Immigration

The Costless Fix to Europe's Jihadi Problem

It needs to stop putting roadblocks in the way of refugees and immigrants seeking jobs

|

Only youthful idealists and German philosophers by the name of Immanuel Kant would say that when it comes to justice, cost is no object—that one must do the right thing no matter what the price tag. Sensible adults, on the other hand, understand that if morality is expensive, you'll inevitably get less of it. Providing a homeless man a home may be the right thing to do, but if it means your child has to take out student loans to go to college, not many people will rise to the occasion.

To listen to critics of Europe's massive problem with immigration, assimilation, and radicalization, this same cost dynamic is at play. For instance, in the wake of the Paris and Brussels attacks, National Review's Reihan Salam very justifiably asked whether it is smart for European countries reeling from the price tag of integrating their existing Muslim populations to admit more Muslim refugees. In a recent Slate piece, he suggests that it is not. This line of argument is perfectly reasonable. Except that it misses the point entirely.

Let's back up. The Paris and Brussels attacks are particularly troubling because of the deep involvement by Muslims who were either born or brought up on European soil. Investigations since have revealed that ISIS sympathizers among local Muslim populations have formed alliances with organized crime to form jihadi networks. Why has this happened?

The standard explanation is that Europe has admitted more Muslims than it can afford to integrate. Muslims constitute less than 1 percent of America's population, but 6 percent of Belgium's, 7.5 percent of France's, 5 percent of Germany's, and 4.6 percent of England's. Integrating foreigners is neither easy nor cheap. It requires intensely targeted services—linguistic, educational, placement, transportation, and policing—to ease their transition. Sweden, Salam notes, spends more than 1 percent of its GDP on settling its refugee population. Failure to spend money on integration means consigning these refugees to segregated Muslim ghettos or banlieues without jobs and without prospects—other than their monthly welfare check—where they become sitting ducks for radicalization.

This narrative sounds plausible. But the counter-intuitive truth is that when it comes to social programs for integrating immigrants—Muslims or anyone else—less is more.

Immigrants don't need job programs. They need jobs. And, for a variety of reasons, Europe provides much more of the first and America much more of the second. Europe has an army of social workers in various NGOs whose job is to prepare immigrants for jobs. Not so much in America, which may be partially why America has a far better assimilation track record than Europe.

Jobs offer immigrants not just a paycheck, but also an entry into their new society, providing them with both the means and motive to learn its language and customs, all of which eliminates the need for formal programs. What is striking in any conversation with Syrian refugees in America is just how ready and willing they are to take just about any job, no matter how lowly or arduous. One Syrian refugee who found an entry-level position in a Walmart in Minnesota walked three miles just for his interview.

Yet many European countries have gone out of their way to deny or severely limit job opportunities for asylum seekers and refugees. Until a few years ago, most European Union countries prohibited asylum seekers from any employment until their application was processed, which could take years. Even now, Cato Institute's Alex Nowrasteh points out, Germany legally bars them from working for the first three months, Italy six, France nine, and England an entire year. Many countries, including Germany, restrict their employment to "shortage" sectors—and some even ban self-employment.

All of this, a 2007 report by EQUAL, an arm of the European Commission, concluded, "creates a situation of dependence where asylum seekers are forced to rely on state welfare or support from other organizations (e.g. NGOs), which also means high cost to the host country. This can contribute to negative public opinion towards asylum seekers and discrimination against them."

Even after refugees obtain work permits, their upward mobility is greatly restricted in Europe, thanks to the exceedingly rigid labor market in many countries. The unemployment rates of France and Belgium are nearly twice that of the United States. This dismal job market affects immigrants much more than the native born, thanks to Europe's tough minimum wage laws and other labor regulations that protect incumbents at the cost of newcomers.

Minimum wage laws mean that low-skilled immigrants who lack the linguistic skills and cultural knowledge of natives can't capitalize on the one advantage they can offer employers: cheaper labor. Belgium has among the highest minimum wage laws in Europe, and also the worst unemployment rates for immigrants (29.3 percent) and their children (27.9 percent).

Europe's tough hiring-and-firing provisions, demanded by labor unions, are poison for immigrants. Why? Because immigrants inevitably involve more risk and uncertainty than natives, and if employers can't fire them, notes George Mason University's Alex Tabarrok, they won't hire them either. It is not surprising that Muslims in France, which has some of the most protective labor laws in the industrialized world, are two-and-a-half times less likely to receive job interviews than non-Muslims.

All of this naturally breeds a feeling of systematic exclusion among European Muslims even if these laws didn't intend to discriminate. But new immigrants are less resentful compared to their children because they have their native countries as a reference point, notes UCLA's Susan Plann, an expert on Moroccan immigration to Europe. Despite the "discrimination," they appreciate the greater human rights protections, the lack of public corruption, and the relative restraint of the police in their adopted country. "The second generation, however, has no point of comparison and can see only the rejection and ghettoization," she notes.

In short, the growing radicalization of Muslims may be a distress response to the broader economic malaise in European countries—not inadequate spending on assimilation programs. Europe needs to deal with its toxic labor laws and curtail its spending on integration programs. That would dramatically improve results—and cost less money to boot.

Still, one could argue that until these laws are fixed, it makes sense for Europe to not compound its "Muslim problem" by letting in more refugees. But walling off Europe may have even more serious repercussions.

If ISIS is a menace, imagine what might happen when its young Syrian victims, crammed into camps in Jordan, Lebanon, and Turkey, without education or prospects, come of age and realize that they were abandoned there by the same Western powers whose misbegotten Iraqi adventure created this horrible mess in the first place? Will they meekly accept their fate or will they seek revenge, especially given how little they'll have to lose?

Preventing such an outcome means welcoming as many of these refugees as possible. This is strongly in the West's interest. The notion that it can seal itself into safety is simplistic, to say the least. Doing the right thing, in this case, may also be the prudent thing.

This column was originally published in The Week.

NEXT: Federal Judge Rules Skim Milk Isn't 'Skim Milk'

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. More spending cures all problems – if it doesn’t cure the problem it just wasn’t enough more.

    1. The people who perpetrated these European jihadi attacks were born and raised in Europe. They are not immigrants. They are not refugees.

    2. Bentley . if you, thought Marie `s stori is amazing, on thursday I bought a top of the range Acura sincee geting a check for $5841 thiss month and-over, 10/k this past-munth . it’s actualy the nicest work Ive ever had . I actually started seven months/ago and practically straight away startad earning minimum $83… per/hr . check out the post right here CHECK IT HERE????? http://www.elite36.com

  2. “””But Europe’s ridiculous labor laws?its stupid minimum wage mandates (that Bernie and Hillary are hell-bent on replicating here) and its silly union contracts (that make it hard to get rid of non-performing workers)?make jobs hard to come by for Muslims. “””

    Then why don’t they stay in the countries they came from since they don’t have these things?

    1. I believe they moved there to collect welfare and rape white women. Right?

      1. I want to move there to rape white children. Jewish Menace!

        1. You sick prick.

          Old man with ruptured spleen.

      2. Pretty much standard operating procedure in their own countries, why change ?

    2. Yeah, that’s the funny part that completely contradicts Dalmia’s assessment of what Muslims need to be a successful force in the global economy. All they need is a lack of constrictive labor laws and they’ll be fine.

      She manages to overlook that the only strict labor laws that exist in majority Muslim nations are the ones imposed by the religion itself that all but remove women from the workforce (and many religious minorities by way of extra taxation and total lack of security). Yet they are still almost exclusively backward shitholes unless they sit on an ocean of oil. And those are still shitholes for the overwhelming majority of their citizens not part of a royal family.

      So they have a freer labor market (for the men anyway) in the countries they’re leaving, yet the problem is the western nations not leaving them alone once they get there. LOL, ok Shika.

      1. I wouldn’t dignify their markets, labor or otherwise, as particularly free. The tribal-based corruption hardly allows markets to operate freely anywhere like a western-based market – even with EU labor restrictions.

        1. Great. I can’t wait for them to import that mentality to the west and couple it with the restrictive legal apparatus of Europe.

          But of greater concern is that these places have had just as long as the rest of the world to develop into civilized societies. And they have failed on a much greater scale than most of the world.

          1. I agree – which is why I said you shouldn’t say they have any kind of freer market than the countries they are emigrating to. Shithole social structure includes shithole legal system, property rights and therefore markets.

            I’m perfectly willing to accept into this country anyone that realizes they are leaving a shithole and want the opportunities afforded to them under our system instead.

    3. Are you single tonight? A lot of beautiful girls waiting for you to http://goo.gl/WbbNre

      1. What, you just assume that we are all cis-gendered shitlords? I mean, we are, but you shouldn’t assume!

  3. …immigrants today, Muslim or otherwise, don’t need these countries to spend money on them, they need to be left alone.

    If only they’d return the favor.
    -woman from Cologne
    -concert-goer in Paris
    -banker in Brussels
    -hotel guest in Mali
    -cartoonist in Denmark

    1. For every Muslim criminal you cite, I can cite a white mass murderer or serial killer. This does mean we can generalize to a whole group of people.

      1. So you think Muslims aren’t white?

      2. Blacks actually have a higher proportion of serial killers than whites. Nearly 1/5th. No other marker of identity corresponds to terrorism like being a Muslim. Those facts are all around here. The cosmos around here sure are pompous, but surprisingly weak on facts when it comes to the pet topics they like to preen most about.

      3. I don’t have the time, but no you can’t. You’ll probably run out of white mass murderers or serial killers before sloopy is done listing the Muslim criminals from March 2016.

  4. Abandoned there? Failing to take care of something that’s not your fault is not “abandonment.”

    1. Yeah, they were abandoned there…after they transported themselves a thousand miles, crossed several borders and showed up at the doorstep of the public assistance office with their hand out.

      1. I watched a video the other day of some trucker yelling out of his cab at the swarm of heavily armed riot cops on the side of the highway to help him get the migrants trying to keel over his vehicle to stop. They didn’t do anything.

        1. Are you sure it was about migrants, and not the Spanish wine trucks that were attacked and flipped over by actual Frenchmen, with the cops nearby but refusing to intervene?

  5. Couldn’t they try, say, exacting their revenge on the people directly responsible, or would that be harder than slaughtering women and children at Easter picnics?

    1. Those responsible are likely armed; the women and children are not.

      1. Concise 2nd Amendment endorsement. Thank you.

  6. Not to be facile but it looks once again like circumventing the free market with central planning is the problem.

    I’m amazed at the amount of effort expended globally trying to out-market the market.

    1. I’m not totally sure, seeing as the labor laws Dalmia’s is decrying are largely absent in Muslim-supermajority countries. Yet those places are almost exclusively shitholes where the standard of living is on par with 15th century Europe* and half of the people are treated as property.

      *Unless you’re part of a royal family

  7. The destructive, degenerate conduct such people engage in are resultant of their retarded and primitive culture. Attempts to ascribe these problems to economic misfortunes miss the point.

    1. *is.

      Do unemployed people in, say, Wisconsin make a habit of blowing shit up?

  8. News Flash: Non-assimilationist cultures do shitty job of assimilating. More on this story at 10.

  9. If only Europeans weren’t so… European.

  10. It’s going to be fun watching the fallout from this refugee crisis unfold for years. Europe is taking in thousands of refugees (hooray for secular humanism!) but what they do with them for the years to come is a big fat question mark. They’re going to be trapped in camps for months if not years, then they’re going to be hustled into ghettos, given a welfare check and forgotten.

    1. It would be a lot easier to forget them if they were sent back to their own countries

      Plus most of these countries don’t have evil labor laws or minimum wages so they should be economic paradise

      1. It would be a lot easier to forget them if they were sent back to their own countries

        Most of “them” were born there. But don’t let that spoil the story.

        1. That is the problem of earlier stupid policies of letting them in. Its best to learn from mistakes then to repeat them.

          1. So send the French back to France, the Belgians back to Belgium! Fine idea.

          2. It’s not the letting them in that’s the problem, it’s the bureaucratic processes that’s going to keep people in limbo for years. This is called humane treatment.

        2. That shouldn’t be any barrier to repatriating them. After all, I’m always hearing about what a wonderful thing immigration is. I’m sure it’ll do wonders for the middle east as well.

          1. That shouldn’t be any barrier to repatriating them.

            That’s remarkably stupid, even from you. You’ll take a kid who was born in France, whose parents were born in France, and send him to Algeria or Sudan or wherever? And they’ll of course let him get off the plane? If his grandparents are from different countries, he would be cut up accordingly and the pieces sent to the countries of his grandparents’ birth in rough weight proportion?

            You live in an amazing universe.

            1. Then I can’t wait for the articles decrying Algeria and Sudan’s immigration policies.

            2. Cut them up? Why? When the bouncer kicks you out of his bar, he doesn’t care where you go. His only demand is that you leave *his* establishment. What you do after that is your problem.

  11. I have no doubt that free job markets are better at integrating Muslims into European society than heavily regulated markets.

    If that were the only issue, however, if Europe’s labor laws were as unobtrusive as they are in the United States, Europe might expect Muslims to be as well integrated into European society as African-Americans. They should hope for better than that.

    1. I’d argue your average Frenchmen is probably more racist.

      1. I’m not sure it’s about race with them, exactly. It’s more about that famous chauvinism for the idea of France.

        They seem to be more confident in the superiority of French culture than we are in ours.

        Sometimes it seems like their main problem with American exceptionalism is that it’s insufficiently French.

  12. Also, let people own guns and carry them concealed. How many sexual assaults do you think will happen as soon as guys start getting shot?

    1. ^^this^^

      The right to self-defense solves the overwhelming majority of problems associated with assimilation, freedom of movement and private property rights.

      1. That’s really the biggest reason why I don’t think Muslim immigration to America will be as problematic as it has been in Europe.

        Americans really do, for the most part, value autonomy and self-defense. Can you imagine what happened in Cologne happening in Houston?

        1. No way in hell would it,happen in a country where the perpetrators knew they’d likely end up imprisoned if they survived the night. Sure, we tolerate some violence, like Ferguson riots, Baltimire riots, LA riots, but those were permitted by the state. I’m sure you remember, when property owners decided to defend their property in the LA riots, the rioters left them alone and went where the cops were allowing them to riot by keeping the property owners away.

          Immigration from those Muslim shitholes won’t be as big a problem here. Until the left takes,over the Supreme Court and guts the 2A and passes hate speech laws that effectively gut the 1A. Then all bets are off.

          1. Of course, then the areas most effected will be states that are just dying to take guns away and that also believe in a huge welfare state. So I’m sure I’ll be fine in Texas while people in NewYork, New Jersey, Illinois and California will be a bit more at risk.

          2. Until the left takes,over the Supreme Court and guts the 2A and passes hate speech laws that effectively gut the 1A.

            Which seems closer to reality that farther from it. 1A is continuously under assault, whether it’s the thought crime of “hate speech” or the nonsense on college campuses or the most innocuous things decried as racist or sexist or some other ist. The left is in the driver’s seat and SCOTUS could be THE issue of the campaign. Blue cities have no hesitation in taking on 2A and that won’t change if the Blue Menace becomes more widespread.

  13. http://bit.ly/21c96s8

    “…Using this framework,we demonstrate that on average, the basic social values of Muslim migrants fall roughly mid-way between those prevailing in their country of origin and their country of destination. We conclude that Muslim migrants do not move to Western countries with rigidly fixed attitudes; instead, they gradually absorb much of the host culture, as assimilation theories suggests.”

  14. Another reason Europe is having problems with integration is because of its rejection of multiculturalism. I know that’s controversial to people who don’t understand what that means. Many Americans imagine that Europe is the epitome of the multicultural model–they’re not. Their model is one of forced integration–which is the opposite of multiculturalism.

    In America, feel free to speak any language you choose. If Muslim women want to cover their heads in public schools, absolutely no one is going to stop them.

    If Latino-Americans move into huge parts of Los Angeles, put up signs in nothing but Spanish, listen to Spanish language radio, and watch four different Spanish language stations on TV, no one is going to stop them. And the third generation that grows up in that part of LA (or Koreatown, Chinatown, Little Saigon, etc) are a lot more American under the multicultural model than the third generation of Muslims are under the forced assimilation models of Germany and France.

    Centrally planned cultures fail as miserably as centrally planned markets, and the sooner Europe dumps its forced integration model and adopts multiculturalism, the better they’ll do with assimilation. Why would trying to force people to abandon their old culture make them more enthusiastic about embracing the new? People just don’t work that way. Try to take something away from people, and they tighten their grip.

    1. Or Europe could just kick the Muslims out.

      And the US has not yet seen the end of the multicultural experiment. When woman are forced to cover their heads whether they want to or not, where areas which speak nothing but Spanish become ghettos and are economic basket cases like Puerto Rico, where you can say anything you want as long as the local ethnic, religious, race etc in power allow it, try speaking freely in many areas the US university system

      1. Maybe a wall is the answer. Or maybe camps? It’s long past time to try some bold new solutions.

        1. Showers. Kills two birds with one stone, so to speak.

          1. Muslims don’t shower. They’re filthy. You should know this, Kohan.

            1. Well, Europeans have special shower technology which covers that. German inventiveness.

            2. Muslims don’t shower. They’re filthy. You should know this, Kohan.

              So, send them to France?

              1. Perfect.

            3. Pretty true. We had to provide lessons to Afghans on how to shit while deployed there. Literally they had no idea how to use a toilet, not their fault since they could and did just shit anywhere, but they were lacking in just about all hygiene standards.

        2. Europe has been fighting against Muslim invasion since Islam was invented. Without that it would have the same dreary culture and economy as the rest of the Muslim countries

          1. I don’t believe North Africa and the Middle East have had dreary economies because they’re Muslim. I think it’s because they’ve been ruled by colonial administrations and then by vicious dictators for more than 100 years.

            Why would libertarians ignore that fact and blame it all on Islam? Yeah, having the economy and the culture devastated by authoritarian dictatorships for a hundred years is bad–but let’s blame those problems on the religion?!

            That’s like ignoring the USSR’s economic problems–not on the central planning and communism, but on the Russian Orthodoxy? Why would we do that?

            1. Why would libertarians ignore that fact and blame it all on Islam?

              let’s flip that around: why should they ignore the existence of Islam. It’s not like economic and/or political freedom are rampant in majority-Muslim nations. The authoritarian dictatorships you point to appear to be a feature of living in an Islamic nation, not an unfortunate outgrowth. The religion pretty much IS the political system. The closest you get to relative freedom of movement is a place like the UAE.

              1. “The authoritarian dictatorships you point to appear to be a feature of living in an Islamic nation, not an unfortunate outgrowth.”

                I’m not going to say that cultural factors like religion don’t have any impact, but I will say that economic opportunities and growth are likely to take hold despite authoritarian dictatorships.

                I’d be happy to argue that capitalism as we’ve had it was an outgrowth of the Protestant work ethic–doesn’t mean authoritarian governments wouldn’t devastate the economies of Protestant cultures, too.

                Meanwhile, from Iranian-American Muslims in Westwood (Los Angeles) to Muslims in Dearborn, Muslims seem to do well economically in free societies just like people from other religions.

                The history of the Muslim world in the 20th Century was about going from colonial administrations, being carved up (often ignoring ethic considerations) in the aftermath of World War I, finally forcing their independence over the course of decades through revolutionary movements typically allied with the Soviet Union, and having those revolutionary movements mature into dictatorships. From Algeria to Egypt, the terrorist groups we know mostly coalesced from resistance to those dictatorships or, as in Syria, Lebanon, and Pakistan, were created by vicious dictatorships. It isn’t surprising that religious fanaticism took hold under those circumstances. And I believe Christian fanatics would have emerged under similar circumstances.

                1. Maybe certain religions are more conducive to violent resistance and less conducive to capitalism, but oppression still breeds revolt anyway, regardless of religion, and who can argue that Muslims are unwilling to rise up against their oppressors anymore? Aren’t they just like the rest of us that way?

                  Liberators became dictators in Cuba, too. But the Cuban people never overthrew the Castro regime. I don’t blame Catholicism for their lack of economic growth. I blame the communism and the authoritarianism for their economic problems–even if Catholicism were in some way a contributing factor. Why is it any different with Islam? Hell, if dictatorships like Assad’s in Syria may look at Cubans’ Catholicism with envy–as if that were the reason Cubans were so reluctant to rise up against their dictators. Assad would be wrong to blame it on that. Oppression breeds revolt–regardless of the religion.

                  1. “I’m not going to say that cultural factors like religion don’t have any impact, but I will say that economic opportunities and growth are [NOT] likely to take hold despite authoritarian dictatorships.”

                    Fixed!

                2. Meanwhile, from Iranian-American Muslims in Westwood (Los Angeles) to Muslims in Dearborn, Muslims seem to do well economically in free societies just like people from other religions.

                  Some better than others.

                  You need to work on better framing your argument if your idea of “doing well economically” is this

                  1. You need to spell out what you’re trying to say with those links.

                    The stats you posted were for the greater Detroit MSA including Dearborn. That’s hardly a case study in how well the Muslims of Dearborn have assimilated, how well they’re doing economically, etc.

                    The link you gave to how well refugees have been doing isn’t indicative of how well Muslims in Dearborn are doing either. Those statistics are about what was happening with recent refugees in 2013. The Muslim community in Dearborn is more than 100 years old.

                    I don’t need a statistic to see how well Muslims in Westwood are doing. Many of them came to LA fleeing the Iranian revolution in 1979. In American history, I don’t think there has ever been an immigrant community that has thrived so well so quickly as the Persian community in Southern California. That community is amazing. And it overlaps heavily with the gay community in West Hollywood and the Jewish community.

                    If there’s any community that can rival the Persian immigrant community in terms of thriving so quickly, it’s probably the Sunni community in Los Angeles. It is not unusual to go to a restaurant in Westwood and sit among Sunnis, Persians, gays, Jews, and Russians–all sitting around eating hummus.

            2. Ken, you are totally off here, and wareagle is right. The religion and the culture are very, very intertwined. (Islam does not have the concept of “separation of mosque and state.”) To blame their troubles on colonialism and dictators misses the point. They got colonized because their cultures are backward. They had dictators and have trouble with democracy because their culture sucks.

              Russian Orthodoxy didn’t overthrow the Czar and impose communism. Islam overthrew what came before and imposed Islam. This is the result.

              1. I didn’t say culture and religion weren’t intertwined.

                I said oppression breeds revolt regardless of religion or culture, and if religion is a contributing factor, it pales in comparison to authoritarianism.

                The Arab Spring was sparked by inflation and a lack of economic opportunity. They blamed their problems on the vicious dictators who oppressed them–and rightly so.

                The radicalness of various resistance movements can be traced directly to oppression by dictatorships. It works the same way with Buddhists. It’s no surprise if the most violent terrorists in the world hail from the areas with the most oppressive dictatorships. It works that way in North Africa. It works that way in Central America.

                Libertarians understand this. Authoritarianism has negative consequences–regardless of other contributing factors. This shouldn’t be controversial on a libertarian website.

                1. Notice, the question of whether Europe should take people in who’ve been radicalized through such oppression is a separate question.

                  I don’t want people coming here from cesspool of anti-American terrorism–and that has virtually nothing to do with their religion. Hell, the Christians in Syria are generally supportive of Assad.

                  Don’t want any potential terrorists coming here from anti-American cesspools regardless of their religion.

                  1. Also, Ken: what accounts for the fact that the ’50s-’60s Muslim immigrants to Europe were little trouble, but now their grandkids are increasingly radical? Surely France and Germany today are less “oppressive” than their original homelands, and France and Germany aren’t any more oppressive than they were 50 years ago. Obviously, there’s more going on than a reaction to oppression.

                    1. “Also, Ken: what accounts for the fact that the ’50s-’60s Muslim immigrants to Europe were little trouble, but now their grandkids are increasingly radical?”

                      Immigrants to France in the 50s and 60s were fleeing civil war in what amounted to another part of France–namely Algeria.

                      I wouldn’t say there wasn’t any trouble during or after the Algerian War. There was lots of trouble actually.

                      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Algerian_War

                      In Germany, things were especially weird because they still had holdover laws from before the Nazi era that said you couldn’t be a German citizen unless your father was a German citizen. Being born in Germany didn’t matter–to be a citizen, your father had to be a citizen.

                      They’d brought in tons of Turkish workers over the years, but because being born in Germany didn’t translate into citizenship, there were Muslims in Germany who had been born there, whose parents were born in Germany, and whose grandparents had been born in Germany–yet they were not considered German citizens. That’s just one example of the kind of alienation those people experienced. This is not conducive to assimilation.

                      Europe’s problems with assimilation have been ongoing. It’s just that average Americans didn’t really start paying attention to Muslim issues until after 9/11.

                    2. For sure, not offering citizenship plays a role. The Romans understood this once they became net importers of immigrants. You can’t take people’s labor or whatever and keep them out of the club.

                2. The radicalness of various resistance movements can be traced directly to oppression by dictatorships.

                  No, it long predates them. It’s in the Koran.

                  1. “No, it long predates them. It’s in the Koran.”

                    Are you suggesting that authoritarianism doesn’t breed resistance movements in non-Islamic countries?

                    That average Muslims would be terrorists even if it weren’t for oppression?

                    This is all demonstrably false.

                    P.S. If the Quran tells people to rise up against oppressive dictators, then score one point for the Quran.

                    1. Are you suggesting that authoritarianism doesn’t breed resistance movements in non-Islamic countries?

                      Sure, but these Islamic “resistance movements” doesn’t want to eliminate authoritarianism in their local areas, they want to impose authoritarian Islam over the entire world (eventually).

                      That average Muslims would be terrorists even if it weren’t for oppression?

                      This is all demonstrably false.

                      An awful lot of “average Muslims” everywhere support the goals of the terrorists, if not terror itself. Simple “oppression” does not explain this. Theology does. Lots of groups are, or have been, oppressed, and yet where are their worldwide terror movements? How much support do they get? Face it: Islam is different.

                    2. “Sure, but these Islamic “resistance movements” doesn’t want to eliminate authoritarianism in their local areas, they want to impose authoritarian Islam over the entire world (eventually).”

                      It’s inaccurate to say that the terrorists and their supporters don’t want to eliminate authoritarianism. Muslim Brotherhood, Islamic Jihad, almost all the terrorist organizations I can think of–they were radicalized (if not founded) in resistance to authoritarianism.

                      Even the organizations that were effectively founded BY vicious dictatorships (like Hezbollah) coalesced around things like the occupation of Lebanon. Whatever else Al Qaeda was, it was also an organization that was opposed to the vicious dictatorship in Saudi Arabia. Perhaps their biggest beef with the U.S. was that when we stationed troops in Saudi Arabia, it wasn’t really to protect the country from the Iranians or Saddam Hussein. They said we were really there to protect the vicious dictatorship in Saudi Arabia from the Saudi Arabian people.

                    3. Muslim Brotherhood, Islamic Jihad, almost all the terrorist organizations I can think of–they were radicalized (if not founded) in resistance to authoritarianism.

                      LOL, they only object to authoritarianism when they aren’t the authorities. That was my point. They aren’t freedom fighters, they’re just another gang of oppressors.

                    4. I hope you read the part below.

                      Just because you see sharia as authoritarianism doesn’t mean they see it that way. Try to see it through their eyes.

                      Northern Nigeria has been Muslim since the slave trading days. Southern Nigeria was and is not predominantly Muslim–but Southern Nigeria controls the government.

                      Meanwhile, the Nigerian government is widely thought of as one of the most corrupt governments in the world–and it’s been that way for a long time. Why would Muslims in Northern Nigeria want to subject themselves to a brutal and famously corrupt government when they could have sharia (the rule of law) instead?

                      In their minds, the alternative to sharia isn’t pluralistic democracy and the rule of law. In their minds, the alternative to sharia is vicious dictatorships like Mubarak’s and corruption like they have in Nigeria.

                    5. It’s sort of like when we’re talking to non-libertarians. When we try to get them to see the alternative to executive authority, rule by bureaucrats, an end to the drug war, etc., they don’t picture Libertopia like we do. They picture Somalia. Many Muslims are like that with sharia. Legitimacy doesn’t come from elected government. It comes from God. In some ways, what they mean by sharia is what we mean by “natural rights”. That mean their rights under sharia were not given to them by government, and the government can’t take them away.

                      I understand that you see sharia as authoritarianism. I hope you understand that just because you see it that way doesn’t mean that’s the way Muslims elsewhere see it. They see sharia as the alternative to authoritarianism. I think they’re probably wrong about what they think, but that doesn’t mean they don’t think it.

                    6. It’s also important to understand that from the perspective of Muslims, the sharia you think they want to impose on the rest of the world, to them, that is the alternative to the whims of authoritarian dictators. When they say “sharia”, in addition to whatever else they’re talking about, they also mean “the rule of law”. Sharia, in their world, means a rule of law beyond the whims of dictators and beyond the whims of men. Many of them even see democracy being imposed on them (rather than being free to live by sharia) the way you would see sharia being imposed on you (rather than democracy).

                      In other words, rightly or wrongly, they see sharia as the alternative to authoritarianism. Just because you see sharia as authoritarianism itself doesn’t mean that’s the way they see it. They see imposing sharia on people the same way necons saw themselves as “imposing” democracy on Iraq. That wasn’t an imposition to neocons. It was a liberation. Those poor women. Forced to walk around wearing burkas exposed to the world. If only they had democracy sharia, then they would be liberated.

                      Cultural perspectives aren’t really a problem. Imposing ourselves on each other is a problem.

                      I don’t want to live by sharia myself, but then I don’t want to live by whatever passes for morality according to Barack Obama and the progressives either.

                    7. Sharia is more than “the rule of law.” It’s rule by one particular law that is medieval, violent, totalitarian, inflexible, religious, anti-freedom, anti-gay, anti-woman, anti-Jew, and anti-Christian.

                      Many of them even see democracy being imposed on them (rather than being free to live by sharia) the way you would see sharia being imposed on you (rather than democracy).

                      Your analogy is inapt. Under democracy, there is little that prevents any individual Muslim from living his life according to sharia. Well, he can’t murder apostates, but he can basically follow the rules. Unfortunately, sharia is not simply about individuals following the rules, it’s about imposing them on everyone else. Fuck that.

                    8. “Sharia is more than “the rule of law.”

                      I didn’t say sharia is only the rule of law.

                      Here’s what I actually wrote:

                      “When they say “sharia”, in addition to whatever else they’re talking about, they also mean “the rule of law”.

                      Emphasis added.

                      “Your analogy is inapt. Under democracy, there is little that prevents any individual Muslim from living his life according to sharia.”

                      It isn’t an analogy.

                      Part of what Muslims like about sharia is that it’s like the rule of law–rather than the whim of dictators.

                      For example, the Egyptians who voted for the Muslims Brotherhood did so because they were hoping the Brotherhood wouldn’t be corrupt and awful like Mubarak, who ruled, essentially, without the rule of law. Then the Muslim Brotherhood got into power and started acting just like Mubarak–making themselves permanent in the Constitution like Mubarak, etc. Turns out politicians can’t be trusted–not even the Muslim Brotherhood. Who knew? It’s easy to seem better than a corrupt dictator when you’ve never been in power.

                      I’ve already cited the same kind of thing in Nigeria.

            3. ” I think it’s because they’ve been ruled by colonial administrations and then by vicious dictators for more than 100 years.”

              And the Ottoman Empire before that, which was not exactly a model of enlightened rule. The Middle East does not have much of culture of liberty in their political philosophy since they were conquered by Muslims from the Roman Empires.

              1. Honestly, Northern Europe didn’t have much of a culture of liberty for a long time either.

                While the English were forcing the Magna Carta on the king, the French kings were cementing absolute rule. Liberty came on the heels of the French Revolution, and much of that was spread by Napoleonic wars of liberation–and then Napoleon crowned himself emperor.

                We, here in North America, were relatively free from government control becasue it was logistically difficult and overly expensive to oppress us–too much. Isn’t that as much about geography as it is about religion?

            4. Okay, how did they get colonized? Was it because they were technologically so far behind the west they had no defense? They were also already shitholes with no human rights but let’s leave that aside. Whatever caused them to be shitholes wasn’t caused by the west or the west wouldn’t have been able to colonize them because they would be just as far along technologically instead of hundreds of years behind. There’s also plenty of countries who weren’t colonized and are still Muslim shitholes, and plenty that were colonized and are modern democracies. There’s no relationship.

              Sometimes I think people must smash their head into the wall repeatedly in order to make arguments stupid enough to believe that Islam isn’t at the heart of the problems that surround all Islamic countries and terrorism.

              1. Some of it was technological. Some of it was industrial revolution kind of stuff.

                Don’t think it was necessarily about the supposed inferiority of their religion, per se.

                Like I said before, I think there are qualities of the Protestant work ethic that lend itself well to capitalism. In competition, the team with the most resources and the ability to exploit them wins.

                “Sometimes I think people must smash their head into the wall repeatedly in order to make arguments stupid enough to believe that Islam isn’t at the heart of the problems that surround all Islamic countries and terrorism.”

                Oh noes! He called me stupid! Now what will i do?

                lol

                Libertarians who ignore the consequences of authoritarianism and blame culture for people’s problems instead should take time to think about what they’re saying, why it might be incompatible with libertarianism–or maybe think about calling themselves something other than “libertarian”.

                1. Ken: “I don’t want people coming here from cesspool of anti-American terrorism”

                  Little Havana residents are fiercely patriotic and law-abiding. It’s not the cesspool, it’s the character and dreams of the people that matter. People who want to come here and embrace Anerican values are welcome, regardless of source.

                  1. Yeah, but Cuba isn’t a cesspool of both anti-Americanism and terrorism is it.

                    Syria kinda is.

                    Many anti-Assad, Sunni, Syrians are anti-American and terrorist. The Shiite, Hezbollah and Iranian Revolutionary Army people are anti-American and terrorist. Even the pro-Assad Christians typically blame America to some extent for the Syrian civil war and their suffering amid that instability.

                    The one thing every side in that conflict seems to agree on is anti-Americanism, with a willingness to target civilians for political purposes coming in as a close second.

                    Bring any of those people here to the United States? No thanks. How ’bout a rock concert to raise money for Syrian orphans and widows instead?

                    1. The richest people I know in California are Muslims. Occupying the 5th most expensive zip code in the world. I respected their conservative outlook, I assume that comes with practicing any religion. Admittingly, a couple of the Muslim kids actually show support for Bernie, but I assume it’s because they were brought up in public schools and American colleges…. they’re as Americanized as any other kid would be.

                      Now, I’ve also been invited to Christian gatherings, and yeah… I preferred not to. I definitely had a sense that they were some practicing pedophiles. At least I get a “Get Out of Jail Free” card for judging white people instead of the mudskins. Ha!

                      I don’t know how you could practice radicalism and expect to create a Dubai. Those radicals definitely did a better job than the Mexicans responsible for Tijuana!

            5. The Middle East and North Africa have had dreary economies since a generation or 2 after they were conquered by Muslims. What was a rich breadbasket province of the Roman then Gothic Empires, deteriorated into backwater crap holes. You can still see broken irrigation ditches that were lined with olive trees 1500 years ago.

              1. Der preyin’ too da rong got dam gawd!!

                1. Rich Persians immigrate here, don’t mess with their money. Advocate for barring immigration if they’re average income is below a threshold. That way, they have to improve their economy before coming here if they want to destroy USA.

            6. There are a number of countries where a return to 19th Century Paternalistic Colonialism would constitute a major economic boost.

              Which is rather a pity, seeing that there are no more 19th Century Colonialists.

          2. And yet I bet you think the Civil War wasn’t about slavery.

            1. The Civil War was about States’ Rights, properly understood.

              1. Yes. The Southern States wanted to deny the Northern States the right to treat slaves as contraband and confiscate them from their owners if they intruded into Free territory.

                The States Rights argument has always been weak. The upper class of the South wanted to be Aristocrats, and bamboozled the rest of the South into fighting for that cause. Thay quite correctly foresaw that the Industrialization of the North was going to break their hold on power. A pox on them, and every other self-selected Elite. Pity that taking them down cost so many lives of the rank and file, though.

        3. ‘Or maybe camps? ‘

          Which is exactly what we’re doing with them.

      2. “When woman are forced to cover their heads whether they want to or not, where areas which speak nothing but Spanish become ghettos and are economic basket cases like Puerto Rico”

        Women being forced to cover their heads even if they aren’t Muslim is the opposite of multiculturalism.

        Speaking Spanish hasn’t turned LA into a ghetto–the Latino community actually revitalized downtown LA and turned what had been a ghetto into something great. At one point, the LA City Council was trying to save the flop houses from redevelopment. If anything, the Latino community led to gentrification. They were the solution to devastation caused by white flight. It’s the cities in the northeast that have suffered.

        The things you believe are simply untrue.

    2. are you kidding me. europe nor the US forced these people to move into their countries. Western countries have essentially created a welfare underclass with a different culture than the primary culture. This is prime for social unrest.

      It’s not for labor, the challenges a muslim faces in germany to get a job are large, learning not only another language but another script. Let alone that these refugees have little to know skills. The goal is to divide and find scapegoats in a population for this long depression we are in.

      You also do not go over the fact that muslims perhaps do not assimilate as well. east asian and western cultures although different do not conflict and both, if given the chance flourish.

      This will go down as one of the greatest failed experiments of all time. some cultures are superior to others, it’s not even an opinion, the data results are there, the test scores are in, the crimes rates are in.

  15. That having been said, freeing up Europe’s labor markets to the extent that America’s labor markets are free and embracing multiculturalism to the extent that America has isn’t likely to integrate European-Muslims into European society any better than African-Americans have been integrated into American society. African-Americans are as American as they can be–but they’re still on the fringes of society in terms of crime, educational attainment, job participation, etc.–and that’s despite freer labor laws than they have in Europe, multiculturalism, African Americans not generally being Muslim. etc. There has to be more to it than free labor markets and assimilating people into the culture.

    Ultimately, the problem with refugees from a war zone is that they’ve been severely traumatized, the men have no ties to the local community through family, etc. They’re basically like college kids on spring break in Cancun–why not get drunk and puke all over everything? Except in the case of Syrian refugees, they have no family or home to back to, no college career waiting for them. They didn’t come to Europe because they wanted to–they wanted to come because their opportunities at home were so bleak. It is not unreasonable for Europeans to not want refugees–because they’re refugees–and if the refugees are coming from a hotbed of anti-Western terrorism, it’s reasonable to oppose bringing in refugees on that basis alone.

    1. What you do about unassimilated Muslims whose grandparents have been in France and Germany since the 1950s and 1960s and what you do about newly arrived refugees from anti-Western terrorist hotbeds is two separate questions. How long should they tolerate refugee rape gangs and terrorist attacks–until the labor markets and multiculturalism starts kicking in?!

      How long will that take? A decade? Two decades? Longer?

    2. African-Americans are as American as they can be–but they’re still on the fringes of society in terms of crime, educational attainment, job participation, etc.–and that’s despite freer labor laws than they have in Europe, multiculturalism, African Americans not generally being Muslim. etc. There has to be more to it than free labor markets and assimilating people into the culture.

      Well it doesn’t help that the War on Poverty and the War on Drugs has completely obliterated the African-American family unit by subsidizing unwed mothers and incarcerating young black men.

      1. Not to mention the growth of a sizable African-American middle class. Let alone the African-Americans that have really made it athletes or entertainers (or much less visibly, entrepreneurs). Imagine that, not all African-Americans fit into a neat little category.

        Kinda like talking white privilege to some hillbilly.

        1. no one says they all fit into one category, but it takes a purposeful myopia to ignore the disproportionate presence of societal pathologies within the black community, many of those caused by (and incentivized by) govt policy.

          1. Some African-Americans are on the fringes of society – those most “helped” by our social engineering geniuses.

            1. My point was that if assimilation into the culture were the only problem, African-Americans wouldn’t be marginalized to whatever extent they are marginalized in American society.

              They may have problems like high incarceration rates that are associated with not thriving in our society, but African-Americans are as culturally American as Europeans could possibly hope that Syrian refugees will ever become.

              African-Americans have problems like high incarceration rates despite cultural assimilation.

              1. Low-income/welfare-dependent African-Americans have that problem Ken.

                Are you bucking for Irish’s mantle?

                1. I have no idea what you’re talking about with Irish’s mantle, but he seems like a pretty smart guy.

                  There may be numerous contributing factors to problems in the African-Americans community. Welfare programs may be one of them. The reason I brought up the African-American community is because it demonstrate that people can still have problems and challenges even if they’re fully integrated culturally and even if we have freer labor laws than Europe.

                  That doesn’t necessarily disagree with what you’re saying about welfare. It clarifies something I said earlier, and it probably disagrees with what Dalmia said.

  16. This article is a good start. Here are some things I would add. First, Europe must immediately decriminalize speech and religion. The influx was caused in part by the fact that they prosecuted people who spoke out against it with ‘hate speech’ laws. I think immigration is important, but people must feel that it is not imposed on them. If they can’t speak out then it feels like an invasion. (Which I think is in part the intention or at least unintended consequence of the hate speech laws (secular shariah) in the first place.) Secondly, the threat of them getting radicalized in refugee camps after they ‘realize’ that the west caused their suffering to begin with is tendentious to say the least – and a terrorist threat at worst. We need not succumb so easily. Finally, I would add that the problem with Islam is that it has been thoroughly discredited as a religion, and so the parents chucked it and instead teach the kids: “You’re a good kid now trust your conscience.” Which is just about the worst advice you can give to a rebellious and ambitious kid (think Beau Berghdahl). And is, ironically, the core message of Islam. Instead they must teach Christian values, even if they don’t want to call them that.

    E.g. Losing your brother to ISIS: “My father and mother have given us a warm kind of Islam.”

  17. Lost me completely on the last two paragraphs. We better import the refugees or their going to kill us? Yes, very convincing argument.

    1. Forget it, JB. It’s Shikhatown.

      1. Is that like Shi Tpa Town or Sodosopa?

    2. We better import the refugees or their going to kill us? Yes, very convincing argument.

      That does seem to be the crux of her argument. The other is that it’s entirely Europe’s fault this particular demographic of immigrants, whom in particular are highly over-represented in violent crime rates and have astonishingly low literacy rates (in their own language) and far lower IQs, would have trouble on the job market. This sort of mass immigration can only be sustained by welfare subsidy, only by government policy. The natural and mutually beneficial relationship between these immigrants and their economy and society was ended decades ago when fewer numbers were filling genuine niches. The smart ones fled the middle east a generation ago.

      This has become something else, some sort of one sided movement of people, the hosts are forced to pay for it at the point of a gun which of course invites only more extortion. If that’s not to be called the worst kind of colonialism, I’m not sure what to call it.

      1. You misused “whom”.

      2. It’s a weird alliance between the socialists and the Muslims. It works like this:

        1. Western countries bring in huge numbers of “refugees” and immigrants from the Middle East and North Africa – because we have to for some reason nobody can explain.

        2. A small but significant percentage of the new Muslims arrivals tend to explode or shoot up place. A large percentage of the rest support the exploders.

        3. Western leaders immediately lecture us that we cannot hold the explody Muslims against the rest.

        4. Instead, they put up cameras, read our emails, track our phones, outfit the police like an armored brigade, and generally turn their countries into police states.

        5. Repeat.

  18. It needs to stop putting roadblocks in the way of refugees and immigrants seeking jobs

    If Europe is so awful at handing migrants jobs, then why do these migrants move there in first place? Perhaps for some kind of economic gain other than employment. What’s the word for that?

    1. On many levels, they look at Europe as Freeshitistan.

    2. then why do these migrants move there in first place?

      Because they don’t want to be killed by ISIS or US bombs?

      1. Many of them are not from Syria or Iraq–they are from North Africa and other ME countries. How are they fleeing ISIS or American bombs?

      2. Because they don’t want to be killed by ISIS or US bombs?

        Are lots of those bombs going off in Eastern Turkey? Armenia? How many of the 20-30 countries that are much closer to Syria than the welfare states of Northern and Western Europe are warzones right now?

    3. If Europe is so awful at handing migrants jobs, then why do these migrants move there in first place? Perhaps for some kind of economic gain other than employment. What’s the word for that?

      Jizya.

      Some preachers actually preach that European welfare is jizya they’re entitled to. Also, ‘jihad seeker’s allowance’.

    4. Jobs like, say, county health inspector?

  19. So, Shikha has a solution to Europe’s ethnic minority problem, huh?
    You know who else had a solution to Europe’s ethnic minority problems?

    1. Mohammed?

  20. Oh sure, the European workforce needs people who are illiterate in their own language and are difficult to train. “Seventy percent of trainees from Syria, Afghanistan and Iraq who started training two years ago have already dropped out.” But the modern world has an increasing need for unskilled labor, right…?

    1. Maybe the Qatari’s should be importing these workers for their World Cup construction projects.

  21. Start making more money weekly. This is a valuable part time work for everyone. The best part work from comfort of your house and get paid from $100-$2k each week.Start today and have your first cash at the end of this week. For more details Check this link??

    Clik This Link inYour Browser
    ? ? ? ? http://www.MaxPost30.com

  22. I think the root error in Shikha’s thinking is that (ideological) maps are not the territory. As libertarians, our favorite hammers are free markets and individual rights, so there’s a tendency to see all problems as nails that can be moved by those particular hammers. Unfortunately, religion, culture, language, etc. are not always fixable that way. Islam, as a religion, is simply not very concerned with individual rights, and free markets are not enough to change that. To a dogmatic open borders type, it doesn’t matter who is immigrating. People are just economic units and bundles of individual rights.

    Another problem that afflicts the ideological blinded is to ignore things like quantity and proportionality. They tend to see problems in all or nothing terms. Is immigration good or bad? If good, then they think “the more, the better,” Of course reality doesn’t work that way. It’s always possible to have “too much of a good thing.”

    1. I think the root error in your thinking is your loss of faith in free markets and individual rights. In fact, Europe’s problem is that it is actually a Secular Caliphate that is more dangerous than can be dreampt of in an Islamic extremist’s wildest fantasies. Their basic philosophy is “We can bomb them by the thousands because muh feelz.” In fact there’s a movie coming out about this – Eye in the Sky.

      1. In fact, Europe’s problem is that it is actually a Secular Caliphate that is more dangerous than can be dreamt of in an Islamic extremist’s wildest fantasies

        Oh sure, just look at the death toll of decades of EU-supporting terrorists, trying to take over the world! All the head-chopping and gay-murdering.

        Give me a break, dude.

          1. I have no idea what point you are trying to make. Yes, many ISIS fighters have died. That does not at all contradict my points about Islam.

            1. So what good has come from converting all those middle and south american natives to Christianity? Can’t we just say that poor people are the problem?

  23. Yeah, it is going to be easy to get countries based on a blood and soil concept of nationhood to change their labor laws based on socialist notions of economic justice so that they can easier assimilate immigrants completely culturally foreign. It may be a correct prescription but they are likely to gag on the medicine.

  24. Europe’s over regulated labor markets aren’t the main problem, here.

    The main problem is a mass migration of people who are unemployable in any advanced economy. Language skills, work skills, work habits, etc. You have to get past that before labor regs become a problem.

  25. Shikha has miraculously discovered what we have been shouting at her for years:
    Mass immigration of unskilled labor is incompatible with a modern welfare state, at least if your goal is not to import a permanently dependent underclass.

    All of this naturally breeds a feeling of systematic exclusion among European Muslims even if these laws didn’t intend to discriminate.

    And if the laws are intended to create a permanent dependent underclass, what then? Wouldn’t all these laws designed to block low skilled labor from the labor market and trap them in government dependence work even better with low skill labor from incompatible cultures?

  26. If ISIS is a menace, imagine what might happen when its young Syrian victims, crammed into camps in Jordan, Lebanon, and Turkey, without education or prospects, come of age and realize that they were abandoned there by the same Western powers whose misbegotten Iraqi adventure created this horrible mess in the first place?

    Blame America First! Blame America First! Blame America First!

    Sheldon, is that you?

    Yeah, the dysfunction in the Middle East is totally all America’s fault. If only the US hadn’t overthrown a tribal Stalinist mafia in Iraq, the Middle East would be swimming in wine and honey. If only the US hadn’t introduced democracy to Iraq, all the Middle East would be a paradise.

    The problems have nothing at all to do with the people of the Middle East, their culture, their beliefs, their preferences, their actions. Oh no. They have no agency at all. Their actions are irrelevant to their outcomes. Their aversion to Liberty and the Rule of Law has nothing at all to do with their problems. Nor their tribalism. Nor their fascism, nor their imperialism, nor their theocratic totalitarianism.

    It’s really pitiful when a supposed libertarian mag has an implicit foreign policy of “it’s evil to overthrow totalitarian thugs”.

  27. If ISIS is a menace, imagine what might happen when its young Syrian victims, crammed into camps in Jordan, Lebanon, and Turkey, without education or prospects, come of age and realize

    that Muslim societies are toilets compared to the West

    1. [last paragraph disappeared]

      I imagine some of them might start asking “what are we doing wrong compared to the West?” Maybe there is something to all that Life, Liberty, Property, and Rule of Law jazz that some Westerners prattle on about.

      1. I imagine some of them might start asking “what are we doing wrong compared to the West?” Maybe there is something to all that Life, Liberty, Property, and Rule of Law jazz that some Westerners prattle on about.

        The west has been a shinging example to the rest of the world for probably 6 or more generations, and yet very non-European countries have got the message.

          1. Why can’t we have an edit button?

    2. I note that not *all* muslim societies are toilets generally, but it’s pretty close in the context of the Syrian discussion.

  28. Isn’t Dubai pretty much open in terms of the job market? They are always hiring immigrants. Why not go there instead of Europe?

    Seems to me that part of immigration is going where the jobs are, not going someplace and demanding the government change to provide them.

    But the real reason they go to Europe is the welfare and to rape women, neither of which flies in Dubai

    1. Why should the House of Muslim (Dar al-Islam) want to take a bunch of illiterate Syrians, heavily sprinkled with terrorists and sympathizers? Better to send them in the House of War (Dar al-Harab) and let Christians support them. It also spreads Islam, so it’s win/win for the Muslim world.

      1. They have. Quite a number have been allowed in. They just don’t label them as refugees, probably because the gulf states already gave a good amount of money to Syria to deal with their people and this whole problem.

  29. Also, didn’t the San Bernadino shooter have a pretty good job? Nice, cushy, well paid government one.

    I think the problem is that people who aren’t religious write about religious people, they don’t understand how they feel.

    They don’t pretend to believe in Islam and jihad because they don’t have a job, they genuinely, truly do. They believe they will be rewarded for eternity for killing infidels on Earth, Any earthly pleasure pales compared to that.

    1. Yup. Too bad so many people are blind to this.

  30. I just got paid $4520 working off my PC. CA02. If you think that’s cool, my divorced friend has twin toddlers and made over $5k her first month. It feels so good making so much money when other people have to work for so much less. Why Not You also try this..

    Start HERE— http://www.alpha-careers.com

  31. I just got paid $4520 working off my PC. CA09. If you think that’s cool, my divorced friend has twin toddlers and made over $5k her first month.Q It feels so good making so much money when other people have to work for so much less. Why Not You also try this..

    Start HERE— http://www.alpha-careers.com

  32. Europe has a Jihadi problem because they have imported…Jihadis.

    1. No, they have Jihadis because they haven’t imported enough of them! /Shikha logic

      1. my step-mum just bought a new cream Toyota Highlander only from working off a pc… browse around this website

        ??????www.paypost50.com

  33. Yeah!!! At least I’m success to EARN $4820/WEEK .I heard about it last 3months and I have made such a great cash. It is very beneficial for me and my family.My relatives wondered to see how i settle my Life in few days thank GOD to you for this….. You also try well? ? ? ?Please avoid spammer.F–03

    START HERE__ http://www.payability70.com

  34. Yeah!!! At least I’m success to EARN $4820/WEEK .R I heard about it last 3months and I have made such a great cash. It is very beneficial for me and my family.My relatives wondered to see how i settle my Life in few days thank GOD to you for this….. You also try well? ? ? ?Please avoid spammer.F–22

    START HERE__ http://www.payability70.com

  35. Welfare state lovin’ Shikha thinks to resolve its inevitable economic and social destruction by fine tuning cause and reapplying as remedy.

  36. my best friend’s step-mother makes $87 /hr on the internet . She has been without work for 9 months but last month her income was $12054 just working on the internet for a few hours. why not try this out START HERE__ http://www.elite36.com
    You also try well? ? ? ?Please avoid spammer

  37. I like her columns better when she is accusing white people of being racist.

  38. Some folks of the Halifax Chronicle-Herald have a strage way to fix a thing.
    http://www.blazingcatfur.ca/20…..ack-story/

  39. I Make up to $67/hour since joining onlinejobs company, which is amazing, under a year ago I bought brand new BMW car with beautifull house.I thank God every day I was blessed with these instructions and now it’s my duty to pay it forward and share it with Everyone, more info??..
    ————- http://www.onlinecash9.com

  40. til I saw the draft which was of $6881 , I didnt believe that my mother in law had been realy taking home money part-time on their laptop. . there best friend has done this 4 only twelve months and at present took care of the mortgage on there condo and got a top of the range Subaru Impreza . Learn More ….

    Click This Link inYour Browser….

    ?????? http://www.Reportmax20.com

  41. Start making more money weekly. This is a valuable part time work for everyone. The best part work from comfort of your house and get paid from $100-$2k each week.Start today and have your first cash at the end of this week. For more details Check this link??

    Clik This Link inYour Browser
    ? ? ? ? http://www.MaxPost30.com

  42. I’ve made $76,000 so far this year working online and I’m a full time student.I’m using an online business opportunity I heard about and I’ve made such great money.It’s really user friendly and I’m just so happy that I found out about it.

    Open This LinkFor More InFormation..

    ??????? http://www.selfcash10.com

  43. Start working at home with Google! It’s by-far the best job I’ve had. Last Wednesday I got a brand new BMW since getting a check for $6474 this – 4 weeks past. I began this 8-months ago and immediately was bringing home at least $77 per hour. I work through this link, go to tech tab for work detail. +_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+ http://www.ReportMax90.com

  44. Start making cash right now… Get more time with your family by doing jobs that only require for you to have a computer and an internet access and you can have that at your home. Start bringing up to $8012 a month. I’ve started this job and I’ve never been happier and now I am sharing it with you, so you can try it too. You can check it out here…

    —————- http://www.online.factoryofincome.com

  45. Start making more money weekly. This is a valuable part time work for everyone. The best part work from comfort of your house and get paid from $100-$2k each week.Start today and have your first cash at the end of this week. For more details Check this link??

    Clik This Link inYour Browser?

    ???? http://www.selfCash10.com

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.