Here I print a new article by Louis Palme, a frequent contributor to islam-watch.org on the crisis of immigration currently facing Europe especially but the entire Western world, due to crises in Africa and the Middle East. It is a timely reminder to all of us to consider the issue dispassionately, rather than allowing sentimentality to cloud our better judgement. Our Western governments are exercising knee-jerk decision-making based on the image of a young child who died, and the fact that thousands are trying to enter their countries. Never before has the mere fact of trying to enter a country by any means meant that entry was simply granted – this is capitulation to an invasion. Our governments are being swayed by the naivete of the Left in painting these migrants as ‘refugees’ – when in fact they have all rejected perfectly save havens in countries such as Turkey, Lebanon and Hungary to reach Western Europe. These are not simple refugees, as in order to claim refugee status a person MUST register in the first safe haven. In fact a Syrian activist tells us the money given to smugglers for a family to reach Europe would buy a house in a SAFE part of Syria, with enough left over to start a business.
On Radio 4’s Today programme yesterday, immigrants were interviewed on their reasons for making their voyage. Two said they simply wanted to continue their studies, and one mother said ‘If I’d known how hard it would be to get here, I wouldn’t have bothered coming’ – hardly desperate refugees any of them – they simply want a better life.
Here is Louis’ perspective on this problem, which he stresses he makes as a child of immigrants himself – he is pro-legal immigration, but agrees with me that this is anything but legal, nor are these really refugees, it is an opportunistic horde coming to claim for their own the benefits and products of 2,000 years of Western civilisation.
The duty of care from our governments to the existing population is being entirely disregarded by our politicians, and herein lies the rub. The reason the West is rich and successful is not merely because of its past history of colonisation. It is because of the work ethic of its citizens – mostly due to the Judeo-Christian values of our culture. The Muslim world has been successful only in remaining stuck in the middle-ages, in not modernising, in ignoring human rights and in oppressing its people with violence and tyrannical regimes.The people now entering the West are part of that world – not ours. They bring the values of Islam with them – which all the attacks on the West have shown us places them in direct opposition to our values, security and laws. The result is certain to be horrific confrontations and probably the same chaos and wars as these people left ‘back home’.
The urge to ‘welcome refugees’ stems from a misplaced compassion for strangers to whom our leaders and media assign unproven motivations and emotions – they fully expect ALL these ‘refugees’ to be ‘just like us’. Most are not seeking safety – they are seeking enrichment. As we can see from the chaos of the Muslim world today, the rights of women are routinely abused, and far from being ‘diverse’ these societies are rigidly homogenous and highly intolerant of ‘the other’. The people of the Western world will be the poorer for their sentimentality and short memory span when the truth of this is finally clear – that this is an invasion, a Hijra in the Islamic – the ‘holy’ Islamic duty to emigrate and conquer.
By Louis Palme
The world is facing the greatest emigration crisis since World War II. The word “emigration” is used because people are definitely leaving their homeland, but it also clear that their ability to legally immigrate into other countries is yet to be decided. The waves of emigrants leaving war-torn Middle East and North Africa have overwhelmed the Western countries’ national security apparatus and the resources of humanitarian aid organizations. Many innocent people are dying. The natural response in the West is “Let’s do something!”
The truth is that the West is already doing an inordinate share of the relief effort for truly displaced people who have been driven from their homes by violence and persecution. Where is a similar response from the Muslim Arab Gulf States?
If Muslim countries like Saudi Arabia justify rejecting refugees out of fear of terrorism, why is that concern irrelevant in the West? Where is the Islamic “compassion” and “brotherhood” for those in need? Meanwhile, Germany will be accepting over 800,000 refugees in this year alone.
A Dubious Poster Child
An even more serious issue has to do with how many of the current wave of emigrants leaving the Middle East and North Africa are truly displaced victims or merely opportunists seeking a better life. The drowning of 3-year-old Aylan Kurdi has become “the symbol of the refugees’ tragic situation.” But was he a victim of Western indifference or parental irresponsibility?
But there is much more to the story than the sympathetic press in the West is willing to reveal: The boy’s father, Abdullah Kurdi, had applied for refugee status in Canada, but his application was rejected as incomplete because he had previously worked in Turkey and needed an exit visa from that country.
So in August, Abdullah joined the mass emigration movement with his wife and two young sons, none of whom could swim. Although they had purchased life-jackets, they weren’t wearing them when a wave swept the wife and two boys overboard. Apparently, Abdullah’s primary goal in Turkey was to get some dentures under the Turkish social welfare program, for which he qualified.
Robert Spencer thinks the story is even more incredible – that Abdullah wasn’t even in the boat carrying his wife and children. See: http://www.jihadwatch.org/2015/09/story-told-by-father-of-drowned-toddler-aylan-kurdi-is-full-of-holes
After the tragic accident, Abdullah and three adult-sized, ornate caskets found their way back to his home town of Kobani, Syria.
Since Muslims bury their dead wrapped in a cloth and laying on their sides, these coffins seem rather out-of-place. If Abdullah and his family were truly displaced, how could they return to their home town for the funeral? If Abdullah and his family were so desperate he had to emigrate in a rubber dinghy, who paid for the coffins, their transport, and airfare for Abdullah’s return to Kobani?
Abdullah was quoted in the media as saying he now wants to stay in Kobani because Syria is already much better than Europe. Common sense would say that this “symbol of the refugees’ tragic situation” is actually a story of an opportunist who irresponsibly put his family in peril while he is getting some new teeth at the expense of the Turkish social welfare system.
A whole different kind of emigration
We are dealing with a whole different kind of emigration. It’s clear that world leaders do not know how to deal with the problem. After WWII, there were a lot of “displaced people” needing a new home. These people were basically aliens in their home countries, “displaced” by the outcome of the war. Jews and Poles come to mind. What we have today are people leaving “failed states” in large numbers. The flow of humanity could potentially be the entire population of those failed states – all for the same reason. But these people are not ideological or cultural misfits. Instead, they are bringing their failed ideology and culture with them. In their new homeland, they want to set up parallel legal systems that are alien to the existing constitutions and legal systems. What will this do to the culture and legal systems of their host countries?
If there were 800,000 armed invaders on the border of Germany, for example, the nation would rightfully repel them. Is there a moral argument that says if 800,000 unarmed invaders try to enter the country illegally, they should be welcomed? Compassion compels us to help those in need, but when there are so many claiming to be in need of assistance, somehow that compassion must be rationed. In the humanitarian triage, who decides which emigrants will become immigrants to a new country? Is it fair to fast-track some people who literally came to our doors uninvited, while others from the same region and circumstances had to wait 10 years for legal entry?
There is also an issue with the sinister dispersal of recent immigrants here in the U.S. Inordinate numbers of Somalis have been re-settled in small agricultural communities. These are towns that employ large numbers of unskilled labor in meat packing and food processing industries. The government is saying to employers, in effect, we are going clamp down on your use of illegal Mexican immigrant labor, but we will replace those workers with Somalis who will likewise work at low wages. To sweeten the deal, the government subsidizes the companies who will employ these workers. What we are discovering, however, is that human labor isn’t interchangeable. Mexicans not only have a strong work ethic but they share the same Judeo-Christian values as most Americans. The Somali workers, on the other hand, do not have the same motivation or values as their employers. This is creating problems.
It will be a disaster if Western countries accept all comers in this new, massive emigration phenomenon. That would encourage more and more people to try to enter Western countries illegally. It would drain the resources of the host countries, and cause reactionary attitudes and responses to the new arrivers. Nations need to be able to “lock the door” and control who enters and who does not enter. Compassion must be tempered by common sense if the good of the people who made the West such as success is to be protected.
marthavanderpol 