Abdelhamid's father turned him in to the police.
The father of the Paris massacre mastermind was concerned about the radicalisation of his son, so he shopped him to les flics.
What I wanted to point out here is this: that it's often the descendants of migrants to Europe, not the first-comers, who turn against the countries into which they've been born and which gave them succour.
There are statistics on this in Christipher Caldwell's well-regarded book "Reflections on the Revolution in Europe".
I can't think of any reason why the newly arriving hordes of refugees (1 million so far this year) will be any different. Why should they be?
The new arrivals may well settle down to make lives for themselves. But what of their progeny? Won't some of them also "fall" into Islamism? Clearly some of the doctrines of Islam are potent motivators.
Given that there is a percentage of Muslims who take up violent jihad (between 2% and 10% depending on the poll and the country), then, with mathematical certitude, the more refugees to the west the more violent jihadi attacks there will be in the west.
As the Financial Times article below says: "The story of the Abaaoud family is hardly unprecedented. Molenbeek [Belgium] is strewn with families split apart by sons and brothers who have fallen into radicalism." [my emphasis].
Note that word "fallen".
But fallen into what exactly?
Well, "fallen" into the Koran, the Hadith and the biography of Muhammad (the Sirah), in which the "perfect example" (as he's known in Islam), shows them the way of the sword, the hatred for infidels, the glory of jihad.
"I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve" (Koran 8:12), says Muhammad, this perfect example of mankind.
And so they flock to follow. Sorry, to "fall".
http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/d8623e26-8fa8-11e5-8be4-3506bf20cc2b.html#axzz3sBmUqxEl
Sent from my iPhone
The father of the Paris massacre mastermind was concerned about the radicalisation of his son, so he shopped him to les flics.
What I wanted to point out here is this: that it's often the descendants of migrants to Europe, not the first-comers, who turn against the countries into which they've been born and which gave them succour.
There are statistics on this in Christipher Caldwell's well-regarded book "Reflections on the Revolution in Europe".
I can't think of any reason why the newly arriving hordes of refugees (1 million so far this year) will be any different. Why should they be?
The new arrivals may well settle down to make lives for themselves. But what of their progeny? Won't some of them also "fall" into Islamism? Clearly some of the doctrines of Islam are potent motivators.
Given that there is a percentage of Muslims who take up violent jihad (between 2% and 10% depending on the poll and the country), then, with mathematical certitude, the more refugees to the west the more violent jihadi attacks there will be in the west.
As the Financial Times article below says: "The story of the Abaaoud family is hardly unprecedented. Molenbeek [Belgium] is strewn with families split apart by sons and brothers who have fallen into radicalism." [my emphasis].
Note that word "fallen".
But fallen into what exactly?
Well, "fallen" into the Koran, the Hadith and the biography of Muhammad (the Sirah), in which the "perfect example" (as he's known in Islam), shows them the way of the sword, the hatred for infidels, the glory of jihad.
"I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve" (Koran 8:12), says Muhammad, this perfect example of mankind.
And so they flock to follow. Sorry, to "fall".
http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/d8623e26-8fa8-11e5-8be4-3506bf20cc2b.html#axzz3sBmUqxEl
Sent from my iPhone
