Posted: 23 Nov 2015 07:24 PM PST
Last month, French President Francois Hollande ridiculed the idea that the massive numbers of Muslim migrants entering his country were any kind of threat.
“Those who argue that we are being invaded are manipulators and falsifiers, who do this only for political reasons, to scare,” the left-wing politician huffed.
And then the pudgy little Socialist had to be rapidly evacuated from France’s national soccer stadium after one of those refugees blew himself up trying to reach Monsieur le Président, and Merkel’s Foreign Minister, Frank-Walter Steinmeier.
Minister Steinmeier had urged rejecting “barriers, fences” when it came to the Muslim migrants, but it was a barrier and the security in front of it that kept one of his beloved refugees from reaching him.
The ordinary people who didn’t have and don’t have the security measures that protect Hollande and Steinemeier died in Paris, blown up and gunned down where they sat, lay and stood.
Hollande's rhetoric is familiar. You can hear it from Obama. You can catch it on the news. We have nothing to worry about. At least not until the bombs start going off. There will be a multi-layered vetting process. The same system that let in all the terrorists before won't let us down now.
At least not until it does.
Everything's fine until the bombs go off. Then we're told not to worry about it because there's no way it could possibly happen again. Not with this new hashtag our brightest brains have cooked up. And then we can let 10,000 potential terrorists into the country while ignoring all the "falsifiers" warning of an "invasion."
It worked for France. It'll work for us.
Vetting for Syrian migrants works as well in the real world as it does for left-wing politicians.
In Greece, overburdened local authorities don’t care. New migrants are allowed to fill out their own paperwork and are handed letters of transit that allow them access to Europe. An employee at a local registration center was quoted as saying, “We just have to trust what they write down.”
And then the media insists that we have to trust what they write down about the refugees. Even the lies.
In September, at a joint press conference with Secretary of State John Kerry, Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier had called taking in migrants a “moral duty” and urged Americans to “increase the numbers you can take into your country”.
Now Germany is hunting for its own links to the Paris attacks. A few days earlier, Steinemeier had boasted that Germans were bending over backwards for the refugees and proving that, “Germany belongs not to the screamers and hatemongers.” But the terror cells of Hamburg might disagree.
But don’t assume that Hollande or Steinmeier learned any lessons from the latest Muslim massacre.
In September, France’s President Hollande told the French that he had information that attacks against France had been planned from Syria and that planning for future air strikes against ISIS would begin.
In that same speech, he announced that France would be taking in 24,000 migrants.
Hollande knew ahead of time that this disaster was coming. He even prepared the response to it at the same time as he was welcoming some of the potential perpetrators into his country.
It wouldn’t be too surprising if he even had a speech pre-written and ready to go for just such an attack.
Even as Hollande was denouncing “manipulators and falsifiers” for trying to “scare” the French, he had a very good idea of just how much there was to be scared of.
The President of France had looked his nation in the eye and lied to them about the invasion.
Monsieur le Président probably didn’t expect to be this close to the killing when it happened. Neither did Foreign Minister Steinmeier. It’s the Jews and Poles in Marseille or the people in Calais who happen to be a little too close to the New Jungle camp that were meant to be the sacrifices of their compassion.
Unfortunately for Hollande and Steinmeier, the Islamic State didn’t get the memo. Unfortunately for us, their only real response to the crisis they caused will be to try to globalize it even further.
Back then Hollande and Merkel were demanding a “permanent mandatory system” for redistributing Muslim migrants across Europe. Germany and France turned the Muslim migrant crisis into a European problem. Now they want to repeat the butchery in Paris around the world.
G20 named the migrant crisis a global problem and expects the world to solve it.
Greece doesn’t have the money, resources or infrastructure to screen the migrant horde. Frontex is undermanned and its employees, in European fashion, work until 4 PM, at which point the refugees just write whatever they want and get handed letters of transit by Greek officials that want them gone.
The Balkan countries are not any better equipped to manage the invasion than Greece. And the European countries that actually want the migrants aren’t interested in checking their papers, but in signing them up for as many social services as possible.
That’s not just true of Europe. It’s equally true of the United States.
Any talk of vetting is nothing more than plausible deniability. Unless a terrorist is already in our database, vetting him is a lost cause. Our system couldn’t handle the World Trade Center bombers or the 9/11 hijackers and they came from functioning countries that weren’t in the middle of a civil war.
We are not going to be able to vet tens of thousands of people who claim they come from Syria, who have fake passports or who plead that they lost their passports at sea, whose names can be rendered in enough ways to give even a linguist a headache and who will get access to the United States long enough for them to disappear even if we did eventually turn up something on them.
And we’re not supposed to vet them.
Despite the rhetoric, France and Germany are less interested in fighting ISIS than in getting the United States and the rest of the world to take more Muslim migrants. Instead of having ISIS in every city in Europe, they seem determined to make sure that it is in every city in the world instead.
ISIS may have carried out the brutal massacres in Paris, but Hollande, Merkel and the other friends of the refugees helped make it happen. And they want to help make it happen around the world.
The migrant crisis is an invasion. The bodies in Paris could just as easily have been stacked up in any country that was foolish and feckless enough to open the door to ISIS by taking in “refugees”.
If Obama and Kerry succeed in their plan to bring tens of thousands of Syrian migrants to America, the next brutal massacre might not happen in Paris. It might happen in one of our cities instead.
Daniel Greenfield is a New York City based writer and blogger and a Shillman Journalism Fellow of the David Horowitz Freedom Center.
Tuesday, November 24, 2015
Posted by solsticewitch13 at 6:40 PM
Posted by solsticewitch13 at 6:29 PM
Posted by solsticewitch13 at 6:27 PM
Posted by solsticewitch13 at 6:26 PM
Steven Emerson, Executive Director
November 24, 2015
Imposing Our Idea of Order in Mideast Doesn't Work
by Pete Hoekstra
November 24, 2015
Western Europe has been redefining the nation state since 1945 when it formed the European Union following World War II.
The simple concept of six sovereign countries focused on a minor range of economic and defense issues has expanded to 28 countries with the Euro serving as the common currency for most of them.
The Eurozone allows for the largely unimpeded movement of people, goods, services and capital across borders. It has also resulted in unprecedented cooperation on crime, security and finance among its members.
If the model succeeded there, can it apply to some of the most troubled areas of the world such as the Middle East and northern Africa?
In fact, their history contains plenty of evidence that compulsory European ideals and standards of governance are part of the deep-rooted problems rather than a solution.
Iraq, Syria, Libya, and other territories with significant instability and chaos may present the perfect opportunities, however, to start rethinking the entire premise of the nation state.
The genocidal ISIS campaign has effectively reshaped long-recognized borders in the region as it seeks to expand its caliphate. The civilized world is committed to defeating the brutal terrorist organization, but nobody has a plan for what happens next.
It is almost impossible for Iraq, Syria, and Libya to ever again exist as they have since after World War I. The French, British and Italians created the three countries with arbitrary, unnatural boundaries that split ethnic groups and attempted to impose a framework of Western governance.
The formula largely failed. Only ruthless strongman dictators like Saddam Hussein, Bashar al-Assad and Moammar Gadhafi could hold them together.
Now that they are no longer functioning states — and it is highly unlikely that they can, will or should reemerge in the manner that they existed before — all stakeholders can become more creative about how to move them forward.
Let's begin with Iraq and Syria and help them to foster new models of governance and cooperation.
It has become painfully obvious that Iraq cannot function autonomously with a centralized power controlled by any one political or religious faction.
Perhaps Iraq and Syria could implement an overarching civilian directorate with rotating leadership among the Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds. It would monitor and distribute oil revenues to three super-autonomous regional executives with their own militaries.
A more federalized administration with strong "satellite" tribes would pose an unusual but potentially effective structure. Who would have thought in 1945 that much of Europe would allow free movement across borders, create a central government and have nearly all of its countries using the same money?
Libya is a different animal all together. It has existed with various leaders pressured by world powers throughout its history. Its devolution after the disastrous 2011 NATO/U.S. intervention continues with competing groups fighting for authority and no party gaining majority support.
The country desperately needs a strong, transparent governing coalition to emerge that can manage the competing tribal factions, possibly by granting them their own degree of sovereignty. The West can help to facilitate — but by no means direct — such a transition.
Who knows how they all might evolve? What we do know is that the past and current structures are unsustainable and dangerous.
Europe and the United States can advise and assist but stop trying to impose its governing models on them. It didn't work after World War I and it hasn't worked more recently in Iraq, Libya, or Afghanistan. All three have failed miserably.
The cultures, educational attainment, and capacity for economic freedom can enable them to become flourishing communities, but to believe it can only occur under western styles of democracy is naïve and arrogant.
World leaders need to approach the problems in the Middle East and northern Africa with imaginative ideas such as those that created the EU.
Forcing square pegs into round holes has not succeeded. The conditions in post-World War II Europe that allowed for the unprecedented template for interaction cannot and will not apply to those whose tribal mindsets and religious beliefs dominate modern politics.
Europe and the United States are better off extending a helping hand to those who know best rather than dictating to them an unfamiliar future.
Pete Hoekstra is a Shillman senior fellow at the Investigative Project on Terrorism. He represented Michigan for 18 years in Congress, including time as chairman of the U.S. House Intelligence Committee. He is the author of "Architects of Disaster: The Destruction of Libya." For more of his reports, Go Here Now.
The IPT accepts no funding from outside the United States, or from any governmental agency or political or religious institutions. Your support of The Investigative Project on Terrorism is critical in winning a battle we cannot afford to lose. All donations are tax-deductible. Click here to donate online. The Investigative Project on Terrorism Foundation is a recognized 501(c)3 organization.
To subscribe: http://www.investigativeproject.org/list_subscribe.php
202-363-8602 - main
202-966-5191 - fax
Posted by solsticewitch13 at 6:24 PM
- Taliban suicide assault squad pledges allegiance to emir Mullah Mansour
- Islamic State ‘province’ bombs hotel in the Sinai
- Al Nusrah Front fights Iraqi militia in Aleppo
Posted: 24 Nov 2015 09:01 AM PST
The Muaskar ul Fida is likely loyal to the Haqqani Network, an al Qaeda-linked Taliban group that is backed by Pakistan's military and intelligence establishment.
Posted: 24 Nov 2015 06:51 AM PST
The Islamic State's Sinai "province" claimed responsibility for a bombing at a hotel in the Sinai earlier today. The group continues to run a prolific insurgency and has proven it is capable of committing mass casualty terrorist attacks against civilians as well.
Posted: 23 Nov 2015 05:49 PM PST
Iranian-backed Shia militias are fighting for Assad in Aleppo as regime forces, backed by Hezbollah and Russian airstrikes, try to push back jihadists and rebels in the northern province.
Posted by solsticewitch13 at 6:20 PM