Phoney ‘Refugees’ And Phones- Calling All Crimmigrants?
Up early today, as I’m in Bali, enjoying time with people I don’t see often enough…
…and this morning I’m energised by the thought of the hotel’s swimming pool!
So not too much time for blog output this week.
But a useful article this month, useful but horrific too, though an element of fake news can be spotted, by The Economist’s inaccurate use of the word ‘refugees’ to describe a bunch of Iraqi illegals on the French Channel coast.
Not Calais crimmigrants this time, but some den in Dunkirk, where mostly Iraqi refugees live until they manage to get on a truck to Britain…
How often does the media need to be told that REAL refugees flee to the nearest safe country. Even a rudimentary knowledge of geography tells us that…
…unless they somehow got a plane directly from Iraq to France, these Iraqis MUST have passed through other countries to get there.
These ‘refugees’ were most likely among the alien rabble we saw stomping through Greece, Serbia, Austria and/or Italy, before they got to France.
And even skipping that, if they are now in France, turning some neighbourhood of Dunkirk into the same sort of squalid squat whose denizens made the lives of Calaisiens hell for so long…
…is France not a safe country?
And if so, then what sort of ‘refugees’ are these people, STILL not content to be in a safe and civilised democracy, unwilling to apply for ‘asylum’ there, instead eagerly plotting further illegal incursions into the UK?
Answer that question for yourselves.
But I know what I think…
These men prowling Dunkirk left decent Iraqis to fight beside their Western allies against the ISIS rape-gang’s caliphate. These men prefer to grub for NGO hand-outs and alarm the decent French folk in Dunkirk.
However, most of you understand all that, though it needs to be repeated until the media hacks clean up their act and describes illegal aliens for what they are.
What’s useful about The Economist article is what it says about malignant migrants and mobile phones.
Some of the residents buy pricey SIM cards brought over from Britain, where buyers need not show an ID, as they must in France. http://www.economist.com/news/international/21716637-technology-has-made-migrating-europe-easier-
PRICEY, please note – poor parasites, getting every kind of largesse from so-called ‘charities’ – even fur coats…Fur Coats for Crimmigants? Don’t Give To PETA!…but there’s handy cash for PRICEY phone-cards?
Not all the wasters need to dig deep into their pockets, though – there’s even a special ‘charity’ called “Phone Credit for Refugees and Displaced People!”
No, we won’t resume our discussion of misusing the word ‘refugees’ – let’s press on with what’s revealed in The Economist
Their importance goes well beyond staying in touch with people back home.
People Back Home?
The phones also bring news and pictures of friends and family who have reached their destination…
Friends and family?
And if left-liberals reckon those suspicions of mine are harsh, then the article provides an unambiguous assertion on how these phones are used, demonstrating an urgent need to focus on the problem..
…motivating more migrants to set out.
That’s not fake news, it’s bad news!
Time for preemptive action, if it’s true, and it undoubtedly is true, that crimmigrant phones –
– are used for researching journeys and contacting people-smugglers. Any rumour of a new, or easier, route spreads like wildfire.
So, if we recognise the risk, are we to ignore it? Surely not? Thus the question arises…
WHAT IS TO BE DONE?
I’m honestly not sure how best this can be handled.
One might think security forces should be ordered into both the ‘asylum centres’ formally organised under government auspices and alien squatter camps, like that in Dunkirk, and seize the phones.
What do you readers suggest?