10
Immigration Law
The stranger that is within thee shall get up above
thee very high; and thou shalt come down very low.
He shall lend to thee, and thou shalt not lend to
him: he shall be the head, and thou shalt be the tail
(Deuteronomy 28:43-44).
I would not presume to advise the French on what to do about
their Muslim populations. After the riots of not-so-distant memory,
after the French cleared their streets of burnt-out cars, after they had
finished rebuilding the burned schools, there was no shortage of
talking heads on television handing out free advice with all the
confidence of hindsight. Frankly, I get a little tired of all the worn out
generals and colonels and ex-CIA operatives treating us to their
expertise, and advising a government that no longer needs or wants
their advice. If they’re so smart, why aren’t they running the country?
Now, there's one very useful book on the market. I think it may be the
most important book written so far about terrorism, about Islam and
about what we’re facing in the world. It’s Tony Blankley’s, The
West's Last Chance: Will We Win the Clash of Civilizations?
Blankley can’t resist offering advice any more than any other pundit,
but before he does, he offers facts and analysis that I hadn’t seen
anywhere else. I came away from his book far less confused about
what is going on than I was before I read it.
Most Americans pay little attention to what goes on in Europe and
our media does very little to help. When Moslem hoodlums were
burning thousands of cars across French cities, including Paris, we
got a lot of pictures of burning cars, of young thugs throwing Molotov
cocktails at the police, but we got very little understanding about what
was going on or why. And when they did try to tell us why it was
happening, for the most part, they got it wrong.
In fairness to the media, they’re in the business of making money.
It is all too easy to forget that, when you’re watching news programs.
If we get bored with the program and switch off, they can’t sell their
commercials so they keep the news buzzing with action. And their
analysis is more combative than it is enlightening. That’s what made
Tony Blankley’s book such an eye opener. Some time ago, he wrote
in The Washington Times:
When, seven months ago, I finished writing my Book, The
West's Last Chance: Will We Win the Clash of Civilizations?,
London had not been attacked by Islamic terrorists, the Tate
Museum in London had not removed an art exhibit because
it offended radical Muslim sensitivities, and France had not
yet experienced the explosion of violence from elements of its
Muslim populations in its no-go zone communities. The fact
that I predicted all these events in my book was not the result
of clairvoyance. It was merely the result of a normally
intelligent person looking at the facts and their rather obvious
implications without the blinding effect of a politically correct
mentality.
And for me, it was the facts that were riveting. Part of the shock
was realizing how much we in this country simply do not know about
what has been happening in Europe. We don’t read the European
press and it seems the news hounds in this country don’t read it either.
They had to take notice, finally, when Paris was burning, but even
then they left us in the dark, probably because that’s where they were.
Political reporters in this country pay attention to what heads of
government do overseas—chancellors, presidents, prime ministers.
They follow all these people around and report to the world on what
these leaders are doing and saying. But if the press has a clue as to
what the man in the street is thinking, they don’t bother telling the
rest of us.
According to Tony Blankley, events in Europe, going on right
now in the streets and coffee houses, are telling a different story.
They’re telling careful observers that the people our newsmen are
covering now in Paris and Bonn, heads of governments, are going to
be turned out of office in the not-too-distant future. The man in the
street is fed up and governments are already leaning to the right
across Europe. They have to pay attention to where the man in the
street is going because these are the people who vote.
Blankley went on to say that the Muslim parts of Paris, Rotterdam
and other European cities are already labeled no-go zones for ethnic
Europeans, including armed policemen. As the Muslim populations
and their level of cultural and religious assertiveness expand,
European geography will be claimed for Islam. Continuing to quote:
Europe will become pockmarked with increasing numbers of
little Falujahs that will be effectively impenetrable by
anything much short of a United States Marine Division. Thus
as the fundamentalism expands into Europe and, perhaps to
a lesser extent, American Muslim communities, not only will
Islamic cultural aggression against a seemingly passive and
apologetic indigenous population increase, the zone of safety
and support for actual terrorists will expand as well.
There are parts of Europe where this is already the case.
According to a German news magazine, “The veil of multi-culturalism has been lifted, revealing parallel societies where the law
of the state does not apply.” Now think about that. It is true in
Europe, but not so true here—yet. In Europe there are zones where
the laws of the German state for example, or the laws of the French
state simply do not apply. They can’t be enforced and the people who
live there enforce their own cultural laws. This is not merely the
future; in Europe, it is now. And as Tony Blankley observed, all this
stuff is third or fourth page news to American news sources. Nobody
is paying any attention. In the waning days of the new French
insurrection, Blankley wrote this:
Soon the violence of the last two weeks will be seen as the
opening of an event of world historic significance. Even when
the current violence subsides, even when the French
government attempts to placate its radical Muslim population
by offering more welfare benefits and programs, it will not be
the end of the story. A new benchmark of the possible will
have been established. The flaccid and timorous response of
the French government will only increase the radicalizing
Muslim’s contempt for western cultural weakness.
Tony Blankley went on to cite Paul Belien writing from Brussels
about the same time, who observed: “It is not anger that is driving the
insurgents to take it out on the secularized welfare states of old
Europe, it is hatred. Hatred caused not by injustice suffered, but
stemming from a sense of superiority. The youths do not blame the
French; they despise them.”
This is something no one in this country seems to grasp.
Whenever you pick up the news magazines or you hear the comments
by the talking heads, people are trying to explain why it is that the
Arabs are so angry at the injustice they have suffered; about the way
that they have been treated by the host country. And that’s all people
in this country seem to understand. Most of the media have missed
the story completely. Talking heads criticize the French for isolating
the Muslims in their country in ghettos, but that is not the picture seen
from Europe.
Paul Belien goes on to report: “Look what a typical radical
Muslim leader, the leader of the Brussel’s based Arab-European
League has to say: ‘We reject integration when it leads to
assimilation. I don’t believe in a host country. We are at home here
and whatever we consider our culture to be also belongs to our chosen
country. I’m in my country; not the country of westerners.”
Where
was he? He was in Belgium. Or, consider the statement of a radical
German-Islamist that Tony Blankley recounted in his book. This from
a German Muslim:
Germany is an Islamic country. Islam is in the home, in
schools. Germans will be outnumbered. We Muslims will say
what we want; we’ll live how we want. It’s outrageous that
the Germans demand that we speak their language. Our
children will have our language, our laws, our culture.
I said I would not presume to advise the French. I don’t know
enough. But the difficulties Europe is having with immigrant
populations serve to throw biblical immigration law into sharp relief.
The Bible offers solutions that can be summarized by two simple,
easy-to-understand, principles: (1) drive out or destroy the
incorrigible elements who will not be assimilated; (2) welcome and
assimilate the rest.
The Palestinians are exhibit number one of a people who could
not/would not assimilate with Israel. And the problem in ancient
times is the problem today. It was a competing religion. Then it was
Baal. Now it is Allah.
Shortly after handing down the Ten Commandments and an
assortment of judgments apropos of the circumstances they faced in
the wilderness, God added this:
Behold, I send an Angel before thee, to keep thee in the way,
and to bring thee into the place which I have prepared.
Beware of him, and obey his voice, provoke him not; for he
will not pardon your transgressions: for my name is in him.
But if thou shalt indeed obey his voice, and do all that I speak;
then I will be an enemy unto thine enemies, and an adversary
unto thine adversaries (Exodus 23:20-22).
This is a good start. God would be an enemy of their enemies.
Israel was headed toward the promised land. They would have to fight
for it, but God would fight on their side: “For mine Angel shall go
before you, and bring you in unto the Amorites, and the Hittites, and
the Perizzites, and the Canaanites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites: and
I will cut them off” (v.23).
What Israel would face was a particular set of people with whom
they were to attempt no accommodation, no assimilation. Their
cultures, particularly their religions, were simply incompatible. The
people were also corrupt beyond imagination. Just how corrupt they
were will be discussed in the next chapter. The six listed tribes were
people who would never assimilate with Israel but would, in the end,
corrupt them if they stayed. God goes on to develop the theme:
You shall not worship their gods, nor serve them, nor do
according to their deeds; but you shall utterly overthrow them,
and break their sacred pillars in pieces. But you shall serve the
LORD your God, and He will bless your bread and your water;
and I will remove sickness from your midst. There shall be no
one miscarrying or barren in your land; I will fulfill the
number of your days (Exodus 23:24-26 NASB).
Every vestige of their religion was to be eradicated from the land,
for it would undermine the laws God gave them—laws that had a lot
to do with health as it turns out. Implicit in this statement is that there
would be health issues in assimilating with a pagan population.
I will send My terror ahead of you, and throw into confusion all
the people among whom you come, and I will make all your
enemies turn their backs to you. And I will send hornets ahead of
you, that they may drive out the Hivites, the Canaanites, and the
Hittites before you. I will not drive them out before you in a
single year, that the land may not become desolate, and the beasts
of the field become too numerous for you. I will drive them out
before you little by little, until you become fruitful and take
possession of the land (vv. 27-30 NASB).
We will learn later that this transition plan also required Israel to
fight. It wasn’t going to be easy, but God would fight on their side.
Just how big was this land to be? “And I will fix your boundary from
the Red Sea to the sea of the Philistines, and from the wilderness to
the River Euphrates; for I will deliver the inhabitants of the land into
your hand, and you will drive them out before you” (v. 31).
But for this to work, no deals could be made with these people, no
treaties, no covenants, and zero tolerance for their religion. They
were not even allowed to take residence in Israel (vv. 32-33).
Now as brutal as this is, the alternative was to become corrupted
and eventually destroyed from within by the people they didn’t drive
out. This is the picture Tony Blankley is drawing for us in Europe
right now. The Europeans have invited these people in to provide a
work force. But many are people who refuse to assimilate. They
won’t learn the French language, nor will they learn German. They
want to have their own government, their own schools, their own
religion. It is their stated goal to eventually make Europe their own
country. But consider what God said to Israel: “You had better get rid
of these people.” There are some religions and some cultures that are
completely incompatible, incorrigible, and corrupt.
Now in the modern politically correct way of thinking about this,
it sounds like Israel was to be a racist, exclusive, xenophobic society,
but that’s not the whole story. In Israelite law, aliens were not only
welcome in Israel, they were to be treated with respect and
consideration. They were to have all the rights, privileges and
responsibilities of one who was Israelite born. That said, Israel was
not to become a multicultural society.
The word “multicultural” is going to be very much in the news,
and we need to think long and hard about the issues it raises.
“Multicultural” is not synonymous with multi-racial. You can have
all kinds of people of different nationalities, races and ethnic groups
living together in one culture. But once you allow the cultures to
separate in an attempt to create a multicultural society, as Europe has
done (and as some in this country believe we should do), you are
headed for trouble. What the Law of God said to the aliens who lived
among them was, “If you are going to live here, you will have to
become part of the culture.”
Israel was given explicit instructions regarding strangers, aliens
who had come to sojourn among them: “Thou shalt neither vex a
stranger, nor oppress him: for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt”
(Exodus 22:21). But wait. What about those people they were to drive
out? These instructions seem contradictory.
We need to pause here to get some terms straight. The word,
“gentile,” is commonly used to describe any person who is not a Jew,
but that is not the correct usage in the Old Testament. In fact, the
singular “gentile” isn’t found there. It is always “gentiles.” The
Hebrew word is goy, in the sense of a massing of people, and it means
“nation.” Usually, it is a foreign nation, but Israel is also spoken of as
a goy, a nation.
Goy is not the word for “stranger.” The word for stranger is ger,
derived from the verb guwr, which means “to sojourn.” The people
who lived in Canaan before the conquest were tribes of people who
were often at war with one another. It was a way of life. There was no
way these people could have been assimilated into Israel en masse.
On the other hand, the stranger is an individual who can easily be
assimilated. Attempting to take in an ethnic group that worshiped
another God would be a disaster.
But the stranger, the sojourner, who arrives in Israel for trade or
for work was to be treated as a guest. That said, the stranger was
bound by the laws of the land: “Ye shall have one manner of law, as
well for the stranger, as for one of your own country: for I am the
LORD your God” (Leviticus 24:22). If that law were applied today,
we would say to people who come to live among us, “You are
welcome here, but you must live under our laws, learn our language,
go to our schools, and accept our culture. All this is required, but then
we will treat you like one of us.” There is more:
For the LORD your God is God of gods, and Lord of lords, a
great God, a mighty, and a terrible, which regards not persons,
nor takes reward: He executes the judgment of the fatherless
and widow, and loves the stranger, in giving him food and
raiment. Love ye therefore the stranger: for ye were strangers
in the land of Egypt (Deuteronomy 10:17-19).
When we have immigrants who come to our country, God says
we should love them, because he loves them. We are not to reject
them or persecute them, but to treat them well. That said, there is no
call to leave them as a completely isolated, separate culture in our
midst. They must, in return for our hospitality, accept our culture and
our laws. There is more:
Also thou shalt not oppress a stranger: for ye know the heart
of a stranger, seeing ye were strangers in the land of Egypt
(Exodus 23:9).
And thou shalt not glean thy vineyard, neither shalt thou
gather every grape of thy vineyard; thou shalt leave them for
the poor and stranger: I am the LORD your God (Leviticus
19:10).
The stranger is entitled to your welfare program on the same basis
as those born in the land. But in Israel, welfare was not brought to
you. You had to work to get it. Israel was to love the stranger, to
accept him as one born in the land. That said, the stranger was
expected to respect the religion of the host country. When it came to
the Sabbath, they were told to shut down their work:
But the seventh day is the Sabbath of the LORD thy God: in
it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy
daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle,
nor thy stranger that is within thy gates (Exodus 20:10).
There was, in Israel, both cultural and religious assimilation. You
were welcome to come and set up shop, but not to keep it open on the
Sabbath. This is not the religious assimilation that says you have to
believe what we believe. You just have to practice what we do. Israel
was not to be a multicultural society. To strangers they said, “You’re
welcome here, but you must assimilate, you learn the language, you
learn the culture, you live by our laws, or you get out.”
The reason was the protection of their religion. It was possible for
a stranger to participate fully in the religion of Israel if he chose to do
so. And this is something that it seems hardly anybody understands.
And thou shalt say unto them, Whatsoever man there be of
the house of Israel, or of the strangers which sojourn among
you, that offereth a burnt offering or sacrifice, And bringeth
it not unto the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, to
offer it unto the LORD; even that man shall be cut off from
among his people” (Leviticus 17:8-9).
What a surprise. Far from being banned from the temple, as they
were by the first century, strangers were actually permitted to offer a
sacrifice. But, if he does it and does not bring it to the door of the
tabernacle, to offer it to Jehovah, that man shall be deported—i.e., cut
off from the social contract. In other words, if you’re going to
worship our God, you must worship our God the same way the rest
of us do. Our civil laws and our religious laws apply to you just like
it would if you were home-born.
And this shall be a statute for ever unto you: that in the
seventh month, on the tenth day of the month, ye shall afflict
your souls, and do no work at all, whether it be one of your
own country, or a stranger that sojourns among you
(Leviticus 16:29).
The cultural and religious assimilation of strangers included the
most common aspects of daily living—even to the point of fasting on
the Day of Atonement.
If I could summarize God’s Law for the modern nation, it is to
avoid multiculturalism like the plague. Require the people who
immigrate to France to become French, speak the language, learn
the culture. The same thing is true here. If a person wants to
immigrate to this country, he should learn English and respect our
culture, our history, and our religion.
And it’s that last that’s part of the problem. France, the
government more than the people, has walked away from their
religious faith. Here in America, there are those trying to take us
down the same path. And if you expect the strangers to assimilate
with your culture, you have to have a culture. That is a warning
that God gave to Israel that should be taken very seriously. In a
long discourse, he said to them:
And it shall come to pass, if thou shalt hearken diligently
unto the voice of the LORD thy God, to observe and to do
all his commandments which I command thee this day, that
the LORD thy God will set thee on high above all nations
of the earth (Deuteronomy 28:1).
The LORD shall cause your enemies that rise up against
thee to be smitten before your face: they shall come out
against you one way, and flee seven ways (v. 7).
But it shall come to pass, if thou wilt not hearken unto the
voice of the LORD thy God, to observe to do all his
commandments and his statutes which I command thee this
day; that all these curses shall come upon thee, and
overtake thee (v. 15).
The stranger that is within thee shall get up above thee
very high; and thou shalt come down very low. He shall
lend to thee, and thou shalt not lend to him: he shall be the
head, and thou shalt be the tail (vv. 43-44).
A multicultural society is an unstable society and it will fall to
those who know who they are and who know where they’re going.
That is the danger France is facing today and the United States will
be facing tomorrow.
Tony Blankley believes that Europe has three choices: One, the
government gets on top of this, restricts civil liberties for Muslims,
takes all necessary action from imprisonment to deportation, and
puts an end to the problem.
Two, rising vigilantism by the man in the street will lead to
much bloodshed but will solve the problem that way. Vigilantism
is on the rise in Europe and we don’t hear very much about this in
this country. It’s much bigger in Europe than most Americans
realize. Tony Blankley’s hope is that it will begin to put the
pressure on the governments in Europe who will turn and do the
right thing.
Three, Europe will roll over and accept the eventual
domination by Islam, which, at last, will leave the United States
completely isolated.
I suppose I could say that Tony Blankley is optimistic long
term, but he seems to expect a lot of bloodshed and some radical
changes in western society. According to him, mainstream opinion
in Europe has recently abandoned political correctness and wants
to halt the inroads of Islam from Norway to Sicily. Governments,
politicians, and media are laying aside doctrines of diversity,
insisting that Islamism (as the French call the fundamentalist form
that pervades the housing estates) is incompatible with Europe’s
liberal values.
Even a left-wing French intellectual, such as commentator
Jacques Juilliard, said that the left’s long-standing tolerance has
been used as an agent for the penetration of Islamic intolerance.
That is a stunning admission and a warning for everyone. In this
country, I don’t look for a change in national direction from mere
persuasion. We can argue about this till hell freezes over and
nothing will change. But let one dirty bomb make lower
Manhattan uninhabitable for a thousand years, and hell will freeze
over.
|