A Band-aid On a Bullet Wound


stop_muslim_immigration_by_elvis4-d84nox9By Justin O. Smith

Temporarily stopping the influx of Syrian and Iraqi refugees into America in order to counter Islamic terrorism is like placing a band-aid on a bullet wound. Still, it is a good first step, and American families, who understand that Islamic terrorism is not isolated to some few “radical” groups like Al Qaeda, Boko Haram and the Islamic State, were well represented on November 16th and 19th, when at least thirty-one U.S. Governors and the House of Representatives set course to block President Obama’s plan to bring 10,000 Syrian refugees into America next year.

By Tuesday, after the Paris terror attacks, twenty-eight governors were saying that Syrian refugees are not welcome in their state, and by Thursday, the House of Representatives voted 289-127 in favor of a bill that requires “greater scrutiny” of Syrian and Iraqi refugees.

Secretary of State John Kerry is advocating that 65,000 Syrian refugees be brought in next year. And Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton states that we must accept no less than 100,000.

If the House bill should fail in the Senate, all U.S. Governors should follow Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal’s example. He issued an executive order authorizing “all departments, budget units, agencies, offices, entities and officers of the executive branch of the State of Louisiana … to utilize all lawful means to prevent the resettlement of Syrian refugees … while this Order is in effect.” The House should also revisit the matter in any upcoming spending bill, even if it means shutting down the government.

Most Americans, many of our leaders as well, are aware that terrorists infiltrating groups of refugees are only part of the problem. They are not speaking of imaginary space-aliens, when they cognitively and logically reason that the ideological doctrines within Islam, such as the mandated perpetual war between the House of Islam and the House of War (non-Muslims) and the supposed supremacy of Islam, creates the prime motivation for the endemic violence of Islam. Americans understand that the terrorists are found in the ranks of converts like Carlos Bledsoe, second and third generation U.S. Muslims like Anwar al-Awlawki and refugees like the Tsarnaev brothers; and, as such, it certainly does not make any sense to import tens of thousands of more potential terrorists, in the middle of a generational and civilizational war between Islamic and Western principles.

Speaker of the House Paul Ryan said that we shouldn’t be accepting “any Syrian refugees without complete assurance those we are welcoming intend us no harm”, but when dealing with the agents of Islam, “complete assurance” would be a false assurance. One cannot offer an assurance against Muslims insidiously infiltrating any neighborhood, as they frequent ballgames, movies and restaurants and act like normal citizens, until they unleash bloodbath upon bloodbath, just like the Abdeslam brothers did in France, terrorist bomber Ramzi Yousef did at the World Trade Center in 1993, nineteen terrorists did on 9/11 and Abdulazeez did at the Chattanooga Naval facility.

Late Tuesday night, eight Syrian men were arrested in Honduras using stolen Greek passports. They were headed for the U.S., and they didn;t speak a word of Greek.

And, Sen. Rand Paul recently pointed out that two Iraqi Al Qaeda members were caught in Bowling Green, KY in 2009, as they attempted to buy Stinger missiles. He also noted the scores of Somalians who came here as “refugees” and then returned to Somalia to fight for Boko Haram.

From the G-20 conference in Turkey, Pres. Obama stated: “… a religious test for [people] fleeing from a war-torn country … is not American. That’s not who we are. We don’t have religious tests for our compassion.” But, on November 19th, Speaker Ryan defended this legislation, which was supported by 47 Democrats, saying, “It’s a security test, not a religious test.”

Obama revealed himself once more to be an arrogant, condescending, hypocritical liar, since he led the legal battle to deport the Romeike family, German Christians, last year. A judge had acknowledged they were escaping religious persecution and initially granted them asylum, but Obama demanded their return to Germany.

Texas Governor Greg Abbott penned a letter to Obama that read “American humanitarian compassion could be exploited to expose Americans to similar deadly danger” (i.e. Paris attacks), and he also stated that the federal government cannot guarantee the Syrian refugees would not contain a significant number of potential terrorists. “As such, opening our door to them irresponsibly exposes our fellow Americans to unacceptable peril.”

Isn’t keeping murderers out of America and defending America our leaders first duty?

On Nov. 16th, New Jersey Governor Chris Christie told radio host Hugh Hewitt: ” I don’t trust this administration to effectively vet the people that they’re asking us to take in. we need to put the safety and security of the American people first.”

The security screening cannot be too precise and accurate, notwithstanding the fact that it takes 18 to 24 months. As many officials, like Rep. Bob Goodblatte (R) have observed, we cannot thoroughly screen someone, when we don’t have access to their actual records, due to the war.

Please also note that last year the Obama administration unilaterally relaxed the security assessments of an untold number of “refugees” who confessed to providing “limited material support” to terror groups.

Testifying on Capitol Hill last month, FBI Director James Comey once again acknowledged that database “gaps” seriously limit the U.S.’s ability to properly screen Syrian refugees: “If someone has never made a ripple in the pond in Syria … reflected in our database, we can query our database until the cows come home, but there will be nothing showing up because we have no record of them.”

Senator Chuck Schumer, a top Democrat, is now saying, “We may need a pause in our refugee program.”

Resettle these “refugees” in Muslim majority nations. Let them go to Bahrain, Qatar, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and the United Emirates, the five wealthiest countries on the Arabian peninsula, which have not accepted a single refugee to date.

Aside from all of this, something is also horribly wrong with our passport tracking system. Terrorists from America and Europe are bragging about how easy it is to travel to Islamic enclaves and return, just like Paris terrorist Abdelhamid Abaaoud and Abdulazeez, who murdered the U.S. soldiers in Chattanooga, not to mention visa overstays.

America should not fall sway to Obama’s false piety, as he spoke at the G-20 conference of Syrian parents, children and orphans. Look at how easily and naturally Muslims booed and shouted “Allahu Akbar” at a soccer game on November 18th in Turkey, when a moment of silence was called for the victims of the Paris terrorist attacks. Understand the prevalence of the “eye for an eye” philosophy ingrained in Islamic culture and applied against any perceived wrong, at the slightest provocation, across the entire world, from France to Mali, despite the fact their Islamic doctrines have created their own misery. And then, rather than open the door to thousands of more potential and active terrorists, remember American parents and children murdered on 9/11 and at Boston __ American children orphaned __ and act forcefully and effectively to ensure something similar or worse will never happen on our watch again: Press America’s leaders to halt all Muslim immigration now.

Obama’s Dead Wrong About the Paris Attacks


It can happen here too.

First off the president should acknowledge that this atrocity was committed by Islamic jihadis

US News, by Christopher Hull, Nov. 14, 2015:

Paris is my favorite city in the world.

Ernest Hemingway once wrote “if you are lucky enough to have lived in Paris as a young man then wherever you go for the rest of your life it stays with you, for Paris is a moveable feast.” I was lucky enough to have lived in Paris as a young man, and Hemingway, if only on this, was right.

So during the Paris attacks my heart broke watching helplessly as reports came from the scene of the Bataclan club massacre. One apparent club-goer, who was himself wounded, posted on Facebook that the terrorists were slaughtering people, “one by one.”

But we are not helpless. Not yet, anyway.

[READ Reaction from around the world to Paris attacks]

President Barack Obama would have you believe, “This is an attack on all of humanity and the universal values that we share.”

But he’s flat, dead wrong. All of humanity does not share Western values, or the Paris attack wouldn’t have happened.

Specifically, though the president painfully and repeatedly refuses to say so, Islamic jihadis do not share Western values.

If they did, President Obama’s cowardly withdrawal from Iraq and refusal to enforce his own red line in Syria would not have led to Islamic State’s rise in the first place – and the resultant surge of refugees into Europe, including, reportedly, at least one Paris attacker.

Yet President Obama would also have you believe that his limp and increasingly unpopular response to Islamic State has “contained” the jihadi army and kept it from “gaining strength,” as he claimed literally hours before the Paris attacks.

Of course, he would also have you believe that climate change is a bigger threat than (Islamic) terror. He insists, “There’s no greater threat to our planet than climate change.” Well, Paris – and New Yorkon 9/11 and Beirut in 1983 and well, New York in 1993 and Beirut last week and Paris earlier this year – are trying over and over to teach us different. The truth is, and the Western world is united in believing it, here’s no greater threat to our planet than Islamic jihad.

And here’s where this matters to you. The Obama White House would also have you believe that the 10,000 Syrian refugees the president is in the process of bringing to America this year alone will “go through the most robust security process of anybody who’s contemplating travel to the United States.” Just last week, the administration acknowledged that it was bringing online refugee screening outposts in the Middle East to “push out really ambitious goals” to “increase the channels” for bringing Syrians to America.

Unfortunately, President Obama’s own FBI director, James Comey, says the U.S. can’t properly vet Syrians for ties to Islamic jihad. Likewise, the assistant director for the FBI, Michael Steinback, has told Congress that when it comes to Syrian refugees, “We don’t have it under control.”

“Absolutely, we’re doing the best we can,” he testified in February before the House. “If I were to say that we had it under control, then I would say I know of every single individual traveling. I don’t. And I don’t know every person there and I don’t know everyone coming back. So it’s not even close to being under control.”

Alabama GOP Sen. Jeff Sessions, who chairs the Senate Immigration and the National Interest subcommittee of the Judiciary Committee, repeatedly asked Matthew Emrich, associate director of the Fraud Detection and National Security Directorate at U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, to confirm or deny Mr. Steinback’s claim that Syrian refugees were “clearly a population of concern” and that U.S. databases don’t have information on them. Emmrich eventually fell silent.

[MORE: Editorial Cartoons on the Islamic State Group]

But you don’t have to. This is where we are not yet helpless.

Refugees – amusingly called “migrants” by sympathetic news outlets trying to finesse that they are generally both illegal and immigrants – have swept through Europe and permeated the national media, as well. The image of Aylan Kurdi, a three-year-old Kurdish refugee washed up on a Turkish beach touched heartstrings around the world, including mine. He looked painfully like my two-year-old boy Thomas.

However, in a sadly goofy way, so did little Richard Martin, the boy killed in the Boston Marathon Bombing by Chechen refugees. In fact, refugees and asylees have played key roles in terror activities from the 1993 World Trade Center bombing to the ongoing flow of al-Shabab recruits from Minnesota.

And it will get worse if we ignore the threat, as Paris suggests. “Just wait,” says an Islamic State group operative, who claims that ISIS has successfully smuggled 4,000 jihadis into Europe hidden among refugees. More to come – in Paris, and if we make the mistake of believing our president, here as well.

So what is to be done?

First, we need to acknowledge that the Ted Kennedy-drafted 1980 law that governs refugee resettlement was, like his 1965 Immigration Act and the Immigration Act of 1990, designed more to maximize the influx of potential Democrats to the United States than to keep it secure in the face of an enemy like the global Islamic jihad.

So, second, Congress should include in the omnibus spending bill required by December 11, 2015some variation of Texas GOP Rep. Brian Babin’s Refugee Accountability National Security Act, which would place a moratorium on refugee resettlement until Congress deems the program has been adequately reviewed, as well as a Government Accountability Office audit of its costs. Even simply defunding all refugee resettlement from Syria would be a start, though the problem of jihadis posing as refugees extends far beyond Syria.

Third, Congress should pass and President Obama should sign the bill sponsored by House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Michael McCaul, a Texas Republican, which would restore control over how many refugees the U.S. admits each year to the legislative branch, where it belongs.

Fourth, Congress should pass and President Obama should sign the bill sponsored by Texas GOP Sen. Ted Cruz and Rep. Florida GOP Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart to designate the Muslim Brotherhood a Foreign Terrorist Organization, just as have Russia, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and arguably even Syria.

[MORE Paris Terror Attacks by ISIS Called ‘Act of War’]

Fifth, the U.S. should militarize its southern border. Attempts to “secure the border” started as early as the late 1800s and have by and large failed. After 9/11, however, George W. Bush ordered 6,000 national guardsmen to the border to at long last seal it for security reasons. Yet as the 2004 elections approached, Bush, who favored immigration expansion for political and business interest reasons, gradually relaxed his grip on the border. President Obama, who favored it to pack the country with left-leaning voters, has literally broken the law to bring people across the border and keep them in the country. Today we have what Marine Corps Gen. John Kelly, then acting commander of the U.S. Southern Command, called an “existential” threat to America.

Sixth, the president (and this could not possibly be Barack Obama) should unite the world around a hard-nosed, realist foreign policy that supports Western civilization’s allies and devastates its enemies – not just in what we now think of as Syria and Iraq, the source of the current refugee tidal wave, but around the world.

Finally, Congress should pass comprehensive immigration reform – and not the amnesty that both the U.S. Chamber and the Democratic Party use that term to describe. A real reform that would:

  1. Reverse the Obama administration’s suicidal (not to mention illegal) decision to unilaterally change the law to allow in immigrants with “limited” terror contact
  2. Eliminate funding for the so-called voluntary agencies which have turned into lobbies to expand the number of refugees ad infinitum
  3. Stop chain migration that immigration forces dub “family reunification” (think about it – why can’t families remain unified in the countries where they start out?) and that could be used to expand President Obama’s 10,000 Syrians exponentially
  4. Give the U.S. control over whom we deem a refugee, not the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees, which has a rotten record that has led some to speculate about how closely it cooperates with the Organization of Islamic Countries.
  5. Eliminate politically correct, politically driven, problem-prone and wildly unsafediversity visas” dreamed up by (who else?) the late Senator Kennedy
  6. Follow the lead of then-Sen. Joe Lieberman, independent of Connecticut, who once proposed eliminating citizenship for those who join foreign terror organizations
  7. Wipe out President Obama’s illegal and unconstitutional amnesty to align the rule of law and perceived incentives to break it
  8. Likewise, end the practice of having anchor babies that those who otherwise disdain and ignore the Constitution incorrectly call the constitutional guarantee of “birthright citizenship,” and which Obama has stood on its head by granting illegal amnesty to parents of these tiny citizens
  9. Finally, let’s give those from native English speaking countries higher priority in immigration law. They put less of a strain on schools, do better over the long term and, well, are less likely to kill us: 83 percent of alleged terrorist attacks take place outside of native English-speaking countries.

That’s a pretty hefty agenda. To even move in that direction, here’s one thing that we as a nation – and the entire Western World – must do before anything else: acknowledge that we are in a war with Islamic jihadis who want us dead for ideological reasons and will stop at nothing to kill us.

Otherwise, not only my favorite city will continue to face an ever-greater risk of senseless slaughter at the hands of blood-thirsty Islamic jihadis.

Yours will too.

Christopher C. Hull, Ph.D., a former adjunct assistant professor at Georgetown University, is the immediate past chief of staff for Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa. He works with clients including the Center for Security Policy, a nonpartisan, nonprofit national security think tank.

Also see:



Breitbart, by Ian Hanchett, Nov. 14, 2015:

Columnist and author Mark Steyn argued that a “large pool of people” who “provide a comfort zone within which this virus incubates” and that Western leaders are going to have to ask themselves “is it really a good idea to admit millions and millions of people to European countries?” on Saturday’s “Fox & Friends” on the Fox News Channel.

Steyn said, “nobody wants to say they were right about this, but I wrote a book almost ten years ago, and people said it was a alarmist. I’ve been listening to you guys all morning, and it’s striking to me, every interview you’ve had, Tucker has said, at one point, well, is it — some variation of is it really a good idea to admit millions and of millions of people to European countries? And people then start to tap dance around that issue, but when you get to it, that’s at the heart of it. That there is a large pool of people who, they don’t want to kill people, they don’t want bomb people, they don’t want to blow people up, but they provide a comfort zone within which this virus incubates. And at some point, if Mr. Hollande, and Mr. Cameron, and all these people talking about our values this morning are serious about that, they will have to do as Tucker did and ask themselves that question, and come up with an answer to it.”

When asked if the president realized “we have different values from the people who did this,” Steyn answered, “No, he doesn’t, and he wants to preserve that myth. If you look at the two big French attacks this year, for example, this attack was on people who just going to concerts, just going to restaurants, just going to soccer games, people find that well, easy to say, well you shouldn’t be blown up if you just go to a restaurant, or you just go to a soccer game. But when you get to the free speech thing, when you get to Charlie Hebdo in January, the majority of Muslims, in France, and in other western European nations, do not accept the concept of free speech. Free speech is not a universal value. It arises from a very narrow, particular tradition on this planet, and when you country becomes ten percent, 15 percent, 20 percent Muslim, there’s less and less of market for a free speech. So, despite what Obama, and Cameron, and Mr. Hollande say, that value of free speech will die, because there will be people who do not share that value.”

Steyn added that the war against terror can’t be fought on an “intelligence basis. I mean, we’ve been talking about whether you can vet people before — as they come in. A lot of these people, for example the Boston Marathon bomber, the guy who did the stabbings in Colorado just last week, they come in, and they’re perfectly normal little kids, and then they get radicalized as they live in Western societies. A quarter million people entered one German state, Bavaria, in September and October, a quarter million people. The German police estimate that it takes 60 people working on just tracking one known person on these watch lists. So, you cannot solve it by intelligence. You have to actually talk about things like a moratorium on Muslim immigration, and waging the battle ideologically. You have to be prepared — you have to, not just talk about our values, as Cameron did. You have to identify what those values are, and be prepared to defend and advance them in the world. Don’t just say that they’re universal. Because the guy in Yemen, and the goat herd, the Pashtun goat herd, and the fellow who thinks that his daughter got raped, so she deserves to die, these people don’t think they’re universal values. And Obama is useless if that’s all that he’s got to say about it.”

He added, “I think it has to be a two prong thing. I mean, this is a domestic battle, as much as an overseas war. In that these are people who nominally are citizens of Western nations, yet feel no allegiance to those nations. I mean, we pretend, we talk about the fellow in Colorado for example. The ABC News headline was a Santa Clara teenager had perpetrated the attacks. So, we present these people as normal residents of Santa Clara, of the United States, of France, Canada, Australia, but they bare, they — in the end, their sense of identity is not French, or Canadian, or Australian, or American. It’s with a pan-national identity, that actually doesn’t think in terms of nation-states. It’s bigger than that. The caliphate isn’t interested in the borders of France, or Belgium, or Germany. it’s actually making the very concept of national identity irrelevant, and replacing it with something bigger.”

How France Became an Inviting Target of the Jihad


PJ Media, by Andrew C. McCarthy, Nov. 14, 2015:

Earlier this year, following the Charlie Hebdo massacre and related terrorist attacks in and around Paris, I wrote Islam and Free Speech, a Broadside” that is part of the series published by Encounter Books. The following is an excerpt.

How did we get to this historical anomaly in France where, as the estimable scholar Daniel Pipes observes, “a majority population accepts the customs and even the criminality of a poorer and weaker community”? It is the result of a conquest ideology taking the measure of a civilization that no longer values its heritage, no longer regards itself as worthy of defense.

France’s population of 66 million is now approximately 10 percent Islamic. Estimates are sketchy because, in a vestige of its vanishing secularist tradition, France does not collect census data about religious affiliation. Still, between 6 and 7 million Muslims are reasonably believed to be resident in the country (Pew put the total at 4.7 million back in 2010 – other analysts peg it higher today). To many in France, the number seems higher, due to both the outsize influence of Islamist activists on the political class and the dense Muslim communities in and around Paris – approximating 15 percent of the local population. An online poll conducted by Ipsos Mosi in 2014 found that the average French citizenbelieves Muslims make up about a third of the country’s population.

As night follows day, when Muslim populations surge, so does support for jihadism and the sharia supremacist ideology that catalyzes it. The reason is plain to see, even if Western elites remain willfully blind to it: For a not insignificant percentage of the growing Muslim millions in Europe, infiltration – by both mass immigration and the establishment of swelling Islamic enclaves – is a purposeful strategy of conquest, sometimes referred to as “voluntary apartheid.”

One of its leading advocates is Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi. A Qatar-based Egyptian octogenarian, Qaradawi is a Muslim Brotherhood icon. He is a copiously published scholar graduated from Cairo’s al-Azhar University, the seat of Sunni Islamic learning for over a millennium, and thus oversees both the International Union of Muslim Scholars and the European Council for Fatwa and Research. Thanks to his pioneering of the highly trafficked IslamOnline website and, especially, to his hugely popular al-Jazeera television program, Sharia and Life, he has become the world’s most influential sharia jurist.

Qaradawi is the sharia backbone of the violent jihad to exterminate Israel – a tiny country surrounded by hundreds of millions of hostile Muslims. The sheikh also vows that Islam will “conquer” both Europe and America, but acknowledges that this conquest will require a strategy more suited to a determined minority that knows it cannot win by force of arms. The key, he asserts, is dawa, the Muslim equivalent of proselytism. In radical Islam, it is hyper-aggressive, pushing on every cultural cylinder, pressuring every institution, and exploiting the atmosphere of intimidation created by jihadist terror to blur the lines between legal advocacy and extortion.

In France, dawa presses against laïcité, the credo of secularism through the strict separation of religion and the state. Qaradawi is quite clear that “secularism can never enjoy a general acceptance in an Islamic society.” He is equally adamant that Muslims, who are bound to live in accordance with the strictures of sharia, must reject a secular framework because “acceptance of secularism means abandonment of sharia, a denial of the divine guidance and a rejection of Allah’s injunctions.” Thus, he elaborates, “The call for secularism among Muslims is atheism and a rejection of Islam. Its acceptance as a basis for rule in place of sharia is downright apostasy.”

This nexus between free speech and Western democracy is worth pausing over. Notice that, in focusing on the incompatibility between Islamic law and democracy’s secular, pluralist underpinnings, Qaradawi draws the inevitable conclusion that democracy equals apostasy. The term apostasy is not invoked idly in radical Islam. As explained in Reliance of the Traveller, a classic sharia manual endorsed by al-Azhar scholars, the renunciation of Islam is a death penalty offense.

Free speech does not exist in a vacuum. It is the plinth of freedom’s fortress. It is the ineliminable imperative if there is to be the robust exchange of knowledge and ideas, the rule of reason, freedom of conscience, equality before the law, property rights, and equality of opportunity. That is why it must be extinguished if there is to be what Qaradawi calls a “place of religion” – meaning his religion. For all its arrogance and triumphalist claims, radical Islam must suppress speech because it cannot compete in a free market of conscience.

To sustain their movement, therefore, Islamist leaders must separate Muslims from secular society. In the West, this means forming Islamic enclaves in which sharia gradually takes root as the de facto and, eventually, the de jure law – enabling Muslims to resist the challenge of critical thinking under the guise avoiding the near occasion of apostasy. Over time, dominion is established over swaths of not only physical territory but legal privilege. Qaradawi puts the matter succinctly:

Were we to convince Western leaders and decision-makers of our right to live according to our faith — ideologically, legislatively, and ethically — without imposing our views or inflicting harm upon them, we would have traversed an immense barrier in our quest for an Islamic state.

The key to the conquest strategy is to coerce the West into accepting a Muslim right to resist assimilation, to regard sharia as superseding Western law and custom when the two conflict. For precisely this reason, the Organization of Islamic Cooperation – a bloc of 56 Muslim countries (plus the Palestinian Authority) – has decreed that “Muslims should not be marginalized or attempted to be assimilated, but should be accommodated.” Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the Islamist president of Turkey who has systematically dismantled that country’s secular, pro-Western system, similarly pronounces that pressuring Muslims to assimilate in the West “is a crime against humanity.”

Free expression is the gateway to assimilation. Consequently, radical Islam cannot tolerate it.

As a result, France is now rife with Zones Urbaines Sensibiles – “sensitive urban areas.” The government officially lists some 751 of them: Islamic enclaves in the banlieues, often referred to as “no go zones” because the indigenous populations discourage the presence of non-Muslims who do not conform to Islamic standards of dress and social interaction, and of public officials – police, fire-fighters, emergency medical teams, and building inspectors – who are seen as symbols of the state’s effort to exercise sovereignty in areas Muslims seek to possess adversely.

Some of these zones inevitably evolve into hotbeds of jihadist activity. As the Gatestone Institute’s Soeren Kern notes, there has been no shortage of Internet traffic suggesting, for example, “the killing of France’s ambassadors, just as the manly Libyan fighters killed the U.S. ambassador in Benghazi.” In a low-intensity jihadist thrum stretching back several years, the torching of automobiles has become a commonplace – as many as 40,000 cars burned annually. Perhaps most alarmingly, over a thousand French Muslims, more than from any other Western country, are estimated to have traveled to Syria to fight for ISIS – meaning many will return to the country as trained, battle-hardened jihadists. Beyond the direct ISIS participants, moreover, the Washington Post has reported that a recent poll found 16 percent of French citizens expressing some degree of support for ISIS – an organization whose rule over the vast territory it has seized is best known for decapitations, rapine, the execution of homosexuals, mass graves, and the enslavement of non-Muslim communities.

Once one grasps the voluntary apartheid strategy, it becomes obvious why radical Islam’s inroads in France, and elsewhere in Europe, seamlessly translate into demands for the enforcement of sharia’s curbs on speech and artistic expression. What is not so obvious is just how profound a challenge to the West this constitutes.

Geller: Muslims Declare War on France–’It Was a Bloodbath’

Thierry Chesnot/Getty Images

Thierry Chesnot/Getty Images

Breitbart, by Pamela Geller, Nov. 13, 2015:

High powered weapons, suicide bombers and grenades. This is war.

“Allahu akbar!” That all-too-familiar battle cry kicked off six Islamic acts of war on the people of France. Muslims set off on a murderous rampage in Paris Friday night, killing at least 166, including at least 100 concertgoers at a music hall featuring an American rock band. The death toll spread across six sites in the city.

Devout Muslims were celebrating the attacks on social media.

One of the apprehended jihadists reportedly stated, “I am from the Islamic State.” Hundreds of thousands of these savages have invaded the continent.

“Terrorist attacks of an unprecedented magnitude are in play in Paris. It’s horror,” French President François Hollande said. “We have mobilized all forces possible to neutralize the terrorists.”

At the concert hall, the merciless jihadis murdered their hostages one by one, as the non-Muslims begged for the lives of their loved ones. Paris police said that the siege ended when French forces killed at least two of the jihad murderers inside the hall.

Hollande ordered a state of emergency in Paris. He also closed the country’s borders. Too little, too late. After the Charlie Hebdo massacre and the subsequent murders at a Jewish grocery in Paris in January, what more warning did Hollande need?

The massacre took place at several different locations in Paris — near the site of the massacre of Muhammad cartoonists at the Charlie Hebdo offices in January. The jihadis focused on what would be prestige targets for them. They murdered several people in a restaurant, as well as at the concert hall. Some were killed in suicide bombings – a hallmark of jihad attacks. There was another bombing near the Stade de France, north of Paris.

One eyewitness said: “I’ve seen two terrorists from my point of view with AK-47s entering the concert room and firing randomly into the crowd. People yelled and screamed.” This witness said that the Muslim murderers calmly reloaded their weapons, then began killing again: “It lasted for 10 minutes. 10 minutes. 10 horrific minutes where everyone was on the floor covering their heads. We heard so many gunshots. And the terrorists were very calm…and they reloaded three to four times their weapons.” This recalls the Allah-worshiping young man who stabbed four people at the University of California Merced last week.

The witness added:

They didn’t shout anything. They didn’t say anything. They were in masks. They were wearing black clothes… And they were shooting at people on the floor. And I was luckily at the top of the stage. The front of the stage. So people tried to escape…and I found an exit when the terrorists reloaded their guns. And I climbed on the stage and we found an exit. And when I went on the streets I see 20 to 25 bodies lying on the floor. And people were very badly injured with gunshot wounds.

Most chillingly of all, the witness said: “I have some friends who are still inside… who are hiding… they are hiding in some kind of room in the dark. They text me and they are very afraid.”

Despite all this horror, the European Union elites are bringing into Europe millions of these savages. I have warned for years about this coming jihad. For doing so, I was attacked, smeared, and marginalized. We were right about it all, and yet still my colleagues and I are blacklisted. Hundreds are dead, and the war has just begun. We did everything in our power to save lives. But the political, media, and academic elites aligned with the savages. And now hundreds more are dead in Paris — and you ain’t seen nothing yet.

This Paris jihad massacre casts into a new light the desire of New York State Senator Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand to bring 1.5 million Muslim migrants from Syria to New York. Obama wants to accelerate the entry of Syrian refugees into the U.S. I can promise you this: I will lead a march against this woman if she pursues this. All attendees will be required to bring pitchforks and torches. If she wants to kill New York State and bring these jihadis into the U.S., she better be prepared for a knock-down, drag-out fight.

Incredibly, Obama said today that the Islamic State (ISIS) is not getting stronger: “we have contained them.” He is either in an early stage of dementia or he is one of them. I submit that it is the latter. In either case, Americans must be ready: lock and load. It’s not just in Paris, it’s here: Garland, Texas, Chattanooga… yesterday, an Ohio Muslim was arrested for plotting to kill U.S. soldiers and bomb churches and schools.

“I’ll be proud when I shed American blood,” Muslim convert Terrence McNeil said, according to prosecutors. He allegedly posted messages advocating jihad against the United States: “I would gladly take part in an attack on this murderous regime and the people.” This was one of their jihad fighters in the US. And Ohio is crawling with them.

These are not idle threats. This is a world war. I have exposed hundreds of Islamic State social postings which name names and provide addresses and photos of U.S. soldiers here in the States, urging American Muslims to slaughter our boys and girls.

Right now, nothing is being done to stop jihad recruiting in U.S. mosques, even as several hundred young Muslims from the U.S. have gone to wage jihad for the Islamic State. And now they seek to wage jihad here at home.

In the wake of this jihad war in France, terror groups like the Hamas-tied Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) will hold press conferences that their running dogs in the media will clamor to cover, hand-wringing about a non-existent “fear of reprisals” and “backlash” against innocent Muslims.

And the jihad machine steamrolls on.

The Muslim migrant stream into Europe is a Muslim invasion. Back in February, the Islamic State warned that they would send millions of Muslim fighters into Europe. They have made good on their every pledge. And now the attacks in Paris demonstrate that Europe is at war.

It’s coming here. Stop Muslim migrant immigration. Now.

Pamela Geller is the President of the American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI), publisher of PamelaGeller.com and author of The Post-American Presidency: The Obama Administration’s War on America and Stop the Islamization of America: A Practical Guide to the Resistance. Follow her on Twitter here. Like her on Facebook here.

The Barbarians Are Inside, And There Are No Gates

1585by Mark Steyn
Steyn on Europe
November 13, 2015

As I write, Paris is under curfew for the first time since the German occupation, and the death toll from the multiple attacks stands at 158, the vast majority of them slaughtered during a concert at the Bataclan theatre, a delightful bit of 19th century Chinoiserie on the boulevard Voltaire. The last time I was there, if memory serves, was to see Julie Pietri. I’m so bloody sick of these savages shooting and bombing and killing and blowing up everything I like – whether it’s the town where my little girl’s favorite fondue restaurant is or my favorite hotel in Amman or the brave freespeecher who hosted me in Copenhagen …or a music hall where I liked to go to hear a little jazz and pop and get away from the cares of the world for a couple of hours. But look at the photographs from Paris: there’s nowhere to get away from it; the barbarians who yell “Allahu Akbar!” are there waiting for you …when you go to a soccer match, you go to a concert, you go for a drink on a Friday night. They’re there on the train… at the magazine office… in the Kosher supermarket… at the museum in Brussels… outside the barracks in Woolwich…

Twenty-four hours ago, I said on the radio apropos the latest campus “safe space” nonsense:

This is what we’re going to be talking about when the mullahs nuke us.

Almost. When the Allahu Akbar boys opened fire, Paris was talking about the climate-change conference due to start later this month, when the world’s leaders will fly in to “solve” a “problem” that doesn’t exist rather than to address the one that does. But don’t worry: we already have a hashtag (#PrayForParis) and doubtless there’ll be another candlelight vigil of weepy tilty-headed wankers. Because as long as we all advertise how sad and sorrowful we are, who needs to do anything?

With his usual killer comedy timing, the “leader of the free world” told George Stephanopoulos on “Good Morning, America” this very morning that he’d “contained” ISIS and that they’re not “gaining strength”. A few hours later, a cell whose members claim to have been recruited by ISIS slaughtered over 150 people in the heart of Paris and succeeded in getting two suicide bombers and a third bomb to within a few yards of the French president.

Visiting the Bataclan, M Hollande declared that “nous allons mener le combat, il sera impitoyable“: We are going to wage a war that will be pitiless.

Does he mean it? Or is he just killing time until Obama and Cameron and Merkel and Justin Trudeau and Malcolm Turnbull fly in and they can all get back to talking about sea levels in the Maldives in the 22nd century? By which time France and Germany and Belgium and Austria and the Netherlands will have been long washed away.

Among his other coy evasions, President Obama described tonight’s events as “an attack not just on Paris, it’s an attack not just on the people of France, but this is an attack on all of humanity and the universal values we share”.

But that’s not true, is it? He’s right that it’s an attack not just on Paris or France. What it is is an attack on the west, on the civilization that built the modern world – an attack on one portion of “humanity” by those who claim to speak for another portion of “humanity”. And these are not “universal values” but values that spring from a relatively narrow segment of humanity. They were kinda sorta “universal” when the great powers were willing to enforce them around the world and the colonial subjects of ramshackle backwaters such as Aden, Sudan and the North-West Frontier Province were at least obliged to pay lip service to them. But the European empires retreated from the world, and those “universal values” are utterly alien to large parts of the map today.

And then Europe decided to invite millions of Muslims to settle in their countries. Most of those people don’t want to participate actively in bringing about the death of diners and concertgoers and soccer fans, but at a certain level most of them either wish or are indifferent to the death of the societies in which they live – modern, pluralist, western societies and those “universal values” of which Barack Obama bleats. So, if you are either an active ISIS recruit or just a guy who’s been fired up by social media, you have a very large comfort zone in which to swim, and which the authorities find almost impossible to penetrate.

And all Chancellor Merkel and the EU want to do is make that large comfort zone even larger by letting millions more “Syrian” “refugees” walk into the Continent and settle wherever they want. As I wrote after the Copenhagen attacks in February:

I would like to ask Mr Cameron and Miss Thorning-Schmidt what’s their happy ending here? What’s their roadmap for fewer “acts of violence” in the years ahead? Or are they riding on a wing and a prayer that they can manage the situation and hold it down to what cynical British civil servants used to call during the Irish “Troubles” “an acceptable level of violence”? In Pakistan and Nigeria, the citizenry are expected to live with the reality that every so often Boko Haram will kick open the door of the schoolhouse and kidnap your daughters for sex-slavery or the Taliban will gun down your kids and behead their teacher in front of the class. And it’s all entirely “random”, as President Obama would say, so you just have to put up with it once in a while, and it’s tough if it’s your kid, but that’s just the way it is. If we’re being honest here, isn’t that all Mr Cameron and Miss Thorning-Schmidt are offering their citizens? Spasms of violence as a routine feature of life, but don’t worry, we’ll do our best to contain it – and you can help mitigate it by not going to “controversial” art events, or synagogues, or gay bars, or…

…or soccer matches, or concerts, or restaurants…

To repeat what I said a few days ago, I’m Islamed out. I’m tired of Islam 24/7, at Colorado colleges, Marseilles synagogues, Sydney coffee shops, day after day after day. The west cannot win this thing with a schizophrenic strategy of targeting things and people but not targeting the ideology, of intervening ineffectually overseas and not intervening at all when it comes to the remorseless Islamization and self-segregation of large segments of their own countries.

So I say again: What’s the happy ending here? Because if M Hollande isn’t prepared to end mass Muslim immigration to France and Europe, then his “pitiless war” isn’t serious. And, if they’re still willing to tolerate Mutti Merkel’s mad plan to reverse Germany’s demographic death cycle through fast-track Islamization, then Europeans aren’t serious. In the end, the decadence of Merkel, Hollande, Cameron and the rest of the fin de civilisation western leadership will cost you your world and everything you love.

So screw the candlelight vigil.



With Open Gates: The forced collective suicide of European nations

Getty Images

Getty Images

The Final Solution to the European Problem

Gates of Vienna, by Baron Bodissey, Nov. 10, 2015:

The following video is a compilation of footage related to the European “migration” crisis taken in the last five or six years. I’ve seen most of these clips before, and Vlad and I have done our own subtitled versions of some of them. The person who put the video together recommends that viewers download it and mirror it, because it probably won’t stay up on YouTube for very long.

Yes, I know it’s got a section with Nick Griffin ranting on about Zionists and banks and whatnot. But not counting that, it’s a pretty good collage of what’s been going on:


The Glazov Gang-Sweden: On the Verge of Collapse:

The Knife Intifada…Coming to a City Near You

Israeli soldiers stands by the body of a Palestinian man at the scene of a stabbing attack near the West Bank Jewish settlement of Adam, north of Jerusalem, Wednesday, Oct. 21, 2015. Israeli police said the man stabbed a female Israeli soldier before he was shot and killed. (AP Photo/Majdi Mohammed)

Israeli soldiers stands by the body of a Palestinian man at the scene of a stabbing attack near the West Bank Jewish settlement of Adam, north of Jerusalem, Wednesday, Oct. 21, 2015. Israeli police said the man stabbed a female Israeli soldier before he was shot and killed. (AP Photo/Majdi Mohammed)

Conservative Review, Daniel Horowitz | November 9th, 2015:

Over the past few decades, Israel has served as the harbinger for everything the Islamic jihad has wrought on western civilization.  The suicide bombings began there and have now become widespread throughout the world.  Now Israel is suffering from the most devastating form of terror – the ubiquitous threat of spontaneous stabbing attacks from Muslims living among them.

Well, it didn’t take long for the knife intifada to come to America, too.

Last Wednesday, 18-year-old Faisal Mohammad, in a scene eerily similar to what is happening in Israel on a daily basis, went on a stabbing rampage against his classmates at University of California Merced.  Thanks to the heroic interference from Byron Price, a construction worker on scene, only four people were injured and nobody was killed.  Mohammed was eventually shot dead by campus police after arriving to the scene. But a manifesto written by Mohammad, discovered by the coroner after his death, showed that he intended to “kill a lot of people.” The manifesto also contained references to Allah.

In Israel today, many of the attacks are not emanating from “Palestinian” Arabs living in Judea and Samaria but from the 1.5 million Israeli Arabs who have citizenship and work among them.

Every time one of these attacks occur, the first reaction from most observers – to the extent they even recognize Jihad as the root cause – is to suspect ISIS of being involved.  In reality, what we are now facing in this country, much like Israelis are confronted with in their neighborhoods, is a widespread freelance Jihad that is even more dangerous than the targeted command-and-control attacks of the past that were the hallmark of Al Qaeda.

In Israel today, many of the attacks are not emanating from “Palestinian” Arabs living in Judea and Samaria but from the 1.5 million Israeli Arabs who have citizenship and work among them.  The success of the global cyber jihad is lighting all of the fuses around the world in a way that presents the West with a greater existential threat than isolated “9-11 style” attacks.

Consider the following finding from a recent counterterrorism report put out by the House Committee on Homeland Security:

There have been more U.S.-based jihadist terror cases in 2015 than in any full year since 9/11. The number of U.S. terrorist cases involving homegrown Islamist extremists has gone from 38 in July 2010 to 127 today—more than a three-fold increase in just five years.

You wouldn’t know it from the media coverage or the silence from most elected officials, but we have suffered from a number of homegrown terror attacks this year.  These attacks are not directed by Al Qaeda or ISIS, they are inspired by their change in focus to fard ‘ayn – the individual duty to carry out Sharia law.

At its core, this is the problem with the mass immigration from the Middle East and Obama’s imminent plan to bring in thousands of more Islamic refugees from Somalia and Syria – a plan that has, thus far, gone unchallenged by Congress.  It’s not just a threat of admitting a handful of professionally trained terrorists.  It’s the certainty of bringing in a large percentage of those who believe in Sharia law and will inevitably subvert our culture and be lured into global Jihad.  We are witnessing the suicide of a nation with our immigration policies and the willful disregard of the threat posed by the Muslim Brotherhood here at home.  What is especially tragic is that we are not learning the vivid lessons of Europe and Israel.

With this clear and present danger staring us in the face, we don’t need a political leadership with a particular degree of sentience to realize the problem.  We need those with the courage and common sense to put aside the political correctness and spare this country – the “Great Satan” (as the Jihadists endearingly call the U.S.) – from becoming as endangered as the “Little Satan.”

Daniel Horowitz is a Senior Editor of Conservative Review. Follow him on Twitter @RMConservative.

M-Day: The Invasion of the West

American Thinker, By David Solway, Nov. 1, 2015:

Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, later Pope Benedict XVI, wrote in his 2007 volume Europe: Today and Tomorrow:

“There is a self-hatred in the West that can be considered only as something pathological. The West attempts in a praiseworthy manner to open itself completely to the comprehension of external values, but it no longer loves itself; it now only sees what is despicable and destructive in its own history, while it is no longer able to perceive what is great and pure there.”

This attitude of self-detestation is both the seed and the fruit of what we have come to call multiculturalism. Benedict does not reject multiculturalism in toto, arguing for its spiritualization, but recognizes that it “is sometimes mostly the abandonment and denial of what is one’s own, a flight from what is one’s own.”

The current pope takes a very different view of the West’s obligation to the Other, having appealed “to the parishes, the religious communities, the monasteries and sanctuaries of all Europe to take in one family of refugees.” According to this saintly luminary, the mistreatment of asylum seekers “makes one cry,” since they are merely “victims of injustice, of this throw-away economy” and war.

Pope Francis’ entreaty to the West flows directly from the 1968 episcopal conference in Medellin, Columbia, which, couched in Marxist categories beloved of Liberation Theologians, spoke of “listening to the cry of the poor and becoming the interpreter of their anguish.” It represented a determined effort, in the ecclesial language it affected, to turn the center into the periphery and the periphery into the center, that is, to raise the Third World to the level of the First and consign the capitalist West to the margins of History.

One way of accomplishing this task is revolution; another is the multicultural flooding of the West with Third Worlders who will radically transform the social, cultural, political and economic structure of Western civilization. (See Leonardo and Clodovis Boff, Introducing Liberation Theology.)

It appears that Pope Francis has got his wish, as Europe has been blessed with wave upon wave of asylum seekers benefitting from both pontifical authority and official complaisance. It has become evident that government officials in many countries and the mainstream media are in lockstep complicity, painting these asylum seekers as refugees deserving of our sympathy, and suppressing information about the epidemic of rape, disease and violence they bring with them. Regrettably, our contemporary Good Samaritans, Liberation Secularists, similarly engaged in exchanging the nodes of center and periphery, have much to answer for. Europe and the West in general are dying of multiculturalism, an affliction that looks as if it may be irreversible.

Hundreds of thousands of Muslims supposedly fleeing the carnage in Syria, over 70 per cent of whom are single males of draft age, are swarming the borders of Europe while some of their number will soon be airlifted into North America. Daniel Greenfield underlines the obvious, “Everyone can see that the majority of Muslim migrants are not sad Syrian toddlers, but angry Muslim men.” Indeed, the EU estimates that only one out of every five migrants claiming asylum is actually from Syria. But one in five is more than enough for Kilian Kleinschmidt, appointed by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) as Senior Field Coordinator of the Zaatari refugee camp in Jordan. The Syrians, he laments, “are the most difficult refugees I’ve ever seen.” Physical intimidation, death threats, smuggling, theft and mafia-like control of the camp’s affairs and resources are their stock in trade.

Clearly, it is not only the Syrians who are “difficult.” To adapt the famous line from the Meatloaf hit song, four out of five ain’t bad. The Human Relief Foundation estimates that 95-97 per cent of the migrants crowding Calais, hoping to make their way to the U.K. “to get money,” are “fit,” restive, violence-prone young men who hail from many Muslim nations.

Deputy Chief executive of the Human Relief Foundation (HRF), Kassim Tokan, seems puzzled by the fact that many of these claimants come from “certain countries, which are safe, [where] they can work.”  Another report reveals that approximately 90 per cent of the Muslim “refugees” from “certain countries,” packing a train from Budapest to Vienna, were men between the ages of 18-45, who threatened, beat and stole from other passengers — a harbinger of things to come. The mayhem they will visit upon the West — which German Chancellor Angela Merkel ludicrously deems an “opportunity” based on “the principles of dignity, human rights and the right to political asylum” — will be nothing short of cataclysmic.

But the malignant farce goes on. Syrian migrants are now suing the Berlin state government for lagging on benefit payments. Carol Brown provides some of the details of the German catastrophe: school children have been indentured to clean up garbage and human waste in public places; trains are out of service until they can be disinfected; girls have to cover up lest the invaders be offended or lose control of themselves; and mysterious illnesses have begun to circulate. Thomas Lifson has re-posted a video of these Muslim interlopers showing them trashing the free housing they received, a handsel of what Europe may look like in the course of time. The graphic images of the Austrian town of Nickelsdorf, mounded with refuse and smeared with fecal matter, present an even clearer picture of Europe’s future.

And, as usual, the media are traitorously complicit. As Dave Jolly writes in Godfather Politics, “The media completely ignores the huge financial and security impact that the refugees are placing on some of these countries. Many European nations are on the brink of bankruptcy and cannot afford to start paying out millions of Euros to support the refugees. Some of the countries have expressed concern about the security risks, stating that they suspect members of ISIS have been hiding among the refugees in order to spread their terrorism into other countries.”

Nor should America expect to be spared. Refugee resettlement programs are targeting small American communities and unlikely states, which as Carol Brown says, is how “you wind up with pockets of Somalis in places like Wyoming.” The state of Idaho is fast becoming a Muslim haven as it absorbs migrants, not only from Syria, but from Iraq, the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Somalia. Tennessee is increasingly prey to Muslim infiltration. The Islamization of Kansas is proceeding as we speak. “Maine’s generous welfare policies,” Greenfield points out, “began collapsing once Somali Muslims swarmed in to take advantage of them.” Brown comments: “may we, here in America, do everything possible to ensure that this is not our future” — though the Obama presidency, the media consortium, the entertainment industry and the American education system are doing everything in their power to make sure it will be. And following the election of pro-Muslim power broker Justin Trudeau in my own country, Canada, too, has opened the sluice valve to its eventual destabilization. It is no accident that ISIS supporters have celebrated Trudeau’s electoral victory.

Even though the oil-rich Islamic nations have refused to admit these asylum seekers, knowing the cost in resources and the prospect of social unrest and internecine conflict such an influx would entail (while, it must be said, plotting to export Islam to the West), liberal politicians have opened the door wide to what is nothing less than an invasion, on the grounds of mercy and compassion. Plainly, more sinister calculations may also be at work — electoral bloc advantages, or potentially treasonable policies of societal collapse, as may be the case under the Obama administration. The argument we sometimes hear that these Muslim hordes will enter a progressively depleted workforce and generate sufficient taxable income to support Europe’s aging pensioners is an obvious canard; most will find themselves on welfare, adding to Europe’s fiscal woes. That we are witnessing a disaster in the making is of no consequence to our leaders or the elite opinion makers and bleeding-heart constituencies in league with them.


As Bret Stephens warns in a Wall Street Journal op-ed titled The Death of Christendom, “The death of Europe is in sight.” He then asks rhetorically,

“Could Europe’s liberal political traditions, its religious and cultural heritage, long survive a massive influx of Muslim immigrants, in the order of tens of millions of people? No. Not given Europe’s frequently unhappy experience with much of its Muslim population. Not when you have immigrant groups that resist assimilation and host countries that make only tentative civic demands.”

His analysis of the looming disaster is unimpeachable. Europeans no longer believe in the things from which their civilization sprang:

“Judaism and Christianity; liberalism and the Enlightenment; martial pride and capability; capitalism and wealth. Still less do they believe in fighting or sacrificing or paying or even arguing for these things. Having ignored and undermined their own foundations, they wonder why their house is coming apart.”

The same admonition applies to the West in general. If it is not true to its core inheritance, namely “the marriage of reason and revelation that produced a civilization of technological mastery tempered by human decency,” and deeds its immemorial patrimony to the standard bearers and foot soldiers of an incompatible and destructive civilization, John Winthrop’s “City on a Hill” will surely come to resemble Ezekiel’s Valley of Bones.

For what is now taking place affects us on an immense scale of historical detritus. The institutions that guarantee our rights and freedoms are falling into rubble no less than the triple walls of Constantinople were reduced under the siege of Mehmed II. Just as the artillery bombardment of Constantinople was carried out by Western mercenaries in the service of Mehmed, bringing massive cannon to bear against the city (see Franz Babinger, Mehmed the Conqueror and His Time), so are we — the appeasers, facilitators, and sycophants as well as the tolerant, apathetic and misguided — surrendering the legacy of the ages to an army of barbarians and to our own self-contempt.

This is how we make restitution for what we have come to regard as our “despicable” history. This is our form of “liberation theology” in its secular manifestation, our “abandonment and denial of what is one’s own.” To put it in other terms, Francis has got the better of Benedict and those of us who still remain faithful to our roots have got the worst of Francis.

The multicultural paradox is readily disambiguated with just a little thought. Our social charity is the product of our spiritual penury, and the political calculus of our leaders in its demographic, electoral or empathetic forms is the result of intellectual debauchery. For what we call the refugee crisis is really the crisis of the West. And the refugees, the asylum seekers, the migrants marching in their hundreds of thousands and soon-to-be millions through our open borders are really an army we have recruited in the campaign to destroy ourselves. M-Day, it would appear, is in its final planning stage. And we have become our own fifth column, the multicultural architects of our own destruction.


Also see:

Direct Experience: The One Benefit of Accepting Muslim Migrants


If the West cannot learn about Islam from doctrine, history, and current events, then let it learn from up close and personal contact.

Frontpage, by Raymond Ibrahim, Oct. 26, 2015:

A silver lining exists in the dust cloud being beat up by the marching feet of millions of Muslim men migrating into the West: those many Europeans and Americans, who could never understand Islam in theory, will now have the opportunity to understand it through direct and personal experience.

Perhaps then they will awaken to reality?

The fact is, most Western people have had very little personal interaction with Muslims.  Moreover, because Muslims in the West are still a tiny minority—in the U.S., they are reportedly less than one percent of the population—those few Muslims that Westerners do interact with are often on their best behavior, being surrounded as they are by a sea of infidels (according to the doctrine of taqiyya).

And although there are a few media outlets and websites that document the hard but ugly truths of Islam, these are drowned out by the overarching “Narrative” that emanates from the indoctrination centers of the West (schools, universities, news rooms, Hollywood, political talking heads, et al).

According to the Narrative, there is nothing to fear from Islam.  If violence and mayhem seem to follow Muslims wherever they go—not to mention plague the entire Islamic world—that is because Muslims are angry, frustrated, and aggrieved, usually at things the West has done.

Although Islamic doctrine calls on Muslims to have enmity for and strive to subjugate non-Muslims whenever possible; although Muslims initiated hostilities against and were the scourge of Europe for a thousand years, until they were defanged in the modern era; although most of the so-called “Muslim world” rests on land that was violently seized from non-Muslims; although reportedly some 270 million non-Muslims have been killed by the jihad over the centuries; and although many modern day Muslims maintain the same worldview that animated their ancestors—most people in the West remain ignorant.

In this context—or absolute lack thereof—how is the average Western person to know the truth about Islam?

Enter mass Muslim migrations.  That is, let the barbarians at the gate in.

I speak not of the true refugees—women and children—but of the hordes of young and able bodied Muslim men; the ones shouting “Allahu Akbar!” as they barge into Europe.

When discussing Western and Muslim interactions in the modern era, it’s my custom to provide historical precedents to show that Muslim hostilities—whether hate for Christians and their churches and crosses, or whether violent lust for “white” women—are not aberrations but continuations.

In this case, however, I have none to give.  For never before in history have the peoples of one civilization been so divorced from reality as to welcome millions of people from an alien civilization—one that terrorized their ancestors for centuries—to come and dwell among them.

The only “history” one can cite is the modern day experiences of those European regions that already have significant Muslim populations, and are taking more in.

In Germany and the United Kingdom, crime and rape have soared in direct proportion to the number of Muslim “refugees” accepted.  Sweden alone—where rape has increased by 1,472% since that country embraced “multiculturalism”—is reportedly on the verge of collapse.

The price of the Islamic influx into Western lands is violence and chaos, in accordance with Islam’s Rule of Numbers: women and children will be exploited and raped; the elderly will be mugged; churches and other institutions will be attacked; terror will set in.   Look to the plight of non-Muslims living alongside Muslims to get an idea of what is coming.

But alas, at this late hour, such appears to be the price that must be paid for decades of willful ignorance.  If the West cannot learn the truth about Islam from theory, from doctrine, from history, and now even from ongoing current events, then let it learn from up close and personal contact.

And if after such firsthand experiences, any Western nation is still too politically correct to act in the name of self-preservation, then let it die.  For it will be evident that there is little left worth saving.

The Glazov Gang-The Death of Europe.

Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is a New York writer focusing on radical Islam.


How the Mohammed retirement plan will kill Europe.

European leaders talk about two things these days; preserving European values by taking in Muslim migrants and integrating Muslim migrants into Europe by getting them to adopt European values.

It does not occur to them that their plan to save European values depends on killing European values.

The same European values that require Sweden, a country of less than 10 million, to take in 180,000 Muslim migrants in one year also expects the new “Swedes” to celebrate tolerance, feminism and gay marriage. Instead European values have filled the cities of Europe with Shariah patrols, unemployed angry men waving ISIS flags and the occasional public act of terror.

European countries that refuse to invest money in border security instead find themselves forced to invest money into counterterrorism forces. And those are bad for European values too.

But, as Central European countries are discovering, European values don’t have much to do with the preservation of viable functioning European states. Instead they are about the sort of static Socialism that Bernie Sanders admires from abroad. But even a Socialist welfare state requires people to work for a living. Maine’s generous welfare policies began collapsing once Somali Muslims swarmed in to take advantage of them. Denmark and the Dutch, among other of Bernie Sanders’ role models, have been sounding more like Reagan and less like Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren.

Two years ago, the Dutch King declared that, “The classic welfare state of the second half of the 20th century in these areas in particular brought forth arrangements that are unsustainable in their current form.” That same year, the Danish Finance Minister called for the “modernization of the welfare state.”

But the problem isn’t one of modernization, it’s medievalization.

27% of Moroccans and 21% of Turks in the Netherlands are unemployed. It’s 27% in Denmark for Iraqis. And even when employed, their average income is well below the European average.

Critics pointed out in the past that a multicultural America can’t afford the welfare states that European countries have. Now that those same countries are turning multicultural, they can’t afford them either.

Europe invested in the values of its welfare state. The Muslim world invested in large families. Europe expects the Muslim world to bail out its shrinking birth rate by working and paying into the system so that its aging population can retire. The Muslim migrants however expect Europe to subsidize their large families with its welfare state while they deal some drugs and chop off some heads on the side.

Once again, European values are in conflict with European survival.

The European values that require Europe to commit suicide are about ideology, not language, culture or nationhood. But the incoming migrants don’t share that ideology. They have their own Islamic values.

Why should 23-year-old Mohammed work for four decades so that Hans or Fritz across the way can retire at 61 and lie on a beach in Mallorca? The idea that Mohammed would ever want to do such a thing out of love for Europe was a silly fantasy that European governments fed their worried citizens.

Mohammed doesn’t share European values. Nor are they likely to take hold of him no matter how often the aging teachers, who hope he gets a job and subsidizes their retirement, try to drill them into his head. Europeans expect Mohammed to become a Swede or a German as if he were some child they had adopted from an exotic country and raised as their own, and work to subsidize their European values.

The Muslim migrants are meant to be the retirement plan for an aging Europe. They’re supposed to keep its ramshackle collection of economic policies, its welfare states and social programs rolling along.

But they’re more like a final solution.

Mohammed is Fritz’s retirement plan. But Mohammed has a very different type of plan. Fritz is counting on Mohammed to work while he relaxes. Mohammed relaxes and expects Fritz to work.  Fritz is not related to him and therefore Mohammed sees no reason why he should work to support him.

European social democracy reduces society to a giant insurance plan in which money is pooled together.  But insurance is forbidden in Islam which considers it to be gambling. European social democracy expects him to bail it out, but to Mohammed, European values are a crime against Islam.

Mohammed’s Imam will tell him to work off the books because paying into the system is gambling. However taking money out of the system is just Jizya; the money non-Muslims are obligated to pay to Muslims. Under Islamic law, it’s better for Mohammed to sell drugs than to pay taxes.

That’s why drug dealing and petty crime are such popular occupations for Salafis in Europe. It’s preferable to steal from infidels than to participate in the great gamble of the European welfare state.

Mohammed isn’t staking his future on the shaky pensions of European socialism. He invests in what social scientists call social capital. He plans his retirement by having a dozen kids. If this lifestyle is subsidized by infidel social services, so much the better. And when social services collapse, those of his kids who aren’t in prison or in ISIS will be there to look after him in his golden years.

As retirement plans go, it’s older and better than the European model.

Mohammed doesn’t worry much about the future. Even if he doesn’t make it past six kids, by the time he’s ready to retire the European country he’s living in will probably be an Islamic State. And he is confident that whatever its arrangements are, they will be better and more just than the infidel system.

Sweden will take in 180,000 migrants this year. Germany may take in 1.5 million. Most of them will be young men following the Mohammed retirement plan.


Europeans are being assured that the Mohammeds will balance out the demographic disparity of an aging population with too many retirees and too few younger workers. But instead the Mohammeds will put even more pressure on the younger workers who not only have to subsidize their elders, but millions of Mohammeds, their multiple brides and their fourteen child Islamic retirement plans.

Retirement ages will go further up and social services for the elderly will be cut. The welfare state will collapse, but it will have to be kept running because the alternative will be major social unrest.

Among the triggers of the Arab Spring were rising wheat prices and cuts to food subsidies. Prices went up and governments fell as street riots turned into civil wars. Imagine a Sweden where 50 percent of the young male population is Muslim, mostly unemployed, turning into Syria when the economy collapses and the bill comes due. Imagine European Muslim street riots where the gangs have heavy artillery and each ghetto Caliph has his own Imams and Fatwas to back up his claims.

Europe is slowly killing itself in the name of European values. It’s trying to protect its economic setup by bankrupting it. European values have become a suicide pact. Its politicians deliver speeches explaining why European values require mass Muslim migration that make as little sense as a lunatic’s suicide note.

Islamic values are not compatible with European values. Not only free speech and religious freedom, but even the European welfare state is un-Islamic. Muslims have a high birth rate because their approach to the future is fundamentally different than the European one. Europeans have chosen to have few children and many government agencies to take care of them. Muslims choose to have many children and few government agencies. The European values so admired by American leftists have no future.

Europe is drinking rat poison to cure a cold. Instead of changing its values, it’s trying to maintain them by killing itself. The Mohammed retirement plan won’t save European Socialism. It will bury it.

Muslim Invasion of Europe

Europe immigrantsGatestone Institute, by Guy Millière, October 22, 2015:

  • The Syrian government sells passports and birth certificates at affordable prices. Many migrants have no passport, no ID, and refuse to give fingerprints.
  • Because Islam is the heart of the culture of people formerly colonized, Europeans rejected criticism of Islam, saying it would blend smoothly into a multicultural Europe. They did not demand the assimilation of the Muslims who came to live in Europe. Much of the time, Muslims are not assimilated — and often show signs of not wanting to assimilate.
  • Any criticism of Islam in Europe is treated as a form of racism, and “Islamophobia” is considered a crime or a sign of mental illness.
  • European people still have the right to vote, but are deprived of most of their power: all important political decisions in Europe are made behind closed doors by technocrats and professional politicians in Brussels or Strasbourg.
  • Europe has renounced force, so to many, it appears weak, vulnerable and easily able to be overpowered.
  • The sudden arrival of hundreds of thousands more Muslims most likely prompts Europeans to think that the nightmare will get worse; they see, powerlessly, that their leaders speak and act as if they have no awareness of what is happening.
  • Central European leaders and people, who have already lived under authoritarian rule, seem to be thinking that entering the European Union was a huge mistake. They came to what was then called the “free world.” They do not seem willing to be subjected again to coercive decisions made by outsiders.
  • Illegal Muslim migrants will live on social benefits until the bankruptcy of welfare states.
  • In all 28 countries of the European Union, birth rates are low and the population is aging. People under thirty account for only 16% of the population, or 80 million people. In the 22 Arab countries, plus Turkey and Iran, people under thirty account for 70% of the population, or 350 million people.

The flow of illegal migrants does not stop. They land on the Greek islands along the Turkish coast. They still try to get into Hungary, despite a razor wire fence and mobilized army. Their destination is Germany or Scandinavia, sometimes France or the UK. Some of them still arrive from Libya. Since the beginning of January, more than 620,000 have arrived by sea alone. There will undoubtedly be many more: a leaked secret document estimates that by the end of December, there might be 1.5 million.

Journalists in Western Europe continue to depict them as “refugees” fleeing war in Syria. The description is false. According to statistics released by the European Union, only twenty-five percent of them come from Syria; the true number is probably lower. The Syrian government sells passports and birth certificates at affordable prices. The vast majority of migrants come from other countries: Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Eritrea, Somalia, and Nigeria.

Many do not seem to have left in a hurry. Many bring new high-end smartphones and large sums of cash, ten or twenty thousand euros, sometimes more. Many have no passports, no ID, and refuse to give fingerprints.

Whenever people flee to survive, the men come with whole families: women, children, elders. Here, instead, more than 75% of those who arrive are men under 50; few are women, children or elders.

As Christians are now the main targets of Islamists (the Jews fled or were forced out decades ago), the people escaping the war in Syria should be largely composed of Christians. But Christians are a small minority among those who arrive, and they often hide that they are Christians.

Those who enter Europe are almost all Muslims, and behave as some Muslims often do in the Muslim world: they harass Christians and attack women. In reception centers, harassing Christians and attacking women are workaday incidents. European women and girls who live near reception centers are advised to take care and cover up. Rapes, assaults, stabbings and other crimes are on the rise.

Western European political leaders could tell the truth and act accordingly. They do not. They talk of “solidarity,” “humanitarian duty,” “compassion.” From the beginning, Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany said that illegal migrants were welcome: she seemed to change her mind for a moment, but quickly slid back. In France, President François Hollande says the same things as Angela Merkel.

After the heartbreaking image of a dead child being carried on a Turkish beach was published, thousands of Germans and French initially spoke the same way as their leaders. Their enthusiasm seems to have faded fast.

The people of Central Europe were not enthusiastic from the beginning. Their leaders seem to share the feelings of their populations. None spoke as explicitly as Viktor Orbán, Prime Minister of Hungary. He said out loud what many of his countrymen seemed to think. He spoke of “invasion” and asked if there were another word to describe the massive and often brutal entry into a country of people who have not been invited to do so. He added that a country has the right to decide who is allowed to enter its territory and to guard its borders. He stressed that those who enter Europe are from a “different culture,” and suggested that Islam might not be compatible with European Judeo-Christian values.

Western European political leaders harshly condemned his remarks and the attitude of Central Europe in general. They decided to take a hard line approach, including: forcing recalcitrant countries to welcome immigrants, setting up mandatory quotas that define how many immigrants each EU country must receive, and threatening those countries that declined to obey. Martin Schulz, President of the European Parliament, said that Europe was built in a spirit of “burden sharing,” and that EU breakup was a risk that could not be excluded.

An acute division, in fact, is emerging between the leaders of Western Europe and the leaders of Central Europe. Another division is growing between the populations of Western Europe and their leaders.

Those who rebuilt Europe after World War II thought that an enlightened elite (themselves) could make a clean sweep of the past and build a dream society where peace and perpetual harmony would reign.

Because they thought democracy had brought Hitler to power, they decided to restrict democracy.[1] Because they thought nationalism was the cause of the war, they decreed that nationalism was harmful and that the cultural identities in Europe had to disappear and be replaced by a new “European identity” that they would shape.[2]

Because Europe had a colonialist past and Europeans had believed in the superiority of their cultures, they claimed that Europe should redeem its guilt and affirm that all cultures were equal. And because Islam was at the heart of the culture of people formerly colonized, the Europeans rejected all criticism of Islam, and said that it would blend smoothly into a multicultural Europe. They did not demand the assimilation of Muslims who came to live in Europe in increasing number.

Because the Europeans thought poverty had led to the rise of Nazism, they built welfare states that were supposed to eliminate poverty forever.

Because two world wars had started in Europe, the Europeans decreed that from now on, Europe would renounce the use of force, and solve all conflicts through diplomacy and appeasement.[3]

We now see the results.

European people still have the right to vote, but are deprived of most of their power: all important political decisions in Europe are made behind closed doors, by technocrats and professional politicians, in Brussels or Strasbourg.

Cultural identities in Europe have been eroded to such a point that saying that Europe is based on Judeo-Christian values has become controversial.

Any criticism of Islam in Europe is treated as a form of racism, and “Islamophobia” is considered a crime or a sign of mental illness.

Islam has not melted into a smooth multiculturalism; it is creating increasingly distressing problems that are almost never brought to light.

Muslim criminality across Europe is high. Consequently, the percentage of Muslims in prisons in Europe is high. In France, which has the largest Muslim population in Europe, the prison population is 70% Muslim. Many European prisons have become recruitment centers for future jihadis.

Muslim riots may occur for any reason : police upholding the law, a Soccer League celebration or in support of a cause.

Welfare states have created a government-dependent class in Europe of many people who live permanently on social benefits. These people are often Muslim. Much of the time, they are not assimilated – and often show signs of not wanting to assimilate. Many reside in virtually autonomous, so-called no-go zones (e.g. France, the UK, and Germany).

Europe has renounced force; to many, it therefore appears weak, vulnerable and easily able to be overpowered.

Populations of Western Europe increasingly think that the dream society that had been promised has turned into a nightmare. The sudden and often brutal arrival of hundreds of thousands more Muslims most likely prompts Europeans to think the nightmare will get worse. They see, powerlessly, that their leaders speak and act as if they have no awareness of what is happening.

Central European leaders and their people, who have directly experienced authoritarian rule, seem to be thinking that entering the European Union was a huge mistake. When the Soviet Union collapsed, they became members of the EU to join what was called then the “free world.” They do not seem willing to be subjected again to coercive decisions made by outsiders.

After living under the Soviet yoke, they preserved their desire for freedom and self-government, and evidently will not now agree to give them up. They know what submission to Islam could mean. Bulgaria and Romania were occupied by the Ottoman Empire until 1878. Hungary was under the boot of Ottoman rule for more than a hundred and fifty years (1541-1699).

Polls show that a majority of Muslims living in Europe want the application of sharia law and clearly reject any idea of assimilation.

Hundreds of thousands of Muslims living in Europe have joined fundamentalist Islamic organizations. Thousands have joined jihadist movements and are now fighting in Syria or Yemen. Many have returned and are ready to act against Europe.

Illegal Muslim migrants are likely to join the Muslims already living in Europe; and they will remain Muslim. They will live on social benefits until the bankruptcy of welfare states. They will reside in the “no-go zones,” and the “no-go zones” will continue to grow. Their occupants come from countries where Christians and women are mistreated; in Europe, they are already mistreating Christians and women.

They come from countries where Western civilization is despised and where hatred of Jews is inescapable — and this remains so among Muslims already living in Europe. For more than two decades, almost all assaults against Jews in Europe were committed by Muslims.

Many of those who arrive, according to European intelligence sources, are already radicalized.

A project to overwhelm Europe by a huge wave of migration was already described by the Islamic State in documents discovered this February. It is hard to rule out that the Islamic State plays a role in what is happening. Turkish authorities are ignoring the massive departures taking place from their coast. If they really wanted the current process to stop, they could stop it. That is clearly not what they do. The Islamic State could not survive without Turkish help. Daily flights on Turkish Airlines bring illegal migrants to Istanbul; they continue unhindered to Europe. The Russians, in their military intervention in Syria, similarly does not seem interested in stopping what is occurring.

Angela Merkel said in Strasbourg, on October 7, that migrants entering Europe today are attracted to Europe, for the reasons Europeans migrants who arrived in America a century ago were attracted to America: to “realize a dream,” presumably of opportunity.

In all 28 countries of the European Union, birth rates are low and the population is aging. People under thirty account for only 16% of the population, or 80 million people. In the 22 Arab countries, plus Turkey and Iran, people under thirty account for 70% of the population, or 350 million people.

Jews are fleeing Europe in increasing numbers. “Native” Europeans are starting to flee as well.

In 1972, in his book “The Camp of the Saints,” French writer Jean Raspail described flooding Europe with Muslim migrants crossing the Mediterranean. At the time, the book was a work of fiction. Today, it is reality.

[1] Christopher Booker, Richard North, The Great Deception, The Secret History of the European Union, Bloomsbury Academic, 2005.

[2] Neil Fligstein, Euroclash: The EU, European Identity, and the Future of Europe, Oxford University Press, 2009.

[3] Wolfram Kaiser, Christian Democracy and the Origins of European Union, Cambridge University Press, 2007.

Also see:

The Clock Ticks On


by Mark Steyn
Steyn on the World
October 20, 2015

The world divides into those who sincerely believe in that “Coexist” sticker and those who think it’s a delusional evasion. After all, if it weren’t for that big Muslim crescent “C” at the front, you wouldn’t need a bumper sticker at all:

That peace-symbol “O”? It’s Muslims, alas, who kill secular hippie pacifist backpackers in Bali nightclubs.

That equal-rights “E”? It’s Muslims who take girls as their sex slaves in Nigeria and kill their own daughters and sisters in Germany because rape has rendered them “unclean”.

The star-of-David “X”? It’s Muslims who are currently stabbing and running over Jews in Jerusalem and then celebrating by passing out free candy.

In India, it’s Muslims vs Hindus. In southern Thailand, Muslims vs Buddhists. The world is a messy, violent, complicated place, but as a rule of thumb, as I said all those years ago in America Alone, in most corners of the planet it boils down to: Muslims vs [Your Team Here].

Millions of complacent westerners genuinely regard Islam as merely another exotic patch in the diversity quilt, but I find it hard to believe that the leaders of liberal progressive political parties can be quite that deluded. Nevertheless, there was Justin Trudeau at his victory rally at the Queen Elizabeth in Montreal last night:

There are a thousand stories I could share with you about this remarkable campaign, but I want you to think of one in particular. Last week I was in St. Catharines, and I met a young Muslim mum wearing a hijab. She handed me her infant daughter and said something I will never forget. She said she’s voting for us because she wants to make sure her little girl can make her own choices in life and that the government will protect those rights.

To her, I say this: You and your fellow citizens have chosen a new government that believes deeply in the diversity of our country. We know in our bones that Canada was built from people from all corners of the world, belonging to every faith, every culture, speaking every language. We believe in our hearts that this country’s unique diversity is a blessing bestowed upon us by previous generations of Canadians who stared down prejudice and fought discrimination in all forms.

In other words: Canadians voted to say no to hate! On CTV early in the evening, Jason Kenney popped up and pushed back against Lisa LaFlamme’s suggestion that the niqab controversy had cost the Tories the election. He pointed out that polls showed some 80 per cent of Canadians opposed to new citizens being masked when taking their oath of allegiance to Queen and country: It had the unusual distinction of being a Harper policy with near universal appeal.

But so what? M Trudeau’s narrative is the one that will prevail – that questioning Islamic self-segregation is at odds with “Canadian values”. And so no politician with an eye to electoral viability will ever raise the subject again.

Most people want to think of themselves as “nice”, and so it’s easier to welcome the increasing presence of shrouded women on the streets of Canada as a deepening of our heartwarming embrace of self-affirmation-by-multiculturalism, rather than something that mocks any conventional notions of women’s rights. Yet, whatever disquiet might be felt, they will take their signal from their politicians, and fall silent on the matter.

~South of the border, Ahmed the Clock Boy made his long-awaited visit to Washington to meet President Obama, following his pilgrimage to President Bashir of Sudan, the butcher of Darfur, a couple of days earlier. When Ahmed first got into trouble for bringing his “clock” to school, Obama Tweeted his approval (“Cool clock, Ahmed”) and invited him to bring it to the White House. Since then, the official line – precocious all-American teen’s enthusiasm and ingenuity stymied by ingrained Islamophobia – has taken a bit of a hit. Ahmed can’t make a clock. All he can do is rip the guts out of some crappy Radio Shack thing from the Seventies, and tape it into a simulacrum of a suitcase bomb, which is not a skill to be disdained, at least in some parts of the world.

However, it’s not really the talent all the hipster execs had in mind when, in the wake of the presidential Tweet, they invited Ahmed to visit the headquarters of Google, Facebook et al. The private sector apparently still has enough sense of self-preservation that the glamorous job offers and grants quietly faded away. And even the Oval Office had supposedly downgraded Ahmed’s audience with Obama to part of the crowd scene on White House “Astronomy Night”. But no: young Ahmed worked his way to the front of the line and was rewarded with a hug from the President.

The greatest clockmaker of our time explained that he’d been unable to bring his clock to Obama because he’s been “too busy traveling”, and it’s kinda bulky, being the size not of a clock but a bomb, and evidently President Bashir’s security in Khartoum being pickier about large ticking devices than the White House. But he’s certainly “busy traveling”: The quintessential Texas teenager and his family have accepted an offer to move to Qatar.

Nonetheless, like Niqab Girl, Clock Boy has taught us all a valuable lesson with his droll and spectacularly successful provocation. The US Department of Homeland Security’s slogan is “If You See Something, Say Something” – unless it’s something that might get you accused of Islamophobia, in which case keep it to yourself.

Which is where we came in, on the morning of Tuesday September 11th 2001 at the US Airways First Class check-in desk:

I got an instant chill when I looked at [Mohammed Atta]. I got this grip in my stomach and then, of course, I gave myself a politically correct slap…I thought, ‘My God, Michael, these are just a couple of Arab businessmen.’

Clockmed has raised the bar on that one. My God, this is just a young Muslim male. So what if he’s ticking? Do I really want to be tied up in sensitivity-training hell for the next six months?

~Meanwhile, in Birmingham, England, where the clock is at the eleventh hour, a new government program designed to identify elementary-school children at risk of “self-detonation” – whoops, I mean “self-radicalization” – is already going gangbusters:

A primary school has reported a 10-year-old Muslim boy to police on suspicion of terrorism, after he complained about not having a prayer room on a field trip.

The boy, a pupil at Parkfield Community School in Birmingham, was on the trip when his ‘changed’ behaviour drew the teachers’ attention.

He also told female Muslim pupils they needed to cover their faces with a head scarf, and expressed an ‘alternative’ view about the Charlie Hebdo attack…

The school referred the boy to police under the government’s Prevent Duty initiative which provides guidance to teachers on spotting signs of extremism.

Over the last 12 months the school, which caters for more than 740 pupils between the ages of five and 11, has reported three pupils to the Counter Terrorism Unit.

All three children were referred after staff were concerned they were displaying signs of developing extremism.

But why is demanding a prayer room a sign of “developing extremism”? All kinds of Muslims demand prayer rooms hither and yon, and they’re not all terrorists, are they? Besides, what’s wrong with wanting a prayer room? Come to that, what’s wrong with expressing an “alternative” view on Charlie Hebdo? After all, an audience of pampered middle-class liberal progressives at Trinity College, Dublin loves “alternative” views on Charlie Hebdo. Why shouldn’t a ten-year-old at Parkfield Community School?

Oh, well. The great thing about a bureaucratic program that requires police investigation of grade-schoolers at risk of “developing extremism” is that it’s the Big Government trifecta: expensive, time-consuming, and assuredly entirely ineffectual. Whereas, say, a policy of reducing Muslim immigration to the United Kingdom is just cloud-cuckoo land. Can’t be done. Pie in the sky. Devoting police resources to investigating every ten-year-old schoolboy who says something “alternative”: that we can do.

~Down Under, following the murder of a police accountant by a 15-year-old “violent extremist”, authorities are now moving on to the jihad’s junior varsity team:

Security agencies are monitoring a 12-year-old boy in relation to suspected terrorist activity, the Australian federal police commissioner, Andrew Colvin, has said, in the leadup to a security summit in Canberra on Thursday…

[Justice minister Michael] Keenan declined to say how many children under the age of 14 were on watchlists. “I do not think it is appropriate for me to go into that,” he said.

Indeed. Being on a “watchlist” doesn’t affect their performance in the school play or on the track team, so lighten up:

Australian Federal Police Commissioner Andrew Colvin said Australia’s terrorist threat had evolved and become younger over the past year.

“We’re shocked that a 12-year-old is on police radar for these types of matters,” Colvin told Australian Broadcasting Corp. television.

ABC reported on Wednesday that the 12-year-old boy was the youngest of 18 suspected extremists named in a court document in March. The boy’s name has not been published.

In case someone invites him to the White House?

And of course:

[Mr Keenan] said it was important to “reach out a hand of friendship” to the Muslim community and “provide reassurance” that security measures were not targeted at one ethnic group or religion.

Best thing to do is target all Aussie 12-year-olds, just to be on the safe side.

~If you’re thinking this all seems an awful lot of trouble and expense for a demographic that seems unusually hard to assimilate, and indeed boasts of its disinclination to do so, well, don’t worry; it’ll get a lot more troublesome and expensive:

Sweden is fast approaching a complete collapse. More and more municipalities are raising the alarm that if the migrants keep coming at this pace, the government can no longer guarantee normal service to its citizens.

Who are these Continentals to demand priority over “migrants” when it comes to government “service”? Keep those migrants coming! Austria:

By September they were arriving at the southeastern border at the rate of 10,000 or 12,000 a day. These migrants are associated in the public mind with the war in Syria but, in fact, come from throughout the Muslim world—Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Bangladesh. Most of them are on their way to Germany. The great majority are young men. By the end of this year, Austrian authorities estimate, 375,000 will have passed through the country, and a quarter of them will have stayed to apply for asylum. Austria will have added 1 percent to its population in just about three months, with virtually all the newcomers Muslims…

Citizens of all the tiny countries that lie between the Middle East and Germany were witnessing a migration far too big for Germany to handle. They knew Germany would eventually realize this, too. Once Germany lost its nerve, the huge human chain of testosterone and poverty would be stuck where it was. And if your country was smaller than Germany—Austria, for instance, is a tenth Germany’s size—you could wind up in a situation where the majority of fighting-age men in your country were foreigners with a grievance.

Whoa. Don’t go there, girlfriend. It’s like The New York Times says:

VIENNA — As befits the city of Sigmund Freud, Vienna has two faces — one sweet, one sinister.

Behind the schnitzel and strudel, Mozart and the opera, lurks the legacy of the Nazis who forced Jews to clean sidewalks with toothbrushes… Now, to the astonishment of many and the alarm of some, the burning question in Vienna’s elegant cafes is, Which face will prevail in the city’s bellwether elections on Oct. 11?

So, if you’re not passing out the strudel to every strapping young Muslim lad coming down the Karntnerstrasse, you’re a Nazi.

Speaking of cleaning the sidewalks with toothbrushes, I don’t think that’ll cut it in the small border town of Nickelsdorf, now “an orgy of garbage and feces of unparalleled dimensions“. In the most well-ordered and maintained country on the Continent, the sh*t is hitting the fans of open borders. We’re gonna need a lot more strudel.

~So don’t mention the veil, don’t mention the ticking, don’t get too specific about the precise nature of the “alternative views” of Charlie Hebdo, “provide reassurance” that it’s nothing to do with Islam …and tell your crime reporters to fill the space with strudel recipes:

Her father and brothers stabbed her to death on her mother’s orders, after she was gang-raped by three men. The rape left her “unclean” and the mother allegedly demanded the killing to restore the family’s honor. German police are seeking the father and brothers. That by itself is not newsworthy; what is newsworthy is the news itself, which appeared in not one of Germany’s major daily newspapers or websites.

Which brings us back to Justin Trudeau, and the niqab “controversy”. You’re not a Nazi, are you? Best to self-veil, metaphorically (for the moment): That way there’s nothing to see.

Also see:


Residents packed the county council chambers for a meeting Monday night, Oct. 19, that included a vote on the refugee resettlement program, denying any state or local funds to flow into the community for such resettlements

Residents packed the county council chambers for a meeting Monday night, Oct. 19, that included a vote on the refugee resettlement program, denying any state or local funds to flow into the community for such resettlements

WND, by Leo Hohmann, Oct. 20, 2015:

It was standing-room only at a council meeting in semi-rural Pickens County, South Carolina, Monday night, as residents flooded the chambers, many of them interested in one topic – the potential of Syrian Muslim refugees being resettled in their county.

On Sunday in Twin Falls, Idaho, more than 100 people marched through town with signs and U.S. flags, protesting refugee resettlement in their town and demanding that a local community college shut down its resettlement office.

On Oct. 6 in Redlands, California, a woman affiliated with a local tea-party group stood up at a city-council meeting and voiced her concerns about possible Muslim refugees being injected into the community from Syria.

In St. Cloud, Minnesota, a group of concerned citizens became visibly upset at a townhall last Tuesday when Gov. Mark Dayton announced that anyone who is not comfortable with that state’s growing diversity, including its expanding Somali refugee population, “should find another state” because Minnesota’s economy “cannot expand based on white, B+, native-born citizens. We don’t have enough.”

Minnesota Gov. Mark Dayton

Minnesota Gov. Mark Dayton

Dayton said he was aware of the racial tensions in St. Cloud with regard to Somali refugees.

“If you are that intolerant, if you are that much of a racist or a bigot, then find another state,” he said, as reported by the Daily Globe. “Find a state where the minority population is 1 percent or whatever. It’s not that in Minnesota. It’s not going to be again.”

All of these developments have pro-immigrant groups worried about the growing “backlash” against America’s fast-growing population of recent immigrants and refugees from Muslim lands in the Middle East and Africa.

From Syria alone, there will be 10,000 coming over the next year, and at least that many more in 2017. The Obama administration wants to bring nearly 200,000 refugees from all nations to the U.S. over the next 24 months.

And the organizations that rake in millions of dollars in government cash working on these resettlements are getting nervous that their plans are coming under growing scrutiny at the local level.

That much is evident by examining the presentations lined up for a major pro-immigration conference set in New York City in December. The conference includes break-out sessions on how to counter the growing “backlash” against refugees, “particularly Muslim refugees,” according to organizers of the National Immigrant Integration Conference.

Countering the backlash

The theme of this year’s conference is “New American Dreams,” picking up the theme of the White House Taskforce on New Americans, which aims to convert 5 million refugees and recent immigrants into “New Americans” armed with full citizenship and voting rights.

But every day more Americans are finding out how the refugee resettlement program works, and most of them don’t like what they see, says refugee watchdog Ann Corcoran, author of the Refugee Resettlement Watch blog.

People are holding protest rallies in Idaho and petition drives in North Dakota. They’re approaching their city and county leaders with questions in California, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Minnesota. And in South Carolina, grassroots activists are educating their local leaders and asking them to block the arrival of refugees. It happened Monday night in Pickens County, where the county council voted unanimously to block funding for any federal refugee resettlements, citing costs and security concerns.

“Technically, they don’t have any legal way to stop them, but the federal government is unlikely to send refugees where they know they won’t be welcomed,” Corcoran told WND. “This is what people need to understand. At the national level, there is no legal recourse. People will talk about the 10th Amendment and states’ rights, but it’s never been tested.”

But Corcoran said there is plenty that citizen activists can do at the local level to cause problems for pushers of refugee resettlement. An informed citizenry is their “worst nightmare,” she said.

This is an industry that, until recently, had operated below the radar in nearly 200 cities across 48 states. A network of church groups, nonprofits and foundations has worked quietly with the federal government and the United Nations to bring more than 3 million foreign refugees into the United States since 1990, about half of them from Muslim-dominated countries with heavy jihadist populations like Somalia, Afghanistan, Iraq and now Syria.

It is also a system that is inherently biased against the most persecuted group of refugees in the world – Christians, Corcoran said.

More than 97 percent of the nearly 2,000 Syrians resettled in the United States so far have been Muslim, for instance.

Idaho residents rally against refugee resettlement in a march through Twin Falls on Sunday, Oct. 19.

Idaho residents rally against refugee resettlement in a march through Twin Falls on Sunday, Oct. 19.

In an effort to counter the pushback, the issue will be taken up at the nation’s largest pro-immigrant conference Dec. 13-15 in New York City. An entire breakout session will address the growing challenges to Muslim resettlement in the United States.

The planners of the session, titled “Understanding and Addressing Today’s Organized Backlash Against Muslim Immigrants and Refugees,” accuse anyone who opposes the “transformation” of their community through Muslim immigration of being “Islamophobic.”

Those “fueling” the pushback against refugee resettlement will be “identified,” and a plan of attack will be put forth. The following are the exact words from the conference program guide:

“This session will explore the resurgence of anti-immigrant and Islamophobic rhetoric and activism and the recent use of Islamophobia to undermine refugee resettlement. This new development has implications for receiving communities and for refugee resettlement, particularly of Muslim refugees. How does this backlash against resettlement fit within the broader attacks on Muslims in the U.S. and what are the best ways to respond? Who are the key actors fueling this campaign and how is their message spreading? Hear from experts from the Muslim community and from refugee resettlement leaders about this new challenge and potential responses.”

The “experts” from the Muslim community are likely to be affiliated with the Council for Islamic-American Relations  or CAIR, a Muslim civil liberties organization with ties to the international Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas. These ties are documented in the court records of the 2007 Holy Land Foundation trial, the largest terror-financing trial ever conducted on U.S. soil.

See WND’s Rogue’s Gallery of terror-connected CAIR officials.

As for the “key actors” who are fueling the pushback against refugees, critics say law-abiding Americans concerned about the safety and security of their communities have every right to speak out and ask questions.

Read more

Islam and the Fall of Europe

American Thinker, by Jerrold L. Sobel, Oct. 20, 2015:

A duality, Islam is first and foremost a political movement ensconced in a religion from which it expresses its imperialist nature through a multi faceted concept known as jihad.  Christian Europe today, among other factors to be discussed later, lacking cognizance of Islam’s millennial ploy of hegemonic control via emigration, is saddled with a demographic birthrate inverse to that of their new emigres.  Europe is in the throes of Islamization. Writes author Bat’Ye’or in her critically acclaimed work: Eurabia: The Euro-Arab Axis.

“The ideology, strategy, and tactics of Jihad has constituted throughout history a fundamental part of Islamic Jurisprudence and literature, since it is through jihad that the Islamic community developed and expanded.”

She highlights a three point historical blueprint used for centuries to secure the fall and Islamization of earlier Christian societies throughout the Middle East, North Africa, and Europe, and how these constituents eventually subdued the majority host populations:

1- As a result of “wars, conquests, temporary peace treaties, terror like practices and alliances” There was a “gradual erosion of resistance within societies targeted but not yet conquered by jihad.”   

2- “Insecurity caused by the constant mass immigration of foreign populations and the subsequent process of alteration and substitution of one civilization by another, hostile to the indigenous inhabitants.” 

3- The emergence of powerful collaborationist parties economically and politically linked with Muslim Rulers.”

Wars, conquests, temporary peace treaties, alteration of host societies, terror attacks, emigration, gradual erosion.  Sound familiar?

Keeping in mind, this book was first published in 2005, the author is not referencing today’s monumental mass immigration into Europe but those of earlier migrations subsequent to the Second World War.  The intent of this hijra is unmistakable.  It can be traced back to the dawn of the Muslim era and codified by the the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah in 628 AD.  This one event set the criteria, the pattern for international relations between Muslims and the Kafir  (anyone not a Muslim) to this very day.

The Treaty was between Muhammad from Medina on the Arabian peninsular and another tribe opposed to Muhammad, the Quraish from Mecca.  It was intended to end years of strife and warfare between the two sides subsequent to Muhammad’s banishment from Mecca.  In part It acknowledged: A 10 year truce; allowed for Muslim pilgrimage to Mecca whence originally they came; offered the Quraish the option of conversion.

Hudaybiyyah, quoted throughout the centuries is a traditional source of pride to Muslims; it’s been their rendering for conquest of non-Muslim lands for millennia.  Facing pposition to the Treaty by some within his group, Muhammad allayed fears by promising “great booty” in the near future.  True to his men, not so the Quraish, within two years Muhammad abrogated the treaty and conquered the city. Why is this relevant today?

As the archetype of Islamic conquest, Hudaybiyyah contains all the elements utilized in jihad to sap the strength of an indigenous population until it breaks:  incessant hostility; terror tactics; 10 year truces; mass emigration; exhaustion of host resources.  This tried and true approach will become the death knell for modern Europe.  Consonant with other aforementioned considerations, mass immigration by foreign Muslim populations is once again leading to one civilization, the Muslims, replacing another, Christians, Jews, and all other “non-believers” on the continent.

Permeated with guilt never shared for their Jewish inhabitants, the European Union (EU) is finally beginning to realize they have opened up the gates of their own demise. Efforts have begun to stem this unprecedented avalanche of Islamic immigration.  According to an article in the Gatestone Institute International Policy Council:  Germany’s Muslim Demographic Revolution,”

  • “There are 20 million refugees waiting at the doorstep of Europe.”
  • Mosque attendance in Germany has doubled.
  • Muslim men “routinely take advantage of the social welfare system by bringing two, three or four women from across the Muslim world to Germany and are married by an Imam.” In accordance with Muslim doctrine the wealth of a country is degraded and usurped as:
  • The married women demand social welfare benefits, including the cost of a separate home for themselves and for their children, on the claim of being a “single parent with children.

It’s worth quoting in full a requiem by Victor Orban, the President of Hungary:

“For us today, what is at stake is Europe, the lifestyle of European citizens, European values, the survival or disappearance of European nations, and more precisely formulated, their transformation beyond recognition. Today, the question is not merely in what kind of a Europe we would like to live, but whether everything we understand as Europe will exist at all.”

A prescient observation by a man recognizing the handwriting on the wall.  Orban acknowledges the insidiousness of this uncompromising, messianic movement and how it seeks not only eradication of host culture but its history as well.

Across his border, German Interior Minister, Thomas de Maiziere stated on August 19, “800,000 Islamic refugee migrants are slated to enter Germany in 2015; a 4 fold increase over 2014.”….the equivalent  of nearly 1% of its total population.  Orban concluded:

“Many of the migrants are from the Middle East and North Africa, a large number (40%) are from countries in the Balkans, including Albania and Kosovo. This implies that nearly half of those arriving in Germany are economic migrants, not refugees fleeing war zones.”

Germany is not alone and this is not new news.  According to the latest 2015 Pew Research Center research, the demographics of this latest migration breaks down the following way:

With an additional 1.5 million Islamic “refugees” expected to stream across the continent this year; 81%, 35 or younger, the alarm has finally gone off.  The European Commission and Turkey have agreed on a plan to stem the flow of refugees to Europe by patrolling Turkey’s frontier with Greece and setting up new camps, but in lieu of factors already mentioned, it appears too late for Christian Europe to recover.   Indeed all signs suggest the next 25 to 50 years will see the inevitable displacement and Islamization of Europe’s Christian population.  The predominant question to many minds is:  How did this happen?  Who made the pivotal decisions to allow such unrestricted immigration onto the continent?

On October 2, 2014 Switzerland voted to limit mass immigration thru its borders.  Rather than follow its lead, European officials registered “regret” over the results of this referendum.  “There will be consequences, that’s clear,” demurred Luxembourg foreign minister Jean Asselborn.  German foreign minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier chimed in, “Switzerland has rather damaged itself with this result.”  Not to be outdone, French Foreign Minister, Laurent Fabius stated the vote was “bad news for Europe.”  One year later, arguably the greatest proponent of Middle Eastern immigration, German Chancellor, Angela Merkel is facing what the Wall Street Journal refers to as a “Revolt over Migrants.”

Speaking in Eastern Germany this past week it was difficult for her to ignore a man holding a poster that read, “stop the refugee chaos.  Preserve German culture and values.  Topple Merkel.”  By all accounts it may be too late for such sentiments.  Reports have it Sharia courts presided by Muslim “peace judges” now dot Germany, where even non-Muslim German judges in German courts cite Sharia law and quote from the Quran.

In 2011, Vienna’s High Court upheld a court conviction of a woman, Elisabeth-Wolff for making this factual statement about Muhammad:

“We all know that Muhammad married Aisha when she was 6 years old and consummated the marriage when she was 9. Now, what do we call this behavior if not pedophilia.”

This is the moribund state Europe is in today.  At least the fabled denizens of Troy had only to contend with one Trojan Horse, not so Europe today; many have already breached their gates.  Greeting these new arrivals are the progeny of earlier emigres usurping the lifeblood and culture of their new homeland.


Also see: