Arithmetic and Guantanamo Bay: Thankful for it; a growing Islamic threat from within and without; and illegal immigration

Posted on January 3, 2011


This here is a very important article about a few realities and the bottom line is that Europe and the Unites States too, better take the threat of Islamic Conquest very seriously. After 100’s of years, Islamic fundamentalists (and there are millions) are ingrained with patience in one key area, which is the slow conquest of individual regions (ie. countries) over decades, and world conquest as an eternal quest. They may create havok and anarchy with terrorist attacks but their underlying goal is very calculated. Over the centuries Islam has conquered many lands, peoples, and countries, and fortunately for the rest of the world has lost some, but not all, of it back. Their are nations conquered long ago such as Iran, or any African nation, and in our most recent century just ended – Lebanon was slowly devoured by Islam, and where it was once peaceful, it is now a terrorist haven.

What is the answer? Controlling and even putting moratoriums on immigration. For the U.S. this is a dual problem because in addition to the level of legal immigration allowed, we have a massive and out of control illegal immigration problem. The Federal government has failed in it’s Constitutional duty to administer a “uniform naturalization (immigration) policy”, while subsequent and simultaneously failing to protect and defend our country against foreign and domestic – invasion and insurrection. Sanctuary cities for example are an illegal farce yet they’re real, and they a a failure of both the Fed and the State Governments that allow them. This is one area that the states are required to cooperate with Fed because states too are required to uphold constitutional law. In contrast if the Fed is failing it’s duties, the States still have their own equilvalent duty to protect it’s citizens, it’s economic wellbeing, and it’s resources as we are seeing with AZ and others. That folks is checks and balances and it’s severely broken down, at the Federal level, and in some states, New York being one of them.

There is a growing problem of bad immigration policy allowing a growing threat of Islamic radicals to foster in New York City and unbeknown to most, in several remote areas of NYS. Radicalized muslims especially don’t assimilate, reproduce at a higher rate (esp when multiple wives are at issue), and having rigid doctrines all but insure their offspring are radicalized too. All this in conjunction with an alarming number of citizens (many of whom also are not assimilated to put it simply) (and many of whom, because they are citizens, are therefore outright subversives and traitors) who are now or have always been recruits and converts and who are working with them, aiding them , and covering for them. They taken many a lesson from how the communists over the decades have infiltrated us, but you should understand that there is a far greater threat now than they were. This is also a problem in several other parts of the country and it is all complicated further by our problem southern border, which they are now and will further exploit. Speaking of the southern border, one final combination in this threat is other nefarious non-muslim groups that are allies with them for whatever reason.

This problem must be addressed and brough under control and as a small part therto, we also consider “Guantanamo Bay, a facility for which I take this occasion to give thanks.”

November 17th, 2010 5:43 am

Arithmetic and Guantanamo Bay

by Roger Kimball

According to my GPS, we are just passing Cuba, whose green hills look lush and inviting off the starboard beam. The name “Cuba” brings to mind the delicious cigars that were circulating on the rear deck last night as a hearty gaggle of National Review “cursers”—that’s Jay Nordlinger’s affectionate term for us—gathered in celebration of a day well spent. The spectacle of Cuba slipping by my window also bring to mind Guantanamo Bay, a facility for which I take this occasion to give thanks.

Thanks? You betcha. How nice that so many of those folks whose goal in life is to murder infidels, i.e., you and me, should be segregated here, a very long swim away from the nearest Boeing 767 to say nothing of any spare boxes of Semtex.

Highlights from yesterday’s panels included Jay Nordlinger’s interview of Bernard Lewis, the eminent scholar of Islam and the Ottoman Empire, and a panel discussion, moderated by NR’s editor Rich Lowry, in which Mr. Lewis along with Andrew McCarthy (you do have his new book The Grand Jihad, right?),
the military correspondent Bing West, John O’Sullivan, Victor David Hanson, and Michael Novak.

Jay’s interview with Mr. Lewis yielded a moderately depressing if familiar litany. The twin facts of 1) massive Islamic immigration and 2) demographic reality ordain that Europe is “inexorably” on its way—well on its way—to Islamicization. Christian Europe has more or less stopped reproducing itself, Islamic Europe is a thriving maternity ward. Sooner or later there will be a reaction to this—possibly an unpleasant reaction—but, said Mr. Lewis, it will probably be too late. The next chapter for the continent known as Europe will be either “Islamized Europe or European Islam. Take your pick.

How about in the Untied States? The demography is not so depressing: fewer Muslims, higher (if only slightly higher) indigenous birth rate. Does the United States have the moxie, the cultural confidence and belief in its own civilization, to overcome the forces of disintegration that assail it? Mr. Lewis said that until a few years ago, the thought the answer was “Yes.” Now, he said, he wonders, which I suppose is slightly more encouraging than a flat out “No.”

Rich Lowry’s opening question was this: are all disputes negotiable? President Obama went to Cairo in 2009 to proclaim a “new beginning” in the relationship between Islam and the West. The key thing to remember, it seems to me, is that a relationship is a two-sided transaction. It’s pleasant to contemplate the universal comity that President Obama’s peace offerings conjure up. What trouble me are folks like Hussein Massawi, a former Hezbollah leader. “We aren;t fighting,” said Massawi, “so that you will give us something. We are fighting to eliminate you.” Rather puts paid to the idea of “negotiation,” doesn’t? At any rate, it reduces negotiation to a choice of what type of casket you’d like for yourself. “And will you be preferring burial or cremation, Madam?”

One problem, as Victor Davis Hanson pointed out, concerns arithmetic. People like President Obama keep reminding us that the majority—the vast majority—of Muslims are not violent jihadist. Noted. Most Muslims, indeed, are horrified by the gruesome antics of their co-religionists: steering airliners into skyscrapers, hacking of the heads of offending journalists, stabbing errant filmmakers: they don’t like it anymore than you or I do.

The problem—well, one problem—is that residue, that “tiny minority.” How tiny is “tiny”? A common estimate is that there 1.2 billion Muslims in the world. Lots and lots of them are just folks, struggling to make the best of things for themselves and there families. But the others? Let’s look at that number 1.2 billion. First, lets give it its zeros:

1,200,000,000

Ten percent is one hundred and twenty million:

120,000,000

One percent—a pretty small minority!—is 12 million.

12,000,000

A tenth of that—not .1, not .01, but .001 percent— is still one million two hundred thousand:

1,200,000

What if there were one million two hundred thousand Osama bin Laden’s in potentia?

Such reflections probably explain why, despite his hopey-dopey “new beginning” “he’s-just-an-isolated-extremist” rhetoric, President Obama has quietly continued virtually all of President Bush’s initiatives when it comes to fighting the “Global War On Terror,” rebaptized as “overseas contingency operations” by the State Department but still deploying the whole panoply of Bush-era options, from renditions and detentions to the intrusive meddling of the “homeland security” department. Yesterday’s news that the 9/11 “mastermind” Khalid Sheik Mohammed would not, after all, be tried in New York put another nail in the coffin of Obama’s misplaced optimism. What will happen now? Andy McCarthy speculated that, for the time being anyway, he will be detained without trial. If only the military commission that had been arranged for KSM had been allowed to proceed in the first place: U.S. taxpayers wouldn’t still be footing the bill for his upkeep and KSM, though he would have been shot or otherwise killed, would at least have been granted the dignity of a fair trial first.

Yet another reason, don’t you think, to give thanks for Guantanamo Bay?

Roger Kimball is a scholar who is the author of several works including:  

December 08, 2010

The Third War on Terror

By Russ Vaughn

In the same period during which almost 1,400 U.S. troops have been killed in Iraq and Afghanistan, nearly 7,000 Mexican citizens have been killed by drug violence.  And that Mexican toll goes up every week in far larger increments than the one from the Middle East.  Recently, in a single event, drug assassins in Ciudad Juárez, the cross-border, sister city to El Paso and one of the largest cities in Texas, murdered a dozen young Mexican children attending a party.  We don’t know how these young people, most of them younger than twenty, may have offended the drug dealers who slaughtered them, but we do know how such lawlessness and disregard for human life should offend us and all people of decency who respect the rule of law.
Let me put this murderous event in geographic perspective for those of you unfamiliar with the proximity between several American border towns and their Mexican counterparts.  The distances involved here are not those usual between cities, but between boroughs or neighborhoods or suburban communities.  In other words, for far too many Americans, such violence is taking place just a few streets over from where they live.  You can kick a football from places in El Paso into colonías of Juárez.  No surprise, then, that bullets from shootouts in the streets of Juárez can, and have, impacted in buildings in El Paso.  For you coastal denizens who see the breadth of your nation only from the air, let me point out that El Paso is much closer to Juárez than is Brooklyn to Manhattan or Hollywood to Malibu.
Many of us who live close to this murder and mayhem have long advocated for our federal government to do more to protect our citizens and deal with this growing threat.  But it increasingly appears that a stronger federal border police presence is simply inadequate to deal with the burgeoning power of the paramilitary Mexican narco-terrorists.  Not only are we looking at the need for an impressive American military presence, but the situation also most likely requires actual American cross-border interventions, probably by battalion- to brigade combat team-sized military units, to return the northern border of our southern neighbor to a lawful state of peaceful coexistence.
I can imagine how most Americans will receive such a dire prognosis when we are already engaged in two foreign wars in the Middle East.  However, as great as the threats presented by Muslim terrorists are, they pale in significance to the possibility of a narco-terrorist-controlled Mexican state with which we share more than thirteen hundred miles of porous border.  If the narcos can seize control of a sovereign nation like Mexico or one of its states like Chihuahua, what is to prevent their thinking they can do the same with parts of the American Southwest?  We already have sufficient cross-border incursions to warrant our ineffective government warning Americans away from portions of Arizona and New Mexico via highway signs because of uncontrolled Mexican drug and human trafficking.
As so many of us in the Southwest have been trying to tell the rest of America, there is a war going on down here.  Because too many of you are so far removed from the battlefield, you remain unconvinced and unconcerned.  Poor Arizona, trying to defend herself from all this lawlessness, came in for nothing but condemnation from a far-too-politicized federal Justice Department and the Democrat-controlled media.  Believe me: the one political group that has a dog in this fight is the Democrat Party, which counts every warm body illegally crossing that border as a lifelong voting constituent from the moment those sandals touch American soil.
As another Vietnam vet friend recently reminded me, the United States has 23,000 active duty troops guarding the border between South Korea and North Korea.  The 160-mile-long Demilitarized Zone is the most heavily defended border in the world.  Those American military forces have been there for fifty-plus years waiting for an invasion from the north that has never happened.  Meanwhile, in the southwest United States, we have only national guard non-combat units protecting our border with Mexico, which is more than ten times as long as that Korean frontier.  And on the Mexican border, the invasion is not just anticipated, but real — a constant, aggressive offensive from the south that has been underway for more than four decades since Lyndon Johnson and the Democrats created the Great Welfare Magnet.
And what should be most frightening to all of us is that those who delivered the terror of 9/11 are very much aware of this slack in American border security.  Do any of you honestly believe that terror organizations sophisticated enough to mount an attack such as 9/11 aren’t aware that by far the easiest way to bring nuclear and biological terror weapons into this country is across that porous Mexican border?  The mission of the United States military is to protect this nation from its enemies.  It’s long past time for them to do so on the Mexican border, where it has become crystal clear that the Mexican and South American drug lords have shown themselves to be America’s mortal enemies.
Recently, Governor Rick Perry of Texas called for the use of American troops inside Mexico:
Texas Gov. Rick Perry, soon to be the leader of the Republican Governors Association, continued his argument Thursday that the federal government needed to halt their intervention in the private sector and refocus their energy toward securing the border — even if that means sending U.S. troops into Mexico.
I guess if the governor of the state with the longest shared border with Mexico is speculating as to the use of American troops inside Mexico, then I’m not so far off in my concerns.  We have an active war zone on our southern border; we just haven’t admitted it yet.
Advertisements
Posted in: Uncategorized