Europe submits voluntarily

[whichphilosophy]

Only the election of anti migration politicians will ever stop this mass migration of economic migrants, or nation shoppers! By that time it will have proven to be too late to save Western culture.

The Henny Penny routine is still pathetic.

Regardless of this we do have a problem with mass migration to the European Union when many of its own members are short of jobs and have economic problems. Immigration should be controlled with the best possible background checks.

Our commitment in the European Union and UK is towards refugees who have mainly been displaced by Western sponsored wars. Economic migrants should only be permitted if they have a work visa and a confirmed contract from an employer. Their visas can be extended accordingly.

Simply allowing millions of economic migrants to be driven in mindlessly by certain political buffoons does not make any real sense where the host countries lack the infrastructure to handle such influxes.

 

[angelo]

Burying your head in the sand won't change a thing!

The Henny Penny routine is still pathetic.

And burying you head ostrich like still won't change the facts!

 

[angelo]

http://www.thecommentator.com/article/5632/uk_muslim_population_of_26_million_by_2051

 

[bigfield]

The Henny Penny routine is still pathetic.

Regardless of this

At least you admit your antics are pathetic.

we do have a problem with mass migration to the European Union when many of its own members are short of jobs and have economic problems.

1. Europe has always had economic problems.
2. Stopping migration won't fix Europe's unemployment problems, because migration isn't the cause of Europe's employment problems.

Immigration should be controlled with the best possible background checks.

This is the kind of weasel statement I'd expect from a politician. Say what you really mean.

Our commitment in the European Union and UK is towards refugees who have mainly been displaced by Western sponsored wars.

Incorrect. Your obligation is to all refugees. Every European country signed the '67 Protocol, so they had better sack up and fulfil their commitment.

Economic migrants should only be permitted if they have a work visa and a confirmed contract from an employer. Their visas can be extended accordingly.

Simply allowing millions of economic migrants to be driven in mindlessly by certain political buffoons does not make any real sense where the host countries lack the infrastructure to handle such influxes.

These 'millions of economic migrants' are nothing more than a creation of the demented minds of the right.

"The sky is falling! The sky is falling!"

 

[bigfield]

The Henny Penny routine is still pathetic.

And burying you head ostrich like still won't change the facts!

The Henny Penny routine is still pathetic.

It's funny to see you claim any concern for the facts, when you are so determined to base your opinion on nutjob blogs, junk newsmedia, and the wild inventions of your own imagination.

 

[angelo]

And burying you head ostrich like still won't change the facts!

The Henny Penny routine is still pathetic.

It's funny to see you claim any concern for the facts, when you are so determined to base your opinion on nutjob blogs, junk newsmedia, and the wild inventions of your own imagination.

Of course your lefty mindset is the correct one and everyone else is wrong! That around 15% of London's population is already muslim, and has seen the election of a moslem Mayor doesn't even make a lefty like yourself bat an eyelid.

 

[whichphilosophy]

Regardless of this

At least you admit your antics are pathetic.

we do have a problem with mass migration to the European Union when many of its own members are short of jobs and have economic problems.

1. Europe has always had economic problems.
2. Stopping migration won't fix Europe's unemployment problems, because migration isn't the cause of Europe's employment problems.

Immigration should be controlled with the best possible background checks.

This is the kind of weasel statement I'd expect from a politician. Say what you really mean.

Our commitment in the European Union and UK is towards refugees who have mainly been displaced by Western sponsored wars.

Incorrect. Your obligation is to all refugees. Every European country signed the '67 Protocol, so they had better sack up and fulfil their commitment.

Economic migrants should only be permitted if they have a work visa and a confirmed contract from an employer. Their visas can be extended accordingly.

Simply allowing millions of economic migrants to be driven in mindlessly by certain political buffoons does not make any real sense where the host countries lack the infrastructure to handle such influxes.

These 'millions of economic migrants' are nothing more than a creation of the demented minds of the right.

"The sky is falling! The sky is falling!"

Correct, all refugees. I was illustrating that we in the West have caused the main influx of asylum seekers. However my posts have always mentioned all asylum seekers.
Most countries, even those the refugees come from are linked by data bases, though not all are. We have always done checks on persons whose papers didn't seem in order or had no valid reason to come over to Europe. We need to ensure that known international criminals are on record have a chance of being apprehended.

There is no problem in taking economic migrants who want a better life but this should be on a visa process with a work permit. To protect local workers against unfair competition Hong Kong introduced a policy of minimum payments which at least matched or exceeded local pay. It worked to some degree while I was there. I am not sure if it would work in Europe.

There are millions who have migrated and there are more to come. For those permitted to stay I see no need for integration (which sounds too much like conformity at times) providing they obey the laws of the host countries and ensure adequate human rights. Convicted criminals and terrorists should be deported or imprisoned. Known criminals or terrorists should be refused entry. There is nothing to stop Britain taking away dual citizenship away from terrorists and criminals but the government has only dithered about it.

Unfortunately the race card has used to equate border controls and security with racism.

- - - Updated - - -

Regardless of this

At least you admit your antics are pathetic.

we do have a problem with mass migration to the European Union when many of its own members are short of jobs and have economic problems.

1. Europe has always had economic problems.
2. Stopping migration won't fix Europe's unemployment problems, because migration isn't the cause of Europe's employment problems.

Immigration should be controlled with the best possible background checks.

This is the kind of weasel statement I'd expect from a politician. Say what you really mean.

Our commitment in the European Union and UK is towards refugees who have mainly been displaced by Western sponsored wars.

Incorrect. Your obligation is to all refugees. Every European country signed the '67 Protocol, so they had better sack up and fulfil their commitment.

Economic migrants should only be permitted if they have a work visa and a confirmed contract from an employer. Their visas can be extended accordingly.

Simply allowing millions of economic migrants to be driven in mindlessly by certain political buffoons does not make any real sense where the host countries lack the infrastructure to handle such influxes.

These 'millions of economic migrants' are nothing more than a creation of the demented minds of the right.

"The sky is falling! The sky is falling!"

Correct, all refugees. I was illustrating that we in the West have caused the main influx of asylum seekers. However my posts have always mentioned all asylum seekers.
Most countries, even those the refugees come from are linked by data bases, though not all are. We have always done checks on persons whose papers didn't seem in order or had no valid reason to come over to Europe. We need to ensure that known international criminals are on record have a chance of being apprehended.

There is no problem in taking economic migrants who want a better life but this should be on a visa process with a work permit. To protect local workers against unfair competition Hong Kong introduced a policy of minimum payments which at least matched or exceeded local pay. It worked to some degree while I was there. I am not sure if it would work in Europe.

There are millions who have migrated and there are more to come. For those permitted to stay I see no need for integration (which sounds too much like conformity at times) providing they obey the laws of the host countries and ensure adequate human rights. Convicted criminals and terrorists should be deported or imprisoned. Known criminals or terrorists should be refused entry. There is nothing to stop Britain taking away dual citizenship away from terrorists and criminals but the government has only dithered about it.

Unfortunately the race card has used to equate border controls and security with racism.

 

[bigfield]

The Henny Penny routine is still pathetic.

It's funny to see you claim any concern for the facts, when you are so determined to base your opinion on nutjob blogs, junk newsmedia, and the wild inventions of your own imagination.

Of course your lefty mindset is the correct one and everyone else is wrong!

One only has to look at your comical performance throughout this thread to see that you are wrong about a staggering number of things.

That around 15% of London's population is already muslim, and has seen the election of a moslem Mayor doesn't even make a lefty like yourself blink an eyelid.

That's correct. Because unlike some, I'm not a frothing-at-the-mouth fucktard.

 

[angelo]

Not sure which is worse, a fucktard or an Islam apologist!

 

[bigfield]

Not sure which is worse, a fucktard or an Islam apologist!

The former has a tenuous grip on reality, and makes an endless stream of ridiculous and inane statements, fuelled by an inability--or unwillingness--to think critically. This is made evident by a nonstop stream of references to nutjob blogs and junk newsmedia.

The latter defends the beliefs of Islam and acts committed in the name of Islam. It doesn't include people who are merely interested in protecting the human rights of Muslims, who are entitled to the same protections as everyone else, despite what some fucktards think.

The fact that you think that I'm an Islam apologist is totally congruent with the twisted, paranoid delusions you've been spouting for months on end.

 

[angelo]

http://www.breitbart.com/london/201...lend-britains-diverse-landscape-known-better/

 

[DrZoidberg]

So Moodys just came with their new credit ratings for Scandinavia. Turns out that Sweden has Scandinavia's strongest economy. We have the lowest unemployment since 1992. We have the lowest crime rate in recorded history. This while our national debt is shrinking. Which makes sense. Taking in refugees as we do isn't itself an explanation. But as Richard Florida's "gay index" indicates. What generates wealth in a modern information age industry is ideas. And ideas thrive in liberal and tolerant environments. And tolerant societies take in a lot of refugees.

https://www.moodys.com/credit-ratings/Sweden-Government-of-credit-rating-730900

Here's a Swedish article that sums it up. Read it with Google translate. It's Sweden's biggest tabloid. The fact that a tabloid writes this is remarkable. Since tabloids often like to stir up fear and drama.

http://www.aftonbladet.se/ledare/ledarkronika/karinpettersson/article22903460.ab

The article also tries to explain why this image of Sweden's ghettofication comes from. They point the blame entirely on racist and Islamophobic blogs. It's like they want Sweden to go down the toilet so they can be all smug about it. But the exact opposite is happening.

 

[angelo]

What that obviously left leaning report is doing is pooh poohing All the nay sayers, that the doom and gloom predicted by some of the consequences of mass migration are wrong. What it should be saying is that despite the invasion the economy is booming in Sweden,. For now!

 

[DrZoidberg]

What that obviously left leaning report is doing is pooh poohing All the nay sayers, that the doom and gloom predicted by some of the consequences of mass migration are wrong. What it should be saying is that despite the invasion the economy is booming in Sweden,. For now!

No, it's not. Moody's is about as right/conservative as you can get. They only care about money. Aftonbladet are not particularly immigrant friendly. If anything they have a neutral stance. They don't hesitate to print articles negative of immigration or Islam. But also Muslim-friendly articles.

And no again, Sweden has had high immigration since the 60'ies. Higher than any of the other Nordic countries. Middle-Easterns/Muslims have come throughout this period. I think the high immigration is one of the reasons of Sweden's high success. The UK has also have had high migration. Also very strong economy. I think there's a connection. I think multi-culturalism is very good for a country, in all manner of ways. Both social and economic. I don't think there's any credible way to twist the statistics around to prove the opposite. So basically... I think you are super wrong Angelo. About everything.

The nay-sayers need to be poo poo'd. Simply because they are so delusional.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moody's_Investors_Service

 

[faded_Glory]

Only the election of anti migration politicians will ever stop this mass migration of economic migrants, or nation shoppers! By that time it will have proven to be too late to save Western culture.

The issue is this: Western culture will change, there is nothing anybody can do about that. Learn to accept it and stop crying. Change is history, history is change. Live and change.

The real question is, what will be the change? One possible change is to turn ourselves into mindless fascists who are prepared to use lethal force against masses of impoverished third world citizens coming here to try and better their miserable lives. Another possible change is to engage with these masses and try to find a way to assist them in their plight without capsizing the ship of Europe in doing so. The latter is to me without any doubt the far better option, but it is also the more challenging one. It will take hard work, creativity and sacrifices, but it will safeguard the roots of our Western culture: respect for the human rights of others. The other option is to go back to the Middle Ages, be brutal and lose everything accomplished since the Enlightenment.

This is our choice, make no mistake about it.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Only the election of anti migration politicians will ever stop this mass migration of economic migrants, or nation shoppers! By that time it will have proven to be too late to save Western culture.

The issue is this: Western culture will change, there is nothing anybody can do about that. Learn to accept it and stop crying. Change is history, history is change. Live and change.

The real question is, what will be the change? One possible change is to turn ourselves into mindless fascists who are prepared to use lethal force against masses of impoverished third world citizens coming here to try and better their miserable lives. Another possible change is to engage with these masses and try to find a way to assist them in their plight without capsizing the ship of Europe in doing so. The latter is to me without any doubt the far better option, but it is also the more challenging one. It will take hard work, creativity and sacrifices, but it will safeguard the roots of our Western culture: respect for the human rights of others. The other option is to go back to the Middle Ages, be brutal and lose everything accomplished since the Enlightenment.

This is our choice, make no mistake about it.

This is the thing that is so stupid about the right. This idea that the western countries have some sort of permanent monolithic and unchanging cultures. Take every single culture today and compare them to each other. You'll find minor differences. But take one of the cultures and compare it to the same just a hundred years ago. It might as well be from a different planet. Different cultures today are extremely similar. And this effect is only becoming increasingly prominent. This planet is developing toward a global monoculture.

Yes, there will be loads of changes. Cultures always change, all the time. Usually for the better. But most importantly, nobody knows what will happen in the future. If you asked somebody in 1900 to guess what society would be like in 2000, they wouldn't have a clue. They'd be so super wrong it wouldn't even be funny. Of course the same is true for somebody in 2000 guessing about 2100. The way Internet has transformed our society in just the last 10 years has led to radical and dramatic cultural changes across the globe. The impact of apps like Tinder cannot be underestimated.

 

[angelo]

So Westerners have to prepare themselves for a radical change of culture? One that would take us all back to mediaeval times and beyond! Like for example, Malaysia.
https://www.rt.com/news/344728-malaysia-sharia-law-bill/

 

[bigfield]

So Westerners have to prepare themselves for a radical change of culture? One that would take us all back to mediaeval times and beyond! Like for example, Malaysia.
https://www.rt.com/news/344728-malaysia-sharia-law-bill/

Only in your bizarre alternate reality could that happen in the West.

In your bizarro world, what is the rate of change for irreligion in the West?

 

[angelo]

So Westerners have to prepare themselves for a radical change of culture? One that would take us all back to mediaeval times and beyond! Like for example, Malaysia.
https://www.rt.com/news/344728-malaysia-sharia-law-bill/

Only in your bizarre alternate reality could that happen in the West.

In your bizarro world, what is the rate of change for irreligion in the West?

Not sure about irreligious growth because for every one person losing his/hers religion, there are at least two new moslems.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/islam-fastest-growing-religion-overtake-6986333

 

[bigfield]

Only in your bizarre alternate reality could that happen in the West.

In your bizarro world, what is the rate of change for irreligion in the West?

Not sure about irreligious growth because for every one person losing his/hers religion, there are at least two new moslems.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/islam-fastest-growing-religion-overtake-6986333

Wow, that is retarded.

1. You say that you don't know the growth rate for irreligion, and then you claim that it is half the rate of growth for Islam.
2. You conflate irreligion with apostasy. Many 'nones' were never religious to begin with.
3. Your source illustrates the stupidity of your Henny Penny fearmongering.

See here:

Pew estimates that Muslims will be a mere 10% of Europe's population in 2050.

Pew also estimates that 'unaffiliated' will be 23.3% of the population, which is more than two 'nones' for every Muslim.

Your silly predictions of an Islamic Europe are obviously a big fat fizzer.