We shouldn’t allow this isolated event in Paris to take our eye off the ball. After all we have our President, Secretary of State and top Democratic candidate focused like a laser beam on the most dangerous threat to our freedom; climate change. They are showing true leadership. Al Gore was doing a 24 hour webcast at the Eiffel Tower Friday the 13th on climate change. If only the terrorists had been listening maybe they could have understood how much we cared and the attack wouldn’t have happened.
Thank goodness France is a gun free zone. That kept them safe.
As the President said Friday, ISIS is contained. As in 2012 when he said we have the terrorists on the run. His thoughts and talking points are obviously based on reality. After all we are sending in 50 advisors to Syria. That should handle it.
ISIS and other terrorist groups do not believe in economic freedom, political freedom, free speech, religious freedom or women’s’ rights but if we can control the temperature and sea levels that should change their minds.
The migrants from Africa would not be going to Europe if they could see all the work being done on climate change. If Africa could just reduce their quality and length of life by getting rid of fossil fuels they would stay. The secondary reason for them leaving is that tyrants and terrorists are killing them.
The World politicians can’t handle a relatively small terrorist group like ISIS, can’t figure out how to fix a small economy like Greece but yet are so arrogant they believe they can control the temperature within one or two degrees two hundred years out and absolutely control the levels of the sea.
When I heard about the Paris attack, I thought for sure it was caused by a video no one had seen.
Bataclan concert hall following terror attackReuters
[G]laringly absent from the discussions [of the Paris attack] are any serious attempts to understand the ideological motivations of the Muslim extremists, several of them French citizens, who carried out the worse terror attacks in France in a generation – including the first-ever suicide bombings on French soil.
**************************
Despite years of warnings by intelligence agencies that radicalized Muslims would eventually emerge from the battlefields of Syria and Iraq to launch bloody attacks in the West, Europe has been blindsided by one of the most brutal terrorist atrocities in recent memory.
The coordinated attacks by three teams of ISIS terrorists in Paris on Friday sent shockwaves far beyond France, with the massacre of at least 129 people reigniting the debate around immigration after it was revealed that at least two of the attackers entered Europe posing as “refugees.”
The attacks also fueled debate over how to end the Syrian civil war, as well as over ongoing efforts to defeat ISIS on the battlefields of Syria and Iraq, the latter of which has seen several successes over the past few weeks.
But glaringly absent from the discussions are any serious attempts to understand the ideological motivations of the Muslim extremists, several of them French citizens, who carried out the worse terror attacks in France in a generation – including the first-ever suicide bombings on French soil.
That, says best-selling author Joel Rosenberg, is the reason such acts of terror are bound to repeat themselves.
Joel spoke to me prior to the attacks at the recent Jerusalem Leaders Policy Summit, and voiced concern that by failing to grapple with the apocalyptic ideology behind actors such as ISIS, Western states would never be able to decisively defeat them.
Watch: Author Joel Rosenberg speaks in Jerusalem:
A jovial, somewhat self-deprecating character, Rosenberg – who worked for Binyamin Netanyahu during his failed prime ministerial bid in 1999, as well as Natan Sharansky – describes himself as “a failed political consultant,” but boasts a rather more successful career as writer, selling millions of novels highlighting the threat of radical Islam.
Today he lives in Netanya in northern Israel with his family, having made aliyah from the US last August at the height of Operation Protective Edge (though a practicing Christian his father was Jewish, making him eligible for aliyah under the Right of Return). From there, he has continued his efforts to explain “the threats we mutually face as Israelis and Americans from radical Islam” – a threat he says he only fully appreciated after working with Netanyahu.
“Misunderstanding the nature of the threat… of evil, is to risk being blindsided by it,” he said, citing Peal Harbor and 9/11 as examples. “And we’re going to be blindsided by a nuclear Iran, just like we’re being blindsided by ISIS.”
“At the core of it, American leaders are refusing to deal with the theology and eschatology of our enemy,” he said. “Not every Muslim is a terrorist, not every Muslim is a threat, not every Muslim is a problem – in fact the vast majority are not.
“The question is, the ones who are – what do they want? What do they say they want? What motivates them?”
The current US administration is particularly hesitant to label the threat as it is.
“Obama refuses to even acknowledge radical Islam. Come on – really? At this stage in the 21st century you’re not even ready to acknowledge the ideology that is motivating these folks? That’s a problem.”
Days later, as the attacks in Paris unfolded, some criticized the US president for once again failing to mention radical Islam at all in his speech reacting to the massacre.
Watch: Obama delivers response to Paris attacks:
But beyond the relatively wide umbrella of “radical Islam” Rosenberg warns of a far deadlier threat.
“Radical Islam encompasses a wide range of groups… Hamas, the Muslim Brotherhood, Hezbollah, the Taliban, Al Qaeda – all of these are serious threats,” he noted. “But apocalyptic Islam is now the biggest threat. this is the Iranian leadership, this is ISIS.”
He argues that the hyper-messianic ideologies shared by both sides of the Shia-Sunni jihadist coin are unprecedented in the history of modern western civilization.
“Apocalyptic Islam is motivated by the idea that the end of days has come, that the Mahdi [Muslim messiah – ed.] is coming at any moment to establish a global Islamic kingdom or Caliphate, and that the way to hasten his coming is to annihilate two countries: Israel the ‘Little Satan,’ and America the ‘Big Satan,'” he explained, describing the messianic beliefs shared by both ISIS and the “Twelver Shia” sect which figures prominently among Iran’s leadership.
“But the western political class doesn’t want to even deal with the theological ideas that are driving the radical Islamists – let alone to explain the end of times theologies of two ‘nation states’,” he continued, referring to Iran and ISIS’s self-declared “Islamic State,” which encompasses huge swathes of territory in Iraq and Syria.
“Never in history have we had one, much less than two states, whose leaders are trying to force the end of the world,” Rosenberg noted.
While Jews and Christians also have their own beliefs in the “end of times” or the messianic age, the difference is that “we don’t believe we have to commit a genocide to bring about the end of times.”
While some strategic and doctrinal differences do clearly exist between Iran and ISIS – who are themselves mortal enemies – Rosenberg emphasized that the fundamental threat was essentially the same.
“Shia apocalypticism and Sunni apocalypticism are similar. Both believe the messiah is coming soon, that his kingdom is coming, they need to change their behavior to accelerate his coming… but the eschatology and strategies are different.
“ISIS’s strategy is to commit genocide today, because the goal is to build the caliphate, to force the hand of the messiah to come.
“Iran is not trying to build a caliphate today. They’re building the infrastructure to build nuclear weapons. Why? Because while ISIS wants to commit genocide today Iran wants to commit genocide tomorrow. The point is: don’t launch until you’re ready. Rather than kill thousands in one day, Iran wants to eventually kill millions.”
He disagreed with assessments shared by some experts that the Iranian regime, while extreme, ultimately functions as a rational actor, insisting their words, beliefs and actions only led to one conclusion.
“When you look a the messages of annihilation they are saying… when you look at the infrastructure they’re building and when you look at the eschatology, these roads converge.
“They’re not interested in negotiating something together with us – they’re taking a gift,” he said of the nuclear deal Tehran signed with world powers. “You’re giving us two paths to a nuclear bomb: if we cheat, or if we don’t cheat? OK we’ll take it!”
In the shorter term Iran might they use its nuclear capabilities for more limited political goals such as “blackmail or to give a cover for terror,” he said.
But in the long term its goals were just as bloodthirsty as ISIS. In facing down both threats, the West must recognize it is facing a zero-sum game.
“For these guys killing is at the center of what they’re doing. When you bear that in mind making concessions isn’t just a mistake or misguided – it’s insane.”
The coordinated attacks in Paris and suspected Islamic State bombing of a Russian airliner raises the risk that Islamic State supporters in the U.S. and other Western countries will spur into action. The opening of a new phase in Islamic State (ISIS) terror will also result in a fresh wave of recruits radicalized by the appearance that the Islamic State is quickly ascending.
You can watch Clarion Project National Security Analyst Ryan Mauro discuss this increasing threat on FOX News’ “America’s News HQ” on Saturday afternoon below:
First, there is a risk of “copycat” attacks by the Islamic State and other Islamist terrorist supporters, including those who are loyal to Al-Qaeda and want to show that the group hasn’t become a “has-been” in the jihadist world. It is hard to express the excitement that an aspiring jihadist will feel at two breakthrough moments in the war against the West in such short order. At this sensitive time, any kind of an attack—even a simple shooting or pipe bombing—takes on much greater significance.
If an Islamist terrorist is planning or considering an attack, it is difficult to resist the temptation to strike now. Even a relatively minor attack becomes part of a bigger story, rather than being forgotten amongst the wave of headlines about acts of violence. On an egotistical level, a jihadist will want to attach his name to this dramatic story.
Secondly, there are those who will worry that they might now lose their chance to strike and earn their ticket to Paradise by dying in jihad as a “martyr.” Supporters of the Islamic State have every reason to expect Western governments to become extra aggressive in rounding up possible terrorists. ISIS supporters who believe they are on the authorities’ radar could choose to act sooner instead of patiently preparing their plot and risk being foiled.
The attacks in Paris and on the Russian airliner show that the threat from the Islamic State is greater than ever, and we’ve entered a new period where they’ve moved towards more sophisticated, Al-Qaeda-style attacks in the West. They are engaging in pre-planning and dispatching teams of operatives instead of just hoping to inspire a random supporter into committing violence independently. This upgrade in quality is a powerful tool in the Islamic State’s propaganda arsenal.
The organization’s ability to recruit is largely based on the appearance of success. No one wants to join an organization whose recent history is filled with losses. Moreover, success is seen as Allah‘s endorsement; the ultimate winning argument in a theological debate among those dabbling in Islamist extremism.
Just as the Islamic State’s burst onto the scene with the capturing of Mosul in 2014 earned it a wave of recruits, these attacks will also earn it a wave of recruits and it will encourage the millions of Islamic State supporters who have yet to take up arms to finally act upon their beliefs.
It is critical that the West push back against the Islamic State’s convincing narrative of success. Those in the region understand the importance of this. We saw many tweets from people in the Middle East directed towards ISIS that told the group that their attacks in Paris cannot erase their setbacks elsewhere.
Dramatic events like these make recent losses like the killing of “Jihadi John” and the Kurds recapturing Sinjar seem like distant memories, but they deserve to be a part of the news coverage and U.S. government’s international messaging. Instead of focusing on single events that the Islamic State hopes will grab our attention, we must put them into a broader context that the Islamic State is less eager for the public to know about.
The murder of some 127 innocents in Paris by a jihadi gang on Friday has again shocked the French and led to another round of solidarity, soul searching, and anger. In the end, however, Islamist violence against Westerners boils down to two questions: How much will this latest atrocity turn public opinion? And how much will it further spur the Establishment to deny reality?
As these questions suggest, the people and the professionals are moving in opposite directions, the former to the right, the latter to the left. In the end, this clash much reduces the impact of such events on policy.
Public opinion moves against Islamists specifically and Islam more generally when the number of deaths are large enough. America’s three thousand dead on 9/11 stands out as by far the largest mortality but many other countries have had their equivalent – the Bali bombings for Australia, the railroad bombing for Spain, the Beslan school massacre for Russia, the transportation bombings for Britain.
Sheer numbers are not the only consideration. Other factors can multiply the impact of an assault, making it almost the political equivalent of mass carnage: (1) The renown of those attacked, such as Theo van Gogh in the Netherlands and the Charlie Hebdo office in France. (2) The professional status of the victim, such as soldiers or police. (3) High-profile circumstances, such as the Boston Marathon bombing.
In addition to the over 27,000 attacks globally connected to Islam since 9/11, or more than 5 per day (as counted by TheReligionOfPeace.com), a huge increase in illegal immigration from the Middle East recently exacerbated feelings of vulnerability and fear. It’s a one-way street, with not a single soul ever heard to announce, “I used to worry about Islamism but I don’t any more.”
These cases make more Westerners worried about Islam and related topics from the building of minarets to female infibulation. Overall, a relentless march rightwards is underway. Surveys of European attitudes show 60 to 70 percent of voters expressing these concerns. Populist individuals like Geert Wilders of the Netherlands and parties like the Sweden Democrats are surging in the polls.
But when it comes to the Establishment – politicians, the police, the press, and the professors – the unrelenting violence has a contrary effect. Those charged with interpreting the attacks live in a bubble of public denial (what they say privately is another matter) in which they feel compelled to pretend that Islam has no role in the violence, out of concern that to recognize it would cause even more problems.
These 4-P professionals bald-facedly feign belief in a mysterious “violent extremist” virus that seems to afflict only Muslims, prompting them to engage in random acts of barbaric violence. Of the many preposterous statements by politicians, my all-time favorite is what Howard Dean, the former governor of Vermont, said about the Charlie Hebdo jihadis: “They’re about as Muslim as I am.”
This defiance of common sense has survived each atrocity and I predict that it will also outlast the Paris massacre. Only a truly massive loss of life, perhaps in the hundreds of thousands, will force the professionals to back off their deeply ingrained pattern of denying an Islamic component in the spate of attacks.
That pattern has the very consequential effect of shutting out the fears of ordinary voters, whose views thereby have negligible impact on policy. Worries about Shari’a, rape gangs, exotic diseases, and bloodbaths are dismissed with charges of “racism” and “Islamophobia,” as though name-calling addresses these real issues.
More surprising yet, the professionals respond to the public’s move to the right by themselves moving to the left, encouraging more immigration from the Middle East, instituting more “hate speech” codes to suppress criticism of Islam, and providing more patronage to Islamists. This pattern affects not just Establishment figures of the Left but more strikingly also of the Right (such as Angela Merkel of Germany); only Eastern European leaders such as Hungary’s Viktor Orbán permit themselves to speak honestly about the real problems.
Viktor Orbán’s Hungary may not last long in the EU. Or maybe he is the group’s future leader?
Eventually, to be sure, voters’ views will make themselves heard, but decades later and more weakly than democratically should have been the case.
Placing the murderous rampage in Paris into this context: it will likely move public sentiments substantially in one direction and Establishment policies in quite the opposite way, therefore ultimately having only a limited impact.
Barack Obama was true to form, not mentioning Islam or Muslims in his statement on the Paris attacks, and not giving a hint that it was his precipitous and politically motivated withdrawal from Iraq that created the vacuum that allowed for the rise of the Islamic State. Indeed, the Islamic State could end up being the most significant legacy of the Obama Administration.
[A]s the Western intelligentsia fell into familiar patterns of response, it only ensured that there would be many, many more attacks, in Europe and the U.S., like the one in Paris Friday. It seems as if no amount of disconfirming evidence will move the establishment Left to remove its blinkers, discard its politically correct fantasies, and face the jihad threat realistically. The Leftists in the corridors of power are today ensuring that there will be much, much more bloodshed.
***************************
That didn’t take long: one of the Islamic State (ISIS) jihadis who murdered at least 160 people in Paris on Friday held a Syrian passport and passed through Greece in October. In October, he was a “refugee” seeking asylum in Europe from the Syrian war zone; in November, he was murdering French civilians for the Islamic caliphate. The Migrant Jihad has begun.
French and European authorities can’t say they weren’t warned. Last February, the Islamic State boasted it would soon flood Europe with as many as 500,000 refugees. And the Lebanese Education Minister recently said that there were 20,000 jihadis among the refugees in camps in his country. Meanwhile, 80% of migrants who have recently come to Europe claiming to be fleeing the war in Syria aren’t really from Syria at all.
So why are they claiming to be Syrian and streaming into Europe? An Islamic State operative gave the answer when he boasted in September, shortly after the migrant influx began, that among the flood of refugees, 4,000 Islamic State jihadis had already entered Europe. He explained their purpose: “It’s our dream that there should be a caliphate not only in Syria but in all the world, and we will have it soon, inshallah.” These Muslims were going to Europe in the service of that caliphate: “They are going like refugees,” he said, but they were going with the plan of sowing blood and mayhem on European streets. As he told this to journalists, he smiled and said, “Just wait.”
A year before that the Islamic State issued a call for jihad murders of French civilians: “If you can kill a disbelieving American or European – especially the spiteful and filthy French – or an Australian, or a Canadian, or any other disbeliever from the disbelievers waging war, including the citizens of the countries that entered into a coalition against the Islamic State, then rely upon Allah, and kill him in any manner or way however it may be.”
Then after the attacks the Islamic State issued a statement claiming responsibility for them, and warning: “Let France and all nations following its path know that they will continue to be at the top of the target list for the Islamic State and that the scent of death will not leave their nostrils as long as they partake in the crusader campaign, as long as they dare to curse our Prophet (blessings and peace be upon him), and as long as they boast about their war against Islam in France and their strikes against Muslims in the land of the Caliphate with their jets, which were of no avail to them in the filthy streets and alleys of Paris. Indeed, this is just the beginning. It is also a warning for any who wish to take heed.”
So war was declared, and acts of war carried out – and the response has been drearily predictable. German Interior Minister Thomas de Maiziere was swift to try to dissociate the Paris attacks from the migrant influx into Europe: “I would like to make this urgent plea to avoid drawing such swift links to the situation surrounding refugees.” Alas for de Maiziere, there was the inconvenient fact of that Syrian “refugee” who pass through Greece on his way to jihad in Paris.
Meanwhile, Barack Obama was true to form, not mentioning Islam or Muslims in his statement on the Paris attacks, and not giving a hint that it was his precipitous and politically motivated withdrawal from Iraq that created the vacuum that allowed for the rise of the Islamic State. Indeed, the Islamic State could end up being the most significant legacy of the Obama Administration. Obviously American troops couldn’t have stayed in Iraq forever, and the Iraq project from its beginnings was based on false assumptions about Islam, ignoring its political, supremacist and violent aspects; but Obama’s hasty and ill-thought out withdrawal took into account none of the realities on the ground: the Sunni/Shi’ite divide, the Iranian influence in Baghdad, the Sunnis’ unwillingness to participate in the Baghdad government and the Shi’ites’ refusal to allow them to do so in any significant way, and more. France today is paying the price for the willful ignorance and short-sightedness of Obama and his administration.
And so as the Western intelligentsia fell into familiar patterns of response, it only ensured that there would be many, many more attacks, in Europe and the U.S., like the one in Paris Friday. It seems as if no amount of disconfirming evidence will move the establishment Left to remove its blinkers, discard its politically correct fantasies, and face the jihad threat realistically. The Leftists in the corridors of power are today ensuring that there will be much, much more bloodshed.
(I don’t understand why anyone is shocked that the European political leaders are “shocked.” Could they really be expected not to claim to be “shocked” when their perceptions of the Religion of Peace have been shown, again, to be delusional? — DM)
In the face of the Islamic terrorism that the West has been experiencing for more than a decade. The current generation of European political leaders has exhibited an irresponsibility and lack of leadership that is almost infantile by allowing unchecked Muslim immigration into Europe, with its free, open borders. The question is whether the terrorist attacks in Paris will finally amount to a wake-up call for the West’s political establishment.
*********************
The West, especially Europe, continues to be taken aback every time a new terror attack occurs, as if each one were the first.
“We are importing Islamic extremism, Arab anti-Semitism, national and ethnic conflicts of other peoples, as well as a different understanding of society and law.” — From a leaked German intelligence document.
The current generation of European political leaders has exhibited an irresponsibility and lack of leadership that is almost infantile.
One of the most surprising aspects of the terrorist attacks in Paris on Friday night is how “deeply shocked” members of the European political establishment appeared to be.
Angela Merkel, David Cameron and the Pope all expressed their condolences — and “deep shock” — at the well-coordinated, citywide terror attacks in six different places across Paris, which as of this writing have claimed at least 128 lives and more than 200 wounded. French President François Hollande confirmed that Islamic State terrorists perpetrated the attacks, carried out with suicide bombings, hand grenades and assault rifles. According to witnesses, terrorists were heard yelling, “Allahu Akbar” [‘Allah is the Greatest”] and “this is for Syria” as they shot into the audience at the Bataclan Theater, where a rock concert was underway.
Police block the streets near the scene of one of Friday’s terrorist attacks in Paris, France. (Image source: RT video screenshot)
Although the writing has literally been on the wall in blood for the past decade and a half, the West, especially Europe, continues to be taken aback every time a new terror attack occurs, as if each one were the first.
After 9/11 in the United States; the 2004 Madrid train bombings, which killed nearly 200 and wounded 2000, and the 2005 attacks on London’s transit system where 56 people were killed and 700 wounded, world leaders have no conceivable excuse left to be shocked and surprised at mass terrorism occurring in the midst of Western capitals.
As recently as a month ago, Andrew Parker, director-general of Britain’s MI5, said that the terror threat to the UK was at its highest level in more than three decades and “growing.” British police and intelligence agencies have intervened to foil six terrorist plots in the past year alone. “That is the highest number I can recall in my 32-year career, certainly the highest number since 9/11,” he said. “It represents a threat which is continuing to grow, largely because of the situation in Syria and how that affects our security.”
Instead of Britain, these attacks happened in France. They could have happened in Germany, where police revealed the arrest of a man whom they believe may be connected the Paris attacks. Recently, the Welt Am Sonntag newspaper cited intelligence warnings that “the integration of hundreds of thousands of illegal migrants Germany is no longer possible in light of the number and already existing parallel societies.” “Parallel societies” refers to Muslim communities that have little or no contact with the rest of the society in their host countries. According to an intelligence document obtained by Welt am Sonntag, “We are importing Islamic extremism, Arab anti-Semitism, national and ethnic conflicts of other peoples, as well as a different understanding of society and law.” Most ominously, however, the intelligence document went on to say that “German security agencies … will not be in the position to solve these imported security problems and thereby the reactions arising from Germany’s population.”
Already in February, it was reported in several European newspapers, among them the British Daily Telegraph, that ISIS threatened Europe with an influx of 500,000 migrants, which would include ISIS operatives hiding among them, to create chaos on the continent.
Astoundingly, European leaders nevertheless allowed the current wave of migrants to flood into their countries. Many of these migrants hide underground, often in the suburbs with these “parallel societies;” with European authorities unable to account for their whereabouts.
In September, a Syrian ISIS smuggler told the British daily, The Express, that more than 4,000 covert ISIS gunmen had been smuggled into Western nations, and were “ready” across the European Union. He also said that the undercover infiltration was the beginning of a larger plot to carry out attacks in the West, allegedly in retaliation for the US-led coalition airstrikes against ISIS.
In September, Lebanon’s education minister, Elias Bou Saab, estimated that thousands of ISIS “radicals” were among the 1.1 million Syrians currently in refugee camps. He predicted that one in 50 migrants are members of the terror organization. Although at the time, the minister admitted that he had no solid information on the infiltration of refugees, he said, “My gut feeling is ISIS are facilitating an operation. To go to Europe and other places.”
The terrorist attacks in Paris are the direct and deplorable result of political cowardice and inertia. Politicians are unable or unwilling to name the problems by their rightful name. The politicians have been shying away from engaging with the enormous security and social problems that Muslim immigration into Europe and the West has caused and continues to cause.
In the face of the Islamic terrorism that the West has been experiencing for more than a decade. The current generation of European political leaders has exhibited an irresponsibility and lack of leadership that is almost infantile by allowing unchecked Muslim immigration into Europe, with its free, open borders. The question is whether the terrorist attacks in Paris will finally amount to a wake-up call for the West’s political establishment.
[O]f all the coverage I watched Friday evening, we couldn’t even bring ourselves to say Islamic terrorists, jihadists. Once again we choose the PC language of “extremists.” We cannot win if we refuse to clearly define this clear and present evil in our time. Instead, we foolishly hope for “peace in our time” as Chamberlain did when confronting the very face of evil. Who will rally together a coalition of the brave, the courageous, the willing to seek out evil and eradicate it? Who will stand up and declare to Islamo-fascism that you will not win?
**********************
As we were driving to the Dallas airport yesterday, we were following the reports coming out of Paris. We sat there awaiting our flight and watched the death toll continue to tick upwards as news came about another attack site. When we landed in Knoxville, Angela, Aubrey, and I learned that the death toll was at 158 with some 200 wounded. My condolences go out to the victims, the families, and those who were once again exposed to this carnage on a Friday night in Paris, France.
And I want to explain how it is that this happens to us in Western civilization. Here in the United States we are witnessing the theater of absurd, where kids on college campuses are demanding free tuition. We have these insidious marches about $15 minimum wage. We actually have individuals screaming that they have a right to not be offended. We have people who castigate those of us as racists and intolerant when we describe the exact enemy who executed these savage and barbaric Islamic terror attacks. And let’s be very honest, it wasn’t even two weeks after the Charlie Hebdo attack before there were Western journalists who stated the cartoonists got what they deserved.
We continue to not take this enemy seriously and the inane talk about people being “war weary” – well, simply put, they are not. How compassionate does it now seem to allow hundreds of thousands of military-aged males from the Middle East to just walk right into Europe?
Sure, call us who advised against that racist, but look at the worst case scenario, which is becoming a regular scenario. Imagine what could have happened in Garland, Texas if the two Islamic jihadists were successful?
So what will be our response? More rhetoric. What will happen at the presidential primary debate? More talk about free education, free healthcare, and free housing? We’re stuck on this “rights” thing and have gotten to the point where too many believe they have a right to everything.
Let us remember that the first unalienable right is life – funny, you don’t hear too many screeching about that right. And what happened in Paris is yet another reminder that there is a group of individuals who have no regard for life – the life of those who they deem as infidels. But this is nothing new! Consider it rather ironic that it was in Paris where John Adams and Thomas Jefferson met with the Dey of Algiers who explained why they were attacking American shipping and pressing our citizens into slavery – they were commanded to do so by their belief.
Here we are all these many years later in 2015, and the same folks are still killing based upon their belief. And the Islamapologists will make the moral equivalency statement, as John Kerry and John Kirby did towards Israel regarding the incessant Fatah and Hamas stabbing attacks. Just as President Obama did by equating the Crusades with the horrific burning to death of the Jordanian fighter pilot. We in the West have reached such a low in self-esteem that we do the job of defeating ourselves even better than the enemy. Trust me, by Christmas we will not remember what happened Friday evening, 13 November 2015. We will fail to do the one thing this enemy will understand: crush them.
In the coming days you will hear the cowardly voices of “we cannot put boots on the ground.” Where are the voices of leadership that will say as Winston Churchill said,
“We have before us an ordeal of the most grievous kind. We have before us many, many long months of struggle and of suffering. You ask, what is our policy? I will say: It is to wage war, by sea, land, and air, with all our might and with all the strength that God can give us; to wage war against a monstrous tyranny never surpassed in the dark, lamentable catalogue of human crime. That is our policy. You ask, what is our aim? I can answer in one word: It is victory, victory at all costs, victory in spite of all terror, victory, however long and hard the road may be.”
Heck, of all the coverage I watched Friday evening, we couldn’t even bring ourselves to say Islamic terrorists, jihadists. Once again we choose the PC language of “extremists.” We cannot win if we refuse to clearly define this clear and present evil in our time. Instead, we foolishly hope for “peace in our time” as Chamberlain did when confronting the very face of evil. Who will rally together a coalition of the brave, the courageous, the willing to seek out evil and eradicate it? Who will stand up and declare to Islamo-fascism that you will not win?
You tell me right now that shutting down GITMO is a swell idea? As long as these jihadists pursue this course of action we shall fight them, kill them, and remove them from the battlefield. They have no rights, they are unlawful enemy combatants, terrorists and who cares if they’re held until they die? I’m tired of this misguided view of justice to make this enemy “like” us. GITMO did not instigate this horrific attack that claimed the lives of 158 people – and possibly others will perish due to their injuries.
We don’t need to sit at a table with Iran and Russia. We need to pull together a strike force coalition that will put their boots not on the ground, but on the necks of these savages.
If we do not squash this, we only allow it to proliferate and continue, and I will not allow my daughters to grow up in this world in fear. I listened to Geraldo Rivera talk to his daughter on air, and now it appears he wants them crushed as well. But how many more lives must be lost before everyone else comes to their senses? Does it take this conflagration to become more personal to pop culture and media elites?
Today I will be with my University of Tennessee Army ROTC alumni brothers and sisters. We have all been on the battlefield – and would not hesitate to return in service of liberty and freedom. We will be attending our Tennessee Vols homecoming football game – just as folks were watching a European football game Friday evening in Paris. You ask, could this happen in the United States?
Well, they could try – the difference here is we have the Second Amendment. And the only way they could be successful is because we also have those who wish to disarm us and create “gun free zones” – such as what happened at Ft. Hood and the U.S. Navy Reserve Facility in Chattanooga, Tennessee.
Time to fight back and beat the living dog crap out of these jackasses and make them fear us. I pray this will not just fade away, that we have candlelight vigils, James Taylor sings “You got a friend” and we blame ourselves – again.
May God bless the souls of those who were so brutally murdered by this planned operation. May God rise up the fighters, that France will find a new Charles “The Hammer” Martel and we as Western civilization will find the spirit of Churchill.
A Greek minister confirmed Saturday night that one of the suicide bombers identified by his Syrian passport had passed through the island of Leros on Oct. 3 as a refugee before reaching France. He blew himself up outside the Stade de France during a French-German soccer match in one of the multiple terror attacks that struck Paris Friday. DEBKAfile: This discovery offered proof of the Islamic State’s exploitation of the Syrian refugee exodus to infiltrate terrorists in the West. French President Francois Hollande and German Chancellor Angela Merkel reject this contention and insist on accepting the Syrian refugees on humanitarian grounds, giving sleepless nights to their security services who have no way of tracking the refugees’ real origins.
There is always the chance that the next attack will knock the scales from our eyes. Always the chance that we will realize the enemy is at war with us, even as we foolishly believe we can end the war by not fighting it, by surrendering. As this is written, the death count in Paris is 158. That number will grow higher, and very many more will be counted among the wounded and terrorized.
“Allahu Akbar!” cried the jihadists as they killed innocent after French innocent. The commentators told us it means “God is great.” But it doesn’t. It means “Allah is greater!” It is a comparative, a cry of combative aggression: “Our God is mightier than yours.” It is central to a construction of Islam, mainstream in the Middle East, that sees itself at war with the West.
It is what animates our enemies.
Barack Obama tells us — harangues us — that he is the president who came to end wars. Is that noble? Reflective of an America that honors “our values”? No, it is juvenile.
In the real world, the world of aggression — not “micro-aggression” — you don’t get to end wars by pronouncing them over, or mistaken, or contrary to “our values.”
You end them by winning them . . . or losing them.
If you demonstrate that you are willing to lose, then you lose. If you sympathize with the enemy’s critique of the West on the lunatic theory that this will appease the enemy, you invite more attacks, more mass murder.
France is hoping the night’s bloodshed is done as it counts its dead. And perhaps it is for now. But the atrocities are not over, not even close.
In Paris, it has been but the blink of an eye since the Charlie Hebdo massacre, after which Western nations joined together in supposed solidarity, supporting the fundamental right to free expression.
That lasted about five minutes.
Intelligentsia on both sides of the Atlantic rationalized that, while we of course (ahem) champion free expression — “Je suis Charlie!” and all that — columnists and cartoonists who dare lampoon a totalitarian ideology are bringing the jihad on themselves.
It was a familiar story. In 2012, jihadists attacked an American compound in Benghazi, killing our ambassador and three other officials. The president responded by . . . condemning an anti-Muslim video that had nothing to do with the attack, and by proclaiming that “the future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.”
Islamic supremacism killed Americans, and America’s president validated Islamic supremacism.
How did the French and the rest of the West react when jihadists attacked Charlie Hebdo in Paris?
After a fleeting pro-Western pose, they condemned . . . themselves.
What happened when American commentators who had spent years studying Islamic-supremacist ideology warned that mainstream Muslim doctrine was fueling jihad against the West?
The Obama administration — the president and his secretary of state, Hillary Clinton — reacted by targeting the messengers, not the aggressors.
Jihadist terror would be obfuscated by euphemisms like “violent extremism” and “workplace violence.” The critics of jihadist terror would be smeared as racist “Islamophobes.” Mrs. Clinton led the administration’s effort to portray examination of Islamic doctrine as hate speech, to brand commentary about radical Islam as illegal incitement.
Wouldn’t that be a betrayal of First Amendment free expression? If so, Mrs. Clinton declared, the government had other ways to suppress it. The administration, she said, would resort to extra-legal extortion: “old fashioned techniques of peer pressure and shaming.”
American government intimidation, not against the jihad but against opponents of the jihad. Could we tell the enemy any more clearly that we don’t think we are worth defending? Could we tell the enemy any more clearly that we are ripe for the taking?
Hard experience has taught us that when jihadists have safe haven, they attack the United States and our Western allies. But as ISIS and al Qaeda expand their safe haven in Syria and Iraq, we tell the world it is everyone else’s problem — the Kurds have to do the fighting, or the Yazidis, the Iraqis, the “rebels,” anyone but us.
As hundreds of thousands of refugees flee the region — many of them young, fighting-fit men whose potential terrorist ties cannot possibly be vetted — we encourage Europe to open its arms and borders to them, promising to open our own as well.
After all, to do otherwise would be to concede that the war is against us — and Obama is the president who “ends” war.
The enemy is not impressed. What Obama calls “ending” war the enemy sees as surrender, as the lack of a will to fight, much less to prevail.
So, as night follows day, the enemy attacked Paris tonight, yet again. Jihadists brazenly proclaimed that they were from Syria, spreading their jihad to France.
Obama responded by soft-peddling the atrocity as a “tragedy,” the acts of war as a “crime.” A “crime” that tonight killed 158 people (and counting). A “crime” by “criminals” who vow more jihadist acts of war against Paris, Rome, London, Tel Aviv, and New York.
We did not ask for a war with jihadists. Years ago, they commenced a war of aggression against us. Pace Obama, you can’t end such a war by withdrawing, or by pretending it is just a crime. You end it by winning it or losing it.
The enemy senses that we are willing to lose it. Tonight, they pressed their advantage. It won’t be the last time.
anneinpt
artaxes
danmillerinpanama
davidking1530
Peter Hofman
Joseph Wouk
Peter
Louisiana Steve
WarSclerotic 
Recent Comments