Moral assymentry is horrific

Adam Milstein writes about how the USA is failing to honor the victims of Islamic terrorism ever since 9-11:

We promised never to forget, and to defend our American freedoms and way of life in memory of those who perished that day. But sadly, over time, our promise to America has evaporated. The evidence is everywhere: in our classrooms, in our city halls, and in the fastest-growing factions of our own politics.

As America marks the 25th anniversary of 9/11, while celebrating 250 years since its founding, those anniversaries compel us to confront a question that is uncomfortable but unavoidable:

What happens when a civilization loses confidence in its own values while its enemies remain completely convinced of theirs?

The threat of radical Islam, foreign and domestic, has not receded. It has spread.

The terrorists of 2000 wanted to murder Americans abroad, and the terrorists of 2001 wanted to destroy American lives and symbols on our homeland. Today’s Islamist threat can still take the form of terrorism, but it also operates through propaganda, political influence, ideological networks and efforts to reshape how Americans normalize, accept, and even cherish radical Islam.

The examples are no longer isolated. In August, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) promoted a back-to-school resource guide that blamed 9/11 on “American support for Israel” and recommended Osama bin Laden’s infamous “Letter to America” to students. After deserved backlash, the material was removed.

Imagine a curriculum about Pearl Harbor that treated Japanese propaganda as required reading while suggesting that American policy was fundamentally responsible for the attack.

We would immediately recognize the moral inversion.

If they did, would it be because religions of the far east aren't built on the same kind of barbarism those of Islamic countries are? Although some could reasonably wonder if today, any moral inversion emphasizing the National Socialist ideology that grew in Germany during WW2 would be considered acceptable.

The problem is moral asymmetry.

When Islamist extremists attack the West, we are told to examine the grievances that supposedly caused them to act.

When Western countries defend themselves, we are told that their very existence is the problem.

When Islamists or their sympathizers are criticized, the discussion immediately shifts to Islamophobia.

This moral relativism is one of the most dangerous weapons available to an extremist movement.

Because if there is no objective distinction between terrorism and self-defense, between murdering civilians and fighting terrorists, between democratic government and authoritarian rule, then there is no moral basis for defending civilization at all.

They understand something that many Western elites have forgotten, ideas matter.

Osama bin Laden understood that he was fighting not simply the American military but American pride. His objective was not merely to kill Americans. It was to convince Americans that their civilization was corrupt, illegitimate and unworthy of defending.

Twenty-five years later, we are helping him make that argument.

Some could say it all began with the Bush administration, which tried at the time to take steps to "convince" the Islamic world that American culture isn't "materialistic and lewd". Bush's appeasements are something Daniel Greenfield also brings up, and that there's a chilling number of people now in the MSM and on the left who're justifying Islamic terrorism:

“Muslim friends and citizens, tax-paying citizens, and Muslims in nations were just appalled and could not believe what we saw on our TV screens. These acts of violence against innocents violate the fundamental tenets of the Islamic faith. And it’s important for my fellow Americans to understand that,” President George W. Bush had claimed in remarks at a mosque after 9/11 while accompanied by terror-linked Islamists. “The face of terror is not the true faith of Islam. That’s not what Islam is all about. Islam is peace. These terrorists don’t represent peace.”

Former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice recently asked the former president to talk about his mosque visit after the attacks to “make sure that our Muslim American citizens knew that we didn’t blame them for what had happened.” Bush chimed in, “I also made it clear that Islam was a religion of peace, not a religion of war, and that these people subverted their religion.”

Muslims, however, don’t agree. It’s not just the generation of Islamic terrorist attacks that have taken place in America since then, the vast majority of which were not organized or planned out by any central terror network like Al Qaeda, but by ordinary Muslims living in the United States.

Some of them may have even paid their taxes.

While Bush was nostalgically recalling his comments after 9/11, the father of Todd Beamer, one of the heroes who led the effort to retake Flight 93 from the Islamic terrorists who had hijacked it, was recording a commercial against Abdul El-Sayed in Michigan. David Beamer had not previously gotten involved in politics, but El-Sayed had been campaigning with Hasan Piker, a Turkish Muslim influencer who said that “America deserved 9/11” and recently told an interviewer that “pound for pound”, America was worse than Al Qaeda and that was too much.

What does it say that Abdul El-Sayed and Zohran Mamdani, the two most prominent Muslim politicians right now, have both been tied to a Muslim who said, “America deserved 9/11”?

Or that the biggest expansion of Islamic political power in America came after Muslims rallied on behalf of Hamas after Oct 7 (Hasan Piker had defended Hamas as “a militant resistance comprised of orphaned soldiers born into a 77-year occupation” and dismissed its atrocities as “rape fantasies”) and in doing so hijacked the Democratic Party to elect terrorist supporters.

Their current crop of candidates includes Melat Kiros, a Colorado congressional candidate who refused to condemn a Muslim terrorist setting a Holocaust survivor on fire, Dariazila Avila Chevalier, a Muslim congressional candidate in New York City who attended a rally celebrating the Oct 7 massacres, Aisha Wahab, a Muslim congresswoman in California who called for diplomatic relations with the Taliban, and Hisham ‘Adam’ Hamawy, the former translator for the Blind Sheikh terror leader at the center of the World Trade Center bombing, and who had volunteered for an Al Qaeda front group. The mask is off and they aren’t hiding it anymore.

A vital lesson could be learned from this, that when nobody's vigilant enough, it's a "conservative" who could end up sowing the seeds of defeat, as Bush did when he basically groveled, and repeated his defeatist positions later on too. Why, the French president Valery Giscard d'Estaing, who was in office during 1974-81, was also "right-wing", and he enabled mass Muslim immigration to France that's taken a horrifying toll since. Even Ariel Sharon was supposedly "right-wing", and was another example who turned out to be a monster. That's why anybody who cares has to pay careful attention so that the right isn't infiltrated by bad actors as the left has. Today's generation of conservatives thankfully seems to have what it takes for that, but it still may not be enough. More vigilance is needed.

The modern sports bandits

Catherine Salgado reports that men pretending to be women in sports have stolen over 2000 medals from lady athletes:

Biological men who claim to be women have stolen more than 2,000 gold medals alone from girls and women in the United States, according to a new estimate from a conservative women’s group.

The explosion in the number of young people, especially male athletes, who claim to be members of the opposite sex is certainly due to the huge Democrat push for putting LGBTQ in everything. But when it comes to sports specifically, it is also true that many boys and men who realized they were never going to reach the level they wanted, competing against their fellow men, figured out that by growing their hair long and changing their names, they could be first every single time. Not only that, but many politicians and celebrities would call them heroes for beating women.

Penny Nance, CEO and president of the Concerned Women for America Legislative Action Committee (CWALAC), said on September 22, “It is shockingly unfair for biological women to have to compete against trans-identifying men. Our research finding that trans-identifying males have stolen over 2,293 gold medals from women in the United States is an outrage. Biological men have distinct advantages over biological women. This reality not only puts women in harm’s way, but it eliminates opportunities for biological women to earn a living and win competitions. Congress must act to protect biological women.”

But the Democrats at this point are unlikely to do so, as they proved over the past decade they've never been supportive of women's rights. It's up to Republicans to prove they can put an end to this, and make sure the frauds return the medals they don't deserve.

Over 40 percent of Americans now support socialism

There was a time several years ago when most Americans did not want to vote for a socialist. Tragically, through propaganda and indoctrination, that's now changing, as a new poll reveals a sizable number of American residents view socialism as acceptable:

More than four in ten Americans have a positive view of socialism – 43 percent – only 12 points lower than the 55 percent who view capitalism positively, a recent Gallup survey revealed.

The survey asked respondents if they have a negative or positive image of small business, free enterprise, capitalism, socialism, and big business.

Small business had the highest rating at 95 percent positive, followed by free enterprise with 77 percent positive, and capitalism with a 55 percent positive rating.

However, 43 percent now have a positive view of socialism. This is “the first time this figure has exceeded 39% in Gallup’s trend since 2010,” Gallup reported.

Democrats’ view of socialism has grown more positive over the past several years. More than half, 57 percent, had a positive view of socialism in 2018. Now, that figure among Democrats stands at 65 percent. Coinciding with that is the fact that Democrats view capitalism less favorably, dropping from 42 percent in 2025 to 35 percent in 2026.

Similarly, independents are cozying up to the ideology. In the last year alone, independents went from a 37 percent positive view of socialism to 45 percent.

Now we can understand how NYC's first Muslim mayor, Zohran Mamdani, got elected too. This is definitely bad news, and unless education programs can be installed successfully to teach why socialism/communism is bad, we'll soon see much more frightening numbers coming up.

Iran continues to collapse

Eric Florack discusses how Iran's dictatorship, despite all their attempts to make it sound otherwise, is collapsing:

In the cleanest tell yet that Iran is on the ropes, a senior Iranian official just put a number on the table Tehran has never put there before. That official told Reuters on Sept. 22 that Iran can reopen the Strait of Hormuz within seven days if Washington eases military pressure and lifts the blockade on Iranian ports. Per that reporting, this marks the first time Tehran has attached a specific, dated performance window to reopening the strait rather than treating it as an open-ended bargaining chip. That's a meaningful shift. A regime negotiating from strength doesn't convert its leverage into a countdown clock — it converts it when the clock is running against it, not the other way around. Reuters doesn't name the "senior official," but it's a safe bet that it's either President Masoud Pezeshkian himself or someone standing close enough to him to speak for the office.

Of course, there's always the question of whether Iran actually follows through on its promises, and the standard response should be "they won't," since in practice, they never have.

That suspicion only deepens once you look at what other Iranian officials said in the same news cycle. CNBC's reporting notes that a separate senior Iranian government official told MS NOW, CNBC's Versant Media partner, that the Reuters and Kyodo reports were "not true." And according to yournews.com's writeup, Iran's semi-official Fars News Agency disputed the account, too. So this isn't a clean, confirmed data point. It's a single-sourced Reuters/Kyodo report, attributed to one unnamed official, that Iran's own state-adjacent media machine turned around and contradicted within the same day. CNBC itself states it "could not independently verify the reports."

That contradiction goes directly to a point I made back in April: Iran's civilian government under Pezeshkian and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps aren't singing from the same hymnal, and this flip-flop looks a great deal like the result. It's reasonable to conclude Iran is fighting something close to an internal civil war right now, waged between the IRGC and whatever still passes for a civilian government in Tehran — one arm offering concessions to end a war it can't win, the other arm racing to deny it before Iranian state media has to explain the offer to its own people.

Let’s recall that Ali Khamenei was killed in a February 28 U.S.-Israeli strike and his son Mojtaba Khamenei was installed as his successor. Mojtaba is now reportedly walled off from his own government by an IRGC security cordon. Gee, big shock.

The walk-back on the Hormuz offer itself is the more useful data point, because it measures Iran's shrinking ability to control its own message, let alone its own war. Even Iranian state media has lately taken on a tone bracing its audience for something difficult, a marked departure from its usual self-assured, defiant register. Pezeshkian's own framing — "we emerged with our heads held high," vowing to "firmly defend" Iran's positions — is the language of a leader managing domestic face-saving, not one negotiating from a position that needs no defending. That combination — tough public talk paired with real, dated concessions offered quietly through mediators — is the classic signature of a regime under genuine pressure, trying to manage two audiences at once: an international one it's handing specific offers to, and a domestic one it's still trying to sell a story of resilience. It calls to mind the rhetoric coming out of Berlin in the days after the Allied landing at Normandy — total confidence on the radio, total collapse on the map.

Well let's hope this all signals Iran's tyrants will surrender soon. But let's still remember they're barbarians, and such monsters don't merely surrender so easily. So even if financial sanctions are having effects, it doesn't mean they'll give up so easily.

The challenges of making the Daily Wire's latest film project

In this Daily Wire interview, they discuss the making of Run, Hide, Fight: Infidels, which is their project for focusing on the issue of Islamic terrorism:

Ben Domenech: Dallas, before we start talking about this movie, which was something that was important for you to do, talk about the decision to go in this direction — one that was a little fraught, just given the topic area and the fact that you were going to take a new and different genre approach to this, I would say, than perhaps you had before while staying in the same family. Walk me through a little bit about the decision processes that led up to deciding to make this movie.

Dallas Sonnier: You don’t hire me to produce a movie if you’re trying to make something for Hallmark, let’s say, and you don’t hire someone normal or reasonable when you’re going to make these kinds of movies. And so I am, in certain ways, built for this moment, just because of the movies that I’ve made and the career I’ve built, and learning how to make high-budget movies for low-budget money. And we always get nice big stars in these movies and the explosions look big. The part of my career I’m most proud of is building this type of movie-making. And so that’s how it gets made. Now the genesis of it was a conversation between me and Mike Richards, the new Daily Wire CEO, Ben Shapiro, and the writer-director of the original “Run Hide Fight” movie, Kyle Rankin.

The four of us got on the call, and we said, “Hey, we should really consider making another ‘Run Hide Fight’ movie. It does so well on the platform, and it’s so successful for us, and we want to go bigger and better.” And so that’s how it came about. And then we battered around some ideas, and Mike Richards was really inspired by the student protests at Columbia University, but most importantly, the counter-protest normal students, so to speak, who fought back and wanted to go to school and go to class and not be interrupted by this pro-Palestine nonsense. So that’s the genesis of the movie and how it came to be and how we go about it. [...]

BD: Just to circle back to the Islam question, there is real concern when you engage in a project like this that the threats that come through are more meaningful and more real than perhaps the long-distance threats of nation-states and the like. Now that may not always be true. There are plenty of documentarians and journalists and people like that who Russia has reached out and targeted over the years in places that are not Russia, despite their insistence on trying to have the same frequency of falling out windows in London. They have not achieved that same level, but it does seem to me that there is always an additional risk that comes when you’re seizing on this topic area. How much of a concern was that for the participants in this production? Did you have to work through their own concerns about this, just given that there’s a reason that there’s not a Charlie Hebdo that involves evangelical Christians?

DS: Sure. We cast the terrorists in the movie mostly from the stunt community. And so I joke around a lot as a proud conservative and as almost a right-wing filmmaker at this point. I joke around that we can’t name our favorite conservative chef because they don’t exist. Conversely, you can’t name your favorite liberal stuntman because they don’t exist. And so when you’re leaning into a really tricky role that has a lot of action and violence and things like that, the trick is to cast a stunt person and then help them get the performance. And so we were unbelievably blessed with that group of guys.

I definitely hope they make sure to employ good security for their project contributors as well. If anything, I'm glad they're now tackling a challenging issue like this, and hope they don't allow intimidation to get in the way. Otherwise, serious subjects will not be focused upon or dealt with. I wish the Daily Wire staff good luck with producing this item.

Muslim gym teacher in India murdered Hindu woman, police accused of failing to act on prior warnings

Ashlyn Davis reports a Muslim gym trainer in west Delhi murdered a Hindu woman:

A 26-year-old Muslim gym trainer identified as Mohammad Imran, alias Aqib, strangled and stabbed a 21-year-old Hindu woman to death inside her home in West Delhi on August 26, after weeks of alleged harassment and threats. Police identified the victim as Muskan Sharma, a Delhi University student and part-time model and content creator, and arrested her former gym trainer two days after the killing.

Police sources have confirmed that Imran had visited Muskan’s home in Old Mahavir Nagar, Tilak Nagar, on the evening of August 26, where she stayed alone. CCTV cameras captured him entering the building between 5:40 pm and 5:45 pm.

According to reports, Imran strangled Muskan before stabbing her multiple times with a knife and fleeing the scene. A domestic worker later found her lying seriously injured on the floor and alerted people in the neighborhood. Her relatives and neighbors rushed her to a hospital, but doctors declared her dead on arrival.

Imran also took the victim’s mobile phone after the attack in an attempt to erase or destroy digital evidence that could link him to the crime. According to police, he allegedly tried to delete data from the iPhone, but failed. He subsequently discarded the device near a drain in West Delhi. Police later recovered the phone, and the device ultimately helped investigators trace Imran. Officials formed several teams and launched a search for Imran. Investigators examined CCTV footage and followed other leads before locating him in Rajouri Garden on August 27.

Police said officers confronted Imran and ordered him to surrender. According to the police account, Imran pulled out a pistol and fired several rounds at the officers. The police team returned fire and shot him in both legs. Officers arrested him and took him to Guru Gobind Singh Hospital for treatment.

Investigators have since examined Imran’s relationship with Muskan and the events that preceded the murder. Police claim the two had known each other for about 18 months after meeting at the gym where Imran worked as a trainer. Their relationship later deteriorated, and Muskan decided to distance herself from him. Officials also suspect that Imran became increasingly possessive after Muskan ended the relationship, and are examining whether jealousy and anger over the change in their relationship motivated the attack. However, Muskan’s family has discounted such assumptions.

Muskan’s family has also accused the police of failing to act on earlier warnings. Muskan had approached a police station on July 18 and complained that Imran was harassing her. Police sources also verify that Imran had a history of drug use and was sent to a de-addiction center after a complaint from Muskan’s family. He was released on July 30 after allegedly injuring himself while at the center. Muskan’s family has alleged that Imran continued harassing and following her for several months and said they expected police to have intervened before the situation escalated.

Now the officers who immobilized the monster by blasting his legs did the right thing, and injuring his legs is a punishment that such offenders should receive more often. But those police officials who failed to act upon previous information did the wrong thing, and must be penalized for enabling such a horrific crime to occur. How much more of these repulsive incidents must it take to understand why serious vigilance is required to prevent them?

Woman whose daughter was murdered on October 7, 2023 confronts irresponsible IDF official

A woman whose daughter was murdered by Islamofascists on October 7, 2023 has taken issue with a former IDF officer whom she blames for the tragedy:

Shelly Meshel-Yogev, whose daughter Libby Cohen Meguri was murdered by Hamas terrorists on October 7, 2023, confronted former IDF Intelligence Directorate chief Aharon Haliva during a chance encounter at a park on Friday, accusing him of failing to personally take responsibility for her daughter's death.

Cohen Meguri was murdered while attempting to escape the Supernova music festival. During the encounter, Meshel-Yogev told Haliva that despite living nearby and knowing her daughter's father, he had never visited or contacted the family.

“You live a kilometer from our house, and you never came. You know her father, and you didn’t come. Don’t lie," Meshel-Yogev said in a video of the encounter posted to her Instagram account.

“Where are you? Where were you? My daughter was buried because of you! You should feel humiliated and carry responsibility, and not breathe and say, ‘I want to come to you, I want to cry with you, because I am also suffering.’ You should say you are suffering like me! You don’t understand this?" she told Haliva.

“You didn’t bother to talk to us once - unlike [former IDF Chief of Staff] Herzi Halevi, who called and said I want to come. Where are you? Where have you been?"

Well the man's a disgrace, and just because he may have voluntarily resigned doesn't excuse that he enabled a repulsive tragedy to occur, and there appear to have been more staff like him who're just as guilty. This is very telling, and another reason why there's only so many IDF officials who owe a serious apology for their horrific failures, with the most important apology being that they cannot serve in authority jobs anymore.

What 9-11 sadly led to an increase of over the past quarter century

Vince Coyner reflects on the aftermath of September 11, 2001, and how Orwellianism sadly led to some of the worst, most disastrous effects on society in over 25 years:

I must confess, I knew very little about Islam or Muslims at the time, and what little I knew was from headlines: the ’72 Munich Olympics, Ayatollah Khomeini’s takeover of Iran, the 1993 WTC bombing, the twin embassy bombings in 1998, and a few other events.

So I did some reading… Things like Bernard Lewis’s The Middle East: A Brief History of the Last 2000 Years, Dore Gold’s Hatred’s Kingdom, Steven Emerson’s American Jihad: The Terrorists Living Among Us, as well as anything I could get my hands on from Robert Spencer and David Horowitz.

That reading, along with observing actual events, made it clear we were seeing the revival of a 1,400-year clash of civilizations that had largely waned for most of the last 400 years. A crystal-clear result of 9/11 for me was the realization that Islam is simply incompatible with the United States.

But 9/11 turned out to be a catalyst for much more. George Bush, against all observable facts, claiming “Islam is peace,” was just the beginning and the latest iteration of political correctness that was beginning to infect America.

Although Americans were united in a way not seen in decades in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, it would not last. The media would showcase every American wartime mistake and lionize those calling for America to withdraw.

By 2003, rallies were common, with activists calling George Bush “Hitler”, and in 2004, the Democrats would nominate a globalist, John Kerry, for president. Four years later, America would send Mr. “fundamentally transforming the United States of America” to the White House.

So despite how Bush did not act responsibly at the time, the left resorted to offensive slurs against him, yet never because of the wrongs he actually did. Such tactics became worse when Donald Trump was elected president.

The quarter-century following 9/11 would see “political correctness” meld the interests of Communists, environmentalists, gays, minorities, and Islam, and together they would morph into a largely anti-American party, i.e., Democrats. They were and are anti-white, anti-Christian, anti-capitalist, and, fundamentally, anti-Western civilization. Their immediate need to protect the “religion of peace” started an avalanche of victimization that would pick up every minority or disgruntled group along the way.

Statues would come down, and not only those of Confederate Civil War generals, but men who built our history, men like Christopher Columbus, George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Ulysses S. Grant, Teddy Roosevelt, and more. Language would change. Marriage, which had meant one man and one woman for more than 2,000 years of Western civilization, was suddenly something else.

Wearing a sombrero or dressing like an Indian for Halloween was suddenly cultural appropriation. The “Broken Windows” policing and “stop and frisk” approach to manifest criminals that had saved urban America from the devastating crime rates of the 1990s were replaced with “Defund the Police” and “community responders.”

Our borders were essentially eliminated, and blue states and cities decided that protecting invaders was more important than immigration law. Not to mention that millions of years of biology were erased by the sudden “reality” that men could become women and women could become men. And from that, children could be butchered without their parents’ consent.

For too many Americans, the legacy of September 11 is a nation that is something of a Bizarro world, where up is down, right is wrong, and anything pro-American is somehow bad.

I’m not one of them. For me, the legacy of September 11 is just the opposite. It reinforced much of what I already knew to be true and, regrettably, took for granted.

A lot of terrible things did indeed occur, with the saddest part being that Bush himself did nothing to prevent bad influences from taking hold, so he has some responsibility there too, and he would not support Trump's presidency. One of the worst things about modern tragedies is how phony "conservatives" enabled them to occur, with disastrous results.

Protestors in Amsterdam tear down PLO flag while onlookers cheer

A good sign from the Netherlands, as residents approve of removing the flag of a jihadist organization that doesn't belong:

Pro-Israel demonstrators were filmed removing a large PLO flag that had been hung from a building overlooking Dam Square in Amsterdam during a demonstration held at the site.

Video footage posted online shows demonstrators pulling down the flag from the H&M building near the square, as cheers can be heard from the crowd gathered below.

According to local media reports, the incident occurred during a pro-Israel rally at Dam Square attended by numerous demonstrators.

A pro-Palestinian counter-protest had also been planned for the square. According to the local reports, authorities decided to move it to another location due to concerns over possible disturbances.

This should make clear, much like a similar case last year in Scotland, that locals don't approve of the Islamic propaganda the PLO represents, which is just as hostile to Europeans as it is to Israelis. The demonstrators who took down the disgusting flag did the right thing.

October 7, 2023 survivor's message to UN

Here's what Yael Savarigo, a survivor of October 7, 2023 had to say to the repellent leaders of the UN:

Yael Savarigo, a native of Nir Yitzhak and survivor of the October 7th massacre, sent a direct appeal to the UN Secretary-General António Guterres.

In a video statement, Savarigo, who is also the leader of Tzav 9, said, "UN Secretary-General António Guterres, my name is Yael Savarigo, born in Nir Yitzhak in the Gaza Envelope. My family and I survived the October 7th atrocities committed by the Hamas terror organization, which you refuse to condemn."

"Your claim that Israel is not committed to the peace agreement in the Gaza Strip is incorrect. It is Hamas that refuses to disarm and is planning the next massacre.

"Israel is committed to the Gaza peace agreement, which states that the reconstruction of the Strip will begin only after its demilitarization, ensuring there is no further threat to Israeli lives.

"We demand that the international community and the UN stop supporting terrorist organization," she emphasized.

It would be additionally be for the best if the UN were to stop being considered a legitimate form of government, which it is most definitely not. Their operatives were guilty of enabling the worst Muslim monsters in Gaza to work in their employ, and why must we continue to have anything to do with the UN at this point?

Update: here's also an interview with Omri Miran, a survivor of Hamas captivity at the time.

A new documentary about the dangers of migration from Islamic countries to the west

The Heritage Foundation developed a new documentary about how mass migration from Islamic countries has had a disastrous effect upon Europe, and the USA's also now feeling the effects:

The West is in a self-inflicted crisis, and the only way to fix it is to recognize the problem.

A new documentary created by The Heritage Foundation in collaboration with former Virginia Delegate and current Blaze TV host Nick Freitas shines a light on how decades of mass immigration have dramatically transformed the U.K. for the worse.

“The Immigration Crisis That Will Destroy the West” gets to the heart of the skepticism of mass migration, particularly from Muslim countries that don’t share similar values. [...]

While President Donald Trump has dramatically shut down the chaos at the southern border and put tighter restrictions on legal immigration, there is still a broad movement to return to the open border, near-limitless immigration policies of his predecessors.

In both the U.K. and the U.S., Freitas noted, there are significant numbers of “mainstream” media, institutional, and political actors who insist that unfettered mass migration is “necessary, economically, socially, and even morally, and to the extent that we have of our own, we should be ashamed of it, and therefore grateful for the cultural enrichment we are now experiencing.”

The documentary highlights how British immigration policy was transformed—beginning with Prime Minister Tony Blair in the early 2000s—from “slow and steady assimilation” to “globalist multiculturalism.”

Nile Gardiner, director of the Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom at The Heritage Foundation, said pointedly of Blair in an interview that his legacy was “disastrous” in terms of “ushering this era of mass migration into the U.K.”

Freitas observed in the documentary that when he visits the U.K., he sees a lot of culture—but it isn’t English. Instead, entire towns and cities resemble locations in the Middle East.

The cultural and legal changes happening within the U.K. resulting from decades of industrial-scale migration are perhaps even more shocking.

As several interviewees in the documentary noted, many of the newcomers have vastly different norms when it comes to gender and behavior between men and women.

For instance, GB News host Patrick Christys said in one interview that there had been a recent court case involving three “illegal migrants” who were housed in a fancy hotel and then raped a woman on a local beach. When they were brought before a court, one of them was asked, according to Christys, if he knew the difference between rape and sex, and the man replied by saying that rape is sex.

“That is the kind of culture that sadly we are importing,” Christys said.

While the U.K. doesn’t publish crime stats by religion, there has been a significant problem of organized, industrial-scale rapes being conducted by mostly Muslim men. The country’s political establishment clearly wants to sweep this under the rug, but the human cost has been enormous.

This is happening because of the astounding and unprecedented demographic changes that the people of England have been forced to accept as the new normal.

That's the sad result of communist/socialist ideologies being normalized to boot. And France has experienced even more horrifying cases like these too over many years. Blair was definitely one of the worst enablers of the situation as we see it today, and what if it turns out he knew anything about the Rotherham rape scandal? This is what Freitas and company mean when they say the political establishment's been trying to hush up the horrors.

It may be possible to reverse this horror, and the war against Iran is an important start. But no doubt, it's going to be very difficult, especially when supporters of totalitarianism enable the Religion of Peace to gain footholds.