Archive for the ‘Islamic terrorists’ category

Returning ISIS fighters given ‘protected identities’

June 28, 2017

Returning ISIS fighters given ‘protected identities’, Israel National News, Mordechai Jones, June 28, 2017

Artist’s conception of Swedish Muslim policyiStock

Swedish Minister for Culture and Democracy Alice Bah Kuhnke has suggested that Swedes who left to fight for radical Islamist groups in the Middle East should be welcomed back and helped to integrate into society.

The minister added she and the government had no idea how many of the returnees were still radicalised versus how many left because they had become disillusioned with Islamist beliefs.

Pamela Geller comments, “This is the very definition of civilizational suicide. These ISIS fighters are part of a group that has vowed to destroy Europe. They should never have been allowed back, and if they had to be, then they should have been immediately jailed. Instead, they’re protected. Madness.”

Last week, another damning report showed the Swedish government had still been paying many Islamists through the generous Swedish welfare system whilst they were fighting in Iraq and Syria, reported Breitbart.

*********************************

Hundreds of Swedish residents who went to fight for the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria have now returned to Europe and the Swedish government has given several of them “protected identities” to keep locals from finding out who they are, reported Breitbart.

The vast majority of the returning jihadist fighters keep a very low profile upon returning to Sweden as many have committed terrorist offences while in the Middle East. 27-year-old Walad Ali Yousef is one returnee that the government has given a special status protecting his identity, normally given to people under serious threat, Swedish Expressen reports. The magazine claims to have tracked 150 such ISIS terrorists who have quietly returned to Sweden.

Yousef, originally from the heavily migrant-populated city of Malmo, spoke to the newspaper complaining he had difficulty finding a job. “I am looking for many jobs but can not get one because my pictures are out there,” he said.

Yousef joined the Islamic State in 2014, travelling to the ISIS capital of Raqqa in Syria. Formerly a small-time criminal, Yousef sent pictures of himself in Syria posing with Kalashnikov rifles to encourage his friends in Sweden to join the terror group.

39-year-old Bherlin Dequilla Gildo, also from Malmo, is now back in Sweden living under an entirely new identity. In 2012 he posted images of himself posing with dead bodies who he called “Assad’s dogs”, and participated directly in killings of Syrian regime soldiers.

The remaining 100 or so Swedes still in the Middle East fighting for the Islamic state are assumed to be the most radical. Some fear that as Kurdish troops push further into Raqqa, those Swedes will attempt to return home.

Swedish Minister for Culture and Democracy Alice Bah Kuhnke has suggested that Swedes who left to fight for radical Islamist groups in the Middle East should be welcomed back and helped to integrate into society.

Ms. Kuhnke made the comments Sunday evening on the television program Agenda which is transmitted by the Swedish state broadcaster SVT, Breitbart reported. The program focused on the fact that some 300 Islamic radicals from Sweden had gone to the Middle East to fight for groups like Islamic State and around half of them had returned to Sweden.

“They need to be channeled back into our democratic society,” Kuhnke said. The minister added she and the government had no idea how many of the returnees were still radicalised versus how many left because they had become disillusioned with Islamist beliefs.

Terror expert Magnus Ranstorp said, “the really dangerous ones have not come back yet,” and added, “The vast majority may not do anything, but they are still a danger to the authorities and it must be managed. It is important for the police to be able to prioritise this area so that they do not become dangerous to society.”

While several of those returning are free, many others like Sultan Al-Amin, 31, and Hassan Al-Mandlawi, 33, have been sentenced to life in prison for their crimes committed in the city of Aleppo.

Swedish authorities have been heavily criticized for welcoming Islamic State fighters returning from the Middle East and claiming to be able to integrate them back into Swedish society.

Pamela Geller comments, “This is the very definition of civilizational suicide. These ISIS fighters are part of a group that has vowed to destroy Europe. They should never have been allowed back, and if they had to be, then they should have been immediately jailed. Instead, they’re protected. Madness.”

The Swedish attitude toward returning jihadists is seen as cowardly by many, as several municipalities have gone above and beyond to cater to returning fighters. In the medieval city of Lund, the government is considering a range of measures including debt forgiveness, driving lessons, and free housing in the name of integrating returning extremists.

Last week, another damning report showed the Swedish government had still been paying many Islamists through the generous Swedish welfare system whilst they were fighting in Iraq and Syria, reported Breitbart.

London Bridge is Falling Down

June 4, 2017

London Bridge is Falling Down, Power LineScott Johnson, June 4, 2017

(Please see also, Theresa May LATEST STATEMENT on London Attacks | Full Speech. — DM)

Though our problem in the United States is less severe than Britain’s, the same obtains here. We continue to import a steady stream of Muslim refugees and immigrants who compound the severity of the risk we face. Can’t we at least turn off the spigot?

**********************

Belief in Islam is a necessary condition of radicalization into Islamism. What is termed radical Islam or Islamism represents a form of Islam. It is a form of Islam with which we cannot live.

When we heard the first reports of the terror attack in London yesterday, there was little room for doubt that the attackers were Muslims celebrating Ramadan. We probably didn’t need to hear that one of the attackers proclaimed “This is for Allah” as he did his dirty work. His declaration was aimed at the slow learners in the audience.

Today Prime Minister May declared that “It is time to say ‘enough is enough.’”. It’s actually past time, but it’s a reasonable statement.

Prime Minister May added: “[W]hen it comes to taking on extremism and terrorism, things need to change.” Although some proposals are implicit in her statement, she does not seem entirely clear on what needs to change. It has something to do with preventing and mitigating “Islamist extremism.” So we have that much to go on.

How is it to be defeated? “It will only be defeated when we turn people’s minds away from this violence and make them understand that our values – pluralistic British values – are superior to anything offered by the preachers and supporters of hate.”

Prime Minister May is not alone in the indirection of her diagnoses and proposals. Most of us are long gone into the self-censorship and shibboleths imposed by the forces of political correctness.

Whether the London Bridge attackers turn out to be “homegrown” or foreign, whether they are Muslims of the first, second or third generation in Britain, the problem they represent is entirely imported.

Though our problem in the United States is less severe than Britain’s, the same obtains here. We continue to import a steady stream of Muslim refugees and immigrants who compound the severity of the risk we face. Can’t we at least turn off the spigot?

Bringing Ramadan in With a Bang: Killing Christians

May 29, 2017

Bringing Ramadan in With a Bang: Killing Christians Front Page MagazineJack Kerwick, May 29, 2017

The point of this essay is to puncture the West’s Politically Correct meme, an ideologically-useful fiction according to which Muslims are always victims and Christians are victimizers—or, at the very least, are never victimized. 

The painful reality is that, globally speaking, when it comes to the topic of religious persecution, the adherents of Islam are the biggest persecutors while those of Christianity are victimized more so than the members of any other religious faith. 

******************************

Jeremy Joseph Christian is a 35 year-old white man who, according to some press reports, is also a “white supremacist.”

Christian, you see, while aboard a train in Portland, Oregon, allegedly hurled “ethnic and religious” slurs at two young women who, evidently, appeared to have been Muslim. “Get off the bus and get out of the country because you don’t pay taxes here,” Christian is reported to have said.  He also, supposedly, expressed a dislike for Muslims and characterized them as “criminals.”

Three men who are now being hailed as “heroes” intervened.  Christian killed two of them, slashing their throats.  The third man was stabbed as well, but survived and is being treated for non-life threatening injuries.

There is much to this story that is still unclear (more will be written at a future time).  Predictably, the Islamic activists of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) spared not a moment to exploit this tragedy for their partisan purposes.  CAIR’s National Executive Director, Nihad Awad, expressly implicated President Trump: “President Trump must speak out personally against the rising tide of Islamophobia and other forms of bigotry and racism in our nation that he has provoked through his numerous statements, policies and appointments that have negatively impacted minority communities.”

Awad’s remarks are not only fundamentally untrue.  For more than one reason, they are profoundly offensive.

One reason that they are offensive is that Muslims, far from being the most persecuted of religious groups in today’s world, are in reality the biggest persecutors.

The reality is that if there is a “rising tide” of any species of violent bigotry, it is Christophobia, not Islamophobia.  No religion is as persecuted around the planet as that of Christianity.

In February, the Center for Studies on New Religions released a study showing that last year, 90,000 Christians throughout the world were murdered because of their faith.  Nearly one-third of these victims were killed by Muslims.  According to Open Doors, an advocacy organization for persecuted Christians, 14 of the 20 worst purveyors of Christian persecution are Islamic countries, and the latter constitute 35 of the worst 50.

Middle Eastern wars in places like Yemen, Syria, and Iraq have been particularly hard on the ancient Christian communities that exist among the Islamic majorities.  Legions of men, women, and children have been slaughtered, maimed, and/or displaced.

Yet the world utters virtually a peep.  Pope Francis, for example, the Pope of my church, while he has indeed commented here and there on the oppression of Christians, he may as well have said nothing, for the Pope’s remarks on this matter have been like whispers relative to the pleas that he makes incessantly on behalf of Islamic refugees.

And while the leftist media in the West seeks to establish a connection between the beginning of Ramadan and Jeremy Christian’s insulting of two Islamic women, over in Egypt some Muslims inaugurated the holy month by…slaughtering dozens of Christian men, women, and children.

The most recent outrage committed against Christians occurred on May 26 in Egypt.  Islamic terrorists attacked a bus full of Coptic Christians, murdering 28 and injuring many more.  Children were among the victims.

The victims were reportedly heading to St. Samuel the Confessor monastery when their bus was blocked by three vehicles and eight to ten assailants wearing military uniforms and masks. The attackers proceeded to blast gunfire into the bus.

The so-called “Islamic State” (ISIS) claimed “credit” for the bloodbath.

In what now reads as ominously as it does presciently, an article published but two days before this attack at the website of Open Doors and authored by one of its Egyptian staff members speaks to the fever-pitch anxieties that the impending Islamic holiday of Ramadan have induced in the members of Egypt’s Christian community.  It is worth reading “Janelle P” in her own words:

“As much excitement as the Islamic holy month brings to Muslims, it does carry a great deal of burdens and concerns to the Christian community in Egypt.  It is a very long 30 days during which Christians in schools, work or public spaces will receive harsh looks and verbal harassments from devout Muslims because of their faith.  They are ridiculed for not fasting like Muslims.  Even in some cases, Christians may face physical violence due to the fact that they were caught eating their lunch by their fasting Muslim coworkers or neighbors!”

Think about this: Due to the celebration of an Islamic holiday, Christians have to brave insults, hostility, and even physical violence.

Janelle P continues:

“It’s not uncommon for Christians to hide somewhere to eat their lunches away from the eyes of the Muslims.” Janelle recalls his own experiences growing up in Egypt. “I remember as a young boy having to eat and drink in the school toilet to avoid trouble with Muslim classmates and teachers.”

Young Christian children must take shelter in school restrooms if they want to eat their lunch unmolested by their Islamic classmates.

“It’s almost protocol during the month of Ramadan for devout Muslims, wherever they are, to turn to the Christians around them and bombard them with intimidating questions about their faith. They aim to distract themselves from the long fasting hours and, if they’re lucky enough, to plant doubt in the hearts of the Christians.”

Janelle P concludes by acknowledging that “We, the Christians of Egypt, feel many different emotions regarding Ramadan.” However, he presumably speaks for his coreligionists in Egypt when Janelle expresses, not rage or hatred, but rather faith that God will show Muslims the error of their ways and bring them to Him.  It is this, at any rate, for which they pray.

The attitude of love that the most oppressed Christians hold toward their Islamic oppressors stands in glaring contrast to that which Muslims have toward those who do not share their vision.

Of course, the point here is not to suggest that all of the world’s billion or so Muslims deserve to be condemned for the actions of the exploitative, oppressive, and murderous among them.  Such a suggestion is unwarranted.  Nor it would be right to suggest that no Muslims experience persecution. There are indeed persecuted Muslims throughout the world, but the persecution that they suffer is almost without exception at the hands of other Muslims.

The point of this essay is to puncture the West’s Politically Correct meme, an ideologically-useful fiction according to which Muslims are always victims and Christians are victimizers—or, at the very least, are never victimized.

The painful reality is that, globally speaking, when it comes to the topic of religious persecution, the adherents of Islam are the biggest persecutors while those of Christianity are victimized more so than the members of any other religious faith.

Counterterror systems are deficient across Europe

May 25, 2017

Counterterror systems are deficient across Europe, DEBKAfile, May 25, 2016

(The U.S. leaks, which President Trump will deal if he isn’t already doing so, provide a welcome diversion from addressing British responsibility for dealing with rampant Islamic terror. — DM)

One of the main reasons the British were so angry over the leaks was that it demonstrated how easy it was to build such bombs as the one used in Manchester, There is no need to manufacture them at secret venues in faraway Yemen, or smuggle them in pieces aboard planes. They can be built in the kitchens of rented apartments in Western Europe’s main cities, as in the case of the Manchester bomb.

***************************

With each passing day since the Manchester suicide bombing, as more details come to light of the terrorist Salman Abedi’s links with a broad ISIS network, it is becoming increasingly clear that the government of British Prime Minister Theresa May, as well as the British secret services, face their biggest security and intelligence crisis in the war on terror.

Their actions on Thursday, May 25, showed that Britain’s political and security authorities were doing their best to avoid being questioned about who deserves blame for allowing the attack, which claimed the lives of 22 people and injured more than 60. One such maneuver was to try and point the finger at President Donald Trump’s administration after photos showing debris from the bomb were leaked to US media from the investigation.

This was followed by expressions of outrage and reports that Britain was halting its intelligence sharing with the US. It was subsequently explained that it was only the Manchester police which had stopped transferring intelligence to their US counterparts, while other sharing continued. President Donald Trump said later the leaks were “deeply troubling” and asked the US Justice Department and other agencies to launch a full investigation.

These events were peripheral to the real question of how 22-year-old Salman Abadi, who had once been on an intelligence watch list, had been able to operate unnoticed by the security authorities, build several bombs, bring one of them to the intended  target – a pop concert at the Manchester Arena – and detonate it without being stopped.

British media Thursday reported police certainty that a terror network operated within Manchester and that Abedi was nothing more than a “mule” whose entire role was to carry the explosive device and detonate it.

But a statement on Wednesday by French Interior Minister Gerard Collomb that Abedi had travelled to Syria to meet with ISIS figures, and leaks on Thursday from German intelligence that the bomber flew from Turkey to the city of Dusseldorf four days before the attack, showed Abedi in a much more central role in a terror network that spanned a number of countries in Europe and the Middle East.

Dusseldorf was also the home of Tunisian terrorist Anis Amri, who carried out the December 2016 truck attack on a Christmas market in Berlin that left 12 dead and 48 wounded.

In that context, the next question is: How did the bomber’s name come to disappear from the terrorist watch list that prevents suspects from boarding international flights?

There is also the question of how the security services failed to notice the ability of the bomber or his network to build a new generation of small but powerful explosives capable of causing massive slaughter.

One of the main reasons the British were so angry over the leaks was that it demonstrated how easy it was to build such bombs as the one used in Manchester, There is no need to manufacture them at secret venues in faraway Yemen, or smuggle them in pieces aboard planes. They can be built in the kitchens of rented apartments in Western Europe’s main cities, as in the case of the Manchester bomb.

Even worse, if Abadi was trained to build bombs, many other members of his network may have received the same training.

The big holes exposed in Britain’s counterterror system undoubtedly beset other European countries laboring to contend with the Islamic terror threat.

The tragedy at Manchester Arena dominated the NATO 28-member summit taking place in Brussels Thursday. There was a minute’s silence for the victims, many of them children, and all-round condemnation by leaders who have no notion when the Islamist terror hammer will descend on their own people.

Will the Dutch Protect their ‘Decadence’ from Islamic ‘Redeemers’?

March 19, 2017

Will the Dutch Protect their ‘Decadence’ from Islamic ‘Redeemers’? Gatestone InstituteGiulio Meotti, March 19, 2017

The Dutch and the Europeans should be proud of what Islamic fundamentalists call “decadence”, but they also must be ready to fight to defend it. “Safe spaces” are not enough. The world does not provide them. Otherwise, they will all end up in one of the “safe houses” that Geert Wilders’s puritanical tormentors have obliged him to spend his life in. “I am in jail”, he has said; “They are walking around free”.

********************************

“Erasmus… came to Holland because it was a haven for freedom of thought.” — Han ten Broeke, candidate for foreign minister in Prime Minister Mark Rutte’s government.

The Islamic supremacists in the Netherlands see themselves as redeemers, rescuing the West from Fortuyn’s “decadence”: drugs, prostitution, gay life, a blasphemous press. But will the Dutch establishment be able to defend these freedoms?

You can be gay, decadent and willing to fight for your freedoms. If you are just gay and decadent, you are doomed.

General elections in the Netherlands are over, but now begins a much bigger campaign: who will defend the famous Dutch freedoms?

Only in the Netherlands is it conceivable that a politician such as Geert Wilders, a brave maverick who for 13 years, 24 hours a day, has lived under police protection; held rallies while wearing a bulletproof vest; moved from one secret location to another one and was guarded as if he were an Asian potentate. The country has already had two political assassinations related to Islam: the politician Pim Fortuyn, and the filmmaker, Theo van Gogh. Another Dutch MP at the time, Ayaan Hirsi Ali — whose name, with Wilders’s, was next on the hit-list pinned with a knife to van Gogh’s corpse — ended up fleeing to the United States. Only Wilders’s protection, generously provided by the Dutch government, has so far avoided a third political murder.

The Netherlands has already had two political assassinations related to Islam: the politician Pim Fortuyn (left), and Theo van Gogh (right), a filmmaker. (Image sources: Van Gogh – Wikimedia Commons; Fortuyn – Forza! Nederland video screenshot)

In the Netherlands, the philosopher Baruch Spinoza became the prophet of tolerance, Karl Marx investigated capitalism and John Locke penned his “Letter on Tolerance”. The mainstream media has claimed that Wilders’s rise and the new “populist” shift of Prime Minister Mark Rutte (who, in January, told immigrants to “act normal or leave“) has been a betrayal of that Dutch tolerance. Exactly the opposite is true.

It is from this tolerance that hard Dutch liberalism gets the will to fight against intolerance. Tolerating the intolerant does not sound like the way to have tolerance continue. This is how the Dutch multiculturalists turned their great legacy upside-down. The Dutch see themselves as “Enlightenment fundamentalists“, upholding the values of Enlightenment — even in the Islamic world.

The question now is: will the Dutch defend these freedoms or instead gradually dismantle them? Dutch Minister of Justice Piet Donner recently suggesting introducing Islamic sharia law into the Netherlands by democratic means.

The “hard liberal” Dutch tradition goes back to Pim Fortuyn, a homosexual proud of the supposed “decadence” of his country, its tolerance, and the freedoms it offers. As the late British journalist Alexander Chancellor wrote:

“The Muslim fanatics berate the West for its decadence, and many in the west guiltily agree that they have a point, but Fortuyn did not think so. He crusaded on behalf of what many would regard as decadence, and was so concerned for its survival”.

Fortuyn considered permissiveness the heart of Western culture. He was a “hard liberal”, militantly defending the post-9/11 Judeo-Christian, Western values against Islamic intolerance, in the same way as Oriana Fallaci, Bat Ye’or, Michel Houellebecq and Geert Wilders have been trying to do.

After last week’s Dutch elections, it is time for the Netherlands to rediscover Pim Fortuyn’s legacy and ideas. A flamboyant, shaven-headed homosexual who taught sociology, Fortuyn wore elegant Italian suits, lived in a palatial home in Rotterdam and wrote a great book entitled, “The Islamization of Our Culture“. He promised resistance against Islam, “a cold war against Islam“, as he called it in an interview in Rotterdam’s Dagblad.

“You have said”, the newspaper Volkskrant reported in an interview, “that foreigners snatch all our blonde women, and then turn around and call them ‘whores'”. “No”, Fortuyn calmly corrected him. “I said Islamic men do that. That’s quite different, sir, than ‘foreigners'”. Then, the Volkskrant asked, in what would become the defining moment of Pim Fortuyn’s life, “why the hate toward Islam?”. “I do not hate Islam”, Fortuyn said. “I find it a backward culture. I’ve traveled a great deal in the world; and wherever Islam rules, it is appalling”.

The Islamic supremacists in the Netherlands see themselves as “redeemers,” rescuing the West from Fortuyn’s “decadence”: drugs, prostitution, gay life, a blasphemous press. Will the Dutch establishment be able to defend these freedoms?

“Decadence” can become lethal for a country when it turns into hedonism, devirilization, the decline of education, and loss of historical memory. By “decadence”, however, Islamic supremacists seem to mean all Western freedoms, not just Dutch permissiveness. But these freedoms are what we should be proud of. And these are what we must be ready to fight to protect. Fortuyn did, and he paid the ultimate price: his own life. Theo van Gogh also did with his film on the submission of women under Islam. After van Gogh was slaughtered by Mohammed Bouyeri, the film immediately disappeared from public view.

The Dutch Left also needs to rediscover its roots. A debate about integration was started in the Netherlands not by the “xenophobic” right wing parties, but by Paul Scheffer, a respected academic belonging to the Labour Party, who in 2000 wrote an essay entitled, “The Multicultural Disaster” — before Fortuyn and Wilders had ever entered the picture. Scheffer wrote of a lenient Dutch people whose multicultural policies had failed to promote the Dutch culture in immigrant communities. Unfortunately, the Dutch Left took the opposite path and that is why it was severely beaten in the election last week.

Mark Rutte’s party also has a lot to learn from this hard liberalism. It was the liberals who put into practice many of Fortuyn’s ideas: banning the burqa, which many Muslims call a way of “protecting” their women, but others call a symbol of Islam dominating women. Prime Minister Rutte’s reaction against the Turkish Republic’s interference in Dutch life would be unthinkable in other European countries: Rutte, fearing Wilders’ rise, stood for his country’s independence and refused to bow to Islamist pressure to allow Turkish President Erdogan’s ministers to address a rally in Rotterdam.

In France, in fact, the authorities allowed Turkish rallies, and thereby showed a submissive mentality to political Islam. Rutte and the Dutch would be wise continue on their road, which is what allowed Rutte to retain his government. Fiscal conservatism may be important, but Western values are, too.

After Fortuyn’s murder, Wilders set himself as the “defender of liberalism“: on gender equality, separation of church and state, and personal autonomy. Unlike many liberals in the United States and Canada, however, Wilders is not willing to surrender these freedoms to Islam. Liberals and feminists in the United States refuse to stand for women’s rights in the Muslim world. They never raise the question of the separation of mosque and state. Instead, they blamed the carnage that the satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo suffered in 2015 on freedom of expression.

Did the Dutch “hard liberals” ever think about Ayaan Hirsi Ali’s brave battle for female rights under Islam, Theo van Gogh and other Dutch journalists, or the crusade Wilders has been leading to protect the country from Islamist intolerance?

Why are the LGBT militants not condemning the crimes of Islam, as Pim Fortuyn did? The editor of an LGBT magazine in Bangladesh was just hacked to death by Islamists; how come no one from the LGBT community in the West condemned or spoke out about it? Why are gay activists keeping silent about homosexuals being murdered by Islamists after, in Florida, a Muslim terrorist butchered 50 of them?

You can be gay, decadent and willing to fight for your freedom. If you are just gay and decadent, you are doomed.

Han ten Broeke, a candidate for foreign minister in Rutte’s government, recently justified the Dutch ban of Turkish ministers by noting that Erasmus came to the Netherlands “because it was a haven for freedom of thought”. This Erasmian tolerance remains very strong at the heart of the Dutch identity, but the presence, among them, of non-European, illiberal Muslims keeps testing the limits of it. The Dutch libertines and libertarians in line with Fortuyn and Wilders do not seem willing to commit suicide, unlike the liberals of Middlebury College in the US, who seem busy trying to lynch any conservative who stops by their campus.

The Dutch and the Europeans should be proud of what Islamic fundamentalists call “decadence”, but they also must be ready to fight to defend it. “Safe spaces” are not enough. The world does not provide them. Otherwise, they will all end up in one of the “safe houses” that Geert Wilders’s puritanical tormentors have obliged him to spend his life in. “I am in jail”, he has said; “They are walking around free”.

Full Measure: Sunday, March 5, 2017: War on ISIS

March 6, 2017

Full Measure: Sunday, March 5, 2017: War on ISIS via YouTube, March 6, 2017

 

UK woman opened home to Muslim “12-year-old refugee,” he was really adult jihadi, said “I’ll kill you all”

March 2, 2017

UK woman opened home to Muslim “12-year-old refugee,” he was really adult jihadi, said “I’ll kill you all”, Jihad Watch

“Julie said she later found that Abdul had been visiting extremist websites on his mobile phone and an interpreter relayed messages, sent to family and friends, where he had been joking about tricking the British government into thinking he was a child.”

The British government was doubtless too busy hounding foes of jihad terror and banning foreign ones from entering the country to pay much attention to a trivial matter such as trying to prevent Islamic jihadi “refugee children” from terrorizing Britons.

“She later found out he was not the person he said he was and had been arrested while posing as a child refugee in Belgium.”

But he still got into Britain by posing as a child again. It would have been “Islamophobic” to keep him out, right? In the same vein, Britain has a steadily lengthening record of admitting jihad preachers without a moment of hesitation. Syed Muzaffar Shah Qadri’s preaching of hatred and jihad violence was so hardline that he was banned from preaching in Pakistan, but the UK Home Office welcomed him into Britain.

The UK Home Office recently admitted Shaykh Hamza Sodagar into the country, despite the fact that he has said: “If there’s homosexual men, the punishment is one of five things. One – the easiest one maybe – chop their head off, that’s the easiest. Second – burn them to death. Third – throw ’em off a cliff. Fourth – tear down a wall on them so they die under that. Fifth – a combination of the above.”

May’s government also recently admitted two jihad preachers who had praised the murderer of a foe of Pakistan’s blasphemy laws. One of them was welcomed by the Archbishop of Canterbury.

Meanwhile, the UK banned three bishops from areas of Iraq and Syria where Christians are persecuted from entering the country. And of course, May banned me from entering the country for saying: “[Islam] is a religion and is a belief system that mandates warfare against unbelievers,” which is like banning me for saying humans need oxygen to breathe.

child-refugee-julie-loose-women-uk

“Mother-of-two reveals she opened her home to Afghan ’12-year-old refugee’ but was shocked when he turned out to be a grown man who threatened to KILL her family,” by Alex Matthews, Mailonline, March 1, 2017:

A mother-of-two opened up her home to a grown man posing as an Afghan ’12-year-old refugee’ who later attacked her family.

The woman said she lives in fear after the man, who said his name was Abdul, threatened to kill her family after he was arrested for assaulting her relatives.

During an emotional interview on ITV’s Loose Women, the mother, who was renamed Julie for anonymity reasons, has now called on the Government to carry out proper age checks on refugees coming to the UK.

She told presenters Ruth Langsford and Saira Khan that she had taken in the asylum seeker after being asked to look after him for a ‘few nights’ by social services.

Julie recalled: ‘When I walked into the room, I didn’t think he was the person they were referring to. He looked about 19. He was very quiet and very timid.

‘I didn’t want to hurt his feelings, but I don’t usually take teenagers. I take younger children. But I just thought he needed a home and didn’t think anymore of it.’

Despite her initial misgivings regarding the boy’s age, Julie generously opened up her home up to the youngster.

However, she became suspicious of his true identity after a dental examination.

She said: ‘We went to a dental appointment and the dentist age-assessed him between 18 and 21.

‘They had to give him the benefit of the doubt and because he claimed he was 12 and the dentist aged him as 21, they placed him at 16. They averaged him.’

Julie said that at first her new arrival was pleasant and well behaved, but soon he turned nasty.

She later found out he was not the person he said he was and had been arrested while posing as a child refugee in Belgium.

She said: ‘He was lovely in the beginning. Very humble, very polite, very thoughtful. But as the weeks went by I started to notice a change in him. I was comparing him to my boy and he was more mature than my boy was.

‘He had been arrested in Belgium. He had a bone density x-ray there and they said ‘‘you aren’t 12’’ and sent him on his way.

‘I found out that he claimed asylum there as 17-year-old. I couldn’t understand why that information wasn’t passed on to me.’

‘I became very frightened, he became quite menacing after I set up a Facebook account for him.

‘I was hoping to help him find his family and then shortly after he was receiving these phone calls where his manner would change dramatically and he became intimidating and quite threatening.

Julie said she felt scared to be alone with Abdul in her own home but didn’t want another family placed with such a temperamental and possibly dangerous man.

She said: ‘I was concerned because if they asked to re-home him, I didn’t want him to go to another family because he wasn’t who he claimed to be.

‘I can remember one day he went up to the fridge and he was looking at a photo of me and my daughter, as if he was trying to intimidate me through my daughter.

‘My daughter was stood there and I can remember thinking, ‘‘don’t turn around’’. I knew and I could see what he was doing in the corner of my eye, but I kept on wiping up.

‘He walked right up behind me and I can still feel his breath on the back of my neck and I can remember feeling petrified.’

Julie said she later found that Abdul had been visiting extremist websites on his mobile phone and an interpreter relayed messages, sent to family and friends, where he had been joking about tricking the British government into thinking he was a child.

She said: ‘I was so shocked. I can remember thinking, ”Oh my god! Who is this person?’’

A permanent home was found for Abdul and it was then that he started to lash out at Julie and her family.

She said: ‘There were other homes that had been offered to him and it wasn’t where he wanted to go.

‘When another home came up he became very aggressive about it.

‘He started [attacking] verbally and then a member of my family got in between us, in fear of me getting hurt, and then he pushed them back and started punching.

‘I ran to get the police and I was just pleading with him to calm down and just said ”why are you doing this?”.

Abdul was arrested for the assault but now Julie lives in fear of him coming back and attacking her family

She said: ‘He did make threats to us before the police took him, to me and the children. He did say when he was removed: ‘I’ll kill you all. I know where you live’

‘I’m very frightened since he was removed. I know that he’s not being properly watched and he could at any time, turn up at my house. I panic if I’m not at school on time.

‘He knows the school runs, he’s knows everything. We changed the locks at the house and I’m constantly vigilant of everything.’…

Draft Two – New Immigration Order Could Come This Week – Nigel Farage – Fox & Friends

February 13, 2017

Draft Two – New Immigration Order Could Come This Week – Nigel Farage – Fox & Friends via YouTube, February 12, 2017

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wH8xztcsmgw

 

U.S. Ill Prepared for Convicted Jihadis Ending Their Prison Sentences

February 9, 2017

U.S. Ill Prepared for Convicted Jihadis Ending Their Prison Sentences, Investigative Project on Terrorism, Patrick Dunleavy, February 8, 2017

1966

The old adage, “Out of sight, out of mind” does not apply to dealing effectively with the threat of Islamism especially in the case of terrorists who have been captured or incarcerated.

Radical Islamic organizations such as al-Qaida and ISIS never forget their members. To them, going to prison is part of the pathway to paradise. Both groups’ leaders, Ayman al-Zawahri and Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, spent considerable periods of time locked up. It did nothing to diminish their zeal, but rather, fueled their fervor. Often, as in their cases, what comes out of prison is worse than what went in.

This is further illustrated by the increased number of terrorists released from Guantanamo who rejoin the fight against U.S. military personnel. Almost one in three released prisoners return to the jihadists’ fold. This recidivism can be attributed in part to the admonitions terrorists receive to assist those who are captured or imprisoned. That support may include financial help for their families and for legal fees.

These instructions were found in a training manual discovered in 2000 by law enforcement officers in Manchester, England.

“I take this opportunity to address our prisoners. We have not forgotten you,” al-Zawahiri said in an interview with Al Shabab commemorating the fourth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks. “We are still committed to the debt of your salvation . . . until we shatter your shackles.”

AQAP’s Inspire magazine went so far as to list the names of incarcerated members for all to remember.

They do this because jihadis firmly believe that sooner or later they’ll be reunited with those members.

If that isn’t ominous enough, consider the fact that as many as 100 people convicted of terror-related offenses in U.S. prisons will be set free in less than four years.

And yet, while Islamic terrorist organizations have rapidly changed in their recruitment and tactical methodologies overall, the U.S. has not adapted to countering the evolving threat.

In the United States, the number of terror-related incidents increased exponentially since 9-11. As they did, authorities adapted new ways to investigate. State of the art technologies help collect and analyze data. Fusion centers were created to get the information into the hands of investigators in real time. Counter terrorism, intelligence, and law enforcement agencies joined together to share.

Legislation has changed how the judicial system prosecutes terrorists. “Our criminal law was unprepared for international terrorism. We simply did not have statutes and penalties that fit what terrorists do,” said former federal prosecutor Andrew McCarthy, who led the prosecution against the first World Trade Center bombers and blind sheik Omar Abdel Rahman.

A vigorous debate continues whether to treat terrorists as criminals or as enemy combatants. A reasonable consensus among the military and the judicial branches is building for the use of both designations.

Two significant changes, in policy and practice, toward radical Islamic terrorists remain to be addressed.

Terrorists go into prison much the same way as the burglar, the drug dealer, or the pedophile. They are housed and fed in existing correctional facilities with common criminals. No mandatory rehabilitation or de-radicalization programs exist for convicted Islamic terrorists. And when they are released, there is no specialized supervisory program applied to monitor their employment or whereabouts.

This situation has to change if we are to deal effectively with terrorism. We should establish a registration list for convicted terrorists. This would provide local authorities with the identity of those recently released to their communities. It has been successfully used with sex offenders. It can work if properly applied.

With as many as 500 terrorists now in custody and more to come, the custodial system must also evolve in how it handles jihadists. Security classification must not be downgraded simply because the terrorist has become “jail wise” (exhibited good behavior) like “American Taliban” John Walker Lindh, who will be released from prison in two years.

Special administrative measures – conditions of confinement – which restrict visits, correspondence and other prison privileges assigned to terrorists must continue.

Uniform security standards for imprisoned terrorists should be established in the federal, state, and local correctional facilities. Jose Padilla, the alleged “dirty bomber” who first learned of a radical form of Islam while in a Florida county jail and was originally sentenced to life in prison, is scheduled to be released in eight years. Who will be the parole officers assigned to supervise him and will those officers be afforded any specialized training before that happens?

In some cases, specialized facilities like Guantanamo are necessary in dealing with enemy combatants and other committed jihadists. They are effective. No anecdotal evidence has been presented showing them to be a recruitment tool for ISIS or al Qaida. That is like saying that Alcatraz was responsible for the increase in violent crime.

The number of people arrested in the U.S. for terrorism-related crimes nearly tripled in 2015. That year, FBI Director James Comey testified that more than 200 people traveled overseas from the United States in an attempt to fight alongside ISIS or al-Qaida related groups in the Middle East and North Africa.

In 2016, Comey said his agents still had 1,000 open cases related to ISIS. Within the next few years, he said, there may be a “terrorist diaspora” of ISIS fighters leaving the battlefield of Syria and returning to their home countries, committed to carrying out more terrorist attacks.

We can only hope that the vast majority will be apprehended before they can carry out attacks here in the United States. And when they are, we had better be prepared to effectively deal with them throughout their entire time in the system. Anything less is unacceptable to the citizens of this great country.