Not just in America: Statue of Polish King who saved Europe from the Muslim horde desecrated

See the story here at Gates of Vienna blog.

The other September 11th….

polish-hussars

GoV:

Austria is about to celebrate the 334th anniversary of the breaking of the Siege of Vienna, which took place on September 11-12, 1683. The force that rode to the relief of Vienna was led by King Jan (John) III Sobieski of Poland, who later became known as the “Hero of Vienna”. [Also called “the hammer of the Turks”—ed]

On the night of September 11 the king arrived with his troops at the summit of the Kahlenberg, the wooded hill that overlooks Vienna. Early the following morning he led his men in a charge down the hill and routed the Turks before the Gates of Vienna, saving the city.

Last night the statue of King Jan III Sobieski on the Kahlenberg was vandalized and damaged.

Continue here.

Over three hundred years ago a horrific battle saved Europe from becoming a Muslim continent, but alas today, except for the Poles (and a few other countries of Eastern Europe) who do remember history, Europe will surely fall without a whimper through the Hijra—the migration.

Just a reminder that Donald Trump at least knew something about history when he traveled to Poland in July, here.

See my complete ‘Invasion of Europe’ archive by clicking here.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Towards A Definition Of Islam And Islamism

When a Leftist Pope gets between a rock and a hard place (laugh of the day)

VIDEO: Husaria – the Polish-Lithuanian Winged Hussars.

VIDEO: How Iraq Was Won and Lost

If you ask most people about the Iraq War, they’ll tell you it was a total disaster. They’ll tell you that George W. Bush lost the war, and Barack Obama cut our losses. But that’s totally backwards.

In this week’s new video, Pete Hegseth, who served in the Iraq war as an Army lieutenant, explains what really happened: President Bush won the war with the surge, leaving office with a stable and quiet Iraq, and then President Obama withdrew, snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

EDITORS NOTE: I was a U.S. Army Lieutenant with the 101st Airborne Division in Vietnam during the Tet Offensive of 1968. We lost the Vietnam war in the same way we lost the Iraq war. The newly elected President Nixon went to the bargaining table, keeping his promise to withdraw all U.S. troops from Vietnam.

President Nixon cut a fragile peace deal with the North Vietnamese. When the North Vietnamese Army invaded South Vietnam, after all of our troops had been withdrawn, Congress failed to provide the needed support promised in the peace agreement. The American people and our elected officials lost their collective “resolve” during the protests against the Vietnam War just as they did in Iraq.

Sadly we once again see that those who forget history are doomed to repeat it.

In honor of Dennis Prager’s birthday, August is PragerU’s annual fundraising month. Please consider making a tax-deductible donation so that we can continue to bring Dennis’s ideas to the next generation.

Expect a New Wave of Millions of Iraqi Refugees

In an article last week, I wrote that Syrian President Basher Assad is regaining power with the help of an Iranian Shiite coalition made up of Iranian fighters joined by Hezbollah, Iraqi and Afghan militias. In the near future, I predicted, it is possible that this coalition will try to rid the country of the millions of Sunnis who make up the majority of Syrian citizens, in order to prevent additional rebellions of the type Syria experienced from 1976 to 1982 and has been suffering from for the last six and a half years.

As a result of last week’s article, I was contacted by Sheikh Walid el Azawi, an Iraqi Sunni living in exile in Europe, who heads a party called “The Patriotic 20 Rebellion.” He wanted to tell me the shocking story of the situation in Iraq, where he claims that for years now, Iran is the real ruler and its Ayatollahs dictate Iraqi government policy and actions.

Iranian hegemony blends in well in Iraq, most of whose citizens are Shiite, and now that the Islamic State established by ISIS in Iraq has disintegrated, the Sunnis there have no armed organization to protect them from both Iranian and Iraqi Shiite rage

The Shiite’s desire to rid the country of its Sunni minority is motivated by a desire for revenge, because up to the year 2003, Saddam Hussein ruled Iraq, and treated the Shiites with terrible cruelty all the years he was in power. After his defeat in the First Gulf War in February 1991, he used artillery to butcher tens of thousands of Shiites who attempted to find safety at the gravesite of Hussein ibn Ali in the city of Najef.

There is an even older feud between the Iranians and the Iraqii Sunnis, dating from the 1980-1981 war forced upon them by Saddam Hussein . This war took the lives of over a million people, both citizens and soldiers, on both sides. It is important to recall that both sides used chemical weapons against each other during that accursed war which ended in Iran’s defeat when the chemical warfare waged against Tehran killed thousands of civilians.
The Iraqi and Iranian Shiite desire for revenge on Saddam Hussein is now directed against his entire religious sector, the Sunnis, who stand unprotected and unarmed against a rising, strengthening Shiite world. The collective power of Sunni forces – made up of organizations such as ISIS, al Qaeda, the Syrian rebels and countries such as Saudi Arabia, Jordan, the Emirates and Egypt – is weakening rapidly over the last few months in the face of the growing strength of the Shiite coalition made up of Iran, Hezbollah, and the Iraqi and Afghan militias.

Sheikh Walid el Azawi claims that as a result of this enormous shift in the balance of power, the Shiites will do everything they can to expel the Sunnis from Iraq to any country willing – or unwilling – to accept them. If this scenario does come to pass, about ten million Iraqi refugees will soon be joining the waves of the 15 to 20 million already existing refugees This wave of refugees can turn Europe, North and South America, Asia and Africa into economic disaster areas, leading to social unrest and political maelstroms. Do not forget to thank Iran and all those who strengthened that country during the past few years.

What is the solution?

Iraqi refugees

During my conversation with the Sheikh, I asked him what solution he and his party have to offer to save the Iraqi Sunnis and convince them to remain in their homeland. His answer came as a total surprise: “The Emirate Solution.” He is convinced that this is the only real solution that can save the Sunnis in Iraq from ethnic cleansing.

The country must be divided into regional states, on the lines of the USA, or cantons as in the Swiss model, each with internal autonomy. Iraq would become a federation with a limited central government while the Emirates would run the lives of whatever group resides in their territory. Each Emirate would lead its own life and refrain from interference in the policies of the other Emirates. Each Emirate would be ruled by a local Sheikh who originally stood at the head of the families within the Emirate’s borders, following the population’s social traditions. This, claims the Sheikh, will create harmony, stability and peaceful relations with neighboring Emirates for the good of all the citizenry.

The “Emirate Solution” will also grant self-rule to the Kurds of Northern Iraq, making the establishment of an independent Kurdish state unnecessary and preventing the certain violent antagonism of the Iranians, Turks and Arabs to its existence and ensuing hostilities

For illustration’s sake, let us recall that the northern Iraq Kurdish region is surrounded by countries that do not share the Kurdish dreams of independence, and has no corridor to the sea. If the neighboring countries allied against the Kurdish state, should one be established, preventing goods and people from reaching it, the Kurds would have no way of leading normal lives. How would they export oil and other products in that case? How would they manage to import necessities?

If the Kurds finally achieve independence in the framework of the Emirate Solution for Iraq, ending the struggle that has been going on for years, where is the problem? Clearly it lies with Iran, which will not agree to the plan now that it has taken over Iraq – unless it is forced to do so. And the only power in the entire world capable of forcing iran to agree to anything is the USA.

Sheikh el Azawi is prepared to go to the US at a moment’s notice in order to meet with decision-makers there and explain the logic behind his peace plan for Iraq and the benefits it s implementation would bring the world and the Iraqis themselves. The Americans, however, are busy dealing with four other issues: North Korea, the relations between the right and left inside America, who is going to resign or be fired on Trump’s staff and natural disasters like Harvey and the flooding in Houston this week. Who could possibly have the time and patience there to do anything about Iraq, the country the US Army left seven years ago with no desire to ever return?

The Emirates Solution in other Middle Eastern states

Afghanistan is another country that gives the US a blinding headache, mainly in the media, and to its security forces, intelligence and army, because the 17 years of American involvement there, the spilled American blood and enormous amounts of money put into the country, have not yielded appreciable results – for one main reason:

The Americans have been using all their power to preserve the artificial Afghan entity established by the British and Russians in the 19th century, despite the fact that it is filled with ethnic strife which prevents the creation of a homogeneous, united nation.. The only result so far is blood, fire and tears.

If the Americans and their allies would only take apart the illegitimate entity called Afghanistan and turn it into autonomous or independent states based on whatever local families rule in each one, so that it is governed by rulers with legitimacy, the heads of families and tribes, possibly Afhanistan could be a land of peace and tranquility reigning among its religious, family and ethnic groups,each living its own life and leaving all the others to do so in peace.

Interestingly, that same Emirate Solution could most definitely be applied to the seven cities of Judea and Samaria in addition to the Gazan Emirate established a decade ago. I am not a fan of Hamas, but Gaza is a state from every practical point of view, and Israel must find a way to deter effectively and clearly the Jihadist gang that has taken it over. Establishing Emirates in Judea and Samaria will grant the people there stability, prosperity and quiet. It will give Israel peace.

That same solution will solve Jordan’s problem as well. It can be divided into a Palestinian Emirate, perhaps more than one, and a Bedouin Emirate. The king will be a symbolic figure as is the Queen of England. Sudan has already split into two states, but both parts should be divided into smaller, more homogenous Emirates in order to bring more stability to this war torn and blood soaked country.

Yemen, a totally tribal society, would benefit from the Emirate Solution, becoming more governable and stable, certainly in comparison to the failed central government it has at present, which has brought many thousands to the point of hunger, disease, suffering and death.

Sheikh el Awazi’s dream, which I share with him, could become the basic principle employed by the world to solve the Middle East problem. Had it been employed in Syrai five years ago, many of its half million dead citizens would be alive today.

Watch: The gloomy future of Syria, Lebanon and Iraq under Iranian hegemony.

EDITORS NOTE: Translated from Hebrew by Rochel Sylvetsky, originally published on Israelnationalnews.com

Steve Bannon: Catholic Church has ‘economic interest’ in ‘unlimited illegal immigration’

Of course Bannon is right. The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) has a monetary interest in illegal immigration and “refugee” resettlement that goes far beyond all its hypocritical talk about welcoming the newcomer. This corrupt and authoritarian fraternity, which moves ruthlessly to stamp out any dissent from its new dogma that Islam is a religion of peace, received $79,590,512 in 2014 alone — that’s right, nearly 80 million dollars — from the federal government for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops Migration Fund.

“Leave them; they are blind guides. And if a blind man leads a blind man, both will fall into a pit.” (Matthew 15:14)

“Steve Bannon says Catholic Church has ‘economic interest’ in ‘unlimited illegal immigration,’” CBS News, September 7, 2017:

In his first extensive interview since leaving the Trump administration, former White House chief strategist Steve Bannon is speaking out about President Trump’s decision to end the DACA program. The Obama-era policy protects nearly 800,000 undocumented immigrants who came to the U.S. as children from deportation.

Bannon spoke to Charlie Rose in an interview that will air this Sunday, Sept. 10, on “60 Minutes.”

Steve Bannon: Look, what he did on DACA the other day. Okay, I don’t agree with that DACA decision, but I understand how he struggled with it, I understand how he’s giving the possibility of a legislative thing. And he said even last night in a tweet – even in a tweet, he would rethink it. Trust me, the guys in the far right, the guys on the conservative side are not happy with this.

Charlie Rose: Can I remind you, a good Catholic, that Cardinal [Timothy] Dolan is opposed to what’s happened with DACA? Cardinal Dolan.

Bannon: The Catholic Church has been terrible about this.

Rose: Okay.

Bannon: The bishops have been terrible about this. By the way, you know why? You know why? Because unable to really – to – to – to come to grips with the problems in the church, they need illegal aliens, they need illegal aliens to fill the churches. That’s – it’s obvious on the face of it. That’s what – the entire Catholic bishops condemn him. … They have – they have an economic interest. They have an economic interest in unlimited immigration, unlimited illegal immigration. And as much as –…

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Catholic Bishop Dolan says that the USCCB is not after more money when defending DACA kids, I beg to differ

Catholic Bishops & Lutherans lament not enough U.S. taxpayer funded refugees coming in to pay their bills

U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops: Bring Us More Muslim Terrorists

Dhimmitude comes to Des Moines

9th Circuit Appeals Court rules against Trump on scope of travel ban

Yes, the Alt-Left Exists and It’s Terrifying by Keri Smith

For those self-identified liberals who may have been seduced by this belief system, by its propaganda, and are fuming at this piece, thank you for reading. — Keri Smith Keri Smith

When writing this piece, a quote kept rattling around in the back of my head. It was the title of the opening chapter of “The Feminine Mystique,” Betty Friedan’s seminal 1963 feminist manifesto: The Problem That Has No Name. Apologies in advance, for appropriating and altering three of the quotes I find most meaningful from that chapter, for my own purposes here:

The problem lay buried, unspoken, for many years in the minds of American liberals…

Even so, most liberals still did not know that this problem was real. But those who had faced it honestly knew that all the media dismissals, the academic justifications, the intellectualized double speak and the manufactured outrage were somehow drowning the problem in unreality…

How can any person see the whole truth within the bounds of one’s own life? How can she believe that voice inside herself, when it denies the conventional, accepted truths by which she has been living? And yet the liberals I have talked to, who are finally listening to that inner voice, seem in some incredible way to be groping through to a truth that has defied the media.”

How can we discuss something we cannot refer to by name?

The Alt-Left Is Real

There is an effort underfoot, in the media and in academia, to declare the Alt-Left a myth, to sweep it back under the rug, to reduce it, in effect, back to being a sickness not spoken of, a problem that has no name. I have had well-meaning friends tell me I should not use the term Alt-Left (or any of its synonyms: Regressive Left, CTRL-Left, SJWism) because they are ‘pejoratives’ used only by the right to attack the left.

In my experience, this is not true. Like canaries in the coal mine, liberals who do not (or no longer) subscribe to the Alt-Left ideology have been sounding the alarm about this creeping plague of repressive groupthink for quite a while now. I believe this attempt to dissuade our use of the term Alt-Left is purposeful (even if not consciously recognized by individuals who are doing it) — for how can we discuss something we cannot refer to by name?

When asked to define Alt-Left, I would describe it as a leftist but illiberal authoritarian ideology rooted in postmodernism and neo-Marxism that supports censorship, condones violence in response to speech, is obsessed with identity politics (much like the Alt-Right), and functions like a secular religion that gives its believers a sense of moral self-worth.

It masquerades as a form of liberalism, but it has more in common with authoritarianism than its true believers can (or want to?) admit. It claims to speak for the marginalized, but it either ignores or attempts to hatefully shame members of marginalized groups who do not subscribe to the ideology.

It is not simply Antifa; it is the ideology that undergirds Antifa, and it has swallowed much of BLM and intersectional third wave feminism. It wishes to swallow the whole of the left, the country, the world. It is rooted in nihilism, resentfulness, and arrogance, though it presents itself as being rooted in equality, justice, and morality. It favors collectivism over individualism, statism over liberty, forced equality of outcome over freedom.

Now…imagine if I had to say that mouthful every time I wished to talk about the Alt-Left because I bought into the notion that to give it a name it would be insulting to fellow liberals. No, to speak of it by name is to out it for what it is and to reduce some of its power.

What’s in a Name?

I can’t tell you how good it felt when I first discovered the work of Dave Rubin, a reasonable liberal, and realized I wasn’t alone in seeing this pernicious belief system for what it really is.In his video, Rubin offers that it doesn’t matter which term we use, what’s important is that we are allowed to identify the problem. “Whatever name you use for this well-meaning yet painfully misguided set of ideas is largely irrelevant. We needed this phrase to identify this backward ideology which puts groups before people. And sometimes you need a label to get people to understand an idea.”

Reasonable liberal Maajid Nawaz, widely credited with coining the term Regressive Left, also made the following observation last year:

Today’s active, organized left is no longer liberal. A liberal will always prioritize free speech over offense. This behavior, censorship on the organized left, post factual behavior, violence being seen as an option and prioritizing group identity over individual rights. That isn’t liberal.”

Do yourself a favor and watch the whole video:

Yet another reasonable liberal, Tim Pool, points out that one of the few things Politico gets right about the Alt-Left is that it is a term used by centrist liberals. Pool says, “Yes, I use the term Alt-Left because I want to make sure everybody knows when I say I’m left-leaning, I’m not the kind of person that’s gonna go out and punch somebody in the face or take away their rights because I think mine are more important.”

I’m also a liberal who’s been using the term Alt-Left since I first learned to trust that voice within myself, that voice that denies the conventional, accepted Alt-Left “truths” by which I had been living.

The first time I used it in a public piece of writing was back in May while attempting to articulate my transformation in belief systems in an essay called On Leaving the SJW Cult and Finding Myself. The essay itself was a long time coming. I started to wake up to the creeping authoritarianism and endless internal hypocrisies of the accepted Alt-Left ideology over a year ago. But leaving behind a belief system to which you’ve subscribed for twenty years is a bit like razing your house to the ground and rebuilding from the ground up.

Suddenly you are starting with nothing; everything you thought you knew is suspect. It takes a long time to evaluate each previously held belief and try to discern which ones hold substance. Where before my house had foolishly been built on the shifting sands of postmodernism, this time I want to ensure that, as Dr. Jordan Peterson might say, my house is built on rock.

It makes me think of George Lakoff’s “Don’t Think of an Elephant,” my first introduction to the concept of framing. Lackoff said “Frames are mental structures that shape the way we see the world….Neuroscience tells us that each of the concepts we have — the long-term concepts that structure how we think — is instantiated in the synapses of our brains…If a strongly held frame doesn’t fit the facts, the facts will be ignored and the frame will be kept.”

I devoured this book when a young SJW. It helped me understand how people could vote Republican and why my right-wing Aunt didn’t seem to be swayed to my point of view no matter how many facts I threw at her. What I didn’t think too much about was how this human tendency is just as prevalent on the left as it is on the right.

The Frog and the Pot

I am of the opinion that a lot of well-meaning people have become converts to the Alt-Left ideology without even realizing it. Like the parable of the slow boiling frog, if you had told me at the beginning that one day I’d be expected to perform mental gymnastics in order to defend censorship and violence in response to speech, I would have leaped from the pot.

Instead, I was conditioned to accept as gospel each new tenet of SJWism over a period of twenty years. I believed in the essential goodness of the ideology, and in my own essential goodness in preaching it. When facts about the direction it was taking me made themselves known to me, I rejected them because they did not fit the frame. As the ideology became more noticeably toxic, hypocritical, and authoritarian, so too did the tactics of the true believers. Whether in academia, in the media, at Google, or online — the message is clear: dare to step out of line or express an independent thought, and a mob of zealous SJW zombies will come for you. The fear of losing one’s job, status, friends or personal safety is a strong motivator in forcing reasonable people to remain silent.

I have received a lot of positive feedback about the sentiments expressed in my writing about SJWism from people all over the political spectrum. Most meaningful to me of these might be the messages I get from fellow liberals who are going through the same realization, confusion, and fear.

In addition to the public responses you can read yourself, I have received private messages from people in academia, journalism, and entertainment — many of them liberals — expressing that the piece resonated with them and that they were afraid to share it (or presumably in some cases, to express themselves about anything at all). Excerpts from a handful of these are below:

I honestly was scared to tweet that…that’s how bad things have gotten. I’ve nearly lost work…The world has gone mad.”

“I have definitely taken notice of so many of my friends on the left going to a dark place.”

“It is totally wild. These people are my friends — my community….They’re so angry.”

“…your piece on the social justice cult affected me more than words can say. After being called ‘violent’…because I used a word that someone decided was offensive…I had a bit of an existential crisis about my life and self-worth. Thus, I’ve been thinking about this quite a bit… I remain committed to the idea that privilege exists and it should be combated through both self-reflection and system action. I also am a proud liberal, and that hasn’t lessened. That said, I can’t get behind the individual scapegoating, shouting and intimidation in the name of fighting hate, or defining sharing a point of view as “educating” and “labor.” Ultimately, the world needs more compassion….I’m trying to get there on talking and writing about some of this a little more publicly, but I don’t think I’m quite there yet (also, the fact that I’m on the academic job market makes me a bit hesitant).” 

“I saw your posts and they were refreshing. I hate politics but free speech is so important to me….but then I remember I work in TV and Music and I can’t say anything that’s going to make me lose my job. It’s crazy what’s going on right now.”

“Just wanted to let you know I’m one of those people who greatly appreciates your voice on social media, but am too afraid of the thought police to voice my support.”

If the Alt-Left doesn’t exist, why are so many liberals and centrists afraid of expressing themselves?

Actions Speak Louder Than Words

If the Alt-Left doesn’t exist, why are so many liberals and centrists afraid of expressing themselves? Why are so many people self-censoring for their own sense of safety? I was fascinated by the James Damore story, not because I have an opinion on the legality of his dismissal, but because his online stoning and subsequent firing confirmed for me what I already suspected: Google, like most of the tech space, the entertainment space, the academic space and the media space has become a panopticon of Alt-Left groupthink, self-censorship, and fear.

I know this fear intimately. As I started waking up to the illiberal nature of the growing Alt-Left ideology, I held my tongue for a long time out of fear of losing job opportunities, the safety of anonymity, and friends. After all, I built my career, and by proxy a lot of my friendships, from this SJW frame. I don’t judge anyone for subscribing to this ideology out of misplaced idealism and a desire to do good; I did for twenty years. Likewise, I don’t judge anyone who is currently waking up from it but is constrained by fear. As I tell folks who write me about it: I don’t know the exact way to get over it. I suspect it’s different for every person. But trust me when I tell you, it is so liberating on the other side.

For those self-identified liberals who may have been seduced by this belief system, by its propaganda, and are fuming at this piece, thank you for reading this far. I believe a part of you is struggling to wake up if you stuck it out this long. I encourage you to start listening to that small voice inside yourself, the one that tells you when something doesn’t seem quite right or reasonable, no matter if it’s accepted by all of your peers.

Take a look at who was really at the Free Speech Rally in Boston for starters. This, for example, is Shiva Ayyadurai. You may decide you don’t like him because he’s conservative, but to call him a “white supremacist” is a dangerous Alt-Left falsehood.

Take the time to listen to Will Johnson and Joey Gibson, two of the organizers of the Patriot Prayer Rally in SF this past weekend. Their rally was canceled after successful media (and political) attempts to smear them as “white supremacists” caused subsequent threats of violence from the Alt-Left. Ask yourself if it’s not odd that so many so-called liberals are now smearing people of color with whom they don’t agree as “white supremacists” (Charles Barkley is apparently one now too, so Johnson, Gibson, and Ayyadurai are not alone).

Then ask yourself if these people, or these people, or these people, or these people, or these people, or these people, or these people, or these people or these people, or these people, or these people, or these people, or these students, or these students, or these students, or these students are really fighting fascism, or if they are acting as footsoldiers (some witting, some unwitting) for a pro-censorship and pro-violence ideology. These facts may not fit your frame, but — do the actions depicted here reflect your liberal values?

I read a C.S. Lewis quote some time ago, that has stuck with me during my transformation in thought. Perhaps it will stick with you:

“Suppose one reads a story of filthy atrocities in the paper. Then suppose that something turns up suggesting that the story might not be quite true, or not quite so bad as it was made out. Is one’s first feeling, ‘Thank God, even they aren’t quite so bad as that,’ or is it a feeling of disappointment, and even a determination to cling to the first story for the sheer pleasure of thinking your enemies are as bad as possible? If it is the second then it is, I am afraid, the first step in a process which, if followed to the end, will make us into devils. You see, one is beginning to wish that black was a little blacker. If we give that wish its head, later on we shall wish to see grey as black, and then to see white itself as black. Finally we shall insist on seeing everything — God and our friends and ourselves included — as bad, and not be able to stop doing it: we shall be fixed for ever in a universe of pure hatred.”

Keri Smith

Keri Smith

Keri is Co-Founder of Whitesmith Entertainment.

VIDEO: Remembering the Munich Olympics Massacre — September 5, 1972

“The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.” 
 — Thomas Jefferson

As Americans begin holding ceremonies in remembrance of the terrorist attach by al Qaeda on September 11, 2001 perhaps it is important to go back and remember another attack, which took place in Munich, Germany in 1972. The attack was planned and executed by the Palestinian terrorist group Black September. I was a young U.S. Army Captain and commander of a field artillery battery in Augsburg, Germany when this internationally televised terrorist attack happened. After the Munich attack my unit, the 1st Infantry Division (FWD) provided additional security for the Olympic village.

I learned a harsh lesson during those days, as Benjamin Franklin wrote, “An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.”

Jeff Dunetz in his article “The Munich Olympics Massacre 45 Years Later” wrote:

Yassir Arafat sent five Palestinian Terrorists into an Olympic Village dedicated to peace and international cooperation. The funding for the terrorist team was arraigned by the future President of the Palestinian Authority Mahmoud Abbas.  Their successful mission was to shock the world–kidnapping and killing the Israeli Olympic team. This was the first terrorist tragedy played out live and worldwide on TV which is probably why we all remember that picture of the Ski-masked terrorist on the balcony.The Olympic committee did not feel the massacre of 11 Israeli athletes were important enough to cancel or even delay the Olympic games, after all, they were only Jews.

“Incredibly, they’re going on with it,” Jim Murray of the Los Angeles Times wrote at the time. “It’s almost like having a dance at Dachau.”

In his book Abu Daoud, who was the mastermind behind the Munich attack stated:

“After Oslo in 1993, Abu Mazen [Mahmoud Abbas] went to the White House Rose Garden for a photo op with Arafat, President Bill Clinton and Israel’s Yitzhak Rabin and Shimon Peres.

“Do you think that … would have been possible if the Israelis had known that Abu Mazen was the financier of our operation? I doubt it.”

When Abu Daoud died, Abbas has eulogized him as he has done with many terrorists since:

He is missed. He was one of the leading figures of Fatah and spent his life in resistance and sincere work as well as physical sacrifice for his people’s just causes.

Read more.

At 4:30 a.m. on September 5, 1972, a band of Palestinian terrorists took eleven Israeli athletes and coaches hostage at the Summer Olympics in Munich. More than 900 million viewers followed the chilling, twenty-hour event on television, as German authorities desperately negotiated with the terrorists. Finally, late in the evening, two helicopters bore the terrorists and their surviving hostages to Munich’s little-used Fürstenfeldbruck airfield, where events went tragically awry. Within minutes all of the Israeli athletes, five of the terrorists, and one German policeman were dead.

Why did the rescue mission fail so miserably? And why were the reports compiled by the German authorities concealed from the public for more than two decades?

Simon Reeve takes on a catastrophe that permanently shifted the political spectrum with a fast-paced narrative that covers the events detail by detail. Based on years of exhaustive research Reeve, in his book One Day in September gives a definitive account of one of the most devastating and politically explosive terrorist attacks of the late twentieth century, one that set the tone for 45 years of renewed conflict in the Middle East and beyond.

September 5th, 1972 set the stage for September 11th, 2001.

As George Santayana wrote, “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”

Watch Simon Reeve discussing his book One Day in September.

VIDEO: Help Fund ‘Cant We Talk About this?’ Film and Ad Campaign

AFDI President Pamela Geller said in a statement:

“In this film, we’re setting the record straight about our Garland free speech event, at which we were not only targeted by Islamic jihadis but apparently by the FBI as well. But we’re doing much more as well: we’re telling the whole, as-yet-untold truth about the war on free speech.”

Geller added:

“Hollywood will never tell this story. The media will never tell this story. Our public schools and universities will never teach our children what happened. The truth must be told.”

Can’t We Talk About This? is a follow-up to AFDI’s acclaimed 2011 documentary, The Ground Zero Mosque: The Second Wave of the 9/11 Attacks. This much-needed new web series gives viewers the inside story of what happened in Garland and why, and lays out the full and appalling details of the all-out assault on the freedom of speech that is taking place today – and why this may be the most crucial battleground today in the war for the survival of the United States of America as a free republic.

Watch the trailer:

We bought a hundred buses and a series of billboards in New York City’s Time Square – we need your support to pay for the ad campaign and production costs of the film.

Please give generously. No one dares do the work we do.

The web series also features seldom-seen news footage and revealing details not only of the Garland event and the jihad killers who wanted to wage jihad there, but also of the many other battlegrounds in the war for free speech that led up to the Garland attack, including the death fatwa issued in 1989 by the Islamic Republic of Iran against Salman Rushdie for his supposed blasphemy in The Satanic Verses; the assassination of Theo Van Gogh by a Muslim on an Amsterdam street in November 2004 for his alleged blasphemy; the Dutch newspaper Jyllands Posten’s cartoons of Muhammad, published in September 2005, which touched off international riots and killings by Muslims – and most disturbing of all, calls in the West for restrictions on the freedom of speech; the Organization of Islamic Cooperation’s years-long struggle at the UN to compel the West to criminalize “incitement to religious hatred” (a euphemism for criticism of Islam); and the U.S. under Obama signing on to UNCHR Resolution 16/18, which calls on member states to work to restrict incitement to religious hatred.

Can’t We Talk About This? covers lesser-known skirmishes in the war against free speech as well, such as Seattle cartoonist Molly Norris’ “Everybody Draw Muhammad Day” in 2010, after which Norris was forced to go into hiding and change her identity after threats. And it traces what immediately led up to the Garland event – most notably, the January 2015 massacre of Muhammad cartoonists at the offices of the Charlie Hebdo satirical magazine in Paris and the subsequent “Stand with the Prophet” event in Garland, at which Muslim groups gathered in the wake of that massacre not to defend free speech, but to complain about “Islamophobia,” while AFDI members and supporters protested outside.

Geller explained: “We’ll set out the media firestorm that followed the Garland event, as well as the attempts to kill me, and explain why the event’s detractors were all missing the point: the freedom of speech doesn’t apply only if you like the message; it applies to everyone. And if it is gone, so is a free society.”

Can’t We Talk About This? tells the whole horrifying story of how advanced the Islamic war on free speech is, and how close leftist and Islamic authoritarians are to final victory and the death of the freedom of speech and free society

Our new billboards went up in Times Square today:

RELATED ARTICLES:

Boston: Gruesome jihad videos nixed for terror trial jury in plot to BEHEAD Pamela Geller

Quran Reciting Barbie

Pinterest BANS Pamela Geller

Ivanka Trump teams with Grover Norquist to boost tax-reform efforts

ISIS Urges Jihadis to Poison Food in US Supermarkets with CYANIDE

Geert Wilders: ‘We want a Europe without the EU’

Dutch Member of Parliament Geert Wilders was invited to speak at the Ambrosetti Conference in Italy. The purpose of the conference titled “Intelligence on the World, Europe, and Italy” was to “to discuss current issues of major impact for the world economy and society as a whole.”

If anything MP Wilders is an outlier and his remarks show him to be a truth teller among those who wish to ignore the truth about what is truly happening across Europe. As MP Wilders put it:

I appreciate inviting someone who does not share your enthusiasm for the European Union. Whether your European dream, like Euro Commissioner Frans Timmermans, just mentioned it. To be honest: His dream is my nightmare.

MP Wilders made it clear that the biggest issues facing the European Union are:

  • The European elite in our midst.
  • The mistake of European nations transferring more and more power to the EU.
  • [L]egislation has been outsourced to Brussels.
  • The lack of a “clear European identity.”
  • A EU that “is characterized by cultural relativism and hostility to patriotism.”
  • The “bitter fruits” of the EU immigration policy.
  • The EU resembling “a cartel of governments dominated by Germany and France.”
  • [T]he EU does not care for the preservation of Jewish Christian culture.

MP Wilders warned, “The problems facing Europe are existential. Non-economics, but Islamization, terrorism and mass immigration are our main problems. Existential, indeed, because it determines who we are, what we are and whether we will still exist as a free people in the future.”

Please read MP Wilder’s entire speech. His words are prophetic and sound familiar. His words are much like those of President Trump in that MP Wilders wants to make Holland Great Again.

National sovereignty, secured borders, controlled immigration, draining the swamp in Brussels and dealing with the growing threats to his culture and Judeo/Christian world view.

MP Wilders is one of a handful of leaders willing to speak out in order to save his country. The forces arrayed against him are like the forces arrayed against President Trump. But MP Wilders knows that we shall overcome those obstacles and restore our virtue and dignity as unique Western cultures and societies.

RELATED ARTICLE: Towards A Definition Of Islam And Islamism

Transcript of Speech by Geert Wilders
Ambrosetti Conference, Italy, Villa d’Este, September 2, 2017

Ladies and gentlemen,

Thank you for being here today. I appreciate inviting someone who does not share your enthusiasm for the European Union. Whether your European dream, like Euro Commissioner Frans Timmermans, just mentioned it. To be honest: His dream is my nightmare.

I realize that my opinion differs from that of many members of the European elite in our midst, but I am an optimist.

I believe in a positive future for Europe as a community of independent, sovereign and democratic countries – collaborating without a supranational political union – a Europe without the European Union.

I believe that true democracy can only exist and flourish within a nation state. The national sovereignty combined with the domestic culture gives us our identity. As well as control over our own limits and budget and the right to decide how we use it ourselves as a nation.

Unfortunately, most of our governments have transferred more powers to the EU, which undermines many important things we have achieved over the past centuries.

Our ancestors fought for a democratic Netherlands. That is a Netherlands where Dutch voters and nobody else decide on Dutch matters. Democracy means that a people can decide on his own legislation.

Democracy is equal to self-government. But by the transfer of our powers to Brussels, the EU institutions and other countries decide on matters that are essential to our nation: our immigration policy, our monetary policy, our trade policy and many other issues.

A large part of our legislation has been outsourced to Brussels. Our national parliaments have become EU executive agencies. Many people object to this.

In the 2005 referendum, the Dutch voted against the European constitution, but a few years later, a slightly modified version was pushed under a new name.

Last year, a large majority of the Dutch voted in a referendum against the EU Association Treaty with Ukraine, but the treaty was still pushed. Very few people can still take the EU as a democratic institution after they have seen this happen.

Another very important thing that the Dutch have acquired over the past centuries were clear and demarcated boundaries. Boundaries are important. Because they protect us and determine who and what we are. Due to our governments that have transferred sovereignty, we are now no longer responsible for our immigration policy and even our own borders.
And the result is terrible.

If you give away the keys of your own home to someone who does not lock the doors, do not be surprised when unwelcome guests find their way in. I believe every nation is in charge of its own boundaries and must be able to decide who is welcome and who not. The Netherlands is the home of the Dutch. It’s the only house we have. And we should have control over our borders and our own immigration policy.

One of these things we also attach Dutch is our national identity. The Dutch have their own identity. And so also the other nations of Europe.

But there is no clear European identity.

The EU is characterized by cultural relativism and hostility to patriotism. But patriotism is not a dangerous threat, it’s something to be proud of.

It means defending the sovereignty and independence of the nation states, and not selling these values ​​in slight compromises to the EU and its bureaucrats.

As the Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban said – I quote – “Europe is a community of Christian, free and independent nations. The greatest danger to Europe’s future is the fanatics of internationalism in Brussels. We will not allow them to bitter the fruits of to invoke our cosmopolitan immigration policy. ” End quote.

I totally agree with that.

The European Commission has recently initiated proceedings against Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic because they refuse to include immigrants. Two years ago, Mrs Merkel invited millions of immigrants to come to Germany.

An historical error. She not only released millions, her policy encouraged them.

Her “Wir buck tie – we can call it” call was one of the biggest suction factors in the European migrant crisis. It is impossible to maintain your identity if you are flooded by millions of newcomers with a completely different culture. A culture that – as is the case with Islamic culture – aims to dominate and refuse[s] to assimilate.

The EU resembles a cartel of governments dominated by Germany and France. These two mighty nations decide almost everything.

But the Poland, the Hungarians, the Dutch, the Italians did not choose Mr Merkel or Mr Macron.

They did not choose Mr Juncker, and we, Dutch, have decimated in the last parliamentary elections of last March, the most pro-EU and pro-ice party in the Netherlands: the social democratic party of my countryman, Mr Timmermans, next to this tomorrow I sit, lost 75% of her seats. My party, the EU’s most anti-EU and anti-icing party, won 33% more seats.

In the 13-party parliament in the Netherlands we are for the first time ever the second party, and next time we will be the biggest.

Another important issue that the Dutch is at heart is our safety. In our streets today, as in many other European cities, we can see daily that the EU and the pro-EU leaders of the national states have saddled us. In our inner cities we are faced with whole neighborhoods that no longer seem to be Dutch, and where Dutch are no longer safe. We have people in our country who are born in our country but who do not share our basic values ​​and it’s even worse.

Parts of Europe even seem to be in war zones. The EU has no war. There have been terrible murderous attacks in Barcelona, ​​London, Manchester, Berlin, Brussels, Nice, Paris, Stockholm, Copenhagen, Madrid, Amsterdam.

Terrorists have entered Europe between immigrant flows that have allowed the EU and national governments. While home grown terrorists are already one of the biggest problems facing our countries today. Thousands of them, throughout Europe, are able to travel freely and wherever they want.

This morning, European anti-terrorism coordinator Gilles de Kerckhove said in a Belgian newspaper that there are now 50,000 radical Muslims in Europe. They can commit a terrorist attack any time, as has happened so often lately.

Brussels, together with the pro-EU leaders in the national capitals, created the conditions that allowed these horrendous events and attacks by allowing millions of immigrants to enter Europe – often uncontrolled, by not requiring assimilation by refusing a ” search culture ‘, a dominant culture, through political correctness and total lack of leadership.

At my office in The Hague is a huge portrait of Sir Winston Churchill. In 1946 he held a speech in which he pleaded for what he called – I quote – “a kind of United States of Europe.” But he did not mean what the Eurofiles mean. He called the British Commonwealth as an example: a loose federation of nations, economically cooperative and bound to a number of principles.

But when he became prime minister in the 50’s, Churchill did not ask for membership of the EU’s forerunner. He found the idea of ​​giving up national sovereignty horrendously. Because he knew that this would lead to the end of democracy, identity and security for his people.

And the EU does not care for the preservation of Jewish Christian culture.

On the contrary, it facilitates Islamization.

Our European civilization, based on the cultural legacy of Jerusalem, Athens and Rome, is the best civilization on earth. It gave us democracy, freedom, equality before the law, the separation of church and state, and the view that sovereign states are there to protect all this. The remedy against all misery and terror is clear: we need to re-emphasize what we are. Only then can we ensure our children a future in a safe, strong and free Europe.

The problems facing Europe are existential. Non-economics, but Islamization, terrorism and mass immigration are our main problems. Existential, indeed, because it determines who we are, what we are and whether we will still exist as a free people in the future.

Ladies and gentlemen,

I believe in freedom of expression. I pay a heavy price for that. I’m on killing lists of Al Qaeda, the Pakistani Taliban and other Islamic groups. I live in a safehouse of the Dutch state and I have been under the 24/7 police protection for 13 years. Everyone is entitled to his or her opinion. I have that too.

And I think Islamization is the biggest threat to our European future. I’m not talking about all Muslims, many of whom are moderate, but I am talking about Islamic ideology that is incompatible with freedom and democracy and we import massively.

The European Commission expresses its concern about the so-called threat to democracy in countries like Poland and Hungary, but it ignores the destructive effect that Islam has on security and freedom of Europe.

For all these reasons – protecting our democracy, our borders, our identity, our security and our freedom – we want a Europe without the EU. Sovereign democratic countries are perfectly able to work together where there are common interests – without the need for a supranational political institution like the EU.

But despite all the bad news, I’m, as I said at the beginning, an optimist. Everywhere in Europe, more and more people become proud patriots.

And know that the patriots will win. And also the nation state.

Nations who are naturally willing to work together where they see a common interest. There is nothing wrong with economic cooperation, on the contrary. We can also work together to fight terrorism. But everything on a voluntary basis, as sovereign nations.

And without a political union. Without the EU.

The future belongs to the Europe of sovereign nations.

Thank you.

U.S. leaflet calls Taliban ‘dogs’ — Muslims outraged

Yes, of course, they’re not enraged at jihad terrorism, they’re enraged that the leaflet calls the Taliban dogs. Why? Because Islam hates dogs:

“Once Gabriel promised the Prophet (that he would visit him, but Gabriel did not come) and later on he said, ‘We, angels, do not enter a house which contains a picture or a dog.’” — Sahih Bukhari 4.54.50

“Abdullah (b. Umar) (Allah be pleased with them) reported: Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) ordered the killing of dogs and we would send (men) in Medina and its corners and we did not spare any dog that we did not kill, so much so that we killed the dog that accompanied the wet she-camel belonging to the people of the desert.” — Sahih Muslim 3811

“Ibn Mughaffal reported: The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) ordered killing of the dogs, and then said: What about them, i. e. about other dogs? and then granted concession (to keep) the dog for hunting and the dog for (the security) of the herd, and said: When the dog licks the utensil, wash it seven times, and rub it with earth the eighth time.” — Sahih Muslim 551

And the leaflet also had the shahada, the Islamic confession of faith, which is not actually a single Qur’an verse as AFP claims, but a combination of elements of two verses (37:35 and 48:29), written on the dog’s body. Taliban, let’s remember, means “students.” Students of what? Islam. Afghans have never protested against the Taliban’s avowed Islamic motivations and goals. But when Americans notice them, watch out. This is how the “Islamophobia” smear always works: Muslims saying “Kill them wherever you find them is fine.” Non-Muslims noticing Muslims saying “Kill them wherever you find them is fine” is “Islamophobic.”

A leaflet distributed September 5th, 2017 by U.S. forces in Afghanistan shows a dog bearing the Islamic Shahada, or profession of faith, being chased by a lion. Photo by Sultan Faizy.

“US angers Afghans with ‘offensive’ leaflet drop,” AFP, September 6, 2017:

US forces apologised Wednesday for dropping leaflets in northern Afghanistan depicting a dog with a Koranic verse written across its body – an image highly offensive to Muslims.

A photo of the alleged leaflet circulating on social media shows a lion chasing a white dog — the same colour as the Taliban’s flag – with the holy verse “there is no God but Allah, and Mohammad is the messenger of Allah” superimposed on its body.

Dogs are seen as unclean creatures by some Muslims and the association of Islam with a canine in deeply religious Afghanistan has angered many people.

“Take back your freedom from these dogs. Help the security forces eliminate these enemies. Take back your freedom and ensure your security,” the leaflet says.

NATO forces frequently drop leaflets over large swathes of Afghanistan in an effort to persuade locals against supporting insurgents.

Social media users condemned the disrespectful design on the leaflets, which were dropped in Parwan province.

“Death to infidels, death to their servants,” one user posted on Facebook.

Another wrote: “They do this in a country with a 99.9% Muslim population. We will see how the (insurgents)… react.”

Major General James Linder, who heads the US and NATO special operations forces in Afghanistan, apologised for the leaflet design which he said was an “error”.

“The design of the leaflets mistakenly contained an image highly offensive to both Muslims and the religion of Islam,” Linder said in a statement.

“I sincerely apologize. We have the deepest respect for Islam and our Muslim partners worldwide.”

An investigation into the incident is under way, said a spokesman for the special operations forces at Bagram Airbase in Parwan, America’s largest base in Afghanistan.

He refused to release a copy of the leaflet.

Hassiba Efat, a member of the Parwan provincial council, told AFP: “The leaflets are very offensive to Islam”.

“The people in the villages are angry about it but so far we have had no reports of any demonstrations.

“They (foreign forces) have apologised and promised to collect as many of the leaflets as possible.”…

RELATED ARTICLES:

First Look: Pamela Geller Bus Ads for ‘Can’t We Talk About This? The Islamic Jihad Against Free Speech’

Virginia: Prison convert to Islam rearrested on gun charges weeks after release

After Iran occupies Syria, it will destroy Europe and North America

There is a long term plan at work here aimed at destroying the West and it can work.

Iran and Russia plan to destroy Western Europe, the U.S. and Canada by means of a new wave of millions of Syrian Sunnis fleeing to the West to escape the Shiite takeover of Syria.

In my weekly column two months ago, I claimed that Iran is the real victor in the Syrian civil war. Using the war against ISIS as a smokescreen, it is taking over large swathes of Syrian territory, mainly in the scarcely populated middle and eastern parts of the country. In the more fertile and densely populated west of Syria, there are Iraqi, Afghan, and Iranian Shiite militias augmenting Lebanese Hezbollah fighters who were given carte blanche to do whatever Hassan Nasrallah decides to do there.

Assad’s strength continues to increase as ISIS and the other rebel forces lose ground. The brutality of Russian involvement and the cruelty of Shiite militias overcame the anti-Assad forces, the turning point occurring when in 2015, Turkey’ s Erdogan was forced by Russia to cease his aid to the rebels and ISIS. Today, although Erdogan is an unwilling ally of Russia, Alawite Assad still sees him, justifiably, as an Islamist enemy.

The Kurds of northeast Syria, treated as below third class citizens until 2011, will never agree to live under Arab mercy once again and it is reasonable to assume that should Syria remain an undivided country under Assad’s rule, the Kurds will preserve relative autonomy in their region – or fight the regime for their rights.

That is certainly a problem, but the main issue facing a united Syria is going to be the drastic demographic changes the country is going to face.

First of all, about half of Syria’s citizens – close to 10 million – are refugees, half located in Syria and the other half in Jordan, Turkey, Lebanon, other Arab countries, Europe, North and South America, Australia and even Israel. Syrian refugees who reached points outside the Arab world will in all probability stay put, benefiting from the secure and orderly lives they can now lead. On the other hand, the 3.5 million now in Jordan, Lebanon and Turkey are awaiting the end of hostilities in order to return to their homes.

Those expectations may be dashed, however, because Syrian reality is totally changed, and large parts of its cities are in ruins after six and a half years of a cruel and bloody war. Countless bombs dropped from planes and helicopters, artillery and tank barrages, mines and explosives planted by both sides have made much of urban Syria, where most of the fighting took place, unsafe to live in. In Homs, Aleppo, Adlib, Hamat and many other cities, entire neighborhoods will have to be razed and their infrastructure rebuilt from scratch.

Decades and billions of dollars are needed to rebuild the country and I, for one, do not see the world’s nations standing on line to donate the necessary funds. Refugees will not agree to switch their tents in Jordan for ruined buildings lacking basic infrastructure in a desolate and destroyed Syria.

The other reason the refugees will not return is their justified fear of the new lords of the land – the Shiites. Iran has been moving Shiites from Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan to Syria for a long time in a clear attempt to change the demographic makeup of the country from the Sunni majority it had before the civil war broke out in 2011. The issue could not be more clear because it is no secret that the pre-civil war Sunni majority considered the Alawite rulers heretic idol worshippers who had no right to live in Syria, much less rule over it.

The Alawites know well that the Sunnis rebelled against them twice: The first time was from 1976 to 1982, a rebellion that took the lives of 50,000 citizens. The second time, slowly drawing to an end, has cost the lives of half a million men, women, children and aged citizens of Syria. The Alawites intend to prevent a third rebellion and the best way to do that is to change the majority of the population to Shiites instead of Sunnis. They will not allow the Sunni refugees to return to their homes, leaving them eternal refugees whose lands have been taken over by the enemy. Iran, meanwhile, will populate Syria with Shiites from Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan.

This ethnic cleansing is the Ayatollah’s dream come true, the dream that sees a Shiite crescent drawn from Iran through Iraq and Syria to Lebanon and the Mediterranean Sea. This will cover the eastern Arab world from the north, while the war in Yemen is being fought in order to create a parallel southern crescent, entrapping Saudi Arabia and Jordan between the two. With the help of Allah, both those countries and Israel, the Small Satan, will soon fall into the hands of the Shiites, while Europe and America do nothing because who cares when Muslims fight other Muslims?

The Shiite majority in Syria will play along with Lebanon’s Hezbollah, their natural allies, and it is possible that some form of federation might be created between the two in order to push the Lebanese Christians out of the picture, “persuading” them to flee to other countries, leaving Lebanon to its “rightful” Shiite masters. This explains Nasrallah’s eager willingness to fight on Syrian soil as well as the opposition of those against Nasrallah to his involvement there.

The new demographic situation in Syria will convince the Sunni refugees that they have no place to which to return. They will try their best to be allowed to leave Jordan, Lebanon and Turkey for any country, preferably North America and Europe, willing to allow them entry. I predict a process that is the exact opposite of the one the world expects to take place when “peace” breaks out in Syria: Instead of refugees returning to their birthplace, expect the mass flight of Sunni refugees from the region, and expect a heightened incidence of Islamist terror in the countries that allow them in.

The reasons are obvious:

1. Former ISIS and rebel forces will infiltrate along with the refugees, because they, too, are Sunni. They are filled with fury and hatred for the Western countries who were part of the coalition that fought ISIS or stood by without aiding the rebels. Some of them will continue their Jihad on European and North American soil. Expect shootings, explosives and ramming attacks against citizens of these countries.

2. Some of the refugees will not find work and live on the economic and social fringes of society, in poverty-stricken Islamist neighborhoods which have already existed for years in many European cities, and where the local police fear to tread. Poverty and life on the fringe of society will turn some of the Muslim young people into easy prey for terrorist organization recruiters who arouse the desire for Jihad by describing the accepting host countries as decadent societies infected with permissiveness, prostitution, alcohol, drugs, materialism and corruption. They present the countries that allowed the immigrants entry as having done so to take advantage of them as industrial slaves, garage hands, cashiers and other degrading occupations, while the privileged citizens are lawyers, accountant, businessmen and homeowners w ho take advantage of the migrants in humiliating ways. It is only a matter of time until young Muslims, especially those who were taught that “everyone is equal” in Western schools, enlist in terrorist organizations.

3. Countries which allow in refugees will suffer a higher crime rate as a result, including violence in public places, sexual attacks and harassment, housebreaking, car theft, substance abuse, unreported work to avoid paying taxes and illegal construction. This will all occur at the same time these countries expend a larger part of their budgets on social services for the refugees, from child allowances to unemployment, health and old age benefits. At this point in time, the percentage of second and third generation immigrants populating the prisons in Western Europe is significantly larger than their percentage in the general population.

4. Increased economic, social and security problems in Europe and North America as a result of the rise in the number of migrants will lead to a rise in the strength of the right and the extreme right. This will in turn lead to more social tensions in the West. Members of Parliament whose only wish is to be re-elected will adapt their parliamentary activity – especially the laws they promote – to the expectations of the rapidly Islamizing constituencies, sacrificing their own people’s interests on the altar of their political careers. Many Europeans, aware of their elected leaders’ betrayal, will despair and leave those socially and economically deteriorating countries. This will increase the rate at which Europe turns into an Islamic region.

And that is how the agreements Iran and Russia will soon coerce Syria into accepting are going to start a chain reaction increasing the number of refugees and pulling Europe down to a point of no return, without the world understanding what is going on. The Atlantic Ocean is not wide enough to protect North America from this debacle crossing the sea.

This is how the Iranian Ayatollahs intend to destroy the heretic, permissive, drunk and materialistic West. More of the unfortunate Syrian millions will find themselves exiled to the heretic countries hated by the Ayatollahs, and Iran will operate from Syrian soil to vanquish Europe and America.

Written in Hebrew for Arutz Sheva, translated by Rochel Sylvetsky, Senior Consultant and op-ed editor of Arutz Sheva English site.

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is a of Iran’s national flags are seen on a square in Tehran February 10, 2012, a day before the anniversary of the Islamic Revolution. REUTERS/Morteza Nikoubazl/File Photo.

Media Conspicuously Omits D.C. Metro Shooter’s Immigration Status

A disturbing incident involving a shooting inside a busy Washington D.C. metro station has received a lot of media attention, but all the reports conspicuously fail to mention if the suspect is an illegal immigrant. A man was captured on camera firing a gun down the escalator of the Columbia Heights Metro station in Northwest Washington in the middle of the afternoon on August 25. He eluded police for days and authorities needed help capturing him so they revealed he had an extensive criminal history and identified him as 22-year-old Cesar Morales, Hispanic with brown eyes, black hair and facial and neck tattoos common among members of violent street gangs.

Law enforcement bulletins warned that Morales was armed and dangerous and local media outlets included screenshots of the Metro D.C. Police Department’s social media alert asking for the public’s help in apprehending Morales. It includes a mug shot of the suspect, who has four tattoos on his face and a large one across his neck. It turns out that Morales had just served a five-year sentence after getting convicted of several gun charges involving the 2013 shooting of a D.C. man. Washington D.C.’s mainstream newspaper reported that the Federal Bureau of Prisons said Morales walked away form a halfway house overseen by the Baltimore Residential Reentry Management Office, which supervises facilities in Maryland, Virginia, West Virginia, Delaware and D.C. Morales was moved to the halfway house as part of a system to help inmates transition back into society. If Morales is in the U.S. illegally, he should have been deported not transitioned back into society.

“Witnesses were unnerved at that brazenness of a man opening fire at 12:15 p.m. in what normally is a bustling transit stop adjacent to a shopping center,” the article states. Another local news report describes “alarming video” that shows two men chasing someone in the station. The shooter left behind a gun, the report says, and the intended target fled. Other coverage mentions a brief foot pursuit before police lost Morales on the day of the shooting and detailed physical descriptions of the suspect, between 5-foot-2 and 5-foot-5, around 150 pounds. This information is just at pertinent as the suspect’s legal status yet no media outlet bothered to include it. Why is it being completely left out of all the news coverage? Even the local Fox news affiliate left it out of a follow-up piece about Morales getting apprehended by Montgomery County Police in Maryland days after the metro station shooting. The information is attributed to Montgomery Police Captain Paul Starks, who offered no further details. Judicial Watch reached out to the D.C. and Montgomery police departments to inquire about Morales’s legal status but neither returned calls.

Montgomery and D.C. protect illegal immigrants from federal authorities by offering them sanctuary. Earlier this year, local government in the nation’s capital took it a step further by launching a defense fund to help illegal aliens facing deportation. D.C.’s new taxpayer-funded initiative is called Immigrant Justice Legal Services (IJLS) and it pays organizations and law firms to help illegal aliens apply for asylum, represent them in deportation proceedings and conduct “know your rights” briefings and workshops, among other things. “In Washington, DC we embrace our diversity and strive to be more inclusive,” Mayor Muriel Bowser said in an announcement when she launched the new defense fund, adding that months earlier she “reaffirmed” Washington D.C.’s status as a sanctuary city. “We must ensure that all District residents can take advantage of their federal and constitutional rights,” Bowser said. “Through the Immigrant Justice Legal Services grant program, we are ensuring that if immigration enforcement changes and problems arise, DC’s immigrant population will have our support and the support of DC’s legal community.”

In Montgomery, an affluent Maryland county, a longtime sanctuary policy led to a series of high-profile murders and other heinous crimes committed by illegal immigrants who had been arrested by local police and released. Under the county’s sanctuary policy, the offenders were not reported to federal authorities for deportation despite their criminal histories. In one year alone, illegal aliens who had been previously arrested in the area committed four murders, including that of a high school honor student and an elderly woman. Two of the killings involved members of the notoriously violent MS-13 or Mara Salvatrucha gang, whose crime sprees have been enabled by the Montgomery County Police Department’s don’t-ask-don’t-tell immigration policy. This hasn’t stopped Montgomery, where this latest metro shooter was captured, from helping illegal immigrants. Even after the illegal alien crime spree, the county dedicated $100,000 to provide “application assistance” to illegal immigrants spared from deportation under President Obama’s backdoor amnesty plan.

Contribute

It is Now or Never for the President’s Decision on U.S. Refugee Admissions Program

In the month of September the President, by law, sends a ‘determination‘ to Congress about the size and scope of the UN/US Refugee Admissions Program for the upcoming fiscal year which begins October 1st.

This is the year he could really accomplish something if he suspends the program and forces Congress to review it.

(It won’t happen in 2018 because it’s an election year.)

But, those of you who follow RRW daily are probably sick of hearing about that.

I meant to write an August round-up (hope it was a good summer for you), but got lazy, so am taking a minute here to just thank you all for continuing to follow my work. And, to thank you (I don’t do that enough) for the donations you have sent my way which I take as validation that I’m providing some useful information.

(I took down my pay pal link when they began their purge of websites they are trying to kill—like my friends at VDARE!)

And, thanks too for the books, letters and notes sent to my snail mail address.

I encourage all of you to visit RRW, and not just rely on your e-mail subscription that I gather is increasingly unreliable (WordPress sends it out, not me).

(Over the years, I told people to simply “google” Refugee Resettlement Watch and my blog was at the top because it had been around for so long.  Now, there isn’t a direct link to the blog, lots of other mentions, but not the front page of RRW as ‘google’ works against freedom of thought and expression.)

If you visit RRW, see the Frequently Asked Questions in the header, see my Facebook page feed and my twitter feed.  You might wish to click on the categories tab (left hand column) and see the drop-down on subject areas.  Top most read posts in recent days are in the right hand side bar.

There are 8,672 posts (written over 10 years) archived here and the very best way to find information is to use the search window (upper left) with a few key words.

Click here if you want to see past roundups and general information from me about RRW.

Onward…

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Angel Mom Mendoza: Politicians Fighting for Illegal Immigrants, Not American Citizens

Boulder,CO: Doctors Without Borders brings propaganda campaign to town

German election 3 weeks away; magazine says 60 Syrian terrorists in the country

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is of a man protesting President Donald Trump’s immigration policies and supporting refugees stands in front of a Trump supporter February 17th  in New York City. Photo by REUTERS/Stephanie Keith.

Iran is following the North Korea play-book

It is no secret that North Korea and Iran are joined at the hip. Iran’s advances on the way to developing nuclear weapons and long range missiles (in violation of UN provisions) are largely attributed to the relationship of these two evil empires. In addition Iran’s new found wealth as a result of Obama’s nuclear deal has allowed it to advance its nuclear program and state of the art missile defense systems purchased from Russia.

Obama’s colossal nuclear deal miscalculation has allowed Iran to expand its aggression and Iran’s Revolutionary Guard’s budget by 40%. Iran seeks to encircle and destroy Israel  which Israel will not permit. Thus the nuclear deal which empowered Iran’s increased aggression will eventually lead to war which may include Iran, Israel, Russia and the U.S. among others.

Nominee for the post of defense minister for new cabinet of Iranian President Hassan Rouhani, Gen. Amir Hatami arrives at the podium to defend himself in a session of parliament in Tehran, Iran, Thursday, Aug. 17, 2017. (AP Photo/Vahid Salemi)

AFP/Tehran in a column titled “Iran’s new defense minister says priority is to boost missile program” reports:

Iran’s new defense minister said Saturday the priority was to boost the country’s missile program and export weapons to shore up neighboring allies.

“In combat fields, especially in missiles, we have a specific plan to boost Iran’s missile power,” said General Amir Hatami, who was appointed defense minister earlier this month, in a speech carried by the ISNA news agency.

“God willing, the combat capabilities of Iran’s ballistic and cruise missiles will increase in this term,” he added. Hatami also said Iran would look to export weapons “to prevent war and conflict”. [Emphasis added]

Read more.

Please read the article below by Melanie Phillips. While North Korea has garnered our attention Iran is far more dangerous. It is Iran who has killed many Americans and whose proxies have killed thousands and made millions homeless.

The Iranian Symptom of the West’s Auto-Immune Disease

By Melanie Phillips

People are understandably preoccupied with the threat from North Korea and what to do about it. But with the polyvalent perversity that characterises our modern age – afflicted as it is by the political equivalent of auto-immune disease in which it seeks to destroy its allies while embracing its mortal enemies – many in the west continue to downplay or ignore the far greater threat to the world from North Korea’s partner in crime, the Islamic Republic of Iran.

It’s not just that, as with North Korea today so with Iran tomorrow; just as “negotiation” [under President Bill Clinton] was supposed to persuade Pyongyang to park its nuclear weapons programme only for us to find to our apparent surprise that it has now tested yet another nuclear device, so the “negotiated” [under President Barack Obama] Iran deal will result before long in our finding to our apparent surprise that it has moved from being the world’s number one terrorist threat to being the world’s number one nuclear terrorist threat.

It’s also not just that Iran and North Korea are working hand in glove in their infernal joint enterprise (although with very different philosophies) to develop the nuclear weapons by which they can either blackmail, attack or destroy the west or commit a further genocide against the Jews; that Iranian scientists and military brass have been reliably tracked to North Korea inspecting or witnessing its nuclear weapons programme development; and that almost certainly Tehran has outsourced some if not much of that programme to Pyongyang.

[ … ]

The Spectator has run a piece by John R Bradley arguing that Iran is the west’s “natural ally” and that the gravest threat to western security and values comes from Saudi Arabia. But this is an example of the “zero sum game” fallacy. Yes, Saudi Arabia is indeed the epicentre of the Sunni Wahhabi ideology which has fuelled the Islamist extremism that now poses such a threat to the west. But it absolutely does not follow that Saudi Arabia’s mortal foe, Shi’ite Iran, is therefore the west’s friend, let alone its greatest ally.

It’s not either/or. Both Saudi Arabia and Iran pose a threat to the west. My enemy, in the case of Saudi Arabia, is currently my tactical friend as well as my enemy; and that’s because my enemy’s enemy, Iran, is my own far more dangerous enemy. [Emphasis added]

Read more.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Netanyahu: Iran influence in Syria threat to Israel

Financing terrorism drains Iran’s economy

Southern Poverty Law Center refuses to classify Antifa as a ‘hate group’

Of course. The SPLC and Antifa have the same overall goal: to destroy the freedom of speech and allow only Leftists access to the public square. The SPLC demonizes and tries to destroy dissenters (including foes of jihad terror) by lumping them in with the likes of the Ku Klux Klan and neo-Nazis. Antifa, a genuinely violent and hateful group, doesn’t make the list because it doesn’t dissent from the Leftist agenda, it works to advance it.

Richard Cohen

“Southern Poverty Law Center condemns antifa, but won’t call hate group,” by Steven Nelson, Washington Examiner, September 3, 2017:

The leader of the Southern Poverty Law Center said the organization condemns the antifa movement but won’t brand it with the center’s often-cited “hate group” designation.

Richard Cohen, the president of the SPLC, told the Washington Examiner the loosely organized antifa movement, short for anti-fascism, is “wrongheaded” in opposing free speech and using violence.

“We oppose these groups and what they’re trying to do. We just don’t think anyone should be able to censor someone else’s speech,” Cohen said, echoing and endorsing recent statements from progressive scholar Noam Chomsky.

“We think they are contributing to the problem we are seeing,” Cohen said. “We think it’s likely to lead to other forms of retaliation. In Berkeley, antifa showed up and shut down speeches. The next time the white supremacists brought the Oath Keepers with them, they brought their own army.”

He said, however, the SPLC won’t label antifa a “hate group” because adherents do not discriminate against people on the basis of race, sexual orientation or other classes protected by antidiscrimination laws, such as religion.

“There might be forms of hate out there that you may consider hateful, but it’s not the type of hate we follow,” Cohen said.

Antifa activism generally but not always features black-clad activists confronting adversaries they deem fascist, such as neo-Nazis or white supremacists. The movement is decentralized, and Cohen notes in many cases it lacks discernible organization, though he said that’s not the reason against a hate-group designation.

Cohen said the SPLC does work to inform local police about the intentions of antifa activists and intends to speak out against the movement, adding “we follow them, but we don’t track them in the same way.”

The SPLC is controversial among some conservatives for its influential hate-group designations, which some on the list call unfair. The socially conservative Family Research Council was attacked in 2012 by a gunman who told investigators he saw the group listed on the center’s website….

RELATED ARTICLES:

UK: State schools allowing girls as young as five to wear hijabs as part of uniform

Netherlands: Muslims at “Palestinian” rally screamed about killing Jews

Muslims at the Hajj are worried about Donald Trump and his policies

…..but, not a word about the responsibility of Muslims to rein-in their terrorist element.

Screenshot (808)

These Hajj Muslims seem to think our concern about Muslim migration is completely lacking in any rational calculation. Don’t miss Raheem Kassam’s good report on Islamic terrorism attacks in ‘welcoming’ Europe and how more Americans need to wake up.  …And, here they are in Saudi Arabia which will never let them stay and become citizens of that Muslim country!

Victims, always victims!

Reuters:

MECCA/RIYADH (Reuters) – Even at Islam’s holiest sites and during the most sacred time of year for Muslims, some people cannot stop talking about Donald Trump.

Among one group of American, Canadian and British pilgrims in Mecca this week for the annual haj, the U.S. president and policies they say target Muslims and immigrants are a regular conversation topic.

“People are irritated, angry, somber, a little bit worried,” said Yasir Qadhi, an Islamic scholar who traveled from Tennessee for his fourteenth pilgrimage.

Haj

“No one that I know is happy at the current circumstances or the current administration. No one, not a single person in this entire gathering.”

As a candidate, Trump proposed barring Muslims from entering the United States. In office, he ordered temporary bans on people from several Muslim-majority countries, which have been blocked by courts that ruled they were discriminatory.

His administration has denied any intention of religious discrimination in the travel ban, saying it is intended purely as a national security measure.

But sharp rhetoric about the threat posed by “radical Islam” which was a central part of his campaign has also drawn accusations he risks alienating more than three million Americans who practise Islam peacefully. [So where are the peaceful Muslims standing up at the Haj to to speak against and discourage the violent ones?—ed]

Many American Muslims say his stance has fueled an atmosphere in which some may feel they can voice prejudices or attack Muslims without fear of retribution.

‘STOP ATTACKING ISLAM’

Reuters apparently didn’t find anyone to speak up against their own terrorist element, but they found this guy!

Baha al-Deen, a pilgrim from ex-Soviet Georgia, said any labeling of Muslims as terrorists should stop.

“God gave us minds and tongues so we can understand each other and talk about our problems,” he said. “Otherwise we will fight like animals.”

Oh, that is going to inspire communication—NOT!

More here.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Trump Administration has kept refugee flow relatively low, but real test coming

Here is what the ‘Refugee Act of 1980’ says the President and Congress must do right now…

New Charleston, WV refugee resettlement office will not open

What about America’s own refugees!