Spanish NGO boat looking for safe dock after saving 60 refugees
Italy closes ports to a refugee boat once again, and it remains unclear where the vessel will be allowed to anchor.
The migrant crisis continues with boats full of young African men. No women or children are to be seen.
Update from GoV:
A leading bishop in the Church of England says that there should be a reading from the Koran at Prince Charles’ coronation after the passing of Queen Elizabeth II. Lord Harries of Pentregarth says that the reading would make Muslims feel included and accepted in British society.
In other news, Spain has agreed to accept an NGO “rescue” ship carrying 59 migrants, after Italy and Malta refused to allow it to land.
“The European commission introduced its controversial hotspots – intended as hubs where arrivals in so-called frontline states would be fingerprinted, identified, registered and moved on – as part of an effort to streamline the reception of asylum seekers at the height of the 2015 migration crisis.
Ten centres, five in Italy and five in Greece, were opened, but EU member states failed to accept even a small fraction of the refugees they had pledged to take, so the centres rapidly turned into squalid, overcrowded camps.
That would be our human rights to live free and unmolested in our own countries without being invaded by third world savages. In Europe, we are the natives.
Peter Moore: worldwide support for unfettered immigration is coming to an end
Immigration is a thorny topic to say the least.
Over the past two decades governments throughout the world have tried to persuade us that immigration is good. They say it expands the horizons of all countries and exposes us to new and different cultures.
Multiculturalism is the way to go. To speak out against immigration and multiculturalism is tantamount to walking around with a huge stamp on your forehead declaring that you are a racist pig.
In terms of absolute numbers it is barely a problem for Australia but still manages to capture the headlines on a daily basis.
So why is it that governments are so keen to enlist the support of communities far and wide? I have no idea, but what is becoming apparent is that this lemming-like worldwide support for unfettered immigration is coming to an end.
I’m pleased about this. I have been critical of it for some time.
Before the anonymous and always vitriolic internet warriors become too excited, let’s stress here that we are talking of immigration and not genuine refugees.
Just two days ago the US Supreme Court ruled that Donald Trump’s travel ban, which covers people from several Muslim-majority countries, was legal.
Previously lower courts had deemed the ban unconstitutional, but the US top court reversed the decision in a 5-4 majority ruling.
The ban prohibits, or makes difficult at the least, most people from Iran, Libya, Somalia, Syria and Yemen from entering the US.
Naturally we have had the usual protests from the usual protest groups. This is religious discrimination, they shout, and an abuse of human rights. Is it discriminatory? I would think so but against that thought, not without reason.
Also why shouldn’t the US have the right to determine who they should and should not let into the country?
In Europe the earlier and initial flush of enthusiasm for welcoming all to their countries has also diminished and in about the same time frame as it was embraced.
Just a year ago German Chancellor Angela Merkel invited a million immigrants to call Germany home.
This was despite the fact that the country was already experiencing problems with the guest workers they had brought to the country some years earlier.
For guest workers substitute “low paid workers to fill in for low paid unrewarding work”.
As the economy weakened, these guest workers became a problem.
So Germany — just like the rest of Europe — is regretting their largesse in welcoming almost anyone from almost any totally dysfunctional country from the Arab or African world.
The trouble is our leaders and obviously the leaders of most of what is laughingly called the democratic West no longer represent the thoughts and minds of their constituents.
I am quite happy to say that Joe Blow anywhere in the world is not in favour of Australia’s current immigration policy and neither are the people of Europe and North America in favour of their government’s policies.
Enough is enough because how far do we need to be responsible for those countries that take no responsibility for themselves?
The trouble-torn countries we are talking about receive billions of dollars in aid from the western world each year.
If it’s an African country it spends the money on new palaces for whichever dictator happens to be in power at the time and lines both his and his relatives’ pockets with untold millions.
Part of the moneys will also, of course, be spent on some sort of ethnic cleansing as well.
If the country belongs to the Arabian world then most of the money will be spent on ethnic cleansing and buying the weapons to enable this. In no situation will the money ever be spent on providing for and looking after all their own people.
To sum up my thoughts is pretty easy. Countries need to sort out their own problems and we, in the global sense, should not be expected to look after the problems they have created.
Any aid moneys should be much more closely monitored and withdrawn before the next palace is being built.
As for immigration, it should be allowed only when it is of an incontrovertible and demonstrable fact that it is of benefit to the host country and should come with any overlays or conditions that are deemed necessary.
It might be old and weary but “charity begins at home”. It works for me.