Germany Bites the Cyanide Capsule

Tags

BBC, Britain First, Christianity and Islam, Civilisation, Counter-Jihad, Counterjihad, Defend the modern world, Demographics of Europe, EDL, edl edl, Eurabia, Facebook, Germans, germany migrants, germany migration, Islam, Islamism, Kurds, merkel germany, migrant crisis Islam, migrants, migration, Multiculturalism, Muslims, Race and ethnicity in the United States Census, syrians, Turks

The gravity of the news that Germany will take an estimated 800,000 ‘refugees’ (in fact, migrants) this year must be given a context in order to be understood. First, one must appreciate that Germany has the lowest fertility rate in Europe and one of the lowest fertility rates in the world, persistently hovering around 1.2 – 1.4 children per woman. For comparison, the average fertility rate in Middle East and North Africa is 3.7 children per woman. Germany’s ‘birth dearth’ is also not a new phenomenon but one that has persisted for over two decades. The effect of this is that Germany’s population (if we factor out immigration) is now declining with each passing year, leaving a worker-retiree ratio that is economically unsustainable.

This context goes some way to explain Chancellor Merkel’s bizarre eagerness in accepting a massive injection of working-age migrants. In Syria – the homeland of most of the coming influx of ‘refugees’ – the fertility rate is 2.8 children per woman, more than double the fertility rate of native Germans. This injection of blood is therefore likely to bear much fruit over the coming decades, leading ultimately to a boost in Germany’s overall fertility rate and an improvement in its worker-retiree ratio. Economically (if only economically), one can make a case for this. It is hugely important that Germany – an industrious economic power and the engine of Europe – avoids becoming a depopulated wilderness. It will be remembered that Japan, although now getting back on its feet, suffered enormously from mass infertility in previous decades. The cost to an economy of a rapidly diminishing labour force can run into the hundreds of billions.

But a nation, it has been said many times before, is more than an economy. Culture, faith, social type and regional character are equally vital to its continued prosperity. A strong market index is hard to appreciate if the country hosting it has been fragmented into a thousand warring hatreds. And with this policy Germany is running just that risk.

The 800,000 Syrians will quickly reproduce into millions, leaving Germany’s bio-cultural make-up eternally altered. Towns and cities across the country will be partly or fully Islamised, their valued eccentricities painted over with state-sponsored ‘harmony’ initiatives and equality workshops. Islamic conversions – in the playgrounds, the prisons and street – will blur the boundary of the native and the alien, in turn threatening the concept of ‘Germany’ itself (a notion already bruised from 100 years of political upheaval).

And then there is crime. My girlfriend, Anja, derives from and still resides in Dortmund, Rhine-Westphalia. She has told me many times (usually in a sunken and maudlin tone of voice) about the link between immigration and crime in Germany, and how it is understood and lamented by every ordinary citizen. How diminutive will her past concerns seem a year from now?

In case the objection is raised, I am fully aware that not every Muslim is a rapist/terrorist/mugger/vandal. But this is only in the same way I understand that not every Romani is a thief. Despite the exceptions, in both cases we have good reasons to fear exactly these crimes from exactly these quarters. And when we consider the scale of the new migration, thousands if not millions of ordinary Germans are being placed in grave and needless danger.

Merkel’s humanitarianism, just like her economics, is hopelessly warped. Doubtless some members of the new German-Syrian community will be grateful to Germany and work in gas stations, supermarkets or healthcare, abiding by the law and paying taxes. But others will blow up trains, shoot civilians and rape innocent women. Does any government have the right to decide this is a pill worth swallowing?

D, LDN.

Advertisement

3 Difficult Questions About the Refugee Crisis

Tags

Afghanistan, Africa, Assad, asylum, BBC, Boats, Britain First, Christianity and Islam, Civilisation, death, Defend the modern world, drama, eritrea, Facebook, flood, immigration crisis, immigration uk, Iraq, Islam, Italy, Kurds, migrants, Multiculturalism, No to Turkey in the EU, politics, Race and ethnicity in the United States Census, refugee crisis, refugees, Spain, syrian war, syrians, Terrorism, Twitter, UKIP, ukip refugees

When a photograph depicting the corpse of young boy washed up on the shore of the Mediterranean emerged last week, the world was shocked and appalled. Unlike any image before it, the photo has galvanised a massive humanitarian response, some of it deeply moving and morally impressive, from Iceland to Poland, Britain to Greece. Money is being thrown aimlessly into the air. Shelter is being offered across the continent. EU governments, including formerly hard-line and conservative regimes, are now yielding to public pressure for greater quotas of asylum seekers for their respective nations.

When emotion shouts in this way, wisdom struggles to be heard. Questions of a more cynical, less humanitarian nature are in this environment extremely difficult to ask. One risks being accused of ‘heartlessness’, ‘meanness’ or ‘xenophobia’ for casting any doubt, however light, on the official humanitarian narrative. But cast it we must.

Here are 3 questions that must be answered, however difficult and cynical they may – in the shouting short term – be considered.

1. Are the majority of ‘refugees’ actually refugees?

This is obviously the most important question at this juncture. Do the ‘refugees’ pouring into Europe deserve the label, or are they simply opportunists seeking a better material outlook for their family? While it is impossible to give a definite answer (one applicable to every different individual case), the information already gathered allows us to at least make a general estimate. Most, if not all, the refugees attempting to reach Europe are actually migrants.

How do we know this? That’s the answer to question 2…

2. Why isn’t Turkey safe enough for them?

The Kurdish child Aylan Kurdi, whose grim fate now dominates every newspaper in the world, did not have to die. He and his family were already safely in Turkey when they chose to shoot for Europe, and since Turkey is perfectly safe and reasonably affluent, Europe has no moral case to answer for his demise. Indeed, while he was been roundly criticised for it, the UKIP member Peter Bucklitsch was brave and entirely correct to place the blame directly on the child’s parents, remarking that had they not been ‘greedy for the good life’, the tragedy could have/would have been averted.

This isn’t actually a complicated matter (or at least it needn’t be). Once a refugee reaches a country of safety, he or she ceases to be a refugee. If that person then chooses to move on in search of a more desirable haven, that person becomes a migrant. It really is that simple.

3. Who is to blame for the crisis?

The answer to this last question is crystal clear. ISIS/Islamic State are to blame. Their cynical and merciless campaign against the people of Syria has sent ripples of destructive chaos across the whole of Eurasia. The everyday suffering in Raqqah and Palmyra is almost too extreme to be imagined. As we luxuriate in our peaceful suburbs, Syrian men, women and children are being enslaved, beheaded, brainwashed, forcibly conscripted, raped and robbed by a psychopathic gang of desert primitives. I fully understand why ordinary people wish to leave the nightmare being constructed. We would all do – or at least, try to do – the same.

But Europe is a not a charity. It is a continent and a civilisation. We have our own problems, our own impoverished masses and our own economic and politic disorders to contend with. In this time of Muslim suffering, the Muslim world must come to its own aid. More than anywhere else, the money-drenched kingdoms of the Arabian Gulf must allow a massively increased quota of migrants into their own territories. If they truly believe in the concept of an Ummah, let them prove it. Let them impress and embarrass the whole world with their brotherly kindness.

And if they do not, the blame is theirs and theirs alone.

D, LDN.

ISIS: al-Qaeda on Steroids.

Tags

Al-Qaeda, America, American Liberty, Barack Obama, Beheading, Civilisation, Counterjihad, Cultural Marxism, Defend the modern world, Desert, Europe, Failed State, Iraq, Iraqi Army, ISIL, ISIS, Jihad, Jihadism, Kurds, Obama, Salafism, Soldiers, Syria, Terrorism, Terrorist

The status of al-Qaeda as the leading edge of Islamist terrorism is at an end. Enter ISIS – the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (al-Sham loosely denoting the Levant). It is no exaggeration to say that this organisation, a military in all but recognition, is the gravest manifestation of Jihad in modern times.

For the past few months, ISIS has swept through deserts of Syria and Mesopotamia, beheading anyone who opposed them, and mutilating anyone who fell short of its understanding of Sharia law. The formerly Iraqi city of Mosul was for a period of days subjected to the meanest hell. It takes energy even to imagine it – the bleeding necks and purple heads, the screaming children and crackling gunfire.

Al-Qaeda wouldn’t have dared to dream this. No effort of Hezbollah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad or a thousand other outfits has conquered this size of territory, acquired this much modern weaponry, or achieved this level of consistency in battlefield success. What we are witnessing is unprecedented.

In Slate magazine, Daniel Byman described the accomplishments of ISIS as follows:

“The territory already under its control is larger than (the State of) Israel, and it is not some barren desert: It includes oilfields, electrical grids, prisons, small manufacturing centers, and the weapon depots abandoned by the Iraqi military, including arms provided by the United States. When ISIS fighters conquered Mosul, they seized the central bank—and its reported $425 million. By comparison, al-Qaida’s budget before 9/11 was about $30 million—and we called it rich.”

Those who have ever wondered what society would be like under a Bin Laden-approved government need wonder no more. The pre-medieval has returned, but – like a steampunk horror movie – the barbarian hordes now posses M16s, Jeeps and video cameras on which to record their deeds.

To list all the macabre events individually would be a Marquis De Sade novel and end up just as long (and unreadable), so let’s isolate a few especially horrid cases:

Yesterday, a video emerged of ISIS fighters spraying gunfire at random civilians from a Humvee on their entrance into Iraqi villages. The organisation also boasted of killing 1,700 US trained Iraqi soldiers during the same invasion. Since then, it’s been reported that an ISIS member has posted a photo of a decapitated head on twitter along with the devilish caption “This is our football. #Worldcup2014”.

That should be enough to communicate the point. These truly are a new breed of monster, lacking in whatever qualities separate us from animals.

What is all this cruelty aiming at exactly? Well, the Independent Newspaper has helpfully translated a manifesto published locally by ISIS fighters.

• “People have tried secular rule – now it is time for an Islamic state.
  
• Women should wear loose-fitting clothes and leave home only when necessary.
  
• Shrines and graves should be destroyed.
  
• Only flag allowed to be carried is the ISIS one.
  
• Places have been opened for police and soldiers of the ‘unbelievers’ to repent.
  
• Drugs, cigarettes or alcohol (are) banned.
  
• Tribal leaders must not become traitors by working with the government.
  
• All Muslims (are) to pray at the mosque at the correct time.
  
• Money we have stolen from the government is for the public. Only the imam of mosques can spend it – thieves will have their hands cut off.
  
• We are the soldiers of Islam and we have taken on the responsibility of re-establishing the caliphate.”

This is fairly generic Islamism. A gun-sight trained on all that makes life worth living. 

So what are we to do? Obama and Cameron have so far behaved like headless chickens. It is likely that there will be drone strikes at some point. Boots on the ground are unlikely. Iran is offering help, but this should be declined.

A fundamental impotence confronts the West, largely of our own making. We simply haven’t got the military bases or the number of personnel to engage ISIS directly. Only the US base in the Gulf is well positioned enough for Western intervention. Other possibilities are mostly wishful thinking. Israel  – for example – could conduct (heroic) air raids, but this would probably result in protests from our effete ‘leaders’ and the harem of anti-logic that is the United Nations. Turkey meanwhile is not our friend, has never been our friend, and will never be our friend where it counts. Jordan isn’t strong enough to repel an army the size of ISIS, and finally, Britain’s army has been stripped to its bare bones and cannot conceivably act alone.

We are left in the position of a mere observer to world-history. That is what happens when military budgets are decimated.

In the unlikely event that Downing Street telephones me for advice, my policy would look something like this – We should be dropping thousands of explosives on any ISIS position cleanly separated from civilians. In Syria, a massive bombing campaign should commence against the ‘rebels’. Assad should not be armed further by NATO but the creaking equipment he has employed thus far will need spare parts, compatible ammunition (only Russia can supply this) and fuel. NATO should not obstruct the supply of these materials.

Although in reality none of us will ever be consulted for our views on this unsightly morass, we must nevertheless stay interested in its outcome.

The ISIS climacteric is fundamentally a pitched battle between the future and the past. Only a fool would say we have no dog in that fight.

D, LDN.