Of European cities which have been irrevocably transformed by mass migration from the Muslim world, Paris does not rank at the top of the list. A quarter of its population isn’t Muslim, like the gang-infested, crime-ridden former port city of Marseille, nor a fifth, like the jihadist hotbed of Roubaix. However, the outraged reaction of Francois Hollande, the lame duck prime minister of France, to President Trump’s remarks at CPAC is laughable when you consider the fact that officials in Paris have had to erect an 8 ft. wall of reinforced glass in order to protect that city’s most recognizable symbol. Leaving aside the fact that Parisiens have to endure a police state that has no parallels in post-war France, a situation prompted by the threat posed by the 6 million Muslims who reside in that country-as well as the millions more who live in neighboring nations like Belgium and Germany-there is the inescapable difference between the Paris of today and the Paris of only a few decades ago.

Why would an ordinary American want to visit a city, however beautiful certain parts may be, where hundreds of Muslims are able to shut down entire blocks of pedestrian traffic-as well as local businesses-while they publicly pray? As gauche as this may be to say in the current year, people visit European capitals to discover the roots of Western civilization, not witness inter-tribal warfare or the Islamic conquest of a once great civilization. The fact that over three-quarters of the victims of terrorist attacks in France have fallen in the 21st century should give astute observers a clue as to the trajectory of that country’s future. Whatever you may think of President Trump, or the reliability of unsourced anecdotes, the notion that the Paris of today is the jewel of Europe, that the decades of unstinting Muslim migration from the third world haven’t permanently transformed France from the nation it once was, beggars belief. Perhaps undiluted multiculturalism, open borders in perpetuity, and the gradual erosion of natural rights in the name of accommodating the world’s “fastest-growing religion” is something that you favor, but don’t try to pretend that this is not what we’re witnessing.

With the world aflame, it’s only appropriate that our periodical digest of immigration and cultural news returns. Starting off in the States, we find that Michelle Root, after a heartfelt meeting with Donald Trump, has decided to throw her support behind his candidacy. For those of you who are unfamiliar with the case, Michelle is the mother of Sarah Root, who was murdered by a criminal alien that is now at large because of our government’s brilliant oversight of this national disaster. For a good exposition of why Donald Trump is worth supporting, I recommend David Horowitz’s fantastic piece in Breitbart, which echoes many of my thoughts regarding the Dump Trump phenomenon. In my mind, it’s the best encapsulation of the pro-Trump argument published thus far. Jack Cashill also has a worthwhile column on this subject in WorldNetDaily. However, for those of you of a more intellectual bent, I recommend reading acclaimed historian Paul Johnson’s coruscating attack on the paragons of PC culture, and explanation of how Trump’s candidacy is a breath of fresh air in this stagnant ideological environment.

Moving north, we’re pleased to note that justice triumphs over sharia, at least in this instance. Accepting this idiotic leftist neologism into our lexicon is bad enough, but allowing the congenital neuroses of social justice warriors to determine the fate of jihadists is a bridge too far. Let’s hope that a certain judge in Minnesota is paying attention to these proceedings.

Rounding out our tour of North America, we land upon Mexico, where El Chapo, formerly the world’s most-wanted fugitive, is one step closer to extradition. Sean Penn could not be reached for comment. Someone who never declines to speak his mind is former Mexican president Vincente Fox, whose torpid retirement has been enlivened by the unexpected success of Donald Trump. What’s notable about his most recent outburst is its stunning lack of self-reflection. A man whose tenure witnessed continued mass emigration-both illegal and legal-virtually no progress by any significant cultural or economic metric, and who was widely considered a more doltish version of President Bush, somehow believes that Trump supporters are the ones operating from a place of ignorance. Go figure.

In Latin America, we find that Panama has closed its border with Colombia in order to prevent Cuban emigres from using their country as a transit point to the United States. However, not before agreeing to the transfer of 3,000 Cubans to American territory. For those of you who haven’t been paying attention, scores of Cubans are now flocking to American shores in order to take advantage of our wet foot, dry foot policy-implemented under President Clinton-which they fear will be coming to an end now that Barack Obama and the Castro regime have reached an uneasy detente.

Hopping across the pond, we find Britain under siege from the usual assortment of anti-fascist fascists, primarily The Religion of Peace and its prog thought enablers. While expressing public discontent with your government’s decision to repopulate your town with Islamic colonists is now grounds for being thrown into a dungeon, it appears that you can still safely threaten to behead political candidates who are not so keen on being invaded by scores of unassimilable aliens. This practice seems to have become a habit among well-integrated British Muslims, BTW. But aren’t these folks just the modern-day Jews fleeing the equivalent of Nazi Europe? No, they’re not, as even the perennially obnoxious Jamie Kirchick readily concedes, although we understand why someone conditioned by decades of open borders propaganda by the likes of NPR would think that’s an apt analogy. The same way it’s understandable that some have convinced themselves that Brexit represents an existential threat to the United Kingdom, although not as great as that posed by Donald Trump, evidently. The truth is much less flattering to the ruling class, alas.

However, truth is worth embracing for its own sake, in addition to its subsidiary benefits. Islamic refugees do pose a threat to European identity-and to the national sovereignty of the countries they’re invading-regardless of how politically incorrect this thought might seem to the gatekeepers of acceptable opinion. Even as the flood of colonizers from the Islamic world seek new paths of ingress, the results of Europe’s dangerous experiment in openness continue to pour in, most recently with a mysterious outbreak of mental illness in Munich, where the Palestinian knife jihad seems to be one more glorious import Mama Merkel has blessed her countrymen with. Is it any wonder that “far-right” thought criminals are catapulting to power in Central Europe?

Speaking of electoral politics, it looks like The Philippines has a new President-elect. Although that country has had its fair share of colorful leaders, Rodrigo Duterte seems to be in a class by himself. In addition to promising cabinet positions to the New People’s Army-a Maoist terrorist group which has waged a nearly half-century battle against the Filipino state-he has also pledged to negotiate with Islamic insurgents in the south of the country. Whether or not this promise includes the creatures who ritualistically sacrificed Canadian citizen John Ridsdel remains to be seen.

Over on the dark continent, we learn that Kenya has finally decided to shut down the world’s largest refugee camp. Followers of this site, or world events in general, can probably recite the litany of atrocities committed by Muslims living in Kenya-particularly those who are Somali refugees-so the decision to potentially repatriate some of these foreign nationals will come as little surprise. Neither will the howls of outrage from human rights groups, which lodged similar protests-equally spurious, as Philip Gourevitch has pointed out-against Rwanda’s effective campaign to close down terrorist havens in the Congo many years ago. 

Last month the intrepid Pamela Geller spoke at my alma mater, delineating the reasons why our freedoms have become captive to an alien, totalitarian ideology-most recently manifested in the attempted jihadist massacre in Garland, Texas. Unlike the bien pensant Chekists condemning PEN for honoring the bravery, honesty and integrity, along with all the other virtues our cultural guardians abhor, of Charlie Hebdo, Pam Geller actually understands the value of standing up for Western civilization and the values it represents. If that civilization is to endure, it’s going to be because of men and women like her and Robert Spencer, not the craven supplicants and toadies who run publications like the New York Times and the Washington Post.

Watch the entire speech for yourself and understand what this struggle is about and why we must prevail.

You’ll have trouble finding an accurate description of the motivation behind the terrorist attacks which took place in Copenhagen a little over a week ago, at least so far as the major media outlets are concerned. Even as European Jewry is being figuratively herded back into the ghetto, the newspapers and networks ostensibly responsible for reporting the news conceal it behind a veil of ideologically-inspired deception. The facts behind this outrage couldn’t be more readily available, yet the logical conclusions to be drawn are anathema to bien pensant opinion espoused by outlets such as the New York Times.

The deceased jihadist was not the first person to target the Great Synagogue of Copenhagen, as Daniel Greenfield points out. Unfortunately, I doubt that he will be the last, as the nation of Denmark-like most of Western Europe-has, over the past half century or so, been flooded with migrants whose progeny the Times will no doubt declare native sons if and when they decide to go postal on the indigenous population. In order to see what a failure the multiculturalist experiment in Europe, particularly Denmark, has been, I would recommend reading a piece by Michael Moynihan published two years ago in The Tablet.

Although encumbered by the open-borders dogma that plagues so many libertarians-and thus, unable to delineate the direct connection between mass immigration from the Islamic world and contemporary anti-Semitism in Europe-it is worth reading. Primarily because it makes explicit the ineluctable link between the tenets of Islam and the actions of immigrant youth which plague the headlines of European newspapers. We can’t begin to address this problem until we acknowledge what the problem is as a society. Alas, that’s something that the leaders of Europe-as well as the United States-are unwilling to do, regardless of the amount of innocent blood sacrificed to their ignoble ideal.