Migrant invasion of Europe
📄 Rendered from the archive database (the original static capture of this page wasn't kept). Content is complete; styling is simplified.
mikado · 2015-09-18 05:04:00 · #1676
I am very pissed that they would allow people who emigrates without even being really in danger to get welfare whereas folks like me came in France after proving our credentials in studies, paying our way here, paying taxes, contributing to the society and not getting welfare.
dedocahedron · 2015-09-18 05:05:00 · #1677
Dalaran1991 · 2015-09-18 05:25:00 · #1678
(09-18-2015 05:04 AM)mikado Wrote: I am very pissed that they would allow people who emigrates without even being really in danger to get welfare whereas folks like me came in France after proving our credentials in studies, paying our way here, paying taxes, contributing to the society and not getting welfare.
No shit man, I said this a few pages earlier. I came here, worked, studied at The Sorbonne, got a Master Pro, and now I struggle to get an APS to work else I'm not permitted to stay here, and I no longer even have social security.
What incentive do I have to be a good, contributing citizen to this country? I should just join the refugee crowd and get free welfare and 400 euro a month. Right now I pay 600 a month to France.
I love the French culture and heritage, but all the good French people should just leave and let this country burn in hell. Then comeback later to rebuild civilization. I'm so pissed off I dont even mind watching the French leftists roast aflame.
TonySandos · 2015-09-18 05:39:00 · #1679
Here is the latest on US policy regarding the Syria campaign. It's both hopeful and frightening. You can only guess at the true motivation for the change of heart.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/original...isis.html#
Congress rethinks anti-Assad stance
A growing number of Democratic lawmakers are openly questioning whether toppling Syria's Bashar al-Assad should still be a priority amid steady gains by the Islamic State.
The issue came to a head Sept. 16 as a key Senate panel held its first IS hearing since the first batch of 54 US-trained rebels was routed in late July by al-Qaeda-linked Jabhat al-Nusra as soon as it entered Syria. Reports that Russia is beefing up Assad's forces with tanks, troops and artillery has only added to the calls of some Democrats for a new strategy.
"I don't know that it helps for us to keep banging the table about Assad," panel member Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., told Al-Monitor. "I think it would be better for us to be as effective as possible in fighting [IS] and restoring some kind of security environment that shifts back the flow of refugees."
Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, D-N.H., shared similar misgivings.
Remember how McCaskill has been ripping the military apart with SJW campaigns and war hawking out the other side of her mouth?
"I think we've come to a point where we should be reassessing what our strategy [should be] with respect to Assad and Syria and the conflict there," she said. "I don't have the answer on me about what I think that should be, but I really think we're at a point where we need to reassess, because what we've been doing is not working."
Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., said he's worried about the "void" left by Assad's removal in the absence of any viable moderate opposition.
"Who are you going to replace him with? What are you going to do? Leave a void?" he told Al-Monitor. "That hasn't worked with Saddam [Hussein] or with [Moammar] Gadhafi. It's a royal, royal mess, and we're just throwing more money at it and making it messier."
And Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., cautioned against open calls for toppling Assad. Instead, he has backed the creation of humanitarian safe zones for civilians brutalized by the regime's barrel bombs as well as Islamist extremists.
"I don't think regime change should be an official policy of the United States," Kaine said. "Our batting record is very poor."
The growing angst follows repeated assurances by the Barack Obama administration that Assad "must go" and that his days were "numbered." Four years and more than 200,000 deaths later, the only groups making much progress on the ground appear to be IS and other extremist militant groups.
During the hearing, McCaskill warned Gen. Lloyd Austin, commander of the US Central Command, that the Pentagon's $600 million request for the train-and-equip program for the fiscal year starting Oct. 1 "seems very unrealistic to me." Austin didn't help his case when he admitted that only "four or five" US-trained rebels — out of 5,400 the Obama administration had hoped to train by year's end with the $500 million appropriated last year — were currently fighting in Syria.
Defense spending bills in the House and Senate set aside $600 million and $531.5 million for the program over the next two years, respectively, but that was before the extent of the program's failure was known. The House-passed defense policy bill, meanwhile, calls for setting aside $531 million for the program in FY 2016.
Shaheen agreed with McCaskill that the program is in jeopardy.
"I do think it will be challenging to continue to support that kind of money," Shaheen told Al-Monitor. "There are other initiatives that have potential to have significant impact, such as efforts to counter [IS] propaganda. There's a center in the UAE [United Arab Emirates] that we've been working with to try and do that; perhaps that's a better place to put those resources."
And McCaskill and Manchin recommended using the money to pay fighters with the Kurdish People's Protection Units (YPG) in Syria. The YPG, which Turkey considers a terrorist group, has increasingly been coordinating with Assad's forces in their joint fight against IS.
"What we ought to do is rethink that $500 million that we've committed, how much we've spent already as far as trying to recruit in Syria," Manchin told Al-Monitor. "Knowing that the Kurds will fight, you can get a much better bang for your buck right there. See if you can back the Turks off from trying to kill the Kurds that are fighting in Syria, and make some peace on that end of it and then you have a united front in terms of a good ground force."
Even Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman John McCain, R-Ariz., a longtime proponent of greater US involvement to counter Assad through no-fly zones and other means, warned that the train-and-equip program was doomed absent "major changes."
McCain has lambasted Russia's full-fledged entry into the fight as proof that President Obama has allowed US foes to gain traction in the Middle East. But others see an opportunity.
One of the biggest war hawks, a man you could comfortably state is one of the main men responsible for instability of the entire Mideast is upset Russia is trying to keep Syria on level ground. I've had more than enough of McCain.
"I would suspect that the reason for the Russian [moves] is the belief that the Assad regime is at least pulling back, and there's some significant instability," Kaine told Al-Monitor. "I don't think they care at all about Assad. I think what they care about is stability. And if that is the case, and they see [Jabhat] al-Nusra and especially [IS] as the same threat that we do, then there are some possibilities there."
Sen. Angus King, I-Maine, agreed. He maintained the need for getting rid of Assad, but said the Obama administration was clearly going about it the wrong way.
"Part of good strategic thinking is that you modify your strategy according to changed circumstances," King told Austin during the hearing. "You mentioned Assad is losing his capabilities every day — I'm sorry, general, I've been hearing that since 2013: Assad is about to go, he's about to collapse. We've got to find a strategy that allows us to move Assad aside in some way, working with the Russians, if necessary, or the Iranians, because he's the irritant that's keeping this thing stirred up."
The comments follow reports that Russia in 2012 offered a compromise that would have seen Assad step down. Western officials have questioned the Kremlin's ability to ever deliver on a proposal that ended up going nowhere.
King went on to embrace McCain's calls for a humanitarian corridor that would be defended against incursions by Assad's air force. Kaine endorsed the idea in an April 21 letter to Obama along with McCain and Sens. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., and Lindsey Graham, R-S.C.
"You would need military support, but I think you would get it," Kaine told Al-Monitor on Sept. 16. "The European nations, I think they would participate in militarily providing safety — with us, with Turkey — to staunch the flow of refugees. You could still have so many more come out of Syria. I actually think that if you do that, and you do it well, that will actually increase the odds of some political resolution of the situation in the country."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/original...isis.html#
Congress rethinks anti-Assad stance
A growing number of Democratic lawmakers are openly questioning whether toppling Syria's Bashar al-Assad should still be a priority amid steady gains by the Islamic State.
The issue came to a head Sept. 16 as a key Senate panel held its first IS hearing since the first batch of 54 US-trained rebels was routed in late July by al-Qaeda-linked Jabhat al-Nusra as soon as it entered Syria. Reports that Russia is beefing up Assad's forces with tanks, troops and artillery has only added to the calls of some Democrats for a new strategy.
"I don't know that it helps for us to keep banging the table about Assad," panel member Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., told Al-Monitor. "I think it would be better for us to be as effective as possible in fighting [IS] and restoring some kind of security environment that shifts back the flow of refugees."
Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, D-N.H., shared similar misgivings.
Remember how McCaskill has been ripping the military apart with SJW campaigns and war hawking out the other side of her mouth?
"I think we've come to a point where we should be reassessing what our strategy [should be] with respect to Assad and Syria and the conflict there," she said. "I don't have the answer on me about what I think that should be, but I really think we're at a point where we need to reassess, because what we've been doing is not working."
Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., said he's worried about the "void" left by Assad's removal in the absence of any viable moderate opposition.
"Who are you going to replace him with? What are you going to do? Leave a void?" he told Al-Monitor. "That hasn't worked with Saddam [Hussein] or with [Moammar] Gadhafi. It's a royal, royal mess, and we're just throwing more money at it and making it messier."
And Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., cautioned against open calls for toppling Assad. Instead, he has backed the creation of humanitarian safe zones for civilians brutalized by the regime's barrel bombs as well as Islamist extremists.
"I don't think regime change should be an official policy of the United States," Kaine said. "Our batting record is very poor."
The growing angst follows repeated assurances by the Barack Obama administration that Assad "must go" and that his days were "numbered." Four years and more than 200,000 deaths later, the only groups making much progress on the ground appear to be IS and other extremist militant groups.
During the hearing, McCaskill warned Gen. Lloyd Austin, commander of the US Central Command, that the Pentagon's $600 million request for the train-and-equip program for the fiscal year starting Oct. 1 "seems very unrealistic to me." Austin didn't help his case when he admitted that only "four or five" US-trained rebels — out of 5,400 the Obama administration had hoped to train by year's end with the $500 million appropriated last year — were currently fighting in Syria.
Defense spending bills in the House and Senate set aside $600 million and $531.5 million for the program over the next two years, respectively, but that was before the extent of the program's failure was known. The House-passed defense policy bill, meanwhile, calls for setting aside $531 million for the program in FY 2016.
Shaheen agreed with McCaskill that the program is in jeopardy.
"I do think it will be challenging to continue to support that kind of money," Shaheen told Al-Monitor. "There are other initiatives that have potential to have significant impact, such as efforts to counter [IS] propaganda. There's a center in the UAE [United Arab Emirates] that we've been working with to try and do that; perhaps that's a better place to put those resources."
And McCaskill and Manchin recommended using the money to pay fighters with the Kurdish People's Protection Units (YPG) in Syria. The YPG, which Turkey considers a terrorist group, has increasingly been coordinating with Assad's forces in their joint fight against IS.
"What we ought to do is rethink that $500 million that we've committed, how much we've spent already as far as trying to recruit in Syria," Manchin told Al-Monitor. "Knowing that the Kurds will fight, you can get a much better bang for your buck right there. See if you can back the Turks off from trying to kill the Kurds that are fighting in Syria, and make some peace on that end of it and then you have a united front in terms of a good ground force."
Even Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman John McCain, R-Ariz., a longtime proponent of greater US involvement to counter Assad through no-fly zones and other means, warned that the train-and-equip program was doomed absent "major changes."
McCain has lambasted Russia's full-fledged entry into the fight as proof that President Obama has allowed US foes to gain traction in the Middle East. But others see an opportunity.
One of the biggest war hawks, a man you could comfortably state is one of the main men responsible for instability of the entire Mideast is upset Russia is trying to keep Syria on level ground. I've had more than enough of McCain.
"I would suspect that the reason for the Russian [moves] is the belief that the Assad regime is at least pulling back, and there's some significant instability," Kaine told Al-Monitor. "I don't think they care at all about Assad. I think what they care about is stability. And if that is the case, and they see [Jabhat] al-Nusra and especially [IS] as the same threat that we do, then there are some possibilities there."
Sen. Angus King, I-Maine, agreed. He maintained the need for getting rid of Assad, but said the Obama administration was clearly going about it the wrong way.
"Part of good strategic thinking is that you modify your strategy according to changed circumstances," King told Austin during the hearing. "You mentioned Assad is losing his capabilities every day — I'm sorry, general, I've been hearing that since 2013: Assad is about to go, he's about to collapse. We've got to find a strategy that allows us to move Assad aside in some way, working with the Russians, if necessary, or the Iranians, because he's the irritant that's keeping this thing stirred up."
The comments follow reports that Russia in 2012 offered a compromise that would have seen Assad step down. Western officials have questioned the Kremlin's ability to ever deliver on a proposal that ended up going nowhere.
King went on to embrace McCain's calls for a humanitarian corridor that would be defended against incursions by Assad's air force. Kaine endorsed the idea in an April 21 letter to Obama along with McCain and Sens. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., and Lindsey Graham, R-S.C.
"You would need military support, but I think you would get it," Kaine told Al-Monitor on Sept. 16. "The European nations, I think they would participate in militarily providing safety — with us, with Turkey — to staunch the flow of refugees. You could still have so many more come out of Syria. I actually think that if you do that, and you do it well, that will actually increase the odds of some political resolution of the situation in the country."
Roosh · 2015-09-18 06:03:00 · #1680
(09-18-2015 05:04 AM)mikado Wrote: I am very pissed that they would allow people who emigrates without even being really in danger to get welfare whereas folks like me came in France after proving our credentials in studies, paying our way here, paying taxes, contributing to the society and not getting welfare.
My mom is an immigrant and she told me she's against it too for the same reason. "I came to the USA legally and I worked." SJW's will be for this invasion more strongly than legal immigrants.
Teedub · 2015-09-18 06:18:00 · #1681
(09-17-2015 05:57 PM)Nineteen84 Wrote:(09-17-2015 05:42 PM)tom Wrote:(09-17-2015 05:39 PM)rudebwoy Wrote: http://www.businessinsider.com/us-russia...ria-2015-9
USA and Russia arguing over Syria.
What the hell is in Syria?
An israeli border & Mediterranean ports
also : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran-Iraq-Syria_pipeline
Words can't describe how mad I am after reading this article. Here's a taster:
Quote:Editor’s note: This article has been updated to reflect recent Wikileaks revelations of US State Department leaks that show plans to destabilize Syria and overthrow the Syrian government as early as 2006. The leaks reveal that these plans were given to the US directly from the Israeli government and would be formalized through instigating civil strife and sectarianism through partnership with nations like Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Qatar and even Egypt to break down the power structue in Syria to essentially to weaken Iran and Hezbolla. The leaks also reveal Israeli plans to use this crisis to expand it’s occupation of the Golan Heights for additional oil exploration and military expansion.
No wonder Roosh is in trouble with the ADL.
An amazing article, that. Those fanatical Sunni's in Saudi too, they're hardline religious half the time and ruthless corporate-globalists the other.
In a perfect world, Russia and Assad would annihilate those two, but it would cause WW3.
As for the US, I'm not surprised some Americans in this thread are beyond angry. Then again, if they weren't doing this stuff, someone else would be. Is it ruthless capitalism to be blamed? Is it corporatism? I don't know. The migrant situation might be left wing, but all this oil shit isn't. Like I said, globalism v people.
We somehow need to move away from oil, as it's going to cause nothing but misery for a long time to come.
Patriarch · 2015-09-18 06:34:00 · #1682
(09-18-2015 05:05 AM)dedocahedron Wrote:(09-18-2015 04:45 AM)Sweet Pea Wrote:(09-18-2015 04:30 AM)LÉtranger Wrote: I will just leave this here:
[img]http://i.imgur.com/JsQsKEe.png[img]
Wait, are the red or white countries where special forces operate? Assuming white?
Absolutely. Russia and China are full of US bases.
I guess you were trying to be funny, but Russia is white and China is red.
Foolsgo1d · 2015-09-18 06:42:00 · #1683
Quote:As for the US, I'm not surprised some Americans in this thread are beyond angry. Then again, if they weren't doing this stuff, someone else would be. Is it ruthless capitalism to be blamed? Is it corporatism? I don't know. The migrant situation might be left wing, but all this oil shit isn't. Like I said, globalism v people.
Who else would be doing this if not the USA?
Russia and China would simply agree trade and arms deals, military support, training and aid. China has encroached on Asia to the distaste of every other country and yet not a single bullet has been fired.
China has invested in Russia, Africa and the US without a single bomb dropped. They have a massive populace with iron clad social influence.
Russia pacified a neighbour because it was being attacked and that was that. No "war on terror" campaign that lasted more than a decade costing thousands of lives and billions in lost money.
Meanwhile the USA has an ally which itself has antagonised an entire region since its inception and to this day conducts covert and overt operations to crush any opposition.
The US interest groups strike me as people who undermine others to further their own goals and be damned with the consequences.
dedocahedron · 2015-09-18 06:43:00 · #1684
(09-18-2015 06:34 AM)Sweet Pea Wrote:(09-18-2015 05:05 AM)dedocahedron Wrote:(09-18-2015 04:45 AM)Sweet Pea Wrote:(09-18-2015 04:30 AM)LÉtranger Wrote: I will just leave this here:
[img]http://i.imgur.com/JsQsKEe.png[img]
Wait, are the red or white countries where special forces operate? Assuming white?
Absolutely. Russia and China are full of US bases.
I guess you were trying to be funny, but Russia is white and China is red.
I dont know you figure it out man. Im sure China is a US base haven.
TonySandos · 2015-09-18 06:43:00 · #1685
I know of graduate students working on plankton as fuel source. There are other options, yes, but removing oil altogether may also lead to violence in Mideast nations when their main exports are gone.
We need a moratorium in the USA to bring a lot of current govt. up on war crimes, treason and corruption. Someone else's leaders may continue the cycle, yet NATO interventionism under feel good guidelines is leading the march on hubris. We could stand to operate more like Russia.
We need a moratorium in the USA to bring a lot of current govt. up on war crimes, treason and corruption. Someone else's leaders may continue the cycle, yet NATO interventionism under feel good guidelines is leading the march on hubris. We could stand to operate more like Russia.
CrashBangWallop · 2015-09-18 06:45:00 · #1686
(09-18-2015 06:43 AM)dedocahedron Wrote:(09-18-2015 06:34 AM)Sweet Pea Wrote:(09-18-2015 05:05 AM)dedocahedron Wrote:(09-18-2015 04:45 AM)Sweet Pea Wrote:(09-18-2015 04:30 AM)LÉtranger Wrote: I will just leave this here:
[img]http://i.imgur.com/JsQsKEe.png[img]
Wait, are the red or white countries where special forces operate? Assuming white?
Absolutely. Russia and China are full of US bases.
I guess you were trying to be funny, but Russia is white and China is red.
I dont know you figure it out man. Im sure China is a US base haven.
Hey buddy, this is your 4th post and half of those have been sarcastic bullshit.
This is a serious discussion.
johnfortunebg · 2015-09-18 06:49:00 · #1687
(09-18-2015 06:42 AM)Foolsgo1d Wrote: The US interest groups strike me as people who undermine others to further their own goals and be damned with the consequences.
The fact that <2% of the US population can dictate the agenda of the Repiblican debate (when the majority of those <2% do not even vote Republican) can tell you a lot about exactly how 'democratic' the political process is in the West.
Can you imagine a referendum on the current migration invasion with the following options:
a) Accept all
b) Accept only proven refugees from Syria and accept them temporarily
c) Return all to safe ME countries without access to our welfare system
Does anyone honestly believe that option a) will get more than 10% of the vote?
The majority in every nation (I am even willing to include Sweden here) will vote for b, with a significant minority (20-30%) chosing option c).
Yet, in our current 'democratic' political system we will most likely get a combination of a) and b) with some ineffective checks introduced, some people returned and some refugees returning to ME when the situation improves. I am willing to bet ~50% will stay in EU and mooch on welfare forever (until money run out and there is chaos, that is).
The Beast1 · 2015-09-18 06:53:00 · #1688
(09-18-2015 06:43 AM)TonySandos Wrote: I know of graduate students working on plankton as fuel source. There are other options, yes, but removing oil altogether may also lead to violence in Mideast nations when their main exports are gone.
We need a moratorium in the USA to bring a lot of current govt. up on war crimes, treason and corruption. Someone else's leaders may continue the cycle, yet NATO interventionism under feel good guidelines is leading the march on hubris. We could stand to operate more like Russia.
This was mentioned elsewhere on this forum but I still feel it speaks true.
Oil is nothing more than 3rd world welfare. If the US and Europe discovered a means to power themselves without it, the entire middle east would descend into chaos. Seriously what else does the sandbox have?
Nothing would make me happier than seeing Saudi Arabia and its "royal family" gutted from its angry citizenry.
mikado · 2015-09-18 06:58:00 · #1689
(09-18-2015 05:25 AM)Dalaran1991 Wrote:(09-18-2015 05:04 AM)mikado Wrote: I am very pissed that they would allow people who emigrates without even being really in danger to get welfare whereas folks like me came in France after proving our credentials in studies, paying our way here, paying taxes, contributing to the society and not getting welfare.
No shit man, I said this a few pages earlier. I came here, worked, studied at The Sorbonne, got a Master Pro, and now I struggle to get an APS to work else I'm not permitted to stay here, and I no longer even have social security.
What incentive do I have to be a good, contributing citizen to this country? I should just join the refugee crowd and get free welfare and 400 euro a month. Right now I pay 600 a month to France.
I love the French culture and heritage, but all the good French people should just leave and let this country burn in hell. Then comeback later to rebuild civilization. I'm so pissed off I dont even mind watching the French leftists roast aflame.
600 euros a month? Shit. That's a lot of money. I feel you.
However do you think it will get better for legal foreigners with Marine le Pen at the Elysée? I am not so sure about that...
If you want I can suggest you something for the APS issue via PM.
(09-18-2015 06:03 AM)Roosh Wrote:(09-18-2015 05:04 AM)mikado Wrote: I am very pissed that they would allow people who emigrates without even being really in danger to get welfare whereas folks like me came in France after proving our credentials in studies, paying our way here, paying taxes, contributing to the society and not getting welfare.
My mom is an immigrant and she told me she's against it too for the same reason. "I came to the USA legally and I worked." SJW's will be for this invasion more strongly than legal immigrants.
Basically, the more precarious your situation as a former immigrant is, the more the odds you vote for the left increase. Ironically, I did an interview once with a leftist girl of a journalism school about Charlie Hebdo. I basically gave her a red pill view of the multiculturalism, religion issues, entitlement of people of foreign origin in France, and though she promised I would be featured on her article, I finally wasn't. On the contrary, foreign guys who just harboured the leftist flag on "tolerance, being open-minded, accepting all religions etc etc" had their say.
I don't care about people who do not have legal papers. Prove your worth and ask for a visa at your embassy, like I did.
Handsome Creepy Eel · 2015-09-18 07:00:00 · #1690
In his conference at 12, our PM Zoran Milanović said the following:
- Croatia has showed a big heart
- Croatia will now also show that it has a brain by 'demanding answers from EU' and 'closing borders', but 'it will never build a fence'
The question of what exactly the EU is going to do and how a border is closed without a fence is conveniently left unanswered. Right now there is a massive traffic jam at the Croatia-Serbia border, with all legal citizens prevented from entering. However, the illegal immigrants are just entering on foot as little as 500m away from the border crossing, and no one is stopping them.
What a country! What a cuck! I really hope he goes on trial for treason someday.
- Croatia has showed a big heart
- Croatia will now also show that it has a brain by 'demanding answers from EU' and 'closing borders', but 'it will never build a fence'
The question of what exactly the EU is going to do and how a border is closed without a fence is conveniently left unanswered. Right now there is a massive traffic jam at the Croatia-Serbia border, with all legal citizens prevented from entering. However, the illegal immigrants are just entering on foot as little as 500m away from the border crossing, and no one is stopping them.
What a country! What a cuck! I really hope he goes on trial for treason someday.
Handsome Creepy Eel · 2015-09-18 07:02:00 · #1691
Quote:However do you think it will get better for legal foreigners with Marine le Pen at the Elysée? I am not so sure about that...
I am also not sure, but what option is left? You just have to risk it and hope that they're reasonable about legal immigration, otherwise you'll be in for a lot more trouble once something even more extreme gets to power.
(09-18-2015 07:02 AM)Handsome Creepy Eel Wrote:Quote:However do you think it will get better for legal foreigners with Marine le Pen at the Elysée? I am not so sure about that...
I am also not sure, but what option is left? You just have to risk it and hope that they're reasonable about legal immigration, otherwise you'll be in for a lot more trouble once something even more extreme gets to power.
Could you elaborate on that? Is she that bad? I've seen a couple of her speeches and interviews and usually very much liked what she had to say. Didn't seem to be that extreme, but maybe I've only seen her moderate side?
Samseau · 2015-09-18 07:19:00 · #1693
(09-18-2015 07:02 AM)Handsome Creepy Eel Wrote:Quote:However do you think it will get better for legal foreigners with Marine le Pen at the Elysée? I am not so sure about that...
I am also not sure, but what option is left? You just have to risk it and hope that they're reasonable about legal immigration, otherwise you'll be in for a lot more trouble once something even more extreme gets to power.
Which is worse... Marine Le Pen, or full-scale economic collapse caused by excessive exploitation of the welfare system?
By the way I doubt Le Pen would do anything to legal immigrants. Why would she make even more enemies?
Libertas · 2015-09-18 07:50:00 · #1694
Don't think Le Pen particularly cares about making enemies at this point. She's basically the Donald Trump of France if a bit more subdued and shrewd, which makes her better in my opinion.
I don't think she's said anything about the legal immigrants already there, but would deport illegals and drastically reduce legal immigration, which is basically what the people in France want.
And while it's certainly good news that people in Washington are now beginning to reassess the "Assad has to go" mantra, the blindness and incompetence of Washington tells me that nothing substantive will be done anytime soon.
Oil won't be going anywhere anytime soon unfortunately. It's simply far too energy dense and provides too much of an EROI, which is why so-called alternative energies have been much ballyhooed for a generation but have not made any noticeable impact at all. Even the so-called fracking boom in the US is drying up because ~$50 a barrel oil puts the producers out of business and the EROI is relatively poor.
To truly get off of oil we need a massive investment in fusion power, but that isn't going to be happening and won't come online until the middle of the century, at earliest. In other words, expect the Instagram-whore-shitting-on Sheiks to have considerable power for some time.
I don't think she's said anything about the legal immigrants already there, but would deport illegals and drastically reduce legal immigration, which is basically what the people in France want.
And while it's certainly good news that people in Washington are now beginning to reassess the "Assad has to go" mantra, the blindness and incompetence of Washington tells me that nothing substantive will be done anytime soon.
Oil won't be going anywhere anytime soon unfortunately. It's simply far too energy dense and provides too much of an EROI, which is why so-called alternative energies have been much ballyhooed for a generation but have not made any noticeable impact at all. Even the so-called fracking boom in the US is drying up because ~$50 a barrel oil puts the producers out of business and the EROI is relatively poor.
To truly get off of oil we need a massive investment in fusion power, but that isn't going to be happening and won't come online until the middle of the century, at earliest. In other words, expect the Instagram-whore-shitting-on Sheiks to have considerable power for some time.
mikado · 2015-09-18 07:56:00 · #1695
This is the program of the Front National about immigration (taken from their webpage)
– Legal immigration going in 5 years from 200 000 people entering every year (supposedly) to 10 000 (a factor cut of 20) (This is your answer, Samseau).
– Suppression of the family reunification. Basically you can't have your family come to France to be with you, even though you are working here.
– Drastically reducing the number of asylum seekers admitted to stay in France
– Suppressing Schengen. France will take back the control of its borders.
– Reducing the maximal length of residence permit from 10 to 3 years with a strict control of the conditions to get it. (Isn't this way too drastic, Samseau?)
– Renegociating the European Convention on Human Rights
– Removing the jus solis. Double nationality not allowed, except when it's the nationality of another european country.
– Kicking out every person who enters or stays illegally on the french soil. No medical help for clandestine immigrants.
– Making it forbidden by the law to legalize people who are already clandestine.
– Forbiding every single manifestation of clandestines, or in favor of clandestines.
– Anti-French racism will be considered as an aggravated circumstance in every legal case.
– Kicking out every person recognized guilty by the law, and have her serve time in his/her country of origin.
– Application of national priority. When the skills are equal, give the job to french citizens. When renting a flat, house, etc, if the social situation is the same, give it to french people first (really?????). No welfare at all for families who don't have at least one parent who is French
– Creating a minister of the Interior, of Immigration and Secularism. It will give every trimester numbers and stats about how many residence permits were issued, naturalizations granted, and expulsions done.
– Cooperate with African and developing countries only if they agree to do their share about migrations flux and deportations to the home country.
– Ban communautarism and assimilate through school first. Add to the constitution "France does not recognize any community".
While I do agree about the illegal immigration, I think it's way too harsh for legal immigrants.
– Legal immigration going in 5 years from 200 000 people entering every year (supposedly) to 10 000 (a factor cut of 20) (This is your answer, Samseau).
– Suppression of the family reunification. Basically you can't have your family come to France to be with you, even though you are working here.
– Drastically reducing the number of asylum seekers admitted to stay in France
– Suppressing Schengen. France will take back the control of its borders.
– Reducing the maximal length of residence permit from 10 to 3 years with a strict control of the conditions to get it. (Isn't this way too drastic, Samseau?)
– Renegociating the European Convention on Human Rights
– Removing the jus solis. Double nationality not allowed, except when it's the nationality of another european country.
– Kicking out every person who enters or stays illegally on the french soil. No medical help for clandestine immigrants.
– Making it forbidden by the law to legalize people who are already clandestine.
– Forbiding every single manifestation of clandestines, or in favor of clandestines.
– Anti-French racism will be considered as an aggravated circumstance in every legal case.
– Kicking out every person recognized guilty by the law, and have her serve time in his/her country of origin.
– Application of national priority. When the skills are equal, give the job to french citizens. When renting a flat, house, etc, if the social situation is the same, give it to french people first (really?????). No welfare at all for families who don't have at least one parent who is French
– Creating a minister of the Interior, of Immigration and Secularism. It will give every trimester numbers and stats about how many residence permits were issued, naturalizations granted, and expulsions done.
– Cooperate with African and developing countries only if they agree to do their share about migrations flux and deportations to the home country.
– Ban communautarism and assimilate through school first. Add to the constitution "France does not recognize any community".
While I do agree about the illegal immigration, I think it's way too harsh for legal immigrants.
Zelcorpion · 2015-09-18 08:15:00 · #1696
(09-18-2015 05:25 AM)Dalaran1991 Wrote: I love the French culture and heritage, but all the good French people should just leave and let this country burn in hell. Then comeback later to rebuild civilization. I'm so pissed off I dont even mind watching the French leftists roast aflame.
You mean - like this guy has done:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnew...rance.html
Quote:Actor Gérard Depardieu to 'sell everything' in France
![[Image: article-2257940-16C690F2000005DC-462_638x564.jpg]](http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/01/06/article-2257940-16C690F2000005DC-462_638x564.jpg)
He is doing the right thing - orgies with teenage Russian girls and single digit taxes.
If you have cash and and are an older man there is probably no better country to live in than Russia. I know personally guys who spent every bloody weekend being flown with a helicopter to a dacza where already 20 cute naked happy enthusiastic girls were waiting for the 2-day-orgy. (Guy was a commodities trader for a rich Russian bloke and the mini-oligarch was treating his best employees to a weekly pussy buffet - of course he was taking part in the orgy too - the Russians know how to live.)
He should just lose some weight or he won't live long enough to enjoy it.
(09-18-2015 07:56 AM)mikado Wrote: [snip]
Well, I have to admit that some of these points do seem a little drastic, but that is probably due to me having lived in a society for too long that just spends its wealth on foreigners.
These proposals do what a government should be doing: putting the own people first. If you don't like their immigration policies, then just don't move there. You seem to like it better in your country - that's fine.
It's actually a pretty plausible no-BS approach that I would much prefer over our German system. A good friend of mine is second-generation immigrant and he knows a lot of other foreigners in his circles. He mentioned some of them receive welfare here while building a house in their home country. Fuck that shit. We have laws to be cucked.
The UAEs are doing the same thing: Their residents come first. If the foreigners want to come work there under shitty conditions, that's fine, but they come there knowing that they will not be living off of the society's support system which was established for the people who actually grew up there, contributing to this system all their lives and for generations past.
TheSlayer · 2015-09-18 08:23:00 · #1698
(09-18-2015 06:03 AM)Roosh Wrote:(09-18-2015 05:04 AM)mikado Wrote: I am very pissed that they would allow people who emigrates without even being really in danger to get welfare whereas folks like me came in France after proving our credentials in studies, paying our way here, paying taxes, contributing to the society and not getting welfare.
My mom is an immigrant and she told me she's against it too for the same reason. "I came to the USA legally and I worked." SJW's will be for this invasion more strongly than legal immigrants.
I'd wager most legal immigrants (minus the ones that become SJWs themselves) don't agree with illegal immigration/and or this type of mass migration where people can just pick up their bags and enter whatever country they like.
Dalaran1991 · 2015-09-18 08:25:00 · #1699
Mikado got it right. Dont be surprised guys, in France even right wings / redpill know Le Pen to be nut and fascist about the "purity of the French race" Kinda ironic because of how unpure it has become lately...
In a nutshell, Le Pen administration would make France very unwelcoming for legal foreigners and downright hostile for illegal immigrants (which is good) There was a bill in France before stating that employers are not allowed to hire foreigners if there are French people of the same skills.
Given the current crisis though, she would still be "the Devil you know", or the better Devil.
It will probably make France a country hostile to foreigners, maybe even hated, but at least it will still be France, with history and culture and good food. With the current system and crisis the France we know and love will be destroyed.
In a nutshell, Le Pen administration would make France very unwelcoming for legal foreigners and downright hostile for illegal immigrants (which is good) There was a bill in France before stating that employers are not allowed to hire foreigners if there are French people of the same skills.
Given the current crisis though, she would still be "the Devil you know", or the better Devil.
It will probably make France a country hostile to foreigners, maybe even hated, but at least it will still be France, with history and culture and good food. With the current system and crisis the France we know and love will be destroyed.
Going strong · 2015-09-18 08:26:00 · #1700
(09-18-2015 06:34 AM)Sweet Pea Wrote:(09-18-2015 05:05 AM)dedocahedron Wrote: ......
Absolutely. Russia and China are full of US bases.
I guess you were trying to be funny, but Russia is white and China is red.
Russia white and China red, how appropriate, by the way... White Russian partisans and Red Chinese maoists...
...
Meanwhile in France, an Erythrean migrant (infected with AIDS and tuberculosis) living (free of charge) in a "refugees center", has just sexually assaulted a 10 years-old girl, then tried to rape the SJW director of the refugees-center.
He got taken into custody, to the police station of Saint-Pol-Sur-Mer, with 8 policemen having to restrain him.
He spit on a policewoman, who currently is getting medically checked for tuberculosis and stuff... He then got freed, after his standard 48 hours of police jail, by a SJW judge!
As soon as he got freed, what did he fucking do?? He came back to the refugee center and tried to rape the... vice-director of the center...
He got arrested again, by ten French policemen. Another judge has been assigned to the case...
So, this is incredible, isn't it?
I mean, if any White or Asian or even non-illegal Black person, were to try to rape a girl in the street, then a female director of a refugee-hostel (and later on, rape her vice-director as well, fucking dude is horny as hell), then spit on the police and violently resist arrest, you would get 15 years in jail.
He just got 2 days of police questioning, and was freed right away, by a leftist judge...
This totally illustrates the threat posed by the walking time-bombs we let enter our continent. Physically powerful men, with no hope for money, no status, no ability to game Western women (a skill they never learned), a lot of kept-up rage and despair... such threats to our societies!!
So anyway, these last weeks, we've had lots of "strange, unexplained" cases of young girls and young women, assaulted all over France... and the media has been hiding the perps' identities
, with the help of Justice officials, who right away send these foreign perps to mental institutions (thus avoiding public trials and scrutiny)...This last crime spree with the Erythrean African, has been published only because the media is a provincial one, no Parisian media would publish it. And anyway, hurry up if you want to read the article online, it will probably be modified soon, to remove references to the Erythrean migrant...
http://www.lavoixdunord.fr/region/saint-...18n3048323
"Mercredi 9 septembre, un ressortissant érythréen hébergé au foyer Adoma de Saint-Pol-sur-Mer a tenté d’agresser sexuellement une fillette de 10 ans qui marchait dans la rue, à proximité du foyer. La fillette a réussi à s’échapper, puis a appelé la police. L’individu est alors retourné au foyer, où il a agressé la directrice, tentant de l’entraîner de force dans sa chambre, là encore pour obtenir des faveurs sexuelles. L’homme a été placé en garde à vue puis finalement libéré vendredi soir.
Le mis en cause, qui a contracté le sida et se trouve en phase terminale, atteint de surcroît de la tuberculose, avait violemment pris à partie la police, lui crachant dessus. Huit fonctionnaires avaient été nécessaires pour le maîtriser. Comme il est ressorti libre de sa garde à vue, mardi vers 13 h, l’individu est retourné au foyer Adoma. Cette fois, il a agressé la sous-directrice selon le même mode opératoire. Il a de nouveau été interpellé avec beaucoup de précaution, au regard de son état d’agressivité et de sa situation sanitaire, puis placé en garde à vue. La justice statuera sur son sort ce jeudi."