British Appeasement

British Appeasement

Dr Joseph Alexander Norland, the person who started Israpundit, wrote to Ms Hunt of UCU.

I am writing to you to protest the UCU boycott of Israel. By now, you have probably heard the reasons for objecting to the boycott numerous times. For this reason I will refrain from repeating the reasons and offer instead two personal observations. All the statements in the following paragraphs are substantiated by mountains of evidence, which I will be pleased to forward to you upon request.

Observation #1. In 1938, the government and the people of the UK engaged in a systematic campaign to appease a terrorist bully at the expense of a small, democratic republic. Need I specify that I am referring to Britain’s appeasement of Hitler and the resulting destruction of Czechoslovakia? Need I draw the obvious parallel between this historic record and the British appeasement of Arab terrorists at the expense of the democratic republic of Israel? Since the UCU boycott is part of this anti-Israel campaign of appeasement, I will repeat here what I tell my British acquaintances at every opportunity:

As a consequence of the British appeasement policy, the world was plunged into World War II, which ended with the the Allies’ victory only because North America joined in to rescue Europe. My country, Canada, alone suffered 45,000 fatalities, which is about 1/10th of the price the US had to pay for the British folly. After the war, Canada forgave the war debt incurred by Britain, while the US bailed out Europe with the Marshall Plan. But when the current British campaign of appeasement, including the UCU boycott, leads inevitably to the Jihadist war against Britain herself, things will be different. For, people like me have vowed never again to rescue Europeans from the fruits of their own follies. This time around, people like me will ensure that Europeans alone pay for their folly.

To sum up this point in a concise asyndeton, “you boycott today, you’ll bleed tomorrow alone”. Don’t say that you have not been forewarned.

Observation #2. Given that I am Canadian, you can assume a priori that I had warm feelings towards the country of my founding fathers. And given that I am neither an Israeli citizen nor Jewish, you can also assume a priori that my view were not particularly pro-Israel. These statements applied until July 25, 2000, when the arch-terrorist Arafat rejected the generous peace offer made to him by the (former) Israeli prime minister Barak. At that point, I engaged in an in-depth study of the Arab-Israel conundrum, as a consequence of which Israel gained an ardent supporter for life.

Along my research, I encountered a string of Britons who were sympathetic to the cause of Jewish national revival and/or its political implementation, Zionism. These included George Elliot (of “Daniel Dironda” fame), Lord Balfour, Col Richard Meinertzhagen (who authored “Middle East Diary”), Col John Henry Patterson and Major General Orde Charles Wingate. Unfortunately, this handful of great Britons is dwarfed by the general anti-Semitic, anti-Zionist and anti-Israel streak that has always characterized English/British policy; for every Patterson there are millions of despicable Ernest Bevins, and for every Meinertzhagen, millions of notorious Ken Livingstones. The roots may be traced to the expulsion of the Jews from England in 1290, from which one can surmise that Britain has not changed in 700 years (A propos: I first became aware of “Britain has not changed in 700 years” when I encountered the primitive catalogue system of the libraries of Cambridge University; rather than boycott Israel, the UCU’s efforts would be more useful in reforming this system, but this is a topic for another time). To demonstrate “the general anti-Semitic, anti-Zionist and anti-Israel streak that has always characterized English/British policy”, which I allege, I will provide but two examples.

    Example #1 During WW II, when Europe’s Jews fell victim to the Holocaust, Britain refused to bomb the rail lines leading to the Nazi death camp, even though the allied planes routinely flew over such camps as Auschwitz. The historical record proves that the refusal was deliberate, and thus Britain stands accused of complicity in the Holocaust.Example #2 The League of Nations granted Britain the mandate over Palestine with the express proviso that Palestine be run as a Jewish National Home. From the outset, perfidious Albion set out to sabotage this mandate and undermine the Zionist project, which George Elliot’s “Daniel Dironda” foretold. Thus, the British authorities undermined Jewish immigration to Palestine, culminating in the 1939 White Paper and the 1947 tragedy of the refugee ship “Exodus”. The British also actively fought with the Arabs in an attempt to squelch the nascent Jewish state: one particularly notorious example concerns the British orchestration of a three-car bomb on Ben Yehuda Street, Jerusalem, on February 22, 1948, in which 52 Jewish civilians were murdered.

Sifting through mountains of data, of which the foregoing hardly scratches the surface, my support for the small, beleaguered democracy, Israel, blossomed into the very garden that George Elliot cultivated in her writings. At the same time, my Canadian affection for Britain turned into a decision to boycott all things British. Indeed, even though my close family members reside in the UK, I have vowed never to set foot on that tainted soil again. Whatever becomes of the UCU boycott, my boycott of Britain stands. And, as noted above, when the Jihadists come for you, notwithstanding Britain’s appeasement and the UCU boycott, don’t count on my help, or on my country’s help.


Dr Joseph Alexander Norland
Ottawa, Ont., Canada

Posted by Ted Belman @ 10:19 am |

Posted in Uncategorized. Leave a Comment »

Why the Democrats Cannot Be Trusted on Israel

Why the Democrats Cannot Be Trusted on Israel

A Financial Times article the other day shows why the Democratic Party cannot be trusted on Israel. No American newspaper has touched this.

Superficially, the Democrats seem to show no daylight between them and the Bush administration. The FT points out that “As recently as 1999 and 2000, it was acceptable for Bill Clinton, a Democratic president, to talk about “Israel’s occupation of the West Bank” as an obstacle to peace. Mr Clinton frequently referred to Israeli settlements in the occupied territories in the same vein. That is no longer mainstream.”

But here’s the payoff:

“The plain fact is there is no upside for candidates to challenge the prevailing assumptions about Israel,” said one of their advisers, who asked not to be named. “The best strategy is to win the White House and then change the debate.”

In other words, the best strategy for friends of Israel is to be sure the Democrats don’t win the White House.

Cross-posted on Mediacrity.

Posted by Mediacrity @ 3:23 pm |

Posted in Uncategorized. 1 Comment »

Netanyahu: As long as we stay in West Bank we’re unbeatable

Netanyahu: As long as we stay in West Bank we’re unbeatable

‘Automatic assumption of withdrawal to 1967 borders is unjustified, immoral and very dangerous for the State of Israel,’ opposition leader tells conference marking Six Day War’s 40th anniversary

“We must set defendable borders which do not include an additional Arab population. I plan to try and reach such an agreement, which will be supported by Egypt and Jordan.”

Lilach Shoval, YNET

“Since the Six Day War the Arab world has been trying to get us off the mountains of Judea and Samaria, but as long as we are on this mountain, we are unbeatable,” opposition leader Benjamin Netanyahu said Monday.

Speaking at a conference held in the capital by the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs (JCPA) to mark the 40th anniversary of the Six Day War, Netanyahu said that “the Six Day War was a turning point in which we turned from a fetal and fragile country whose existence was questionable, into a state which cannot be defeated.”

The conference was dedicated to United Nations Resolution 242, which was adopted five months after the war and outlined guidelines for a peaceful solution in the Middle East.

“This possibility was on the agenda. The fact that we were unbeatable made us move from war to peace. It was a necessary condition in causing parts of the Arab world to recognize the State of Israel and its right to exist. Today the peace process is in retreat following the unilateral withdrawal from Lebanon, the pullout from Gaza and the Second Lebanon War,” Netanyahu said.

“Today not only our enemies, but also our friends, question the fact that we are unbeatable. This moves us away from peace and brings us closer to war. The Six Day War was aimed at removing the question mark over our existence and paving the road to peace.

“All those who lament the terrible thing that happened to us during the Six Day War are wrong, because something wonderful happened to us. Our weakness today is that we are not claiming our rights. If we fail to fight for our rights, they will disappear.

“This is the weakness of our policy. If the voters decide that I must return to lead the country, I do not plan to control the Palestinians and annex them to Israel. On the contrary, they should be independent. Today they are also controlled by their own people.

“I do not see a possibility of returning to control the Palestinians through the military. This is not on the agenda. The argument today is not about the populated territories, but about the empty territories. The argument is about parts of our homeland, which are also the foundations of our defense.”

‘We must set defendable borders’

The opposition leader noted that “the automatic assumption of withdrawing to the 1967 borders is unjustified, immoral and very dangerous to the State of Israel. We must set defendable borders which do not include an additional Arab population. I plan to try and reach such an agreement, which will be supported by Egypt and Jordan.

“We must change the Oslo Accords. The main flaw of the Oslo Accords is that Israel is required to make more and more concessions, while the Palestinians continue to demand their right of return. We must find a partner for peace and take the right of return off the agenda. Cancelling the right of return is a precondition for concessions. At the moment we have no partner, because those standing in front of us declare that they want to destroy us.

“If we reach an agreement with a partner which is not a partner and reach an agreement with Hamas, we will not achieve peace but will only be giving Iran an advantage, like what happened in the withdrawal from Lebanon and the disengagement. Our main effort should be directed at preventing Iran from arming itself.”

In response to a question from the audience, Netanyahu said that Israel must not leave the Golan Heights. “If we leave the Golan Heights we will get a piece of paper but not a defendable border, and therefore we must remain on the Golan Heights.”

Posted by Ted Belman @ 3:48 pm |

Posted in Uncategorized. Leave a Comment »

Why is US indirectly funding Hamas

Why is US indirectly funding Hamas

New PLO account disbursing millions

Khaled abu Toameh and AP, THE JERUSALEM POST Jun. 3, 2007

Donor funds have begun flowing into an account controlled by Palestinian Authority Finance Minister Salam Fayyad, effectively ending the international boycott of the Hamas-led government. The funds will be used to pay partial salaries to tens of thousands of PA civil servants.

Fayyad said Sunday that the new account, which had been set up to bypass an international boycott of the Hamas-led government, is a key step toward restoring relations between the Palestinians and donor countries.

However, the end of the boycott, imposed when Hamas rose to power more than a year ago, is not yet in sight, Fayyad told The Associated Press.

“We have started using the PLO account,” PA Information Minister Mustafa Barghouthi confirmed. “This is an important step toward lifting the siege.”

A May 14 letter from the US to the European Union authorized the deposit of funds in Fayyad’s account.

While Arab countries and Norway have already put a total of $184 million into the new fund, the two biggest donors to the Palestinians – the US and EU – have not committed to it, he said.

The new fund was established last month. Donor countries can now send money to this account without concern that banks involved in the transfer will run afoul of US anti-terror regulations, Fayyad said.

“As a legal matter, there is now a full possibility of having money transferred directly to us without risk that the money might be intercepted [or] seized, or causing banks doing the transactions any trouble with the correspondent banks,” he said.

Fayyad said his ultimate goal was to restore the single Treasury account he had operated before Hamas came to power in March 2006. The account was dismantled under the previous Hamas-controlled government. Instead, donors then bypassed the Hamas-run Finance Ministry by parceling out aid directly to different recipients, such as subsidies to tens of thousands of unpaid civil service workers.

Fayyad said he has been in touch with EU officials about sending aid to the PLO account.

“There are obviously political considerations that have so far gotten in the way of that normalization,” he said. “Nevertheless, what we are seeking to accomplish is working closely with the EU, hopefully to get to that point in the not-too-distant future whereby they are able to
transfer money to us directly.”

Fayyad’s biggest challenge is to cover the bloated government payroll for 165,000 employees, half of them members of the security forces.

“We are trying to impart a little bit of order to that process, at least hoping that this would reduce the level of anxiety on the part of not only the government employees, but also other segments of the population that deal with the Palestinian Authority,” he said.

Over the weekend, the United Arab Emirates transferred $80 million to the PLO account. The money will also be used to pay salaries.

Fayyad said he hoped that with the new mechanism in place, more pledges would now come in. However, he said, the key to getting out of the crisis is a resumption of Israeli tax transfers.

With Hamas’s rise to power, Israel froze the transfer of some $55 million a month that it collects on behalf of the Palestinians, much of it from Palestinian workers in Israel.

That money amounts to about two-thirds of local Palestinian revenue, Fayyad said.

He added that the new account might give the Palestinians a stronger case to demand payment.

Fayyad said only a political solution to the conflict can help solve the Palestinians’ economic woes. He cited a recent World Bank report that said the Palestinian economy cannot recover unless Israel lifts its system of restrictions on Palestinian movement and trade.

“There has to be a better tomorrow for everybody, for both of us, Israelis and Palestinians,” he said. “Where we are in right now is an extremely difficult and dangerous situation.”

On Saturday, the Dutch Foreign Ministry announced that it would be dispatching a “special grant” of 6.3 million euros ($8.4 million) to the PA in the coming months. Foreign Minister Maxime Verhagen insisted that the funding is “also in Israel’s best interests,” as the money would improve the humanitarian situation for 17,000 policemen and their families.

“This allowance will not only help increase safety in the territories, but also will improve living conditions for police officers and their families,” the Dutch ministry stated in a press release.

“The Palestinian civilian police have played an important role in recent months in containing and calming disturbances among Palestinians, notably in the Gaza Strip; the police must be strengthened to maintain and enhance safety and public order in the Palestinian territories.”

In recent weeks, Qatar gave $44 million, Norway gave $10 million and Saudi Arabia donated $50 million to the PA.

Japan is also considering renewing direct funding to the PA. It has donated about $900 million to the PA since 1993.

According to a recent report by the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), donations to the PA from foreign countries rose by almost 300 percent in 2006, totaling $900 million – as opposed to $349 million the previous year. The sharp increase came despite the international boycott.

According to the report, both Arab and Western countries have increased their donations, channeling them through an account known as the Temporary International Mechanism and the office of PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas.

Posted by Ted Belman @ 4:59 pm |

Posted in Uncategorized. Leave a Comment »

Polish girl’s Holocaust diary unveiled

Polish girl’s Holocaust diary unveiled


JERUSALEM — The diary of a 14-year-old Jewish girl dubbed the “Polish Anne Frank” was unveiled on Monday, chronicling the horrors she witnessed in a Jewish ghetto – at one point watching a Nazi soldier tear a Jewish baby away from his mother and kill him with his bare hands.

The diary, written by Rutka Laskier in 1943 shortly before she was deported to Auschwitz, was released by Israel’s Holocaust museum more than 60 years after she recorded what is both a daily account of the horrors of the Holocaust in Bedzin, Poland and a memoir of the life of a teenager in extraordinary circumstances.

“The rope around us is getting tighter and tighter,” the teenager wrote in 1943, shortly before she was deported to Auschwitz. “I’m turning into an animal waiting to die.”

Within a few months Rutka was dead and, it seemed, her diary lost. But last year, a Polish friend who had saved the notebook finally came forth, exposing a riveting historical document.

“Rutka’s Notebook” . The 60-page memoir includes innocent adolescent banter, concerns and first loves – combined with a cold analysis of the fate of European Jewry.

Some 6 million Jews were killed by the Nazis during World War II, after European Jews were herded into ghettos, banned from most jobs and forced to wear yellow stars to identify them.

“I simply can’t believe that one day I will be allowed to leave this house without the yellow star. Or even that this war will end one day. If this happens I will probably lose my mind from joy,” she wrote on Feb. 5, 1943.

“The little faith I used to have has been completely shattered. If God existed, He would have certainly not permitted that human beings be thrown alive into furnaces, and the heads of little toddlers be smashed with gun butts or shoved into sacks and gassed to death.”

Reports of the gassing of Jews, which were not common knowledge in the West by then, apparently had filtered into the Bedzin ghetto, which was near Auschwitz, Yad Vashem experts said.

The following day she opened her entry with a heated description of her hatred toward her Nazi tormentors. But then, in an effortless transition, she described her crush on a boy named Janek and the anticipation of a first kiss.

“I think my womanhood has awoken in me. That means, yesterday when I was taking a bath and the water stroked my body, I longed for someone’s hands to stroke me,” she wrote. “I didn’t know what it was, I have never had such sensations until now.”

Later that day, she shifted back to her harsh reality, describing how she watched as a Nazi soldier tore a Jewish baby away from his mother and killed him with his bare hands.

The diary chronicles Rutka’s life from January to April 1943. She shared it with her friend Stanislawa Sapinska, who she met after Rutka’s family moved into a home owned by Sapinska’s family, which had been confiscated by the Nazis to be included in the Bedzin ghetto. Sapinska came to inspect the house and the girls – one Jewish, one Christian – formed a deep bond.

When Rutka feared she would not survive, she told her friend about the diary. Sapinska offered to hide it in the basement under the floorboards. After the war, she returned to reclaim it.

“She wanted me to save the diary,” Sapinska, now in her 80s, recalled Monday. “She said ‘I don’t know if I will survive, but I want the diary to live on, so that everyone will know what happened to the Jews.’”

Sapinska stashed the diary in her home library for more than 60 years. She said it was a precious memento and thought it to be too private to share with others. Only at the behest of her young nephew did she agree to hand it over last year.

“He convinced me that it was an important historical artifact,” she said in Polish.

In 1943, Rutka was the same age as Anne Frank, the Dutch teenager whose Holocaust diary has become one of the most widely read books in the world. Yad Vashem said Rutka’s newly discovered diary was authenticated by experts and Holocaust survivors.

Rutka’s father, Yaakov, was the family’s only survivor. He died in 1986. But unlike Anne Frank’s father, he kept his painful past inside. After the war, he moved to Israel, where he started a new family. His Israeli daughter, Zahava Sherz, said her father never spoke of his other children, and the diary introduced her to the long-lost family she never knew.

“I was struck by this deep connection to Rutka,” said Sherz, 57. “I was an only child, and now I suddenly have an older sister. This black hole was suddenly filled, and I immediately fell in love with her.”

“I have a feeling that I am writing for the last time,” Rutka wrote on Feb. 20, 1943, as Nazi soldiers began gathering Jews outside her home for deportation.

“I wish it would end already! This torment; this is hell. I try to escape from these thoughts of the next day, but they keep haunting me like nagging flies. If only I could say, it’s over, you only die once … but I can’t, because despite all these atrocities, I want to live, and wait for the following day.”

However, Rutka would write again. Her last entry was dated April 24, 1943, and her last written words were: “I’m very bored. The entire day I’m walking around the room. I have nothing to do.”

In August, she and her family were sent to Auschwitz, where she is believed to have been killed upon arrival.

Posted by Ted Belman @ 10:12 pm |

Posted in Uncategorized. Leave a Comment »

Malaysia Chief Justice: “A Muslim can renounce his faith but the way one leaves a religion is set by the religion itself, in this case Sharia law”

Malaysia Chief Justice: “A Muslim can renounce his faith but the way one leaves a religion is set by the religion itself, in this case Sharia law”

Ominous words, considering the penalty for apostasy established by Muhammad’s own orders: baddala deenahu faqtuhu — “If anyone changes his religion, kill him” (Bukhari 9.84.57).

“A Muslim can renounce his faith, but only as set out by Sharia,” from AsiaNews:

Kuala Lumpur (AsiaNews) – “A Muslim can renounce his faith but the way one leaves a religion is set by the religion itself, in this case Sharia law”. Chief Justice Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim, has stepped into the heated debate which has arisen in the aftermath of the Federal Court ruling on the Lina Joy case. May 30th, two of three judges, rejected the Christian convert’s appeal, to have the National registrar cancel the word “Islam” from her documents, given she is no longer a Muslim. The country’s highest court has referred the decision to the Islamic Court, whom the Registrar is asking to, declare the woman an apostate in order to modify her documents. In fact two legislations exist in the country: Islamic and constitutional, which are often conflicting. In the case of Lina Joy this is evident: the Constitution guarantees freedom of religion; Islamic law punishes conversion to another religion.

Now more than ever the religious minorities [in] Malaysia feel threatened and denounce the imposition of the Sharia even in the case of non Muslim citizens.

As reported in the daily newspaper The Star, the Chief Justice strongly supported Federal Court verdict explaining: “To say that she is not under the jurisdiction of the Sharia Court – because she no longer professes Islam – is not appropriate, (in so far as) the way one leaves a religion is set by the religion itself”. He said a mere statutory declaration that one has renounced Islam is not sufficient to remove the word “Islam” from a Muslim person’s identity card, “This is because apostasy is an issue dealing with Islamic laws”.

Meanwhile Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi today clarified that “no political pressure influenced the Federal Court Judges’ decision, while admitting that the issue of non Muslims and Islamic courts needed to be dealt with, but exclusively by the government. The Christian community has [long] appealed to the authorities to reaffirm the supremacy of the Constitution over Islamic laws.

Posted by Marisol at June 4, 2007 9:54 AM


Posted in Uncategorized. Leave a Comment »

U.S. signs security pact with Kurdistan, warns Turkey not to invade

Posted in Uncategorized. Leave a Comment »

It’s Not Racist to Oppose Amnesty for Illegals

It’s Not Racist to Oppose Amnesty for Illegals
USA Sher Zieve
June 5, 2007

Contrary to some stated opinion on both sides of the US political aisle, being against a blanket amnesty (any bill that holds past criminal offenses as unimportant is one that proposes amnesty) for illegal immigrants is not a racist stance. Instead, it is a pro-American sovereignty position.

Those who still believe that the United States has the right to be a sovereign nation are meeting with increasing opposition. However, until Congress passes a law that states the invasion of the US via its borders is legal it is still against the law.

The “immigration reform bill” currently in the US Senate again places those of Hispanic origin who cross the US southern border illegally above other races attempting to enter the US legally. And this proposed bill also discriminates against those individuals of Hispanic origins who entered, or are working to enter, this country legally. That’s the true racism—the bigotry and discriminatory practices in the mold of patently xenophobic groups such as La Raza (“The Race”), MEChA and the Mexica Movement.

It is not racist to insist that the laws of one’s country be upheld. It is, however, racist to draft laws that offer advantages and perks only to a specific race or races of people—while not providing these same rewards for others.

As of 2006, it is estimated that 10% of the total population of Mexico is living in the USA—that’s Mexican nationals. For decades US citizens have been paying an increasing percentage of their taxes to fund the illegals-who-cross-our-southern-border’s assault on US services—including healthcare and schooling. Multiple US healthcare facilities have been forced to close, due to the onslaught of illegals demanding—and receiving—free health care. Our public school system also provides free education for non-US citizens. But, none of these free services to those in our country illegally are enjoyed by our own citizens. Instead, our own healthcare and educational costs and taxes continue to rise—our costs go up because schools and healthcare organizations are subsidizing the illegals. Our taxes go up because we’re, also, paying for the illegals. In other words, We the People are being assaulted in our checkbooks and pockets at least twice.

It is not racist for citizens to balk at having their own services diminished and costs increased due to the invasion of illegal immigrants. It is, however, racist for US lawmakers to draft and pass bills that benefit only those who have entered the country illegally and then tax and penalize legal citizens to pay for the illegal ones. It is called taxation without representation. Only the illegals are now being represented. But, if this Amnesty Bill passes both Congressional houses, with one stroke of a pen millions of people will be instantly legal. It is also NOT racist to protect our borders.

Former President Theodore Roosevelt – not a racist – gave a speech in 1917 in which he said:

It is our boast that we admit the immigrant to full fellowship and equality with the native-born. In return we demand that he shall share our undivided allegiance to the one flag which floats over all of us.”

He told the Kansas City Star in 1918:

“English should be the only language taught or used in the public schools.”

He then wrote to the President of the American Defense Society on January 3, 1919:

In the first place we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the man's becoming in very fact an American and nothing but an American. There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag, and this excludes the red flag, which symbolizes all wars against liberty and civilization, just as much as it excludes any foreign flag of a nation to which we are hostile...We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language...and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.”

Roosevelt’s statements are as correct and pertinent today as they were almost 100 years ago. What a shame and tragedy that our lawmakers have either forgotten the principles and laws upon which this country was founded—or have chosen to ignore them—in order to gain the illusion of political power. One thing remains certain. These same lawmakers and law-enforcers are no longer listening to the country’s legal citizens.

Related Reading:
NMA Illegal Immigration Fact Sheet

Sher Zieve is an author, political commentator, Staff Writer and Program Director for The New Media Alliance a non-profit (501c3) national coalition of writers, journalists and grass-roots media outlets. Zieve’s Op/Ed columns are widely carried by multiple Internet Journals and sites and she also writes hard news. Her columns have also appeared in The Oregon Herald, Dallas Times, Boston Star, Massachusetts Sun, Sacramento Sun, in International news publications and on multiple University websites.

Posted in Uncategorized. Leave a Comment »

A Continent of Losers

A Continent of Losers

Created 2007-06-04 12:18

The migration waves now hitting Europe are unprecedented in human history, and far, far greater in scope and speed than those which brought down the Roman Empire in the 5th century. Newsweek writes about “Europe’s invisible illegals”:

European authorities are becoming nervous about burgeoning Pakistani populations in places – such as Italy, Spain and France – where there were few or none at all just a few years ago. Now numbering in the hundreds of thousands, many of these Pakistanis have sneaked onto the Continent via Iran, Turkey and the Balkans. They’ve also begun taking a circuitous route across Africa and then by ship to Spain’s Canary Islands or the Mediterranean coasts of Europe. Almost overnight, Pakistani neighborhoods have sprung up in Barcelona and Bologna. Increasing numbers of Pakistanis now use Africa as their stepping stone. The Pakistanis, who must travel longer distances, pay traffickers almost 10 times as much as Africans do – from $11,000 to $20,000 – to get them in. In some cases they are also guaranteed help for two or three attempts to make it across the frontier. Some fly first to East Africa or the Sahara. It’s now common for African and European patrols to intercept boats carrying scores of South Asians bound for Europe.

Lars Hedegaard interviewed German professor Gunnar Heinsohn who pointed out that while “A woman in Tunisia has 1.7 children. In France she may have six because the French government pays her to have them. Of course, the money was never intended to benefit Tunisian women in particular, but French women will not touch this money, whereas the Tunisian women are only too happy to.”

Source URL:

Posted in Uncategorized. Leave a Comment »

Shamnesty on the Senate floor

Posted in Uncategorized. Leave a Comment »