The refugees are practicing a jihad called hijra

The ‘refugee’ crisis is jihad by another name

It’s Islamic conquest through migration

By Monica Crowley - - Wednesday, November 18, 2015

Immediately following the Islamic State terror attacks in Paris that killed and wounded hundreds of people, French President Francois Hollande rightly declared them “acts of war” deserving a “merciless” response.

This latest act of violent jihad, however, stems directly from another form of jihad, one that has been underway in Europe for decades but has ramped up dramatically over the past year.

It’s called hijra.

Hijra is a core part of jihad going back to the Prophet Muhammad that involves Islamic conquest through migration. The objective is to overwhelm non-Muslim territories with Muslim populations until they achieve domination through sheer numbers. No weapons necessary — until they gain enough control.

At least one of the Paris jihadis originated in Syria and registered as a “refugee” through Greece. This is less a “refugee crisis” and more an occupation.

Several weeks ago, I traveled through Central Europe and witnessed firsthand this Islamic tsunami.

Across Austria and Germany, I saw tens of thousands of people pouring in, with few constraints on their whereabouts and behavior. It was clear that it was only a matter of time before the chaos turned far more convulsive and violent.

Let’s be clear: Some of them may be fleeing war and persecution, but most are not. In fact, only about 10 percent of the new arrivals are from Syria; the other 90 percent are from elsewhere in the Middle East, North Africa and countries like Pakistan and Indonesia who are using the European Union’s open doors-open borders policy to reach the West for social welfare and the longer-term goal of spreading Islam.

They stopped being “refugees” when they failed to register for asylum in the first safe country in which they arrived. But the EU refuses to enforce its own borders and laws on asylum (sound familiar?). Because most of the EU member states have also laid down the welcome mat, thousands continue to pour in daily. In Germany alone, an estimated 1.5 million Muslims are expected.

If the EU were serious about taking in genuine “refugees,” it would have followed Australia’s example of processing all refugees offshore. Those who qualify as actual refugees are then brought onshore to be further processed. All others are sent back to their countries of origin.

But the EU is apparently intent on committing continental suicide — largely because of misguided World War II guilt concerning “displaced persons” and a desire to replenish a declining workforce. It will take all comers, regardless of who they are, why they are coming to Europe and what they intend to do once there.

In Vienna I visited the main train station and “refugee” camp, through which the majority are coming into central Europe. Most were en route to Germany, whose chancellor, Angela Merkel, has thrown open the doors to them.

The place was crawling with police. A few volunteers told me that security was a serious issue — rape, assault, child abuse, theft, murder — so the government had increased the police and military presence.

Contrary to the narrative that most of the “refugees” are families escaping the march of ISIS, most are, in fact, young men. I did see some women and children, but they were the distinct minority.

In fact, 80 percent of the “refugees” are men. Many of them say that once they get asylum, they will take advantage of EU policy to bring in the rest of their families.

Perhaps they will, perhaps they won’t. Perhaps it depends on what they intend to do once settled. Prior to the Paris attacks, ISIS had claimed that it had several thousand fighters in central Europe. They did not operate in a vacuum. There is also a growing al Qaeda, Iranian-loyal militia and Muslim Brotherhood presence. Reports of Shariah enclaves are on the rise.

At the Vienna train station, we approached two women sitting behind a sign marked “lawyer” and asked politely what services were provided. One of them snapped, “Legal.” When we then asked what percentage of the refugees were Muslims versus Christians, she replied angrily, “Does that make a difference?”

We were told that many Muslims turned away food provided by the International Red Cross because it was stamped with a Christian cross. We were also told that many of the men carry weapons, knives specifically, which they often use to threaten those trying to help them.

Many are increasingly using tactics such as hunger strikes, lawsuits and threats of violence to force German authorities to meet their ever-growing list of demands, from free health care to their own single-family homes — while laughing at demands for assimilation.

Even before the Paris attacks, the Muslim flood had prompted a backlash, with massive protests and opposition parties gaining across Europe. After the attacks, France and several other countries imposed strict border controls. Yet despite the latest round of terror and the rising national security risks, the invasion continues unabated.

Meanwhile, its waves are crashing upon our own shores. The Obama administration has announced that the United States will accept 200,000 “refugees.” More to come — and all eligible for full social welfare benefits. This dovetails with the existing Refugee Resettlement Program, which the administration has used to bring in tens of thousands of Muslims, often settling them in red or purple states. Not a coincidence.

Europe is quickly reaching the point of no return, after which its transformation will be irrevocable. We have more time to prevent such a transformation here, but that time may be shorter than we think.

The Islamic Trojan Horse looks next to America. Will we let it in?

• Monica Crowley is editor of online opinion at The Washington Times.