Tag Archive for: Muslims

Hillary: Muslims “have nothing whatsoever to do with terrorism”

/in , , , , , /by

How will President Hillary Clinton have the slightest chance of defeating the Islamic State when she is so divorced from reality as to say something like this?

“Hillary: Muslims ‘Have Nothing Whatsoever To Do With Terrorism,’” by Guy Benson, Townhall, November 20, 2015:

Behold, the woman who shall soon be crowned Queen of the endlessly self-righteous and self-congratulatory “Reality Based Community:”

Clinton Muslims Nothing To Do with Terrorism

This is pure claptrap. Everyone understands that the West is not at war with Islam broadly, and that an overwhelming percentage of Muslims reject violent extremism. It’s been beaten into our heads by politicians of all stripes since 9/11, and we’re generally bright enough to draw the relevant distinction: “These Muslims over here are just peaceful, faithful people living their lives, whereas those Muslims over there are radical and seek to impose a toxic strain of their faith via terror and violence. We have no quarrel with the former group, which thankfully represents the large majority; the latter group must be confronted and defeated.” This dynamic isn’t hard. It can be quickly and easily explained, yet we are constantly bombarded with dumb, sanitized denialism like Hillary’s second sentence above. Instead of treating us like adults, we’re infantilized. And to what end? Muslims are peaceful and tolerant, we’re instructed, and they have nothing whatsoever to do with terrorism. This last bit is insultingly preposterous. Some Muslims have quite a lot to do with terrorism, actually. Like the ones who were led by their hardcore theology to kill 3,000 people on 9/11. Or blow up trains in Spain. Or target London’s public transit system with bombs. Or slaughter students at a Kenyan university. Or Devastate a nightclub in Indonesia. Or shoot up a shopping mall in Nairobi. Or lay siege to a hotel in Mumbai. Or terrorize Nigerian schoolgirls. Or, you know, take hostages in Mali. I could go on for some time. But those aren’t real Muslims, our Thought Leaders inform us. Islamists loudly beg to differ — and wouldn’t they know a lot more about their motives and religious teachings than Western purveyors of bumper sticker feel-goodery? Try this: Ask someone who’s convinced jihadists shouldn’t be considered Muslims whether or not Osama bin Laden’s corpse should have been discarded with no regard for Islamic traditions. Or whether the terrorists at Gitmo should be deprived of prayer mats, or Halal meals, or Korans. Maybe some enterprising reporter will ask Hillary these questions someday. In any case, the “nothing to do with terrorism” line is plainly nonsense. The more difficult part is the “peaceful and tolerant” phrase. It’s absolutely true that a huge preponderance of Muslims worldwide abhor and reject religious violence. But as I explored in a piece after the Charlie Hebdo massacre, there is a worrisomely sizable strain of abject illiberalism that runs through mainstream Islam. Data from Pew, a respected global pollster, gathered two years ago:

Pew death penalty for apostasy

Shall we count the 86 percent of Egyptian Muslims, or 62 percent of Malaysian Muslims, or the 17 percent of Turkish Muslims who believe leaving Islam is punishable by death among the “tolerant”? Do the millions of Muslims who express support for suicide bombings against civilians “in defense of Islam” qualify as “peaceful”? Or mustn’t we ask such questions when there’s a vapid slogan to be spouted, or a politically-correct tweet to be disseminated? The concern, of course, is that leaders who are unable or unwilling to comprehend and properly identify a threat will be ineffective in neutralizing it. Hillary’s defenders will say that President Bush also refrained from directly naming the enemy. True, but the current administration of which Mrs. Clinton was a part has taken euphemism-deployment to another level….

RELATED ARTICLES:

Utah homework: make propaganda poster for terror group

UK: Muslims attack convert from Islam to Christianity with pickaxe

Vetting Needed to Separate Friend from Foe Among Refugees

/in , , , /by

The Obama Administration is adamant the 10,000 Syrian refugees it plans to resettle in the U.S. are subject to a tough vetting process. The process is tough and long, but a poll in 2014 found that 13 percent have positive feelings towards ISIS. An ideological vetting process that can separate Islamist from non-Islamist is needed to separate valuable friends from deadly foes.

The vetting process should not just rely on criminal records and databases used to detect terrorists and their associates. Because the threat is ideological in nature, it is very possible we could allow in someone with a radical outlook but has yet to establish the kind of operational connections that would show up in a database.

A new bipartisan congressional terrorism report found there isn’t a global comprehensive database of foreign jihadists who have gone to Syria to fight. It says the U.S. doesn’t even have a national strategy against terrorist travel and “information about foreign fighters is crossing borders less quickly than the extremists themselves.” There’s also the serious problem that there is a more general lack of intelligence about Syria.

Watch Clarion Project National Security Analyst Ryan Mauro and retired INS agent Michael Cutler, who gave testimony to the 9/11 Commission, discuss the vetting process for Syrian refugees:

The U.S. has a vetting process of 18 to 24 months. About 1,800 have come to the U.S. in the past two years and a little bit more than half passed the vetting. Names are checked against databases and there’s an interviewing process to make sure there isn’t information linking them to terrorist or criminal activity and that the biography they provided is truthful.

No news reports or explanations by the administration indicate the process includes evaluating the outlook of the applicant to find signs of Islamist sympathies, anti-American views or other forms of extremism like anti-Semitism.

An ideology-based screening process separating Islamists from non-Islamists (as opposed to simply terrorist from non-terrorist) minimizes the chances of a radical getting through and maximizes the chances of identifying an ally to work with. It is not in our interest or in the Syrians’ interest for an Islamist to take a moderate’s place in line.

By failing to identify anti-Islamist friends among the Syrian refugees, we are hurting our cause and losing a chance to undermine the Islamist extremist cause. For example, Dr. Zuhdi Jasser, president of the American-Islamic Forum for Democracy, is a powerful voice against Islamism. He is in the U.S. doing his work because his parents sought refuge in America from the Assad regime.

The U.S. needs Muslim activists like Jasser. We need fluent Arabic speakers and those who understand that part of the world. We need voices who can speak first-hand about the horrors of ISIS, other Syrian Islamists and the Iran-backed Assad dictatorship. We need Muslims who are on the lookout for extremism and will not hesitate to report it and even keep tabs on it. These are roles that Syrian refugees who oppose Islamism can help fill.

The debate over the administration’s desire to bring 10,000 refugees into America is fierce and contentious, but a middle ground exists between an indefinite ban on Syrian refugees and trusting the current plan.

ABOUT RYAN MAURO

Ryan Mauro is ClarionProject.org’s national security analyst, a fellow with Clarion Project and an adjunct professor of homeland security. Mauro is frequently interviewed on top-tier television and radio. Read more, contact or arrange a speaking engagement.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Three Reactions ISIS is Hoping We Will Have

32 Killed in Nigeria in Suspected Boko Haram Attack

Europe on High Alert as Police Kill Terror Suspects in Paris

Paris: Radicalizing the Next Generation of Muslim Youth

Eight Syrian Muslims caught illegally crossing Texas border

/in , , , , /by

Why would Syrians be trying to enter illegally when Obama is breaking down every restraint in order to get them in legally? Only if they’re up to some nefarious purpose.

“EXCLUSIVE — REPORT: 8 Syrians Caught at Texas Border in Laredo,” by Brandon Darby and Ildefonso Ortiz, Breitbart, November 18, 2015:

Two federal agents operating under the umbrella of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) are claiming that eight Syrian illegal aliens attempted to enter Texas from Mexico in the Laredo Sector. The federal agents spoke with Breitbart Texas on the condition of anonymity, however, a local president of the National Border Patrol Council (NBPC) confirmed that Laredo Border Patrol agents have been officially contacting the organization with concerns over reports from other federal agents about Syrians illegally entering the country in the Laredo Sector. The reports have caused a stir among the sector’s Border Patrol agents.

The sources claimed that eight Syrians were apprehended on Monday, November 16, 2015. According to the sources, the Syrians were in two separate “family units” and were apprehended at the Juarez Lincoln Bridge in Laredo, Texas, also known officially as Port of Entry 1.

Border Patrol agent and NBPC Local 2455 President Hector Garza told Breitbart Texas, “Border Patrol agents who we represent have been contacting our organization to voice concerns about reports from other agents that Syrians crossed the U.S. border from Mexico in the Laredo Sector. Our agents have heard about Syrians being apprehended in the area from other federal agents.” Agent Garza added, “At this time, I cannot confirm or deny that Syrians have crossed, for security reasons.”

Agent Garza further stated that in matters as sensitive as Syrians crossing the border from Mexico, it would be highly unlikely that federal agencies would publicize it or inform a broad group of law enforcement. He did say that Local 2455 is taking the reports seriously and that they “will be issuing an officer safety bulletin advising Border Patrol agents to exercise extra precautions as they patrol the border.”

Breitbart Texas can confirm that a Syrian did attempt to enter the U.S. illegally through Texas in late September. The Syrian was caught using a passport that belonged to someone else and U.S. authorities decided against prosecuting anyone involved due to “circumstances.”

What circumstances?

RELATED ARTICLE: Toronto Muslim charged with carrying concealed meat cleaver into Parliament

After Paris, National Security Issues Lead Democratic Debate

/in , , , , , /by

The format of the Democratic debate was altered at the last minute to give each candidate time to give a statement about the Paris terror attacks at the beginning of the debate.

Speaking first, Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders said that, “Together, leading the world, this country will rid our planet of this barbarous organization called ISIS.” However, it remains to be seen how Sanders would lead this fight since he advocates a non-interventionist approach and says that theU.S. should only have a very limited supporting role in the fight in Syria. Sanders believes that the fight against the Islamic State can only be effectively waged by Muslims.

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton repeatedly identified the enemy as jihadists, rejecting the non-descript terminology used by the Obama Administration who calls them “violent extremists.” Clinton made no sweeping promises as Sanders. Rather she said she would be laying out “in detail what I think we need to do to with our friends and allies — in Europe and elsewhere — to do a better job of coordinating efforts against the scourge of terrorisim.” She stressed that “all the other issues we want to deal with depend on us being secure and strong.”

In his opening statement, former Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley said that the events in Paris spoke to the new face of “conflict and warfare” in the 21st century, and as such, required “new thinking, fresh approaches.” O’Malley remarked that “we have a lot of work to do to better prepare out nation and to better lead this world into this new century.”

Polling shows that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton dominated last night’s Democratic presidential debate, particularly on national security.

Public Policy Polling came out with the first post-debate poll that showed 67% of Democratic primary voters declaring Clinton the overall winner of the second presidential primary debate and 75% saying they most trust her on national security of the three candidates. The following is a summary of the national security positions taken by each candidate during the debate:

Hillary Clinton

She aligned herself closely with President Obama throughout the debate but presented three areas of difference on Islamist extremism: Identification of the enemy; support for Syrian rebels and an implicit criticism of President Obama for suggesting that “containment” of the Islamic State is a sign of success.

Right off the bat, Clinton repeatedly used Islamic terminology to define the enemy as “jihadist.” She also seemed to understand that the root of violent jihad is in the Islamist ideology, which she emphasized is not subscribed to by most Muslims. She described the adversary as “Islamists who are jihadists,” but she did not discuss whether she believes that “moderate Islamists” like the Muslim Brotherhood should be embraced as allies against “jihadists” like the Islamic State.

The second point of difference came when she was asked about President Obama’s claim that the Islamic State is “contained” shortly before the Paris attacks. While Clinton avoided criticizing the president directly, she rejected containment as a measure of success, saying it is impossible to contain a group like the Islamic State and only its defeat is acceptable.

The third point of difference was on Syria. She explained that she urged President Obama to equip moderate Syrian rebels in the beginning of the civil war to prevent jihadists from creating a safe haven. Clinton believes that developing allies on the ground in Syria would have given us a valuable ally today.

Clinton also suggested a tougher approach towards the Gulf states and Turkey. She said it is time for them to “make up their mind about where they stand” on the fight against jihadism.

On the topic of the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq that preceded the rise of the Islamic State and the collapse of Iraqi security forces, Clinton said that the withdrawal was in compliance with a U.S.-Iraqi agreement signed by the Bush Administration. After U.S. forces left, Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki decimated the Iraqi security forces with his sectarianism and cronyism. This, combined with the civil war in Syria and other regional variables, enabled the Islamic State to seize large parts of Iraq.

She defended the NATO military intervention in Libya to topple Gaddafi by pointing out the large amount of American blood he had on his hands from supporting terrorism. Clinton also mentioned how the Libyans elected moderate leaders after he fell. She addressed the civil war in Libya by saying the U.S. should provide more support to the current moderate Libyan government.

On the topic of Syrian refugees, Clinton said she agrees in principle with bringing 65,000 Syrian refugees into the U.S. (as O’Malley advocates) but only if they are completely vetted. Her tough language on vetting suggested that she envisions overhauling the process to become stricter, but she did not present a specific proposal.

Unlike Sanders, she would not commit to cutting the defense budget but promised to closely review military spending. She cited Chinese moves in the South China Sea and the increased aggressiveness of Russia, such as its broadcasting of a new drone submarine that can be equipped with tactical nuclear weapons.

Clinton is currently the frontrunner by a mile. She leads nationally with 55% in an average of polls; leads Iowa with 54%; is in second behind Sanders in New Hampshire with 43% and leads in South Carolina with 65%. You can read our factsheet on Clinton’s positions related to Islamism here.

Bernie Sanders

As we mentioned in our coverage of the recent Democratic forum, Sanders views the threat as being rooted in an Islamic ideology but—unlike Clinton—advocates a non-interventionist approach. His argument is that the U.S. should only have a very limited supporting role because the fight against the Islamic State can only be effectively waged by Muslims. He again stated that the fight with the Islamic State is part of a “war for the soul of Islam.”

Sanders rejected a strategy of pursuing regime change, apparently referring to the Syrian dictatorship and the removal of the Gaddafi regime in Libya when Clinton was Secretary of State. He cited U.S.-backed regime changes in places like Chile and Guatemala as counterproductive mistakes.

He spoke out in favor of cuts to the defense budget. He argued that U.S. military spending is far too high and that much of the excess costs are not even necessary for fighting terrorism.

Sanders is currently in second place overall. He is the runner-up nationally with 33%; is in second place in Iowa with 30%; leads in New Hampshire with 44% and is in second place in South Carolina with 17%. You can read our factsheet on Sanders’ positions related to Islamism here.

Former Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley

At the recent Democratic forum, O’Malley embraced the camp that believes Islamic terrorism is a byproduct of political grievances against the U.S. He did not repeat his ludicrous claim that U.S. troops overseas and the operation of Guantanamo Bay are the chief reasons for the strength of the Islamic State and Al-Qaeda.

However, during the Saturday night debate, he acknowledged that the threat comes from an Islamic ideology. Unlike Clinton who defined the enemy as “jihadism,” O’Malley defined it as “radical jihadists”—which begs the question: What is a “non-radical jihadist?”

In describing where the Islamic State threat emerged from, O’Malley pointed to the overthrow of the Saddam Hussein regime in Iraq and especially the disbanding of the Iraqi army. He said that many of ISIS’ current members used to be a part of the Iraqi military until we fired them. There is truth to that statement, but it seems to suggest that O’Malley remains committed to the belief that the “root cause” of the Islamic State and other Islamist terrorists are mistreatment and political grievances, rather than ideology.

O’Malley continued to embrace a non-interventionist strategy, saying that the U.S. should not be trying to overthrow dictators. He then seemed to contradict himself when he said the U.S. should take the lead in fighting “evil.”  He said his “new” foreign policy would be one of “engagement” and “identifying threats” as they gather.

On several occasions, O’Malley cited the need for human intelligence sources as part of his strategy—but that’s nothing new and it’s not a strategy. Everyone agrees that more human intelligence is needed.

He reiterated his support for bringing 65,000 Syrian refugees into the U.S., up from the current 10,000 that President Obama plans to bring in. He did not address how they would be vetted and taken care of, especially when a poll of Syrian refugees found that 13% feel positively or somewhat positively towards the Islamic State.

O’Malley is in last place among the three remaining candidates. He is in last with 3% nationally; last in Iowa with 5%; last in New Hampshire with 3% and last in South Carolina with 2%. You can read our factsheet on O’Malley’s positions related to Islamism here.

You can read the Clarion Project‘s comprehensive factsheets on each party’s presidential candidates’ positions related to Islamism by clicking here.

ABOUT RYAN MAURO

Ryan Mauro is ClarionProject.org’s national security analyst, a fellow with Clarion Project and an adjunct professor of homeland security. Mauro is frequently interviewed on top-tier television and radio. Read more, contact or arrange a speaking engagement.

RELATED ARTICLES:

No-Fly Zones, Military Spending, Confronting Putin: GOP Debate

Democrat Candidates: Wide Differences on Islamist Terror

GOP Debate on Mute About National Security

CAIR Berates Trump for Support of Closing Extremist Mosques

Why France?

/in , , , , , /by

In the wake of the terrorist attacks which killed at least 129 in Paris on Friday, people are asking why France in particular was targeted by the Islamic State. The Islamic State detests the entire Western world and seeks to destroy it and replace it with a global Islamist caliphate. Yet it prioritizes which countries to attack and when.

The reasons listed here are by way of explanation from the Islamic State’s point of view, to help our readers understand. They are not to be taken as a justification of the Islamic State’s actions, which ultimately are caused by their hateful extremist ideology.

Here are the top five reasons why the Islamic State attacked France and Paris in particular.

France has been fighting the Islamic State and other Islamists.

French President Francois Hollande led his country into airstrikes against the Islamic State, bombing targets in Syria for the past two months. It was the first country in Europe to join America in bombing ISIS targets in Iraq and has so far been the only European country to join airstrikes against ISIS in Syria.

France also led the fight against Islamists in North Africa, it was French soldiers that liberated Timbuktu from Islamist insurgents belonging to al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb in Mali.

The Islamic State is therefore fighting those who fight it the most, in an effort to persuade the civilian population of France that the war is about French foreign policy and not about a global Islamist Caliphate and to cow them into submission through terror.

France has specifically named the Islamist ideology as the problem.

French Prime Minister Manuel Valls said after the Charlie Hebdo attacks France is at war with radical Islam. The French Ambassador to America clarified afterwards, saying, “We are at war with radical Islam. It means that right now… Islam is breeding radicalism which is quite dangerous for everybody.” Not only has France named the problem but they are taking active steps against the Islamist ideology within France, not just against groups like Al-Qaeda and ISIS, but also against groups like the Muslim Brotherhood, which promote the ideology of Islamism that leads to violent extremism.

France is standing up for its values and seeking to integrate Muslims

Prime Minister Manuel Valls explicitly stated, “We seek to establish a model of Islam that is fully integrated, fully compatible with the values of the Republic.”  This is anathema to ISIS as they cannot countenance an integrated Islam which operates peacefully within a broader society. France is proactively attempting to integrate Muslims, which, if successful, would destroy the “Islam vs the world” narrative peddled by the Islamic  State.

Paris represents the Enlightenment values of Western civilization.

The Islamic State decried the city as “the capital of prostitution and vice, the lead carrier of the cross in Europe — Paris.” Paris is at the center of European and Western fashion, culture and literature and one of the great historical cities of European civilization.

France is where much of the enlightenment took place and where modern ideas about citizenship, human rights and the separation between religion and state were first articulated and formed.

For an Islamic State obsessed with symbolism, an attack on Paris is an attack on European/Western enlightenment values.

The Islamic State is obsessed with history and honor.

France is an old country with a long history. The Islamic State has a laundry list of grievances against France going back a thousand years. ISIS also hates Europe in general for its colonial past.

It blames France, in particular, for the break-up of the Ottoman Empire and the abolition of the Caliphate following the First World War.  France was one of the leading countries involved in the crusades in the 11th century, and it is where the early Islamic Caliphate’s advance into Europe was halted by French ruler Charles Martel at the Battle of Tours in 732.

The Islamic State is obsessed with seeing itself as the revived Muslim Caliphate. It is therefore essential to its worldview that Europe’s old colonial powers are defeated. For similar reasons, ISIS has long threatened to conquer Rome, which would represent a symbolic victory over the long defunct Roman Empire.

Without that, the Islamic State cannot claim to avenge the centuries old grievances with which it is obsessed and thus cannot fulfil its claims to restore the ‘lost honor’ of the immah.

RELATED ARTICLES:

50,000 Europeans Fighting for ISIS, Says Counter-Terror Chief

Belgian Government Admits It Has Lost Control of No-Go Zone

ISIS Agitprop Video Shows Training of the Next Generation

How the Paris Attacks Increase the Threat to America

Syrian Muslim migration to the U.S. rests in the hands of Ryan and McConnell

/in , , , /by

I’m happy to report that our readers are more up on the news than I have been these last few days.  Thanks to all of you who are sending me hot-off-the-press news on the roiling controversy about Syrian refugee resettlement AP (After Paris).  I just don’t have the time to post it all!

Speaker Ryan and Senate Majority leader McConnell will be the ones who determine the fate of resettlement of Syrian refugees in the US this year (not the governors!). Kentucky is gradually becoming an important resettlement target and it’s been a mystery to me why McConnell has let it happen. I can only assume McConnell gets campaign contributions from industries, including the chicken processing industry, which needs cheap reliable laborers. For ambitious readers, we have a very large archive on Kentucky extending back many years (with many problems) here.

LOL! I did take a break today as Rush Limbaugh held forth for what I assume was much of his show and every time I turned on the TV I heard the “R” word (refugee).  Heck, everyone is covering it, I reminded myself.

Here, at Politico, is a story from yesterday I’ve been meaning to get to.

Don’t get me wrong, it is wonderful that governors across the country are speaking up, but even if you wish them to have the power to stop the resettlement (unless there was a Constitutional challenge which does need to get underway, but will take years!) there is really only one place it can be done quickly with any finality (for this year) and that is in Congress where the FUNDING MUST BE CUT OFF.

See our post on Saturday where I said just that—CONGRESS MUST USE ITS POWER OF THE PURSE!

The refugee resettlement contractors know that very well or they wouldn’t have had an emergency press conference call today!

Here is Politico telling us what the stakes are and informing us that what happens next will be the first crisis for new House Speaker Paul Ryan.

A cascade of Republicans on Monday implored the Obama administration to scrap plans to resettle 10,000 Syrian refugees in the United States next year, saying they pose an unacceptable security risk in the wake of last week’s terrorist attacks in Paris.

And, in a dramatic twist, the sudden standoff is raising the possibility of a government shutdown next month.

Throughout the day a host of Republican governors around the country, wary that refugees could end up in their home states, blasted President Barack Obama’s plans. But those governors lack real sway over the process, andsome are asking Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) to insert a provision in the Dec. 11 spending bill that would bar more Syrian settlers.

Did you see this?  Lindsey Graham has backed off his earlier proposal to ADD funding for Syrian resettlement!

The politics are moving fast: The Democratic governor of New Hampshire, a Senate candidate, is siding with conservatives, and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) is reversing his support for a $1 billion spending bill intended to allow in more Syrian refugees after touting the measure just weeks ago. GOP leaders are keeping their options open as they mull whether to try to block new Syrian refugees by adding language to the must-pass spending bill.

[….]

Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), one of the leading immigration hard-liners in the Capitol, sent a letter to colleagues calling for provisions in the omnibus spending bill that would give Congress more oversight over Syrian refugees.

[….]

Ryan and McConnell will have to decide quickly on a course of action as they confront the first potential legislative crisis since Ryan became speaker.

More here.

Please everyone, starting tomorrow call your Washington elected representatives and call the leadership—Ryan and McConnell—and let them know how you feel.  And, keep calling through the Thanksgiving recess.

By the way, the resettlement contractors*** are ginning up their grassroots and the most maddening part of that is that they get to use your tax dollars to do it!

***Nine major federal contractors which like to call themselves VOLAGs (Voluntary agencies) which is such a joke considering how much federal money they receive:

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Huckabee: Speaker Ryan should reject Syrian refugees or resign7

House Immigration Subcommittee to hold hearing on Syrian resettlement on November 19th

AP (After Paris) two Governors say don’t send Syrian refugees to my state

Guest post: Disillusioned Refugee Resettlement Worker Unloads

Breaking news: Michigan Gov. now says “no thanks” to Syrian refugees

White House Petition: Moratorium on all Middle Eastern refugee resettlement to America; sign it!

98% of Syrians entering U.S. are Sunni Muslims

/in , , , , , /by

Here is where the 291 Syrians who have entered the U.S. in FY2016 have been placed.  California, Texas, Kentucky, Arizona and Ohio make the top five.  (I selected for my search October 1, 2015 to November 15, 2015 and assume the data base is up to date to the 15th, but can’t know that for sure).

The flood gates have been opened and they will arrive hot and heavy now (will the governors have any power?).

map Syrians first six weeks of 2016

At the Refugee Processing Center (click on reports and select interactive reports, you will be able to figure it out!) you can also check the religions of arriving refugees.  Here is the breakdown for the 291 so far this fiscal year (assuming data base is up to date as of November 15th, two days ago):

3 Catholics

1 Christian

1 Orthodox

286 Sunni Muslims

As we have reported many times, the UN High Commissioner for Refugees picks most of our refugees and in the case of the Syrians they come from UN camps populated by mostly Muslims.   He has 20,000 chosen for us already.  At a recent immigration conclave in Washington, DC, we were there to hear him say that the Syrian Christians are not persecuted because the “regime” (Assad) was protecting them.

As long as the UNHCR is choosing most of our refugees, I don’t expect the percentage of Muslims in the stream to change much.

One other bit of confusion flying around in the mainstream media is that somehow we will be getting Syrians who have flooded into Europe, we won’t be (at least not in any great number for now).

RELATED ARTICLES:

In first six weeks of FY2016 we resettled 827 Somalis; all but one are Muslim

In Wake of Paris Attacks, Here’s a Map of the States Shutting Their Doors to Syrian Refugees

After Paris, Obama’s Abandonment of Leadership

What Congress Can Do to Stop Obama From Resettling Refugees

ISIS Just Named D.C. As Possible Target for Terrorist Attacks. Has the Risk Increased?

Forget About Mass Deportation of Illegals – Immediately Deport All Muslims

/in , , , , /by

Before I get the illiterate and naïve supporters of Islam sending me a thousand emails, let’s go over again my definition of a Muslim.

‘ A Muslim is one who follows all aspects of Sharia law to the best of his/her ability, an Apostate is one who follows only a few self serving aspects of Sharia law’

America is so focused on deporting Mexican illegal immigrants that it has forgotten the worst threat to America are the followers of the Quran. There is no nice way of saying the Quran is evil, dangerous, and the world’s number one threat.

Of course the illegal Mexican immigrants need to be deported, but right now Americans must make every effort to deport any person who follows the teachings of their Prophet Mohammed. Mohammed was the world’s top hater, racist, and child molester ever known to the world. One can’t follow Mohammed and be a good person. Simply absolutely no way.

The tragic events of what happened in Paris yesterday should be an eye opener to all. The murders were not carried out by Jews, Christians, Buddhists, or even Satanists. They were carried out by people who love and follow the exact teachings of Mohammed and the Quran. There is nothing that happened in Paris on 13 Nov 2015 that has not been advocated in the name of Islam for over 1400 years.

Do you think your children are safe in their schools, at the shopping malls, or sporting events? They are not. There are over 2300 Islamic Centers and mosques scattered strategically across our great country. Hate and violence is being spread in these mosques every day and I have for years reported on what is being taught to the Muslim adults and children of the mosque. Evil atrocities worse than what happened in Paris will soon come our way and by the hands of followers of Islam. America will suffer much worse than any of us can imagine. Be prepared.

America seems to be on a self destruction course and in reality there is little any common American can do about it except to be prepared to fight the enemy known as Islam and it’s followers. This means that not only will you be fighting faithful Muslims who desire to kill you and your families, but you will be fighting the millions of liberals who will support Islam even when the certain death from Islam is at their doorsteps.

Do not allow your rights to be taken from you. This includes the 1st and 2nd Amendments of the Constitution specifically. Never stop voicing your opinions and disgust of the Satan known as Islam. never surrender your weapons to the supporters of Islam. once you give up your Constitutional rights you have surrendered yourself the the depravities of Islam.

The self proclaimed Prophet of America (Obama) is not on the side of free loving and peaceful Americans. He is the Commander and Chief of the greatest military force the world has ever known and he will use this force to suppress the rights of the American people and to support Islamic values.

Many of you are likely thinking that many Muslims are Americans, and we can’t possibly deport Americans. You must keep in mind that Muslims can not and do not hold any allegiance to America and our Constitution. They hold allegiance only to Mohammed, Islam, and the same values of Al Qaeda, the Muslim Brotherhood, and ISIS. Anyone who holds allegiance to Islam can never be an American.

Dr. Ben Carson on the Islamic State: We must ‘destroy them before they destroy us’

/in , , , , /by

“We’re talking about global jihadists, and their desire is to destroy us and to destroy our way of life….our goal is not to contain them but to destroy them before they destroy us.” Why is it so rare to hear presidential candidates make such simple, obvious and commonsensical statements?

“Carson on ISIS: ‘Destroy Their Caliphate,’” by Jordan Schachtel, Breitbart, November 10, 2015 (thanks to Bulldog):

…Carson was asked by Fox Business host and debate moderator Maria Bartiromo if he supports President Obama’s recent initiative to place 50 special ops forces in Syria, and leave 10,000 U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan.

“Well, putting the special ops people in there is better than not having them there because they — that’s why they’re called special ops, they’re actually able to guide some of the other things that we’re doing there, and what we have to recognize is that [Russian President Vladimir] Putin is trying to really spread his influence throughout the Middle East,” Carson responded….

“You know the Chinese are there as well as the Russians, and you have all kinds of factions there. What we’ve been doing so far is very ineffective.”…

“But we can’t give up ground right there. We have to look at this on a much more global scale,” Carson said. “We’re talking about global jihadists, and their desire is to destroy us and to destroy our way of life.”…

“So we have to be saying, ‘How do we make them look like losers,’ that’s the way they’re able to gather a lot of influence, and I think in order to make them look like losers, we have to destroy their caliphate,” he stated.

“And you look for the easiest place to do that, it would be in Iraq. Outside of anbar in Iraq there’s a big energy field. Take that from them, take all of that land from them, we could do that, I believe, fairly easily, I’ve learned from talking to several generals, and you move on from there, but you have to continue to face them, because our goal is not to contain them but to destroy them before they destroy us,” Carson concluded.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Al Nusra’s Lion Cubs Religious Academy: “All the Christians and a message to America, your grave is in Syria”

UK Muslims claim to be “negatively affected” by counter-terrorism policies

VIDEO: The Collective suicide of Europe — The Muslim Migrant Invasion

/in , , , , , /by

This video was produced by The Death of Nations and is titled “With Open Gates: The forced collective suicide of European nations.”

Breitbart reports:

Although the 19-minute film may feel like a dispatch from the future, it is cut entirely from recent news reports, police camera footage, and interviews. Kicking off with scenes of a modern car ferry disgorging thousands of illegals into Greece, the film then cuts to dozens of aerial shots of columns of migrants marching north into Europe.

The film then changed to the harrowing testimony of one young Greek woman who was unable to hide her horror and despair at the scale of the migrant crisis sweeping over her home island of Lesbos. Just six miles from the Turkish coast, the island was subjected to migrant riots in September as newcomers turned on their hosts for not moving them to mainland Europe fast enough.

Read more.

RELATED ARTICLE: In first six weeks of FY2016 U.S. resettled 827 Somalis; all but one are Muslim

EDITORS NOTE: If you wish to support the producers of this video you may do so with Bitcoins/BTC at
1ybX49kKFNN7hKnrzaegnha4Fy9WrFATu. The music used in the video is titled”Invasion A.D.” by Carpenter Brut (Google Play • AmazonMP3 • iTunes)

What would I ask Republican Presidential candidates tonight?

/in , , , , , /by

Someone asked me to prepare a list of questions I might ask Republican candidates tonight in Milwaukee.  So I wrote up a quick list and thought I would share them with you.  Now mind you, there is no way that anyone would ever ask the candidates if they would scratch the whole darn Refugee Admissions Program, so that is not one of my questions.

  1. The Obama Administration has said recently that it will admit 10,000 Syrians in the fiscal year 2016 resettlement of 85,000 third world refugees to American towns and cities in 48 states, yet the Director of the FBI James Comey recently told Congress that the Syrians, coming from a failed state, could not be properly screened. In this battle between the U.S. State Department (that wants many more than 10,000), and the FBI (Homeland Security concerned with the possible infiltration of ISIS in the refugee population), how would you bring your cabinet together on this critical issue?
  2. The Center for Immigration Studies recently released a new study which finds that a Syrian family of four resettled in America will cost U.S. taxpayers over a quarter of a million dollars over five years. Would that factor figure into your decision on how many refugees America can afford because it is the President who has almost exclusive power for determining refugee numbers and makes that determination every September?
  3. Recently Senator Jeff Sessions office released data on welfare use of refugees in America and found that 90% of Middle Eastern refugees were using some form of social services—food stamps, cash assistance, Medicaid and so forth—and that rate was higher for that group than refugees from elsewhere in the world. There are also reports of widespread fraud in the welfare application process. What would you do to discourage fraud and limit welfare for all classes of immigrant?
  4. The United Nations is choosing most refugees admitted to the U.S. (over 20,000 Syrians have been referred by the UN) and 97% of the Syrians chosen thus far have been Muslims who are presently housed in UN camps. Would you go against the UN and seek out Christian and other religious minorities in need of resettlement as a first priority?
  5. In 2014, the U.S. admitted 67% of the refugees that were resettled anywhere, the next highest country was Canada with 9%. If you were President would you urge a more equitable distribution to first world countries?
  6. The world is watching in horror as Europe is being inundated with tens of thousands of migrants. Approximately 8,000 are arriving in Germany each day (originally welcomed by the government). Only about half are Syrians and the largest percentage are economic migrants, not legitimate refugees. If you, as President, had a private meeting with Chancellor Angela Merkel, what would you say to her?
  7. The refugees being housed presently in Turkey, Lebanon and Jordan will be there temporarily, perhaps years, but they will not be given citizenship rights. Those resettled to the U.S. and other western countries are permanent residents on a track to citizenship. What alternative would you suggest for managing, especially the Syrian flow, short of making tens of thousands of them U.S. citizens?
  8. Our present system of resettling refugees is virtually controlled by the UN, the U.S. State Department and nine federal contractors which monopolize the resettlement of refugees and even choose the towns and cities where they will go. In a ______ Administration would you seek to reform this out-of-control resettlement program and give some authority to state and local elected officials which virtually have none right now? Would your administration propose or support existing reform legislation?
  9. Non-profit organizations affiliated with some religious denominatons are being paid millions of tax dollars each year to bring refugee families to cities of their choosing and in three to six months that family is expected to be on its own and the non-profit then brings in the next group incentivized by a federal payment that is calculated by the head (per refugee). Would you pledge to reform the program to put more responsibility back on to private charity as the original act of 1980 invisioned?
  10. There have been many reports recently of school systems overloaded with needy immigrant students who require extra help with learning English and to deal with mental traumas, would your administration seek a moratorium on resettlement until officials in overloaded cities and local and state taxpayers could catch their breath?

Don’t hold your breath!  I would be blown away if there is any question relating to refugees tonight in Milwaukee, even though, as I said in my previous post this morning—immigration is THE issue for 2016!

RELATED ARTICLES:

Note to Antonio Guterres! Terrorists do use refugees as cover to get into Europe

Another South Carolina County Council says no to refugee resettlement

Obama plan to use executive amnesty for a half a million illegal aliens, blocked in 5th Circuit Appeals Court decision

Swedish Kristallnacht commemoration: Jews not invited due to ‘Security Risk’

/in , , , , /by

It is becoming increasingly common for cowards and trimmers to use real and imagined security risks as a fig leaf to cover up their slavish adherence to the norms dictated by authoritarian political correctness.

“Critics claim that Hägglund’s omission must be due to the crowd he invited to the event, implying that it could only be far-left or anti-Israel – thus creating the environment which justified the ‘security risk.’” But Hägglund masks his real agenda by hiding behind this security threat. And if there is a genuine security threat, this will only encourage the thugs and fascists and Jew-haters to menace more events, so as to turn public affairs to their liking.

“Scandal: Jews not invited to Swedish Kristallnacht commemoration,” by Tova Dvorin, Israel National News, November 9, 2015 (thanks to David):

The organizers of an anti-Nazi event in Sweden face controversy Monday, after declining to invite the Jewish community to the event.

“Umeå against Nazism” will run in the city of Umeå on Tuesday and Wednesday, commemorating Kirstallnacht, or the “Night of Broken Glass,” the massive 1938 pogrom against Austrian and German Jews which is seen as marking the start of the holocaust.

But, absurdly, Jews will not be invited.

The organizers claim that inviting the Jewish community presents a security risk, nt.se reports, citing anti-Semitic and anti-Israel protests present at past events.

“In previous years, we have had a lot of Palestinian flags at these rallies, and even one banner where the Israeli flag was equated with a swastika,” organizer and local Workers’ Party member Jan Hägglund told locals. “The Jewish community wasn’t invited because we assumed they might be uncomfortable around that sort of thing.”

Critics claim that Hägglund’s omission must be due to the crowd he invited to the event, implying that it could only be far-left or anti-Israel – thus creating the environment which justified the “security risk.”

Meanwhile, the event’s Facebook page appears to even downplay the Jewish community’s role in the event, instead conveying a generalized, vanilla message of tolerance – not opposition to anti-Semitism.

Some local officials are holding counter-rallies in protest – including municipal worker Anders Agren, who invited the Jewish community to a ceremony which will feature the lighting of memorial candles and a moment of silence.

RELATED ARTICLE: UK: Muslim official nixes anti-Islamic State presentation at University College London

White House wants to speed up Syrian Muslim resettlement

/in , , , , , /by

Obama doesn’t have much time left—he has to get as many refugees resettled (seeded!) in your towns and cities as he possibly can before January 2017.

Here is Reuters yesterday on news that the US State Department is gearing up to open more processing centers in the Middle East so as to speed up the relocation of more Syrians to your towns.

WASHINGTON, Nov 6 (Reuters) – The Obama administration is moving to increase and accelerate the number of Syrian refugees who might be admitted into the United States by opening new screening outposts in Iraq and Lebanon, administration officials told Reuters on Friday.

The move comes after President Barack Obama pledged in September to admit an additional 10,000 refugees in 2016 from Syria, torn by four years of civil war and disorder.

The U.S. State Department confirmed the plans to open a refugee settlement processing center in Erbil, Iraq, before the end of 2015, and to resume refugee processing in Lebanon in early 2016, said spokeswoman Danna Van Brandt.

The White House would not say how many additional refugees it may take in beyond the 10,000, but two senior administration officials said they are seeking ways to increase the number.

“We want to be in a place where we can push out really ambitious goals,” said one of the officials, who spoke to Reuters on the condition of anonymity.

The State Department runs nine screening centers worldwide that serve as meeting points for refugees and U.S. Department of Homeland Security employees who have to decide who is suitable for resettlement in the United States.

And get this, we will re-open the processing center in Lebanon (guess those security concerns have disappeared)!

Homeland Security workers stopped traveling to Lebanon to meet with refugees when the facility there closed over a year ago due to security concerns.

Wouldn’t you like to be a fly on the wall as the US Department of Homeland Security (FBI) says Syrians can’t be properly screened yet Homeland Security is speeding up the process of getting those not properly screened in here faster to satisfy the White House and UN/US State Department and the contractors.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Who is Dmitry Orlov? And, is the end nigh for Germany?

Catholic Charities begins resettling Syrian Muslims in Louisiana

The real story about refugee protest in Idaho! Bring it on SPLC!

Myth: Refugees get free cars explained; not free, but taxpayer subsidized

North Dakota poll: Lutheran’s refugee program opposed by 57%

In Atlantic City, NJ, owner of shuttered casino says he would house Syrian refugees

Iran’s Justice Minister: U.S. world’s top terrorism supporter, drug trafficker

/in , , , , /by

“Iran Calls U.S. World’s Top Terrorism Supporter, Drug Trafficker,” Washington Free Beacon, November 6, 2015:

The head of Iran’s Justice Minister [sic] on Friday called the United States the world’s top supporter of terrorism and drug trafficker, according to regional reports.

Mostafa Pour-Mohammadi, Iran’s Justice Minister, made the remarks while in Russia for a meeting with his counterparts.

“I want to say that we perceive the United States as country supporting terrorism and spread of narcotic substances,” Pour-Mohammadi was quoted as saying in Iran’s state-controlled press.

In Afghanistan, for instance, drug production has increased exponentially since U.S. forces invaded the country, Pour-Mohammadi claimed.

“Today, financial support and supply of weapons [to terror groups] are carried out either by the United States or by its allies,” the leader added….

RELATED ARTICLES:

“Jihad” is “misunderstood” spiritual struggle, Muslim scholar tells Oprah

France: Muslim plotted to attack MP “to serve Islam”

Iran: U.S. must pay reparations to the Islamic Republic

/in , , , , /by

The billions in sanctions relief weren’t enough. The Islamic Republic sees the weakness of the Obama Administration, and is pressing forward with more demands.

“Iran: U.S. Must Pay Reparations to Islamic Republic,” by Adam Kredo, Washington Free Beacon, November 5, 2015:

An Iranian military leader is demanding that the United States pay Tehran reparations for the deaths of more than 250,000 Iranians at the hands of U.S. affiliates, according to regional reports.

Mohammad Reza Naqdi, a brigadier general in Iran’s volunteer Basij Force, said on Thursday that the Obama administration “should pay ransom” for its supposed role in killing Iranians during the 1979 Islamic Revolution that brought hardline extremists into power.

The demand for a ransom comes just a day after Iranians across the country took to the streets to rally against America and Israel. They burned U.S. flags and chanted, “Death to America.”

It was disclosed on Wednesday that Iran has been found to be directly responsible for the deaths of nearly 200 U.S. troops in Iraq and the wounding of nearly 1,000 others. The Obama administration has been hesitant to prosecute Iran under U.S. terrorism laws for these killings.

Naqdi said Iran has “irrefutable” evidence that America is responsible for the deaths of more than 250,000 Iranians.

“In the days when the Islamic Revolution was underway and after that and during the holy defense (the Iraqi-imposed war against Iran 1980-1988), over 250,000 Iranians were massacred directly by the U.S. or by its proxies at Washington’s order, and these US crimes can be proved based on undeniable and irrefutable proofs and documents,” the military figure was quoted as saying by Iran’s state-controlled Fars News Agency.

Because of this, Iran “should receive compensation money from the U.S. for the death of their children and beloved ones at the hands of the merciless Washington,” the report stated.

The report goes on to claim that Iranian officials have evidence that the United States worked with former Iraqi strongman Saddam Hussein, providing him weapons during his war against Iran.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Robert Spencer in FrontPage: The Islamic State Attacks Russia

UC Merced stabbing attacker praised Allah, authorities search for motive