Posted on 05/04/2007 1:11:58 AM PDT by rmlew
I disagree. It is not necessarily true that Steyn is being "illogical" by "ignoring" the concept of "separation". It may be that Steyn believes (as I do) that there is simply no such thing as "separation" in today's world. Many Muslims are already citizens of Western countries. Many more travel as tourists, students, businessmen, etc. Still others sneak across borders. It only takes a relative handfull to create havoc. The level of isolation necessary to achieve "separation" from the types of WMD that will likely be available to all wealthy people in a few decades' time is unattainable.
If that is the cause, then we have to folow Ann Coulter’s suggestion and no one has the heart for that.
I read a bunch of Lewis after I saw him at AEI. He and Mark hit it right on the head, and so did you. The West has no stomach for this fight.
The French are quietly freaking out, and you can see them putting up natalist policy everywhere.
Personally I think we are screwed regardless. I’m down to hope as well.
While not dealing exclusively with Islamic immigration, Mr. Steyn has previously covered the topic of immigration.
So, does this guy believe he can wave a magic wand and all the Muslims who are already in Canada will disappear?
Prayer works. (See Fatima/Russia, and the Virgin Mary). Load and lock, keep dems from office, and at the same time pray for the conversion of Muslims.
So what happens when a million other Muslims sense the "Big Mo"?
If you followed Mark Steyn at all with any degree of seriousness it would be very obvious to you that Mr. Steyn is no advocate of surrender. He stands on very solid ground.
It’s the author of this article who misses the point - By a country mile.
I highly recommend “America Alone.”
It’s an interesting and easy read...you can probably knock it out in a day!
Even the most conservative Republican President in the country would be powerless to stop Muslim immigration.
“Even the most conservative Republican President in the country would be powerless to stop Muslim immigration?”
oooooh reeeeeeeely...
well let me inform you that after the next muzzie terrorist bombing in America...you won’t be able to PAY the muzzies in this country to stay here!!! Or have you forgotten what the Japanese in America went through after Pearl Harbor.
It follows that I don't understand what Auster's problem is.
But that's the reality: the Canada of tomorrow will be built by who shows up. For the sake of multicultural virtue, we decided to outsource the future.
Then instead of recommending some concrete step like ending immigration, Steyn will write, "Nothing much to do about it now except hope the gamble pays off."
So how is Auster's conclusion about Steyn wrong?
Thus Steyn's real message is not the conservative message of defending and restoring one's threatened civilization; it is the liberal message of surrendering to the destruction of one's civilization.
“have you forgotten what the Japanese in America went through after Pearl Harbor.”
Of course we remember, which practically guarantees it won’t happen again.
“Of course we remember, which practically guarantees it won’t happen again.”
yeaaaaaaaa well you can take that pc crap over to the DU
‘cause one more muzzie terrorist bombing in America and every muslim swingin’ dick will have to pack up his koran and family and go back to whatever hellhole that he originated from.
Our ancestors didn’t risk life & limb to come to this country just so a bunch of camel jockeys could come here, terrorize our women & children and make hamburger out of our families!
Won’t happen, Marvin. America lacks the cajones to even save herself. But don’t feel bad. The rest of Western Civ isn’t any better. Oh, and I was a freeper long before you and will be one long after, so you can take your DU insult with you.
ooohhhh it will happen...with or without you...oldtimer! LMAO
Not at all. Steyn is clearly indulging in irony. He's inviting the reader to come to his own conclusion and realize that what's happening now ain't gonna work out well.
Auster is apparently too thick to recognize it.
If its so clear, please point out what should clue in Auster to Steyn's irony.
Auster is apparently too thick to recognize it.
So according to you, Auster is not intelligent enough to see the emperor's new clothes.
I wouldn't know about that. But he's evidently not intelligent enough to recognize Steyn's irony -- at least in this particular case.
In no way is Steyn proposing that things be allowed to continue on their current course. Instead, he is engaged in convincing his readers that a.) there is an immigration problem and b.) if things are allowed to continue on their current course, the nature of Canada will change.
Before a solution can emerge, you must first convince the public that there is a problem. The most effective form of persuasion is to allow the reader to arrive at the desired conclusion on his own.
Auster is evidently not of this school.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.