Well then, as another day dawns the BBC becomes more and more overt in its SUPPORT for the swarm of third world immigrants queuing up to storm the Channel tunnel and get into the UK. Yesterday they joined in the general left wing outrage that Cameron used the “S” word! How DARE he refer to these find upstanding people in such terms. I’ve noticed at least TWO BBC presenters – Stephen Nolan and William Crawley – piously bleating that we need to “understand” the “desperation”of these “poor people” How ridiculous and how BIASED. If they don’t like ‘swarm” may I suggest Cameron tries “infestation”?
THE SWARM…..
Bookmark the permalink.
The Left are more bothered about the words we use to describe these aggressive benefit seekers than they are helping to find a solution. The sad reality, as far as I can see, is this: the Left – i.e. Labour, the BBC, the Guardian and Channel 4 along with universities etc. – have brainwashed a large swathe of the population into a self-loathing, multicultural worldview that uses the British Empire as the continuous scapegoat for the world’s ills. This horrific paradigm of intolerant, liberal self-hatred is a cynical and ideological ploy by the Marxist plotters to further their cause of undermining national identity.
In the majority of cases I believe that these aggressive foreigners are not the innocent and harmless refugees the naive and hopelessly gullible Left want to make out; I believe many could be ISIS terrorists and benefit seekers who have the sole aim of syphoning as much as possible from our fruitful land. The media are conveniently ignoring the plights of lorry drivers who’ve been attacked and how locals are being subjected to violent behaviour by these invaders.
Alex, I don’t think that there can be any doubt that there is a malign ‘globalist’ element at play here. The deliberate and concurrent opening of borders by complicit governments in Europe and in the USA (with the ensuing incoming swarm of illegal economic immigrants, hardened criminals, terrorists, rapists and, certainly, a minimal number of bona fide refugees) is both a step towards the destruction of the nation states of Europe and, also, to the establishment of a North American bloc comprising Mexico, Canada and the USA. Cameron’s pro-Europe stance and Obama’s call for the UK to remain in the EU are clear indicators of intent. Obama’s backbone is Marxism, Cameron’s is missing.
The other day I suggested “Invasion” as an alternative. I now think a “colonisation of illegal immigrants” as even more appropriate, although your “infestation” is good too.
One online dictionary defines swarm as- a great number of things or persons, especially in motion. I think David Cameron was spot on.
Demon
I have been using the term invaders for a couple of years.
I then state that what we should be doing is what our forefathers did.
Meet these people on the beaches and kill them.
Keep killing them until they lose their desire to invade.
Killing them? No. Rounding them up and transporting them back to their countries of origin and taking the cost of the flights out of Cameron’s Overseas Aid Budget. Yes.
Demon
“Rounding them up “etc. No good.
They will try again.
Killing them prevents this.
It also prevents them producing offspring.
The longer this continues, the more distasteful the solution will be. It could have been done with minimal trouble, if they’d stamped down hard on the Salman Rushdie fatwa. The authorities then threw open the doors and imported millions of third world muslims. They turned a blind eye to hate preachers. Turned the other cheek for Lee Rigby. Do nothing about invading scum in Calais. We’re now in a situation that only robust no nonsense state violence can resolve. Of course, they won’t do anything, so instead we sleepwalk towards civil war.
As for Calais, we have read calls to send in the Army, and we have heard outrage against talk of more severe means to stop these illegals from storming the tunnel. Cameron is said not to have ruled it out; this is a strange story given his action so far. Now what would the Army do, presumably they would be entitled to use rubber bullets? What if that didn’t deter, presumably lead ones, it is only logical, that is what armies are for. Let us hope they will be so authorised, but I fear it is a vain hope.
That is not outrageous, we are faced with an aggressive invasion. What is outrageous is the half-hearted attempts by the French to stop them, and the weakness of our own government – although I suspect Mrs May would like to be allowed to do more – and the hand wringing of bleeding heart liberals generally who opt for the soft option and those in the BBC who love to fall for and to propagandise any sob-story going.
Are any of these individuals carrying guns, or knives? Is that ever examined, that they may have evil intent? Not on the BBC.
Will our government ever wake up to the danger and do something to stop it? Cameron gets in front of the cameras and in usual shouty and fake outrage mode talks about dogs and fencing – weak and pathetic.
When will he put the indigenous people of these islands, and particular those of England first. He should stop the policy of allowing our Navy colluding with the people traffickers – any picked up at sea should be returned to Africa, not brought to Italy. These illegals from France and any others must be rounded up on entry and sent back immediately. The BBC must examine its approach which is wrong and give far more time to the views of people here who oppose what is being allowed.
The BBC is behaving disgracefully. Hardly unexpected as it has nothing but contempt for conservative ( correct use of the word ) and traditional England and it’s people.
Ignore every word you hear .
The correct words to describe the Calais people attempting to enter England are
invaders
illegal aliens
illegal attempts to enter a sovereign state. by force.
There is no merit in using any other terminology.
Refuse to do so.
On this matter we must break the hold of the PC BBC and it’s hangers on
This is a matter for us the people.
These people can and do exaggerate their circumstances and the bleeding hearts believe them.
If a group of people are hellbent on crashing though a state’s frontier, against the wishes of that state, then the attempt is not “migration” but invasion.
The state so beseiged has the right to use any force necessary to stop said invasion.
A plague would perhaps be more apt…Or maybe a mischief, the collective noun for Rats.
Yes plague describes the threat exactly. But it is a plague for which there is no known cure once it takes hold and it remains active for generations.
Well perhaps he should have said “one or two”…maybe just maybe that might have prevented criticism.
I hear at great length from the BBC as to how living conditions are terrible in Somalia, Syria, Libya, etc, but I have never heard any sort of explanation as to why all these “people” who originally came from from Somalia, Syria, Libya, etc are now so desperate to get out of France.
The French might want to get rid of them, but that is a different issue. At the moment the the “people” are not in the poor/war-torn countries they were born in and are they are trying (with increasing levels of violence) to get out of a western democracy with one of the largest economies in the EU.
Has anyone ever heard the BBC give any coverage to the question of why France is seen by “the people” as no better than Somalia/Syria/Libys?
And these ‘poor’ people are reportedly paying 8,000-10,000 euros to get to England. Why doesn’t the BBC do one of its investigative programs on what happens to those migrants who eventually make it into England. How are they housed and fed and does our Benefits system become involved.
I am sure there will only be another 200,000,000 give or take the odd 10,000,000 on the African continent who would be setting off for here should we agree to take them in.
If it wasn’t for the Channel, every migrant would be here and none would be in Europe.
Imagine that?
..
Although some mosqueteers would head the other way .
(Who thought of that description before? ) .
“Europe’s great misfortune is that it is situated right on the doorstep of the world’s most dysfunctional continent -Africa- and the world’s most dysfunctional cultural sphere, the Islamic world.” Fjordman ‘Defeating Eurabia’
Britain’s great misfortune is to be located right on Europe’s doorstep.
Thius is the crux of the problem and the one reality the liberal Westerner will not face.
Western civilisation has been remarkably successful over the last centuries. It is responsible for the modern world and is hated for that.
The hatred is born out of envy and a realisation that the underlying beliefs of the West make it superior and able to create an advanced civilisation.
Then the West went temporarily insane and in 1914 went to war.
This led to 1939 and the vile Nazi regime.
We as a culture lost all our confidence and now we see the result. Liberalism is nothing more than a fatal lack of spirit and a loss of belief in the future and yourself.
The liberal cannot defend his country and his culture because he does not believe it is worthwhile.
If we as a people are to survive then we will need new men and women who reject this negative view of ourselves and our past.
If they do not appear then it is the end for the West.
To oppose the BBC/liberal elite is to at least make a stand .
That misfortune is misfortune only when the government does not uphold the law, and defend the borders. Defence of the borders is the prime responsibility of the the state. No other requirement is as mandatory as that.
Bob Whitaker The Mantra
Asia for the Asians, Africa for the Africans, White countries for everybody!
Everybody says there is this RACE problem. Everybody says this RACE problem will be solved when the third world pours into EVERY white country and ONLY into white countries.
Holland and Belgium are just as crowded as Japan or Taiwan, but nobody says Japan or Taiwan will solve this RACE problem by bringing in millions of third worlders and quote assimilating unquote with them.
Everybody says the final solution to this RACE problem is for EVERY white country and ONLY white countries to “assimilate,” i.e., intermarry, with all those non-whites.
What if I said there was this RACE problem and this RACE problem would be solved only if hundreds of millions of non-blacks were brought into EVERY black country and ONLY into black countries?
How long would it take anyone to realize I’m not talking about a RACE problem. I am talking about the final solution to the BLACK problem?
And how long would it take any sane black man to notice this and what kind of psycho black man wouldn’t object to this?
But if I tell that obvious truth about the ongoing program of genocide against my race, the white race, Liberals and respectable conservatives agree that I am a naziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews.
They say they are anti-racist. What they are is anti-white.
Anti-racist is a code word for anti-white.
On tonight’s Newsnight, Kirsty Wark snarled and said Cameron had “infamously” used the word swarm. But that’s all I expect of Newsnight, infamously unprofessional and biased.
It seems to me that the vast majority of people don’t care what they’re referred to, they just don’t want them to come here. BBC on the wrong side, yet again.
Infamously? What on earth did she mean. ? Moronic . Infamously implies a negative judgement. Most people think Cameron was being polite.
The BBC is off on it’s own yet again.
Kirsty Squawk isn’t too bothered about 1400 children being abused by muslims in Rotherham or Christians being beheaded in the middle east, no, Kirsty is one of those ‘infamously’ anti whites.
1400 in Rotherham is just the tip. The real figure is likely to be north of 30,000.
War crime by a government against its own defenceless young girls, and in peacetime. War crime of the worst sort.
No parallel for it anywhere, anytime.
On Radio 5 the other night the BBC man in Calais was asking one of those poor downtrodden would be illegal immigrants so desperate to reach our benefits, oops, sorry, shores why he would be willing to risk his life to do so. His reply was that it was better to risk dying in the attempt that to return to his oh so dangerous home land, where ever that might be.
The BBC’s man failed to ask the obvious question by asking what danger he was in if he stayed in France rather than risking death by forcing his way into the Channel Tunnel or secreting himself on a vehicle.
Well, it seems to me that is an obvious question to ask the lying piece of scum, but perhaps the BBC would prefer not to let us hear the obvious answer which is that the other countries in Europe are not dumb enough to throw money at them, provide them with nice cosy houses and send for their families to join them.
What mugs our politicians are taking us for with the BBC doing every thing they can to make us feel guilty and uncaring for not inviting the world and his dog to rush here to take advantage of us.
Amounderness.
Its not just about benefits. Britian has NUMEROUS attractions for the invaders. Take a look at this and you will se ebenefits do not differe greatly between Britian and France
http://news.sky.com/story/1528542/asylum-seekers-why-they-come-to-uk-and-france
But there are other things, the English language is a massive pull, then there is multiculturalism, massive bridgehead communites especially in London, the soft and polite nature of British people which leads us hide any resentment towards immigrants, repressive laws forcing the indigenous to treat immigrants with kid gloves, the high reputation of Britian abroad as a great coutnry to live, the over representation of foreigners in public positions – when a Bangladeshi sees one of their peasnats become a lord, of course they see Britian a s aland of opportunity for themselves.
I’m intrigued by the political background and motivations behind all this.
It was always my presumption that the UK was hamstrung by obligations set by the EU, but clearly if France is less generous that cannot be the case.
So why are we? Given the public mood, especially as voiced in the election result, why the reluctance to create and ‘sell’ legislation to curtail these clearly bonkers benefits that serve the working population so poorly.
It surely would not be unpopular? Well, other than with a highly vocal, unrepresentative, cucooned metropolitan elite.
Or is that the real problem?
when a Bangladeshi sees one of their peasants become a lord...who can barely speak English.
These are people that were made peers of the realm by Blair, so that the enriching culture of Islam will vote for Labour. Then we must not forget the tens of thousands of vulnerable young girls offered to the green dragon for his pleasure. Where are you St George, slayer of green dragons?
Treason of the very worst sort. Thirty pieces of silver comes to mind – betrayal of the Christian heritage and culture of the UK.
The big weakness seems that if the police cannot stop anyone to ask for ‘papers’ they cannot stop anyone to ask unless they are suspected of a crime.
Does this mean that all the illegals are free to come and go as they please. Maybe someone who knows better than me could confirm. How are they got rid of?
Historically there have been certain defensive advantages to being a relatively large, self-sufficient island nation surrounded by a 20+ mile moat filled with chilly water.
However, I am surprised some enterprising French have not relieved a few batches of aspiring doctors of their last $2000 and packed them on une leaky Pedalo or deux, and pushed them off the beaches of Normandy to bob about until HMS Cameron can arrive to ‘save’ them as required by various treaties most don’t recall being asked about.
This issue ties the BBC and the EU together in ways that may not serve either well.
It’s enough to make me even more dedicated in having choice returned in securing my family’s future.
Suicidal social engineering experiments imposed by unelected Brussels beuraucrats spun by overpaid BBC PR staff is not high on my agenda.
You fool! Now you’ve told them. 😉
Interesting that we can still believe we are a self-sufficient island as, it is predicted, more than half of the UK’s food will be arriving from abroad within a generation.
Large scale immigration into the UK only places further pressure on home-based food production while, at the same time, multinational supermarkets, supposedly in the interest of consumers, force down the prices they pay to farmers. The hard-pressed farmer, while endeavouring to maintain a viable business, then turns to the EU for ‘subsidies’ available for turning productive farmland over to inefficient solar- and wind-power projects. (There’s no need to ask who subsidises the ‘subsidies’.) UK consumers, while believing that their supermarkets are working for their benefit, are in reality benefitting the multi-national corporations who have an interest in maintaining fears about ‘global-warming’ . As pressures on our food production increase so will the pressures on UK consumers (or ‘fussy eaters’ as the BBC calls them) to accept, and become reliant on, GM modified food and food production. Much of that will be sourced from a GM-food compliant EU. Seeds will, of course, be supplied (or withheld if deemed desirable) by multinational companies such as Monsanto and DuPont, both US-owned. When the foot comes down we will have nowhere to turn.
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/feb/24/uk-will-need-to-import-over-half-of-its-food-within-a-generation-farmers-warn
http://www.genewatch.org/sub-568547
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8789279.stm
I’d heard about this, but until now was unaware of the context:
http://metro.co.uk/2015/07/31/bbc-reporter-at-centre-of-social-media-outrage-after-asking-migrants-if-they-are-going-to-go-back-to-the-jungle-5321748/
Given the BBC’s mastery of spinning outrage out of context when it suits, it’s ironic that few others will either.
Even more ironic is me doing my bit to correct it here.
I think the term originated in the USA during the depression and referred to the hobo camps set up by the train riders. In which case it is quite apt.
The Twitter lot are the perpetually offended metropolitan left. Representing a tiny group of the irrelevant.
Tweet from @Radio4today:
Shoes of a man who died trying to board Eurotunnel train to UK
Cousin tells his story http://t.co/OZBHxS6N2n #Calais http://t.co/OPXfCicGHH
Suffice to say this latest approach by the BBC is not going any better in the comments as previous efforts
”Shoes of a man,” bbc talking cobblers now.
Best idea so far is to have a navy vessel or clapped out cruiseship dock at Calais and put all the migrants on board and then set off for the north coast of Africa. If they aren’t on UK soil they can’t claim asylum.
“Swarm” is not a word I would use. “Strutting in” is the term that comes to my mind watching the VT from Calais.
I remember a `Disaster Movie ` from the 70`s called `The Swarm` , produced by Irving Allen . It was a movie about `killer bees `, won`t be shown on BBC TV again ,ever .
Walked the North Cornish Coast Path a couple of weeks ago, its amazing just how many anti tank bollards and remains of gun emplacements still remain. Its a shame that our excuse of a government doesn’t take invasion as seriously as their predecessors did.
Just seen some sob story on Sky, immigrant arrived here, but doesn’t have the money to phone home to say he’s arrived safely. Nowhere does this go unchallenged.
1) How come you don’t have a phone, everyone else at Calais seems to?
2) How come you can afford the trip so far?
3) The most pertinent, if the place you’ve left behind is so dangerous, why have you left your family behind?
Edit: Just saw the report repeated again, at the start of the report this same guy without the money to make a phone call is stood next to his mate, who….has a phone planted on his lug hole!!
How stupid do they think we are and how stupid are these reporters? Don’t they know that to lie to a ‘non believer’ is culturally considered OK to further their plight, taqiya anyone?
https://twitter.com/OkKelly22/status/617795766493552640
Yes it is, one of them has her eyes showing.
We’ ve had our differences with France, but regardless, she is a sister civilisation.
God help France.
Surely you are wrong. We are constantly being told that these people come to European countries to enrich those countries and to benefit those countries both economically and culturally.
The photograph have probably been faked by the right wing press or Israelis.
So much for the ‘swarm’ the BBC today was talking about ‘The Jungle’ in Calais.
How different the perception of these descriptions become when utter by those on the Left.