Immigration or Invasion?

Europe’s embrace of mass immigration can be explained in part by guilt from the Nazi era. It’s no coincidence that Germany, which has the most guilt to deal with, has pledged to take in the most refugees.

But other European nations are not free of guilt. Some of them collaborated with the Nazis, and even those who didn’t feel a need to expiate for the sin of European anti-Semitism.

The irony is that Europe’s current welcoming policy toward immigrants and refugees seems destined to bring about the very fate it is intended to avoid. European governments have decided that the best way to expunge any trace of racism or xenophobia is to invite into their midst people who are as far removed from European culture and tradition as it is possible to be. The reasoning seems to go as follows: if Europeans persecuted the Jews for their “otherness,” they can make up for it by accepting millions of “new Jews”—not actual Jews, but people who by reason of their otherness can stand in as proxies for the Jews.

The problem is that the “new Jews” are on the whole decidedly anti-Semitic. Europe’s atonement for its past anti-Semitism is to invite into the continent the most anti-Semitic people on the planet. It’s no secret that the majority of the refugees and immigrants now pouring into Europe are Muslims. What’s more, many of these Muslims are from the Middle East and North Africa (“MENA”), the most anti-Semitic portion of the Muslim world.

According to a 2014 poll conducted by the Anti-Defamation League, 74 percent of those polled in MENA had anti-Semitic attitudes. The top ten in the ADL Global Index are:

• West Bank and Gaza— 93 percent of the adult population holds anti-Semitic views.
• Yemen— 88 percent
• Algeria— 87 percent
• Libya— 87 percent
• Tunisia— 86 percent
• Kuwait— 82 percent
• Bahrain— 81 percent
• Jordan— 81 percent
• Morocco— 80 percent

In short, the “new Jews” are reminiscent of the old Nazis. In fact, Hitler is considered a hero in many of the MENA countries, and Mein Kampf is a popular book. In a 2009 statement, Sheik Yusuf al-Qaradawi, one of the most popular and influential spiritual leaders in the Muslim world, called the Holocaust “a divine punishment” of Jews, and prayed that the “believers” would finish the job started by Hitler.

For a continent which is dedicated to the proposition that what happened to the Jews must “never again” happen, it seems odd to lay out the red carpet for people who are dedicated to finishing Hitler’s work. Here it seems appropriate to add the obligatory qualifier and note that of course not every Muslim hates Jews. But, then, neither did every German in the Nazi period hate Jews. And certainly many of them never endorsed the final solution to the “Jewish problem.” Still, as the German experience showed, a dedicated minority can wreak havoc if the majority are willing to stand by and look the other way. Given the results of the ADL poll, a large number of Muslims might be willing to avert their eyes. And in Germany, Muslims already outnumber Jews by about forty to one.

There might be less to worry about if Germany took pains to assimilate its growing Muslim population. But the guilt hangover from World War II mandates that the multicultural other be given special treatment. And one way of showing respect for the other is to absolve him of any duty to assimilate. To ask the other to assimilate implies that you think your culture is better than his—which, of course, would be a major social blunder. As a result, in Germany and elsewhere in Europe, parallel Muslim cultures with separate rules and institutions have grown up alongside the native cultures.

What’s happening is not a Germanization of Islam, but an Islamization of Germany. As Germany braces to receive some 800,000 refugees and migrants this year (a four-fold increase over 2014), very little is being done to acquaint them with Western standards of behavior. Instead, Muslim have turned urban areas into de facto “no-go” zones, polygamy is commonplace, sharia courts operate in all big cities, and churches are being turned into mosques. Moreover, rather than undertake the difficult task of integrating young people into Western society, Germany, according to one report, is “handing over the religious education of the next generation of German Muslims to Islamist radicals.”

One could counter that it’s not easy for the government to oversee what’s being taught in the madrassas, but Vijeta Uniyal, the author of the report, isn’t talking about madrassas, he’s referring to the public schools. In a number of German states, the Islamic Studies program has been given over to the Turkish-Islamic Union for Religious Affairs (DITIB). The organization, which has close ties to Turkey’s Islamist party, the AKP, oversees the writing of textbooks, the selection of teachers, and the content of the curriculum. Given the anti-Semitic leanings of the AKP leadership, one wonders how their friends in the DITIB deal with such a sensitive topic as the Holocaust.

Or will they have to address the subject at all? In the state of Bavaria, it’s been proposed that Muslim students should be exempt from mandatory visits to former concentration camps. The stated reason is that children from Muslim families have no connection to the German past. Yet one of the chief architects of the final solution—a man who worked closely with Eichmann and Himmler—was Hajj Amin al-Husseini, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, and one of the most prominent and influential Muslims of the time. Moreover, as the ADL poll shows, anti-Semitism is still very much alive in the Middle East. In short, the students who are likely in most need of Holocaust education are the ones least likely to receive it.

Muslims are exempt from Holocaust education by reason of the excuse that they have no connection with the German past. But very little is being done to give them a connection with the German present. Consequently, a lot of German Muslims don’t connect with propositions which most Germans take for granted—that all men are created equal, and that sort of thing. Thus, thanks to the twisted logic of multiculturalism, a new European holocaust may be in the making, with Germany once again at its center.

The target of the new holocaust, however, may not necessarily be Jews. That’s for the simple reason that Jews are leaving Europe in large numbers. Having taken note of multiple attacks on Jewish synagogues, businesses, and individuals, many have decided not to wait around to see how Europe’s experiment with Muslim immigration turns out.

In the absence of Jews, Muslim supremacists have always been able to find other targets for their enmity—pagans, Zoroastrians, Hindus, Buddhists, Amadiyyah, and Christians. One needn’t consult the history books to notice. Boko Haram is waging war on Christians in Nigeria, and the Islamic State is conducting a holocaust against the Christians and Yazidis of Iraq and Syria. The Muslims trekking north into Europe not only carry the seeds of anti-Semitism, they also carry the seeds of animosity toward non-Muslims in general. A popular slogan in the Middle East is “first comes Saturday, then comes Sunday.” It means that after the Muslims have finished with the Jews, they will come after the Christians. But what if—as is increasingly the case in Europe—the Jews are no longer around? In that case, the secondary target will likely become the primary one.

As Barry Shaw, a Mid-East analyst, recently observed of the migrants, “these people do not escape the Middle East, they bring the Middle East with them.” If the history of Muslim migrations teaches us anything, it’s that Muslims do not assimilate to existing cultures and religions; rather they become the culture and religion of the lands they migrate to. The first Muslim migration was the hijra—the relocation of Muhammad and his followers from Mecca to Medina in 622 AD. Muhammad didn’t come to Medina in order to integrate, he came to dominate. In a relatively short time, he expelled or killed the Jews in Medina and established Islam as the only religion in the region.

Muhammad’s use of migration as an instrument of Islamization became the model for subsequent hijras. It still is today. In a 1974 speech at the United Nations, former Algerian President Houari Boumedienne proclaimed:

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.

The massive relocation he predicted has already begun and it’s being hastened along by Europe’s massive guilt complex. Saudi Arabia is also lending a hand. It recently offered to build 200 mosques for Syrian refugees in Germany. Saudi Arabia does not, of course, allow Christian churches to be built on its soil. But why, you may wonder, don’t they build 200 mosques for Syrians in Arabia? They would be cheaper to build and it would be much more convenient for the Syrians.

The reason that the Saudis don’t want the Syrians is that they fear the instability that might ensue. They also fear that jihadists might mix in with the refugees. Many Europeans have the same fears, but they have little say in what happens to them. What is happening to them, as the Saudis understand is a hijra—a slow-motion conquest by migration. Or, more accurately, migration combined with maternity—the war of the wombs that Boumedienne predicted. It is a war that Europe is fast losing.