Who would have thought?

That allowing uncivilized,uneducated,illegal migrants into to one’s country would cause any problems? :roll:

Yahoo via the AP-

But as usual we get a tiny bit of truth,buried in a steaming pile of BS-

First sentence we get a whiff of where this is headed-

” A study funded by the German government has found that the recent influx of mostly young, male migrants has led to an increase in violent crime.”


Then we have the tiny bit of truth –

“The study by criminologist Christian Pfeiffer uses figures from the northern state of Lower Saxony to examine the impact of refugee arrivals on crime in 2015 and 2016.

Published Wednesday, the study attributes a 10.4 percent rise in violent crimes in the state during those two years almost exclusively to refugees.”

And finally the steaming pile-

“It notes that young, mostly male refugees traveling alone are more likely to commit crimes if they feel they have no hope about their future, and that most come from Muslim countries “characterized by male dominance.”

Families Ministry spokeswoman Verena Herb said the study confirms the need for greater integration efforts in Germany.”

No,you idiot,it confirms the need to send them all packing back to where they came from.They will never integrate,they will subjugate :evil:

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

38 Responses to Who would have thought?

  1. Michael in Nelson says:

    I agree with one of the comments…”You had to pay for a study to know this?” http://falfn.com/CrusaderRabbit/wp-content/plugins/wp-monalisa/icons/wpml_wacko.gif

    • K2 says:

      Well, it’s likely the rise in crime was much much worse, so they needed a “study” to keep the lid on.

  2. Darin says:

    More benefits of diversity-


    “Merkel Lego’s” spread to NYC-


    Mayor card carrying communist idiot DeBlasio refered to them as a “$50Million dollar investment”

  3. Over here Winston Peters has been giving those warnings in a more PC way. That the cost to public services from migrants is greater than there overall contribution. That house prices in Auckland will go up. That our cultural way of life will be gone for good. And what do people call him? A maori basher and a racist. Which is why he dare not say anything about Islam.

    • mawm says:

      But he’s not saying it now, now that Jacinta has given him enough baubles and he has empowered someone whom the largest portion of New Zealanders did not want to run the country. Disgraceful!

  4. Guys I’m aware of the labour-NZ first agreement. Labour will now have to make immigration less than it otherwise would have made it. They will allow less students in, those students who are going to do a short course to get citizenship, things will change.

    I talked to someone who works at AUT and he says that the reason for all of these students was to get citizenship, without citizenship they may as well study in India. Anyhow here is a copy of the agreement, on page 6 is has a section on immigration.


    • mawm says:

      That certainly does not look like allowing Jacinta to invite the Manus Island migrants to NZ. Winston was also most visible in his lack of any comment at all. He’s a fake.

      • Mawm ok fine, he didn’t do much about the refugees. And how many extra people is that again?

        In the meantime before then when he negotiated with National and Labour, he tried to get the immigration number down. And he did by 10s of thousands per year. Now that he is in a coalition agreement and they’ve agreed on how to lower immigration the deal is sealed.

        If he had in the negotiations talked about refugee quotas then great but that’s only a few hundred or thousand. Finally, he’s only 7.5% of the vote. Compare that to Act, United Future, the Maori Party or the Conservatives, if they had got 7.5% would they be able to bring immigration down by 10s of thousands.

        No they wouldn’t, they wouldn’t have quite that hard.

        • He’s done something to lower immigration numbers, now that he’s got something, he can’t just ask for more, he’s got what he’s agreed to.

        • Lara says:

          I don’t believe he was ever going to go with National, it was all a sham, making the whole process even more of a disgrace. Once NZ is rid of WP, the better off we will be. Winston rode MMP for all it was worth, giving the finger to the majority of voters at the same time. We might as well be an African dictatorship.

      • mawm says:

        Warren – Sorry to be pedantic but there is absolutely nothing in that agreement about numbers or trying to reduce them, only stuff about work visas and migrant exploitation. Here’s a reminder of what their agreement is.

        • As per Labour’s policy, pursue Labour and New Zealand First’s shared priorities to:
        • Ensure work visas issued reflect genuine skills shortages and cut down on low quality international education courses.
        • Take serious action on migrant exploitation, particularly of international students.

        Here’s an article from Stuff dated April 2017. In there is a graph from Statistics New Zealand that shows a continued growth of migrants. Obviously we don’t know what Jacinta is doing about it but there has been no coverage of her reducing numbers.


        So, I can’t see any reduction by 10’s of thousands that you claim.

        In the meantime before then when he negotiated with National and Labour, he tried to get the immigration number down. And he did by 10s of thousands per year.

        I think you’ve been sold a pup! http://falfn.com/CrusaderRabbit/wp-content/plugins/wp-monalisa/icons/wpml_yes.gif

        • Mawn, first of all that article was in early 2017, which says that there are about 70,000 per year, under National and Seymour. 2ndly there is a difference between acceleration vs going backwards. Nobody’s advocating that the amount of migrants should go back and be negative.

          The argument is about how much of an acceleration is healthy. Under National they still say we should keep immigration high. I do remember reading somewhere in an article about how Labour would agree to reduce Migration figures by 30,000. And how do you do that?

          A + B + C + D + E = 70,000. If you reduce E, and don’t increase the other variables it will go down. So what Labour and NZ First have both agreed on is who do we need least. By saying we only want those doing high quality courses and doing a course will not get you citizenship, it means a reduction.

          If the Reserve bank raises the interest rate to 20%, this would reduce the amount of money in circulation. So no the article says nothing about the actual figures, but two things. I’ve already stated one of them by reducing international students, you decrease immigration. The 2nd is that the actual real agreement goes for many pages, like at least 30 pages. That’s the nitty gritty agreement.

          What I’ve shown you is the summarised agreement. And in this age that is the agreement that everybody is interested in. People like to just look at something shortly and get the main idea. Getting people to concentrate on details is getting harder and harder, with the short attention spans people have.

          Lastly this article shows how they plan on reducing immigration, and by how much. 20,000 to 30,000. So do you still think I’m nonsensing you by saying a reduction by 10s of thousands.


          • mawm says:

            Warren – That is Labour’s election policy! – and one knows how much of election policy never happens. Anyway, it’s all about tightening up on existing immigration policy except for the “no visa for below Bachelor degree”. Again they do not have definite caps to numbers – it’s all hope-changey kind of stuff that might or might not bring down the numbers. I see that they are proposing a doubling of refugee numbers which is the primary refugee only and not all the relatives that follow.

            To date they have done nothing to change matters and we can wait and see. Maybe Winston will weigh in at that stage.

            • Mawn, it became Labour policy, after Winston made a deal with them. You know full well Winston made this as part of the deal. You now know that this will affect plenty of people.

              You also know that the refugee numbers are only a small amount relative to the total amount we take in.

              I can’t say anything that I’ve already stated.

  5. Contempt says:

    Dang. Wrong link. Good start after a long break😩

  6. Lara says:

    Winston should never have been in a position to be a maker of any sort. He had only seven percent of the vote, FFS, and he gets to choose the govt? What kind of democracy is that? Arden made my blood boil when on election night she stated ‘MMP will decide.’
    What arrogance. So, she had a right to govern, even though the majority of voters rejected her and her ilk? We have a broken electoral system that gave a charlatan with hardly any votes one hundred percent of the power, sidelining what the majority wanted.
    It’s a disgrace alright, Winston enabling a girl PM and a bunch of kids to rule over us. No wonder he is silent. Embarrassed maybe? ‘You can’t always get what you want’ That speech was also the height of arrogance. I so can’t wait for the next election, three years or sooner, when Winston is toast, hopefully the Greens also, and Labour are soundly chucked out by the electorate kicked into touch. I hope its a bloodbath. National are not much better, but at least they had the moral right to govern! Hopefully NZ will still be in one piece by then!! MMP is an utter joke, yet National helped to enable it, doing nothing to get rid of it when they could. That is something I just don’t get.

  7. Lara says:

    I personally think Key was behind the keep MMP thinking by National, but it was English who paid the price, sadly. Winston has chosen the govt three times now, yet nothing as done to make changes to MMP. Still, MMP has lost all credibility with the voters, and I bet if put to the vote now, it would go. But will the powers that be, Labour or National ever give us the chance again? National maybe, Labour never. We should get another say, after Winston 2017. Wouldn’t hold my breath however, as the pollies see it as a system that allows no accountability from the voters, especially re the list MPs. Corrupt system and corrupt govt, both.

    Happy New Year, by the way!

  8. KG says:

    “Corrupt system and corrupt govt, both.”
    Damn right, Lara. http://falfn.com/CrusaderRabbit/wp-content/plugins/wp-monalisa/icons/wpml_good.gif
    May you have a very fine ’18.

  9. Lara says:

    Thanks, KG, you too. May this dreadful govt collapse soon, that’s my new year’s wish. She is an unbearable PM, so very out of her shallow, look-at-me depth! The people were right to reject her..and even more, I don’t think she really wants it Sigh.

    • Ronbo says:

      Had enough, New Zealand? Try a republic – parliamentary government sucks! In fact, democracy sucks! A parliamentary government with a majority can do anything except turn a man into a woman….and to add more gasoline on the fire its a socialist democracy you guys have – the worst of all possible worlds.http://falfn.com/CrusaderRabbit/wp-content/plugins/wp-monalisa/icons/wpml_negative.gif

      • KG says:

        A republic won’t work here, not now.
        “The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars,
        But in ourselves, that we are underlings.”

        • Darin says:

          A Republic is like a fine Swiss Watch,it will run along smoothly for many years-as long as no idiots are allowed to fiddle with the inner workings.

  10. Lara maybe your not aware of it, but Karl Marx was about destroying 3 things: Family, religion, and property rights. Amy Adams-National has done more to damage the family in 3 years, then everything else that has been done since 1968 to damage the family. In 1968 there was the Guardians Act, it states that a parent is simply a guardian for as long as they are fit to do so. In 1989, the Children Young Person’s and their families Act came out stating what was expected, if you violate those terms you lose your child. In 2004 the care of children’s act came out.

    Section 4 says the needs of the child are paramount, meaning we’ll take your child away if you don’t serve your child. While there are two parents they are guardians (sections 15 & 16), and in the case where that’s not the case, the person able to provide the day to day care of the child is what makes someone the automatic custodian, who will get the house in the case of divorce (97). I could go on and on.

    Now with Amy Adams she got rid of the cross checks. So in family court, they would cross check your statements, to make sure it stacked up, this was on the NZ police site-no cross checks just go to court fill out a protection order and that’s it. Before I went on my crusade they even said you can get a property order and take the house, they took that statement off after my crusade.

    She made some other changes to family law, she tightened the system by saying the problem we have is that the police and court system presume that a woman might lie we need to change that.

    She’s made further changes to domestic violence laws or made an attempt to do so, saying that if a woman kills her husband, it isn’t necessarily murder if he’s annoyed her enough. As far as I’m concerned the family is as dead as it can be under National.

    That’s when I said I can’t vote for National. There’s no part of the family left to destroy. The reason I wrote this book is there are only two solutions left for us guys.

    Don’t make the guardian of your child someone who is in anyway dishonest. You wouldn’t make someone the guardian of a million $ trust, so with the laws they’ve made if you make someone dishonest you only have yourself to blame.

    2ndly, don’t put your money in any asset that the government has the right to seize or forfeit. There is one thing and only one thing that is exempt and I have made 70+ You Tube videos to prove my point, using law dictionaries.


    The point I’m getting at is Labour and National have destroyed the family as an independent unit. There is absolutely nothing left of it as an independent unit, because its not an independent unit. And Winston Peters has done the least to destroy it. The National MPs have just ignored everything I said, not even answering my questions. If it’s of any comfort to you, I’ve just had enough of both National and Labour and other parties. Finally ever since I’ve worked on that book they’ve shifted legislation around, renaming it.

    What I’m saying is I’m absolutely disappointed in National. There was also that National MP who wanted to pass a resolution making the Jews tenants in their own land. To me your choice is Marxist communist labour, or the Nazi Party. Oh that’s right even Hitler didn’t challenge the family in regards to gender.

  11. Sorry its so long, I had no idea it would take that much space.

  12. Ronbo says:

    I notice no New Zealanders have the guts to comment on my suggestion!

    The time comes when you just have to admit that your government is so totally screwed up …and that your politicians so corrupt ….and that no reform is possible… and that if you don’t act soon you’ll be sold off by your traitor politicians… and made slaves of the People’s Republic of China

    The time has come to kill the beast of bad government and start all over again, or at least try – better to die on your feet that live as a slave on your knees.

    Yes, it’s that bad.

    • mawm says:

      We might not be perfect but we do not have the corruption of the American political system nor do we have politicians going into politics purely to enrich themselves ( and never to the extent that occurs in the US). The MMP system is garbage and has now been shown to be so but it was done so that minority party voters could have some sway in law making in NZ. That a charlatan such as Winston has abused it shows its huge flaws.

      Warren – The attack on the family is a policy of the Frankfurt Group and has been going on for decades around the world. I hoped that with globalist Key gone National would return to its more Tory roots. Many like you and me have been turned off by the direction Key went.

      • Yes Mawm with at least your last paragraph I agree, it has been a long slow death to the family unit. Now the family is how ever the government defines it. The Children, Young Person’s and their families act says a family is to serve the needs of children, full stop. What about parents, what about fathers.

    • Yes Ronbo, I’m with you on that and by the way, we now owe at least $90 billion. Some of which is owed to the Chinese-the debtor is servant to the lender-Proverbs 22:7. So the massive increase in debt by National is not making us a more sovereign nation.

      We are in no way a free people any longer. The people in New Zealand have difficulty accepting it because the government will fix all of their problems.

      Oh yes and the Czech republic has a constitution with 10 pages worth of rights, to protect individuals, these rights are limitations on government. We need something like that, once we overhaul the entire system.

      • KG says:

        “We are in no way a free people any longer.”
        Damn right. And most of the battery hens that people have become are either totally unaware of that fact or just don’t care. It’s easier that way than accepting the concept of personal responsibility.

  13. Lara says:

    I still find National the lesser of the two evils on offer. Labour and the Greens will push us hard left, destroying what is left of the family and taking out the economy also, as they give handouts to bludgers and make life ever easier for solo Mums etc. Ardern is an obvious UN puppet (do doubt H1 is pulling her strings). English comes across as a decent family bloke, which is why our MSM demonizes him, even now, when he is no longer in power. Course the biased MSM helped roll Ardern into power, and all one hears from them is rosily glowing reports. There is no other choice, but to vote National, or not vote at all.

  14. Lara from a man’s point of view exactly what is the point of having a family. Innocent till proven guilty used to exist in family court. If you go the NZ police website:



    You will see my point, that is once you find out that the protection order is to protect women and children. Easily any women can get a protection order like that, without a trial. Until I did my crusade where I put 300 fliers in people’s mailboxes including the source documents, including photocopies of citations of my law dictionary, they arrogantly had on it even if you are the registered proprietor, a property order will mean you forfeit the property.

    My point and question is really simple, exactly what is the point of raising a family here in New Zealand. These changes have been implemented between 2014 and 2017.

    Still not convinced, look up sections 42, 45, 46, 47 and 52 of the Family Proceedings Act, and see just who has the power in a relationship. Look at section 3 of the Domestic Violence act where the way you use your money is now violence.

    As far as raising a family here in New Zealand it has never ever been worse, from a man’s point of view. Which again brings me to the question, what can you say to convince someone here in New Zealand it’s worth waiting for someone.

    There are only two strings of hope. #1: You wouldn’t make anybody dishonest guardian of a $1 million trust, so why make somebody who’s not absolutely totally dishonest guardian of your child. The other has already been stated a few hours ago.

    Those two strings of hope is all that is left, Labour’s not going to make things better nor is National, because ever since 1968 the parents of the child are simply the guardians, and all that has happened is things have been brought to their logical conclusion.

    So again my challenge to you is the family doesn’t exist as an independent unit, they can’t destroy it anymore than it has already been destroyed.

  15. by ‘absolutely totally dishonest’ I meant ‘absolutely totally honest’.

  16. Lara says:

    Point taken Warren. I hear what you are saying. Might take the no vote option next time, or vote for the Conservative party as a protest vote, if they are still around!!

    • Thanks Lara, sometimes I feel the same way. When it was the Bill and Ben Party, I seriously considered voting for them. The fact of the matter is if you really want to know who comes first, its not you or me.

      Its like they go into Parliament with an objective and that’s it, nothing will stop them from achieving it. I’ve thought up starting the ‘no consent, no confidence, no vote party’, so that those of us who are not going to vote, can make it official that nobody’s worth our vote. Also added to that would be every MP would get of copy of why they aren’t worth your vote.