“And those who emigrate for Allah’s sake after they are oppressed, We will most certainly give them a good abode in the world, and the reward of the hereafter is certainly much greater, did they but know;”
– The Qur’an; Surah 16:41
“Migration cannot be ended as long as there is kufr (unbelief) or as long as there is an enemy that resists”
– The Prophet Muhammad
“I charge you with five of what Allah has charged me with: to assemble, to listen, to obey, to immigrate and to wage Jihad for the sake of Allah”
– The Prophet Muhammad
“The West must not fear Islam- when Islam is in power, all people will live peacefully,”
– Iyad al Sheikh Mahmoud, leader of Syrian rebel group, Jabhat al Nusra
The “Refugee Crisis” that has gone on for months has been described by men like Dr. Mudar Zahran, a Jordanian Palestinian academic, as “the soft Islamic conquest of the West.” The term “Hijrah” refers to a migration for the cause of Islam. Like any spiritual teaching, one can choose to make this an internal quest towards “God-Realization”, or make it something that is “external”, as is typically the case of fundamentalists. The apparent result of “Hijrah” and/or “Jihad” seemed to come to a head on Friday, November 13th, when the world was shocked by a coordinated terror attack on multiple “soft targets” (non-military/government targets) that claimed the lives of approximately 130 people in Paris, France. It was a coordinated attack that former CIA Director, James Woolsey told the BBC would have required “government-style planning”.
Unfortunately, this was far from an “isolated incident”, but rather was a crescendo on a slew of attacks in recent weeks and months credited to the terror group commonly referred to as “ISIS”. As I have pointed out in previous posts, ISIS is a creation of U.S. foreign policy and the trifecta of U.S., Israeli and Saudi intelligence and geopolitical manipulations in the Middle East. These manipulations and meddlings resulted in deaths of 224 passengers aboard a Russian jetliner on October 31st and then 130 people in Paris on Friday, November 13th.
First, I can’t help but point out the dates of these two attacks. October 31st of course, is Halloween, also known as “Samhain”. Samhain was known to be a time when the veil between the material world of the living and the “Otherworld” of the dead (as well as various etheric entities), was said to be particularly thin. One element of this Holy Day would have entailed a blood sacrifice (typically of an animal). This day has been utilized by occult practitioners over the centuries as a day of potent ritual magick and, in the rituals of dark occult practitioners, alleged human sacrifice.
Second we have Friday the 13th. Known to most as the “unlucky day” of superstition, what fewer people realize that it was Friday, October 13th in 1307 that the King of France ordered the arrest, torture and eventual execution of the Knights Templar. The Templars were originally guardians of pilgrims to the Holy Land during the Medieval Crusades, and were endorsed by the Catholic Church. While originally taking vows of poverty, the Templars grew financially powerful and eventually got into the banking business, lending to both church and state. After becoming deeply in debt to the Templars due to his war with the English, King Philip IV of France “defaulted” on his debt by having the Templars rounded up and executed. However, legend has it that some managed to escape and established what would later become Scottish Rite Freemasonry.
Another interesting tidbit about the 13th date, is that it was on November 13th, 1918 that the Allied troops occupied Constantinople, which was the capital of the Ottoman Empire – the last great Muslim Empire. This marked the defeat of the Ottoman Empire in World War I, which led to the crumbling of the Great Caliphate and the rise of Anglo-American hegemony in the Middle East. It is here in Turkey where many of the Syrian “rebels” are being armed and trained, hence the Russian bombing at the Turkish border with Syria that resulted in the fighter jet being shot down (and then the parachuting pilots, and then the medical helicopter), and the recent escalation of tensions between the two nations. More intriguing is the fact that our ally is buying oil from ISIS’ pillaged oil fields, according to Russian President Vladimir Putin and Iraqi MP and former national security adviser Mowaffak al Rubaie:
In the last eight months ISIS has managed to sell … $800 million dollars worth of oil on the black market of Turkey. This is Iraqi oil and Syrian oil, carried by trucks from Iraq, from Syria through the borders to Turkey and sold …[at] less than 50 percent of the international oil price…
It was also in Turkey during a recent soccer match that a request for a moment of silence in memoriam of the victims of the Paris Attacks was met with a chorus of ‘boos’ and chants of “Allahu akbar” (which was chanted by the terrorists during the attacks). Yes these are our “allies”. Similar to our “allies” in Saudi Arabia, which is one of the most brutally oppressive regimes in the Middle East where women aren’t even allowed to drive(where are the Feminists on this one?), and acts as a “home base” for Wahhabism – the brutal, ultra-fundamentalist form of Sunni Islam that ISIS and other Islamic terror groups adhere to.
Meanwhile, President Obama has repeatedly stated that “the removal of Assad is crucial to undercutting the ideology that drives fighters to the Islamic State”. This statement is ABSOLUTE B.S. Assad is the polar opposite of ISIS. Assad’s Syria WAS one of the most developed nations in the Middle East, where Christians and Muslims lived peacefully, and women could go to college and didn’t have to wear burkas. Assad is also a Shiite Muslim. But as I have stated in previous articles, Assad was on the “wrong team”, so the U.S., NATO, and Israel funded and trained mercenaries and jihadis out of Saudi Arabia, etc. to take down Assad. Now as a result of this, we have ISIS.
The hypocrisy from the Obama Administration has reached near-absurdist levels with all of this. In recent legal proceedings in Egypt, evidence arose that the Obama administration used the U.S. Embassy in Cairo to provide direct financial support to key Muslim Brotherhood (a major radical Islamic organization linked to ISIS) political operatives. This should not really come as a surprise for anyone remotely familiar with the Administration’s support for the “Arab Spring” that led to the installation of the brutal Muslim Brotherhood regime in Egypt that was eventually disposed by the country’s military brass. Likewise, Egyptian officials have called for the President’s half-brother, Malik Obama to be placed on the country’s terror watch list because of his involvement as an owner and investment adviser for the Sudan-based Islamic Dawa Organization, or IDO, and the organization’s umbrella group, the Muslim Brotherhood. The Egyptian Minister of Religious Endowments as well as other Egyptian leaders.
In any case, the Paris attacks have now resulted in France escalating its presence in Syria, (which was the reason ISIS attacked in the first place) bombing ISIS “headquarters” in the region, using coordinates it gained from U.S. intelligence (interesting that the U.S. didn’t go after these targets). Russia has extended an arm of alliance to France, and has also expressed empathy with the shared loss of civilian life, however tensions between Russia and other NATO countries threaten any kind of cohesion. But now, France has a new ally in the war against ISIS in Germany, after France invoked article 47.2 of the E.U. treaty. However Sahra Wagenknecht, a member of the National Committee of the Left Party and the Bundestag voiced concern:
If you send German Tornados (fighter jets) to Syria, you only create more terrorists and increase the danger of an attack in Germany
Now it is understandable that the Paris attacks left the population of France and Europe at large in a state of fear and panic, which was evident when firecrackers sent a crowd of Parisians fleeing for their lives. It is this fear and concern that also seemed to justify the power given to French President Francois Hollande and the French Government to suspend separation of powers under a state of emergency (martial law) for an extended period of three months. A recent article out of the New York Times illustrates some of the results of this martial law in France:
All over France, from Toulouse in the south to Paris and beyond, the police have been breaking down doors, conducting searches without warrants, aggressively questioning residents, hauling suspects to police stations and putting others under house arrest.
There have been 1,072 police searches already and 139 police interrogations, and 117 people have been placed in custody, the Ministry of the Interior said on Monday. Those included a weekend raid on a restaurant selling halal burgers and Tex-Mex food in the Paris suburbs, where officers found nothing suspicious after breaking down the doors.
Many of those being swept up are among the hundreds of French who have already been flagged as potential security threats in the notorious S-files of the security services. The police are now free to pick up and interrogate suspects virtually at will.
An indication of the lingering shock of the attacks — and the fear coursing through French society — is that few, publicly at least, are protesting these exceptional measures.
This is somewhat similar to the state of emergency and martial law (which was actually enabled by the Weimar Republic Constitution established pre-NSDAP power) declared by Adolf Hitler and the NSDAP did after the Reichstag Fire in 1933. This was done to secure Germany from the wave of Communist terror attacks and assassinations that were running rampant throughout Germany as well of the rest of Europe at the time. At the time, this was seen by many as reasonable and justifiable given what had been occurring. The same mentality exists here as ISIS continues its menacing behavior in the wake of the tragedy.
However, there are definitely voices of dissent amongst the population, who point to the ability of the French Government to seize electronic data and block internet sites as a cause for concern. Others fear that the imposition of this French police state will cause unfair blanket persecution of the nation’s Muslim population, which is currently the largest in Europe. There is also general concern of the erosion and impeding upon of civil liberties that inevitably takes place during a heightened security “lockdown” of a country.
Another precautionary measure taken during the implementation of martial law in France was the closing of France’s borders. This was a move applauded by the growing “Alt-Right” Nationalist Movement that has progressively gained steam in France as well as other European nations with increasingly displaced or marginalized native populations. This has been the result of European nations seeing their populations surge as “Syrian” migrants continue to pour into Europe, and is evidenced by the popularity of figures like Marine Le Pen, who was recently tried for “anti-Muslim hate speech”. Despite demonization from E.U. bureaucrats and the media, this tide of nationalism that is rising in Europe is a natural result of massive influxes of peoples whose look and customs are completely different from the native population. In centuries past, this would have been seen as an invasion.
Of course it is always worth mentioning that the vast majority of these “refugees” are primarily migrants from Africa and various parts of the Middle East and not actually “Syrian” (of course, who knows when no one requires a passport to enter) who go to Europe for economic reasons. As of late September, of the 213,000 “refugees” that had arrived in Europe, only some 44,000 were actually Syrian. A recent article out of NBC News, entitled “Europe Clamps Down on Borders, Leaving Migrants Stranded” stated how Serbia and Macedonia, which lie on the primary migrant route were now restricting the entry of refugees to JUST those from Syria… and Iraq, and Afghanistan. According to the NBC News article, one of the major groups protesting being left out were in fact IRANIAN migrants (as well as Moroccan, Pakistani, etc.). This really starts to change the narrative attempting to be maintained.
It also worth mentioning that for every “widow and orphan” who gets pictured in the press, there are many times that of young, “military-aged” men. I challenge people to look through ALL the different images that have been taken – not just the hand-picked ones chosen to evoke feelings of sympathy and pity. We have also heard open statements from ISIS as well as Intelligence Officials who detail a plan to smuggle some 4,000 ISIS fighters into Europe via the refugee lifeboats. This essentially creates a “Trojan Horse” scenario, which may very well have led to, at the very least in part, to the horrific scene that took place in Paris the night of November 13th. Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban has stated that these refugees “looked more like an army than asylum seekers.” Orban has gone on to state that the migrant crisis did not happen by chance:
Ladies and gentlemen, what we face is nothing less than the challenge of finding ourselves at the gateway to the implementation of a deliberate conceptual project… which seeks to marginalise the nation states of Europe… Where this project has failed to overcome Christianity and the identity of the nation state – in conventional political struggle, it will strive to eliminate it on ethnic grounds…
Jewish Hungarian billionaire investor and social engineer, George Soros, responded to Prime Minister Orban’s desire to first and foremost protect national sovereignty and the people of Hungary:
[Orban’s] plan treats the protection of national borders as the objective and the refugees as an obstacle, our plan treats the protection of refugees as the objective and national borders as the obstacle.
Of course, I just couldn’t leave the subject of the “European Multicultural Revolution” without this little gemfrom Israeli-American actress and founder of the European Institute for Jewish Studies in Sweden, Barbara Lerner Specter:
Europe has not yet learned how to be multi-cultural and I think we’re going to be part of the throes of that transformation, which MUST take place. Europe is not going to be the monolithic… societies that they once were in the last century. Jews are going to be at the center of that. It’s a huge transformation for Europe to make. They are now going into a multi-cultural mode and Jews will be resented because of our leading role. But without that leading role and without that transformation, Europe will not survive.
How is it that Europe won’t survive? Perhaps she’s talking about the overall decline of birthrates among Europeans, which has been encouraged by the “Cult of Climate Change” which essentially states that having children is “bad for the planet”. The latest annual summit of these “cult leaders” meets in Paris starting on Monday. Sadly, Europeans and people of European descent can be made to feel guilty about these sorts of things rather easily. This psychology has been exploited to the utmost degree by a culturally subversive media and political establishment. What’s funny is that none of these “environmentalists” are talking about the environmental impact of mass migration into a small area like Europe.
In the early part of the 11th century, A.D., Roman Catholic Europe and the Holy Roman Empire were embroiled in a conflict with the Muslim World, which was seeking to expand its influence along with the spread of Islam. This war came to a head when the Muslim Moors of Spain. It was during this conflict when influential Jewish financiers and merchants that had close ties with the Spanish royal courts worked as spies and informants for the invading Moors, and used subversive tactics which enabled the Moorish conquest of Spain. It is thought that the reasoning for this was a combination of resentment towards Christianity, the Catholic Church and the European people, as well as opportunity for financial and political gain. This period was known as a “Golden Age for Jews“. Spain remained a Muslim country until 1492, when King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella mounted a “reconquista”, booting out the Moors- and the Jews. History is a funny thing.
Now we’re going to switch gears a little and look at the situation that is beginning to unfold here in the U.S. The Federal Government has stated that it plans on spending $1 billion of taxpayer dollars to transport and settle 10,000 “Syrian” and “Iraqi” refugees this year, and then 85,000 more refugees “from around the world” in 2016, according to Secretary of State John Kerry, and then up to 100,000 refugees in 2017. In a recent interview on CBS’ “Face the Nation”, Kerry proceeded to parrot the popular talking point that “We’re facing the worst refugee crisis since the end of World War II, and I think the United States has to do more…”
However, this is not a move that is supported by the majority of the American people, with polls showing that 6 in 10 Americans do not approve of taking in the “refugees”. This is a point of view that has been declared as being “shameful” by the beacons of morality over at the Anti-Defamation League. As highlighted in the book “Red Mafiya: How the Russian Mob Has Invaded America” by Jewish American author, Robert I. Friedman, this is an organization that pressured and eventually convinced the FBI to call off investigations of individuals with known affiliation to the Jewish-Russian Mafia who also sought “refugee status” back in the 1970s, as doing so would be “anti-Semitic” (of course, pointing out any sort of wrongdoing on the part of a Jewish organization is “anti-Semitic” in and of itself).
CEO of the Anti-Defamation League, Jonathan Greenblatt predictably called upon the spirit of Nazi Jewish Persecution and the “Holocaust” (see my recent article on the subject) in an attempt to guilt and shame the American people in his op-ed entitled “Closing the Borders to Refugees: Wrong in the 1930s, and Wrong Today” (someone should probably inform Mr. Greenblatt that the southern border of the U.S. is definitely NOT closed):
…in January 1939 another poll asked whether the U.S. government should permit ‘10,000 refugee children from Germany—most of them Jewish—to be taken care of in American homes.’ An astounding and shameful 61 percent said no.
In May of 1939 the St. Louis carrying 937 Ger¬man refugees—mostly Jews fleeing the Third Reich—set sail for Cuba. Most had applied for U.S. visas. Turned away from Cuba, as the St. Louis sailed so close to Florida that the passengers could see the lights from Miami, they appealed to President Roosevelt to give them safe harbor. With public opinion opposed to lifting the stringent immigration quotas or to make an exception for the ship’s passengers, the St. Louis returned to Europe. Almost a quarter of the passengers perished in the Holocaust.
Today, the world faces the largest refugee crisis since World War II. Almost 60 million people around the world have been forcibly dis-placed from their homes. The war in Syria, fueled by the unparalleled brutality of ISIS, is largely responsible for the spike. And once more—shamefully—there is a push for the United States to turn a blind eye to the suffering of refugees and shut our doors to those in need.
So first we have a predictable, although still pretty disgusting sort of “blame and shame” projected onto America, which outside of Israel has been the most tolerant, accepting and opportunity-laden place Jews have EVER lived since the supposed “exile”. The amount of Jews and Jewish interest groups (i.e. AIPAC, ADL, etc.) in positions of power and influence in America is mind-boggling. Second, we have the “refugee poll” where the racist/xenophobic Americans voice a politically incorrect opinion. This is a meme I’m seeing all over social media these days. Third, I think it is really interesting to see the use of figure of “60 million” people “displaced from their homes” in the last paragraph. I’m not too sure how close it is to actual facts and figures, but it seems awfully similar to the “6 million” Jews in Europe that were stated to be in one form of turmoil or another in various news articles and op-eds (about 200 actually) from 1900 to 1945. Again, history is a funny thing.
In response to public concern over the Paris Attacks, House Republicans in D.C. have sought to pass legislation that would establish increased screenings for Syrian and Iraqi refugees. According to Associated Press, the new legislation “sets high hurdles for refugee admissions, including FBI background checks and individual sign-offs by top federal officials”. However, the Obama Administration stated that these requirements were “untenable” and that the bill “would provide no meaningful additional security for the American people, instead serving only to create significant delays and obstacles in the fulfillment of a vital program that satisfies both humanitarian and national security objectives.”
Not surprisingly, President Obama has stated that he would indeed veto any such legislation that made its way onto his desk. The President stated that doing so would create an “unnecessary burden” and proceeded to mock public concerns, stating that Americans don’t need to fear “widows and orphans”. Obama’s State Department likewise states that “military-aged males” make up only 2% of refugees entering the U.S. However, the latest alleged suicide bomber in France was a woman, and likewise, Iraq War Veterans will attest that the use of women and children, as weapons by Islamic extremists is indeed a very real thing. But folks like ADL CEO Jonathan Greenblatt insist we have nothing to be concerned with here:
The American screening process for refugees works. With millions of refugees admitted to the United States since 1980, including hundreds of thousands admitted since 9/11, there have been no recorded terrorist attacks committed in the U.S. by refugees. Unlike European countries, the U.S. has the luxury of admitting refugees only after their applications and background screenings are complete—often after a three-year process.
This all sounds great, but here’s the problem: if the White House is adamant about getting 10,000 refugees in by the end of this year, 85,000 in 2016, and then 100,000 in 2017, how on earth is this “quota” going to be met with the stringent sort of process that Greenblatt states is currently in place. This is going to be massively taxing on government administrations that have been facing budget cuts. I would say that either the quota will not be met, or we are going to see “shortcuts” being taken, which would in turn likely lead to people getting in who are not who they say they are. Isn’t this something we’d want to make sure doesn’t happen, especially since it is ultimately the American taxpayer that is going to be footing the bill for all of this? Of course, I know it’s racist to think that anyone who isn’t white could be a liar.
Oh and remember the Christmas Tree Bomber here in Portland? You know the guy who was given bomb making supplies and radicalized by the FBI (kinda like firemen starting fires to keep funding for the dept.) back in 2010? He was a Somali refugee. So much for the “no recorded terrorist attacks committed in the U.S. by refugees” statement, but then maybe he meant to say “successful” terrorist attacks. At the end of his op-ed Greenblatt further nullifies his argument when he states:
It is important to note that the attacker who may have slipped into France with refugees was not himself a refugee. He had never applied through official channels, cleared stringent international background checks, or been granted refugee status. He was a terrorist with a fake passport, not a refugee.
It is obvious that Mr. Greenblatt has little interest in presenting actual facts when it comes to the “process” that exists for this flood of “refugees” in Europe or statistics on terrorist activity in the U.S. His op-ed/guilt trip only further exemplifies why the ADL is NOT a credible source of accurate information and serves little purpose other than to morally pontificate and chastise America and the Western world. More over, he essentially shows that it is indeed possible and plausible for terrorists to do exactly what they said they would do. Remember, criminals don’t care about laws. That’s why they’re criminals.
In any case, the goal here in the U.S. is to have 180 American cities take in these “refugees”. One of those cities happens to be here in Portland, OR, which is currently the “whitest” major metropolitan area in the country, which apparently is a bad thing according to media and social justice warriors. A cover of a recent edition of the free local entertainment rag, “The Willamette Weekly” had a large photo of a big-eyed, sad looking young Middle Eastern girl on the cover with the headline, “The Newest Portlanders”. Yes, there are indeed sad and tragic stories of people fleeing for their lives and who may indeed need help, but we need to understand that the photo-ops and overall narrative here is designed to trigger emotional response, which cancels out logic and reason.
Here in Portland, the liberal hipster /yuppie crowd and their baby-boomer, ex-hippie parents who think they’re still fighting the 1960s Cultural Revolution (news flash – it’s over and you won – kinda) that make up the voting majority eat this stuff up. Believe me, I used to deal with these folks on a daily basis when I was a door-to-door political canvasser. I just had to feed them talking points off MSNBC or Media Matters and they were signing up as members and/or giving me money. We would talk about “job creation” and “social justice” as I sold “half-truths” and “pie-in-the-sky” ideals that had little or no real basis in political, economic or social reality.
I worked to appeal to their emotions and convince them that Working America (the organization I worked for) and the AFL-CIO (the parent organization and the largest labor union coalition in the country) cared about them, even after I realized that wasn’t necessarily true. This is an organization that has essentially turned on its member base and pushed heavily for a massive influx of cheap labor to come from south of the border and effectively replace American workers, under the moniker of “fairness” for all workers. This is a strategy that benefits the corporations it supposedly is there to act as a bulwark against.
What many people aren’t aware of is that “refugees” are settled by what are known as “Resettlement Contractors”. These are organizations that get paid, per person to settle refugees, and set them up in various government systems, such as HUD, WIC, Public Schools, etc. These Resettlement Contractors also work in conjunction with major international corporations that operate here in the U.S., many of them in and around specific designated resettlement zones. The contractors essentially supply these corporations with cheap labor. This can be readily seen in the mid-west with Somali and other refugees working for the major meat packing plants like Tyson, Swift and Jennie-O.
This isn’t about “helping” anyone, except multinational corporations, their shareholders, and politicians and bureaucrats who get kickbacks. This is about a complete restructuring and dismantling of the western nation state as things like the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal/treaty that just passed here last month begin to take shape, destroying any sort of defense we had against a global corporatocracy. Meanwhile we have another expected “surge” coming from the southern border (which is another, even easier route for terrorists or anyone else who wants “free” assistance), which further will erode any sort of sovereignty.
Yes, there is a multicultural community being manufactured here, and it is benefiting these global mega-corporations and the international financial institutions that fund them. Europe and the U.S. as we know them have served their purpose, but the ideals that many in these nations still hold onto are a barrier to global corporate power, so they must be “replaced” by people who are accustomed to living under tyranny and less attached to real liberty.
And still, after their best efforts to be “liberal” with the white kids and liberal yuppies marching with “Black Lives Matter” and going to “Immigration Reform” rallies and all the rest, the “The National Report” still published an article stating that Portland is the “‘Most Racist’ City in the United States”. The author, Jewish-American journalist and Portland native, Jane M. Angi, slams the city’s progressive denizens as “closet-racists”:
On the opposite end of this racial divide is the progressive liberals, whose heart’s bleed for whatever cause is deemed most chic. They hate themselves for being white, yet think lowly enough of the African Americans to assume they always require their heroic assistance. Portland seems to be more of a lily-white utopia for haughty pseudo-humanitarians rather than the cornucopia of diversity that it is commonly portrayed as.
You will find the highest concentration of these closet-racists primarily in the heart of Portland. The city itself is ivory faces as far as the eye can see, until you wander out away from the city that you will actually begin to see any other races intermingling with the sea of snowy white bodies. It’s an unspoken truth that Portland is predominantly white, and they want to keep it that way.
Take what you want out of that, but the over-arching narrative is that white people are racist because they’re white, and it doesn’t matter how much “penance” they give for their whiteness, they will still be white, and therefore, still inherently racist.
But still, the modern “liberal” mindset is to “progress forward” at any cost, even if it means going off a cliff. It has been my experience through working in that environment with these types of folks that many have little or no concept of how the national or global economy works. he only things they seem to understand are emotionally triggering buzzwords and talking points, driven by a childlike obsession with “fairness” – the idea that people are “entitled” to things because they exist, regardless of works, contributions, and service to others or even “the content of their character”, especially if they are a member of a “victim class”.
Many are seemingly unable to understand that the goal is not for these immigrant/refugee populations to “integrate” with our society, nor do they want to. Many fundamentalist Muslims see it as a tenet of Islam NOT to integrate with “non-believers”. But the average self-hating liberal “trendy” doesn’t seem to get that. They are blind to the fact that the ideals of many of these immigrants/refugees are diametrically opposed to theirs. They love multiculturalism because it gives them more diverse restaurant options and vocal support of it makes them feel morally superior to those who don’t.
The average liberal doesn’t understand that the state is broke, or how we as a nation being tied to a debt-based economy run by global financial cartels, necessitates that resources and financial capital will indeed remain quite finite. This includes government welfare. But there are many hardline Cultural Marxists in the herd, who support things like the Cloward-Piven Strategy, which is a political strategy outlined in 1966 by American sociologists and political activists Richard Cloward and Frances Fox Piven that called for overloading the U.S. public welfare system in order to precipitate a crisis that would lead to a replacement of the welfare system with a national system of “a guaranteed annual income and thus an end to poverty“. Unlike legal immigration, refugees or people given “asylum status” (i.e. people who can “prove” they’re fleeing some form of physical threat or persecution) immediately qualify for welfare benefits. Bringing in mass wave-after-wave of “asylum-seekers” will inevitably collapse an already stressed system.
The U.S. Government is preparing for this crisis as we speak, with the launch of the U.N.’s “Strong Cities Network” back at the end of September which was according to White House Press Releases, to “Strengthen Community Resilience Against Violent Extremism”. The stated goals are as follows:
• Garnering partnership of cities in international efforts to build social cohesion and resilience to violent extremism
• Using persuasive voices of authorities and communities to challenge violent extremism in all of its forms and manifestations
• Capacity-building and improvement of collaboration
• To counter a range of domestic and global terror threats
• To enable cities to learn from one another, to develop best practices
• Will empower municipal bodies to fill this gap while working with civil society
• Safeguard the rights of local citizens and communities
• Determine action at all levels of governance to counter violent extremism
• Coordinate our efforts and cooperate across borders
• Connect cities, city-level practitioners and the communities through a series of workshops, trainings and sustained city partnerships
• Provide an online repository of municipal-level good practices and web-based training modules and grants supporting innovative, local initiatives and strategies
• International Steering Committee of approximately 25 cities and other sub-national entities from different regions that will provide the SCN with its strategic direction
• Use collective lessons in this international platform for joint innovation
I find it humorous to hear an organization claiming that it is going to heighten security, while somehow “safeguarding rights”. It was the first U.S. Ambassador to France, Benjamin Franklin that stated, “Those who give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”
Attorney General Loretta Lynch stated at the announcement of the U.S. partnering with “Strong Cities” at the U.N. General Assembly back in September that “in the years since that morning when terror rained from the sky (9/11), we have continued to see violent extremists emerge from within our own communities – from terrorists inspired by groups like ISIL to fanatics motivated by hatred against religious or ethnic factions.”
She went on to state that:
Communities have too often been left isolated and alone. But through the Strong Cities Network that we have unveiled today, we are making the first systematic effort in history to bring together cities around the world to share experiences, to pool resources and to forge partnerships in order to build local cohesion and resilience on a global scale. Today we tell every city, every town and every community that has lost the flower of its youth to a sea of hatred – you are not alone. We stand together and we stand with you.
The first Annual Summit for the “Strong Cities Network” will be in the spring of 2016 in Paris, interestingly enough. So what we essentially are seeing in all of the replacement the nation state with a more “global” framework. This is being done through erasing borders, forced integration, trade deals and global governance networks like “Strong Cities”. Is this good or bad? I suppose if you want a completely unaccountable system of governance and want to be surrounded by a mass of people who might not really care for you or your ideals, it’s great. For those of us who may not be so keen on all of this, there is cause for concern as the “global police force” will more than likely not take too kindly to dissenters or rabble-rousers.
On Thanksgiving, The President compared the Syrian refugees to the Pilgrims fleeing persecution (funny, I’m pretty sure there was no welfare office in colonial America) and claimed a moral responsibility for America to bear the burden of refugees whose plight was created by the unaccountable actions of the Executive Branch and their seedy allies. Oregon Governor Kate Brown echoed this sentiment when she recently wrote in regards to the refugees “As Oregonians, it is our moral obligation to help them rebuild their lives…”
No, Barry. No, Kate. It is NOBODY’S “moral obligation” to rebuild anyone’s life except their own. The whole point of charitable service and hospitality is that it is done out of one’s own good will and free choice. When this is forced on people, the notion that it is still somehow retains “moral righteousness” is absurd. I’m sorry, but one does not have a “right” to live in someone else’s house when a burglar takes over theirs. They have a responsibility to defend themselves, their home. and their family. If they choose not to out of fear or whatever reason, than others can choose to provide hospitality, but there is no higher order that can rightly say that this hospitality is ever obligatory. This is essentially the same as someone telling you that you have to take someone into your home and have no choice but to do so.
As far as a terrorist threat or any other kind of threat, I suggest people learn how to defend themselves and buy a firearm. Children (as well as elderly and disabled) need to be protected. Adults need to protect themselves. But don’t do that if you’re a white guy, because white guys with guns are the “real terror threat” in America apparently. In all seriousness, this is who the “Strong Cities Network” in America as well as Europe will target – white men with constitutionalist or nationalist leanings, as well as gun-owners, libertarians, and military vets. These are men with a statistically low crime rate, who nine times out of ten are NOT violent, but are the biggest and most vocal threat to the establishment and WILL defend themselves and their families.
Maybe these refugees should just be allowed to move into the White House, as any sort of “moral obligation” falls on the hands of the Obama Administration who act without the approval of the American people. That place is huge. They’d have servants and fun parties – they’d all have a great time with Barry and Michelle!
Or perhaps we should just follow the lead of newly-elected Canadian Prime Minister Kevin Trudeau and say that lone, “straight” male refugees be excluded from entry. I heard that gay Muslim men are about as populous as unicorns. Maybe then the gay Muslim men can open new food carts so we can all enjoy the delicious taste of multiculturalism and get the opportunity to understand other cultures as we all march toward the future under one global corporate government where any notion of civil liberties is stomped under the boot of “fairness” and “safety”.
So yes, pray for Paris, pray for the victims families, and pray for those displaced in war torn Syria. And if you want to take a refugee family into your home because it makes you feel good, go for it! But don’t force others to do what you believe is right. And seriously, let’s stop with all this “fairness” and “safety” crap, okay? Now, more than ever, it is imperative that we grow up.
Those who have ears to hear should hear. Namaste and God Bless.