I am convinced that Barack Obama’s strategy to swamp America with immigrants Muslim and Mexican was inspired by his watching Star Trek: The Next Generation, which was broadcast between 1987 and 1994. What he likely took away from the series was a plan very similar to that of the Borg. As Jean-Luc Picard, commander of the Enterprise, said of the Borg: "In their collective state, the Borg are utterly without mercy; driven by one will alone: the will to conquer. They are beyond redemption, beyond reason."
You know what the Borg are, don’t you? That interstellar beehive of conquered worlds, using the enslaved as disposable pawns in that will to power? “Resistance is futile.” Resist, and you die. Submit, and you survive as a numbered cipher in service to the Collective.
That was a good plan, Obama must have thought, while he was “community organizing” in Chicago and teaching – or maligning or mis-teaching with tongue in cheek – constitutional law at the University of Chicago, as a “visiting fellow.” He was going to “fix” this country. It was too “white.” Too beholden to the “flawed” Constitution. Too European. He had a plan to swamp the country with Muslims and Mexicans, that is, with any real Mexicans or Central Americans passing through Mexico to enter the U.S.
As long as the “immigrants” were brown or black or fifty shades of gray between those hues, it didn’t matter. It didn’t matter if they wore burqas or niqabs or baseball caps or Pancho Villa hoodies, one and all were welcome to come and overwhelm Honky. He certainly wasn’t going to encourage and enable the invasion of the U.S. by white Europeans who wished to flee their looting welfare states, as I’m sure many want to. Use the Muslims and Mexicans as one would use salt and sand on icy roads. Salt will break up the ice, sand will give traction. After all, grains of salt or sand have no individual identities. Being Muslims, Mexicans, and assorted varieties of manqués and ciphers in between those hues, their “selves” are inextricably linked to the tribe, the Umma, the Cube, the race, La Raza. You don’t give them dirty looks or they’ll hit you.
But if you even think of hitting them, you’re guilty of racism and thoughtcrime.
In the name of multiculturalism, Obama has his own Treky Prime Directive: Never, ever ask Muslims and Mexicans to discard their stagnant or alleged cultures and assimilate into American culture and adopt American values of freedom. To expect them to would confess that “latent” racism among white and Asian Americans and even among blacks that Obama and Hillary Clinton are so well-acquainted with. Muslims of whatever race and Mexicans, even if some of them do resemble Vicente Fox, are not to be charged with racism. That, after all, would be racist.
And then came along the hit TV series, The Walking Dead, in 2010, two years into his first term, and Barack Obama had another brilliant idea: Treat the herds of flesh- and wealth-eating Muslims and Mexicans as brainless zombies feeding off of American efforts and sweat (via the welfare state and protected minority laws), who have invested – or infested, if you like – the U.S. as “the walking dead,” but on the sly, so their feelings won't be hurt. (¡Somos los muertos vivientes y usted no puede tocarnos!) Obama won't reveal that he has nothing but contempt for the people he claims he represents, or champions, or uses his executive powers for. Muslims and Mexicans are merely pawns in his quest for power. Please! No falafels or enchiladas at the White House dinner table! We're not that common! Michelle! You spilled some of that Sauce Cardinal all over your $500 Erin Featherstone blouse! Do you think I’m made of money? Oh. That’s right. Taxpayers are made of money.
The primary goal of Obama’s Borg/Mexican strategy is to “get Whitey.” That has been the leitmotif of his seven-year reign. To drown civilization with social and economic ballast as it was drowned by zombies in World War Z. To get Americans to accept halal food and to whistle “La cucaracha” while they worked and to fast with their fellow Muslim-citizens on Ramadan or suffer another terrorist attack and refrain from wearing American flag t-shirts in the presence of “Mexican-American” high school students.
Dare we call Obama a racist? Yes. Would he admit it? No, not in so many words. He would deny it in his usual folksy yadda-yadda patois. But if one were to attach a summary evaluation of his words and actions over the last seven years – aside from his booby-trapped foreign policy and Marxist economic “reforms” – that’s the only conclusion one can come to. He’s out to impoverish the country. To “transform” it. To play the black knock-down game on it as many times as possible until it swears eternal fealty to the Umma and obeys the Ulema and white Americans revere Saul Alinsky and Karl Marx and their neighborhood El Salvadoran rapist and thug with his “colors” tattooed to his chin.
It may be interesting to witness the clash between Muslims and Mexicans over who gets to lord it over the fetid swamp that will be America when it’s multiculturally conquered and “properly” ethnically diverse once Obama is finished stocking it with alligators, escaped pythons, poisonous snakes, mosquitoes, and unpotable water. The paddle tour will not be as entertaining as one through The Great Okefenokee Swamp.
On June 16th on FrontPage Daniel Greenfield wrote a review of Ann Coulter’s book on this very subject and “amnesty,” ¡Adios, America!.
Amnesty is a sinkhole of corrupt interests, from businesses looking for cheap labor to Democrats looking for cheap votes, and panic by fossilized political entities like the NAACP, unions and the Republican Party; eager to surrender out of fear that they will be be left behind by the demographic future…..
Coulter’s latest book, “Adios, America” is an uncompromising attack on the policies, justifications and rhetoric of amnesty. It’s full of the punchy quotes she’s known for, such as “Americans ought to be suspicious about being told incessantly fences don’t work. It’s like being told wheels don’t work”, accompanied by a broad survey of the entire immigration and illegal immigration debate.
The biggest targets are the latest efforts at amnesty, from the disastrous Republican amnesty effort to Obama’s unilateral legalizations, which have been disguised by Orwellian word games. After years of amnestiers claiming that their amnesty isn’t really amnesty, she lays out the simple fact that “Any law that forgives an illegal act, in whole or part, is an amnesty….”
But…but….all those defamed “illegals” will boost the economy and help to create wealth and not take jobs away from blacks and whites, won’t they? Isn’t that what the immigrants from Europe did in the late 19th and early 20th centuries?
Yes. That’s what they did then. The catch is that there was no welfare state for them to hook up to, either. No federal teats three dozen little piglets could suck on. Nor were they looking for any. Immigrants of the past, as recently as Cubans, were looking for freedom – not freedom to loot and become parasites.
As she points out, the vast majority of illegal aliens once legalized will begin collecting between $14,642 and $36,992 from the taxpayer.
“We’re always told that we need to amnesty illegals to shore up Social Security. How, exactly, are people who make so little money that they don’t pay income taxes going to save Social Security?” she asks.
Mexicans can play the cultural, economic and civilizational jihad game as well as Muslims. All they need to do is take a leaf from their Islamic ilk about how to milk the welfare state and never pay into it. Soren Kern had some interesting statistics to report in his Gatestone article, “Welfare Jihad in Europe” from May 31st.
Anjem Choudary, a British-born radical Islamic cleric who lives off the British welfare state, has repeatedly urged his followers to quit their jobs and claim unemployment benefits so they have more time to plot holy war against non-Muslims.
Choudary believes that Muslims are entitled to welfare payments because they are a form of jizya, a tax imposed on non-Muslims in countries run by Muslims, as a reminder that non-Muslims are permanently inferior and subservient to Muslims.
In 2010, The Sun reported that Choudary takes home more than £25,000 ($39,000) a year in welfare benefits. Among other handouts, Choudary receives £15,600 a year in housing benefit to keep him in a £320,000 ($495,000) house in Leytonstone, East London. He also receives £1,820 council tax allowance, £5,200 income support and £3,120 child benefits. Because his welfare payments are not taxed, his income is equivalent to a £32,500 ($50,000) salary. By comparison, the average annual earnings of full-time workers in Britain was £26,936 ($41,000) in 2014.
Moreover, Kern reports that social welfare fraud of the kind perpetrated in Denmark is being repeated throughout Europe, and that a Swedish soldier deployed in Afghanistan said that he was likely to get less help when he came back to Sweden than returning jihadists [from Syria and ISIS] were.
What’s at stake is the composition of the electorate in any election year. Writes Greenfield about Coulter’s book. The composition will be Borg and Mexican:
The transnational assumption behind the advocacy for illegal immigration is that the Americans, the French or the Israelis are not entitled to have their country the way they want it, but must bow to a higher international agenda. And if the locals don’t like it, they can always be displaced and replaced by a new herd of voters who may be a financial burden, but who will always vote the correct way.
Taking apart the 11 million figure often bandied about, Coulter contends that it’s more like 30 million and warns that amnesty is the final and ultimate political issue of the Republic.
“If we lose immigration,” writes Coulter, “we lose everything.”
Now, isn’t that “racist”?
Mexicans can also take another leaf from their Muslim compañeros de armas in Europe once they become permanent, “legalized” settlers in America who refuse to assimilate. In 2012, Walid Shoebat discovered something called the Institute of Muslim Minority Affairs. I’m sure La Raza has a similar organization that researches and describes how the gringo culture can be made to bend to the Hispanic will.
The manifesto explains "Muslim Minority Affairs" as more than an organization or a social concept, but as a calculated foreign policy of the Saudi Ministry of Religious Affairs, designed to achieve these specific goals. Now, don’t start denigrating the Saudis. They’re our “friends,” aren’t they?
1) Recruit individual Muslims who live in non-Muslim lands and transform them as a collective unit by establishing Islamic centers, educational programs, mosques, and organizations (like the Islamic Society of North America and the Muslim Students Association) that serve to prevent Muslims from assimilating into the cultures of their non-Muslim host nations.
2) Encourage these Muslim residents of non-Muslim host nations to shift the demographic scales in their own favor by means of population growth—and separatism—thereby enabling them to more effectively advance an agenda based on fundamentalist Wahhabi [i.e., Saudi] teachings and the legitimation and spread of Sharia Law in the West.
3) Eventually the proliferation of Muslims in the host nations will hit critical mass, tilting those societies toward majority-Muslim status.
4) Ultimately, the host states will join the Muslim commonwealth.
Once the Muslims have dealt with those pesky, nominally Catholic Mexicans, that is.
To be continued.