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.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment