Category Archives: IMMIGRATION

UPDATES ONGOING (4/22): Why Belgium Should Be Rioting, Not Crying

Europe, IMMIGRATION, Islam, Jihad, Terrorism

The Belgians should be rioting, not crying. Enough of the wreath laying. You’re filling landfills, which is where your government and its security apparatus belong. Make government officials cry. Overthrow your flaccid overlords. The contempt this left-liberal, impotent outfit evinces for the lives of its citizens is unparalleled.

The Turks are way better than the Europeans. When the butcher Brahim Abdeslam commenced his pilgrimage to Syria, the Turks were sharp enough and responsible to send him packing back to Brussels, where he was wanted, but not a Wanted Man. Brussels let Brahim go.

This time, even Washington, less diligent than Ankara, is hot under the collar about indifference and incompetence that goes beyond what is expected from government. (Government can never do anything right, because the incentives are inverted; the worse the functionaries do; the more funding they get.)

European citizens, like Americans, are being placed in danger by their governments’ policies of egalitarian, indiscriminate mass immigration. The only thing individuals can do is refuse to die; which means stop frolicking like idiots. Realize that the mindless mantra, “Don’t let the terrorists win,” is also the European State’s mantra. Other than East-European governments like Hungary’s, western power brokers like Angela Merkel want their citizens to soldier on; die to maintain status quo. Smart Europeans will boycott hotbeds of violence and incivility–Belgium—until the power base gets scared that the tax base is goign to dry up.

Background courtesy of The Daily Beast.

… “Jihadists think that Europe is the soft underbelly of the West and Belgium is the soft underbelly of Europe,” said French terror expert Gilles Kepel.

Many of the major recent attacks in Europe have clear links to Belgium. In May 2014, French ex-Syria jihadist Mehdi Nemmouche went to the Belgian capital to attack the Jewish museum in Brussels. There are Brussels links to the weapons used by Amedy Coulibaly in his attack on a Jewish supermarket on Jan. 9, 2015, shortly after the Jan. 7 attacks on Charlie Hebdo, and the Paris attack in November last year has clear ties to the Molenbeek neighborhood specifically. Many of its attackers either resided or grew up in the borough.

Jean-Charles Brisard, the author of a biography of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the founder of ISIS’s earlier incarnation al Qaeda in Iraq, said it’s more useful to think about the ISIS phenomenon in Western Europe as a Francophone network because the operatives in Brussels are a mix of French and Belgian nationals.

Brisard calculates that 534 Belgians have gone to Syria and about 200 have returned; he believes the French-Belgian ISIS apparatus is much greater than European security officials initially thought.

Tracking the individuals is a mammoth task.

“For now, the networks comprise basically 20 individuals around the 10 [Paris] terrorists,” he said. “So it’s least 30. It’s still looking like four or five connected but there might be more that we don’t know yet.” For every terror suspect being surveilled it takes between 20 and 25 counterterrorism officials to track him. Coulibaly, for example, was using 20 different phones, according to Brisard, and each required a different officer to monitor the incoming and outgoing calls.

The Belgians are unwilling or unable to commit that kind of manpower, one of the country’s counterterrorism officials told BuzzFeed a week before the attack.

“Frankly, we don’t have the infrastructure to properly investigate or monitor hundreds of individuals suspected of terror links,” he said.

The problem is exacerbated in Brussels because the local police force is divided into six police corps spread over 19 boroughs (particularly odd since the population is only 1.3 million). Sharing intelligence is complicated by the silos.

Robin Simcox, a British-born specialist on European terror networks who now works at the conservative Heritage Foundation, says the Paris and Brussels attacks prove that European intelligence agencies have been comforting themselves—and their constituencies—with a fallacy for a decade.

“What have they been saying since 7/7?” Simcox asked, referring to the al Qaeda bombings in London in July 2005. “‘Oh, those kinds of attacks are not possible anymore. Any time a network gets too big, we find out about it. Anyone tries to construct a suicide vest, we’ll get it. The attacks will be knives and guns.’ Well, it’s the emperor has no clothes, isn’t it? It happened in Paris, now Brussels; it nearly happened in Verviers back in January [2015]. All kinds of assumptions about the kind of threat we were going to be facing in coming years. And we were all too complacent about it.”

The Belgian field commander, if not quite the “mastermind” of the Paris attacks, Abdelhamid Abaaoud, had previously been linked to four separate terror plots in Europe. He got away each time.

He was thought to have “guided” Nemmouche, the Frenchman who shot up the Jewish museum in Brussels. In the attack planned but later aborted in Verviers, Abaaoud had remotely instructed two Belgian nationals, Sofiane Amghar and Khalid Ben Larbi, who fought with ISIS’s elite Battar Brigade.

Abaaoud had been in Greece at the time, and subsequently returned to Syria after Belgian commandos raided Amghar and Ben Larbi’s safe house in Verviers. (The operation constituted the largest firefight in Belgium since the end of World War II.) Abaaoud was also involved in the failed attack on a high-speed train from Paris to Amsterdam in August 2015. It failed only because three American tourists, two of them in the Oregon National Guard, wrestled the AK-47-wielding gunman to the ground before he could kill anyone.

In a February 2015 issue of ISIS’s propaganda magazine Dabiq, Abaaoud boasts about being able to slip by a continent-wide dragnet for him, despite the fact that European security services all had a recent photograph of him, which had been published by a Western journalist.

“I suddenly saw my picture all over the media, but… the kuffar were blinded by Allah. I was even stopped by an officer who contemplated me so as to compare me to the picture, but he let me go, as he did not see the resemblance! This was nothing but a gift from Allah!”

Abaaoud’s turn from first-generation Belgian into international terrorist follows an all-too-familiar script to those who monitor European jihadism. Although he was once enrolled in the Catholic college Saint-Pierre, an elite school in a tony suburb of Brussels, he dropped out and took to a life of gangsterism and petty crime.

UPDATES ONGOING (4/22) WITH RELATED TWEETS:

Wrong, Trump, Islam Loves Us … To Bits

Donald Trump, IMMIGRATION, Islam, Terrorism

“Wrong, Trump, Islam Loves Us … To Bits” is the current column, now on WND (abridged). An (unabridged) excerpt:

“I think Islam hates us,” said Donald J. Trump days before the last, March 10 debate in Coral Gables, Miami.

To mainstream media, this was a body blow as big as the blasts at the Brussels airport and metro station, on March 22.

The debate moderator gave Trump room to retract. Or, rather, to furnish the religion-of-peace politically correct pieties supplied by John Kasich before Brussels, and Hillary Clinton after the latest murder-by-Muslim of 31 European innocents.

The Kasich-Clinton statements are interchangeable:

“Let’s be clear: Islam is not our adversary. Muslims are peaceful and tolerant people and have nothing whatsoever to do with terrorism.”

Trump plowed on. To the question, “Did you mean all … Muslims?” he replied by insisting that a large number of Islam’s 1.6 billion-strong nation—Ummah—are prepared, even poised, to “use very, very harsh means” against Americans, whom, oddly, he, Donald Trump, would dearly like to protect.

“They’re talking about radical Islamic terrorism or radical Islam,” said Trump. “But I will tell you this. There’s something going on that maybe you don’t know about, maybe a lot of other people don’t know about.”

It’s in the “they” and the “but.” Trump, whose pronouns are often missing a subject, was likely questioning the competition’s habit of pairing “radical” with “Islamic terrorism.” For if Islam is radical, as he probably suspects, then the “radical” adjectival is redundant.

People are pacified by such pairings. They persist in using veiled language. We’re up against an “ideology,” they noodle. We have to fight the ISIS “ideology”—which happens to be the al-Qaida “ideology”; is the “ideology” shared by Boko Haram and the Al-Nusra front; and has been the “ideology” around which Islam has organized since the 7th century, without meaningful religious reformation.

The ISIS “ideology” “represents the natural and inevitable outgrowth of a faith that is given over to hate on a massive scale,” writes NRO’s David French. Surveys conducted across the Muslim world reveal that a majority of Muslims are virulent anti-Semites, those “far removed from the Arab–Israeli conflict” as well.

Well, of course. The vilest vitriol in the Qur’an is reserved for us Jewish “apes.”

“Enormous numbers of Muslims are terrorist sympathizers,” observes French. “Roughly 50 million” are sympathetic to ISIS. “In Britain, for example, more Muslims join ISIS than join the British army.” Overwhelmingly, the Muslims questioned held disgusting views. How can they not? “Polygamy and sexual slavery” (verse 4:3) and the violent subjugation of women (4:34) are commanded in their Holy Book, too.

Brian Kilmeade, a Fox News Channel personality—with all the cerebral deficiencies the affiliation portends—wrote a book, “Thomas Jefferson and the Tripoli Pirates: The Forgotten War That Changed American History.” In it, to judge by a Factor interview he gave, late in 2015, Kilmeade co-opted Jefferson as a neocon, fighting 21st century America’s War On Terror.

Kilmeade’s silliest pronouncement during that interview was to say that the Muslim Tripoli Pirates had been practicing Islam in the way it was not meant to be practiced.

Did the Tripoli Pirates pirate The Authentic Islam, Mr. Kilmeade? If so, when in the course of its bloody history does The Authentic Islam kick-in?

Delve into the Qur’an, the hadith and the Sira, and it becomes abundantly clear: Islam is radical, has been for some time. …

… Read the rest. The complete column, “Wrong, Trump, Islam Loves Us … To Bits,” is now on WND.

The unabridged version will be on The Unz Review, Saturday morning.

Trump Doesn’t Need To Talk Like A Conservative

Conservatism, Donald Trump, Environmentalism & Animal Rights, IMMIGRATION, Republicans

“Trump Doesn’t Need To Talk Like A Conservative” is the current column, now on WND. An excerpt:

With his decisive victory on Super Tuesday II (March 15), Trump is already winning for America.

We’ve won a reprieve. There will be no 13th Republican debate. It was cancelled by the candidate. Megyn Kelly can save her new outfit and mink eyelashes for the next liberal shindig she attends.

Despite the best efforts of Scarlet Letter “E” Republicans and conservatives, Trump has 673 out of the 1237 delegates required, 263 more than runner-up Ted Cruz. The New York Times—it lies a little less than Fox News—has conceded that “Rubio’s exit leaves Trump with an open path to 1,237 delegates.”

Alas, bar the last debate, in Coral Gables, Miami, March 10, the other 11 debates have not showcased the best of Trump.

And it’s not that Trump doesn’t talk like a conservative. Talking like a conservative is meaningless.

The Marco Mattel Doll mouthed near-perfect conservative bulletin points. Pull a string, and Barbie’s beau would disgorge conservative words and phrases from a rotating repertoire. Look the other way, and the Cuban Ken was passing liberal legislation with Chucky Schumer (Dem).

Talking like a conservative doesn’t mean a politician will act like a conservative.

Come to think of it, Republican presidents who talk and act conservatively are as elusive as Big Foot. There hasn’t been a sighting in maybe a century. A purist would cite Democrat Grover Cleveland as America’s last conservative president. He preached and practiced the maxim that “the people must support the government, but the government must not support the people.”

True, too, is that conservatives, younger ones, it seems, have adopted much of the Left’s Orwellian, illiberal thinking, thankfully alien to The Donald.

While the Left controls the intellectual means of production—schools (primary, secondary, tertiary), media, foundations, think tanks, publishing prints—the “Respectable Right” is hardly on the outs with the liberal smart set.

Both factions are agreed:

Endless immigration is a net good, as long as it’s legal.

Source of immigration is insignificant, as long as it’s legal. At heart, every Afghani, Iraqi or Somali are just closeted Jeffersonians.

Racism: Whites have come a long way and have a long way to go, ad infinitum.

Michelle Fields: New Conservatives get as exercised as liberals about pursuing legal remedies for hysteria.

In such a national emergency as Fields caused, the advice of Humphrey Bogart, playing Rick Blaine in “Casablanca” (channeled by Woody Allen in “Play It Again Sam”), should be considered: “I never saw a dame yet that didn’t understand a good slap in the mouth …”

Fields, a reporter, claimed she was assaulted by the Republican front-runner’s surrogate. She offered iffy evidence for her allegations. Fields had scrummed Trump. She was too close for comfort to a candidate who’s the target of daily death threats. Solemnly, conservatives took to debating the “assault” endured by Fields and the merits of a legal remedy.

The law is an ass. But so are these conservatives. (The Fields matter has since been settled: Megyn Kelly will get Fields a spread in Vogue, Kelly’s alma mater.) …

… . Conservative talk is not all it’s cut out to be. When it comes to philosophical convictions (the stuff discussed above), most conservatives more closely resemble their beltway liberal friends than Republican Party voters. …

… Read the complete column. “Trump Doesn’t Need To Talk Like A Conservative” is now on WND.

Washington State Pinkos In A Pickle Over Sex-Selective Abortions

Ethics, Feminism, Gender, IMMIGRATION

The Evergreen State’s oink sector has a problem. It loves immigration, refugees too. The more the merrier. In fact, the door of the gym I frequent was plastered, recently, with a sign welcoming refugees and urging “haters” to leave. I’d have published the club’s name, but management soon thought the better of it and removed the sign. Perhaps the paying “haters” threatened to take their business elsewhere.

In any event, the pinkos in power in Washington State are partial to abortion as well, but dislike sex-selective abortions and want to ban it—mostly, is my guess, because girls are the fetuses generally expelled from immigrant uteruses.

Immigrants? Yes, you didn’t think Americans practiced sex-selective abortion, did you?!

The joy of multiculturalism is missing from the discussion about the monstrous practice of killing girls in-utero. From “Importing Monstrous Morals”:

Yes, In addition to their mostly ordinary abilities, the Indian H-1B intake is bringing with it an extraordinary antipathy for little girls. Chain migration means that each H-1B recruit brings in an extended family—all the better to help sustain the practice.

Empirical proof of these impregnable positions comes from the University of California, San Francisco. The UCSF conducted a “qualitative study of son preference and fetal sex selection among Indian immigrants in the United States.” It showed that “Indian immigrant women are using reproductive technologies and liberal abortion policies in the United States to abort female fetuses.” The study was published in Social Science & Medicine. Therein, the objects of observation are quoted as saying this: “There is such a thing as too many daughters, but not too many sons.”

The current monomania over Muslims and their disdain for women conceals that the habits of Hindus are as horrible. (And that diversity is a catastrophe, or is that a stretch!?)

MORE “Importing Monstrous Morals.”

Related: Abortions based on gender of fetus would be banned under Olympia bill