Perspective

Immigration Policy Not Foreign Policy Is The Real Reason For Terror Attacks

Submitted by Henry Armitage

**

There is a mendacious line of argument prevalent on the left that seeks to let Islam off the hook when Muslims commit acts of terror in the West. Jeremy Corbyn’s post-Manchester campaign speech is representative of this, the shriveled old pencil-necked lefty promoting the idea that Western foreign policy in the Middle East is the real reason why so many underage British girls today are in the morgue or in intensive care with items of hardware embedded in their flesh. (Why he didn’t explicitly extend his explanation to cover the girls in sexual servitude to Paki rape gangs is a mystery…)

Besides promising more hospital beds for terror victims and more police to harass people for singing politically incorrect songs, he promised to “change what we do abroad,” essentially claiming that the problem is not Muslims (of whom it appears the attacker was “no more representative than the murderer of Jo Cox was of the rest of us”) but UK foreign policy.

Clearly, there is some superficial truth to this line, making it a useful fallback for the reality-embattled left. However, it is actually a stupid cop-out that needs to be deconstructed.

Note: In what follows I will be using the term “ISIS” broadly to cover all the various mad-as-a-cut-snake jumpin’ jihadi groups causing chaos in the Middle East as an arm of US-Israeli-Globalist foreign policy. K?

ISIS and the Globalists Are on the Same Team

In the first place, it is now common knowledge among people who breathe through their nose that the US and its allies are actually supporting ISIS as a matter of policy. I mean, come on. We now have the likes of Thomas L. Friedman of the New York Times berating Trump in print for (allegedly) fighting ISIS—and this on April 12, in the week after he was induced to break with his campaign policy and actually bombed the Syrian military base over what was probably an ISIS chemical attack against a number of beautiful babies.

Note also that Friedman does not ask “Why are WE fighting ISIS in Syria,” but “Why is TRUMP fighting ISIS in Syria? A tacit acknowledgment that it was not the previous Government’s policy to do so.

And have people already forgotten the Wikileaks emails in which Clinton and Podesta corresponded over how the Saudis and Qatar are supporting ISIS? Or the Goldman Sachs Transcripts that similarly revealed Clinton’s knowledge of intra-Islamic arms supply channels, while Secretary of State? Effectively, she was confessing to aiding and abetting as an “ally” a country that through its terror network was killing US citizens.

It never made a lick of sense to try to resolve a “civil” conflict by fighting against both sides, as the Obama White House and the whole, worldwide globalist cabal has professed to do for the past six years—but, post-Wikileaks, that contention became a bold-faced lie.

Much has rightly been made of the fact that on the one occasion when ISIS forces attacked Israel (by accident), they actually apologised afterward. Ditto the Israeli policy of treating wounded ISIS fighters before blithely sending them “back to the border.” Of course, if ISIS is cozy with Israel, that automatically makes them cozy with the US and her Western allies, too. Such is the way things work in the Pax Americana.

And remember when a congressional hearing back in 2015 was told that literally no more than “four or five” “moderate rebels” trained by the US at a cost of $500 million had not yet defected to ISIS? Likewise, the UK Government has so far spent almost 2.5 billion supporting ISIS in Syria alone. That should have bought Ariana’s fans a little protection, no?

Given that ISIS and related groups have objectively been the beneficiaries of the roughly 5 trillion that the US has now spent on Middle Eastern intervention, perhaps we could extrapolate that the terrorists could hardly wish for better allies than the “crusaders” whose children they are nonetheless intent on blowing to pieces?

Arabs may be dumb, but they are not that dumb—especially the ones agentic enough to manufacture home-made explosives and\or travel the world to join this or that paramilitary organization. They are simply pressing their advantage, knowing that their place, like that of their regional patrons within the global power structure, is currently unassailable. This enables them to go on the offensive and terrorize ordinary Western sheeple who have no idea what is going on, putting in practice the time-honoured, violently expansionist plan that was clearly set out by Mohamed himself. How else are they going to get their worldwide Caliphate? Have a debate with Richard Dawkins?

Given all this, contrary to what Corbyn et al say, there is actually some reason to suspect that if support were withdrawn from Arab terrorists abroad, Jihadi attacks would actually intensify in the West in protest and as disgruntled, US, British and Australian-born ISIS volunteers come home to roost.

 Christian Middle Easterners Don’t Do Terrorism

Perhaps the most pusillanimous refrain that is heard after each new Enriching incident is that we must be extra nice to Muslims to prevent them from radicalizing and blowing us up to assuage their tender feelings. This is why we are told a Muslim ban “would not make us safer.” Somehow, though, the much smaller number of Christian refugees from the Middle East are not treated with such sensitivity.

In the US, Trump’s plan to prioritize persecuted minority Christians as refugees over Muslims was predictably attacked, despite the fact that in 2016 only 1% of refugees accepted from Syria were Christian (where Christians are 11.2% and especially targeted by ISIS groups). Imposition of the Jizya, sex slavery, beheadings, crucifixions…These are some of the things that Christians suffer in ISIS-controlled territories. And typically expatriates express their chagrin at US foreign policy by holding peaceful protest rallies and verbally ambushing the likes of Senator McCain at public events, as seen here:

Yes, as a direct result of US and allied activity in the Middle East, Christians in several countries are being widely persecuted by radical Islamists. Surely they have more reason than their persecutors to feel resentment against the West? The same anti-Christian discrimination occurs in the UK, too. Why aren’t Christians from all over the world volunteering to fight for the Assad Government in Syria, shouting “Kyrie Eleison!” and hitting the nail bomb detonator?

If it were true that “terrorism has no religion,” or whatever, we would expect the hard-done-by Christians whose lands are being overrun by ISIS to be the ones attacking us at home—that is, if we let them in in sufficient numbers for the comparison to be possible. The US takes only 1% of Christians from Syria, as noted above, but the same Pew Research paper also notes that Christian refugees still outnumber Muslim in the US. Similarly, there is no shortage of non-white Christians, Hindus and Sikhs, etc. in the UK and elsewhere throughout Europe.

Now, I am not saying that importing Christian blacks and browns is good policy, only that the violence they do against us is usually not religiously motivated and hence tends to be less spectacular and filed under something other than “terrorism” before being forgotten.

It might also be noted that many born-again Mujaheddin these days lack a Muslim family background. They might be White, like this guy, or victims of their parents’ race mixing, like this guy. Now the question is, if Islam itself has nothing to do with inspiring terrorism, why are unhinged people like this so disproportionately drawn to it?

And of course, my argument wouldn’t be complete without a link to a counter-Jihad site listing the numerous Koranic verses that make it clear “jihad” doesn’t mean having a chat about God over tea and scones.

Muslims are the biggest Victims of Terrorism!

Finally, the left likes to tell us how good we have it in the West. We experience only a small fragment of the world’s share of murderous Muslim attacks, so what are we worried about?

Suck it up, Kaffir!

Obviously, it’s incumbent on us to fully join the Muslim world via continued mass immigration so that we can experience our fair share of this vibrancy. But seriously, does it not occur to these apologists that they are engaged in self-contradiction? If Muslims are the biggest victims then clearly terrorists are not motivated primarily by a sense of injustice committed against them by Westerners.

Sure, partisan warfare is one thing, but this is not 2004 and the attacks we are talking about are not against members of the Iraqi Parliament. But what did these 29 Egyptian Copts do to deserve their fate? Or these 48 Iraqi marketgoers? Maybe they were selling pork products…?

Conclusion

We are going to be hearing more of this excuse from the left and from Muslims themselves in the future as these attacks continue to escalate and #NotAllMuslims becomes increasingly risble. Since we on the real right have no sympathy for Judeo-interventionism, it is tempting to concede the point and then proceed to argue that, well, Muslims don’t actually contribute anything good, so there’s no reason to have them here even if they aren’t all born baby killers…Or we simply allude to the long history of conflict between Christendom and the Dar al-Islam. The latter point should be emphasised as well, but it is not the only reason why people espousing the nonsense refuted here should be pilloried until they learn to think before opening their mouths.

Comment

20 comments

  1. Endymion 14 August, 2017 at 23:46 Reply

    Sometimes I think times were better when faggots weren’t allowed to have opinions. There was no public debate to be had when you were being invaded by your enemies. You simply went to war.

    This is what we need to do: declare the masses legally incompetent children and go to war.

  2. GermanEngineered 31 May, 2017 at 21:07 Reply

    It’s as if the leftists have their families locked in the basement of their homes with a Muslim holding them at gunpoint to say these ridiculous things like, “it’s the UK’s foreign policy that’s the problem.” That would make more sense than actually suggesting they believe it. Assuming the hostage situation is not true, we can say with great confidence that most Proper Whites in the UK are not being white-shamed by Corbyn and his mates any longer. Hence, Brexit. To me, Brexit is 100% about the EU being a sieve to let in all kinds of four-legged animal sex LARPing ragheads.

  3. jsigur 31 May, 2017 at 17:20 Reply

    Immigration policies have nothing to do with false flag capers done to locals by the globalist using various cover organizations. It’s the smoke screen. Oh, are we allowed to question Jewish reporting and fact claims in here?

  4. JosephtheGreat 31 May, 2017 at 00:34 Reply

    One of your better articles for sure and I completely agree. Blaming foreign policy on these attacks is only convincing to those who are ignorant of what US foreign policy actually is. Even the 911 attackers were Saudi arabs who are “great allies” of the US. None of the terrorist in any of these attacks had any loved one or family member killed by US bombings in the middle east. Many of them were second generation who weren’t even born or living in the middle east.

    You’d also expect that they would target someone other than preteens at a concert if their motive was revenge against the government. They would choose a target that would make it clear to the world what kind of message they were trying to send. If I was seeking revenge for a murdered relative I wouldn’t shoot random people on the street. I would find who I believed was most responsible and I would get them.

  5. Hipster Racist 30 May, 2017 at 18:50 Reply

    the US and its allies are actually supporting ISIS as a matter of policy.

    This was an “insane conspiracy theory” not long ago, now it’s conventional wisdom. I wonder what other “insane conspiracy theories” will be conventional wisdom a few years from now?

    • ThomasER916 30 May, 2017 at 23:16 Reply

      >I wonder what other “insane conspiracy theories” will be conventional wisdom a few years from now?

      The JQ

    • Endymion 15 August, 2017 at 00:09 Reply

      Degenerate aliens called Deros, occult secret societies running our World, evil reptilian aliens, Nordic inner earth “aliens”, time travel, space travel, various exotic technologies, the cloning of world leaders, the creation of monstrous chimeras, the reality of psychic phenomena and the ontological implications of consciousness being the foundation of everything that exists.

      But first the Satanic paedophiles must be exposed. After that the sky is the limit.

      Oh, you don’t believe me?

  6. ))) Depeche Europa ((( 30 May, 2017 at 17:45 Reply

    I support the Destruction of the European Union……

    The Rise of Poland and Hungary…….

    And Massive Gun Shipments from Russia……

    ……to White Nationalists in Europe…..

    Ha!!

  7. Dan Osarchuk 30 May, 2017 at 14:28 Reply

    Muslims butcher and blow up thousands a year, but only when a white does something do the Politically Correct call it ‘Hate’ and ‘Intolerance’.

  8. Ken 30 May, 2017 at 14:18 Reply

    I am glad this was written. I have been saying the same thing for years. We control the borders do we not? Enemies have to go through those borders. We spend a trillion dollars on the MIC every year, so there is no excuse that anyone who is a threat is on this side of the border.

  9. Johnny Fascismo 30 May, 2017 at 14:11 Reply

    Bashar al Assad is one of the only political leaders in the middle east who is protecting Christians. If you are a Christian, and you support the “moderate” rebels, you are in effect an apostate.

    Foreign policy and immigration policy are intertwined in facilitating attacks like what happened in Manchester last week. Overthrowing the Assad regime is of no interest to us here in the West. The same can be said about Gaddafi in Libya. These regimes were stabalizing forces in their regions before Western intervention. First they destabalize then they see “now we’re required to take in refugees from the regions and just about anyone else who wants in while we’re at it.” Stop meddling in third world affairs and these regions would still be stable! And if your going to continue to meddle, shut down immigration from these regions. These people are going to be resentful for the destabilzation of their country and are going to lash out on innocent citizens who neither control foreign policy or immigration policy.

    Honestly these people are hostile to us even without the meddling and bringing large numbers of them into our countries probably isn’t a good idea in any context.

    • Ike35 30 May, 2017 at 18:03 Reply

      Yes but our greatest enemy, I mean ally, is hell bent on the order through chaos theory there goy and we all know Izzy gets what it wants.

  10. James OMeara 30 May, 2017 at 12:18 Reply

    “the time-honoured, violently expansionist plan that was clearly set out by Mohamed himself. ”

    And Jesus “clearly” forbade divorce, while saying nothing about abortion or homosexuality or teetotalism. I don’t think Evangelical Christians spend a lot of time trying to eliminate divorce, though. Quite the contrary; these “defenders of marriage” have the highest divorce rates in the US. (Lowest: Catholic, gay-marrying Mass.) Which is to say you can’t predict the behavior of believers on the basis of their supposed Holy Book; or, in other words, an ethnic group is prior to its religion.

    • Ken 30 May, 2017 at 14:32 Reply

      Christianity has the built in excuse that they were born sinners, so therefore it is never Christianity to blame for not having solutions, it is the Christians to blame. I find that hard to reconcile to reason and certainly not logic.

      Are we perfect? I think that is the wrong question. Are there strategies that could be more successful in doing god/s work than Christianity? I believe so. I turn to Mindfulness, Yoga Nidra, and philosophy and science to guide those practices to spiritual understanding of the world and what higher powers may be that bind it. I can only understand what I am capable of understanding, so it makes no sense to me to form a religion or subscribe to somebody elses. I don’t see how the NT is thorough enough to confer any substantial enlightenment of wisdom on its own. Which makes for a very convenient excuse for a priest caste. The concept of both Heaven and Hell create an (apparently) unresolvable paradox. Paradoxes do not exist in nature. If one is found, then it the perspective or question that is flawed.

      In fairness, I am not sure how successful I would be at getting to where I want to go, without the foundation of being a confirmed Lutheran. Can the morality and responsibility I strive for, exist without that foundation? I do not know.

    • Moishe-the-Beagle 30 May, 2017 at 20:40 Reply

      No he didn’t. You just think so bc you were raised catholic. He said it was a sin.

      There is some flexibility of interpretation in religious books but not enough to ever make Islam a religion of peace.