Beating the Wehrmacht

The UK has reported record number of migrant arrivals to its borders in recent weeks, with nearly 1,000 landing in England in a single day at the weekend. Former Border Force chief Tony Smith erupted at the British Government for failing to reach a viable agreement with Paris to ensure people attempting to cross the Channel are intercepted and returned to France.

Here.

Well, dang. The migrants are making Adolf's boys look like beginners: they're successfully breaching the English Channel as a water barrier that has protected the British Isles for centuries. Napoleon: hang your head in shame!

Amazes me to realize how many people think there is somehow something virtuous about this situation. The French authorities allow their territory to be used as a launching point for illegal migration to another country. And the British government apparently accepts the situation, occasional sound bites notwithstanding.

Douglas Murray, I think, nailed it in is his book The Strange Death of Europe. There is no master plan at work here. No, what this is, is the end result of decades of politicians making decisions that were the easiest way out for them at a particular point in time. Decisions taken with no look to the future or to the consequences that could arise a decade or more down the road. And the decisions are still being made in that fashion.

Thilo Sarrazin wrote a book called Germany abolishes itself, regarding the issues of migration and slow loss of one's own culture. But in reality, it seems Sarrazin could have written a work of broader scope titled Europe abolishes itself, for the same processes are at work in many countries of Europe.

I won't bang on about the evils of this or that. I'll just point out something that needs to be realized by Western leaders: A lifeboat is useful only so long as it doesn't capsize from overloading. The West would do far better to help out people in need in their own countries or regions. The problem is to do that realistically means someone will have to be there to ensure that help is given as intended and not subjected to warlord or bandit pressures ... and that implies a loss of sovereignty for those who are being helped. No, not a popular option at all these days.

Cheers

a reply to: F2d5thCavv2

It is being aided and abetted from within Britain. It is all part of the master plan to descend the stable parts of the world into utter chaos. Day by day, the intruders numbers grow.

Where are the SAS and the British Commandos?

P

a reply to: F2d5thCavv2The laugh is Boris Bunter has sent the army to assist at Poland's border to prevent it being breached but sends the Border Farce,I mean Force to act like a taxi service at our southern border.
Same with RNLI,taxi service for illegals now.I know of a few people who have cancelled their charitable donations to RNLI over this.
Four star hotels and pocket money awaiting these 'cultural enrichers'.Lets hope the food and WiFi is to their liking because the rest have been moaning about it for months.

a reply to: pheonix358
They are in Poland,securing their border from 'Belarusians' from the middle East.You couldn't make this stuff up but what do we expect from a cabinet full of immigrants.They really think it's great and have no real allegiance to Britain,no matter what they say.

In a morbid sense, it is kind of fascinating.

For centuries, the nation-state and idea of national sovereignty held sway.

Now they are being challenged, with some success, not by the invasion of highly organized armies, but by groups of migrants, here and there. Yet ... the total mounts, and in all likelihood will only increase as long as the current policies remain in effect.

One notes that in many countries, ideas of national sovereignty still hold sway. But not in the West.

Cheers

a reply to: F2d5thCavv2
You've heard the saying "softly, softly cachee monkey", That's their game.
Your idea of going into these supposed run down countries is a no brainer. EXAMPLE. Afghanistan, the US has been there years and the mass of ordinary citizens rejoiced at the freedoms the US bought them. Tthheenn, the minority of "freedom fighters" (I don't want to put the name I would like to call them else I'd get banned) decided they wanted their country back. So they've got what they wanted and dragged Afghanistan back to the stone age it was rescued from.
People keep making trivial comments on the reason the migrant cross over numerous countries to get to the UK, believe me it is for one reason only THE FREE HANDOUTS THEY GET, nothing more.

a reply to: F2d5thCavv2

There is an easy solution but unfortunately our government bows to woke sensibilities and puts people's feelings before national security and the best interests of the British people.

A succession of administrations of various political persuasions have buried their heads in the sand and despite the occasional political soundbite have done nothing whatsoever to redress the situation.

I remember David Cameron stating quite firmly that he was going to stem the tide and stop this invasion after the disastrous social engineering policy of open door immigration introduced under Bliar and Brown.
Yet both legal and illegal immigration went up under his stewardship.

A trend that every subsequent Prime Minister has followed.

I don't blame the poor buggers trying to get here, the majority of them have come from absolute #holes and are only trying to better themselves.....BUT NOT AT MY EXPENSE or to the detriment of my country.

Boris huffed and puffed and came out with the oh so predictable promises of stopping this tide of immigrants....and he's done absolutely nothing.

The French are taking the piss and are doing nothing to prevent these migrants trying to gain entry into the UK.
They see it as an opportunity to aggravate and punish the UK for having the temerity to leave the EU and to generally annoy their age old enemy.
In addition they want the UK to assist in the policing of the migrants in France - as far as I'm aware something that hasn't been forthcoming, but could be wrong on that.

We have the resolve and the capability to virtually eliminate this form of illegal immigration, what we lack is the leadership.

originally posted by: glen200376
a reply to: pheonix358
They are in Poland,securing their border from 'Belarusians' from the middle East.You couldn't make this stuff up but what do we expect from a cabinet full of immigrants.They really think it's great and have no real allegiance to Britain,no matter what they say.

Spot on, Boris is part Turk, Part French, Part a lot of many other things and except for his Eton Accent and speech impediment he is very much NOT British (Ethnically speaking though you know we are a mixed bunch).
So many of the Cabinet with there SNEERING faces are actually NOT even from Europe but are first and second Generation Asians.

Now to be fair in the PAST we have had some GOOD foreign prime ministers such as Benjamin Disraeli a Continental Jew whom changed his religion to Anglican and became more British THAN British and was the head of the Conservatives back when THEY Were the left wing party in the 1800's (the Wig's or Liberals as they also go by were actually at time far more right wing than the Tory's despite there name though usually they were more left wing but not back then), he brought in schooling for children whom would otherwise have found themselves down mines from the age of four.


We are an ISLAND and have traded with the greater world since the year Zero (And well before that in fact like forever as long as people have lived here) but never before have we seen so many very different people to us come into our nation in such a short space of time, in fact in the past whenever so many people moved the people whom already lived in the lands the new arrivals came to vanished or were wiped out, those were the times of tribal migration's yet this is actually exactly the same thing tribal migration on HUGE Scale and who will vanish, WE WILL unless we keep what is ours that is not racism that is fact born out by historical observation.

The ones AIDING This are the FRENCH, by law THEY were legally obliged to return those illegal migrants to either the European country or other country they entered France FROM be that Germans, Belgium, Spain, Bloody Switzerland, Italy or any other nation that they were BEFORE getting to France or to send them back to there nations of origin if it is KNOWN since many of these illegal migrants will not disclose there origin nations and NOT to facilitate there move to another nation such as OURS, the French are NOT playing Ball and they are NOT upholding there legal obligation and are letting them come here and destroy our nation simple as that.

I was of the belief that Boris Johnson was from New York City, New York?

Born
Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson
19 June 1964 (age 57)
New York City, New York, US
Citizenship
United Kingdom
United States (1964–2016)[2]

Oh he was. Err, is

Mayor of London

In office
3 May 2008 – 9 May 2016

Preceded by
Ken Livingstone
Succeeded by
Sadiq Khan

Member of Parliament
for Uxbridge and South Ruislip
Incumbent

Assumed office
7 May 2015

Member of Parliament
for Henley

In office
7 June 2001 – 4 June 2008

Preceded by
Michael Heseltine
Succeeded by
John Howell

Are British politicians allowed to have dual citizenship?

I know a bunch of Aussie leeches got the good salt for holding two passports, is it not the same laws in blighty?

en.wikipedia.org...

Citizenship

United Kingdom,

United States (1964–2016)[2]

a reply to: LABTECH767

a reply to: Dalamax

I don't know if it's statute but assume it is that they have only British citizenship to hold office but when he became Theresa Mays foreign secretary he had to officially renounce his US citizenship (a job he only managed for two years and was a failure at?).

a reply to: F2d5thCavv2

Achtung!


Payback for exiting the EU? Arab Spring? I think illegals have an easier time getting jobs in UK vice France. Perhaps they have been refused asylum in EU member states and ordered to leave and see the UK as their last chance. I dunno, the world has sunk into madness.

a reply to: EndtheMadnessNow

I think Arab Spring and the wars in the ME are excuses being made to convince the publics of the Western countries to look the other way while they are sold down the river by their so-called leaders.

Sure, those events cause unrest and generate genuine refugees. But there are plenty of migrants coming from all over the 'developing' world, not just areas that are unstable. And then are situations like what is happening on the Belarus : Poland border at the moment: SOMEONE transported those people to Belarus to crash the EU's eastern border. And those migrants have a very specific destination in mind: Germany, because the social benefits are considered very good there by the migrants. Or, one should ask themselves how Haitian migrants arrived at the Rio Grande.

It all makes a mockery of the idea of assisting and sheltering genuine refugees.

Still, I think Douglas Murray's argument was correct: the core of this problem has been political decisions made with no foresight. I also think that yes, there are parties who are financing, supporting, and encouraging opportunistic migration with a goal of destabilizing Western societies. But I firmly believe the only reason they are able to do that is that the political leadership of the West is failing its own people very badly. For decades, we have not had leadership. We've had short-sighted deal makers who top priority is papering over problems. The migrants have more or less taken stock of this lack of resolve and now we have this situation.

Cheers

Ok cool. Thank you.

a reply to: LABTECH767

a reply to: F2d5thCavv2

To start off, it'd be wrong to put Douglas Murray and Thilo Sarrazin's works on the same footing. The former comes off as an opportunistic reactionary along the lines of Jean Raspail and Oswald Spengler.

Granted, a great man like Schopenhauer was likewise inclined towards pessimistic analysis. Granted, Murray is principled enough to decline a seat in Parliament. Granted, Murray has the merit of actually travelling abroad to investigate these problems. Granted, it was foolish for Europeans to not adopt polygamy, as they did in the Thirty Year War, over a disastrous immigration policy. Granted, the short-term benefits of immigration (superficial distinctions, diet and language, facilitating increased communication) are being offset by the long-term consequences.

However, do we really need pessimistic prophets to tell us what is already obvious to all? Douglas has been praised by Roger Scruton (whose role models are scarcely praiseworthy, particularly the theologian Edmund Burke) and Sam Harris (aside from his proper homage to Bertrand Russell, most of his recommended books would be better left unread).

Generally, the best-sellers of the day are largely forgettable and play no major role in the future struggle. Schopenhauer's epoch-making The World as Will and Representation, on the other hand, was ignored for upward 30-40 years, according to Richard Wagner's reminiscences.

As for Thilo Sarrazin, I'm inclined to give ear to him, insofar as he seems like a decent German who mustered up the courage to speak on behalf of the people. He has more merit than a blase intellectual like Douglas Murray. Although it could be maintained that Sarrazin was pandering to the masses, the press has mislabelled him as deliberately provocative. He plainly stated that he only blames the unacceptable conditions enabled by the system, not the individual foreigner. Regrettably, his work seems unavailable in English, I've merely surveyed a few articles and interviews from him.

I'm preparing a second write-up to follow up with my ramblings, you can expect a delay in my response.