The "migration crisis" on the Polish border, Part 2
Sanctions? What sanctions? Quite clearly, democracy and peace in the Middle East presents the EU with a serious problem: no refugees to harvest. The EU's mendacious "European values" grandstanders now have to double down
The EU remains quiet about the invaders putting their own children's lives at risk on a freezing border, and instead accuse Poland of heartless inhumanity for refusing to interfere in what another country freely gets up to within its own borders. The EU expects us to overlook the fact that by no stretch of the imagination can these "migrants" be in need of asylum. Instead, we are told to see a "humanitarian crisis," and to agree with Lukashenko, Putin and the invading Muslims that the crisis is of Poland's making. The EU, for its part, has been relentless in its psychological attacks on the Polish population. Listen to EFA/Greens MEP, Viola von Cramon-Taubadel, in the clip below.
"Lukashenko has shown to us the weakness of the migration and asylum system." Are you kidding me?! Muslim rape gangs running amok for decades in several EU countries shows the asylum system is strong? Fifteen jihad mass murder attacks in the EU in 2021 (a very quiet year) proves the asylum system is working just fine? Jihad attacks on churches now a regular feature of the European cultural scene tells us that the asylum system is in good nick? Municipalities buckling under the financial strain of supporting thousands of Muslims who refuse to work illustrates that the asylum system is great? The Muslim prison population is way out of proportion to their numbers in the population, and this in the context of massive under-arrest and under-incarceration of Muslim offenders (as the Shari'a commands) confirms the asylum system is just tickety-boo? Poland refuses to reward those who destroy her border installations and physically attack her soldiers with the prize of asylum, and now we can see the asylum system has a weakness. Exactly how stupid are European citizens expected to be?
'Asylum' has long ago entered the Newspeak lexicon, there to join represent, community, violence, racism, privilege, critical, peace, diversity, extremist, and a host of other words that no one seems to know the meaning of anymore. The word 'asylum' now means the right of any Muslim anywhere to travel to and settle anywhere and to be paid forever for doing nothing at all while being immune from punishment for whatever he or she does do. This is exactly the end state of jihad. The planet belongs to Muslims, and they are entitled to live at the expense of non-Muslims, whom they are entitled to abuse at will. Multiculturalism is full blown hybrid warfare that has been going on for decades, supplanting critical thought with dogma in the Western populations.
In a dark sort of way, one can say that Soviet Communism shielded the East European populations from multiculturalism. It would be naïve to suggest that they do not have their share of social ills and identity hang-ups, but dogmatic blindness to the reality of Islam is not one of them. From the vantage point of Poland, advancement lies to the West. Unfortunately, a significant minority in Poland equates everything about the West with advancement, including its multiculturalism. They display a quite reasonable reluctance to deny anyone their human rights, especially given their own history. Even more unfortunately, they equate any critical view of the West either as a desire to return to Communism, or as support for the socially backward forces in Poland. Out of this cognitive cauldron bubbles a deeply confused personal anguish over "those helpless, vulnerable people freezing in the forests on our border."
Let us be very clear about a few facts: firstly, when the media report that the migrants are "on the Polish border," it must not be lost sight of that those migrants are not in Poland, but on the sovereign territory of Belarus. It flies in the face of international law and common sense to demand of Poland that it takes care of people in another country, especially when that country has gone out of its way to place those people in the predicament in which they now find themselves, and those people willingly paid good money for the privilege.
Secondly, all the Muslims attempting to violate the Polish border from Belarus are officially tourists in Belarus. Yes, my dear readers, we are expected not to wonder how it is that thousands of Middle Eastern families, babies and grannies included, rushed en masse to catch a vacation in sub-zero, dictatorial, Belarus, a place that none of them had ever heard of till then. To add insult to injury, we are also expected to believe that they have been duped.
Thirdly, helpless, vulnerable people do not evade legal border crossing points and legal entry procedures. Helpless, vulnerable people do everything to strengthen their case for entry by showing how great their need is and how well they behave. Helpless, vulnerable people do not tear down the border installations of the country they're seeking help from. Helpless, vulnerable people do not attack the border guards they want should let them through. Helpless, vulnerable people do not shout "Fuck you!" and scream "Allahu akbar!" at those same border guards. Helpless, vulnerable people do not deliberately make their own children even more vulnerable. All of this is clear as day, yet at the sight and sound of women and children suffering, some hold themselves responsible for their situation and feel compelled to do something, exactly the effect that a hybrid attack is supposed to have. It is the "We must do more to help Muslims integrate" syndrome before the Muslims have even invaded.
Viola von Cramon-Taubadel's lays it on thick that Poland is the problem, and so serious is the EU about solving this problem that it even dispatched the President of the European Council, Charles Michel, to talk some sense into the recalcitrant, inhuman Polish government.
We are speaking of people, people in need, people who look for a better life and many of them are refugees from Afghanistan and Syria and we have to make sure that we uphold the European values also at the external border of Poland and Lithuania, and therefore I hope that Charles-Michel can achieve any kind of a cooperative approach together with the Polish government to make sure that we have a humanitarian approach also at the external border at the east of the European border (sic).
This narrative of Poland's defenders as hostile border guards that refuse to let in people in need is picked up by the international media, which says a lot about the extent to which international law has been eroded. "Hostile border guards that refuse to let them in," are border guards who are doing their job: guarding the border. This attempt at casting the Polish border guards as monsters does have the unintended benefit of conveying to Muslims that the Polish border guards are no pushovers. And they are not.
There are reports of strong young men having made it across the border in the middle of the nights, only to be caught by the border guards, get roughed up, have their phones smashed, their money taken and expelled back to Belarus. Such treatment is important, but without escalation, the same individual will be back again and again until he succeeds, tying down valuable Polish resources that could be applied elsewhere. For this stalemate Poland alone is to blame. It recognises, correctly, that it is facing a hybrid war, but remains essentially pacifist in the face of it. Unless it is prepared to escalate more than its enemies are escalating, it is condemned to a very costly attrition to which it must eventually succumb.
Viola von Cramon-Taubadel mentions Belarus/Russia's role in the whole attack on Poland, but always as the briefest aside, hastening back to resume her demoralising of the Polish people:
I fully agree that the conduct of the invitation [from Lukashenko to Muslims to travel] to Belarus is a plan that is mainly coming from Moscow.
"Invitation" is an interesting choice of words. By what authority could Aleksander Lukashenko, President of Belarus, invite citizens of Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan and elsewhere to enter Poland? Of course, the dictator did nothing of the kind. All he did was make good on his threat to flood the EU with migrants. It worked for Erdoǧan (whom the EU paid for his troubles); why should it not work for Lukashenko?
The EU's protests of blackmail sound distinctly hollow against its barely-concealed eagerness to get its hands on the sudden bonanza of Muslims, if only the "far-Right" government of Poland were not so heartless. "We are speaking of people, people in need," urges Viola von Cramon-Taubadel, "people who look for a better life and many of them are refugees from Afghanistan and Syria." And who are the rest who are not "refugees from Afghanistan and Syria"? People from across the Middle East, "who are looking for a better life." There is nothing wrong with looking for a better life, provided it is done legally. Every criminal, petty or big-time, is looking for a better life, and those who attempt enter countries by flattening their border installations and attacking their border guards are criminals.
But nevertheless, we speak about people, we speak about people dying at the external border in the forest and this is really something that we have to prevent.
There is the credibility of the European Union also in danger, and we really should come up with a more comprehensive approach than just building walls or barbed wires on our external borders.
How is the credibility of the European Union in danger, if it did not issue the invitation to Middle Eastern Muslims to walk right into Poland, Lithuania and Latvia? Or did it? Let us take a closer look at the "comprehensive approach" Von Cramon-Taubadel urges upon the nations guarding the EU's external borders.
I think we have to find a system where we find ways to distribute migrants — and of course many of them have relatives and friends and connections in some of the member states and for them its pretty easy to connect and to integrate into our society. I mean, we do not speak about big numbers. We speak about a couple of thousands in the end and I think the European Union will manage to find ways to integrate them. I know many of them would also like to go to Germany and so far we speak about four thousand people who have arrived since this invitation programme of Lukashenko has begun. I hope we will manage to find proper ways to accommodate them, to give them work, to offer them a decent life. This is what people expect and this is what works very well when we look at the developments in 2015.
"Find ways to distribute migrants." 2015, Act 2. Go for the head of the snake. This is a continuation of the EU's battles with Poland, Hungary and the other usual suspects. Even if the EU had nothing to do with Lukashenko sending thousands of people to the border, they are certainly capitalising on it to bring Poland down a peg or two.
But listen to Von Cramon-Taubadel talking. Even if Lukashenko had not invited planeloads of people to rush the Polish border, she more than makes up for that by all but urging them to come. Never mind Lukashenko's social media blitz, the entire Middle East now knows, from the mouth of an MEP herself, that it doesn't matter how you get into the EU, just get yourself in and we'll take care of the rest. Why would the EU want to harm Lukashenko if he is advancing their policy? How "tough" can we expect those the EU sanctions against Lukashenko to be? Viola von Cramon-Taubadel is far from alone in her hybrid assault on Poland.
At least Viola von Cramon-Taubadel has enough nouse to not believe what she is saying. But what are we to make of this cringeworthy performance by Portuguese MEP Pedro Marques on those tough EU sanctions:
In a sense it [sanctions] have been effectiive already, but it needs to be scaled up. ...They should be targetted. They should not harm the citizens in general, but we need to target Lukashenko and all his friends in the regime. So yes we consider that we need to increase the scope of the sanctions and it must have been effective because Lukashenko started this new kind of aggression towards Europe when they became more desperate, when European sanctions were being more effective and causing more damage to the regime and to his allies. We know, even from the opposition in Belarus, that these sanctions, if well targetted, have also the capacity to divide the regime ...because they feel more the consequences of their actions towards their country, towards the Belarusians, towards the democratic opposition in Belarus. So I think we are doing well. We should continue, and at the same time of course, we have to block this aggression by the regime.
The highly dignified Polish MEP Anna Fotyga, who clearly has lived more life than the Western European pontificators and obscurantists, and unwilling too suffer fools, was having none of this milque-toast pussyfooting:
Sanctions should be extremely strong, adequate to the scope of the crimes committed by Lukashenko himself and the whole regime, I repeat, the usurper of the Presidential power in Belarus. I have my own experience from the time of martial law in Poland and combatting the communist regime. Actually, all of us, people linked to the opposition, supported strong sanctions. We were able to suffer not eating properly, but being able to get rid of an unwanted regime, and the same was communicated by [Belorusian opposition leader] Svetlana Tikhanovskaya clearly today in Strasbourg to MEPs, that Belarusian society is in favour of sanctions. Sanctions are effective and, actually, any voice speaking about concern with sanctions, of the wellbeing of the society of Belarus, of ordinary people, are a kind of hypocrisy.
Anna Fotyga goes on to make the critical point that Iraq has just had successful, internationally observed elections and one cannot speak of Iraq as in a refugee crisis. Yet Baghdad was the main airport from which the Lukashenko/Putin operation brought people to Belarus. Pedro Marques had no option but to insist that they were nonetheless refugees, so that Poland has to take them in, apparently not realising that he was justifying what Lukashenko had done. Sanctions? What sanctions? Quite clearly, democracy and peace in the Middle East presents the EU with a serious problem: no refugees to harvest. The EU's mendacious "European values" grandstanders now have to double down and:
- Actively advocate for getting those Muslims on the border across into the EU, and for bringing in more people directly from the Middle East, war or no war.
- See Poland and other countries that resist EU pressure as obstacles to that end
- Have nothing to say about Lukashenko's conduct except to whitewash it as an "invitation"
- Cannot bring themselves to mention "some member states" by name, thereby trivialising their difficulty
- Say not a single word against Russia, despite its being "obvious" that the Kremlin is behind this.
- Fail to mention Angela Merkel's call to Lukashenko over the head of the unidentified "member state" the Kremlin is trying to destabilise
- Fail to mention that Angela Merkel had called Vladimir Putin to, purportedly, ask for his help in resolving the very border crisis he was supposed to have created.
It is obvious that this whole affair is not only about the EU wanting to provide asylum to people stuck in Belarus, unable to get to Germany. There are many ways to get them from Belarus to Germany. They could even be airlifted directly. And now for the Russian doll: remember that ban on flights between Belarus and the EU, the so-called sanctions? What a shame. There is no alternative but to force Poland to open its borders and let these people through. For Poland to capitulate would mean the end of its democratically-elected government and the end of the whole pesky Visegrád project. Why would anyone be mistaken in seeing this as an EU hybrid attack on Poland hidden inside a concern for "asylum seekers" hidden inside so-called sanctions against Lukashenko? The last thing on earth that the EU wants is to impose effective sanctions on their one "refugees" supplier, hence the mantra of "They should be targetted. They should not harm the citizens in general," even if the citizen in general understands and accepts that the only sanctions that work are those that will harm them too. The supposed concern for not harming ordinary people is nothing more than a transparent ruse for avoiding effective sanction. Hypocrisy within hypocrisy. Lies within lies within lies.