Posted tagged ‘Islamic immigration’

Obama “chastises” Americans for not wanting 1,300 ISIS supporters

December 15, 2015

Obama “chastises” Americans for not wanting 1,300 ISIS supporters, Front Page Magazine, Daniel Greenfield, December 15, 2015

idiot

It used to be that the American people chastised their leaders when they didn’t live up to their standards. But under the left, the guy who dug the country deep into debt, trashed national security and the economy, and is letting Islamic terrorists take over half the Middle East is the one “chastising” us.

President Obama chastised Americans on Tuesday for forgetting their immigrant roots and neglecting the lessons of a checkered history

“In the Syrian refugee today, we should see the Jewish refugee of World War II,” Obama said at the National Archives, surrounded by the original Constitution, the Bill of Rights and the Declaration of Independence. “How quickly we forget. How quickly we forget,”

I’m surprised the original Constitution didn’t burst into flames.

Also the Jewish refugee of WW2 was fleeing genocide by, among others, Muslims. The Syrian Muslim (Obama refuses to take Syrian Christians or Yazidis) is perpetrating genocide. Obama is comparing the victims of genocide to the perpetrators of genocide.

Polls show that 13% of Syrian migrants support ISIS. That’s 1,300 out of every 10,000 Syrian Muslims Obama brings to America. And he’s forbidden law enforcement from even checking their social media. That’s why the San Bernardino attack happened.

“New York and cities across America were transformed into a sort of global fashion show.  You had Dutch lace caps and the North African fezzes, stodgy tweed suits and colorful Caribbean dresses.”

9/11 was a real global fashion show. Just think of the ruins as a kind of “global catwalk” to show off some fezzes.

But wait… now it’s time to bash America’s “checkered history.”

“From the start, Africans were brought here in chains against their will, and then toiled under the whip… New York City shops displayed those signs, “No Irish Need Apply.” … Chinese immigrants faced persecution and vicious stereotypes, and were, for a time, even banned from entering America.  During World War II, German and Italian residents were detained.”

Some of those slaves were sold by Obama’s ancestors. And his people continue to engage in violence against other African groups. But we detained certain people during WW2 when we were afraid of an invasion… so we must be ashamed.

We must resolve to always speak out against hatred and bigotry in all of its forms — whether taunts against the child of an immigrant farmworker or threats against a Muslim shopkeeper.

Also we must resolve to speak out when Obama’s favorite anti-Israel protesters hijack Jewish ceremonies and rant about Islamophobia. Or when the government forces nuns to violate their religion. We must speak out when Christians are fired for opposing gay marriage and when Jewish students are terrorized for opposing Islamic terrorism.

“The truth is, being an American is hard.  Being part of a democratic government is hard.”

It gets easier when you ignore the legislature, the courts and the people… and rule by executive order.

“Where we work through the democratic process, and not through violence or sectarianism to resolve disputes”

And now let’s applaud the latest race riots and #BlackLivesMatter activists screaming hate at a Christmas tree ceremony.

“More than 60 years ago, at a ceremony like this one, Senator John F. Kennedy said, “No form of government requires more of its citizens than does the American democracy.”

And Obama is a reminder that too many of our citizens have failed.

White House: Fiancee Visa Program Won’t Be Suspended During Review – Outnumbered

December 12, 2015

White House: Fiancee Visa Program Won’t Be Suspended During Review – Outnumbered, Fox News via You Tube, December 11, 2015

(Nor is the Obama Administration doing anything else, beyond tyring to decide whether there is a problem. Please see also, DHS Official Unable to Give Number of Syrians in U.S. or Number of Expired Visas. — DM)

 

 

DHS Official Unable to Give Number of Syrians in U.S. or Number of Expired Visas

December 12, 2015

DHS Official Unable to Give Number of Syrians in U.S. or Number of Expired Visas, Washington Free Beacon, December 11, 2015

(But what difference does it make now? — DM)

Migrants and refugees walk towards the border with Serbia, while other migrants, who were not allowed to cross into Serbia, lie on the ground awaiting for a solution, near the village of Tabanovce, in northern Macedonia, Thursday, Nov. 19, 2015. Four nations along Europe's Balkan refugee corridor shut their borders Thursday to those not coming from war-torn countries such as Syria, Afghanistan or Iraq, leaving thousands of others seeking a better life in Europe stranded at border crossings. (AP Photo/Boris Grdanoski)

Migrants and refugees walk towards the border with Serbia, while other migrants, who were not allowed to cross into Serbia, lie on the ground awaiting for a solution, near the village of Tabanovce, in northern Macedonia, Thursday, Nov. 19, 2015. Four nations along Europe’s Balkan refugee corridor shut their borders Thursday to those not coming from war-torn countries such as Syria, Afghanistan or Iraq, leaving thousands of others seeking a better life in Europe stranded at border crossings. (AP Photo/Boris Grdanoski)

While lawmakers had requested that its secretary, Jeh Johnson, testify before the committee, the agency sent Burriesci instead, saying that she is the resident expert on these issues.

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

A senior Department of Homeland Security official was unable to tell Congress the number of Syrian refugees who have entered the United States in the last year and the number of Americans who have traveled to Syria and returned, in testimony on Capitol Hill that angered many lawmakers.

Kelli Ann Burriesci, a deputy assistant secretary in the department’s office of policy, could not provide statistics about immigration when the House’s national security subcommittee grilled her about potential flaws in the visa waiver program.

While lawmakers had requested that its secretary, Jeh Johnson, testify before the committee, the agency sent Burriesci instead, saying that she is the resident expert on these issues.

However, Burriesci struggled to answer questions, prompting anger from lawmakers and concerns that the department is failing to track potentially dangerous immigrants.

“How many Syrian refugees have entered the U.S. in the last year” Rep. Jim Jordan (R., Ohio) asked Burriesci.

“Sorry, I didn’t bring any of the refugee numbers with me,” she responded.

Jordon then asked: “Do you know how many Americans have traveled to Syria in the last year?”

“I don’t have that number on me either,” the official responded.

“So you wouldn’t know how many Americans have traveled there and returned?” Jordan pressed.

“I don’t have that number on me,” Burriesci stated.

When asked by Jordan, “How many visa waiver program overstays are there currently in the U.S.,” Burriesci again responded that she does not “have information” on that subject.

The lack of answers led to frustration.

“We’re talking about the refugee issue and the Visa Waiver Program issue and you can’t give us numbers on either program?” Jordan asked.

Rep. Mark Meadows (R., N.C.) noted that the last time Congress was provided with accurate information about the number of people still living in the United States with expired visas was in 1994.

“If we’re looking at visa overstays, and sitting here debating a visa waiver program, and yet, the very instance of visa overstays and the potential terrorist threat that accompanies that, you’re tracking that, yet the last information Congress got was 1994,” Meadows said. “Do you not see a problem with that?”

“I think you should receive the data as soon as it is available,” Burriesci responded.

Rep. Ron DeSantis (R., Fla.), the subcommittee’s chairman, expressed frustration mid-way through the hearing and asked Burriesci if there is someone she can call to get help.

“You can’t give us the number of people on expired visas? You have staff? Can they just call DHS so we get it before the hearing is over?” DeSantis asked. “This should not be that difficult.”

Burriesci did not respond to that question and continued to struggle.

“What percentage of the people leaving the [United States] are you able to capture?” Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R., Utah) asked.

“I … I may have that with me but I have to look,” Burriesci said while shuffling through papers. “I’m sorry. I do not have that statistic.”

“You’re supposed to be the expert on this,” Chaffetz responded. “This should be right off the top of your head. You’re coming before Congress. … These are basic questions about the functionality here.”

DeSantis ultimately noted that Burriesci’s testimony was troubling.

“This is not inspiring a lot of confidence and I think a lot of questions have been raised instead of answered,” he said.

In statement released after the hearing ended, DeSantis expressed his frustration at the department’s inability to provide Congress with answers about potential flaws in the visa waiver program.

“Islamic jihadists are on the march and 13 people were massacred in San Bernardino, yet DHS seems clueless about what is going on with potential threats to our security,” the lawmaker said. “Congress needs to plug holes in immigration programs ranging from the visa waiver program to the refugee program. The testimony by DHS today gave Americans serious cause for concern about whether our government has a handle on the threats we face.”

Op-Ed: Post San Bernardino — How stupid are we supposed to be?

December 7, 2015

Op-Ed: Post San Bernardino — How stupid are we supposed to be? Israel National News, Jack Engelhard, December 7, 2015

A house filled with some 2,000 rounds of ammunition and nobody saw nothin’. Zip.

The place was crawling with a massive arsenal of weapons that likely filled the garage to the kitchen sink — but who, me?

Nothing. Looked pretty normal, say relatives, friends, acquaintances and anybody who visited a house that was stockpiled for mass destruction.

Even people who lived in and around the house – WHAT? We saw nothing unusual.

They had to step over and around a mountain of Improvised Explosive Devices (IED) to get from the living room to the bathroom, but nobody winced?

Nobody asked – “Yo, Syed, what’s this?”

That’s what we are supposed to believe. Nobody else but those two had a hand in the murder of 14 innocents in San Bernardino.

Accomplices? Zero. So they say and so we are expected to believe.

Mr. Obama spoke to us a few moments ago. Finally called it terrorism, though not Islamic terrorism. For us to guess.

He announced that he is taking the fight to ISIS. We should feel safe. Except that ISIS, or ISIL, as he calls it, is one problem.

Worse is the local, the unaffiliated but radicalized freelancer who comes from within our own neighborhood.

We know where ISIS lives. But for the introvert, the retail operator we have no address until it’s too late. Case in point, San Bernardino.

We are not at war with Islam, said the president, so no wonder people who knew the Farooks were shocked…shocked!

Typical Americans, say people who knew them.

Quiet. Unassuming. Friendly. Hard-working, Doting father. Loving mother. Played Scrabble. How do you spell jihad? Capital J?

There were no clues. Nope. Nothing to suggest a husband and wife radicalized to the hilt and armed to the teeth.

“They lived the American dream,” said a neighbor, who likewise saw nothing, knew nothing, suspected nothing. Nothing at all.

Golly, he was born here, good old Syed. What more do you want? Wife came from Pakistan. Wonderful country, Pakistan.

So what if, as rumor has it, he hated Jews and maybe Christians. Doesn’t everybody? A regular Joe, Syed.

She kept to herself, did Tashfeen. All agree to this. Typical American wifey in a hijab. Most likely clipped coupons to save on milk and explosives.

“They were the perfect couple,” say people who knew them as the perfect couple.

Too bad it had to end like this. Obviously it was our fault. Global warming.

So the president assures us that he is keeping us safe.

Ban Radical Islamists and those Syrian migrants from entering the country and we’ll start believing.

70% of asylum seekers stay in Sweden illegally

November 29, 2015

70% of asylum seekers stay in Sweden illegally, Front Page Magazine, Daniel Greenfield, November 29, 2015

moronie-from-sweden

Sweden has been forced to announce it can’t take any more of the migrant invasion. Meanwhile an interesting statistic turned up by Ingrid Carlqvist in Gatestone shows that even those whose asylum applications are rejected, and Sweden is fairly liberal in that regard, are not going anywhere.

October 16: Internal police documents were revealed that show 70% of people who have their asylum application rejected ignore the decision and stay illegally in Sweden. Of the 9,000 deportation cases sent to the police by the Immigration Service this year, 70% had vanished from their registered addresses, and had left the police completely nonplussed. Patrik Engström, head of the Swedish border police, told Swedish public radio, “This means we put out an all-points bulletin for these people but then do not actively look for them. We wait for tips and things like that. We do not have the resources to go out and look in a random fashion.” Police now have 21,000 deportation cases piled up.

Now Sweden is one of those countries that has residence registration. This is an alien idea to most Americans. It means that you must register where you live with the government. As the Swedish Tax Agency states, “You are in the register until the day you move abroad or die.”

Now it’s supposed to be technically rather difficult for someone to just live in Sweden without being on the books. Sweden is not the United States. Like a lot of European countries, it has a tightly regimented bureaucracy. And yet, also like a lot of these countries, the influx of migrants has long since made that bureaucracy and its databases meaningless. A change of address is supposed to be reported within one week.

But then again, I doubt that the Swedish authorities want to deal with this. So they don’t. That is how no-go zones form.

And then the activists protest on behalf of the migrants and they somehow no doubt will keep on collecting assorted benefits even while they remain in the country illegally.

Obama: not bringing ISIS jihadists to America would “betray our values”

November 17, 2015

Obama: not bringing ISIS jihadists to America would “betray our values”

obama_muslim3

Also not freeing Al Qaeda terrorists from Gitmo would violate our values. And describing Islamic terrorism as Islamic terrorism would really violate our values.

It seems as if Obama’s version of American values is a little hard to tell apart from ISIS values. Right down to locking up a filmmaker who made a YouTube video about Mohammed.

Speaking to reporters from Islamic Turkey, a regime which has made it illegal to even discuss its own genocide and which sponsors Islamic terrorists around the world, Obama got on his high horse over the huge numbers of Syrian Muslim migrants he wants to import to America.

But not before making a bunch of excuses for his own incompetence.

“It’s not their sophistication or the particular weaponry that they possess, but it is the ideology they carry with them and their willingness to die,” Obama whined.

That would be the ideology whose name the administration is unwilling to speak. But ISIS would need much better weaponry if Europe and America didn’t insist on importing its fighters into their countries. Once there all they need is a gun or a homemade bomb to wreak havoc.

This is a war where we’re inviting in our own invaders. And Obama doubled down on keeping the invasion going.

“Slamming the door in their faces would be a betrayal of our values. Our nations can welcome refugees who are desperately seeking safety and ensure our own security. We can and must do both,” Obama promised.

Except we can’t do both. 9/11 and the World Trade Center bombing and the Boston Marathon bombing showed that. As well as the countless smaller terror plots since then.

Then Obama rejected the idea of focusing on helping persecuted Christians over the violent Islamic Supremacist majority. “When I hear folks say that, well, maybe we should just admit the Christians but not the Muslims, when I hear political leaders suggesting that there would be a religious test for which person who’s fleeing from a war-torn country is admitted, when some of those folks themselves come from families who benefited from protection when they were fleeing political persecution, that’s shameful. That’s not American. That’s not who we are. We don’t have religious tests to our compassion.”

Actually Obama does. It’s why his regime has been deporting Christians while taking in huge numbers of Muslims.

If we’re taking in refugees, we should be taking in those who genuinely have nowhere else to go in a region dominated by Muslim countries. Sunni or Shiite Muslims have their own countries they can go to.

They are not refugees.

During WW2, the United States did not admit Nazis, moderate or otherwise, as refugees. That would have been ridiculously stupid. Syria is in the middle of a religious civil war between Sunnis and Shiites. Neither side are victims. They are both perpetrators of massacres toward each other.

Obama claims that we should not “somehow start equating the issue of refugees with the issue of terrorism.”

The “somehow” part comes because refugees are an entrance point for terrorists and terrorism. It’s not “somehow”. It’s directly causative.

While Obama bleats about compassion, his compassion has been utterly lacking when it comes to persecuted Christians. He only has compassion for Muslims.

The War That Hasn’t Ended

November 14, 2015

The War That Hasn’t Ended, National Review, Andrew C. McCarthy, November 13, 2015

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.

Salon, Guardian blame “right-wing” for Paris jihad attacks

November 14, 2015

Salon, Guardian blame “right-wing” for Paris jihad attacks, Pamela Geller, November 14, 2015

Paris-theatre

Outrageous, but not surprising. The enemedia is aligned with the jihad force. As the jihad heats up in the West, the media is becoming more clumsy and desperate in its attempts to deflect attention away from the jihad and back to its favorite bogeyman, “right-wing extremists.” Now, even when the evidence of Islamic jihad responsibility is everywhere, as it is with the Paris attacks, “journalists” still find ways to put the blame on the “right-wing” that they hate far more than they do bloodthirsty jihadis, whom they don’t dislike at all.

When Muslims attack, the left attacks …… us.

Paris-jihad

“Salon: Paris jihad massacre shows that ‘right-wing’ needs to ‘moderate their rhetoric,” by Robert Spencer, Jihad Watch, November 14, 2015:

The American Left is beyond parody. Apparently Salon would have us believe that the Paris jihad massacre happened because “the right wing media” criticized the Black Lives Matter movement. Islamic jihad? Warfare against unbelievers? The Islamic State’s stated imperative to murder French civilians? Only greasy Islamophobes take such things seriously: everyone knows Fox News and Ben Carson are the real culprits!

“And so the hate speech begins: Let Paris be the end of the right’s violent language toward activists,” by Chauncey DeVega, Salon, November 13, 2015:

In a still developing situation, the city of Paris, France, is under attack by terrorists armed with guns and explosives. Many dozens of people have been killed. A still undetermined number of people have been wounded. The terrorists took dozens of hostages in a concert hall. French police and military forces have been deployed. There is mayhem and blood in the streets of Paris….

In the United States, the right-wing media and movement conservatives have for decades consistently used eliminationist and other violent rhetoric to describe liberals, progressives and other people with whom they disagree. As was seen in the recent attacks on a Charleston-area black church, and other violence by right-wing anti-government militias, such rhetoric does not float in the ether of the public discourse, harmless and unacknowledged. No, it does in fact lead to action.

In recent months, the right-wing media has used language such as “terrorism” and “violent,” or that the latter is “targeting police for murder” to describe the Black Lives Matter movement. Such bombastic and ugly screeds–which are wholly unfounded, with no basis in empirical reality–have also been used by right-wing opinion leaders to describe the African-American students who are fighting against racism at Yale and the University of Missouri….

Real terrorists have killed people in the streets of Paris. The right-wing media needs to take note of that fact and moderate their rhetoric and abusive language accordingly.

Given the American right-wing’s casual habit of using violent language to describe their foes, and to gin up fear and anxiety among the movement conservative base, the Fox News’ right-wing echo chamber and its elites should be ashamed given the death and destruction that terrorism actually reaps in practice.

And from The Guardian:

Guardian: After Paris jihad, ‘far-right groups may well fuel more hatred,’” by Robert Spencer, Jihad Watch, November 14, 2015:

The Guardian doesn’t worry about the Islamic State presence in France. It isn’t concerned about how many Islamic State sympathizers are living in France now. It couldn’t care less how many more jihadis will enter France via the refugee crisis. No, the Guardian is only concerned about the sole matter that worries the Western intelligentsia: will “far-right groups” exploit this jihad massacre to “fuel more hatred”? I.e., will those who believe in free societies start calling attention to the jihad threat again?

“Paris attacks leave France in trauma, fearing for the future,” by Natalie Nougayrède, Guardian, November 13, 2015:

…Muslims in France will now increasingly fear being associated with fanaticism and terror. Populist, far-right groups may well fuel more hatred. After Charlie Hebdo, thousands of French soldiers were dispatched across the country to secure key installations, schools, train stations, institutions….

 

The Barbarians Are Inside, And There Are No Gates

November 14, 2015

The Barbarians Are Inside, And There Are No Gates, Mark Steyn, November 13, 2015

1585

I’m Islamed out. I’m tired of Islam 24/7, at Colorado colleges, Marseilles synagogues, Sydney coffee shops, day after day after day. The west cannot win this thing with a schizophrenic strategy of targeting things and people but not targeting the ideology, of intervening ineffectually overseas and not intervening at all when it comes to the remorseless Islamization and self-segregation of large segments of their own countries.

What’s the happy ending here? Because if M Hollande isn’t prepared to end mass Muslim immigration to France and Europe, then his “pitiless war” isn’t serious. And, if they’re still willing to tolerate Mutti Merkel’s mad plan to reverse Germany’s demographic death spiral through fast-track Islamization, then Europeans aren’t serious. In the end, the decadence of Merkel, Hollande, Cameron and the rest of the fin de civilisation western leadership will cost you your world and everything you love.

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

As I write, Paris is under curfew for the first time since the German occupation, and the death toll from the multiple attacks stands at 158, the vast majority of them slaughtered during a concert at the Bataclan theatre, a delightful bit of 19th century Chinoiserie on the boulevard Voltaire. The last time I was there, if memory serves, was to see Julie Pietri. I’m so bloody sick of these savages shooting and bombing and killing and blowing up everything I like – whether it’s the small Quebec town where my little girl’s favorite fondue restaurant is or my favorite hotel in Amman or the brave freespeecher who hosted me in Copenhagen …or a music hall where I liked to go to hear a little jazz and pop and get away from the cares of the world for a couple of hours. But look at the photographs from Paris: there’s nowhere to get away from it; the barbarians who yell “Allahu Akbar!” are there waiting for you …when you go to a soccer match, you go to a concert, you go for a drink on a Friday night. They’re there on the train… at the magazine office… in the Kosher supermarket… at the museum in Brussels… outside the barracks in Woolwich…

Twenty-four hours ago, I said on the radio apropos the latest campus “safe space” nonsense:

This is what we’re going to be talking about when the mullahs nuke us.

Almost. When the Allahu Akbar boys opened fire, Paris was talking about the climate-change conference due to start later this month, when the world’s leaders will fly in to “solve” a “problem” that doesn’t exist rather than to address the one that does. But don’t worry: we already have a hashtag (#PrayForParis) and doubtless there’ll be another candlelight vigil of weepy tilty-headed wankers. Because as long as we all advertise how sad and sorrowful we are, who needs to do anything?

With his usual killer comedy timing, the “leader of the free world” told George Stephanopoulos on “Good Morning, America” this very morning that he’d “contained” ISIS and that they’re not “gaining strength”. A few hours later, a cell whose members claim to have been recruited by ISIS slaughtered over 150 people in the heart of Paris and succeeded in getting two suicide bombers and a third bomb to within a few yards of the French president.

Visiting the Bataclan, M Hollande declared that “nous allons mener le combat, il sera impitoyable“: We are going to wage a war that will be pitiless.

Does he mean it? Or is he just killing time until Obama and Cameron and Merkel and Justin Trudeau and Malcolm Turnbull fly in and they can all get back to talking about sea levels in the Maldives in the 22nd century? By which time France and Germany and Belgium and Austria and the Netherlands will have been long washed away.

Among his other coy evasions, President Obama described tonight’s events as “an attack not just on Paris, it’s an attack not just on the people of France, but this is an attack on all of humanity and the universal values we share”.

But that’s not true, is it? He’s right that it’s an attack not just on Paris or France. What it is is an attack on the west, on the civilization that built the modern world – an attack on one portion of “humanity” by those who claim to speak for another portion of “humanity”. And these are not “universal values” but values that spring from a relatively narrow segment of humanity. They were kinda sorta “universal” when the great powers were willing to enforce them around the world and the colonial subjects of ramshackle backwaters such as Aden, Sudan and the North-West Frontier Province were at least obliged to pay lip service to them. But the European empires retreated from the world, and those “universal values” are utterly alien to large parts of the map today.

And then Europe decided to invite millions of Muslims to settle in their countries. Most of those people don’t want to participate actively in bringing about the death of diners and concertgoers and soccer fans, but at a certain level most of them either wish or are indifferent to the death of the societies in which they live – modern, pluralist, western societies and those “universal values” of which Barack Obama bleats. So, if you are either an active ISIS recruit or just a guy who’s been fired up by social media, you have a very large comfort zone in which to swim, and which the authorities find almost impossible to penetrate.

And all Chancellor Merkel and the EU want to do is make that large comfort zone even larger by letting millions more “Syrian” “refugees” walk into the Continent and settle wherever they want. As I wrote after the Copenhagen attacks in February:

I would like to ask Mr Cameron and Miss Thorning-Schmidt what’s their happy ending here? What’s their roadmap for fewer “acts of violence” in the years ahead? Or are they riding on a wing and a prayer that they can manage the situation and hold it down to what cynical British civil servants used to call during the Irish “Troubles” “an acceptable level of violence”? In Pakistan and Nigeria, the citizenry are expected to live with the reality that every so often Boko Haram will kick open the door of the schoolhouse and kidnap your daughters for sex-slavery or the Taliban will gun down your kids and behead their teacher in front of the class. And it’s all entirely “random”, as President Obama would say, so you just have to put up with it once in a while, and it’s tough if it’s your kid, but that’s just the way it is. If we’re being honest here, isn’t that all Mr Cameron and Miss Thorning-Schmidt are offering their citizens? Spasms of violence as a routine feature of life, but don’t worry, we’ll do our best to contain it – and you can help mitigate it by not going to “controversial” art events, or synagogues, or gay bars, or…

…or soccer matches, or concerts, or restaurants…

To repeat what I said a few days ago, I’m Islamed out. I’m tired of Islam 24/7, at Colorado colleges, Marseilles synagogues, Sydney coffee shops, day after day after day. The west cannot win this thing with a schizophrenic strategy of targeting things and people but not targeting the ideology, of intervening ineffectually overseas and not intervening at all when it comes to the remorseless Islamization and self-segregation of large segments of their own countries.

So I say again: What’s the happy ending here? Because if M Hollande isn’t prepared to end mass Muslim immigration to France and Europe, then his “pitiless war” isn’t serious. And, if they’re still willing to tolerate Mutti Merkel’s mad plan to reverse Germany’s demographic death spiral through fast-track Islamization, then Europeans aren’t serious. In the end, the decadence of Merkel, Hollande, Cameron and the rest of the fin de civilisation western leadership will cost you your world and everything you love.

So screw the candlelight vigil.

Breaking: Idiot ‘shocked’ by Paris attacks

November 14, 2015

Breaking: Idiot ‘shocked’ by Paris attacks, American ThinkerDaren Jonescu, November 14, 2015

(Tut, tut. As Obama said soon after the attack had begun, we must not jump to conclusions. He was right, of course. It may have been done by those violent Christian Crusaders. — DM)

Who knew there were violent Muslims?  While online, watching the French news coverage of the multi-site terrorist attacks in Paris, I scrolled down to find a most telling update:

Merkel shocked

“Profoundly shocked”?  Really?  Does that mean that when she first heard there had been a terrorist attack in Paris, her immediate reaction was, “Who would do a thing like that?”  Perhaps that explains why she is so deeply offended that anyone would object to admitting up to a million unidentifiable Muslim refugees into her country.  Europe’s leadership has clearly created an alternative reality for itself, in which public concerns about the Islamicization of Europe are simply the unfounded paranoia of closed-minded nationalists.

Speaking of nationalism, isn’t it odd that Angela Merkel, leader of Germany’s Christian Democratic Party, has taken her humanitarian stand specifically in favor of the only refugee population one could find that is associated by religious affiliation and political history with profound Jew-hatred and Holocaust trivialization?  It would be amusing, were it not so sad, to remember how pleased North American conservatives used to be with the “pro-business” Merkel.  An object lesson in why conservatives must stop confusing pro-business with pro-freedom – two very different positions, in fact.  If there is still a significant pro-freedom faction in Europe at all, one hopes its members are well beyond being “shocked” that Muslims could commit violence.

If there is such a thing as poetic justice, its gavel is going to come down very hard on all those national leaders who, in the name of political correctness (or worse), are currently importing massive populations of poor, unassimilated Muslims into their nations.

Godspeed to France’s latest victims of the West’s politically correct collective suicide attempt.