“Europe is for Europeans”
With too many Muslim migrants, “the continent could become ‘Muslim’ or ‘African.'”
“Only a ‘limited number’ of migrants should be permitted to reside in Europe”
According to globalist labels, these are the “racist“, “Islamophobic“, “intolerant“, “EU democracy-threatening“, “far right“, “Nazi” words of populists like Hungarian leader Viktor Orban, and Italy’s Matteo Salvini right? Throw in Donald Trump too. Except, that they are not the words of “populists” who have been logically and responsibly aiming to protect their citizenry and democratic heritage, but are constantly attacked and disparaged, even by the Pope–the blind guide sitting comfortably, wealthy and walled in at the Vatican. These words have been issued by a global leader that is deemed to be a top peacemaker who also teaches the young about how to be peacemakers: “The Dalai Lama”. His words of warning about Muslim migration should be on front pages of the news everywhere, but they won’t be, because they are not what globalists want to hear nor convey to the public. They fear that the Dalai Lama might influence citizens who have been duped into thinking that kindness and charity means to throw out all logic and fling open the doors to every and anyone regardless of their background activity or their goals.
The Dalai Lama went on to instruct:
“Receive them, help them, educate them, but ultimately they should develop their own country….I think Europe belongs to the Europeans.”
“Dalai Lama: Europe Will Become ‘Muslim’ if Migrants Allowed to Stay”, by Thomas D. Williams, Breitbart, June 27, 2019:
The Dalai Lama insisted Wednesday that “Europe is for Europeans,” warning that if too many migrants are allowed to stay, the continent could become “Muslim” or “African.”
The Buddhist spiritual leader, who has been living as a refugee in India since fleeing Tibet in 1959, told the BBC that only a “limited number” of migrants should be permitted to reside in Europe.
The 83-year-old said Europe should take in refugees and offer them an education, but then send them back to their homelands.
“European countries should take these refugees and give them education and training, then the aim is return to their own land,” he said.
The BBC host asked what should happen if migrants want to stay in their adopted countries, to which the Dalai Lama replied:
“A limited number is OK, but whole Europe eventually become Muslim country? Impossible. Or African country? Also impossible.”
Asked what was wrong with the scenario of Europe becoming Muslim or African, he said: “They themselves I think better to their own land. Keep Europe for Europeans.”
This was not the first time the Tibetan leader has voiced these opinions……

Raja says
Dalai Lama is a racist because he is NOT towing the globalists and Islamic agenda. Never mind even if he tells the truth.Truth is for poor mortals.
Kepha says
The poor fellow is seeing his own country deliberately flooded by migrants of a different culture.
Kevin says
I may be poor, but I believe in self-preservation.
Terry Gain says
Not only is he not towing the line, he’s not toeing it.
CRUSADER says
Gandhi and now the Dalai Lama, have recognized truths about society….
SATYAGRAHA may be a term which is apt…
“First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, and
…then you win!”
Well, that particular statement wasn’t from Gandhi-ji, nor from a labour union leader,
but it became an amalgamated phrase which stands firmly even today….
—————–
In June 2011, the Christian Science Monitor included the quote in its list of “the 10 most famous things never actually said,” while several high-profile politicians have attributed this quote to Gandhi.
It appeared to be in part a paraphrase from the book “Freedom’s Battle”, a collection of essays and speeches written and compiled by Gandhi. He wrote about introducing his particular form of determined, but nonviolent protest, which he termed SATYAGRAHA, from the Sanskrit and Hindi term for “holding onto truth”:
“Unfortunately for His Excellency the movement is likely to grow with ridicule as it is certain to flourish on repression. […] It is for the nation to return an effective answer by organised non-co-operation and change ridicule into respect. Ridicule is like repression. Both give place to respect when they fail to produce the intended effect. […] His Excellency resists the temptation to reply to his critics, meaning thereby that he has not changed his opinion on the many vital matters affecting the honour of India. He is ‘content to leave the issues to the verdict of history.’ Now this kind of language, in my opinion, is calculated further to inflame the Indian mind. […] It will be admitted that non-co-operation has passed the stage ridicule. Whether it will now be met by repression or respect remains to be seen. Opinion has already been expressed in these columns that ridicule is an approved and civilized method of opposition. The viceregal ridicule though expressed in unnecessarily impolite terms was not open to exception. But the testing time has now arrived. In a civilized country when ridicule fails to kill a movement it begins to command respect.”
Nonetheless, a speech by union leader Nicholas Klein in 1914 provides a closer version of the misattributed quote:
“And, my friends, in this story you have a history of this entire movement. First they ignore you. Then they ridicule you. And then they attack you and want to burn you. And then they build monuments to you. And that, is what is going to happen to the Amalgamated Clothing Workers of America.”
Gandhi’s name has been associated with this quote since at least 1982, when the Workshop Of Nonviolence Institute summed up Gandhi’s philosophy in an issue of WIN Magazine:
“Gandhi once observed that every movement goes through four stages:
**** First they ignore you; then they abuse you; then they crack down on you
and then you win.”
The misattributed quote, then, is most likely a combination of Klein’s 1914 speech combined with an attempt to summarize Gandhi’s nonviolent doctrine and philosophy.
peter says
Gandhi like our present pope lead the foundation for islaminzation of Indian sub continent . But for him we would have been far better off as a nation .
CRUSADER says
Jinnah played an enormous part!
PAKI-stan = Punjab, Afghania, Kashmir, Sindh, and Baluchistan
so… P, A, K, i, -stan
https://www.livemint.com/Opinion/TqmeVu0fCwQZlGlqvFbhwL/The-contrasting-game-theories-of-Gandhi-and-Jinnah.html
The contrasting game theories of Gandhi and Jinnah…
Gandhi’s proclivity for infusing religion into politics was a brahmastra, a weapon that, in less scrupulous hands, has turned into a thorn in our flesh…
For an iconic crusader of non-violence, M.K. Gandhi chose a curious point of entry into the Indian freedom struggle—an offer to enlist recruits for Britain in World War I (WW1). His rationale was that if Indians provided unconditional aid in an hour of need, Britain would accord dominion status to India out of a sense of moral obligation.
But, Britain had other plans. Its immediate concern, after the war, was the prospect of a strike into India from Afghanistan spearheaded by Raja Mahendra Pratap, Abdul Hafiz Mohamed Barkatullah, and Ubaidullah Sindhi. In February 1919, the colonial government imposed the Rowlatt’s Act against “sedition”. At this point, Gandhi called a nationwide strike. Martial law was declared in Punjab and police opened fire on a crowd gathered for the Baisakhi festival in Jallianwala Bagh, killing close to 1,000 people. In response, Gandhi fashioned the tools that would win India freedom—non-cooperation and civil disobedience. Even more ingeniously, he changed the goalpost by tethering the Indian freedom movement to the pan-Islamic movement that demanded, despite the destruction of the Ottoman Empire in WW1, that the mosques in Mecca and Medina remain under the control of the Caliph of Islam. This was in alignment with the goal of Hindu-Muslim unity which was one of the top three obsessions in his life, along with the reform of Hinduism and the termination of British rule.
The result was an unprecedented mobilization cutting across religious lines. By conflating the Indian cause with the cause of Islam, Gandhi had radically changed the tenor of the freedom movement, and become its unquestioned leader. Thousands of Indians gave up their jobs, lakhs of rupees were collected from the public, and Gandhi promised swaraj in a year.
In December 1921, the new viceroy, Rufus Daniel Isaacs, was rattled enough to offer talks on dominion status. Gandhi chose to reject the offer. In isolation, neither decision of Gandhi—to unconditionally provide service to the Raj in WW1 and to reject an offer to discuss dominion status—makes game theoretic sense. If Gandhi felt that the recruitment of Indian volunteers was of value to the British, he could have used this to press for concessions before providing the desired benefit. With an unconditional commitment, it was only to be expected that the British would not deliver on their end of the bargain. Similarly, while Isaacs’ offer could have been read as an attempt to make Gandhi settle for Indian autonomy and surrender the demand for the caliphate, Gandhi could have accepted the offer of autonomy, and resumed the Khilafat movement after securing sizeable concessions.
However, at the heart of Gandhi’s genius was his ability to recast the independence struggle not as a political battle but a moral crusade. He wanted to change the British from within, not coerce them. His commitment to their cause allowed him to seize the ethical high ground and justify his radical step of non-cooperation following their betrayal of trust.
Further, Gandhi’s moral crusade always rested on sound political considerations. Given the past history on war recruitment, Gandhi knew that Isaacs’ offer could not be trusted. Also, with many of Gandhi’s comrades, including the Ali brothers, in jails, participation in talks could have been seen as a sign of betrayal, and would have resulted in a precipitous loss of support.
Gandhi was opposed on both the recruitment drive and the declining of the Isaacs offer by Muhammad Ali Jinnah.
Jinnah, presciently, had no faith in the British propensity to respect ethical niceties. He argued that Indians should first be “put on the same footing as European British subjects” before being asked to fight for British interests. He was also opposed to mixing religion and politics and joined the Khilafat movement only to avoid being entirely sidelined from Muslim politics.
Jinnah’s ultimate embrace of what he once called “the communal fringe” was a political response to his marginalization within the Congress, and the decimation of the Muslim League in the 1937 elections to the state legislatures. He was hell-bent on the creation of Pakistan as a Muslim country, but one where “in course of time Hindus would cease to be Hindus and Muslims would cease to be Muslims, not in the religious sense, because that is the personal faith of each individual, but in the political sense as citizens of the state”. The present softening of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) stance, given their commitment to a “Hindu rashtra”, echoes his seductive, but entirely illusory, vision for a liberal theocratic dispensation.
The Khilafat movement ran aground when Gandhi withdrew from it following an incident of violence at Chauri Chaura in February 1922. He never regained his stature among the Muslim elite. Even prior to Chauri Chaura, there had been indications in the Mapilla violence in Kerala in 1921 that non-violence would not hold, given the level of consciousness of the public. Of course, Gandhi’s faith in the masses was “boundless”. But had he foreseen the violence, would he have engaged with Isaacs in talks?
In his memoir “India Wins Freedom”, Abul Kalam Azad, one of the towering leaders of the independence struggle who stuck by Gandhi, describes Gandhi’s intransigence on Isaacs’ offer as a decisive mistake. But it must be remembered that without the Khilafat movement, Isaacs would probably never have offered dominion status. Gandhi’s proclivity for infusing religion into politics was a brahmastra, a weapon that, in less scrupulous hands, has turned into a thorn in our flesh.
“Jinnah” (1998 movie starring Christopher Lee)
Raja says
With the glorification of gay marriages, passiveness to rape, mass murder by Moslems in the West,” Europe for Europeans” is a very far cry as they have become brain dead
Dennis says
Though he will be accused of bigotry and racism, his remarks speak to a truth that is unavoidable. The world of Islam does not allow its believers to assimilate into what the adopting society requires of its citizens. That inability is so obvious from what has already been the case in Europe, to avoid that reality is to turn your back on the truth that the free world faces. That is sad. Immigrants are expected to adopt the mores and cultures of the societies that they have moved to. America saw an influx of immigrants in the late 1800’s and early 1900’s and these immigrants, all of which came from different cultures, with their own conduct impressed upon them over the eons; yet, they were able to meld into society, and become American’s first, without allowing their prior culture, religious beliefs and customs to disable them from adapting to what becoming American first was all about. Islam does not allow its believers to do so, as Islam expects its followers to always put Islam first as the domination (only acceptable) religion, dominating political environment, dominating legal system that does not provide for equal protection and due process, a very subjugating treatment of the female agenda, and generally a belief system that precludes its believers of ever accepting what it takes to assimilate. I do not agree that free societies should educate these people as that invites problems. Sure we should help them educate, but in their own countries, among their own kind. Those are the facts of life that the free world faces today, and we must convince world leaders to understand the clear and present danger that these believers represent to all of the other societies world-wide.
Anke Leibrecht says
intentional ignorance causes the blindness to these facts..
Hugh Fitzgerald says
The Dalai Lama has been all over the place on this matter. Sometimes he praises Islam in pope-francis outreach terms, and at other times — as here — he seems to be talking sense Quaeere: does he think that India should “be for the Hindus” or, in a variant, “be for the Hindus and Buddhists”? Where do Muslims belong, in his view?
gravenimage says
+1
DP111 says
Where do Muslims belong in this view.
As humans they belong on this planet. As Muslims, there is a good case made that they be confined to a geographical area, and then no immigration or trade with that area except the very necessary.
We did something very similar to another existential threat – Soviet union, Warsaw pact and the ideology of communism that made them an existential threat.
gravenimage says
Yes–we were largely safe in the West from Jihad when Islam was isolated.
Walter Sieruk says
The Dalai Lama’s warning about the possibility of the European Union becoming Muslim in the future is a message that’s well worth heeding
For the zealous and committed Muslim in their Islamic quest are very active . They are active not only by the means of the violent and deadly jihad by also by the means of the subtle , sly ,insidious infiltration by stealth jihad.
The powerful influence of the stealth jihad should not be over looked. For what is known as the Stealth jihad otherwise called the Muslim method of Islamic Gradualism to enact Sharia law in countries of Europe In contrast to the way of the violent jihad or also called the militant jihad .This non-violent form of the jihad for Islam is a very sly, insidious, subtle and deceptive way of working for the advancement of Islam.
This Muslim scheme for achieving the goal of the Islamic agenda is as, many times, as subtly effective as it is demonically clever.
Furthermore, this Islamic gradualism, in some ways, is very similar to the instruction printed in the book entitled THE ART OF WAR by Sun Tzu. Which reads “At first, then, exhibit the coyness of a maiden, until the enemy gives you an opening; afterwards emulate the rapidity of a running hare, and it will be too late for the enemy to opposes you”
mgoldberg says
Indeed Hugh, he doesn’t but opine upon the obvious problem but not the issue of the Jihad, Jihadists, and how this relates to national sovereignty, civil and individual liberties and the deterioration of these and the populations and nations so affected. Back in my youth, I was living for a short time at a tibetan community in the states and stood guard over his door when he first visited America. I had no idea at the time what his views might be in such matters, nor my own at the time. But… the abbott of the monastery community in a private conversation flat out asked me a question about how I felt about Arab/Jewish problems. I thought it
was some kind of zen query testing me or something like that. My universalist peacefulness to all explanation I thought sounded mighty peaceful, mighty right for his ears. I asked him his thoughts on those problems, and what he said to me in a very king, forgiving yet direct manner was just this
‘Islam…. is a devil’s religion’
It took me years to come to grips with his statement. I didn’t want to internalize that, think about it, nor drill down into his reply. But years later I did.
Angemon says
And he was attacked b the usual suspects for it. Good to see he’s sticking to his guns.
Tom says
“Fear not the path of truth for the lack of people walking on it.” John F. Kennedy.
The Dalai Lama has no fear of telling the truth and I, for one, respect him for doing so.
We need more truth and less adherence to politics and political correctness if we are to regain our country and sovereignty back from the globalist left and Islamists.
gravenimage says
Dalai Lama warns: “Europe is for Europeans,” EU will become “Muslim” or “African” if migrants allowed to stay
…………………….
Glad to see him speaking the truth here. But he has, sadly, been quite inconsistent on the subject of Islam.
He is one instance:
“Dalai Lama: There is no such thing as a Muslim terrorist”
‘Any person who wants to indulge in violence is no longer a genuine Buddhist or genuine Muslim,’ says Tibet’s exiled spiritual leader
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/dalai-lama-muslim-terrorism-islam-no-such-thing-as-video-watch-speech-a7317001.html
He does not really understand the threat of Islam–still, far better than the Pope.
tim gallagher says
Thanks for that information, gravenimage, I have trouble respecting anyone who flip flops the way the Dalai Lama seems to do. It’s hard to follow the views of people who are so lacking in logic and consistency. No such thing as a “muslim terrorist” and “genuine” Muslims aren’t violent.!! Good grief. It’s impossible to be more ignorant about Islam’s nature. He must not know anything about what is in the Koran. I respect the views of people like Robert Spencer, David Wood, Wafa Sultan, Nonie Darwish, et al, and most of the commenters here at Jihad Watch, who actually know what Islam is genuinely all about, and have consistency in their viewpoint. I suspect the Dalai Lama doesn’t know much at all about Islam’s content, but, I guess, he can see the damage that is being done in Europe and hence has managed to make the right call on this occasion. Well, I guess I’d give him credit for saying something which he would probably know would be unpopular with lots of people, so that takes a bit of courage. There seem to be many people who are too afraid to ever say anything that is politically incorrect.
Paul J says
Nothing wrong with a man admitting he was wrong. The one who insists he is right even though he knows he isn’t is the one to worry about.
tim gallagher says
I agree with you, Paul J. The one thing that matters is, without a doubt, sincerity. If the Dalai Lama has woken up, that’s great. If he now turns around and says contradictory things, such as that Islam contains no calls for violence, and that there are “no Muslim terrorists”, then I’ll have zero respect for him. The point you make about people who “insist they are right even though they know they aren’t” is important. I have a huge problem with so many people, media types, politicians, et al, who still keep this protection racket for Islam going, because I just can’t believe they still think there is no problem with islam. There’s too much evidence to the contrary. I can’t believe they are sincere and just still blind to the evils of Islam. I guess they are the type of people you are talking about who actually know that what they are saying is a load of lies, yet, for some reason I don’t understand and find inexcusable, keep lying to the populations of their countries. There’s no excuse for that. We all have to be sincere and tell the truth as we see it.
gravenimage says
Tim Gallagher wrote:
I suspect the Dalai Lama doesn’t know much at all about Islam’s content, but, I guess, he can see the damage that is being done in Europe and hence has managed to make the right call on this occasion.
………………
Yes–this seems to be the case. I don’t believe that he is admitting he was wrong previously.
Here is Hugh Fitzgerald at Jihad Watch from last year on this very subject:
“Hugh Fitzgerald: Two Versions of the Dalai Lama (Part I)”
https://www.jihadwatch.org/2018/09/hugh-fitzgerald-two-versions-of-the-dalai-lama-part-i
Part II is here:
https://www.jihadwatch.org/2018/09/hugh-fitzgerald-two-versions-of-the-dalai-lama-part-ii
Part III is here:
https://www.jihadwatch.org/2018/09/hugh-fitzgerald-two-versions-of-the-dalai-lama-part-iii
tim gallagher says
As I said above, gravenimage, I can’t stand people who are dishonest. It is OK to be wrong about things, but definitely not OK to lie. I think it must be a lack of courage that makes some people lie and make apologies for Islam, even though they know it is a danger and a force for evil. As for the Dalai Lama, well he seems to be all over the place. I don’t understand people who seem to flip flop like that. It seems very strange. I think people should have some consistency in the point of view they express.
gravenimage says
I don’t think the Dalai Lama is deliberately lying, Tim–like so many, he is in denial about the threat of Islam.
tim gallagher says
You are probably right, gravenimage. He does seem to have a mixed up type of mind. You are probably right about the many people who are in denial or wilful ignorance or whatever it is, about Islam’s threat. I have trouble understanding how this denial or blindness works. You have to be so blind to reality not to have noticed the problem by now. In people that I know, even family members who are fairly left wing, I find that they have bought the whole multiculturalism is just wonderful argument (which I also believe in except that I don’t believe it can work with Muslims – with Buddhist and Christian Asians, etc, it works quite well) and so they are reluctant to say, or even see, that, hey, wait a minute, this isn’t working, and also I find them too polite (maybe too nice) to say that Muslims are creating problems in our society, that there’s a problem here.. I also find some of them have bought a lot of the leftist criticism of western society, that it has oppressed people badly in the past, etc. They feel a bit of guilt, which I’ve seen Robert Spencer mention. I will say that I have noticed some of them waking up to the problems with islam compared to the way they saw things a few years back, so that’s a bit of progress. Still, this ability of many people to ignore obvious problems does continue to amaze me. It’s quite a strange phenomenon. Maybe it gives people a more peaceful life by being able to ignore gathering problems for as long as possible.
gravenimage says
Agreed, Tim. And I have friends and family members in denial, as well, Very frustrating–but I imagine this is true of most people here.
Terry Gain says
So, it turns out that the Dalai Lama is like me: prescient and peaceful. He must be an Aquarian.
I look forward to his pronouncement that uncontrollably violent Islam is not a legitimate religion.
CRUSADER says
Britain for Britons
Sweden for Swedes
Europe for Europeans
With whatever seems lacking in the DL’s commentary,
I’ll still take this message and run with it!!!
Renate says
God bless the Dalai Lama!
Wellington says
This guy, as others have mentioned, has been all over the map on issues. He has said that Trump is not a moral man and has criticized any attempt to control illegal immigration on our southern border. Sometimes he says correct things but many times he does not. I don’t trust him.
Besides, reincarnation is a crock of shit for which no solid evidence whatsoever exists and he accepts this nonsense. This is because he is, in the final analysis, a fool. Don’t rely upon him at all.
CRUSADER says
Not true! 😉
Richard “Ram Dass” Alpert
has ample proof from LSD and ‘shroom trips
about alternate states and reincarnated lives.
Rufolino says
So variable, impossible to take the creature seriously. You don’t know where you are.
Emma says
what I find disturbing is the BBC journalist asking the Dalai Lama what was wrong with the scenario with Europe becoming muslim or african — enough said!
The Blue Raven says
I know no one wants to talk about the elephant in the room, even Robert, but the fact is this is all deliberate and part of the NWO agenda. This is not a conspiracy theory. If the shoe fits. And there is a reason they want to Islamise the west. They want its population gone by 2050. In my novel, Adam, I will go into the details of it. In case anyone wants to contact me for more information, you can Dm me on twitter: https://twitter.com/blueraventales or email me via my website: http://www.blueraventales.com/
gravenimage says
Even Islam, as destructive as it is, is unlikely to wipe out the entire population of the West in 30 years. Where did you get this?
CRUSADER says
We only have 12 years of existence left, anyway, according to “A.O.C.”
gravenimage says
🙂
CRUSADER says
Blue Raven,
Make your novel more about “War of the Worlds”
whereby the Islamists attempt a take over (in the format which
Wahhabists and Salafists and Muslim Brotherhood and 12th Imamists
have imagined and thrust upon the world)….
The Blue Raven says
Let me connect the dots for you. Muslims have more babies than western people. Up to four wives and up to dozen children. gravenimage asks where do I get my information? Douglas Murray, Katie Hopkins, Paul Joseph Watson, Tommy Robinson, Viktor Orban, to name a few. I imagine that none of you believe that there is a plot being hatched by the UN, the EU, the CFR, the Bilderberg group, Pentagon’s black budget and other secret clubs and organizations to usher in a New Word Order. But there is. You all think that you are awake. I hate to disappoint. You are not. You are only partially awake.
gravenimage says
I have never heard *any* of these Anti-Jihadists claim that Muslims will wipe out the entire population of the West in 30 years. Citations, please.
Really, things are bad enough–there is no need to make things up.
DP111 says
Asked what was wrong with the scenario of Europe becoming Muslim or African, he said:
This inane idiotic question was asked by the BBC reporter. More, the BBC reporter was female and Indian – Rajini Vidyanathan.
This uneducated buffoon ( a modern humanities graduate from a UK university), has no concept what Islam did to Hindu India, in its centuries occupation of India. It also wiped out Buddhism in lndia, a land where it was founded.
Its quite likely, that were it not for Britain, India would quite likely be Islamic.
DP111 says
Rajini Vidyanathan ( a modern humanities graduate from a UK university), has no concept what Islam did to Hindu India, in its centuries occupation of India. It also wiped out Buddhism in lndia, a land where it was founded.
Rajini Vidyanathan, clearly has no loyalty to historic Britain, and that is why she has no misgivings or regret, to see historic Britain destroyed. When and not if, Britain is Islamic, Hindu “idolators” ( in Islamic law), such as she, will be persecuted, forced to convert or driven out. When that happens, she knows she has a bolt hole back in India. Thus confirming the Dalai Lama’s view.
gravenimage says
Good posts–yes, this question is moronic.
cetude says
Dalai Lama is a very wealthy meat eater and overrated. You have to look at the person and not the religion; not all Muslims are raving maniacs. Look at China–they are a very heartless cruel government and is atheist. So you really don’t even need a religion to be brutal.
DP111 says
Not all Muslims are fanatics. But any Muslim who confirms he is a Muslim cannot go against the Koran and the example of Mohammed. He might not actually slit throats, but he will not stop the Jihad, even by words.
As far as this war is concerned Islam is an existential enemy. Same as in WWII, Nazism was the enemy but not all Germans were Nazis.
gravenimage says
The idea that ideology is immaterial is *quite* false. Islam teaches violent Jihad and we see the fruits of this in over 35,000 Jihad terror attacks just since 9/11.
infidel says
As a proud Hindu Indian, I say that extend this rule to ALL IMMIGRANTS… even those that are highly skilled and qualified. MULTICULTURALISM HAS YIELDED NOTHING BUT HEARTBREAK for the West. U have gained nothing positive out of it… save stray cases of individual brilliance and talents here and there. But collectively U have lost out… And now U are facing extinction of Ur culture… Say goodbye to immigrants at the earliest. Give them long term temp visas.. but never Ur citizenship, right to vote and for goodness sake the right to run for elected office…