Out of the many, many terrible policy decisions that have been made by the Obama misadministration, perhaps the worst is the effort being made to “resettle” thousands of Syrian “refugees” into this country. This move has been widely opposed by the American people, and even provoked a rare show of cartilage (can’t call it genuine backbone) in most of the elected Republican state governors. Nobody with any sense wants these “refugees” here because of the obvious security threat that they represent.
In a ludicrous display of hollow-chest thumping, Obama attempted to “shame” his opponents into accepting them by casting these “refugees” as just a bunch of harmless little three-year old orphans and widows. I doubt that anyone who wasn’t already in the tank for him believed it, considering all the empirical evidence we’ve seen so far about Muslim “refugees” from the Middle East. Indeed, those who know anything at all know that what Obama is really doing is importing a future war into our country – one that will eventually be fought right here on our own soil.
Don’t believe me? Then look to the European experience. Europe – much of whose leadership is as ridiculously obtuse as our own – is basically under foreign occupation as I write this. Because of politicians who are so open-minded that their brains have fallen out, large chunks of Europe threw open the gates to over a million Muslim “migrants,” and are now reaping the consequences of their stupidity.
Look at Europe. The first and most obvious thing we see is the increase in Muslim terrorism, whether successful or stifled before it could take place, often being committed by Muslim “refugees.” At least two of the perpetrators of the Paris bombings and mass shootings back in November had Syrian passports and had been processed through Greece as refugees. Other Muslims have plotted attacks in Belgium, in Holland, in France, and elsewhere where they’ve been allowed to settle in large numbers.
But the overt terrorism isn’t all that Europe is suffering. Muslim “refugees” have been perpetrating a “rape jihad” all across Europe, and especially in Germany and Scandinavia, which culminated this past New Year’s Eve in a mass sexual assault in Cologne, Germany, that involved over a thousand “refugees.” Norwegian police recently declared Oslo (the capital) to be “lost.” German police recently admitted to losing control of immigrant neighborhoods. Even as useful idiots push a petition to ban Donald Trump from the UK, British police have had to admit that Trump was actually right, and there ARE “no-go zones” all across Britain where they’ve lost effective control of their own cities to the Muslims. The head of the Swiss military forces has declared that Europe faces a civil war due to the influx of migrants and the aggression they are bringing with them. Politicians all across Europe – apparently having joined the NRA – are exhorting their people to arm themselves for self-defense. Two known members of an ISIS death squad who were posing as refugees were recently arrested in Finland. Muslims have spread fliers all across Sweden threatening the Swedes to either convert to Islam or die. Muslims have vandalized and burned down church buildings everywhere they went. Muslims all across the continent confidently and publicly proclaim that they’re going to “breed out” the native Europeans and establish a caliphate across the continent.
People, wake up. These are not “refugees.” These are not “migrants” looking for a better life or freedom from danger or more opportunity. These are hostile invaders who constitute a societal and military threat to their host countries. These are not harmless little three-year old orphans and widows. The large majority of these Muslim invaders are military-aged males who are purposefully coming into Europe for the purpose of trying to conquer it. Only a fool or a blind man cannot see this.
We should also, by way of contrast, note the example of the handful of European countries like Poland, Hungary, Denmark, and Austria that have refused to allow themselves to be inundated. These countries aren’t seeing the rape and arson and violence and triumphalism that others like Germany and Sweden are. These countries are keeping their people safe, and are doing so by simply asserting their sovereign right to enforce their own borders. It is little wonder that “far-right, anti-immigrant” parties are on the rise in the rest of Europe. Those parties are the only ones with enough wits about them to try to head off the demographic and military disaster that is headed Europe’s way.
So, what about the United States of America?
The obvious question that we should ask anyone who advocates for us to take in more of these “refugees” is this: What makes you think that the Muslims coming here won’t do the same things that they’ve been doing in Europe, once they reach a critical mass of population? Seriously, what makes anyone think the situation here would be any different? The fact is, there is no logical reason – none at all – to believe that.
Indeed, it’s already happening here. We’ve seen terrorist as a result of our policy of taking in Muslim “refugees.” The Tsarnaevs, who bombed the Boston Marathon, were refugees from Chechnya. Muslim immigrants have also committed their share of terrorism. Mohammed Abdulazeez, the Chattanooga shooter, was an immigrant from Kuwait of Jordanian-Palestinian extraction. Tashfeen Malik, the female half of the San Bernardino shooters, was a recent immigrant from Pakistan, married to a husband whose family was also from Pakistan. These are just the most prominent examples.
We’ve also seen the rape jihad begin in America. We’ve also seen Muslim groups threaten violence. We’ve also seen Muslim triumphalism and declarations that America will be destroyed and a caliphate built in her place. These are the actions and words of invaders, folks.
We shouldn’t be surprised about any of this. What we see in Europe, and are starting to see here in America, is actually encouraged in the Qur’an. It is a phenomenon called “hijra,” an Arabic word meaning “migration” or “exile.” The example for this is found in the Qur’an, 8:72-73,
“Those who believed, and adopted exile, and fought for the Faith, with their property and their persons, in the cause of Allah, as well as those who gave them asylum and aid,- these are all friends and protectors, one of another. As to those who believed but came not into exile, ye owe no duty of protection to them until they come into exile; but if they seek your aid in religion, it is your duty to help them, except against a people with whom ye have a treaty of mutual alliance. And remember Allah seeth all that ye do. The Unbelievers are protectors, one of another: Unless ye do this, protect each other, there would be tumult and oppression on earth, and great mischief.”
In this passage, “adopted exile” is translated from the root form hjr, which primarily denotes the concept of “containment” or “confinement,” and can carry the connotation of being quarantined or compartmentalized. The specific context refers to those Muslims (known as muhajirun) who had left Mecca during the early part of Mohammed’s ministry, when the Muslims were coming under persecution, and fled to Medina. There, they joined with Medinan believers, known as ansari, and eventually gathered enough power to be able to conquer Mecca. This exile, however, doesn’t have to be in a friendly land. These verses have also been applied to encourage Muslims to adopt exile in a foreign land and voluntarily confine themselves in a non-Muslim society, refusing to assimilate to their host society. Then, they will agitate for Islam, demanding that their host society adopt Islamic law, even using violence to force non-Muslims to obey Islamic strictures (see, for example, the way Muslims in many places in Europe have forced non-Muslim women to adopt the hijab when out in public). When opposition arises, they join together and give aid and fight for Allah against the unbelievers, since “persecution” has arisen! Hence, what is touted as a defensive doctrine is in reality carried out in an offensive manner.
Eventually, it’s all going to boil over, both here and in Europe. At some point in the not too distant future, the Muslims are going to make their play – and the results, regardless of what they end up being, are not going to be pretty or pleasant. And each of us is going to have to make a choice – will we fight them, or will we surrender to them?
Many Europeans and Americans, generally those on the Left, will be happy to surrender, so long as it means the end of that dreaded white male, capitalistic patriarchy that they hate so much. Of course, if the caliphate did happen, they’ll find out that they didn’t really want anything that comes with it – the burqahs, the throwing gays off of buildings, the stoning people for adultery, whipping women for standing too near a male she’s not related to, and all the rest. By then it’d be too late.
Many more of us, however, will elect to fight them, and this will precipitate the civil war of which I and many other have been speaking. While Americans tend to think of Europeans as completely disarmed, keep in mind that civilian Europe does have guns – even if they’re much more severely restricted – and Europeans have been buying more of them in recent weeks. America, as the left-wingers always tell us, is awash in guns. There are an estimated 300 million firearms in the hands of 100 million Americans. That’s a terrific force, if it can be wielded effectively.
This explains why Barack Obama and his lackeys – who side with ISIS, the other terrorist groups, and with radical Islam in general – are so keen on disarming Americans, especially veterans and others with tactical and weapons training. He knows that an armed America could successfully resist Islamic incursions.
Which we would have to do, if any fighting breaks out. But when it does, just remember this – American citizens will largely be on their own. The police, at both the federal and state levels, have been so thorough indoctrinated with political correctness that any resistance by armed Americans to widespread Islamic violence on our own soil will be treated as “insurrection.” There’s a reason that all kinds of federal agencies maintain militarized law enforcement units. The Department of Education doesn’t employ SWAT teams and up-armored MRAPs to keep unruly kids in line – they’re for keeping in line unruly adults with guns defending their families and communities. In the event of any outbreak of violence, do not expect most police forces above the local level to be on our side – and even then, we could only really count on the support of the rural forces and county sheriffs. So be settled in your own minds how you’re going to deal with that.
As for the military, well, it’ll be a mixed bag. Many in the military will take their oaths seriously, and will not be willing to fire on American citizens who are defending their own country from hostile foreign invaders. Unfortunately, Obama and his crew have spent the last seven years homosexualizing, effeminizing, and mercenizing the armed forces, filling them with a motley collection of illegal immigrants, gang members, and sodomites. These folks will be more than happy to open fire on largely white male Christian “insurrectionists” when ordered to by the Seditionist-in-Chief. Expect that the military may have a civil war of its own, as the good people left in the services will seek to restrain the bad people.
It’s a shame that I would even have to write something like this, that the Left has done so much damage to our social fabric and has so consciously sought to destroy our nation. However, if our own government is acting to import war into our country, we need to be ready for it when the day comes.
© Tim Dunkin