Topic: Europe, you reap what you sow... - page 16. (Read 56222 times)

^

Why arent finnland and norway going down too?
They too are socialist and take refugees in - and oh boy greece on place 13 in the HDI ranking while they are taking refugees to no end and have the most leftist .gov in the EU.

Something in your narrative just doesnt work.

Sweden to become a Third World Country by 2030, according to UN











According to UN projections, Sweden will be a much poorer country by 2030, much worse than what anyone in the Swedish government indicates.

The UN report HDI (Human Development Index) predicts a significant decrease in Swedish prosperity, unlike their Nordic neighbors, who will retain their top positions and even strengthen them globally in the long run.

In 2010 Sweden had the 15th place in the HDI rankings but according to UN forecasts, Sweden will be #25 in 2015, and in 2030 on the 45th place.

Sweden is one of few countries with such a sharp deterioration from what it had in 2010.

Finland demonstrates one of the world's best school systems, while the Swedish school have lost competitiveness.

Fewer ends up on welfare dependency in their Nordic neighboring countries while Sweden continues to have a greater amount of family households forced to live on welfare, which are a couple factors causing the dropped global competitiveness.

Negative developments, or rather liquidations can be exemplified by Orrefors Kosta Boda, which in 1992 had 940 employees in Sweden and was a profitable industry. Today less than 100 remain in the company after further cost reductions and adaptations in order to meet global competition.

Most of today's less developed countries such as Cuba, Mexico, the Baltic countries and Bulgaria according to the 2030 UN report will be passing Sweden in prosperity.

Even Greece, which today is more or less bankrupt, but will be on 13th place by 2030.

Sweden's leftist establishment and media believe a cornerstone of their perfect society is multiculturalism: large scale immigration from some of the poorest, most backward nations on earth. Swedes who disagree with that plan risk being labeled racist, fascist, even Nazi.

"We had a perfectly good country," Ingrid Carlqvist, a journalist said. "A rich country, a nice country, and in a few years' time, that country will be gone."

The logic should be really simple to understand, yet many have difficulties grasping it: If you import the Third World, it's what you'll get.

Here is the UN report:


http://speisa.com/modules/articles/index.php/item.454/sweden-to-become-a-third-world-country-by-2030-according-to-un.html

In Sweden, when a criminal murders an innocent person, it is the latter's fault. When some third world immigrant from Congo or Somalia rapes a native woman, then also the latter should be blamed for the crime. The Swedes are just an embarrassment for humanity and I am glad that they are self-exterminating themselves by importing all these Somalis, Afghans, Pakistanis and Arabs.

Sweden: Death by Immigration









Mass immigration is continuing to claim victims in Sweden. Murder, assaults and rape have become everyday occurrences in this small country, with a population just short of ten million, which last year opened its doors to almost 163,000 immigrants. The latest victim is 22-year-old Alexandra Mezher. She was stabbed to death last week by a so-called unaccompanied refugee child at the asylum house where she worked.

Although the massive influx of asylum seekers has decreased drastically since January 4, when Sweden implemented border controls on the Swedish/Danish border, the people who are already here pose a giant problem to municipalities, police and citizens. The police are fighting a losing battle against street crime, as well as daily incidents at asylum houses – general disturbances that include fights, rapes and threats.

The asylum houses are in a state of anarchy. On January 27, police were dispatched to a home for teenagers in Lindås, where a riot had erupted. Policeman Johan Nilsson told the local paper, Barometern:

    "One [of the youths] was refused when he tried to buy candy, and got angry with the staff. He gathered some 15 friends, and the staff was forced to lock themselves in while the mob smashed windows and other things. The instigator, supposedly 16 years old, is suspected of having started the riot, and another one is suspected of making unlawful threats and of violent rioting."

That suspect was later released, after producing a document that stated he was under 15, and thus not criminally responsible.

Another, more serious incident occurred at the asylum house Signalisten in Västerås on January 20. Ten policemen arrived at the facility due to reports of the repeated rape of a 10-year-old boy. The policemen were met by a large mob standing in a corridor, shouting and shaking their fists. The situation escalated to the point where the police were forced to flee for their lives. One of the officers later wrote in his report that it was only due to the presence of a police dog handler that he and his colleagues were able to escape:

    "Even more people appeared behind us. I was mentally prepared to fight for my life. We were 10 police officers in a narrow corridor. And I heard someone yell that there is an emergency exit. I felt that we could easily have been outmaneuvered, considering the environment and the number of counterparties."

The policeman also wrote in his report that he hoped for more training in the future, on "how to handle crowds in confined spaces."

That the Swedish police are no longer able to do their duty is evident. National Police Commissioner Dan Eliasson recently demanded 2,500 more officers and 1,600 more civilian employees for the police, to handle the heightened terror threat and the increased influx of refugees. Considering the length of time needed to train policemen, it will probably be a while before the police can increase its numbers. Eliasson also demanded a budget increase of between 1.8 and 2.8 billion kronor ($214 million - $332 million), because the "migrant situation means a significantly higher workload for the police."

He identified at border controls and asylum houses as especially in need of greater resources, all over the country: "We need to be there often, there are fights and disturbances."

On January 26, what everyone had been dreading finally happened. The police arrived at an asylum house for "unaccompanied refugee children" in Mölndal early in the morning, after reports of a knife fight. By the time they arrived, it was too late. Asylum house employee Alexandra Mezher lay bleeding on the floor, stabbed by one of the "children" she cared for. She died in hospital a few hours later.

The police arrested a person claiming to be a 15-year-old from Somalia on suspicion of murder, as well as the attempted murder of one of the youths who allegedly tried to intervene. He was later remanded. According to the local daily, GT, the staff had previously warned on several occasions that the suspect had psychiatric problems.

The Mezher family are Lebanese Christians who fled the violence in Lebanon 25 years ago. Alexandra's mother, Chimene Mezher, told the British paper, The Daily Mail:

    "We left Lebanon to escape the civil war, the violence and the danger. We came to Sweden where it was safe, to start our family. But it is not safe any more. ... And I just want to know why... why Alexandra? She wanted to help them, but they did this. I just want answers."

Chimene Mezher now accuses Swedish politicians of murdering her daughter. The dramatic recent population increase in Mölndal, a suburb of Gothenburg, has scared many of the 60,000 residents. In less than a year, 8,000 asylum seekers have moved in -- half of whom are so-called "unaccompanied refugee children."

It has now emerged that staff at the asylum house where Alexandra Mezher was murdered had repeatedly complained about unreasonable conditions. A year ago, employees warned about being understaffed and working alone: "So far, nothing serious has happened, but it will," said a desperate employee who called the Health and Social Care Inspectorate ("Inspektionen för vård och omsorg" or IVO). IVO inspected the asylum house, but found everything was in order. When Mezher was murdered, she was alone in the residence with ten asylum seekers. So far, no motive for the murder has emerged.

When the National Police Commissioner appeared on the "Good Morning Sweden" TV show, the day after Mezher's murder, he expressed sympathy for the murderer, but barely mentioned the victim. This sparked frenzied outrage on social media. Eliasson said:

    "Well, you are of course distraught on behalf of everyone involved. Naturally, for the person killed and her family, but also for a lone young boy who commits such a heinous incident. What has that person been through? Under what circumstances has he grown up? What is the trauma he carries? This entire migration crisis shows how unfair life is in many parts of the world. We have to try to help solve this best we can."

The atmosphere on social media is now almost revolutionary. People are posting videos of themselves accusing the government of murder, of filling Sweden with violent people and completely ignoring Swedes.







What does the Swedish government really think? Does it maintain that the right of asylum is more important than everything else -- even the safety of its own people?

Gatestone Institute called Sofia Häggmark, a non-partisan official at the Department of Justice unit for migration rights. Here is the Q & A:


http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/7363/sweden-death-by-immigration

You Muslims (especially the Turkish Muslims such as yourself) were the biggest supporters of Hitler. Just like Hitler you want to exterminate the Kurds, Armenians, Greeks, and the Assyrians. On the other hand, Trump favors severing ties with radical Muslims, who want to exterminate the non-Muslims. And for your kind information, Hitler exterminated the Jews after the Muslims requested to do the same:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/netanyahu-holocaust-muslims_us_56276ea5e4b02f6a900ea795

George Soros Warns Europe: Absorb 500k Refugees Costing $34Bn, Or Risk "Existential Threat"

Zerohedge  by Tyler Durden 10:00 am

Authored by George Soros, originally posted at NYBooks.com,

The asylum policy that emerged from last month’s EU-Turkey negotiations - and that has already resulted in the deportation of hundreds of asylum seekers from Greece to Turkey - has four fundamental flaws.

First, the policy is not truly European; it was negotiated with Turkey and imposed on the EU by German Chancellor Angela Merkel.

 

Second, it is severely underfunded.

 

Third, it is not voluntary. It imposes quotas that many member states oppose and requires refugees to take up residence in countries where they don’t want to live, while forcing others who have reached Europe to be sent back.

 

Finally, it transforms Greece into a de facto holding pen without sufficient facilities for the number of asylum seekers already there.

All these deficiencies can be corrected. The European Commission implicitly acknowledged some of them this week when it announced a new plan to reform Europe’s asylum system. But the Commission’s proposals still rely on compulsory quotas that serve neither refugees nor member states. That will never work.

European Commission Vice President Frans Timmermans is inviting an open debate. Here is my contribution.

A humanitarian catastrophe is in the making in Greece. The asylum seekers are desperate. Legitimate refugees must be offered a reasonable chance to reach their destinations in Europe. It is clear that the EU must undergo a paradigm shift. EU leaders need to embrace the idea that effectively addressing the crisis will require “surge” funding, rather than scraping together insufficient funds year after year. Spending a large amount at the outset would allow the EU to respond more effectively to some of the most dangerous consequences of the refugee crisis—including anti-immigrant sentiment in its member states that has fueled support for authoritarian political parties, and despondency among those seeking refuge in Europe who now find themselves marginalized in Middle East host countries or stuck in transit in Greece.

Most of the building blocks for an effective asylum system are available; they only need to be assembled into a comprehensive and coherent policy. Critically, refugees and the countries that contain them in the Middle East must receive enough financial support to make their lives there viable, allowing them to work and to send their children to school. That would help to keep the inflow of refugees to a level that Europe can absorb. This can be accomplished by establishing a firm and reliable target for the number of refugee arrivals: between 300,000 and 500,000 per year. This number is large enough to give refugees the assurance that many of them can eventually seek refuge in Europe, yet small enough to be accommodated by European governments even in the current unfavorable political climate.

There are established techniques for the voluntary balancing of supply and demand in other fields, such as with matching students to schools and junior doctors to hospitals. In this case, people determined to go to a particular destination would have to wait longer than those who accept the destination allotted to them. The asylum seekers could then be required to await their turn where they are currently located. This would be much cheaper and less painful than the current chaos, in which the migrants are the main victims. Those who jump the line would lose their place and have to start all over again. This should be sufficient inducement to obey the rules.

At least €30 billion ($34 billion) a year will be needed for the EU to carry out such a comprehensive plan. This includes providing Turkey and other “frontline” countries with adequate funding to maintain their very large refugee populations, creating a common EU asylum agency and security force for the EU’s external borders, addressing the humanitarian chaos in Greece, and establishing common standards across the Union for receiving and integrating refugees.

Thirty billion euros might sound like an enormous sum, but it is not when viewed in proper perspective. First, we must recognize that a failure to provide the necessary funds would cost the EU even more. There is a real threat that the refugee crisis could cause the collapse of Europe’s Schengen system of open internal borders among twenty-six European states. The Bertelsmann Foundation has estimated that abandoning Schengen would cost the EU between €47 billion ($53.5 million) and €140 billion ($160 million) in lost GDP each year; the French Commissioner for Policy Planning has estimated the losses at €100 billion ($114 billion) annually.

Moreover, there is no doubt that Europe has the financial and economic capacity to raise €30 billion a year. This amount is less than one-quarter of one percent of the EU’s combined annual GDP of €14.9 trillion, and less than one-half of one percent of total spending by its twenty-eight member governments.

It is Europe’s political capacity that is lacking, at least at the moment—its ability to make effective unified decisions about such an urgent matter. Most member states are restricted by the EU’s fiscal rules from running larger deficits and financing them by issuing new debt in the capital markets. Even though German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schäuble lifted hopes in Davos in January when he spoke of a European Marshall Plan to deal with the migration crisis, he also insisted that any spending should be financed out of revenues rather than by adding to the existing government debt.

Taking on new common European debt, backed by the joint and several guarantee of the EU’s members, would raise strong objections, particularly in Germany. Even if the debt were restricted to addressing the migration crisis, Germany and others would see it as a dangerous precedent toward creating debt backed by EU members collectively, with Germany responsible to step in if other countries fail to repay their share of the debt. Berlin has diligently avoided providing such a precedent throughout the euro crisis. That is why the question has not even been raised, let alone seriously considered. But there are other ways to raise the necessary funds using existing EU structures.

Member states could raise new tax revenue in order to fund what is needed. However, Europe does not have the political capacity to raise the necessary sums needed in time to contain the crisis. For a new tax to be perceived as fair, it would have to be imposed equitably across the EU. The proper route for such a tax increase would be for the European Commission to propose new legislation to be adopted with the unanimous support of all members. This would likely fail, since it would give every country the right to veto the tax. If a “coalition of the willing” of at least nine countries could be assembled, the Commission could opt for “enhanced cooperation,” the approach used for the proposed European financial transaction tax (FTT). If the recent experience with the FTT is any guide, this process would take months to conclude.

A more promising alternative would be to re-open the European Commission’s Multiannual Financial Framework, which establishes the EU’s broad budgetary parameters, including the maximum amounts the EU may spend in different areas. The forthcoming mid-term review of this EU budget offers an opportunity to increase the VAT contribution of member states, and designate that some of the new funds raised should go to a refugee crisis fund. This would also be difficult but offers the most realistic path forward.

It will be crucial, however, to make a large part of the funding available very quickly. Making large initial investments will help tip the economic, political, and social dynamics away from xenophobia and disaffection toward constructive outcomes that benefit refugees and countries alike. In the long run, this will reduce the total amount of money that Europe will have to spend to contain and recover from the refugee crisis. This is why I call it “surge” funding.

Where will the necessary funds come from? There is a strong case to be made for using the EU’s balance sheet itself. The EU presently enjoys a triple-A credit rating that is underused and that allows it to borrow in the capital markets on very attractive terms. And with global interest rates at near historic lows, now is a particularly favorable moment to take on such debt.

Tapping into the triple-A credit of the EU has the additional advantage of providing a much-needed economic stimulus for Europe. The amounts involved are large enough to be of macroeconomic significance, especially as they would be spent almost immediately and exercise a multiplier effect. A growing economy would make it much easier to absorb immigrants, whether they are refugees or economic migrants—a win-win initiative.

The question is: How to use the EU’s triple-A credit without arousing opposition, particularly in Germany? The first response is to recognize that the EU is already a triple-A borrower in the global bond markets, through facilities created to deal with the Eurozone crisis. Indeed, it was during the financial crisis that the EU repeatedly put its borrowing capacity on display, establishing financial instruments (such as the European Financial Stabilization Mechanism, or EFSM, and the European Stability Mechanism, or ESM) capable of borrowing tens of billions of euros on attractive terms in very short order. Once Europe’s leaders made a political decision to act, they were capable of doing so very quickly.

Some of these European financial entities, which still have considerable borrowing capacity, could be redirected to the refugee crisis. This would be far more efficient and faster than creating a new borrowing mechanism for the purpose. And such a redirection would require only a political decision—one that can be taken at short notice if the political will can be generated.

Two sources of money in particular—the EFSM and the Balance of Payments Assistance Facility—should be put to the task. These sources complement each other: the EFSM was designed for loans to euro-area members, whereas the balance of payments facility is for EU members that do not belong to the Eurozone. Both kinds of loans will be necessary for a comprehensive approach to the crisis. Both also have very similar institutional structures, and they are both backed entirely by the EU budget—and therefore do not require national guarantees or national parliamentary approval.

The combined gross borrowing capacity of the EFSM and the Balance of Payments facility is €110 billion ($125 billion), a number meant to coincide with the annual revenue ceiling of the EU budget. The amounts of each facility were set so that the EU never has more than its annual budget in debt outstanding. The Balance of Payments Assistance Facility’s €50 billion of borrowing power is almost completely unused. The EFSM has made some €46.8 billion worth of loans to Portugal and Ireland but has substantial spare capacity. They jointly have well over €60 billion of capacity, and this capacity grows each year as the loans to Portugal and Ireland are repaid.

The EFSM, the ESM, and its precursor, the EFSF, were all established in response to the euro crisis. The task back then was to provide cheap credit to countries like Ireland, Portugal, Spain, and Greece that had otherwise been frozen out of the credit markets. The expectation was that these countries would repay their loans from the EU once they had been restored to financial health.

Now the task is fundamentally different. As with the euro crisis, the refugee situation is at a critical point and requires a very quick response. But it differs from the euro crisis in that the countries to which the funds would be aimed—like Jordan, Lebanon, Turkey, and Greece—are merely on the frontlines of what must be a collective European undertaking; they are entitled to grants, rather than loans, and should not be obliged to repay the monies they receive.

If we accept this reality, how then will the surge funding get repaid? The answer is that the EU and its member states must find new sources of tax revenue, and do so in a way that spreads the repayment obligation as widely as possible. This could be done by levying special EU-wide taxes. The new tax revenue could come from a variety of sources, including the EU-wide VAT, which already provides revenue to the EU; a special tax on gasoline, as Minister Schäuble has suggested; or a new tax on travel into the EU and on visa applications, which would shift some of the burden onto non-EU citizens wishing to travel to the EU.

It was noted above that the process of levying new taxes inside the EU is one that will take a long time to complete. However, those looking after the finances of the EFSM and the Balance of Payments facility will want to know that the loans they make have a sure source of repayment. That’s why the EU must guarantee that it will find this new tax revenue by the time it is needed, even if the exact source of the new revenue has yet to be determined.

The question remains, how can the necessary political will be generated? The European Union is built on democratic principles. I believe there is a silent majority that wants to preserve the European Union even if it is currently not a well-functioning institution. The leaders will listen if this silent majority makes its voice heard.

The refugee crisis poses an existential threat to Europe. It would be irresponsible to allow the EU to disintegrate without utilizing all the resources it has at its disposal. The lack of adequate financing is the main obstacle standing in the way of successful programs in the frontline countries. Throughout history, governments have issued bonds in response to national emergencies. That is the case in Europe today. When should the triple-A credit of the EU be mobilized if not at a moment when the European Union is in mortal danger?

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-04-12/george-soros-warns-europe-absorb-500k-refugees-costing-34bn-or-risk-existential-thre

INSANE! HUNDREDS OF MIGRANTS USE TRAIN AS BATTERING RAM AT GREEK BORDER

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x5_YJ8YoCiY

‘Like 1984’ — Politician Admits To Bussing Migrants To Schools To Guilt Students Away From Controlled Borders Views





A Swedish member of parliament has expressed his frustration after revelations a Swedish school engaged in social engineering to change the political views of their young pupils.

Sweden Democrat (SD) member of parliament Kent Ekeroth said the actions of the school showed the political establishment in his country had all-but succeeded in turning the country into an Orwellian “1984-society”.


The deliberate, and apparently successful reprogramming of Swedish school children’s political views was revealed by a boastful Social Democratic Party party member in the nation’s left wing, best-selling newspaper Aftonbladet. Speaking for an article celebrating the arrival of migrants at one Stockholm suburb school suburb councillor Ebba Östlin explained the effort to change the school had started in 2010.

The school had hosted mock elections that year and to her horror 25 per cent of the 12-16 year olds at the school voted for the anti mass-migration Sweden Democrat party. This result, reports Aftonbladet “started a discussion on the need for a greater mix [of young people in] the municipality”.

Councillor Östlin said of her response to the right-wing result in the mock-vote: “We saw that many in the Falkbergsskolan school election voted for SD. We then felt this was a point to work actively on, [to change] values and issues”.

Explaining the ease with which staff at the school, working together with their local government, could change the political views of their pupils headmistress Anna-Lena Bergman said: “Young people are very receptive when they receive understanding, and can think again. We said they would try to make the new students feel welcome”.

Now 12 students are bussed in from across town every day and have their own Arabic-speaking teachers and class. Headmistress Bergman told the paper teaching them in Arabic rather than Swedish with the other pupils had “advantages”, but they had found trying to migrate them to Swedish-taught lessons “the most difficult step”.

Councillor Östlin explained that forcing an increase in diversity, and the number of non-Swedish pupils at the school had succeeded in bringing down the Sweden Democrat vote in the school.

The Botyrka municipality where the Falkbergsskolan school is located is already one of Stockholm’s most ‘multicultural’ suburbs. More than half of its inhabitants are not of Swedish origin.

Speaking to Breitbart London, Sweden Democrat MP Kent Ekeroth said he was dismayed by the boasts of the local government and the actions of the school, but not surprised. He said: “It is totally insane and goes to show what a 1984-like society Sweden has become.

“This really is political correctness gone out of control. That schools and politicians take it upon themselves to directly and actively ‘correct’ pupils’ political views, even though they are supporting a legitimate and democratic party, is a breach of their mandate and and an appalling show of disrespect towards opinions apart from their own”.

“It is more like the DDR [the former Communist East German Republic] than Sweden”.


http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/04/11/children-school-right-wign-views-local-council-bussed-class-migrants-side-town/

Muslim Labour Councillor Suspended Over Claims She Called Hitler ‘Greatest Man In History’







A Labour councillor has been suspended from her party for allegedly tweeting anti-Semitic messages, said to include calling Adolf Hitler the “greatest man in history”.

In the latest such scandal to hit Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour Party, a 20 year old Politics and Sociology student elected last May to Luton Borough Council has been suspended from the party over anti-Semitic tweets uncovered by an investigations team from the Campaign Against Anti-Semitism.

Back in February 2013, Aysegul Gurbuz is alleged to have approvingly predicted Iran would use a nuclear weapon to “wipe Israel off the map”, using the hashtag “TEAMAHMADINEJAD”.

Other tweets credited to her account include: “Adolf Hitler = greatest man in history” (October 2011); “#iwannameet Hitler” (December 2011); “If it wasn’t for my man Hitler these Jews would’ve wiped Palestine years ago. Sorry but it’s a fact. Not hating on Jews btw” (November 2012); and “The Jews are so powerful in the US it’s disgusting” (January 2013).

One of the tweets, from October 2012, even attacked the then leader of Ms. Gurbuz’s party, Ed Miliband. Assessing his chances of becoming Prime Minister, the tweet said of the man who identifies as an atheist and Jewish through his heritage: “Ed Miliband is Jewish. He will never become prime minister of Britain.”

Ms. Gurbuz has denied tweeting the messages, reports The Mail, suggesting that her sister is the responsible party. Nevertheless a Labour Party official confirmed last night that “Councillor Gurbuz has been suspended from the Labour Party pending an investigation.” The tweets will also be referred to Luton Borough Council’s independent standards committee.

Ms. Gurbuz — who is events organiser for the Friends of Palestine society at the Univeristy of Warwick and sits on a panel supervising Bedfordshire Police — told the Campaign Against Anti-Semitism:

“It was a joint account I had with my sister so I don’t know if she’s gone out and tweeted that, but I’m absolutely appalled right now. Where I live we’ve got very good cohesion with the Jewish community… I’m absolutely shocked.”

Speaking on the BBC’s Andrew Marr Show, Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn said:

“Anti-Semitism is absolutely abhorrent and wrong. Anyone that commits any act of anti-Semitism, that makes anti-Semitic remarks, is auto excluded from the party and an inquiry follows immediately.

“We have suspended, we will suspend, any member that behaves in that way.”

According to a report in The Mail, commenting on the Labour Party’s recent problems with anti-Semitism, Lord Carey — a former Archbishop of Canterbury and current vice-president of the Council of Christians and Jews — said he would not say the Labour Party is “riddled” with anti-Semitism, but the problems “are real enough” and the absence of effective action from the leadership demonstrates that “Labour is not ready to govern”.


http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/04/10/muslim-labour-councillor-suspended-over-claims-she-called-hitler-greatest-man-in-history/


--------------------------------------------
It is not a sin if you lie to an infidel.

UK Equalities Chief Who Popularised The Term ‘Islamophobia’ Admits: ‘I Thought Muslims Would Blend into Britain… I Should Have Known Better’




The former head of Britain’s Equalities and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), Trevor Phillips, has admitted he “got almost everything wrong” on Muslim immigration in a damning new report on integration, segregation, and how the followers of Islam are creating “nations within nations” in the West.

Phillips, a former elected member of the Labour Party who served as the Chairman of the EHRC from 2003-2012 will present “What British Muslims Really Think” on Channel 4 on Wednesday. An ICM poll released to the Times ahead of the broadcast reveals:

    One in five Muslims in Britain never enter a non-Muslim house;
    39 per cent of Muslims, male and female, say a woman should always obey her husband;
    31 per cent of British Muslims support the right of a man to have more than one wife;
    52 per cent of Muslims did not believe that homosexuality should be legal;
    23 per cent of Muslims support the introduction of Sharia law rather than the laws laid down by parliament.

Writing in the Times on the issue, Phillips admits: “Liberal opinion in Britain has, for more than two decades, maintained that most Muslims are just like everyone else… Britain desperately wants to think of its Muslims as versions of the Great British Bake Off winner Nadiya Hussain, or the cheeky-chappie athlete Mo Farah. But thanks to the most detailed and comprehensive survey of British Muslim opinion yet conducted, we now know that just isn’t how it is.”

Phillips commissioned “the Runnymede report” into Britain and Islamophobia in 1997 which, according to both Phillips himself and academics across the country, popularised the phrase which has now become synonymous with any criticism – legitimate or not – of Islam or Muslims.

Durham University’s Anthropology Journal noted in 2007: “It has been a decade since the Commission on British Muslims and Islamophobia was established, a Commission that through its 1997 report, “Islamophobia: a challenge for us all” (“the Runnymede report”) not only raised an awareness of the growing reality of anti-Muslim and anti-Islamic hostility in Britain, but also marked the onset of what might be described as ‘the first decade of Islamophobia’. In doing so, the Runnymede report propelled the word ‘Islamophobia’ into the everyday common parlance and discourses of both the public and political spaces.”

Phillips says his new data shows “a chasm” opening between Muslims and non-Muslims on fundamental issues such as marriage, relations between men and women, schooling, freedom of expression and even the validity of violence in defence of religion. He notes – echoing an article on Breitbart London just two weeks ago which reveals a growing disparity between older and younger Muslims in Britain – that “the gaps between Muslim and non-Muslim youngsters are nearly as large as those between their elders”.

And while he is cautious to note that many Muslims in Britain are grateful to be here, and do identify with role models such as Hussain and Farah, there is a widening gap in society with many Muslims segregating themselves.

“It’s not as though we couldn’t have seen this coming. But we’ve repeatedly failed to spot the warning signs,” he admits.

“Twenty years ago… I published the report titled Islamophobia: A Challenge for Us All, we thought that the real risk of the arrival of new communities was discrimination against Muslims. Our 1996 survey of recent incidents showed that there was plenty of it around. But we got almost everything else wrong.”


http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/04/10/thought-europes-muslims-gradually-blend-britains-diverse-landscape-known-better/

Relax. Everyone is peaceful. Everyone loves everyone else.

Hmmm, this is pretty nasty. Hope I don´t get the head chopped off for posting it or anything. If it happens, thanks for the good times...and best of luck.

I can't imagine that one migrant and hungry man was invited one's house and after eating, he dares raping host and treats him killing. And he only gets him make blowjob.
Can you find it logical?

As the journalist Wolfgang Bauer reminds us, the Syrian people witness the horrors of the Paris and Brussels attacks every single day The most relevant newspaper cartoon on the asylum story popped up on the front page of The Irish Times this week, for Martyn Turner's sketch caught two scandals in one. On the left hand side was a rich businessman stepping onto a palm-fringed island under the caption: "Since forever, RICH people have been taking their assets offshore to avoid tax..." On the right hand side of the cartoon, refugees in a flimsy rubber boat sail across choppy seas beneath the words: "Since recently POOR people have been taking their assets offshore... Guess which problem we have worked day and night to stop?" Well, of course, it's the poor guys who are getting the chop - courtesy of an annual €3bn to the Turks and an easy visa for anyone from Izmir to Iskanderia who wants to take a look at the EU which the refugees risked their lives to reach. Comment: Europe offers Turkey €3bn, visa deal & EU access talks to stop refugee flow to Europe It's not just that - nor the clever-clogs way in which the EU packed its first boat of returnees with Pakistanis who don't quite qualify for our pity, and thus couldn't be seen on our television screens as refugees fleeing for their lives.They all went meekly aboard, guarded by the blue legions of Frontex, that least accountable of all border institutions the EU has yet invented. I'm sure they're all gentle lads and lasses, but why on earth do they wear these preposterous hygiene masks over their faces when confronted by refugees? ...more

http://www.sott.net/article/316169-Europes-shame-The-forced-return-of-refugees-to-terrorist-state-Turkey

I think he wanted getting a new experience  but when Somalian asked for more, they began fighting😊

Interesting story!
He was raped by a Somalian man
He sucked his black stick and he had knife?  If he had knife so why he didn't defend himself before sucking his organ?

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/world-news/cologne-police-told-to-alter-their-reports-on-the-sexual-assaults-by-refugees-remove-the-word-rape/

this news is too ridiculous to handle..  i guess this man, who had been raped by an immgrant , has got stockholm syndrome if not

he must be out of his mind otherwise, nobody wants his rapist to be released ..

You know what you do