It's common knowledge by now that we have 'Al Qaeda' cells in every major European city, disaffected Islamic youths with crime rates out of control, clerics who declare 'jihad' on their host country on a very regular basis, a whole entire welfare class who were originally supposed to 'replenish the work force' but instead languish in their ghettos all day and go rioting when bored, and of course blowing people up in subways when they don't agree with the foreign policy.

For everyone else, they are forced to adopt ID cards, install cameras everywhere, limit free speech so as not to set off the muzzies, and in the case of Londonistan, allow unlimited immigration because if you give Al Qaeda safe haven, they might consider you a friend :nice:

And then we have our demented multi-cultists who keep beating the drum of 'diversity' above all else, as if oblivious to all the consequences it brings... or are they? http://pichold.com/Images/Smilies/hsugh.gif

As Orwell said, "the reaction is the (intended) action."

Hello multi-cultural fascism of the 21st century. :)

So either I agree with you or I'm a Muslim/terrorist sympathizer? Wow! Talk about my many choices, yeah?


(*"agree with me or you're bad?" Wait....who's the facist?*)

So either I agree with you or I'm a Muslim/terrorist sympathizer? Wow! Talk about my many choices, yeah?


(*"agree with me or you're bad?" Wait....who's the facist?*)http://pichold.com/Images/Smilies/kekekegay.gif

Seriously though. How can the mutli-kult lobby be so oblivious? I submit that you can't be doing such a bad job unless it was intentional. This is all dialectics.

Unfortuantely, I was being serious. Take a look in the mirror.

:usa:

You're becoming more and more absurd with every post.

Thumper except for this obsession you're a nice young man-ok-I'm a fundamentalist-to me the moslems are eastern rednecks.i don't hate rednecks but I know that they pose a potential threat.
Certainly the influx is causing problems and there are going to have to be controls.The Europeans are fed up with dictatorship-they're more sensitive and intelligent than the Americans about the balance between Society's prerogatives and individual rights.
There is a backlash in Europe but coloring all the people as having this or that set of convictions is useless.People everywhere are concerned about their day to day trials
and consider the drift of History writ large as a luxury for the powerful and wealthy.

After WWII, was Europe a safer place before, or after, mass muslim immigration?

Ever been to place called Brampton?

All the Muslims moved there... not to Europe, silly.

After WWII, was Europe a safer place before, or after, mass muslim immigration?

Europe has a difficult time,they were dealing with terrorists decades before we were.The US should be more receptive to their counsel.

Not enough options.

Thumper except for this obsession you're a nice young man-ok-I'm a fundamentalist-to me the moslems are eastern rednecks.i don't hate rednecks but I know that they pose a potential threat.
Certainly the influx is causing problems and there are going to have to be controls.The Europeans are fed up with dictatorship-they're more sensitive and intelligent than the Americans about the balance between Society's prerogatives and individual rights.
There is a backlash in Europe but coloring all the people as having this or that set of convictions is useless.People everywhere are concerned about their day to day trials
and consider the drift of History writ large as a luxury for the powerful and wealthy.Here's a simple question:

What's the purpose of importing hostile peoples into your society, if even the general populace is against it? What's the only way to make society accomodate such a problem? Government control.

What is we see is socialism (in the form of multi-kult), begetting more socialism (police state).

I don't believe for a second that the people who are instituting these polices are suddenly champions of humanity and want to transform Europe into the United Colors of Benetton for that purpose. They play both the liberals and the immigrants as tools for their agenda.

Here's what Wikipedia says about London at the moment:

The presence of active Islamists in London began to cause tensions with Middle Eastern, European and the United States governments, who view many of these groups as terrorists. After terrorist attacks by Algerian militants in France in 1995 the French government accused the British government of not doing enough to curtail their activities.

Foreign governments were particularly angered when the head of Al-Muhajiroun, Omar Bakri Muhammad, claimed he lived in the UK under a "covenant of security", whereby he was left alone by the authorities so long as he did not sanction attacks on British soil. The British government denied the claim. Some suspects of the 1995 attacks on Paris have fled to the United Kingdom; as of 2005, France is still waiting for the extradition of suspect Rachid Ramda. Several non-British major newspapers have echoed the claim that the UK intentionally tolerates radical Muslims and hinders extradition of suspects in order to buy peace from terrorists. [2] [3]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Londonistan

The government uses the spectre of 'Islamic terrorism' in the same way they used Communism and the red scare during the cold war. Without such an elusive enemy, where are you going to get your defence budget, and how else will you get rid of those pesky civil rights?

How can the UK be simultaneously fighting a 'War on Terrorism' and harboring terrorists at the same time? This is exactly how a protection racket works.

Without this class warfare that is really Marxist in origin, we won't have these huge government institutions needed to regulate and 'protect' us.

Here's a simple question:
What's the purpose of importing hostile peoples into your society, if even the general populace is against it? What's the only way to make society accomodate such a problem? Government control.
What is we see is socialism (in the form of multi-kult), begetting more socialism (police state).
I don't believe for a second that the people who are instituting these polices are suddenly champions of humanity and want to transform Europe into the United Colors of Benetton for that purpose. They play both the liberals and the immigrants as tools for their agenda.


You're justified in your skepticism,I'm sure-I don't think this is a choreographed thing-you seem to want to say it's some kind of conspiracy-it's more llikely people
leaving poverty in pursuit of a better life-and they don't want to leave their identities behind them.
They do have a lot they DO want to leave behind and this is the saving grace-alienating them is neglecting a potentially beneficial resource...

The government uses the spectre of 'Islamic terrorism' in the same way they used Communism and the red scare during the cold war. Without such an elusive enemy, where are you going to get your defence budget, and how else will you get rid of those pesky civil rights?
How can the UK be simultaneously fighting a 'War on Terrorism' and harboring terrorists at the same time? This is exactly how a protection racket works.

Without this class warfare that is really Marxist in origin, we won't have these huge government institutions needed to regulate and 'protect' us.

When a population is growing it's natural that certain controls will have to be implemented.Addressing what to control is important-what you're proposing is
a more rigorous program of controls and it will result on a net loss of liberty for the native as well as the "invader"-You can't have real profit without growth...
You're advocating stagnation and further it's this attitude of stagnation that's got us in recession now.[Yes,I know the rich arent unhappy about the economy-for the millionth time show me the consumer base!]

LOL, so the US is accusing the UK of harbouring terrorists? Can you make a sentance with the words Pot, Kettle, Black? Ever heard of the IRA ;)

Hugs

lilnymph

our own leaders are forcing us to live in police states.

:usa:

Oh, Dude, if you knew anything at all about me, you would understand why that is so funny!
:nice:

Just as a note, wikipedia is a horse**** source. It's written by its users regardless of any qualifying factors like a college degree, intelligence, decency, or any knowledge on a given subject.

Anybody with half a brain would instantly disregard a wikipedia reference that was cites as "truth."

Get better information, and stop spouting your racist :bs: as fact when the strongest sources you can cite are other people who are undoubtedly out to further the same agenda as you.

Whats the fine for not having your papers (ID) in order in the EU nowadays?

You're justified in your skepticism,I'm sure-I don't think this is a choreographed thing-you seem to want to say it's some kind of conspiracy-it's more llikely people
leaving poverty in pursuit of a better life-and they don't want to leave their identities behind them.
They do have a lot they DO want to leave behind and this is the saving grace-alienating them is neglecting a potentially beneficial resource...yes, I'm implying conspiracy. The government has complete control over it's borders. It's not a matter of people in the third world seeking greener pastures that they can simply knock and they are let in. You seem to think this is all their doing. If that was the case, Japan would be flooded by Chinese boat people right now, but they choose not to as this time.

Likewise, we cannot absolve the governments in what has happened. But we're not just talking about simple human migration. We're talking about KNOWN/CONVICTED TERRORISTS residing in London, England, even after they're extradition was sought by foreign governments.

What do you make of this, fat mike? Everyone needs to put their tin foil hat on for a moment. If we keep calling politicians stupid, or incompetent, we let this police state conspiracy continue unabated under our noses. THINK.
When a population is growing it's natural that certain controls will have to be implemented.Addressing what to control is important-what you're proposing is
a more rigorous program of controls and it will result on a net loss of liberty for the native as well as the "invader"-You can't have real profit without growth...
You're advocating stagnation and further it's this attitude of stagnation that's got us in recession now.[Yes,I know the rich arent unhappy about the economy-for the millionth time show me the consumer base!]I'm not sure what you're saying here. Is this an economic argument?

As can be clearly seen, these people who are rioting were described as MOSTLY UNEMPLOYED, add onto that, the native population of countries like germany have an unemployment rate of around 10 percent.

Trying to sustain the ponzi social security scheme of 6 workers to every pensioner is obviously untenable, and it's because of simple naivete of everyone else that the government has used this demented logic to usher in their Trojan Horse.

our own leaders are forcing us to live in police states.yes, by importing the muzzies

Europe has a difficult time,they were dealing with terrorists decades before we were.The US should be more receptive to their counsel.


I pray to God that the U.S. NEVER follows the lead of countries like France when it comes to dealing with Muslims.

Paris is in flames as we speak, and has been for 7 days now. There has been millions of dollars in property damage, hundreds of vehicles burned, etc. The French government has brought this upon itself.

The word is, that these young Muslims have an "identity crisis", and that they're "angry". This is insane. France is THE most accomodating country when it comes to it's assimilation policies, yet these people are still angry.

This is a very bad omen IMO.

yes, I'm implying conspiracy. The government has complete control over it's borders. It's not a matter of people in the third world seeking greener pastures that they can simply knock and they are let in. You seem to think this is all their doing. If that was the case, Japan would be flooded by Chinese boat people right now, but they choose not to as this time.

Complete control? Not so fast...Business is politically powerful in this country and can't be ignored-if the corporations and the wealthy say they want some slack in the borders no politican has the clout to oppose that without a lot of public opinion to back them up.

Likewise, we cannot absolve the governments in what has happened. But we're not just talking about simple human migration. We're talking about KNOWN/CONVICTED TERRORISTS residing in London, England, even after they're extradition was sought by foreign governments.

Alot of this is simple migration-that there may be things being overlooked doesnt surprise me though and you're correct in deploring that...

What do you make of this, fat mike? Everyone needs to put their tin foil hat on for a moment. If we keep calling politicians stupid, or incompetent, we let this police state conspiracy continue unabated under our noses. THINK.
I'm not sure what you're saying here. Is this an economic argument?

A diminishing population doesn't tend to sustain market growth and profits,yes it's an economic argument...

As can be clearly seen, these people who are rioting were described as MOSTLY UNEMPLOYED, add onto that, the native population of countries like germany have an unemployment rate of around 10 percent.

You want to deport these people-you'd have to amass some kind of enormous police effort and if ouy ever accomplished your task then you have a big paramilitary force that's supposed to vanish into the woodwork?

Trying to sustain the ponzi social security scheme of 6 workers to every pensioner is obviously untenable, and it's because of simple naivete of everyone else that the government has used this demented logic to usher in their Trojan Horse.

You could make a convincing argument they let their guard down and the mass migration occurred but you won't settle for that-you have to make the
thing a conspiracy-what kind of fool politician would invite these kinds of problems? There is no secret government-there are always people plotting and scheming for power but they can never come to an accord-everyone wants the top spot...

Complete control? Not so fast...Business is politically powerful in this country and can't be ignored-if the corporations and the wealthy say they want some slack in the borders no politican has the clout to oppose that without a lot of public opinion to back them up.I consider most western governments to be corporatist. So business/government same diff :p

But we have to admit that Europe's situation is nothing like the US where illegal immigrants are ACTUALLY DOING WORK.


Alot of this is simple migration-that there may be things being overlooked doesnt surprise me though and you're correct in deploring that...Again, fattie, stuff like this doesn't happen unless government sanctioned. Just because the US does nothing to secure the sovereignty/integrity of its southern border, doesn't assume it's impossible for other countries.

THIS WAS POLICY.

A diminishing population doesn't tend to sustain market growth and profits,yes it's an economic argument...Well I hope you're saying that it's a bad thing that the corporations/business interests have subverted national interests simply to 'sustain market growth' or shareholder profits.

Although manpower is not neccessary for productivity. Japan doesn't accept mass migration and as a result, has the most advanced robotics industry in the world. Australia, without tariffs, would bury the US with it's agricultural industry.

And in light unemployment of over 10 percent, all of these economic arguments have proven false.

You want to deport these people-you'd have to amass some kind of enormous police effort and if ouy ever accomplished your task then you have a big paramilitary force that's supposed to vanish into the woodwork? Hold on partner, I'm a libertarian :)

At the moment these people are just languishing on welfare, and live cloistered from French society. How could immigrating back home be any worse? What do you think would happen if instead of recieving welfare, they were offered a severance package for repatriation instead?

I mean they are obviously not making it in France for any number of reasons, perhaps they might actually prefer to immigrate back home, just as many Jews have made Aaliyah.
You could make a convincing argument they let their guard down and the mass migration occurred but you won't settle for that-you have to make the
thing a conspiracy-what kind of fool politician would invite these kinds of problems? There is no secret government-there are always people plotting and scheming for power but they can never come to an accord-everyone wants the top spot...YOU MUST BELIEVE! :o

I consider most western governments to be corporatist. So business/government same diff :p

Civil liberties? The west has an issue with personal freedoms remember?

But we have to admit that Europe's situation is nothing like the US where illegal immigrants are ACTUALLY DOING WORK.

i admit i need to study this question more..I know a lot more about we're doing than what Europe is doing...

Again, fattie, stuff like this doesn't happen unless government sanctioned. Just because the US does nothing to secure the sovereignty/integrity of its southern border, doesn't assume it's impossible for other countries.

THIS WAS POLICY.

political pressure was brought to bear by businesses seeking labour-I know this is true for Germany...

Well I hope you're saying that it's a bad thing that the corporations/business interests have subverted national interests simply to 'sustain market growth' or shareholder profits.

Money is important.Trade is important,the color of your business partner is not important.

Although manpower is not neccessary for productivity. Japan doesn't accept mass migration and as a result, has the most advanced robotics industry in the world. Australia, without tariffs, would bury the US with it's agricultural industry.

And in light unemployment of over 10 percent, all of these economic arguments have proven false.

Labour is only half the equation-markets-consumers-it's a lot simpler to market to a class of people that are still outfitting themselves with necessities...

Hold on partner, I'm a libertarian :)

At the moment these people are just languishing on welfare, and live cloistered from French society. How could immigrating back home be any worse? What do you think would happen if instead of recieving welfare, they were offered a severance package for repatriation instead?

opportunites back home arent there-what you're proposing would cost money and there's no guarantee anyone would go for it

I mean they are obviously not making it in France for any number of reasons, perhaps they might actually prefer to immigrate back home, just as many Jews have made Aaliyah.
YOU MUST BELIEVE! :o

i need to bone up on France like i said before...reserving comment..

most stupid choice ever in a poll
then I realized who had set it up...

A diminishing population doesn't tend to sustain market growth and profits,yes it's an economic argument...

A 'diminishing population' doesn't need market growth to maintain a high standard of living, in fact it's desirable to not import everybody else's poverty just so some suits can get rich much faster than they would ordinarily. The above statement implies there some sort of right to ruin a country to feed the egoes of people who think there is some great 'right' to get filthy rich at the entire society's expense. There isn't.

A 'diminishing population' doesn't need market growth to maintain a high standard of living, in fact it's desirable to not import everybody else's poverty just so some suits can get rich much faster than they would ordinarily. The above statement implies there some sort of right to ruin a country to feed the egoes of people who think there is some great 'right' to get filthy rich at the entire society's expense. There isn't.

Then you got inflation,Partner.

The problem isn't so much a shrinking population, but an aging population. An ever expanding pensions program may not be sustainable, but forcing people aged 70+ to work in Wal-Mart (like in the US) is not a very ethical solution; obviously there has to be a middle road, and it must be found.

The problem isn't so much a shrinking population, but an aging population. An ever expanding pensions program may not be sustainable, but forcing people aged 70+ to work in Wal-Mart (like in the US) is not a very ethical solution; obviously there has to be a middle road, and it must be found.

The same problem-the point is there arent as many to support the elderly-it's a problem of shrinking population...

most stupid choice ever in a poll
then I realized who had set it up...http://pichold.com/Images/Smilies/hsdance.gif

Then you got inflation,Partner.which is controlled by the central banks :o

The same problem-the point is there arent as many to support the elderly-it's a problem of shrinking population...
Shrinking working population, the older people are consuming but not producing; the shrinking of the population as a whole is a much less serious effect. Take the example of China, the population growth will slow and reverse a little there but in the mean time, there will huge change in the age structure of the population, this will slow economic growth down enormously.

Shrinking working population, the older people are consuming but not producing; the shrinking of the population as a whole is a much less serious effect. Take the example of China, the population growth will slow and reverse a little there but in the mean time, there will huge change in the age structure of the population, this will slow economic growth down enormously.so which do you think is more important, GDP, or per capita earnings?

And it's already been noted that importing the third world and their poverty is not neccessary for a more productive workforce, especially when most of them are UNEMPLOYED.

Per capita is more important, but you need to look at demographics and income distribution to get the whole picture. Really I would have to look at why are they unemployed to make any comment. I don't have the race allergy you do but I do know the Western world should be attracting the educated from these countries more than the non-skilled.

Per capita is more important, but you need to look at demographics and income distribution to get the whole picture. Really I would have to look at why are they unemployed to make any comment. I don't have the race allergy you do but I do know the Western world should be attracting the educated from these countries more than the non-skilled.If per capita income is more important, why increase the population unnaturally and even import poverty?

Certainly China has a very robust economy, but compared to Denmark of only 5 million, where would you rather live based on individual quality of life? http://pichold.com/Images/Smilies/hsugh.gif

If per capita income is more important, why increase the population unnaturally and even import poverty?
Some are illegal, some are refugees and some are legally allowed in through the normal channels. Increasing a population gives greater potential for economic growth. Letting in refugees is something that is done in obedience to UN regulations, perhaps those rules need to be changed since many of the refugees are in fact economic migrants.


Certainly China has a very robust economy, but compared to Denmark of only 5 million, where would you rather live based on individual quality of life? http://pichold.com/Images/Smilies/hsugh.gif Denmark of coarse, and I am sure many immigrants would give the same answer.
I have a question for you; where would you like to live, in the US or in Denmark?

Some are illegal, some are refugees and some are legally allowed in through the normal channels. Increasing a population gives greater potential for economic growth. Letting in refugees is something that is done in obedience to UN regulations, perhaps those rules need to be changed since many of the refugees are in fact economic migrants.I don't think you're following me.

It's a subtle but very important difference. WHAT KIND of economic growth are we talking about?

The china example is to show you how while a massive population is certainly an engine for the GDP, each individual lives like a cockroach. Similiarly, India's GDP probably surpasses Switzerland.

Denmark of coarse, and I am sure many immigrants would give the same answer.
I have a question for you; where would you like to live, in the US or in Denmark?Probably Denmark for da pretty white wimminz :o

I would prefer growth in high value, high tech fields but most immigrants from these countries are low skilled so they do not work in these fields. I understand where you are coming from fully, I think about these things regularly. Without closing borders fully and turning away genuine refugee's I have no real solution. Population growth is needed in Europe, so it has to come from someplace. Not all immigrants are low skilled though.

The same problem-the point is there arent as many to support the elderly-it's a problem of shrinking population...

Nope, you have more technology vastly increasing the producitivity of just about everyone. The day of people have 10 kids to work the farm are over, as is having 10 kids because 6 or 8 of them will die before they reach age 10. One person can do the work it took 50 to do a hundred years ago.