Kenn's Laws | | REAL Black History | History & Archaeology | History of Racial Violence

Why I am not a Holocaust denier | Kenn Sings | Why Racism is Wrong | Why White Supremacy is Wrong | Why Antisemitism Is Wrong

MUST READ ► My Horrific Experience With A Psychopath

Why American blacks don't want
to go back to 'racist-free' Africa

Support my hard work via Patreon ►

December 15, 2017 -- Germany lay in ashes at the close of the Second World War. 

Using a little girl as a sympathy prop, the media tugs
on our vulnerability: empathy. All they want is a normal life.
Sorry, but committing over 32,000 document terror attacks
since 9-11/2001 may be normal in Muslim countries,
but it's not acceptable in civilized Western nations. 

Most Germans didn't flee. They rebuilt their nation. 

The Cultural Revolution devastated China through the 1960s. Countless millions died. There was no wave of Chinese fleeing the country. Rather, they stayed and rebuilt their nation. 

Middle Easterners, including hordes from Pakistan, seem incapable of rebuilding their societies. The reason? They apparently lack the inherent aptitude. 

And so they seek a better life — and who can blame them — by leeching off Western nations. 

Granted, there are some who are gifted and contribute to their host nations. But taken in the aggregate, the millions of mostly Muslim "migrants" have been little more than an invective festering infection that does nothing to enhance Western nations. 

German government officials are pondering paying these invaders to go home. Are these officials serious? We doubt it. 

From BBC ▼

If you'd travelled across the world to pursue a better life, would you move back in return for money?

Germany is betting that the answer is yes.

The country has long offered migrants and asylum seekers financial incentives to leave its shores, and until 28 February 2018 it's prepared to pay out extra.

Individuals will get €1,000 and families up to €3,000 (£2,650; $3,540) to cover rent or resettlement costs back in their home countries - things like basic kitchen or bathroom facilities.

Critics say Angela Merkel's government is trying to bribe its way out of a tricky situation, but supporters say the scheme will help sad, exhausted migrants who just want to go home.

Germany is by no means first to this approach. So where else has done it - and is it morally wrong?

'Pressure is being ramped up'

According to Dr Jeff Crisp, a Fellow at the Chatham House think tank, so-called "voluntary return" programmes for asylum seekers have been around for at least 20 years, and everywhere from Australia to the UK and Canada has tried them.

"The pressure on people to return is definitely being ramped up, and return is being seen as the key to the whole migration situation in Europe at the moment," he told the BBC.

"Governments in Europe particularly much prefer these programmes because they're less messy. There's less likelihood that things will go wrong than when you're forcing people onto planes in handcuffs."

Figures from the International Organization for Migration (IOM), which runs many countries' reward schemes, show that some 39,000 people received cash or benefits in kind in 2016, at a cost of $32.7m. And by far the biggest number - 54%, or 54,006 people - were leaving Germany.

How does a government sell that kind of outlay to the voting public?

In Scandinavia, which has seen a migrant influx in the past decade, officials say it's cheaper to help asylum seekers leave than to house them in immigration centres.

Sweden currently offers grants of 30,000 Krona (£2,653; $ 3,550) for lone migrants and 75,000 for families, paid as a lump sum in US dollars.

And in spring 2016, nearby Norway made headlines for adding a 10,000 kroner "bonus" onto its existing rewards package for the first 500 asylum seekers to apply.

"We need to entice more [people] to voluntarily travel back by giving them a bit more money on their way out," Migration Minister Sylvi Listhaug declared.

Continue reading ►


Owner: Columbus Marketing Group, Inc. Permission is granted to use original material in this article providing (1) the byline is included in an obvious manner crediting as the author, (2) a link to this page is included and (3) no changes are made either by deletion, addition or annotation. Original compositions at are sometimes seeded with decoy data, such as hidden acronyms, to detect unauthorized use and plagiarism.


Post a Comment