Wednesday, November 22, 2017
View Blog
Minimize
Feb 25

Written by: Diana West
Tuesday, February 25, 2014 6:17 AM 

On Feb. 9, 50.3  percent of Swiss voters passed a referendum to cap immigration from the EU. In the course of a (very hostile) Spiegel Online interview with Christoph Blocher, leader of the Swiss People's Party, the impetus becomes clear. The EU's so-called freedom of movement -- read: untrammeled immigration into decreasingly sovereign states --  has approached a crisis for Swiss nationhood.

"Some 23.8 percent of Switzerland's population is comprised of foreigners, and almost 15 percent are first-generation naturalized Swiss citizens," Blocher said. "No similar European state has anything like that."

Once the shocking fact that nearly one in four people in Switzerland are foreigners sinks in, it seems logicial to conclude, as Galliawatch does, that many if not most non-native voters probably opposed the immigration cap. That means that the outcome among native Swiss was likely a more resounding majority than 50.3 percent indicates.

For now, then, the Swiss have affirmed they are still a nation, a culture -- rather an amazing feat given these demographics. Spiegel puts it down to "scaremongering."

SPIEGEL: In your campaign for the referendum, SWP drafted horror scenarios of an overflowing Switzerland, a country that has become a cement jungle. The truth is that your country is doing better than ever before. Why the scaremongering?

Blocher: It's not scaremongering. If things continue, we will surpass the 10-million mark in 2033. By 2061, we will have 16 million inhabitants, more than half of whom will be foreigners.

Bravo, Blocher, for at least halting the slide.

He and Spiegel are talking past each other, of course, and from different planets: one, patriotic and sovereign, the other, materialist and globalist. These are the opposing views of modern times. Once, when nationalities seemed to be cut in stone, it was fuzzy globalists who was the theorists, the "dreamers." Then came Marx. Today, the superstructure of globalism has crushed the state, and it is the fanciful nationalist who thinks in terms of "what if." What if democratic governments actually loved their countries, separately and individually? What if cadres of unelected officials in governments, in multinational conglomerates, were not able to order nations to commit suicide? What if citizens restored their rightful powers over their own destinies -- even to the extent that the Swiss have?

Such questions are relevant everywhere a real culture war through population transformation (mass immigration, legal, illegal and "refugee") is underway. That covers the entire Western world, from Switzerland to the US. In Dekalb County, Georgia, according to Joe Newton, chairman of a group called Citizens for Refugee Resettlement Relief in Georgia, the demands of refugee resettlement, for example, require county schools to "provide costly instruction in over 100 languages."

That's not a "melting pot" -- which hasn't functioned for half a century -- that's multicultural obliteration.

To what end? The end of our nation.

Of course, Spiegel would call that "scaremongering."

Newton recently published the following op-ed (hat tip Refugee Resettlement Watch):

"Georgia's refugee resettlement efforts are out of control"

by Joe Newton

Thirty-four years ago, President Jimmy Carter — grandfather of Georgia Democrat gubernatorial candidate Jason Carter — signed into law the Refugee Resettlement Act. This well-intentioned and costly law, however, is outdated and must be drastically overhauled.

The act provided for 70,000 legal refugees per year to enter with a fast-track toward citizenship. The U.S. State Department was supposed to screen applicants for communicable diseases and security threats — and the refugees were supposed to be designated as fleeing from brutal treatment due to their religious and political beliefs. This is no longer the case.

Incredibly, our country’s refugee screening has basically been turned over to the United Nations. The U.N. Office of the High Commissioner for Refugees determines who meets the “refugee” definition. Ninety-five percent of the refugees arriving are referred by this agency, says researcher Edwin Rubenstein. Even more incredible, he found that the top 10 countries of origin are Bhutan, Burma, Iraq, Somalia, Cuba, Congo, Iran, Eritrea, Sudan and Ethiopia. Clearly, the U.N.’s definitions and priorities are quite different from those of the average American!

The designation of “refugee” is now most often given to everyone in an entire class of people who are deemed victims of “discrimination.” An individual need not prove personal hardship.

American religious and secular agencies also receive taxpayer funds for every refugee they get the U.N. to recommend for admission. Then the refugees are foisted off on communities without warning or preparation — and DeKalb County has been a favorite dumping ground. And, as one can see from the top 10 countries of origin, many of these refugees have customs and culture that mix into American culture about as well as oil and water.

The program has brought into Georgia over 66,000 refugees who average having four children per year. We now have the third generation of these people in Georgia who are eligible to vote — with a potential voting population of over 150,000.

In 2010 the welfare cost to Georgians was $17 million, according to the Department of Health and Human Services. Counties chipped in $4 million of your money — most of which came from your property taxes. The federal government pays most of the cost for 90 days, and then Georgians absorb the welfare cost in perpetuity. Estimates show that the Georgia welfare cost is now approaching $40 million annually and rising exponentially.

Because of this program, DeKalb County schools must provide costly instruction in over 100 languages. Cobb schools also have to grapple with this growing language burden.

To his credit, Gov. Nathan Deal asked the State Department to stop sending more refugees to Georgia — and it has so far complied. But that is only a temporary solution.

The bottom line: Georgia does not have to participate. It doesn’t have to accept the federal money. Research shows that if a state legislature cuts off the money, these people move to another state. When Indiana and other states cut off the money the welfare-minded refugee population quickly moved to greener pastures.

Also, according to HHS, of the Georgia refugees who do want to work only 40 percent are still working after 90 days. At the end of a year, only 18 percent still work and there is a rapid drop-off soon thereafter.

This is an entirely new welfare class we are creating to the detriment of our state and culture.

It is noteworthy, by the way, that state Sen. Jason Carter has never made any effort to try to reduce or eliminate this program even though it is overburdening his DeKalb County constituency. In fact, he supports it as part of his grandfather’s “legacy.”

Democrats joined the Republican governor to temporarily stem this refugee tide into our state. But why doesn’t the General Assembly just simply end this refugee racket by cutting off the money flow?

Because love of country has been conditioned out of us.

Tags:
Donate
Minimize
Print  
Links
Privacy Statement  |  Terms Of Use
Copyright 2012 by Diana West