I was thinking about the Muslim refugee situation and the following elements of it in the case of Europe.
Looking at what is happening, I'd say this is brilliant as a strategic move.
-
Send in thousands of innocents and mix a few soliders in.
-
Suck up fiscal reserves by having the host pay for the parasites willingly.
-
Refugees naturally see Sharia as truth and law so they naturally demand this from the host.
-
host vs parasites disfunctional relationship: host thinks in positive terms and believes parasites are symbiotic while parasites only see host as a food source.
-
Activate soldiers and cause attacks. Host is blind to these actions and parasites now clamor against discrimination. Host agrees still thinking parasites are symbiotic.
-
Sharia law gets a foothold (London) and will spread across to other sectors by the simplistic idea of building mosques (massive gathering centers to keep parasites on track) and at the same time cause surrounding areas to bow down to Sharia law (bars, restaurants and such).
-
The Islamic phobia call to arms. Brilliant because this puts pressure on the host to accept or make a move.
-
Host if awakens will now be faced by Holocaustic recourse or if never awakens have submitted itself to invasion.
On the radio I heard that there are 1.2 billion Muslims. Let's go big and say 20% are radical. That's 200,ooo soldiers willing to die with bombs strapped to themselves and able to strike in the heart of civilian populations.
Obviously, there's a Billion non-radical Muslims and don't deserve generic hate and distrust but the issue that scares me is that all those refugees entering Europe haven't and can't be vetted.
Tokugawa Ieyasu stamped out Christianity in Japan and gave the people a choice: live and stomp and spit on a Bible or die and keep their faith. Many Christians did step and spit on the Bible and went undetground but knowing that death is waiting they didn't come out of the woodwork until the end of WWII almost 200 years later. Do we need such extreme measures?
I am personally pro-legal-immigration. However, that means you come into your host country and accept that countries way of life. Obviously, the new immigrants will bring changes but those changes should be for the better of the host country not on the level that a minority population can cause the host country to loose its identity and become the country of the immigrant. If they liked their previous country so much then they should go back. blending has happened in the past but those nationalities were still closely aligned to the host enough that new introduction of holidays, festivities, mannerisms and customs didn't change the host. A few examples are all those who came from Europe and interestingly enough many from Asia. I think a reason for this is that those immigrants could manage their religion within the host country enough that the little friction tahg does exist could be worked out.
Which makes me wonder if Islam which has been trying to invade Europe for centuries can coexist even though their origin shared from the same book. The Asian religions don't share the same book yet manages to blend in.
Can this ever work out? I really don't know. Is there anything that could help? Yes, putting all these Muslim refugees through an indoctrination program and keep them out of society until they accept to get jobs and be a part of a fruitful society. Create massive public work infrastructure if jobs don't exist but don't give them free money. But penning them up is inhumane! Is it? If they don't like it they are free to go home. Remember they want to come into the host country and need to suck it up.
view the rest of the comments →
[–] [deleted] 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
[–] WhiteRonin [S] ago
Huh? No comprende ...
[–] [deleted] 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago