Posts

Trump’s new counterterrorism strategy singles out ‘radical Islamists’

Bolton says: “Radical Islamist terrorist groups represent the preeminent transnational terrorist threat to the United States, and to United States’ interests abroad. The fact is the radical Islamic threat that we face is a form of ideology. This should not be anything new to anybody. King Abdullah of Jordan has frequently described the terrorist threat as a civil war within Islam that Muslims around the world recognize, and he is, after all, a direct descendent [sic] of the Sharif [inaudible], the keepers of the holy cities. If that’s how King Abdullah views it, I don’t think anybody should be surprised we see it as a kind of war, as well.”

The idea that there is a significant pushback to the jihad ideology within the Islamic world is a trifle overstated. The concept of jihad as meaning warfare against unbelievers in order to establish Islamic law’s hegemony over them is deeply rooted in Islamic texts and teachings, as well as in Islamic law. Nonetheless, in 2011 the Obama Administration removed all mention of Islam and jihad from counterterror training; this is a strong step in the right direction, toward once again enabling counterterror analysts to study and understand the motivating ideology of the enemy.

“New White House Counterterrorism Strategy Singles Out ‘Radical Islamists,’” by Adam Kredo, Washington Free Beacon, October 4, 2018:

The Trump administration is implementing a new, government-wide counterterrorism strategy that places renewed focus on combatting “radical Islamic terrorist groups,” marking a significant departure from the Obama administration, which implemented a series of policies aimed at deemphasizing the threat of Islamic terror groups.

In releasing the first national counterterrorism strategy since 2011, the Trump administration is working to take a drastically different approach than that of the former administration, according to senior U.S. officials.

While the Obama administration sought to dampen the United States’ focus on Islamic terror threats, the Trump administration has made this battle the centerpiece of its new strategy.

National Security Adviser John Bolton acknowledged in remarks to reporters Thursday afternoon that the new strategy is “a departure” from the former administration’s strategy, which has been characterized as a failure by Republican foreign policy voices due to the increasing number of domestic terror attacks and plots across the United States

“Radical Islamist terrorist groups represent the preeminent transnational terrorist threat to the United States, and to United States’ interests abroad,” Bolton said.

“The fact is the radical Islamic threat that we face is a form of ideology,” Bolton said. “This should not be anything new to anybody. King Abdullah of Jordan has frequently described the terrorist threat as a civil war within Islam that Muslims around the world recognize, and he is, after all, a direct descendent [sic] of the Sharif [inaudible], the keepers of the holy cities. If that’s how King Abdullah views it, I don’t think anybody should be surprised we see it as a kind of war, as well.”

“One may hope that the ideological fervor disappears, but sad to report, it remains strong all around the world, and even with the defeat of the ISIS territorial caliphate, we see the threat spreading to other countries,” Bolton added.

The Trump administration strategy also shifts the focus to Iran, characterizing the country as the foremost state sponsor of terror across the globe.

“The United States faces terrorist threats from Iran, which remains the most prominent state sponsor of terrorism that, really, the world’s central banker of international terrorism since 1979,” Bolton said. “And from other terrorist groups. Iran-sponsored terrorist groups such as Lebanese Hezbollah, Hamas, and Palestinian Islamic jihad, continue to pose a threat to the United States and our interests.”…

EDITORS NOTE: This column with photos originally appeared on Jihad Watch. The featured photo is by Sophie Keen on Unsplash.

Italy’s Salvini and Hungary’s Orban meet, call for creation of a ‘pan-European anti-migrant alliance’

Italy’s Interior Minister Matteo Salvini and Hungary’s Viktor Orban met yesterday in Milan to discuss a historic alliance to save Europe from further invasion.

Keep an eye on Europe!  Is it just in time or too late?

“We are near a historic change on a continental level!” – (Matteo Salvini)

From Deutsche Welle:

Viktor Orban and Matteo Salvini strive to forge new European anti-migrant alliance

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban and Italian Interior Minister Matteo Salvini made no secret of their mutual admiration ahead of their meeting in Milan on Tuesday.

United in their anti-immigration policies and relentless bashing of the EU, the two right-wing lawmakers called for the creation of a pan-European anti-migrant alliance that would seek to prevent migration to Europe from besieged regions in Africa and the Middle East.

Salvini, who heads the far-right League party, the junior partner in Italy’s populist coalition, told reporters that Italy and Hungary would strive to forge a future union “that excludes socialists and the left, that brings back to the center the values and identity” that their parties represent.

Italy yellow shirts

Left-wing protesters in yellow shirts gathered in opposition to Salvini/Orban meeting.

“We are near a historic change on a continental level,” Salvini added.

Orban, meanwhile, called on the European People’s Party, the largest group in the European Parliament to which his Fidesz party belongs, to adopt a hardline stand against illegal immigration. Salvini’s League party has since 2014 allied itself in the European Parliament with the likes of Marine Le Pen’s National Rally and Freedom Party of Austria.

What Hungary does on land, Italy does by sea

Orban described Salvini as his “hero and companion” for turning away migrant rescue ships, claiming that such actions were crucial for Europe’s security.

“Hungary has proven that migrants can be stopped on land,” said Orban. “And this is where Salvini’s mission starts: “(Italy) must show that migrants can also be stopped at sea.”

Continue reading here.

See my archives on the ‘Invasion of Europe’ by clicking here.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

13 more of Australia’s rejected asylum seekers are headed to Yourtown, USA

750 “faith” groups and “faith” leaders tell the President that they want 75,000 additional third worlders admitted to US beginning October first

German publication asks: When should the media report on murders committed by refugees?

Security ‘specialists’ and Open Borders activists argue that Trump is doing TOO MUCH vetting of refugees

RELATED VIDEO: A Nation of Immigrants.

Migration Madness Syndrome

Europe’s Elite want their citizens to believe open borders and migration from Islamic countries will solve their need for a future workforce due to a shrinking population. I call their bluff. If they need workers, why not get them from the poorer parts of the EU–Romania, Bulgaria, Greece? This isn’t about guest workers. This is about the Left securing a voting block so they can be voted into office in perpetuity.  Islam makes for a perfect partner in their endeavor to achieve political dominance. Both conspire to tear down society and rebuild their Utopian ideal. What the Left doesn’t realize is when Islam ultimately takes power, as it tends to do, the last laugh will be on the them, just as it was with the Tudeh Party in Iran. In the end, Islam has no loyalty to Kafirs, only to Allah and Mohammed.

To understand Islamic migration today, it is imperative to understand the concept of hijra. The hijra dates to the time of Mohammed when he left Mecca and moved to Medina where he became a warlord and politician. Mohammed’s migration, or hijra, is so important to the success of Islam that it is the basis for the Islamic calendar.

Hijra is a form of soft jihad and is quite effective for spreading Islam.

Al Qaeda recruiter Anwar al-Awlaki stated, referring to doctrine: “Jihad today is obligatory on every capable Muslim…it is your duty to find ways to practice it and support it.” He then lists 44 ways to support jihad. In #36 Preparing for Hijrah, al-Awlaki quotes Mohammed: “Hijrah does not stop as long as there is an enemy to fight”.  Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Al Qaeda 9/11 mastermind, said, “the practical way to defeat America is through immigration and “outbreeding non-Muslims”.  These jihadists are not creating new ideas. They are repeating 1400 year old doctrine.

The bottom line: Hijra is a tactic to pave the way for Sharia.

Ultimately, the danger of migration is not that there will be too many unemployed workers draining welfare dollars from the state, but it’s that Sharia supremacists will keep Islamicizing the EU.  These guest workers aren’t going home. They have a religious duty to stay and fulfill the doctrine. Their loyalty is to Allah and Mohammed, not to the Kafir countries of the West. History has shown that once a nation is invaded by Islam, it will become 100% Islamic, unless driven out.

What is the solution?

We must wake up to the true nature of the problem. The doctrine of the Left says we aren’t nice enough, we need more programs, we need to integrate migrants better–the fault is always ours. I happen to agree that the fault is with us, but it is due to our ignorance, not our lack of virtue.

Once we understand the problem is the Islamic doctrine, then we can make proper plans for solutions, like changing migration laws, citizenry laws, instituting zero tolerance for Sharia, etc. In the meantime, churches and everyday people need to push back. We can’t wait for the government Elite.

Society can use social pressure like a weapon. We need to make fun of Sharia, use shame and humor. Islam reacts to shame and humor like a weed to poison. When a society can make Mohammed jokes, we win. It’s that simple. As soon as we become a citizenry of blasphemers, the problem solves itself.  This is key: to reverse Islamization, it must entail mass civil disobedience against censorship and oppression of freedom of thought, not just a few brave souls.

We must never give up. We must come out of the closet and face our fears. We can prevail and must because our civilization and freedoms are too precious to lose. Stand up Europe. Do not let North Africa and Arabia be your destiny.

RELATED ARTICLES:

The Fiscal Cost of Resettling Refugees in the United States

Minnesota Somalis: You’re old and we are taking over

RELATED VIDEO: To learn more about hijra, watch video Hijra: Islamic Migration

Saudi Graduate of al Qaeda Terror Camp Arrested in Oklahoma

On February 6, The New York Times published a chilling report on the arrest in Oklahoma of a foreign national who had attended an al Qaeda training camp. The defendant in this case is Naif Abdulaziz M. Alfallaj, a 34-year-old citizen of Saudi Arabia who has been residing in the U.S. since 2011. Allegedly he attended a terror training camp in Afghanistan in 2000 when four of the 9/11 hijacker/terrorists also attended training sessions at that very same camp.

Here is an excerpt from the Justice Department’s press release on the arrest:

According to the (criminal) complaint, the FBI found 15 of Alfallaj’s fingerprints on an application to an al Qaeda training camp, known as al Farooq, which was one of al Qaeda’s key training sites in Afghanistan.  The document was recovered by the U.S. military from an al Qaeda safe house in Afghanistan.  The document is also alleged to include an emergency contact number associated with Alfallaj’s father in Saudi Arabia.  Alfallaj is alleged to have first entered the U.S. in late 2011 on a nonimmigrant visa based on his wife’s status as a foreign student.  According to the complaint, he answered several questions on his visa application falsely, including whether he had ever supported terrorists or terrorist organizations.

The indictment returned today charges two counts of visa fraud.  Count One alleges that from March 2012 to the present, Alfallaj possessed a visa obtained by fraud.  Count Two alleges he used that visa in October 2016 to apply for lessons at a private flight school in Oklahoma.  The third count in the indictment charges Alfallaj with making a false statement to the FBI during a terrorism investigation when he was interviewed and denied ever having associated with anyone from a foreign terrorist group.

This is a “good news/bad news” story.

It is certainly impressive that our government was able to uncover the evidence upon which this criminal case is based, however, he was lawfully admitted into the United States in 2011, more than a decade after he received terror training.  He has been in the United States for about seven years and his presence in the United States only came to the attention of the FBI when he sought pilot training in October 2016.

It was discovered that he had lied when he applied for his visa to enter the United States by concealing his connection to terrorism.

This case causes me to have a sort of flashback to the congressional hearing at which I testified on March 19, 2002. The title of the hearing was the “INS’s Notification of Approval of Change of Status for Pilot Training for Terrorist Hijackers Mohammed Atta and Marwan Al-Shehhi.”

The C-SPAN video of that hearing is one that every member of Congress and the leadership of DHS, the State Department and other agencies of the Trump administration should be required to watch, especially as they contemplate calling into action a bureaucracy that continues to demonstrate its ineptitude in effectively screening aliens applicants for immigration benefits.

I have frequently noted in many of my articles and in my testimony before congressional hearings that the 9/11 Commission identified immigration fraud as the key entry and embedding tactic of terrorists.  This is why the second largest contingent of law enforcement personnel assigned to the Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF) are ICE agents.

As a former INS agent I don’t like to speculate, I certainly prefer to deal with facts, however, there are some very serious and obvious questions that the Alfallaj case raises.

While it may be that Alfallaj had no nefarious purposes for taking pilot training, it is impossible to not consider the that Alfallaj is a “sleeper agent,” that is to say, an enemy combatant who entered the United States with the ultimate goal of participating in a deadly attack.  If so, was he planning to participate in a hijacking of an airliner with others who perhaps have yet to be identified? Or was he perhaps planning to complete his flight training and then use a rented airplane as a weapon?

Having considered the case of Alfallaj, we must contemplate President Trump’s offer to provide 1.6 million DACA aliens with lawful status and pathway to citizenship.

Purportedly these illegal aliens entered the United States as children and hence had no control over their situation.  However, because they may be in their mid 30’s it is entirely possible that a significant number of them may lie about their actual dates of entry and that, although they claimed that they entered as children, they may well have entered relatively recently as adults.

Furthermore, these aliens are citizens from countries around the world, as reported by the DHS.

I addressed my misgivings about the the president’s plans in a recent articleDACA Solution Must Heed 9/11 Commission Findings. In conducting their deliberations about President Trump’s solution for DACA illegal aliens, members of Congress must take into account that the adjudications process would be conducted by a division of the DHS, along with other agencies that have failed, time and again, to properly vet aliens who have turned out to be terrorists and/or criminals.

President Trump ignited a firestorm, awhile back, when he issued executive orders to prevent the entry of aliens from countries that sponsor terrorism who could not be effectively vetted by our officials. President Trump’s stand on this issue was entirely proper and prudent, given the totality of circumstances. As I noted in an article back then, a provision of the Immigration and Nationality Act, Title 8 U.S. Code § 1182, provides the President of the United States with the discretionary authority to imposed such restrictions even though he was enjoined by judges from implementing his orders.

The President is still very much concerned about the vetting process for aliens seeking entry into the United States to prevent the entry of terrorists and criminals. Indeed, during his State of the Union Address, when he discussed the second of his “four pillars” for reforming the immigration system, he referred to the “loopholes” by which criminals and terrorists enter the United States.  In reality, there are no “loopholes” but fraud that goes undetected and a lack of integrity of the immigration system.

Nevertheless the President is willing to rely on that same system to legalize 1.8 million DACA aliens.  It is likely that even more aliens would file applications, many laden with fraud information and claims.

After the attacks of 9/11 we were frequently told that for America to be safe, our officials had to “get it right 100% of the time” while in order for the terrorists to succeed, they only had to “get it right once.”  Every application filed by an alien for a visa or for lawful status provides terrorists with that opportunity of “getting it right.”

Consider this excerpt from Chapter 12 of the 9/11 Commission Report:

Before 9/11, no agency of the U.S. government systematically analyzed terrorists’ travel strategies. Had they done so, they could have discovered the ways in which the terrorist predecessors to al Qaeda had been systematically but detectably exploiting weaknesses in our border security since the early 1990s.

We found that as many as 15 of the 19 hijackers were potentially vulnerable to interception by border authorities. Analyzing their characteristic travel documents and travel patterns could have allowed authorities to intercept 4 to 15 hijackers and more effective use of information available in U.S. government databases could have identified up to 3 hijackers.

Looking back, we can also see that the routine operations of our immigration laws-that is, aspects of those laws not specifically aimed at protecting against terrorism-inevitably shaped al Qaeda’s planning and opportunities. Because they were deemed not to be bona fide tourists or students as they claimed, five conspirators that we know of tried to get visas and failed, and one was denied entry by an inspector. We also found that had the immigration system set a higher bar for determining whether individuals are who or what they claim to be-and ensuring routine consequences for violations-it could potentially have excluded, removed, or come into further contact with several hijackers who did not appear to meet the terms for admitting short-term visitors.

Our investigation showed that two systemic weaknesses came together in our border system’s inability to contribute to an effective defense against the 9/11 attacks: a lack of well-developed counterterrorism measures as a part of border security and an immigration system not able to deliver on its basic commitments, much less support counterterrorism.

The succession of terror attacks carried out by aliens who gamed the immigration system and acquired political asylum, lawful immigrant status and even citizenship, prove just how incapable that system is to deal with its current workload of 6 million applications annually, sounding alarms the President must hear.

False security is worse — far, far worse — than no security, particularly where terrorists are concerned.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Missouri: Muslim diversity visa recipient sent $1M to terrorist in Jordan

Just like the 9/11 hijackers, possible Saudi terrorist arrested by the FBI told his flight instructors he wanted to be a commercial pilot

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in FrontPage Magazine.

Words Not Enough to Deter Iran

Brazen actions by Quds Force commander Qassem Suleymani show he is not deterred.

In a dramatic press conference held at Andrews Air Force base on Thursday, the U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations, Nikki Haley, accused Iran of violating its commitments under UN Security Council resolution 2231, the instrument that renders official the deadly “Iran deal” known as the JCPOA.

Standing in front of a giant section of fuselage from an Iranian Qiam missile shot down by Saudi Arabia as it was hurtling toward the Riyadh international airport recently, Haley said: “Just imagine if this missile had been launched at Dulles Airport or JFK, or the airports in Paris, London, or Berlin. That’s what we’re talking about here. That’s what Iran is actively supporting.”

In other words, acts of war. Let me make that very specific: Iran has declared war on Saudi Arabia, and is engaging in that war by attacking civilian targets in the Saudi capitol, Riyadh, and by targeting civilian facilities, such as the international airport and the Yanbu oil export terminal, where another Qiam missile was shot down.

“What is most revealing about this missile is what’s not here,” Haley said. “It is the large stabilizer fins that are typically present on these kinds of missiles. The Iranian Qiam missile is the only known short range ballistic missile in the world that lacks such stabilizer fins and includes nine valves that you will see running along the length of the missile. Those valves are essentially Iranian missile fingerprints.”

Haley revealed that Iran delivered those Qiam missiles to Houthi rebels in Yemen, who acted as Iranian surrogates by launching them against Saudi targets. She then invited reporters to walk around an array of partsfrom the Qiam missile, including pumps bearing the tell-tale stamp of Shahid Bagheri Industries, the Iranian manufacturer.

I first exposed the involvement of the Shahid Bagheri Industrial Group in Iran’s ballistic missile programs in 1998 in Reader’s Digest, where I documented the active collaboration of Russia and China in Iran’s missile programs. That’s nineteen years ago. You can read that article here.

A Pentagon spokesperson, Laura Seal, provided additional detail this week to Ambassador Haley on three other Iranian weapons systems captured by the Saudis from Houthi rebels. These were an anti-tank guided missile, the Toophan; the Qasef-1 armed attack drone; and the Iranian Shark-33 boat, “an explosive-laden, unmanned boat used in an attack the Saudi Arabian frigate HMS al Madinah,” Seal said.

Until this press conference, no one has really held Iran accountable for the Houthi rebel attacks against Saudi civilian facilities. So this joint effort by State and Defense (and presumably our intelligence community) to expose Iran’s role in them deserves a shout-out.

Under Obama, such attacks were attributed to the Houthis, only, even when they directly targeted U.S. warships. So Ambassador Haley’s press conference, and the backup she received from the Pentagon, suggest a significant shift in policy from the Trump administration.

It’s time to call out Iran for its role in “fanning the flames” of conflict throughout the region, Haley said.

I would suggest, however, that words are not enough. And I base that suggestion on the recent behavior of Quds Force commander, Maj. Gen. Qassem Suleymani.

Before any of our career military readers object to his seemingly lowly rank, let me point out that the Iranian military has no higher rank than Major General in any of its branches, whether the regular army (known as the artesh) or the Revolutionary Guards Corps, the IRGC.

So Maj. Gen. Qassem Suleymani is a top dog. In fact, he outranks current Iranian defense minister, Brigadier General Amir Hatemi.

For wannabe jihadis and militiamen, Qassem Suleymani is the man.

He is the one who has directed Iran’s terrorist onslaught against the United States in Iraq for the past decade.

He is the one who has recruited Sunni jihadists in the Taliban and Hamas to join Iran’s ongoing war against the United States and Israel.

He is the one who succeed in recruiting al Qaeda in Iraq leaders to join with Iran in opposing U.S.-led governments in Baghdad, and who supplied explosives and technology for explosively-formed penetrators that killed some two thousand U.S. soldiers in Iraq, as seen in this video that I helped to produce for an Iranian pro-freedom group.

Qassem Suleymani has been acting with increasing brazenness in recent weeks, ever since he established a new command headquarters inside the Syrian border with Iraq at Abu Kamal. Earlier this month, he dispatched Iraqi Shiite militia chief Qais al-Khazali on a tour of Syria and Lebanon, to demonstrate the opening of Iran’s long-sought “land bridge” across Iraqi territory through Syria and Lebanon to Israel’s northern borders.

Khazali traveled in an armed convoy on open roads during daylight hours, accompanied by Lebanese Hezbollah troops. He visited Damascus, then Beirut, where he met with Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah. Then he accompanied Hezbollah militiamen to their positions along the Israeli border, even filming a portion of his tour and broadcasting it in Iraq.

Why didn’t the Israelis – or the US Air Force – take him out? I cannot answer that, and I find that disturbing.

According to the Israeli-based Debkafile, Suleymani envisioned Khazali’s trip as the first step toward sending some 15,000 Iraqi Shiite fighters to positions facing Israel’s northern borders.

Now that is truly scary.

It’s not as if we don’t know who this guy is. Khazali was detained by U.S. forces in Iraq in 2007 for his role in murdering American soldiers but was subsequently released by Prime Minister Nouri al-Malaki at the insistence of Suleymani.

In a second brazen move, Quds Force commander Suleymani ordered Hamas military leader Marwan Issa on December 11 to begin a new wave of missile attacks against Israel, purposefully using an open phone line to deliver the message.

“The Iranians wanted the Israeli and Egyptian intelligence agencies eavesdropping on incoming and outgoing phone calls to and from Gaza to hear Suleymani pledge full Iranian support for any military action conducted against Israel,” the Debkafile reported.

Suleymani continues to travel outside of Iran in defiance of a UN travel ban, reaffirmed in UN Security Council Resolution 2231, that forbids him and other Quds Force leaders from leaving Iran.

My own modest proposal would be that Suleymani meet his maker thanks to a U.S.-launched Hellfire missile, or that we bankrupt him crippling multilateral economic and financial sanctions.

Congress is contemplating numerous Iran sanctions bills, including one that would sanction Iran for its role in supporting the Houthi rebels in Yemen.

A version of a Senate bill that would target individuals engaged in “destabilizing” activities, inside Iran or abroad, passed in the House on October 30, but would require significant  heat-butting in both chambers to become law.

Yet another provision pending in the House, HR 3320,  would slap additional sanctions on Hezbollah.

While I certainly support any and all of these measures, at this juncture in the ongoing shooting war, they amount to words.

In my view, the Trump administration also needs to step up military pressure on the Iranian regime, to make sure they understand that their military adventurism will not go unchallenged or unpunished. And beyond that, we should make Tehran know that we have a really big – TRULY BIG – ace in the hole in our pocket. It’s called freedom.

Should the Trump administration choose to use this tool to its fullest, I wouldn’t give the Iranian mullahs half a day to pack their bags and decamp. Beyond that, they’d be dead.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in FrontPage Magazine.

Under Totalitarian Islamic Sharia Law, Weinstein Could Walk

The Harvey Weinstein exposé has opened a can of worms. The news is filled on a daily basis about sexual abuse and harassment in the workplace. If the West were ruled by Sharia, however, it would likely not be in the news. First, under strict Sharia, women would not be in the workplace if men were there. No women, no groping.

Furthermore, there would be no rape to report. Why? Under Sharia, rape can only be proven if there are four male witnesses. If a man rapes a women in private, no witnesses, no problem. But wait.  Can’t the woman report the crime? Yes she can, but in a Sharia court, her testimony has only half the value of a male witness. Result? No conviction.

There is another reason that there would be no news about sexual abuse in the workplace. Under Sharia, a woman is seen as the cause of the molestation. She is so attractive to a man that he can’t control himself. She is the perpetrator. The man is the victim.

Conclusion? Sharia could solve the problem of these news headlines, but at the cost of inhumanity towards women.

Totalitarian Islam

Mohammed practiced totalitarianism. All people around him had to submit to his demands. After Arabia submitted, Mohammed left Arabia and began his mission to have Sharia rule the world. Just as in the year 632, after Islam enters a society, over time, the society becomes totally Islamic. This is totalitarianism.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Political Islam, a totalitarian doctrine

The True History of Muslim Conquests

Syrian refugee complains that her brothers can’t come to U.S. from Saudi Arabia

What is wrong with this sob story?

This Syrian family and the brothers left behind were in Saudi Arabia (one of the brothers had already emigrated to S.A.). Saudi Arabia is a safe country!  Therefore, why are these people now the responsibility of the US taxpayer? They weren’t living in some sqaulid camp.

They were in arguably the richest country in the Middle East!

So tell us again why Saudi Arabia couldn’t house millions of Muslim refugees in their tent cities reserved for the brief Hajj period? Instead we are taking Syrian ‘refugees’ from S.A.!
SA tent city

From the San Diego Union-Tribune.

It is worth reading the whole article because there are lots of useful nuggets and some important comments by critics of the program (besides the story of a Syrian family that came to the U.S. as ‘refugees’ from Saudi Arabia!)

By the way, I’m sure many of you are saying—yes! If we must have them, keep them in California!

Even though overall arrival numbers in fiscal 2017 dropped by more than half from the previous year, San Diego County continued its legacy as the California county that took in the most refugees.

In a year that began with a promise of more refugees than ever before coming to the U.S. and ended with an ongoing court battle over how many and whom the president could block from coming, about 1,500 refugees resettled in San Diego County, according to data from the State Department. That’s down from just over 3,100 the year before, and it’s the only time that number has dipped below 2,000 in the last decade.

“The fact that we remained the largest county, it definitely makes us proud to continue the tradition of San Diego being a safe haven,” said Etleva Bejko, director of refugee and immigration services for Jewish Family Service, a resettlement agency.

Where refugees resettle once the U.S. agrees to take them is a complicated decision-making process that factors in whether they already have family living here, which agencies have the bandwidth to support them and which places have infrastructure in place to help them succeed. That often means that places like San Diego that already have large populations of people from a country will continue to take refugees from that country. [Multiplier effect! Like Ft. Wayne in my previous post—ed]

San Diego County has been known for leading the state in refugee arrivals since large numbers of Iraqis fleeing war began arriving in late summer of 2007.

Confirmation again! Federal resettlement contractors paid by the head!

Bejko said her organization has had to reorganize support efforts because of the overall decreases in arrivals. Resettlement agencies receive funding based on the number of refugees that they help.

[….]

Three members of the Tarakji family, originally from Damascus, Syria, were some of the few who made it to the U.S. after the travel ban. The slowdown in accepting refugees has separated them from two other members of their family.

Catholic Charities resettled mother Alshifaa Hammoush, 52, father Manaf Tarakji, 58, and daughter Maria Tarakji, 21, in April. Two sons, Yasser Tarakji, 29, and Yaman Tarakji, 27, remain in Saudi Arabia.

They had already been trying to immigrate to the U.S. to reunite with their extended family who live in San Diego County when the war in Syria broke out. [They hit the jackpot because the refugee category is the most desirable way to get into the country. They get their hands held by a federal contractor who helps them get all of their welfare (not available to other categories of legal immigrant)!—ed]

After bombing destroyed the pharmacy where Hammoush worked and scared off Manf Tarakji’s clients for his electronics repair business, and a car exploded outside their building, the family fled in 2013 to Saudi Arabia, where the oldest son was already living and working.

Once in Saudi Arabia, they couldn’t continue the process to get family-sponsored green cards.

They stayed there in limbo, unable to fully establish new lives because they were on visitor visas that they had to renew every three months, until they were accepted as refugees to the U.S. Yaman Tarakji was separated into his own refugee case because of his age, and he is still waiting for processing.

The oldest brother, Yasser Tarakji also tried to apply but never heard back from the U.N. agency that registers refugees.

[….]

Still, separation from the two sons is painful for all of them. Whenever Maria Tarakji looks at photos from their last day together in Saudi Arabia, her eyes wet with tears.

“The U.S. was accepting refugees forever. It’s unfair to do this now,” Maria Tarakji said. “It’s really hard to live here, and our brother is not here.”

She said she’s had to take responsibility for tasks that her brothers used to handle, like choosing an internet router.

Both brothers work in computer programming and repair.

Continue reading here.

See my San Diego archive here.  It wasn’t too long ago that we reported that the IRC there was involved in some housing fraud controversy.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Guest column: Feds shifting costs to states for refugee resettlement

Polish Catholics celebrate Battle of Lepanto, send a clear message to Islamists

Think Progress complains about Russian facebook pages that mention refugees

Tensions grow in Ft. Wayne, IN over placement of Rohingya Muslims in Burmese neighborhoods

State Department’s Refugee Processing Center screws up (on purpose?)

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is of the Tarakji family: son Yaman Tarakii, 27; father, Manaf Tarakji, 58; mother, Alshifaa Hammoush, 52; son Yasser Tarakii, 29; and daughter Maria Tarakji, 21. The father, mother and daughter arrived in the U.S. in April as Syrian refugees. Two sons are still in Saudi Arabia (Courtesy Photo)

Google, Facebook and Twitter sued for aiding and abetting ISIS

Good. I hope they win a massive settlement and drive them all out of business. Each one has been cutting off its platform to foes of jihad terror. In February, referrals from Facebook and Twitter to Jihad Watch dropped by 90% and have never recovered. Google has changed its search results so that when one searches for topics related to Islam and jihad, only results whitewashing Islam’s links to terrorism come up. Meanwhile jihad terrorists, as is clear from this case, have free rein. These monopolies need to be broken up, and the sooner the better, as they are actively working against the freedom of speech.

“Daughters of California man killed in Barcelona terror attack sue Google, Facebook and Twitter ‘for aiding, abetting and knowingly providing support and resources’ to ISIS,” by Julian Robinson, MailOnline, October 6, 2017:

The family of a California man killed in the terror attack in Barcelona is suing Facebook, Twitter and Google for their part in ‘aiding, abetting and knowingly providing support and resources’ to ISIS, it has emerged

Jared Tucker, from Walnut Creek, was one of 13 people who died when a van mowed down pedestrians on the Spanish city’s packed La Rambla on August 17.

The three daughters of the 42-year-old, who was celebrating his one year anniversary with wife Heidi Nunes-Tucker in Barcelona when he was killed, have now filed a lawsuit against the tech giants.

According to the New York Post, the complaint claims the firms have ‘for years knowingly and recklessly provided the terrorist group ISIS with accounts to use its social networks as a tool for spreading extremist propaganda, raising funds and attracting new recruits.’…

RELATED ARTICLES:

LEAK: Google Employees Defend Discrimination Against Conservatives

UK: Viewers of “jihadi websites” or “far-right propaganda” to get 15 years in prison

Eyewitness of Barcelona jihad attack: No priest came to comfort wounded, but Cardinal declared all religions peaceful

Afghan security forces tipped off Taliban in failed attempt to kill Secretary of Defense Mattis

“NBC spoke with two unidentified Taliban commanders, who claimed sources in Afghanistan’s security apparatus tipped them off to Mattis’s visit. Mattis…told reporters that Afghan forces would strongly oppose the action.”…”They will find Afghan security forces against them.”

Maybe they will. But will they find Afghan security forces for them? Why not? Afghan forces supposedly on our side have been responsible for numerous attacks on their U.S. “allies.” There remains no reliable way to distinguish Afghan jihadis from “moderates.” What is Mattis doing to address that? Nothing? Why not? Would it be too “Islamophobic” to explore that problem realistically?

“Taliban Tries To Kill Mattis During Surprise Afghanistan Visit,” by Thomas Phippen, Daily Caller, September 27, 2017:

The Taliban claimed responsibility for an attack on Kabul International Airport Wednesday morning targeting Defense Secretary Jim Mattis who was making an unscheduled visit to Afghanistan.

Mattis had left the airport by the time the attack started, NBC News reports, and no casualties have been reported….

“At 11.36 am two missiles were fired on Kabul International Airport from Deh Sabz district, damaging the air force hangers and destroying one helicopter and damaging three other helicopters, but there were no casualties,” airport chief Yaqub Rassouli said according to USA Today….

“We fired six rockets and planned to hit the plane of U.S. secretary of defense and other U.S. and NATO military officials,” one Taliban commander told NBC News. “We were told by our insiders that some losses were caused to their installations but we are not sure about James Mattis.”

NBC spoke with two unidentified Taliban commanders, who claimed sources in Afghanistan’s security apparatus tipped them off to Mattis’s visit.

Mattis was holding a press conference away from the airport at the time of the attack, and told reporters that Afghan forces would strongly oppose the action.

“If in fact there was an attack … his is a classic statement to what Taliban are up to,” Mattis said. “If in fact this is what they have done, they will find Afghan security forces against them.”

RELATED ARTICLES:

Robert Spencer in PJ Media: Oklahoma Beheading Trial: Is Obeying the Qur’an a Form of Mental Illness?

Minnesota: Leftists in city of jihad stabbing spree protest Iranian ex-Muslim’s speech: “Islamophobia is White Supremacy”

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is of U.S. General John Nicholson, the commander of NATO’s Resolute Support Mission, saluting U.S. Defense Secretary James Mattis upon arrival at NATO’s headquarters in Kabul, Afghanistan, Sept. 27, 2017.

Trump administration considering dropping Pakistan as an ally

Long overdue and much needed.

“US weighs dropping Pakistan as an ally,” by Katrina Manson, Financial Times, September 15, 2017:

The Trump administration is considering dropping Pakistan as an ally as it examines tough measures to quell more than 20 terrorist groups it says are based in the country.

Officials familiar with the Pakistan prong of Washington’s new “AfPak” strategy — which involves an open-ended commitment in Afghanistan and praise for India — say it has yet to be fleshed out. But they have plenty of levers.

President Donald Trump last month promised to get tough on Pakistan, accusing it of “housing the very terrorists that we are fighting”. It was the most public breach yet in an often rocky relationship.

“No US president has come out on American national television and said such things about Pakistan,” said Husain Haqqani, former Pakistan ambassador to the US.

“US policymakers are at the end of their tethers about what they see as Pakistan not helping them while promising to help them.”

The administration has already put $255m in military aid on hold after Mr Trump announced the policy shift. It is eyeing an escalating series of threats, which include cutting some civilian aid, conducting unilateral drone strikes on Pakistani soil and imposing travel bans on suspect officers of the ISI, the country’s intelligence agency. It could also revoke Pakistan’s status as a major non-Nato ally or designate it a state sponsor of terrorism.

The latter options would limit weapons sales and probably affect billions of dollars in IMF and World Bank loans, along with access to global finance….

RELATED ARTICLES:

Robert Spencer: Trump Is Right — Pakistan Is No Ally

Iran decries “cowboy” Trump’s “ignorant hate speech” at UN

EDITORS NOTE: According to the Center for Global Development, “The United States began providing economic assistance along and military aid to Pakistan shortly after the country’s creation in 1947. In total, the United States obligated nearly $67 billion (in constant 2011 dollars) to Pakistan between 1951 and 2011. The levels year to year have waxed and waned for decades as US geopolitical interests in the region have shifted. Peaks in aid have followed years of neglect. In several periods, including as recently as the 1990s, US halted aid entirely and shut the doors of the USAID offices. This pattern has rendered the United States a far cry from a reliable and unwavering partner to Pakistan over the years.” Read more.

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.

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!

Just A Note On Macron-Management by Hugh Fitzgerald

It has just been revealed that Emmanuel Macron, President of France, has in the first three months of his presidency spent more than $30,000 on make-up services. That would be a remarkable sum for anyone to spend, but what makes it even more remarkable is that Macron is only 39, the youngest French President ever, and therefore, one might assume, someone who would be least in need of such services, and certainly not to this expensive extent.

Even before this embarrassment, Macron had been stumbling. Just a few months ago, a political neophyte, he had defeated Marine Le Pen for the French presidency with an astonishing 65% of the vote. Now his popularity has plummeted to 36%. What explains this colossal drop? Partly it has to do with Macron’s authoritarian personality, revealed only after the election, and most evident in the curt way he treated the army chief of staff, who objected to defense cuts, leading to the general’s resignation. Partly it has to do with his proposed cut of 10 billion euros to spending on research, health, and housing, and on his controversial proposal to revamp the labor laws, making it easier for employers both to hire and fire.

But Macron’s rather cavalier views on Islam may also have played a part in his drop in popularity. During the election, he said little on the subject of terrorism. It was enough for voters that he was not Marine le Pen, who had been endlessly maligned in the media, labelled an “Islamophobe’ for expressing alarm both about what the Islamic texts and teachings inculcate, and about the observable attitudes and behavior of too many Muslims. But the little that candidate Macron did say on Islamic terrorism was disturbing. “We have a share of responsibility,” he warned, “because this totalitarianism feeds on the mistrust that we have allowed to settle in society…. and if tomorrow we do not take care, it will divide them [the Muslims] from us even more.”

So for Macron, it was “we” — the French — who must acknowledge responsibility for Muslim terrorism, because it is our mistrust of Muslims that causes them, in turn, to subscribe to Islamic “totalitarianism.” We must force ourselves not to “mistrust” them. But that’s an attitude that cannot be commanded. How should the French react, after each attack by Muslim terrorists, at Charlie Hebdo, at the kosher market, along the Promenade des Anglais in Nice, at the Bataclan nightclub? How should they react as each thwarted attack — along the Champs-Elysees, outside the Louvre, in front of Notre Dame, beside the Eiffel Tower — is announced? With so much murder and so much mayhem, how can they not mistrust the Muslims in their midst? Macron followed up this impossible demand with a sentiment worthy of Pope Francis: To lessen this “mistrust,” Macron said, French society “must change and be more open.” More open to what? To Islam, of course.

On April 20, 2017, during the campaign, after an Islamic terrorist killed one police officer and wounded two others in Paris, Macron said: “I am not going to invent an anti-terrorist program in one night.” He had been a government official during two years of continuous terrorist attacks on French territory. Didn’t the public have a right to assume that he would have given some thought to anti-terrorist measures to be taken? Instead of insinuating that he was being unfairly asked to suddenly come up with “an anti-terrorist program in one night” (he was being asked no such thing), shouldn’t he at least have shown the French people that he had been thinking carefully about how to deal with the terrorist threat, and here were some of his thoughts?

Also disturbing was the revelation, during the campaign, that there were some doubtful Muslims on his staff. One of these was Mohamed Saou, who was discovered to have promoted on Twitter the Islamic statement: “I am not Charlie.” Sensing a potential scandal, Macron felt compelled to dismiss Saou on April 6. But on April 14, on a Muslim French radio station, Macron was caught on a “hot mic” describing Saou as a “good guy, a very good guy.” Is a Muslim who insists he would never express solidarity with the murdered cartoonists of Charlie Hebdo a “very good guy”?

On April 28, Mohamed Louizi, author of the book Why I Quit the Muslim Brotherhood, released a detailed article on Facebook that accused Macron of being a “hostage of the Islamist vote.” Republished by Dreuz, a Christian anti-jihad website, Louizi’s article gave names and dates, and explained how Macron’s political movement had been infiltrated by Muslim Brotherhood militants. Since Macron has not refuted the article’s facts, we can assume it is correct. And if it is correct, then we have to worry about Macron, and it’s he who, with the election behind him, has to convince the French public that he recognizes the meaning, and menace, of Islam. It’s the only way to calm their fears.

Since being elected, Macron has announced the formation of a task force on terrorism, consisting of around 20 people, chiefly intelligence analysts, who will supervise and oversee all counter-terrorism efforts directly under the president’s authority. But this, while laudable, is not nearly enough; he has to express a different vision of France, one that has no room for a supposed “amalgame” with Islam.

Is Macron an open promoter of Islam in France? It is more politically correct to say that he is a “globalist” and an “open promoter of multiculturalism.” He does not want to think of France as too French. For he wants to deny the French that heightened sense of their own country, with a specific history, art, literature, politics — a French civilization — of which they have always been proud. Instead, he thinks of Islam as part of this new, multicultural amalgam that he claims France has become. When he visited London last February 22, he told an audience of expatriates that “French culture does not exist, there is a culture in France and it is diverse.” The same day he dared to dismiss one of the greatest sources of French national pride: “French art? I never met it.” Clouet, Chardin, Manet, Monet, Cezanne, Gauguin, Derain, Bonnard, Matisse, then, are apparently not French artists, for there is no such thing as “French art.”

If France is for Macron nothing but a cultural amalgam or olla-podrida, and there is no longer anything specifically French about that county’s civilization, then the Muslims in France are just as “French” with their Muslim culture as the French are with French culture. But the Muslims do not accept the idea of an “amalgam.” They do not celebrate multiculturalism. They want not a mixture of cultures, but for Islam to dominate. Macron fails to realize that it has not been the French who rejected the Muslims; France has made great efforts, teaching its language and its culture to many different kinds of immigrants. The country has been open and welcoming to these migrants and tried, with great success in most cases, to integrate them. That program of integration worked with immigrants from Portugal in the 1950s, from the French Antilles in the 1960s and, in the half-century since, with immigrants from all over: Eastern Europeans, Hindus from India, Filipinos, Brazilians, Andean Indians, Vietnamese Buddhists, and sub-Saharan African Christians. Only the Muslims have failed to integrate, that is have failed to willingly accept the laws, customs, understandings of the Infidel French. In French schools, it is Muslim students who refuse to study topics they deem anti-Muslim, as the Crusades or the history of the French monarchy, or as likely to encourage sympathy for the Jews, as the Holocaust. Meanwhile, Muslims press for ever greater attention being given in those same schools to the study of Islam.

In May, Macron visited West Africa, where French troops are engaged in a campaign against Islamic militants in Mali, Niger, Chad, Burkina Faso and Mauritania, and where he promised to be “uncompromising” in the fight against the Jihadists. One wonders why he can be so forthright and clear-headed about the Islamic threat in West Africa, and at the same time fail to recognize the threat within metropolitan France from those millions of Muslims whose religion teaches them to hate the Kuffar, who are commanded to wage Jihad until the entire world is subjugated, and Islam everywhere dominates, and Muslims rule, everywhere. The fact that not all Muslims follow the Qur’an’s commands is slight consolation, for that may reflect not moral but prudential considerations. The time may not be ripe, as Muslims still constitute less than 10% of the French population. But the duty does not dissipate, and Muslims are patient. Macron recognizes a Muslim menace, but so far only in a not-in-my-backyard, limited-to-west-africa sort of way.

At this point, Macron has little to lose in taking a strong anti-Islam position. Everything that has happened since he won the election on May 7 has only increased alarm in France and in Europe. Just two weeks after he was elected, there was a major attack at a concert in Manchester. Other attacks have taken place since then in France, Sweden, Belgium, Spain, Finland. Jihadist attacks include the Barcelona van attack, a car attack on French police, a car attack on police in Belgium, a knife attack in Paris, a knife attack in Hamburg, an attempted bombing in Brussels, a car attack in Paris, a knife attack in London, a knife attack attempt in the United Kingdom, a knife attack in London, a hammer attack in France, a vehicle attack with knives at London Bridge, a machete attack attempt outside Buckingham Palace, a machete attack in Brussels, a second machete attack attempt in Brussels, a stabbing attack in Turku, a machete attack outside Buckingham Palace…and these are only the ones that come instantly to mind.

President Macron is surely aware of all this. It’s time he started to talk about Jihadists in Paris the way he talked about them in West Africa. He needs to stop painting his face, and start telling his own people, the French people, that this entirely factitious ‘“amalgame” of Muslim and French culture does not exist, that French civilization — its politics, its art, its literature, its music, its philosophy — is eminently worth defending, and that if Muslims have their way, France would end up looking, at best, like one of the dreary North African countries. What Macron needs most is not all that expensive makeup and the services of some pretty esthetician, but a makeover in his understanding, so that he will sound the way in these parlous times he ought to sound, which is to say, a lot less like Tariq Ramadan, and a lot more like Charles De Gaulle.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Netanyahu tells UN top dog that Iran is building missile sites in Syria, Lebanon to strike Israel

Gorka: McMaster “sees the threat of Islam through an Obama administration lens”

Moroccan Muslim asylum seeker was targeting women, slashing their throats

“Then a person ran towards us shouting ‘He has a knife’, and everybody from the terrace ran inside. Next, a woman came in to the cafe. She was crying hysterically, down on her knees, saying someone’s neck has been slashed open.” – A witness

Surely you know what happened in Finland on the heals of Barcelona, but here from Reuters we get more facts on the killer and the poor innocent women who were sadly in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Over the years we have written a few posts on Finland, but it isn’t as easily accessible (or slovenly welcoming) as other Scandinavian countries like Sweden and Norway.

This Reuters story is surprisingly unrestrained and relatively free of whitewash (or is that because those quoted weren’t pulling punches and speaking in politically correct terms?):

HELSINKI/TURKU, Finland (Reuters) – Finnish police said on Saturday that an 18-year-old Moroccan man, arrested after a knife rampage that killed two people and wounded eight, appeared to have targeted women and that the spree was being treated as the country’s first terrorism-related attack.

Finland’s loss of innocence. Photo: Inquirer.

The suspect arrested following the attack on Friday after being shot in the leg by police in the city of Turku had arrived in Finland last year, police said. They said they later arrested four other Moroccan men over possible links to him and had issued an international arrest warrant for a sixth Moroccan national.

Finnish broadcaster MTV, citing an unnamed source, said the main suspect had been denied asylum in Finland. The police said only that he had been “part of the asylum process”.

The case marks the first suspected terror attack in Finland, where violent crime is relatively rare.

“The suspect’s profile is similar to that of several other recent radical Islamist terror attacks that have taken place in Europe,” Director Antti Pelttari from the Finnish Security Intelligence Service told a news conference.

[….]

Both of those killed in the Turku attack, and six of the eight who were wounded, were women, the police said. The two who died were Finns, and an Italian and two Swedish citizens were among the injured.

Ville Tavio (Finns party): Asylum system is primary means of entry for terrorists.

“It seems that the suspect chose women as his targets, because the men who were wounded were injured when they tried to help, or prevent the attacks,” said Crista Granroth from the National Bureau of Investigation.

“The act was cowardly … we have been afraid of this and we have prepared for this. We are not an island anymore, the whole of Europe is affected,” Prime Minister Juha Sipila said. [Well, maybe not Poland and Hungary that have closed their borders to Muslim migration!—ed]

[….]

Some members of the nationalist Finns party, which was kicked out of the government in June for their new hard-line anti-immigration leadership, blamed the government for what they said was too loose an immigration policy.

“The asylum system is the primary road for illegal immigration, used also by the terrorists. Harmful immigration can be controlled only by reducing Finland’s attractiveness, or by border controls,” said Finns party lawmaker Ville Tavio.

Much, much more here.

What is asylum? (As opposed to refugee resettlement)

In the refugee resettlement process, wannabe refugees must prove they are persecuted, the UN screens them (supposedly!) and a country accepts them and flies them in.

For asylum, the wannabe refugee makes his or her way to a ‘safe’ country and then applies for asylum (or often called political asylum). They are supposed to make a case that they would be persecuted if returned home. Europe is dealing with mostly asylum seekers (many are phony and are really economic migrants) who are basically loose in the country until their cases can be processed.

And, are often loose because they have been rejected and no one has made them leave!

So, it is a misnomer when you hear the Left and political leaders refer to asylum seekers as refugees. They are not legitimate refugees until their cases have been processed and the governmental body responsible has granted them asylum.

See my Finland files here. Invasion of Europe archive is here.

RELATED ARTICLE: Syrians struggling with basic needs in Edmonton, Canada