If it were any country but Germany which had opened its borders to unsorted so-called ‘refugees’ ,(from where ever); the world would be a bit less critical. But Germany produced the most evil, xenophobic and racist regime; the Nazis, which systematically exterminated millions of People within the memory of those alive today..
And if Germany had not been defeated in World War II, what atrocities would it have unleashed on the world?
For the Chancellor of Germany to ‘Open Borders’ to ‘refugees’ and allow them to flood towns and cities, without much of a back ground check; it is this ‘conscience cleaning’ that produces contempt.
Unlike the basic ‘immigration’ centres where people are housed and their identities checked, Germany flung open it’s borders so that anyone could walk in and get whatever was not nailed down.
Perhaps, to Merkel it seemed so angelic, until hundreds of thousands of unknown people poured in with their own agendas. Until the Germans began to feel uncomfortable in their own country.
Until the rest of the European Union balked at Merkel’s virtual demand that each country take thousands of persons, who, instead of fighting for their own country, ran.
Brexit was provoked by the demand that England take a pre-determined number of refugees. Other nations have put up barriers and refused, some are just waiting for the chance to leave the E.U. if pushed.
This is because most people find it very strange that Muslims want to go to Christian countries. Not to Saudi Arabia, Iran or even one of the ex-members of the Soviet Union which are Muslim states, but to avowed Christian countries, where the lifestyle and focus is different, and, in many ways, in conflict with their so-called ‘Islamic’ culture.
Muslims want to go to a Christian country where they can demand that Christians adopt to their way of life.
But Merkel doesn’t see it that way, she’s looking for ‘points’ to prove what an Angel she is.
Letting in so-called refugees in 2015/16 does not wipe away the era of Nazism. Does not make people forget what was. And who committed the atrocities. This sop to German consciences does not work, because it is just too obvious.
When the events in Cologne occurred, few people were surprised. Some assumed it would have been worse.
The recent murders in Berlin at a Christmas Market should have been foreseen. The perpetrator was on the ‘Watch List’ and had already been denied asylum.
So why wasn’t he deported? Imprisoned? Somehow confined?
The response of the German people will not be pretty.
What is the Main Cause of a Heart Attack? What is its Solution? A heart attack is the blockage of… Read More
In the vast economic arena, one term that often takes center stage, inciting extensive debates and discussions, is the "debt… Read More
De-Dollarization: The Changing Face of Global Finance The financial landscape is in a state of flux, with an intriguing economic… Read More
The curtains closed on a dramatic Bundesliga season with Bayern Munich standing tall once again, clinching their 11th straight title.… Read More
The Unfolding Story of Celine Dion's Health In recent news that has left fans across the globe stunned, iconic singer… Read More
As the echoes of the recent NBA season start to fade, the attention of enthusiasts is firmly glued to one… Read More
View Comments
Merkel should not be placed next to Hitler unless you're doing a contrast and compare of dark versus light. Not trying to defend Ms. Merkel, but blaming her for the establishment and consequences of a brutal regime is like saying America invented slavery. I don't see how her treatment of the refugees could in any way be construed as “sopping the conscience”. Surely she wasn't trying to ease her conscience. Although I believe the decisions she made, in her official position, were according to her personal conscience.
So she extended kindness to strangers and it didn't prevent a terrorist attack. Surely she wasn't being unrealistic. I don't think for one minute Ms. Merkel ever even entertained the notion that her acts of decency, civility and compassion toward fellow human beings in distress would stop or prevent planned acts of evil by others aiming to create more distress.
Your post does make an interesting point and it's a question that nobody has yet answered. Why do the Muslims migrate to so-called Christian countries? Why don't the refugees go to Muslim countries? Won't a Muslim country show them empathy, sympathy, compassion, kindness, and charity? Don't Muslims always say that their religion requires such acts? It's an Islamic duty. It's not like in America where we always argue "separation of church and state". Isn't the religion of Islam and a government run by Muslims woven together, i.e. NOT separate? Don't Muslim countries have programs in place to receive refugees or show kindness to strangers, especially fellow followers of the faith, since it's a part of their religion? These questions beg for answers.
At any rate, IF you have the power to help somebody … anybody … you should not withhold something that within your power to do because _________. The blank could be filled in with all kinds of answers (or “excuses”) such as:
~ The good I do won't stop terrorism or other horrific acts.
~ The good I do might make people angry who disagree with me.
~ The good I do won't “fix” what's “broke”!
Evil should always be overcome with good. That's not an ideal or an impossible dream. That's real life! Doesn't everybody live according to their own conscience?
I like your post, but I think you misread my item a bit. In all countries there are laws dealing with immigration. One goes through the steps. One doesn't just arrive and is instantly allowed free reign. Either one is confined somewhere while the documents or lack thereof are examined.
The Cubans who arrived in America in the famous Mariel were not just sent on the road or housed in unsecure locations. They were vetted. Some were only given 'parole' because they had committed offences in Cuba and had to report.
What Merkel did was to open borders, due weak checks, so that this chap who did the truck thing in Berlin was able to do it. And others are just like him, able to wander around Europe and select targets, because they are not refugees.
Other nations, from Bulgaria to Hungary and of course, Britain, are not into open borders. They have their laws and nothing to prove.
What Merkel has done is behave as if totally unaware of the possibilities of terrorism and her behaviour is questionable.
If you wanted to immigrate to Germany you couldn't just arrive and be immediately accepted.
The questions of who these migrants are, why they are migrating, and their purpose needs to be asked and investigated. And that is not being done. And it is my belief that if Germany had not had its' past of Nazism, it would not feel obliged to prove anything.
Oh I did not misread you. When you and I have our tête-à-tête, it's always clear that we both have definitive thoughts and ideas about a specific topic, event, etc. I always respect what you write. You articulate well. But I also have my “two cents” and I know that you are courteous enough to let me speak my mind, even if we don't see things the same way. :)
(Unlike my husband who will talk right over me and keep on going like a bulldozer!! :) )
Recently, I followed up on the question, and wrote an article about Saudi Arabia... which has these empty tents reserved for five days a year, for about 3 Million visitors for the Haj.
Qatar takes none, UAE takes none, Iraq and Iran take none... why do they go to European countries? It is a little strange. And what I think is that many are looking for 'freeness'.
My friends, the problem is not with German but the problem is that law is weak because under this law all the countries fulfill their aims and objects. say foolish are those who allow others to say at their homes and after sometimes they wills natch their houses and homes surely as the histories have shown clearly.
Political protection is present there where as kingship in the past as in Germany, France, united Kingdom and Russia from the very beginning. Giving Political protection is their personal law for the those who have any political rift in their countries.
Every country must ban to give political protection to any citizen belonging to any country. As United Kingdom gives political protection to different people but no one can ask UK why she gives political protection? Its main reason is that it is their home law no one can ask why she does so?
The point is that every country has it's entry requirements. Always had them since borders were created. In the modern day, if I want to go to Britain I have to satisfy certain requirements.
In emergency situations, as Syria, there would or should be some huge 'Ellis Island' kind of entry point so that those who are questionable would be vetted before released or sent back.