Europeans to Muslim Immigration:
"Non, Nee, Who Needs It?"
I got in trouble yesterday with my knee-jerk liberal readers by bashing Hillary –(one reader called me a male chauvinist pig!) So, while nursing those wounds I might as well keep making trouble today and take my lumps all at once. Today I will be called a racist and anti-Muslim. This is shaping up as my “political incorrectness week.” I say what others dare not… I’m not brave, just retired and have nothing to lose..
So, here I go….
The United States of Europe, the E.U., is proving a hard sell to average Europeans. The British have never much cared for the idea. But the French, at least French officials have pushed hard for it, arguing that only a united Europe could compete in with the industrial and military power of the US.
But those dreams went up in smoke this week as French voters resoundingly turned down the proposed E.U. constitution. The Dutch will be the next to say “nee.”
What’s happened? Why have average Europeans turned sour on the idea?
In a word – immigration. Well, not any kind of immigration, specifically Muslim immigration. That too is a change. Europeans had been like folks in California who, though they clucked their tongues about growing illegal immigration, are delighted to hire cheap illegal workers from south of the boarder to clean their houses and cut their lawns. For Europeans that source of cheap, and often skilled, labor has flowed largely from Muslim countries.
The French in particular have absorbed huge numbers of Moroccan and Algerians, a legacy of their imperial past. So too have the British and the Dutch and to a lesser degree, Germany. For decades all went well. Then 9/11 happened. When those Arab-piloted planes destroyed 3000 lives and a hunk of lower Manhattan, they also destroyed something few noticed at the time -- the E.U.
It did not happen overnight; in fact it kind of kind of snuck up Europeans. The Germans were first shocked to discover that much of the early planning for 9/11 took place in Hamburg. Then Spain learned that some of the last minute plans were hatched in right in downtown Madrid.
The French started looking around too only to discover that their Arab immigrant community was crawling with bin Laden supporters. The 9/11 attacks energized radical Muslims in France and the became openly militant in not only their anti-western beliefs but recruitment as well. The French government tried to staunch this militancy by banning religious garb at schools, not because Christians and Jews were causing trouble, but because Muslims were wearing using traditional Islamic gear the same way American gangs use gang colors – as way of identifying sympathic followers and thumbing thier nose at the "enemy" by saying in effect, “we’re here, we hate everything you stand for, whatya going to do about it?”
Europeans citizens themselves began to notice, as if for the first time, just how many Arabs were now living among them. They also took note that there seemed only two kinds of immigrant Muslims: Those that openly voiced support for radical Islam’s brand of anti-West, anti-Christian, anti-Semitic views, and those who simply said nothing about it, one way or the other. Was this silence complicit agreement with Islamic terrorism? Or was it the silence of fear -- fear of their own enemy within? Either way it was not a comforting silence.
Then came the vicious train bombings in Madrid, a wake up call to all Europeans that they too were on radical Islam’s hit list.
Slowly the politically correct mantra, “Islam is a peaceful religion,” was eroded by Muslims themselves.
Newsweek's story that the Koran might have been mistreated by American soldiers, and what happens? Muslims in Pakistan riot and kill 15 other Muslims. That sent this message to westerners: “When infidels piss off Allah someone is gonna die, and if we can’t get our hands on a western we’ll kill one another.”
The Dutch got their first taste of radical Islam last August when a Dutch-Moroccan assassinated Dutch filmmaker, Theo Van Gogh. Van Gogh’s sin was making the film, "Submission," which he made with a Dutch politician who had renounced the Islamic faith of her birth.
“Dutch terrorist expert Edwin Bkker — who works for the Netherlands Institute for International Relations, the Clingendael Institute — also claims the Netherlands is relatively low down on the list of countries that faced the "wrath of Islam". Other factors, however, play a role, such as the willingness of the local Muslim population to support terrorist attacks. This is important in light of the fact the Dutch secret service AIVD said last year that at least 100 Islamic extremists are active in the country. Recent political concern in The Hague has also been expressed about the recruiting of Dutch Islamic youth for Jihad, meaning holy war....Furthermore, Colyn said terrorists could view the Netherlands as a "judicial paradise" due to the acquittals at the end of 2002 and mid-2003 of a group of terrorists ..." (Full Story)
Here’s what European voters were saying this week when millions voted “no” on the E.U. constitution: Unreconstructed, unreformed Islam is NOT a peaceful religion, at least not the way it is currently being taught to its masses. Instead it is a xenophobic, homophobic, misogynistic, uncompromising artifact of the mankind’s brutal past. Its followers allow no distinction between secular and Islamic law. While mouthing respect for diversity Islam condemns and vilifies all things non-Islamic. While mouthing “respect for women,” it denies almost all the liberties afforded to Muslim men. And, infidels are fair game.
It’s become clear to Europeans that accommodating large numbers of poor and poorly educated Muslims is just asking for trouble. Suddenly that cheap labor has become potentially very expensive. Muslims immigrants are proving too unruly, too unreasonable and too destructive for modern, secular societies to accommodate, at least in large numbers.
That’s the emotion Europeans acted upon this week when they voted no on an E.U. constitution, a constitution that among other things liberalized immigration policies across E.U. member countries. Voters understood that among those E.U. members would eventually be Turkey – the gateway of the Muslim world into Europe. When that happened it would mean lots more Muslims coming to Western Europe, an image that scared voters already worried about the Muslims living among them.
Is this just further evidence of white European racism? Sure, some of that is always part of any anti-immigration movement. But it’s not why so many voted no. It’s may be the politically correct thing to do, to chalk the E.U.’s demise on racists, but it again lets the real culprits – radical Muslims -- off the hook – turning the victimizers into victims. This isn't about religion. It's about pathological Islamic-driven aberrant, anti-social behavior. It’s crazy-person behavior and we all have to stop making excuses for it.
And its long past time Muslims start carrying more of the weight on this issue than have been forced to do to date. Muslims have to do some serious housecleaning of their own, and soon. Because, fellow infidels, if you want to meet real racism, real prejudice -- industrial-strength, undiluted and unembarrassed prejucice -- say hello to radical Islam.
The simple truth is that it's Muslim behavior itself is that's the driving force behind growing anti-Muslim paranoia. And, it’s not just their misbehavior when in the West, but evidence that, even when among their own, they can't behave like responsible, critical thinking adults.
KABUL, Afghanistan, June 1 - A suicide bomber set off a powerful explosion today at a funeral ceremony in a mosque in the southern city of Kandahar, killing at least 19 people, among them the Kabul police chief…. The governor of Kandahar, Gul Agha Shirzai, told reporters that the suicide bomber's body had been found and that he was a member of Osama bin Laden's Al Qaeda network. "We have found documents on his body that show he was an Arab," Mr. Shirzai said, The Associated Press reported. (Full Story)
The real story here is not the E.U. vote. That’s just a commonsense reaction to what’s going on. But it’s a warning Muslims worldwide should consider far more a threat to them than all George W. Bush’s planes and troops combined. Because there will be -- can not be -- a military solution to Islamic terrorism. Only Muslims themselves can put a stop to such aberrant religious misbehavior. The trouble is, so far anyway, they seem disinclined to do so.
There are really only two logical outcomes to this saga, and neither involves military agression from the West but passive agressive actions that will be far more damaging to the Muslim world in the long run. If this behavior continues unabatted much longer Muslim nations who refuse to modernize Islamic teachings will find themselves facing international isolation. Europeans have begun this process and if it continues Muslims will eventually find themselves virtual prisoners within their self-imposed, 12th century Islamic theme park nations. Visas to study and work in the West will dry up. Trade will be stifled as Western nations treat every shipment form an Arab nation as a potential national security threat. The Arab world will become a backwater of history.
The best outcome for Muslims -- not to mention the rest of us -- would be for Muslim nations take a clue from Martin Luther and produce their own reformist principles bringing Islam into step with modern times. Rules that require that all Mosques and all Mullahs must toe the line and knock off teaching hate, or else. That would be start. It will take a while for those whose minds have already been poisoned by radical Islamic hate to die off. But they need to begin, and soon.
In 1949 Justice Robert Jackson noted that, while the US Constitution grants citizens a wealth of personal and political rights, it was not intended as a a "suicide pact." For it to work everyone had to follow some common sense rules. The same goes for such valued Western concepts as political and religious freedom. These too are not suicide pacts. Compliance with some basic commonsense rules is required in order to keep the whole thing from devolving into a giant ideological/religious food fight.
At the top of that list is respect for other’s beliefs. It’s a key and indispensable concept to the survival and prosperity of any modern, pluralistic society – that is except when those beliefs include justifying murder and mayhem within that society. That crosses the line. That kind of religious bullyism breaks the contract and those that follow such a course should expect to be abscessed off from the rest of the body politic.
I think that is not an unreasonable line to draw. But the world is still waiting to see Muslims in large numbers show the slightest willingness to draw that line, and draw it in an unambiguous, non-word-mincing and convincing way. So far they are still at the "wink, wink, nod, nod stage," when it comes to condemning radical Islamic terrorism.
Until they do draw that line Muslims should not act surprised if they are met with growing suspicion, increased profiling and just generally a cold shoulder from the rest of us.
Now, how much trouble am I in for that?
Quote of the Day
Fair & Balanced?
“Even we at Fox News manage to get some lefties on the air occasionally, and often let them finish their sentences before we club them to death and feed the scraps to Karl Rove and Bill O'Reilly. And those who hate us can take solace in the fact that they aren't subsidizing Bill's bombast; we payers of the BBC license fee don't enjoy that peace of mind. Fox News is, after all, a private channel and our presenters are quite open about where they stand on particular stories. That's our appeal. People watch us because they know what they are getting. The Beeb's (BBC’s) institutionalized leftism would be easier to tolerate if the corporation was a little more honest about it.”
(Fox News London Bureau Chief, Scott Norvell, in the May 20 Wall St. Journal, Europe)