Are you in the mood to look at a situation of high tragedy
and see what in it may compel someone to crack up with uncontrollable laughter?
If your answer is yes, I invite you to read the latest editorial by the
esteemed editors of National Review Online (NRO.) It came under the title:
“After Brussels, Time to Get Serious,” and was published on March 22, 2016.
Because a presentation is usually made of two parts – one
being the information that's relayed; the other being the logic that weaves the
information into a coherent tapestry – it is better in this case to make a
clear distinction between the two when discussing the stream of ideas that were
strung together by the editors. And so, we put aside for now our preoccupation
with the veracity of the information that's relayed, and concentrate on the
logic of what's delivered as opposed to what's promised.
The title of the piece makes it clear that the intent of the
editors (hence their promise) is to deliver something that is serious. In
making this promise, they mean to say that nothing of what was done up to now
has been serious, but they have the formula that will change all that, and
solve the heretofore insoluble problem.
So we go through the editorial looking for the proposed
solution. We find a preamble that prepares the readers for that moment, and
then find what the editors claim to be the solution.
First the preamble: “In another part of the [city] are
roiling ghettos populated largely by Muslims from North Africa and the Middle
East – for example a Belgian-born French citizen of Moroccan descent who was
captured last week in Brussels just a few hundred yards from his childhood home
… A refusal to require assimilation of immigrants has resulted in cities
fractured along ethnic lines … As Brussels officials have admitted: 'It's
literally an impossible situation, it's very grave'”.
Now the NRO editors' solution: “Securing our borders is a
crucial step. Other measures are necessary. Ted Cruz stated, 'We need to
empower law enforcement to patrol and secure Muslim neighborhoods before they
become radicalized.' … Directing limited resources toward certain mosques and
community centers. This strategy should entail allying with the Muslims … New York City was engaged
in this sort of surveillance program. It should be restarted, and others like
it begun … Defeating the Islamic State will require eradicating it in Iraq and Syria . An air campaign backed by
American forces on the ground is the way to rip it. This war will require a
serious strategy, carried out by leaders serious about keeping America safe”.
This being the logic, we now gauge the veracity of the
information that's relayed by the editorial piece. Here is how the editors
begin to lay out what they say are relevant facts: “Decades of willful
blindness to the problem of ideological fanaticism...” Look closely at that
statement, and you'll conclude it is not a factoid but an opinion disguised as
fact. It is bogus, and so is everything else that was built on it.
What is relevant to this case is that the terrorist act
pulled in Brussels
was hatched in the French section of the city and not the Flemish. It is
connected to an event that happened in France months before, and to
another event that happened years ago. This was the time when young unemployed
French-born non-White citizens rioted in Paris
and set cars on fire to draw attention to their plight. That incident should
have served as a warning sign to the French authorities but was ignored.
Here is the difference between America
and Europe . The “new worlds” of Australia and the Americas were populated by
immigrants who left their identity and everything else behind to start a new
life with strangers. Once settled, these people remained open to accommodating
newer immigrants themselves. And the tradition continued with wave after wave
of immigrants. By contrast, the migrants who end up in Europe
learn that they must contend with indigenous populations which are not as open
to accommodating them.
But not all Europeans harbor the same level of rejection for
the newcomers. Germany
in particular that lived through a sad chapter of racist ideology in the past
has now become the most accommodating European nation to newcomers. It has a
program of assimilation that is as good, if not better, than any in the new
worlds. The other nations display various levels of acceptance or rejection ...
the French being the most chauvinistic of all as if to live up to the ideal of
Nicolas Chauvin from whose name was derived the word “chauvinism”.
This should lead us to the view that because Muslims started
settling in America
more than a century ago and turned out to be outstanding citizens, we must take
it for granted that they will continue to be outstanding.
If something can change that reality, it will be the moves
suggested by the morally bankrupt small men who pander to Jewish groups by
provoking young and immature Muslims who will be forced to challenge the system
to assert their manhood – or whatever.
This is a decades-old Jewish plan. It was put together by
Jews who pretended to be security experts and flooded the media with
suggestions on how to racially profile the Muslim population.
They said that a system of this kind was in force in Israel , and we
now see the result. They had 250 casualties in 5 months over there, a figure
that translates into 36,000 casualties per year for an America that is
60 times larger.