New Jihad Watch: Immigration & Jihad

posted at 8:52 am on June 13, 2007 by Bryan

How should the war effect US immigration policies? Robert Spencer looks at Lebanon’s choice to stop granting visas-on-entry to Arabs to prevent jihadis from entering, as it points the way toward a sane US immigration policy.

Download for your iPod

Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air



Trackback URL


Fred!/Robert Spencer!!

ctmom on June 13, 2007 at 9:07 AM

OT — since we apparently have to have our green beans and power tools labeled in another language, other than just English — Not Our National Language — why can’t it be French? I like French better than Spanish.

Call it passive/aggressive, but I’m looking for new ways to piss off the illegals, and I can’t think of a better way than to tell them we speak English and French, not spanish. It’s multicultural, isn’t it? And they have that guy Sarkoszy (sp?), and he’s deporting illegals left and right. So, what the heck?

Jaibones on June 13, 2007 at 9:24 AM

I’m willing to revert to French fries and French toast, but that’s about it on going toward French. There would be one exception: 1) if Canada were to give up Quebec and 2) Quebec asked us to annex them. Seeing that the chances of stipulation one are less than zero and stipulation two is even less likely, I’d rather just piss ’em off by our being “bilingual:” English and Ebonics.

To try to stay on topic… great post, Robert. It’s common sense, not racism. What we’re doing right now is tantamount to giving tourist visas to the Japanese and Germans in 1942.

flutejpl on June 13, 2007 at 9:55 AM

Another great vent with Robert Spencer. He addressed a problem I’ve wondered about myself… How do you deal with radical Islamists without coming into conflict with religious liberty as specified in the Constitution.

I strongly agree that one of our first steps should be to restrict all visas from countries designated as hostile to the US. Why shouldn’t our visa restrictions match our trade restrictions?

However, I am nervous about requiring “statements” from mosques stating that they do not support political Islam, and if not, labeling them as a political organization (making them subject to monitoring). I’m worried that such a law would be structured generically (and not targeted at radical Islam only), and could be used to persecute churches that try to inform their congregations of Biblical stances on political issues. How could such a law be structured so that it 1) doesn’t violate the Constitution, and 2) doesn’t get used as a tool against other benign groups?

dominigan on June 13, 2007 at 10:02 AM

I wonder how many jihadist are coming in our border right now from South America, anticipating getting a Zoro visa?

moonsbreath on June 13, 2007 at 10:10 AM

If I could just perfect my Jihad detector I could solve our Muslim immigration problems!

Drtuddle on June 13, 2007 at 11:09 AM

Great job, Mr Spencer. You’re awesome. I am completely impressed by your ability to delve so deeply into this disturbing extremism without wanting to choke the life out of somebody. I get so angry reading about their absolute evilness, that I get completely flustered. And getting me flustered is not an easy task.

(Sorry guys, I don’t know how to praise Robert and his classy presentations without sounding a little bit ghey. :-))

csdeven on June 13, 2007 at 11:12 AM

Great Vent Robert Spencer! Common sense solutions backed by facts – this is what we need to hear!

Excellent commentary that makes perfect sense. Don’t count on that influencing the Left however, they have their minds made up.

omegaram on June 13, 2007 at 12:20 PM

Every time I see Robert Spencer on Jihad Watch, I want to cry. Not because he’s bad or wrong, but because he’s so right and relatively unheard….

unamused on June 13, 2007 at 12:47 PM

How could such a law be structured so that it 1) doesn’t violate the Constitution, and 2) doesn’t get used as a tool against other benign groups?

dominigan on June 13, 2007 at 10:02 AM

Robert said it himself, but I would extend it to Islam as a whole. Make them swear that they are abandoning the Islamic ideal of Jihad and Islamic supremecism. If they do not, or if they do they domonstrate by actions or inaction the contrary, be decared a political organization and therefore subject to the same scutiny that other radical political ideologies are subject, such as the American NAZI party.

My personal view is that Islam is a socio/political/economic system and not a “religion” in the western sense of the word. It should not therefore be treated as a religion under western law.

P. James Moriarty on June 13, 2007 at 1:27 PM

This is too rich. On this day in history 1807 : Thomas Jefferson subpoenaed in Aaron Burr’s treason trial

Burr had already been politically and socially disgraced by killing former Treasury secretary and Revolutionary-era hero Alexander Hamilton in a duel in 1804. After killing Hamilton, Burr, still Jefferson’s vice president, went into hiding to avoid prosecution for murder. (The charges were later dropped.) Burr then concocted a seditious plan to enlist the help of Britain and Spain to create a separate nation in the southwestern reaches of the American continent, including parts of Mexico, over which Burr would rule. The outrageous plan failed miserably when one of Burr’s co-conspirators, General James Wilkinson, betrayed Burr and alerted Jefferson to the plot. Burr was hunted down and arrested in 1806 and indicted for treason.

LakeRuins on June 13, 2007 at 3:58 PM

Since Islam is both religious and political, then it should be reclassified. It should also apply to any other religion that gets involved in the same such as immigration and sheltering illegals. That goes to the bible thumpers that keep telling me I’m going to hell.

I still wondering that Jehovah witnessed.

Kini on June 13, 2007 at 4:02 PM

Another great vent. It would only seem logical when people are a “guest” in your home or country, the minute they start trying to rearrange the furniture, it is time to change their status.

Bobber on June 13, 2007 at 4:27 PM

My question is will the survivors of the next attack stick their heads further into the sand or will they pull them out, beat the hell out of the “war is a bumper sticker” side of government and do something?

Thanks R. Spencer for you relentless effort to try to wake up the brain dead!

abinitioadinfinitum on June 13, 2007 at 4:29 PM

However, I am nervous about requiring “statements” from mosques stating that they do not support political Islam
dominigan on June 13, 2007 at 10:02 AM

Maybe we can get them to “promise” that they won’t become radical Muslims. Our government seems to think it will work just fine with MS13 and other gang members, so why would it not work with Muslims? It’s not as if their religion COMMANDS them to LIE or anything!

abinitioadinfinitum on June 13, 2007 at 4:43 PM

dominigan: “However, I am nervous about requiring “statements” from mosques stating that they do not support political Islam, and if not, labeling them as a political organization (making them subject to monitoring).”

Such statements would be worthless because all mosques support political Islam. Islamic doctrine allows Muslims to lie about the beliefs to infidels. The majority of the Koran is devoted to Mohammed’s political program. Only a fraction of it is devoted to religion. If you are a Muslim, you have a political program. There is no render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s and render unto God what is God’s in the Koran. The Koran demands that you submit completely to Allah. There is no division between religion and politics in Islam.

That is why 80% of the mosques in American have been radicalized by Wahhabi-trained preachers using mosques as cover to promote Islamic imperialism. Mosques are political organizations with a political ideology of ill will to non-Muslims. Of course, we should monitor mosques. Every terrorist plot begins in a mosque. If the FBI is not planting listening devices in every radical mosque and recording the imam’s sermons, I want my tax money back.

Tantor on June 13, 2007 at 5:05 PM

Thanks, Mr. Spencer, for yet another excellent Vent.

The problem as I see it is twofold:

First, we have mistakenly declared a war on terror, not jihadists. Sadly, too few people in this country, and the vast majority of our elected officials, refuse to name the enemy. Until we correctly name the enemy, we can only prevent “terrors” from entering the country.

Second, the ACLU and others of their ilk will pull out all the guns should we attempt to disallow muslims entrance to the USA. Add to that screeching chorus every democrat, moonbat, lily-livered lib, Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, the MSM, and half the republican party.

Serious people quickly realized the threat we faced on 9/11. Others more knowledgeable and keen (like Mr. Spencer,) knew years before. I hate having to say this again, but it is going to take a truly monstrous event of overwhelming proportions to wake the others up. When that finally does happen, we must act very quickly to put in place all the restrictions we have neglected to date. The “others” will only be outraged for a few weeks–after that they will have come up with many reasons why we deserved it, as well as conspiracy theories, etc.

IrishEi on June 13, 2007 at 5:31 PM

Yep IrishEi, I couldn’t have said it better.

4shoes on June 13, 2007 at 6:07 PM

Great job on the song by Bryan and Michelle!

Another good vent by Robert too – especially the parts about categorizing political mosques as political entities. Don’t churches, mosques, synagogues etc have to stay out of politics to maintain a tax exempt status? Any tax attorneys or CPAs out there who can explain the specific consequences of a tax exempt religious institution crossing the line on this?

forest on June 13, 2007 at 7:35 PM

Soon to come on US currency.

Replace – In God We Trust to In Allah We Trust, or Else.

Kini on June 13, 2007 at 7:42 PM

that song was way beyond awesome.

emmaline1138 on June 13, 2007 at 7:54 PM

OH ROBERT, sweetie >>>>

You actually make me look FORWARD to getting the bad news.



seejanemom on June 13, 2007 at 8:11 PM

Anything that puts a knot in the firehose of Mohammedans getting into any secular infidel country is a good idea.

Mosques (“Schools of Islamic Learning”, et al) should all be considered political recruitment centers for the Koranically-declared overthrow of the West …with a quasi-“religious” coating of cultural saccharine for the suckers.

profitsbeard on June 13, 2007 at 9:47 PM

Dear Robert, please don’t ever think that the dearth of commentitude is a reflection of our opinion on the importance or relevance of your {greatly appreciated} filmed commentary on this website. Rather, I think it is the time of the post, when we are at work. I for one, wish to listen closely and without the pressures of sneaking a peek at the office.

I admire the thoughtful comments preceding mine by those who were able to listen.

Thank you, thank you, thank you for your contributions to this website.

We have purchased over half a dozen of your books and audio CDs (TPIGTI&TC) and shared them with local officials and even one of our state reps, who promised to listen to it (the CDs) on his return trip. (Got a handwritten TH note for that).

Oh, yes, you make a difference, Robert. Oh, yes.

RushBaby on June 14, 2007 at 12:26 AM

“Islamophobic?” Does that mean fearing an ideology that bears responsibility for virtually all of the terrorism in the world at this time? Hell, if you’re not Islamophobic, you’re not paying attention.

morganfrost on June 14, 2007 at 8:26 AM

an ideology that bears responsibility for virtually all of the terrorism in the world at this time?

At this time and throughout all of History. And it will never stop, unless it is forcefully stopped.

americaslaststand on June 14, 2007 at 6:13 PM

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, although I’m sure not so eloquently as Mr. Spencer: why are we letting our fear of hurting someone’s feelings overrule our fear of being killed??? America is making a fool of itself by letting people call us racist for being afraid of radical islamists or for being afraid of an open border. We SHOULD be afraid of these things, and that has NOTHING to do with race!

hollygolightly on June 14, 2007 at 7:47 PM

And I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. Islam is not a religion, it’s a death-cult. The Founding Fathers did not have Islam in mind when they gave us freedom of religion and they would not have recognized Islam as a religion. Islam should not receive and does not deserve First Amendment protection.

Maxx on June 15, 2007 at 9:47 AM