Millions of individuals fleeing Syria and other Arab Muslim nations that were systematically destabilized over the last several years by the regime of Barack Hussein Obama are attempting to enter Europe. This, in turn, has resulted in political pressure being put on the White House to allow an undisclosed number of these persons – who are being referred to as “refugees” by the international community and the press – into the United States.
Some Washington lawmakers have expressed concern that relaxing our immigration regulations yet further to accommodate these displaced persons would pose a grave security risk to the United States (as though the Obama administration is concerned with such trifles), and that anyone being considered for admittance must be properly vetted for potential ties to terrorist groups.
Though it is doubtful, one hopes that they would be more thoroughly scrutinized than the tens of thousands of Syrian and Somali “refugees” that Obama has furtively spirited into the U.S. over the last few years.
While the obsequious Western press showcases drowned children washing up on Turkish beaches and rioting over train passage into Europe, there’s little doubt that Barack Hussein is eagerly rubbing his palms together in anticipation of allowing untold numbers of malefactors into the country now that the approval of the international community and gullible Americans is at hand.
Let’s keep it simple and leave aside the folly and peril of America attempting to repeat Europe’s multicultural experiment after witnessing how this has destroyed Europe. Nor must we belabor the point that there is no assimilating a minority group that has no desire to be assimilated, thus any proposed increase in allowances for such émigrés is obviously contraindicated. Finally, our nation being too economically strapped these days for such a display of largesse is so agonizingly clear that it doesn’t even merit discussion.
“Not only are Syrians resorting to desperate measures to seek a better life for themselves and their families in Europe, but they are dying in the process …” – David Miliband, president, International Rescue Committee
Gotta love that “seeking a better life” bilge to rationalize America expediting her Obama-assisted suicide – which Miliband did on the same day when he chimed in with others’ calls for America to throw open its borders to the displaced Arab Muslims.
Of course, we’ve been hearing that propaganda for decades referencing illegal immigrants from Mexico, haven’t we? “Seeking a better life for themselves north of the border.” No doubt that phraseology was calculated to engender our sympathy, as though the entirely understandable motivations projected onto poor little oppressed Pablo by liberals accorded him the right to partake in that which he had no role in establishing (and to which he has since demonstrated he has no intention of contributing).
Well, we accommodated poor little oppressed Pablo in his quest to escape the grinding poverty of his south-of-the-border septic tank to the tune of tens of millions just like him, and were deceived into overlooking the abject insanity of doing so from cultural, economic and national security perspectives.
Now we have MS-13 gang members, Zetas, drug-cartel soldiers, assorted Africans, Arabs, Asians and who-knows-who “seeking a better life for themselves” as they stream unmolested across our border with the easy grace of cockroaches on a dimly lit tenement floor.
That being the case, in considering how to put up these alleged refugees, we might as well throw critical thinking and caution entirely to the wind, right?
For example, we certainly wouldn’t want to ask why some of the oil-rich Arab Muslim countries aren’t providing asylum for these refugees, because we would discover that they don’t want to risk being deluged by jihadis. We might learn that jihad is prioritized above humanitarianism in Arab Muslim culture, and that wealthy Muslim nations will pour billions into Islamist expansionism (mosques, madrassas, weapons), but they won’t prepare for the inevitable humanitarian crisis that lurks around the corner for every nation, even when they know it will threaten fellow Muslims.
And why would we remind ourselves of how for months, we have been railing against the Obama administration’s cruel summary dismissal of thousands of asylum-seeking Christians and other religious minorities who are being enslaved and murdered by al-Qaida and the ISIS terror group in the very same Arab Muslim nations from which the refugees in Europe hail? If we considered that bit of business, we might demand that our government categorically deny admittance to so much as one of these people.
It is also definitely worth a look at the similarities between this European refugee crisis and the “undocumented minor” onslaught that took place on our border with Mexico in 2014. One major resemblance would be the contrived flavor of the stories the European refugees related to the press and aid workers. These were very reminiscent of the scripted tall tales we heard in the background stories of “refugees” in the 2014 crisis.
I find it very curious indeed that nearly identical methods and circumstances are tending to materialize in high-profile crises around the world, wherein the uncanny character of a given calamity winds up revealing the Obama administration’s treacherous, greasy fingerprints.
So is this Arab Muslim invasion of Europe an unfortunate happenstance, or is it another crisis in the school of the Cloward and Piven strategy of orchestrated crisis (through which political change is forced via the deliberate engineering of widespread instability in social, economic or political realms)? The Marxist-derived treason of Cloward-Piven has indeed been deployed by this administration previously – in precipitating the 2014 border crisis, in what the Justice Department attempted to bring about through “Operation Fast and Furious,” and in the current state of escalating tensions between inner-city blacks and police.
These are, or were, entirely contrived by the White House and entirely calculated to bring about desired (though illicit and profoundly injurious) objectives. Any who would challenge this contention are either denying, or they’re lying.