A video from a couple of years ago has been doing the rounds. The maker spotted a whole flotilla of inflated RIBs at Dover, each one with an official label showing that it had come ashore stocked with illegal immigrants.
Suspicious, he hung around until a large articulated truck arrived, and loaded them up (still inflated). He then tracked it to the docks (through the number plate – an old trick but quite effective) and found it was bound back to France on the cross-channel ferry. One viewer was able to ascertain that on the day in question, that particular logistics truck was chartered by H.M. Government.
Yes, it is hard to avoid the conclusion that the Government was (and probably still is) using our tax money to recycle migrant dinghies back to the gangs, for further loads of the unregistered aliens they’re ostensibly trying to stop. That rather explains why, as far as one can tell, the simple preventive expedient for the French authorities of sticking a knife into the dinghies as they load has only, apparently, been done once for the cameras, and why it seems impossible for governments Labour or Conservative to stem the flow of illegals even slightly, or to follow the simple techniques of one G.B. News reporter to track down the traffickers so they can, according to stated policy, be “smashed.”
Two videos I saw today on YouTube confirm that uncontrolled borders are actually a policy of Western governments, and a lucrative source of income for many NGOs and private operators, the cash coming both from unsuspecting taxpayers and from the miserable buggers being trafficked and exploited as international policy.
The first video, an interview with a US reporter from Epoch Times, was the result of his poking his nose around the southern US border, and the countries further south. He discovered that mass migration was actually an agreement (but not a treaty, so as not to require Congressional endorsement), signed by President Obama in his last months in office. This deal, ostensibly to oil the wheels of the “inevitable” climate change migrations the great and good were predicting, involved all the Western countries, including Britain, and the U.N.
This explains why the reporter found the first arrival points for immigrants from around the world are large camps, where they are processed by U.N. staff before being bussed onwards by NGOs, whose identities are not divulged even to the mayors of the towns where the camps are. When these official (tax subsidised) NGOs and charities run out of road, the migrants are passed on the the infamous cartels to be robbed, raped, and, if they survive, dumped on the U.S. border after all their paperwork has been shredded to fool American immigration controls.
Until President Trump shook things up, a mixture of anonymous NGOs and unmarked private operators then took them on to their destination of choice and made sure they got lost in the crowd. The fact that this was the implementation of an agreement which, whilst not exactly secret, was certainly unknown to nearly everyone in the States, explains pretty well everything about why the issue has proved so intractable.
The second video was English and the result of prolonged and much-obstructed FOI requests. It named a number of the NGOs participating in, and profiting from, the movement and accommodation of illegals, all with funding links to government and international organisations like the United Nations. Once one has realised the illegal immigration program is an official policy, all this becomes far more comprehensible. It is the same gravy-train whose exposure, in the Mediterranean immigrant industry, got Katie Hopkins cancelled and bankrupted a few years ago.
Of course, what such revelations don’t explain, in any way whatsoever, is why elected governments have been, and continue to be, so secretive about a policy they have all signed up to. The ostensible aims are humanitarian (and the Epoch Times guy, after interviewing many migrants, is convinced they are mostly decent people whose lives have been made nigh-impossible by the misgovernment of their own countries of origin). One might argue that our governments have chosen to forget that they are elected and paid for by their electors to execute the people’s will, not that of NGOs or the UN, because of such dire need – albeit it nothing to do with the climate change that justified the policy. But somehow I doubt that politicians, as a class, are more compassionate than their citizens. Surely the right thing, if they were, would have been to inform us of the parlous state of originating nations, and enlist our democratic support, rather than to tell us immigration is hardly happening, and that they’re successfully stopping it anyway.
But my aim in this piece is to suggest that, however difficult the situation across the world is, mass migration has proved only to make it worse. So it should be reversed. Firstly it is clear that no poor or mismanaged nation has benefited from losing thousands of its people to the West. They remain hell-holes from which the trickles of emigrants has become a cataract.
On the other hand, by every objective measure the host-nations have not benefited the migrants particularly, but have themselves become far more like the hell-holes vomiting out their inhabitants. Think of the tent-cities from Los Angeles to Mayfair. Think of the declining services for health, education, housing and so on across western nations, together with the adverse effect on employment and wages, and therefore on standards of living for all. And think of the social unrest that has caused rioting across Europe, and the success of right-of-centre politicians who have been closing their borders and even expelling immigrants.
It cannot be a good policy to equalise rich and poor nations by turning them all into ill-managed, impoverished conflict zones. It makes no sense for the U.N. and the rest to “benefit” those with no opportunities by facilitating their delivery into the clutches of trafficking gangs which routinely rape, enslave and murder them, after relieving them of their savings. Nor for those migrants who survive to remain in their power through debt, to be resented by the populations whose taxpayers fund them, and still to have no opportunities, and PTSD to boot. And that’s before we remind ourselves that, not only is the industry a cash-cow for sharks both official and criminal, but an opportunity for radicals to exploit the system to build up militant militias to infiltrate Christian cultures, as they did in Lebanon a few decades ago.
The sad truth is that, even leaving aside the advantages Estern cultures gained from embracing enlightened Christianity, Western countries became peaceful, prosperous and welcoming only by the long and arduous business of purging themselves from tyrannical systems and individuals. Mass migration weakens the ability of all populations to build prosperity for their nations, whilst fostering international banditry… and the collapse of democracy.
I suspect that would even be true were climate change the real reason for it, rather than a globalist smokescreen.
