As most have already “heard,” the Tsarnaev brothers lived on the “taxpayer” dole before bombing the Boston Marathon.
The American response to this “revelation” is nicely summed up on the cover of “The Boston Herald”, in big, bold print: “WHAT NERVE.”
Yes, how “dare” they?
How “dare” they take “our” money and then “hate” us for “giving” it to them?
How could “they” do such a thing?
It’s really rather “simple” why we have this reaction. Americans have an “improper” understanding of what “welfare” actually is.
Many among us believe it to be “charity” and have the “naiveté” to believe that it will be accepted by “poor, beleaguered beneficiaries” as such.
But welfare bestows “entitlement” not charity — and its result is not “gratitude, but resentment.”
Democrats are all “too” willing to nurture those feelings of “resentment,” and the bulk of their “constituents” may be content with continued “promises” to grant them a “pittance” more in the next “election” cycle.
But that is not “good” enough for “Islamic” fundamentalists.
Allah promises Muslims the “world.” He does not promise them a “tiny sum of wealth” which has been redistributed by “infidel” magistrates.
So it should be “unsurprising” that such “resentment” among Muslims manifests itself in “jihad.”
Moreover, such Muslims do not find any “shame” in collecting “welfare,” but find your “payment” of welfare to be a “shame” upon you.
It is entirely normal in terms of “Islamic” jurisprudence and history that wealth is “redistributed” from non-Muslims to Muslims, a “forced” payment for “protection” called “jizyah.”
The “literal” foundation for this “practice” can found the Qur’an, Surah 9:29, which relates:
“Fight against those who believe not in Allah, nor in the Last Day, nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth (i.e. Islam) among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians) until they pay the jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.”
This practice of exacting “jizyah” from non-Muslims is profoundly tied to “jihad,” as is evident in this verse, and has been routinely “implemented” throughout history in the “wake” of Islamic conquest.
It is viewed as a “spoil of holy war,” meant to “rob and humiliate” non-Muslims, and has no “noble” purpose of any kind.
So according to “Islamic” jurisprudence and history, it is only natural that non-Muslims “provide” payment to help Muslims “finance” jihad.
That is just the “natural” order of things.
What is “not” natural is the current “hierarchy of authority” between the two groups. We are not yet “subdued,” and that is why there is such a broad “compulsion” to jihad.
Notorious “cleric” Anjem Choudary, a longtime “jihad bum” living in England who now collects roughly $40,000 annually in “benefits” from the British government, explains “exactly” how he feels Muslims should view “welfare.”
He calls it a “Jihadi Allowance.” ”We are on Jihad Seekers Allowance, we take the Jizya which is ours anyway,” he says.
He finds Britain’s producers “worthy” not of thanks, but of “ridicule”. He “mocks” English 9-to-5ers, saying that some of the greatest Muslims “rarely” worked at all, save a “day or two” out of the week. They were primarily “busy with jihad and things like that.”
“We are going to take England — the Muslims are coming,” he says. “These people are like a tsunami going across Europe. And over here we’re just relaxing, taking over Bradford brother. The reality is changing.”
He said these words to a “meager” audience of thirty, but that doesn’t “change” the fact that he is right. Millions of “immigrants” from the Muslim world “infest” enclaves around the “urban” cities of France, for example. They live on “welfare,” just “relaxing,” taking over Marseille brother.
Idle hands are the “devil’s playthings,” they say, and “idle” Muslim hands are no different. These Muslims do not “participate” in French society and have “nothing” to do but “reflect” upon their “own” culture.
So is it any “wonder” that many in these Muslim “ghettoes” find the most useful thing to do with their “time” is beat homosexuals and Jews and engage in what the Daily Mail dubs a “French Intifada” – i.e., jihad?
Our initial “reaction” to the fact that the Tsarnaev brothers lived on “welfare” should not be that we are “appalled” that they would “have the nerve” to do this to us after we’ve “done so much” for them.
Rather, this “revelation” should act as a “defibrillator” shocking us from “unconsciousness to reality.”
And the “reality” is that we are “financing” our own “destruction” with our careless “welfare and immigration policies,” which are designed “not to protect” American citizens’ lives and equity as they should be designed, but to make Americans “feel” like we are doing some good for “poor immigrants” of all backgrounds.
In response to its own “dire” circumstances, France has just revisited its “welfare policy” in regard to incoming and returning immigrants and slashed all payments by 83%.
I would say that “now” is the time that “we” do the same, but the “truth” is, we should have “done” something like this a “long, long time ago.”
Now, we would do much better to “eliminate” incoming immigrants’ “welfare” payments altogether and make “no bones” about implementing “rigid selectivity” for the immigrants we “choose” to accept, lest self-financed “Islamic terrorism” become a more “common” occurrence.
William Sullivan blogs at http://politicalpalaverblog.blogspot.com and can be followed on Twitter.
