In the West, we talk about the “tip of the iceberg.” In Africa, they talk about the “ears of the hippopotamus.” It’s the same idea: that there’s something big in the water, but you see only a small part of it. Mass immigration is like that. Its harmful consequences are reported every day even in the liberal media. But the full extent of the harm is concealed. Here’s an example from the BBC:
Christina Edkins killing: Phillip Simelane detained
A man who killed 16-year-old Christina Edkins on a rush-hour bus in Birmingham has been detained indefinitely under the Mental Health Act. Phillip Simelane, from Walsall, stabbed the teenager in a random attack as she made her way to school in March . He had been released from prison, unsupervised, three months before the attack – despite warning signs over the state of his mental health. … Mrs Justice Thirlwell, sentencing Simelane, said it was “likely to be a life-long order”. The judge added: “It is made for the nature of the offence and necessary to protect the public from serious harm.” She also expressed concern that Simelane had not been receiving treatment at the time of the killing.
Christina had been travelling to LeasowesHigh School in Halesowen on the number 9 bus, two weeks after her 16th birthday, when she was attacked. Simelane, who was sitting behind her on the upper deck, stabbed her in the chest as he walked past to get off. He was arrested a few hours after the attack following an extensive manhunt. … A memorial garden dedicated to Christina is due to be opened at her former school on Thursday. Speaking on behalf of the family, the great uncle said Christina was a “bright, beautiful girl” who was looking forward to her school prom and loved sports. He added: “Her headmaster said, ‘if a school could choose its pupils it would be full of Christinas’. Now the family asks the question – when this man was discharged from prison on 13 December 2012, why was the recommendation, made a few weeks earlier by mental health experts, that he be supervised after release whilst adjusting to life back in the community, not followed up?” (Christina Edkins killing: Phillip Simelane detained, BBC News, 2nd October 2013)
According to the BBC, Phillip Simelane is “from Walsall.” In fact, he’s from Swaziland via Walsall:
The 24-year-old was born in Swaziland, southern Africa, and arrived in the UK at the age of nine. He lived in Walsall with his siblings and mother, who had separated from his father. (See here)
Why was he here? Immigration from Africa imposes huge costs on the UK and has never had a democratic mandate. If Christina Edkins’ great uncle had pointed this out, he would have been in serious trouble. Instead, he was the model White victim, complaining only about the lack of services for the perpetrator: “Speaking [after the sentence], Christina’s great uncle Chris Melia said: “We have no sense of vengeance or revenge. We just want him out of the way and [to] remember Christina. The authorities didn’t help him, [they] just let him out of the prison door and let him go, just abandoned him. If there had been some help and authority he wouldn’t have been on the bus.”
The BBC also says that Simelane carried out a “random attack.” It’s always “random” when a non-White murders or assaults a White without an obvious motive. We’re forbidden to suggest another possibility: that many non-Whites hate Whites and enjoy harming them. If the great uncle had suggested that, he would also have been in serious trouble.
However, he’s right that the murderer would not have been on the bus if the authorities had provided expensive help funded by White tax-payers. The problem is that another Black schizophrenic might have been there instead. The murder of Christina Edkins is the tip of the iceberg: beneath it lies a stark biological reality. Blacks are not only much more violent than Whites, they are also much more prone to schizophrenia (see here). Over the decades, the White nation of Britain has spent billions of pounds treating and providing hospital places for mentally ill Blacks. Many billions more have been spent on imprisoning criminal Blacks and on trying vainly to raise Blacks from low achievement.
In other words, Britain has spent huge sums trying to do the impossible: alter the biology of Blacks. Without mass immigration, there would have been none of this useless expense and Christina Edkins would still be alive.
So would many other White victims of Black murderers. Britain’s crime statistics would look much healthier in other ways, because Blacks commit rape, assault and robbery at much higher rates than Whites. So do Pakistanis and other non-Whites (see here, here and here).
All this has been obvious for many years. Non-Whites in Britain cost huge sums of money and commit huge amounts of crime. The same thing is happening in Norway, which has watched Britain from across the North Sea — and decided it wanted some vibrancy,of its own. This means that Norway also had a brutal bus-murder this year. In fact, it’s had three of them:
Failed asylum seeker kills three on bus
The man accused of stabbing to death a woman and two men on an express bus in western Norway was an asylum seeker from South Sudan who was due to be deported from Norway on Tuesday … The 31-year-old, who was living at an asylum reception centre in Årdal, was due to be deported to Spain on Tuesday, after having his application rejected in June.
“This person had applied for asylum, and come to Norway in April,” a spokesman for Norway’s immigration directorate said. “He was rejected in June, and was supposed to be returned to Spain under the so-called Dublin Regulation.”
The man is accused of killing the bus driver, Arve Haug Bagn (55) and Margaret Molland Sanden, a 19-year-old biotechnology student at the Oslo and Akerhus University College of Applied Sciences. The third victim, a Swedish man in his 50s, has not been named. Police believe that the three victims were the only people on the bus when the man attacked.
… The attack marks the second time the Valdres Express has been hijacked. In 2003, it was hijacked by a mentally disturbed 26-year-old Ethiopian man who stabbed the driver to death. (Failed asylum seeker kills three on bus, The Local (Norway), 4th November 2013)
The Norwegian authorities haven’t released the name or picture of this murderer, but he seems to be claiming mental illness too (see here), which may mean that he will be allowed to stay in Norway.
Either way, the similarity between the murders of Christina Edkins and Margaret Sanden makes me wonder if there was something sexual at work. Blacks don’t react well to rejection by attractive White women. But that’s crime-think, of course. For liberals, it’s far better to pretend that these very similar crimes were random tragedies. They weren’t: they were direct and predictable consequences of mass immigration. Non-Whites are violent in their homelands and violent in the West. If you import Third-World people, you will get Third-World pathology. This is not hard to understand, so liberals have no excuse for opening the borders.
Now let’s turn to a third story about vibrant enrichment. This one might seem more like farce than tragedy:
Taxpayers foot £350k legal bill for Muslim pubic hair battle
A top judge has criticised the “astonishing” £350,000 cost of a legal battle over a couple’s right to shave their disabled daughter’s pubic hair. The mother and father of the young woman, who cannot be named and is referred to as ED in court documents, said their daughter’s pubic hair should be removed in line with Islamic tradition. But their local council, which has cared for their daughter since 2008, questioned whether the disabled woman had the mental capacity to consent to her hair being removed. In 2011 the couple applied to the family court for their daughter, now in her thirties, to be returned home and raised the “stark” issue of her pubic hair being removed – leading to a long-running, £350,000 taxpayer-funded legal battle. But the couple have now dropped the case at the last minute, leaving a judge at London’s High Court “utterly baffled”.
Mr Justice Roderic Wood said: “I thus remain utterly baffled by the course this litigation has taken, and perplexed by this lack of clarity in their case. Obtaining a 10-day slot of a High Court Judge’s time is not easy, for there are many competing cases of equal if not greater urgency than this one.” … (Taxpayers foot £350k legal bill for Muslim pubic hair battle, The Daily Telegraph, 29th October 2013)
If £350,000 is an “astonishing” cost, think how much the local council is spending on care for the disabled woman. It will work out at millions. That’s more expense for White tax-payers because of mass immigration. But is it fair to blame the Muslim parents for an unlucky roll of the genetic dice? Almost certainly it is. This is another iceberg story. Just as Blacks in the West suffer from schizophrenia at much higher rates than Whites, so Muslims suffer from “disability” at much higher rates. Why? It’s simple: in-breeding. Pakistanis, in particular, have a vibrant custom of marrying close relatives:
700 children born with genetic disabilities due to cousin marriages every year
The problem is worst among children born in Britain’s Pakistani community, where more than half of marriages are between first cousins, and children are 10 times more likely than the general population to suffer genetic disorders. The medical risks of first cousin marriages include higher rates of infant mortality, birth defects, learning difficulties, blindness, hearing problems and metabolic disorders.
As adults, the children born from first cousin marriages are at increased risk of miscarriage or infertility. A third of children affected die before their fifth birthday. An investigation by Channel 4’s Dispatches programme found that although more than 70 British studies have proved the risks, and 700 British Pakistani children are born with associated genetic diseases every year, many people deny the dangers. Ann Cryer, the former Labour MP for Keighley, suffered abuse for trying to highlight the problems.
“It’s a public health issue and we deal with public health issues by raising awareness, by talking about subjects such as obesity, such as drug addiction, such as alcohol,” she said. “But for some reason we’re told that we mustn’t talk about cousin marriages because this is a sensitive issue. I think it’s absurd, we have to talk about it in order to find solutions.”
Research shows the number of cousin marriages has risen dramatically in the UK over the last three decades, mainly between British Pakistanis, but also between first cousins in the British Bangladeshi community in which nearly a quarter of people marry their first cousins, and in some Middle Eastern and East African communities. (700 children born with genetic disabilities due to cousin marriages every year, The Daily Telegraph, 22nd Aug 2010)
This is a “sensitive issue” because it might be exploited by racists who say that non-White immigration is very harmful to the West. Racists are wicked people, you see: they speak the truth. So would liberals rather die than admit their errors? No, they’d rather you and your family die. Liberals get the righteous glow of supporting Third World immigration; ordinary Whites like Christina Edkins and Margaret Sanden pay the price. But it can’t go on. The iceberg of human biology will sink the ship of liberalism. Our job is to ensure that the West doesn’t sink with it.