Over recent decades, Europe’s radical left, trade unions, and employers have opened borders to undocumented immigrants for all the wrong reasons — ideology, political correctness, and greed. As a result, European immigration policy has been less than successful in assimilating waves of these newcomers. The French riots of 2005 were an indicator of uncontrolled immigration and failure to assimilate.
Along with France, other European Union (EU) nations have experienced religious strife arising from conflicts between Muslim strictures and European secularism.
An estimated 14 million Muslims currently reside in Western Europe, with 6 million of them in France. Many remain un-assimilated on the lower economic and social rungs of society. Islamic law (Shariah) is firmly established in the EU, with the number of Shariah courts in each country on the rise.
Rather than following a set of rules to govern civil society, Shariah courts proscribe a pattern of personal conduct. Thus some Muslims claim that international human rights, as products of Western culture, are repugnant to Islam.
In addition, Shariah interpretations differ from country to country and even from imam to imam. By allowing different laws for different ethnic groups, Shariah has the potential to balkanize a nation.
The recent history of U.S. immigration is a mirror image of Europe’s, except that the United States has fewer Muslim immigrants. United Nations (U.N.) officials complain that public opinion polls in Europe and America show a growing intolerance toward undocumented immigrants and the impact they have on national sovereignty, social and welfare programs, and yes, the environment.
U.N. officials contend that this immigration heresy is neither politically nor globally correct. In line with the U.N., immigration advocates in the Obama administration contend that the United States must welcome and provide for undocumented newcomers.
Meanwhile the leading nations of Europe are in the throes of re-thinking their immigration policies. EU nations are realizing that open borders and waves of unassimilated immigrants undermine national sovereignty and integrity.
In contrast to the U.N. position, the EU signed a pact in 2008 that includes a pledge to deport illegal aliens from European territories and to strengthen border controls. Yet illegal aliens continue to stream into Europe from the Middle East, East and West Africa, and Asia.
For example, in 2009, France dismantled camps set up by illegal aliens in the Calais area, from which undocumented immigrants were attempting to cross to Britain. In April 2010, three armed immigrants attempted to enter Britain illegally by boarding a Scottish school bus at the ferry in Calais, but they were repulsed.
Italy is intercepting illegal aliens at sea and sending them back from whence they came. In reply, twenty-four illegal aliens from Eritrea and Somalia have filed a lawsuit against Italy in the European Court of Human Rights, claiming that interception is a violation of a human right — to enter another country legally or otherwise.
Lawyers for the twenty-four East Africans argue that interception of their clients violates Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights — prohibiting torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
Supporting their case are immigrant advocates who hold that interception of persons attempting to enter another nation illegally is inhuman treatment.
These advocates hold that illegal aliens have an unfettered right of entry, and that the national sovereignty of a detaining nation needs to be stretched to include international waters. Italy and other European countries reply that foreign nationals allowed into Europe pending a human rights lawsuit tend to disappear into Europe’s ghost population of illegal aliens and thus fail to show up for their court hearings.
The Obama administration, aided by congressional Democrats and lobbyists, seeks amnesty for illegal aliens presently in the United States, even if their numbers are as high as 36 million men, women, and children. As in the Obamacare debates, the president and congressional Democrats choose to ignore the voices of the majority of U.S. citizens, who say no to socialized medicine and no to European-style immigration.
President Obama’s outreach to the Muslim world and to Muslim foreign nationals in the United States legally or otherwise is a growing matter of concern.
Many U.S. citizens are questioning government accommodations made to Muslims, such as installing foot baths in public educational buildings and prayer rooms in airports. They question the failure to raise the American flag at Islamic schools operating in the United States and the downplaying of Americans threatened or murdered by Islamic terrorists.
These include the massacre of thousands in the World Trade Center attacks; the attempted murder of U.S. soldiers at Fort Dix, New Jersey; the murder of a U.S. soldier in Little Rock, Arkansas; the murder of 13 soldiers at Fort Hood, Texas; and scouting for the massacre in Mumbai, India, that left 166 dead.
These attacks indicate a jihad mentality and call into question the Obama administration’s elimination of the words “Islamic Terrorists” from the U.S. government lexicon.
The demographic changes wrought by unfettered illegal immigration together with a redistribution of wealth could evolve into the borderless nation proposed by Saul Alinsky, founder of the anarchy-based community organizing that inspired young Barack Obama.
As President Obama discounts the exceptionalism of the U.S.A. as a melting pot of immigrants, he seeks to accommodate undocumented immigrants who demand “no borders, no states.”
Illegal immigration poses a real and present danger to the United States.
More Posts by James Walsh
© 2016 Newsmax. All rights reserved.