Posts

Pope Francis changes tune, praises Sweden’s moratorium on immigration

Pope Francis has made it a personal duty to be defender of Islam, and less than a week ago, he stated that “fear of migrants is making us crazy.” Now the Pope has issued a new, astonishing statement, saying that “a ruler must use prudence, because prudence is the virtue of those who govern.” Yet this prudence has been the focus of so-called populists who opposed the reckless immigration policies the Pope has so often endorsed.

Pope Francis stated that Sweden is “an example of a country that had accepted many migrants in the past but realized recently that the migrants coming in were becoming ghettoized rather than integrating in Swedish society.” The Pope further stated that “unassimilated migrants can lead to a dangerous ‘ghettoization’, which is bad for the migrants themselves as well as the nation.” The Pope is now praising Sweden’s moratorium on immigration, after being for a considerable period one of the foremost defenders of open borders, despite not himself leading by example and opening the doors to the Vatican to everyone. Now he has inexplicably made a U-turn, recognizing that the refusal of many Muslim migrants to integrate is indeed a problem, however he may ultimately minimize the seriousness of that problem.

The Pope has good reason to change his tune. “Rising numbers of mostly Islamic immigrants in Sweden had led to the development of Muslim-controlled ‘no-go zones’ where law enforcement fears to enter,” and where 80% of Swedish police want to quit over the dangers Muslim migrants pose to their safety.

“Pope Francis Praises Sweden’s Moratorium on Immigration,” by Thomas D. Williams, Breitbart, January 29, 2019:

Countries that are unable to assimilate migrants should stop accepting more until they are able to integrate them, Pope Francis told reporters on the papal plane Monday.

The pope put forward Sweden as an example of a country that had accepted many migrants in the past but realized recently that the migrants coming in were becoming ghettoized rather than integrating in Swedish society, and so put a moratorium on accepting more.

“A ruler must use prudence, because prudence is the virtue of those who govern,” Francis told reporters during a press conference returning from Panama.

“I am reminded of the example of Sweden, which took in many migrants escaping from dictatorships in Latin America in the 1970s, but all of them were integrated,” he said.

“But last year the Swedes said stop for a while because we are unable to finish the integration process. And this is the prudence of the ruler,” Francis said.

While praising the “generosity” of nations such as Italy, Greece, and Lebanon in receiving migrants and refugees, the pope said that more “realism” was needed.

“The way to solve the problem of migration is to help the countries where migrants come from,” he said. “They come because of hunger or war. Invest where there is hunger. Europe is capable of doing this, and this is a way to help those countries grow.”

Despite the pope’s well-known vocal advocacy for immigration, this is not the first time he has suggested that there are important limits.

Returning from Sweden itself in November 2016, Francis suggested that playing host to unassimilated migrants can lead to a dangerous “ghettoization,” which is bad for the migrants themselves as well as the nation.

On that occasion as well, the pope counseled prudence in determining how many migrants should be received by a given country.

The pope’s words followed on a meeting with an unnamed government official who informed Francis that Sweden was experiencing difficulties integrating the large numbers of migrants who are arriving into the country…….

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column with images is republished with permission. The featured image is by Pixabay.

US govt approved thousands of child bride requests, ‘Middle Easterners had highest percentage of approved petitions’

Of course they had the highest percentage of approved petitions. The government didn’t want to appear “Islamophobic,” and sacrificed the well-being of these girls to that fear.

Islamic tradition records that Muhammad consummated his marriage with (i.e., raped) Aisha when she was nine, and the resultant fact that child marriage is accepted in wide swaths of the Islamic world. Child marriage has abundant attestation in Islamic tradition and law.

Turkey’s directorate of religious affairs (Diyanet) said in January 2018 that under Islamic law, girls as young as nine can marry.

“Islam has no age barrier in marriage and Muslims have no apology for those who refuse to accept this” — Ishaq Akintola, professor of Islamic Eschatology and Director of Muslim Rights Concern, Nigeria

“There is no minimum marriage age for either men or women in Islamic law. The law in many countries permits girls to marry only from the age of 18. This is arbitrary legislation, not Islamic law.” — Dr. Abd Al-Hamid Al-‘Ubeidi, Iraqi expert on Islamic law

There is no minimum age for marriage and that girls can be married “even if they are in the cradle.” — Dr. Salih bin Fawzan, prominent cleric and member of Saudi Arabia’s highest religious council

“Islam does not forbid marriage of young children.” — Pakistan’s Council of Islamic Ideology

Hadiths that Muslims consider authentic record that Muhammad’s favorite wife, Aisha, was six when Muhammad wedded her and nine when he consummated the marriage:

“The Prophet wrote the (marriage contract) with Aisha while she was six years old and consummated his marriage with her while she was nine years old and she remained with him for nine years (i.e. till his death)” (Bukhari 7.62.88).

Another tradition has Aisha herself recount the scene:

The Prophet engaged me when I was a girl of six (years). We went to Medina and stayed at the home of Bani-al-Harith bin Khazraj. Then I got ill and my hair fell down. Later on my hair grew (again) and my mother, Um Ruman, came to me while I was playing in a swing with some of my girl friends. She called me, and I went to her, not knowing what she wanted to do to me. She caught me by the hand and made me stand at the door of the house. I was breathless then, and when my breathing became all right, she took some water and rubbed my face and head with it. Then she took me into the house. There in the house I saw some Ansari women who said, “Best wishes and Allah’s Blessing and a good luck.” Then she entrusted me to them and they prepared me (for the marriage). Unexpectedly Allah’s Apostle came to me in the forenoon and my mother handed me over to him, and at that time I was a girl of nine years of age. (Bukhari 5.58.234).

Muhammad was at this time fifty-four years old.

Marrying young girls was not all that unusual for its time, but because in Islam Muhammad is the supreme example of conduct (cf. Qur’an 33:21), he is considered exemplary in this unto today. And so in April 2011, the Bangladesh Mufti Fazlul Haque Amini declared that those trying to pass a law banning child marriage in that country were putting Muhammad in a bad light: “Banning child marriage will cause challenging the marriage of the holy prophet of Islam, [putting] the moral character of the prophet into controversy and challenge.” He added a threat: “Islam permits child marriage and it will not be tolerated if any ruler will ever try to touch this issue in the name of giving more rights to women.” The Mufti said that 200,000 jihadists were ready to sacrifice their lives for any law restricting child marriage.

Likewise the influential website Islamonline.com in December 2010 justified child marriage by invoking not only Muhammad’s example, but the Qur’an as well:

The Noble Qur’an has also mentioned the waiting period [i.e. for a divorced wife to remarry] for the wife who has not yet menstruated, saying: “And those who no longer expect menstruation among your women, if you doubt, then their period is three months, and [also for] those who have not menstruated” [Qur’an 65:4]. Since this is not negated later, we can take from this verse that it is permissible to have sexual intercourse with a prepubescent girl. The Qur’an is not like the books of jurisprudence which mention what the implications of things are, even if they are prohibited. It is true that the prophet entered into a marriage contract with A’isha when she was six years old, however he did not have sex with her until she was nine years old, according to al-Bukhari.

Other countries make Muhammad’s example the basis of their laws regarding the legal marriageable age for girls. Article 1041 of the Civil Code of the Islamic Republic of Iran states that girls can be engaged before the age of nine, and married at nine: “Marriage before puberty (nine full lunar years for girls) is prohibited. Marriage contracted before reaching puberty with the permission of the guardian is valid provided that the interests of the ward are duly observed.”

According to Amir Taheri in The Spirit of Allah: Khomeini and the Islamic Revolution (pp. 90-91), Iran’s Ayatollah Khomeini himself married a ten-year-old girl when he was twenty-eight. Khomeini called marriage to a prepubescent girl “a divine blessing,” and advised the faithful to give their own daughters away accordingly: “Do your best to ensure that your daughters do not see their first blood in your house.” When he took power in Iran, he lowered the legal marriageable age of girls to nine, in accord with Muhammad’s example.

“US govt approved thousands of child bride requests,” AP, January 12, 2019 (thanks to The Religion of Peace):

WASHINGTON: Thousands of requests by men originally from other countries, including Pakistan, to bring in child and adolescent brides to live in the United States were approved over the past decade, according to government data obtained by AP news agency. In one case, a 49-year-old man applied for admission for a 15-year-old girl.

The approvals are legal: the Immigration and Nationality Act does not set minimum age requirements. And in weighing petitions for spouses or fiancées, US Citizenship and Immigration Services goes by whether the marriage is legal in the home country and whether the marriage would be legal in the state where the petitioner lives.

Take a look: 21pc girls in Pakistan become victim of child marriage, WHO reports

But the data raises questions about whether the immigration system may be enabling forced marriage and about how US laws may be compounding the problem despite efforts to limit child and forced marriage. Marriage between adults and minors is not uncommon in the US, and most states allow children to marry with some restrictions.

There were more than 5,000 cases of adults petitioning on behalf of minors and nearly 3,000 examples of minors seeking to bring in older spouses or fiancés, according to the data requested by the Senate Homeland Security Committee in 2017 and compiled into a report.

Some victims of forced marriage say the lure of a US passport combined with lax US marriage laws are partly fuelling the petitions.

“My passport ruined my life,” said Naila Amin, a dual citizen from Pakistan who grew up in New York City. She was forcibly married at 13 in Pakistan and applied for papers for her 26-year-old husband to come to the country.

“People die to come to America,” she said. “I was a passport to him. They all wanted him here, and that was the way to do it.”

Amin, now 29, said she was betrothed to her first cousin Tariq when she was just eight and he was 21. The petition was eventually terminated after she ran away.

She said the ordeal cost her a childhood. She was in and out of foster care and group homes, and it took a while to get her life on track.

“I was a child. I want to know: why weren’t any red flags raised? Whoever was processing this application, they don’t look at it? They don’t think?” she asked.

Over that period, there were 5,556 approvals for those seeking to bring in minor spouses or fiancées, and 2,926 approvals by minors seeking to bring in older spouses, according to the data. Additionally, there were 204 approvals of applications by minors seeking to bring in minor spouses….

USCIS didn’t know how many of the approvals were granted by the State Department, but overall only about 2.6 per cent of spousal or fiancée claims are rejected.

Separately, the data show some 4,749 minor spouses or fiancées received green cards to live in the US over that same 10-year period.

The country where most requests came from was Mexico, followed by Pakistan, Jordan, the Dominican Republic and Yemen. Middle Eastern nationals had the highest percentage of overall approved petitions.

EDITORS NOTE: This column by Jihad Watch with images is republished with permission. The featured photo is by Emiliano Vittoriosi on Unsplash.

France: Nearly 80% of jihad attackers had been on terror watchlist, 97% percent were on radar of authorities

They’re watching them, but they’re not stopping them. Imagine how different France would be today if French authorities had the will to stop these jihadis, and the determination not to allow any more to enter the country. But that would require a sea change in the French political establishment.

“Report: Nearly all terror attacks in France carried out by radicals already known to police,” by Ken Dilanian, NBC News, January 6, 2019:

WASHINGTON — The vast majority of terror attacks in France were carried out by Islamic radicals who had been known to police or intelligence services, according to a new report by a global security think tank.

Bratislava-based GLOBSEC examined 22 terror incidents in France since 2012. Nearly 80 percent of the people behind those attacks had been on a terror watchlist, and 97 percent had been on the radar of authorities, according to the firm’s new analysis, obtained by NBC News.

The figures included Saïd and Chérif Kouachi, career criminals with long records who killed 12 people in January 2015 in the offices of the satirical weekly newspaper Charlie Hebdo in Paris.

The statistics are likely to bolster the longstanding criticism leveled at France and other European countries that authorities are not doing enough to prosecute and imprison those who pose a threat. Statutes related to providing material support to terrorists, which carry long prison terms in the U.S., are not often prosecuted in France, and jail sentences are much shorter.

“The main issue throughout Europe is the sentencing, which is extremely lenient and also allows for terrorists/jihadists to be freed quite early for ‘good behavior,’” said London-based terror expert Olivier Guitta, founder and managing director of the security firm GlobalStrat….

RELATED ARTICLES:

Maine – Somali Muslims Attack Assimilation: “We’re Here To Stay, Whether You Like It Or Not!”

Change.Org Petition To Impeach Rashida Tlaib Is Gaining Momentum

Pompeo Rebukes Obama: We’ll Kick ‘Every Last Iranian Boot Out of Syria’

Palestinians Burn Netanyahu, Trump ‘Coffin’ at Terror Rally

EDITORS NOTE: This column with images first appeared on Jihad Watch. It is republished with permission.

Denmark’s migration minister tells Somali Muslims: “Return home and rebuild the country from which you came”

Denmark has admitted many Muslim migrants, but it is also trying to preserve its culture. It has “introduced a series of integration programmes to stop non-Western migrants ghettosing in the Scandinavian peninsula, including telling migrants in high-ethnic neighbourhoods that their children must attend daycare from the age of one to learn Danish values or the parents face losing social security benefits.” And it is also sending migrants back home. Since early 2017, “the Immigration Service began its review of refugee residency permits” and “nearly 1,000 Somalis have had their Danish residency permit revoked.”

Denmark’s migration minister Inger Støjberg has stated:

If you no longer need our protection and your life and health are no longer at risk in your home country, and specifically in Somalia, you must of course return home and rebuild the country from which you came from.

The Danish parliament has also given the go-ahead “to a new policy that will see criminal migrants placed on an uninhabited island before their deportation,” which is a good idea given the spread of jihadi radicalization in Western jails.

Preserving democracy, the rule of law and the stability of society should be the first priority of every European leader.

In October, Ms Støjberg rejected EU efforts to impose migrant quotas, saying “too few contribute” to the workforce — Denmark being known as a country with a high cultural value work ethic.

The failure of numerous Muslim migrants to assimilate and integrate into European culture has proven to be a massive problem. The migrant crisis in Europe — mass rapes, jihad attacks, the rise in antisemitism, no-go zones, sharia patrols, sharia courts, a rise in child marriage, an increase in female genital mutilation, and the like — continues. Under no circumstances should any aspect of Western principles or laws be sacrificed to suit foreign interests, yet this is happening, and increasing since the migrant crisis began. The ongoing assault against the cornerstone of free society, free expression, is also increasing.

Inger Støjberg

“Danish Minister Tells Somalis ‘Go Home and Rebuild Your Country’”, by Victoria Friedman, Breitbart, December 18, 2018:

Denmark’s migration minister Inger Støjberg has told the country’s Somali migrants to return home and work on improving their own country after the Danish government ruled parts of Somalia safe.

Since the Immigration Service began its review of refugee residency permits in early 2017, nearly 1,000 Somalis have had their Danish residency permit revoked, reports the Danish Broadcasting Corporation.

Of those, 516 had been directly granted asylum while another 412 were family members who joined them as through chain migration, also known as “family reunion” or “family reunification”.

“If you no longer need our protection and your life and health are no longer at risk in your home country, and specifically in Somalia, you must of course return home and rebuild the country from which you came from,” Ms Støjberg said.

The automatic right to asylum from countries like Somalia was revoked in Denmark’s 2015 amendment to its Immigration Act.

As a result, the Immigration Service announced in autumn 2016 that it would use the new legal basis to review about 1,200 residence permits given to Somalis because of changes to “general conditions” in parts of their country, whereby “there is no longer a basis for asylum, simply because they come from there”.

Unlike neighbouring Germany and Sweden, Denmark has taken a tough line on asylum and integration since the Syrian conflict sparked Europe’s migrant crisis in 2015.

In October, Ms Støjberg rejected EU efforts to impose migrant quotas, saying “too few contribute” to the workforce — Denmark being known as a country with a high cultural value work ethic.

She is hardly a rogue element in the Danish government, with her rejection of the migrant quota being echoed the following month by the country’s prime minister, Lars Løkke Rasmussen, who said that it was “wrong” to force European Union member states to take asylum seekers…..

RELATED ARTICLE: A quarter of a million foreign thugs deported – thanks, Trump!

EDITORS NOTE: This column with images originally appeared on Jihad Watch. The featured photo is by Ian on Unsplash.

Belgium: Amid violent protests, Prime Minister resigns over his support for UN migration pact

Belgium is descending into chaos; the UN Migration Pact has caused a crisis in the nation. The country’s Prime Minister Charles Michel has now quit after losing a vote of no confidence.

“Demonstrators clashed with riot police and targeted the EU Commission’s Berlaymont headquarters, which suffered several smash [sic] windows.” Critics, “including former Belgian immigration minister Theo Francken, argue that the agreement will increase migration to Europe.”

The upheaval in Belgium comes as a result of the concern and frustration of citizens who have been left in the dark, but are astute enough to oppose and ask questions about the UN Migration Pact. Some of those protesting “said the public should have been consulted before adopting the migration pact.” This should be the demand of every prudent Western citizen.

Some considerations about the UN Migration Pact: it stipulates that migration is a human right. Recall the flood of Muslim migrants into Western European countries including Germany, France, Sweden and the UK, and the crisis of crime that followed. Many people noted that many, if not most, of the migrants were not refugees at all, but economic migrants. But soon this became clear to all honest observers, given the flocking of the migrants to the wealthier European countries — as opposed to seeking refuge from persecution and war in the first nation to which they arrived.

The rise of so-called “populist” movements helped to educate a largely ignorant public that had been virtually ambushed. Globalists then decided to try to protect the flow of economic migrants by designating it a “human right” for migrants to swarm into Western countries. To sign on to the UN Migration Pact means an acceptance of indiscriminate, open-door migration. The countries that have signed on have also committed themselves to helping these economic migrants actually choose the country that they think best serves their needs, and settle there.

Left unmentioned are all the costs associated with the plan: health-care, resources to help migrants, and the security costs of host countries, which are bound to increase, given what we have already seen across Europe since the migrant crisis began. The Pact also puts migrants at the front of the line for a range of state benefits and services. What are the immediate and long-term implications of all this for patriotic citizens, including those immigrants who have settled into Western states through legal means and have respected and obeyed the laws of their host societies?

The UN Migration Pact also demands a commitment from participating states to “eliminate all forms of discrimination, condemn and counter expressions, acts and manifestations of racism, racial discrimination, violence, xenophobia and related intolerance against all migrants in conformity with international human rights law.” Citizens of Western countries are given no indication of what form such a commitment would take. Given Canada’s anti-Islamophobia Motion M-103 and the aggressive efforts by the Organization of Islamic Cooperation to criminalize speech that offends Islam, this is worrying. The freedom of speech in the West has long been hanging by a thread. Also, there is a little-discussed Turkish influence in the Pact that should give everyone pause.

It is good that Michel is gone. We may hope that the citizens of many other countries in the West awaken to the globalist agenda and the dangers of the UN Global Compact on Migration before it’s too late.

“BELGIUM CHAOS: Prime Minister RESIGNS as UN migrant pact crisis ERUPTS,” Harvey Gavin, Express, December 18, 2018:

BELGIUM’S Prime Minister Charles Michel has quit after losing a vote of no confidence, Belgian media reports.

Mr Michel was forced to reshuffle his government to avert its collapse after Flemish nationalist party the N-VA pulled their support in protest over Belgium’s decision to adopt a controversial UN Migration pact. King Philippe of Belgium allowed Mr Michel to continue with a minority government, which agreed to the United Nation’s Global Compact on Migration. The decision to adopt the pact sparked violent protests in the Belgian capital, Brussels, on Sunday, amid fears it could lead to an increase in immigration.

Demonstrators clashed with riot police and targeted the EU Commission’s Berlaymont headquarters, which suffered several smash [sic] windows.

The UN pact was agreed in July by all 193 UN members except the US, but only 164 formally adopted it at a meeting last Monday in Morocco

It sets out a series of non-binding guidelines aimed at improving global cooperation on migration, combating people trafficking and protecting the human rights of migrants.

But critics, including former Belgian immigration minister Theo Francken, argue that the agreement will increase migration to Europe.

Some of those protesting in Sunday’s demonstrations said the public should have been consulted before adopting the migration pact.

Ten countries, mostly in formerly Communist Eastern Europe, have since pulled out of the pact.

Hungary’s right-wing leader Viktor Orban has previously branded it a “threat to the world” while Austrian Chancellor Sebastian Kurz said he would not sign up in order to “defend its national sovereignty”….

EDITORS NOTE: This column with images originally appeared on Jihad Watch. It is republished with permission. The featured

UK government’s adoption of UN migration pact “all but violates” its pledge to cut immigration

“A leading immigration think tank has said that the United Kingdom’s adoption of the UN’s migration pact “all but violates” the government’s pledge to cut immigration.”

Alp Mehmet, Vice Chairman of Migration Watch UK, stated:

No government serious about reducing migration should be committing to it. As for our government, by signing up to the Compact, they are all but violating a manifesto promise to reduce immigration substantially.

Mehmet is correct. A major survey found that the UK public voted for Brexit because of the EU’s reckless immigration policy, so given May’s surrender, the Brexit vote has been rendered null and void. Back in February, May betrayed Brits and surrendered to the European Union’s open-door immigration demands for years after Brexit.

The UK is in such a deplorable state now that it refused to offer asylum to one of the most needy refugees in the world, Asia Bibi, a Christian victim of Pakistan’s blasphemy laws. Why? because the May government feared “unrest” from Muslims, who have rioted by the thousands in Pakistan, baying for Asia Bibi and her family’s blood.

“UK Commitment to UN Migration Pact ‘All But Violates’ Govt Immigration Pledge: Think Tank,” by Victoria Friedman, Breitbart, December 12, 2018:

A leading immigration think tank has said that the United Kingdom’s adoption of the UN’s migration pact “all but violates” the government’s pledge to cut immigration.

On Monday, the UK and 163 other nations committed themselves to the United Nations’ Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration — the first attempt at the “global governance” and institutionalisation of migration.

The UK’s delegate at the UN conference in Marrakesh, Morocco, the Foreign Office’s minister of state Alistair Burt heralded the compact, claiming it “tackles” illegal immigration.

Migration Watch UK fired back at the assertion, saying, “This is the wrong move. The word ‘control’ does not appear in the final text of the Compact.”

“The Government committed, 3 times in election manifestos, to reduce immigration by a lot (a goal supported by 73% of the public according to one poll).

“How is signing a Compact which binds the UK into ‘enhanc[ing] the availability… of [migration] pathways’ compatible with that?”

Alp Mehmet, Vice Chairman of Migration Watch UK, told Breitbart London, “This Compact is misguided and one that the UK should not have signed.

“No government serious about reducing migration should be committing to it. As for our government, by signing up to the Compact, they are all but violating a manifesto promise to reduce immigration substantially.”…..

EDITORS NOTE: This column with images originally appeared on Jihad Watch. It is republished with permission. The featured photo is by James Giddins on Unsplash.

Canada: Opposition, protests and a petition against the UN Migration Pact

The UN Migration Pact represents a catastrophic dismantling of key components of democratic institutions by the United Nations, a body that has increasingly alliedwith the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC). The Pact — officially named the “Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration” — indicates that it “offers a 360-degree vision of international migration and recognizes that a comprehensive approach is needed to optimize the overall benefits of migration, while addressing risks and challenges for individuals and communities in countries of origin, transit and destination.” It also states that “No country can address the challenges and opportunities of this global phenomenon on its own.” 

This means (sarcasm warning ahead) that all countries must depend on the competent, just and democratic United Nations to guide them to enjoying the benefits of mass migration. To do this, one would have to turn a blind eye to the globalist vision of open borders that has plunged Europe into crisis, a crisis that has led in turn to the rise of the so-called “populist” movement. Contrary to the media’s labeling of it as “racist” and “Nazi,” this movement supports democracy, supports Israel, and aims to defend free societies, marginalize Islamic supremacists, and stop their incursions into Western countries. So-called “populist” leaders have also sought to protect their citizens from the damage of unlimited, unvetted migration.

Canada, in contrast, has offered to “lead the charge”on the UN Migration Pact.

As a concerned, patriotic Canadian citizen and Royal Canadian Air Force F18 retired combat pilot, Major Russ Cooper — co-founder of the group Canadian Citizens for Charter Rights and Freedoms — wrote a summary of his concerns about the UN Migration Pact:

Objective 2 which commits destination nations to the elimination of poverty and social inequity in originating nations;
Objective 5 requirement to assist migrants with identifying the best host country for their needs;
Objective 7 stipulation that calls for “irregular” status migrants to be considered for “regular” status;
Objective 16 direction to accommodate family reunification programs thereby expanding, exponentially, the flow rate of migration;
Objective 17 requirement to eliminate “all forms of discrimination” in the host population including those that call into question the political opinions of migrants. Here we can see Motion M-103 as a precursor for a larger, more comprehensive Global Compact initiative;
Objective 17 direction to tightly control criticism of migrants and migration programs;
Objective 17 restrictions on media outlets and professionals to ensure they are properly “sensitized” and “educated” in matters pertaining to migration;
Objective 20 stipulations that faster, better, more efficient remittance programs be developed to funnel monies out of destination and into originating nations; and
Objective 22 requirement to make all migrant-gained social benefits and pensions portable to any other jurisdictions of his or her choice.

The Migration Pact can be read in full HERE.

Canada’s opposition Conservative leader Andrew Scheer advised Prime Minister Justin Trudeau: “Instead of signing international agreements that erode our sovereign right to manage our borders, the prime minister should focus on restoring order at home.” To that, Trudeau had no reply except to accuse Scheer of using “Rebel Media talking points.”

Restoring order in Canada and securing security, economic growth and jobs for Canadians, don’t appear to be on the agenda of the globalist Trudeau. It is well known that he welcomes anyone and everyone into Canada. Directly following Trump’s temporary immigration ban on Muslim countries, Trudeau tweeted“To those fleeing persecution, terror & war, Canadians will welcome you, regardless of your faith. Diversity is our strength #WelcomeToCanada.” Already, at least 25,000 Syrian refugees were accepted into the country in 2016, while there were over 20,000 illegal border crossings into Canada from the US through the Quebec border from early 2017 up to Spring 2018. Over the Easter weekend alone, 600 illegal migrants crossed into Canada. During the summer, such entries were expected to be around 400 per day. The crisis prompted even the Washington Post to publish an article: Nigerians are walking into Canada, prompting request for U.S. to take action. Since Spring, there has been virtual radio silence on the matter. The U.S.-Canadian border is approximately 3,987 miles long. Add to that the Alaska-Canada border, at 1,538 miles. By way of comparison, the U.S.-Mexican border is roughly 1,933 miles.

Unfortunately, persecuted Christians and Yazidis have not been included in Trudeau’s big welcome. Instead, Trudeau has welcomed in Islamic State jihadists who kill, rape and torture, hoping that these jihadists would be a “powerful voice” in Canada once they became “deradicalized.” Trudeau also has an Islamic entryist problem in his own government. He even sent a delegation to the 44th session of the Council of Foreign Ministers of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, and imposed Islamic blasphemy laws on Canada via the anti-Islamophobia motion M-103. A followup to that motion documents the objective to “monitor citizens for compliance” and train law enforcement officers to investigate online and offline “hate speech.” Meanwhile, Trudeau discriminates against Christians — referring to them as the “worst part of Canadian society”; he cut off summer job funding to any organization who opposes abortion.

Some more appalling information: the Trudeau government has spent an astronomical amount of taxpayer money on self-serving media and social media campaigns: over $13,600,000 on sponsored social media posts, along with an earmarked $675,000,000 in funding for the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation in 2016. And now with elections coming up in 2019, Trudeau has pledged a $595,000,000 media bailout for media news organizations of his choosing.

Now Canadians must pay for his migration project far into the future, just as Canada’s unemployment rate is the worst it has been in four decades.

This is the country, almost unrecognizable as Canada after three years of Trudeau, that now intends to lead the charge on the UN Migration Pact. President Trump has already rejected the pact, although since the U.S. shares a long border with Canada — as well as with Mexico — his administration’s work will clearly be cut out for it, amid his other battles against the relentless attacks from globalist Democrats. Slovakia, Hungary, Poland, the Czech Republic, Israel, Austria, Bulgaria, Switzerland, Australia and Italy have also rejected the Pact.

A rally against the UN Migration Pact is set for this upcoming Saturday on Parliament Hill. Canadians are encouraged to sign a petition against the Pact HERE. Canada is set to sign the Pact in Morocco on December 10-11.

COLUMN BY

EDITORS NOTE: This column with imaged originally appeared on Jihad Watch. It is republished with permission.

Germany: Muslim migrant screaming ‘Allahu Akbar’ and waving hatchet threatens people at Christmas market

“According to police the man is a 38-year-old foreign citizen from Bornhagen, who was heavily intoxicated.”

Merkel’s regime is so globalist and internationalist, or else so suicidal, that it is more likely, in reaction to this event, to ban alcoholic beverages or outlaw hatchets than to reexamine its policies regarding mass Muslim migration.

“Allahu Akbar shouting man waving hatchet threatens people at German Christmas market,” Voice of Europe, December 2, 2018:

A 38-year-old man has been arrested on Saturday after threatening people at a Christmas market in Witzenhausen, Germany.

Around 8:30 pm the police received several phone calls about a man with a hatchet walking along the pavement in the direction of the local Christmas market.

After arriving, the man brandished the hatchet and repeatedly shouted “Allahu Akbar”. Numerous people left the Christmas market having been threatened by the aggressive man.

According to police the man is a 38-year-old foreign citizen from Bornhagen, who was heavily intoxicated. Fortunately, he didn’t injure anyone….

The aggressive perpetrator was later arrested in the pedestrian zone….

EDITORS NOTE: This column with images originally appeared on Jihad Watch. It is republished with permission. The featured photo is by louis amal on Unsplash.

UK MEP Janice Atkinson: “No one asked the people of the UK if we wanted our culture and way of life destroyed”

Joshua Winston – Janice, for the most part, the majority of world religions live side by side in peace, with occasional clashes. Are you seeing that Islam is the only religion which seems unable to live in peace and harmony with anyone without demanding special status and privileges far outweighing its percentage of the population or the contribution Muslims make within their host country and culture?

Janice Atkinson – I think the problem with Islam, as reinforced on the BBC recently by a Sikh priest, is that they work on ancient scriptures that they take as literal and convey this to uneducated and therefore vulnerable people. Literal interpretations take no account of the modern world. But that suits many jihadist imams for their own political and jihadi aims. If you can keep the poor and uneducated masses joined by a medieval doctrine, you have a ready-made audience, a united audience, united in hate and mistrust. Look at Pakistan and the case of Christian woman Asia Bibi. The uneducated masses are calling for the death sentence by stoning to death. The saddest part of this is that Western governments were not prepared to offer her asylum because they are afraid of upsetting the uneducated Pakistanis in their own countries, particularly the UK, where I feel so ashamed that my government have pandered to a loud, intolerant and hateful minority.

We have allowed this minority to exist in their own multicultural bubble which has festered hate, mistrust, misogyny and abhorrent practices such as FGM, child marriage, arranged marriage and Sharia law. And, of course, child sexual grooming, which is conducted by 80% Pakistani/Pakistani heritage men.

JW – You have correctly broken down all of the crime statistics caused by migrants in your last book, and you’ve spoken of the sectarian violence that certain cultures bring with them. This violence would still occur in a Muslim-dominant, Sharia-compliant world. It’s also right to note all of the Muslim-majority countries that are not living in, or knowing, peace in this period of time today. Why are Muslims blind to the fact that their ideology does not, never has, and never will work, and yet they seek to recreate it, whilst claiming to be running from it, in every land in which they settle?

JA – The Middle East is a complex place and competes for dominance for particular Muslim sects. The UAE is tolerant of Westerners because they chose to be economically, it works for them. However, as Westerners, we know the rules and obey them. In other states, it is a cruel and barbaric system. However, what amazes me is that they migrate to Western countries, presumably to live a free existence for their families, but then revert to living under Islamic rule. This is unacceptable, and Western governments should be clear on this. Sharia is unacceptable under any circumstances, the rule of law of the host nation has supremacy. If not, there are many Sharia-compliant countries that they could live in.

JW – I always say that Islam is the liberal left’s viagra. It’s the thing that gets them the angriest and sees them rise up en masse. I believe that the left are the true racists. They use Islam as a political tool. Many a rally I’ve been to, and I recall one where a man told me that Christians have the Ten Commandments (love thy neighbour [which is actually from the Great Commandment], don’t covet your neighbour’s wife, etc.), and this was his way of telling me that Sharia (stone your wife) is simply Islam’s Ten Commandments. For me, there seems to be a disconnect in the left’s brains. Reason, reality, facts and logic seem to play no part in their agenda. Any thoughts?

JA – It’s the left’s voter base. They courted the Muslims decades ago when they first arrived here, and to be fair, they have been loyal. I find it deeply troubling that the left are not standing up for Jews, and the anti-Semitism is sickening and frightening, so much so that British Jews are leaving the UK, as indeed they are across Europe. The left choose not to see the link between national socialism and Nazism, which is the same thing, that they are supporting. The left’s women disgust me. They march against Trump, Brexit and populism while sipping their organic chia lattes, in their designer pussycats, marching in designer trainers, with the kids in tow, or they leave them at home with the cheap immigrant nanny. Yet these feminazis are silent on the crimes committed by Muslim men in the name of religion. Where is their voice against child sexual grooming, FGM, child marriage, stoning and forced marriage? They are sickeningly silent and complicit. Let’s get outraged about pink clothes for little girls, blue toys for boys, or sexy underwear advertised on the subway. Yet let’s stay silent on barbaric Islamic practices. I detest them.

JW – I came across a new world recently – Islamo-denier. Would you call yourself an Islamo-denier, meaning that you don’t believe Islam is a religion at all? We’ve all been beaten over the head with the word ‘Islamophobia’, and I’ve heard several people use the term ‘Islamophilia’ (which means an irrational urge to coddle and care for and adhere to and protect Islam). Do you like the word ‘Islamo-denier,’ and is it a word that might be capable of combating all of the -isms and -phobias that the media throw at and accuse us of?

JA – I hate the branding of ‘isms’ and phobias. Again, it is a made-up construct as part of our cultural wars which are raging at the moment. Yet what we are fighting for is our culture, history and way of life. The majority in this country are sick and tired of these attacks from the left calling everyone who would like curbs on migration and Muslim migration and support controlling our borders and leaving the EU as racists and xenophobes. The so-called Conservatives and the UK socialists do not understand, and that is why they are losing votes to the so-called ‘populists.’ There is a quiet revolution going on. We are at a tipping point in this country; we have to win the culture wars and go back to common sense. We have to ditch the hate crime laws, brought in by Blair and being reinforced by the UN, EU and other supra-national organisations, which are all designed to dilute our culture and language. They have to learn that people are decent, sometimes they make mistakes, but to imprison and fine people for joking about a religion is a very slippery slope.

JW – And lastly, is Britain sinking, and not just because of Theresa May and her Brexit sellout? Is Islam the iceberg that will break us? What is your vision for the future of Britain? Living in London, all I see are different cultures spending 30 years and more building up their own enclaves. Muslims are political animals, and they push for Sharia wherever they are in positions of power, and their positions of power are rising in the UK, with more and more self-identifying Muslim MPs and mayors and councilors. If you have enough people voting for a thing, then you’ll have to give it to them, and the rest of us will have to live under it. I see Britain being divided – Sharia to the left, rule of law to the right. Do you see the UK as sinking? Is there a solution for the UK in relation to living harmoniously, if at all, with Islam?

JA – Sinking? We are sinking under the weight of Brussels’ bureaucracy, high taxes, green taxes and identity politics. Mrs May does not have a vision for our country, and she is a proven liar on Brexit. She was a disastrous Home Secretary, again caught out by lying; she let the police and border force down by forced redundancies, and the Conservative party should not have vote for her as Prime Minister. The writing was on the wall when the police booed her at their conference. When you do not have the support of the emergency services, and policing is by consent in the UK, that should have been obvious that she was not suitable to be PM. I don’t blame the Muslims for seeking office, they at least like to take part in shaping our country, it’s just that it’s shaping it in the wrong direction. Voter fraud is rife in their communities — as demonstrated in Tower Hamlets — that’s why the left are so opposed to voter identity at elections.

Islam, if not curbed, will be a huge problem. We should halt all new mosques; shut down those financed by Saudi Arabia, deport hateful Imams and tell the adherents that they have to live by the law of our land, not Sharia. We should also consider a ban on Muslim migration from countries like Pakistan.

London is a big issue because of migration. Knife crime and murders are rife, mainly committed by migrants or the children of migrants. We have imported the third world, and are now suffering from third world practices. Tower Hamlets is Sharia-compliant and burkas are de riguer. No one asked the people of London, or indeed, the UK, whether we wanted to have apartheid in our towns and cities. No one asked us if we wanted our culture and way of life destroyed, so much so that British people — black and white — have moved out of these ghettos. Our London Mayor, Khan, is presiding over this. At today’s count, we have seen 119 murders of young people in London since the beginning of the year. The rogue roll call shows migrant children with machetes, guns and knives. There were always violent criminals, but this has taken it to a new level. With the left and even the so-called Conservatives calling for an ‘holistic’ and healthcare approach to the problem, they are admitting defeat.  That’s not what I want as a Londoner, and neither do the majority of decent people. We want effective policing, more police who will take the drug dealers, the gang members and their useless parents off the streets to keep us safe. We need a Mayor Rudy Giuliani; instead, we have a spineless Mayor who likes a photo call with meaningless platitudes. To label these crimes as a ‘healthcare’ issue is abrogating responsibility from the parents, making excuses. There have always been poor people who live in deprived areas, but they didn’t take up arms against each other as normal in our schools, public transport system and estates. There is right and wrong, the parents have lost control, there are not enough police and prisons. Machete attacks are not the result of being poor.

My future for Britain would be an off-shore Singapore-like country. Very low taxes, prisons that work, death penalty for jihadi terrorists, an increased police, border and armed forces, a country that chooses its migrants on merit, an attractive place for business with low corporation tax, a reformed NHS that works for the people, not the consultants and healthcare tourists, to provide housing and support for our armed forces and veterans who will take priority over immigrants, abolish Foreign Aid, and instead contribute to educational and water projects and emergency disaster relief, to care for our elderly in dignity, an education service that excels in STEM subjects and trains our own engineers, scientists and health staff, to abandon transgender teaching in schools and public servants, so we will not see the spectacle of our police in painted nails and high heels, and our children not tainted by sexual abnormalities and persuaded they are transgender when they are little children, to ban halal slaughter and the export of live animals, to believe in Britain and Make Britain Great Again.

EDITORS NOTE: This column with images originally appeared on Jihad Watch. It is republished with permission. The featured photo is by Chris Lawton on Unsplash.

Denmark to United Nations: NO! No Refugees

Invasion of Europe news…..

It isn’t just those mean ol’ eastern European countries like Hungary and Poland that are unwilling to accept refugees, Denmark has had enough.  So has Austria and Italy.

From The Local Denmark:

Denmark refuses to take in UN quota refugees in 2018

Denmark said Thursday it would not take in any refugees under the UN’s quota system in 2018, focusing instead on integrating those recently arrived in the country.

In 2016, the Scandinavian country suspended its participation in the UN refugee quota system, and has yet to resume it.

“We’re still in a situation where we’re struggling to integrate the many refugees who have come to Denmark in recent years,” Immigration Minister Inger Støjberg said in a statement.

So-called UN “quota refugees” are offered resettlement in a third country if the country where they first register as refugees cannot accommodate them.

A member of the liberal Venstre party in Prime Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen’s conservative coalition government, Støjberg has orchestrated Denmark’s immigration policy since 2015.

“While an increasing number of refugees have entered the labour market, there are still too many who cannot support themselves,” she said.

More here.

See my ‘Invasion of Europe’ file here.

EDITORS NOTE: The featured photo is by Markus Winkler on Unsplash.