Political Motives for Islamic Colonization

Anyone who has seen a crime investigation show is probably familiar with "Means, motive, and opportunity", and while they may not cover the full complexity of a certain crime, it is self-evident that all three are required for it to be committed.

The crime in question: the reckless import of dangerous, seditious, pernicious, unstable, lawless, violent immigrants from backward parts of the globe into first-world countries, in numbers that would, undoubtedly, threaten their indigenous population in a matter of years from now.
The perpetrators: the executive and legislative branches of the aforementioned first-world countries, in the form of politicians, bureaucrats, diplomats, and whoever may be pulling their strings.

Keep in mind, what follows is merely a theory, based on observations, circumstantial evidence, and psychological behavior patterns.

While it is not hard to see that the ruling factions have had ample opportunity and means to commit this crime, which endangers the very societies they emerged from, the motives behind it remain in the realm of speculation, as we are all fed lies and misinformation - not to mention more direct repression efforts (the EDL members arrested for an imaginary plot come to mind).

There are the suggestions that all of this is done deliberately, due to ideological reasons, powered by guilt over the 'wrongdoings' of the west, adjoined by the dripping if socialist poison into several successive generations. According to this theory, the 'elites' are replacing the working class with foreigners, which they believe they can be controlled more easily, but anyone who compares between the riots of western lower classes, and muslims, can easily see which are easier to control; and if the matter was merely cheap labor, then there is absolutely no need to import Somali rapists, out of all the poor people in the world.
Furthermore, while useful leftist idiots and anarchist-wannabes may think of these barbarians as genuine comrades, the more practical 'elites' exhibit a behavior pattern of fear. When someone is terrified of a bully, he might prefer to strike his own family member, telling him to shut up, lest they get in trouble - even if trouble is bound to come anyways.
Thus, the lashing out of governments, police, and judicial systems against their own population, seem the result of being scared.

Let us now cover a few ground rules regarding politicians, bureaucrats, judges, and similar sort who get to high positions of power:
  1. They - unshockingly - value their careers above all else. These people expend considerable effort rubbing elbows with all sorts of characters, to get ahead. When someone works hard to achieve something, he a) believes he deserves it, and b) is unlikely to risk his investment.
  2. As mentioned above, they don't get to where they are without making a few connections, which means they now owe a few favors to some folks. To find out what is the agenda of a politician, one has to 'follow the money', and see who he is connected with, rather than listen to his empty rhetoric. In other words, many officials are bought - instead of serving the purpose of their office, they fulfill the narrow interests of puppet masters.
  3. Despite Obama's campaign slogan, politicians and bureaucrats strive not to change things, but to 'keep the wheels turning', while maintaining a facade of being in control. It's simply good for business, as 'Democracy' is based on keeping the public lulled, so policy makers can get away with fulfilling the wishes of their support groups - usually on the former's expense.
  4. Therefore, politicians tend to favor short-term resolutions that will bring them some immediate credit, over long-term plans that risk making them unpopular, and prefer inaction to risky action. They also don't mind if their short-term decisions would leave a serious mess for someone else down the road.

Now, keeping these basics in mind, let's consider a hypothetical situation, where Saudi princes, or some islamic group, tells these politicians and bureaucrats that in order to enjoy the benefit of their precious oil, they would have to accept large numbers of muslims in their countries?
What would a politician do? In an age where concepts like "national pride", "patriotism", or the notion of western culture having any value, are taboos, taking a stand against islamic extortion would brand him a racist and a bigot, which would be the end of his career. Worse, refusal to comply with this blackmail could lead to an economical disaster, for which he would share the blame, again losing his career, and possibly (depending on which pressure groups he owes a favor to) his life.
The answer, therefore, is a no-brainer - take the deal, and do whatever it takes to keep it under wrap.

Add to that a little self-convincing, as people always find a way to see themselves in a good light, and it's even easier to live with yourself afterwards. After all, in time, all those fast-breeding, angry primitives would come to see the superiority of our generous social security systems, and 3/4 naked pop starlets, and would integrate... wouldn't they?
And if they won't, the results would only be felt 10-20 years later anyway, it would be someone else's problem, and they could always claim to have acted in the interest of multiculturalism and John Lennon.

If the first phone call Obama made after being elected was to the PLO thug Abbas; if he groveled before islam (while blaming the Jews for everything) in Cairo, and humiliated both himself and the US before a Saudi dictator, who rules over a country where 'human rights' is synonymous with sin'n'stoning, then it is quite likely that Saudi* interests were involved in funding his campaign.
Obama is not an idiot - not even a deluded Harvard kid, because those do not survive long in a practical, and cutthroat political system. He may be a socialist and a muslim at heart, or not - it is irrelevant, when morality in politics is merely a theatrical play for the general public, reinforced by the drama hungry media - but what I do know, is that one does not go from being a nobody, to US president, so fast, by sticking to principles.

With the American presidency compromised, it's not hard to imagine that top EU personnel, like UK Prime Minister David Cameron, who promised to fight for turkey's membership in the union, despite its giant leaps towards becoming another islamic theocracy, are also 'on the payroll', as part of the deal. After all, the EU needs Arab oil even more desperately.
Now all these rulers have to do is shut down all those nagging 'islamophobes' at home, who get in the way of 'business as usual', and can risk their careers with an uncomfortable truth. As long as most of the public is kept asleep, content to go to parties and watch celebrities, they can end their terms peacefully, without fear of being remembered in history as the second Chamberlain.

This would not be the first time in history where an imperialist, expansionist force has used its economical power to subvert and coerce other nations to do its bidding, but just because our non-leaders are fine with selling our future short, while they fly off in private jets to a safer zone, or hide inside walled neighborhoods, while their countrymen are raped and murdered, doesn't mean we should stay silent, and allow it to happen.

So speak now, while you still can! Express your dissent today, when there's still a viable tomorrow!

* Hammas being the Iranian puppet, and PLO/Fatah the Saudi one, through the EU and the US.

1 Comments - Share Yours!:

PatriotUSA said...

Very well done, HL. Thanks for posting this. I am off tonight due to headaches.