With this in mind, the following ought to do it on the issue of the absolute insanity of admitting adherents of the bizarre Muslim cult into the very hearthstone of your own society:
The world better pay attention, because this will be the fate of every country that allows large Muslim communities to form in its midst. Clinging to traditional forms of Islam, their mindset is largely incompatible with the Western view of life which is based on openness, tolerance and freedom. Sizeable Muslims populations are thus a sure prescription for terror and violence, because those in their midst will sooner or later strike out against the societies they despise.Thanks to the blogosphere tens of thousands of these warnings are circulating and the rate of generation and circulation increases with each day.
No amount of political correctness can conceal the fact that many Muslim enclaves in the West are neither peace loving nor patriotic. Large portions of their populations feel no allegiance to their host countries and they are all too ready to approve of violence in order to further their ends. Their lack of gratitude is truly breath-taking . . . . But we should not be all too surprised by this behavior from people who are taught by their religion to despise and kill infidels.
There is a question that often drops from the lips of British Muslims during their fraternizing times together: “Are you British or Muslim?” It is not difficult to guess how many of them answer. In the minds of many, pledging allegiance to the host country would effectively mean ceasing being a good Muslim .
. . . Despite all of the reassuring statements by their official representatives, far too many Muslims loathe their adoptive country . . . . If British Muslims were a peaceful group they often claim to be, the hate-filled sermons of radical imams would not be attended, and would be denounced . . . .
Britain is now paying the harrowing price for decades of mindlessly admitting large numbers of Muslim immigrants. Ignoring the warning signs along the way, it pursued the policies of multiculturalism to their inevitable conclusion. Today its unassimilated Muslim minority is waging a war against its host country.[1]
However, as Lawrence Auster has accurately written, there are certain people who get this warning right off the bat, some take a while till society teeters on the brink, and others just never do.[2]
The latter class of observers seem particularly sold on national and cultural suicide. The reasons are widely speculated upon but the phenomenon -- whatever the possible basis for it -- invariably presents in the form of a mind boggling oblivousness to facts that are open and obvious to people who have to live with the consequences of this incipient suicide.
This is much like the two heroes in a horror movie who creep down in the cellar of the haunted house to investigate a smell or a noise and then decide to split up to continue the search! Everyone in the theater KNOWS this is an insane decision but the protagonists are drawn to it like the Enterprise in a Klingon tractor beam.
The phenomenon can also be visualized by recalling how two magnets react to each other if the poles of the same polarity are directly opposite each. The closer they are pushed together the stronger the mutually repellant forces. So with liberal/elite thinking about multiculturalism or immigration. The closer the problem gets to them, the stronger is the opposite reaction, whereas with people like you and me, dear readers, this mental minefield across which no contrary facts can proceed is simply absent.
As with the magnets, so with Mr. Bush's massive expenditure of capital to advance the loopy "comprehensive" immigration bill. It was just nuts in its blindness to the anger of citizens over day #5,000 of Grabass on the Bordertm, its transparent mendacity for positing the need for a "comprehensive" solution (as though a series of interim solutions just could NOT have gotten the job done), and the egregious management of the bill to ramrod it through the Senate without hearings, and certainly without time for citizen input.
Yet . . . this was the solution to which our elites were drawn. This was what passed for reasonableness at the pinnacle of the political establishment.
Dennis Mangan at Mangan's Miscellany gets at this disconnect this way:
The elite correctly want liberalization of trade and globalization because they know that free trade is the cornerstone of modern prosperity. . . . On the other hand, . . . the elite scheme for mass immigration because they're delusional about its consequences for the U.S. . . .What other symptoms are there of this disconnect?
The libertarians and the economists (and the libertarian economists) who are so enamored of both free trade and mass immigration make the crucial mistake of ignoring both the welfare state and History (with a capital H). Regarding History, they take economics to be the science of human interaction, and fail to see that ethnicity and nationality have been the supreme drivers of international politics and war. And in their zeal for mass immigration they also fail to take the welfare state into account, so they miss the fact that[, for] a huge number of low-skilled workers[,] externalities and [the] benefits [they claim] -- crime, health care, income transfers -- fall to the state [to deal with and provide].[3]
- Mr. Bush's unseemly race to reassure the Muslims in D.C. just after 9/11;
- His recently idiotic speech to the same Muslims;
- Mr. Bush's sending in troops to Iraq instead of Iran or Syria;
- Mr. Bush's failure to punish the Saudis in any way for their financing of Wahhabism in the U.S. and around the world;
- Mr. Bush's failure to demand of the Saudis that they cease forthwith the funding of Wahhabi proselytizing and mosque construction in the U.S.;
- Mr. Bush's failure to raise the issue of the dysfunctionality of Islam and the millennium-long threat it has posed to countless millions throughout history to the present day;
- Mr. Bush's failure to failure to stop immigration of Muslims;
- Mr. Bush's failure to articulate a precise meaning for the phrase "War on Terror";
- Mr. Bush's failure to enforce the borders;
- the mirror-image failures of the Congress; and
- Mr. Bush's failure to reign in the U.S. Attorney who's done such yeoman's work in prosecuting Border Patrol Agents while the nation groans with the burden on our public resources and the drug, terror, gang, and subversive aspects of illegal immigration, among other things.
- Gordon Brown has banned ministers from using the word ‘Muslim’ in connection with the terrorism crisis; and
- Deputy assistant commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, was to declare that "Islam and terrorism don't go together." [4]
While the NAACP has been fighting for the rights of African-Americans for nearly a century, it's important to fight for Muslim Americans in a post-9/11 world, the nation's Homeland Security chief told guests at the 98th NAACP national convention Tuesday evening.[5]Mr. Chertoff himself had earlier met with Muslims imams at the Dearborn, Mich. mosque.
The lack of normal mental wiring is there in plain view. Of all the problems that we would think would be occupying the mind of the highest domestic security official in the land, "fighting for Muslim Americans in a post-9/11 world" isn't one of them. It's as though the Home Secretary in WWII Britain would have announced at a speech to the British-German Friendship Society how important it is to fight for German Britons in the post-Dunkirk world.
Just who is it exactly that our leaders are? This video is a bit on the raw innuendo side but its point hints at part of the problem. [6]
The problem of Saudi subversion aside, there is still this massive flight from the truth that we see in our elites. Maybe we'll call it the "X" factor in Western life. Every person with common sense knows what defensive and offensive measures need to be taken, but all the beautiful people can think of is to cry "racism" as the magic incantation to solve the problem of truth too inconvenient and too close.
Notes
[1] "Britain Under Siege." By Vasko Kohlmayer, FrontPageMagazine.com 7/11/07.
[2] "Pravda on the Hudson raises possibility of Muslim repatriation." By Lawrence Auster, View from the Right, 10/10/06.
[3] "Why the elites and the people disagree on immigration." By Dennis Mangan, Mangan's Miscellany, 7/2/07 (emphasis added).
[4] Daily Express and Mark Steyn, respectively, quoted in "Declare your independence." New Nationalist, 7/4/07. The New Nationalist has an interesting take on the "truth repulsion" phenomenon. To talk openly about the Islamic nature of terrorism is to risk acknowledging the gigantic hole in the edifice of liberal multiculturalism. To acknowledge error indirectly is to lose power and/or to require oneself to make much harder judgment calls than in the relaxed past. To acknowledge the threat is to make clear that one is not taking the actions to get rid of the threat.
[5] Detroit News, quoted in "Chertoff for Muslims." Right Truth, 7/13/07 (emphasis added).
[6] "Who controls America?." Judeophobe Watch, 7/4/07. For more details on this particular aspect of the problem see: "The Scandal of U.S.-Saudi Relations." By Daniel Pipes, National Interest, Winter 2002/03.
No comments:
Post a Comment