Luke Ford

That’s crazy, right? Why would the Jewish state want to take in enemy aliens?

Well, does not the same reasoning apply to the West? Why would any Western countries want to take in Muslims, who are famously hostile to the West?

Every people and religion developed in a specific locale and they are not equally suited to every other place in the world. For instance, blacks and muslims have been disasters for every western country that has taken them in.

Chaim Amalek writes: “Every free nation has the natural right to control its borders against invasion and to decide who gets to pass over them and who does not. Hungary has as much right to remain predominately Hungarian and Christian as Israel (to cite another nation that has built mighty walls to keep out unwanted migrants, in her case, from Africa) has to remain predominately Jewish. As for this current wave of Muslim migrants flooding over Europe, what does it say about their religion and their civilization that makes Muslims so desperate to settle in predominately Christian lands?”

Comments to Steve Sailer:

* Israel has actually been treating some Syrian casualties from the civil war there, casualties who, presumably, come across via the Golan Heights. The NYT reported on this a while back, but here’s a JPost article on it from last year.

An excerpt:

Yossi Melman, a leading national security analyst who has written extensively about Syria, told the Post, “Zionism would not collapse if we accept 200 refugees. Why not?’” Hadas Ziv, public outreach director for PHR-Israel, told the Post last week that Israel should press the UN to set up a safe haven in Syria, near the Israeli border, to create a humanitarian escape corridor.

* I was looking at a Daily Mail article and the pictures were shocking. HUGE numbers of fighting age males coming over, way more than the old men, women and children. How many of these are plants? (ISIS threatened to do so a while back.) How many are going to go all Charlie Hebdo? What a colossal clusterfuck.

I ran some numbers. If the refugee total reaching Germany doubles next year, they will have taken in 2.6 million refugees in three years time. (Doubling is a conservative estimate, as the number quadrupled from 2013 to 2014 estimates, and I see no reason to assume things are going to get better.) That’s a population increase of about 3.25%. How in the Hell is Germany supposed to absorb that number? These people have little (if any) of anything. They’re blowing it all. The crazy bastards (the EUs leadership class) are blowing it all up.

* The Reuters dispatch yesterday about unemployed anesthesiologist Syrians in Sweden & Norway, which the wire service bizarrely calls “the Nordics” (not in reporting about any biker gangs AFAICT), was notably retarded. In their list of bad consequences of a flood of jobless Arabs they put “fueling far right parties” in the top priority spot; I would think the most salient bad effect to be: flood of jobless Arabs. Also they cited the Copenhagen synagogue attack as evidence of “hostility to immigrants” — sorta sounds like it could be hostility *from* them, too, doesn’t it?

* The West was evil when it colonized these people’s countries with a thin layer of administrators.

The West is evil when it objects to being colonized by them.

Somehow, it’s the West that is always evil.

Comments to Steve Sailer:

* If they had to stay in Syria the men would have to fight to defeat the other warring factions. Those who are fleeing are using the excuse that they “have” to flee to leave. Christian Arabs have been able to emigrate for decades and their communities have grown weaker and weaker as a result. ISIS atrocity tactics actually have a logic to them. They enable their rivals to be classified as refugees and given special entry status to the West. The rivals leave in large enough numbers to weaken that group which enables ISIS to gain territory.

* The average IQ of the Gulf Arab populations is about 85 in comparison with the average IQ of Western European populations of about 100. But the Gulf Arabs have the will to survive while Western Europeans have become suicidal.

* Kafirs enjoying a higher standard of living than believing Muslims is an affront to Allah.

* Why do Syrians not flee to Israel?

Because the Israelis are smart, sane, and not lead by enemies of the people.

* The refugee crisis appears to be getting worse, and, at minimum we are now being inundated with photos, and memes, that I personally haven’t seen since studying the World War Two period and its aftermath (which, needless to say, also involved huge amounts of refugees.)

This is not the first time that refugees (usually fleeing general anarchy and chaos) have become an issue in history. So then the question is how to handle it.

#1 – The most obvious way is to try to keep them out passively, by building fences and stopping trains, such as Hungary is doing now. However, this leads to photos propaganda (not saying it’s false, but propaganda is what it is) such as the heartbreaking photo of the 3 year old dead on the beach in Turkey. Of course that child could have died in any number of ways, and there’s no one for one correspondence here, but he is already being manipulated as the face of this crisis.

#2 – Another more radical solution is to stabilize the situation of the countries from whence these refugees are coming. Mostly that means Libya and Syria, particularly the latter at this point. In other words, instead of simply controlling one’s border, one seeks to control the area beyond one’s border. So already I see that Commentary magazine is implying that the US and the EU are at fault for not going to war against Syria, or against Iran (because Syria is its client) and so on.

#3 – A further more radical solution is to simply annex or colonize the areas where the threats (violence, anarchy, and refugees) are emerging. In fact this is a component of a lot of wars, partititions, and colonial expansions. Nature abhors a vacuum, and political stability abhors a political vacuum of power.

The bad part about this is that the problem isn’t going to be solved by welcoming refugees, as though that would solve anything anyway, unless one wants to have all of the public spaces in one’s country turned into refugee camps. No, there needs to be the imposition of order, which is going to involve the application of force. Unfortunately a passive posture isn’t going to work anymore. We need to be more alert, more proactive, and even perhaps a bit more hard-nosed.

It is not, by the way, my intention to argue for any more wars that the US must fight for someone else’s pipedream. It does mean that we are bound to interfere a bit more aggressively in the political arrangements of our near and distant neighbors.

MORE COMMENTS TO STEVE SAILER:

* Why should these poor Arabs have to live under the thumb of white racist Europeans when their Arab brothers have plenty of money to construct them nice new homes in the Arab world?

* Well because the “white racist Europeans” – the elites anyway – along with the Israelis and diaspora Jewry would rather have Arab refugees in Europe than Arab solidarity and nationalism ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baathism ) in the Middle East. Which is why they’re trying to destroy the last remaining remnants of Baathism in the Middle East right now, and why they’ll try to leverage the current refugee crisis to finally build up enough support to bomb or invade Syria.

* Qatar doesn’t seem to be doing much to house their fellow Arabs. You know, it’s almost as if Arab elites are more aware than European elites of just how much trouble other Arabs can be …

* Remember that these are Saudi and Gulf State elites, and they’re elites because they’ve been backed by the US and the West, and they’ve been backed by the US and the West because they’ve been anti-Shia and anti-Arab nationalism/Baathism. If they were the kind of Arab elites to support Baathism, they wouldn’t have been elites for long.

* There are entirely vast nearly empty places in Saudi Arabia. It must be cheaper to keep them there than Europe. Same thing for North Africa. There’s plenty of room in Morocco Chad, etc. The EU should pay to take them all to places in North Africa and SA.

* Watch the news reports and videos of the masses of “refugees,” and note how overwhelmingly adult and male they are. These aren’t refugees – they are people establishing a foothold on European soil. Their Third World brides will come later.

Another thing: the rules should be that refugees should have to return after their countries are stabilized. These “refugees” clearly have no plans of ever going back.

* I have been pointing out to anyone who will listen that Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain, UAE, and Israel have all failed to take a single Syrian refugee. I mentioned that into a heavily left-leaning Facebook chat and it was quite popular with no comebacks screaming racism just yet.

One other thing I learned is that Germany actually sends refugees back after the wars ends. They took a huge number of Yugoslavs in the early nineties but after the war ended they managed to repatriate quite a few of them. So the Syrians paying big money to get to Germany are very likely going to get sent back to Syria in a couple years. That’s the plan at least.

As for Iceland it is pretty dreary there nine months of the year. I think those status whoring Icelanders are pretty safe in that not many Syrians would want to, let alone can or will get there.

The last little cynical thing I was thinking of is that of all the possible migrants in the Middle East / African regions, Syrians are pretty much the whitest. Is Germany being smart by filling up on the whitest refugees but when the next batch of say, Sub-Saharan Africans start arriving in Europe in massive numbers, Germany can rightfully claim they are full and others must take these less-white newcomers?

* Brutally suppressing and crushing internal dissension is critical to developing solidarity and nationalism. The ideological and political infrastructure to implement Arab solidarity and nationalism was challenged and attacked by the US because it was regarded as hostile to its interests.

* India has a giant wall & moat around Bangladesh. Saudi Arabia is building a hi-tech wall against Iraq. China built the world’s longest wall against barbarians thousands of years ago. The Romans built a wall to keep the Scots out 2,000 years ago. Israel has a very tall fence to keep out Africans and if that doesn’t work baton and bean bag rounds.

Walls are in, mate.

* Just suppose that the 1965 Immigration Act was never passed, and furthermore, none of the ‘civil rights’ BS of that era ever got any traction.
Imagine, if you will, that at this day, the USA was still the Wasp dominated nation of old.
Imagine, again, that somehow a bloody civil war had erupted in a still ethnic Belgian Belgium.

Then, it would be likely that the USA would offer any Belgians who sought it refuge, purely on the emotive and instinct grounds that ‘they are our people’.
Such a nation, though, would not make the same offer to Africans or Syrians.