Europe submits voluntarily

[whichphilosophy]

If they hadn't wrecked it, there would not be a need to fix it.

I'm not excusing the US invasion of Iraq, but the Mid-east was the piss hole of the world before 9-11.

They were quite happy shooting each other before the US and Europe decided to join it. It's begins with O and ends in L.

 

[whichphilosophy]

Islam is also fast growing amongst Europeans.

No.

Yes

 

[Jokodo]

Legitimate refugees is not a problem. In a sense we are obligated to try and help because the US, Britain and some European countries caused the current problem in Syria. The main issue lies with economic migrants. They destroy their IDs and 'forget' their birthdays.
Since Europe abandoned its borders its very hard, sometimes to distinguish between a refugee and an economic migrant.

In the news they said "refugees" refused to be finger-printed in Hungary because they were afraid that they would be forced to live in the country of entrance.

Hungary is putting asylum applicants into closed detention camps (i.e., effectively prisons). If that weren't bad enough in itself, those camps are absolutely overcrowded and understaffed - and they intentionally, consciously, keep it that way as a matter of policy, there are political decisions not to extend capacities. Under those conditions, refugees are treated more like cage animals than like inmates. And that's now. If Austria, Germany, Denmark start start applying the Dublin III rules again and deport people back to Hungary, it's only going to get worse.

[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RREyoA1bvZA[/YOUTUBE]

You would do all you can to avoid ending up there. Any human would.

You still don't seem to have understood that Middle Easterners are humans.

Also Danish apparently reduced daily allowance while refugees were on a train and people who were planning to stay there refused to leave the train because of it.

Denmark first of foremost said that it considers the Dublin III to be still fully in force. In other words, it threatened to deport people back to Hungary. So above for why that's a good reason to try and get on to Sweden asap.

And most people who went on to Sweden actually have relatives in Sweden. People tend to want to go to places where they already know someone because that makes it easier to integrate.

This looks like a well organized and informed (about laws and regulations) economic invasion.

If you believe all of them are illiterate, of course you'll never understand how they could possibly follow the news.
Hint: The people who come here are almost invariably more educated than their country's average, and many of them speak at least English.

 

[Jokodo]

That is blank nonsense and a perfect example of the lefty obsession of trying to make Christians worse than Muslims. But let's see:
- are Christians in the US South engaging in terrorist attacks on a regular basis?

Yes:  Anti-abortion_violence

- are satirists in the US South subject to death threats and massacres for criticizing Christianity or daring to draw Jesus?
- are young Christians in the US South going to the Middle East to fight for the theocratic CSIS (Christian State in Iraq and Syria)?

Close enough: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...ntigay-conservative-evangelicals-9193593.html

- are Southern Baptists in the US South refusing to serve alcohol as part of their job duties?

Peanuts. They're banning alcohol county-wide. Fun fact: In Turkey, Tunisia, Kosovo, Albania, Algeria (the closest Muslim majority countries from where I live), alcohol is legal for everyone over 18. You'd have to all the way to Libya or islamist-controlled areas of Syria to find places where it's illegal (while alcohol is fully legal in the government, FSA, or Kurdish controlled areas of Syria).

 

[Jokodo]

Yes you should.
If now you could give a complete list of European countries where you can't, this might actually be relevant to the discussion.

I was talking about long term repercussions for Europe so your objection is irrelevant here. Besides, there are already 200 Subway restaurants in UK that are "halal only" even with minority being Muslim. As Muslim population increases it will get worse.

There are probably 100s of eateries in my city that don't serve horse meat, although it is an accepted part of the local cuisine. If I want horse meat, I go to one of the places that do serve it, problem solved. If I just need to get something in my stomach, I'm happy about pork, or for that matter turkey.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Scale it for the size of their native populations.

- - - Updated - - -

Some sources claim that Saudi Arabia has informally accepted half a million Syrians since 2011 but without declaring them as refugees - with 200,000 additional residencies issued to Syrian nationals and an estimated 300,000 who entered on tourist visas but never left.

It's still shameful that they won't accept anyone as refugees - but expected. They haven't even signed the Geneva convention, so hey. Saying that we shouldn't accept anyone until they do is like saying that we should have the death penalty for apostasy from Christianity as long as they have the death penalty for apostasy from Islam.

I don't know about you guys, but I want to live in a society that thrives to be one of the best, not one that models itself after the worst.

I found this article but perhaps more searching is required:
http://www.infowars.com/saudi-arabi...3-million-people-yet-has-taken-zero-refugees/

Saudi Arabia Has 100,000 Air Conditioned Tents That Can House 3 Million People Sitting Empty Yet Has Taken Zero Refugees

While Europe takes the burden of the migrant crisis

I am sure this is true. Why would Saudi wish to ruin its reputation as an upstanding pillar on human rights by taking people in.

Don't waste our time with infowars.com

1. Saudi Arabia 0
2. Barhain 0
3. Qatar 0
4. Kuwait 0
5. UAE 0
6. Oman 0
http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/604373/Refugee-crisis-Arab-nations-fail-Syrian-refugees

Meanwhile an update on the 100,000 air conditioned tents, The latest figure is NIL
There again if I were from those states I would probably say the US and European voted in governments of these countries caused the conflict in Syria and they should fix it.
However riding on the back of the refugees coming in are economic migrants and perhaps one or 2 from ISIS
The European governments will do nothing until it is too late.

At this point the whole thing needs to be considered suspect--the original source is a Lebanese paper that has published a lot of false stuff in the past.

- - - Updated - - -

Legitimate refugees is not a problem. In a sense we are obligated to try and help because the US, Britain and some European countries caused the current problem in Syria. The main issue lies with economic migrants. They destroy their IDs and 'forgetì their birthdays.

The UNHCR estimates that 75-80% of the people currently moving towards Western Europe along the Balkan route are legitimate refugees (more than 50% from Syria alone, but Syria isn't the only country from which people legitimately flee). So if you think that the overall numbers are overwhelming, the numbers will still be challenging at least once you subtract "economic" refugees.

UNHCR isn't credible.

 

[Jokodo]

The UNHCR estimates that 75-80% of the people currently moving towards Western Europe along the Balkan route are legitimate refugees (more than 50% from Syria alone, but Syria isn't the only country from which people legitimately flee). So if you think that the overall numbers are overwhelming, the numbers will still be challenging at least once you subtract "economic" refugees.

UNHCR isn't credible.

If you have a more credible source offering a more credible estimate, feel free to link it! Of course you won't. You never do.

(And, no, UNHCR didn't publish similar figures in previous years. The situation in 2015 is totally different from previous years.)

 

[Jokodo]

However riding on the back of the refugees coming in are economic migrants and perhaps one or 2 from ISIS

Sure ISIS has sufficient funds to buy 10 or 20 Bulgarian passports (guaranteeing free movement within the EU) from corrupt Bulgarian officials instead of risking that their agents are uncovered by the very people who are running from them, if that's really what they're up to?

 

[TSwizzle]

UNHCR isn't credible.

Not in this case they aren't.

 

[whichphilosophy]

However riding on the back of the refugees coming in are economic migrants and perhaps one or 2 from ISIS

Sure ISIS has sufficient funds to buy 10 or 20 Bulgarian passports (guaranteeing free movement within the EU) from corrupt Bulgarian officials instead of risking that their agents are uncovered by the very people who are running from them, if that's really what they're up to?

That's more than enough. They can contact radicals in the host country Even 10 can cause disruption. A whole army of ISIS is most improbable but it doesn't take a lot of people to plant a bomb or shoot someone

 

[whichphilosophy]

Scale it for the size of their native populations.

- - - Updated - - -

Some sources claim that Saudi Arabia has informally accepted half a million Syrians since 2011 but without declaring them as refugees - with 200,000 additional residencies issued to Syrian nationals and an estimated 300,000 who entered on tourist visas but never left.

It's still shameful that they won't accept anyone as refugees - but expected. They haven't even signed the Geneva convention, so hey. Saying that we shouldn't accept anyone until they do is like saying that we should have the death penalty for apostasy from Christianity as long as they have the death penalty for apostasy from Islam.

I don't know about you guys, but I want to live in a society that thrives to be one of the best, not one that models itself after the worst.

I found this article but perhaps more searching is required:
http://www.infowars.com/saudi-arabi...3-million-people-yet-has-taken-zero-refugees/

Saudi Arabia Has 100,000 Air Conditioned Tents That Can House 3 Million People Sitting Empty Yet Has Taken Zero Refugees

While Europe takes the burden of the migrant crisis

I am sure this is true. Why would Saudi wish to ruin its reputation as an upstanding pillar on human rights by taking people in.

Don't waste our time with infowars.com

1. Saudi Arabia 0
2. Barhain 0
3. Qatar 0
4. Kuwait 0
5. UAE 0
6. Oman 0
http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/604373/Refugee-crisis-Arab-nations-fail-Syrian-refugees

Meanwhile an update on the 100,000 air conditioned tents, The latest figure is NIL
There again if I were from those states I would probably say the US and European voted in governments of these countries caused the conflict in Syria and they should fix it.
However riding on the back of the refugees coming in are economic migrants and perhaps one or 2 from ISIS
The European governments will do nothing until it is too late.

At this point the whole thing needs to be considered suspect--the original source is a Lebanese paper that has published a lot of false stuff in the past.

- - - Updated - - -

Legitimate refugees is not a problem. In a sense we are obligated to try and help because the US, Britain and some European countries caused the current problem in Syria. The main issue lies with economic migrants. They destroy their IDs and 'forgetì their birthdays.

The UNHCR estimates that 75-80% of the people currently moving towards Western Europe along the Balkan route are legitimate refugees (more than 50% from Syria alone, but Syria isn't the only country from which people legitimately flee). So if you think that the overall numbers are overwhelming, the numbers will still be challenging at least once you subtract "economic" refugees.

UNHCR isn't credible.

The Saudis for instance blocked Visa applications from Syrians but promised to build 200 mosques in Germany

http://www.ukip.org/saudis_reject_syrian_refugees_but_offer_to_build_200_mosques_in_germany

According to reports from Syrian exile groups countries like Saudi Arabia are refusing visas to Syrians as they fear the impact of more secular, Arabic speaking people disrupting Saudi civil society

As for your point on reliable sources, I don't know any news media is consistently reliable

Are those from Pakistan and Bangladesh refugees. Yet only a few even want to apply for Asylum. Many are throwing away their IDs

 

[Jokodo]

Sure ISIS has sufficient funds to buy 10 or 20 Bulgarian passports (guaranteeing free movement within the EU) from corrupt Bulgarian officials instead of risking that their agents are uncovered by the very people who are running from them, if that's really what they're up to?

That's more than enough. They can contact radicals in the host country Even 10 can cause disruption. A whole army of ISIS is most improbable but it doesn't take a lot of people to plant a bomb or shoot someone

It doesn't take more than a few, true.

But one way or another, it's irrelevant to the discussion of whether or not to close the borders for the 1000s of refugees a day coming from Hungary to Germany right now.

If ISIS wants a bomb planted in a major European city, they recruit people already there, or they buy Bulgarian passports for their agents and put them on a plane from Sofia to Frankfurt. They have no reason to send their people on a long and exhausting trek where they might be identified by other refugees actually fleeing ISIS.

It simply makes no sense.

It does make sense for ISIS, though, to announce, counterfactually, that they will send thousands of people to come into Europe along with the legitimate refugees, for a number of reasons.

If you spread that rumor, you're helping and no-one but them.

 

[barbos]

This looks like a well organized and informed (about laws and regulations) economic invasion.

If you believe all of them are illiterate, of course you'll never understand how they could possibly follow the news.
Hint: The people who come here are almost invariably more educated than their country's average, and many of them speak at least English.

I did not say they were illiterate, and "organized and informed" != "educated".

 

[Loren Pechtel]

UNHCR isn't credible.

If you have a more credible source offering a more credible estimate, feel free to link it! Of course you won't. You never do.

(And, no, UNHCR didn't publish similar figures in previous years. The situation in 2015 is totally different from previous years.)

I don't think we have good data. I'm just saying UNHCR isn't good data.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The Saudis for instance blocked Visa applications from Syrians but promised to build 200 mosques in Germany

http://www.ukip.org/saudis_reject_syrian_refugees_but_offer_to_build_200_mosques_in_germany

According to reports from Syrian exile groups countries like Saudi Arabia are refusing visas to Syrians as they fear the impact of more secular, Arabic speaking people disrupting Saudi civil society

As for your point on reliable sources, I don't know any news media is consistently reliable

The point is the root source for this issue is a paper far more interested in ideology than truth--there's no point in paying attention to it.

Are those from Pakistan and Bangladesh refugees. Yet only a few even want to apply for Asylum. Many are throwing away their IDs

They're throwing away their IDs because it makes it all but impossible to deport them. All the more reason to think they're economic migrants, not true refugees.

 

[Warpoet]

Nothing as reliable as a thread about immigrants to get people who purport to be liberals, or to value basic democratic principles, to show their true colors.

 

[Bomb#20]

And what is your solution? do you suggest Europe lets everyone in?

What would happen if Europe did let everyone in who wants to come?

I'm unconvinced that it would be bad for Europeans.

You are smoking something, aren't you?

As this is about the only rebuttal I get when I suggest this, I have to assume that there is no reason at all to think that I am wrong.

In the 1930s and 1940s, Palestine pretty much let everyone in who wanted to come. I take it you're unconvinced that this was bad for Palestinians, and you have to assume that there is no reason at all to think that it was.

You have a strong emotional impose that I must be wrong, but it is pure emotion (ie racism), with no thought behind it at all.

And if you were a Christian instead of a whatever-your-faith-is, and you encountered a person who had a strong emotional reaction that you were wrong but couldn't articulate why, you would conclude it was pure emotion, i.e., Satan-worship.

I'm even less convinced that it would be bad for those who want to go.

Nobody contests that.

Indeed; but neither do they give it much thought. If things are better to a sufficient degree for a sufficient number of people, then that offsets any slight worsening of the situation for a small number of people. (Not that we have anything other than emotional assumptions that such worsening might occur).

Even if allowing unrestricted migration was to cause a small amount of harm to a small number of Europeans, it would still be a good idea if it causes a big benefit for a large number of non-Europeans - but only as long as you agree that non-Europeans are people.

If an identity thief from the USA (i.e., the Utilitarian Society of Australia) breaks into all your bank accounts and embezzles half your income for the rest of your life, and distributes it among a dozen impoverished people in the third world, it will cause a small amount of harm to you and a big benefit to a large number of non-Europeans. This would therefore be a good idea. Anyone who objects to such an act evidently thinks non-Europeans are not people.

 

[barbos]

Nothing as reliable as a thread about immigrants to get people who purport to be liberals, or to value basic democratic principles, to show their true colors.

Reminded me a scientific study of differences between liberals and conservatives. Turned out conservatives cared more about actual people they know especially in their group and less about abstract people in general. Liberals were the opposite, they cared more about abstract people and less about real people near them.
Basically, conservatives hate people they don't know, and liberals hate people they know
So neither group turned to be inherently better than the other.

I am in the center - hate everybody equally

 

[Jokodo]

If you believe all of them are illiterate, of course you'll never understand how they could possibly follow the news.
Hint: The people who come here are almost invariably more educated than their country's average, and many of them speak at least English.

I did not say they were illiterate, and "organized and informed" != "educated".

You got it upside down. Given that they're educated, its no wonder that they're informed without having to stipulate that they're "organised".

 

[barbos]

I did not say they were illiterate, and "organized and informed" != "educated".

You got it upside down. Given that they're educated, its no wonder that they're informed without having to stipulate that they're "organised".

You keep assuming that they are educated, when the only thing we know for sure they are "educated" in are European laws and regulations regarding refugees.