The 'Goodness' of Migrants: When Feelings Trump Facts

When will people admit that the absolute truth is: Everywhere these "people" are allowed to live and multiply these horrorific atrocities ALWAYS come with them. Name any country that has either invited them in en masse, or any country or town that has simply been overrun with them without invitation. This culture is entirely antithetical to western culture and the authorities know it. For that matter, anyone with a working brain likely knows it too. So why do people continue to allow their governments and leaders to offer carte blanche to them ? WHY ?

I realize that some disdain the "history repeating itself" concept, but what European nation sustained most of Hitler's hatred? Britain! "Beacon of hope"?....I can think of another type of "beacon" much more suited to the perception of the Muslim immigrant's mindset!

Thank you, Mr. Murray!

Dear Mr. Murray,

You are one of very few journalists who understands the issues of terrorism and are prepared to confront the liberal-left, do-gooders and the naïve to recognise what the vast majority of people in Britain know to be the truth about migration and ISLAM even if the Question Time audience and the panelists do not!

I have no objections to people coming to the UK to make their lives here but there are ways and means of doing so and living in camps in France is NOT one of them. My wife is Muslin and she applied in her home country to come to the UK. She does not involve herself in terrorism or to force the indigenous people to become Muslim, but rather wishes to live as the British people live and to conform to the norms of life in the UK. Incidentally, I believe that others of the Muslim faith are of a similar mind but many do not and they represent a sizable percentage of Muslims in Britain; to suggest otherwise is to join the Dustin Lance Black's of this world i.e. the naïve.

I am currently filling in forms (79 pages of A4 Q/A) to legally comply with extending my wife's stay in the UK and this endeavour involves questions that are very searching. I wish to God this was not the case, but the alternative is to put the lives of British citizens and foreigners, at risk from people like Munir Mohammed of Derby and Ahmed Hassan Mohammed Ali born in Iraq and many others who have been responsible for significant loss of life and limb.

I would only add that Orwell, according to at least one of his biographers, based the Ministry of Truth in part on the BBC building he worked in. How remarkably prescient.

The only guy that can save the UK is Tommy Robinson. He is a man of the people and understands the Islamist threat. Plus, unlike too many Nationalists he doesn't blame the Islamic problem on the "Jews". He is on Rebel Media and needs support.

"What exactly did we gain from their presence in our country? And what exactly
was the 'goodness' that you think they brought?"

That is the question -- of course rhetorical questions need not to be answered.
However, an answer should be given -- nothing good can possibly come out of this abandon
of all that's reasonable and decent -- throwing their citizens under the bus without an explanation.
Leaders of countries do not produce miracles, they are fallible creatures; and they are showing
fear, which will not help them solve their problems.

Is it any wonder that, though Jesus loved people, He did not trust them "...for He knew what was in man"?
He knew that the first part of His mission would be very difficult for people to comprehend;
yet it had to be done preliminarily, regardless of the consequences -- for our sakes.
Knowing that "The world cannot hate you; but it hates Me because I testify against it,
that it is evil". Thus, there can only one outcome when in the face of such absurdity as we
are experiencing -- our demise. But we still have to protest encroaching madness because
it has to be done -- there's no other choice. Notwithstanding, the western world is trying to do
nothing.
It's as if, although they see it coming, still refusing to confront the inevitable social holocaust.

if challenged with these 2 cases, mr. black would no doubt point out that this is just 2 of many people who have "graced" britain with their presence. he could probably even trot out a couple of examples of "moderate" muslims, perhaps like asad shah, a shopkeeper in glasgow. unfortunately, mr. shah can no longer be used as an example by mr. black, because he was an ahmadiyya muslim, and as ahmadis believe that mirza ghulam ahmad was a prophet who came in 1889, almost all other muslims believe that ahamdis are apostates, since muhammed claims to be the final prophet. thus, tanveer ahmed, a sunni muslim (~93% to 95% of muslims are sunni), found it necessary to travel 200 miles to murder mr. shah for wishing his christian customers a happy easter on fakebook on 2016-03-26.

maybe mr. black should move next door to mr. ahmed's family, or maybe even next door to mr. ahmed himself, who has no doubt been released by now by virtue of being muslim, and therefore "innocent." they should get along famously.

Even without the crime, terrorism and cultural disruption, there is no benefit from large-scale immigration. The assertions of some sort of economic benefit from immigration are lies. More people require more production of everything to maintain the existing standard of living -- more food, fuel, housing, electricity, water, and everything else. They add to the existing problems of shortages of various things, and create more congestion, pollution, overcrowding, etc. There is no country that isn't already overpopulated, and would benefit from having fewer people, not more. Unless immigrants are more civilized, intelligent and productive than the people already there, they are an economic and cultural problem that any country would be better without.

The violence and poverty most of these people are trying to escape are the result of their barbaric culture, and they bring that culture with them. They can't be helped unless they change -- if enough of them would change, they could have peace and prosperity in their own countries.

It would be interesting to ask some advocates if the "goodness" level of potential immigrants is higher, lower, or about the same as existing citizens. Of course, they won't answer that immigrants have a lower "goodness" level. But would they be willing to argue that immigrants have a higher "goodness" level than citizens? That seems like a politically dangerous stance! And if the "goodness" level of immigrants is about the same, what are they arguing about, anyway?

Great! Every time a Brit mentions Israel trying to expel African migrants making life in South Tel Aviv terrible, Israel should mention Calais. Looks like Britain is no more willing to accept economic migrants who cross other states to get to Britain anymore than Israel is willing to accept economic migrants crossing Egypt that regards Africans as slaves and then crossing the Sinai where they suffer all kinds of abomination to reach their dream, Israel. What is good for Britain is certainly good for Israel that is willing to pay those economic migrants to leave willingly.

The goodness of migrants rests solely in their ability to provide cheap labor for business. Cheap labor translates to higher profits, so business finances promotional campaigns to show migrants as beneficial. The cheap labor drives down labor rates for prior residents and displaces other laborers who become welfare recipients - wards of the state and tax burdens. Migrants rarely have the same social habits as prior residents which leads to conflict and relative degradation of living conditions.

So long as businesses can profit from cheap migrant labor, however, there will be money to sell the benefits of migrants - no matter how much damage they do to society in general.

Americans and for that matter, West European political elites despise themselves and their "legacy" populations. It is a mental illness.

Does the West have the backbone to survive? At this point, I doubt it.

As usual I can't add anything to what Mr Murray has said, if this cancer of political correctness is not outlawed the UK is finished as a western nation.

'But one day they will ask, and with increasing -- and justifiable -- anger.'
And one day, angry people will look for those responsible for selling them utopian narratives and big lies, to pay.
Such 'progressive' propagandists and fantasists are making Europe look away from the real problems arriving on its doorstep.
Meanwhile leaders in the Muslim world promote the cultural and demographic conquest of Europe, which puts the BBC crowd-pleasing virtue-signalling of someone like Dustin Lance Black into some perspective.

"What exactly did we gain from their presence in our country?" Mr. Murray asks. Absolutely nothing. A loss, which is what Britain experiences every day, is not a "gain." The politicization and policing of speech is not a "gain," but it does penalize any negative words spoken about Islam. A "gain" is seen in the tilted minds of those who wish to erase British history and culture in order to not offend Muslims and the barbarians from Calais. Remember that these brutes and savages have murdered and terrorized truckers and drivers on their way to the Chunnel. The "Jungle" should be removed again, by fire bomb if necessary to hasten the removal of that shanty town and to hasten the departure of its bums to hopefully to the sh'holes from whence they came.

Greetings:

Ah yes, Calais, part of which French Président Macron (taller than Napoleon, younger than DeGaulle) referred to as "the jungle" without any media upset at all.

My question for "open borders" aficionados around the world is, "Why to you have locks on the doors and windows of your domicile when so many are homeless ???".

Black can get away with making such statements unchallenged in the UK just as he can (and likely does) here in the US. People believe, correctly as it turns out, that if they confront Leftists like Black with facts the facts will be ignored and they will be personally attacked verbally, in print/bytes and sometimes physically by many other Leftists. It is so much easier to sit on the couch watching reality TV than to subject themselves to the Leftist retribution for daring to voice a non-PC fact or opinion. And sometimes the non-Leftists simply don't care. They don't vote (thankfully, who wants people who don't care selecting the nation's leaders?)and they won't get off that couch other than for food, drink and the money to buy housing, food and drink.

Brits and Europeans generally accept the decisions "their" governments make for them. If they object, there is little tendency to write letters, make phone calls or take to the streets to voice their objections. This is why the Brexit vote was such a "event". After decades of their governments surreptitiously foisting the EU on their voters without informed consent, EU subjects have displayed little to no propensity toward revolution, though some have indicated some degree of displeasure about their country's membership in the EU. Complacency abounds on both sides of the Atlantic, though moreso on the Eastern side.

Great commentary again Douglas. Why is it that the BBC has to have a foreigner provide his views on the illegal migrants coming from Calais, are there not Brits that could be used for this purpose?

Oh, Hell, these highly educated and way-above average intelligence poor, misunderstood "Asylum Seekers" are only going to ENRICH Britain, as well as teach young White girls the wonderful aspects of islam! So, yes, DO bring in hundreds of thousands, maybe a few MILLION more of these highly respectable, well-educated contributors to British society. What could POSSIBLY go wrong?????

Blackthorne

Well said Douglas. The "roar of approval" from the QT audience was rather like the Germans holding up welcome banners for Syrian immigrants.

Reality is now sinking in for the Germans. Unfortunately the blind idiots of QT are still floating in the slime of their self-accredited compassion, which clouds their vision. Meanwhile, young girls, British Jews, and terrorist victims are paying a heavy price.

I hope I live long enough to see the tide turn.

With technology displacing labor at a high and rapidly increasing rate and government debt growing without bound why are open borders and massive immigration by low and unskilled immigrants a good thing for the US economy? Why are these people good for the US economy but not good for the economies of their home countries?

Wouldn't it be better for the US and other advanced economies to help the countries that are the sources of all this immigration become better places to live?

Yet again Douglas Murray brilliantly encapsulates the bind we are in. The endless drivel about 'celebrating' multicultural 'diversity',compounded by leftist,liberal hypocrisy which condemns legitimate critical discussion of Islam as 'islamaphobic and 'othering' whilst facilitating the rapid growth in the West of the most othering of all ideologies, namely fundamentalist Islam.

This entire fable re illegals seems to have developed a life of its own. It is shameful in the extreme when decent people in England find theselves bullied into accepting the dross of other nations, but in the meantime, the governments of those nations are given a free pass by the leftist lovies for their corruption, incompetent leadership when dumping their excess citizens on other countries.

Under the May government, things have reached a pretty pass as she foot drags the Brexit agreement to a near halt, swans about doing little to appease the indigenous population while not much seems to happen when these illegal misfits are caught in the act of their reign of error and the BBC and other 'news organisations' drip feed the public a steady diet of bubkes as to the reasons why they want to slaughter the people of England. The patience of the nation wears thin, and if history is to be the barometer of a people who are at their wit's end, then perhaps it is beyond time Maybe May pulled her finger out and acted like a leader. Or not.

It appears we citizens are all, each nation seemingly, fighting for our countries' survival....a fight that seemed doomed in the US before Trump's miraculous election considering the mass media is owned by globalists and the democrat-infused FCC was intent on cleansing the internet of populist opposition pre-Trump. We now appear to have a chance.
Sadly that chance in europe and GB may have passed with the recent elections in france, germany, netherlands, sweden. the people have little chance when the media is so controlled.

The age of immigration is over. We are in a different world with travel and communications accessible to hundreds of millions of people. Immigration was necessary and useful when jobs were available and it was beneficial for the economy. Today in the European Union the free movement of people provides all the jobs available and there are still twenty million europeans out of work in an age when robots will fulfill many tasks. There is therefore no need for immigrants from overseas however harsh it may seem unless they have special talents. Migration has now become a criminal industry with millions claiming asylum or refugee status without justification or simply seeking a better life in the US, Australia or Europe which is simply not possible without creating serious social problems in our own societies as we are seeing in so many towns and cities. If we are supposed to live in countries where the rule of law applies, illegal immigration cannot be accepted and all illegal migrants must be returned to their own countries. The UN should make it mandatory for refugees or asylum seekers to find a safe country on the same continent and not cross the world. Each country has to take responsibility for its own citizens. In the case of the USA dreamers there is a case for granting them permanent resident status or nationality but that is where it must end. On our planet soon to have ten billion human beings, the rich nations and the U N have to find ways to improve the living standards of the hundreds of millions of people in the poor countries if we expect peace and prosperity for our children. I have said this many times already

Unfortunately, the sad problem is that most people act first and think later. Not all people are the same, or act the same. Giving people too much credit, believing that they will do the right thing — is stupid. It so happens that many people are normal, educated and civil, while many others, especially nowadays are acting like barbarians. It is sad but true and, I think, it is also too late. Europe is full of barbarian who are taking over most of the continent. Thank you Douglas Murray and Gatestone.

Naturally with a media outlet as openly biased as the BBC, broadcasting the "learned" opinion of a person emanating from the fantasy world of Hollywood script writing makes perfect sense. Anyone living in the UK who possess at least one reasonable eye and ear coupled to the semblance of a brain might have noticed just how over-crowded this tiny island is. One can without effort observe the huge acreages of farm land and meadow land that have disappeared under "developments" of housing and industrial estates. One can during drives in what were country areas of the UK note the disappearance of woodlands and other natural areas at an alarming rate. Leaving aside the cultural and religious differences of these masses of African, Asian and Middle Eastern "migrants" there is simply no more room in the UK. The primary reason why these Third World migrants want to come to the west is caused simply by their own culture of polygamy and breeding way beyond the resources in their native lands. Presumably the BBC and its avid supporters will only be happy when the UK descends, through over-population, to the level of a typical African country.

This article is so correct. When the audience is chosen for programmes such as "Question Time", they tend to be taken from a certain element of the local community and in many ways are not representative of the wider area. There are many, many in Britain who don't want to accept the illegals gathering in Calais. Unfortunately, the shouts of racist whenever anyone offers an alternative opinion frightens the BBC so they carefully vet the audience. There have been occasions when individuals have been removed from the studio for not fitting in and following the agenda, most of which is stipulated by the leftists within the organisation. It all comes down to licencing in the end, and the BBC would never do anything to jeopardise their position on that. Cowardice? Yes. Criminal? Yes, Treacherous? Yes. But that is the BBC in today's world. Totally PC and compliant with the Governments rulings, and fear of a terror attack by the very people they defend. If you were to ask the people on the streets if they wanted illegal immigrants in the country, an overwhelming number would say no, but the media and government are in complete denial of this. Political Correctness is ruining this country daily and no one in Government or the media has the courage to say it as it is. It is something for the US to think about. Would they really like to see Muslim women in the full veiled black crow outfit working in the stores in their cities, or within the Government? Would they like them in their schools and universities? Well, rest assured, that won't happen! In fact, it is the main reason they wear such garb, they want to become unemployable and so will stay home and produce children. The Governments across Europe, and in particular Britain, have finally seen through this ploy, but they still allow many of them to sit at home and collect their welfare handouts. Europe has an extremely bleak and uncertain future, and it will soon affect the US too.

Exactly! Thank you! Well said!