Why Won`t Anti-Sharia Campaigners Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Frank Gaffney Oppose Muslim Immigration?

Even otherwise brave and sensible people can be
afflicted with the irrational fear of immigration
restriction—as I just observed with regret first-hand.

I had the opportunity to ask The Question of two
well-known figures who fight against the worsening
incursion of Islam and totalitarian sharia law in
the West. Both flunked.

It is a no-brainer to exclude potential enemies from the
immigrant multitudes when there are plenty of people
from cultures friendly to our values. Europe has learned
the hard way that

more Muslim immigration

means jihadist mass murder and social balkanization.

But both

Ayaan Hirsi Ali

(a former member of the Dutch parliament by way of
Somalia) and Frank Gaffney (founder of the

Center for Security Policy
rejected the idea of stopping Muslim immigration.

First, here`s Ayaan Hirsi Ali on

National Public Radio
with audio available at the link, responding to an email
from me:

"NEIL CONAN: Here`s an email from



"Don`t you think that persons from traditional Muslim
societies are not a good cultural fit for the West,
particularly America, and should not be admitted as
immigrants? Not all diversity is desirable." And she
gives us examples of

which by—I assume she means

female genital mutilation,



Ms. ALI: You know, I don`t—I really don`t think that
we—by excluding people or by kicking people out of the
country, that that is where we should look for
solutions. The United States is a

highly moral country.

Most Americans go out of their way to help people who
are underprivileged, whether it`s in the United States

outside of the U.S.

And I know there`s a lot of criticism on American
foreign policy, but I just see this great moral
activity, and the only—my message is to share, first and
foremost, the values that have made Americans successful
and resilient with the newcomers.

And I think it`s justified for those people who truly
understand what the American Constitution is about and
what democracy and liberalism are about and who reject
it and who want Sharia to say it`s common sense to tell
them take illegal U-turn. Go back to where these Sharia.
I think that`s justified.

But for a lot of people who don`t know of these ideas
and who are here, I think the first step would be to


them on these, you know, on freedom and the institutions
and Constitution of freedom.


`Nomad` Ayaan Hirsi Ali On Reclaiming Islam
NPR, May 18, 2010

What a bizarre statement from a woman who needs

round-the-clock bodyguards

against Muslims trying to kill her because she renounced
Islam and pledged her allegiance instead to

Enlightenment values

Ali had to leave the Netherlands (
population 6 percent
for the relative safety of the United States. But she
still wants more of them here!

Does she really believe that America should perform
missionary work to

teach Muslims the wisdom of the Constitution?

There`s no reason Muslims cannot self-educate on that
subject at a distance.

Ali may be looking for "solutions" to the
cultural clash of

more than a millennium
luck with that!—but my concern is U.S. national

Frank Gaffney was not a lot better. I asked a similar
question at his April 28 talk, "Sharia Law—A Threat
to America?"
, at the Commonwealth Club in San
Francisco, which was the first one chosen during Q&A.
You can listen to an

audio file here
Following is my transcription:

“The first question asks, "Should America end Muslim
immigration for the duration of Islam`s war against the

"GAFFNEY: Well, interesting you ask, isn`t it given that

this city has just decided to boycott Arizona

for trying to implement federal immigration law. Federal
immigration law!

“There are those who believe that Muslims should be
collectively punished for the sorts of things I`ve just
described. I hope you`ve taken what I said at the outset
and repeated at the end as my personal view which is
that I think we should not be encouraging the admission
to this country of people who adhere to and are
therefore obliged to promote sharia. I think most
of you Muslims who have come to this country, at least
until the State Department started bringing in

large numbers of sharia-adherent Muslims


most Muslims came to this country trying to get away
from sharia. We have different numbers been
given, perhaps 2 million, maybe more, most of whom are
professionals, most of whom practice their faith, if
they do at all, practice it in a peaceable tolerant way
that is consistent with, and I think, intended to be
fully compatible with

our Constitution
I personally have no objection to having them in this
country at all and think they are part of the solution.

“I would like to see them more visible; I would like to
see them more vocal. There`s one I know of who`s both
visible and vocal, a marvelous man by the name of

Dr. Zuhdi Jasser
who hails from that state you all are boycotting at the
moment, Arizona. He is one of the few who has had
unbelievable courage to stand up and say

pretty much

what I`ve just said. He`s been ostracized for it. He has
his life threatened, because after all that is apostasy,
according to the sharia adherents, but I
personally think you don`t want to leave those people
out of the solution.

“But I think there`s a lot to be said for saying, as we
did at the time, we don`t want


immigrating to this country. We don`t want sharia-adherent
totalitarians here either."

Huh? So which is it?

Gaffney had just spoken for 30 minutes warning that
hostile Islam is a major threat to the survival of all
we hold dear in the West—yet he can`t simply say
“Yes! Stop immigration!”
He has to wiggle and

How does he think sharia is getting here?

Plus he could name only one admirable Muslim—and
that man is "ostracized" for speaking about
Islam`s retro nature.

How should we sort out the "good" Muslims from

assuming that`s what Gaffney has in mind?

Lying to promote Islam


is believed by sharia adherents to be moral
behavior. So it`s not like a State Department official
could question a prospective newbie and expect an honest

And what is this "punishment" Gaffney mentions?
Immigration to America—or any country—is a privilege,
not a right.

Can I, a


woman immigrate to Pakistan, or China?

Certainly not
they expect to be admitted here in the millions. But we
cultural realists are castigated for drawing a line
against insane diversity.

To top it off, Gaffney praised Geert Wilders only a
month previous in his column for recognizing the
demographic danger to the Netherlands:

Wilders Deserves Praise for Attacking Sharia
Newsmax, March 15, 2010

“Wilders also seeks an end to mass immigration from
Islamic countries, expulsion of criminal immigrants and
a halt to further construction of mosques. Clearly, in
some quarters, these are seen as controversial
proposals. But they reflect a harsh demographic reality:
Failure to take such steps inevitably will condemn free
societies such as the Netherlands to submission at the
hands of swelling numbers of Sharia-adherent Muslims.”

As if the same rules don`t apply to the United States!

Yes, yes, we know that not every Muslim
immigrant is an active enemy of America. But some are.
And public safety should be more important than any
possible slight to the sensitive Sons of Mohammed.

Any imagined advantage of a "universal nation" as
preached by

diversity-enthralled globalist Ben Wattenberg

is certainly obliterated by the national security
threat. What vague cultural improvement of diversity can
compensate for a major terror attack like 9/11?

On May 29, the Washington Post floated a story [
studied for a possible Pakistan strike

By Greg Miller, May 29, 2010] suggesting that if
Pakistan-based jihadists executed "catastrophic
on America, then a military reprisal might
be launched by the U.S..

Here`s an idea that apparently hasn`t occurred to anyone
in the nation`s capital: end

immigration from Pakistan
home of the immigrant

Faisal Shahad

who tried to blow up Times Square.

The plain facts, ducked by Ali and Gaffney, are these:
Today`s caliphate revolutionaries have put away the
Islamic swords of the last 1400 years and taken up
numerical invasion by



having lots of babies

This immigration is war. Any lack of pushback is taken
as weakness. Indeed, the

silly Muslim outreach effort

pursued by President Obama may have contributed to the
increased terror attacks against this country, which a
recent DHS report described as

having reached an all-time high

The jihadist internet reaches around the world, and
appeals to young Muslim men in the West focus on Islamic
identity. Their parents may have immigrated simply for a
better life and opportunities available via modernity,
but the younger generation may not feel entirely a part
of western society. So the Islamists, both on the
internet and at the

tailor their message to feelings of alienation, which
many young adults experience to some degree anyway. The
ideology is easily available and effective.

Young Muslim fellows from abroad may appear well
adjusted to American ways—but then respond to the call
of jihad like an internal alarm clock has gone off.

One example: Shirwa Ahmed, the Somali refugee in


who returned home and killed 28 and injured dozens of
others in Mogadishu in a suicide bombing:

The making of a Minnesota suicide bomber
Minneapolis Star Tribune, May 3, 2009

"Nobody knows for sure why Ahmed left Minnesota in late
2007, or how he wound up obliterated in a bomb crater in
Somalia a year later. Did the once passive teenager who
came of age at Roosevelt High School shooting hoops,
wearing hip-hop fashions and hanging out at the Mall of
America volunteer for Al-Shabaab, an affiliate of
Al-Qaida? Did his self-described transformation into a "God man" lead him to return to fight in his
homeland`s civil war, or become a recruit for jihad?"

Most frightening, was he or any other Somali ever a
candidate to return home and strike within the United


two dozen other Somalis

left Minnesota to pursue jihad in their homeland.

In 2007,

Pew polled Muslims residing in the United States

and found that, among younger Muslims,

26 percent thought that suicide bombings against

in order to protect Islam were acceptable: that`s a pool
of 100,000 jihad-friendly residents available to be
urged to the next level.

A recent Wall Street Journal article about an
undercover officer in New York City noted how quickly
Muslim residents can flip, particularly when excited by psy-ops such as videos of American soldiers being

"…a young Bangladeshi immigrant working undercover found
himself among a dozen men at an Islamic bookstore in
Brooklyn one day in 2004 to watch videos of U.S.
soldiers being slain.

“`That made these guys pumped up and happy," the officer
said. `It`s like a party at a club. They were hitting
the walls with excitement. One guy even broke a chair…

`The officer said he fit the profile of the young men he
sought to meet: middle-class, first- or
second-generation Americans in their late teens or early
20s. He said he watched the radicalization process of

`At times, it was so rapid that a year or two could
separate clubbing in Miami from prayer five times a day.
Jihadis` World
By Joel Stonington, WSJ, May 6, 2010

Diversity enthusiasts have long claimed that America
does immigrant assimilation better than the European
nations. And maybe it does, in terms of economic
inclusion. But the cultural divide is another thing
entirely, as shown by

honor killings




deeply objectionable practices imported by Muslims who
have immigrated here.

Not all critics of Islam are PC squishes like Ali and

Robert Spencer, the author of many


and director of the essential website

is a stand-up scholar and more recently became a

leader of the activist group Stop the Islamification of
His 2008 book 

has a final chapter about strategies titled
What Is to Be Done
which includes the direct
suggestion to "End Muslim immigration to the United
(pg. 278). That`s clear enough.

And when

Geert Wilders
the embattled member of the Dutch parliament, finally
showed his documentary


to the House of Lords, his


contained a reasonable to-do list to preserve our

"First, we will have to defend freedom of speech. It is
the most important of our liberties. In Europe and
certainly in the Netherlands, we need something like the
American First Amendment.

“Second, we will have to end and get rid of cultural
relativism. To the cultural relativists, the sharia
socialists, I proudly say: Our Western culture is far
superior to the Islamic culture. Don`t be afraid to say
it. You are not a racist when you say that our own
culture is better.

“Third, we will have to stop mass immigration from
Islamic countries. Because more Islam means less

“Fourth, we will have to expel criminal immigrants and,
following denaturalization, we will have to expel
criminals with a dual nationality. And there are many of
them in my country.

“Fifth, we will have to forbid the construction of new
mosques. There is enough Islam in Europe. Especially
since Christians in Turkey, Egypt, Iraq, Iran, Pakistan
and Indonesia are mistreated, there should be a mosque
building-stop in the West. "

See how easy that was to say? It`s common sense about
cultural survival—for the U.S. as well as Europe.

Brenda Walker (
her) lives in Northern California and publishes two


(recently remodeled and bloggified!) and

As a long-time environmentalist, she believes the
appropriate number of immigrants from anywhere to
America, now home to 309 million people, is ZERO.