The hippies of the 1960s had many colorful phrases to express their minimalist grasp of politics. Some of these gnomic one-liners, however, held a grain of truth. “Whoever you vote for, the government always gets in” describes today’s British uniparty to a nicety, even if that is on the way out, at least in its current form. With the Conservatives going the way of the Whigs in the nineteenth century, and Labour continuing to collapse in the polls, Britons can only hope Nigel Farage’s Reform UK, and even Rupert Lowe’s Restore Britain, are not part of the same machinery, the deep state, the system.

Speaking of which, back in the Sixties, Timothy Leary’s exhortation to “turn on, tune in, drop out”, was more than just an invitation to a decade-long drug party. This imperative was telling the listener to grasp what it means to live inside “the system” and then think about getting out. Anyone who has ever gone “off the grid” will understand, and this escapist, naturally defensive impulse is once again catching on as the malevolence of the globalist system becomes ever more apparent to ever more people. But one phrase from the 1960s (a decade which has caused us untold trouble ever since), with a couple of minor adjustments to fit our modern world, might serve today; “What if they gave a war and nobody came?” This line is attributed to a pacifist poet of the day, Carl Wittman, during the anti-Vietnam War movement. But applying it today (with some modification) to Britain and its increasing Islamic presence, we might re-phrase it thus: “What if they staged a coup and nobody noticed?”

If Islam is not gradually taking control of British governance both at a local level and in “the mother of all Parliaments”, then it is doing an excellent impersonation of doing just that. Up at the top of the political ladder, Britain has a Muslim Home Secretary, Shabana Mahmood, who says that Islam is at the forefront of everything she does, and London’s Muslim Mayor has said pretty much the same thing throughout his almost 10-year tenure. A few rungs down, the Labour MP for Dewsbury and Batley, Iqbal Mohamed, recently said in the House of Commons that there should be sanctions against British MPs who exhibit “Islamophobia”, an ill-defined phrase that means approximately the same as “anti-Semitism”. That is, anything Jews and Muslims don’t want to hear spoken out loud concerning their respective tribes (and these people are tribal at heart). Ten of the UK’s major cities have Muslim mayors. There are Muslim enclaves in the Civil Service, the Home Office, and the Police Force (or “Police Service”, as it has been pacifically re-branded). The National Association of Muslim Police (NAMP) represents a sub-section of the British police along the lines of the Association of Black Police Officers. This sectarianism is rife in the British public sector, and any ethnic grouping will find representatives in their chosen field. Unless, it goes without saying, you are White. As for the new political opposition in the House, Nigel Farage’s Reform UK has a Muslim Chair, Zia Yusuf, and their next London Mayoral candidate, Laila Cunningham, is a Muslima. Farage has no choice but to cozy up to Islam, despite his occasional bluster about increasing Muslim influence politically and culturally. He told an interviewer last year that to alienate the Muslim vote would be electoral suicide, and he is right. Muslims vote in far higher numbers per capita than the native population. Ballot day is even a rare day out for the wives. The local imam tells the head of the house which box to put their X in, and the husbands tell the wives. This is line-management, Islamic style. The Greens, another party doing increasingly well in the polls, are clearly being used as a Trojan horse for Islam. At a recent by-election victory, the victorious Green Party candidate, a Muslim, yelled “Allahu Akhbar!” during his acceptance speech, and dedicated his victory to Gaza.

The first supposed rebuttal of the idea that Britain is being Islamized with the complicity of the British Government is that it is a “conspiracy theory”, that weary old trope. So why not ask an expert? Edmund Fitton-Brown, a man with a superbly British name, worked from 1984 to 2017 for the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (the UK equivalent to the US Foreign Ministry). In an interview with The Daily Telegraph, Mr. Fitton-Brown claimed that “Islamist entryism… [can be seen] throughout the Civil Service”, adding that this venerable body “reflects society”.

“Entryism” is now becoming an in-vogue word among the dissident Right (such as it is), and is associated with Britain’s Fabian Society, a long-established group of Socialist 5th-columnists. Muslims are metaphysically equipped to play the same long game as the Fabians, but things are accelerating.

The increasing presence of Islam in British life is not confined to politics and the infrastructure of government, however. In March, London’s iconic Trafalgar Square was occupied in a manner of which Hitler could only have dreamt. Trafalgar Square, with its famous Nelson’s Column, was often used as a visual establisher in old, black-and-white movies, telling the audience that the film’s action was moving to London, in the same way the Eiffel Tower showed the movie-watcher that we were now in Paris. Trafalgar Square is famously home to flocks of pigeons, but in March it was taken over by a different flock: Muslims.

Led by Sadiq — now Sir Sadiq — Khan, the London Mayor, thousands of Muslims took to their knees to pray in the open air, despite mosques springing up in London like morning mushrooms. They completely occupied this most famous of public spaces. They were celebrating iftar, the end of Ramadan, and Khan claimed this was the largest such celebration of its kind in the world. Nick Tomothy, the Conservative Shadow Justice Minister, called this an “act of domination”, and was predictably vilified for talking out of class about this absurd ritual. Ramadan is portrayed as noble and virtuous, one of many wonderful things from the Islamic world. In reality, it just means skipping lunch, something any of us could do without inconvenience. I’m no dietician, but skipping lunch would not be a bad idea for many Muslims, given the size of some of the men present in their absurd mix of pajamas and black leisure-wear. But the prayer-meeting was clearly a visible sign of dominance, and it was not confined to Trafalgar Square.

Football — or “soccer”, for American readers — is something like a replacement for religion in the UK. The two teams currently tussling for the Premier League title are Arsenal and Manchester City, who used to play at stadiums named for parts of their respective cities: Highbury and Maine Road. As both teams needed larger, higher-capacity grounds, they were duly built and named after their sponsors. So it is that the two leading teams in the land now play at the Emirates Stadium and the Etihad Stadium respectively. During Ramadan, the call to prayer rang out at many stadiums.

At the end of Ramadan, when Muslims are allowed to eat during daylight hours, football games across the country were stopped for Muslims to get some refreshment. Fans of Leeds United — notorious for their violence in the heyday of British football hooliganism in the 1970s — booed the fact that the game they had paid a lot of money to watch had to be stopped for a religious observance. There will undoubtedly be ongoing police investigations, perhaps with a detail from the National Association  of Muslim Police taking the lead.

So, that is the state of play in Britain. How about the international stage? In terms of policy influence, Islam has a strong gravitational pull in some areas. Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s refusal to allow the U.S. to use its airbases to strike Iran infuriated President Trump, and was almost certainly done to placate the Islamic lobby. Similarly, the vote against the “grooming gang” enquiry was entirely engineered to protect vulnerable, high-profile Labour seats, such as that of Jess Philips, in Muslim wards. Philips is the Minister for the Protection of Women, but voted against an inquiry into one of the UK’s darkest chapters against women. In the last election, her winning margin in an overtly Islamic electoral ward was cut from thousands of votes to hundreds, hence her voting against something Muslims do not want investigated. She too is quick to stress to Muslims that the UK was not involved in offensive strikes against Iran. It is a curious thing that many Muslims angered by potential British involvement in military action against Iran are Sunni, while Iran is 90% Shia. When it suits Islam, it becomes the monolith it often claims it is not.

Harry Cole, Editor-at-Large at The Sun newspaper, got an exclusive interview with Donald Trump shortly after Starmer’s announcement of non-co-operation in the Iran offensive. Now, even the MSM can’t ignore Muslim influence over policy, because Trump noticed and said so. He told Cole that it looked as though the Prime Minister was pandering to his Muslim voting bloc, and he was right. The nature of that bloc, however, is changing both its allegiances and its tactics at local level.

And, like all good parasites, Islam has found a host nation whose king may even be a convert. Internet rumors are the modern version of village gossip, the difference being that the chattering wives of yesteryear had no way to confirm their beliefs. That is no longer the case, and the latest suspicion raging through the UK is that King Charles has secretly converted to Islam. He certainly can’t do enough to promote Islam, and he describes himself as “defender of the faiths” rather than the traditional “defender of the faith”. King Charles III is certainly not to be found rallying to the flag, and the British and English flags are themselves an endangered species. On the anniversary of Pakistan’s independence, that nation’s flags could be seen flying in streets across Britain. Britain’s famous Union flag, however, as well as the English Cross of St. George, have been turned into signs of allegiance to a mythical “far Right, and arrests have been made for carrying it at demonstrations and hanging it in British streets. Visible expressions of nationhood are increasingly being demonized, and outward displays of patriotism bullied out of existence. The British flag, says a Government policy statement, is now a “tool of hatred”.

Flags, of course, are supposed to be exactly that. The Scottish Saltire, with its diagonal white cross over a blue background, was the flag under which William Wallace marched against the hated English, back in a time when hatred of the other was the dynamo behind national pride rather than something you could go to jail for.

Have I cherry-picked these instances of Islamic takeover? Certainly. But there are an awful lot of cherries to pick from, and each day seems to bring a new incursion into the British people’s belief that their country is theirs in any meaningful sense. To give a full account of accelerating Islamization, this piece would need to be novella-length. Britain is heading towards being a de facto caliphate.

Children are a natural target for indoctrination, and there are reports of White, non-Muslim children in northern schools being allowed only sips of water during Ramadan so as not to make their Muslim classmates feel “excluded”, another word of power. The schools call this coercion of children “sharing the journey”. While a schoolteacher from Batley, North Yorkshire, remains in hiding with his family for displaying pictures of Mohammed (explicitly haram), the man who supposedly transcribed the Koran is not the only prophet who may not be depicted. New “Islamophobia” laws may criminalize certain images in children’s pictures. This includes Jesus, one of the Islamic prophets, so any child drawing a Nativity scene — or any traditional Nativity scene in a school — could soon fall afoul of the law.

With increasing and apparently unstoppable Muslim immigration comes an increase in the crime rate. Despite the authorities doing all they can to hide crime statistics broken down by ethnicity, sexual assaults are on the rise, and the UK is now threatening Sweden’s position as the “rape capital of Europe”. My brother moved from our native London to Sweden at the start of the 1990s. In 1975, there were 421 reported rapes in Sweden. In 2024, there were 10,167. In half a century, this represents a rise of 2,300%. When my brother first moved there, and I visited him along with his twin brother, he proudly told us that any rape in Sweden made the front pages of the newspapers because they were so rare. Sweden is now only a few percentage points behind South Africa in terms of reported rape. And it is not just sexual assault that is turning Sweden from the “Socialist paradise” once lauded by the Left into a chaotic caliphate. The only country which now has more grenade and bomb attacks worldwide than Sweden is Mexico, home of the fun-loving drug cartels.

There is an interesting, albeit unwelcome, form of cultural exchange going on at present between the U.S. and the U.K. The British population is around 5% Black, compared with America at around 13%, but the respective Muslim populations are approaching the same level in reverse. The epicenter of American Islam, as American readers will know, is Dearborn, Michigan, but the recent Somalian fraud in Minneapolis shows the type of cultural enrichment the U.S. is increasingly experiencing countrywide. Senator Chip Roy recently confirmed that there are now 300 mosques in Texas, alarming in the year of the 25th anniversary of 9/11.

Back in the U.K., Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer recently called Muslims “the face of modern Britain”, and he appears at each and every Muslim event he can sign up for. The few minor attacks there have been on mosques look very much like false flags, but they were still sufficient to release tranches of government money (aka “tax revenue which actually belongs to those who pay it”) for mosque protection. Muslims are perfectly capable of protecting themselves, however, as the sight of Muslim men patrolling the streets of Manchester on horseback recently confirmed. The police watched this bizarre spectacle as these new Saladins rode through the streets threatening people, but did nothing.

Islam has all the weaponry it needs to conquer Britain, and there is not a scimitar to be seen. All the caliphate requires is its enemies’ tolerance, which it can manipulate, and accusations of Islamophobia translated into legislation is the most powerful weapon in the Islamic arsenal. If I had to predict Britain’s future with relation to Islam, I would say two things: Balkanization and Submission. Whites will move out of the cities and take over counties in an attempt to rebuild the Shire. Submission is in italics because I am not referring to the literal translation of “Islam”. I am sure we all remember being told throughout this century that Islam means “peace”, but it does not. It means “submission”. Submission is also the title of a 2015 novel by Michel Houellebecq in which France is partly taken over by Islam. What transpires is a sort of power-sharing deal between Islamic and French politicians. Britain looks to be making this fiction a reality.

By the end of this century, the United Kingdom could be ruled by Islam, with the White, kufr Shires providing both the jizya (the tax imposed on native people in a country under Islamic rule) and the expertise to do what low-IQ Muslims never could. This is not the seventh century, but it doesn’t mean seventh-century people can’t run it. Nietzsche wrote very little about Islam, but notes in The Antichrist; “At least Islam assumes it is dealing with men”. Now, that is a currency currently in short supply in the U.K.

Birmingham is England’s “second city” and has been in the grip of a strike by waste-disposal workers for two years. Footage from its streets look like a war-torn, Third-World country, and many other cities are not far behind as their Muslim population increases and the rubbish bags and other detritus pile ever higher. The local Muslim communities, of course, instead of going to the mosque every 20 minutes, could perhaps forego one visit a week and get together to work out how to solve the problem. Call the local council, for a start. If you are Muslims representing a particular mosque, say, they will listen to you because they would probably be out of a job should they not. Find out where the municipal rubbish-tips are. Organize vehicle-runs to transport the trash-bags to where they belong. Instead of paying for another new prayer-room, perhaps hire a vermin-control company to advise and take action on the growing pest problem. Make sure you protect your children from the diseases that inevitably spread wherever there are rats. None of this, it goes without saying, is happening, and residents increasingly live in their own filth.

Annalee Newitz wrote an interesting book in 2013 called Scatter, Adapt, Remember. It is a history of mankind’s ability to survive extinctions, but, mutatis mutandis, it has much to say about how Whites will react to their current plight. One of Ms. Newitz’s recommendations, however, is optimistic in modern-day Britain:

In the near term, we need to improve one of humanity’s greatest inventions, the city, to make urban life healthier and more environmentally sustainable. Essentially, we need to adapt the metropolis to Earth’s current ecosystems so that we can maintain our food supplies and a habitable climate.

As you will gather, the book has a Green slant to it, but the city as a locus of stability in a threatened society is an idea which is fading fast. Islamization is hardly going to improve city life.

And the Islamization of Britain relies on a concomitant “de-Christianization”. Churches are increasingly closing down, being turned into mosques, or mysteriously burning down. Local authorities are starting to talk about “re-purposing” graveyards. Christmas is rarely mentioned in the MSM, and the shops are currently full, not of traditional Easter eggs, but “Gesture eggs”. Christianity is very much last millennium’s religion in Britain.

The “new British” continue to pour in, and the government cannot do enough to accommodate them in the style they demand. By 2030, the government intends to give 40% of new-build homes to immigrants. Whites, of course, are leaving in ever-greater numbers, and the demographic seeds of Islamic dominance are already being sown. The British, like all White countries, are reproducing at well below the replacement rate, Muslims well above it. In the end, the deep state and its operatives in government will have given away what was once the most powerful nation in the world, and its people will have failed to stop them. Perhaps Islam is to be admired for its success in not losing its instinct to conquer, as the British have.

Barack Obama was the affirmative-action president. Salman Rushdie is the affirmative-action literary giant. Like Obama, Rushdie didn’t get to the top of his profession thanks to the depth of his talent and power of his intellect. No, he got there thanks to the color of his skin and the leftism of his politics.

Separated by an ocean, united by Islam

And just as Obama harmed Blacks and worsened race relations in America, so Rushdie has harmed the cause he claims to hold most dear: freedom of speech and of the artistic imagination. Still, look on the bright side. Rushdie is now one of the most famous writers in the world, feted by his fellow leftists everywhere from America to the Antipodes. He’s just published a new book with a simple title and pretentious subtitle: Knife: Meditations on an Attempted Murder. It was written in response to the knife attack launched on him in 2022 by one of the countless Third-World savages whom leftists like Rushdie have imported into the West since the Second World War.

Simplicity and pretension: The cover of Salman Rushdie’s Knife

He was lucky to survive. But the odds were always far better for him than they were for the Glaswegian shopkeeper Asad Shah, who was attacked by another Third-World savage in 2016. Like Rushdie, Shah was accused of blaspheming against Islam. Unlike Rushdie, Shah wasn’t immediately helped by a friendly crowd when the savage began stabbing. That’s why Rushdie is alive and Shah is dead. But the living Rushdie has never acknowledged the dead Shah or explored the disturbing parallels between those two knife-attacks separated by the Atlantic and united by Islam. Part of the reason for Rushdie’s silence on Shah may be that Rushdie has no desire to share the limelight. I’ve never been impressed by the depth of Rushdie’s literary talent, but I have always been impressed by the size of his ego.

Asad Shah and his heroic murderer Tanveer Ahmed (image from BBC)

Knife is another vehicle for Rushdie’s ego and another opportunity for White and Jewish leftists to shower him with praise. And yes, I agree with some of the praise. Rushdie has responded with courage and humor to a near-fatal assault and months of painful treatment in hospital. But his writing hasn’t gotten any better and his analysis of art and Islamic pathologies hasn’t got any less pretentious or any more honest. The literary critic Erica Wagner said that “Knife is a tour-de-force, in which the great novelist takes his brutal near-murder and spins it into a majestic essay on art, pain and love.” She also described how Rushdie tries to understand his would-be assassin, a Lebanese migrant called Hadi Matar:

About two-thirds of the way through Knife, Rushdie conducts his own imaginary interview with this assailant, “my would-be Assassin, the Asinine man who made Assumptions about me, and with whom I had a near-lethal Assignation” – Rushdie’s wordplay never fails him — and attempts to conceive of the young man’s motives. (“Review: Salman Rushdie’s memoir is horrific, upsetting – and a masterpiece,” The Daily Telegraph, 15th April 2024)

In fact, Rushdie’s wordplay never fails to be adolescent. And Matar’s “motives” really aren’t as complex or mysterious as Rushdie tries to pretend. In The Satanic Verses, the character based on the Prophet Muhammad bears another piece of Rushdie’s adolescent wordplay. He’s called Mahound. Get it? Rushdie resurrected a medieval European version of Muhammad’s name to associate Muhammad with dogs, which are of course unclean animals in Muslim eyes (Mahound has also been regularly used by Christians to vilify Muhammad as the founder of a false religion). Elsewhere in The Satanic Verses, there are prostitutes named after Mahound’s wives. One of those wives is dead and the prostitute named after her incites “necrophilia” in her clients, “who forbade her to make any movements.” Rushdie was mocking and subverting Islam. Orthodox Muslims have responded to the mockery and subversion in entirely healthy and predictable fashion: by trying to kill him.

The evils of Islam

It’s entirely healthy from the point of view of Islam, that is. Orthodox Muslims believe in being feared, not in being loved or admired for their tolerance. Whereas Christianity in the West tolerates abominations like Piss Christ (1987) and continues to decay and dwindle, Islam in the West responds with violence to abominations like The Satanic Verses and continues to grow in size, power, and influence. There was a very simple way of avoiding this problem, but for obvious reasons Rushdie and his supporters refuse to mention it. Non-White Muslims should never have been allowed to colonize the West. As it is, not only have Muslims been allowed to colonize the West: they’re being heavily subsidized to breed and to deepen the roots of their evil religion.

And I think “evil” is a fair description of Islam. Take this horrible story from fourteen years ago:

My mum has always had a special place in her family because she was the first girl to live beyond childhood. Five of her sisters died as babies or toddlers. It was not until many years later that anyone worked out why so many children died and three boys were born deaf. Today there is no doubt among us that this tragedy occurred because my grandparents were first cousins. …

My family is not unique. In the UK more than 50 per cent of British Pakistanis marry their cousins – in Bradford that figure is 75 per cent – and across the country the practice is on the rise and also common among East African, Middle-Eastern and Bangladeshi communities.

Back when my grandparents were having children, the medical facts were not established. But today in Britain alone there are more than 70 scientific studies on the subject. We know the children of first cousins are ten times more likely to be born with recessive genetic disorders which can include infant mortality, deafness and blindness.

We know British Pakistanis constitute 1.5 per cent of the population, yet a third of all children born in this country with rare recessive genetic diseases come from this community. Despite overwhelming evidence, in the time I spent filming Dispatches: When Cousins Marry, I felt as if I was breaking a taboo rather than addressing a reality. Pakistanis have been marrying cousins for generations. …

Throughout I had to remind myself that this is a health story – nothing more. It is not about religion or cultural identity. It is about avoidable suffering such at that experienced by Saeeda and Jalil Akhtar, whom I met in Bradford. They are first cousins and have six children, three with the genetic disease mucolipidosis type IV. This stops the body getting rid of waste properly and affects brain functions controlling vision and movement.

Mohsin, their second eldest, is 17 and blind. He wanders aimless and helpless, often crying in frustration. His sisters Hina, 13, and Zainab, 11, have the same condition. They live in almost complete darkness. Saeeda is worn down from years of round-the-clock care. She spoon-feeds them, dresses them and fears for them. Neither she nor her husband can quite accept that their familial link is the cause of this pain.

This is a major public health issue that has huge implications for other services. The cost to the NHS is many millions of pounds. On average, a children’s hospital will see 20 to 30 recessive gene disorders a decade, but one hospital in Bradford has seen 165, while British Pakistani children are three times more likely to have learning difficulties, with care costing about £75,000 a year per child. However during this investigation we found no efforts to introduce any national awareness-raising campaign. Why? (“The greatest taboo: One woman lifts the lid on on the tragic genetic consequences of when first cousins marry,” The Daily Mail, 23rd August 2010)

The answer to the question is simple. Why? Because leftists would much rather allow children to suffer horrifically than criticize a doubly sacred minority: brown-skinned Muslims. Leftism collaborates with the evil of Islam. For further examples, take Asad Shah again. If Rushdie had, per impossibile, tamed his egomania in Knife and written about Shah’s murder, he would have had to begin the story with the death-sentence imposed in Pakistan on a Christian woman called Asia Bibi. Her conviction for blasphemy against Islam was grossly and blatantly unfair, but it was enthusiastically supported by mainstream Muslim groups in Pakistan.

A mainstream mosque in Maryland honors the hero-martyr Mumtaz Qadri

When a Muslim politician called Salmaan Taseer began to campaign on Asia Bibi’s behalf, one of Taseer’s bodyguards expressed his disapproval by machine-gunning Taseer to death. The bodyguard, Mumtaz Qadri, then peacefully surrendered to the authorities and calmly accepted his subsequent execution for murder. His photo later appeared on a poster issued by a mainstream mosque in Maryland, USA. Pakistani colonists in America were celebrating the anniversary of his death and hailing him as a ghazi-shahid, a hero-martyr.

Headchopping for Muhammad

Are Salman Rushdie and his leftist admirers disturbed that Muslims in America are celebrating Mumtaz Qadri, a murderer for Muhammad and dedicated enemy of free speech? They should be. After all, it’s certain that Qadri would just as happily have machine-gunned Salman Rushdie as he machine-gunned Salmaan Taseer. But Rushdie and his fellow leftists have ignored the mosque in Maryland. They don’t want to face the true scale of the disaster they’ve inflicted on the West. That’s also why Rushdie and his fellow leftists have ignored the murder of Asad Shah in Glasgow, which was carried out in direct imitation of Mumtaz Qadri by a Pakistani migrant called Tanveer Ahmed. That murder earnt Ahmed the title of ghazi, “hero,” but Britain no longer has the death-penalty, so he didn’t go on to become a shahid, “martyr,” too.

Many other Muslims in Britain would be very happy to earn the title of ghazi. That’s why a schoolteacher who worked in the Yorkshire town of Batley is still in hiding. He showed his religious-studies class some satirical cartoons of Muhammad in 2021 and roused the wrath of local “Islamists,” as conservatives and libertarians dishonestly call them. They’re not Islamists: they’re mainstream Muslims. And the death-threats they issued to the teacher were entirely believable. After all, a teacher called Samuel Patey had recently been beheaded by an “Islamist” in France after he was falsely accused of showing blasphemous cartoons of Muhammad to one of his classes. Libertarians and conservatives blame such murders not on Muslim migration but on “liberal cowardice.” We’ve got to act robustly in defense of free speech and stop treating Muslims like children. But a decadent Western state that allows mass migration by Third-World savages is never going to act robustly against them.

To ask is to answer

And what if, per impossibile, Britain did begin to “act robustly”? Suppose the state had responded to the death-threats in Batley by hunting down and jailing those who had issued or inspired them. Would that have pacified or inflamed the situation? Would the “Islamists” have been cowed or emboldened by this infidel persecution? Would those sent to jail have seen the error of their ways and ended their sentences as staunch supporters of free speech? Merely to ask the questions is to answer them. There are only two kinds of “robust action” that will solve the worsening Third-World pathologies in the West, including the Muslim war on free speech. The first is an immediate and permanent end to Third-World migration into the West. The second is the deportation of all non-Whites now resident on Western soil back to their homelands.

But leftists and their libertarian allies can’t admit the truth. That’s why they’ll turn Knife into a best-seller. It offers them comforting fantasy rather than uncomfortable reality. And note that Rushdie can’t even be realistic about the central fact of the book: the vicious attempt on his own life. He indulges in adolescent wordplay about “my would-be Assassin, the Asinine man who made Assumptions about me, and with whom I had a near-lethal Assignation.” But an “assignation” is agreed by both parties. Rushdie didn’t agree to that meeting with a Third-World savage. It was imposed on him against his will. Just as Third-World migration has been imposed on ordinary Whites against their will by the hostile elites of Western nations. Unlike Salman Rushdie, countless ordinary Whites have not survived their one-sided “assignations” with Third-World savages. I wrote about one of those ordinary Whites in an earlier article about Rushdie and his “asinine assassin.” In the same month as the attempted murder of Rushdie, an 87-year-old grandfather called Thomas O’Halloran was murdered in a “shocking act of unprovoked violence” whilst riding his “mobility scooter in broad daylight.” A Black career criminal called Lee Byer is due to go on trial for the murder.

A choice between truth and lies

Leftists ignored the actual murder of Thomas O’Halloran, but wailed in shock and horror about the attempted murder of Salman Rushdie. And now, in April 2024, they’re heaping praise on Rushdie’s Knife and ignoring the murder of another White grandfather by another Third-World savage. A so-called asylum-seeker called Ahmed Alid has just been found guilty of murdering 70-year-old Terence Carney in October 2023. Like Hadi Matar, Salman Rushdie’s would-be assassin, Alid used a knife. Unlike Matar, he was successful in slaying an infidel for Islam.

Two Third-World savages imported by leftists: Hadi Matar and Ahmed Alid

But there will be no close analysis of Terence Carney’s murder by leftists like Salman Rushdie. That’s why I can reach a simple conclusion. I don’t know the meaning of life but I do know the meaning of Knife. Rushdie’s tour-de-force is yet more proof of how leftists never hesitate when given a choice between truth and lies, between reality and fantasy, between facing facts and feeding their own egos. It’s lies, fantasy and ego every time.