Category Archives: Homeland Security

MI5 Is MIA: British Security Missing In Action. Reliably So.

Britain, Government, Homeland Security, Intelligence, Islam

A degenerate culture, filming and fawning over the most dangerous individuals in society, who are free to roam around and plot murder: UK’s Channel 4 produced a TV documentary, The Jihadis Next Door, strarring featuring one of the London Bridge attackers, Khuram Butt. Butt was not on the lam, or being apprehended by UK Insecurity Forces, or hunkering in a bunker in Iraq. He was parading around in Barking, east London, broadcasting his intentions. Pretty much.

Even the Imam at the mosque expelled Butt for his murderous lust, but not his British protectors.

Scotland Yard? MI5? All missing in action. Always. Isn’t abnegation by the State Security apparatus the norm, rather than the exception? A norm the sheeple agree to live with?

British authorities hound, even jail, English men and women found in contempt of Islam. But never the reverse. Arrests of individuals for non-violent speech infractions, such as reciting a verse from a book by Churchill book, are not unheard of.

But that was yesterday or the day before. What’s Islam been up to today? French gendarme hammered, literally, with hammer. Authorities are in the dark. They always are:

And as I was writing the above, Murder by Muslim in Australia.

UPDATE (6/5): London Bridge Burns A Week After Manchester Massacre. WINNING.

Britain, Donald Trump, Homeland Security, Islam, Left-Liberalism, Terrorism

The Manchester Ariana Grande concert is out of date. There’s been a NEW murder-by-Muslim-immigrant, this time on London Bridge.

Duly, Fake News proceeds to rage about President Trump’s normal-person response to more killing by Islam’s emissaries. “Alarmist blowhard” they, celebrities and journos, dub the president.

CNN appears to stage a Muslim solidarity protest against terrorism in Londonistan, but can’t muster a quorum. Parents of last week’s murdered kids urge other kids to keep making merry in Manchester. That’s considered a far more sane response than Trump’s visceral outrage!

Out come the helpless hand gestures, the flowers, the stuffed animals (don’t these people care about landfills?), and other sanctimony—which shows a frightening normalization among the dhimma (“non-Muslim citizens of an Islamic state”). The usual learned helpless is displayed by the population and people interviewed. “I wanted the help, but couldn’t.” Such is life.

No guns, no right to life, no freedom: No such deductions are reached.

Arrests are always AFTER THE FACT. Yet British sheeple are praising their insecurity forces.

UPDATE (6/5):

Keep annoying the Muslim mayor, POTUS.

 

UPDATE II (5/31): NEW COLUMN: Manchester Massacre And The Immigration Vexation

Britain, Homeland Security, IMMIGRATION, Islam, Jihad, Terrorism

“The Manchester Massacre Was Murder-By-Muslim Immigrant” is now on The Daily Caller. An excerpt:

“ISIS” did not attack in Manchester; a second-generation Muslim, son of immigrants, did.

The Islamic State may have inspired 22-year-old Salman Abedi, but ISIS in the Middle East did not murder 22 youngsters and injure dozens at a pop-tart performance in Britain.

ISIS, no doubt, is pleased Salman Abedi has killed in Manchester. The outfit is eager to continue providing inspiration, even training, to his kind. But the ephemeral ISIS did not send Abedi and his ilk to kill Britons.

The Abedis, who fly the Libyan flag outside the family home, were invited into England. Policy makers and power brokers in the West have invited Muslim immigrants to live among us in the belief that, underneath the burqa, the abaya and full-body swaddle they were just like us.

Almost all these Muslim killers are legitimate immigrants. Before the Manchester murderer came Knifeman Khalid Masood, on Westminster Bridge (March, 2017). There were the immigrants who carved up Drummer Lee Rigby, in Woolwich, and the Muslim who gutted an American woman in central London, both in 2013. It’s hard to keep up.

This is how citizenship in the West has been rubbished. Not by ISIS, but by your representatives: State officials who regard all of us impersonally and imperiously. The same overlords squint at the great unwashed of England or Middle America from behind their parapets in Whitehall and Washington. The same sorts despise us all for wanting neighborhoods that are safe, maybe even a tad monocultural.

While the Muslims who strike at our families live among us, they’re not of us.

Look, language mediates behavior. To properly respond to the vipers that elect to kill Americans, Europeans and Englishmen, we need to closely describe them.

To be vested in linguistic accuracy is to be vested in the truth. The closer language cleaves to reality, the greater the likelihood that correct, and corrective, action will follow.

Certainly the term of choice must reflect not ideology, right or left, but reality. For if we don’t describe exactly who’s killing us; we’ll be unable to eject them from our midst. …

… READ THE REST. “The Manchester Massacre Was Murder-By-Muslim Immigrant” is now on The Daily Caller.

Bulldoze the family home, a la Israel, send them packing to Libya.


Winning.


Here’s a loser:

UPDATE II (5/26):

Myron Robert Pauli On Facebook:

Excellent points. These attacks are not carried out by ICBM’s located overseas (and we need to hunt down rocket sites) – they have been carried out by people who get here or into the UK, France, Spain, Belgium, Germany etc. So: [1] On what basis do we let most of these people in as immigrants – especially if they wish to fly foreign flags?, [2] Are there not other more deserving and more capable immigrants?, [3] Why do we let people overstay their visas? [4] Why do we have trespassers released back into the communities to do more trespassing? [5] Why do trespassers get reduced college tuition? [6] Why does not Congress make more sensible immigration rules? [7] How does confiscating my cheese spread make America safer?

In Poland…

Our protectors.

UPDATE II (5/31): We fund their hobby.

He shopped. Nobody said a thing. “Manchester Bomber Bought Most Of Weapon’s Parts By Himself, Police Say.”

It’s in the Qur’an and Sunnah:

How The French Lost Their Place In Their Country By Aping America

America, EU, Europe, Homeland Security, Islam, Left-Liberalism, Multiculturalism

On May 7, 2017, the French elected to get down on their knees, face to Mecca, butt to Brussels. Patriot Marine Le Pen lost to an inconsequential Obama-like figure called Macaroni, or something.

Fox News and its British neoconservative pundits celebrated the defeat of a “nationalist anti-Semite who cozied up to Vladimir Putin. Le Pen, again. (Pray tell again why you watch Fox News?) Le Pen had told the little runt, her rival Emmanuel Macron, that, “France will be led by a woman. It will be either me, or Mrs. Merkel.” The French chose Merkel and her house boy.

But did they?

What’s happening? Christopher Caldwell explains, with reference to the work of French geographer Christophe Guilluy. “The French, Coming Apart”:

A process that Guilluy calls métropolisation has cut French society in two. In 16 dynamic urban areas (Paris, Lyon, Marseille, Aix-en-Provence, Toulouse, Lille, Bordeaux, Nice, Nantes, Strasbourg, Grenoble, Rennes, Rouen, Toulon, Douai-Lens, and Montpellier), the world’s resources have proved a profitable complement to those found in France. These urban areas are home to all the country’s educational and financial institutions, as well as almost all its corporations and the many well-paying jobs that go with them. Here, too, are the individuals—the entrepreneurs and engineers and CEOs, the fashion designers and models, the film directors and chefs and other “symbolic analysts,” as Robert Reich once called them—who shape the country’s tastes, form its opinions, and renew its prestige. Cheap labor, tariff-free consumer goods, and new markets of billions of people have made globalization a windfall for such prosperous places. But globalization has had no such galvanizing effect on the rest of France. Cities that were lively for hundreds of years—Tarbes, Agen, Albi, Béziers—are now, to use Guilluy’s word, “desertified,” haunted by the empty storefronts and blighted downtowns that Rust Belt Americans know well.

Guilluy doubts that anyplace exists in France’s new economy for working people as we’ve traditionally understood them. Paris offers the most striking case. As it has prospered, the City of Light has stratified, resembling, in this regard, London or American cities such as New York and San Francisco. It’s a place for millionaires, immigrants, tourists, and the young, with no room for the median Frenchman. Paris now drives out the people once thought of as synonymous with the city.

… there’s no reason to expect that Paris (and France’s other dynamic spots) will generate a new middle class or to assume that broad-based prosperity will develop elsewhere in the country (which happens to be where the majority of the population live). If he is right, we can understand why every major Western country has seen the rise of political movements taking aim at the present system.

… When France’s was a national economy, its median workers were well compensated and well protected from illness, age, and other vicissitudes. In a knowledge economy, these workers have largely been exiled from the places where the economy still functions. They have been replaced by immigrants. … Again, Paris’s future seems visible in contemporary London. Between 2001 and 2011, the population of white Londoners fell by 600,000, even as the city grew by 1 million people: from 58 percent white British at the turn of the century, London is currently 45 percent white. …

… In certain respects, migrants actually have it better than natives, Guilluy stresses. He is not referring to affirmative action. Inhabitants of government-designated “sensitive urban zones” (ZUS) do receive special benefits these days. But since the French cherish equality of citizenship as a political ideal, racial preferences in hiring and education took much longer to be imposed than in other countries. They’ve been operational for little more than a decade. A more important advantage, as geographer Guilluy sees it, is that immigrants living in the urban slums, despite appearances, remain “in the arena.” They are near public transportation, schools, and a real job market that might have hundreds of thousands of vacancies. At a time when rural France is getting more sedentary, the ZUS are the places in France that enjoy the most residential mobility: it’s better in the banlieues. …
Our Immigrants, Our Strength,” was the title of a New York Times op-ed signed by London mayor Sadiq Khan, New York mayor Bill de Blasio, and Paris mayor Anne Hidalgo after September’s terrorist bomb blasts in New York. …

…The real divide is no longer between the “Right” and the “Left” but between the metropoles and the peripheries. The traditional parties thrive in the former. The National Front (FN) is the party of the outside. …

… Indeed, with its opposition to free trade, open immigration, and the European Union, the FN has established itself as the main voice of the anti-globalizers. At regional elections in 2015, it took 55 percent of workers’ votes. The Socialists, Republicans, Greens, and the hard Left took 18 percent among them. In an effort to ward off the FN, the traditional parties now collude as often as they compete. In the second round of those regional elections, the Socialists withdrew in favor of their Republican rivals, seeking to create a barrage républicain against the FN. The banding together of establishment parties to defend the system against anti-system parties is happening all over the world. Germany has a “grand coalition” of its two largest parties, and Spain may have one soon. In the U.S., the Trump and the Sanders candidacies both gained much of their support from voters worried that the two major parties were offering essentially the same package. …

… Western statesmen sang the praises of the free market. In our own time, they defend the “open society”—a wider concept that embraces not just the free market but also the welcoming and promotion of people of different races, religions, and sexualities. The result, in terms of policy, is a number of what Guilluy calls “top-down social movements.” He doesn’t specify them, but they would surely include the Hollande government’s legalization of gay marriage, which in 2013 and 2014 brought millions of protesters opposing the measure onto the streets of Paris—the largest demonstrations in the country since World War II.

French elites have convinced themselves that their social supremacy rests not on their economic might but on their common decency. Doing so allows them to “present the losers of globalization as embittered people who have problems with diversity,” says Guilluy. It’s not our privilege that the French deplorables resent, the elites claim; it’s the color of some of our employees’ skin. French elites have a thesaurus full of colorful vocabulary for those who resist the open society …

… It’s not our privilege that the French deplorables resent, the elites claim; it’s the color of some of our employees’ skin. French elites have a thesaurus full of colorful vocabulary for those who resist the open society: repli (“reaction”), crispation identitaire (“ethnic tension”), and populisme (an accusation equivalent to fascism, which somehow does not require an equivalent level of proof). One need not say anything racist or hateful to be denounced as a member of “white, xenophobic France,” or even as a “fascist.” To express mere discontent with the political system is dangerous enough. It is to faire le jeu de (“play the game of”) the National Front. …

… The “American” society that Guilluy describes—unequal and multicultural—can appear quite stable, but signs abound that it is in crisis. For one thing, it requires for its own replication a growing economy.

Important read: “The French, Coming Apart.”