Trump vs. the “Islamic Conquest of the West” by Selwyn Duke January 30, 2017
The irrational left, which means virtually all the left, is apoplectic over President Trump’s executive order halting immigration from terrorist-spawning countries. Its minions are complaining that the move is “un-American,” which in their world apparently involves playing Russian roulette with American lives.
The New York Times just ran a teary-eyed piece lamenting “immediate collateral damage imposed on people who, by all accounts, had no sinister intentions in trying to come to the United States,” as the paper put it. The fake news is right there — “by all accounts” — slipped in casually in the hope the reader will slide by it unthinkingly. In reality, there are many people, from intelligence experts to politicians to social commentators to Muslims themselves, warning that there’s no way to truly know these people’s “intentions.”
One of the most striking reports on this front — both because of its content and how the Fake News (mainstream) Media ignored it — was an October 2015 Glazov Gang interview with Dr. Mudar Zahran, a leader of the Jordanian Opposition Coalition now living as a refugee in Britain. While calling himself an “orthodox Muslim,” he nonetheless issued an eyebrow-raising warning:
Keep the Muslim migrants out of Europe.
What’s more, he insists that they must be returned to their native lands.
While Europe was the focus at the time (as the destination of most Mideast migrants), Zahran’s warnings absolutely apply to the US. And what he says is troubling: Many if not most of the migrants are not what they appear (video below).
First, we’d always been told the issue was Syrian refugees uprooted by their nation’s civil war. Yet Zahran stated that many of the Muslim newcomers aren’t even Syrian.
The proof is in the pudding, too. When we read stories about migrants committing crimes — rape, murder, a terrorist act or something else — the perpetrators generally are Afghani, Moroccan, Tunisian, Iraqi, Somali or some other nationality that doesn’t happen to be Syrian. This is just casually mentioned in the reportage’s “who” aspect, and the relevant question doesn’t occur to most readers.
What the heck are these non-Syrian migrants doing in the West when the “refugee” scheme was sold to Westerners with a “help the Syrians” message?
The next part of the con, states Zahran, is that “75 percent of those arriving from Syria come from safe area[s]” because the Syrians “in disaster areas cannot … leave.” But it gets worse. He also asserts that half the Syrian male migrants “have actually held weapons and fought in the Syrian war.”
Then there are the truly malevolent fakefugees. As Zahran put it, “I can authoritively [sic] confirm — I have photos, I have images, I have pictures, I have names of terrorists who actually are already in Europe posting their photos in Europe on Facebook.”
This warning has been echoed by other Muslim figures as well. Also in 2015, Lebanese Education Minister Elias Bou Saab warned that 20,000 jihadis likely lurk in his country’s refugee camps, and Syrian ambassador Riad Abbas claimed that 20 percent of Muslim migrants entering Europe had Islamic State (IS) ties.
How these miscreants could penetrate the West brings us to the third part of the con: Despite leftist claims to the contrary, there is no way to reliably vet the Muslim migrants.
First, nations such as Syria simply don’t have comprehensive, Western-style databases containing information on their citizens. Intelligence officials have acknowledged this, as has the Greek government and even former Secretary of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson. As Investor’s Business Daily put it in 2015, “Syria and Iraq, along with Somalia and Sudan, are failed states where police records aren't even kept. Agents can't vet somebody if they don't have documentation and don't even have the criminal databases to screen applicants.”
Moreover, what good would the data be, anyway? As NYC Syrian community leader Aarafat “Ralph” Succar pointed out in 2015 while warning of IS infiltration in the US, you can bribe Syrian public officials and get government documents stating you’re whoever you want to be. Said he, “You can go to the Syrian government today and say to them, ‘I need a piece of paper that says I’m Tony Caterpillar.’ And they give it to you,” reported the New York Post.
As for the notion these migrants can be vetted, Succar has a simple response: “[A]re you out of your mind?”
Yet even if we could weed out the fakefugees, it wouldn’t matter because vetting informs only about what migrants are, not what they will become or what their children will be. This is relevant not only because radicalization often occurs in the West itself, but because studies show that younger generations of Muslims in the West are actually more jihadist-minded than their elders. “Islam is the problem,” as I recently wrote — the gift that keeps on giving.
And the calculation is simple: If one million Muslim migrants enter a nation over time and just 1/10th of one percent are or will become terrorists, that’s 1,000 dangerous jihadists. Are you willing to bet, your life, that this estimate is liberal and not conservative?
Yet as dangerous as terrorists are, there’s a bigger picture here, a deeper con being perpetrated by the Arab world via the mass migrations. As Zahran warned, “I have to be honest; you read Arab magazines and Arab newspapers [and] they are talking about, ‘Good job! Now we’re going to conquest [sic] Europe.’ So it’s not even a secret.”
Zahran called this process “the soft Islamic conquest of the West” and noted that what Muslims “couldn’t do in the last 20 years, now the West is doing for us for free — and even [is] paying for it.”
The last part of the migration con concerns why leftists “care” so much about fakefugees. Not only is there the ego-driven ideological imperative of preserving their multiculturalist dogma, but consider: The vast majority of U.S. Muslims now vote Democrat, with Obama having gotten 89 and 85 percent of their votes in, respectively, 2008 and 2012. In contrast, pious, church-going Christians favor Republicans by wide margins.
Now note that while Christians are 10 percent of Syria's population and are being targeted for extermination by IS, only one half of one percent of the “Syrian” migrants admitted under Obama were Christian. Compassion? Does the Left really care about these migrants’ lives?
Or just their future votes?
Whatever the case, the treasonous — or, as some would say, “internationalist” — alt-left often speaks about redistributing the wealth. They clearly don’t mind spreading the terrorism around, either. Why not? The West won’t long feel compelled to send soldiers to the Middle East if we bring enough of the Middle East to the West.
More Muslims have arrived in the US just since 9/11 than did so during our nation’s entire history leading up to it. This, the handiwork of the left, has already resulted in hundreds more Westerners dying in jihadist attacks. How much more blood do you liberals want on your hands?