The Hidden Costs of Jihad

“Throughout 2016, hotels in Paris were offering discounts of up to 65% on room rates to attract tourists who began to shun the city in the wake of the jihadist operations. Another economic cost is the massive increase in expenditure on intelligence, law enforcement and security. In 2016 the DGSI, the domestic intelligence service, increased its staff by 35% from 3,500 to over 4,700. Law enforcement officers, who have accumulated millions of hours in overtime, have to be paid. Three days after the November 13 attacks, the government announced that it would recruit an additional 5,000 police officers. Tens of millions have been allocated to deradicalization programs, reorganization of prisons and other initiatives aimed at countering jihad at home. The military operations against Islamic State in Syria and Iraq cost $365 million in 2016 alone.”

And they’re spending all this money while creating the problem for themselves with unrestricted Muslim immigration and a refusal to demand that Muslims assimilate, adopt Western values, and reject the aspects of the Qur’an and Sunnah that conflict with French secularism and Western norms. Madness.

“The Hidden Costs of Jihad,” by Leslie Shaw, Clarion Project, December 18, 2016 (thanks to Inexion):

One of the objectives of Islamic State’s “attack and polarize” strategy in France is to hit the economy, an objective that was successfully attained in the aftermath of the November 2015 and January 2016 attacks, which were immediately followed by a slump in retail sales and tourism.

Throughout 2016, hotels in Paris were offering discounts of up to 65% on room rates to attract tourists who began to shun the city in the wake of the jihadist operations.

Another economic cost is the massive increase in expenditure on intelligence, law enforcement and security. In 2016 the DGSI, the domestic intelligence service, increased its staff by 35% from 3,500 to over 4,700. Law enforcement officers, who have accumulated millions of hours in overtime, have to be paid.

Three days after the November 13 attacks, the government announced that it would recruit an additional 5,000 police officers. Tens of millions have been allocated to deradicalization programs, reorganization of prisons and other initiatives aimed at countering jihad at home.

The military operations against Islamic State in Syria and Iraq cost $365 million in 2016 alone. All of this is not good for a struggling economy with chronically high unemployment and massive budget deficits.

The cost to the private sector, beyond the decline in retail sales (estimated at 4 points during the 2015 Christmas shopping period), tourism and hospitality is more difficult to calculate.

One major cost is that of heightened security, both in terms of physical protection from external attack and internal security. Essential measures in corporate security, HR and cybersecurity all require considerable investment in human capital and technology.

Screening of new hires, monitoring employees to detect radicalization, intelligence gathering, threat awareness, perception, assessment and response necessitate considerable non-productive investments that divert resources from business development.

In addition to these visible costs, there are also hidden costs. Terrorist attacks impact employee health and productivity. Bomb scares in the public transport network and delays at airports due to heightened security checks slow down mobility, wasting both time and money. Anxiety and stress take their toll on employee performance.

A further cost is that of non-violent or cultural jihad. Demands for religious accommodation such as wearing of religious garments, praying during breaks and on the job, collective praying, proselytizing, refusal to carry out tasks, refusal to work with a woman or follow instructions given by a woman, demand for leave of absence and scheduling accommodations all carry a financial cost.

In America, the Ariens Company calculated that the annual cost of wildcat prayer breaks was in excesss of $1 million. The company is currently the object of a suit filed at the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission by a group of Muslim workers, backed by the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR).

Considering that the case could go all the way to the Supreme Court, the cost to the company may well run into several million dollars in legal fees, above and beyond any fines or compensation which may be ordered by the courts.

Such demands also have a secondary cost because of their impact on non-Muslim co-workers. A manager in a well-known commercial and logistics firm has revealed that demands by Muslim employees generate resentment due to perceived inequitable treatment and lead to a deterioration of workplace atmosphere, damage to team spirit and the emergence of factions.

In France, the corporate sector is beginning to wake up to the extent of these problems. On December 15, 2016 a conference entitled Business Faced with the Phenomenon of Radicalization was held at the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development headquarters in Paris.

The event was organized by the CDSE (Corporate Security Directors Club) and was attended by around 600 representatives from the private and public sectors. Flagship corporates such as Renault, Disneyland, Air France, Aéroports de Paris, Auchan, Michelin, AccorHotels, Schneider Electric, Total, Thales, Veolia and Vinci sent large contingents of their executives.

Renault sent 19 people, which is not surprising since the auto sector has been affected by the phenomenon since the 1980s. There were 17 delegates from the French Central Bank. One of the speakers was a senior HR Director from Nestlé, who related how a recurrent problem in the company was the refusal of Muslim employees to interact with female supervisors.

A central question that emerged at the conference was whether employees should be free to manifest their religious beliefs in the workplace and to what extent that freedom should be restricted.

Dr. Mustapha Benchenane, an Algerian political scientist, maintained that it was neither the role of the employer nor the state to fix such limits, but that imams should explain that prayer is not a priority during working hours and that Muslims can pray at home after work. He also expressed opposition to restrictions on dress, such as the wearing of the hijab….