Political Motives for Islamic Colonization

Anyone who has seen a crime investigation show is probably familiar with "Means, motive, and opportunity", and while they may not cover the full complexity of a certain crime, it is self-evident that all three are required for it to be committed.

The crime in question: the reckless import of dangerous, seditious, pernicious, unstable, lawless, violent immigrants from backward parts of the globe into first-world countries, in numbers that would, undoubtedly, threaten their indigenous population in a matter of years from now.
The perpetrators: the executive and legislative branches of the aforementioned first-world countries, in the form of politicians, bureaucrats, diplomats, and whoever may be pulling their strings.

Keep in mind, what follows is merely a theory, based on observations, circumstantial evidence, and psychological behavior patterns.

While it is not hard to see that the ruling factions have had ample opportunity and means to commit this crime, which endangers the very societies they emerged from, the motives behind it remain in the realm of speculation, as we are all fed lies and misinformation - not to mention more direct repression efforts (the EDL members arrested for an imaginary plot come to mind).

There are the suggestions that all of this is done deliberately, due to ideological reasons, powered by guilt over the 'wrongdoings' of the west, adjoined by the dripping if socialist poison into several successive generations. According to this theory, the 'elites' are replacing the working class with foreigners, which they believe they can be controlled more easily, but anyone who compares between the riots of western lower classes, and muslims, can easily see which are easier to control; and if the matter was merely cheap labor, then there is absolutely no need to import Somali rapists, out of all the poor people in the world.
Furthermore, while useful leftist idiots and anarchist-wannabes may think of these barbarians as genuine comrades, the more practical 'elites' exhibit a behavior pattern of fear. When someone is terrified of a bully, he might prefer to strike his own family member, telling him to shut up, lest they get in trouble - even if trouble is bound to come anyways.
Thus, the lashing out of governments, police, and judicial systems against their own population, seem the result of being scared.

Let us now cover a few ground rules regarding politicians, bureaucrats, judges, and similar sort who get to high positions of power:

1. They - unshockingly - value their careers above all else. These people expend considerable effort rubbing elbows with all sorts of characters, to get ahead. When someone works hard to achieve something, he a) believes he deserves it, and b) is unlikely to risk his investment.
2. As mentioned above, they don't get to where they are without making a few connections, which means they now owe a few favors to some folks. To find out what is the agenda of a politician, one has to 'follow the money', and see who he is connected with, rather than listen to his empty rhetoric. In other words, many officials are bought - instead of serving the purpose of their office, they fulfill the narrow interests of puppet masters.
3. Despite Obama's campaign slogan, politicians and bureaucrats strive not to change things, but to 'keep the wheels turning', while maintaining a facade of being in control. It's simply good for business, as 'Democracy' is based on keeping the public lulled, so policy makers can get away with fulfilling the wishes of their support groups - usually on the former's expense.
4. Therefore, politicians tend to favor short-term resolutions that will bring them some immediate credit, over long-term plans that risk making them unpopular, and prefer inaction to risky action. They also don't mind if their short-term decisions would leave a serious mess for someone else down the road.

Now, keeping these basics in mind, let's consider a hypothetical situation, where Saudi princes, or some islamic group, tells these politicians and bureaucrats that in order to enjoy the benefit of their precious oil, they would have to accept large numbers of muslims in their countries?
What would a politician do? In an age where concepts like "national pride", "patriotism", or the notion of western culture having any value, are taboos, taking a stand against islamic extortion would brand him a racist and a bigot, which would be the end of his career. Worse, refusal to comply with this blackmail could lead to an economical disaster, for which he would share the blame, again losing his career, and possibly (depending on which pressure groups he owes a favor to) his life.
The answer, therefore, is a no-brainer - take the deal, and do whatever it takes to keep it under wrap.

Add to that a little self-convincing, as people always find a way to see themselves in a good light, and it's even easier to live with yourself afterwards. After all, in time, all those fast-breeding, angry primitives would come to see the superiority of our generous social security systems, and 3/4 naked pop starlets, and would integrate... wouldn't they?
And if they won't, the results would only be felt 10-20 years later anyway, it would be someone else's problem, and they could always claim to have acted in the interest of multiculturalism and John Lennon.

If the first phone call Obama made after being elected was to the PLO thug Abbas; if he groveled before islam (while blaming the Jews for everything) in Cairo, and humiliated both himself and the US before a Saudi dictator, who rules over a country where 'human rights' is synonymous with sin'n'stoning, then it is quite likely that Saudi* interests were involved in funding his campaign.
Obama is not an idiot - not even a deluded Harvard kid, because those do not survive long in a practical, and cutthroat political system. He may be a socialist and a muslim at heart, or not - it is irrelevant, when morality in politics is merely a theatrical play for the general public, reinforced by the drama hungry media - but what I do know, is that one does not go from being a nobody, to US president, so fast, by sticking to principles.

With the American presidency compromised, it's not hard to imagine that top EU personnel, like UK Prime Minister David Cameron, who promised to fight for turkey's membership in the union, despite its giant leaps towards becoming another islamic theocracy, are also 'on the payroll', as part of the deal. After all, the EU needs Arab oil even more desperately.
Now all these rulers have to do is shut down all those nagging 'islamophobes' at home, who get in the way of 'business as usual', and can risk their careers with an uncomfortable truth. As long as most of the public is kept asleep, content to go to parties and watch celebrities, they can end their terms peacefully, without fear of being remembered in history as the second Chamberlain.

This would not be the first time in history where an imperialist, expansionist force has used its economical power to subvert and coerce other nations to do its bidding, but just because our non-leaders are fine with selling our future short, while they fly off in private jets to a safer zone, or hide inside walled neighborhoods, while their countrymen are raped and murdered, doesn't mean we should stay silent, and allow it to happen.

So speak now, while you still can! Express your dissent today, when there's still a viable tomorrow!

---

* Hammas being the Iranian puppet, and PLO/Fatah the Saudi one, through the EU and the US.

4 year old girl hacked to death by muslim mother

This is a very gruesome story and the ending is tragic. A four year old girl was found dismembered in her home with her muslim mother listening to recordings of the qur'an.

I am at a loss over this except to state that once again we are witnessing barbaric violence and death from the tenets of islam and islamic teachings, as the qur'an.

The 'religion of pieces' strikes again against those who are the most helpless against it. From the Sun.co.uk

"There is no peace within islam, and with islam there will NEVER be peace."

---

Mum ‘chops up her girl’

By MIKE SULLIVAN

Crime Editor

and RHODRI PHILLIPS

A MOTHER was under arrest last night after her four-year-old daughter was murdered and horrifically mutilated.

The child's disembowelled corpse was found with her heart and other organs cut out and placed in different rooms of the family's flat.

Muslim mother Shayma Bharuchi, 35, was allegedly sitting rocking back and forwards next to the remains of daughter Nusayba in their kitchen.

She was listening to readings of the Koran being played through her headphones on an MP3 player at ear-splitting volume.

The gruesome scene was discovered by Nusayba's father Jerome Negney, 36, when he arrived home at the flat in Clapton, East London, mid-afternoon on Thursday.

Shayma is alleged to have stabbed the child and then dismembered her in a ritualistic-style bloodbath.

Jerome, believed to be a Muslim convert, called 999 and paramedics pronounced Nusayba dead at the scene. Her mother - thought to have two other children, aged 14 and 16, who were not at home at the time - was arrested.

Police confirmed they were not looking for anyone else over the tragedy.

Doctors who examined Shayma later declared her unfit for police interview and she was sectioned under the Mental Health Act.

Yesterday shocked neighbours told how they saw her led weeping from the flat by two police officers.

One resident, a mum in her 30s, said: "She always wore a black headscarf, a veil.

"Usually you could only see her eyes.

"I often heard shouting coming from the flat as she and a man argued. "Their quarrels would become very heated."

Yesterday police were keeping watch outside the flat as specialist child abuse officers began their investigation. A woman remained in custody.

Original article is here.

Lamar Smith (R-TX-21) on illegal immigration and terrorists

This is from Blogs For Borders, another great site that I have found to be an excellent site with very reliable sources. Most here know where I stand on illegal immigration, securing of our borders, terrorism and how current and past administrations have failed in all of these areas. Some administrations did a much better job than others. Currently, we have what I think is the WORST administration since 'Jimmy, the Dhimmi Carter.'

---

Immigration Enforcement and Secure Borders Keep America Safe From Terrorists

Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX-21): When naturalized U.S. citizen Faisal Shahzad was arrested for his terror plot to detonate a bomb in Times Square, it exposed more than the ongoing attempts by international terror organizations to attack America and the weaknesses in our intelligence gathering. The arrest of Faisal Shahzad was another in a long line of examples that demonstrate the need to secure our nation’s borders and enforce our nation’s immigration laws to keep terrorists from entering the United States.

For years, we’ve known that strong border security is a fundamental component of national security. If we don’t know who is coming into the country, then we don’t know what harm they might do us. The Times Square bomber was able to gain U.S. citizenship because a background check failed to identify him as a threat. Shahzad attempted to blow up a car left in Times Square. Fortunately, his attempt failed due to alert citizens and a poorly constructed bomb. He recently pled guilty to terrorism charges and is awaiting sentencing.

Similarly, Omar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the Christmas Day bomber, had previously been given a visa to enter the U.S. But even after his own father called to alert authorities that Abdulmutallab might have been radicalized, his visa was not revoked and he was allowed to board a plane to the United States. As the plane approached its destination—Detroit—Abdulmutallab tried to detonate a bomb under his clothing, in an attempted suicide attack. His plot also was thwarted by alert passengers and a poorly made bomb.

Our national security policy should consist of more than relying on dumb bombers and smart citizens. Sooner or later, a terrorist is going to build a bomb that works. In both of these terror attempts, our immigration system failed to keep these terrorists either from entering the U.S. or becoming citizens. Strong immigration enforcement and border security are the first line of defense against terrorists. If we can prevent terrorists from entering the U.S., we can prevent attacks on U.S. soil.

This is not the first time that our immigration system has been used by foreign terrorists to gain a safe haven in the United States. The 9/11 hijackers also received visas to come to this country. And once they were here, all but one of the 9/11 hijackers acquired some form of a U.S. identification document. These forms of ID ultimately helped them board commercial flights on 9/11.

Following the devastating attacks, Congress appointed the 9/11 Commission to examine intelligence failures that led to September 11. The 9/11 Commission recognized these immigration-related weaknesses as part of the problem. To keep terrorists—who may already be in the U.S. illegally—from getting valid forms of ID, Congress passed the REAL ID Act. The law prohibits illegal immigrants -- including terrorists -- from obtaining forms of identification that can be used for federal identification purposes such as boarding planes and entering federal buildings. Regrettably, the Obama administration supports repealing the law.

To address visa security, Congress created the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Visa Security Program. The goal was simple: increase the security of the visa process at U.S. embassies and consulates around the world. At visa-issuing posts where the program exists today, 100% of applicants receive additional screening. Unfortunately, such screening only exists at 14 locations out of a list of the 29 designated “highest-risk” posts worldwide. At other posts, less than two percent out of 5.8 million applications receive additional screening.

The Abdulmutallab “near miss” is a reminder that we need full screening of visa applications at all “high risk” posts. That’s why Republicans in the House and Senate introduced the Secure Visas Act of 2010. It mandates that the Department of Homeland Security maintain the Visa Security Program at the 14 consular posts that already have them and create new units at the 15 other posts that ICE has designated as “highest-risk.”

Terrorists may also be exploiting weaknesses in the Southwest border to enter the U.S. illegally. In 2007, then Director of National Intelligence Admiral McConnell confirmed that the U.S./Mexico border is a gateway to the U.S. for terrorists. According to recent news reports, the Department of Homeland Security issued a terror watch regarding possible illegal crossings into the U.S. by terrorist suspects and recruiters. The report came from Texas authorities who allegedly were warned that Somali terrorists—members of Al Shabaab, a group aligned with Al Qaeda—are illegally crossing the U.S.-Mexico border.

It makes no sense to deny the link between immigration enforcement and national security. If we want to prevent attacks, we need to keep terrorists from getting visas and stop them from coming to the U.S. and obtaining citizenship. That means enforcing our immigration laws, not ignoring them! Terrorists will use any means possible to enter the U.S. The only way to guarantee that we will not have another terror attack on U.S. is to strengthen border security and enforce our immigration laws. Until we do that, Americans will remain vulnerable to attacks.

Lamar Smith represents Texas’ 21st district in the U.S. House of Representatives and ranking member on the House Judiciary Committee.

Hat tip: Blogs For Borders