The Manchester terrorist, Salman Abedi, his family, and some neighbors.

Before yesterday's terror attack in London, Mark Steyn wrote a couple of columns about the Manchester terrorist, Salman Abedi, his family, and some neighbors. In one column Steyn wrote,

The preferred euphemism of British politicians for the likes of Mr. Abedi is "extremist". But there are an awful lot of moderate extremists out there, so you'll have to be a really extreme extremist to jostle your way through the pack to the point where anybody notices you.

...When you looks at the fools he and his comrades have made of the British state, I'm surprised Salman Abedi could stop laughing long enough to self-detonate.

As the number of Muslims increase, the number of extremists increase. As the number of extremists increase, the number of terrorists increase. As the number of terrorists increase, so the word "terrorist" has to be defined down so that a beleaguered security state can refine its priorities: There's no time for your nickel'n'dime Isis recruits, brides of Isis, "Islamic Fighting Group" commanders, bomb-makers, embassy-bombing masterminds... When it's an ever more stretched net with ever more gaping holes, everyone slips through.

Salman Abedi did not become a terrorist, a murderer, an "extremist", until the final moments of his life. But it's the 22 years leading up to that last definitive act that foretell the future for Britain and for its social tranquility. All the sophisticates assure us that this isn't an immigration problem because young Mr Abedi was "British". But he lived in no England recognizable to those who came before. He was raised in a world that has already seceded from England - an England after the neutron bomb, where the unlovely sprawl of urban Manchester still stands, but where the troubled girls run off to become brides of Isis, and the good girls work at the mosque and congratulate their brothers on self-detonating their way to Paradise.

What's in it for the existing populace of the United Kingdom in either of those models? Regardless of where Salman Abedi was born, the problem he exemplifies was imported. And the very least the British should demand of their politicians is that they cease importing any more of it.

There is no plateau, no equilibrium, no stablilization, no "acceptable level of violence" here - not in a time of transformative demographic change. The longer free citizens postpone making that very modest demand, the grimmer and more "divisive" the options will get.

Read more here.

"Madness rooted in politics"

Peter Skurkiss writes at American Thinker,

The United States is importing people with a religious and cultural propensity to commit horrific acts of hatred and revenge against Western Civilization. This is madness rooted in politics.

...This incident at OSU is an example of the Obama administration's reckless refugee resettlement policy. One has to wonder how many others like Abdul Razak Ali Artan are here existing like potential time bombs, ready to explode if America does not show what they consider to be proper deference to them and their religion.

There can be no question that the current refugee resettlement program is extremely risky. To understand why many people in power support and defend it is to understand how far the madness of multiculturalism and diversity has affected policy.

Multiculturalism is the belief that all cultures are the same and should be placed on equal footing. It is a tolerance for all values. At its beginning, even the strongest proponents of multiculturalism never believed that multiculturalism was valid. They pushed this philosophy so as not to appear to be overly condescending to those from, shall we say, developing cultures. Think of it as a type of noblesse oblige, if you will. But as is so often the case of those pushing a false narrative, the multiculturalists came to believe their own propaganda over time.

Now in elite circles, it's goodbye Washington, Jefferson, Madison, and the Constitution and hello to diversity. And don't think multiculturalism isn't buried within the motive of Hampshire College in Amherst, MA to lower the U.S. flag on campus after the election, restoring it after protests.

Judging from the actions of Democrat politicians, immigrants who come here from Third World cultures and with Third World mindsets are not expected to blend in. Heaven forbid, as that would be an affront to their "dignity" and go against the grain of multiculturalism. As a result, separate enclaves are popping up across the country, even in the heartland. The Democratic Party celebrates Balkanization as this enlarges their constituency base, never caring how it weakens overall American culture and strength.

...Of course, the commitment of the elites to multiculturalism smacks of hypocrisy. When you consider that among all of us, they are the most insulated from the adverse affects of their insane policy, due to their wealth and power. One has to wonder what the elite reaction would be if Muslim terrorists periodically ran amok in murderous rampages in the Georgetown section of Washington, D.C. or at Harvard, Princeton, and Yale, the inner sanctums of the elite, instead of at a state university catering to the middle class.

So it is in this poisonous environment of multiculturalism über alles that the likes of a thoroughly brainwashed university administrator can openly grieve over the passing of Abdul Razak Ali Artan, the terrorist at Ohio State.

Read more here.