Muslim Brotherhood operative Tariq Ramadan is quite outspoken about the Islamic game plan. Beats me how anyone can call this sly jihadist a ‘moderate’ or a ‘reformer’- he is neither.

“Islamic Reformation is Done!”

“The Germans claim that they want to integrate you in their society. We tell them we are going to integrate them in our Umma (Muslim world) after converting them to Islam.”

He said the same in America:

Tariq Ramadan openly calls for Muslim colonization of the U.S. 

‘It should be us, with our understanding of Islam, our principles, colonizing the United States of America.’ -Dallas, July 27, 2011

No ‘reformation’ to see here. You will be colonized, infidel. Islam will rule, like in the days of the marauding Muhammad. Colonization means sedition, subversion, sabotage, terror, thuggery, coercion and intimidation.

Here you can see how integration of Muslims in France  is ‘done’ in reality.

thanks to SOS Oesterreich:

Giscard d’Estaign:  we must stop immigration!

Mitterand: “we must reduce immigration”

Chirac: “We must limit immigration”.

Sarkozy: ‘we need to  be more selective with immigration”.

The new minister of interior: “The problem with immigration is resolved”.

And that’s what reality looks like, dare to compare:

Spot the difference between EUrabia & Africa:

(UK) Labour Plays ‘Race’ Card, Presses Ahead with Immigration/thanks to RoP

The grand plan to replace the natives with a Mohammedan proletariat is  being questioned by racist, recalcitrant British rednecks and football hooligans. Can’t have that.

By Macer Hall/Express/UK

Reeducation & Propaganda Against Public Resentment:

Public opinion about migrants could be changed through education, the document said

LABOUR dismissed the British public’s widespread opposition to mass immigration as “racism”, a Government document revealed yesterday.

Officials made it clear that public opinion was strongly against relaxing border controls.

But ministers were urged to ignore voters’ “racist” views and press ahead with a secret policy to encourage migrants to flood into Britain. Whitehall experts even proposed a major propaganda campaign to soften up voters in preparation for the mass influx of newcomers.

Australia follows promptly:

• Australia Admits Terror Threat, Presses Ahead with Immigration/RoP

The details were laid bare in the original draft of a policy document released for the first time under the Freedom of Information Act.

Last night critics accused the Government of snubbing the concerns of British citizens in their deliberate pursuit of a multicultural society.

Sir Andrew Green, chairman of the population think-tank Migrationwatch UK, said: “This report confirms that ministers deliberately rode roughshod over public opinion in adopting a policy of mass immigration.

“They concealed their real intentions in the hope they would benefit from the immigrant vote without losing their working-class supporters. They are now paying the price.”

Shadow Home Secretary Chris Grayling said: “The Government has simply not been telling the truth about its policies on immigration. More and more evidence is now emerging to show that they deliberately planned a big jump in immigration for their own political purposes.”

“Now they are trying to rewrite history to pretend those decisions never happened. Their conduct over all of this has been a complete disgrace.”

Written by staff at the Home Office and Cabinet Office in 2000 in the run-up to the expansion of the European Union into eastern Europe, the report made it clear that voters wanted tougher rather than looser border controls.

“It is correct that public opinion favours relatively restrictive policies on immigration,” the document said. But demonstrating thinly disguised contempt for much of the British public, the document said that this opposition was linked to racist attitudes.

It said: “Recent research shows that anti-immigrant sentiment is closely correlated with racism rather than economic motives. The most negative attitudes are found among those who have relatively little direct contact with migrants but see them as a threat.”

Ministers also ignored warnings that immigration would lead to an explosion in organised crime including trafficking in drugs, illegal migrants and prostitutes. “Migration has opened up new opportunities for organised crime,” the report insisted.

The document, titled Going With The Flow: Managing Migration in the 21st Century, went on to urge the Government to manipulate public opinion on the issue.

“A new approach to migration policy would need to be not only accompanied by, but underpinned by, a clear strategy for public opinion and public debate,” the report argued.

“Government has tended to assume that negative public opinion on migration is a given that is beyond its control. In fact, research (and common sense) suggests that past governments have had a significant influence on public opinion.”

It added: “On other issues, government has been strategic and proactive in addressing public opinion, it could do so on migration.” The document even suggested the more migrants that moved to the UK, the more the British people would come to accept them.

It said: “Education and people’s personal exposure to migrants make them less likely to be anti-migrant.” The document went on to be heavily edited before being officially published in 2001, with all references to public opposition stripped out.

References to migration opening up “new opportunities” for organised crime were also expunged from the final version. The row over Labour’s secret immigration policy erupted last year when former ministerial adviser Andrew Neather admitted the Government had a “driving political purpose” to spread multiculturalism in Britain.

He said ministers had deliberately set out to use immigration to undermine Labour’s opponents and “rub the Right’s noses in diversity”. Border and Immigration Minister Phil Woolas last night rejected the criticism. He said: “This report confirms there was no open-door policy on migration.

“It makes quite clear that migration is not a substitute for Government policies on skills, education and training of British citizens, which the Government has invested in over the past decade. The Home Secretary at the time was also criticised for changes to the immigration policy being too tough.”

“We have tightened them still further. Our new flexible points-based system gives us greater control of those coming to work or study from outside Europe, ensuring that only those that Britain need can come. Britain’s borders are stronger than ever before.”

How do you feel about immigration levels?

5 % said  We could welcome even more immigrants

1 % believe Things are OK as they are

11% suggest  we should Cut immigration numbers drastically

83 % wants to Keep Mohammedans OUT!

Eat this, Mr KRudd!

A Dire Lesson for Australia:

How Labour drowned Britain in immigrants

Andrew Bolt

What an astonishing turn-around there has been in the debate about immigration in Britain, as even the Left contemplates (too late!) what it’s now wrought. Here is Rod Liddle, a former speechwriter for Labour, in theSunday Times:

There is something a little pitiful watching Gordon Brown tell the country how worried he is about immigration, and how it must not be a taboo issue… The only reason Brown is addressing the issue now is that we are six months away from an election and he fears that the troglodyte BNP thickoes will chew away great big gobfuls of angry working-class voters…

It is little more than lip service from the (unelected) prime minister and, worse, unaccompanied by even the vaguest admission that his government has let its people down.

We know from the Labour backbencher Chris Mullin’s diaries that ministers would not address the issue of immigration because they were terrified of being called racist: so they did nothing. More recently, the former home office adviser Andrew Neather suggested that the Labour government threw open the doors to vast numbers of immigrants precisely in order to create a truly multicultural Britain, whether or not the British public wanted such a thing (every opinion poll suggests that they did not).

Labour ministers insist that the previous Conservative government was lax on immigration, too — but that is a specious argument. In 2006 nearly 600,000 immigrants entered Britain, more than 10 times the number who arrived in the last year of John Major’s government; the scale of difference has been beyond reasonable comparison. We should be clear: immigration is primarily Labour’s mess, and it was a deliberate policy…

Brown wishes to capture the votes of the white working class by talking about immigration but not actually doing anything about it. They in turn resent, rightly or wrongly, the fact that their communities have been changed beyond recognition; that street crime figures are up exponentially; that it’s harder to acquire social housing; and that they are priced out of jobs. This is unpalatable to many, but it is how a lot of people feel.

It would be far more honest of the government if it said: tough luck, Labour voters — we want a cheaper unskilled and semi-skilled workforce and we have no moral or intellectual objection to your towns and cities being transformed by huge numbers of people who may not share your cultural values.

Dumber than dirt. Embarrassing. These are the people who govern us!

Andrew Bolt

Spot the four mistakes in Tanner’s speech:

Federal Finance Minister Lindsay Tanner has scoffed at the suggestion that Australia is overpopulated, saying other countries would laugh if Australians mounted that argument as an excuse for clamping down on immigration….

“…Bangladesh is roughly twice the physical size of Tasmania but home to about seven times the population of Australia.”…

In the next few months the Federal Government will release the latest Intergenerational Report. It will forecast that Australia’s population will grow by 65 per cent in the next 40 years, hitting 35 million by 2049.

Mr Tanner says that figure is a projection, not a target, and it is impossible to predict with any certainty just what the population will be in 40 years’ time.

Mistake one: We don’t decide on something so important as our population density on the basis of whether other countries might “laugh”.

Mistake two: We don’t decide on something so important as our population density by using Bangladesh as our model.

Mistake three: The relevant question isn’t the population density in our deserts, but in our cities – where most immigrants will actually settle.

Mistake four: 35 million may be a projection, but it is not impossible at all to predict that we will reach that number in even less than 40 years while this government continues to grow our popluation by 440,000 a year. Just do the maths.

Fact is, the Government has ramped up immigration precisely at a time when our politicians are refusing to build the power stations, dams, train lines and freeways – or even release the housing land – that these millions more people will need. And that’s without even considering the looming cultural tensions or the basic aesthetic objection to having so many more people in your face.

Thanks to Mullah

More gobbledegook from Australia’s  dear leader:

“It’s important that we are in a conscious discussion and a conscious process to evolve options for regional institutions in the future rather than just sitting back and waiting for big problems to emerge.” Kevin Rudd

Rudd’s Indonesian shambles

Wanted: more public servants to help wreck jobs

Look, Mr Rudd. Terrorists on boats

“Too racist to discuss”- Andrew Bolt

The successful interdiction of the Merchant Vessel Ocean Lady by the Canadian Forces was based on advanced intelligence, most probably aided by law enforcement agencies in Toronto. This has no doubt helped Canada prevent a major terrorist infiltration. When the ship attempted to enter Canadian territory on 16 October 2009, the Canadian Navy patrol frigate HMCS Regina was working with law enforcement and intelligence agencies to interdict the ship. Investigations to date have revealed that Ocean Lady is a ship owned and operated by the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Elam (LTTE)…

More than a dozen men from a ship now docked in British Columbia have already been identified as members of the terrorist group

It has emerged that the militarily defeated LTTE have not disappeared, but rather they are dispersing. The most popular destination areas for their fighters and supporters will be well known terrorist safe havens such as Canada. Other target areas for their fighters will be Australia, New Zealand, the UK, and other European countries. According to figures from Sri Lanka, 10,000 or more LTTE fighters and supporters have been identified and are being held, but a few thousand have escaped. As such, we can expect that literally hundreds of individuals will want to escape to countries such as Canada. More>>Terrorists on boats

And then this:

A “World Government” to Control Your Every Move

To be honest, I thought – and said – Christopher Monckton was exaggerating a bit in claiming the the United Nation’s Copenhagen meeting on global warming would negotiate the creation of a new world government:

At Copenhagen, this December, weeks away, a treaty will be signed…I read that treaty. And what it says is this, that a world government is going to be created. The word “government” actually appears as the first of three purposes of the new entity. The second purpose is the transfer of wealth from the countries of the West to third world countries, in satisfication of what is called, coyly, “climate debt” – because we’ve been burning CO2 and they haven’t.

But now Alarmist of the Year Tim Flannery, on yet another gassy overseas junket, suggests this is indeed the intention – and his most fervent hope for these talks:

We think of them as being concerned with some sort of environmental treaty. That is far from the case. The negotiations now ongoing toward the Copenhagen agreement are in effect diplomacy at the most profound global level. They deal with every aspect of our life and they will infuence every aspect of our life, our economy, our society.

Mark Steyn rightly asks;

Did you know every aspect of your life was being negotiated at Copenhagen?

Three questions for Kevin Rudd:

1. Which of Australia’s sovereign powers will this treaty take from us?

2. How much will this treaty cost us?

3. Are you really going to sign it?

Patrick Walters, National security editor/The Australian

KEVIN Rudd’s concept of an Asia-Pacific community by 2020 has been canvassed at the weekend’s East Asia summit in Thailand together with a rival vision from new Japanese leader Yukio Hatoyama.

East Asian leaders meeting in Hua Hin yesterday discussed the broad regional architecture, with the Prime Minister promoting his plan both at the formal leaders’ meeting and in a series on bilateral discussions.

The Copenhagen Climate Change Treaty Draft – wealth transfer defined, now with new and improved “dignity” penalty

“What I detect across the region is an openness to a discussion about how we evolve our regional architecture into the future,” Mr Rudd said yesterday.

“It’s important that we are in a conscious discussion and a conscious process to evolve options for regional institutions in the future rather than just sitting back and waiting for big problems to emerge.”

Mr Hatoyama’s plan is for the creation of an East Asian Community based firmly on the existing ASEAN regional institutions, which could exclude the US.

“You might ask Mr Rudd if his idea is more of an institutional approach than a functional approach,” Japanese government spokesman Kazuo Kodama told journalists at the summit.

Mr Rudd also took the opportunity to lobby regional leaders on his plan in a series of bilateral talks with heads of government from South Korea, Japan, New Zealand and The Philippines.

Mr Rudd also announced Australia would provide $50 million to help deploy civilian experts into disaster and conflict zones in the Asian region.

“The government will create a register of up to 500 Australian specialists who will be able to be deployed overseas at rapid notice.

“They will be drawn from both the public and private sectors,” he said.

Mr Rudd also confirmed the ASEAN-Australia-New Zealand free trade agreement, signed this year, will formally come into force on January 1.

The agreement between the 10 ASEAN economies and Australia and New Zealand brings closer together 12 regional economies, with more than 600 million people and a combined GDP of $3.1 trillion.

Mr Rudd said the agreement would cover 20 per cent of Australia’s two-way trade, worth $112 billion, and eliminate tariffs on 96 per cent of our exports to ASEAN nations by 2020.

The FTA covers tradable goods as well as services, investment, intellectual property and e-commerce.

The nations covered by the AANZFTA are the 10 ASEAN member states: Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Burma, The Philippines, Singapore, Malaysia, Thailand and Vietnam, as well as Australia and New Zealand.

On Saturday, Mr Rudd met Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao to discuss the proposed Asia-Pacific community as well as the upcoming Copenhagen climate summit and bilateral issues, including the case of Stern Hu, the senior Rio Tinto executive held in detention by Chinese authorities since early July.

Mr Rudd said the Hu case was the subject of “intense and continuing discussion between the foreign ministries of China and Australia”.

“My purpose in raising these matters today was simply to highlight the fact that this was a continuing matter of concern to Australia, and I will continue to do so in the future,” he said.

Foreign Minister Stephen Smith said yesterday that bilateral relations with Beijing were getting back to “business as usual” in the wake of the Hu case.

“Whilst we’ve had some significant tensions in the relationship, we believe very much in the last month or so things are getting back to business as usual, and that’s a very good thing with a very important relationship,” Mr Smith said.

“We continue to urge the Chinese authorities to bring this matter to a conclusion as quickly as possible, to expedite it.”

Greg Sheridan from the Australian in Paris with MP Thierry Mariani, a Sarkozy confidant, best known for his trenchant views on immigration:

“… the only solution is for France’s neighbours in North Africa to develop sufficiently so their citizens are willing to stay there.”

Hardly. That’s not what Muslims have in mind:

“We will outbreed you with the bellies of our women…”

Houari Boumédienne, Algeria’s undisputed ruler until his death in 1978, said it clearly In 1974:

“One day, millions of men will leave the Southern Hemisphere to go to the Northern Hemisphere. And they will not go there as friends. Because they will go there to conquer it. And they will conquer it with their sons. The wombs of our women will give us victory.

Integrate this?

From the Boulevarde St Germain, take a metro about 15 minutes north to the 18th arrondissement. Here there are a few white faces, but not many. There are some Chinese, but most of the people come from the Maghreb, Morocco or Algeria, or from sub-Saharan Africa. The streets are scruffy. Many women have their heads covered, and groups of young black men stand around on corners. Further north, beyond Paris’s city limits, are ghettos where no white face is seen. There are five or six million Muslims in France out of a total population of 64 million, almost all from Africa. Many are successful French citizens, but the levels of unemployment, disadvantage and alienation in the ghettos are strikingly high.

“You’ll see suburbs of Paris where there are only blacks, or people from the Maghreb. It’s a disaster for French society – there is no melting pot.”

Since the election two years ago of Nicolas Sarkozy – himself the son of an immigrant – there has been a more robust national discussion of immigration policy and what France expects from its new citizens…

Read it all

The trouble with Islam is bigger than  KRudds fantasies about “Global Warming”. Nobody can deny the 600 pound gorilla in the room, the question is now: WTF are we gonna do about it?

After Federal Labor MP Kelvin Thomson came out against unhindered Mohammedan immigration, a few more of our timid polit-props are “coming out:”

Here’s a young senator from South Australia: Cory Bernardi

A Debate We Cannot Ignore

The recent call for a review of Australia’s migration intake has, in my opinion, a great deal of merit.

In fact I am pleasantly surprised that the usual assortment of jibes attacking those who advocate for a more measured migration program hasn’t yet taken place.

Perhaps that’s because this time, the advocacy comes from a leftist Labor politician. I have no doubt that if a conservative made such a call the cries of ‘xenophobia’ and ‘dog whistle politics’ would have been deafening.

Continued below…

(Bill Muehlenberg) The Need for Clarity

An Australian writer suggests connecting the dots.

Newslinks:

• Somali Gold Teeth Jihad: Islamists forcibly remove teeth
• (UK) Muslim Offers Tourist Free Bed, Then Rapes Her…
• German School Warned Not to Teach Armenian Genocide…
• Hamas Brags about Seizing UNWRA Ambulances…
• Kenyan Muslims Push for Sharia

Who knows, perhaps those claims will be made after reading this comment.

But before you rush to judgment, let me make something very clear.

I have benefited from migration more than most Australians. My father came here from Italy in 1958 and my wife is an Irish migrant. I have an extended family comprising Australians who have originated from Malaysia, Denmark, Austria, Ireland, England and Italy.

They all add to the richness of my life and that of our nation, which is why I don’t want any of you to construe what I am writing today as me being anti-immigration. Nothing could be further from the truth.

But there is something clearly wrong with our current migration system and it is about time we had a decent conversation about it. Unfortunately it is a conversation that many conservatives shy away from due to the vile and outrageous pot-shots it often provokes.

I recall receiving a most abusive (and frankly inappropriate) email from an ABC journalist over a previous comment that dared to question the high level of benefits given to those entering our territory illegally and claiming asylum.

The facts apparently meant nothing to this supposedly unbiased reporter from our national broadcaster who told me what he thought in no uncertain terms.

The ‘coincidental’ inclusion of a grammatical error from that same comment on the ABCs Sunday morning show ‘Insiders’ suggests how upset he was when confronted with reality rather than the fantasy world he has created at taxpayers’ expense.

But the immigration problems we need to deal with are not limited to illegals. Our authorised migration processes are clearly not working effectively either.

The past few years has seen what can only be described as an explosion in race-oriented violence ranging from terrorist plots and riots in Cronulla to stabbings and gang rape.

The question is why?

Shooting from the hip, my view is that it comes down to assimilation – or lack of it.

Unfortunately too many new Australians put their faith, their clan or their historical hatreds ahead of the values of their adopted country.

They seek to use our freedoms, our systems and our tolerance as a means of undermining our values and indulging in behaviour that is anathema to most Australians.

The suggestion that our migrant intake should be reduced to ensure sufficient vetting of applicants and their background is a step in the right direction. But I believe there is a bigger problem.

Evidence suggests that the many so called ‘race’ problems are not caused by the original immigrants but by their radicalised children. Somehow the progeny of those who have been offered a better life in Australia are keener to continue ancient rivalries or religious hatreds than their forbears.

Such beliefs can only be cultured by the same extremist poison that is far too prevalent in the UK, Europe and parts of Africa and South East Asia.

The question many ask, but too many of us avoid answering, is where does most of this indoctrination of hate begin?

For some it is in the home but evidence suggests that for many it begins in the mosque. Yet to say so is to subject oneself to claims of intolerance and bigotry.

Frankly it is time for the excuses to stop.

For how long can we be expected to accept sermons of hate dismissed as ‘incorrect translations’? Surely it is right to ask how the self proclaimed ‘religion of peace’ can be so regularly used as an excuse for murder and destruction from some of the very people endorsed as scholars of its holy book?

This past week, the activities and arrest of an alleged Islamic terrorist were blamed on the Australian welfare system by one of his relations. Let me tell you, if this was a genuine reason for the dismantling of the welfare state then I’d probably join the campaign.

The problem though is that this claim, like many others, is a load of rubbish. It is simply seeking to blame Australian society for the alleged vile activities of a religious extremist.

The same type of excuses were used by radical islamists (and others) to endorse or justify the catastrophic events of September 11.

In Australia we are yet to see the public protests advocating death to infidels or open displays of bilious hatred that have occurred in other countries. The day we do, and are expected to accept it as freedom of speech, is the day our nation ceases to become the egalitarian one previous generations have fought so hard to defend.

You may ask, as I do, how we can prevent the expansion of racial and religious hatred from infecting Australian society? Unfortunately, I don’t have the answer.

However, it is clear to me that unless we are prepared to stop making excuses for those who support the doctrine of intolerance and hatred; until we are prepared to talk openly about the problems associated with immigration policy and assimilation, we will be ignoring a battle that must be won.

It is a battle for the very future of our country and winning it will require a great deal of courage from our politicians, transparency from members of the fourth estate and support by members of the public.

We must now be willing to engage in the same debate that too many nations have ignored to their own regret. Unless we are prepared to learn from the experience of others, the difficulties we are experiencing today may just be the genesis of a problem that could change our country forever.

Let me know what you think by posting your comments below.

Steyn on Britain and Europe

Whenever I write about Europe’s shriveled birth rates, I get irate letters from Brits and Germans and the rest saying, “You idiot! I’d love to have kids. But I can’t afford ‘em.” Of course not. You’re paying for Afghan welfare moms’ kids: 

The 36-year-old moved into the detached property last July and receives £170,000 a year in benefits, which includes £12,500 a month for her rent.

£170,000 = $275,000.

Mrs Saiedi moved to London seven years ago after she fled her native Afghanistan during civil unrest.

• Who are the fascists in Europe?

She was made homeless from a five-bedroom house in Ealing, West London, in 2008 and pleaded with the council for a suitable home but there was nothing available.

As well as seven bedrooms, the house in nearby Acton has two reception rooms, a dining room, two kitchens and an extensive back garden.

The landlord, Ajit Panesar, is being paid double the normal market value of the property because of another government loophole.

If Osama bin Laden were smarter, instead of training suicide bombers to fly planes into skyscrapers, his Afghan camps would have been training up armies of women to do as Mrs. Saiedi did. The entire western world would be his by now.

National Review’s The Corner, July 11th 2009

• Playing Muslim: A Day in the Life of the UK Police…
• The BNP Takes a Few More Bashes from The Times
• Bunglawussi jitters: The BNP is a threat to every Muslim
• ‘Soaking The Rich’ Doesn’t Increase Tax Revenues (and doesn’t create wealth)
• Puff Ho Now Doing PR for Club Gitmo Guests
• Heads in the sand: UK intel top dogs “laughed” at Al-Qaeda link to 7/7 bombings

Emigration and Economic Woes in Britain

The Return of the Ten Pound Pom?

From the Gates of Vienna: Fjordman sent the following news: