Anders Breivik: Europe’s dreams crash in flames

by Robert Whiston FRSA Sept 2011

Summer of Violence – The sudden eruption of violence in Norway and then a few weeks later in Britain, seriously questions the foundation upon which we all presumed our lives were based. Examining the background throws up more questions than answers. Indeed, the firm foundation from where we think we can pose our questions may itself be illusory – slowly crumbling as we speak. How could a ‘civilised society’ become that brittle and prove that fragile ? Has Europe become a “conundrum wrapped inside an enigma” ?  We ignore the possibility at our peril.

Anders Breivik is the self-confessed mass murderer who shot dead dozens of Norwegian young people this summer. On the same day (July 22nd 2011) he set off a bomb in Oslo city centre killing yet more innocents. In so doing he triggered a chain reaction where his actions were disposed of by the Press as simply the twisted logic of a right-wing fanatic.

 Right: Norwegian Anders Behring Breivik, aged 32.

He is alleged to have political links with the far right and various ‘fringe’ groups and the media has tried to discount his import by variously displayed him in uniform and holding weaponry.

Will we ever fathom his puzzling behaviour ? Do we really want to fathom the riddle or are we content to dustbin the issue ?  Is it safer for us to remain happily cocooned in a state of ignorant bliss ? Will it be easier to write him off simply as a psychopath ? There are many strands to these events and they may take us to dark places.

People who do not conform to the limited range of stereotypes acceptable to mainstream society are usually branded as evil masterminds or dangerous revolutionaries. This is usually how we ‘deal’ with a ‘slaughter of the innocent’.

However, this does not mean that single individuals cannot change the world in a twinkling – and we have only to look at Bin Laden (World Trade Center, NY, Sept 2001), and Admiral Yamamoto (Pearl Harbour 1941, killed 1943) as exemplars in living memory. In time we might feel we should accord Breivik the same serious consideration we now apply, for example, to Marx, Lenin or Islamist terrorists.

The August 2011 riots in London were allegedly triggered by a neighbourhood’s response to the police shooting dead a suspect. A large crowd then gathered outside the local police station demanding an immediate explanation. They all presumed him to be totally innocent but in fact he was carrying a firearm. In a ‘white’ area this would not be the expected response of the neighbourhood’ and the burning down of property would not have resulted. The following weeks saw ‘gangs’ blamed for the looting but as cases have processed through the courts this has become increasingly less likely. The British police have said little about the riots; the retaliatory nature of the arson would seem to indicate that the neighbourhood in north London did not feel part of society in general

The Norwegian police have not given the usual access to the Press who are thus unable to reveal anything from their interviews with the accused and coverage has been unusually sporadic as a consequence. The sub-text is that he has nothing important to say and the world should view him as either certifiably mad (insane) or a maverick ‘loner.’

What is agreed by sources is that he left a 1,500-page manifesto highly critical of Norway’s ruling Labour party for supporting Muslim immigration and enforcing “multi-culturalism”. Across Europe the fallacies and shortcomings of multi-culturalism are slowly being acknowledged by political leaders. Breivik, while confessing to the murders and taking police through his actions, denies committing any crime (criminal act) and has allegedly not expressed any remorse for his actions. This is somewhat reminiscent of captured IRA terrorists who always claimed in court that their murders were political acts and not criminal. Presumably, a political statement against his nation’s multi-cultural policy.

To understand the emptiness of the words ‘political act’ and the insincerity of the excuse for enacting terror, a reading of Mr. Tom Travers’ letter – a magistrate living in Ulster – to the entire legal and political establishment living in the South, i.e. Republican Ireland, is essential. [1]

When men commit murder, society and opinion shapers castigate them and label them as if rogue elephants. But when an equally lethal woman wreaks havoc murdering, say, children or families members, suddenly she is a human being with deep problem in need of help which we, as a society, must immediately address.

Buying into the dream

The vision of Europe’s ‘political pioneers’ was one of a future where peace and harmony would prevail; where differences that had caused wars were set aside; where the indigenous people’s ‘standards of living’ would not just grow but they would be economically secure against shortages. So much greater would be the disposable income and wealth of a federated Europe that the riches could be shared with migrants who would also contribute to the growing wealth.

The theory borrows heavily from the American model of integration and should have worked (ref. ‘the American Dream’). America’s previous deviations from the smooth path of integration have been occasioned mainly by Blacks in urban ghettoes and their ‘segregated’ status until the 1960s (ref. Los Angeles (Watts) Riots of 1965 and 1992). And what is a riot ? It is, in the words of Martin Luther King, ” . . .  the language of the unheard.”

The vulnerability which white, English-speaking America now faces is that it is, or will soon be, outnumbered (projected for 2050), by Spanish-speaking Hispanics who, as a group appear to make little attempt to learn the language (something of a highly noticeable trait among Asian females in the UK). Society is always in flux  but will the Hispanics dimension provide a prescient dichotomy that will emerge in differing forms as a cultural divide ?

Australia, once had so smooth an immigration policy that it as something of a backwater (perhaps because it once picked its immigrants ?). However, that has all changed in recent years. Once a nation made up entirely of immigrants, “the most sensitive public issue” in the Aug 2010 General Election was immigration.

In a country big enough to be categorised a continent, Australia is trying to control the 6,300 asylum seekers that reached Australia in 130 boats in 2010 (thought to be highest number in 20 years), with the highest number coming from Afghanistan (2,700) ( Approved immigration and quotas would appear acceptable to Australians but not the illegal entry attempts (asylum seekers).

In Aug 2011 the Australian government found itself locked in a battle with the courts over its right to negotiate a swap of refugees with Malaysia. Under the deal Australia would have sent 800 asylum seekers to Malaysia and would have received 4,000 refugees in return over four years

What we are not being told is that immigration numbers is a concern across all of Europe and Scandinavia. We have only a casual intimation in reports that this lies at the heart of Anders Breivik’s decision to act. Those countries that have tried to enact deportations have received ‘warning letters’ from the UN, e.g. China, Malaysia, France, Canada, Iraq to name but a few.

To date few political parties have publicly considered the implications of a discontented population – and only a few bold politicians have voiced the publics concerns. Yet viewed in the round the past decade has seen mounting discontent in the form of riots, arson and looting usually by minorities against the indigenous population

Where was this photo (right) taken ?

Was it in London during the Aug 2011 riots ?

No, it was taken in Denmark during the riots there in Feb  2008.

A quick resumee of riots, arson, and ethnically related civil unrest over the past ten years is unsettling.

If we begin at the year of the twin towers destruction in 2001, outbreaks of civil disorder of varying ferocity have been a yearly event in almost all western European and Scandinavian countries. The table below shows only those civil disorder outbreaks that are directly connected with immigration or Muslim issues.

Belgium, the very capital of a federated Europe united under one flag and currency, is not only disintegrating culturally with Islamic riots nearly every year but falling apart as French and Walloon speakers drift further apart. Racial conflict, once thought to be confined to the unique circumstances of America’s birth pangs and infant years have now burst upon the smug Europeans.

Hugely enjoyable films such as ‘East is East’ and ‘Bend it Like Beckham’ open a humorous window into the incongruities of inter-racial relations with their sometimes comedic and shambolic frictions. However, they both have a darker subterranean depth to them. For all the supposed blending-in and assimilation the main protagonists remain stubbornly wedded to the old life in the old country.

Sweden & Norway

If Norway came as a shock – the ethnic riots and later the terror of Anders Breivik – then so too must the events unfolding in Sweden have been met with astonishment.

Sweden’s population and population changes has seen it increase from just under 9 million (8,975,670) in 2003 to  9½  million (9,417,000)  in 2010. The number of immigrants rose from 63,795 in 2003 to 99,000 in 2010. Only about half that number, as the diagram below shows, left Sweden, i.e. emigrated  ( ).

Nearly one in five of the population has a foreign background and it is estimated that 15% of Sweden’s population is born abroad.

Left: Sweden – Immigration and emigration 1900 – 2010

In Norway the comparable figure is only 1 in 8. Immigrants and those born in Norway to immigrant parents constitute 600,900 persons or 12.2% of  Norway’s total population (in Britain 1 in 12 of the population were born overseas). Analysis by geographical region reveals the composition to be  287,000 who have a European background; 210 000 who have an Asian background; 74,000 from Africa; 19,000 from Latin-America and 11,000 from North America and Oceania.

Of all Norwegian-born persons with immigrant parents 54% had an Asian background (see Enoch Powell and multi-culturalism below). Statistics Norway notes – and so should politicians – that “17% are 20 years or older”.  [2] The converse is that over 80% are aged under 20 and this proportion (and social volatility) can only be expected to grow.

  • “. . . Immigration reached record levels last year for the Northern European nation of Norway. In 2006, Statistics Norway (SSB) found that 45,800 immigrants arrived in the country and 22,100 people left, for a total net immigration of 23,700 people – 30% higher than 2005.“ [3]

Between 1990 and 2009, a total of 420,000 non-Nordic citizens immigrated to Norway and were granted residence there.

  • 26% came as refugees
  • 26% were labour immigrants
  • 11% were granted residence in order to undertake education.
  • 23% came to Norway for family reunification (someone already living in Norway
  • 16% were granted residence because they had established a family.

Unfortunately this coincided with surges in rape and sex offences in both Sweden and Norway. By 2005 Norwegian headlines heralded this new concern – see “Norway, Rape  and Multi-culturalism”  ( and

In 2009 Swedish headlines followed suit reporting that; “Sweden having the highest incidence of reported rapes in Europe – twice as many as “runner-up” the UK” [4]

  • “In Sweden, 46 incidents of rape are reported per 100,000 residents. This figure is double as many as in the UK which reports 23 cases, and four times that of the other Nordic countries, Germany and France.“

Over 5,000 rapes are reported in Sweden per annum while reports in other countries of a comparable size amounted to only a few hundred.
A report by the EU-funded Daphne II organisation revealed that “resident aliens” from Algeria, Libya, Morocco and Tunisia made up the largest number of rapists (see also

The Swedish media is trying to puzzle out why, after all the state’s hospitality in-depth and welcoming programmes, these offences should be related to one ethnic minority. At the same time it is trying to grapple with how it should understand them.

Why are they rioting ?” is the question posed – as if there were a rational answer to a secular, non-religious Sweden. The conundrum of “Why is this happening” has brought Swedes to the point where a research project has been launched to find out why young men burn cars.  Since answers will only be available in about three years, the Swedish media is continuing to investigate on their own.

We can speculate that it will come down to personal ‘investment’ in society and personal ‘identification’ with it. We can also speculate that the analysis and model that will apply to ‘westerners’ will be straightforward and easy to implement. The analysis and model for the Asian (or Muslim) mind, we suspect, will be totally different.

The concept of ‘nationhood’  is not such a predetermined given among those from North Africa, parts of Asia, and the Islamic world in general. Muslims readily identify firstly as a religious group, who are a part of the world-wide Muslim community (Ummah) and apart from the rest of the world (it can be seen as a self-imposed isolation).

The Ummah is the great leveller; the common denominator which allows all Muslims to refer to each other as ‘brother.’ For more on the problems posed by culture, tribal rivalry and religion see “An outline of the immigration pattern of the Pakistani community in Britain .This source gives an expression to how some Pakistanis see themselves and their non-participatory role in mainstream Britain:

  • “Many of the early Pakistani migrants to Britain have been the most reluctant to attach a British identity to themselves. The main reason for this attitude stems from their history with colonial Britain, where attaching a British identity would ultimately mean accepting to be subjects of the British.”
  • “With the effects of globalisation, Pakistani’s are also worried about losing their traditions, customs and values and hence hold onto the security of their close-knit society with a hesitance in accepting anything ‘British’ “ – Jacobson, 1997, 185.

Addendum: Feb 14th 2014. Russia Today TV news reported on a looming immigration crisis in the EU as resentment was said to be growing among  a once placid population. It cited the Swiss which had just voted to put curbs on immigration from EU countries. Brussels was said to be ‘outraged’ by the Swiss vote and threatening sanctions. But relevant at this juncture is its coverage of other EU members, including Norway. Reportedly over 5,500 illegal immigrants has been deported and in one Oslo suburbs all the indigenous people had moved out, tired of being mugged, threatened, etc by non-white immigrants.  In one local school 3 out of 4 places were taken by immigrant children. Over the past 30 years, RT reported, the immigrant population in Norway had expanded 10 fold (for more, go to Appendix B).

Greece and Turkey

All of this friction with the indigenous population has been undertaken by Muslims originating from various countries with young Turkish and Moroccan immigrants figuring highly in many of them.

None of this has appeared in theUK’s mainstream news media and it goes a long way to explaining the reluctance of several central European countries, e.g.France and Germany, to Turkey’s bid to accession to EU membership.  The British government appears to have naively seen this as ‘unreasonable’ by their European neighbours. As a result the British people have also been puzzled by implacable hostility to Turkey’s membership.

Left:  Rome – Muslim mobs roam the streets [allegedly] hunting for Peruvians and Ecuadorians.[5]

Austria and Luxembourg stand out as having no reported riots listed over the past 5 years and in the case for Greece though it has had far more riots in each year than any other country they have either been politically based or economically inspired, e.g. its huge debt and the terms of the IMF loans.

However, in saying that Greece now accounts for 90% of all detected illegal immigration into the EU. Some years ago it stood at 75%. Greece has 36% unemployment among the young and the invasion as they see it of immigrant using the Turkish border adds fuel to the social unrest. Official statistics put the number of immigrants at 15% of the population but many Greeks themselves see it as far higher, circa 40%. So while the demonstrators may campaign on economic, employment and debt issues, immigration is the strong but unspoken ‘undercurrent.’

Enoch Powell and multi-culturalism

Multi-culturalism was “the Left’s” solution to rising tensions brought about by growing immigration numbers and the increased social dislocation it produced.

It was a regime adopted by all socialist inclined political parties across Europe and was seen as a panacea and the antidote by the ruling cliques to what they saw as the very unreasonable attitude adopted by the far less well-educated about the perceived threat posed by immigration. By definition, the ruling cliques did not live among these less well-educated / working class. The situation looked far rosier in the Surrey commuter belt than it did in Birmingham or Leeds.

In Britain the rising tensions brought about by growing immigration numbers was first felt in the 1950s and 1960s when thousands of West Indians (Windies) were encouraged to settle in the UK to meet a labour force shortage. [6]

These immigrants went not to leafy Surrey or Sussex but to the bleak industrial areas of the Midlands and the North.

From Pakistan alone 50,0000 people entered Britain in the 18 months before the 1962 Immigration Act came into force compared with the 17,000 who entered between 1955 and 1960. [7]

The Pakistani population in Britain has grown from about 10,000 in 1951 to roughly 1.2 million today (circa 2010)’s government estimates there are over 7 million Pakistanis living overseas, the majority in the EU (2.2m) and North America.

And from the other part of the Indian sub-continent more than 60,000 Indians (mostly Hindus) arrived before 1955. Indians began arriving in the UK in large numbers shortly after their country gained independence in 1947. The flow of Indian immigrants peaked between 1965 and 1972 inflated byUganda’s sudden decision in Aug 1972 to expel 50,000.India and other countries accepted 20,000 and 30,000 Ugandan Asians were accepted by the UK.

The 1960s saw a “balance of payments crisis” in Britain with the IMF called in to assist. The amounts were trivial by today’s standards. All but essential foreign exchange was banned and the amount an individual could take out of the country was limited to £50 Sterling.

By contrast, the 21st century has seen remittances sent by Pakistanis living in Europe increase from $US 74.5 million in 2003–2004 to $US 247.6 million in 2008–2009. [8]

It was the intellectual and academic Enoch Powell MP who stated the obvious in 1969. As a politician he paid the highest price and was chased out of office and polite circles. But viewed more than 40 years later his opposition to multi-culturalism and what it would bring upon the indigenous peoples have been proven right. Drawing parallels with other civilisations he quoted from Virgil’s ‘Aeneid:’ [9]

  • “As I look ahead, I am filled with foreboding; like the Roman, I seem to see ‘the River Tiber foaming with much blood.”

A full reading of his Birmingham speech predicts many of the ills that social planners did not plan for but should have been able to envisage, whenever a happily homogenous majority is elbowed into a seemingly second class role.

The rise and rise in immigration was obvious to the British public but politicians of all parties (as if all were signed up to a conspiracy), refused to discuss the matter and roundly condemned the BNP for raising it as an election issue.

Above: “Focus on People and Migration: 2005” UK. Source: ONS.

The table above shows immigration as a percentage of the population and the number of immigrants. The maroon coloured columns represent the number of total foreign-born persons in the UK population (in thousands). The trend line shows the percentage of the total population that immigrants represent, i.e. around 4% in 1951 but over 8% in 2001.

Until 2001 the trend line had always been less than or equal to the total numbers (i.e. the columns). It divergence after 2001 is either the fulfillment of part of Powell’s prediction – a second and third generation out-reproducing the indigenous population, or greater immigration.

Holding up a mirror to the EU

Did Anders Breivik look around Europe and conclude that to mistrust government policy statements was the only feasible option ? We don’t know if he did or whether in doing so he was right. But governments deliberately misleading the public is nothing new or rare as the revelations by Julian Assange attest (ref. WikiLeaks, 2010).

Government statistics in the US and Britain divide their population into racial groups and number them as part of the population – though ‘discovery’ can take some effort in the case of the UK. The main categories used are White, Black and Asian with sub-groups within each.

Scandinavian statistics, Swedish, Norwegian, Canadian and Dutch prefer not to do this. Rather they only politely list immigrants by the country they have left and one has to guess their racial or religious make-up.

The result is the table seen here (left). From it we can discern falling birth rates among those of Nordic origins and soaring rates among Asia and Turkey (Muslims ?) and Eastern Europeans (Catholic and Orthodox ?).  Not only are Norwegians ‘out-birthed’ but they are a minority in mortality figures in their own country with only 414 deaths recorded out of a total of 1,537.

Enquiries made to Sweden’s and Norway’s official statistical bodies reveal that they do not collect data of an immigrant’s religion, i.e. Muslim:

  • Statistics Norway does not register individuals by religion or membership in life stance communities. Therefore, we do not know who or how many persons in Norway are Buddhists, Muslims, Catholics, etc”

The same pattern of censored data appears atStatistics Netherlands.  They state they ‘do not have the figures for the number of deportations’ despite deportations being a political hot button for 5 years.

We tend to forget that there are Christian communities in both India and Pakistan (not  forgetting Anglo-Indians), and in the case of Egypt the Christians have been there longer than Muslims yet they and their churches regularly come under attack.[10]

Christians are banned from certain area of Egyptian life – not unlike apartheid or Jews who were barred from holding office in Germany in the 1930’s. A ‘caste’ system has emerged where Christians do unclean jobs. In May 2009 the government passed a law to slaughter all pigs inEgypt– pigs owned exclusively by the Coptic Christian minority (10%) and were used to help “process” all of Cairo’s waste and earn a living. Since the tensions of 2009 every year has seen churches attacked or burnt down by Muslim mobs.[11]

The “Arab Spring” has thus been unkind to Christians.

 Playing a blinder

When playing any sport someone who perform with a lot of skill, dexterity and as a result successfully trounces the opposition is said to be playing a blinder. Politicians have over the past 40 years taken this to new heights in the field of immigration and its public debate.

We are only now beginning to learn of the deliberate policy of misinformation regarding immigration into Britain and one suspects it is a pattern repeated all over Europe.

The Telegraph (23rd Oct 2009) carried the headline; “Labour wanted mass immigration to make UK more multicultural, says former adviser.” This astounding confession from within the bowels of Whitehall went on to explain how the Labour government knowingly:

  •  “ . ..  threw open Britain’s borders to mass immigration to help socially engineer a “truly multicultural” country.” [12]

Andrew Neather, a former adviser to Prime Minister Tony Blair, and ministers Jack Straw and David Blunkett, relates how the huge increases in migrants over the last decade were partly due to a politically motivated attempt by ministers to radically change the country and “rub the Right’s nose in diversity” (diversity is the acceptable term for ethnic minorities). Not content with the natural evolution Labour chose to accelerate it.

Judged against what Britain can produce these politicians measure up as intellectual pygmies. What possessed these little men with their shallow minds to reveal to the world that they are nothing more than political dwarfs ?

The government decision in 2000 to secretly impose mass immigration on the working class (and thereby suppress wages) was masked by a spurious public debate concentrating on the supposed economic benefits to the nation and the need for more migrants to bring even more prosperity.

Information supplied by our members and staff inside the Immigration Control Office to Michael Howard MP, then leader of the Conservative Party, enabled his to take the government to task in 2004 – 05 over its misleading “official figures”. Andrew Neather, explained:

  • “The “deliberate policy”, from late 2000 until “at least February last year” [2008], when the new points based system was introduced, was to open up the UK to mass migration.”
  • “Some 2.3 million migrants have been added to the population since then, according to Whitehall estimates quietly slipped out last month.”

Critics of immigration policy say the revelations show a “conspiracy” within Government to impose mass immigration for “cynical” political reasons. There has always been a suspicion of a link between the Labour Party and immigrants with Labour gaining most from immigrant votes in old industrial heartlands. Sir Andrew Green, chairman of the think tank Migrationwatch, said:

  • “Now at least the truth is out, and it’s dynamite.
  • “Many have long suspected that mass immigration under Labour was not just a cock-up but also a conspiracy. They were right.
  • “It is the first beam of truth that has officially been shone on the immigration issue in Britain.”


The Dutch politician Pim Fortuyn was perhaps the first to publicly call for a curb on immigration in 2002. He was deliberately murdered by, of all things, an “animal rights activist” (Volkert van der Graaf) on 6 May 2002.

Since then the return of failed asylum seekers has climbed the agenda and the expression “Normen en waarden” (i.e. norms and values) has become a catchphrase in the country.

The Dutch people ,traditionally very tolerant, have expressed increasing unease with sharing their homeland with foreigners who they say do not subscribe to Dutch values. [13] The Netherlands is not alone in questioning the merits of multi-culturalism and on-going immigration.

Plans were drawn up 5 years ago to deport (expel) 26,000 failed asylum seekers. At the time this was thought to represent one of the largest deportations in modern European history. In the event the ECHR intervened and its ruling means all EU governments find their deportation plans neutralised.

The sheer size of immigration numbers across Europe and their very continuation over many years hints of an industry operating in a grey economy. This industry may provide the logistics, funding and the documentation required. It may also provide the legal mechanism to exploit loopholes and thwart control and deportations.

Somalian refugee – and a former Muslim – Ayaan Hirsi Ali caused a furore when she agreed with Pim Fortuyn, that Islam was a ‘backward religion’ (Jan 2003).

Right: The V.V.D. party candidate,  Ayaan Hirsi Alis

Theodoor Van Gogh, who worked with the Somali-born writer Ayaan Hirsi Ali, was shot dead by Mohammed Bouyeri, a Dutch Moroccan Muslim in Nov 2004. [14]  The fact that she now goes everywhere with a bodyguard demonstrates that ordinary Muslims haven’t grasped the concept of free speech. Muslims are not allowed to change their religion – Ayaan Hirsi Ali is now an atheist – and to exercise freedom of thought can be heretical and not tolerated by Islamists.

Asked why the V.V.D. had shifted more to the right she replied:

  • “It depends on how we define right. They say we really have to change integration policy and this time they mean it.

Britain was still not up to speed with the shifting sands when Geert Wilders, head of the Dutch Freedom Party who had been invited to a meeting in Britain by a parliamentarian was refused entry and deported back to the Netherlands in Feb 2009. (He was later allowed to enter the UK).

Germany & Austria

Germany unlike many EU countries began its immigration history (wisely, many would say) with temporary status “guest workers” for Turkish migrant workers. But migrants do not come cheaply. They put a variety of strains on a nation’s infrastructure, e.g. education, health, transport, housing etc, as China is now finding out and which have been fully discussed in Britain with the recent arrival of hundreds of thousands from Eastern Europe.

German and Austrian governments are concerned that the aging population’s pension rights will not be properly funded by contributions from a smaller younger work force. Some experts, as of March 2011, predict that there will be a labour shortage in the coming years which is a cue for allowing more immigration from Eastern Europe. (An estimated 350,000 people of Turkish origin live in Austria).

The same arguments which were used in Britain in 2004 about an aging populations and a future pension fund shortfall (ref. Adair Turner) appear to have been used in Germany and Austria. However, this ignores the cyclical nature of births (estimated to rise after 2030) and the ability of government policy to directly affect family size.

Britain, unlike most western EU countries, had a very healthy national pensions fund (NIF) at the end of the 1990s which has only grown in the following decade. [15] Tony Lynes of the National Pensioners Convention predicted in 2004 that by March 2006 the NIF closing balance would be £24.5 billion ‘above the  recommended level’ and he expected it to rise to over £60 billion by 2010. In other words, about £48 billion above the recommended level (see Table above).

Adair Turner’s proposals for individuals to funds their own private pension involved yearly rates of saving that would have significantly dragged down living standards and required such huge capital amounts that they were totally impractical for the middle and working class.

The predictions of unfunded state pensions disregards the increased wage drift and increased contributions (based on a percentage of earned income) from a future smaller but economically more active and better paid work force. [16] Importing unskilled labour would only defer the switch to greater automation, higher productivity and higher wages.

Overlooked too in the conclusions of Adairs’  2004 report is the price, in benefit entitlements, the present economy is having to pay during an economic recession for migrant workers who have not ‘banked’ enough credits into the system.

Eastern Europe

In 2004 the UK government predicted 13,000 workers a year would arrive looking for work from the new EU member countries (most notably Poland), but the actual figure for registered workers was about 329,000 in just 18 months.

Only 2 or 3 countries of the old EU e.g. Sweden, UK, agreed to open their borders for migrant workers from the new accession countries.

 Left: Adult Polish employed in UK between 2003 – 2010.

By 2006 British minister were conceding that about 600,000 people had come to work in the UK from the eight nations which joined the European Union in 2004.  None were illegal immigrants or asylum seekers (two categories often confused with migrant workers).

All of the 600,000 had correctly applied for and received documentation to work in the UK. Over half (62%) were Polish; with 82% were aged between 18 and 34, with 56% of all migrants working in factories.

Maintaining an equilibrium

Arguably the only thing that has prevented social eruptions prior to those witnessed in Aug 2011 was the off-setting effects of in-flow and out-flows. For instance, figures for 2004 show the overall migration number was made up of 359,000 people leaving the UK with 582,000 settling in the UK (these figures do not include illegal immigrants), producing a net gain of only 223,000 pa.

What is different in the past 2 years is the slump in migration, i.e. British and EU citizens leaving the UK. This fell to 368,000 in 2009 compared with 427,000 in 2008. An estimated 140,000 British citizens emigrated in 2009, the lowest number since 1999 and down from 173,000 in 2008 (see also Fig 1.8, below).
However, an estimated 590,000 people arrived to live in the UK in 2008 and a further 567,000 in 2009. A gain of 1 million in 2 years.

Once the origins of the immigration figures in to the UK are examined one immediately becomes worried as to the impossibility of their accuracy.

It would appear that they are mainly or partially based, according to ONS, on the International Passenger Survey, or IPS. Asylum seekers & their dependants not identified by the IPS.

The IPS is nothing more than a sample survey of people arriving in and / or departing the UK’s main airports and sea routes including the Channel Tunnel. Why Britain’s ONS should use this measure which relies on the total honesty of the respondee is unclear. [18]

An alternative to the IPS regime is the Long-term International Migration or LTIM. The latter is more complete and comprehensive, taking into account, for example, asylum seekers. The table above shows the figures from both measures with Net Flows showing striking discrepancies.

Asylum seekers

Foreign born individual who do not apply for a visa and/or work permits – and are thus not immigrants – fall into the Asylum or illegal categories. By definition the number of illegal entrants to the UK is unknown. Cumulatively it might be an additional 1 million – or far more if one includes the numbers given ‘amnesty’ from deportation by the various administrations , eg 1974, 1993, 1999 and 2008).  [19] In the case of Britain the annual cost of managing the asylum system in 2004 exceeded £2bn.

In 2002, there were more than 111,000 asylum applications to Britain– more than double the number in France. By 2004 Downing Street was claiming that people claiming refuge in Britain tumbled in 2003 by almost 35,000. [20] At the time ministers were hoping the 41% fall would lessen discontent over the politically charged issue of immigration of workers from Eastern Europe due on 1st May after the EU expansion.

However, as stated earlier, the expected arrival of a few tens of thousands from Eastern Europe turned out to be hundreds of thousands.

Above: Asylum applications  Source: Statistics Netherlands

Asylum applications submitted in the Netherlands last year (2010) totalled 13,300 (see graph). This was a decline of 11% over 2009. More than 50% of asylum seekers were from Muslim countries, most notably Somalia and Iran.

France received 38,590 applications for asylum in 2000. By 2009, the highest number of applicants were registered in France (47,600 applicants) followed by Germany (31,800), the United Kingdom (30,300), Sweden (24,200), Belgium (21,600), Italy (17,500), the Netherlands (16,100), Greece (15,900) Austria( 15,800), Italy (17,670), Norway (17,140) and Switzerland (15,900). [21]

An ‘asylum seeker’ is defined as a person who flees their country of origin to escape persecution of his /her religious or political beliefs. This was the original intention of asylum laws. Later, in 1967, escaping “conflict” was added to UN Convention on refugees. [22]

In the 19th century liberal Britain was seen as the natural haven for overseas anarchists / agitators. Karl Marx, Lenin and many others found refuge in the UK. Only after ‘The Siege of Sidney Street (Jan 1911), together with a few other public outrages was political asylum brought under firmer control.[23]

A variety of countries were prompted by both internal and external influences to enact restriction on immigration. Australia’s Immigration Restriction Act of 1901 was followed by Britain’s Aliens Act in 1914 and the US in 1917.

In recent years a new category of asylum seeker has emerged – that of ‘economic’ asylum seeker. This is broadly defined as someone who leaves their country purely to have a better quality life. Economic asylum seekers do not face any of the personal danger endued by political asylum seeker. Personified by the Vietnamese “boat people” of the 1970s and Cubans fleeing to Florida their journeys are not without personal hazard.

Given that there is much confusion in the media and in public debate generally about 1. asylum seekers, 2. refugees and 3. economic migrants, the following definitions from Migrationwatch may assist: [24]

  • “Asylum seeker” means a person who has applied for asylum under the 1951 Refugee Convention on the Status of Refugees.
  • “Refugee” in this context means an asylum seeker whose application has been successful. In its broader context it means a person fleeing e.g. civil war or natural disaster but not necessarily fearing persecution as defined by the 1951 Refugee Convention, e.g.Hungaryafter the crushing of the 1956 uprising.
  • “Economic migrant” means a person who has left his own country and seeks by lawful or unlawful means to find employment in another country.

What confuses the picture is that many asylum seekers are in fact economic migrants who hope to secure entry into the United Kingdom by claiming asylum.

Some asylum seekers and some economic migrants can therefore be justifiably categorised as economic opportunist. With the advent of special concessions for women claiming domestic violence at their port of entry, another category of opportunist has been created.

In 2001, 4.9 million (8.3%) of the total UK population were born overseas. This is more than double the 2.1 million (4.2%) in 1951. Immigration need not be permanent. For instance, although foreign-born persons totalled 1 in 12 of citizens in the UK they do not all stay. Just over a third (34%) of foreign-born migrants (inc. European and non-Europe) who came to the UK in the 1990s emigrated within four years of arrival (this re-migration also occurs in Canada).

‘Marrying-in’ versus ‘Marrying-out’

Migrants and asylum seeker once they have secured permission to stay will often seek to forge a new life for themselves. In due time settling down and having children will occur and this will necessitates marriage and/or cohabitation.

Statistics Norway has adopted a novel approach to this phase. They have found that Norwegian marriage patterns show the country is becoming an increasingly diverse. Within society, more marriages are occurring where one spouse is Norwegians and the other an immigrant (on an annual basis). They outnumber the marriages between persons who both have an immigrant background. While this is the aggregated picture Statistics Norway notes that there are distinct differences among different ethnic groups of immigrants.

Endogamy and exogamy are the terms used to explain a tendency or patterns to marry within the tribe, cultural group or kin (endogamy), or to marry out of the group (exogamy). Muslims tend to be endogamy while other parts of Asia are the reverse, e.g. people from Philippines and Thailand. [25] This part of the overall picture of integration is one that is very much overlooked and yet might prove significant.

The past two thousand years of European history has seen the ascendancy of exogamy particularly in the Roman, Attila the Hun, the Persians, Norman (e.g. Roger II of Sicily) and the British colonial period beginning in the 17th century.

The tendency among Jews is endogamy (inter-family marriage) which has perhaps marked them out in Europe.  This has probably accelerated a separateness or a). historic sense of persecution and b). accentuated by the tenet that being born of a Jewish women bestows Jewishness. The pattern of inter-family marriage (e.g. second cousins) is today repeated by Pakistani immigrants.

Another similarity between Jewish and Muslim – and for that matter Hindu – weddings is the ‘arranged marriage’ (of which some are said to be ‘forced marriages’).[26]

Norwegian marriages where the man had an immigrant background and the wife did not, accounted for 13% of all marriages. Marriages where the woman had an immigrant background and the husband did not, accounted for 7% (in 2004). Just 11% of all marriages, totalling 2,600, in 2004 were between spouses who both had an immigrant background. Marriages where neither party had immigrant background accounted for 69%.

Specifically, of a total of 1,600 marriages, 3% of Pakistani men married a Norwegian woman and 3% married a woman with a different country background. The rate of Pakistani women marrying non-Pakistani men was even lower (circa 2%).

By comparison, men and women from the Philippines and Thailand had a rate of over 60% of marriages where the other spouse was either a Norwegian or non-immigrant.


Is the failure to integrate and adopt western patterns of living, cultural norms and behaviour the root cause of the unrest listed above ? If it is, then the choice that ‘multi-culturalism’ will be the road leading to a solution was wrong and faith in it misplaced.

From ancient history there appear to be two conflicting paradigms yet both models when used have been shown to succeed. One it the Roman (and Greek) option with which we are all familiar and has been the bedrock of progress the Western World for 2,000 years. In essence it is a “Unless you join us, adopt our habits and be like us then you must be against us.” A modern-day interpretation of this doctrine was George W Bush’s “War on Terror” speech.

The second model is that of Persia – based on the city of Persepolis An empire , lead by Darius and Xerxes existing at approximately the same time as the Greek and Rome epochs (400 BC – 400 AD). It opted to embrace diversity and not to subjugate its diverse peoples to a common standard for money, buildings, clothing, or language etc. However, although both systems extracted tribute and respect / loyalty (allegiance) from their subject nations one suspects the Roman way was less subtle and more sharp-edged.

In the past 20 years non-whites appear to pose a greater problem for citizens of Eastern European countries, e.g. jeering at football matches when African or Asian players are part of the visiting team. Military occupation in two world wars might be a factor in some nations’ reluctance to be welcoming to strangers or the Soviet years may have fostered an insular attitude. However, these seem unlikely candidates given the experience of other countries.

When former education minister David Blunkett suggested in 2002 that Britain’s educational system was being ‘swamped’ by immigrants the furore that erupted in the press was unimaginable. While the marginalisation of the majority was obvious at the consumer level of life, Blunkett had stepped on the thin ice of a political no-go area and was castigated as tactless and gauche by the media. [27]

He was, nonetheless, giving voice to something that had been simmering over many years. Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher reportedly made the controversial comment in the early 1980s that Britain was being “swamped by an alien culture”. In 2007 and again in 2009, the issue again burst to the surface.

It is too easy to point to Poles (Polish Resettlement Act 1947), Ukrainians (post 1945), and Hungarians when Britain accepted 22,000 of the 200,000 Hungarians who fled as refugees in 1956, as examples where integration and assimilation was made easy by their skin colour. However, in the mindset of the 1950s and 1960s, Poles and Hungarians were just as ‘alien’ a culture as Jamaicans and Indians.

For 2,000 years ‘The West’ has been all about political and cultural dominance or hegemony – a world view. Arguably those who were prepared to embrace ‘The West’ and it values (warts and all) have not looted and not rioted. Only a tiny minority rioted and looted, the vast majority left everyone in peace and therefore probably subscribe to the hegemony.

  • “In twentieth-century political science, hegemony is central to cultural hegemony, a philosophic and sociologic explanation of how, by the manipulation of the societal value system, one social class dominates the other social classes of a society, with a world view justifying the status quo of bourgeoisie hegemony.” –   Antonio Gramsci

An issue of the Brussels Journal from Sept 2006 contributes some useful insights and alternative views. It states that the only major political party in Norway that had voiced any serious opposition to Muslim immigration was the right-wing Progress Party. The party is said to attracts / receives about two-thirds or even 70% of its votes from men. In contrast Socialist Left party, which is pro-feminist, attracts / receives about two-thirds or 70% of its votes from women.

The parties most critical of the current immigration are typically male parties, while those who praise the multi-cultural society are dominated by feminists.

Looking at other possible explanations for why men seem more attuned to the potential and future consequences of mass immigration, the Brussels Journal states: [28]

  • “Another possibility is that Western feminists fail to confront Muslim immigration for ideological reasons. Many of them are silent on Islamic oppression of women because they have also embraced “Third-Worldism” and anti-Western sentiments.”
  • “Most Norwegian feminists are also passionate anti-racists who will oppose any steps to limit Muslim immigration as racism and xenophobia.”

If this has substance then they are caught in the vice of their own rhetoric. The stance struck by feminists becomes more unenviable when oppression complained of is seen as only coming from Western men:

  • “American writer Phyllis Chesler has sharply criticized her sisters in books such as ‘The Death of Feminism ‘ . . . . . Chesler has a point. Judging from the rhetoric of many feminists, all the oppression in the world comes from Western men, who are oppressing both women and non-Western men. Muslim immigrants are “fellow victims” of this bias.”

An Inquiry has been set up by the British government to look at the causes of August riots and looting and why some areas were affected while others escaped. Darra Singh, currently chief executive of Job Centre Plus, has been appointed chair of the ‘Communities and Victims Panel.’ They will be looking at:

  1. The motivation for a small minority of people to take part in riots
  2. Why the riots happened in some areas and not others and
  3. How key public services engaged with communities before, during and after the riots. [29]

Whether they will get as far as the key components and the degree by which government mislead the public or the conspiracy not to inform the public about the momentous decisions being made over immigration numbers, is doubtful. Singh’s complexion and minority background will no doubt avert criticism of an ‘establishment whitewash’ and this may appease the minorities but will it reflect the concerns of the host nation ?

In the unlikely event that both sides of the riot and looting story are told and weighed, the report will stand a high risk of being ignored . In time they will be forgotten in the same way that the reports into the 2001 racial violence have failed to be acted upon.

Turn back the pages to 2001 and we see reports analysing the rots of that summer (Bradford, Oldham and Burnley etc), concluding that it is the environment and external factors that need addressing. No blame is attached directly to the rioters and property destroyers. They are not admonished for a lack of self-control, a lack of moral compass, a lack of pride in their town and a lack of respect or personal responsibility to others.

There are a variety of telling touchstone test that can be made when the report is published. The Independent Review bodies were set up for each troubled town in the wake of the June 2001 riots is one measure and their key recommendations are amalgamated below (to avoid duplication): [30]

  • Different communities lived “parallel lives”
  • A meaningful concept of citizenship should be found
  • Immigrants could take an oath of allegiance setting out a “clear primary loyalty to this nation”
  • Open and honest debate about multi-culturalism in Britain needed
  • Threat of “more serious” trouble in future unless action taken
  • Council must communicate effectively to white people its spending on projects for ethnic minorities
  • Greater integration of Asian people through community projects
  • A series of violent incidents were sparked by a war between Asian and white drug gangs
  • ‘Grinding poverty’ further exacerbated the situation
  • Debate about identity, shared values and citizenship needed
  • Majority of those involved in disturbances were young men

At the time all the areas were identified as being affected by high levels of unemployment, lack of a strong cultural identity and disenfranchisement of young people. Correspondingly, the awesome spectra of the Far Right was said to have stalked the same town areas and agitated unrest. Given the supposed spectacular success accorded to the Far Right in arranging for a full breakdown in law and order why did they wait from 2001 to 2011 to flex their muscles again ?

It later transpired that ‘the Left’ and Asian agitators had been at the forefront of the 2001 riots. A similar situation arose 20 years earlier at the time of the 1981 Brixton riots – now hailed by some on the Left as a heroic uprising. The savagery of the 1981 riot was unprecedented: [31]

  • ” . . . some [people were] pulled from their homes for a beating by the mob.”

By Dec 2001 there was a flow of reports, e.g. Burnley task force; Oldham Independent Review; Denham Report, all analysing what had gone wrong and what was believed to be the factors. [32]

Of all the many interesting points made three were especially noteworthy;

  • Firstly, the acceptance that instead of bring people together and creating ‘tolerance’, “multi-culturalism” appeared to have led to an undeclared and self-imposed ‘apartheid’ existence (with the rate of mixed-race marriage in the town at less than 1%).
  • Secondly, in the year leading up to the riots there were 572 reported race related crimes in the Oldham area, not as one might suspect immigrant victims but rather 62% of the victim were White.
  • Thirdly, a paranoid fear that parties of the Far Right might be conspiring, lead the Far-Left political groups to circulate rumours and agitate for civil commotion.

All of these items must have been a difficult fact for mainstream politicians to accept.

The Final Report for the 2011 riots (when it is published), will undoubtedly underline the deprivation and poverty of the neighbourhoods involved and a general lack of a formal education on the part of the rioters and looter. If we are lucky fatherlessness will be mentioned as “possibly a minor contributing factor.” but it is almost certain to mention the role of the Far Right as a direct contributing factor.

The Immigration game

If anyone thought that immigration and asylum seeking was a casual unplanned affair and the preserve of individuals finding themselves in dire straights, then a reassessment is desperately required. Immigration and asylum is now big business with huge profits for the traders and coordinators in human cargo. A typical story of the illegal refugee trade is that of 29-year-old Sri Lankan Tamil refugee who had paid people-smugglers £9,600 ($16,600 AUS or $15,000 US) for a “nightmare” voyage to Australia. In countries where many survive on a dollar-a-day, the misgiving must be where do these people obtain such large amounts of money.

A search of the Internet will reveal the extent to which the paperwork and legal documentation can be arranged and even the latest legal ruling by the ECHR to be used to avoid and evade deportation. Advice on Immigration Tribunals decisions is also given.

  • Asylum chances:
    Many people now try to figure out where they have the best chance to get a positive result from their asylum applications. This is very difficult to answer because it depends a lot on each separate case and on whether or not authorities believe that you are telling the truth.

Calculating in advance where the best financial deal can be struck who is most likely to accept an application should be no part of seeking asylum. An industry is emerging that is directly threatening the sovreign power of the state to control its own border in the manner it chooses. For instance, one website relates the developments of the European Court of Human Rights ruling in Jan 2011 which decided that Greece was violating the human rights of a refugee (in one individual’s case) by detaining him under ‘inhuman’ conditions and leaving him homeless. to the man in the street this asylum seeker had already made himself homeless when he left his own country. No one gave Marx or Lenin accommodation paid for by the tax-payer. The ECHR also judged that Belgium had violated his human rights by deporting him to Greece. Thus the advice was :

  1. This means hundreds of “Greek” cases waiting for a decision before the ECHR are expected to be judged in the same way
  2. All the countries having already decided to suspend deportations to Greece because of the decisions pending before the ECHR will have to decide if they will soon themselves examine the asylum cases of the people threatened by deportation to Greece.
  3. European countries which have not yet stopped deportations to Greece will have to decide about it soon.
  4. This decision will indiscriminately concern persons who have been fingerprinted and holders of pink cards in Greece.


Statistics Canada which normally prides itself on the presentation of its data is not very forthcoming when immigration, emigration and refugees numbers are sought.

The best that can be found are shown here (left)  based on the 1996 – 2001 Census.

The UK historically supplied most of Canada’s immigrants. In 1981 the UK was in first place with 18,915 immigrants. By 2009 the number had fallen to 8,154 and first place had been taken over by China at 30,770 with India in second place at 29,171 and the Philippines only a whisker below that level.

Canada is one of the countries that does not list immigrants by religion, however, in a table of the ‘Top Ten’ countries by immigrant’s origin, Muslim countries figure strongly. This is shown in the Table below but in an abbreviated form.

At the lower end of the Top Ten table over 22,000 immigrants are from Islamic countries – closely behind the 29,000 Hindus.

Canada’s planned refugee intake for 2010 has been set at 24,693 (a provisional total). Notwithstanding this, in 2009 Canada received 103,894 claims for refugee status; the most numerous single source was Mexico at 20,000. Therefore, a divergence appears to exist, i.e. between 24,693 and 103,894. A variance one would expect to be squared by deportation or refusals but this data seems hidden away. “Removal Orders” as they are referred to are difficult to find and none accord with data found elsewhere


The future prospects for Europe look profoundly ominous. There is a distinct perception of loss of identity among the host nation’s indigenous peoples – a feeling of being perennially overlooked (Appendix A).

Is this due in part to the pressure exerted by the organs of the EU giving no future option other than an integrated federal state where traditional nationhood may eventually evaporate.

Could it be due in part to the pressure exerted by social engineering to enforce tolerance of others, and thereby creating the very opposite of a liberal state, namely the intolerance of individuals who disagree or deviation from the prescribed party line ?

Could the emphasis on the identity of minorities and their rights be undercutting the sense of identity among the indigenous peoples ? New Zealand which has always had a large non-white population will probably not feels the same identity tensions or experience associated frictions. How this will play out is fascinating.

The complexion of Australia is changing and may be a factor in the peoples’ concern over immigration as an issue. A visitor to Canada in the last 10 years cannot help but be struck by the same change in urban areas like Toronto. The tension Europe is presently experiencing could be visited on either or both of these countries, The saving grace is that they are far roomier than any country in Europe and they may be totally unaffected.

It is to be expected that the work-a-day life of an immigrant is tough and up hill for the first generation. America, Canada and Australia all have long histories where this is true. However, by the 3rd and 4th generations assimilation and integration is usually complete.

Every ‘immigration industry’ that a country has had to face in the past was one of its own making – all that has now changed.

We have already seen men become discontent with the effects of measures to make  women as equal and to date these have been brushed aside as a silly concern or a phenomenon of no consequence. Could it be that in gifting ‘rights’ to an additional section of society we provoke Gresham’s Law ?

Are we chasing out the value of rights and debasing them by broadening the entitlement base ? Before we dismiss such ideas we should consider the impact of automatically extending any type of franchise if the result is a diminishing of the rights of the other section – the traditional holders – in society.


Appendix A

Tower block tenants’ fury at hand-outs for refugees

 By Sandra Laville, Telegraph, 09 Aug 2001 [abridged]

  • “They get free washing machines, fully furnished flats, free travel to school,”  said Steve a 25-year-old resident. “They have £150 mobile phones, drive Mercedes cars, carry knives and they are all trying to cop off with 14-year-old girls on the estate.”

Forty years ago a new housing estate of 18 storey tower blocks at Sighthill in Glasgow’s northern suburbs opened to re-house families from the city’s slums. By the late 1990s with no local employment some 500 flats stood empty with their windows boarded up.

Then, without warning, at the beginning of 2001 a fleet of coaches arrived carrying 1,500 asylum seekers (men and women).They were placed in the 500 flats that had stood empty for years.

Before their arrival residents had watched as van loads of decorators arrived to paint the flats earmarked for the newcomers. Locals from their crumbling and unheated version of the same flats saw a stream of delivery lorries bring new furniture for the flats which had been completely renovated, then fully furnished with new kitchen ware and fitted washing machines – and free travel to school for the children. The 1,500 refugees at Sighthill make up one fifth of the population.

In 2000 Glasgow city council was paid £20 million-a-year by the Home Office to house the asylum seekers in a 5-year programme that will eventually provide 8,500 refugees with a home in the city.

The Home Office’s money covers £165 a week for each refugee family and £120 a week for a single person. That compares to an average rent the council receives from tenants in Sighthill of £50 a week, leading to accusations that it is making money out of the system.

Norrie Gower, the chairman of the tenants’ association, blamed the council for not preparing the ground for the dumping of 1,500 people in a deprived area with a history of social and economic problems.

“People here are angry,” he said. “They think the asylum seekers are getting better treatment than they are. They wait months for repairs and they see the refugee flats fitted with new furniture.”

Nabila, 31, a mother-of-two who fled Somalia eight months ago, lives in a two-bedroom flat on the 6th floor. She has a new three-piece suite, a nest of coffee tables and a washing machine, all provided by the council. In the corner of the room is a computer, a mobile telephone lies on the table and a stereo sits near the wall. Nabila, who receives £98 a week in vouchers for her and her 2 children (more than an unemployed UK citizen), said she saved her vouchers to buy the computer (circa £250).

Despite Scottish Office assurances that no more asylum seekers will be sent to Sighthill , the council’s building services division continued delivering more three-piece suites and beds in preparation for new arrivals.

Appendix B

  Russia Today, TV news (Feb 14th 2014).

RT reported that public concerns about “immigration”  was driving a wedge between EU states and the Commission in Brussels.

Without citing sources it listed several EU members states where immigration was a hot issue.

Switzerland – already mentioned (see Addendum above).

France – a survey found 70% thought there were too many foreigners in France.

Britain – a survey found 77% wanted immigration reduced.

Norway– already mentioned (see Addendum above). The cost of maintaining immigrants in the form of welfare benefits paid was said to be proving too expensive (the cost of living is much higher compared to the rest of the EU), so that even for wealthy Norway, which has probably the largest Sovereign Fund of any nation, felt it was prudent to call a halt to proceedings. Local NGOs believed that the possibility of successful integration was low due to most immigrants having either no job skills or low-grade skills which were never going to be compatible with the Norwegian economy and labour market demands.


[4] The Local (Sweden) 27 Apr 2009

[6] For example the Notting Hill Riots, 1958 between whites and Afro-Caribbean. It later transpired that theCaribbean was a second choice after the option toattract unemployed Italians was rejected on the grounds that they had been part of the Axis powers – Ref. Lord Justice Dunn.

[7] See Shaw, 1998: 25. “An outline of the immigration pattern of the Pakistani community in Britain”

[8] In August 2009, Pakistan’s Finance Minister launched a Pakistani Remittance Initiative to facilitate the continued rapid growth of remittance inflows from the Pakistani living overseas.

[9] The Aeneid is an epic poem, written by Virgil (circa 29 to 19 BC), that tells the legendary story of Aeneas, a Trojan who travelled to Italy, where he became the ancestor of the Romans. Written in two halves the second half tells of the Trojans’ ultimately victorious war over the Latins, under whose name Aeneas and his Trojan followers are destined to be subsumed. Hence, the Tiber foaming with blood. It may also have been an attempt to remove the somewhat  effete and unwarrior-like Romulus and Remus legend.

[12] The Telegraph, 23rd Oct 2009. “Labour threw open Britain’s borders to mass immigration to help socially engineer a “truly multicultural” country, a former Government adviser has revealed.”

[13] “Dutch MPs approve asylum exodus’, 17 Feb 2004,

[14] His film “Submission” criticised the treatment of Muslim women. Van Gogh was hit by eight bullets and died immediately.

[15] So healthy that successive governments have pilfered it to fund other multi-million pound projects

[16] The Fifth Report of the Select Committee on Social Security, Session 1999-2000 [HC 56]

[19] Migrationwatch estimated that the population of unauthorised migrants in 2005 was in the range 515,000 – 870,000.

[20] “The Home Office said 49,370 people applied for asylum in Britain in 2003, compared to 84,130 in 2002. With dependants, that was 61,050 for the year, compared to 103,080 in 2002.”

[22] UN Article 1A, (1951) as a person who “owing to a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality, and is unable to or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country”

[23] See also the ‘Houndsditch murders’ Latvian gang shooting several unarmed police officers Dec 1910, and the ‘Tottenham Outrage’ of Jan 1909 by Latvian anarchists.

[26]  See for instance: Raja 2005, Wikan 2005 and Bredal 2006. URL as above.

[27] David Blunkett became Home Secretary in 2001 and was responsible for introducing the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Bill in 2002 which gave rise to his ‘swamping’ comment. The proposal was that children of asylum seekers should be taught in ‘accommodation centres’ rather than slow down the progress of other pupils by a) not speaking English and b) numerically overwhelming local schools

[28] “How the Feminists’ “War against Boys” Paved the Way for Islam” Brussels Journal, Sept 2006

[29] “Inquiry panel will look at cause of August riots”, The Independent, Aug 31st 2011.

[32]  The Ritchie Report, Dec 2001, largely blamed deep-rooted segregation.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s