Saturday, July 22, 2017

True Security Requires Vetting for Ideology, Not Passport

True Security Requires Vetting for Ideology, Not Passport

by Clifford Smith
July 17, 2017
Be the first of your friends to like this.
Originally published under the title "How Trump Can Use Travel Ban Win to Fix Vetting of Immigrants."
The Trump administration has an opportunity to implement a better system for keeping out the bad apples.
In a ruling that came as a surprise to many, the Supreme Court of the United States upheld key elements of the Trump administration's so-called travel ban. President Trump is claiming the ruling is "a clear victory for our national security." But is a temporary travel pause from six countries a true national security victory?
The president went from an unconstitutional, unacceptable, unworkable, and un-strategic "Muslim ban" to an evolving "travel ban" aimed not at Muslims, but at people from seven (and then six) Muslim-majority countries. While a number of people originating from the countries affected by the travel ban have been arrested on terror-related charges over the years, his measure wouldn't have kept out those responsible for the most deadly acts of terrorism in the U.S. The travel ban is also merely temporary.
Lost in all this is that a major national security triumph is within Trump's grasp if his administration follows its own stated logic for a temporary ban — to create space for a review of our immigrant vetting procedures. This is a worthy goal that has thus far gone unfulfilled.
The real threats to our national security come not from specific countries, nor from moderate Muslims, but from an ideology, namely Islamism or radical Islam, to which an estimated 10 to 15 percent of Muslims subscribe. While some countries have more Muslim extremists than others, there are many good Iranians who oppose the radical Islamist ideology of the Iranian regime, and Canadians who are radical Islamic terrorists.
It is the ideology of entry-seekers we should be worried about, not their passports.
Even theocratic countries with many radicals, such as Iran, have pro-democracy activists who should be free to come to the United States if they wish. It is the ideology, not the passport, we should be worried about.
Updating our immigration vetting procedures to reflect this reality, with new procedures to identify and exclude Islamists, has never been more critical.
Excluding immigrants who harbor ideologies hostile to the United States is not new. Anarchists were excluded from entering the United States in the aftermath of the 1901 assassination of President William McKinley, and laws aimed at excluding Communists remain on the books, specifically excluding "Any immigrant who is or has been a member of or affiliated with the Communist or any other totalitarian party," or others who seek to overthrow the government.
But these laws have not been updated in ways that meet the current threat from radical Islam. Our laws already disallow anyone affiliated with terrorist organizations from immigrating here. However, recent events such as the San Bernardino massacre and numerous attacks in Europe demonstrate that formal association with a terrorist organization is not necessary to inflict massive damage.
Their dedication to a totalitarian, theocratic version of Islam, not a formal association with a terrorist group, is the real problem. ISIS and other terrorist organizations realize this, and thus seek to indoctrinate individuals who are not formally associated with the group to carry out attacks.
Our laws should be updated to deal with this threat, excluding those with beliefs that are fundamentally at odds with the Constitution and would reject it as the supreme governing authority in America. This would exclude Islamists, who are by nature theocrats, while allowing moderate Muslims who believe in the separation of mosque and state.
Polite questioning can be very effective in ferreting out Islamists pretending to be moderates.
New citizens are already required to pledge support for the Constitution; there is no good reason to allow immigrants who are hostile to its principles.

 Of course, people can lie about their beliefs when seeking entry to the U.S., and extremists are more likely than most to lie to achieve their goals. But polite interrogation by immigration staff trained in directing questioning to expose inconsistencies, together with simultaneous electronic screening of their social media and internet activity, can be very effective in ferreting out Islamists pretending to be moderates.
Setting all this up won't be easy, and the path forward will undoubtedly include mistakes. But ignoring this poisonous Islamist ideology when vetting immigrants leads to disillusionment, balkanization, and terrorism. The best way to protect Americans, including moderate Muslims who would like to become Americans, is to ensure radicals are excluded.
Clifford Smith is director of the Middle East Forum's Washington Project.
Related Topics:  Immigration, US policy  |  Clifford Smith

Metal Detectors and Palestinian Lies

Metal Detectors and Palestinian Lies

by Bassam Tawil  •  July 22, 2017 at 5:00 am
  • The slain police officers were stationed there to ensure the safety of Muslim worshippers. The Palestinian spin doctors are attempting to divert attention from the terror attack by making it look as if the crisis began when Israel installed the metal detectors and not when two police officers were murdered.
  • First, the security measures, including the placement of the metal detectors, was not an Israeli initiative but came as a direct and necessary response to a specific terror attack. The Israeli government did not convene and take a decision to install the metal detectors in order to alter the status quo or stop Muslims from praying.
  • Second, it was the Palestinians who took the decision not to enter into the Temple Mount unless the metal detectors are removed. The Palestinians and the Waqf are lying to the world by telling it that Israel is denying Muslims access to their holy sites.
  • The Palestinian opposition to the metal detectors at the Temple Mount means one thing only: that the Palestinians are determined to turn the holy site into a weapons cache and use it as a launching pad to carry out terror attacks against Israelis. If the mosque were then actually destroyed in the process, guess who would be blamed? Possibly that is even the real agenda.
Approximately 4,000 Palestinian Muslims pray outside the entrance to the Old City of Jerusalem, on July 19, 2017, in protest at the installation of metal detectors at the entrances to the Temple Mount. (Photo by Ilia Yefimovich/Getty Images)
The controversy surrounding the Israeli authorities' decision to place metal detectors at the gates of the Temple Mount calls to mind the famous Arab saying, "he beat me and cried then came to me to complain." This inversion of reality is a common among perpetrators who pretend to be victims.
The decision to install the metal detectors came after Arab terrorists murdered two Israeli police officers at the Temple Mount on July 14. The three terrorists -- Israeli Arab citizens from the city of Umm al-Fahm -- used a submachine gun and knives to carry out their attack. The weapons were easily smuggled into the Temple Mount thanks to Muslim worshippers not having been required to pass through metal detectors or undergo body searches by policemen stationed at the gates.


IPT Video: Islam in America As Described by Three Leading Voices

Steven Emerson, Executive Director
July 22, 2017

IPT Video: Islam in America As Described by Three Leading Voices

IPT News
July 21, 2017
Be the first of your friends to like this.

Shaker Elsayed, Jonathan Brown and Yasir Qadhi are considered religious authorities by national Islamist groups. Elsayed remains a senior imam at a prominent Northern Virginia mosque despite a history of radical preaching, and Brown and Qadhi are routinely invited invited to address conventions and fundraisers. The broader public might be surprised to hear their views. 
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.  

202-363-8602 - main
202-966-5191 - fax

Plot to replace Europeans with refugees exposed

WASHINGTON – Millions of migrants mostly from Africa and the Middle East have swarmed Europe in the last three years – the result of what has been explained by world leaders as a war-driven “refugee” crisis.

Yet, a United Nations document, prepared in the year 2000 and rediscovered by WND, reveals the U.N. was already promoting the notion of “replacement migration” in Europe with the support of open-borders non-governmental organizations and “progressive” politicians.

The document – “Replacement Migration: Is It a Solution to Declining and Aging Populations?” – details the plunging birthrates across Europe and identifies a solution: mass immigration.

The 17-year-old document contended mass immigration was necessary to replace the aging populations of developed countries. Without the migration of populations from the developing world, it reasons, economies will suffer because of labor shortages and falling tax revenues.

“Therefore, among the demographic variables, only international migration could be instrumental in addressing population decline and population aging in the short to medium term,” the report concludes.

The report specifically targets the U.S., Germany, Britain, France, Italy, Japan, South Korea and Russia as prime candidates for replacement migration. It is not an obscure study, written and then ignored, but a founding piece of the pro-migration agenda pushed by the United Nations, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and open-borders advocates.

“Following the publication of the draft of this study, the Population Division of the United Nations organized an Expert Group Meeting on ‘Policy Responses to Population Aging and Population Decline’ from 16 to 18 October 2000, at United Nations Headquarters in New York,” the report notes.
“Replacement migration was one among a number of possible policy responses that were considered.”

Is America headed down a suicidal path by following the ‘European model’? Find out in Leo Hohmann’s ‘Stealth Invasion: Muslim Conquest Through Immigration and Resettlement Jihad’ — available now at the WND Superstore.

According to U.N. documents, the meeting was attended by a host of government and non-governmental organizations and individuals, and it featured numerous policy proposals in support of “replacement migration.”

Attendees included the International Organization for Migration, a U.N. group that recently declared that mass migration is not only “inevitable” but “necessary”; the U.N. Population Fund, a group dedicated to “family planning” and the spread of contraceptives; and the U.S. Census Bureau.
Among the invited experts were two Americans, Judith Treas, a sociologist at the University of California at Irvine, and Michael Teitelbaum, former vice president of the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation.

Both experts concluded that a large increase in migration would not benefit the United States, though Treas noted that immigration already accounts for about one-in-five new Americans.

“Immigrants will not prevent the long-run aging of the population, except in the highly unlikely scenario of a ten-fold increase in annual immigration levels,” Treas said.

What do YOU think? Are open borders a globalist power grab? Sound off in today’s WND poll!
When writing about Europe, on the other hand, many experts supported “replacement migration.”
Patrick Buchanan
Patrick Buchanan

Veteran political commentator and former White House adviser Patrick Buchanan told WND the fact that the U.N. “signed on to a mass migration of Third World peoples to Europe and America, to replace the native populations, is consistent with its anti-Western ideology and comes as no surprise.”

“Not long after its birth, the U.N. came to be dominated by delegates, diplomats and staff among whose operative principles was that the West was guilty of historic crimes against humanity, and that justice demanded the endless transfer of the West’s illicitly acquired wealth to a Third World it had oppressed,” said Buchanan, a senior adviser to U.S. Presidents Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford and Ronald Reagan and a former presidential candidate.

“Resentment, envy and hatred of the West among intellectual circles at Turtle Bay (the U.N.) – often echoed within the West itself – needs to be resisted like a disease, if the West is to remain the Great Civilization it has been,” he told WND.

Former U.N. Ambassador Alan Keyes told WND he views the “replacement migration” plot as “a decisive existential threat.”

“Given our form of government, careless immigration policies actually exacerbate an attack on the sovereign body of the people, whom the U.S. Constitution vests with ultimate human authority over the government it establishes, and the constitutional terms on which it is established,” he said.

On Wednesday, at a keynote to a gubernatorial forum in Minnesota, former Republican Rep. Michele Bachmann also warned that migration from Islamic countries is a vital threat to Western civilization.

“This is something that we have to be cognizant of, and not be afraid of it,” Bachmann said, according to the St. Paul Pioneer Press.

“That’s what I see in Minnesota: too many people who are being afraid of being called racists, bigots, Islamophobes — I’m not afraid of it, because what we’ve got to do is talk about the truth of the problems that are going on in Minnesota.”

Bachmann said America should “step up deportation in the country of people who are unwilling to bear allegiance to the United States,” stop immigration from Muslim countries and prevent the creation of “parallel societies within our society.”

Ten years ago, when Europe’s demographic crisis was not as apparent as it is today, WND covered an international conference in Warsaw that warned of a coming “demographic winter” that posed an existential threat to Europe as the rejection of the “natural family” was leading to plunging birthrates and the consequent importation of millions of workers from countries with historic colonial ties who spurn Western values and refuse to assimilate.

Male-dominated migration

More than 1.3 million migrants applied for refugee status in Europe in 2015, a record number for the continent, according to the Pew Research Center.

An estimated 75 percent of Europe’s asylum seekers in 2015 were young males, many without significant training or education. Among them were Gambian (97 percent male), Pakistanis (95 percent male), Afghanis (80 percent male), Iraqis (75 percent male) and Syrians (71 percent male).

Aydan Özoğuz, the German commissioner for immigration, refugees and integration, told the Financial Times that only 25 percent of recent migrants to Germany would find employment in the next five years.

“Many of the first Syrian refugees to arrive in Germany were doctors and engineers, but they were succeeded by many, many more who lacked skills,” Özoğuz said.

In Sweden, the government accepted 163,000 asylum seekers in 2015. A year later, only 500 of these migrants had found any work, according to the European English-language news site The Local.

The migrants cost the Swedish government millions of dollars in financial and housing benefits from the state.

Sign the petition encouraging Congress and President Donald Trump to defund and deport the United Nations.

In the Netherlands, 90 percent of Syrian and Eritrean asylum seekers who entered in recent years remain dependent on social benefits.

Almost none were employed after 18 months in the country, reports Wakker Nederland, a Dutch public broadcaster.

In addition, a high percentage of so-called asylum seekers are not refugees fleeing persecution or war but economic migrants seeking to move to Europe for financial benefit.

Only 2.65 percent of migrants who crossed the Mediterranean to Italy in 2016 were deemed refugees, according to a U.N. report. Out of 181,436 migrants, a mere 4,808 were granted asylum in Italy.

The same U.N. report notes that 90,334 of the migrants to Europe did not even request asylum. Instead, they entered into the black market economy immediately.

Many E.U. officials are no longer denying that fact, with one official claiming last month, “In most of the cases, and that is actually the case on the central Mediterranean route, we’re talking clearly and manifestly about economic migrants.”

European Council President Donald Tusk agrees with the assessment, concluding the current policy toward illegal immigration is “not enough.”

Some politicians in Europe are calling for a strict crackdown on illegal immigration, placing the blame for mass migration on NGOs as well as the complicity of the European Union.

“You can’t any longer speak about immigration but about an invasion organized, funded and planned by Brussels with the complicity of Rome,” Matteo Salvini, the leader of Italy’s Northern League party, claimed in May.

Migration ‘inevitable’

Along with the E.U., the United Nations has been a major proponent of migration to the European continent.

The U.N.’s New York Declaration on Migrants and Refugees, a document adopted by the General Assembly in 2016, demonstrates the continued support for migrants provided by the U.N. It includes provisions to “strongly condemn xenophobia against refugees and migrants and support a global campaign to counter it” as well as “strengthen the positive contributions made by migrants to economic and social development in their host countries.”

The U.N.’s views on migration are further outlined in a video created by the International Organization for Migration (IOM), a U.N. organization that provides services for migrants.

A U.N. propaganda video released in July declares: “Migration is INEVITABLE. Migration is NECESSARY. Migration is DESIRABLE.”

Watch U.N. video promoting mass migration as “necessary”:

Some believe the actions by the U.N. and NGOs are leading to what French writer Renaud Camus termed “the Great Replacement,” in which, over just a few generations, the names of places remain the same but the people and their values change.

The Roman Catholic archbishop of Strasbourg, Luc Ravel, recently stated in the French publication Valeurs Actuelles that France was undergoing such a replacement, pointing to the influx of Muslim immigrants and their high birth rates relative to the native population.

“Muslim believers know very well that their birthrate is such that today, they call it … the Great Replacement, they tell you in a very calm, very positive way that, ‘one day all this, it will be ours,'” said Ravel.

Ravel and other critics on the right provide as further evidence of an engineered “Great Replacement,” the propensity of left-wing media and politicians to decry childbirth, promote abortion and simultaneously declare that migration is needed to raise birthrates, as evidenced in the following screenshots.
But the Great Replacement is seen as a positive for many left-wing political parties across Europe, many of which have been vocal supporters of migrants and regularly court them with policy proposals.

For example in Germany, a whopping 63.7 percent of Social Democrats and 65 percent of German Green Party voters support giving residents without an E.U. passport the right to vote in elections.

A migration policy paper written by experts under the German government’s commission on migration came to a similar conclusion, declaring that migrants should be able to vote in local elections.

Germany’s commissioner on migration, Oezoguz, further believes that the length of prior residency required for citizenship should be reduced.

But the European populace overwhelmingly rejects the current rate of migration.

According to a Pew study, 94 percent of Greeks, 88 percent of Swedes, 70 percent of Britons and 67 percent of Germans report they are unhappy with the E.U.’s handling of refugees.

Prophesying a ‘demographic winter’

In 2007, at the fourth World Congress of Families, attended by 3,300 lawmakers and activists from 75 nations, Poland’s vice premier, Roman Giertych, warned of a coming “demographic winter.”

Returning to the centrality of marriage and families is the only way to avoid civilizational disaster, he insisted, declaring the family as “the hope for Poland, the hope for Europe, the hope for the entire world.”

“Without the family, there is no nation, there is no continent, there is no civilization, there is nothing,” he said.

Just eight months before the congress, Mark Steyn, in his book “America Alone: The End of the World as We Know It,” warned that amid the shrinking of the European family, one of the fastest demographic evolutions in history already was making traditional views of European culture outdated.

He predicted Europe “will be semi-Islamic in its politico-culture character within a generation.”

While it takes a fertility rate of at least 2.1 children per woman for a nation to replenish itself, countries once known for big families, such as Greece and Spain, had fertility rates of 1.2 and 1.1 respectively at the time. The current rate in Greece may be as low as 1.1. Italy’s fertility rate is 1.4, while the country’s Muslim population has grown from about 2,000 in 1970 to 2 million today.
By 2050, Steyn wrote in September 2006, 60 percent of Italians, for example, will have no brothers, no sisters, cousins, no aunts, no uncles.

“The big Italian family, with papa pouring vino and mama spooning out the pasta down to an endless table of grandparents and nieces and nephews, will be gone, no more, dead as the dinosaurs,” he wrote.

Italy is currently the gateway for migrants into Europe, and over 180,000 migrants entered Italy in 2016.

A paper by European Union representative Constantinos Fotakis concluded that “replacement migration” would be beneficial for the entire E.U.: “There is a growing awareness that restrictive immigration policies of the past 25 years are no longer relevant to the economic and demographic situation in which the Union now finds itself. Some European policy makers think that it is now the appropriate moment to review the longer term needs for the EU as a whole, to estimate how far these can be met from existing resources and to define a policy for the admission of 3rd country nationals to fill those gaps which are identified.”

French official Georges P. Tapinos expressed support for mass migration as a humanitarian consideration. Interestingly, the recent massive wave of “refugees” was justified almost purely on the basis of humanitarianism.

Earlier this month, President Trump hinted at the demographic decline in his speech in Warsaw’s Krasinski Square, arguing the survival of the West rests ultimately not on armies and economies but on “strong families and strong values.”

“The fundamental question of our time is whether the West has the will to survive. Do we have the confidence in our values to defend them at any cost?” Trump asked.

“Do we have enough respect for our citizens to protect our borders? Do we have the desire and the courage to preserve our civilization in the face of those who would subvert and destroy it?”

Trump then emphasized: “We can have the largest economies and the most lethal weapons anywhere on Earth, but if we do not have strong families and strong values, then we will be weak and we will not survive.”

Like the reporting you see here? Sign up for free news alerts from, America’s independent news network.

America is headed down a suicidal path, according to Leo Hohmann’s “Stealth Invasion: Muslim Conquest Through Immigration and Resettlement Jihad,” available now at the WND Superstore.

The Long War Journal (Site-Wide)

The Long War Journal (Site-Wide)

Posted: 22 Jul 2017 10:36 AM PDT
The son of Mullah Haibatullah, the emir of the Afghan Taliban, killed himself in a suicide attack that targeted Afghan forces in the southern province of Helmand earlier this week.
Posted: 22 Jul 2017 08:12 AM PDT
Additionally, The US State Department noted that Somali security forces "remained incapable of securing and retaking towns from al-Shabaab independently," and while not explicitly stated, hinted that the African Union Mission in Somalia (AMISOM) is failing.
Posted: 22 Jul 2017 08:04 AM PDT
The Islamic Republic of Iran and its Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) are running a propaganda campaign to appropriate victory in Mosul and the broader war against the Islamic State as their own, while omitting US military support, which has been critical in the campaign.