This week the BBC held a World on the Move Day dedicated to the migrant crisis. It was obvious from its slushy offerings that the BBC made no coherent attempt to distinguish between refugees, asylum seekers and economic migrants. Instead we got a barrage of manipulative and patronising ‘reporting’ and a dribbling diatribe from a motley assortment of organisations. No amount of virtue-signalling and mawkish sentiment can mask the fact that most of the immigrants coming to our shores are not refugees but economic migrants.
This lack of clarity serves only to further antagonise and polarise opinion. While the BBC indulges itself in a day of maudlin nonsense, it neglects to report on black market gang masters, slave labour, sex trafficking and the increase in terrorism, all which accompany uncontrolled immigration. There are genuine refugees and asylum seekers who desperately need our help but we need to avoid histrionics. Although we must provide sanctuary to those truly in need, the reality is that we do not have enough resources to take in an unlimited number of migrants. Since 2008 Europe has been economically flatlining. The UK is heavily in debt. We do not have enough social housing, hospitals and schools sufficiently to support our current population, let alone new economic migrants.
Immigration is vital to ensure Britain does not develop into an homogeneous bloc, as this is culturally, socially and economically unhealthy. But an open door policy on immigration results in ideological polarisation. Human beings are pack animals by nature, tribal by instinct. We want to belong to a group and look to the strongest among us to help us take care of ourselves and our children.
Our consciences, intelligence and spirituality elevate us from the more base aspects of ourselves. But when our resources and way of life are unreasonably threatened we lose these enlightened parts of ourselves and become territorial and aggressive. Societies integrate successfully when there are adequate resources. The speed in which our society is changing though immigration, combined with competition for scarce resources, only serves to create fear, panic and distrust among us all.
The BBC is complicit in dismissing our concerns about immigration as ‘racist’. Why is it racist to want the government that we elected to take care of its own citizens? Why is it taboo to protest against an open door policy on immigration? Why does the BBC and its ilk insist on describing economic migrants as ‘refugees’? The BBC is so desperate to promote the EU agenda on immigration that it clumsily reported on the city of Miami as an example of successful immigration. Affluent, educated Hispanics certainly contributed to the growth of Miami, but I have yet to read about a nuclear physicist or captain of industry appearing among those ‘refugees’ terrorising Christians in Germany.
The BBC also triumphantly brandished a demand by the insidious Save the Children charity that refugee children are enrolled in school within one month of arriving in the UK. Perhaps those who run that charity would like to donate some of their bloated earnings to building new schools as a way to accommodate this? There was even a request by researchers at the Open University to provide refugees with a better map from Syria to Europe. This ridiculous virtue-signalling only serves to enrich people traffickers and drains a country of its most precious resource – people.
I was further enraged by the disingenuous interview with Labour Party member, Lord Dubs, who escaped Nazi Germany on the Kindertransport. The BBC’s attempt to compare Jews who fled for their lives from Nazi Germany to economic migrants from Algeria is disgraceful. It cheapens the memory of the Holocaust. As a Jew I felt revolted at the sight of a Holocaust survivor being used by the BBC to promote their dishonest agenda.
The laughable centrepiece of this immigration propaganda day was the speech by Angelina Jolie, the UN’s special envoy. Jolie says countries have an ‘international responsibility’ to look after migrants. I am curious as to why this UN-appointed mouthpiece admonished only the dying West and not wealthy countries in Asia and the Middle East. I refuse to listen to political preaching from a woman who used to wear a vial of her husband’s blood around her neck. I also have no respect for the UN, which is a corrupt organisation run as a cartel by dictators and wealthy despots. We only need to look at who is in charge of the UN Human Rights panel – Saudi Arabia – to know that the UN is morally bankrupt.
Why does the West have to take responsibility for conflicts and man-made famines caused by these corrupt dictators and greedy despots in other parts of the world? We must stand up to these fascists without being afraid of being accused of Islamophobia or racism. Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States are not indulging in self-flagellation over their migrant polices. Neither is the UN instructing them to open their borders. We can debate the pros and cons of the Iraq war until we run out of breath. Given the history of the Middle East there would still be some sort of turmoil happening and we would still be facing some sort of migration crisis – regardless of whether we had intervened or not.
The BBC immigration fest was like a propaganda broadcast from North Korea. We are instructed to cry on cue and worship at the altar of celebrity, all in the name of immigration. Woe betide us if we divert from the party line.