What are the causes of recent swarm of immigrants to Europe?

Post Reply New Topic

I see no women, no children, no elderly

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=30e_1440698507

If the angle of the video is to vilify the refugees (which probably is, judging by the choice of words), then they probably wouldn't want scenes with crying women and children, because people usually react with some degrees of compassion (if any are left).

But with foreign male strangers? Usually with suspicion. Even fear if they are particularly hard looking. Most people who survived seeing their families blown up tend to be hard.

I can't really comment on the politics as I'm busy trying to forget how my country voted for David "Toff" Cameron the second time after his sterling performance in setting the stage for this mass-migration.

All I know is that he is US's little b***h. And if they want us to further alienate anyone who looks vaguely Middle-Eastern, he will obey.

It always seems that whenever times are hard, we must find some outsiders to hate on, and judging by so many thoughtful comments in the nets these days, the "west" had chosen anyone associated with Islam...

But... to try to answer the purpose... scare us into letting them set up a police state? I mean, the UK's infrastructure is not in good shape, but scare the dumb general public enough with tales of hairy men wearing balaclavas, and people won't complain as much when they shut down more schools and hospitals and transfer the savings into building more useless tanks...

Hm .

everyone gets paid and Europe doesn't seem to care

so why not?

To be more specific, the big-wigs get paid. We common folk are either powerless or distracted by other s**t. It's likely that we will be the ones footing the bill (as always) if money is spent on the refugees.

But there seem to be no right way out of this shite.

We are struggling as it is. We can take them in, and hopefully they will be grateful enough to overlook the fact that we had a hand in bombing their countries to hell. Of course, there are significant logistical (and social) problems with having a bunch of mentally and physically broken people stashed in the corner of an EU country...

We could do the stupid thing and "return to sender". If our illustrious leaders (or more likely, the dumb-ass voters) choose this path, we might as well give ISIL (or whatever crazy militant group we can think of/invent) with free weapons. They always forget that these groups prey on the desperate...

Are you saying that taking in these people (including many trained ISIS militants) is good for the society, but looking after own interest, protecting borders and sending them back is going to make ISIS dislike us?

The fact that most of Britons are ready to bleed for the idea of equality, despite not understanding the basic problems of creating equality industry is a sort of mental handicap on its own. UK is a nation of ignorance: people cannot write, count, do not know geography or politcs - but all have strong pro human rights views taken right from the media. Most of all, Britons take media's views as their own. People are pro left-wing, pro equality, pro immigration because they were brainwashed over generations into loving Labour as the only right party.

The equality industry rose in 1960's and 1970's and today employs thousands of people in its administration, to carry out equality 'monitoring' costing millions of pounds. That monitoring in practice means x-raying every aspect of our lives in search of anything that not necessarily is - but could appear as unequal and therefore discriminatory.

Along with the growth of administrative positions within the 'Equality and Diversity' industry, emerged a new group with inner call to fight for equal rights and paranoia of seeing and fighting discrimination in every sphere of our lives. They began to call themselves Equality and Diversity Practitioners - true professionals with mission. They are however, a horde of non-productive administrators, breeding bureaucracy and paralysing all spheres of public life. Their other achievements are spreading and supporting of misandry in the name of 'positive discrimination' (yes positive discrimination is a legal term and is used by same industry) and forcing nursery teachers to bring toddlers to justice for inappropriate language.

They shine with example of equality, starting with the Chief Executive of Equality and Human Rights Commission, whose salary is £42,500 higher than that of David Cameron! Those people get paid ridiculous money to maintain Human Rights Act, Equality and Diversity Act and keep producing other useless legal acts but they will never change their beliefs, aims or goals - because once you get paid this much money you will stick to your program even if it brings death to your own people.

Haiti's problems can mainly be blamed on the french, for having kept them bankrupted for most of the history of their country.

Read Travesty in Haiti by Tim Schwarz. It will give you a better picture as to what is happening - how the NGOs are feathering their own nests pretending to help the poor, and how the governments are pulling the farmers down to make the country totally subservient.
The UN are trying to get the DR to take in the children of illegal Haitians that were born here. They are calling them Dominicans of Haitian descent when they are not considered by the locals as Dominican - just illegals. Jus Sanguinis applies here.
If my wife and I had a kid here it would be English. The UN are changing the rules to force mass migration.

Here are some more theories. When I look at a map of the Ottoman Empire in the early 20th Century, I can see that it controlled a huge portion of what we think of today as the Arab world. Of course the Ottomans themselves were not Arabs so in principle the Arabs would welcome the opportunity to escape from Ottoman rule.

As the century progressed, the Ottoman Empire did fall, and a new map of Europe was drawn by Europeans. As a consequence, new "countries" were created in an area that had no recent tradition of "national sovereignty", except possibly Egypt. Each country had its mix of religious and ethnic groups. Note that the term "Arab" really just means a person whose mother tongue is some form of Arabic, it is in no way an ethnic designation. I have seen Arabs with blond hair and blue eyes, and others with jet-black skin. In some countries, one group had the numeric majoriy but a different group dominated politically, possibly because their group was dominant in the area where the administrative capital was located. So these groups were pitted against each other in competition for scarce resources. Even if these areas had been peaceful before, they soon became warlike as the different groups knew of no other way to achieve their objectives or defend what they believed to be rightly theirs.

Then came Naziism which tried to exterminate the Jewish population in Europe (and the rest of the world had they succeeded). Although they succeeded in killing millions of hated Jews, a certain number of Jews escaped to the Zionist settlements in Palestine. When the Nazis lost the war, the British who were now in charge didn't know what to do with the Jewish refugees in Palestine. On another day, they could probably have dispensed with the "problem" quite easily but after the Holocaust (which by the way was not a myth) they had to be as humanitarian as possible. While they weren't paying complete attention, a Jewish state was declared in Palestine, against which all neighboring "countries" immediately declared war. The Jews were supposed to lose that war. They didn't.

This situation had to be resolved somehow. So where I might go a bit off the deep end with this is that I believe that a large number of people in power in Europe quietly encouraged the militarization of the Arab world through various means, in the hope that a militarized Arab world would easily wipe out the State of Israel. My theory being that these Europeans, by no means all of them German, were privately enraged that the Holocaust had failed (even though they may have been overjoyed that the Germans no longer occupied their countries, they felt no remorse whatsoever over what had happened to their former Jewish neighbors, quite the opposite).

So Israel's neighbors tried repeatedly to wipe out the Jewish state, but shockingly, failed every time. So then the principle of unintended consequences took over. The militarized Arab world, having failed in its original purpose of finishing the job H**ler started, turned to fighting within itself. Shi'a vs. Sunni vs. Alawite vs. various Christian sects, a few Muslim "heretic" groups, plus non-Arabs in particular the Kurds (another former Ottoman subject group with no tradition of national sovereignty, whom the Turks and Persians also despise).

Then you get people like Dick Cheney who seem to believe that "American know-how" can sort everything out quite neatly, but that's another story.

At the End of the Day (don't you hate that expression?) what you get is an absolute Hell of pervasive and perpetual war in what was once the Ottoman Empire (except of course for Turkey itself, mostly). In whose universe would millions of refugees NOT be flooding into Europe?

I find it ironic that modern Europeans, appalled by the "Islamization" of their continent, have to some extent chosen to deal with it by playing Muslim immigrants against whatever remaining Jewish population they have. Jewish businesses and people are harassed and physically attacked by angry Muslims and Christian Europeans sit in front of their TVs watching this and say "tut-tut".

As for the US funding immigration into Europe, it makes no sense from a geo-political perspective. The US needs eastern Europe strong, not weak. The cold war may be over, but eastern Europe is still the buffer between Russia and western Europe. It would make sense to strengthen that barrier, not weaken it.

As for countries allowing illegal immigration in their own country, it's probably more complex. Here in the US we have identity politics in play, and a sizable number of latinos that see ethnicity before immigration status and thus they believe it's a racial equality issue. Likewise, we have anti-immigration people that also see it as a race issue and attempt to frame it as a white vs. minority issue. It makes it hard to make any progress when the issue is constantly stuck on race and not the effects of illegal immigration. Behind this backdrop our businesses support illegal immigration since it lowers the wages of all workers, and that's probably the core reason it hasn't been solved: powerful people in business run the US.

I'm sure the European problem has very nuanced sub-issues as well. In both cases, the ultimate solution is a long ways away: if you stabilize an unstable region the people there have no reason to leave their homes, family, and culture.

Good point. And although I have not way to know, I suspect you are right.

From what I can gather from watching Fox News and Al Jazeera the root cause is instability caused by ISIS. Hungary is talking about building a border fence, they found an abandoned truck in Austria that contained over 20 badly decomposed bodies of what they believe were Syrian refugees, and thousands of refugees are landing on the Greek Isles.
The thing that distresses me the most about this is most of the commentators aren't calling for the destruction of ISIS, which is the root cause, but rather they are asking what is the European Union going to do. Treat the symptom, not the disease.

Interesting combination of news sources.Before they go about destroying ISIS they should first check with the Turks. The Turks (their pathetic government, anyway) love ISIS for what they are doing to the Kurds.

As far as Turkey goes, NATO and the EU need to sit them down and point out that it is in their immediate interest to cooperate with the countries that are trying to eliminate ISIS because A) They have economic ties to these organizations that can be severed, and B) After ISIS grabs off the Arab world ( unlikely but possible ), it is logical that they would go after Turkey, as Empires of Conquests must continue to conquer or they stagnate and die. The Turks surely know this, because it happened to them. And about my mix of news sources, divergent sources of information makes for an informed opinion.

I think you are looking for confirmation of your views that there is some overarching political agenda.

European majority countries and European colonies (particularly in the in the English speaking world) seem to be where many people fleeing war and conflict are gravitating toward. The reasons are complicated but the recent spike in numbers is largely precipitated from political instability but you have to consider poverty, high birth rate and lack of access to resources and employment opportunity.

Industrialisation and globalisation of capital has mean't old national boundaries are getting less meaningful. There is an agenda to tap into cheap labour so illegal flow of migrants from Africa into Europe and South Americans into the US is still seen as a necessity in some quarters. What's happening at a global level is similar to the end of the 19th century when masses of poor moved from rural areas into cities looking for opportunity. The attitudes of the "bourgeoisie" toward that influx was not unlike the attitudes we carry for third world migrants.

Dude, Jack. You had misunderstood my rant.

Many of these refugees may, one way or another, find out that we helped f**k up their country with our political games.

Like what others have said, they are not really ever going to integrate well, but now you have a bunch of people willing to take s**t jobs no European or 2nd/3rd gen immigrate would touch. Also, at least they are now far away from recruiting centres of those fundies, plus you can keep a close eye on them.

As for the ISIL comment, what I mean is if we kick them back, they either have to choice of lying down and dying, or join them so get back at us. I mean, what do you expect? Most people will be mighty pissed if someone blew up their house and refuse to pay anything. That's how "terror" groups recruit people: give them a chance of venting their anger at some scapegoat.

But I notice how the "western" media are increasingly spouting one-sided shite. Petty tribalism. Will still stand by the US government even though they had pissed all over us...