From Ms M. Pace
As a regular reader of Daphne Caruana Galizia’s opinion page in The Malta Independent on Sunday, I am somewhat disappointed at the recent inconsistency of her articles. Daphne Caruana Galizia’s sermons no longer reflect the constructive objectives they once did. Contrarily, her articles are verging on controversy, aiming to incite retaliatory response rather than express critical opinion.
Her topic last Sunday emphasised that in less than six years our borders will be open and that it is pointless for anybody to criticise this state of fact. Although this is true, these borders will only be open to EU nationals who enjoy the right to freedom of movement and labour. Immigration barriers will not fall for refugees from Eritrea, Sudan or any other sub-Saharan nations currently facing mass extinction through genocide, disease and deprivation.
Malta was never one of the colonisers of Africa and is in no way committed to fulfil any obligations to past exploitations of the Dark Continent, as are our French, British and Dutch counterparts.
By voting to join the Union, the electorate did not anticipate our vulnerability to give in to international pressures and a UN treaty signed half a century ago that could be revoked in the national interest. That same electorate who voted in favour of EU accession will not object to migration from EU nationals because we enjoy the same reciprocal privilege. It is highly unlikely however that any Maltese or EU national will seek prosperity in countries like Mauritania or Algeria.
An invasion from Africa was never on the EU accession agenda we voted for when Mr Verheugen was here, insistently trying to sell us “Europe”.
Our inability to cope with this illegal influx or to disallow immigrants from landing on an island so overpopulated is completely unacceptable. Our national interest must always outweigh the humanitarian element. The Nationalist Party, which should be safeguarding this interest, has now been completely defeated by a pocket of pressure groups that have nothing better to do than make their voice heard.
This effectively brings us to the cultural diversity most of our columnists craftily overlook. Whether one is a practicing Catholic or not, religion is an integral part of our way of life and forms the fundamentals of our culture. An influx of Muslims in Malta will result in conflicting customs between sacred beliefs, which will ultimately translate into a birth of extreme factions in this once peaceful, God-fearing and proud nation.
The roots of Islam do not comply with those of Christianity and the tolerance levels of the Islamic culture towards other “infidel” beliefs are much less than we would like to believe. Population explosions in these ethnic minorities will be an absolute certainty and in the short to medium term, this nation will be overrun.
It is very unfortunate that anybody who voices an opinion or expresses concern in the national interest, or against illegal migration, is being conveniently labelled a racist. This is obviously a shallow attempt by a handful of liberalists who crusade for a modern and broad mentality with the singular objective of diluting our moral values and sowing the seeds of permissiveness.
Contrary to Daphne’s opinion, I must dispute the fact that multiculturalism does not build superpowers and affluent nations like the United States. The British or Roman Empires were certainly unicultured, as was Adolf Hitler’s Third Reich and Napoleon 200 years before him, in their insatiable quest for European dominance. The secret of America’s success was that its mainland was never struck by war as Europe was. In addition, while the rest of the world was busy destroying itself in the middle of the last century, the US was amassing immeasurable wealth reserves, which it was never forced to forfeit or exchange for its freedom.
This wealth was subsequently converted into American global domination through the spread of politics and capitalism. The same capitalism, which encourages multi-racial societies in its endeavour to exploit vast supplies of cheap labour and misery, where the rich grow richer and the poor perish. Multicultural diversity in a nation does in no way generate a propensity for economic success. Contrarily, it tends to destroy the very essence of civilisation.
What happened in Yugoslavia is living proof of this.
The new Alleanza Nazjonali movement, which was so heavily criticised over the last couple of weeks, is not a Nazi subsidiary, as many would like to portray them. This is a group of open-minded, non-fanatical individuals who do not fear retaliation from the puppeteers of our media. People who have the national interest at heart and who are stifled by the hypocrisy of our bureaucrats, who in turn are powerless to defend our nation from this subtle tribal invasion.
The defeat of Nazi Germany in 1945 made nationalistic ideologies a dark chapter in history and an untouchable taboo. This was followed by a systematic suppression, which automatically opened the gates for the extreme left to infiltrate and indoctrinate the new post-war European generations with Marxism. Countries like France, which was once the hub of Christianity, have recently had to submit to the shame of having to remove the Crucifix from public areas in order to keep their ethnic populations content. The absence of the mention of Christianity from the new European Constitution is also cause for concern from both a moral as well as a cultural perspective.
The EU was originally founded with economic and peaceful objectives in mind. This has been transformed however into a political monster with liberal attitudes where gay marriage adoptions and abortion have become the order of the day, and which is now feeding on the last remnants of morality we have left.
A continent, which was proud to be the cradle of civilisation, is being returned to its barbaric origins by means of polluted mentalities and the acceptance of uncontrolled cultural diversity.
And all in the name of human rights.
Mary Pace
MSIDA