Should The West Be More Like Thailand In Its Refugee Attitude?

[HughJass]

In his book Deadlier Than The H-Bomb Wing-Commander Leonard Young states that there are only two reasons for Third World Immigration:
1. To pollute and destroy our race by mongrelization; and
2. To provide degenerate urban mobs which can be used for revolutionary purposes.

He clearly identified the real driving force behind the plan to destroy Britain when he wrote:

“The Banking System which was foisted on this country in 1694 and during succeeding years over most of the world has been the main means by which the...... "the chosen people who are not allowed to be criticised"... have brought misery and impoverishment everywhere. By their manipulation of finance they have been the cause of most wars and economic and social troubles. They have been able to obtain control of governments and of the means of publicity (Press, Radio, TV, Films, Publishing Houses, News Services, etc.) and so have been able to suppress the truth and propagate the lie. This has enabled them to fool and bully the people of the world into following the most suicidal courses until the... "the chosen people who are not allowed to be criticised".... are now in the position of expecting to clamp final dominion upon the world by means of a supranational organisation and some form of irresistible world police force which they would control.”

If you think we don’t have censorship in Britain, try and buy a copy “from any good bookshop” or borrow one from a public library.

[YeahSiam]

In his book Deadlier Than The H-Bomb Wing-Commander Leonard Young states that there are only two reasons for Third World Immigration:

1. To pollute and destroy our race by mongrelization; and

2. To provide degenerate urban mobs which can be used for revolutionary purposes.

He clearly identified the real driving force behind the plan to destroy Britain when he wrote:

“The Banking System which was foisted on this country in 1694 and during succeeding years over most of the world has been the main means by which the...... "the chosen people who are not allowed to be criticised"... have brought misery and impoverishment everywhere. By their manipulation of finance they have been the cause of most wars and economic and social troubles. They have been able to obtain control of governments and of the means of publicity (Press, Radio, TV, Films, Publishing Houses, News Services, etc.) and so have been able to suppress the truth and propagate the lie. This has enabled them to fool and bully the people of the world into following the most suicidal courses until the... "the chosen people who are not allowed to be criticised".... are now in the position of expecting to clamp final dominion upon the world by means of a supranational organisation and some form of irresistible world police force which they would control.”

If you think we don’t have censorship in Britain, try and buy a copy “from any good bookshop” or borrow one from a public library.

Pure racist BS

Pollute and destroy

"our" race? Like they

raped, pillaged and

plundered the rest of

the world and its

natural resources,

you mean?

Karma's a bitch, mate

Suck it up; "your" race

earned it

[Sutty]

Not being narrow minded at all these so called refugees are after one of two things and the second group will take both first

First group as much as they can get out of any EU COUNTRY till they bleed it dry and move on

Second group bomb the crap out of any EU COUNTRY after they have bled it dry.

Solution let none in forget the do gooders look after our own first second third last.

[Sutty]

So a country being overrun, the shit being bombed out of it, in total turmoil and only a fraction are "genuine refugees"?

They are only going to the countries for welfare handouts?

How narrow minded the anti refugee voices are.. There is a problem that was created by the US and Coalition involvement in the Middle East

which needs addressing. But to say people are just coming for welfare cheques is narrow minded.

Us and coalition? ???? I belive the president of Syria is the one causing this and did it not all start with the people revolting against him in the Arab spring era??? Oh no sorry forgot it's all America's and coalition partners faults why because it suits narrow minded goody goody's

[nithisa78]

Lord have mercy

[djayz]

If I may quote Helmut Kohl from sometime back in the 1980s "Das Boot ist voll" (the boat is full). This was in regards to a similar situation facing Germany back then (not the current refugee crisis facing Europe). He summed it up nicely.

No one region can be absorb so many people...

[manarak]

Option C:

no, keep them in the middle east in refugee camps and send an international expeditionary corps to secure the region.

we have armies, why not use them

[Howitzer]

Of course other countries shouldn't take responsibility and why should thailand have to deal with immigrants going to the west for their many benefits.

Some people claim oh you know it's the west that caused the syrian refugee problems by supporting assard. Well put that aside let's talk about this in a logical manner.

Say a group of people have become homeless. You decide to let them stay in your home. The homeless people are too numerous you cannot take them all in you decide to ask your neighbour to help take them in.

Does your neighbour need to oblige you all because you take in these homeless people does he need to listen to you?

Of course not. Your neighbour doesn't need to listen to you. In short don't spread your morality to others this is something the west loves to do and even worse it is always hypocritical like the US calling for democracy for example when in reality they are using it as a facade for their own benefit.

That is why saudi arabia doesn't need to have human rights even though their human rights abuses are one of the worst in the world.

Your western countries want to take them in that isn't the concern of non western countries. Now all because you cannot manage you somehow expect others to take them in? Just cannot stand the audacity of some people to expect others to follow the stupid actions of western countries.

[Gulfsailor]

So a country being overrun, the shit being bombed out of it, in total turmoil and only a fraction are "genuine refugees"?

They are only going to the countries for welfare handouts?

How narrow minded the anti refugee voices are.. There is a problem that was created by the US and Coalition involvement in the Middle East

which needs addressing. But to say people are just coming for welfare cheques is narrow minded.

Answer 4 questions, why are only 20% from Syria, the rest from Pakistan, Iran Eritea and sub Africa, 2. Why are 90% males between 21-35 years old 3. why do they risk their lives crossing the Med then trekking through 6 or 7 other countries to reach Germany, Sweden etc when they were safe in Turkey or other countries and 4. why isn't Saudi etc opening there doors to them, they are neigbouring countries of the same culture....Give qualified answers to these questions and maybe then some of us would have sympathy for them

It's not possible to answer questions which are stated as fact, but are in reality completely made up. By you or someone else? Please post a source for your figures. Otherwise I'll have a few questions for you, following your method of formulating questions, they are in order of ridiculousness;

1) Why are 90% of foreigners living in Pattaya child molesters?

2) Why are foreigners in Thailand 10x more likely to cause a traffic accident?

3) why has the UK GDP risen by more than 20% per annum in the past 20 years, if not because of immigration.

Good luck answering such questions...

[PattayaPhom]

So a country being overrun, the shit being bombed out of it, in total turmoil and only a fraction are "genuine refugees"?

They are only going to the countries for welfare handouts?

How narrow minded the anti refugee voices are.. There is a problem that was created by the US and Coalition involvement in the Middle East

which needs addressing. But to say people are just coming for welfare cheques is narrow minded.

Answer 4 questions, why are only 20% from Syria, the rest from Pakistan, Iran Eritea and sub Africa, 2. Why are 90% males between 21-35 years old 3. why do they risk their lives crossing the Med then trekking through 6 or 7 other countries to reach Germany, Sweden etc when they were safe in Turkey or other countries and 4. why isn't Saudi etc opening there doors to them, they are neigbouring countries of the same culture....Give qualified answers to these questions and maybe then some of us would have sympathy for them

It's not possible to answer questions which are stated as fact, but are in reality completely made up. By you or someone else? Please post a source for your figures. Otherwise I'll have a few questions for you, following your method of formulating questions, they are in order of ridiculousness;

1) Why are 90% of foreigners living in Pattaya child molesters?

2) Why are foreigners in Thailand 10x more likely to cause a traffic accident?

3) why has the UK GDP risen by more than 20% per annum in the past 20 years, if not because of immigration.

Good luck answering such questions...

For statistics you can refer to Amnesty and RedCross, geography, a world map will show which countries have been passed through.

[arjunadawn]

This is a false option.

[arjunadawn]

So a country being overrun, the shit being bombed out of it, in total turmoil and only a fraction are "genuine refugees"?

They are only going to the countries for welfare handouts?

How narrow minded the anti refugee voices are.. There is a problem that was created by the US and Coalition involvement in the Middle East

which needs addressing. But to say people are just coming for welfare cheques is narrow minded.

Us and coalition? ???? I belive the president of Syria is the one causing this and did it not all start with the people revolting against him in the Arab spring era??? Oh no sorry forgot it's all America's and coalition partners faults why because it suits narrow minded goody goody's

Wrong! The sleight of hand to parade Syria as the poster child obscures the fact that numerous people are not Syrian.

The numbers overwhelmingly support gross dependency on the welfare system. When the data is equivicol, as the people themselves, they say readily where they want to go and why. It most certainly has to do with generous state benefits. A cursory review of one website alone, and its sources, MuslimStatistics, clearly reflect the fact you deny.

The president of Syria is a boil on sunni islam and always has been, but without question current events were provoked by the US Which Path to Persia strategy. The US was wholly behind the Arab Spring with its National Endowment for Democracy quasi State Dept agency and its intimacy with Soros's Open Society money and their demonstrable starting of nearly every color revolution in modern history. This is not conspiracy, these are readily accessible facts.

This fiction that the masses are soley or even mostly refugees from western provoked wars is patently false. We don't have to wait for history to reveal this, we know this already. This is an economic migration, in the whole. Moreover, irrespective of the emotional imperatives liberals toss out there is still no reason to self death all of western culture and subsume it into some post enlightenment hybrid of regression and distortion.

Yes, the West should be more like Thailand. The single greatest detriment to classes of people needing a temporary hand out in western liberal democracies has been the multi generational open hand of dependency. This has primarily eviscerated the west already, certainly the US. Holding an open invitation to the remainder of the world is a stalking horse to usher in radical changes in governing philosophies and relations between the state and the people. There is no way these can be paid for with existing mechanisms and forms of government.

[Rimbuman]

YES,YES,YES YES,YES, WHAT MORE CAN ONE SAY the west will not be the place we knew and loved in 20 to 30 years,it will become a cesspit like the country's those of a certain faith left

Don't have to wait 20 or 30 years for that.

[benalibina]

The Bilderberg Group must have given its okay....the aim being ?

[kerrysum]

I think they would be better settled in some prosperous country in the middle east .

That would be my thought, if their home country can never handle it, I would think that they have a problem... But I really do not think it is my problem to fix other countries problems, I have enough of my own from illegal immigrants. So how are all of these Somalians getting into Thailand? And yes illegally? Or is NATO backing it with cash? I believe each nation should have sovereignty... So maybe in Thailand it is called foreigners...

[Thaimike370]

One problem of all this, is that the vast majority are muslims, now muslims have been settling in UK for years, the premise being that they will intigrate in the UK multi cultural society.

This has clearly not happened, there are are huge areas of major cities with predominently muslim communities who do not intigrate, and effectively do not want to. They live by thier sharia laws, and indeed are attempting to bring these laws into the mainstream laws of the UK in some cases. There is obviously a huge section who follow the jihad ethic from within the UK etc

There is also the fact that many of these so called refugees are comming from effectivly lawless countries, and being "integrated" into law abiding societiies, which causes more conflict. This can be seen from nunerous footage from thier trek across Europe, the total carnage, rubbish and disregard for the people and countries they are travelling through.

There is huge rising resentment in all the countries that are supposedly offering refuge to these people, ( who are refusing refuge in some countries as it not up to the standard they require ie financial handouts ) as time goes by this will get worse.

Mereley accepting these people into differant societies is not the answer to this situation,

Muslims will NEVER integrate, they want to kill everyone who does not follow their barbaric faith, they have absolutely no intention of obeying our Christian British Law. They want to try and force their barbaric sharia laws on the UK and the rest of the world. They will try to reduce Britain to be like the hell hole they are leaving or have left, given the opportunity. Muslims should only work for Muslims as they only try and force their NO alcohol, no bacon beliefs on those of us who eat and drink what we like, by refusing to sell it in the supermarket that is stupid enough to employ them. They then sue the companies that gave them the job which they knowingly accepted though that was a requirement of their work. They do not want refuge in your country, they want to take it over. Every country that has accepted them are now suffering mass rape and paedophilia, increased murders and crime, Sweden, UK and now Germany and France are good examples of this. All economic immigrants and Muslims should be deported and sent back to their own countries. If they worked as hard putting their own country right as they do trying to destroy the host country they have moved into, there would be far less problems for the civilised world to worry about. Unfortunately, the end result will be civil wars breaking out in every country where they are becoming the majority and cause problems for the natives.

[Smurkster]

Its always amusing to me as an American, whenever I hear any complaints from other Americans about "Sharia law hijacking The USA" I laugh..USA has not the slightest clue as to what happens when those certain types of Muslims infiltrate, they complain, but US has not experienced anywhere near the sort of crap the UK has

Of course not.

The US hasn't accepted anyone fleeing from the war that they created.

I think you missed my point Actually UK's problem goes back far beyond any "War'' about which you speak.. Britain has been dealing with a barrage of muslims coming into the country since the end of the Empire..OH and what about the Skypes Picot agreement huh...Yup that was the UK redrawing all these silly non existent borders after WWI and the break up of the Ottoman empire...that is arguably the BIGGEST reason any of this nonsense is happening right now in the region...drawing up lines of nations the way we think of them of in the west was what doomed this whole obviously TRIBAL region....

[Ducking and]

The answer to this question depends on whether you are going to protect your country or not. It also depends upon whether or not you realise that in this day of modern arms the best way to invade a country is not with armaments. Once your mind is properly set with regard to these things, you are more likely to make the right decision. No vote necessary.

[hugh2121]

Should all the countries in the world get together through UNHCR and each take a temporary share of refugees?

1. Yes, they should take some of the strain.
2. No, Let Europe take them all, even if it collapses them.

-----------------------------------------

Why only these two options? It seems that a majority of the so-called refugees are not refugees but simply illegal immigrants looking for a better life in the West. How about all nations take a hard line approach like Hungary? Otherwise, the flood of Africans may well be the end of Europe as we knew it.

Option 3. No, all countries should turn them away.

That's the one that gets my vote.

[kiwikeith]

YES,YES,YES YES,YES, WHAT MORE CAN ONE SAY the west will not be the place we knew and loved in 20 to 30 years,it will become a cesspit like the country's those of a certain faith left

Nz is already a casspit, sorry to say that.

Rohingyan children are selling flowers in the streets of Hua HIn now and foriegners are selling goods at night from different bordering countries, Hua Hin is full of cheap Burmese labourors.

They blend in and are not noticed that much by the average european, not that it is any of our bussiness.

Thailand has thousnads of refugees by default.

They don't need to do much more or the place will be awash. More!

Lots of Burmese girls work in Chiang Rai and Chiang Mai, they seem to be exploited and end up with a thai boyfriend so they can stay in thailand.

[gemguy]

Well...something that has to be recognized is how in the past most of those countries we are discussing were in such a state that 90 percent of the citizens could not escape the countries even if they tried.

Now the borders are in turmoil and they are leaving more or less unrestricted while many of them have been wanting to leave for a long time...and finally they can.

So yes the intervention and or interference by the western nations has created the ability for a significant percent of the people to leave and many are those who wanted to leave anyhow...even before the war and the IS and the invasion of Iraq...because they were already in fear of their well being under the former dictatorial brutal regimes anyhow.

Just another fact to be considered in the whole convoluted affair.

Cheers

[Brewster67]

Its always amusing to me as an American, whenever I hear any complaints from other Americans about "Sharia law hijacking The USA" I laugh..USA has not the slightest clue as to what happens when those certain types of Muslims infiltrate, they complain, but US has not experienced anywhere near the sort of crap the UK has

In the main, I agree with you, but they are seeing how Europe has changed, and they know that the US is in the early stages of exactly the same 'takeover'.

They are not prepared to sit and wait for the US to ed up with the fate that belies Europe.

I think the US fears a much different outcome. The US has over 300 million ffirearms and a hell of a lot easier to build up an arsenal there.

I think there is a deep underlying fear that with the rise of such groups as 'black lives matter'..... That the minority groups are going to link up and it will only take one incident to set off a chain reaction and there will be carnage on the streets.

[Brewster67]

So a country being overrun, the shit being bombed out of it, in total turmoil and only a fraction are "genuine refugees"?

They are only going to the countries for welfare handouts?

How narrow minded the anti refugee voices are.. There is a problem that was created by the US and Coalition involvement in the Middle East

which needs addressing. But to say people are just coming for welfare cheques is narrow minded.

Please explain why they are passing through numerous safe countries to get to the ones that just so happens to have the most generous welfare benefits system? ie: Germany and Sweden. Why are there thousands camped in Calais?... France is a safe country and has a welfare system, albeit not as generous as the UK.

Why are there disgarded Pakistani, Afghan and Bangladeshi ID cards and passports being found discarded along the Balkan corridor?.... Why has the German Inerior minister declared that 81% of migrants claiming to be Syrian are in fact NOT Syrian and are unqualified to be a 'refugee' in the general sense of the word?

I think it may be thee who is narrow minded. Even the soft liberal lefty pinkos are running out of arguments now.

Where are all these silly people who were waiting on the platforms of Munich railway station with their 'refugees welcome' placards now??? Have they taken any into their homes?... Why is Merkell calling anyone who raises concerns 'far right racists, nazis and fascist'???

It is my experience that the moment the 'racist' word is mentioned, the person using it has lost the argument.

[Brewster67]

Here is a very good interactive map of the exodus to Europe over the past 3 years.

I suggest you set the speed controller to about 60-70%

You will notice the true extent, and Syria is anything but the single reason people are moving to Europe, despite the way the mainstream media always state the reason as 'fleeing war torn Syria'.... Which is simply untrue.

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/10/28/interactive-map-lets-watch-thousands-migrants-flooding-europe/

Every single dot represents 25 paople.

You can hover your mouse over an individual country to see that country's 'invasion'.

[overherebc]

There is no reason why Thailand should welcome or even pay attention to any other nation that tells them they should welcome ' refugees '

I've been here a long time and I like it the way it is.

Take a look at the coutries being over-run at the moment and you will notice they all have very good welfare systems, that's why they are being slowly taken over by uneducated and mentally arrogant ( I'll delete it myself ). Only a very few of these so called 'refugees' are genuine. The rest are looking for a free ride that will be paid for by the people who spent a lifetime working and end up with less money per months than these sh-ts who demand all and give back nothing. Politicians who spout forth that we must help them are only whoring themselves they think these people will give them so they can keep their cushy jobs and expensive life styles.

I'll stop now before I get extreme.

[overherebc]

Whoring themslves for votes, I meant to say.

[i claudius]

What a silly question in the OP, really?. What any country should do is examine whether they take their reponsibilities under international law seriously or not. I suppose here here we are speaking of the UNHCR Refugee convention of 1951 and later protocols and ammendments.

If any signatory does not want to abide by the conventions they should be honest and withdraw from them. None of this rubbish of talking big regarding human rights and doing otherwise.

sorry i answered this post in error .

[i claudius]

YES,YES,YES YES,YES, WHAT MORE CAN ONE SAY the west will not be the place we knew and loved in 20 to 30 years,it will become a cesspit like the country's those of a certain faith left

Yes, the place you

loved so much, you

emigrated to Thailand

Please read again , LOVED SO MUCH , yes loved it , not what it has become and what it will turn into , is that simple enough for you to understand?

[Brewster67]

YES,YES,YES YES,YES, WHAT MORE CAN ONE SAY the west will not be the place we knew and loved in 20 to 30 years,it will become a cesspit like the country's those of a certain faith left

Yes, the place you

loved so much, you

emigrated to Thailand

Please read again , LOVED SO MUCH , yes loved it , not what it has become and what it will turn into , is that simple enough for you to understand?

We all have different reasons for coming to Thailand, and I would say very very few came here because they dislike their own country so much that they have decided to tear up their lives and move to a foreign land on the other side of the world.

When I came here 5 years ago, it was always mine and my wife's intentions to establish something here, then make a small family and go to the UK to educate them and make a business there, but it is becoming increasingly difficult to make an argument for going there now.

Thailand was always supposed to be temporary, but now is looking more and more permanent.

I still love the UK and love many people over there, but I seriously hate what it is becoming.

People of different ethnicities are technically 'sub-species' of the human race. It was noted by a famous naturalist who I can not for the life of me recall his name. But made a very valid point that across the whole spectrum of nature, the over-riding rule is that no sub-species can survive together, as one will always attack the other. which is why all sub-species exist separately.

Add to this mankind is hard-wired with a tribalist instict which has been essential for his survival, which can still be seen all over the world, wars, borders, football hooliganism.... the list is endless.

This is why the 'multi-cultural' experiment has failed everywhere it has been attempted.

Cultures and civilisations clash.... They never intergrate.

[micmichd]

What a silly question in the OP, really?. What any country should do is examine whether they take their reponsibilities under international law seriously or not. I suppose here here we are speaking of the UNHCR Refugee convention of 1951 and later protocols and ammendments.

If any signatory does not want to abide by the conventions they should be honest and withdraw from them. None of this rubbish of talking big regarding human rights and doing otherwise.

UNHCR Refugee convention of 1951 but ist that the part that says "first safe country"...well many of the millions that are 90% male between 21-35 years of age have travelled through numerous "safe: countries, in fact most have lived and or worked in Turkey for a few years and have been targeted by human traffickers for the financial gains. Not one single person from Syria, Iran Eritea etc should be anywhere on European soil seeking refuge legally. Face reality, they are all economic migrants and mostly ungrateful for the assistance they are receiving to boot

This is as ridiculous as making all international flights illegal and then force travellers to stay in the first country where immigration allows them to stay.

Maybe the 1951 UNCHR convention is too old, more people used boats in these times.