|Expect to see much more of this headed to Europe... soon.|
Remember WikiLeaks? We learned that those in power of the United States worried about the treatment of the immigrant populations in France that enjoy setting cars on fire far greater than do assimilating:
Comments in diplomatic cables released by whistle-blowing website WikiLeaks and published by the daily Le Monde show frustration over France's record in assimilating minority groups and highlight concerns the problem could be deepening.
"France not only has a problem with integration or immigration; it also needs to act to give Muslims a sense of French identity," the U.S. embassy in Paris said in a secret diplomatic cable to Washington dated Aug. 17, 2005.
The comments foreshadowed a wave of violent clashes in December that year between youths, many of them second-generation immigrants, and police in the gritty suburban housing projects that ring major French cities.
Television footage of burning cars and rioting youths was beamed around the world, casting a spotlight on tension between the French government and descendants of immigrant groups, many of whom belonged to France's 5-million-strong Muslim community.
"The real problem is the failure of white Christian France to view its dark-skinned and Muslim compatriots as citizens in their own right," the U.S. embassy told Washington in a cable dated Nov. 9, 2005. Craig Stapleton was U.S. ambassador to France under the administration of President George W. Bush.
A succession of WikiLeaks releases has exposed the inner workings of U.S. diplomacy and revealed at times frank views of foreign leaders, prompting charges of irresponsibility from countries including France.
The cables published by Le Monde date back to mid-2005 and cover the presidencies of both Mr Bush and Barack Obama, but there is little variation in U.S. attitudes toward France and its policies on immigrants and minorities.
"French institutions appear insufficiently flexible for a population that is growing more diverse," said a cable from Jan. 2010. Charles Rivkin is currently U.S. ambassador to France.In 2007, The New York Times reported that Libya was attempting to normalize relations with Europe and part of this arrangement found that nation stopping illegal immigrants from reaching Italy by boat, using force if necessary to stop the peaceful invasion from transpiring unabated:
Italy’s job has been, in many ways, more difficult: Facing resistance in a Parliament it controls only narrowly, the center-left government has not made any major changes in immigration procedures. And Libya, the launching point for many of those heading to Italy, is far less reliable than more democratic nations like Morocco or Senegal.Now we are engaged in a limited aerial bombardment of Libya for reasons that aren't quite clear to us, nor have they be defined in an honest manner. We at SBPDL have a theory as to the real reason we are bombing Libya, but first a warning from the Colonel:
Libya has in recent months, however, been more helpful, possibly because it is working toward a closer relationship with Europe. Its leader, Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi, has forged informal agreements with Italy to crack down on smugglers and patrol its own borders to keep those fleeing other African countries from entering and then heading north from its shores.
Libyan leader Moammer Khadafy played the race card Monday, warning Europe that if he falls they will be deluged by hordes of illegal African immigrants.
"There are millions of blacks who could come to the Mediterranean to cross to France and Italy, and Libya plays a role in security in the Mediterranean," he told the France 24 television station.
"Libya may become the Somalia of North Africa, of the Mediterranean," Khadafy's son, Seif, added. "You will see the pirates in Sicily, in Crete, in Lampedusa. You will see millions of illegal immigrants. The terror will be next door."
There are perhaps millions, tens of millions, hundreds of millions of Africans who would do anything humanly possible to make it to Europe, not realizing that once they inundated Europe they'd merely extend the problems that plagued their nation of origin.
The United States of America, governed by the edicts of Black Run America (BRA), admonished the French government for not making enough concessions to a massive population that absolutely hates the indigenous, white French population. These foreign populations openly flout French law and burn Paris with reckless abandon.
Libya offered a buffer from an endless sea of humanity that desires a better life in Europe.Unable to attain a better life in African countries -- because these populations have an inability to create anything even remotely near what Europe has to offer -- Africans would risk everything to join their fellow Black people in burning cars in the suburbs of Paris.
Libya offered to keep these people at bay. Now the United Nations has passed a No-Fly Zone over that nation, whose leader warned of the desire consequences to Europe if his rule were to fall.
By bombing Libya, the United States prepares to open the floodgates of Africa and ensure that the problem of those Muslims and Black people in France who are having trouble assimilating will quickly have that hindrance removed. With the inundation of France (and all of Europe) by tens of millions of Africans the Libyans kept at bay, it will be the white populations of those nations assimilating to the mores and culture of the invading Africans.
Much the same as Americans are expected to do in the face of the Hispanic tsunami in this nation.
This is the reason we join other nations in bombing Libya. Not for some abstract ideas like "freedom" or "democracy," but to stop that nation from keeping millions of Africans from participating in The March into Europe.