We won't save refugees by destroying our own country

B00Mer

Keep Calm and Carry On
Sep 6, 2008
44,800
7,297
113
Rent Free in Your Head
www.getafteritmedia.com
Food for thought.

We won't save refugees by destroying our own country



Actually we can’t do what we like with this country. We inherited it from our parents and grandparents and we have a duty to hand it on to our children and grandchildren, preferably improved and certainly undamaged.

It is one of the heaviest responsibilities we will ever have. We cannot just give it away to complete strangers on an impulse because it makes us feel good about ourselves.

Every one of the posturing notables simpering ‘refugees welcome’ should be asked if he or she will take a refugee family into his or her home for an indefinite period, and pay for their food, medical treatment and education.

If so, they mean it. If not, they are merely demanding that others pay and make room so that they can experience a self-righteous glow. No doubt the same people are also sentimental enthusiasts for the ‘living wage’, and ‘social housing’, when in fact open borders are steadily pushing wages down and housing costs up.

As William Blake rightly said: ‘He who would do good to another must do it in minute particulars. General good is the plea of the scoundrel, hypocrite and flatterer.’
Britain is a desirable place to live mainly because it is an island, which most people can’t get to. Most of the really successful civilisations survived because they were protected from invasion by mountains, sea, deserts or a combination of these things. Ask the Russians or the Poles what it’s like to live without the shield of the sea. There is no positive word for ‘safety’ in Russian. Their word for security is ‘bezopasnost’ – ‘without danger’.

Thanks to a thousand years of uninvaded peace, we have developed astonishing levels of trust, safety and freedom. I have visited nearly 60 countries and lived in the USSR, Russia and the USA, and I have never experienced anything as good as what we have. Only in the Anglosphere countries – the USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand – is there anything comparable. I am amazed at how relaxed we are about giving this away.

Our advantages depend very much on our shared past, our inherited traditions, habits and memories. Newcomers can learn them, but only if they come in small enough numbers. Mass immigration means we adapt to them, when they should be adapting to us.

So now, on the basis of an emotional spasm, dressed up as civilisation and generosity, are we going to say that we abandon this legacy and decline our obligation to pass it on, like the enfeebled, wastrel heirs of an ancient inheritance letting the great house and the estate go to ruin?



Having seen more than my share of real corpses, and watched children starving to death in a Somali famine, I am not unmoved by pictures of a dead child on a Turkish beach. But I am not going to pretend to be more upset than anyone else. Nor am I going to suddenly stop thinking, as so many people in the media and politics appear to have done.

The child is not dead because advanced countries have immigration laws. The child is dead because criminal traffickers cynically risked the lives of their victims in pursuit of money.

I’ll go further. The use of words such as ‘desperate’ is quite wrong in this case. The child’s family were safe in Turkey. Turkey (for all its many faults) is a member of Nato, officially classified as free and democratic. Many British people actually pay good money to go on holiday to the very beach where the child’s body was washed up.
It may not be ideal, but the definition of a refugee is that he is fleeing from danger, not fleeing towards a higher standard of living.

Goodness knows I have done what I could on this page to oppose the stupid interventions by this country in Iraq, Libya and Syria, which have turned so many innocent people into refugees or corpses.

But I can see neither sense nor justice in allowing these things to become a pretext for an unstoppable demographic revolution in which Europe (including, alas, our islands) merges its culture and its economy with North Africa and the Middle East. If we let this happen, Europe would lose almost all the things that make others want to live there.
You really think these crowds of tough young men chanting ‘Germany!’ in the heart of Budapest are ‘asylum-seekers’ or ‘refugees’?

Refugees don’t confront the police of the countries in which they seek sanctuary. They don’t chant orchestrated slogans or lie across the train tracks.

And why, by the way, do they use the English name for Germany when they chant? In Arabic and Turkish, that country is called ‘Almanya’, in Kurdish something similar. The Germans themselves call it ‘Deutschland’. In Hungarian, it’s ‘Nemetorszag’.

Did someone hope that British and American TV would be there? I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: spontaneous demonstrations take a lot of organizing.

Refugees don’t demand or choose their refuge. They ask and they hope. When we become refugees one day (as we may well do), we will discover this.
As to what those angry, confident and forceful young men actually are, I’ll leave you to work it out, as I am too afraid of the Thought Police to use what I think is the correct word.

But it is interesting that this week sees the publication in English of a rather dangerous book, which came out in France just before the Charlie Hebdo murders.
Submission, by Michel Houellebecq, prophesies a Muslim-dominated government in France about seven years from now, ushered into power by the French Tory and Labour parties.

What they want, says one of the cleverer characters in the book, ‘is for France to disappear – to be integrated into a European federation’. This means they’d much rather do a deal with a Muslim party than with the National Front, France’s Ukip equivalent.

If any of this sounds familiar to you, I wouldn’t be surprised. It’s amazing how likely and simple the author makes this Islamic revolution sound.

Can we stop this transformation of all we have and are? I doubt it. To do so would involve the grim-faced determination of Australia, making it plain in every way that our doors are open only to limited numbers of people, chosen by us, enduring the righteous scorn of the supposedly enlightened.

As we lack the survival instinct and the determination necessary, and as so many of our most influential people are set on committing a sentimental national suicide, I suspect we won’t.

To those who condemn reasonable calls for national self-defence as bigotry, hatred and intolerance (which they are not), I make only this request: just don’t pretend you’re doing a good and generous thing, when you’re really cowardly and weak.

Read more: PETER HITCHENS: We won't save refugees by destroying our own country | Daily Mail Online
 

Johnnny

Frontiersman
Jun 8, 2007
9,388
124
63
Third rock from the Sun
It is bigotry. I'm descended from immigrants who were escaping war. On my mom's side in one case they went on the fight for canada

Killing nazi's as a member of the Devils brigade

Also it would make us hypocrites
 

AnnaG

Hall of Fame Member
Jul 5, 2009
17,507
117
63
Holy crap. And I thought Blacklung was the only goof ignorant and discourteous enough to post mile-long stuff with huge photos.
 

Dixie Cup

Senate Member
Sep 16, 2006
5,683
3,564
113
Edmonton
What a good article and there is so much truth to what he is saying. I think he's correct in stating that it may well be too late to turn things around. I just hope Canadians are more realistic and maintain a handle on who comes into this country. It's all well and good to be idealistic, but at some point, we have to be realistic or risk losing what we currently have.


I saw the video of those guys at the train station in Germany and without a doubt they are not refugees!


JMHO
 

Blackleaf

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 9, 2004
48,322
1,649
113


Ludicrous woman. Yvette Cooper is the Labour MP for Normanton, Pontefract and Castleford, the Shadow Home Secretary and the wife of the detestable former Shadow Chancellor Ed Balls, who lost his seat in May's General Election. She's also the one who wants to fill every town in Britain with TEN refugee families, completely ignoring the fact that immigration (thanks to the last Labour government) is already way too high and needs to be slashed to a tenth the level that it is now, back to the level it was for decades up until Blair's Labour opened the floodgates in the late 1990s for nothing other than to gain hundreds of thousands of potential new Labour voters and, as they admitted themselves, to "rub the Right's noses in diversity."

I've noticed that Cooper, whilst telling the public that we should accept more immigrants in our towns, and appears in a ridiculous photograph holding a sign saying #refugeeswelcome, isn't opening her and Balls' home to immigrant lodgers, nor do they seem to be accepting immigrant lodgers in their lavish second home, a large £655,000 property in north London for which they use their taxpayer-funded parliamentary allowances to pay the mortgage interest. And nor, like most members of the metropolitan Left-wing elite which now runs this country, living in their well-heeled leafy suburbs, but unlike millions of ordinary Britons, do they have any experience of what life is like with many immigrants living in their vicinity, taking all the school places, the housing and putting strain on the local NHS. The only immigrants they have any experience of is the cheap Polish and Lithuanian nannies which look after their little Tarquins and Aramintas.



This means they’d much rather do a deal with a Muslim party than with the National Front, France’s Ukip equivalent.

Sorry, Peter. Whilst I agree with most things you ever say in your common sense articles, I'll have to disagree with you on this one. The Front National are France's equivalent of the BNP, not Ukip.
 
Last edited:

JLM

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 27, 2008
75,301
547
113
Vernon, B.C.
Holy crap. And I thought Blacklung was the only goof ignorant and discourteous enough to post mile-long stuff with huge photos.

If I see more than about one long paragraph, it's usually relegated to the round file! :) :)
 

JLM

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 27, 2008
75,301
547
113
Vernon, B.C.
Holy crap. And I thought Blacklung was the only goof ignorant and discourteous enough to post mile-long stuff with huge photos.

And that's only ONE thing he's ignorant and discourteous enough to do. Add bragging and bull sh*tting! :)
 

Jinentonix

Hall of Fame Member
Sep 6, 2015
10,607
5,250
113
Olympus Mons
It is bigotry. I'm descended from immigrants who were escaping war. On my mom's side in one case they went on the fight for canada

Killing nazi's as a member of the Devils brigade

Also it would make us hypocrites
Quick question. Did your ancestors ever refuse food because it wasn't ritually prepared by a bunch of religious idiots? The "refugees" in Germany did. Did your ancestors ever burn food and clothing that was given to them in times of desperation? The "refugees" in Calais did. In fact the organization that was providing aid to those in Calais has called it quits on them. Were your ancestors a bunch of worthless ingrates? The REAL refugees aren't but unfortunately about 90% of the "refugees" aren't actual refugees.


Germany is a victim of its own left-tard stupidity. They've invited hundreds of thousands of "refugees" into Germany but the reality is, they've only got housing for less than 1,000. In some cases they've kicked out the current residents of public housing to give these so-called refugees a place to live.


Then there's Saudi Arabia who magnanimously offered to build up to 200 mosques in Germany alone for the "refugees". Yet Saudi Arabia, a very wealthy Gulf state hasn't taken in one, single refugee.
All those over here who are so gung-ho about bringing them here need to seriously ask themselves WHY the Saudis and the other wealthy Gulf states refuse to take in any of these people.
 

Cliffy

Standing Member
Nov 19, 2008
44,850
192
63
Nakusp, BC
Quick question. Did your ancestors ever refuse food because it wasn't ritually prepared by a bunch of religious idiots? The "refugees" in Germany did. Did your ancestors ever burn food and clothing that was given to them in times of desperation? The "refugees" in Calais did. In fact the organization that was providing aid to those in Calais has called it quits on them. Were your ancestors a bunch of worthless ingrates? The REAL refugees aren't but unfortunately about 90% of the "refugees" aren't actual refugees.
Blah, blah, blah....
Did these refugees from the Muddled East feast with their rescuers, then kill them and steal their land? Why are they refugees? Is it because some other Muslims bombed the crap out of their homes? No. It was western governments who bombed the crap out of their homes under the pretense of bombing ISIS.
 

selfsame

Time Out
Jul 13, 2015
3,491
0
36
Did these refugees from the Muddled East feast with their rescuers, then kill them and steal their land? Why are they refugees? Is it because some other Muslims bombed the crap out of their homes? No. It was western governments who bombed the crap out of their homes under the pretense of bombing ISIS.

Some points of consideration:
1- This wave of migration has been planned.
2- Killing so large number of people in the daily bombs and explosions has been planned.

The purpose is to evacuate these countries of their citizens.

Why: Because we are more than them in the number of citizens: we are much more numerous than the Zionists: so the Zionists kill of us as much as they can, specially they kill the ones who are mostly in the reproductive age and who can reproduce.

In addition to encouraging the emigration: so that the Arab countries round about Tel Aviv will be less numerous.

The Zionists are acting now like Pharaoh in the past and how he killed a large number of the Children of Israel: he killed their sons and spared their daughters for the service.
 
Last edited:

Twila

Nanah Potato
Mar 26, 2003
14,698
73
48
The Saudis are bombing Yemen because they fear the Shia Houthis are working for the Iranians. The Saudis are also bombing Isis in Iraq and the Isis in Syria. So are the United Arab Emirates. The Syrian government is bombing its enemies in Syria and the Iraqi government is also bombing its enemies in Iraq. America, France, Britain, Denmark, Holland, Australia and – believe it or not – Canada are bombing Isis in Syria and Isis in Iraq, partly on behalf of the Iraqi government (for which read Shia militias) but absolutely not on behalf of the Syrian government.

The Jordanians and Saudis and Bahrainis are also bombing Isis in Syria and Iraq because they don’t like them, but the Jordanians are bombing Isis even more than the Saudis after their pilot-prisoner was burned to death in a cage. The Egyptians are bombing parts of Libya because a group of Christian Egyptians had their heads chopped off by what might – notionally – be the same so-called Islamic State, as Isis refers to itself. The Iranians have acknowledged bombing Isis in Iraq – of which the Americans (but not the Iraqi government) take a rather dim view. And of course the Israelis have several times bombed Syrian government forces in Syria but not Isis

The sectarian and theological nature of this war seems perfectly clear to all who live in the Middle East . The Sunni Saudis are bombing the Shia Yemenis and the Shia Iranians are bombing the Sunni Iraqis. The Sunni Egyptians are bombing Sunni Libyans, it’s true, and the Jordanian Sunnis are bombing Iraqi Sunnis. But the Shia-supported Syrian government forces are bombing their Sunni Syrian enemies and the Lebanese Hezbollah – Shia to a man – are fighting the Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s Sunni enemies, along with Iranian Revolutionary Guards and an ever-larger number of Afghan Shia men in Syrian uniforms.

And if you want to taste the sectarianism of all this, just take a look at Saudi Arabia’s latest request to send more Pakistani troops to protect the kingdom (and possibly help to invade Yemen), which came from the new Saudi Crown Prince and Defence Minister Mohammed bin Salman who at only 34 is not much older than his fighter pilots. But the Saudis added an outrageous second request: that the Pakistanis send only Sunni Muslim soldiers. Pakistani Shia Muslim officers and men (30 per cent of the Pakistani armed forces) would not be welcome.

from
Who Is Bombing Who in the Middle East? | Common Dreams | Breaking News & Views for the Progressive Community
 

lone wolf

Grossly Underrated
Nov 25, 2006
32,493
210
63
In the bush near Sudbury
Why: Because we are more than them in the number of citizens: we are much more numerous than the Zionists: so the Zionists kill of us as much as they can, specially they kill the ones who are mostly in the reproductive age and who can reproduce.

Are you saying saltpeter will solve the world's problems?
 

JLM

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 27, 2008
75,301
547
113
Vernon, B.C.
Just confirmed on C.B.C. news this morning that Justin is about to "veer off the rails". One of his first priorities is to get plans in place to import 25,000 immediately. It will be fun to watch that, but not quite so funny to live with it after they arrive.
 

MHz

Time Out
Mar 16, 2007
41,030
43
48
Red Deer AB
Let's hope the first load comes to your street.

What a good article and there is so much truth to what he is saying. I think he's correct in stating that it may well be too late to turn things around. I just hope Canadians are more realistic and maintain a handle on who comes into this country. It's all well and good to be idealistic, but at some point, we have to be realistic or risk losing what we currently have.


I saw the video of those guys at the train station in Germany and without a doubt they are not refugees!


JMHO
It is our 'soldiers' marching homeward bound. You get what you pay for. Lets hope they have been clued in that the war is over even if they didn't get the country they were promised. We should watch what our politicians are actually doing with our money.

Seems like Cliffy and Megahurtz have found a soulmate
Is that how you found yours?? Somebody agree with 1 of your points out of 1,000 is probably close enough, should that ever actually happen.
 

damngrumpy

Executive Branch Member
Mar 16, 2005
9,949
21
38
kelowna bc
Who are the refugees in this case? Yes some are Muslims but not the majority
of them. Many are Kurds (eastern Orthodox Christians) mostly there there are
the Syrian Christians the Iraqi Christians and moderate Muslims with means
and education and trades. These people are targets of the crazy people and not
crazy people themselves. Originally I too was questioning who was coming.
Not really concerned at the moment. We were through this with Vietnamese,
Hungarians and other groups and to date I haven't seen the country destroyed.
now if we were bringing in terrorists and ISIS to escape from justice that would
be different. I wonder if we do protest too much here
 

AnnaG

Hall of Fame Member
Jul 5, 2009
17,507
117
63
Well, Justine IS the head of THE natural governing party, right. It is the ONLY party that knows what ALL Canucks want. And they know this without even asking.