THE UNACCOMPANIED MUSLIM MINOR REFUGEE TERROR ATTACK IN LONDON
Taking in ( phony Muslim) refugees causes terror.
Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical left and Islamic terrorism.
Last decade, Ronald and Penelope Jones were being feted for their work as foster parents. Now their suburban Surrey home was raided in an investigation into the train bombing in London.
The Joneses had won praise for fostering hundreds of children. But their growing interest in taking in refugees from Muslim countries turned their pleasant home with its wooden fences and green backyard into a ticking time bomb.
And that bomb may have gone off at the Parsons Green station leaving behind flash burns and horror.
Earlier, the Joneses had admitted that, “We’ve had a real mix of children from Iraq, Eritrea, Syria, Albania and Afghanistan.” The tidal wave of refugees from these countries has swept across Europe bringing terror and death.
Ronald Jones, 88, and Penelope Jones, 71, like so many well-meaning Westerners, had no idea what they were letting themselves in for until the police were hammering at their door. Now they themselves have been turned into refugees, seeking shelters with relatives, while the police search for clues to the latest terror attack.
The couple became interested in fostering “refugees” when the media barraged helpless listeners with sob stories of Syrian suffering. But while they spoke often of children, the actual migrants are adults.
At the center of the case is Yahyah Farroukh, a Syrian, in his twenties. Farroukh was no child.
Neighbors described a constant flow of traffic to the Jones home. The visitors wore the traditional Islamic clothing often associated with the Jihadists who are the core of the European terror threat.
Prayer mats were set out in the garden. And there were constant cell phone conversations.
Farroukh allegedly invaded Europe by taking a migrant boat from Egypt to Italy.
Another of the alleged Jones “refugees” is an 18-year-old Iraqi from Baghdad who had apparently been monitored by law enforcement. And may have even been previously arrested. A refugee charity allegedly helped bring him to the UK. And arranged to have him placed with the Joneses.
The Iraqi had overloaded even the endless generosity of the Joneses who reportedly found him troublesome and dangerous. And that must have taken some doing.
It was this Iraqi whom police may suspect planted the bomb at Parsons Green station. And when the bomb went off on a crowded train on Friday, the holiest day in the Islamic religion, the manhunt began.
The Iraqi refugee was arrested trying to buy a ticket to Calais.
Calais to Dover is the route that refugees take to penetrate the UK. The Joneses had spoken of one “boy” in their care who had “managed to get in a lorry travelling through Calais.”
The Iraqi refugee suspect had originally come through Calais, but now he was headed the other way.
France has even better developed Islamic terror networks than the UK. And from Calais, it’s a few hours to the terrorist no-go zones of Brussels in Belgium, where terror plots originate and anything goes, or to the Islamic suburbs of Paris like Sevran. And the terror traffic may go both ways.
Last month, Bachir Hamou, an Algerian, rammed a car into French soldiers near Paris. He was caught by French authorities in Pas-de-Calais. Where was he headed? The Joneses may not be the only ones who take in “refugees”. Westerners take them in before they kill. Their Islamic comrades take them in afterward.
The Iraqi suspect in the Parsons Green attack had come by way of Calais and its infamous “Jungle camp”. Had he reached his destination, he would have found illegal contacts and allies to move him onward. The UK had already taken in “vulnerable” minors from the “Jungle” as part of a deal to dismantle it despite warnings that they might represent a terror threats. But the horde of migrants from Muslim countries are still besieging the UK and France.
The news reports say that he penetrated the UK as an “unaccompanied minor”. And minors need foster parents to “care” for them. That was how the Joneses came into the story.
But many of the “unaccompanied minors” who arrived during the migrant surges that plagued Europe and America were never minors. They were adult men pretending to be teenagers.
The Iraqi suspect in the Parsons Green bombing case hasn’t been named. The Syrian has. But the names and ages mean very little. Despite the vocal protestations of refugee activists and the media, we cannot vet or verify the masses of migrants who claim to be arriving from war torn terror states.
The names and ages are meaningless.
In Sweden, the migrants can be listed as “children” if they “don’t look over 40”. Back in the UK, a 12-year-old “child refugee” from Afghanistan raised his foster mother’s suspicions when she noticed how hairy he was. He turned out to be a decade older. His last words to his foster mother were, “I’ll kill you and I know where your children are.”
Back when they were being feted for their dedication to fostering children, Mrs. Jones had said, “I treat them how I would like to be treated if I was in that situation.”
The trouble though is that Islamic terrorists aren’t Mrs. Jones. And when the shoe is on the other foot, it turns out to have a bomb in it.
Westerners opened their hearts to the “child refugees”, but the children turned out to be violent men with a nasty tendency to kill, threaten and rape. The cuckoo’s eggs have hatched into vicious bombings and horrifying attacks. Sympathy for the Syrian devil ends in coffins and hospitals.
We don’t know everything that there is to know about the Parsons Green attack. And considering the tendency of the authorities to minimize the terrorism angle, it’s possible that we never will.
But we do know that thoughtless kindness to evil can be the worst sort of cruelty.
Leftist critics tell us that Islamic terrorism is blowback for the cruelty of our foreign policy. But it is most often blowback for the misplaced kindness of their immigration policy. As we once again debate the Muslim travel ban, we ought to consider the case of an elderly British couple who just wanted to help.
But their kindness was sadly misplaced. The wages of that kindness allegedly burst into a fireball in the London Underground, scorching commuters who only wanted to make it to the weekend.
The Joneses had wished to take in vulnerable children. Instead they housed angry men. And those angry men are suspected of setting off a bomb on a train packed with children. It was these children, not the migrant refugees playing at being unaccompanied minors, who were the true vulnerable children.
It was they who deserved kindness and care. Not their attempted murderers.
This was the horror that the misplaced kindness of taking in Muslim migrants brought to the UK.
“There was a poor little boy smashed into the floor with his face bleeding and screaming. There was a woman shouting that she was pregnant… Kids were being pushed out of the way and their nannies and mothers were trying to grab them… There was a girl with no skin on her legs, one with the back of her garment burned away.”
Those who made it possible for the terrorists to commit this atrocity were not being kind. They were being cruel.
Welcoming terrorists to the United Kingdom or the United States, to Canada or to Australia, is not kindness. It is cruelty. What feels good can end with children screaming in the London Underground.
One thought on “Mohammedan enrichment causes terror”
Re: “The couple became interested in fostering “refugees” when the media barraged helpless listeners with sob stories of Syrian suffering. ”
GLOBALISM IS AN ATTACK ON PROPERTY RIGHTS.
So is “liberalism” (aka “socialism;” “communism;” and “Marxism”), with its claims to desire ENFORCED “equity,” (equality of outcome over a truly equitable equality of opportunity) “fairness,” and of course, “Wealth Redistribution” (aka THEFT).
Know what else attacks on property rights are known as?
“CRIME” and “SLAVERY”!
Those pitiful dupes in Europe are only now starting to wake up to that simple fact – when you join the larger gang for more security, you end up sacrificing your freedom to do so!
Giving up freedom for security is always a big mistake!
Comments are closed.