The Lies About Mass Muslim Immigration

And the dire consequences.

For over 30 years on American television, and before that on radio, the premier game show was called “Truth or Consequences”.  For about 20 years, it was hosted by the ever-popular Bob Barker.

On the show, contestants received roughly two seconds to answer a trivia question correctly (usually an off-the-wall question that no one would be able to answer correctly, or a bad joke) before "Beulah the Buzzer" sounded.   If, as was almost always the case, the contestant could not complete the "Truth" portion, there would be "Consequences," usually a zany and embarrassing stunt. From the start, most contestants preferred to answer the question wrong in order to perform the stunt. Said the show’s producer Ralph Edwards, "Most of the American people are darned good sports.”

In many broadcasts, the stunts on Truth or Consequences included a segment with a popular, but emotional, heart-rending surprise for a contestant, that being the reunion with a long-lost relative or with an enlisted son or daughter returning from military duty overseas, particularly Vietnam.

Bob Barker would sign off the show by saying “I hope all your consequences are happy ones.”

It is my contention that in this sad era of Islamist terrorism, jihadism and attempts to form a “world-wide Caliphate”, (starting with a desire to remove the Jews from Israel, followed by a gradual demographic/migratory take-over of Europe and a myriad of mini-wars in Africa, the Philippines and other Asian countries where Muslims seek the submission of their neighbors), that the idea of accepting hundreds of thousands of Muslim migrants to Canada and the United States, has some consequences, and these should be discussed, frankly and honestly.

And to understand this topic, there is no better way than to use Truth or Consequences, the television show, as a metaphor.

The contestants were only given a few seconds to come up with a factual answer to an obscure question, and no one really expected the contestants to come up with an answer. In fact, when on a rare question, someone had the answer, the host would turn it into a two or three part question, virtually guaranteeing that the contestant couldn’t answer the whole question.

The “consequences” were accepted; even though the game was stacked against the contestant. The fun or glory of being a contestant meant that the embarrassment suffered by the contestant in the “consequences” part, was of course accepted. And the producer said that most Americans are “darned good sports”. We might also say that they are darned tolerant.   In some extreme cases they could be considered downright masochistic.

The questions and their answers, then, the knowledge of obscure facts required to fairly play the game, were all irrelevant. For the entertainment of the public, contestants were only too happy  to play a game that they could not win, that would embarrass them, but might bring on some emotional prize of being reunited with a family member that usually happened once a show.

As I have argued in my book, Tolerism:  The Ideology Revealed, when tolerance becomes a culture’s preeminent virtue, it can morph into masochism all too easily.

The tolerance of Americans for a President, whose background and values were inadequately vetted by the mainstream media, continues;   they are such “good sports”. Their President has repudiated most traditional values and twists world events so that Islamist goals are obfuscated and most problems of the world are accepted as the fault of the Americans not the Jihadists.

In fact, the mere attempt to discuss the real problem, the real “truth” is something that the media only allows for a few seconds, as most investigation of the problems are prevented by the adoption of verbal barriers – when the real contestants of real life talk, they are forbidden to talk about the real truth by the adoption of words in our vile political correctness like “racist”, “intolerant”, “occupier” etc.    Just as Mr. Barker gave the contestants only a few seconds to answer the question, which was not possible, we today have consented to a world promoted by the media and the universities, where facts cannot be discussed nor the opinions based on the veracity of those facts.    We cannot critique any other culture for fear of being shunned and marginalized as “racists” when our very heritage requires that we demand that liberal values like the protection of individual rights and our liberal justice system should be paramount always, and that we oppose cultures that are anti-liberal, that are anti-Jewish or anti-Christian or anti-Yazidis or anti-gay or anti-woman, etc.   We are ready to be embarrassed by the consequences and don’t see that we are abused by the very rules of the game.

Donald Trump was dissed as a “racist bigot” by most of the media for daring to question Muslim immigration, until we can get a better handle on the consequences, even though a Canadian Muslim professor (Salim Mansur) made that very argument in testimony on immigration policy to the Canadian Parliament. Hardly anyone would even enter into the discussion because it is labeled politically incorrect.

We are not even allowed, it seems to discuss the facts and the consequences, even though, not all our consequences “are happy ones”. Moreover, we just don’t seem to understand that the consequences stem from failing to know the truth.

Here is the truth:

  • Not all cultures are equal
  • Muslim terrorists, unlike random killers, have a transnational movement now based in the ISIS state.    
  • Terrorism is not just violence, but violence to strike such fear into a society that people submit to certain politico-cultural demands.   
  • War was declared on 9/11 and our problem that we don’t take that seriously enough.   
  • As I have written elsewhere, many Muslim young men come from a culture of rape.
  • As Daniel Greenfield has written, 13% of the (mostly) Syrian refugees/migrants support the aims of ISIS, which is the greatest evil of our times. 
  • Many of the migrants have turned down Canada’s offer of refuge.   They are more attracted by the generous welfare systems of Germany and Scandinavia,
  • Syria and Iraq both expelled their Jewish populations.   The migrants are very anti-Jewish.   .
  • Canada has in part delegated the vetting of refugees to the United Nations.   The United Nations does not espouse western liberal values..
  • Some of the migrants traveled on small boats from which Christians and Yazidis were thrown into the sea to die.   Do we know how many and who did this?   Do we care?  Doris Epstein has recently argued that western governments are “ignoring the most-at risk refugees: the non-Muslims targeted for genocide by the Islamic State (ISIS)..  At the top of the threatened and persecuted list are the Yazidis, and then the Chaldo-Assyrian Christians. But all the non-Muslim minorities, such as the Mandaens, the Bahai and the Assyrians, are targeted.

Too few people in the U.S. and Canada actually care about the facts and have remade in their minds the migrants into deserving refugees who deserve the billions of dollars we shall spend on them.   Moreover, the consequences of not wanting to know the facts is that all opinions are suspect without a knowledge of the facts.

Shouldn’t Muslim migrants be trained to overcome the dangerous ideas taught to them in the dysfunctional, illiberal countries from which they come?

The most important point is that real life is not a game show, where lack of knowledge of the facts results in silly, sometimes embarrassing consequences. In real life, the failure to know fact from fiction may result in deadly consequences. Look up the Wikipedia entry for “List of Islamist terrorist attacks” for a rather complete history of major attacks from 1980 to the present, which show approximately 395 major Islamist terrorist attacks.

How many of them can you name? Oops, your two seconds are up; you now have to live with the consequences.

Share