1/4 Brits Want All Immigrants Sent Back

IslamizationBritainby Enza Ferreri   11/24/14
A new report, “How to talk about immigration”, contains some interesting statistics. It was published by British Future, that describes itself as “an independent, non-partisan thinktank engaging people’s hopes and fears about integration and migration, opportunity and identity, so that we share a confident and welcoming Britain, inclusive and fair to all.”

That description belies the “non-partisan” label, as we know what the socialist-shibboleth words “welcoming, inclusive and fair” actually mean. And reading the paper, whose authors declare to be shocked by some poll results it reports, confirms its partisan nature: if you are impartial, you should refrain from emotional involvement, which in itself shows that you have something at stake.

This is what shocks them. On page 17: asked what they think about the statement “The government should insist that all immigrants should return to the countries they came from, whether they’re here legally or illegally”, 25% of all UK respondents said they agree, 52% disagree.

One out of four is an impressive proportion, especially if you consider that the repatriation would be for all immigrants, legal and illegal, and given the current climate of fear of expressing opinions that the report’s authors classify as “rejectionist”: much nicer to be classified “liberal”, which in the deceptive lingo the Left has imposed on all of us doesn’t really mean – as it should – a defender of the freedom of the individual from the power of the state (the meaning intended by the creators of the term and its general philosophy), but a socialist or communist, namely its diametrically opposite. Leftists don’t like to be called by their proper names: Marxist, socialist, Trotskyist, Maoist, communist, anarchist. They prefer the stolen moniker “liberal”, even though – nay, exactly because – it’s totally inaccurate.

But the opinion surveys carried out by ICM, Ipsos MORI and YouGov, on which the immigration report is based, have other good, indeed better, news. On page 16: over two thirds, namely 67%, of people interviewed disagree with “In an increasingly borderless world, we should welcome anyone who wants to come to Britain and not deter them with border controls”, while 14% agree.

England Calling comments:

Public rhetoric about immigration is rapidly hardening. There will come a tipping point where the rhetoric has departed so far from the politically correct position that serious action to restrict immigration will occur because the stretch between rhetoric and action will become too great to sustain in a society where governments are elected.

A party political bidding process on the subject of immigration is already taking place and there will come a point where serious action has to follow or there will be a very real chance that either one or more of the mainstream parties will become irrelevant and be superseded, or members of the mainstream parties will wrest control of these parties from their pc indoctrinated leadership and adopt a policy on immigration closer to what the public wants.

EnzaEnza Ferreri is an Italian-born, London-based Philosophy graduate, author, and journalist. She has been a London correspondent for several Italian magazines and newspapers, including Panorama, L’Espresso, La Repubblica. She is in the Executive Council of the UK’s party Liberty GB. • (1154 views)

This entry was posted in Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

10 Responses to 1/4 Brits Want All Immigrants Sent Back

  1. Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

    Have a simple test (while people are hooked to a lie detector): Ask them “Do you think it should be against the law to blaspheme Allah or Mohammed?” If they say yes, out they go…legal or illegal. It’s called self-preservation.

  2. Timothy Lane says:

    The UKIP supports halting immigration as well as independence (which would be required for halting immigration, at least from EU countries), and they’re becoming an increasing threat to Cameron’s Tories (who are starting to try to address their concerns, albeit probably insincerely). Similar anti-immigrant groups are doing well in other countries, for much the same reasons.

    I rather like Brad’s approach, except that it wouldn’t take the jihadists long to learn the question and how to answer it in accordance with the doctrine of taqiyya.

  3. Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

    I am a little surprised it is only 25%. I suspect it to be more given the success the UKIP has recently had. It has poached voters from both the Tories and Labour. Of course, it is possible the respondents were not completely honest with the questioners as they didn’t wish to be seen as intolerant. I believe this same impulse keeps the Obamanation’s approval ratings, as per the polling firms, higher than the actually are.

    • Timothy Lane says:

      My figuring is that when people are asked about some aspect of Barry Zero or the Obama Gang, they feel safe in answering honestly. But when asked about Barry Screwtape Obama (approval ratings), many are reluctant to state their true opinions lest they be accused of being racist. (This is especially likely if the pollster sounds like a black.)

  4. GHG says:

    Obviously many Brits don’t have the intellectual acuity to understand that murderous jihadi’s just want a house in the suburbs with a white picket fence like the rest of us. And besides, Obama’s amnesty clearly illustrates the folly of thinking that that many people can be deported – it’s just not feasible. So get over yourselves and get with the program. Send your daughters to Rotherham, send your sons to Syria, put a potato sack over your wife and watch for your beheading appointment in the mail.

  5. David Ray says:

    No. 1 baby name in Britain is Muhammad. That’s a sad state of affairs.

    • Timothy Lane says:

      Europeans see no reason to bring more children into the world, since they see it as a drab place with no hope of anything better (i.e., exactly the results one can expect from a secularist welfare state). Muslims, on the other hand, see their religion as the basis for future hope, if only the hope that comes from taking over the countries allowing these Trojan Horses in.

      • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

        That’s so very well said, Timothy, and is in complete accord with the evaluation of the subject by Mark Steyn. It may not be survival of the fittest, but it is certainly the survival of the most willing.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *