Saturday, February 13, 2010

Illegal Immigration and Indifference

What happens to a nation when it no longer has the will or courage to defend its culture? What becomes of a country that jettisons its laws in favor another system of laws completely alien to their own out of fear or perceived tolerance? What is the destiny of a people when they lost the common bond of language? What becomes of a society in which laws designed to protect its national sovereignty are ignored?

The answer to all these questions is simple. The nation begins to crumble. It weakens its own foundations, and then collapses under its own weight of misguided benevolence. In trying to save the world, it loses itself and often becomes as worse off as those it was trying to save. The history books are full of examples. For a nation not to just survive, but prosper, it must offer a system of values and laws which are common to and accepted by all; a vision of what is expected of the people and of the government. We have these. They are called the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

To foster a common understanding of the meaning and intent of these documents, we must adopt a common language. In America, that language is English. Immigrants must always be welcome, provided they are willing to abide by existing guidelines. They should feel free to keep the familiarity of their native customs and language, but these must never be construed as substitutes for the values, laws, or language already in place, nor should be considered in addition to the values, laws, or language on the host country.

As the article below, written by Susan MacAllen for FamilySecurityMatters.com, illustrates, these basic rules of governance are being thrown out the window by some of our neighbors across the pond in Europe. Some places, such as in England, France, and Holland, are essentially allowing themselves to be governed by a minority. National laws, customs, and values are being superseded by foreign laws which in many respects are contrary to laws and customs of the host country, including the rights of others, tolerance of religion, and equality of gender. Their citizens are the ones being forced to conform as if they were a conquered people.

Nations don’t just fall to military conquest. They can fall just as easy to indifference.


Salute the Danish Flag – it’s a Symbol of Western Freedom
By Susan MacAllen

In 1978-9 I was living and studying in Denmark. An elderly woman to whom I was close said something to me one day that puzzled me for many years after. I forget what the context of our conversation was, but she commented that I – as a young American in Denmark – should not let any Dane scold me about the way America had treated its black population, because the Danes in her view treated their immigrants at least as badly. I wasn’t sure which immigrants she meant, so I asked her. She answered that she meant those from the Middle East. But in 1978 – even in Copenhagen, one didn’t see these Muslim immigrants.

The Danish population embraced visitors, celebrated the exotic, went out of its way to protect each of its citizens. It was proud of its new brand of socialist liberalism – one in development since the conservatives had lost power in 1929 – a system where no worker had to struggle to survive, where one ultimately could count upon the state as in, perhaps, no other western nation at the time.

The rest of Europe saw the Scandinavians as free-thinking, progressive and infinitely generous in their welfare policies. Denmark boasted low crime rates, devotion to the environment, a superior educational system and a history of humanitarianism.

Denmark was also most generous in its immigration policies – it offered the best welcome in Europe to the new immigrant: generous welfare payments from first arrival plus additional perks in transportation, housing and education. It was determined to set a world example for inclusiveness and multiculturalism.

How could it have predicted that one day in 2005 a series of political cartoons in a newspaper would spark violence that would leave dozens dead in the streets – all because its commitment to multiculturalism would come back to bite? By the 1990’s the growing urban Muslim population was obvious – and its unwillingness to integrate into Danish society was obvious. Years of immigrants had settled into Muslim-exclusive enclaves.

As the Muslim leadership became more vocal about what they considered the decadence of Denmark’s liberal way of life, the Danes – once so welcoming – began to feel slighted. Many Danes had begun to see Islam as incompatible with their long-standing values: belief in personal liberty and free speech, in equality for women, in tolerance for other ethnic groups, and a deep pride in Danish heritage and history.

The New York Post in 2002 ran an article by Daniel Pipes and Lars Hedegaard, in which they forecasted accurately that the growing immigrant problem in Denmark would explode. In the article they reported: “Muslim immigrants…constitute 5 percent of the population but consume upwards of 40 percent of the welfare spending. “Muslims are only 4 percent of Denmark’s 5.4 million people but make up a majority of the country’s convicted rapists, an especially combustible issue given that practically all the female victims are non-Muslim. Similar, if lesser, disproportions are found in other crimes.”

“Over time, as Muslim immigrants increase in numbers, they wish less to mix with the indigenous population. A recent survey finds that only 5 percent of young Muslim immigrants would readily marry a Dane.” “Forced marriages – promising a newborn daughter in Denmark to a male cousin in the home country, then compelling her to marry him, sometimes on pain of death – are one problem… “Muslim leaders openly declare their goal of introducing Islamic law once Denmark’s Muslim population grows large enough – a not-that-remote prospect. If present trends persist, one sociologist estimates, every third inhabitant of Denmark in 40 years will be Muslim.

”It is easy to understand why a growing number of Danes would feel that Muslim immigrants show little respect for Danish values and laws. An example is the phenomenon common to other European countries and the U.S.: some Muslims in Denmark who opted to leave the Muslim faith have been murdered in the name of Islam, while others hide in fear for their lives.

Jews are also threatened and harassed openly by Muslim leaders in Denmark, a country where once Christian citizens worked to smuggle out nearly all of their 7,000 Jews by night to Sweden – before the Nazis could invade. I think of my Danish friend Elsa – who as a teenager had dreaded crossing the street to the bakery every morning under the eyes of occupying Nazi soldiers – and I wonder what she would say today.
In 2001, Denmark elected the most conservative government in some 70 years – one that had some decidedly non-generous ideas about liberal unfettered immigration. Today Denmark has the strictest immigration policies in Europe. ( Its effort to protect itself has been met with accusations of “racism” by liberal media across Europe – even as other governments struggle to right the social problems wrought by years of too-lax immigration.)

If you wish to become Danish, you must attend three years of language classes. You must pass a test on Denmark’s history, culture, and a Danish language test. You must live in Denmark for 7 years before applying for citizenship. You must demonstrate an intent to work, and have a job waiting. If you wish to bring a spouse into Denmark, you must both be over 24 years of age, and you won’t find it so easy anymore to move your friends and family to Denmark with you.

You will not be allowed to build a mosque in Copenhagen. Although your children have a choice of some 30 Arabic culture and language schools in Denmark, they will be strongly encouraged to assimilate to Danish society in ways that past immigrants weren’t. In 2006, the Danish minister for employment, Claus Hjort Frederiksen, spoke publicly of the burden of Muslim immigrants on the Danish welfare system, and it was horrifying: the government’s welfare committee had calculated that if immigration from Third World countries were blocked, 75 percent of the cuts needed to sustain the huge welfare system in coming decades would be unnecessary.

In other words, the welfare system as it existed was being exploited by immigrants to the point of eventually bankrupting the government. “We are simply forced to adopt a new policy on immigration. The calculations of the welfare committee are terrifying and show how unsuccessful the integration of immigrants has been up to now,” he said.

A large thorn in the side of Denmark’s imams is the Minister of Immigration and Integration, Rikke Hvilshoj. She makes no bones about the new policy toward immigration, “The number of foreigners coming to the country makes a difference,” HvilshĂžj says, “There is an inverse correlation between how many come here and how well we can receive the foreigners that come.”

And on Muslim immigrants needing to demonstrate a willingness to blend in, “In my view, Denmark should be a country with room for different cultures and religions. Some values, however, are more important than others. We refuse to question democracy, equal rights, and freedom of speech.” Hvilshoj has paid a price for her show of backbone.

Perhaps to test her resolve, the leading radical imam in Denmark, Ahmed Abdel Rahman Abu Laban, demanded that the government pay blood money to the family of a Muslim who was murdered in a suburb of Copenhagen, stating that the family’s thirst for revenge could be thwarted for money. When Hvilshoj dismissed his demand, he argued that in Muslim culture the payment of retribution money was common, to which Hvilshoj replied that what is done in a Muslim country is not necessarily what is done in Denmark.

The Muslim reply came soon after: her house was torched while she, her husband and children slept. All managed to escape unharmed, but she and her family were moved to a secret location and she and other ministers were assigned bodyguards for the first time – in a country where such murderous violence was once so scarce.

Her government has slid to the right, and her borders have tightened. Many believe that what happens in the next decade will determine whether Denmark survives as a bastion of good living, humane thinking and social responsibility, or whether it becomes a nation at civil war with supporters of Sharia law.

And meanwhile, Americans clamor for stricter immigration policies, and demand an end to state welfare programs that allow many immigrants to live on the public dole. As we in America look at the enclaves of Muslims amongst us, and see those who enter our shores too easily, dare live on our taxes, yet refuse to embrace our culture, respect our traditions, participate in our legal system, obey our laws, speak our language, appreciate our history . . . we would do well to look to Denmark, and say a prayer for her future and for our own.

FamilySecurityMatters.org contributing editor Susan MacAllen writes a political blog, askew.blogharbor.com, and has written on an extensive array of subjects for over 20 years. She has lived overseas and been intimately involved in the French culture since the Muslim immigrant population emerged in the south of France.

3 comments:

Winddragon said...

There was never that big of a problem with Innigration before it was alway the way that you come to our country land of the free and you at least speak out language. It was never a though of hurting feelings or getting ones feelings hurt that just the way it is:come to our country and live by our rules. Even little childern know that the rules are made at to ones house you are playing. Keep you language but keep it at your house don't make up speak your language, we are letting you live.

Gatekeeper said...

The really good news for the USA is that we will join Denmark in facing the Muslim menace. 2010 is going to be a revolutionary year in the USA.

As we force our government to take a Danish-like approach to immigration of all types, liberals will howl like banshees with cries of xenophobia, and it will fall upon deaf ears.

Any threat to MY personal security will be met with whatever force I deem necessary to eliminate that threat.

As things now stand, a properly indoctrinated Muslim IS a real threat to ALL of us. No other "religion" is a bigger threat at this moment to personal liberty and freedom.

Another Opinion said...

As a post script to my article on the Tea Party Movement, I've read recently where the leadership of the TPM is described as "baby boomers trying to get their way one last time" or "baby boomer trying to relive the 1960's".

An interesting fact, if true, since many of the early baby boomers are now senior executives (aka "the establishment") or just retiring. Which means, much of the media, including the liberal Left, is run by the older boomers while the TPM, which seems to be slightly younger represents the later boomers (who were, by the way, a more militant than their older brothers and sisters).

So we may be seeing an intergenerational as well as a social, philosophical, and economic split in the country.