— by Polydamas
The terrorist attack that claimed the lives of more than fifty Americans and injured the same number last night at a nightclub in Orlando, Florida should not have come as a surprise to anyone. According to news reports, the murderer, one Omar Mateen, had pledged his allegiance to the fundamentalist Islamic State in Iraq and Syria. He was an American-born Muslim, born in New York to parents from Afghanistan. His motivation for specifically attacking the Pulse nightclub in Orlando was reputed to be his disgust with the gay lifestyle of the club’s patrons.
There is no reason to believe that this mass murder will yield any different reaction from the mainstream media than after the mass murder perpetrated seven months ago in San Bernardino when Syed Rizwan Farook and his wife Tashfeen Malik murdered 14 people and wounded 29 others. The same chattering class of commentators will indignantly proclaim that Islam is a most peaceful religion and that all peace-loving Muslims should not be subjected to discriminatory treatment on account of a few, bad and unrepresentative apples.
The American left is more than eager to give Muslim Americans every benefit of doubt and vociferously denounces the collective guilt of all Muslims for the sins of the few. It also roundly condemns as “ethnic profiling” and “racist discrimination” any advance surveillance and interdiction efforts of radical Muslims by law enforcement agencies. However, in sharp contrast and very hypocritically, the American left is very eager to fan the flames of hatred and attribute collective guilt to millions of peaceful gun owners every time that a criminal or deranged individual commits (mass) murder with his or her firearm. While Muslims are absolved of guilt by association, the left is quick to pronounce the National Rifle Association and every American gun owner collectively guilty for every murder that is committed by others. After every mass murder, there is no shortage of inflammatory tweets by leftists that advocate that gun owners should be shot with their own weapons or imprisoned or, at the very least, be dispossessed of their firearms and possessions.
In the coming days, there will be many leftist politicians who will attempt to capitalize on this crisis to propose the outright repeal of the Second Amendment and the complete confiscation of every firearm held in private hands. Democratic Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton has already expressed that her platform required the complete prohibition of private firearm ownership along similar lines as Australia and Great Britain. Whenever there is any crisis, the standard leftist response is always more government control and less individual liberty.
The question that is on the lips and on the minds of every safety-conscious American is what can be done to prevent similar acts of terrorism in America. First, we must ratchet down unrealistic expectations of safety and security and live in the real world. We do not live in a world of Utopian fantasy, and, unfortunately, no country in the world in the past, present or future could or can possibly guaranty the perfect safety of its citizens. We must learn to accept a certain baseline level of innocent civilian casualties just as we have learned to accept a certain baseline level of automobile-related deaths.
Second, enacting draconian new laws that create more “gun free zones” which should be more accurately called “victim disarmament zones” will not be effective. Instead, we must learn the lessons that Latin American countries and Middle Eastern countries like Israel have learned decades ago in dealing with terrorism. One cannot travel in Mexico, Central or South America without seeing armed security guards wielding automatic firearms standing outside government buildings, churches, large restaurants, sports venues, movie theaters, and supermarkets. There were more than forty armed guards outside the Curtis Culwell Center in Garland, Texas on May 3, 2015 to protect the 200 attendees at the “First Annual Muhammad Art Exhibit and Contest” sponsored by Pamela Geller’s organization American Freedom Defense Initiative. These guards shot and killed Elton Simpson and Nadir Soofi, the two radicalized Muslims who attempted to massacre the attendees. The lesson here is that every business establishment that is open to the public must take concrete steps to protect its business patrons, including hiring security guards. The only practical antidote to massacres is more security and visible frearms, not disarmament.
Third, we must rid ourselves of dangerous illusions that the many Middle Eastern refugees that the Obama administration has been settling clandestinely in every city and town all across America are all simply here to start a new and peaceful life in America. President Barack Obama can promise the American public until the cows come home that each one of these refugees has been thoroughly vetted by immigration and the Department of Justice. If it is not impossible for Omar Mateen, who was born in the United States and grew up among Americans, to become radicalized and to decide to forcibly impose his religious Muslim Sharia law on the kufr unbelievers, it is not impossible that a certain percentage of the young male Muslim refugees who have just arrived also harbors similar beliefs and propensities to enforce them with violence.
There was an excellent article last year in Front Page Magazine by Daniel Greenfield titled “The Death of Europe: How the Mohammed Retirement Plan Will Kill Europe” and dated October 21, 2015 (http://bit.ly/1GizN8z), which is respectfully reproduced below. Over the past half century, Europe has transplanted into its midst many Muslim immigrants to prop up European socialism. The article states “The Muslim migrants are meant to be the retirement plan for an aging Europe. They’re supposed to keep its ramshackle collection of economic policies, its welfare states and social programs rolling along”. Mr. Greenfield correctly notes, “Why should 23-year-old Mohammed work for four decades so that Hans or Fritz across the way can retire at 61 and lie on a beach in Mallorca? The idea that Mohammed would ever want to do such a thing out of love for Europe was a silly fantasy that European governments fed their worried citizens”.
Mr. Greenfield observes that “Mohammed doesn’t share European values. Nor are they likely to take hold of him no matter how often the aging teachers, who hope he gets a job and subsidizes their retirement, try to drill them into his head. Europeans expect Mohammed to become a Swede or a German as if he were some child they had adopted from an exotic country and raised as their own, and work to subsidize their European values”. Mr. Greenfield explains that “European social democracy reduces society to a giant insurance plan in which money is pooled together. But insurance is forbidden in Islam which considers it to be gambling. European social democracy expects him to bail it out, but to Mohammed, European values are a crime against Islam”. He continues that “Islamic values are not compatible with European values. Not only free speech and religious freedom, but even the European welfare state is un-Islamic”. He concludes that “The Mohammed retirement plan won’t save European Socialism. It will bury it.”
For the same reason that Europe’s grand leftist experiment with Islam to prop up its socialist public infrastructure has failed miserably, President Obama’s leftist social experiment to import Muslims into the United States in order to teach them the values of living in a pluralistic and tolerant democratic society will also fail. Among these refugees there is a certain percentage of Omar Mateens and Syed Rizwan Farooks. Despite America opening its arms to them and giving them housing and government jobs, they will simply not open their hearts and their minds to embrace gay people just because enlightened American culture has so decreed. They do not get their values and morals from tolerant American churches and do not embrace American culture as disseminated by Hollywood. Their allegiance is first, foremost, and only to Islam — and their beliefs are sincerely-held and their actions are fully supported by the Qu’ran.
As more and more Muslims arrive on the shores of America, they will prove themselves highly resistant to assimilation in the melting pot of America, will refuse to compromise their religious beliefs, and will use violent means to assert their dominance over the decadent west. As they become more numerous and dominant, they will make America submit or die trying. Americans should reasonably expect a good percentage of these Muslims to follow up their religious beliefs with consistent deeds and to attack and destroy any pillars of our pluralistic and tolerant society that are incompatible with Islam and with Sharia law.
Americans must understand that, unless they turn away from the path that President Obama and the left have decreed from their ivory towers, Europe’s dire present will be America’s future, complete with daily and relentless persecution of dogs that are considered unclean by the Qu’ran, gays and lesbians, Jews and Christians, and women who do not dress and behave modestly enough, and anyone who does not submit in accordance with the immutable dictates of the Qu’ran and Sharia law.
===========
The Death of Europe
How the Mohammed Retirement Plan Will Kill Europe
Daniel Greenfield
Front Page Magazine
October 21, 2015
European leaders talk about two things these days; preserving European values by taking in Muslim migrants and integrating Muslim migrants into Europe by getting them to adopt European values.
It does not occur to them that their plan to save European values depends on killing European values.
The same European values that require Sweden, a country of less than 10 million, to take in 180,000 Muslim migrants in one year also expects the new “Swedes” to celebrate tolerance, feminism and gay marriage. Instead European values have filled the cities of Europe with Shariah patrols, unemployed angry men waving ISIS flags and the occasional public act of terror.
European countries that refuse to invest money in border security instead find themselves forced to invest money into counterterrorism forces. And those are bad for European values too.
But, as Central European countries are discovering, European values don’t have much to do with the preservation of viable functioning European states. Instead they are about the sort of static Socialism that Bernie Sanders admires from abroad. But even a Socialist welfare state requires people to work for a living. Maine’s generous welfare policies began collapsing once Somali Muslims swarmed in to take advantage of them. Denmark and the Dutch, among other of Bernie Sanders’ role models, have been sounding more like Reagan and less like Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren.
Two years ago, the Dutch King declared that, “The classic welfare state of the second half of the 20th century in these areas in particular brought forth arrangements that are unsustainable in their current form.” That same year, the Danish Finance Minister called for the “modernization of the welfare state.”
But the problem isn’t one of modernization, it’s medievalization.
27% of Moroccans and 21% of Turks in the Netherlands are unemployed. It’s 27% in Denmark for Iraqis. And even when employed, their average income is well below the European average.
Critics pointed out in the past that a multicultural America can’t afford the welfare states that European countries have. Now that those same countries are turning multicultural, they can’t afford them either.
Europe invested in the values of its welfare state. The Muslim world invested in large families. Europe expects the Muslim world to bail out its shrinking birth rate by working and paying into the system so that its aging population can retire. The Muslim migrants however expect Europe to subsidize their large families with its welfare state while they deal some drugs and chop off some heads on the side.
Once again, European values are in conflict with European survival.
The European values that require Europe to commit suicide are about ideology, not language, culture or nationhood. But the incoming migrants don’t share that ideology. They have their own Islamic values.
Why should 23-year-old Mohammed work for four decades so that Hans or Fritz across the way can retire at 61 and lie on a beach in Mallorca? The idea that Mohammed would ever want to do such a thing out of love for Europe was a silly fantasy that European governments fed their worried citizens.
Mohammed doesn’t share European values. Nor are they likely to take hold of him no matter how often the aging teachers, who hope he gets a job and subsidizes their retirement, try to drill them into his head. Europeans expect Mohammed to become a Swede or a German as if he were some child they had adopted from an exotic country and raised as their own, and work to subsidize their European values.
The Muslim migrants are meant to be the retirement plan for an aging Europe. They’re supposed to keep its ramshackle collection of economic policies, its welfare states and social programs rolling along.
But they’re more like a final solution.
Mohammed is Fritz’s retirement plan. But Mohammed has a very different type of plan. Fritz is counting on Mohammed to work while he relaxes. Mohammed relaxes and expects Fritz to work. Fritz is not related to him and therefore Mohammed sees no reason why he should work to support him.
European social democracy reduces society to a giant insurance plan in which money is pooled together. But insurance is forbidden in Islam which considers it to be gambling. European social democracy expects him to bail it out, but to Mohammed, European values are a crime against Islam.
Mohammed’s Imam will tell him to work off the books because paying into the system is gambling. However taking money out of the system is just Jizya; the money non-Muslims are obligated to pay to Muslims. Under Islamic law, it’s better for Mohammed to sell drugs than to pay taxes.
That’s why drug dealing and petty crime are such popular occupations for Salafis in Europe. It’s preferable to steal from infidels than to participate in the great gamble of the European welfare state.
Mohammed isn’t staking his future on the shaky pensions of European socialism. He invests in what social scientists call social capital. He plans his retirement by having a dozen kids. If this lifestyle is subsidized by infidel social services, so much the better. And when social services collapse, those of his kids who aren’t in prison or in ISIS will be there to look after him in his golden years.
As retirement plans go, it’s older and better than the European model.
Mohammed doesn’t worry much about the future. Even if he doesn’t make it past six kids, by the time he’s ready to retire the European country he’s living in will probably be an Islamic State. And he is confident that whatever its arrangements are, they will be better and more just than the infidel system.
Sweden will take in 180,000 migrants this year. Germany may take in 1.5 million. Most of them will be young men following the Mohammed retirement plan.
Europeans are being assured that the Mohammeds will balance out the demographic disparity of an aging population with too many retirees and too few younger workers. But instead the Mohammeds will put even more pressure on the younger workers who not only have to subsidize their elders, but millions of Mohammeds, their multiple brides and their fourteen child Islamic retirement plans.
Retirement ages will go further up and social services for the elderly will be cut. The welfare state will collapse, but it will have to be kept running because the alternative will be major social unrest.
Among the triggers of the Arab Spring were rising wheat prices and cuts to food subsidies. Prices went up and governments fell as street riots turned into civil wars. Imagine a Sweden where 50 percent of the young male population is Muslim, mostly unemployed, turning into Syria when the economy collapses and the bill comes due. Imagine European Muslim street riots where the gangs have heavy artillery and each ghetto Caliph has his own Imams and Fatwas to back up his claims.
Europe is slowly killing itself in the name of European values. It’s trying to protect its economic setup by bankrupting it. European values have become a suicide pact. Its politicians deliver speeches explaining why European values require mass Muslim migration that make as little sense as a lunatic’s suicide note.
Islamic values are not compatible with European values. Not only free speech and religious freedom, but even the European welfare state is un-Islamic. Muslims have a high birth rate because their approach to the future is fundamentally different than the European one. Europeans have chosen to have few children and many government agencies to take care of them. Muslims choose to have many children and few government agencies. The European values so admired by American leftists have no future.
Europe is drinking rat poison to cure a cold. Instead of changing its values, it’s trying to maintain them by killing itself. The Mohammed retirement plan won’t save European Socialism. It will bury it.