustard

          Well, considering the world now, Pax Britannica is looking better and better.

      • Daniel Maris

        I agree Chan Chan, Augustus obviously hasn’t done his homework.

    • HooksLaw

      ‘ the murder of foreign civilians in Algeria does obligate the West to intervene’ – correct.

      This is not the same as the hysterical claims of ‘interventionism’ from The Spectator (or indeed Robinson on last nights BBC news).

      • Tom Tom

        So now you want to invade Algeria and screw it up like Iraq, Libya, Syria, Egypt, Bahrain

      • d knight

        Sorry it does not ‘obligate’ us at all

        We may choose to do so, that is a different thing entirely

    • Daniel Maris

      Islam holds that the land of Islam and the land of the non-Muslims are perpetually at war and that the only exception allowed to that are brief 10 year truces that may be agreed to Islam’s advantage.

      This is important because all Muslim clerics receive instruction from theologians who confirm this longstanding interpretation of Sharia law and nearly all Muslims attend Mosque or send their children to receive instruction from clerics.

      Of course, people don’t always act on what they are taught, but it is important to appreciate the above. For one thing it explains the rather ambivalent nature of alliances with Muslim governments. They often seem more embarrassed than grateful for our help don’t they? Once one understands the theology, you can see why – to appear grateful is almost an admission of disloyalty to the (Islamic) cause.

      • Augustus

        I am well aware of the intolerance among Muslims of others and other faith-traditions, and how this intolerance has besmirched Islam and its place in our world. Christians and Jews were once a vibrant part of the North African culture. Early Christianity thrived there. But history is never simple, French-Algerian history has its share of terrible things done on both sides in the mistaken name of some higher principle. Muslims believe that Jesus was only
        a messenger of Allah, but the Qur’an refers to Jesus as “ruh Allah” meaning the breath or spirit of God. So why do Muslims display no reverence about Jesus and his place in history? Why do they so readily indulge in Christian hatred and empty Islam of Jesus’s spirit and that aspect of humanity nearest and dearest to God symbolized by Jesus in the Qur’an? If this perpetual war and intolerance is taught as a relatively new phenomenon they have then indeed taken the spirit of God and the Kingdom of Heaven for Muslims out of the Qur’an.

        • Daniel Maris

          You’re mistaken. It’s not a new phenomenon. It’s always been there, ever since Jews and Christians rejected Mohammed’s claim to be a true messenger of God. The only reason that aggression wasn’t visible before was because (a) when the Caliphate ruled, Sharia held sway and Jews and Christians were oppressed as second class citizens (any show of dissent would have been met with ruthless violence) and (b) as the Caliphate declined and ultimately disappeared, it was replaced by Western Colonial rule which ensured Muslims could not oppress Jews and Christians as they had done before, or at least not to the same extent, backed by the force of law.

          The reason this violence and aggression has always been there is that Muslim theologians claim (without, incidentally, putting forward any textual evidence) that Christians and Jews have corrupted in their “Holy Books” the original words of the Prophets (which was why Mohammed had to come and give humanity the cleansed, pure word of God delivered by the Archangel Gabriel).

          From that point of view you can see why Muslims are so aggressive and antagonistic to Christians and Jews (although there are other

          aspects of Islamic ideology which add to that aggression and antagonism e.g. the alleged offences of the Jews against Mohammed). They are taught that Jews and Christians are active corrupters of the word of God – a pretty heinous crime for a true believer.

    • Tom Tom

      How do those Mirage jets get to Mali ? Do they by chance overfly Algeria ? Do they by chance get refuelled by USAF KC-135 tanker aircraft ?

      • d knight

        Open press states 2 Mirage F1 and 6 Mirage 2000 plus KC135 (French Air Force) are deployed in Mali. Even if they flew strikes through Algerian airspace they could tank them without assistance from the US

        • Tom Tom

          True France has 14 KC-135s…and the GE-SNECMA engines for KC-135s are Made in France

  • Jebediah

    The New York Times is wrong, as are you to recommend it as a primer. The French are fighting in their own and our self-interest. They and we do not want an Al Qaeda “state” in North Africa, nobody does. It’s whack-a-mole time; sadly we or our allies have to keep doing it, possibly for decades. Vive la France, for taking this on.

    • Daniel Maris

      I agree. This is as much a game of patience as anything else. People sometimes underestimate the terrible strains that the modern world is putting Islam under.

      Just as the Protestant stress on getting everyone to read the bible and to interpret it ultimately undermined belief in the Bible, so too the internet and other modern forms of communication are resulting in Muslims hearing a whole lot more about Islam (and also non-Islam) than they ever used to. It is putting Islam under a lot of pressure.

      What we have to do is contain Sharia law (both abroad and in this country); conduct propaganda against it within Islam; and as you say “whack-a-mole” when ever the head appears.

      In 100 years’ time it may be that Islam as a cultural belief system is beginning to fracture.

      In the meantime it is vital we do not concede even one inch of territory to Sharia in the UK (and other democracies). In fact we should win back some inches by going on the offensive against FGM, arranged marriages, lax immigration rules,

      unlawful attempts to prevent outmarriage etc., unsupervised Islamic “Saturday” schools.

      • Tom Tom

        Ah Daniel… “the Bible” ? What Bible…there are so many versions but few are relevant to a Jewish God and a Jewish Galilean and you will find a “Protestant Bible” very different from those most people have failed to read… fact very few really know what it in the Bible. Your analogy does not hold because Islam has ONE Koran having destroyed the other scripts and Satanic Verses are very powerful refutations……but Islam is not a religion it is a political gospel of Submission

        • Daniel Maris

          It’s clear from what I wrote that I was not claiming a close analogy. I was saying the analogy was more to do with freedom of information.

          Muslims until quite recently have more often than not have not really known a great deal about Mohammed’s life or the contents of the Koran. They certainly haven’t been exposed to critiques of Islam or to details of how life is lived outside the lands of Islam. It is the internet, multi-channel TV and other new sources of information that are changing things.

          • Tom Tom

            Islam is not about KNOWING but about OBEYING. It is weak individuals bound into a tribal GROUPTHINK based on resentment of CHristians and Jews for being more economically successful and seeing their Individual Freedom as antithetical to GROUPTHINK. Islam will not evolve any more than Socialism will ever evolve into Lockean Liberty. It is what it is. Islam used to be called Mohammedism because it is a Religion of Mohammed to compete with the Religion of Jesus Christ……….the Satanic Verses are a major threat to this notion

      • salieri

        No quarrel with the rest of your post, but I have to assume the first two paragraphs were meant to be ironic. What a terrible strain it must be, indeed, suddenly to realise that you inhabit a mediaeval, tyranically stifled, petty-minded and cruel world; that your personal destiny is not yours to fulfil; that if you dare to reject the faith that holds you in chains you are condemned to die; that you may not even question its scriptures, since all legitimate interpretation was set in stone centuries ago; and that your own little world has (since the 13th century) given sod-all to the rest of the globe economically, culturally, scientifically, artistically and spiritually.

        And as for belief in the Bible being undermined by the ordinary person’s freedom to read it and think about it for himself/herself, I believe you are quite wrong. Of course Christian belief has dwindled dramatically but the many and obvious reasons do not include freedom of thought. If I may be so bold, I would suggest that one of those obvious reasons is the Establishment’s irreversible determination to promote a multiplicity of other faiths, other ‘cultures’ and ever fewer moral values in its misguided obsession with ‘equality’. Whether this is desirable or not can be debated with sincerity and reason on both sides, but you can’t have it both ways: if the modern world requires the suspension of all judgement on moral relativism, the same must logically apply to those who demand it.

        • Daniel Maris

          You’re entitled to your viewpoint but it was in my view the spread of reading and the ability to study bible texts which, after 200-300 years undid the Protestant belief culture, especially once exposed to the powerful and penetrating questions posed by science (e.g. geology and evolutionary biology).

          • Tom Tom

            “Science” is a silly term…….are you thinking of Physics ? That has enough reasons to believe in God; or Darwinism mocked up as Pseudo-Religion as Marx himself even dedicated Das Kapital to Darwin ? There is absolutely no contradiction Daniel……you must read much much deeper

            • the viceroy’s gin

              The kid has to actually read some thing, before reading deeper.

              And yes, “science” is a silly term, particularly as used by the ignorant and uneducated.

            • Daniel Maris

              I am talking about science in context – science as denied by Protestant theology in the 19th century (and still denied by a sizeable part of Protestantism) i.e. denying the true age of earth, that animal species had evolved (whatever one might think of the details of Darwin’s explanation), the scale of the cosmos and the non-existence of a physical entity known as heaven.

        • eeore

          The problem with the case you make is that if is entirely hung on modern hobby horses with no basis in fact.

        • Tom Tom

          “There are those who hate Christianity and call their hatred an all-embracing love for all religions.” – G K Chesterton ILN, 1/13/06

  • Collamore

    “Can the West solve a problem like Mali?”
    The answer to this badly-phrased question (militant Islam is the problem, not “Mali”) is: Yes, but only by applying overwhelming force, with the willingness to kill and destroy. As was done by Britain in the Sudan in the 1890s.
    If the West lacks the will to apply those means, then it shouldn’t get involved.

    • HooksLaw

      Wrong. The west can act to protect its interests in co-operation with the local governments. Pakistan is an area that needs rationality and stability – the west can help but it would be preposterous to suggest a full scale invasion.

      • Tom Tom

        The West created Pakistan – Britain created Pakistan – it was founded by a Barrister from Lincoln’s Inn

      • Collamore

        “Hooks”, who said the west shouldn’t “act with local governments” to protect itself? Not I.
        In fact, in the instance I cited (Sudan), the British acted in cooperation with the Egyptian government and with local anti-Mahdi leaders.

      • Hexhamgeezer

        Indeed. i wonder where it would get its rationality and stability from though – certainly not from us or the K0ran. It could do with less corruption, being less tribal, less militarised (including economically), less I$lamic – in fact, less Pakistani.

    • Colonel Mustard

      I’m glad someone else understands what fighting a war really requires.

    • eeore

      The issue is not militant Islam, it is 30% of it’s exports going to China.

      Mali produces gold, rice and has untapped Iron Ore, all of which China has been stockpiling.

  • Hexhamgeezer

    ‘we are all going to have to learn a lot about Mali and the Sahel’

    Waste of time unless you are going to learn about Islam. This is not about the Tuaregs or whatever bunch of illiterates are in Darfur, Sinai, Tanzania, Waziristan, Dagestan etc etc.

    Until the guys in charge and their flag bearers admit what the problem is, lets have no more young British lives wasted. Forget ‘insurgents’ ‘education’ ‘development’ ‘Islamists’
    protection of narco barons, and tackle Islam.

    Until you address the ideology all else is criminal deception.

  • In2minds

    Problems with Islamists, why go to Mali we have that here in the UK?

    • Patriccia Shaw

      Can We not get it across to folk that continued meddling in Arab/Islamic affairs is counterproductive. Folks have done too much harm in Palestine

      US policy has proved counterproductive. With naive trust in Mali’s democratic institutions, the US supported a military it thought was controlled by friends, only to see the elected government toppled by a US-trained officer. This is not the only echo of Afghanistan: Mr Belmokhtar learnt his trade there when the US was arming the Mujahideen.

      • Colonel Mustard

        Hello telemachus.

      • eeore

        Who knew that Obama used the name Patriccia Shaw on the interwebz?

  • Bluesman

    Cameron himself seems more and more committed to interventionism.

    So we all imagined the cuts in the defence budget then?

    I believe the term is “Epic Fail”.

    • HooksLaw

      Infantile analysis, starting from the original premise. And its France who does not have the lift capability to send in its troops.

      • an ex-tory voter

        Re your earlier comment. You asked for a list and were given a list but have not responded.

        • Coffee House

          Of course he will not reply. He didn’t want a list. He was juts trying to make a point, and when your evidence showed his point was bogus he has nothing to say and will move on to troll another comment.

      • Tom Tom

        It has 45 Transall cargo planes

      • d knight

        It is lift capacity for heavy equipment that France lacks

        You may have noticed that Mali is rather a long way away from the sea, which is the normal way you move such equipment

  • HooksLaw

    It is not a ‘front on the war on terror’. There is an attempt to usurp the duly constituted government which the west is assisting that government to resist.

    I suggest you get a new job with the Daily Express as a headline writer.

    • Tom Tom

      duly-constituted government in Damascus you mean ?

    • the viceroy’s gin

      The “duly constituted government” in Mali was overthrown in a military coup.

      I suggest you get your nose out of the Cameroons’ hindquarters and pay attention to what’s going on.

  • Dogsnob

    “…a terrorist safe haven so close to Europe’s borders would be extremely dangerous.”

    Due to the liberal policies espoused by our elites throughout the last thirty years and more, the terrorist has many safe havens within Europe’s borders. The Spectator should sit back and congratulate itself on their creation and maintenance.

    • HooksLaw

      A list would be helpful.

      • Koakona

        Leicester, London, Bradford, Birmingham, Stoke to just get the list started….

        • chan chan

          Don’t forget these in addition…and growing. More if you want them, HooksLaw…

          Marseilles – 25 percent (200,000 of 800,000)
          Malmö – ~25 percent (67,000 of 270,000)
          Amsterdam – 24 percent (180,000 of 750,000)
          Stockholm – 20 percent (>155,000 of 771,038)
          Brussels – 20 percent (some say 33 percent)
          Moscow – 16 percent-20 percent (2 million of 10-12 million)
          Luton – 14.6 percent (26,963)
          The Hague – 14.2 percent ( 67,896 of 475,580)
          Utrecht – 13.2 percent (38,300 of 289,000)
          Rotterdam – 13 percent (80,000 of 600,000)
          Copenhagen – 12.6 percent (63,000 of 500,000)
          Aarhus – ~10 percent
          Zaan district (Netherlands) – 8.8 percent
          Paris – 7.38 percent (155,000 of 2.1 million)
          Antwerp- 6.7 percent (>30,000 of >450,000)
          Hamburg – 6.4 percent (>110,000 of 1.73 million)
          Berlin – 5.9 percent (~200,000 of 3.40 million)

          • Patriccia Shaw

            You should rejoice in this opportunity to interact with these proud and sincere people
            It is when they are oppressed that they kick

            • Colonel Mustard

              Oh, look “Patriccia Shaw” (two ‘c’s) with an avatar that was once used by telemachus before he settled on the Labour party’s red rose.

            • Tom Tom

              Then they aren’t going to like the oppressed Britons when they react

            • OldSlaughter

              Funny how many choose not to interact.

              Also, they kick when they can.

          • Tom Tom

            You forgot Berlin and Cologne

            • chan chan

              Berlin is there, at the end. I didn’t forget Cologne, it just wasn’t in my selection. The list can go on…and yes, they will not like the reaction from Britons when the tipping point arrives; unless something politically extraordinary happens in the meantime, it will. My guess is it won’t be pretty. The idea that Britain, or any other european state will become muslim is nonsense. The continental europeans will react more harshly, probably appallingly so, than Britons will. You wait and see…things will get worse before they get better. I forget who it was, but some commentator on here said, and I’m paraphrasing, “they forget they’re on a continent where the adherents of a particluar religion were all but annihilated because they were considered problematic”. That idea’s still out there in continental europe, no shadow of a doubt, I’m afraid…

              • Tom Tom

                Thirty Years War is a good precedent.

    • Austin Barry

      “The mosques are our barracks, the domes our helmets, the minarets our bayonets and the faithful our soldiers…”

      Islam has told us that it at war with us. Domestically, our leaders have surrendered.

Can't find your Web ID? Click here