Thursday, November 08, 2007

Scenes from the Immigration Disaster in Britain

Julie Jarman, a single mother in Britain, wanted a sister for her eleven year old daughter Laura, so she decided to adopt one (because, of course, marrying and having a second child of her own would be out of the question). Since her only child was the result of a "long relationship" that Ms. Jarman had enjoyed while working as an aid worker in the African country of Tanzania a decade or more ago, she decided to adopt a full-blooded Tanzanian girl who had been abandoned by her relatives in Britain and was in foster care. Yet when the Tanzanian girl, named Zahina, came to live with Ms. Jarman and her daughter, all didn't work out as Ms. Jarman had hoped - for reasons that should have been fairly obvious to all involved.

Julie says that for the first six months she lived with them she put in a huge emotional investment trying to establish a mother/daughter relationship with Zahina, chatting to her, playing with her, taking her on outings, but it was always the same.

"I simply couldn't reach her. I suppose I did get frustrated by it. I would say to her sometimes: 'Do you want me to be your mummy?', and she would reply: 'No, I've already got one.'

Soon after, Zahina started writing stories in which an imaginary animal is rejected by its adoptive mother. Ms. Jarman assured Zahina she would never do that, but the girl - who read the sitation more clearly than the clueless Ms. Jarman - didn't buy that for a moment. Zahina eventually wrote her mother in Tanzania and begged to return home. Her mother's reply made clear that would not happen, at which point Zahina tried to warm to Ms. Jarman. Unfortunately, for Zahina, it was too late. Ms. Jarman decided to not to go through with the adoption, and - just as Zahina had predicted in her stories - sent her back to the foster system.

This could all be read as a sad, but predictable story of a liberal European woman's naivete combined with lousy adoption laws in Britain. But none of that deals with the truly awful core of the story: the mess created by the UK's open borders immigration policy.

Consider how Zahina came to Britain in the first place:

Her circumstances were particularly sad. Her family in Tanzania were very poor and she and her sister lived with their mother and stepfather in a one-room tenement.

"It is not clear why her family decided to send her to Britain but she arrived here after it was apparently arranged for her to stay with an uncle and his British partner.

Soon after this, however, the couple separated and the uncle's partner was left alone to look after Zahina. Attempts to send her back to Tanzania were unsuccessful because her parents could not be traced. Unwanted in Tanzania and here in Britain, she was taken into care.

Consider these few paragraphs. According to the article, Zahina did not arrive with an immigrating parent, she was sent - rather like a package - to an uncle already living in Britain. Apparently, under British law, it is possible for a poor couple in a remote African country to send a child to Britain simply because they have a relative already living there, despite the fact that the relative was not a parent or even a sibling. But it gets worse! When the uncle decided he didn't want to raise her, he abandoned the child to his partner - not a relative of the girl - who then in turn dumped the child on the British taxpayers. Notice that the British government apparently made no effort to force the uncle (to whom the child was sent in the first place) to care for his relative. This indicates that although he accepted her when she came to Britain, British law placed no responsibility on him for her subsequent care, or that British authorities could or would not enforce any such provisions. One doesn't know which possibility is worse.

The article indicates that Britain could not repatriate the child to Tanzania because "the parents could not be traced." But this is belied by the earlier account that Zahina exchanged coorespondence with her mother in Tanzania. Apparently, Tanzania's postal service could find her parents in order to deliver a letter, but the Tanzanian government could not locate them when it came to reuniting them with their child. Yet faced with such nonsense, the UK did not insist that Tanzania accept the child - its own national - and leave it to the Tanzanian government to find the parents or care for the child at its expense of its taxpayers. No, the British government simply added Zahina to the crushing social welfare burden currently born by British taxpayers, who are footing the bill for this poor child. And, you may bet, Zahina will grow up thoroughly resentful of her adoptive (by default) nation, its alien culture and its alien people and will become, in time, yet another enemy of the West living in the West, undermining it from within.

The Tanzanians must think Britons fools. And they are absolutely right to do so.

Can there be any doubt that Britain's current immigration laws are designed purposely to destroy the British nation?


At 10:13 PM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

Pytheas wrote:

"Can there be any doubt that Britain's current immigration laws are designed purposely to destroy the British nation?"

Its hard to say who is "behind" all of this, however if one wanted a real police-state with radically reduced civil rights, rampant immigration would be a great way to do it. When people's are afraid of each other and violence becomes the norm, and the whites "have nowhere left to run" when they run out of suburbs, they will happily give away their civil liberties for saftety (i.e., a police state).

Ive wondered if this what is up. Or perhaps its just defeated Marxist loons who wish to destroy the West out of sheer hatred in any way they can. Perhaps its globalists pining for a world government wishing to make national borders meaningless as whites will be severely outnumbered and unable to outvote the redistribution of their wealth to the third world.

Whoever is really "pushing" this isn't thinking of their own descendents 100 years from now though. It will probably be a very rough time in ol' Blighty in 2107 when whites really are outnumbered in Britan everywhere. Will the monarchy survive? Why would dark people from Africa give a damn about the Winsdors? Why would they elect the decendents of Gordon Brown and Tony Blair? I dont think they will.

Its weird isn't it? Britan is being "handed over" to multi-culti groups by the establishment. I think the "establishment" believes that all these divergent peoples will never turn on the establishment, but they are wrong. If I had to bet, in 100 years it will be all of the "other races" brutally mistreating whats left of whites in Britan, as they will be the minority that it will be "OK" to pick on.

There is a "Lord of the Flies" theme to all of this, but the elite just dont realize it. They are literally giving Britan away, they will not get it back.


Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home