Europe submits voluntarily

[whichphilosophy]

The Eu is failing to distinguish between economic migrants and refugees

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-Tory-MP-claims-people-pretending-Syrian.html

'Likewise, we have people in this country who have come here, claimed asylum and then they go back on holiday in the places where they've claimed asylum from

Of course more figures are required but in such instances why would they be going back if they did flee in the first place.

Your post bears no relation to the post you're ostensibly replying to.

It does in that I added The Eu is failing to distinguish between economic migrants and refugees

 

[Jokodo]

Your post bears no relation to the post you're ostensibly replying to.

It does in that I added The Eu is failing to distinguish between economic migrants and refugees

Which has nothing at all to do with the fact that it is inconsistent to simultaneously complain that "70%+ of the refugees/migrants are single men coming to take our women" and use projections based on the assumption that they'll bring an average four family members through unification schemes when estimating the total numbers.

Which was the only point of my post.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

You mean just the apologist sources?

All you rely on are apologist sites of Western aggression that has gone on non-stop for decades in the ME.

You are an apologist for Muslim aggression, always blaming it on the west.

- - - Updated - - -

Interesting.......................http://www.jihadwatch.org/2015/11/g...he-next-five-years-20-million-muslims-by-2020

Did you notice how he arrived at the figure? By assuming every refugee brings an average of 4 family members through family reunification schemes. If you want to maintain your other favorite complaint about how they are all horny single men, you should object those estimations if you want to be consistent.

Another case of Schrödinger's immigrant - the single young men who are coming to take our women, who are also married and going to bring their families if we let them stay.

And why do you consider that an unrealistic assumption? Note how they're mostly young men, not families?

 

[TSwizzle]

Non-Muslim inmates in several of Britain's category A prisons are being forced to pay a 'protection tax' to radical Muslim prisoners out of fear of facing violence.
The 'tax', known as 'jizya', was found to be enforced by some Islamist extremist prisoners in four of Britain's largest prisons.

Daily Mail

Little by little . . . . . . .

 

[untermensche]

All you rely on are apologist sites of Western aggression that has gone on non-stop for decades in the ME.

You are an apologist for Muslim aggression, always blaming it on the west....

ISIS in it's current state is a direct result of US aggression and murder and torture. And of course weapons.

To deny it is simply to be an apologist for US crimes.

 

[whichphilosophy]

It does in that I added The Eu is failing to distinguish between economic migrants and refugees

Which has nothing at all to do with the fact that it is inconsistent to simultaneously complain that "70%+ of the refugees/migrants are single men coming to take our women" and use projections based on the assumption that they'll bring an average four family members through unification schemes when estimating the total numbers.

Which was the only point of my post.

You mentioned refugees/migrants but my point is the Eu fails to distinguish between the two.

 

[bilby]

Which has nothing at all to do with the fact that it is inconsistent to simultaneously complain that "70%+ of the refugees/migrants are single men coming to take our women" and use projections based on the assumption that they'll bring an average four family members through unification schemes when estimating the total numbers.

Which was the only point of my post.

You mentioned refugees/migrants but my point is the Eu fails to distinguish between the two.

Good.

 

[DrZoidberg]

You are an apologist for Muslim aggression, always blaming it on the west....

ISIS in it's current state is a direct result of US aggression and murder and torture. And of course weapons.

To deny it is simply to be an apologist for US crimes.

I deny that. It explains Iraqi Sunni support when ISIS entered Iraq. But I reject that ISIS is a product of American aggression. I think ISIS primarily is the result of the brutal and secular Assad regime. When communist Poland fell it went very religious for similar reasons. The Catholic Church had during the communist years been a source of hope and resistance. The mosques had been something similar in Syria. The uprising in Homs in the 80'ies (I think it was) also quickly turned very Islamic.

I'm not defending USA's actions in the Middle-east. I just don't think ISIS is purely the result of American aggression. I do think American bad behaviour is the a factor to why Europeans are travelling to Syria to fight for ISIS. But there are many ingredients to that mess as well.

 

[angelo]

Interesting.......................http://www.jihadwatch.org/2015/11/g...he-next-five-years-20-million-muslims-by-2020

Did you notice how he arrived at the figure? By assuming every refugee brings an average of 4 family members through family reunification schemes. If you want to maintain your other favorite complaint about how they are all horny single men, you should object those estimations if you want to be consistent.

Another case of Schrödinger's immigrant - the single young men who are coming to take our women, who are also married and going to bring their families if we let them stay.

That's the single freeloaders. The married ones have many children so as to increase their benefits!

 

[Jokodo]

All you rely on are apologist sites of Western aggression that has gone on non-stop for decades in the ME.

You are an apologist for Muslim aggression, always blaming it on the west.

- - - Updated - - -

Interesting.......................http://www.jihadwatch.org/2015/11/g...he-next-five-years-20-million-muslims-by-2020

Did you notice how he arrived at the figure? By assuming every refugee brings an average of 4 family members through family reunification schemes. If you want to maintain your other favorite complaint about how they are all horny single men, you should object those estimations if you want to be consistent.

Another case of Schrödinger's immigrant - the single young men who are coming to take our women, who are also married and going to bring their families if we let them stay.

And why do you consider that an unrealistic assumption? Note how they're mostly young men, not families?

I have not, at this point, expressed an opinion about whether or not this assumption is realistic. I've pointed out the obvious fact that it is inconsistent to both complain that "look who's coming - only single men trying to get our women" and make this assumption to arrive at scary numbers.

As you would know if you had read my post.

The number is unrealistic, though, the numbers registering in Austria or Germany are around 70% males - and that number includes includes fathers or even male children travelling with their families. So the real number of men travelling alone will be somewhat above 50%, of whom many won't have family. In order to arrive at an average of four additional individuals through family unification, those who do bring family would have to be bringing 8-10 apiece.

- - - Updated - - -

Non-Muslim inmates in several of Britain's category A prisons are being forced to pay a 'protection tax' to radical Muslim prisoners out of fear of facing violence.
The 'tax', known as 'jizya', was found to be enforced by some Islamist extremist prisoners in four of Britain's largest prisons.

Daily Mail

Little by little . . . . . . .

Daily Mail... says all.

- - - Updated - - -

Which has nothing at all to do with the fact that it is inconsistent to simultaneously complain that "70%+ of the refugees/migrants are single men coming to take our women" and use projections based on the assumption that they'll bring an average four family members through unification schemes when estimating the total numbers.

Which was the only point of my post.

You mentioned refugees/migrants but my point is the Eu fails to distinguish between the two.

Whether or not that is true has no relation to the point I was making. If you feel you have to make this point again, see if you can find a post to the content of which it is pertinent and reply to that, or make a new thread. Just don't reply to my post if what you're saying bears no relation to what I'm saying.

- - - Updated - - -

Did you notice how he arrived at the figure? By assuming every refugee brings an average of 4 family members through family reunification schemes. If you want to maintain your other favorite complaint about how they are all horny single men, you should object those estimations if you want to be consistent.

Another case of Schrödinger's immigrant - the single young men who are coming to take our women, who are also married and going to bring their families if we let them stay.

That's the single freeloaders. The married ones have many children so as to increase their benefits!

Excessive use of exclamation marks does not turn incoherent arguments into coherent ones.

 

[Jokodo]

ISIS in it's current state is a direct result of US aggression and murder and torture. And of course weapons.

To deny it is simply to be an apologist for US crimes.

I deny that. It explains Iraqi Sunni support when ISIS entered Iraq. But I reject that ISIS is a product of American aggression. I think ISIS primarily is the result of the brutal and secular Assad regime. When communist Poland fell it went very religious for similar reasons. The Catholic Church had during the communist years been a source of hope and resistance. The mosques had been something similar in Syria. The uprising in Homs in the 80'ies (I think it was) also quickly turned very Islamic.

I'm not defending USA's actions in the Middle-east. I just don't think ISIS is purely the result of American aggression. I do think American bad behaviour is the a factor to why Europeans are travelling to Syria to fight for ISIS. But there are many ingredients to that mess as well.

You have it backwards. ISIS originated as part of anti-US insurgency in Iraq. When Syria became volatile, they already had an efficient organization ready to grab a part of the country. So even if they didn't hold any major territories in Iraq before 2014, that's where they formed.

Wikipedia for a start:

The group originated as Jama'at al-Tawhid wal-Jihad in 1999, which pledged allegiance to al-Qaeda in 2004. The group participated in the Iraqi insurgency that followed the March 2003 invasion of Iraq by Western forces. In January 2006, it joined other Sunni insurgent groups to form the Mujahideen Shura Council, which proclaimed the formation of the Islamic State of Iraq (ISI) in October 2006. After the Syrian Civil War began in March 2011, the ISI, under the leadership of al-Baghdadi, sent delegates into Syria in August 2011. These fighters named themselves Jabhat an-Nuṣrah li-Ahli ash-Shām—al-Nusra Front—and established a large presence in Sunni-majority areas of Syria, within the governorates of Ar-Raqqah, Idlib, Deir ez-Zor, and Aleppo.[40] In April 2013, al-Baghdadi announced the merger of the ISI with al-Nusra Front and that the name of the reunited group was now the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL). However, Abu Mohammad al-Julani and Ayman al-Zawahiri, the leaders of al-Nusra and al-Qaeda respectively, rejected the merger.

 

[untermensche]

ISIS in it's current state is a direct result of US aggression and murder and torture. And of course weapons.

To deny it is simply to be an apologist for US crimes.

I deny that. It explains Iraqi Sunni support when ISIS entered Iraq. But I reject that ISIS is a product of American aggression. I think ISIS primarily is the result of the brutal and secular Assad regime. When communist Poland fell it went very religious for similar reasons. The Catholic Church had during the communist years been a source of hope and resistance. The mosques had been something similar in Syria. The uprising in Homs in the 80'ies (I think it was) also quickly turned very Islamic.

I'm not defending USA's actions in the Middle-east. I just don't think ISIS is purely the result of American aggression. I do think American bad behaviour is the a factor to why Europeans are travelling to Syria to fight for ISIS. But there are many ingredients to that mess as well.

The military leadership in ISIS is primarily former members of the Iraqi military.

No US invasion, no Iraqi military in ISIS, no US weapons in ISIS, ISIS is a far less effective force, maybe even non-existent at this point.

 

[bilby]

 

[Trausti]

Hoping to combat the disproportionate number of rapes committed by immigrants and their descendants, a number of political parties are pushing for sexual education to be included in the Danish language courses provided to foreigners, Metroxpress reported.

Between 2013 and 2014, 34.5 percent of all individuals convicted of rape were immigrants or their descendants despite those groups only accounting for roughly 12 percent of Denmark’s total population.

http://www.thelocal.dk/20151028/denmark-to-teach-foreigners-about-sexual-morals

The obvious solution to the rape epidemic by "immigrants or their decedents" is to increase the number of "immigrants or their decedents" in the country. European women should learn to check their privilege and let the marginalized refugees have their way. Wouldn't want to be called an islamophobe.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

You are an apologist for Muslim aggression, always blaming it on the west....

ISIS in it's current state is a direct result of US aggression and murder and torture. And of course weapons.

To deny it is simply to be an apologist for US crimes.

ISIS exists because the Islamists rush into any power vacuum.

 

[angelo]

Moslems have been slaughtering Moslems for 1500 years, before there even was an Iraq or Syria. Western actions had nothing to do with it.

 

[untermensche]

Moslems have been slaughtering Moslems for 1500 years, before there even was an Iraq or Syria. Western actions had nothing to do with it.

It is the US that has been slaughtering Muslims for over a decade non-stop.

And an unprovoked US invasion and decade long brutal occupation that is the major cause of the current form and strength of ISIS.

 

[Trausti]

Moslems have been slaughtering Moslems for 1500 years, before there even was an Iraq or Syria. Western actions had nothing to do with it.

It is the US that has been slaughtering Muslims for over a decade non-stop.

And an unprovoked US invasion and decade long brutal occupation that is the major cause of the current form and strength of ISIS.

The US did not start the Syrian civil war. But, if it must be faulted, the US is somewhat blameworthy for failing to browbeat the Shiite Iraqi government to stop persecuting the Sunnis. This, along with the wildly misguided notion that we could arm "moderate" Syrian rebels, is America's contribution to the crisis.

 

[angelo]

Islamic apologists need someone to blame for their warlike behaviours. They simply look for a reason the why of 9/11 or the London bombings for example when the reasons are right there in their koran, inspired by their bloodthirsty founder Mohammed.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Moslems have been slaughtering Moslems for 1500 years, before there even was an Iraq or Syria. Western actions had nothing to do with it.

It is the US that has been slaughtering Muslims for over a decade non-stop.

And an unprovoked US invasion and decade long brutal occupation that is the major cause of the current form and strength of ISIS.

What math are you looking at where 1500 < 10?