And there are other issues besides terrorism. Already there are over forty million (40,000,000) Muslims in Europe, a continent that was once the heart of Christendom. Already their presence is transforming Europe into something other than what people who love traditional European culture and civilisation have always known, and not in a good way. I've seen it with my own eyes on my visits there. After the Charlie Hebdo attacks 27% of Muslims in the UK said they had some sympathy with the attackers. (I am not a fan of the content of Charlie Hebdo myself, but that doesn't mean that killing its contributors was an acceptable solution.) Other polls have showed 40% of Muslims in the UK in favour of the imposition of sharia law there. Studies in other European countries have yielded similar results. A minority, yes, but far too large a minority to be complacent about. The delusional stubbornness of liberals like Angela Merkel, who may go down in history as the woman who destroyed a continent, seems like lunacy to me. What kind of place will Europe be in the future? Will it still be a land of castles and cathedrals, open countryside, classical music, cafes serving pork and wine, people who enjoy life? Or will it be something altogether more grim, divided, and dangerous? You cannot tolerate everything and everyone forever, or you will end up being ruled by those who live by a firmer creed.
Monday, November 16, 2015
On recent events
I agree with the U.S. governors (including Texas's Greg Abbott) and European leaders who are refusing to accept any refugees from the Middle East, and am unimpressed by the arguments of those who criticize them. These leaders' first responsibility is the protection of their own people, not to rescue the world. No, most of the refugees are not likely to be terrorists. But if even a few are, that is too many. (If you knew that one apple in a barrel of a hundred were poisoned, would you cheerfully grab a random apple and eat it?) How are governments supposed to determine which "refugees" have terrorist sympathies and which do not? It is known that Daesh (ISIS) have smuggled agents into Europe, including apparently at least one of the Paris murderers, as "refugees" and have boasted about doing so. It is also known that many, perhaps even most, of these "Syrian refugees" are not even Syrian, but are opportunists from other countries drawn by the West's generous welfare states and higher standards of living. That is not a valid reason to open the borders. I have every sympathy for _Christian_ refugees, but unfortunately the modern West's reigning ideology of "non-discrimination" does not seem to permit them to be favored; in fact, it appears that Christian refugees are actually at a disadvantage under the Obama administration's current system.