UKC

/ Hungary submitting anti-migration bill

Please Register as a New User in order to reply to this topic.
Nina_Sky on 15 Feb 2018

https://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2018/02/13/world/europe/ap-eu-europe-migrants-the-latest.html

"The Hungarian government says it is submitting an anti-migration bill to parliament dubbed "Stop Soros," targeting civic groups which organize, support or finance migration.

The measures propose that such groups would need permission from the interior minister for their activities.

Prime Minister Viktor Orban, who is radically opposed to migration, claims the groups are carrying out what Orban calls a plan by Hungarian-American billionaire and philanthropist George Soros to bring millions of migrants from Africa and the Middle East to Europe."

I've read elsewhere that Poland, Austria and Czechoslovakia may also follow suit in an effort to stop George Soros' plan to Islamise Europe by essentially replacing ethnic Europeans with non-Europeans.
Given that Hungary is still within the EU, how are they able to do this yet we're repeatedly told that control of UK borders is subject to the whims of the EU at least until Brexit is completed, perhaps even afterwards?

tom_in_edinburgh - on 15 Feb 2018
In reply to Nina_Sky:

> I've read elsewhere that Poland, Austria and Czechoslovakia may also follow suit in an effort to stop George Soros' plan to Islamise Europe by essentially replacing ethnic Europeans with non-Europeans.

Yes, Jewish people are well known for trying to Islamise things.

Just as well we have the Brexiters and Eastern-European neo-nazis to deliver us from their nefarious plotting.

 

balmybaldwin - on 15 Feb 2018
In reply to Nina_Sky:

 

> Given that Hungary is still within the EU, how are they able to do this yet we're repeatedly told that control of UK borders is subject to the whims of the EU at least until Brexit is completed, perhaps even afterwards?

I would be surprised if they indeed passed this and that Europe would stay silent, but the reason they might get it through is it is targeting "civic groups which organize, support or finance migration" (at a guess aid agencies that are seen to make Hungary an attractive destination) and NOT changing their border arrangements per se.

Secondly the EU laws on movement of people only apply to EU citizens not immigrants to Europe...I don't know if EU law also reiterates the Geneva convention rules

I'm sure the UK government could if it wanted do the same... e.g. ban private citizens from going to Calais with a load of blankets and only allow approved charities/gov agencies etc.

Jimbocz - on 16 Feb 2018
In reply to Nina_Sky:

Czechoslovakia has not existed for 25 years. 

 

Nina_Sky on 16 Feb 2018
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:

> Yes, Jewish people are well known for trying to Islamise things.

> Just as well we have the Brexiters and Eastern-European neo-nazis to deliver us from their nefarious plotting.

Sorry, poor wording on my part. Soros, the UN and the EU clearly see population replacement as the potential solution to a number of issues (as they themselves have stated), and Islamisation could well be the indirect result given that the majority of migrants are coming from Muslim countries and Islam is generally very deeply-rooted, prescriptive, dominating and reluctant to reform.

The neo-nazis comment really is quite silly though, even if we do now live in an age where even Steven Pinker has been described as 'alt-right'! Presumably there are plenty of countries who'd be strongly opposed to the mass immigration of white Europeans (and rightly so), but that doesn't make them neo-nazis.

Nina_Sky on 16 Feb 2018
In reply to Jimbocz:

> Czechoslovakia has not existed for 25 years. 


To add shame on top of my embarrassment, I once lived there (a very long time ago)! I guess old habits really do die hard

Nina_Sky on 16 Feb 2018
In reply to balmybaldwin:

Excellent explanation. Thank you. I'd mistakenly conflated this bill with some Eastern European border controls-related news stories I've seen recently, such as this one (which is quite vague but implies the ability to deny entry to migrants):

https://www.total-croatia-news.com/politics/16789-croatia-and-hungary-to-organize-police-border-control-exercises

There's also this, from last summer:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-36753648

And quite a few mentions on their official site:
http://abouthungary.hu/border-security/

 

Jimbocz - on 16 Feb 2018
In reply to Nina_Sky:

> To add shame on top of my embarrassment, I once lived there (a very long time ago)! I guess old habits really do die hard

 

I lived there as well and really liked the Czech people.  They were mostly a bunch of racists though, and would happily tell you that while it might be technically wrong to gas Jews, gypsies would be fine.  

I disagree with your assumption that there is a plan to replace white Europeans with Muslims.  Have you seen what is happening in Syria and Afghanistan?  That's the reason for the large number of Islamic refugees, not some nefarious plot. And they aren't replacing anyone, immigrants work, pay taxes and generally make a place better.

 

wbo - on 16 Feb 2018
In reply to Nina_Sky:you need to Edit your profile,so it includes racism and conspiracy theories about wicked George Soros as your interests

 

Nina_Sky on 09:53 Mon
In reply to wbo:

> you need to Edit your profile,so it includes racism and conspiracy theories about wicked George Soros as your interests


Perhaps you need to edit yours to include 'Anyone with a different political or social opinion to me will immediately be labelled racist'.

proandras - on 14:03 Mon
In reply to balmybaldwin:

Look at these maps showing the average salaries in Europe:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_European_countries_by_average_wage
Net salary is 715 euros in Hungary, 1978 euros in UK, cc. 2200 euros in French and Germany.

Add it to that you have to speak Hungarian in order to get even the simplest job. It is not surprising that there are not hordes of immigrants who want to live in Hungary. Especially, if the government directly advertises its hostility towars them, like building fences, etc. The legal or illegal immigration issue has a totally different grade in Hungary and in UK.

 

Nina_Sky on 14:10 Mon
In reply to Jimbocz:

> I disagree with your assumption that there is a plan to replace white Europeans with Muslims.  Have you seen what is happening in Syria and Afghanistan?  That's the reason for the large number of Islamic refugees, not some nefarious plot. And they aren't replacing anyone, immigrants work, pay taxes and generally make a place better.

It isn't my assumption. As far back as 18 years ago the UN stated that replacement migration is a solution to European population decline:
http://www.un.org/esa/population/publications/migration/migration.htm

Peter Sutherland, former UN Special Representative for International Migration, made it clear that distinct European cultures and national identities are simply obstacles to be overcome:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-18519395

The UN group International Organization for Migration recently declared that mass migration is not only “inevitable” but “necessary”.

Dimitris Avramopoulos, the EU Migration, Home Affairs and Citizenship commissioner, has made it clear that Brussels sees asylum not as a way to offer temporary respite from war but instead as another method of permanently transplanting third world populations into EU nations.
“They have found safety in Europe, but we also need to make sure they find a home,” he writes of refugees, going on to insist that programming Europeans to welcome mass migration is “not only a moral imperative”, but “also an economic and social imperative for our aging continent — and one of the biggest challenges for the near future”.

The EU leadership has even been criticised for being 'too white':
https://www.politico.eu/article/brussels-blind-to-diversity-whiteout-european-parliament/

As I mentioned earlier, I don't think Islamisation is the goal (my first post was badly worded), more an inevitable consequence when the majority of immigration involves Muslims. It's only even relevant because Islam is historically highly resistant to reform, very dominant and unique in that it isn't just a religion, but also encompasses a political and legal system. This therefore increases the speed and scale of societal changes.

Even if, for argument's sake, Soros is being treated completely unfairly, if you allow the ongoing migration of millions of people from countries with high birth rates into countries with low birth rates, they're going to replace the native populations. How else is that likely to pan out?

The situation in Syria and Afghanistan accounts for the refugees who fled those countries and then settled temporarily nearby to wait out the conflict. It doesn't acount for the millions of migrants who chose to make a cross-continental journey to very specific countries with the aim of permanently resettling there for economic reasons, refusing asylum in multiple safe, developed countries en route. It also doesn't account for the millions of other migrants from African countries.
In fact only 2.65% of migrants who crossed the Mediterranean to Italy in 2016 were deemed refugees, according to a UN report, even using their pretty liberal criteria.

I agree that legal, controlled immigration is generally a net positive gain from an economic perspective, but we're talking about mass, chaotic immigration, which is entirely different.

An estimated 75% of Europe’s asylum seekers in 2015 were young males, many without significant training or education. Aydan Özouz, the German commissioner for immigration, refugees and integration, told the Financial Times that only 25% of recent migrants to Germany would find employment in the next 5 years.

“Many of the first Syrian refugees to arrive in Germany were doctors and engineers, but they were succeeded by many, many more who lacked skills,” Özouz said.

In Sweden, the government accepted 163,000 asylum seekers in 2015. A year later, only 500 of these migrants had found any work, according to the European English-language news site The Local. The migrants cost the Swedish government millions of pounds in financial and housing benefits from the state.

In the Netherlands, 90% of Syrian and Eritrean asylum seekers who entered in recent years remain dependent on social benefits. Almost none were employed after 18 months in the country, according to Wakker Nederland, a Dutch public broadcaster.

Even the argument that controlled immigration 'generally makes a place better' should come with the caveat that the migrants wish to integrate into society, respect native customs and traditions and contribute to the economy, otherwise the evidence is actually pretty damning (I say this as someone of mixed British-Asian heritage and the wife of an immigrant).

Post edited at 14:15
TobyA on 14:44 Mon
In reply to Nina_Sky:

If you're going to cut and past other people's writings into your posts you should really say so, or add a link so people can follow up your sources and decide what they think of them. It would seem a lot of your post was lifted from here: http://www.wnd.com/2017/07/plot-to-replace-europeans-with-refugees-exposed/#SlIESBsyZKRb8iTm.99

If you are a regular reader of World Net Daily I'm not that surprised that you'd be pimping anti-semitic conspiracy theories about George Soros! Kinda their bag isn't it?

Did you read WND lead story today in their world section? "Did war of Gog and Magog begin on Saturday?" I like the bit... "Israel and Iran made direct military contact on Saturday for the first time, signaling a significant escalation in the multinational entanglement in Syria. This development contains unique elements that several end-of-days experts say presages the Messianic war of Gog and Magog."

neilh - on 14:58 Mon
In reply to Nina_Sky:

Basically countries like Hungary, Bulgaria and Rominia desperately need migrants otherwise they will be in permanent decline. They have shrinking populations and need people to migrate to them.

Their future rests with migration.

It is upto the local population to recognise this and change or be on the scrapheap.

thomasadixon - on 15:35 Mon
In reply to neilh:

Or they end up with a relatively small population that has lots of land, like Canada for example.  What a terrible position to be in.

It's worth noting that even though the perspective is different you are saying what Nina_Sky is saying, that the future of these countries is to import a new population to replace the one that's currently there, and whose numbers are falling.  I always find it interesting that we've all been told to have fewer babies, because population is too high (and so trashing the climate, etc), and now that people have done that we're being told that we need more people, because the population is falling...

Jimbocz - on 16:29 Mon
In reply to thomasadixon:

 

> It's worth noting that even though the perspective is different you are saying what Nina_Sky is saying, that the future of these countries is to import a new population to replace the one that's currently there, and whose numbers are falling.  I always find it interesting that we've all been told to have fewer babies, because population is too high (and so trashing the climate, etc)

Why is everyone talking about replacement?  If you've got a bunch of people living in a place, then some more people come to live there, they don't REPLACE the people who are already there.  Is that not obvious?  Is there a problem understanding English?

I'm from America, a land built and made great by immigration, notwithstanding the current politics. If you think the Irish immigrants who came to work and brought us some great bits of their culture ended up replacing anyone, you are not coherent.  

Sorry Thomasdixon, I'm responding to the initial racist troll rather than you, but you also said replacement so I replied to you. 

TobyA on 16:38 Mon
In reply to Jimbocz:

> If you think the Irish immigrants who came to work and brought us some great bits of their culture ended up replacing anyone, you are not coherent.  

I sympathise with the point you are making, but I think perhaps if you asked an American of Lakota, Navajo or Comanche descent they might strongly disagree with your example!

 

thomasadixon - on 16:46 Mon
In reply to Jimbocz:

Generally, see TobyA's comment!

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7834459

See that for a use of the term replace, it's not a loaded term.  One generation replaces the previous generation.

neilh - on 18:25 Mon
In reply to thomasadixon:

The problem is also economic. Away from 1 or 2 city areas in those countries the young leave and either immigrate or move to the  capital city’s . Thus compounding the problem. The economics for these countries is not good. Best parallel is with the deindustrialised areas of the uk. 

Nina_Sky on 08:03 Tue
In reply to TobyA:

> If you're going to cut and past other people's writings into your posts you should really say so, or add a link so people can follow up your sources and decide what they think of them. It would seem a lot of your post was lifted from here: http://www.wnd.com/2017/07/plot-to-replace-europeans-with-refugees-exposed/#SlIESBsyZKRb8iTm.99

First of all, that isn't true; it isn't 'a lot' of my post, or anywhere close. It's actually a very small part.
Secondly, you've fixated solely on that one small part of the post and ignored the other 90%.
Thirdly, you've not actually made any effort to disprove the information given.
Finally, even the source that you attack has quoted directly from the Financial Times, The Local, and Wakker Nederland anyway (it even states this in my post!) so unless you're somehow arguing that facts stop becoming facts when quoted by the wrong source, even your attack makes no sense.

Apart from that, an excellent rebuttal. If you're not actually interested in having a discussion, why waste the time replying?

 

Foxache - on 08:36 Tue
In reply to Jimbocz:

> Sorry Thomasdixon, I'm responding to the initial racist troll rather than you

I may not agree with all of the points that she's making, but to call her a racist troll really is pathetic. If you haven't got the stomach for a controversial discussion then maybe it's better to just avoid it altogether.

 

 

douwe - on 08:42 Tue

 

> Finally, even the source that you attack has quoted directly from the Financial Times, The Local, and Wakker Nederland

The Local is a translation site translating local news to English, that's not an original source.

Wakker Nederland? I guess you mean De Telegraaf which is a Dutch tabloid newspaper. Only an idiot would quote from there and think it would be taken seriously.

To me you come across as a rightwing extremist conspiracy theorist. At least from what you've posted in this thread.

 

MG - on 08:50 Tue
In reply to thomasadixon:

> See that for a use of the term replace, it's not a loaded term.  

Of course its a loaded term in this context.

 

mountainbagger - on 09:25 Tue
In reply to Nina_Sky:

> if you allow the ongoing migration of millions of people from countries with high birth rates into countries with low birth rates, they're going to replace the native populations. How else is that likely to pan out?

If you're interested, it pans out like this: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/livebirths/bulletins/parentscountryofbirthenglandandwales/2016

Nina_Sky on 10:07 Tue
In reply to douwe:

> The Local is a translation site translating local news to English, that's not an original source.

> Wakker Nederland? I guess you mean De Telegraaf which is a Dutch tabloid newspaper. Only an idiot would quote from there and think it would be taken seriously.

> To me you come across as a rightwing extremist conspiracy theorist. At least from what you've posted in this thread.

And yet you think you can qualify a statement using "Only an idiot would..." and expect it to be taken seriously?

Here are some alternative sources for the exact same information in that small part of my post (the rest of which has strangely been ignored):

"In fact only 2.65% of migrants who crossed the Mediterranean to Italy in 2016 were deemed refugees, according to a UN report, even using their pretty liberal criteria."

http://www.unhcr.org/uk/news/press/2017/2/58b458654/refugees-migrants-face-heightened-risks-trying-reach-europe-unhcr-report.html
http://www.asylumineurope.org/reports/country/italy/statistics

"An estimated 75% of Europe’s asylum seekers in 2015 were young males, many without significant training or education. Aydan Özouz, the German commissioner for immigration, refugees and integration, told the Financial Times that only 25% of recent migrants to Germany would find employment in the next 5 years."

http://www.migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/briefings/migration-to-the-uk-asylum/
I suspect they got the year wrong and it should have been 2016, not 2015.

http://www.oecd.org/berlin/publikationen/Arbeitsmarktintegration-von-Fluechtlingen-EK-OECD-Arbeitspapier-092106.pdf (page 7), along with "On average, it takes refugees up to 20 years to have a similar employment rate as the native born", further undermining jumbocz's the claim that "immigrants work, pay taxes and generally make a place better".

“Many of the first Syrian refugees to arrive in Germany were doctors and engineers, but they were succeeded by many, many more who lacked skills,” Özouz said.
https://www.ft.com/content/022de0a4-54f4-11e7-9fed-c19e2700005f

"In Sweden, the government accepted 163,000 asylum seekers in 2015. A year later, only 500 of these migrants had found any work, according to the European English-language news site The Local. The migrants cost the Swedish government millions of pounds in financial and housing benefits from the state."
https://www.thelocal.se/20160531/fewer-than-500-of-163000-asylum-seekers-found-jobs

In the Netherlands, 90% of Syrian and Eritrean asylum seekers who entered in recent years remain dependent on social benefits. Almost none were employed after 18 months in the country, according to Wakker Nederland, a Dutch public broadcaster.
https://www.cbs.nl/en-gb/news/2017/25/most-syrian-asylum-seekers-have-housing

Hopefully these sources are to your liking. I also find it quite amusing that the entire focus for some has been attacking the original sources, yet it's been proven that the original sources, apparently so terrible and biased, had all used factual, accurate information. Maybe now we can move past the smokescreens and childish, bigoted namecalling?

MG - on 10:15 Tue
In reply to Nina_Sky:

Let's say your right about everything. What do you conclude? What should we do?

douwe - on 10:31 Tue

 

> Hopefully these sources are to your liking. I also find it quite amusing that the entire focus for some has been attacking the original sources, yet it's been proven that the original sources, apparently so terrible and biased, had all used factual, accurate information. Maybe now we can move past the smokescreens and childish, bigoted namecalling?

No we can not.

Your selective quotes of different sources don't in any way support your original claim that George Soros is part of a conspiracy to Islamise Europe by essentially replacing the ethnic population by non-Europeans.

Also it doesn't change my impression you are basically very afraid of uncertainties in our future and the unknown in general. And you channel this fear into anger fuelled by right-wing conspiracy theories.

Post edited at 10:37
jondo - on 10:32 Tue
In reply to Nina_Sky:

Hungary is openly semi facist and anti Semitic. 

At least they are open about it as opposed to say... Poland.

Nina_Sky on 12:27 Tue
In reply to douwe:

> No we can not.

> Your selective quotes of different sources don't in any way support your original claim that George Soros is part of a conspiracy to Islamise Europe by essentially replacing the ethnic population by non-Europeans.

> Also it doesn't change my impression you are basically very afraid of uncertainties in our future and the unknown in general. And you channel this fear into anger fuelled by right-wing conspiracy theories.

Then that's your issue, not mine. I started a discussion, albeit a controversial one. I'm perfectly happy to have my mind changed. To then be labelled a racist or a troll really is lazy, facile and ultimately pointless when no effort is being made to actually dispute the information put forward. I really don't understand this sneering, aggressive tone that seems to dominate these kinds of topics. Are people now so desperately insecure that an alternative point of view has them immediately looking for the quickest, easiest way to dismiss it out-of-hand or conflate it with the rise of the Third Reich, rather than engage with it? Oh but of course, if you marginalise and stigmatise a discussion topic or opinion, it saves you the trouble of *having* to engage. No thought or effort required. No courting the terrible risk that you may have to change your mind.

The reference to Islamisation has already been explained. The claim re: Soros isn't mine (I just paraphrased it for the purposes of reposting), but it is that of apparently a very large number of people including a large number of European politicians. Yes, it is a conspiracy theory, but given its prevalence and Soros' background it does at least interest me. He's said that Europe's migrant crisis is an opportunity to influence immigration policies worldwide and collaborate with other wealthy donors, and he's promised USD$500M to fund migrants arriving in Europe. He's been criticised by the Israeli foreign ministry for "continuously undermining Israel's democratically elected governments by funding organizations that defame the Jewish state and seek to deny it the right to defend itself". He's funded more than 100 organisations in countries across the globe, contributed millions of dollars to influence lawmakers and politicians and has a long history of involving himself in various countries' internal affairs, so he's either widely (and very deeply) misunderstood or he's an incredibly wealthy man with powerful connections, a strongly liberal bias and motivations that are questionable. Either way, it seems at least worthy of examination.

Having said all of that, even assuming that the accusations being made against Soros are totally false (which they may well be), that has no bearing whatsoever on the question of European population replacement, cultural destruction, social division and economic strain due to mass immigration and it also has no bearing on the UN and EU stance on effectively importing people to fill a demographic gap. I already said this in the long follow-up post that I made, but again, it's easier to instead just attack sources or use inflammatory labels.

Yes, I'm afraid of uncertainties in our future, as I expect many people are. No, I'm not afraid of the unknown in general. No, I'm not angry and I don't see how any rational person could perceive anger in anything I've posted. Irritation? Absolutely. If people actually want to discuss this, great; put forward your point of view, but if it's just going to be a case of repeatedly quoting out of context or ignoring points you prefer not to deal with, or just telling me I'm racist/trolling/paranoid/angry/whatever else, then it's just a waste of time for the sake of smug self-indulgence.

Jimbocz - on 12:32 Tue
In reply to TobyA:

 

> I sympathise with the point you are making, but I think perhaps if you asked an American of Lakota, Navajo or Comanche descent they might strongly disagree with your example!

I've visited Navajo reservations and there was a distinct lack of  Irish people there.  I didn't see any evidence that they or their culture had been replaced.  

You guys might be using the non loaded version of Replacement, but I couldn't help but think of the White Supremacists in Charlottesville chanting "Jews will not replace us" 

 

Jimbocz - on 12:37 Tue
In reply to Foxache:

> I may not agree with all of the points that she's making, but to call her a racist troll really is pathetic. If you haven't got the stomach for a controversial discussion then maybe it's better to just avoid it altogether.

No apology here, I can spot racism when I see it.  Just because I don't have time to argue every BS Web link that the Muslims actually want to eat our babies doesn't make it a winning argument.

Post edited at 12:37
Foxache - on 12:40 Tue
In reply to Nina_Sky:

I do think the Soros link is unlikely. Yeah you might say "there's no smoke without fire" and where he's concerned, there's a lot of smoke, but I've yet to see enough evidence to show he'd have enough to gain to make it worth his while. I don't see any basis at all for the whole 'Islamisation' thing, although you have already addressed that. Yeah it could well end up an indirect result.

Re: the European population replacement though, I find it difficult to just dismiss it. It's obviously being touted as a solution to a declining European population (although surely immigrants are subject to the same laws of nature as the rest of us?!) and if you keep on importing millions of migrants who are reproducing faster than the natives, it seems likely to result in the ethnic majority eventually becoming a minority. Judging by the major problems with social division already seen with relatively small migration in the UK and the fact that the likes of Cameron, Sarkozy, even Merkel have stated that multiculturalism has failed, that alone looks like a major potential issue.

Foxache - on 12:45 Tue
In reply to Jimbocz:

> No apology here, I can spot racism when I see it.  Just because I don't have time to argue every BS Web link that the Muslims actually want to eat our babies doesn't make it a winning argument.

Well apparently you can't, and so far from what you've contributed to this thread it looks like it's your ability to argue that's lacking, not your time. You can't even focus on what has actually been said. Repeatedly misquoting for dramatic effect or banging on about stuff that she's already dealt with, the above being a great example. It's like the old 'never play chess with a pigeon' adage.

"BS web link that the Muslims want to eat our babies" I mean seriously, what are you on about?!

Post edited at 12:47
douwe - on 13:10 Tue
In reply to Nina_Sky:

So you've posted a whole bunch of links and theories, which may or may not reflect your opinion, to tell us you are very afraid and we should probably be afraid too of mass immigration and the subsequent replacement of the ethnic population of Europe for non-European Islamists. A fear which you have spoken about in others threads also. ( I have taken the liberty of reading some of your other posts since I got interested). But you do not like to be branded as a right winger?

Jimbocz - on 13:12 Tue
In reply to Foxache:

> it's your a It's like the old 'never play chess with a pigeon' adage.

True enough.  Is that last post where you strut around as if you won?

 

Eric9Points - on 15:02 Tue
In reply to Nina_Sky:

This all seems a bit confused to me. Apparently Ms Sky does not object to the EU giving shelter to refugees from Syria or Afghanistan, or presumably Darfur, or Sudan etc, but does object to economic refugees from sub Saharan Africa, many of whom will not be muslim. At the same time she seems pre occupied with Islamification as she calls it.

 

Economic migrants are not allowed to stay in the EU, so I don't she what her objections are other than the EU may not be strict enough in enforcement.

 

Regarding subsequent employment of refugees in EU countries, if other countries are the same as the UK then asylum seekers are forbidden by law from seeking employment until they are granted the right to remain. Something that many asylum seekers find incredibly demoralising as the application process normally takes years.

 

Finally, Hungary can no longer be thought of as a liberal democracy and is squaring up for a fight with the EU over some of the anti democratic legislation it has recently passed. As an aside my own 6/10 support for remaining in the EU is because our MEPs are sitting in the same parliament as quite a few neo nazis from other countries who should never have been allowed to join.

Nina_Sky on 15:05 Tue
In reply to douwe:

> So you've posted a whole bunch of links and theories, which may or may not reflect your opinion, to tell us you are very afraid and we should probably be afraid too of mass immigration and the subsequent replacement of the ethnic population of Europe for non-European Islamists. A fear which you have spoken about in others threads also. ( I have taken the liberty of reading some of your other posts since I got interested). But you do not like to be branded as a right winger?

I've only really posted one theory (the Soros conspiracy) which, as already stated, isn't fundamental to the wider issue anyway. The links I've posted do support my opinion re: population replacement, which is why I posted them (and just to clarify for those who couldn't even bother to read them, none actually specifically refer to Islam nor do they reference Muslims eating our babies).

Being called a 'right winger' doesn't bother me (is that even supposed to be an insult these days?). What bothers me is people using labels like 'racist' and 'troll' and then acting as if they've just rebutted an argument, when they haven't even challenged the statistics put forward or really bothered to read anything I've written, save from skimming it for a few inflammatory buzzwords that they can then quote out of context before more triumphant strutting (I read the pigeon adage and it did raise a smile)

Jimbocz - on 16:36 Tue
In reply to Nina_Sky:

Well, you've already been called out for cutting and pasting most of your post from somewhere else, and then someone familiar with the actual sources you quoted lets us know that they are unreliable right wing junk.  You seem to be wanting someone to come along and argue every point in your theory that there's a vast conspiracy to allow Islam to take over Europe.  Like arguing about gravity, few people are willing to spend the time aarguing that a xenophobic fear of foreigners is a bad thing. Including me, so after this post I won't be trying any more.

You also seem to not have any understanding that racist and xenophobic arguments like these are seen as evil by most right thinking people because of the damage they've done throughout history.  So that's why people are impolite to you when calling you a racist.  If you don't like being called a racist, stop making racist arguments. 

douwe - on 17:14 Tue
In reply to Nina_Sky:

Most of what you post boil down to one thing; xenophobia. It's just the same old far right record being played over and over again.

Your statistics and links are nothing to be challenged. It's just a smokescreen of links which you've prepared to back up your argument and give it the appearance of mainstream legitimacy.

You talk about "the question of European population replacement, cultural destruction, social division and economic strain due to mass immigration" as if it is a fact. It is not.

You talk about "The UN and EU stance on effectively importing people to fill a demographic gap" as if it is a fact. It is not.

You pretend to want to discuss the subject but actually you've clearly made up your mind already. You are just looking for a platform to vent your nationalist far right politics.

 

 

Eric9Points - on 17:28 Tue
In reply to douwe:

I wouldn't necessarily describe the views of Ms Sky as right wing or even nationalist. Just someone who is worried about their "blood line" for want of a better word, becoming tainted by those that are different from her.

I heard all this stuff from my father many years ago, a good man but whose views on race and culture were formed in the 20's and 30's and which I found abhorrent. He shared the views of many Scottish protestants of the early twentieth century about Irish Catholics who had come over to Scotland as economic refugees and who in his view were breeding like rabbits and sponging off hard working Scots. You'll no doubt recognise the similarities with Ms Sky's narrative and if like me, you'd grown up in Scotland you'd also recognise the poisonous nature of these prejudices and the damage they have caused to Scottish society.

summo on 20:06 Tue
In reply to Nina_Sky:

I wouldn't trust anything in thelocal.se it's a clickbait ad revenue driven website primarily aimed at publishing Google translated articles, that ideally present one side of controversial story, for a majority of USA based audience who haven't ever been there, but feel some affinity because they had some ancestor from there 150years ago.

Foxache - on 20:29 Tue
In reply to Jimbocz:

> Well, you've already been called out for cutting and pasting most of your post from somewhere else, and then someone familiar with the actual sources you quoted lets us know that they are unreliable right wing junk.  You seem to be wanting someone to come along and argue every point in your theory that there's a vast conspiracy to allow Islam to take over Europe.  Like arguing about gravity, few people are willing to spend the time aarguing that a xenophobic fear of foreigners is a bad thing. Including me, so after this post I won't be trying any more.

> You also seem to not have any understanding that racist and xenophobic arguments like these are seen as evil by most right thinking people because of the damage they've done throughout history.  So that's why people are impolite to you when calling you a racist.  If you don't like being called a racist, stop making racist arguments. 


Why are you constantly lying? Literally one post later she provided reputable sources (such as the UN and the Financial Times) for the exact same information, none of which were discredited as being right wing junk.

Another lie: you keep referring to the conspiracy to allow Islam to take over Europe when it was mentioned ONCE, and even then only in reference to whatever link about Hungary started the thread off. Subsequently it's been repeatedly referred to as an indirect consequence, but again, you'd much rather knock down those straw men.

For someone who "doesn't have time" to rebut the points made (or apparently even read them) you can find plenty of time to repeatedly misquote or just plain fabricate points that are easy to rebut.

Is it any wonder you think that "most Czech people are racist" when you set the bar this low.

Foxache - on 20:33 Tue
In reply to Eric9Points:

I can't be bothered to trawl through all the posts but I'm pretty sure she said somewhere she was Asian and her husband wasn't born here, in which case the whole purity of bloodline thing seems unlikely.

Mr Lopez - on 21:36 Tue
In reply to Foxache:

> Why are you constantly lying? Literally one post later she provided reputable sources (such as the UN and the Financial Times) for the exact same information,

Do they? I read the first few links and none of them say anything close to what's claimed

Nina_Sky on 23:08 Tue
In reply to douwe:

> Most of what you post boil down to one thing; xenophobia. It's just the same old far right record being played over and over again.

> Your statistics and links are nothing to be challenged. It's just a smokescreen of links which you've prepared to back up your argument and give it the appearance of mainstream legitimacy.

 

Well if being strongly critical of conservative Islam and/or its political aspirations in The West makes me a far right nationalist xenophobe (could you not cram a few more cliched labels in there?!) then I'm proud to count myself in the company of the likes of Aayan Hirsi Ali, the Imam Tawhidi, Maajid Nawaaz, Aynaz Cyrus, Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins, Bill Maher, Salman Rushdie and Jordan Peterson to name but a few.
Or if it's the fact I've dared to express concerns over mass immigration, I can count Jeremy Corbyn, Angela Merkel, Alain Destexhe and Former U.N. Ambassador Alan Keyes amongst my fellow deplorables.

I would provide another "smokescreen of links" (apparently new terminology for evidencing your argument that must have passed me by), but that's already proven to be a waste of time, as is any attempt to discuss this on an internet forum. At least we've all had fun though.

 

Ramblin dave - on 09:36 Wed
In reply to Nina_Sky:

> Well if being strongly critical of conservative Islam and/or its political aspirations in The West makes me a far right nationalist xenophobe (could you not cram a few more cliched labels in there?!) then I'm proud to count myself in the company of the likes of Aayan Hirsi Ali, the Imam Tawhidi, Maajid Nawaaz, Aynaz Cyrus, Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins, Bill Maher, Salman Rushdie and Jordan Peterson to name but a few.

> Or if it's the fact I've dared to express concerns over mass immigration, I can count Jeremy Corbyn, Angela Merkel, Alain Destexhe and Former U.N. Ambassador Alan Keyes amongst my fellow deplorables.

I suspect that it's probably the scaremongering about "George Soros' plan to Islamise Europe by essentially replacing ethnic Europeans with non-Europeans" that did it, to be honest. Expressing concerns about shadowy Jewish conspiracies against "ethnic Europeans" puts you in rather less glittering company.

douwe - on 09:42 Wed
In reply to Nina_Sky:

Well I'm glad you see yourself as a great critical thinker "in the company of the likes of Aayan Hirsi Ali, the Imam Tawhidi, Maajid Nawaaz, Aynaz Cyrus, Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins, Bill Maher, Salman Rushdie and Jordan Peterson".

I don't really see you that way and nothing you've posted proves you to be on the same intellectual level of reasoning as those you percieve yourself to be in company of.

But; more power to you!

Bjartur i Sumarhus on 10:18 Wed
In reply to Nina_Sky:

"Our Grandparents fought Nazis so we could be called Nazis for believing what our Grandparents believed"

Jimbocz - on 10:55 Wed
In reply to douwe:

> Well I'm glad you see yourself as a great critical thinker "in the company of the likes of Aayan Hirsi Ali, the Imam Tawhidi, Maajid Nawaaz, Aynaz Cyrus, Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins, Bill Maher, Salman Rushdie and Jordan Peterson".

> I don't really see you that way and nothing you've posted proves you to be on the same intellectual level of reasoning as those you percieve yourself to be in company of.

> But; more power to you!

That's not fair, I'd say she's right on par with Bill Maher, the comedian.  He frequently spouts the "All Muslims secretly want to kill us" thing. The rest of his show is a hoot. 

Jimbocz - on 11:17 Wed
In reply to Foxache:

> Why are you constantly lying? Literally one post later she provided reputable sources (such as the UN and the Financial Times) for the exact same information, none of which were discredited as being right wing junk.

> Another lie: you keep referring to the conspiracy to allow Islam to take over Europe when it was mentioned ONCE, and even then only in reference to whatever link about Hungary started the thread off. Subsequently it's been repeatedly referred to as an indirect consequence, but again, you'd much rather knock down those straw men.

> For someone who "doesn't have time" to rebut the points made (or apparently even read them) you can find plenty of time to repeatedly misquote or just plain fabricate points that are easy to rebut.

> Is it any wonder you think that "most Czech people are racist" when you set the bar this low

If my points are so easy to rebut, you sure are doing a crummy job of it.  

Did you even read the first post?  Allow me to quote "I've read elsewhere that Poland, Austria and Czechoslovakia may also follow suit in an effort to stop George Soros' plan to Islamise Europe by essentially replacing ethnic Europeans with non-Europeans."

Then you said 

> Another lie: you keep referring to the conspiracy to allow Islam to take over Europe when it was mentioned ONCE,and even then only in reference to whatever link about Hungary started the thread off. Subsequently it's been repeatedly referred to as an indirect consequence, but again, you'd much rather knock down those straw men.

The "Straw man" was the whole point of her post!  As many others have confirmed by arguing against the same thing. You are the one who needs to try harder mate. I think you are having trouble following all this.

Perhaps you are just the weak minded type she's hoping to influence with this racist tripe.

 

 

Post edited at 11:20
Big Ger - on 08:21 Thu
In reply to Nina_Sky:

Nothing changes here does it?

Someone posts a right leaning OP, and backs it up with facts, figures, and quotes.

Along come the left leaning, start calling the OP and anyone who agrees with her childish  "troll", "racist" and other cliche left wing tripe names, while never offering anything to debunk the substantive points offered, or trying to engage in rational debate.

The whole left leaning argument on this thread seems to be; "You posted something I dislike, so I have the right to call you names, without ever trying to prove you wrong."

No wonder the left are in decline.

Eric9Points - on 10:04 Thu
In reply to Big Ger:

I've never thought of bigotry as being right wing or left wing but if the right want to claim it as theirs then who am I to disagree?

 

I think each of Ms Sky's rather confused jumble of points were addressed but don't let selective recollection get in the way of your whingeing.

elsewhere on 10:37 Thu
In reply to Big Ger:

So you think an OP referring to "George Soros' plan to Islamise Europe" is backed up by facts.

Post edited at 10:38
Big Ger - on 12:00 Thu
In reply to elsewhere:

> So you think an OP referring to "George Soros' plan to Islamise Europe" is backed up by facts.

No, I think the OP has already explained her mistakes with regard to the Soros quote, in an open and honest manner. 

Laughingly all the left can say about the detailed and linked points is that the OP is a smelly poo poo head.

Oh, and before you start with your usual stupidity, no no one has actually used those words to describe her. But there again, no one has seriously challenged anything either.

elsewhere on 12:26 Thu
In reply to Big Ger:

"Someone posts a right leaning OP, and backs it up with facts, figures, and quotes."

But you said the OP was backed up by facts, figures and quotes.

Are you aligning youself with the idea of a Jewish international financier, EU or UN led plan of population replacement?

Big Ger - on 13:05 Thu
In reply to elsewhere:

Are you saying the OP hasn't added to the debate and confessed that she was wrong?

 

elsewhere on 13:20 Thu
In reply to Big Ger:

Are you aligning yourself with ideas such as "Sorry, poor wording on my part. Soros, the UN and the EU clearly see population replacement " because that's still hardly different from a Jewish international financier, EU or UN led plan of population replacement?

Jimbocz - on 13:29 Thu
In reply to Eric9Points:

> I've never thought of bigotry as being right wing or left wing but if the right want to claim it as theirs then who am I to disagree?

> I think each of Ms Sky's rather confused jumble of points were addressed but don't let selective recollection get in the way of your whingeing.

And I am proud to have called her out as a racist troll.

The jury is still out on wether she is actually a troll in the Russian sense (a fake account created by someone paid to spread divisive ideas) but there's no doubt about the point of that argument is only to increase the amount of hate and division in this world. 

I wouldn't be surprised at all if there weren't a Russian cubicle dweller in a Moscow suburb cackling with delight that this idea of population replacement is now getting a serious airing.  Stranger things have happened on the Internet.

Jimbocz - on 13:29 Thu
In reply to Eric9Points:

> I've never thought of bigotry as being right wing or left wing but if the right want to claim it as theirs then who am I to disagree?

> I think each of Ms Sky's rather confused jumble of points were addressed but don't let selective recollection get in the way of your whingeing.

And I am proud to have called her out as a racist troll.

The jury is still out on wether she is actually a troll in the Russian sense (a fake account created by someone paid to spread divisive ideas) but there's no doubt about the point of that argument is only to increase the amount of hate and division in this world. 

I wouldn't be surprised at all if there weren't a Russian cubicle dweller in a Moscow suburb cackling with delight that this idea of population replacement is now getting a serious airing.  Stranger things have happened on the Internet.

Big Ger - on 13:36 Thu
In reply to Jimbocz:

> And I am proud to have called her out as a racist troll.

> The jury is still out on wether she is actually a troll in the Russian sense (a fake account created by someone paid to spread divisive ideas) but there's no doubt about the point of that argument is only to increase the amount of hate and division in this world. 

> I wouldn't be surprised at all if there weren't a Russian cubicle dweller in a Moscow suburb cackling with delight that this idea of population replacement is now getting a serious airing.  Stranger things have happened on the Internet.

And this is why the Left will fade into obscurity, they cannot see outside of their little bubbles, have no contrary evidence to offer, and only speak in insult and cliche.

Big Ger - on 13:37 Thu
In reply to elsewhere:

The fact that you have selectively ignored most of what she has written, only goes to show me being right.

 

See her reply, with the usual links and quotes, of Monday at14.10

Post edited at 13:40
DubyaJamesDubya - on 13:39 Thu
In reply to neilh:

> Basically countries like Hungary, Bulgaria and Rominia desperately need migrants otherwise they will be in permanent decline. They have shrinking populations and need people to migrate to them.

> Their future rests with migration.

> It is upto the local population to recognise this and change or be on the scrapheap.

Because the world really needs an ever growing population.

DubyaJamesDubya - on 13:41 Thu
In reply to Jimbocz:

> Why is everyone talking about replacement?  If you've got a bunch of people living in a place, then some more people come to live there, they don't REPLACE the people who are already there.  Is that not obvious?  Is there a problem understanding English?

> I'm from America, a land built and made great by immigration, notwithstanding the current politics. If you think the Irish immigrants who came to work and brought us some great bits of their culture ended up replacing anyone, you are not coherent.  

> Sorry Thomasdixon, I'm responding to the initial racist troll rather than you, but you also said replacement so I replied to you. 

Coming from a land where a load of immigrants really did replace the population by targeted eradication?

Ramblin dave - on 13:44 Thu
In reply to Big Ger:

> Nothing changes here does it?

Nope. Someone posts something that could literally be quoted verbatim from a Neo Nazi propaganda leaflet, and you turn up to whine about "the left leaning" being big meanies.

douwe - on 15:34 Thu
In reply to Big Ger:

> Someone posts a right leaning OP, and backs it up with facts, figures, and quotes.

I think you're doing those who identify themselves as conservative or with right of the center leaning political orientation a huge disservice here by lumping them together with the lunacy posted by the OP.

The original post about "George Soros' plan to Islamise Europe by essentially replacing ethnic Europeans with non-Europeans." was never backed up with any facts, figures, and quotes. Period.

Later on the OP thinned down her rethoric and mainly focuses on "European population replacement, cultural destruction, social division and economic strain due to mass immigration and the UN and EU stance on effectively importing people to fill a demographic gap"

Also for these statements no facts, figures, and quotes were given.

Large part of the links are statistics about percentages of housing, jobs found and welfare recieved by immigrants at some point in some EU member state. Or selective quotes about immigrants from diverse news sources. “Many of the first Syrian refugees to arrive in Germany were doctors and engineers, but they were succeeded by many, many more who lacked skills,” Özouz said. Those seem pretty gratuitous without any real context and probably just meant as something to set the mood.

Other links and claims are simply false:

"It isn't my assumption. As far back as 18 years ago the UN stated that replacement migration is a solution to European population decline:http://www.un.org/esa/population/publications/migration/migration.htm

This is a link to a study about the possibilities of replacement migration as a solution to European population decline. It concludes it might be a possibility amongst other options but would also lead to unwanted side effects such as social division. Replacement migration has NEVER become an UN nor EU policy. This is simply scaremongering by the OP.

"In fact only 2.65% of migrants who crossed the Mediterranean to Italy in 2016 were deemed refugees, according to a UN report, even using their pretty liberal criteria."http://www.unhcr.org/uk/news/press/2017/2/58b458654/refugees-migrants-face-heightened-risks-trying-reach-europe-unhcr-report.html

http://www.asylumineurope.org/reports/country/italy/statistics

First link is totally irrelevant and gives figures about how increased border restrictions made the journey to Europe more dangerous.

Second link does contain statistics but nowhere is the figure 2.65% mentioned. In fact it mentions a 5,3% refugee rate and a 60,6% rejection rate.

The list goes on and on..

I find it quite unfortunate that you seem to want to simplify this thread to left leaning against right leaning. When it seems to be more a question of somebody posting statements under the pretence of wanting to start a discussion but actually trying to push a political agenda based upon lies and conspiracy thinking.

Post edited at 15:44
Jimbocz - on 15:35 Thu
In reply to DubyaJamesDubya:

> Coming from a land where a load of immigrants really did replace the population by targeted eradication?

Someone better tell the Navajo, Hopi and Pueblo people that they have been replaced and eradicated. I guess the ones I met were actors, possibly funded by Soros?

I  would never say the Native Americans didn't suffer after America was formed, but not replaced. 

Post edited at 15:37

Please Register as a New User in order to reply to this topic.