Page 1 of 14 1211 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 35 of 456

Thread: The Strange Death of Europe - a discussion about mass migration

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Livin' in Oz
    Posts
    56,024

    Default The Strange Death of Europe - a discussion about mass migration

    An interesting opinion piece by Douglas Murray, author of "The Strange Death of Europe"

    Why Australia needs to stand firm and protect its borders


    A floral tribute to the Westminster Bridge attack victims. Picture: Getty Images



    The news that Australia is refusing to join the UN’s Global Compact for Migration will cause howls of complaint at home and abroad. “Don’t you know what you are doing?” these people will cry. “Do you see who you are allied with? The US and Hungary. Really?”

    The Australian government should ignore these howlers. For it is not the government of Malcolm Turnbull, or those in Hungary or the US, that is wrong. It is the UN, which keeps trying to push mass migration on to nation-states and whose officials imagine that the answer to the existence of some porous, poor and failed states is to make the world one great porous, poor and failed state. Nation-states have the right to resist this pressure, and they should.

    Yet one of the most startling facts about migration in recent years has been that the greatest plaudits continue to go to those who are most reckless in their policies, while the most abuse goes to those who are most prudent. Perhaps this is because grandstanding and virtue-signalling are cheap. You can almost always get other people to pay for them.

    Nobody in recent years has made so impulsive and catastrophic a decision as German Chancellor Angela Merkel. Her 2015 decision to open the borders of Europe to anyone who made it there is having consequences that will roll out for years to come. Yet even as the German public turns against her and her party, she continues to be lauded across the international opinion-forming classes. Despite unleashing social and security problems across an entire continent, organs of international elite opinion and Merkel’s fellow world leaders continue to give her an easy ride. At worst she was “well-intentioned” and “naive”, they say. By contrast, the leaders of countries that refuse to accept open-borders, mandatory migrant quotas and the like are the ones that come in for execration and attack.

    Nevertheless, the rule of law and the protection of the social stability and security situation in countries such as Australia are worth defending, whatever the pushback. The Australian delegation at the UN in New York was right to state that the UN had “failed to make clear distinctions between regular and irregular migrants and between refugees and migrants”. These distinctions matter. Indeed they are vital. For they are not only a defence of the law but also a prudent response to a challenge that is only going to grow. For countries that fail to secure their borders in the end cannot secure their people either.

    Take my own country, Britain. More than a year has passed since it was rocked by three Islamist terror attacks. The first attack, on Westminster Bridge, claimed the lives of five innocent people including a police officer who was stabbed to death by the attacker inside the gates of Parliament. The second attack, at the Manchester Arena, killed 22 mainly young people and maimed and injured hundreds more. They were victims of a young suicide bomber who waited for them in the lobby as they streamed out of an Ariana Grande concert. In the third attack, a fortnight later, three men rampaged across London Bridge in a van and then ran through Borough Market slashing at the throats of passers-by, targeting women. While doing this they were heard to shout “This is for Allah”. Their attack injured 48 and stole the lives of eight people.

    The dead that night included two Australians. Sara Zelenak, 21, was stabbed through the neck. Kirsty Boden, 28, a nurse, was stabbed through the chest as she ran to help other victims of the attack. After the third attack British Prime Minister Theresa May announced that “enough is enough”. But the truth is that she is incapable of acting because like the rest of us she is a hostage of the asylum and migration policies of her predecessors.

    One year on from those attacks and that statement, the government’s only initiative has been the appointment of an “extremism commissioner”. After half a year that appointee (anti-extremism activist Sara Khan) has announced that her first priority is to gather evidence about “all forms of extremism in the UK”. So “enough is enough” turns out to mean: “We will appoint a commissioner who will appoint a board to look into unrelated issues.”

    Of course one wishes Khan well. But here is one bitter truth that I bet Khan’s commission will not look into. Among last year’s attackers, most should never have been in Britain in the first place.
    The Westminster Bridge attacker, a convert to Islam, was indeed born in Britain. But the Manchester Arena bomber should never have been there. His father was a member of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, an al-Qa’ida affiliate. Back in the 1990s the LIFG was opposed to Libyan ruler Muammar Gaddafi, and he returned the favour. So when the situation in Libya got too hot for Ramadan Abedi and his wife they decamped to Britain, where they were given asylum. Weeks later their son Salman was born in Manchester.

    Twenty-two years later he would repay the country that gave his parents sanctuary by detonating an explosive packed with nuts and bolts to cause maximum damage to the young skulls and spines into which they ripped.

    Just this past week a British newspaper revealed that in 2014 the Royal Navy saved Salman Abedi along with other British nationals from the civil war in Libya. HMS Enterprise rescued him and 100 other British nationals when the security situation in that country deteriorated. What was he doing there? Why were he and his family ever in Britain? And why did Britain keep paying the family’s travel expenses whenever they felt like visiting the country they allegedly had fled?

    An even clearer story emerges from the London Bridge attackers. And it has been even less dis*cussed. The three perpetrators that night were Youssef Zaghba, 22; Khuram Butt, 27; and Rachid Redouane, 30. Zaghba and Redou*ane were born in Morocco, an entirely peaceful and pleasant country. An inquest after the attack found that Redouane had entered Britain using a false name, claiming to be Libyan, and he was five years older than he had pretended. He had been refused asylum under his false Libyan iden*tity, exhausted his further appeals, absconded and lived under his Moroccan identity instead. So again, why was he in Britain? What was he doing for us? What did Britain get out of this deal?

    The case of Butt is even more shameful. He had been born in Pakistan and was described as having arrived in Britain as a “child refugee” in 1998, his family having moved to the UK to claim asylum based on “political oppression”. What nobody has been able to explain since is why, other than saving al-Qa’ida fighters from Libya, Britain’s immigration services in the 190s were still giving “asylum” to people from Pakistan.

    Pakistan in the 90s was not in a state of war. The country is — for good or ill — an ally of Britain and about as stable a country as you get in that region. His family does not appear to be among the numerous religious minorities so eagerly persecuted by the Muslim majority in Pakistan. So why was Butt in Britain? What exactly did he bring to Britain in the years that followed?


    "Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome and charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime" Mark Twain... so... Carpe the living sh!t out of the Diem

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Livin' in Oz
    Posts
    56,024

    Default Re: The Strange Death of Europe - a discussion about mass migration

    ...... continued..........


    After the London Bridge attack May and London mayor Sadiq Khan eagerly launched into a debate about the role that internet companies had in tackling terror.

    It is an interesting debate. But it had nothing to do with that attack. So far as is known there was no subterranean online jihadist activity going on. In fact the attackers and their associates could hardly have been more out in the open. The year before the London Bridge attack Butt was even on British television as was one of the stars of a Channel 4 show: The Jihadis Next Door. So he wasn’t exactly hiding. He was starring on prime time. May and Khan didn’t need to sit on the tech companies to avert an atrocity such as London Bridge. They just needed to turn on their televisions.

    When something is staring you in the face and you ignore it, there is always a reason. One conclusion that I have come to over the years I have been covering the story of extremism and terrorism in Europe is that the one connection nobody in power wants is between anything negative and anything to do with migration. There is a reason: which is that this is a problem they have brought us.

    Of course every religion and ideology can produce nutters. But it still does not make any sense — indeed, it could be said to be a form of madness — to import forms of extremism we used not to have. And this — for politicians in Britain and Europe — is the toxic underbelly of this debate. We have had, on continental Europe even more than in Britain, plenty of violent ideologies and creeds of our own. But Islamic extremism is an imported problem. A problem our politicians imported in the post-war period right up to the present.

    Obviously that isn’t to say that all those people who have come from Pakistan and other Muslim countries are terrorists. Clearly not. But they have too many people among them who profess an ideology that countries such as ours are not just slow but reluctant to recognise. And if those people who have come to our countries legally show the mess of our system, what hope do we have with illegal migration at the level that supranational organisations such as the EU and UN think is perfectly fine?

    A great problem for the pro-mass migration panjandrums is that the public can make all the obvious connection with our own eyes. But our politicians are incapable of providing answers. And it is not as though the answers are easy. For instance, what do you do with citizens who hate the state they are in? For most Europeans this is an unanswerable question. But because a question cannot be answered or is hard to answer, it does not follow that the question must not be asked. Yet there, for the time being Britain, like the rest of western Europe, uncomfortably sits.

    I am often asked by Australian friends what differences exist between Europe and Australia in these matters. And on my tour of Australia this month I look forward to hearing and learning more about this. But, broadly speaking, from the outside it looks to me like there are two clear differences.

    The first is in your immigration policies. To the fury of many campaigners in Australia and abroad, a generation of Australian politicians, from John Howard onwards, made the most important realisation of all. They realised that you have a country or you don’t. And if you have a country you have to have borders and rules. Unlike Merkel and European Commission president Jean-Claude Juncker, John Howard and Tony Abbott in particular knew the difference between “legal” and “illegal” immigration is not some tiny technicality to be got around by a phalanx of human rights lawyers. The difference between legal and illegal immigration is the law. The law that Australia’s representatives at the UN have once again necessarily and heroically upheld. Because if you don’t have the law then you don’t have much of a state either.

    The second difference is that Australia seems to still have (though this may be on the wane) some residual common sense of a kind that appears to be almost absent in my country. There seems to remain in Australia a strain of perfectly legitimate opinion that still finds it acceptable to say: “If you don’t like it here then why don’t you hop it?” In Britain and most of western Europe anybody who uttered such a statement would be too sensible to survive.

    And perhaps that’s where we are more generally. A country that imports jihadists who are down on their luck and a continent that welcomes anyone who makes it there is a continent with a deeply troubled future. The best piece of advice any Brit or European can give to an Australian today is the saddest advice of all: don’t do what we did. The happier piece of advice — and one this Brit is happy to give to our Australian friends — is: keep doing what you are doing. You are right. And don’t let anyone, not even the UN, try to tell you otherwise.

    The Strange Death of Europe by Douglas Murray (Bloomsbury Continuum, $22.99) is out now. Murray will be in Australia this month on a national speaking tour with Think Inc.
    "Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome and charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime" Mark Twain... so... Carpe the living sh!t out of the Diem

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    victoria, australia. (1 address now)
    Posts
    49,915

    Default Re: The Strange Death of Europe - a discussion about mass migration

    Mass migrations of species are not a new phenomenon, that's how we all got where we are. Migrations out of Africa are 'the norm' if it comes to that and this is just another one driven by the usual reasons. Food, security, climate, population pressure, tribal warfare. If millions decide to move, they will.

    Religions are a wild card, and the religions of the book seem to be particularly nasty if you are 'the other'. Of course I think they are all constructs, partly an adaption of the cooperative nature of man, partly a power grab by those who think that way. Our species does seem rather gullible. But you cannot ban a belief.

    Importing a terrorist already grown is one thing that may be reducible, importing a future one as an infant, or having a future one born in country is another problem entirely. There is no easy answer to that one other than keeping a very close eye on those promoting it under whatever guise, and removing them.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Between Here and There
    Posts
    26,856

    Default Re: The Strange Death of Europe - a discussion about mass migration

    Well said.
    One of the most enduring qualities of an old wooden boat is the smell it imparts to your clothing.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Northern California Mountains
    Posts
    12,151

    Default Re: The Strange Death of Europe - a discussion about mass migration

    I have read the book. It is thoughtful, serious, scholarly. It is excellent.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Wow-Ming
    Posts
    17,396

    Default Re: The Strange Death of Europe - a discussion about mass migration

    Just look at the history of Australia.

    The blissful lives of the people were utterly ruined by a horde of thieving, raping, murdering, degenerate, savage immigrants.

    From Great Britain.
    We're merely mammals. Let's misbehave! —Cole Porter

  7. #7
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    MD
    Posts
    46,006

    Default Re: The Strange Death of Europe - a discussion about mass migration


  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Northern NSW Australia
    Posts
    71,316

    Default Re: The Strange Death of Europe - a discussion about mass migration

    We best all get used to mass migrations, Global Warming and it's resulting heat waves and sea level rise are going to see millions on the move.

    Unless we normalise machine gunning people in the water they will come.
    '' You ain't gonna learn what you don't want to know. ''
    Grateful Dead

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    4,465

    Default Re: The Strange Death of Europe - a discussion about mass migration

    Imigration will be the savior of the western world, If it weren't for immigration fertility rates would be in catastrophic areas where populations simply don't recover. Not only will climate shift require massive movements of people from low lying population areas. Not only will economic conditions require the movement of people from less prosperous areas to more prosperous, but the simply issue of falling birthrates in just about every "developed" nation means that without immigration, those developed countries wouldn't be able to care for their elderly, wouldn't be able to find the labor they need to remain developed countries, and wouldn't be able to encourage the tax base required to maintain critical services.

    It's a no brainer, leave the xenophobia behind and embrace reality. We need immigration in order to maintain a civilized world.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Northern NSW Australia
    Posts
    71,316

    Default Re: The Strange Death of Europe - a discussion about mass migration

    Reality ???? Xenophobes have no use for Reality !!!
    '' You ain't gonna learn what you don't want to know. ''
    Grateful Dead

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Fredericton, New Brunswick
    Posts
    34,044

    Default Re: The Strange Death of Europe - a discussion about mass migration

    We have had mass migration, for all the reasons pushing it today, since our species started to emerge. In fact our ancestors species migrated too. Go back far enough, and our really distant ancestors migrated from the sea onto the land. Even as humans, our history has always been the history of migration.

    I "get" the value of culture as much so anyone; my roots,are in various bits of Britain and elsewhere, and our trip to the UK last May was stirring, exactly for that reason.

    But there is no "native" Brit, even among the white folks who developed the culture over centuries. Except maybe if some Celt or other still exists as a pureblood. Brits are mongrels, from Saxon, Roman, Norman, Celt, Viking, and various lesser tribes. There is a lot of Spanish blood in Ireland, for instance. If our current genetic testing has shown anything it's shown that we're all mongrels.

    So I have zip time for the "strong borders" stuff, actually. It is ahistorical, or rather, it presumes that somewhere along the line we can and should "stop" history. Preserve exactly the makeup as at a particular bit of time.

    I understand that there is loss in any change, and the folks who lose are very often the folks who have more to start. But cripes. Pretending that there isn't loss on the other side too is remarkably silly. The refugees we spend time with from the Ivory Coast have lost all contact with their language, culture, family. Have all this Western wealth surrounding them, but precious little real opportunity to be anything except poor - at least the adults. They can't read, can't speak either English or French well, have serious physical illnesses - acquired either in their trauma which made them refugees or in their 14 years living in camps.

    They can't help but be socially isolated, in a way they never were before. Are they better off? Sure. And worse off.

    That is the truth of migration, whatever the cause - and whether or not we see the reason as legitimate.
    If I use the word "God," I sure don't mean an old man in the sky who just loves the occasional goat sacrifice. - Anne Lamott

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Livin' in Oz
    Posts
    56,024

    Default Re: The Strange Death of Europe - a discussion about mass migration

    Quote Originally Posted by Boston View Post
    Imigration will be the savior of the western world, If it weren't for immigration fertility rates would be in catastrophic areas where populations simply don't recover. Not only will climate shift require massive movements of people from low lying population areas. Not only will economic conditions require the movement of people from less prosperous areas to more prosperous, but the simply issue of falling birthrates in just about every "developed" nation means that without immigration, those developed countries wouldn't be able to care for their elderly, wouldn't be able to find the labor they need to remain developed countries, and wouldn't be able to encourage the tax base required to maintain critical services.

    It's a no brainer, leave the xenophobia behind and embrace reality. We need immigration in order to maintain a civilized world.
    I'm not sure where the issue of xenophobia was raised? I've been in a relationship with an Islamic migrant for near enough the past two years myself. No-one has argued against migration either.

    The issue is mass migration... open borders. We had a brief period of open borders in this country when the idiot Greens in coalition with the Labor Party were in power (Labor got in towards the end of 2007 and were bundled out after the failure of their open borders policy in late 2013). After a few chaotic years, even Labor realised that open borders don't work... and they sent new self-selecting migrants off to Nauru and Manus Island. Over 50,000 people had migrated in the meantime - and it is still creating chaos.

    Problems of the type Jeff referred to are best dealt with "at home".
    "Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome and charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime" Mark Twain... so... Carpe the living sh!t out of the Diem

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Livin' in Oz
    Posts
    56,024

    Default Re: The Strange Death of Europe - a discussion about mass migration

    Quote Originally Posted by Chip-skiff View Post
    Just look at the history of Australia.

    The blissful lives of the people were utterly ruined by a horde of thieving, raping, murdering, degenerate, savage immigrants.

    From Great Britain.
    Look in the mirror first, Sunshine:

    When we think about some of America’s first settlers, the Mayflower landing in 1620 often comes to mind. But the colonization of North American began before the Pilgrims, with the founding of Jamestown in 1607. According to Robert Railton, Australia-based scholar and Ancestry member, the success of the colony depended on “the labor of British convicts, vagabonds and waifs swept from the streets of British cities.”

    Between 50,000 and 120,000 British convicts were transported to America, a fact that makes many Americans “incredulous,” says Railton. This is often because convicts were politely referred to as “servants.” In addition, the scarcity of distinct record sets for convicts decreases the odds of Americans knowing about their British convict ancestors. Railton is an advocate for Americans discovering their similarities to Australians, “I also think it is important for people to understand that Australians are not unique in having convict ancestors.”

    Then, of course.... America decided to steal people. 10.5 million of the 12 million stolen for your mass migration of servant class people (I think you called them slaves) made it to the Americas, with about 1.5 million dying in the process. So, maybe you'd want to rate your behaviour first, eh? How'd that all work out for you?
    "Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome and charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime" Mark Twain... so... Carpe the living sh!t out of the Diem

  14. #14
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    4,465

    Default Re: The Strange Death of Europe - a discussion about mass migration

    Quote Originally Posted by TomF View Post
    We have had mass migration, for all the reasons pushing it today, since our species started to emerge. In fact our ancestors species migrated too. Go back far enough, and our really distant ancestors migrated from the sea onto the land. Even as humans, our history has always been the history of migration.

    I "get" the value of culture as much so anyone; my roots,are in various bits of Britain and elsewhere, and our trip to the UK last May was stirring, exactly for that reason.

    But there is no "native" Brit, even among the white folks who developed the culture over centuries. Except maybe if some Celt or other still exists as a pureblood. Brits are mongrels, from Saxon, Roman, Norman, Celt, Viking, and various lesser tribes. There is a lot of Spanish blood in Ireland, for instance. If our current genetic testing has shown anything it's shown that we're all mongrels.

    So I have zip time for the "strong borders" stuff, actually. It is ahistorical, or rather, it presumes that somewhere along the line we can and should "stop" history. Preserve exactly the makeup as at a particular bit of time.

    I understand that there is loss in any change, and the folks who lose are very often the folks who have more to start. But cripes. Pretending that there isn't loss on the other side too is remarkably silly. The refugees we spend time with from the Ivory Coast have lost all contact with their language, culture, family. Have all this Western wealth surrounding them, but precious little real opportunity to be anything except poor - at least the adults. They can't read, can't speak either English or French well, have serious physical illnesses - acquired either in their trauma which made them refugees or in their 14 years living in camps.

    They can't help but be socially isolated, in a way they never were before. Are they better off? Sure. And worse off.

    That is the truth of migration, whatever the cause - and whether or not we see the reason as legitimate.
    According to Caesar's conquest of Gaul, most of the true Celts, not just the name applied to a general population by todays cultural anthropologists but instead, the five recognized tribes of Roman times; most of the true Celts were the remnants of the defeated tribes driven across the English channel. So even they are refugees of a war long ago. As I recall England was mostly Pict, Saxon and Angles prior to Caesar

    In the end we are all the same.

    I couldn't agree more about the "strong borders" stuff, its "rubbish". The idea that we can somehow stop the clock at some arbitrary time and keep it there is nonsense. It's damaging to our forward progress and it'll only mean we have that much more catching up to do when we finally return to sanity.

    We should all be working to help one another instead of working to keep the "other guy" down. Immigration is key to survival at this point and the xenophobia that goes with isolationism is self defeating. Our best bet is to embrace and nurture our new countrymen just as we would want to be by those who came before us. Religion does every once in a while come up with something beneficial, in this case, it's "do to others, as you'd have others do to you" or however that goes.

    Oh and I raised it Fella, the deal is around here the rise of open racism within politics and the public are the driving force behind the xenophobia typical of the republican party today. The ONLY reason the racists are going off on strong borders at least in this country is, well racism; xenophobia call it what you will.
    Last edited by Boston; 08-04-2018 at 08:12 PM.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    4,465

    Default Re: The Strange Death of Europe - a discussion about mass migration

    I didn't see Chip's comment as ignorant. in general native tribes had much much higher levels of development than what early European scholars gave them credit for. Read, "Mystic Warriors of the Plains" Thomas E Mails or "The Hopi Survival Kit" same author. Life was far from idyllic, but when has it ever been for any of us? Each society comes with it's own set of difficulties.

    the question is, does immigration spell life, or death. I say life. ;-) and I believe the evidence is well positioned to support my view.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Northern NSW Australia
    Posts
    71,316

    Default Re: The Strange Death of Europe - a discussion about mass migration

    Well it was a life without smallpox, measles, flu. syphilis and hi impact lead poisoning Dan
    '' You ain't gonna learn what you don't want to know. ''
    Grateful Dead

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Livin' in Oz
    Posts
    56,024

    Default Re: The Strange Death of Europe - a discussion about mass migration

    Quote Originally Posted by PeterSibley View Post
    Well it was a life without smallpox, measles, flu. syphilis and hi impact lead poisoning Dan
    You seem to be skipping past the Makassan influence. Not only did the Europeans introduce it via the First Fleet in Sydney Harbour, the Makassans introduced it into Groote Eylandt.

    The prevalence of the hereditary Machado-Joseph Disease in the Groote Eylandt community has also been attributed to outside contact. Recent genetic studies showed that the Groote Eylandt families with MJD shared a haplogroup with some families from Taiwanese, Indian, and Japanese families.

    So, stop cherrypicking and realise that stuff happened beyond what the Greens policy says it was.
    "Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome and charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime" Mark Twain... so... Carpe the living sh!t out of the Diem

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Location
    Los Angeles CA USA
    Posts
    101

    Default Re: The Strange Death of Europe - a discussion about mass migration

    Quote Originally Posted by PeterSibley View Post
    Well it was a life without smallpox, measles, flu. syphilis and hi impact lead poisoning Dan
    Syphilis came from the North American Indians and went back to Europe with Columbus. Apparently some of the crew had hanky-panky.

    The Indians' revenge.

    btw, the "we need immigration" people have nothing between their ears. Look what it did for Rome. I s'pose if you lived in a unowhathole, then having Attila visit would be an improvement but most of you live in gated communities. Them gates are not going to work when the immigrant population outpaces your own. You are fools if you think so. Suicide, anybody ? Why don't you jump off that cliff by yourselves and leave the rest of us alone ?

    @Peter, when you invite fifty refugees to live in your back yard, then we can listen to you. Until then your concerns and empathy are just hot air.
    Last edited by on the border; 08-04-2018 at 10:05 PM.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Livin' in Oz
    Posts
    56,024

    Default Re: The Strange Death of Europe - a discussion about mass migration

    Quote Originally Posted by Chip-skiff View Post
    Just look at the history of Australia.

    The blissful lives of the people were utterly ruined by a horde of thieving, raping, murdering, degenerate, savage immigrants.

    From Great Britain.
    One more on that "blissful lives" comment:

    Bess Nungarrayi Price, in her foreword to Jarrett’s book, says, “My own body is scarred by domestic violence...We Aboriginal people have to acknowledge the truth. We can’t blame all of our problems on the white man...This is our problem that we can fix ourselves…”... Paleopathologist Stephen Webb in 1995 published his analysis of 4500 individuals’ bones from mainland Australia going back 50,000 years. (Priceless bone collections at the time were being officially handed over to Aboriginal communities for re-burial, which stopped follow-up studies).[15"> Webb found highly disproportionate rates of injuries and fractures to women’s skulls, with the injuries suggesting deliberate attack and often attacks from behind, perhaps in domestic squabbles. In the tropics, for example, female head-injury frequency was about 20-33%, versus 6.5-26% for males. The most extreme results were on the south coast, from Swanport and Adelaide, with female cranial trauma rates as high as 40-44% -- two to four times the rate of male cranial trauma. In desert and south coast areas, 5-6% of female skulls had three separate head injuries, and 11-12% had two injuries. Web could not rule out women-on-women attacks but thought them less probable.
    "Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome and charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime" Mark Twain... so... Carpe the living sh!t out of the Diem

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Wow-Ming
    Posts
    17,396

    Default Re: The Strange Death of Europe - a discussion about mass migration

    You don't get irony. But then you've never had a clue.

    Guess you've taken up the White Man's Burden, and are happy with locking them up, including the kids. A good beating from a whitefella keeps them on the straight and narrow. Being in irons keeps them from harming themselves.

    It's God's blessing, I reckon, that you care so much.
    We're merely mammals. Let's misbehave! —Cole Porter

  21. #21
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    4,465

    Default Re: The Strange Death of Europe - a discussion about mass migration

    Quote Originally Posted by on the border View Post
    Syphilis came from the North American Indians and went back to Europe with Columbus. Apparently some of the crew had hanky-panky.

    The Indians' revenge.

    btw, the "we need immigration" people have nothing between their ears. Look what it did for Rome. I s'pose if you lived in a unowhathole, then having Attila visit would be an improvement but most of you live in gated communities. Them gates are not going to work when the immigrant population outpaces your own. You are fools if you think so. Suicide, anybody ? Why don't you jump off that cliff by yourselves and leave the rest of us alone ?

    @Peter, when you invite fifty refugees to live in your back yard, then we can listen to you. Until then your concerns and empathy are just hot air.
    Actually one of Scipio the younger's recruitment policies prior to the battle of Zama was to offer slaves freedom and foreigners citizenship in return for service. A policy that reinvigorated the Legions and helped Rome survive an additional 600 years.

    It was arguably Pauline Christianity which ultimately defeated rome. That and having so outrageously mistreated and then misjudged Alaric and his Visigoths in 400VE or somewhere in that time frame. Immigration had nothing to do with it.

    Oh wait, what was that about between the ears ???? LMAO

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Location
    Los Angeles CA USA
    Posts
    101

    Default Re: The Strange Death of Europe - a discussion about mass migration

    Quote Originally Posted by Boston View Post
    Oh wait, what was that about between the ears ???? LMAO
    History is what's between my ears. Rome the Republic died when Caesar brought an army across the Rubicon. Rome as an empire lasted much longer but it was nothing to be proud of. Unless you are a big fan of Caligula, anyhow ...

    Now tell us how life went for the angles and saxons in 1066. Or how the people in eastern europe loved the benevolent Turks. Or what fine things Attila the Hun brought to the areas he visited. At least Genghis Khan and Alexander had to conquer the known world, their victims didn't just throw open the doors and hand over their wives.

    Historically, "immigration" has been the end of existing cultures in every single instance. Maybe you think Syrians are superior to Australians or Americans, but in reality they aren't going to do more than thank you as they destroy your country. This is what has happened every single time throughout history.

    You guys are like Adam Greenspan ... "But it's not in their best interests !"

    Yes. Right. It isn't. But what difference did that make ? Ever ?

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Location
    Los Angeles CA USA
    Posts
    101

    Default Re: The Strange Death of Europe - a discussion about mass migration

    edit: forgot to mention the most obvious one : run over to your nearest indian reservation and ask someone there how they feel about mass immigration. I am pretty sure their answers will not fit your happy happy warm and fuzzy descriptions of the benefits of mass migrations. But think of the chillldren !

    Why not just cut to the chase and hand it over ? Take ten containerships to the middle east, say Iran, fill with several million poor deprived immigrants and bring them home to your very own neighborhood ! Sign over the title to your house, give them the keys to your business, chop down all the trees so they can have a desert like the one they made at home, and kiss the wifey bye-bye as she leaves for her new position, third wife in the harem. Why bother with the intermediate motions, just save everyone a lot of effort.

    Oh. no, I was probaly wrong on the wife thing. That would be Attila or Genghis who took the nice ones. The Iranians would not accept a used western woman, she could get buried halfway then stoned to death, from their position of moral superiority. So just the bye-bye part, forgt the harem and the black blanket covering her up. A sheet will do.

    Really nice people y'all want to invite in.

    You guys are crazy. That's all there is to say on this subject.
    Last edited by on the border; 08-04-2018 at 10:47 PM.

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Northern NSW Australia
    Posts
    71,316

    Default Re: The Strange Death of Europe - a discussion about mass migration

    You are talking armed invasions there Mr Border. not the model under discussion.
    '' You ain't gonna learn what you don't want to know. ''
    Grateful Dead

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Location
    Los Angeles CA USA
    Posts
    101

    Default Re: The Strange Death of Europe - a discussion about mass migration

    Quote Originally Posted by PeterSibley View Post
    You are talking armed invasions there Mr Border. not the model under discussion.
    You're right ! this is even better, they don't have to waste all that money on horses and spears !

  26. #26
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Northern NSW Australia
    Posts
    71,316

    Default Re: The Strange Death of Europe - a discussion about mass migration

    True and there is the possibility of real friendships developing.
    '' You ain't gonna learn what you don't want to know. ''
    Grateful Dead

  27. #27
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Livin' in Oz
    Posts
    56,024

    Default Re: The Strange Death of Europe - a discussion about mass migration

    Quote Originally Posted by Chip-skiff View Post
    You don't get irony. But then you've never had a clue.

    Guess you've taken up the White Man's Burden, and are happy with locking them up, including the kids. A good beating from a whitefella keeps them on the straight and narrow. Being in irons keeps them from harming themselves.

    It's God's blessing, I reckon, that you care so much.
    Speaking of not getting it. Better than a doubling of life expectancy. Food during drought times (no need to eat the kids any more). And so on, but you won't see it. It's outside your blinkers
    "Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome and charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime" Mark Twain... so... Carpe the living sh!t out of the Diem

  28. #28
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    4,465

    Default Re: The Strange Death of Europe - a discussion about mass migration

    Quote Originally Posted by on the border View Post
    History is what's between my ears. Rome the Republic died when Caesar brought an army across the Rubicon. Rome as an empire lasted much longer but it was nothing to be proud of. Unless you are a big fan of Caligula, anyhow ...

    Now tell us how life went for the angles and saxons in 1066. Or how the people in eastern europe loved the benevolent Turks. Or what fine things Attila the Hun brought to the areas he visited. At least Genghis Khan and Alexander had to conquer the known world, their victims didn't just throw open the doors and hand over their wives.

    Historically, "immigration" has been the end of existing cultures in every single instance. Maybe you think Syrians are superior to Australians or Americans, but in reality they aren't going to do more than thank you as they destroy your country. This is what has happened every single time throughout history.

    You guys are like Adam Greenspan ... "But it's not in their best interests !"

    Yes. Right. It isn't. But what difference did that make ? Ever ?
    LOL you are confused, todays immigration and histories military expansion are two completely different things. The FACT is that the fertility rate in the developed world is at catastrophically low numbers and without immigration, those societies won't survive. There's a lot more reasons we desperately need immigrants to make the west viable into the next century but I'll stick to the fertility rate issue for now, however your fear of ancient military expansion scenarios is nonsense.
    Last edited by Boston; 08-04-2018 at 11:41 PM.

  29. #29
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Location
    Los Angeles CA USA
    Posts
    101

    Default Re: The Strange Death of Europe - a discussion about mass migration

    Quote Originally Posted by Boston View Post
    LOL you are confused, todays immigration and histories military expansion are two completely different things.
    Absolutely different ! In the case of military expansion, the victims put up a struggle !

    The FACT is that the fertility rate in the developed world is at catastrophically low numbers and without immigration, those societies won't survive.
    You better talk to the Bureau of Land Management about this. They will be shocked, shocked I tell you, to discover that the solution to overgrazing is import more herbivores ! If there is not enough food for 600 deer, then the solution is to import another 600 ! A breakthrough in resource management is nigh ! Thank you !

    There's a lot more reasons we desperately need immigrants to make the west viable into the next century but I'll stick to the fertility rate issue for now,
    Here's a hint : the planet now has over 7 billion people. We know from satellite photos, that the Earth is actually finite. There are not enough resources. Global warming is going to decimate food production. Fertility is a backwards-issue. There are too many people. not too few. The United States did wonderfully with 250 million people. If about a hundred million people left, life would be better. And if most of them left from California, it would be the best

    however your fear of ancient military expansion scenarios is nonsense.
    Ancient ? The American Indians were still putting up a struggle when my grandfather was young. Sitting Bull died in 1890. Geronimo died in 1909. My dad was born in 1910.

    Maybe you are eleven years old but I made it farther in life ... enough so that I can say with some justification, you are nuts. You are promoting suicide.

  30. #30
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    4,465

    Default Re: The Strange Death of Europe - a discussion about mass migration

    Quote Originally Posted by on the border View Post
    Absolutely different ! In the case of military expansion, the victims put up a struggle !


    You better talk to the Bureau of Land Management about this. They will be shocked, shocked I tell you, to discover that the solution to overgrazing is import more herbivores ! If there is not enough food for 600 deer, then the solution is to import another 600 ! A breakthrough in resource management is nigh ! Thank you !


    Here's a hint : the planet now has over 7 billion people. We know from satellite photos, that the Earth is actually finite. There are not enough resources. Global warming is going to decimate food production. Fertility is a backwards-issue. There are too many people. not too few. The United States did wonderfully with 250 million people. If about a hundred million people left, life would be better. And if most of them left from California, it would be the best


    Ancient ? The American Indians were still putting up a struggle when my grandfather was young. Sitting Bull died in 1890. Geronimo died in 1909. My dad was born in 1910.

    Maybe you are eleven years old but I made it farther in life ... enough so that I can say with some justification, you are nuts. You are promoting suicide.
    1) again military expansion and immigration are two completely different things, your fears are unfounded.

    2) Your assumption that immigration has any semblance to overgrazing is ludicrous

    3) Your inability to grasp todays issues with an aging population and a lagging work force are entertaining but classic among those fearful of the obvious, isolationism isn't the answer, cooperation is.

    4) Yes ancient, and no your mention of relatively modern colonialism does not negate the fact that your previous argument of ancient Rome's experiences where ignorant at best and are unfounded within todays complexities.

    5) ad hominem attacks are a certain sign that your arguments are inferior and your fear of change is a driving force of your ideology based thinking, rather than a factual based understanding of the global economy.

    The simple fact is that immigration will provide the manpower and the vitality developed economies so desperately need in order to maintain their societies. We will do significantly better embracing diversity than we will rejecting it.
    Last edited by Boston; 08-05-2018 at 12:40 AM.

  31. #31
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Sitka, AK
    Posts
    25,968

    Default Re: The Strange Death of Europe - a discussion about mass migration

    The idea we need highly fertile immigrants to save our society is nuts. But then again liberals have been arguing we need them to pick our vegetables and do jobs we don’t do. So yeah, I understand the mentality.
    "Simple minds discuss people, Average minds discuss things, and Great minds discuss ideas".

  32. #32
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Location
    Los Angeles CA USA
    Posts
    101

    Default Re: The Strange Death of Europe - a discussion about mass migration

    Quote Originally Posted by Boston View Post
    1) again military expansion and immigration are two completely different things, your fears are unfounded.
    There are sixty million (give or take some) dead Indians who would dispute this with you. But I am very thankful for your assurances that my "fears" are unfounded. I will take those to the bank tomorrow morning and deposit them.

    2) Your assumption that immigration has any semblance to overgrazing is ludicrous
    Certainly. Deer eating all the available food is totally different than humans eating all their available food ! How could I be so stupid ?

    3) Your inability to grasp todays issues with an aging population and a lagging work force are entertaining but classic among those fearful of the obvious, isolationism isn't the answer, cooperation is.
    More to the point, your inability to recognize a giant Ponzi scheme is mildly entertaining.

    4) Yes ancient, and no your mention of relatively modern colonialism does not negate the fact that your previous argument of ancient Rome's experiences where ignorant at best and are unfounded within todays complexities.
    Well I guess you told me ! The fact that Rome followed much the same path as the west is following today and it ended up in their destruction has no relevance. And the real-world documented experience of American Indians within the lifetime of my grandparents, I guess that has even less relevance.

    More assurances please, I want to deposit an entire folder of them to justify the trip.

    What's kind of funny is I had this exact same experience in the late nineties / early 2000's with the general public. I said at the time, "This is not going to work" and everyone laughingly handed me a tin hat. If I could have cashed all those worthless assurances in 2009 I would be wealthy beyond measure today.

    5) ad hominem attacks are a certain sign that your arguments are inferior and your fear of change is a driving force of your ideology based thinking, rather than a factual based understanding of the global economy.
    Oh jeeze the poor widdow snowflake. You guys can say whatever despicable thing you like about people not in the in-crowd but laughingly mention that you are nuts and you go wailing back to mumsy, 'Ad hominem waaaaa."

    There's no ad hominem there, it's a statement of fact. Just 'assuming' all this stuff, which has no basis in reality, is factually nuts. Adding another hundred million refugees to a society that is already ripping itself apart through internal divisions is not I repeat not an answer to anything. Even considering it is, yes, nuts.

    The simple fact is that immigration will provide the manpower and the vitality developed economies so desperately need in order to maintain their societies. We will do significantly better embracing diversity than we will rejecting it.
    I repeat the above. Your assurances are worth the paper they are printed upon. Your claims have no basis in human experience. These are fantasies and a giant ponzi scheme which you are promoting. One thing we do know is that there is always some point at which ponzi schemes fail. And it's always a disaster for everyone except the first two or three participants. Do you think you are in that class ?

    More more more is not the answer to human problems at this time.

  33. #33
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Northern NSW Australia
    Posts
    71,316

    Default Re: The Strange Death of Europe - a discussion about mass migration

    Conflating military invasion with immigration ? A bit silly in the context being discussed.
    '' You ain't gonna learn what you don't want to know. ''
    Grateful Dead

  34. #34
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Location
    Los Angeles CA USA
    Posts
    101

    Default Re: The Strange Death of Europe - a discussion about mass migration

    Quote Originally Posted by PeterSibley View Post
    Conflating military invasion with immigration ? A bit silly in the context being discussed.
    One thing about people, they don't give up their fantasies very easily

    Please explain to me what "settling the West" was ? Because to my fearful-of-change ignorant racist old white guy eyes it is exactly what we are talking about, a mass influx of people from an incompatible culture. A mass influx which overwhelmed the original inhabitants. In the current situation that would be us, the existing culture.

    In case you hadn't noticed, the continental US is no longer home to American Indians. In fact they aren't even allowed to control their "own" reservations.

    When you people destroy yourselves, remember that I will be in the sky laughing. Or more likely down below, but I'll still get a kick out of it

  35. #35
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Northern NSW Australia
    Posts
    71,316

    Default Re: The Strange Death of Europe - a discussion about mass migration

    Agreed regarding Australia's original inhabitants too. The difference is we are armed to the teeth now and can repel and armed invasion. Something Aborigines and America's First Nations tried to do but were unsuccessful.
    '' You ain't gonna learn what you don't want to know. ''
    Grateful Dead

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •