As everyone knows, if Mr Tusk were to return to power as an obedient child of Brussels, he would agree on the spot to the EU’s plan to accept immigrants. How many will it be? The EU currently expects several tens of thousands. But according to probably underestimated data from Eurostat, 2.4 million immigrants should be admitted in 2030 and 71 million in 2080. The UN also states that by 2050 as much as 82 percent of population growth in developed countries would come from immigration!
What the Muslims failed to achieve neither in 732, when Charles Martel stopped them at Tours, nor in 1683, when King Sobieski defeated them at Vienna, will now become a fact, as a result of the capitulation of the Brussels authorities and their servants !
We are only at the beginning of this path. But the disastrous consequences of this policy are already being felt. This is very clear from the example of France. The country welcomed 246,000 immigrants in 2021 and 320,000 in 2022. There are now 7 million of them in France, or more than 10%. population, but one more amount needs to be added: children of first-generation immigrants. Bruno Tertais, deputy director of the Strategic Research Foundation, claims that by 2022, 75 percent of France’s population growth will come from immigration. However, the wave will be amplified not only by new immigration, but also by the fact that Muslims are having more children than native French people. In 2022, 22 percent of the names given to newborns in France were Arabic! According to some predictions, the Muslim population in France will become the majority by mid-century.
What are the consequences in France today? Is welcoming newcomers profitable, as some claim? Well, economist Benoit Perrin has calculated that immigration brings France a profit (some work and pays taxes) of about 116 billion euros, but costs 170 billion euros per year (due to various social and medical benefits). This means that “we have a deficit of 54 billion euros per year due to immigration.”
But the intangible costs are even more dramatic. Most Muslim newcomers are unable and unwilling to assimilate or even integrate. So they live together and soon occupy entire neighborhoods of large cities, or even cities in practice, such as Roubaix (100,000) or Trappes (35,000). Everything there is decorated in Islamic style: clothing (especially for women), food, mosques and Arabic customs. People no longer hear church bells, only phone calls from the mosque. Slowly these are neighborhoods and cities where there is no security and where the police or even the fire brigade hesitate to enter.
These Muslim areas, where young people struggle to find work, are overrun by drug trafficking and gang fighting. There are shootings every week, not only in Arab neighborhoods but also in city centers, as recently in Marseille, where bullets sometimes hit people who have nothing to do with gangs. Today, in many peripheral neighborhoods of large cities, there is no sense (or reality) of safety. In addition, people of immigrant origin (about 15 percent of the population) commit 50 percent. all crimes in the country.
The political impact of immigration is also becoming increasingly visible: three-quarters of Muslims vote for the French ultra-left, as we saw in the last presidential elections.
The way things are going, the French identity will very quickly cease to exist if we continue to accept the Brussels decrees. Worst of all, immigration advocates use humanitarian slogans to encourage the acceptance of Muslim immigrants. In fact, encouraging immigration is an extremely anti-humanitarian act. Being uprooted from one’s roots is no cause for joy for an emigrant. Even more so if this means that you become alienated in another country, are often unemployed and end up in the world of drugs, gangs and crime. Dragging these people out of Arab countries means dooming them (in the vast majority of cases) to misfortune. Moreover, it is a death sentence for the countries from which they come and which – deprived of their more dynamic populations – lose the possibility of any development! This is therefore not good for the immigrants themselves, nor for their countries of origin, nor for the citizens of the countries of destination, who have to live in danger and risk losing their own identity. Immigration is a lose-lose operation. It is only positive for the mafia, which makes billions in profits by taking advantage of these poor people.
The humanitarian stance is about respecting the identity of everyone, wherever they are. We need an Arab identity in Arab countries, as well as a French identity in France or a Polish identity in Poland! A humanitarian policy would consist of rich countries creating a large fund (like the Marshall Plan) to finance the development of countries from which people emigrate. Everyone would benefit from this, except the said mafia.
Unfortunately, the Brussels policy, supported by Mr Tusk, is still suicidal. Let the Poles think about it. Do they want Poland to quickly experience the situation France is in now? Do they want to move towards the loss of identity that we would inevitably experience if we listened to people like Tusk? Do the Poles really want this?
Source: wPolityce