The Council on Foreign Relations is an American-based think tank. It was founded in 1921 in order to help leaders and policymakers “better understand the world and the foreign policy choices facing the United States and other countries”. Its website says it has “no affiliation with the U.S. government”, and that is quite true: the CFR is primarily affiliated with the trans-national elites who consolidate and manage the emerging regime of global governance.
The list of officers, directors, emeriti, and members of the CFR reads like a who’s-who of the Washington/New York power elite. Among the names I recognize are John Abizaid, Fouad Ajami, Madeleine Albright, Tom Brokaw, Martin Feldstein, Maurice Greenberg, Carla Hills, Richard Holbrooke, Colin Powell, Penny Pritzker, David Rockefeller, Robert Rubin, Laura D’Andrea Tyson, Vin Weber, Christine Todd Whitman, and Fareed Zakaria. These are the people who circle the centers of power in Washington D.C., playing musical chairs in lobbying firms, think tanks, charitable organizations, and the Cabinet. Not coincidentally, many of them are also frequent attendees at the World Economic Forum in Davos, annual Bilderberg Group meetings, and other popular venues where the movers and shakers of the New World Order meet to chart our global future.
A recent CFR article takes a look at the migration crisis in Europe from the perspective of the NWO. Those who would “harmonize” the borderless global society have every reason to be concerned about the situation in Europe. Yet what they find alarming is not the mass influx of illiterate third-world refugees itself, but the possibility that the crisis might enhance the popular appeal (and thus the political clout) of “nationalist” and “xenophobic” parties in Europe.
The article is full of useful facts and statistics on the current refugee crisis in Europe. If you want to know how many migrants there are, where they originate, and where they are landing, the CFR has all the data. Its editorial opinions, however, are a different issue.
To give you an idea of the slant imposed on the raw data, consider this 2011 photo of Tunisian refugees at Lampedusa, which was used as the header for the CFR article:
This particular photo was taken in Lampedusa during the “Camp of the Saints” crisis of 2011, when the rate of migration into the EU generated by the “Arab Spring” was even greater than it is today. Of all the photos that could have been used for the piece, the editors at CFR chose one of the most innocuous. These young Tunisian men are poignant and affecting in their dejection. And they appear — dare we say it? — almost white, and therefore less subliminally threatening to the gutmenschen of Europe and North America.
Needless to say, this photo is not representative of the thousands that were taken during the crisis of 2011. More typical examples may be found among these shots of the arrivals in Lampedusa:
Lampedusa: boatload of refugees #1
Lampedusa: boatload of refugees #4
Lampedusa: boatload of refugees #7
Or Malta:
Malta: boatload of refugees #2
Or Sicily:
Sicily: boatload of refugees #1
There were hundreds — perhaps thousands — more boats just like these, packed to the gunwales with desperate, illiterate, and mostly Muslim refugees from all parts of Africa and the Middle East. The crisis triggered by their arrival in Italy, Malta, Greece, and Spain cannot be solved by disbursing a few hundred million more euros from the coffers in Brussels, or expanding the refugee reception camps in Sicily and Calabria, or establishing new job training centers in Rome and Athens.
This is a deep, intractable, systemic crisis engendered by the very same immigration policies that the CFR is doing its utmost to protect.
Below is the complete article from the CFR website. I’ve marked certain sentences and phrases in red for later discussion.
Europe’s Migration Crisis
by Jeanne Park, Deputy Director
April 30, 2014
The rising tide of migrants and asylum seekers fleeing turmoil in Africa and the Middle East poses complex challenges for European policymakers still reeling from the political fallout of recent economic upheaval. To date, Europe’s collective response to its growing migration crisis has been ad hoc and, critics charge, more focused on securing the bloc’s borders than on protecting the rights of migrants and refugees. Many European Union countries struggling with high levels of unemployment and reduced government services have also seen a rise in political extremism and xenophobia. These developments have raised concerns about an erosion of EU core values like human rights and travel freedoms opened up under the Schengen Agreement. With nationalist parties projected to make big gains in the May 2014 European elections, it remains unclear if political headwinds will facilitate a new climate of immigration reform.
Where do these migrants and refugees come from?
Political upheaval in the Middle East and North Africa is reshaping migration trends in Europe. In 2011, the number of illegal border-crossing detections in the EU jumped by nearly 35 percent from the previous two years to 141,000 as thousands of Tunisians started to arrive at the Italian island of Lampedusa, off the coast of Sicily, following the onset of the Arab Spring. Sub-Saharan Africans fleeing unrest in Libya followed in 2011-2012. In 2013, European border agency Frontex reported another spike of detections along the EU’s maritime borders, this time due to the growing numbers of Syrian refugees. The EU also received more than 350,000 applications for international protection in 2013, the highest number since data collection began in 2008.
Illegal border crossings most often fall along several major routes spanning the southern and eastern borders of Europe. In 2013, a surge in detections occurred along the central Mediterranean passage, with Lampedusa and Sicily serving as the main entry points for migrants and asylum seekers from Syria, Eritrea, Egypt, and Somalia. Deteriorating security situations in Libya, Central African Republic, and South Sudan are also seen as contributing factors to this growing migration crisis. Some experts believe that the withdrawal of International Security Assistance Force troops from Afghanistan at the end of 2014 will spur an exodus of Afghan asylum seekers to Europe.
Making a distinction between asylum seekers and economic migrants is not always clear cut, even though they are entitled to different levels of assistance and protection under international law. This gray area is frequently exacerbated by the inconsistent methods with which asylum applications are often processed across the EU’s twenty-eight member states.
Which EU member states have been hardest hit by the crisis?
The EU member states hardest hit by the economic crisis — Greece, Italy, Malta, Cyprus, and Spain — have also served as the main points of entry for migrants and refugees because of their proximity to the Mediterranean Basin.
The Eastern Mediterranean route has seen the highest level of irregular migration since 2008. In 2012, 51 percent of migrants (PDF) entering the EU illegally did so via Greece. That shifted in 2013 after Greek authorities enhanced border controls under Operation Aspida (or “Shield”), which included the construction of a barbed-wire fence at the Greek-Turkish border.
Increased Spanish patrols in the waters off western Africa have curbed migration along the Western Mediterranean passage in recent years. However, 2013 saw an uptick in activity along the Strait of Gibraltar, with new reports surfacing of migrants traveling in dinghies to elude detection.
With the resurgent popularity of the Central Mediterranean passage in 2013, Italy and Malta have borne the brunt of the most recent wave of irregular migration. According to Frontex, there were more than 31,000 illegal border crossings along this route during the first nine months of 2013, almost quadruple the number of detections there compared to the same period in 2012. Several major incidents of boats capsizing off the coast of Lampedusa last year, including one in October 2013 that claimed more than 360 lives, garnered global attention and elicited calls from human rights activists, Pope Francis, and policymakers for a united European response to the migration crisis.
Entry-point states bear unilateral responsibility for migrants under the Dublin Regulation (PDF). Revised in 2013, this EU law continues to stipulate that asylum seekers must remain in the first European country they enter, and that country is solely responsible for examining migrants’ asylum applications. Migrants who travel to other EU states face deportation back to the EU country they originally entered.
To facilitate burden sharing across the EU, entry-point states have called for the suspension of the Dublin Regulation. However, northern European countries like Germany, France, Sweden, the United Kingdom, and Belgium point out that they registered 70 percent of the 332,000 applications received by the EU in 2012.
“Both the burden and the sharing are in the eye of the beholder. I don’t know if any EU country will ever find the equity that is being sought,” says Center for Strategic and International Studies senior fellow Heather Conley.
What conditions do these migrants face?
Migrant detention centers along Europe’s southern periphery — in Greece, Italy, Spain, and Malta — have all invited charges of abuse and neglect over the years. Many rights groups contend that a number of these centers violate Article III of the European Convention on Human Rights, which prohibits inhuman or degrading treatment.
“We used to think of migration as a human security issue: protecting people and providing assistance,” says Geneva Center for Security Policy deputy director Khalid Koser. “Now we clearly perceive — or misperceive — migration as a national security issue. And the risk of securitizing migration is that you risk legitimizing extraordinary responses.”
In Italy, migrants face fines and deportation under the controversial Bossi-Fini immigration law, which stipulates that they must secure work contracts before entering the country. This 2002 law makes illegal migration (and aiding illicit migrants) a punishable offense. Despite its severity, some say it has done little to curb the flow of migrants in recent years.
The situation is especially acute in Greece, which hit hard by a four-year-old debt crisis and successive rounds of austerity measures. Overcrowded facilities lacking proper ventilation, clean water, and sanitation have been blamed for compromising migrants’ health, and police mistreatment and harassment continue to elicit censure from rights groups. Ascendant right-wing extremist groups like Golden Dawn that campaign on anti-immigrant platforms have also contributed to an uptick in xenophobic violence. The country’s soaring unemployment rates and drastic cuts in public spending mean there is scant economic opportunity and welfare support for migrants and refugees.
While these Mediterranean states received about half of the €1.82 billion the EU set aside for external border funds for 2007-2013, the budget for migration issues is limited because all EU states have curbed public spending in the wake of the economic crisis. Similarly, Frontex saw its annual budget cut from €118 million in 2011 to €85 million in 2013. In December 2013, the European Commission created an emergency fund of €50 million to help countries facing “high migratory pressure,” with €30 million set aside for Italy. However, many critics charge that these funds are insufficient to address the magnitude of the situation.
In contrast, migrants in the richer north find comparatively well-run asylum centers and generous resettlement policies. But these harder-to-reach countries often cater to migrants who have the wherewithal to navigate entry-point states or obtain expensive travel documents that ensure safe air passage with the assistance of traffickers. These countries remain inaccessible to most migrant groups looking for work or international protection.
How has the European Union responded?
As with the sovereign-debt crisis, national interests have consistently trumped European ones in the areas of migration and asylum. This was illustrated in 2011, when France briefly reintroduced border controls in the free-movement Schengen area, a cornerstone of the European project, in response to the influx of thousands of Tunisian and Libyan refugees in neighboring Italy.
The adoption of “fortress” policies by several EU member states has come at a high cost, some rights groups contend. In Greece, the implementation of stricter border-control operations, like its Aspida program, has taken precedence over reforming a dysfunctional asylum system. And while Aspida has successfully lowered the numbers of migrants entering the EU via the Greek-Turkish border, many rights activists believe that fortified land borders have simply pushed refugees and migrants to risk more dangerous sea passages.
The more economically stable countries of the north have continued to offer more inclusive migration and asylum policies. In September 2013, Sweden announced that it would offer permanent residency to all Syrian refugees. Germany also committed to offer ten thousand Syrian refugees temporary residency late last year. But some experts say these policies run counter to the trend of anti-immigrant sentiment that is gaining hold in both countries as well as across much of Europe.
“The backdrop to this [growing anti-immigrant sentiment] is the difficulty that many European countries have in integrating minorities into the social mainstream. Many of these immigrants are coming from Muslim countries, and the relationship between immigrant Muslim communities and the majority populations is not good,” says CFR’s Charles Kupchan. “Europe has historically embraced more ethnic than civic approaches to nationhood, unlike the United States, and that is part of the reason immigration is proving so difficult,” he says.
The recent economic crisis has also spurred a demographic shift across the continent, with citizens of crisis-hit states migrating to the north in record numbers in search of work. And while the issue of intra-EU migration has sparked anxiety over social welfare benefits in recent months, “those who are coming from the Middle East and North Africa tend to provoke more heated political debate because of this issue of communal cleavage and integration,” says Kupchan.
What are the main proposals for managing the crisis?
In June 2013, the European Parliament voted in favor of establishing a framework for a common European asylum system. However, implementation and enforcement across the twenty-eight-member bloc remains a challenge, and many critics charge that the legal framework lacks clarity and still gives too much discretion to member states. “Migration is an issue that strikes at the heart of sovereignty. It’s about national identity, economic competitiveness, security — so it’s not surprising that governments are not willing to cede much ground,” says CSIS’s Conley.
While most EU member states have generally been receptive to recommendations for expanded maritime patrols in the Mediterranean and the adoption of technology and information sharing tools, there has been less agreement about instituting policies that safeguard the rights of asylum seekers and migrants.
A 2013 Mediterranean Task Force report (PDF) stressed the needs for increased cooperation with countries of origin and transit to curb trafficking and more legal paths for migrants. The report proposed allowing migrants to apply for asylum from countries of origin or transit, thereby eliminating the need for risky and illegal crossings, as well as issuing humanitarian visas to refugees from recognized conflict zones like Syria.
These proposals have failed to gain much traction. Experts say that any movement on immigration reform is unlikely before the European Parliament elections in May 2014, in which nationalist parties across the continent are expected to make significant gains.
What are the potential consequences of an inadequate EU response?
The lack of a coordinated EU response to Middle Eastern and North African migration in the near-to-mid-term could exacerbate the ways in which individual countries see migration through the lens of national security rather than international protection.
“The political response of countries pushing migrants out or incarcerating them for long stretches runs counter to the very values that the EU promotes, like protecting human life and the right to asylum,” says Conley.
In addition to undermining core values of the EU, Conley fears that a sustained influx of migrants could spur more member states to suspend Schengen, as France did, for longer stretches of time. “I suspect if the politics surrounding migration really start getting messy, you’ll see countries reintroducing internal borders with greater frequency, which means they would have chiseled away at one of the main pillars of Europe, which is the free movement of people,” she says.
Policymakers also worry about the longer-term effects of rising xenophobia and nationalism. Many cite Switzerland’s recent vote to impose quotas on immigration from EU countries as an example of how mobilized anti-immigration parties can fundamentally change a country’s politics.
“The longer these nationalist parties have the upper hand and become more mobilized and professionalized, then it be may be that they can continue the spirit of anti-immigration even once Europe begins to recover economically. That is my concern,” says the Geneva Center’s Koser.
Now let’s take a look at the interpolated editorial opinions — implied or overt — of the Council on Foreign Relations:
…more focused on securing the bloc’s borders than on protecting the rights of migrants and refugees
Why shouldn’t Europe be more concerned with securing its borders than coddling people who illegally breach them? Isn’t one of the prime functions of a sovereign state to protect its borders against all encroachments?
Even devotees of the European Union — as distinct from those who wish to re-establish the sovereignty of individual European nation-states — should support border controls at the frontiers of Europe. The refugees who wash up on European shores deserve charitable consideration, but the rights of the natives come first.
[I]t remains unclear if political headwinds will facilitate a new climate of immigration reform.
One may assume that the CFR understands “immigration reform” to mean the same thing in Europe that it does in the United States — i.e., opening the borders to all and sundry in the name of “social justice”.
The EU also received more than 350,000 applications for international protection in 2013, the highest number since data collection began in 2008.
How could any political entity, even one the size of the EU, sustain such an annual rate of influx without destroying itself?
The unemployment rate for young people in much of Europe is already near 50%, and even higher in Greece and Spain. The boat people are mostly young, and those who are willing to work will underbid local wage rates, driving even more twenty-somethings onto the dole. Those who are unwilling to work — a large proportion, based on previous experience — will draw welfare benefits for themselves, their wife or wives, and their 4.5 children per wife.
The political and economic systems of southern Europe cannot withstand such migration rates, no matter how much harder the Germans work to pay for further bailouts. If the current trend continues, it can only end in collapse.
“Now we clearly perceive — or misperceive — migration as a national security issue. And the risk of securitizing migration is that you risk legitimizing extraordinary responses.”
But aren’t extraordinary responses called for?
And if you don’t legitimize them, you can expect illegitimate ad-hoc responses that will be far more brutal and inhumane than anything the state could ever devise.
And while Aspida has successfully lowered the numbers of migrants entering the EU via the Greek-Turkish border, many rights activists believe that fortified land borders have simply pushed refugees and migrants to risk more dangerous sea passages.
What has pushed migrants to cram the rickety boats and make the crossing to Lampedusa is the fact that the vast majority of them succeed, and will never be sent back to Africa or the Middle East. They’ve all seen what happened to their predecessors, and they know the “Mare Nostrum” initiative will do its best to rescue them. They know that when they get to Europe, they will live far better than they did at home. They know that only a small percentage of illegal migrants will be sent back, and an even smaller proportion will die trying to make the crossing.
That’s why they risk the more dangerous sea passage.
…the difficulty that many European countries have in integrating minorities into the social mainstream.
There are two important points to be made here:
| 1. | It is simply impossible for Europe to integrate immigrants in the numbers that have been arriving since 2011. | |
| 2. | It is impossible to integrate large numbers of Muslim immigrants under any circumstances. Muslims refuse to integrate. Their cultural, religious, and political ideology prohibits integration. |
[T]here has been less agreement about instituting policies that safeguard the rights of asylum seekers and migrants.
Policies that safeguard the rights of asylum seekers must take a back seat to the safety, prosperity, and cultural integrity of European natives. All other priorities constitute a betrayal of native Europeans and a violation of the fundamental contract the state makes with its citizens.
“The political response of countries pushing migrants out or incarcerating them for long stretches runs counter to the very values that the EU promotes, like protecting human life and the right to asylum,” says Conley.
The very values promoted by Ms. Conley, if applied by the European Union over the interests of its citizens, would destroy both the Union itself and its component states. Why would any sane person promote such values?
…rising xenophobia and nationalism
Now we’re getting down to the nitty-gritty. Above all else, European nationalists must be squashed.
“The longer these nationalist parties have the upper hand and become more mobilized and professionalized, then it be may be that they can continue the spirit of anti-immigration even once Europe begins to recover economically…”
And we can’t have that, can we?
No matter what, immigration must not be opposed. Our global masters have made the decision, and there will be no choice: the immigrants must come.
Mass immigration is overwhelmingly opposed by Europeans, Australians, and North Americans, but political leaders have imposed it on their electorates anyway. When it comes to this issue, “democracy” is a complete sham. This failure is indicative of a concerted, deliberate plan by the elite leaders of Western governments who meet at international gatherings to decide the future of their peoples, regardless of those peoples’ wishes.
One may charitably assume that mass immigration was originally planned with the best of intentions. Demographic trends in the West were already apparent forty or fifty years ago. Anyone charged with looking ahead and planning for the future welfare of his people could see that the welfare system would become unsustainable in half a century without a drastic change of course. The obvious solution was to import foreigners who would replenish the supply of young tax-paying workers as the native population aged and retired.
I don’t think those early planners realized that it couldn’t possibly work. I doubt they examined Islamic culture in any depth. And why should they? Muslim countries were so obviously inferior. The wretched refuse of their teeming shores would be surely be delighted to migrate to the West and enjoy all the benefits of civilization whilst working hard to take care of aging white people.
It was such a great idea. What could possibly go wrong?
It’s too late now; the clock can’t be turned back. The system doesn’t work, but there is no longer any alternative. The immigrants must come, millions upon millions of them. Any opposition to the process must be ruthlessly squashed, by any means necessary.
Hat tip: LS.
I say tie a line to the boat tow it back south from whence it came and run it ashore. EU bureaucrats are screwing western civilization.
It is difficult for me to understand how the European political and economic elites cannot see that it is ultimately NOT in their best interests or in the best interests of their grandchildren to destroy western culture and western governance.
Where are the women?
Absolutely right – the notion that these are persecuted people fleeing their countries is nonsense. The vast majority seem to be fit, healthy young men. They are economic migrants pure and simple.
Baron, your article is spot on as usual. As for the CFR assessment on Migrants? Doesn’t that word entail other meanings as well, like the initial acceptance from the country targeted of those wishing to migrate in the first place? This is not migration as the CFR report suggests but a peaceful invasion because there is no invitation from the accepting nation, Italy, for those on unauthorised boats, to enter its territory.
And as such and under international law it is an illegal invasion and Italy and those other nations on the ‘front line’ of this mass invasion – by those who have no legal invitation to be there, have every right to refuse entry.
Renzi is the EUs puppet, so we cannot expect any real action from him, and because of his pretend concern and inaction, it can only provoke a more forceful action from those who are concerned enough to involve themselves in that action, action I have no doubt will come about.
I’m not sure that “peaceful” is an accurate description of the tidal waves of human beings assaulting the Mediterranean. Sure, they’re not arriving with weapons and killing the indigenous populations, but the sheer overwhelming numbers is quite destructive.
At least when the Gaels, naked and painted blue, surged down from the northern regions to destroy Rome and its environs their motives were obvious. And there weren’t any Romans standing about wringing their hands over the fate of those marauders.
This is an enabled invasion, but it’s not peaceful by any means. Thus it’s not surprising that the CFR didn’t mention crime statistics in its report. Or that they don’t comment on the demographics of the invaders. As the bishop said, where are the women?? Their absence speaks volumes.
Don’t think it was the Gaels, Dymphna, wot ransacked Rome. Maybe the Gauls?
The Gaels to which I refer are the ones who came surging down in unpredictable waves from the Alps. They’d cleaned out the Picts and were now focusing on raids to the south…circa 375 B.C. ff
In other words before Rome was the Empire it later became. See Remi Brague:
http://www.amazon.com/Eccentric-Culture-Theory-Western-Civilization/dp/1587312158
Since I can’t find my copy it’s probably gone, serving as a gift in one of the Baron’s jaunts. Remi Brague is French, iirc, but luckily this one was translated. At some point I recommended it to Fjordman and he also found it useful.
Among other images, Brague used this sculpture to show the warrior culture among the Gaels:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dying_Gaul
The history of the sculpture itself is interesting; e.g., his hair would have been longer but it was damaged over time so whoever was repairing it gave him a haircut. Besides being scary they were known for their very white skin…
Gaels are Irish, Manx, and Highland Scots.
Gauls were the continental Keltic peoples.
Two different things.
There must come a time when all the foreign criminals, islamic fanatics, serial welfare dependents and the workshy immigrants are deported en masse. We cannot support them and why on earth should we?
This is all about recreating the feudal system so they don’t care about culture; serfs don’t have a culture. They don’t care about anything except fooling enogh of the people, enough of the time so that they don’t wake up until its all over and the deed is done.
Watch for the recruiting of immigrants into the police, they will become the enforcers; the kapos of the system….
I’m afraid there is no alternative but to start sinking these boats and letting their occupants drown – either that or Europe drowns under the ‘asylum-seeker’ flood. Note how all these (so-called) asylum-seekers are males. Does Europe really need cowards who flee the problems of their own countries to leave their women and children to suffer alone?
Actually, many of the “migrants” that arrive at Lampedusa are women. Not a huge proportion, but maybe 5%-10%. ANSA and AGI often report that they arrive with their children, and some are described as pregnant.
All of those women, children, and babes in utero immediately become wards of the Italian state, which is then forced to repeatedly beg the EU for help. Financial assistance is always delayed, and is never quite enough to cover the additional costs.
Hence the growing appeal of Lega Nord, which wants to cut Northern Italy off from the South, and leave Sicily, Calabria, and Puglia to their own devices.
There seems to be widespread fracturing and fissioning in the West. America has her share of unrest from a number of causes. Only one of them concerns unchecked look-the-other-way illegal immigration. That one is simply part of a larger divide between the blue domains and the red. Or perhaps the populists and the elites. The latter is joined at the hip with the underclass, at least as far as the size and scope of government is concerned and the level of welfare entitlements. That may be the case in Europe also?
Here is an ongoing wiki discussion of what’ s blowin’ in the wind here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._state_partition_proposals
One more bizarre aspect of the CFR is that it serves as a major (if not exclusive) NWO indoctrination center for senior U.S. military officers, seemingly obligatory before a colonel may be considered for the first star or even a Lt.Col. for the “bird” (i.e. Colonel). It’s either this or the Kennedy School, from which the light humor news today is (with headline slightly amended by me):
Harvard’s Kennedy School Students Call for Training To Combat [White, male] Privilege in Classroom
http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2014/5/4/kennedy-students-call-orientation/
Looks like ‘the camp of the saints’ made real.
Camp of Saints by Jean Pierre Raspail – The West folds and allows a zillion subcontinent people to come in by the shipload and walk all over them. I remember buying this book 41 years again 1973. How prophetic.
Solution is to find an island a long way from anywhere as the left in all western countries is 100% allied with this policy.
Let’s resettle them in anti-racist, progressive Cuba.
Tow the boats across the Atlantic under escort of several Western Navies, level the weaponry straight at the Cuban Security Agency’s mural of Che Guevara, and tell them,
“Either accept these people, or we’ll make you accept them.”
And what a messy plate of Moros y Cristianos we’ll have then!
Quote:
The Council on Foreign Relations is an American-based think tank. It was founded in 1921 in order to help leaders and policymakers “better understand the world and the foreign policy choices facing the United States and other countries”.
end
Yeah, right.
Sounds like manipulation. If I want to “better understand” anything, I read for myself.
John Galt lll might have hit on an idea. An island somewhere remote. What about Antarctica?
No thank you! Too close to Australia!
Not if they have to swim
Unfortunately we ain’t seen nothing yet.
Sub Saharan Africa is having a population explosion amid complete societal dysfunction. The next 20 years may see as many as 300 million Africans make the trek to Europe. Egypt is crumbling, 85 million in a country that may be able to support 20 million, the surplus is going to attempt to get into Europe. The whole North African crescent from Somalia to Sierra Leone is FUBAR. The only counter to this is a massive investment program from rich countries to the 3rd world to stabilize these places. This is going to require taking political control, probably through the UN. Unfortunately the “best and brightest” in the US and western Europe are too busy trying to de-stabilize and impoverish Russia through support of mad people in Russia’s “near abroad”.
Sorry to be picky, roger in florida, but Egypt is in Saharan Africa.
I agree that much of this region is a disaster area, due in no small part to our least favourite ideology. Farther south, things are more patchy.
I know where Egypt is and I don’t see where I said it is in Sub Saharan Africa.
Certainly Islam is a major cause of the problems but the entire continent of Africa is dysfunctional, there is hardly any structure above a grim and primitive tribalism.
My point is that without huge intervention from the 1st world Africa’s problems are going to become European problems. I suspect that the leaders of CFR know this and will use the inevitable crisis to impose world government through the UN.
“The only counter to this is a massive investment program from rich countries to the 3rd world to stabilize these places.”
What fantasy land are you living in? There’s a reason why these places are all screwed up. Any money ‘we’ send there will be 99% stolen by the elites and crime bosses. Also the northern African nations are all muslim. Everything islam touches crumbles and falls to dust.
Porky;
I understand that the 3rd world is riven by corruption and that their problems are to a large extent self inflicted. However it is obvious that this tidal wave of 3rd world emigration into Europe (and the US) is motivated by economic disparity between the 1st and 3rd worlds. This catastrophe cannot be avoided while this disparity exists, raging about fences, sinking refugee ships and inflicting pain on the migrants will not work, and is cruel and inhumane. These are people and we should do all that we can to alleviate the appalling conditions that exist in far too much of this world, it is in their interest, and ours, to do this. I did say that political control should be vested in the UN, we do need to recognize reality, but that is probably too much to ask of our present (and probable future) leaders.
This is ethnic cleansing of the indigenous population of Europe, engineered by faceless people who have no interest in democracy and who must have a deep seated hatred of Europeans. They are the real racists and extremists. Their grand plan has now reached a point at which it will be overwhelmingly successful.
Sorry for the error in the above post. For “ethnic cleansing”, read “genocide”, a more appropriate word.
Genocide is defined as ethnic murder.
However you dress it up, the intention is to reduce to minority status the indigenous population. The end result is the destruction of European nations as we have known them, using subterfuge and not necessarily violence. This policy is extremely effective, thus far.
Rapid onset population change. As if on cue from today’s Daily Telegraph:
Almost one in three people in Britain will be from an ethnic minority within a generation, a report suggests.
http://bit.ly/1fM0lkV
There was a piece on the Jeremy Vine BBC Radio 2 programme today about this predicted demographic change. However, being the BBC it looked at the negative effect on members of ethnic minorities who are living in areas which are predominantly white English eg Devon, Corwall, North Yorkshire and how difficult it was for them to not see other people of similar ethnicity.
It would never occur to the PC BBC to look at the effect on indigenous English people, many of whom feel like they are strangers in their own country, so changed are the areas in which they live.
Great article Baron, by the way.
The BBC is a disgusting organ – rotten to the core – and should be dismantled.
MC writes:
“This is all about recreating the feudal system so they don’t care about culture; serfs don’t have a culture. They don’t cares about anything except fooling enogh of the people, enough of the time so that they don’t wake up until its all over and the deed is done.
Watch for the recruiting of immigrants into the police, they will become the enforcers; the kapos of the system….”
Yes, this could well be the end result of this immigration “policy.” But it’s difficult for me to believe that even our political and economic elites would want to live in such a world or want their grandchildren to live in such a world.
I find myself returning to the idea that many of elites are caught up in an ideology which they hold with the kind of belief that most of us reserve for our religion. We’ve called it multiculturalism or PCMC which appears to be an incoherent set of ideas in which minority groups are put in the place that “the proletariat” used to occupy in communism/socialism.
MC, They have already recruited ethnic minoroities into the Metropolitan Police Service and the outcome has been a number of high profile corruption cases-remember Ali Desai? Of course this has nothing to do with ethnicity, culture etc…well it has actually but we are not allowed to say so.
‘Demographic trends in the west were already apparent forty or fifty years ago’
It is more accurate to say that demographic trends (of white europeans) WERE SET IN TRAIN FIFTY OR SIXTY YEARS AGO, via the following tactics:
Endless propaganda about ‘the demographic timebomb’ – overpopulation.
Strong propaganda about, and promotion of ‘family planning’, and the ready availability of contraception, including abortion on demand.
The promotion of lifestyles which made child bearing and rearing ‘inconvenient’ (feminism, homosexuality).
The removal of tax advantages to married couples and parents.
Couldn’t have made a better job of it if that was what they intended – or did they?
The final slap in the face with a wet kipper is that they now tell us that we need immigrants to ‘sustain the ageing white population’ -which is patently not true or we wouldn’t have three million unemployed working age people (in U.K.), who are a bigger drain on the public purse and public services than the ‘ageing white people’ that they are supposed to be supporting
Yes Phil, and only aimed at the Western white world with never a mention of the real overcrowded countries like India, China, Pakistan and all those dysfunctional Islamic lands.
And an analogy would be that when taking down a gang – in this case the world’s most prosperous nations – you aim for the gang leaders, once they are taken care of the rest of the gang generally falls into line.
Nemesis–
Can’t find the source now, but I read an essay on this method of dis-assembling black drug gangs in Chicago’s south side. Those in charge were sure they’d mortally weaken the gangs this way. Instead of reducing crime by imprisoning the brains & leadership of the drug distribution business in the southside, the authorities managed to create headless chickens – heavily-armed headless chickens – who still run drugs but they shoot one another AND innocent by-standers in the process. Parts of Chicago are worse than any third-world hellhole.
Those who can afford to do so are leaving Chicago and heading south. Ironically, it was their ancestors who first headed up to the midwest cities in the 1920s and 30s, looking for more economic opportunity than they could ever have hoped for in the old South. Many white bigots were only too glad to give them the bus fare for the trip North.
Dymphna, if there is one thing I have learned about the criminal, it is seldom that they will work alone, and generally, individual criminals will either desist in their activities, eventually giving crime away, or they will form up with other like minded individuals to carry on with their wicked ways.
Gangs that have no leaders do not survive as gangs because in all human team endeavours, there is always a pecking order. If there is no pecking order than all you have is a loose bunch of individuals doing their own thing- that kind of individualism does not survive as a viable gang, and as in your own comment, inevitably become the heavily armed headless chickens that destroy themselves. In ordered society that pecking order is of course through team leaders appointed into those positions, the difference of course between ordered societies and criminal gangs being that the gang leaders tend to be the toughest and dominant, but not always the smartest within the group.
Outlaw Motorcycle Gangs are a case in point and just like the society they spurn, they have a rigid system of hierarchy or pecking order. When police pull over OMG riders out for their weekly run or raid their heavily fortified ‘Club House’ those ‘experienced’ officers will always seek to speak with the leader of the group rather than deal with individual gang members.
It’s a form of protocol that enhances officer safety and instils a certain kind of ‘respect’ for the police who do this.
Chicago turning out to be another Detroit?
A couple more points:
1. The argument that a constant stream of new immigrant citizens is required to maintain the welfare state is preposterous, a moments thought would show you that what then would be necessary is for the population to rise exponentially: If it requires 5 workers to support 1 retiree then 25 will be required to support the 5 who will eventually retire, then 125 will be required to support the 25 who will eventually retire, etc.
2. We already have a historical and current example of the results of introducing Africans into advanced western cultures: Does anybody on this forum believe that the 35 million descendants of the 3 million or so African slaves brought to this country have been a positive for the US?
What we are on the brink of (and it is probably too late to change the outcome) is a catastrophe unparalleled in history.
The introduction of African slaves had, at the least, an economic reason; the cultivation and harvest of cotton and tobacco. The importation of Hispanics began as a source of cheap labor during the 1940’s(while white and black men were at war). This importation morphed into a source of Democrat voters which is now threatening to take over the country in perpetuity.
I believe that the original reason for importing Muslims into Europe was essentially the same, though Charles de Gaulle dressed it up as a new, non-Anglo American axis of power called Eurabia. As if Algeria or any other Muslim country would ally itself with ANY infidel nation. We now have an Islamic population of three to seven million, and a Muslim student population of 600,000 or more, 15,000 of whom have no known address or record of class attendence.
Most Muslims in America are not trying to fit in here. Fitting in is not a Muslim tradition.
And they can’t even play basketball.
And they don’t even play basketball.
Please don’t start with race-baiting. I have too many decent, good black friends to even bother arguing with you.
As Walter Williams said recently, blacks have been duped by the Democrats to vote for a limited and corrupt self-interest.
You might as well ask if the Founding Fathers’ decision to break off from England was a positive – there are many indications that it was not, that the whole rebellion thing was set up by the wealthy and connected who wanted to profit from the trade and commerce that was beginning to flourish. So they were willing to overlook the slavery situation in the lower colonies simply because they needed those colonies to succeed. So they kicked the can down the road.
And you could question England’s insistence that her commercial colony in Virginia HAD to take slaves even if the Commonwealth didn’t want them. England was deep into the slave trade, as were the northern colonies here. They didn’t use slaves themselves, but they sure profited from that human cargo. England needed the cotton and sugar and rum the slaves produced.
Not only is your question a form of race-baiting, it’s also disingenuous. The race “question” in this country can be solved as soon as the government quits reinforcing criminal behavior. The Democrat Party has a plantation and America’s blacks are as enslaved as ever they were.
As Walter Williams has noted repeatedly, there was a large black middle class and it got destroyed by socialism. Now the govt will do the same to the white middle class.
Hear, hear, Dymphna!
My family’s a mix of European, Middle Eastern, and southern Chinese strains. I’ve known “white” Americans who’ve done genetic studies and found that there was some Octoroon “passing” in their family trees, or admixture with Indigenes. My own white heritage is at best “Anglo-Saxon” only by osmosis (although we are Protestants).
The race question will never be solved, evolution has not made us equal, this will always cause conflicts and inequalities.
Evolution is still a theory Oz. I see no evidence that would even suggest to me, that the theory of evolution should even be considered.
You may believe that Asians, Blacks, Europeans are all the same through some sort of miracle, but for those who believe in any version of evolution theory, this is simply not possible. Perhaps Africans in Brazil, Europe and America perform poorly because of that mythical institutional ”racism”.
Whatever spell has caused blacks to perform poorly, a great portion of them will always blame whites for poor academic and occupational performance. A multi-ethnic society will never work out. America has geography on its side, plenty of room for peaceful, voluntary segregation, but even now its a disaster.
No Oz, I have an open mind on why there is such diversity within the Human Race.
And considering that the ‘missing link’ has been missing for such a long time, I have formed the opinion that there ain’t no such animal!
A few years back, DNA tests showed that the whole Human family has but one ancestor, now who or what that ancestor was is of course open to all kinds of debate, bear in mind also, that we have just learned that DNA can be manipulated.
So as far as I am concerned the jury is still out on our ancestral past and how the whole Human thingy came about.
You could always apply to join the British Commonwealth (like other former colonies), with a view to becoming a province, so we’d have a replacement for Scotland if it leaves the UK.
We lose the McDonalds, but get McDonald’s! (I have to confess that I stole this joke, such as it is).
What Kepha said!
Dympna, given the relatively high profile of your side, you need to always keep in mind that such outbursts might be false-flag, Moby operations designed to discredit you.
‘side’? I mean SITE!
Quite right, Mr. Parker. I am aware of at least four such provocateurs. You never see their comments.
Being a real person rather than a paid provocateur, I find it frustrating that PCMC is so firmly entrenched that its purveyors believe that anyone who describes reality differently than the accepted PCMC narrative is a ‘discredit’ to fill-in-the-blank (culture, religion, race, humanity, etc.). With a near-total lack of criticism, PCMC is self-perpetuating to the point of self-destructiveness.
PCMC decides that we mustn’t say that Muslims and Muslim gangs are purposely targeting and enforcing sexual slavery of white girls and women in the West.
PCMC declares that we mustn’t say that black people and gangs are purposely targeting and viciously beating and murdering white people in the USA.
PCMC hides that Africa has an INSANE amount of rape – including gang rape of infants used to cure AIDS.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/southafrica/1362134/South-African-men-rape-babies-as-cure-for-Aids.html
When Muslims, Africans, and African Americans commit rape, torture, and murder, these humans make FREE WILL choices to act in evil.
These evil actions cause people to discriminate (against identifiable groups of people committing crimes) in an increasingly vain attempt to protect themselves and their families from being victimized by more evil.
End the evil, end the discrimination.
Excellent analysis, Baron: thank you.
“Core Values” should trigger Red Alert. Translations needed:
“Protecting human life” = protecting criminals.
“The right to asylum” = preferred method of nation-breaking.
“Asylum seeker” = assisted invader.
This is the same EU that announced that Europe “needs” 50 million more Africans. Why stop? Millions more where those come from.
This is not “madness”: it is malevolence.
See “EU Nation-Breaking” http://libertygb.org.uk/v1/index.php/home/root/news-libertygb/6352-eu-nation-breaking