Europe submits voluntarily

[angelo]

Need some references for that statement maxparrish.

While he is technically correct; the argument doesn't really hold any water since there's absolutely zero reason to suspect there's anything other than socio-economic factors at play there. And they're statistically also victims more often.

The differences can mostly be explained by the fact that there's large numbers of dissatisfied youth of immigrant descent whose socio-economic position tends to be more fucked up than that of other Germans. Not that racists would accept this obvious bit of reality as explaining the difference when they could just blame it on the foreigners.

I'll be fucked!!!! So these people don't need an excuse to rape and pillage because of their background. There are many natives who come from much worst background who are model citizens!

 

[angelo]

Merkel is lying through her teeth. The majority of these "refugees" are economic migrants.

So Aleppo is trash and the refuges are not political? I find what's passing through Merkel's dentition perfect. As for violence, well, forced immigrants initially tend to be so, but, they settle down and make the place better place to live.

I'm thinking that with Germany's current 300K worker shortage each year the emigres will ultimately fit right in. Sure there's going to be some reaction and it could upset an election or two. Still with its economic engine intact Germany will right itself and continue toward a more pluralistic future making good Germans out of most all who stay after the troubles in their homelands pass.

This thing is just a blip, a minor blip, that will not result in reversion to Nazi ways.

What say you?

These people's first allegiance is to Islam, Germany or other Western nations last. In places where they become a majority they demand sharia. The Eurabia thesis has every chance of eventuating in the not too distant future!

 

[Ford]

These people's first allegiance is to Islam, Germany or other Western nations last. In places where they become a majority they demand sharia. The Eurabia thesis has every chance of eventuating in the not too distant future!

I know!


So all that remains is to determine the color of the box cars we load them onto...right?

 

[Bomb#20]

So what fraction of the current wave of Muslim immigrants do you think are in favor of legal abortion?

I don't know - do you? However, in a recent international poll where respondents in 23 different countries where asked whether they believe a woman should have a right to abortion under any circumstances, the ratio of "yes" answers was higher in Turkey (the only Muslim majority country polled) than in places like Canada, Germany, or the United States,

According to Pew Research Center, the fraction in Muslim countries who believe having an abortion is morally unacceptable ranges from a low of 52% in Turkey to a high of 89% in Indonesia -- all of them higher than the U.S. (49%) and vastly higher than Canada and Germany. Pew didn't ask in Albania and the former Soviet republics, but no doubt the numbers are much lower there; the communists were pretty effective at defanging competing religions. But those aren't where the current wave are coming from. It's beyond implausible to suppose that the current immigration wave won't tend to reduce support for abortion rights in Northern Europe.

Strawman.

Hey, you're the one who offered right-to-lifers and McCarthyists as a representative sample of politically incorrect people. I work with what you give me.

 

[Bomb#20]

People in this thread are saying essentially that we're betraying our great-grandchildren by integrating people who are not us and letting them have be part of where our society is going.

That's a misunderstanding of what people in this thread are essentially saying. The people being "not us" is immaterial; the point is that they are likely to hurt your great-grandchildren. Furthermore, it isn't integrating the people and letting them be part of where your society is going that will hurt future generations; it's failing to integrate them and letting them redirect where your society is going that's the problem. If Europe was as good as the U.S. is at integrating Muslims and getting them to go with us rather than letting them push us in a different direction, then this would be a very different discussion.

Pointing out that my great-grandchildren might not actually like the direction in which I'd like to steer society (even though I of course hope they will) is a perfectly relevant discussion point in that context.

If the reason they won't like it is they'll have been brainwashed to believe in subjugating women and killing gays, we shouldn't put any value on catering to their opinions.

 

[angelo]

These people's first allegiance is to Islam, Germany or other Western nations last. In places where they become a majority they demand sharia. The Eurabia thesis has every chance of eventuating in the not too distant future!

I know!


So all that remains is to determine the color of the box cars we load them onto...right?

Send all economic migrants right back where ever they came from. I understand it ain't easy as they destroy all their papers, which leaves the problem of sorting out where they really are from, but I'm sure there are ways of finding out.
By getting rid of these freeloaders, it makes it so much easier to help the genuine refugees.

 

[bilby]

I know!


So all that remains is to determine the color of the box cars we load them onto...right?

Send all economic migrants right back where ever they came from. I understand it ain't easy as they destroy all their papers, which leaves the problem of sorting out where they really are from, but I'm sure there are ways of finding out.
By getting rid of these freeloaders, it makes it so much easier to help the genuine refugees.

If you live in Broome, and decide to move to Perth because there are better paying jobs in Perth, should the people of Perth send you back where you came from?

What if you want to move from Perth to Sydney?

What if you want to move from Perth to New York, Paris, or London?

Why are ANY of these cases morally different from moving to any of these cities from Aleppo, or Damascus, or Mombassa, or Lagos?

An economic migrant is someone who moves from a place where things are tough, to a place where they hope things will be better - usually because there are more or better paid jobs at their destination. Why should you be allowed to move from Perth to Sydney for economic reasons, but if Abdul moves from Damascus to Munich, he is a 'freeloader' who should be 'got rid of'?

 

[dystopian]

Those numbers were a projection of possibilities given trends.

So...

completely made up numbers.

Whatever the actual number it will be, those numbers demonstrate that at current rates of growth those are deep concern.

Wait what.

"Whatever" the actual number it will be, "those" numbers (presumably are you referring to the the completely made up 1000-1500 figures here)
demonstrate that at *current* rates of growth they're of deep concern?

So if the *actual* number was say.... 1 per day... that would show that 1500 people a day is a serious problem... at the actual current number of 274 a day.

How... the... fuck... does... your... brain... work?

Starting in May of 2015 the monthly number of asylum seekers increased to 5400, rising to 8100 in July. It continued upward, and in August it rose to 11,800 and in September to 24306. The total coming to 73,000 for the year. EVEN if the numbers level off to 25,000 per month for October, November and December that is another 75,000 which brings the total to 150,000 per year (and if, as you said, the current number is 86,000 as of mid-October, we are right on track).

Oh I get it now... you're still looking at completely arbitrary points in time and extrapolating forward from them. Thinking that because there's been an upward trend over the past few months that therefore those numbers will not only *keep on increasing* (or staying the same) for the next few months...

...but the next 15 years too.

I've already explained why you can't do that, though.

If, on the hand, the upward trend continued arithmetically (say 35K for Oct, 45K for Nov, and 55K for December) then the total would be 210,000 for the year (much more than 180K). As the daily rate rate has already has been close to 1000 per day (25,000 divided by 30 days) the authors speculation is entirely plausible, as is 180K figure for the year.

Except even if we assume that it will keep on increasing for the foreseeable future and that we get a 180.000 people....

...the number of 1000-1500 a day over the entire year is stilll grossly inflated.

So the author's speculation is NOT plausible.

And again, that's ignoring the idiotic claim that it'd be 1000-1500 a day for 15 years.

AND next year? With many millions of displaced or economically challenged persons still seeking to get into Europe, many other nations refusing entry, then any bigger number is plausible...e.g. 30,000 (or more) per month is not out of the question. If so, that could mean 360,000 applications for Sweden in 2016.

Even if it's that many for 2016... and that's highly unlikely (not to mention, again, a completely made up number)... it won't be for 2017 and beyond. There simply aren't enough refugees to keep that up.

Yes, we get your continued denial and handwaving. But that is the point, those "ifs" have already happened - generous chain migration into Sweden is a reality. The prior years numbers are in the article.

Pointing out that you make up numbers while treating them as fact is not denial and handwaving. It doesn't matter whether family reunification is a thing in Sweden (the rules are actually quite strict, from what I can tell); you can not simply extrapolate from those numbers and state that the number you arrive at is going to be the actual number (especially when you clearly don't even take into consideration things like how the 'chain-migration' phenomenon *includes* giving residency permits to family members who are *also* already seeking asylum in the country, and thus even if you assume 3 family members will join every succesful asylum application you can not simply triple the asylum seeker numbers to arrive at the actual number of new residents)

You need to review the numbers. The latest month of completed data is September at 24,000 or so applications for that month. Only if applications drop to 8K per month (or less) will the 100K figure be attained. Alternatively it could be double that.

Alternatively alternatively, it could be a tenth of that. The point is, you don't fucking know.

Yes, "anything is possible", but that was not your original objection. Your objection was the author suggesting that it is possible to have 180k in a year or 1000 to 1500 per month. If your backing off your absolutist claims then say so.

I never said (certainly not in 'absolutist' terms) that 180k a year was impossible. In fact, I explicitly granted that it was possible. What I *did* say was that it was impossible to have 1000-1500 a month for 15 years.

Moreover, not that this trend started in May (not the last two months).

I did not say it started in the last two months.

As I have shown,

What? You haven't shown anything.

Wrong. See above. The "pool" of those wishing to migrate has barely been touched.

First of all, we have no way of determining how large or small that pool is. So you can't actually make appeals to it.

Secondly, it's still not wrong because people do not and can not simply seek asylum in Sweden because they want to. There needs to be a completely implausible constant chain of humanitarian crisis events over the next 10-15 years for these absurd claims to be remotely plausible.

My honest question did not get an honest answer. Either it is possible or usual that asylum seekers eventually bring their families or not. Telling us that "well, its not automatic" is a lame and weak acknowledgement that the author's estimates are based on a valid assumption.

No, it's not. Pointing out that it's not automatic demonstrates that you *can not* simply assume that every succesful application leads to an additional number of people joining him/her (to say nothing of the fact that you can not simply assume that number to be 3)

So you are out of intellectual ammunition are you? So you have nothing left but to confirm that Norway's refusal to be a doormat has reduced their door ringers (and kickers) to a 1/5th to 1/10th of that of Sweden? You're making progress.

Again, what the fuck relevance does this have to what we are talking about?

You'll accept that bananas used to be straight until we selected that trait out because curved bananas sell better? I could try and make either your refusal or acceptance of that fact into some sort of personal victory...

...but it'd have absolutely fuck all to do with anything.

 

[Underseer]

Don't forget the no-go zones!

Those Europeans have so completely surrendered to the Muslims that they deny no-go zones even exist, but we know for a fact they exist because they said so on FOX News! Also, some French guy said that Saddam didn't have nukes! Can you imagine anyone believing something so insane? The Europeans obviously can do nothing but obey their Muslim masters, whom they have all submitted and surrendered to. It's really sad. As soon as Europe allowed itself to be conquered by socialism, Muslim conquest was inevitable.

I will pray for you all. [/conservolibertarian]

 

[angelo]

Send all economic migrants right back where ever they came from. I understand it ain't easy as they destroy all their papers, which leaves the problem of sorting out where they really are from, but I'm sure there are ways of finding out.
By getting rid of these freeloaders, it makes it so much easier to help the genuine refugees.

If you live in Broome, and decide to move to Perth because there are better paying jobs in Perth, should the people of Perth send you back where you came from?

What if you want to move from Perth to Sydney?

What if you want to move from Perth to New York, Paris, or London?

Why are ANY of these cases morally different from moving to any of these cities from Aleppo, or Damascus, or Mombassa, or Lagos?

An economic migrant is someone who moves from a place where things are tough, to a place where they hope things will be better - usually because there are more or better paid jobs at their destination. Why should you be allowed to move from Perth to Sydney for economic reasons, but if Abdul moves from Damascus to Munich, he is a 'freeloader' who should be 'got rid of'?

View attachment 4486

Then why call them refugees? They clearly are nothing of the sort! Why shouldn't a muzzie move from Damascus to Munich ? Sure he can do that! All he has to do is apply for a
migration visa and pass the tests that some migrants are asked to pass. Doesn't the fact that they destroy their identity papers even faze you a little? Can you guarantee that the muzzie is not an Al Quada, or terrorist of some nut job outfit like ISIS, or Hamas or whatever, name your favourite terrorist organization, there's no shortage of them!

 

[DrZoidberg]

I have read the Quran. Several translations. It's written in verse=vague. It's full of pretty metaphor. It's not a legal text. There's actually nothing about forcing people to emulate Mohammed. He's just upheld as a good role model. Which is questionable. But wasn't the topic here. On the non-toleration of infidels, the Quran is pretty specific. It's only the pagan Arabs that are to be instantly persecuted. They're all gone now. So it's moot. Regarding everybody else the Quran prattles on endlessly about that it's always better to forgive those who have transgressed you.

Like most religious text you can behave pretty much any way you want and you'll be able to find justification for it in the Quran. So claiming that ISIS is Islam in it's purest form I'd say is Islamophobia (the correct way of interpreting that word).

ISIS are the way they are because it's members are dicks. Not because they are Muslims. The Nazis were the way they were because they were dicks. Not because they were Christian. Same thing. Both these movements used their respective holy books to justify their atrocities. Whether or not either of them interpreted their holy book correct is a retarded debate. They both did, and didn't at the same time. That's the problem with a vague text.

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/quran/023-violence.htm

Good argument. If somebody took their time to write it down it must be true.

These people are interpreting the Quran in the worst possible way. No shit it makes it look bad. But you might as well interpret it in a positive way = a religion of peace.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Sweden "suffered" from a homogeneous Scandinavian and white culture - a neutral country that minded its own business and provided prosperity and security, along with one of the lowest crime rates in the world. Somewhere along the line Swedes started feeling guilty that they looked out for their own, got out the self-flagellation whips, and pleaded for third-worlders of limited skills and abilities to squat in their home, while the Swedes (already with one of the highest tax rates in the world) footed the bill.

The result? Crime, sexual assault, a new underclass, and social division. What a way to f' up what they had accomplished. Look at some of the recent developments (paraphrased from my prior link):

In a nation of 10,000,000 in 2014, 33,500 were granted asylum. With the added 'chain migration' of family members last year, 110,000 people were granted residency status in Sweden. (And an unknown number of illegal aliens).

There may be 180,000 asylum seekers coming to Sweden in 2015. If half of them are granted asylum, and they each bring over three relatives, then there will be 270,000 new immigrants to Sweden in a single year. Over 8000 people arrived just last week, 1,716 of whom were so-called "unaccompanied refugee children."

Many are people from countries that are not at war are taking their chances and applying for asylum in Sweden.

The Swedish economist Tino Sanandaji (of Iranian-Kurdish descent, and therefore tougher than most Swedes, who, if they criticize the immigration policy, are immediately accused of racism) writes on his blog that Swedes could soon be in the minority in their own country:

"1,000-1,500 asylum seekers a day for 15 years equals 5.5 to 8.2 million asylum seekers. At the end of 2014, the Statistical Central Bureau, SCB, calculated that 21.5% of the Swedish population were of foreign descent: 2.1 million, out of 9.7 million. The number of people of Swedish descent -- born in Sweden with two parents born in Sweden -- has been stable at about 7.7 million and is expected to remain stable or increase slightly due to birth surplus. If those of foreign descent increase their number by about 5.6 million, they will become the majority."

Impromptu temporary lodgings have been created in sports centers, ice rinks, and at the Sturup airport hotel, to name a few.

Trelleborg's mayor wrote a desperate letter of appeal for help to the government, just as, a few weeks ago, the Örkelljunga municipality did in vain:

"In the past, many asylum seekers have taken the route through Denmark to Malmö, but this changed about two weeks ago. From September 10 until the morning of October 1, 14,100 asylum seekers arrived in Trelleborg by ferry. There is no indication that the pace is slowing; if anything it is continuously increasing. On Tuesday, September 22, Trelleborg received word from the Immigration Service that the municipality where children and young people arrive is by law the authority that is required to provide housing, care and living expenses, until such time as the Immigration Service decides upon a designated municipality. ... Trelleborg has quickly ended up in a situation where the regular services to the community are at great risk of being affected. ... By writing this letter, we would like to bring to your attention the enormous strain we now find ourselves under."

The only concrete help so far has come from some of the neighboring municipalities, who have opened up facilities to house some of the Trelleborg migrants.

Malmö, is also in serious trouble. For the last few weeks, the central train station in Sweden's third largest city has been overrun with migrants, but the volunteers that showed up for the first few days with food, water and clothes have lost interest. The daily Sydsvenska Dagbladet summed up the desperate situation in Malmö, where even the city's empty jail was considered (and rejected) as possible housing for refugee children. It now looks more like a possibility for adult refugees.

The Social Democratic mayor of Filipstad, Per Gruvberger, also recently raised the alarm that his municipality of 6,000 people will not be able to provide schooling and childcare for the 1,100 asylum seekers now assigned to his municipality.

The stiff reply of the Minister for Justice and Migration, Morgan Johansson, to this cry for help was: "If need be, Filipstad will just have to expand its operations."

"The work situation for the entire authority is very strained. The pressure is enormous. The work environment has deteriorated severely," said Sanna Norblad, local chairperson of the ST union, to daily Norrköpings Tidningar.

Yet, according to the article a surprisingly large portion of the citizenry still overconfidently believe that "Daddy State" will make everything all right. This a very Swedish view, like the wishes of children, that Peter Santesson, head of polling institute Demoskop, wrote about on the website Dagens Opinion. Santesson states that the Swedes have an unusually high level of trust in the social order, and that they are convinced that "somewhere higher up, there is always someone smarter and more informed, taking responsibility and making sure everything works." ... it could be disastrous.

The blogger Johan Westerholm, a Social Democrat who is critical of the government, points out in an October 7 titled "System infarction in the Immigration System," that in addition to those who are already in Sweden, we need to add those who are not granted asylum in Norway and Finland, and will therefore be sent back to the last country they were in -- Sweden. Considering that Finland rejects 60% of asylum applications, it is fair to assume that during the coming weeks, the chaos will only escalate.

"People seem to be aware that there are problems, but I do not think they know how vulnerable we really are. We rely on the state to take care of us, as it has in the past."

Swedes, once consider one of the brightest nations now wallows in suicidal altruism; injecting culturally and intellectually inferior peoples into its social DNA. These masses will never fully assimilate, many years later they will remain economically dependent, and they will become a social and political drain on Swedes who had spent a lifetime paying huge taxes for their own "utopia". And for what?

So white people won't feel guilty. Bye bye Sweden.

Sweden has a retarded system of integrating new immigrants that is very costly and time consuming. That's what the Trelleborg major is complaing about. Once we change the system along the American or British system we won't have the problem. In Sweden we forbidd refugees from working. And then complain they're smooching off the system. The immigrants of course work illegally which means we have to employ cops to stop them. A bizarre arrangement. A better system is just letting them come here and get a job like everybody else. Sweden's labour laws are convoluted and weird. It's take quite a while to understand them. It's hard even if you know Swedish.

But over time it'll sort itself out. Also.... worth noting. During WW2 we took in a massive amount of Finish refugees. We're nowhere near that number now. What that proved is that Sweden won't suffer one bit. Florida had a similar situation in the 90'ies when Fidel suddenly allowed everybody to leave who wanted to leave at once. They all went to Florida. A sudden unplanned extreme immigration. The result? Short term. Nothing much happened. Sure, it was expensive for the government to cope with it. But then again, lots of free labour which put money/value into the system. Long term = pure benefit.

 

[angelo]

Your ABC. Make sure you don't miss the the 7.30 Report.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-10-...n-men-involved-in-sydney-terror-raids/6866562

 

[untermensche]

Your ABC. Make sure you don't miss the the 7.30 Report.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-10-...n-men-involved-in-sydney-terror-raids/6866562

Are you so ignorant to think that millions of people with different opinions can't be produced?

Have you ever once met a Muslim and got to know them?

They are human beings.

The exact same thing as European Christians.

Just as likable and despicable.

 

[whichphilosophy]

I know!


So all that remains is to determine the color of the box cars we load them onto...right?

Send all economic migrants right back where ever they came from. I understand it ain't easy as they destroy all their papers, which leaves the problem of sorting out where they really are from, but I'm sure there are ways of finding out.
By getting rid of these freeloaders, it makes it so much easier to help the genuine refugees.

I would agree that we should help the genuine refugees and discourage economic migrants, some of whom will form part of black economy of illegal exploited workers.
Unfortunately Europe is not doing that.

 

[whichphilosophy]

The good news is that it seems ISIS are now on the run. The bad news is guess where many are likely to end up.

I'm sure Merkel will make them welcome!

Sure. Free psychotherapy and disability payments as a result of the trauma of chopping off heads. Someone made them do it. They suffered from Schizophrenia as they heard voices in his head hence not responsible for own actions. As for their sexual perversions, the Germans will provide with a Jihadi Rubber doll which is special because it blows itself up.

 

[TSwizzle]

But over time it'll sort itself out. Also.... worth noting. During WW2 we took in a massive amount of Finish refugees.

How many of these refugees from Finland were followers of teh islam ? Precious few I would wager. You're another one that makes ridiculous comparisons that are worthless.

 

[Ford]

Your ABC. Make sure you don't miss the the 7.30 Report.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-10-...n-men-involved-in-sydney-terror-raids/6866562

Are you so ignorant to think that millions of people with different opinions can't be produced?

Have you ever once met a Muslim and got to know them?

They are human beings.

Angelo and Maxie would disagree with that last statement. If they were human beings, it would be abhorrent to load them into boxcars and ship them to a "final" destination.


Such solutions are much easier when you think the victims are sub-human "muzzies."

 

[Trausti]

Celebrate diversity you silly islamophobes!

Authorities in Indonesia's conservative Aceh province said on Sunday several Christian churches would be shut down this week, just days after a mob burned down a church, killing one person and injuring several others.

http://in.reuters.com/article/2015/10/18/indonesia-aceh-violence-idINKCN0SC0AA20151018

 

[dystopian]

Oh no!

Hey man, you're the one who said stupid statements should be mocked. You made a stupid statement.

Except I didn't. I made a statement you disagreed with. Two different things.

So you were actually talking about the long-term benefits of low levels of immigration,

No, I was talking about long-term benefits of immigration. Not low levels of immigration, or high levels. Simply immigration. You seem incapable of reading that as it's written; adding either "high levels of third world immigration" to what I mean; or, when I tell you not to do that, adding "low levels" to it. Stop. Just stop putting words into my mouth.

which nobody has disputed here, and introduced it into a discussion of a specific high immigration situation because of your deep appreciation of the red herring as a form of performance art? If you hadn't intended to imply that the current spike will in the long run be beneficial then you'd have had no reason to write what you wrote.

Here's the problem. I *do* think it will be beneficial long term. You however, decided to word your post in such a way as to imply that if I were to state such a thing, that automatically means I'm in favor of all these other things, things which you happen to dislike in rather strong language. You do understand that a thing can have both positive and negative outcomes right? I hope that you also understand that just because you think that x will also lead to y, that doesn't mean that y actually will and that other people may have perfectly valid reasons for thinking that y will not.

You need to work on your reading comprehension. "It is demographically impossible FOR YOU to get a high level of third world immigration without a surge of Islamic influence." Obviously America can get a high level of third world immigration without a surge of Islamic influence; we're getting Latin American influence. But the demographics of the people currently trying to get into Sweden, the Netherlands, etc. and having a substantial rate of success at getting in are different from the demographics of the people trying to get into other places; and there is no politically powerful demographic in Northern Europe in a position to enact policies preferentially admitting Christians or Hindus or Buddhists over Muslims. Hungary could probably pull off a high level of third world immigration without a surge of Islamic influence. You can't.

That's weird... because we've definitely had high levels of third world immigration in the past without any surges in Islamic influence. Also, you DO realize that there's a lot of latin-american immigration to Europe as well, right? Not to mention a lot of immigration from non-islamic Asia and Christian Africa.

Then you're in need of a logic lesson.

No, I really just think you need to stop pretending you're not a zeti reticulan trying to infiltrate human culture.

What you wrote that I'm responding to was not an argument. I was responding to your expression of your evident certainty that "assert that a surge of Islamic influence in Europe would be wonderful for European society" did not describe anything people in this thread had said. But anybody who's paying attention to the thread can recognize your own earlier post as a case in point.

You mean the post in which I by no means stated anything that could be construed as wanting a surge of islamic influence?

Yes, you were just typing libelous words. So keep trumping up those strawman accusations; keep advertising that you consider libeling your opponents an acceptable debating tactic.