The establishment propaganda media playing its predictable game, to dwindling audiences. My latest at The Geller Report:
President Trump has signed executive orders calling for the building of a wall on the Mexican border and instituting a temporary ban on immigration from seven countries that are hotbeds of jihad terror, and the establishment propaganda media is enraged. How dare the United States of America move to protect and defend itself?
The New York Times ran a piece headlined: “Anxiety About Muslim Refugees Is Stoked Online by the Far-Right Media.” It claimed: “For the months leading up to the presidential election, and in the days since President Trump took office, ultraconservative websites like Breitbart News and Infowars have published a cycle of eye-popping stories with misleading claims about refugees. And it is beginning to influence public perception, experts say.”
Here’s some real news for the fake news purveyors over at the New York Times: the “far-right media” isn’t responsible for “anxiety about Muslim refugees.” Who is actually responsible? People such as Somali Muslim migrant Mohammad Barry, who in February 2016 stabbed multiple patrons at a restaurant owned by an Israeli Arab Christian; Ahmad Khan Rahami, an Afghan Muslim migrant who in September 2016 set off bombs in New York City and New Jersey; Arcan Cetin, a Turkish Muslim migrant who in September 2016 murdered five people in a mall in Burlington, Washington; Dahir Adan, another Somali Muslim migrant who in October 2016 stabbed mall shoppers in St. Cloud while screaming “Allahu akbar”; and Abdul Razak Artan, yet another Somali Muslim migrant who in November 2016 injured nine people with car and knife attacks at Ohio State University.
What’s more, all of the jihadis who murdered 130 people in Paris in November 2015 had just entered Europe as refugees. In February 2015, the Islamic State boasted it would soon flood Europe with as many as 500,000 refugees. The Lebanese Education Minister said in September 2015 that there were 20,000 jihadis among the refugees in camps in his country. On May 10, 2016, Patrick Calvar, the head of France’s DGSI internal intelligence agency, said that the Islamic State was using migrant routes through the Balkans to get jihadis into Europe.
But as far as the fake news purveyor known as New York Times is concerned, it’s all just fearmongering by the “far-right media.”
Meanwhile, The Hill published an op-ed entitled: “Trump’s refugee ban is the perfect ISIS recruiting tool.” In it, the estimable Stuart Shapiro, clearly a deep thinker, declared that Trump’s immigration ban was “amazing fodder” for the Islamic State’s “anti-U.S. rhetoric.” Shapiro lamented that “an organization that was on the run in Syria and Iraq has just been handed an amazing recruiting tool: A written proclamation from the U.S. president that everything they’ve been saying all these years about the United States being at war with Muslims is true.”
The Hill is an execrable and cowardly rag, eager to kowtow to Left-fascists and Islamic supremacists, but this is over the top even for it. Their “reasoning” here appears to be that if we defend ourselves against Islamic jihadists by temporarily stopping immigration from jihad terror hotspots, it will only create more jihadists. So we must let that immigration continue, even though Islamic jihadists will be among the immigrants, and that will presumably make for fewer jihadists. If, in other words, we allow jihadis to enter the country and murder a certain number of American citizens, that will pacify other Muslims and keep them from becoming jihadis. But if we stop this immigration even temporarily in an attempt to prevent jihadis from entering the country, Muslims who were hitherto peaceful and moderate will be so enraged that they will take up arms against us.
This is an inversion of rational thought that only the Leftists of The Hill could possibly swallow. It’s tantamount to saying that we must not defend ourselves, because that will only embolden our attackers further. We should instead surrender to those attackers.
Also, Barack Hussein Obama was President of the United States from January 20, 2009 to January 20, 2017. He flung the nation’s doors wide open to Muslim migrants, and heavily favored Muslims over non-Muslims. Did this stop Islamic State recruitment? Did it even slow it down? No, the Islamic State proclaimed itself the caliphate on June 29, 2014, during Obama’s presidency, and repeatedly declared its intention ultimately to conquer the U.S. It also repeatedly called for the murder of Americans. So we have solid evidence that an open-door immigration policy does not in reality pacify Islamic jihadis.
Remember also that the Islamic State declared:
The fact is, even if you were to stop bombing us, imprisoning us, torturing us, vilifying us, and usurping our lands, we would continue to hate you because our primary reason for hating you will not cease to exist until you embrace Islam. Even if you were to pay jizyah [tax for infidels] and live under the authority of Islam in humiliation, we would continue to hate you.
Clearly, then, the Islamic State will continue to hate us even without immigration restrictions.
The Hill is outstandingly ridiculous even among Leftist establishment propaganda media outlets. But it is just echoing the Left’s line: the Los Angeles Times published a piece claiming the same thing that The Hill did. For the American Leftist intelligentsia today, the worst thing an American President can do is move to protect America.
It’s an indictment not of Trump, but of the Left.