Hope this can rescue Holland. Go with a new election, and if a pro-Islamic coalition still emerges, no point still sticking the finger in the dike.

Posted by: Infidel Pride at June 30, 2006 3:14 AM

I don't like the spin the media is putting on this. they portray Verdonk as a tough enforcer of immigration policy. In reality she was just bowing to her muslim masters. I want her to go down but I want the real reason to be told.

Posted by: pissedoffcanadian at June 30, 2006 3:31 AM

Americaningermany, I wouldn't advise anyone to go preaching anything in Somalia. It is the absolute basket case of all basket case failed states, and it is an absolute no-hope lost cause. Holland has not YET reached that stage, and it might still be possible to save it.

As for Verdonk and her so-called 'hard line reforms', they are pathetic and will achieve nothing substantial in the war on Jihad. The only policies that are likely to do this are a complete ban on any further muslim immigration and the forced repatriation of any muslims who call for sharia law, support terrorism etc,etc.

That's the way I see it, anyway.

Posted by: enemyofislam at June 30, 2006 3:47 AM

Mr. Spencer,

This was anything *but* anti-dhimmitude from D66.It was a brazen and unfortunately successful attempt to trip up a government in order to secure early elections. Support for the Left is slipping and waiting for the scheduled elections May next year is not in the Lefts interest. This is something just short of a coupe.

Let's review the order of things here

1)A Left wing program does a hatchet job on Hirsi Ali, accusing her of lying
2)Hirsi Ali herself admits she has not been truuthful in her application for citizenship
3)Verdonk is forced to act. Admittedly she acted a little too rash
4)Parliament, and the Left specifically demand Verdonk does everything in her power to secure Hirsi Ali's citizenship.
5)Verdonk does everything in her power to secure Hirsi Ali's citizenship.
6)The Left is angry that Verdonk does everything in her power to secure Hirsi Ali's citizenship. and demand her resignation in a motion of distrust.
7)The motion fails (64 to 79)
8)Despite the majority of parliament expressing trust in the minister and the cabinet, D66 takes it upon itself to trip up the government, never mind the majority.

This isn't anti-dhimmitude. This is a big step to a government inhabited by uber-dhimmies. Labour is set to become the biggest party. Leader Wouter Bos has expressed opinions equating islamophobia to anti-semitism. That's what is quite possibly in store for us, government-wise.

D66 anti-dhimmi? How I wish.

Posted by: EJ at June 30, 2006 3:51 AM

"I know, I am a bigot because I do not want ANY moslems in our countries.
I am also bigotted enough to say that I also do not want to be around devil-worshippers who drink blood and sacrifice babies."

Great googlymoogley!!!

where do you hang out????

Look: Your enthusiasm is in order, but Hirsi Ali definitely qualifies as an ally in the war against Islam, she has risked a lot more than many of us ever will and the backstabbing going on in the Dutch parliament is what this is all about, nothing else...

Posted by: sheik yer'mami at June 30, 2006 4:29 AM

So they decide to crack down on Muslims and she is the big fish? Something is rotten in Holland, and it ain't dead fish!

Posted by: Dumbo at June 30, 2006 5:06 AM

If one is claiming asylum to get away from an oppressive islamic nation, wouldn't it also be reasonable to expect that individual to give up the practice of the very religion he claims has caused his oppression in his homeland, that is, islam?

Yes, it would. We shouldn't take any asylum seekers from Muslim countries unless they are apostates.

This sounds harsh, but is it? Muslim asylum seekers can go to other Muslim countries. The UK, at any rate, is tiny, and there are so many non-Muslim asylum seekers wanting to come here. Any asylum seeker facing genuine persecution will be glad of any country that takes them in. They have no automatic entitlement to live somewhere as good as here.

Posted by: Interested at June 30, 2006 6:39 AM

OT

Two Algerian refugees who came to Australia in 1992, have been given 15 year jail sentences for drugging,stealing and raping their victims.

The fact that they were Algerian was mentioned by the commercial channels but not by the ABC, which is the government channel.

Posted by: Voltaire at June 30, 2006 7:32 AM

What a "heart warming" article, with just a touch of bias reporting.

Moved by plight, French shelter illegals:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20060629/wl_csm/ofugitivex

"But through a combination of demonstrations, sympathetic media coverage, and political savvy, the sanctuary movement has managed to at least temporarily put a human face on the issue..."

Posted by: adobe at June 30, 2006 8:48 AM

Voltaire

The ABC is financed by the Australian Government yes, but it does NOT pay lip service to the govt. Quite the contrary.
It is a left-greeny biased channel.

I am surprised they ever say anything bad about muslims.

And more OT:
Did you watch "4 Corners" the other night?

The car-stealing and re-birthing rackets in OZ are run by mo's,,,surprise, surprise! They even force people out of their cars with weapons!!
I have to say I was surprised the ABC even ran with this topic! these creeps seem to excel in ruining everything.

OT again
Americaningermany
You were great with abu nutcase on the other thread (JW)!!

Whoever said we are getting more trolls is correct.

Posted by: Gramfan at June 30, 2006 9:20 AM

Hi Gramfan,

No, I didn't see 4 corners. I'll try and have a look at the repeat.

Posted by: Voltaire at June 30, 2006 9:30 AM

"This Hirsi Ali broke the law. She falsified her asylum papers. While I have to admire the woman for standing up against islam, she did break the law. She should be preaching against islam in her native Somalia!"
-- from a posting above

Hirsi Ali explained fully the various statements she made about her background, said she had identified herself improperly, but it now turns out that what she thought was improper (something to do with her clan name) in fact was correct so that she did not lie after all. In any case, it's all ridiculous. She accepts and respects and defends Holland, and the rights it provides. She respects and accepts and defends Holland and its emphasis on the individual far more than many people born in Holland, who seem in what she calls their "collectivism" to endorse the notion of an autonomous Muslim community free to impose its own Muslim laws and customs on other Muslims even in Holland.

The very idea of sending Hirsi Ali back to Somalia, where she would not last one minute, shows a frightening misunderstanding of how important of her, and our, and their, real situation. Thank god she is in the West, is intelligent, articulate, and -- let's not ignore it, for it is a valuable asset in getting media attention and even in helping to convince doubters -- very attractive.

Posted by: Hugh at June 30, 2006 9:37 AM

"Thank god she is in the West, is intelligent, articulate, and -- let's not ignore it, for it is a valuable asset in getting media attention and even in helping to convince doubters -- very attractive."

For Christ's sake, man, you left out black. Must we treat ourselves like children forever?

Posted by: Television at June 30, 2006 9:50 AM

This is sort of similar to what happened in Spain. The MSM misinformed people as to why people didn't vote for the government after the madrid bombings. People were upset with the government for being dhimmis. Instead it was seen as people being against the war. So when people rightfully didn't vote for the government, the even more evil new government used it as an excuse for full blown dhimmitude. It seems when governments act like dhimmis the MSM distorts the message so much that the resulting election is almost a win win situation for the muslims. In the spanish elecion a third choice was needed. Something tells me we are in a similar situation in the netherlands now.

Posted by: pissedoffcanadian at June 30, 2006 10:08 AM

she did not lie after all.

She did lie about the amount of time she had spent in Somalia. But that's about it, and in any case, so what? She is an asset to the West. I wish she'd come to England - can't we swap her for Madeleine Bunting?

However, I'm with Americaningermany on the general point about not taking Somali or other Muslim asylum seekers. As Hirsi Ali was a Muslim at the time she entered Holland, she would have been excluded. But for every Hirsi Ali, there are thousands of Muslim asylum seekers who will not fit in and who mean us harm.

If it becomes known that, in order to claim asylum in a nice country like Holland or the UK, Muslims should renounce Islam, then more of them will do so. As for those who won't - do we want them?

Posted by: Interested at June 30, 2006 10:17 AM

Hi Voltaire
Very OT but here you go!

It was pretty bad news, I must say!
=================================================

http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/content/2006/s1670135.htm

Car Wars
Reporter: Chris Masters

Broadcast: 26/06/2006

If your late model car goes missing, don’t expect to see it again soon.

Chances are it’s being rapidly dissected by swarming thieves, the parts packed into containers destined for ports in the far off Middle East. There, the stolen pieces will be unpacked and assembled like a mosaic, then rebirthed as a shining "new" vehicle.

Or maybe it’s only headed interstate, to start a new life as a "clone" of another vehicle, with stolen identity and forged plates.

The inventiveness of Australia’s stolen car industry seems limited only by its imagination. Its practitioners are becoming more brazen and more artful. At one end there are the scammers who inhabit the smash repair game or who swipe old cars and sell them for scrap. At the other are the balaclava-clad thugs who use axes and baseball bats and terror to force drivers from luxury vehicles.

While police can take credit for a recent dip in total car thefts, still about 85,000 cars are stolen every year – one every six minutes - and many are never recovered.

Authorities can only check a small percentage of containers so they can only guess at the number that end up overseas. Their suspicions were first aroused by a spike in exports of apparently legal parts to the Middle East. A huge police operation then uncovered a virtual Aladdin’s Cave of stolen vehicles and parts, bound for the Middle East. Now police believe that Middle Eastern crime groups, centred on south-western Sydney, have captured the biggest share of this lucrative market.

As Four Corners reports, cars are stolen to order: make, colour, model, year; a wreck is bought legally in Brisbane and a vehicle of the same type is stolen in Sydney so that it can be rebirthed and sold in Melbourne; gangs fight at auction rooms over who will buy the wrecks that can be used for rebirthing.

Chris Masters reveals the various tricks of the stolen car trade and traces the spectacular crash of one big syndicate following an investigation that ran for six months and involved 450 police and extensive phone taps.

While insurers and smash repairers blame each other for encouraging crooks, technology may hold the key to beating them. Masters looks at an Australian proven anti-theft invention – the spraying of thousands of uniquely coded microdots on the car’s underbody – and asks why manufacturers have been slow to take it up.

"Car Wars" – on Four Corners, 8.30 pm Monday 26 June, ABC TV.

This program wil be repeated about 11 pm Wednesday 28 June; also on ABC2 digital channel at 7 pm and 9.30 pm Wednesday.

Posted by: Gramfan at June 30, 2006 10:22 AM

Americaningermany if Hirsi Ali was to preach against islam in somalia she would be killed she could also get killed by islamic finatics if she was to be deported back to somalia also a lot of finatics know that she has been preaching against islam in the west and i am sure they wouldnt waste a single second looking for her to kill her her life would be in danger if she was to be deported back

Posted by: Greek Gurl at June 30, 2006 10:29 AM

As far as the Netherlands is concerned when it comes to Hirsi Ally; it's pretty much academic now since she has accepted a job in Washington with the American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research, a think tank.

I look forward to her being a great voice for knowledge about Islam in America.

Posted by: Mackie at June 30, 2006 10:32 AM

this is what muslims say about hirsi ali http://www.islamophobia-watch.com/islamophobia-watch/2006/5/15/ayaan-hirsi-alis-lies.html

Posted by: Greek Gurl at June 30, 2006 11:20 AM

Mackie, exactly. Its the Dutch's loss and America's gain. I certainly hope that she will be remain vocal and will get plenty of media attention in the United States.

Posted by: Abu Allah at June 30, 2006 11:22 AM

Greek Gurl:

More taquiyya, and kitman for dhimmis' and liberal media to digest.

Posted by: Mackie at June 30, 2006 11:36 AM

How can one person bring down a government single handed?

Posted by: William Wallace Ellerslie at June 30, 2006 11:38 AM

americaningermany, have you ever considered changing your handle to americanonadifferentplanet?

BTW, Hugh, EJ's is right when he/she says that this has nothing to do with anti-dhimmitude.
It's a coup by the left in three stages. And a perfectly executed one, I might add.
Given that some are still babbling about Hirsi Ali lying on her application, just shows how effective their smoke and mirrors were. Macchiavelli has nothing on the Dutch left.

Posted by: Kim Hartveld at June 30, 2006 11:51 AM

Let's take a look at a short Bio of Ayaan Hirsi after she came to the Netherlands. Also note that she became the second most popular politician in the Dutch parliament which speaks to why Mrs Verdonks quick, and rash condemnation of Hirsi did not play well with the Dutch people, and a great deal of the politicians even though Verdonks survived a no confidence vote .

Born in 1967 in Mogadishu (Somalia), Ayaan Hirsi attended secondary school in Kenya. From the middle of the nineties she studied political science in Leiden (Netherlands). In the same period she had various jobs, such as cleaning woman and mail sorter. In 2001-02 she was an interpreter and translator. In 2002 she joined the think tank of the Dutch Social Democratic Party. In 2003, she switched over to the Dutch right-of-the centre (classical) liberal party, the VVD, because of this party's firm stand on immigration issues and became a member of Parliament.

She was raised as a Muslim but has recently become agnostic. She has an incredible command of the Dutch language and is a sharp debater. She abhors woolly, placating rhetoric, which is so typical of Dutch politics. According to a recent poll she ranks second among the most popular politicians in Holland. And her political star is still rising. Yet her political message stirs a lot of controversy, especially among Muslim radicals.

It was the criticism by the late Pim Fortuyn (the Dutch politician who was killed by an animal rights activists) of the impact of Islam on Dutch society which sharpened her awareness of the threat of Muslim radicalism. Fortuyn openly qualified the Islam as a backward religion and Ayaan Hirsi Ali shares this view. When she was still in the socialist party she wanted to put the issue high on the political agenda. But the party did not support her view, because it was afraid that it would play into Fortuyn's hands. Ayaan Hirsi Ali is especially critical of the lack of tolerance for dissenting opinions among Muslims, as well as their oppression of women.

According to Ayaan Hirsi Ali, the emotions incited by her statements, especially among radical Muslims, underscores the state of the Islam. (Radical) Muslims are incapable of self-reflection. Consequently, any critical remark is perceived as an offense.

She believes that the Dutch are insufficiently aware of the threat which a rapidly growing radical Islam poses for the basic values and norms of Dutch society.

Because of her outspokenness and the collaboration of a fifteen minute film on the treatment of women in Islam with Theo VanGogh who was murdered on a public street by a Muslim,the incident became internationally known and she has and continues to received death threats and needs permanent personal protection.

Posted by: Mackie at June 30, 2006 12:03 PM

Albania, Algeria, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Benin, Brunei, Burkina, Cameroon, Chad, Comoros, Djibouti, Egypt, Gambia,Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan,Lebanon, Libya, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Mauritania, Morocco, Mozambique, Niger, Nigeria,Oman, Pakistan, Palestine, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Sudan, Suriname, Syria, Tajikistan, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, Uzbekistan Western Sahara AND Yemen. Posted by: americaningermany

What exactly was your source for this? Some of the countries listed above in bold have Muslim populations less than 20%. As a result, I wouldn't try and block people from these countries. And Guyana or Mozambique - do they really have Islamic governments?

Posted by: Infidel Pride at June 30, 2006 12:07 PM

If it becomes known that, in order to claim asylum in a nice country like Holland or the UK, Muslims should renounce Islam, then more of them will do so. As for those who won't - do we want them? Posted by: Interested

It is halal for Mohammedans to lie about converting away from Islam if they think they will be persecuted. I forget the exact Quran verse under which that is sanctioned, but remember, for all the genuine apostates that you could be getting, you could also be getting a high number of fraudulent apostates i.e. closet Muslims.

While I welcome the genuine apostates who are in dar ul Harb already, let newer apostates flee to moderate Muslim countries, like Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan, Tunisia, Eritrea. There is no reason why any infidel country, including Britain, should be expected to have them.

Isn't Europe getting enough Infidel refugees/immigrants from Infidel countries in Africa, Americas (e.g. Guyana), Asia (e.g Myanmar)? Is there such a shortage of workers (i.e. a replacement population) that Europe has to take in a high number of immigrants?

Posted by: Infidel Pride at June 30, 2006 12:21 PM

It is halal for Mohammedans to lie about converting away from Islam if they think they will be persecuted.

Yes, it is. Of course they would have to be monitored for signs of reversion to Islam. And the sincerity of their apostasy should be tested using the Israel test.

However, apostates from Islam have so much to teach us, that I think we would be unwise to exclude them.

Posted by: Interested at June 30, 2006 12:41 PM

"Free speech" in the Netherlands: http://www.writely.com/View.aspx?docid=ah6sxjndq9qq_53kt9zs

Posted by: scaramouoche at June 30, 2006 2:28 PM

I think the solution is simple: stop all muslims immigranting to other countries until Saudi Arabia allows Christians, Jews, Buddhists and people of all faiths to come and go freely and build Churches, Synogogues, Temples and hole free religious services in Mecca, Medina and all of Saudi Arabia.

Posted by: Bohemond_1069 at June 30, 2006 3:54 PM

The simplest solution is to treat Islam the same way the we treated Communism during the cold war or Nazism in the 1930s. This would mean making Muslims ineligible to immigrate but freely accepting refugees from Islam.

Copts, Assyrian Christians, Pakistani Hindus, Malaysian Chinese, Indians, and Orang Asli would all qualify but not their persecutors. People like Hirsi Ali would be treated with the same status that we treated people like Solzhenitsyn. These defectors were protected from communist retaliation and honoured and we should do the same for defectors from Islam.

It is true that some Muslim jihadists may use takiyya to hide among the refugees, but we can deal with them just like we dealt with communist moles hiding among defectors: i.e. imprison or execute them for espionage. As for the home-grown Muslims, deal with them just like we dealt with the home-grown commies or nazis, by blacklisting, constant scruitiny, and exposure.

During the Cold War the West also played off Maoist China and Tito's Yugoslavia against the Soviets and today we should help increase and inflame all divisions with Islam. To keep them fighting among themselves is to the advantage of the free world.

Posted by: Provoslavni at June 30, 2006 4:59 PM

> The simplest solution is to treat Islam the same
> way the we treated Communism during the cold war
> or Nazism in the 1930s.

So your solution, as it were, is to repeat "treat(ments)" that manifestly FAILED.

The Nazis obviously were never contained, and ultimately it took a total-commitment war to destroy them. The Soviets pretty much did as they pleased for 70 straight years, and only collapsed due to inertia -- there's no reason on earth why, for instance, a more bloody-minded Gorbechev couldn't have behaved exactly as the Chinese dictatorship did toward its protestors, and thereby continued the regime.

Talk and containment NEVER placate evil.

It must be destroyed.

Posted by: Mike Schneider at June 30, 2006 5:59 PM

Mike,
Read my post again. I was writing specifically about immigration policy and except for the last paragraph, nothing more. I agree with you that containment not only was a miserable failure but think perhaps it may actually have prolonged communism.

Nevertheless, the United States, at least, did keep dedicated communists from immigrating and spreading their virus internally and several false defectors were prosecuted. As soon as WWII begain even homegrown nazis such as the German-American Bund found themselves subject to arrest, internment, or deportation.

Posted by: Provoslavni at June 30, 2006 6:18 PM

While I look down on the Dutch government for its treatment of Ayaan Hirsi Ali, I don't think that any Western country needs to be so rash as to ban all Muslim immigration. I teach in a community where there are many immigrants from Muslim Africa (Sierra Leone, Mali, Guinea), and a lot of the younger generation is being drawn away from Islam by a combination of secular temptation, disgust with radical imams in mosques, and a quiet outreach by mostly African-American Christians. For many in Christian missions, the European Muslim diaspora has long been the wedge whereby an Evangelical witness was able to penetrate countries like Algeria, Morocco, and Turkey. I know at least one Somali immigrant boy who wants to join the US army after high school because his family frankly admires everything it and the country it serves stands for. I pray the young fellow gets all of God's blessings (and as a Christian, I believe that means spiritual rebirth, among other things--see John 3).

Yes, we need to be more vigilant, and there are classes of immigrants whom we should not admit. There are also lots of people whom we need to deport. We got it in spades for allowing the despicable blind Egyptian Abdurrahman in. However, we should not underestimate our own absorptive resources or the fact that many Muslim emigrants are, by their act of relocation, ready and willing to accept a few changes.

ANd, if I were a consular officer, I would pray for the privilege of signing Hirsi Ali's visa.

Posted by: Kepha at June 30, 2006 6:34 PM

I'd say, if the "Muslim apostates" want to do some real good for the world, they should stay in their own countries and fight against the tyranny of Islam. It strengthens Mohammadism to allow them to free themselves of their internal thorns.

The West has enough problems with the infil-traitors that the idiot leadership/business interests invited in since the 1960's.

It's too crowded in the U.S. and Europe already.

Islam should learn the hard-knock lessons of harsh reality by discovering how to feed their own out-of-control populations and developing their own industries, etc., etc., etc.

No more immigration until Islam reforms.

Posted by: profitsbeard at June 30, 2006 8:38 PM

"and a quiet outreach by mostly African-American Christians."
-- from a posting above

One hopes that is true. One wishes that effort well.

Posted by: Hugh at June 30, 2006 9:56 PM

I agree with Bohemond. The solution is simple. The World puts this condition that unless all islamic countries allow the building of churches, temples and synagogues, the World will not allow the building of mosques. This will be a good start, and the measure is not drastic by any standards. If only this were implemented, we would be seeing a lot more progress. The out right prevention of muslim migration, much though I like it, is too drastic a step for the diplomatic fuddy duddies. The World can start with this, and the rest shall follow.

Posted by: arjun.sevak at July 1, 2006 1:40 AM

I agree with several posters above who maintain that this is hardly a sign of "anti-dhimmitude", or more accurately Anti-Jihad. It's also inaccurate and deplorable for media to depict Ms. Verdonk as a "hard-line immigration minister." She's anything but. Her actions were simply a political expedient, and disgustingly cynical. She was attempting to toss bloody red meat to the anti-immigration forces beginning to roil in Holland, and she chose a convenient scape goat and a serious thorn in her side: Ms. Ali.

Remember that Rita Verdonk's first reaction to the murder of Theo Van Gogh was to suggest that all native born Dutch with less than an 8th grade education should take Islamic sensitivity training -- as if Mr. VanGogh's murder was a result of blue collar Dutch ignorance and native Dutch intolerance of Muslims rather than a Muslim Jihadist murder by a Dutch Muslim inspired by Islam. Verdonk is a slithering creature.

I view the situation with Ms. Hirsi Ali to be symptomatic of the incredible challenges and difficulties faced in the West vis-a-vis Islam. I deeply disliked the idea that she lied in order to gain access to the West. I think her case is indicative of how a majority of asylum seekers have come to the West -- very often clearly under extremely dubious circumstances.

Just because her outlook on Islam comports with certain anti-Jihadists doesn't mean her lies and deception should be ignored.
We have cheapened the significance of being citizens of the West by tolerating lies and deceptions or illegal immigration. This is one of our worst crimes against ourselves in recent years. When we reduce citizenship or access to the West in the most base and economic terms, or allow citizens to lie and cheat to come here, and then encourage them to bring in their entire extended families -- should we be surprised in the slightest when those admitted under such circumstances hold us in complete contempt? It's another example of liberal appearing policies concealing malignant paternalism and stupidity.

The exact same can be said of the horrible invasion by Mexicans today. They don't come here with any love for America, or any respect for American laws. They come here with contempt -- and their contempt is fostered and magnified once they find the road remains difficult upon arriving in the US. Somehow, rather than recognizing that they have transgressed, or that their own lack of qualifications are the things which impede their progress -- their ire is focused against America -- they wrap themselves up in righteous indignation that their God given right to prosper in our land has not been honored by us -- and in the end we become the transgressors against their hurt sense of pride, and their damaged sense of entitlement. To the extent that we feed their sense of cultural pride -- all the money spent on aiding them -- all the projects and aid to 'help' them -- all of these things boomerang and help to amplify their sense of entitlement, and to augment their frustrations against us. None or little of it translates into efforts on their parts to assimilate or feel grateful in the slightest.

It won't surprise me in the slightest to find a decade hence that we are plagued with marxist terrorist Hispanic organizations who are bent on the destruction and Reconquista of the USA, given such dynamics.

Once upon a time, being an American or a European held some mystique -- some prestige -- some value. We've freely given away something very precious that we owned, and in so doing, have abased ourselves and the currency of citizenship. Why should they cherish citizenship, or bear us any good will under such circumstances? They have not paid sufficiently to come, at least not paid sufficiently to those who are supposedly the stewards of the West. Such persons have not earned the right to come here. It's a disastrous mistake for us to imagine that people who have not earned citizenship by believing in us and our ways, or who have lied to obtain membership, end up utterly hating the club, and ultimately rejecting membership once here.

Ms. Ali may be one of the rare ones who seems to understand where her bread is actually buttered. Maybe that's a good enough reason to ignore other aspects of such cases. Maybe such persons should be forgiven once they see the light after lying and being showered with privileges and with our hard won rights. But something about that seems extremely wrong to me. But perhaps in a world where so many things seem even more wrong and broken perhaps it's all we can do. But isn't such a surrender another sign of our lack of confidence in our notions of fair play -- ethics -- propriety? Another example of an idea which holds itself out as one thing, a noble thing, but is in reality an ignoble thing, like giving away citizenship to liars and cheats under the guise of openness, charity, and largesse and getting, rather than gratefullness and productivity, a bunch of inimical haters of ourselves and our system?

Posted by: jsla at July 1, 2006 3:54 AM

We have cheapened the significance of being citizens of the West by tolerating lies and deceptions or illegal immigration.

And what's even more frustrating is that legal migrants have to jump through all sorts of hoops to get into many Western countries. Pay huge fees, fill out reams of forms, prove their worth, health and skills, and wait months, even years, to be accepted. The U.S. doesn't even seem to have a skilled migrant program like we do in Australia.

Yet sneak across the border of any Western country, or show up on a tourist visa and just never leave (which is a lie in itself), and that's okay. You're rewarded, even if you are nothing but a huge financial burden, or even a danger to the society you've forced your way into. It's nuts.

Posted by: feralee at July 1, 2006 10:24 AM

> Nevertheless, the United States, at least, did
> keep dedicated communists from immigrating and
> spreading their virus internally

And had jack-squat success to show for it.

Today, every Congressman with the exception of Ron Paul can be accurately described as a "socialist" whether he accepts the label or not. All major media outlets are socialist. All universities and public education apparati are firmly dominated by socialism.

At the street-level, you can read the daily horror-show right here.

"It's France here now." -- Martin McPhillips

Posted by: Mike Schneider at July 1, 2006 2:53 PM

> It's too crowded in the U.S.

Obviously you've never been outside of a metro area in the US.

Posted by: Mike Schneider at July 1, 2006 2:57 PM

> I deeply disliked the idea that she lied in
> order to gain access to the West.

Would YOU LIE in order to escape a life of RAPE and SLAVERY? What do you think "life" consists of for women under Islam?

The astounding stupidity (there is no other word for it) of some contributors here is just mind-boggling.

And what right do commie-collectives known as "governments" have to declare ownership of all the dirt on earth, and control the flow of humans about on it like cattle in a feed-lot chute?

- - - -
As Islam goes to war against "Western" (socialist) governments, I am able to muster nearly as many tears as I did when I heard that Hitler's Nazis and Stalin's communists once battled it out on the eastern front.

Posted by: Mike Schneider at July 1, 2006 3:04 PM

Don't tell me: Wacko in Waco? ( Gebback in dat hidey hole witda ammo n yall's poaknbeens innacan, heeah? Da Rapcha shonufs cummin now! )

Posted by: jsla at July 1, 2006 4:55 PM

Mike,

The US didn't always act on this policy of officially excluding Commmunists but at least the policy did officially exist. It seems that the feds today are openly facilitating the advance of Islam both inside and outside the US. But then again, anything the US federal government does is likely to be incompetent at best and more likely destructive to everything sensible.

Amen to your observation about Ron Paul. He is the only representative you can count on to stand on principle. Sometimes I thing he's the only congressman that's actually read the constitution.

As for the slide into socialism, that's been going on since Lincoln and his thugs crushed Southern independence and put the US on the road to empire. Of course no one would dare call themself a "socialist" today: Their preferred term is "neo-conservative" but they're still a bunch of Trotskyites.

Posted by: Provoslavni at July 1, 2006 5:41 PM

I wish every reader of this web site would get the book "While Europe Slept : How Islam Is Destroying the West From Within" by Bruce Bawer.
It is the finest culture war book in print. It is distinctly useful for consciousnes raising of Americans who don't have a feeling for the European spirit of the times. I bought nine extra copies and gave them away to friends and family.

Posted by: Nashville Gene at July 2, 2006 6:31 PM

Provo, you're quite right about nearly all of that -- and anybody who thinks more power in the hands of socialist governments is a bulwark against religious fanaticism is a goddamned moron.

IMO, the very best possible thing that could happen in the world today are simultaneous ten-megaton strikes upon Washington and that stupid black rock.

Posted by: Mike Schneider at July 2, 2006 6:41 PM

The part Provo wasn't right on:

> As for the slide into socialism, that's been
> going on since Lincoln and his thugs crushed
> Southern independence and put the US on the
> road to empire.

The "slide" has been going on since all those assholes in Philadelphia sat down an usurped the principles inherent in the Declaration of Independance by re-subjection everyone to a federal goverment under the aegis of the odius and LIE "We the People".

To be followed swiftly thereafter by President George Washington putting down the "Whiskey Rebellion" by sending in federal troops to crush a bunch of poor sods not interested in paying his extortio-, er, taxes.

For which his face should be blown clean off Mt. Rushmore.

It'll be the 4th of July in a couple days; observe the festivities by burning a one dollar bill, and vicariously subject Washington to the actual fate he richly deserves, and is already hopefully receiving in Hell (if you believe in that sort of justice-in-the-afterlife nonsense).

Posted by: Mike Schneider at July 2, 2006 6:58 PM

(The link in the above most was suppposed to go to here.)

Posted by: Mike Schneider at July 2, 2006 7:00 PM

Mike,

Actually I agree that the roots go further back than Lincoln. In retrospect, the Articles of Confederation were superior than the federalist Constitution but the original intent of the Constitution (pre-Fourteenth Amendment) was far superior than the federal tyranny we live under today. The Muslim jihadists and the federal power grabbers both work in tandem to suppress any vestige of freedom we have left.

Posted by: Provoslavni at July 3, 2006 1:04 AM

Provoslavni and Americaningermany --- what's the point of entering a dialogue with someone who wants to see thermonukes dropped on Washington, or who pines over the Whiskey Rebellion? He's clearly insane. Daddy or Mommy probably did very nasty things to him early on because his revulsion and hatred of authority is so complete that he'd prefer to murder rather than subject himself to the rule of law. He's a traitor to the US Constitution -- and despite his fantasies about himself he's not an American and hates democracy. Clearly he's an idiot.

Posted by: jsla at July 3, 2006 12:33 PM