50 Million Muslims In Europe, 80% Are Beggars and Criminals Living on Western welfare

[Exocet]

Kudos to him,the truth comes out.

WpZ0kxA9BD0

Thoughts ?

[Vlerchan]

I'm not seeing this being reported on a single reputable site.

Reading the transcript the speaker sounds insane.

"But some of those preachers preferred to spend their nights watching porn, instead of giving lessons to Islamic children."
I fucking knew it!?

[Stronk Serb]

We need to tighten on immigration policy regarding non-Europeans coming to Europe.

[tasminsmith]

eugh stop the immigrants yass

[Exocet]

We need to tighten on immigration policy regarding non-Europeans coming to Europe.


We should allow limited immigration,a constructive immigration,those that are making troubles and coming here for the welfare should be deported to wherever they come from.

[Stronk Serb]

We should allow limited immigration,a constructive immigration,those that are making troubles and coming here for the welfare should be deported to wherever they come from.

That's what I meant to say. The immigration policy is too lax.

[That's the Spirit]

We should allow limited immigration,a constructive immigration,those that are making troubles and coming here for the welfare should be deported to wherever they come from.

This is what UKIP support, but the ignorant either call it racism or say UKIP believe in no immigration at all.

Immigration is a positive thing; UKIP will let immigrants in if they have a job sorted and they speak the language. But sadly they are called racists for this, GJ people of England.

[Harry Smith]

This is what UKIP support, but the ignorant either call it racism or say UKIP believe in no immigration at all.

Immigration is a positive thing; UKIP will let immigrants in if they have a job sorted and they speak the language. But sadly they are called racists for this, GJ people of England.

No the ignorant are the UKIP supporters who fail to see that we have 2 million brits living abroad in Spain who watch sky sports, speak english and refuse to get involved in the local culture.

How any young person can support UKIP actually baffles me. This is a party where members claim gay marriage causes storms, where they abuse their position as MEP's for monetary gain, and more importantly a party who want to destroy the NHS.

Good job to the people who stand up to UKIP, they're a bunch of old tories who think that they're somehow radical when all they offer is an out dated view of Britain.

org__iDiPrY

[Vlerchan]

Farage doesn't want immigrants, but he does want immigrants with no rights.

Which is more or less as expected for a crypto-Libertarian ex-banker.

---

edit: Oh, and hi, Harry.

[Babs]

UKIP seems like a dated and dumb party and I have trouble taking its supporters seriously.

[Mil1dreded]

Politics is always messy and I do agree we need more control on immigration because an extra half a million a year is too much and it's not racist to say that unfortunately for ukip a lot of their members seem to be moronic blaming gay people for weather and outdated racist views it's the party members letting them down

[Small town girl]

Its so great how they give the muslim man and the nazi equal time to talk. How anyone even can be this ignorant is baffling. The number of homeless muslims would never be up in 80 percent because of pure laziness or because of some conspiracy to earn money from OUR WESTERN SOCIETY!!! Its more likey its so high because peoples education is not validated if they're not from the west and the job market excludes people with ethnic names.

[tasminsmith]

ukip yass

[dirtyboxer55]

Its so great how they give the muslim man and the nazi equal time to talk.

is that a bad thing though. would you rather have it skewed in one direction? that doesnt seem fair

[Aajj333]

Islamphobia is a dangerous thing, please do not spread it.

[Small town girl]

is that a bad thing though. would you rather have it skewed in one direction? that doesnt seem fair
If you read my entire post you know that i was being ironic. They give the nazi WAY more time to talk, which completely skewes this interview in one direction. But maybe i wasnt being obvious enough i guess... :yes::what:

[Vlerchan]

If you read my entire post you know that i was being ironic. They give the nazi WAY more time to talk, which completely skewes this interview in one direction. But maybe i wasnt being obvious enough i guess...
Liberals get a lot more air-time defending liberalised immigration than the Far Right.

ukip yass
Other than making it harder for immigrants to enter Britain is there an actual tangible basis to support UKip?

[JamesSuperBoy]

It is always difficult to verify sources and media reports but one other article by this guy

Yahya Abu Zakariya in 2012 was a denial of the number of jews killed in germany. His claim was that he had employed forensic chemists to analyse materials from the camps.

[Small town girl]

Liberals get a lot more air-time defending liberalised immigration than the Far Right.

Well, i wasnt talking about an in general, but about THIS particular interview. Also, maybe the reason is that The Far right are a minority, while the people that are pro-immigration represent a bigger part of the society.

[Vlerchan]

Well, i wasnt talking about an in general, but about THIS particular interview.
Right. Sorry. I missed that.

Also, maybe the reason is that The Far right are a minority, while the people that are pro-immigration represent a bigger part of the society.
Nope. (http://www.pewglobal.org/2014/05/12/chapter-3-most-support-limiting-immigration/)

You can oppose immigration and not be Far-Right though.

[Human]

I think in England immigration should be tightened but I doubt 80% are beggars lol

[TheBigUnit]

The number of homeless muslims would never be up in 80 percent because of pure laziness or because of some conspiracy to earn money from OUR WESTERN SOCIETY!!! Its more likey its so high because peoples education is not validated if they're not from the west and the job market excludes people with ethnic names.

Totally agree


You see, you must see the bigger picture here, a lot of these Muslim immigrants are also refugees. These people are running for their lives from oppressive and the major protests, that being said the immigration system is too laxed though unfortunately.

I highly doubt the numbers that 80% are beggars, in fact the main dislike for the Muslim immigrants is the fact they affect the job market, some are too qualified for some jobs and that make the nationals jealous. The beggars have no affect on the society other than loitering and theres police to deal the the unrulys, if "beggars" really affected the government systems that much the governments themselves should change because no doubt theres many more nationals that are beggars than immigrants.

The governments shouldnt allow entire masses to enter, instead the "qualified and educated" plus immediate family

[Vlerchan]

Lots of people are talking about cutting immigration (in Europe). Can someone offer a coherent basis as to why immigration should be cut?

I would appreciate if it could be mentioned alongside a coherent mechanism to do such but it isn't required.

[Small town girl]

Right. Sorry. I missed that.


Nope. (http://www.pewglobal.org/2014/05/12/chapter-3-most-support-limiting-immigration/)

You can oppose immigration and not be Far-Right though.
Well, i agree on that you can oppose immigrants and not be far right, but i feel like most of the anti-immigrant opinions that get voiced come from the very far right. Also, im starting to get a little curious about your views on immigrants? Are you pro-immigrant or anti or somewhere inbetween, and why do you have those opinions? You don't have to answer if you dont want to or if you dont really have an opinion, i'm just curious, since we had this discussion. (:

[TheBigUnit]

Lots of people are talking about cutting immigration (in Europe). Can someone offer a coherent basis as to why immigration should be cut?

I would appreciate if it could be mentioned alongside a coherent mechanism to do such but it isn't required.

I would say it's job market competition and nationals jealous immigrants getting jobs over them, the few beggars are a scapegoat stating that healthcare is being tolled, that being said i believe the immigration policies should be regulated better but not cut

[Vlerchan]

but i feel like most of the anti-immigrant opinions that get voiced come from the very far right.
You're Swedish. I would imagine - considering how entrenched liberalism is in Swedish political culture - it would seem like that:

In Europe-proper though anti-immigrant sentiment is seen outside those identifying with the Far Right.

Also, im starting to get a little curious about your views on immigrants? Are you pro-immigrant or anti or somewhere inbetween, and why do you have those opinions?
I'm pro-immigration when it comes to cultural Europeans (inc. Americans, Canadians, etc.). I'm for free movement of these peoples and so and so on. I'm less so pro-immigration when it comes to non-cultural Europeans (point system required). I also believe we should set up our societies so that non-cultural European immigrants should have to assimilate at a base level (i.e., adopt the most basic common European cultural values) in order to function here.

I'm discriminatory for a reason. In order to build a European Union of states we need to create at least the impression of a common cultural-intellectual tradition. Diluting this tradition with alien values will eliminate these required foundations. There's also appeals to social cohesion in general: Liberals want to build their atomised societies with consumerism, crude self-preservation, and vulgar individualism, as a people's common denominator, and I can't help but view this idea as fundamentally disgusting (dissocial, etc.).

You don't have to answer if you dont want to or if you dont really have an opinion, i'm just curious, since we had this discussion. (:
I've not an issue at all with people throwing questions at me.

I quite enjoy discussing all this. Like 95% of my posts are ROTW.

that being said i believe the immigration policies should be regulated better but not cut
What do you mean by regulated better?

[TheBigUnit]

What do you mean by regulated better?

There should be stricter rules, only immediate family of someone you sponsor should be accepted

[Vlerchan]

There should be stricter rules, only immediate family of someone you sponsor should be accepted
You mean from outside Europe? or from both inside and outside Europe?

[TheBigUnit]

You mean from outside Europe? or from both inside and outside Europe?

I guess inside the EU, it should be more lax as youre already a "part" of the group, but i meant more for outside

[Living For Love]

While I agree that man in the video might be exaggerating a bit, tightening immigration laws and policies in Europe is something I've been advocating a looooong time ago, basically what Exocet said, a constructive immigration is probably what Europe should be looking for, not welcoming with open arms every single lowlife that crosses our borders.

[Saint of Sinners]

Meh. If it was up to me I'd say erase all borders and territories, let humanity be finally united as one. Maybe then we might be able to leave this piece of rock and collectively reach for the stars.

But we don't live in that utopia. I believe we shouldn't view immigrants as "the competition/enemy". After all every one of our ancestors immigrated out of sub-sahara Africa. I don't differentiate between religion/culture, we're all human to me.

But hell what do I know XD I'm probably just some crazy dreamer with my head in the clouds. Or maybe I'm an illuminati new world order lizard :O

[Vlerchan]

I would appreciate if responses to my posts were made in-thread:

Luck is the reason I spotted this.

In Sweden, as soon as you'll start talking about what your talking about now (cultural europeans, non-cultural europeans) your definetly being categorized as far right haha phuckphace: Heil Hitler?

It's seen as far right because its seen as being based on a seperation, between "us" and "them", and also has its roots in the impression that immigrants dont want to integrate in a new society. (wanting it to be a law to that non europeans should assimilate the eupropean culture)
There is an "us" and "them". " Us" exists because there is a "them". "Us" can't exist without "them". That's not the problem though: the problem is that " them" isn't of inherent value and there's no need need to treat "them" like that.

If non-Europeans all wanted to integrate we wouldn't be having this discussion.

I'm more of the traditional left wing[.]
You mean as in Marxist?

I'm of a more untraditional and heterodox left-wing (Marxist standpoint).

[W]ith which i'm implying that i first of all do not believe in the importance of preserving the old culture in more ways than as documents.
I don't want to preserve European culture as is until the end of time either.

My point being that i do not see any problem with immigration in general, because i believe mixing cultures is important for the social and general development of a society.
I'm not much into melting pots. I support multiculturalism for the most part. I use the "for the most part" qualifier because as I've mention I think societies need to share the same set of base values for the reasons outlined. Besides that I'm fine with cultural differentiation.

Two good examples are the USA and the empire of Alexander the great aka the hellenistic era.
The USA is built on the foundations I described as fundamentally disgusting.

Greater Macedonia fell apart after Alexander the Great's death along cultural lines.

But it can do bad things to the economy, because most countries dont have a good immigration policy that'll help people with integrating in a new society.
I'm not sure what you mean by "integration" in the context of what you have written:

I would appreciate if you offered a definition.

You said you found the liberal approach was "disgusting" if im right? There we have something we both strongly agree on.
I'm not using liberal here to refer to the Swedish Liberals in particular here just as a note:

Though it's nice we seem to agree on something.

[Small town girl]

If non-Europeans all wanted to integrate we wouldn't be having this discussion.

I would refrase that and say: if Europeans didn't shut out the immigrants that want to be integrated we wouldn't be having this discussion.

You mean as in Marxist?

Yes, definetly somewhere around that label anyway :cool::cool:


I'm not sure what you mean by "integration" in the context of what you have written:

I would appreciate if you offered a definition.

When i say integration i mean for immigrants to become a part of their new society. :yes:

[Vlerchan]

I would refrase that and say: if Europeans didn't shut out the immigrants that want to be integrated we wouldn't be having this discussion.
OK. I'm going to make this simple on myself:

Please produce verifiable evidence that when immigrants don't integrate it is the fault of the natives.

---

As I see it the issue is that some - the non-integrators - immigrants come for economic reasons and with the intention of leaving at some point. There's not the same incentive for these people to integrate and lots don't. The problem is though that these people stick around and don't end up returning:

There children grow up inside a non-integrated household - become non-integrated in their formative years as a result - and then tend towards associating with non-integrated members of their own culture because these people are most relatable. Education tends to disrupt this effect but their lack of (linguistic in particular) integration is can be shown to hinder that.

When i say integration i mean for immigrants to become a part of their new society.
Now I'd like to know what "a part" means.

Sorry if this seems excessive. Just this discussion is impossible without understanding this.

[Left Now]

Vlerchan,I think by "a part" she means giving some of their main differences with the people of that country up and adapt new ways more suitable and familiar for people there ,so they be able to recognize them as one of themselves.

[Vlerchan]

Broken Pen: That's what I'm supposing. But if it's the case she supports immigrants doing this then she's no different to me - other then being ore optimistic in defining her approach to immigration.

[phuckphace]

it appears as though the European far right is pulling a Reagan and indulging in low-effort "welfare cheats are coming to take your pensions" demagoguery. are we really nationalists here or just welfare chauvinists?

yes non-Euro immigration is a problem, but it's also one of many. the Right ought to spend less time rousing the rabble and more time discussing policy changes to combat this and other issues.

[Vlerchan]

are we really nationalists here or just welfare chauvinists?
The European Far Right is an odd bunch.

You have the British BNP (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_National_Party#Policies), who are your style of left-Fascists.
You have the Dutch VKK (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Party_for_Freedom#Party_platform) who are based around anti-Islam, to the extent of being real strong supporters of LGBT rights whilst still paradoxically prizing Holland's Judeo-Christian heritage, and have no real economic platform other than excluding immigrants/Muslims.
You have the French FN (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Front_%28France%29#Political_profile) who are anti-immigration and whatever economics happen to be popular at the time, so right now it's protectionism but before the downturn it was explicit neoliberalism.
You have the German NDP (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Democratic_Party_of_Germany#Platform_and_philosophy) which are neo-Nazis who are real vague about their economics, except for excluding immigrants/Muslims.
You have the Austrian FoP (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_Party_of_Austria#Ideology) who are more-or-less racist libertarians.
You have the Italian MS-FT (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tricolour_Flame#Ideology), who are your style of left-Fascists.
Russophilia (http://www.worldaffairsjournal.org/article/strange-bedfellows-putin-and-europe%E2%80%99s-far-right), Welfare Chauvinism, and anti-Islam (and consequent liberalism) tend to be binding factors. Other than that it's your guess.

[...] but it's also one of many
What, in your opinion, are the other issues?

[CosmicNoodle]

Immigration rules need to be tightened, and you need to get your news from a reputable source because that's bulshit.

[phuckphace]

The European Far Right is an odd bunch.
-snip-

I like the BNP because they seem to have a pretty good grasp on "the big picture", i.e. they understand that non-Euro immigration is bad for Britain, but correctly see it as part of a larger problem of globalization and economic liberalization. others would rather rave about minarets and halal meat all day.

nationalism without anti-capitalism doesn't make sense to me given the nature of today's world-system and how it works against national interests.

What, in your opinion, are the other issues?

dismantling the EU and the capitalist world-system in general, the Big One.

restoring monetary sovereignty and national solvency.

labor organization, or elevation of the working class within a socially conservative framework.

ideally I'd like to do all of the above without having to worship Odin or Hitler-Jesus.

[Vlerchan]

nationalism without anti-capitalism doesn't make sense to me given the nature of today's world-system and how it works against national interests.
That's what one Irish nationalist (https://www.marxists.org/archive/connolly/1897/xx/scirenat.htm) thought too and I think it's a good general principal.

But Britain has large allotments of economic power. From the perspective of the nation as a whole - and not just its fifth quintile-lets - it benefits Britain to engage within the world capitalist system. The problem - I know - with economic openness is that it creates a dependence on the workings of other nations but Britian's not a dependent as much as a dependee.

dismantling the EU and the capitalist world-system in general, the Big One.
Is it the EU, or the current manifestation of the EU, that you have an issue with?

restoring monetary sovereignty and national solvency.
Former's good.

Latter's problematic (as in hard to realise) I think.

labor organization, or elevation of the working class within a socially conservative framework.
Define: 'socially conservative framework', though I agree with elevating the working class, even if through different mechanisms.

ideally I'd like to do all of the above without having to worship Odin or Hitler-Jesus.
[Liberal-individualism] has old roots. In most respects, it represents a secularization of ideas and perspectives borrowed from Christian metaphysics, which spread into secular life following a rejection of any transcendent dimension. Actually, one finds in Christianity the seeds of the great mutations that gave birth to the secular ideologies of the first post-revolutionary era. Individualism was already present in the notion of individual salvation and of an intimate and privileged relation between an individual and God that surpasses any relation on earth. Egalitarianism is rooted in the idea that redemption is equally available to all mankind, since all are endowed with an individual soul whose absolute value is shared by all humanity. Progressivism is born of the idea that history has an absolute beginning and a necessary end, and that it unfolds globally according to a divine plan. Finally, universalism is the natural expression of a religion that claims to manifest a revealed truth which, valid for all men, summons them to conversion. Modern political life itself is founded on secularized theological concepts. Reduced to an opinion among others, today Christianity has unwittingly become the victim of the movement it started. In the history of the West, it became the religion of the way out of religion.

De Benoist, A., and Champetier, C (2000) Manifesto of the French New Right in Year 2000, p. 2. (https://neweuropeanconservative.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/manifesto-of-the-french-new-right1.pdf)

[phuckphace]

But Britain has large allotments of economic power. From the perspective of the nation as a whole - and not just its fifth quintile-lets - it benefits Britain to engage within the world capitalist system. The problem - I know - with economic openness is that it creates a dependence on the workings of other nations but Britian's not a dependent as much as a dependee.

oh, I get that. I fully expect that such a move (dismantling the EU and the capitalist world-system) would take a minimum of three or more decades if done in stages, which would be the smoothest and least disruptive way to go.

I predict that some capitalism, some international free trade are a necessary evil during this process.

Is it the EU, or the current manifestation of the EU, that you have an issue with?

mostly the latter, but I think avoiding such arrangements if at all possible is a good rule of thumb.

Former's good.

Latter's problematic (as in hard to realise) I think.

it's probably more realistic of a plan for smaller countries with smaller foreign debts. the staggering size of that of the US, not so much.

...unless you're implying that deficit spending is sometimes unavoidable regardless of a nation's fiscal policy? I don't have an opinion on this yet.

Define: 'socially conservative framework', though I agree with elevating the working class, even if through different mechanisms.

it's basically the same plan as you have - full employment, living wage, shorter work week, possible minimum basic income, universal healthcare, etc - albeit with a noticeable lack of secular internationalism or affirmative action.

[Vlerchan]

mostly the latter, but I think avoiding such arrangements if at all possible is a good rule of thumb.
I guess living in the US it must offer a different outlook:

The US could run viable isolationism. Ireland - and most European countries - not so much - though I don't want that anyway. Not to mention that world isn't going to turn to nationalist isolationism soon and I believe forming within regional blocks is required to have one's interests heard at an international level.

And I like free trade, of course.

it's probably more realistic of a plan for smaller countries with smaller foreign debts. the staggering size of that of the US, not so much.

...unless you're implying that deficit spending is sometimes unavoidable regardless of a nation's fiscal policy? I don't have an opinion on this yet.
I was more on to the first bit. Most OECD countries are averaging debt to GDP ratios of like 80%.

However I do support deficit spending during (bad) economic downturns, with the idea of financing that through growth and tax returns.

[...] albeit with a noticeable lack of secular internationalism or affirmative action.
I'm not too big on affirmative action - even then I live in Europe, Ireland itself is >95% white, ~88% ethnic-Irish - though secular internationalism would be important.

---

I was also hoping for a response to the De Benoist quote, though I think I know what you're going to say.

If you want my view I don't think the US is salvageable anyway in that regard if I'm honest.

[Small town girl]

OK. I'm going to make this simple on myself:

Please produce verifiable evidence that when immigrants don't integrate it is the fault of the natives.

Not necessarily the fault of the natives as individuals, but of the way the country/government handle integration. What we often see is immigrants only moving to the cheaper neighbourhoods, resulting in polarisation, with which i in this case basically mean black neighbourhoods. I don't know how or if this is handled differently in your country, but this is what happens in almost all liberal/capitalist societies, so i would doubt it's different where you live. My conclusion is herefore that it's not the fault of the natives directly, but simply that of capitalism/liberalism. :confused::rolleyes:


Now I'd like to know what "a part" means.


A part of the system, stuck in the hamster wheel, whatever you want to call it. Making a contribution to the society you live in.

[Vlerchan]

What we often see is immigrants only moving to the cheaper neighbourhoods[.]
I see it as hard to blame the natives, government, or country for when poor, unskilled immigrants arrive and these poor, unskilled immigrants can only being able to afford to live in a cheaper residential areas. This is something inherent to modern immigration itself, where we live in semi-skilled and skilled societies, and then need to import lots of unskilled peoples to run the stuff we are no longer willing to.

It's also not something that might be unique to capitalism or liberalism, since socialism has never claimed to want to end income and wealth inequalities, so you would still have the poorer imports congregating around the same areas, and the same problems existing.

I don't know how or if this is handled differently in your country, but this is what happens in almost all liberal/capitalist societies, so i would doubt it's different where you live.
You'll find that there's not a single party in Ireland that poses itself as anti-immigrant (despite the quite nationalist character of several of them), and the anti-immigration independent candidates don't get more than a handful of votes, if that's a reflection of our success in managing our immigrants.

For reference, one in nine people in Ireland were born abroad (http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/one-in-nine-people-living-in-ireland-were-born-abroad-209895.html).

A part of the system, stuck in the hamster wheel, whatever you want to call it. Making a contribution to the society you live in.
You can be part of the system, i.e., making an economic contribution, without being part of the society.