Who says a “refugee” has a right to a life in a first world country?

Hmmm!  Good question!  We’ve been so beaten over the head with this concept—refugees and asylum seekers ask for/demand entry into an advanced society—we assume somehow it’s the law.

Israel’s MK Michal Rosin : “Israel is responsible for the fate of the asylum seekers …”

Two countries are challenging the premise—Australia and Israel.

If the refugees and asylum seekers are looking only for an escape from persecution, why not let other smaller, less-developed countries give them a home?

Readers remember this—migration for economic reasons does not make one a refugee.

Here is Immigration Minister Scott Morrison in Australia on Monday. The Leftists must be screaming in Canberra!

From the Sydney Morning Herald:

In his strongest indication yet that he is looking to send refugees to Cambodia, Immigration Minister Scott Morrison has warned that the right to resettlement is not a ticket to a better life in a first world country.

His warning has followed recent visits by Mr Morrison and Foreign Minister Julie Bishop to Cambodia, and has fuelled speculation the Abbott government is in negotiations to send asylum seekers on Nauru who are found to be refugees, to the developing country.

Mr Morrison said resettlement was about sending people to places where they would be free from persecution.

“I just don’t buy into this argument that only first world countries are able to participate in resettlement,” he told Sky News.

And in Israel, the Leftists are spitting mad as they learn some African asylum seekers (from Israel) are going willingly to Rwanda.   By the way, we learned previously that they are going with money in their pockets which this article does not mention.

From Haaretz via EastAfro (Israel Slammed for Sending Asylum Seekers to Rwanda without Status, Rights):

The government is facing criticism after Haaretz discovered that African asylum seekers from Eritrea and Sudan who agree to leave Israel voluntarily are being sent to Rwanda and Uganda without the benefit of official documentation or any guarantees of basic rights.

Asylum seekers who have been sent to these African countries have said that they do not receive any support from any government upon arrival, and that no one is doing anything to look after them.

About 10 days ago, Interior Minister Gideon Sa’ar said 81 asylum seekers have voluntarily left Israel for African states. The government has refused to say which countries are taking in the asylum seekers or to disclose other details of its agreements with these states.

MK Michal Rosin (Meretz) will convene an extraordinary session of the Knesset Committee on Foreign Workers, which she chairs, to discuss the agreements.

This is worth watching!  The UN High Commissioner for Refugees must be having a heart attack over this idea!  But, why not spread the refugee burden to less-developed countries?

By the way, I expect both Cambodia and Rwanda are receiving generous foreign aid from Australia and Israel, so now they are getting something in return!

The goal of Muslim immigration according to Muhammad

For more than a year, we’ve harped on the need for you to read this book‘Modern Day Trojan Horse:  Al-Hijra: The Islamic Doctrine of Immigration.’   If you haven’t done it yet, here is a summary of the basic concept.

The push for Shariah law is further advanced in the UK, here is a photo from an anti-alcohol demonstration in London in December. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2523658/Muslim-campaigners-protest-sale-alcohol-popular-East-London-area.html

From Israel Islam & End Times (emphasis is mine):

THE ISLAMIC concept of Hijrah (Immigration) as a means of supplanting the native population and reaching the position of power is a very well-developed doctrine in Islam.

[Then a little history lesson]

Muslims learned and remembered this lesson, and since then the concept of Hijrah- Immigration- as a means of supplanting the native population and reaching the position of power became a well-developed doctrine in Islam. Immigration in Islam is not a Western liberal romance about how the newcomers gratefully search for opportunities for a better life in liberty and offer their talents and loyalty to the benefit of their new homeland. Immigration as Islam sees it is an instrument of Islamic expansionism that employs religious and ethnic separatism in order to gain special status and privilege, then subvert, subdue, and subjugate non-Muslim societies and pave the way for their total Islamization and implementation of Shari’ah law.

[….]

The main principle for a Muslim community in a non-Muslim country is that it must be separate and distinct. Already in the Charter of Medina, Muhammad outlined the basic rule for Muslims who emigrate to non-Muslim land, i.e., they must form a separate body, keeping their own laws and making the host country comply with them….

Here is the concept of Taqiyya  (lying to infidels) at work.

Muhammad’s teachings forbid Muslims to immigrate to a non-Muslim country if they pursue the goal of their own personal gain or pleasure. But if they immigrate with the ultimate goal of spreading Islam and making it victorious, or at least this is a part of the reason for their immigration, then they are allowed both pleasure and personal gain. A Muslim immigrant should not integrate with the host society, but if his stay depends on showing some kind of integration to the host non-Muslim society, then he is permitted to demonstrate a fake integration, only in appearance and only temporarily, until the goal of subduing and the Islamization of this host society is achieved.

Liberals (and some most Republicans!) don’t get it!

That is why all those discussions so popular among Western liberals about which method is best for the integration of the religious Muslim immigrants into the host non-Muslim societies are not only futile; they are amusing, like disputes about the best way to make a tiger a vegetarian.

Church is state, state is church:

From the start, Muhammad brushed aside the Christian postulate about separation of Church and State: in the Islamic community, Church is State, and State is Church. The most important result of Hijrah was the expansion of Islam outside its initial borders not only as a religion, but as a socio-religious and socio-political system. Muslim immigration is a transitional period of preparation for transforming the host society from an open society into an Islamic society of the “slaves of Allah” and of establishing a political system, a State, based on Islamic principles.

There is more, read it all.

One thing that we Christians, Jews and atheists, focused on our daily lives, don’t get is that this is a process expected to take generations—-Islamists are focused on an end-game that likely won’t happen in their lifetimes.

Addendum:  This post has been one of our most-read posts since we reported the news last Friday.