Home Stop Muslim Terror by Stopping Muslim Immigration
Home Stop Muslim Terror by Stopping Muslim Immigration

Stop Muslim Terror by Stopping Muslim Immigration

Lone wolf terrorism is the biggest trend in Islamic terrorism. Unlike classic Islamic terrorism, it requires no cells stretching across countries the way that 9/11 did. The perpetrators don’t even need to enter the country under false pretenses the way that the World Trade Center bombers did.

In many cases, they are already citizens. Some were even born in their target country.

Classic counterterrorism is directed at organizations. It’s inadequate for stopping individual Muslim terrorists like Omar Mateen who was able to murder 49 people at a nightclub in Orlando or closely related duos like the Tsarnaev brothers in Boston or the husband and wife team who carried out the San Bernardino terrorist attack which took the lives of 14 people.

Even the standard technique of planting informants into mosques, deeply opposed by the Islamic lobby in the United States, fails when individuals decide to act alone or only trust their wives or brothers to be in on the plot with them. If an individual Islamic terrorist fails to let his plans slip, either online or to an FBI informant, stopping him can be extremely difficult if not entirely impossible without a stroke of luck.

And Islamic terrorists only need to be lucky once. We have to be lucky every time.

Every absurd Islamic terror plot broken up by law enforcement, the type of thing dismissed by the media and ridiculed by commentators, launching rockets at planes, underwear bombs and blowing up trains, contained the seed of a horrific terrorist attack just like Orlando, Boston or Nice.

When you turn on the evening news and see a running death toll, it’s because one of those absurd and ridiculous terror plots actually succeeded. And it’s happening more and more often.

The reason is simple. Unlike classic Islamic terrorism which required organization and infrastructure, the new brand of Islamic terror only needs one thing… Muslims.

Lone wolf terrorism operates entirely off the existing Muslim population in a particular country. The bigger the Muslim population, the bigger the risk. Any Muslim or Muslims who have settled in a particular non-Muslim country can answer the call of Jihad at any given time without warning.

There is no way that the FBI or other law enforcement agencies could begin to monitor even a fraction of the Islamic settler population sympathetic to terror. The FBI alone has almost 1,000 active ISIS cases it was investigating last year in all 50 states. It does not have nearly the resources it needs to handle them.

As the Muslim settler population in the country increases, the number of cases will grow. No matter how much law enforcement expands the scope of its operations, it will not be able to keep up with the high natural birth rates of the Muslim settler population whose terrorists don’t need a fraction of the training or skills that trained law enforcement figures do. The more the Muslim population grows, the more terror attacks like Orlando, Boston and Nice will get past law enforcement.

Any technological or logistical solutions to this crisis on the law enforcement end will only be band aids.

The source of the problem is Islamic immigration. That is the only possible solution. The only way to reduce the growth of the lone wolf Islamic terrorism problem is to reduce or end Muslim migration.

If this is how bad it is when Muslims are only 1% of the population, what happens when the Muslim settler population doubles and then doubles again? Accompanying these rising population numbers will be rising influence by the Islamic lobby. Islamic groups such as CAIR with a history of terror ties and opposition to counterterrorism will have even more power to stymie law enforcement investigations. The end result will be far more successful Muslim terrorist massacres taking place on a constant basis.

Muslim immigrants are already inherently privileged when it comes to their ability to enter this country ahead of far more peaceful and far more deserving groups. For example, the vast majority of Syrian refugees admitted to this country are the Muslims who perpetrated and are perpetuating their religious war in the region rather than their Christian and Yazidi victims who face slavery and genocide at their hands.

This Islamic immigration privilege must be withdrawn. Muslim immigration must at the very least be scaled back to a level that law enforcement can cope with. At best it must end entirely until the Muslim world manages to stabilize its way of life to the extent that it can peacefully co-exist with non-Muslims.

There will be endless arguments over what percentage of Muslims support terrorism, but our own experience of recent attacks shows that many of them came from attackers who overtly appeared to be “moderate” and “ordinary”. For every Islamist activist dressed in Salafist fashion and tweeting praise of ISIS, there is at least one, if not many more, whom you would pass on the street without a second look.

Before the Boston Marathon bombing, the Tsarnaevs did not seem like Jihadists. They would have been classed with the general category of “moderate” Muslims. And then they struck.

That is how it is.

The internet has decentralized terrorist training camps. Any Muslim can acquire the skills and equipment he needs to kill a few or a dozen or even a hundred if he chooses to follow his religion.

Not every Muslim will shoot up a nightclub or bomb a marathon, but we have no foolproof way of telling them apart. And even many Muslims who would not shoot up an office party in San Bernardino will still sympathize with the perpetrators. And even those Muslims who don’t will often continue supporting the Muslim lobby of organizations like CAIR that stymie law enforcement investigations of Islamic terrorism.

Muslim immigration makes Muslim terrorism worse.

Once we understand this inconvenient truth, then everything else naturally flows from it. The type of terrorism that we are dealing now won’t be beaten by breaking up organizations or droning terrorist leaders in training camps in Yemen or Pakistan. The enemy is right here. He speaks our language. He walks down our streets. He looks at us with hate in his Halal heart and he plots to kill us.

He may pledge allegiance to ISIS or Al Qaeda, but he is part of the larger organization of Islam. It is this organization, more than any of its Jihadist factional subdivisions, that represents the true threat.

Lone wolf terrorism is a viral threat that is spread by Islamic migration. We can only end it by closing the door. As long as the door to the Muslim migrant stays open, we will live under the threat that our neighbor or co-worker will be the one to kill us tomorrow or the day after that.


  1. Infidel29/1/17

    Excellent analysis.

    On a tangent, since I am always interesting in tactical solutions to such problems, I think the Israelis have actually made significant progress in identifying some of these lone wolves ahead of time, although of course I don't know the details (but could speculate :)

  2. The Islamic lobby in the U.S. is growing as now so-called Jewish groups like the ADL, Hillel, and others are doing its bidding. Perhaps more donations come from the EU and the Arab League to these organizations.

  3. An excellent posting. I have only one matter to bring up in disagreement. There is ultimately no lone wolf Muslim terrorist. The Prophet Mohammed is always lurking in the background, inspiring the terrorist and urging him on.

  4. Anonymous30/1/17

    That's right, Daniel and Gloria Stewart. Each and every Muslim is a killer, enabler or sympathizer. Visceral hatred of the infidel (that's us) is intrinsic to Allah, Mohammed, Koran, Hadiths, Sunna. Anyone with the slightest allegiance to this system is prone to escalation by family and leaders. Becoming a "better Muslim" leads to alienation from infidels who are seen as vermin. We face death, dhimmitude enslavement, and the inhuman Sharia.

    Oaths of allegiance mean nothing; they lie (takiyya) to further their conquest. If there were patriotic American Muslims, where are they? Heard from many lately?

    The AIDS retrovirus is so dangerous because it hides within cells, and attacks the body's own defense systems, just as CAIR, etc. exploit American Civil Rights to kill America.

    American Citizenship is a privilege, not a right; carefully granted only to those who bring value, good will, and love of freedom.


  5. Anonymous30/1/17

    @Gloria Stewart
    Good comment. Mohammed was a terrorist. All of his followers are exhorted to follow in his footsteps, if they are able and to the extent they are able.

    Of course "Terror" is not the only reason to bar Muslims from all countries. Islam fully intends to conquer the whole world and Terror is only one of the weapons that Islam uses to accomplish that. An even more lethal weapon is their Population Bomb. They fully intend to out breed their intended victims. And this Population Bomb weapon has been imployed deliberately and consciously from the very beginning of Islam. That's why Islam commands its followers to practice polygamn, to have four wives if they are able to support them, and to have as many children as they can by their female slaves.

  6. This is so simple a solution that it defies the illogic of the Left. It befuddles the Left and drives it to rage. Don't admit more Muslims. Is that religious discrimination? No. It is ideological discrimination, the Islamic ideology being to dominate this country, not "co-exist" with non-Muslims or respect its laws. I'm sure that many honchos on the Left are familiar with the Muslim Brotherhood Memorandum and the statements of CAIR spokesmen and of what's preached in many American mosques that waging civilizational Jihad against the West is an obligation of all Muslims, activist or passive, and that the Left is quite at home with it all, because the Left wants totalitarian submission, as well.

  7. Although I agree with EVERYTHING you wrote, I know that Muslim immigration will not stop. Trump is trying to do something about it but almost all of the politicians in D.C. are against it and him. I believe the only ones with him are the Generals and their armies. As long as there are "non-violent" Muslims, our leaders will not deter them. I hope to be proven wrong.

  8. It seems to me the root of the problem is failure of the Muslim community to police itself. There is scant repudiation from Muslim leaders nor from the rank and file. If there are moderate Muslims, their silence makes them irrelevant and leaves only the voices and actions of the radicals from which to judge the supposed religion of peace.

  9. Like the 'palestinians' the Islamic murderers here don't really have a goal or agenda. Anarchy and bloodletting are its only objectives. It's self contained nihilism. So there's no clear way to eradicate it. What DOES have an affect is pressuring the thought leaders on the left who lend it legitimacy. You can't stop a mass murderer if they're committed to mass murder. Perhaps though you can toss a few liberal Hollywood types in Gitmo for fomenting the ideation of mass murder. Islam has been around a long time. It's impervious to moderation. But gay liberal feminist Jews flocking to it not in spite of what it is but because of what it is is a new-ish thing. It's time to go after the collaborators. And after all Hollywood WANTS a platform to rant and rave. I say give them one, in front of Congressional hearings and in front of a judge.

  10. Typically, the alleged lone wolves are part of real or virtual communities that take all the dangerous parts of the Koran as absolute truth to be carried out when possible. Which one actually chooses to put "Muhammad's Kampf" into action is almost incidental.

  11. Y. Ben-David31/1/17

    There is an interesting debate sponsored by the "intelligence-squared" group debating the question "Is Islam a religion of peace". The only panelist of the four I recognized was Ayan Hirsi Ali. It was noted that no Islamic scholars were willing to appear (I guess they knew they would be torn to pieces!) so one American-born young women was there along with a British-born Muslim who was an admitted former terrorist and who turned against those views). To their credit both were quite honest about the problem of Islamic terrorism and extremism. They didn't say that "the terrorists are not 'real' Muslims". They just claimed that the "peaceful side" of Islam should be more forceful in confronting the extremists' ideology . So far so good. When a question was asked if there are top Islamic scholars who are willing to denounce the extremists, the British fellow said.."yes there are a few...one prominent one was in Pakistan but he was blown to smitereens by a suicide bomber along with the worshippers in a mosque with him. The others are afraid to speak out".
    At that point both Ayan Hirsi Ali and her colleague said "thank you for proving our point for us"!
    What is interesting is that the organizers poll the audience before the debate and then again afterwards to see which side was the most persuasive. Before the debate 42% said they believed Islam is a religion of peace, about 30% said no, the rest were undecided. After the debate, the number who said it is a religion of peace dropped precipitously and those who said it is not became the clear majority. Facts speak for themselves.

  12. Anonymous31/1/17

    Dear EbonyRaptor,

    This isn't Ireland during the terror of the IRA. Catholic laity and clergy spoke against IRA terror. Now, the Muslim community does indeed police itself... toward continued jihad and hatred.


  13. Anonymous31/1/17

    The truth about muzzies is that there are two types among them, a majority living in abject subjugation and a minority criminally insane, both of them feed each other: the murders generate submission, the insufferable subjugation creates murderous monsters. Now the question remains, who would seek such a constituency?

  14. Anonymous1/2/17

    The sooner Western Civilization re-accepts the 1400 year old truth that islam is a quasi religion/political agenda of hate & death the sooner we can move on to what must be done periodically. That they must be decimated in a way that leaves them reeling for hundreds of years. Charles Martel knew that their savagery had to be met with equal savagery. It is only logical that a society/culture (using the words very loosely) that is built on a savage code (sharia) would not understand or respect civilized rules of engagement. So we must steel ourselves to meet the enemy on their own terms. That may well be against all our sensibilities but do you want sensibilities or do you want death or subjugation to the vile tenants of islam for yourself and your progeny?

  15. Two questions, a yes disqualifying: Do you think sharia should be allowed everywhere? Do you believe in polygamy?


Post a Comment

You May Also Like