Thursday, June 2, 2011
Faces rather than figures supply the drama in this year’s annual documents from the Southern Poverty Law Center ($PLC to VDARE.com)—its Financial Statements and the IRS 990. (The so- called Annual Report is really just a sales brochure).
A Changing of the Guard is underway (the Center threw itself a 40th Birthday Party this past April). Since 2009 the Board Chairman has been Howard Mandell, a Rabbi from Virginia Beach. The past year, two new Directors have been named. Ellen Sudow appears to be part of the $PLC’s outreach to the homosexual community—amongst other involvements, she chairs the Governance Committee of “The Sexual Minority Youth Assistance League” (SMYAL). The other is a hedge fund manager called Andrew Fredman.
For those who are counting, this seems to mean that of the eleven Directors, one is Chinese, four are black, and five Jewish. Only one, James McElroy—notable for spearheading the effort to strip San Diego’s Mount Soledad of its cross—appears to be of traditional American Christian heritage.
Perhaps this casts some light on the $PLC’s amazing “Money Mountain”—as I called it last year. This continues to grow. Total assets for the year ended October 31st 2010 rose 13.25% to $250.77 million—Net Assets (e.g. after deducting all payables) rose 14.39% to $228.7 Million.The $PLC has never been wealthier. MORE.
Several years ago, the late Milton Friedman, American champion of economic freedom, remarked that combining high levels of social-welfare payments and open-door immigration policies would inevitably lead to national bankruptcy. This was an observation of plain common sense. No one needs a doctorate in economics to understand that, in an impoverished world, high welfare payments and easy immigration lead to unsustainable levels of government spending followed by either grinding levels of taxation or inflationary debt, usually both. Either welfarism or uncontrolled immigration can ruin a nation in a few short decades, but in combination, they are a sure bet for national disintegration.
Once bad economic and social policies become entrenched, dependent political constituencies make necessary nation-saving changes extremely difficult. to enact. We see this every day in Congress and state legislatures. We see it on the nightly news as unions demonstrate, strike, bully, and threaten violence in Greece, France, and Wisconsin. Across the country, we see illegal aliens boldly demonstrating against enforcement of immigration laws and demanding amnesty.
The same combination of bad policies is ruining many European Union (EU) nations, and in a few of them, the fifth column of immigrant and allied political strength has rendered any native resistance extraordinarily difficult or even criminal. This is particularly true where new “hate speech” laws have been enacted. In Sweden, Belgium, and the UK, any criticism of Islam, including use of unfavorable statistics on Muslim crime or welfare, is subject to prosecution. In Belgium, the Socialist Party was even able to ban and muzzle their conservative competition for a while. The two largest Flemish parties, the New Flemish Alliance and Vlaams Belang, oppose multiculturalism, want to restrict immigration, and are now advocating Flemish secession from Belgium.
Yet even in some of the most liberal EU nations, some alarming statistics are breaking through the suppression of speech and information. The discovery that 40 percent of Denmark’s welfare budget was spent on a Muslim population of only four percent turned Denmark to more conservative government and strict immigration control. The revelation that that the non-Western five percent of the Swedish population was receiving half of Sweden’s welfare budget has at least awakened Sweden to the reality of Milton Friedman’s observation that open-door immigration would inevitably bankrupt and destroy a welfare state.
Norway is fortunate in having considerable petroleum reserves off its western coast. Revenue from a National Petroleum Fund has been a substantial boon to supporting Norway’s welfare budget. Since 2006, however, the Confederation of Norwegian Enterprise (NHO) has been warning that immigrant welfare use is so high that the National Petroleum Fund may be depleted within a few years. Unless Norway changes its immigration policies, Norway’s non-Western immigrant population of about three percent will quadruple by 2015. At the same time, Norway’s declining birth rate, now averaging only 1.8 children per couple, will result in a seven percent reduction in the workforce. Norway’s non-Western immigrant population is heavily concentrated in Oslo, where 55 percent of the welfare budget goes to that population group. The largest part of these are Pakistanis. In the last seven years, Pakistan’s population has increased by 30 million, over six times the entire population of Norway. Although conservative resistance is growing in Norway, the Left-Green coalition has dominated the Norwegian Parliament since 2005.
Assimilation has been the great hope of high immigration enthusiasts in both the United States and the European Union nations. It has not worked recently in the U.S. and has now been recognized as a disaster in many EU nations. Recently, the chiefs of state of Germany, France, and the UK declared multiculturalism to be an unmitigated failure. In fact, assimilation of Muslim populations in Europe is going the other way. Young European-born Muslims in the EU have far stronger loyalties to Islam and their grandparents’ homeland than their grandparents and have little identification with European nationality or culture. This is especially pronounced among young Muslim women.
In the Netherlands, a majority of young Muslims consider Islam and their grandparents homeland their chief loyalties. An alarming Daily Telegraph poll of British Muslims indicated that 40 percent of them want to introduce Sharia Law into British courts. Twenty percent are willing to admit sympathy with terrorists. One in three German Muslim youth want Islam to be the national religion of every country, and the same number were prepared to use violence against non-Muslims to serve the Muslim community. Over half said that Muslims should not adapt to Western society.
The Islamization of Europe first began with hiring Turkish, Yugoslav, and Moroccan guest-workers in Germany, France, the Netherlands, and Belgium. When these largely low-skilled and poorly educated workers were no longer needed, they did not go home. They stayed to become an increasing welfare burden. Sweden’s welfare-state politicians realized that Sweden’s 1.75 births per family could not sustain its native population. They thought immigrant taxpayers would save the Swedish welfare state. But the refugees they welcomed were predominantly low-skilled and poorly educated. Rather than generating the taxes to pay for the Swedish welfare-state, the net result was vastly increased welfare dependence and spending and a startling increase in crime.
Wyatt was the first killed in an organized battle, but not the first killed overall. See
RALEIGH — The State Capitol will mark the 150th anniversary of the Battle of Big Bethel on Saturday, June 11. Though the battle in June 1861 took place in Virginia, North Carolina soldier Henry Lawson Wyatt was reportedly the first soldier to die in battle for the Confederate cause in the Civil War.
From 10 a.m. until 3 p.m., the North State Rifles re-enacting group (www.northstaterifles.com) will be on the northwest Capitol grounds at the Wyatt monument. Group members will speak about Wyatt’s life, model the variety of uniforms worn by Tar Heels in the first year of the war, and give a lecture on the Battle of Big Bethel.
Displays at “Remembering Big Bethel” will shed light on how soldiers made the transition from home to the battlefield.
|First Confederate Soldier Killed In The WBTS|
Remembering first Confederate casualty
|Henry Lawson Wyatt & The Confederate Monument, Tarboro|
Mister President, members of the Court,
I am here because of what I have said. I am here for having spoken. I have spoken, I speak and I shall continue to speak. Many have kept silent, but not Pim Fortuyn, not Theo Van Gogh , and not I.
I am obliged to speak. For the Netherlands is under threat of Islam. As I have argued many times, Islam is chiefly an ideology. An ideology of hatred, of destruction, of conquest. It is my strong conviction that Islam is a threat to Western values, to freedom of speech, to the equality of men and women, of heterosexuals and homosexuals, of believers and unbelievers.
All over the world we can see how freedom is fleeing from Islam. Day by day we see our freedoms dwindle.
Islam is opposed to freedom. Renowned scholars of Islam from all parts of the world agree on this. My witness experts subscribe to my view. There are more Islam scholars whom the court did not allow me to call upon to testify. All agree with my statements, they show that I speak the truth. That truth is on trial today.