Happy New Year Liberals & Refugees: (Pat >Condell) via YouTube</a, January 1, 2017
Archive for the ‘Islamic integration’ category
Happy New Year Liberals & Refugees: (Pat Condel)
January 12, 2017When “Peace” Means Capitulation to Islam
January 8, 2017When “Peace” Means Capitulation to Islam, Gatestone Institute, Giulio Meotti, January 8, 2017
(“[W]e do not need to defeat you militarily; we only need to fight long enough for you to defeat yourself by quitting.” Obama’s America can’t quit because we haven’t started fighting political Islam. We simply continue retreating. Perhaps America will start fighting this month. — DM)
Beyond the electoral map, jihad is already changing the face of Europe’s soft underbelly in different ways: freedom of expression is retreating everywhere from Berlin to Amsterdam, Islamic veils are proliferating, sharia courts work at full speed in many EU capitals, and Jewish communities are fleeing. Muslim reformers are silenced, the assimilation of Muslims is failing, and the Western intelligentsia is already signing letters of capitulation. The latest have been such as the fraudulent resolution at the UN, and UNESCO declaring Jewish holy sites and even the Old City of Jerusalem — the heart of Judaism for nearly 4,000 years and the seat of Christianity for 2000 years — Islamic, despite Islam not even existing historically until in the seventh century, hundreds of years later.
The next “peace conference” in Paris, on January 15, is where 70 nations will probably agree to another UN Security Council vote to establish a Palestinian State, presumably (according to UNSC Resolution 2334) with the Old City of Jerusalem, the heart of the Jewish people and sacred to the Christian people, as its capital. It is another terrible sign of the West’s soft capitulation to terror. It is also reminiscent of another “peace conference,” in 1938, when in Munich the Western democracies bowed to Hitler and the Czechoslovak state was mutilated and deprived of defensible borders. Six months later, abandoned by its French and British allies, and bullied by the Nazis, Czechoslovakia was overrun by Germany. Like Israel today, the Czechs in the 1930s were accused of being “disturbers of the peace”. “Peace,” as in the inversions of George Orwell, sometimes means capitulation to Islam.
**************************
“We will win because Americans don’t realize… we do not need to defeat you militarily; we only need to fight long enough for you to defeat yourself by quitting.” — Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, one of the al-Qaeda planners of the 9/11 attacks.
“This Spanish retreat [in 2004] will be perceived as a huge political triumph for Al Qaeda and like-minded Islamic radicals — probably their most important achievement since September 11, 2001.” — James Phillips, Heritage Foundation.
ISIS’s henchmen butchered 90 people at the Bataclan Theater. What did the French government do to avenge them and to destroy the Islamists responsible? Absolutely nothing. The day after an Islamist killed Westerners at a Christmas market in Berlin, no German military flight took off to bomb ISIS.
The next “peace conference” in Paris, on January 15, is where 70 nations will probably agree to another UN Security Council vote, to establish a Palestinian State, presumably with the Old City of Jerusalem, the heart of the Jewish people and sacred to the Christian people, as its capital. It is another terrible sign of the West’s soft capitulation to terror.
Like Israel today, the Czechs in the 1930s were accused of being “disturbers of the peace”. “Peace,” as in the inversions of George Orwell — sometimes means capitulation to Islam.
What inspired al-Qaeda to attack the United States, according to one of the terrorists, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (KSM), who helped plan 9/11?
The American psychologist, James E. Mitchell, who crafted the interrogation program that helped stop terrorist attacks and saved countless lives after 9/11, just published a book, Enhanced Interrogation.
In it, KSM is quoted as saying that al-Qaeda expected the United States to respond to 9/11 as it had to the 1983 bombing of the US Marine barracks in Beirut — the United States “turned tail and ran.” In the end, KSM told Mitchell:
“We will win because Americans don’t realize… we do not need to defeat you militarily; we only need to fight long enough for you to defeat yourself by quitting. … Eventually, America will expose her neck for us to slaughter.”
That is exactly why Islamists are trying to hit the West’s soft underbelly: the office of the magazine, Charlie Hebdo, restaurants and theaters in Paris, a café in Copenhagen, a promenade in Nice, a church in Normandy and a Christmas market in Berlin. Islamists perfectly understand that the West’s most exposed flank is its home front. The same lifestyle that we defend by words is the main obstacle to the initiative of the defense against Islamists. Islamists have told us in every way, “we love death more than life”, while we in the West love the expectation of life more than life itself.
Anyone who has listened to statements of Osama bin Laden and ISIS’s Abu Bakr al Baghdadi knows that they showed a deep understanding of Europe’s situation by offering “a truce” to any country that would distance itself from the war on terror — or in other words, surrender. Through terror attacks, many jihadists are already proving able to decide the fate of many governments.
Compare what happened in two different countries after the 9/11 attacks.
November 2001: Within two months after the terror attacks in New York, Pennsylvania and Washington, the U.S. overthrew the Taliban in Afghanistan.
March 2004: Within a month after the terror attacks in Madrid, the Spanish public toppled its conservative government, elected a Socialist one and abandoned the Western military coalition in Iraq. A few days after taking office, Zapatero’s Socialist government withdrew the 1,300 Spanish troops that were deployed to Iraq by the previous conservative government of José Maria Aznar. As James Phillips at the Heritage Foundation explained:
“This Spanish retreat will be perceived as a huge political triumph for Al Qaeda and like-minded Islamic radicals — probably their most important achievement since September 11, 2001.”
In an interview with Time magazine a few months after Iraq’s withdrawal, Zapatero declared that “sexual equality is a lot more effective against terrorism than military strength.” He then promoted the “Alliance of Civilizations,” an initiative calling on the West to negotiate a truce with Islamic terrorists.
The Spanish result was understood in al-Qaeda circles as a monumental victory, and prompted the Islamists’ networks to invest in seeking to influence the outcome of elections elsewhere in the West.
The public relations department of al-Qaeda and ISIS have learned how to talk in a language the soft West can understand.
After Spain, jihadists have been able to determine the fate of another election, in France: President François Hollande, in fact, just announced that he will not stand for re-election in 2017. His presidency was mortally defeated by a campaign of multiple terror attacks that demoralized Hollande’s government and destroyed his political credibility. ISIS’s henchmen butchered 90 people at the Bataclan Theater in Paris. What did the French government do to avenge them and to destroy the Islamists responsible for that carnage? Absolutely nothing — or Raqqa would have been dust.
In December 2016, a new Islamist terror attack may have ordained the future of another European political leader: Angela Merkel. But beyond Merkel’s electoral chances, jihad had already destined the course of Europe’s most important nation when its Chancellor, after 12 people were murdered at a Christmas market in Berlin, said that Germany “is stronger than terrorism.” Merkel refused, however, to show how Germans are stronger than Islamists, such as through changing their policy on migration and multiculturalism. The day after an Islamist killed Westerners at a Christmas market in Berlin, no German military flight took off to bomb ISIS.
ISIS’s henchmen butchered 90 people at the Bataclan Theater. What did the French government do to avenge them and to destroy the Islamists responsible? Absolutely nothing. The day after an Islamist killed Westerners at a Christmas market in Berlin, no German military flight took off to bomb ISIS. Pictured above: French President François Hollande and German Chancellor Angela Merkel chat during a “unity march” of world leaders held in Paris on January 11, 2015, days after Islamist terrorists murdered 17 people in the Paris area. (Image source: AFP video screenshot)
“Many Westerners have accepted the normality of the most sordid attacks,” said the Canadian philosopher, Mathieu Bock-Côté. “We have internalized the presence in our lives of the Islamist violence. We do not know what this war against radical Islam would mean.”
The fate of another European country, Denmark, was decided by Islamists in 2005, when Danish appeasement and impotence dominated the cartoon crisis.
Beyond the electoral map, jihad is already changing the face of Europe’s soft underbelly in different ways: freedom of expression is retreating everywhere from Berlin to Amsterdam, Islamic veils are proliferating, sharia courts work at full speed in many EU capitals, and Jewish communities are fleeing. Muslim reformers are silenced, the assimilation of Muslims is failing, and the Western intelligentsia is already signing letters of capitulation. The latest have been such as the fraudulent resolution at the UN, and UNESCO declaring Jewish holy sites and even the Old City of Jerusalem — the heart of Judaism for nearly 4,000 years and the seat of Christianity for 2000 years — Islamic, despite Islam not even existing historically until in the seventh century, hundreds of years later.
The next “peace conference” in Paris, on January 15, is where 70 nations will probably agree to another UN Security Council vote to establish a Palestinian State, presumably (according to UNSC Resolution 2334) with the Old City of Jerusalem, the heart of the Jewish people and sacred to the Christian people, as its capital. It is another terrible sign of the West’s soft capitulation to terror. It is also reminiscent of another “peace conference,” in 1938, when in Munich the Western democracies bowed to Hitler and the Czechoslovak state was mutilated and deprived of defensible borders. Six months later, abandoned by its French and British allies, and bullied by the Nazis, Czechoslovakia was overrun by Germany. Like Israel today, the Czechs in the 1930s were accused of being “disturbers of the peace”. “Peace,” as in the inversions of George Orwell, sometimes means capitulation to Islam.
1. The Third Jihad – 9/11 and Muslim Silence
January 8, 20171. The Third Jihad – 9/11 and Muslim Silence, Clarion Project via YouTube, January 5, 2017
The blurb beneath the video states,
In episode 1 of The Third Jihad, Clarion Project exposes the US Islamic leaderships overwhelming silence over condemning and publicly mourning the tragedy of 9/11. It highlights CAIR and other groups unwillingness to specifically condemn the terrorists of 9/11. Get TTJ to direct your inbox every week http://www.clarionproject.org
The e-mail I received this morning states,
As a member of Clarion’s top tier group, we’re excited to send you an advance copy of episode 1 of our film series The Third Jihad.
In 2007, Clarion Project completed this landmark film highlighting radical Islamists’ engagement in a “multifaceted strategy to overcome the Western world,” waging a “cultural jihad” to “infiltrate and undermine our society from within.”
On the film’s 10th anniversary you will be astounded at how accurately we predicted the future, in a world where radical Islam was allowed to flourish, in a world where political correctness silenced Islamist detractors and in a world where ‘cultural sensibilities’ trumped free speech.
(video embed)
Week by week we will unfold the story of radical Islam, unveiling its historic, cultural, religious and militant roots and show how they manifest themselves in today’s society.
As ever, we would ask two things from you: Please send us your comments and please share this video with as many people as you can.
Thanks for your support,
The Clarion Team
Germany: Muslim migrants who witness “right-wing hate crimes” to be immune from deportation
January 6, 2017As I have noted many times, hate crimes are political capital. When real ones don’t exist, they must be invented. This will only lead to more fabricated anti-Muslim hate crimes — and there have already been many. Hamas-linked CAIR and other Muslims have on many occasions not hesitated to stoop even to fabricating “hate crimes,” including attacks on mosques. A New Jersey Muslim was found guilty of murder that he tried to portray as an “Islamophobic” attack, and in 2014 in California, a Muslim was found guilty of killing his wife, after first blaming her murder on “Islamophobia.”
This kind of thing happens quite frequently. The New York Daily News reported that “a woman who told cops she was called a terrorist and slashed on her cheek in lower Manhattan on Thursday later admitted she made up the story, police said early Friday. The woman, who wore a headscarf, told authorities a blade-wielding wacko sliced open her face as she left a Manhattan cosmetology school, police sources said.”
We were told that a Muslim boy was attacked and beat up on his school bus in North Carolina — but a photo showed him without a scratch and no one on the bus corroborated his story. And recently in Britain, the murder of a popular imam was spread far and wide as another “Islamophobic hate crime” – until his killer also was found to be a Muslim. The Mirror reported that the imam “was targeted because he had made efforts to turn youngsters away from radical Islam.”
According to The Detroit News, a Muslim woman, Saida Chatti, was “charged with making a false police report after she allegedly fabricated a plot to blow up Dearborn Fordson High School to retaliate against the November terrorist attacks in Paris….Police say Chatti called Dearborn investigators Nov. 19, six days after Islamic extremists killed 130 people in Paris.”
And similarly in Britain, a Muslim woman was “fined for lying to police about being attacked for wearing a hijab. The 18-year-old student, known only as Miss Choudhury, said she was violently shoved from behind and punched in the face by a man in Birmingham city centre 10 days after the atrocities in the French capital on November 13.”
“Migrants to be IMMUNE from deportation if they witness ‘right-wing’ crime under proposals,” by Simon Osborne, Express, January 5, 2017:
MIGRANTS who suffer or witness “right-wing” hate crimes will be immune from deportation under proposals put forward by the federal German state of Brandenburg.
The state parliament became the first in Germany to offer migrant victims of crime extra rights last year following a rise in recorded attacks and the new measure is now being pushed by the Ministry of the Interior.
A statement from the ministry said: “In addition to consistently preventing and prosecuting criminal offences, special protection of the victims and special care are necessary if the victims are people of foreign origin.”
Supporters of the move argue new arrivals are uniquely vulnerable without support networks in Germany and deportation could make their lives harder.
The regional parliament also agreed “to ask the regional government to make sure that victims of right-wing violent crimes are offered the possibility of being issued with residence permits and tolerances”.
Migrants who commit a crime, or share responsibility for a violent incident when in Germany, will be exempt from the proposed new rule….
European Immigration: Mainly Muslim, Mainly Male, Mainly Young
January 5, 2017European Immigration: Mainly Muslim, Mainly Male, Mainly Young, Gatestone Institute, Douglas Murray, January 5, 2017
In the wake of the attack in Nice, there should have been a fulsome public discussion over what if anything can be done to ensure that people who have been in France for many years — in some cases their entire lives — are not indoctrinated to hate the country so much that they drive a truck through a crowded sea-front on Bastille Day.
Or there could have been a wide public debate over whether, with so many radicalised Muslims already in France, it was a wise or foolish idea to continue to import large numbers of Muslims into this already simmering situation.
Merkel seems to hope that with this raising of a burka ban the German public will forgive or forget the fact that here is a political leader so devoid of foresight that she unilaterally chose to allow an extra 1-2% of the population to be added to her country in a single year, mainly Muslim, mainly male and mainly young.
The burka and burkini, like the headscarf, are only issues because millions of people have been allowed, unchecked, into Europe for years. The garment is merely the simplest issue at which to take aim. Far harder are the issues of immigration and integration. It is possible that Europe’s politicians cannot answer these questions, because any and all answers would point the finger at their own failings.
The European publics might get fed up with the distraction tactics of talking about garments and instead seek answers to the challenge we now face, as well as retribution at the polls for the politicians who brought us here.
2016 was a fine year for Islamist terrorism and an even finer year for Western political distraction. While Islamic terrorists repeatedly succeeded in carrying out mass-casualty terrorist attacks, as well as a constant run of smaller-scale strikes, the political leadership of the free world continued to try to divert their public.
The most striking example of the year came in the summer with the French debate over whether or not to ban the “burkini” from the beaches of France. The row erupted in the days after another 86 people were murdered in a jihadist terrorist assault — this time in Nice, France. With no one sure how to prevent access to vehicles or any idea how many French Muslims might want to follow suit, the French media and authorities chose to debate an item of beachwear. The carefully staged decision by an Australian Muslim woman to have herself filmed while wearing a burkini on a French beach ignited the row, which was eagerly seized upon by politicians.
At the local and national level, the decision to discuss the burkini allowed all the larger political issues behind Europe’s growing security problem to be ignored. In the wake of Nice, there should have been a fulsome public discussion over what if anything can be done to ensure that people who have been in France for many years — in some cases their entire lives — are not indoctrinated to hate the country so much that they drive a truck through a crowded sea-front on Bastille Day. Or there could have been a wide public debate over whether, with so many radicalised Muslims already in France, it was a wise or foolish idea to continue to import large numbers of Muslims into this already simmering situation.
As it was, neither of these debates did occur, and no meaningful political action was taken. Instead, the issue of the burkini sucked all the oxygen out of the debate, leaving no room to discuss anything more serious or longer term than beachwear.
In the wake of the July 14 attack in Nice, France, in which 86 people were murdered, there should have been a fulsome public discussion over what if anything can be done to ensure that people who have been in France for many years — in some cases their entire lives — are not indoctrinated to hate the country so much that they drive a truck through a crowded sea-front on Bastille Day. (Image source: France24 video screenshot)
Across the continent in 2016, it appeared that other politicians realised the enormous advantage of such distraction debates. For instance, in the Netherlands in November, the country’s MPs voted for a ban on wearing a burka in public places. Prime Minister Mark Rutte apparently found this an enormously convenient debate. Not only did it temporarily reduce some of the pressure that his government is feeling at the rise of Geert Wilders’s Freedom Party to the top of opinion polls, but it also distracted attention from the years of mass immigration and lax integration demands which have been a hallmark of the Dutch experience.
After importing hundreds of thousands of people whose beliefs the Dutch authorities rarely bothered to question, the public would be satisfied — the Rutte government hoped — if only the small number of Dutch Muslim women who wear the burka were prevented from doing so. The Netherlands will have to see whether its implementation of such a law works any better than it does in neighbouring France, where “white knights” routinely show up to pay the fines of women fined for violating the burka ban there.
The Rutte government was not the only one to adopt this cynical strategy. Its most cynical deployment of all came in December, with the announcement by the German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, that she would ban the burka in Germany.
As with the Dutch government, Merkel clearly hoped that in throwing this tidbit to the German public she might head off the threat that the Alternative for Germany party (AfD), among others, now poses to her party in this year’s election. But the move also raises the question of just how stupid does Angela Merkel believe the German people to be? It would seem that Merkel hopes that with this burka ban the German public will forgive or forget that here is a political leader so devoid of foresight that she unilaterally chose to allow an extra 1-2% of the population to be added to her country in a single year, mainly Muslim, mainly male and mainly young.
This is a Chancellor who, even having previously admitted that Germany’s multicultural model had “failed,” revved immigration up to unprecedented and unsustainable levels. Now, like her counterparts across the continent, she must hope that the German public are satisfied by this burka morsel and that, as a result, they will return Merkel and her party to power so that they can repeat whichever of their mistakes they choose in the years ahead.
It is possible, of course, that the European publics are wiser than their leaders and that they will see through these cynical and distracting tactics. There are extremely good reasons to ban any garment which covers a person’s face and allows them to wander as an anonymous stranger in our societies. There are some — though fewer — reasons to ban wearing a burkini on a beach. Certainly the governments of France, the Netherlands and Germany are within their rights to instigate and enforce any and all such bans. Such moves, however, are but the smallest register imaginable of a problem that seems far beyond this generation of politicians.
The burka and burkini, like the headscarf, are only issues because millions of people have been allowed, unchecked, into Europe for years. The garment is merely the simplest issue at which to take aim. Far harder are the issues of immigration and integration. It is possible that Europe’s politicians cannot answer these questions because any and all answers would point the finger at their own failings. Or it is possible that they have no answers to the problems with which they have presented the continent. Whichever it is, they would do well to reflect that in 2017, the European publics might get fed up with the distraction tactics of talking about clothing and instead seek answers to the challenge we now face, as well as retribution at the polls for the politicians who brought us here.
Cologne Police Attacked for ‘Racial Profiling’ During New Year’s Eve Security Operation
January 2, 2017Cologne Police Attacked for ‘Racial Profiling’ During New Year’s Eve Security Operation, Breitbart, Oliver JJ Lane, January 2, 2017
Hailed a success by its organisers for reducing the number of violent crimes committed on New Year’s Eve from over 1,000 last year to less than a dozen, Cologne police are now being criticised for using “racial” methods.
Left-wing activists, including members of the local Green party, have criticised the police for focusing their security efforts too clearly at the same groups which were identified as the main perpetrators of the 2016 attacks. The comments came after Cologne police controlled thousands of so-called ‘Nafris’ — North Africans — as they attempted to enter the city centre ring of steel.
Germany’s Deutsche Welle reports the remarks of Green party chairman Simone Peter who noted that while the measures had worked, he doubted the legality of the police’s actions. He said: “It raises the question of proportionality and legality when around 1,000 people were checked and partially detained based on their appearance alone.”
Meanwhile left-wing politician Christopher Lauer, active at times with the Social Democrats and Pirate Protest Party, said of the terms used by Cologne police that it was “sweeping prejudice against an entire group of people based on their appearance”.
“I regard this term as highly dehumanizing.”
Despite the ill feeling over the approach, Cologne’s local Express newspaper reports the arrest of a 38-year-old Syrian on New Year’s Eve as police believed “urgent” action was necessary following intelligence he was planning a terror attack that evening. The migrant had previously been arrested for terror-financing offences.
COLOGNE, GERMANY – DECEMBER 31: Police hold a group of men in front of Hauptbahnhof main railway station / Maja Hitij / Getty Images
Cologne police gave regular updates through the night and local newspapers carried updates from the force reporting the number of Nafris who had been stopped, searched, and turned away. Upon arriving, hundreds of potential migrant troublemakers and even individuals known to have been involved in the 2016 attacks were immediately turned around and escorted to trains out of the centre.
In all, 1,200 Nafris were controlled by Cologne police. In addition, the force recorded two sexual assaults, six thefts, and 29 individuals were arrested. One train coming into the city which police learnt had 300 North Africans on-board was stopped and turned back just before it reached the centre.
This contrasts with the 2016 celebrations when over 500 women were recorded as victims of sexual assault and 28 were raped. Including other crimes such as thefts and assaults, there were some 1,300 victims.
Cologne’s police chief was forced to retire early after the policing failure, which saw less than 100 officers on patrol for the whole city. Now defending the force from having policed the event too thoroughly instead, chief Jürgen Mathies said that while they had deliberately targeted Nafris for searches and identity checks, of the hundreds met in this way “there was a clear threat of criminal activity present”.
He said “We had groups of people who were comparably aggressive” to those that police encountered last year.
The police chief also emphasised the fact that police hadn’t only performed security checks on North Africans, but had investigated other groups as well. The city’s mayor called the measures “necessary”.
The force also defended the ‘Nafri’ term, which was admitted to be an internal policing term. An internal document describing Nafris revealed in the German press briefs police officers that they come from Egypt, Algeria, Lebanon, Libya, Morocco, Syria, Tunisia, are generally between 15 and 25-years-old, and are violent.
The document states: “The clientele behaves very aggressively against intervening police officers and city colleagues… Armaments (folding knives) are regularly carried.”
Sweden: Muslim migrants enraged over not being given “own house”
January 1, 2017Sweden: Muslim migrants enraged over not being given “own house”, Jihad Watch,
This sense of entitlement is perfectly understandable. In Islamic law, non-Muslims have the duty to provide for the upkeep of Muslims. British jihadist Anjem Choudary said in February 2013:
“We are on Jihad Seekers Allowance, We take the Jizya (protection money paid to Muslims by non-Muslims) which is ours anyway. The normal situation is to take money from the Kafir (non-Muslim), isn’t it? So this is normal situation. They give us the money. You work, give us the money. Allah Akbar, we take the money. Hopefully there is no one from the DSS (Department of Social Security) listening. Ah, but you see people will say you are not working. But the normal situation is for you to take money from the Kuffar (non-Muslim) So we take Jihad Seeker’s Allowance.”
This is, of course, based on the Qur’an: “Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued” (Qur’an 9:29).
“Migrants Angry with Sweden Expected ‘Own House’, Girlfriend,” by Virginia Hale, Breitbart, December 31, 2016:
Migrants dissatisfied with the quality of life provided for them by Swedish taxpayers are increasingly speaking out, with one Syrian even accusing Swedes of wanting to kill him and his fellow ‘refugees’.
“You have made our lives miserable”, Syrian Mohammad Jumaa wrote in an opinion piece published by Sweden’s public broadcaster Thursday. Blasting how he and other migrants have waited a year but have yet to be provided with “a good and natural life”, which includes a well-paid job, he laments: “We are people, not animals that only need to eat and sleep!”
Slamming Swedes for “forcing” migrants to “wait in housing with poor conditions”, he wrote: “I am an honourable and honest man. Many refugees curse the day they came here.
“I can’t believe this is in Sweden!” the Syrian exclaimed and accused the country, which casts itself as a ‘humanitarian superpower’, of only pretending to care about human rights. “Why did you open your doors to us refugees, if you can’t help us to live a dignified, respectful and fulfilled life?” Mohammed asks.
“Do not tell me [as an excuse] that you have so many refugees in Sweden. I know that. But I do not understand why you want to kill us a second time. This waiting process is the same as killing us.”
Waiting “is the same as dying”, and it “leads to a lot of stress” and “a lot of bad feelings”, the Syrian explained. Adding that most migrants feel the same way, Mohammed begs Swedes to show care for him and his cohorts, and to see them as “human beings and not just animals or numbers”.
His fellow Syrian, Mahmoud, made a similar appeal for compassion in an interview broadcast Tuesday. “I want a house”, he told Swedish Radio, bemoaning having to live in an apartment, which he said hampered his chances of finding a girlfriend.
Presenter Katarina Gunnarsson notes that the Syrian’s room, paid for by taxpayers “looks like a hotel room”, but Mahmoud said he had higher expectations of life in Sweden.
“I had very high hopes of getting my own private house. And then they give me this apartment. It’s like a refugee camp. What is the difference?” the former Damascus resident complained.
“I’m 25 years old and have not had a girlfriend before. I’m still a virgin. I’m looking for a girlfriend, I’m looking for a wife. But this is impossible, how can I be able to have a life in this room?” he added….
Germany: Muslim migrants kick baby on bus, attack paramedics trying to treat child
December 29, 2016Germany: Muslim migrants kick baby on bus, attack paramedics trying to treat child, Jihad Watch,
The new masters of Germany are impatient with those who do not recognize their preeminence. But a few more lessons about how it’s “racist” to resist, and all will no doubt be well.
“Rampaging Syrian migrants KICK BABY on bus, then attack paramedics trying to treat child,” by Rehema Figueiredo, Express, December 28, 2016 (thanks to Blazing Cat Fur):
MIGRANTS kicked a one-year-old baby on a bus then attacked paramedics with BELTS as they tried to treat the infant.
The shocking attack happened at approximately 9pm on Sunday night in Augsburg, one of Germany’s oldest cities.
Residents were being evacuated following the discovery of a bomb from the Second World War and some had boarded a replacement night bus when a fight broke out.
Several Syrian migrants erupted with anger because of a pram taking up space on the bus.
Migrants hurled abuse at other passengers before a fight broke out, with four of the Syrian men using the handles on the bus to hoist themselves up and attack women and old people to try and drag them into the fighting, according to an eyewitness.
The migrants paid no attention to anyone in their way, at one point kicking a one-year-old in the face.
Paramedics were called and arrived on the scene to help the injured but the men began attacking them with belts – not letting up until the police were called….
UK: 12 million more migrants will arrive in 25 years without hard Brexit
December 29, 2016UK: 12 million more migrants will arrive in 25 years without hard Brexit, Jihad Watch,
MASS immigration will continue at “unacceptable” levels for at least the next two decades unless Britain makes a full break with Brussels, a report predicted last night.
The case for a hard Brexit is compelling, given the self-induced disintegration of Europe due to its reckless immigration policy.
“An increase of anything like 12 million in just 25 years is, quite simply, unacceptable to the British public and certainly not what they voted for in the referendum.”
A hard Brexit will likely be well received by the Queen, given her views about Muslim migration. A BBC political editor reported this week that the Queen stated: “I don’t see why we can’t just get out. What’s the problem?” Back in June, the Queen accused EU Courts of denigrating Britain by “protecting terrorists,” and asked dinner guests: “‘Give me THREE good reasons’ to remain inside the European Union.”
“BREXIT WARNING: 12 MILLION more migrants to arrive in UK in 25 years without hard Brexit”, by Macer Hall, Express, December 29, 2016:
Figures showed that annual net migration to the UK from EU countries would be unlikely to fall below 155,000 in the “medium term” if the country stays in the EU’s Single Market.
And the Government’s ability to reduce the influx will be “extremely limited” as long as the EU’s free movement rules remain in force.
The disturbing forecast of near-record levels of migration for years ahead was set out in a report from the population think tank Migration Watch. It was being seen last night as a devastating blow to campaigners for a so-called “soft Brexit” that retain the UK’s full Single Market membership.
Supporters of a full break with Brussels insisted that snatching back control over immigration was at the heart of the vote to leave the EU in last summer’s referendum on the UK’s membership of the bloc.
Alp Mehmet, vice-chairman of Migration Watch UK, said: “This research spells out the very serious consequences for our society of net migration continuing at its present scale with membership of the single market resulting in a relentless increase in our population.
“An increase of anything like 12 million in just 25 years is, quite simply, unacceptable to the British public and certainly not what they voted for in the referendum.”
Tory MP Philip Hollobone said: “Migration Watch’s forecasts have always been thoroughly reliable and are the best we are going to get from anyone.
“The picture they paint is completely unacceptable.
“We simply can’t stay in the Single Market if it means we are going to get that sort of level of immigration.
“Above all, people voted in the referendum for a change in our approach to immigration.”
And John Bickley, Ukip’s immigration spokesman, said: “Migration Watch have confirmed Ukip’s worst fears, that remaining in the Single Market will not result in the UK ‘leaving the EU’ as we will have to continue to accept uncontrolled immigration from the EU.
“Total net immigration will add 12 million people to the population in just 25 years, more than the equivalent of the entire current populations of Bulgaria and New Zealand.”
He added: “Theresa May needs to set out in no uncertain terms that when the UK leaves the EU it will also cease to be a member of the Single Market.
“The UK will then, like the rest of the world, have access to the Single Market, and tariff free access will be hugely beneficial to the EU, which runs a massive trade surplus with the UK.”
The Migration Watch report cited official figures showing that annual net migration from other EU nations to the UK reached 189,000 in the 12 months to the end of last June….
Is National Guilt Making Germany More Vulnerable To Terrorism?
December 23, 2016Is National Guilt Making Germany More Vulnerable To Terrorism? Investigative Project on Terrorism, Abigail R. Esman, December 23, 2016
(Due to its entirely appropriate feelings of guilt for Hitler’s Holocaust — the imprisonment, torture and murder of six million Jews — Germany resolved to import Islamists who share Hitler’s views about Jews and desire to finish his work in the name of Allah. Does their desire to murder Christians as well help to assuage their guilt? — DM)
“All Germans know the history of the murderous race mania of the Nazis that led to the break with civilization that was the Holocaust,” Merkel’s spokesman Steffen Seibert said last year. “This is taught in German schools for good reason, it must never be forgotten. …. We know that responsibility for this crime against humanity is German and very much our own.”
**********************
From the moment it became clear that the mass killings at Berlin’s Breitscheidplatz Christmas market on Monday were the actions of a Muslim terrorist, accusing fingers have pointed at German Chancellor Angela Merkel. And not without good reason. Beyond Merkel’s “open door” to Syrian refugees has been the government’s general sloppiness when it comes to counter-terrorism.
Germany has seen several small-scale attacks in recent years. Other plots have failed, not because the authorities were so effective, but largely because the perpetrators were so incompetent. In one case, an attack was stopped only because one plotter thought better of the idea and turned himself in.
But the issue is bigger than Merkel. It encompasses the entire spirit of Germany after World War II, and the shadows of its guilt. This has never been clearer than it is now – after the Berlin attack – because unlike terrorist attacks in Brussels and in Paris, this one was entirely predictable and even more preventable. It simply should not have happened.
Throughout the European Union, guilt about the Holocaust has colored government approaches to Muslim immigrants since the rush of guest workers arrived in the 1970s. Concern about “tolerance” and religious rights have repeatedly led to oversensitivity among lawmakers and to a tendency for Europe’s leaders and many of its people to simply look away.
Honor violence was ignored for decades until former Dutch Parliamentarian Ayaan Hirsi Ali forced it into the limelight in the years just after 9/11. So were anti-Western sermons given by Arab-funded imams in Europe’s mosques. But nowhere, rightfully, has the guilt been quite as heavy on a country’s soul as it has been in Germany.
Which may explain what the Wall Street Journal describes as “a cascade of mishaps before and since the [Christmas market] attack” that “suggest Germany isn’t geared up for countering the terrorist threat.”
Everything that needed to be known about Anis Amri, the Tunisian-born suspect in the attack was known well before he plowed his truck into the outdoor festivities on Dec. 19, killing 12 people and injuring 48. Authorities watched him for months, though the Daily Beast reports he “managed to slip off their radar” sometime around September. He served time in Italy for arson. He had a history of drug trafficking. He had been convicted in absentia of robbery in his home country of Tunisia. He had known connections to an extremist imam. Germany even rejected his asylum claim, though he managed to escape deportation.
And yet he was still free, roaming the streets of Germany.
Then there was the target of his attack. The U.S. State Department issued a travel alert for Europe last month, warning of possible terrorist attacks at “holiday festival, events, and outdoor markets.” And a child is suspected of attempting to bomb another German Christmas market two weeks prior to the Berlin attack. Yet no barriers were erected to protect the market. There appear to have been no checkpoints, and no heightened security at the event.
For the right person, it was the right place. Amri, shot and killed by police in Milan, Italy early Friday, was the right person.
This isn’t just a “cascade of mishaps.” Much of Germany’s failure to quash Muslim youth radicalization and to defend against terrorist attacks comes from its approach to national security and surveillance. Post-Holocaust Germany has placed tight restrictions on intelligence-gathering, particularly when it comes to privacy concerns.
“Skepticism towards surveillance runs deep in Germany because of the excesses of the Nazi Gestapo and East German Stasi secret police,” Reuters reports. In addition, a Law Library of Congress analysis notes that, “intelligence agencies are not authorized to use force or other types of police powers to gather information.”
And yet, says Reuters, “Intelligence agencies say there are signs that Islamic State may have planted fighters among the hundreds of thousands of migrants who arrived in the country in uncontrolled fashion last year.”
In June, however, Germany announced long-overdue plans to loosen some of those limitations, making it easier for officials to track radicalized teens – a move that followed a series of attacks by 15- and 16-year-olds.
Germany’s past also shapes its migrant policy today. Merkel and her supporters point to the fact that many Germans were migrants after the war, and they speak of the lessons learned during the Shoah.
“All Germans know the history of the murderous race mania of the Nazis that led to the break with civilization that was the Holocaust,” Merkel’s spokesman Steffen Seibert said last year. “This is taught in German schools for good reason, it must never be forgotten. …. We know that responsibility for this crime against humanity is German and very much our own.”
Opening the doors to religious minorities escaping war and autocracy is a form of repentance. So, too, is a hands-off approach to religious figures who preach violent or misogynistic doctrines that violate our own. Such approaches may ease German consciences, but they too often go awry. What, after all, are jihadist attacks like the one at the Breitscheidplatz market if not “crimes against humanity”? Germany is right not to forget its past. But in trying to set it right, the country has just gone tragically very wrong.
anneinpt
artaxes
danmillerinpanama
davidking1530
Peter Hofman
Joseph Wouk
Peter
Louisiana Steve
WarSclerotic 
Recent Comments