UN Immigration Policy

[henry d]

It`s not white genocide, read 1-4 again and let it filter through...

[JRDS]

I am afraid that is exactly what it is, irrespective of any Weasel words from the UN.

Edited December 5, 2018 by JRDS

[oowee]

31 minutes ago, JRDS said:

I am afraid that is exactly what it is, irrespective of any Weasel words from the UN.

Not at all. We should use this stuff to our advantage when we are outside of the EU. When countries like France mistreat migrants (Calais) then we use things like this to our benefit. When we talk about proper pathways then lets use that to quickly resolve cases and those found to be not legit get returned using the pathway procedure. Outside of the EU we should be able to more readily get these processes working properly.

[henry d]

58 minutes ago, JRDS said:

I am afraid that is exactly what it is, irrespective of any Weasel words from the UN.

Really? Genocide?

[Rewulf]

10 minutes ago, oowee said:

Not at all. We should use this stuff to our advantage when we are outside of the EU. When countries like France mistreat migrants (Calais) then we use things like this to our benefit. When we talk about proper pathways then lets use that to quickly resolve cases and those found to be not legit get returned using the pathway procedure. Outside of the EU we should be able to more readily get these processes working properly.

I can see your line of thinking, but theres a problem.

We already have rules and procedures for dealing with refugees and illegal economic migrants, human rights laws and international codes of conduct that are recognised by 99% of countries concerned.

But they dont work, or are largely ignored.

So why should this new UN mandate proposal be any different ?

You say France mistreats migrants at Calais, in what respect ?
Because every now and again they dismantle the camps ?
They just move to a different area, or filter off in to the interior for a while, before drifting back to their preferred points of embarkation.
What France should really do is force them to claim asylum in France, and enter the process, or deport them.
But then you ask, deport them where ? Who are they, where did they actually come from originally, you cant send them back to Syria surely ?
This is repeated in every country where migrants land, very few are ever sent back.

How does the UN hope to address this fundamental, basic problem, when it cant solve the basic problems that cause refugee/ illegals anyway.
Why didnt the UN send in peacekeepers or make a buffer zone in Syria , then we wouldnt have had so many of the refugees and murder/economic destruction that happened, and still happens in the area.
I wont go too far into the ISIS thing, but would it have been so hard to crush them with a concerted effort from the UN ,US and other coalition forces, ask yourself why this did not happen ,and why we now have a list of dead from London, Manchester, Paris and many other places in Europe.
Why dont the UN 'peacekeepers' do their job of keeping the peace, rather than watching war unfold.

But no, the UNs 'strong decisive action' is to make refugee migration easier ?

Yes I know it says that they are going to tackle the underlying causes of refugee/illegal migration.
But I must say the UN s record speaks volumes in this respect.
Congo, Rwanda, Balkans, Somalia, Mali and Sudan.
Consider their performance in these theatres.
Then consider whether they are fit to propose how WE are to deal with the aftermath of their inaction.
 

[JRDS]

Depends on your understanding of Genocide.  Not in terms of killing people although they sometimes do that.  But the long term goal of the plan is for Europe to be one EU state with mixed race occupants who have no allegiance to the country they live in.  Look at 2 of the prize winners both of whom have encouraged huge third world migration into their own countries.  The end goal is for the UK is for the rest of the UK to end up like London, a multicultural **** hole with no allegiance to the indigenous population.  That is the goal of the K-C Plan, have a read. 

 

https://www.quora.com/Is-the-Kalergi-plan-a-conspiracy-theory

[oowee]

9 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

I can see your line of thinking, but theres a problem.

We already have rules and procedures for dealing with refugees and illegal economic migrants, human rights laws and international codes of conduct that are recognised by 99% of countries concerned.

But they dont work, or are largely ignored.

So why should this new UN mandate proposal be any different ?

You say France mistreats migrants at Calais, in what respect ?
Because every now and again they dismantle the camps ?
They just move to a different area, or filter off in to the interior for a while, before drifting back to their preferred points of embarkation.
What France should really do is force them to claim asylum in France, and enter the process, or deport them.
But then you ask, deport them where ? Who are they, where did they actually come from originally, you cant send them back to Syria surely ?
This is repeated in every country where migrants land, very few are ever sent back.

Your right we should use the rules that we have. There is so much that the country can do to properly manage migrants EU or otherwise and for refugees real or illegal. That we don't do that in my view exacerbates the real problems that some communities experience. It's not though a fault of the migrants or refugees it's a fault of the managing agencies.

In France those in the illegal camps are mistreated because they are largely ignored and not dealt with. They should be taken into formal camps and processed one way or another. The failure of the French Government to tackle the issue is one that the UK Government should pursue. 

Lets hope that one of the advantages that comes from Brexit is that we can manage this better. It must start with a debated public policy setting out what we will do in the varying circumstances. 

Returns 2016. 2400 immigration offenders, 6200 foreign national offenders, 2400 failed asylum cases.

Interesting; 'India rejects deal on return of illegal immigrants from UK amid fears of mass deportations' Does not bode well for agreeing the New international trade deals. 

[Rewulf]

1 minute ago, oowee said:

Your right we should use the rules that we have. There is so much that the country can do to properly manage migrants EU or otherwise and for refugees real or illegal. That we don't do that in my view exacerbates the real problems that some communities experience. It's not though a fault of the migrants or refugees it's a fault of the managing agencies

No, its not the fault of genuine refugees, people who are grateful for a safe haven, who wish to stay and integrate/contribute.
This country has a good history of welcoming these people , from the Poles and Jews of WW2 up to the present day.
The problem is non genuine cases, and fake asylum claims, people who are here to freeload.
We have enough home grown ones already.

 

5 minutes ago, oowee said:

In France those in the illegal camps are mistreated because they are largely ignored and not dealt with. They should be taken into formal camps and processed one way or another. The failure of the French Government to tackle the issue is one that the UK Government should pursue. 

Agreed 😯
But dealing with the French government ? Good luck with that.

 

7 minutes ago, oowee said:

Lets hope that one of the advantages that comes from Brexit is that we can manage this better. It must start with a debated public policy setting out what we will do in the varying circumstances.

I hope so, but it needs to be OUR policy, not the UNs.

 

7 minutes ago, oowee said:

Interesting; 'India rejects deal on return of illegal immigrants from UK amid fears of mass deportations' Does not bode well for agreeing the New international trade deals.

It should be a separate issue entirely, once the maharajas of Indian business have their say, I think the way shall be smoothed ..

Either that , or stop our 'aid' payments ?

[henry d]

24 minutes ago, JRDS said:

Depends on your understanding of Genocide.  Not in terms of killing people although they sometimes do that.  But the long term goal of the plan is for Europe to be one EU state with mixed race occupants who have no allegiance to the country they live in.  Look at 2 of the prize winners both of whom have encouraged huge third world migration into their own countries.  The end goal is for the UK is for the rest of the UK to end up like London, a multicultural **** hole with no allegiance to the indigenous population.  That is the goal of the K-C Plan, have a read. 

 

https://www.quora.com/Is-the-Kalergi-plan-a-conspiracy-theory

Then it isn`t genocide, so don`t use the term!

Have a read past the first reply (and Guido is a conspiracy theorist) of your link

[JRDS]

59 minutes ago, henry d said:

Then it isn`t genocide, so don`t use the term!

Have a read past the first reply (and Guido is a conspiracy theorist) of your link 

I didn't you used it?? I did say it depends on your understanding of the word.

 

Genocide is intentional action to destroy a people (usually defined as an ethnic, national, racial, or religious group) in whole or in part. The hybrid word "genocide" is a combination of the Greek word génos ("race, people") and the Latin suffix -cide ("act of killing").^[1] The United Nations Genocide Convention, which was established in 1948, defines genocide as "acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group".^[2][

^{The KC Plan could be conceived as that if it intends to destroy a race of people not by murder but by mixing ethnic races.}

^{They have awards for it Blair and Merkel have both won it surprise suprise, it is not a conspiracy theory.}

http://www.westernspring.co.uk/the-coudenhove-kalergi-plan-the-genocide-of-the-peoples-of-europe/

You keep your head buried in the sand.

Edited December 5, 2018 by JRDS

[Rewulf]

46 minutes ago, henry d said:

Then it isn`t genocide, so don`t use the term!

Raphael Lemkin, Polish Jewish jurist[6]

By "genocide" we mean the destruction of an ethnic group…. Generally speaking, genocide does not necessarily mean the immediate destruction of a nation, except when accomplished by mass killings of all members of a nation. It is intended rather to signify a coordinated plan of different actions aiming at the destruction of essential foundations of the life of national groups, with the aim of annihilating the groups themselves. The objectives of such a plan would be disintegration of the political and social institutions, of culture, language, national feelings, religion, and the economic existence of national groups, and the destruction of the personal security, liberty, health, dignity, and even the lives of the individuals belonging to such groups…. (Axis Rule in Occupied Europe ix. 79)[2][7]

 

48 minutes ago, henry d said:

Have a read past the first reply (and Guido is a conspiracy theorist) of your link

I take it youve read Pan Europa ?

[henry d]

4 hours ago, JRDS said:

I didn't you used it?? I did say it depends on your understanding of the word.

I used it as I knew it was exactly where you were headed for. My understanding may differ from yours though, so how do we get somewhere with this?

 

^{The KC Plan could be conceived as that if it intends to destroy a race of people not by murder but by mixing ethnic races.}

^{The problem here is you have a bad argument; If A, then B, there is nothing wrong with races mixing it`s been happening for a few million years, get over it! Finally it has to be intentional by the race that is" invading/mixing the genes" in this case they are not the ones behind it as that is your NWO minions headed by Blair/Merkel etc (according to your theory). They cannot force someone to come to europe and if you turn round and say that they are doing it by coersion or incentivising then it does become a conspiracy theory.}

^{They have awards for it Blair and Merkel have both won it surprise suprise, it is not a conspiracy theory.}

^{I assume you mean the Charlemagne prize? If so it is a huge leap to say it is a prize for genocide as it is for work doen in the service of unification of europe, anything over and above this being more than a pat on the back and a chance of a slap up meal each year is taking it into conspiracy theory arenas, unless you have proof??}

http://www.westernspring.co.uk/the-coudenhove-kalergi-plan-the-genocide-of-the-peoples-of-europe/

You keep your head buried in the sand.

Yeah, yeah, lizard overlords NWO, chemtrails, Flat Earth, 9/11, FEMA death squads, big pharma.....

[Rewulf]

15 minutes ago, henry d said:

I used it as I knew it was exactly where you were headed for. My understanding may differ from yours though, so how do we get somewhere with this?

So you put words into his mouth so you could berate him for using them , because you knew where it was going ?
A strange logic if ever Ive heard it 

 

16 minutes ago, henry d said:

The problem here is you have a bad argument; If A, then B, there is nothing wrong with races mixing it`s been happening for a few million years, get over it! Finally it has to be intentional by the race that is" invading/mixing the genes" in this case they are not the ones behind it as that is your NWO minions headed by Blair/Merkel etc (according to your theory). They cannot force someone to come to europe and if you turn round and say that they are doing it by coersion or incentivising then it does become a conspiracy theory.

No theres nothing wrong with races mixing , if they want to.

No it doesnt have to be intentional by the race 'invading' this is exactly why you havnt even read what the CK plan is about.
The idea is to remove any purity of race by dilution, so making them easier to control by removing their national, racial and cultural identity.

No you cannot force someone to migrate, but blair and merkel did a damn good job of making it a very welcoming prospect.
And be damned to the social time bomb that its become for the indigenous population of Europe.

21 minutes ago, henry d said:

I assume you mean the Charlemagne prize? If so it is a huge leap to say it is a prize for genocide as it is for work doen in the service of unification of europe, anything over and above this being more than a pat on the back and a chance of a slap up meal each year is taking it into conspiracy theory arenas, unless you have proof??

No one said it was a prize for genocide, you did.
Does it not make you feel uncomfortable that the prize even exists ? That most of its winners are people who make a living out of pushing for the US of E. Who promote globalism and uncontrolled migration ?
Is that what the EU is for, I thought it was for trade, for the good of its citizens ?
People at the top of the EU thought they could keep one of the founding fathers of the project out of the spotlight, because of his very strange public and literal beliefs.
But when the man  vision of  how he wanted Europe to become started to come to fruition, and the people who started winning the prize fund that he created, because they enacted his policies,  us tin foilers noticed.
You can ignore it all you want, but before you rubbish the story, at least educate yourself about it.

[yod dropper]

Well there must be something in it that people don't like. Belgium finds itself without a PM over the issue of the UN migration pact.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-46611320

 

[henry d]

More likely that he could not stay pm because he already had a tenuous position due to the huge number of political parties they have over there, that was just one last straw.

[oowee]

I see our new draft migration policy is up for discussion. What a load of carp that is. People need to get with the real world. We need people without 'skills' as much as with. What we do not want is the anarchist, terrorist. Our Brexit policy to give equal weight to non EU applicants will be problematic.

[Rewulf]

2 minutes ago, oowee said:

I see our new draft migration policy is up for discussion. What a load of carp that is. People need to get with the real world. We need people without 'skills' as much as with. What we do not want is the anarchist, terrorist. Our Brexit policy to give equal weight to non EU applicants will be problematic.

Agreed, how many do you need? I reckon I can send you 200,000 from Notts and Derby alone, London should be able to supply a couple of million, Birmingham and Manchester a half mill a piece .
Let me know if you need any more.
We dont NEED any more unskilled migrants , from ANYWHERE else.
We have plenty of people here already that need putting to work, whether they like it or not.

Paying people to do nothing is the worst part of socialism, and a mentality that breeds more and more lazy people..literally !

[oowee]

I thought we had a tory government intent on tackling the problem. ? Until we do we NEED people. 

[das]

On 04/12/2018 at 22:50, oowee said:

You knew what you were voting for. 

In my book less and controlled immigration makes sense and migration from the EU as a preference. 

I want my kids to have the world as a choice. 

 

Totally agree, as quoted by someone before 'Third world immigration will eventually turn you into a third world country'

[Rewulf]

34 minutes ago, oowee said:

I thought we had a tory government intent on tackling the problem. ? Until we do we NEED people. 

Last time the tories tried to reform the benefit system , they couldnt get it through the  house.
Why ? Traditionally labour have been the 'benefit party' and their core voters are people on benefits, immigrants and socialist academics.
So until a radical change can be pushed through in how the voting system works , (hell will freeze over first) the status quo will persist, until the bubble bursts of course, and the system becomes unsustainable, about another 20 years by my reckoning.
Unless we can sneak a big war in there somehow first (more likely)

[oowee]

So in between times whilst we await the miracles and the second coming, we NEED people. 

I am sitting at dinner here, next to a doctor from Washington State, whilst in hols in Philippines. He is saying how dependent they are The US) on labour from here mostly nurses and care workers. 

[Rewulf]

14 minutes ago, oowee said:

So in between times whilst we await the miracles and the second coming, we NEED people. 

I am sitting at dinner here, next to a doctor from Washington State, whilst in hols in Philippines. He is saying how dependent they are The US) on labour from here mostly nurses and care workers. 

Are qualified nurses unskilled ?
Care workers could be I suppose, but they must have had a job to go to in the US ,otherwise they wouldnt have been let in the country.
What social security benefits/pensions do they qualify for working there ? None I would imagine.

How many people do we need in this country? Another million or 2 ?
Thats another 1 or 2 million housing places we need, on top of the millions we already need and can barely supply, another million NHS patients, schools for dependants ?
And all the while we have those 2 million people already here ,  dossing about our towns and cities suckling on the benefit teat.

And when they spit another generation out, we shall probably need some more migrants to pay taxes to keep them in benefits too, or so the (highly improbable) story goes.

Its unsustainable , in so many ways.
The cup is full, the vessel is finite, pouring more in just makes a mess, and risks breaking the vessel.

[oowee]

9 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

Are qualified nurses unskilled ?
Care workers could be I suppose, but they must have had a job to go to in the US ,otherwise they wouldnt have been let in the country.
What social security benefits/pensions do they qualify for working there ? None I would imagine.

How many people do we need in this country? Another million or 2 ?
Thats another 1 or 2 million housing places we need, on top of the millions we already need and can barely supply, another million NHS patients, schools for dependants ?
And all the while we have those 2 million people already here ,  dossing about our towns and cities suckling on the benefit teat.

And when they spit another generation out, we shall probably need some more migrants to pay taxes to keep them in benefits too, or so the (highly improbable) story goes.

Its unsustainable , in so many ways.
The cup is full, the vessel is finite, pouring more in just makes a mess, and risks breaking the vessel.

Yes they are unskilled on the new policy proposals (earning below £30k ish). I keep saying but you are not hearing me. Our standard of living, is not sustainable in its current form. WE are unable, like the rest of the developed EU, to accept, either the reality of trying to preserve it, or the consequences of trying to changing it. 

Only the wealthy will maintain what we have at the expense of the majority. 

Edited December 19, 2018 by oowee

[Rewulf]

1 minute ago, oowee said:

Yes they are unskilled on the new policy proposals (earning below £30k ish). I keep saying but you are not hearing me. Our standard of living, is not sustainable in its current form. WE are unable, like the rest of the developed EU, unable to accept either the reality of trying to preserve it, or the consequences of changing it. 

Only the wealthy will maintain what we have at the expense of the majority. 

I not disagreeing with you, I just dont see how more immigration, from wherever, helps with our vast social security bill.
Never mind the lack of infrastructure and damage to social cohesion.

We need to get Brexit sorted and try and stabilise the country, without EU meddling, get people working using an incentive scheme.

It helps if opposition parties would try to have the same sort of vision, rather than simply 'opposing' whatever is put on the table by government, in the vain hope of securing political brownie points.
A lot of ordinary people are getting wise to this, and this sort of behaviour is going to be severely punished at the next election.

[oowee]

Exactly right. I dont want to see our social security bill increase any more than you. Equally i want to see granny looked after. 

 I cant help thinking that our (uk) adversarial politics does not help us to get to a common sense view of the way forward. We need to face tough choices at some point.

Lets form a new party 'PW a party for common sense'.

I have to go to bed now i have a ferry to catch in the morning.