Because Islam

Terrorism, Islam, and Immigration:

Whenever a new terrorist attack is reported, I’m reminded of that LifeLock commercial about a bank robbery. After a group of masked robbers smash into the bank, the uniformed officer on duty explains to frightened customers that he’s not a security guard, only a security monitor. He notifies people if there’s a robbery, but he doesn’t do anything to stop it.

Over in Europe, people are beginning to understand that their local and federal governments aren’t going to do anything about the terrorist problem. Oh, sure, the authorities will investigate the latest attack, identify the perpetrator, and, if they’re lucky, break up the cell to which he belonged. But on the most basic level, nothing changes, nothing is ever done.

What are the basics that are being ignored?

Well, in the first place, it would be helpful to recognize that these acts of terror are committed by Muslims, not by Methodists or Mormons. Moreover, the higher the concentration of Muslims in a given society, the more likely that terrorist attacks will occur. In Hungary, Poland, and the Czech Republic which have strict immigration laws and few Muslims, there have been no major terror attacks. In Germany, Belgium, France, and England, which have liberal immigration laws and large Muslim populations, terror attacks have become an almost weekly occurrence.

One of the primary ways to prevent terrorist attacks is to put a halt to Muslim immigration or else to curtail it sharply. But Europe’s governing class is committed to open borders. They’re also committed to the narrative that all cultures are created equal. So if Muslims are acting up, it can’t, by their reckoning, have anything to do with Islamic culture; it must be because of racial hatred or intolerance on the part of the natives. Like the security monitor in the LifeLock commercial, European authorities witness the invasion of their territory, but they don’t do anything to stop it. Indeed, many deny that terrorism has any connection to immigration.

***

There’s a lesson to be learned here, but for Europeans the lesson comes late in the game. Once the Muslim population of a country grows beyond a certain point, it becomes very difficult to control the terror problem. Yes, of course, not every Muslim is a terrorist. But it’s become something like a mathematical certainty that a certain percentage are. Thus, as the Muslim population grows, so does the number of terrorists and potential terrorists. You can belatedly close the borders, but if you wait too long the damage will already have been done. It’s not a matter of closing the barn door after the horses have escaped, but of closing it after the war horses and Trojan horses have gotten inside.

It’s a different matter for the U.S. In America it’s not too late to tighten up the borders, to curtail Muslim immigration, and to develop sophisticated vetting procedures. It’s not too late to put Muslim communities on notice that they need to do more to purge the terrorists from their midst, and to eliminate from their culture those elements that foster radicalization. None of this will happen, of course, without a radical change of mind—a realization that we are not just fighting ISIS or lone wolves, but that we are also engaged in a do-or-die culture war with people who are determined, either by violence or by stealth, to replace our culture with theirs.

Across the Atlantic, the substitution of one culture for another is well under way, and the Europeans don’t quite know what to do about it. It’s difficult to know what to do when the enemy is already within your borders and when he is practically indistinguishable from the non-violent practitioners of his faith. Because of years of inaction, many parts of Europe are now in a place where all the options are terrible to contemplate.

The lesson for us is that we can’t afford to let the Muslim immigration problem grow to the point where—as in large parts of Europe—it is nearly impossible to deal with the consequences. Because, beyond a certain point, no amount of concrete barriers and bomb-sniffing dogs will be able to stem the terrorist tide.

Will the British finally wake up?

I was surprised to read that maybe, just maybe the British may have had enough of “tolerance.”  I was not surprised to read that America’s liberals are as hypocritical and insane as ever, refusing to learn the obvious lessons the recent terror attacks are teaching.

London Undone by Terror

An ocean away, another seven caskets tell the story of a war the West is desperate to end. For the British, who’ve watched the tide of terrorism swell to three attacks in as many months, the time for sensitivity is over. There’s been “too much tolerance” of Islamic extremism, Prime Minister Theresa May warned, as police searched for clues to another ISIS-inspired rampage. Just days after families put 22 loved ones to rest after the Manchester Arena bombing, three men slammed their van into a crowd of people while others hacked through a local market with foot-long machetes.

“It is time to say enough is enough,” May said of the lax attitude that’s given radical Muslims a foothold on their soil. “Right now, through weak policies, we have allowed the fundamentalists to spoil it for the majority,” intelligence sources explained. After three bloody months, British officials are putting every option on the table — including burka bans and new citizenship rules. As far as May is concerned, political correctness is a luxury the U.K. can no longer afford.

Three thousand miles away, that’s a point Donald Trump has been trying to drive home since the earliest days of his candidacy. After eight years of letting foreigners stream into our country — with the barest of background checks — U.S. leaders have watched ISIS’s infiltration of Europe with an anxious eye. In his first week on the job, President Trump rolled out an executive order designed to keep what’s happening in England from coming here. Liberals came unglued, accusing the new administration of religious profiling — or worse. Now, months into a vicious court battle that’s stopped the president from keeping America safe, the Left’s protests seem more ridiculous than ever. While the London police rush to put up concrete barriers across its most beloved landmarks, the world has a choice: it can learn from Britain’s mistakes — or repeat them.

We know where this White House stands. “In any event we are EXTREME VETTING people coming into the U.S. in order to help keep our country safe,” the president tweeted. “We need the courts to give us back our rights.” While the Supreme Court decides whether to take the case against the president’s “travel ban,” President Trump is already asking for a tougher version. And there’s good reason for it, as Senator Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) pointed out over the weekend. “You’ve got some [terror] groups that are looking at a big play like taking down an airliner. You’ve got others who need very little support, very little planning, and can do incredible damage, which is actually in many ways almost more of terrorism because you go anywhere, do anything, you wonder what could happen at any moment. It could happen here.”

Perhaps the most maddening part of the liberals’ effort is that they’re trying to tie Trump’s hands, when he has the benefit of intelligence that most people don’t — including the judges deciding this case. As someone who worked in counterterrorism and law enforcement, I understand that there’s a reason the president is entrusted with screening protocols, especially when they’re in the interest of national security. As David French wrote in National Review, there’s nothing extreme about that.

“We know that terrorists are trying to infiltrate the ranks of refugees and other visitors. We know that immigrants from Somalia, for example, have launched jihadist attacks here at home and have sought to leave the U.S. to join ISIS. Indeed, given the terrible recent track record of completed and attempted terror attacks by Muslim immigrants, it’s clear that our current approach is inadequate to control the threat. Unless we want to simply accept Muslim immigrant terror as a fact of American life, a short-term ban on entry from problematic countries combined with a systematic review of our security procedures is both reasonable and prudent.”

“The stakes are indisputably high,” White House officials warned in its brief to the Supreme Court. “The court of appeals concluded that the president acted in bad faith with religious animus when, after consulting with three members of his cabinet, he placed a brief pause on entry from six countries that present heightened risks of terrorism.” Is the Left going to take responsibility if its lawsuit succeeds and people are killed on American soil because no one could look into these foreigners’ backgrounds? Will they hide behind black robes when Britain’s terror lands at our shores, ushered in by eight years of Obama’s indifference?

Meanwhile, liberal hypocrites like Senator Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) are daring to criticize President Trump for not doing enough on terrorism. That’s ironic, since Schumer’s party is the one standing in the way of the White House’s security overhaul! “Rigorous vetting and tightening up wherever we have to is essential in this new world,” he argued. Of course, this is the same man who in January decried Trump’s stricter immigration policy, insisting, “Tears are running down the cheeks of the Statue of Liberty.” Better the Statue of Liberty, British mourners would say, than thousands more grieving families who will never see their loved ones again because their government was more concerned about being politically correct than protecting their citizens.

Paris Climate Agreement: a scam we’re lucky to escape

President Trump just outed the US from the Paris Climate Agreement: cue outraged hysteria.

After days of drama and suspense, President Trump announced Thursday that his administration will exit the Paris climate agreement.

“So we’re getting out,” Trump said. “The Paris accord is very unfair at the highest level to the United States.”

Trump’s decision fulfills a campaign promise and satisfies strong Republican opposition to the global climate deal but also isolates the U.S. and is certain to bring condemnation from world leaders and critics in the scientific community.

But even people who think “climate change” is a “real problem” don’t think that the Agreement would have done much of anything to fix the “problem.”  It just would have further crippled the US economy.

Manchester: it’s about culture

I wasn’t consistently interested in politics until a year or so ago when things started to get a lot more interesting and to give hints of something other than the stale status quo, possibly even of hints of hope.  Politics had seemed a hopeless mess, but now what we’re witnessing on a national and international level (for many places) isn’t just about politics; it’s about culture.  Sounds like the oft quoted “politics is downstream from culture” really does apply.  It is culture, history, people and their stories and times that are fascinating. The reason I care so much now about current events and politics is because it’s about the survival of a culture and people and of what’s left of Western Civilization — or perhaps about its death, hopefully followed by the reemergence of something to replace it.

We are cursed to live in interesting times and to perhaps witness the end of an era and the beginning of a new one, a turning point.  These are times that would be griping to read about from a more distant perspective, but difficult to live through.  Life, if you’re paying attention, is more interesting than any novel.  And more scary.

There have been lots of PC hand wringing, calls of “solidarity!” and “not all Muslims!” hashtags in response to the recent Manchester terror attack. There have also been quite a few not-PC, and thus more true, responses. One by John Paul Meenan focuses right in on the cultural problem.

There’s only one real way to resist Islamic terrorism: is the apathetic West up to the task?

Yes, we must respond, and this is a ‘war’ of sorts, the first principle of which, as Sun Tzu says, is ‘know thy enemy.’ One aspect of that, in turn, is seeing ourselves as our enemies might see us… There is a method to the madness of ISIS, and they choose their targets with aforethought. To such ‘men’ who have their women dress, if dress is the right word, in what amount to full-body shrouds, one can see how someone like Grande and her troops of teenage imitators would make them froth and foam at the mouth.

Ah, yes, the clash of cultures, which our politicians and their followers, which includes most people, just do not get. At the heart of any society is its religion, whether that religion be supernatural or not, what God or gods they worship, what founds their laws and customs, where they put their time and energy, how they raise their children and govern their families, towns, societies. Islam has a very different idea of how all of this is to be done than what was once the Christian land of ‘Britain,’ but the hollowness of an increasingly agnostic and apathetic British culture, along with the rest of the West, is weak and prone against the onslaught of a resurgent Islam.

When these tragedies strike at the heart of our own culture…, I wonder why? Not in the sense of why Islam spreads its religion and gains converts by violence, for that has been the case since its founding by Mohammed, but, rather, that Islam has already, in a deep and real sense, won the war, without the necessity of such violence…

Furthermore, sheer demographic numbers, by births and immigration, ensure that Britain, along with many other European countries, will be more or less Islamic enclaves within a generation or two, and under such a regime, there will not be many, if any, concerts like Ariana Grande’s. I suppose the a priori violence signifies some level of impatience, so that they might hurry things along, or frustration, or just to prove who’s really in charge. As ISIS has already implied by their social media response, there is more of this to come.

No one knows how many potential terrorists there are in Britain, which has over 3 million Muslims, with more or less untrammeled immigration still continuing. Most of these are law-abiding citizens, one may presume, but some, even if it be a small number, are not only prone to such mayhem but actively planning further bloodshed, and it does not take many to bring a numerically more dominant culture to its knees.

Yes, we must resist, and do what we can by police and military intervention, but how do you stop people who are willing to kill and die in the process, seeing this is a glorious ‘worship offered to God’? How many police officers, gates, cameras, barriers, security? Do we hole up in reinforced walled communities, fearful to go out the door? To face such an enemy requires primarily a resistance that is cultural, which ultimately means religious, something we have by and large lost.

As we reflect and pray, Brits and all the rest of us have a lot of soul searching to do, to ask who we are, what it really means to be ‘British,’ or ‘Canadian’ or ‘American.’  For if we know not who we are, how can we know who is the enemy?

And this is why so many people are searching for identity, why there are so many resurgences of populism, civic nationalism, the alt-right, people focusing on racial identity.  Everyone is searching to find their “tribe” and to ensure its survival.  On some level, people realize that this is about the survival of a way of life, maybe even the survival of their own lives.  Some non-religious people are waking up to the fact that actually Christianity wasn’t such a bad thing and did make the good of Western Civilization possible.  When the barbarians are at the gate, maybe it’s time to get religion.  Unfortunately, it’s probably going to have to get a lot worse before most Westerners wake up.

 

What would we do without government investigators or the media to uncover and report on the truth?

Answer: We’ll just do it ourselves.

The internet, even with all its downsides, has certainly done some interesting things for the way “normal” folks can do awesome things.  Are the authorities not doing their duty in investigating a (potential) murder case?  Covering things up are they?  Media not doing their jobs to honestly report facts and relevant current events?  No worries.  The centipedes and /pol/ are on top of things.

Just a couple examples from today.

On the Donald this morning, they were talking about Wikileaks’ twitter announcement: BREAKING: Sweden has dropped its case against Julian Assange and will revoke its arrest warrant

So now does Mr. Assange just need a pardon from Trump and he’ll actually get to leave the Embassy?  Some pedes seem to think leaving may be too dangerous for Assange even if that were possible, and that maybe it’s just a trap.  I almost wouldn’t put it past the pedes and/or /pol/ to somehow break Assange out of the Embassy and have him whisked away to some safe and undisclosed location.

Google, of course, failed me for any further information.  If you want truly breaking news, skip the news outlets, just go to the citizen investigators of the internet.

In other news, the centipedes and /pol/ are busy working to collect, archive and sift through every trace of Seth Rich on the internet (just one of many threads with them hard at work).  They’re analyzing his entire life and personality and picking out anything that would lead to confirmation that he was the source of the DNC leaks and was murdered for it.  As the circumstantial evidence amasses, it becomes increasingly easy to believe this “internet conspiracy theory.”

If it’s the so-called “unbiased media” and government officials — who we should supposedly be trusting over “weirdos” on the internet — who keep dishing out falsehoods and fake news, what are we supposed to think when the so-called “internet conspiracy theories” keep turning out to be true these days.  I’m not sure there is anything too weird and convoluted to believe, especially when it comes to politics.

The conquest of Europe moves forward

Since we’re seeing a new Islamic conquest of Europe (one that just took a step forward due to the French election outcome), it seems timely to be reminded of the previous Islamic conquests.  Before you say, but remember the Crusades! take a look at this:

Also of interest from Bill Warner:

The Fate of France

As we all know by now, Le Pen lost and Macron won.  What will happen to France?  Time will tell, but I’m glad I don’t live in France.  Some folks think it was too late anyway. Some think that Le Pen’s loss won’t be the end of nationalism for the French, but that it will continue to grow.  What option do they really have?  Fight back or be destroyed.  Here are a couple different responses (PJW and Razorfist so language of course):

Paul Joseph Watson made this before the results were in.  His take was somewhat more hopeful than Razonfist’s but since Le Pen lost I’m not sure it matters.