Immigration and related issues, mainly in the United Kingdom.

Details of other pages are at the end of this page


Extracts in date order, except latest additions first. Updated 15 December 2018

Racism – Gandhi, Ghana
Statue of 'racist' Gandhi removed from University of Ghana
Michael Safi
The Guardian, 15 December 2018.

A Mahatma Gandhi statue has been removed from the campus of the University of Ghana after protests from students and faculty who argue the Indian independence leader considered Africans "inferior".

The statue was unveiled at the university in the Ghanian capital Accra two years ago but has been the subject of controversy and was removed in the middle of the night on Tuesday, leaving just an empty plinth.

Scholars have highlighted evidence in past years showing the revered freedom-fighter, whose theories of civil resistance helped India throw off British colonialism and inspired generations of activists including Martin Luther King Jr, held derogatory views towards native communities in South Africa.

A 2015 book by two South African writers pointed to instances where Gandhi complained that Indians were being forced to use the same separate entrances as Africans, meaning "their civilised habits ... would be degraded to the habits of aboriginal natives".

"About the mixing of the Kaffirs with the Indians, I must confess I feel most strongly," he wrote in a letter in 1904.

More sympathetic students of Gandhi's life say his views were ignorant and prejudiced but a product of their time, and that his campaigns for social justice hold universal resonance and have fuelled some civil rights activism in Africa.

Students at the university welcomed the decision to remove the statue. "It's a massive win for all Ghanaians because it was constantly reminding us of how inferior we are," Benjamin Mensah told Agence France-Presse. ...

Campaigners in Malawi are trying to stop another Gandhi statue from being erected in the country's second city, Blantyre.
[Site link]


Immigration abroad – France
Macron accused of treason by French generals for signing UN Migration Pact
Laura Cat
Voice of Europe, 14 December 2018.

General Antoine Martinez has written the letter signed by ten other generals, an admiral and colonel, and also includes former French Minister of Defense Charles Millon.

They've given strong warning that Macron's signing the U.N. Global Migration Pact strips France of even more sovereignty providing an additional reason for "an already battered people" to "revolt".

The highly decorated military co-signees assert that the beleaguered Macron is "guilty of a denial of democracy or treason against the nation" for signing the migration pact without putting it to the people.

"The French state is late in coming to realize the impossibility of integrating too many people, in addition to totally different cultures, who have regrouped in the last forty years in areas that no longer submit to the laws of the Republic," the letter advises, also saying that mass immigration is erasing France's "civilizational landmarks".
[Site link]

Immigration abroad – universities, free speech, USA
Disturbing percentage of American colleges restrict speech, study finds
Cory Compton
Campus Reform, 13 December 2018.

The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) analyzed the written policies at 466 of America's top institutions of higher education and discovered that 89.7 percent of the colleges maintained policies that restrict student and faculty expression. Each of the colleges is rated as "red light," "yellow light," or "green light" based on the degree to which their policies inhibit the First Amendment.

"Most colleges impose burdensome conditions on expression by maintaining policies that restrict students' free speech rights," FIRE Senior Program Officer Laura Beltz said. "Colleges should be a place for open debate and intellectual inquiry, but today, almost all colleges silence expression through policies that are often illiberal and, at public institutions, unconstitutional."

Nearly 30 percent of the studied institutions received the "red light" status, given to colleges that implement at least one policy highly restricting free speech. ...

Only 9 percent of institutions examined by the nonprofit received the "green light" status, which means that there are no policies that restrict free speech. Finally, FIRE reports that the number of institutions with the "yellow light" designation have nearly tripled in the past decade, from 21 percent in 2009 to 61 percent in 2018. ...

"Many colleges and universities have taken steps to reform their policies over the years, but this year's report shows that much work remains to be done," Nicole Neily, president of the free speech organization Speech First, said in a statement to Campus Reform. "By maintaining vague, overbroad policies, students are put in the impossible position of not knowing exactly what might get them in trouble – and so, out of an abundance of caution, they refrain from expressing opinions on topics like politics or religion altogether."

This "kind of self-censorship is entirely unacceptable and inconsistent with a proper college experience," Neily said. "This chilling – where universities discourage and deter certain kinds of speech – is entirely intentional, and in my opinion poses the greatest threat to free speech on campuses today."
[Site link]

Immigration abroad – crime, Germany
Germany: One in Three Prison Inmates Born Abroad
Virginia Hale
Breitbart, 13 December 2018.

The proportion of prison inmates housed in German jails who were born abroad has risen to 32 per cent this year, according to the latest government figures.

Federal Statistics Office data revealed that 16,267 offenders from overseas were inmates in the country's jails as of March 31 this year – a number which has risen by almost five per cent from 2017, Die Welt reports.

Comprising just under a third of the prison population, which stands at 50,957, foreign nationals are hugely overrepresented in the system compared to their numbers in Germany, where 10.6 million aliens make up around 12 per cent of the country's total population. ...

In a report estimating that housing foreign criminals in German jails was costing taxpayers around 720 million euros a year, Die Welt noted that authorities were largely failing to use mechanisms which allow the Federal Republic to send criminals to serve jail time in their country of origin, with fewer than 200 inmates transferred to their homeland for detention each year.

And despite changes to the law in 2016, which meant delinquent migrants could be expelled from the country as soon as they are sentenced to prison, a study found that out of 700,000 migrants convicted of crimes (with the exclusion of traffic-related offences) between 2014 and 2017, only 19,342 were deported.

Furthermore, Welt reported that as of the end of 2017, 4,396 of these – or one in five – were still living in Germany.
[Site link]

Racism – hypocrisy
Acceptable Racism
Walter E. Williams
Townhall, 12 December 2018.

How appropriate would it be for a major publicly held American company to hire a person with a history of having publicly made the following statements and many others like them? (In the interest of brevity, I shall list only four.) "The world could get by just fine with zero black people." "It's kind of sick how much joy I get out of being cruel to old black men." "Dumbass f–-ing black people marking up the internet with their opinions like dogs pissing on fire hydrants." "Are black people genetically predisposed to burn faster in the sun, thus logically only being fit to live underground like groveling bilious goblins?"

I think most Americans would find such blatant racism despicable and would condemn any company that knowingly hired such a person. Leftists of every stripe would be in an uproar, demanding the dismissal of such an employee. College students and their professors would picket any company that hired such a person. ...

Most Americans would see such statements as racist, but consider this: Suppose we slightly changed the wording of each statement, replacing the word "black" with "white." For example, "The world could get by just fine with zero white people." Would you consider that statement to be just as racist? I would hope you'd answer in the affirmative. They're all racist statements!

The full scoop on those statements can be found in an excellent essay by William Voegeli, "Racism, Revised," in the fall edition of the Claremont Review of Books. The racist statements about white people were made by Sarah Jeong, one of the newest members of The New York Times' editorial board. Jeong attended the University of California, Berkeley and Harvard Law School. She decided to become a journalist specializing in technology and the internet. ...

... Leftists have been taught utter nonsense by their college professors. The most insidious lesson taught is who can and who cannot be a racist. Jeong was born in South Korea in 1988 and became a U.S. citizen in 2017, so she is a minority. According to the thinking of academia's intellectual elite, a minority person cannot be a racist. The reason is that minorities don't have the political, economic and institutional power to adversely affect the lives of whites.

Such reasoning is beyond stupid. Here's a test. Is the following statement racist? "Jews are money-hungry hustlers." Before you answer, must you first find out the race of the person making the statement? Would you suggest that it's not a racist statement if the speaker is black but it is if he's white?

Voegeli says that calling someone "racist" is one of the most severe accusations that can be made against a person but at the same time is among the vaguest. ...

Voegeli's article is rich with many other examples of how lots of Americans are losing their minds in matters of race. Muhammad Ali had it right when he said: "Hating people because of their color is wrong. And it doesn't matter which color does the hating. It's just plain wrong."
[Site link]

Multiculturalism – race, diversity
Interview with Eric Kaufmann: race on a professor's whiteboard
Nick Spencer
Church Times, 14 December 2018.
[Nick Spencer is Senior Fellow at Theos]

We are clearly in turbulent waters, here. Indeed, given that Kaufmann's new book, Whiteshift, opens with the bracingly blunt sentence, "We need to talk about white identity," it seems that they are freezing waters, too. Careers can die in such climates. There be not only dragons here, but neo-Nazis, Islamophobes, and racists with whom no sane person, let alone an academic social scientist, would want to be seen dead.

So the obvious question is, why go there? Kaufmann is Professor of Politics at Birkbeck, University of London. He is a respected expert on immigration and demography, and the author of several books, ...

He came across to me, when I met him, as thoughtful and reasonable. ... ...

"Demography is the most predictive of the social sciences," Kaufmann told me. /.../ We may not be certain about Britain in 2100, but we can, he said, generate some reasonably reliable scenarios.

Two of those scenarios give Whiteshift its name. Whiteshift 1.0, as he described it to me, is about "the decline of the white ethnic majority in Western countries. It's furthest down the road in the US, where non-Hispanic whites are about 60 per cent of the population, down from 85 per cent in the mid-1960s." The US is predicted to be "majority minority" by the 2040s, with New Zealand, Australia, and Western Europe forecast to join it by 2100.

"I am arguing that a lot of the populist upsurge around immigration is tied to that, in the sense that spikes in immigration make a lot of people think about . . . the security of their identities." Populism, contrary to much of the received wisdom, has nothing to do with economics. ...

In a 2017 paper for Policy Exchange, the centre-right think tank, he argued that "racial self-interest" – "the realm of group partiality, even clannishness" – was not racism, and urged pro-immigration groups to "avoid using charges of racism to side-line discussions of ethno-demographic interests". To do so, he warned, "compels those whose true motivations are ethnic to couch them in economic terms".

Research published in that paper highlighted divided attitudes: almost half White British Remain voters agreed that a White British person who wanted to reduce immigration "to maintain her group's share of the population" was being racist, compared with just five per cent of White British Leave voters.

Whiteshift 2.0 is the "longer-term demographic" in which what were "white majorities [will] absorb different members of racial groups", and "select which ancestry myths, which traditions, that mixed-race population is going to look to". ...

This does not seem to be particularly contentious. Whiteshift is packed with data – dozens of bar charts, line graphs, scatter diagrams, density maps – which preclude even ideological opponents from rubbishing it. It is a mercy that Kaufmann writes well, because otherwise its 500 pages might feel as long as some of his forecasts. Either way, the book is clearly no thinly disguised agitation for a cause. Moreover, since Kaufmann was born in Hong Kong, brought up in Canada, and is a quarter Chinese and a quarter Latino, it's hard to claim him for the nationalist Right. He, and his book, demand to be taken seriously.
[Site link]

Multiculturalism – culture
Migrants MUST adopt the culture of the West or stay at home says EGYPTIAN president
Ellie Genower
Daily Express, 14 December 2018.

Egypt's president has said migrants shouldn't expect the West to "open their doors" to them if they refuse to integrate.

Abdel Fattah al-Sisi said guests of Western counties like the UK, Germany and England "must completely abide by its laws, customs, traditions and culture". The 64-year-old added: "If you are not willing to do this, don't go." ...

The president said: "Every country has the right to protect its people and their interests.

"It must generally respect human rights in a framework that preserves its national interests."

In the speech, recently reported by US-based research institute MEMRI, Mr al-Sisi criticised people who expect Western countries "to open their doors so that we can go there demanding to keep our own culture.

"You demand to go there with your culture which you consider to be non-negotiable. You say, 'this is how we are and you must accept us [because of] human rights'. No.

"Don't expect them to open the door for you so you can go into their country and cause trouble. No." ...

He said: "Instead of asking me why countries [in the West] close their gates to us, you should ask yourself why the people of Afghanistan don't take better care of their own country.

"Why have they been killing one another for 40 years?

"[The same is true of] Pakistan, in Egypt, in Syria, in Libya, in Iraq, in Yemen, and in Somalia.

"We fight amongst ourselves in our own countries, and then we expect countries that work day and night to achieve progress to protect their people and to maintain a certain standard of living for them – we demand that they let us in so we can have part of their [success]."
[Site link]

Politics – Conservative Party
UK's post-Brexit immigration policy paper will be published next week
Reuters, 13 December 2018.

Britain will outline its post-Brexit immigration policy next week, House of Commons leader Andrea Leadsom said on Thursday, confirming the publication of a long-awaited paper on one of the government's central policies.
[Site link]

Diversity – race
Why we can't ignore the challenges of immigration [part 1]
Trevor Phillips
Unherd, 12 December 2018.

Is ethnic diversity a threat to the West? The original title of an UnHerd debate in which I recently took part was obviously contestable, but in itself the statement seemed innocuous to me. How naïve. Ferocious objections were raised the moment it was announced, on the grounds that the question suggests people of colour represent a danger to Britain and other developed nations in Europe and the Americas. It would not be the first time such anxieties have flared.

But the (mainly white) academics who thought that they were doing victims of racism a favour by shutting down the debate, might have paused to consider how this question can be read from the other side of the colour line. I know that they tell themselves that they are saving people of colour from the depredations of the likes of Tommy Robinson. It's convenient for liberals to invest all racial evil in such bogey men; it avoids them having to interrogate their own contribution to racial injustice.

Tragically, it won't be the people who play these political games who pay the price of their self-indulgence. Many of us not protected by the carapace of white identity see this question from a very different standpoint.

For a start I, for one, don't feel that I need salvation by white Messiahs; and I don't need them to tell my neighbours that I really am rather nice in spite of my being black. The truth is, I'd rather like people of colour to be seen as a threat to the established order. I know that on the Left it's regarded as really quite wicked and divisive to assert that race may be a more significant social cleavage than wealth or income; to suggest, in short, that culture and ethnicity may trump class. But people of colour have been here before many times. ...

... I believe that one of the great benefits of diversity to any society is that it can add resilience, but often, it is the newcomers who trigger radical change for the better. And many of us would welcome change in societies which, for the most part, have brought us four centuries of slavery, colonialism and chronic racial injustice. So, had I had the chance to respond to the original question on the night, my answer would have been "Yes. And a good thing too."

In fact, the title of the debate was changed. The initial, hysterical, reaction to news of the event threatened to make rational conversation impossible. A letter from dozens of university lecturers and students accused all the participants of accepting a "white supremacist" framing.

Ridiculous as this suggestion was, the debate's organisers, the academics Matthew Goodwin and Eric Kaufmann, along with its sponsors, UnHerd and The Academy of Ideas, demonstrated a maturity conspicuously missing from their ivory tower critics, and adjusted the language, though not the central point of discussion. The question became: Immigration and Diversity Politics: A Challenge to Liberal Democracy? Naturally, the armchair radicals found that they had too much else to do to turn up to the evening; that claret at high table doesn't sip itself.
[Site link]

Diversity – race
Why we can't ignore the challenges of immigration [part 2]
Trevor Phillips
Unherd, 12 December 2018.

I am pro-immigration, as you might expect; my Guyanese family has – mostly – prospered in the UK and the USA. The experience of those who have lived in diverse societies such as America or Canada is that a mix of cultures and traditions can give an enormous boost to creativity and innovation in a society – if managed effectively. But if poorly managed, that mix offers friction and lethal civil strife. Guyana's experience is of the latter, and of attendant decades of poverty. My fear is that our complacency will produce more of both in the UK.

... More of us are meeting more different kinds of people than at any time in human history. And alongside the promise of diversity comes the threat of social dis-integration.

Research on both sides of the Atlantic shows that the great splits in Western societies are becoming less and less to do with economics and more and more arising from cultural difference. ...

The complacent liberal viewpoint is that such divisions are essentially transient; embodied in the banality of the slogan that "there is more that unites us than divides us". No doubt most people in the ethnic and cultural majority, used to imposing their norms on others, genuinely believe this to be true. The politeness of immigrants can lead others to believe that their adoption of majority behaviours in public means that the newcomers have abandoned belief in their own traditions; some people mistakenly think this is what integration means.

But the truth is that there are sincerely held differences in multicultural societies that we need to acknowledge. Not all traditions share the same view about the place of women in society; there is a reason why Muslim women are significantly less economically active than any other demographic. White people in London, New York, Oxford, Cambridge and Los Angeles have a progressive and tolerant attitude towards homosexuality – but a visit to any of the burgeoning immigrant-supported megachurches in the UK will make it evident that these attitudes aren't shared by their black or Asian neighbours, who are turbo-charging the revival of fundamentalist Christian faith in our cities. ...

But the growing chasms in our societies do not just lie between the settled and the newly arrived. There are also ever-widening ones between those who have been here long beyond living memory. ...

Many in the left-behind regions of the Midlands, and the North know that the promise of globalisation that puts a spring in the step of highly-educated city dwellers sounds more like a death rattle in their towns and villages. To the latter, a more diverse ethnic and cultural mix doesn't mean a vibrant future; it means competition from the cleverest, most determined and most ambitious souls from other societies. It's a match-up they are going to lose and they know it.

Even those in the prosperous urban regions aren't protected. Many scoff at the idea of white decline as mapped in Eric Kaufmann's magisterial study Whiteshift. They do so at our peril, if not their own; they forget what Britain was like half a century ago. ...

Unless our elites are ready to confront the genuine challenges being posed by ethnic diversity, no matter how desperately we strum the chords to Kumbaya, nothing will protect us from the wave of political change that is sweeping the West.
[Site link]

Benefits and costs – Birmingham
Plea for emergency help as 45,000 new migrants settle in Birmingham
Jane Haynes
Birmingham Mail, 11 December 2018.

More than 45,000 migrants have settled in Birmingham in three years, putting huge pressure on schools, the NHS and housing services across the cash-strapped city.

The impact of the influx of new arrivals is hitting communities in west Birmingham, including Nechells, Aston, Lozells, Newtown and Handsworth. Leafier communities are barely touched.

Birmingham City Council is now asking for £860,000 emergency Government funds to help it cope.

Part of the cash will be used to fund a dedicated immigration officer, at a cost of around £59,000 for a year, to support newcomers. ...

There is increasing pressure on schools due to demand for places and rising numbers of children with English as a second language; on the NHS due to additional GP registrations and demand on primary care; and on available private rented and social housing. There is also higher demand on benefits and local unskilled jobs, particularly in the initial stages of resettlement and integration.

In 2016 the total number of new refugees and migrants arriving in Birmingham was 15,409 - the equivalent of 1.4% of the total Birmingham population. During the same year 6,364 migrants, refugees and UK citizens left the city, giving a net migration of 9,045.

In the two years since, at least the same number have arrived into Birmingham.

That's enough people - more than 45,000 - to fill Villa Park, home of Aston Villa FC, to capacity. ...

The report adds: "What we are seeing are divides in the city between those areas which are accommodating new languages, cultures and people with those areas where there has been little to no change for several decades. This is reflected in city's schools, neighbourhoods and high streets. ..."

The cash bid for £862,542 has been made to the Ministry for Housing Communities and Local Government's (MHCLG) Controlling Migration Fund. ...

The city is an officially-recognised 'City of Sanctuary' illustrating its commitment to be a welcoming place of safety for all, offering sanctuary from violence and persecution. ...

The new document has been developed in consultation with representatives of organisations from statutory, voluntary and community sectors who are actively engaged in work concerning asylum seekers, refugees and migrants, through the Birmingham Migration Forum.
[Site link]

Immigration abroad – USA
158 million migrants want to move to the U.S. despite Trump introducing stricter immigration policies
Daily Mail, 11 December 2018.

Despite tough new immigration policies imposed by the Trump administration, the United States is still the top pick by far for migrants seeking a new home.

Some 158 million people have desires to move to the U.S. The number accounts for around 21 percent of all those in the world seeking a new home.

The U.S. beats other supposedly attractive countries including Canada and some European countries.

In a worldwide survey, Gallup found that 15 percent of the world, or 758 million, want to move, most for jobs. ...

Recent scenes along the border back such findings with thousands making their way to the U.S. by foot from El Salvador, and Honduras.

In those two countries and the Dominican Republic, half of the citizens in those countries want to leave. ...

'While this increase in the desire to migrate may set off alarms among those who would like to see fewer people on the move, Gallup typically finds that the percentage of those who have plans to move is much lower than the percentage who would like to move,' said the survey company.
[Site link]

Immigration abroad – European Union
Bureaucrat Nominated to be Next EU Chief: Uniting Europe With Africa 'Matter of Destiny'
Virginia Hale
Breitbart, 11 December 2018.

Named as the centre-left's candidate for the next EU Commission President, Frans Timmermans announced he would crush conservative governments in Europe, insisting that the continent uniting with Africa is "a matter of destiny".

Timmermans, who currently sits as the Commission's first vice-president, was nominated to lead the Party of European Socialists (PES) in next May's elections by delegates at the EU Parliament grouping's annual congress in Lisbon on Saturday.

The former Dutch defence minister, who has previously claimed Europe could "not remain a place of peace and freedom" unless mass immigration-related "diversity" is imposed throughout the continent including across "even the most remote corners", has notably spent much of his time as President Jean-Claude Juncker's deputy ordering eastern EU states to open their borders to third world migrants. ...

Europe's relationship with Africa was another major priority Timmermans outlined in his speech, telling delegates to be "under no illusion ... it is a matter of destiny" that EU taxpayers eliminate the violence and poverty-plagued continent's problems or else welcome the "hundreds of millions of people" from Nigeria alone who he has previously noted will be heading to the bloc as a result of its "demographic explosion".

"So, whose fate is going to be dealt with by whom: Europe's fate by Africans, Africa's fate by Europeans. We are in this together. Our destinies are linked," he said, pledging to ensure developing the third world continent is "high on the agenda" because its population – which is set to more than double to 2.2 billion by 2050 – "is a common responsibility" for the entire bloc.
[Site link]

Racism – hate crimes
Enforceable Subjectivity
Theodore Dalrymple
City Journal, 11 December 2018.

The Times of London recently informed us that "the number of hate offences recorded by police jumped after the terror attack by Khalid Masood at Westminster in March last year." The paper continued by noting that "incidents of hate crime went on rising in May and June after terrorists attacked the Manchester Arena and London Bridge." ...

What is a hate crime? The Times explains, "hate crime is defined as any criminal offence which is perceived by the victim or any other person to be motivated by hostility or prejudice towards someone based on a personal characteristic. In fact, the expression of hatred – or perceived as such – now is itself a crime."

As law, this is perfectly Kafkaesque, in that rumor and suspicion are granted the weight of truth. There is apparently no need for an objective correlative of a person's perception. According to the Metropolitan Police, "evidence of the hate element is not a requirement. You do not need to personally perceive the incident to be hate related. It would be enough if another person, a witness or even a police officer thought that the incident was hate related." We have regressed to the days before Elizabeth I's famous declaration more than four centuries ago that she had no desire to make windows into men's souls. Now everyone can do so, and his attempts, however inaccurate, fantastic, or self-interested, have legal force.

Needless to say, the personal characteristics that are specially protected are what one might call the usual suspects: race, religion, nationality, or sexual proclivity. However, according to the Times, the government has asked the Law Commission "to investigate whether crimes driven by hostility to men [as against women] and the elderly" should be considered "hate crime." Hating the elderly is so much worse than merely preying on them, beating them, or stealing their belongings.

Expressions of hatred now being a crime in themselves, it cannot be long before differential liking for groups of people will be a crime, inasmuch as this would imply at least a potential for dislike of others. The good citizen must therefore refrain from expressing such preferences. ...

Curiously, liberals who have long denied that punishment deters crime – or indeed serves any purpose, except to take vengeance on the weak and vulnerable, driven to crime by their wretched circumstances – are generally avid for strong penalties for hate crime. The way to make people like one another is to punish them into amiability.
[Site link]

Racism – The Guardian
Desperately seeking racism – how the Guardian gets it all so wrong
Ollie Wright
Conservative Woman, 11 December 2018.

The Guardian is currently in the middle of a festival of grievance, based on its recent report 'Bias in Britain', which desperately hunts for examples of racism. ...

Employment is a big issue in the report. If non-white Britons can't get the job they want, or are overqualified for the role they are in, that's racism. The Guardian cites a man with a law degree, stuck in a job he doesn't like and unable to find an opening in a firm of solicitors. It doesn't consider that this might be because we have far too many graduates chasing a fixed number of graduate jobs. ...

Mr Gayle also discusses employment discrimination in banking, with the example of another young man denied his desired career. It just so happens that he has a conviction for fraud. You might think that although he deserves a second chance, it's still best if he isn't allowed to manage your bank account. But the Guardian, of course, manages to smell racism.

It also draws our attention to how overall household income for families of Pakistani and Bangladeshi (though not Indian) origin is significantly lower than for white families. Here's a hint for the Guardian: where the wife chooses not to work, the family's overall income is likely to be lower. Government stats are clear that women from both groups are substantially less likely for various reasons to work than white women. Thirty-eight per cent of Pakistani/Bangladeshi women work, against 73 per cent of white women.

Although I'm sure there are some racist employers unwilling to take these women on, there are many issues at play and there are many cultures across the world where women are less likely to join the formal workforce. If racism was the main reason for their employment levels, there would be a more or less identical ratio for Pakistani/Bangladeshi men not working, when set against white men. But there emphatically isn't. For men, it's more like nine per cent against four per cent.

And as the Spectator points out, once in employment, people of Pakistani/Bangladeshi heritage are now very nearly equally represented to the same degree within professional/managerial levels as anyone else. Meanwhile the median incomes of Britons with Indian heritage are on the verge of overtaking the rest of the population. This in a country supposedly mired in racism.

Some of the Guardian's other examples seem simply daft. Apparently, if someone misspells or mispronounces your name, that can be an example of racial bias against you. Most native English speakers struggle with the consonant-dense surnames of Eastern Europe: is this proof of xenophobia? /.../ To include this sort of nonsense devalues any attempt to understand or confront real bigotry.

... The Guardian's report is strong on accusation but weak on causative links. Answers without solid evidence are worse than useless; they poison debate and prevent real solutions being found.

Any racism we still have is thankfully ever diminishing. As TCW's Karen Harradine argues, by global standards, we are now one of the least racist countries you can find.
[Site link]

Immigration abroad – United Nations
Signing the UN Migration Pact sells us down the river
Kathy Gyngell
Conservative Woman, 11 December 2018.

In the drama over Brexit, the Government's decision to sign the United Nations Migration Pact – despite its pledge to control our own borders – has slipped by almost unnoticed. Leaders of some 150 countries, including the United Kingdom, have agreed to this hubristic document, a 'global pact' couched in the language of humanity that would manage global migration (as if) and prevent 'suffering and chaos' (as if).

It has gone ahead despite opposition and the withdrawal of several nations, including the United States. In less compliant Europe, rows over the accord have erupted. Belgium's ruling coalition government has collapsed as a result; Slovakia's foreign minister has tendered his resignation.

It is hardly surprising that it has roused such a response. It is an extraordinarily ambitious and interventionist document. It lays out 23 objectives to open up legal migration and discourage illegal border crossings, and 'manage' the more than 250 million now on the move globally.

The US government disavowed these negotiations late last year. Since then other alarmed countries including Australia, Austria, the Czech Republic, Dominican Republic, Hungary, Latvia, Poland and Slovakia have pulled out of the process.

On Friday the US took aim again at the pact, labelling it 'an effort by the United Nations to advance global governance at the expense of the sovereign right of states'.

In the meantime Mrs May's Government has expressed no such concern but in its usual inimitable way has promised one thing while doing another.

Its response to British unease, typically politely expressed in a petition (with more than 123,000 signatures) which called on ministers NOT to support the UN Global Compact on Migration, our Government claimed that the agreement could 'support global co-operation on migration without affecting the sovereignty of all countries to control their own borders'. Really? ...

Once again we are being sold down the river and can only hope that this UN intervention is as ineffective as others before it have been. The word 'control', please note, appears nowhere in the final Compact document.

Under its humanitarian guise the aim of the pact is to make illegal immigration legal, to turn pathways which are now 'irregular' into regular ones: 'We commit to adapt options and pathways for regular migration in a manner that facilitates labour mobility . . . with a view to expanding and diversifying availability of pathways for safe, orderly and regular migration.'

Worrying as well is that opposition to this regularisation of mass migration looks set to be 'institutionalised' as a hate crime. Objective 17 of the Compact reads: 'Eliminate all forms of discrimination and promote evidence-based public discourse to shape perceptions of migration'.

It is of course far easier for the UN to play this blame game, and appeal to Western tolerance and hospitality (and guilt), than to address the root cause of the problem – the vicious, intolerable and failing regimes from which so many citizens want to flee. These are the regimes whose conscienceless leaders sit at the highest UN table and are behind this pact. They are, as Karen Harradine described it on the UN's anniversary, members of a club for tyrants run by tyrants.
[Site link]

Diversity – universities
Universities launch drive to recruit more white males as low numbers give them 'minority group' status
Henry Bodkin
Daily Telegraph, 10 December 2018.

Universities are setting targets to recruit more white male students after low numbers meant they are now classed a "minority group".

Essex and Aston Universities have become Britain's first non-elite institutions to write the target into their official recruitment plans, putting white males on a par with Black students and women engineers.

White British students are in a minority at roughly one in ten institutions, according to the Higher Education Statistics Agency.

Meanwhile on certain courses such as pharmacy, business and some science degrees, more than seven in 10 students is from an ethnic minority.

In 2016-17, 27 per cent of the UK undergraduate intake were white males, down from 30 per cent in 2007-08.

Oxford University has previously announced a drive to attract more of the group. ...

Previous research has indicated that university staff have a mixed reaction to schemes aimed specifically at white boys in case it leads to accusations of racism.

A study led by King's College London said: "We found that people were quite uncomfortable with the idea of running a targeted activity with this group, in a way that we've not encountered, for example, targeting young black African men. ..."
[Site link]

Immigration – public opinion, Europe
Most Europeans want less migration: survey
Eline Schaart
Politico, 10 December 2018.

More than half of Europeans want fewer immigrants to move to their country, according to a new survey published Monday.

Fifty-one percent of those surveyed from 10 EU countries – Greece, Hungary, Italy, Germany, Sweden, Poland, France, the Netherlands, the U.K. and Spain – said fewer or no immigrants should be allowed to move to their country, compared to a worldwide average of 45 percent, Pew Research Center found.

Thirty-five percent of European respondents said they wanted about the same number of immigrants to come to their countries, while 10 percent said their countries should allow more immigrants.

Large majorities in Greece (82 percent), Hungary (72 percent), Italy (71 percent) and Germany (58 percent) said fewer immigrants or no immigrants at all should be allowed to move to their countries. The number of people who supported less migration was less than half in France (41 percent), the Netherlands (39 percent), the U.K. (37 percent) and Spain (30 percent). ...

The survey was published on the same day that more than 150 countries ratified an international U.N. migration pact that had triggered infighting in ruling parties and governments across Europe.
[Site link]

Emigration – world
Gallup: More Than 750 Million People Globally Now Wanting to Migrate
Virginia Hale
Breitbart, 10 December 2018.

More than 750 million people want to migrate to another country permanently, according to Gallup research published Monday, as 150 world leaders sign up to the controversial UN global compact which critics say makes migration a human right.

The Gallup World Poll survey, which interviewed 453,122 adults in 152 countries between 2015 and 2017, found that 15 per cent of the world's adult population would like to move to another country if they had the chance.

Noting this proportion had risen from 13 per cent between 2010 and 2012, and 14 per cent between 2013 and 2016, the pollster commented that rising populism and a backlash to mass immigration seen in many Western electorates has apparently not deterred would-be migrants from wanting to seek a better standard of living elsewhere.

Regionally, the desire to migrate was found to be highest in sub-Saharan Africa, where 33 per cent of adults wanted to migrate permanently, followed by Latin America and the Caribbean (27 per cent), European nations outside of the EU (26 per cent), and the Middle East and North Africa (24 per cent).

Gallup found there were 13 countries in which half or more of the adult population said they wanted to migrate to another country, with Sierra Leone (71 per cent) topping the list for its proportion of would-be migrants, followed by Liberia (66 per cent) and Haiti (63 per cent).

The U.S. remains by far the most popular country for people wanting to move abroad, with 21 per cent of potential migrants selecting it as their top destination, with Canada, Germany, France, Australia, and the UK each also ranking highly.
[Site link]

Asylum – children, fraud
Liverpool council finds 24 adult asylum seekers who are posing as children as it launches legal fight to stop almost £1million in taxpayers cash being spent on their care
Liz Hull
Daily Mail, 8 December 2018.

A legal fight has begun to stop almost £1 million of taxpayers' money being spent on adult asylum seekers posing as children, it emerged last night.

Since May Liverpool council say 39 refugees whose age was in doubt have arrived in the city.

Following specialist assessments costing £60,000, 24 were found to be adults, while only 15 were under 18. Another 17 cases are under review.

Some asylum seekers coming to Britain try to lie about their age because support for under-18s is much better than for adults.

Children must be offered free access to schools and universities, secure housing and qualify for more benefits.

But councillors in Liverpool say that when the age of an asylum seeker is disputed, solicitors representing the refugees attempt to contest the council's age assessment by threatening to take the authority to judicial review.

Instead of incurring high legal costs, the council has been providing homes and support for the young immigrants – at a cost of around £350,000 a year – until they claim they reach adulthood.

However, according to a report to the council's education and children's services committee, it can't go on funding the increasing numbers as it tackles a £6.6 million budget shortfall.

Bosses have now agreed to pay to fight the next six cases in court. They say that if they win, it could save them up to £850,000 a year.

Councillor Barry Kushner, cabinet member for children and social care on the city council, said: 'We will start to challenge these cases so we're not rolling over all the time.

'But this is a judicial review and is expensive. They cost £20,000 to £30,000 a time. There are some legal firms playing the system, which is a real issue. We need the Government to link things together because their age assessments at the point of entry into the UK are not robust enough.' ...

The Local Government Association said Liverpool's problems were not unique.
[Site link]

Illegal immigration – victims, police
Police told not to take action against illegal immigrants who are victims of crime
Charles Hymas
Daily Telegraph, 8 December 2018.

Police chiefs have issued guidance to officers barring them from automatically alerting deportation authorities to an illegal immigrant who has been a victim of crime.

The measures, introduced amid "heightened interest" after the Windrush scandal, also ban officers from checking the police national computer solely to see if someone has leave to remain in the UK.

Police chiefs believe fears of being reported could deter illegal immigrants who have been crime victims from coming forward.

The guidance from the National Police Chiefs' Council (NPCC) states that where a person reporting a crime is also identified, potentially, as a person without leave to remain or to enter the UK, the "fundamental principle" must be to "first and foremost" treat them as a victim.

However, if, during the investigation, it became apparent the victim was illegally in Britain, officers could "at the appropriate juncture" alert immigration enforcement.

"The police will [in those circumstances] share that information with Immigration Enforcement, but will not take any enforcement action in relation to any suspected immigration breaches," the NPCC paper states.
[Site link]

Immigration abroad – border security, USA
Border Patrol stops more than 60,000 undocumented immigrants at Mexico-U.S. border in November - the most ever during Trump administration but it's STILL not as high as under Obama
Adry Torres
Daily Mail, 8 December 2018.

The arrest of undocumented families who have crossed the Mexico-United States border rose to record levels under Donald Trump in November.

Agents with the U.S. Customs and Border Patrol arrested or denied entry to 62,456 immigrants that crossed the southern border the U.S. last month, surpassing October's figures of 60,772.

News of the soaring number of border arrests comes after Trump's calls to complete the border wall and military stationed along key points of the 1,954-mile long border.

Yet the highest numbers of arrests or refused entries in recent years actually occurred under President Barack Obama, when in October, 2016, as many as 66,842 immigrants were stopped or arrested, according to a CBP report posted by the federal immigration agency on Thursday.

'The November 2018 border numbers are the predictable result of a broken immigration system – including flawed judicial rulings - that usurps the will of the American people who have repeatedly demanded secure borders,' said Katie Waldman, a spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security.
[Site link]

Politics – United Nations, UK
British government defend UN Migration Pact
Westmonster, 8 December 2018.

Governments across the world are refusing to sign the UN's Migration Pact – but it looks like the British government will be signing up.

Countries ranging from the USA to Poland to Australia have refused to back signing the Compact at a conference in Marrakech in a few days, with Aussie Prime Minister Scott Morrison explaining: "The Compact fails to adequately distinguish between people who enter Australia illegally and those who come to Australia the right way, particularly with respect to the provision of welfare and other benefits.

"This is inconsistent with the management of Australia's strong and orderly migration program under the Liberal National Government."

A petition against the UK signing up rocketed to over 100,000 signatures in no time. But the British government have now responded with a tone clearly supportive of the Migration Pact, saying: "The Global Compact for Migration will support global co-operation on migration without affecting the sovereignty of all countries to control their own borders." ...

It will hugely anger the British public that once again a government that talks tough about controlling migration post-Brexit is willing to sign the country up to a Compact on immigration comprehensively rejected by countries across Europe and the world. Actions speak louder than words.
[Site link]

Immigration – debate, intolerance, free speech
What Happened When We Tried to Debate Immigration [part 1]
Matthew Goodwin and Eric Kaufmann
Quillette, 8 December 2018.

Immigration and diversity politics dominate our political and public debates. ...

... The debate, held in London on December 6, was a great success, featuring a nuanced and evidence-based discussion attended by 400 people.


Aside from ourselves, two university professors who between us have researched the issue for decades, the panel included Trevor Philips, the former Head of the Equality and Human Rights Commission (who is of African-Caribbean heritage), and David Aaronovitch, a liberal columnist at The Times. The debate was chaired by Claire Fox and co-sponsored by the Academy of Ideas, founded to provide a "forum committed to open and robust public debate in which ideas can be interrogated," and the online magazine UnHerd, which aims to draw attention to stories and ideas that do not usually get covered in the mainstream media.

... Before the event had taken place, before a word had been spoken, one professor accused us of "helping to advance a white nationalist agenda" and engaging in "nativist and racist discourse." Other academics retweeted accounts that suggested we were "complicit in violence," including the U.S. mail bombs and the mass shooting at a Pittsburgh synagogue (two of our panelists are of Jewish heritage). Still others contended that we were contributing to racism, that by posing the question we were "devaluing" scholars from minority backgrounds (Kaufmann is of mixed race).

In the spirit of compromise, and to meet our critics halfway, we changed the title of the event to: "Immigration and Diversity Politics: A Challenge to Liberal Democracy?" But that was not enough. Even after this change, academics joined with self-described anti-fascist activists to publish an open letter on the platform Open Democracy. Titled "Framing ethnic diversity as a 'threat' will normalise far-right hate," the letter claimed that the debate "was framed within the terms of white supremacist discourse" and "automatically targets communities already suffering from discrimination as part of the 'problem.'" While the letter did not call for the debate to be cancelled, it concluded that "no other alternative factor or scenario is identified as a 'threat.'" that the event had "racist presumptions," "contributes to far right 'dog whistling,'" and "serves to normalise ideas that should be firmly challenged." These claims, they continued, were "undeniable."

... One of our Wikipedia pages was vandalized while others sought to interest the press in a smear campaign. A network of activist academics and students – both inside and outside of our institutions – raised complaints with our universities. While we were not formally asked to cancel the debate, one of us came under pressure to withdraw. ...

Furthermore, the reason that academics have spent so much time exploring the idea of "threat" is because large numbers of people across Western democracies do feel under threat from immigration and rising ethnic diversity. There is no point shying away from it. It is reflected in countless studies and surveys, such as an Ipsos-MORI study last year, which found that across 25 countries an average of 42 percent of people believe that immigration is having negative effects on their country, while just under half feel that immigration "is causing their country to change in ways that they do not like." ...
[Site link]

Immigration – debate, intolerance, free speech
What Happened When We Tried to Debate Immigration [part 2]
Matthew Goodwin and Eric Kaufmann
Quillette, 8 December 2018.

But there is also a deeper issue here, which concerns the "normalization hypothesis." Warning against the "normalization" of the far-right has long been a cornerstone of thinking among anti-fascist and left-wing activists. The argument is that mainstream institutions like universities, the media and political parties should never give a platform to fascist or far-right figures because this treats them as legitimate actors, risks increasing their appeal, and fuels hostility towards immigrants and minorities. ...

The "normalization hypothesis" is widely accepted by journalists and academics, including those who work on populism, fascism and closely-related fields like immigration, identity, criminology, race and gender. ...

... Given the importance of free expression and inquiry in any open society, we believe it is incumbent upon those who demand an ethical limit on free expression in the interests of sensitivity to offer rigorous evidence of harm, and a method of demonstrating harm that is transparent and can be replicated and falsified.

The claim that our title was deeply offensive to ethnic minorities and risked fueling xenophobia by "mainstreaming" far-right discourse should be put under the microscope. Researchers must always be willing to open their claims to measurement and back assertions up with data. /.../ To turn our backs on the scientific method is to yield to our biases, abandon the quest for objectivity and simply engage in a naked struggle for power. ...

... the idea that exposing a controversial speaker to critical questioning, or using a controversial phrase to frame discussion on a "mainstream" platform somehow increases support for extremism, has no basis in social science. The "normalization" charge is an article of faith rather than a conclusion based on an empirically-verified theory. The fact that it is so often invoked to no-platform speakers on university campuses, or silence enquiry, means that it must be held to empirical account. ...

Whether or not you felt offended by our debate is anchored strongly in social construction: Those who feel the most strongly invested in liberal ideology, regardless of race, found the description about our debate more offensive than others. ...

Short of any empirical evidence that shows harms arising as a direct result of a debate over the harms of not having a debate, we feel that free societies should engage in open discussion of uncomfortable issues. ...

The reaction to our debate reflected the three psychological processes identified by Jonathan Haidt and Greg Lukianoff in their new book The Coddling of the American Mind. Haidt and Lukianoff warn that progressive activists at elite American campuses are engaging in precisely the kind of psychological processes that Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) seeks to correct. Catastrophizing involves focusing on the worst possible outcome as the most likely outcome. "If I don't get a good grade, my life is over," is one example. Another is the notion that a public debate will help fascists to triumph. ...

While we are all for robust debate, the response to our event reveals a great deal about the mindset of some of our most vociferous opponents, including those who teach our young adults in universities.
[Site link]

Multiculturalism – racial blending, identity politics
Will racial blending undermine identity politics? Let's hope so
Lionel Shriver
The Spectator, 7 December 2018.

Behold, the most incendiary statistic in America: the Census Bureau's projection of when whites will become a minority in what last century was 'their own' country. (In only 1980, 80 per cent of Americans were white. Mind, where the US leads, Europe often follows.) When in 2008 that red-letter date moved up to 2042, notes California demographer Dowell Myers: 'People went crazy.'

After decades of progressive lobbying for multicultural inclusion, the startling proximity of this demographic tipping point is enticing a certain brand of activist to embrace the rhetoric of replacement instead. Evident during the midterms, this new approach to the melting pot is militant. ...

The language of demographic conquest has obvious appeal. At last, no more begging for equal opportunity. Isn't triumph more gratifying than entreaty? The plan: subjugate mainstream culture, and then supplant it. If and when the power dynamic flips, the perceived arrogance of historical white domination would logically invite payback.

Looking to 2020, the younger, more radical wing of the Democratic party might reconsider this strategy, however tempting the rhetoric of unapologetic demographic takeover. First off, it's jumping the gun. Minorities are still regionally concentrated. More than 60 per cent of the country is still white, and 69 per cent of the electorate is white. Tell all these people that they're yesterday's news and you're looking forward to their being dead? You lose.

Worse, the victorious brandishing of the tipping-point invites political backlash. ...

But there is a third way: we could have a go at that statistic, which is soft, woolly and anachronistic.

The Census Bureau uses a peculiarly puristic definition of 'white', in reality a baggy, catchall category covering a vast range of genetic and ethnic backgrounds, and largely defined by what white people aren't: non-white. If you have one white and one non-white parent (like Obama), you're non-white. Indeed, check any other racial category in addition to 'non-Hispanic white', and the government doesn't count you as white. Yet in truth, few whites have exclusively European lineage, as customers so often discover.

Mixed-race Americans already constitute a not-insignificant 7 per cent of the population, and the number of mixed-race children is soon set to double. More than a quarter of Asians and Hispanics in the US marry outside their race. If you loosen the definition of 'white' and start including people who are, say, half white, and may identify as white (whatever that means), the proportion of America's whites is going up. With that more relaxed definition, the Census Bureau itself projects that as far out as 2060, 68.5 per cent of the US will still be white. ...

However satisfying, crowing over outnumbering the native-born erstwhile majority is divisive, and encourages whites to regard votes for minority candidates as votes for their own demise. Besides, as an American sick to death of race being put at the forefront of every issue, I adore the spanner of intermarriage – which creates a growing category of people who don't fit into the pigeonholes of identity politics, and mercifully blur the arbitrary dividing lines between groups that needn't be at each other's throats. I love the idea of race in future becoming increasingly vague.
[Site link]

Emigration – Africa
Tackling migration – An African perspective
Yvonne Aki-Sawyerr
Deutsche Welle, 7 December 2018.

For most of my life, I have lived away from my home city. I was born in Freetown, the capital of Sierra Leone. I lived in Ghana and then Canada as a child. Following a master's degree at the London School of Economics, I lived in the UK for 26 years. In my first job with Arthur Andersen, ...

Let me use the situation of my home city Freetown to give an African perspective on migration, against the backdrop of the fierce debate over the Global Compact on Migration of the United Nations. The current situation in Sierra Leone can be aptly described as dire based on a number of human development indices. Already, back in 2000 a survey found that over half of university-educated Sierra Leoneans were migrating to more developed countries.

A more recent study indicated that we have only two doctors and 17 nurses for every 100,000 inhabitants. I can testify to this body and brain drain from a personal experience: only seven of my 28 classmates who graduated from secondary school with excellent results in 1984 live in Freetown today.

This is an age-old phenomenon not just in Sierra Leone, but across Africa: Skilled people often turn their backs on their native cities and countries, and they seldom return. ...

In spite of this emigration, Freetown, like most African cities, still has to cope with net immigration due to the influx of low-skilled workers from rural areas. So, while we lose our professional capacity in providing essential services to support vulnerable, poor residents, we also have to cope with new arrivals seeking opportunities in our cities.

This is why, as the new mayor of Freetown, I have made human development one of my top priorities. We need to make skills and jobs accessible to young people if we want to curb migration. ...

African cities need to be part of the answer to problems caused by migration so that they can be mitigated. ...

This week, ahead of the UN conference on migration, the Mayors' Migration Council will be established in Marrakesh, led by mayors from around the world. For too long, the UN was focused on exchanging views only at the national and international level. It is unfortunate that the voices of mayors and local government are scarcely represented in these discussions.

If we want to deal with migration issues effectively, the voice of cities must be heard on international platforms.
[Site link]

Immigration – public opinion
The more English you feel, the more you think immigration is bad for Britain, study finds
Rory Tingle
MailOnline, 6 December 2018.

The more English a person feels the more likely they are to believe immigration has had a negative impact on Britain's economy and culture, a new survey has revealed.

But despite the survey finding that Scottish National Party voters were the most likely to be positive about the cultural and economic affects of immigration, there was little difference between the overall views of those north and south of the border.

The new data is part of the English and Welsh and Scottish attitudes towards immigration report produced by the National Centre for Social Research (NatCen) and published today.

It brings together data from the recent British and Scottish Social Attitudes surveys, conducted by the NatCen and ScotCen during the second half of 2017.

It found that the majority of people in both England and Wales and Scotland were more positive about immigration than negative.

In Scotland, 46% viewed immigration as good for Britain's economy, while 43% of Scots felt it enriched the country's culture.

This was similar to England and Wales where 47% of people thought immigration was good for the economy and 43% that it was good for its culture.

However, when NatCen looked at views based on political alliance and national identity, it found that the more English people felt the more likely they were to view immigration negatively.

While 43% of respondents who identified as English not British said immigration was bad for the economy, 32% said it had undermined British culture.

This compared to 17% and 8% of those who identified as British not English respectively.

Leave voters in both regions were much more likely to be negative about the impact of migration. ...

Sir John said that SNP voters in 2017 holding positive views about migration helped create the impression Scotland as a whole did as well.

But he said those Scots who supported other parties were less positive about immigration.

Sir John added: 'Consequently, although the balance of opinion about migration is much the same in Scotland as in the rest of Britain, the link between attitudes towards the subject and how people vote at election time is somewhat different north of the border.'
[Site link]

Multiculturalism – human rights, free speech
When truth is a crime
Theodore Dalrymple
Salisbury Review, Winter 2018.

It is not surprising in an age of Newspeak that a court set up to defend certain rights such as that to free speech should end up by suppressing them. ...

According to the European Court of Human Rights, free speech consists of freedom to say whatever the court, ex post facto, finds it acceptable for people to say. And in the case of E S, an Austrian woman who suggested during a seminar in Vienna that Muhammad was, or might have been, a paedophile, the court has ruled that the woman's right to free expression had to be 'carefully balanced... with the right of others to have their religious feelings protected, all to serve the legitimate aim of preserving religious peace in Austria.' It was therefore perfectly in order for E S to have been fined by Austrian courts for having said what she did.

It would be difficult to find a legal judgment in recent history that is morally more cowardly, intellectually feebler, and potentially more disastrous in its effects, than this. Among other considerations, the European Convention on Human Rights, which the court was set up to enforce, nowhere recognises a right not to have religious feelings offended. /.../ It surely requires very little reflection to understand how restrictive of almost any kind of speech a right not to offended in one's feelings would be. ...

Let us briefly examine the case. The court said that E S's claim had no substance in fact and was therefore merely insulting. The court therefore sets itself up as the arbiter of what in essence is an historical claim. But this was not a case of libel, in which the truth, falsehood or malice of what has been said about a living person is in question. Muhammad has been dead more than thirteen hundred years. ...

... Even if one accepted (as to some extent or other one surely must) the view that autres temps, autres moeurs, the religious feelings of the susceptible would hardly be assuaged: for the accurate or literally true description would imply that, far from having been an exemplar for subsequent ages to follow, Muhammad was a model to be avoided. And this runs contrary in a very fundamental way to the beliefs of Islam, which could hardly fail to offend sensibilities of many Moslems. In other words, the court's ruling is in essence not that certain untrue things may not be said of Muhammad, but that certain things may not be said of him even if true. The European Court of Human Rights is therefore not a court at all, in the sense that most of us understand the word: it is an Inquisition to root out heresy. ...

As to the 'legitimate aim of preserving religious peace in Austria', the Inquisitors seem to have accepted the following logic:

If you say x, person y says that he will become violent.

Therefore it is incumbent on you not to say x, rather than incumbent on person y not to threaten or even carry out violence.
The Inquisitors are therefore appeasers in the worst possible sense, and to rely on them to protect our freedoms is like relying on Mr Madoff to safeguard our savings. ...

But in any case, the judges displayed a startling ignorance, above all today, in suggesting that Muslims worship Muhammad. Although to outsiders it may appear as if they do so, they themselves would find the suggestion offensive and deeply blasphemous. The judges have therefore offended against Muslim feelings. I suggest that they shut up and be heavily fined.
[Site link]

Immigration abroad – public opinion, European Union
Immigration tops voter concerns in EU election season
Ryan Heath and Hanna Pawalec
Politico, 6 December 2018.

Immigration tops the list of voter concerns in 22 of the 27 EU countries that will vote in European Parliament election in 2019 – including Germany, France, Italy and Poland – for the fourth year in a row, according to an EU-wide survey conducted for the European Commission.

Terrorism was the top-ranked issue in Spain, Romania, Ireland, Croatia, and Lithuania.

The last time Europeans voted to send members of the European Parliament to Brussels and Strasbourg – in May 2014 – the "economic situation" dominated Europe's list of worries.

In 2015, immigration shot up the list as more than one million migrants came to Europe via the Mediterranean and through the Western Balkans.
[Site link]

Immigration abroad – Italy
Italian government reduces migrant landings by 96% in two years
Voice of Europe, 6 December 2018.

The Italian government has drastically reduced the number of migrant landings in the country. Since January this year 23,000 people arrived in Italy by sea and that's 96 per cent less than two years ago.

The migrants who do manage to arrive mostly come from Tunisia, Eritrea, Sudan and Pakistan.

Italy's large reduction in migrant landings shows that the policies of Interior Minister Matteo Salvini work. The migration hardliner refused numerous ships into Italy's ports and made a deal with the Libyan coastguard to return migrants.
[Site link]

Immigration – public opinion
Government is hiding the true cost of immigration to encourage public to support open borders, voters believe
Hugo Gye
The Sun, 5 December 2018.

Most Brits believe ministers are deliberately hiding the true cost of immigration, a shock report has revealed.

A majority of the public say they think the Government is lying about the toll taken by the influx of migrants.

And they accuse the authorities of deliberately letting in more people from abroad because they want to make Britain more diverse.

The Henry Jackson Society think-tank found that wide groups of society are now signed up to "conspiracy thinking on immmigration".

58 per cent of Brits said politicians have deliberately hidden how much immigration costs taxpayers and society.

And 51 per cent think the Government has "deliberately tried to make British society more diverse through its immigration policy".

Three out of ten voters said people who speak out against immigration are demonised for their views.

Leave supporters are more likely to distrust the Government on migration.

Researchers warned that the establishment has stoked the public's fear by refusing to acknowledge their concerns about the impact of open borders.
[Site link]

Immigration abroad – Belgium, United Nations
Belgium government on brink of COLLAPSE over UN migration pact
Carly Read
Daily Express, 5 December 2018.

Belgium's government is at risk crumbling over the United Nations' controversial Migration Pact, which has been welcomed by the nation's Prime Minister Charles Michel but challenged by the country's largest opposition party.

Bart de Wever, leader of the New-Flemish Alliance, has blasted the UN Migration Pact as unacceptable while Belgium's leader Mr Michel is keen to sign it in a move that could trigger the fall of the Belgian government. Mr de Wever said: "It's non-binding, but will that serve as an argument in court? The fact that the EU is no longer pursuing push back policies on refugees is the result of a court decision, not a political one." ...

Belgium is not the only nation to disagree on the controversial pact which would not only make immigration a human right, but also see those who challenge it jailed for committing hate crime.

The document has been boycotted by Italy, France, Poland, Israel, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Australia, Slovakia, Hungary and Austria which have all rejected the proposals in favour of tougher border controls.
[Site link]

Crime – gangs, London
London has 180 heavily-armed gangs with members as young as EIGHT roaming its streets, Met Police Chief Cressida Dick reveals
Richard Spillett
MailOnline, 5 December 2018.

Around 180 gangs now operate in London and are recruiting primary school children to their ranks, the head of the Met Police has revealed.

The capital has seen a surge in the murder rate this year, with 127 homicides already recorded and some areas becoming battlegrounds of tit-for-tat shootings and stabbings.

Cressida Dick, the Commissioner of the Met Police, today insisted that increasing stop and search checks and deploying armed officers to some areas is 'turning the tide' on spiralling violence.

But she warned that rooting out 'entrenched' gangs around the capital will take 'a long time'. ...

'We've got about 180 gangs in London and they are quite entrenched some of them and they are busy bringing children in.' ...

The Commissioner backed the use of 'tactical contact' by police, which has seen police drivers knocking into moped muggers who refuse to stop.
[Site link]

Multiculturalism – social cohesion
How multiculturalism divides us
Paul Embery
Unherd, 5 December 2018.

Let's start with the basics. Anyone who believes in freedom has a duty to defend the right of fellow citizens to live the life they choose within the parameters of the law. That means upholding their entitlement to worship whom and how they wish, dress and eat as they like, assemble with whom they choose, and so on.

These freedoms are fundamental to liberty, and a society that imposes restrictions on them will inevitably be less free. But as Britain and other Western nations experience deepening problems of societal fragmentation and atomisation, a serious assessment of the role of the State in facilitating integration and social harmony is crucial. In particular, consideration of the effects of the policy of State-sponsored multiculturalism is overdue.

Conventional wisdom has it, of course, that multiculturalism is an inherent good: progressive, inclusive, enlightened, the essence of equality. Sceptics are dismissed as reactionary nativists.

And yet a philosophy designed to break down barriers and bring people together has in fact achieved the very opposite. Modern Britain is dotted with monocultural ghettos whose inhabitants often live an utterly parallel existence to their compatriots dwelling in some cases just a few streets away.

Is it perhaps because the active promotion of separation and difference – for that, ultimately, is what State-sponsored multiculturalism amounts to – drives wedges between people and is inimical to integration? Might it be that we took a wrong turn when we opted for the salad bowl over the melting pot?

Cultural solidarity is hard-wired into the human psyche. People naturally gravitate towards those with whom they feel a sense of cultural understanding and attachment, and the societies most at ease with themselves are those in which deep and enduring common bonds exist, developed organically over generations through shared customs, language, institutions, religion and social mores. ...

The promotion of multiculturalism has the effect of unpicking this. It starts from the point that nothing that went before has any greater relevance to what exists now, that no culture or tradition should be elevated above others, and that the State should be if not an uninterested then certainly a disinterested party in the cultural life of the nation. In doing so, it dismisses an entire history, and violates the sense of belonging felt by those whose lives, as well as those of their ancestors, were so profoundly shaped by that history. ...

The political elites like to kid us about all this, of course. So they constantly preach the gospel of multiculturalism while ignoring its deleterious effects. Thus, we are invited to take pride in the fact that 'Britain is a diverse, multicultural society.' Well, parts of it certainly are. But much of it isn't. ...

These champions of multiculturalism will fiercely upbraid those who argue against their creed. There are the usual insinuations that opponents must be motivated by racism – a logical fallacy which conflates culture and race, and ignores the obvious fact that one can be a committed multiracialist without embracing multiculturalism. ...

Proponents of multiculturalism do not seem to see the hypocrisy in respecting ancient cultures and civilisations elsewhere while neglecting and derecognising our own.
[Site link]

Immigration abroad – EU, United Nations
EU countries mass BOYCOTT of UN meeting making MIGRATION a HUMAN RIGHT
Joe Gamp
Daily Express, 4 December 2018.

A new United Nations initiative to class migration as a HUMAN RIGHT is being boycotted by European Union (EU) member states, including Italy, France and Austria, who have all rejected the proposals in favour of tougher border controls.

This week's unveiling of UN proposals for universal migrant rights is being treated with such suspicion that only Britain, Holland and Denmark have signed up unreservedly. The so-called UN Global Compact for Migration aims to set out universal rights and conditions for migrants – but one Member of the European Parliament has pointed out that if adopted then even the criticising of the very concept of migration would be considered a hate crime. Italy, a nation tacking a huge migrant influx, was furious about the new 'meddling' legislation and refused to attend the meeting in Marrakech on December 10 and 11. ...

The UN's Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration was provisionally approved by UN members in July. ...

But the compact has since been rejected by UN states such as Austria, Poland, Israel, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Australia, Slovakia and Hungary. ...

The UN Global Compact for Migration was launched on September 19 2016 during a summit on migrants and refugees.

The pact's main objectives include making migration easier, boosting international efforts for safe passage in order to save lives, and minimising environmental factors.

The deal would also improve border management, provide basic services to migrants and ramp up laws against perceived as "anti-migration hate crimes".
[Site link]

Immigration abroad – multiculturalism, USA
Poll Shows Huge Democrat Bias Toward Muslims Over Christians
Neil Munro
Breitbart, 4 December 2018.

Sixty-eight percent of Democrats say employers should grant a request for prayer space by Muslims – but only 45 percent say employers should grant a similar request by Christian employees, says a survey by Grinnell College.

In contrast to the Democrats' 23-point anti-Christian bias, the November poll showed only a ten point gap in response from conservatives.

Thirty percent of Republicans say employers should provide a prayer space for Muslim employees and 40 percent say employers should support a similar service for Christians, according to the Grinnell College poll of roughly 500 people.

The same poll showed a three-point pro-Christian skew among Donald Trump's voters and a huge 20-point pro-Muslim skew among Hillary Clinton voters. ...

The poll asked, "Suppose a group of devout Christians [or devout Muslims] asked their employer to provide a private place for them to pray together. Even if it is a hardship [on business], do you think the employer should or should not accommodate the request?"
[Site link]

Politics – Conservative Party
There is no Brexodus – but they will still cook the immigration books
Alp Mehmet
Conservative Woman, 3 December 2018.

Let's be clear, the 74,000 figure was of 74,000 more EU nationals arriving than leaving in the year to June 2018 – hardly a Brexodus – a number that equals three-quarters of a million people in ten years; and that is without taking into consideration future births or dependants joining them.

This narrative may have suited the government, because it helped divert attention from the painfully high non-EU net migration figure of a quarter of a million also reported, which happens to be the highest for 14 years. ...

Cabinet papers leaked last week to the Telegraph detailed the Government's post-Brexit immigration plans. If reported correctly by the Telegraph, these plans, contrary to Mrs May's promises, will largely squander any benefit gained from our departure from the EU.

Far from reining in the uncontrolled flow of lower-skilled workers from the EU after free movement ends, they reveal the free flow of cheap labour from the EU will continue. It would appear therefore that the government, after massive pressure from the employer lobbies, have caved in and even have in mind, post-Brexit, the possibility of throwing the net further, beyond the EU. ...

The dishonesty is that not only will this allow unlimited access to cheap labour for business to continue but that it will also, ostensibly, reduce net migration. The offering of 11-month visas for those wishing to work in lower-skilled occupations will, in effect, result in the fiddling of the immigration statistics. ...

... An additional complication with the scheme, even if it has been devised with the EU in mind, is that the Government have said that post-Brexit all applicants – EU and non-EU citizens – will be treated in the same way.

The potential for attracting would-be migrants from countries whose citizens already pose a high risk of overstaying their permitted time and going to ground is likely to go up significantly.
[Site link]

Immigration abroad – deportation, Denmark
Denmark to banish foreign criminals to remote island
James Rothwell
Daily Telegraph, 3 December 2018.

Foreign criminals sentenced to deportation are to be banished to a remote island off the coast of Denmark, the country's government has announced.

Finance minister Kristian Jensen said the criminals will be detained at a facility on Lindholm, an uninhabited seven-hectare island in the province of Vordingborg. ...

The Lindholm facility will house rejected asylum seekers who have been convicted of crimes, as well as foreign citizens who do not have permission to stay but cannot be deported for legal reasons.

For example, some of those due to be detained at the facility are stateless, while others come from countries which do not have a readmission agreement with Denmark.

"They will not be imprisoned," Mr Jensen told Danish news agency Ritzau.

"There will be a ferry service to and from the island, but the ferry will not operate around the clock, and they must stay at the departure centre at night. That way we will be better able to monitor where they are."
[Site link]

Immigration – bigotry
A special kind of poison
Laura Perrins
Conservative Woman, 3 December 2018.

Matthew d'Ancona of the Guardian believes that if you voted to Leave the EU because you were concerned about immigration then you are a bigot. A bigot, plain and simple. ...

I agree with d'Ancona when he says a lot of the Brexit vote was about immigration but of course I don't agree with his assessment that this makes you a bigot. ...

The expansion of our population since 2004 is unprecedented. It grew to an estimated record 65.1 million in 2015, increasing by more than half a million in just one year since 2014. And you are not permitted to blink an eye about this. Not one teensy, weensy bit, otherwise they will bring out the BIGOT insult.

Britain has experienced a population increase of over 5 million in just over a decade, from 2005 to 2016. The previous 5 million took 35 years to achieve, between 1970 and 2005. This is the sharpest increase in the population in 70 years. But you are not allowed ask any questions or demand any answers or vote in a way that will upset the dudes at the Guardian – or else.

In addition to this we are to accept, according to d'Ancona, that this population increase has had no impact on the provision of housing, health or education services because magically the law of supply and demand does not exist any more. It just disappeared along with d'Ancona's sense of loyalty to his fellow working-class citizens. ...

And let's just take on the NHS and social care point. There is no doubt these services are kept afloat by the hard-working immigrants, because in a socialised health system you need workers who are willing to work for what would be below market rate, and these are often from poorer countries.

However, it is one thing for a country to hire nurses and doctors from a poorer country if they are spare to that country, but there is absolutely nothing moral about stealing nurses, doctors and health care workers from poorer countries if that country cannot spare them. So, don't feel so smug about your own open borders if in truth that talented Bulgarian doctor in a London A&E has left Bulgaria 'deepening the crisis in their already dysfunctional health systems'.

Finally, d'Ancona seems a bit upset that economic matters no longer trump all when it comes to political debate and policy, as 'culture is nudging old-fashioned political economy out of its prime spot'. To which I say – so what?

Are we no longer permitted to have a culture of our own? Have the multi-cultis abolished British culture? And this from the very same people who no doubt travel the world to 'discover and experience' other cultures. It seems everyone else's culture is better than the stinking British and their 'extremely unpleasant nativism'.

The headline states: 'Let's be honest about what's really driving Brexit: bigotry.' No, let's be honest about what's really driving the likes of d'Ancona: pure contempt for his fellow citizens and a total lack of empathy about why some people might not be on board with the whole open-borders lark.

I generally try to avoid imputing motive, something the Left does to the Right all the time, but this time it is unavoidable. Matthew d'Ancona believes many of his fellow Brits are bigots for caring and daring to preserve their own national and cultural heritage.
[Site link]

Racism – Islamophobia
Muslims demand full legal protection from Islamophobia
Dan Sabbagh
The Observer, 2 December 2018.

Muslim organisations are urging Theresa May, Jeremy Corbyn and all other party leaders to adopt a newly proposed working definition of Islamophobia in an attempt to put pressure on a reluctant Home Office to follow suit.

The Muslim Council of Britain and other Islamic groups want the Conservatives and Labour to take the lead in the aftermath of a week marked by public outrage over the alleged racist bullying of a 15-year-old Syrian refugee in Huddersfield.

The definition was set out in a report published by a cross-party group of MPs last week and says: "Islamophobia is rooted in racism and is a type of racism that targets expressions of Muslimness or perceived Muslimness." ...

The plea for politicians to adopt the definition comes after a bruising summer dominated by rows about antisemitism in the Labour party as well as Islamophobia among the Conservatives, following a particularly controversial newspaper column written by the former foreign secretary, Boris Johnson, in which he compared fully veiled women to letterboxes and bank robbers. ...

Those who worked on the definition of Islamophobia wanted it to capture the reality that, while Muslims are not a race, abuse against them amounts to a form of racism. At the same time it was felt important that the definition did not silence non-racist criticism of Islam.

Two of the most influential contributions to the parliamentary group's work were made by Professor Salman Sayyid of Leeds University and AbdoolKarim Vakil of King's College London.
[Site link]

Illegal immigration – smuggling
UK 'lacks will' to tackle British-based people-smuggling 'mafia', French mayor claims
Abul Taher
Mail on Sunday, 2 December 2018.

Ruthless people-smugglers risking the lives of migrants in the English Channel are controlled by British-based 'mafia bosses', yet UK authorities 'lack the political will to tackle them', a French mayor claimed yesterday.

Franck Dhersin, mayor of Teteghem, a village near Dunkirk, said traffickers cramming boats with migrants are mostly Iraqi Kurdish gangs investing their profits in the UK. He said French coastguard services are receiving almost nightly calls to rescue migrants from inadequate, overcrowded boats.

'It is only a matter of time before someone dies trying to cross the Channel in boats,' he said.

'Our intelligence shows that there are several gangs operating in this area, in Calais, Dunkirk and Boulogne,' he added. 'These gangs are mostly Iraqi Kurdish but the leaders of these gangs are based in the UK. They have dual nationality, British and Iraqi.

'We have got this information from the foot soldiers we arrested in Calais. The gang bosses are reinvesting the money into the property market, in restaurants and nightclubs. They send some money back to Iraq, but most of it is reinvested in Britain.'
[Site link]

Asylum – fake child
Revealed: Adult asylum seeker who posed as a 15-year-old schoolboy to sit GCSEs 'is still being treated as a child by British authorities'
Sebastian Murphy-bates and Martin Robinson
MailOnline, 2 December 2018.

The Iranian asylum seeker who posed as a 15-year-old GCSE student is still being treated as a child despite him being outed as an adult.

The 6ft 1in man, who came to Britain using the name Siavash, spent six weeks as a Year 11 pupil at Stoke High School in Ipswich, Suffolk, but was only taken out of class when pupils became upset and parents threatened a boycott.

An official probe found he is almost certainly over 18 and should be treated as an adult asylum seeker, which would mean he could be deported if his claim is refused.

But a source claims that the Home Office is still treating him as a child and that he is still claiming to be under 18 on his application, telling The Sun: 'He's been pulled out of school but he's still protected as a minor.' ...

In Norway all child asylum seekers had their wrists and teeth x-rayed last year because in 2016 around 40 per cent of under-18s arriving in the country were actually found to be over 20.
[Site link]

Politics – United Nations
Criticising migration could become CRIMINAL offence under new plan
Thomas Hunt
Sunday Express, 2 December 2018.

A leading MEP has warned EU citizens they could be "jailed" for criticising migration policies if a new United Nations agreement is acted upon.

The United Nations Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration seeks to make immigration a universal human right. MEP Marcel de Graaff said: "I would like to say some words on the global compact on migration. On the 10th and 11th of December there will be an international congress in Marrakesh Morocco. The participating countries are set to sign this agreement and although this joint agreement is not binding it is still meant to be the legal framework on which the participating countries commit themselves to build new legislation.

"One basic element of this new agreement is the extension of the definition of hate speech.

"The agreement wants to criminalise migration speech. Criticism of migration will become a criminal offence.

"Media outlets that give room to criticism of migration can be shut down.

"The compact for migration is legalisation of mass migration.

"It is declaring migration as a human right so it will, in effect, become impossible to criticise Mrs Merkel's welcome migrants politics without being at risk of being jailed for hate speech." ...

The document is an "intergovernmentally negotiated agreement, prepared under the auspices of the United Nations, that covers all dimensions of international migration in a holistic and comprehensive manner".

Austria, Australia, Bulgaria, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Italy, Israel, Poland, Slovakia and Switzerland have already stated they will not sign the agreement.

One of the "guiding principles" of the document asks for a "whole-of-society approach" to promoting mass migration, including the role of the media.
[Site link]

Immigration abroad – Bosnia
EU Confirms Funding for Migrants Massed at Bosnia Border, Locals Say Crime Rife
Virginia Hale
Breitbart, 2 December 2018.

As the EU confirmed it was spending taxpayers' cash on migrants seeking to break into the bloc, Bosnians have pleaded for the Balkans migration route to be shut down amidst increasing "militancy" from newcomers.

Authorities in border towns in Bosnia, which is outside the European Union, have been struggling to cope with increasingly bold and forceful attempts to push through police lines and onto EU soil since mid-October, when thousands of third world immigrants began camping near the border with EU member Croatia – reportedly following misinformation that Croatia was set to open its frontiers.

In the border town of Bihac, Mayor Suhret Fazlic said the 3,000 or so migrants currently living in the area nearby were presenting a major problem for the city with "militant behaviour" and committing hundreds of criminal offences. ...

On Thursday, the EU Commission announced it would be spending an additional €500,000 of taxpayers' money on "humanitarian assistance" to third world migrants camping in the Balkans with the intention of illegally crossing into the bloc.

"Refugees and migrants continue to arrive in Bosnia and Herzegovina and the EU is committed to provide humanitarian assistance to those in need," Aid Commissioner Christos Stylianides boasted in a statement which noted Brussels has spent €31 million on migration-related projects in the region since 2015.

Earlier this week, the UN Migration Agency/International Organization for Migration (IOM) admitted "80 to 85 percent" of immigrants attempting to break into the EU from the Balkans are "economic migrants and not people who need international protection".

IOM coordinator for the region, Peter Van der Auweraert, said "roughly 35 percent are Pakistanis", accounting for the largest proportion of migrants, while around 20 percent claim to be from Syria.

"But concerning the Syrians, I have doubts because we also have a number of people from North Africa who say they are Syrian," he added, telling Euronews: "In total, between 20,000 and 21,000 people have entered Bosnia since the beginning of the year and 4,500 of them are still here.

"Therefore, three-quarters of the migrants managed to enter Croatia illegally," Van der Auweraert said.
[Site link]

Immigration abroad – public opinion, France
Almost 80% of French don't want to accept more migrants, according to new opinion poll
Alex King
Voice of Europe, 2 December 2018.

According to an opinion poll on immigration conducted by Ifop, in partnership with the Jean Jaures Foundation and the American Jewish Committee, 52 per cent of French men and women believe that France welcomes "too many foreigners".

A further 27 per cent believe that France welcomes "enough", meaning that a total of 79 per cent of the country's citizens believe that France should not welcome any more immigrants.

The poll, which was published in the weekly Journal du Dimanche, also revealed that 64 per cent of respondents agreed with the statement: "our country already has many foreigners and welcoming additional immigrants would be undesirable".

77 per cent said that they fear a policy that is too welcoming of immigrants, and 71 per cent believe that excessive migration will lead to a decrease in wages, due to migrants' willingness to work for lower pay. ...

With the majority of migrants having arrived from countries across the Middle East and North Africa, in particular Libya and Syria, Pew Research Center has predicted that Western Europe will see a dramatic rise in its Muslim population, with France forecast to see a rise from 8.8% in 2016 to 18.0% by 2050.
[Site link]

Illegal immigration – via Ireland
Georgian 'people smuggling gang took advantage of lax Irish borders to smuggle their illegal migrant families and girlfriends into the UK on ferries to Wales'
Richard Spillett
MailOnline, 1 December 2018.

A gang of Georgians took advantage of lax Irish border controls to smuggle illegal migrants into the UK, a court has heard.

Gurami Shariashvili, 27, and a group of his compatriots allegedly helped their girlfriends and family members to claim asylum in the Republic of Ireland before smuggling them across the border and into mainland Britain via the ferry to North Wales.

George Kapitadze, who has pleaded guilty to conspiracy to break immigration rules, was stopped by Special Branch officers at Holyhead port as he drove four female Georgians into the country, on June 22 last year.

A jury heard how Shariashvili conspired with family members Levani, 30, Giri, 45, alongside Mikhail Mamulashvili, 35, Leri Mgaloblishvili, 45, and Ilia Diasamidze, 35, to smuggle the economic migrants using a variety of methods.

In June 2017, a man called Giorgi Berikashvili was cought trying to board a flight from Belfast to Manchester using a fake Portuguese passport after he'd travelled to Northern Ireland from the Republic. ...

Gurami and Giri Shariashvili, both of Feltham, Middlesex, Mamulashvili, of Eastham, London, and Mgalobshvili, of London all deny conspiracy to facilitate breach of immigration law. ...

The trial continues.
[Site link]

Politics – Conservative Party
Andrew Green: Immigration. Voters will spurn the end of free movement if it brings no reduction in numbers
Lord Green
ConservativeHome, 1 December 2018.

This week's immigration figures have made uncomfortable reading for a government that has pledged a major reduction in immigration. EU net migration is still, despite Brexit, at 74,000 – roughly the size of the British army. Non-EU migration is a quarter of a million – that is, the highest for 14 years.

Meanwhile, it is curious, to put it mildly, that the Prime Minister should be majoring on her achievement in bringing free movement to an end just as leaked Cabinet documents suggest that the Government is about to lose much of the benefit by caving in to the employer lobbies. They are planning, it seems, to camouflage their surrender by fiddling the immigration statistics.

The Prime Minister has indeed chosen as the top reason for backing her deal with the EU that "free movement will come to an end, once and for all, with the introduction of a new skills-based immigration system". However, the Daily Telegraph had a leak of Cabinet papers describing how the Government proposes to manage migration post-Brexit. If broadly correct, it could well throw away much of any benefit gained from our departure from the EU.

The Government seems to have in mind fiddling the immigration statistics. They would do this by offering eleven-month visas for those wishing to work in lower skilled occupations. Presumably, this is intended to appease the employer lobbies who want continued, and preferably unlimited, access to cheap labour. The trick is this. When passengers arrive in the UK a sample are asked whether they plan to remain in the UK for a year or more. If so, they are asked further questions, and are then included in the statistics as immigrants, but if they have visas which are only valid for 11 months they will say no and walk on through.

That ruse will keep them out of the statistics but, once the eleven months are up, how could their departure possibly be enforced? A previous scheme for low skilled hospitality workers had to be closed in 2005 amidst Home Office concerns that it was being used to facilitate illegal immigration. The same could happen again with these workers joining the population of illegal immigrants who are estimated by former Home Office officials to number about one million. Alternatively, they could work legally for eleven months (probably at higher pay) and then drop off the radar. The Home Office do not remotely have the resources to find them, let alone remove them. Indeed resources devoted to border control fell by 20 per cent in the five years to April 2017. ...

It is all very well for the Government to claim that it has restored "control" of migration but, if that leads to another increase in numbers, the outcome would be deeply unwelcome to the public, nearly two thirds of whom consider that immigration has been too high over the last decade; among Conservative voters that is 84 per cent.
[Site link]

Immigration abroad – USA
Feds catch convicted murderer in migrant caravan: DHS
Stephen Dinan
Washington Times, 30 November 2018.

Homeland Security said Friday that a convicted murderer was among the members of the migrant caravan, and was caught trying to sneak into the U.S. late last week.

Until four months ago Miguel Angel Ramirez, 46, was in a Honduran prison serving time for murder, authorities said. ...

Homeland Security says it has identified 600 criminals within the caravan.

"The fact that Border Patrol arrested a murderer within the first caravan-related apprehensions at our southern border proves how real the threat of the caravan is to our national security and public safety," said department spokesman Tyler Q. Houlton.
[Site link]

Recent news and views

Recent news and views (this page, above).
These extracts are ones not yet included in any of the following pages which are updated less often than this page.

Selected news and views in date order

News and views - selected extracts for 2018 except recent ones (seld.htm).
News and views - selected extracts 2017 (seld4.htm).
News and views - selected extracts 2016 (seld3.htm).
News and views - selected extracts 2013-2015 (seld2.htm).
News and views - selected extracts before 2013 (seld1.htm).

These are the more notable or substantial items, omitting ones that are more lightweight or ephemeral. These can be found also in the main collections shown in the pages described below, but are copied here for those who want to skip the less important material. Some items are, of course, borderline but have to be either included or excluded. The extracts are in reverse date order, so the latest are at the top of the page.

News and views in date order

Extracts of news and views in reverse date order, so the latest are at the top of the page. Items that are less important or more ephemeral are included along with those that are more notable. If you prefer to read by starting at an earlier date and working forwards, you can do so either by using the "Up" links provided or by going through the summary list (see below) in the desired order and using the hyperlink from each item there to the relevant extract.
From 1 January 2018, except recent ones.
2008 and 2009.
2007 and earlier.

News and views in subject order

These are the same extracts as given elsewhere in date order, but they are presented here by subject. To avoid having too many subject headings, 'multiculturalism' here includes multiracialism and multiethnic issues; 'population' includes overpopulation.
From 1 January 2018, except recent ones.
2008 and 2009.
2007 and earlier.


A list of some publications on immigration and related matters (pubs.htm). Not updated recently.

Links to other sites

Links to relevant other sites of possible interest (sites.htm). Not updated recently.

The date given for an extract occasionally differs slightly from the date given for the article on a website. This is because it is not uncommon for an article to appear on a publisher's website the day before it appears in the printed version of the newspaper.

Some reports here do not mention immigration or immigrants, but their relevance is indicated elsewhere. For example, a report on the consequences of population pressure is relevant since the rise in the UK's population is largely due to mass immigration. A report on the level of knife crime might not at first seem relevant here, since there is usually no mention of immigration. However, other reports indicate that it is a significant factor. An item on education can be relevant because inadequate education in the UK is a reason given by some business managers for employing foreigners.

Where longer extracts of an article are divided into several parts, this is almost always done only for convenience of presentation here.

Where no webpage link is provided, the source is usually, with the exception mainly of older extracts, the printed publication. In these cases, many but not all of the full reports can be found on the publishers' websites. However, if searching for the full report, note that it is not unusual for the heading and the text to have been modified. For example, the heading "British television is hideously white, says equality chief", printed in The Daily Telegraph, is or was "Britain's most popular television programmes 'too white', says Trevor Phillips" on the newspaper's website.

Extracts can, if preferred, be read in chronological order by using the "" link to go to the start of the item next above the one just read.

The address of this site was until early July 2011.

Please report errors and omissions to feedback ; (replace the semi-colon with @ and omit spaces) - thank you.

Number of recent news items on this page: 49

Site address: