Thursday, July 28, 2016

When Is Enough Enough?

Obviously, it’s an important story. So, the Daily Mail is covering it. Other news sources, not to much.

How is German public opinion reacting to the new wave of terrorist attacks? How does it see Angela Merkel’s open arms policy now? Apparently, the German public has just about had enough. Unfortunately, it takes a lot of bloodshed and a lot of sexual abuse for it to come to its senses.

The paper reports:

Angela Merkel's open door policy to refugees is no longer welcomed in Germany following four savage Muslim attacks in a week.

Attitudes to Syrians seeking asylum has hardened after ISIS suicide bomber Mohammad Daleel blew himself up outside a wine bar in the quiet in the quiet Barvarian market town of Ansbach.

Other violence over the space of four days in the last week has left Germans feeling vulnerable and afraid. A new survey found that 83 per cent of Germans see immigration as their nation's biggest challenge - twice as many as a year ago.

More than 200,000 failed asylum seekers like Daleel remain in the country - and many Germans blame Merkel for inviting more than a million refugees into the country in the past year without adequate background checks. 

The mood sweeping Germany was summed up by mother of two Anna Lissner who said she now feared for her children's safety.

The suicide bombing has proved we do not know who we have invited in.' said the 47-year-old who lives in the town of Ingolstadt, which is located on the River Danube, southern Germany.

How are the politicians reacting? Initially, far left politicians supported the policy wholeheartedly. By now, however, they are jumping on the anti-immigrant train. Members of Merkel’s own party are doing the same:

Sahra Wagenknecht, leader of the far-left Linke party, said the German Chancellor's statement 'wir schaffen das' (we can manage) when she opened the country's doors to those fleeing war zones had been found wanting.

Wagenknecht said the 'intake and integration of a large number of refugees and immigrants is accompanied by considerable problems.'

And even one of Merkel's deputies admitted Germany cannot control the number of migrants crossing their borders insisting the country needs its sovereignty back.

Stephan Mayer called immigration a 'big challenge' for law enforcement, and said the government were not able to register and control.

'We have to regain sovereignty and we have to regain the rule of rights. There's a lot of space for improvement,' he said. 

'We were not able to register and control all the migrants that crossed the German border.' 

The Daily Mail reporters interviewed German citizens. Here is what they found:

In Nuremberg, one of the oldest cities in Germany, women interviewed said they were now afraid for their safety.

Some Germans understand perfectly well why the British voted for Brexit:

Eric Bohunsky, who operated a cycle taxi service for tourists, said uncontrolled immigration into Germany was creating problems.

He said he admired Britain for voting for Brexit and securing control of their borders.

'The British people have done well to stand up to Brussels and those who dictate who can come into their country,' said the 50-year-old.

'We are heading for problems here, but I just hope there are no further attacks.

'The problem is not knowing who we have let in and what they might do.'

The question now is: how long can Merkel hold on to power? And, how long will it take for Germany to reverse its open arms policy, not just by offering therapy to the newly arrived refugees, but by sending them back where they came from?


Katielee4211 said...

And another question is; will they ever learn?

Ignatius Acton Chesterton OCD said...

And can you imagine? Citizens are upset with their governments! The nerve...

And the mainstream media outlets (in almost all countries) don't get it. Not one bit.

Brexit, Trump, you name it... they're all mystified.

I'm sure the New York Times will heap praise on Chancellor Angela for her "courage," and then go onto wonder why the "paper of record" is losing money. It's because it has become the daily missal of the American Left.

And other outlets are not much better at reporting, analyzing and digesting this new expression of the citizenry... this new phenomenon of (gasp!) sovereignty. It's all backwards. It takes inputs, processes them through the prism of yesteryear, and poops them out the other end as a vacant and irrelevant mess of gobbledygook. It's remarkable how newspeople who show up in print and on the Glowing Box are so convinced they know so much, when they demonstrate they know very little. Watch them without a teleprompter.

I read Max Boot's op-ed piece about European terrorism in today's WSJ. I usually enjoy Max Boot, but this was just weird. Basically, his piece equates the historical European political terrorist movements (first anarchists in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, and then ethno-nationalist-political movements in the late 20th century) with today's Islamic extremism. His conclusion: this is a temporary thing. I've read the piece three times because it does not compute. This isn't a temporary thing, this is the beginning! There's no equivalence at all. Comparing the Black Hand/IRA to ISIS??? Madness. Anarchists' ends are radically Leftist, as are most of the terrorist movements that Boot cites (Red Brigades, IRA, etc.). It's political, often with a local/ethnic twist, attacking political and materiel targets. These movements also usually had limited geopolitical ends. ISIS is totally different, playing on an entirely different level, attacking social and cultural targets. They have no geopolitical limits -- their mission field is the whole world, with every human being living under shariah (which is a totalitarian religious legal system). Islam is not just a religion, nor does it respect church-state distinctions or ecclesial limitations. Boot fails to recognize the distinction between ideology and religion. One could say it's all politics from the standpoint of power, but not when you look at the ends being pursued. Ideology is a system of ideas, particularly of economic and political theory... its ends are material. Certainly the IRA had clear ends... they sought to unite an island by force. Religion is a system of faith and worship, and its ends are metaphysical. ISIS wants us all -- the whole world -- living under the Caliphate, under shariah law, because of what their revealed truth informs them. There is no supernaturally transcendent revelation in economics or politics. This is where Boot's logic falls apart. At least he hates Trump.

World elites live in la-la land. My own sense is that they are failing because they are convinced of their own moral magnificence and cognitive superiority. They have forgotten what society and culture are all about. Elites increasingly live purely in the material world, and have abandoned the spiritual realm as irrelevant and unknowable. It's a fantasy world, a willful suspension of disbelief, and they are utterly convinced of its Truth. It is conceit, propelled by deceit, and yields blissfully smug ignorance. This is why the rest of us are viewed as uneducated, bitter clingers. At least we have a sense of what's at stake.

Syrian Lives Matter.