Sunday, June 2, 2013
Send us your violent bigots ... yearning to butcher our citizens
by Ann Coulter
It’s been a bad few weeks for cultural assimilation. Last month, two welfare-receiving immigrants in the United States, Dzhokhar and Tamerlan Tsarnaev, set off bombs at the Boston Marathon, killing three people and injuring hundreds. By the end of the week, they had murdered a cop and engaged in a wild shoot-out and bomb-throwing melee with the police.
Last week, a couple of ethnic Nigerians butchered a British soldier with meat cleavers in broad daylight on a bustling street in a London suburb, then boasted about the murder in video interviews with bystanders. (On the bright side, they did not claim to be princes and ask for your life savings.)
Also last week, immigrants, mostly Muslims, began rioting in peaceful Sweden — burning schools to the ground, torching cars and throwing rocks at the police. (Who among us hasn’t lost his temper trying to assemble an Ikea china cabinet?)
Supporters of the West’s current immigration policies can’t keep ducking reality. So they try to shut down debate by calling their opponents racists, xenophobes, know-nothings and fascists.
The English Defense League (EDL), for example, is portrayed in the media as a bunch of racist football hooligans. So I was surprised to learn that the EDL has not only a Jewish division, but a gay division. (Harvey Fierstein could be their president!) They expressly support Israel against Muslim terror and burn Nazi flags at their rallies.
Apparently it is considered “fascist” to oppose actual fascists immigrating to your country.
A few years ago, an opinion piece in The New York Times denounced the pro-gay positions of anti-immigration groups such as the EDL for “co-opting” gays. The co-opting is so thoroughgoing that the anti-immigration Dutch politician Pim Fortuyn was himself gay. He was assassinated by a vegan animal rights activist upset at criticism of Muslims.
But surely members of the EDL oppose Britain’s immigration policies out of ignorance?
It briefly seemed so. A month ago, the head of the EDL, Tommy Robinson, provoked a round of liberal sneering when he tweeted: “welcome to twitter homepage has a picture of a mosque. what a joke.” Various media outlets leapt to point out that the photo was, actually, the Taj Mahal.
The liberal Guardian mocked: “It’s worth pointing out that the ‘mosque’ that started this ... was in fact the Taj Mahal, the marble mausoleum in India. It’s almost as if the very existence of the EDL is based on false information, suspicion and idiocy.”
Except — oops — it wasn’t the Taj Mahal. It was a mosque — the Grand Mosque in Muscat, Oman, to be precise — as The Guardian quietly admitted in an altered photo caption after stealthily removing the comment about the EDL’s “idiocy” for imagining it was a mosque. It’s almost as if the very existence of The Guardian is based on false information, suspicion and idiocy.
Britain, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland and Spain have recently enacted, or are considering enacting, further restrictions on immigration, alarming immigration enthusiasts. The New York Times reported this week that the “right-wing Swiss People’s Party” is requesting a referendum on immigration.
Wait a second! A referendum doesn’t sound fascist at all. In fact and to the contrary, it’s always the advocates of unrestricted immigration who try to avoid letting the people vote. Marco Rubio and the rest of the pro-amnesty “Gang of Eight” don’t even want the country to know they’re about to vote on a mass immigration scheme.
Liberals say, “Basic human rights are not subject to a vote!” — and then define “basic human rights” as “the right of people who don’t live in your country to move there.”
Manifestly, opponents of open immigration are not fascists, anti-Semitic, anti-gay, intolerant or idiots. But as long as we’re on the subject, may we inquire into the tolerance and other Western values of the potential immigrants themselves?
Last week, U.S. law enforcement officials reported that Muslim immigrant Ibragim Todashev admitted that he and Boston bomber Tamerlan Tsarnaev had murdered three Jewish men in a Boston suburb on the 10th anniversary of the 9/11 attack. (Which also, I believe, was the work of immigrants.) The victims’ throats were cut from ear to ear, nearly decapitating them. One was Tamerlan’s best friend.
Searching The New York Times’ webpage for “English Defense League,” turns up this multicultural story out of Saudi Arabia: “Online Campaign Draws Attention to Case of Saudi Father Accused of Rape and Torture.” The father, Fayhan al-Ghamdi, a prominent Islamic cleric, served only a few months in a Saudi Arabian prison for allegedly raping, burning and fatally beating his own 5-year-old daughter.
It’s not just Muslims who aren’t warming to Western values. Polls by the Anti-Defamation League going back decades have shown a steady decline of anti-Semitism in the U.S. But a 2002 poll showed a surprising upsurge.
While 17 percent of all Americans were said to hold “strongly anti-Semitic” views, 35 percent of Hispanics did — as did 44 percent of foreign-born Hispanics.
(Note to Sheldon Adelson: It may be time to give your Hispanic employees a raise.)
Liberals get a kick out of accusing their opponents of what they themselves are guilty of. But this may be the most audacious reverse-guilt play yet. For objecting to the importation of primitive, violent, child-rape-forgiving bigots, the opponents of mass immigration are accused of bigotry.
Revealed: The British charity that uses taxpayer cash to campaign for migrant benefits and protect a foreign rapist
Tacpayer’ money funded a team of lawyers fighting European Court of Human Rights cases on behalf of foreign criminals and illegal immigrants.
The human rights quango the Equality and Human Rights Commission quietly gave nearly £200,000 to a pressure group so it could take controversial human rights cases to the court in Strasbourg.
The group, the AIRE Centre (Advice on Individual Rights in Europe), used the money to fight and win a series of cases and represented among others a Nigerian rapist and two Somali criminals who won the right to stay in Britain.
The cases were picked as part of a policy of ‘strategic litigation’ designed to overturn ministerial decisions and rulings made in British courts, and to extend equality and human rights laws in favour of immigrants and criminals.
The centre – a registered charity – was in the news yesterday as the source of the legal complaint against Britain for restricting access to our benefits system.
It brought test cases arguing for the right of EU immigrants not to have to undergo a residency test before they can claim a host of benefits.
The European Commission has now referred Britain to the EU’s European Court of Justice in Luxembourg over the right to reside test.
Work and Pensions Secretary Iain Duncan Smith accused the European Commission of a power grab and has vowed to ‘fight every step of the way’ to retain the residency test. But yesterday the Mail revealed that the group was handed around half a million pounds over five years by the Foreign Office.
Now an investigation has revealed further funding, by the Equalities and Human Rights Commission. Over three years, from April 2009 to April 2012, the AIRE Centre received £185,906.
The money was for a project designed to get around a ban on Government legal aid funding for cases at the European Court of Human Rights. The centre used the money to hire staff and recruit lawyers to bring cases before the court.
One major case it won involved two Somali criminals who won the right to stay in Britain and, crucially, led to a ruling which shackled ministers in their efforts to send home dozens of other Somali criminals living here.
Another involved a Nigerian rapist whose deportation was blocked by Strasbourg because of his right to a ‘private and family life’ under the European Convention on Human Rights.
The centre also lobbied Parliament for prisoners to be given the vote and supported cases involving prisoner voting rights before the Strasbourg court.
In its project application documents to the Equalities and Human Rights Commission, the AIRE Centre said the project would ‘improve the response to systemic human rights and equality failures that exist in Great Britain by offering a strategic response’. It said: ‘The AIRE Centre targeted litigation... will maximise the impact of the European Court’s jurisprudence in specific areas.’
The money was spent on a team of human rights lawyers together with staff, administrative, training, building, and travel costs, legal and professional fees and a hotline for applicants to register their cases.
The centre’s funding application, obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, said it was unable to take on cases even if it considered them ‘viable’. It said: ‘We have only been able to adopt an ad hoc rather than strategic approach to our ECtHR litigation due to our limited resources.’
The charity – set up in 1993 by human rights lawyer Nuala Mole – has also received funding from the Diana, Princess of Wales Memorial Fund and Comic Relief.
Tory MP Priti Patel said: ‘It is outrageous that taxpayers’ money is being used and abused in this way. It is particularly outrageous that money is being used to undermine benefit rules when the British public are crying out for benefit reform.’
A spokesman for the equalities commission said: ‘The commission provided funding to support the centre’s work on issues including human trafficking, domestic violence and protecting the human rights of those at risk of torture.’
Posted by jonjayray at 6:37 PM