Be more German

I wasn't making a joke, remember I've no sense of humor, I was giving you some advice what to do and a risk assessment.
I know what the original post was all about and I also think you shot off as usual without thinking of any financial ramifications till I mentioned it.
You never said how many would be let in and how you'd choose, again not thought out.
Anyway the threads gone it's length now thank fuck.

Going off today's news it looks like Germany is set for a massive influx of refugees. I can only see the whole situation getting much worse for the foreseeable future. What is the solution? I don't know the answer. I wish I did.
This is a humanitarian crisis on a massive scale. Nobody should ever be criticized for trying to flee genocide, persecution and torture to provide a better life for their families. Part of the problem, as I see it, is that the refugees have become dehumanized. Instead of being seen as human beings in desperate need of help they are seen by many as a horde of human scroungers looking to set up shop and put their feet up in the country that offers the best prospects for their long term future.
The problem lies in differentiating between those who are in genuine need of help and those who may be sneaking in via the back door and then plotting against us ( the West ) in a Trojan horse style of operation.

The problem is at the root and as I said ages ago will have to be dealt with radically with huge collateral.
Open the doors and the situation is self propogating. I see Saudi Arabia and countries closer to Syria and Iraq are helping out?
What are Eritreans in Hungary for, the ride?

Playing devils advocate, let us just suppose that the refugees coming across the Med to Europe were not Syrians, Iraqis, Afghanis or Africans but were Australians, New Zealanders or Canadians for example. Would we in the UK be just as reluctant to offer them a helping hand in their hour of need? I think not. Many of us would go to great lengths to offer them shelter and sanctuary and woe betide anyone who opposed our generosity.

This for me, is the crux of the matter. It is only human nature to gravitate towards our own kith and kin and people with whom we have a common bond. The fact we are mainly Christians and speak English is part of our very being. And this is where the concept of a multi-cultural society is found wanting. As a nation, we Brits have no real real affinity with the people of Syria, Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya . They speak a different language and worship a different god, and from what we see on the news a lot of them appear to be hot heads and rabble rousers. What right minded person would welcome such people into their country? Good old USA is no different. Uncle Sam is very good at playing the role of international Sheriff but they don't seem to have the same benevolence when it comes to their next door neighbours over the border in Mexico. I believe they refer to them as wetbacks. The vast majority of Mexicans are devout Catholics and have no connection or affiliation with the Muslim faith but they are still viewed with suspicion and derision by the Americans.

The biggest problem for the UK is that the damage has already been done. For years we pretended to be tough on terrorism while invading Iraq and Afghanistan. The London bombings on July 7th 2005 changed the landscape completely. Home grown Jihadis brainwashed to hate the country of their birth and despise the majority of people living in our green and pleasant land. We are now a hub for Islamist terror throughout Europe and beyond.
Make no mistake, modern democracy is at war with radical Islam. The terrible plight of the boat people in the Med has become a ticking bomb for Europe and beyond. It's no longer simply a humanitarian issue and that is ultimately the real tragedy.

Was Enoch Powell Dr Who?

Soul Kitchen wrote:Was Enoch Powell Dr Who?

I'm not convinced that Powell could see into the future because I doubt very much he was referring to the middle east when he gave his ' rivers of blood ' speech.

The political landscape in the UK has changed beyond recognition since the sixties. Iirc it was Nigel Farage who said that the integration of all sections of our society could only be achieved by the will of the people and not by statute. I tend to think he is right.

Many Brits are now afraid and worried about the future where immigration is concerned. Many fears are unfounded but every new atrocity carried out in the name of Islam just adds more flames to the fire.

As Hilary Clinton said, ' Just because you keep rattlesnakes in your own backyard it doesn't mean they will only bite the neighbours.'

Forget nationality for a moment.

Our country as something like 75 million people living here.

If we took 800,000 migrants, that equates to more or less one new person for every 100 here now.

The age profile of the migrants are generally young males or young family units.

The majority of these migrants do not speak English, nor have any understanding of our culture and thus cannot immediately support themselves or the family - so the burden falls on the tax payer and will remain so until they are able to stand alone.

Bolton Metro I believe as a population of around 250,000 so to take in 800,000 new people we have to BUILD three new Boltons - that is three lots of the houses in Bolton, three lots of GP and hospital services that Bolton has, three lots of schools and child care requirements that Bolton has.


It just goes on and on, three lots of infra structure such as sanitation, refuse collection, transportation, shops, etc.  Three lots of people to facilitate the 'new' three Bolton's - teachers, doctors, nurses, refuse collectors, firemen, policemen, bus drivers, social workers, translators, benefit staff, housing staff, etc, etc, etc.

And all of this NOW - no time to build the houses, schools, hospitals, etc.  No time to recruit and train the doctors, nurses, teachers, refuse collectors, etc, NOW.  No time to raise the revenue to pay for all this - the money as to come out of the pot - NOW.

Add on to all of this that a vast majority of these migrants (even the professional ones) will need to be paid for a substantial amount of time whilst they are processed and learn the language before they even think about getting a job - even assuming they really want to get one.

If this doesn't make you think, then these 'three new Bolton's' are just this years 'contribution' will there be a need for another three Boltons next year too, and the one after that and the one after that...until they stop coming?

That's not even considering how or if these migrants make and effort to integrate rather than remain in their own communities and bring their own cultural negatives - do we think that decades of rule under the likes of Sadam and Ghadaffi, or the war zones of Somalia or Afghanistan have not had an effect on peoples views of what is the right thing to do?

People are entitled to be free and safe but to travel through many, many other countries where they can be free and safe, simply to get to the UK, Germany, Sweden, etc where they clearly expect more - which can only be provided by giving less to those already here - and who have already put into the pot - seems to be calculated and cynical of them.

It's not racism to talk like this - it's realism.

Be more Sluffy 

Sluffy wrote:Forget nationality for a moment.

Our country as something like 75 million people living here.

If we took 800,000 migrants, that equates to more or less one new person for every 100 here now.

The age profile of the migrants are generally young males or young family units.

The majority of these migrants do not speak English, nor have any understanding of our culture and thus cannot immediately support themselves or the family - so the burden falls on the tax payer and will remain so until they are able to stand alone.

Bolton Metro I believe as a population of around 250,000 so to take in 800,000 new people we have to BUILD three new Boltons - that is three lots of the houses in Bolton, three lots of GP and hospital services that Bolton has, three lots of schools and child care requirements that Bolton has.


It just goes on and on, three lots of infra structure such as sanitation, refuse collection, transportation, shops, etc.  Three lots of people to facilitate the 'new' three Bolton's - teachers, doctors, nurses, refuse collectors, firemen, policemen, bus drivers, social workers, translators, benefit staff, housing staff, etc, etc, etc.

And all of this NOW - no time to build the houses, schools, hospitals, etc.  No time to recruit and train the doctors, nurses, teachers, refuse collectors, etc, NOW.  No time to raise the revenue to pay for all this - the money as to come out of the pot - NOW.

Add on to all of this that a vast majority of these migrants (even the professional ones) will need to be paid for a substantial amount of time whilst they are processed and learn the language before they even think about getting a job - even assuming they really want to get one.

If this doesn't make you think, then these 'three new Bolton's' are just this years 'contribution' will there be a need for another three Boltons next year too, and the one after that and the one after that...until they stop coming?

That's not even considering how or if these migrants make and effort to integrate rather than remain in their own communities and bring their own cultural negatives - do we think that decades of rule under the likes of Sadam and Ghadaffi, or the war zones of Somalia or Afghanistan have not had an effect on peoples views of what is the right thing to do?

People are entitled to be free and safe but to travel through many, many other countries where they can be free and safe, simply to get to the UK, Germany, Sweden, etc where they clearly expect more - which can only be provided by giving less to those already here - and who have already put into the pot - seems to be calculated and cynical of them.

It's not racism to talk like this - it's realism.

Nobody's called it racism to consider the strain on infrastructure, that's completely valid and fair. 

There's also no reason for us to take 800,000 migrants in, but the whole of Europe should be sharing the burden as they aren't going anywhere - i still haven't heard  an alternative?

There should be an EU wide response to this, not tighten the borders and hope it doesn't reach us, we're in it together.

I only refer to 800,000 migrants as per the original opening paragraph of this thread.

We should share the load throughout Europe. 

No idea what an alternative is.

bwfc1874 wrote:No idea what an alternative is.

As an island the alternative to taking 100's of thousands of migrants is already in operation.

Ye a massive increase in illegal immigrants making their way into the country. They'll find a way in eventually, there's too many people and they keep arriving. Burying your head in the sand and hoping it goes away will make things worse long term.

These are people too, as one guy said on the news what's happened to them could happen to anyone Syria was one of the most stable countries in the region not long ago.

bwfc1874 wrote:We should share the load throughout Europe. 

No idea what an alternative is.

Well the migrants are in general coming from Syria, Afghanistan, Somalia, Libya and sub Sahara.

If you think about it there are many, many nearer countries to most of them than Europe, such as Russia, China. Saudi Arabia, Iran, South Africa, etc, etc.

Maybe those countries are experiencing migrant issues too but if they are I've not heard of them.

Makes you wonder why the migrants are not flowing to these countries too if safety is what they are seeking?

Just a thought.

Because Europe is correctly recognised as one of  the most tolerant, stable and prosperous regions of the world. 

We're lucky to be here and I personally wouldn't trade that in order to live in a less attractive place for immigrants.

I really don't see what point you were trying to make there. Human traffickers bring people to Europe because that's what the demand is for, the reasons are obvious.

bwfc1874 wrote:These are people too, as one guy said on the news what's happened to them could happen to anyone Syria was one of the most stable countries in the region not long ago.

Ha Ha Ha

He probably got mixed up with Jordan.

Yes they are people too and it's an absolute shame what is happening.

I still don't want to see thousands of migrants here when we are struggling to look after our own folk. Not to mention the nutty 'British' passport holders who make plenty of north west mill town citizens life a nightmare.

We are chocker full.

bwfc1874 wrote:Because Europe is correctly recognised as one of  the most tolerant, stable and prosperous regions of the world. 

We're lucky to be here and I personally wouldn't trade that in order to live in a less attractive place for immigrants.

I really don't see what point you were trying to make there. Human traffickers bring people to Europe because that's what the demand is for, the reasons are obvious.

My point, which you have picked up on anyway, is that there are choices, at least to a greater or lesser extent.

We therefore have to some extent have choice also not to have an open door policy to them.

I'm not saying what is right and what is wrong just that there ARE other alternative countries for the migrants to travel to - and nearer too - just that they choose not to go to them it seems.

Sluffy wrote:

bwfc1874 wrote:Because Europe is correctly recognised as one of  the most tolerant, stable and prosperous regions of the world. 

We're lucky to be here and I personally wouldn't trade that in order to live in a less attractive place for immigrants.

I really don't see what point you were trying to make there. Human traffickers bring people to Europe because that's what the demand is for, the reasons are obvious.

My point, which you have picked up on anyway, is that there are choices, at least to a greater or lesser extent.

We therefore have to some extent have choice also not to have an open door policy to them.

I'm not saying what is right and what is wrong just that there ARE other alternative countries for the migrants to travel to - and nearer too - just that they choose not to go to them it seems.

Ye there are other countries they could go too. But why would you for instance risk your life getting out of Syria and travel to Russia - along a route that will be far more difficult, to arrive in a country where you know there's no support for those in need and you'll receive no protection from the government.

I've been to Moscow the way immigrants are treated is appalling - compete sub-citizens - same in Dubai and I'd imagine China is pretty similar.

I'm not suggesting an open door policy I'm suggesting we have to be realistic; in that this isn't going to disappear, and join Merkel in setting a standard. Then using our influence to make others do the same instead of hoping it goes away - more arrive every day and they'll keep trying because what the fuck else would you do?

bwfc1874 wrote:I'm suggesting we have to be realistic; in that this isn't going to disappear, and join Merkel in setting a standard. 

She isn't setting a 'standard'.

She is in charge of a country that has land borders which stretch for hundreds and hundreds of miles. 

And another reason that so many migrants have ended up there is because it is a wealthy country and nothing to do with Germany doing more than their fair share.

Germany have more migrants because of geographics.

If it was just due to 'geographics' they'd be heading to France, Belgium and others too. It's down to her declaring that they'd take the refugees - as opposed to Hungary's policy for instance which is to check who they are and deport on an individual basis. There's a clear difference in policy.

Germany are setting a standard and this government should be ashamed of themselves, yet again the idiots are more interested in minor political points than ever doing something progressive or decent.